LETTERS


Training of army chaplains The Catholic chaplain criticised in the final report of the Baha Mousa inquiry (News from Britain and Ireland, 17 September) was deployed to Iraq just three months after he had joined the army. During that time he was expected to undergo basic army training, as well as providing educational sessions to the troops on ethical aspects of soldiering. He was clearly a novice himself in all aspects of his role and, as his evidence shows, frequently at a loose end and lacking the means to under- stand what was going on around him in the chaos and heat of that Iraq summer. None of this, it cannot be overstressed, was his fault. But it is incredible that such a raw recruit should be pitched into one of the most dangerous and controversial episodes ever faced by the British army. How are chaplains recruited, trained and supported? Paul McGowan Coventry


I was appalled to read the comments of Mgr Stephen Alker, former principal Catholic chaplain. The job of a Catholic chaplain may well be “extremely difficult and demanding”, but surely a Catholic priest does not leave aside his humanity and concern for people when he dons military uniform? What, I wonder, are military chaplains actually for? Bernard Tucker Old Alresford, Hampshire


Language of the new Missal Fr Allen Morris (Letters, 17 September), in con- nection with the discarded 1998 Missal translation, rightly reminds us that there is a difference between true episcopal consen- sus and majority canonical vote. He also implies, correctly, that one of the functions of Roman primacy is to promote true consen- sus. However, it is not clear that these ideas can help address the decidedly unconsensual situation in which we now find ourselves. Fr Morris is effectively challenging the nar- rative current among the new translation’s critics. This account is bleak indeed. According to the chair of the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (Icel) in the late 1990s, Bishop Maurice Taylor, all but one Anglophone episcopal conference voted over- whelmingly for the 1998 text, and even the US episcopate voted by a two-thirds major- ity in its favour. Subsequently Liturgiam Authenticamappeared, written by a small cir- cle of officials in the Congregation for Divine Worship (CDW), without even the episcopal members of that congregation being consulted. It was made clear to bishops’ conferences that if they did not approve the work of the recon- stituted Icel, Rome would insist on its imposition anyway. And then, after the con- ferences duly complied, even this work, done


18 | THE TABLET | 24 September 2011


The Editor of The Tablet 1 King Street Cloisters, Clifton Walk, London W6 0GY


Fax 020 8748 1550 Email thetablet@thetablet.co.uk All correspondence, including email, must give a full postal address and contact telephone number. The Editor reserves the right to shorten letters.


The mother of Baha Mousa (right in the picture), an Iraqi hotel receptionist who was beaten to death while in British army custody. A Catholic army chaplain is accused of failing to report evidence of abuse.


Photo: Reuters


faithfully according to the conventions laid down, was hacked about, secretly, incompe- tently and arbitrarily, by officials in the CDW before the final text appeared. Now, this account is only what is generally


believed. If it is wrong, then someone in author- ity needs to set it right, because such a sad story seriously undermines any confidence that the disruption occasioned by a new text is for the better. But if the received story is correct, then there is no meaningful sense in which we are dealing with an episcopal consensus about the new translation. It seems more promising to read the torrid history in terms of Rome, out of concern for Catholic unity, requiring local churches to change their translation policies. Precisely as Catholic Christians, we need to be sensitive to needs beyond our local expe- rience. Central authority may properly call us to behave in ways we would not choose of our own accord. There is a place for obedience to Rome’s authority and primacy. I do not think this argument, in this con-


text, an attractive or cogent one, but I can recognise its basic honesty, its coherence with Catholic tradition, and the sincerity of peo- ple like Cardinal Napier (Letters, 23 July) who believe in some version of it. Such a way of thinking might, if we work at things, help loyal Catholics attached to post-conciliar norms negotiate a way through what initially seems an impossible trilemma: between withdrawal from the Eucharist, public disobedience, and collusion with authority’s abuse. If we are to work through the present litur-


gical tensions well, we need a catechesis couched not in ambiguous subtleties but in plain speaking. If even its advocates are squeamish about saying why the new trans- lation is being visited upon us, something is seriously amiss. Philip Endean SJ Boston, Massachusetts


So – we have an interlinear translation of the Latin liturgy. Now the burning question I hear


asked from group to group and from parish to parish is: “How soon can we expect the next English version of the liturgy?” (Dr) Jacqueline Field-Bibb London N21


I am disappointed that the phrase in the Nicene Creed “propter nos homines” which was sen- sibly translated as “for us” a generation ago is now given as “for us men”. In contemporary English, the word men means male persons exclusively just as, for example, the word wife means a married woman exclusively and not a woman generally or the mistress of a house. If, for some reason, it is necessary to put a noun in apposition to “us” it should be something like “guys” or “folks” or “people”. The trans- lation of the current Irish-language version of the phrase is “on our behalf, the human race”. This may sound stilted in English but it is ele- gant in Irish, and accurate. Denis Fahey Dublin, Ireland


As a child in the 1940s I was prepared to accept the use of “men” to mean all humankind, but not now. This is the twenty-first century! Words matter – they convey meaning. Ursula Coogan Birkenhead, Wirral


On a recent holiday in Italy I noted that in the Eucharistic Prayer the priest declares that Christ poured out his blood “for all” (“per tutti”) in contrast to “for many” in the new English Missal. Why does the Vatican permit Italians to use good theology while forcing English- speaking Catholics to use flawed theology? Frank Capocci Southampton


Well, thanks for Michael G. Ryan’s two cheers (one-and-a-half?) for the new translation (“Time to say ‘yes’”, 3 September). For all the caterwauling I read in The Tablet, you would think they were changing every last word, turn- ing the altars around, and moving the tabernacles. Oh, wait, we did that, didn’t we? At least some of us are old enough to remem- ber. A lot of us in the pews didn’t like it at the time, but we went along. And we survived. Perhaps we could trust in the Holy Spirit more and give the bishops a break? Passive-aggres- sive is so unattractive. Jerry Swiacki Upper Chichester, Pennsylvania, USA


Don’t eat more fish I have mixed feelings about being told not to eat meat on Fridays again. Such directives, coming in the form of an order, somehow lose


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36