Her er litt mer av det Bouyer skriver om arbeidet med revideringen av messeliturgien rett etter konsilet – jeg har selv uthevet enkelte ord.
But what can I say, at a time when the talk was of simplifying the liturgy and of bringing it back to primitive models, about this actus poenitentialis inspired by Father Jungmann … The worst of it was an impossible offertory, in a Catholic Action, sentimental «workerist» style, the handiwork of Father Cellier, who with tailor-made arguments manipulated the despicable Bugnini in such a way that his production went through despite nearly unanimous opposition.
You’ll have some idea of the deplorable conditions in which this hasty reform was expedited when I recount how the second Eucharistic prayer was cobbled together. Between the indiscriminately archeologizing fanatics who wanted to banish the Sanctus and the intercessions from the Eucharistic prayer by taking Hippolytus’s Eucharist as is, and those others who couldn’t have cared less about his alleged Apostolic Tradition and wanted a slapdash Mass, Dom Botte and I were commissioned to patch up its text with a view to inserting these elements, which are certainly quite ancient—by the next morning! …
I prefer to say nothing, or 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 quarters of the Saints higgledy-piggledy, all based on notions of their own devising! Because these three hotheads obstinately refused to change anything in 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!
… After all of this, it’s not much surprise if, because of its unbelievable weaknesses, the pathetic creature we produced was to provoke laughter or indignation—so much so that it makes one forget any number of excellent elements it nevertheless contains, and that it would be a shame not to salvage as so many scattered pearls in the revision that will inevitably be called for.
To finish with this sad tale, I shall point out what subterfuge Bugnini used to obtain what was closest to his heart, or, I should say, what the men who have to be called his handlers managed to pass through him.
On several occasions, whether the scuttling of the liturgy of the dead or even that incredible enterprise to expurgate the Psalms for use in the Divine Office, Bugnini ran into an opposition that was not only massive but also, one might say, close to unanimous. In such cases, he didn’t hesitate to say: «But the Pope wills it!» After that, of course, there was no question of discussing the matter any further.
… I would be given the answer, though weeks later, by Paul VI himself. As he was discussing our famous work with me, work which he had finally ratified without being much more satisfied with it than I was, he said to me: «Now why did you do [x] in the reform?» At this point, I must confess that I no longer recall specifically which of the details I have already mentioned was bothering him. Naturally, I answered: «Why, simply because Bugnini had assured us that you absolutely wished it.» His reaction was instantaneous: «Can this be? He told me himself that you were unanimous on this!» …