Re: [liturgy-l] Re: Lord's Prayer
- I don't think anyone argued that either version was "heretical." That's a bit of a stretch.Lew
On Jun 21, 2012, at 9:52 PM, dlewisaao@... wrote:I don't see this as being a big problem, either. Most people simply are familiar with the traditional wording, so it should be very easy to teach to the extent required. Somehow I don't think that there is a successful argument for the traditional wording being heretical or off target theologically, but I do think that forcing people into newer, often awkward language would be bad pastorally.David---------------------------
dlewisaao@...In a message dated 6/21/2012 9:42:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vistantn@... writes:
I’m sorry, but I just don’t see this as being such an insurmountable problem. I am an engineer (I speak math, equations, and drawings) language is truly my “second” language. I think in pictures, not words. And, OK, I am and “old ____” (you fill in the blank). I was not suggesting that Rite I (or any other expression of the Tudor English) was either: a) everyone’s cup o’tea or; b) easily understood without explanation. I was only suggesting that, “Thou that takest away the sins of the world, have mercy upon us,” is pleasanter (to MY ear) than the abominable (and thank God, gone) translation, “You who take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us.” (It always reminded me of a chocolate beverage.) As for the “tremendous amount of catec hesis” I will only say that 60 years ago it could be accomplished by the time one reached the age of 10 or 11 – which is hardly an age for “extensive” learning … again, your experience may vary.
In omnibus pax,
St. Paul’s (TEC), Murfreesboro, TN
(Where the installation of the new Letourneau organ is my primary focus a t the moment.)
On 6/21/12 3:38 PM, "Daniel Lawson" <k95dl01@...> wrote:
It takes an immense amount of catechesis so that the faithful can use the language to communicate the closeness to God the language intends to communicate.
Texts grow on you. In my congregation we used to alternate between the PB and the ICET versions of the Lord's Prayer. At some point I stopped alternating and now we use the ICET text exclusively for all uses of the Lord's Prayer. That includes at he end of council and committee meetings as well as in public liturgies. Using the PB version would now trip up a lot of people, especially the youth for whom the ICET text rolls off their lips.
Frank C. Senn
--- On Thu, 6/21/12, Joseph Farias <jfarias@...> wrote:
From: Joseph Farias <jfarias@...>
Subject: [liturgy-l] Re: Lord's Prayer
Date: Thursday, June 21, 2012, 2:05 PM
When I was at Notre Dame, it seemed that the CCT translation of the Lord's Prayer worked well chanted but never "worked" when recited. So we ended up using traditional language when spoken for the reasons cited earlier.
What I find more interesting is in the RC lectionary the revision changed the more critical translation to the prayed traditional language text. I presume biblicists might find this even more disconcerting than I.
-- Michelangelo, 1561
Joseph G. Farias 973-267-5330 jfarias@...
jfarias@... St. Thomas More
jfarias@... Convent Station NJ
(Consider the environment. Please print this email only if absolutely necessary.)