Change To Roman Missal

 

There has been another change to the Roman Missal, one begun by Blessed John XXIII and completed under Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis: as you may have heard, St Joseph is to be included in the invocation of the Saints in Eucharistic Prayers II, III and IV.  As you know Blessed John added his name to the Roman Canon. 

 

In response to numerous petitions received from the faithful, and with the support of Benedict XVI during his pontificate, and now announced and decreed by Pope Francis, the Foster Father of the Lord will now be named after Our Lady in all the Eucharistic Prayers.

 

Here is the text of the decree.

 

This is welcome.  Joseph as the Foster of the Lord and Patron of the Universal Church deserves such a recognition - to be invoked in the liturgy during every Mass.  We need his protection and prayers in these times. 

Lenten Devotion To Our Lady Restored

As I mentioned in one of my posts yesterday, there are a number of changes to the Holy Week ceremonies in the new translation of the Missal, and today we encounter one of the first: the restoration, in part, of the commemoration of Our Lady of Sorrows, celebrated on the Friday of Passion week (now fifth week of Lent) in the liturgy prior to the changes of Vatican II.  Blessed John Paul II directed that the collect of the commemoration be included as an option in today's Mass.

This is a wonderful restoration, it encourages a more devotional approach to the liturgy and that is not a bad thing.   As we are about to enter Holy Week, there is no better companion than Our Lady who can lead us through the events and help us enter into them in a deeper way.  Meditating on her sorrows, those of a mother and a faithful disciple, we may experience a livelier sorrow ourselves, and that sorrow will help us come closer to the Lord who offered his life for our salvation.

Traditionally today's memorial commemorates Our Lady's compassion, a compassion not only for her suffering Son, but also for us who still labour under the yoke of sin and struggle with the difficulties of life.  As we reflect on that we see what a beautiful commemoration this is and how necessary it is for us in these times, particularly when so many have suffered, even at the hands of representatives of the Church.  Surely the Holy Mother of God holds in her heart all those innocents who, like her Son, have been abused by others.  I hope many priests will use the optional collect and preach on the Compassionate Heart of Mary, the Lady of Sorrows.  Personally I would have like to see a restoration of the full Mass of the commemoration, rather than just an optional collect, a restoration which would also include the Stabat Mater.

Blessed John Paul restored a number of Masses from the Tridentine liturgy.  The Mass of Tears is one (cf Roman Missal, Masses for Various Intentions, 38 B), and the Mass for Chastity is another (cf Roman Missal, Masses for Various Intentions, 39).  Strangely, in a time when purity and chastity were under attack - the 1960's, those reforming the liturgy felt the need to remove a Mass which was badly needed.  Crazy. 

Collect

O God, who in this season

give your Church the grace

to imitate devoutly the Blessed Virgin Mary

in contemplating the Passion of Christ,

grant, we pray, through her intercession,

that we may cling more firmly each day

to your Only Begotten Son

and come at last to the fullness of grace.

Who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit,

one God, for ever and ever.

Amen.

New Stocking Rubrics!

With Holy Week coming, it is time for priests to refresh their memories and look again at the various ceremonies and their rubrics.  Given that we will be using the new translation for the first time, it is advisable for all priests to read through the texts and rubrics very carefully because there are changes.

The most obvious concerns Good Friday and the adoration of the Cross (note adoration not veneration).  According to the first form, the cross draped in purple, is processed in silence to the sanctuary, and there unveiled with the threefold "Ecce lignum Crucis".  The second form consists in processing with the already unveiled cross and stopping for the threefold chant.  The cross is not to be unveiled in procession. 

Another change which must be noted: the priest, before he adores the cross, must remove his chasuble and shoes - he approaches the cross in his bare/stocking feet: an act of humility.  That can only be good. 

So, brothers, make sure you don't wear those colourful socks on Good Friday - I would suggest plain, black socks, and make sure there are no holes - nothing worse than a big, ugly toe sticking out for all the parish to see.  I think it goes without saying that fresh, clean socks are a must.  I would also suggest slip-on shoes, you can be sure that laces will become a problem when under pressure.

That said, I wonder how many of my brothers will follow this rubric, or indeed, how many of them will even know about it? And, in protest, will members of the ACP arrive with doc martens laced up to their armpits?

Dishing It Out

Fr John conducts his first (and only) General Absolution service

My attention was drawn,  a couple of days ago, to a post on Fr Z's blog - from an Irish person who was enduring the disobedience of their parish priest.  Here's the piece, but in summary, their parish priest is refusing to implement the new translation of the Missal and is now using what is an abrogated text.  This PP is also revving up to impart General Absolution on all and sundry in preparation for Christmas.

As always, Fr Z gives good advice, I would also like to direct you to FrB's blog for another good response. 

I was talking about the situation with a priest friend of mine and we both agreed that such actions on the part of a priest are utterly selfish and disrespectful towards their parishioners.  As members of the Universal Church, of the Body of Christ, these parishioners have the right to participate in the full life of the Church, and that includes the full liturgical life of the Church.  Their pastors have no right to break the Communion which exists, and in refusing to use the official liturgical texts of the Universal Church, these priests are undermining that Communion. 

The fact that some parishioners may be as rebellious and disobedient as their pastors is no excuse: pastors must seek to deepen Communion, not encourage a breach.  In reality these priests are engaged in something more serious than refusing to acknowledge a new translation of the liturgy, they are breaking the solemn oaths of their ordination and leading people into schism. Is that too harsh?  Well, if you see the fruits of the actions of these disobedient priests, the ghettos of rebellion and anger their parishes have become, we see how serious such situations can become.

My priest friend was wondering what these priests are now engaged in?  Given that they refuse to use the now official English language texts of the Mass, but use an abrogated translation, is it the case that their Masses are now valid but illicit?

As for the General Absolution: FrB has very good points to make, but one in particular stands out: regular General Absolution is invalid. And of course people go home, never to darken the doors of a confessional again, genuinely believing that the General Absolution Father dished out was valid, that their sins are forgiven, and they didn't even have to think of what their sins were.   But General Absolution is being given in Ireland, particular in quasi-penitenial services.  It seems this is an issue the new Nuncio will have to deal with, and perhaps a senior cleric may need to be called to Rome again to be reminded again that the problem must be dealt with.

I remember I was asked a few months ago if I would give General Absolution.  I was encouraging my parishioners to go to confession regularly, and someone said to me that it would better that I gave General Absolution because people do not like individual confession anymore - they don't like revealing such intimate details about their lives.   At least if I gave General Absolution then people's sins would be forgiven and, after all, isn't that the most important thing? 

I explained that the forgiveness of sins, and all the sacraments, were not magic; that the actual confession of their sins was important. I then told the person that if they wanted me to give them General Absolution, I would have to lock them all in the Church and set it alight so, in danger of being burned to death, the General Absolution would then be valid. However, I said, if anyone happened to survive, they would still be obliged to confess their mortal sins as soon as possible.  I do not think I will be asked for General Absolution again!

Interestingly, today in the Diocese of Meath we celebrate the feast of our Patron Saint, St Finnian of Clonard.  Known as the "Tutor of the Saints of Ireland", he founded the monastery and school city of Clonard, famous throughout Ireland and Europe as a place of learning and holiness.  Many Irish Saints studied at Clonard and were formed in holiness by St Finnian, among then St Colmcille (Columba), patron of Ireland, and St Brendan.   According to tradition he was ordained Bishop of Clonard, one of the ancient dioceses which now form the present Diocese of Meath.

Finnian was a faithful Irish priest, not content with getting by, or doing the minimum, but seeking to live as virtuous a life as possible, and to teach others to do the same.  In being called the "Tutor of the Saints of Ireland", it was not a honour to praise his academic skills, but more radically, his holiness which was pedalogical and evangelical in nature.  In this, Finnian is a potent example of all priests; that we must be teachers in holiness, not merely in words, but first of all by example.  We must also be faithful to Mother Church, as was Finnian.  I think St Finnian would be a good patron of the reform the Church in Ireland now needs: after all, the best reformers are teachers in holiness.

Catching Up

Back to the Hedge School: the future of Catholic schools in Ireland?

Getting time to blog has been difficult in the last week - various pastoral duties; yesterday was pretty busy.  So time, I think, for a little news round up so Father Director can get on his pony and rant for a bit - we all need a bit of a rant every now and again.  Famous last words which will be regretted, no doubt, as I sit in the rogue's gallery waiting for my turn in confession.   So "Charitas" as St Francis de Paolo would say.

My colleague over at the St Genesius blog has an interesting post on the ongoing discussions over the future of Catholic education in Ireland.  Our American and British readers will know all about this since they have been dealing with the assault on Catholic education for decades.  It seems that the draft proposals for Catholic schools (ie those the government decides to leave with us) are suggesting that religious education, and indeed ethos, be strictly kept to certain times and not permitted to "infiltrate" (my word) the rest of the curriculum.

Well, the Catholic Church's response to this should be brief and unambiguous: "Not on your Nellie!"  Here's where the new appointments to Irish Sees becomes important.  The new Irish bishops will need to be strong and indeed defiant in the face of such suggestions.  If these proposals are to implemented by the government, then the Church should refuse to accept them and refuse to implement them in our schools. 

Lest the fearful among us object - the Constitution of this country is on our side on this one, and we should use it.  I often ask myself, why is the Church in Ireland terrified to use the Constitutional protections we have and actually feel the need to negotiate a compromise when there is no need to do so?  There seems to be a fear of standing up to the government. 

We do not have to hand over schools.  Regardless of what Irish ecclesiastical figure says we should, there is no onus on us at all.  It is up to parents to decide if they want a Catholic education for their children.  If the majority do, then there is a need for lots of Catholic schools.  If secularists want non-denominational schools, they are entitled to them under the Constitution - so they go and set them up and the government must support them.  But why are they whining on about Catholic schools?  Is it the case that they do not want to go to the bother of setting up their own, they want to take the easy way out and take over ours?  Or is it a case they want to get rid of Catholic education altogether? 

Ironically, as has happened in other countries, when all this has been settled, and there are secular schools galore, there will be a clamour to get children into the remaining Catholic schools, and no doubt you'll find plenty of secularists among them. 

As for the suggestion that the display of religious artifacts "be inclusive of all belief systems".  With all due respect, if you pop into a Jewish or Muslim school you will not find a crucifix (which is offensive to Muslims by the way - they do not believe Jesus was crucified), nor a statue of Our Lady of Lourdes.  Nor, in a Catholic school, should we find statues of Hindu gods, Buddha or a mihrab. Nor should we celebrate the festivals of other faiths since many of these are offensive to our Christian faith.  How can we, as followers of Christ and as monotheists have our children, whom we are trying to catechize, celebrate Rama Navami, the feast of the birth of the god Rama?  Yes, we must teach our children respect for other religions, and something about them, but as for putting them on the same level as Christianity by celebrating the feasts and erecting shrines to other gods, that's not on.  Again, the response to this must also be decisive "No".

In other news, RTE is reeling (no pun intended) from the government's decision to hold an enquiry into the defamation of Fr Kevin Reynolds.  As we all know this case was horrific, and to be honest I am delighted things have turned out as they have: we need to expose the shoddy journalism which has become commonplace in a number of media organisations.  Here is one priest who did not sit down and take the accusations, and while I have little time for the ACP's ideological agenda, I think they have done the Church in Ireland a service by pushing Fr Reynold's case.  I know of too many cases where innocent priests and religious were not permitted to challenge accusations.  It was easier to pay the compensation and apologise, and so some superiors took that road rather than risk offending people in the current climate.   

The question is: how will this inquiry turn out?  Will RTE learn?  And will other stories which were not entirely true be investigated also?  Is this a single enquiry into one case, or will the government bite the bullet and conduct a thorough investigation?

The full implementation of the corrected translation of the Missal is upon us. On Saturday evening, with the Vigil Masses, all texts for the Mass must come from the new Missal - the old Missals are no longer to be used.  As you trot across the net you'll find many articles and blog posts on this, and many are not happy. One writer says the implementation of the new Missal is an act of Vatican Vandalism (some say the implementation of the vernacular Missal was another such act - I shall not comment).  What I find most amusing, is that the liberals who are protesting are in the same position as the traditionalists back in the Seventies - they do not want the change, they will resist it; they will cling to the old Missal for dear life.  I wonder if that irony has dawned on them.

My own experience has been positive.  In my parish my people have responded most generously to the new translation.  My daily Mass goers have the new responses off by heart.  Some have wondered why the change, and they have listened to the explanations.  For a number of weeks I devoted the Sunday homilies to the new translation and to a catechesis on the Mass in general and it was well received.  I think when people are introduced to the new translation with openness and enthusiasm, they respond.  A friend of mine, a layman, said that in parishes where the priests are positive and explain the changes and reasons for them, the people will be positive and welcome the translation; in parishes where priests are negative and rebellious, the people will be negative.  There is some truth in that. In the meantime I must pop out to the cemetery and find a nice spot to bury the old Missals - I don't like the idea of burning them.

And to end, today is the feast of the Martyrs of Vietnam: to all our brothers and sisters in that country, we wish you a happy feast day.  May the example of your holy martyrs, who offer the whole Church an outstanding witness to the Catholic faith, sustain you and all of us as we seek to live the Gospel with greater fidelity.

Among these martyrs is St Theophane Venard, a young French priest beheaded in Tomkin in 1861.  St Therese of the Child Jesus was a devotee of his: she had his photograph pinned to the curtain hanging over her bed as she was preparing for death.  She prayed to him often and sought his help in her suffering: I believe he obtained many graces for her.  There is something about Theophane which is very Theresian - a practitioner of the Little Way, I think.  May he watch over all of us in these times.  And to end, a photograph of Theophane, to print out and pin up over your bed just in case the angel of death decides to pop in for a chat.

St Theophane Venard, priest and martyr

(1829-1861)

All Going Well

With the last few days being busy I have had little time to post.  Some good news though: the new translation of the Missal - the corrected translation, is going down very well in Rathkenny.  The daily Mass goers know the new responses off by heart - they are correcting me when I slip.  The Sunday Mass goers used the responses for the first time last Sunday and I must say I am impressed - they prayed them with gusto!  No complaints there at all.  After the Saturday Vigil one parishioner said: "Father, isn't the new translation beautiful?"  Overwhelmingly positive.  The Congregational Cards are disappearing - I had to put out a new batch this morning - people are taking them home to read and learn. 

So things are going well here in Rathkenny.  Contrary to the expectations of the critics in the ACP, there is no revolt, just people who are interested in the change, understand why it was necessary and they are just getting on with it.  Perhaps it is a case that I am just blessed with great parishioners (and that's true) but I think my experience is being reflected elsewhere.  Indeed a brother-priest in a nearby parish has been using bits of the translation for a while and his parishioners love it. 

Missals Recalled

I got a letter from Veritas yesterday, it seems my Missals, and many others, are being recalled for "quality control issues".   I was hoping to have the blessing of the new Missals later this week, but that will have to be put on hold.  They say that the printer hs accepted full responsibility.

The letter says that a representative will be in touch with me "over the next number of weeks" to have my copies collected and replaced.  That means I will be using my Magnificat for a while yet.  CTS produced an interim Missal - I hear from priests in England that it is awkward, but at least they have something.  Apart from the little booklets CTS and Veritas have produced, there is nothing but the cards.  I notice, as have others, when you go into Veritas the cheaper CTS new Mass booklets are hidden away behind the more expensive Veritas ones: please make note of this if you are popping in to buy one.

There are indeed quality control issues.  I was with a priest friend of mine last evening and we were talking about this.  He has gone through his new Missal with a forensic eye and has noted many, many mistakes.  The one that really drove him nuts was that a number of the musical settings of prefaces for feasts/memorias, are spread over two pages in such a way that one has to turn the page mid note, mid word.  He was demonstrating how awkward this was and actually he was right.  Things like this can be dealt with with a little planning.  Perhaps this is one problem Veritas wants to correct.  I hope so.

On the subject of the Missal, William Oddie has a lovely article in the Catholic Herald Online.  I have to share his joy.  I was visiting some sisters on Monday evening and we were discussing the new Missal, we were all enamoured with the restoration of so many quotations and references to Sacred Scripture.  How could the translators back in the 70's have left out these references?  Were these not the people who were telling Catholics at the time to read more Scripture? 

Anyway, the long track continues.  I hear priests  in the Archdiocese of Armagh have been told by the Cardinal they are only allowed to use the people's parts of the new Missal: that which is on the congregation cards.  The rest: Prefaces, Eucharistic Prayers and Proper are not allowed until the First Sunday of Advent.  That's different from the rest of the English-speaking world.  In our diocese we can go ahead and use them with the exception of the Propers, as is the case in the UK.  Ah yes, there is still a long way to go......

UPDATE:   It seems a flurry of letters have been flying out from Veritas.  After inquiries I hear numerous priests have had their Missals recalled.  Brother priests who read my blog, have you had your Missals recalled?  Also, brothers in other English speaking countries - what are your new Missals like?

New Arrival

"Speak of the devil and he will appear" - perhaps not the most appropriate expression, but it fits: having posted on the arrival of the new Missal down with Fr Burke in Cloyne, it has also made its appearance in Rathkenny. 

As I was having breakfast after Mass the doorbell rings and a young courier is standing smiling at the front door with three brown boxes: "I'm visitin' all the priests today," he says.  The Tertio Ed en Anglais has come.  

Structurally not as bad as I thought, functional though with a nod in the direction of beauty, but the four colour plates are not good.  At first glance CTS is still far superior.  I will get some time later for a better look.  But at least I am happy to finally have the new translation: it has been a difficult birth, and I fear the difficulties may not be over.  Come the 11th September Pere Hogan will be ready.

But....what to do with the old Missals??  Fr Z (peace be upon him), has a few ideas.  

Changes

Two interesting posts to which I would like to draw to your attention.  The first from Christopher McCamley on his Catholicus blog concerning possible changes to the structure of Irish dioceses.  He says he has heard that the aim will be to reorganise the Church in Ireland into two metropolitan provinces: Armagh and Dublin, and eleven dioceses - five in the province of Armagh, six in the province of Dublin.  I presume Armagh will remain the primatial See.  If this is true then that is good, I think this is the way to go.  I had thought of twelve dioceses in two provinces, but eleven is even slimmer. 

The second post is from Fr Gabriel Burke on the new Missal - his arrived yesterday.   I have to say my heart dropped when I read what he had to say and plummeted to the depths when I saw the pictures.  I feared that Veritas would make a dog's dinner of the Missal and I think my fears may have become a reality.  Those pictures look ghastly - the quality deplorable.  A real 60's-70's production Fr Gabriel says: why should I be surprised!   I saw the CTS Missal when over in London and it is a beautiful volume - beautiful art, good quality - a book designed with great care for a sacred purpose.  

I am a good customer of Veritas; over the years I have, perhaps, spent too much of my money on books - I am addicted to books.  I know some of the staff there and a finer group of people you will not meet.  But the quality of Veritas publications is very poor.  They seem to be stuck in a cheap 60's/70's mode and cannot get out of it.  I'm sure it can't be that they can't afford better quality books - they publish the national catechetical programme (the dismal Alive-O), so they are making lots of dosh on that.  I don't know....

I have ordered three Missals for the parish - we have three churches, but I think I will buy a CTS version (chapel edition) for my own personal use.  I know some have waited to see the quality of the Irish version, I think they are going to opt for the CTS and hold on to their green A4 paperback supplement to cover the Proper of Irish Saints.  That said I find myself asking the question once again: when will we ever get to grips with beauty in the Church in Ireland?  Must we forever labour under the ugly and purely functional? 

Art from the Irish Missal: the Resurrection???

Art from the Irish Missal: the Crucifixion

Art from the CTS Missal: The Crucifxion

Art from the CTS Missal: the Annunication

Aghast!

To quote a classmate of mine whenever he was shocked at something: "I'm staggered, I'm speechless, staggered, aghast, ooh Lord, staggered".  I am gradually catching up on my internet reading - these last few days have been very busy between parish work, Fraternity work and dialoguing with printers.   I was reading Fr Z (peace be upon him) and discovered the Pastoral Letter of Archbishop Sheehan of Santa Fe, dealing with the problem of cohabitation among Catholics.   The reason I react is because I cannot believe a bishop could respond today in the way that he has to one of the foremost moral problems in the contemporary Church. 

In his Letter the Archbishop has confounded the "compassion/let's not offend brigade" by pointing out the moral and spiritual consequences of irregular unions in a straightforward way while being compassionate.  I am surprised at the confident way in which he deals with the subject: no cringing, endless apologies; no fearful ambiguity, just the truth, take it or leave it, but if you leave it there are consequences, but God still loves you, and the Church loves you and asks you to come to your senses (cf. the Prodigal Son).

This is refreshing, but of course not without response - the usual suspects have wheeled out the rusty objections citing lack of compassion etc etc.   Fr Z (peace be upon him) has one example of such an attack on his blog.   There is one thing those who object to this teaching do not get, and will probably never get because they have compromised truth with opinion and emotion: the Church and her ministers can still love and reach out to those who are living immoral lives without having to compromise or cover over the truth. 

Every single one of us today know people in these situations, and most of us have members of our families in these irregular unions.  Our response: keep the door open, love them, do not shun them, but do tell them and remind them that their way of life is wrong and try to bring them to regularise their situation.  That is what I try to do with members of my own family in that situation.  They know where I stand and some of them try to avoid you at times because you prick their conscience and make them feel uncomfortable - and that is actually good because that means the gravity of situation is apparent to them and while they try to ignore it or dismiss you, they can't do it forever, eventually (we hope) it will get too much for them and they will seek to calm their conscience and do the right thing.  And the priest should be there to help them. 

Compassion and truth, as all of us know, are not mutually exclusive, they each come into their own when they are in harmony with each other.

On another topic (staggered, aghast etc) I see the ACP are still trying to create a rebellion against the corrected translation of the Missal.  My word they are persistent!  I think they are so because they know the game is up: the Church is reforming in the Catholic tradition rather than the protestant/liberal/realitivistic tradition and the new translation is the symbol of that.  They have wheeled out Angela Hanley to do the necessary and she is using the language of abuse (I wonder what she could be alluding to there).  Reading her article it appears to me that she is trying to bully the bishops by equating the promulgation of the new Missal with their failure to protect children in the past.  It seems to me she might be saying that in both situations they are abusing their power and allowing the abuse of the innocent.  I suppose we had to expect that approach to raise its ugly head at some stage.

CTS Missal Gorgeous

Fr Finigan has provided us with a link to a sample page from CTS's version of the corrected translation of the Missal - I have to admit I was salivating - it looks absolutely gorgeous.  Just last week I put our parish order into Veritas for three copies for the three churches in the parish - there is a special discount price if ordered before June.  I hope the Veritas edition will be just as nice otherwise I will regret submitting the order.  From experience Veritas tends not to do great publications, but I hope they rise to the occasion and in the spirit of the new translation, present us with a masterpiece. 

One commenter on the site shares my apprehension, but consoles himself by intimating he will buy the CTS version - I will probably do that myself for my own Missal, but I think our official Missals in diocesan churches will probably have to be the Veritas edition.  I also wonder if the Veritas edition will include the Latin Mass in the back as does the current translation - always good to have the basic Mass texts in the same volume.

A Missal should be a work of art, a book worthy of the Holy Mysteries for which it is used.   Our functional approach to the liturgy has meant we tend to be functional and boring in our liturgical books and use art more inclined to conceptualism than sacred realism.  Given the darkness of the times, the empty place art has deviated to and the rich tradition of faith and culture Pope Benedict has been at pains to revive in the Church, I hope beauty will be restored to our books. 

I know some liturgist somewhere will remind me of the "noble simplicity" of the Roman Rite, but I do not think Bauhaus modernism was what was meant by the ancients when they used this phrase.   As far I am concerned the above illustration is a perfect example of noble simplicity which is supposed to leave room for true beauty rather than cloak religious art and liturgy in gray and uniform ugliness.


UPDATE:  I see the self-styled Association of Catholic Priests has issued a statement following their meeting with the bishops in which they voiced their opposition to the corrected translation.  See Fr Z's (peace be upon him!) commentary on the statement - always very enlightening.  It seems all did not go well at the meeting - perhaps for the first time in their career as clerics they found they could not bully the bishops or frighten them into giving into their demands.  Congratulations to our bishops, when it comes to the implemetation of the corrected translation they have the full support of the orthodox priests of Ireland, and the young priests in particular: we are right behind you, fathers in God! 

The Association's intention to meet in Portlaoise to discuss their response sound ominious, I hope for the sake of unity they will not ferment any more dissent on this issue, we in Ireland have had enough! 

Related to this I hear Bishop John McAreavey of Dromore, who was involved in the translation process, has been giving some excellent workshops on the new Missal, and some of the accompanying explanatory books are quite good, so congratulations to the Bishop and all involved.

The Last Sting?

You know, the Irish Times really can be a bad egg in Ireland at times.  It is constantly stirring things up when it comes to the Church.   It is Ireland's paper of record, and yet when you look behind some of their stories, you tend to find things are a little bit different than they reported.  One example is personal to me.  When I preached on the Civil Partnership Bill about a year ago, the Irish Times mentioned me in an article giving the impression that they had spoken to me: they hadn't.  The journalist never spoke with me - made no contact. Not only had they the incident backwards, they never bothered to check their facts and if they had they would had a very different, and indeed less sensationalist, article. 

Well, they are off again stirring things up with regard to the new translation of the Missal - again (more appropriately, as one commenter in the combox said, the "corrected translation").   As expected, with the Missal on course for Advent, the old guard is still furiously dribbling over their complan and the Irish Times are spoonfeeding them to keep bashing the Church. 

It seems our bishops have met them and the priests have expressed their concerns, or if the Times' tone is anything to go on, they ranted and raved at their Lordships.   In respose the bishops are due to come out with a statement.   For one thing these priests are members of the dissident Association of Catholic Priests (sic), a minority group of aging liberals that does not represent the majority of priests in the country, so the bishops need to bear that in mind.   This issue may be the last sting of dying wasp for the ACP generation, but we have to bear in mind that that sting can be dangerous and highly toxic.

In discussion with brother priests, I think many, if not most, are willing to accept the corrected translation, their main concern being how to help the laity adjust.  Having spoken with many members of the laity (many of whom are women), they have no problem.  As some women (please note ACP) have indicated to me, they have no issue at all, some have said: "It'll be easier than the change from the Latin".  The corrected translation is going down very well with younger priests and the seminarians - in fact they are waiting with baited breaths to get into it - there is excitement among many of them.  Our seminarians are the future priests of the Church, the ones who will be ministering when all the members of the ACP are gone - we should be listening to them. 

Ironically, in their rejection of the Church's new official translation, one of ACP's number, Fr Sean McDonagh, an ecologist, said:

'the excuse for using sexist language in the new translation smacked of Humpty Dumpty in Alice through the Looking Glass, where he said “when I use a word . . . it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.”'

Isn't that what these priests have been doing to Church teaching for decades - reinventing it, distorting it and manipulating it according to their own opinion so they can choose what it means, more or less? 

Interestingly, related to this, the dissidents in the US have given up the ghost, and have assented to the corrected translation.

New Translation of Missal: Online

A quick post.  A friend of mine alerted me - the text of the new translation of the Missal has come online.  WikiSpooks has the entire text. 

Teddy Bear Jesus

William Barclay the renowned Scripture scholar once wrote that Jesus was not a "nice" man - he was more complex than that.  Barclay, who was a Scottish Presbyterian, was a fine commentator on Scripture with a gift for explaining what the text means with lively examples.  He was praised by many, including the Servant of God Archbishop Fulton Sheen.  He is correct when he asserts that Jesus cannot be reduced to being a nice man, yet for many Christians today that is the image they have of Jesus - nice, gentle, kind, loving, peaceful, tolerant, compassionate etc etc.  Yes, he was all these things, but much more.  And contrary to the prevailing wisdom he could also lose the cool and he taught hard lessons which certainly grates with the "Jesus the nice man" image.  

Fr Longenecker has an interesting post on his blog reflecting on such matters, I thought it would be good reading.  One of the problems we have in the Church today is the prevalence of this nice Jesus, or what some call the Teddy Bear Jesus.  As Pope John Paul II taught, Jesus is challenging, and this is part of the Gospel which we must preach to the men and women of today: you see, we are dealing with reality not a comfortable mythology.

Following up on our discussion on the new translation of the Missal, William Oddie over at the Catholic Herald Online (perhaps the best Catholic newspaper in Britain and Ireland) has a very good article on the whole issue.  He believes the new translation will help renew reverence for the Mass, I think he may be right, though if priests are determined to turn the laity against it for ideological reasons, then there will be problems.  If we approach it with open minds and tolerance (Aha!), we may indeed see that our liturgy is enhanced.

Just a few nights ago a priest friend and I were talking on the phone about the new translation, he began to read the First Eucharistic Prayer - wow, it was a moment of sheer beauty - the language is so rich, the references clear, it calmed the soul through its poetry.   The translation is not perfect, but it is beautiful, yes awkward in places, but yet it stands out.  This new translation is a movement in the right direction: from the banal to the beautiful, to what the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council originally intended.

Old Priests Reject New Translation

As expected the self-styled the Association of Catholic Priests of Ireland (ACP) have launched their call to the bishops to "postpone" the introduction of the new translation of the Missal - they want it "postponed" for five years.  Now you might wonder why I have put postponed in inverted commas, well if you read their statement you'll see why: in reality they do not want it postponed but discarded altogether so, after consultation with the people (ie them, I presume), a new more vibrant, dare we say "relevant", Mass can be put in place. 

See their views here.   Sarah McDonald of the Catholic News Service has an interesting article on it.  I also got to hear part of an interview on Newstalk with Fr Padraig McCarthy from the group who was talking about the number of words in a sentence in the new translation.  His objections were pretty poor. Fr Vincent Twomey had been on earlier defending the translation pointing out the overall positive aspects. 

The new association's objections were anticipated since the rejection of the new translation now falls in the overall agenda of those who dissent from orthodox Christian teaching and Catholic teachings in particular.  But there is also another reason they reject it: their understanding of the liturgy is different from the Catholic understanding.  Influenced by the secular thought of the sixties and seventies (they are all of that generation), liturgy is mostly a human centred, human focused activity: it is all about the gathered community gathering together to celebrate this gathering.  A ritualistic order of service does not fit into this view of liturgy.  The theology of the meal, which is part of the Church's theology of the Eucharist, overshadows the sacrificial element which is downplayed and even rejected, and so a new translation which heightens our focus on the ritual of the sacrifice is unacceptable.

They seem to be particularly stung by Rome's rejection of the 1998 translation and that the expertise of those experts who produced it was "spurned" - seems to be the usual argument liberals use to keep their agenda in place: reject it and you hurt good people who have worked so hard - I've heard that excuse recently. 

I remember seeing the 1998 translation before it went to Rome - a liturgy professor displayed it proudly for us when in seminary.  Looking at it I knew Rome was going to have a fit and it would be rejected.  They had rewritten the Missal according to their own taste - adding their own prayers: it was not a proper translation at all - but a new Missal.  It was also a massive tome - it seems when they got down to writing their own prayers for the Mass they forgot to stop.  I remember the state the professor was in when news came through Rome had rejected it - he nearly had a heart attack with fury, complaining about those who had no idea about the people in the Church today and no sense of what real liturgy was, and the "good people who worked so hard on it now being hurt and rejected".   Thank God Vox Clara came along and got things back on track.

The new translation is not perfect, but it is a vast improvement on the present one which is inaccurate, banal and even dodgy in places.  The new is more archaic, but that is a positive - trendy translations age very quickly - imagine a Mass written in sixties language:   "Hey dude God, slap me a five" just doesn't do it;  no, "Lord God, grant us your grace" sounds better.  A trendy translation which the ACP wants will quickly become irrelevant, a classical translation, while not this year's slang, will not date.  All the religious traditions recognise this - they conduct their liturgies and worship with a poetic and symbolic language, many of them with a language which is no longer spoken by the masses, because they recognise that while worship is part of every day life it also looks beyond this life, to God and this means ritual action, formal prayer and beauty are essential.  

Another positive about the new translation: it will slow priests down saying Mass.  It might curb the Sprint Mass and reintroduce a little more decorum into prayer.  That can only be a positive.