Varietates Legitimae 52: Areas of Adaptation in the Roman Rite

VL’s Chapter IV considers those “areas of adaptation.” In this small section, we look ahead to this final topic of the document Varietates Legitimae, what we’ll be covering as we wrap up the final issues of inculturation in the Roman Rite.

52. The constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium had in mind an inculturation of the Roman rite when it gave norms for the adaptation of the liturgy to the mentality and needs of different peoples, when it provided for a degree of adaptation in the liturgical books (cf. below Nos. 53-61), and also when it envisaged the possibility of more profound adaptations in some circumstances, especially in mission countries (cf. below Nos. 63-64).

 

Varietates Legitimae 49-51: Multiple Cultures

Finishing up VL’s consideration of prudence, I thought it would be helpful to link the last three sections of this sub-topic.

49. In a number of countries there are several cultures that coexist and sometimes influence each other in such a way as to lead gradually to the formation of a new culture, while at times they seek to affirm their proper identity or even oppose each other in order to stress their own existence. It can happen that customs may have little more than folkloric interest. The episcopal conference will examine each case individually with care: They should respect the riches of each culture and those who defend them, but they should not ignore or neglect a minority culture with which they are not familiar. They should weigh the risk of a Christian community becoming inward looking and also the use of inculturation for political ends. In those countries with a customary culture, account must also be taken of the extent to which modernization has affected the people.

50. Sometimes there are many languages in use in the one country, even though each one may be spoken only by a small group of persons or a single tribe. In such cases a balance must be found which respects the individual rights of these groups or tribes but without carrying to extremes the localization of the liturgical celebrations. It is also sometimes possible that a country may be moving toward the use of a principal language.

51. To promote liturgical inculturation in a cultural area bigger that one country, the episcopal conferences concerned must work together and decide the measures which have to be taken so that “as far as possible, there are not notable ritual differences in regions bordering on one another.” (SC 23)

Commentary:

Rome is wise to leave the discernment of VL 49 in the hands of competent bishops, plus the local clergy and laity.

The problem of multiple tribal languages is very real, and not just for the larger nations. The common, if not principal language, is often a European tongue, and this presents a problem on some levels. Liturgiam Authenticam was a little too-accepting of colonial languages, I thought. This too is an important discernment that must be made on the local level.

We Americans do not always realize it, but national boundaries in the Third World are often an imposition from colonizers, and don’t always adhere to the boundaries of nationalities and cultures. How does the Church support ministry and liturgical inculturation without appearing to take sides in political simmerings in hot spots? Cooperation and collaboration seem needed more than ever.

 

Varietates Legitimae 48: Acceptable/Unacceptable Local Customs

A very interesting section:

48. The constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium envisaged the admission of rites or gestures according to local custom into rituals of Christian initiation, marriage and funerals. (cf Nos. 65, 77, 81. Cf. Ordo Initiationis Christianae Adultorum, Praenotanda, 30-31, 79-81, 88-89; Ordo Celebrandi Matrimonium, editio typica altera, Praenotanda, 41-44; Ordo Exsequiarum, Praenotanda, 21-22.) This is a stage of inculturation, but there is also the danger that the truth of the Christian rite and the expression of the Christian faith could be easily diminished in the eyes of the faithful. Fidelity to traditional usages must be accompanied by purification and, if necessary, a break with the past. The same applies, for example, to the possibility of Christianizing pagan festivals or holy places, or to the priest using the signs of authority reserved to the heads of civil society or for the veneration of ancestors. In every case it is necessary to avoid any ambiguity. Obviously the Christian liturgy cannot accept magic rites, superstition, spiritism, vengeance or rites with a sexual connotation.

Why single out these rituals? Marriages and funerals obviously predated Christianity. Initiation rituals, too, are well known in countless cultures, but the RCIA, as we read before, permits many additional rituals during various rites.

Note the “break with the past.” Certainly no tolerance for organic development from the pastoral view. (But you all know I have doubts about its absolute necessity.)

And that last list … there are elements of superstition in Christianity: chain letters, and other usually harmless practices associated with Mary and the saints. If the concern is with people misinterpreting, shouldn’t the caution be widened to include the appearance of ambiguity? What do you think?

 

Varietates Legitimae 47: Avoiding Religious Syncretism

What about non-Christian religious practices, though morally and spiritually valuable? There is a notion that one religion is pretty much the same as another, but the Church wants to ensure that message is not what is communicated through the rites.

47. The liturgy is the expression of faith and Christian life, and so it is necessary to ensure that liturgical inculturation is not marked, even in appearance, by religious syncretism. This would be the case if the places of worship, the liturgical objects and vestments, gestures and postures let it appear as if rites had the same significance in Christian celebrations as they did before evangelization. The syncretism will be still worse if biblical readings and chants (cf. above No. 26) or the prayers were replaced by texts from other religions, even if these contain an undeniable religious and moral value.*

* These texts can be used profitably in the homily because it is one of the tasks of the homily “to show the points of convergence between revealed divine wisdom and noble human thought, seeking the truth by various paths” John Paul II, apostolic letter Dominicae Cenae, no. 10.

 

Varietates Legitimae 46: “Necessary Prudence”

VL 46-51 covers the sub-topic “necessary prudence.” In other words, just because something can be done doesn’t mean it should be done. A first appeal to Vatican II and everybody’s favorite (and unique) nod to organic development:

46. “Innovations should only be made when the good of the church genuinely and certainly requires them; care must be taken that any new forms adopted should in some way grow organically from forms already existing.” (SC 23) This norm was given in the constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium in relation to the restoration of the liturgy, and it also applies, in due measure, to the inculturation of the Roman rite. In this field changes need to be gradual and adequate explanation given in order to avoid the danger of rejection or simply an artificial grafting onto previous forms.

It’s a high bar. Requirement must be genuine and certain. Less troubling is the notion that new forms should develop from old. The (in)famous Agnus Dei tropes are an example. The Fraction Rite, at times, must be extended. So the genuine need is present. But since the old form permits more than a threefold repetition, it is less certain that employing tropes is a good idea. This, in spite of the traditional form of many litanies in the Catholic tradition.

Interesting also the appeal to a “danger of rejection.” This, before the days of English MR3.

 

Varietates Legitimae 44-45: Images and Devotion

VL considers images used for prayer:

44. The constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium has firmly maintained the constant practice of the church of encouraging the veneration by the faithful of images of Christ, the Virgin Mary and the saints, (SC 125, Lumen Gentium 67, Canon 1188) because the honor “given to the image is given to its subject.” (Council of Nicea II: Denz.-Schonm. 601; cf. St. Basil, “On the Holy Spirit,” XVIII, 45; Sources Chretiennes, 17, 194.) In different cultures believers can be helped in their prayer and in their spiritual life by seeing works of art which attempt, according to the genius of the people, to express the divine mysteries.

And some thoughts on the proper place of devotions. Their evolution from initial introduction, not to be done at Mass, and the oversight role of the bishop:

45. Alongside liturgical celebrations and related to them, in some particular churches there are various manifestations of popular devotion. These were sometimes introduced by missionaries at the time of the initial evangelization, and they often develop according to local custom.

The introduction of devotional practices into liturgical celebrations under the pretext of inculturation cannot be allowed “because by its nature, (the liturgy) is superior to them.” (SC 13)

So much for the rosary during Mass, I guess.

It belongs to the local ordinary (Canon 839.2) to organize such devotions, to encourage them as supports for the life and faith of Christians, and to purify them when necessary, because they need to be constantly permeated by the Gospel. (Vicesimus Quintus Annus, 18) He will take care to ensure that they do not replace liturgical celebrations or become mixed up with them. (Vicesimus Quintus Annus, 18)

 

Varietates Legitimae 43: Art in Liturgy

VL gives one section to treat the visual arts:

43. The liturgical celebration is enriched by the presence of art, which helps the faithful to celebrate, meet God and pray. Art in the church, which is made up of all peoples and nations, should enjoy the freedom of expression as long as it enhances the beauty of the buildings and liturgical rites, investing them with the respect and honor which is their due. (cf SC 123-124, Canon 1216) The arts should also be truly significant in the life and tradition of the people.

The same applies to the shape, location and decoration of the altar, (cf old GIRM 259-270, canons 1235-1239, esp. 1236) the place for the proclamation of the word of God (cf old GIRM 272) and for baptism, (Cf. De Benedictionibus Ordo Benedictionis Baptisterii seu Fontis Baptismalis, 832-837) all the liturgical furnishings, vessels, vestments and colors. (cf old GIRM 287-310) Preference should be given to materials, forms and colors which are in use in the country.

Since it doesn’t directly engage the texts of the Church, it seems more leeway is given to the visual depiction of liturgy. “Seeing is believing” aside, we all know that sight touches more people than sound. Visual arts would seem to be as significant as any factor in the wise application of inculturation.

 

Varietates Legitimae 41-42: Adaptations in Movement

Let’s now look at what VL has to say about gestures and movements. The CDWDS clearly intends these to be treated differently, but I would stress they are two forms of one aspect. I would also like to consider them in tandem with the musical arts.

41. The liturgy is an action, and so gesture and posture are especially important. Those which belong to the essential rites of the sacraments and which are required for their validity must be preserved just as they have been approved or determined by the supreme authority of the church. (cf. canon 841)

The Church here speaks of gestures such as laying-on-of-hands, the pouring of baptismal water, and the anointings of the various sacraments.

The gestures and postures of the celebrating priest must express his special function: He presides over the assembly in the person of Christ. (cf. SC 33, Canon 899.2)

The gestures and postures of the assembly are signs of its unity and express its active participation and foster the spiritual attitude of the participants. (cf. SC 30) Each culture will choose those gestures and bodily postures which express the attitude of humanity before God, giving them a Christian significance, having some relationship if possible, with the gestures and postures of the Bible.

And these would be gestures of standing, sitting, kneeling, bowing, walking, and the use of hands.

42. Among some peoples, singing is instinctively accompanied by hand-clapping, rhythmic swaying and dance movements on the part of the participants. Such forms of external expression can have a place in the liturgical actions of these peoples on condition that they are always the expression of true communal prayer of adoration, praise, offering and supplication, and not simply a performance.

I think the CDWDS treads with difficulty here. I would agree that non-traditional movement such as dance need to be rooted in the participation of the assembly. As an art form, is music held to the same standard? And if not, why not dance?

 

 

Varietates Legitimae 40: Adaptations in Music

Let’s turn to what VL has to say about music:

40. Music and singing, which express the soul of people, have pride of place in the liturgy. And so singing must be promoted, in the first place singing the liturgical text, so that the voices of the faithful may be heard in the liturgical actions themselves. (SC 118; also 54, old GIRM 19)

Singing the Mass, not just singing at the Mass: excellent.

The note for this last section is supplemented by a nod to the people’s participation in Latin:

While allowing that “a suitable place be allotted to the language of the country” in the chants, “steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or sing together in Latin those parts of the ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them,” especially the Our Father.

Interesting that the Lord’s Prayer would be included in the Mass Ordinary; that’s not a traditional view of the piece.

As for the rest of the section, VL gives a nod to the local cultural traditions of music, and its suitability for the liturgy, citing Vatican II:

“In some parts of the world, especially mission lands, there are people who have their own musical traditions, and these play a great part in their religious and social life. Due importance is to be attached to their music and a suitable place given to it, not only in forming their attitude toward religion, but also in adapting worship to their native genius.” (SC 119)

The texts themselves are very important. It’s not just about Latin, or about cultivating cultural talent of composers and musicians:

It is important to note that a text which is sung is more deeply engraved in the memory than when it is read, which means that it is necessary to be demanding about the biblical and liturgical inspiration and the literary quality of texts which are meant to be sung.

Suitable material–not just that. But VL endorses what “can be made suitable,” implying that musical inculturation will try things, test things, reform and adjust things to make something work for the spiritual benefit of believers:

Musical forms, melodies and musical instruments could be used in divine worship as long as they “are suitable, or can be made suitable, for sacred use, and provided they are in accord with the dignity of the place of worship and truly contribute to the uplifting of the faithful.” (SC 120)

The citing of “melodies” is interesting here. That certainly would include something composed in the style of the culture. I’m not sure it wouldn’t preclude secular influences. A non-Christian religious melody adapted for the Mass–I would think that requires a very careful approach.

In the US, I’d think back to the 70′s. Using a few of the songs from Godspell seemed a decent approach, especially as some of Stephen Schwartz’s music was itself derived from hymnody and Christian devotion. But existing pop songs because they have a reference to Jesus? Please. Better to compose in the style of the music.

 

Varietates Legitimae 39: Adapting Language

39. Language, which is a means of communication between people. In liturgical celebrations its purpose is to announce to the faithful the good news of salvation (Cf. Canons 762-772, especially 769) and to express the church’s prayer to the Lord. For this reason it must always express, along with the truths of the faith, the grandeur and holiness of the mysteries which are being celebrated.

Nothing to say explicitly on artistry here–that would be my criticism of VL 39. Expressing the faith: important. Grandeur and holiness of the liturgy and sacraments? That needs an artistic rendering, too, not just Latin grammar.

Careful consideration therefore needs to be given to determine which elements in the language of the people can properly be introduced into liturgical celebrations, and in particular whether it is suitable or not to use expressions from non-Christian religions. It is just as important to take account of the different literary genres used in the liturgy: biblical texts, presidential prayers, psalmody, acclamations, refrains, responsories, hymns and litanies.

Any linguistic aspect could be introduced. Non-Christian expressions of vocabulary are, of course, another matter. The translation principle suggested here is also interesting: don’t just render the words, but also the style of the text.

 

 

Varietates Legitimae 38: Adaptations Which Can Be Made

For readers exasperated with the theological, liturgical and pastoral preliminaries, today we have a preview of “adaptations which can be made,” part b of chapter III.

The next numbered sections of part bconsider language (39), music and singing (40), gestures, postures, and other movements (41-42), art (43), and devotions (44-45).

Longer sections will follow, but a short one for the moment:

38. In an analysis of a liturgical action with a view to its inculturation, it is necessary to consider the traditional value of the elements of the action and in particular their biblical or patristic origin (cf. above Nos. 21-26), because it is not sufficient to distinguish between what can be changed and what is unchangeable.

Not everything that can be changed should be changed.

Any comments?

 

Varietates Legitimae 36-37: More on Unity and Authority

36. The process of inculturation should maintain the substantial unity of the Roman rite. (SC 37-40) This unity is currently expressed in the typical editions of liturgical books, published by authority of the supreme pontiff and in the liturgical books approved by the episcopal conferences for their areas and confirmed by the Apostolic See. (Cf. Vicesimus Quintus Annus, 16) The work of inculturation does not foresee the creation of new families of rites; inculturation responds to the needs of a particular culture and leads to adaptations which still remain part of the Roman rite.

The note here gives a commentary from John Paul II to the CDWDS: “This is not to suggest to the particular churches that they have a new task to undertake following the application of liturgical reform, that is to say, adaptation or inculturation. Nor is it intended to mean inculturation as the creation of alternative rites…. It is a question of collaborating so that the Roman rite, maintaining its own identity, may incorporate suitable adaptations.”

So there will be, at this time, no organic development of new rites.

With three reference documents, VL37 is interesting in pounding in the importance of authority, first of the CDWDS, then bishops’ conferences, then bishops. “No other person” follows:

37. Adaptations of the Roman rite, even in the field of inculturation, depend completely on the authority of the church. This authority belongs to the Apostolic See, which exercises it through the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments; (Cf. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 22; Canons 838.1 and 838.2; John Paul II, apostolic constitution Pastor Bonus, 62, 64.3: AAS 80 (1988), 876-877; Vicesimus Quintus Annus, 19) it also belongs, within the limits fixed by law, to episcopal conferences (Cf. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 22 and Canons 447ff and 838.1 and 838.3; Vicesimus Quintus Annus, 20.) and to the diocesan bishop. (Cf. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 22, and Canons 838.1 and 838.4; Vicesimus Quintus Annus, 21.) “No other person, not even if he is a priest, may on his own initiative add, remove or change anything in the liturgy.” (SC 22) Inculturation is not left to the personal initiative of celebrants or to the collective initiative of an assembly.*

Likewise concessions granted to one region cannot be extended to other regions without the necessary authorization, even if an episcopal conference considers that there are sufficient reasons for adopting such measures in its own area.

* The situation is different when, in the liturgical books published after the constitution, the introductions and the rubrics envisaged adaptations and the possibility of leaving a choice to the pastoral sensitivity of the one presiding, for example, when it says “if it is opportune,” “in these or similar terms,” “also,” “according to circumstances,” “either … or,” “if convenient,” “normally,” “the most suitable form can be chosen.” In making a choice, the celebrant should seek the good of the assembly, taking into account the spiritual preparation and mentality of the participants rather than his own preferences or the easiest solution. In celebrations for particular groups, other possibilities are available. Nonetheless, prudence and discretion are always called for in order to avoid the breaking up of the local church into little “churches” or “chapels” closed in upon themselves.

This notion should get more attention:

(T)he celebrant should seek the good of the assembly, taking into account the spiritual preparation and mentality of the participants rather than his own preferences or the easiest solution.

We’ve seen this in other documents (RCIA, OCF, Pastoral Care of the Sick) as we’ve examined the leeway given to the local community in the celebration of the sacraments and other rites.

What did you think of the caution about “breaking up the local church into little ‘churches’ or ‘chapels’ closed in upon themselves”?

 

Varietates Legitimae 34-35: Goal, Unity, Authority

VL 34 gives three basic concerns, which I would interpret as the CDWDS’s “agenda” for the whole document:

34. In the planning and execution of the inculturation of the Roman rite, the following points should be kept in mind:

• 1) the goal of inculturation;
• 2) the substantial unity of the Roman rite,
• 3) the competent authority.

The goal, obviously, is the evangelization of believers, the cultivating of their faith, and a hoped-for influence on the culture in which they find themselves. VL cites Vatican II to find a basis for the portion of this goal:

35. The goal which should guide the inculturation of the Roman rite is that laid down by the Second Vatican Council as the basis of the general restoration of the liturgy: “Both texts and rites should be so drawn up that they express more clearly the holy things they signify and so that the Christian people, as far as possible, may be able to understand them with ease and to take part in the rites fully, actively and as befits a community.” (SC 21)

(Active participation, again!)

Rites also need “to be adapted to the capacity of the faithful and that there should not be a need for numerous explanations for them to be understood.” (SC 34) However, the nature of the liturgy always has to be borne in mind, as does the biblical and traditional character of its structure and the particular way in which it is expressed (cf. above Nos. 21-27).

35b is a matter of careful discernment. Rome desires something of Rome to be in the structure and details of the celebration of liturgy. With the new translation, for example, we have Roman grammar assembling English words. If the grammar of a language is part of the theological grounding of liturgy, or a significant part of the actual ritual, then this makes sense.

My opinion tends to be formed by the nature of the art of composition. I would argue the imposition of foreign grammar on English rites runs the risk of damaging the artistic rendition and quality of the whole. It would be like insisting all keyboard music be played on the organ. Some parishes lack a quality organ. Some otherwise excellent pieces are arranged for piano. A subset of these might adapt well. But other pieces would not. And then an assessment would be needed on how this particular directive would be received. There might well be a virtue to having a piece accompanied on organ above piano, all other things being equal. Or it might be that a secondary aspect of liturgy has been raised to a level not in keeping with its relative importance. In the case of organ versus piano, the cultivation of excellence in liturgical music. In the case of translation, the rendering of texts to inspire faith, rather than disengage it.

Any thoughts on this?

 

Varietates Legitimae 33: Principles and Practical Norms for Inculturation of the Roman Rite

VL chapter III, numbered sections 33 through 51, begins a serious look at the “Principles and Practical Norms for Inculturation of the Roman Rite.” Over the next several posts, we will examine the state of affairs of inculturation, and study the norms given by the CDWDS.

33. As particular churches, especially the young churches, deepen their understanding of the liturgical heritage they have received from the Roman church that gave them birth, they will be able in turn to find in their own cultural heritage appropriate forms that can be integrated into the Roman rite where this is judged useful and necessary.

The liturgical formation of the faithful and the clergy, which is called for by the constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium, (SC 14-19) ought to help them to understand the meaning of the texts and the rites given in the present liturgical books. Often this will mean that elements which come from the tradition of the Roman rite do not have to be changed or suppressed.

 

Varietates Legitimae 31-32: The Responsibility of The Episcopal Conference

National conferences of bishops have particular responsibilities, as we read in these two sections:

31. Since it is a question of local culture, it is understandable that the constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium assigned special responsibility in this matter to the “various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established.” (SC 22; cf. SC 39, 40, canons 447-448ff) In regard to this, episcopal conferences must consider “carefully and prudently what elements taken from the traditions and cultures of individual peoples may properly be admitted into divine worship.” (SC 40) They can sometimes introduce “into the liturgy such elements as are not bound up with superstition and error … provided they are in keeping with the true and authentic spirit of the liturgy.” (SC 37)

After the direct quotes from Vatican II, a few previews of what is to come later in VL:

32. Conferences may determine, according to the procedure given below (cf. Nos. 62 and 65-69), whether the introduction into the liturgy of elements borrowed from the social and religious rites of a people, and which form a living part of their culture, will enrich their understanding of liturgical actions without producing negative effects on their faith and piety. They will always be careful to avoid the danger of introducing elements that might appear to the faithful as the return to a period before evangelization (cf. below No. 47).

In any case, if changes in rites or texts are judged to be necessary, they must be harmonized with the rest of the liturgical life and, before being put into practice, still more before being made mandatory, they should first be presented to the clergy and then to the faithful in such a way as to avoid the danger of troubling them without good reason (cf. below, Nos. 46 and 69).

These steps all seem to be sensible, if they are carried out with due competence, study, and preparation.