august 2011

Hvordan følge opp pave Benedikts synspunkter på liturgien?

En dr. Peter Kwasniewski, professor i teologi og filosofi ved Wyoming Catholic College i Usa, skriver her begeistret om hvordan liturgien feires der han arbeider:

Pope Benedict XVI is leading the Church out of a forty-year captivity marked by a “hermeneutic of rupture and discontinuity” into a new era in which Vatican II can be seen for what it truly is: one among many Councils, in continuity with them, and not opposed to all that had come before.

This is true in a special way of the Sacred Liturgy. Too often in recent decades the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass has been celebrated in a way that is quite different from, and even opposed to, the way it had been celebrated since time immemorial. The Pope is calling us back to a celebration in keeping with the dignity and mystery of the Eucharistic mystery. He is gently but firmly calling the Church back to continuity with her own Tradition. This is the deepest reason for his motu proprio liberating the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite: he wishes to see the two uses or forms exercising a mutual influence, such that lost continuity can be regained over time. It is a long term strategy with many immediate practical consequences. The “reform of the reform” has indeed begun, and the question that each knowledgeable Catholic must ask himself is this: Am I with the Pope and the real Vatican II, or am I de facto against the Pope because I wish to perpetuate a supposed “spirit of Vatican II”?

All over the world, parishes, chapels, and religious communities are adding the Extraordinary Form to their roster of Masses. The Pope’s example is beginning to have effects on the way Mass in the Ordinary Form is celebrated outside of the Vatican, especially in cities and in cathedrals. Plainchant and polyphony, ornate vessels and vestments, the Latin language, incense, and other such once familiar features of liturgy are returning in a way that could never have been foreseen even ten years ago. The seminaries and religious orders that are swelling most rapidly are those that have heartily embraced the Pope’s reforms. …

Les resten av dette innlegget på NLM-bloggen.

En blogg om den tradisjonelle latinske messen

Etter tips fra en leser lenker jeg til en blog (fungerer ikke lenger, 2012) som vil forklare den tradisjonelle messen på en praktisk og upolemisk måte.

This blog is devoted to providing gentle explanations for inquiring Catholics of the so-called ‘»Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite» (also variously called the ‘Old Rite’, the Tridentine Mass, the ‘Traditional Latin Mass’, the usus antiquior, and probably many other names besides).

It is intended for anyone who would like to learn more about the Catholic liturgical tradition, but who is put off by the large number of (often rather polemical) blogs that either ‘bitch’ about liturgies they don’t like or seem to talk in a rather elitist, intellectualising manner.

I explain the different parts of the Mass, step by step, and try to offer reasons for some of the features newcomers may find strange. I hope this will be a practical guide too, including advice about what to do at an Extraordinary Form Mass in order to get the most out of it.

Om å drive ungdomsarbeid

Amy Welborn skriver (etter verdensungdomsdagene) om hvordan det er å drive katolsk ungdomsarbeid, og om hvordan pave Benedikt gjør det:

Catholics fret about youth ministry. They worry about the kids and the young adults and how best to reach them and keep them and lure them back. Every few years a new wave of models and programs surges through the American Catholic landscape, promising new levels of «engagement» and «relevance.»

Some of these efforts are probably effective, others are window-dressing, and still others are just more of the same, just with different slang.

Last week – as anyone who isn’t totally dependent on the secular media (which barely covered it) is aware – more than a million Catholic teens and young adults, along with hundreds of clergy and religious, gathered in Madrid with the Holy Father for World Youth Day.

Anyone interested in the question of how to minister to young Catholics might want to set aside – just for a few minutes – all the expert advice you’ve bought and paid for over the years and watch and listen to what the Holy Father said during his time with these millions of young people. No charge.

Under tar jeg bare med overskriftene – les resten i artikkelen.

1. Teach them who they are

2. Continually hold up Christ as the answer

3. Seeking Christ? He gave us the Church so we can find Him

4. The Way of the Christian is the Way of the Cross

5. Go Out to All Nations

Siste søndag med gammel engelsk oversettelse

I England og Wales innføres den nye engelske oversettelsen av messen allerede 1. september (ellers er det 1. søndag i advent som er dagen). Fr. Ray Blake skriver derfor om gårsdagen:

Evening Mass is finished and it was the last Sunday Mass with old translations, somehow I think we should have had a wake, some act to mark its passing, like the medieval burial of the Alleluia. It isn’t saying farewell to friend, I’m glad we have fished with it.

We have been using the new translations at weekday Masses for little while now, just so Sunday next I am used to them and we have a few people trained to make the new responses, so during the week I am just going to put the loose page of the old Missal Propers out and the little paperback interim Missal.

Maybe I might put the old Missal out somewhere under a black pall. It marks the end of an era, …

Omnípotens sempitérne Deus, qui abundántia pietátis tuæ

Father Z. skriver før dagens søndagsmesse – 11. søndag etter pinse i den tradisjonelle kalenderen – at messen alltid handler om hva Kristus gjør for oss. Han skriver så en hel del om dagens kollektbønn:

Omnípotens sempitérne Deus, qui abundántia pietátis tuæ et mérita súpplicum excédis et vota: effúnde super nos misericórdiam tuam; ut dimittas quæ consciéntia métuit, et adjícias quod orátio non præsúmit.

Norsk oversettelse (1961):

Allmektige evige Gud, du som i overfloden av din faderkjærlighet gir dem som ber, langt mer enn de fortjener og ønsker, la din miskunn strømme ut over oss, så du tar bort det som vår samvittighet frykter, og gir det som bønnen ikke våger å be om.

Father Z. bokstavtro oversettelse til engelsk:

Almighty and everlasting God, who in the abundance of Your goodness surpass both the merits and the rayerful vows of suppliants, pour forth Your mercy upon us, so that You set aside those things which our conscience fears, and apply what our prayer dares not.

Til slutt i innlegget skriver han om messen mer generelt:

… St. Augustine (+430) says that Jesus “prays for us as our priest, prays in us as our Head, and is prayed to by us as our God. Therefore, let us acknowledge our voice in Him and His in us” (en Ps 85, 1).

Holy Mass is all about what Christ does for us.

Mass is a sacred action in which God is the principal actor. By our baptism we participate actively in His sacred action. Christ is the Head, we the Body. He takes our voices and makes them His own. Our actions become His. We must therefore never usurp the liturgy, change it around to suit our tastes. With Christ’s own authority Holy Church gives us the Mass. She alone provides the proper prayers and rubrics.

When we pray as Holy Church directs, bending our will to hers, our earthly voices ring authentically with the celestial, and ecclesial, voice of the Risen Christ.

Langs Hadrians mur

Jeg har en siste ferieuke, og skal fra lørdag morgen av gå langs muren mellom England og Skottland som keiser Hadrian lot bygge fra år 122 e.Kr. Vi reiste fra Oslo til Edinburgh torsdag kveld, ser noen museer i den byen i dag, før vi ankommer Segedunum (Newcastle) i kveld. Lørdag morgen starter vi på vår seks dagers vandring, sammen med familie fra USA – i alt 135 km.

Les mer om Hadrians mur på Wikipedia – på og på

Pave Benedikt: Skam dere ikke over Herren!

Slik hilste pave Benedikt de unge i Spania (fra Rorate Cæli)

Of course, there is no lack of difficulties. There are tensions and ongoing conflicts all over the world, even to the shedding of blood. Justice and the unique value of the human person are easily surrendered to selfish, material and ideological interests. Nature and the environment, created by God with so much love, are not respected. Moreover, many young people look worriedly to the future, as they search for work, or because they have lost their job or because the one they have is precarious or uncertain. There are others who need help either to avoid drugs or to recover from their use. There are even some who, because of their faith in Christ, suffer discrimination which leads to contempt and persecution, open or hidden, which they endure in various regions and countries. They are harassed to give him up, depriving them of the signs of his presence in public life, not allowing even the mention of his holy name. But, with all my heart, I say again to you young people: let nothing and no one take away your peace; do not be ashamed of the Lord. He did not spare himself in becoming one like us and in experiencing our anguish so as to lift it up to God, and in this way he saved us.

Benedict XVI – Address – Welcoming ceremony – Madrid/Barajas

Messens hovedstruktur – konklusjon

Jeg konkluderer min grundige presentasjon av dr. Haukes foredrag ved the Fota Liturgical Conference – som jeg aller først skrev om her – med hva han sier spesifikt om noe kardinal Ratzinger har skrevet om messens hovedstruktur:

In a short article of 1971, cited by Ratzinger, Jungmann also shows “that, linguistically speaking, Luther’s use of the word ‘Supper’ [Abendmahl] was a complete innovation. After 1 Corinthians 11:20 the designation of Eucharist as ‘meal’ does not occur again until the sixteenth century, apart from direct quotations of 1 Corinthians 11:20 and references to the satisfaction of hunger (in deliberate contrast to the Eucharist).”

The meaning of “Eucharist” also fits with the meaning of rational verbal sacrifice (oblatio rationabilis), which spiritualizes the category of sacrifice and is well suited “to interpret what is special in Jesus’ sacrifice. For what we have here is death transformed into a word of acceptance and self-surrender.” Ratzinger concludes: “This much should be clear at this stage: if the basic structure of the Mass is not the ‘meal’ but eucharistia, there remains a necessary and fruitful difference between the liturgical (structural) and the dogmatic level; but they are not estranged: each seeks and determines the other. … But the meal symbolism is subordinated to a larger whole and integrated into it.”

Messens hovedstruktur – Jungmann

Fra Dr. Haukes foredrag om messens hovedstruktur (som jeg har nevnt flere ganger, bl.a. her – hele foredraget kan leses her) tar jeg også med noe av det han siterer fra den kjente liturgen Josef Andreas Jungmann. Jungmann er veldig klar på at måltidet aldri var messens hovedpoeng, men heller takksigelsen, eukaristien, frembæringen av offer til Gud:

In 1949 Jungmann published an article dedicated entirely to the “basic structure (Grundgestalt) of the Eucharist. Other writings on this theme followed, especially in 1967, 1970 and 1971. Already in a contribution of 1943 he had shown that in the ancient Jewish banquet, on the occasion of the great feasts, a gesture of offering could be found when the father of the family elevated the chalice. The liturgy of Saint Basil, in the institution narrative, ascribes this gesture to the Last Supper itself, a reference which “very probably” corresponds to the historical reality. “The Lord takes the bread in his holy hands and holds it, showing it as he offers it towards the heavenly Father.” The sacrificial symbolism manifests itself therefore not only in the separation of the holy species, but also in the elevation of the gifts which can be observed already in the offertorium: there the offered gifts “receive that movement towards God … which is ultimately due to the transubstantiated gifts, the body and blood of the Lord.”

The “thanksgiving” is at the same time an “offering-up” which shows itself in the early Middle Ages in the elevation of the chalice before the consecration. Since the 12th century, the elevation is first of all an invitation to adore and to salute the Lord, but it must be taken into account that it originally contained a sacrificial symbolism. “It is also not enough to say that the sacrifice becomes present under the structure of the meal; for even in this case, the Mass would not be the visible sacrifice of which the Council of Trent … and the whole Tradition speaks.”

In his article on the “basic structure of the Mass,” Jungmann stresses “that in all liturgies, without exception, the basic structure of the celebration is formed as a thanksgiving to God, and indeed as a thanksgiving from which the offering springs: we give thanks to you and so we offer to you.” “Everything that expresses the giving, the movement of the gifts towards God” belongs to the exterior gestures which manifest this idea. … In this sense, the whole rite between the Liturgy of the Word and the Communion is clearly referred, also as structure (Gestalt), not merely to the togetherness of a common table, but to the movement towards God which begins in the preparatory part of the Mass and comes to rest in the Communion rite.” This “ritual expression is not the fruit of a late and secondary development, but was impressed already in the primitive Church in the institution of Jesus.”

The great historical study of Jungmann on the Roman Mass, Missarum solemnia, is also important for our topic. Here he presents the earliest names of the Holy Mass. “On the basis of the liturgical texts themselves, Jungmann shows that, even in the most ancient forms, the eucharistia – the prayer of anamnesis in the shape of a thanksgiving – is more prominent than the meal aspect. According to Jungmann, the basic structure, at least from the end of the first century, is not the meal but the eucharistia; even in Ignatius of Antioch this is the term given to the whole action.”

… After the reference to the biblical concepts of “breaking bread” and the “Lord’s banquet,” Jungmann mentions first of all the importance of the title “Eucharist” already in the early post-biblical sources. Immediately after it, however, he reports a whole series of concepts that revolve around the notion of “sacrifice.” We should also mention here the early testimonies of the Didache and of the First Letter of Clement (even if Jungmann himself does not report these sources in his overview). The Didache, a writing from ancient Syria, indicates the Eucharist as “sacrifice” (‘tusia’) and sees in it the fulfillment of the prophecy of Malachi about the pure offering which must be practiced at any place and at any time (Mal 1:11). Also extremely important is the reference of the First Letter of Clement, in which Pope Clement I in the year 96 addresses the Corinthians. He is dealing with the reinstitution of the presbyters-bishops who had been driven away from their ministry without any valid motive. Their ministry has an apostolic origin. The central task of the presbyters-bishops is the “offering of the gifts” (prosenegkóntas tà dôra).89 After the concept of sacrifice, Jungmann mentions still other names of the Mass, such as “the Holy,” “service (liturgy),” “assembly,” and “Mass.”

Mer om forståelsen av messeofferet

Shawn Tribe presiserer stadig hva han mente med innlegget (som jeg nevnte her) om messen som offer. Han skriver i en kommentar til sitt eget innlegg:

Just to keep things in focus, as I’ve noted above, being «Mass-centered» is not really the issue I’ve tried to speak to, but rather how the Mass is being understood. One could give primary focus to the Mass and still fall into the issue I am presenting.

Han skriver også noe som jeg har tenkt mange ganger, og gjerne selv kunne ha formulert akkurat som han selv gjør det:

I’ve known people who speak so (use the term «Sacrifice of the Mass») but yet still have a view of the Mass which still sees it as -essentially- about encountering Christ in the Blessed Sacrament through adoration at the moment of consecration and receipt of Holy Communion. I think in those instances it is a case of traditional language having been adopted, but without necessarily a full comprehension of the theological underpinnings and meaning of those terms.

This is why I say that I believe the Trinitarian dimension needs to be expounded upon, as does a
typological consideration between the Old and New Testament. These will help to give those theological underpinnings and help us to understand the Mass in the light of the big picture of salvation history and the heavenly liturgy.

En full og hel forståelse av messeofferet

Shawn Tribe skrev på NLM-bloggen i går et interessant innlegg om messen – se her. Der tar han opp viktige poenger fra starten av den liturgiske bevegelsen, som tradisjonalister gjerne glemmer. De arbeidet for at betydningen av det hellige messeofferet skulle gjøres så tydelig som mulig, og at andre fromhetsøvelser ikke skulle få stå i veien for Kirkens viktigste liturgi på noen måte.

På den tid (1920-30) hadde man ikke begynt å tenke (feilaktig) på messen som først og fremst et måltidsfellesskap, men også gode ting som eukaristisk tilbedelse og privatandakter kunne komme i veien for messeofferet. I vår tid og i vårt land er selve konsekrasjonen vektlagt ganske mye, og det er ikke noe galt i det, men mange ser ut til å legge liten vekt på at Kristus så i messen bærer seg selv frem som et lyteløst offer for Faderen. Slik skriver Shawn Tribe:

… today, those of us who are working toward some sort of genuine revival and restoration of the liturgical life in the Latin rite are accustomed to think critically of the liturgical over-emphases of the progressivist school of liturgical thought – the over-emphasis of the meal aspect over the sacrificial, the horizontal over the vertical and so on – but many may not be as conscious as they should be of the presence other over-emphases, seemingly «traditional», coming from what we might call the more pietistic and devotionalist mindset; over-emphases which are indeed still manifest today and which, in their own way, also come at the expense of the sacrificial aspect of the Mass.

So of what do I speak? One has only to look at some of the journals and books of the earlier 20th century Liturgical Movement to see this particular over-emphasis described in the context of their own time:

«The Mass came to be less and less appreciated as the sacrifice of Christ. Instead, the adoration of the Eucharist was greatly developed, and thereby the spiritual energies of the faithful were in the course of centuries turned away from the sacrifice itself.

We must try to keep in mind that, during the Mass and in particular at the consecration, the primary and essential thing is the offering of the sacrifice; the adoration of the Species is entirely secondary. We should strive to impress ourselves and those committed to our care with a deep understanding and appreciation of the sacrificial action. The Mass is not a “devotion,” it is not the adoration of the Eucharist: it is the sacrifice offered by Christ, and in this offering we are actually participating since it is also our sacrifice. We come to Mass, not so much to adore Christ in His divinity as to offer the body and blood of the divine Lamb to our heavenly Father.»

This quotation is from Fr. Pius Parsch (as quoted in the July 1938 issue of Orate Fratres), who admittedly was not without his own excesses, but he is certainly on point here both in his identification of a problem and in his understanding of the sacred liturgy. …

Debatten etter dette innlegget dreier seg etter min mening litt for mye om eukartistisk tilbedelse; den er vel ikke i særlig grad problemet, selv om det er sant at den aldri må komme i veien for messens hellige sonings- og tilbedelsesoffer. Innleggets forfatter skriver derfor også i en kommentar:

The primary point of focus however is simply this: if one’s view of the Mass is such that it is understood as purely or even primarily an act of Eucharistic adoration of Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament, then this is a very incomplete understanding of and approach to the Mass which needs to be addressed. It is a reductionism. Not the only one of course, but it is one and various problems spring from it. We should take recognize it and seek to foster a fuller understanding of the full nature of the Mass.

Marias himmelfart og vår

Ragnhild Helena Ådland Høen er en av noen få katolikker som regelmessig skriver Vårt Lands andakt på side 3. I dag skriver hun ganske treffende, slik at jeg drister meg til å sitere hele andakten.

Din egen himmelfart

Det begynner å bli en stund siden vi feiret Kristi Himmelfart. Har du tenkt over at du skal oppleve din egen himmelfart en gang? Som kristne tror vi ikke bare på sjelens udødelighet, men på det ufattelige mysteriet kalt «legemets oppstandelse». Så sjokkerende konkret tror vi.

I dag, 15. august, feirer Den katolske kirke festen for jomfru Marias opptagelse i himmelen. Har du en primstav? Da vil du se at det er en krone eller et Maria-bilde avmerket i dag, på «Marias Himmelfart». En krone fordi Maria er himmeldronningen. l det gamle Testamente var det nemlig kongens mor som var dronning, og i Johannes Åpenbaring er Maria kronet som dronning i himmelen (Åp. 12,1).

Hvorfor er de katolske og ortodokse kristne «så opptatt av Maria»? Det henger nøye sammen med den sterke vektleggingen av inkarnasjonen – av at Jesus faktisk er Gud som har kommet til oss i ekte kjøtt og blod. Som det står i dagens bibettekst: «På dette kjenner dere Guds Ånd: Hver ånd som bekjenner at Jesus Kristus er kommet i kjøtt og blod, er av Gud.» (1. Joh. 4,2)

Og hvordan ble Jesus Kristus kjøtt og blod? Jo, i Maria, hun som profeterte at «fra nå av skal alle slekter prise meg salig» (Luk 1,48). Ikke vær redd for henne. Du tilber ikke H. M. Dronning Sonja selv om du viser henne ære som Norges dronning. På samme måte tilber du ikke Maria selv om du viser henne ære som Himmelrikets dronning.

Hvorfor er det et poeng at Maria ble opptatt i den himmelske herlighet med både kropp og sjel? Fordi det viser oss at legemets oppstandelse er reell. Det er en oppfyllelse av det løftet Jesus har gitt alle som følger ham om at vi også vil bli tatt imot i Paradis. Helt fysisk, helt virkelig. Er det ikke herlig?

Messens hovedstruktur – Ratzinger

Dr. Hauke nevner at kardinal Ratzinger uttaler seg (i boka «Feast of Faith», s 35-36) om forsøket på å skille mellom messens ytre og indre, i måltidsstrukturen og offerinnholdet. han har ingen tro på et slikt skille:

As Ratzinger observes: The explication according to which the structure of meal and the content of sacrifice were juxtaposed “could not provide a satisfactory answer in the long term. Particularly if the structure is not merely a ceremonial form, but at its core an indispensable manifestation of its essential content, it makes no sense absolutely to separate the one from the other. The lack of clarity which has prevailed in this area, even during the Council, regarding the relation between the dogmatic and liturgical levels, must be regarded as the central problem of the liturgical reform. Failure to deal with it has resulted in a great many of the individual problems which have since preoccupied us.”

Messens hovedstruktur – mer om Guardini

Dr. Hauke skriver videre (i et foredrag som jeg bl.a. nevnte her) at Guardini møtte motstand ang. sitt syn på ‘måltidet’ som messens struktur, bl.a. fra Jungmann. Guardi modererte seg så litt, men ikke mye – og den siste setningen i sitatet under overrasker meg; at Guardini var en av dem som aller mest arbeidet for at messen skulle feires «versus populum».

… at a 1943 symposium at Vienna, he was confronted with the view of Jungmann that the Mass in the primitive Church contains “not only the essence, but also already the expressive shape [Gestaltausdruck] of the sacrifice,” Guardini stressed the hypothetical character of his own exposition and remarked: “it cannot by any means be a question of us changing anything on our own initiative. I proposed only to consider whether it is not correct and possible to make more prominent, besides the aspect of sacrifice, also the other aspects present in the entirety of the Holy Mass, such as the meal and the commemoration, so as to gain a more balanced picture.” Already in 1942 Guardini had published a letter in which he conceded “that it is probably not possible to accept only one form [Gestalt] and that, at certain points, the form of the sacrifice enters into the form of the meal.” “In this way, Guardini admitted that the essence of the Eucharist as acrifice finds expression also in its exterior structure.”

Guardini’s concern to accentuate the “meal” as “structure” or “basic form” of the Holy Mass was influenced by the liturgical movement at the beginning of the 20th century. At the end of the 19th century, the faithful had received Holy Communion only a few times a year. Pope Pius X, however, encouraged the faithful to communicate more frequently, inviting even children. In order to emphasize the active participation (participatio actuosa) of the faithful in the liturgy, the common communion became the focus of attention.

Guardini’s proposal went further, however, inasmuch as it described the Eucharistic banquet, Holy Communion, as the basic structure of the entire Eucharistic mystery. This approach would also influence Church architecture: the sacred space was structured in a way to accentuate the aspect of the meal, especially by facing the celebration toward the people. Guardini was one of the first and most influential supporters of the Mass celebrated “versus populum”. …

Messens hovedstruktur – Romano Guardini

I foredraget til Prof. Manfred Hauke: “The “Basic Structure“ (Grundgestalt) of the Eucharistic Celebration According to Joseph Ratzinger” – som kan leses her – var det først og fremst noen tanker av Romano Guardini som for meg forklarer hvordan vi er kommet dit vi er i dag; at messen knapt forstås som et offer båret fram for Gud mer. Legg merke til hvordan kadinal Ratzinger vurderer dette spørsmålet (uthevet av meg).

The discussion of our topic, in its stricter sense, begins in 1939 with some meditations of Romano Guardini, … The core of the discussion revolves around the idea that, according to Guardini, the “structure” (or “form, figure, shape”, in German Gestalt) and its “content” (Gehalt) are entirely different things: the Holy Mass, in its “structure”, is a meal, but its “content” is a sacrifice. This divergence between liturgical structure and dogmatic content, according to Ratzinger, “must be regarded as the central problem of the liturgical reform. Failure to deal with it has resulted in a great many of the individual problems which have since preoccupied us.” …

… The starting point of our discussion is the appearance of a devotional book by Guardini in 1939, entitled Meditations before Mass (Besinnung vor der Feier der heiligen Messe). This work goes back to a series of short meditations held by Guardini for young people from 1930 to 1932 at Castle Rothenfels in Bavaria. According to Guardini, every “authentic liturgical action … contains a basic structure [Grundgestalt] which supports it and which gives to it its specific life.” The sacraments, especially, “are no mere apportionments of divine gifts, but life events, constructed according to the essence of man, whose soul expresses itself in the body, and whose body is formed by the soul. ‘Form’ [‘Gestalt’] is the manner in which the human essence is alive. … Therefore one of the most important tasks of liturgical education is to reveal as clearly and as vigorously as possible the interior structure of the divine events. So what is the basic structure of the Mass? It is that of the meal.”

In support of this thesis, Guardini refers especially to the Last Supper, and then continues: “The supporting structure of the Mass is the meal. The sacrifice does not emerge as structure, but remains behind the whole. In this way, it is not pushed back. Already in the history of religion, every cultic meal, or even ultimately every meal, depends on it. … The animal that should serve for food must be immolated, properly speaking, before the altar, because blood and life belong to God … From the altar, from the hands of the Lord, man then receives the immolated victim and uses it as nourishment.” Applied to the Mass, this means: “Its structure is the meal; behind it – not as structure, but as reality, as fountain, as condition – is the sacrifice.”

Guardini forstod selv ganske snart at hans tanker ble misforstått av mange, og gjorde forandringer i senere utgaver av skriftet:

In the fourth edition of 1947, Guardini omits his expositions on the “structure” of the Holy Mass. He explains this omission in his preface, writing: “the chapter ‘The Form of Commemoration, the Meal’ … had to be omitted because it gave rise to certain misunderstandings. … The reflections of the chapter dealt with … a pure problem of form [Formproblem]. They were not, however, understood in this way, but they were implicated in the old controversy in which the Catholic doctrine says that the Mass is ‘a true and proper sacrifice’ … The reflections of the mentioned chapter did not concern, not even in a minimal way, this controversy. …

På tross av dette inneholdt senere utgaver likevel det Guardini selv hadde tatt bort.

Messens hovedstruktur – Innledning

Jeg nevnte for et par dager siden et foredrag fra fjerde Fota Liturgical Conference; Prof. Manfred Hauke holdt foredraget “The “Basic Structure“ (Grundgestalt) of the Eucharistic Celebration According to Joseph Ratzinger”. Foredraget kan i sin helhet leses her.

Jeg siterer litt fra starten av foredraget, der dr. Hauke presenterer ganske tydelig hovedspørsmålet han vil ta opp; er messen et offer eller et måltid, og hvordan er det eventuelt begge deler:

The discussion concerning the “basic structure” of the Holy Mass has been concentrated up to now primarily in the German-speaking countries. We find a certain foreshadowing of the debate already in a controversy in the years before the First World War: Franz Seraph Renz (1884-1916), in a substantial monograph on the history of the Eucharistic sacrifice, proposed the thesis that the Eucharistic sacrifice, in its essence, is a meal (1902). As Ratzinger does not refer to the controversy that sprang from this suggestion (especially in the years 1906-1910) or to its connection with a certain condemned proposition in the decree of Pope Pius X, “Lamentabili”, against Modernism (1907), we mention it here only briefly.

The “tendency towards an increasing importance of the meal aspect of the Holy Mass” begins with the Augsburg theologian Franz Seraph Renz. Renz “confused the nature of the sacrificial act with the purpose of union with God” and states that: “the Eucharistic worship is essentially a meal with a sacrificial character”. The ideas here described would be reelaborated by a student of Renz, Franz Sales Wieland (1877-1957), according to whom before Irenaeus the Eucharistic celebration was understood as a meal. Only after Irenaeus did the thankgiving sacrifice [Danksagungsopfer] become a presentation/offering sacrifice [Darbringungsopfer]. Wieland was challenged by the Innsbruck dogmatic and fudamental theologian Emil Dorsch SJ (1867-1934). The relevant works of Wieland were put on the Index because they were seen to be connected to proposition 49 of the anti-Modernist decree of Pius X, “Lamentabili” (1907): “When the Christian supper gradually assumed the nature of a liturgical action those who customarily presided over the supper acquired the sacerdotal character”.

Fjerde Fota Liturgical Conference

Den fjerde Fota Liturgical Conference ble arrangert i Irland i to omganger i sommer, første runde var i slutten av juni. Denne konferansen kan man lese om her, dvs. om alle de interessantee personene som skulle holde foredrag:

H.E. Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke
Prof D. Vincent Twomey
Prof. Dr. Dieter Böhler, SJ
Fr. Sven Leo Conrad Dom Cassian Folsom, OSB
Dom Paul Gunter, OSB
Prof. Dr. Manfred Hauke
Prof. Dr. Helmut Hoping
Fr. Uwe Michael Lang
Prof. William Mahrt
Dr. Caitríona Ó Dochartaigh
Prof. Lauren Pristas
Dr. Janet Rutherford

Av disse foredragene har jeg bare sett Prof. Manfred Haukes foredrag publisert (som kan leses her), og det er til gjengjeld svært interessant. Det heter «The “Basic Structure“ (Grundgestalt) of the Eucharistic Celebration According to Joseph Ratzinger», og handler om hvordan noen teologer har prøvd å skille mellom liturgiens indre innhold (som er offeret) og dens ytre form (som er måltidet), og hvordan disse forsøkene ikke har vært vellykkede – og også er blitt kritisert av kardinal Ratzinger.

Les gjerne hele det interessante foredraget selv. Jeg kommer tilbake til deler av det om ikke lenge.

Tradisjonell latinsk messe søndag 14. august

Første TLM i St Joseph kirke (i Oslo) etter sommerferien blir feiret søndag 14. august kl 19.00.

Tekster og bønner for denne 9. søndag etter pinse kan lese på latin og norsk HER. Som ordinarium synger vi (som vanlig i det grønne kirkeår) Messe XI og Credo I. Programmet for messen fins HER.

Skroll til toppen