Friday, August 05, 2005

Liturgy Wars, Part 18,346

From the superlative Robert Mickens, The Tablet's man in Rome, another round of USCCB-ICEL-Rome war games comes to light:

THE UNITED STATES bishops’ committee on the liturgy (BCL) says there are “real difficulties with the translation” of the most recent English draft of the Ordo Missae (Order of Mass), following the rejection of nearly half of its proposed changes to the original text by the International Committee on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) – the group overseeing the translation.

Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie, Pennsylvania, who is the BCL’s chairman, sent all the American bishops a copy of the newest English translation of the Ordo a month ago and invited them to make line-by-line suggestions to improve it. In a letter accompanying the text, seen by The Tablet, Bishop Trautman said the BCL was “convinced … that the translation of the Order of Mass is one of the most important matters to have ever come before” the bishops’ conference. He said the revised text was “much improved over the first draft” (which was completed in early 2004) but he expressed concern that there were still “problematic passages … phrases [that] were seen as infelicitous to English spoken in the United States”. He also said there were questions about “the intelligibility of some words”....

Substantial word and syntax changes in the Gloria, the Sanctus, and in the various Eucharistic Prayers have been retained in the latest translation of the Order of Mass and it is unclear how much power the bishops’ conferences will have in altering the final draft, which is expected to be completed early next year.

Bottom line: I was talking with an American bishop for my last Tablet piece, and he gave his mindset to me straight -- "Our people have been misinformed, misformed, and it's time to straighten it out." Across the aisle, there's the Egan approach of "We can't keep changing this piecemeal and keep confusing our people. It has to stop."

What say you, gentle snowflakes?

-30-

12 Comments:

Blogger CDE said...

I will never forget something Cardinal Mahony once said when expressing his concern about these changes to the liturgical texts:

"Following the (clerical sex abuse) scandal," he said, "the last thing our people need is to now disrupt the liturgy, which has been a source of nourishment and strength during this difficult journey."

See the whole article here.

Disrupt the liturgy?! Now there is the pot calling the kettle black.

5/8/05 08:41  
Blogger CDE said...

We do well always and everwhere to give you thanks through Jesus Christ our Lord

This often struck me as a strange sentiment of praise. As a kid, before I even cared much about the Church, it struck me as particularly false to my experience: I don't do well always and everywhere...

Something like it is right and just or it is fitting would seem more congruent with human experience.

5/8/05 12:43  
Blogger CDE said...

Jeff,

I know you're right about what the Church is praying here -- because of hearing how the text is translated in Spanish etc. -- but the most important use of words is to communicate, not simply to make beautiful cadences. And I am saying that, as a teenager, these words failed to communicate effectively with me. The use of the subjunctive was ambiguous enough to lead me to see the prayer as something very odd... that wasn't calling for a value response on my part, but expressing something that sounded almost Pharisaical. And I think that's a problem... unless, of course, I was the only one who didn't understand the meaning. Which I grant is possible. I've always been a bit slow on the uptake...

6/8/05 04:09  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The present mass doesn't communicate to me at all. It is wooden, mundane and clumsy. It sounds like a 7th grade English composition. With a grade of about a D+ on the top.

It has some weird phrases like "and also with you." What the heck is that? It's not something I would say to someone; it's not a faithful translation of anything. So, why is it there!?

The one that always makes me go tilt is "Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again" right in front of the just consecrated Eucharist. I always feel like jumping up and saying "WAIT, there He is now!" It's no wonder so many people don't believe in the substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

The "Holy, Holy, Holy" doesn't usually sound holy at all, but its level of ambiguity varies from church to church. It ranges from incongrous to bump-and-grind. I don't know what it is anymore and I don't think anyone else does either. It's a major contributor to the loss of reverence in the mass.

"We always do well...." is a flat out lie. Lying to God is a bad thing, and not very successful. He's all-knowing, after all.

Phrases like "Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation" are flat and understated. They're another reason why reverence is lacking in the mass. Flattened out in an attempt to mimic modern English, they stil don't resemble anything you should be saying to the guy next to you on the bus OR God, for that matter.

"...which earth has given and human hands have made. It will become for us the bread of life. " NO, Panera is the bread of (natural) life. Can we be more specific??? It becomes the Body of Christ, the bread of eternal life.

And there's always the unintentionally funny line at the end: "Thanks be to God (I can get out of here now)." There really has to be a better way to convey the essence of what is supposed to be meant there because this means clearly something else to most of the people within hearing range.... =)

Add the raucous mess that most contemporary liturgical "music" contributes and PHEW. No wonder we have problems.

6/8/05 08:47  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

But what's really funny about all this is that the very people complaining that change would be deleterious to the layman in the pews had absolutely no problem with the huge and damaging changes right after Vatican 2. Indeed, they were heartless and vicious in their mad rush for change, yanking the rosaries out of old ladies' hands, belittling all comers as stupid and uninformed, and acting like revolutionaries for years. People still get accused of being nostalgic with a horrible perjorative connotation, even though most catholics now cannot even remember before the council. Gotta keep that name-calling alive!!!! It's the only way to keep momentum going, eh?

Give me a break.

6/8/05 09:41  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gyro,

"Et cum spiritu tuo" is literally "and with your spirit." And that's what should be there...not some vague weirdness like "and also with you." It is meant to address the priest qua priest. It's not a street greeting--like anyone needs to be told that. When was the last time you said that to anyone on the bus?

The difference between the "old" ICEL's efforts and our efforts (and hopefully Vox Clara's efforts) is that the old ICEL's intent was malicious and the new is not, we hope. There was a large contingent in the church which wished to change the church from the inside--update it--because they were ASHAMED of it. Bull. They had every right to be ashamed of themselves but they should not project it onto the church. We are not ashamed of her.

Ok, the whole phrase is "We do well always and everywhere to give you thanks." This is a lame statement because it's directed at God, who doesn't need to be told this. AND it's mundane and we don't do anything well always and everywhere.....much less give God thanks. It's hokey.

If "Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation," means "Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, King of the universe" then we'd ought to say that instead of the mealymouthed watered-down version we have.

The whole memorial thing "Christ has died, etc." is an ICEL addition anyway. It shouldn't even be there.....

And Gyro, I'm aware that Deo Gratias comes down literally as "Thanks be to God." But I still think it's funny.

6/8/05 21:18  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ask older ladies, Jimmy, and see if they say that they were forced to put the rosaries away.... And see if they say they were castigated--even made fun of--and made to feel that rosaries were inappropriate in church.

Catholics who are traditional have been abused in the worst way verbally. I've been abused verbally by progressives. I don't take it anymore. No one has to take that kind of browbeating. Not for politics, not for power, not for the progressives' pride. That's not what Catholicism is about.

And of course I mean the female kind when I say "old ladies." You are confused.

6/8/05 21:25  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

News for you, Gyro. "Et cum spiritu tuo" means literally word-for-word "and with your spirit," and for your information, that was the literal translation before Vatican II. Whatever possessed ICEL to change it I don't know. I can only guess, but it wasn't good.

Also, I understand what you are trying to tell me about "We do well always and everywhere to give you thanks." You and probably a couple of other speedreaders would like to tell me that the phrase in question says that we *would* do well always and everywhere to thank God. But that's not what is says!! The verb tense is wrong. It says "we do well always and everywhere to give God thanks" and the fact is we don't do that, we aren't doing that. Lousy grammar or lying--take your pick.

7/8/05 03:10  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gyro, ICEL had nothing to do with the assasination of Kennedy. =) But it was full of dissidents and more than a few sex abusers. Check out the (old) news here: http://www.adoremus.org/0602Pederasty.html

AND if you have been paying any attention to what's going on with ICEL, it was reconstituted by the Holy See a few years ago because its performance stunk. They can't get anything approved, in case you haven't noticed. Not even NAB Old Testament which is still sold in the US with sections rejected by the Holy See. Why? We don't have anything else. Sad.

And I won't even start with the inclusive language joke.

"Comme le prevoit" has been ruled illegitimate finally. It NEVER should have been allowed because, among other things, it opened the door for "original" compositions which weren't supposed to be there. ICEL's crappy "original" compositions are one of the things that finally brought the Vatican down on them. And rightly so. They tried to screw up the ordination rite.

It would help you if you weren't so verbally abusive. You progressives are mighty ready to drop names but you don't know as much as you think.

7/8/05 03:58  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry about the misunderstanding on the Adoremus article. I did misread the article. I'm sorry for the inaccurate reference there.

Explain to me, though, how come the ICEL credit occurs in the frontisplate of all the editions of the NAB. Who translated/prepared it in English?

And also do you have an explanation why ICEL is being reorganized with Vox Clara alongside? Surely, the Holy See has a reason. According to your information, what is it?

And I would like to know the passage in the documents of Vatican II where it says extended original compositions are okay to use in the Mass.

There's an interesting thing that happens when people quote documents (and names of documents) at each other (especially in comboxes). What happens is that the documents get "set in stone," and the more sensible and historical meanings associated with the original objects of the documents drop out. (Sort of like what happened with V2 in total.)

For instance, there never was a consensus that "comme le prevoit" should be used to draft large quantities of original material for liturgical use (ie. the prayers in the Liturgy of the Hours, for instance). Among some, there was the belief that in the process of translation using "comme le prevoit," because of its nature, more or less original composition would be required. However, that was nowhere the rule, since others disagreed, even only if in principle. After all, taking this to its maximum would mean rewriting every single thing, all out of whole cloth! And no precise amount imagined was ever set out in "comme le prevoit" itself, if I have read it right. Please correct me if I am wrong.

So suddenly this is a big issue and the Vatican has reversed itself? I think not. I think it has always been a controversial issue and perhaps it has just come to a head because too many liberties have clearly been taken in a situation where more restrained behavior had previously been expected.

It's a little like a fresh young man, upset about being slapped after clearly getting out of line by community standards, who says, "But she never told me I couldn't!!"

Does everyone NEED to be told exactly what they can't do? What kind of a church would that be, if so?

8/8/05 20:50  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gyro,
Along with millions of other Catholics, I find Mass difficult at times. I go every week, because I know Mass is about worshipping God and I want to do that.

But the very poor translations, the really odd sense that people are trying to manufacture the Mass (like they manufacture a jr. school play), and the just-plain-bad music makes it difficult to concentrate, much less participate in prayer properly. Surely you can understand that. The Novus Ordo, as commonly done, is simply not reverent; indeed, often not even intended as worship, but rather as celebration (of ourselves).

We have lost the ancient distinction among quite different things: "who God is," "what God has done" and "what we are to God." We conflate them into "We are good because God loves us. Period." And that's messed up--He loves us, but only as a result of His incredible goodness and unsurpassingly bad taste. ;)

We need for the Holy See to step in and straighten things out. I'm not the only one who thinks so. They could start with the grammar; or the music; or the orientation of the priest; or all the laypeople up wandering about. I don't care where they start, but they need to begin soon. The church is a shambles and the longer they wait, the fewer people can remember or imagine how it's supposed to look....

8/8/05 21:05  
Blogger Der Tommissar said...

Why don't we save all the trouble and go back to the Latin for everything but the readings and Homily?

That was my first reaction, but then it hit me...even if we go back to saying the Mass in Latin (beautiful daydream) who will be doing the translations for the missals?

Who did them back in the day?

11/8/05 18:57  

Post a Comment

<< Home