Fr Joe Borg (The Sunday Times, February 21) mentions the fear in certain Catholic circles of a return to the pre-Vatican II Church because of the so-called New Liturgical Movement, which is partly inspired by then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger's theological works on the liturgy.
It is hard to believe the Pope's intention is to turn the clock back half a century. His writings on the liturgy should convince us of this. His insistence is on celebrating the Eucharist with great reverence in harmony with the liturgical directives of Vatican II. This will bring out the spiritual richness and the theological depth of the 1970 Missal.
I therefore cannot understand the point of Anscar Chupungco's criticisms referred to by Fr Borg. Reading Chupungco;s address on January 21, I expected more substantial arguments from an expert. As a renowned liturgist he must have at least read Ratzinger's erudite liturgical studies, which in fact already, a decade ago, provided a scholarly answer to all the objections raised again in January.
Chupungco severely criticises the "reform of the post-conciliar reform" for "the absence of an historical and cultural approach to the liturgy". Ironically, the Pope, in his publication The Spirit of the Liturgy, bases his arguments on historical and cultural evidence while stressing that "we cannot simply replicate the past. Every age must discover and express the essence of the liturgy anew. The point is to discover this essence amid all the changing appearances. It would surely be a mistake to reject all the reforms of our century wholesale".
Chupungco himself admitted in his address that "there are surely instances of post-conciliar implementation that are debatable, but we should be careful to distinguish them from the conciliar principles". It is precisely the debatable implementation of conciliar principles that the ongoing reform of the Roman Missal is tackling. Revisions of the Order of the Mass are still ongoing from 1965.
Till 2007 there were at least nine revisions in an attempt to implement the desired changes by Vatican II. Also, a lot has been left to personal creativity, leading in many instances to an impoverishment of the liturgical act. In many instances, the Holy Sacrifice of the Eucharist is reduced to a common prayer meeting, wherein whole parts of the rite are abusively altered to reflect the personal tastes of particular groups. I have witnessed some negative experiences in this regard: priests and lay animators indiscreetly dumping "the Church's living and most ancient spiritual tradition".
May I ask why all this fuss about the revision of the English translation of the Missal, as if it is the only translation which is being revised? Are the "renowned liturgist" and Fr Borg not aware that in 2001 the Instruction Liturgiam authenticam requested the revision of all vernacular translations of the liturgical texts? Revision was called on for two reasons: the dynamic change, in 50 years, of linguistic idioms and the serious theological problems of ad experimentum translations. The Maltese translations of the liturgical texts, very frequently, are a poor rendering of both the Maltese idiom and the theological propositions translated.
Finally, the choices of the present Pope are also advancing the ecumenical cause. Due to the radical changes in the Latin rite some Orthodox liturgists have been concerned about the validity of the Catholic sacraments, perceiving indiscriminate changes as a sign of theological anarchy.
I do not consider myself to be one of "the younger generations who are nostalgic for a turning back of the clock". However, I do think that the Church is badly in need of an ad intra "purification of memory" involving both liberal and conservative circles in an effort at reconciliation and peaceful co-existence into one body. Pope Benedict is in fact calling for an "interior reconciliation in the heart of the Church". It is nonsense and counterproductive to continue dividing the Catholic Church into a Church of the past and a Church of the present; a pre-conciliar and a post-conciliar Church.