Sacred Liturgy Research Articles

Reforma liturgické reformy? K 50. výročí vydání Konstituce o liturgii (4. 12. 1963)

The first document of the Second Vatican Council was the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, with 50 years having elapsed since its promulgation (on the 4th December 1963). The study reflects on issues of developments in the field of liturgy over this time period and reacts to certain contemporary trends. After a survey of the history of the liturgical movement, the course of the reform of the Mass liturgy after the Council of Trent and that after the Second Vatican Council are compared in a historical excursus. The polarity between the divine and human side of liturgy is consequently dealt with and the connected tension between continuity and discontinuity in realization of intentions of reform is reflected on.

Liturgy and Morality. Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum Concilium in the Context of Moral Theology

50. rocznica uchwalenia Konstytucji o liturgii świętej zachęca do teologiczno-moralnej interpretacji tego dokumentu Vaticanum II. Jej owocem jest stwierdzenie istniejącej w historii zbawienia korelacji pomiędzy liturgią i moralnością. Objawienie Starego Testamentu odsłania koniunkcję kultu i moralności, a próby jej rozerwania w historii Narodu Wybranego spotykają się z ostrym sprzeciwem proroków. Krytyka ta zawiera jednak zapowiedź nowej przyszłości, w której Bóg usunie podział między kultem a moralnością. Nowy Testament przedstawia realizację tej obietnicy w wydarzeniu Jezusa Chrystusa. Jego zbawcze dzieło ustanawia chrześcijańską liturgię, w której człowiek uczestniczy jako istota duchowo-cielesna. Zbawienie aktualizowane w liturgii uświęca przez łaskę, która może być przyjęta jako miłość Boga respektująca wolne działanie człowieka. Zbawienie uobecniane w liturgii Kościoła jest bowiem relacją, współdziałaniem Boga i człowieka, łaski i wolności. Sacrosantum Concilium wyraża tę objawioną prawdę, podkreślając obiektywny i subiektywny wymiar liturgii jako dzieła Chrystusa, w którym chrześcijanin czynnie, świadomie i owocnie uczestniczy (participatio actuosa). Jest to przede wszystkim udział duchowy, zatem również moralny. Tylko wtedy możliwy jest zewnętrzny wymiar liturgii, w którym zawierają się szczegółowe formy, postawy, gesty i różnego rodzaju działania uczestnika świętej liturgii. Oznacza to, że liturgiczna participatio actuosa wymaga moralnego działania poprzez konkretne naśladowanie Chrystusa, prowadzące do nawrócenia. Wówczas „wiara działa przez miłość” (por. Ga 5, 6). W ten sposób dochodzimy do pojęcia ofiary, która w przypadku człowieka polega na jego całościowej przemianie. Grzeszny człowiek obdarowany miłością Trójjedynego Boga może na nią odpowiedzieć własną, stopniowo dojrzewającą miłością. Proces ten konstytuuje dramat Boga i człowieka, czyli napięcie pomiędzy łaską i wolnością, któremu odpowiada właśnie korelacja liturgii i moralności. Co więcej, zależność ta pozwala na autentyczne doświadczenie liturgii i moralności, chroniąc je przed redukcją do rytualizmu i moralizmu.

Let Me Put It Another Way: Digital Media and the Future of the Liturgy

December 4, 2013, marks a significant day in the modern history of Christian worship: the fiftieth anniversary of the promulgation of the Second Vatican Council's Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy...

THE FIRST SESSION AND AFTER, OCTOBER 1962–SEPTEMBER 1963

The first document that emerged from the Council, in December 1963, was Sacrosanctum Concilium (Constitution on Sacred Liturgy) and it set the tone for the rest of the Council's work. The initial document still insisted on the primacy of Latin in the liturgy and the priest continuing to turn his back to the worshippers.

The Priesthood of Christ and Followers of Other Faiths

Those, like Karl Rahner and Jacques Dupuis, who led the way in developing a theology of religions did not introduce reflections drawn from the priesthood of Christ. Those very few (e.g. Robert Sherman) who reflect on the priesthood of Christ have not appreciated the possibilities it offers for a theology of religions. After drawing on Hebrews, Paul, and John, this article cites relevant testimony from the Feast of Christ the King and Vatican II’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. It then develops six themes from Christ’s universal and eternal priesthood—in particular, what can be called the sacerdotal existential—which illuminate the situation of those who follow other religions or none at all.

The Second Vatican Council on other living faiths

This article critically evaluates what Vatican II taught about other living faiths in four documents: the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy ( Sacrosanctum Concilium, 1963), the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church ( Lumen Gentium, 1964), the Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions ( Nostra Aetate,1965) and the Decree on the Church’s Missionary Activity ( Ad Gentes, 1965). Too often those who consider Vatican II’s attention to other faiths consider only Nostra Aetate. Beyond question, that declaration was central in importance and impact. Nevertheless, the three other documents just mentioned fill out the Council’s integral teaching on the religious ‘others’. The last and longest text from Vatican II, the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World ( Gaudium et Spes , 1965), also adds some further, significant considerations. But space precludes examining it in this article.1

Issues Around Eucharistic Practice

The current state of liturgical life in the Church is marked by theological tension and competing practices. Recent documents from Rome like Redemptionis Sacramentum (On Certain Matters To Be Observed or To Be Avoided Regarding the Most Holy Eucharist) are marked by a change of tone and vision with regard to liturgical celebration and ongoing renewal. The return to a view of liturgy as rubrics and the sharpened distinction between the ministerial priest and the lay faithful are indicative of deeper theological tensions. According to the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (1963, hereafter CSL), the entire celebration of the Eucharist, rather than only the words of institution, is an expression of the Eucharistic faith of the Church. And so, we can say that the deep pattern of the celebration of the Eucharist—the Liturgy of the Word, Eucharistic Prayer, and participation in Bread and Cup—is a text-in action (see Ricoeur, 197–221) that is both a model of what we believe and a model for what we believe and its ethical implications (see Geertz, 87–125). Each of us reads and interprets every facet of the Eucharistic celebration from our subjective perspective, that is, the understanding that we bring to our participation. It is, therefore, not surprising that there should be such a wide range of reactions among pastoral ministers to the recent documents and directives pertaining to this central act of worship. What are some of the sources of these tensions?

Sunday Worship in the Absence of Discernment: The Challenge of Non-Eucharistic Sunday Services

Since the Second Vatican Council and its reform of the liturgy, increasing numbers of Catholic parishes and communities have found themselves in a difficult situation. While a renewed understanding and participation in the celebration of Eucharist as the “source and summit” of our lives (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy [CSL], no. 10] was called for, communities around the world find themselves not able to celebrate the Eucharist on a regular basis due to diminishing numbers of ordained presbyters. Local communities, dioceses, and, more recently, the Vatican itself, have become involved in devising ways to respond to this situation, known variously as Sunday Communion services, Sunday Celebrations Without Eucharist, Sunday Celebrations of the Word and Hours, or as the Congregation for Divine Worship’s Directory (1988) calls them, Sunday Celebrations in the Absence of a Priest. A more recent unofficial title, and the one which I opt to use because of its fittingly memorable acronym, is Sunday Worship in the Absence of a Priest or SWAP. The 1988 Directory approved the use of three different forms of SWAP: Morning Prayer, Evening Prayer, or a Liturgy of the Word, with the option of pre-

How “Catholic” is the Sacred Liturgy? Or: A Mass for the Masses

How “Catholic” is the Sacred Liturgy? Or: A Mass for the Masses Paul Jerome Keller, O.P. If “catholic” means universal, is the Sacred Liturgy, or what Roman Catholics refer to as the Mass, for everyone? Do we really mean that it is universal, that is for each and every person, regardless of country, race, age, practices or beliefs? Or, is it, as many take the Liturgy to be, reserved only for those who are baptized Catholics or Orthodox?1 Or can we go even further and say that the Sacred Liturgy is to be limited only to those faithful Catholics and Orthodox who truly hold what the Church holds regarding the contents of the faith and the morals that the Church teaches? Should, then, those who find themselves in disagreement with the Church’s dogmatic and moral teachings, or even the Church’s cultic practices, all take themselves elsewhere to worship? In this article, I will argue that the Sacred, or Divine, Liturgy is truly catholic or universal. It is meant for every person as the most excellent way to worship God. Indeed, no one is excluded from the Sacred Liturgy; rather, it is the only universally true form of divine worship valid for everyone.2 This is an important truth during the Year of Faith announced by Pope Benedict XVI as “a summons to an authentic and renewed conversion to the Lord, the one Savior of the world.”3 Moreover, the love of Christ, the pope 1 Throughout this article, although I refer to “Catholic,” it is my concern not to exclude Orthodox Christians from the conversation, given that our respective liturgies are both Eucharistic and sacrificial. 2 It is understood, of course, that, in order to most fully participate in the Mass is to also receive Holy Communion, an act reserved to those who fully accept all the doctrinal and moral teachings of the Catholic Church and are in a state of grace. Nevertheless, even a Catholic who is prevented from receiving Holy Communion is still obliged to worship at Mass on the prescribed days of the year, pointing to the fact of the supreme importance of worship at the Sacred Liturgy, which I treat below. 3 Benedict XVI, Apostolic Letter motu proprio data Porta Fidei (11 October 2011) 6. Antiphon 17.3 (2013): 212–224 213 How “Catholic” is the Sacred Liturgy? Or: A Mass for the Masses says, “fills our hearts and impels us to evangelize…,” sent by Christ “through the highways of the world to proclaim his Gospel to all the peoples of the earth (cf. Mt 28:19).”4 This year, he instructs, is “a good opportunity to intensify the celebration of the faith in the liturgy, especially in the Eucharist, which is ‘the summit towards which the activity of the Church is directed…and also the source from which all its power flows.’”5 My argument runs as follows. The worship of God is a necessary (though not the whole) part of what fulfills human beings. God has revealed how best to worship him in order that we might be happy, most especially through the Incarnation of his Son, Jesus Christ. Christ instituted the Holy Eucharist as the supreme act of worship. Since God desires all people to be saved, that is, find eternal happiness, all are called to worship God through the supreme act of worship instituted by Christ, which takes place in the Sacred Liturgy. Made for Paradise As the Catechism of the Catholic Church points out, “God put us in the world to know, to love, and to serve him, and so come to paradise.”6 Adam and Eve, in the first paradise before their fall, enjoyed the realm of creation that God had given them, but more so, they enjoyed perfect friendship with God. God’s plan for them was that they would collaborate with him “in perfecting the visible creation.”7 Most important, however, was that their entire existence, their work, their rest, their mutual relations, consisted in a delight, a profound happiness that resulted from the joy of friendship with God. By the grace of original justice, Adam and Eve honored and loved God for himself...

Sacred Liturgy and Asceticism: Respect for the Ius Divinum

Sacred Liturgy and Asceticism: Respect for the Ius Divinum1 Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke Introduction First of all, I express my heartfelt gratitude to Father Paul J. Keller, O.P., President of the Society for Catholic Liturgy, for the invitation to address the 2012 Annual Meeting of the Society. In accepting the invitation, it was my desire to encourage you as a scholarly and professional association devoted to promoting the Sacred Liturgy, the highest and most perfect expression of our life in Christ in the Church, especially through your attention to an interdisciplinary approach which respects the integral elements of divine worship: language and gesture, music, art and architecture, vesture, vessels and linens. In a particular way, I urge you, in accord with the teaching of Pope Benedict XVI on the Sacred Liturgy, to continue your promotion of the beauty that must necessarily mark every aspect of divine worship. Fittingly, during the 2012 Annual Meeting, you have chosen to address the subject of asceticism and the Sacred Liturgy. The term “asceticism”, derived from the Greek term askesis for the exercise necessary to achieve athletic or gymnastic excellence, has from the time of the Greek Fathers, in the words of Louis Bouyer, “come to designate the effort a Christian must exercise in the battle waged against those things, both from within himself and from without, that oppose the realization of the ideal of Christian perfection as proposed in the Sermon on the Mount.”2 Such spiritual exercise 1 Keynote Address delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Catholic Liturgy in St Louis, Missouri, on 28 January 2012. 2 “L’ascèse ... en et venue à désigner tous les efforts auxquels doit s’exercer le chrétien, dans cette lutte qu’il doit mener contre ce qui, en lui ou en dehors de lui, s’oppose à la réalisation de l’idéal de la perfection chrétienne proposé dans le Sermon sur la montagne.” Louis Bouyer, “Ascèse, ascétique et ascétisme,” Dictionnaire Théologique (Tournai: Desclée & Co., 1963) 80. [Hereafter, DT] English version: Louis Bouyer, Dictionary of Theology, trans. Charles Underhill Quinn (Tournai: Desclée Antiphon 17.1 (2013): 3-30 4 RAYMOND LEO CARDINAL BURKE is not seen as the fruit of human effort alone as opposed to the action of divine grace, according to a Pelagian view, or even as complementary to divine grace, according to a semi-Pelagian view, but, rather, is seen to depend completely upon divine grace. It is, in fact, divine grace that inspires or prompts ascetical activity as the fitting response of man to God.3 If every dimension of our life in Christ demands asceticism, so that Christ’s life within us, divine grace, may produce its fruit, then, above all, asceticism is necessary if we are to “worship in spirit and truth.”4 As the history of the liturgical reform following the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council has so strikingly demonstrated, a lack of attention to the discipline required for true worship deforms what should be worship of God into a man-made and man-centered activity. Pope Paul VI, in his homily on the Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul in 1972, reflecting upon the situation of the Church in the world, spoke of his sense that “through some fissure the smoke of Satan has entered into the temple of God.”5 He spoke of a pervasive doubt, uncertainty, restlessness, dissatisfaction and dissent, and of a loss of trust in the Church, coupled with a ready placement of trust in secular prophets who speak through the press or social movements, seeking from them the formula for a true life.6 He noted how, even within the Church, the state of uncertainty prevailed, observing that after the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council it was believed that “a day of sunlight had dawned upon the Church,” while, in fact, “a day of clouds, storms, darkness, wandering and uncertainty” had arrived.7 He commented that we seek to dig the abysses deeper rather than to fill them.8 & Co., 1965) 42. [Hereafter, DTEng]. 3 See DT, 80–82. English version: DTEng 42–43. 4 Jn 4:24. 5 “... da qualche fessura sia entrato il...

Pope Benedict XVI on the Postconciliar Liturgical Reform: An Essay in Interpretation

Pope Benedict XVI on the Postconciliar Liturgical Reform: An Essay in Interpretation William H. Johnston Fifty years ago the Second Vatican Council, in the words of Pope Benedict XVI, “launched the most extensive renewal of the Roman Rite ever known.”1 What was Pope Benedict’s assessment of and response to that renewal and the way it was carried out in the Church in the years since the Second Vatican Council? Many see that assessment as fundamentally negative. Shortly after Cardinal Ratzinger (later to become Pope Benedict XVI) published in 2000 his book The Spirit of the Liturgy, John Baldovin described it as a “powerful indictment of the last thirty-five years of Roman Catholic liturgy,” finding that “almost no aspect of liturgy escapes his wrathful pen.”2 More recently, Massimo Faggioli portrayed Pope Benedict’s establishment of the Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms of the Roman Rite through the 2007 Motu proprio on the liturgy, Summorum Pontificum, as “not far from renouncing Vatican II as such, stopping every pastoral effort aimed at receiving the liturgical reform and Vatican II through the liturgy.”3 James Sweeney also interpreted Summorum Pontificum as an action “reversing the thrust of the liturgical renewal.”4 Helen Hull Hitchcock held that Cardinal Ratzinger (and John Paul II) 1 Benedict XVI, Video Message for the Closing of the Fiftieth International Eucharistic Congress in Dublin (June 17, 2012), available at http://www. vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/messages/pont-messages/2012/documents /hf_ben-xvi_mes_20120617_50cong-euc-dublino_en.html. 2 John Baldovin, “‘Lo, the Full, Final Sacrifice’: On the Seriousness of Christian Liturgy,” Antiphon 7 (2002) 10–17, at 13. 3 Massimo Faggioli, True Reform: Liturgy and Ecclesiology in Sacrosanctum Concilium (Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2012) 144. 4 James Sweeney, “How Should We Remember Vatican II?” New Blackfriars 90 (2009) 251–260, at 254. Antiphon 17.2 (2013): 118–138 119 Pope Benedict XVI on the Postconciliar Liturgical Reform: An Essay in Interpretation judged “the post-Conciliar liturgical reform” in need of “a thorough re-evaluation.”5 The list could be lengthened. Are these views sound and accurate? It is certainly true that various of Joseph Ratzinger’s writings and statements, especially before but also after becoming pope, communicated a critical judgment regarding the liturgical reform. In his memoirs, for example, he described “the crisis in the church” in the postconciliar era as due “to a large extent…to the disintegration of the liturgy.”6 A search through his body of work for words describing results of the liturgical reform or features of its implementation can produce a strikingly negative lexicon, ranging from “banality,” “superficiality ,” and “deficiencies” to “fragmentation,” “frightening impoverishment ,” “wretchedness,” “deformation,” “disintegration,” “destruction,” “devastation,” “anarchy,” “chaos”—and the like.7 Many strong words, all pointing in the same direction. 5 Helen Hull Hitchcock, “Pope Benedict XVI and the ‘Reform of the Reform,’” in Benedict XVI and the Sacred Liturgy, ed. Neil J. Roy and Janet E. Rutherford (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2010) 70–87, at 81. 6 Joseph Ratzinger, Milestones: Memoirs 1927–1977 (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1998) 148. 7 For “banality,” see Joseph Ratzinger, The Feast of Faith: Approaches to a Theology of the Liturgy (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986) 100, 120–121; idem, A New Song for the Lord: Faith in Christ and Liturgy Today (New York: Crossroad, 1996) 39, and elsewhere; “superficiality,” idem, New Song, 198; “deficiencies,” idem, “The Spirit of the Liturgy or Fidelity to the Council: Response to Father Gy,” Antiphon 11 (2007) 97–102, at 99; “fragmentation,” idem, “Assessment and Future Prospects,” in Looking Again at the Question of the Liturgy with Cardinal Ratzinger, ed. Alcuin Reid (Farnborough: Saint Michael’s Abbey Press, 2003) 145–153, at 148; “frightening impoverishment,” Joseph Ratzinger and Vittorio Messori , The Ratzinger Report: An Exclusive Interview on the State of the Church (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1985) 128, also Joseph Ratzinger, “Zur theologischen Grundlegung der Kirchenmusik,” in idem, Theologie der Liturgie: Die sakramentale Begründung christlicher Existenz, Gesammelte Schriften, vol. 11 (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 2008) 501–526, at 503; “wretchedness,” idem, The Spirit of the Liturgy (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2000) 130; “deformation,” idem, New Song, 174; “disintegration ,” idem, Milestones, 148; “destruction,” idem, “Assessment and Future Prospects...

“Anglican Use of the Roman Rite”?: The Unity of the Liturgy in the Diversity of Its Rites and Forms

“Anglican Use of the Roman Rite”? The Unity of the Liturgy in the Diversity of Its Rites and Forms Hans-Jürgen Feulner The internationally known German liturgist Balthasar Fischer († 2001) was rather far-sighted and somewhat euphoric, when, already in 1981, in connection with article 4 of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, he mentioned the ecumenical dimension of the liturgy: Nowhere does reunification any longer mean—and also not in the West—the adoption of the Roman liturgy and of specifically Catholic piety. Today one can very well imagine how the magnificent liturgy celebrated by our Anglican brothers, with some minute changes, could become a ritus legitime agnitus [lawfully acknowledged rite]; an English liturgical family among the liturgical families of the Catholic Church. With all the spiritual riches that have been amassed here in 400 years, she would join her wagon to the train of Catholic liturgies.1 On June 15, 2012, a decree of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) created the Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of the Southern Cross2 —the third Personal Ordinariate to date. This 1 Balthasar Fischer, “Liturgie oder Liturgien?”, in Trierer Theologische Zeitschrift 90 (1981) 265–275, here 273–274 (translation from German; emphasis added and my explanation of the Latin expression). Here the term “liturgical families” more probably means “rites.” 2 Holy See Press Office, “Erezione di Ordinariato Personale di Our Lady of the Southern Cross e nomina del primo Ordinario”, in Daily Bulletin (June 15, 2012): http://www.news.va/en/news/73782 (accessed 10/12/2012); Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Decree of Erection of the Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of the Southern Cross” (June 15, 2012; Prot.N. 150/2012), in Acta Apostolicae Sedis (AAS) 104 (2012) 599–603 (Latin and English texts). See also Steve Cavanaugh, Antiphon 17.1 (2013): 31-72 32 HANS-JÜRGEN FEULNER was accomplished with the agreement of the Australian Bishops’ Conference and in accordance with the guidelines of the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus3 (with Complementary Norms4 ) issued on November 4, 2009 by Pope Benedict XVI. The Australian Personal Ordinariate is a diocese-like institution of the Roman Catholic Church (juridically similar to a Military Ordinariate5 ). The same is also true of the already established Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham,6 created on January 15, 2011 for England and Wales, and of the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter,7 created on January 1, 2012 for the United States “Anglican Ordinariate Erected; Fr Harry Entwistle named Ordinary”, in The Anglican Use of the Roman Rite: http://anglicanusenews.blogspot. co.at/2012/06/australian-ordinariate-erected-fr-harry.html (last modified 6/15/2012, accessed 10/12/2012). 3 Latin Text: Benedict XVI, Constitutio Apostolica “Anglicanorum Coetibus qua Personales Ordinariatus pro Anglicanis conduntur qui plenam communionem cum Catholica Ecclesia ineunt”, in AAS 101 (2009) 985–990; English text on the website of the Holy See, www.vatican.va. See also Gianfranco Ghirlanda, “The Significance of the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus,” in L’Osservatore Romano: Weekly Edition in English (18 November 2009) 8. 4 Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Complementary Norms for the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus”, in AAS 101 (2009) 991–996; English text in L’Osservatore Romano: Weekly Edition in English (11 November 2009) 4; http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/ congregations/cfaith/documents/ rc_con_cfaith_doc_20091104_normeanglicanorum -coetibus_en.html (accessed 10/13/2012). 5 See John Paul II, Constitutio Apostolica “Spirituali militium curae ” (April 21, 1986), in AAS 78 (1986) 481–486. English text: http://www.milarch.org/atf/cf/%7B1AF42501-01D5-4EF8-BA484450AC27EF98 %7D/priests’%20manual%20appendix.pdf (pp. 12–15; accessed 10/13/2012). 6 Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Decree of Erection of the Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham” (January 15, 2011; Prot.N. 217/08), in AAS 103 (2011) 129–133 (English and Latin texts). See also http://www.ordinariate.org.uk/document.doc?id=12 (accessed 10/13/2012). 7 Holy See Press Office, “Erezione di Ordinariato Personale di Chair of St. Peter e nomina del primo Ordinario”, in Daily Bulletin (January 1, 2012): http://press.catholica.va/news_services/bulletin/news/28616...

From Rubrics to Ars Celebrandi—Liturgical Law in the 21st Century

From Rubrics to Ars Celebrandi—Liturgical Law in the 21st Century Alcuin Reid Introduction During the 1970s and 1980s rubrics—even modern ones— were widely disregarded if not dismissed as irrelevant. They were years when the General Instruction of the Roman Missal was too often treated simply as a set of guidelines and the Missal itself as a mere planning resource. Liturgical law was not taken seriously and grave liturgical abuses took place, even in seminaries. Bishops were not infrequently “surprised” by occurrences in liturgies over which they presided. Today the abuses of the immediate postconciliar decades seem largely—though not entirely—to have ceased. The problem now is more one of ignorance of liturgical law and of a laissez-faire attitude to ritual which evacuates liturgical rites of the sacred and to a lesser or greater extent renders each parish or community’s celebration not the celebration of the Liturgy of the Church as the Church has given it us, but a celebration of “what we do here.” Thus a subjectivization of the Church’s liturgy endures and in some places has taken root. It gives rise to the question: Does positive liturgical law have a place in the life of the Church of the twenty-first century? Or is such law devoid of meaning and authority ? Are there reasons for taking rubrics seriously?1 The Nature of Liturgical Law What is liturgical law? The clearest definition may be found in the 1954 doctoral dissertation of Msgr. Frederick R. McManus (1923–2005): “The ordering and regulation of the Sacred Liturgy 1 I am assuming that for celebrations of the usus antiquior the answer is self-evident; cf. Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, Instruction Universae Ecclesiae (30 April 2011), no. 28. Antiphon 17.2 (2013): 139–167 140 Alcuin Reid make up liturgical law.”2 McManus sees liturgical law as having divine origin in the dominical command: Hoc facite in meam commemorationem (cf. Lk 22:19; 1 Cor 11:23), and in the authority given by Christ to the Church (cf. Mt 28:18-20). He regards it as part of the potestas ministerii of the Church.3 Historically, this potestas was exercised at a local level; bishops or their chapters gave assent to the modification of liturgical rites and texts as necessary.4 At times secular princes—who were by no means “secular” in the sense of the separation of Church and State as we understand today—intervened in liturgical regulation, the most notable example of whom was the Emperor Charlemagne (c. 742–814), in what has become known as “the Carolingian reform” at the end of the eighth century.5 The disputes and denials of the Protestant Reformation and the decadence that had given rise to them led the Council of Trent to underline the local bishop’s duty to correct sundry errors and to supervise liturgical observances.6 Interestingly, in its seventh session (3 March 1547), the Council asserted liturgical discipline quite strongly: If anyone says that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church in customary use in the solemn administration of the sacraments may, without sin, be neglected or omitted at choice by the ministers, or can be changed to other new ones by any pastor whatever: let him be anathema.7 2 Frederick R. McManus, The Congregation of Sacred Rites (Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1954) 5. 3 Cf. ibid., 6–7. 4 Examples of pre-Reformation liturgical regulation of local liturgical books may be found in: Archdale A. King, Liturgies of the Primatial Sees (London: Longmans, 1957). 5 See: Alcuin Reid, The Organic Development of the Liturgy (2nd ed., San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005) 22–27. 6 “Quæcumque in diocesi ad Dei cultum spectant, ab ordinario diligenter curari atque iis, ubi oportet, provideri æquum est.” Session 21, canon 8. Norman P. Tanner, ed., Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, vol. II (London—Washington DC: Sheed & Ward—Georgetown University Press 1990) 731. 7 Canon 13: “Si quis dixerit, receptos et approbatos ecclesiæ catholicæ ritus in solemni sacramentorum administatione adhiberi consuetos aut contemni, aut sine peccato a ministris pro libito omitti, aut in novos alios per quemcumque ecclesiarum pastorem mutari posse: anathema sit.” Tanner...

Embracing Local Ecology in Liturgical Expression

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes Victoria Neufeldt, ed., Webster's New World Dictionary of American English, 3rd college ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1994), 429. The Encyclopaedia of Earth explains that: “Carbon is the most abundant element found in organisms. For this reason, carbon is considered the fundamental building block of all life,” and that “Carbon is a critical element to all life. It is one of the six bulk elements and is the second most common element in the human body. By mass it is the most abundant constituent of all the major molecules that organisms are formed from, including nucleic acids (e.g., DNA), proteins, carbohydrates, and lipids. As a result, living organisms are intimately involved in the carbon cycle.” “Carbon,” in Encyclopaedia of Earth, ed. Cutler J. Cleveland (Washington, DC: Environmental Information Coalition, National Council for Science and the Environment), http://www.eoearth.org/article/Carbon?topic=49557 (accessed June 1, 2011). Roger M. Downs and Lynn S. Liben, “Mediating the Environment: Communicating, Appropriating and Developing Graphic Representations of Place,” in Development in Context: Acting and Thinking in Specific Environments, eds. Robert H. Wozniak and Kent W. Fischer (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1993), 173–74. Ibid., 159. Catholic Church, “Sacrosanctum Concilium: the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy,” #37, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html (accessed June 1, 2011). Ibid., #38. For further information on the ramifications of this trend for liturgical inculturation, see my essay: “Bridging the Cartesian Chasm: A Radical Empiricist Perspective on Liturgical Inculturation,” Studia Liturgica 40 (2010): 208–23. Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, “Fifth Instruction for the Right Implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy of the Second Vatican Council, Liturgiam Authenticam: On the Use of Vernacular Languages in the Publication of the Books of the Roman Liturgy,” Origins 31:2 (May 23, 2001): 17, 19–32. (Hereafter referred to as LA). Ibid., §5. Ibid. To this list could also be added: eternal/historical and individual/communal (among others). Joseph Ratzinger, Call to Communion (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1991), 44. Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on Some Aspects of the Church Understood as Communion,” Origins 22 (June 25, 1992): 108–12. Ibid., #9. Killian McDonnell, “The Ratzinger/Kasper Debate: The Universal Church and Local Churches,” Theological Studies 63 (2002): 231. Ibid., 230. Ibid., 234. Joseph Ratzinger, “On the Relation of the Universal Church and the Local Church in Vatican II,” Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (December 22, 2000): 46, quoted in McDonnell, 237–38. This is a view seen with increasing frequency in official church documents on the liturgy, such as LA mentioned above. The exceptions to universal ritual were the local rites that had been celebrated continuously for more than two centuries prior to the Council of Trent, such as the Ambrosian Rite (Milan) and the Spanish (Mozarabic) Rite. For further detail on this, see my articles: “Grounding the Timeless in Place: Exploring the Influence of the Physical Environment on Liturgical Conceptions of Time,” Australian Journal of Liturgy 12/1 (May 2009): 84–107; “Relating Liturgical Time to ‘Place-Time': The Spatio-Temporal Dislocation of the Liturgical Year in Australia,” Christian Worship in Australia, eds. Stephen Burns and Anita Monro (Strathfield, NSW, Australia: St. Pauls, 2009): 33–45; “Inculturating the Easter Feast in Southeast Australia,” Worship 78:2 (March 2004): 98–117. Kevin Irwin, “Toward a New Liturgical Movement,” Origins 40/46 (April 28, 2011): 755. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid., 756. See http://www.onlymelbourne.com.au/melbourne_details.php?id=2798 (accessed May 30, 2011). Anscar J. Chupungco explains that inculturation of the liturgy involves the process of inserting the texts and rites of the liturgy into the framework of the local culture, resulting in a liturgy “whose shape, language, rites, symbols and artistic expressions reflect the cultural pattern of the local church.” Anscar J. Chupungco, Liturgical Inculturation: Sacramentals, Religiosity and Catechesis (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press/Pueblo, 1992), 30, 37. Such as the phrase from the Exsultet (2011 translation, International Commission on English in the Liturgy) proclaimed during the Easter Vigil: “Be glad, let earth be glad, as glory floods her, ablaze with light from her eternal King, let all corners of the earth be glad, knowing an end to gloom and darkness”; or the phrase from the traditional Pentecost sequence: “O most blessed Light divine, Let Your radiance in us shine, And our inmost being fill.” Sacrosanctum Concilium #38. This is not to say that we cannot speak/sing of the historical circumstances of Christ's incarnation, just that we should not fail to speak/sing of our own lived experience of Christ's presence alongside the historical reality of his birth. Additional informationNotes on contributorsClare V. JohnsonClare V. Johnson is senior lecturer in sacramental theology and liturgical studies at Australian Catholic University, Strathfield, NSW, Australia.

Sacrosanctum Concilium : Archbishop Paul J. Hallinan and the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy

Sacrosanctum Concilium : Archbishop Paul J. Hallinan and the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy

Vatican II on the Liturgical Presence of Christ

In its Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy ( Sacrosanctum concilium, December 1963), Vatican II listed five modes in which the risen Christ is actively present in the liturgical celebrations of the Church. Four of these five modes emerge strongly in the revised rites published from 1969 into the 1970s. But post-Vatican II sacramental theology has not displayed much interest in the five modes of Christ’s presence. The lack of an analysis of ‘presence’ may be a major reason for this neglect. The article proposes ten characteristics of presence: as relational, mediated, personal, free, transformative, costly, bodily, multiform, feminine, and future-oriented.

Eucharistic Concelebration: From Symbol to Reality (review)

Reviewed by: Eucharistic Concelebration: From Symbol to Reality Sean O. Sheridan T.O.R. Eucharistic Concelebration: From Symbol to Reality by Guillaume Derville. Montreal: Wilson & Lafleur, Ltée, 2011. In Eucharistic Concelebration: From Symbol to Reality, Monsignor Guillaume Derville considers Eucharistic celebration as part of the new "Liturgical Movement" that Pope Benedict XVI has encouraged. Derville divides his work into three chapters. The first chapter is entitled "A Historical View of Eucharistic Concelebration" (7-39). Although Derville gives a very brief overview of the historical concept of Eucharistic concelebration, he devotes the majority of this chapter to the teachings on concelebration of the Second Vatican Council and the relevant post-conciliar documents. As should be anticipated, he focuses on the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum concilium (17-27), primarily articles 57 and 58 granting permission for concelebration, and the concept of the communion of priesthood with the episcopacy as addressed in the decree Presbyterorum ordinis (27-32). In this chapter, Derville briefly reviews the important post-conciliar documents on concelebration, e.g., the instructions Eucharisticum Mysterium (32-33), Inæstimabile Donum (35) and Redemptionis sacramentum (36), the 1970 and 2000 Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani (IGMR) (34, 35), and the declaration In celebratio Missae (34-35). He also briefly addresses canon 902 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law and canon 700 of the Code of Canons for the Eastern Churches (37-38). Derville concludes chapter one with the invitation to reflect on how concelebration is a sign of unity of the ministerial priesthood and the conditions under which concelebration is appropriate. (39). He considers these questions in greater depth in chapter two. Derville entitles the second chapter "Unity of the Priesthood: Reality and Representation" (41-58). Having introduced the relevant documents in chapter one, Derville reflects on them more closely in chapter two and also [End Page 311] provides a discussion of Saint Thomas Aquinas' Question 82, Article 2 of the Summa theologiæ. Thomas Aquinas noted that "the Eucharist is the Sacrament of unity of the Church" (42) and pointed to concelebration at the Mass of priestly ordination. "[I]n the same way that the Apostles ate with Christ during the Last Supper and that day received the power to consecrate, so those who have just been ordained concelebrate with the bishop who ordains them" (43). In addition to considering these texts to analyze the unity of the ministerial priesthood, Derville addresses the topic of "presbyterate and brotherhood", including the role of the ministerial priesthood to be at the service of the common priesthood (52-56). Derville entitles the third chapter "Configuration of the Priest to Christ in Eucharistic Celebration: Some Theological-Pastoral Considerations" (59-95). In this chapter, Derville considers the manner and circumstances under which concelebration should occur. For example, he discusses the portions of the Eucharistic liturgy in which the concelebrant actively participates, where a concelebrant should be located in relationship to the altar of sacrifice, and the vestments he should wear (63-84). Derville concludes this third chapter with a discussion directed to the priest who is contemplating whether or not to concelebrate. Derville poses two questions to the priest about how he might participate in the Eucharist: "[F]irst, what happens to the reality that is made present, that is with the Eucharist, which makes present the Paschal mystery (including the sign and the dignity of the celebration in its essential aspect of prayer and worship)? Second, is my action oriented towards service and the good of the people?" (88-89). Throughout the text, Derville supports his observations and comments with an abundance of official ecclesiastical documents as well as various commentators on the texts. While he references only a handful of the works that commentators originally published in English, this work makes accessible to an English speaking audience the numerous works of the foreign language commentators that he considers. With its ample sources, this work would be of particular relevance to those persons interested in liturgical law, but should also be useful for all priests as they consider both the sign and action of Eucharistic concelebration. [End Page 312] Sean O. Sheridan T.O.R. The Catholic University of America School of Canon...

The Ancient Norm of the Holy Fathers (‘pristina sanctorum Patrum norma’) as a Criterion for an Authentic Renewal of the Sacred Liturgy

AbstractThe highest vocation of men, as well as of all creation, consists in this: to give glory to God, the Triune God, which means to worship Him and to adore Him. Mankind, fallen into sin and wounded by original sin, needs instruction and example for a true and authentic divine worship. The holy word of God reveals to men how to worship in the right manner, indicating the example of the heavenly worship, the worship of the Angels. The fullness of revelation, and also the fullness of the revelation concerning the right manner of divine worship, was brought by the incarnate Son of God, showing us and teaching us to ‘adore God in the Truth and in the Spirit’ (Jn. 4·23). The unbroken and organic liturgical tradition of the Church, whose privileged witnesses are the Holy Fathers and the so-called Gregorian Rite or the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite, always sought to worship God in such a manner, which expresses clearly the holiness and the mystery of the Divine Majesty and easily elevates the hearts o...

At the Supper of the Lamb: A Pastoral and Theological Commentary on the Mass by Paul Turner

238 Antiphon 16.3 (2012) library of those who are seeking deeper spiritual reflections on fully entering into the sacramental and liturgical actions of the Mass. Shawn Colberg Saint John’s University Collegeville, Minnesota Paul Turner At the Supper of the Lamb: A Pastoral and Theological Commentary on the Mass Chicago: Liturgy Training Publications, 2011 x + 163 pp. Paperback $16.95. The appearance of the third edition of the Roman Missal, according to the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops, blesses the whole Church with the opportunity to “deepen its understanding of the Sacred Liturgy, and to appreciate its meaning and importance in our lives.” Parish communities are encouraged not to simply implement the changes, but to use this event as a moment for liturgical catechesis so that the faithful may deepen their engagement with the liturgy. Paul Turner’s volume provides an excellent tool for doing exactly that. This book seeks to help individuals and communities “understand the parts of the Mass so that you may enter them more intentionally and prepare for them with wisdom” (ix). Further, it strives to provide a pastoral, historical and theological background to the various parts of the Mass, not merely as a commentary but as “an invitation to worship, a call to a new intention, a deeper awareness of the privilege we share to be invited to the supper of the Lamb” (ix). Fr. Turner is one of the most prolific and respected authors of pastoral resources on sacramental and liturgical practices. He holds a doctorate in sacred theology from Sant’Anselmo in Rome, is a former president of the North American Academy of Liturgy, and serves as a facilitator for the International Committee for English in the Liturgy. He is also a priest of the Diocese of Kansas City-St Joseph and pastor of St. Anthony parish in Kansas City, Missouri. Turner’s scholarly expertise and his rich experiences as a pastor come together to make this book a truly distinctive and effective resource for worship leaders, liturgy committees, pastors, and music ministers. At the Supper of the Lamb follows the Order of the Mass in the Roman Missal, including the texts for each of the four Eucharistic Prayers. Turner treats each rite by beginning with the appropriate text and rubrics from the Roman Missal, along with pertinent citations from the General Instruction of the Roman Missal. He then considers many of the theological, 239 Book Reviews historical, and practical aspects underlying the given text and rubrics. Every section concludes with a series of discussion questions that probe deeper into the meaning of the rites described and their application within particular worshipping communities. These discussion questions are a particularly strong point within this excellent text. The questions reflect Turner’s deep insight into the lives of parish communities and the theological and pastoral concerns that arise in them. For example, after describing the development and theological foundation of the Penitential Act, Turner asks: “On what occasions does your worshipping community use the blessing and sprinkling of water? Why have you made those choices?” and “How much silence is observed after the priest invites the community to recall its sins? Is it enough?” (13). Space is given for readers to write responses to the questions, and thus the entire volume has the appearance of a workbook. In this way, the very format of the book helps engender the result it seeks to achieve: personal reflection and engagement with the Mass. One of the greatest strengths of this volume is the way it uses the pastoral experience of particular communities as a resource for their own ongoing liturgical catechesis. Turner’s book laudably traces the historical origins of various rites to give readers a sense of the ancient patrimony surrounding certain prayers and practices. Few readers will know that the earliest extant version of the Roman Canon comes from a fourth century work on the sacraments by Ambrose of Milan (69) or that the word Alleluia appears only once in the New Testament, in the Book of Revelation, where it serves as a refrain for a hymn sung to the risen Christ and that this is, perhaps, why the Alleluia became attached to...

The Theo-Centric Character of Catholic Liturgy

347 The Thomist 75 (2011): 347-64 THE THEO-CENTRIC CHARACTER OF CATHOLIC LITURGY RAYMOND LEO CARDINAL BURKE Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura T O SPEAK ABOUT the theo-centric character of ecclesiology, of the Church, and, specifically, of the Sacred Liturgy, as the highest and most perfect expression of the life of the Church, could seem to be a redundancy. Is not the Church, by its very nature, divine, that is, called into being and sustained in being by God, and, therefore, centered in God? A fortiori, are not the Church herself and the Church’s worship, by definition, directed to God? Otherwise, she would end up in some form of idolatry. Why is it necessary to devote attention to the truth that the Sacred Liturgy is centered in God, that it is, in fact, the action of God the Son Incarnate, seated in glory at the right hand of the Father and, at the same time, active in the Church, on our behalf, for the salvation of the world? What has happened, in our time, to make it necessary to address the God-centered character of the Sacred Liturgy? In canonical terms, why is the discussion of the ius divinum, of the divine right of God to be worshiped by us in the manner in which He wishes to be worshiped, so seldom taken up in our day? I. CONTEXT To speak of the theo-centric character of the Sacred Liturgy or of the ius divinum and the Sacred Liturgy is, in simple terms, to speak of the right relationship between God and His creation, especially man, the only earthly creature created in the image of RAYMOND LEO CARDINAL BURKE 348 God Himself. Clearly, such a conversation has to do, first of all, with the Sacred Liturgy as the highest and most perfect expression of the relationship between God and man. There is no other aspect of the life of the Church in which the truth about God’s relationship with man should be more visible than the Sacred Liturgy. Such a conversation, however, if I am not mistaken, has been rarely engaged in recent years, so that it causes wonder to speak of the relationship between God and man and the Sacred Liturgy, the relationship between the ius divinum and the Sacred Liturgy. In the time since the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, but certainly not because of the teaching of the council, there has been an exaggerated attention on the human aspect of the Sacred Liturgy, which has overlooked the essence of the Sacred Liturgy as the encounter of God with us by means of sacramental signs, that is, as the direct action of the glorious Christ in the Church giving us the grace of the Holy Spirit. I wish to offer an initial reflection on the theo-centric character of Catholic liturgy which I hope to be able to develop and expand in the future. In light of my background as a canonist, I focus the discourse on the ius divinum and the Sacred Liturgy. It should be clear, however, that the canonical perspective is necessarily securely grounded in the theological reality of the Church. First, I will take up the subject in the Sacred Scriptures and in the Magisterium, and then its manifestation in canonical discipline. Since the canonical order is at the service of the objective order of our life in Christ in the Church, it is fundamental to understand, at least in its essentials, the objective relationship of the ius divinum and the Sacred Liturgy, in order also to understand the deepest significance of the canonical norms that govern the Sacred Liturgy. The liturgical law of the Church, after all, is at the service of the theo-centric nature of Catholic worship. II. SACRED SCRIPTURE When God offered the covenant to His chosen people, to repair the covenant destroyed by the sin of Adam and Eve, He THEO-CENTRIC CHARACTER OF CATHOLIC LITURGY 349 1 Gen 2:17; cf. Gen 3:3. Translations of Scripture are taken from the Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition. 2 Gen 3:4-5. 3 Exod 20:2. 4 Exod 20:3. 5 Exod...