Wednesday, 22 April 2009

Which way round?

A little while ago I posted my first question on Fr Z's blog and I shall be very interested to see if anybody picks it up. Not for the first time I have seen it suggested that the current versus populum celebration of mass derives from a mistranslation of a passage in the General Instruction on the Roman Missal. Fine. I have no problems with ad orientem. In fact I have long recognised that it makes more sense visually. But a mistranslation into English while influential in the many English speaking parts of the world is hardly going to be noticed where French, Italian, German, Spanish or Polish constitute the vernacular. Over the last thirty years I have been at Mass in France, Italy, Switzerland and Germany. I have visited churches in Spain. In almost every case the sanctuary had been reordered to facilitate the versus populum celebration. The only exceptions were those Roman basilicas where it had been traditional- as most notably at St Peter's. I am sorry to say that I suspect that I am being told a half-truth rather as I was given an untruth when I was led to believe that the reordering was mandated by Vatican II. How come so many got it wrong?
Posted by at

3 comments:

  1. Jeremy Priest23 April 2009 at 03:59

    I think it was partially influenced by the fact of television broadcasts of Mass from St. Peter's where Mass is seemingly celebrated versus populum, even if it is in fact still celebrated ad orietem. This visual impression from the Council influenced people all over the world to assume that this was the mandate of the Council.

    In addition, some liturgical "experts" encouraged this. Many, including Josef Jungman SJ, clearly saw this versus populum position as a departure from the tradition.

    I think the switch that came about through the frenzy for the novel and innovative that was part and parcel of the 1960's.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Patricius23 April 2009 at 09:05

    Thanks, I think there is something in what you say regarding the influence of televised masses from Rome. In my more cynical moments I suggest that the bishops at the Council saw how the Pope did things and thought they would like to be popes in their own dioceses! I feel less certain about the importance of the cultural zeitgeist of the 1960s. The revolution was so complete and against something so entrenched and longstanding that I feel that something little short of an act of authority must have been involved to bring it about.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ben Trovato30 April 2009 at 23:33

    I remember growing up in the 70s and the cultural zeitgeist then really was 'different is good' in my parish: anything that was not what we'd done before was thought to be ipso facto better than anything we had always done...

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)