I was re-reading Liturgiam Authenticam Liturgiam Authenticam and came across some interesting points.

As I noted in several of these discussions I thought that the specifics of LA were intended only for the Latin Church but that the general principles went beyond good recommendations to something we needed to follow. Now I’ve noted a few interesting points I missed earlier that makes me think that our Church ought to pay very close attention to LA.

Below is the text that seems to have relevance for Eastern Catholics:

Section 87 speaks to the need to have a common translation of common texts with the other Churches unless this is truly impossible. Accomplishing this is certainly not impossible

Section 88 calls for a single translation.

Section 89 and 90 recommend common translations with all Byzantines, Catholic and Orthodox.

And we can see in the Liturgical Instruction (1996) that this is not just a suggestion.

What can Byzantine Catholics take away from Liturgiam Authenticam?

It doesn't seem to me that this has a direct bearing on the issue of the proposed translation. It may be desirable to have a common translation, but we certainly must use something until a common translation is produced.

What is coming is not merely a new translation. It is a major revision of the Divine Liturgy!

The Liturgical Instruction doesn’t just suggest common translations. It goes beyond that:

I agree that in the meantime we must have something. We do! The 1964 Liturgicon could easily be reprinted with corrections until a common translation is prepared. The rubrics are accurate according to the official edition published in Rome. The proposed new Revised Liturgy is a purposeful departure from the Roman edition.

But we are discussing LA. If there are specific provisions that do apply to the Eastern Catholic Churches then what measure should be given to the general provisions that are not specifically addressed to the Eastern Catholic Churches? The general provisions speak to (among others) the need to be accurate in translation, faithful in rubrics. They even speak to the need not to use exclusive “inclusive language”. Is it just for us to ignore these principles?

Admin,

Also you might want to consider the collection:
INSTRUMENTUM LABORIS

See my thoughts on this old thread:
Will the Bishops Listen?

What!!!!!! You mean ROME would want us to have a common translation, not only with the Albanians, Belarusian, Bulgarians, Greeks, Hungarians, Italo-Albanians, Macedonians, Melkites, Romanians, Russian Byzantines, Ruthenians, and Ukrainian Catholics who use English in this country, but with our Orthodox counterparts??? Just think of the implications that all the commonality would bring, preposterous. Why, if that happened people wouldn’t be so uncomfortable when they visited another church, maybe they’d even feel welcome. Maybe then they would grasp the commonality between not only their Catholic churches, but, gasp, with the Orthodox. Then where would we be? That might even start us down the road to healing that old rift we’ve had going for half a millennia.

No, what we need is another “irregular” translation. Our hierarchs have ignored what Rome has said to do for a long time, after all, they know what is best. We don’t need an authentic liturgy, let’s make it up as we go, we don’t owe anything to anyone.

I think someone posted earlier, saying this has no bearing on us, because we need a translation to use until a common one is produced. We have that new one to add to the mix of things, just forget correcting that old one we had until a common one come around.

Sui juris anyone?

Sine Nomine.

“The road to hell is paved with the skulls of erring priests, with bishops as their sign posts." – St. John Chrysostom

Nameless,

I do not mean to diminish John's very valid point, by being lighthearted or facetious, but let's forget neither our Slovak brethren, nor especially our tiny remnant Georgian brothers and sisters, please!

Many years,

Neil

And, of course, those who prefer the Old Rite.

Fr. Serge

Dear Sine,

What I don't understand is why there isn't someone in Rome watching over this kind of thing, with the authority to stop just this kind of run-away liberal nonsense. How could the bishops and their committee be so out of touch with our Church? Don't the bishops actually talk to the people? Don't the bishops care what their people have to say?

Nick

Originally posted by Nicholas...

Not to be unkind, but Rome in its dubious wisdom gave birth to the NO mess, which continues to this day. Seeing as how the RC’s haven’t kept their own liturgical house in order, why would you expect them to do it for your own church?


~Isaac

Dear Isaac,

Reasonable point, you're right.

But then, where are Byzantines to turn for support, when their own leadership, and the "committee" seem ready to take us in another direction, blindly following all the mistakes the R. C. Church made in the 70's and 80's?

Nick