Again Twice Wrong

Again Twice Wrong

Gloria.TV News – 1/31/18

The Italian Bishops’ Conference announced that it wants to introduce a wrong translation of the Our Father in the Italian Mass which will also be used in the Vatican. The wrong translation will say something like: “and do not abandon us in temptation”. The Italian Mass contains already a wrong translation of the words of consecration which says that the chalice is given up “for all” instead of “for many”. The Italian bishops refused to correct the mistake although Benedict XVI ordered them to do so already in 2006.

Facebook
Twitter
Google+
http://angelqueen.org/2018/01/31/again-twice-wrong/
Get AQ Email Updates
AQ RSS Feed

4 comments on “Again Twice Wrong

  1. “The Italian Mass contains already a wrong translation of the words of consecration which says that the chalice is given up “for all” instead of “for many”. The Italian bishops refused to correct the mistake although Benedict XVI ordered them to do so already in 2006.”
    This is outrageous. No wonder the faith is dying in Italy.
    Fr. Hesse argued that the above mentioned alteration of the words of consecration invalidates the consecration. He admits that it is only his opinion. But his argument seems to be reasonable.

  2. Canon Hesse, STL, STD of truly blessed memory, was brilliant, clear, juridically precise and one of the most engaging and warmly humorous theologians I’ve ever encountered. One phrase from him was, and remains, worth far more than a million pages of the drivel and gobbledygook that has drowned the Church since V2.
    /
    A Thomist in the highest sense of that glorious title, he invariably distinguished between validity and nonsense, between clarity and murk, between orthodoxy and heresy (or worse).
    /
    Central to his argument on the key issue of Sacramental validity in the protestantized “new rite”, imposed by diktat in defiance of dogma and even common sense, was his conviction that the “rite” in itself was a schismatic act.
    /
    He did state that were “it” to be prayed exclusively in Latin, by a priest with a proper intention and in observation of the formal rubrics of the pre conciliar Church concerning orientation, vestments, etc, then, but only in such a way, it might be valid. He was very careful to point out that his was only a private opinion, as our friend Anthony mentioned, and not a definitive assertion – a clear example of duly reverential humility on his part.
    /
    From personal observation, it might seem that Heaven does honor the intention of priests, laboring under the lash of their progressive ecclesial masters, by not altogether withdrawing all graces, fruits and spiritual and temporal favors, otherwise obtainable in the True Rite of the Roman Church, and in light of the holier dispositions of pious souls compelled to fulfill their Sunday obligation in Nervous Ordeal parishes, over and against the dogmatically superior case laid out by Canon Hesse – but only IF one accounts for the ENTIRE scope of the issue, taking into account the severe crisis induced by V2. It is an enormous task to do so and one measly post from an obscure and easily error-prone AQ “commentator” like me can not possibly begin to address it substantively.
    /
    In sum: anyone who had not yet viewed the Canon’s conferences on YouTube should do so.

    • Thank you, gpm, for your wise observations.

      I am beginning to wonder if this discussion might be related to Pope Benedict’s resignation/abdication. Suppose PB was in the process of recognizing the truth of Fr. Hesse’s position; namely, that the Novus Ordo, on a practical level, threatens the validity of the sacraments, especially of the Eucharist. Thus he moves to make the Tridentine Mass more available (Summorum Pontificum) and imposes the correct form for the words of consecration at the Novus Ordo Masses. The latter directive is then flatly rejected by the Italian bishops’ conference (and perhaps by others). How could he, in good conscience, continue to preside over the universal Church, when large segments of believers are possibly being subjected to invalid Masses under his watch? And, furthermore, when his efforts to correct the situation are undermined by rebellious bishops and priests?

      Yet, I agree with you that, especially in these troubling times, the Good Lord will not deprive the faithful of the graces that they earnestly seek in the sacraments.

  3. In view of FrankenPope’s Magnum Principium (which sounds like a Clint Eastwood Dirty Harry movie) that the Holy See will “recognize” (i.e., accept “as is”) liturgical translations by local bishops’ groups, the new translation of the Lord’s Prayer will stand (especially because that’s what FrankenPope says it should say) as well as the existing translation of the Words of Consecration, because that’s what FrankenPope and the ghostwriter of his Amoris Laetitia (Archbishop “Tucho” Fernandez) say – the former in paragraph 297 (“No one can be condemned forever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel”) and the latter in a 1995 article (“I rely firmly upon the truth that all are saved”) .

Leave a Reply