The Catholic Church is introducing new English texts, which follow the Latin very closely. I am inclined to agree with those who think this archaic and affected even though it is accurate. You can't get away with this kind of thing in English. It is useful to have the translation but for study purposes, I don't see the point of it for public use, one might as well stick to the Latin and be done with it.
Styles of English are so dependent on social class, age and place of origin, with all the connotations that go with these things, that the language should not be used in the public liturgy at all. Whatever style of English is used will be divisive. I don't know why the sixteenth century Trent rejected the use of the vernacular but I would be surprised if the reasons that applied then do not still apply now.
2 kommentarer:
While I'd agree with your "Dewfall" comment on another blog (Fr. Blake's, I think) - I think you're over concerned about people being divisive over the language. People expect more formal language in a Mass setting.
In the introduction to my "New American Bible" (the one the US uses for readings at Mass) there is a specific reference to the fat that the language chosen is more formal - but it wouldn't alienate people, because people do expect more formality in liturgy, than if they were just saying "Hey" to a friend.
Karen
I would like to think you were right but people in the UK have funny attitudes, they are much more divided by social and economic class.
The language in the Swedish vernacular is quite formal and true to the Latin but that is ok as people do not have the same class hangups. However, the problem here is that so many people are not good with the language anyway. See Va' sa' du? above.
Skicka en kommentar