Dennis Sadowski has a fascinating article in the Catholic News Service on the historical tradition of the Church and how the updated English missal fits within that history. A summary can't do his reporting justice, but I'll pull a few quotes:
When the third edition of the English-language version of the Roman Missal is implemented at Advent, it will mark the continuing evolution of the eucharistic liturgy that began in the earliest days of the church.
[. . .]
"It's not the changing that's abnormal. It's not changing that's abnormal," said Jesuit Father John Baldovin, professor of historical and liturgical theology at Boston College, who explores the history of the missal and the new English translation in a video series on the National Jesuit News website.
The translation that began being implemented in English-speaking countries in 2010 has been openly criticized by some clergy and liturgy experts for its structurally complicated language that they believe strays from the intent of Vatican II's liturgical reforms. But other liturgists responsible for catechesis on the missal are reminding the faithful that the translation helps bind modern-day Catholics with early Christians through its more authentic language.
"People may find it interesting that this has developed over centuries. It isn't something dropped out of the sky at Vatican II, but it has a history," said Christina Ronzio, director of the Office for Worship in the Cleveland Diocese.
"What it does is it establishes continuity of that tradition of the church," she said.
[. . .]
Diocesan-based liturgists Ronzio and Thiron both have included a discussion of liturgical history in their workshops on implementing the translation after initially hearing from people who perceived the translation as betraying Vatican II's promise. With knowledge of history, the anger has largely disappeared, they said.
"One of the things (people) appreciate most about the Catholic faith is tradition," Thiron said. "When they see tradition is being preserved, they're comfortable with that."
If it looks like I've quoted a lot, know that I haven't even scratched the surface. I left out all of the history because there was no reasonable way to pull that aspect apart and preserve continuity. It's a wonderfully written article and definitely worth a read, for history buffs and for those interested in the new missal.
 |
| Photo: CNS/Nancy Wiechek |
No comments:
Post a Comment