mar 252011
 

I sitt foredrag “The Possibility of Reconciling the Liturgical Calendars of the Extraordinary Form and the Ordinary Form” sier Fr. Angelo Van der Putten, FSSP, mer om selve kalenderproblematikken mot slutten. Han er svært så kritisk mot noe av det som skjedde rundt 1970 (muligens for skarp i formen?). Det er blant annet at man tok bort septuagesima-ukene (før-fasten) og pinseoktaven – og ga mange av de mest kjente helgenene nye datoer – som regnes som det mest dramatiske og unødendige.

… Louis Bouyer, an expert liturgist and a member of the concilium, had this stinging criticism to make of the new calendar: “I prefer to say nothing, or so little, about the new calendar, the handiwork of a trio of maniacs who suppressed, with no good reason, Septuagesima and the Octave of Pentecost, and who scattered three-fourths of the Saints „higgledy-piggledy‟, all based on a notion of their own devising. Because these three hotheads obstinately refused to change anything of their work and because the Pope wanted to finish up quickly to avoid letting the chaos get out of hand, their project, however insane, was accepted.”

Perhaps this quote from F. Gerald Calvet, O.S.B., the abbot of the Monastery of St. Madeleine, in Le Barroux, France, will help show the importance of this organic growth necessary for true reform: “Since the Council, we have witnessed a break in tradition. Instead of a homogeneous and harmonious development of the rites, as was always the case until then, a “manufactured‟ liturgy has been established.” “Liturgy is, by its very nature, transcendent. The stability of the rites must reflect the immutable celestial liturgy, and should detach man from a ceaselessly changing universe, in order to associate him with the canticle of the angels: the liturgy ought to be a native land for the faithful.”

These learned men see that not only have the “reforms” which we see around us, particularly in the liturgy, not been what Vatican II desired nor seemingly have they been beneficial to the piety of the faithful or the good of the Church at large. I think it indisputable that Pope Benedict XVI desires a reform of the “reform”. How this will involve the new calendar is difficult to say. The history, tradition, and natural harmony of the one year cycle is clearly evident from the innumerable authors who have written on it: from the time of the Fathers up to the great liturgists of the twentieth century who preceded, by a brief space of time, Vatican Council II. There is a monumental amount of material showing the principle lex orandi, lex credendi. Perhaps it seems to some that with the new translation of the Roman Missal, coming out in Advent of the year 2011, that the time is opportune to make an amalgamation or harmony between the two calendars. It is this author’s thought that this would perhaps not be the wisest or most prudent action at this time. We must apply the principles of sound liturgy, which is the organic growth and piety of the people, both of which would be offended by this endeavor. It is clearly necessary to study this question with greater research and understanding of the necessary organic development of the liturgy. The fear is that if any changes are made the same complaint made about the previous “reformers” will be rightly made about us as well. …

Hele foredraget kan leses her (pdf-fil).

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(obligatorisk)

(obligatorisk)