USCCB: Dramatic debate, cliffhanger result on liturgy

[tee_eff_em]

USCCB: Dramatic debate, cliffhanger result on liturgy

Posted on Jun 13, 2008 06:23am CST.

By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
Orlando, Florida

Perhaps it’s only fitting that a meeting held in Florida, the state that made the hanging chad famous, should feature a dramatic cliffhanger vote, which, as election day ended, remained inconclusive.

Heading into the U.S. bishops’ spring meeting in Orlando, it didn’t seem likely that a proposed new translation of the Proper of Seasons, part of the prayers and other texts for the Catholic Mass, would stir up much dust. Following a decade and a half of impassioned argument over such texts known colloquially as the “liturgy wars,” many bishops privately expressed fatigue and a desire to move on – suggesting to most observers that approval of this text ought to be more or less a given.

…

After all that the bishops were unable to reach a decision, largely because of the electoral math.

The rules of the conference require that the text be approved by two-thirds of its members, not just those physically present. Since there are 250 Latin Rite bishops in the United States, 166 “yes” votes are required to approve it, while 83 “no” votes are necessary to reject it.

As it turns out, the Orlando meeting was sparsely attended – one headcount yesterday found just 178 voting members. As a result, this morning’s ballot failed to get enough “yes” votes to approve the text, or enough “no” votes to block it.

As a result, Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, president of the conference, announced that bishops who were not present will receive ballots in the mail in order to settle things one way or the other.

Sigh…

tee

 

[SenorSalsa]

This is already being discussedin the Catholic News section
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=246624

 

[benedictgal]

Actually, it’s most appropriate to discuss this situation in the Liturgy forum. It is most regrettable that those bishops who didn’t attend the meeting managed to slow down the train considerably.

Francis Cardinal Arinze, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has already told the bishops in clearly expressed terms that they needed to act as soon as possible on the new translations.

As late as 2006, the Prefect wrote to the USCCB indicating that:

With reference to the conversation between yourself, the Vice President and General Secretary of the Conference of Bishops of which you are President, together with me and other Superiors and Officials when you kindly visited our Congregation on April 27, 2006, I wish to recall the following:

The Instruction Liturgiam authenticam is the latest document of the Holy See which guides translations from the original-language liturgical texts into the various modern languages in the Latin Church. Both this Congregation and the Bishops’ Conferences are bound to follow its directives. This Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments is therefore not competent to grant the recognitio for translations that do not conform to the directives of Liturgiam authenticam. If, however, there are difficulties regarding the translation of a particular part of a text, then this Congregation is always open to dialogue in view of some mutually agreeable solution, still keeping in mind, however, that Liturgiam authenticam remains the guiding norm.

The attention of your Bishops’ Conference was also recalled to the fact that Liturgiam authenticam was issued at the directive of the Holy Father at the time, Pope John Paul II, to guide new translations as well as the revision of all translations done in the last forty years, to bring them into greater fidelity to the original-language official liturgical texts. For this reason it is not acceptable to maintain that people have become accustomed to a certain translation for the past thirty or forty years, and therefore that it is pastorally advisable to make no changes. Where there are good and strong reasons for a change, as has been determined by this Dicastery in regard to the entire translation of the Missale Romanum as well as other important texts, then the revised text should make the needed changes. The attitudes of Bishops and Priests will certainly influence the acceptance of the texts by the lay faithful as well.

Liturgicam Authenticam, the official Vatican document regarding translations, was also supposed to have been used in A New Song to the Lord. However, the document merely pays “lip service” and did not completely follow the guidelines set forth by the Holy See.

About a week and a half ago, I ran into my local Ordinary at the airport. I asked him about the vote for the proposed changes to the Roman Missal. He gave me a pained look and would not answer my question outright. I asked him if he’s looked them over and he changed the subject. Mind you, it was a simple and friendly question. I am perplexed by his response.

Now, I am well aware that each bishop was provided with an electronic copy of the proposed translations for them to read prior to their June meeting. It is somewhat disheartening when my own local Ordinary didn’t really have an answer.

Now, our diocesan director for Divine Worship is working with the USCCB team on the Spanish translations (which, from what I understand, are being taken part and parcel from the Mexican Roman Missal, which is what we use in Texas). When I visited with the former Secretary for the USCCB Committee on Divine Worship, I was told by Msgr. Moroney that we were to use the Mexican lectionary, Book of the Gospels and Roman Missal until such time as a U.S. approved translation was ready for us to use. This was five years ago. And, oddly enough,m we were given that time frame back in 2003. I guess it was a bit too ambitious because nothing has moved. If any steps have been made, snails have moved faster.