4 January 2016
More Questions about German Mistranslations of the Liturgy of the Hours
Newer UPDATE on the question of German versions of the Liturgy of the hours mistranslating the Editiones Typicae ... at the Office of Readings for "Die 12 ianuarii vel sabbato post dominicam Epiphaniae" there is a passage from Faustus Regiensis in which the penultimate and antepenultimate paragraphs are an elegant exposition of Supersessionism: The Torah gives way, Grace takes its place; the Shadow is taken away, Truth demonstrated ... etcetera.
I would be interested to know if the German version includes this sermon by this Saint; and, if so, whether it includes these paragraphs. And whether they are bowdlerised in translation.
Apparently, one of the English versions translates Evangelium as Message. Seems odd to me. I wonder what the date of that translation is.
More interestingly still, a reader tells us that that the German translation talks about us receiving etc, rather than the People of the Promise doing so. NOW ... WHAT is the date of THAT version? And I wonder what the German version does with the prayer for the Conversion of the Jews in the Vespers of Easter Sunday?
I wonder what the other major languages do here.
"The Mater Misericordiae teaches the Church that the forgiveness granted on Golgotha knows no limits. Neither the Torah* with its quibbles, nor the Sophia tou Kosmou* with its distinctions, can hold it back. The Church's forgiveness must be every bit as broad as that offered by Jesus on the Cross and Mary at his feet". (Pope Francis on January 1. My italics.)
Frankly, I do not entirely agree with the Holy Father's rather unkind words about the Jewish Torah. It is, as I understand it, not an obsession with minutiae by which a human hopes to 'earn' Justification (this was the old anti-Judaic and mistaken Lutheran analysis), but an identity marker of those who desire to remain in fidelity to their Covenant with a Merciful God. Moreover, as a Catholic I love the Torah because, for us, our Redeemer is himself Torah Incarnate. But I do most warmly welcome the Pope's evident belief that the Sacrifice on Golgotha has superseded the written decrees which are now nailed to the Cross like the loot nailed to a Roman military tropaeum (Colossians 2: 14) ... and I particularly like his phrase "knows no limits", together with his clear implication that the breadth of the Mercy offered by the Church must not exclude any category, least of all the people of Jewry. One in the eye for Marx and Co! They need as many in their eyes as they can get!
Talking about Cardinal Marx and his English disciples and their impertinent requests that a particular Prayer, composed by Pope Benedict for the Extraordinary Form, should be "reviewed" by a subdepartment in a Roman Dicastery, I wonder ... er ... do you think these bishops fulfill the Divine Office in the post-Conciliar form of the Liturgy of the Hours? ... if so, what did they make of the Prayer for the Conversion of the Jews at Lauds yesterday morning "We beseech thee that thy Gospel, O Christ, ... may be received by the People of the Promise"? [Die 2 ianuarii , ad Laudes matutinas, Preces, the second versicle and its Response, beginning in Latin Christe, quem, ab angelis glorificatum ... etc..] Did they cross their fingers behind their backs and diplomatically hiccup as their Chaplains said those words, or, perhaps, did they make the sign to avert the Evil Eye?
I simply cannot help coming to the reluctant conclusion that these bishops are behaving with quite a degree of hypocrisy; perhaps trying again to hurt the already wounded Traddy community; or to stir up trouble against a potential regularisation of the SSPX; or, possibly, just simply to trash the legacy of a Pope Benedict whom they never liked. Otherwise, why have they never asked the CDW to "review" so many such passages in the post-Conciliar Office? Or, if they have, when did they do it? Is their request on record? If there is any sincerity in their request for a "review" of the Extraordinary Form, why do they not strengthen their case by saying "We have already sought a substantial revision of equally objectionable passages in the Liturgy of the Hours and in the selected Biblical pericopae in the Eucharistic Lectionary?"
I have written before about the manifest evidences that the Liturgia Horarum was produced before the currently fashionable heterodox attitude to Judaism was invented in the years around 1980. I add to my previous lists the end of the Patristic Reading on December 31, from S Leo the (very much more) Great (than any modern German or British Cardinal or Bishop): "The birthday of the Lord is the Birthday of Peace: for thus speaks the Apostle: He is our peace, He who made the Two One; since, whether we are Jew or Gentile, through Him we have access in the one Spirit to the Father." (The 'Apostle', of course, whose words are represented in italic, is S Paul in Ephesians*.)
*** the (Jewish) Law, "la legge con il suoi cavilli"; the Wisdom (Zeitgeist) of the World, "la Sapienza di questo mundo"; I intend a post some time on the authorship of Ephesians.