Category: Liturgy

Posted on

The Whole Counsel of God

There is a wonderful passage from the Acts of Apostles in today’s Mass and it comprises a sermon from an early Bishop (St. Paul) to the priests of the early Church.

Paul’s Farewell Sermon – The scene is Miletus, a town in Asia Minor on the coast not far from Ephesus. Paul, who is about to depart for Jerusalem summons the presbyters (priests) of the early Church at Ephesus. Paul has ministered there for three years and now summons the priests for this final exhortation. In the sermon, St. Paul cites his own example of having been a zealous teacher of the faith who did not fail to preach the “whole counsel of God.” He did not merely preach what suited him or made him popular. He preached it all. To these early priests Paul leaves this legacy and would have them follow in his footsteps. Let’s look at excerpts from this final exhortation. First the text them some commentary:

From Miletus Paul had the presbyters  of the Church at Ephesus summoned. When they came to him, he addressed them, “You know how I lived among you the whole time from the day I first came to the province of Asia. I served the Lord with all humility and with the tears and trials that came to me…., and I did not at all shrink from telling you what was for your benefit, or from teaching you in public or in your homes. I earnestly bore witness for both Jews and Greeks to repentance before God and to faith in our Lord Jesus…..But now, compelled by the Spirit, I am going to Jerusalem……“But now I know that none of you to whom I preached the kingdom during my travels will ever see my face again. And so I solemnly declare to you this day that I am not responsible for the blood of any of you, for I did not shrink from proclaiming to you the entire plan of God….. (Acts 20:1-38 selected)

Here then is the prescription for every Bishop, every priest and deacon, every catechist, parent and Catholic: that we should preach the whole counsel (the entire plan of God). It is too easy for us to emphasize only that which pleases us or makes sense to us or fits in our worldview. There are some who love the Lord’s sermons on love but cannot abide  his teachings on death, judgment, heaven and hell. Some love to discuss liturgy and ceremony but the care of the poor is far from them. Others point to His compassion but neglect his call to repentance. Some love the way he dispatches the Pharisees and other leaders of the day but become suddenly deaf when the Lord warns against fornication or insists that we love our neighbor, enemy and spouse. Some love to focus inwardly and debate over doctrine but the outward focus of true evangelization to which we are commanded (cf Mat 28:19) is neglected.

In the Church as a whole we too easily divide out rather predictably along certain lines and emphases. Life issues here, social justice over there. Strong moral preaching over here, compassionate inclusiveness over there. When one side speaks the other side says, “There they go again.”

And yet somewhere we must be able to say with St. Paul that we did not shrink from proclaiming the whole counsel of God. While this is especially incumbent on the clergy it must also be true for parents and all who attain to any leadership in the Church. All of the issues above are important and must have their proper place in the preaching and witness of every Catholic, clergy and lay. While we may have gifts to work in certain areas we should learn to appreciate the whole counsel and the fact that others in the Church may be needed to balance and complete our work. It is true we must exclude notions that stray from revealed doctrine, but within doctrine’s protective walls it is necessary that we not shrink from proclaiming the whole counsel of God.

And if we do this we will suffer. Paul speaks above of tears and trials. In preaching the whole counsel of God, (not just favorite passages and politically correct themes), expect to suffer. Expect to not quite fit in with people’s expectations. Jesus got into trouble with just about everyone. He didn’t just offend the elite and powerful. Even his own disciples puzzled over his teachings on divorce saying “If that is the case of man not being able to divorce his wife it is better never to marry!” (Matt 19). Regarding the Eucharist, many left him and would no longer walk in his company (John 6). In speaking of his divine origins many took up stones to stone him but he passed through their midst (Jn 8).  In addition he spoke of taking up crosses, forgiving your enemy and preferring nothing to him. He forbade even lustful thoughts let alone fornication, and insisted we must learn to curb our unrighteous anger. Preaching the whole counsel of God is guaranteed to earn us the wrath of many.

As a priest I have sadly had to bid farewell to congregations and this is a critical passage whereby I examine my ministry. Did I preach even the difficult stuff? Was I willing to suffer for the truth? Did my people hear from me the whole counsel of God or just the safe stuff?

How about you? Have you proclaimed the whole counsel of God? If you are clergy when you move on…..if you are a parent when your child leaves for college…..if you are a Catechist when the children are ready to be confirmed or have reached college age…..If you teach in RCIA and the time comes for sacraments……Can you say you preached it all? God warned Ezekiel that if he failed to warn the sinner, that sinner would surely die for his sins but that Ezekiel himself would be responsible for his death, (Ez 3:17ff). Paul is able to say he is not responsible for the death (the blood) of any of them for he did not shrink from proclaiming the whole counsel of God. How about us?

The whole counsel of God.

This video contains the warning to the watchmen (us) in Ezekiel 3. Watch it if you dare.

Posted on

Truth in the New Translation Series #3: The Communicantes of the Roman Canon

In this series we are looking at the new Translation of the Roman Missal and how it restores to us a clearer articulation of the beautiful truth contained in the Latin text. Many of these truths have been lost or ambiguously presented in the current rendering we are using. Lex orandi, Lex credendi  (the law of praying is the law of believing). Hence the new translation, since it is more accurate and literal,  gives us a chance to more clearly appreciate anew the beauty of our faith based on what we pray. The previous installments in this series can be found here:

Truth in Translation Series

As usual, the Latin text is presented, followed by the new translation, and then by the rendering currently in use.

LATIN: Communicantes, et memoriam venerantes, in primis gloriosae semper Virginis Mariae, Genetricis Dei et Domini nostri Iesu Christi: sed et beati Ioseph, eiusdem Virginis Sponsi, et beatorum Apostolorum ac Martyrum tuorum, Petri et Pauli, Andreae, (Iacobi, Ioannis, Thomae, Iacobi, Philippi, Bartholomaei, Matthaei, Simonis et Thaddaei: Lini, Cleti, Clementis, Xysti, Cornelii, Cypriani, Laurentii, Chrysogoni, Ionnis et Pauli, Cosmae et Damiani) et omnium Sanctorum tuorum; quorum meritis precibusque concedas, ut in omnibus protectionis tuae muniamur auxilio. (Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.

NEW TRANSLATION: In communion with those whose memory we venerate, especially the glorious ever-Virgin Mary, Mother of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ, † and blessedJoseph, Spouse of the same Virgin, your blessed Apostles and Martyrs, Peter and Paul, Andrew, James, John, Thomas, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Simon and Jude: Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, Cornelius, Cyprian, Lawrence, Chrysogonus, John and Paul, Cosmas and Damian] and all your Saints: through their merits and prayers, grant that in all things we may be defended by your protecting help. [Through Christ our Lord. Amen.]

RENDERING IN CURRENT USE: In union with the whole Church we honor Mary, the ever-virgin mother of Jesus Christ our Lord and God. We honor Joseph, her husband, the apostles and martyrs Peter and Paul, Andrew, (James, John, Thomas, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Simon and Jude; we honor Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, Cornelius, Cyprian, Lawrence, Chrysogonus, John and Paul, Cosmas and Damian) and all the saints. May their merits and prayers grant us your constant help and protection. (Through Christ our Lord. Amen.)

1. The Communion of the Saints– It has been a long and ancient tradition to refer to our relationship with the saints as the “communion of the Saints”. The current rendering fails to use the word communion, but only union and  adds the phrase “the whole Church.” It is not wrong to say that we have a communion with the whole Church if we hold the faith and are in a state of grace. However, noble though this idea is, it is not what the Latin says. The Latin text literally says, “In communion (with) and venerating the memory of…..” and then goes on to list the saints. Hence what we have described here is the communion of the Saints and the fact that we venerate their memory and are swept up into the communion of the Saints. This communion is described as a kind of hierarchy beginning with Mary (see just below) and then Joseph. Then the apostles and then the martyrs. The prayer goes on to mention all the apostles by name along with some of the early martyrs. The prayer will conclude by asking the Lord’s protection on account of their prayers. The new translation thus restores to us, by a more literal rendering, a more proper understanding of the communion of the saints to which the prayer refers.

2. The glories of Mary re-articulated– The current version we are using rather flatly says, “We honor Mary, the ever virgin Mother…..” But the Latin (and the newer and more accurate Translation) speak of her more effusively, indicating that we venerate the memory “especially, the glorious ever-virgin Mary.” Note that Latin says we honor her  “in primis” (in the first place). The New English captures this reasonably by saying “especially.”  The Latin calls her glorious, as does the new translation. Why all this? Mary is not just any saint. She is the Queen of all the saints. She is Queen Mother of the Church. She is “our tainted nature’s solitary boast.”  She is God’s masterpiece. She is the new Eve. She has pride of place in any listing of the saints. Many Old Testament texts have been taken by the Church and applied to Mary down through the Centuries. For example: You are the glory of Jerusalem, you are the Joy of Israel, you are the highest honor of our people. (Judith 15:7). I am the rose of Sharon, I am the lily of the valleys (Song 2:1). Your name will be renowned through all generations; thus nations shall praise you forever (Ps 45:18). Blessed are you, daughter; by the Most High God, above all the women on earth. (Judith 13:18) . The trust you have shown shall not pass from the memories of men, but shall ever remind them of the power of God. (Judith 13:25). Well, you get the point. Mary is honored in the first place and is the glorious ever-Virgin Mary, Mother of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ. The new translation, by accurately reporting the Latin restores her glories and pre-eminence among the saints.

3. Clarity about Joseph– The reference to Joseph in the Roman Canon is relatively new. It was added in 1962 by Pope John XXIII. The exact Latin phrase that was added was sed et beati Ioseph, eiusdem Virginis Sponsi (and of Blessed Joseph, the spouse of the same Virgin). The wording was chosen very carefully to reflect the fact that he was her husband to be sure, but she was the same Virgin who was just called “ever-virgin” in the previous phrase. It is a way of re-emphasizing Mary’s Virginity which is necessary today in an age where many, even in the Church have wanted to doubt it. The current version lost this nuance when it simply said, “Joseph her husband.” The new translation restores the emphasis by translating it: “blessed Joseph, Spouse of the same Virgin. ” Note too that Joseph gets his adjective back: “Blessed.” The current version so often just eliminated words without apparent reason. Why not call him blessed as the Latin does? It was puzzling. But thankfully the new translation will have us giving Joseph his due.

4. Blessed apostles and martyrs– The same may be said for the apostles and martyrs whom the Latin calls “blessed.” The current version eliminated the word. Why again is a mystery. But the new translation will once again let us give them their due. They are blessed indeed.

5. They Are God’s Holy Ones –  Perhaps I am being picky but the current version says, “and all the saints” but the Latin says, “and all YOUR saints.” They are God’s saints after all, his holy ones. The New Translation gets this right as well.

This is a video I put together some time ago in honor of the Blessed Mother, she who is our tainted nature’s solitary boast:

Posted on

Truth in the New Translation Series: # 2 – The Memento Domine or Commemoration of the Living in the Roman Canon

This is the second installment of a series begun last week on the New English Translation of the Roman Missal. In this series I seek to present the new translation as a truer translation and hence a truer expression of the Catholic faith than the version in current use. In case you missed the first installment it is here:  Truth in the New Translation Series – The Te Igitur

With the new translation the richness of the Catholic faith in the Roman Missal is once again made available to Catholics in English speaking settings. Many of these riches have been kept hidden by an inferior translation ( a paraphrase, actually) in use since 1970.

We now turn our attention to the second paragraph of the Roman Canon known as the Memento Domine. Presented first is the Latin text, followed by the new translation, followed by the version in current use:

Latin Text: Meménto, Dómine, famulórum famularúmque tuárum N. & N.  Et ómnium circumstántium, quorum tibi fides cógnita est, et nota devótio: pro quibus tibi offérimus, vel qui tibi ófferunt hoc sacrifícium laudis, pro se, suísque ómnibus, pro redemptióne animárum suárum, pro spe salútis et incolumitátis suæ; tibíque reddunt vota sua ætérno Deo, vivo et vero.

New Translation: Remember, Lord, your servants N. and N. and all gathered here, whose faith and devotion are known to you. For them and all who are dear to them we offer you this sacrifice of praise or they offer it for themselves and all who are dear to them, for the redemption of their souls, in hope of health and well-being, and fulfilling their vows to you, the eternal God, living and true.

Version in current use: Remember, Lord, your people, especially those for whom we now pray, N. and  N. Remember all of us gathered here before you. You know how firmly we believe in you and dedicate ourselves to you. We offer you this sacrifice of praise for ourselves and those who are dear to us. We pray to you, our living and true God, for our well-being and redemption.

1. We are God’s servants – In the translation in current use we refer to ourselves as “your people” but the Latin refers to us as famulorum famularumque (literally “servants and handmaids). The new translation restores the more accurate word “servants” to refer to us. It is true that the use of the word “handmaids” has been dropped. This is likely due to its rather archaic sound in the modern setting. The translators have simply made use of the single word, “servants” to  refer to both male and female though, it is true,  the Latin text distinguishes the two. Perhaps in the modern setting we can say it is a distinction without a difference. But the return to the truer rendering of the word “servants” is helpful to our age. In current times we are slow to acknowledge that, before anything else we are or do, we are God’s servants. We are not God’s equal, neither are we free to set the terms of our obedience to God. That would be pride, the primordial sin wherein Adam and Eve essentially said, “I will decide what I want to do and I will decide whether it is right or wrong.” But as it is, we are not to yield to pride, we are to realize and accept that our greatest glory is to be God’s servant. The Lord Jesus said, 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 (Mk 10:43-45). It is appropriate as an antidote to the current climate which has downplayed our status as servants of the Lord.

2. A less presumptive declaration of our faith and devotion – The current version rather presumptively tells God what he should know by saying, You know how firmly we believe in you and dedicate ourselves to you. This tone is rather presumptive and boldly  asserts things about ourselves that we are not the judge of. Hence the new translation more accurately and humbly renders the Latin, and all gathered here, whose faith and devotion are known to you. Now we will no longer tell God what he should know about us but rather we will simply and humbly accept that he knows for himself and on his own terms the true degree of our faith and devotion. Here too is another antidote to the rather bold and presumptive tone our times.

3. The distinction between the offering of the clergy and the people  – What the priest is doing at the Altar is separate and distinct from what the gathered people are doing. The ordained ministerial priest in virtue of his ordination is making the offering to the Father in persona Christi capitis (in the person of Christ the head). It is Christ himself who is speaking and ministering through the ordained priest. The Latin text does say offerimus (we offer) but the “we” referred to here is the celebrant along with any other con-celebrating priests. As to the people the Latin text says, vel qui tibi offerunt (or who (themselves) offer unto you). Hence the people DO offer unto God, but in an offering distinct from (though related to) what the priest(s) celebrant(s) are doing. The people are offering prayers, a sacrifice of praise, bread and wine, and monetary support, indeed the gift of their very selves to God. And they make this offering as an exercise of the common or royal priesthood they received in baptism. But as the Catechism points out the common priesthood  of all the baptized  and the ministerial priest are ordered to one another but differ essentially (cf CCC # 1547). The Second Vatican Council affirmed that

Though they differ from one another in essence and not only in degree, the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial or hierarchical priesthood are nonetheless interrelated: each of them in its own special way is a participation in the one priesthood of Christ. The ministerial priest, by the sacred power he enjoys, teaches and rules the priestly people; acting in the person of Christ, he makes present the Eucharistic sacrifice, and offers it to God in the name of all the people. But the faithful, in virtue of their royal priesthood, join in the offering of the Eucharist.  They likewise exercise that priesthood in receiving the sacraments, in prayer and thanksgiving, in the witness of a holy life, and by self-denial and active charity. (Lumen Gentium 10)

Hence the more careful rendering  of the new translation spells out the careful wording of the Latin text which preserves the inter-related though distinct offerings taking place here: For them and all who are dear to them we offer  you this sacrifice of praise or they offer it for themselves and all who are dear to them. The lack of proper distinction in the past decades has led to harm in both distinct branches of the priesthood. It has led to a clericalization of the laity, thus undermining respect for their proper role and mission in the temporal order as well as at mass. It has also tended to laicize the clergy thus diminishing respect for their distinct role among the faithful in terms of the celebration of the Sacred liturgy, thus sanctifying, teaching and governing in sacred matters and equipping the laity to exercise proper oversight of the temporal order. It is surely hoped that the new translation will assist in rearticulating and thus recognizing the proper roles and distinctiveness of clergy and laity.

4. Rendering  our vows– The new translation says that the faithful,  in making their offering,  are  fulfilling their vows to you (a fairly literal rendering of the Latin tibíque reddunt vota sua). This is a gloss on a phrase that occurs not infrequently in the psalms occurring over a dozen times in this or a similar form: I am under vows to you, O God; I will present my thank offerings to you. (Ps 56:12) or again, Praise awaits you, O God, in Zion; to you our vows will be fulfilled (Ps 65:1). The fact is that we owe God our praise. To praise God is described repeatedly in the psalms and elsewhere in Scripture as a kind of debt we owe to God. He is worthy of our praise and since we have this debt we have a kind of vow or promise to render and fulfill that debt of gratitude and praise. Too many people today think of worship as something that exists for them. Hence we hear people say that they “Don’t get anything out of Church” or that they “Are not being fed.” But in the end it is not about you or me. The focus is God and that we owe him a debt of gratitude and praise. We ought to go to Church simply because God is worthy and we have a debt or vow to render. It is nice if the sermon is good, my favorite song is sung etc. but that is not why we go. We go to render or fulfill our sacred duty and vow, to give thanks to God who is infinitely worthy.

The current English version misses the Scriptural allusion altogether by simply saying “We pray to you.” Fine, but again notice the subtle shift to us and what we are doing. Notice too a complete loss of the reason, (our vow or duty). The current text also stumbles badly because it inaccurately links the “We pray” to an expected reward: “for our well being and redemption.” In other words the current translation links our act of praying to reward whereas the Latin text and the new translation link to a duty pure and simple. Here again, the new translation will provide a vast benefit by helping us to recover reference to our duty to worship God and render him thanks simply because he is worthy and we have a duty, obligation and vow to render this even without any hope of reward for it.

So here we are only two paragraphs into the Roman Canon (Eucharistic Prayer I) and we have had much to discuss. The New translation provides vast benefit in terms of teaching and the recovery of sacred truths which the 1970 version obscured. As can be seen the poor translation of 1970 is directly connected to many struggles we have had in the Church in terms of an improper understanding of the faith and of worship. It is not the only cause, but surely we can see how the new translation will help us recover important truths. More installments in this series will be coming soon.

Video: I realize that some of you do not appreciate Gospel music the way I do. But one of the great blessings of Gospel music is that its focus is almost always on God and what God has done. So much of other modern Church music focuses too much on us. One of the great themes of Gospel music is that God is worthy, worthy of all our praise. This song says,

I’ve got so much to thank God for. o many wonderful blessings, and so many open doors. A brand new mercy along with each new day That’s why I praise You and for this I give You praise

For waking me up this morning, That’s why I praise You,  For starting me on my way,  That’s why I praise You.  For letting me see the sunshine,  that’s why I praise You  of a brand new day.  A brand new mercy along with each new day,  That’s why I praise You and for this I give You praise!

Posted on

Truth in the New Translation Series: The Opening of the Roman Canon

I have little understanding why anyone would not want a new translation. I DO understand that familiarity is often appreciated but the fact is,  what we have been using since 1970 is not even a translation. At best,  it is a paraphrase. For those of us who know Latin, the poverty of the current English Missal was enough to provoke anger and deep sorrow. The richness of the Latin text is great and masterful,  and that most Catholics have had no real access to it is a matter that has needed correction for decades.

In this series which I begin today as an occasional feature  I would like to look at some of the  new texts which have already been released. I would like to compare them both to the Latin text and to the current rendering (I cannot call it a translation) we are currently using. I would like to begin with the venerable Roman Canon. In this installment we will look just at the opening lines of that text. As you will see many important teachings are being recovered in the new translation, teaching never lost in the Latin but soon to be restored by a correct and complete translation to the English speaking world. I list first the Latin, then the new translation, then the current rendering for your reference. There follows my commentary.

Te igitur, clementissime Pater, per Iesum Christum, Filium tuum, Dominum nostrum, supplices rogamus ac petimus, uti accepta habeas et benedicas + haec dona haec munera, haec sancta sacrificia illibata, in primis, quae tibi offerimus pro Ecclesia tua sancta catholica: quam pacificare, custodire, adunare et regere digneris toto orbe terrarum: una cum famulo tuo Pap nostro N. et Antistite nostro N. et omnibus orthodoxis atque catholicae et apostolicae fidei cultoribus.

New Translation: To you, therefore, most merciful Father, we make humble prayer and petition through Jesus Christ, your Son, our Lord: and bless these gifts, these offerings, these holy and unblemished sacrifices, which we offer you first of all for your holy Catholic Church. Be pleased to grant her peace, to guard, unite and govern her throughout the whole world, together with your servant N. our Pope and N. our Bishop, and all those who, holding to the truth, hand on the catholic and apostolic faith.

Current Rendering: We come to you, Father, with praise and thanksgiving, through Jesus Christ your Son. Through him we ask you to accept and bless + these gifts we offer you in sacrifice. We offer them for your holy catholic Church, watch over it, Lord, and guide it; grant it peace and unity throughout the world. We offer them for N. our Pope, for N. our bishop, and for all who hold and teach the catholic faith that comes to us from the apostles.

Observations:

  1. Getting our focus right– Notice that the New translation begins “To you therefore” whereas the current usage has “We come to you.” The New translation renders the Latin (Te igitur) correctly. But of equal importance is the fact that the proper focus is restored in the New Translation. The focus shifts from us (“we”) to God (“You”).  One of the greatest problems with modern liturgy has been its anthropocentric focus. Modern liturgical notions have wanted to focus on the  self-aware, gathered community than seems to frequently to celebrate and focus on itself. Modern songs go on at great length to describe that we are gathered, that we are church, that we are called, chosen, etc. Modern church architecture too has tended to focus the community upon itself with circular and fan shaped churches. It is true that perhaps in the liturgies of the early half of the 20th century that the congregation had all but been forgotten. But the over correction now needs correction itself. The focus of worship is God, what God has done, is doing and who He is. God is worthy of our worship and praise. Liturgy does not exist to entertain me or please me. It is directed to God. God, it is true speaks to us and ministers to us,  but until we focus on Him and pay attention to him as our true focus, the Lord’s ministry to us is less fruitful than it should be. Consider for example a visit to the doctor. If the focus is merely on what pleases me and makes me feel good, and not the truth that the Doctor offers, the fruitfulness of the visit to the doctor is severely compromised. In the same way, if my visit to God’s house is on me and what pleases me and affirms me, and not on the truth that God proclaims and on his goodness and wisdom, my visit to God’s house is far less fruitful. Hence the Latin text and the new translation focuses on God and leaves behind the anthropocentric emphasis of the current rendering.
  2. Celebrating the Father and the Son– Notice the Latin text and the new translation contain far more adjectives in reference to the Father and the Son than the current rendering. The current render calls him merely “Father” whereas the Latin and the more faithful New translation refer to him as a most clement or most merciful Father. Further the Son is referred to as Jesus Christ your Son and our Lord. The Lordship of Jesus Christ cannot be emphasized enough in an age which has tended to reduce him to a merely affirming brother who told us to love each other and other nice things. Further, the great mercy and clemency of the Father must also be emphasized in an age which has tended to identify the Father with the “vengeful God of the Old Testament.”
  3. Ecstatic joy in the gifts we offer– There is a kind of ecstatic joy in the Latin and the new translation as we describe what we offer as gifts, offering and unblemished sacrifices. When I celebrate the Mass in Latin I sense a real joy as I say haec dona! haec munera! haec sancta sacrificia illibata! (these gifts, these offerings, these holy unspotted sacrifices) We are joyful in what we bring to God and we describe them almost as a child who has personally made a gift for a parent and joyfully presents it. The current rendering does not capture this joy but simply speaks of the them as gifts we offer in sacrifice. Gone is any reference to them as being holy or unspotted. The Old Testament had required a sacrificial lamb that was unblemished, hence the new translation also recaptures the scriptural allusion of the Latin.
  4. Recovering the Church as Bride– One of the most egregious tendencies of the current rendering is to consistently refer to the Church as “it” rather than as “she” and “her.” The Church is not an impersonal institution but is the great Bride of Christ. She is His Bride and our Mother. You will note that the new translation restores the proper pronoun “her” as opposed to the impersonal pronoun “it”.
  5. The Church needs more than guidance, she needs governance–  Note too that the new translation asks the Lord to grant her peace, to guard, unite and govern her. The current rendering is less strong asking the Lord merely to “guide” the Church rather than govern her. Frankly we need more than guidance. We DO need governance. We need commandments, and clear instruction. Too many moderns prefer a suggestive and supportive God who affirms but does not correct or punish, who does not direct and command. But the real and true God does command, does insist and does correct and punish. It is proper that the Latin “regere” should once again be properly rendered “govern.”
  6. A papal title recovered – One of the great titles of the Pope is Servus Servorum Dei – the Servant of the Servants of God. The current rendering omitted what the Latin says and simply called him our Pope. He is that but there is no greater dignity than to be the servant of God. In Mark 10:43-44  the Lord told the Apostles that the greatest among the flock must be the servant, even the slave of the others. The Pope’s most profound quality is that he has authority as one who serves.
  7. The faith is true– The Latin text is ancient and makes use of the word orthodox. It is used as an adjective, not as a proper Noun as though it were referring to the Orthodox Churches of the East. The word “orthodox” refers literally to “straight (or correct) thinking.” Hence it means that which is revealed to us and which is true. Hence the New translation correctly renders the word orthodoxis in a way that avoids the impression of the Churches of the east and captures what the Latin was originally getting at. The orthodox are those who cling or hold to what is true. The current rendering simply omits any reference to this word. But more than ever we need to recover a sense today that our faith is not just a viewpoint, or a way of thinking. Our faith is a truth claim. The opposite of what we teach is not just less meaningful, it is false. Jesus said, For this I was born and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice. (John 18:37). The Roman Canon alludes to this verse here. It is good that we have this back in  the new translation. More than ever we need to recover a notion that when the Church announces the faith to the world, she (we) are not just expressing an opinion. We are speaking the truth. And those who are of the truth listen to us.

Well, we’re just getting started. And you can see how much has been lost and how much is being recovered in the new translation just these few lines. Praise God for this new translation which restores to us many teachings lost by the poor paraphrase we are currently using. I hope you’ll see that any discomfort in getting used to a new text is more than worth the price to recover the richness of the Latin Text.

Msgr. Bruce Harbert is a member of the new ICEL commission which was responsible for developing the new translation. In this 11 minute video he describes some of the insights and history of the new translation.

Posted on

On Creative Genius and Music as a Kind of Onomatopoeia

A few days ago we discussed whether Angels sing. My own conclusion from the discussion is that there is little or no evidence that Angels sing. About the closest reference is Job 38:7 and even there it is not perfectly clear that they sing. Perhaps the most positive way to state my point is that musical expression is a particular gift and genius of the human person. And our capacity for music is not just to make crude sounds. Rather we are possessed, at least collectively, of creative genius in this regard. The video below illustrates this genius.

Do you remember your grammar and the grammatical term Onomatopoeia? An Onomatopoeia is a word that sounds like the object it describes. Words like oink, meow, Wham! Sizzle, and my personal favorite:”Yackety Yak”

There are times too when music takes up a kind of onomatopoetic quality. In the video below Moses Hogan, one of the great modern arrangers of the old African American Spirituals describes his arrangement of “Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho.” He has the male and female voices in a frenetic dialogue with lots of staccato notes dominating in the male voices.  This creates the very sound of an intense battle! The song sounds like what it is describing. It’s a kind of “musical onomatopoeia.” There are other aspects of the same concept, you’ll hear the trumpet in the soprano and the battle reach climax in a moment of dissonance. And wait till you hear the walls fall at the very end in a cascade of notes! 

In this three minute video Moses Hogan describes his intent of echoing the sound of a battle and then the song is sung. Enjoy this brilliant and beautiful arrangement of the Spiritual. Admire too the wonderful discipline of the choir that is necessary to execute this spiritual flawlessly.

Posted on

Turn Down That Microphone and Preach from Your Soul: How Modern P.A. Systems Have Harmed Preaching

I had a funeral  today and for various reasons the P.A. System was not working during the time for the homily. I have a large cavernous Church, built of stone and plaster and both music and voice resonate well. With a fairly full church I had to preach the Old Fashioned way, I belted it out.

I was reminded again how powerfully the modern use of microphones has affected preaching and to some extent singing. To preach without a microphone means to preach with elevated volume and it requires one to strongly project the voice. In effect one has to preach authoritatively and passionately. I had to speak boldly. And as I preached in this manner the physical requirement began to affect the message. As adrenaline began to build, enthusiasm and a kind of confident joy overtook me.

Now I am not generally known for a quiet style of preaching anyway 🙂   but preaching in this manner strengthened my message even more. Body and soul were fully engaged in proclaiming the message. Ah what power the preachers of old had to have! Imagine Jesus preaching out in the open to thousands. He surely did not speak gently, he needed power to project.

It is not the first time I have preached without a microphone. Yet today it occurred to me that I have to do more of this. I have learned in the past to stand far back from the mike but perhaps, in the right conditions no P.A. at all is best.

I have discussed with brother priests before the concern I have at how too much microphone harms our preaching. Too much microphone causes the priest to adopt a gentle, lyrical style of preaching. His style too easily becomes suggestive rather than bold proclamation. The suggestive and conversational tone of many a modern preacher can, if not balanced by other things, amount to an “uncertain trumpet.”  St. Paul warns, “For if the trumpet produces an uncertain sound, who will get ready for battle?” (1 Cor 14:8) It is a sure fact that many of the Catholic faithful have no readiness or appetite for battle and this can surely be laid at the feet of uncertain and uninspired preaching and teaching.

So perhaps a suggestion….No! a strong prescription! Use less microphone for the preaching moment and for the proclamation of the Word. It is a very different type of preaching that emerges from such a context, and  I think, a far better, bolder and braver preaching. The lectors too will benefit from a louder and bolder style.

It is a true fact, not all churches, (especially the ones built after 1970 and until recently), are  well suited for this option. But many are and we surely need bolder preaching today and trumpet that is more certain. Some of preaching simply comes down to the physicality of the moment. If a priest needs to project his voice he is affected by that very fact and his message inevitably turns bolder and braver. He will feel the very voice of the Prophets echo though him.

Lectors too will find a whole new experience for they will not merely read the Word  of God, they will proclaim it. And those in the pew will be less sleepy and the authority of the Word of God will reach them in a whole new way.

And finally, music will also benefit. Too much modern Church music, if you ask me (and I know you didn’t but I’m saying it anyway),  is rather sing-songy and lyrical. Meditative music is nice and has its place but we also need a return of some of the bold and brave singing enshrined in the hymns of the past;  before heavy use of P.A.  systems influenced us to sing more softly and in a more folksy manner.  Different musical styles all have their place but good gutsy singing has taken something of a hit and I blame the loud microphones for some of it.

Less mike and more manpower may well re-energize the proclamation of the Word, the preaching  of it and the singing of praise to God. A certain trumpet can awaken even the dead! (cf  1 Cor 15:52).

This video shows Jesus preaching to an unruly crowd in the synagogue. No Microphone in those days!

Posted on

Angels Don’t Sing

Angels Don’t Sing! Or at least that is my proposition. When I say this to people they usually respond. “Of course angels sing, you are just plain wrong.” I would like to challenge you to find that I am wrong. Perhaps I am. But why do I say that angels don’t sing? A number of reasons:

1. There is no Scriptural verse that I have ever read that describes them as singing. Even in the classic Christmas scene where we depict them as singing “Glory to God in the Highest,” the text says that they SAY the song  not that they sing it (cf. Luke 2:13).  If you can find a Scripture text that shows the angels singing please share it, but I’ve looked for years and can’t find it. Here too I state this humbly and may be wrong. If so you will help me.

2.  The catechism never says that angels sing.

3. The liturgy of the Church does not seem to indicate that angels sing. Perhaps the closest that we come are the prefaces. There is reference to the “song of the angels” (the Holy, Holy, Holy) but they are said to “say”  this song. The most common ways of describing what they do regarding the heavenly hymn and what we join in with are phrases such as: Sine fine dicentes (saying, without end), Clamantes (shouting), in gaudio confitentes (declaring  in joy), Concinunt – This is about as close as the Latin gets to saying they sing. It can be translated “they sing”  but can also be translated “they agree in saying”  or “they say together.” There is also a phrase that comes up in the prefaces which says, cumque omni militia caelestis exercitus hymnum gloriae tuae canimus (and with all the heavenly hosts we sing the hymn of your glory). But the we who sing is us. That the angels are referred to as singing is not clear. It may well be a gloss on Psalm 137:1  In the sight of the angels I will sing your praises Lord.

4. I cannot say I have comprehensive knowledge of the Fathers of the Church so here I cannot definitively declare they never indicate that angels sing. Perhaps you can assist in this regard?

5. Though there are references to nine “choirs” of angels, the word choir here means “order” or “group.”

6. It would also seem that, having no bodies, they cannot sing. For to sing is to cause the vocal cords to vibrate, causing the air to vibrate as well. While it is true that angels are said to talk, and do other things such as blow trumpets, it is unclear if this is meant literally or analogously. It is possible that humans hearing  or seeing angels were enabled to do this through a temporary grace which was not hearing or seeing in the conventual sense as though the angels had actual physical bodies. (However, St. Thomas effectively argues that angels do sometimes assume bodies, (Pars Prima, 51.1)). Even if this is the case, they are still never said to sing.

So here is my proposition, “Angels don’t sing.”  I will further state that singing is a particular glory of the human person. The capacity is unique to us, a very special gift. In the heavenly liturgy I propose to you that it is we who will sing, and not the angels.

This is only a proposition!  I have thought about it for years. I do not declare it with pride as though I am certain I am right. But for the reasons stated I want to propose this for your consideration. How say you?

Posted on

What Did He Call Me? – On the Significance of Being the Sheep of the Lord

We’re so used to hearing that the Lord is our Shepherd and we are his sheep that sometimes we miss the humor of the Lord calling us sheep.  The Lord could have said we’re strong and swift as horses, beautiful as gazelles,  or brave as lions. But he said we are like sheep. I guess I’ve been called worse but it’s a little humbling and embarrassing really.

What of sheep? What are some of the things we can meditate on. In the end it is not all humble pie we have to eat.  There are higher qualities we can admire. But let’s start with the humble and move to the higher.

1. Sheep are WAYWARD animals. It means that they just tend to wander off. Now don’t tell me that doesn’t describe us. All we like Sheep have gone astray, every one to his own way (Isaiah 53:6). A sheep will nibble here and browse there and get lost lost, he doesn’t know how to get back to the sheep fold unless the shepherd goes and brings him back. Sheep just keep on going and don’t come back. Dogs and cats can find their way home, The horse can find the barn, But not the old sheep. This is how it is with us. We get easily lost. We need the sheep fold of the Church and we need the shepherd who is Christ ministering through his Pope, bishops and priests. Otherwise we just wander here and there.

2. Sheep are WITLESS –  That is to say they just plain dumb. Ever hear of a trained sheep?  We train dogs and birds, horses and even lions. But the sheep cannot be trained! Now we human sheep like to think we are so smart. Sure we’ve been to the moon and we have all this technical computer stuff. But too many of us aren’t even smart enough to pray every day, get to Church on Sunday and follow God’s basic directions for life. We’re so stupid that we even do things that KNOW harm us. Even the simplest directions from God we either confuse or get stubborn about. We cop an attitude and say “We know a few things too.” That’s right, we do know a very few things. We’re so dumb we think we’re smarter than God! We think we have a better way than God’s way. No that’s really dumb.

3. Sheep are WEAK– A sheep just has no way to protect himself. The mule can kick, the cat can scratch,  the dog can bite, the rabbit can run, and the skunk…you know what he can do. But the old sheep? Without the care of the Shepherd and the dogs, the sheep is history. The wolf comes and all he can do is stand there and get killed. And so it is with us if it were not for the care of Jesus the Good Shepherd. The world, the flesh and the devil have got us cornered. And if it were not for the Lord and the power of his grace we would be toast. We like to thin we’re strong. We have armies, we amass political power, monetary power, star-power. It all gives us the illusion that we are strong. But then the slightest temptation arises and we fall. We need the Lord and his grace and mercy or we don’t stand a chance because by our self we are weak and prone to sin.

4. Sheep are WORTHWHILE animals. The sheep is a valued animal. In Jesus’ day many a man counted his wealth by sheep. Sheep give meat and milk, produce lambs and wool. Shepherds made many sacrifices in Jesus’ day  to breed, herd, and protect these valuable animals. And so it is with us. We may not feel worthy at times but apparently we were worth saving because the Lord paid the price of our redemption. He saw the price and paid it all. And not with any diminishable sum of silver and gold but with his own precious blood.

5. Sheep WALK together – Sheep flock together and thus are safer.  To be a solitary sheep is dangerous. It’s a good way to get devoured. Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour (1 Peter 5:8). The scriptures also say Woe to the solitary man! For if he should fall, he has no one to lift him up (Eccles 4:10). Sheep are not supposed to go off on their own, neither are we. We are called to part of a flock and to be under the care of a shepherd. Most of us realize this in a parish setting. But in the wider sense we are under a bishop’s care and ultimately the care of the Pope who is the chief Shepherd and the one representative of Christ the Good Shepherd.  The Lord Jesus said there is to be one flock and one shepherd (John 10:16). God wants us to be in the protection of the folk with a shepherd watching over us. An old spiritual says, “Walk together children. Don’t you get weary. There’s a great camp meeting in the promised land.” Now too many like to say, “That old Pope doesn’t know this or that.” But again I say, to wander from the care of the flock and the Shepherd is a mighty dangerous thing.

6. Sheep are WARY– Jesus says, “He who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.  To him the gatekeeper opens; the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.  When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice.  A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers. (John 10″11-14).  Sheep have the remarkable quality of knowing their master’s voice and of instinctively fearing any other voice and fleeing from it. In this matter sheep are smarter than most of us. For we do not flee voices contrary to Christ. Instead we draw close and say, “Tell me more.” In fact we spend a lot of time and money to listen to other voices. We spend huge amounts of money to buy televisions so that the enemy’s voice can influence us and our children. We spend large amounts of time with TV, radio, Internet. And we can so easily be drawn to the enemy’s voice. And not only do we NOT flee it, but we feast on it. And instead of rebuking it we turn and rebuke the voice of God and put his word on trial instead of putting the world on trial. The goal for us is to be more wary, like sheep and to recognize only one voice, that of the Lord speaking though his Church, and to flee every other voice.

OK fellow sheep face it. We got called a sheep and it is deserved. But remember it’s not just the humble qualities, it’s the higher ones too. And the final beauty is this. If we are sheep, that means we have a Good Shepherd:

I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me— just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. (John 10:14-16)