Is this a Little Nicky trivia question?
Posted on 11/29/2002 5:00:21 PM PST by Loyalist
An Open Letter to the Church Renouncing my Service on I.C.E.L.
Father Stephen Somerville, STL.
Dear Fellow Catholics in the Roman Rite,
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.
Rev Father Stephen F. Somerville, STL.
First impressions are lasting impressions.
Did you used to be a member under another name?<>
<>Will Catholic Family News be publishing your book? It sounds like it will be a page-turner <>
Right now he owes both myself and Bud McDuell an apology for calling us "sons of Satan" because our view on the Church didn't meet with his approval.
<> Can you tell me the name of the Saint that was accosted by a schismatic who queried the Saint thusly, "Do you know who I am?" and the Saint responded, "Yes, you are the Son of Satan." Can you tell me the name of that Saint? It is a VERY Traditional practice to call schismatics Sons of Satan and because I, in my admittedly intellectually challenged status, know this information, I am positive you not only know the information, you are required to defend its practice because it is Traditional practice. So, tell me the name of the Saint.<>
You guys have all the tolerance of Muslim fanatics on a bad day.
<> I consider folks like that pacifists<>
You both really ought to sign up for Islam--
<> I tried. They wouldn't even let me get close to the sign-up sheet beacuse they heard by Miraculous Medal clicking against my Crucifix hanging around my neck<>
you've got the appropriately closed psychologies.
<>I thought only modernists appealed to psychology to buttress their reasoning<>
LOL!
"<> Can you tell me the name of the Saint that was accosted by a schismatic who queried the Saint thusly, 'Do you know who I am?' and the Saint responded, 'Yes, you are the Son of Satan.' Can you tell me the name of that Saint? It is a VERY Traditional practice to call schismatics Sons of Satan and because I, in my admittedly intellectually challenged status, know this information, I am positive you not only know the information, you are required to defend its practice because it is Traditional practice. So, tell me the name of the Saint.<>"
And here, all this time, I've been misinformed by these folks that you were a neo-Catholic!
But, wait, you're carrying on a Tradition that dates, let's see, to about the second century (I won't be too specific, don't want to give away the game, here)! Why, your actions have behind them nineteen hundred years of Tradition!
It turns out that it is YOU who are the Traditionalist! But, wait,... these others claim to be Traditionalists... How can that be? If they aren't Traditionalists, what are they...?
sitetest
Sitetest, how is it that you, a lowly N.O. type (and no doubt a Papolatrist) know what I am referring to?
When Ultima eventually discovers the name of this Saint and reads what he had to say, as a "traditionalist" he would be required to drop the appeal for an apology, correct? :)<>
<>I, Catholicguy, with firm faith believe and profess everything that is contained in the symbol of faith: namely,
I believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is visible and invisible. I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven: By the power of the Holy Spirit, he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered, died and was buried. On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. I believe in the one holy catholic and apostolic church. I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
With firm faith I believe as well everything contained in God's word, written or handed down in tradition and proposed by the church--whether in solemn judgment or in the ordinary and universal magisterium--as divinely revealed and called for faith.
I also firmly accept and hold each and every thing that is proposed by that same church definitively with regard to teaching concerning faith or morals.
What is more, I adhere with religious submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman pontiff or the college of bishops enunciate when they exercise the authentic magisterium even if they proclaim those teachings in an act that is not definitive. <>
There, Tradboy, I can make that Profession of Faith; so can Polycarp; so can sitetest; so can Patent; so can sandyeggo; so can Black Elk; so can ninenot; so can aquinas fan; so can st. chuck; so can american colleen so can ALL REAL Catholics.
Do you know who CAN'T make this Profession of Faith? You, Zvaidist and your schismatic ilk.
Now, what was this about "phony?" :)<>
Is this a Little Nicky trivia question?
In the December issue of Chronicles is an item depicting the evolution of Free Republic. The author of the piece cites the reason for it's censorship as having to do with attracting donors to fund FR's $240,000 budget. The conspiracy theorists, anti-semites, and leftist infiltrators began to create a reputation that FR was a gathering place for kooks. So things had to change."....the diversity of thought on Free Republic has been reduced to the musings of neoconservatives, Zionists, Republicans who act as if Free Republic were an annex of GOP headquarters, those who consider George W. Bush a demigod and offer daily prayers for him, and other sycophants and cheerleaders."
Bud opposed the unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation. Because that point of view is not consistent with the party line, I am not surprised that he was banned for voicing that opinion. I liked Bud. Though I disagreed with his support of the SSPX, I was also aware of his limited choices where he lived, a distinction I think important to note. Bud also exhibited charitable attributes worthy of remembrance. It's sad to be aware of another victim of the PC juggernaut.
Article Last Updated: Friday, June 14, 2002 - 8:25:22 AM MST
Friends recall 'human side' of ex-priest
Pleasant memories jar with molestation accusations
A big kid. Charismatic. A joy to be around. The clown who always wore purple high-top sneakers -- even sometimes during Mass. Yet this same man, former priest Stephen Kiesle, has told Fremont police he fondled hundreds of children who sat in his lap as he read them stories.
Longtime friends of Kiesle, who was convicted of molesting two boys in Union City and now is accused of molesting five girls in Fremont, are trying to come to terms with the Kiesle they thought they knew and the Kiesle facing child molestation charges.
"We used to let our youngest boy sit in his lap and wrestle with him, just like fathers and sons do," said Paul Heimsness, the father of the two boys Kiesle was convicted of molesting in the late 1970s when he served at Our Lady of the Rosary Church in Union City. "We never thought anything. He was our priest. We never knew the devils he was fighting underneath the surface."
Are anti-Catholics more Honest about Vatican II then Self-styled 'Traditionalists'??? (Part I)
Ask yourself that question as you read the following series which will be updated occasionally. This first installment is from a tract which quoted a well-known anti-Catholic whose name I will not mention. Yes it is doctrinally specious in places but the main thrust of the argument is correct:
XXXXX XXXXXXX noted Evangelical authority on Roman Catholic doctrine, takes an in-depth look at the documents of Vatican II in the preface to the fifth edition of his book VVVVVVVVVVVVV. XXXXX XXXXXXX writes:
"The Second Vatican Council, which closed late in 1965, made changes in the liturgy, administrative practices, and in the matter of religious freedom. It repeated the claim that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church, although it did recognize that other churches contain some elements of truth.
"But Pope John XXIII, who called the first session, and Pope Paul VI, who presided over the later sessions (as well as several prominent cardinal and theologians), took care to emphasize that no changes would be made in the doctrinal structure of the Church...The primary purpose of the Council was to update the liturgy and administrative practices and so to make the Church more efficient and more acceptable to the 20th century world.
"The introduction of the `New Mass,' for instance, brought about a change in language - Latin is no longer required, except in the prayer of consecration. But as Protestants, it is not important to us whether the Mass is said in Latin or English or Swahili - it is not the language of the Mass that we object to, it is its content and meaning. (See Chronicle II, `The Sacrifice of the Mass').
"On previous occasions, Rome has changed her tactics when old methods became ineffective, but she has never changed her nature. In any religious organization, doctrine is the most basic and important part of its structure, since what people believe determines what they do. An official document, `The Constitution on the Church' prepared by the Council and approved by the Pope, reaffirms basic Catholic doctrine precisely as it stood before the Council met.
The doctrine of papal infallibility is restated. We are told that when `by a definitive act he proclaims a doctrine of faith and morals...his definitions, of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, are justly called, irreformable (Article 25). The pope has lost none of his powers. He remains the absolute ruler in the Roman Church. But if papal decrees past and present are `irreformable, `what hope is there for real reform in the Church of Rome?
"The document on the Church repeats in substance the teaching of the Council of Trent that `priests and bishops are the representatives of God on earth...justly, therefore, they are called not only angels, but gods, holding as they do the place of authority of God on earth.' (Catechism of Trent).
"In fact, no more sweeping claims were made by the Council of Trent (1545-1563), nor by the First Vatican Council (1870), than are made in these documents from Vatican II. Despite all the claims to the contrary, the Council has firmly maintained the doctrine of the primacy of Peter and of papal succession. In his book, Ecclesiam Suam, Pope Paul expressed his distress because of what some of the `separated brethren' say about the pope as the stumbling block in the way of church unity. He said, `Do not some of them say that if it were not for the primacy of the pope, the reunion of the separated churches with Catholic Church would be easy? We beg the separated brethren to consider the inconsistency of this position, not only in that, without the pope, the Catholic Church would no longer be Catholic, but also because without the supreme decisive pastoral office of Peter, the unity of the Church of Christ would utterly collapse.'
"We must say that at this point we agree with the Pope, at least to this extent, that if the Roman Catholic Church were reformed according to scripture, it would have to be abandoned. But the gross errors concerning salvation still remain. Moreover, the Council did nothing toward removing the more than 100 anathemas or curses pronounced by the Council of Trent on the Protestant churches and beliefs. If there is to be any true unity, surely this would seem the logical place to start...
"The `Constitution on the Church' makes it abundantly clear that Rome has no intention of revising any of her basic doctrine, but only of updating her methods and techniques for more efficient administration and to present a more attractive appearance. This is designed to make it easier for the Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, and Protestant churches to return to her fold. There is no indication that she has any intentions of entering into genuine give-and-take church unity negotiations. Her purpose is not union, but ABSORPTION. Church union with Rome is strictly a one-way street. The age-old danger that Protestantism has faced from the Roman Church has not diminished; in fact, it may well have increased. For through this less offensive posture and this superficial ecumenicism, Rome is much better situated to carry out her program of eliminating opposition and moving into a position of world dominance.
<> So, there it is. This Protestant is more honest about Vatican Two than the soi disant "sspx traditionalists,"(who are protestants who go to mass)<>
The Washington Post,
Metro Local News.
Monday, March 24, 1975, p. C-1.
Circus Troupe Performs for Palm Sunday
By Marjorie Hyer
Washington Post Staff Writer
A young woman in pink and gold spangled tights balanced herself on a weaving pole 20 feet above the high altar of Holy Trinity Roman Catholic Church in Georgetown yesterday.
A cheeky clown shouted encouragement to the priest; a sequined showgirl piled her cape of fluffy turquoise marabou on the altar as her part of the offertory.
While worshipers throughout Christendom celebrated Palm Sunday yesterday with more traditional commemorations of Christ's triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the Rev. James English of Holy Trinity enlisted the talent of nine circus performers to drive home a gospel lesson.
"Unless you become like little children you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." said Father English, paraphrasing the text from the Gospel according to Matthew.
In his brief homily that launched the parish's regular 9:30 a.m. family mass, Father English offered three reasons for enlisting performers from the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey circus to help launch Holy Week, the most sacred season on the Christian calendar.
First, he said, "circus people always remind us that we should never get too impressed with ourselves."
Second,, he pointed out, just us Jesus went to Jerusalem knowing that his triumphal entry would be followed by his death, "circus people know that life is both hard and easy. Circus people know that all through life you are going to have to fall down and then get up again."
Third, he said, "this world doesn't really like the little child that lives in all of us and so we are forced to suppress and sometimes forget that child ...
"But whenever we go to the circus, that child grows and stretches and we remember that the Kingdom of God belongs only to children."
A congregation of more than 800, of whom at least a third were children, packed into the greystone church that bears on its front a proud bronze plaque marking it as a regular place of worship of the late John F. Kennedy.
Youngsters, charged with anticipation, squirmed impatiently in the pews and whined at their parents that they wouldn't be able to see when what they deemed the main event took place.
After Father English finished his homily, recorded music heralded the first act -- clowns in baggy pants, fright wigs and all.
Ron Seberini milked five minutes of laughs and applause out of the simple act of assembling a portable music stand.
His wife, Sandy, also a clown, brought equal expressions of delight with a comic juggling routine.
The 33-inch clown midget, Prince Paul, distinguishable from the children only by his white-face clown makeup, worked before delighted crowds in the side aisle.
Then it was time for the Knop troupe and its balance pole act. Almost casually, Kristina Knop climbed to the top of the l8-foot steel stem and balanced there as her three male cohorts on the ground passed it back and forth among them.
Her toes seemed almost to puncture the stained glass skylight above the altar as she did a headstand while the bottom of the pole was passed from forehead to shoulder to one upraised hand. She kept her quivering perch as the polebearers walked precariously up a ladder and as the ends of the ladder were hoisted to shoulder height.
Even the most restless of the children sat silent as Kristina balanced her body across the handlebar-like device at the top of the pole, her outstretched arms frozen in a swan dive pose.
The church rocked with applause as the Knop troupe took its bows, first to the congregation and then turning, they mice a deep obeisance toward the altar.
The performers retired to the back-of the church as Father English thanked them calling them "nine of the most wonderful people in the world."
"I'll go along with that!" called out Prince Paul to the delight of priest and parishioners.
The entire troupe returned as part of the offertory procession and at Father English's invitation joined ;him behind the altar.
After communion, Father English presented on behalf the congregation wooden crosses to each of the performers -- including Prince Paul who is Jewish
After mass the dazzled congregation gathered to meet the performers who flanked Father English on the church steps.
Asked if he had received any criticism of the unorthodox Palm Sunday service, Father English replied in the negative. "They loved it," he said.
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.