It's true !!!
Basilicas were Roman public assembly buildings, up to and including the cathedra, or chair, for the highest-ranking Roman official in attendance. They were used for social, civil and religious functions. By the time the Christians gained favor, it was natural to use them for liturgical worship, and that's how early middle age Christians blended the Roman basilica and the Christian church together. We ended up with the name, but in fact we are just borrowing it indefinitely.
The chair -- cathedra -- became the place of honor for the local bishop, flanked as was the Roman civil chief by his attendants, in this case priests, deacons, archdeacons, etc. And thus was born the Cathedral. The basic basilica shape was twice the width in length, with a ceiling about width high, as were Christendom's earliest churches. Along the way the cruciform idea came up and the transepts started sneaking out from the body near the altar...
Altars were originally tables, as in Roman days, when they'd be moved around for the purpose (basilica as multi-purpose room) not marble plinths, and none of the seats -- of which there were not many -- were either nailed down, so to speak, or pews. So liturgies were less formal -- in terms of here / there, stand up / kneel down, etc. Fr Josef Jungmann, SJ, the 20th century's greatest liturgical historian, figured all of this out, to the fascination of Pope John XXIII, and thus was born the Vatican II liturgical reforms.
As it happens, Jungmann is not the hero in Rome he once was. There is now a revisionist movement that seeks to correct deficiencies it claims in his historical research or interpretation. Having studied Jungmann in college, it is inconceivable that he knowingly got anything wrong, but maybe historians are finding more documents now to which he did not have access.
Anyway, generally speaking, this line is put forth by conservatives who think Vatican II reforms have gone too far. They may be right, though I would point out Jungamnn did not author the practical extrapolations on Vatican II documents with which they are so concerned. Some of this is done in support of a revival of the Tridentine, or Trent-based, liturgical form, from the Council(s) of Trent, at which Catholicism got itself together after Luther and strategized a counter-Reformation, without using that phrase.
The Tridentine liturgy is also frequently -- and incorrectly -- identified with the "Latin Mass," since any Liturgy of Catholicism can be celebrated in Latin.
Then-Cardinal Ratzinger was not the fan of Jungmann that Pope John XXIII was. He even wrote on Liturgy, which is fairly unusual for a Pope. As you can imagine, if a non-fan of Jungmann attains the papal cathedra, as it were, it makes the once-beloved Josef a target for bright kids earnestly hope one day to make Bishop. And thus the historical and theological reaction to Vatican II's reforms, and Jungmann by extension, gain weight.
How much? To wrap this up, for the first time in 40 years a Tridentne Liturgy was celebrated in a chapel of the most famous basilica in the world -- St. Peters' -- just this last Sunday.
So, Kim, it's a timely topic.
As for RB mentioned above in this string, and my TIF position, which looks pretty solid even now, transported me to an earlier era. Thanks.
Posted Tuesday Oct 20, 2009 13:55
#