How Contrary Orientations Signify Contradictory Theologies

Catholics who delve into serious discussions of liturgy, wishing perhaps to know what all the fuss is about, quickly discover that one of the hottest of hot-button questions, and in some ways the most important, is the orientation of the liturgy. What is the big deal about the direction the priest happens to be facing at Mass? [1]

For starters, the custom of all Christians either offering or participating in the Eucharistic liturgy facing East has the same apostolic roots and the same universality in Church history as the use of water baptism, the praying of the Psalms, the worship of the risen Christ on Sunday, the veneration of the Mother of God and the saints, and of their relics. As a matter of fact, eastward orientation predates the use of official priestly vestments, consecrated church buildings, and even the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed that we recite every Sunday. Does that make it old enough and widespread enough to take seriously? If not, why do we take the other things seriously? They should be just as dispensable, or more so.

Think of it this way: Would you, if you are a practicing Catholic, want Sunday to be abolished, replaced by another day of the week, or simply taken off the roster? That would be an unthinkable deviation from Christian practice. Would you want all the Psalms removed from the Mass and the Divine Office? Should we replace water baptism with a civil naming ceremony, or stop honoring our Blessed Mother because it might make us feel like immature children or offend anti-maternal feminists? Have priests celebrating in jeans and T-shirts, because that’s the common clothing of our day, as robes and cloaks were the common clothing of ancient times? Impossible! It cannot be that something we have done for millennia should suddenly be dropped.

But this is exactly what we have done with ad orientem worship. For nearly 2,000 years, clergy and faithful together faced in the same direction in expectation of Christ and in adoration of Him, the One who already comes in mystery in the Most Holy Eucharist, the One who is to come manifestly at the end of the world to judge the living and the dead and the world by fire.

Ad orientem preserves the eschatological orientation of the liturgy. When Christians first gathered on Sundays to worship the Lord, they were anticipating the second coming of Christ — this seems to be the very oldest characteristic of our corporate worship. As Dom Gregory Dix notes, the “primordial form” of Sunday was not so much a feast looking back to the resurrection of Christ on the first Easter, or to any particular mystery or moment of His earthly life, but rather a looking forward with longing to the Lord’s return in glory, imploring Him to deliver us from the evils of sin, death, and hell. Sunday Mass was about the life of the world to come, which the early Christians, suffering bitter and horrific trials, must have thought about a great deal as they hoped and prayed that they would remain faithful: “lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil.” [2] For this reason, the eastward focus of prayer was a poignant symbol: after the dark and cold night, the sun will rise gloriously on the eastern horizon, shedding light and warmth.

Not to mention all the Scripture passages, repeatedly commented on by the Church Fathers, that either call Christ “the East”, or say that He ascends to the East, or that He will come from the East (cf., inter alia, Ps. 67, 34; Acts 1, 10–11; Mt. 24, 27; Zech. 6, 11–12). [3]

In turning the priest towards the people, we decisively severed ourselves from that which was most ancient, most intrinsic, and most distinctive in our worship as Christians. When we return to ad orientem, we return decisively to the fundamentals of Christian faith and its original practice. Ironically, in adopting the novelty of versus populum — a supposed “return to the earliest practice” in the judgment of mid-20th century scholars, whose conclusions have all been overturned by the work of subsequent scholars — we ended up losing the most ancient element of all.

It is not hard to see why this custom should have been nearly convertible with Christian worship as such. Most simply, worship is about God, not about us. Or rather, it is about us only insofar as we are from God, in God, and for God, our Creator, Savior, Sanctifier, and Judge. Hence, even to the extent that, as St. Thomas Aquinas says, the liturgy is for our needs, since God who is infinitely good stands to gain nothing for Himself, it is still done for the love and praise and thanking of God, who is the source and fulfillment of our needs. Our need, in short, is FOR GOD; our deepest need is to go beyond ourselves into Him. The very purpose of worship is to take ourselves out of ourselves and establish us in God. In this sense, any aspect of liturgy that does not clearly terminate in God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, or any aspect that seems to terminate in us, is not liturgy, whatever else it may be (e.g., self-regard, social posturing, therapy, superstition).

Hence, the ad orientem stance simply expresses the act of worship as such, whereas the versus populum stance contradicts it outright. This is why it is not merely unfitting but antithetical to religion. [4] The theologian Max Thurien, writing (somewhat surprisingly) in the official Vatican journal Notitiae, observed, in a statement that anticipated Ratzinger’s similar and more famous remark in The Spirit of the Liturgy:

The whole celebration [of Mass] is often conducted as if it were a conversation and dialogue in which there is no longer room for adoration, contemplation, and silence. The fact that the celebrants and faithful constantly face each other closes the liturgy in on itself. [5]

Along the same lines, the papal master of ceremonies Guido Marini remarked at a conference in Rome:

In our time, the expression “celebrating facing the people” has entered our common vocabulary. … [S]uch an expression would be categorically unacceptable the moment it comes to express a theological proposition. Theologically speaking, the holy Mass, as a matter of fact, is always addressed to God through Christ our Lord, and it would be a grievous error to imagine that the principal orientation of the sacrificial action is the community. Such an orientation, therefore, of turning towards the Lord must animate the interior participation of each individual during the liturgy. It is likewise equally important that this orientation be quite visible in the liturgical sign as well. [6] 

Marini helps us to see not only that the object of liturgy should always be God, or the God-man Jesus Christ, never mere man, but also that this objective orientation (we cannot avoid the East even in our ordinary way of speaking!) should be visible, evident to the senses, easily grasped by the intellect, and easily translated into the movement of the will that we call love, which is ordered to the good — to a good outside of ourselves, in the case of our ultimate end.

I will characterize the contrast between the contradictory postures in terms of their subject/object signification.

In the ad orientem arrangement, the subject/object appears as man/God. The priest both looks and acts like an image of Christ, the mediator between God and man. Paradoxically, the ceremonial centrality of the priest in the old rite serves to emphasize that God is the one and only object of worship, since the priest is so obviously assimilated to his office as alter Christus.

In the versus populum arrangement, the subject/object appears as people/priest. The priest, even with the best of intentions and behavior, looks and acts like an empowered facilitator of a communal event; the vis-à-vis positioning confers on him a sort of autocratic prominence as the one to whom the congregation is subordinated and beholden. This may be the psychological reason why some priests overcompensate with informality, jokes, banter, smiles, waves, applause, or what have you — the priest’s very “over-againstness” in versus populum seems to demand a downplaying of the over-against by means of emphasizing that he’s really “one of us,” after all! How sad that the one true and obvious way of representing that the priest is “one of us” — namely, by having him face in the same direction as everyone else and offer the sacrifice on their behalf, the very same sacrifice they are offering in the hearts — has been discarded as an opaque and expired symbol, to be replaced by a format that turns the Mass into something done towards the people and, in a sense, imposed upon them. In reality, the Mass is something Jesus Christ according to His human nature does towards the Most Holy Trinity, as the great prayer “Suscipe, Sancta Trinitas” perfectly expresses — and we are permitted to join in.

Ironically for a rite that is supposed to be less clericocentric and more popular, the priest in the new rite becomes far more central and attention-getting because his personality, his “vernacular style” or “way of being a priest,” intrudes. Versus populum does nothing but underline this unfortunate amplification of human presidency at the cost of assimilation to Christ’s kenosis and unique mediation.

Kathleen Pluth brilliantly captures the problem and the solution. Having said that she hates being a cause of distraction to others by cantoring in the front of a church and that she much prefers finding refuge in a choir loft (singers should be heard and not seen), she then turns to the celebrant of the Mass:

The role of the priest is exponentially more complex. He cannot hide. His role is inherently, and in some regards primarily, visible, leading the congregation through the veil, into the Holy of Holies. We follow him, as he expresses in the highest possible way his conformity to Jesus, our advocate before the Father. For centuries the symbolism of our “following” the priest was clear. However, in the postconciliar period, and without a direct referrent in the Council’s documents themselves, the character of the priest’s relationship to the people has been visibly distorted by the versus populum posture.
          When people face each other, they aim to please. They make eye contact; they smile encouragingly. There is a word for such gestures: flattery. People flatter their priests and their priests flatter them, at an average ratio of, say, 500 to 1. None of this is encouraged in the Council documents. The versus populum posture is specifically worldly. It sets up the priest, not as a model to follow, but as a talk show host to be flattered insofar as he delights us. There are no good reasons for this.
          The lines of sight to God should be made clear in the Liturgy (see Pseudo-Dionysius’ Ecclesiastical Hierarchy for a beautiful exposition of how this should work), but instead our path towards God is obscured by the distracting cycle of eye-contact and feedback. The Sunday liturgy is for everyone their primary and for many their only contact with the Church. As such, its symbols should express the truth, including the truth about ecclesial relationships, which should not be a matter of flattery but of service. The Psalmist sings, “Let your priests be clothed with holiness/The faithful shall ring out their joy.” Ad orientem posture lets priests be priests and the people be themselves too, all facing God together.[7]

Accordingly, it was much to the devil’s advantage to turn the priest around to the people, creating a charmed circle of neighborly affirmation that brought the experience of the Mass down to the level of a horizontal exchange, a back-and-forth in everyday speech. There is nothing transcendent about that; on the contrary, God is domesticated, tamed, manipulable — not a recipient of sacrifice but a subject of conversation.

In the Western context, moreover, where the use of a sacral language had been the nearly universal and exceptionless practice for most of the Church’s history, the sudden introduction of the vernacular — until recently, a bland and boorish vernacular, at that — contributed to this serpentine leveling as well. Ad orientem, use of Latin and plainchant, and kneeling for communion are simple but potent ways to repudiate the democratic horizontalism that has afflicted the liturgy for the past fifty years. The dismantling of these things — the removal of communion rails, the practice of communion standing (again, I speak within the Western experience as it developed over the second millennium), the reception of communion in the hand, the abolition of the acolyte with the paten, and so forth — all of these are consistent with a larger perspective of the warping of the act of worship into an act of precipitous self-esteem, one that is hauntingly reminiscent of the scenario played out in the Garden of Eden.

NOTES

[1] Of course, this topic has been taken up many times at NLM, but there are always more angles from which to pursue it, and we will never leave it alone. Here are some earlier articles: “Why Does Facing Ad Orientem Matter?”; “The Marian Character of Ad Orientem Worship”; “The Priestly Character of Ad Orientem Worship”; “Fr. Dwight Longenecker on Worship Ad Orientem”; “The Normativity of Ad Orientem Worship According to the Ordinary Form’s Rubrics.”

[2] See Dom Daniel Augustine Oppenheimer, “Towards the Second Coming: Facing the Liturgical East.”

[3] All these texts and more, with good commentary, may be found in this article: “Convertere, Israël, ad Dominum Deum Tuum!: A Benedictine Monk Defends Worshiping Eastwards.”

[4] This argument is developed at greater length in my article “Mass ‘Facing the People’ as Counter-Catechesis and Irreligion.”

[5] Max Thurian, “La Liturgie, contemplation du mystère,” Notitiae 32 (1996), 692; reprinted in English in L’Osservatore Romano, 24 June 1996, p. 2.

[6] The full text may be found here.

[7] The article may be found here.

Guido Marini: Latin is the Language of Catholicism

In preparation for the visit of Pope Benedict to Great Britain, The Herald has conducted an interview with Msgr. Guido Marini, Master of Apostolic Ceremonies. While the entire interview (which is really more an article containing some quotes - including the title of this post - and otherwise some rather questionable explanations by the author) is not available online, a summary is:

A substantial part of the Mass to be celebrated by Pope Benedict at Bellahouston Park in Glasgow on September 16 will be said in Latin, the Vatican has confirmed.

In an interview with The Herald, published today, Monsignor Guido Marini, the Pope’s master of ceremonies, reveals the Canon and Preface – the most significant parts – will be said in the ancient language.

Mgr Marini said: “For all the Masses said in the UK the Preface and the Canon will be said in Latin. What the Holy Father intends by using Latin is to emphasise the universality of the faith and the continuity of the Church.”

You can read the entire summary at The Herald's website here.

Details about the Papal Liturgies This Christmastide

Msgr. Guido Marini, Master of the Pontifical Liturgical Celebrations, has made some comments about the Papal Liturgies of the imminent Christmastide to the Italian Catholic newspaper Avvenire (cf. Italian original here). Some points of interest:

The Midnight Mass will be preceded by a short prayer vigil which concludes with the Kalenda, the Christmas Proclamation, which had heretofore been included in the Mass itself, whereas Msgr. Marini notes that this placement corresponds better to its nature, since the "Roman Martyrology foresees the singing of the Kalenda on the day of the vigil of Christmas at the end of Lauds or of a Little Hour of the Liturgy of Hours".

The Holy Father will not wear cope and mitre for the Urbi et Orbi blessing, but choir dress. To forestall any rash comments, this is not without precedent, as may be seen from the accompanying picture of Pius XII imparing the Urbi et Orbi blessing on Easter 1952. The choice would seem to be connected to the fact that the Pope does not publicly celebrate the Missa in die, and is therefore not vested prior to the blessing. Msgr. Marini explains that it is "a solemn benediction which is not connected to a particular liturgical rite."

After Pontifical Vespers on 31 December there will again be Eucharistic Adoration to signify, in the words of Msgr Marini, "the centrality of adoration in the life of the Church and of the disciples of the Lord."

Pope Benedict will wear a Roman chasuble for the Mass of the Epiphany.

The Mass of the Baptism of the Lord will again be celebrated in the Sistine chapel ad orientem. As Msgr. Marini explains "this means that at some points the Pope will turn towards the Crucified, thus underlining the correct orientation of the Eucharistic celebration. This is not about turning the back to the people, but about assuming the same orientation as the assembly, which precisely looks toward the Crucified."

Guido Marini on Papal Liturgy under Benedict XVI

Vatican Radio German Service today carries an interview with Msgr Guido Marini, the Papal MC. Of course, many points are covered which we have heard about from him before. Here are some of the parts I thought more interesting and which we have not heard, or at least not from this perspective, before:

Vatican Radio: Monsignor Marini, how would you define the liturgical style of Pope Benedict?

Monsignor Marini: That is not an easy question, because the liturgical style encompasses both the exterior and the interior dimension of celebrating - and of course the respective understanding of what the liturgy is. I think the liturgical style of Pope Benedict emphasises both the proper sobriety which has always characterised the Roman liturgy, and the sense for the mystery and the sacred. And then I see a strong turning towards the Lord who after all is present at every moment of celebrating.

Vatican Radio: At the centre of every service there is not the priest, and that means not even the Pope, but the risen Christ. Now critics say that some of these new elements [of the papal liturgies introduced in the tenure of Guido Marini, NLM] distract the faithful rather than help them to focus on the essential. All the gold and the lace were too conspicuous, it is said, very simply designed liturgical instruments and vestments which make the celebrant practically invisible would be better. What is your stance on this?

Monsignor Marini: I don't believe that these elements distract. Of course care has to be taken that the Lord remains at the centre. The danger of distraction is always there, and therefore an education is needed which always leads back to the centre. But everything in the liturgy, also in its details, which conveys beauty, harmony and splendour , does not distract from the mystery of God, but really helps to meet Him who is infinite Beauty.

[...]

Vatican Radio: To what extent does Pope Benedict himself suggest changes in his services? Or is it you who suggest them to him?

Monsignor Marini: To say the truth: In this time in which I've had the grace to be near the Holy Father it has not been like I had received instructions each time. It is rather a conversation, an exchange of ideas, a collaboration. For my part I try to suggest and submit liturgical elements to the Holy Father. He weighs the pro and contra, expresses his mind and gives an orientation which then clearly is followed.

Vatican Radio: For example?

Monsignor Marini: You have mentioned before some "innovations", in quotation marks, in the liturgy. For example then Communion: Who receives from the hands of the Holy Father, receives kneeling. This suggestion has been seized by the Holy Father, and he has given his instructions in this respect.

Elevations at the Papal Mass

One year ago yesterday, Msgr. Guido Marini was appointed as Master of the Liturgical Celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff. Over this year, we have gratefully witnessed the application of the hermeneutic of continuity to papal liturgies, including the return of many traditional elements of the Roman Rite in general - most important among which the return of the Cross to its central position on the altar - and of the papal Mass in particular - the traditional form of the ferula, for instance. These elements have been added in a gradual way, so as not to cause ruptures and confusion by sudden drastic changes.

Since we mentioned yesterday the application of the hermeneutic of continuity to the Ordinary Form by the example of the form of the elevation of the Host after the Consecration, I was reminded of one element of the tradition of the papal Mass which we have not yet seen restored: the special form of the elevation of the Sacred Species in the Solemn Papal Mass. This used to be performed in the following manner: after the "normal" elevation as done at every Mass, the Pope would turn by 90 degrees to the right (epistle side) and again elevate the Host/Chalice, then 90 degrees more to right (thus having his back towards the altar) for another elevation, and finally turn to the left by 270 degrees (thus facing towards the Gospel side) for a fourth elevation, before turning back towards the altar and setting down the Host/Chalice. In this manner he symbolically showed our Lord and God in the Sacred Species to the four cardinal points, i.e. the entire earth.

An example can be seen in the following video of the Coronation Mass of Bl. John XXIII (go to 2:50):



Now, this practice was not abolished after the liturgical reforms. In fact, even John Paul II continued it until his illness prevented him from doing so. Here is an example of a papal Mass in 1985 (go to 1:20; you will notice, however, that instead of four distinct elevations, it is now a continuous elevation):



It would certainly be very welcome if this traditional manner of elevation at the Papal Mass towards the four points of the compass (preferably with the four distinct elevations) would be one of the next elements reintroduced in the ongoing Benedictine restoration of the sacred.

Papal MC Explains Changes in Papal Liturgy to French

Le Figaro, the most important French secular newspaper of the centre-right, carries a very insightful item in the run-up to the papal visit to France this coming weekend. The article explains the meaning and importance of the traditional elements reintroduced into the liturgical celebrations of Pope Benedict XVI with admirable accuracy for a secular newspaper. It also lets Msgr. Guido Marini, the Papal MC, explain himself some points to the French. Don Guido again stresses Communion on the tongue as the norm, while Communion in the hand is the exception. The article is also to be commended for rightly pointing out that these changes are not the personal agenda of Msgr. Marini, but are willed by the Holy Father himself. It even touches on the issue of enrichment of the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite by liturgical tradition and situates the recent developments in the context of the New Liturgical Movement desired by Pope Benedict, pointing out, as we have consistently done, that the Holy Fathers way of fostering this is leading by example, not issuing ukases. Such articles are inestimable as complementing Pope Benedict's teaching by actions with the corresponding explanations. The more we see such articles appearing in much-noted places like this one, the sooner the Holy Father's example and vision will spread to the dioceses. Here the article is in an NLM translation:

Why the Pope Renews With the Traditional Liturgy

By Jean-Marie Guénois, special envoy to Rome

Catholics will discover Saturday at Les Invalides the Return of Forgotten Practices.

In the sacristy, it is he who watches over the vestments of Benedict XVI. The pope enters, they exchange a smile, already focused on the Mass which the Successor of Peter is preparing to celebrate. Monsignor Guido Marini, a young Italian prelate of 43 years, is the Master of Papal Liturgical Celebrations. His childlike face shows a very precise look. No detail seems to escape him. Thin, tall, he respectfully assists the pope in putting on his vestments. Then come a time of prayer. The Mass can begin.

Saturday morning, behind the altar installed on the Esplanade des Invalides, Monsignor Guido Marini in the same way will help Pope Benedict XVI. In October 2007 he himself appointed the young prelate to this more than sensitive position. He is in charge to order, down to the second, the Masses of the Pope: from the choice of vestments and liturgical accessories to the singing, not forgetting the choice of chalices and through to postures of the body. It is the formal style of the celebration of the Eucharist which rests in his hands. When one knows the commitment of Benedict XVI to beautiful liturgy, he could not have randomly selected the one who has replaced another Marini, Piero Marini, whose face is better known as he was the Master of Celebrations of John Paul II for two decades. Indeed, the master of ceremonies is always within two steps of the Pope during major celebrations.


A Cross at the Centre of the Altar

An exposed position, therefore, media-wise and even more so ecclesially. The young Guido Marini knows something about that. In recent months, he concentrates on him praise but also criticism. He embodies the return of tradition. The reason are the liturgical "innovations" for the Mass of the Pope, which are all resumptions of elements forgotten in recent years. But it is true that in matters of liturgy the smallest symbol is fraught with meaning.

So Parisians, Saturday morning, and those who follow the Mass in Lourdes, Sunday and Monday morning, will not be surprised to see that the Pope will give Communion in the mouth of the faithful kneeling, except of course if the person is physically prevented. That Benedict XVI, another example, no longer systematically carries the famous silver pastoral staff of John Paul II, a Christ on the Cross, a work by Lello Scorzelli made in the 1960s for Paul VI, but a Greek cross [note: not actually correct, it really is a Latin cross] without a corpus which was in the hands of Pius IX (pope from 1846 to 1878). That a stately cross will return to the centre of the altar from which it had been withdrawn, under Pope John Paul II, for a matter of television images. That the thousands of consecrated hosts will be contained in ciboria of precious metals and not in clay ones. One should also mention the use, for the great Feasts, of old papal mitres, richly decorated and which had lain sleeping among the treasures of the Vatican. And the use, in certain circumstances, of the papal throne…

So many "novelties" which reassure some, but trouble part of the Church, or even annoy those who denounce this as "a step backwards". It is said that certain people were somewhat shocked by these requests, when Monsignor Guido Marini came to prepare, in mid-June, the Pope's voyage this week. Regarding, in particular, the question of communion in the mouth kneeling.


If Monsignor Guido Marini is not for nothing in these developments, it would betry poor knowledge of the operation of the Holy See to imagine that he is the sole person responsible for this. Particularly since there is in the Catholic Church a "ministry" in charge of these issues: the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. If he advises, the Pope decides. It is therefore Benedict XVI himself who wishes this new course. The choice of this master of papal liturgical celebrations has been recommended to him by his Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the number 2 of the Holy See, whose master of ceremonies Monsignor Guido Marini was when he was archbishop of Genoa, a priest noticed there for his pastoral charisma, of a mild temperament and attentive to everyone, qualities he has not lost apparently in the Vatican. He holds a double doctorate in law, civil and canonical, and a litentiate degree in psychology of communication.

In his bright office at the Vatican, at the corner of St. Peter's Square, Msgr. Marini explains: "Benedict XVI wants to emphasize that the norms for distributing Communion in the Catholic Church are still in force. One has indeed forgotten that the distribution of Holy Communion in the hand is due to an indult, an exception, one might say, given by the Holy See to the episcopal conferences that request it." He recognizes that Benedict XVI has a "preference" for communion in the mouth but that "the use of this modality does not detract from the other modality, to receive the host in hand." However, he observes, "to receive the host in the mouth highlights the truth of the Real Presence in the Eucharist, it helps the devotion of the faithful and introduces more easily into the sense of mystery. So many aspects it is important to stress today and urgent to recover." Nothing, therefore, of a papal fantasy. These changes in liturgical forms are part of a clear vision of Benedict XVI and explicitly expressed in Rome by several interlocutors close to him: "To achieve, ultimately, a liturgical synthesis between the Mass of Paul VI and that which tradition can contribute to it as enrichment."

As for the method to get there, it refuses the trails of a new liturgical war, but it intends to rely on "teaching" and "patience". Still according to the proponents of this issue, the Pope intends to counterpoise "by example" the "deficiencies" that he has always denounced since the 1970s: the lack of "recollectedness" and "silence"; the loss of the "sense of the sacred", which he also calls the "cosmic" sense of the liturgical celebration where, according to Catholic theology, and also Orthodox by the way, "God Himself, through the Incarnation of the Son, makes Himself really present in the consecrated host."


"Serving the Sense of the Sacred"

Monsignor Guido Marini is formal: "It is not a battle between the old and the modern, much less between the preconciliar and the conciliar ones. This kind of problematical ideology is today outdated. The old and new belong to the same liturgical treasure of the Church. The liturgical celebration must be the celebration of the sacred mystery, of the crucified and risen Lord. It is our task to find, in the heritage of the liturgy, a continuity to serve this sense of the sacred." And he points out, in passing, that many focus on the four or five developments of recent months without seeing that he works just as much with the "legacy" of his predecessors, among whom Archbishop Piero Marini. "There is no break with what was being done before," he assures. As for the use of the papal throne or old mitres, it is not systematic [in the sense of "exclusive"]: they are used "only on some solemnities."

No rupture, certainly, but this movement of gentle reform of the liturgy, as symbolic as it may be in its appearances, is firmly rooted in the thought of Benedict XVI. He has never hidden anything before becoming pope. In his memoirs, My Life, Memoirs 1927-1977 [published in English as "Milestones"], published ten years ago in France at Fayard, Joseph Ratzinger showed his colours regarding the liturgical reform of the Second Vatican Council which he had lived at the age of 40: "I was dismayed," he wrote, "at the ban on the old Missal, since such a development had never been seen in the history of liturgy. (…) A renewal of liturgical awareness, a liturgical reconciliation that again recognizes the unity of the history of the liturgy and that understands Vatican II, not as a breach, but as a stage of development: these things are urgently needed for the life of the Church. I am convinced that the crisis in the Church that we are experiencing today is to a large extent due to the disintegration of the liturgy (…) This is why we need a new liturgical movement which will call to life the real heritage of the Council." As a fine connoisseur of Roman life says, Fr. Federico Lombardi, an experienced Jesuit who heads Vatican Radio and the Press Office, one must be wary of "interpretations" that would lead to consider these developments as a revolution. But everything suggests that this "new liturgical movement" is well and truly launched. Benedict XVI does not envisage disseminating it by way of regulations, but by the force of example.

Development in Continuity - the Full Interview with Mgr. Marini

After having advanced the part of the Osservatore Romano interview with Mgr. Guido Marini, the papal MC, concerning the new papal pallium, which was the occasion for this interview, the NLM now presents you a translation of the full interview. I highly recommend everyone to read it in its entirety. It may be considered a milestone in the pontificate of Benedict XVI in its liturgical aspects, since it fully and very publicly explains the motivations and reveals the programme behind the liturgical changes we have seen and roots them in the concept of "development in continuity" - the organical development which is so essential for a healthy liturgy and is at the core of what the New Liturgical Movement is about. The "hermeneutic of continuity" is expressly invoked, and endorsed, and explained as it applies to the Faith and liturgy, both the lex credendi and the lex orandi. One of the most striking quotes, in this sense, is I think the following, said regarding the reintroduction of the ferula of Bl. Pius IX, and which might be taken as a motto for the liturgical programme of Benedict XVI: "This ... attests to a development in continuity, a rootedness in tradition that allows you to proceed in an orderly manner on the way of history." How blessed we are in this pontificate! The interview also touches the "Benedictine altar arrangement", ad orientem celebration, the reception of Holy Communion kneeling and on the tongue, which Mgr. Marini says will be the norm at papal Masses and in this is setting an example for the entire Church, and Summorum Pontificum.

Here now is the interview with Gianluca Biccini in its entirety:

From 29 June onwards the pallium worn by Benedict XVI for the solemn liturgical celebrations changes. The one which the Pope will use for the Mass of Saints Peter and Paul will be of the shape of a closed circle, with two end pieces that hang down in the middle of the chest and the back. The cut will be wider and longer, whereas the red color of the crosses which adorn it will be preserved. "This is the development of the Latin form of the pallium used up to John Paul II," explains the Master of Papal Liturgical Celebrations, Monsignor Guido Marini, explaining historical and liturgical reasons for the new insignia in this interview to "L'Osservatore Romano."

What are the elements of continuity and innovation compared to the past?

In light of careful studies, regarding the development of the pallium over the centuries, it seems that we can say that the long pallium crossed over the left shoulder was not worn in the West as from the 9th century onwards. Indeed, the painting in the Sacred Cave of Subiaco, dating back to ca. 1219 and representing Pope Innocent III with this type of pallium, seems to be a deliberate archaism. In this sense the use of the new pallium intends to meet two requirements:first of all to emphasize more strongly the continuous [organic] development which in an arch of more than twelve centuries this liturgical vestment has continued to have; in second place the practical [requirement], because the pallium used by Benedict XVI since the beginning of his pontificate and has led to several annoying problems from this point of view.

There remain differences between the papal pallium and the one which the Pontiff imposes on the archbishops?

The difference remains even in the current pallium. What will be worn by Benedict XVI from the solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul onwards takes the form of the pallium used up to John Paul II, albeit in a larger and longer cut, and with the color red for the crosses. The different form of the papal pallium vis-à-vis the one of the metropolitans highlights the diversity of jurisdiction which is signified by the pallium.

Since a few months the pastoral staff that the Pope uses in [liturgical] celebrations has changed. What are the reasons for this choice?

The golden pastoral staff in the shape of a Greek cross - which belonged to Blessed Pius IX and was used for the first time by Benedict XVI in the celebration of Palm Sunday this year - is now used constantly by the Pontiff, who has thus decided to replace the silver one surmounted by a Crucifix, introduced by Paul VI and also used by John Paul I, John Paul II and by himself. This choice does not mean simply a return to the old way, but attests to a development in continuity, a rootedness in tradition that allows you to proceed in an orderly manner on the way of history. This pastoral staff, called "ferula," corresponds in fact in a more faithful way to the form of papal pastoral staff typical of Roman tradition, which has always been in the shape of a Cross without Crucifx, at least since the pastoral staff began to be used by the Roman Pontiffs. And then we must not forget also an element of practicality: the ferula of Pius IX is lighter and easier to handle than the pastoral staff introduced by Paul VI.

And the pastoral staff made by Lello Scorzelli for Pope Montini in the mid-sixties?

It remains available to the papal sacristy, along with so many objects that belonged to the predecessors of Benedict XVI.

The same goes for the choice of vestments worn by the Pope in the various celebrations?

Also in this case it must be said that the liturgical vestments chosen, as well as some details of the rite, intend to emphasise the continuity of the liturgical celebration of today with that which has characterised the life of the Church in the past. The hermeneutic of continuity is always the precise criterion by which to interpret the Church's journey in the time. This also applies to the liturgy. As a Pope cites in his documents Popes who preceded him in order to indicate continuity in the magisterium of the Church, so in the liturgical sphere a Pope also uses liturgical vestments and sacred objects of the Popes who preceded him to indicate the same continuity also in the Lex orandi. But I would like to point out that the Pope does not always use old liturgical vestments. He often wears modern ones. The important thing is not so much antiquity or modernity, as the beauty and dignity, important components of every liturgical celebration.

An example are the voyages in Italy and outside Italy, where the papal vestments are prepared by the local churches.

Of course. Just think of the one to the United States or to that in Italy, first to Genoa and then to Salento. In both cases it were the diocese who prepared the liturgical vestments of the Pope, in agreement with the Office of Liturgical Celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff. In the variety of styles and with attention to characteristic local elements, the criterion adopted was that of beauty and dignity, typical dimensions of the sacred action which takes place in the Eucharistic celebration.

At this point could you anticipate for us some particular liturgical aspect of the next international voyage?

I can say that the time of preparation was very fruitful and the collaboration found in Australia very cordial and ready. Pope Benedict XVI will meet once more young people from all over the world and we all pray that once again this meeting may be the cause of great grace for all, an opportunity to come to know with more intensity the face of Jesus and the face of the Church, a spur for a prompt and generous response to the Lord's call. The hope is that also the liturgical celebrations, prepared with care and really participated in because lived from the heart, may be privileged occasions for the reception of this grace.

What can you tell us about the high papal throne, used on occasions like the consistory, and abot the Cross which has been returned to the center of the altar?

The so-called throne, used in special circumstances, is simply meant to highlight the liturgical presidency of the Pope, the successor of Peter and Vicar of Christ. As for the position of the cross at the centre of the altar, it indicates the centrality of the Crucified [Lord] in the Eucharistic celebration and the correct orientation which the whole assembly is called to have during the Liturgy of the Eucharist: one does not look at each other, but we look to Him who was born, died and rose again for us, the Saviour. From the Lord comes the salvation, He is the East (Orient), the rising Sun to Whom we must all turn our gaze, from Whom we must all receive the gift of grace. The issue of liturgical orientation within the Eucharistic celebration, and also the practical way in which this takes shape, has great importance because with it is conveyed a fundamental fact which is at the same time theological and anthropological, ecclesiological and concerning the personal spirituality.

Is this also the criterion to understand the decision to celebrate at the ancient altar of the Sistine Chapel, on the occasion of the Feast of the Baptism of the Lord?

Exactly. In circumstances where the celebration takes place in this way, this is not about turning the back to the faithful, but rather about orientating oneself together with the faithful towards the Lord. From this point of view "the door is not closed to the assembly", but " the door is opened to the assembly", leading it to the Lord. Particular circumstances can be found in which, because of the artistic circumstances of the sacred place and its unique beauty and harmony, it becomes desirable to celebrate at the ld altar, where among other things the correct orientation of the liturgical celebration is preserved. There should be no surprise: it suffices to go into St. Peter's in the morning and to see how many priests celebrate accoring to the ordinary rite which resulted from the liturgical reform, but on traditional altars and therefore oriented as the one of the Sistine Chapel. [NLM note: While the reference to particular artistic circumstances is made again, like it was at the interview in January when the Pope celebrated ad orientem for the first time in the Sistine Chapel, the excellent theological explanation which Mgr. Marini gives is really applicable to all liturgical celebrations. From this and from the reference to the normality of such celebrations in St. Peter's basilica, we may infer that this is another instance of Pope Benedict's modus operandi in small, innocuous steps, firmly pursuing the reorientation of the liturgy, but without causing upheaval.]

In the recent visit to Santa Maria di Leuca and to Brindisi, the Pope has distributed Communion to the faithful in the mouth while kneeling. Is this a practice destined to become habitual in the papal celebrations?

I really think so. In this regard it must not be forgotten that the distribution of Communion in the hand still remains, from a juridical point of view, an indult [i.e. an exception] to the universal law, granted by the Holy See to those bishops' conferences who have requested it. The manner adopted by Benedict XVI aims to underline the validity of the norm valid for the whole Church. In addition one could perhaps even see a preference for using this manner of distribution which, without taking away anything from the other [manner], better highlights the truth of the Real Presence in the Eucharist, helps the devotion of the faithful, and introduces [them] more easily to the sense of the mystery. These are aspects which, in our time, pastorally speaking, it is urgent to stress and recover.

What does the Master of Liturgical Celebrations respond to those who accuse Benedict XVI of wanting thus to impose preconciliar models?

First of all I like to stress the cordial and convinced adhesion which is also noticeable regarding the liturgical teaching of the Holy Father. As far, then, as terms like "preconciliar" and "postconciliar", used by some, are concerned, it seems to me that they belong to a language already overcome, and, when used with the intent to indicate a discontinuity in the path of the Church, I think they are wrong and typical of very reductive ideological visions. There are "things old and things new" that belong to the treasure of the Church of always and should be considered as such. The wise man knows to find in his treasure the one and the other, without invoking other criteria than the evangelical and ecclesial ones. Not everything that is new is true, as on the other hand also not all that is ancient [is true]. The truth transcends the old and the new, and it is to it [truth] that we must strive without preconceptions. The Church lives according to that law of continuity by virtue of which She knows a development rooted in tradition. What is most important is that everything comes together so that the liturgical celebration is really the celebration of the sacred mystery, of the crucified and risen Lord Who makes Himself present in his Church, re-actualising the mystery of salvation and calling us, in the logic of an authentic and active participation, to share up to the extreme consequences His own life, which is a life of the gift of love to the Father and to the brethren, a life of holiness.

Today still the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, on the use of the Roman liturgy prior to the reform carried out in 1970, seems to give rise to contrasting interpretations. Are celebrations presided by the Pope according to the extraordinary form, which is this old one, presumable ("ipotizzabili")?

That is a question to which I cannot give an answer [literally: do not know to give an answer; a very guarded response]. As for the motu proprio referred to, considering it with serene attention and without ideological notions, together with the letter addressed by the Pope to the bishops of the entire world to present it, a twofold precise intention becomes apparent. First of all, the [intention] to facilitate the achievement of "a reconciliation in the bosom of the Church", and in this sense, as has been said, the motu proprio is a very beautiful act of love for the unity of the Church. Secondly - and this is a fact not to forget - its purpose is to encourage a mutual enrichment between the two forms of Roman rite: in such a way, for example, that in the celebration according to the missal of Pope Paul VI (which is the ordinary form of the Roman rite) "will be able to demonstrate, more powerfully than has been the case hitherto, the sacrality which attracts many people to the former usage."

New Papal Pallium

A new form of the papal pallium, seen to the right, will be introduced on the Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul. I had seen rumours about this as early as the middle of May, but now it is confirmed in tomorrow's edition of the Osservatore Romano. Msgr. Guido Marini, the papal MC, explains the change in an interview with Gianluca Biccini. Here is the relevant part in an NLM translation:

"This is the development of the Latin form of the pallium used up to John Paul II," explains the Master of Papal Liturgical Celebrations, Monsignor Guido Marini, explaining historical and liturgical reasons for the new insignia in this interview to "L'Osservatore Romano."

What are the elements of continuity and innovation compared to the past?

In light of careful studies, regarding the development of the pallium over the centuries, it seems that we can say that the long pallium crossed over the left shoulder was not worn in the West as from the 9th century onwards. Indeed, the painting in the Sacred Cave of Subiaco, dating back to ca. 1219 and representing Pope Innocent III with this type of pallium, seems to be a deliberate archaism. In this sense the use of the new pallium intends to meet two requirements: first of all to emphasize more strongly the continuous [organic] development which in an arch of more than twelve centuries this liturgical vestment has continued to have; in second place the practical [requirement], because the pallium used by Benedict XVI since the beginning of his pontificate and has led to several annoying problems from this point of view.

There remain differences between the papal pallium and the one which the Pontiff imposes on the archbishops?

The difference remains even in the current pallium. What will be worn by Benedict XVI from the solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul onwards takes the form of the pallium used up to John Paul II, albeit in a larger and longer cut, and with the color red for the crosses. The different form of the papal pallium vis-à-vis the one of the metropolitans highlights the diversity of jurisdiction which is signified by the pallium.

Perhaps you will remember a post on this same subject which I wrote in January, The Pallium - History and Present Use. It is both consoling and encouraging to know that my own critical thoughts concerning the form of Pallium introduced in 2005 by the former papal MC are in concert with those of the present papal MC and, it seems reasonable to assume, the Holy Father himself.

It is also very rewarding and important for the reform of the reform seeing the emphasis which is given to the principle of organic development, which I have highlighted in the interview above.

Two more pictures of the new pallium from the Osservatore:



[SRT: Further to the announced development with regard to the papal pallium, Fr. Uwe Michael Lang also has an article about the pallium in L'Osservatore Romano.

The NLM will provide further translations of these sometime today. Watch for updates.]