A vigilant friend has alerted me to an open letter to priests
entitled: “Revising the Mass texts: Is this the real issue?” posted on
The Tablet website on March 31.
Written by an Edinburgh priest, Fr Mike
Fallon, and going under the headline, “Let us keep the ‘1973 rite’ of
the Mass on”, it is over-long, rambling and querulous in tone. (Mind
you, this is The Tablet website so I should not expect such a “Letter”
to be short, concise and full of zeal for the magisterium.)
According
to Fr Fallon, the real issue has nothing to do with the revised texts
of the Mass that will replace the inaccurate translation that we have
been lumbered with for 40 years; it is all to do with authority.
He
talks about “the process which has brought this new translation to
fruition”, going on to state, “It is no secret that many people
worldwide are unhappy, to say the least, about the New English Missal
and perhaps, more importantly, how it came to be produced.”
He grumbles
on about the revised texts “never [having] been authorised by the
English-speaking bishops of the world, in accordance with their
established responsibilities”; worries whether “the Scottish bishops are
aware of the authoritative role they have in virtue of their office for
introducing a new translation to the people of the country”; believes
the whole process of the improved translation (he puts the word
improved in quote marks, which speaks for itself) “constitutes a grave
disservice to the people of God”; is convinced that “it goes against not
only the spirit of the second Vatican Council but indeed it goes
against its very letter and runs counter to the clear teaching of that
Council”; and ruminates that “It is tempting as a priest in a parish to
ignore the new translation and carry on with life.”
There is much
more in the same vein and I cannot quote it all, but I think that I have
conveyed the flavour of Fr Fallon’s discontent.
I find his letter
puzzling, disturbing and dispiriting.
I have great reverence for the
priesthood; indeed, I pray for all priests every day.
At the same time I
feel greatly irritated by the person of Fr Fallon.
I am puzzled
that he does not rejoice in the greater accuracy of the new translation.
As we pray, so we believe; and if the beauty and truth of the wording
of the liturgy has been blunted by a poor, 40-year-old translation, so
in a subtle way, has our belief. I am disturbed by his rebellious
attitude.
Surely his task is to be obedient to his bishop (and his
bishop’s task, to implement the New English Missal, along with the
other English-speaking bishops around the world)?
I am dispirited by his
peddling the dreary phrase, “the spirit of the Second Vatican Council”,
as if that dubious and elusive spectre has anything to do with the
workings of the Holy Spirit.
It doesn’t; the sooner it is buried with a
stake through its heart and garlic round the doorposts, the better.
As
a result of reading Fr Fallon’s letter, I have treated myself to a
crash course in the new translation of the Mass, courtesy of the
estimable Fr Zuhlsdorf and his weekly column in the Catholic Herald.
(How come I missed this treat? Good can always come from bad, so thank
you Fr Fallon, for leading me indirectly to Fr Zuhlsdorf’s wisdom and
sanity.)
I won’t quote “Fr Zee”, a celebrated blogger on liturgical
themes, as I am sure other Herald readers will know his columns better
than I do.
I just wish Fr Fallon would stop huffing and puffing
and giving us his own Hibernian version of “Non serviam”.
He should read
Fr Zee and then, when the times comes, properly instruct his
parishioners – for whom he is directly responsible – on the reasons why
the new English translation is a good thing.