Bryan Cones at US Catholic on liturgical translation.
Archive for category Translation / New Missal
Only 41% agree that translations in the same style should be done for other rites such as marriage, confirmation, and the Liturgy of the Hours, with 52% disagreeing (36% strongly disagreeing) that other rites be similarly retranslated.
“I believe the Roman Missal, the third edition, has really been a great opportunity to revive the sanctity and the reverence we should have for the Eucharist and for the Mass.”
A scholar in liturgy who is also a professor of renaissance English and a convert from Anglicanism to Orthodoxy says that use of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer material by English-speaking Antiochian Orthodox communities is harmful in many ways — in essence, it imports heresy into the liturgy. Much of his critique is relevant to the Ordinariate use of Prayer Book language and texts.
“To quote the late Msgr. Fred McManus, the American peritus at Vatican II who helped the bishops establish ICEL and suffered greatly as he saw it dismantled: ‘They could at least have the decency to change its name’.”
There are five liturgical items are up for a vote.
Two things led the German bishops to reject the new missal: the recent debacle of a failed translation of the burial rites, and a change of pope.
“Every text is, to some extent, a bafflement to its translator, because every language, like every writer, has characteristics that can’t be ‘carried across’ — which is what ‘translate’ means — into another tongue, another culture.”
This resulted from the reactions of members of the German bishops’ conference, the appeal of the Austrian bishops’ conference, and fundamental questions from the Swiss bishops’ conference.
I would be interested to get reactions to this, and I have my hard hat handy.