More from Mgr Wadsworth

[Nick Baty]

I welcome the trustees decision to invite Mgr Wadsworth

And yet you're not renewing your membership?

Sadly, a significant proportion of the editorial board have the same outdated and intolerant views as Southern Comfort

They work very hard – for nothing. Perhaps they would welcome another member like your good self?

[Peter Jones]

Sadly, a significant proportion of the editorial board have the same outdated and intolerant views as Southern Comfort.....

What views? I don't know what the views of the editorial board are - do you? Southern Comfort is not the looney-liberal you seem to think he is. So give us some examples but with the academic rigour you are accustomed to, give precise evidence. Otherwise, all you are doing is mud-slinging.

I suggest we all go back to first principles and read paragraphs one to four of Sacrosanctum Concilium.

[docmattc]

What views? I don't know what the views of the editorial board are - do you?

As I sat on the editorial board as a 'guest' two years ago when I was a trustee, I am aware of the views of its members, yes, or at least those views as they were at the time. Membership of the board has changed little since then accoring to the most recent magazine. To maintain the precision you ask for, I said "a significant proportion of the editorial board" which may or may not equate to its corporate view. I'm sure they would prefer that their discussions were not made public, but since you ask for evidence: I have seen email rejecting for review a Mass setting composed for the EF because it did not conform to (one interpretation of) the current (ie OF) GIRM. I have heard a priest considered with deep suspicion for celebrating Mass in Latin. A more traditionally minded author was rejected as a possible contributor because "we're not ready for Vatican II to be demolished yet".

Southern Comfort is not the looney-liberal you seem to think he is.

I'm sure he isn't, but he's doing a very convincing impersonation of one.

[Nick Baty]

Individual views of editorial board members are irrelevant unless they affect the publication of the journal which, at the moment, remains a very interesting read.

[Dom Perignon]

This has now gone too far - we seem to have moved on from considering Mgr Wadsworth's article to attacking members of Music and Liturgy's editorial team. If readers have comments on the content of M&L feel free to make them, but on another thread or via emails.

[nazard]

...I suggest we all go back to first principles and read paragraphs one to four of Sacrosanctum Concilium.

Those very paragraphs may well be the very heart of the problem. Although they look very fine and dandy, they are deficient in any precision which you would expect in an outline contract specification or invitation to tender, which are the equivalent documents in the secular world.

For example,

The Council also desires that, where necessary, the rites be revised carefully in the light of sound tradition, and that they be given new vigor to meet the circumstances and needs of modern times.

Anyone preparing to work from Sacrosanctum Concilium would look immediately for the definitions of "sound tradition", "where necessary", "vigor (sic)", and "the circumstances and needs of modern times." Although further down the same document a little more is given on these topics, it hardly amounts to a rigorous definition. The whole document would make the eyes of Mgr Jarndyce light up with glee. It can be argued about for generations.

Think about this sentence:

For the liturgy, "through which the work of our redemption is accomplished," most of all in the divine sacrifice of the Eucharist, is the outstanding means whereby the faithful may express in their lives, and manifest to others, the mystery of Christ and the real nature of the true Church.

At first sight this appears to define the liturgy as the outstanding means whereby the faithful may express in their lives...

But this is just one possible way of using language. Surely this describes the use of liturgy, and quite possibly its purpose, but not what it is made up of, which is what we often want to know, and argue about.

Remember C S Lewis in the voyage of the Dawn Treader, Eustace says that in our world a star is a ball of flaming gas. "No" says the retired star, "that is not what a star is, but only what it is made of." We who actually piece together instances of liturgy on the production line, as musicians, priests, or any other role, need to know both, and Sacrosanctum Concilium is very vague at the nuts and bolts level.

I think we are in the position of someone mixing something to a poor specification. Do we add sultanas because they are good for cakes, cement because it is good for walls, or farmyard manure because it is good for roses? After all, all three are well established in our culture.

[Southern Comfort]

...I suggest we all go back to first principles and read paragraphs one to four of Sacrosanctum Concilium.

Those very paragraphs may well be the very heart of the problem......

While nazard's post is very interesting, Peter Jones did say first principles, and that is precisely what SC gives: principles, not exact specifications. Further on, SC is surprisingly precise about what sort of things need to be attended to, and in this respect it is far more specification-orientated than the other Vatican II constitutions, but in general it is similar to those constitutions in that it gives in broad brush strokes where it thinks the Church's life should be moving. It could scarcely be otherwise, given that the practical implications of how the reform would be carried out were at that stage unknown.

[keitha]

The Trustees have invited Mgr Wadsworth to give the Creighton Lecture in his capacity as the Executive Director of ICEL on the basis that the new translation of the Mass will have been in use for almost a year by the time the Lecture takes place and new translations of the Rites are being worked on. He is a priest of the Archdiocese of Westminster, ordained in 1990, a former seminary professor, and has been honoured by the Pope having been appointed a Monsignor.
His first degree was in music (voice and piano). He has studied choral conducting and accompaniment at Trinity College of Music, London and the Royal Academy of Music. He has a graduate degree in theology from Maynooth Pontifical University and has published research on the history of liturgical translations in English since the Vatican II. He has, in recent years, directed a number of seminars for priests concentrating on the art of celebrating in both forms of the Roman Rite.

The SSG’s object is “to promote study, understanding and good practice in the celebration of the liturgy of the Roman Catholic Church, in accordance with the teaching of the Church.” The Trustees hope that Mgr Wordsworth can provide some insight into the new translation and its process, and provide some reasoned views on those matters covered by our object. We hope that there will be an opportunity for reasoned discussion for the benefit of all.

[Peter Jones]

Peter Jones did say first principles, and that is precisely what SC gives: principles, not exact specifications.

These principles are most important. Wadsworth is manifestly a fan of Mediator Dei - he refers to this encyclical in the video above. Pius XII himself places Mediator Dei in context: a world of pain in gradual recovery from World War II. Some sixteen years later - Sacrosanctum Concilium - the context has changed: the modern world - and fifty years on, post-modernity, multiculturalism, relativism,fragmentation of societies, declining interest in the practice of institutional religion in Europe (not limited to Christianity) ...etc.

The SSG’s object is “to promote study, understanding and good practice in the celebration of the liturgy of the Roman Catholic Church, in accordance with the teaching of the Church.”

Well here's the teaching of the Church:

3. Therefore, this sacred synod, proclaiming the noble destiny of man and championing the Godlike seed which has been sown in him, offers to mankind the honest assistance of the Church in fostering that brotherhood of all men which corresponds to this destiny of theirs. Inspired by no earthly ambition, the Church seeks but a solitary goal: to carry forward the work of Christ under the lead of the befriending Spirit. And Christ entered this world to give witness to the truth, to rescue and not to sit in judgment, to serve and not to be served.

4. To carry out such a task, the Church has always had the duty of scrutinizing the signs of the times and of interpreting them in the light of the Gospel. Thus, in language intelligible to each generation, she can respond to the perennial questions which men ask about this present life and the life to come, and about the relationship of the one to the other. We must therefore recognize and understand the world in which we live, its explanations, its longings, and its often dramatic characteristics.

While agreeing with much that Wadsworth says - and I'm a fan of the so-called hermeneutic of continuity - the question I would address to the Trustees is do you think Wadsworth is truly trying to understand and recognise the world in which we live?

[JW]

Do we have to label ourselves? How does that help us?

[Peter Jones]

The Trustees hope that Mgr Wordsworth can provide some insight into the new translation and its process.......

Do we need a lecture on these subjects? There's already been so much in print, in formation days and in the blogosphere that this sounds a bit stale to me. Why not address how the translation is being received?

[Southern Comfort]

Wadsworth is manifestly a fan of Mediator Dei - he refers to this encyclical in the video above. Pius XII himself places Mediator Dei in context: a world of pain in gradual recovery from World War II.

Here's Mediator Dei 1947, para 60:

The use of the mother tongue in connection with several of the rites may be of much advantage to the people.

followed by Sacrosanctum Concilium 1963, para 36.2:

But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.

These both refer to the vernacular, but both use the phrase "the mother tongue". Question: is the translation of RM3 in the mother tongue, or in another language? Discuss.

And then discuss again with Mgr Wadsworth at his Crichton Lecture. And don't forget to ask him what he really thinks about Vox Clara.

[alan29]

The Trustees hope that Mgr Wordsworth can provide some insight into the new translation and its process.......

Do we need a lecture on these subjects? There's already been so much in print, in formation days and in the blogosphere that this sounds a bit stale to me. Why not address how the translation is being received?

Presumably they anticipated the likely reaction to the texts and will be no more bothered now than they were then. (In sorrow.)

[Southern Comfort]

Some people have asked me whether I have something against Mgr Wadsworth, so I just wanted to clarify that he is a really nice man and that I get on extremely well with him on a personal level. I just don't happen to agree with everything he says! Wouldn't it be a boring world if we all thought the same about everything?!

[NorthernTenor]

Some people have asked me whether I have something against Mgr Wadsworth, so I just wanted to clarify that he is a really nice man and that I get on extremely well with him on a personal level. I just don't happen to agree with everything he says! Wouldn't it be a boring world if we all thought the same about everything?!

I look forward to seeing this attitude reflected in SC's approach to those he cannot bludgeon into agreement with his views. His wish to deny Msgr. Wadsworth a platform does not encourage me, though.