Tuesday, June 13, 2006


In just two days, our U.S. Bishops will be meeting in good old Los Ahn-ga-lese, California, home of the Taj-Mahony (Gerald's famous description of the cathedral that I describe to look like a subsidized housing project). Part of this big meeting: to vote on the new translation for the celebration of Holy Mass.

This translation, far better than what we have today, not 100% perfect, but still a big improvement, has already cleared England and Australia. However, a certain fish-person who heads the BCL will do his darnedest to hold things up. He and other dissenting bishops already tried to pull a fast one on Rome by saying that Oh, the people have been used to what we have now for nearly four decades, with absolutely no regard for the many centuries that they had already thrown away. However, Francis Cardinal Arinze, prefect for the Congregation of Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments knew better and responded No go! I want a translation that conforms to the confines of Liturgiam Authenticam. Plain and simple.

Trautman and pals best watch out. Why? Let me remind you of this clause in Liturgiam Authenticam:
104. For the good of the faithful, the Holy See reserves to itself the right to prepare translations in any language, and to approve them for liturgical use.

So what that means is that if these guys can't come to grips and get a proper translation, Rome can (and will if need be) come up with one.

I'm sure there will be quite a bit of news like this throughout much of the Catholic blogosphere.

UPDATE 6/13/06 1:30 PM: According to a report by the Tablet, Scotland's episcopal conference just voted to approve the new ICEL translation of the Mass. More pressure on the USCCB? Hopefully! (hat tip to Rocco)



Argent said...

Hahahahaha! So he's evolved from a traut to a generic fish, huh?

Brian Michael Page said...

Well, he likes "inclusive" language that much, I figured I'd use inclusive language for BOTH syllables. hehehehe!

Anonymous said...

Brian, we agree on many things but on this issue I really think you're wrong.

What's being proposed is pseudo-English using Latin syntax and grammar. For example, the end to the penitential rite uses a literal translation of a figure of speech, the ablative absolute, that would have guaranteed you a low grade in 9th-grade Latin.

What we need is artistic, poetic, idiomatic English, not this silly rubbish.

Brian Michael Page said...

Truthfully, I'd like to see the entire Gray Book. You really think that what we have now is better RP?

I truthfully would have far rather seen a result similar to that of the New Ignatius Bible (2nd Catholic Edition). I've heard some bits and pieces of the new Mass, but I'd really have to see more. Something has to be better that what we already have, I think.


Anonymous said...

Yes, the current wooden and didactic text needs to be fixed, but what is being proposed is not an improvement. It is liturgical laetrile, a false nostrum that will accomplish nothing beneficial, other than to satisfy traditionalists and those who think it sufficiently inoculates the texts from inclusive language.