Bishops' statement on ICEL translation of Ordo Missae

[Canonico]

I welcome Bishop Mark Jabalé's comment released through the Catholic Communications Service today concerning the 'leak' of the document. (Bishops' Conference of E&W Press releases). In my innocence I thought that it might have been deliberately leaked in order to test public opinion! However, as Bishop Mark reveals, a great number of Catholics, 'ordinary' as well as 'Ordinaries' seem to have been part of the consultation process which, like the proposed new translation, is by no means complete.
At the same time, it's all very well asking peoples' opinion about things, but unless Catholics (ordinary or not) have the necessary experience and have done some background study into the topic under discussion you can very easily end up with, (in the words of the late Cardinal Heenan) 'Nothing but shared ignorance'! Then again, Presbyter has already reminded us that we can also get some 'pretty poor stuff' even from STL's (or BA's, BD's and even JCD's)! Perhaps the reaction of the Apostles when asked by Jesus if they were going to leave him too ('Lord, to whom shall we go?') has some relevance here! We are still on the journey, so perhaps the most sensible course of action is to keep on talking and listening to the guide as well as to each other!

Hyperlink modified - now goes direct to Press Release page. Admin, 25 May 2004

[presbyter]

I welcome Bishop Mark Jabale's comment released through the Catholic Communications Service today concerning the 'leak' of the document.

Wow - he sounds cross - and rightly so, I think. We who were consulted are under strict instructions not to reveal the text to anyone, for the sound and sensible reasons Bishop Jabalé states.

[mcb]

Wow - he sounds cross - and rightly so, I think.

I can't say I agree. Bishop Jabalé's indignation looks somewhat synthetic to me, and perhaps not chiefly for domestic consumption. The arguments in his statement don't seem to me to withstand scrutiny. Since it was possible to extend the consultation process to lay associations (and I'd say it's disappointing that he doesn't include scholarly associations concerned with language and translation among the bodies it was felt appropriate to consult) it means there was nothing inherent in the draft which requires confidentiality - nothing which would have caused scandal by entering the public domain and nothing about the enterprise itself which would be harmed by wider exposure to the public gaze.

Allowing the bishops to "consider the matters away from a spirit of controversy" is a red herring. There's no sense in which the bishops are more likely to reach more dependable decisions by stifling public discussion. What the bishops are supposed to do is exercise discernment in respect of all the views that come to them arising from a more public airing of the issues. That's their responsiblity (and their charism?).

The rest is merely the exercise of power. 'We are the Church's decision makers; the rest of you are there to receive our decisions.' The Tablet's approach - encouraging public discussion without having any very evident axe to grind on the substance of the proposed translation - seems decidedly more grown up to me, and more in the spirit of aggiornamento we used to read about a fair old while ago.

M.

[mcb]

At the same time, it's all very well asking peoples' opinion about things, but unless Catholics (ordinary or not) have the necessary experience and have done some background study into the topic under discussion you can very easily end up with, (in the words of the late Cardinal Heenan) 'Nothing but shared ignorance'!

Or (in the words of the late Cardinal Newman) 'sensus fidelium'.

M.

[Canonico]

Re: mcb's message:
I don't wish to engage in too serious a discussion about the nature of episcopal charisms; that might require a new heading or sub-heading. However, in the context of mcb's message, I do feel that episcopal charisms should have more to do with discerning what Christ wants for his Church than in discerning what might please 'Joe Public' as though they were politicians. As a very-much-alive Cardinal has said, 'Truth is not determined by a majority vote.' (Card. Joseph Ratzinger)
I relation to mcb's interpretation (tongue in cheek, I feel - I hope! ) of sensus fidelium (or rather consensus fidelium) ; I suggest that Cardinal Newman would certainly not equate it with 'shared ignorance' which could possibly be described as nonesensus infidelium.
I do, however, agree with mcb about the usefulness of scholarly associations and individuals in translating liturgical texts. For example, Fr. Alex Jones sought the advice of such experts as J. R.R. Tolkien when he was translating the Jerusalem Bible. Perhaps Bishop Mark's list of those consulted is not complete because ICEL is, after all, an international undertaking and other expert advisers may already be involved. I hope (and pray) so!

PS. Sorry I don't know how to use the 'so-and-so wrote' facility as others have done. I can't discern the correct buttons to press. Good job I'm not a Bishop!

[mcb]

Good job I'm not a Bishop!

Give it time!

Newman uses both sensus fidelium and consensus fidelium in On consulting the faithful.... A lot of subsequent writers seem to use them synonymously.

I expect we agree: there's no place for quasi-political posturing in any kind of consultation of the faithful, but given the nature of language as a constantly-evolving social entity, the views of the Church at large - lay or ordained, theologically trained, linguistically trained or neither - must play a significant part in determining the language of public prayer.

Click on the "quote" button next to the post you want to cite, and then delete the bits you don't need.

M.

[Canonico]

Click on the "quote" button next to the post you want to cite, and then delete the bits you don't need.

Thanks, mcb; full of practical usefulness!
By the way, 'subsequent writers' seem to be a problem with many theologians. The real problem is that because they are subsequent, the author can't really reply. Unless, of course, he/she is a saint and then the subsequent author is in real trouble!

PS - We can't keep meeting like this. Perhaps the picture you post with your pseudonym might give a clue to where we might meet someday!

[mcb]

We can't keep meeting like this. Perhaps the picture you post with your pseudonym might give a clue to where we might meet someday!

OK, ready when you are.

M.

[Merseysider]

Click on the "quote" button next to the post you want to cite...

Thank you Canonico. Have always wondered how this worked.

[Merseysider]

Except it didn't.
Hm!
Any clues anyone?

[presbyter]

Re: mcb's message:
As a very-much-alive Cardinal has said, 'Truth is not determined by a majority vote.'

Now don't tell us you've got the T-shirt Canonico
http://www.cafeshops.com/ratzfanclub.3558971

[presbyter]

Having posted that link and read the T-shirt, I am praying that no member of the Cardinal's Fan Club is also a member of ICEL. One does not have to be a devotee of "Eats (,) shoots and leaves" to see the ambiguity in the script. Is it the Cardinal himself or merely his Fan Club who have been "Putting the Smackdown on Heresy since 1981"? "Smackdown" - now there's a word for ICEL to avoid!

[Canonico]

Now don't tell us you've got the T-shirt Canonico
http://www.cafeshops.com/ratzfanclub.3558971

Presbyter, I kid you not! I certainly am in possession of the aforesaid T-Shirt and I've also got the baseball cap as well as the car sticker. But here's the frightening thing: they were bought as a present for my Ordination Anniversary by my Curate - yes, there are still some of them about! (Curates, I mean.)

[musicus]

Except it didn't.
Hm!
Any clues anyone?

You can't quote a quote. Click on the quote button associated with the original text that you want to quote. This will create a new post that quotes the entire original. Then delete any parts of the text that you don't want to quote. Add any comments of your own after the quotation.

Hope this helps.

M

[musicus]

Meanwhile, back on topic...