Cardinal Robert Sarah (Cardinal Sarah Twitter)
I hope this isn't passive-aggressive on Cardinal Sarah's part and God willing, His Eminience knows what he is talking about and won't be the next Cardinal Mueller. But who knows these days.I wonder what Praytell thinks about this or a certain priest over there?
Cardinal Sarah Confirms Vatican Retains Last Word on Translations
In a new article, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship discusses the effects of the Pope’s recent revisions to canon law governing liturgical translations.
Edward Pentin
VATICAN — Cardinal Robert Sarah has weighed in on Magnum Principium, Pope Francis’ motu proprio on liturgical translations, reassuring the faithful that the Vatican will continue to safeguard any changes or new liturgical translations to ensure they remain faithful to the original Latin.
In an article in the French Catholic journal L’Homme Nouveau, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (CDW) confirmed that the motu proprio’s change to Canon 838 — which shifts some responsibility for translating liturgical texts away from the Vatican to local bishops — will still require the Vatican to give approval to any such changes or translations.
The article, officially dated Oct. 1 — the day on which Magnum Principium (The Great Principle) came into effect — bolsters the guidance issued with the motu proprio by Archbishop Arthur Roche, secretary of the CDW. Archbishop Roche stressed that the Vatican’s role in confirming texts remains an “authoritative act” presupposing “fidelity” to the original Latin.
Cardinal Sarah’s statements on the matter contradict those who see the motu proprio as a gateway to more liberal vernacular interpretations of liturgical texts, inconsistent with their Latin original.
The Holy Father, who signed Magnum Principium Sept. 3, authorized changes to Canon 838 that decentralized the translation process, giving local bishops responsibility for translating liturgical texts, while retaining the Vatican’s authority to approve or reject a proposed translation.
The CDW will no longer instruct bishops to make proposed amendments, but retains authority to confirm or veto the results at the end of the process.
Among other consequences, this means that the Vatican commission Vox Clara, which was established by Pope John Paul II in 2002 to help the CDW vet English translations, will no longer be needed.
The Pope said he made the changes because of “difficulties” that unsurprisingly have sometimes arisen between the Vatican and bishops’ conferences. He added that he wanted “a vigilant and creative collaboration full of reciprocal trust” between the Holy See and bishops’ conferences, so that the renewal of “the whole liturgical life might continue.” It, therefore, “seemed opportune,” he said, “that some principles handed on since the time of the Council should be more clearly reaffirmed and put into practice.”
The Pope added that, having listened to the recommendations of a commission he had created to look into the matter, he wanted to make the collaboration between the Vatican and bishops’ conferences “easier and more fruitful,” in accordance with the Second Vatican Council constitution on the liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, and Blessed Paul VI’s 1964 motu proprio Sacram Liturgiam.
Liturgiam Authenticam
In his article, Cardinal Sarah begins by reasserting that the “authoritative text” concerning liturgical translations remains Liturgiam Authenticam, the 2001 instruction issued by the CDW, that aimed to ensure “insofar as possible” that texts must be translated from the original Latin “integrally and in the most exact manner.”
For this reason, he continues, the faithful translations carried out and approved by bishops’ conferences “must conform in every way to the norms of this instruction.”
The cardinal then focuses primarily on the two key changes to paragraphs of Canon 838: the first that states the Holy See is to “recognize” (recognitio) adaptations to texts by bishops’ conferences; and the second that states the Holy See is to “confirm” (confirmatio) translations that are “faithfully” prepared by bishops’ conferences and approved and published by them after the Holy See’s confirmatio.
He stresses that the recognitio “protects and ensures conformity to the law and the communion of the Church (its unity),” while the confirmatio “must only” be granted by the Holy See if, after examining a translation, it deems the translation “faithful” and consistent with the Latin based on Liturgiam Authenticam’s criteria.
Furthermore, Cardinal Sarah underlines that both the recognitio and the confirmatio are “by no means a formality” and cannot be granted after a “rapid review” of the work. He also adds that the confirmatio “presupposes and implies a detailed review” by the Holy See and the possibility that translations may be rejected if they are found not to be faithful to the Latin. Such a decision, the cardinal affirms, “would be binding” on the bishops’ conference.
He adds that this clarification corresponds with Archbishop Roche’s guidance notes on the motu proprio.
The changes, the cardinal continues, do not “alter the responsibility of the Holy See and thus its authority with respect to liturgical translations.” Rather, he says, the Holy See must continue to evaluate whether any changes are “truly faithful” to the Latin in order to safeguard Church unity.
Concluding Comments
After explaining how the recognitio and confirmatio will actually lead to better and more faithful adaptations and translations of liturgical texts, Cardinal Sarah ends by stressing how important such a process of consultation and approval is, in evaluating all kinds of human endeavors, to ensure we have done them “to the best of our abilities.”
“Our life is thus a tapestry of recognitio and confirmatio that allows us to advance with the greatest fidelity with respect to the demands of reality,” he says, adding that the process in this context is no different.
He closes by quoting the Holy Father’s letter of Sept. 26 to bishops’ conferences, praising the Pope for “admirably” saying it is a question of making the collaboration between the Vatican and the bishops’ conferences “easier and more fruitful.”
Edward Pentin is the Register’s Rome correspondent.
8 comments:
I don’t think he will be elected. Racism hasn’t died in the Church today, also Francis being the politician he is, stacked the Cardinaliate woh his own breed of Cardinals, no different than politicians appointing senators here in canada that are of their bent to stop opposition of bills to be made law. Our best bet might be someone who is more centrist in the “public perception” but theologically Conservatve like JPII was.
Cardinal Sarah would be fantastic but the German racists won't go for him
All the talk about collegiality...Ut Unum sint's desire to "find a way of exercising the (Papal) primacy which, while in no way renouncing what is essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation"... has led me to the following:
His Holiness Pope Francis has demonstrated the bottom line in regard to the Papacy:
The Pope rules the roost. It is that simple. Within the True Church, the Pope rules the roost.
Catholicism is built upon the Rock — Saint Peter...the Pope...the Papacy.
The Church of Rome is in charge of us. The Church of Rome will not surrender the God-given awesome power and authority, exercised in charity, that She possesses over her subjects.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
I hope its someone like sarah or ranjith, and not an SJ...
I, unfortunately, do not think that Cardinal Sarah will be elected pope if he is still eligible at the time of the next conclave. To me, he certainly would be the pope that we need as opposed to the pope that we currently have.
It will be interesting to see if, in time, the various conferences begin to wordsmith the language of the liturgical texts and how the Congregation ultimately reacts to that tinkering. Though I don't think a Tower of Babel will ultimately result, I'm sure there will be those who try to go after "and with your Spirit", "consubstantial" and "for many".
His first act as pope should be to suppress the Jesuits. In the interest of fairness, I also think he should suppress the Legionaries of Christ.
The election of a pope is a political act. Sometimes a candidate is chosen who is closely associated with his predecessor (e.g. Benedict XVI). Given the length of JP II's reign this came as something of a surprise. In 1903 it was clear that Leo XIII had wanted Cardinal Rampolla to succeed him, but the cardinals wanted a change and elected Pius X (in some respects an unlikely choice). There was a slight surge in support for Rampolla when the Archbishop of Cracow tried to use the imperial veto against him, but it was never enough.
Nowadays there are geopolitical factors in play. Bergoglio's Latin American provenance was in his favour, and there will be an impetus to select the next pope from Asia or Africa. If Francis leaves enough of a mess (which seems likely) then Sarah may be in the running. To select a middle-of-the-road Italian curialist such as Parolin wouldn't be a bad idea, although it might be seen as 'playing safe'. At least Murphy-O'Connor won't be around to make mischief.
North American prelates never seem to punch their weight. This was very noticeable at the Council. Perhaps Burke could organize a 'team Sarah', although I can't see Blaise Cupich in it.
I'm hoping the next pope but one will be Athanasius Schneider. Interestingly he shares his surname with S.Pius X.
John’s second paragraph is a nightmare scenario. Weak leadership at this point in history provides cover for the insurgents already operating in the Church. The sappers are strengthened by the populist movement fawning over the race or geography of the pope. A milquetoast Italian is not much better.
The problem, of course, with electing an ‘operative’ is that he might be an operative for the insurgents. So looking for a solid Catholic who could do the hard work himself or knows how to hire one who can is our best hope.
Post a Comment