A liberal magazine has published an article which calls for disobedience with regard to the proposed new (Novus Ordo) Mass translation. The new translation - which is said to be more faithful to the authoritative Latin text - finally clears up some decades-old translation errors. Liberals hoped protests from a certain bishop (who "tried mightily to stop the new translation train") might convince the bishops to reject the more accurate translation, but their hopes were shattered when the bishops approved the proposed new translation at their meeting in November.
Now, faced with the prospect of a new, more accurate Mass text, certain liberal minded persons are considering what "strategies" might save them from (God forbid!) having to use the more accurate translation. One liberal writer has publicly issued a call to disobedience stating that...
"This leads me to pose a question to my brother priests: What if we were to awaken to the fact that these texts are neither pastoral nor ready for our parishes? What if we just said, 'Wait'?"
He admits that this might "smack of insubordination to talk this way" but says "it could also be a show of loyalty and plain good sense - loyalty not to any ideological agenda but to our people, whose prayer the new translations purport to improve, and good sense to anyone who stops to think about what is at stake here."
Yea, right, he has no "ideological agenda" whatsoever. He just wants to "save" the people from a more accurate Mass translation. Oh, what a hero he is! Saving Catholics everywhere from accuracy! What a lofty goal that is, eh?
But wait, there's more. Just after the above, he references the "Jesuit Refugee Service [which] affirms to accompany, serve and defend the rights of vulnerable and often forgotten people." As if saving Catholics from what he complains are "clumsy" translations (read: more accurate translations) is akin to "defend[ing] the rights of vulnerable and often forgotten people." And, the cherry on the cake: He claims that what is at stake "is nothing less than the Church’s credibility." Oh please!
In his article, the writer also writes (whines) about...
* "the systematic dismantling of the great vision of the council’s decree [on the liturgy]" (So a more accurate translation of the Mass from the original Latin "dismantles" the Council's decree? How exactly does that happen?)
* "recent instructions from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments that have raised rubricism to an art" (You wouldn't want to have to follow any rules, now would you?)
* "the endorsement, even encouragement, of the so-called Tridentine Mass" (Oh no, anything but that!)
* "the liturgy, the prayer of the people, is being used as a tool - some would even say as a weapon - to advance specific agendas" (But your using the liturgy as a weapon/tool to advance a liberal agenda for the last 40 years was to be praised, right? And, how exactly does making a translation more accurate make the liturgy a "tool" to advance an agenda?)
He also says...
* "Before long the priests of this country will be told to take the new translations to their people by means of a carefully orchestrated education program that will attempt to put a good face on something that clearly does not deserve it" (Hmm... an accurate translation of the Novus Ordo doesn't deserve a "good face"? Now if a tradition-minded Catholic had said that very same thing, wouldn't there be talk of schism?)
* "The veterans who enthusiastically devoted their best creative energies as young priests to selling the reforms of the council to parishioners back in the 1960s will be asked to do the same with regard to the new translations. Yet we will be hard put to do so." ("Selling" the reforms? I thought Catholics had embraced them with such joy)
* "We can see the present moment only as one more assault on the council and, sadly, one more blow to episcopal collegiality" (wah, wah, wah... we shouldn't have to make the Mass translation accurate... no, please not that! wah, wah, wah...)
* "Further, the council also wisely made provision for times of experimentation and evaluation ...something that has been noticeably missing in the present case" (Wisely? Polka masses, clown masses, Satan costumes... Oh PLEASE let this be "noticeably missing"!)
* a supposed need exists to "defend our people from this ill-conceived disruption of their prayer life" (If only you had felt this need 40 years ago!)
He tries to make his point against the new translation by referencing a recent dinner conversation with his friends, some of which were "quite angrily" aware of the "impending changes." He says the ones who were not aware of the changes reacted "somewhere between disbelief and indignation" upon learning of them. [Gee, what a surprise that your (presumably) like-minded friends would agree with you. Alert the press.]
He also claims some newly translated words made a group of Catholics laugh, which he said "should make us all tremble." So he thinks laughter by some people to the phrase "Joseph, spouse of the same virgin" (wow, that's funny) is a matter for trembling, while (presumably) applauding the experimental polka / clown / etc. Masses which have occurred over the last 4 decades. Hmm... interesting. Does he really think that these people in a conference room who supposedly "laughed" at these few words would actually laugh during Mass? Um...nevermind, it's not uncommon for liberals to actually encourage laughter at Mass (gulp!)
He also tries to find support for his position by claiming that some persons in the diocese of South Africa gave the new translation "a chilling reception", and that it "met almost uniformly with opposition bordering on outrage." Doesn't he see a bigger problem here if the - oh so humble - Catholics of that area were truly "outraged" by a more accurate Mass translation?
And, irony of ironies, he appeals for disobedience - the same stick the liberals used against tradition-minded Catholics is now apparently something to be praised if it means sparing Catholics from something that (he thinks) "in the end, [will] actually bring discredit to the Church and further disillusionment to the people." Irony of ironies, is it not? The main difference is, however, that many (but not all) tradition-minded Catholics never were disobedient to begin with. They were just accused of being disobedient.
But, the ironies don’t end there. He has made some "proposals" that he almost certainly would have rejected 4 decades ago if tradition-minded Catholics of that time would have suggested them (e.g. consulting with the people, "market testing"). He knows perfectly well that if these steps had been taken 40 years ago there would have been little chance of the Novus Ordo Mass ever taking hold of mainstream Catholicism. But now, liberals will willingly suggest such measures since things aren't going their way. They will try any desperate attempt possible to save their "sinking ship". In fact, an entire website has been set up so that fellow liberals, "empowered Catholics", and an assortment of misguided Catholics can "have their voice heard", with the hopes that poor Catholics can be spared the horrible disaster of a more accurate Mass translation.
The best irony of all would be if the site was inundated with millions comments such as the following: "I wholeheartedly agree with you - please stop the new Mass translations. Just bring back the traditional Mass."
But that would probably kill the liberals. Literally.
[12/4]
Posts
