PrayTell - Worship, Wit & Wisdom

US Catholic: Bend or bow, how not to pray English

Nov 8

Posted by Other Voices in Translation / New Missal | 12 Comments

“Bend or bow, how not to pray English” by Bryan Cones at US Catholic.

Send to Kindle:

This entry was posted on November 8, 2010, 6:01 pm and is filed under Translation / New Missal. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

12 Comments

#1 by John Drake on November 8, 2010 - 9:43 pm

Reply Quote

Yawn. Maybe US Catholic ought to get out and do some real reporting of their own. Mr. Cones is the sole reason I have not renewed my subscription to that wonderful publication.

Report Comment
- #2 by Bryan Cones on November 16, 2010 - 11:56 am
  
  Reply Quote
  
  We did. And quite even-handed if I do say so myself. No hissy fits. http://www.uscatholic.org/church/2009/07/incoming-missal
  
  Report Comment
#3 by Christopher Douglas on November 8, 2010 - 10:39 pm

Reply Quote

Why is this diatribe posted here? The opening sentence sounds like a two-year-old’s banging his rattle on his high chair. If someone doesn’t like the translation or process, can’t we at least expect him to abide by a modicum of self-control? This melt-down hissy-fit makes one want to politely avert ones eyes. Or is this what the left believes to be a reasonable, civilized response? You must be kidding?

Report Comment
- #4 by Gregg Smith on November 9, 2010 - 8:42 am
  
  Reply Quote
  
  You don’t have to read it if you don’t want to. Is the writer not allowed to post an opinion? Why so hatefuland upset?
  
  Report Comment
  - #5 by Chris Grady on November 9, 2010 - 12:52 pm
    
    Reply Quote
    
    Because that is just how they are.
    
    Report Comment
  - #6 by Christopher Douglas on November 10, 2010 - 9:57 am
    
    Reply Quote
    
    I’m neither full of hate nor upset; however, you’re right that he can say whatever he likes and that this is not my site and that I don’t have to read it. They can post here whatever they like. But, then, it might be fun to post a diatribe from another perspective, as well. And when some posters attack that would-be article, I hope that you would defend it in an even-handed manner.
    
    Report Comment
#7 by Joe O'Leary on November 9, 2010 - 2:57 am

Reply Quote

This “hissy fit” topos is just another talking point — his article is spot on, and you do not point to anything in it with which you can disagree. Surely everyone has got the message by now? Surely the train wreck is not going ahead as scheduled?

Report Comment
#8 by Ioannes Andreades on November 9, 2010 - 12:48 pm

Reply Quote

Why can’t the pope change something issued by a council, provided that it is no re: faith/morals? Mr. Cone’s article is sloppy.

Perhaps I am alone in thinking that bowing is usually a down and up movement, taking about two seconds. Whereas bending is a more accurate description of what is going on in the Euchraristic prayer. The priest is supposed to remain with his torso lowered for a longer time than what would probably generally be though of as a bow. Either way, it’s not a big deal. There are larger mistakes in the 2010 “corrections”. Harping on bow vs. bend is irrelevant.

Report Comment
- #9 by John Drake on November 10, 2010 - 9:16 am
  
  Reply Quote
  
  In the rubrics for the Creed, for example, it tells us how long to bow…
  
  He was born of the Virgin Mary,
  and became man. (all bow during these words.)
  
  Report Comment
  - #10 by Ioannes Andreades on November 10, 2010 - 11:26 am
    
    Reply Quote
    
    I once read a fascinating article by a writer of instruction manuals for assembling parts of nuclear power plants. He said that it is not enough to write in order to be understood; one must write in order not to be misunderstood (a fault of which my writing is often guilty). I submit that the wording is still unclear, as making an up-and-down movement at some point during the pronunciation of “these words” is still consistent with the directive. Perhaps, “All bow for the duration of these words,” would work. Still, I think that “bend” would work well.
    
    Report Comment
#11 by Chris Grady on November 10, 2010 - 11:25 am

Reply Quote

Christopher Douglas :
I’m neither full of hate nor upset; however, you’re right that he can say whatever he likes and that this is not my site and that I don’t have to read it. They can post here whatever they like. But, then, it might be fun to post a diatribe from another perspective, as well. And when some posters attack that would-be article, I hope that you would defend it in an even-handed manner.

Ah, welcome to the wonderful ‘trad Catholic’ world where two wrongs always make a right!

Report Comment
- #12 by Christopher Douglas on November 10, 2010 - 12:59 pm
  
  Reply Quote
  
  Huh? I was responding to Mr. Smith, from whom one might legitimately hope for evenhandedness. As for you, if past performance is any indication: not the proverbial snowball’s chance.
  
  Report Comment