Discussing the June 2002 edition of Liturgy News, including the editiorial by Father Tom Elich.

| Home About John Lilburne Journal Ordination Rite translation 2002 Roman Missal Ê |  |  | # 1208 K Sat 27 Jul 2002 This week I have been reading the June 2002 edition of Liturgy News. It is the quarterly bulletin of the Liturgical Commission of the Archdiocese of Brisbane (which is in Australia). The editor is Rev Dr Tom Elich and it has the imprimatur of the Archbishop of Brisbane, John Bathersby. Its an informative publication, although it does not provide as much detail as RomanRite.com. The headings for the News section show similarities to what I have covered: New Missale Romanum Rejection of Revised Sacramentary Rejection of the Ordination Rite Letter on Penance Popular Piety and Liturgy USA Norms for Communion The article on the new Roman Missal has one sentence about the differences between the 2000 and 2002 General Instructions: Curiously, in this definitive edition, further changes have been made to the advance Latin text which the Vatican published in 2000 (see Liturgy News, September 2000, pp 2, 10). Its not much, particularly compared to what I have written about it, but at least its something. Father Elich's editorial has received some attention on other sites. Its about the letters written in April 2002 by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments regarding translations of liturgical books. The editorial begins: ### REJECT! It is obviously disappointing to see years of good work go down the drain. When it is a work of collaboration offered voluntarily to the Church by international scholars from various disciplines, work which was happily received and overwhelmingly approved by eleven bishops conferences, a rejection sticks in the craw. When the rejection is based on misrepresentation or at least misinformation, then honesty requires that the facts be stated. I agree that rejection is disappointing, but it is also necessary for upholding standards and quality. I see the letters as providing feedback on what the standards are. Even if the people are volunteers there is a need for quality for the good of the whole community. The editorial highlights tensions that exist about translations of the liturgical books. Hopefully more open and and honest discussion will lead to an effective resolution of them. Posted by J.R. Lilburne, 27 July 2002. |  | Other sites: Tom Elich - photo and contact information at Brisbane Liturgy Commission Cathtelecom report 24 July 2002 "Rome refuses to bless English liturgy texts" Cathtelecom 11 July 2002 "Liturgy debate heats up" on Father Elich's editorial Catholicleader.com.au 14 July 2002 edition "Liturgy debate becomes heated"