"Suffer the Tinkers to come unto..."

Interesting potential for a spanner in the works of the Papal visit to the Celtish Isles:

THE Pope's visit to Britain has been thrown into turmoil amid fears swarms of gipsies will turn up hoping to meet him.

Waves of travellers have already started descending on Birmingham ahead of the pontiff's four-day tour of the UK next month....

An emergency meeting with the Catholic Church was called over fears the whole city could be flooded with thousands more.

Police evicted the travellers who have come over from Co Donegal, Ireland.

But they just moved their camp yards across the road to the Shire Country Park yesterday.

The travellers told council officials they didn't have £25 pilgrim passes for the event on September 19.

On the assumption that the editorial supporting Creative Commons is itself....

... in the commons. Here is JT's article from Chant Cafe:

I've written uncountable numbers of words scolding ICEL for keeping its texts proprietary and charging for access - on grounds that this is a practice contrary to the whole history of Christianity. Even before Christianity, Judaism taught that the teaching of the Torah and the knowledge of the rabbis was not a commodity to be bought and sold. They could charge for the time, for the room in which they teach, and the books that contained the teaching, but the knowledge itself could not be commodified or limited. The Christian ideal of the same impulse is embodied in the prohibition against "simony" - a sin named for Simon Magus (Acts 8:18-24) who offered disciples money in exchange for the laying on of hands. Peter said to Simon: "Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money."

But enough with the condemnations and lectures. I would like to make positive case for something wonderful and easy that ICEL could do right now. It could post a single note on its website that said: "All texts bearing an ICEL copyright may be distributed, copied, transmitted, or recorded, provided ICEL is acknowledged as the source." Over time, the front matter of all ninety-six books could be customized with this announcement on the next printing, but, for now, the digital announcement would be enough.

ICEL could formalize this announcement with a legal stamp of a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license, which is nothing other than a means for getting around certain legal contingencies on texts. The plainly worded announcement would do the same work. The point is to put the texts into the commons where they belong and where they would be were it not for modern legislation that artificially restricts the use of texts.

How could ICEL do this? It is just a matter of doing it. There is nothing more to do. ICEL owns the texts and can control them completely. It is as simple as that. It is a small step with enormous consequences.

For starters, the outpouring of joy across the entire world would be spectacular to behold. It would be one of the largest jail breaks in the history of Christendom, all this wonderful books set free at last, just as the teachings and sermons and liturgical books of all ages were free from restrictions on their distribution.

For decades, ICEL has been the subject of decades of derision and beating, and now with the new texts on the way, this problem has intensified. All of this would change instantly. The global sense of elation would be palpable. The world press would take notice. The New York Times would sing the praises of ICEL. The point of Christian generosity and charity would be undeniable. There isn't a soul who wouldn't praise ICEL for having done the right thing. It would be a bright day in the history of the faith.

In light of this, ICEL should put up a banner on its site that says: "If you support our efforts to evangelize the world with these free resources, please consider a contribution." I would certainly dig as deep as I could. So would thousands, even millions of others. The gratitude would translate into vast financial contributions that I would expect would far exceed the amount that ICEL currently receives in royalties. Even better, this money would be given voluntarily, not extracted by force. The ICEL staff would feel better about itself and be flush with new resources to do its work.

What happens next? That's when the world community of English-speaking Catholics gets to work. Imagine of blizzard of fantastic iPhone apps that contain the Rite of Baptism for Children, The Book of Blessings, The Book of Prayers, The Code of Canon Law, The Order of Christian Funerals, and the entire Roman Missal, right there in the palm of your hand. No more lugging around heavy books (though anyone would be free to do so). No more being stuck without the right blessing at your fingertips.

What would ICEL have to do to develop these? Nothing. They would all be developed within a matter of weeks and months, on the initiative of people like me and thousands of others.

Every single one of the texts would be scanned and put online, some low quality but many high quality, perfect for printing at a moment's notice. These texts would appear on uncountable numbers of websites. They would be multiplied again and again and again without limit.

There would be Kindle editions and iPad editions and editions for every epub that is around. Publications that routinely pirate these texts without payment - you know who you are - would no longer have to fly under the radar screen or fear the copyright police. They could go about their missionary work with their heads held high.

Monasteries, convents, and parishes could all freely record their liturgical services and post them on youtube without having a sense that they are doing something wrong. They could sell CDs and custom missals to raise money for themselves.

The new missal, when it appears, would come in a huge range of editions. Some would be heavily bound with the most expensive leather and beautiful medieval stylings. Other editions would come in small paperback editions that you can carry in your pocket, and wouldn't that be glorious to have an edition that every single Catholic could afford to carry (imagine a price of, say, $7)? Talk about evangelization!

The Bishops and ICEL are right now extremely concerned about catechesis on the new missal. Well, stop worrying about it. Making the texts part of the commons will allow all the creative energies of all Catholics to put to use in the cause of education. Nothing educates like the text itself, and so long as the text lives in copyright prison, there will be problems. Why limit the Gospel? Free it completely and 90% of the work is already done for you. ICEL has limited resources, so why not call upon the vast energies out there just waiting for a chance to help?

The next stage will be spin off publications. There will be manuals, hymnbooks, songbooks, children's books, commentaries, reference sets, dictionaries, concordances, searchable files, illustrated books, and many other media types that no one has yet thought of. There will be audio books and instructional DVDs and CDs, as well as downloadable MP3s. Do you know of priests who have trouble singing the whole Mass? Well, this is an easy thing to correct if anyone can make a demo file and distribute it without paying for the privilege. Keep in mind that none of this can be done now, at least not legally, without jumping through hoops and paying ICEL. This is why it is not being done now!

Why not harness all of these energies on behalf of the Catholic liturgical project? ICEL needs help. It cannot be singularly charged with the whole burden. It cannot expect only four publishers who know the ropes to do the bulk of the work here. It is a very simple matter of freeing the texts that would make the difference. In other words, all of ICEL's texts would take on the same precise status as all Christian texts have had from the first to the late nineteenth century when copyright enforcement first became global and some Christians wrongly took the bait and deliberately set out to limit their influence.

To be sure, many Christian texts are part of the commons already. The old Latin Missal is an example. No one has to pay anyone to publish that text. The same is true with Gregorian chant from all ages. The same is true of the Douay-Rheims Bible and hundreds of other translations that are in public domain now.

Take a close look here: all of these source texts are flourishing in every way right now! I can call take out my phone and look at the completely music in the old rite for the whole of today's services, right now, and it takes about two seconds. I cannot do this with all of the texts that are under conventional copyright. There is a reason for this.

The ICEL decision would inspire other publishers too and perhaps put an end to the copyright arms race that is killing the life of the liturgical text. GIA might move to do the same with the Grail Psalter. The same could happen with the NAB translation of the Bible. Composers might even follow in line. The entire house of copyright cards could fall, and what a blessing that would be! But it all must start with ICEL.

So a plea to ICEL: thousands of others like me want to be involved. We want to help. We want to spread the Good News. We want to work as messengers for Catholic liturgy. Please allow us to do so in every possible way. It is just a matter of posting a simple sentence.

St. Augustine once gave a homily about the divine qualities of the word and its capacity for being shared. He pointed out that he need not parse out his words carefully for fear of losing them to the hearer, but rather that the hearer can take all of his words even as he can retain them. He made an analogy here to the way the Father and the Son can have the same thoughts and the same words without the one displacing the other. Herein lies the mystery and glory of the message, the magnificence of the idea and its infinite reproducability. It was precisely the capacity of words to be spread, and for truth to be held by an unlimited number of people, that inspired the spreading of Christianity all over the world.

Let's recall that power, that glory, and make it happen again.

(dang, I miss easy internet access... who'd a thunk?)

Liturgical Orphans

One untoward effect of a good retreat, or a sacred music colloquium, or even a serendipitous stumbling upon the Divine Office being prayed solemnly and corporately and beautifully, (am I remembering correctly, was there some question on the 900-Pound Catholic Blog as to whether one was actually joined to the Church's liturgical life when one prayed the L ot H alone? I digress...) all three of which I have had the great blessing to experience in the past two months, is that it takes real, conscious effort not to subsequently sit... er... kneel in judgment when one finds oneself in less... carefully prepared liturgies.

Even when one is not annoyed, one can hardly help but be distracted when a presider greets the Faithful with "The Lord IS with you...", and then gives what amounts to a long homily betwixt the greeting and the penitential rite; when an, admittedly lovely-voiced, cantatrix croons suggestively into the console-mounted mic'; when a phalanx of seven extraordinary ministers routinely marches on the sanctuary to help the shepherd feed his flock of, I-am-not-making-this-up-I-counted-the-second-day-of-the-routine-mea-culpa, THIRTY-something, (when is someone in charge going to notice that more time is spent singling the ems out with a specially choreographed Communion than is saved by having them then administer the Sacrament to the rest of the assembly; when not one, not two, but THREE different individuals open for the Main Event, each welcoming us, each introducing themselves, (in one case also naming "my partner in proclaiming the Word,") and each reminding us what day it was; an adult server whose alb is so tightly cinched and so snugly fitted that I was reminded of Joan on Mad Men; loopy General Intercessions...

On this house-hunting expedition, I am feeling, (and Himself shares this,) most homeless on Sunday mornings.
And who would have imagined it? but the fact that it is out of season has meant being not so much deprived as spared as we seek a parish. "Dry" masses are preferable, for the most part, to those with music, (which tend to the insipidly moist...)

So it is with great joy, (and not a little shame for my pessimism, O Me, of little faith!) that I say that Mass on Sunday was very well prepared and conducted indeed.
I had only half-jokingly said the day before that my major goal was simply to avoid Hail Mary Gentle Woman, but that I had no expectation of being able to do so.
Well! three sturdy hymns, a nice little responsorial Magnificat during the Communion procession, the correct lectionary psalm, a decent Ordinary, superbly played and sufficiently assertive and vigorous organ accompaniments, excellent organ pre- and postludes and interesting improvs, (though I might question the Music From the Hearts of Space registration on one of the latter...;oD); a suitably talented yet even more suitably diffident cantor; a wide ranging homily that utilized the readings AND practical application AND pertinent personal anecdotes AND doctrine and dogma AND Catholic identity...

Anyway, I don't know to whom to be grateful, the cathedral rector, or the diocesan O of W, or the Bishop -- but thank you, thank you, thank you.

Come to think of it, who am I, (is the accepted term Left-foot Lucy, or One-foot Wanda?) to question anyone's registration?

It is probably too far away to make it my parish when the dust settles on our domestic arrangements, but it's a great comfort to know it's there.

Incidentally, the aforementioned serendipitous L ot H? an errand in Chicago last month finished early, Himself dropped me off at St John Cantius en route to another errand. I figured I could pray quietly until Vespers, (it wasn't actually the Vespers themselves upon which I stumbled, I knew about them...) and instead was uplifted by what I can only suppose was a bit of practice for an upcoming organ recital by Br Jonathan Ryan. Passion Symphony by Marcel Dupré?
Glorious, thrilling. (And talk about "Christmas in July"...)
I am frankly envious of anyone who can attend.
But I shouldn't feel too deprived, I shall keep my eye out for what Adam Brakel (sp?) is accomplishing at the cathedral here.

"Gay priests giving gay priests a bad name"

No, honestly, that's how the headline to Bryan Cone's US Catholic piece reads.

You can't make this stuff up, well, maybe the Onion could, but there's no need, it satirizes itself.

The Value of Ritual Over Spontaneity

A thread over at PrayTell misled me with the lede, I thought it would be about the General Intercessions, since it concerned a book by James McCartin, Prayers of the Faithful.
No, it more generally concerns the spiritual life of American Catholics, and to some extent, the expression finds in devotions, in popular piety.

Two commentators had thoughts that caught my attention:

Most of us don’t live in our parents’ neighborhood or even their state. ISTM that the rise of the traditionalists in all their varieties are one of many attempts to build praying communities within a widely dispersed Church.

Michael O'Connor

I'd never thought of that before, but surely the hunger for custom, and ritual denied so many of us either by our nomadic existence, or by deliberate suppression, is a force to be reckoned with in the burgeoning of the various forms of neo-traditionalism.

And I thought this was a wonderful apologia of liturgical worship in response to another poster's bemoaning the lack of aptitude, (I would ascribe it to a wholesome reluctance,) for spontaneity he finds in Catholics:

Catholics have traditionally understood talking to God through the use of non-spontaneous texts as being just as authentic as spontaneous prayer.

...At times of significant rituals of life – especially [death] – spontaneous words are not often lacking, but often become obstacles, whereas ritual expressions convey the inexpressible more aptly.

To some extent, that reliance on ritualized texts is a sign of the inexpressible dimension of our conversation with God. ... the use of the ritualized texts has more dimensions to it....I would be wary of is the assumption that spontaneity=authenticity.

Karl Liam Saur

Amen!
Not only do words other than of our own immediate devising better convey the ineffable, but there is extraordinary comfort in being able to rely upon them, in not having creative demands added to the burdens one is already under at some of life's great moments.
I really think this, the notion of a received pattern to our worship, is one of the greatest strengths of Catholicism, and one of its strongest tools in effecting true catholicity, and I think TPTB have ignored that to their perils, and ours, in recent Church .... doings.

The CMAA has a cunning plan.....

....m'Lord.
But Fr Ruff has found them out

Fly? Why?

What is it about the human psyche, okay... MY psyche, that feels such inordinate satisfaction of a steamy summer afternoon, to have finally vanquished, er, well ... successfully swatted a lone, noisy fly that had loitered about the house for the last day or so?

The Mighty Hunter

Keeping the Sabbath

This article doesn't really resonate with me, (I have little patience with those who are nostalgic for the trappings of a faith they do not hold,) I only take note of the fact that a piece in the NY Times startlingly admits that James Carroll, the go-to guy for commentary on Catholicism for much of the MS print M, is, and identifies him as, a "dissenting Catholic."

No doubt were the article on a page more journalisticly demanding than the Style section, the "dissenting" would have been omitted, and the Times would go back to pretending that a disgruntled ex-employees unable to live up to pledges and promises freely given offer the most objective insights into an institution...

I, of course, am non-compliant, for years nearly my only gainful employment has been on the Sabbath; even today, I am scurrying out to sub, (I had forgotten how interesting it can be to hear the same homily four times -- I am serious, speaking only of prepared homilies now, now the winging-it nonsense of one of my favorite priests, which becomes very tiresome. Observing the differences, and the homilist's willingness to engage, [or otherwise,] the changing "character" of his auditors from Mass to Mass is like watching any other kind of live performer, and one can learn as much from the nont-so-competent as from the fine ones.)

Prayers Requested

Please pray for a dear, dear woman, a long time friend of my family, Sr Virginia Mary, a cloistered Dominican.
I have heard that she is gravely ill.

One of the jolliest saintly people I have ever known.

Speaking of false choices...

... I have tried never to make the Mass of Creation my own personal whipping boy for all that is wrong with contemporary music that is used by Catholics (note: not "contemporary Catholic music,") but isn't there some middle ground between holding it up as the epitome of all that is rotten, and holding it up as some sort of ideal?

Lots and lots and lots of new Mass settings were set out and presented and sung at this convention. They all started to sound the same after a while. A few somewhat nice things here and there, but no apparent new “Mass of Creation” or “Community Mass” on the horizon.

And another thing...

... how is programm[ing] the entire Ordinary and much of the Proper in Latin [and Greek] chant, and us[ing] Latin for some of the presidential texts" producing "a sudden lurch, [that] would [inarguably] feel like someone is pushing an agenda" (which happens to be the Church's agenda for the Roman rite, but never mind....,) the only alternative to dual liturgies one entirely in Gregorian chant, and one entirely in English and chant-free?

It's a false choice.

Pride of Place and Offering Options

Shall we take the road less traveled, or the one with the best pavement?

Did you know that Morning Prayer at NPM is entirely in Latin, sung to Gregorian chant? But only one monk keeps showing up, so they hold it in his hotel room. The Alternative Morning Prayer is in the convention hall, and over a thousand show up for that one. It’s in English.

Does NPM give Gregorian chant “pride of place” as Holy Mother Church taught at the Second Vatican Council? No, would be the obvious answer. Not much is in Latin at all. “Lauda Sion,” the Corpus Christi sequence, was sung in Latin during Communion at Mass last night, but the music (very solid, BTW) was by Michael Joncas. The choir sang “Christus vincit” in Latin before the closing hymn, “To Jesus Christ, our sovereign king.” But Ordinarium or Proprium Missae in Latin Gregorian chant? Nope.

At Morning Prayer the opening verse, “Lord, open my lips,” is in different settings each day, none of them based on Latin chant. About the only chant here is the Lord’s Prayer, in the eminently usable English setting by Robert J. Snow.

But wait. Sing to the Lord: Music in Divine Worship, the US bishops’ document on liturgical music, says this at no. 73: “The ‘pride of place’ given to Gregorian chant by the Second Vatican Council is modified by the important phrase ‘other things being equal.’ These ‘other things’ are the important liturgical and pastoral concerns facing every bishop, pastor, and liturgical musician. In considering the use of the treasures of chant, pastors and liturgical musicians should take care that the congregation is able to particpate in the Liturgy with song. They should be sensitive to the cultural and spiritual milieu of their communities, in order to build up the Church in unity and peace.”

NPM is following this advice – one almost wants to say, to the letter. Suppose the planners of a future NPM convention Mass programmed the entire Ordinary and much of the Proper in Latin chant, and used Latin for some of the presidential texts. It would be a sudden lurch, and it would feel like someone is pushing an agenda on everyone. One can hardly understate the depth of ill will and hurt feelings which would result. “But it’s the Church’s agenda,” someone will glibly object. Well, yes and no. “Building up the Church in unity and peace” is the Church’s agenda.

The music at NPM liturgies is a grab bag. Some (but not much) chant, quite a bit of so-called traditional hymnody and service music, and lots of contemporary music, sometimes in languages other than English. The music draws on the liturgy and the Bible and it reflects the people gathered. The music helps everyone to celebrate the sacred mysteries, to unite themselves to the Lord and each other in song.

NPM has a chant section. They asked me to start this a few years ago. Across NPM, interest in chant seems to be quite strong. Nobody is anti-chant, at least not publicly.

Of course not, that would be like talking about crazy Aunt Hazel in front of non-family members...

Oh, and if you find that disappointing you are a "zealot."

Just Another Flavor...

There is quite a conversation going on over at Musica Sacra regarding the advisability of otherwise of the CMAA "manning a booth" at a large convention of liturgical musicians.

I am all for outreach, missionary work, reconciliation, however you want to wrap your mind around what this would be, except --

I think it would be dangerous and self-defeating to present the aims of the CMAA, (not the CMAA itself, mind you, we're just a bunch o' guys with no claim to authority, but the aims,) as just another item on the buffet, and an exotic and not-to-everyone's-taste item at that.

Gregorian chant, music that promotes reverence and recollection, adherence to the music precepts of the Church as expressed in authoritative documents, respect for the integrity of the actual texts of the Mass -- these are not pickled herring.

I think a better way to go would be offering add to the "swag."
A beautiful pamphlet digest of the musical rubrics of the current GIRM, for instance, also providing links to free msucial resources on the Interwebs.

Tough Times, All Over

This story about the Vatican running a deficit actually gladdens my heart.

Firstly, yet another sign that we're all in this together.
Second, the expenses incurred are for worthy matters, pastoral visits, improved communications, preservation of what the Church already has.
And third, despite the MSM's getting-tired-by-now meme about purportedly endemic loss of love for, faith in, attachment to the Church and Her leaders - "annual donations from churches worldwide - known as Peter's Pence - were up."

Um... yeah.

"And in other breaking news, prohibition is repealed..."

A periodical devoted to liturgy and ministry, from a more or less Catholic perspective, (less "more" and more "less" all the time,) is all... het up?... over something that happened four decades ago.

“Do not let your hearts be troubled.”

These words from John 14:1 are encouraging, but how hard we struggle with them. We find so much to be troubled about. ...
We are living through troubling times in our world and in our church. In past years, [this periodical] has filled the pages of this music ministry issue with articles by leading pastoral musicians who were excited by the next page in music ministry. There were always new texts to explore, new perspectives on ritual forms, new ideas, and renewed purpose.

Not this time.

In the past, pastoral musicians were joined here by liturgists who wrote about the integration of various musical forms into the liturgy, enhancing ritual elements through sung prayer.

Now, no one wants to take the chance of saying the wrong thing and being censured for it. For example, we know that we will receive a new Roman Missal and that as a result of the translation most of the musical settings of the common of the Mass (music we have come to love and know by heart for years) will cease to exist.

That’s troubling. It’s very troubling to the hearts of pastoral musicians who have devoted countless years to building up repertoires of Mass settings for their assemblies that for the most part will be discarded. It’s troubling when people who are fine musicians, fine pastoral people, and solid theologians are replaced by individuals who have no formation but can play “what the people want to hear.” It is very troubling that the people with the right training, the right skills, the right formation, and a close connection to the Holy Spirit are considered too threatening, too challenging, too subversive for parish life.

It also seems a little drama-queeny to throw a pity party now, in light of the fact that there are finally signs of this situation being remedied.

Yes, good and skilled organists and composers and singers were, figuratively speaking, thrown on the bonfire in the '60s and '70s, while their instruments and pages and pages of music were lost to the auto da fe, somewhat more literally.
And they and it were replaced with graduates of the "Gee, nobody else knows what he's doing, so I might as well be a Catholic music director too!" school of liturgy, and music cribbed from "Skunk in the Middle of the Road."

But that's all water under the thingummy.

Oh, wait... are they really talking about discarding the build-up of rubbish that has passed for liturgical music in recent years? THAT'S what passing is being mourned?

Hmmm.... maybe I was reading The Onion.

(p.s. I do not rejoice in ANYone losing his job, particularly if he is competent.
But I don't see that happening.
Anywhere.
At all.)

Three Rules to Live By

Since I'm not even sure I'll be able to afford the Colloquium next year, (still haven't come down from that mountain, much less gathered my thoughts to post about it, but I shall, eventually,) Ireland's out of the question, but wouldn't it have been loverly?

Fr Stephane Quessard spoke on the renewal of Sacred Music commencing with a potted history of the origin and use of the term itself from it's apparent coining by Michael Praetorius around 1614. Quessard observed three challenges to Sacred Music in the thought of Joseph Ratzinger (1) That sacred music must go beyond the limits of current European thinking avoiding triteness and commercialism. (2) That the Church has to restore the logos at the centre of sacred music. (3) That the chant repertoire must be emphasised as normative to the Rite.

And what of THIS?:

Finally James Macmillan spoke, or rather gave his manifesto for the future, in a talk entitled The Spirit of the Liturgy: Rejoice in Tradition and Embrace the Future. Macmillan obviously knew he was 'preaching to the choir' with much he said but seemed a little more circumspect than he has been elsewhere- probably considering the presence of three bishops in the room by this stage. He concentrated on the problem of the value of 'beauty' and it's general neglect, indeed deliberate exclusion of the concept, from much liturgical consideration in recent years. In the context of the general alienation that occurred between Church and professional musicians, in the 1960s, Macmillan touched on the misinterpretation of participatio actuoso that has prevailed

Oh, you mean the prevailing translation, or at least understanding of the concept, "full, conscious and calorie-burning participation?

Proudly Pro-Choice

Nah, don't worry...

But in a quick skim of headlines and blogs, (everything is needfully quick until I am back home... or homish,) came across more of the on-going fracas over the attempted public shaming that is "Ten Worst..." lists; a plea for a better, more civil approach, (people from CenCa are just obviously better people...) which notes the limited resources we all have; and the news that a number of bishops have withdrawn their support of the Catholic Campaign form Human development.

The latter is my themes, and the bishops' the choice which I proudly favor.
Not funding or de-funding of the CCHD per se, but the acknowledgment of limitations and the acceptance of the fact that choices must be made in expenditures, be the of time, talent or treasure.

And no, I suppose I wouldn't send money to the CCHD and necessarily trust that it would be spent wisely, in support of aims I share.
It might be, but it would be like using a poor search engine, or taking the time to sing through OCP packets, one merely guesses of course, but based on past disappointment it doesn't seem the wisest way to allot limited resources.

It makes more sense to give directly to charities one embraces, or to use Google, or to look specifically at new offerings from composers whose work one admires.

For that matter, since the CCHD dust-up is about charitable monies, I should also add, based on how they've spent my money in the past, I don't give much to my diocesan appeal.

I'd rather give directly to retirement funds for religious, or family counseling services, or the St Vincent de Paul society, or Peter's Pence.

Whereas, say, Kwanzaa parties are fine and all, but not on my nickle.

So, I'm all for choice, sometimes...

I'm not a Cafeteria Catholic, but does this make me a Buffet Benefactor?

A new round of Motu Mania?

No access, no posting, no time, but this popped into my mailbox on an alert:

What Benedict means by 'new liturgical movement
By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
Rome

Sometime soon, the Vatican is expected to release a motu proprio, meaning a legal document under the pope’s authority, which will transfer responsibility for an aspect of marriage law from one Vatican office to another. Though it will probably fly below the public radar, the document provides a glimpse into Pope Benedict XVI’s approach to liturgy, meaning how the church celebrates the Mass and its other rituals.

Specifically, Benedict is expected to encourage the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, the Vatican's office for liturgical policy, to focus on promoting what he describes as a “new liturgical movement." The obvious question, of course, is what exactly he means by that.

In a narrowly tailored legal document, the pope can’t unpack the idea, but Vatican observers say that Benedict’s broad liturgical approach can be described in terms of “continuity,” i.e., recovering elements of the liturgical tradition which he believes were too hastily set aside or downplayed in the immediate period after the Second Vatican Council (1962-65). His own style when he celebrates Mass reflects this thrust, including distributing communion on the tongue, rather than in the hand, and placing a crucifix on the altar to remind people that the focus is on God rather than the celebrant.

The “new liturgical movement,” then, is one which attempts to restore what Benedict XVI and like-minded observers believe was lost in the post-Vatican II period, perhaps principally, in the pope's mind, a strong sense of transcendence.

The phrase “new liturgical movement” was first used by the pope back in 1997, when as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger he published a set of memoirs about his life up to 1977 under the title Milestones.

Here is the relevant section, which I’ll quote at length:

“There is no doubt that this new missal [after Vatican II] 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 recognize 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. A renewal of liturgical awareness, a liturgical reconciliation that again recognizes 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 worldwide 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.”

That extract provides the context in which the phrase from the forthcoming motu proprio should be understood (assuming it appears as expected), which otherwise may seem a bit out of the blue.

What does the Holy Father mean?
I think he means, Save the Liturgy, Save the World...

"Sacred Signs and Actions of the Mass, Standing, Kneeling, Singing ..are Themselves Prayer"

Well done, Your Excellency (why must the Mundelein musicians' retreat and the CMAA's shindig coincide??!?#?%???)

The liturgical act requires a new kind of consciousness, a “readiness toward God,” an inward awareness of the unity of the whole person, body and soul, with the spiritual body of the Church, present in heaven and on earth. It also requires an appreciation that the sacred signs and actions of the Mass -- standing, kneeling, singing and so forth -- are themselves “prayer.”....
Does modern man seem incapable of real worship? I think so. But the more important question for us is this: If [so] what are we going to do about it?
One of the few people who have wrestled with the issues [is] Father Robert Barron.

Barron puts the issue this way: “The project is not shaping the liturgy according to the suppositions of the age, but allowing the liturgy to question and shape the suppositions of any age. Is the modern man incapable of the liturgical act? Probably. But this is no ground for despair. Our goal is not to accommodate the liturgy to the world, but to let the liturgy be itself -- a transformative icon of the ordo of God.”

Barron suggests that in the post-conciliar era, the professional Catholic liturgical establishment opted for the former path, trying to adapt the liturgy to the demands of modern culture. I would agree. And I would add that time has shown this to be a dead end. Trying to engineer the liturgy to be more “relevant” and “intelligible” through a kind of relentless cult of novelty, has only resulted in confusion and a deepening of the divide between believers and the true spirit of the liturgy....

We need to discover new ways to enter into the liturgical mystery; to realize the central place of the liturgy in God’s plan of salvation; to truly live our lives as a spiritual offering to God; and to embrace our responsibilities for the Church’s mission with a renewed Eucharistic spirituality.

Read the whole thing.
I say, a red hat for Chaput!

Oh, yeah... and

SAVE THE LITURGY, SAVE THE WORLD!

More on Vevuzelas and the Liturgy! (well, kinda...)

I'm not the only one who sees a possible future for the Vevuzela in Catholic worship.

(But unlike me, most good Christian folk seem to be ag'in'... have they no vision? are they against progress?)

The Telegraph reports that Archbishop Vincent Nichols is concerned that vuvuzelas, blamed for ruining the usual respectful silence of football matches, [emphasis added, LOVE that line,] could be used during the Papal Visit to the UK. Tatchell, Hitchens, Fry and Dawkins have apparently all responded by letter to the Archbishop, saying, "Thanks Archbishop! Great idea!"
'Although himself an avid football fan, the Most Rev Vincent Nichols, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, is worried that the forthcoming Papal visit could be marred by vuvuzelas. "I have had enough of them already," says the Archbishop of Westminster. "I hope they stay in South Africa. Personally, I think the football would be more enjoyable without this constant cacophony."