Making the best of the coming translation

Fr. Philip Endean, SJ, in “Sense and Sensitivites” in The Tablet, takes up the weighty problem of bishops and priests and lay people who will have to implement a Missal translation they do not believe in.

This week I received an email from a priest on this topic. The email is lightly edited here so as not to disclose the name or location of the priest or his bishop. It reads, in part:

I had hoped that what we got would be basically OK; from what I have seen so far, it’s mostly not OK. Nevertheless, I didn’t even think that stopping it was possible. If stopping it were possible, at this point, I think it would be best for all concerned. I just didn’t consider that as a possibility at this point.

And so I felt I had to operate as if that were not possible because of the responsibilities I have in the diocesan position. I have expressed my feelings and thinking to Bishop X and he seems quite sympathetic and even mostly in agreement; but I think he also feels that there is no possibility for stopping it now, and we need to do the best we can with what we have been handed. I sent him a copy of Ed Foley’s talk to the Catholic Academy for Liturgy and he was very much in agreement with that.

It seems to me that if it is a done deal, and if we are facing a sure implementation of this text, then all we can do is pray it as best we can, give it our best shot, and then if there are texts that jump out at us for their un-proclaim-ability, then hope it will be obvious to enough of the powers that be to move for a change. I also think, perhaps, there may be some texts that sound really off kilter at first, but after praying them for a while, they will become clearer and better. I guess that is my best hope.

In case you’re wondering… No, this is not the same bishop who said “disaster” privately and “blessing” publicly. It’s another bishop.

61 comments

  1. Fr Foley is brilliant and authoritative.

    I had not noticed that “that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable” can be heard as referring to two sacrifices, whereas “ut meum et vestrum acceptabile fiat” is unambiguously singular.

  2. The Vibrant Parish Life Study of 129 parishes with 46241 respondents found that while the liturgy was number one in importance it was half way down the list of 39 items in being well done. Mediocre might be a good word.

    That means those of us in the pews have been making the best of mediocrity in the Mass for a long time. The mediocrity of the new translation will just replace the mediocrity of the old translation and fit in very well with the rest of the mediocrity we experience.

    So for priests and pastoral staff who are disturbed by the mediocrity of the new translation which they may not be able to change, try dealing with some of the mediocrity which you can change. Just begin listening to parish members. BTW, the Vibrant Parish Life survey found listening by pastoral staff members was even further down on the list of being well done.

    My suggestions for less mediocrity (in order of my preference):
    1. Sung Eucharistic Prayer
    2. Sung Lord’s Prayer
    3. Sung Creed
    4. Sung dialogues.
    5. A really good new Gloria and Sanctus (I tend to like the chant like ones)
    6. That an old Mass setting that I hate is never sung again
    7. Sung responses to Prayers of the Faithful
    8. Only sing hymns that I know
    9 Only sing hymns that I like
    10. Preludes, choral music or part of the LOH during the fifteen minutes before Mass begins
    11. Predictable hymns at predictable times, e.g. Palm Sunday
    12 More psalm texts or psalm paraphrases in place of hymns
    13. More use of some sung Latin in the Mass, e.g. Kyrie and Sanctus during penitential seasons.
    14. Occasion use of some sung Spanish in the Mass, especially for Gloria, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, Lord’s Prayer

    If priests and pastoral staff begin listening to parish members, they will be able to compile an even longer list of mediocrity to improve which will keep them completely occupied until the next revision of the Missal gives us a chance to deal with its mediocrity.

      1. Todd,

        I agree that Ordinary Time is the better location. We need to find ways to make Ordinary Time special, i.e. give people reasons to attend at the low attendance periods of the year. Advent and Lent are already better attended than average.

        Like the way you responded to the idea. It is a fine model for pastoral staff listening

        You requested more information and clarification, followed by a suggestion of how with a twist the idea might be considered. You paid attention to the idea and the person. You did so in a way that didn’t over commit yourself. You also did not bring up all sorts of issues that would make your concerns the center of attention rather than the person’s idea.

        By way of contrast, a lot of the responses to my suggestions just cited all the problems, shifted attention to the concerns of pastoral staff members, or dismissed the suggestions because they were a mere matter of taste. These are the sort of responses that produced the very low ratings for pastoral staff listening found in the Vibrant Parish Life Study.

        For a couple of decades as a planner in the public mental health system I spent most of the time listening when I wasn’t crunching data. I was fortunate that early on a senior manager had told me to “listen, listen, listen. It is really hard to make a mistake if you listen to everyone.” In many ways I found it worked at least as well or even better than having all the data.

    1. Anything Latin is Penitential, to me at least. It reminds me of a dark past that is long gone…and it’s time to move on.

      1. Some traditional churches may spend their time droning in dead languages — though the Greek and Slavonic of the Oriental Churches are not dead languages. For Catholics to do it would indeed by a step back to a dark past, sening two messages: (1) we do not like the modern world; (2) we do not really believe that the Gospel has anything to say to the modern world.

      2. When I rise to sing the ordinary of the EF Mass, my mind, body, and soul stretch through millennia of Christian and pre-Christian philology, verse, and prayer. The crossroads of this modern man finds solace in memes that stretch far back into the early stages of sacral language. At I encounter the living Lord through a profound immersion in the many interwoven semiotic layers that cover our ancient rites.

        I have often referred to a “liturgical nomenklatura” here. The Novus Ordo is a centrally planned liturgy not unlike the Soviet planned economy. The reformed rite is a construct of an academic apparatchik deeply convinced that conference papers and monographs could nourish the hearts of the “modern person”. The Novus Ordo is not a product of the “People of God”. It is the condescending gift of a self-anointed intellectual cast to a lay faithful that may or may not have desired an academic experiment disguised as a rite “for modern man”.

        The EF embraces an earnest organicity. An unfolding of our ancient heritage in our modern age presents ever-present challenges, such a further revision of the EF more consonant with Nostra Aetate. The conciliar challenge to respect the dignity of all human beings did not require an annihilation of tradition but rather a continual but critical evolution of our ancient traditions.

  3. Mr. Rakoksky,

    Let’s see about some of these, in no particular order: At my parish [2 priests, 7 Masses in 2 languages each weekend] some of what you would like, or some combinations of them, would not be logistically possible, because it would lengthen Mass too much. We need a certain minimum amount of time between Masses for parking lot turnover, even if priests and accompanist don’t take time for a drink of water between efforts.

    Referring to the same group of preferences, I would prefer to NOT sing all of those parts every week. Doing so doesn’t leave any place to go for ‘extra’ on special days.

    Numbers 6, 8, and 9 are impossible due to their extremely individual [not to mention somewhat self-centered] nature. We are currently using a setting that I dislike rather intensely. There’s nothing wrong with it, I just don’t like it. Too bad for me. It will probably change next month anyway.

    Number 5 is similarly subject to individual taste. What you find grand might drive several dozen folks right out of regular attendance.

    Number 11 would probably lead to a choir revolt, out of sheer boredom. We have some predictable standards but they rotate. You have your favorites, I have mine, and the choir directors have theirs. The overlap is not perfect.

    Number 10 isn’t practical here. The choir sings twice a month at a Mass that starts 1 hour and 20 minutes after the preceding one. When we do a prelude, it’s typically instrumental and lasts just a few minutes. Besides, the choir works really hard to put together the Mass music. Regular preludes take away needed prep time. I already despise the length of rehearsal.

    We don’t do number 14 as you describe, but at Easter Vigil we alternate readings between Spanish and English, and similarly alternate languages with some other parts of the Mass. Until this year we did the same at Christmas Midnight Mass, but this year we held a Spanish language Mass on Christmas Eve.

    Cont’d…

    1. At St Paul’s in Cambridge, we know from decades of experience that singing the dialogues, the Ordinary, and the proper prayers and prefaces adds a de minimis amount of time to the Mass. And the Mass is not rushed. Mass lasts 60-65 minutes. Singing the Ordo takes much less extra time than people imagine.

      1. We sing everything priest’s and laity’s parts (not the readings, sadly) at our Sunday Masses, use incense, etc and it takes about an hour and ten minutes depending on the length of the homily. At our daily Mass, there are no hymns, but the alleluia, sanctus, mystery of faith, Great Amen and Agnus Dei are sung without accompaniment. I give a brief homily, about 70 people are present and it takes 23 minutes. I’ve timed it. 🙂

      2. In our particular circumstances a few extra minutes makes a big difference. Mass already lasts 60-65 minutes. We do sing the Ordo sometimes, but depending on the crowd it can be problematic. To mandate that would not be helpful in my parish.

        Father Allan, I’ve been to Masses done in 17 minutes, with all the required parts done in a non-rushed fashion, although fewer attendees. Of course, there was no extra time taken for anything either. . .but that’s not the point under discussion.

      3. Of course, now that we all no longer have a proscription against Masses after noon, we are freer to insert an extra 15 minutes between Masses to permit the Mass not to be wagged by the parking tail.

      4. Karl,

        We start at 7:40 AM. The Sunday Spanish Mass starts at 12:30 – and runs until 2 or later most weeks. Sunday evening Mass begins at 6 PM. Adding time in between? Not going to happen. Starting earlier cuts attendance significantly, and going a whole lot later leaves our priests with no rest and less voice. Not to mention leaving no time for the other things we do there on Sunday afternoons.

    2. We had a 30 minute Sunday Mass this morning. Mind you, our pastor was suffering from some sort of stomach flu. We did have a condensed homily, and he used EP3. Not much in the way of chant though. 🙂

    3. Number 5 is similarly subject to individual taste. What you find grand might drive several dozen folks right out of regular attendance.
      ————————————————–
      I’ve always found the LESS grand is more likely to drive the folks through out the doors to another denomination.

  4. …Cont’d

    We do some Latin, in accord with your number 13. I have never heard anyone asking for more of it, but nor have I heard complaints.

    Number 12 we do sometimes. More correctly, we do psalm-based and -paraphrased hymns regularly.

    How about improving the quality and delivery of readings/homilies? Our former pastor actually read the Gospel about 3 times during the 9 years his time and mine overlapped. Each time he was doing a last-minute substitution. The other times he memorized and PROCLAIMED the Gospel, caps intended. He told a story, and made it very real and engaging. His homilies he delivered from notes, but in such a fashion that the very few times he was off his best game he was still better than most at their best. I know at least one couple that kept attending church at all because he was worth hearing. Haven’t seen them much lately, though.

    I’d like to expand just a little bit on that above paragraph. Not our former pastor’s virtues, of those I’ve said enough, but on the overall quality of the public speaking and stagecraft. Yes, stagecraft. There is an element of theater in the Mass, and it’s too often ignored. Good public speaking skills – pacing and enunciation in particular – cover a lot of it. How much of this is taught and developed in seminary formation and ongoing training? Some guys talk much faster than ordinary ears can hear.

    The rest usually goes under the headings of decorations and general reverence and competence, without being overbearing. I’ve been fortunate to not encounter too many priests who are incompetent, but a few have been terribly impressed with themselves, and it shows in their celebration of Mass. This, we can well do without.

  5. Hear, hear, Lynn…..my experience, also. Don’t expect much from theologates/seminaries in terms of public speaking, ars celebrandi, etc. Many seminaries basically have one liturgical style course and many faculty are not the best example in terms of preaching, liturgical style, chanting, etc. (many have little to no pastoral experience)

    The focus has been even more diluted in recent years depending upon the seminary and its focus – you have minorities (majorities) in some ordination classes that have taken time from ars celebrandi, sacrament preparation and re-invested in learning the EF. And we wonder what the impact on our ecclesiology will be?

  6. I usually shop around in Manhattan where the liturgies, with few exceptions,are truly ho hum events liturgically speaking. Most haven’t changed a bit since 1970. St. Patrick’s is better than most, but then again it should be. A few have a sung canon, a procession with hymns, no propers sung that I can think of. Solemnity is defined more by the number of candles and flowers in use, than by the dynamics of the liturgy itself.

    None of them can even come close–including St. Patrick’s–to “Smokey Mary’s” off Broadway (St. Mary the Virgin, High Anglican). The exception is Our Savior’s on Park Avenue. Of course, this is the famous Fr. Rutler’s parish (of EWTN fame) and is has a very good choir and a conservative EF or OF liturgy each Sunday. The church is very beautiful with seemingly unlimited resources to do just about anything. Some might find it insufficiently relaxed in spirit to what they’re accustomed to.

    1. The exception is Our Savior’s on Park Avenue. Of course, this is the famous Fr. Rutler’s parish (of EWTN fame) and is has a very good choir and a conservative EF or OF liturgy each Sunday.

      I speak for myself only and not in any official capacity, but we have OF and EF liturgy both every Sunday.

      The church is very beautiful with seemingly unlimited resources to do just about anything.

      “Seemingly” is the key word.

  7. I love the reaction to my list. I am glad I forgot to articulate the reason for the list. It might have discouraged the comments.

    The Vibrant Parish Life study indicates many if not most people think the Mass is poorly done in comparison to other things in the parish, but they also say that it is the most important thing in the parish. I think they really mean that; it is not just some abstract belief.

    Since the Mass is so important I suspect most people have accumulated their own very idiosyncratic lists of what would make it better based upon their experiences. The Latin during penitential seasons is something that I came across; it seemed to work well. That reminds me that I also came across a priest who sang the Eucharistic Prayer only during penitential seasons. (Actually he had a wonderful voice, so the obvious joke doesn’t apply).

    The point is that the New Missal implementation is going to be experienced by people who all have their idiosyncratic experiences of what would improve things. They are not a blank slate.

    For those who are going to try to sell it; it will be an almost impossible task. Take my list as an example. There is very little on it that has directly to do with the implementation, but many things could be affected to the good or bad by accidentals of how the implementation is done in a particular parish.

    For those who feel they must criticize the implementation at the parish level: If most people have all their own idiosyncratic experiences of what works and what does not work, you probably won’t impress them much with your complaints unless you are willing to start addressing their suggestions and complaints.

    The bottom line: find out what people think would improve things (ask for the positives rather than the negatives) before trying to implement changes. I am not advocating democracy in decision making, just listening to people and understanding them in their diversity before you act or try to communicate.

  8. LN [#9] “Number 11 would probably lead to a choir revolt, out of sheer boredom. We have some predictable standards but they rotate. You have your favorites, I have mine, and the choir directors have theirs. The overlap is not perfect.”

    Since when is good liturgy that which pleases the choir?

    The job of liturgical musicians is to lead or accompany the assembly in song. The reason for song is to unify and uplift the assembly in their parts of the text. The further we get from that principle the further we are from liturgy and closer to mere performing arts and sacred entertainments.

    The choir, the presider, the cantor, the lector, and all other liturgical ministers need to tamp down their egos and find other outlets for their artistic expressions. That is not their role in the liturgy.

    If we want full, conscious, and active participation, we need to make FCAP as easy as possible. That means a small enough repertoire of songs that every song every Sunday is familiar to the congregation.

    Select two new songs a year with great care for the congregation and expect to hear them a half dozen times a year for a decade. Hymnal change should be slow and organic.

    An Easter Season Mass setting, a Christmas Season Mass setting, recited Lenten and Advent Masses, no more than three setting for Ordinary Time, introduced one per year over three years and kept for at least a decade each.

    Most important, use the Psalter with five or less Psalm tones. The 200+ full or partial texts provide enough variety, and, given decent instruction and enough repetition, any congregation can sing pointed texts to known chants.

    These are not matters of taste. They are matters of practical liturgical ministry.

    In most parishes I have known over five decades, the loss of the choir and the addition of those voices in the midst of the assembly would be a net gain.

    On the other hand, at least the choir rehearses what they do. Oh, that presiders and lectors…

    1. Tom,

      I didn’t say that good liturgy is that which pleases the choir. I said that if we sang the same things all the time we’d get bored and revolt. It would probably take the form of just not doing it any more, and that would be a genuine loss for our parish. I enjoy the blessing of being part of a group of musicians that includes some extremely talented people, to and including professional musicians. The whole would not be readily replaced.

      It’s not about ‘pleasing’ the choir, anyway. I think rather in terms of keeping engaged. Folks who can’t stand the rarely-changing style/settings/songs are likely to simply not show up. On the other hand, if material rotates reasonably regularly, many are willing to hang on knowing that soon enough they’ll be using something they like better.

      You make a very clear statement of how you think it should be done. I respect your opinion, but I disagree with it, or, perhaps better, I think it would not be the best approach for our parish. Given the level of participation in our parish, including a singing congregation and well-prepared lectors, I feel pretty confident that our mileage varies from yours.

  9. LT [#16] “I’d like to expand just a little bit on that above paragraph. Not our former pastor’s virtues, of those I’ve said enough, but on the overall quality of the public speaking and stagecraft. Yes, stagecraft. There is an element of theater in the Mass, and it’s too often ignored. Good public speaking skills – pacing and enunciation in particular – cover a lot of it. How much of this is taught and developed in seminary formation and ongoing training? Some guys talk much faster than ordinary ears can hear.”

    YES, stagecraft, performance skills, movement blocking, attention to sight lines, diction, enunciation, projection, attention the the differing content and addressees of different texts, reading that reflects meaning rather than efficiency, posture, gesture, direction of eyes to assembly when addressing assembly and not when addressing God.

    Distinguish narrative from direct address and recollection from present action.

    Waiting for the assembly to make their responses instead of beginning them for them.

    Transparency in ministry requires effort, rehearsal, and humility.

    How many priest do all of us together know who have since ordination ever asked for any feedback on their presiding?

    How many priests do we know who skip Easter Vigil or Christmas Midnight Mass rehearsals which are mandatory for all other ministers?

    If you will click on my name, you will find a blog which is focused on these sorts of issues.

    Do you think there is any market for offering priests this sort of information through training or reviewing of videos of their presiding? I fear not.

  10. The reason Anglican priests are so much better celebrants is that they are chosen by the parishioners, who expect value for money.

  11. If only we could pick our priests! I think Anglicans are better at somethings for sure. But then their formation was almost certainly better.

  12. Someone compared the 191 Freiburg priests with the apostles who turned their back on Jesus… Let’s hope that if and when the laity get a say in the appointing of priests they won’t apply such benighted criteria… The result could be worse than anything we have now.

  13. I think you can rest easy Father, its not going to happen anytime soon, like so many other aspects of faith.
    In a way of course The Chuch is quite correct in not letting us cobble together our own versions of religion. That is for others.

    1. Who are these “other” who “cobble together [their] own versions of religion”? If this is an insulting slam against Protestants, I don’t want to miss it.
      awr

  14. Yes, it is an insulting slam to refer to others’ convictions as “cobbling together their own version of religion.” Where is your respect for human dignity and conscience? Lots of Protestants and liberal Catholics believe things I do not. I can be honest about that. But I presume good faith, intelligent reflection, honest conviction, and sincerity. To say that they just “cobbled together” their beliefs is – there’s no other word for it – an insulting slam.

    You might check out the comment policy of this blog too – I wonder what the moderator would say about the ecumenical sensitivity of your words.

    awr

  15. Everone is entitled to their view Father. That hapens to be mine. With upwards of 150,000 Churches on this planet, I think I can be forgiven for thinking that.
    As for the moderators, as ever its their prerogative not to publish my less than perfect thoughts.

    1. How is the number 150,000 relevant? Are you saying you would respect people’s beliefs in conscience as long as the number of differing beliefs were limited? But since the diversity is so great, you don’t feel you have to respect their consciences?

      I won’t take up the question of whether you’re forgiven or not. I will point out that your attitude is incompatible with everything taught by the Second Vatican Council and all the popes since, including Pope Benedict XVI, on respect for others’ beliefs.

      awr

  16. I do not concede that I have disrespect for anyone s beliefs. You seem to take issue with my phrase “cobbled together”, which means “put together out of existing material” …usually from a number of sources. Maybe it means something else across the pond?
    Since a great many of my family are non-Catholic , and since my Father was not a Catholic, I think I can safely say I have respect for others beliefs.
    My core point is that you cannot believe anything you like within the Catholic Church. There are limits. Limits which do not apply elswhere.

    1. Is the Oxford English Dictionary a credible source on your side of the pond?

      “Cobbled,” adj.
      Mended or put together clumsily (esp. of shoes), patched, botched.

      My charge stands.

      Who, btw, ever said that you can believe whatever you want in the Catholic Church? I certainly never did, nor would I.

      awr

    1. Actually, I think we’re getting somewhere quite clear and specific. The charge is disrespect for others’ beliefs, and I stand by it.

      I’m willing to let go of this conversation, but not before making a comment.

      There is a disproportionate amount of mean-spiritedness coming from “conservative” or “traditional” Catholics all over the blogosphere, and it’s got to stop. It’s toxic. It seems to be on the increase in our Church since Pope Benedict XVI became pope and made his controversial liturgical decisions. Though the Pope does not (I hope) intend it, his decisions seem to be given new energy to some unholy forces on the Right. When we see our Church being represented by voices which are intolerant or disrespectful, we all need to stand up and say clearly: This is not acceptable. This is not our Catholic Christian faith.

      This attitude should be challenged wherever it comes from on the ideological or theological spectrum. And let no one say that it is justified on the Right because it was allegedly done on the Left 40 years ago or whenever. Wrong is wrong, and getting even doesn’t justify it.

      awr

      1. I thoroughly agree with your third paragraph here- I wish I had something eloquent to add, but Fr. Anthony has said it exactly as I would have! The mean-spiritedness and know-it-all arrogance needs to end.

  17. Returning to the headline post. I would urge everyone to read Fr Lang of The London Oratory. His comments on the new translation are superb.

  18. Kenny, I’m definitely on your side. This whole blog is permeated with political correctness of the most nauseating kind. If Hilaire Belloc were to post here he would be deleted straight away:

    Heretics all, where e’er you be,
    In Tarbes, or Nimes, or over the sea;
    You never will have good words from me.
    Caritas non conturbat me.

    1. John Nolan,

      To be clear, the issue here is that I’m defending respect for others’ beliefs as taught by Vatican II and all the popes since. I hold that it is inappropriate to refer to Protestants’ beliefs as “cobbled together.”

      Do you hold that Vatican II is “political correctness of the most nauseating kind”? Would you say the same of the postconciliar popes including the current one? Do you reject the Holy See’s recent announcement of dialogue with atheists?

      Vatican II on religious freedom wasn’t an issue for Belloc, since he died in 1953. But it is an issue for us. Please clarify where you stand on it.

      awr

      1. Vatican II on religious freedom wasn’t an issue for Belloc, since he died in 1953. But it is an issue for us. Please clarify where you stand on it.

        Such questions coming from the conservative side are seen as mean-spirted heresy hunting.

  19. Thanks John. I love that you quote Belloc.
    Here is another,
    Wherever the Catholic sun doth shine there is always laughter and good red wine,
    at least I ve always found it so. Benedicamus Domino……… My favourite quote of his.

  20. Fr Ruff,

    You ask me to clarify my position, and I am happy to do so. I believe in freedom and toleration, which includes freedom of religion and free speech. I would ask you to comment on a fairly recent case. A Royal Navy sailor declared himself a Satanist and after appeal to the European Court of Human Rights won the right to practise his “religion” on the ship on which he was serving. Were I one of his shipmates I would have been a bit worried about this.

    On the matter of free speech, the wheel would appear to have turned full circle. It is now liberals who would attempt to stifle dissent on the grounds that it is not “appropriate” (as they define it) or might possibly offend somebody (who is already waiting in the wings with an axe to grind).

    As for dialogue with atheists, we do that all the time, surely? The bloke I chatted to in the pub this lunchtime might have had any religion or none (although I suspect he was not a Moslem). Had the subject got on to religion I hope I would have had the courage to stand up for the truth, but I find in these situations there is a tendency to take the easy way out and indulge in a spot of relativism. But that is for the sake of politeness.

  21. There is a disproportionate amount of mean-spiritedness coming from “conservative” or “traditional” Catholics all over the blogosphere, and it’s got to stop.
    Father Anthony, I concur that mean-spiritedness must stop, no matter from what point on the political compass it radiates. Whether it’s about our vision of the meaning and purpose of the Church, civil rights and the dignity of each human life in countries in the Middle East or within the perimeters of abortion clinics, or in the mean streets of Ciudad Juarez or Oakland, it is chaos that prevails when it boils down to “He said…she said…..You say ‘tomaytoe,’ I say tomahto….Anything you can say, I can say better!”
    In another MR3 thread, I cajoled that, IMO, we cannot “complain a new church into being.” I virtually begged you to articulate “what, then, must we do?” if you had the helm of the barque?
    This is not some bathetic “Can’t we all just get along?” exclamation. Most of my conservative sisters and brothers with whom I identify, many of whom you know personally, are not strident, bitter voices either crying “Finally, revenge and justice are OURS!” or “S/he’s a pinko commie heretic, cast them out! We have in common what is supposed to eventuate as “communion.”
    I, for only one, appreciate that you have strived to contribute positively to dialogues that must be shared here on your blog and elsewhere. But for the sake of that discussion, all of us need to put the injury and insult down, articulate what we have in common that must be preserved so we reject stasis and chaos in order to move forward, and eventually pick up our offerings and lay them on the altar.
    “What do you want us all to do?”

    1. ‘What do you want us all to do?’ Recognise that we are about to have an objectively problematic (in anyone’s book) text, imposed on us because collegial due process was not followed. Call a halt, and try to talk the situation through–in a process in which people are heard, and authority begins to behave with integrity and transparency. If this kind of repair work is not done, then exhortations ‘to put the injury and insult down’ are manipulating us into accepting falsehood.

  22. Kenny, I can’t find Fr Zarembo’s post – I assume he has removed it himself. I confess that Belloc is one of my heroes; a first-rate Catholic apologist who wasn’t afraid to say or write what he thought even though he wasn’t always right! One thing is certain – he would have had nothing but contempt for the namby-pamby “we must respect everyone’s beliefs” crowd.

    On one occasion HB was at Mass in Westminster Cathedral, and in the tradition of his French upbringing stood for the Elevation. A verger tapped him on the shoulder and told him it was customary to kneel at this point.
    “Go to hell!” snarled Belloc.
    “I’m very sorry, sir,” replied the verger, “I didn’t realize you were a Catholic.”

  23. “One thing is certain – he would have had nothing but contempt for the namby-pamby “we must respect everyone’s beliefs” crowd.”

    I rather fear that his contempt would have extended to Vatican II’s Nostra Aetate.

  24. I’m delighted to see the Church rocked by dissension and discord over the future of this missal and the Roman liturgy. It illustrates average Catholics, clergy, professional and amateur liturgists alike, aren’t going to take Vox Clara’s or CDW’s decrees lying down. Dutifully submitting to the Vatican mind-control apparatus now trying to stampede their inferior workmanship on the rest of us while equating their every decision with the “magisterium”, another “gift of the Holy Spirit”, pious blather. As they gleefully and customarily railroad the rest of the Church into blind obedience.

Leave a Reply

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