Sunday, May 08, 2005
Modern Liturgical Thought
The Ragemonkeys comment, perhaps responding in part to Justine's comment
------------
Anyway, in the recent BCL Newsletter, it is noted that at the March meeting of the BCL it was decided to request from the Vatican a number of adaptations to the Order of the Mass in the new Roman Missal. These are all adaptations which were approved for the 1985 Edition of the Sacramentary (which we still are forced to use since ICEL is still, after 3 years, working on an English translation of the 3rd Edition of the Roman Missal). These include the seven additional versions of Penitential Rite form C (for Fr. Tharp, I checked my Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia, and the only form C is, using the English, "You were sent to heal the contrite, Lord have mercy. You came to call sinners, Christ have mercy. You plead for us at the right hand of the Father, Lord have mercy."), four alternative intoductions to the Lord's Prayer, etc. None of these greatly upset me, but the reasoning was laughable. I qoute, "The Committe suggested that since the use of these options has shaped the liturgical formation of two generation of Catholics, their disappearance from the Mass could cause confusion and consternation as people try to adjust to new translations."
Now, maybe it is just me, but that seems like a load of something. First, let's set aside the whole "two generation" bit (since it seems like 20 years is only one generation). Are you telling me that most Catholics would even know that there was a difference? After all, too many priests just make up the parts which they are mostly talking about (Penitential Rite, Intro to the Lord's Prayer, Dismissal), so most people would not know what the "approved" variants are. Secondly, what about the hundreds of years of Gregorian Chant and Latin being an integral part of the liturgy of the Mass, forming truly generations of Catholics, and which the Second Vatican Council, and nearly every Pope since, has said must not only be preserved, but all things being equal must be given a place of pride and priviledge? Liturgist of the ilk of Bishop Trautman, did not show one ioda of concern for the "confusion and consternation" of the Catholic people when they ejected them from the Mass. As a result of their hasty ejection of the true liturgical traditions of the Roman Catholic Church Sunday Mass attendance has plummetted from over 75% prior to the liturgical changes of the late 1960s to less than 25% in the USA. It is only worse in Europe which seems to pride itself on being "post-Christian." Now, I am not saying that we need to return to the Tridentine Mass. There were accretions, and need for some renewal. I actually believe that the Novus Ordo, if done as the Second Vaitican Council prescribed, with an appropriate mix of Latin and the venacular, and truly SACRED music is a beautiful, deeply spiritual encounter with Christ. Just look at the beautiful liturgies for the funeral of Pope John Paul the Great, and the Installation of Pope Benedict XVI.
St. Pius V, pray for us.
------------
Anyway, in the recent BCL Newsletter, it is noted that at the March meeting of the BCL it was decided to request from the Vatican a number of adaptations to the Order of the Mass in the new Roman Missal. These are all adaptations which were approved for the 1985 Edition of the Sacramentary (which we still are forced to use since ICEL is still, after 3 years, working on an English translation of the 3rd Edition of the Roman Missal). These include the seven additional versions of Penitential Rite form C (for Fr. Tharp, I checked my Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia, and the only form C is, using the English, "You were sent to heal the contrite, Lord have mercy. You came to call sinners, Christ have mercy. You plead for us at the right hand of the Father, Lord have mercy."), four alternative intoductions to the Lord's Prayer, etc. None of these greatly upset me, but the reasoning was laughable. I qoute, "The Committe suggested that since the use of these options has shaped the liturgical formation of two generation of Catholics, their disappearance from the Mass could cause confusion and consternation as people try to adjust to new translations."
Now, maybe it is just me, but that seems like a load of something. First, let's set aside the whole "two generation" bit (since it seems like 20 years is only one generation). Are you telling me that most Catholics would even know that there was a difference? After all, too many priests just make up the parts which they are mostly talking about (Penitential Rite, Intro to the Lord's Prayer, Dismissal), so most people would not know what the "approved" variants are. Secondly, what about the hundreds of years of Gregorian Chant and Latin being an integral part of the liturgy of the Mass, forming truly generations of Catholics, and which the Second Vatican Council, and nearly every Pope since, has said must not only be preserved, but all things being equal must be given a place of pride and priviledge? Liturgist of the ilk of Bishop Trautman, did not show one ioda of concern for the "confusion and consternation" of the Catholic people when they ejected them from the Mass. As a result of their hasty ejection of the true liturgical traditions of the Roman Catholic Church Sunday Mass attendance has plummetted from over 75% prior to the liturgical changes of the late 1960s to less than 25% in the USA. It is only worse in Europe which seems to pride itself on being "post-Christian." Now, I am not saying that we need to return to the Tridentine Mass. There were accretions, and need for some renewal. I actually believe that the Novus Ordo, if done as the Second Vaitican Council prescribed, with an appropriate mix of Latin and the venacular, and truly SACRED music is a beautiful, deeply spiritual encounter with Christ. Just look at the beautiful liturgies for the funeral of Pope John Paul the Great, and the Installation of Pope Benedict XVI.
St. Pius V, pray for us.
