I especially like the "Prayers at the foot of the Altar"! . . . . . . Oops, there's no altar in the NO - - - wonder why they have the prayers at the foot.................oops, they think of everything - those prayers are gone!

Say, what sort of scandal is that NO perpetrating? Do they want the whole world to lose the faith?

While I tink they are fairly pointless, I look at it this way:

Upon the resumption of the 1950 Tridentine Missal as supreme in the Church, perhaps the pseudo-Catholics will adjust to it that much more easily.

 :cool:

Honestly though, I am still gonna check it out after advent to see what they did, and how they implement it.

I am not holding my breath.

The new translation will get the vernacular closer to the already deficient Latin of the "official" NO.

Until this advent, we have had TWO Novus Ordo Rites. 1.) The NO in Latin (said almost nowhere except Rome &  the Brompton Oratory in England) and 2.) the horrible mistranslations of the NO, which arguably even invalidate the Mass.

So now we have the vernacular closely translated the NO Latin. There are a few benefits.

1.) "For many" will FINALLY replace "for all"(only took them 40+ years). Therefore doubts regarding validity of the form on this basis will become moot.

2.) The big "swindle" in the translation (besides "for many") was the butchering of "Mysterium Fidei" in the Latin NO. It was moved to immediately after the consecration. The Latin "Mysterium Fidei" was supposed to refer BACK to the consecration that just took place. The ICEL idiots of the 70's, instead mistranslated it looking FORWARD. "Let us proclaim the mystery of faith". Then the Mass calls for "When we eat this Bread and drink this Cup, we proclaim your Death, O Lord, until you come again."or something similar. This is NOT the mystery of faith. The mystery of faith is the transubstantiation! So FINALLY this will be corrected. The new English translation accurately states "Mystery of Faith".

That said, the new translation will still be deficient because the original Latin is deficient. "Mystery of Faith" should have never been removed from the consecration of the wine, the offeratory prayers are now awful, etc. Basically all of the criticisms of the Ottaviani intervention still hold to the new translation.

In addition, the translation does nothing to curb EM's, girl-altar boys, irreverent music. Lipstick on a pig indeed.

Noticed one point you made Stevus:

When you say that the English "for all" will be changed back to "for many," and any talk about invalidity will be "moot," I argue that if they're not ordained priests, then it doesn't matter if they're saying the right words or not.

Wonder if this is even a bigger scam than having the words totally wrong in the first place. I mean, what's worse than having a man that poses as a priest (and, worse still, that BELIEVES HIMSELF TO BE A PRIEST) saying the right words? Wouldn't it be better if he weren't a priest (even believing himself to be one, like the first case) and saying the wrong words and not effecting anything or even badly PRETENDING to do such a thing?

Hmm, maybe I was unclear. What's worse?

Scenario 1) Man thinks he's ordained a priest (but the rite of ordination in the NO is not effected, let's say) and says the wrong words of consecration (for all,) thereby forcing the people that have it right (the trads that have seen the defect for the 40 years that the bad translation has been there) to leave because they recognize the problem.

OR

Scenario 2) Man thinks he's ordained a priest (but the rite of ordination in the NO is not effected let's say) and says the RIGHT words of consecration (for many,) thereby fooling the people that have it right (the trads that have seen the defect for the 40 years that the bad translation has been there) luring them back into the Novus Ordo, believing that tradition has been "reverted to" and "obedience."

I would rather they'd continued to keep their horrible translation, because now, this potentially could get a bunch of "reeds blowing in the wind" going back to the Novus Ordo, believing they're not only being obedient, but that Rome is "going traditional," which anyone that truly understands the nature of this beast, will recognize as a show to suck more people into the modernistic way, get more money, et cetera.

This is all the same incrementalism that our parents and grandparents endured (and some succuмbed to,) and the vast majority of us recognize as such. Little by little, they're going to introduce these "changes" to try to fool more and more traditionalists.

Most of us are like this pooch:



... I hope.

Parents,

Please re-read my post. I chose my words very carefully.

Therefore doubts regarding validity of the form on this basis will become moot.

I never said ALL arguments against validity would be moot. I foresaw your very objection regarding validity of orders.  :wink:

2.) The big "swindle" in the translation (besides "for many") was the butchering of "Mysterium Fidei" in the Latin NO. It was moved to immediately after the consecration. The Latin "Mysterium Fidei" was supposed to refer BACK to the consecration that just took place. The ICEL idiots of the 70's, instead mistranslated it looking FORWARD. "Let us proclaim the mystery of faith". Then the Mass calls for "When we eat this Bread and drink this Cup, we proclaim your Death, O Lord, until you come again."or something similar. This is NOT the mystery of faith. The mystery of faith is the transubstantiation! So FINALLY this will be corrected. The new English translation accurately states "Mystery of Faith".

It seems that you are mistaken about the new and improved translation.  From the USCCCB website and pdf of the new translation:

After the "words of the Lord" (as directed by Paul 6 in his Missale Romanum):

91. Then he says:

The mystery of faith.

And the people continue, acclaiming:

We proclaim your Death, O Lord,
and profess your Resurrection
until you come again.

Or:

When we eat this Bread and drink this Cup,
we proclaim your Death, O Lord,
until you come again.

Or:

Save us, Savior of the world,
for by your Cross and Resurrection
you have set us free.

The wording is slightly different (though absent is the "Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again" option; but that one was an ICEL invention and has never actually been in the Latin Missal) but they are essentially the same "mysteries of faith" that have been in place from the beginning of the Novus Ordo.  They don't seem to "refer BACK to the consecration that just took place" any more than they did under the old and yucky translation.

Parents,

Please re-read my post. I chose my words very carefully.

Quote

Therefore doubts regarding validity of the form on this basis will become moot.

I never said ALL arguments against validity would be moot. I foresaw your very objection regarding validity of orders.  :wink:

Actually, when the new translation comes into effect, the consecration will still be doubtful. And I STILL would not trust it.

Why?

Well, besides the fact that it ihighly unlikely a valid priest if offering it, it is still a deficient formula, because it has removed the words "Mysterium fidei."