|
Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the
Sacraments
Prot. n. 2322/99/L
Rome, 26 October 1999
His Excellency,
The Most Reverend Maurice Taylor
Bishop of
Galloway
Your Excellency,
This Congregation is now able to respond to your recent letter
requesting a meeting between Officials of the Congregation and representatives
of the Mixed Commission for English-language translations. As regards Your
Excellency’s being received by the Superiors of the Congregation, the
unhesitating answer is that you are always most welcome, but from what is set
out below you will appreciate that the Congregation considers that such a
meeting, in order to be truly productive, ought to follow upon certain steps
which should no longer be deferred. On the other hand, the feasibility of more
ample contacts between the Congregation and the employees or collaborators of
the Commission is doubtful, since such contacts not only lack a formal basis
but are characterized by the very disadvantages to which it would seem that
Your Excellency has had cause to advert since your letter was written. In
addition, while it will be important to communicate the contents of this
present letter to the relevant Conferences of Bishops, it seems best for a
variety of reasons to contact Your Excellency directly concerning the important
matters to be treated here, leaving to you the necessary contacts and measures
towards a practical implementation.
The gravity of the present situation of the Mixed Commission has
been underscored in relation to its work on a translation of the editio
typica altera of the Rites of Ordination of the Bishop, of Priests, and of
Deacons, though its implications extend far beyond this single text. The
Congregation notes that complications in the functioning of the Mixed
Commission have now given Your Excellency cause to intervene in an exceptional
way. Specifically, it has been reported that one draft translation was
substituted at short notice by another, and that after the second had been
approved by the Bishops of the Commission, that text was then set aside by Your
Excellency in favor of a third text. There are also reports that
misunderstandings may persist in the interpretation of the response of this
Dicastery given on 20 September 1997, including the supposition that the list
of observations include with that response was exhaustive. In fact, as the
response stated, that list was merely illustrative, and it was not intended to
be subject to discussion or refutation by translation personnel of the Mixed
Commission. Furthermore, from the reports which the Congregation has received,
it would appear that Your Excellency, in the face of such difficulties, has
commendably seized the appropriate moment to raise the issue of a revision of
the Statutes of the Mixed Commission.
The context for such an initiative would seem to be characterized
by two significant issues in particular, namely the role of the “executive
secretary” and the membership of the “advisory committee”
specifically involving certain liberties taken by the former and the question
of how to ensure more satisfactory membership of the latter. The Congregation
would concur with Your Excellency that these are points of particular concern,
and wishes not only to pledge its support for a revision encompassing these
issues, but also to underscore others which should be included in the same
process.
In seeking to fulfill its mandate of ensuring that translations
accurately and fully convey the content of the original texts, the Dicastery
for a number of years now has communicated its concerns regarding an undue
autonomy that has been observed in the translations prepared by the Mixed
Commission. These observations have often been countered with unfounded charges
of personal grudges and hostility to the Commission. In reality, the lack of
response to the Holy See’s stated concerns on the part of those who have
effectively had in hand the work of the Commission has often hampered and
delayed the Congregation’s work to a notable degree, also occasioning a
disproportionate commitment of its resources.
In their contacts with the Dicastery, not a few Bishops have
expressed concerns not only about the quality of the translations produced by
the Mixed Commission but also about procedures which they felt limited their
own ability to obtain corrections and improvements that they considered
necessary for the accuracy of the texts. Increasingly, the Mixed
Commission’s texts paraphrase or redraft the editiones typicae ,
while revising the rubrics so extensively as to impede effective recourse to
the Latin text for the sake of clarification. In fact, the texts and the
rubrics have sometimes been altered in substance without prior authorization
from the Holy See, and indeed without even a request for such authorization.
These concerns of the Congregation have recently been reinforced and have found
authoritative confirmation in the instructions received by the Congregation for
the preparation of new norms of liturgical translation.
For some years now, this Dicastery has also expressed its
misgivings about the use of the Commission’s resources for activities not
concerned with translation, including the composition of original texts, which
in fact are not the province of the Mixed Commission. A further concern is the
fact that the Mixed Commission’s authorization for the use of its texts,
such as the so-called ICEL Psalter, appears to have resulted in their
being employed in ways which directly contravene liturgical law. As regards
texts of the original composition in the most recently revised English
translation of the Roman Missal, reports have reached the Congregation of
alleged plans to allow their publication for use by non-Catholic ecclesial
communities even prior to the granting of any recognitio for their use
in the Roman Liturgy. This very fact has then been presented to the
Congregation by some quarters as an argument that the recognitio should
be granted so as not to impede an ecumenical initiative. The freedom of the
Holy See to act in matters pertaining to its competence cannot be encumbered in
such a way.
An adequate response of the Mixed Commission to the
Congregation’s expression of concern about a projected second volume of
liturgical documentation that departs from the model of the Enchiridion
Documentorum Instaurationis Liturgicae (ef. Prot. P. 451/98/L, 11 January
1999), has not been forthcoming. The Congregation is obliged to note also that
a translation of the Caeremoniale Episcoporum was published by the Mixed
Commission without the necessary episcopal approbation and without the
recognitio of this Congregation.
All of these factors appear to converge towards the conclusion
that the Mixed Commission in its present form is not in a position to render to
the Bishops, to the Holy See and to the English-speaking faithful an adequate
level of service, nor to produce with appropriate promptness the texts that
will be needed in the foreseeable future, including acceptable translations of
the book De Exorcismis et supplicationibus quibusdam, the
Martyrologium Romanum, and any additional material that the Holy See may
decide to insert in the Missale Romanum. It is inconceivable that
English-speaking clergy and faithful should have to wait a decade or more for
such translations.
Problems in the English-language translations of the liturgical
texts assume a particular gravity in proportion to the prominence of the
English language in the international community. Even while it remains
essential that liturgical translations be made directly from the original texts
into the various modern vernacular languages, the impact which the
English-language translation is likely to exert on certain other versions is an
observed and unavoidable fact, which in turn must be said to place a
significant responsibility on those charged with the translations into English.
Moreover, 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 regulation 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.
It is therefore clear that a thoroughgoing reform and
revitalization of the Mixed Commission is needed to ensure greater efficacy and
to furnish a more sound procedural basis for the Commission’s functioning,
while also supplying for any lacunae in its present juridical status.
Indeed, apart from the difficulties which have arisen, such a revision of the
Statutes would appear to be overdue in light of the subsequent publication of
the 1983 Codex Iuris Canonici and the 1988 Apostolic Letter Vicesimus
Quintus Annus, in which his Holiness Pope John Paul II requested a
re-evaluation of the working of Commissions for the translation of liturgical
texts (cf. AAS 81 [1989] 916, n.20).
For these reasons, this Congregation for Divine Worship and the
Discipline of the Sacraments, exercising the mandate assigned to it in the
Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus, article 62, regarding the
superintendence of “those matters which pertain to the Holy See in
relation to the moderation and promotion of the Sacred Liturgy,” hereby
directs the Statutes of the “International Commission for English in the
Liturgy” be revised thoroughly and without delay. The revised Statutes,
drafted in active consultation with this Dicastery and incorporating within the
Constitution of the renewed Commission the considerations attached to this
letter, are to be submitted within six months for the approval of the 11 Member
Conferences of Bishops. After they will have received the assent of at least a
relative majority (i.e., six) of the Conferences -- the vote within each
Conference being by two-thirds majority -- the approved Statutes will then be
subject to the recognitio of this Congregation.
Your Excellency, this Congregation is well aware of the
difficulties of your own position as Chairman, and certainly has no intention
of causing any distress to you personally. It wishes rather to encourage you to
carry forward with determination your recent initiatives, and pledges you every
assistance in bringing this complex and long-standing question to a rapid and
definitive resolution. The Congregation itself remains ready to provide any
assistance which would be helpful.
I would be most appreciative if Your Excellency would keep the
Congregation informed of all developments, including the forwarding of a copy
of any circular letters sent to the Bishop Members of the Commission, to whom
Your Excellency is free to communicate a copy of this present letter.
In expressing once again to Your Excellency its deep gratitude for
your undertaking the necessary intervention to set the Commission on a new and
altogether more efficacious course, I remain,
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Jorge A. Card. Medina Estévez
Prefect
CONSIDERATIONS
Pertaining to the Revisions of the Statutes of the
“International Commission on English in the Liturgy”
1) The activities of the Mixed Commission are to be defined
as the translation into English of the editiones typicae of the Roman
liturgical texts and books in their integrity. Consequently, any proposals for
cultural adaptation, modification or the composition of original texts remain
the province of the individual Bishops’ Conferences according to the norms
of the 1994 Instruction Variatates legitimae and subject to the approval
of the Holy See. Likewise to be excluded from the activities of the Mixed
Commission are relations with commissions or other bodies pertaining to
non-Catholic ecclesial communities. For such relations it is preferable that
other structures be constituted when necessary, distinct not only in name but
in fact from the Commission for translation.
2) It would seem also that the office of “executive
secretary” is in need of a careful reconfiguration, so as to increase in a
notable way the due accountability of such a figure and to ensure a clearer
demarcation of his role from that of the Bishop Members of the Commission.
Perhaps the Commission itself, constituted entirely of Bishops, might elect a
Secretary among its officers, making unnecessary the presence of an
“executive secretary” at its own meetings.
3) Out of respect for the dignity of the human person and
in light of Catholic teaching on social justice, paid employees of the
Commission should have the necessary guarantees regarding their employment, but
should serve ad tempus. It would thus be opportune to ensure a periodic
renewal, fixed by the Statutes, of all involved in the Commission’s work.
This Dicastery, on the basis of the needs of the Commission, would reserve the
right to grant an extension of such terms by dispensation whenever
necessary.
4) The members of what are currently termed the
“Advisory Committee” or the “Secretariat,” and their
respective collaborators, shall require the nihil obstat of this
Congregation in order to assume and to maintain their posts, which nihil
obstat will be issued in response to the presentation by the Commission of
specified documentation that will include attestations by the Ordinaries of the
prospective members.
5) All involved in the work of the Mixed Commission must
understand that their contributions are anonymous and confidential.
6) To prevent improper uses of tests prepared by the Mixed
Commission, provisions should be made that the granting of copyright permission
or direct publication for their use in liturgical celebrations or for any other
use by the clergy, the faithful or the general public is excluded in the
absence of the recognitio of the Holy See permitting their use in the
Sacred Liturgy.
7) The redrafting of the Statutes should be undertaken
directly by the Bishop members of the Commission rather than by its secretarial
staff or its advisory committee, and the initial drafts should be treated as
confidential prior to the submission of a definitive draft (preferably by
Easter of 2000) for examination by the 11 Member Conferences and this
Congregation.
|
