52 - Catholic Liturgical Reform

Catholic Liturgical Reform
By German Martinez

Since liturgical reform, through a controlled process of historical restoration, has failed to revitalize the communal life of the church, a new creative liturgical movement, christologically founded, is imperative in order to bridge the gap between worship and people's experience of faith in our present culture.

Twenty-two years have passed since the promulgation of the Constitution on the Liturgy.¹ That document was the first-fruit of Vatican II(1963-65), sealing half a century of liturgical movement and inaugurating a new order of worship in the Roman Catholic Church. The Sacrosanctum Concilium represented one of the most concrete pastoral efforts of the Council to safeguard the Roman tradition and to meet the challenges of the church entering a new age.

Now that twenty years have dissipated the anxieties and urgencies of change, we are in a better position to evaluate the outcome of this most controversial reform of modern Catholicism. If the goal of Vatican II was a new vigor of worship to meet the needs of modern times, as stated in the introduction to the Constitution, can we acknowledge today the actual interaction between liturgy and culture, worship and life, new order of worship and present social conditions? Did the reform simply restore the classical forms of the past, or did it also envision cultural adaptations within ritual creativity? In the end, the most important practical question is: Did the Vatican II reform actually make worship relevant to the lived religious experience of the whole person and the real community in celebrating the mystery of Christ?

A critical evaluation of the progress of this liturgical renewal to date would note among its achievements: first, that it revived a sense of community; second, it promoted active participation; third, the essential step of sharing the Word and the Bread became a reality; fourth, it enhanced communal singing; fifth, it developed a simple, essential, and

German Martinez is Associate Professor of Systematic Theology, Carlow College, Pittsburgh. He received the doctorate at the University of St. Anselm, Rome, where he also taught. Born in Spain, Dr. Martinez has written extensively on liturgical theology for French, Italian, Spanish, and English journals.
¹ Documents on the Liturgy, 1963-1979: Conciliar, Papal, and Curial Texts, ed. by International Commission on English in the Liturgy (Collegeville, Minn: Liturgical Press, 1982). To these documents we should add those issued by the bishops and national conferences.

53 - Catholic Liturgical Reform

flexible structure; sixth, it opened the door to a new sacramental ministry and diversified lay ministries; and, finally, worship appeared clearly as the foundation and apex of Christian life.

Since Vatican II, liturgical life has regained transcendent universality in theory and practice, thus expanding the potentiality of worship from an ecumenical point of view. From a Roman Catholic perspective, the involvement of bishops and scholars around the world made the reform a reality of the whole church without precedent in the history of Christianity.

I

Problems encountered should not be allowed to discredit progress made. A critical evaluation of successes and failures must hinge on the two poles around which the process of liturgical reform developed, as stated in the Constitution: safeguard vital tradition and meet contemporary challenges.² To what extent did the results meet those two essential goals?

The church did revitalize its communal life in specific areas, as summarized above. It implemented a new order of worship through a process of historical restoration. But that was all: a restoration of the past, with a timid attempt of adaptation to the present.

In search for future creativity, remarks about some of the areas where the liturgical reform failed to live up to our expectations can be made. These remarks about failures, which cannot be taken in absolute terms, will attempt to preview the unfinished agenda for the future.

(1) The Unfinished Agenda. The outcome of the recent liturgical renewal is in many ways definitely positive, although this is not the general opinion of many sociologists. Their attempt to analyze the reaction of the people deals mostly with the fall-off in religious attendance of young adults, an acute problem that goes far beyond the complexities of worship. A deeper level of understanding in regard to the rejection of religious attitudes and ritual changes is needed. Surveys have been useful, but in these precise liturgical matters they are only partial and can be deceiving.

The present problematic situations are comparable in both American and many European churches. Recently, Father Andrew Greeley said: "The most directly pastoral effort of the Vatican was liturgical reform. Yet, as Father Patrick Collins recently acknowledged in a painfully honest interview in the United States Catholic,³ most liturgies are 'lousy.⁴ A real paradigm seems apparent from the sociological point of

² The last paragraph of the introduction to the Constitution summarized the goals proposed by the Council: "The Council also desires that, where necessary, the rites be carefully and thoroughly revised in the light of sound tradition, and that they be given new vigor to meet the circumstances and needs of modern times."
³ Patrick Collins, "What Can We Do About Lousy Liturgy?" U.S. Catholic 46 (1981), p. 6.
⁴ A. M. Greeley, "The Failures of Vatican II After Twenty Years," America 146 (1982), p. 88. See also "The Failures of Vatican II Revisited," ibid., pp. 454ff.

54 - Catholic Liturgical Reform

view: "The liturgical changes were brought about and generally accepted by the elitist minorities," but "the popular masses have reacted negatively, either falling off more and more in liturgical attendance, or holding on to ancient ritual forms."⁵ Although these opinions lean toward the pessimistic side, they cannot be overlooked.

In this reform, two main negative underlying factors must be seriously considered: first, the imbalance in the ritual presentations of the religious story, and second, the failure to clarify the complexities of religious symbolism.

(2) The Irrelevant Spirituality. An essential aspect, barely tackled so far, is the actualization of the liturgical language, and, above all, the doctrinal content. Current history is absent from the liturgy, composed-as it is-of mostly 1,500-year-old Roman prayers. This codified and anachronistic Roman language corresponds to an old social order and is irrelevant for where people work today.⁶ A contemporary spirituality is missing, for instance, to voice the dramatic outcry for justice and peace in our day, to cite just one contemporary issue.⁷

The urgent need is for new creativity, not just timid adaptations, in several directions: integration of current theology, more biblical, ecumenical, and historical in its content; incorporation of the salvation history of the American people with an exegetical, mystical-body-of Christ metaphoric language to reflect the interconnection between symbolic rites and corporate history; correction of sexist language; new focus from a hierarchical and institutional language to a prophetic and communal one; broadening of the Christian vision in the liturgical language and content from a spirituality of individualistic perfectionism to a spirituality of social corporate responsibility in relation to creation, life, and human community. As Msgr. John Egan asked, "How can you revise the story of the liturgy to make it inclusive of the hopes and fears, sufferings and aspirations of today's world?"⁸

(3) The Communication Gap. The above-mentioned aspects of an historical language and anachronistic theological content are at the bottom-line of a communication gap. A further inadequacy originates from the misinterpretation of the concept of participation.

The Constitution on the Liturgy, and subsequent documents, exhausted all the adjectives that could express complete participation. In fact, "this full and active participation by all the people is the aim to

⁵ I. A. Isambert, "Reforme et Analysis Sociologiques," La Maison Dieu 128 (1976), p. 78.
⁶ Cf. an enthusiastic and profound view of the future of the liturgy based on its history and tradition by J. A. Chupungco, Cultural Adaptation of the Liturgy (New York: Paulist Press, 1982).
⁷ A telling example is the failure to connect liturgy and social action as Msgr. John J. Egan contends in a recent article, "Liturgy and Justice: An Unfinished Agenda," Origins 13 (1983),pp. 245-253. Cf. also R. Avila. Worship and Politics (NewYork:Orbis, 1981); C. Duquoc and J. Guichard, Politique et Vocabulaire Liturgique (Paris: Cerf, 1975).
⁸ Op. cit., p. 252.

55 - Catholic Liturgical Reform

be considered before all else."⁹ Consequently, the restructuring of the new rites called for the greatest possible interaction and dialogue of a community-celebrant. Was the idea of participating overdone?

Two different factors can bring about a wordy liturgy: (1) the imbalance between verbal, symbolic, and silent participation, and (2) over-use of conceptual and explanatory language.

Liturgies became overly verbose, and some of the non-verbal symbols disappeared without replacement. Father Patrick Collins expresses it this way: "I think people can be active participants listening and observing as well as speaking and moving around…. So, all during the Mass, it's one distraction after another."¹⁰

The theme of the day may be dense, and the doctrinal aspects diversified. Too much content cannot be compressed into too short a period of time, even though the liturgy of the Word takes two thirds of the celebration. Consequently, times of silence tend to disappear.

The second negative factor is the prevalent use of conceptual and dialectic language. The language that worship requires is metaphoric and symbolic, not only because liturgy is rooted in Scripture, but because of its own nature. "We put in the liturgical texts," Antoine Vergote writes, "too much theological disclosure. We thus mix up two functions: the cultural expression and the more intellectual reflection about the contents of faith."¹¹

The participation envisaged here is of the total person engaged-in quality, not quantity-in the depths of an actual, vibrant, and transforming mystery of God. This mystery is revealed and present under the veil of symbols and images, whose meaning, including the formula of text, depends on their transparency, consistency, and presentation.

A balanced integration of good communication and eloquent silence gives the desired atmosphere of contemplation, allows the integration of communal and private prayers, and ultimately leads from the human surface to the depths of the mystery of God. The total need is not only circular (priest-community), but also vertical (community-divinity) participation and internalization.

(4) The Eclipse of Sacredness and Wonder. The loss of the sense of the "sacred" and "mystery" is the most universal criticism of the liturgy. It has been said that people do not complain about changes, even radical changes, but that their dissatisfaction stems overwhelmingly from the loss of a sense of mystery. The sacredness of worship in approaching the supernatural seems to constitute an essential dimension of the identity of people's own souls. That identity is lost when changes bring about banality. It is like taking away the living spring of their religious spirit.

In fact, the sensus fidelium is profoundly aware of worship as a

⁹ Sacrosanctum Concilium, p. 14.
¹⁰ Op. cit., p. 10.
¹¹ Antoine Vergote. "Éclipse ou renouveau du sens du sacré dans I' actuelle liturgie," La Maison Dieu, 128 (1976), p. 112.

56 - Catholic Liturgical Reform

transcendent action of the actually salvific presence of the mystery of God. That action makes it possible to enter, beyond the limits of earthly and temporal existence, into the eternity of God. Do the newly adapted rites actually convey that sense of profound and reverent participation?

To draw a clear-cut line between the old and the new liturgy would be simplistic. The former used contemplative music (Gregorian), language presumed to be sacred (Latin), and a proliferation of gestures and signs (crosses, incense, bells, etc). The latter is characterized by popular, sometimes secular tunes, more familiar and conceptual language, and above all, poverty of signs. The "grandeur and sublimity," "spirit of reverence," "profound and dignified action" of the Latin Mass have been contrasted, although rather indiscriminately, with "the banality of the entire rite" and the "simplistic rather than profound" liturgy of the new Mass.¹²

Therefore, a profound presentation of the religious story in the ritual actions and the attitude of reverent awe and communion are imperatives demanded by the same nature and function of the Christian mystery, as long as it is not obscured with any glimpse of magical myth that alienates human life. In fact, "every liturgical celebration is a sacred action."¹³

(5) The Shallowness of Functionalism. The liturgical reform, intending to bring the liturgy closer to the people, simplified rituals without wanting to discard essentials. Any knowledgeable person agrees that the Mass of Paul VI, for instance, corresponds to authentic tradition in its formal structure better than the Tridentine form. Dissatisfaction does not come from change, but from a lack of quality and depth.

The attempt to bring the liturgy closer to the average person is, without doubt, a commendable one. But we have acted often in a simplistic and naive way. Signs and rites are not functional, but symbolic. "I think we're hitting the very core of what liturgy is," says Archbishop Weakland, "how through human signs and symbols one can create an awareness of transcendency. That does not negate the human element of the symbol but says that the symbol doesn't stop there-it goes beyond that."¹⁴

The social dimension referred to above interweaves with and complements this transcendent symbolism in the liturgy, leading to "an experience of the depth of existence"¹⁵ and the discovery of that sacred dimension in our own depths. At the same time, our union with divinity depends on the capability of linking that sacred human dimension with the holiness of God. Worship, as a symbolic action, constitutes that link. So, meaningfulness and understanding are essential. Nevertheless, the

¹² Cf. J. Hitchcock, The Recovery of the Sacred (New York: Seabury Press, 1974).
¹³ Sacrosanctum Concilium, 7.
¹⁴ R. C. Weakland. "You Can't Renew Liturgy Without Renewing People," St. Anthony Messenger (May, 1981), p. 16.
¹⁵ Antoine Vergote, op. cit., p. 112.

57 - Catholic Liturgical Reform

power of a symbol depends also on its grace, aesthetic value, and its quality to communicate effectively with the imagination.

Music, art, human sensitivity, a minimum of acting qualities in the celebrant as a leader are important, but never without the profoundness of dignity, reverence, and the atmosphere of contemplation. No doubt, our liturgy is impoverished as to its symbolism. This becomes apparent, for example, in the rite of marriage that has been reduced from the symbolism of a covenant to a simple contract. The liturgies of the Eastern Rites are a good example; they did not yield to the Western temptation of functionalism and efficiency.¹⁶

The official documents fully endorsed the same ideals regarding quality of participation. They refer continually to dignity, nobility, profoundness, and the solemnity dependent above all on the quality of participation.¹⁷

(6) The Over-Massed Liturgy. The importance of the Eucharist in the life of the community and its central role within the sacramental economy are beyond doubt. The New Testament and the classic Christian tradition would confirm this. The problem arises only when we narrow down and reduce all the worshipping and praying community gatherings to the Mass. It is the core, but not the total liturgy. Unfortunately, this tendency has predominated in these past two decades. Did we realty overuse the Mass to epidemic proportions?

The Mass became the only resort for any kind of religious gathering, including social and even political events. This "pan-Massism" constitutes a liturgical imbalance that does not favor the quality, or even the centrality, of the Eucharist. There is no possible doubt regarding the intrinsic link between the Eucharist and the sacraments, but a frequent rite inclusion in the Mass of baptism, confirmation, and other sacraments does not allow the momentum and space due to specific rites that sanctify decisive events of human life. It is a question of pluriformity and balance versus reductionism and privatism.

There is not only a Mass for every occasion, but also several Masses for every day. This was not so in the early church, for only toward the end of the first millennium does the daily Mass become a universal practice.¹⁸ At the same time, again from Apostolic times, another important liturgical institution continues: the Liturgy of the Hours, This communal non-Eucharistic form of worship, "the public and common prayer of God's people," has yet to be reclaimed.¹⁹ It is not exclusive to clergy or religious, but belongs to every member of the community.

¹⁶ Cf. G. Martinez. "Greco-Roman Cultural Symbols and Ritual Creativity Today: An Approach to Marriage," Questions Liturgiques 65 (1984), pp. 39-52.
¹⁷ For instance, USCC (ed.), Third Instruction on the Correct Implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Washington, 1970).
¹⁸ Gregory 1 (590-604) provided the first firm reference to daily Mass in Rome. Cf. Daniel Callam, C.S.B., "The Frequency of Mass in the Latin Church ca. 400," Theological Studies 45 (1984), pp. 613-650.
¹⁹ General Instructions on the Liturgy of the Hours, No. 1, in Documents On the Liturgy, p. 1086.

58 - Catholic Liturgical Reform

Some Protestant churches regained this tradition, like the international communities of Taize in France. The question to ask is whether "we are using, or should I say abusing, the prayer form of the Eucharist to fill needs that could be better met by other celebrations." ²⁰

(7) The Under-Estimation of Liturgical Catechetics. Although these twenty years could be defined as the attempt to bring the liturgy to the people, the needed simultaneous movement of the people to the liturgy has not fully occurred. The attempt changed the rites; but the old mentality persisted.

The way around the impasse is to be found in the precedence of the Fathers of the church. The goal of the preaching of the Fathers was to found a christocentric liturgical spirituality; as Ambrose puts it, "to encounter Christ in his mysteries."²¹ Their preaching and catechetics were called mystagogia, which meant a profound initiation into the mysteries of salvation. Without this mystagogia from Scripture to human reality in the liturgy as an in-depth experience, there is no renewal. New forms of imagination may appear. Oftentimes, they are merely modern gadgets, because the key of the ritual signs is in the Bible, and they are accepted only through experimental faith. As Archbishop Weakland says, "You can't renew liturgy without renewing people."²²

It goes without saying, therefore, that there is no effective liturgical catechetics without biblical support and background. Failure results when catechetics is stripped of its biblical substance. Scripture is the key not only because it provides fundamental inspiration, themes, and symbolism of the salvific actions in the New Testament, but also because the entire Bible structures the broad and rich context of the compexity of rituals and gestures, prayers and readings of any liturgy. William J. Bausch states that against the problem of reductionism, and ignorance of Scripture, too, "we have to regain the context of the sacraments," because "to have reduced an intricate piece of music to a simple one-finger tune is precisely what happened to the sacramental system.²³

Integral to an effective mystagogia is lay involvement in liturgical preaching. This specific lay involvement is gaining momentum today. Extraordinary ministers to the Word are already a reality in many congregations in different countries. A variety of lay preachers helps forge a link between biblical background and modern society. The opportunity brings personal motivation and a variety of styles of

²⁰ R. L. Tuzik, "Ordinary Time," FDLC Newsletter 8 (1981), p. 32. For a theological approach to the problem, cf. E. Schillebeeckx, op. cit., pp. 29ff.
²¹ Ap. Proph. David, 12, 58. A prototype of liturgical catechesis is the Byzantine treatise written by a lay-person, Nicholas Cabasilas (ca. 1320-91). A Commentary on the Divine Liturgy, ed. J. M. Hussey and P. A. McNulty (London: SPCK, 1960).
²² Op. cit., p. 16.
²³ W. J. Bausch, A New Look at the Sacraments (Notre Dame, Indiana: Fides/ Claretian, 1977), pp. 6 and 7 respectively.

59 - Catholic Liturgical Reform

insightful preaching to the heterogeneous congregation of our society. The priests are limited in what experience they can bring to their homilies. Lay people can offer the realism and wealth of their lived world,²⁴

The role of women in ministry especially constitutes an essential contribution of the lay ministry involvement in liturgy, from liturgical catechetics to a role of equality in all community celebrations. This movement is one of the greatest challenges in today's American churches, and the potential for a profound renewal in our society. In 1975, Paul VI declared that "in the 'advancement of women,' the church has already recognized a 'sign of the times' and has seen in it a call of the Spirit."²⁵ This call of the Spirit has yet to be heard, despite the fact that ,'many of the most healing and hope-filled rituals of our time are being created and led by women of deep faith and enduring hope."²⁶

(8) The Standardization of Worship. The monolithic uniformity of the post-Tridentine Latin liturgy has been definitely broken in language and the use of rigid rubrics. Nevertheless, the cultural adaptation of these twenty years has been minimal and represents external implementation of the revision, thoroughly engineered and planned in Rome. The masterfully well done enterprise by the Consilium envisioned a turning back mostly to the classical forms of the Roman sacramentaries within a historical perspective. The Roman tradition, one among many, was indeed rediscovered. But that is as far as it has gone.

Will there be some day an American tradition of worship? The key to the overwhelming problem of decentralization of a bureaucratic machinery, which can no longer provide effective top-down solutions, is a new reciprocity model of the church. The symbiotic relationship between the worship action and a concrete church experience of faith in being and in transforming society is still denied in practice. The feeling of a liturgy out of tune with these times of grace stems from the practical denial of the "movement of the Spirit" and the "sign of the times" of the local church. Will there be in the future the possibility of a creative grassroots liturgical process, instead of the "in abstract" handouts from the top?

The church took the first step of restoration. Now, let the local churches take the second step and actually embody the traditions and the genius of individual peoples in the liturgy. It belongs to their future. This more profound ritual creativity has nothing to do with particular

²⁴ Cf. G. Zevini, "The Christian Initiation of Adults into the Neo-Catechumenal Community," Concilium 122 (1979), pp. 65-74. Also Sacrosanctum Concilium, 9 and Evangelii Nuntiandi, 14. They offer us the best example of liturgical preaching by lay people. It is surfacing more and more in many countries. See the case of "regular" lay preachers in West Germany, J. Frank Henderson, "The Minister of Liturgical Preaching," Worship 56 (1982), pp. 228-30.
²⁵ Paul VI, "Address on International Women's Year," Origins (May 1, 1975),p. 719.
²⁶ M. Fox in Brian Swimme, Manifesto for a Global Civilization (Sante Fe: Bear and Company, 1982), p. 41.

60 - Catholic Liturgical Reform

whims of adventurism of the moment. It is one of the most telling constants of the historical developments of Christian worship. Its inner nature demands it. ²⁷

"Even in the liturgy, the church has no wish to impose a rigid uniformity."²⁸ But stifling uniformity is still the reality. Ample possibilities for new ritual creativity are overlooked-even in those specific cases where the Constitution gave the opportunities. A typical example is the ritual of marriage. It has always been rooted in local customs, and the Constitution foresaw the possibility of an entirely local rite. Unfortunately, however, the Roman rite was uniformly adopted. The secondhand process of translation of a contractual rite missed the opportunity of recuperating the biblical paradigm of the covenant in the celebration of marriage. Comparison of this instance with the Eastern rites will point out the dull and symbolically poor expressions of the Western liturgical reform.²⁹

One striking fact is that the Eucharist, for example, is celebrated in exactly the same way in Nairobia, in Manila, and in New York. But these three capitals represent three thoroughly different cultural worlds.³⁰

Besides this global standardization within world-wide Catholicism, another type of standardization affects directly the local faith community. It results in routine uniformity and ritualistic stereotypes within the liturgy of a parish. If Masses are all the same mold and shape, for instance, the worship service cannot meet the needs of a heterogeneous community: ethnic groups, most notably Hispanics, young people, divorced, unchurched Catholics, and so on.

II

A retrospective look at these past two decades leads to an indisputable assessment: a new order of worship is in place. This new order is, however, the simple result of a historical revision. A controlled process of archeological restoration of rites, translation of European and Roman cultural expressions, and limited local adaptations have been accomplished.

A new liturgical movement is imperative in order to bridge the cultural and religious gap. This contradicts the assumption that liturgical growth has reached a standstill. If the church is a historical

²⁷ Cf. the excellent study of A. J. Chupungco, "A Historical Survey of Liturgical Adaptation," Nolitiae (January, 1981), pp. 28-41. "It has been justly said that the Romans possessed the receptive but not the creative imagination," according to E. Bishop, "The Genius of the Roman Rite," Liturgica Historica (Oxford, 1918), p. 12.
²⁸ Sacrosanctum Concilium, 37.
²⁹ Sacrosanclum Concilium, 77-79. The Praenotanda to the Roman Ritual of Marriage emphasize the same need, but the American ritual is just a translation of the Latin ritual.
³⁰ Cf. R. Kaczynski, "Der Ordo Missae in Der Teilkirchen des römischen Ritus," Liturgisches Jahrbuch 25 (1975), pp. 134-135, and Anselme-Titianna Sanon, "L'Africanization de la liturgie," La Maison Dieu 123 (197 1), pp. 108-125.

61 - Catholic Liturgical Reform

concretization of the mystery of Christ, and its worship a core dimension of sacramental life, liturgy will be maintained alive in an ever on-going process of renewal. In other words, if the Eucharist is the source and summit of the whole Christian life, this communal prayer action cannot be anything but inclusive of all the hopes and sufferings, joys and struggles of the actual local and global community. This leads to a decisive future agenda: the strong development of the religious and pastoral dimensions of the liturgy.

Ironically, the immediate past experience within our secular society has been a strong reaffirmation of that very religious dimension, despite the assumptions against it. The theories of secularization of the sixties have been and should be dismissed as fantasies. In the existential struggle, the secular person will still search for sacred transcendence through symbolic expressions. Here we need to acknowledge the importance of the liturgy in a technological age.³¹

Andrew Greeley pointed out recently that religion was simply the major failure of Vatican II.³² He insisted that there was a disintegration of both the symbolic paradigm and the old religious story system without providing a substitute for them. Consequently, the paramount future task will be the construction of religious story systems which are concerned for present needs and experiences. Attention to religious phenomena and experience of the present will ensure a living liturgy of the grassroots. Spiritual imagination can create a new stage of development for an American Order of worship.

The future task will be, indeed, an interdisciplinary effort. Two different sources must interact, the hierarchical-collegial source and the grassroots source of the local church. This collaboration will create a sound tension between the normative structure and grassroots religious experience, resulting in creative interaction between the local and the universal church.

Solutions without the cultural religious creativity of the faithful produce abstract and frigid liturgies. It is in a concrete community that the experience of the kairos actualizes a privileged salvific movement, incorporated into the essential structure without stifling the genuineness of its message and the novelty of its symbolism. Here only can the cultural gap disappear into human visual arts, literary composition, movement and action, symbol and story, aesthetic sensitivity, and warmth of feeling for an "incarnational" liturgy.³³

Current trends in the area of pastoral music, for example, exemplify the movement from restoration to creativity. Pre-conciliar models which stressed passive congregational participation cannot directly be transplanted into a post-conciliar liturgy which has as its aim full participa-

³¹ Cf. Harvey Cox, Unsecular Man: The Persistence of Religion (New York, 1972).
³² Op. cit., p. 86.
³³ Cf. P. W. Collins, More than Meets the Eye: Ritual and Parish Liturgy (New York: Paulist Press, 1983).

62 - Catholic Liturgical Reform

tion. The past twenty years have been a remarkable period in the development of pastoral music. Composers have had to create new musical forms of expression to serve the needs of a developing liturgy and a pilgrim church. This pastoral music renaissance has not been without its growing pains, and debate continues concerning the quality of contemporary liturgical music.³⁴ Yet current trends represent the best example of innovative reform which must hinge on two perennial dimensions of worship: on the one hand, the scriptural, christological, communal, and solemn celebration of salvific action, and, on the other hand, the embodiment in that celebration of the warmth and profundity of human experience.

"I find the great thing in this world is not so much where we stand as in what direction we are moving," wrote Samuel Eliot Morison, in his preface to his Oxford History of the American People.³⁵ Communal Christian prayer and worship can no longer subsist in lofty cultural isolation. The movement of the spirit makes a new liturgical movement imperative. Here in America, new emerging ministries from within the community could represent a new frontier for the future of worship. Here also, after more than twenty years of restoration, the diversified celebrating communities will want to create their own lived experience and feel "at home." This will only come about with a new era of renewal "from within." Here spiritual imagination will flow spontaneously from the biblical-liturgical spirit of a strong community of faith.

³⁴ Cf. T. Day, "When the Congregation Prays Twice," Commonweal 112 (1985), pp. 143-146. See also, "Dissonance Over Church Music (readers reply)," ibid., pp. 272-276.
³⁵ The quotation is taken from Oliver Wendell Holmes; quoted in J. Z. Smitz, "The Influence of Symbols Upon Social Change: A Place On Which To Stand," in J. Shaughnessy, et al., The Roots of Ritual, p. 137.