Yes, one hears with great emphasis. There can be no disruption in the liturgical life of the church, no “before” and “after” the Council. Liturgies and rituals evolve slowly, like living organisms. Liturgy can’t be “engineered” de novo by experts sitting at their workdesks. “Hermeneutic of continuity” is the slogan of the day.
one hears God saying.
“My spirit blows where it will, and I want to keep my options open. Sometimes I move slowly, sometimes quickly. I once inspired nineteenth-century Cecilians to throw out overnight all the orchestral Masses and vernacular hymns and revive Latin chant, and then a couple decades later I inspired Pius X to throw out the Cecilian chant and replace it with Solesmes melodies. Nothing organic about any of this. But it took me longer to inspire architectural development from Romanesque to Gothic to Baroque, and it took me a really long time to inspire Carolingian organum to develop into Palestrina.”
Not only God feels this way.
I recall Fr. Robert Taft saying to me in a taxi in Rome some time ago.
“Of course we engineered a liturgical reform like twentieth century technicians. We’re the same people who put a man on the moon. Do they expect us [and our liturgy] to behave as in 7th century Byzantine Christendom?”
You will have heard by now that Msgr. Guido Marini, Pontifical Master of Liturgical Ceremonies, gave an address [thanks to NLM for this version with their emphasis] at a clergy conference in Rome. Guess which side he comes down on? The Front Office is pushing the “hermeneutic of continuity” pretty strongly. Get used to it, I guess. But raise some questions too.