mai 262011
 

Fr. Ray Blake i England har nylig skrevet et interessant innlegg på sin blogg om hvordan messen ble feiret tidligere (og hvordan den korresponderte med folks private bønneliv), hvordan den liturgiske bevegelse og Vatikankonsilet ønsket noen (nokså forsiktige) forandringer i liturgien, og hva resultatet virkelig ble. Det er vanskelig å skrive noe fornuftig om disse tingene om man ikke kjenner liturgien (offentlig og privat) før 1970 ganske grundig (og faktisk kan feire den gamle messen). Ikke mange prester gjør det (og har derfor mindre å bidra med, etter min mening), men det gjør Fr. Blake – og skriver han bl.a.:

… One of the difficuties of the style of worship used at Mass over the last forty years is that it was difficult for many to recognise what happened in Church with what they do at home when they prayed. This dychotomy alone I suspect caused many to lapse. In most parishes Low Mass, with its profound silence, was all that was on offer, in larger parishes High or Sung Mass was usually left to the curates, with the Parish Priest hardly ever saying it. It was Low Mass that formed the spirituality of both priests and people. I don’t believe the VII Fathers intended what we ended up with what we have. They certainly intend some vernacular and I suspect their real intention was some blurring of the distinction of Low and High Mass. Their intention was to open up the treasures of the liturgy and form a liturgical people who participated fully in the liturgical life of the Church, hence the abreviation of the Divine Office.

It is prayerfullness within the the liturgy, not alonside the liturgy seems to be the aim of the Reform of Reform. It was prayerfullnes that marked the Holy Father’s liturgical celebration to Britain, and that prayerfulness was plainly recognisable both by Catholic and non-Catholic commentators in a way that the dancing, hand waving, wordy style of liturgy is not. …

..(Concerning the liturgical movement) … the reforms from Pius X through to Pius XII seem to encourage the non-passive involvement of the faithful. The expectation is that the people are at least singing the Ordinary and dialogues, understanding the texts that are used, so these, not a parallel or personal devotion are the underpinning of the Church’s life. At its best this happens in the Novus Ordo. The problem is it rarely happens. Antiphons are replaced by hymns, what should be sung prayerfully is said in a rather perfunctory way, with little personal prayerful engagement. What should be a prayerful encounter with God is not, and easily slips into a celebration of the community, or worse, the celebrant.

Pope Benedict speaks often about the ars celebrandi, essentially that seems to be about celebrating Mass prayerfully, which at the very least means the priest and other minister being recollected, recognisably prayerful. It is this recollectedness that is so characteristic of the older form of Mass. What I suggest the older form can learn from the newer form is the interaction between sanctuary and nave, which now seems so much part the experience of those who attend both forms, however the older form is always recollected, the newer form is not.

Han illustrerer denne artikkelen med et interessant bilde – fra Østerrike, tror jeg.

 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)