document on the liturgy
"Proper disposition" replaces sanctifying grace.
Example of contradiction - "The priest can never innovate when it comes to the liturgy, unless the good of the church genuinly requires it".
"Latin can constitute a grave obsticle in the divine office Liturgy. Really, how can that be so. How can latin possibly constitute a grave obstacle?
This document clearly forshadows the changing and revising of all of the sacraments. I do not know how a traditionalist bishop could ever sign this document.
simpler melodies for small churches. Remember this is within the context of having all of the congregation sing and chant. And, it emphasizes simple for small churches. And, that suggests more complex for large churches. However, in practice, this is the worst thing you could do for large congregation singing. In large churches, complex singing by mass amatuer/beginner/awful singers will never work and will sound terrible. In small churches, you could actually potentially sing complex hymns with the whole congregation because the small space will limit the distortion that distance will create with sound waves so on so forth. So, here they have it backwards, and they emphasize it as such.
Flip this on its head, if it is just chant singing done by a choir, simpler hyms would be better for smaller churches because they do not have the resources to accomodate complex hymns for the choir. That usually requires professionals, and only in a big city with big church and big church funds can a professional choir normally be supported. So, it is all backwards here.
This document actually rejects the repugnant art that we see so common in vatican 2! ch 3 124 "Let bishops carefully exclude from the house of god and from other sacred places those works of artists which are repugnant to faith, morals, and christian piety, and which offend true religious sense either by their distortion of forms or by lack of artistic worth, be mediocrity or by pretense."