An Open Letter to the Church Renouncing My Service on I.C.E.L.

An Open Letter to the Church Renouncing my Service on I.C.E.L.
Father Stephen Somerville, STL.

1 – I am a priest who for over ten years collaborated in a work that became a notable harm to the Catholic Faith. I wish now to apologize before God and the Church and to renounce decisively my personal sharing in that damaging project. I am speaking of the official work of translating the new post-Vatican II Latin liturgy into the English language, when I was a member of the Advisory Board of the International Commission on English Liturgy (I.C.E.L.).

2 – I am a priest of the Archdiocese of Toronto, Canada, ordained in 1956. Fascinated by the Liturgy from early youth, I was singled out in 1964 to represent Canada on the newly constituted I.C.E.L. as a member of the Advisory Board. At 33 its youngest member, and awkwardly aware of my shortcomings in liturgiology and related disciplines, I soon felt perplexity before the bold mistranslations confidently proposed and pressed by the everstrengthening radical/progressive element in our group. I felt but could not articulate the wrongness of so many of our committee’s renderings.

3 – Let me illustrate briefly with a few examples. To the frequent greeting by the priest, The Lord be with you, the people traditionally answered, and with your (Thy) spirit: in Latin, Et cum spiritu tuo. But I.C.E.L. rewrote the answer: And also with you. This, besides having an overall trite sound, has added a redundant word, also. Worse, it has suppressed the word spirit which reminds us that we human beings have a spiritual soul. Furthermore, it has stopped the echo of four (inspired) uses of with your spirit in St. Paul’s letters.

4 – In the I confess of the penitential rite, I.C.E.L. eliminated the threefold through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault, and substituted one feeble through my own fault. This is another nail in the coffin of the sense of sin.

5 – Before Communion, we pray Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldst (you should) enter under my roof. I.C.E.L. changed this to ... not worthy to receive you. We loose the roof metaphor, clear echo of the Gospel (Matth. 8:8), and a vivid, concrete image for a child.

6 – I.C.E.L.’s changes amounted to true devastation especially in the oration prayers of the Mass. The Collect or Opening Prayer for Ordinary Sunday 21 will exemplify the damage. The Latin prayer, strictly translated, runs thus: O God, who make the minds of the faithful to be of one will, grant to your peoples (grace) to love that which you command and to desire that which you promise, so that, amidst worldly variety, our hearts may there be fixed where true joys are found.

7 – Here is the I.C.E.L. version, in use since 1973: Father, help us to seek the values that will bring us lasting joy in this changing world. In our desire for what you promise, make us one in mind and heart.

8 – Now a few comments: To call God Father is not customary in the Liturgy, except Our Father in the Lord’s prayer. Help us to seek implies that we could do this alone (Pelagian heresy) but would like some aid from God. Jesus teaches, without Me you can do nothing. The Latin prays grant (to us), not just help us. I.C.E.L.’s values suggests that secular buzzword, “values” that are currently popular, or politically correct, or changing from person to person, place to place. Lasting joy in this changing world, is impossible. In our desire presumes we already have the desire, but the Latin humbly prays for this. What you promise omits “what you (God) command”, thus weakening our sense of duty. Make us one in mind (and heart) is a new sentence, and appears as the main petition, yet not in coherence with what went before. The Latin rather teaches that uniting our minds is a constant work of God, to be achieved by our pondering his commandments and promises. Clearly, I.C.E.L. has written a new prayer. Does all this criticism matter? Profoundly! The Liturgy is our law of praying (lex orandi), and it forms our law of believing (lex credendi). If I.C.E.L. has changed our liturgy, it will change our faith. We see signs of this change and loss of faith all around us.

9 – The foregoing instances of weakening the Latin Catholic Liturgy prayers must suffice. There are certainly THOUSANDS OF MISTRANSLATIONS in the accumulated work of I.C.E.L. As the work progressed I became a more and more articulate critic. My term of office on the Advisory Board ended voluntarily about 1973, and I was named Member Emeritus and Consultant. As of this writing I renounce any lingering reality of this status.

10 – The I.C.E.L. labours were far from being all negative. I remember with appreciation the rich brotherly sharing, the growing fund of church knowledge, the Catholic presence in Rome and London and elswhere, the assisting at a day-session of Vatican II Council, the encounters with distinguished Christian personalities, and more besides. I gratefully acknowledge two fellow members of I.C.E.L. who saw then, so much more clearly than I, the right translating way to follow: the late Professor Herbert Finberg, and Fr. James Quinn S.J. of Edinburgh. Not for these positive features and persons do I renounce my I.C.E.L. past, but for the corrosion of Catholic Faith and of reverence to which I.C.E.L.’s work has contributed. And for this corrosion, however slight my personal part in it, I humbly and sincerely apologize to God and to Holy Church.

11 – Having just mentioned in passing the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), I now come to identify my other reason for renouncing my translating work on I.C.E.L. It is an even more serious and delicate matter. In the past year (from mid 2001), I have come to know with respect and admiration many traditional Catholics. These, being persons who have decided to return to pre-Vatican II Catholic Mass and Liturgy, and being distinct from “conservative” Catholics (those trying to retouch and improve the Novus Ordo Mass and Sacraments of post-Vatican II), these Traditionals, I say, have taught me a grave lesson. They brought to me a large number of published books and essays. These demonstrated cumulatively, in both scholarly and popular fashion, that the Second Vatican Council was early commandeered and manipulated and infected by modernist, liberalist, and protestantizing persons and ideas. These writings show further that the new liturgy produced by the Vatican “Concilium” group, under the late Archbishop A. Bugnini, was similarly infected. Especially the New Mass is problematic. It waters down the doctrine that the Eucharist is a true Sacrifice, not just a memorial. It weakens the truth of the Real Presence of Christ’s victim Body and Blood by demoting the Tabernacle to a corner, by reduced signs of reverence around the Consecration, by giving Communion in the hand, often of women, by cheapering the sacred vessels, by having used six Protestant experts (who disbelieve the Real Presence) in the preparation of the new rite, by encouraging the use of sacro-pop music with guitars, instead of Gregorian chant, and by still further novelties.

12 – Such a litany of defects suggests that many modern Masses are sacrilegious, and some could well be invalid. They certainly are less Catholic, and less apt to sustain Catholic Faith.

13 – Who are the authors of these published critiques of the Conciliar Church? Of the many names, let a few be noted as articulate, sober evaluators of the Council: Atila Sinka Guimaeres (In the Murky Waters of Vatican II), Romano Amerio (Iota Unum: A Study of the Changes in the Catholic Church in the 20th Century), Michael Davies (various books and booklets, TAN Books), and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, one the Council Fathers, who worked on the preparatory schemas for discussions, and has written many readable essays on Council and Mass (cf Angelus Press).

14 – Among traditional Catholics, the late Archbishop Lefebvre stands out because he founded the Society of St Pius X (SSPX), a strong society of priests (including six seminaries to date) for the celebration of the traditional Catholic liturgy. Many Catholics who are aware of this may share the opinion that he was excommunicated and that his followers are in schism. There are however solid authorities (including Cardinal Ratzinger, the top theologian in the Vatican) who hold that this is not so. SSPX declares itself fully Roman Catholic, recognizing Pope John Paul II while respectfully maintaining certain serious reservations.

15 – I thank the kindly reader for persevering with me thus far. Let it be clear that it is FOR THE FAITH that I am renouncing my association with I.C.E.L. and the changes in the Liturgy. It is FOR THE FAITH that one must recover Catholic liturgical tradition. It is not a matter of mere nostalgia or recoiling before bad taste.

16 – Dear non-traditional Catholic Reader, do not lightly put aside this letter. It is addressed to you, who must know that only the true Faith can save you, that eternal salvation depends on holy and grace-filled sacraments as preserved under Christ by His faithful Church. Pursue these grave questions with prayer and by serious reading, especially in the publications of the Society of St Pius X.

17 – Peace be with you. May Jesus and Mary grant to us all a Blessed Return and a Faithful Perseverance in our true Catholic home.

A lot of the newer music can't be sung by basso either--at least I never could.

Oooo... too low? Too bad?

I'm a soprano, but my low notes are huge for a soprano, and at my old parish, the organist would put it all down two keys. I'm sorry, low A's at 8 am aren't going to be loud. That's part of why I quit cantoring.

Honestly, though, it's a bit insulting, not just to musicians, but the congregation, to force juvenille tunes on a captive audience. That just doesn't fit the majesty that's supposed to be there.

Just to show I can too be even handed, I state total agreement with each and every word of this post of yours. I would add that there was nothing irreverent about saying the rosary at Mass. The priest said the Mass. The altar BOYS responded on behalf of the people. Missals existed with translations on facing pages and descriptions of choreography to keep people aware of where in the Mass the priest was. People knew the meaning of the consecration and conducted themselves accordingly and the magnificent Latin language caused no one to have boils but rather provided some precious respite, peace and quiet in an unquiet world. AND no one got the notion that the laity were some sort of equivalent of the priest, lifting their hands up, grabbing at each other and generally Kumbayaing their way through ever stranger rubrics. Valid, yes, but very often a liturgical toothache nonetheless.

<> O schismatic, where is thy sting?

Patent has, once again, cleaned your clock and you and your ilk are reduced to posting the arguements of individual canonists against the supreme power of the Pope. I think the entire exercise incredibly funny. Even the Protestants on these threads know that what the Pope decides goes. They are more traditional, in that sense, than you and your ilk.<>

<> A.C. is not over her head. She is on solid ground and in Union with the Pope. You, however, have walked the plank off the Barque of Peter and you are drowning in your schism and as you head down for the third time, you issue inane disquisitions about the Captain of the Ark of Salvation

And when the Captain sends out the lifeboats, you carp the boats are insufficiently varnished and you refuse to climb aboard. It really is pathetic you think yourself intellectually superior to others; even the Pope. Pride is the anchor that will drag you down....<>

We are talking about a new faith here, when taking all of this to its logical conclusion -- a move away from God and toward Man. I cannot speak for the King of Kings, but somehow I don't think this is what he had in mind for us. I think the decayed fruits of Vatican II are evidence enough of this displeasure

<> Do you foilks EVER stop and think about the consequences of your self-serving statements? You say that The King of Kings is displeased with Vatican II "decayed fruits".

That being so, you have to accept that he was REALLY angry at you trad-clowns and so He let Vatican II happen.

Your "logic" cuts both ways<>

I don't think you are stupid at all--.... But the mysticism is gone, the sense of the sacred which was palpable when you walked inside any church before 1970. In its place is this mundane humanism hardly distinguishable from the platform of the Democratic Party....

<> Speaking of stupid....<>

Dear BlackElk,

To you and the others that I've pinged, my compliments. I have virtually nothing to add to this conversation as you, and other Catholics, have said all that can be said.

I've bookmarked this thread to my profile page, as it once again gives folks the opportunity to see the complete refutation of the schismatic position, again.

As to the status of laity who assist at illicit schismatic SSPX Masses, I believe that the relevant documents from the Church indicate that though assistance, per se, isn't schismatic, it is generally gravely sinful, and frequent assistance at these Masses by schismatics leads to a schismatic mentality, thus leading, ultimately, to schismatic status.

This result, sadly, is quite clear in the postings of some posters here.

It may be helpful if you were to once again tell us the peculiar circumstances that led to the reversal of the excommunication of the Hawaii laypeople. As we've already seen, at least one poster here doesn't even have a basic understanding of the nature of excommunication. Perhaps others are deficient in knowledge about this particular case. The schismatics cite this case until they are blue in the face, but never ever reveal the particular circumstances that make this case the exception, not the rule.

sitetest

BTW, you guys better be pushing the Unabomber-loving Williamson to make peace with John Paul II; an Italian Pope is likely to tell your little sect to wander in the wilderness

<> True enough. If these clowns had the sort of "traditional" Pope they appear to desire, the entire lot of 'em would have been excommunicated LONG ago.<>

When you bookmark, include the article that began this thread: a renunciation by one who served on ICEL, complete with fulsome praise for SSPX. I'm amused by those who think they've refuted the iron logic of the traditionalist position, which is essentially this: nobody, not even a pope, can replace true Catholicism with ersatz Catholicism and get away with it. Pretty soon the faith collapses--as it is doing all over the planet.

Like the dwindling crew of AmChurch liberals, you must be soooo offended by the conservatism of the rising generation.

There are a lot of people who were in their early 20's and teen years when Vatican II went through who are quite disgusted with the younger generation who are far more conservative. People who ask questions like, and just exactly why are we throwing away some of the most glorious music ever written? And I'm seeing a lot of families of people just older than me with 4-7 kids. That's a switch. The ones just older than them have 2, three at the most, with a few exceptions.

I do think that Mass totally in Latin all the time will not come completely back. There is a trend in the music anyway to at least put the Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus, and Angus Dei in Greek and Latin - and it's catching on quite well. I've heard no objections other than the usual suspects, and they haven't even been that loud. The Credo...I don't know. That might not go over so well. But, I do think there will be daily Mass in the Vernacular. Latin will make a bit of a comeback, but there will be a balance. And the language definitely needs to be tightened up.

What do you mean WILL be excommunicated? Are you finally conceding we are NOT now excommunicated--that your past posts to the contrary were lies? Anyway I can't see why you guys get so exercised about schism and excommunication when you spend all your time praising the Pope for hugging mullahs and witchdoctors and for telling them and how wonderful their religions are.

And by the way, while we're at it, if Patent cleaned my clock, how is it he is silent on the numbers for SSPX which I presented as 1 million and which he claimed were phony. Has he finally read the article that began this thread which cites the same number--as well as double the number for priests--which Patent also got wrong? You guys are laughable, fumbling all over yourselves in an effort to be coherent while still hurling slanders.

How old are you? Sacred Heart Cathedral in Dallas at an early-morning Sunday Mass was crawling with senoras in tilmas making Novenas, saying the Stations, and praying to La Virgen de Guadalupe.

<> Look, facts and ultima are often incompatible. Everyone else knows that here. Don't be surprised.

The fact is that the old Liturgy ( I grew up with it)was every bit as banal as the new Liturgy is alleged to be. I never knew what the heck was going on. Me and my friends just went cause we had to. I don't think things have changed that much.

What is different is the Mass is being used to divide - the pure "traditionalists" from the moronic, Pope-worshipping riff-raff who go to the Pauline Rite who have been duped into following a false religion. The Mass is being used by the Neo-Donatists as a polemic against what the self-annointed Catholic Puritans satanically assert is a revolutionary Church abandoned by the Holy Spirit who let it be led into error by revolutionary Popes intent on destroying all traditon.

The sulphurous schismatics think themselves a cut above all others. They aren't. They are fetid protestant partisans who are slaves of Satan.<>

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.