Saturday, February 18, 2006
Robinson Walking Backward
Zenit has an interesting interview posted with Father Jonathan Robinson, author of the book "The Mass and Modernity: Walking to Heaven Backward"
What I have tried to do in my book is to step outside this ecclesiastical framework and examine how the Enlightenment and Enlightenment-era philosophers -- especially Kant, Hegel and their successors -- changed how people in the West understand and perceive God, man, society, religion, community and much more.
I'm sure this is an interesting book. In the interview, Robinson seems to tie in the advent of modern philosophy with Roman Catholic liturgical shortcomings. I don't see how it fits, but maybe it's better to wait for the book.
Robinson applies his understanding of Newman, the source of his subtitle:
Newman was not preaching the modern idiocy that we have to sin in order to be virtuous, but he was reminding us that bad practice is based on confused and false principles, and it is by an often bitter experience that we finally see the truth a bit more clearly. I think that confused and false principles have seriously damaged the liturgy. That means that any reform, or renewal, of the liturgy will cause us to walk to heaven backward.
It's presumed that those confused and false principles date from the Council. But I'd suggest that many of them crept into liturgical practice since Trent. It's hard to believe every priest everywhere, thanks to the bulwark of the 1570 Rite, was able to keep modernism at bay.
The Church is supposed to bring something to the world, not accommodate its message to what it thinks Tom, Dick or Harry will swallow.
Well, of course it is. No serious Catholic would suggest otherwise.
If by authentic liturgical renewal you mean a liturgy based on God's revelation -- and not on our aspirations -- as well as serious preaching based on this same revelation, and finally on an attempt to live holy lives, then nothing more is required. The only effective way of overcoming false views about human nature and the meaning of life is by an effort to present to our times the mysterious reality of the Paschal Mystery in a more vivid and unsentimental way.
Robinson has a point here, especially if we understand that the point of Sacrosanctum Concilium was to purge a failing liturgy from the sentimental aspects of tradition. It's hard to see how a fussy focus on particulars: ad orientam posture, fancy vestments, or the appeal of a childhood remembrance of an idealized liturgy can be considered part of liturgical renewal.
The original 1962 Rite indult was a concession to clergy who were unable (or unwilling) to adapt. Was such an indult provided with counterweights to encourage deeper prayerfulness or holiness? Of course not. The 1570 Rite--to some eyes--was already perfection on earth.
Robinson is correct that liturgy should be about God. Too often we are presented with the false choice: liturgy is about the gathered assembly or about the priest who confects and doesn't need any other mortal body in sight. The truth lies somewhere outside of extremism and somewhere in the realization that authentic liturgical reform will, though with faltering steps, lead is to a sincere worship of God and open to earthly sancitification of the people involved.
