BOOKS
GR EGO R I US MAG N U S – W i n te r 2 0 2 4 – Ed i t i o n N o . 1 6
Interviews in L’Espresso: Six Petitioners Extract from the newly published The Latin Mass and the Intellectuals (ed. Joseph Shaw), reviewed on p36.
The day after the publication of the petition in The Times, the Italian newspaper L’Espresso devoted a full page to a series of statements by six of the petitioners, with a brief introduction.1 The instant availability of these texts after the publication of the petition is an indication of careful advance planning. The petitioners picked out for inclusion were two Britons, Bernard Wall and the composer Lennox Berkely (who was knighted in 1974), and four Italians: the philologist Giacomo Devoto; Cristina Campo’s old friend, the poet Mario Luzi; the historian Massimo Pallottino; and a second composer, Luigi Dallapiccola. The full text follows.2 The footnotes are editorial.
A hundred European men of culture, some well-known progressives among them, have asked the Pope to reinstate the traditional Mass. Why? We asked them about it directly. A hundred European men of culture (a number of well-known progressives among them) have signed an 'ecumenical and apolitical' memorandum in the defence of the traditional rite of the Mass, and have sent it from London to the Holy See. This has come as a great surprise to the Vatican. In fact, among the signatories of the memorandum are people generally thought to be indifferent, if not hostile, to religious issues. It is already quite unusual for Protestants, members of the Orthodox church and Jews to comment on a matter of ritual that does not directly concern them, but when it comes to well-known agnostics and even atheists who do so, the mystery deepens. Why did they do it? We put this question to some of the more distinguished signatories: a philosopher and historian of Catholicism, a composer, a poet, a musicologist, a scholar of ancient history, and a philologist. These appear for the first time in English translation here, and in a new book, The Latin Mass and the Intellectuals: Petitions to Save the Ancient Mass from 1966 to 2007 (ed. Joseph Shaw): see the next item for a review.
The critic BERNARD WALL
For me, defending the Mass in its traditional form is a bit like defending Venice: it means preserving an artistic heritage that is under threat. But besides the aesthetic aspect of the issue, I also feel some resentment over the Church’s autocratic way of operating, a view shared by many other signatories of the petition, even though some of them are clearly not believers. I am disappointed that the Church simply issues extraordinary decrees, without even consulting those concerned, overturning without any explanation what only ten years ago was its official position. Mine is a protest against both the authoritarianism of the Church and against the disavowal of the intrinsic value of the Mass in its traditional form. We should not forget that the traditional Mass is not only a rite, Page 32
but also a form of art. Some object that these considerations only apply to a few intellectuals, and that the intention of the Church is to make the ritual more accessible to the masses. Well, I am not sure whether the masses will appreciate this attempt; maybe they will, maybe they won’t. I have no problem with the translation of the Mass into vernacular languages, as long as they are translated well. But changing the rite itself is sheer stupidity. In any case, I would not have imposed the changes in such a totalitarian manner. I am both a traditionalist and a radical: a traditionalist when it comes to Latin, and a radical when it comes to politics. Hence, I hope that our antiauthoritarian appeal has an impact, as there must be many other intellectuals in Italy and France who feel as we do about this. It is a great shame that Latin, which was already disappearing from our universities, is now also
disappearing from the Mass. Latin is a fundamental European language, and, at a time when we are all becoming very good Europeans, it seems wrong to remove such an essential tool from our lives, not least for the knowledge of our immediate past; for example, who will understand Dante, with all his references to classical culture, if there are only a few scholars who continue to cultivate Latin? But I am also afraid of tastelessness, of ugliness and vulgarity. I find it troubling that today’s priests can get so worked up and frantic, writing so many bad books. We are in an age of decadence for the Church, something akin to the late Middle Ages, with those futile squabbles of Scholasticism in middecline. 1. L’Espresso, 18 July 1971, page 10. 2. T he Editor would like to express his gratitude to Fr Stephen Morrison, OPraem, for his assistance with the translation.
www.fiuv.org/
