In his letter (The Tablet, 21 March) about the new translation of the Mass, Fr Leo Chamberlain makes the case for a solemn and formal language. But Our Lord’s language is usually simple and direct. Two obvious examples relevant to the liturgy of the Mass are the Our Father and the words of consecration at the Last Supper.
Mick Duggan, Banstead, Surrey
I cannot refrain from expressing my own pleasure and relief to have read in the first defence of the new translation from Fr Leo Chamberlain.
I have personally been thoroughly shocked by the continual repetition of complaints against the English of the Mass and even statements of abandonment of Mass-going by some, as a result of their discomfort at the translation.
Does the language of worship not deserve better than the language of the market place? Or even of the home? In any case, is the Mass not more than the language used at its celebration?
Basil Longy, by email
Grant, dear Editor, that craving your indulgence and not desiring to dissipate your time which is precious in this present climate of having to subsist in a busy life, and not withstanding the enormous daily efforts of priests to portray an unsophisticated communication to those whom we endeavour to serve may I append to the recent correspondence - albeit that I think we have shut the stable gate after the horse has bolted - that it is time that correspondence appertaining to the topic of the English translation of the Mass should be terminated forthwith so that we can all get on and make the most of it despite the blatant fact that at least 95 per cent of those who must sit and listen each day (and probably the celebrant himself) leave the Eucharist with no real idea of what the prayer was trying to portray although we dearly wanted that they might be impelled more readily towards higher goods that cannot be seen.
Fr E Michael Peters, Southampton
Loading ...
