AI SUMMARY:
Ressourcement movement (French for "return to the sources") was a 20th-century theological effort to rejuvenate the Catholic Church by reconnecting with its earliest foundations—specifically Scripture and the Church Fathers (Patristics). In the context of the Mass, this movement sought to peel back medieval and Baroque "accretions" to recover the simplicity and communal nature of early Christian worship.
These theological priorities directly informed the liturgical reforms of Vatican II, leading to several major changes in the Mass:
1. "Active Participation" of the Laity
The movement's core goal was to move the congregation from being passive "spectators" to active participants.
- Dialogue Mass: Restored the practice of the assembly responding aloud to the priest rather than remaining silent while altar servers answered on their behalf.
- Congregational Singing: Encouraged the restoration of communal singing and chant to engage the faithful.
2. Use of the Vernacular
By "returning to the source," theologians noted that the earliest liturgies were celebrated in the local language (Greek in the East, and eventually Latin in the West because it was the common tongue at the time).
- Linguistic Shift: This historical precedent justified shifting from Latin to modern local languages so that people could deeply understand the mystery being celebrated.
3. Restoration of Early Liturgical Elements
The movement identified ancient practices that had been lost or obscured over centuries and sought to restore them.
- Prayers of the Faithful: Reintroduced the "universal prayer" where the community offers intentions for the world.
- Expanded Scripture Readings: Moved from a one-year cycle of readings to a three-year cycle, significantly increasing the amount of the Bible (especially the Old Testament) heard at Mass.
- Sign of Peace: Restored as a communal gesture of reconciliation before receiving communion.
4. Architectural and Ritual Shifts
To emphasize the Mass as a "communal meal" and "sacramental communion" rather than a private transaction by the priest, several physical changes occurred:
- Altar Orientation: The priest began celebrating Mass facing the people (versus populum) instead of facing away from them toward the apse (ad orientem).
- Removal of Barriers: Many churches removed altar rails to create a more unified space between the sanctuary and the congregation.
- Communion Rite: Introduced the option to receive Communion standing and in the hand, reflecting some early Church practices described by the Fathers.
5. Simplified Rites
Theologians argued that the Mass had become cluttered with repetitive prayers and complex rubrics. The reform aimed for "noble simplicity," discarding elements that were duplicated or added over time with "little advantage" to the faithful's understanding.
9 comments:
From what I have gathered over the years from comments by historians who should know, the Bugnini claims of his version being "gimmee that old time religion" did not hold up to historical scrutinty, and his mass was largely composed of flights of fancy and major assumptions drawn from protestants.
As for what language the Roman empire used, Latin became the administrative language of the empire, while Greek was used as a universal language in the east. The western Roman Church adopted wholesale the Roman architectural, administrative, clothing, ans language style of the empire, and Latin became the universal language in all things until modern times.
As for mass goers understanding the Latin mass, the Church would have done far better in accurate translations provided worldwide in missals in local languages and continuing Latin education of children, rather than the universal ditching of Latin leaving the Church splintered by language and local practice and further splintered by the Bugnini mass options and as chaotically practiced.
Pau VI was hoodwinked by those around him; and it was at "Humanae Vitae" that he decisively drew the line. He was in many ways a tragic figure, much akin to T.S. Eliot's Archbishop.
I'm not aware of any historical precedent for the priest facing the people during liturgy or for a three-year lectionary cycle.
The rest of the changes are also suspect to me, but not as blatantly ahistorical as those two elements.
Yes, the facing the people lie was proven about 20 years ago! I don’t know when the Roman Canon was canonized, but it certainly has “universal prayer” embedded in it making the recovery of it redundant!
Only the intellectually challenged did not know what "Dominus Vobiscum" meant - if one heard it once or twice and had a Missal.
Resourcement was only the excuse; the real motivation was an idealogical communitarianism which saw the liturgy more as the work of the gathered faithful, i.e., a communal meal, rather than Jesus Christ presenting his one Sacrifice on the Cross through the agency of the priest. Thus we see the reason for Mass facing the people, removing altar rails, Communion in the hand, etc., etc., etc. This is also is what is driving the German Synodal Way, the belief that the common laity are the source of authority rather than Sacred Tradition and the hierarchy established by Jesus Christ.
Anthony, I agree with what they planned, Bugnini and company. I think too, that ecumenical considerations trumped authentic tradition. Protestants were quite pleased with “The Lord’s Supper” approach to the Eucharist with a deemphasis on the Sacrificial part. Also removing the things that for Protestants were too Catholic was helpful—remove Latin, free standing tables, and the like, although most Protestants, Lutherans, Methodists and Episcopalian maintained the altar railing and kneeling for their communion. Trying to bring us closer to Protestant theology about “the Lord’s Supper” distanced us from the East, where in fact the older Mass had far more in common, not to mention they have a valid priesthood required for validity of the Eucharist. Vatican II did not bring us closer to Protestants in any significant way in terms of priesthood or the Eucharist, and it distanced us from the East. Go figure!
It's interesting because the Roman Catholic understanding of the mass developed in ways that are quite different than the Orthodox understanding of the liturgy, especially with the idea of propitiatory sacrifice that was codified at Trent. The Protestant reaction to that obviously led to all sorts of ideas foreign to the Church fathers, and in recent decades the Roman Catholics have seemingly attempted to move closer to Protestant ideas, at least in terms of liturgical praxis.
All the while, despite the argument that Roman Catholic practice is seeking to realign with the early Church, it hasn't actually done so. Rather, it seems to continue to model Protestantism in various ways. It would be an interesting thing if those in charge of Roman Catholic liturgics actually looked to the early Church they claim to want to emulate, which neither had the understanding of liturgy as propitiatory sacrifice a la Trent nor the mere idea of communal meal a la the Reformation
Post a Comment