Thousands join campaign to delay changes to missal

Bravo Fr. Ryan. You are following your conscience as well as those who oppose this clunker of a translation.
REMEMBER WHAT RATZINGER SAID:
“... there stands one’s own conscience which must be obeyed before all else, even if necessary against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority. This emphasis on the individual, whose conscience confronts him with a supreme and ultimate tribunal, and one which in the last resort is beyond the claim of external social groups, even the official Church, also establishes a principle in opposition to increasing totalitarianism”.
(Joseph Ratzinger in: Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II ,Vol. V., pg. 134 (Ed) H. Vorgrimler, New York, Herder and Herder, 1967).

That last part "in opposition to increasing totalitarianism" is ironic, 43 yrs later it is used to refer to B16 (Ratzinger) himself!

About these two paragraphs in particular:

"What is at stake, it seems to me, is nothing less than the church's credibility," he added. "Does obedience mean going against our best pastoral instincts in order to promote something that we believe will, in the end, actually bring discredit to the church and further disillusionment to the people? I do not think so."

But even in cases where opposition was initially strong, there appears to be now "a sense of resignation, that 'resistance is futile,' as one priest put it to me," Simmermacher added in an e-mail to CNS.

As to the first paragraph, it would be a mistake for Rome to think that Catholics will plug into this Borg-like collective consciousness on command and as to the second, the church's credibility is just about non existant.

"The anger of the people in the pews and many priests (and some bishops) seems to be rooted not so much in what they feel are anachronistic and clumsy translations -- vexing though they appear to be to many -- but in what they see as an arbitrary imposition of liturgical values that are foreign to them by faceless bureaucrats in distant Rome."

There's an easy way to deal with this. Just provide some catachesis to the new translation. The faithful aren't stupid. We can understand words like "consubstantial."

How very NCR. Get over it.

Because of the lack of inclusive language, this new translation is by the men and for the men. I hope they enjoy it, we women will just have to continue to worship our God in our own words. It is sad that the official Catholic worship continues to divide the people of God.

It won't work, and it's misguided. Why don't these people grow up?

Father Michael Ryan represents the best approach to this flawed and deplorable process by which so many feel disenfranchised and unheard. Joe (Benedict) Ratzinger isn't listening and has not been the least interested in "listening" to any voice that does not mirror his exact right wing ideology. He only listens to his shills and they, no doubt will be coming out of the woodwork like so many roaches, to PUSH his reactionary agenda down the throats of millions of Catholics who think these "translations" are both flawed and unworkable. Ratzinger has done nothing but stifle free thinking and the rights of all baptized Catholic to have a voice in the most important Sacrament: The Holy Eucharist. Benedict is the antithesis of the spirit of the Second Vatican Council and everything he does tell us this. It's all going to backfire and the signs of decay and rot seem to be advancing at a faster pace than I would have thought possible. Come Holy Spirit and rebuild, REFORM and renew the Church as the Council Fathers hoped it would be. Bring strength to The People of God as they work to bring the changes needed so that the Catholic Church will reflect the teachings and examples of Jesus and NOT those of princes (cardinals) and monarchs (John Paul II and Benedict), as they are not leading as disciples of Jesus but as imperial rulers who by their words and deeds, devalue women and homosexual people, as well as progressive theologians.

"the translation process has involved linguistic, biblical and liturgical scholars from each of the 11 English-speaking countries" that belong to the International Commission on English in the Liturgy.
"The texts may be unfamiliar now, but the more one understands their meaning, the more meaningful their use will be in the liturgy,"
He also acknowledged concerns "about unfamiliar vocabulary and unnecessarily complicated sentence structures."
"I can attest that the new translation is good and worthy of use."
"It is not perfect, but perfection will come only when the liturgy on earth gives way to that of heaven, where all the saints praise God with one voice," he added.

I, too, was in the seminary in 1963 when Pope Paul VI presented the Second Vatican Council's liturgical document, "Sacrosanctum Concilium". It was St. Joseph's Franciscan Seminary. Francis is credited with telling his brothers and sisters to "Preach the Gospel, use words if necessary." It is by our actions and words that we share the Good News. So our call to service and our love of liturgy were nurtured and honed by our friar/professors. Elocution, diction and public speaking were highlighted. We had excellent English, German and Latin teachers, and we practiced in the classroom, on the playground, and in Chapel. Some of us were not that great in math or biology, and even less great at sports, but we all could pray in English and Latin with joy and intelligibly. (We also could recite beautiful poetry and sing lovely lieder in German.)
If our English profs were grading Bishop Arthur J. Serratelli's quotes, I suspect that he would be lucky to get a "B-". As for the translations, the "linguistic, biblical and liturgical scholars from each of the 11 English-speaking countries" would get similar or lower grades with comments noting that parts of this translation are somewhat true to the letter but lacking regard for the spirit.
Bishop Serratelli said some have criticized the new text, "often without having seen more than a few examples out of context." I have read the new text in its entirety, in context and with accurate memory of our liturgy before Vatican II. I, too, note that this translation is somewhat true to the letter but lacking regard for the spirit.
Let us never forget that "faith comes through hearing". Paz y Bien, Rolando.

Oh what about all the Catholics in 1969 who were appalled at the changes in the liturgy that were forced on them.Did many priests then say.."oh Wait" Paybacks a real bitch for Catholic liberals aint it hahahahaha.

one church, one mass, the latin mass.

time to remove the mass of paul the VI, get over it you old hippies.

As in South Africa, most Catholics, whether they like the new translation or not, will go along with such because the Church and its liturgy is their way of worshipping God. That, alas, is what the Roman bureaucrats count on. They can impose whatever they want on millions of people and get away with it. That is what they are accustomed to doing. It usually works. So, absent a local hierarchy that says no, they will continue to do so.

Obedience: n. 1 the practice or quality of being obedient. 2. submission to another's rule or authority. 3. compliance with a law or command.

Hope that helps.

The tragedy of this imposition is that the 'real' ICEL, before it was reconstitued by Rome, had completed this work in 1999, including beautiful new opening prayers that drew upon each of the Sunday Gospels in their cycles. One local liturgist said of this rejected revision, 'Cinderella has been put in the closet, and we are being made to dance with the ugly stepsisters'. Having experienced the new translations for over a year here in South Africa (the people's parts) I would challenge any who would say our liturgical celebrations have been 'improved'. Resignation and disengagement- yes, improvement- no.

Let's see, 17,000 out of 1.6 billion...what's the percentage there? I don't have my calculator.
It is interesting to see now who the "conservatives" are in the Church. Who are the ones who refuse any change and who it is that wants to preserve tradition and yet remain open to ongoing renewal. You'd think it was 1965 all over again- but the tables are turned. Just strange, isn't it?

"Thousands" might--tens of thousands WON'T.

The irony is absolutely delicious. The post-Vatican II "reformers" who foisted all sorts of faulty liturgical "change" and "renewal" in the 1960s and 1970s, insisting that, while change was often difficult, it was necessary, are now on the other end of the argument as the Church finally corrects some longstanding inadequacies of translation.

Gotta love it.

"...but in what they see as an arbitrary imposition of liturgical values that are foreign to them by faceless bureaucrats in distant Rome"

god ferbid that them their in roam impose values on da roman Right dat crazy tock! were kin I sin my name to dat partition dat da reverent wat looks like the exersist is tockin bout? da powder of cris compelz me!

Liberals want the clock changed to 1973 and the batteries taken out so it is always the glory days!

The South African experience is far from descriptive. It represents the very opposite of what the bishops intend to do. They do not intend to repeat the mistakes of the post-Vatican II reforms, changing fundamental elements of the Mass without any more of an explanation than "Vatican II said to do this".

The bishops intend to present at least one year's worth of intensive catechesis at the parish level regarding the revised translations. They intend to introduce the translations carefully. Many parishes and diocese are already doing so. In my diocese, the diocesan newspaper just completed a thirteen-part explanation of the new Order of Mass. Parishes are using the weekly bulletin as a means of communicating about the revisions. As the time draws closer to the implementation time, parishes and dioceses will be having informational meetings to introduce the translations and explain the meanings of more difficult concepts and unusual words. Even after the translations go into effect, the parish priests will be expected to offer explanations during the homily.

In other words, there will not be an implementation that looks like South Africa's. Rather, it will be careful and will be a time of great grace, a time when we, as Catholics, can reflect on what the Mass means, its history, its place in our lives of faith. In many ways, it will be like rediscovering the Mass all over again. What a time of grace for the Church, if we open ourselves to that grace!

I am so humored by all of your comments. You make this to be such a great problem but no one is looking at the real problems within our church. I am dizy! We are like a ship lost in a stormy sea as in the Book of James. Worry more about allowing all the baptized be empowered to grow in the image and likeness of God!To look at the face of God in everyone and treat them with love honor and dignity and respect. We in our humanness will never speak with one voice that makes us all happy all of the time. We all have our own agenda if we are honest, we do better if we try mot to jam it down eachothers throats.

Not in my name!

Count me as wanting this faithful, much improved translation, and in any case, count me as not obstructing the leadership of the Holy Father and our bishops in carrying out their responsibilities for the sacred liturgy.

There will be challenges, it will take some getting used to, and yes that will take time and energy on my part...but I'm a man under authority.

Father Ryan, with respect, this is NOT helpful.

Wow. I wish this story would die. As a denizen of Western Washington, I am really embarrassed by this whole thing. My friends from other areas of the country are making fun of us and it is no good.

Since B16 allows (even encourages) the promulgation of the Tridentine Liturgy, I wonder if the same courtesy and respect will be extended to those priests and congregations who wish to continue with Novus Ordo? I would bet not.

This campaign might have credibility except to the millions and millions of us who had to sit passively 40 some years ago and watch the so-called "liturgists" impose on us their own purely private visions and wordings, none of which had been mandated by Vatican II. As loyal Catholics we bowed our heads and accepted, incredulous of what was happening. Now we see what dissent and disloyalty can come to.

Interesting article because I remember that the time of the introduction of The New Mass circa 1970, large percentage of Catholics were upset and confused by these changes in the Mass.

These Catholics were certainly ignored and no accommodation vis-a-vis the Traditional Latin Mass was made for them.

I guess the tables are turned?

I think the new proposed changes to the missal should not be taken so negatively. Let's see what fruits come out of it. I say give it a chance. When the new changes are impleminted, I don't believe it will cause anyone to loose their soul. I do agree that cathechists (instructions)should be given prior to impleminting the changes..that way the people will have a better understanding why the changes are made.

What is the big deal? Its not as if we're going to use the beautiful, universal language of the Church, the language employed by Rome at Holy Mass - Latin.

Come on folks- 40 years or so of gimmick Masses, overdone inclusiveness, exaggerated tolerance, endless dialog, constant, nonsense apologies to others and the watered down teaching of the Faith has not bore fruit. Let's get really CATHOLIC again.

Can we apply for an Indult to use the Paul VI 1964 missal? It was done for those who wished to use the Tridentine Mass and the 1962 missal. What is done for the one can be done for the other. Right?

Holy Mass is the mystery of the Eucharist and a rite rich in prose, nuance, and vocabulary. We learn about the Mass through our entire lives.

At age fifteen I started to attend Latin Mass. I was intrigued by a language that I could not understand but desperately wanted to explore. I wanted to understand the Mass on its own terms and not according to my demands. It has taken me another fifteen years to become proficient in Latin. After that first Low Mass I could have said, "I don't understand this! I want this to be easy! Why won't the priest speak to me? Why won't he face me? What about me?" The Mass is a wonderland of meaning, full of infinite layers of meaning that interact with one another throughout the church year. Savor these revolutions of time and significance. The Holy Liturgy doesn't revolve around us.

After comparing the Latin texts to the new translation, I am convinced that the new translation communicates the intent of the Latin Missal much better than the 70's translation. If a person can't understand the words of the translation, he or she should consult a dictionary and ask a pastor or priest for assistance. Better yet, study the missal in a group. Do not lower the liturgy to a level of easy comprehension. Strive to grow intellectually within a liturgy well beyond the immediate comprehension of any person.

I feel a certain sorrow for Fr. Ryan and his priestly formation. Does he know nothing of the Church prior to Vatican II? The Church obedient trusted it's shepherd's with the new changes and were betrayed by the "bastardization of the liturgy" into a pseudo protestant liturgy! When we "grew up" and did our home work, we learned the truth and returned to the ligurgy handed on to us by our ancestors. The Tridentine Liturgy! Deo Gratias! May God in His mercy open the eyes of our blind shepherds! Latin Mass churches are opening again not closing as in the Novus Ordo church. There are no priest shortages as in the Novus Ordo churches and still these blind shephereds deny the faithful and the will of two Holy Fathers!

It has not worked for 40 years!!

the English mass really has not worked out welll in 40 years.
More people have left the church, as priests and Sisters, but with the coming of the Latin Mass, more young people ages 18-40 who has never seen a latin mass are "RUNNING "to hear and attend this Mass!.

The is the new church now coming of age, the 1960's crowd are starting to die out, "Thank God" with all the non reverence at that NO MASS, more presence on the priest and not Our Lord, I can see why the younger people want the Latin Mass.
I am now 56, served mass for 46 years over 24,000 masses I have served, I am so happy for the return in whole of the true mass, The Latin Mass.

I welcomed the great change in the church, and all the evils of the past from what was suppose to be a great opening of the church, became the most evils of the church for the last 40 years. As you can see, in the last 40 years, you have tried and tried, but people are leaving because you have not taught what the church wanted, revenence toward the Blessed Sacrament.
I bet I could walk into your churches and ask simple catholic questions on our religion, and most can not answer, I have asked many, they response is always, "Oh thats old religion, you got to get with the new church". I hope you are asked at the gates of heaven and see what Our Lord would say.

All I have to say, 17,000 is a drop in the bucket to the millions who want the Latin Mass now, I give it 10-15 years, the english mass will be in the past. One church a week opens up to the latin Mass.

The Novus Ordo Mass has been a failure.
People have left the CHurch because of it.
The Novus Ordo Mass is pedestrian, Protestant,
talky, hand shaky, unmystical, boring.
It has not worked for forty years.
People have stayed away, hence the empty
Catholic churches on Sunday.

There has to be a return to tradition.

I had a desire to start my own commerce, however I did not earn enough amount of cash to do this. Thank heaven my close mate recommended to utilize the personal loans. So I received the car loan and made real my old dream.

We forget too often that The God the Father and Jesus did not leave us orphans but in union gave us the Holy Spirit to lead us. Throughout the ages the Spirit of God has led God's people. Jesus even preached that we must not lock ourselves into tradition.

History indicates that most of Jesus twelve apostles were married men. Then came the middle ages and our priesthood demanded celebacy be the norm. Jesus language was Arabic. With Paul and with others, the church language and writings were in Arabic, Greek and also in Latin. Latin eventually became the universal language of the Roman Catholic Church. However as time past, the Holy Spirit knew the importance of the laity's need to be actively involved in the life of Christ and to have an active participation in the church"s liturgy and the life and ministry of the mystical body of Christ,His Church. This would come about through the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit wanted the people to have their Mass and liturgy in thier own language and at the same time allowing for some of the traditional language to be heard and sung in part of the liturgy.

Jesus, at the last supper did not turn his back to his apostles and other disciples as he gave thanks to His almighty Father and instituted the Sacrament of the Eucharist in which the bread and wine would become His body and blood. In that sacrificial offering of Himself to the Father and to us he asked the Father to accept this offering for the forgiveness of our sins and
for our salvation, whic He knew was the will of His Father. So in Vatican II, the Holy Spirit led the priest to no longer turn it's back to the people but to let the priest,like Christ, face God's people as they prepare to receive this Sacaramentin which we too truly receive the body and blodd of Christ Jesus.

Today other changes are being asked to take place. Changes that others claim are more in line to the Latin tradition or interpetation. What I failed to see and to hear from the Church is how much of the change is of the Holy spirit and How much may be more of just the human spirit. For some of the changes it may improve part of the liturgy but also some seem very much to weaken it. I do not think the Church leaders trusted in God enough to let the laity have much input on thier concept of what changes may be best for the Church. I feel during this age that the Church has not opened itself to the leadership of the Holy Spirit because they are afraid where the Holy spirit might lead them. The Holy Spirit may be speaking through its lay memebers, the lay priesthood, but the Church is afraid to hear their voice and want only the openion of their scholarly prieshood. We need to listen to listen to what both priest and laity have to say and pray for the gift of dicernment to ientify what is truly the will of God.