Priest “Fired” for Refusing to Use New Translation
Tim Townsend, St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Marriage Referendum Drive Begins in Maryland
Michael Dresser, Baltimore Sun
The Reign of the Eggheads
Daniel Ben-Ami, Spiked Review of Books
Santorum Benefiting from Mistaken Religious Identity?
Rachel Zoll, Associated Press
Dawkins v. Archbishop of Canterbury
Tim Walker, The Independent
Fact v. Fiction in Journalism
John Dzieza, Daily Beast
February 27th, 2012 | 8:31 am
Priest “Fired” for Refusing to Use New Translation
The title strikes me as inaccurate. The linked article notes that the problem goes back at least five years, so it’s not really a problem with the new translation, although the bishops are paying more careful attention to this translation, and so they take an even dimmer view to the priest’s habit of extemporizing.
February 27th, 2012 | 9:39 am
For Maryland residents, the petition information for the referendum on same-sex marriage is at mdpetitions.com.
February 27th, 2012 | 10:51 am
I have endured many, many improvisations by theatrical priests. In their eyes they are improving on the missal’s words, and/or making them more listener-friendly. However, to me, invariably their version is a) not as good as the original; and b) distracting, sometimes jarring, and occasionally heretical. An example of the latter was “May Almighty God have mercy on us, forgive us our sins, and bring us to [an awareness of] everlasting life.” [] denote the priest’s ad-lib addition. Every mass he said. Changes the meaning from a hopeful appeal for mercy for poor sinners to a universalist “everyone’s saved” message.
Thankfully, almost every mass I’ve been to since the restored translation (not “changed”) has been done reverently with the correct words, and most slip-ups were unintentional.
Jack’s point is well-taken. It’s not the restored translation so much as the priest’s obstinacy. Likely, he is also a dissenter on faith and morals. When he was ordained he vowed to be obedient to his ordinary (bishop)–an essential gesture during the ordination rite–and so he is in default on his vows.
February 27th, 2012 | 11:58 am
The priest notes “He [the bishop] seems to consider the church as the bishops, and my notion is that the church starts with the people.”
I’ve found that people who claim to speak for “the people” usually mean “the people” that agree with their personal ideas. That’s not much of a base for a religion.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact