Changes to the Mass Come Advent 2011

So if by chance you haven’t heard, come Advent 2011 the Catholic Church in the US (and other English speaking countries) will be using a revised translation of the Roman Missal, the text followed when saying Mass. After Vatican II the Missale Romanum (Latin for Roman Missal) was set as the “definitive text” of the Liturgy. Since it was in Latin, it obviously had to be translated into other languages, and apparently there were quite a few, umm, liberties taken by those who translated it into English. So after about 40 years with a mediocre translation, efforts were made to better align the English text with its Latin counterpart.

As a result, our Roman Missal has undergone more than a dozen changes (far more than other countries such as Spain, whose Missals are also being slightly revised). Though these changes have already been approved by both the USCCB (US Conference of Catholic Bishops) and the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments in Rome, the new Missal won’t be used until Advent 2011 to allow time for the education of both clergy and laity.

So a few notable changes:

“through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault” added in the middle of the Penitential Act
When the Priest says, “The Lord be with you” and we respond “And also with you”, we will now respond “And also with your spirit”
A few changes in the Nicene Creed (“of all things visible and invisible”, “consubstantial with the Father”)
Different Mysteries of Faith (“Save us, Savior of the world, for by your Cross and Resurrection you have set us free.”, “We proclaim your Death, O Lord, and profess your Resurrection until you come again.”)
“Lord I am not worthy to receive you, only say the word and I shall be healed” is replaced with “Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed. (I’ll cop to being a little sad about this change – that was my favorite line of the whole Mass!)

For those of you familiar enough with the Mass that you know by heart some of the Eucharist prayers, they are completely different. So in some ways the Mass will feel a little foreign. But as we are One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, the texts followed at a Mass in the US should match as perfectly as possible the texts read at a Mass in Europe or Africa or Latin America. These changes are ultimately a good thing, they’re making our text more true to Tradition, the Bible and/or the Mass as the universal Church celebrates it.

Check out the new Roman Missal so you can start to familiarize yourself with it. And share the link with your Catholic friends because we need to help the Church spread the word!

Order of the Mass PDF from USCCB Site

General Info Regarding Changes from USCCB Site

I’ve since written a longer post on the changes to the Mass, which includes more of the changes to the texts: More Changes to the Mass. You may also want to check out: To A Deeper Understanding of the Mass. God bless!

Tags: the Mass

Catholic Living | admin | August 29, 2010 9:39 pm

21 Comments

By Bill, August 19, 2011 @ 6:55 pm

I don’t mind change but what does this gain other than perhaps multilingual folks will not be confused. Thanks for posting this, other than a blurb in our Diocesan news there’s been very little, actually no talk about the changes at all…and I’m a lector so one might think there would have been something.
By admin, August 22, 2011 @ 8:07 pm

Bill, thanks for checking out the post – glad to hear it was helpful! While there are quite a few reasons for the changes, I think the central one is unity. Just like the Mass is supposed to be more or less the same at every parish you go to in the US, it’s also supposed to be more or less the same at every parish all over the world. Since we are one Church, one Body of Christ, one family, it is only right that our unity be reflected in the Mass (the source and summit of Catholic life). Unfortunately the previous translation of the Mass into English didn’t conform itself to that unity as truly as it could have, and we will all be feeling those consequences come Advent.

I know it’s tempting to focus on the inconvenience of it all, but this is a good thing. We’re getting a more literal translation which will make our Mass translation more true to the Church’s tradition, more true to the Bible, and more true to Latin Missal. Hope that helps. Thank you for your service to the Church and God bless!
By Kim, August 25, 2011 @ 2:47 pm

Thanks for posting some of the changes, I agree it is more important for the mass to be accurate than “convenient.” It is also convenient to sit my children in front of the TV, but that doesn’t make it right!
By John, September 5, 2011 @ 2:24 am

I was so fazed by the changes to the mass yesterday that I was glad I’d had a consubstantial breakfast. I returned home for a nice strong chalice of tea to restore me. Why replace language which we all use with language which no one uses? Will this improve communication?
By admin, September 5, 2011 @ 9:57 am

LOL I understand the concern John, and the new wording will surely take a little while to get used to. I would respond with two points:

1) The Church is not so much replacing familiar language with “heightened” language as she’s restoring the original language of the Mass. It was the translation back in the 60s that actually replaced the language of the Mass with the casual, colloquial wording we are familiar with today. Consubstantial may not be a word we use often, but it’s truer to the original meaning of the Creed.

2) It is quite intentional that the wording is a little out of the ordinary. The Mass is an extraordinary event where earth and Heaven meet – the more formal language of the Mass is supposed to draw attention to this fact. There’s a beauty and an eloquence to be found in the new wording that just isn’t possible when using everyday language. I’d say it isn’t so much about improving communication as helping us get into a frame of mind where we can worship more devoutly.

So hang in there! And may God bless you for loving the Mass enough to be concerned!
By Meg, September 15, 2011 @ 7:55 pm

Vatican II was a change – this isn’t
By Terry, September 22, 2011 @ 10:22 am

I am not in agreement with the changes. Once again we are being an obedient church. Let’s bow the the bishops and the pope. I can’t understand why we did not fight this. The language is not of today’s. Nation Pastoral Music Association let us all done by not standing up for the people. I guess is is easier to give in then to stand up for the church. I can’t believe all the money that now needs to be spent for new masses, for the new missal, and hymnals, or worship aids. Perhaps we should turn our receipts in to the Vatican or to our diocese. I am for change but to go back 45 years is not change, it is a power play to regain control of the church. Worship is of the people, it should be in today’s language, it is who we are. It’s time to stand up to these “Yahoo Bishops” and even the pope and say it is the church of the people. Come on folks let’s wake up. Do you wonder why people are leaving? Wait, I think we are going to see many more leave after this. I love my church, I love the Sacraments, I don’t love rules and regulations, and that is what our church is becoming. How sad. Good luck all, we are going to need it.
By admin, September 25, 2011 @ 8:31 pm

Terry,

I can appreciate your concern that the new texts cause all kinds of changes for us as laypeople – this can be frustrating. I would just respond in a few ways:
- part of being Catholic is obedience to the Church that Christ established. Just as Jesus was obedient to the Father, it is our duty as His disciples to be obedient to Him. You make obedience sound as though it’s something bad, but it’s a virtue (and a very difficult one I might add!)
- it’s not about power. “But Jesus called them to him and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant” (Mt 20:25-26). Can individuals in our hierarchy sometimes get caught up in power dynamics? Of course, they’re human as we are. But ultimately they became priests to serve, not to “lord it over” us laymen
- it’s good to hear you love the sacraments – they’re undoubtedly at the heart of the Christian life. But we have those sacraments only because of our bishops – who are part of a long line of bishops going back 2,000 years who have protected those sacraments and handed them down to us.

I believe that in time we’ll all come to love the new changes in the Mass, but only if we’re willing to let Jesus work on our hearts. If our minds are already made up, He won’t override our free will. Praying that you, and all the rest of us (myself included), will have the humility to put our own opinions aside and ask Jesus to help us see the Mass as He does! God bless you!
By Matt, September 25, 2011 @ 8:35 pm

The Liturgy is not a plaything; not something we just “made up.” It is rather a precious gift with which the Church has been entrusted. If we obscure that through incorrect translation, we obscure the Liturgy itself. Furthermore, by improperly translating the Mass, which is of course he greatest prayer we offer, we lose layers upon layers of meaning. For instance, in Eucharistic Prayer 3, it says “so that from East to West….”. It is supposed to be, “from the rising of the sun to it’s setting…”. By this simplistic translation, we obscure the time aspect… Think “always and everywhere!” This idea is key: we are not simply united in our prayer with the rest of the Church militant, but with all those who came before us, with the angels, the saints, and the church suffering!

Plus, as if that wasn’t enough the new corrected translation restores hundreds of scriptural references, the most obvious of which are “with your spirit,” a phrase used by St. Paul, and the centurion’s prayer “Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof…”
By Judy, September 28, 2011 @ 10:55 am

All I have to say is “WWJD” Do you really think Jesus cares about word changes. He cares about people. This just does away with the changes made in Vatican II. It is going back to the old obedient ways and treats us as though we don’t have a brain.
By Dana, October 12, 2011 @ 7:42 pm

I agree with the intent of the changes, but not how they did it. Consubstantial???? Noone uses that word, they might have well have used latin, its foreign to most english speakers. Invisible? Unseen is a much broader term, more encompassing I think. Although “through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault” is a nice addition.
By Christopher, October 17, 2011 @ 10:27 am

Does the Vatican seriously believe that God is trapped in time, in the language and traditions of the early Church? I don’t think so. I do not believe that if Jesus walked the earth today, that he will be donning the garments he wore in his time or speak the language that he spoke. If the church is always right, then why is it changing what has been practiced for the past 40 years? If it was wrong then, perhaps it is wrong now. I don’t buy the rationale given for the changes.
By admin, October 18, 2011 @ 10:40 am

These changes aren’t about the Church being right or about power. The purpose of the Mass is to worship God – and the changes are intended to help us do that better. It’s about Him primarily, not about us. The language is supposed to remind us that what we are doing is sacred, that in the Mass Heaven and Earth will meet, and that in this world there is no great act of worship we can perform. As hard as it is, because it will definitely take getting used to, I think if we keep our focus on Him rather than ourselves we’ll all not only get used to the changes, but learn to love them.
By Judith, November 11, 2011 @ 9:07 pm

If we all take the time to look around, change is everywhere. I loved the latin mass as a child. It was changed. I was so familiar with the changes made at Vatican II. It has been changed. I do not question why change. I answer why not? I agree with keeping our focus on Him rather than ourselves,we’ll all not only get use to the changes, but learn to love them. Words inspire.
By Jack, November 14, 2011 @ 11:30 am

Its amazing…no, disappointing…to me to see how many of the faithful seem to think their own likes and dislikes should reflect what is proper liturgy. None of us CREATED the liturgy…that was done centuries ago for our benefit; none of us participated in the discussions on what was “proper” or “correct” after the church made the attempt with Vatican II to bring the universal mass to the vernacular around the globe. Does no one trust the Bishops… the Magisterium… the church… to try to make what are VERY SUBTLE tweaks to the massive changes that brought the mass to all of us in our own language one generation ago? If our focus remains on our faith and our eternal goal, why should any of these things the church does FOR ALL OUR BENEFIT cause us strife? Why does anyone think they know better than the collective work of our church leaders in reflecting the liturgy, as originally intended? Its human nature to resist change, especially to things that are familiar and cherished; if we can just let go of the impulse to resist change…and continue to embrace our communities and how we will all undergo these tiny changes together…in service to the Lord…we will see that these tweaks are not disruptive, but a chance to learn something about the liturgy, and our role in it.
By John, December 6, 2011 @ 7:20 pm

You can`t beat a bit of Latin though. Driving on the motorway and a Fiat went past. Straight out of my head came the words.Fiat voluntas tua. Et in ceolo .Et in Terra. Bad spelling and maybe not accurate. But how long was that little thought waiting in my head?
By John, December 6, 2011 @ 7:21 pm

Sicut in ceolo. I got that wrong.
By maria, December 24, 2011 @ 4:24 pm

I realize we must support the changes, but how nice it was fifty years ago to hear the beautiful language and singing in the old latin mass. It is hard for us old people to adjust to the new. It’s sad to see the traditions dissappear no matter how improved others think they are. Sort of like tearing down the pyramids to put up a Walmart.
By Christopher, December 25, 2011 @ 2:32 pm

Now it’s time to go back to the Old Testament (Nebrew) and the New Testaement (Greek) and a few other texts and do a proper translation of them.
By michelle, July 30, 2012 @ 7:55 pm

The purpose of this change is because they want to make deeper the meaning of response and to be more accurate that’s what i have learned from Christian living values Education