Friday, April 7, 2006

Bishop Trautman of Erie Lectures on Liturgical Changes at St. John's

Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie, Penn., the chair of the bishops' liturgy committee, offered a ringing critique of the proposed new translation of the Sacramentary, or the book of prayers for use in the Mass, which will come up for a vote before the American bishops in June. He spoke at a theology seminar at St. John's University in Collegeville on March 26.

Trautman called the June vote on the new Sacramentary a "decisive and defining" moment, acknowledging candidly that the conference is "divided."

"Liturgical language must not just be faithful and accurate, but intelligible, proclaimable, dignified, and reflective of the contemporary mainstream of the English language as spoken in the United States," Trautman said.

The heart of Trautman's argument was that too often, in its search for a "sacred vocabulary," the new translations veer into vocabulary and constructions foreign to the "living language of the worshipping assembly," thus failing to promote the "full, conscious and active participation" that was the vision of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65).

Thanks to the always informed John Allen, Vatican correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter, who is soon to change his venue from Rome to Manhattan. Allen includes a statement from Father Bruce Harbert, executive director of the organization proposing the controversial changes.

--

The shy and retiring Gerald from The Cafeteria is Closed, has some thoughts on one of Bishop Trautman's statements:

Often, Trautman said, these new translations are closer to the Latin original, but he argued that they needlessly dislodge "accurate, orthodox formulations of the faith we have prayed for the last 35 years."

*#%$ ! 35 years? Egads! Certainly he had no trouble tossing overboard nearly 2 millennia in the bloody '60s ! The revolutionaries of yesteryear are the reactionaries of today, it's priceless.


1 comment:

Anonymous said...

No matter what comes of this, you can be sure that Bishop Trautman is going to continue to do whatever he wants anyway. He has a history of doing just that. Bearing that in mind, I wonder that he's bothering to comment. Probably because if it's official he feel like he better complain.