Video interview with the new Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship, Archbp. Roche

20 Comments

1. Supertradmum says:

   2 September 2012 at 11:12 AM

   Moms, take your kids to daily Mass. As the Archbishop pointed out, his vocation was encouraged young. Last night, I had a long conversation with two young people in their twenties, who work in London in catechesis, and they agree with me that vocations come out of families primarily. I know this personally and does this Archbishop.

   And what an interesting comment on his learning the Mass by translating the New Mass and seeing the Scriptural and Patristic origins. And, as a great fan of St. Bernard of Clairvaux, my favourite saint, I was glad to hear of the Archbishop’s reference to the prayers of the Mass and Bernard speaking and thinking Scripturally and Patristically.

   And, how funny, his comment that he did not know how many liturgists there were in the world until he began work on the new translation!! But, he could have added that we should go back to the Tridentine Mass. He refers to “tradere”, the handing down of what was heard from Christ–just a bit more and….

   I know a very fine older man going into Valladolid for the pre-seminary year next week. I loved watching this today as my son enters seminary tomorrow at Wonersh, and the idea of martyrdom is real there as at the Venerabile and Valladolid. There is a grounding among the young men who know what being a diocesan priest will be like in the future against the “aggressive secular world” which is Britain. I am glad the Archbishop referred to this.

   When the Archbishop speaks of the hostile press at Pope Benedict’s visit, he cannot be more true. That the BBC misread the public is an understatement. The Pope’s visit has made a great impression here still.

   Pray for “Supertradson” and other sems here. Thank you, Father Z for posting this.
2. frjim4321 says:

   2 September 2012 at 11:31 AM

   LOL, all those nice words about how the new translation is elevated language the brings forward the scriptural and patristic allusions . . . just like the 1998 product did!
3. Ttony says:

   2 September 2012 at 11:45 AM

   Fr Jim: isn’t the issue with the 1998 translation all the other things it brought forward, like disgendered language?
4. nanetteclaret says:

   2 September 2012 at 11:50 AM

   frjim4321 –

   I’m surprised that you have time – on a Sunday morning at 11:31 a.m. – to respond to a blog post.
5. VexillaRegis says:

   2 September 2012 at 12:22 PM

   @Nanetteclaret: Well, he could, like me, live in another time zone.
6. Kelvin Dock says:

   2 September 2012 at 12:34 PM

   This bishop has form:
   http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100043365/diocese-of-leeds-announces-brutal-programme-of-parish-closures-why-is-this-happening/
   His move to Rome was a bit of a puzzle; hope I’m wrong, but I can’t imagine him lifting a finger to promote Summorum pontificum.
7. Father G says:

   2 September 2012 at 1:27 PM

   @nanetteclaret

   Not all our Sunday mornings are booked solid with Masses. Today I had an early morning Mass (6:45AM), my next one is at 12:30PM, and my third and final Mass isn’t until 6:30PM.

   So, yes, there is time to respond to a blog post. :-)
8. Sixupman says:

   2 September 2012 at 2:07 PM

   Kelvin Block is correct, ++ Roche has indeed form, inter alia, he closed down a parish which majored in Traditional Catholicism, with a good combination of TLM, NOM, Benediction, et al.

   A while ago, misunderstanding Mass times, I ended up at an NOM, the priest unknown to me. The Mass was beautifully Celebrated and with the Consecration in Latin. The sermon was of such a quality that I was perforce to congratulate the priest and had a short conversation with him. Whilst relatively young the priest was steeped in deep pre-Vatican II Catholicism. Only recently did I learn that the said priest was Fr. Lawler, the same who had been at the brunt end of +Roche’s antagonism towards old-time Catholicism.
9. (X)MCCLXIII says:

   2 September 2012 at 2:57 PM

   Fr Lawler is an outstanding priest; a helpful confessor and the best preacher I have ever heard. It’s a pleasure to assist at his Masses.

   I don’t understand why he was persecuted in Leeds under Bishop Roche. Sad to relate, he had a similar experience in Nottingham diocese, where he served for a while (a little under a year, I think). Despite being greatly appreciated by most of his parishioners in Loughborough, it seems that the complaints of a few were enough for the bishop there to dispense with his services.

   On special occasions coachloads of former parishioners come to Lancashire from both Yorkshire and, most impressively, Leicestershire to support him. (That’s a very long way by English standards.)
10. (X)MCCLXIII says:

    2 September 2012 at 3:04 PM

    It would be a very pleasant surprise (very pleasant and also very surprising) if Abp. Roche were to do anything to promote Traditional worship. He has been very unsympathetic in the past (e.g. https://wdtprs.com/2007/10/bp-roche-leeds-uk-head-of-icel-statement-to-priests-on-mp-10-sept/) and I am not aware of any contrary examples of support for Tradition.
11. frjim4321 says:

    2 September 2012 at 3:12 PM

    I’m surprised that you have time – on a Sunday morning at 11:31 a.m. – to respond to a blog post. — Nanette Clarette

    If I need your help with my time management skills I’ll be sure to look you up, but for the time being I’m doing okay.

    As has been pointed out by others, not everyone lives in the Central time zone.

    Fr Jim: isn’t the issue with the 1998 translation all the other things it brought forward, like disgendered language? — TTony

    It’s fair to bring up that matter, because inclusive language and the composition of A, B, and C Opening Prayers were certainly among issues brought up in the belated letter of rejection sent from the Vatican to the chairs of the Episcopal conferences around 2001 or so. I have the PDF of that letter around here somewhere. *BUT* the translations of the orations from the typical edition were indeed elevated language and brought forward the scriptural and patristic material.

    Of course the recent Vox Clara product is different than the 1998 ICEL product, and it’s what the Vatican forced through, but it’s intellectually dishonest to leave out 15 years of history (not to mention expense) as if it never happened.
12. Vecchio di Londra says:

    2 September 2012 at 3:51 PM

    Fr Jim – “the translations of the orations from the typical edition were indeed elevated language and brought forward the scriptural and patristic material.”
    ‘Elevated language,’ hm, a matter of opinion. ‘Nebulous’, ‘vague’, ‘hazy’, ’empty’ or ‘banal’ – are other opinions. But the previous versions were versions, not accurate or even complete translations, which was their purported aim. In fact it is apparent that the old post 1970 translations of the Collects and Postcommunions were actually intended to mask and subtly alter the original meaning. Fr Z blogs daily on this subject, so I’m not revealing any new fact here.
    A translation is not a ‘product’. It is simply a liturgical translation from the key text in Latin, and any translation is to be judged by its accuracy.
13. frjim4321 says:

    2 September 2012 at 5:08 PM

    Vecchio . . . I don’t know if you realize I was referring to the 1998 text and not the 1973 text.

    The 1998 text is available in many places, including Wikispooks. An upload from a Canadian bishop, I believe.

    Yes, the translations/texts are known as “products” in much of the literature.
14. nanetteclaret says:

    2 September 2012 at 5:29 PM

    frjim4321 –

    I’m sorry you were offended by my comment. My experience has been that priests are always busy on Sunday morning, sandwiching in hearing confessions, committee meetings, coffee hour with parishioners, etc. in between Masses. 11:30 a.m. CDT is 9:30 a.m. on the West Coast and 12:30 p.m. on the East, so even lunch with parishioners after Mass would be a possibility. Plus praying the Liturgy of the Hours has to be fitted in somewhere. I was just truly surprised.
15. frjim4321 says:

    2 September 2012 at 5:40 PM

    Nanette, it is a holiday weekend and we did not have coffee and doughnuts this weekend. The Big Event is Catechetical Sunday in two weeks and then the place becomes a beehive of activity for nine months. A holiday weekend without a wedding or baptism is rare so I’m wringing out every last bit of summer that I can. I am the only priest here so am on duty for everything, so the odd quiet Sunday is a luxury.

    With regard to weddings on holiday weekends, I truly loath them. Why do all these couples think it’s wonderful to block out the holiday weekend for their families and friends? So, so nice to have a very quiet holiday, particularly when the proverbial YKW hits the fan first thing Tuesday morning.
16. Vecchio di Londra says:

    2 September 2012 at 5:50 PM

    Fr Jim – I was including 1998 in my ‘post-1970’ category of liturgical mistranslations.
    One tiny instance: before 1970, in one of the first of the (wearisomely numerous) versions of the English text, ‘ut intres sub tectum meum’ was translated as ‘that you should enter under my roof’ – a translation of the Latin, and of course a direct quotation from Matt 8:5-13. That remained in place for a while. The subsequent bland ‘to receive you’ emptied the prayer of any scriptural meaning whatsoever. (Funny how often the ‘newer’ translation was blander and less scriptural than the previous one. I was taking note of all this from 1963 on, so I noticed. I noticed for example that in parts of Germany already by 1964 the liturgy was a) all in German – not yet legal, and b) utterly unrecognizable as a Catholic Mass.

    By ‘the typical edition’ you mean I assume the third ‘typical edition’ of the NO English translation, promulgated in 2000, published in 2002, reprinted with corrections and further amendments in 2008.
    Two earlier typical editions of the revised Missal were issued in 1970 (promulgated in 1969) and 1975.

    Whew, that’s an awful lot of updating and correction, and a lot of input from many busy liturgists, just for one language translation. Must be quite expensive on a global level. Maybe they should just have a single untouchable text, to keep costs down? :-)

    “Yes, the translations/texts are known as “products” in much of the literature.”
    Errrr, which literature? Maybe I’ve led a sheleterd life, but I’ve never yet heard of this curious consumer-speak term applied to the liturgy. Can you provide some links please, Father?

    Btw, when you wrote “it’s intellectually dishonest to leave out 15 years of history (not to mention expense) as if it never happened,” did it not occur to you that there might be millions of other Catholics who might have thought, might indeed still think, that it was intellectually and theologically dishonest to leave out 1500 years of history by trying as hard as possible to kill off the Catholic Mass in Latin, against the express instruction of the Second Vatican Council?
17. robtbrown says:

    2 September 2012 at 7:36 PM

    frjim4321 says:

    A holiday weekend without a wedding or baptism is rare so I’m wringing out every last bit of summer that I can. I am the only priest here so am on duty for everything, so the odd quiet Sunday is a luxury.

    I sympathize with your typical hectic American Sunday. When I was doing consulting work, I would return from Sunday mass, pack, wait for the limo to pick me up mid afternoon to head the airport for a flight to DC, and sometimes arrive in the hotel as late as 10:30. And that was a day off.

    With regard to weddings on holiday weekends, I truly loath them. Why do all these couples think it’s wonderful to block out the holiday weekend for their families and friends?

    I don’t know about other holiday weekends, but I do know that a major reason for choosing Labor Day weekend for a wedding is that the Bride wants to get married as late in the year as possible but also wants summer colors, which are not an option after LD.
18. Norah says:

    2 September 2012 at 9:04 PM

    Speaking of weddings….a few years ago a church in Melbourne Australia was being renovated and a young woman was quite disappointed that the scaffolding couldn’t be removed because she said that they would spoil her wedding pictures! lol
19. Ttony says:

    3 September 2012 at 2:32 PM

    (I imagine everybody has moved on so if there is no answer to this, it’s not because “there is No Answer to this.)

    Fr Jim said:

    “It’s fair to bring up that matter, because inclusive language and the composition of A, B, and C Opening Prayers were certainly among issues brought up in the belated letter of rejection sent from the Vatican to the chairs of the Episcopal conferences around 2001 or so. I have the PDF of that letter around here somewhere. *BUT* the translations of the orations from the typical edition were indeed elevated language and brought forward the scriptural and patristic material.

    Of course the recent Vox Clara product is different than the 1998 ICEL product, and it’s what the Vatican forced through, but it’s intellectually dishonest to leave out 15 years of history (not to mention expense) as if it never happened.”

    Father Jim: this isn’t fair. The 1998 rejected version and the recently adopted wersion both offer elevated language. I’m sure anybody involved in the latter will accept that. But “inclusive” language is as bad, as inapproriate, as methodologically unsound as “dynamic equivalence”, and it was right that the 1998 offering should be rejected.

20. Pingback: Fr. Groeschel Rimsha Masih Joel Osteen Dating Non-Catholics | Big Pulpit

Comments are closed.