Plus de Review

We review at the beginning of most classes, not more than 5 minutes. When reviewing, I always add some new information onto the reviewed material. Every little new tendril will reach out toward something else that will crop up later on.

For example, last week we covered some Bible basics and the first two chapters of Genesis:

"Hey y'all, let's review a bit of what we learned last week: what are the two parts of the Bible? The Old Testament and the New Testament. Yes, what's the difference? The Old Testament was before Jesus was born. [new stuff] Yes...we might say Before Christ, B.C. What's B.C? It's how we make dates before Jesus. Yes, and after B.C? Ummm, A.D.? What's that mean? No guesses? It means Anno Domini; it's Latin for "Year of (our) Lord." So the O.T. corresponds to...B.C., yes, and the N.T. to A.D., yes, more or less.

[review] And the O.T. was written in what language? Jewish! Not quite...Hebrew! That's it.  And the N.T.? Latin! No...? Greek! Yes, Greek. [new stuff] By the way, what's the language of the Church? Latin? Yes, there you go. All the unusual words you'll see this year are going to be Hebrew, Greek, or Latin. Sometimes you can guess the language by what I'm reading from.

[review] Somebody tell me about Adam's rib. He misses his rib and wants her back! That's right! [new stuff] How many ribs did God take from Adam? One. Yes...so how many wives should Adam have...three? Ha, no, one! Yes. God didn't take a bunch of ribs for Adam to have a wife posse, just one rib. Now all of us men, and boys, who are future men, inherited that sense of missing something. Honorary son, let's say God took your rib and made her out of it, and you over there, your rib became this girl, and my wife came from my rib. Now if you're missing your rib, do you want his rib? Ha, no I want mine! Right. You don't just want any rib...you want your rib. Well that's how my wife is to me, not just a woman that God made, but what? The woman God made for you? Yes, just for me. I don't want another woman any more than I want someone else's rib."

All of these new bits anticipate concepts that the kids will encounter later on.

The Power of Luck

Regular readers will know my elder daughter nearly died in an accident on Memorial Day ( ICU ). Since then she's finished all her therapy regimens, and can drive again. She's about 80% of her old self, and gradually recovering. However, she lives at home (instead of being in school at the College of Charleston) and is on some meds. Before the accident she had applied for summer work at 5 places, but by the time she was employable again, all the positions were filled. She hasn't been able to get a job, and she's been feeling down about her circumstances.

Last night at my Knights of Columbus business meeting I asked everyone to pray for my daughter's full recovery. Our Insurance Agent, Steve Miller (the other Steve Miller) was sitting next to me, wasn't up on her story, so I filled him in. He said he'd sure pray for her, probably thinking as I used to, there but for the Grace of God....

About 4:00 this afternoon I got a Catechism-related email from Steve (we're both catechists). At the end of the email he wrote, "I have been thinking about Francie since I woke up this morning. All the LeBlancs are in our prayers."

At about 4:30 Francie came in and asked if she could borrow some money to buy some dressy clothes. Umm yeah, I guess, what are they for? Well, she just got back from calling on the place she most wanted to work for back before Memorial Day, and they hired her to start tomorrow as the hostess! The daughter is so re-energized and optimistic, I think she may have recovered to 85% in about an hour.

The power of...you know.

At the top, Francesca and Alexandra about 9 years ago.

Helpmeet

This post is also available through Sunday Snippets

This is  a common interchange in my house:

"You are a great wife." (Love sees clearly)

"That's because you're the perfect husband." (Love is blind)

I have wondered for a couple of decades now, what makes for the best spouse? And yesterday I figured it out, I think, with some help from Fr. Dwight Longenecker, author and blogger. In one of his books I remember a line like this about saints:

A saint is someone who let God make him into everything God intended for him to be.

Which I have adjusted to:

The best spouse is one that most helps you to let God make you all He intended for you to be.

Which is a good working definition in my household.

Other definitions are welcome.

Podcastapalooza

Hey y'all, I'll be on the The Catholic Revolver with Jerry | Internet Radio | Blog Talk Radio live on Saturday the 4th at 12 PM Pacific, 2 PM Central, & 3 PM Eastern.

Here's the link:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/catholicrevolver/2010/09/04/the-catholic-revolver-with-jerry--christian-leblanc

While you hold your breath 'til Saturday, have a listen to some of Jerry's other podcasts, such as:
 
 The Catholic Revolver with Jerry - Alex Basile 8/3/2010 - Jerry Weber | Internet Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Alex is a published (as in PUBLISHED) catechist; we both write columns at Amazing Catechists, the brainchild of Lisa Mladinich who is also a published (as in PUBLISHED) catechist:

The Catholic Revolver with Jerry - Lisa Mladinich 7/26/2010 - Jerry Weber | Internet Radio | Blog Talk Radio

More New Translation

          

Can you read that? Me neither..."rational"..."tunic"..."holocausts"?...willya just speak English?

 In 6th grade Wednesday Sunday School™ we spend 3 classes on the Mass, taught from the Missalette. The Mass quotes from the Bible extensively, and I expect the kids to recognize some of those instances, and figure out why they matter. Unfortunately, the current English translation of the Latin text isn't reliably close to the 'original' 1970 Latin Mass, nor to the English of the New American Bible, which can make the Scriptural sources hard to figure out. For example, the children are taught the story of the Centurion. In the NAB, he says:  "Lord, I am not worthy to have you enter under my roof; only say the word and my servant will be healed." But as we approach Communion in the Mass, we say: "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed," which is so paraphrased I have to coach the kids into seeing the connection. And I wonder: what's the point of quoting Scripture if the quote can't be recognized by the typical layperson at Mass? I assume the prior translators wanted a more accessible text for the peeps in the pews, even if there was a corresponding loss of meaning and Biblical context. But if 11-year-olds can and do rise to the occasion, then their elders should be able to manage as well...which reminds me of the KJV/ Douai Rheims translation brouhaha in the early 17th century. 

Digressing already I see.

Anyway, I've been periodically keeping up with news about the final text of the Roman Missal, Third Edition; what I'd call the New & Improved English Mass. I've hoped for a text which is closer to the Latin Mass and closer to Scripture, which makes the catechist's job easier. For those who must know every detail, here's the link to the approved revised text:

http://usccb.org/romanmissal/girm-texts.shtml

The USCCB subtitles its Third Edition webpage "New Words: A Deeper Meaning, but the Same Mass," and they are absolutely right. I might've said "Back to the Old Words: A Deeper Meaning, but the Same Mass," but I wasn't on the committee.

And for those who simply must access the 1970 Latin text (you know who you are) here it is:

http://www.catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/TextContents/Index/4/SubIndex/67/TextIndex/9

Out of the blue on Saturday (8/21), I learned from the pulpit that our parish would be hosting a lecture on Sunday by Msgr. Bruce Harbert on the New Translation of the Roman Canon; he's the executive director of ICEL (International Committee on English in the Liturgy), and superintended the translation. On Sunday his lecture covered the new translation in general, and specifically the first few lines of the Mass as examples. I was already familiar with the newly-revised Centurion's quote and preferred it to what we have now, and during the Q&A I asked him to comment on that particular bit of revision.

First, he said that to comment on the Centurion's line, he should back up and cover that whole part of the Mass. He started here: "This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world," which is replaced by "Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sins of the world." Catechetically the new version is much better, since it more closely aligns with John 1: 29 & 36.

The second line we have now is "Happy are those who are called to his supper." The new Third Edition says "Blessed are those called to the supper of the Lamb," which is closer to its source, Revelations 19:9. I would truly prefer "Blessed are those called to the wedding feast of the Lamb," per the Bible verse, but the 1970 Latin text says 'supper' not 'wedding feast'. So I'll still have to do some explaining as we go from the Missalette to the Bible. I do wonder why the writers of the Latin text didn't say 'wedding feast,' which is so much richer a concept than 'supper,' (Jesus marrying His Bride, the Church) but I wasn't on the committee. Think supper; now think wedding feast. Which one seems Heavenly to you? Uh-huh.

Last comes the Centurion, who now says, "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed," and will soon say, "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed." (Mt 8:8, Lk 7:6)  Again, I'd prefer the verse, "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my servant shall be healed," which is what he like, said to Jesus, y'know? But I wasn't on the committee.

[Here are three texts in Latin: Ecce Agnus Dei, ecce qui tollit peccata mundi/ Beati qui ad cenam Agni vocati sunt/ Domine, non sum dignus ut intres sub tectum meum: sed tantum dic verbo, et sanabitur anima mea.]

Msgr. elaborated a bit on each, and why the new translation was better. Then he paused...and said, "Does this answer your question?" I responded that it was a bugaboo every year in Catechism class to teach that chunks of the Mass are taken from Scripture, but the quotes in Mass are so altered that it's hard for the kids to make the connections without lots of explaining. The new translation will make my job easier. He then said that was really the point of the whole lecture: that the Third Edition will make the connection between the Mass and the Bible more explicit. As the meeting broke up, someone came over and said he had never realized that "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed" was intended to recall the Centurion. Imagine that.

(As it turns out, these three lines that he discussed are the same three that get most of the attention in my Mass classes, per this link: MassDensity.)

There's one other revision I'm aware of that will also make for better catechesis, which occurs in the Eucharistic prayer:

Currently: "Almighty God, we pray that your angel may take this sacrifice to your altar in heaven. Then, as we receive from this altar the sacred body and blood of your Son, let us be filled with every grace and blessing."

New: "In humble prayer we ask you, almighty God: command that these gifts be borne by the hands of your holy Angel to your altar on high in the sight of your divine majesty, so that all of us who through this participation at the altar receive the most holy Body and Blood of your Son may be filled with every grace and heavenly blessing." In this case I'll be able to emphasize "participation." And the new text is much more vivid, which helps 6th-graders if not jaded adults.

(More on this part of the Mass here: Samson&EucharisticPrayer#1)

So I'm happy with the Third Edition Mass, and will be using it this year in Wednesday Sunday School™. By the time it debuts in November 2011, the kids'll be prepared, and may even explain some of it to their parents.

Translation Intermission

Between the last post and the next one, I'm adding this useful observation by friend, fellow blogger, and Latin translator extraordinaire, Magister Christianus, co-author of the book shown above. Magister writes in response to the issues involved in the latest English translation of the 1970 Latin Mass:

"If the English were not over their heads, I would share this with my students to help them see the importance of precision in language and all that goes into issues of translation. At some point I usually tell them that I do not know how to translate Latin myself. They are shocked, and then I explain with a simple sentence like:

Puella aquam portat.

My first year Latin students, who are just two weeks into the year, could translate this as "The girl carries water," but I point out some variations. Which of these is the best translation:

The girl carries the water.

The girl carries water.

A girl carries the water.

A girl carries water.

"This can go on and on until you have produced 27 distinct translations, several of which are not Standard English, but all of which incorporate some, though undoubtedly not all of what is going on in the Latin. The closest thing to a full translation is something like the following monstrosity:"

"A girl, perhaps one in particular or one in general or even the concept of girl, but no matter what understood as a smaller or lesser boy and thus significant for her attention-getting placement in the sentence, though the attention may simply be to connect the lesser boy with the servile content of the sentence, is now in the process of carrying or in general transports, but at this moment or in general does nothing else with, water, whether that be aquatic fluid in general, a particular yet unidentified container of water, or the specific container of water that had taken the speaker’s attention."

Magister blogs in English at Bedlam or Parnassus, and in Latin at Ecclesia Latina.

New Translation

Yes, yes, it's completely exciting that we're getting a New (and unlike New Coke, improved) Mass in English, which will make catechizing the little pagans much easier, and which I'll post about in more detail later. In the meantime, get ready for whining from the pews and desks about having to, like, learn new stuff, y'know?

Just to show ya how old this Anglophone complaint is, let's look at the Preface to the 1611 King James Bible, which followed hot on the heels of the Douai-Rheims Bible, which was the English translation done under the auspices of the Catholic Church. In trying to stay faithful to the source text (St. Jerome's Latin Vulgate), the D-R translators borrowed some Latin words (some of which had first been borrowed from Greek) into their English Bible. The KJV translators, however, objected to putting such scholarly, unfamiliar words into a book which the common man should be able to understand, and said as much.

First, unlike the Puritans, they aren't gonna fiddle with what already works:

"Lastly, we have on the one side avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans, who leave the old Ecclesiastical words, and betake them to other, as when they put WASHING for BAPTISM, and CONGREGATION instead of CHURCH..."

That is, Greek words such as 'Baptism' βαπτίζω are ok when everybody already knows them, and there's no point in replacing them with plain Anglo-Saxon stock such as 'Washing.' Which makes me wonder about those Puritans: 'washing' wouldn't translate 'baptize' all that well for the full-immersion-no-sprinkling crowd. And sturdy Anglo-Saxon 'Church' beats the Latin-sourced 'Congregation' any day. English people are familiar with Baptism and Church...leave well enough alone. (I wonder why they didn't try to translate Shakespeare into English? That's a little joke.)

Nor will they get hoity-toity like the Catholics across the Channel:

"....as also on the other side we have shunned the obscurity of the Papists, in their AZIMES, TUNIKE, RATIONAL, HOLOCAUSTS, PRAEPUCE, PASCHE, and a number of such like, whereof their late Translation is full, and that of purpose to darken the sense, that since they must needs translate the Bible, yet by the language thereof, it may be kept from being understood. But we desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar."

And to some extent they are right: who knows what azimes are? But then again, tunic, rational, and holocausts have been regular English words for a long time now, and thank ya Douai-Rheims for them; I suppose the KJV translators roll over in their graves every time an Englishman says "rational." Even Paschal is standard Church vocabulary on both sides of the Atlantic. Regarding praepuce...well, this isn't a blog about plumbing, and even to mention it is to say too much.

So the little effort it'll take to get acquainted with the new Mass in English should be worth it, and I can already assure you, neither azimes nor praepuce makes an appearance, thank goodness. We sure don't need no stinkin' azimes: if English was good enough for Jesus it's good enough for me.

This article has also been posted at Amazing Catechists.