De zwanenzang van Piero Marini

Nu met veel bombarie de Nederlandse vertaling van Piero Marini's boek uit 2007 'A Challenging Reform: Realizing the Vision of the Liturgical Renewal' wordt aangekondigd (zie hier), uitgegeven door de Abdij van Berne (bekend van hun voorliefde voor het 'betere' Nederlandstalige lied) en vertaald door Prof. Jozef Lamberts, is het goed even terug te blikken naar reacties op de Engelstalige editie.
Dr. Alcuin Reid schrijft over dit boek:

"Let us be clear: this publication is a partisan response to what Marini terms “a tendency to return to a preconciliar mindset that has for years now characterised the Curia’s approach”. This perceived trend, some liturgists believe, has gained considerable momentum in this pontificate. The book is also an act of filial homage by Marini to his mentor, Bugnini. Marini was at Bugnini’s side in the work of reform from the outset while still a young deacon and priest. It is a pity that their close personal association is not clearly acknowledged or discussed here.Nevertheless, the book is significant because for the first time the political manoeuvring and motivations of Bugnini and Lercaro et al as they sought rapidly to bring about “a liturgy that would be more pastoral and open to the needs of the contemporary world” are openly discussed.
What is clear is that the implementation of the liturgical reform was politicised from the beginning. The “enemy”, the Congregation for Rites, which was responsible for the liturgy after the Council of Trent, “was still firmly anchored to a limited tradition since the Council of Trent and not in favour of the broad innovations desired by the Council.”
Whether the Council desired any such thing is a moot point. Nevertheless, we are told that the Curia and Congregation for Rites “were in no way suited for the implementation of the Vatican II reform. It was likely that the radical nature of the liturgical reform promoted by the Constitution on the Liturgy was not fully appreciated by the Curia.”
Hence it was necessary to establish a body that did appreciate this but which also had independence of the Curia. This took time and political effort on the part of Bugnini and Lercaro and the most fascinating facet of this book is Marini’s account of the ensuing intrigues as they wrestled to ensure for themselves exclusive authority and the interpretation implementation of Sacrosanctum Concilium. Eventually, when Paul VI’s personal support had been harnessed, Marini was able to boast that it was the “Consilium that had the upper hand.”
And so Marini can rejoice that “the support of the Pope and the collaboration of those forces that had long awaited the liturgical renewal” combined to make it “possible for the Consilium to begin to produce the new revised rites.” This relied on “two crucial further factors: the efficient functioning of the Consilium and the marginalisation of the Congregation of Rites.” The Consilium was “competent, international, collegial, efficient, and unconstrained by precedent,” he claims, and “was greatly aided by the direct access of the president and secretary to the Pope.” Furthermore, “its innovative approach to reform which was closer to reality and more suitable for implementing a liturgical renewal able to fulfil the desire of Vatican II by meeting the needs of the modern world.”"

Daarom is het begrijpelijk dat Piero Marini een klaagzang houdt op wat hij beschouwt als de "nostalgie", vooral bij jonge priesters. (Voor een gelijkaardige klaagzang in ons taalgebied, zie Evert P. de Jong in Tijdschrift voor Liturgie 92 (2008) pp. 252 e.v.).

Uit de bespreking van George W. Rutler in het nummer van maart 2008 van First Things lezen we dat Marini schrijft: "In order to renew the liturgy, it was not enough to issue new directives; it was also necessary to change the attitudes of both the clergy and the lay faithful to enable them to grasp the purpose of the reform. "
Elders in deze bespreking schrijft George Rutler: "There are no grays in the book: Champions like Lercaro, Giobbe, and Larraone were "brilliant" and "charismatic" and "progressive," while anonymous members of the Congregation for Rites were "anchored in the past" and often "overplayed their hand.""

En ook nog in deze bespreking valt te lezen:
"Marini fuels the suspicions of conspiracy theorists by admitting: "Unlike the reform after Trent," the liturgical reform after Vatican II "was all the greater because it also dealt with doctrine.""

Kortom, historisch een zeer interessant boek, zo lijkt het, maar inhoudelijk voorbijgestreefd.

Beklagenswaardig is vooral dat met deze Nederlandse vertaling opnieuw de weg van de eenzijdigheid gekozen wordt. We herinneren eraan dat de basiswerken van de Nieuwe Liturgische Beweging in de Nederlandse taal zoals de Ordo Missae van de Buitengewone Vorm, kardinaal Ratzingers "De geest van de liturgie" en Uwe Michael Langs "Conversi ad Dominum" er NIET zijn gekomen op initiatief van 'katholieke' uitgeverijen of academische instanties maar van weldenkende individuen die begaan zijn met de verstandelijke en geestelijke ontwikkeling van de gelovigen.
Hoelang moeten we nog wachten op vertalingen van andere klassiekers van Marchetto, Gherardini, Reid, Gamber, en anderen?
Het blijvend éénzijdig benaderen van de liturgie-hervorming, tegen de kerkelijke en culturele ontwikkeling ingaande, kan niet anders beschouwd worden als een misbruik van het verstand en de ziel van de gelovigen.