Three cheers for Alan Griffiths, and less than three for authority that brings discredit on itself.
Pray Tell wrote:Pray Tell reported yesterday that “some experts have been eliminated from the preparation of liturgical books because of their criticism of the missal translation project.” Today’s online Tablet (subscription required) reveals the name of the translator sacked: Fr. Alan Griffiths of Portsmouth Diocese, UK.
A priest who worked on the new English version of the liturgy but publicly criticized the way last-minute changes were made to the new Missal has been sacked by the body in charge of the new translation. … Fr. Alan Griffiths has been told by the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL), that he will not be asked to do any more work for them.
Fr. Griffiths, a respected translator, became critical of the final text approved by Rome when he became aware of how different it was from the text approved by the bishops of England and Wales. He guesses that ICEL acted because of his letter to The Tablet (Pray Tell report here) in which he wrote:
This latest revision drives a coach and horses through the guidelines contained in Liturgiam Authenticam, the 2000 document of the Holy See on how to translate liturgical prayers into the vernacular. Secondly, many of the changes are simply not correct English. My fear is that the whole process will be made to look ridiculous.
Copernicus wrote:Three cheers for Alan Griffiths, and less than three for authority that brings discredit on itself.
Indeed. The powers that be are rapidly losing their credibility.
They just don't get it. They lost credibility many moons ago... and we wonder why priests and laity (especially younger folk) get disillusioned, give up and leave the Church.
This is hardly surprising. This whole sorry saga has been marked by overarching pride and a chronic inability to listen. Like many poor leaders they have taken early recourse to diktat and bullying. Is this the best the church can produce ..... if so, heaven help us!
This whole sorry business (and I include the 2010 tinkering) is inspiring some extraordinary justifications and rationalisations from those who think that Rome can never be wrong (see the Pray Tell blog).
Like VML, I am wondering if anything can be done. Do we just tolerate this in silence? Does the SSG have a view and is it minded to express it?
musicus wrote:Does the SSG have a view and is it minded to express it?
For the record, the SSG trustees at their meeting on November 27 agreed to my suggestion that I should write to Bishop Roche expressing our 'concern' at the amendments being made by the Congregation to the ICEL translation. I duly wrote to him, adding that 'if the cause of "only the best for the liturgy" entails a further delay in the implementation of a new translation of the entire Missal in England and Wales beyond Advent 2011, so be it.' I did not expect a reply, nor have I received one.
I have no idea whether or not this is true, but I received this in my inbox today in an email entitled "This is how it's done", accompanied by a suggestion that this could be model for future process among the clergy:
A priests’ deanery in Archbishop Dolan’s archdiocese (New York) just passed a resolution to delay implementation of the missal for at least a year so that priests have an opportunity to study it, offer input, and participate in setting up consultative structures. Initially there was skepticism. Then the dean mailed out samples of the new texts. Seeing the texts swayed almost every priest in the deanery to vote for the resolution. It now goes to the archdiocesan priests’ council.
musicus wrote:Does the SSG have a view and is it minded to express it?
For the record, the SSG trustees at their meeting on November 27 agreed to my suggestion that I should write to Bishop Roche expressing our 'concern' at the amendments being made by the Congregation to the ICEL translation. I duly wrote to him, adding that 'if the cause of "only the best for the liturgy" entails a further delay in the implementation of a new translation of the entire Missal in England and Wales beyond Advent 2011, so be it.' I did not expect a reply, nor have I received one.
Yes, well, what could he say? But I am delighted to hear that SSG has made its views known.
