"But it was as if there were
two parallel liturgies: the priest with the altar-servers, who celebrated Mass
according to the Missal, and the laity, who prayed during Mass using their own
prayer books"
Vatican City, February
20, 2013 (Zenit.org) | 1705
hits
Here is the
second part of a Vatican translation of the reflection Benedict XVI gave last
Thursday, Feb. 14, when he met with the clergy of Rome. The Holy Father
delivered the reflection extemporaneously, recounting some of his memories of
the Second Vatican Council.
Let us begin
with the first theme. After the First World War, Central and Western Europe had
seen the growth of the liturgical movement, a rediscovery of the richness and
depth of the liturgy, which until then had remained, as it were, locked within
the priest’s Roman Missal, while the people prayed with their own prayer books, prepared in accordance with
the heart of the people, seeking to translate the lofty content, the elevated
language of classical liturgy into more emotional words, closer to the hearts
of the people. But it was as if there were two parallel liturgies: the priest
with the altar-servers, who celebrated Mass according to the Missal, and the
laity, who prayed during Mass using their own prayer books, at the same time,
while knowing substantially what was happening on the altar. But now there was
a rediscovery of the beauty, the profundity, the historical, human, and
spiritual riches of the Missal and it became clear that it should not be merely
a representative of the people, a young altar-server, saying "Et cum
spiritu tuo", and so on, but that there should truly be a dialogue between
priest and people: truly the liturgy of the altar and the liturgy of the people
should form one single liturgy, an active participation, such that the riches
reach the people. And in this way, the liturgy was rediscovered and renewed.
I find now, looking
back, that it was a very good idea to begin with the liturgy, because in this
way the primacy of God could appear, the primacy of adoration. "Operi Dei
nihil praeponatur": this phrase from the Rule of Saint Benedict (cf. 43:3) thus
emerges as the supreme rule of the Council. Some have made the criticism that
the Council spoke of many things, but not of God. It did speak of God! And this
was the first thing that it did, that substantial speaking of God and opening
up all the people, the whole of God’s holy people, to the adoration of God, in
the common celebration of the liturgy of the Body and Blood of Christ. In this sense, over and
above the practical factors that advised against beginning straight away with
controversial topics, it was, let us say, truly an act of Providence that at
the beginning of the Council was the liturgy, God, adoration. Here and now I do
not intend to go into the details of the discussion, but it is worth while to
keep going back, over and above the practical outcomes, to the Council itself,
to its profundity and to its essential ideas.
I would say
that there were several of these: above all, the Paschal Mystery as the centre
of what it is to be Christian – and therefore of the Christian life, the
Christian year, the Christian seasons, expressed in Eastertide and on Sunday
which is always the day of the Resurrection. Again and again we begin our time
with the Resurrection, our encounter with the Risen one, and from that
encounter with the Risen one we go out into the world. In this sense, it is a
pity that these days Sunday has been transformed into the weekend, although it
is actually the first day, it is the beginning; we must remind ourselves of
this: it is the beginning, the beginning of Creation and the beginning of
re-Creation in the Church, it is an encounter with the Creator and with the
Risen Christ. This dual content of Sunday is important: it is the first day,
that is, the feast of Creation, we are standing on the foundation of Creation,
we believe in God the Creator; and it is an encounter with the Risen One who
renews Creation; his true purpose is to create a world that is a response to
the love of God.
Then there were
the principles: intelligibility, instead of being locked up in an unknown
language that is no longer spoken, and also active participation.
Unfortunately, these principles have also been misunderstood. Intelligibility
does not mean banality, because the great texts of the liturgy – even when,
thanks be to God, they are spoken in our mother tongue – are not easily
intelligible, they demand ongoing formation on the part of the Christian if he
is to grow and enter ever more deeply into the mystery and so arrive at
understanding. And also the word of God – when I think of the daily sequence of
Old Testament readings, and of the Pauline Epistles, the Gospels: who could say
that he understands immediately, simply because the language is his own? Only
ongoing formation of hearts and minds can truly create intelligibility and
participation that is something more than external activity, but rather the
entry of the person, of my being, into the communion of the Church and thus
into communion with Christ.
No comments:
Post a Comment