I dag leste jeg om den årlige, tamilske Mariavalfarten til Mariaholm (katolsk leirsted i Spydeberg i Østfold for uinnvidde). 1000 mennesker var til stede, leser vi, og det første bildet viser fremste del av en av prosesjonene. Det andre bildet viser et ganske overraskende, og stort, tilbygg til kapellet på Mariaholm.
Vårt Land skrev i går om In Vitro Fertilisering at den kjente (og nokså radikale) telologen Jacob Jervell advarte mot den i 1984, litt før loven om kunstig befruktning kom i 1987:
Jervell var blant dem som (i 1984) fryktet at assistert befruktning ville kombineres med «den såkalte genetiske ingeniørkunst», at barn skulle bli menneskelige produkter med utvalgte egenskaper som går i arv.
Tre tiår senere konstaterer filosof Bjørn K. Myskja at Jervell fikk rett. Det er nå lov å kombinere assistert befruktning med «preimplantasjonsgenetisk diagnostikk (PGD) for å unngå alvorlige sykdommer, eller for å få et barn med en vevstype som egner seg for stamcelledonasjon til et sykt søsken», skriver NTNU-professoren i artikkelen «Assistert befruktning og familieverdier i forandring: Er vi på et moralsk skråplan?» i Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift. Der undersøker han om «utglidningen» man advarte mot på 80-tallet har slått til, og forskjeller i holdninger da og nå.
Få deler Jervells bekymring lenger, skal vi tro Myskja. Han mener folk har tatt en moralsk U-sving. Nå mener de at det er et gode å kunne få barn gjennom teknologi.
– Det de advarte mot på 80-tallet, ser vi nå som fremskritt. Det som før var åpenbart moralsk feil, er nå moralsk riktig. Flertallet har umerkelig endret syn, sier professoren til Vårt Land.
I samme artikkel står det også:
… teologen og feministen Astri Hauge skrev i Vidunderlige nye barn: Fra livmor til laboratorium (1988):
Når man først åpnet for assistert befruktning for ektepar, ville nye grupper kreve likebehandling. Man ville kreve at nye bruksområder ble åpnet.
Enslige og homofile ville kreve sin rett mens forskning på befruktede egg, surrogati og «kommersiell reproduksjonsservice» ville bli virkelighet, hevdet Hauge.
Argumentene ville fremstå som «logiske og akseptable isolert sett» … små skritt ville «naturlig» lede til nye små skritt ….
Noen (kanskje mange) vet vel at Den katolske kirke er mot all form for kunstig befruktning, siden «alle barn skal bli til gjennom en kjærlighetsakt». Medisinsk behandling kan sørge for at dette skal kunne skje, men man skal ikke flytte selve unnfangelsen bort fra kjærlighetsakten. Jeg skrev en oppgave om dette og andre medisinnske spørsmål på presteseminaret Allen Hall for akkurat 20 år siden, bl.a. dette:
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued on February 22, 1987: Donum vitae. Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation – Replies to Certain Questions of the Day.
Very early this document states that «From the moment of conception, the life of every human being is to be respected in an absolute way because man is the only creature on earth that God has wished for himself and the spiritual soul of each man is «immediately created» by God; his whole being bears the image of the Creator.»
From this basic understanding mainly two issues are discussed in the document; Prenatal diagnosis and Artificial fertilization. …
… When the document turns to Artificial fertilization it first of all says that the Church’s teaching on marriage and human procreation affirms the «inseparable connection, willed by God and unable to be broken by man on his own initiative, between the two meanings of the conjugal act: the unitive meaning and the procreative meaning. … fertilization is licitly sought when it is the result of a conjugal act which is per se suitable for the generation of children … from the moral point of view procreation is deprived of its proper perfection when it is not desired as the fruit of the conjugal act, that is to say of the specific act of the spouses’ union».
This excludes all kinds of In vitro fertilization, even the homologous kind, and also homologous artificial insemination, «except for those cases in which the technical means is not a substitute for the conjugal act but serves to facilitate and to help so that the act attains its natural purpose.» But the situation gets morally even more difficult when one considers that in the technique used for IVF several extra human embryos are produced and destroyed, and there are also other issues like heterologous artificial fertilization and surrogate motherhood to complicate the matter. Many of these issues are discussed in Donum vitae in great detail.
An underlying issue here is the question of a right to have children: «the desire for a child is natural: it expresses the vocation to fatherhood and motherhood inscribed in conjugal love. …. Nevertheless, marriage does not confer upon the spouses the right to have a child, but only the right to perform those natural acts which are per se ordered to procreation. A true and proper right to a child would be contrary to the child’s dignity and nature. The child is not an object to which one has a right, nor can he be considered as an object of ownership: rather, a child is a gift … (therefore the child has the right) to be the fruit of the specific act of the conjugal love of his parents; and he also has the right to be respected as a person from the moment of his conception.»
Den katolske kirkes katekekisme skriver også nokså tydelig om dette (og bygger på dokumentet Donum vitæ fra 1987):
2376. Teknikker som medfører adskillelse av foreldreopphav ved at en tredje person bringes inn (sæddonasjon, eggdonasjon, leie av livmor) er dypt uhederlige. Slike teknikker (inseminasjon og kunstig befruktning ved en annen person) krenker barnets rett til å fødes av en mor og en far det kjenner, og som lever sammen i ekteskap. De utgjør et brudd på «eneretten til å bli far og mor bare ved hjelp av hverandre».
2377. Dersom slike teknikker (inseminasjon og kunstig befruktning ved egen partner) praktiseres innenfor ekteskapet, er de kanskje mindre skadelige, men de forblir moralsk sett utillatelige. De skiller den seksuelle handling og forplantningen fra hverandre. Den handling som gir opphav til barnets eksistens, er ikke lenger en handling hvor de to gir seg hen til hverandre, den «legger fosterets liv og identitet i legers og biologers hender, og lar teknikken overta styringen med menneskets opphav og bestemmelse. Et slikt maktforhold er i seg selv i strid med den verdighet og likhet som foreldre og barn skal ha felles». «Forplantningen mister moralsk sett sin særegne fullkommenhet når den ikke er villet som frukt av den ekteskapelige handling, det vil si ektefellenes særlige forening. (…) Bare ved å ta hensyn til det bånd som finnes mellom betydningen av den ekteskapelige handling og enheten i mennesket, kan forplantningen finne sted i samsvar med menneskets verdighet».
Mandag var vi i Beziers og så bl.a. på den flotte katedralen der – den kalles fortsatt katedral selv om de mistet biskopen for litt over 200 år siden; Napoleon mente nemlig at Kirken burde organiseres mer effektivt og med større bispedømmer. Tirsdag og onsdag formiddag så vi kirker og museer i Toulouse – katedralen, den like berømte St Sernin og Église des Jacobins (der St Thomas Aquinas ligger under alteret) – og onsdag ettermiddag så vi katedralen i Bordeaux, der vi er nå.
I går besøkte vi også Musee des Augustins i Toulouse og så bl.a. denne flotte statuen – kalt Virge et l’Enfant, dite Notre Dame de Grasse.
Eller mer presis stilt er vel spørsmålet heller; hva slags rytme og hastighet skal liturgien ha? På NLM-bloggen stod det for noen dager siden en artikkel om dette, der man innledningsvis kan lese: «Tempo and pacing are crucial parts of the success of any endeavor, and especially the liturgical arts, music, and education. The speed of delivery, the space between events and ideas, and the overall energy of one’s demeanor form a significant part of the tone of one’s message. Fish bite when the lure is in motion.»
Så skrives det noe om hva dette betyr for bl.a. undervisning, før vi kan lese:
An effective liturgist will establish exactly the right pace and habits in order to focus on the content itself. Conservatives often say “reverence takes time.” This is a fair statement, a worthy maxim, and a good drumbeat to rally fellow conservatives against Fr. Hasty Minute-Mass. But the tendency here is toward being slow, which may not be the most effective or appropriate tempo. The adage “festina lente” or “make haste slowly” conveys prudence, however quickness can convey strength, enthusiasm, and engagement. Just because something is slow, doesn’t mean it is rich and reverent. Slow liturgy might even be boring and anemic. So the question remains, “What pace makes an effective liturgy?”
Current educational research suggests there can be multiple «speeds» in one classroom. The traditional mass allowed for flexible pace and tempo in various parts of the liturgy, because the priest, choir, and faithful could occupy themselves in their own tasks without remaining necessarily in lockstep with each other. Similarly, effective liturgists today allow for a similar flexibility in the tempo; if the altar is delayed, the organist plays; if the choir is still singing, the priest slows his pace to wait for them to catch up. All things to be done are done well and given their proper amount of time, which may be a few moments or a few minutes.
Nonetheless, impatience has no place in the liturgy. An effective liturgist never “twiddles his thumbs” while waiting. Let me provide a key example: It is not uncommon in many parishes for the opening procession to reach the sanctuary before the organist has finished the introduction to the opening hymn. Having arrived at the altar, the priest sits there and looks at everyone, as they look at him; and together they glare and wait for those annoying few people to stop singing verses one and two, so that Mass can begin… forget about singing verses three and four! If we wonder why people don’t sing, it may have nothing to do with the song selections, the music, or the musicians– and it may have everything to do with the pastor and the altar servers. ….
Focusing on the content requires obedience to the liturgy. All analogous educational research suggests that an ordered “liturgical” environment fosters greater learning and participation. ….
Vi er nå på en ti dagers ferietur til de sørligste delene av Frankrike; vi landet i Nice tirsdag formiddag, var der i noen timer (besøkte bl.a. minnesmerkene etter terrorangrepet) og reiste så til Marseille, i går kom vi til Avignon og brukte en del timer i pave-palasset. Vi skal bli en dag og natt til i Avignon, men i dag skal også besøke Orange for å se på flotte romerske ruiner. I morgen stopper vi noen timer i Nimes, som også har romerske ruiner, på vei til Beziers, der vi skal være fire dager sammen med venner fra Oslo. Siste del av turen (neste uke) inneholder stopp i Toulouse og Bordeaux.
Vi var sist i Franrike i 2011, og da besøkte vi berømte katedraler nord for Paris.
John Allen skriver om pave Frans’ møte de de polske biskopene for noen dager siden, og sier at pave Frans der fremhevet «vicinanza» (nærhet) heller enn konfrontasjon for å overvinne sekulariseringen:
On Tuesday the Vatican released the transcript of a July 27 question-and-answer session Pope Francis held with the bishops of Poland, in which he seemed to suggest that the right way to resist secularism isn’t to prevail in intellectual arguments, but to “out-love” the opponents of the faith. … There are several fascinating nuggets, including:
– Francis’ reflection on what he sees as a contemporary form of Gnosticism that seeks to separate the individual from the community, especially the Church.
– His fiery rejection of “ideological colonization,” especially the promotion among children of the theory that people are free to choose their own gender.
– His insistence that the roots of the contemporary refugee crisis are in wars driven by financial interests.
– The pontiff’s ringing defense of the parish as the basis of ecclesiastical life, that must not be “thrown out the window.”
– Francis’ call to treasure the elderly, the “grandpas and grandmas” of society, as the “memory of a people.”
At the big-picture level, however, perhaps what’s most fascinating is the alternative way of reading the “progressive” social and ecclesial agenda that’s been associated with Francis since the beginning of his papacy.
Clearly, Francis has shifted the focus away from the “wars of culture” in the West and open confrontation with secularism, towards a more pastoral and social action-oriented approach. In the eyes of some observers – including, it has to be said, some senior Churchmen – that’s risked confusion about Catholic doctrine and the traditional spiritual pillars of the faith, opening the door to ever-greater capitulation to secularism.
What becomes clear listening to Francis speak to the Polish bishops, however, is that seen through his eyes, the aim isn’t giving in to secularization – it’s staging the battle on a different field, away from abstract debates towards hands-on pastoral proximity – what Francis likes to call vicinanza, “closeness” – especially to people in greatest difficulty.
Though he doesn’t quite put it like this, the idea seems to be that the right way to resist secularism and to win souls isn’t to prevail in intellectual arguments, but to “out-love” the opponents of the faith and thereby draw people to the Church.
There are several places in the text where, if one hadn’t paid careful attention to the header, it would be tempting to think this was actually a transcript of Pope Benedict XVI. That’s especially true of Francis’ diagnosis of Gnosticism and Pelagianism as the most worrying contemporary heresies, and his insistence that neither God can be found without Christ nor Christ without the Church. …..
I St Olav domkirke i Trondheims nylig utgitte hefte om Hl Olav leser vi også:
Ættesamfunnet i Norge hadde siden uminnelige tider vært splittet i storfamilier («ætter») , som kriget mot hverandre. Da Olav kom tilbake til Norge var dette «ættesamfunnet» delvis i oppløsning. Ættefaren var nå blitt bygdehøvding eller hersker over store landområder.
Ættehøvdingene misbrukte makten de hadde. På tingene dømte de bønder og småfolk etter landets lover, men selv tok de seg friheter som truet landets fred.
Som lovgiver og lovens håndhever fikk kong Olav sin viktigste oppgave: Å gi lover som beskyttet nyfødte barn, kvinner, treller og andre svake i samfunnet, og straffe dem som forbrøt seg mot landets lov og rett. I lang tid var disse lovene kjent som «St. Olavs kristenrett». Ennå i dag er deler av vårt rettsvesen tuftet på denne lovsamling.
Olav konge fikk 10 relativt rolige styringsår, og i denne perioden førte han samlingen av Norge et mektig skritt videre. Olavs samlingsverk inneholder blant annet følgende:
1) Han hadde herredømme over et stort rike. Olav var trolig den første rikskongen som sikret seg reelt styre i innlandsområdene Trøndelag og Opplandene.
2) Olav Haraldsson la grunnlaget for en riksomfattende lokal styringsordning. Han skal ha innsatt lendmenn i alle landsdeler.
3) Olavs rolle ved innføringen av kristendommen er grunnleggende. Ved tingmøtet på Moster, i Sunnhordland i 1024, fikk Norge også en riksomfattende kirkeorganisasjon med kirker og prester, en kristen rettsordning og fremfor alt forbud mot all annen religionsvirksomhet.
Kristendommen (Den katolske kirke) ble som kongens tro – rikets eneste tillatte religion.
Kongen ble i sin levetid Kirkens øverste leder, inntil Kirken senere ble helt selvstendig.
4) Gjennom kamper mot politiske motstandere økte Olav kongens riksgods betydelig. Han var den første rikskonge som i omfattende grad lot prege norsk mynt. Olav var den første rikskongen som hadde effektiv styring over hele Norge. Han foretok også mange misjonsreiser i de landsdelene som ennå ikke var blitt kristnet, og gav slik kristendommen varig fotfeste.
I St Olav domkirke i Trondheims hefte om Hl Olav leser vi videre:
Etter kong Olavs død begynte mirakuløse ting å skje. En solformørkelse ble umiddelbart koblet til slaget på Stiklestad, som et bud om himmelens vrede. Man hørte om flere helbredelser, blant annet fikk Tore Hund leget et sår i hånden da et stenk av kong Olavs blod kom på det. Vel ett år etter kongens fall, ble liket gravet opp, og biskopen erklærte ham for en hellig mann, 3. august 1031. Dette fikk folkets tilslutning – både av hans venner og tidligere fiender, og senere også av paven. Han ble lagt i skrin og satt på høyalteret i Klemenskirken i Nidaros, som Trondheim den gang het. Senere ble skrinet flyttet til koret i Nidarosdomen.
Kulten til St. Olav bredte seg hurtig over hele Nord-Europa. Det skjedde mange undere når folk i Norge og i utlandet ba om hans forbønn, ja, det gjør det fortsatt den dag i dag! Det ble bygget svært mange St. Olavs-kirker – ikke bare i Norden, men også i større byer som Novgorod, London og York. Olav ble helligkåret som martyr for sin død under korsmerket. Han blir i tillegg æret som Norges evige konge og landets og folkets vernehelgen, fordi det var han som fullførte den lange kristningsprosessen. Ved siden av Maria var St. Olav den mest avbildede helgen i nordisk middelalderkunst, både i maleri og skulptur. Disse fremstillingene går fra 1100-tallet og frem til reformasjonen. Olav vises enten stående, kronet og med en øks i den ene hånden, eller sittende, og oftest med et uhyre under føttene – symbolet på de onde maktene han overvant. Den sterke folketradisjonen om St. Olav vitner om den kraft han hadde i folks trosliv i Norge – ikke bare i katolsk tid, men også lenge etter reformasjonen i 1537. …
Historisk kunnskap er viktig for å forstå kong Olav Haraldssons samtid. Olavs konversjon og kristenliv viser hans lange vei fra hedensk råskap, til et liv mer i samsvar med Hvitekrists vilje. Olav overvant det onde ved å gi sitt liv for den kristne rett og for Norges enhet. Kong Olav var den første av de europeiske herskerne som ble gitt tittelen «Rex Perpetuus» – «evig konge». Han er Norges evige konge. Hans kongstanke skulle lede hans etterfølgere og gi folk trygghet og rettferd.
St Olav domkirke i Trondheim har nylig utgitt et hefte om Hl Olav (på flere språk), der det bl.a. står:
Mens Olav Haraldsson overvintret i Rouen (1013 – 1014), ble han kjent med kristentroen. Han fikk grundig undervisning om «Hvitekrist» og Hans synlige samfunn her på jorden (Den katolske kirke). Erkebiskop Robert forberedte selv det norske kongsemnet til dåpen (i 1014).
Den katolske kirke feirer Olav den Helliges dåp og omvendelse som fest eller minnedag den 16. oktober. Ved Olavsalteret, det norske nasjonal-alter i Roma, blir dagen feiret som fest.
Av hertug Richard II lærte Olav hva et sivilisert og moderne statsstyre innebar. Da Olav senere ble konge i Norge, innførte han den katolske kristenretten, hvor den svake for første gang i vår historie oppnådde beskyttelse mot den sterke. Dette hadde vært utenkelig uten kongens læretid i Rouen. Her fikk han også høre om keiser Karl den Store (768 – 814), som ville bygge ett stort frankisk og katolsk rike. Han ble nå Olavs store forbilde; «Rex iustus». Olav ville bygge Norge til ett, kristent rike, bygget på lov og rett.
Etter et års opphold i Rouen dro han til England og videre derfra til Norge for å erobre landet.Palmesøndag 25. mars 1016, i sjøslaget ved Nesjar, seiret han over jarl Svein Håkonsson, Einar Tambarskjelve og Erling Skjalgsson – landets fremste høvdinger. Og samme år ble Olav valgt til konge i Norge på Øretinget i Trøndelag.
Hos First Things leste jeg en artikkel og så jeg et intervju om at samtalegruppen Evangelicals and Catholics Together er 20 år.
SE INTERVJUET HER, og slik starter artikkelen:
In the mid-1990s, facing increasing pressure from the progressive side of the Culture Wars, Father Richard John Neuhaus and Charles Colson founded a remarkable initiative, Evangelicals and Catholics Together. It was controversial from the start. How could evangelicals and Catholics get past their differences on matters of salvation, Mary . . .? What forces from outside the churches imposed this unifying endeavor upon them?
Father Thomas Guarino, professor of systematic theology at Immaculate Conception Seminary School of Theology at Seton Hall University, joined Mark Bauerlein recently and explained it. He is co-chairman of ECT (with Dean Timothy George) and co-editor of a 2015 volume that collects ECT’s statements on vital matters on which Christians of different denominations might find common ground.
Given the increase in public and legal hostility to Christian doctrine, we need to recognize ever more diligently the fundamental grounds of faith across the churches. Father Guarino is an eloquent representative of that positive unity. We hope you enjoy the talk. … …
Viewed from his hometown of Wadowice, Poland, Pope John Paul II could be styled as the last and greatest expression of the Habsburg spirit, meaning a a broadly tolerant, open and cosmopolitan view of the world that saw national pride and loyalty not as a threat of imperial cohesion but one of its sources.
John Allen skriver slik om pave Johannes Paul og verdensungdomsdagen:
From the beginning, Catholicism in principle has been a universal, global faith, addressed to “the nations” in every corner of the earth. In many ways, however, it was John Paul II who made the Church truly global in practice, first by being the first non-Italian pope in 500 years, second through his staggering commitment to foreign travel – 104 foreign trips covering three-quarters of a million miles, more than three times the distance from the earth to the moon – and third, through his foundation of World Youth Day.
Because of John Paul, Catholics tend to think in more global terms about their Church, realizing that the experiences and priorities of believers in, say, Chicago and London, are not always those of Catholics in Jakarta, or Mumbai, or Riyadh.
Anyone who watched John Paul II during the eight WYD celebrations over which he presided, including Argentina, Poland, the United States, the Philippines, Spain, France, Canada and Italy, was always struck by the delight he took in seeing young people waving the flags of their countries and projecting pride in their cultures. Those instincts resonated with John Paul, because he took such fierce pride in his own Polish roots. … …
Den kjente (og ikke spesielt konservative) liturgen og jesuitten John F. Baldovin skriver i magasinet America om hva som er fakta og hva som er misforståelsen når det gjelder prestens retning foran alteret, bl.a.:
Turning toward the East, or ad orientem, is technical liturgical language for the priest and people facing in the same direction. The suggestion is nothing new. The decision to allow Mass facing the people has had its opponents since it was allowed shortly after the end of the Second Vatican Council. And more recently it has been championed by none less than Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in his many writings on the liturgy. …
… Opponents of Mass facing the people often point out that the Second Vatican Council’s “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy” contains no provision for the practice. They are correct. The issue was discussed in the commission that produced the document as well as in the debates on the floor of the council. … But shortly after the constitution was approved in December 1963, the first instruction for implementing the reform appeared. “Inter Oecumenici” (1964) stated: “The main altar should preferably be freestanding, to permit walking around it and celebration facing the people. …
The alert reader will observe several things. First, the altar is described as both the place where the “Sacrifice of the Cross is made present” and “the table of the Lord.” … Second, it is interesting to note that facing the people is not mandated. That is, it has never been forbidden, perhaps because too many chapels were built in such a way that having an altar separate from the wall was not architecturally feasible. Nonetheless, the preference is clear that the main altar of a church is to be separated from the wall to make Mass facing the people possible.
Another “fiction” that is sometimes repeated is that the General Instruction presumes that the priest will face East. Critics point to four points in the description of the Mass (Nos. 124, 146, 157 and 165) when the priest is directed to turn towards the people. Two cautions are appropriate here. These directives may be in place to deal with the possibility that the priest can face East, in which case the Instruction makes clear that there are times when he must face the people. But the document does not direct the priest to turn around again to the altar after the prayer over the gifts and the eucharistic prayer—that is, it does not presume that he will be facing East.
One last fact: At the time of Vatican II some argued that the original position of the priest was facing the people. This, too, seems to have been a fiction. All of the evidence we have from the early church shows that facing East whence the Lord was expected to make his final coming was expected. In church building that could not be oriented (e.g., St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome) the priest faced East, which was also toward the people.
Baldovin skriver en hel del mer i denne artikkelen, bl.a. om hvorfor dette spørsmålet er blitt så veldig viktig i Kirken i vår tid: «A reversion to the pre-conciliar position of the priest at Mass would be a profound signal that the forward steps the church took in Vatican II are in question.»
Hos Corpus Christi Watershed kan vi lese at en biskop i USA har nektet alle feiring av messen ad orientem i sitt bispedømme, men et dokument fra Vatikanet fra år 2000 nekter biskoper å komme med slike bestemmelser:
When the 2000 (2002) Missal was promulgated, the Vatican’s CDW was asked whether bishops have authority to forbid “ad orientem” celebration. Dated 10 April 2000, the CDW response was unequivocal:
HIS DICASTERY [i.e. the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship] wishes to state that Holy Mass may be celebrated versus populum or versus apsidem. Both positions are in accord with liturgical law; both are to be considered correct.
There is no preference expressed in the liturgical legislation for either position. As both positions enjoy the favor of law, the legislation may not be invoked to say that one position or the other accords more closely with the mind of the Church.
This letter (PROTOCOL NO. 564/00/L) specifically addresses whether a bishop can forbid “ad orientem.” They stated that, while exercising his rightful role as “moderator of the Sacred Liturgy in the particular Church entrusted to his pastoral care,” the Diocesan Bishop can neither “exclude nor mandate the use of a legitimate option.”
This letter was sent by the same congregation responsible for drafting the 2000 (2002) Missal and GIRM, which was approved by Pope St. John Paul II. The letter was signed by Cardinal Medina, CDW Prefect, and Archbishop Tamburrino, CDW Secretary. I have no idea why so many people commenting on this issue refuse to make reference to it.
Andre dag under Sacra Liturgia konferansen var det også en interessant sesjon (foredrag og videre samtale) om sangen som naturlig hører (hørte) med i messen:
After lunch, Dr Jennifer Donelson (of NLM) gave her paper, Origins and Effects of the Missa Lecta: Priestly Musical Formation in a Low Mass Culture. She began with an examination of solemnity, noting that the reference and norm in Sacrosanctum Concilium is the Solemn Mass (cf. SC 112-113). However, these sorts of Masses were rare before the Second Vatican Council, and are rare today. The general experience today is effectively that of a Low Mass with hymns replacing the Propers, and perhaps some singing of the Ordinary. The notion of solemnity is informed more by civic considerations than by liturgical ones – more people, more flowers, more applause sometimes seem to be what makes liturgical celebrations «solemn».
The Low Mass, however, cannot be understood properly without reference to the Solemn Mass …
Dr Donelson went on to look at the history of the relationship between speaking and singing in the liturgy. Up until roughly the end of the first millennium, liturgical texts were either spoken in near silence (as the Roman Canon is in the EF), or sung aloud. The number of texts spoken in a quiet voice increased between the 9th-11th centuries – for example, the prayers at the foot of the altar – and by the 12th century the rise of the missa lecta for various reasons had caused a rupture between text and music in the Western Church.
Why did this rupture persist? Low Mass made daily Mass possible, and an increased devotion to the Blessed Sacrament was thus also nourished, enabling more frequent reception of Holy Communion. Considerations of validity/liceity also contributed to the increasing neglect of music in the Roman Rite, resulting ultimately in minimalistic celebrations and a mechanistic, overly-rubrical approach to the liturgy: «It is in this way that one comes to think of the sacred liturgy in terms of power and control rather than in humble reception of what has been handed on.» (Dr Donelson)
Dr Donelson argued passionately against what she termed «liturgical sloth», the idea that if it takes 1 hour 15 minutes to sing a Solemn Mass, but 45 minutes to say a Low Mass, then why bother singing? Such an attitude is damaging and corrosive, as well as lacking in love. …
Andre dag under Sacra Liturgia konferansen holdt Dom Alcuin Reid et interessant foredrag han hadde kalt: On the Council Floor: The Council Fathers’ Debate of the Schema on the Sacred Liturgy. Der stilte han spørsmålet: «What did the Fathers of Vatican II think they were approving in Sacrosanctum Concilium – liturgical evolution or revolution?»
Dom Alcuin began by outlining the hermeneutical principles to be borne in mind: «What happened in the interpretation and implementation of the Constitution is an important and potent area for study, but we shall be unable to do that well if we do not read the Constitution in a manner that is consistent with the minds of the Council Fathers. We must be good historians: understanding the historical context of the principles and measures they laid down is crucial. An a posteriori isogesis of the Constitution, as is fashionable in some circles, is simply bad scholarship.»
He then moved to the conciliar discussion of article 37 of the schema, which would later become article 50 of SC, demonstrating the importance of reading the Council Fathers’ interventions in their entirety. To take two examples: Cardinal Spellman and Cardinal Ottaviani are often depicted as arch-conservatives, liturgical dinosaurs, resistant to any sort of possible liturgical reform, but this is based on a certain cherry-picking of their interventions regarding the liturgy constitution. If one reads the whole of their speeches, it is clear that they both accepted the need for genuine liturgical reform. The principle of enhancing actual participation in the liturgy «cannot be disputed» (Spellman), and the positive effect of «the pastoral work on the liturgy» (Ottaviani). They, along with other Council Fathers, were concerned that article 37 needed some clarification, but they were not opposed to genuine (one could say organic) progress in the area of liturgical reforms.
Only one bishop, Wilhelm Duschak, made an intervention that was revolutionary, in which he outlined his idea for an ecumenical «Mass of the World». But, as Dom Alcuin mentioned: «If we do read the Fathers’ interventions—all of them—it is simply impossible to assert that revolution (Duschakian or otherwise) was what they intended. Indeed, the debate on article 37 (50) proves the opposite. It shows that the Fathers accepted the principle that, so as to achieve a greater participatio actuosa a moderate reform of the Order of Mass was desirable.»
Dom Alcuin went on to point out that the work of Group 10 of the Consilium, who were responsible for the reform of the Ordo Missae, seems to have gone a long way beyond the intentions of the Council Fathers as expressed at Vatican II – where, almost right at the start of the discussion about the liturgy constitution, Bishop Henry Jenny, a member of the Preparatory and Conciliar Commissions on the Liturgy (and later of the Consilium) said that «The current Ordo Missae, which has grown up in the course of the centuries, certainly is to be retained» (General Congregation XII). ….
Sacra Liturgia UK har nylig hatt en interessant konferanse i London, og på NLM-bloggen har de offentliggjort referater fra konferansens fire dager.
Her er referatet fra første dag med (det svært mye omtalte) innledningsforedraget til kardinal Robert Sarah. Hele dette foredraget kan leses her.
Andre dag inneholder følgende referater:
The day began with Dom Alcuin Reid and his paper entitled On the Council Floor: The Council Fathers’ Debate of the Schema on the Sacred Liturgy, in which the question was posed: what did the Fathers of Vatican II think they were approving in Sacrosanctum Concilium – liturgical evolution or revolution? …
Dom Charbel Pazat de Lys then gave a paper entitled The Public Nature of the Liturgy, in which he examined the practical, sociological, institutional and christological meanings of the word «public». …
Prof. Peter Stephan’s paper was entitled The Vicissitudes of Liturgy and Architecture Shown at the Example of Berlin’s Cathedral of St Hedwig, in which he explored the «anti-liturgical modification» of historical churches. …
After lunch, Dr Jennifer Donelson (of NLM) gave her paper, Origins and Effects of the Missa Lecta: Priestly Musical Formation in a Low Mass Culture. …
A panel discussion on Sacred Music followed, which included Prof. William Mahrt, the publisher of NLM. There were lively discussions and exchanges regarding the best ways to introduce into a parish the singing of the propers and the resources available to help with this, along with other topics. …
Tredje dag er det referat fra:
Dr Clare Hornsby gave a lecture with the title: The Council of Florence of 1439: Diplomacy, Theology and the Arts in Early Renaissance Italy.
Fr Uwe Michael Lang was next to speak, with a paper entitled The Tridentine Liturgical Reform in Historical Perspective.
The next paper was delivered by Bishop Alan Hopes, entitled Sing a New Song to the Lord: Towards a Revised Translation of the Liturgy of the Hours.
The fourth paper of the day was by Prof. Joris Geldhof, entitled Liturgy Beyond the Secular.
The final paper of the day was «Especially in Mission Territories» (SC 38)? New Evangelisation and Liturgical (Reform of the) Reform was given by Dr Stephen Bullivant,
Fra fjerde dag er det følgende referater:
Prof. Helmut Hoping’s paper on one of the most fundamental aspects of our liturgy, Liturgy and the Triune God: Rethinking Trinitarian Theology.
Fr Michael Cullinan then gave us a slightly different perspective as a moral theologian in his paper The Ethical Character of the Mysteries: Observations from a Moral Theologian.
The next paper was given by Prof. David Fagerberg on Doing the World Liturgically: Stewardship of Creation and Care for the Poor.
The fourth talk was given by Mgr Andrew Burnham, on Divine Worship: The Missal and «the liturgical books proper to the Anglican Tradition» (Anglicanorum Coetibus, III).
Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone then offered some concluding reflections, summing up the talks and liturgies of the conference. He urged patience with regard to the upcoming work of the CDWDS regarding the question of the reform of the reform, but said that the celebration of the Mass ad orientem in the usus recentior would go a long way towards preparing the way for it, and reiterated Cardinal Sarah’s appeal to priests to begin celebrating Mass eastwards from the 1st Sunday of Advent this year. He encouraged all present to pay attention to the details of the liturgy in the celebration of it, holding up the London Oratory as an model and exemplar.
Det er litt underlig at hvilken vei presten står ved alteret har blitt så veldig kontroversielt i Den katolske kirke; i den lutherske og den anglikanske kirke (der prestene ofte(st) vender seg ad orientem) er det ikke slik. Og det handler jo også bare om hvilken vei presten vender seg ca 10 minutter i løpet av messen. På (den nokså liberale/ moederne) liturgibloggen Pray Tell fikk et innlegg om kardinal Sarahs forslag om at prestene bør vende seg ad orientem 148 kommentarer på tre dager før debatten ble stoppet.
I et annet innlegg på samme liturgiblogg kan vi lese ganske treffende i kommentar 35 og 36:
#35
… Cardinal Sarah said nothing controversial about ad orientem, unless ad orientem, the ancient and traditional Catholic practice, which is alive in the Church today, is controversial.Eastern Catholics celebrate ad orientem. Catholics who offer the Mass of Pope Saint John XIII celebrate ad orientem. Catholics in the Ordinariates celebrate ad orientem. Catholic bishops and priests offer the Ordinary Form ad orientem.
Pope Francis has celebrated ad orientem.
The Orthodox celebrate ad orientem.
Never did Cardinal Sarah say even one word that should have led anyone to say that Pope Francis planned to implement ad orientem Mass at Advent.
There wasn’t anything “controversial” (unless an ancient and totally acceptable Catholic liturgical practice, which is alive today) about ad orientem. There isn’t anything controversial about promoting ad orientem.
Cardinal Sarah did nothing wrong. I also don’t accept the interpretation that the press release indicated that Pope Francis “slapped down” Cardinal Sarah. …
#36
If the explosion on the blogosphere in the last few days have shown anything, it is that promoting ad orientem it is highly controversial!Note, I am not one to condemn ad orientem, nor have I done so. I have celebrated ad orientem. But I’m perfectly aware that promoting it – which I don’t do – is highly controversial.
I suppose one should that that it SHOULDN’T be controversial, that there’s NO REASON why it should be. But yet, it is. I state that as a fact, apart from my judgment of it.
Johan Allen skriver at pave Frans slo tre fluer i ett smekk da han utnevnte den amerikanske legmannen (og medlem av Opus Dei) Greg Burke til ny leder av Vatikanets pressekontor, etetr p. Federico Lombardis, SJ:
… First, he’s helped lay to rest perceptions that he’s anti-American. It’s well known that Francis had never traveled to the United States before his papal voyage in September 2015, that much of the most strident criticism he’s drawn since his election has come from American circles, and that his comfort zone is mostly defined by Spanish and Italian-speakers.
Up to this point, Francis had not turned to an American for a single truly significant Vatican post, and the longer that drought went on, the more pronounced impressions would have become that the pontiff had imposed a “no American need apply” policy.
A native of St. Louis (and a lifetime Cardinals fan), Burke is as American as they come. Granted, he’s spent much of his adult life in Rome, he speaks multiple languages, he’s traveled widely and is a citizen of the world, but his personality and outlook are still quintessentially American. By naming Burke to one of the most visible Vatican positions of all, Francis effectively has inoculated himself against impressions that Americans don’t have a significant place in his Church.
Second, Francis has also demonstrated that subject-matter competence is important in making important Vatican personnel choices. Burke came to Rome as a journalist working for Catholic news outlets, which gave him a deep understanding of the story. Because he was exceptionally talented, however, he quickly transitioned to the big leagues, first to Time magazine and then to Fox News.
That background means Burke has an insider’s understanding of the dynamics of the news business, and he speaks the language of professional journalists. Burke was hired by the Secretariat of State in 2012, and took over as the number two official as the Vatican Press Office in February. At the senior levels of the Vatican today, there’s simply no one better positioned to engage the media.
A similar observation could be made about Garcia, by the way, a veteran journalist who’s well-liked and well-respected in the Vatican press corps, and who brings enormous good will to the post. In that sense, Francis will get credit for naming the right people to the jobs.
Third, Burke is a member of Opus Dei – in their parlance, a “numerary,” meaning a lay person who nevertheless is celibate – which is a Catholic group typically seen as fairly conservative. By conventional standards, Burke’s personal politics (which, by the way, have never interfered with his job) could probably best be described as center-right. At a time when some see Pope Francis as a liberal stacking the deck with like-minded progressives, this appointment runs counter to the stereotypes and invites observers to consider whether for Francis, it’s ultimately more the quality of the individual than their ideology that actually matters. …
På nettsidene til Den katolske kirke i Danmark ble det kunngjort en messe som skulle feires lørdag 25/6 i St Augustins kirke på Østerbro i København:
For kun anden gang i Danmark siden liturgireformen i 1969 fejres højtidelig pontifikalmesse (bispemesse) efter den ældre (ekstraordinære) form af liturgien. Koret vil blandt andet synge William Byrds smukke messe for fem stemmer.
I forbindelse hermed meddeler biskop Czeslaw Kozon også firmelsens sakramente efter det ekstraordinære ritual til 14 unge fra Danmark, Sverige og Tyskland.
En video viser deler av seremonien (se under) og på nettsidene til Sankt Karl Borromæus gruppen kan vi lese mer. Også på Jylland, i Randers litt nord for Århus, feires den tradisjonelle messen regelmessig, organisert av Sankt Knuds selskab.
Jeg holder på å rydde kontoret, siden jeg skal flytte inn i nytt kontor (i Akersveien i Oslo) om en måneds tid. Denne gangen kaster jeg flere ting enn jeg har gjort ved tidligere oppbrudd, og beholder nesten bare ting jeg har skrevet de siste 20 år (også her kaster jeg en hel del). Bl.a. kastet jeg for noen dager siden alle prekener jeg holdt før 1995; det var ganske mange søndagsprekener (og -programmer) og bibeltimer fra mine seks år i Arendal Frikirke. Jeg så bl.a. at jeg hadde holdt en serie bibeltimer over Paulus’ brev til galaterne min første høst i Arendal. Jeg så at jeg hadde gjort grundig arbeid, men nå er det bare en kort oversikt igjen:
BIBELTIMENE I ARENDAL. FRIKIRKE H0STEN 1988
OVER GALATERBREVET
1. TORSDAG 1/9 GAL 1,1-9 – TEMA: Bare ett evangelium
2. TORSDAG 15/9 GAL 1,10 -2,10 – TEMA: Paulus’ apostelkall og kamp for de hedningekristne
3. TORSDAG 6/10 GAL 2,11-21 – TEMA: Korsfestet med Kristus, liv i Kristus
4. TORSDAG 20/10 GAL 3,1-14 – TEMA: Frelst ved tro
5. TORSDAG 3/11 GAL 3,15 – 4,7 – TEMA: Loven og løftet om barnekår
6. TORSDAG 17/11 GAL 4,8-31 – TEMA: Den gamle og den nye pakt
7. TORSDAG 1/12 GAL 5,1-26 – TEMA: Ånden og menneskenaturen
8. TORSDAG 15/12 GAL 6,1-18 – TEMA: Ansvar for andre og seg selv
