N THAT CLASSIC spiritual work by Thomas à Kempis (Imitation Of Christ) we read: “Seek, child, to do the will of others rather than your own.” This was not the view taken by FATHER GODFREY DIEKMANN, whom some consider the most radical of all the 1960s reformers. In opposition to Thomas à Kempis, Diekmann believed that he knew better than all the saints of the last 1,200 years. Diekmann had a deep hatred for the immemorial tradition of the church and ardently desired extensive changes to the traditional liturgy.1
In A Nutshell • Since few have time to read long articles these days, let me summarize: (a) Father Diekmann believed all the saints over the last 1,200 years—as well as the fathers of the Second Vatican Council—were dead wrong about the liturgy; (b) Diekmann’s main argument was that it was impossible for anyone to become fluent in more than one language. To give just one example, on 14 November 1963 (according to Cardinal Antonelli’s diary):
“The Conciliar Commission on the Sacred Liturgy met at 5:30 p.m. in the Aula of the Sacred Congregation of Rites. Cardinal Larraona presided. […] Father Diekmann opposed the retention of Latin in the Collects. […] The President then intervened and asked the Commission to bear in mind that only 108 of the Council Fathers had approved the use of the vernacular in the Collects. He called on the Commission to respect the wishes of the Council…”
In a private letter shortly afterwards, Father Diekmann wrote:
“Even Wagner spoke up for keeping the collect in Latin! […] We argued violently … I was so mad I could spit. Wagner, Martinmort, not honest.”
Is Diekmann Correct? • Remember that Diekmann was born in Roscoe, Minnesota, and spent the rest of his life in Minnesota. People from the Midwest (like myself) often find it hard to believe anybody could know more than one language. But if Father Godfrey Diekmann had taken the time to meet someone from Belgium, he’d have discovered that most Belgians are fully fluent in at least three languages. Communication with Belgians can be annoying because they sometimes switch languages in the middle of a sentence. It’s not uncommon for people from Africa to speak three languages. The same is true for people from the Philippines. Indeed, Monsignor Robert A. Skeris (a priest from Wisconsin) was fluent in eight languages.
The Choir I Direct • The choir I direct is quite a mixture. One choir member is a U.S. Marshall. Another is unemployed. Two members earned doctorates from major universities. Several members are from Africa. One member is a ‘platinum’ artist. Some members brought their education to a close after high school. About 50% of the members of my choir are fully fluent in English and Spanish.
Jeff Is Deficient • Most of my colleagues here at Corpus Christi Watershed are fluent in at least two languages. Today I will feature just one of them. My colleague, VERONICA MORENO is a homeschooling mother of five (5) children who also volunteers her “free” time to tutor—each day (!)—her legally blind niece. She recently published two blog articles: one in English, and one in Spanish. In spite of the fact that Father Diekmann thought of himself as very, very, very much more clever than all the saints of the last 1,200 years, Veronica’s ability to speak two languages fluently eviscerates his argument.
Summary • To summarize, Father Godfrey Diekmann believed himself to be much smarter than all the saints who lived over the last 1,200 years. In reality, Diekmann was dead wrong. The church was wise to promote (and honor) a lingua sacra for the public worship Almighty God. The Congregation of Rites (23 July 1964) reminded us:
At Vatican II “the great majority of the Fathers approved the various dispositions concerning a wider use of the vernacular precisely because of the existence of that first paragraph [Sacrosanctum Concilium §1] which ensured substantial preservation of the Latin, apart from a few particular cases (salvo jure particulari), such as the concession made to China.”
1 All this is described in a biography (or perhaps a hagiography) of Diekmann by Sister Kathleen Hughes, published by Diekmann’s monastery. So much for objectivity! Indeed, in a letter dated 3 March 1964, Father Godfrey Diekmann—who was ostensibly a Benedictine monk—accidentally said the quiet part out loud, asking: “What young candidate for the priesthood would ever consider the monastic life if there is even a possibility of having to spend three hours a day praying or singing the Office in Latin?”
