Is there need of a new liturgical reform?Of related interest is Rorate Caeli's post from the previous day, "For the Record - Ranjith: regarding "timing and nature of the Motu Proprio, nothing yet is known" (February 21, 2007). In an "Inside the Vatican" interview, the Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship, Archbishop Albert Ranjith, acknowledged the rising call for a restoration of the old Mass, suggesting that the most pressing question is not so much the 'what' as the 'how' of a pastoral attitude in implementation. Acknowledging the liturgical problems of experimentation and novelty and insipidity, he stated:
Abbot: I believe that the Dogmatic Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium was a response to a widely held conviction that the liturgy needed a reform. The Council Fathers were seeking to bring out the community aspects of the mass, as well as make it more effective in teaching the truths of the Catholic Faith. Unfortunately, the theological necessity for a continuity in the underlying doctrine and structure of the celebration of the Mass in its preconciliar and post conciliar forms had undergone a rupture or break with Tradition. That is what we are dealing with today. The Second Vatican Council clearly called for some modest reforms in the liturgy, but it intended them to be organic and clearly in continuity with the past. The Old Rite becomes a living treasure of the Church and also should provide a standard of worship, of mystery, and of catechesis toward which the celebrations of the Novus Ordo must move. In other words, the Tridentine Mass is the missing link. And unless it be re-discovered in all its faithful truth and beauty, the Novus Ordo will not respond to the organic growth and change that has characterized the liturgy from its beginning. This is what should be prompting many of us to the founding of a new liturgical movement which will be able to give back to the liturgy its sacramental and supernatural character, and awaken in us a faithful understanding of the Catholic Liturgy.
Thus, we need to recover a true sense of the sacred and mystical in worship.A further interesting study would lie in the incongruities between the subsequent remarks offered by Archbishop Ranjith about Communion in the hand and official actions taken in regard to the practice in response to the petition by the bishops of Poland (see our post, "'Development of Discipline' in the Congregation for Divine Worship?" Musings, Feb. 21, 2007).
And if the faithful feel that the Tridentine Mass offers them that sense of the sacred and mystical more than anything else, then we should have the courage to accept their request.
With regard to the timing and nature of the motu proprio, nothing yet is known. It is the Holy Father who will decide.
And when he does, we should in all obedience accept what he indicates to us and with a genuine love for the Church strive to help him. Any counter attitude would only harm the spiritual mission of the Church and thwart the Lord’s own will.
A. Here (in the Rorate Caeli post) Archbishop Ranjith is quoted as stating:
"Communion in the hand had not been something that was first properly studied and reflected upon before its acceptance by the Holy See. It had been haphazardly introduced in some countries of Northern Europe and later become accepted practice, eventually spreading into many other places. Now that is a situation that should have been avoided. The Second Vatican Council never advocated such an approach to liturgical reform."B. But on April 21, 2006, came the Vatican's gift to Poland:
... authorization for Communion in the hand -- something that John Paul II had never allowed in his homeland -- an authorization undersigned by Archbishop Ranjith along with Francis Cardinal Arinze, the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship.Small potatoes to some, perhaps; but this suggests a confusing lack of consistency with traditional liturgical law, which many will find demoralizing. It should also be recalled what the Angelic Doctor said about changing traditional laws (ST, I-II, Q 97, 2): human laws should never be changed unless the good to be gained by the change proportionately outweighs the inevitable harm done by any change by way of diminishing the binding power of the law. Perhaps the Congregation for Divine Worship could inform us pew peasants what the benefits gained by the change might be.
1 comment:
HI! me and my group from PAREF woodrose made a video regarding the Sanctosanctum Concilium and it would really mean a lot to us if you watch it. :) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8J6QLjMPsIs&feature=plcp
Post a Comment