Abp. Schwietz: New Missal Translation has "Dogmatic Clarity"

Archbishop Roger Scwietz

Archbishop Schwietz of Anchorage, Alaska has written a good article that expresses his strong support of the new english translation of the Roman Missal that will be implemented next Advent. He explains that his recent trip to Russia, where he celebrated the Mass in Russian, was formative in helping him realize how "unifying" the new translation will be for us here in the United States with the rest of the world. His excellency explains:

My trip to Magadan, Russia, to be with Father Mike Shields and the people of the Church of the Nativity for the 20th Anniversary celebration of the parish’s founding was eventful in so many ways. The gratitude of the people was expressed in every imaginable way. Their faith was clearly felt in the services we celebrated. I even began to pick up a bit of Russian while I was there.

As we celebrated the Sacred Liturgy of the Mass each day (in Russian) I began to recognize more and more the invocations and responses. After a while it became clear to me that the Russian translation of the Roman Missal which they were using was the same as ours in English: Not what we are currently using, but what we will be starting to use in Advent 2011. Just as I have seen in Spanish, French and German translations of the Roman Missal, we now have a common way of translating the Latin into the vernacular — common for all except the English speaking world. The English has been less tied to the Latin text.

That will soon change as we in the United States and elsewhere begin using the new English translation of the Roman Missal. Having labored over this translation in the U.S. bishops’ conference for years, I am happy to see this day arrive. I am well aware that some people feel the translation could be improved. At the same time, I am delighted that we are joining the rest of the Catholic world in sharing the beauty and simplicity of the Roman Rite with its Scriptural references and dogmatic clarity.

The great part of this article is that he acknowledges that there are those that disagree with the implementation of the translation as it is currently written, but he explains that such opposition is, and should be, in the shadows of the need for unity that comes from joining the rest of the World by sharing the same translation for the Missal. He describes the new translation as the... "beauty and simplicity of the Roman Rite with its Scriptural references and dogmatic clarity."

One of the biggest arguments against the implementation of the new translation comes from those that say that Dioceses are not doing enough in Catechetical formation regarding its use. The Archbishop, the Archdiocese of Anchorage, and the Catholic Anchor have already begun to address this concern. The Archbishop explains:

As this year of 2011 begins, I invite all of us to look into the reasons for the new English translation of the Roman Missal, and to launch into a time of preparation for the reception of this text. It is a text that is more clearly scripturally based and more elevated in its effort to worship God with dignity.

Among the resources which will be made available to us throughout this year of preparation is the series of reflections being presented by Father LeRoy Clementich, CSC. Father Clem has prepared several texts to help us understand the background and value of the new translation. Please read them carefully and, perhaps save them for future reference. They will give us the opportunity to prepare ourselves to adjust to our liturgical language with a trust in the Spirit’s continued guidance of the church. May our spirit of adventure help us receive the New Roman Missal for the greater glory of God.

He explains that the reason we should be so accepting of this translation is because it is, "elevated in its effort to worship God with dignity." In this simple statement, he not only explains why the translation is good for us Catholic and good for the Mass, but the proper role of the text in the Mass, that is: Worship.

On top of his support for the translation, the Archbishop has also implemented a Catechesis program for the new translation inside the pages of the Catholic Anchor. The feature is called Preparing for the New Translation of the Roman Missal. It will be written by Father Leroy Clementich, C.S.C.

We applaud the Archbishop for his support of the new translation, and the beginning efforts of explaining, instructing, and Catechetically forming the faithful in the Archdiocese of Anchorage.

†††

Why Latin?!

The following is from one of my favorite blogs: Acts of the Apostasy: Press '1' For English

We attended Mass at our "home" parish today due to scheduling conflicts, and I was quickly reminded why I don't like going there. 
It was announced that, in honor of yesterday's Feast Day of Our Lady of Guadalupe, that the first reading would be read in English and Spanish. And, as an added bonus, the Prayers of the Faithful would be read in English and Spanish.
And the secret surprise was...the final blessing, in Spanish.
Never mind that we're a white-bread suburban parish.
It got me thinking, though - since the Mass included elements not spoken in the vernacular, then why not just use Latin?

This is actually my favorite argument FOR LATIN as the language of the Mass. [This is not an argument about form. i.e. Tridentine versus Novus Ordo - it is about the language used AT mass, regardless of the form.]

Actually this is a good time to explain my comment above. When Vatican II occurred, they changed both the FORM and the LANGUAGE. The get more info on how this occurred visit the Vatican Website - That being said, it is important to recognize that my argument here is about language and not necessarily form. [Although I am in favor of the Extraordinary Form.]

My argument is that many parishes across our country have a multi-cultural membership. In fact many churches have multiple masses, each of which are said in a different language. This perplexes me because our faith is supposed to be universal. In fact, Catholic means universal. So how then do those parishes create a universality within their parish, when they divide the people through language and sometimes culture? [Again this isn't about form, or associated practices of form.] Such parishes essentially divide their church and segregate parishioners from one another for the sake of what?

So you can divide parishes which creates more problems than I believe multiple masses in different languages helps; or you can choose one language and essentially have only a portion of your parish hear the Mass in their vernacular.

Or you could just use latin. Sure the people wouldn't HEAR the mass in their vernacular but everyone could get a MISSAL in their vernacular. Sure, there are limitations to this as well... as there is no perfect system, but in the end I would much rather create a universal setting than one that divides the church. It also encourages people to participate in the Mass in a much more academic way through reading and study via a missal. The Mass is about CHRIST and not us... we should do what we can to create churches that are universal and unified... not ones that a segregated and divided.

[Note: I realized after I posted this that I didn't explain fully my argument. I left out the fact that I do appreciate and enjoy the mass in english. Especially the new form. Even more, I love that after S.P. we can now celebrate both forms of the Mass. [Well not here in Alaska... any priests want to come say a Tridentine Mass?] My argument is more aimed at those parishes that do what the parish did in the opening quote. I think the vernacular can play a very important and educational role in our theological catechisis.]

'Pro Multis' - Part II

There is a longstanding/ongoing discussion about the latin words: 'Pro Multis.' They are found in the consecration of the mass. I posted earlier about this discussion here:
Pro Multis Discussion

For most, it isn't a big deal. We hear the words every Sunday (or more) and think not to much of it. The debate above speaks for itself, and we can really reconcile the confusion and move on.

For those of you that don't know what I am talking about, the phrase 'Pro Multis' translates to 'for many' or 'for all.' It really depends on context and who you ask. A good question and answer section can be found at EWTN and various other places. The summary is that the Aramaic words meant a kind of combination. Through context and meaning, especially since the phrase was to be applied to the entire Gospels. The problem is that for a long time the LATIN texts were 'Pro Multis.' So teaching occurred on those words, and our faith doctrine developed with those words. Then in the 1970's, the vernacular translation switched it to 'for all.' Again creating confusion, until their was some clarity a few years ago. Like I said, all is fine at that point with a little research, digging, and understanding. Plus there is a new translation coming out in a year or so (hopefully) which will change it to align with the Latin for a nice union between the Norvus Ordo (our regular Mass) and the TLM/EF (the Latin 1962 Mass) so things will flush. It will also bring the Latin and Orthodox churches closer in liturgical form as well. So, I was satisfied. Until, yesterday...

You see here is a snippet from yesterdays reading of the Gospel from Mark 10:35-45:

But it shall not be so among you. Rather, whoever wishes to be great among you will be your servant;

whoever wishes to be first among you will be the slave of all. For the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many.

So now what? I mean, it has to be from the same 'pro multis' form in the latin of the bible? I don't mean to be a traditionalist to the point of annoyance, and I KNOW when the new translation of the Missal comes out people are going to be frustrated, and annoyed. But this is why it is necessary. It will make everything SYNC up. Right now, we have to spend hours and hours explaining the doctrine because of silly and sloppy translations.