Monday, September 11, 2017
EVEN THE AWFUL 1970 ROMAN MISSAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION IS BETTER THAN THE STYLES OF MUSIC THAT DEGRADE THE ROMAN MISSAL
ITS THE MUSIC, STUPID, THAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE ORDINARY FORM MASS, MUSIC MANUFCATURED WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ROMAN RITE'S PATRIMONY OF MUSIC INTRINSIC TO THE MASS--FORGET ABOUT VERNACULAR TRANSLATIONS BEING THE MAIN PROBLEM! NO! MUSIC IS!
(I am typing this in the midst of Irma battering the Georgia coast and thus Richmond Hill's Catholic rectory which is in a regular neighborhood. No telling how long I'll have electricity. Winds are sustained at 40 mph and gusting to 60 or more! Pouring rain too! Fun, fun! Pray the electricity doesn't go off!)
But on to more important things like the pope and the liturgy!
Praytell has an interview with Bishop Coyne of Burlington, Vermont on the pope's new promulgation on the liturgy's translation. It is very balanced and tells us that at least he isn't one who wants to promote even more liturgical division by tinkering with the new and glorious translation of the English Mass which doesn't mean that some prayers and prefaces could be improved--but who would notice but the priest.
But read the interview, especially the negative Praytell comment section unless those get deleted soon by pressing here.
I don't think there will be any noticeable change to our American translation of the Mass when it comes to the parts of the Mass--people are accustomed now to the changes, music has been written for the retranslation. I would be shocked if the people's parts change.
However, the prayers of the priests, especially collects and prefaces need to be reexamined. Some of these are simply poor English and could be revised easily without changing the theological, devotional and spirituality of these prayers. There are some real clunkers.
However, even if I were to use the older translation for these prayers next Sunday, no one would notice. Only Praytell geeks continue to complain about the new translation clunkiness. I have never had any parishioner at St. Joseph or now here at St. Anne say anything to me about the quality of the new English translation.
The new canon law that Pope Francis promulgated is a bit confusing to me. The Congregation for Divine Worship still has to approve revisions but only by saying "yes" or "no" to them. What confuses me about this is that there seems to be a wholesale rejection or approval of the translations without singling out what the problematic areas are. This would be a bit frustrating to Bishops' Conferences to have the whole thing rejected without comment on the parts that need revision, no?
But folks, it isn't the quality or lack of quality of the vernaculars used in the Mass that is the major problem. It is the music. I listened only to the processional of Pope Francis Mass in Cartehena yesterday and the music, while its quality was fine, was totally inappropriate for the Mass. As the pope incensed the altar with his black eye and bandaid on his eyebrow, the instrumental music was of "jazz" style and this for the Mass which is about the suffering and death of Jesus which only then leads to the resurrection. Do they understand what Jesus' went through to accomplish the resurrection? Do they understand the Mass is about the Holy Sacrifice of the Cross made present now but in an unbloody way?
The bishops of the world would do well to focus on the proper theology and doctrine of the Mass and the implication of this proper understanding as to the style of music that is appropriate for the Roman Rite and the Holy Sacrifice!
(Still have electricity but I have just lost my "Direct TV" satellite signal--which means I am cut off from the news--praise God!)