I liturgien trenger vi ‘både og’
Jeg syns at det er litt trist at her på bloggen (og også mange andre steder) blir debatten nokså polarisert, både når vi diskuterer liturgi og flere andre emner. Men det blir ofte mer fruktbare samtaler når man forstår hverandre bedre. Jeg har også blitt spurt av noen som misliker bloggen min, hva jeg egentlig ønsker med den. Det er det ikke så lett å svare på fullt ut, men når det gjelder Kirkens liturgi ønsker jeg først og fremst at den kan feires best mulig, og jeg tror at vi oppnår det best ved å berikes av elementer fra både den gamle og den nye messen.
I min lange liste med liturgibøker har jeg nå begynt på Laurence Paul Hemmnings «Worship as a revelation». Boka er ganske filosofisk og teoretisk, og jeg har ikke kommet så veldig langt i den, men mot slutten skriver Hemming noe (og siterer kardinal Ratzinger) som kan hjelpe oss til å legge vekt på både det gamle og det nye, når vi kontinuerlig skal arbeide med liturgien:
I have already remarked on Benedict XVI’s characterization of the need for a ‘hermeneutic of continuityin interpreting the postconciliar period of the Church’s life. He has extended this interpretative key to the liturgy itself, by saying that ‘the changes which the Council called for need to be understood within the overall unity of the historical development of the rite itself, without the introduction of artificial discontinuities’, adding in a note: ‘I am referring here to the need for a hermeneutic of continuity also with regard to the correct interpretation of the liturgical development which followed the Second Vatican Council. … …
In 1996, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger gave a protracted interview to the German journalist Peter Seewald about the state and present situation of the Church. He spoke once again of his disappointment with liturgical developments in the postconciliar period, speaking of how the liturgy has been ‘flattened’ and evacuated of mystery. Seewald put the following question: ‘wouldn’t it be conceivable to reactivate the old rite in order to work against this levelling and demystification?’ The future pope’s response is a clear indication that there are no short-cuts, no easy solutions to the present situation with respect to the sacred liturgy. Ratzinger replied:
That alone would not be a solution. I am of the opinion, to be sure, that the old rite should be granted much more generously to all those who desire it. It is impossible to see what could be dangerous or unacceptable about that. A community is calling its very being into question when it suddenly declares that what until now was its holiest and highest possession is strictly forbidden and when it makes the longing for it seem downright indecent. Can it be trusted anymore about anything else? Won’t it proscribe again tomorrow what it prescribes today?
But a simple return to the old way would not, as I have said, be a solution. Our culture has changed so radically in the last thirty years that a liturgy celebrated exclusively in Latin would bring with it an experience of foreignness that many could not cope with. What we need is a new liturgical education, especially of priests. It must once again become clear that liturgical scholarship doesn’t exist in order to produce constantly new models, though that may be all right for the car manufacturing industry. It exists in order to introduce us into feast and celebration, to make man capable of the mystery. Here we ought to learn not just from the Eastern Church but from all the religions of the world, which all know that liturgy is something other than the invention of texts and rites, that it lives precisely from what is beyond manipulation. Young people have a very strong sense of this. Centres in which the liturgy is celebrated reverently and nobly without nonsense attract, even if one doesn’t understand every word. We need such centres to set an example. Unfortunately, in Germany tolerance for bizarre tinkering is almost unlimited, whereas tolerance for the old liturgy is practically nonexistent. We are surely on the wrong path in that regard.

Biskop Elliott i Melbourne, Australia, som jeg skrev om i går (se her), hadde da visse innvendinger mot den tradisjonelle latinske messen, men har nå begynt å feire den selv. En av grunnene til hans forandring er at artikkelen jeg da siterte, var skrevet for 6-8 år siden, og nå etter pave Benedikts Summorum Pontificum er situasjonen blitt ganske ny. Dessuten var Elliot i mot en viss type TLM, der presten og ministrantene holdt på med noe for selv oppe ved alteret, mens folket gjorde andre ting – sang salmer vanligvis. Messen han her feiret (