Bishop Trautman told the National Catholic Register that he and about half of the nation’s bishops believe the proposed text contains too many complicated words, as well as sentences and phrases that are too long. The words “precious chalice,” for example, replace the word “cup” during the consecration prayers.
“To me, ‘precious chalice’ says something gold with diamonds all around it,” Bishop Trautman said. “Jesus used a drinking cup at the last supper, not a precious chalice.”
[Via Christus Vincit]
Now if that statement doesn’t shout volumes about the bishops views on the liturgy I don’t know what does. Does he think of the term precious blood means blood with bling? Gee even Indiana Jones knew that the Holy Grail was holy not for what it looked like, but for what it once contained. Bishop Troutman as chair of the USCCB’s Committee on Liturgy gives foxes hope that one day they might too be employed in the hen house.
I have been listening to Prayer of the Faithful from the The Antiochene Syriac Maronite Church Podcast since last week and I am experiencing a little translation envy. The podcast is in English though they are obviously using a different translation then the one used in the English version of the Liturgy of the Hours. After hearing their version it makes it harder to read the Divine Office and note notice the rather dull translation. In their translation the language has much more of a sense of mystery and precision in theological language. It is a good thing in translation to simplify texts, but too often it goes to far.
For example the graphic format JPEG allows you to save pictures with varying amounts of compression. The higher the compression the lower the quality of the image. The term "lossy" is used to describe these compressions. Translations are almost always lossy also. Translating from one language to another involves some degradation from the original language. As in JPEG compression there are trade offs you make in determining the accuracy of the translation. Too much compression results in a picture that become incomprehensible from the original. Too much simplicity and plain language results in the same degradation when translating liturgical texts. What has happened to our liturgical texts is that the compression has resulted in mystery loss and loss of theological precision.
11 comments
�Jesus used a drinking cup at the last supper, not a precious chalice.�
It became precious because it contained HIS blood, not because of what it looked like….sheeeesh…
Half the bishops? What was that vote count again?
You might check out the new book on the Holy Grail written by Mike Aquilina and Christopher Bailey.
http://www.grailcode.com/christopher-bailey/
It became precious because it contained HIS blood, not because of what it looked like….sheeeesh…
Exactly!!!
BMP
It also speaks volumes for what the bishop thinks of the average Catholic’s intelligence. Reminds me of the time when my doctor felt the need to explain to me what “hirsute” meant.
Okay, maybe that was too much information.
Bishop Trautman may be a successor to the Apostles but he is still a dork (in all charity).
Come on, how stupid do they think people are? Okay, so some of the words are not common English. The people will learn.
The Voskoization of parishes fittingly matches up with Trautperson’s vision of liturgy….they go hand in hand. He must think that we are so incredibly stupid and idiotic that any symbolism, beauty or mystery to our faith would only confuse us. A good Catholic vocabulary or correct translations will only serve to make our eyes glaze over because we’re only plebian laypeople with no theological training like him.
I would love to see the translation of the mass that Trautperson would develop on his own –
“OKee-Dokee boys and girls, here is our liturgy-witurgy!
Jesus said to his friendsees, this piece of bread is like my body-wody, and I would like to share it with oomeses! Then he held a cup of wine and said this wine is like my blood, and I would love to sharey-warey it with all my special friends.
Now let’s all get up and sing a very special songy-wongy while we hold hands and dance around the altar…”
BBAARRRFFFF!!!!
I think you all are being uncharitable. The good man isn’t implying that the laity can’t understand big words. “Precious chalice” is part of the consecration prayers. Therefore, he’s just worried that the average PRIEST won’t be able to memorize and pronounce such big words. *sarcasm off*
Or maybe Trautperson is really worried that us silly laypeople will associate ‘precious’ in ‘precious chalice’ with The Lord of the Rings…
“PRECIOUS!!!! PRECIOUS!!!!”
But was’nt the Last supper in the context of the Passover, in an upper room (most likely a wealthy person) could not the “cup” truly have been materially a precious cup, used for the passover??? My Jewish neighbor kept a beautiful passover cup in the china closet, and used it only for passover. Or am I mising something??
Comments are closed.