I expect it from Bishopess Schori . . . but a Catholic Bishop?
Posted on 05/11/2007 10:31:16 AM PDT by NYer
div style="clear:both;">Last month, in a report memorable for its glaring lack of fact-checking, the English edition of the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano announced in its necrology the 2 April death "at age 70" of Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie.
It was actually Trautman's predecessor, Bishop Michael Murphy, who went home to the Lord on that date; Murphy was 91. Though Trautman received an apology from the paper's staff before the edition even hit the street, it was too late to roll back the presses; a prompt correction was issued in the following week's paper, but the first report had already caused a wave of shock among some far-flung prelates.
The chair of the US bishops' Committee on the Liturgy and (concurrently) first critic of the Holy See's increased interest in the mechanics of English-language worship over recent years, Trautman -- who already released one such prominent critique this year in the pages of The Tablet -- launches his most blistering salvo to date on the revised renderings of the Roman Missal in tomorrow's edition of America.
Here's but a sampling:
What will the person in the pew hear and comprehend? Will the words “prefiguring sacrifices of the Fathers” and “born ineffably of the inviolate Virgin,” for example, resonate with John and Mary Catholic? Is this prayer intelligible, proclaimable, reflective of a vocabulary and linguistic style from the contemporary mainstream of U.S. Catholics? Is the liturgical language accessible to the average Catholic and our youth? Does this translated text lead to full, conscious and active participation? I think not.Yep, he's kickin', alright.
This prayer is not an isolated example. While the latest ICEL translations for the proper of the saints and the commons are improved, we still encounter the following: “O God, who suffused blessed John with the spirit of mercy” (Collect for March 8) and “Cyril, an unvanquished champion of the divine motherhood” (Collect for June 27) and odd expressions like “What you have charged us to believe will taste sweet to the heart” (Collect for April 21). Does the
heart “taste?”
All liturgy is pastoral. If translated texts are to be the authentic prayer of the people, they must be owned by the people and expressed in the contemporary language of their culture. To what extent are the new prayers of the Missal truly pastoral? Do these new texts communicate in the living language of the worshiping assembly?...
Will the priest and people understand the words of Eucharistic Prayer 2: “Make holy these gifts, we pray, by the dew of your Spirit”? This translation was among the top 10 texts that the U.S. bishops in their consultation considered most problematic, but still ICEL did not change it.
In the new missal you will hear awkward phrases like “We pray you bid.” This is not American English. Ponder these concrete examples and judge for yourself.
What happened to the liturgical principles of the “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy”? The council fathers of Vatican II stated: “Texts and rites should be drawn up so that they express more clearly the holy things which they signify; the Christian people, as far as possible, should be able to understand them with ease and to take part in them fully, actively and as it befits a community” (No. 21). Note the words “with ease.” This is the norm, the expressed wish in the constitution. This is a prerequisite that calls not just for the accuracy of translated texts but for the easy understanding of those texts.....
Liturgical translations must communicate. If liturgical language is divorced from the reality of culture, communication is impossible.
What is missing in the present moment, unfortunately, is the voice of liturgical scholars and the voice of the laity, the assembly.
If the language of the liturgy is inaccessible, how can liturgy catechize and convey the reality of the living, risen Son of God in the Eucharist? If the language of the liturgy is a stumbling block to intelligibility and proclaimability, then the principle lex orandi, lex credendi is severely compromised. If the language of the liturgy does not communicate, how can people fall in love with the greatest gift of God, the Eucharist?
Church of God, judge for yourselves. Speak up, speak up!
People in the pews are too stupid to understand this stuff, doncha know?
/s/
If it's beyong a third grade reading level, it's too hard, waaaaah....
Pope Donald thinks weer tew stoopid fer dem biggun werdz.
I’d trust pig latin over ANY translation proffered by Donny-baby.
That's a provincial attitude, isn't it? What about the rest of the English speakers?
Dear Bishop Trautperson
Will all due respect sir, you are divorced from reality. It doesn’t really matter to a number of people the accessability of the liturgy, they are horribly catechized anyway. We need to return to the language of the 1962 Roman Missal and quit pandering to the liberals.
Thank you.
Me
One of the purposes of this new translation is to produce a single English version that will be in use by ALL speakers of English, not just Americans. But don’t expect Trautperson to know that. Or care.
I expect it from Bishopess Schori . . . but a Catholic Bishop?
Shame on L'Osservatore Romano.
Don't they know that Trautman died decades ago?
LOL! From the neck up, certainly.
Trautman and his ilk certainly didn’t care much about what Joe and Mary Catholic thought about the liturgy back in the ‘70s when they forced the nes mass on them. All this contemporary language stuff. They had already translated the old mass into English. No protest from the masses. Jacques Maritain, the hero of many liberl Catholics, was a bit perplexed by the zeal of the liturgical reformers. It was his opinion that all that was needed had already been done. But the zealots ran with it. imbued with a radical iconoclasm that hadn’t been seen since the Reformation, and of course by the same sort: Priests in need of affirmation of their self-importance. Never mind what the laity thought. Just bull ahead.
“Does the heart “taste?””
Here is a man with no poetry in his heart.
“If translated texts are to be the authentic prayer of the people, they must be owned by the people and expressed in the contemporary language of their culture.”
What a great big pile of stinking, steaming road apples.
“Speak up.”
Okay. Shut up, Trautman. You’ve done more than enough harm already.
Bravo! Bravo!! (The plebeian masses tossing bouquets of roses, the angelic choirs singing Hosannas...the whole bit!)
We’re just a bunch a’ dumb cat’liks, doncha know? We can’t handle accuracy and biblical imagery in the liturgy and require dumbed down, flat pedestrian lyrics in our worship...
I think what anybody who knows what a collect is, knows what “suffuse” means, doncha?
Personally, I dislike “born ineffably of the inviolate Virgin.” But I’ll take one or two strange expressions over “for the salvation of all,” or “and also with you.”
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.