The liturgical attack begins

We saw this coming, didn’t we?  There was the appointment of new consultors to the CDW.

From Amerika:

Pope Francis has ordered a review of the new Mass translation

Pope Francis has ordered a review of “Liturgiam Authenticam,” the controversial decree behind the most recent translations of liturgical texts from Latin into English and other languages. The commission, established by the pope just before Christmas, is also tasked with examining what level of decentralization is desirable in the church on matters such as this.


What’s next?

I think we know.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.


  1. rtjl says:

    IF we go back to banal English translations, I will take refuge in the Eastern rites or the Extraordinary form. If Summorum Pontificum is repealed, I will simply take refuge in the Eastern rites. Now that I know better is available, I am not going back.

  2. Fr AJ says:

    Ugh, soon we’ll be downloading the weekly new translation onto our tablets for Mass.

  3. Bthompson says:

    Every day it seems there is something more and more demoralizing than the day before. With all due respect, he frustrates me to no end.

  4. APX says:

    If SP is repealed, and the EF is no longer permitted, that would make things difficult for traditional societies of Apostolic Life such as the FSSP and Institute of Christ the King. I’m trying to picture some of the FSSP priests I know offering Mass in the OF using banal language and it’s, uh, difficult.

    I’m thankful I have many other options such as the Anglican Use Ordinariate and Eastern Rites should things really go south.

  5. billy15 says:

    The article said the decree was “controversial”. Why is it controversial? Who says it’s controversial?

  6. rtjl says:

    And please don’t put me at the mercy of my local conference of bishops. One of the values I have traditionally found in the papacy was that it could be counted on for at least some protection against those guys.

  7. RobS says:

    Short answer for them: no decentralization. There, easy.

  8. thomas tucker says:

    The next shoe to drop. Much as I hate to say it, I think Benedict did us a disservice with his papcy. I wish he had stacked the College of Cardinals with tradition-minded orthodox prelates, celebrated the EF publicily, mandated a return to ad orientem, relieved the un-orhtodox of their duties as bishops, and ordered an EF Mass at every parish weekly. Perhaps we would have a Church going in the right direction, unlike what we are seeing now.

  9. TimG says:

    Further division on top of division. If unity is the goal, this makes absolutely no sense.

    I keep reminding myself that if St Paul can be converted, so can Francis and his associates. It is very difficult (since they are supposed to be on OUR side) but we must pray for them.

  10. thomas tucker says:

    btw, having said that, I understand he is way too nice, gentle, and non-confrontational to have done those things. But still, I wish….

  11. greenlight says:

    “What’s next? I think we know.”

    I don’t know! I don’t know anything anymore. Doing away with Summorum Pontificum? Can it get worse than that?

  12. Ivan says:

    Don’t forget amazingly modernists among Dutch & Flanders (Belgium) bishops who has already changed nothing less but a prayer that GOD Himself gave to us – “Our Father”

    “Several Dutch Catholics are protesting because the bishops of the Netherlands and Belgium have changed the words of the Our Father as well as to propose an “ideological re-reading of the text.” Vox Populi, a Catholic lay group, is organizing a petition arguing that it was more correct the old “bekoring” translation ( “temptation”, from the Latin “temptationem”) while the new version will replace the word with “beproeving” (which means “test “,” ordeal “, or” tribulation “).”

    On the first advent sunday I attended the NO Mass i Flanders, and on that day everyone in the Church, each churchgoer has got into the hands a small booklet, and was called by the local priests to pray a ‘new’, ‘better version’ of “Our Father”.(!?)

  13. donato2 says:

    If you have a bishop who was appointed by Francis, or who is otherwise liberal, you can kiss the traditional Latin Mass goodbye.

  14. rtjl says:

    I just read this article over at Amerika –

    If that is where we are once again headed, this is truly discouraging.

    As I indicated in a previous post, I’ve already experienced this and I was so glad to find the church emerging from this. I don’t want to go back. My diocese has been devastated by the kind of theology and pastoral practice represented here. If this comes back it will essentially force me into being a Sunday obligation only Catholic as far as the public expression of my faith is concerned. I will have to look somewhere other than my parish or diocesan community for deeper spiritual sustenance.

  15. Mike says:

    Will be praying hard during the Nellie Gray Mass here in D.C.

  16. donato2 says:

    The pace of all this has accelerated greatly in the last year or so. The liberals are now trophy hunting. Cardinal Burke and the Traditional Latin Mass are in the cross-hairs.

    I have one word for all this: Merciless.

  17. Archbishop Roche seems to be broadly supportive of the principles and aims of Liturgiam Authenticam, so that’s one less reason to worry, despite the spin from “America”.

    Also, one wonders if this will turn out like so many of the Pope’s other investigative ad-hoc committees. Remember the women deacon question?

  18. Lavrans says:

    If the Missal changes again, which is an enormous expense upon churches throughout the world (except, of course, the German Church), I will take refuge in the local Anglican Ordinariate parish. This will mean giving up friends, community, and many other things at my current parish, but I will not subject my family to heretical or even banal Masses and prayers anymore. We are not going back.

  19. haydn seeker says:

    From my cold dead hand.

  20. Chris Garton-Zavesky says:

    May I confess to being of two minds about all this?

    On the one hand, in the Middle Ages, some Sees had their own particular forms of particular parts of the rite; on the other hand, Pope Pius V standardized the rite, allowing for forms more than 200 years old.

    On the one hand, Lex Orandi……; on the other, decentralization should, in theory, allow us to proclaim the truth in our worship of God. What’s to stop decentralization at the level of the local ordinary? Couldn’t individual priests continue their properly right-minded, Catholic ways?

    On the one hand, if he changes the way in which we pray, isn’t he (in very significant ways) changing what we believe? On the other, Cardinal Burke and company are (already) preparing a formal correction — and (because here I need three hands) wouldn’t this critique also give greater credence to the members of the SSPX, who claim that changing elements of the Mass and the Divine Office in effect changed what Catholics believe?

    May we be grateful for Pope Francis’ exposing the wolves who have been masquerading in sheep’s clothing for far too long?

  21. TNCath says:

    Should we expect the results of this study to be an apostolic exhortation entitled “Babel Laetitia” ?

  22. TNCath says:

    Excuse me, “Babelis Laetitia.”

  23. jst5000 says:

    I’m not buying it. We all know Pope Francis is against a reform of the reform (oh, wait…. perhaps a reform of the reform of the reform is good again?)

  24. Dan says:

    The third secret of Fatima predicted clearly a war in which the Pope as well as many Bishops and Cardinals would die.
    This secret has always been written off as fulfilled because St. Pope John Paul II was shot. That explanation always bothered me. First JP II did not die. Second, if that was our case our Lady would be wrong about a pope dying, third, when Our Lady and Our Lord talk about death rarely are they referring to death in this transient state we call life. They are most often referring to a much more serious death.
    Certainly many Bishops and perhaps even the Pope could be in danger of death, of the spiritual sort, if we continue down this dangerous road.
    Please pray for them. Offer a rosary as soon as you possibly can for them as our Lady has requested.

  25. Atra Dicenda, Rubra Agenda says:

    I’m so tired of this Papacy. I never imagined a chastisement would proceed like this. Surely this is a chastisement for our sins. We’re being given the Pope and policies we deseve for our manifest offenses.

  26. Ivan says:

    Your last sentence is very important. And I agree with that. The wolves are now really finally openly exposing themselves, because they think, the ‘big head’ is on their side.
    There is just one problem with this ‘revelation’ of them all,- namely, many simple minded faithful (believers) who are born in the last few decades, are really misguided, and don’t see, not et all, how many are among us, and who they really are. Some of them are just very irritated by the faithful ones, and see the real sheeps and real shepherds as a wolves, instead otherwise.
    But nevertheless I have hope that God will helps them who really don’t knows. He really will give all them the chance to see the true light.

  27. MWindsor says:

    “With all due respect, he frustrates me to no end.”

    Rank is something you wear. Respect is something you earn.

  28. Plebs Sancta Dei says:

    Last Sunday, I was in prayer at Mass, and the thought arose–given all the troubles the faithful are hearing about–that AT LEAST WE HAVE THE NEW TRANSLATION, which is so beautiful and takes my soul above the wretched 70’s carnival music. Now this! In our earthly life, no area has been left untouched by Satan: the family, masculinity, true marriage, unborn babies (the most innocent among us). Now, there is almost no corner where the spiritual life is untouched by darkness.

    Can we yet consider that Benedict did not resign of his own volition and perhaps he is the Roman Pontiff in captivity? Can we also consider that Francis may not…? When will these questions be acceptable in the public forum? I consider myself a middle-of-the-road traditional-minded N.O. Catholic, but I am now wondering where I stand.

  29. mysticalrose says:

    Ditto, rtjl. I am so close to being done.

  30. robtbrown says:


    No, it was not Written off as fulfilled. The text said it was one interpretation.

  31. stuartal79 says:

    The bright side is attendance will grow at EF Masses. I do not the EF or SP will be attacked. It would go against the pluralism thing.

  32. JSII says:

    I have been saying this for while now. Whether the Holy Father knows it or not he is exposing the modernist’s left and right. I have to believe this is why Father Benedict is at peace with his decision to abdicate. What an act of humility. The youth of the Church and the young faithful families, who are actually still having children, will remain faithful… The smaller church will begin anew… The Dubia are not going away anytime soon…

  33. dlmzdy says:

    Could we be looking at Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and SPXX, part II, like Cardinal Burke, and the Society of St John Fisher?

  34. Ivan says:

    Off topic maybe, but please see the latest new about Malta case:

  35. siculocatholic says:

    Or we can take refuge in the Anglican Use Rite of the Church unless, of course, that will be under attack as well. Now I know why the Orthodox and SSPX are snippy towards us…..

  36. John Nolan says:

    In the course of 2016 I attended a vernacular Mass twice. On every other occasion it was in Latin, EF or OF. Since I was a teenager finding a decent liturgy has been a struggle, but now I am in my 60s it is no longer a problem. I support the classic Roman Rite by singing at it, having spent the last twelve years studying Gregorian Chant (and there is still much to learn).

    Cardinal Ratzinger seems to have come to the opinion by the year 2000 that the pope does not have the authority to make substantive liturgical changes (see ‘Spirit of the Liturgy’). Yet there was certainly a case for ‘decluttering’ the liturgy at the beginning of the 20th century, since most of the clutter was due to papal and curial interference in the previous three centuries.

  37. Curley says:

    This has been said elsewhere, but Pope Francis has turned a lot of conservative Catholics into traditionalists. Certainly has in my case. This will encourage more of that

  38. Dan says:

    sorry robtbrown, I should have said, “largely written off by those in denial”

  39. Robbie says:

    These are troubling times and the pace of action by the Pope appears to be increasing. He seems to be waging a multi-front campaign designed to place maximum pressure on those who oppose him in hopes their resistance crumbles under the weight of his actions. I don’t know how things will proceed from here, but I am more worried now than I have ever been and I have been very worried for a long while.

  40. jnppo says:

    I have never posted on this blog, although I have been a reader for many years. If we are going back to that horrible translation and back to the 1970’s, I will not be able to take it again. I waited over 40 years, with patience, for things to turn around. I cannot do it again. God help us.

  41. Peter in Canberra says:


  42. LarryW2LJ says:

    AD, RA

    “I’m so tired of this Papacy. I never imagined a chastisement would proceed like this. Surely this is a chastisement for our sins. We’re being given the Pope and policies we deseve for our manifest offenses.”

    Ditto. Sorry to say, but ditto.

    And I look at friends and acquaintances who think we “Have the best Holy Father evhur!” and I feel even more out of place and alone.

  43. Tom A. says:

    If the dollars stopped flowing into the coffers, that would get their attention. Write a letter and stop writing checks.

  44. stuartal79 says:

    Curley, I have recently become a traditionalist, as well.

  45. Father Z, I am hoping you still have the old WDTPRS blog format in a file somewhere. Sadly, it seems you may need it before too long.

  46. From the article:

    To quote one disgruntled parishioner, “Father, some of those prayers might as well be in Latin.”

    An unintentional confirmation of a well known fact!

  47. jmurph says:

    I am starting to think (ok, maybe hope) that Obama is to Pope Francis as Trump is to the next pope. In other words, the next pope will be a massive, complete, and wholehearted reversal of this current pontificate as the College will realize the damage done and seek to undo it with maximum clarity and speed.

    Yes, I know, there’s lots wrong with the analogy….but I have to believe most cardinals, particularly many who voted for Francis, have got to be having a wicked case of buyer’s remorse. No matter what, I think we can rest assured centuries will pass before another cardinal from Latin America ascends.

    Maybe too much hopefully thinking on my part?

  48. Lucas Whittaker says:

    Geoffrey Hull does a good job of defining the traditionalist position in the introduction to his book, The Banished Heart: “The traditionalist position, simply put, is that one cannot change the religious culture in which Catholicism has always been expressed without attacking the bases of faith itself.” By that definition, every Catholic who is not a zombie should be a traditionalist. And I define a “Catholic zombie” as a man who does not recognize the beautiful Christ who is the object of our faith. When you recognize him he elicits a response, and captivates . . . I will only add that there is nothing naive about Pope Francis. He is taking a wide-eyed approach to his papacy, having a definite agenda. As that agenda becomes wholly discernible I believe that it is better for me if I refrain from commenting directly about it.

  49. Lavrans says:

    I agree with those who have said that this Papacy in particular has turned many conservatives into traditionalists. I would say that I am among them too.

  50. PhilipNeri says:

    I am (somewhat) consoled by the fact that Rome moves at a glacial pace. LA was published in 2001. The new Missal translation in 2011. Even with a loaded CDW and a sympathetic pope, a new translation isn’t in the offing anytime soon. I wish they would turn their attention to more pressing matters. . .like a 2011-like translation of the awful Baptismal Rite.

    Fr. Philip Neri, OP

  51. Peter in Canberra says:

    I would prefer it if Pope Francis spent some more time being a voice against the moral perils of our age.
    For example, where are the cries of objection and horror from Church leaders about the recent (US Salk Institute) announcement of successful development of pig-human chimeric embryos?

  52. frjim4321 says:

    Let’s try for some intellectual honesty here people.

    Nobody wants the 1973/1974 product back.

    The correct comparison is between the ICEL 1998 and the Vox Clara 2010. In which the ’98, even stripped of the newly-composed alternative prayers, is the hands down winner in every respect.

    Can we at least represent the history of the process with some accuracy and integrity?

  53. acardnal says:

    As our gracious host has said, “Save the liturgy, Save the world.”

  54. Genna says:

    The way I’m feeling I can only quote the last paragraph in the current blog post of the estimable Fr. Ray Blake: “The experience of many Catholics in this Age of the New Martyrs is one of absolute desolation, there is little consolation coming either from without or within, many feel they have lost faith or faith has become fragile and tenuous, consolation has gone, prayer becomes like wormwood, the Mass a tedious obligation, all we are offered is the Cross: hold fast, what you are living by is real faith, a faith without consolation or warmth just the rough cold unwelcoming wood of the Cross.”

  55. sw85 says:

    @ PhilipNeri,

    Of course, we don’t need a “new” translation, do we? We have a perfectly terrible one already close at hand.

  56. joekstl says:

    To frjim4321 – you are absolutely correct. At least we have a voice of sanity here. The history of the English translation is necessary to truthfully judge where we are right now. I and retired Bishop Donald Trautman (Erie, PA) are alumni of the Jesuit Theology faculty at the Universityh of Innsbruck Austria and I see him at our annual alumni meetings. His interactions with the US Bishops at the time of the debate on the ultimate 2011 result are eye opening. Some of them are detailed in his articles in America Magazine. I have downloaded the 1998 translation and often compare it to what we have now – it is vastly superior. In our parish we don’t have the expense of missals for the congregation. We believe we should listen to the presider’s prayers and the readings from the Scriptures. The people’s parts, and songs, are projected nicely on left and right walls facing the assembly. And for those in our overflow chapel area, we have a flat panel screen with the same information.

    Thanks again for your great comment.

  57. Ben Kenobi says:

    Just the other day I had a friend ask me, “what was the part of the bible that spoke most to you? Well, given that I was a convert I decided to pull out the NIV and.. guess what I found?

    What is mankind that you make so much of them,
    that you give them so much attention,
    that you examine them every morning
    and test them every moment?

    I have been fighting this nonsense for closing in on 20 years now. There’s been hardly a moment of my adult life that we haven’t seen people pushing to change the language.

    I will have to go buy a Douay-Rheims. Before they become illegal again.

  58. Benedict Joseph says:

    frjim4321 and joekstl: I can only say that the current translation is so far superior to anything I’ve heard in decades that it is startling to see otherwise. It does require attentiveness. But a priest given to the practice of meditating on the prayer, instead of using them as a script would not find them daunting. Obviously this approach is not favored by some who prefer a less taxing engagement with the liturgy.

    joekstl: The practice of projections on a screen during Holy Mass is nothing less than a nightmare, and I am not hyperbolizing. The Joel Osteen School of Liturgy is obviously now in vogue.

    That being said, it is no longer possible to doubt the probability that the current occupant of the Chair of St. Peter has revealed himself to be at the very least poorly suited for his position. Of all sites Rorate Caeli is now asking brutal questions regarding the validity of Pope Benedict’s resignation. Today I had the dubious fortune of stumbling across a blog by a woman named Anne Barnhart. Despite the brutal and disturbing personal perspective she offers one cannot deny the pertinence of her questions.
    Pope Francis election is widely acknowledged as having been crafted by Cardinal Danneels and his confreres of the St. Gallen Group. This “fraternity” of left wing clerics (Cardinals Martini, Murphy-O’Connor, Lehmann, Kasper, Silvestrini) was termed by Cardinal Danneels as a “mafia club.” Cardinal McCarrick has commented that we will have a new Church in five years. Cardinal Maradiaga illuminated the profile of this pontificate clearly in January 2015. “The Pope wants to take this Church renovation to the point where it becomes irreversible.”
    Have had the experience of watching shepherds abandoning responsibility, as well as exercising it irresponsibly and malevolently during my life –as young teenager subsequent to “the” Council, and now in the early stretches of antiquity, I can say it is well beyond time that the episcopate exercise its responsibility to bring to an end any and every attack on the flock – particularly by any and all their fellows in the episcopate.
    Where is the Christian and virile response to what appears the daily abuse office?

  59. mharden says:

    Yep. Surely, not even Pope Francis would issue another edition of the Roman Missal only 5 years later? Nope: he’s going to say, diocese can use whichever one they prefer. “Decentralization” = Protestantization. In so many different ways. That’s why he won’t answer the dubia, because he WANTS different dioceses to do things differently…even doctrine.

  60. Lucas Whittaker says:

    Father Jim, The Council’s Sacrosanctum Concilium calls for greater participation at Holy Mass, but the options found in the Bugnini-Liturgy, to which you refer, including the 4 different Eucharistic “prayers”, that make up the new Mass of the Faithful, actually deter the faithful from participation. Pope St. Pius X said:

    “If you wish to hear Mass as it should be heard, you must follow with eye, heart, and mouth all that happens at the altar. Further, YOU MUST PRAY WITH THE PRIEST THE HOLY WORDS SAID BY HIM in the name of Christ and which Christ says by him. You have to associate your heart with the holy feelings which are contained in these words and in this manner you ought to follow all that happens at the altar. When acting in this way you have prayed Holy Mass.”

    A good example of this type of participation is given as a brief commentary on the text of the usus antiquior by Dom Gueranger. I will paste a public link to that appendix on my Goggle Drive:

  61. Orlando says:

    It’s time to go into a news blackout and wait for this nonsense to pass. What happens or doesn’t happen in Rome won’t effect my life one iota. My heart breaks for all souls being led down the dark path , but as for me and my family, we know the truth. No Pope or idiotic rumination of so called Princes of the Church can ever separate me from Holy Mother Church. So for my own sanity , time to ignore it all.

  62. Emilio says:

    I feel as if the Pope (and his hit men) are acting as if they felt like he was running out of time: with desperation. At world youth day in Krakow, he told those present that “a Pope” would be present in Panama in 2019, even if it wasn’t him. After SMOM, I am still so shocked that I’ve lost whatever respect for him that was left, and I’m no longer able to defend him. If Amerika is reporting the truth and now they are going after Liturgiam Authenticam (all other languages but English have been dragging their feet since 2001 to stall and render it irrelevant in their regions)… the prospect of returning to the banal translations are too horrific to even entertain… I’ve only been able to attend Mass in English again since 2011. After SMOM, I now believe anything is possible in this Pontificate… he has no regard for his predecessors, nada. Let’s not pretend as if ANYTHING protects Summorum Pontificum. It’s the St. Gallen Mafia in action, and may God have mercy on all their souls.

  63. Kathleen10 says:

    My, my, he is really a busy little beaver now isn’t he? There seems no limit to what he wants to dabble with. Well, one of his friends did say that if he sensed he was “running out of time he would speed up”, so perhaps, the best thing we can hope for is he’s running out of time. Although the man looks better than he did three and a half years ago. He’s the Pope of Dorian Grey, he isn’t aging. Odd.
    As with everything else he has fiddled with, this won’t end well for the Liturgy, just as it won’t end well for the Once Sovereign Order of Malta nor Cardinal Raymond Burke. It is astounding how out in the open all these maneuvers are, clearly, there’s no fear of anyone in the temporal world or supernatural. We may end up with a Liturgy Comic book.
    And still he has his believers and apologists.

  64. Sam Schmitt says:

    Are we seriously considering republishing (and repurchasing) all the books, rewriting all the music, relearning all the responses? This is madness.

  65. Absit invidia says:

    Well … the year of mercy DID end – and to these modernists, at the snap of a finger, it switches off to a now declared open season on traditional minded Catholics (if there ever was a closed season). Their idea of mercy and tolerance is not Christlike, even to whom they think they’re being merciful to.

  66. Lurker 59 says:

    On one side of this are those that want to hide Christ from the people by using vapid banal language. On the other are those that understand that Christ is encountered through mystery.

  67. ALL: I have culled out some of the more unhinged, poorly considered comments.

    I want all of you to take a few things into consideration.

    First, I don’t want this blog’s combox to descend into the fever swamp of hatred that you see at lib sites like the Fishwrap.

    Second, do you have no respect for me? You put nasty, personal comments about Pope Francis in my combox – because I am overly optimistic that you are able to CONTROL YOURSELVES. Whom do you think people will blame for your stupid, thoughtless comments? YOU?

    Third, cui bono?

    Fourth, I allow my combox to be open most of the time, though I use moderation more and more. Please, be respectful, think before posting. I repeatedly delete comments from some of you. I will simply lock you out soon.

    Fifth, pray and GO TO CONFESSION. Considering some of your comments (deleted), you need to GO TO CONFESSION. And I am NOT KIDDING.

  68. Marie Veronica says:

    Disturbing news. Each day is more demoralizing than the last. One of my prayers is that my children do not suffer through (and their faith from) the confusion I experienced as a child in the 1970s and 1980s. I was deeply rattled this past week. A priest who visits on occasion “ad libbed” the first part of the Mass. The only prayer said before the readings was the Kyrie. The Mass was stopped at several points for scriptural reflections, general reflections, comments. It was novel in every sense of the word. I was reflecting on it later and thought how disorienting it was…novelty feels like amnesia.

  69. Lucas Whittaker says:

    Please allow me to say to you, my fellow like-minded traditionalists, that we should always choose the course of action and emotion that allows for participation for both sides, because it is only through participating with our neighbor (no matter how difficult he might become) that we fulfill ourselves and work for the common good of the Church. If our neighbor fixes an unbridgeable gulf between himself and us, that does not mean that we must necessarily turn away from him. We continue to face our neighbor with an open heart–out of charity, while hoping that he will again open the way for us to participate together for the common good. It is in this way that we can continue to work for the common good of the Church, even if “our hands have been tied”, to use a common expression. This is especially true regarding our Pope, no matter how saddened we might become by his actions.

  70. darius says:

    We must pray for this pope: Dear Lord, have mercy on Pope Francis. Guide and protect him so that one day, he may enter the kingdom of Heaven. If possible, can that be this year?

  71. arga says:

    this is horrible news. One effect: it will make it even harder than it has been to hold up the Church as the bearer of true tradition when this Church cuts and pastes the Mass every few years, and is now also busily cutting and pasting doctrine too. How many converts of the old days would have made the move under such conditions?

  72. Uxixu says:

    There is a large group of the clergy ordained in the 70’s and 80’s who really do not like the new translation. My territorial pastor is amongst them (he also outright refused to allow a traditional Latin Mass, though backed off a bit and begged a few excuses after some dialogue and he did allow me to have a traditional baptism by the FSSP in the parish for my youngest, but it took some persistence, which I intend to continue to in respectfully requesting the permission for a Mass).

  73. Athelstan says:

    Hello APX,

    If SP is repealed, and the EF is no longer permitted, that would make things difficult for traditional societies of Apostolic Life such as the FSSP and Institute of Christ the King.

    Actually, I think the script is to squeeze tradition back into their communities, rather than get rid of them. Why? It can be isolated, ghettoized once again there. I strongly get the sense that the current ordinary of Rockford would be quite happy to have the Institute of Christ the King oratory there be the sole repository of the TLM, or anything else remotely traditional; he’ll be happy to drop in for confirmations and all that. And when he leaves, be sure to post guards by the door to make sure it doesn’t infect anyone else.

    It’s the Walter Sullivan Model of Trad Handling.

    The difference from Sullivan’s day, however, is the quite large numbers of young priests who have discovered and embraced tradition. There are too many to keep them all from moving into positions of authority, one day.

  74. joekstl says:

    To Benedict Joseph: sorry that you think our parish’s use of projection on a wall is a “Joel Osteen Liturgy”. Print on a wall is the same as print on a page. [NO. It most decidedly is NOT the same as what you can choose to open up and look at in your hands.] If the Guttenberg Bible had been invented in the 16th century instead of the 14th – would you have called it Protestant. Or, does the writing on the wall in the Book of Daniel, Mene, Mene . . .portend the coming of Luther and Joel Osteen? [The Daniel comparison is absurd. Who wrote on the wall then and who is projecting now?]

    To Lucas Whittaker: yes, participation is key. Our words that usually describe people at Liturgy on Sunday give a clue that we don’t really participate: the priest “says” Mass; people “attend” and “hear” Mass . Our Sunday liturgy is a communal prayer and if the priest is facing away from the people and praying in a language foreign to them – them it is hard to participate and pray as community and not as quiet individuals. [That’s just plain dopey. And I suspect you have a limited notion of “active” or “actual” participation.]

    There seems to be a sense in these posts that our current liturgical language is somehow so fixed that it is sacrosanct and can’t possible be changed because the Latin original is ancient and for all time. [You haven’t been around here very long, have you.] So some have called our Ordinary Form the Pope PaulVI Mass; which replaced the Pius V Mass. And before that, in the West, we had the Milanese Liturgy, the Old Spanish or Mozarabic Liturgy, or the Celtic Liturgy, or the Gallican Liturgy, not to mention the Roman Stational Services. Then we have the Romano-Frankish Mass in Carolingian times. In all of these, the people had a prominent role – until the Tridentine reforms. [And you think they don’t now… I rest my case. Condescending, much?]

    Lastly – if we’re talking ancient and the use of prescribed language – perhaps we should take as a model the earliest (I think) description of Christian Sunday liturgy as described by Justin Martyr in his first Apology. [No, we really shouldn’t. We’ve learned a thing or two since the time of Justin, may he pray for us. If and when we return to a time of active and energetic bloody persecution, which we can’t rule out, we can have this discussion again.] He has all the elements of our current Roman Novus Ordo: memoirs of the apostles or writings of the prophets are read; then the president exhorts to the imitation of these good things; bread, wine and water are brought forward and THE PRESIDENT OFFERS PRAYERS AND THANKSGIVINGS, ACCORDING TO HIS ABILITY; there is then a collection for the poor, and a portion of the Eucharist is brought to those who were absent. [“According to his ability”… imagine how well that would go today. On the other hand, many of us don’t have to imagine.]

    As long as we have these elements [Minimalism is not healthy.] – I find our current liturgy and any possible variants to be wholly welcome and valid. [How generous of you.]

  75. asburyfox says:

    At the time that the Vatican under Benedict was correcting the English translation of the Novus Ordo, I pleaded that Pope Benedict was wasting his time tinkering with the Novus Ordo. He should have abrogated the Missal of Paul VI and brought out his own missal. I called for the Missal of Benedict XVI. Didn’t happen. The reform of the reform is now dead. The Novus Ordo Mass is a lost cause. Leave the Novus Ordo Mass to the Modernists. The Missal of Paul VI is by the Modernists for the Modernists. The TLM and the Missal of John XXIII is the future of the Church. Now it’s time to focus on keeping and spreading more TLMs.

  76. Athelstan says:

    Fr Jim,

    The correct comparison is between the ICEL 1998 and the Vox Clara 2010. In which the ’98, even stripped of the newly-composed alternative prayers, is the hands down winner in every respect.

    Purge all the inclusive language and all the extra prayers they drafted with zero authority, and perhaps we can start to talk.

  77. Curley says:

    Does it ever get to a point where Francis gets tired of the constant crises and controversy? Would he turn on his inner circle? “Spadaro! You said no one would care if I took over Malta!”

    Also, realized today that if Benedict had delayed his abdication to June of 2013, Daneels would not have been in the conclave, he turned 80 that month. What if.

  78. joekstl says:

    Please don’t use scare quotes regarding Eucharistic prayers. The are just as valid and licit as Prayer 1. The history of the Mass of the Roman Rite documents diversity.

    [So what?]

  79. Kerry says:

    Shortly before he died, Charles Rice, Emeritus Professor of Law at Notre Dame, gave an interview to Micheal Voris. Most memorably he said, (and was referring to Pope Francis), “Trust the Holy Spirit, trust the Holy Spirit”. Despite the vast “Huhs?”, and stupefying “What’s!” of this pontificate, Pope Francis is, (in my Vulgate vernacular), still the guy. He is the Pope, and if we start to believe he is not, that way madness lies. (And lots of Protestants! Heh.)
    Some passages from the introduction of True Devotion of Louis de Montfort: The spirit of Montfort is evident especially in what has become known as the Pontchateau Affair. Having preached a mission in the village of Pontchateau, the missionary fulfilled a dream: with thousands of helpers, he literally built a hill and erected a life-size Calvary to be a permanent site of pilgrimage. The task took well over a year. The day before the scheduled solemn dedication of the shrine, the Bishop rescinded his permission for the blessing of the Calvary….Again his detractors had won the day. About a week later, the saint was told by the Bishop that the entire shrine had to be demolished, on direct order of King Louis XIV. Saint Louis de Montfort’s enemies had informed the royal court that the Calvary of Pontchateau would be a likely hideout for an invading British force and, therefore, it had to be destroyed. Montfort: “We had hoped to build a Calvary here; let us build it in our hearts.” To the amazement of all, Saint Louis de Montfort accepted the King’s irreversible decision peacefully as part of the mysterious ways of a loving Providence.
    Trust the Holy Spirit.

  80. joekstl says:

    You state that the current translation is far superior to anything you’ve heard in decades. That’s because you haven’t heard the 1998 ICEL translation.

    [No, that’s not what I stated. And you have no idea what I have heard or haven’t heard. I had, as they came “off the press”, the various drafts of translations every step of the way. But the FACT is that he 1998 translation was not approved. It was never a translation in an official sense.]

  81. Geoffrey says:

    I really pray nothing comes of this. The new English translation of the third edition of The Roman Missal is beautiful. I never hear anyone complain about it. I don’t think the “average” Catholic cares. I have anxiously been awaiting the revision of The Liturgy of the Hours, so that the collects / prayer of the day would finally match up. I suppose this project will be on hiatus now?

  82. iamlucky13 says:

    @ Fr. Jim:
    “The correct comparison is between the ICEL 1998 and the Vox Clara 2010. In which the ’98, even stripped of the newly-composed alternative prayers, is the hands down winner in every respect. “

    I’m going to have to respectfully disagree. I readily and frequently find much more depth of meaning in the 2010 (2011?) translation. For one of many examples I could pick from:

    “Have mercy on us all, make us worthy to share eternal life.”
    “Have mercy on us all, we pray, that…we may merit to be coheirs to eternal life.”

    This concept of being heirs is so much more extraordinary of a message – we’re not just responding to a hope of being let into heaven and having a place to experience an extension of life, but of being elevated to a relationship with God comparable to that of a family, inheriting heaven like our true home.

    It also makes reference to our own efforts (“we pray” and “merit”) by which we participate in our salvation rather than conveying a sense that we might idly sit by and wait to be made worthy. After all, the salvific event that is beyond our ability to merit but enables us to be worthy has already happened, so the remaining step is our response to that salvation. The reminder that we are called to action ourselves rather than be passive is both edifying and dignifying. The 2011 translation really seems to me to invite fuller participation of the mind and will in the liturgy.

    When I take the time to read some of Father Z’s “WDTPRS” posts, I’m continually struck by this contrast between the active sense in the 2011 translation and the passive senses of the previous translations. It’s ironic, really, what with all the talk about “dynamic equivalence” in the language, that the older translations come across as so static.

    I also have to admit, my favorite part of the 2011 translation is the word “consubstantial.” After the changes were announced, while some were fretting rather condescendingly about lay people being incapable of understanding such an unusual word, I was marveling at how the Church has synthesized a term (from roots that all English speakers are familiar with) that by the very nature of its exclusive use articulates a meaning specific to the Trinity and of a much more remarkable character than “one in being.” While the former example of dynamic equivalence primarily failed to be dynamic, this example primarily failed to be equivalent.

    @ joekstl
    “In our parish we don’t have the expense of missals for the congregation. We believe we should listen to the presider’s prayers and the readings from the Scriptures. The people’s parts, and songs, are projected nicely on left and right walls facing the assembly. And for those in our overflow chapel area, we have a flat panel screen with the same information.”

    Having a missal present in the rack does nothing to take away from the experience of those who prefer to simply listen, but is a major benefit to those like me who comprehend better by listening and reading, especially when I want to do things like flip back to the first reading or Epistle because I realize there is a link between them and the Gospel.

    And is that really a savings? A hardcover missal and hymnal like Adoremus costs $15 each in volume, should last a decade or more, and usually includes prayers in addition to the psalms and readings that visitors may use before or after Mass when the projection screens are dark.

    A pair of projectors bright enough to be seen easily in a medium-sized church costs as much as several hundred such missals, and will generally not last as long as the hymnals, may require some additional costs to provision for power and a projection area (which can displace good locations for sacred art), distracts from the altar or the ambo (even more so because of the typical harsh, bluish toned light being out of place with most church color and lighting schemes), and requires someone to prepare the slides for each Mass (a very regular chore for parishes with daily Mass that might oddly choose to dispense with the convenience of missals) and run the projector.

    The added energy use of the projectors also is not very much in keeping with the spirit of Laudato Si.

  83. RobW says:

    ‘The day the Church abandons her universal tongue [Latin] is the day before she returns to the catacombs.”–Pope Pius XII

  84. WYMiriam says:

    FrJim, your question “Can we at least represent the history of the process with some accuracy and integrity?” is an important one. I’m glad you gave us this challenge.

    I would begin my answer to your question with another question: are we agreed that at least part of the difficulty over translations in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass started after Vatican II’s Sacrosanctum concilium was promulgated? Yes? I, too, think we’d probably all agree it did, since the Council fathers called for some — N.B. “some” — vernacular to be used in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. That necessarily meant that translations were to be made. However, *why* did translations have to be made? The missal I used before Vatican II, even though it was a child’s missal, had English translations in it, and so did my parents’ missals.

    All right; now, let’s look at the documents of Vatican II “accurately” and “with integrity.” First, the Council Fathers allowed some, notall, vernacular; Latin was “to be retained.” Next, let’s go deeper into Vatican II, where priests are given explicit instructions to teach their people (enough) Latin in order that they, the people, may pray or sing those parts of the Mass which pertain to them.

    (My apologies for not giving a citation; my copy of Vat. II is buried who-knows-where, and my computer is not to be relied upon for looking things up on the internet.)

    Granted, I have veered a little bit off the matter of translations. I think it is necessary to emphasize these two snippets from Vatican II for the simple reason that we would not be having this discussion, in all likelihood, had the Council fathers’ original wishes been faithfully carried out: most of the Mass would still be in Latin. Since I don’t recall anything in Vatican II documents specifically mandating changing the prayers of Holy Mass, then . . . well, there wouldn’t have needed to be brand-new translations into English, would there? We would have been using what was already there, right? If not, please tell me where I’m wrong.

    I am immensely relieved to hear you say “Nobody wants the 1973/1974 product back”! You say that the ICEL 1998 translation “is the hands down winner in every respect” over the Vox Clara 2010 translation. I humbly submit that you would be doing a wonderful service for all of us if you would take time to publish, say, a dozen or more examples, giving side-by-side translations: original Latin, Vox Clara 2010, and ICEL 1998, along with erudite explanations [a la Fr. Z and “What Does The Prayer Really Say?”] detailing exactly why your preferred translation is far and away the best.

    Who knows? Perhaps Vox Clara might pick up on it and hire you for their next translating assignment?

    P.S. I can’t say it often enough: how glad I am that “Nobody wants the 1973/1974 product back”!

  85. Uxixu says:

    The 1998 snippets posted to Commonweal and other places do flow a bit better in their prose but are still theologically deficient from a Catholic standpoint (while they have usually added the “holy” back they still tend to leave off “Our Lord” before the holy name, for example). It still seems to diminish references to the sacrificial priesthood (“holy hands”) almost certainly due to ecumenism rather than sound Catholic theology, similarly for the justifications in translating calix as “cup” instead of “chalice.” It’s also lacking relative clauses that are integral to the Latin and not merely superfluous flavor. There could be a way to get to that middle ground but the 1998 is not it from what’s been revealed.

    The larger question begs why, if not how completely contrary to Catholic apologetics against Cranmer and Luther (amongst other infamous Protestant heretics), if not the anathema of Canon 9 from Trent, Session XXII on any who would require the Mass to be in the vernacular. The allowance of greater use of the vernacular makes a certain amount of sense but not for the Canon or other unchanging parts of the Ordinary. Even those Rites and Uses that took advantage of Rome’s traditional tolerance for diversity, such as Sarum, were word for word and gesture for gesture identical to the contemporary Roman Rite in the Canon. Ultimately, the Roman Canon should be made mandatory, in Latin, and should be required to be ad orientem in the Roman Rite. The other EP should, if not abrogated entirely, forced to conform to the GIRM and use the Roman Canon on Sundays and Solemnities and restrict EP2 to ferials and weekdays.

  86. Fr_Sotelo says:

    Does no one believe in the words of St. Pio? “Pray, and do not worry.” The Church is in Good Hands, no matter what.

  87. Kerry says:

    “…if the priest is facing away from the people and praying in a language foreign to them – them it is hard to participate and pray as community and not as quiet individuals.” Uh, negatory joekstl. When the “priest is facing away from the people” to whom is he facing, and to whom is he speaking, and for whom is he making prayer and supplication? (And, I must ask, hard for whom? Just youm, rhymes with whom, or are you the representative spokesman…? If the latter, how were you selected? You do know the jest, the young man says, “Father, the Mass was beautiful, but during some parts, you spoke so quietly, I could not understand what you were saying”. To which the Priest replied, “I was not speaking to you”.)
    If by our “current liturgical language” is meant Latin, do you know how and why Latin came to be the language of the Roman Catholic Church of the Latin Rite, and why a language whose meaning does not change over time (!) is important, both practically and symbolically? (Just for fun, look up the Pater Noster in Anglo Saxon, Old English and Middle English. Recordings will be easy to find also. The great charge of Christ to the Apostles was/is to preserve and hand on the Faith as it was passed down. To suggest that the most ancient is therefore the most accurate is a mistake. For one, it would certainly bypass Aquinas as an upstart youngster.) For more excellent reading I refer all to this excellent post of April, 2015, of our host here: Here is a quote worth emphasis: ” By the time it was codified in Pius V’s 1570 Missale Romanum, the Roman way of worshiping was polished under the influence of the theologically clear Council of Trent.” Polishing takes a long time.
    One more name, well, two, Christine Mohrmann and Father John Hunwicke. (Sorry; another long paste-up). “Writing in 1959, something like a decade before the Novus Ordo Mass was rendered into the impoverished English of Old ICEL, Christine Mohrmann showed that the very nature of Christian liturgical language, from the earliest times, had been sacral and hieratic. “Christians sought for prayer forms which were far removed, in their style and mode of expression, from the language of everyday life. This tendency was combined with a conscious striving after sacral forms of expression”. Taking the Didache , that strange early text sometimes admired by liturgists unsympathetic to what were to be the classical forms of East and West, she shows “a linking up with the Old Testament sentence structure and parallelism – such as we find also in the New Testament Canticles and prayers, and … the introduction of Aramaic and Hebrew elements which clearly indicate a striving after sacral stylisation. There is here an obvious differentiation from the language of everyday life …”. Moving on to the introduction of Latin into the worship of the Church, she demonstrates, as I showed in an earlier post, that the dialect deliberately constructed for this purpose was deliberately archaic and sacral; based upon those pagan Roman formulae of immemorial antiquity by which fields were lustrated or the gods of an enemy city persuaded to desert it. The “monumental verbosity coupled with juridical precision … wealth of words … parallelism, alliteration and rhyme … ” in the pagan formulae are to be found, above all, in the Canon of the Mass. ” A sacral style has been created which links up with the old Roman prayer of the official Roman cult”. One finds oneself idly wondering if the members of old ICEL were ignorant of Mohrmannn’s weighty arguments, or whether for their own doctrinal-cultural reasons had decided deliberately to ignore her findings. ”
    As the Truth of the Church does not change, it truth is expressed in a sacral language which also does not change.
    A parting question, is the Mass meant to be didactic or latreutic ?
    Benedictum sit nomen Domini nostri Jesu Christi.

  88. Benedict Joseph says:

    Father, in reference to you just admonition of 27 January @ 5:59…
    The issue of self-governance in the face of unwarranted provocation is sensitive. There is not a conscientious Roman Catholic who has endured existence in the Church since October 1962 who has not experienced calculated intellectual and spiritual assault by priests, nuns, theologians and left-wing laity wielding the weapons of ecclesiastical privilege, intellectual superiority, and a sanctimonious inscrutable “spirituality.”
    Is there anything more annoying than a sanctimonious fraud with an enormous superiority complex who believes their self a channel of wisdom – particularly when they stand in contradiction to Wisdom Itself?
    When their quiver of tactics proves ineffective they mask themselves as one of the groundling faithful, now fifty years post-council uncatechised and in need of merciful advocates to advance the cause of “simple believers” held in slavery to the very immorality this crew has been advocating for two generations.
    Confronting any resistance they then adopt a caricature of ecclesiastics of the pre-conciliar era and terrorize the conscious faithful.
    The faithful are in a rage because they have been deliberately provoked into a rage by the shepherds who are consigned with the responsibility lead them to the Prince of Peace.
    Those of us who have consciously endured this sadistic mode of ecclesiastical leadership since its inception since our youth, and clung desperately to the Barque are long past submission to the abusers of power.
    Rage does not adequately render what many of us are experiencing at the hands of sixties priests, deranged sisters, and Gnostic theoretician.
    Being a Roman Catholic in this deliberately constructed dungeon of chaos is not only spiritually lethal, but a danger to mental and physical health.
    The faithful are in the hands of spiritual and psychological abusers and it need be brought to a mighty and abrupt corrective. To be told to conduct yourself like good Catholic ladies and gentlemen in this environment is insufficient, counterproductive and cruel. Calling upon courtesy, submission and obedience to legitimate ecclesiastical authority in the current situation traverses the border of sadism, and it begs the big, forbidden and unspoken question, “Who is presently legitimate?”

  89. joekstl says:

    My point is that perhaps if you had heard the 1998 translation you might have agreed to its superiority.

    [I had all the drafts as they were issued.]

  90. joekstl says:

    So plenty. The comment implied that the the other Eucharistic prayers are somehow not really proper prayers. And the fact that the history of the Roman Rite shows a diversity in these prayers says to me that we need not
    Take the position that anything other than prayer 1 shoul be disallowed.

  91. joekstl says:

    Our church space is relatively small and the projectors are donated. A main reason we don’t use hymnals is that we use a variety of music and are thus not bound to one source. The light on the bare walls is not harsh and does not distract. Our worship leader prepares the slides as part of her job.

    [BTW… if you are addressing yourself to some point made by someone in a comment, above, then the FIRST thing you type in the combox is the NAME/HANDLE of the person to whom you are addressing yourself. That’s how we do things here.]

  92. OldProfK says:

    I would not call these developments good on their faces, but if you’ll all forgive me an inversion of Southey, may I offer:

    “But things like this, you know, must be
    Before a famous victory.”

  93. Matthew Gaul says:

    Barring Divine Intervention, the Latin Church liturgical wars will perdure until such time as everyday Latin laymen have an organic sense of tradition, and recapture a balance between Tradition and Authority. The Latin Church is obsessed with Authority to the diminishment of Tradition. As long as this continues, it’s always going to be about “getting our boys in office.”

    I blame Protestantism – both because the Reformation turned Rome and the papacy into a sort-of shibboleth which it was not previously; and because many Protestant converts to Catholicism, over-reacting to the anarchy of their former faiths, are for a time dyed-in-the-wool uniformitarians. This takes a couple generations to wear off.

    In many of the Eastern churches, when the hierarchy is obtuse, it is oftentimes just roundly ignored by the locals. Granted, many of those churches make poor decisions by over-emphasizing Tradition at the expense of Authority, but their experience is an object lesson.

    I don’t see any of this changing any time soon; how could it? There are social forces at play that are five centuries in the making, and in some cases, a millennia. The Latins, in my “nobody-from-Upstate-NY” opinion, have to truly internalize that “Rome” is not the same thing as “Catholic,” and “hyper-nomianism” is not the same as the virtue of obedience. Until those brazen serpents are broken, y’all are stuck in this rut forever.

    If there is something that everyday laymen and local clerics can work towards, it is finding ways to impose mediating institutions between themselves and Rome. So many commenters above mention taking refuge in the Eastern churches or the Ordinariate. They are safer in part thanks to their “middle management.” There are also the occasional order parishes and monastic communities that have some subsidiarity protection from Rome, but they are rare.

    Even if you can’t attend a minority Catholic church or rite, may I propose supporting them in some fashion? I know a person who, whenever he hears of *any* type of minority rite parish is in jeopardy, even if not the same as his own parish, he immediately prays for them, and sends them money if he can, as long as he can. I’m sure the Spirit will reveal to some chosen persons other ways of building up decentralized Tradition.

  94. Rod Halvorsen says:

    Now with the Pope’s new set of polished crosshairs on the Mass itself, it is only time that separates us from a review of the 1962 Missal. Thus another question rears its head and is yet to be answered, that being how many FSSP and ICKSP {etc} priests will obey when told that the 1962 Missal is just fine, but they must pray the Mass in one, some or all of the following ways: 1} in the vernacular and 2} facing the people 3} using new “dynamic equivalent” Scripture texts.

    And before y’all say they can’t do that because the 1962 Missal is enshrined in Summorum Pontificum, let me say that by using Spadaroan New Math which grants us the certitude that “2+2=5”, such mods would be interpreted as merely “disciplinary” and not in danger of molesting the Mass itself.

  95. Lutgardis says:

    joekstl says: To Lucas Whittaker: yes, participation is key. Our words that usually describe people at Liturgy on Sunday give a clue that we don’t really participate: the priest “says” Mass; people “attend” and “hear” Mass . Our Sunday liturgy is a communal prayer and if the priest is facing away from the people and praying in a language foreign to them – them it is hard to participate and pray as community and not as quiet individuals.

    Perhaps we should use the proper verb to describe our action at Mass then–assist.

    From the CCC 2180: The precept of the Church specifies the law of the Lord more precisely: “On Sundays and other holy days of obligation the faithful are bound to participate in the Mass.”117 “The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceding day.”118

    That said, “hearing” or, more accurately, “listening to” parts of the Mass does count as participation. Look to St. John Paul II’s 1998 ad limina address on active participation, which gives good instruction on how we are called to participate:

    “Active participation certainly means that, in gesture, word, song and service, all the members of the community take part in an act of worship, which is anything but inert or passive. Yet active participation does not preclude the active passivity of silence, stillness and listening: indeed, it demands it. Worshippers are not passive, for instance, when listening to the readings or the homily, or following the prayers of the celebrant, and the chants and music of the liturgy. These are experiences of silence and stillness, but they are in their own way profoundly active. In a culture which neither favors nor fosters meditative quiet, the art of interior listening is learned only with difficulty.”

    In the same document, he spoke of the importance of including prayers “in a language foreign to them” as well:

    “Conscious participation calls for the entire community to be properly instructed in the mysteries of the liturgy, lest the experience of worship degenerate into a form of ritualism. But it does not mean a constant attempt within the liturgy itself to make the implicit explicit, since this often leads to a verbosity and informality which are alien to the Roman Rite and end by trivializing the act of worship. Nor does it mean the suppression of all subconscious experience, which is vital in a liturgy which thrives on symbols that speak to the subconscious just as they speak to the conscious. The use of the vernacular has certainly opened up the treasures of the liturgy to all who take part, but this does not mean that the Latin language, and especially the chants which are so superbly adapted to the genius of the Roman Rite, should be wholly abandoned. If subconscious experience is ignored in worship, an affective and devotional vacuum is created and the liturgy can become not only too verbal but also too cerebral.”

  96. pelerin says:

    Oh dear me – this is getting so depressing. I read the comments by joekstl in which he/she refers to a presider (instead of Celebrant), songs (instead of hymns), the assembly (instead of the congregation) and people at liturgy (instead of people attending Mass) and wondered when these new terms came into being and why. And as for showing words on screens during Mass which I believe is common in protestant mega churches words fail me. [Key word: protestant]

  97. PhilipNeri says:

    Why must we limit “understanding the Mass” to language alone? This strikes me as a modernist/intellectualist prejudice. St Thomas teaches us that knowledge comes through the senses. Hearing is just one of the senses. Reducing “understanding the Mass” to mean little more than “understanding the words of the Mass” can lead us to falsely believe that we are capable of grasping the Mystery of God in words alone. It’s simplistic and decidedly Pelagian. Much like the homiletical advice given to A Certain Generation of Priests — “Preach like they are all eighth-graders” — praying the Mass with an eighth-grader’s vocabulary and grammar is insulting to the laity.

    Fr. Philip Neri, OP

  98. Grabski says:

    Joekstl. By their fruit you will know them. The OF has opened the doors to puppet Masses. Polls Masses. Mimed readings. Mistranslations

    No. All is not well since 1967

  99. Grabski says:

    Sorry. Polka Masses.

  100. Adaquano says:

    I still don’t understand the argument of how the NO especially in its more lax form of everyone actively particpates has helped people understand the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass better. Granted I think there were plenty of people prior to the reforms of the Mass that just sat being silent, and that really hasn’t changed I guess. My main point being if all these reforms were so great why the all the poor numbers in Mass attendence, sacraments, vocations, etc? My experience is that the most successful parishes are the most orthodox and the most heterodox (I suppose because both have strong conviction).

    I’ll continue to focus on my and my family’s salvation. Yet, when you have a young child it is discouraging not to have a Church that is more concerned for being like the world instead of moving it. Yes, the Lord is in control but you can’t help but be hurt when you see friends and family members that have little faith because so few to care about eternal salvation.

    A liturgy focused on how actively you participate in songs, etc instead of shifting your focus on the heavenly seems to be a major factor for all of this. Personally, I grew up in a parish that while active was still a bit too focused on “active” participation. When a new parish opened in high school where the pastor had a very reverent liturgy did I start really taking the faith seriously.

  101. Rod Halvorsen says:

    Probably an attempt to bring back the Common Lectionary to facilitate Coagulated Worship Services.

    Because……….doctrine and morality have been “divorced” from the Magesterium and we are no longer straight-jacketed by all that “rigid” stuff.

    Freedom at last from the ball and chain of belief and morality!

    But don’t take my word for it, take it directly from the most egregious words of Amoris Laetitia that no one seems to care about:

    “…I would make it clear that not all discussions of doctrinal, moral or pastoral issues need to be settled by interventions of the magisterium.” {Para 3}

  102. robtbrown says:


    Completely agree, but it is not limited to language.

    Why is it that every corner of every church must be illuminated? A few years ago I returned to Chartres after many years and scratched my head over the restoration, which, we are told,returned the church to its original state. Really? I didn’t know there was electric lighting in the Middle Ages.

  103. Father Bartoloma says:

    Response 101: get!

  104. Henry Edwards says:

    BenedictJoseph at 6:48 AM,

    What a complete description of the “spirit of Vatican II” as experienced by so many of the Church’s most devoted members in recent decades!

  105. HighMass says:

    Wow, yes we have wondering when the other shoe going to drop. We must pray, and ask Our Lord and Our Lady to bless those who cause upset in the church.

  106. Austin says:

    And what if we do?

    One could just as well look at the history of the Roman Rite and note that it tends to uniformity in essentials. The Roman Canon is supposed to be the default Sunday eucharistic prayer for good reason.

  107. Sam Schmitt says:

    I would argue that the 1998 translation is not clearly superior to what we have now, as has been claimed by frjim4321 and joekstl. The the 1998 version has most of the flaws of the older version – for the simple reason that it is basically a revision of the 1973, not a fresh translation.

    The same problems that plagued the 1973 – concepts and words in the Latin that are left out, other ideas added – remain. The old versions of the mass parts – Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, etc., as well as the people’s responses – are still in place. Stilted, disjointed sentences are still cobbled together to make up the prayers and prefaces. Scriptural allusions and traditional concepts such as merit or pleading before God, and anything else deemed superfluous or awkward by the translators are still systematically omitted. Prayers and introductions that are not in the Roman Missal are still added. What we have is not the Roman Rite translated but rather an ICEL rite, purged and edited by the translators of anything, it seems, judged to be out of place or not in keeping with modern ideas about the faith.

    You can see this by comparing the translations of the collect for the First Sunday of Advent. First, the Latin:

    Da, qu?sumus, omnipotens Deus,
    hanc tuis fidelibus voluntatem,
    ut, Christo tuo venienti iustis operibus occurrentes,
    eius dextera sociati, regnum mereantur possidere caleste.
    Per Dominum.

    The version we now pray:

    Grant your faithful, we pray, almighty God,
    the resolve to run forth to meet your Christ
    with righteous deeds at his coming,
    so that, gathered at his right hand,
    they may be worthy to possess the heavenly Kingdom.
    Through our Lord . . .

    And the 1998 version:

    Almighty God,
    strengthen the resolve of your faithful people
    to prepare for the coming of your Christ
    by works of justice and mercy,
    so that when we go forth to meet him
    he may call us to sit at his right hand
    and possess the kingdom of heaven.
    We ask this through our Lord . . .

    While the 1998 is an improvement over the 1973 version, there are still things left out and other things added, for no apparent reason.

    While the Latin asks simply for the will or resolve (reflected in the current version), the 1998 seems to think that all we need is to be “strengthened” in a resolve we already have. The wonderful Advent image of “running forth” to meet Christ with our righteous deeds is lost, replaced by the rather general notion of preparing to meet Christ by (the generic-sounding) “works of justice and mercy.” The further image of being gathered (“sociati” – being in his company) at his right hand is replaced by the “call to sit” (found nowhere in the prayer) at his right hand. Finally, the idea of merit or being worthy – related, of course, to the righteous deeds mentioned earlier – is simply left out.

    So the entire prayer is flattened, the “story” of our running forth to meet Christ with our righteous deeds whereby we are worthy to possess the heavenly kingdom is eviscerated, replaced by a generic notion of preparing for his coming by works of justice and mercy. Not a bad image, I suppose, but the Latin is so much richer – and subtle – than that.

    I hope frjim is right when he says that “no one wants the 1973 translation back,” but the 1998, while it is an improvement, has all the fundamental problems of the older translation.

  108. joekstl says:

    There is this mantra on this blog about turning to the Lord. I see the Lord present on three ways on the Novus Ordo versus populism: present in the gathered assembly; present in the scripture; and present on the altar table the form of bread and wine. [Under the appearance of bread and wine. Perhaps you see them as equal, as well.] So we the congregation gather around the altar table and Ambon and are thus facing the Lord in our communal prayer. I, personally, never want to return to the Sunday worship of the first third of my life. [Hasta luego. And there seems to be little room for the eschatological in your notions. Not a surprise.]

  109. Uxixu says:

    Having the propers and readings in the vernacular should completely preclude any need for hand missals or misalettes, much less God forbid, projection on a screen. Kyrie eleison. Look at and listen to the speaker!

  110. joekstl says:

    We don’t put the propers or readings on the wall. Just the music and people’s parts such as the Hlory to God, Holy Holy Holy etc.

  111. joekstl says:

    I can’t speak except for our parish. We are small. As of a year ago we had about 450 families. We started an outreach with welcomers, including a “next steps” station in the vestibule for those who want more info about our Church. Additionally we have three different worship experiences as to music: one Mass with traditional choir; one with just a cantor and two with our praise band. On the past year we have added 50 new families. We are close to a large African-American community and our praise band meets the needs of our black converts. [I wonder if it does or if people only assume that it does.]

  112. AnnTherese says:

    Although I’ve grown fond of saying “consubstantial” in a prayer (kind of like a pet), I think the work and subsequent landfill waste of this past translation and a potential new one seem like a sinful waste of financial and human resources with little comparative benefit. Imagine if that could be used on real needs in our Church and world that are presented in Catholic Social Teaching? Imagine!

    Fr. Z's Gold Star Award

    [You have a good point. Think about how much money was wasted in the wreckovation of churches, not to mention the disrespect to those who built it in the first place. And now a lot of money must be spent to put to right the stupid and wasteful wreckovations. So too with this next round of pointless, reckless, tinkering.]

  113. Uxixu says:

    I was thinking there’s perhaps another opportunity here to be realistic and recognize there really isn’t unity in the Roman Rite… How about a blanket amnesty from Rome to allow any Missale Romanum that a priest and congregation want from say, 1910. This would allow the TLM to use the ancient Holy Week instead of the Bugnini and priests like Fr Jim to use the 1973, (pity the poor parishioners). Reform of the Reform types could use the 1964…

    I acquired a 1948 Missale Romanum and would freely let the local FSSP use it in licit celebration of the old Holy Week as well as the 15 octaves suppressed in 1955…

  114. joekstl says:

    To Fr z (I assume you are raider in red). Yes a lot had happened since Justin Martyr and a lot has happened since Trent. I do try to be generous.

    [I am not the “raider” in any way here. This is MY blog. You are in my house, as a guest. Omnia mea, mea. Omnia tua, mea.]

  115. NoraLee9 says:

    Dear Ben:

    Get a Haydock! The commentary is almost line by line. It was compiled in 1859, so no worries about modernist heresy, & the text is the DR. There’s a free version online. Take it for a test drive.

  116. ncstevem says:

    ” I, personally, never want to return to the Sunday worship of the first third of my life.”

    So I was correct, the commenter is a 1970’s holdover.

    Joey, [No. No. I’m cutting the rest. You don’t get to do that.]

  117. joekstl says:

    To Fr Z: yes it does meet their needs. We talk extensively to converts and pointedly ask them what attracted them to the Catholic Church and our parish in particular. It has helped that we have a parish Catholic school associated with the Notre Dame ACE program. Half our students are non-Catholic but do become familiar with our Catholic faith. Parents of our black students who do ask to become Catholic cite their experience with our teachers and pastor and our weekly school worship as factors. They often cite our music as something familiar to them from their (mostly) Baptist religious churches.

  118. OldProfK says:

    Thanks kindly for the tip on the Haydock, NoraLee9. I wasn’t familiar with it, and I’m test-driving.

  119. Lucas Whittaker says:

    Father Z, do I hear you stating that the Latin phrase, “Propria domus omnia optima” is not necessarily true here because it is not always the quiet, welcoming place that a home should be? I am grateful that you leave the door open for visitors anyway: It is good to be among great fellow Catholics here.

  120. Grabski says:

    Joekstl. It’s either an altar or a table.

  121. jaykay says:

    Fr Jim says:”The correct comparison is between the ICEL 1998 and the Vox Clara 2010. In which the ’98, even stripped of the newly-composed alternative prayers, is the hands down winner in every respect.”

    I know you’re a proponent of the 1998 proposal, Father, and you’ve often expressed that here, cogently, but really, although what I had heard of it in preparation back then was limited (and that was Eamon Duffy’s address to a conference in Oxford in 1996) and it was better than the previous, I’d have to say: no. It was not a hands-down winner over 2010. It was analysed and found very much wanting in very many respects by the Congregation in about 2000/2001, and rightly so when you read the relevant communication, which is available online, and has been since then. That’s for those who are interested in how things actually developed, which is a good deal of us here.

    Also those of us who live in parishes with many immigrants and yet get by without projections on the wall, or other fads. Which only last as long as we have electricity to produce same, which can’t be guaranteed forever. Or microphones. Or indeed, printed anything. We should learn it by heart. It’s not difficult, God knows.

  122. Midwest St. Michael says:

    Dear OldProfK & NoraLee9,

    The Haydock is online, here:

    I check it quite often when this good ol’ boy gets bumfuzzled. ;^)

    God bless both of you and yours,

  123. joekstl says:

    OK. let’s go with what Eastern Rites call it: the Holy Table.

  124. jlmorrell says:


    Your comments make much more sense to me after you alluded to your age and the desire never to return to the Mass of the first third of your life. In the years that I’ve been promoting the TLM the Catholics that have always had a hatred for it were of your generation. This was odd and disappointing at first. But then I came to find a certain a comfort in the fact that such a diabolical disorientation had not yet infected the younger generations of Catholics.

  125. frahobbit says:

    If the Catholic and Lutheran Churches join, how will we know when a Lutheran minister is how shall I call it, “presiding”? That would be a serious attack on the Divine Liturgy.

  126. joekstl says:

    I don’t have a hatred for the TLM. I find the Novus Ordo versus populum richer and a better way to commemorate what Jesus told us to do: remember his sacrificial death in a meal around a table, where we pray as a community in vernacular language and song.

  127. Grabski says:

    Joekstl. But we aren’t Eastern Rite Catholics now are we?

    It’s an altar. Sorry.

  128. Grabski says:

    Joekstl. The OF is many things, but “rich” isn’t one of them!

    [To the extent that it conforms to the Roman tradition it is, sure. But there are also element that detract from the riches which remain in it. You might read some of my posts on the Collects of Masses.]

Comments are closed.