In an earlier post, Andrea Grillo suggests that it is time for a sixth instruction on the right implementation of Sacrosanctum Concilium — an instruction that would get us past the pitfalls of the fifth: Liturgiam authenticam, on the translation of liturgical texts.
Because Pray Tell readers have considered the issues of liturgical translation with some attention over time, I thought it would be interesting to open the floor for brainstorming suggestions as to what this new instruction ought to contain.
* * *
For myself, I can identify material in both Liturgiam authenticam and Comme le prevoit (the document it supplanted) that is true and valuable. Occasionally a point that looks innocuous on the page has turned out to be disastrous when actually implemented, and so demands qualification. And then, there are some provisions that just need to be edited out: either as mistakes or overblown claims, or tending too far toward paranoia or idealism. Peter Jeffrey’s critique of LA as “ignorant” takes up many of its assertions as incoherent and historically fictive.
* * *
Here are the two texts:
The floor is open. What provisions would you add, keep, strengthen, revise, or throw, and why?
[Nota Bene: If you want to argue that Vatican II did not really want vernacular liturgy in the first place, please make that case somewhere other than this thread. Thank you.]