M.P. signed; document being translated

By Phil Lawler (bio - articles ) | Jun 07, 2007

The reliable Father Z, citing a "solid" informant, reports that the motu proprio is now in the translator's shop being prepared for publication.

This report still does not tell us when the document will appear-- although presumably it won't be today. It does tell us that the document has been signed by the Pope and is ready for release as soon as the translators do their job.

Phil Lawler has been a Catholic journalist for more than 30 years. He has edited several Catholic magazines and written eight books. Founder of Catholic World News, he is the news director and lead analyst at CatholicCulture.org. See full bio.

Sound Off! CatholicCulture.org supporters weigh in.

All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

Show 9 Comments? (Hidden)Hide Comments
  • Posted by: - Jun. 19, 2007 12:42 PM ET USA

    We are to have a problem in our diocese and parish. The bishop will most likely not cooperate and our pastor and priests do not know the Latin Mass. Can you imagine the protests they will make? My first mention of the coming MP was a demur on the part of the pastor. He seems to think very few would care to have Latin.He even suggested a parish that might have it.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 08, 2007 9:10 AM ET USA

    The following appears in an introduction to my pre-Vatican II missal vis a vis the use of vernacular tongues in the Mass: "We can see how easily error, and grave error too, might find its way into a liturgical text submitted to such constant changes." (The Roman Missal, with introduction by Abbott Cabrol, 12th edition, revised.) The events of the past 40 years have proven the good Abbott's words entirely correct. So why is the MP being written first in Italian rather than Latin???

  • Posted by: - Jun. 08, 2007 1:16 AM ET USA

    The nice thing about this being in Latin ... in 800 years historians (if there are any) will still be able to read and understand it. English, on the other hand, will be unrecognizable. Take this example. In 995AD: "God lufode middan-eard swa, dat he seade his an-cennedan sunu..." In 1611 AD: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Sonne..." And in 2050CE: "FrGd so hearted wrld shee uggh boy ..." If we were there, we'd end up saying "English ... it's Greek to me."

  • Posted by: - Jun. 07, 2007 11:48 PM ET USA

    Humpty, perhaps you mean early Church documents. (I think so.) In which case we shouldn't see the earliest manuscripts we have in our possession as definitively being the originals. Our earliest manuscripts may or may not be the original language in which they were written. A lot can happen in 10 to 100 years. I tried to take out the original manuscript of St. Paul's letter to the Romans from the Vatican library, but someone had already checked it out...and it was overdue. Who is Petrus?

  • Posted by: - Jun. 07, 2007 11:20 PM ET USA

    I don't usually get too torqued at commenters but: "Latin is an elusive language to translate." Its only elusive when the effusive ICEL play gin rummy with the Creed.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 07, 2007 7:13 PM ET USA

    I suspect many will agree with me that Latin is not an elusive language. It's English, in the minds of the elusive, that cutely finds a way out.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 07, 2007 6:55 PM ET USA

    Not that I am making a prediction or anything, but I would like to note some upcoming dates in the Liturgical Calendar. St. Anthony of Padua, June 13 Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, June 15 Immaculate Heart of Mary, June 16 St. Gonzaga, June 21 Sts. Paulinus of Nola, John Fisher and Thomas More, June 22 St. John the Baptist, Sunday, June 24 St. Cyril of Alexandria, June 27. St. Irenaeus, Thursday June 28 St. Peter and St. Paul, June 29

  • Posted by: - Jun. 07, 2007 3:02 PM ET USA

    Ross Dee: I totally agree with you that Latin is an elusive language to understand and translate. Perhaps that is why none of the Church documents were written in Latin, mostly Greek with some Hebrew and Aramaic, until Tertullian wrote his missives. [Unfortunately, as BXVI pointed out recently, Tertullian renounced the Church in his later years, as he advanced in wisdom!] En, mercedes iurisperitorum discum eleemosynarium vero vacuefaciunt.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 07, 2007 11:42 AM ET USA

    I certainly hope that, in the translation of the document, the meanings will not change. There is always that risk of loopholes when it is translated to English, because it is such an elusive language. When this document hits America, I hope it won't "twist" in the winds.