4. The Second Vatican Ecumenical Council in its deliberations and decrees assigned a singular importance to the liturgical rites, the ecclesiastical traditions, and the discipline of Christian life proper to those particular Churches, especially of the East, which are distinguished by their venerable antiquity, manifesting in various ways the tradition received through the Fathers from the Apostles.[Orientalium Ecclesiarum 1] The Council asked that the traditions of each of these particular Churches be preserved whole and intact. For this reason, even while calling for the revision of the various Rites in accordance with sound tradition, the Council set forth the principle that only those changes were to be introduced which would foster their specific organic development.[Sacrosanctum Concilium 4; Orientalium Ecclesiarum 2, 6] Clearly, the same vigilance is required for the safeguarding and the authentic development of the liturgical rites, the ecclesiastical traditions, and the discipline of the Latin Church, and in particular, of the Roman Rite. The same care must be brought also to the translation of the liturgical texts into vernacular languages. This is especially true as regards the Roman Missal, which will thus continue to be maintained as an outstanding sign and instrument of the integrity and unity of the Roman Rite.[SC 38; Apost. Const. Missale Romanum : AAS 61 (1969) 217-222; GIRM 399]
Eastern Rites date back to the time of the apostles, and so their antiquity is respected. The principle of organic development applies to these Eastern Rites, and would seem to be governed by the principles of sound development.
Here in LA4, we read first the principle that the Roman Rite depends in part on translation of its texts to maintain the qualities of integrity and unity. Particular Eastern Rites are less likely to be rendered in multiple languages, so the concern here is apt.
Any thoughts on this? Any Eastern Catholics or Orthodox care to comment on this?