Posted on 12/01/2005 11:58:39 AM PST by NYer
Catholic bishops are usually loath to acknowledge dissent within their ranks. So it was surprising when the U.S. bishops publicly released the results of an internal poll that showed them almost evenly split on new English translations for the Mass. The divisions among the bishops revealed that perhaps they do not walk in lockstep as much as conventional wisdom holds.
Some disagreement is to be expected, of course. But what was surprising about the bishops’ comments on the proposed translations was their intensity and passion. Liturgy is “where the rubber really hits the road, as far as church is concerned,” said Bishop William Skylstad of Spokane, Washington, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). “So [bishops] are very honest in what they have to say.” Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, vice president of the USCCB and U.S. representative to the International Committee on English in the Liturgy (ICEL), agreed. “It’s the most important thing we do, to worship God,” he said. “We’re all pastors here.”
Over the summer, the USCCB Committee on the Liturgy polled bishops on proposed revisions to the Mass. The translations, submitted by ICEL, are intended to bring the post-Vatican II Mass-celebrated in U.S. churches since 1970-in line with new Vatican directives that require greater adherence to the original Latin. [Editor’s Note: For more on the background to the debate over ICEL and how disputes over liturgical language often go to the heart of the practice of collegiality and the implementation of Vatican II, see “Lost in Translation,” by John Wilkins, p. 12.]
Overall, the new translations would change twelve of the nineteen responses recited at Mass by the full congregation. Many of the changes are minor, but significant nonetheless. The familiar exchange between priest and congregation, “Peace be with you / And also with you,” would be replaced by “Peace be with you / And also with your spirit.” The ICEL proposal would return the “mea culpa” (“through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault”) to the Confiteor. Perhaps most jarring, the phrase “Lord, I am not worthy to receive you” would become, “Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof.”
Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie, Pennsylvania, who heads the bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy, said the summer survey found that 52 percent of bishops favored the changes, while 47 percent judged them “fair or poor.” The new translations need a two-thirds vote to pass.
In thirty pages of written comments released by Trautman’s committee, there are harsh responses from several bishops. Trautman said the divisions among the bishops fell along traditional “liberal/conservative” lines, but declined to elaborate. Some bishops complained that the language seemed “too British.” Others called the new translations clumsy, awkward, archaic, wordy, or stilted. “Painful to the ear,” one bishop noted. “During the years I was teaching Latin,” another bishop observed, “had a student submitted comparable translations for classical Latin texts, I would have given him a low grade.”
Not all bishops were critical. Some praised the new translations as more dignified and elegant, with “an air of solemnity and formality that is sometimes missing from current translations,” which were completed under great time pressure in the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council. The most frequent commendation of the new translations concerned the text’s “fidelity” or “faithfulness” to the original Latin (two terms, frequently used by those of a conservative bent within the conference, which echo Benedict XVI’s view that a “reform of the reform” is needed).
On the whole, the bishops found more things to dislike than to praise. “The new ICEL translation is like doing drastic major surgery on a patient in need of a few cosmetic procedures,” one bishop said. One archbishop seemed positively frightened by what might happen when trying to introduce the new translations to the laity: “Some usually quite civil people turned ugly about more changes,” he said.
Taking stock of the bishops’ objections, the Committee on Liturgy recommended that thirty-one of the fifty-two changes be restored to the 1970 version, including the Confiteor. A poll conducted during the week of the November bishops’ meeting, for example, found that 55 percent of bishops reject the “under my roof” revision in the new translation.
Beyond all the sparring over grammar and sentence structure, the bishops demonstrated a deep pastoral concern for their flocks, a concern that is not always evident in the operation of the church’s administrative bureaucracies. Time and again, bishops said their people would not understand-and probably not accept-changes to the prayers they had come to embrace over the thirty-five years since the council’s liturgical reforms were implemented. “What ought to be a source of stability-the liturgy-will become a source of uneasiness and frustration for the good people who continue to come to the Eucharist,” one bishop remarked.
Four years of scandals have given Catholics ample reason to distrust their leaders. The bishops, knowing all too well that the laity’s reservoir of good will has nearly run dry, now seem skittish about giving Catholics something else to be angry over. “I feel we have put our people through a great deal these past few years. They have handled the abuse crisis very well,” one bishop said. “I don’t think they will handle ‘Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof’ very well at all.”
Inquisitor needed, ninenot. Your presence required.
LOL! Staying away from heirarchs sounds like very wise counsel!
Where were these Bishops when the new Mass was being formulated?
"LOL! Staying away from heirarchs sounds like very wise counsel!"
She was a very wise old lady and her best friend was the Most Holy Theotokos! I wouldn't be in the least surprised if she was where the advice came from! :)
Absolutely! You don't want to get hit by the backsplash from a well-aimed lightning bolt!
The comment about the paving in Hell has been variously attributed to St. John Chrysostom, St. John of the Cross, St. Athanasius, and St. Jerome. Of course, they would all be right. Except for this guy:
"“I don’t think they will handle ‘Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof’ very well at all.”"
Judging from the size of the brain contained therein, his skull isn't large enough to use for paving - maybe for kitty litter . . .
. . . oh, darn, now I'm going to have to go to confession on Saturday . . .
I don't say it in Latin, because I don't have the latin memorized, but I do say it in English right after the official response, quietly, but say it I do...and think about the faith of the centurion, too...
"The divisions among the bishops revealed that perhaps they do not walk in lockstep as much as conventional wisdom holds."
This fact is precisely the evidence that the Holy Spirit is the One in charge. The other evidence just as miraculous is how the Jews continue to survive the assault of history because it could only mean that such a people are truly the Apple of God's Eye.
I went to a Spanish language mass once, for a funeral where I was helping to do the post-funeral dinner. I don't have much Spanish language background, only one semester after a whole lot of french and a little Latin, but even then, I could tell that the Spanish seemed more accurate on some points where I knew the English was badly worded, and I felt cheated.
"I always say it in Latin (Domine, non sum dignus, etc.) because the lame paraphrase - probably done that way to avoid using the word "soul," which might have implied something other than materiality and horizontality - offends me so much."
I say it in Latin also, for much the same reason.
I do likewise with the Gloria, among others.
"I don't say it in Latin, because I don't have the latin memorized, but I do say it in English right after the official response, quietly, but say it I do...and think about the faith of the centurion, too..."
And I suspect, KAC, that that is the very reason why the Latin, "Domine, non sum dignus ut intres sub tectum meum, sed tantum dic verbo et sanabitur anima mea!" was put in the Mass in the first place. The Liturgy is supposed to be the ultimate lex orandi, lex credendi event. That line of the noble centurion teaches us more than that we are individually unworthy, it also teaches us that even a Roman military man, the representative of a pagan occupying power, could and did become a believer and that Christ helped him. The story of the Samaritan woman is another example of this, but for a non Semitic person, like you and me, what a powerful image this supplicant Roman is. That centurion is us! You see here, in one small snip of the old Liturgy, how much you Latin Rite Christians lost when the Vatican dropped the old Mass!
"Judging from the size of the brain contained therein, his skull isn't large enough to use for paving - maybe for kitty litter . . ."
My great grandmother would be very happy (and a bit surprised) that an "Americaneetha" (American woman) Roman Catholic would say that!
" . . . oh, darn, now I'm going to have to go to confession on Saturday . . ."
Nah, the Theotokos is chuckling; don't worry! :)
Exactly why I repeat the more accurate version to myself.
"Only say the word and my soul shall be healed."
It's a stepping out in faith. Like the Centurion, we are putting our faith on the line. We are saying, Yes, Lord, even after 2000 years, we believe you are here, at this moment,with us in the Eucharist.
Yes Lord, I know you are Lord, the one who has pity for our soul-sickness, our emptiness, our need for YOU.
Only say the word, Lord, and I believe that you will come into my heart, even if I don't see any bells and whistles, any halos or stigmata.
You are the bread of life. Your flesh is real food, and your blood real drink. And you have called me to your banquet, set me down, dressed me in the white linen of a redeemed soul, and now, not because I could ever deserve it, but because you love me, you feed me with that, yourself, which is the only thing that can heal me, reconcile me, make me whole.
I behold you, Lamb of God, broken in the priest's hand. and in my mind I am back at Calvary, where you hang on the cross broken for love of me. I am at the last supper where you break the bread and say the words, "This is my body."
I am here, kneeling in adoration, for you, my Jesus, are my life, my hope, my Lord.
Adore te devote, latens deitas!
Lord I am not worthy, I can never be worthy,
but because you say the word, you call me to you, my soul will be healed.
**“It’s the most important thing we do, to worship God,” he said. “We’re all pastors here.”**
Thank God for Cardinal George!
But those are the direct words of Scripture spoken by the Centurion to Christ. And what did Christ say to him -- I have not seen such faith!!!!
Where is the faith of our bishops??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.