Wednesday’s Change at the CDW

Sandro Magister writes today in L’Espresso that Pope Francis’ revolution in the Roman curia continues to chop off some heads.

As Pray Tell reported, Fr. Corrado Maggioni, SMM has been named undersecretary (third in command) at the Congregation for Divine Worship. He is 58. With his appointment, Fr. Anthony Ward , SM (66) and the Spaniard Juan-Miguel Ferrer Grenesche (53) lose their jobs.

Magister sees the removal of Ferrer, whom Benedict XVI had appointed in 2009, as significant. Benedict brought him from Toledo, Spain, where was had been vicar general for Cardinal Cañizares Llovera, whom Francis recently removed as prefect of the CDW without yet naming a successor. Magister notes Ferrer’s respect for tradition, especially in the field of music and Gregorian chant.

Anthony Ward is known for his close work with Msgr. James Moroney, executive secretary of Vox Clara, in the production of the new English missal. Some have wondered whether Ward had a hand in the writing of Liturgiam authenticam, the 2003 Vatican document on liturgical translations, although other names have also been mentioned in that regard.

Magister reports that the new undersecretary has liturgical sensitivities close to those of the former papal MC Piero Marini. Marini worked under Annibale Bugnini in carrying out the liturgical reforms called for by the Second Vatican Council.

In “Encountering Christ in the Liturgy,” Maggioni gives a solid, mainstream understanding of the liturgical reform. He gets exactly right the importance of interior participation before external participation. And he says this about the “truth of signs”:

There comes to light also the importance of the “truth” of signs: the altar, a sign of Christ, cannot be transformed into somewhere to put things, as if it were a shelf, nor can the sanctuary, where the priest acts “in persona Christi” be mistaken for a stage, nor can the baptismal font be reduced to a basin and jug, nor the gift of the white robe be minimised by placing on the newly baptised person a small piece of material which cannot be worn, nor can the paschal candle, sign of Christ risen and living forever, be a tube of plastic which never burns down while it shines, brighter than “the morning star”…

Anthony Ruff, OSB

Fr. Anthony Ruff, OSB, is a monk of St. John's Abbey. He teaches liturgy, liturgical music, and Gregorian chant at St. John's University School of Theology-Seminary. He is widely published and frequently presents across the country on liturgy and music. He is the author of Sacred Music and Liturgical Reform: Treasures and Transformations, and of Responsorial Psalms for Weekday Mass: Advent, Christmas, Lent, Easter. He does priestly ministry at the neighboring community of Benedictine sisters in St. Joseph.

Please leave a reply.

Comments

13 responses to “Wednesday’s Change at the CDW”

  1. Rita Ferrone

    Is the real issue being close to the sensibilities of Marini and Bugnini, or being close to “the mind of the Church” whose liturgical reform has been supported by mainstream scholars and church leaders across the world for a generation and more. Magister has this way of making everything into a political football match, and each team has its iconic “captain.” But in reality, this is not a football match, it’s a Catholic liturgical reform founded responsibly and upheld by all but a few, who have managed to raise their profile and make their case very vocally and visibly through the pontificate of Benedict XVI. The critiques that Pope Benedict offered deserve to be heard, but they do not wash away the fact that there was and is an edifice built by the reform, and built to last. Maggioni is perhaps like Maggioni, and like countless other scholars and churchmen who inhabit that world without becoming a partisan of someone else.

    Reply
  2. Jordan Zarembo

    It’s extremely interesting that both the reform/renewal school and the restorationist school use heavily semiotic language to buttress their respective arguments. I am partial to the school of reformed liturgy in this regard, as a focus on significance as communicated through a more basic and simplified liturgy is preferable to the use of an anachronistic baroque to communicate the significance of liturgy. I have often thought that the most ardent supporters of the EF would do better to scrap the bombastic solemn Masses and embrace some of the sartorial and ceremonial simplifications of Paul VI. In this way, an easier semiotic comparison could be made between the two forms.

    I am not disturbed by Pope Francis’s appointment. In fact, perhaps it’s a good event that each pope subsequent to liturgical reform places his imprint on liturgical evolution and debate. The success of either the Ordinary or Extraordinary Forms rests in great part on its ability to communicate sacramental signs to the faithful. I do not think that either form has been completely successful in this regard. Growth by fits and starts is perhaps not a disadvantage but an intrinsic part of liturgical development.

    Reply
  3. Karl Liam Saur

    On a tangential note:

    http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/37391/

    Reply
  4. Ann Riggs

    Interior is understood as prior to exterior??? This is incredibly “modern,” part of the irony of the positions of a Church that was once known for its resistance to modernity. The priority of the internal is very “modern,” in the historical sense.

    The very use of material elements and ritual, and the understanding of them as self-communications of God and the actions of the Risen Christ among us, speak to a priority of our materiality, our corporeality, our sensibility. Our reality is not that of spirits within a body, but of embodied spirits, persons whose be-ing, and whose spirit-uality, are necessarily those of a body. Liturgy speaks to us through our material elements, our bodies as participants in its actions and receivers of its sacramental bounty.

    The interior does not precede the exterior. The interior is constructed from the exterior in its interaction w/ our sensibilities, including our individual temperaments and prior influences that can shape the way the sensible is received and perceived.

    The exterior is crucial to the way we are formed in our interiority. The language and actions of the liturgy, both externally and subliminally, are a primary exterior influence on the shaping of individuals’ spirituality and their understanding of the gospel and church. Until the CDW folk understand that, it will be difficult to see their decisions as helpful to providing a liturgy that is both reflective of AND formative for the entire Body.

    Reply
  5. Peter Haydon

    At the risk of going off topic may I ask what happens to those who lose their jobs? I expect that priests can return to their dioceses which are obliged to provide a post and allowances. What about a bishop?
    What happens in respect of their pension entitlements and other social security entitlements?

    Reply
    1. Ann Riggs

      @Peter Haydon – comment #5:
      I believe bishops also have a lifetime entitlement. Those who served as Ordinaries can reside there. I don’t know about lifetime Vatican bureaucrats.

      Reply
    2. Todd Flowerday

      @Peter Haydon – comment #5:
      You can bet that lay people hammered aside by Cardinal George were on their own resources to find another job.

      Believe me: nobody is worried about clergy losing curial jobs, least of all the ordained themselves.

      Reply
  6. Peter Haydon

    Thank you Ann and Todd.
    I think that if a cleric has renounced the faith or in some way made himself unsuitable for any appointment then there may be a case for him to cease to be a member of the clergy. But those who followed the wishes of those who appointed them or perhaps failed in a position for which they had inadequate preparation do, in my view, deserve to be treated as fairly as civil employment law demands.
    In the case of Cardinal Burke it does not seem to me that he should be treated worse than, say, Cardinal Bernard Law.
    Whatever pleasure, or regret, we may find in changes to people in office I hope that kindness and mercy are not forgotten.

    Reply
    1. David Annable

      @Peter Haydon – comment #8:

      Remember Cardinal Burke is not unemployed he is the Patron to the Knights of Malta, it is mostly a ceremonial position, but still it’s a job and I would assume the knights would want to care of their patron. The Knights of Malta have more than sufficient resources to take excellent care of the Cardinal. It wouldn’t surprise me if he is in better shape financially with them than working in the Vatican.

      This is not to demean, in anyway, the excellent charitable work that the Knights of Malta do perform and fund.

      Reply
      1. Peter Haydon

        @David Annable – comment #9:
        Thank you David.
        I am not sure that the Order of Malta ought to divert funds from their charitable works for this. But I did not wish to focus on Cardinal Burke: I wonder how Cardinal Law’s cost of living is covered and if the same source should not cover Cardinal Burke.
        But are the others covered as well?
        Presumably the lay people working for the Curia had normal employment contracts and would have been entitled to redundancy pay and retained pension rights. One expects that they would have something to offer a future employer. Clerics may not have had comparable terms of employment and would not find it easy to find work in the commercial world even if it was appropriate for them to look. Would JP Morgan or Texaco have any positions for clergy?
        I am thinking also of Bishop Liveres. Whatever the real reason for his dismissal I hope that there will be provision of accommodation and some money to live in dignity.
        It strikes me that dismissing people, with no opportunity to rectify any failings, no support offered and no opportunity to justify their actions, sets a very bad example of employment practice. If JP Morgan or Taxaco dismissed their employees in such a way I wonder if the church would applaud their employment practice.
        I make no comment on the work of the clerics involved or of the two firms mentioned. I was taught at school by the former Grand Master of the Order of Malta, Andrew Bertie so may not be neutral on that one. He taught me French and Turkish, the latter being a minority language at school.

      2. Paul Inwood

        @Peter Haydon – comment #10:

        It strikes me that dismissing people, with no opportunity to rectify any failings, no support offered and no opportunity to justify their actions, sets a very bad example of employment practice. If JP Morgan or Taxaco dismissed their employees in such a way I wonder if the church would applaud their employment practice.

        A major problem is that virtually everywhere in the USA the name of the game is “at-will employment”, i.e. employment at the whim of the employer, who may dismiss any employee for no reason at all at any time, even within days of appointing that person. It’s very different from anywhere else in the world, where people have employment contracts and some legal security. The only institutions in the US where security of tenure is alive and well are universities and similar institutions.

        This is why you hear multiple horror stories of parish or diocesan employees being dismissed when a new pastor arrives, or with no notice at the end of a calendar year, having no legal redress against such sins against justice. So yes, the Church in practice does applaud this sort of employment practice, at least in the US if nowhere else. And the fact that the nation and the state (in particular some US states) do support this mode of behaviour across the board is iniquitous and a scandal. In other countries it would never be tolerated. In the US there is no such thing as suing an employer for wrongful dismissal, because (amazingly in such a “civilized” society) there is no such thing as wrongful dismissal.

        If Francis knew about this, imagine what he would say…

  7. Michael Joncas Avatar
    Michael Joncas

    May I say that one of the things of which I was most proud as a presbyter of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis was a document promulgated some years ago entitled “Justice in Employment,” stating the criteria for terminating employment and the processes to be followed guaranteeing the rights of both employer and employee? We are presently in a change from this document to a new set of “Codes of Conduct” and it remains to be seen whether or not these new codes will as effectively promote justice in employment. However I believe the document may still be online at the Archdiocesan website and might be worth examining as a first step toward responding to the situations Paul Inwood describes.

    Reply
  8. Peter Haydon

    Thank you Paul and Father.
    Paul write of “horror stories of parish or diocesan employees being dismissed when a new pastor arrives” and it seems to me that the Pope may be doing the same. I do not know the full facts and say only that this is how it seems to me.
    I had a skim through various Encyclicals and found very little of direct relevance. In Laborem Exercens in paragraph 11 John Paul II writes in praise of labour codes fostered by the International Labour Organisation.
    CC 2436 speaks of the harm of unemployment.
    I was surprised not to see anything more explicit but may well have missed something.
    So I am puzzled.
    It does allow me to repeat my pet theme that bishops should have training and that employment law and practice should be part of this.

    Reply

Posted

in

by

Anthony Ruff, OSB

Tags:

, , ,

Discover more from Home

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading