Friday, June 13, 2008

And the vote is.....

...undecided. The vote for the new ICEL translations needs 166 "yes" votes to pass and "83" votes to fail. Those present at the vote? 178. Not enough "yes" votes. Check out some of the plaints from the Bishops. Dare I say that they border on the silly? My, what stellar thinkers we have leading us. With shepherds like these, who needs wolves? Excerpted from John Allen, Jr's column
Among other things, Galeone cited the text’s use of the phrase “the gibbet of the Cross.”

“The last time I heard that word was back in 1949, during Stations of the Cross in Lent,” Galeone said.

“I challenge anyone to proclaim what’s given here at Mass,” he said. “It’s very difficult.”

“A good translator has to understand not just the original language, but also one’s own into which these texts are being put,” Galeone said. Despite assurances to the contrary, he said, the new texts are “slavish” with respect to the Latin originals.

“I’m an obedient son of the church, and if these texts are passed as they stand, I will pray with them,” Galeone said. “But I feel that the vernacular has been a blessing to our people.” Galeone added that with “all due respect” to the recent ruling from Pope Benedict XVI authorizing wider celebration of the old Latin Mass, he hasn’t celebrated the old rite since 1970. If he were asked to do so today, he said, he would instead celebrate the new rite of the Mass in Latin.

Galeone’s speech seemed to open the floodgates, as other bishops rose to voice reservations about the new translations.

Auxiliary Bishop Richard Sklba of Milwaukee, for example, said, “If I have trouble understanding the text when I read it, I wonder how it’s going to be possible to pray with it in the context of worship.”

Sklba warned that if the proposed text were adopted, “our priests and our people” will press the bishops to come back to it “again and again” to remedy perceived defects. “This is not yet mature,” he said.
With all due respect, Your Excellencies, we've only waited for what, 20 years for a proper translation. Let us sell no translation before its time, eh? If my teenage sons can understand "gibbet" and have enough brain power, nay, not brain power, motivation to at least pick up a dictionary to look up a word that they don't know, why do you consider us pewsitters to be addled vacuous nincompoops? So something isn't understandable? Where does the responsibility lie to TEACH? Teach, as in explaining to pass on a concept, an idea, a know? Like what BISHOPS are supposed to do.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!! Spare us from your foot-dragging and your lack of imagination. Pssst, by the by, your admissions make you look rather weak-brained and foolish.

Oh, and here's the killer quote from Archbishop Pilarcyzk:
Responding to the “let’s move on” argument, Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk of Cincinnati warned that it “depends on what you’re moving forward to,” arguing that the new texts would be “a linguistic swamp.”
Linguistic swamp?????

Excuse me while I go and read the Propers for Sunday's Mass. Let me see what obscure words I can look up for my edification.


Anonymous said...

Dan Hunter says: The moral authority of the True Religion is presently being mocked by barbarians, apostates, pagans, and worshippers of Satan; and it is first of all because of the dearth of moral guidance, a lack of compass, by many of the chief shepherds of the flock of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Even Saint John Eudes tells us: 'The road to hell is paved with the skulls of bishops'. This is a take on Saint Athanasius' original statement: "The floor of hell is covered with the skulls of bishops." Both are a wake-up call to the bishops, priests and laity. Therefore let the shepherds beware.

Kyrie Eleison.

Anonymous said...


Dearest Excellenciess,

What we have now is a linguistic wasteland. I prefer swamps to wastelands, because in swamps many beautiful plants and animals can flourish, thrive, wax fruitful, propagate themselves, and vivaciously exist in all other ways.

In a linguistic wasteland, by the way, the aforementioned sentence would be reduced to: "Lots of things live in swamps." See the difference?

Please, by all means, grant us the blessing of a linguistic swamp in which our faith can be nurtured (to say nothing of our intellect)! I look forward to its abundant fruits.

Ex animo,

frival said...

I'm going to do something crazy and give the dissenting bishops a point here. There are a lot of people in the pews who will not understand the new translation and will also become angered that we're now going to use an elevated diction (they likely won't know what the word 'diction' means either, but that's another story). They're out there, and there are far more of them than we'd like to think. I'd wager that to one extent or another they probably even outnumber those of us who would with glee pull out a dictionary to learn any words we might not know - or for that matter just use the Internet.

The fault is not in acknowledging their existence nor in giving hearing to their expected complaints; the fault lay in allowing those who put ease and comfort ahead of a more full proclamation of the Gospel to set the target for which we aim. The poor we will always have with us, indeed, in money, intellect, drive and more. Ministry to the monetarily poor, however, does not have the end result of leaving them destitute in the gutter but of raising them to a more exalted status. Ministry to the intellectually and spiritually poor must do exactly the same. And last I checked, none of us is as rich as God in pretty much any area, particularly spiritually.