Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Thoughts on the Bishops' Meeting

I am sitting here, while working, watching the Bishops' meeting on this little Telecare network video feed. I have yet to see the number of viewers get above 1000. EWTN is not covering this meeting and I doubt that was their choice. Maybe it was, but I mean...come on... The only reasonable explanation for EWTN wanting to back out would be a lack of funds. Its possible.

Now they are talking about the new translation. Something about Antiphons?

I have mixed feelings about the new translations. It could set back the use of Latin in the liturgy another 30 years. The new translation will be en vogue for a time and there will be a new spirit of sacral English all the time for everything. I wish the Bishops would talk about catechesis for the faithful on the use of latin in the liturgy rather than a new translation. The vernacular should be a help to the congregations. It should be seen and rarely heard.

Will the new translation be better? Sure will. Will it help more people understand exactly what is really going on during the Mass? It will indeed. It is a much more accurate and beautiful rendering of the latin original. It will do some good no doubt. But it is not the latin, and therefore in some way separates us from the universality of the Church in the Roman Rite.

6 comments:

Moonshadow said...

But it is not the latin, and therefore in some way separates us from the universality of the Church in the Roman Rite.

I see what you mean and I hadn't thought of that. It's a good thought. I mean, well-intentioned. Peace of Christ.

becket said...

I will also add here. Will the new translation change the GIRM. Meaning an abuse of EMHC, altar girls, sacred music like gregorian chant not having pride of place although it does, priests facing East. No it won't. Things will still look and seem the same except the words. Way more needs to be done to the NO Mass to get in continuity with the Extra-Ordinary Form. A lot!.

Matt said...

I should not blog when I am frustrated. :-)

I realize the vernacular has become prominent and we should be grateful for the progress made. We should not lose sight of the ideal either.

There is a certain symbolism in using a single language, and that is the undoing of Babel.

Moonshadow said...

and that is the undoing of Babel.

Yes, I totally get that and totally agree. That was our strength.

sekman said...

This is an interesting point which I have not seen brought up. I disagree with your comment about the symbolism of a single language, is not the Extraordinary Form entirely in Latin? The New Translation will ONLY bring changes to literal words of music and the literal language of the mass, it will in no way cut down on abuse of EMHC's, girl servers, or increase the number of Ad Orientem Liturgies. Note too these problems do not lie solely in translation but in indults and exceptions to liturgical norms. I too would love to see an increase in Latin in Ordinary Form liturgies, however, we must face reality, without it being required by Rome we won't see much Latin in the Ordinary Form. This translation will be a huge improvement over what we have now.

Matt said...

Hi sekman, thanks for the comment. I'm sorry to say that I don't follow what you mean.

I know the new translations won't get rid of the abuses, but it is a start, right?

Also, I really don't understand what you mean by this:

"I disagree with your comment about the symbolism of a single language, is not the Extraordinary Form entirely in Latin?"

That it is entirely in one language is exactly my point...so, what did you mean?

"The whole truth is generally the ally of virtue; a half-truth is always the ally of some vice." - G.K. Chesterton