Posted on 09/14/2009 1:36:31 PM PDT by NYer
The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has declined to comment on reports that the Vatican is considering a “reform of the reform” of the liturgy, but a formal statement on the matter is expected soon.
An official in that department told the Register Sept. 8 that “everything is under study and is progressing” but added that he could say no more until Cardinal Antonio Llovera Cañizares, prefect of the congregation, or the Holy See Press Office, issued an official statement.
On Aug. 22, the reliable Vatican watcher Andrea Tornielli reported that cardinals and bishops of the congregation voted almost unanimously at their plenary meeting in March “in favor” of 30 proposals aimed at increasing reverence in the liturgy. He said these included “a greater sacrality of the rite, the recovery of the sense of Eucharistic worship, the recovery of the Latin language in the celebration, and the remaking of the introductory parts of the Missal in order to put a stop to abuses, wild experimentations and inappropriate creativity.”
Tornielli also wrote that the bishops had reaffirmed the importance of receiving Communion on the tongue rather than the hand, and that Cardinal Cañizares was studying the possibility of “recovering” the practice of celebrating Mass with the priest facing ad orientem (literally “to the east”; i.e. in the same direction as the people).
However, there are conflicting reports over whether these last two proposals were included in the propositions that Tornielli reported were delivered to Pope Benedict XVI on April 4.
The deputy director of the Holy See Press Office, Passionist Father Ciro Benedettini, played down the report, saying at the end of August there were “no institutional proposals in existence regarding a modification of the liturgical books currently in use.”
However, in an Aug. 29 blog post, Tornielli stood by his story, saying that a period of “study had begun” on what will probably amount to long-term reform after plenty of consultation. He said he did not mention “institutional proposals regarding a modification of the liturgical books currently in use” but rather referred to “more precise and rigorous indications regarding the manner of celebration with the existing books and in some cases those just published.”
Clarity on this issue has been difficult to obtain on this story, partly because of the absence of senior officials — most notably Cardinal Cañizares — who have been on vacation. The Spanish cardinal was expected to return to Rome in late September. Also, the congregation’s secretary, American Archbishop Augustine Di Noia, has only recently been appointed and was not yet willing to comment on the cardinal’s behalf.
“We’re waiting for the cardinal to return at the end of the month,” the Vatican department’s official said. “Then there will be a statement from the press office or the cardinal himself.”
It’s not clear when the Vatican will issue that statement, and it may be a long while coming; there had been no communiqué when the Register went to press.
Cardinal Cañizares, who is affectionately nicknamed “the little Ratzinger” because his views closely coincide with those of the Holy Father, is known to want to move forward decisively on retrieving a truer interpretation of Sacrosanctum Concilium, the liturgical constitution of the Second Vatican Council.
In a recent interview with the Italian monthly journal 30 Days, the cardinal said: “At times, change was for the mere sake of changing from a past perceived as negative and outdated. Sometimes the reform was regarded as a break and not as an organic development of Tradition.”
The Pope has long held this view, which he made known when he was cardinal. On the subject of the priest celebrating Mass facing the people, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger wrote in his book The Spirit of the Liturgy, published in 2000, that the council said “nothing about ‘turning to the people.’”
Today’s celebration versus populum (facing the people), he wrote, is based on a misunderstanding of the significance of St. Peter’s basilica (which changed the orientation of the altar because it faced west instead of east) and an inaccurate interpretation of the Last Supper.
Reservations about Communion in the hand and celebration versus populum were also voiced by Cardinal Cañizares’ predecessor, Cardinal Francis Arinze, most notably in an interview with the Register in March 2007. However, he thought it “unwise” at the time for his department to enforce changes.
The Vatican secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, sought to dampen speculation of possible “reform of the reform” in an interview with the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano Aug. 27.
He said the Pope does not intend to roll back the conciliar reforms, and he encouraged observers to instead focus on the actual actions the Pope has undertaken since his election.
Cardinal Bertone said the Pope does have a plan for “reform of the Church,” but it’s one that focuses on personal holiness and fundamental questions of faith.
He also stressed the Pope’s main priority in his messages is to restore a sense of awareness of God in the world and in society.
That would be a blessing, for all of us. I look forward to finding a church near me that follows them. It explains why some churches in my area seem on a desperate rush to push more ‘changes’, they must be expecting this kind of thing.
Later, a wise person used that concept by analogy to help me grasp the underlying spiritual meaning of sexual purity: that in marriage, the spouses' sexual organs --- their procreative/amative capacities --- are blessed by God's law and consecrated "to each other." which makes one realize that immodesty, fornication, sexual impurity, etc. are to be avoided, not just because they have bad consequences, but because they're actually a kind of sacrilege: the trivialization of a high and holy thing to base usage.
It made sense to me as I pondered it. But the sacred-specialness of the way we handle (or don't handle) the Eucharistic gifts, seemed to be lost, to become casual and coarsened, at just the same time that the desacralization of the sexual gifts was running rampant.
The very concept of sacredness becomes unteachable, then unthinkable, because we don't have anything sacred we can even use as an analogy.
I don't suppose I've expressed this very well, but it's something I've thought about a good deal.
Is there any point in receiving on the tongue from a lay extraordinary eucharistic minister?
You're definitely asking the wrong person :-) We don't have EMHCs in the Maronite Catholic Church and communion is distributed by intinction and only on the tongue. I'll let the other freepers respond. However, you may want to call in or email your question to jouneyhome@ewtn.com. The program airs tonight at 8pm.
September 14
Open- Line
Dr. Francis Beckwith
Former Evangelical Protestant
Some are. Still breathing myself (although treasuring the last non-gray hairs) and if I am anything like my mom, I have about 40 years to go, God willing.
But that misses the point of the younger Catholics who have taken up the cause. Our parish (Tridentine Mass) is split between older worshipers and younger, with relatively few in the 30s-40s, for some reason. But the handful of middle-agers who do come tend to bring kids, which is great!
Yes - for several reasons.
1. To demonstrate reverence to the Blessed Sacrament.
2. If you receive on the tongue from a priest but in the hand from a EEM, you will forget and hold up your hands to the priest. Guaranteed. (That's when I decided I was not going to make distinctions and just receive on the tongue.)
3. Maybe you'll gross out the EEM and he (more likely she) will quit. < j/k >
(It's hard to believe we tip-toed across the Tiber in 2004. How time flies when you're having fun!)
I made our Archbishop do a double take by addressing him as “Your Grace”, not realizing in my Anglican ignorance that that is British usage and not American.
I never received standing in the Episcopal Church, except at rustic retreats, ad hoc gymnasium services, and places like that. I was very surprised when I crossed the Tiber to find no altar rails and no kneelers down front!
It would be easy to install them in our church, though. And with a crane large enough to handle the altar (which is an enormous chunk of Carrara marble) ad orientem celebration would be easy too. I think somebody was planning ahead . . . in a good way.
1. Altar rails were installed;
2. Priest administered the Host;
3. The lay minister followed with the chalice.
That's how it was done in our very High Piskie parish -- the priest simply went down the row of kneeling parishioners. If two priests (or a priest and deacon) were present, each took one side of the altar rail and had a chalice bearer following.
It is faster than the single line in front of the priest (or lay minister) because there's no pause while the next person presents him or herself. The priest is in constant motion and by the time he gets to the end of the rail, the other end has filled up again. Very efficient.
Since in our old parish I was in the choir and my husband was Head Usher at the High Mass, I can tell you with certainty that we had more communicants in that parish and yet less time elapsed in administering communion.
I like the way you think.
Move the altar back to the screen, revise the screen to place the Tabernacle over the altar . . . . There's even a chancel of sorts, so we could have a Chancel Choir (even though we were never a monastic foundation). I guess my residual Anglicanism is showing . . . < g >
LOL! Yes, it does freak them out. I realize that's probably not the right attitude for approaching Communion, but still...
I always receive the host on my tongue. I won’t take Christ into my hands.
This was NOT really changed.......it’s just that a lot of libs thought that Vatican II changed it. At least that’s my understanding.
I believe that we will even see Communion rails come back. Also — my priest had said that in a few years we will all be receiving on the tongue.
A few people at Daily Mass saw me going up for a blessing even from the priest when they would not give us Communion on the Tongue. They also see me receiving on the tongue all the time.
I would say that about six to eight of them have changed and now receive the Holy Eucharist on their tongue!
BTW, Welcome Home!
I think you expressed it beautifully. Thank you.
I almost called my bishop "my lord." That would have been a showstopper!
I absolutely agree. I just saw an older picture of my church from before they tore out the altar rails. I can't say it was an improvement, asthetically or liturgically.
That's how we received in my old Anglican home - on the tongue on our knees. Maybe Rome will catch up with the TAC soon!
I suppose it could cause confusion with "Monsignor".
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.