The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
hydra, Kind, Augoustinos, Poliscifi, The Cub
5606 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 58 guests, and 448 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Church of the Holy Trinity (UGCC) - Brazil
Papal Audience 10 November 2017
Upgraded Russian icon corner
Russian Greek Catholic Global Congress
OL EuroEast II (2007) Group
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics34,756
Posts412,069
Members5,606
Most Online2,716
Jun 7th, 2012
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Re: Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Robert Taft, S.J. [Re: Tomassus] #406489 06/19/14 03:00 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,585
Michael_Thoma Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,585
Pray Tell's Nathan Chase stated the following in the comments section, due to a lot of negative comments regarding the interview:

Pray Tell interviewed Robert Taft and asked him to be witty, humorous and engaging. Taft delivered. We decided to post his responses in their unedited form due to the nature of the post, i.e. an interview in which we requested wit and humor.
It is important to realize that many years of scholarship lie behind Taft’s responses, so they are not just flippant remarks. They are perhaps embellished by Taft’s characteristic wit, but not flippant. Instead of critiquing the tone of Taft’s interview, this thread should discuss the issues that Taft’s responses bring up.

Re: Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Robert Taft, S.J. [Re: Michael_Thoma] #406493 06/19/14 11:05 PM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,983
ajk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,983
Originally Posted by Michael_Thoma
Pray Tell's Nathan Chase stated the following in the comments section, due to a lot of negative comments regarding the interview:... Instead of critiquing the tone of Taft’s interview, this thread should discuss the issues that Taft’s responses bring up.
There is one more line in this response by Nathan Chase:
Quote
I.e. – keep the comments civil and about content, not style

He might better have said that to Taft from the get go.

Re: Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Robert Taft, S.J. [Re: 2lungsambassador] #406534 06/23/14 01:18 PM
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
E
Epiphanius Offline
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
Offline
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
E
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
Originally Posted by 2lungsambassador
Boy does Fr. Taft ever rub me the wrong way! He's done the entire Church a great service by his scholarly work but he has that Jesuit ability to be really abrasive and bluntly insulting.

2lungs,

Some of Archm. Robert's remarks didn't sit well with me, either. I am a great believer in the notion that true ecumenism *has* to work in both directions--otherwise, the ecumenists on both sides (of whichever division we're considering) will have their "dialogues" and might even achieve a kind of "reunion," but since the stalwarts (or "NCWs") on both sides have already excommunicated them in their minds, what have they achieved? Just another iteration of the old adage that "when two churches unite, the result is three churches."

(Actually, I find it rather strange that ecumenists can be *so* patient and accepting of diverse points of view--as long as those points of view are on the other side of the fence.)

Originally Posted by 2lungsambassador
His dismissive remarks about NCWs is really over the top and frankly Manichean.

Hmm ... I'm curious as to why you consider them "Manichean."

Originally Posted by 2lungsambassador
... as if there are only the nice fluffy sheeplike Catholics who go along with the regime of the Novus Ordo and liturgical abuses galore ...

Now, here it depends entirely on what you are calling "abuses." AFAIK, a practice can only be called an "abuse" if it is in violation of the current liturgical norms of the RCC.

Aside from poor homiletics (and people performing liturgical roles without any kind of liturgical garb), my #1 complaint about the current RC practice is something that Dom Gueranger himself was complaining about over 150 years ago--the absence of (or lack of attention to) congregational singing!

From it's very inception, a major principle of the RC "Liturgical Movement" was that the faithful needed to be actively involved in the Liturgy itself (i.e. not merely the usual para-liturgy of hymns and prayers taking place during Mass). This meant singing and chanting the actual liturgical parts that pertained to the people. The problem then, as now, was that few priests really perceived music as an integral part of the Liturgy, and therefore would be willing to take the trouble to try and get a reluctant congregation to learn the simple chants and then sing them--with very few changs--every week. It was/is *much* easier to have a "real" choir (often with a paid choir director) who can "perform new material" every week while everyone else--the priest included--only has to listen. (And if for some reason this was not possible, no music at all was "just fine!")


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Re: Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Robert Taft, S.J. [Re: Roman refugee] #406535 06/23/14 02:00 PM
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
E
Epiphanius Offline
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
Offline
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
E
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
Originally Posted by Roman refugee
"context is everything." says Fr. Taft.

Doesn't that statement explain his thought?

Divine Truth is not dependent on context.

Roman,

While this is certainly true, Divine Truth in its purest form cannot be expressed in human language. What is expressed in human language is always subject to interpretation, for which context plays an important role--*that's* what Fr. Taft is talking about. (Just think of all the times when heretics have taken scripture passages out of context!)


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Re: Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Robert Taft, S.J. [Re: Michael_Thoma] #406607 06/27/14 12:07 AM
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 426
Lester S Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 426
Originally Posted by Michael_Thoma
Originally Posted by MichaelO
Quote
Father Taft said:
"The liturgy doesn't need fixing. For starters it just needs a translation into something remotely resembling English."

This cannot be a true statement. Father Taft is the author of the Ruthenian Revised Divine Liturgy. Father Petras and Father Hayduk and Bishop Kudrick all say they revised the Divine Liturgy the way Father Taft said to. Is he embarrassed at how bad his Revised Divine Liturgy is? What's going on?
Fr. Taft, I think would deny being the author of the RDL. He is not Ruthenian. He was asked to verify that the RDL contains nothing heretical.

http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/372681/Was%20RDL,%20now%20Q%20on%20Father%20Rober

http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/322231


Thank you, for clarifying this.

Re: Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Robert Taft, S.J. [Re: Tomassus] #406617 06/27/14 08:02 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
S
StuartK Offline
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Father Taft is most assuredly NOT the author of the RDL, which was the internal product of the Byzantine Catholic Church's Intereparchial Liturgical Committee--of which Taft is NOT a member. Taft was asked by the Congregation for the Oriental Churches to review a draft of the RDL, but was instructed ONLY to look for overt instances of heresy or gross theological errors. Of course, he did not find any. This does not mean he approves of the RDL, and his statement above is largely conditioned by his experience with it.

Re: Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Robert Taft, S.J. [Re: Tomassus] #406618 06/27/14 08:05 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
S
StuartK Offline
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
From the general tenor of the comments on this thread, I conclude that a lot of the participants are not intellectually equipped to deal with Archimandrite Robert in an intelligent manner. You just have no idea what he is saying--and worse, you have no idea what YOU are saying.

Re: Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Robert Taft, S.J. [Re: StuartK] #406652 07/01/14 10:39 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,172
Orthodox Catholic Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,172
Well, I'm certainly not so equipped to deal with either Father Archimandrite Taft or Stuart!

That doesn't prevent me from enjoying reading both while trying to comphrehend them.

Context is very important when trying to understand the very precise mind of Father Taft whose conclusions may sometimes startle people. That is because his mind is racing way above my own speed limit, for example.

Usually, in such a case, I blame myself and go back to the drawing board of a slower and more comprehensive approach that could/should go beyond the parameters of an interview or the like.

My two cents' worth.

Alex

Re: Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Robert Taft, S.J. [Re: StuartK] #406666 07/02/14 07:19 PM
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
E
Epiphanius Offline
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
Offline
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
E
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
Originally Posted by StuartK
From the general tenor of the comments on this thread, I conclude that a lot of the participants are not intellectually equipped to deal with Archimandrite Robert in an intelligent manner. You just have no idea what he is saying--and worse, you have no idea what YOU are saying.

Stuart,

Sorry if any of my comments have given you that impression.

However, I should have to note that in this interview, Archm. Robert
makes a number of offhand remarks that *probably* sound a lot more normal to someone like yourself, who know him much better than we do. But to the uninitiated, they *do* come off as echoing statements we've all heard numerous times--often from some, shall we say, less-than-qualified sources.

The one item in particular that had me scratching my head was this one:
Quote
Papa Francesco is good for everything, including liturgical renewal. When he first celebrated Mass in the Sistine Chapel he had them toss out the altar facing away from the congregation that his predecessor had installed.

Is he actually saying that *no* oriented altar existed in the Sistine Chapel until Pope Benedict added one?

This one also had me puzzled:
Quote
The liturgy doesn't need fixing. For starters it just needs a translation into something remotely resembling English.

One might assume here that he's talking about the RDL, but the implication is that *no* decent translations exist. Also, the implication certainly appears to be that the problem is entirely that *all* existing translations try too hard to match the originals, with the quality of English expression suffering as a result--is that really what he means? (That hardly seems to be the case with the RDL.)


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Re: Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Robert Taft, S.J. [Re: Tomassus] #406668 07/02/14 09:56 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
S
StuartK Offline
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
He's eighty-something and in the Honey Badger phase of his life. He's earned the right to say what he wants and not care how people take it.

Quote
Also, the implication certainly appears to be that the problem is entirely that *all* existing translations try too hard to match the originals, with the quality of English expression suffering as a result--is that really what he means? (That hardly seems to be the case with the RDL.)


The problem exists in both dimensions. The RDL, for instance, swings wildly between excessive (and unnecessary) literalism to pure paraphrase, and in neither case do the translators demonstrate any really felicity with the English language.

Liturgical translation is an art, one which requires one to be fully fluent both in English and in the original language, as well as having a grasp of the intricacies of liturgics. Above all, since liturgy is poetry, one must also be a poet.

Too many people trying to do liturgical translation lack ability in one or more of these areas. And some of the most prominent lack ability in all of them.

Re: How (and How Not to) to Read the Fathers [Re: Adam DeVille] #406722 07/05/14 09:49 AM
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 556
Economos Roman V. Russo Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 556
It is impossible to overestimate the contribution Bob Taft has made to liturgical studies over the past fifty years. My wish for my dear old friend and kindly mentor is best expressed by Dylan Thomas, "Do not go gentle into that good night,/ Old age should burn and rave at close of day;/ Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

Re: Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Robert Taft, S.J. [Re: Epiphanius] #406959 07/18/14 12:28 PM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,429
G
griego catolico Offline
Member
Offline
Member
G
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,429
Originally Posted by Epiphanius

The one item in particular that had me scratching my head was this one:
Quote
Papa Francesco is good for everything, including liturgical renewal. When he first celebrated Mass in the Sistine Chapel he had them toss out the altar facing away from the congregation that his predecessor had installed.

Is he actually saying that *no* oriented altar existed in the Sistine Chapel until Pope Benedict added one?

With all due respect, Fr. Taft needs a new pair of glasses.

Here is a photograph of the Sistine Chapel where His Holiness Francis celebrated his first Mass as Pope: Link.
You can clearly see that the altar where His Holiness Benedict XVI would celebrate Mass had obviously not been "tossed out".

Did Fr. Taft forget that His Holiness Francis would later celebrate Mass for the feast of the Baptism of the Lord on the altar that he allegedly had thrown out?: Link.

I am surprised that Fr. Taft would make such a blunder.
Happy retirement!

Re: Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Robert Taft, S.J. [Re: griego catolico] #406965 07/18/14 03:51 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,172
Orthodox Catholic Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,172
Carefuld Griego!

Honey Badgers can be dangerous! smile

Alex

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Administrator, Father Anthony 

The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2019 (Forum 1998-2019). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3