Books In struggle over language and liturgy, the world church
dawns
LITURGY FOR THE NEW
MILLENNIUM: A COMMENTARY ON THE REVISED SACRAMENTARY By Mark R.
Francis, Keith F. Pecklers, Editors The Liturgical Press, 169 pages,
$19.95 |
|
By PATRICK MARRIN
If there is a keynote in this remarkable little volume of essays
on the Revised Sacramentary, perhaps it is the 1979 statement by Jesuit Fr.
Karl Rahner that the shift to the vernacular languages in the liturgy was the
unmistakable signal of the coming to be of the world church.
Always prescient, Rahner knew translation would open the door to
inculturation, and inculturation to globalization, and that this was the deep
renewal set in motion by Vatican II. It began with language but would
eventually impact the theology, canon law and ecclesiastical structures of the
church in the modern world.
For those who might regard the current stand-off between
Romes Congregation for Divine Worship and the International Commission on
English in the Liturgy as only about language, Liturgy for the New
Millennium both informs and alerts us to what is at stake in the work of
the commission and what now appears to be a high-level effort to slow or
impede its 35-year-long mission to give the churchs prayer a living
voice.
This book is styled as a set of essays about the new Revised
Sacramentary, or collection of prayers for the Mass, produced by the commission
and currently awaiting judgment in Rome. In 12 precisely interwoven chapters,
the book serves two purposes. First, the nonspecialist reader gets a thorough
description of the commissions process, including translation norms, the
changing needs and demographics of worshiping assemblies, and the decision to
compose new prayers while preserving the core elements of the Roman Rite. It
also includes a detailed explanation of some of the specific rites that have
benefited from careful research during the 17-year labor to revise the
sacramentary.
Second, readers are introduced to a remarkable scholar whose
expertise in liturgical inculturation has placed him in a critical staging area
for the world church Rahner envisioned. Benedictine Fr. Anscar Chupungco, in
whose honor these essays were written by his former students at the Pontifical
Liturgical Institute in Rome, has focused his career toward developing the
insight that translation opens wide the door to inculturation, with
broad implications for the future of the global church.
Chupungco was appointed in 1973 as the first Filipino on the
pontifical institutes faculty by Rembert Weakland, who was then abbot
primate of the Benedictine order. Chupungco served as the institutes
president for 12 of his 23 years in Rome. In that time, he came to be regarded
as a living link between Europes liturgical pioneers and more recent
developments in Asia. In 1993, Chupungco became the founding director of the
Paul VI Liturgical Institute in the Philippines, a center for forming
liturgists to serve throughout Asia. He is thus positioned uniquely between
East and West and between Northern and Southern Hemispheres at a time when the
churchs 1 billion membership is shifting dramatically from a First to a
Third World majority.
Chupungco has also served as consultor to both the International
Commission on English in the Liturgy and the Congregation for Divine Worship.
He is highly respected for his balanced approach to all the issues that are
converging and, to some extent, hanging on the outcome of the tension between
Rome and the commission.
Romes decision in 1997 to reject the commissions
translation of the new ordination rite marked the beginning of a new phase, in
which the Vatican began to assert a degree of authority over translation that
stood in contrast with the councils vision of a collegial undertaking
governed by the bishops conferences. Combined with repeated Vatican
warnings about the dangers of inclusive language, this new phase has cast a
long shadow over the entire liturgical field and especially over the fate of
the
American sacramentary.
In an October 1999 letter to Scottish Bishop Maurice Taylor, head
of the commissions episcopal board, Cardinal Jorge Medina Estévez,
prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, called for a total
reorganization, insisted on Roman approval of any scholar engaged in the
process and hinted again that new translation norms would be used to evaluate
the commissions already completed work. Medinas demands would
effectively give him full and final control of the process.
This improbable outcome parallels stories circulating in Rome
that, for example, the sacramentary submitted by the Japanese bishops got its
final scrutiny by a few Japanese seminarians drafted from one of the
international colleges in Rome.
The commissions process is explained in detail by current
executive secretary John Page in the opening chapter of Liturgy for the New
Millennium. The first postconciliar English sacramentary, published in
1973, contained prayers transliterated from the Latin, often taken from popular
bilingual missals used by preconciliar Catholics to follow the Mass. The
commission was authorized by its bishops to produce new translations and to
compose new alternative prayers that would give living voice to the
churchs prayer.
In close collaboration with the bishops conferences, the
commission submitted for approval in stages revisions of 2,000 Latin texts and
300 newly composed prayers, a revised translation of the General Instruction,
or introduction, to the sacramentary, and a new supplemental Pastoral
Introduction, which took seven years and 15 drafts to complete. The work was
approved by the bishops and sent to Rome in 1998 in hopes that it could be
published during this Jubilee year.
Page, with respect to Romes suggestion that the
commissions executive structure has somehow become a rogue operation,
says little except to lament that after quietly working for a decade, the
commission found itself the target of a well-orchestrated polemic originating
with traditionalists in the United States. Romes deference to these
fringe groups against the commission and its sponsoring episcopal conferences
remains one of the most troubling aspects of the present situation.
Gilbert Ostdiek offers the reader a fascinating inside look at the
complex translation process, whose goal is not just fidelity to the original
text but equal fidelity to the needs of the here-and-now assemblies that must
gain access to the mysteries the prayers proclaim. Ostdieks review of the
principles that have guided the commission is a spirited defense of the 1969
Vatican document Comme le prévoit, favored by Pope Paul VI but
now seemingly destined for suppression by Medina.
Jesuit Fr. Keith Pecklers discusses the changing role of the
liturgical assembly as the most visible manifestation of a dramatic shift in
ecclesiology after Vatican II. An active assembly has replaced the passive
audience, and this has accelerated the need for liturgical language and ritual
to connect with and unify those who assemble. Pecklers documents the changing
face of the church: At the beginning of the 20th century, 80 percent of
all Christians were whites living in the Northern Hemisphere; by the year 2020,
however, 80 percent of all Christians will be people of color
living in the Southern Hemisphere.
Bishop Wilton Gregory of Belleville, Ill., Chupungcos first
doctoral student, remembers his teachers frequent invitation to view the
world upside down by reminding them that the liturgical seasons favored
Christians living in the Northern Hemisphere, where Christmas comes in winter,
not summer, and Easter coincides with spring, not autumn. The image captures
the challenge we in the North and West will face as the majority church locates
to the East and South.
Margaret Mary Kelleher discusses the decision to compose new
prayers for the sacramentary. As the church learns to pray in the vernacular,
she writes, it is engaged in this self-realization as world church. This is
therefore a process never complete, requiring a willingness to move constantly
from past to future, to negotiate from one ecclesial reality to the next.
If history teaches anything, it is that an attempt to freeze-frame
tradition can only endanger a dynamic process. If this were not so, the church
would still be a Jewish sect using one of several Aramaic dialects as the only
reliable link to its founder. It is evident from the New Testament that the
primitive church accepted translation into the dominant Mediterranean languages
and culture as necessary to the missionary mandate from Jesus himself. The
genesis of the church was not a single event but an ongoing birth, whose
ultimate extension is envisioned in the Pentecost account in Acts people
of every culture hearing the gospel proclaimed in their own language.
Kellehers analysis addresses not only the process of ongoing
ethnic inculturation, but might apply as well to the deepest and most difficult
inculturation of all, from one institutional generation and culture to the
next, which requires acceptance of change as the essence of any living
tradition the word itself meaning to hand on, not to hold
on. If the International Commission on English in the Liturgy is being
brought to heel to halt this deeper agenda, it may well prove to be one of the
most audacious attempts at cultural rollback in history. Self-actualization,
invoked by an ecumenical council, is a door once opened that is not easily
closed again.
The oft-invoked presence and counsel of Anscar Chupungco
throughout the book serves to tie these and other helpful essays together
thematically. He is also looked to as an exemplar of the kind of careful
scholarship, fidelity to primary liturgical sources and generous openness to
reciprocity that will be needed to resolve the current standoff over the
Revised Sacramentary. Much is at stake for both the church and the modern
world.
Patrick Marrin is editor of Celebration, NCRs
sister publication on liturgy.
National Catholic Reporter, April 14,
2000
|