Advent Changes to the Liturgy

In less than two weeks the Catholic Church in the United States will implement the new changes to the Mass. I must confess that I have honestly tried to avoid learning very many specifics of what these changes consist of, confident that there will not be a single one with which I will agree. Nevertheless, I believe it is safe to say that the changes in language will in every instance be a move away from the ordinary language of the people to a formal, stilted, and obsolete phraseology.

Let's just take 'Et Cum Spiritu tuo'. The literal translation of course is 'and with your spirit', and that is the idea, literal translations of the original Mass texts. So 'and with you also' becomes and with your spirit. The problem of course is that a literal translation is not always the best translation, because it does not always reflect what the person wanted to convey. That phraseology may have been perfect 1500years ago, but that doesn't mean it gives the best sense of what the author of these words was trying to say. The Lord be with you, and with you also. Have we really improved our worship by saying and with your spirit. I mentioned this to my wife recently and she asked what does 'and with your spirit' mean. Of course we are going to teach her what it means and that will solve the problem.

How about Lord I am not worthy that you should come under my roof? The context doesn't even work. This is about coming into my home to heal a sick individual. For most of us it doesn't really relate to receiving communion. Its jarring, and once again the question becomes what does this mean. Is it talking about coming under the roof of my mouth? I know I thought that when I made my first communion. How can this be an improvement over 'Lord I am not worthy that you should come to me'? Why shouldn't our people in the pews every week be allowed to say prayers that make sense and are related to the current culture in which they live? What do we gain by using language that is no longer the language of the people?

This is a useless discussion of course because those with the power have made the decision and that is what it will be. They simply don't care what anybody else thinks. There are, however, a couple of points that I think are worth making. First I find it fascinating how the clergy is suddenly 'gung ho' about how wonderful the new translation is, and how much it will enhance everybody's appreciation of the liturgy and deepen the spiritual response to the sacred texts. I don't believe it for a minute. A couple of months ago I spoke to a priest friend who talked about how horrible this new translation is. I'm pretty sure he has not said one negative word to his parishioners. Its distrurbing to think how power can impose it's will on those it rules and forces to do its bidding. Totally forgotten are the battles the Bishops fought not so many years ago to prevent this new translation from being implemented. Of course Rome's response has effectively been to change the Bishops. I'm pretty sure no priest over 50 thinks this is a good idea but all are falling into line.

Secondly how is it that some commission in Rome can know how we folks in the pews in Maryland can best express our prayers of praise, petition, etc to God. We are talking about a commission that even lacks the day to day involement with the English language as it is spoken and used in the United States. What is this conformity all about? Why not have parishoners under the guidance and direction of the pastor choose words and phrases that they can relate to, and maybe have different texts for the childrens Mass, the teen contemporary Mass, and the Mass for the old folks like us? The decision to require everything and every word to be determined by Rome simply brings home to us more and more that this Church is not concerned with the lives and needs of its people but rather wants everyone to simply conform to its way of operation.

Finally, the reality is that these changes are minor and not so important in the overall scheme of things. This is of course one of the reasons the Church can get away with such a backward looking move. How upset can one become over word changes in a few of the regular parts of the Mass? Most of us will barely notice the changes as we continue with our usual attentiveness at Mass. It reflects, however, a heirarchy that has forgotten the Gospel message. It is a heirarchy that protects itself as it did in the sex abuse crisis. It is a heirarchy that stifles dissent which has severely impaired it as a prophetic voice and impaired its ability to develop new and creative approaches to the modern day challenges it faces. The Church has lost much of its ability to speak for the downtrodden, to speak on immigration reform, to command the respect of the lay people in the pews. It has become a heirarchy that has forgotten to live the gospel message of serving rather than being served, and recognizing as Paul did the charisms that exist in every segment of the People of God. The Bishops are not constitutive of the Church, and the time has come for all members of the Church to insist that their ideas, beliefs, and perceptions matter too.