Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Quote of the Day

. . . I happen to find the Latin mass beautiful, and at first I seemed to object less to the new changes than most Catholics I know. I attend Spanish language mass from time to time. In that liturgy, we already use phrasing similar to that the New Old Missal introduces. The Vatican is not nearly so interested, however, in the accuracy of the translation of the mass as it is in dragging today's vernacular mass back in time. They want the 1962 mass with all the trimmings. This new translation business is a tasty treat for the lockstep sheep and papist throwbacks.

Though I seem to be alone in it, I don't mind having to use (the new) "consubstantial" in the Nicene Creed. "Consubstantial" – it's so, so Latin, I almost like it. There is, however, good reason not to like this kind of change. Daunting Latinate terms like "consubstantial" are tools in the grift. When the boys in the Vatican want our money, they remind us that all are welcome – no theology knowledge needed. But when people in the pews challenge man-made doctrine, the men in miters are all too quick to remind us that our lack of advanced degrees from the Pontifical Gregorian University might leave us less than qualified to challenge the Holy See on any Catholic matter.

The average Catholic is too busy living a life to familiarize him or herself with the specifics of each papal encyclical, each tenet of dogma and the many voluminous, seminal Roman Catholic theological texts – and the Magisterium likes it that way. Ecclesiastical jargon makes the bishops look like they have the inside line on God. Hence the current pope's fervor for evangelization in the developing world: Hungry, illiterate people make good converts.

The New Old Missal matter works well as a diversionary tactic. Its well-timed fanfare shifts attention away from a pontificate mired in perversion. It is easier to sit at the long table in a gown parsing the Filioque than it is to sit at that same table and discuss the ordination of women, the Vatican's culpability in spreading HIV and AIDS in the developing world, and its own spiritual cancer in the form of bishop-facilitated child rape. . . .

– Michele Somerville
"The Truth Behind the Godawful New (Old) Roman Catholic Missal"
The Huffington Post
November 29, 2011

Related Off-site Link:
The Best Priestly Review of the New Translation – Colleen Kochivar-Baker (Enlightened Catholicism, November 29, 2011).

See also the previous PCV post:
Yesterday's Language: The New Words of the Catholic Mass

1 comment:

  1. A small group from my former parish in Chicago wanted a Mass in Latin. One of the priests went through all the trouble of filling out the forms then required to get permission for a Mass in Latin. Permission was granted, and on the designated day, a Saturday, the priest was there, but no one else showed up. The priest was annoyed. Instead of filling out all those forms, he could have been making lasagna.

    Latin, lugubrious hymns, the rattling of rosary beads, sermons about the need for more and more money, people wandering in late and leaving early -- in short the sights and sounds that obscured the meaning of the Celebration of the Eucharist are faded memories. When asked, "What are you doing Sunday morning?," many Catholics, myself included, would say, "I have to go to church." Pews in those days were full of people like me who didn't want to be there. I don't know what's happening in other parishes, but my church is packed every Sunday with people who do want to be there. I am incredibly grateful to be one of them. The "New Translation" makes me nervous. Is the "New Translation" the thin edge of a wedge? Will it lead to a time when once again I won't want to go to Mass on Sunday? Heaven forbid! NanookMN