Showing posts with label novus ordo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label novus ordo. Show all posts

Sunday, February 9, 2014

Reforming the Irreformable?





IT COULD BE evidence of exemplary patience on the part of NLM editor Jeffrey Tucker that I am still counted among the contributors to this blog. More than two years have passed since I posted anything relative to the ‘reform of the reform’. Although I consider myself a capable writer, I am not a fast one, which impairment makes the demands of parish ministry even less favorable to the task of unpacking my liturgical ruminations for those who might care to know them. But that only partly explains the hiatus.

I have the impression that whatever can be said in general terms about the ‘reform of the reform’—its origin and aims, its scope and methodology, the various proposals advanced in its interest (if not in its name), its proponents and critics—has pretty much already been said.1 Although the movement is difficult to define (Is it synonymous with the ‘new liturgical movement’ or but one stage of it?),2 its overall aim was nicely summed a few years ago by the Ceylonese prelate who stated that the time has come when we must “identify and correct the erroneous orientations and decisions made, appreciate the liturgical tradition of the past courageously, and ensure that the Church is made to rediscover the true roots of its spiritual wealth and grandeur even if that means reforming the reform itself…”3

Long before Joseph Ratzinger became Pope Benedict XVI, he was critically evaluating the reform of the liturgy following the Second Vatican Council, identifying those aspects of the reform which have little or no justification in the Council’s liturgical Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium (SC) and which undermine the true spirit of the liturgy.4  As pope it was in his power to remedy the deficiencies—the “erroneous orientations and decisions”—of the reform on a universal scale not only by his teaching and personal liturgical example but also by legislation. He accentuated the liturgy’s beauty, promoted the liturgical and musical treasures of the Western Church (including of course the usus antiquior of the Roman rite), and introduced more tangible continuity with tradition in the manner of papal celebrations (e.g., the ‘Benedictine’ altar arrangement, offering Mass ad orientem in the Sistine and other papal chapels, administering Holy Communion to the faithful on their tongues as they knelt). His successor, Pope Francis, is a different man with a different personality and style, and his priorities clearly lie with other aspects of the Church’s life. I am not holding my breath in anticipation of further official progress along the lines marked out by Pope Benedict, who has deservedly been dubbed the “Father of the new liturgical movement.”5

But let us suppose, practically speaking and perhaps per impossibile, that the ‘reform of the reform’ were to receive substantive institutional support. Even so, I doubt the endeavor would be feasible—if we take that term to mean the reform of the present order of liturgy so as to bring it substantially back into line with the slowly developed tradition it widely displaced. It is not sour grapes about last year’s papal abdication that prompts my saying so. Like any movement, the ‘reform of the reform’ stands or falls on its own principles, not on any one pope or partisan. No: the ‘reform of the reform’ is not realizable because the material discontinuity between the two forms of the Roman rite presently in use is much broader and much deeper than I had first imagined. In the decade that has elapsed since the publication of my book, The Reform of the Reform? A Liturgical Debate (Ignatius Press, 2003), which concerns almost exclusively the rite of Mass, a number of important scholarly studies, most notably those of László Dobszay (†2011)6 and Lauren Pristas,7 have opened my eyes to the hack-job inflicted by Pope Paul VI’s Consilium on the whole liturgical edifice of the Latin Church: the Mass; the Divine Office; the rites of the sacraments, sacramentals, blessings and other services of the Roman Ritual; and so forth.8 Whatever else might be said of the reformed liturgy—its pastoral benefits, its legitimacy, its rootedness in theological ressourcement, its hegemonic status, etc.—the fact remains: it does not represent an organic development of the liturgy which Vatican II (and, four centuries earlier, the Council of Trent) inherited... (continued)


Link:

Thursday, December 29, 2011

RealCatholicTV Phone Conversation: "Have you been suppressed?"

From RealCatholicTV's Facebook Page:
Actual transcript of a recent telephone conversation : "Have you been suppressed?" "Not to the best of my knowledge, but it's never happened to me before so I wouldn't know what it feels like."

This posting silence for the octave of Christmas or thereabouts was and is and remains a planned thing over the vacation (many of our staff are traveling to see their families, who they do not see very much over the year etc.)

We have not been suppressed. At least, I don't think so . . .

For now, feast your eyes upon this - Fr Eduard Perrone, priest of the Order of Melchizedek, scholar, gentleman, composer, confessor, model for all young men, speaks about the mind-bending awesomeness of the Mass at the CTH conference 2009.

Saturday, November 21, 2009

Friday, August 21, 2009

U.S. bishops launch website on new Mass translation

.- After years in the making, the English translation of the new Roman Missal is nearing its completion and is now awaiting the final approval of the bishops and the Vatican. In an effort to begin educating the faithful and clergy on the new translation, the U.S. bishops have launched a website.

The new website, which was launched on August 21, includes background material on the process of the development of liturgical texts, sample texts from the Missal, a glossary of terms and answers to frequently asked questions.

A press release from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) says that content will be added to the website on a regular basis over the next several months.

Bishop Arthur Serratelli, who chairs the bishops' Committee on Divine Worship, welcomes the faithful to the new site in a video, saying, "In the years since Vatican II we have learned a lot about the use of the vernacular in the liturgy and the new texts reflect this new understanding."

Describing the translation, Bishop Serratelli says, "The new texts are understandable, dignified and accurate. … They not only strive to make the meaning of the text accessible for the listener, but they also strive to unearth the biblical and theological richness of the Latin text..."

Friday, July 25, 2008

Vatican Approves New English Translation For The Order Of Mass

July 25, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

WASHINGTON— The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has received approval (recognitio) from the Holy See’s Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments for the new English-language translation of the Order of Mass (Ordo Missae).

This is the first section of the translation of the third edition of the Roman Missal. It includes most of the texts used in every celebration of the Mass, including the responses that will be said by the people.

In its letter, the Congregation pointed out that while the texts are binding, the approval “does not intend that these texts are to be put into use immediately.”

Cardinal Francis Arinze, Prefect of the Congregation, explained the reasons for providing the text at this time. The purpose is to provide “time for the pastoral preparation of priests,deacons and for appropriate catechesis of the lay faithful. It will likewise facilitate the devising of musical settings for parts of the Mass.”

The text is covered by copyright law and the Statutes of the International Commission on English in the Liturgy.

The more significant changes of the people’s parts are:

  1. et cum spiritu tuo is rendered as “And with your spirit”
  2. In the Confiteor, the text “through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault” has been added
  3. The Gloria has been translated differently and the structure is different from the present text
  4. In the Preface dialogue the translation of “Dignum et justum est” is “It is right and just”
  5. The first line of the Sanctus now reads “Holy, Holy, Holy Lord God of hosts”
  6. The response of the people at the Ecce Agnus Dei is “Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.”
At this time, no date is available as to when the entire translation of the Roman Missal will be released.

USCCB

h/t to NLM via Mulier Fortis
____________________________________

Fr. Z wrote:
"Various internet news agencies put out stories, all with lists of some changes to common parts of the translation which will affect people directly.

Whereas CWN, for example, reported that in the words of consecration of the Most Precious Blood the priest will say, "poured out for you and for many (pro multis)", which is the single most important change in the English translation, CNS was entirely silent about it!

The left-leaning news agency of the USCCB was silent about the change to the words of consecration.

No one can believe they missed that part.

You will recall that since Paul VI made this decision, the Pope reserves to himself the tranlation of sacramental forms. Benedict XVI determined that a correct translation of pro multis must be included in all the vernacular versions and told Card. Arinze to write to that effect to all the Conferences of Bishops: the form had to be something like "for many", "for the many", "for the multitude" (French has "pour la multitude"), for example.

WDTPRS has four lengthy articles on the pro multis issue. I am happy to report that they played a role in the deliberations about what to do with pro multis. Also, in my recent PODCAzT I included an an answer to a question put to me in voicemail about this controversial point.

That said, I observe that the news report said "for many".

While I am glad that we will have a more accurate translation, I think that the better form would be the more precise "for the many", rather than the less precise "for many".

First, "the many" seems, to my ears, larger.

Second, "the many" sets it off as a group.

Third, "the many" has more of an eschatological direction to it, making the group sound like the body of the Chosen before the throne of God in heaven.

Either way will be an improvement.

However, I will continue gently to lobby in a happy sort of way until the Missal is ready for publication."

Link

Tuesday, July 8, 2008

"OK, I've Calmed Down"

[father-erik-flame-thrower2.jpg]

"Ever since Rome in her wisdom finally recognized the disaster which was old ICEL, restructured it, and formed the Vox Clara Commission, I have been waiting with fervent hope for the a good translation of the Novus Ordo. Face it, the translation that we have now bites. Not only is it's language pedestrian, lacking in linguistic beauty, and hardly spiritually uplifting, it is really a paraphrase. Reams and megabytes have been spilled about what has been ideologically mistranslated and just plain left out of in the current translation. Finally, it seemed that we would be able to celebrate a Mass that lives up to the Latin original. But, someone has slammed on the brakes. And from the comments of the bishops at last month's meeting, it is because certain bishops think that we priests are too inept to handle dependent clauses and the laity too dim to understand words not regularly used on TV. I also suspect that there is something deeper going on. The liturgical establishment does not, to say the least, like the direction Rome is taking the liturgy and is doing everything in its power to obstruct the liturgical restoration. This seems to be only more step in an organized campaign..."