In the Foreward to the "green book" the Bishops state:
This new translation seeks to be consistent in rendering biblical and technical terms, faithful to the vocabulary and thought of the text's original context in the patristic period, but also accessible to a contemporary American congregation.
My emphasis.
...Faithful to the patristic period, but accessible to a contemporary American congregation--an interesting proposition, but impossible. That the Bishops think this is possible is at the root of the problem with the RDL. (I prefer MML - man made liturgy.) To the extent that congregations are "contemporary Americans," is the extent to which they reject the thought of the patristic period, for they reject logos--reason.
The Pope, in his Regensburg lecture, sets forth role of logos in the ancient Christian world:
...God is the God who has revealed himself as logos and, as logos, has acted and continues to act lovingly on our behalf. Certainly, love, as Saint Paul says, "transcends" knowledge and is thereby capable of perceiving more than thought alone (cf. Eph 3:19); nonetheless it continues to be love of the God who is Logos. Consequently, Christian worship is, again to quote Paul - "λογικη λατρεία", worship in harmony with the eternal Word and with our reason (cf. Rom 12:1).
The Pope continues:
...The thesis that the critically purified Greek heritage forms an integral part of Christian faith has been countered by the call for a dehellenization of Christianity - a call which has more and more dominated theological discussions since the beginning of the modern age...I must briefly refer to the third stage of dehellenization, which is now in progress. In the light of our experience with cultural pluralism [this is the fundamental value of the contemporary American congregation--i.e. my "truth" is as good as your "truth"], it is often said nowadays that the synthesis with Hellenism achieved in the early Church was an initial inculturation which ought not to be binding on other cultures. The latter are said to have the right to return to the simple message of the New Testament prior to that inculturation, in order to inculturate it anew in their own particular milieux [in the case of the MML -- to make patristic thought accessible to the contemporary American congregation]. This thesis is not simply false, but it is coarse and lacking in precision. The New Testament was written in Greek and bears the imprint of the Greek spirit, which had already come to maturity as the Old Testament developed. True, there are elements in the evolution of the early Church which do not have to be integrated into all cultures. Nonetheless, the fundamental decisions made about the relationship between faith and the use of human reason are part of the faith itself; they are developments consonant with the nature of faith itself [that is to say, Truth is not relative].
In
Truth and Tolerance then Cardinal Ratzinger wrote,
Relativism has become the central problem for faith in our time...Relativism thus also appears as being the philosophical basis of democracy.
In his sermon before the conclave in which he was elected, Cardinal Ratzinger spoke of the "dictatorship of relativism".
Today, having a clear faith based on the Creed of the Church is often labeled as fundamentalism. Whereas relativism, that is, letting oneself be "tossed here and there, carried about by every wind of doctrine", seems the only attitude that can cope with modern times. We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one's own ego and desires.
In the MML, the faithful now recite a Creed that does not comport with the Creed of the patristic period. Modern thought has replaced ancient truths. Herein is the root of the problem with the MML.
Previous Topic
Index