• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

“What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too…” Pope Benedict XVI (7 July 2007)

  • About
  • Symposium
  • Hymnal
  • Jogues Missal
  • Site Map
  • Donate
Views from the Choir Loft

Is the 1998 ICEL Missal Translation Worth Another Look?

Fr. David Friel · June 21, 2015

MAKE NO SECRET of my appreciation for the 2011 English translation of the third typical edition of the Roman Missal. I am an unabashed supporter who has publicly sung the praises of this new translation very often (for example, in an article for Homiletic & Pastoral Review and on Views from the Choir Loft HERE, HERE, & HERE).

I would be hard-pressed to think of a parishioner who dislikes the new translation. The occasions when I’ve heard a complaint about it from an ordinary churchgoer are extremely few. This translation received an overwhelmingly positive response from a September 2012 CARA study, which found that 7 in 10 Catholics feel the new translation is “a good thing.”

Yet, when reading certain publications, one gets the sense that every Catholic in the world is up-in-arms about the present translation. Why is there this dichotomy?

One of the most commonly proffered solutions to the “offensive,” “clunky,” and “imposed” new translation is that we should scrap it and simply use the 1998 English translation that was the result of many years of work. In a recent letter to the editor of The Tablet, Father Gerald O’Collins, SJ, made an impassioned plea that permission be given to use the 1998 translation. All such requests have been denied by Archbishop Arthur Roche, Secretary of the CDW.

I will not explore all the issues with the 1998 translation in detail here. Suffice it to say that its creators subscribed to the theory of “dynamic equivalence,” and the result was a very “dynamic” translation. This principle of translation, of course, was supplanted by the method of “formal correspondence” by directive of the 2001 document Liturgiam Authenticam.

The most important reason why the 1998 translation cannot simply be used to replace the 2011 translation, however, is often overlooked. The reason is this: the 1998 text is a translation of the second typical edition of the Roman Missal from 1975. The third typical edition was promulgated in Latin in 2002. How could we reasonably revert to a translation of an outdated Missal, much less such a loose translation that never held any force? The 1998 translation is obsolete in every way.

There is no need to go back to another translation, nor is there a need to craft hastily another translation. The present missal is imperfect, I admit, but it is a monstrous step forward from the previous ICEL translation of 1970. It has many merits of its own accord, independent of comparison to other translations. Its texts & rhythms & beauty have nourished my young priesthood, and it is nourishing the faith of English speakers worldwide. Praise God, from Whom this blessing has flowed!

Editor’s Note : We thank Fr. Friel for another wonderful post. Regarding the “lack of consultation” myth—which Fr. Friel didn’t have time to address in this article—it’s worth pointing out that Msgr. Andrew Wadsworth has utterly repudiated this. He has publicly stated that each bishop remained free to consult whomever they wished throughout the process, and no restrictions whatsoever were placed upon them.

Opinions by blog authors do not necessarily represent the views of Corpus Christi Watershed.

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: 1998 Rejected Sacramentary, ICEL New Translation of the Roman Missal, Roman Missal Third Edition, The Old ICEL Translation of the Mass Last Updated: January 1, 2020

Subscribe to the CCW Mailing List

About Fr. David Friel

Ordained in 2011, Father Friel served as Parochial Vicar at Saint Anselm Church in Northeast Philly before earning a doctorate in liturgical theology at The Catholic University of America. He presently serves as Vocation Director for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.—(Read full biography).

Primary Sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

Quick Thoughts

Alabama Assessment!

We received this evaluation of Symposium 2022 from an Alabama participant:

“Oh, how the Symposium echoed the words of Cardinal Merry Del Val: …choosing only what is most conformed to Thy glory, which is my final aim. In one short and fast paced week, the faculty and attendees showed me the hand of God and our Lady working in our lives. The wide range of education—from Gregorian Chant, jazz modes in organ improvisation, to ‘staying sane’ while leading a choir—were certainly first-class knowledge from the best teachers of the art. However, the most powerful lesson was learning how to pray as a choir. The sacrifice of putting songs together, taking time to learn the sacred text, meditating on the church teaching through the chants, and gaining the virtues required to persevere in these duties were not only qualities of a choir but of a saint. The sanctification of the lives of the attendees was a beautiful outcome of this event … and that in itself is worth more than a beautifully-sung Solesmes style chant!”

—Jeff Ostrowski
PDF Download • Trinity Sunday (22 pages)

Feel free to download this Organ Accompaniment Booklet for Trinity Sunday (Second Vespers). Notice how the modes progress by number. Psalm 1 is mode 1; Psalm 2 is mode 2; Psalm 3 is mode 3; Psalm 4 is mode 4; Psalm 5 is mode 5. I am told by an expert that other feasts (such as Corpus Christi) are likewise organized by mode, and it’s called a “numerical office.”

—Jeff Ostrowski
10 June 2022 • “Official” rhythm of plainsong

I continue to search for the most beautiful way to present the “pure” Editio Vaticana scores. (Technically, the “pure” rhythm of the official edition is what everyone is supposed to use.) You can download my latest attempt, which is the Introit for this coming Sunday: Feast of the Most Holy Trinity. Because this is not an ancient feast, the Introit had to be adapted (perhaps around 750AD). Prior Johner says the adaptation is “not an entirely happy one.”

—Jeff Ostrowski

Random Quote

[Speaking about the Silent Canon, with audible “per ómnia”] — “So in all such cases it is usual for the otherwise silent celebrant occasionally to sing a clause aloud, to show how far he has arrived.”

— Father Fortescue (pages 313-314) • “A Study of the Roman Liturgy”

Recent Posts

  • “I Decided to Get a Plane Ticket and Fly 8,700 Miles From Singapore to Take Part.”
  • Alabama Assessment!
  • “How Has Nobody Done This Before?” • Vol. 1
  • “Exceeded Every Expectation!” • Mr. O’Brien’s Review
  • “81 Photos” • Sacred Music Symposium 2022

Copyright © 2022 Corpus Christi Watershed · Gabriel Lalemant on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Corpus Christi Watershed is a 501(c)3 public charity dedicated to exploring and embodying as our calling the relationship of religion, culture, and the arts. This non-profit organization employs the creative media in service of theology, the Church, and Christian culture for the enrichment and enjoyment of the public.