Pope Francis writes corrective and clarifying letter to Cardinal Robert Sarah
Pope Francis has sent a rare, corrective and clarifying letter to Cardinal Robert Sarah to “express simply” and “clearly” some remarks on Motu proprio Magnum Principium on the translations of the liturgical texts and biblical texts. In the document – made public by the Holy See Press Room – addressed to the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, the Pope emphasizes first of all the “clear difference” that the new Motu proprio establishes between recognitio (recognition) and confirmatio (confirmation). These, the Pontiff recalls, are not “synonymous” or “interchangeable”. And this, he says, “to repeal the practice adopted by the Dicastery following the Liturgiam authenticam and that the new Motu Proprio had wanted to change.”
Regarding the responsibility of the Episcopal Conferences to “translate faithfully (faithfully),” Pope Francis emphasizes, “it should be made clear that the judgment about Latin fidelity and any necessary corrections was the task of the Dicastery, while now the new norm grants the Episcopal Conferences the right to judge the authenticity and consistency of one and the other terms in translations from the original, along with dialogue with the Holy See. ” Confirmation, the Pope adds, “does not necessarily mean a detailed word-by-word examination, except in the obvious cases that can be brought to the bishops for their further reflection.” This is still stated in the letter, “it is particularly relevant for the relevant formulas, for example with the Eucharistic Prayers and especially the sacramental formulas approved by the Holy Father.”
Pope Francis reiterates in his letter to Cardinal Sarah, “recognitio only indicates the verification and preservation of conformity to the law and communion of the Church.” That is why, he adds, “the process of translating relevant liturgical texts (i.e. sacramental formulas, the Creed, Our Father) into a language – from which they are considered authentic translations – should not lead to a ‘imposition’ to the Episcopal Conferences of a given translation made by the Dicastery, as this would undermine the right of the Bishops.” For the Pope it is therefore “incorrect to attribute to confirmation the purpose of recognitio (i.e. to” verify and safeguard compliance with law”).
The “confirmation” (confirmation) still notes, “It is not a purely formal act but necessary for the edition of the liturgical book translated. It is granted after the version has been submitted to the Apostolic See for the ratification of the Bishops’ approval in a spirit of dialogue and help to reflect if and when necessary, respecting their rights and duties, considering the legality of the process being followed and its ways. “
The Pope finally refers to the note “Commentaire“, sent by Cardinal Sarah to the Pope on September 30, and “published on some websites and erroneously attributed to his person.” “I ask you kindly,” concludes Francesco, addressing the cardinal, “to provide for the dissemination of my reply to the same sites and to send it to all Episcopal Conferences, Members and Consultors of this Dicastery.”
You can read more commentary at NCR Online and at PrayTell. The original letter in Italian is below:
[gview file=”https://holy.trinity.joburg/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Letter_of_Pope_Francis_to_Prefect_of_Divine_Worship_Congregation.pdf” height=”400px”]
PrayTell has provided an English translation:
Vatican City, October 15, 2017
To His Eminence the Most Reverend
Cardinal Robert SARAH
Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship
and the Discipline of the Sacraments
Vatican City
Your Eminence,
I received your letter of September 30, in which you wished to express your gratitude for the publication of Motu Proprio Magnum Principium and to send me a note of elaboration on it, Commentaire, striving for a better understanding of the text.
In expressing my thanks for the commitment and the contribution, I would simply like to express, and I hope clearly, some observations on this note that I consider to be important especially for the proper application and understanding of the Motu Proprio and to avoid any misunderstanding.
First of all, it is important to point out the importance of the clear difference that the new Motu Proprio establishes between recognitio and confirmatio, well established in articles 2 and 3 of canon 838, in order to abolish the practice adopted by your dicastery following Liturgiam authenticam (LA) which the new Motu Proprio intended to change. We cannot therefore say that recognitio and confirmatio are “strictly synonymous (or) are interchangeable” or that “they are interchangeable at the level of responsibility of the Holy See.”
In fact the new canon 838, through the distinction between recognitio and confirmatio, asserts the changed responsibility of the Apostolic See in the exercise of these two actions, as well as that of the episcopal conferences. Magnum Principium no longer argues that translations must conform in all points to the norms of Liturgiam authenticam, as was previously the case. For this reason, individual numbers of Liturgiam authenticam must be carefully reconceived, including nos. 79-84, in order to distinguish what is required by the code for translation and what is required for legitimate adaptations. It is therefore clear that some of Liturgiam authenticam’s numbers have been abrogated or are taken up into the terms in which they were reformulated by the Motu Proprio’s new canon (eg. no. 76 and also no. 80).
On the responsibility of the bishops’ conferences to translate “fideliter,”it should be pointed out that the judgment of fidelity to Latin and any necessary corrections had been the task of the dicastery, but now the norm grants to episcopal conferences the right to judge the quality (bontà) and consistency between one term and another in the translation from the original, even if this is in dialogue with the Holy See. Confirmatio no longer supposes a detailed word-by-word examination, except in the obvious cases that can be brought to the bishops for their further reflection. This applies in particular to the relevant formulas, such as the Eucharistic Prayers and in particular the sacramental formulas approved by the Holy Father. Confirmatio also takes into account the integrity of the book, that is, verifying that all components that make up the typical edition have been translated (1).
Here it can be added that, in the light of the motu proprio, “fideliter” of § 3 of the canon implies a threefold fidelity: in primis, to the original text; then to the particular language in which it is translated, and finally to the comprehension of the text by the recipients (see Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani nos. 391-392).
In this sense, recognitio only indicates verification and preservation of conformity to the law and communion of the Church. The process of translating relevant liturgical texts (eg. sacramental formulas, the Credo, the Pater Noster) into a language – from which they are considered authentic translations – should not lead to a spirit of “imposition” upon the episcopal conferences of a given translation made by the dicastery, as this would undermine the right of the bishops sanctioned in the canon and, already prior to that, Sacrosanctum Concilium 36 § 4. Moreover, let us recall the analogy with canon 825 § 1 concerning the version of Sacred Scripture, which does not require confirmatio by the Apostolic See.
It is mistaken to attribute to confirmatio the purpose of recognitio (i.e. to “verify and safeguard compliance with law”). Of course, confirmatio is not merely formal, but necessary for publication of the translated liturgical book: it is granted after the version has been submitted to the Apostolic See for the ratification of the bishops’ approval in a spirit of dialogue and aid to reflection, if and when necessary, respecting their rights and duties, considering the legality of the process followed and its various aspects (2).
Finally, Your Eminence, I reiterate my fraternal gratitude for your commitment and note that the Commentaire which has been published on some websites, and erroneously attributed to you, I kindly ask you to provide this response to the same sites, and also to send it to all episcopal conferences, and the members and consultors of your dicastery.
Fraternally
Francis
(1) Magnum Principium: The goal of the translation of liturgical texts and of biblical texts for the Liturgy of the Word is to announce the word of salvation to the faithful in obedience to the faith and to express the prayer of the Church to the Lord. For this purpose it is necessary to communicate to a given people using its own language all that the Church intended to communicate to other people through the Latin language. While fidelity cannot always be judged by individual words but must be sought in the context of the whole communicative act and according to its literary genre, nevertheless some particular terms must also be considered in the context of the entire Catholic faith because each translation of texts must be congruent with sound doctrine.”
(2) Magnum Principium: “Without doubt, attention must be paid to the benefit and good of the faithful, nor must the right and duty of episcopal conferences be forgotten who, together with episcopal conferences from regions sharing the same language and with the Apostolic See, must ensure and establish that, while the character of each language is safeguarded, the sense of the original text is fully and faithfully rendered and that even after adaptations the translated liturgical books always illuminate the unity of the Roman Rite.”
[/vc_column_text]