Current and Forthcoming: 3rd Sunday of Lent


Father, you have taught us to overcome our sins
by prayer, fasting, and works of mercy.
When we are discouraged by our weakness,
give us confidence in your love.

O God, author of every mercy and of all goodness,
who in fasting, prayer and almsgiving
have shown us a remedy for sin,
look graciously on this confession of our lowliness,
that we, who are bowed down by our conscience,
may always be lifted up by your mercy.


Lord, in sharing this sacrament
may we receive your forgiveness
and be brought together in unity and peace.

As we receive the pledge
of things yet hidden in heaven
and are nourished while still on earth
with the Bread that comes from on high,
we humbly entreat you, O Lord,
that what is being brought about in us in mystery
may come to true completion.

COMMENT: The first collect has psychological focus; the second a spiritual one. The prayer after communion in the first version has a social focus; the second is deeply personal.

12 Replies to “Current and Forthcoming: 3rd Sunday of Lent”

  1. Preface of the Annunciation (MR 2002):
    Vere dignum et iustum est, aequum et salutáre, nos tibi semper et ubíque grátias ágere: Dómine, sancte Pater, omnípotens aetérne Deus: per Christum Dóminum nostrum.
    Quem inter hómines et propter hómines nascitúrum, Spíritus Sancti obumbránte virtúte, a caelésti núntio Virgo fidénter audívit et immaculátis viscéribus amánter portávit,
    ut et promissiónes fíliis Israel perfíceret véritas, et géntium exspectátio patéret ineffabíliter adimplénda.
    Per quem maiestátem tuam adórat exércitus Angelórum, ante conspéctum tuum in aeternitáte laetántium. Cum quibus et nostras voces ut admítti iúbeas, deprecámur, sócia exsultatióne dicéntes:

    For with faith the Virgin Mary heard
    from the heavenly messenger
    that, by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit,
    the Christ was to be born among human beings and for their sake.
    In her immaculate womb she lovingly bore him,
    that the promises to the children of Israel might be fulfilled
    and the hope of nations be realized beyond all telling.

    For the Virgin Mary heard with faith
    that the Christ was to be born among men and for men’s sake
    by the overshadowing power of the Holy Spirit.
    Lovingly she bore him in her immaculate womb,
    that the promises to the children of Israel might come about
    and the hope of nations be accomplished beyond all telling.

    It appears that in their zeal to "de-inclusify" 2008, Vox Clara has inexplicably misplaced the Archangel Gabriel! A publisher friend tells me that, as of yesterday, they were on BATCH #5 of "ERRATA" to be corrected in the Missal proofs. It is to be hoped these "errata" include not only erroneously used semicolons, but true errors of translation like this one.

    Surely 2008's "fulfilled" more adequately renders "perficeret veritas" than "come about," as pedantic a phrase as anything you'd find in the old ICEL.

    Speaking of the old ICEL, the Vox Clara preface conclusion reverts to the old ICEL: "May our voices, we pray, join with theirs" (old ICEL: "blend"), thus failing altogether to translate "ut admitti iubeas," the unmistakable invocation of God's agency in our worship, rendered beautifully (and accurately) in 2008 (as Liturgiam Authenticam mandates): "we pray you, BID our voices join with theirs."

  2. Jeffrey: I think your comment explains why some are griping and whining about the new translation. Their problem is not with the grammar and language of the new versions, but with the faith and belief they embody.

  3. While many of the "new" collects and prayers are richer in many ways, there is still is the annoying, consistent grammatical problem. It is a good and joyful thing that a list of errata is being created; but, on the other hand, it would have been more professional and even pastoral if these errors had been caught and corrected prior to the Missal's publication.

  4. Henry:
    Some, but not all. And it is very discouraging for those of us who are quite happy with "the faith and belief embodied by the new translation," to have conservative blogs regularly lump together everyone who objects to the new translation as "those whining about the new (corrected) translation", when we know very well that the person writing those words knows as well as we do that the 2010 is an inferior creation, and when we know equally as well why he don't come right out and say it.

  5. it would have been more professional and even pastoral if these errors had been caught and corrected prior to the Missal's publication.

    As the author of numerous published textbooks, I find this entirely normal. Typically,the principal culling of errors takes place by reviewers of the page proofs during the publication process.

    However, I have been studying carefully the revised daily propers since the beginning of Lent, and have yet to spot any grammatical typo or stylistic infelicity in any of them. So I'm beginning to wonder whether the alleged difficulties have been exaggerated, perhaps deliberately.

  6. "have yet to spot any grammatical typo or stylistic infelicity in any of them."

    Does the phrase: "God who have . . ." make grammatical sense? This occurs frequently in numerous places which can be easily found.
    Text books in the past twenty-five years at least have been riddled with errors of spelling and grammar. Often this is the result of readers/editors depending on spell checkers coupled with publishers haste to get textbooks "out" in order to harness the profits they bring. One would hope for better in the new Missal.

  7. "Oh, God who have…" is correct grammatically, as you are addressing God, so the verb is in the second person, i.e., you…have.

  8. I'm not sure that is correct. If God is being addressed using the word "you" as suggested in your example would be correct; otherwise using "who" is not correct. However, you raise a good point about God being addressed. If that is the case, greater clarity of that expression would be good. I think the problem fundamentally lies in the slavish desire to translate into English the Latin mass without enough credence being given to the poeticism that is lost by doing that. Added to that is the mystery of who actually did the translating at Vox Clara. Looking at the Anglican Use rite would have provided a beautiful and poetic model. While I do not particularly like some of the translations, we're stuck with them, much like a marriage, for better or worse. As musicians, I think we need to provide to the texts as much musical beauty as we can. After all, the weather forecast can be a thing of beauty if set to the right music. : )

  9. @Myron:

    Although sometimes it can be hard to wrap the mind around on a first hearing, personally, I really do think the issue you're pointing out is in fact one of the best changes in the revised translation. Prayers are not supposed to be *about* God, they are supposed to be *to* God. The current ICEL prayers regularly take the didactic form, "God, you did X. Now please do Y." ("God, you led the children of Israel out of Egypt. Lead us to salvation," or whatever.) The constant practice of instructing God concerning facts about himself ("God, you are merciful and compassionate") is a very unnatural manner of speaking to somebody, and the overall effect of this type of construction is that, even though they are nominally in the form of an address to God, such prayers end up regarded pretty much as mini-lessons for the congregation. Which is not their real function.

  10. Here's a beauty: the Prayer Over the Offerings for Saturday of the Fourth Week of Lent:
    Oblationibus nostris, quaesumus, Domine,
    placare susceptis,
    et ad te nostras etiam rebelles compelle propitius voluntates.
    Per Christum.

    Here's 2008:
    Be pleased with our offerings and accept them,
    we pray, O Lord,
    and in mercy compel even our defiant wills
    to turn to you.
    Through Christ our Lord.

    Here's what was sent to the publishers (and remains, unless it's been corrected in the FIVE batches of ERRATA sent out to them so far):
    Be pleased, O Lord, we pray,
    with these oblations you receive from our hands,
    and even when our wills are defiant
    constrain them mercifully to turn to you.
    Through Christ our Lord.

    First of all, the adverb should come BEFORE the verb: Vox Clara has several of these misplaced adverbs, about which the Congregation was warned in the "Areas of Difficulty" brief LONG LONG before the typsetting of new Missals got underway. "Constrain them mercifully" is just incorrect English (not to mention that "compelle" is "compel," not "constrain." But if you compare Vox Clara's "creation" with the Latin and 2008, you'll see other problems:
    (1) “from our hands” is not in the Latin; (2) there is no subordinate clause in the Latin but a direct petition; (3) "etiam" modifies "nostras rebelles voluntates"; (4) “even when” makes no sense in the context of the prayer; perhaps, “especially when.” But the problem should even come up since, as noted, there is no such construction in the Latin!

    Vox Clara is the group that's supposed to insure fidelity to Liturgiam Authenticam, right?

Comments are closed.