An Irish Archbishop Tells It Like It Is

From Rorate Caeli comes this refreshing bit of news.  The Most Rev. Diarmuid Martin, Archbishop of Dublin, Ireland, preached a homily this past Sunday during the Dublin Diocesan Liturgical Resource Center.  In light of the precarious situation concerning the Association of Catholic Priests, an Irish clerical group vehemently opposed to the coming translation of the Roman Missal, Archbishop Martin's words provide a much needed spiritual boost to Ireland's faithful:

You do not simply go to Mass. The liturgy is not a performance but an action in which God’s people actively participate. The liturgy is however in the first place the action of God. Active participation is not just about us saying and doing things. There is an active participation which is fostered through silence and reflection and interiorly identifying ourselves with what is taking place. In today’s world there is anyway a superabundance of words and a fear of silence. The liturgy must always lead people beyond the superficial and fleeting character of much of contemporary culture.

Where the liturgy becomes performance we can very easily end up with banalities and with what some have called the "disneyisation" of the liturgy. Such banality is often linked also with a sense of personal protagonism, at times by the priest or of a musical group or even of guest speakers. Our reading this morning reminds us that “we have nothing to boast about to God”. The liturgy is not our work.

Archbishop Martin's characterization of the "disneyisation" of the Mass is particularly on target.  Sadly, a lot of the musical settings for the Mass wind up sounding like something from Shrek or Beauty and the Beast.  The musical interludes certainly appear to place the liturgy at the service of the music, as opposed to making the music serve the liturgy. 

The archbishop's words serve to reinforce what Pope Benedict XVI has said about banality.  In his book The Spirit of the Liturgy, Pope Benedict uses the word "banal" to characterize the infiltration of the "pop/rock" genre into the Mass.   A lot of the songs seem to turn into elaborate musical numbers that emphasize the "performance" more than the prayer.

A huge tip of the Texas stetson certainly goes out to the blog Rorate Caeli for posting this key part of Archbishop Martin's homily, and, a bigger tip of the stetson goes to Archbishop Martin for his wise words.

Poll Time

At Fr. Z's invitation, I post this poll and ask that you participate in a survey that he is conducting:

Fr. Z's Blog – What Does The Prayer Really Say? Slavishly accurate liturgical translations & frank commentary on Catholic issues – by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf o{]:¬)

In order for him to get a good sampling, he needs universal participation! I've already voted.

Breaking News from the Congregation for Divine Worship

From our friends at the New Liturgical Movement and Fr. Z's blog comes this news of great importance:

In the coming weeks a document of Benedict XVI will be released which reorganizes the competences of the Congregation for Divine Worship, entrusting it with the task of promoting a liturgy more faithful to the original intentions of Vatican II, with less room for arbitrary changes, and for the recovery of a dimension greater sacredness.

The document, which will take the form of a motu proprio, is the fruit of a long maturation - it has been reviewed by the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts and the offices of the Secretariat of State -, and is motivated mainly by the transfer of jurisdiction over matrimonial cases to the Roman Rota. These are the so-called "ratum sed non consummatum" causes, i.e. regarding the marriages which took place in church but have not been consummated because of the lacking carnal union of the spouses. There are about five hundred cases a year, and they mainly affect some Asian countries where there are still arranged marriages with girls of a very young age, but also Western countries for those cases of psychological impotence to perform the conjugal act.

Losing this section, which will go to the Rota, the Congregation of Divine Worship will de facto not be concerned anymore with the sacraments and retain only jurisdiction in matters liturgical. According to some authoritative leaks, a passage of the motu proprio of Benedict XVI might explicitly mention that "new liturgical movement" of which has spoken in recent days Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera, speaking during the consistory of last November.

Cañizares told Il Giornale, in an interview published on the eve of last Christmas: "The liturgical reform was carried out with great haste. There were very good intentions and a desire to apply Vatican II. But there was precipitancy... The liturgical renewal was seen as laboratory research, the fruit of imagination and creativity, the magic word then." The cardinal, who had not been unbalanced in talking about the "reform the reform", had added: "What I see as absolutely necessary and urgent, according to what the the Pope wishes, is giving life to a new, clear and vigorous liturgical movement throughout the entire Church", to put an end to "arbitrary deformations" and the process of "secularisation, which unfortunately is at work even inside the Church."

It is known how Ratzinger has wanted to introduce in the papal liturgies significant and examplary gestures: the cross at the center of the altar, communion kneeling, Gregorian chant, the space for silence. It is known how much he values beauty in sacred art and how much he considers it important to promote Eucharistic adoration. The Congregation for Divine Worship - which some would also like to rename [sc. Congregation] for the Sacred Liturgy or for Divine Liturgy - will thus have to concern itself with this new liturgical movement, also by opening a new section of the dicastery dedicated to sacred art and music.

The report comes from Andrea Tornielli, one of Italy's most notable Vatican reporters.   The news is certainly welcome.   Fr. Z calls Pope Benedict XVI the Pope of Christian Unity and there is certainly merit to this designation.  However, for me, Pope Benedict XVI is also the Pope of the Reform of the  Reform. 

An Irish Rebellion

The winter of discontent continues.  It seems that on the heels of Fr. Anthony Ruff's letter, more negative reactions to the coming Roman Missal  have filled cyberspace.  Evidently, some priests in Ireland have also taken up the banner in protest against the coming English translation of the Roman Missal.

Here is what they said in their press release:

The celebration of the Mass is central to our work as priests and, more importantly, to the lives of the people we serve.  In the words of the central document of Vatican II, Lumen Gentium  (The Light of the People), the Mass is “ the source and summit of the Christian life.” (LG11). Our concerns flow from our experience as pastors who attempt each Sunday to celebrate the liturgy with our people in a meaningful, dignified and prayerful way.  Many bishops, priests, lay people, theologians and liturgists across the English speaking world share our concerns

Opposition on the grounds of the Language used

• A word-for-word translation from Latin into a vernacular language, mandated by the document Liturgiam Authenticam (March 2001), demonstrates a lack of awareness of the insights gained from linguistics and anthropology during the past 100 years. Translators in other international bodies follow the ‘dynamic equivalent’ norm which means translating according to the sense of the original text, rather than literally.

• The ACP is gravely concerned that this literal translation from Latin has produced texts that are archaic, elitist and obscure and not in keeping with the natural rhythm, cadence and syntax of the English language.  In fact, from the few available samples of the new texts, it is clear that the style of English used throughout the Mass will be so convoluted that it will be difficult to read the prayers in public. In the words of Bishop Donald Trautman, former chair of the United States Bishops’ Liturgical Committee, this is a translation where “the vocabulary is not readily understandable by the average Catholic…  how can someone read the text in public when some of the sentences contain 70 or 80 words.” 

It is particularly ironic that this Latinised, stilted English is being imposed on Irish people who are so blessed with world-renowned poets, playwrights, and novelists.

• Catholics should be allowed to pray publically in their own language.  Jesus used the language of the people when he was speaking with them. The New Testament is written in the language of the ordinary people, not classical Greek.

• The ACP is aware of the history of this translation. It regrets that the expertise of scholars in many disciplines was spurned. Many of these scholars gave their time and talents freely to help the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL), produce acceptable texts.  In 1998 the ICEL translation was accepted and approved by every conferences of bishops in the English speaking world.

• The translation is also in conflict with the Constitution of the Sacred Liturgy which has a whole section on norms for adapting the Liturgy to the temperament and traditions of people. This allows for legitimate variations and adaptations. (No. 38).

• This translation runs contrary to one of the main goals of our Association, namely: That liturgical celebrations use rituals and language that are easily understood, inclusive and accessible to all. 

Sacrosanctum Concilium, contrary to popular myth, did not necessarily mandate that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass be celebrated entirely in the vernacular. 

36. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.
2. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the Liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.

The ACP also seems to forget that Liturgiam Authenticam, promulgated by soon-to-be-Blessed John Paul II, also takes its root from Sacrosanctum Concilium:

3. These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language.
4. Translations from the Latin text into the mother tongue intended for use in the Liturgy must be approved by the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned above.

While the Association of Catholic Priests' seems to echo some of the same arguments that Bishop  Trautmann made when he was trying to stall the approval of the revised texts, the ACP seems to not quite understand neither Liturgiam Authenticam nor Sacrosanctum Concilium.  Neither document indicates that priests, let alone, the faithful, needed to have been consulted in matters concerning the translation.  It just seems to me that pride has overtaken fidelity in this case.

 

A Winter of Discontent

With the way some circles are reporting the coming implementation of the new translation of the Roman Missal, one would think that they were confusing it with the purported 2012 Armageddon predictions.    Many are calling the process flawed.  Others seem to be longing for the fleshpots of the 1998 translation.  Still others claim that we don't need one at all.

Having worked for the Texas House of Represenatives (including a brief stint in the Texas Senate) for 12 years, I call tell you that legislative processes, be they secular or sacred, are never pretty things to watch.  They can sometimes be downright brutal.  However, the end result is, more often than not, of great benefit to those for whom the laws and measures are intended. 

In the Church's case, we must remember that She is not a democracy.  The work that she undertakes in such massive projects is meticulous and not based upon popular opinion or polls.  This is why the letter, written by Fr. Anthony Ruff, that appeared in a recent edition of the magazine America leaves me with sadness and a great deal of concern.

Fr. Ruff's open letter to the bishops of the United States expresses his displeasure with the coming revised translation of the Roman Missal.  He went so far as to say that:

The forthcoming missal is but a part of a larger pattern of top-down impositions by a central authority that does not consider itself accountable to the larger church. When I think of how secretive the translation process was, how little consultation was done with priests or laity, how the Holy See allowed a small group to hijack the translation at the final stage, how unsatisfactory the final text is, how this text was imposed on national conferences of bishops in violation of their legitimate episcopal authority, how much deception and mischief have marked this process—and then when I think of Our Lord’s teachings on service and love and unity…I weep.

I see a good deal of disillusionment with the Catholic Church among my friends and acquaintances. Some leave the Catholic Church out of conviction, some gradually drift away, some join other denominations, some remain Catholic with difficulty. My response is to stay in this church for life and do my best to serve her. This I hope to do by stating the truth as I see it, with charity and respect. I would be ready to participate in future liturgical projects under more favorable conditions.

With all due respect to Fr. Ruff, I believe that some of the assertions of displeasure that he is raising really have no credence, unless the folks airing their discontent are the signers of the infamous "What if We Just Said Wait" petition.  It is ironic that Fr. Ruff talks about Jesus' teaching on unity and love.   The Holy Eucharist is the Sacrament par excellence of unity and love.  However, over the past four decades, there has been some semblance of unity missing in the English translation of the Roman Missal that we currently have in place.  For example, while the rest of the world prays "And with your spirit", we pray "And also with you."  We say similar things, in essence, but, we are not saying the same thing.   Thus, there is that perceptible rupture to the unity.

Fr. Ruff's concern that people will leave is also something rather difficult to fathom, but, sadly, it's not new to the Church.  Even in Jesus' time, folks leaving Him was a sad reality.  Recall Jesus' discourse on the Bread of Life.  Recall the reaction that some of his disciples had to this:'

[61] Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard, and who can hear it? [62] But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you? [63] If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? [64] It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life. [65] But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning, who they were that did not believe, and who he was, that would betray him.  [66] And he said: Therefore did I say to you, that no man can come to me, unless it be given him by my Father. [67] After this many of his disciples went back; and walked no more with him.

Now, I am not saying that the folks who are contemplating leaving the Church because of the translation are betraying Jesus; however, as I see it, the reasons for their pending departure are superfluous.  They want to leave because words are being changed, or, more specifically, because the words that we are going to pray at the Mass are being restored to better reflect the awesome mysteries that unfold before us at every Holy Sacrifice. 


The charges of decption that Fr. Ruff raises are, I believe, unfounded. He alleges that the process was not followed.  Rome mandated a  new process because, for whatever reason, the previous one had some issues.  The process was followed and respected.  Naturally, edits will occur and bumps will mar the road from time to time, but, the process was followed.  The charges of mischief and deception are, I believe, smoke screens to hide a deeper issue.

That Fr. Ruff decries the notion that the priests nor the laity were consulted about the process seems to me like selective amnesia.  Over 40 years ago, when the Mass changed practically overnight, comments were not solicited from the priests nor the faithful.  The changes came, abruptly, but, they happened.   It is ironic that Fr. Ruff is having the same reaction to the coming Roman Missal that countless priests and faithful had over four decades ago.  It's as though the liberals of the late 1960s-early 1970s have now become the new conservatives, as they are trying to conserve the current translation.  

The bishops were the ones consulted by way of the English-speaking national episcopal conferences.  They were given the ICEL versions of the texts (grouped in diferent booklets) to review, possibly revise and adapt, and vote to approve, submitting their amended versions to the Holy See.  That is how the process is supposed to run.  Neither Sacrosanctum Concilium nor Liturgiam Authenitcam states that the Holy See has to consult with priests or the faithful about the process.  Any final changes that werer made, came from the Holy See, as is its right.


I trust the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and the decisions they have made regarding the coming translation.  I trust Pope Benedict XVI and the decision that he made to promulgate this edition of the Roman Missal.   As the Holy Father told the bishops of England and Wales:

Finally, I should like to speak to you about two specific matters that affect your episcopal ministry at this time. One is the imminent publication of the new translation of the Roman Missal. I want to take this opportunity to thank all of you for the contribution you have made, with such painstaking care, to the collegial exercise of reviewing and approving the texts. This has provided an immense service to Catholics throughout the English-speaking world. I encourage you now to seize the opportunity that the new translation offers for in-depth catechesis on the Eucharist and renewed devotion in the manner of its celebration. “The more lively the eucharistic faith of the people of God, the deeper is its sharing in ecclesial life in steadfast commitment to the mission entrusted by Christ to his disciples” (Sacramentum Caritatis, 6).

We must trust the Holy See on this one.  We should take the same attitude that St. Peter had when Jesus posed this question to him:

[68] Then Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also go away? [69] And Simon Peter answered him: Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. [70] And we have believed and have known, that thou art the Christ, the Son of God.

For us, to have fear is useless.  We need to trust.

The Presentation of the Lord

February 2nd marks the Solemnity of the Presentation of the Lord, commonly known as Candlemass.  It is rather interesting that this holy feast falls during the dead of winter when the days are at their coldest and, in some areas, their darkest.

Down here, the South Texas hinterland, usually warm and balmy, resembled the frozen northern tundra (sans the snow that should be falling tomorrow evening).  At this evening's Mass, the darkness and chill certainly made their presence known.

Yet, despite the frigid temperatures and the fading light, tonight, we basked in the eternal warm glow of the True Light of God, the Light who physically entered His temple for the first time.   In St. John's Gospel account, Jesus refers to himself as the Light.  St. John, in his prologue, calls Jesus both the Word and the Light.  While the Second Temple was certainly a marvelous edifice, according to both scriptural and historical accounts, it reached its zenith when the One for whom it was built finally entered.  All of the readings point to this unique encounter.  The temple lifted its portals to allow the true King of Israel, the Son of David, to enter its precincts.  Solomon, David's son, had built the Temple, but, it was the Son of God, the true Davidic heir, who consecrated it with His presence.

Perhaps Pope Benedict XVI makes this point best.  In today's homily for the Solemn Vespers of the Presentation of the Lord, the Holy Father said that:

On today's feast contemplate the Lord Jesus that Mary and Joseph are in the temple "to present to the Lord" ( Lk 2:22). In this Gospel scene reveals the mystery of the Son of the Virgin, consecrated by the Father, came into the world to faithfully fulfill his will (cf. Heb 10.5 to 7). Simeone to him as "a light for revelation to the Gentiles" ( Lk 2:32) and announces his prophetic word supreme sacrifice to God and his final victory (cf. Lk 2:32-35). It is the meeting of the two Testaments, Old and New. Jesus comes in the ancient temple, He who is the new Temple of God comes to visit his people, thus fulfilling the obedience to the Law and inaugurating the final time of salvation.

It''s interesting to observe closely the input of the Child Jesus in the solemnity of the temple, a big "go away" of so many people taken from their commitments: the priests and Levites with their rosters, the number of devotees and pilgrims, eager to meet with the Holy God of Israel. None of these, however, notice anything. Jesus is a child like the others, the eldest son of two very simple parents. Even the priests are unable to grasp the signs of the new and unique presence of the Messiah and Savior. Only two elderly people, Simeon and Anna, discover the big news. Led by the Holy Spirit, they found that Child as the fulfillment of their long wait and watch. Both contemplate the light of God, who is lighting the world, and their prophetic vision opens to the future, as the announcement of the Messiah: " Lumen Gentium to revelationem! "( Lk 2:32). In the attitude of the two prophetic elders is all the Old Testament that expresses the joy of the Redeemer. At the sight of the Child, Simeon and Anna sense that He is just waiting.

Pope Benedict further explores the issue about light when he notes that:

The first: the Gospel image of the Presentation of Jesus in the temple contains the fundamental symbol of light, the light that, starting from Christ, shines on Mary and Joseph, Simeon and Anna up and, through them all. The Fathers of the Church have linked the radiation to the spiritual path. Consecrated life expresses this journey, especially as " Philokalia "love of beauty divine reflection of the goodness of God (cf. ibid. , 19). On the face of Christ shines the light of that beauty. "The Church contemplates the transfigured face of Christ to find strength in faith and not risk the loss in front of his face disfigured on the cross ... it is the bride before the bridegroom, share in his mystery, wrapped in his light, [from which] have achieved all of his children ... But a singular experience of the light that emanates from the Incarnate Word are certainly called to the consecrated life. The profession of the evangelical counsels, in fact, places them as a sign and prophecy for the community of brothers and the world "( ibid ., 15).

Even though these words are directed to the religious (sisters and brothers), as today is the World Day for Consecrated Life, I believe that they also apply, in some way, to us, as well.   We need to be like Simeon and Anna.  To us is revealed the true Light.  When we were baptized, we received a candle that was lit from the Paschal Candle.  Our parents and godparents were charged to help us to keep that light burning so that we can meet and recognize the Lord when he comes.   Simeon and Anna experienced that Light first hand.  So impacted were they by that light that they spread the word about the Child.  Anna went so far as to tell virtually everyone she met about this  Child. 

The Presentation also points to the Paschal Mystery.  The young infant Jesus was "ransomed", so to speak, by a pair of turtle doves.  Some 33 years later, he would return to the Temple, purifying it from the profane elements that had invaded its sacred space (the moneychangers and the vendors).  Then, he, who had been ransomed through animal sacrifice would himself authentically ransom humanity with his holy, true and perfect oblation.  Every symbol in the Holy of Holies pointed to Jesus:  the altar, the incense, the Mercy Seat, the priest and the sacrifice itself. 

Mary, too, plays a role in all of this.  Mary is the fulfillment of the Ark of the Covenant, as in her womb, she carried the true Priest, the true Bread from heaven and the true Law, Jesus.  Now, as she presented her divine Son to the Lord, she carried him in her arms into the Temple.  Thus, both the Ark and its Sacred Content had finally come full circle, returning to the Temple.

In this cold night, when the temperatures are teetering below the freezing mark, I pray that the Light of Christ, that Light to all peoples, will continue to shine brightly in our hearts, melting the frozen chill of sin and dispelling its darkness.

Pleasant Memories

Those of you who regularly read this blog probably know that I have been sharing my experiences in Houston during the Society for Liturgy Conference. Another place that holds dear and fond memories for me is St. Louis, Missouri. I happened to be there on a work-related seminar when I found out that the Gateway Liturgical Conference was overlapping. I was able to spend Saturday morning at this conference and got to meet and listen to one of my heroes, then-Archbishop Malcolm Ranjinth.

While at St. Louis, I went to daily Mass at St. John the Apostle Catholic Church (shown above). When I was searching for a YouTube clip of the hymn "O God, Our Help in Ages Past", this particular parish showed up. I figured that this was the perfect blend of two blessed occasions of liturgical renewal that I experienced in St. Louis and in Houston.