The Catholic Academy of Liturgy met yesterday, right before the opening of the North American Academy of Liturgy, which is meeting in Montreal, Canada.
(NAAL began in 1973 with a meeting organized by two Jesuits, Frs. Walter Burghardt and John Gallen. It was officially founded in 1975 at Notre Dame, and the first meeting was at Loyola in Louisiana. Its ecumenical membership numbers somewhere around 500 members, of which a bit less than half are Roman Catholic. Worship at the meetings is sometimes Christian, sometimes interfaith in consideration of the Jewish, and now Muslim, members.)
Scholarly topic for the morning session of the Catholic Academy of Liturgy was Anything But The Roman Missal.
More precisely, liturgical diversity in Canada. Very interesting panel with Fr. Gaetan Baillargeon (Directeur, Office national de liturgie, bishops’ conference), Simone Brosig (Director, Office of Liturgy, Diocese of Calgary), Fr. Bill Burke (Director, National Liturgy Office, bishops’ conference), Peter Galadza (professor of Eastern Catholic Liturgy, St. Paul University, Ottawa).
A few highlights:
* French-speaking and English-speaking Catholics in Canada have quite different histories and traditions. Oversimplification: the French are more traditional and less legalistic. Example: implementation of new GIRM for the French meant “let’s not worry about details of new rules, let’s focus on the spirit of the liturgy. Actually, let’s not change much of anything.”
* In some places people stand for the Eucharistic Prayer after the Sanctus, then kneel for the “consecration” (aka Institution Narrative) (aka Supper Narrative). In other places people stand for the entire EP. In other places people kneel for the entire EP. Time to unify all this, right? Bishops’ conference almost got agreement that all would kneel for all of EP – but French-speaking bishops would accept this only if the local bishop had freedom to legislate otherwise (since standing until the Supper Narrative is in fact the universal norm). Holy See would approve this only if the local-bishop-clause were removed. Bishops’ conference rejected this. Which means: the diversity continues.
* Communion under both forms is common among English-speakers, rare among French-speakers. At joint liturgies some resist both forms because “that’s not Catholic, it’s English.”
* Marriages are increasingly not just ecumenical, but interfaith. The rite of marriage needs development to acknowledge this.
Reports were heard from the national liturgy offices of the U.S. and Canada, with ICEL update from Fr. Paul Turner.
* A Spanish-language Missal for the US is in progress. Its completion relies largely upon the process being completed in Mexico. The US bishops are considering issuing just the official Spanish-language order of Mass separately, with the remaining materials to be issued upon the completion of the work in Mexico.
* Yes, Vox Clara is really producing a Roman Pontifical. But this doesn’t necessarily mean they’re acting like a translation agency, taking over ICEL’s work. Their Pontifical will simply bring together the episcopal rites in their current translation, with adjustments made (e.g. “And with your spirit”) where necessary. No new translations in it. (But still…)
* The Eucharistic Prayers for Children will soon be coming out in a separate fascicle. ICEL created a quite literal translation of the Latin – but the Latin was never intended as an original to translate, the idea was that it would be a model for developing original texts in vernacular languages. The Latin missal of 2008 doesn’t include these prayers in Latin because the Latin text isn’t intended for liturgical use. (And then some people got to get worked up that the Church was doing away with these prayers. Not.) The new missal in English doesn’t include these prayers because – I’m not making this up – the English missal has to mirror the contents of the Latin missal. Even though… oh, never mind. For now, the current translation will remain in use, with necessary adjustments such as “And with your spirit.” The fascicle will provide for this, while a more extended conversation about how to draft original English EPs for children can be taken up. Interesting question: do the assembly acclamations throughout the prayer work in practice, when these liturgies are celebrated infrequently?
* A U.S. document on preaching is coming which supplements but does not replace “Fulfilled in Your Hearing.” A concern from the floor: why is the consultation by invitation only, why couldn’t there be an open consultation as worked so well for Sing to the Lord? The question was handily dodged by pointing out that it’s being produced by the Committee on Clergy, Consecrated Life and Vocations, not the liturgy office.
* Common English-language lectionary (for those not in the U.S.) continues to bounce from one translation to another, after many candidates have fallen. Now they’re looking at the ESV, the English Standard Version, which comes from Protestant evangelicals.
I had a pleasant lunch with Msgr. Rick Hilgartner, director of the US liturgy office, and his able assistant, Fr. Dan Merz. I began by promising that nothing they said would go on this blog! The conversation was free and open. And I learned two things that are so interesting I can’t resist divulging them. (Just kidding, Rick.)
Excellent afternoon panel on future publication prospects for CAL with Glenn Byer (Director of Publications, CCCB), Hans Christoffersen (Publisher for Academic and Trade Markets, Liturgical Press), Don LaSalle, S.M.M. , and Mark Wedig, O.P. Wide ranging discussion on the many rapid changes buffeting us – print journals are fading, electronic media are rapidly changing, attention spans are shortening, book lengths are getting smaller, few Catholics are now going into liturgical studies. CAL membership is aging. Where is the field going??
At the business meeting, the Catholic Academy for Liturgy elected to its three-person leadership team: Fr. Anthony Ruff, OSB. This means I’ll rotate into office of president in two years.
awr, with thanks to Alan Hommerding
Please leave a reply.