The Bugnini-Liturgy and the Reform of the Reform - MusicaSacra

ather than being considered New Testament counterparts of the psalms,
built on the principle of paralklismus membrorum. This is why their psalm-like
arrangement in the new breviary appears to be so unnatural.
This lack of sensitivity to the structure of the Hours is evident not only
in changing the position of the hymns but also in another innovation of the
Bugnini liturgy: the fusion of Lauds and Vespers with the Mass. In the history
of liturgy, three examples of this combination are known: the attachment
of Lauds to the midnight Mass of Christmas, the addition of Vespers
at the end of Mass on Holy Thursday, and the shortened Vespers (or Lauds,
respectively) sung at the conclusion of the Easter Vigil Mass. All three go
back to a unique situation and find their explanation therein. Besides, none
of them disturbs the integrity of the Office and the Mass; the Hour is sung
as a whole between the communion and the postcommunion, i.e., at the
end of the Mass. According to the Bugnini liturgy, the hymn and the psalms
are to be sung before the Mass, whereas the canticle from the Gospel
comes after the communion, which means that the Hour has practically
been broken down into its constituent parts; its psalms mean an unjustified
prolongation of the beginning of the Mass, the mixing of two liturgical
cycles, each of which requires a different attitude. Cut off from the psalmody
and the rest of the Hour, the canticle functions as a simple song of
thanksgiving. This solution is to be considered particularly dangerous if it
is not the exception but the rule, as in some parishes, monasteries and seminaries,
etc. He who experiences the Hours in this form day by day cannot
form a proper notion of their proportions and the logic of their structure.
I feel no desire to listen to a symphony by Beethoven between the second
and third movements of a Mozart symphony, not even by way of exception,
and much less to see it established as general performance practice.
The life-like structure expressing the character of the Hours has fallen
victim to the enforcement of a principle contrived at the office-desk. The
structure that had been followed by 500 Office rites through 1500 years
of liturgical history has been rejected, indeed prohibited (!) by the 501 st
Office. Do the votes of 500 count so little against 1? Can this inconsiderate
procedure claim our inner loyalty and affection beyond external compliance?
The adinventiones suae, defying the overwhelming majority, are audacity;
if, however, they are aimed at eliminating the majority, an impudence;
and if for achieving this my obedience to the Church is required, then,
violence.
18