The "Reform of the Reform" is in motion

"The “Reform of the Reform” is in motion
In today’s edition of Italian daily Il Giornale, religious journalist Andrea Tornielli brings the news that several “propositiones” approved by the plenary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (reserved session held on March 12, 2009) regarding several reforms of the new Mass of Paul VI. Full translation below:

…]

The Cardinals and Bishops members of the Congregation voted almost unanimously in favor of a greater sacrality of the rite, of the recovery of the sense of eucharistic worship, of the recovery of the Latin language in the celebration, and of the remaking of the introductory parts of the Missal in order to put a stop to abuses, wild experimentations, and inappropriate creativity. They have also declared themselves favorable to reaffirm that the usual way of receiving Communion according to the norms is not on the hand, but in the mouth."

rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2009/08/urgent-reform-of-reform-is-in-motion.html

Brick by brick, the Liturgy is being rebuilt.

Thanks for posting this!

This all sounds good to me. When will the changes to the liturgy occur?

"In an “Pleanary Vote” ,several “propositiones” approved by the plenary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (reserved session held on March 12, 2009) regarding several reforms of the new Mass of Paul VI.

The Cardinals and Bishops members of the Congregation voted almost unanimously in favor of a greater sacrality of the rite, of the recovery of the sense of eucharistic worship, of the recovery of the Latin language in the celebration, and of the remaking of the introductory parts of the Missal in order to put a stop to abuses, wild experimentations, and inappropriate creativity. They have also declared themselves favorable to reaffirm that the usual way of receiving Communion according to the norms is not on the hand, but in the mouth. There is, it is true, and indult which, on request of the [local] episcopates, allows for the distribution of the host [sic] also on the palm of the hand, but this must remain an extraordinary fact. The “Liturgy Minister” of Pope Ratzinger, Cañizares, is also having studies made on the possibility to recover the orientation towards the Orient of the celebrant, at least at the moment of the eucharistic consecration, as it happened in practice before the reform, when both the faithful and the priest faced towards the Cross and the priest therefore turned his back to the assembly."

The full article can be found here.

rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/

I can not wait for this to take place.

I was raised in the Latin Rite. I was an Altar Server under that Rite. I like having the priest facing me, I like commuinion in the had, although I am not overly attached to that. I LIKE the Novus Ordo and the vernacular mass. I hope they leave it alone.

I don’t understand this need for people to face East. If you believe that Jesus is present on the altar who care which way the altar faces? Everybody is facing Jesus after the consecration.

I am no fan of the latin mass. I have been to a few lately and I was underimpressed. Personally, if someone likes the priest facing away, receiving on the hand, etc. then I wonder why they don’t go to the latin mass.

The priest isn’t facing away, he is facing God with you. Like a captain on a ship guiding us to our Lord. For someone raised in the Latin Mass you seemed to have not been paying attention. You may like Holy Communion in your unconsecrated hand, but the Church is making a change to that indult.

What? I don’t see evidence of that in this article.

See, but that’s the thing: it’s not about what we prefer. It’s about the liturgy and the *symbolism *behind all of these acts. I won’t go into it in great detail, but if you read up on the it, you will discover the richness and then you’ll probably not only understand, you might even change your mind.

Great news almost daily ! Deo Gratias !

On your knees folks :slight_smile:

youtube.com/watch?v=PeiE-lznSYE&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.incorruptiblesforum.org%2Fshowthread.php%3Ft%3D1311&feature=player_embedded#t=13

You need a letter form the Pope himself ? :stuck_out_tongue:

Vatican Denies Rumors of Coming Liturgical Reform

Zenit is a pretty reliable source.

VATICAN CITY, AUG. 24, 2009 (Zenit.org).- The Vatican is denying rumors promulgated by some news organizations that announced forthcoming changes in the liturgy.
Father Ciro Benedettini, deputy director of the Vatican press office, clarified that “for the time being there are no institutional proposals for a modification of the liturgical books used at present,” Vatican Radio reported.
In recent days some media sources incorrectly reported that the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments had presented proposals to Benedict XVI for a “reform of the liturgical reform” motivated by the Second Vatican Council.

Well, the proposals spoken of weren’t about modifying the liturgical books, they were about liturgical practices. But still, if Fr. Benedettini says there was no such list of proposals presented to the Pope, I will believe him until shown otherwise.

Why does the article say Pope Ratzinger? I never heard someone refer Pope John Paul II as Pope Wojtyla.

Perhaps you can show me where the article says anything about a “change” to the indult of receiving in the hand.

Well…please explain what Rite you belong to now…Did you leave the Latin Rite? Do you understand what Latin Rite is? How can you make a valid argument either for or against something if you really don’t even know what you are talking about? Not trying to be uncharitable…just truthful.

It is actually a proper posture for the priest and the people to face the same direction. The priest is leading us as we seek the face of God. He is offering the Spotless Victim on our behalf to God. Note what the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger said about turning towards the Lord:

Modern man has little understanding of this “orientation”. Judaism and Islam, now as in the past, take it for granted that we should pray toward the central place of revelation, to the God who has revealed Himself to us, in the manner and in the place in which He revealed Himself. By contrast, in the western world, an abstract way of thinking, which in a certain way is the fruit of Christian influence, has become dominant. God is spiritual, and God is everywhere: does that not mean that prayer is not tied to a particular place or direction? Now we can indeed pray everywhere, and God is accessible to us everywhere. This idea of the universality of God is a consequence of Christian universality, of the Christian’s looking up to God above all gods, the God who embraces the cosmos and is more intimate to us than we are to ourselves. But our knowledge of this universality is the fruit of revelation: God has shown Himself to us. Only for this reason do we know Him, only for this reason can we confidently pray to Him everywhere. And precisely for this reason is it appropriate, now as in the past, that we should express in Christian prayer our turning to the God who has revealed Himself to us. Just as God assumed a body and entered the time and space of this world, so it is appropriate to prayer – at least to communal liturgical prayer – that our speaking to God should be “incarnational”, that it should be Christological, turned through the incarnate Word to the Triune God. The cosmic symbol of the rising sun expresses the universality of God above all particular places and yet maintains the concreteness of Divine Revelation. Our praying is thus inserted into the procession of the nations to God.

Further down, the Holy Father manages to dismantle the argument in support of celebrating “facing the people”:

Admittedly, these connections were obscured or fell into total oblivion in the church buildings and liturgical practice of the modern age. This is the only explanation for the fact that the common direction of prayer of priest and people got labeled as “celebrating towards the wall” or “turning your back on the people” and came to seem absurd and totally unacceptable. And this alone explains why the meal – even in modern pictures – became the normative idea of liturgical celebration for Christians.

In reality what happened was that an unprecedented clericalization came on the scene. Now the priest – the “presider”, as they now prefer to call him – becomes the real point of reference for the whole Liturgy. Everything depends on him. We have to see him, to respond to him, to be involved in what he is doing. His creativity sustains the whole thing.

Not surprisingly, people try to reduce this newly created role by assigning all kinds of liturgical functions to different individuals and entrusting the “creative” planning of the Liturgy to groups of people who like to, and are supposed to, “make a contribution of their own”. Less and less is God in the picture. More and more important is what is done by the human beings who meet here and do not like to subject themselves to a “pre-determined pattern.”

He also makes a very good argument here:

On the other hand, a common turning to the East during the Eucharistic Prayer remains essential. This is not a case of accidentals, but of essentials. Looking at the priest has no importance. What matters is looking together at the Lord. It is not now a question of dialogue, but of common worship, of setting off towards the One who is to come. What corresponds with the reality of what is happening is not the closed circle, but the common movement forward expressed in a common direction for prayer…

My parochial vicar, from time to time, celebrates the Liturgy of the Eucharist facing liturgical East. Ever since he read both the Spirit of the Liturgy and Turning Towards the Lord, it has given him a different perspective on the true nature of the Mass. Rather than putting this posture down, perhaps it would do us well to read these books so that we can recapture what we have nearly lost over the course of 40 years.

If you modify liturgical practices you have to modify the books, either the GIRM or the rubrics in the Missal, where the practices are spelled out.

Either that, or issue instructions on how the current practices are to be interpreted.

Under Canon 16, the body that issues liturgical law also has the authority to issue authentic interpretations that carry the force of law.

It’s very similar to how the Supreme Court can tell lower courts how to interprete and enforce a law, but does not change the verbage of the law itself.

I’ll believe it when I see it. A few years ago when they were remodeling the church, they took out all the statues, what was left of them anyway after an earlier remodel job or something, they took the large crucifix that was in the front and moved it to the back wall. Many visiting priests have made a point to comment on this and it was like water off a duck’s back. To me it seems the people in charge want to be protestants or something. There ain’t nobody goin’ to reform anyone out in these parts! I think their attitude is that they do it their way and the Vatican can go take a leap.

My, My, how charitable. Apparently I am stupid and I don’t understand my own faith.

I am latin rite. Perhaps I miswrote it.

Yes I do understand all the symbolism and I find it much of the symbolism of the tridentine mass unnecessary. For your information I have read up on it to see if I was missing something from my ancient memory, I was perhaps 12 when the mass changed in my area.

I find that the reverance and glory of the mass is in what you bring to it. I also have over thirty years in the Navy and I have stood on the bridge of a ship and I can assure you of one thing. There are people in front of the Captain on that ship. Especially if your in the foc’sle or on the bow.

I am fully versed in all the symbolism. I don’t need a dead language to worship God and my unconsecrated hand is probably cleaner than my unconsecrated tounge since the mouth is the dirtiest part of the body.

Allow me to ask, when the church first started after Pentacost, did the apostles and deacons walk around putting the eucharist on the tounges of those 3000 first converts or was it shared some other way?

I disagree with you. I am neither less educated than you, less Catholic than you, less reverant than you. I simply feel differently than you. If your prefer the other way than please attend all the tridentines you wish. I feel no need of it.

Pax vobiscum

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.