Perhaps because I am near the same age and have had similar experiences, I read Edward Schaefer's confession with sympathy and agreement. Any one who has planned music programs for both OF and EF communities, knows how much more difficult and frustrating the OF task can be. That said, I particularly appreciate that Schaefer doesn't fall into the trap of denying that the pre-council liturgy needed reform. Those of us who lived it know better.

One could argue that the Church is in need of reform now, since we've now gone to the other extreme - from all doom and gloom to all sweetness and light. (Did we really "forget" the Resurrection? Have we now "forgotten" Christ's passion? Not sure about that.)

Semper reformanda, as they say.

But I always wonder whether this reform was best done through an ecumenical council? Reform may be needed in the US, but would a consititutional convention be necessary or even desirable?

Sam Schmitt

Regarding the pre-Vatican II liturgy: was it the Mass itself--texts and rubrics--that needed reform (in the eyes of those here who believe so), or was it the typical ways in which it was celebrated? The things I hear people saying seem mostly to be cultural and attitudinal rather than inherent in the rite. I certainly have been to my share of horribly gloomy EF Masses, but it has had entirely to do with the priest's way of celebrating, the music (or lack thereof), and the exterior 'feel' of the faithful in the pews. None of these things is required by the EF.

And yet the Latin Mass and the Roman church survive the bashing.

Umnnnhh....Charles, I agree with your overall conclusion, but I did NOT know that you were a periti at VatII, thus completely confident that the 1965 missal is 'actually' what the Council fathers had in mind.



That "gloomy chant" remark is intriguing. Seems to me that one can make Chant sound gloomy, or not; it depends entirely on the choirmaster and the TEMPO at which the Chant is sung. It's also likely that the schola is ignoring (or ignorant of) the meaning of the text.

At Sexagesima, the words "exsurge" and "adjuva" should be sung with a bit of force--just a BIT--before the compliant/suppliant end of the melody a few words later. If that is not present in the singing, then yes, I expect that the Chant will be 'gloomy.' Or at least very boring.

We're about the same age, Charles.

It was your confidence-level that piqued my curiosity.

The 1965 edition was certainly preferable to the later ones, by far; I don't doubt that the current mishmosh strayed quite a distance from the vision. Neither does/did Ratzinger/B-16.

I don't recall, however, the darkness/sombreness which you do. Perhaps "sober" would be the word I'd choose. I think that it's theological: many seem to think that this life is the only one and they've 'immanentized the Eschaton.'

As to the music, well.......a lot depends on your parish choir director, no? In my home parish there was plenty of joyful music, which I used later as the choir director for the local EF Mass.

And Chant is also quite joyful, when it should be, viz., Christmas and Easter (inter alia).

BUT: Chant can be funereal dirge-music when the tempo drags, as some self-appointed experts suggest or insist. It's not 'sober' nor 'somber' then; it's downright awful. "Purgatorial" is the best word for it.

"I also remember "low masses" in which the priest rushed through the entire liturgy in 25 minutes or less."

25 minutes is probably about what priests should shoot for in celebrating the EF Low Mass without a sermon (unless the readings for the day are particularly long.) With a competent celebrant, it shouldn't feel rushed. The Mass will be slightly longer if there is both a general communion and prayers after Mass.

The drive to reform comprised much more than the twenty-minute mass with its auctioneer delivery. Twentieth-century scriptural scholarship exceeded the cumulative knowledge of what had preceded it, yet Catholics tended to have little acquaintance with the full range of the revealed Word. Thomas Aquinas had become deified to the point that other significant philosophical developments and points of view were left unexplored. (How can one argue against the other side if you’re not even permitted to examine the precepts of the other side?) The pervasive understanding of sexual development sustained attitudes that today would hardly be considered healthy. In short, the whole of Catholic culture needed reexamination.

Schaefer is careful to distinguish his admiration for the Latin mass from such needed correctives. By doing so, he embraces something that can -with nuture- be shared with many others.

There are vernacular Masses today that are 30 minutes or shorter - with or without any singing. Mid-day Masses for downtown workers on a short lunch break. Sunday Masses on military bases or in reserve units. It's not the time taken, but the attitude. And it has nothing to do with which direction the priest faces.

Gregorian chant is not as difficult as many make it out to be. Some of it is quite complicated, but much of it is not. Psalm tones can be used for the Propers when preferable. Again, it's not in the time taken, but in the attitude of the musician how the chant will sound.