Following up on a previous article I posted on this blog....
During the Holy Father’s recent visit to Colombia, the Vatican released a new motu proprio from him, specifically amending canon 838 of the Code of Canon Law.
In effect, from now on, the process of translating texts for use in Catholic worship into vernacular languages around the world will be vested in local Conferences of Bishops as opposed to the Vatican, a task that had been previously reserved to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.
This new Papal edict limits the Vatican’s role at the end of the process, when a Bishops’ Conference submits a proposed translation for approval. No longer will the Congregation for Divine Worship submit an extensive list of required amendments to the text at that stage; instead, it will simply say “yes” or “no.”
Given that in most cases, Rome won’t want to delay an entire translation, many observers believe it’s now more likely that, whatever the bishops decide in the end, that will be what the Vatican accepts.
Well, depending upon who happens to be sitting on the Papal cathedra and who is in charge of the Congregation at the time!
Since the Vatican Council II, and especially under the Pontificates of St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI, there is no denying that the Vatican had succeeded in forcing an overhaul of the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL), bringing in a new staff more to the Congregation for Divine Worship’s liking.
The Congregation also created advisory bodies in different languages, with the first being the Vox Clara Commission for English in 2001, and effectively took control of the translation process itself.
The result in English was the God-awful translation of the Mass we presently have. It is a clear break with the post-Vatican II principle of “dynamic equivalency,” that is, adopting translations in ways which better responded to the needs of contemporary worship.
Instead, under the reactionary regimes of the two former Pontificates, an English translation more faithful to the Latin, was prescribed, a translation which hoped to would better safeguard the doctrinal treasures of the Mass and preserve the unity of Catholic worship.
Unfortunately, the present translation reveals little facility with Latin and a complete ignorance of English syntax and grammar.
Over the last quarter century, two factions have arisen over what is believed to be the result of Vatican II’s intrusion into the Sacred Liturgy.
One faction argues that implementation of the Council went a little bit crazy in the 1960s, 70s and 80s. They likewise argue that Pope St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI simply supplied some necessary corrections, moving the Church back towards what this group sees as the “true” spirit of the Liturgy.
The other group believes that the decisions of Vatican II were too great a shock and that the conservative reactionaries in the Vatican were waiting for the moment to come when they could start rolling things back. That moment arrived under St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI. As a result, critical elements of Vatican II’s promise were either stalled or outright reversed.
The fact is both factions are correct.
For the immediate future, Pope Francis’ motu proprio will have little effect upon English speaking worshiping communities. When parishes gather for Mass for the foreseeable future, the prayers will be exactly the same as they were. Over time, however, the Pope's action could have significant implications for the look and sound of Catholic worship.
Still, in the short term, this will be seen as a vindication for those (like me) who insist that it is outrageous for translations to be made thousands of miles away in Rome rather than by Bishops who know their native languages.
This latest action by Pope Francis appears to be another example to that the pendulum is -- for the present at least -- swinging hard in the opposite direction from the one in which it was heading under the previous two Pontificates.
As with all things pertaining to the reforms and practices being introduced into the life of the Church under the Pontificate of Francis, the next conclave and the next Pontificate will determine if any of these reforms and practices will continue and have long term consequence or be suppressed and quickly forgotten.
We shall see!
No comments:
Post a Comment