Liturgical Adaptation In The Roman Catholic Church In The Twentieth Century

One of the most significant developments in Roman Catholic worship in the twentieth century has been the increasing sensitivity to the cultural setting in which worship is offered. The landmark decision of the Second Vatican Council, which called for all worship to be offered in the vernacular language, is only one example of important developments in the process of liturgical inculturation. This article describes the process, concentrating on the important decisions of the Second Vatican Council.

Prior to Vatican II The fifty years prior to the Second Vatican Council witnessed a renewed interest in matters liturgical and in making the liturgy truly the prayer of the church. Prompted by both the liturgical movement and the liturgical reforms of Pius X, Pius XII, and John XXIII, the liturgy once again became the object of serious study by theologians, historians, and missionaries. Since it was also during this period that the church was wrestling with the modernist controversy, which discouraged the open questioning of any aspect of church life that was considered traditional, it is not surprising that these studies most often revolved around a return to the sources of the Roman rite as it was practiced in the city of Rome from the fourth to the seventh centuries. The effort was to recapture the valued "?Roman genius?" of the liturgy and to clearly distinguish the classical forms from the medieval and baroque accretions, which, in the mind of many in the liturgical movement, tended to blur the true nature of liturgical celebrations. Thus, it was on the basis of historical precedent that a call went out to adapt the liturgy to the needs of the day. Like the liturgical reform attempted by Gregory VII in the eleventh century, one could characterize both the papal reforms of the liturgy and the approach of liturgists during this period as a "?repristinization?" of the Roman rite: a return to the simplicity, sobriety, and clarity of expression characteristic of the classic Roman genius in order to render the worship of the church more accessible to the faithful, especially to those in mission lands. It was on the basis of historical precedent, then, that the restoration of the Easter Vigil (1951) and Holy Week (1955) by Pius XII was undertaken. Masses were promoted by some in the liturgical avant-garde in both Europe and the United States. It was also on the basis of historical research into the liturgy that the period just prior to Vatican II began to hear more and more calls for the use of the vernacular in worship. Because of the groundwork done by liturgists and historians in the years prior to Vatican II, the Preparatory Commission on the Liturgy established by the pope in 1959 was in a position to quickly draft a schema of the document on the liturgy. It reflects the advanced state of the research on the liturgy prior to the council that this schema became the first order of business of Vatican II. Vatican II The norms for liturgical adaptation to the customs and traditions of peoples are outlined by Vatican II (S.C. 37–40). These articles clearly move beyond what many critics had labeled an "?archaeological?" approach that characterized much of the preconciliar research on the liturgy, and they open the way for real adaptation of the liturgy based on a reformed Roman rite characterized by a "?noble simplicity, brevity and clarity?" (S.C. 34). While the council proposes the Roman rite as a "?universal?" rite, it does so fully aware that there will have to be important differences in the way in which it is celebrated in cultures as diverse as those found in Africa and Asia. Article 37 of S.C. announces the general principle governing liturgical adaptation and is based on Pius XII's encyclical Summi Pontificatus. This article opens the door to true liturgical pluralism within the Roman rite by stating:

The church has no wish to impose a rigid uniformity in matters which do not affect the faith or the good of the whole community; rather, the church respects and fosters the genius and talents of various races and peoples.

Clearly, the principle enunciated in this article reflects the historical reality lived by the church down through the ages, except for the anomalous period after the Council of Trent. It is the faith itself that constitutes ecclesial unity and not a rigid uniformity in the cultural expression of that faith in the liturgy. The article further establishes two general criteria for admitting elements of a particular people's way of life in the worship of the local church. One is negative: "?that anything not indissolubly bound up with superstition and error?" may be admitted into the liturgy. The other is positive: that these elements be "?in harmony with the true and authentic spirit of the liturgy.?" Both of these criteria require interpretation that is not exhaustively provided by S.C. and that will become the object of subsequent debate after the council. Having stated these general principles of adaptation, S.C. 38–39 then moves to more concrete proposals regarding their implementation and to what could be termed the first level of adaptation of the Roman rite. It provides for "?legitimate variations and adaptations to different groups, regions, and peoples?" in the revision of the liturgical books. These revisions and adaptations are to be done "?especially in mission lands,?" although the sense of the word especially (praesertim), as explained by the conciliar commission, while emphasizing the need for adaptation in mission lands, does not mean to exclude the possibility of adaptation in countries where Christianity and the Roman rite have known a long history. S.C. 37 sets a limit to these adaptations with the expression "?provided the substantial unity of the Roman rite is preserved.?" The expression "?substantial unity of the Roman rite?" is nowhere defined by S.C., but is most probably referring to article 39, which speaks of adaptation within the limits set by the edition typica of the liturgical books. This means to say that the unity of the Roman rite is safeguarded when the norms for adaptation, written into the official liturgical books issued by Rome, are observed. These norms give some limited freedom to the "?competent territorial authority,?" i.e., a national conference of bishops, to adapt the liturgy to local needs. It should be noted that if the liturgical books provide for it, the bishops' conferences may institute modifications in the liturgy, that go beyond simple cosmetic changes and that even restructure the rite itself. Article 39 further states that this kind of adaptation is to be applied "?especially in the case of the administration of the sacraments, the sacramentals, processions, liturgical language, sacred music, and the arts.?" This mandate is reiterated in article 63, which calls on the bishops' conferences to prepare new rituals adapted "?to the needs of the different regions.?" Thus, the approach to adaptation taken by these articles (S.C. 38–39) could be described by the term acculturation, defined as an initial encounter between the Roman rite and the local culture. While maintaining the nucleus of the Roman rite, a translation of those elements that are contingent on Western culture would be recoded or reinterpreted into the particular forms and expressions of the "?receiving?" culture in order to make them more expressive of the faith. Article 40 deals with a more radical form of adaptation, which can be rightly called inculturation. While the norms proposed for acculturating the liturgy as found in the revised liturgical books might be sufficient for renewing the liturgy in a European country such as Italy, the council wisely foresaw that in areas of the world that are not heirs to an exclusively western-European cultural tradition, the need for adapting the liturgy would require not only more profound modifications of the Roman rite, but a real inculturation of the liturgy. This inculturation of the liturgy can be defined as an ongoing process of a reciprocal, critical interaction and assimilation between the Roman rite and the local culture. Although the initial draft of the first part of this article specifically mentioned the missions, this reference was dropped in the final redaction of the document in order to allow the application of this article to other "?places and circumstances?" not considered "?missionary?" ("?Typis Polyglottis, Vaticanis?" in Schema Constitutionis de Sacra Liturgia [1962], 27). S.C. 40 spells out the nature of these adaptations and the procedure that is to govern their implementation in three paragraphs. The first paragraph stipulates that the "?competent territorial ecclesiastical authority?" is "?to carefully and prudently weigh what elements from the traditions and culture of individual peoples may be appropriately admitted into divine worship.?" The adaptations judged opportune should then be submitted to the Holy See's approval. The second paragraph deals with the Holy See's granting the bishops' conferences the authority to direct "?preliminary experiments?" for a specified length of time and within certain groups so that "?the adaptations are made with all the circumspection they demand.?" Finally, the third paragraph speaks of the technical assistance of experts, "?particularly in mission lands,?" where the problems associated with this kind of adaptation would presumably be more complex. While articles 37–40 of S.C. mark a revolutionary departure from the centuries-old Roman resistance to any kind of liturgical adaptation, they should also be read in the context of other articles that speak of more general principles of liturgical reform such as article 24, which emphasizes the importance of the liturgy being thoroughly grounded in sacred Scripture. Also, article 23 reflects a more cautious attitude toward both liturgical adaptation and the unity of the Roman rite. It states that even after careful "?theological, historical, and pastoral investigation,?" as well as a "?study of the experience derived from recent liturgical reforms, … there must be no innovations unless the good of the church genuinely and certainly requires them; care should taken that any new forms adopted should in some way grow organically from forms already existing.?" The same article warns against "?marked differences between rites used in neighboring areas.?" While these caveats might seem today to be overly cautious, they reflect the "?compromising nature?" of a document drafted to assuage the anxieties of some of the more traditional conciliar participants, who feared not only ill-considered innovation but the wholesale destruction of the Roman rite. Articles other than 37–40 of the same document, however, speak in very specific terms of the possible need for the radical adaptation or inculturation of the liturgy in "?mission lands,?" especially in the celebration of the sacraments of initiation and marriage. Article 65 proposes that "?besides what is part of Christian tradition, those initiation elements in use among individual peoples, to the extent that such rites are compatible with the Christian rite of initiation?" be allowed. In much the same spirit, article 77, which speaks of the revision of the marriage rite, states that "?the competent, territorial ecclesiastical authority … is free to draw up … its own rite suited to the usages of place and people.?" This call for adaptation expressed by the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy becomes even more insistent and sophisticated in subsequent conciliar documents, that treat the relationship between the church and culture, especially the Decree on the Missionary Activity of the Church (A.G. 9–11, 21–22) and the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (G.S. 44, 58). These documents, along with the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (L.G. 13, 17, 23) and the Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions (N.A. 2), being the product of a more mature degree of conciliar thought on the question of adaptation, help to describe in more detail the relationship of the church to culture and hence clarify some of the ambiguity noted in the documents relative to liturgical adaptation. One of the most important theological constructs proposed by the council to describe the relation of church to culture is found in the Decree on the Missionary Activity of the Church (A.G. 10). This article proposes the Incarnation of Christ as the paradigmatic way in which the universal church relates to local cultures. The Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World defines this relationship as reciprocal; it is not simply a question of the church "?translating?" into another cultural idiom the datum of the faith, whose western European expression is considered somehow normative. Rather, citing the historical relationship between the church and culture, it belongs to the church itself to again profit from the "?riches hidden in different cultures?" and "?to learn to express the Christian message in the concepts and language of different peoples?" through fostering a "?vital contact and exchange between the church and different cultures?" (G.S. 44). Moreover, "?the church has been sent to all ages and nations and, therefore, is not tied exclusively and indissolubly to any race or nation, to any one particular way of life, or to any customary practices, ancient or modern?" (G.S. 58). These teachings of the council clearly have implications for the more radical adaptation or of the liturgy as described in S.C. 40 in groups and nations that are not heirs to the western European cultural tradition. Postconciliar Developments The period just after the council saw intense activity on the part of the various commissions established to revise and translate the new liturgical books into modern languages. It should be pointed out that the very translation of the official Latin edition typica versions of the liturgical books constitutes an adaptation. The instruction Comme le prevoit of 1969 on the translation of liturgical texts for celebration with a congregation (D.O.L. 838–880) clearly enunciates principles and norms that emphasize that the text, "?as a ritual sign, is a medium of spoken communication?" (D.O.L. 842) and discourages a literal fidelity to the Latin text. This instruction opts for the principle of "?dynamic equivalence,?" whereby the concepts expressed in the Latin text are rendered in a modern language by proposing an equivalent concept drawn from the culture where the language is used. Realizing the complex nature of this enterprise, the Consilium also wisely notes that the mere translation of texts is "?not sufficient for a fully renewed liturgy. The creation of new texts will be necessary?" (D.O.L. 880). Looking at the introductions and ritual directions in the revised and translated liturgical books, the word adaptation is applied to the liturgy in two distinct ways. The first kind of adaptation concerns the alternatives provided by the liturgical books themselves to be selected by those who prepare the liturgy so that the celebration might "?correspond as fully as possible to the needs, spiritual preparation, and mentality of the participants?" (General Introduction to the Rite of Mass 313). The Actio Pastoralis instruction on Masses for special groups and the Directory for Masses with Children, issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship, make further provision for this kind of adaptation of the eucharistic celebration based on number, age, and spiritual needs of those who make up the assembly. The revised rites of initiation, for example, also contain articles, that provide guidelines for the presider's adaptation of the celebration (RCIA 67; Rite of Baptism for Children 27–31; Rite of Confirmation 18). A second kind of adaptation proposed by the postconciliar documents already enunciated in S.C. 38 and 39 falls within the purview of national bishops' conferences deputed by S.C. 63 to compose their own rituals "?adapted to the needs of their specific regions,?" which were to be confirmed by the Holy See. Elements from the local culture that substitute or illustrate the Roman ritual can be incorporated into the liturgy. This acculturation of the liturgy parallels to some degree the principle of dynamic equivalence at work in the translation of verbal texts. Much of the postconciliar work on adaptation, especially in Africa and Asia, has used this method. The recent "?Roman Missal for the Dioceses of Zaire?" approved by the Congregation for Divine Worship in 1988 ("?Le Missel Romain pour dioceses du Zaire,?" Notitae 24 [1988]: 454–472) is a good example of the use of this approach. This missal "?interprets?" the Roman Missal in the cultural idiom of this region of Africa, restructuring the rite, adding local gestures, and proposing alternate prayers that reflect deeply held values in Africa, such as respect for ancestors. The third and most radical form of adaptation, inculturation, is not provided for by the liturgical books, except in the case of marriage. The Introduction to the Rite of Marriage speaks not only of assuming elements from the local culture to illustrate what is contained in the Roman ritual (O.C.M. 13–16) but of the creation of a whole new rite based on the culture of the place, as long as the presence of the minister who witnesses the vows is safeguarded and the nuptial blessing is given. In this case, the Rite of Marriage seems to be in genuine dialogue with local cultures, a dialogue that presupposes a real reciprocity by encouraging the use of marriage customs and traditions originating in the pre-Christian culture. However, in general, there seems to be a marked hesitance on the part of the Roman authorities to implement fully the possibilities inherent in article 40 of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. On the one hand, there seems to be a fear that adaptation would lead to a total disintegration of the Roman rite, whose theological and formal characteristics are deemed worthy of retention, even in very different cultural contexts. On the other hand, not very much time has elapsed for this to take place. As we know from history, it took several centuries for the Christianization of the Roman Empire to get to the point where the church felt comfortable in adopting formerly pagan customs into Christian worship. Although conciliar documents like Nostra Aetate 2 speak of a real openness and respect for non-Christian religions, it seems that a similar process needs to take place in non-European areas before the liturgy can truly be described as having inculturated elements from non-Christian religions, that are an integral part of the cultural identity of these countries. As the previous pages have demonstrated, liturgical adaptation is not a new phenomenon. Since the liturgy is the self-expression of the church, it has and must continue to adapt itself to the different and changing cultural environments in which it finds itself or risk becoming irrelevant. Much more is at stake than simply making people feel more "?at ease?" in worship; the very mission of the church to preach the gospel to all nations is compromised when adaptation does not take place. As Anscar Chupungco notes, "?The refusal to adapt amounts to a denial of the universality of salvation?" (Anscar Chupungco, Cultural Adaptation of the Liturgy [New York: Paulist Press, 1982], 87). The challenge that faces all local churches at present, especially those in non-European settings, is essentially one of evangelization, of proclaiming and celebrating the message of the gospel and the mystery of Christ in a way that is meaningful to the many cultures of the human race. This can only be done if local churches are allowed to continue on the road to true liturgical inculturation indicated by the Second Vatican Council. Paul VI indicates:

Evangelization loses much of its force and effectiveness if it does not take into consideration the actual people to whom it is addressed, if it does not use their language, their signs, and symbols, if it does not answer the questions they ask, and it does not have an impact on their concrete life. (Evangeli Nuntiandi 63)