The New Translation Of The Roman Missal


The New Translation Of The Roman Missal

The new translation of the Roman Missal, which comes into force on the 1st Sunday of Advent, plans to change the wording of the Creed “of the same nature as the Father” to “consubstantial with the Father.” This more precise translation puts an end to a theological controversy that shook the Church of France.The new translation of the Roman Missal
From Advent 2021,  The new translation of the Roman Missal ” Neither triumph of scrupulous Latinists, nor the victory of conservative theologians, nor theological vanity: the proposed new translation is simply the sign of the life of liturgical tradition and theology. It also means, finally, the overcoming of a controversy that has lasted since 1965. The Son, we will recite from now on, is “consubstantial with the Father.

The official translation of 1964

It is in the context of the liturgical reform desired by the Holy Council. In particular by the conciliar Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium of December 1963, that the official translation of the Ordinary of the Mass, that is to say, the Gloria, Kyrie, Credo, etc. was implemented in January 1964 under the patronage of what was then the linchpin of liturgical reform in France.

A new translation of the Missal: the ten things that change for the faithful

There were, of course, already many translations into French, but none until then had a liturgical and canonical value. In January 1964, the CPL opened the site and initially retained the classic formula “consubstantial with the Father.” On February 28, 1964, a meeting took place with The archives have preserved, about the “consubstantial,” the remarks exchanged during the tour de table: “Incomprehensible and unacceptable,” say some; “Difficult,” another remarked. A third suggests: “sharing our nature. The new translation of the Roman Missal

Endless controversy

What then occurs that no one had anticipated: a rebellion of the laity against certain post-conciliar clericalism. Translators and bishops saw nothing coming. Instead, he belongs to the opening figures of French Catholicism. On the front page of Catholic France, however, on July 2, 1965, he wonders if he has not become a dissident, “a Paleo-Catholic Nicene,” in the sense of an attachment to the Council of Nicea. He describes his dismay in front of the obligation which is made to him to sing that “the Son is of the same nature as the Father” and comments: “We laypeople of flat country, we have only to follow the simplified liturgy. For our use. The new translation of the Roman Missal

 A  new translation of the Roman Missal

Gilson then launches into a vast argumentation against the  Damasus (around the year 500), and Toledo (around 675), goes back to the end of the Middle Ages, to finally conclude: “The liturgical reform is reasonable, beneficial, necessary; but in new languages ?? the meaning must remain the same. The new translation of the Roman Missal. The main point raised by Gilson is, therefore, the insufficiency of a translation which he nevertheless recognizes as necessary. The new translation of the Roman Missal.

“Of the same nature” is not optimal.

The first page of Figaroof July 8 tries to appease the spirits, under the pen of the father Michel Riquet in an article entitled “Neither heretics nor schismatics.” he recognizes that “the current French translation of liturgical texts water down the vigour of the Latin text. It is certainly permissible to regret it”. But he also underlines that “the translation, adopted today by the liturgical episcopal commission of France,  The days of Arianism are over”.The new translation of the Roman Missal.

The same nature as the Father

In a letter to Gilson dated July 6, 1965, Congar writes: “I am aware of your article from Catholic France. I take the liberty of expressing my agreement to you. I, in January, supported the protest or the questioning of a priest in the same direction. He just remarked that the semi-Arians had signed the formula “of the same nature” and that S. Hilaire had been exiled so as not to admit it” (Gilson Archives). Jacques Maritain wrote in 1965 to Pope Paul VI: The new translation of the Roman Missal.

Lubac’s father’s opinion

De Lubac had sent, in March 1965, a lengthy report addressed to Mgr Boudon, president of the Liturgical Episcopal Commission: “‘Of the same nature, he wrote, does not at all signify concrete unity, identity, and hence the uniqueness of nature or substance. Two beings can be “of the same nature”: it does not follow that they are “one.” The expression says nothing beyond a generic unit. The new translation of the Roman Missal “By abandoning the consubstantial for an expression as loose as ‘of the same nature, continued the Jesuit,  “Henri de Lubac returned to the question again in the mid-1980s: The new translation of the Roman Missal.

Cardinal Liénart and Mgr Renard

The new translation of the Roman Missal. Bishops are sensitive to remarks made in this way, in public or in private. The CNPL archives thus show, behind the scenes, Cardinal Liénart and Mgr Renard.  Mgr René Boudon returns accounts to the assembly of cardinals and archbishops and underlines in passing, which is incontestable; the bishops in May 1964 approved the incriminated formula by a vast majority. The new translation of the Roman Missal.

Political tensions

In 1966, the theological issue was tinged with a political dimension, the immediate effect of which was to make the controversy insoluble in the short and medium term. Jean Madiran, former secretary of Charles Maurras and director of the review Routes, is, organizing an “international petition” ” Once these tensions disappeared, in the entirely different context of the pontificates of Benedict. The new translation of the Roman Missal.

Vocabulary for kids

A more precise formulation

The firmness of the CNPL, the Liturgical Episcopal Commission, and the French episcopate at the time was not self-evident.  “Of the same nature” is not “heretical” The remark of the Liturgical Episcopal Commission of June 12, 1972, was also very correct:  From 1965-1967, a peaceful revision of the translations was conceivable and envisaged. “A hundred times on the job, put your book back. The new translation of the Roman Missal.




Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here