|
作者
|
內容
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/8 上午 08:38:00
|
|
|
在新的禮儀年，相信大家在堂區的主日彌撒中，都會看到和用到教區禮委新出版的《主日感恩祭》小冊子。不知大家對它有何看法？
一、它的設計和排版；
二、它與先前《主日感恩祭》版本的不同之處
三、現時的「試用版」有何值得改善之處？
|
|
stefano
|
Posted -
2006/12/8 上午 11:53:06
|
|
|
edward兄所指的是現在將臨期的嗎??
那只此一本, 去年的新書嗎???
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/8 下午 02:50:37
|
|
|
是的。
不知大家對該書有何看法？
新和舊其實是很相對的。我們的新約，不也己有二千年的歷史嗎？
|
|
stefano
|
Posted -
2006/12/8 下午 04:11:34
|
|
|
記得個時講過, 舊個本有d詞彙比較深or未能達到原文既意思, 所以重新整理. 再將這是上主的話改為上主的話.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2006/12/9 下午 11:42:32
|
|
|
設計和排版當然可以做得更好,可惜當時(去年)的時間太急.
其實改版的工作是頗認真的,他們將拉丁版本,連梵二後的五(?忘記了,所以不肯定)個中文譯文及英文譯文列出比對,當然也有今版提議的譯文.最後修訂出今次的版本.所以實在應感謝那些為這事工出過力的弟兄姊妹.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/11 下午 07:42:46
|
|
|
公教報對新禮儀書將「這是上主的話」改為「上主的話」曾作過專文刊載來探討。
但將書信引言的「弟兄們」改為「弟兄姊妹們」則似乎不知為甚麼。是為政治正確嗎？
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/11 下午 07:43:58
|
|
|
不過話說回來，翻譯始終不是一件討好的工作。大家互相鼓勵吧！
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2006/12/11 下午 11:43:41
|
|
|
edward,
你是想說「這是上主的話」改為「上主的話」吧!
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2006/12/11 下午 11:57:32
|
|
|
General Introduction to the Lectionary (Second Edition)
Sacred Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship
21 January, 1981
c) The "Incipit"
124. In this Order of Readings the first element of the incipit is the customary introductory phrase: "At that time," "In those days," "Brothers and Sisters," "Beloved," "Dearly Beloved," "Dearest Brothers and Sisters," or "Thus says the Lord," "Thus says the Lord God." These words are not given when the text itself provides sufficient indication of the time or the persons involved or where such phrases would not fit in with the very nature of the text. For the individual languages, such phrases may be changed or omitted by decree of the competent Authorities.
After the first words of the incipit the Order of Readings gives the proper beginning of the reading, with some words deleted or supplied for intelligibility, inasmuch as the text is separated from its context. When the text for a reading is made up of non-consecutive verses and this has required changes in wording, these are appropriately indicated.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/12 上午 08:31:33
|
|
|
哈哈，是的。已經改了。謝謝提點！
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/12 上午 08:39:13
|
|
|
但按照該份《Ordo Lectionum Missae》的原文，似乎卻沒有「brothers and sisters」一語。
有時，英文版的禮規翻譯，亦有很明顯的「以意創造」成分啊。
也許我們可以問：教會出過哪些Decree，是准許中文版的「弟兄們」譯成「弟兄姊妹們」的呢？
當然，小弟亦不想單從法理上考慮。問題是在於：
一、若從文體的內容和結構而言，保祿書信甚至整個新約的首要聽眾（primary audience），是「弟兄們」抑或「弟兄姊妹們」？
二、「Incipit」既然是置於「恭讀....」之後和「上主的話」之前，那麼它的角色，是在於忠實地引述聖經的語句，抑或只是一種禮儀稱謂，以致日後可以任意地改為「各位先生女士」、「各位靚仔靚女」？
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/12 下午 05:38:18
|
|
|
按靚仔兄所引述文件的原文：
DE "INCIPIT"
[124] "Incipit" continet primam verba introductoria consueta: "In illo tempore", "In diebus illis", "Fratres", "Carissimi", "Haec dicit Dominus", quae tamen omittuntur ubi in ipso textu est sufficiens indicatio temporis vel personarum, vel ubi ex natura textus talia verba non sunt opportuna. Pro singulis linguis popularibus tales formulae mutari vel omitti possunt ex decreto Auctoritatum competentium. [...]
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/13 下午 05:10:38
|
|
|
此外，按新書的聖誕禮儀：
〔p.36, 43, 47, 51〕
「信經：念至『他因聖神降孕，由童貞瑪利亞誕生』時，單膝跪下致敬（視乎情況需要，可以深鞠躬代替）。」
然而，若按照原文：
Dicitur "Credo". Ad verba "Et incarnatus est" genuflectitur.
這裡的「genuflectitur」其實是指單膝跪，抑或雙膝跪？
按照《Ordo》（2006年版，p.39）：
In Missis vigiliae et diei, ad verba symboli "Et incarnatus est ..." omnes genua flectunt. (IM, 137)
而根據彌撒經書總論的第137條：
Symbolum cantatur vel recitatur a sacerdote una cum populo (cf. n.68), omnes stantibus. Ad verba "Et incarnatus est", etc. omnes profunde se inclinant; in sollemnitatibus vero Annuntiationis et Nativitatis Domini genua flectunt.
在彌撒中單膝下跪，可說是主祭所特有的姿勢。而禮書上所述的「genua flectere」一詞，則有別於「genuflectere」，似乎只可以解作「雙膝下跪」。況且，按照《總論》第43條，信眾的「genuflectant」，實際上是指雙膝下跪。
問題是：「genuflecteri」（被動語型）一詞，又當何解？
一、若按照上文下理，則似乎譯作「屈膝」或意譯為「跪下」較妥。
二、為何在中譯版本，選擇以宗徒信經而不以尼西亞信經作為翻譯的依據呢？
三、「視乎情況需要，可以深鞠躬代替」一語，是否加入了譯者的個人闡釋呢？「視乎情況需要」與禮規所指的「地方所限、或參禮人數眾多、或因其它合理原因受阻」（n.43），實在甚不同矣。
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/13 下午 06:55:33
|
|
|
此外，關於「降生成人」一語所牽涉的問題。
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2006/12/13 下午 09:33:46
|
|
|
我有一印象,不知有沒有記錯,在禮儀中可以深躹躬來代替單膝跪/跪下是1924年中國主教會議的決議.我沒有該書在手,就算有,以我的拉丁程度,要找也有點難度.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/13 下午 11:26:05
|
|
|
靚仔兄：
一、小弟的淺見是－－梵二禮儀改革後的彌撒禮規，已經完全地替代了舊禮的整個系統。因此，以往關於舊禮禮規的解釋及地方適應，都隨著禮儀改革所推出的新制而失效了。
二、若教友在某些禮儀場合中下跪，而在其他禮規要求下跪的部分深鞠躬，則很不連貫。
比如：小弟堂區的聖堂落成前就試過－－聖週四的主的晚餐彌撒，祝聖聖體聖血部分「因教友沒有這個習慣」不下跪，但在恭移聖體部分則下跪。這是甚麼邏輯？
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2006/12/18 下午 10:26:27
|
|
|
一.習慣/俗是不會就這樣隨"改制"而取消的,除非他們明顯違反新制,或新制有明文規定.這是教會法一向的做法.
否則,輔祭穿的"紅白衣"是違規,在禮儀中搖鈴也不恰當.
二.聖禮部回應領聖體後可自由坐或跪,及在領聖體前不可以特別法限制領聖體者不准作單膝跪不是已答了你的問題嗎?
呀!我似乎理解錯了你的第二條問題.是的,邏輯上是不大連貫的.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/21 下午 09:00:13
|
|
|
靚仔兄：
何以見得，按照新禮禮規，輔祭穿紅白禮袍或在彌撒中搖鈴，屬不恰當之行為？
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2006/12/22 上午 09:45:32
|
|
|
因為如照你所說,舊的習慣不可保留,則這兩樣新禮規中都沒有的事物,都應一併停止廢除.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/22 下午 12:40:28
|
|
|
Dear Handsome:
Cf. GIRM 1975
109. A little before the consecration, the server may ring a bell as a signal to the faithful. Depending on local custom, he also rings the bell at the showing of both the host and the chalice.
301. Ministers below the order of deacon may wear the alb or other vestment that is lawfully approved in each region.
304. Regarding the design of vestments, the conference of bishops may determine and propose to the Apostolic See adaptations that correspond to the needs and usages of their regions.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/22 下午 12:47:16
|
|
|
Also:
QUERY: In Mass with a congregation celebrated more solemnly, different ways of incensation are being used: one plain and simple; the other, the same as the rite for incensation prescribed in the former Roman Missal. Which usage should be followed?
REPLY: It must never be forgotten that the Missal of Pope Paul VI has, since 1970, supplanted the one called improperly "the Missal of St. Pius V," and completely so, in both texts and rubrics. When the rubrics of the Missal of Paul VI say nothing or say little on particulars in some places, it is not to be inferred that the former rite should be observed. Therefore, the multiple and complex gestures for incensation as prescribed in the former Missal (see <Missale Romanum>, Vatican Polyglot Press, 1962: <Ritus servandus> VIII and <Ordo incensandi> pp. LXXXLXXXIII) are not to be resumed.
In incensation the celebrant (GIRM nos. 51 and 105) proceeds as follows: a. toward the gifts: he incenses with three swings, as the deacon does toward the Book of the Gospels; b. toward the cross: he incenses with three swings when he comes in front of it; c. toward the altar: he incenses continuously from the side as he passes around the altar, making no distinction between the altar table and the base.
Notitiae 14 (1978) 301-302, no. 2.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/12/22 下午 12:52:50
|
|
|
It is quite clear that our liturgies, even in its official promulgations, in the 1970-1980s are quite marked by a so-called "hermeneutic of discontinuity". Therefore we can unfortunately find official interpretations like these - other examples being, namely, "mea culpa", "pro multis", etc.
Now people say that "The Mass of Pius V" was "never" abolished.
Seemingly this kind of climate is now over and we are heading toward another end of the pendulum.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2007/1/8 上午 10:03:33
|
|
|
看來我是記錯了,搖鈴是沒問題的.
但紅白衣理論上,如照edward所說則需先經地區(主教團)的"許可"才可穿著,對嗎?但梵二後主教團有正式發出這許可嗎?
|
