Mixed messages: Liturgy across Christian churches
The new Catholic translations of the Mass pose a stumbling block to ecumenical relations, says a Lutheran liturgy scholar.
One of the great joys that I have experienced in my life of faith has been the ability to join with Roman Catholics and Christians of several differing traditions in occasions of worship, including ecumenical events, and to already know the words of many of the prayers and other liturgical texts.
Such common language and common worship has done much to foster the fulfillment of Christ's prayer that all "may be one" (John 17:22). The reason that this could happen is that, since the early 1970s, Christians of many different traditions-Roman Catholics, Episcopalians, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, and others-have been using not only the same prayer texts but also the same English translations of those prayer texts in their worship.
Thanks to the work of the Roman Catholic International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) and the International Commission on English Texts (ICET), the translations of the "Lord, have mercy," the "Glory to God," the Nicene Creed, liturgical greetings and responses ("The Lord be with you/And also with you"), the "Holy, Holy, Holy," and the "Lamb of God," appearing in the 1973 (and current) Roman Missal, were used in the publication of new worship books in other Christian communities produced in the 1970s and beyond, including the most recent Evangelical Lutheran Worship in 2006.
This great ecumenical convergence in liturgical language, also fostered by Protestant adaptation of the three-year Roman Catholic Lectionary for Mass, has enabled Christians of diverse traditions to worship in each other's liturgical assemblies without the need even of a text or worship aid in front of them. Up to now, we have known each other's liturgical responses because they were our liturgical responses as well. No longer, unfortunately, will this be the case.
Based on a more literal style of translation from the Latin called for by the 2001 Vatican instruction Liturgiam Authenticam, the now-approved new translation of the Roman Catholic Order of Mass has put an end to this common liturgical language among English-speaking Christians, with the result that much of English-speaking Protestant Christianity alone will be using what was originally Roman Catholic liturgical language. At the same time Roman Catholics will now be using a new translation of their own, one that has much more in common with the interim translations in use before 1970 than it does with those since then.
Liturgiam Authenticam itself, however, directs that in the translations of texts "a similar agreement is desirable with the particular non-Catholic Eastern churches or with the authorities of the Protestant ecclesial communities," when those texts do not touch on a matter of doctrinal dispute. Unfortunately, I know of no ecumenical consultation that took place on this question; one must wonder why this did not and has not happened.
As a result of what has appeared to many Christians as a unilateral liturgical move, Presbyterian scholar of liturgy Horace Allen claimed that "the entire ecumenical liturgical conversation and dialogue is over-finished, dead, done." While I find that sentiment somewhat premature, I do think its survival is not automatically assured any longer without serious attention and sustained reflection and conversation by those of us who remain committed to the liturgical implications of the pursuit of full, visible Christian unity.
How tragic it would be if, when the history of Christian liturgy in the late 20th and early 21st century is written, that this time period be described, in but an extended footnote, as one during which an ecumenical liturgical experiment was tried but was found lacking and did not last even for 50 years. I hope we can commit ourselves to making sure in our prayer and in our scholarship that this does not happen.By Maxwell E. Johnson, professor of liturgy at the University of Notre Dame. This short reflection is based on his 2006 Aidan Kavanagh lecture, "The Loss of a common Language? The end of Ecumincal-Liturgical Convergence." This article appeared in the August 2009 issue of U.S. Catholic (Vol. 74, No. 8, page 15) along with "Incoming Missal."
re: "How tragic it would be"
By The Eminem Fan (not verified) on Thursday, October 14, 2010"How tragic it would be if, when the history of Christian liturgy in the late 20th and early 21st century is written, that this time period be described, in but an extended footnote, as one during which an ecumenical liturgical experiment was tried but was found lacking and did not last even for 50 years."
Perhaps this is not tragic. Perhaps it is a cause for rejoicing that this tragic, failed experiment might almost be over.
I love & care for Protestants & all other people. But over the last 50 years, it seems to me that in many ways, including how we worship, we as Catholics have sold out what we believe to appease the Protestants... or even worse, to appease "modern society" even when society is wrong.
It seems to me that seeking unity at all costs, including downplaying or disowning the truth about the Sacrifice of the Mass & the Priesthood of Jesus Christ, is a mistake and can never lead to real unity.
New Roman Missal
By Christine (not verified) on Thursday, October 14, 2010A stumbling block?? Hardly. Growing up Lutheran I remember using the very texts that the new Missal uses, we used the response "And with your Spirit" and the older forms of the Nicene Creed, Gloria, etc.
Now, as a Catholic, I am thrilled to know that these beautiful texts will be restored come Advent 2011.
Having seen the hyperrevisionism used in the ELCA and much of the Protestant mainline, I am grateful for the fine work of the Vox Clara team.
The real stumbling blocks
By Fr. Jim (not verified) on Wednesday, August 12, 2009The Protestants ordaining women and homosexuals is a far greater stumbling block. But I don't see them stopping because it bothers us. Often they predicate ecumenism on us becoming more Protestant, but God forbid they become more Catholic.
And by the way, according to
By Eric Giunta (not verified) on Sunday, August 2, 2009And by the way, according to my research Mr. Maxwell E. Johnson is a pastor of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.
ELCA Lutherans, in my opinion, have no business accusing ANY Christian body of harming ecumenical relations.
If anyone is placing stumbling blocks, it is the ECLA. Let's take a look at some ELCA distinctives:
1) ordination of women and sodomites
2) acceptance of abortion, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, homosexual marriage, and euthanasia
3) denial of the inerrant authority of Scripture
And Rev. Johnson is worried that accurate TRANSLATIONS of liturgical texts will impede ecumenical relations? If it means, placing the Catholic Church farther away from "liberal Lutheranism, I hope they are impeded!
Looks to me the good Reverend is worrying too much about the outside of the cup, and not what's within.
One wonders whether relations with the ELCA should fall under inter religious dialogue, rather than ecumenism. Rev. Maxwell's denomination is just barely Christian, let alone Lutheran.
Say What?
By Eric Giunta (not verified) on Sunday, August 2, 2009I'm not sure what this pastor is talking about.
I'm wrapping up summer studies at Oxford (UK), and hear ALL the Anglican parishes use elevated, dignified English that's a lot more faithful to the texts of Scripture and the Roman Missal than the tripe we Catholics are fed.
(I mean no insult to tripe, a delicacy where my family comes from [Sicily]!)
Secondly, it's been my experience that Orthodox Christians generally employ the same kind of elevated language in their own translations of Scripture and Liturgy. And for that matter, so do conservative Protestants generally.
Am I completely off the mark here?
Perhaps, but...
By David (not verified) on Sunday, August 2, 2009look at how well or how poorly these Protestant churches are connecting with their members and drawing in new members. The prime purpose of the church is to continually evangelize and re-evangelize non-members and members alike. How well is the Catholic Church doing? How well are Episcopal/Anglican churches doing? How well are the evangelical churches doing?
I think a valid argument can be made that the strength of the Catholic evangelization of Africa and Asia has been because the church uses and inculturates local languages and customs into its worship. Is is too late to close the barn door and take away a lot of that in public worship? How well will a new translation in Latinized English, Latinized Zulu, Latinized Swahili, Latinized Japanese or Latinized Chinese aid the mission of the Catholic Church?
Real ecumenism is not about "sounding alike"
By Jeffrey Pinyan (not verified) on Wednesday, July 29, 2009I dare say there's a danger in having Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans, etc. using a liturgy that the casual observer would think is the same across the boards. Isn't the law of prayer the law of belief? Since Catholics believe differently from non-Catholics, shouldn't the liturgy celebrated by Catholics be distinctly Catholic?
Ecumenism is not about sounding alike so that it appears that our differences have disappeared. Vatican II's Unitatis Redintegratio needs to be re-read.
The obvious solution ...
By Frank H (not verified) on Wednesday, July 29, 2009is for our Christian brethren to join the English-speaking Catholic Church in adopting these new and vastly improved translations. The beauty and reverence of all our liturgies would benefit.
The quality of these translations is second-rate
By David (not verified) on Saturday, August 1, 2009@Frank H
I applaud the recovery of biblical metaphors and allusions in the new translation. However, the quality of these translations is severely degraded by the inferior English that they use. I find the English neither beautiful nor reverential, rather ugly and disturbing. It is as though the translators have deliberately attempted to parody the Latin.
We need the Mass to be translated into good formal English that is poetic, idiomatic, rhythmic and uplifting.
Is it the Catholic Church's job alone to be "ecumenical?"
By Ryan (not verified) on Wednesday, July 29, 2009Articles like this remind me that so often, if the Catholic Church doesn't alter itself to please Protestant leaders, we're accused of acting "unilaterally" or being provocative to the "separated brethren." Could it not be suggested that when many of the non-Catholic denominations adopted wording of prayers, and the lectionary cycle, they may have felt the Catholic Church acted on its own in some way back then? When do Protestant denominations have to start coming to ecumenical conferences and agreeing to regain Catholic doctrines or ideas that they long ago eschewed? This cannot be a one-way street. Further, why doesn't US Catholic just come out and say they hate the new translation of the missal? Every piece about the new translation focuses on how bothered people are by it.


