Any day now…

…could be soon…  perhaps by Friday…

Share:

9 comments

    1. Yes! I am!!! And although I am a few more
      rungs down the food chain than you are
      (you working for a publisher and me just a music director in a small parish in the smallest state), I am more than weary of the
      vacillation.
      Yes folks, here it is – no folks, not yet –
      let’s look at the new/revised mass settings
      to prepare – well no, we can’t show them yet
      because this might no be the final text.
      Oy!!

  1. By the way, I can’t help but wonder whether history will judge bishops like Cardinal McIntyre and Joseph Dwyer as prophetic. After all, if their criticisms of the earlier incarnation of ICEL’s work had been accepted by the committee and Msgr. McManus we would not be dealing with any of this today.

    1. As much as I defend the entire liturgical reform, I have often wondered whether, if it hadn’t gone quite as far, and if it had given us better texts early on, it would have prevented our current problems. But I suspect nothing could have prevented our current turmoil entirely, and perhaps it’s inevitable that a reform of the scope of Vatican II be rocky for several generations.
      Along the same lines, I wonder whether, if the ICEL 1998 translation had backed off a bit on some of its more creative aspects, it wouldn’t have aroused such opposition from Rome and would have been approved.
      I find it fascinating to hypothesize about “what could have been.” But I think in any scenario it would probably be pretty messy, and there’s no perfect path which would solve everything.
      awr

      1. With regard to 1998: I have to say that I found the whole project to have a bit of a double personality. With regard to translation, it seemed to move (with the exception of the issue of inclusive language) in a more “conservative” direction, both in style and substance. The general approach to the liturgy itself, however, was one that sought to implement the long-standing desiderata of progressive liturgists (“streamlining” the entrance rite, making the Mass more “thematic” with opening prayers keyed to the Scripture of the day, more locally composed texts not derived from Latin originals, etc.). I wonder if the former might have made it through if it had not been joined with the latter.

        Ah. . . what might have been.

      2. I think it would be fruitful to engage in such introspection, as it were, with a view to MR4.

  2. …perhaps it’s inevitable that a reform of the scope of Vatican II be rocky for several generations.

    If the teachings of Vatican II were to be fully realized and understood and implemented sometime within the next 50 years or so, I think it would be the fastest that the reforms of any Council have ever been put into place. It sounds a bit crass to say so, but it has ONLY been 45 years or so!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *