Vatican moves to take control of translation
agency
By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
NCR Staff
In a move likely to fuel debate over both liturgical reform and
Roman centralization, the Vatican has asserted sweeping new powers over the
commission charged with translating liturgical texts into English.
Potentially the most controversial demand is that staff and
advisers for the International Commission on English in the Liturgy receive a
Vatican nihil obstat, or official permission, in order to obtain
and to keep their jobs.
The directives came in a confidential Oct. 26 letter from
Cardinal Jorge Medina Estévez, prefect of the Congregation for Divine
Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, to Scottish Bishop Maurice
Taylor, the current chair of the commission. NCR obtained a copy of the
letter.
The International Commission on English in the Liturgy was
created after Vatican II as a cooperative venture among the worlds
English-speaking episcopal conferences. It is governed and funded by those
conferences.
The move could set the stage for another contentious debate
within the U.S. bishops conference on Vatican demands for control over
previously autonomous institutions, following the recent vote on norms for
Catholic higher education (NCR, Dec. 3). Because the commissions
statutes must be revised, the Vaticans new powers will not take effect
until six of the 11 full member bishops conferences approve them by a
two-thirds vote.
The Vatican wants fast-track action on the statutes. Medina
directed the bishops who govern the commission to have a draft ready to submit
to their conferences by Easter, and said the bishops themselves should carry
out the revision in active consultation with this dicastery.
Rome has sent a letter to conference presidents relaying its
instructions.
In addition to the right to veto staff and advisers, Medina is
seeking rules that would bar the commission from publishing anything without
Romes approval, from creating original texts and from forming
relationships with non-Catholic organizations.
The full text of Medinas letter may be found on the
NCR Web site at www.natcath.org/ncr_onli.htm under documents.
The commissions reaction to the Vatican demands will be
discussed in a special meeting of the 11 bishops who sit on its governing
board, slated for late January in London. Each member conference designates one
bishop on the board; Cardinal Francis George of Chicago represents the United
States.
Medina wrote the Oct. 26 letter in response to Taylors
request for dialogue between the commission and the Vatican. Medina said that
such conversation would be pointless until the structural changes outlined in
the letter were accomplished.
An American liturgist familiar with the controversy over
translation said that plans exist for similar instructions to the French and
German translation bodies.
The move caps several years of criticism of the commission from
the Vatican and conservative liturgical groups in the United States, both of
which have charged the commission with taking too many liberties with the Latin
originals of liturgical texts. Especially controversial is the
commissions preference for inclusive language -- the use of
gender-neutral vocabulary where consistent with the meaning of the text, such
as people rather than mankind.
In 1997, Rome vetoed a translation of the new ordination rite for
bishops, priests and deacons prepared by the commission. In 1998, the Vatican
demanded more than 400 changes to the commissions translation of the
introduction to the lectionary, or collection of scripture readings for Mass.
At the same time, Rome insisted that the U.S. bishops lift their imprimatur, or
approval for publication, of a collection of Psalms produced by the commission
(NCR, June 19, 1998).
Medina voiced dissatisfaction with the ordination rite in his
letter to Taylor. The commissions translation of the Sacramentary, or
collection of prayers for the Mass, is currently awaiting Vatican action; most
observers doubt it will be approved without significant revision.
Though American liturgists have long complained about lengthy
review processes in Rome, Medina placed the blame for delays in approving texts
largely on the commission, saying its translations have caused a
disproportionate commitment of resources in his office.
Observers said the controversy reflects two realities that have
shaped the church after Vatican II: an ongoing tension between universality and
local flexibility in the liturgy, and the Vatican desire to keep the
influential American church closely aligned with its own priorities.
Medina is dismantling the commission as its existed
up to now, said an American bishop who spoke to NCR off the
record. Its a very political move designed to curb the influence of
liturgists, primarily Americans, perceived by the Vatican as too
liberal.
The issue boils down to, who knows best how a liturgical
text should sound in English - the English-speaking bishops and their most
talented scholarly advisers, or the Vatican? the bishop said.
In a telephone interview with NCR, Taylor said the
severity of Medinas letter surprised him. We thought we were
responding to Romes demands in a normal way, he said.
Were now into an extremely serious, extremely difficult
situation.
Though some commission supporters hope the board will oppose
Medinas demands, sources told NCR that such resistance will likely
have to come from outside the United States. George is said to share much of
the Vaticans criticism. In his first meeting with the board in June 1998,
George warned that Rome was looking for dramatic changes in the
commissions approach to translation (NCR, June 19, 1998).
Moreover, the U.S. bishops Committee on Liturgy has a rocky
relationship with the commission. In recent months, the committees staff
has clashed with the commission over several issues - leading to charges from
some commission supporters that the bishops staff has attempted to
exercise disproportionate influence over the commissions work.
According to its statutes, the International Commission on
English in the Liturgy is responsible to its member episcopal conferences - the
full members are Australia, Canada, England and Wales, India, Ireland, New
Zealand, Pakistan, The Philippines, Scotland, South Africa, and the United
States. The commissions staff and offices are located in Washington.
In the letter, Medina said the nihil obstat for staff and
advisers would be granted in response to the presentation by the
commission of specified documentation that will include attestations by the
ordinaries of the prospective members.
Medina said employees should have the necessary guarantees
regarding their employment, but should work for fixed terms. This
dicastery
would reserve the right to grant an extension of such terms by
dispensation whenever necessary, Medina said.
Medina said the position of executive secretary is in need
of careful reconfiguration, so as to increase in a notable way the
accountability of such a figure and to ensure a clearer demarcation of his role
from that of the bishop members.
Medina also said the statutes should prevent the commission from
granting permission for the publication of texts, or from publishing them
directly, without the prior approval of the Vatican for liturgical use.
In recent years, publication of the commissions
translations ahead of Roman approval has generated controversy - especially its
Psalter, or collection of Old Testament psalms, published by Liturgy Training
Publications in Chicago. Based on inclusive language principles, that Psalter
is widely used among English-speaking religious communities, although it never
received Vatican clearance.
Medina claimed that events since Vatican II suggest that Rome
should control international translation bodies.
The experience of the years since the council, as well as a
deepening theological reflection, have brought clearly into focus the fact that
the constitution, the regulations and the oversight of an international
commission for liturgical translation are rightfully the competence of the Holy
See to a degree which is not always sufficiently reflected in the statutes
which govern such bodies, Medina wrote.
Supporters of the commission argue that this is not what was
intended by Vatican II, noting that the Constitution on the Sacred
Liturgy assigns responsibility for translating liturgical texts to the
individual bishops conferences, urging them to work together with other
conferences that use the same language.
The commission actually predates the constitution by two
months, said Monsignor Fred McManus, a frequent consultant to the U.S.
bishops on liturgical matters and an adviser for the commission. It was
entirely an initiative of English-speaking bishops at the council. It was never
conceived as an arm of the Vatican.
Medina said that English-speaking conferences bear special
responsibility for fidelity to the Latin original, since many conferences
around the world are often influenced more by the English version of church
texts than the Latin.
In part, the rift between Rome and the commission reflects
differing philosophical approaches to translation. Conservative liturgical
activists have complained that the commissions method of dynamic
equivalency - aiming for translations that make the text accessible in
English rather than for a word-for-word rendering of the Latin - produces
doctrinally suspect results.
For example, in the commissions translation of the revised
rite of ordination, the Latin phrase universo clero - literally,
from the entire clergy - is rendered as from all who are
called to your service. Critics saw a deliberate attempt to soften the
distinction between ordained clergy and laity.
The Vatican believes the commission should produce a literalistic
translation, with adaptation to local circumstance performed by national
conferences. Taylor, however, said some member conferences lack the resources
to do that on their own.
Taylor said the commission is trying to strike a balance between
the Vaticans agenda and the needs of its members. We want to pay
attention to those in authority, in Rome and in the individual
conferences, Taylor said. We really want to serve the church in the
best possible way.
National Catholic Reporter, December 24,
1999
|