Liturgical reforms

  • Thread starter Thread starter jbelokur
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jbelokur

Guest
Does anyone know of any sites on the web that would have some information on the upcoming liturgical reforms?

jbelokur
 
Does anyone know of any sites on the web that would have some information on the upcoming liturgical reforms?

jbelokur
 
Things like that we will be responding “And with your Spirit” at some point. Stuff like that.
 
jbelokur said:
Things like that we will be responding “And with your Spirit” at some point. Stuff like that.
Click to expand...
There are varying target dates. The initial one was for the First Sunday of Advent 2010. But, now, it’s been pushed back to either 2011 or 2012. The date that the experts seemed to be leaning towards at a conference I recently attended was 2011.
 
My response would be that you can look all you want, but two days before NEVER would be my guess at the implementation deadline.

This has been something that has been going on for the better part of the last 7 years, and continues to seem like it’s never going to occur. A target date of 2012 is so absurd… why do we need four more years to prepare for something that was originally intended to occur with the commencement of the last edition of the GIRM?
 
MusicMan said:
My response would be that you can look all you want, but two days before NEVER would be my guess at the implementation deadline.

This has been something that has been going on for the better part of the last 7 years, and continues to seem like it’s never going to occur. A target date of 2012 is so absurd… why do we need four more years to prepare for something that was originally intended to occur with the commencement of the last edition of the GIRM?
Click to expand...
I would not be too pessimiistic. Rome, from what I have heard and read, wants to get this thing taken care of as soon as possible.

The whole ball started roling when Cardinal Medina, Francis Cardinal Arinze’s predecessor on the CDWDS, looked over the ICEL version of the rite of Ordination. He observed that:
In their contacts with the Dicastery, not a few Bishops have expressed concerns not only about the quality of the translations produced by the Mixed Commission but also about procedures which they felt limited their own ability to obtain corrections and improvements that they considered necessary for the accuracy of the texts. Increasingly, the Mixed Commission’s texts paraphrase or redraft the editiones typicae, while revising the rubrics so extensively as to impede effective recourse to the Latin text for the sake of clarification. In fact, the texts and the rubrics have sometimes been altered in substance without prior authorization from the Holy See, and indeed without even a request for such authorization. These concerns of the Congregation have recently been reinforced and have found authoritative confirmation in the instructions received by the Congregation for the preparation of new norms of liturgical translation.
Click to expand...
For some years now, this Dicastery has also expressed its misgivings about the use of the Commission’s resources for activities not concerned with translation, including the composition of original texts, which in fact are not the province of the Mixed Commission. A further concern is the fact that the Mixed Commission’s authorization for the use of its texts, such as the so-called ICEL Psalter, appears to have resulted in their being employed in ways which directly contravene liturgical law. As regards texts of the original composition in the most recently revised English translation of the Roman Missal, reports have reached the Congregation of alleged plans to allow their publication for use by non-Catholic ecclesial communities even prior to the granting of any recognitio for their use in the Roman Liturgy. This very fact has then been presented to the Congregation by some quarters as an argument that the recognitio should be granted so as not to impede an ecumenical initiative. The freedom of the Holy See to act in matters pertaining to its competence cannot be encumbered in such a way.
Click to expand...
An adequate response of the Mixed Commission to the Congregation’s expression of concern about a projected second volume of liturgical documentation that departs from the model of the Enchiridion Documentorum Instaurationis Liturgicae (ef. Prot. P. 451/98/L, 11 January 1999), has not been forthcoming. The Congregation is obliged to note also that a translation of the Caeremoniale Episcoporum was published by the Mixed Commission without the necessary episcopal approbation and without the recognitio of this Congregation.
Click to expand...
All of these factors appear to converge towards the conclusion that the Mixed Commission in its present form is not in a position to render to the Bishops, to the Holy See and to the English-speaking faithful an adequate level of service, nor to produce with appropriate promptness the texts that will be needed in the foreseeable future, including acceptable translations of the book De Exorcismis et supplicarionibus quibusdam, the Martyrologium Romanum, and any additional material that the Holy See may decide to insert in the Missale Romanum. It is inconceivable that English-speaking clergy and faithful should have to wait a decade or more for such translations.
Click to expand...
This precipitated a whole new revamping of ICEL and it also brought about the creation of the Vox Clara Commission.
 
So, what you’re telling me is that this situation is actually 10 years old, and we’re anticipating another 3-4 more years of foolishnes before it actually happens.

Two days before never.
 
In that same letter, Cardnial Medina also noted that:
Problems in the English-language translations of the liturgical texts assume a particular gravity in proportion to the prominence of the English language in the international community. Even while it remains essential that liturgical translations be made directly from the original texts into the various modern vernacular languages, the impact which the English-language translation is likely to exert on certain other versions is an observed and unavoidable fact, which in turn must be said to place a significant responsibility on those charged with the translations into English. Moreover, the experience of the years since the Council, as well as a deepening theological reflection, have brought clearly into focus the fact that the constitution, the regulation and the oversight of an international commission for liturgical translation are rightfully the competence of the Holy See to a degree which is not always sufficiently reflected in the Statutes which govern such bodies.
Click to expand...
It is therefore clear that a thoroughgoing reform and revitalization of the Mixed Commission is needed to ensure greater efficacy and to furnish a more sound procedural basis for the Commission’s functioning, while also supplying for any lacunae in its present juridical status. Indeed, apart from the difficulties which have arisen, such a revision of the Statutes would appear to be overdue in light of the subsequent publication of the 1983 Codex Iuris Canonici and the 1988 Apostolic Letter Vicesimus Quintus Annus, in which his Holiness Pope John Paul II requested a re-evaluation of the working of Commissions for the translation of liturgical texts (cf. AAS 81 [1989] 916, n.20).
Click to expand...
For these reasons, this Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, exercising the mandate assigned to it in the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus, article 62, regarding the superintendence of “those matters which pertain to the Holy See in relation to the moderation and promotion of the Sacred Liturgy,” hereby directs the Statutes of the “International Commission on English in the Liturgy” be revised thoroughly and without delay. The revised Statutes, drafted in active consultation with this Dicastery and incorporating within the Constitution of the renewed Commission the considerations attached to this letter, are to be submitted within six months for the approval of the 11 Member Conferences of Bishops. After they will have received the assent of at least a relative majority (i.e., six) of the Conferences - the vote within each Conference being by two-thirds majority - the approved Statutes will then be subject to the recognitio of this Congregation
Click to expand...
This letter was issued nine years ago. Two years after that, Liturgiam Authenticam came into being.
 
MusicMan said:
So, what you’re telling me is that this situation is actually 10 years old, and we’re anticipating another 3-4 more years of foolishnes before it actually happens.

Two days before never.
Click to expand...
The reason it is going so slow is becaue this translation is for all English speaking countries and those countries whose liturgical language in English (India, Pakistain, parts of Africa and the Pacific islands). Each conference has to agree on the ICEL translation but can ask for amendments for their particular conference. Also, only two books have been approved and there are still several more that need to be approved. They want to introduce it as a whole package and not do it piecemeal. The date of 2012 is what the CDW is looking at right now, which is later than what I heard over in October.
 
Joannm said:
When I was at the FDLC conference Bp. Seratelli and the secretary Msgr. Sherman said that the best place to get accurate information was the USCCB website. They stated there was much informtion on the web, including a lot of editorializing with regard to the changes that have been damaging to their efforts to get accurate information out.
Click to expand...
While this is true (I had gone to the FDLC meeting in San Antonio back in 2003), I still trust Adoremus. It seems that the editor is widely respected by the CDWDS as when she was introduced to Archbishop Malcom Rajith, the Secretary to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, he indicated that her publication was in high regard at the Congregation.

I heard the Chairman’s address (watched the live feed from EWTN on Veterans Day). He said that the FDLC had warmly received the new translation. That’s a good start. Let’s hope that this will translate into diocesan commissions getting with the program and working with the bishops to provide meaningful catechesis as to why we needed to have this important sacral language restored back into the Roman Missal.
 
Two good places to go for liturgical discussion and news are these blogs:
  • The New Liturgical Movement (devoted to reform of the reform and traditional Latin Mass, as well as some other forms of classical liturgies)
  • What Does the Prayer Really Say? (WDTPRS - Blog of Fr. John Zuhlsdorf or “Fr. Z”).
    If there are any official changes happening within the liturgy, you can rest assured it will be on these blogs first.
Both sites focus on Ordinary (new Mass) and Extraordinary (Traditional Latin Mass) Forms.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top