Cara Week,
seems to me that the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum is not having and could not have, at least in Italy, large and visible practical effects, since the use of the Missal of Pius V in the latest version, that of John XXIII 1962, allowed only to "stable groups adhere to the earlier tradition." So the intervention of Pope Benedict XVI should be used almost exclusively to heal the rift due to groups which arose around the bishop Lefebvre, whereas those who prefer truly Catholic and use the Tridentine missal in its entirety without rejecting the Second Vatican Council, as do the other hand, Lefebvre .
is to be hoped, in my opinion, that only happens like that. But what can not fail to have wider consequences, or at least resonances, this line of reasoning adopted by the motu proprio. It is in fact not a decree, as if to say "dry", which decides on standards deemed appropriate practices "in apart "from theological premises, or a pardon as that of John Paul II (Quattuor abhinc annos and Ecclesia Dei of 1984 adflicta of 1988)
The principle is set, art. 1, with the now well-known distinction between "ordinary form" and "form extratraordinaria" lex orandi: the Roman Missal of Pius V and the Roman Missal of Paul VI - would be - two expressions of the same lex orandi, that the Catholic Church of the Latin rite, which does not entail a division in the lex credendi, remaining two uses, old and new, the one Roman rite. We can also avoid the other premise, of legal interpretation, according to which the Missal Romano, in the form promulgated by John XXIII in 1962, was never abolished. In any event, this claim seems to apply to any previous liturgical book, generally considered to be venerable and holy by any reform later. Sophisticated therefore a bit 'means any form not expressly repealed previous ritual should be used, at least in the extraordinary form! For example, in Piedmont, the ritual Eusebius, as he had assumed the card.Bertone when he was bishop of Vercelli! The very first premise would
- accepted as a principle of general liturgical law proposal which seems to be - to that same conclusion, each lex orandi, that is, every rite established by lawful authority Church is good for use, unless it is clearly outside the law of credit, which is unthinkable, or was wrong the same authority that requires or permits. It is clear that the liturgical variations in time and space of the Church are not necessarily driven by concerns strictly dogmatic but spiritual and pastoral adaptation that is understandable and in various cultures. Oration that works well in the Ethiopian Orthodox rite maybe be incomprehensible in greek Byzantine or Syrian, and not only because of language differences.
Andrea Grillo, articulated in his speech at the United News of July 15th comes to fear effect "gnostic" this disconnect between lex and lex orandi credendi, as if the content of faith could ignore the wording of the liturgy itself. However, that not all formulas are of course equivalent of liturgical prayer is not obvious: just think of the offertory dell'antifona eschatological theology or of absolution in the pre-conciliar rite, where he prayed that the deceased were to be saved from hell at the Last Judgement !
A second "choice" charged with consequences not just in the historical and theological interpretation is that the letter of Pope Benedict XVI gives the liturgical reform desired (as previously thought) from the Second Vatican Council. According to the Pope reform, vigorously advocated and analytically detailed in the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium, was instead merely "desired" by the council. And "moved by this desire," the Pope Paul VI in 1970 approved liturgical books, reformed and partly renewed. Evidently such a reading of the conciliar can score a point in favor of those who support the idea that the character of pastoral Vatican II puts it at a level not to make decisions, but pastoral exhortation, of hope and not will direct operations.
It seems really difficult to argue that interpretation of Sacrosanctum Concilium exegetically meaning in so that the relatives are scattered: the review (recognoscatur), to reform, it fits ... Then it becomes virtually useless to cite all the verbs that express the will of decision-making in the reform decrees signed by Pope Paul VI: a case for everyone, by the Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum of April 3, 1969, verbs and jussimus sic proferri volumus about the only mandatory formula for use on the bread and wine in all the Eucharistic prayers. By the way, who now chooses the ancient rite of 1962 as it can escape the peremptory nature of that statement? Of course, considering that only Paul VI has simply not desired and commanded it and everything else or that the form and the above formulas remain possible as "extraordinary."
is clear that if the Pope is convinced of this interpretation, it should express it in an even more authoritative and explicit. Otherwise you risk going without sufficient reason to dismantle this kind of liturgical edifice really great, at least in terms of visibility and organic, which is resulted from the "will" (again, how far it is commonly thought) the council with regard to ' entire organization of the liturgy of the Roman rite.
That this removal, demotion or at least authoritative, can begin to be confirmed by looks. 9, which states that the priest may grant permission to use " earlier ritual "also in the administration of baptism, marriage, penance and anointing of the sick (because they do not come back then to call her last rites?), while the bishop has the license to celebrate the sacrament of confirmation" using the earlier Roman Pontifical " (remember that Paul VI in Divinae consortes naturae has changed quite profoundly essential rite of confirmation, even in the "form").
This is granted, shall or may be granted "if it recommends the good of souls." It is clear that this formula, rather the principle of pro bono animarum, suprema lex any rules of the church, wants to put out due to personal taste and exclude all we can do a folkloric use of the concessions of the "motu proprio", which is really to be feared, but it seems equally clear that you can overshadow the suspicion that the "new rite" can not point or they can not get the "good animarum, or at least the past it can be achieved more easily.
the theologian Ratzinger was and is personally convinced it seems clear from reading his book The Spirit of the Liturgy, in which he claims, for example, the incongruity of what he called the celebration "before the people", referring to the importance of instead celebrate the Eucharist to the rising sun (and then before the tabernacle). I was among those who hoped that did not bear upon those beliefs. It happened. The practical consequences may be minimal, even zero, or positive only in the sense of calm wing "Tridentine" and perhaps mend the schism at a price not too heavy. I am among those who can not hope, on the ground that the person who challenges for things like he does because he wants to challenge or give reason to feel full.
The Pope's belief is that there are Catholics, not just the elderly, who like the rite of Pius V because they are less willing to be manipulated, say the most banal "democratized", or finally as a safeguard better the sacredness in which shall be placed and lived the liturgical celebration and that of the other sacraments. But if we fail to see and feel, and maybe even do not understand, give this order, would be ideal rite orthodoxy, where the Mass is behind the iconostasis and the sacred gate. And they should also infer that the Eucharistic celebration of the first community in the context of a real dinner, did not have any of this sacred desirable!
Only the future will tell of the practical effects of this motu proprio. In this falls to us to clarify the theological interpretation of the node value of Vatican Council II. Knot now, even more intricate than before. As more complex presents a final "aporia," that the role of the bishop in the liturgy. Pope Ratzinger presented his decree as to the bishops that it will raise the concern of having to decide anew on this subject, in each case deciding for them or better to rely on the request of a coetus fidelium (composed of many?) And the benevolent response of the parish priests, and only in the event of a dispute comes into the bishop to keep the harmony in the community based on the principles laid down.
a short speech, that of Pope Benedict XVI, who alerted the bishops, priests and scholars in the care of souls: Someone (I refer only to Italy and the Piedmont in particular) invites you to talk as little as possible, others capture as a stimulus to review the better way to celebrate, others fear the devaluation of the already mentioned post-conciliar liturgical reform, and then the entire council ... The "aporia" are still on the table at the edge of contradiction. A motu proprio that will perhaps not much to do, but certainly a lot to think about.
Victor Cross (Asti)
0 comments:
Post a Comment