|Why is the new translation of the Mass so offensive to liberals?|
I must say that having read the new translation of the Mass, I really don't know what is so offensive about it. Maybe, he is concerned by the fact that it reads as a more distinctively Catholic translation. It can't be just the fact that this has come 'top down' from Rome. After all, was not the 1969 Roman Missal rather a top-down translation of the Mass coming directly from Rome? Here is his open letter. My thoughts on his thoughts in bold, deep purple.
'Your Eminences, Your Excellencies,
With a heavy heart, I have recently made a difficult decision concerning the new English missal. I have decided to withdraw from all my upcoming speaking engagements on the Roman Missal in dioceses across the U.S. After talking with my confessor [Was his confessor, perhaps, sympathetic to his viewpoint?] and much prayer ['Lord, let this translation pass from me. Nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt...'], I have concluded that I cannot promote the new missal translation with integrity. I’m sure bishops want a speaker who can put the new missal in a positive light, and that would require me to say things I do not believe. [Gosh...How on Earth must Priests have felt in the 1970s when they were more or less forced to present the Mass of Paul VI in 'a positive light', even while people were (apparently) leaving the Church in droves?]
Fr Anthony Ruff, OSB
The forthcoming missal is but a part of a larger pattern of top-down impositions by a central authority that does not consider itself accountable to the larger Church [It is to God, surely, that the Holy Father knows he is accountable. I am sure he has the good of souls at heart]. When I think of how secretive the translation process was, how little consultation was done with priests or laity [Yes, let's allow the Mass to be newly translated and implemented by the Laity!], how the Holy See allowed a small group [of not very liberal Catholics] to hijack the translation at the final stage, how unsatisfactory the final text is [to me], how this text was imposed on national conferences of bishops in violation of their [much abused] legitimate episcopal authority, how much deception and mischief have marked this process – and then when I think of Our Lord’s teachings on service and love and unity… I weep.
Indeed you do, but, come on, this is, if you don't mind me saying, a little bit rich.
Father, if I may be so bold, I have a few questions...
- Everything you complain of was complained of by traditional priests, surely, in the 1970s. Can you not see the great irony of this in your open complaint which is tantamount to public dissent?
- Are you really weeping on account of the Church and because of your great care for souls or are you weeping because your superiors (this translation comes with Pope Benedict XVI's Apostolic approval) are promoting something that, from your liturgical and perhaps ideological viewpoint, you just do not agree with?
- Could it be, Father, that the Holy Father is wiser than even priests and the laity?
- Could the new translation be a work of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit that Our Lord promised to be with the Church always, even until the End of Time?
- Could it be that His Holiness has surveyed the damage caused by liturgical innovation and wishes to see the Church move towards Christian worship, rather than to promote the anthropocentric worship of the modern rite?
This letter appears to be yet more evidence that the house of cards built by liberals is falling down and they don't like it one little bit. The America magazine website has already received comments both positive and negative in tone. Say a prayer for Fr Anthony Ruff, OSB. He has given up his life for Christ.