That seems to be the gist of today's Vortex, which is really a snippet of the Mic'd Up program from a few days ago. It probably is the case that there are some underhanded operatives within the Vatican communications apparatus who would like to spread confusion and will do so by sabotaging the English translations of the Holy Father's utterances. Be that as it may, two questions immediately pop into mind:
- How is it that the two previous pontiffs (Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II) didn't have nearly as much trouble getting their messages accurately translated into English? Oh, there was that condom fluff-up a few years ago, but that was such an obvious failed-hit-job that we never heard of such issues again.
- It's been a year now, and if the Holy Father isn't aware of the difficulty in getting his message translated into English, he's deliberately naive OR he welcomes the confusion. What other explanation is there for not taking immediate measures to correct the English-translation difficulties?
Some things the folks are saying in this video are so obvious that I'm surprised they are oblivious to their meaning. For instance, at 4:00, they remark how the term "civil union" has a different meaning in Europe than in the English-speaking world. Be that as it may - why, oh why, did the English translators choose that phrase? They must have known how it would be interpreted, right?
Then, right after that at 4:22, John Thavis remarks that no prior pope ever gave an interview to a journalist. Well, gee-willikers! Is it possible that the previous popes were onto something or perhaps just a tad more careful in making their messages plainly understood by all? That's why there was "careful vetting": to ensure that the teaching of the Church was accurately presented and not reduced to a bunch of mishmash.
I am embedding only the summary of the Mic'd Up. Here is a link to the entire thing; the "Francis Effect" is only one of several topics discussed. In this longer version, Voris makes a good suggestion, if only in a "tongue in cheek" manner. He suggests that some individual(s) in the English-translating office be fired. Good idea! Again, I look askance on the delay in remedying that sorry state of affairs in the Vatican.
I am glad somebody is watching the referee !!!!!!
ReplyDeleteA few things come to mind...first, let me assure you that I am not interested in Florida swampland, nor do I have my head buried in the sand. I am a fan of both Michael Voris and you, watching and reading both daily. I have not watched his mic'd up this week as yet, but I believe you've most likely summed up what was said.
ReplyDelete- I really think it's time to put away the arsenal. Why? We're all on the same side. Both of you have taken your hits, let it go. You've made your mind very clear on the subect. He's made his mind clear. Let it be, and go in peace to love and serve the Lord.
- Holding on to this will continue to foment your anger and a grudge. You are obviously a great fan of Michael's since you play his shows regularly here at your blog. If he has wronged you, you have made your side quite clear. Continuing your point is unnecessary.
- At this point it is beginning to appear that your "demands" have not been met and so you continue. Step back, see what our Lord sees...you have so much to share and give without continuing this. Let us forgive (even when it hasn't been asked for) and forget allowing those who are fighting the good fight beside us to differ since it (the difference) is not mortal sin.
I sincerely thank you for all you do, and I know will continue to do. May God bless you with an abundance of Divine Grace this day and always.
Reality...time to print off the grocery list.
In His service...together.
Mariann, thank you for your kind words. I WILL address error, no matter the source. I'm not going to pretend that it doesn't exist when it presents itself repeatedly. Frankly more wicked forces have prevailed because of well-meaning but wrong-thinking suggestions that we "let it go" when errors keep presenting themselves; that's actually part of the strategy. Certainly I'm not suggesting that would be deliberated on Voris' part, but the dynamic would exist nonetheless.
DeleteHave you addressed these same words to Mr. Voris? He was the one coming at us with "the arsenal"; we're merely rebuffing his jabs at us. As long as that continues, there will be a respectful yet direct response.
This whole incident, while the longest, is not the first time I've taken issue with his positions. The "demands" (and why use that pejorative language?) are simply that he respect those of us who will raise issue with the Holy Father's seeming gaffes.
I actually have to correct myself here a bit. In this post of mine, I didn't even take issue with Voris' previous mischaracterizations of me and other bloggers. I was simply taking issue with his opinion that all this mess is the sole responsibility of nameless translators in the Vatican. I'm truly baffled that my differing opinion can be construed as a "demand". Explanation, please?
DeleteSeems Voris has lots of friends who are hitting the blogs to comment whenever a traditionalist says something about him. Personally, I like MV. He has done good work. But he started the shooting war, not the other bloggers.
DeleteMV needs to understand that when you make a big noise, people begin to look your way. If you get the dogs to avoid you by pointing at another, it doesn't give you friends.
I've see lots of bloggers who have been very nice to him. Now, not so much.
I wonder if this is clear enough for you all:
ReplyDeleteMarried Lesbian couple" to have daughter baptized - and first the "two mothers" will be confirmed in the Cathedral - Next Saturday, April 5, Umma Azul will be baptized in the Cathedral [of Córdoba, Province of Córdoba, Argentina] and president Cristina Fernández [de Kirchner] could be the godmother.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/
It follows on two men (one a tv star - dressed like a woman) getting baptized while bergoglio was bishop in Buenos Aires
http://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A487-BsAs-Homo.htm
Now maybe Bergog's hand-picked successor is going to be slapped down for promoting homosexuals w/children in the Catholic Church -- but just like contraception and throwing off modest dress and head coverings was the bait that got all the women to accept the 'new' 'mass' -- so will letting their divorced and remarried children receive communion be the bait to get the women to accept homosexual "marriage".
Is it not odd? Here we are in the year of our Lord, 2014 (and 2013), and we find out that translation is simply impossible.
ReplyDeleteThat raises some issues, such as why was this not discovered before--or is it a new phenomena caused by…what?…sunspots?
If it is not a new phenomena, then I guess that our Bibles are useless. Church documents can only be read in the original Latin. No more reading of novels that were not originally composed in our native language...
Interesting comments! And these translation problems only became prominent during this past year. Interesting, that!
DeleteAs I have often said elsewhere, sometimes it's mis-translation, other times it's the words of the Pope himself (even in the original)…At what point do we hold the Holy Father responsible for the things he says (or doesn't)?
ReplyDelete