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.
On second thought, perhaps he will be remembered....in the Church of Winona. Since there is absolutely no desire to return to union with the Roman Catholic Church, St. Marcel will be viewed as holding the keys. Winona will become the Holy See of Marcel. Did Marcel ever visit Minnesota? They will have to transfer his body there.
Oh yeah? Let's have a look at what historians report about the Arian Heresy and St. Athanasius' role in it:
"Athanasius and the Church of Our Time," p. 23
By Msgr. R. Graber, Bishop of Regensburg, 1974,St. Athanasius, one of the Four Great Eastern Doctors of the Church, lived in the fourth century, during the time of what used to be considered the greatest crisis of faith ever to befall the Catholic Church, the Arian Heresy. The Arians (not to be confused with the Aryans, who were the progenitors of the Indo-European peoples) denied the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. The vast majority of churchmen fell into this heresy, so much so that St. Jerome wrote of the period: ingemuit totus orbis et Arianum se esse miratus est (the whole world groaned and was amazed to find itself Arian).
St. Athanasius was the Bishop of Alexandria in Egypt for 46 years. He was banned from his diocese at least five times and spent a total of 17 years in exile. He was censured, exiled, and hounded by a nominal Church hierarchy that was for the most part in heresy. He even suffered an unjust excommunication from Pope Liberius (352-366) who himself was under Arian influence, signed a semi-Arian document, and is held by some Church historians to have fallen into personal heresy.
It is a cold fact of history that St. Athansius stood virtually alone against the onslaught of heretical teaching ravaging the Church of his day, saying that "If the world goes against the truth, then Athanasius goes against the world (Athanasius contra mundum). The saint even consecrated orthodox bishops outside his own diocese, acting out of necessity for the good of the Church.
St. Athanasius was described by John Henry Cardinal Newman as a "principal instrument, after the Apostles, by which the sacred truths of Christianity have been conveyed and secured to the world." Often referred to as the Champion of Orthodoxy, St. Athanasius was undoubtedly one of the most courageous defenders of the Faith in the entire history of the Church. If anyone can be singled out as a saint for our times, surely it is St. Athanasius.
The Catholic Church survived the Arian crisis, and so it will survive the present one. For our part, it is our duty to remain faithful to the unchangeable teaching and Sacred Tradition of our Holy Catholic Church, and not to compromise the Faith in any way with the present trend of Liberalism and Modernism sweeping the Church worldwide.
"What happened over 1600 years ago is repeating itself today, but with two or three differences: Alexandria today is the whole Universal Church, the stability of which is being shaken, and what was undertaken at that time by means of physical force and cruelty is now being transformed to a different level. Exile is replaced by banishment into the silence of being ignored; killing by assassination of character." --
How...ecumenical. Opening the Church of the Lord of Lords to the practices of the lord of this world.
<> Yes, that is an ontological impossibibilty. Doctrine develops, it doesn't become the opposite of what it had been previously.<>
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.*** If this is the case (and it may well be as far a I have studied it) there may be unintended consequences for the RCC. First, the "apparent" ecumenical openness of Vatican II may convey to rank in file Catholics that we Protestant "separated brethren" aren't so bad
<> You aren't<>
and thereby make them feel more comfortable attending home Bible studies, etc. led by evangelicals with the result that these RC fringe people become evangelical Protestants.
<> I 'spect that does happen, to some folks. It is also the case that hundreds of protestant ministers have converted. I think it a "good exchange," in that we have adult converts knowing what they are "getting into" vs., in most instances, Cradle Catholics who never knew the Faith. We are strengthend by the exchange. We get intelligent and fervent Christians and you get the tepid:)<>
Second, the "apparent" ecumenical openness of Vatican II may be just the cover needed for liberal forces within the RCC to push the envelope to include compromise of RCC doctrine and tradition.
<> I don't think it is just an apparent openness. I think it genuine, and necessary. Thanks be to God..
It is impossible to "compromise" Christian Doctrine. The Holy Spirit protects the Catholic Church from teaching error.
Tradition is what Rome decides is tradition. It is not decided by schismatics. New Advent's Catholic Encyclopedia, under "Tradition and The Living Magisterium" has a good explanantion of who it is that determines what does an does not constitute Tradition.<>
I am not prepared to say to what extent the second has happened. I have seen many, many instances of the first. In fact, I don't doubt that the whole ECT debacle was in part motivated by a RC desire to stem the inroads being made by evangelicals. Theologically the ECT statement was deceptive at best. No orthodox Catholic or Protestant should have signed
<> I really haven't paid any attention to the ECT. Mebbe I should check it out. I was under the impression it was about working together for the good of society while putting aside doctrinal controversies.Mebbe I am way off.....gotta link?<>
What historian? Your author is a propagandist. This subject has been visited many times. The parallels between Lefebvre and Athanasius end when asked if the pope forbid Athanasius's concecration of bishops.
Typical dishonest response when proven wrong: attack the source of the information. For people who tolerate no criticism of the Church, you sure break your rules when the Church disagrees with your views.
See post 751<>
See post 751<>
See post 751
P.S. Can you make the Catholic Profession of Faith that I posted earlier?<>
I'm stealing that one, we baptist are having the same problem in our churches, and are dealing with a bunch of liberals ourselfs. Thats why I'm a card carrying Militant Independent Fundamental Bible Believing Baptist.
Back later, I have to go patrol the parameter of my compound.
I know all about it. You guys are having at least as difficult a time we we Catholics. We do have much in common.
<> So, when you attack the Documents of an Infallible Ecumenical Council that is ok but when St Chuck describes an author of a book as a propagandist that is "dishonest?"<>
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.