I am on the road again this week, and working on two platform
presentations so I only have time to offer you an 'off the cuff' response.
Annabale Bugnini published a memoir (_The reform of the liturgy_) that may
well be described as an _Apologia pro vita sua_. It covers the years of his
life in which he was involved in the work of the Consilium. The book brought
into focus a number of areas of the reform that stirred up fervent debate
about his role in particular and the work of the Consilium in general.
I.e., the book seemed to heighten, rather than reduce, the intensity of
the debate about what elements of the reform were from the Consilium, which
from Paul VI, and which were driven by Bugnini himself. Stanislaus Campbell
(_From breviary to liturgy of the hours_) may have done as good a job as
anyone at sorting out the bits related to one aspect of the reform, and he
runs into solid wall after solid wall in his attempts. Bugnini was held
responsible by many for making substantial changes to the liturgical books
on his own initiative and using his close relationship and private meetings
with Paul VI as a 'cover' for changes that were, in effect, compromises he
devised among the conflicting views of the members of the ConsIlium. So many
claim that the 'Bugnini books' are now foisted upon the whole of
Christendom.
----- Original Message -----
From: John B.Wickstrom <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, May 10, 1999 12:22 PM
Subject: Bugnini controversy?
> Dear Stan, thank you for your learned and apposite response. Might I ask,
if
> others might be interested as well, for a comment on the "controversies
> following Bugnini's book?
> thanks again,
> jw
>
> Stan Metheny wrote:
>
> > First, a general comment, since this kind of question is often
asked.
> > Most of the specific questions to which one would like to have answers
about
> > the post conciliar reform of the liturgical books are likely to remain a
> > mystery lost in the bowels of time. Members of the committee still
living,
> > for a variety of reasons, are reluctant to divulge any of the 'real
story'
> > beyond what is available in the limited info in the archives, published
and
> > unpublished. No one currently plans to publish additional diaries or
notes
> > in the wake of the controveries following Bugnini's book. Reopens too
many
> > old wounds, I suspect. So we are left with the handful of 'official'
> > responses which appeared in _Notitiae_ or the responses to queries from
> > various episcopal conferences that were published in the conference
> > newsletters.
> > To determine the 'official' reason for a specific calendar change,
one
> > would most likely need to consult the meeting notes and responses to the
> > various schemata of the Consilium sub-group (Study Group 1) on the
Calendar,
> > and even then one often seeks in vain. Some of these are published; most
> > must be retrieved from various archives in Rome or from private archives
of
> > the members.
> > That said, as I read Butler (Thurston/Attwater), Catherine died on
29
> > April. (I.e., onset of final illness on 21 April, death eight days
later.)
> > Perhaps some learned Bollandist might tell us if this is the currently
> > accepted wisdom? As is well known, there was a concerted effort by the
> > consilium to assign a saint's feast to a date as close as possible to
the
> > date of death, or translation of relics, if date of death was in Lent.
So
> > might one reasonably speculate that this was why the group moved
Catherine's
> > date?
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: John B.Wickstrom <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 29, 1999 12:01 PM
> > Subject: Re: FEAST 29 April
> >
> > > Does anyone know why the feast of Catherine of Siena was moved in the
> > > recent reforms from its traditional date (like so many) of April 30?
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > John B. Wickstrom
> > > Kalamazoo College
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> --
>
>
>
> John B. Wickstrom
> Kalamazoo College
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|