Bishop Trautman Criticizes New Mass Translation

(NPR) ...Bishop Donald Trautman, former chairman of the bishops' committee for the liturgy, says the priests now have to recite some sentences that are 90 words long. He also dislikes the formal tone. For example, in one funeral Mass, the priest implores God to give the departed "kind admittance to Your kingdom."

"If your mother or father or brother or sister died," Trautman says, "would we want one of us to say, 'Welcome into Your kingdom?' Or do we want to say, 'Give kind admittance into Your kingdom?' I have [an image] of someone being a ticket-taker at the door giving out tickets to enter, giving kind admittance."

A Power Play?

Trautman says sometimes the new translation is not faithful to the Bible. For example, it has Jesus, a poor carpenter, sipping from a precious chalice during the Last Supper.

"Any Greek dictionary will tell you, it's a drinking cup," Trautman says, "It's a vessel. It's not a chalice."

Trautman says even Indiana Jones got that one right; the rugged historian selected a rough cup as the Holy Grail.

But Trautman's concerns also go beyond vocabulary to theology. He cites where the new translation says Jesus died "for you and for many."

"In preaching, we will hear that Jesus died for all people, but at the altar we will hear it Jesus died for many," he notes. "For whom did he not die?"

The Rev. Michael Ryan, the pastor of St. James Cathedral in Seattle, has similar reservations. "It seems that the Latin is more important than the theology; that's a pity," Ryan says.

"The Second Vatican Council talked about language that would exhibit 'noble simplicity,' " Ryan says. "This is anything but that. No, it's a total move away from the teaching of the Second Vatican Council."

"We're dealing with a power play on the part of certain people in Rome who wanted to make changes in order, I think, to bring under greater control people in the English-speaking world."

Jeffrey Tucker, a musical director in Auburn, Ala., and managing editor of the magazine Sacred Music, thinks the changes are for the better.

"There's a kind of paranoia about all of this," Tucker says. " 'Oh, look! We don't want to go back to pre-Vatican II days with nuns that hit us with rulers and priests [who] are fussing at us for our sins all the time or whatever.' All we're really saying here is that we want church to feel and sound like church."

Tucker says the new words and music are an overdue adjustment from a liturgy that is too "chatty."

Monsignor Rick Hilgartner, who is overseeing the change in liturgy for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, agrees. And he asks: Just how accessible does the liturgy have to be? "People might say, 'Well, what about children?' So do we then say that the whole liturgy has to be at a third-grade reading level? How long would that sustain adults in the faith?..."

Read More

h/t to Fr. R.

• New Catholic Mass Already Causing A Stir

Related:

• Cardinal George: "I feel as if we're doing guerilla warfare here."

Father John Trigilio: Why Priests are Happy and Sometimes Not

By Father John Trigilio

Recently, I attended a symposium on the priesthood at Catholic University of America. The keynote speaker was Msgr. Stephen Rossetti. He spoke on the data he included in his recent book “Why Priests Are Happy: A study of the psychological and spiritual health of priests.”  The evidence speaks for itself. Most priests are in fact happy BEING priests. A few, in fact a very small minority, are unhappy and regret making promises of celibacy and obedience. These fellows are much like their lay counterparts who regret either their choice of spouse or even being married at all. There will always be a few who did not choose properly and perhaps were too immature at the time or were pressured to make such an important and lifelong decision. Nevertheless, the commitment to one’s spouse, be it a woman or the Church, is a decision for life. That is told to men before they make it and it is reiterated throughout their lives. Society on the other hand, tells these guys that no decision is forever. Modern culture thrives on the supremacy of the ego, hence, some people disregard solemn oaths ‘until death do us part.’ Priesthood (in the Latin Rite) is a marriage of the ordained man to his spouse, the Church. And like all married men, that marital bond is intended for life even if one later realizes he made a mistake. The time to change your mind is BEFORE saying ‘I do’ whether to a bride or to a bishop.

Where I take variance with Monsignor Rossetti is that while most priests are happy being priests, which includes celibacy and obedience, not all enjoy how priests are treated. A very few may resent getting up in three in the morning to anoint a dying person at the nursing home or may regret sacrificing a wife and kids to comfort them in late middle age and beyond. Those kind of priests who fortunately few and far between. Most priests know it comes with the job and they offer it up for a higher purpose. What many priests dislike, however, is when they feel like they work for a corporation more than for a family of faith.

The corporate business model some bishops and dioceses espouse make pastors feel like middle management and not as spiritual shepherds of the local, neighborhood flock. Most priests do love the priesthood. Most love being priests and doing priestly work. Most are willing to sacrifice time, opportunity and reward for the higher good of saving souls. What most priests do NOT like is the often oppressive bureaucracy emanating from diocesan headquarters. Canon law and liturgical rubrics are not the problem, but often the plethora of diocesan regulations and policies that go well beyond micromanagement. Vatican II spoke of subsidiarity, yet most times even legitimate options afforded priests are being transformed into mandatory rules as if Father is not qualified to decide for himself.

No one is saying that we should change the priority of study at the seminary. Philosophy and Theology must remain first and foremost. Perhaps, one semester on management would help so that a new pastor would be confident in hiring or firing employees; in knowing when replacing the boiler takes a back seat to replacing the roof; in balancing a budget for an average size parish with a school and CCD program three or four times as large as the school; should he try to keep and/or get new religious sisters to teach or go all lay.

Mundane as the business of running a parish can get, even that is doable if you have some competent parishioners to advise and guide you on parish council and finance committee alike. What really makes priests unhappy, however, is the injustice done to brother priests by their own kind. There will always a few parishioners who misunderstand or just dislike you for no reason whatsoever. Some personalities will spread rumor and gossip about the priests of the parish from time to time but many will quietly approve and appreciate what you do.

Professional jealousy and clerical sycophants are what discourage priests. When their bishops do not treat them as sons of the church but as lower level managers whose task is to be a company man at all times, then you get some unhappy priests on your hands. When the same guys have been on Personnel Board for the past 20 to 30 years; when assignments are made not based on qualifications but on church politics and ‘who you know rather than what you know;’ when special treatment is given to those who went to the bishop’s alma mater while those who had to fight tooth and nail to preserve their orthodoxy and virtue while in the seminary are made to feel like misfits after ordination; these make for disillusioned clergy to be sure.

Foibles of parish life are like family life. Any husband and father realizes that no family is perfect and that every day has its challenges. Likewise, every priest knows that no parish is perfect (and no pastor or parochial vicar is perfect either). There are good days and bad days. Many challenges and many opportunities for grace and conversion. What deflates priests, is not celibacy or Magisterium, but subterfuge, duplicity and deceit from their own ordained brethren. When church ceases to be about faith and more about solvency, then priestly zeal can drop dramatically. Yes, bills must be paid and responsible financial procedures and policies be in operation. On the other hand, bishops do not need ‘yes’ men, they need honest, courageous, and un-ambitious advisors to give them reliable and responsible counsel. Sometimes, you wonder if the old Soviet Union did not reincarnate or morph itself into a diocesan bureaucracy.

Priests are happy being priests and doing priestly things, like celebrating the Sacraments, teaching the faith, visiting the sick, and helping parents form their children into Christian men and women. What makes us unhappy is being treated like we’re guilty before we even know what the accusation is. What kills priestly zeal is corporate red tape and extreme micromanagement. I promised respect and obedience to my bishop and his successors but not to a committee or board advising him on numerous matters.  That is not to say most priests who work in chanceries and central administration are not devout, sincere, hard working or competent men. Most are. But there are places where the tenure has been so long and the cronyism so pronounced that middle management makes itself indispensible and necessary. During the worst of the clergy sex scandals, it was not just the perverts who misbehaved and a few bishops who swept things under the carpet, it was also a few middle management clergy giving bad advice and a few becoming a buffer between priest and bishop. When that happens, good priests are unable to communicate important information to their chief shepherd because someone in between has blocked or intercepted the message. Access to the bishop for any priest has to be unfettered as any son would be to his dad. When the corporate model is enshrined, however, it feels like only the vice presidents and board members have access and lower level employees just do their work and keep quiet.

I have been ordained 23½ years and can truthfully say I would not be happy doing or being anything else in the world. I love being a priest and love doing priestly things. What disheartens me and my colleagues is not the human element but the dark side of human nature which can tarnish any human heart, be it clergy or laity, priest, deacon or bishop.

When priests are told they need to get anger management treatment merely because they preached a homily in support of Humanae Vitae and in condemnation of birth control and abortion; when priests are admonished for enforcing canon law and requiring sponsors for baptism and confirmation to be Catholics in good standing; when priests are reprimanded for exercising their legitimate liturgical options as stated in universal law; when pastors spend sleepless nights over meeting diocesan assessments; when assignments and transfers are arbitrary and haphazard rather than based on experience, history and qualifications; then zeal begins to erode and evaporate.

On the other hand, when priests feel like they actually belong and work in a family of faith rather than in a corporate business, they are willing to endure any hardship, obstacle or inconvenience. When priests feel that their bishops see them as spiritual sons rather than ordained employees, they will love them in return and serve them to the best of their abilities.  Most priests ARE happy but they can be even happier. Does not mean more pay or more vacation. Does not mean eliminating celibacy or the hierarchy. It means ditching the corporate model once and for all. Bishops are more than Vice Presidents and corporate executives. They are SHEPHERDS and priests and deacons are there to serve and assist them.

It helps when church authority is employed to discipline all instances of misbehavior (like teaching heterodoxy or committing liturgical abuse) and not just when it involves personally disagreeing with one’s superiors or their prudential judgments. Stepping one someone’s toes is not the same gravity as denying a revealed truth or committing sacrilege, yet often those crimes go unnoticed or unpunished while minor infractions of diocesan policy are punished with severity and swiftness.

The aftermath of the scandals has made some of the faithful suspicious but most still trust and love their priests. The excessive and over-the-top sacrosanct respect given to the clergy until the end of the 1950’s has gone and rightfully so. Sadly, some parishioners have become more bellicose, contentious and disrespectful especially when a priest is merely defending church doctrine or enforcing church discipline. Yet, even these burdens can be borne as long as the priest feels he is supported downtown as well. Priests expect to be called on the carpet if we are guilty of misbehaving in any way but we also presume to be backed up when we defend Holy Mother Church by those lukewarm Catholics who seek to make her irrelevant in matters of faith and morals.

A good and holy priest, like Father Robert Levis, who just turned 90 this summer, is now living in a nursing home. He was very active until two years ago when he fell and suffered a concussion to the head and later broke his hip. Yet, he spent 65 years of priesthood faithfully serving the Church. Most of his time was spent teaching at Gannon University especially as Director of the Pontifical Center for Catechetical Studies. Staunchly defending the Magisterium in a time when there was no universal catechism (before 1992) and when most religion texts for children had butterflies and clouds rather than Commandments and Seven Sacraments, he valiantly fought for orthodoxy from pre-K to Grade 12. He championed Catholic colleges and universities to return to their Catholic roots and embrace Ex Corde Ecclesiae. Ridiculed by some but loved by so many more, Father Levis not only exemplified defensor fidei, he also personified priesthood. Offering Mass every day of his priesthood, he served in local parishes every weekend, sometimes driving many miles in horrible snowy weather.

Father Levis regularly came to my home to anoint, bring Holy Communion and hear my brother’s confession. Michael had been suffering from Muscular Dystrophy all his life and was in a wheelchair as a teenager and bedridden in his early 20’s. He died at the age of 26 but looked forward to Father Levis’ monthly pastoral visits. And there were hundreds of people Father Levis visited and thousands he counseled and gave spiritual direction. Many conversions and reversions are owed to his effort. Writing software and then books to teach the faith to youngsters and teens alike, Father Bob is most famous for being the primary host of WEB OF FAITH on EWTN.

Despite all his achievements and successes, he was never elevated to any papal honor. Many of his contemporaries were made Monsignors but not Father Levis. He would never seek it nor expect it. But no one on this earth can deny that if anyone ever deserved it, it was Levis. In other dioceses outgoing bishops often get some purple for their loyal supporters. Being made a Monsignor does not make a priest happy nor does denying the honor make him unhappy. Seeing a political use of the papal honor, however, leaves a bad taste among many. Father Levis despite his confinement has always been a happy priest. He LOVES his priesthood. I and many others think all honors, be they papal knighthood or being made a chaplain to his Holiness, they should go to priests who earned it by going over and beyond what is already and normally expected in every priest. Happiness would be knowing that a dear beloved friend and mentor was finally given the honor and recognition he was due BEFORE he left this earth.

I have other priest friends who are of Levis’ ilk. They, too, personify priestly piety and holiness. They are parish priests, seminary faculty and hospital and prison chaplains. They are devout, orthodox, reverent and deeply in love with the Church, the Holy Eucharist, the Blessed Mother and totally loyal to the Roman Pontiff. But they are not political nor are they company men. It is unlikely any of them will receive formal honors or recognition. That will not make them unhappy but it will make those of us who appreciate and revere them most unhappy. When I was a child in Catholic grade school, I remember the pastor, Monsignor Connelly giving a shiny silver dollar to the student who made the most improvement, who attended the most school days, who got the best grades. That recognition made many of us aspire to do better and try harder. If the pastor had given awards to his favorites, on the other hand, no one would have been encouraged in the least bit. Yes, there are many happy priests who are happy being priests and happy doing priestly work. The few who go beyond the required and who show courage in time of adversity, honor and integrity in time of opposition and heroic virtue day in and day out should be recognized so as to show the rest it can be done. Excellence is not a fantasy. Celibacy and obedience are not seeds of unhappiness, either. Sacrifice, self-denial and perseverance help fighting the good fight and finishing the race.

When the human element of the Church is fair and just, that enables the rank and file to busy themselves with the pastoral work that has to be done. When there is cronyism, politics, skullduggery and intrigue among the clergy (upper and lower), then the zeal can be robbed from those who find it distasteful and inappropriate. Happiness is the natural object of the human person that is why we seek eternal happiness in the next life. Happiness is like joy. It comes from having inner peace which is tranquility of order. When our will conforms to the Divine Will, there is harmony and peace in our soul and that creates a sense of happiness. Knowing you are doing what the Lord wants you to do makes you happy. But human beings can also bring unhappiness when they distort the truth and when they deny justice to fellow human beings. A former bishop told me that he loved to get letters of support for his priests since most people only write their bishop when they want to complain about a priest and rarely to compliment him. We have all had the experience of the nasty letter from the irate parishioner who feels mistreated. Whenever a positive letter came in, this bishop made the same effort to call the priest in and share the contents. If more parishioners wrote supportive letters before their pastor got transferred or before he leaves this earth, it might help keep more guys happy on the job. When you doubt that your efforts have any effect, that there may be no fruit to your labor, it can be discouraging. Hence, I always tell people when I visit other parishes that they need to express their satisfaction from time to time, to their priest and to their bishop. No need to remind them to complain when he is not doing what he is supposed to do, people react immediately and rightfully so. Jesus often gave encouragement and so should all of us.

h/t to Fr. Z.

Links:

• Why Priests are Happy and Sometimes Not
• Fr. Trigilio: what makes priests happy, what grinds them down, and a suggestion

Related (some of the B.S. Father Trigilio has had to endure, in the diocese where his family lived):

• Excerpts from dispute between bishop, suspended priest

Lost in translation

By Bishop Donald Trautperson

Why the new Mass prayers may be confusing.

(U.S. Catholic)  I was leading a group discussion on the merits of the renewed liturgy of Vatican II when John, a middle-aged businessman, commented, “I can’t imagine my life without the liturgy; it strengthens me each week—but I never understood the Mass until we had it in English.”

Some in the group said the liturgy was why they became Catholic; others said the liturgy was why they stayed in the church. All of these individuals had experienced the power of the liturgy to transform lives. That liturgy is about to undergo a face-lift with a new translation of the texts for the Mass.

What prompts this new translation? In 2000 Pope John Paul II authorized a new edition of the Roman Missal, the book that contains the texts of the Mass. The new translation of it is slated to be ready for use next year.

In 2001 the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments issued new principles and directives for translating from the original Latin into the vernacular in a document called Liturgiam authenticam. Following these new norms, the translation of the new Missal has intentionally employed a “sacred language,” which tends to be remote from everyday speech and frequently not understandable. For example, the Preface, or opening of the Eucharistic Prayer, of the Assumption says of Mary’s delivery of Jesus: “She brought forth ineffably your incarnate Son.”

When the bishops at the Second Vatican Council made the historic decision that the liturgy of the church should be in the vernacular, there was no mention of sacred language or vocabulary. The council’s intent was pastoral—to have the liturgy of the church prayed in living languages. Translated liturgical texts should be reverent, noble, inspiring, and uplifting, but that does not mean archaic, remote, or incomprehensible. While the translated texts of the new Missal must be accurate and faithful to the Latin original, they must also be intelligible, proclaimable, and grammatically correct. Regrettably the new translation fails in this regard.

Did Jesus ever speak to the people of his day in words beyond their comprehension? Did Jesus ever use terms or expressions beyond his hearer’s understanding? Jesus did explain the parable of the sower privately to his disciples in Mark (4:10-12) and Luke (8:9-10). In John 6 many of Jesus’ disciples found his Bread of Life discourse hard to accept. In these instances it is the message—not its vocabulary—that required further explanation...

Read More

Cardinal George: "I feel as if we're doing guerilla warfare here."

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

By Ann Rodgers, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie lost his 10-year battle to prevent the Catholic bishops from approving a new Mass translation that he believes is awkward and ungrammatical. But his finale on the floor had the bishops tied up in knots over whether their president, Cardinal Francis George, broke church law when he gave a Vatican office permission to finish one set of English translations without the U.S. bishops' approval...

As Bishop Trautman persisted in his arguments, Cardinal George sighed, "I feel as if we're doing guerilla warfare here."

But he promised to look into a possible solution, drawing laughter when he said, "The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops could sue the Congregation [for Divine Worship] in the Apostolic Signatura" -- the Vatican's highest court. But during a coffee break, Bishop Trautman was mulling the possibility of doing that himself...

More

Bishops split over Mass translation

Monday, November 16, 2009

By Ann Rodgers, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The nation's Catholic bishops will address many social controversies at their meeting in Baltimore this week. But the topic with the greatest potential for conflict among them is a new translation of the Mass.

They will vote on a pastoral letter on marriage that explains church opposition to artificial contraception, cohabitation and gay marriage. They are expected to approve an easy-to-read pamphlet explaining church opposition to technologies that aid conception. They're also updating directives on the tube-feeding of incapacitated people. While they may debate how best to make those points, they are points the bishops agree on.

What divides them is a new translation of the Mass that has been in the works for years. Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie has led the charge against what he sees as a "slavish" rendering of Latin into convoluted, ungrammatical English....

"American Catholics have every right to expect a translation of the new missal to follow the rules for English grammar. But this violates English syntax in the most egregious way," he said...

In 2001, the Vatican's Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments published Liturgiam Authenticam, new rules for translation. It stressed faithfulness to fourth-century Latin texts that were translations from Greek, Hebrew and other languages. It encouraged a special vocabulary for prayer that differed from everyday speech.

"Thus it may happen that a certain manner of speech which has come to be considered somewhat obsolete in daily usage may continue to be maintained in the liturgical context," it said.

Bishop Trautman, a biblical scholar and a past president of the bishops' committees on doctrine and liturgy, has been the most vocal critic of the resulting translations. The bishops have already approved most of the new Mass. The last few parts -- mostly prayers for saints days -- are now up for a vote.

Bishop Trautman's objections aren't to the most recent changes but to the tone of the entire translation. He wants the bishops to reject at least one set of translations this week, then send a high-level delegation to Rome to work out revisions throughout the Mass.

"This is our last chance to raise these issues and talk about them. But the parliamentary laws probably won't allow us to get at the heart of the issue [in Baltimore], because we can only discuss and debate the four items before us," he said...

*snip*

He already has lost arguments against changing the Nicene Creed's declaration that Jesus is "of one being with the Father" into "consubstantial with the Father." His focus now is on an issue that any parochial school student should understand: poor grammar and syntax.

Latin has sentences without subjects, so the literal translation has produced fragments rather than sentences. A "sentence" for Lent says, "Who, after he told the disciples of his coming death, manifested his glory to them on the holy mountain to show, as the law and the prophets also bear witness, that the path of suffering leads to the glory of the resurrection."

In the Nicene Creed, the current "we believe" will become "I believe." Bishop Trautman objects that the original Greek says "we believe." But his focus now is on the fact that "I believe" is said once at the beginning of the creed, without repeating it for each article of faith. When the U.S. bishops inserted three more "I believe" statements for clarity and good grammar, Vatican officials removed them.

The Vatican liturgy office is run by a Spaniard who speaks no English, although one of his top aides is American. Bishop Trautman noted that the new Spanish Mass has all the repetitions of "I believe" that were cut from the English Mass.

Not every bishop shares his concerns. The new Mass has strong defenders, such as Archbishop Allen Vigneron of Detroit, who believe it will introduce a new generation to a lost spiritual vocabulary. Others believe that the texts aren't bad enough to cause a crisis or that there are better ways of winning Vatican cooperation than lambasting the proposed prayers in public.

Bishop David Zubik said he respects Bishop Trautman's scholarship, but finds the new translations acceptable.

"This has been in discussion for the better part of a dozen years," he said. "You're never going to have a perfect package. ... I think some of the translations are beautiful. There are others that I might not particularly like, but I would have to say that I find the majority of them meaty, thought-provoking and coming from the heart."

Rocco Palmo, a Philadelphian who talks with bishops for his blog, "Whispers In the Loggia," said many who share Bishop Trautman's opinion believe his tactics may backfire.

"I'm not sure there will be a floor fight," he said. "Rome has shown a willingness, if the conference has passed the texts, to be considerate of amendments that the bishops want. That strategy of collaboration has a much better chance of working."

But Bishop Trautman believes it's irresponsible to approve prayers that people can't easily commit to heart. If these prayers are used in parishes, he said, "I think there will be fewer people coming to Eucharist."

He's been getting e-mails from Catholics dismayed at the examples they found on a Web site that the bishops set up to prepare Catholics for the new Mass: www.usccb.org/romanmissal.

"I've got Ph.D.s, monks, parish priests, everyone writing and asking me to please do something about this," he said.

"We need to stand up. We still have a chance."

• Bishops split over Mass translation
• Erie's Catholic bishop speaks his mind on church issues
• Bp. Donald “Ineffable” Trautman’s jihad against the new translation [Fr. Z POLL]
• Quotes from your e-mail about Bp. Trautman’s war on the translation 1, 2, 3

Erie's Catholic bishop speaks his mind on church issues

By DANA MASSING
dana.massing@timesnews.com

Erie Catholic Bishop Donald W. Trautman enunciated each word he spoke about the blood of Christ.

"It will be shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven," the bishop said, his voice carrying to the back of Gate of Heaven Cemetery's chapel, where he was celebrating a Mass on Nov. 2.

By the time the annual service for All Souls' Day comes around in 2010, Trautman will likely be saying some different words.

"For all" is due to be replaced with "for many" in a New English translation of the Roman Missal. U.S. Catholic bishops will vote on the final section of it at their fall meeting, which begins Monday.

Trautman has been a vocal critic of some of the changes.

But speaking out is nothing new for the man who will celebrate his 20th anniversary as Erie's Catholic bishop in 2010.

"I have taken controversial stances when it was necessary," Trautman said.

He took Mercyhurst College to task for inviting Hillary Rodham Clinton to speak at its main campus during the 2008 presidential race, saying the Catholic school shouldn't give a platform to someone in favor of abortion rights.

This year, he had similar reasons for decrying the University of Notre Dame's decision to give President Barack Obama an honorary degree when he spoke at commencement.

But long before Trautman was a bishop who worried about candidates disavowing Catholic beliefs, he was a boy who just wanted to be a priest.

Trautman was born in Buffalo and said he was called to the priesthood in grade school.

As a teen, he announced at breakfast one morning that he'd passed the seminary entrance exam. His parents weren't thrilled at first. They were concerned about his youth, and wanted him to have more experience in the world, he said.

When Trautman was a senior in the seminary at Niagara University, he learned he was being sent to Austria to study at the University of Innsbruck. It was 1958, and there were no cell phones or e-mail to connect him with home. He tried to get out of it.

But Buffalo's Catholic bishop said Trautman had to go if he wanted to be a priest.

"The bishop knew better than I did," Trautman said.

In Austria, his professors included theologian Karl Rahner and liturgist Josef Jungmann, men who Trautman said brought about Vatican II.

"When I left after ordination in 1962, I cried like a baby because that seminary, Innsbruck, became my second home," Trautman said.

Back in his first home, the Diocese of Buffalo, he taught and was a pastor, chancellor, vicar general and auxiliary bishop.

Trautman was named a bishop in 1985. For his motto, he chose "Feed my sheep."

He was named the ninth Catholic bishop of Erie in 1990, succeeding Bishop Michael Murphy.

Roman Catholic bishops are required to submit a letter of resignation to the Vatican when they turn 75. But it's not always accepted right away.

Trautman, 73, has 19 months until his 75th birthday and isn't opposed to retiring then.

"The diocese needs younger leadership, younger blood, fresher ideas, bishops with more energy," he said. "My heart and soul are with the people. I will stay here with the people when I retire, but they need a younger bishop."

Monsignor Robert Smith, the diocese's vicar general and Trautman's right hand, hopes Rome adds a couple of years to this bishop's term.

Smith said he respects Trautman.

"He doesn't ask anybody to do things he wouldn't do," Smith said.

Local funeral director Mark G. Razanauskas was a friend and fan of Trautman's predecessor.

"It's always hard to follow in the shoes of someone who's well-liked," Razanauskas said.

That was true for Trautman, who has faced challenges such as fewer priests and Catholic students, Razanauskas said.

Trautman said bishops don't want to close or merge parishes or schools but sometimes have to recognize the inevitable.

"A bishop never closes a school," he said. "A school closes itself by lack of students or lack of dollars. ... What do I gain by closing a school? Nothing. I'm in favor of Catholic education."

Trautman said he believes more schools and parishes will close or consolidate as the Catholic Church responds to changes in where people live.

Razanauskas, a member of St. Casimir Church, said parishioners don't always see the whole picture that bishops have to consider when making decisions.

He's come to admire Trautman as a hardworking bishop who wasn't threatened by Murphy and relied on him for help.

When Murphy died in 2007, Razanauskas heard something at the cemetery that made him appreciate Trautman even more.

"His voice broke. He choked up. It was very moving," Razanauskas said, adding that Trautman "has a wonderful human side that I got to see."

Razanauskas also believes the current bishop has a better sense of humor than people realize.

It showed after Murphy's death, when the Vatican newspaper reported it was Trautman who had died during that Easter week.

"I told people that there was an early resurrection," Trautman told the Erie Times-News at the time.

In a more recent interview, the bishop admitted to being a very private and reserved person with "a little bit of perfectionism."

He's hands-on, going to all personnel board meetings, but said he struggles to balance between being behind his desk and out among the people. Long days start in his office at St. Mark Catholic Center and end after a meeting, maybe with college students, or a special service, perhaps for a parish anniversary.

"I put 30,000 miles a year on my car," said Trautman, who buys a Chrysler every few years. He prefers a heavy car for winter travel in the 13-county diocese.

He considers it his job to teach, to sanctify and to shepherd.

Trautman started the St. Martin's Center Bishop's Breakfast Program to feed the homeless; the Diocesan Bank to provide financial help to parishes; and the Catholic chapel in the Millcreek Mall, where he hears confessions on Ash Wednesday. The chapel drew praise for taking the Catholic Church to the people and scorn for its location and expense.

Thelma Manendo approves of the chapel and Trautman.

"He's reached out to a lot of people," said Manendo, who volunteers at the chapel. "He's made it so comfortable. He's walking in the footsteps of Jesus."

The mall space costs about $2,000 a month to rent.

"It is costly for us, but I see it as a real form of evangelization and therefore I think worth the dollars," Trautman said.

He also tries to share the faith with high school students at about 60 confirmations a year.

"I'm proud of the fact that in my 19 years of being bishop here, I have never repeated a confirmation homily," he said.

He never anticipated he'd also be reaching out to clergy sex-abuse victims in his diocese.

"I have met with every single victim personally, and I will continue to do that, although no one's coming in these days," he said.

The bishop said abuse didn't reach an epidemic level here.

"I met the crisis head-on," he said. "Where there were proven facts, I removed those priests from active ministry."

Trautman couldn't recall how many victims he'd met or how many priests he'd removed.

He said he wishes the medical profession would take some responsibility for the crisis. He said the church has been the focus. Yet, in some files there are letters signed by doctors saying that a priest had been treated "for this issue" and was OK to be reassigned, Trautman said.

"Oftentimes, bishops followed advice given by medical doctors," he said.

Trautman said he admires the work women do in ministry, calling them "true disciples helping the church today."

But he believes Scriptures and tradition prohibit women from being ordained as priests.

"It's not a question of equality," he said. "I think it's a question of recognizing God's ordering of his church and what he has wished and willed for the church."

But Trautman also is a man who pushed for inclusive language in liturgy.

When last elected head of the bishops' Committee on Liturgy, he beat candidates acceptable to conservative groups that opposed gender-inclusive language.

Trautman's stand on language is perhaps a blending of what some would call his conservative and progressive sides.

"My priests will tell you I'm very traditional and conservative," Trautman said. "However, I have a reputation, I think, among the conference of bishops and others of being very progressive in matters of liturgy."

As a good bishop should, he said, he will implement the new translation of the Roman Missal after it is approved by the Holy See, probably in 2010.

But Trautman also said he'll do what he can to amend it.

He's concerned that it uses words like "ineffable" and "consubstantial" and has sentences with as many as 88 words.

He calls the text a "slavishly literal translation" from the Latin that has "needless changes," including "for many."

He bases his arguments on the life of the Lord he follows.

"If you look at the Gospels, Jesus never talked to the people in words they could not comprehend," Trautman said.

"We should never make our speech in liturgy or in teaching or preaching incomprehensible. Our words should reflect and reach the people as Jesus did."

• Erie's Catholic bishop speaks his mind on church issues
• Bp. Donald “Ineffable” Trautman’s jihad against the new translation [Fr. Z POLL]
• Quotes from your e-mail about Bp. Trautman’s war on the translation 1, 2, 3

Bishop criticizes ‘slavishly literal’ English translation of missal

U.S. Bishop Donald W. Trautman of Erie, Pa., presents the third annual Frederick R. McManus Memorial Lecture at The Catholic University of America in Washington Oct. 22. Bishop Trautman spoke about the nonpastoral approach of some passages in the new English translation of the Roman Missal. (CNS photo/Nancy Wiechec)

By Mark Pattison
Catholic News Service

WASHINGTON – Bishop Donald W. Trautman of Erie, Pa., former chairman of the U.S. bishops’ liturgy committee, sharply criticized what he called the “slavishly literal” translation into English of the new Roman Missal from the original Latin.

He said the “sacred language” used by translators “tends to be elitist and remote from everyday speech and frequently not understandable” and could lead to a “pastoral disaster.”

“The vast majority of God’s people in the assembly are not familiar with words of the new missal like ‘ineffable,’ ‘consubstantial,’ ‘incarnate,’ ‘inviolate,’ ‘oblation,’ ‘ignominy,’ ‘precursor,’ ‘suffused’ and ‘unvanquished.’ The vocabulary is not readily understandable by the average Catholic,” Bishop Trautman said.

“The (Second Vatican Council’s) Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy stipulated vernacular language, not sacred language,” he added. “Did Jesus ever speak to the people of his day in words beyond their comprehension? Did Jesus ever use terms or expressions beyond his hearer’s understanding?”

Bishop Trautman made his remarks in an Oct. 22 lecture at The Catholic University of America in Washington, as part of the Monsignor Frederick R. McManus Lecture Series. Monsignor McManus, a liturgist, served as a peritus, or expert, during Vatican II.

The Roman Missal has not yet been given final approval for use in the United States. The U.S. bishops were scheduled to vote on four items pertaining to the missal at their November general meeting in Baltimore. It is expected that the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments would give its “recognitio,” or approval, at some point following the U.S. bishops’ vote.

Bishop Trautman took note of sentences in the new missal that he said run 66, 70 and 83 words, declaring that they were “unproclaimable” by the speaker and “incomprehensible” to the hearer.

“American Catholics have every right to expect the translation of the new missal to follow the rules for English grammar. The prefaces of the new missal, however, violate English syntax in a most egregious way,” Bishop Trautman said, citing some examples in his remarks.

“The translators have slavishly transposed a Lain ‘qui’ clause into English without respecting English sentence word order,” he added. The bishop also pointed out subordinate clauses from the missal that are “represented as a sentence,” and sentences lacking a subject and predicate.

Bishop Trautman also questioned the use of “I believe” in the retranslated version of the Nicene Creed, “even though the original and official Nicene Creed promulgated by the first Ecumenical Council of Nicaea in 325 said ‘we believe’ in both the Greek and Latin versions.

“Since this is a creedal prayer recited by the entire assembly in unison, the use of ‘we’ emphasized the unity of the assembly in praying this together as one body. Changing the plural form of ‘we’ to ‘I’ in the Nicene Creed goes against all ecumenical agreements regarding common prayer texts,” he said.

The bishop complained about the lack of “pastoral style” in the new translation. The current wording in Eucharistic Prayer 3 asks God to “welcome into your kingdom our departed brothers and sisters,” which he considered “inspiring, hope-filled, consoling, memorable.”

The new translation asks God to “give kind admittance to your kingdom,” which Bishop Trautman called “a dull lackluster expression which reminds one of a ticket-taker at the door. ... The first text reflects a pleading, passionate heart and the latter text a formality – cold and insipid.”

Bishop Trautman quoted the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, which said rites and texts “should radiate a noble simplicity. They should be short, clear, free from useless repetition. They should be within the people’s powers of comprehension, and normally should not require much explanation.”

“Why are these conciliar directives not implemented in the new missal?” he asked. They are “especially” relevant, Bishop Trautman added, to “the people of the third millennium: children, teenagers, adults, those with varying degrees of education, and those with English as a second language.”

He acknowledged that “there are those who disagree with the way the liturgical reform of Vatican II was interpreted and implemented” and who maintained that “a reform of the reform” was necessary to stem what they saw as “diminishing religiosity (and) declining Mass attendance” tied to the Mass texts.

But while “the Latin text is the official, authoritative text,” Bishop Trautman said, “the Latin text is not inspired. It is a human text, reflecting a certain mindset, theology and world view.”

As a consequence, “a major and radical change” and “a major pastoral, catechetical problem erupts” in the new missal during the words of consecration, which say that the blood of Christ “will be poured out for you and for many,” instead of “for all,” as is currently the practice.

“For whom did Jesus not die?” Bishop Trautman asked. “In 1974 the Holy See itself had approved our present words of institution (consecration) as an accurate, orthodox translation of the Latin phrase ‘pro multis,’“ he added. “It is a doctrine of our Catholic faith that Jesus died on the cross for all people.”

Bishop Trautman took issue with a 2006 letter to bishops by Nigerian Cardinal Francis Arinze, then head of the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, which said that “salvation is not brought about in some mechanistic way, without one’s own willing or participation.”

“I respond that Jesus died even for those who reject his grace. He died for all,” Bishop Trautman said.

“Why do we now have a reversal? The Aramaic and Latin texts have not changed. The scriptural arguments have not changed, but the insistence on literal translation has changed.”

Bishop Trautman hearkened back to Monsignor McManus, whom he called “an apostle of the liturgical renewal.”

“If Monsignor McManus were with us today, he would call us to fidelity to the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy and encourage us to produce a translation of the missal that is accurate, inspiring, referent, proclaimable, understandable, pastoral in every sense – a text that raises our minds and hearts to God.”

• Link

Bishop Trautman: Average Catholics Too Dumb to Understand New Prayers

Father Z. wrote:

Bp. Trautman doesn’t think you are smart enough to understand the proposed new translation of Mass

"I was alerted to this by one of the veteran WDTPRSers who added: "Does anyone care about this stuff anymore?"

Here is the headine:

Bishop Trautman objects to some proposed language changes

So, bishop near the end of his long career, firmly mired in the stale old ideas of yesteryear, bravely soldiering on under the baggage of the 1960’s, is still objecting to the Holy See’s norms set for liturgical translation.

His Excellency Donald W. Trautman of Erie is nothing if not consistent. He reminds me of a guy who might go to the same old restaurant every day for lunch, sit at the same place every day, and order exactly the same sandwitch… but to do so in Rome.

Here is the story with my emphases and comments:

BY DANA MASSING
dana.massing@timesnews.com [more details]

"Ineffable."

The word worries Erie Catholic Bishop Donald W. Trautman.

He doubts that "John and Mary Catholic," sitting in their church pew, would understand it. [Two things here. Again and again His Excellency has demonstrated in his comments about liturgical translation and the new norms that he doesn’t not believe that you are very smart. He thinks you are too dumb to understand the prayer. He thinks you are too thick or detached to wonder what it means if you don’t immediately understand and then think about it or look it up. Also, he thinks that every prayer must be immediately able to be clearly understood. This leaves no room for the effect of mystery.]

That’s why Trautman will try to tell other U.S. bishops that such words shouldn’t be in a new English translation of the Roman Missal.

U.S. Catholic bishops are holding their June general meeting today through Saturday in Orlando, Fla. They are expected to vote on an English version of the portion of the Roman Missal involving prayers for seasons like Advent and Lent, unless Trautman can convince them to delay a decision on the translation. [He wants to delay … the … translation. Get that? Because surely we haven’t waited long enough.]

"I am at this point reserved about endorsing it," Trautman said two days before the start of the meeting. "I will try to speak on the conference floor to point out what I consider some major deficiencies in the translation." [Please, O God Almighty and Omnipotent Father, in your ineffable way inspire the bishops of the conference to keep this fellow in check.]

A presentation on it is likely today, with voting probably on Friday, he said.

The portion of the Missal being discussed is the Proper of Seasons.

"These would be the prayers at Mass for the opening prayer, the prayer over the gifts, the prayer after Communion," Trautman said. "These would be the prayers for all of Advent, Christmas, Lent, Easter and then the Sundays of the year." [I have a copy of the draft of these prayers. I think you would like them.]

The Vatican wants a translation more faithful to the original Latin text. [Not … just … the VATICAN!]

Trautman said the draft includes words such as "ineffable" that would not be in the ordinary vocabulary of people.

"This should be the prayer of the people," Trautman said. "I’m not for having street language. ... We should certainly have elevated tone, but words like that are just beyond the common comprehension." [Okay… figure that out. Elevated language but not comprehensible.]

Catholics coming out of a lunchtime Mass at Erie’s St. Peter Cathedral weren’t familiar with "ineffable." [WDTPRS asks … SO WHAT? The problem here is that if you make everything immediately comprehensible to the lowest common denominator it will wind up being pretty much like what we have now in the old lame-duck ICEL prayers:

God,
you are big.
Help us be big like you.

If people hear and interesting word, they might… oh my gosh… wonder what it all means and slowly but surely get the idea that monosyllables and grunting might not actually convey what the Latin prayers convery.]

According to Webster’s New World College Dictionary, Fourth Edition, the word means "too overwhelming to be expressed or described in words; inexpressible; too awesome or sacred to be spoken."

It’s "not in my daily language," said Shirley Skiba, a member of St. Luke Catholic Church in Erie. [Maybe Shirely shouldn’t be the measuring stick for the language of liturgical prayer.]

Skiba said words used in the Mass should be "something we feel comfortable with." That’s the case with the current translation, for the most part, she said. [Enough said.]

"I think it should be language the everyday person can understand," she said.

Trautman called parts of the proposed translation "archaic" and "just clumsy language." [Then His Excellency should take the time to explain it to Shirley.]

One proposed change, for the first week in Advent, would replace "old way of life" with "ancient bondage," the Erie bishop said.

"Ancient bondage is very ambiguous and not clear enough to the people," he said. [Yes. But there is a problem. I ask you, dear reader, does "old way of life" mean the same thing, even on the surface, as "ancient bondage"?]

Regarding another change, he said, "They speak of ‘into the joy of true peace.’ Well, we would say ‘rejoice in true peace.’ That’s much more understandable." [However, entering into a state of joy means something different than simply being joyful.]

In another vote related to language, the bishops will decide whether to replace "vosotros" with the more familiar "ustedes" in Spanish-language Masses in the United States. Trautman compared using "vosotros" in Spanish to using "thou" in English. [Aaaaaaaaand…. that would be… bad?]

...

Listen as Erie Catholic Bishop Donald W. Trautman talks about what the U.S. Catholic bishops will be discussing during their June general meeting Thursday through Saturday in Orlando.

Some English words might be hard, but they are the perfect word to do the job. To replace that word, you need a circumlocution or paraphrase. That makes translations overly wordy. But it is part of the very nature of Roman prayer to be concise. Even the concision is meaningful.

Enough said. "

• Link