January 21, 2010

• In Tuesday’s post, I used the term “true Liturgical Renewal” and connected this term with what the Holy Father has desired, written in description of and support of, and, in his very deliberate and pastoral way, gradually begun to put into place.  

  Today I wanted to share a short quote which comes from a book he wrote called “The Spirit of the Liturgy“.   I had read this excellent little book just over a year ago, but was reminded of it recently by an excellent post over at “Gregorian Rite Catholic” – and, by all means, please check out the whole article, as it is well worth the read! 

  (NOTE: then Cardinal Ratzinger is here speaking about the Tridentine or Traditional Latin Mass using the figure of an ancient fresco which had been “protected” by being largely covered over with whitewash):

  ---

  “[The fresco] had been preserved from damage, but it had been almost completely overlaid with whitewash . . . . In the Missal from which the priest celebrated, the form of the liturgy that had grown from its earliest beginnings was still present, but, as far as the faithful were concerned, it was largely concealed beneath instructions for and forms of private prayer. The fresco was laid bare by the Liturgical Movement and, in a definitive way, by the Second Vatican Council. For a moment its colors and figures fascinated us. But since then the fresco has been endangered by climatic conditions as well as by various restorations and reconstructions. In fact, it is threatened with destruction, if the necessary steps are not taken to stop these damaging influences. Of course, there must be no question of its being covered with whitewash again, but what is imperative is a new reverence in the way we treat it, a new understanding of its message and its reality, so that rediscovery does not become the first stage of irreparable loss” (Joseph Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy, Ignatius Press, 2000, pp. 7-8).

  ---

  I believe it is worth pointing out a distinction which is not made often enough, in my experience: namely, the distinction between what was “laid bare”, according to the Holy Father’s words above, by the Liturgical movement, “and, in a definitive way, by the Second Vatican Council” on the one hand, and on the other, the Liturgical outcome of the so-called “Reform” which followed the Council proper.   Many readers, I’m sure, have read this sentence without reflecting that the subject in this sentence is still the ancient fresco of the Tridentine or Traditional Latin Mass!  Unfortunately, rather than continuing to allow the “colors and figures” of this venerable work of art to be seen and to “fascinate us”,  what has happened instead is that this ancient fresco has indeed been “threatened with destruction” by a combination of adverse climatic conditions, unsympathetic ”restorations and reconstructions”, and other damaging influences. 

  Which is as much as to say that what the Catholic faithful got in the way of “Liturgical Reform” after the council, despite the fact that it may have been promoted and authorized by some of the major players who were in attendance at that council, was NOT what the council itself, in it’s official documents had authorized – indeed quite to the contrary.

  And which, in turn, is as much as to say that just because someone has been authorized by God to prophesy truly, doesn’t mean that that same person will necessarily interpret his own prophecy accurately, nor that he will necessarily act in a manner appropriate to, or congruent with, that prophecy.  For example, consider what happened in the following passage, recounted by the Apostle John, after Jesus had raised Lazarus from the dead:

  ---

  Therefore the chief priests and the Pharisees convened a council, and were saying, “What are we doing? For this man is performing many signs. “If we let Him go on like this, all men will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.” But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all, nor do you take into account that it is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish.” Now he did not say this on his own initiative, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but in order that He might also gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. So from that day on they planned together to kill Him. (Jn 11:47-53)

  ---

  Here you have the “Pope” of that time – Caiaphas, who sat in the “cathedra” of Moses, actually prophesying truly about Jesus, but yet missing the point of his own prophecy – that Jesus was indeed the promised Suffering Servant-Messiah, and going on to plot how to kill Him!

  Now, I should be clear that I’m not saying that Paul VI was as bad as Caiaphas!  However….the principle may indeed apply - and I think it can be seen to have applied at various other points in history as well, where ”bad” (or perhaps merely “weak”) men have been in positions of authority in the Church, and, as a result, the Church has gone through a period of declension and/or suffering.

  Just so, I believe it is possible to see that the Council Fathers, while under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, asked for one thing in the official documents of the Second Vatican Council, and yet, some of those same men, later, because they were blinded by various contemporary agendas and fads to the true interpretation of those council documents, ended up implementing NOT what the council documents actually proposed, but instead, something else entirely.

  Should, then, faithful Catholics have all revolted against this hi-jacking of the Council?  Perhaps creating another “Protesting Church” and claiming that the Pope was really the Anti-Christ, like Luther did?   As a former Protestant myself, I can certainly understand why many would be tempted to follow this path – and why some in fact DID follow it in the years after the Council.  And yet at the same time, since I have come to see the folly of the “Protesting Church” vision and its’ rejection of God-ordained authority, I must instead point to the words of our Lord in dealing with what was, in some ways, a very similar problem existing in his own day:

  ---

  Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. (Mt 23:1-3)

  ---

  So…how are the Catholic faithful of today to follow our Lord’s teaching and “observe and do what they bid you, but do not ye after their works?”  Well, perhaps our Holy Father is showing us a way – a way to observe and do what the council documents call for, but not to do so in the way in which those misguided men did who threatened the ancient fresco of the Liturgy with destruction by their ill-considered (if not actually ill-intentioned) “reforms”.  A way forward which involves going back – through the restoration of much that these misguided men sought to destroy and expunge, first (and most obviously) by the liberation of the Tridentine or Traditional Latin Mass and it’s taking root in every parish as the Pope has called for in his Moto Proprio Summorum Pontificum. But not, as he has stated in the quote above, for the purpose of merely re-covering the ancient fresco with “whitewash”, but rather so that the Liturgical goals stated in the council documents (e.g. of true active participation of the laity in the Mass, of the primacy of the Latin language, and that pride-of-place be given to Gregorian Chant) might be realized.

  Let us all heed the teaching of our Holy Father and follow the path forwards into true Liturgical Renewal which he has marked out for us, that ALL the Catholic faithful, in every corner of the globe, may come to rejoice in the beauty of the ancient fresco of the Liturgy, fully restored, unhindered and unfettered by the blind and misguided efforts which have unfortunately prevailed since the close of the council, so that the Church may emerge from the dark and cold of its’ 40-year winter into a new springtime of faith and hope; of truth and love; of piety and fervor.

  • 2:36 am
  • 1 Comment