Pope says he wants to change the words to the Lord's Prayer because current interpretation suggests God leads us 'into temptation'

By Reuters and Sara Malm for MailOnline

Pope Francis has said he wants to change the interpretation of 'Our Father', the best known prayer in Christianity.

The Pontiff said the Roman Catholic Church should adopt a better translation of the phrase 'lead us not into temptation' in the Italian version of the Lord's Prayer.

He said the current phrasing, which is the same in English and many other languages, suggests that it is God who has a choice to lead us into temptation or not.

'That is not a good translation, because it speaks of a God who induces temptation',' the pope said in a television interview on Wednesday night.

Francis said the Catholic Church in France had opted for a different phrasing, which worked around this particular issue.

The French translation uses the phrase 'do not let us fall into temptation' as an alternative, which, the Pope said, implies that the fault would be human.

He indicated that it or something similar should be applied worldwide.

The prayer is part of Christian liturgical culture and memorised from childhood by hundreds of millions of people within all branches of the religion - both Catholic and Protestant.

It is a translation from the Latin vulgate, which was translated from ancient Greek, which was in turn translated from Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus.

Liturgical translations are usually done by local Churches in coordination with the Vatican.

Link:

• Pope says he wants to change the words to the Lord's Prayer because current interpretation suggests God leads us 'into temptation'

From the Pope’s End of the World, A Voice Not Lost in Translation

“Here in Buenos Aires we have seen Padre Bergoglio come out of a van any freezing night at 3 a.m. to set up a table with hot soup and coffee for the prostitutes of Flores, the neighborhood where he was born. Not a word of reproach or a sermon, just a cup of hot soup, a smile. Then someone picks up a cup and whispers in his ear; he walks aside and hears her confession, dries a torrent of tears, whispers something that the penitent assents to, sobbing. I know it seems bizarre…but Someone told us that angels rejoice when something like that happens no matter how bizarre it may look here on Earth. The absolution of the good thief on Calvary was no model of sacramental propriety either, but it worked.” (Carlos Caso-Rosendi, These Stone Walls)... (continued)

Read More at These Stone Walls

Link:

• From the Pope’s End of the World, A Voice Not Lost in Translation 

Related:

• Fr. Gordon MacRae: Federal Court to Hear Oral Arguments in Habeas Corpus Appeal

The Linus Van Pelt Lesson on Translation Accuracy

By Ann Barnhardt at Barnhardt.biz

That really is a sweet little clip. The child who voiced Linus had such a quintessentially warm American accent, even down to the little lisp. Magic in a bottle - from the voices to the soundtrack. It was made in 1965 and stands as a marker of the end of the Christian American culture, only recognized now in retrospect.

But, a nit to pick, and a great lesson for all in how important an accurate translation of the Bible is. Most Bibles today read Luke 2:14 as:

"Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, goodwill toward men."

The last clause is totally wrong, and was mangled intentionally and with malice.

The Vulgate Latin, which is St. Jerome's inspired synthesis of the original source texts triple cross-referenced against each other in Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew in preparation for the eventual setting of the canon of scripture at the Council of Carthage in 397 AD, reads thusly:

"...gloria in altissimis Deo et in terra pax in hominibus bonae voluntatis"

In English, in the Douay-Rheims translation this reads:

Glory to God in the highest; and on earth peace to men of good will.

These are two completely different ideas. Radically different. The bad, modern translation has peace and goodwill together as co-subjects, as unqualified universals: "peace, goodwill TOWARD men". The accurate translation clearly has goodwill not as the COMPOUND SUBJECT along with peace, but as the QUALIFIER. To men OF GOOD WILL. Good will isn't the subject, it is the OBJECT OF THE PREPOSITION.

The Peace of Our Lord is a massively qualified, and extremely rare and precious thing. When the priest says at Mass, "Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum" (The peace of the Lord be always with you), he isn't just saying "nice things" as filler. This is a profound and precious prayer.

Why would God, in His Perfect Justice, wish good will towards those men who are at war with Him, and thus His Church? Is not the Second Person, God Incarnate in the Manger in Bethlehem, the Judge of mankind? Is not the Baby wrapped in swaddling clothes He who will sort the sheep from the goats? Is He not the One who is come to sift the wheat from the chaff? Did He not say:

"Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword."

Oh, but if we are under attack by Communist-homosexualist infiltrators, and we want God reduced to an abstract philosophical construct, an "I'm okay, you're okay" joke of a deity, an effete, toothless "idea" that is merely an excuse for neo-pagan self-worship and narcissistic performance opportunities, then, by all means, mangle and rearrange the Word of God. As the infiltrators tell their victims, "It doesn't really matter what the original texts said - all that matters is what today's translation says to you . . . "

Luke 2:14 is a quick, easy way to check the veracity of any translation of the Bible. Break yours out and check right now. And then, when you find it incorrectly translated, as you almost certainly will, ask yourself what other verses have been mangled. And then ask yourself what you're missing in the seven books that Luther removed. Uh-oh.

Then, just GET A DOUAY-RHEIMS and use the Church's authoritative English translation without fear or worry that you are reading Communist-homosexualist agitprop.

Link:

• The Linus Van Pelt Lesson on Translation Accuracy

Cardinal Burke on the Liturgy - Traditional Latin Mass and Ordinary Form, New English Translation

Cardinal Raymond L. Burke with Raymond Arroyo on EWTN:


h/t New Liturgical Movement

Related:

• Moving Beyond
• Exile to Malta for Cardinal Burke
• The Scandal That is Eating the Heart out of the Catholic Church in America
• Cardinal Raymond Burke: Obama’s Policies ‘Have Become Progressively More Hostile Toward Christian Civilization’

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

The Holy Bible: Catholic Action Edition

My new bible (purchased used, in almost-new condition):

The
Holy Bible
Catholic Action Edition

Confraternity Text
Genesis to Ruth, Psalms, New Testament

Douay-Challoner Text
Remaining Books of Old Testament

Copyright, 1953, by
Catholic Books, Inc.

Nihil Obstat
Bernard L. Rosswog, O.S.B., S.T.D.
Censor Librorum

Imprimatur
†Vincent G. Taylor, O.S.B., D.D., LL.D.
Abbot-Ordinary,
Diocese of Belmont Abbey Nullius

"OK, I've Calmed Down"

"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..."

More

• OK, I've Calmed Down

Archbishop Mark Coleridge's Pastoral Letter for Pentecost

From Father Z:

"I was alerted by Australia Incognita to an interesting pastoral letter for Pentecost issued by Archbishop Mark Coleridge of the Diocese of Canberra and Goulburn in Australia. The letter concerns liturgical practice.

Find it here.

Let’s have a look at part of it with my emphases and comments.

PREPARING THE FEAST

A Pentecost Letter on the Liturgy
To the People of God
of the Archdiocese of Canberra and Goulburn

In the splendid words of the Catechism, the Holy Spirit is “the artisan of ‘God’s masterpieces’, the sacraments of the New Covenant” (CCC, 1091); and at this time of Pentecost I want to speak to you of the sacred liturgy in which “God’s masterpieces” are celebrated. In doing so, I am conscious of my role in the Archdiocese as the moderator of worship, charged with the duty of sanctifying the People of God, especially in the sacred liturgy.

A NEW PHASE

Pentecost Sunday was the day chosen by the Australian Bishops to implement the new General Instruction of the Roman Missal, albeit in a provisional translation to be replaced by a final version once the new translation of the Roman Missal appears, perhaps late in 2009. For a copy of the new translation, go to www.acbc.catholic.org.au/documents/200707031933.pdf. I would especially ask the clergy to read the Instruction as a whole.

The General Instruction sets out how Mass is to be celebrated in the Roman Rite, [Obviously, this is the Novus Ordo we are reading about.] and the new version has been drawn up in the light of forty years of experience of Mass celebrated according to the Missal of Paul VI. The changes it introduces are not great. For the celebrant there are a number of changes, but for the people there are just two:

The congregation stands immediately after the celebrant has said “Pray, brothers and sisters, that our sacrifice will be pleasing and acceptable to God, the almighty Father” and before praying “May the Lord accept this sacrifice…”.

Before receiving Holy Communion, communicants bow to the One they are about to receive. Bowing is the preferred gesture, but those who are accustomed to genuflect before receiving or to kneel to receive will be free to follow their custom. [Excellent. He doesn’t try to squelch freedom.]

At www.acbc.catholic.org.au/documents/200804151396.pdf you can find a brochure outlining and explaining these changes.

The new version of General Instruction is one of a number of indications that the Church is moving into a new phase of the ongoing journey of liturgical renewal, the roots of which reach back to the Second Vatican Council and beyond. In earlier times, it seemed that the process of liturgical renewal begun by the Council was complete. But that is not the case. The journey of liturgical renewal, we can now see, is only in its early phases, and the appearance of the General Instruction is one indication of this. Other still more important indications will be the appearance in the not too distant future of the new translation of the Roman Missal and the new translation of the Lectionary. Now is the time, the Spirit is saying to the Church, to take stock of the liturgical renewal of the last forty years, to discern as clearly as possible what has succeeded and what has failed, and to make adjustments in the light of that discernment.

This means that all of us will have to be open to learn, and that is not always easy. Over recent decades, liturgical habits have taken hold, some of which have been beneficial, others detrimental to the celebration of the liturgy. It is never easy to break the hold of bad habits, especially when we do not see them as bad. Openness to learn always involves humility, a preparedness to recognise that I do not know all the answers. In the case of the liturgy, that humility involves a preparedness to learn from the Church, to whom alone the liturgy belongs; and in the new General Instruction and the new translations of the Missal and Lectionary, it is the voice of the whole Church, the Bride of Christ, that we hear.

THE BIG PICTURE

Against that background, let me make some general observations.

Silence

Our worship generally has become very chatty, [It is a problem, I think, in the Novus Ordo itself, that it lends itself to chattiness.] to the point where one of the challenges now is to allow silence to play its part in the liturgy. This might begin with our places of worship. Where once our churches were places of silence for the sake of prayer in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament, the custom has arisen in more recent years for people to talk freely in the churches, certainly before and after Mass. The same is true of the sacristy: where once silence was the rule (again for the sake of prayer and recollection) often now the sacristy has become a noisy and distracting place. Once was too that the priest was expected to pray the prescribed prayers as he vested for Mass, [YES!!] and this was one factor which contributed to an air of silence in the sacristy. I wonder would it be possible to encourage an air of silence or at least quiet in sacristies before Mass, and to make our churches places where there is a silence which supports prayer. Of course there are times when one has to talk in a sacristy or a church, but it is a question of the prevailing atmosphere. In that sense, I am speaking more about prayer than about silence for its own sake.

Then there is the question of the place of silence within the Mass itself. The Roman Rite presupposes seven silences:
1) before the Act of Penitence
2) before the Collect (after the celebrant’s call to prayer)
3) after the First Reading and before the Psalm,
4) after the Second Reading and before the Gospel Acclamation
5) after the Homily
6) during the Intercessions (after the intention is announced and before “Lord, hear us”)
7) after Holy Communion

Some of these either disappear or are reduced to a bare minimum with the result that the liturgy can have a noisy and unreflective feel to it. This is often what people are referring to when they speak about a loss of the sense of the sacred in the Mass – a weakened sense of the presence of God and the deeper resonances of the liturgical words and actions that comes with silence. In this new phase of the liturgical renewal, I think we need to work hard at creating a greater sense of silence as that from which the words and actions rise and that to which they return.

Language

The style of language used at Mass will change when the new translation of the Roman Missal appears, perhaps late in 2009. [I certainly hope it will be before that!] It will be a more elevated and sacral idiom, which may feel strange at first. But it is important to realise that the language of the liturgy was never everyday language; it was always more elevated and even slightly old-fashioned. [That is exactly right. Even the Latin used when the language shifted from Greek to Latin in Rome was not the Latin of the common people. It was an elevated style. Some make the claim, falsely, that the language of liturgy ought to be in the language of the people as it is spoken. Not so!] That is because it is ritual language. For the celebrant to say at the start of Mass, “Good morning, everyone” and for the people to reply “Good morning, Father” is everyday language which in other contexts would be perfectly appropriate. But in the liturgical context it is out of place because it misunderstands ritual and the language that it requires. It can suggest a casual or informal approach to the liturgy which focuses more on the priest and the people than on their common worship of God. Therefore, in this new phase of renewal, another thing we need to understand better is the kind of idiom appropriate for worship.

When the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council approved the use of the vernacular languages in the liturgy, they had no idea of what was on the way. They imagined that some parts [Right!] of the liturgy would move into English (in our case), but that Latin would remain in general the language of worship. [YES!] It was up to Bishops’ Conferences to ask the Holy See for permission to use the vernacular at certain points of the liturgy. [This is what the likes of Annibale Bugnini (NB: Archbp. Piero Marini worked for him, and some people say still works for him) fought to hard against. For Bugnini the liturgical reforms were also all about shifting the power to regional conferences so that they, not the Holy See, could approve the translations!] What happened then was that Bishops’ Conferences generally and spontaneously asked for the entire liturgy to move into the vernacular and the permission for this was given. That is why it seemed that the Church went from Latin to English overnight. Some in the Church have continued to worship in Latin – as is their right – but most are happy to have moved into English. At the same time, it does not have to be a stark choice of one or the other. In the Cathedral at least I have asked that some elements of the Greek and Latin of earlier times be retained in the Mass, even if English remains by and large the language of worship. This means that the Kyrie is sung at times in Greek, and the Common of the Mass, the Gloria and the Creed are sung at times in Latin. Similarly some of the great hymns of the Gregorian repertoire – especially the Marian anthems – are sung at times. It would be a pity if such a heritage were wholly lost to us. It is perhaps more difficult for parishes than for the Cathedral which has greater resources. But some modest use of the ancient languages of worship can be enriching. [I would say some bold use of ancient languages could be even more helpful in reestablishing the attitudes Bp. Coleridge is wisely promoting.]

Music

Music is another vital element of worship that needs to be revisited as we set out on this new phase of the journey. It is not just a question of having good music, but of having good music which serves prayer and which, in that sense, is not an adornment of the liturgy but integral to it. [Precisely. Music is not an "add on". It is not meerely "functional" or "utilitarian". True sacred music is itself prayer. Listening to it is an active participation in prayer. Thus, good sacred music is an "integrating" part of liturgy, pars integrans.] The music of the liturgy needs to rise from the silence of prayer and create a still deeper sense of that silence. Of course, it has the function of creating a sense of unity as one voice is made of many voices. But it also needs to be music that opens on to the mystery of God, which is what I mean when I speak of serving prayer. Some of the songs used in worship tend to replace or disrupt any sense of silence; they add to the sense that the liturgy is “noisy”.

Some of the texts used are also decidedly feeble and even at times questionable theologically. [Excellent!] Historically, the Roman Rite used only the Psalms in the Eucharistic liturgy: hence the Entrance and Communion Antiphons which were sung with the Psalms and accompanied the Entrance and Communion Processions. It is not a matter of saying now that only the Psalms are acceptable; but they do have a privileged place in the musical repertoire of the Roman Rite. I might add that the Holy See has asked Bishops’ Conferences around the world to draw up a list of music approved for use in worship. This is part of a pruning process of the repertoire that has built up over the last forty years, and it is already taking place in Australia.

The music chosen for worship should be appropriate to the liturgical season and to the part of the Mass when it is sung. This may seem obvious, but it is not uncommon for choices of music to fail on one or both counts. It is worth recalling too that singing or music should not be prolonged unnecessarily. In the Roman Rite, singing or music tends to accompany action rather than stand in its own right. Therefore, the music or singing should stop once the action is complete.

The Body

Another important consideration at this time is the use of the body in worship. Here again it is important to remember that the actions of the liturgy are ritual actions and to see the prescribed gestures of the liturgy as a kind of sacred choreography. This includes a range of gestures: genuflection, the sign of the Cross, bowing (during the Creed and before Holy Communion), kneeling, the use of the hands by the celebrant (to greet the people, to pray, to bless the gifts and the people). It is important that all of these are done simply, carefully and well, with neither over-statement nor under-statement.

Ritual means on the one hand that we worship not just in spirit but in body; it means on the other hand that we avoid theatricality. Theatricality can be a problem with liturgical movement or dance, especially at school liturgies. It can become a kind of concert, which is why at times people applaud at the end. That is clearly not what the liturgy requires. Liturgical movement – whether done before or during the liturgy – needs to serve prayer; it needs to lead people more deeply into the mystery of God. If it does that, it can have a place in the liturgy, but if it does not then it would be better left to a concert.

Beauty

Pope Benedict has stressed the point that beauty has a unique power to speak of the mysteries of the faith, and to speak to those who may not share our faith. That is why the Catholic Church has always been concerned with beauty in worship – not for the sake of a vapid aestheticism but for the sake of the Gospel. Imperfect created beauty makes visible the perfect uncreated beauty of God which is revealed supremely in Christ crucified and risen. Therefore, the buildings in which we worship should be beautiful, which is not to say highly elaborate or impossibly expensive. The great churches of the Franciscan tradition, for instance, have about them a striking simplicity, but they are also strikingly beautiful. Some of the older churches in the Archdiocese are beautiful and need only to be respected for what they are. Many of the newer churches are less evocative, and it is worth asking perhaps how they might be made more beautiful without spending a fortune.

Not only our churches but also the vestments and vessels used in the liturgy need to be of first-class quality. I would ask that parishes have an audit of the vestments and vessels currently in use to see whether they are worthy of the sacred mysteries. I would also offer a reminder that chalices and patens should not be of glass or pottery but of metal. Vestments and vessels of quality are of course an item on a parish budget, but they should be an item close to the top of the list. To claim that a parish could not afford anything better is to raise questions about priorities. [Thus exploding the arguments of the minimalist progressivists.]

Creativity

A final more general consideration concerns creativity in the liturgy. At times, there is the impression that creativity means that we have a freedom to change and adapt the liturgy as we see fit. But this is not the Church’s understanding. Creativity in Catholic worship means that we do as well as possible what the Church sets down in the liturgical books. People coming to Mass have a right to a celebration of the liturgy according to the norms set down by the Church; [Hear! Hear!] anything else can be unsettling and distracting. Without changing anything, we are to bring as much prayer, intelligence, imagination and sensitivity as we can to the act of worship. Creativity concerns the quality of our participation, not an adaptation of the ritual in an attempt to improve it or to make it more relevant.

To speak of participation is to raise the question of what the Council meant when it stressed the need for “full, conscious and active” participation in the liturgy. At times, this is taken to mean that everyone has to do everything all the time. But this is not the Church’s understanding. The Roman Rite presumes that everyone has his or her particular role in the liturgy and that participation means that each performs his or her own role as well as possible. To listen in silence to the Readings is certainly “active” participation, as are all the great silences that are built into the liturgy. To speak of “conscious” participation does not mean that every word, gesture and action needs to be immediately and easily accessible to all, since much of the symbolism of the liturgy moves at a more than conscious level. Creativity in the liturgy respects the different levels at which the language, actions and symbols move and the way in which they gather up the whole human person.

....

At this point Archbishop Coleridge moves into the norms. You can read that part yourselves.

WDTPRS gives high kudos to Archbp. Coleridge!"

• Link