Dissident Irish priests try to create discord and resentment against the new translation

I direct your attention to the Holy Father’s Letter to Catholics in Ireland.  Last year Pope Benedict suggested to the Irish people that they give special attention to traditional forms of piety, prayer and penance.

Now we read that a group of Irish priests have issued a sustained whine about the new, corrected English translation of the Roman Missal.

From the Catholic Herald comes this.

Irish priests claim new Mass translation is ‘elitist and sexist’

By Sarah MacDonald

A group representing more than 400 of Ireland’s 4,500 priests has made an urgent plea to the country’s bishops to postpone the introduction of the new English translation of the Missal for at least another five years.

The call from the Association of Catholic Priests came as the National Centre for Liturgy in Maynooth launched a new publication aimed at explaining and preparing priests and lay people for the changes in the Missal. The new texts will be introduced on November 27, the first Sunday of Advent and the start of the liturgical year.

At a news conference in Dublin, representatives from the priests’ group said the proposed literal translations from Latin had produced texts that were “archaic, elitist and obscure and not in keeping with the natural rhythm, cadence and syntax of the English language”.

The association also criticised the new translation for “exclusivist, sexist language”. [Hmmm.   I they actually used those words, then it is fairly safe to conclude that they are of a certain age and are not inclined to favor anything Pope Benedict proposes.  Break out the tambourines and big-hair perms.]

Fr Dermot Lane, president of Mater Dei Institute of Education in Dublin, said the priests were making an 11th hour appeal to the Irish Catholic Bishops’ Conference and urged the bishops to begin consulting with priests, liturgical committees and lay people to develop new texts that would inspire and encourage the faithful.

“We are passionately concerned about the quality of our liturgical celebration and about the quality of the language that will be used in the way we worship Sunday after Sunday,” he said. “If this goes ahead, instead of drawing people into the liturgy, it will in fact draw people out from the liturgy.” [Rubbish.  No one knows that.  It will be the attitude of the priests as they implement this new translation that will make the difference.  If these priests have problems with their flocks “because of the new translation”, it will because that is they they wanted it to turn out.]

The association said that it was “gravely concerned” that the “word-for-word translation from Latin into a vernacular language … demonstrates a lack of awareness of the insights gained from linguistics and anthropology during the past 100 years”.  [It isn’t a “word for word” translation for one thing.  I would like to quiz the priests who put their names to this thing and find out how many of them actually looked at prayers in the new translation.  Any prayers.  I am not even talking about comparing them side by side with the Latin.  How many actually read the texts?  I’ll wager very few.  They are parroting the dissent of their pack-leaders.]

[…]

[Get this…] The priests’ association suggested that the Irish bishops follow the example of the German bishops and assert the right to make their own decisions regarding the celebration of the liturgy in Ireland. [There it is.]

Fr Gerard Alwill, pastor of a rural parish in the Diocese of Kilmore, said during the news conference: “We are saying very clearly that this new translation of the Missal is not acceptable… We are deeply concerned that if these new texts are imposed, they could create chaos in our church. [Sorry, but… who is creating the chaos?] Our Church doesn’t need chaos at this time. [I suggest to Fr. Alwill that his time would be better spent in reflection on the Holy Father’s Letter to Catholics in Ireland.]

“How can we, the priests, be asked to introduce this with any conviction when we ourselves haven’t had any input into it and when we have such serious doubts and reservations about it?” he added. [Interesting attitude: If I didn’t get to make it, I don’t want it.  Ordained in the, say, 70’s?]

Fr Alwill called upon priests, parish pastoral councils, religious men and women and lay people to read the texts [there’s a start] and to raise any concerns they may have with their local bishop. [To what end?  At this point all they are doing is fomenting discontent.  Cui bono?]

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Throwing a Nutty and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

84 Responses to Dissident Irish priests try to create discord and resentment against the new translation

  1. Andrew says:

    I am really tormented about something and it has to do not only with the above comments but also with the entire approach to the new translation of the Roman Missal. It is being presented as if something hitherto completely unheard of mysteries were about to be revealed: something that will require a lot of “study” and “expert” input. Even the USCCB webpage dedicated to the new translation exhibits this same mindset. Under “resources” there is lots of “expert” advice, but where is the normative Latin text? It’s not even included as far as I can see. Is that text of no value to all the “experts”? Is that some secret document comprehensible only to a few initiated unknown individuals? Please! The “editio typica” is the first things that should be mentioned, provided, and used both for reference and for actual liturgical celebrations. It should have been used and known and understood by all clergy for decades by now. Sheeesh! There is nothing new about to be revealed. It’s just an improved translation folks. Canon 249 anyone?

  2. Philangelus says:

    “How can we, the priests, be asked to introduce this with any conviction when we ourselves haven’t had any input into it

    Am I to understand, then, that these very priests were the ones who created the lame-duck ICEL translation? Because if not, then they had no input into the previous version either.

  3. Ed Mechmann says:

    When I was in Ireland last summer, I was deeply impressed by the piety of the ordinary people. I firmly believe that the great number of the Irish faithful will accept and love the new translation.

    As for the priests, I saw some wonderful pious priests celebrate Mass beautifully. However, I also saw the worst liturgical abuse of my life: a priest who skipped the entire second half of the Eucharistic Prayer, went straight from the Mystery of Faith to the Our Father, and skipped the Agnus Dei too. My wife and I were stunned, but nobody else seemed to bat an eye, which made me believe that this was typical in that parish. Talk about chaos in the Church!

    Please pray for the bishops and priests of Ireland.

  4. catholicmidwest says:

    Philangelus,
    No, most don’t know the Latin text, although I hope most priests know it exists. The priesthood, like any other vocation, is full of button-pushers and box-checkers. Call it the bell curve, if you want to. They’re just whining. It’ll pass. The real danger is that someone with some real authority will mistake it for something else and give in at some point. However, I think (hope) we’re too far down the road for that to happen in any big way.

  5. thereseb says:

    “Ordained in the, say, 70’s?”

    Indeed, Fr Z – your large intake of Mystic Monk coffee has made you mystic – nay psychic.

    Fr Alwill was ordained in 1977. Ex St Patrick’s college

    http://www.inishmagrath.com/

    More on the other named priests follows.

    [Yet another reason to order Mystic Monk Coffee! It gives you psychic powers!]

  6. catholicmidwest says:

    Looks like they’re getting the new translations the same day we are, November 27 this year. I know that’s not uniform in the English speaking group. Does the rest of the UK get them that day too? Canada? Australia/New Zealand?

  7. mitch_wa says:

    Funny thing about their complaint of it’s “exclusivist, sexist language” is that places where collects used to start “Father” now start “Oh God who…” the masculine language is removed. Our bishop has been holding little lecture/talk things on the new translation and he played it up as being an more inclusive translation. If there was a masculine and feminine “who” in English that wouldn’t be the case, but since it is a lot of prayers appear washed of their specific masculine language about God.

  8. Hieronymus says:

    Paint me far from shocked. This attitude is precisely the reason we have a Novus Ordo to translate in the first place. Why should it be surprising that they push back against any attempt to take their masterpiece away from them?

  9. catholicmidwest says:

    Oh before we’re done, the you-know-what will probably hit the fan here too. It’ll be interesting to say the least. If the Holy See backs down, the whole game is over. They will never be able to enforce anything again and all hell will break loose.

  10. Maltese says:

    “…they could create chaos in our church. [Sorry, but… who is creating the chaos?]”

    Lol; good one! Isn’t it ironic that so often in trying to be relevant and “cool” the Church often makes herself stale? In reinventing herself during the flower-child era–essentially taking a 2,000 year old formula, and adding bell-bottom pants to it, so to speak–the Church did a great disservise to herself. In the arena of the Liturgy, especially, the Church almost completely discarded a thing so venerable and beautiful, and put in its place something so trivial and banal in comparison. It boggles the mind!

  11. thereseb says:

    Fr/Monsignor Dermot Lane is an Irish Jesuit – and although I cannot find the precise date of his ordination – it is immaterial, as the Irish SJs inhabit a 70’s timewarp.

    I am very worried by the thought of the exclusivist and sexist language he refers to? Is it true that the switch from “For All” to “For many” means that culchies and judies are no longer included in God’s plan for salvation? I’m in double trouble then.

  12. Aaron B. says:

    They want a five-year delay just for a translation? I wonder if these same men (or their ideological predecessors, if they’re too young) delayed even five months when they changed the language, prayers, vestments, altars, music, and everything else they could think of when the Novus Ordo came to town.

  13. TNCath says:

    Fr. Z wrote: “It will be the attitude of the priests as they implement this new translation that will make the difference. ”

    Indeed! The success of the translation is dependent upon the willingness and ability of the priests as well. Unfortunately, I’m not so sure most of them have either the willingness or the ability. While Ireland is a very wonderful place in many ways, liturgical life in Ireland, especially in most of the small parishes in the heart of Ireland–the small towns and rural farming communities–is a terrible, terrible mess nearly everywhere you go. I fear that the priests in these parishes, most of whom go unsupervised for long periods of time because their bishops are just happy to have a warm body in their parishes, will simply do as they please in implementing the new translations just as they did back in the 1960’s when they were implementing the Novus Ordo. Omissions, additions, ad libs, ( in the words of Cardinal Arinze, “the do it yourself Mass”) will continue unless and until the bishops insist and actively supervise the implementation correctly. Otherwise, get ready for more of the same–and not just in Ireland.

  14. The Astronomer says:

    Fr. Dermot Lane’s attempts at fomenting disobedience are nothing new. Fr. Lane taught at the Catholic University Of America in the early 1980s, whereupon I had the distinct ‘pleasure’ of being a sophomore undergrad in his course “Jesus as the Christ.” His class’ main thrust was that Jesus did not know He was divine until He began His mission around the age of 30, but rather that He was ‘aware of a unique closeness to God.’ Father lane referred to this mature view of Jesus as ‘Ascending Christology.” (and if our young teen mush-heads did not parrot back his party line in essays tests, but dared assert orthodoxy thought, we got a D or F)

    He also made the remarkable claim that the Church had finally managed to transcend such archaic concepts as “trans-substantiation.” He actually smirked and said “to think that all over the World little pieces of bread are becoming the actual Body of Jesus is fostering a childish, Star Trek outlook that somehow Christ is ‘beaming down’ into each Host .” I will never forget this.

    His attempts at direct disobedience are sad, but not surprising to this reader. Rather than opprobrium, these men need prayers.

    [Anecdotal, but useful. Thanks.]

  15. David Homoney says:

    “We are deeply concerned that if these new texts are imposed, they could create chaos in our church.” I guess the they don’t think that the NO created chaos? Their arguments don’t hold much water.
    Fr. Z. I almost blew a mouthful of Mystic Monk Blend out my nose on this phrase “Break out the tambourines and big-hair perms.”.Wonderful. [Order more coffee now. I will try to give you many more Danny Thomas-esque “spit-takes” in the future.]

  16. Fr_Sotelo says:

    mitch_wa: The prayers have not been “washed” of the term Father. Rather, the original Latin in those texts is “Deus” and not “Pater.” The idea with inserting “Father” in the Novus Ordo was to make the prayer more personal and emotional for the listerner, so show that God is close to us like a Father. We can just run up, hug God, and yell out “Daddy!” Well, that was the 70’s, but now we realize that thinking of God always with such warm fuzzies is not necessarily helpful to the spiritual life.

    So, there is good reason for reverting to a faithful translation of “Deus” (as in “Omnipotens Deus,” a common starter in the collects) for that reminds us that God is also transcendent, Mystery, far above us, awesome, and not reducible to our version of a super daddy. He is a Mighty God, and guides with Providence all things, and “Father” does not necessarily capture this in the same way.

    These Irish priests are making ridiculous fools of themselves, and need to go find their big boy panties and suck it up. The whiney and crying tantrums of the Catholic clergy in protest of the most petty things does nothing to edify the priesthood for our times. People in Ireland, as well as here in the U.S., are dealing with inflation, unemployment, and the breakup of their families, and a myriad of problems with the youth. We priests need to stop and think about that, and realize that most of the folks out there could care less if a new translation of the Missal makes Father go into a meltdown of crying and hissy fits.

  17. Josephus Muris Saliensis says:

    I love this! they want to wait for 5 years . . . UNTIL THEY ARE ALL DEAD!!!!!

  18. wchoag says:

    I am seeing this kind of resistance more frequently as the implementation of the corrected translation approaches.

    This type of priest will be very damaging to the Church in areas of pastoral leadership, sacramental theology, and ecclesiology if they come to the altar with such internal opposition to the corrected vernacular.

    The Church has a responsibility to her clergy, for their temporal support and spiritual well-being. Nevertheless, this may be a time for bishops to openly invite priests and deacons to seek laicisation if they cannot abide the renewed direction of the Church, especially as evidenced under the Benedict Pontificate. These clergy of a particular generation, who in both their formation and scholarship, make so much of the historical conditioning of the Church–in the mutable, human element of the Church–are themselves so conditioned to a single, sad period of recent Church history so as to be irreparably compromised as effective ministerial leaders.

    Step aside, Reverend Fathers (oh…you are uncomfortable with such formality? Tough!) for the greater glory of God and the needs of His People!

  19. The Astronomer says:

    Here’s the 1977 book by Fr. Lane used as the text: “The Reality of Jesus: An Essay on Christology.” You can look it up on Amazon. The sole review there concludes with: “This departure from traditional Christology seems somewhat veiled by an appeal to the absolute mystery of God, when Lane argues that even Jesus couldn’t have been the perfect revelation of the Father. “

    That about sums up where fr. Lane is coming from. St. Padre Pio, pray for us… [There goes the anecdotal quality. Thanks even more!]

  20. RichR says:

    Do they really want to simply delay it?

    On the surface, it sounds reasonable. It sounds like, “Okay, we will ultimately have this translation, but what’s the hurry?” Who would argue for rashness and unpreparedness? However, in reality what is meant is, “Let’s get it off the table so people will forget about it…. while we derail it.”

  21. lucy says:

    After reading Astronomer’s first post, I stopped right there and said a prayer for Fr. Dermot Lane. If he truly believe what he said back then today, he’s in a heep of trouble and headed the wrong direction. Everyone please say a prayer for him.

    Fr. Sotelo – dead on, as usual !

  22. Tom in NY says:

    St. Patrick’s at Maynooth says it requires a competency exam or previous courses in two of Hebrew, Greek or Latin. It’s tough to find their course list for Scripture. NUI Maynooth shows courses from elementary to Ovid’s Metamorphoses Apuleius and Plautus; for Greek, courses in Homer and Aristophanes. What tools do Maynooth’s modern students have for Scripture?
    Salutationes omnibus.

  23. catholicmidwest says:

    Astronomer,
    You said, …”these men need prayers.” Yes, indeed, right after the tar and feathers and the removal of their pensions.

  24. catholicmidwest says:

    wchoag,
    Okay, down to earth now, wchoag: Do you really think they will risk their insurance and pensions by leaving? Really? These people are not young and can’t start over.

  25. Dan says:

    Just two points I’d make:

    “We are passionately concerned about the quality of our liturgical celebration and about the quality of the language that will be used in the way we worship Sunday after Sunday,” he said.

    Perhaps this is true. But who can compare, to take a recent example, the current Collect for the 4th Sunday in Ordinary Time and the incoming version, and honestly say that there was a concern for the quality of the language in the former? It is milk, as St. Paul says, and not real spiritual food.

    “The priests’ association suggested that the Irish bishops follow the example of the German bishops and assert the right to make their own decisions regarding the celebration of the liturgy in Ireland.”

    This is, in a way, a rehash of Gallicanism. One would think the 1st Vatican Council would have settled this.

  26. Randii says:

    I live in an affirming diocese [Not a Catholic diocese?] and my take is that this new translation will be DOA here. Many priests are simply going to refuse to use it. How widespread the defiance will be is the question. There is really little Rome can do to enforce this.

  27. spock says:

    Do they have any examples ?
    What is sexist in the new translation according to them ?
    Exactly, what don’t they like about it ?

    In short; Where’s the beef ?

  28. Supertradmum says:

    If anyone studies the heresy of Americanism in the United States, as I have, one realizes that the vast majority of bishops and priests who were caught up in the idea that Rome had no right to dictate to the American Church were Irish. Why so many Irish? Because this has been the mindset among many in Ireland since the 18th century, partially as a result of a desire for a nationalist Catholic Church as opposed to the national Anglican Church. Some of the Irish clergy hated ultramontanism and historically wanted more independence from Rome than other European countries. This spirit of rebellion is still alive and well, and, sadly, has been passed down to younger priests, or rather, the self-selection of these liberals types choosing the same old same old to go forward to Ordination.

  29. Tony Layne says:

    Y’know, the dissenters in every other English-speaking country have been whinging and effing about the new translation for—what, three or four years? And these brachiosaurs are just now getting on the “What if we just said ‘wait'” bus? Sounds like they’re caught in the same time warp Rip Van Winkle was!

  30. Random Friar says:

    This could get downright ugly. Imagine helping out at a parish where the pastor/liturgical committee decided against the new translation. There’s enough chaos now.

    What would I do? I’m not sure. [Use Latin.] It would seem wrong to deny the Mass, especially to the patient and suffering innocents among the faithful. I would loathe to have a verbal battle between myself and those who respond according to the lame-duck translation. My gut reaction for now would be to leave the flock with instructions as to where the next neighboring Mass would be.

  31. Charivari Rob says:

    catholicmidwest – “…I know that’s not uniform in the English speaking group. Does the rest of the UK get them that day too? Canada? Australia/New Zealand?

    Ireland is not part of the UK, thank you.

  32. catholicmidwest says:

    Randii,
    What the hell is an “affirming diocese?”

  33. sawdustmick says:

    In English speaking Countries where the Clergy and / or the Laity have proved themselves far too immature to accept the Reform of the Reform, perhaps we should ditch the new translation ?

    …..and then just implement the Latin original

  34. catholicmidwest says:

    Random Friar,

    Yes, it could get ugly. We shall see.

    We’ve been playing “pay now or pay later for decades now.” Well, guess what? The bill collector may have finally arrived. Can we put him off any longer? Don’t know. We shall see shortly, I expect. [He can’t be put off forever, you know.]

  35. catholicmidwest says:

    Oh, and Randii,

    You said that “There is really little Rome can do to enforce this.” In a real world, that’s not at all true. Rome could put its collective big boy panties on and use real tools to bring the bishops into line, thus bringing parishes into line. Rome can move intransigent bishops to undesirable cheap little dioceses and basically bury them; Rome can appoint “diocesan assistants with clout” where needed. Rome can extract payment from aberrant (affirming?) dioceses to force them to do things; Rome can deny promotions as it sees fit; Rome can act through the CDF to make people move their rumps or face censure; Rome can put on a big promotion of how bishops are supposed to behave and make them look like heels for taking their own pensions and retiring to luxury in cases where things aren’t working right. Rome can stimulate a holiness movement much like the post-reformation surge. And more.

    The church has hesitated to do these things, thinking that they weren’t necessary. Well, they haven’t been absolutely and irrevocably necessary as we’ve seen…..yet. But that could always change.

    The powers-that-be in the RCC have feared for a long time that the notoriety surrounding a show of resolve would cause widespread apostasy. However, when we finally reach the point where there is widespread apostasy anyway and the notoriety increases to a fever pitch over all kinds of correlating issues (child abuse, the local mass, priests who can’t shut up about their disagreements, etc), you may finally see a show of resolve, since it will finally dawn on the final arbiters in Rome that the notoriety won’t be made any worse by a show of resolve anyway. And at that point, it will appear to them that they only have everything to lose by simply going limp. This may be the straw that breaks the camel’s back, or it may not. Only time will tell.

    Remember that the Reformation went on and on and interminably on, for decades, before Rome finally responded to it, and then it ultimately rallied in a giant surge, only to partly fend off protestantism. I don’t expect this pattern to be any different.

  36. Jakub says:

    It is time to put a end to this tomfoolery, remove the chaff…

  37. Emilio III says:

    Anybody remember the delay in translating the 1970 Missal? It was Advent of 1969 before they started to use it!

  38. Pigeon Street says:

    They have a website: http://www.associationofcatholicpriests.ie/2011/02/press-conference-on-new-liturgical-texts/#comments

    They are a very troublesome set of priests. They do not like the Church teaching on sexuality. There is a manifesto there. You can also leave comments. They selectively post comments, at least that is my experience.

  39. Tom in NY says:

    Addendum:
    The Bachelor of Divinity program at Maynooth requires a competency in Latin for admission. The students are required to get two university-level years of Greek and Hebrew each. Ergo, it appears the students have the tools for mature Scripture study in the original languages. To see for yourself, http://www.maynoothcollege.ie/courses/undergrad/
    Salutationes omnibus

  40. Fr Martin Fox says:

    The Archdiocese of Cincinnati is pretty “middle of the road” for U.S. dioceses. We’ve got plenty of priests who don’t like this translation, either for ideological, theological or sentimental reasons, or else because it’s more trouble; but we’ve got a good number of priests who see the value of this and are very positive.

    Moreover, the priests divide another way; those who don’t like it, but realize that moaning and whining about it publicly will only make their lives harder. They see the practical wisdom of putting a good face on it: “this is a good opportunity!” or “this is no big deal.” And there are those who will, for whatever reason, complain openly, and only make things worse.

    There will, no doubt, be pockets where the new missal will somehow be slow to arrive by postal service, but I think few parishes in the Archdiocese of Cincinnati will actually refuse to go along. I don’t think our Archbishop will tolerate it in parishes. And he does get around to the parishes pretty frequently. What will parishes not using the new missal do when the Archbishop shows up? They can hardly hide non-compliance.

    I think most active priests will go along, happily or not; some of the older priests who aren’t assigned to parishes may not.

  41. gloriainexcelsis says:

    I hope, Father, that you will also comment on the German Catholic bishops and university “theologians” calling for the end of celibacy, ordaining women, recognizing gay couples, etc. Dissent is everywhere and in many forms.

  42. If they don’t like the new translation, they can always use Latin…this is just sad.

  43. Randii says:

    An affirming diocese, and I suspect there are many more of these in the US than some might think, is basically the Catholic church diocese as an Episcopal diocese.

    Decisions and what doctrines to teach/preach and which to ignore are made by the priest and the parish council. With the parish council not rarely having final say.

    The bishop istays out of it – though he knows what is going on and got caught at one particular dioces a while ago with a quite dubious service going on. He apologized of course but that same stuff is still going on at that parish.

    So, during signature gathering for Prop 8 in California, the large majority of Cathoilc parishes here refused to allow signatures to be gathered on their property. In contrast, the Mormon churches in this area were the focu of gathering signatures and organizing the other churches in the effort – mostly the evangelicals. The Mormons and evangelicals made the difference in the narrow pasage of 8 while Catholics voted slighly against it. Maybe because it was not preached about from most pulpits – you think?!

    The bishop here mouthed quiet support for Prop. 8 but refused to override parish choice on this and there was little coverage of it in the diocesan paper.

    By contrast, almost every parish here was urging their members to contact Washington the week before the Dream Act was voted on and the diocesan paper had many articles on this. In fact granting amnesty to illegal immigrants is probably the most frequently written about topic in the paper.

    It’s a very liberal area. The parish spectrum goes from ultra-liberal to moderate. The few moderate parishs try to present the “happy face” Catholicism of Catholic Answers and they mostly promote the CA theme of the possibility of near universal salvation. Something EWTN regulars Tim Staples and John Martinoni often preach. As long as you honestly beleive what you beleive and live a good life you can be saved – pretty close to works justification but I digress.

    There is one Latin Mass offered at a chapel but frankly the turnout was from the start minimal and is falling. You just don’t find “that kind” of Catholic here.

    No unity, no oneness of faith and no oneness of doctrine – that is the sign of an affirming diocese.

  44. robtbrown says:

    Randii says:

    I live in an affirming diocese [Not a Catholic diocese?] and my take is that this new translation will be DOA here. Many priests are simply going to refuse to use it. How widespread the defiance will be is the question. There is really little Rome can do to enforce this.

    Incorrect. Here is what will happen in the US:

    At least half of the priests will immediately implement the improved translations. About half of the others will drag their feet but eventually also implement them. Those remaining, determined to keep their feet firmly planted in 1975, will be given poor assignments.

    Also: The combo of Summorum Pontificum and the new translations have alerted priests that the liturgy is going to be more formal.

  45. robtbrown says:

    Randii,

    Unfortunately, Calif will move more slowly because of the influence of Mahony and Quinn. The one good thing about California is that Msgr Lawrence Purcell, the void who was once rector at NAC and Abp Quinn’s protégé, never became a bishop.

  46. amenamen says:

    Clueless? Or dishonest?

    “How can we, the priests, be asked to introduce this with any conviction when we ourselves haven’t had any input into it …?” So says Fr. Lane from Ireland.

    No input? What on earth is he talking about? Where has he been for the past twenty years?

    “Fr Dermot Lane …urged the bishops to begin consulting with priests, liturgical committees and lay people to develop new texts that would inspire and encourage the faithful.”

    Begin? The process of consultation for the revised translation has been going on for approximately twenty years. There have been endless opportunities for “input.” The enormity of the claim, that Fr. Lane and other priests had no chance to give their “input”, beggars the imagination. The truth is that the bishops of Ireland, England, the United States, and the rest of the English-speaking world have sought out, and obtained, prodigious amounts of “input” from priests and lay persons over the course of the past two decades. It was precisely because of such “input” that the Vatican was convinced of the need to issue the instruction, Liturgicam Autenticam, in 2001.

    ICEL’s plans for a new translation were well underway in the 1990s, when the bishops of the English speaking word began to raise questions and objections about the quality of the revisions ICEL was suggesting. A tremendous amount of “input” finally led to a rejection of ICEL’s proposed translation, and the process began all over again in 2002, with new leadership at ICEL. During the process, over the last nine years, the new translation had to be approved by each bishops conference, segment by segment. Every time the bishops voted to approve a segment of the translation, there was wide and extensive debate, and “input” from numerous people. The process did not take place in secret. It was well publicized.

    If Fr. Lane claims that, only now, at the “eleventh hour,” he suddenly feels the urge to give his input, one may ask why he has never felt the need to do so until now. Or is it, perhaps, that his “input” has already been considered, at length, repeatedly, and that it has been thoroughly and completely rejected? Has he actualy read Liturgicam Autenticam?

    The lengthy process of translating and approving an English translation “began” a long, long time ago. The very thing that Fr. Lane says he wants the Irish bishops to “begin” to do, has already been done, and it was done well.

  47. robtbrown says:

    gloriainexcelsis says:

    I hope, Father, that you will also comment on the German Catholic bishops and university “theologians” calling for the end of celibacy, ordaining women, recognizing gay couples, etc. Dissent is everywhere and in many forms.

    When JPII was pope, Cardinal Ratzinger often raised the problems in Germany to the inner circle. Unfortunately, Italians like Cardinal Sodano and Cardinal Re pooh-poohed the German situation.

  48. Random Friar says:

    As a parish priest, here’s my opinion on the new translation… Oh wait, it doesn’t matter.

    No, really. How do we take the perfect example of love and obedience to the Father for love of man into an act of rebellion for political and aesthetic purposes?

  49. catholicmidwest says:

    I live in a small rural diocese. There’s not much going on around here to be honest, as usual. I think that around here more than half of the parishes will comply because the bishop has made it clear that he expects it. How a few of the more progressive priests in this diocese will manage to do that I’m not exactly sure, but fighting this within the official church around here will be like trying to make water not find its own level. People will bitch and moan, but they’ll get used to it. I expect that the translation will be put in place regardless, so people who don’t like it much might as well not get left, as a practical point.

    Longer term, not sure of the effect.

  50. catholicmidwest says:

    And of course, I have no idea what will happen with liturgical abuses and liturgical excursions–all the silly things that aren’t in the rubrics, have never been in the rubrics and will never be in the rubrics. Will they increase, decrease, stay the same? Will more pop up in defiance or ignorance? No clue. We’ll see.

  51. JKnott says:

    Here’s an idea. For those in the ..”passionately concerned about the quality of the liturgical celebration” resistance movement in Ireland or elsewhere , perhaps the Holy Father might suggest a reverse Ordinariate. Sort of a swap. Smaller, purer Church.
    Seriously, I agree that, at least in some of the parishes in my area, the priests will just simply ignore the new translation. So many priests ad lib their own words under the current “lame-duck” translation, it seems natural that the habit of disobedience won’t change much. They just won’t make waves.

  52. Maltese says:

    Those remaining, determined to keep their feet firmly planted in 1975, will be given poor assignments

    Either that or they’ll be made Monsignors!

  53. amenamen says:

    Correction.
    In my previous comment I attributed a quote to Fr. Lane, who was the main subject of the article. The quote was from Fr. Alwill, another member of the same group.

  54. Pigeon Street says:

    This is a comment I saw on the ACP website:

    ”Sean
    February 4th, 2011 at 9:44 am
    I fully support the Association in this. The new texts are a step back to a church that I thought had died long ago? The fact that it is so difficult to access what is proposed says plenty ( apart from the US website…. there is no Irish equivalent offering us a full copy of the proposed new texts) about how the ordinary clergy and people are kept in the dark. I appeal to the Irish Bishops to have the common sense to reject this imposition.”

    No. The Church didn’t and won’t be dying. The project failed. The dissidents caused trouble for a time, but they were ultimately forgotten, and the Church carried on her work.

  55. jarthurcrank says:

    I have said this elsewhere, but the best way to force compliance is to do what the Catholic Interracial Council used to do in the Archdiocese of Washington when they visited all the parishes to see — and publicly expose – – which parishes were disobeying Archbishop O’Boyle’s orders to integrate the pews. In this case, form groups explicitly modeled on the Catholic Interracial Council model and visit each parish -sometimes on a Sunday, sometimes on a weekday – to find out which parishes and which priests are refusing to use the new missal – – expose them – – an explicitly compare these priests to the priests who refused to desegregate their pews 60 years ago.

  56. shane says:

    Someone on a secular Irish forum (boards.ie) likened the ACP to a geriatric form of the Rotary Club. I think he had a point.

  57. shane says:

    “Some of the Irish clergy hated ultramontanism and historically wanted more independence from Rome than other European countries.”

    Gallicianism was widespread throughout the entire Church in the late 18th century, certainly not peculiar to the USA or Ireland. From Cardinal Cullen (he incidentally wrote the formula on papal infallibility at Vatican I) and the Synod of Thurles onwards the Catholic Church in Ireland was always distinguished for its ultramontane nature (hence the old saying that in the Catholic Church the Irish obey the rules while the Italians make them).

  58. thereseb – Fr. Lane is a diocesan priest not a Jesuit though there are Jesuits in the ACP. I know people who challenged his theology before and he wasn’t pleased. I once found a critique of Lane’s books by one of our, now deceased, friars who basically identified him as a liberal protestant. He’s still teaching at Mater Dei, still influencing future catechists and teachers of religion. At a ‘month’s mind’ mass a few years back I swear his sermon denied the immortality of the soul. He and his fellow members of the Association of Catholic Priests are, as a few commentators have noted, the aging relics of the ‘hippie church’ of the 70’s. Two of them are fellow Capuchins, one I admire for his compassion but I cannot support his theology and the other I think .. well I won’t tell you what I think. Of the others they are a mixed bag of liberals and malcontents. At least two have been censured by the Vatican.
    This association is just trying to drum up attention for itself. It was formed after the National Council of Priests collapsed last year. This is its rump. Most clergy are too busy to care or too orthodox to support their rubbish.
    As I think I have maintained before, here and elsewhere, the Irish Church is liberal with a conservative veneer. Much liberalism was imported from the U.S. in the 60’s and after where it found fertile ground among younger clergy and religious. Generally younger clergy and religious (the few we have) are more conservative and they have the support of that body of orthodox clergy who got a good foundation before the Council. Most clergy in Ireland just ignore these guys.

  59. spock says:

    56 comments and not one example of specifically what the irish priests complaining about.
    Is it referring to God as Father as opposed to Creator or something like that ?
    It seems we’re getting our hackles up with knowing what they’re specific issue is.

    What examples do the Irish priests have of sexism or elitism in the new liturgy?
    Not that it makes a whole lot of difference to me since I go to the EF anyway. But once in awhile I go to Mass with family, or weddings, funerals etc. in the Novus Ordo.

    Where’s the beef ?

  60. Sliwka says:

    Re: Chaos in the Church

    It was brought up quite a number of posts ago about the implementation dates of the New Missal in other English speaking countries (ESCs). This, I think, is what in a minor sense is more chaotic than a new missal (esp. in America and Canada in places like Seatle/Vancouver and Toronto/New York State where cross border Catholics are a greater possibility). As a convert, it still boggles my mind that there is not a uniformity in even the translation of Scripture in the Lectionaries of ESCs, let alone the entire Mass.

    As it stands in Canada, we are still waiting for the recognitio on our nationally specific texts. http://www.cccb.ca/site/eng/media-room/statements-a-letters/2840-update-on-the-new-english-language-translation-of-the-roman-missal-for-use-in-canada

    Here I think the translation will go over well, although at least one priest I have spoken with had expressed his concern over the “slightly clunky language” (his words) that occasionally pop up in the texts. He did also say that the corrected changes such as Domine, non sum dignus, ut intres sub tectum meum showing its proper Scriptural roots (this was during a class on the Synoptics) do justice to the very Scriptural nature of the Mass that is lost with the current ICEL “translation”.

  61. Sleepyhead says:

    “…Ordained in the, say, 70’s?”

    Yup! “Fr Alwill was ordained in 1977″ http://www.inishmagrath.com

  62. JKnott says:

    spock: “Where’s the beef’?
    Have you ever heard of non serviam?
    Still, I think the dissidents should be allowed to go where they can have all the input they want in another denomination.
    In that light, if I were doing a Podcast like Father Z does , then on this subject, the theme music would be:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-CFpiszqA4

  63. spock says:

    JKnott,

    I would agree that people who don’t like it can and should go where their more comfortable and also if they refused to use the new Missal, they are not serving the church as they should but that’s really is for a bishop to handle, not me.

    The point is to try understand and learn and not simply go ” harumpf” and be cynical and send sarcastic Youtube vidoes . Reason trumps feelings. Period. Don’t feel. Think, think and think some more.

    I still am wanting to know which word or words they don’t like. I am on the side of the magisterium regardless. I still want to know what their issues are.

    I am having a hard time believing that they think the “and with your spirit.” vs. “and also with you” is sexist or elitist or that they think the new translation of the “Domine Non Sum Dignus” is sexist or elitist. How many female Centurions were there anyway? :)

    Is there an issue with the “I believe” vs the “We believe” for the Creed translation? Do they think that is sexist or elitest ? Seems unlikely. Similarly, “I” and “We” are not more or less archaic than the other.

    Can you think of any ?

    There’s a part of me that thinks that people simply don’t like to be told what to do and that is the real issue. “Vocation” is superset of “work”, it is not alongside or adjacent to. In mathspeak, “Work” belongs to the set “Vocation.” And when your working, one has a boss and the boss says “Do this …” and you do it provided it’s ethically permissable of course.

  64. robtbrown says:

    Maltese says:

    Those remaining, determined to keep their feet firmly planted in 1975, will be given poor assignments

    Either that or they’ll be made Monsignors!

    That was the way it was done in 1975.

  65. kiwitrad says:

    The new ‘translation’ has been used in NZ since Advent last year. Most people seem either irritated or resigned. The Catholic newspaper here is full of angry letters and the main attitude seems to be either “What’s the point?’ or ‘I used to understand what we were saying at Mass, now I don’t’. There hadn’t been any real explanation from priests or Bishops beforehand though we were told it would make the Mass a more prayerful experience for us. Alas, it seems to have failed in that.

    One thing that most irritates people is “Lord I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof…” people say “What roof? I haven’t got a roof?” They don’t even know it comes from the Bible. We needed more Catechesis. The ‘sexist’ part is, I believe ‘For us men…’ shock horror!

  66. JKnott says:

    spock:
    More importantly…..pray, pray and pray some more!
    And a little humor is good for the soul.

  67. tperegrinus says:

    Unbelievable…Since when have the Irish really cared about the “natural rhythm, cadence and syntax of the English language” …to be sure!

  68. kiwitrad says:
    One thing that most irritates people is “Lord I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof…” people say “What roof? I haven’t got a roof?” They don’t even know it comes from the Bible. We needed more Catechesis. The ‘sexist’ part is, I believe ‘For us men…’ shock horror!

    – That is already in the existing translation of the Creed, but the vast majority of priests in Ireland skip over the ‘men’ bit and say, ”For us and for our salvation…”

    Trying to appease the femi-nazi crowd, of course.

  69. Henry Edwards says:

    CMW: “Randii, What the hell is an “affirming diocese?”

    In this context, “affirming” is a synonym for “unfaithful”.

  70. Gail F says:

    Randii: I am surprised at your equating Tim Staples and John Martignoni with this group of dissenting Irish priests. There is a lot of room in Catholic theology for opinions about who will be saved, and how many, and what they have to believe and/or do. If they weigh in on the “more rather than less” side, I cannot see that they fall into any position that is remotely heretical. You really undercut your case there by dragging this in, IMHO.

  71. May I make a couple of corrections? thereseb, as Bro Tom Forde OFMCap has pointed out, Father Dermot Lane is a priest of the Archdiocese of Dublin, not a Jesuit (http://www.dublindiocese.ie/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=27 ).

    catholicmidwest and Charivari Rob, the Republic of Ireland, covering more than three-quarters of the island of Ireland, is not part of the UK but Northern Ireland is. The Church in Ireland covers the whole country and some dioceses, including the primatial see of Armagh, have territory in both the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland.

    catholicmidwest, a partial answer to your question: England and Wales, ‘September 2011 – use of the Order of Mass from the new translation in England & Wales; other texts such as Collects will remain in our current translation. . . The full text will be used when it has been published. The Bishops have received the text of the Missal with the recognitio of the Holy See. However, some texts which are to be included in the Missal and are proper to England and Wales, i.e. the National Propers, are (January 2011) still awaited. Until all the texts have been received it is not possible to give a date for publication. The earliest it is likely to be is for Advent 2011 but it may be later than that’ http://www.liturgyoffice.org.uk/Missal/Resources/IntroductionFAQ.shtml ).

    Some perspective: as the report of Sarah MacDonald points out, the ACP, a voluntary organization founded last year, includes fewer than ten percent of the priests of Ireland. My opinion as an Irish priest ordained in 1967 but based in the Philippines, is that the members of the ACP are stuck back in the 1970s, as some comments have suggested, and seem to be unaware that the majority of Catholics in the world today were born after Vatican II. When I go home to Ireland I see very few young people at Sunday Mass. And, as Archbishop Diarmaid Martin of Dublin pointed out some time ago, two generations have grown up without proper catechesis.

    The Irish bishops have set up a national program to prepare everyone for the new Missal which they hope to introduce on the First Sunday of Advent this year (http://www.liturgy-ireland.ie/liturgy-newsandviews2010.html ). This can offer priests an opportunity to teach the ABCs of our faith that so many don’t have anymore.

    The Church in Ireland has taken a battering in recent years and it is a difficult mission for priests. But the priest is still seen as central in situations such as tragedies, for example. The media often interview parish priests in such situations and quote their homilies. In other words, there is a space there for evangelizing and catechizing. On a recent home visit, despite some fears, I found people happy to meet a priest and some strangers struck up conversations with me in buses, trains, etc, because they saw my collar.

  72. Jack Hughes says:

    The best argument (in my opinion) against this lot is the qustionable grammer used in the current Missal.

  73. Sorbonnetoga says:

    Just BTW, thereseb, Dermot Lane is NOT an Irish Jesuit. He is a priest of the Archdiocese of Dublin, a PP (or Pastor in American terms) and is also President of the Mater Dei Institute, a training college for school religion teachers. The only serious Christian on the staff of MDI, incidentally, is a Scots Presbyterian!

  74. thereseb says:

    Br Tom Forde

    I hang my head in shame at referring to Mgr Lane as a Jesuit. You are of course right, as a slightly more leisurely spin around the web confirms. I am now frantically consulting my Gatley on Libel and Slander to see what will happen if I am basiloftused. Especially as words such as “jesuitical” are still listed as insults in the Oxford English Dictionary, and I live in the libel capital of the world………

  75. Genna says:

    I suspect the demand for a five-year moratorium may be a cynical calculation of a return to “normality” under a new pontiff.
    I cannot credit that grown men could behave like mewling babes throwing their rattles out of the pram.
    They would do well in view of recent revelations which rocked the Church in Ireland to keep quiet, stuff strident clericalism back in its box and show a little humility towards and obedience to our present Pontiff.

  76. thereseb says:

    Reading the website, references and comments thereupon , I feel moved to wonder if the whole thing is some dastardly ultra-montane conspiracy to lure the whole set of soixante-retards into the open for the Apostolic Visitation. Like an ekkkklesiastical duck-shoot.

  77. Young Canadian RC Male says:

    Hey everyone, I just had a thought. Many of you seem to be worried that the new translations will be outright rejected by your priests in your parishes. Fr. Z or anyone, is there a website or somewhere we will be able to access both the New and the older translations so that we can report our rebellious priests to the CDF? We should know know to prepare for the future.

  78. Young Canadian: I just thought of a website kind of like a rate-my-teacher site… only the CDF would be reading it!

    I like the idea a lot. A big issue for me is dealing with liturgical abuses on the local level. I want to work in the Church but that puts me in a tricky position since the people who decide who works in the Church also do the liturgical abuses… What to do? We need an anonymous reporting system.

    Check these links out to the New Missal and a guide to liturgical abuses and resources to help face them:

    http://www.usccb.org/romanmissal/

    http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/articles/badliturgy.htm

  79. aspiringpoet says:

    “archaic, elitist and obscure and not in keeping with the natural rhythm, cadence and syntax of the English language”.

    WHAT?

    Frankly, the current translation offends my literary ear. Being a convert, I was relieved when I found out it was only a (not very accurate) translation of much better Latin originals. Methinks these priests need to revisit their Shakespeare and learn what the English language can be.

  80. Tony Layne says:

    @Randii:

    ” The few moderate parishs try to present the ‘happy face’ Catholicism of Catholic Answers and they mostly promote the CA theme of the possibility of near universal salvation. Something EWTN regulars Tim Staples and John Martinoni often preach. As long as you honestly believe what you believe and live a good life you can be saved – pretty close to works justification but I digress.”

    It’s not only a digression but an unjust oversimplification. I used to listen to Catholic Answers quite frequently on my way home from work; Messrs. Staples and Martinoni don’t plug such an Indifferentist perspective. For a better look at CA’s answers to salvation outside the Church, check out this tract; they also stress that there is a hell and that some people will go there.

  81. Conchur says:

    Gerry Alwill!? That is hilarious. He was president/headmaster of my old school, St. Patrick’s. Indeed he taught me Technical Graphics/Drawing in 1st Year. He was the very epitome of Fr Trendy touchy-feely horsesh*t (Irish readers will get the reference). An object of scorn for the teachers and ridicule for the students, his nickname was Oddball and was well deserved. The man is a halfwit.

  82. chironomo says:

    I saw somewhere a pundit calling the German Dissident thing a “Nursing Home Rebellion”. It seems the same dynamic is at work here. 400 Priests out of 4500? And that is just the number that this group “represents” (Does it really represent them, or did they simply put their name on a mailing list to get information, or attend a meeting to find out what it’s about?) . I wonder how many of those 400 would sign on to a “we wont’t use it” movement.

    But even so… 400 out of 4500? So if one-out-of-eleven parishioners in my parish thinks that we should be kneeling and recieving communion on the tongue and singing chant, then that’s the direction we should go? Why don’t we take a churchwide poll and see how many Catholics would prefer greater solemnity and reverence at Mass? How many would prefer to return to communion on the tongue and altar rails… how many would prefer to hear Gregorian Chant and Polyphony? How many would like to see guitars and drums banned from church? If we only need one out of eleven to have a voice that demands being listened to, imagine what we could do!

  83. chironomo says:

    Reading the website, references and comments thereupon , I feel moved to wonder if the whole thing is some dastardly ultra-montane conspiracy to lure the whole set of soixante-retards into the open for the Apostolic Visitation. Like an ekkkklesiastical duck-shoot

    I pondered this very thing about two years ago in an article (on my no-longer-online blog) that considered whether the many “leaks and tweaks” surrounding this and other reform issues of the past 5 or 6 years were actually done on purpose to flush out opposing views on a variety of things. I would point to some of the fallen… Fr. Ruff being the most recent I can think of, as examples of various persons who have been forced to take sides and made to publicly take a position. And it’s a shame, because some serious reflection on the part of these individuals regarding their role in the Church would be preferable.

    As long as progressives can oerate under the umbrella of “acceptable practice” they can go unnoticed and think of themselves as mainstream. If you take the time to really read into what is being said on many of the progressive blogs, you find that they are starting to see themselves as being on the outside, and they have adopted a defensive posture (such as these Irish Priests, the “WIWJSW” petition here in the US, the Women Religious, etc…) . They have always liked to think of themselves as being on the outside, and they imagine a world that is dominated by Traditionalists and Conservatives in which they are the “rebellion”, but in an institutional sense, they have been in charge for quite a while, and are now being pushed out and they have to now be REALLY on the outside. They don’t do this well….

  84. benedictgal says:

    I wonder if the Irish priests and one Fr. Anthony Ruff exchanged notes? It’s rather interesting that their announcement comes a day after Fr. Ruff’s open letter to the United States Bishops wherein he makes the same complaints. Talk about a winter of discontent. Fr. Ruff and I have already had some exchanges about his letter.