Dumbfounded and Disillusioned

[nazard]

...Perhaps getting off-topic, but I'm not sure about the term 'Protestant'. As far as I know, nobody says that they are a Protestant. They say that they are Christians - and may follow this up with 'Non-conformist', 'Independent', 'Methodist' etc.
I would imagine most Anglicans would be very offended if they were referred to as 'Protestants'.

This thread does seem to have taken a strange turn towards wishy washy religion. First, I am criticicised for suggesting that the church is guided by God, and now you are suggesting that protestants do not like to think of themselves as protestants. I know a fair number of protestants, all my mother's family, who are an enormous lot, as she is one of a dozen, other anglicans, methodists, presbyterians and their cousins the welsh annibynwyr, and they are all proud to call themselves protestant. They believe that they protest against and reject the authority of the church, either because they believe the church's claim to authority to be incorrect, or because the authority was so misused that a reform of the church was necessary, and they now belong to that reformed church which was guided to that reformed position by God and has subsequently been guided on its way, again by God. They are pleased to call themselves protestant, and many are amused to call themselves "proddies" when there are catholics about.

If we are ever going to get anywhere with unity, we need to bring together those with firm views. I don't think we will ever get anywhere by trying to all become wishy washy.

Now, how about all singing Anglican Evensong together? It certainly beats a lot of the stuff occupying another thread at the moment.

[Nick Baty]

Now, how about all singing Anglican Evensong together?

Quite! In my CofE days we were joined by neighbouring Catholics for Evening Prayer several times a year. We loved their psalms and they loved our hymns. It was an almost-perfect marriage. But here I am, OT – I apologise now before the bear raises a paw!

[John Ainslie]

Indeed. EP has side-tracked us with his suggestion that we should become Protestants. The point of this thread was Psalm Project's complaint that there are some priests who preach against acceptance of the new translation.

Are there problems with the acceptance of the new translation? Doubtless we shall discover both plus-points and faults. Let's take time to assess them fairly.

A fair assessment of music used in Christian worship by our ecumenical brethren is another matter altogether, for another thread.

[NorthernTenor]

Agreed. This was a cry from the heart. It's not to be ignored or used for other purposes, by EP or anyone else.

[keitha]

Indeed! But I think the issue can go a little further. Psalm Prelude's cry from the heart is triggered (if that is the right word) by a repeated denigration of, and rebellious refusal to use the new translation by a certain priest. My question is what can be done about it? What should we do if we have a priest who simply refuses to use the new translation and causes scandal in the way he does so. Are we, those in the pews, under any duty to do something? If so, what?

[docmattc]

Are we, those in the pews, under any duty to do something? If so, what?

Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff. It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.

[oopsorganist]

Any catholic priest works hard in social isolation - it is a very difficult vocation and for any priest to be struggling with a change in the Liturgy - to the point of railing at the congregation about it, just needs lots of guidance and support. He must be a very unhappy man.

All the words and all the translations are just tools. Words have slightly different meanings to all of us. In our parish we are content to read whatever is on the Mass sheet. I'm easy either way because I don't understand lots of it anyway. If it was not for all the preparation and training at SSG SS, I might not have noticed particularly.

Where the parish priest is so visibly and publicly upset there will also be a very upset congregation and other also upset in ministries. But it will resolve eventually, somehow. The parish in question could go on reading the old translation without it really worrying anybody. Eventually things will change, the priest will leave, die whatever. It will just take longer for that parish to evolve. Perhaps they could just do that and that will save the parish priest getting much too upset over something that is supposed to be a help to him.

[gwyn]

Eloquently put, Oops.

[SOP]

I will go further - beautifully and charitably put Oops - thank you.

Sometimes in our pursuit of excellence we can forget our primary aim of being a Christian, followers of Christ.

A sincere thanks for the reminder - please keep reminding me.

[Southern Comfort]

Psalm Prelude's cry from the heart

Love the Howells reference! I hope Psalm Project will enjoy the gloss on his username.

[Southern Comfort]

a repeated denigration of, and rebellious refusal to use the new translation by a certain priest.

Actually, if reports are to be believed, there are at least 500 priests in Ireland who are doing exactly the same thing, not just "a certain priest". Psalm Project is not alone; but on the other hand the priests have a point, and since they are not being listened to by their ecclesiastical superiors they are offloading onto their congregations in their frustration.

I would be somewhat reluctant to criticise the priest, given that there is a much larger and better-organised groundswell of opinion against the new version in Ireland than in the UK. I suspect the UK's groundswell is still to come.

[Nick Baty]

....there is a much larger and better-organised groundswell of opinion against the new version in Ireland than in the UK. I suspect the UK's groundswell is still to come.

I think the UK groundswell is there, SC. From what I've heard over the last few weeks, there are plenty of priests and musicians who will not be using the new translation. But we're less likely to vocalise it in the UK. Are we more in fear of the hierarchy over here? One priest told me, "We do things quietly in England – if we shout, it's more likely to land on a desk in Rome and then we'll be told not to."

[Southern Comfort]

Well, yes, Nick. I am aware of a small number of parishes in my diocese who so far have made no moves whatsoever to transfer to the new translation. I suspect that this could be the case in many other dioceses, too.

[Nick Baty]

What has surprised me most is the number of clergy who appear to know very little about it. One priest – a far from rebellious type – told me, "I haven't had a chance to look at it yet". I can't be critical – he has three churches in various states of disrepair and goodness know how many schools, convents, hospitals etc.

[dmu3tem]

EP has side-tracked us with his suggestion that we should become Protestants. The point of this thread was Psalm Project's complaint that there are some priests who preach against acceptance of the new translation.

Quite so. The central issue for me with this thread is whether priests can preach against (or for) acceptance of the new translation.

It strikes me that the issue boils down to two fundamental questions:

[1] Does the law of the land allow Church authorities to prohibit, restrict or otherwise regulate what is uttered from the pulpit?

Subsidiary to this is the question: Does the law of the land allow congregations (or groups within a congregation) to prohibit, restrict or otherwise regulate what is uttered from the pulpit?

The precise answers to these questions depend on citation of particular clauses in statutes or in judgements made under case law. Here, we are not really dealing with matters of opinion, but with legal fact, So, if there are any lawyers who can provide such data this might prove really useful.

[2] On grounds of 'natural right' can priests preach for (or against) the new translation?

Here are some points that ocurr to me; but I am sure there are others:

(a) Issues of 'conscience'. Text matters, because differences in choices of words or phrasing can alter the meaning of what is uttered. When you utter something you are, in effect, subscribing to it. Yet, like any other person, a priest may or may not have reservations about the new translation. During a service members of a congregation can evade such difficulties by not saying the text they have difficulty with. A priest cannot do this. Whatever his private feelings, he has to be seen to utter (usually aloud) the text that has been provided. This leaves him with only two options:
(i) Some form of casuistry or mental reservation. He utters the words as required but privately he disagrees with them and perhaps mentally substitutes an alternative phraseology. In the context of a public service, where everyone assumes that what he says he subscribes to, this strikes me as being dishonest.
(ii) At some point during or after the service he provides for everyone who is there some sort of statement or commentary about those parts of the text he considers require further debate, or elucidation. At parish level there are only two places where this can be done: during the sermon or in some statement in the weekly parish magazine or bulletin.

(b) Sermons are often used for commentary on passages of scripture, usually the reading for the day. Is there any significant difference between this and commenting on parts of the liturgy?

Note that when sermons comment on passages of scripture such commentary can depend on meanings assigned to particular words or phrases the scriptural passage. It can even depend on how those words have been translated from the Greek or Hebrew original. Is there any difference between this and commentary on a particular translation into English from a Latin 'master original'?

(c) In the past supporters of the Tridentine Mass have shown that they were quite prepared, for reasons of conscience, to carry on with such services despite official disapproval. It would be interesting to study the rationale they used to justify such behaviour. After all the same strategies may be used by those wishing to continue with the 1973 ICEL translations.