Archbishop Piero Marini, the Master of Papal Liturgical Celebrations, gives us some insight into how the Holy Father himself has implemented liturgical reform. Although listening to what he says can sometimes be nuanced and open to interpretation, watching what he does manifests more clearly his mind on the subject.
What has changed in the liturgy since the Council? Is it only a question of a diversity of cultures, of tastes, sensitivity, colours and greater freedom in performing rites and applying rubrics? Has only the exterior array changed in accordance with changing aesthetic tastes? Today in the Church we find various tendencies: some want a more horizontal liturgy, a community event marked by participation, others prefer a more vertical and detached liturgy. On the one hand we have parish liturgies, on the other we have liturgies celebrated by movements and by those attached to the Tridentine Mass, who mourn the passing of Gregorian chant. Is there a boundary between aesthetic emotion and an authentic sense of the spiritual? Is a beautiful liturgy one which satisfies the tastes of consumers? The liturgy is not a consumer good; it is not the Church's supermarket! We know it is first and foremost the work of God, adoration, reception, bestowal. Hence we must ask ourselves what are the fundamental criteria for the beauty of the liturgy, apart from trends and tastes. It would be a great error simply to apply secular standards of aesthetic taste to the liturgy...
Beauty in the liturgy always calls for some renunciation on our part: we must renounce banality, over-imagination, extravagance. Moreover, the liturgy must be given the time and space it needs. We must not be in a hurry. Rather than taking the initiative, we must allow God the freedom to speak to us and reach us through his Word, through prayer, gestures, music, song, light, incense, fragrances. Like a musical composition, the liturgy needs space, time, silence, detachment from ourselves, so that words, gestures and signs may speak to us of God.
Even the much knocked about idea of liturgical participation does not escape his grasp. The reductionist view of participation, common to much of the reform movement to date, must be broadened for liturgical renewal to achieve its intended goal.
Active participation: During the first stage of the implementation of the reform, participation assumed a mainly exterior and didactic aspect, which later often degenerated to a sort of over-participation, at all costs and in every manner. The liturgy is not the sum of the emotions of a group of persons and much less a receptacle for personal feelings. It is above all time and space to interiorise the words we listen to and the sounds we hear in the liturgy, to make our own the actions performed, to assimilate the texts recited and sung, to let ourselves be penetrated by the images seen and the fragrances smelt.
[Via Summa Minutiae]
