Bishop Trautman Concerned about Confusion

John Allen reports that Bishop Donald Trautman is concerned about the new liturgical translations. He’s worried that lay people will be confused, and might not understand Catholic teaching. He called upon members of the Catholic Academy of Liturgy to protest the proposals.

“Bishop Trautman challenged Catholic liturgical scholars of North America to assist the bishops in promoting a liturgy that is accessible and pastorally aware,” the release said. “He urged them, in a spirit of respect and love for the Church, to be courageous in questioning those developments that would render the liturgy incomprehensible and betray the intention of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65).”

So the “Liturgy wars” are not over, Allen says. I don’t think anyone suggested they were. But it is interesting now to see the folks who led the charge for thirty years on the defensive. Where were their concerns for “confusing the faithful” when the faithful were concerned and were complaining? How did they respond to those complaints? How did they respond to complaints that inaccurate translations could lead to confusion about Catholic teaching? The shoe is now on the other foot. (Amy makes this point a little more pointedly).

This is not the first time Bishop Trautman has complained about these things, of course. See this article from Adoremus Bulletin in 2000.

I’m left wondering how translating the liturgy accurately (and in keeping with our Scriptural translations) could “render the liturgy incomprehensible,” and how faithfulness to the liturgy of the Second Vatican Council could “betray the intention of the Second Vatican Council.”

4 thoughts on “Bishop Trautman Concerned about Confusion

  1. Bishop Trautman is at least consistent in his practice of misapplying V II (the “intent” indeed!) and helping render the liturgy less than it should be. He used the magic words of those of his ilk–“pastoral” and “comprehensible.” “Pastoral” is a code word meaning “justifiably contrary to Catholic teaching or practice.”

    So no surprise here. The real surprise is why the USCCB re-enlisted him as their liturgical committee chairman recently, when the trend has been going toward restoration of good liturgical norms.

  2. +J.M.J+

    First reaction to the bishop’s objection: He must think that we lay Catholics are awfully stupid!

    Second reaction: About six years ago, I went with my Mom to an Episcopalian church where a organist-friend of hers was playing during the liturgy. So I had an opportunity to sit through an Episcopalian “Mass” (is it wrong to use the scare quotes? I mean, Anglican/Episcopalian orders aren’t valid so it most likely wasn’t a valid Mass, but that is what they call it. Well, I digress….)

    Anyway, I was struck by how their liturgy was so close to how ours should sound (“And with thy spirit” rather than “And also with you”… etc). I left feeling sad that our translation of the Mass doesn’t sound more like that.

    So I really wish I could ask Bishop Trautman the question: “Are Catholics dumber than Episcopalians?” I mean, they’ve been getting along just fine with a beautiful liturgy, so why would it be such a huge “pastoral” problem for Catholics to enjoy the same beauty during Mass?

    In Jesu et Maria,

  3. I have no patience with this nonsense anymore. As I have said before, the solution is simple: ticktockticktockticktock.

    Sign me “Watching the Clock”,

    Fr. Philip, OP

Comments are closed.