Posted on 04/13/2005 9:30:29 PM PDT by Cato1
“I was dismayed by the prohibition of the old missal, since nothing of the sort had ever happened in the entire history of the liturgy.” Extract from Cardinal Ratzinger's book Milestones: Published by Ignatius Press.
The second great event at the beginning of my years in Regensburg was the publication of the Missal of Paul VI, which was accompanied by the almost total prohibition, after a transitional phase of only half a year, of using the missal we had had until then.
I welcomed the fact that now we had a binding liturgical text after a period of experimentation that had often deformed the liturgy. But I was dismayed by the prohibition of the old missal, since nothing of the sort had ever happened in the entire history of the liturgy. The impression was even given that what was happening was quite normal.
The previous missal had been created by Pius V in 1570 in connection with the Council of Trent; and so it was quite normal that, after four hundred years and a new council, a new pope would present us with a new missal. But the historical truth of the matter is different. Pius V had simply ordered a reworking of the Missale Romanum then being used, which is the normal thing as history develops over the course of centuries.
Many of his successors had likewise reworked this missal again, but without ever setting one missal against another. It was a continual process of growth and purification in which continuity was never destroyed. There is no such thing as a "Missal of Pius V", created by Pius V himself. There is only the reworking done by Pius V as one phase in a long history of growth. The new feature that came to the fore after the Council of Trent was of a different nature. The irruption of the Reformation had above all taken the concrete form of liturgical "reforms". It was not just a matter of there being a Catholic Church and a Protestant Church alongside one another. The split in the Church occurred almost imperceptibly and found its most visible and historically most decisive manifestation in the changes in the liturgy. These changes, in turn, took very different forms at the local level, so that here, too, one frequently could not ascertain the boundary between what was still Catholic and what was no longer Catholic.
Consequences could only be tragic.
In this confusing situation, which had become possible by the failure to produce unified liturgical legislation and by the existing liturgical pluralism inherited from the Middle Ages, the pope decided that now the Missale Romanum - the missal of the city of Rome - was to be introduced as reliably Catholic in every place that could not demonstrate its liturgy to be at least two hundred years old. Wherever the existing liturgy was that old, it could be preserved because its Catholic character would then be assured. In this case we cannot speak of the prohibition of a previous missal that had formerly been approved as valid. The prohibition of the missal that was now decreed, a missal that had known continuous growth over the centuries, starting with the sacramentaries of the ancient Church, introduced a breach into the history of the liturgy whose consequences could only be tragic. It was reasonable and right of the Council to order a revision of the missal such as had often taken place before and which this time had to be more thorough than before, above all because of the introduction of the vernacular.
But more than this now happened: the old building was demolished, and another was built, to be sure largely using materials from the previous one and even using the old building plans. There is no doubt that this new missal in many respects brought with it a real improvement and enrichment; but setting it as a new construction over against what had grown historically, forbidding the results of this historical growth, thereby makes the liturgy appear to be no longer a living development but the product of erudite work and juridical authority; this has caused us enormous harm. For then the impression had to emerge that liturgy is something "made", not something given in advance but something lying within our own power of decision. From this it also follows that we are not to recognise the scholars and the central authority alone as decision makers, but that in the end each and every "community" must provide itself with its own liturgy. When liturgy is self-made, however, then it can no longer give us what its proper gift should be: the encounter with the mystery that is not our own product but rather our origin and the source of our life.
The disintegration of the liturgy.
A renewal of liturgical awareness, a liturgical reconciliation that again recognises the unity of the history of the liturgy and that understands Vatican II, not as a breach, but as a stage of development: these things are urgently needed for the life of the Church. I am convinced that the crisis in the Church that we are experiencing today is to a large extent due to the disintegration of the liturgy, which at times has even come to be conceived of etsi Deus non daretur: in that it is a matter of indifference whether or not God exists and whether or not He speaks to us and hears us. But when the community of faith, the world-wide unity of the Church and her history, and the mystery of the living Christ are no longer visible in the liturgy, where else, then, is the Church to become visible in her spiritual essence? Then the community is celebrating only itself, an activity that is utterly fruitless. And, because the ecclesial community cannot have its origin from itself but emerges as a unity only from the Lord, through faith, such circumstances will inexorably result in a disintegration into sectarian parties of all kinds - partisan opposition within a Church tearing herself apart. This is why we need a new Liturgical Movement, which will call to life the real heritage of the Second Vatican Council.
Get your head into some current statistics.
Lincoln, NE, has PLENTY of vocations, as does Rockford, IL., and Arlington, VA.
Your claim that the 'NO does not foster vocations' is ridiculous.
In all honesty, I can't tell whether or not you are being sarcastic.
When Arlington had an orthodox Bishop, Arlington had many vocations. Now Arlington has a squishy Bishop. Arlington has few vocations.
Funny thing, that...
Mount St. Mary's Seminary (Emmittsburg, MD) has a reputation for orthodoxy. It's full.
St. Mary's Seminary (Baltimore, MD) has a reputation as a pink palace. It's almost empty.
You figure it out.
As opposed to the 12-minute daily Novus Ordo where the poor altar boys/girls really don't have anything to do at all.
Please...
I am a Ratzinger fan, but this kind of "straw man" stuff about how terrible things were "in the past" is just ludicrous in light of our present liturgical debacle.
Agreed, and if orthodoxy is being presented to theses young men, fostering a modest increase in vocations; it is not because of the NO, but in spite of it.
Me, too. I do take out an old Missal and read through them (and some other parts) occasionally.
Well, it's good for my Latin. And since I don't know what happened to my own old Missal, I depend on one I found in a second-hand book store -- with the facing translation in French. So sometimes it's good for my French, too.
Ping.
And I am convinced he is right. Lex orandi, lex credendi.
Restoring the Tridentine Mass is only the first step, but it is the necessary first step.
Cardinal George is not trustworthy. He believes that the Orthodox Churches (the same ones that believe birth control is OK) are legitimate paths to salvation.
The Novus Ordo that I encounter here is a grotesque pseudo-Protestant pastiche that deserves immediate shredding. Now what is done at the EWTN Chapel is just fine for a Daily Mass, but the Holy and Undivided Trinity deserve better from us on Sunday.
I am not interested in a general restoration of the 'Tridentine Mass' with a suppression of the Novus Ordo because of all of the recriminations and politics that are attached thereto. But I would be interested in the Sarum Use of the Roman Rite re-authorised for "the Latin Church" in place of the mess most of us endure...
Of course, my views in this post are personal and reflect the dreadful, horrible, state of the 'Roman Catholic Church in Australia...
Do Orthodox churches condone birth control, and if so, under what restrictions?
Asking for information only, without prejudice.
God bless you.
You know, a day may come when Greek is the only language we can all speak, again. This modern thing does not only corrupt what is said, it also mutes. We translated the Bible in all tongues, but the Word is less audible each time.
Of course, the Filioque is still what is, but we may end up with no one saying it.
"It's a Catholicized Protestant service. It belongs on the ash heap."
I agree, of course. But I was attempting to understand why in some quarters the Novus Ordo style of religion is popular and preferred. People say to me it is friendly, contemporary, relaxing which suggests it fits in with comfortable lifestyles where social harmony is given some religious dimension and and provides some approval or understanding of the lives they lead. The Christian religion is thus being rebranded as a therapeutic device, stripped of its divine historical mission and released from any strong guiding role.
"The Christian religion is thus being rebranded as a therapeutic device, stripped of its divine historical mission and released from any strong guiding role."
As a matter of fact, the Eastern Fathers regularly refered to The Church as a hospital for the soul. I doubt they were thinking of the NO, however. I suppose the difference is between the therapy one gets at a hospital and that which one finds at the country club.
Things weren't "terrible." The discussion you are referring to was about genuine liturgical reform to clear up things that were not gross violations, but were simply the product of accumulated sloppiness or ignorance over the years.
The whole point was that there was a genuine reform that started in the early part of the 20th century and led to the revival of Gregorian, the revival of certain rites, and a more reverent attitude towards the Mass - and that all of this was destroyed by the psuedo-reform carried out by VatII, which introduced the NO. (Incidentally, I have found that NO Masses are quite lengthy. Dull, irreverent, and full of borderline heresy, but lengthy.)
"I am so disgusted by the Novus Ordo I encounter in Western Australia that I am of the opinion that the Roman Rite/Western Catholic Church, in penance, sorrow, and contrition, should throw out the Novus Ordo and take of up the Divine Liturgy of St. James of Jerusalem in reparation for the last thirty/forty years of devastation and desecration."
Interesting choice of Liturgies. It is probably the Liturgy St. Cyril refers to in his catechatical sermons in the 4th century but the earliest text extant, I believe, is from the 10th century and by then had been quite Byzantinized. It is a beautiful Liturgy, though. Why not that of St. Basil or St. John Chrysostomos? The Sarum Liturgy is also a good choice for the West as are some of the Celtic Liturgies of Ireland. No matter what happens, I would hope that the Roman Church reinstitutes the other services and devotions of The Church which have fallen by the wayside, as others here have suggested. These ancient services, along with the Liturgy, were designed to, in the course of a Church year, teach all the Truths of the Church and bring the Faithful into a closer communion with our God and each other. They have been preserved in Orthodoxy and are looked forward to throughout the year by the Laos tou Theou. A number spring to mind, The procession of the Icons on the Sunday of Orthodoxy, which reminds us of the importance of maintaining the "orthodoxy" of our belief, the Akathist Hymn to the Most Holy Theotokos which teaches us about the miracle of the Incarnation by which God became man so that man can become like God, the procession with the epitaphios and kovouklion on Good Friday where we participate in the entombment of Christ, descending into Hell with Him to rise into the Light of Pascha and of course the Resurrection Service before the Divine Liturgy at midnight on Great and Holy Pascha. But even something as simple as reading the Apolytikia, Kontakia and Synaxaria of the saints on their feast days teaches us and edifies us in the Faith. To those of us who look at the Church of Rome from the outside, it appears that much of the decline in spirituality found among the Faithful there seems directly tied to the loss of these devotions which teach us to live the Faith in exchange for the dictates of the catechism. The catechism is a fine thing, but sometimes book learning doesn't translate into life living.
One of the biggest problems, IMHO. It's not quite as blatant an error as the social gospel/liberation theology school, and hence flies under the radar. One of the parishes in my town has a pastor who obviously regards it as the world's biggest 12-step program. This extended to every liturgical event, where the prayers have been rewritten to talk about "addiction" and "healing," and to all parish sermons and other activities. The whole focus is on the people themselves, and their real or imagined woes (this is a very prosperous parish full of well-educated, well-off people). And judging by what I see in Catholic bookstores, this is very common.
Sorry, but the point of the suffering and death of Our Lord was not to make us quit smoking. The whole therapeutic model has trivialized the Faith, and the freedom of the clergy to extend this into the NO Mass (where you can do anything you want, it seems) has trivialized the Mass, too. Just when I thought it couldn't be trivialized anymore.
Interestingly, in some places older rites are being revived and are permitted. In Spain, the so-called Visigothic (or Mozarabic) Rite is being permitted a bit more widely. It was suppressed with the coming of the Frankish Rite, but continued in some places. (I have always thought it was because these places were under Muslim domination, had no bishops, and didn't get the message that the Mass had changed!) In any case, it has been celebrated off and on in Toledo over the centuries, and now is being celebrated in a couple of other places, as well. It is rather similar to the Byzantine liturgy, from what I have read - although I have never managed to attend one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.