If the NCR doesn't like it it must have merit.
I find it interesting that they seem to worship scholarship. Maybe they should start their own church for the enlightened Jesus seminar types.
"The Woodstock Generation wets its pants (either due to frustration at losing their grip on power or out of sheer decrepitude)." Heeheehee, good one, Mark! May it continue to happen.
I would faint dead away if I ever read any thing like this dreck that flings reference to Vat II around like pixy dust where someone actually gave citations to the relivent Vat II documents! "Reform of the reform?" I call it cleaning up their mess!
That is one of the most (literally) hysterical and (unintentionally) amusing pieces I've read in a long time. I won't be able to do satire on those "serious, adult, educated Catholics" for quite a while now - they're beyond parody.
The unfortunate thing is that the new translations, or the return to old translations, is being done in the style of the pre-Vatican II church, heavy-handed and at the whim of those in power.
Totally! Never mind all the letters of protest that have poured in from all corners of the English-speaking world lo these forty years, begging for a proper translation, and not just from your parish "nut" either, but from real live "average" Catholics in the pews. (However, I suppose that they don't have the "gnosis" to appreciate the ICEL version that our NCR-readin', "serious, adult, educated Catholics" have.) Or that any real "serious, adult, educated Catholic" who knows anything about the Latin original of the new Ordo and knows another language knows we got short shrift on the translation end in English (I hear it all the time when I go to Mass in Espanol).
"Literal" translation??? Horrors! Saints - errr, something or someone, I guess, John Kerry maybe? - preserve us!!!
John:
Absolutely,
I liked this gem:
...the revisionists were attacking the reform.
Uh, no. The reformers of today are trying to undo the revisions that the flower-children of the 60's foisted on the Faith under the cover of Vatican II.
We're finally waking up to the fact that those revisions had a lot more to do with the groovy generation's pet ideologies thant they did with what Vatican II actually called for.
Not to worry. I don't imagine more than a few bishops in America will actually implement the changes anyway. Too many of them are of the same tie-dyed generation.
Maybe I crossed the Tiber at the right time (I hope), when the stuck-in-1968 liturgical "translators" are finally going to be nixed and liturgical "innovation" stopped. These Woodstockers remind me of their counterparts in the ECUSA that ruined the Anglican liturgy with the 1979 BCP (was sold to the sheep as "optional", but the Woodstockers in the ECUSA found a way to make it "mandatory.") Looks like this ongoing battle in the Catholic Church is very similar. Don't give in to the "innovators" - been there, done that, don't want to go through it again.
Which leaves open a not inconsequential question: If the prayer of the community is left to the formulation of those who hold power, without consideration for the extensive and long work of a much wider community, what’s to stop another liturgical coup in the future, should the people and ideas in power change?
This analysis strikes me as incredibly worldly: Summing up the process of the reforming the liturgy as a political process, with winners and losers a power struggle. It seems to me that asking "Who should have the power to shape the liturgy?" is asking altogether the wrong question. Better to ask: "What liturgical reforms afford the dignity and reverence appropriate to the Church's supreme prayer to the Father: the re-presentation of Christ's sacrifice at Calvary?"
"It's a Psychedelic Weekend on Oldies 109.9....this weekend, we'll feature the artists who made the GoGo60s such a wild time to be alive....Listen for your chance to win an authentic I WENT TO THE THE LAND O' LAKES CONFERENCE AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS LOUSY T-SHIRT. Plus.....we'll also give away the tape of Charlie Curran's first tirade against Humanae Vitae.... It's a wacky piece of history you won't want to miss.... All sponsored by National Catholic Reporter- Where The Spirit of The Hootenanny Mass Never Died.....That's all this weekend on Oldies 109.9- Where All The Retreads Have Gone...."
What exactly is so awful about "And With your Spirit" that they would use it as an example to advance their complaint?
Oh Gerard--Hootenanny Mass! I thought I was the only one who grumbled that epithet when our balding guitar-toting cantor starts a-strummin and a-wailing his wretched hootenanny Alleluia!
It is most amusing that people think that translating the Latin words 'et cum spiritu tuo' correctly is part of some grand conspiracy to revert the Church back to 1545. Over here on my 'open-minded and inclusive' Jesuit campus, it will most definitely be seen as the Church 'infringing' on the 'rights' of the college to define its own Catholicism, even though it is just a translation issue. It just seems that people are looking for things that simply aren't there, and any reason to assert themselves as the Final Arbiter of Truth.
"...some had a history of objecting to inclusive-language translations, including two of the American archbishops and the lone scripture scholar."
And the problem is?
"It just seems that people are looking for things that simply aren't there, and any reason to assert themselves as the Final Arbiter of Truth."
So, if there's nothing there, what's there to be worried about? Why all the discussion here? Sounds like it's hitting on something very sensitive for you folks.
Just please, please, please, can we get rid of all the horrible, limp, "non-sexist" language. Please.
_He_ is _Father_ and _Lord_, dagnamit. And, as a woman, I can cope with that.
And I don't need to be mollycoddled along with patronizing inclusive language. I'm intellegent enough to work out that "man" applies to "humanity" all by my little womanly lonesome.
Ungh. Why can't 60's liturgists burn their bras on their own time.
"Liturgical coup?" Isn't that what happened at Vatican II? (and I say this as one who loves the "Novus Ordo" - it is all that I know, having been born in 1960).
Anyway, it makes me laugh to read all of the fuss about this. The general public will begin to fuss when the revised translation comes out. They will all wonder why it has to change. Why can't it stay the way "it always was".
But, I'll be happy because it'll be the perfect opportunity to catechize!
G. - well, you've answered my musical question:
"Where have all the Retreads gone?"
Larry - I think you need to be asking the folks at NCR what's to be worried about. They're the ones acting like they just dropped some bad tabs. "Which way to the freak-out tent, man?"
"So, if there's nothing there, what's there to be worried about? Why all the discussion here? Sounds like it's hitting on something very sensitive for you folks."
Larry, I bet a lot of people here would hate this change if had been proposed by *gasp* a Jesuit...
Oh, and don't miss the fact that these new translations probably wouldn't have passed any sort of vote within the English-speaking church; they had to resort to "liturgical fiat" to get their way. If I were a bit more savvy, I might find a Nazi shirt-color analogy to use here...
Michael:
I know this is terribly hard to grasp, but the Church is not a democracy. It is governed by bishops, for better or worse. When bishops institute a translation of the liturgy that (horrors!) reflects what the liturgy says, that is not a threat, an intimidation, an act of violence, or even vandalism. It's called "doing their job." Would that they did their jobs more often.
It's called "doing their job."
Especially since they didn't do it the first time around. And since most regulars here (I think) would see this as part of the "reform of the reform" (or, better, "reform of the hijacking"), you'll find few complaints and little insecurity here. The point is, no Jesuit would propose this (unless it was Mitch Pacwa or Cardinal Dulles or someone like that).
Michael,
Fear not! If a lage panda freshly escaped from Sweden had made these changes, or even a Jesuit - you would still here jubulation over here. It's the contant not the sourse that brings joy.
Mark:
I know this is terribly hard to grasp, but I was making a joke.
The article states: "If the prayer of the community is left to the formulation of those who hold power, without consideration for the extensive and long work of a much wider community, what’s to stop another liturgical coup in the future, should the people and ideas in power change?"
I was merely noting humorously that when a small, non-representative group of people makes a decision in private that you approve of, everythings fine and dandy, but when you don't it's fiat.
"Fear not! If a lage panda freshly escaped from Sweden had made these changes, or even a Jesuit - you would still here jubulation over here. It's the contant not the sourse that brings joy."
oh, but John, if a large panda escaped from Sweden, some libertarian brownshirt might try to have sex with it. It probably wouldn't have time to make liturgical changes...
Nice call on the double-standards, Michael.
No Michael:
A joke depends on incongruity. If a democratic organization fails to act democratically and I defend that, then I am being incongruous. When a non-democratic organization acts like what it is: a hierarchy and I say, "So they acted like a hierarchy? So what?" that's not incongruous.
First you must establish that I believe all organization are democratic or should be democratic. Then you must demonstrate that, in this special hypocritical case, I excused the non-democratic act.
In fact, I have this funny idea that democratic organizations should act democratically and the Church, which is hierarchical and not democratic, should act according to its nature.
Perhaps if you took the time to discover that I think the bishops are to be obeyed even when I dislike what they order (except, of course, if they command something directly repugnant to the commands of God), you would find that I don't have a simple system of appealing to episcopal authority when they say what I like and dismissing it when they don't.
A "small, non-representative group of people mak[ing] a decision in private", formulating the "prayer of the community . . . without consideration for the extensive and long work of a much wider community [i.e., John and Jane Catholic and their ancestors through the centuries]"? Hey, you've just described the ICEL committee, until it was recently reconstituted at the Vatican's behest. Hunh. Whaddaya know.
Mark,
I will apologize only for the use of the word "vote" which erroneously implied democracy. Perhaps I should have said "never be agreed upon by a majority of English-speaking bishops."
Anyway, in the case of this liturgical reformation, I agree that those in power acted according to the rules laid out by the heirarchy of the Church; I never assumed the organization to be democratic. However, one could say they acted in bad faith (little f) by doing it in secret and not getting the approval or at least input of a larger number of English-speaking constituents.
In the case of the Mass. gay marriage decision, the courts acted according to the rules of the judiciary and in the spirit of protecting the rights minorities from the whims of the majority. However, one could say they acted in bad faith (little f) by doing it without the approval or at least input of the legislature or voting masses.
One action you support because you like the decision; the other you do not because you don't. It's a double standard that I light-heartedly pointed out. Sorry if I caused any anxiety.
Michael,
The different standard is that only one group has a Charism of governance vouchsafed by the Holy Spirit.
They should do a mocumentary with those NCR guys, a la A Mighty Wind.
Quote:
"two were not native English-speakers"
Since none of them are native Latin-speakers either, I fail to see the point.
These two probably just know a lot of Latin.
The problem of the NCR, and most people in western society, is that everything has to be seen through the lens of power. Everything since the dawn of the post-modern era (1960's) has framed in power terms. Oppressed and oppressor, liberation, etc. Vatican II allegedly 'liberated' oppressed Catholics from the evils of the secret Latin language and the supposed stranglehold of a cabal of Cardinals in the Vatican. Now, this correction of the translation is being seen as a power grab by the Vatican to 'return their thumb' to position, when all it really is is correcting a bad translation. That's what I meant when I said that people are looking for things where there isn't anything.
Hello Michael,
I confess some perplexity.
I don't see what is so difficult to understand here.
1) The Church is a hierarchical organization that often does things "behind closed doors." It is acting according to its nature. Sometimes it does things we like in that fashion and sometimes it does not. I did not like the decision to allow altar girls but I did not, at the time, rip the Chruch for doing so "undemocratically." If I was going to criticize or bemoan it I had to find other grounds.
2) Massachusetts is, in fact, a democratic government, or a representative republic, at any rate; so when courts run roughshod over popular will there is a violation of nature to actually become upset about.
Of course, one man's "protecting the rights of minority" is another man's elite favored interest group. Perhaps that is why nearly all of the most daring legal and societal innovations of recent decades have come through the ukase of the courts rather than the legislatures.
At any rate, I don't see any comparison between the two.
I honestly don't know if these changes would have passed a "bishops vote" in the US synod. New appointments have shifted things in a more conservative direction. But if such a vote failed, it might, may I suggest, because a large number of American bishops are frankly borderline heterodox on certain issues.
As to that, I can't say that Arian bishops were allowed to put doctrine to a bishops' vote when push came to shove. But perhaps that was just the intolerance of an undemocratic age.
best regards,
This article is vintage Babel-speak, full of two-year-old "my way or no way" rage.
"... he discovered that a secretly appointed committee of 11 men -- no women included -- met quietly at the Vatican to overturn decades of work on translation"
No women! Holy cats!
So how exactly is that unlike that "authoritative gathering of the world’s bishops 40 years ago"?
Favorite line -- the utterly defeated and sarcastic, "And so on."
Hee hee. Back to the VOTF Friday nite committee on committee formations! Followed by the CTA Saturday pancake and vegan sausage breakfast worship!
Hello PMC,
Good point.
I'm also thinking of a secret meeting of a dozen men during Passover about two millenia ago.
Maybe that one's undemocratic as well.
it doesn't withstand the scrutiny of serious, adult, educated Catholics in the early 21st century
Let's see. I'm reasonably serious, especially on matters of faith. Adult? Well, my children are now teenagers, and I came late to marriage. Educated? Do two university degrees count as educated? Catholic? Been one for over 30 years now, through thick and thin. In the early 21st century? Last time I checked, that's where we are.
And I'm expected to object that several [of the translators] had a history of objecting to inclusive language???
Sorry, NCR. My response is Alleluia!
P.S. I'm also a woman.
Well said Karen.
BTW how's the temperature at home this weekend? 
Hello Don,
Just rub it in our faces that you're in the middle of high summer, why don't you?
best regards,
Don (Kiwi):
Thank you.
I didn't know whether to laugh at that article because it was so ridiculous or cry because it was so pathetic. I guess prayer is the most appropriate response. At least, once I cool down--inclusive language is one of my really "hot" buttons.
The temperature is much improved. High the last day or two around -6 C, lows maybe -11C, and not much talk about wind chill factors. After last weekend, it feels almost balmy. It's warm enough that the salt they put on the streets can actually do its job and melt the snow/ice. And the days are starting to get noticeably longer at both ends. So things are looking up--not that winter won't dump on us a few more times yet. March is not so severely cold, but can be very stormy.
And if our days are getting longer, yours must be getting shorter . . .
Hi Richard.
Just a genuine concern for Karen's wellbeing
She had such a bad freezing weekend lastweek. And yes, the weather is great - will be for a couple of months yet.
Karen.
The inclusive language is another part of PC, and it drives me nuts too.
Tess may still have some of it in her parish, but most of it has disappeared in our parish.
Does anyone else think Joel Martin, way up at the beginning of this string, had a good point? Will the missalettes reflect this decision at mass?
+J.M.J+
>>>Will the missalettes reflect this decision at mass?
Won't they have to?
They've reflected every other change in the liturgy so far, such as when "for you and for all men" was shortened to "for you and for all", and when "This is the Word of the Lord" became simply "The Word of the Lord". Don't see why they won't change accordingly when the new translation comes out - whenever that will be. Can't be soon enough for me, I'm so anxious to see the end of the old ICEL translation!
In Jesu et Maria,
Don:
You are enjoying that unspeakably lovely summer weather and you have a parish which is largely free of inclusive language??? How unfair can life get? 
I could say many things, but I will confine myself to the observation that to whom much is given, much will be required. Who knows how many years of purgatory I've been able to work off by living in this environment?
Our parish priest is, sadly, a product of the 60's. He does have many good qualities--from what I've heard and read, it could be much, much worse. But he does have this thing about inclusive language, and I fear that one of these times I'm going to lose my cool and ask him, (politely, of course!) to stop insulting my intelligence.
Rosemarie:
I hope and pray that you are right. But my experience of human nature, especially that of entrenched bureaucrats who like the way things have been going and see this as a step backwards, suggests that the new changes will be met with a great deal of stonewalling, obfustication, foot-dragging and just plain ignoring by the ideologues responsible for this mess.
If a priest sees fit now to change the wording of the Mass to suit his whims, despite clear directives to the contrary, what is going to stop him from continuing the practice after the new translation becomes available?
I guess we have to hope and pray for strong, orthodox bishops who will enforce the regulations. There does appear to be a turning of the tide, but sometimes it seems so painfully slow!
Don: Just moved from Christ the King (Christchurch) to another parish where the language is a bit more PC, but not by much. It's just having gone from such an orthodox parish to a slightly more 'inclusive' parish is a bit of a shock. Don't worry, there isn't any liturgical dance or anything to horrible.
BTW, we're forcast a nice 24 degrees celsius tomorrow.
Nat.Cat.Report. writes : "Powers in Rome handpicked a small group of men who in two weeks undid work that had taken dozens of years.”"
Funny isn't it. "Liturgical words" will be nearer to latin liturgy, that needed centuries to be completed !
Finally, this reform of the reform will stick us nearer to the wisdom of centuries with Vatican II's wisdom added.
Finally, I think it's something interesting,isn't it ?
Proper translations can't come soon enough. What was done to the mass after Vatican II was literally a scandal because it led many astray.
God Bless
If 'Et avec votre esprit' is good enough for the French, I don't see why English speakers shouldn't have a proper translation of the Latin too.
Great!
As an Episcopalian, I've appreciated the Catholic liturgy. As a latin student, I was really annoyed when I found out just how much got left out of the english "translation" of the mass.
It's kind of like what happened to us in our latest prayer book, but at least there, we knew we were losing something. Here, there is a whole generation of Catholics who think they know what the Mass is, but in reality, they've never heard and understood significant portions of it.
Pax Vobiscum
2 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
