www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology No Progress with Vatican says SSPX

Dear James and All,

What is needed is more of this where there is a want and need:

www.pittsburghlatinmass.org [pittsburghlatinmass.org]

I agree a universal indult would be in order. The indult is offered here in Pittsburgh, albeit at only one church; but the SSPX, one chapel, is still here as well.

I believe Bishop Wuerl, now Archbishop of Washington, (Who was much maligned from certain quarters on the internet when named to the post. Imagine that?), would have extended the indult to more parishes if the need was expressed and feasible.

Bill

That is good advice on the web site just posted. Go to high mass first. Seems for some reason either to follow the motions and what the people attending should be doing. Surprised Pitt. has just one setting.

Neil,
I am sorry but when the Campos group was reunited with the Catholic Church, the Church took a further action (I forget what it is called but if you search the CA forums (if they are ever back up) you will find it there) to say that the marriages done by the Campos priests where now vaild.

Also if you read Canon Law you can see that without faculties that confessions are invalid.

Can. 976 Any priest, even though he lacks the faculty to hear confessions, can validly and lawfully absolve any penitents who are in danger of death, from any censures and sins, even if an approved priest is present.

So if a priest lacks facultiesand ther is no danger of death, then the confession would be in valid and the absoultion would be unlawful. Or can you explain why these terms are in this code?

As for confirmation. The ordinary minister in the Latin Church is the local ordinary. A priest can not administer this sacrament without the approval of the local ordinary.

I guess this is just one of those things we will have to agree to disagree on.

Neil,

Thanks for re-posting the posts on the distinctions between the Augustinian and Cyrprianic views. It was still an interesting read 1 1/2 years later!

As to the increasing fascination with the 1962 Missal (I admit I love the form) why can this not be done in the vernacular? I struggle to understand the interest in celebrating in a language very few understand. Yes, Latin is ancient and venerable. But is it an absolute value for the Church's worship? I believe the banner of the restoration of Latin as a symbol of the Latin Church's restoration is overplayed in this regard.

I would say - celebrate the 1962 Missal in the language of the people. Sprinkle in a few Latin and Greek verses, but let the bulk of it be in the vernacular. My sense is that such a movement would be an unstoppable force within Latin Catholicism.

I would also add that, in the spirit of Pope Benedict's commitment to liturgical diversity, he should consider releasing the ancient usages/rites of the West (Mozararabic, Gallican, Ambrosian, Celtic and Anglican) from any territorial or canonical constraints. Apart from the Celtic (and correct me if I am wrong here), these ancient rites are still in use in Toledo, Lyon and Milan respectively. The indult to celebrate the Anglican usage is a good first step, but why not authorize all properly trained Roman priests to celebrate it or any other Western usage?

In the Byzantine East we have the same tradition (in theory mostly, certainly less in practice) of liturgical diversity, with the liturgies of St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil the Great and St. James of Jerusalem as part of our liturgical patrimony.

God bless,

Gordo

Peace Gordo,

I too would love attending Mass via the 1962 Missal said in the vernacular. I think there was something from the Council of Trent, however, that forbade anything like that from occurring--at least for the TLM.

I'll let someone most knowledgeable in these matters speculate about possible loopholes that might exist which would allow these decrees to be sidestepped.

and

Trent session 22 [ewtn.com]

It would not be a problem for an ecumenical council to legislate the vernacular in the TLM, not that I approve of that, because I don't.

But my point is that Trent does not bind/cannot bind on this subject for a future ecumenical council. It's not a dogma.

Logos Tee

First, I quite agree. (In fact, I think permission for vernacular in the TLM could be given without an ecumenical council.)

Second, while I�m not unsympathetic to the idea of having some vernacular in the TLM (or more generally to efforts to increase the use of the TLM), I think the best thing would be for a traditional celebration of the novus ordo to be made readily available.

By a traditional novus ordo, I tend to think of 3 things (although others may add more):

1. Celebration ad orientum

2. The creed in the original Greek

3. Consecration in Latin (Alternatively, a language such as French, which has �pro multis� is translated as �pour la multitude�.)

Thoughts?

-Peter.

For those interested in the Tridentine Mass in decent English, I suggest the English Missal, originally published by Knott. It went through several editions in the last century and may well be back in print - it was done both in an Altar edition (quite beautiful) and a hand-missal (quite inexpensive).

Fr. Serge

Gordo,

I think you underestimate the resistance of the majority of American Bishops. I base this observation on what has occured in recent years in just trying to get an accurate translation of the Pauline Mass. As late as last year Bishop Trautman, as head of the BCL, thought he'd found a loophole in Litugiam Authenticam that would allow keeping the horrible 1970's ICEL translations "for pastoral reasons." Bishop Trautman argued that people were attached to these awful translations and it would be too hard for them to learn the accurate responses. Some of the more traditional Bishops quite correctly pointed out that 35 years ago people had to learn a whole new liturgy. Nonetheless, a slight majority agreed with Bishop Trautman. It finally took a directive from Cardinal Arinze, last May I believe, to straighten Bishop Trautman out and make clear Rome was serious about an accurate translation of the Mass. The "loophole" was closed.

I would like to see a universal indult for the TLM, but I agree with Peter B about a reform of the Pauline Mass. I think that would be most meaningful to the majority of Roman Rite Catholics.

1)I agree with Peter that the Mass should be celebrated Ad Orientum.

2)It would certainly be nice to hear the Roman Canon in Latin, but I think that English would also be acceptable. I would get rid of Eucharistic Prayers II-IV and mandate the Roman Canon.

3)An accurate translation of the Mass from Latin to English, which is now being worked on. If you compare the Pauline Mass in Latin to the 1962 Mass, you will be surprised at how much didn't change.

4)Proper Music! Out with Haugen and Haas, lets hear some Gregorian Chant and some of the work of the great composers such as Byrd and Palestrina. As a matter of necessity, most of this would be in Latin. Our Church has well over 1000 years of traditional music, by some of the greatest composers in history, and it is largely ignored. At a Low Mass without choir, traditional Catholic hymns could be sung by the congregation.

A good first step would be to start to teach and use Jubilate Deo. This booklet was issued by the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship in 1975 as a personal gift of Pope Paul VI to the Catholic Bishops of the world. Those same Bishops have studiously ignored it for 31 years. It was supposed to be the minimum chant repertiore (in Latin) for every parish. If anything speaks to the intent of Pope Paul VI and Vatican II in regard to music, this is what they were thinking. Then again, if the majority of current Bishops think people are too dumb to learn accurate responses in English, how could we possibly be expected to be smart enough to learn a bit of Latin?

Here is a link to Jubilate Deo [ceciliaschola.org] with a printible booklet form for anyone interested.

Still on the subject of music, lets put the choir back in the choir loft. We don't need an above ground orchestra pit next to the altar. I find it to be just another distraction from the Sacrifice occuring on the altar. I find that in the Eastern parish I am in now I have no problem singing the responses with the cantor leading from behind me instead of up front waving his arms about.

5)Proper Vestments. By this I don't mean a return to the "fiddleback" vestments of the TLM. Just the use of some lace and and some ornate material for the chausable. Enough already with the plain stuff. There is nothing wrong with giving Glory to God.

6)A return to the liturgical calendar of 1962 with a restoration of the lost feasts and seasons. What is "ordinary time" anyway? Ordinary time to me is the time I am at home, at work, its my everyday life. The feasts and seasons of the Church, every day of the year, are quite extraordinary.

7)Ban the Orans posture.

8)Maintain communion under both species, but get rid of communion in the hand.

Those are my ideas, designed to reunite and modern Roman Catholics with a tradition that is quickly being lost. I think though, that the present culture of the Roman Rite is too entrenched to accept these changes. At the Roman parish we used to attend, and where my daughter still attends school, the vast majority of people think the things they see and do at Mass were mandated by Vatican II. I saw people well into their 80s doing the Orans posture at the Our Father because they think "that's how they want us to do it now." Without proper guidance from the Bishops, trends become norms. We have many friends from that parish, and I am surprised how many don't realize that most of the changes that occured in the 1970s were not mandates of the council. I also have to explain to most of them what an Eastern Catholic Church is. It is two full generations now detached from the first 1900 years of tradition. There is a tremendous amount of (unintentional) ignorance to be overcome.

I also like Gordo's suggestion for a freeing of the older western rites. I would love to attend a Sarum Use Mass. I am not sure that the proper documents survive to recontruct all of these ancient rites as they were properly celebrated, however. As a side note, I believe that when the Pauline Mass was introduced, the Ambrosian and Mozararabic Rites were also modernized.

Doug

Well, celebrating the Novus Ordo ad orientem, using ornate (even fiddleback) vestments, praying the Canon in Latin (as well as the rest of the Mass) are all allowed in the Novus Ordo. The only thing you mention is the Creed in Greek. I don't think that would be a simple parish priest's prerogative, though perhaps it should be.

The problem is that although this is allowed, it is not widespread because of the priests, or perhaps of whiny parishioners... :p

A sense of what liturgy is and is supposed to be seems to be the prerequisite for widespread Masses such as these. There is headway being made, however, so we have reason to be hopeful.

Logos Teen

Is it Tee now? Getting hip on us?

It would not require an ecumenical council to legislate the use of the vernacular in the old Latin Mass as the form of the Eucharist Liturgy is a discipline. This could be done with a General Council of the West or even just by mandate from the vatican.

Trent can not bind the pope at all in matters of discipline, which again, the actual form of the Liturgy is.

Otherwise the Church would have only one Eucharistic Liturgy.


David, the Byzantine Catholic and Carmelite pre-novice (postulant really)


ps Amado, yes I do have a lot to say on that matter but I think it might be best if I keep it to myself.

Dear Doug,

I agree with many things you said; a few others I would disagree with slightly; but about one thing I am positively baffled -- namely, what good reason you could have for wanting to ban the Orans posture.

Dear Teen (Tee),

Not too long ago, I asked a Latin parish priest whether he would need permission if he wanted to say a NO mass in Latin. He said wouldn't need permission, but his bishop might not too happy with him.

I didn't actually ask him about Greek, but I expect it would be the same for Greek as for Latin.

As far as multi-lingual mass, such as Greek for the creed but English for the rest, I don't see why that should be any more of a problem than having the entire mass in Greek (or Latin), but perhaps there are seperate rules for that. Anyone know?

God bless,
Peter.

Peter B,

I should have been more specific and probably should not have used the word "ban". I mean to say people should be instructed that the Orans posture is reserved for the priest. Over the course of time in the Roman liturgy it has become primarily a priestly gesture, not one for the people. I may be off on how long it has been primarily a priestly gesture without looking it up, but I would think close to 1400 years.

The best explanation I have seen as to how this practice crept into the congregation is as follows. The priest prays in the orans posture when he is saying prayers on behalf of the people. When he is saying prayers with the people, such as the Creed, he does not use this posture. In the TLM the Our Father was recited by the priest alone, thus he prayed with upraised hands. In the latter years of the TLM the people were given permission to recite the Our Father with the priest if they could do so in Latin, however the priest maintained the orans posture. In the Pauline Mass this posture was retained by the priest for the Our Father all though he was praying with the people. I believe it is the only occasion in the Mass when this happens. The people, as they are wont to do, copied the priests motions.

Of late (a wedding last month) I have seen people adopting this posture whenever the priest does it at other points in the Mass. It strikes me as a bit silly and not far removed from hand holding. I see it as something that has crept into practice for no particular reason uncorrected. I believe in keeping a reverent posture during prayer and leaving the gestures reserved to the priest to the priest.

If I've gotten any of these facts wrong, my apologies, I don't have time to research the references at present but will try to do so later tonight.

I've long suspected that many Catholics consider the Orans posture and hand holding to be akin to each other, but I think this is the first time I have heard someone express that view explicitly.

Quote

If I've gotten any of these facts wrong, my apologies, I don't have time to research the references at present but will try to do so later tonight.

I look forward to it. (I'm certainly no expert in this matter.)

God bless,
Peter.