Catholic Sensibility

Some clarification on rites 1962, 1970, etc. Sensible guests Liam and John P challenged me on my criticism of the indult usage of the 1962 Rite. I took serious time to examine my views, which each of these good people considered uncharacteristically harsh. Perhaps we each hold fast to an ideal of completely prayerful and appropriate worship. And perhaps a flawless expression of this prayer is impossible in the Pilgrim Life. I still believe that we are obliged to correct errors and not rely on the good intent of either mortals or God to allow us to say, "We did our best," without making some effort to improve either outward signs or inner attitudes. The use of the 1962 Rite is a problem for me. It's a problem to the extent I think parishes like St Joan's are a problem, or even that non-Catholic worship is a problem. In all these cases though, I'm a non-participant. So to that extent it's none of my danged business what the indult parish, St Joan's, or the evangelical Church down the street do. It's not at all likely that any of these three will ever hire me, or that I will choose to join any of them as a parishioner, so for the rest of my life, personally, what they do isn't any concern to me at all. It is conceivable that I might be in any or each of the three as a guest, but it would be for one liturgy, during which I would try and temper the clucking of the inner liturgist and simply pray. But then I would go back to my own parish. Let's turn to the area of immediate concern, the indult Mass. I read SC 21: "In order that the Christian people may more certainly derive an abundance of graces from the sacred liturgy, holy Mother Church desires to undertake with great care a general restoration of the liturgy itself." and "In this restoration, both texts and rites should be drawn up so that they express more clearly the holy things which they signify ..." and SC 23: "That sound tradition may be retained, and yet the way remain open to legitimate progress." and SC 25: "The liturgical books are to be revised as soon as possible; experts are to be employed on the task, and bishops are to be consulted, from various parts of the world." and SC 34: "The rites should be distinguished by a noble simplicity; they should be short, clear, and unencumbered by useless repetitions ..." and SC 35: "That the intimate connection between words and rites may be apparent in the liturgy ... In sacred celebrations there is to be more reading from holy scripture, and it is to be more varied and suitable." and the whole of SC 50: "The rite of the Mass is to be revised in such a way that the intrinsic nature and purpose of its several parts, as also the connection between them, may be more clearly manifested, and that devout and active participation by the faithful may be more easily achieved. For this purpose the rites are to be simplified, due care being taken to preserve their substance; elements which, with the passage of time, came to be duplicated, or were added with but little advantage, are now to be discarded; other elements which have suffered injury through accidents of history are now to be restored to the vigor which they had in the days of the holy Fathers, as may seem useful or necessary." and SC 51: "The treasures of the bible are to be opened up more lavishly, so that richer fare may be provided for the faithful at the table of God's word. In this way a more representative portion of the holy scriptures will be read to the people in the course of a prescribed number of years." While it is true that some, if not most liturgists play loose with SC 116, and other choice passages, papal permission notwithstanding, the unreformed 1962 Rite remains a problem in theory for the Catholic Church. People who know me know I'm not shy about being critical of the pope, curia, or bishops. The reasoning that the pope said it's okay to ignore SC 21, 23, etc. carries no weight with me. The good news is that unlike the present curia, I'm not ever likely to strong-arm indult parishes into doing it My Way, whatever that way might be. Keep doing as you please regardless of the yammering on this web site. Be assured that St Joan's and the Most Holy Apostolic Charismatic Church of God's Holy Word on the next street corner will do as they have done. I think the potential balkanization of Roman liturgy is a problem. I think the approach of the CDWS to inclusive language Lectionaries parallel to the Ecclesia Dei indult is sheer hypocrisy. I think fussbudgetting about who pours chalices and when belies a naive, if not criminally negligent approach to liturgy. I think most everyone these days, many progressives included, are scared by the prospect of real liturgical reform, and most of the Church is hiding in comfortable tradition of its own making or interpretation, especially in areas where Mass attendance is sinking under the Barque. So if you worship by the 1962 Rite, don't take my criticism personally. Let me rephrase and say, "I think you can do better, but lucky for us all, I flunked the terrorist sequence in liturgy school."