Posted on 02/26/2007 8:25:35 AM PST by Frank Sheed
If so, my bad! I thought it was in reference to Post 2.
Thought so, ELS. Mrs. Tax tends to make herself explicit. It must be due to her need to communicate clearly with her kids!
No, my bad. ;-)
Pardon my monosyllabic bluntness :-). I really like Cardinal Schoenborn; I wouldn't mind if they coughed at Cardinal Mahony!
According to my pastoral associate, when I brought up bells, it was only around for 1000 years and is no longer necessary because people know what is going on.
Why the stripping away of so much of the beauty, I wonder.... Sad.
It helps me to experience the mysteries of our religion. We can have polka masses, clown masses, etc., but no overly reverent ones? And my church is a more 'basic' church than most - not a lot of extra 60's things thrown in.
I will check out the book.
What's this last photo in your post? It looks like 3 women in blue jeans??
Minor correction:
"... a step forwards, to before Vatican II"
The post was from the What Does the Prayer Really Say blogsite. I have no idea why the photo was presented. It is not mine!
Update from the New Liturgical Movement blogsite today...
Ad orientem
Over at Fr. Zuhldorf's blog, he provides a link to a translated piece (coming originally via the Cafeteria is Closed) wherein Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn discusses ad orientem and versus populum: Ad orientem versus at the Viennese Cafeteria
Fr. Zuhlsdorf gives some interesting commentary through the piece.
I believe that one question which fails to be given enough emphasis when this issue arises in this kind of context (I speak of the Cardinal, not Fr. Zuhlsdorf) is that practical consideration, apart from the question of theology (which indeed would find neither orientation inadmissable inherently), of how this shift to versus populum liturgies has been understood and implemented by faithful and priests alike and the fruits that have come from that in our current secular and ecclesial culture.
A great problem in the liturgy today is the over-emphasis upon the communal, as well as a fundamental misperception of the nature of the Christian community in the liturgy and the ultimate horizontalization of the liturgy. That being the case, a pragmatic question enters in addition to the questions of our longstanding liturgical tradition of ad orientem and that is this: which practice can best serve as a corrective to this problem, or help prevent the problem in the first place, and also best stand in continuity with our tradition and acting in unison with the various ritual traditions of the Church? The answer is clearly ad orientem.
While versus populum is not inherently wrong, and could be received properly under the proper conditions and disposition of both the priest and the laity, we can ask, what have been the effects as we've found them in our climate and conditions?
We can argue for intellectual catechesis as the answer, but as we all know, in liturgical matters, while catechesis is great, liturgical praxis itself is often the best form of catechesis. This is particularly the case when you are dealing with two warring liturgical theologies. In such an instance, what is needed is enforcement and actions which speak of the message the Church wishes to get across.
posted by Shawn Tribe
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.