In a time of liturgical questions, changes, challenges, reforms, and reforms of reforms, filled with arguments, disputes, power plays, and power players, perhaps a bit of psalmist-inspired Reformation perspective is in order. If it worked for 16th century Martin Luther and 20th century Roman Catholic hymnal editors, perhaps we 21st century folk can profit from it as well.
Posts Tagged ICEL
Over at the Chant Cafe they have the text of the address by Msgr. Andrew Wadsworth, Executive Secretary of ICEL, at the meeting of the Church Music Association of America. There are a number of interesting features.
This week we use the second of the Advent Prefaces from the Roman Missal. I am puzzled by its third paragraph. – Msgr. Bruce Harbert, former executive director of ICEL
Part 4 of Gabe Huck’s series on the new missal.
“Now we leave translation aside to talk about a much less noticed disaster. In the 2010 missal, the Vox Clara missal, why are there no ‘alternative’ collects? These original English texts have been an element of our sacramentary since 1973.”
The Chant Cafe links an interview from The Tablet with Mgr. Wadsworth of ICEL.
Pray Tell is happy to present this interview with Msgr. M. Francis Mannion of the diocese of Salt Lake City.
Paul Vallely’s article echoes a number of quite pained reactions I have been hearing from balanced, committed UK Catholics over the past weeks.
Part 2 of Gabe Huck’s 4-part series.
“Once you get beyond “Push” or “Pull” on the shop door, translators must make judgments where right and wrong are probably not the best words to describe what happens. No translation will say exactly what the original says to one for whom the original language is the mother tongue.”
“I may be wrong, but I have the impression that at least some, perhaps many, of the bishops share the unhappiness about the new translation which is felt by many priests and lay Catholics. Yet the new translation is being promoted as a precious gift.” Fr. Kevin Kelly in a letter to the bishops of England and Wales
“We three [national episcopal conference] presidents voiced our concerns in particular about the Holy See’s right to approve the statutes contrary to Sacrosanctum Concilium. We did not believe that Cardinal Arinze’s lawyer had in fact refuted our arguments, but there was no further discussion.”
“Recognizing the impossibility of genuine dialogue on this matter, we made our point and then got on with the rest of the agenda.”
“It is still incumbent on bishops’ conferences to reclaim the rights and responsibilities entrusted to them by law, and wrongly usurped.”