Beyond the Prosaic: Renewing the Liturgical Movement

Rating:
Summary: Review by a Benedictine monk
Review: Dunstan O'Keefe writes in "The Downside Review", Autumn 1998. Until very recently, there has been no adequate forum in which the stoic and silent majority of Catholics who have dutifully borne with the liturgical reforms that came in the wake of Vatican II could articulate their feelings and express their unease. The more immoderate rantings of the extreme reactionaries and the worst experimental excesses of the progressives have had a high profile, but the legitimate concerns of those who occupy the middle ground are only now finding a voice. Increasing uncertainty about the direction of continuing liturgical reform, exacerbated by conflicting messages from those in authority, is causing alarm among those who have been "normally content to regard the external form of the liturgy as a relatively peripheral concern". The widespread concern over the state of Catholic liturgy provided the context for an international conference of the Centre for Faith and Culture held at Westminster College, Oxford in 1996. The present volume presents some of the papers given on that occasion, and includes as an Appendix the Oxford Declaration on Liturgy which summarized the Conference's conclusions. At the time, this statement provoked considerable controversy and was said by the "Catholic Herald" to represent "a watershed for English Catholicism". Certainly it was a welcome opportunity to raise vital questions previously thought to be taboo in a sober and scholarly atmosphere and helped to highlight the existence of organizations which are springing up, not so much to band catholics together to resist further innovation, as to "prepare the intellectual and organizational ground for a revision of the novus ordo in a traditional direction". These papers make clear that the word "traditional" here is to be interpreted in the broad sense - "Tradition" with a capital 'T', and not - or not necessarily - as in "traditionalist". Far from rejecting the need for reform, the Liturgy Forum set up by the Conference aligned itself with the intentions of the pre-conciliar liturgical movement and of Sacrosanctum Concilium, Vatican II's Constitution on the Liturgy, but declared as one of its main conclusions that the new rite of the Mass did not necessarily fulfil those intentions. Indeed, they have "in large part been frustrated by powerful contrary forces, which could be described as bureaucratic, philistine and secularist". Both in Christopher Zealley's Introduction and in Fr M. Francis Mannion's' "The Catholicity of the Liturgy: Shaping a New Agenda", we have a useful analysis of the various positions currently held and of the groups with which these positions are associated. Apart from the stance which would involve "advancing official reform", four distinct agendas can be identified, though it should be recognized that a degree of overlap is inevitable, and any individual may advocate elements of different agendas. If it is assumed that the post-conciliar reforms are, in their broad outline, a legitimate expression of the mind of the Council and a basis for further development, two alternatives emerge. The first, 'inculturating the reform', suggests that while the revisions of the past thirty years have more or less successfully given the Church a new set of liturgical books, these achievements are but a prelude to a much more profound and far-reaching reform of the liturgy. This position proposes a new diversification and decentralization of Catholic liturgical life. Related to this position, and perhaps more representative of the members of the Liturgy Forum, is the "recatholicizing" agenda. This is distinguishable from other possible solutions in that it regards the principal challenge of ongoing liturgical reform as spiritual rather than structural. It seeks to develop an aesthetic, eschatological and doxological sense within the worshipper. Another pair of agendas begins with the premise that reform since 1962 has not followed what Cardinal Ratzinger has called "the fundamental law of liturgy: that it should follow the law of organic growth within the universality of the common tradition". The changes which have occurred represent sudden lurches, displaying discontinuity with the past, rather than the measured organic growth which should characterize the Church's response to changing circumstances. Such a premise leads to a range of options, from those espoused by the 'restorationist' camp, who would wish for a return to the pre-conciliar status quo, to a desire to "reform the reform", returning to what they would regard as the true intentions of Sacrosanctum Concilium, and reviewing "in depth" the processes and actual achievements of the liturgical reform. With this programme we can associate some of the most important names in the liturgical renewal: Klaus Gamber, Brian W. Harrison and Aidan Nichols, and identify a common desire for a greater pluralism, allowing a reformed liturgy to coexist both with the novus ordo and the Tridentine rite. Such labels are useful in that they provide a focus for the sort of level-headed and pragmatic discussion that a stark dichotomy between the liberal and the reactionary has made almost impossible. The limitations of such categories become apparent, however, in the chapter written by Mark Drew, whose proposals constitute a mixture of the three more conservative agendas. In his reluctance to align himself with any one camp, but rather to garner the best of the tradition, he might be said to typify the spirit of the Forum. The obvious enthusiasm and positive thrust of the contributors is tinged with a tone of deep sadness. Serge Keleher stops to consider the pre-conciliar sources of the present crisis to ask how the actuality came to be so much at odds with the aims of the Council, while Eamon Duffy's penetrating analysis of the English translation of the 1973 Roman Missal reveals the full horror of the "theological shrinkage" perpetrated by ICEL, though we can at least hope that the worst errors are likely to be removed in the new Sacramentary. While several contributors call for a restoration of liturgical chant, Marc-Daniel Kirby's paper on "Sung Theology", written in a decidedly abstract and apolitical vein, makes few practical suggestions, and is curiously at odds with the more contentious tone of the other pieces. It can at least be taken as a reminder - however unintentional - of the dangers of excessive mystification. Perhaps, too, given the strength of feeling that these issues arouse, it is well to keep in mind Mark Drew's assertion that in the work of liturgical renewal, "the most important task will be performed on our knees'".