forty-plus years of common ecumenical liturgical work (much of that work the contribution and legacy of our academy members!). This is not a Roman Catholic issue; it is an ecumenical one! We are in this together! Listen also to our colleague Gordon Lathrop much more recently: My principal concern is this: the new missal translation has simply and unilaterally abandoned what had been our shared ecumenical texts. Amid all the other furor. . . . I wonder if most people who have thought about this new translation have even noticed this loss. . . . The common Gloria, Sanctus and Creed translations are gone here. So is the common translation of both the full Preface dialogue and the briefer presidential “Lord be with you” exchange. . . . The sense will be, rather, that what happens in Roman Catholic worship is qualitatively other than what happens in the worship of other communities. If this is what you think, then this missal will serve and reinforce your conviction. If it is not what you think—if the Creeds we share really are shared confessions, for example, and if the ordo of the Mass is recognizable to you in the patterns of the service in many other places—I hope you will lament with me. Words matter.16 Similarly, with regard to Benedict XVI’s claim in Summorum Pontificum that the pre–Vatican II Missale Romanum was never abrogated, Mark Francis noted in The Tablet that: Historical precedent . . . demonstrates that the “Tridentine Rite” was meant to be abrogated in 1970. . . . Designating the old and new rites “uses” within the same rite is an attempt at canonical sleight of hand and does not solve the problem.17 But, of course, one really does not to go any further than Pope Paul VI to hear essentially the same thing. As narrated by Massimo Faggioli, when asked by his philosopher friend Jean Guitton why he would not concede the 1962 missal to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and his SSPX, Paul VI responded: Never. This Mass . . . becomes the symbol of the condemnation of the council. I will not accept, under any circumstances, the condemnation of the council through a symbol. Should this exception to the liturgy of Vatican II have its way, the entire council would be shaken. And, as a consequence, the apostolic authority of the council would be shaken.18 The rest, as they say, is history.
3. The Vision of CSL and Its Continued Implications Earlier I referred to the current debates over whether we need a reform of the 14 NAAL Proceedings
Published on Oct 8, 2014
Published on Oct 8, 2014
The North American Academy of Liturgy (NAAL) (http://www.naal-liturgy.org/) is an ecumenical and interreligious association of liturgical sc...