Cardinal Brandmuller Beat Us To The Punch

One of the things we were going to use as a capstone for our discussion of Sacrosanctum Concilium was to compare what we know as the Pauline Mass with what appears to have been envisioned by the liturgical constitution itself. The question would then be posed whether or not what was discussed in the Council was what was actually done in practice.

Cardinal Brandmuller, who I'm certain is a huge fan and reader of this blog (who isn't?), has decided to go ahead and answer the question for us. Per Rorate:

I must emphasise that the form of the post-conciliar liturgy with all its distortions, is not attributable to the Council or to the Liturgy Constitution established during Vatican II which by the way has not really been implemented even to this day. The indiscriminate removal of Latin and Gregorian Chants from liturgical celebrations and the erection of numerous altars were absolutely not acts prescribed by the Council.

With the benefit of hindsight, let us cast our minds back in particular to the lack of sensitivity shown in terms of care for the faithful and in the pastoral carelessness shown in the liturgical form. One need only think of the Church’s excesses, reminiscent of the [Iconoclastic crisis] which occurred in the [8th] century. Excesses which catapulted numerous faithful into total chaos, leaving many fumbling around in the dark.

Just about anything and everything has been said on this subject. Meanwhile, the liturgy has come to be seen as a mirror image of Church life, subject to an organic historical evolution which cannot - as did indeed happen - suddenly be changed by decree par ordre de mufti. And we are still paying the price today.

Interesting stuff, and dead-on accurate, I think.