9th International Congress on the Liturgy - S Anselmo

[presbyter]

On Zenit today. Presumably full text will appear on the Vatican website soon.

Notes Fruits as Well as Errors in 50 Years of Reform

VATICAN CITY, MAY 6, 2011 (Zenit.org).- The liturgy lives from a constant relationship between tradition and progress, according to Benedict XVI.
The Pope made this observation today when he addressed participants in the 9th International Congress on the Liturgy sponsored by the Pontifical Liturgical Institute of Rome's St. Anselm Pontifical Athenaeum.
The congress, titled "The Pontifical Institute: Between Memory and Prophecy," was celebrating the 50th anniversary of the institute's foundation by Pope John XXIII.
The Holy Father drew from this title to consider "memory" and "prophecy."
"In regard to memory, we must note the abundant fruits elicited by the Holy Spirit in half a century of history, and for this we must thank the Giver of all good, despite the misunderstandings and errors in the concrete realization of the reform," he said.
"With the term 'prophecy,'" the Pontiff continued, "our gaze opens to new horizons."
He said that the "liturgy of the Church goes beyond the 'conciliar reform.'" This reform, Benedict XVI clarified, "was not primarily to change the rites and gestures, but rather to renew mentalities and to put at the center of Christian life and ministry the celebration of the paschal mystery of Christ. Unfortunately, perhaps, also for us pastors and experts, the liturgy was taken more as an object to be reformed rather than a subject capable of renewing Christian life."
The liturgy lives from a "correct and constant relationship between healthy 'traditio' and legitimate 'progressio,'" he added.
"Not infrequently tradition and progress are clumsily opposed," the Pope stated. "In reality, the two concepts are integrated: tradition is a living reality, which because of this includes in itself the principle of development, of progress."

[JW]

OK, while not disagreeing with anything the Pontiff says here, the reform of liturgical rites and gestures was enthusiastically promulgated by the majority of the bishops at the time and also by Paul VI when instructing that the 'norm' should be the new order, thus sidelining the Tridentine Rite. This gives the new rites and gestures considerable authority which must be taken into account if we are considering revising them.

[Southern Comfort]

"Misunderstandings and errors", eh? That kind of anonymous sniping indicates shaky ground, methinks.

Our present pope is a theologian, but no liturgist or historian, despite his certain interest in these areas.

"This reform, Benedict XVI clarified, "was not primarily to change the rites and gestures, but rather to renew mentalities and to put at the center of Christian life and ministry the celebration of the paschal mystery of Christ. Unfortunately, perhaps, also for us pastors and experts, the liturgy was taken more as an object to be reformed rather than a subject capable of renewing Christian life."

Can he really not know of the movement for liturgical reform, begun in 1910, which most certainly wanted to change rites and gestures and reform the liturgy itself as well as the mentality of those celebrating, in addition to re-emphasising the Paschal Mystery?

These words appear disingenuous. No amount of papal authority can change history. He must know that his attempt to pretend otherwise in Summorum Pontificum backfired spectacularly.

[alan29]

My understanding of Vat 2 was that the renewal of the liturgy was precisely meant to lead to a deeper spiritual life. They were designed to open the scriptures, to have them commented on, to clarify peoples roles and to encourage study and more active participation. And that's just off the top of my head.

[presbyter]

Alan - nice "off the top of the head" thoughts but before these, let's just remind ourselves of the agenda - the Introduction to the Constitution itself.

1. This sacred Council has several aims in view: it desires to impart an ever increasing vigor to the Christian life of the faithful; to adapt more suitably to the needs of our own times those institutions which are subject to change; to foster whatever can promote union among all who believe in Christ; to strengthen whatever can help to call the whole of mankind into the household of the Church. The Council therefore sees particularly cogent reasons for undertaking the reform and promotion of the liturgy.

2. For the liturgy, "through which the work of our redemption is accomplished," [1] most of all in the divine sacrifice of the Eucharist, is the outstanding means whereby the faithful may express in their lives, and manifest to others, the mystery of Christ and the real nature of the true Church. It is of the essence of the Church that she be both human and divine, visible and yet invisibly equipped, eager to act and yet intent on contemplation, present in this world and yet not at home in it; and she is all these things in such wise that in her the human is directed and subordinated to the divine, the visible likewise to the invisible, action to contemplation, and this present world to that city yet to come, which we seek [2]. While the liturgy daily builds up those who are within into a holy temple of the Lord, into a dwelling place for God in the Spirit [3], to the mature measure of the fullness of Christ [4], at the same time it marvelously strengthens their power to preach Christ, and thus shows forth the Church to those who are outside as a sign lifted up among the nations [5] under which the scattered children of God may be gathered together [6], until there is one sheepfold and one shepherd [7].

3. Wherefore the sacred Council judges that the following principles concerning the promotion and reform of the liturgy should be called to mind, and that practical norms should be established.

Among these principles and norms there are some which can and should be applied both to the Roman rite and also to all the other rites. The practical norms which follow, however, should be taken as applying only to the Roman rite, except for those which, in the very nature of things, affect other rites as well.

4. Lastly, in faithful obedience to tradition, the sacred Council declares that holy Mother Church holds all lawfully acknowledged rites to be of equal right and dignity; that she wishes to preserve them in the future and to foster them in every way. The Council also desires that, where necessary, the rites be revised carefully in the light of sound tradition, and that they be given new vigor to meet the circumstances and needs of modern times.

[alan29]

Thanks for the reminder. I had forgotten how beautiful some of those documents are. Paragraph 2 is an absolute gem.

[presbyter]

The text of the Papal address is available now in Italian

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2011/may/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20110506_sant-anselmo_it.html

[presbyter]

And there's more on Zenit today

http://www.zenit.org/article-32593?l=english

[presbyter]

The prelate continued, "The post-conciliar liturgical reform is considered in large circles of the Catholic Church as a rupture with tradition and as a new creation,"

How large? I know and know of plenty of liturgical scholars who would not agree with that at all. How about some concrete statistics, rather than a sweeping statement.

[presbyter]

That is why the Pope "wished to contribute to the resolution of this dispute and to reconciliation within the Church: the Motu Proprio promotes, so to speak, intra-Catholic ecumenism," he noted.
However, the prelate added, this presupposes that the old liturgy "is also understood as an 'ecumenical bridge.'"

Intra-Catholic ecumenism? I don't see much desire for that among members of the LMS who I have met. Some of the nastiest people I've ever come across in my life.

[NorthernTenor]

For what it's worth, presbyter, my impression as a quasi outsider (convert of many years who has never attended a celebration of the older form, yet who is uncomfortable with the hermeneutic of rupture) , is that there are times when I feel like calling down a pox on both houses; but then I think how difficult it can be for any of us to think well of the agents of radical change when it threatens long-cherished beliefs, whatever direction the wind blows.

[presbyter]

I feel like calling down a pox on both houses

Me too. (But are there really two houses? I have no idea why Rome is reacting like this and giving the impression the Church is almost at war with herself. For those who want it, there's more than adequate provision of the EF in my diocese.)

Yet this is a bit much though NT. The parish I looked after in the early 1990s hosted a 1962 EF celebration after the OF celebrations had finished on a Sunday morning. One weekend, there had been a mix-up on the rota of the three priests who celebrated this Mass in turn. No priest arrived ..... great knocking on presbytery door as I was about to start my lunch ....... help! No Priest! Please celebrate Mass for us. So I went into church - explained that I would happily celebrate Mass for the faithful in Latin but that it would be the Missal of Paul VI because I do not know how to celebrate the 1962 Missal. Four people walked out...... and I still wonder how they managed to fulfill their obligation that day.

A colleague, some twenty-odd years ago, was verbally and physically assaulted by a mad woman who tried to prevent him entering "her" church because he would have been the first priest ordained after the Council to celebrate Mass there. For her, his ordination was not valid.

I have no problem with those who want to celebrate the EF. If a group wanted to use my church, that's fine. Find a priest and get on with it.

I have no problem if a group would like to celebrate the OF in Latin (and why, in these documents, does Rome not promote that way of celebration?) I myself would do that for them, if they gave me a month or several to brush up my Latin..... but it's unlikely as this type of celebration is solemnly celebrated with plainsong and polyphony some three and a half miles from me every Sunday.

I myself prefer to celebrate in English...... but not with "trivial" music.

[keitha]

Cardinal Koch seems to have said that

"Benedict XVI knows well that in the long term we cannot remain with a coexistence between the ordinary and extraordinary forms in the Roman rite, but that the Church will again need in the future a common rite."

What do we think of that?

[presbyter]

Summorum Pontificum 2007

Art. 5. § 1 In parishes, where there is a stable group of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly accept their requests to celebrate the Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962, and ensure that the welfare of these faithful harmonises with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the guidance of the bishop in accordance with canon 392, avoiding discord and favouring the unity of the whole Church.

Instruction of ECCLESIA DEI April 2011

15. A coetus fidelium ("group of the faithful") can be said to be stabiliter existens ("existing in a stable manner"), according to the sense of art. 5 § 1 of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, when it is constituted by some people of an individual parish who, even after the publication of the Motu Proprio, come together by reason of their veneration for the Liturgy in the Usus Antiquior, and who ask that it might be celebrated in the parish church or in an oratory or chapel; such a coetus ("group") can also be composed of persons coming from different parishes or dioceses, who gather together in a specific parish church or in an oratory or chapel for this purpose.

I think the penny must have dropped in Rome that most individual parishes are very unlikely to produce that stable group of faithful, hence, to me, the rather desperate sounding - "such a coetus ("group") can also be composed of persons coming from different parishes or dioceses" Different dioceses even? Well I never.

[presbyter]

Instruction of ECCLESIA DEI April 2011

19. The faithful who ask for the celebration of the forma extraordinaria must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria ...........

Well, if I might say so, there's a sentence that some members of a certain society really should take to heart. I'm sure that as they profess profound allegiance to the Holy See in all matters - and not just the ones that suit their own personal tastes - they will do so.