jan 212014
 

NLM-bloggen (NLM=The New Liturgical Movement) leser jeg et interessant (og litt dristig) innlegg om Vatikankonsilet og den påfølgende liturgireformen. For noe katolikker er den nye liturgien (på morsmålet) det eneste forbinder med konsilet skriver Peter Kwasniewski. Men selvsagt tok konsilet opp mange andre spørsmål, skriver han, og det som skjedde med liturgien årene etter konsilet var egentlig noen annet (eller mye mer) enn det biskopene hadde bedt om. Slik skriver han:

Pope John Paul II pointed out: “For many people, the message of the Second Vatican Council was perceived principally through the liturgical reform” (Vicesimus Quintus Annus, 12).

That’s just the problem in a nutshell, isn’t it? If the liturgical reform itself was bungled—and, in the wake of the scathing critiques of Gamber, Ratzinger, Nichols, Lang, Mosebach, Robinson, Reid, et alia, it is no longer intellectually honest to think that it was not, in some very important respects—and, what is worse, if its implementation was still further compromised by the prevailing secularism of the environment into which it was launched, one must ask: What version, or rather, what caricature, of Vatican II did those many people perceive whose idea of the Council came, perhaps exclusively, from the liturgical revolution?

They took in little or nothing of the authentic doctrine of the Council—the salubrious doctrine that, according to John XXIII’s intention and the very words of Vatican II itself, fully accorded with the teaching of former ecumenical councils, especially those of Trent and Vatican I. … …

… What is necessary today is to show, patiently, persistently, and accurately, with the humility and confidence born of careful study, that the fathers of Vatican II did not desire or ask for the liturgical reform that came out of Bugnini’s Consilium, that the Novus Ordo Missae is not in full accord with Sacrosanctum Concilium, and that the teaching of the sixteen official documents of Vatican II supports rather than dismantles traditional Catholic theology and piety. …

 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)