Do The Red, Say The Black
Posted by: tony on 11/04/2007 08:21 PM
Updated by: tony on 11/04/2007 08:52 PM
|
Expires: 12/05/2007 12:00 AM
|
Darwin at Darwin Catholic has been hanging with the homeys at The New Liturgical Movement and brings his own interesting perspective to the table.
There's been recurrent talk at The New Liturgical Movement over the last few weeks about the difference between (if any) "the reform of the the reform" and "do the red, say the black".
The "reform of the reform" seems to be used to refer to a desire to see changes in the current missal to bring it more into line with the 1962 missal -- or more properly, into line with what might have been the result had the post-conciliar liturgical committees stuck to a faithful and straightforward implementation of Sacrosanctum Concilium in making changes to the 1962 missal.
"Do the red, say the black", or DTRSTB, is used to cover the range of things under general heading of celebrating the current missal without informal additions, without abuses, and as much in tune with the traditional manner of Roman liturgy as possible (due place to Latin, chant where appropriate, incense at high masses, etc.)
One of the things that has struck me in watching these debates is that in many ways I find myself in the peculiar position of defending the new missal because of conservative liturgical principles.
I have absolutely no problem with the new Missal. If priests had done the red and said the black from the beginning, we probably would not have (or need) a New Liturgical Movement or a papal Motu Proprio. The corollary to this is "don't do what's not red, and don't say what's not black".
One of the huge problems I have seen (and the NLM folks hope to see corrected by the Motu Proprio) is individual priests taking abusive liberties with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. We are fallen humans. When the pope promulgates a new missal, you know the Holy Spirit is guiding him. When Fr. X makes an "modification" to the Mass, especially if he does it on the urging of a lay committee of fallen humans, you can't be sure that it is what our Lord wants.
This is one of the attractions of the Vetus Ordo (Old Order). There was not this "flexibility" for individual priests to make changes to the Mass. Oh, they could do things like during the "secret prayer" thank God in Latin for the golf game they were going to enjoy after the Mass was finished. Even if they did that it did not scandalize the faithful or lead them astray.
This was also the beauty of Latin. Few priests were fluent enough in Latin to "improvise" the prayers. They were somewhat forced to "stick with the program". With the switch to the vernacular, it opened up a whole smörgåsbord of possible abuses.
I know that in our church we have a pastor who is liturgically orthodox. He does what is required of the missal, his homilies are engaging and relevant to the day's readings, and the music follows the current liturgical norms. Our parish is blessed.
But when a priest improvises (whether he is actually allowed to or not) you never know what you are going to get. This is especially true when the priests is trying to "maximize butts in the pews" rather than teaching God's Truth boldly, charitably and effectively.
|
