I grew up on the post-Vatican II liturgy (and "The Vatican Rag" http://youtu.be/3f72CTDe4-0 ), and I have to say this feels like an ideologically-driven step backward. Sure, there's may well be more poetry in some of the changes, but any liturgy that adds in the word "consubstantial" is being driven more by theological purity than the needs of any congregation. #ddtb
Embedded Link
On Sunday, Catholic service undergoes biggest change since Vatican II of 1960s – The Denver Post
The biggest changes in the Catholic Mass in 40 years will greet churchgoers Sunday, the first day of Advent, which marks the beginning of the liturgical year and the Christmas season.
226 view(s)
My early religious education (before I crossed the Tiber) was in the RCC. I don’t ever remember using the word consubstantial when reciting the Creed, although I certainly learned what it meant. Perhaps it’s just my poor memory? After all, that was a very long time ago. I clearly remember the change from Latin to English. There was a man who translated over a loud speaker system (speaking very softly, though) before the Official Change. It was sort of like listening to the commentator at a golf game.
Priest in a normal voice: Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem…
Translator whispering: I believe in God the Father Almighty…
All part of Pope Prada’s desire to undo everything since Vatican II, so no big surprise. One good thing is that it may drive more liberals from the church.
I don’t think it likely it will drive anyone — but it might make it easier for some to leave. People tend to stay in a church (or any other social group) because (a) it fits their beliefs, (b) they like the company and fellowship there, and (c) it’s a familiar habit. This impacts (c) most of all.
On the other hand, having dealt with trivial liturgical changes in my own parish, I know how much heat it can engender among some. And not always for good reasons — liturgical conservatism isn’t a good or bad thing, it’s a thing. The liturgy can be improved, it can be damaged, it can be a mixture. Resistance to it for the sake of being anti-change is just as mindless as embracing it for the sake of changing.
I agree with BD’s first sentence–this is in line with current Papal policy or philosophy. I believe Kurt’s response to Ratzinger’s proposed reforms was “forward into the Middle Ages”. Ratzinger seems to believe this will make the Church stronger, but it may just leave it leaner, because it’s already meaner.
Oh, it’s definitely a reining in of changes that have taken place. There were a lot of folks (not all church types, but most of them considered conservative) who were never thrilled by the particular vernacular English version chosen for the Mass (and many of them wish the Latin Mass would be brought back and be done with it). But clearly there’s a desire to guide / control the language in an orthodox fashion.