Bishops' Schedules: Bishop Robert C. Morlino Sunday, July 2, 2006 11:00 a.m. -- Preside and Preach at the Celebration of the Eucharist, Stational Mass, St. Patrick Church, Madison Bishop William H. Bullock Thursday, June 22, to Friday, July 7, 2006 Visit to Rome, Italy

New translations:
Reflect meaning of Latin words

		Under the Gospel Book + Bishop Robert C. Morlino

Dear Friends:

As I draft this communication with you, I am still in Los Angeles toward the end of the meeting of the U.S. Bishops' Conference. I have not had sufficient time to get an adequate sampling of the news media coverage of the changes in the translations that we use in celebrating Mass.

The one thing that should be clear is that no changes will go into effect immediately since the translations which we bishops approved have to be sent to Rome in order to receive recognition. Thus no one can presume that the translations which we approved will turn out to be those which we use in the celebration of Mass, word for word.

Having said this, it is clear that, by and large, the texts, which we are offering to the Holy See for approval, will receive that recognition. The language of the Mass, once Rome gives this approval, will sound noticeably different and I want to begin to offer you an explanation for this, as soon as possible, even from Los Angeles soil.

Translations after Vatican II: 'Dynamic equivalence'

After the Second Vatican Council, guidelines were issued by a commission, known as the Concilium for liturgical translations following the liturgical reforms enacted in Vatican II documents. These guidelines did not enjoy the highest level of the authority of the Holy See, as they were not issued by the Pope; that is, this commission, called the Concilium, issued these guidelines on their own authority, which they had legitimately received.

The core of these guidelines lay in the instruction that the texts of the Mass should be translated according to a principle of "dynamic equivalence." This would mean that the words of the Latin text being translated would be separated from the content of those words. The content would be extracted from the words and could be translated into terms that were quite different.

Perhaps the best example of this is the prayer that we say immediately before communion: "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you." The Latin text says, "Lord, I am not worthy to enter under your roof." This second text recalls the passage about Jesus and His response to the request of the Centurion in healing his child. The Centurion said, "Lord, I am not worthy that I should enter under your roof." The Latin text repeated these Biblical words of the Centurion.

The official translation following the guidelines of the Concilium simply said, "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you." Thus, the words of the Centurion in Scripture were set aside in favor of the general content of those words which were translated more simply. If this is either confusing or boring I apologize, but I do think I owe you an explanation, in terms of possible media attention so that you can both understand yourself and then explain to others.

Misunderstandings of council teachings: 'discontinuity hermeneutic'

This principle of dynamic equivalence as applied to the translations of the Mass is at the core of some of the misunderstandings of the teachings of the Second Vatican Council. The principle of dynamic equivalence was used to justify removing the language of sacrifice in many instances from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, leaving simply the language of table and meal, rather than altar and sacrifice. Vatican II never intended to diminish in any way our understanding of the Eucharist as both sacrifice and meal. To diminish the sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist is part of what Pope Benedict has rightfully called, 'the discontinuity hermeneutic', a way of interpreting the Second Vatican Council, which is, in fact, incorrect.

Many of the incorrect interpretations of the Second Vatican Council were learned, through no one's bad intentions, through what, in fact, occurred at the Eucharistic Celebration, as opposed to what had gone before. Perhaps in no other place than the Eucharist was the "discontinuity" between pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II more powerfully experienced by our Catholic people in the United States. The problem remaining is there is no discontinuity, nor should this be experienced anywhere, especially at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

New instruction guiding translations

Under the authority of Pope John Paul the Great, a new instruction was issued for guiding translations of the Mass texts. This instruction, called Liturgiam Authenticam, is an instruction issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship, with the explicit approval of Pope John Paul II, which gives this document a level of authority considerably higher than the guidelines issued by the Concilium shortly after the Council.

Liturgiam Authenticam explicitly rejects the principle of dynamic equivalence as normative for translations for reasons that I have already outlined in this communication. Liturgiam Authenticam insists on what could be called the "principle of formal equivalence", that is, translations of the Mass texts need not be word-for-word literal translations but they must reflect clearly the meaning of the Latin words in the text.

So it is not permissible when translating "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof" completely to omit the notion of "entering under my roof" with its reference to the Biblical story. It is not acceptable to say simply, "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you."

Probably the best example of translation according to dynamic equivalence is in the response of the people to the priest, "And also with you" as the priest greets the people saying, "The Lord be with you." The Latin text says clearly, "and with your spirit" seeking to indicate, by that word "spirit", the special character or seal which the Sacrament of Holy Orders imprints on the soul of the priest. The priest says to the people, "The Lord be with you," and the people respond, "and with your spirit." meaning to affirm the specific identity of the priest as different from those who have not received the Sacrament of Holy Orders.

The response, "and with your spirit" contains an act of faith in the priesthood specifically. The response, "And also with you" does not contain this expression of faith, so according to Liturgiam Authenticam the response, "And also with you" is not acceptable. One of the characteristics of the discontinuity hermeneutic was the blurring of the distinction between ordained ministry and non-ordained service in the church. That blurring, that error of the discontinuity hermeneutic, is now in the process of being corrected.

We will survive these changes

Many of us priests wish that we did not have to go through any further episodes of changes at Mass because our people have become familiar with the translations which have been in place for 40 years. But we must also remember that 40 years ago, changes were abruptly made with regard to practices with had been in effect for hundreds of years, and if we survived those changes, we will surely survive the current ones. I know we will survive and the changes will force all of us to realize that some mistakes were made in the implementation of the Second Vatican Council by people with every good intention - this is always the case as we all make mistakes.

It would be unfortunate if someone were to draw the unreasonable conclusion that we should continue what is mistaken simply because we have become familiar with it. If we were to apply that kind of reasoning to areas outside the liturgy, we all know that it simply wouldn't work. We, in our human weakness, can become familiar and used to all sorts of things that simply are wrong, and the fact that we have become used to them doesn't in any way mean that we should never correct ourselves.

Pray in language which is heavenly

So in due time, the Vatican will give us a final, officially approved text and then, as always, we will take some time, trying to understand the changes and to implement them so that all of us, as Catholics of good will, will pray to the Lord in language that reflects a more accurate translation of our Latin liturgy and also in language that is more reverent, that is, language which is not the ordinary language that we speak in everyday life, but language which is heavenly and reminds us that in the Eucharistic Liturgy, we are precisely present by way of anticipation to heaven.

Just as we use incense to remind ourselves that the air in heaven smells differently than the air on earth, we will use language to remind us that the liturgy is a foretaste of heaven and how blessed we are to be able to enter into and experience that foretaste as we worship with Christ the High Priest.

It is noteworthy that the bishops of the other English-speaking countries have approved the same translation that we have, with the exception of Canada, where the matter has not yet come up for a vote of the bishops' conference. The universality of the language of the Mass in all English speaking countries will no doubt be a great gift.

Thank you for reading this. God bless each one of you and I hope that the joy of family, rest, and recreation are with you during the wonderful days of summer in the Diocese of Madison. Praised be Jesus Christ!