What’s It All About?

At The National Catholic Reporter, a pastor from Salina, Kansas reflects on the new translation of the Roman Missal as an episode more about “who’s in charge” than about language. Here are some excerpts:

All the hype that preceded the inaugural use of this new translation, and all the explanations that were written to justify it and to “explain” how much better it was going to be than the one currently in use were plainly just not true.

I am now 76 years old. I have served the church as a priest for the last 40 of those years. I don’t think I will live long enough for anyone to convince me that the new translation is so much better, so much more spiritual, so much more pleasing to God, and will make me a so much more holy person to say, as we are now required to say at the beginning of the Second Eucharistic Prayer: “You are indeed Holy, Oh Lord, the fount of all holiness” than to say, as we used to say: “Oh Lord, you are holy indeed, the fountain of all holiness.”

You can read the whole thing here.

Editor

Katharine E. Harmon, Ph.D., edits the blog, Pray Tell: Worship, Wit & Wisdom.

Please leave a reply.

Comments

42 responses to “What’s It All About?”

  1. Claire Mathieu

    This would not be happening if people did not passively let it happen.

    There is no fighting against it in my parish. Certainly no enthusiasm at all, and responses are a lot less audible than before, but there are no real complaints. People seem mostly indifferent. They go through the motions, since that’s what they’re supposed to do, but in reality, nobody cares.

    What conclusion can we draw from this? That it doesn’t matter. Words don’t matter. The liturgy doesn’t matter. There is no particular meaning attached to the words coming out of the presider’s mouth.

    For those who do not share that indifference, it is depressing and disturbing. Were we dreaming when we thought the Mass was the summit of our faith life? Was it an illusion?

    Is the Catholic church dead?

    Reply
    1. Brigid Rauch

      Again – is it that people don’t care, or that they see no means of making a change? Is it that they don’t want to fight, or that they don’t have the time or energy for a hopeless fight? Or is it that the individuals who don’t like the new translation feel themselves isolated? I can’t help but fell we are all being used to pressure each other into acquiescence.

      Reply
      1. Karl Liam Saur

        Those are not the only options. The more realistic, and likely, option, is that different people have different reactions to different changes, so that it is difficult to drive data to a coherent narrative about the changes. The problem is that people who write about the changes tend to want to impose a coherent narrative on it all, either positively or negatively, driven by the dramatic need for protagonists and antagonists. The temptation towards drama is part of the larger problem.

        * * *

        And, finally, there is a certain contrariness that is a part and parcel of American Catholic culture for many decades: that it is not cool to get lathered up about the liturgy. For the folks at the edges of the conversion who care MIGHTILY about the liturgy, this cultural dynamic is very frustrating, to the point that it drives ghettoization of the edges.

    2. Jordan DeJonge

      If it’s dead, it’s died a double death- first, in the dislodging of its traditions in the concilliar years, from which the thorough mind can draw the same conclusions as yourself, Claire. For anyone who takes the old ways seriously, the reforms as they happened can not but appear as a selling out and a tacit admittance of irrelevancy. Likewise, now the half hearted return to them appears as an impossible retreat into fantasy. First it despised its past and now it balks at its future. Whither the Church?

      I think we can only hang on and hope.

      Reply
  2. Jack Rakosky

    I wonder how many chalices of flour Mary used to prepare bread for the Holy Family.

    From the NCR comments.

    Reply
    1. Jeffrey Pinyan

      A cup is a unit of measure. A chalice is not. I doubt Jesus carefully measured out a cup of wine (before or after mixing it with water) at the Last Supper.

      Reply
      1. RP Burke

        That is only one meaning of the word “cup”. Logical fallacy to assume the inverse is valid.

      2. Jeffrey Pinyan

        [delete]

  3. Earle Luscombe

    I would hazard a guess that should a major pollester do a scientifically valid survey as respects acceptance of the new Mass, we would come up with a nicely shapped bell curve, with maybe ten percent of us on each end, and the other eighty, somewhere’s in the middle. Perhaps JR would like to add his insight. But is the church dead? I don’t think so. I do, however agree with you Claire, the vast majority really don’t care.

    Reply
  4. Jack Rakosky

    “in reality, nobody cares”

    The reality is that studies have consistently shown that Catholics are less satisfied with the quality of their liturgies, preaching, and ministry than Protestants. This has been going on for decades.

    Did the New Missal make any significant change positively or negatively? I doubt it.

    I don’t think it is correct to say that nobody cares. That is not what the data says.

    It is also incorrect to say that nobody does anything about it. Certainly many former Catholics have said that they have chosen Protestant Churches because those churches satisfied their spiritual needs better.

    It is also possible that many Catholics may have significantly decreased their giving to the Church even when they have not left it. That is very difficult to measure. In the period after 2002, contributions to Catholic Charities in our diocese went down modestly (about 10%) but donors went down about 30%. When donations drop, the clergy can usually rely upon bigger donors to make up most of the difference.

    Since we don’t keep attendance, and contributions are an unreliable indicator. It is difficult to measure what people are doing.

    Obvious only a very few people (sexual abuse victims, people who lost their parishes) are trying to make the management’s life miserable, although they do quite a job for their small numbers.

    Reply
    1. Jack Rakosky

      P.S.

      Giving to Catholic Parishes Drops
      http://philanthropy.com/blogs/prospecting/giving-to-catholic-parishes-drops/32021

      Contributions declined at more than half of parishes from 2008 through 2010, according to a new study. Roughly 20 percent of parishes said giving remained flat during that time, while 13 percent reported that contributions decreased at first and then rebounded. About 10 percent of parishes said donations rose.

      This decline of course is due to the economy. However, its magnitude might make pastors and bishops more receptive to threats of withdraw of financial support. Obviously they are having difficulty keeping up the funding, even assuming they are going to the wealthier members of the parishes to try to keep even.

      Reply
    2. Karl Liam Saur

      “It is also possible that many Catholics may have significantly decreased their giving to the Church even when they have not left it. That is very difficult to measure. In the period after 2002, contributions to Catholic Charities in our diocese went down modestly (about 10%) but donors went down about 30%. When donations drop, the clergy can usually rely upon bigger donors to make up most of the difference.”

      This problem is certainly going on where I worship….

      This is why it’s good for finance councils, and the parishioners that rely on their reports, to ask for multi-year trendlines of median donation data, not just averages.

      Reply
  5. Joe O'Leary

    I cannot believe the suicidal folly of the bishops. There is very widespread rage about the new translations. Priests and people are fuming. Why would the bishops insult the entire English speaking world in this way? What kind of madness is this? And what we are witnessing is not a clean backlash. It is a foul dispiritedness that will translate into fermenting resentment and loathing, as if the Catholic Church had not already done enough to make itself loathed. Some say that it is only one small extra irritation, but I think that the irritation is not one that people will take in their stride, like bad sermons. The mediocre words — e.g. “are in your presence” instead of “stand in your presence” — are too pointed a reminder of the stale and greasy minds that composed them and that complacently imposed them, oblivious of the adult dignity of the faithful. In short the new mass will make propaganda, Sunday after Sunday, against the Vatican and the bishops.

    Reply
  6. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

    Someone just last night commented to me how proud they were of themselves because last Sunday they could sing the Gloria and recite the Creed without the worship aid in front of them. It’s sinking in and being well accepted. I’ve not experienced one complaint from anyone either about the laity’s parts or what they hear the priest praying. I’ve not heard a bitter word from any priest in our diocese about how their parishes are doing, in fact all seem to be doing well. I celebrated Mass for an absent priest in another parish in the city and was very pleased with the volume and level of participation there. On vacation to California earlier in the month while attending a Sunday Mass and sitting toward the back where people normally don’t participate very well, I was very pleased with how the people around me were singing and saying all their responses and very pleased that every one said “I” believe at the Creed when the celebrant slipped up and began with “we.” The whole anti-corrected translation movement has been a “tempest in a chalice” whereas the reality is that people have accepted it very well and have made a real effort to adopt it and adapt to it; but it will take a matter of years to see what real impact it will have on the Church, i.e. the law of prayer is the law of belief. My wager is that the new translation will have a positive impact on the personal faith of our Catholics both lay and clergy. But only time will pray-tell.

    Reply
    1. Karl Liam Saur

      Fr Allan

      Just remember that, as someone who has quite publicly and enthusiastically embraced the translation, you are perforce less likely in the first place to hear the kinds of complaints you are not hearing – you just need to be careful to be aware of the risk of selection bias. (The same is true for the other side; people who openly grouse about the translation are less likely to be witnessing praise of it from peers, too.)

      We always need to remember our cognitive biases in interpreting what we are not noticing.

      Reply
      1. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

        Karl what you say is true, but I’ve been looking for negative feedback and haven’t received it. As well, I pay attention to how people are participating–another very broad example would be the pro-life Mass televised from the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception Sunday night with an extremely diverse congregation–their participation sounded very robust and participative, detected no pouting about the new words or passive aggression about not praying them out loud or using the older version as an act of defiance. And my brother priests would be no shrinking violets in communicating their own parish experiences in the negative.

      2. Karl Liam Saur

        Fr Allan

        If you were my pastor, and I were aggrieved (but not ideologically so) about the Missal translation, I would not tell you even if you asked. It would take a *lot* more than an invitation for me to trust that the inquiry were genuine. (Or I’d have to have a more ideological basis that trumped my reticence.)

        This is not specific to you, btw: it’s a reflection of what I’ve observed not so much in myself but over 30 years of watching how typical Catholics decide or decline to give negative feedback. The reason I’ve observed it is because how often I’ve seen the problem of people who evince complaints around people they trust have truly open hearts (which is rarely a priest – priests are largely seen as having to support The Firm, which reduces perceived openness) will simply fail to do so when the audience is different.

        I don’t think the National Shrine audience is typical for parish life.

        That said, I am not saying there is widespread dissatisfaction out there.

        Personally, I suspect we are far from being able to say one way or another, but I could well be wrong about that. Perhaps in 3 years time we will be closer to that point. Until then, I find the drive towards a conclusion premature. That’s just my take FWIW.

      3. Henry Edwards

        Liam, I’ve not recently been following here enough to know whether or not you’re “aggrieved” about the new translation. But I feel sure that you would not be, if you were a member of Fr. McDonald’s parish.

        My basic premise being that a positive pastor evokes positive feelings, in this area as others.

        In my own experience in two parishes, one more liberal and the other more conservative than average, and with a similar variety of priests, I’ve heard varying degrees of enthusiasm, but no really negative complaints.

        In any event, my own prediction is that in three years, we’ll have moved on and will no longer be discussing this.

      4. Jack Rakosky

        I agree strongly with Karl on this.

        On a variety of issues with regard to a variety of people (Pastor, Pastoral Associates, music ministers) I have found people very reluctant to voice their true opinions in public. It goes beyond their relationship to particular people. In many cases people are just very wary of upsetting people in the parish generally.

        I was able to overcome some of this when I was on pastoral council by interviewing a group of about 20 parish leaders anonymously on about ten questions. In the report I gave each person’s responses verbatim but scrambled them so no one could detect who had said what.

        The respondents eagerly went through the published report looking for their responses. It was like finally that could speak freely and their opinions could be public without worrying that someone in the parish would be upset about them personally.

        Of course the Vibrant Parish Life Study also reported “Parish leadership that listens to the concerns of parishioners” to be one of the most poorly done things in the parish.

    2. Chris Grady

      Why is it that every time Allan McDonald (and certain other Kool aid drinkers) writes about the new Pell-Moroney-Ward-etc mistranslation, I hear this:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s62MrU8mHx4

      Reply
  7. Bill Kish

    I agree with what Fr. Dlabal says in the article. I do not see the new translation adding to the reverence or quality of the Mass. We have less participation with the music in our parish, at least until we have new hymnals or get used to the new Mass settings.

    Reply
  8. Brigid Rauch

    One factor that we haven’t discussed is self-selection. For example, someone who is very irritated by the liturgy in one parish may move on to another parish. Two pastors with very different styles will then honestly report that they are getting positive feed-back.

    As far as I can tell, no one is collecting good data on what people think of the new translation. A series of anecdotes is not good data. What I fear the most is that many people will self-select by walking out the door and not returning.

    Reply
  9. Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh

    I serve in the Savannah Diocese along with Fr. McDonald. I have heard numerous priests comment negatively, but not bitterly, on the new translations. In conversations, even Fr. McDonald has noted the significant difficulties posed by bringing these prayers to proclamation.

    Reply
    1. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

      I think we all have commented on how things could have been translated in a better way, God knows we did so with the 1973 translation too. And certainly the additional work and expense to implement could add to negative feelings. But I would suspect that your parish as well as the others in our Macon deanery are doing just fine with the translation and no one is boycotting Mass over it over protesting in the streets.

      Reply
    2. Chris Grady

      BLOG MODERATOR PLEASE NOTE:

      Someone calling themselves Fr Michael J Kavanaugh appears to be accusing Allan McDonald of saying one thing in real life and something different on this blog about the new Pell-Moroney-Ward-etc mistranslation.

      Surely such unsubstantiated accusations of hypocrisy cannot be tolerated?!

      Oh wait, Allan McDonald has on January 25, 2012 at 12:10pm substantiated them.

      Reply
      1. Peter Haydon

        Chris
        If reading opinions that you disagree with upsets you I suggest that you ignore them. The value of a blog like this is, in part at least, the chance to read differing views. We all get tired of disagreements after a bit.
        Try a French language mass if you dislike the English. It might be refreshing.
        Cheers
        Peter

      2. Mary Burke

        +1, Chris.

    3. Mary Burke

      Very interesting indeed, Fr Michael. Thank you! It reinforces the old advice, Audi alteram partem. From Fr Allan’s post one could be forgiven for thinking there was no altera pars in Savannah. It also helps readers to put other contributions of Fr Allan into context.

      Reply
  10. Scott Pluff

    Here’s another anecdote. I have the benefit of a wife who is an average Catholic (doesn’t work for the Church, isn’t trained in theology, doesn’t take more than an average interest in ecclesial matters, attends Mass most but not all weekends). Her reaction to the new missal: 1) it’s not the end of the world 2) it is a step in the wrong direction 3) the overall effect is the words of the Mass have become even more “blah, blah, blab, blab” without meaning or relevance to her life. She gets more out of the preaching, songs, intercessions and the parish bulletin than from anything else in the liturgy.

    Should people need advanced training in theology, liturgy and scripture to make sense of our liturgies? I wonder if our liturgies are becoming so sophisticated that we’re leaving ordinary people behind.

    Reply
    1. Chris Grady

      And maybe, Scott, your wife is worthy of better – indeed of the very best.

      Almighty God, as Sister always said, certainly is!

      And in this translation, the very best is not what they got.

      Reply
  11. Lee Bacchi

    There is at least one priest in our diocese who still uses the Sacramentary. We are all waiting to see what happens.

    Reply
    1. Claire Mathieu

      If he’s near Rhode Island, could you send me email to tell me where he presides at Mass so that I may go there when I need to be uplifted? Thanks! (Google me to get my email.)

      Reply
      1. Dr. Dale Rodriguez

        Oh God, don’t tell Bp Tobin about it!

    2. Brigid Rauch

      “The Church is not a democracy”, but I wonder what would happen if the people at any given Mass were given the option which translation they wanted to use?

      Reply
      1. Karl Liam Saur

        Didn’t happen in 1970, when people had to accommodate a lot more change from one English missal to the next, so I wouldn’t hold my breath….

      2. Sean Parker

        My guess is that the majority would choose the translation that we had last year.

  12. John Kohanski

    But the books are so pretty!

    http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/#8676047218188037477

    Reply
  13. Jeff Rexhausen

    I would like to survey the people in my parish to see how they’re doing with the new translation, its influence on their prayer during and outside of liturgy, what they want us to do differently (or keep the way it is), etc.

    Perhaps others would like to do the same.

    How about offering suggestions for specific questions? I know Jack generally prefers open ended questions, and we should be able to come up with some good ones, but I’d also like to get ideas about questions using scales.

    Reply
  14. Jack Feehily

    I am going to survey my parishioners on how they feel about the new translation. I will make it clear that I am not doing this to foster opposition
    to it, but to give them an opportunity to express their impressions. Does anyone have some suggestions for fairly worded questions?

    Reply
    1. Sean Parker

      Keeping in mind that many people claim to neither like nor dislike the new translation’s words (at least openly they claim it), it would be good to have a response that reflects this rather than requiring people to take one side or the other (ie. they either like it or they don’t). Additionally, you may want to ask about each change individually, rather than the overall change as a whole – well, it would be impossible to ask about each individual change, but possibly each section that was changed.

      Reply
  15. M. Jackson Osborn

    A good place to begin is by not having your questions to intimate in any conceivable way that a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’ either one is an indicator of good vs not good. Nor that one answer is perceived to be any any way a better or more approved of answer, or indicative of a plus or minus of status or desirability. Nor allow questions to be put in such manner as to elicit one or another response – with its loss or gain of personal desirablity.

    I myself have serious doubts about such surveys, because they are generally thought up and run by people who have an uncanny knack for getting the negative or positive results reflective of their own bias or preference. It is almost a given that ‘don’t likes’ will outweigh ‘do likes’ because they are typically more nastily vocal, while the great ‘neither like nor dislike’ middle roaders are likely mostly to remain silent.
    Most people who instigate surveys already have in mind the result they wish to hear. That is the whole purpose of them.

    Reply
  16. Gregg Smith

    Scott: excellent post. People are tuning out. The music and preaching are even more important now.

    Reply

Posted

in

,

by

Editor

Tags:

Discover more from Home

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading