Papal Visit

[johnquinn39]

[quote][the use of a final hymn is good practice /quote


- No, it isn't.

[johnquinn39]

[The Papal Visit is an excellent opportunity to learn from current best practice

- No, it isn't.

[johnquinn39]

[ It's good to see that Haydn (et al) are being rehabilitated -

- No, it isn't.

[NorthernTenor]

?

[JW]

Pope Benedict is on record as encouraging good liturgy as a way to attract people into our churches and has been instrumental in introducing the Extra Ordinary Form (which Paul VI had forbidden for Parish Masses). He has appointed a new MC (who has 'vetted' the Papal Visit liturgies). As our pastor coming to visit his flock in England, I hope and expect him to ensure that he presides at Liturgies which give us examples of what he considers to be best practice. If he is not an example to us, who is? Where are we going as a church?

Perhaps this discussion just demonstrates the impossiblity of the Church agreeing on what is best practice....

My real prayer for the visit is that the Pope will be teaching us by example (not just in liturgical matters) and help us in England to strengthen our Catholic belief and identity in these difficult times.

[Southern Comfort]

JW,

BXVI's ideas of good liturgy are, alas, at variance with 99.9% of the Church's practice. There is absolutely no reason to give him additional credence over any other opinion. The man is in his dotage now and cannot (understandably) adapt to other modes of liturgical expression. His choice as current MC panders to this, rather than exposing him to how the world celebrates.

In other words, I am sorry, but he actually does not know what best practice is, and is not likely to (and the fact that he is pope does not alter this: he may be a theologian, but he sure as heck isn't a liturgist). His views as Pontiff are not the guiding principles for how local Churches celebrate, and should celebrate. Nor should they be. Nor are the views of his advisors likely to be anywhere near the experience of liturgical norms in this country. They simply haven't got a clue. Their attitude falls between the unthinking adoption of the past and the aggrandizement of the papal figure. Neither of those will fly today.

(And, I should add, if you want to see liturgical abuses — i.e. bad practice — look on BXVI's doorstep. Go to St Mary Major where the most egregious abuses routinely occur, or St John Lateran, or plenty of other Roman churches.)

The examples of best practice could even be the SSG. Did you come to this year's Summer School? Liturgy as prayer, not liturgy as pontifical performance? Liturgy involving true ministry, rather than people poncing around doing wonderful jobs? Liturgy leading people to God, rather than liturgy as the "perfunctory discharge of an obligation" (to quote Chris Walsh in a well-known piece).

Sorry for the acerbity, but I'm rather fed up with people assuming that papal liturgies will be the be-all-and-end-all of everything. If we started from the premise that papal liturgies would by definition be ghastly, then we could be pleasantly suprised when they turn out to be halfway good.

[nazard]

... he sure as heck isn't a liturgist...Their attitude falls between the unthinking adoption of the past and the aggrandizement of the papal figure...

These are very strong statements. Do you have any evidence for them?

How do you become a liturgist? How do you recognise one? What do you regard as the definitive textbooks on liturgy? Are the norms of liturgy in this country codified? If so, where? Does anyone follow them?

I am reminded of Rabbi Blue's quip, "You go and pray to God in your way and I'll go and pray to Him in His."

[alan29]

I'm interested in the idea that what happens at a Papal Mass with months of preparation/practice and a ministerial cast of thousands can be seen as a model of good practice at St Burgers in the Marsh on any given Sunday at 9.00 am. How does that work exactly?

[Southern Comfort]

How do you become a liturgist? How do you recognise one?

By years of study and experience of the liturgy. BXVI has no liturgical qualifications. He only has his personal opinion, which may not be identical to the opinion of the liturgists of the Church, who at least have years of study and an appreciation of context behind them.

Any sensible bishop/archbishop/cardinal/pope, in the absence of any formal studies or experience in a particular discipline, appoints qualified people to advise him in that discpline. It is notable that the present papal MC has no liturgical qualifications whatsoever. Nor has the Prefect of the CDWDS, but that is of course fairly usual these days.

Are the norms of liturgy in this country codified? If so, where? Does anyone follow them?

Yes. At least for the Mass, they are codified in GIRM 2005 (E&W), taken in tandem with the Bishops of England and Wales' document Celebrating the Mass and ancillary documents.

[nazard]

...
Yes. At least for the Mass, they are codified in GIRM 2005 (E&W), taken in tandem with the Bishops of England and Wales' document Celebrating the Mass and ancillary documents.

Good, I'm relieved to find you and I in agreement. Now its time for compline...

[NorthernTenor]

[BXVI has no liturgical qualifications. He only has his personal opinion.

Fascinating, SC. What are these all-important liturgical qualifications? An NVQ in Liturgical Studies validated by the Liturgy Office of the Diocese of Portsmouth, perhaps? Or maybe a Masters in post-Conciliar liturgical praxis from the University of Neasden? It makes me wonder how all those Holy Fathers got by ...

Incidentally, what do you know of this Holy Father's studies and writings (as opposed to his lack of liturgical qualifications)?

[docmattc]

I am constantly amazed at how papal views/speeches/examples can be taken as paradigms by those who agree with them, and dismissed as ill advised/ill informed/merely personal opinion of an old man etc by those who do not.

Its more bizarre when I see a papal pronouncement (with which person x agrees) held up as infallible, but another pronouncement, which might carry the same weight, dismisse out of hand because person x disagrees with the pope on that matter.

A somewhat more dispassionate and reasoned middle ground would be more helpful in any debate.

BXVI's ideas of good liturgy are, alas, at variance with 99.9% of the Church's practice.

Just because almost everybody is doing it, it doesn't necessarily make it right.

[alan29]

This is getting to be rather like those fundamentalists who trade blows using biblical verses.
I am amazed that people involved in liturgical preparation should pour scorn on the academic study of liturgy. If you chose to turn your back on the theology of liturgy then the community that you serve is missing out on a vital element of its formation. All you are left with is personal likes and dislikes, and yours are no more relevant than the next man, no matter how exalted a position he or you may hold.
Not all ignorance is bliss.

[NorthernTenor]

This is getting to be rather like those fundamentalists who trade blows using biblical verses.
I am amazed that people involved in liturgical preparation should pour scorn on the academic study of liturgy. If you chose to turn your back on the theology of liturgy then the community that you serve is missing out on a vital element of its formation. All you are left with is personal likes and dislikes, and yours are no more relevant than the next man, no matter how exalted a position he or you may hold.
Not all ignorance is bliss.

If you're referring to my comment, Alan, I think that qualifies as an Aunt Sally. Have a look again at what I actually wrote. I have the highest regard for the breadth, depth and humanity of the Holy Father's learning, which includes but is not limited to the liturgy. He's one of the great synthesists of our age, and the intithesis of the fundamentalist.

[alan29]

No doubt he has ...... but that doesn't prevent each one of us from improving our own understanding in a way that goes beyond "The Holy father says ......" Neither does it make his liturgical opinions a matter of infallible dictat.