Click here for a link to The New Liturgical Movement reporting on a recent meeting of the Ecclesia Dei commission. The 'universal indult' in the form of a Motu Proprio has been rumoured for some time, but there seems more and more reason to suspect that it is something tangible. Allegedly, the commission have finished the text of the Motu Proprio, and now all remains is for Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos (the president of the commission) to present it to the Holy Father for dissemination.
To explain to readers who have no idea what I'm talking about: In 1969 the Church authorised a new missal to be used by the Latin Church, in accordance with the initial wishes of the Second Vatican Council and the subsequent work of a liturgical commission. This missal (or Novus Ordo, the Mass of Paul VI) was substantially different from the Mass being said up to that time in many important ways, but nevertheless was promptly enforced throughout the Catholic world. Many individuals continued saying the old Mass; England in particular having special permission to do so. This special permission, although becoming more widespread and encouraged by Pope John-Paul II, was vehemently opposed by many bishops. This led to more and more hostility.
I would like to point out that in 1988, when the Society of St. Pius X (established by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, left, and dedicated to the Catholic traditions of the Church pre-Vatican II) were ex-communicated, the issues were far-ranging and more complex than simply the use of the old Mass. To cut a long story short, the Ecclesia Dei commission was set up to monitor the licit traditional orders then being set up (like the Institute of Christ the King and the Fraternal Society of St. Peter) as well as to try and encourage full communion with the SSPX.
Now the issue is being discussed, after nearly 20 years of the Ecclesia Dei indult, of whether to more easily allow and encourage the use of the old Mass. The old Mass can be traced back as an organic development from the time of Pope St. Gregory the Great from the 7th Century. It is the Missal codified by St. Pius V, as commissioned by the Council of Trent, to standardise the western Rite, and therefore also lately known as the Tridentine Mass, with the most recent publication in 1962. Currently anyone wanting to offer this Mass publically must receive permission from their local ordinary. Unfortunately many bishops feel threatened by traditionalists, and opposed to the old Mass being said at all. Therefore many dioceses do not offer any, at least not on a regular basis or on Holy Days, which would otherwise enable Catholics to observe their faith in the same way as their ancestors. This is despite Pope John-Paul II's statement in Ecclesia Dei Aflicta that:
To explain to readers who have no idea what I'm talking about: In 1969 the Church authorised a new missal to be used by the Latin Church, in accordance with the initial wishes of the Second Vatican Council and the subsequent work of a liturgical commission. This missal (or Novus Ordo, the Mass of Paul VI) was substantially different from the Mass being said up to that time in many important ways, but nevertheless was promptly enforced throughout the Catholic world. Many individuals continued saying the old Mass; England in particular having special permission to do so. This special permission, although becoming more widespread and encouraged by Pope John-Paul II, was vehemently opposed by many bishops. This led to more and more hostility.
I would like to point out that in 1988, when the Society of St. Pius X (established by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, left, and dedicated to the Catholic traditions of the Church pre-Vatican II) were ex-communicated, the issues were far-ranging and more complex than simply the use of the old Mass. To cut a long story short, the Ecclesia Dei commission was set up to monitor the licit traditional orders then being set up (like the Institute of Christ the King and the Fraternal Society of St. Peter) as well as to try and encourage full communion with the SSPX.
Now the issue is being discussed, after nearly 20 years of the Ecclesia Dei indult, of whether to more easily allow and encourage the use of the old Mass. The old Mass can be traced back as an organic development from the time of Pope St. Gregory the Great from the 7th Century. It is the Missal codified by St. Pius V, as commissioned by the Council of Trent, to standardise the western Rite, and therefore also lately known as the Tridentine Mass, with the most recent publication in 1962. Currently anyone wanting to offer this Mass publically must receive permission from their local ordinary. Unfortunately many bishops feel threatened by traditionalists, and opposed to the old Mass being said at all. Therefore many dioceses do not offer any, at least not on a regular basis or on Holy Days, which would otherwise enable Catholics to observe their faith in the same way as their ancestors. This is despite Pope John-Paul II's statement in Ecclesia Dei Aflicta that:
Moreover, respect must everywhere by shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition by a wide and generous application of the directives already issued some time ago by the Apostolic See for the use of the Roman Missal according to the typical edition of 1962.
I am very excited about the possibility of the old Mass being liberalised. It will mean that Catholics will be able to have freer access to the traditional mass which is a part of our heritage. It is encouraging to read the writings of our current Holy Father, before he became Pope. As Cardinal Ratzinger, he stated (in the extended interview Salt of the Earth):
Unfortunately for us, there is a nearly limitless tolerance for spectacular and adventurous alterations, while effectively there is none at all for the older liturgy. We are in this way surely on the wrong path... Personally, I maintain that there is needed a more generous attitude in granting the old Rite to those who desire it. You just can’t see what could be so dangerous or unacceptable in that. A community calls itself into question when it suddenly considers forbidden what until just a little before seemed sacred and when it makes the very desire for it seem reprehensible. Why must these things still be believed? Isn’t it possible that what is being enjoined today will be forbidden tomorrow?So if he will use his convictions to guide his papacy, then traditionalists certainly have a lot to look forward to, as do Catholics who simply yearn for more reverence in the Liturgy.
I have been a member of the Latin Mass Society for over a year now, and am excited at the prospect that I could soon begin to act as a representative for the Birmingham area. We are lucky enough in our Archdiocese to have His Grace Vincent Nichols, who is very friendly towards the traditional practices of the Church. We have an old Mass offered every Sunday and Holy Day in both Birmingham and Oxford Oratories, and many others in surrounding counties. But with regards to Birmingham itself, I think there is a huge potential to encourage and unite those Catholics who are faithful to the old Mass, and who knows, even one day have Mass celebrated at St. Chad's Cathedral from the magnificent high altar once again!
Thanks for what I thought was a really good explanation!
ReplyDeleteThanks! That is good to know
ReplyDeleteI wonder that form the new rumoured indult will take and whether there will be any restrictions on the numbers of people constituting a ‘private’ or ‘public’ Mass. There are canonical questions pertinent to the de-restriction of the Old Mass that must be answered as well.
ReplyDeletePastoral considerations include providing for a Pauline Rite Mass before a Pian Rite one so that the people can choose. I’m also worried about the quality of the celebrations. Currently, the Old Rite is celebrated by aficionados who really know the rubrics and celebrate it with piety and reverence. However, a general opening up will result in priests who are not rubrically qualified celebrating and making a mess out of it. Remember the mumbled Low Masses in the 50’s?
If these modernist priests celebrate the Old Rite, I don’t think they’ll have any more respect for the rubrics that they do the Pauline Rite ones. Priests might even sabotage the Old Mass by jumbling though it to inoculate the people.
The Church buildings will be a problem too. Too many new Churches and wreckovated old ones are not ‘ad orientem’ friendly.
Then there’s the question of the Old Calendar. His Holiness Pope John Paul has canonized so many new saints who do not appear in the Old Calendar. Will the liberalization include an ‘update’ of the sanctoral cycle as well? I'm sure that will get the traditionalists up in arms.
I would also like to make a few clarifications on the so-called Mass of Vatican II. The actual Mass of Vatican II was promulgated in 1965, at the conclusion of the council. You can find the complete text here: http://www.coreyzelinski.8m.com/1965_Mass/. Sorry but I couln't link it.
Most folks are not aware of this and think that the Pauline Rite is what the Council had in mind. However, that’s not true. The text here, which came out immediately after the Council and was ‘the’ English text from 1965-1969/70 when Pope Paul’s Novus Ordo Missae came out, is much closer to the Council’s intentions.
The whole Novus Ordo affair highly alarmed the Orthdox who saw it as an unlimited exercise of Papal power, killing off millennia of received tradition, for that is what the liturgy and tradition(tradidi) are, something received, not created in committee, with the stroke of a pen.
Another clarification is that the SSPX was never excommunicated. Only ++Archbishop Lefebvre, +Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer and the 4 priests they consecrated bishops were informed of the latae sententiae excommunication they incurred in Ecclesia Dei Adflicta. The Society, which was canonically established with approval from the Vatican and the local Bishop of Econe long before the ordinations was never excommunicated.
St. Pius the V codified the Mass as celebrated in Rome and made it the normative expression of the Roman Rite which in effect halted the local developments of that Rite taking place. Before this, there were variations in how the Roman Rite was expressed and celebrated in different localities such as the Sarum Rite in England. He did not create a new Mass. The ‘Tridentine’ Mass is essentially the same Mass going back hundreds of years. He merely imposed the Roman usage universally in the Roman Rite.
He also did not impose it as the ‘only’ legitimate Rite and suppressed all others. Rites older that date back more than 200 years, such as the Dominican, Gallican, Ambrosian, Mozarabic and the Rite of Braga were allowed and survived until universal adoption of the Pauline Rite killed, or at least incapacitated them.
The term Tridentine Rite is also a post-Vatican II invention. Before this, there was only the Missale Romanum, the Roman Missal. Like Roman Catholic is a term invented by the Anglicans to differentiate and establish their claims as Anglo Catholics. Before that, there was just Catholics =)
Msgr. Peter Elliot proposes the more neutral term Classical Roman Rite for the Pian Rite and Modern Roman Rite for the Pauline.
Having said all that, I really, really, really do hope and prayer that the Old Rite will be liberalized, come what may. Hopefully, the graces poured out from this Mass of the ages will flow over and revitalize the Church as well as contribute to anchor the reform of the reform.
Let’s pray that the Holy Father has the strength to see this through.
St. Pius V, pray for us.
PS
Sorry for the extremely long comment but liturgical talk always gets me up in arms =)
Thank you Andrew. I was trying to simplify it for my readers, but your commentary provides some important clarifications. I do think that the Mass of Pius V was a little more than an identical missal to the current Roman one, I think there were actually some improvements made, but I could be wrong.
ReplyDeleteThe 1965-69 mass wasn't really a new mass, but a streamlined vernacular version of the current Latin mass. The priest invariably faced the people, the prayers at the foot of the altar were axed, and a lot of experimentation occurred. The changes in 1969 were much more widespread, with rewriting of many prayers, completely revised lectionary, new 'eucharistic prayers', new rubrics (drastically reducing the external signs of reverence required by the priest)... we could go on all day. I recommend reading the link I provided to these changes, since the Ottaviani intervention was a critique of the missal itself before its implementation, and extremely prophetic I think. Well, more common sense than prophecy really, but needless to say, warnings were not heeded.
I agree it would help to be able to use the Tridentine Mass with the new calendar, although where new saints feast days are taken advantage of, the new lectionary is not necessarily better, and many things are lost in the new calendar like the season of penitance before lent (Septuagesima). Its difficult to see a clear way forward, but for now I would suggest preserving the old rite completely intact - since such a rupture from tradition has occurred. It will take a long time to rectify the new rite, and having the two side by side would allow a liturgical and theological continuity to properly develop, after a realisation of the rupture which should be clearly evident.
Matt, I hope that you are not appalled by my lastest posting on FWC. Your explanation here about the 1960's reform is quite good. The Church is the real movement. Be discerning. Keep things in perspective - God first. Fr R
ReplyDelete