Monday, October 22, 2007

The Voice of the Irrelevant: NCAN

The National Coalition of American Nuns (all 30 of them) have written a letter denouncing what they actually have not yet seen.

Tremble and Quake!! Ye Bishops!!

To Each U.S. Roman Catholic Bishop Regarding English Translations For The Liturgy

Dear Bishop, [the proper form of address is "Your Excellency"...and it just gets worse.]

We are writing to you, each U.S. bishop, the U.S. Bishops' Committee on the Liturgy, the International Committee on English in the Liturgy (ICEL), and the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments in regard to the new Vatican-ordered translation of the Liturgy. [What! Not B-16???]

The Vatican-appointed translators have not produced a translation that is understandable to Catholics in the pews. We understand that, according to a 2005 poll of bishops, 47% of the U.S. bishops rated it "fair or poor". The media has reported that even some bishops are complaining that some texts contain "clunky and archaic language". [Nothing like "a Poll" to determine substance, eh?]

For example, why would the words "consubstantial to the Father" be used in the Creed? What meaning do these words have for 21st century English speaking Catholics? Why use a medieval expression like, "We pray you bid" in the new Missal? This is not the way people speak today in the English-speaking world. [True. And nothing prevents them from learning the meanings, either...]

We need to follow the liturgical principles set forth in the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy from the Second Vatican Council. Article 21 of that document states, "Christian people, as far as possible, should be able to understand them (texts and rites) with ease".

Ummmnnnhhhh...perhaps our priests will be asked to TEACH the faithful?

Or would that be asking too much?

(More of their semi-coherent drooling may be found at the link.)

HT: The Jester


Brother James said...

Well, there are many other concepts that the average pew-warming catholic doesn't understand, and I'd be loath for the Church to change these:

Humanae Vitae

Etc, etc, you get the point. If we dumb down liturgy for the disinterested, why wouldn't we also alter doctrine as well. You know, to "remain relevant."

Terrence Berres said...

If there's no one who can understand "consubstantial", is there anyone who can distinguish consubstantiation from transubstantiation?

[dynamic equivalent translation:]

Can dem Lute-runs unnerstan dese big wurds bedder dan Cat-liks can dese days?

xxxxxx said...

Personally, I find that I communicate better with God using a different mode of language. I find the language of the tridentine mass so beautiful. There is a profound sense of awe at the majesty of God the Father.