The Leeds branch of A Call to Action, a Catholic pro-reform group, has released a statement about the new translation of the Missal. In it they criticise the translation for its "archaic language" and "clumsy phraseology", and warn that some of the language could make young people and women feel excluded from the liturgy.
They call for a return to one of the two exisiting, complete English translations of the Missale Romanum - one of which was rejected by the Vatican in 2001, and the other of which "suffered wholesale revisions at the hands of the Roman Congregation" without proper consultation. Criticism of the current translation is not resistance to change, they argue, but when the liturgy fails to edify and enlighten all Catholics, an alternative must be found.
Read the commentary in full:
Loading ...
What do you think?
You can post as a subscriber user ...
User comments (2)
ACTA Leeds' statement has hit the nail on its head! As a parent, I am very much concerned on how I could enthuse my daughter in fully participating in the liturgy, as envisioned by Vatican II through its document "Sacrosanctum Concilium". My participation has also been affected - in conscience I cannot respond "And with your spirit", or say "consubstantial" or "under my roof...and my soul shall be healed". I think a strong representation should be made with the Holy Father to repudiate the current translation and replace it with the 2000 edition (or the 1973 one), throw out Liturgicam Authenticam, disband Vox Clara, prevent the abuses made by the Congregation for Divine Worship, and restore the original setup of ICEL and its relationship with bishops' conferences. Jesus once criticised the fundamentalists of his time. It's disheartening that there are fundamentalists in the Church he founded and they had the upper hand as far as this new missal is concerned!
I fully endorse the sentiments expressed by ACTA. As a modern foreign linguist and recently retired Head Teacher of a Catholic secondary school, it seems to me that, in both language and in its potential to attract and enthuse young people, the "new" translation of the English Missal reads as if it should have preceded the translation it replaced. The previous version was clearer and more modern in its tone. This translation leaves me with a strong and worrying sense that we are being transported back to the Catholic Church of the early 1960s - not a recipe for engaging and challenging young people in the second decade of the twenty-first century.