Fr Z has been posting on the situation in Germany where there has been some pressure NOT to use the new Missal wording when it comes to the words of consecration. In English - to keep saying "for all" instead of the correct "for many". (Correct because that's what the Latin original actually says and that's what the Church has approved.) The Holy Father has written a letter to the German bishops reminding them that they must use the correct wording, not least because the poor translation that came in during the 1970's was due to a misunderstanding in the translation of the biblical texts connected to words of the consecration. It seems that even a more faithful and up-to-date understanding of the Scriptures is not to stand in the way of liberals holding on to their cherished (if faulty) formative past (ie the heady days of the1960/70s). Fr Z has his own version here - less scholarly but more like the one I would write (hence neither of us is Pope!)
I was drawn to writing about this because I have heard priests here in England say they will not use the new translation - quite publicly before their fellow priests. I think that in fact most of them have gone over to using it but sometimes publicly criticising it and continuing to use their own or the old translation where they feel particularly offended by the new (or just can't be bothered to instruct the people).
This might be at the introduction to the penitential rite: in the same conversation I heard a priest bemoan the lack of people at Confession but also state that he doesn't like to mention sin at the start of Mass! Could there be a mystical connection between these two facts..?
It might be what the Holy Father calls the "obnoxious and banal" greetings that priests introduce the Mass with (cf "Feast of Faith, page 83).
It might be the words of consecration.
It might be a completely made-up preface (reported to me recently).
It might be at a funeral where the priest still uses the old prayers and preface in the people's funeral books.
It could be anywhere in the Mass. The point is that such people are making up their own minds according to their own lights. Their interpretation is, they believe, better than the Church's scholars, better than the Pope's instructions, better than what the rest of the Church is doing. They are, in fact, Protestants in the the proper sense of the word. They protest in word and deed against the legitimate authority of the Church. Each one is his own little protestant pope - sadly, unlike the real Pope, these have no promise from Our Lord that the gates of Hell will not prevail against them. People have forgotten that "there is a 'Rite', that is, a prescribed
liturgical form, and that liturgy is genuinely liturgy only if it is not
subject to the will of those who celebrate it." (cf "Feast of Faith" Page 85 by Cardinal Ratzinger.)
Incidentally, the Holy Father concludes his letter to the German bishops by saying that he hopes they will present the correct catechesis - the one he outlines - as soon as possible.
Hope springs eternal for nothing is impossible for God!
Hope springs eternal for nothing is impossible for God!
3 comments:
Thank you Father as usual your post is informative and totally Catholic. May Almighty God continue to bless you.
"For all" is an incorrect rendering of Matthew 26 :28 and no doubt derives from the "lets be nice to all" attitude of the 70s, to which many of the more Relativist German prelates are still clinging.
Much though we would like to think that all will be saved,
Matthew 25 :41 and other texts, suggest otherwise.
Father,
Thanks for the post and it may well be a timely reminder for the Germans in the great ‘pro multis’ debate but just how long has this debate been raging for? And really by now it should have been put to bed, especially with the recent implementation of the Third Edition of the Roman Missal. However, the Holy Father might have been better addressing the not too few priests who persist in continuing with the old ICEL ‘Gloria’, changing ‘for many’ to ‘for all’ and ‘chalice’ to ‘cup’, to mention but three examples. All these I have personally witnessed this year and not that many miles from you!
I find this quite interesting as not only is it grossly disobedient but it is also misleading to the unsuspecting punter in the pew. For if, as I trust that they are, diligently following the words in their brand new Mass books, they will clearly notice the change, thereby emphasizing the flawed 1970’s theology, so beloved of the heterodox priests (and bishops it has to be said) who occupy most of the Cathedras in England and Wales and other parts of Europe (Germany included). This then plays into the hands of those who would rent the Church from her past history; as when the observant punter makes a challenge, they are fed all the liberal guff about how the Church is ‘being turned backwards’ and that ‘God loves us ALL (not the many) no matter what we do’ and all the rest of the old ‘fuzzy- wuzzy-bear’ claptrap, so beloved of the 1970s ordinand.
If, in my professional life, I was as disobedient as some of your brother priests, i.e. willfully ignoring written instructions, do you know what would happen to me? Firstly, I would be called to account and put on a performance improvement plan. Then if I persisted I would be formally disciplined and ultimately sacked.
How interesting and strange that many of our Bishops seem to lust after the glories of the secular world ( http://thatthebonesyouhavecrushedmaythrill.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/brazillian-bishop-honoured-by.html ) but yet don’t want to ‘govern’ the Church by some of the high standards of governance found outside the Church.
I greatly love Rome and the Holy Father but how I wish they had more teeth!
St Peter and St Paul – Pray for us!
Post a Comment