Thanks to Rorate-Caeli blog for this news:
Click HERE
For the Record: Sévillia says Bertone confirms motu proprio
Pope Benedict's Secretary of State, Cardinal Bertone, was interviewed by French journalist Jean Sévillia for the cover story of this week's Le Figaro Magazine (the weekly magazine of the French national daily Le Figaro).
The interview has not yet been made available on the web, but Sévillia has confirmed in an interview to Radio Courtoisie (Source: Una Voce France) that, in his interview, Cardinal Bertone said that "the recently-published Apostolic Exhortation is not a substitute for and is not additional to the Motu Proprio on the liturgy expected from the Pope".
The text has been confirmed by the Cardinal, but not any date of publication. Naturally, we will wait for the article in Le Figaro Magazine to provide the exact words of Cardinal Bertone -- who, by the way, is finally moving (around Easter) to his apartment in the Apostolic Palace, only recently vacated by Cardinal Sodano, according to L'Indipendente.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In an interview for the cover story (pages 56-60) of Le Figaro Magazine (weekly magazine of the French national daily Le Figaro), published today (not yet available on the newspaper's website); excerpt:
Is a Decree widening the possibility of celebrating the Latin Mass according to the rite from before Vatican II (the so-called Mass of Saint Pius V) still expected?
[Secretary of State] Cardinal Bertone: The merit of the conciliar liturgical reform is intact. But both [for reasons of] not losing the great liturgical heritage left by Saint Pius V and for granting the wish of those faithful who desire to attend Masses according to this rite, within the framework of the Missal published in 1962 by Pope John XXIII, with its own calendar, there is no valid reason not to grant to every priest in the world* the right to celebrate according to this form. The authorization of the Supreme Pontiff would evidently preserve the validity of the rite of Paul VI. The publication of the motu proprio which specifies this authorisation will take place, but it will be the pope himself who will explain his motivations and the framework of his decision. The Sovereign Pontiff will personally explain his vision for the use of the ancient Missal to the Christian people, and particularly to the Bishops.
*au prêtre du monde entier: literally, to the priest of the whole world
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Saturday, March 24, 2007
Could it? This week? Start practicing your responses!!!!
From Fr. Zuhlsdorf's blog "WDTPRS (What does the prayer really say)"
Something is up.
From the Bolletino:
Yesterday evening the Pope received in audience:
His Eminence Francis Card. Arinze, Prefect for the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments;
His Eminence Darío Card. Castrillón Hoyos, President of the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei".
Remember that reports have the Motu Proprio coming out after 25 March but before the Triduum.
Today I spoke with someone to whom a bishop recently received by the Pope said that the Pope was "determined".
Start practicing your responses…
"Introibo ad altare Dei…"
Something is up.
From the Bolletino:
Yesterday evening the Pope received in audience:
His Eminence Francis Card. Arinze, Prefect for the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments;
His Eminence Darío Card. Castrillón Hoyos, President of the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei".
Remember that reports have the Motu Proprio coming out after 25 March but before the Triduum.
Today I spoke with someone to whom a bishop recently received by the Pope said that the Pope was "determined".
Start practicing your responses…
"Introibo ad altare Dei…"
GET YOUR MISSALS READY!
A rough translation from Babelfish. This article comes from the French magazine "Golias"
Thanks to Rorate-Caeli for the link.
With your missals Black and white St V !
Our information concerning the imminent publication of the motu proprio which would allow a use much broader pre-conciliar rite gives rise us to think than it could take place before Easter.
The document will be indeed published before the end of the Lent : in any case, Pope Benedict would be solved there. Mgr Malcolm Ranjith, the secretary of the Congregation for the divine worship specified always that the document was now in the hands of the Pope himself which will choose the most convenient moment. Besides Rome fears certainly a general outcry, being made perhaps illusions on the real determination of those who oppose it.
The " motu proprio " would not consist of a recognition but questioning of the reform of Paul VI of the right for any priest to celebrate in private the Tridentine mass. Moreover, the text would grant groups of faithful the true right to celebrate a mass according to its rite : it would force to some extent the restive bishops. It is known that there were a long time an iron arm with Nanterre between Mgr François Favreau then Mgr Gerard Daucourt and a bunch of traditionalists very few but determined who obtained finally profit of cause. A special episcopal vicar even given, Father Yvon Aybram. Currently, such an arm-of-iron continues between traditionalist group and Mgr Thierry Jordan, archbishop. This last was secretary of cardinal Villot in Rome and division with its former spiritual Master in Rome a visceral aversion for lefebvrism. It moreover was given the responsability by the French episcopate " to recycle " without too much benevolence the young ecclesiastics who left Ecône.
This " motu proprio " would change completely : he would transform a concession (what the bishop of Metz, Mgr Pierre Raffin, called a " merciful bracket " in a true right). In the ecclesiological plan, this " motu proprio " should cause very critical reaction. Indeed, it reduces the responsibility for the bishop, guarantor of the authentic communion for a particular Church.
It is rather probable that this " motu propio" supports the development of the communities thus having recourse from now on to the indult. Moreover, the commission " Ecclesia Dei " would see its capacities grow. Since in a diocese a group does not find a priest laid out to celebrate the mass with its request, it could impose a solution and undoubtedly send a priest of its choice. With term, the idea cherished by Mgr Perl would be that of the creation of a ordinariat which can incardinate the priests what would also make it possible to accomodate wandering ecclesiastics. For the record, Mgr Perl could thus cap the mitre and become a kind of universal bishop of the traditionalists.
Another " monsignore " whose name also returns for this possible episcopal ministry near the traditionalists, Rudolf Michael Schmitz, of the diocese of Cologne and of the Institute of Christ King Superior (created by Mgr Gilles Wach) also let hear that a very advantageous solution for the traditionalists would be found soon. In a maintenance granted to the review " Enjoy ", Schmitz affirms that this document should make it possible to any priest to celebrate in public according to the Tridentine rite (and thus not only in private).
This "motu proprio" should have appeared at the end of January. The opposition of a certain number of prelates was what prompted Benedict XVI to be patient. Among the opponents to this "motu proprio", Cardinals Karl Lehmann, Jean-Pierre Ricard (forced by his brothers of the French episcopate, being himself [personally] quite favorable to it), Jean-Marie Lustiger, Godfreed Danneels, Giovanni Battista Re should be particularly mentioned... The opposition to this project does not follow the usual criteria of conservatism. The archbishop of Paris, André Vingt-Trois, is very hostile to the project itself, though he is counted among the conservatives. Other prelates, such as Angelo Bagnasco, archbishop of Genoa and president of the Italian Episcopal Conference, are, on the contrary, favorable to it.
Reprinting of the old missal in progress...
Another sign that the publication is very near from now, and that this text would be released, is the decision of houses Italian editors... to reprint the old missal according to the rite of Black and white Saint V In an implicit way, at the time of a maintenance granted to the monthly magazine " Inside the the Vatican " (of preserving tendency and very Roman), archbishop Ranjith recognized that they are the reserves of many bishops who delayed the project, even if in the beginning it was also they who in the opinion of the Pope made necessary a standpoint of authority on behalf of Rome. For Joseph Ratzinger, as for the cardinal Alfons Maria Stickler, the mass of Black and white Saint V not having never been prohibited, needs to be authorize: it is simply a question of recognizing a right which already exists. In fact, this " motu proprio " initially intends to cure the problem arising from bishops who according to Mgr Ranjith would exert an abuse of power.
The coexistence of two stages of same and single Roman rite would undoubtedly constitute an exception. If there are many rites in the catholic Church, and if they can coexist, there in general exists only one " stage " of each one of them (even if there are alternatives). Cannot thus coexist of the various layers, for example a liturgical book of the XVIII century and another of XX for the same rite. From where, the opposition of the current known as of Solesmes to the coexistence of two missals which represent two versions of the same Roman rite, the last having replaced that of Black and white Saint V This position is defended by the archbishop Benedictine of Toulouse, Mgr Robert LeGall and by Mgr Raffin, already quoted. In Rome by the ceremonial of the Pope, Mgr Piero Marini, and by the former "évincés " secretaries of the Congregation for the liturgy, Mgr Francesco Pio Tamburrino and Mgr Domenico Sorrentino.
The response of the defenders of two rites, Mgr Ranjith and even... Joseph Ratzinger is inspired in particular by a thesis of the liturgist Klaus Gamber. For this last, because of the importance of the introduced changes, it is not a question of a new version of the same single Roman rite but of a new laughter, the " modern rite " different from the traditional rite. Consequently, their cohabitation is completely possible, legitimate and even desirable.
In the optics however of Joseph Ratzinger, who remains that of a " reform of the reform ", in the long run, it would be to arrive to a single Roman rite, undoubtedly nearer to the old rite than of new.
More reserved and pessimist that the traditionalists known as rejoined in Rome, Mgr Bernard Fellay, the Holy Superior of Fraternity Black and white X expresses the fear which lapse of time does not become interminable.
Thanks to Rorate-Caeli for the link.
With your missals Black and white St V !
Our information concerning the imminent publication of the motu proprio which would allow a use much broader pre-conciliar rite gives rise us to think than it could take place before Easter.
The document will be indeed published before the end of the Lent : in any case, Pope Benedict would be solved there. Mgr Malcolm Ranjith, the secretary of the Congregation for the divine worship specified always that the document was now in the hands of the Pope himself which will choose the most convenient moment. Besides Rome fears certainly a general outcry, being made perhaps illusions on the real determination of those who oppose it.
The " motu proprio " would not consist of a recognition but questioning of the reform of Paul VI of the right for any priest to celebrate in private the Tridentine mass. Moreover, the text would grant groups of faithful the true right to celebrate a mass according to its rite : it would force to some extent the restive bishops. It is known that there were a long time an iron arm with Nanterre between Mgr François Favreau then Mgr Gerard Daucourt and a bunch of traditionalists very few but determined who obtained finally profit of cause. A special episcopal vicar even given, Father Yvon Aybram. Currently, such an arm-of-iron continues between traditionalist group and Mgr Thierry Jordan, archbishop. This last was secretary of cardinal Villot in Rome and division with its former spiritual Master in Rome a visceral aversion for lefebvrism. It moreover was given the responsability by the French episcopate " to recycle " without too much benevolence the young ecclesiastics who left Ecône.
This " motu proprio " would change completely : he would transform a concession (what the bishop of Metz, Mgr Pierre Raffin, called a " merciful bracket " in a true right). In the ecclesiological plan, this " motu proprio " should cause very critical reaction. Indeed, it reduces the responsibility for the bishop, guarantor of the authentic communion for a particular Church.
It is rather probable that this " motu propio" supports the development of the communities thus having recourse from now on to the indult. Moreover, the commission " Ecclesia Dei " would see its capacities grow. Since in a diocese a group does not find a priest laid out to celebrate the mass with its request, it could impose a solution and undoubtedly send a priest of its choice. With term, the idea cherished by Mgr Perl would be that of the creation of a ordinariat which can incardinate the priests what would also make it possible to accomodate wandering ecclesiastics. For the record, Mgr Perl could thus cap the mitre and become a kind of universal bishop of the traditionalists.
Another " monsignore " whose name also returns for this possible episcopal ministry near the traditionalists, Rudolf Michael Schmitz, of the diocese of Cologne and of the Institute of Christ King Superior (created by Mgr Gilles Wach) also let hear that a very advantageous solution for the traditionalists would be found soon. In a maintenance granted to the review " Enjoy ", Schmitz affirms that this document should make it possible to any priest to celebrate in public according to the Tridentine rite (and thus not only in private).
This "motu proprio" should have appeared at the end of January. The opposition of a certain number of prelates was what prompted Benedict XVI to be patient. Among the opponents to this "motu proprio", Cardinals Karl Lehmann, Jean-Pierre Ricard (forced by his brothers of the French episcopate, being himself [personally] quite favorable to it), Jean-Marie Lustiger, Godfreed Danneels, Giovanni Battista Re should be particularly mentioned... The opposition to this project does not follow the usual criteria of conservatism. The archbishop of Paris, André Vingt-Trois, is very hostile to the project itself, though he is counted among the conservatives. Other prelates, such as Angelo Bagnasco, archbishop of Genoa and president of the Italian Episcopal Conference, are, on the contrary, favorable to it.
Reprinting of the old missal in progress...
Another sign that the publication is very near from now, and that this text would be released, is the decision of houses Italian editors... to reprint the old missal according to the rite of Black and white Saint V In an implicit way, at the time of a maintenance granted to the monthly magazine " Inside the the Vatican " (of preserving tendency and very Roman), archbishop Ranjith recognized that they are the reserves of many bishops who delayed the project, even if in the beginning it was also they who in the opinion of the Pope made necessary a standpoint of authority on behalf of Rome. For Joseph Ratzinger, as for the cardinal Alfons Maria Stickler, the mass of Black and white Saint V not having never been prohibited, needs to be authorize: it is simply a question of recognizing a right which already exists. In fact, this " motu proprio " initially intends to cure the problem arising from bishops who according to Mgr Ranjith would exert an abuse of power.
The coexistence of two stages of same and single Roman rite would undoubtedly constitute an exception. If there are many rites in the catholic Church, and if they can coexist, there in general exists only one " stage " of each one of them (even if there are alternatives). Cannot thus coexist of the various layers, for example a liturgical book of the XVIII century and another of XX for the same rite. From where, the opposition of the current known as of Solesmes to the coexistence of two missals which represent two versions of the same Roman rite, the last having replaced that of Black and white Saint V This position is defended by the archbishop Benedictine of Toulouse, Mgr Robert LeGall and by Mgr Raffin, already quoted. In Rome by the ceremonial of the Pope, Mgr Piero Marini, and by the former "évincés " secretaries of the Congregation for the liturgy, Mgr Francesco Pio Tamburrino and Mgr Domenico Sorrentino.
The response of the defenders of two rites, Mgr Ranjith and even... Joseph Ratzinger is inspired in particular by a thesis of the liturgist Klaus Gamber. For this last, because of the importance of the introduced changes, it is not a question of a new version of the same single Roman rite but of a new laughter, the " modern rite " different from the traditional rite. Consequently, their cohabitation is completely possible, legitimate and even desirable.
In the optics however of Joseph Ratzinger, who remains that of a " reform of the reform ", in the long run, it would be to arrive to a single Roman rite, undoubtedly nearer to the old rite than of new.
More reserved and pessimist that the traditionalists known as rejoined in Rome, Mgr Bernard Fellay, the Holy Superior of Fraternity Black and white X expresses the fear which lapse of time does not become interminable.
Friday, February 23, 2007
"IT IS THE HOLY FATHER WHO WILL DECIDE"
All who are interested in the Church’s liturgy are wondering if the Pope will soon issue a motu proprio allowing the celebration of the "Old Mass," and (if he does), what it will say. One of the Vatican’s liturgists sheds light on the Pope’s plans:
ANTHONY VALLE: Your Excellency, you have been generous in giving several interviews to the international press regarding liturgy since becoming the secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship. Some of your statements have been misinterpreted and aroused controversy rather than providing the intended clarity. Would you care to clarify anything?
ARCHBISHOP MALCOM RANJITH: What I wished to insist on in those interviews was that the post-conciliar reform of the liturgy has not been able to achieve the expected goals of spiritual and missionary renewal in the Church so that today we could be truly happy about it.
Undoubtedly there have been positive results too; but the negative effects seem to have been greater, causing much disorientation in our ranks.
The churches have become empty, liturgical free-wheeling has become the order of the day, and the true meaning and significance of that which is celebrated has been obscured.
One has to, then, begin wondering if the reform process had in fact been handled correctly. Thus, we need to take a good look at what had happened, pray and reflect about its causes and with the help of the Lord move on to make the necessary corrections.
VALLE: It seems as if Pope Benedict XVI will release a motu proprio to liberalize the use of the traditional or Tridentine Mass. Some hope that the Pope’s motu proprio will institute a juridical structure enabling priests to celebrate the traditional Mass without being unjustly harassed and persistently thwarted by, ironically, not people of other faiths or secular authorities, but by their own pastors and bishops. Is this hope for a new juridical apparatus realistic? Is such an apparatus necessary?
RANJITH: Well, there is this rising call for a restoration of the Tridentine Mass. And even certain leading figures of the elite have made public appeals for this Mass in some newspapers recently.
The Holy Father will, I am sure, take note of this and decide what is best for the Church.
You speak of the possible realization of new juridical structures for the implementation of such decisions. I do not think that this would be so much of a problem. Rather what is more important in all of this is a pastoral attitude.
Will the bishops and priests reject requests for the Tridentine Mass and so create a need for juridical structures to ensure the enforcement of a decision of the Pope? Should it go that way?
I sincerely do not hope so.
The appropriate question the shepherds have to ask themselves is: How can I as a bishop or priest bring even one person closer to Christ and to His Church?
It is not so much a matter of the Tridentine Mass or of the Novus Ordo. It is just a question of pastoral responsibility and sensitivity.
Thus, if the Tridentine Mass is the way to achieve an even better level of spiritual enrichment for the faithful, then the shepherds should allow it.
The important concern is not so much the "what" as much as the "how." The Church should always seek to help our faithful to come closer to the Lord, to feel challenged by His message and to respond to His call generously. And if that can be achieved through the celebration of the Novus Ordo Mass or the Pius V Mass, well, then space should be provided for whatever is best instead of getting down to unnecessary and divisive theological hair-splitting. Such things need to be decided through the heart and not so much through the head.
After all, Pope John Paul II did make a personal appeal in Ecclesia Dei Adflicta of 1988 to the bishops, calling upon them to be generous in this matter with those who wish to celebrate or participate in the Tridentine Mass. Besides, we should remember that the Tridentine Mass is not something that belongs to the followers of Archbishop Lefebvre only. It is part of our own heritage as members of the Catholic Church.
The Second Vatican Council, as Pope Benedict so clearly stated in his speech to the members of the Curia in December 2005, did not envisage a totally new beginning, but one of continuity with a renewed sense of enthusiasm and a new outlook that better responds to the missionary needs of the time.
Besides, we also have the serious question of the diminishing number of faithful in some of the churches in the Western world. We have to ask ourselves what happened in these churches and then take corrective steps as may be necessary. I do not think that this situation is attributable to secularization only. A deep crisis of faith coupled with a drive for meaningless liturgical experimentation and novelty have had their own impact in this matter. There is much formalism and insipidity visible at times.
Thus, we need to recover a true sense of the sacred and mystical in worship.
And if the faithful feel that the Tridentine Mass offers them that sense of the sacred and mystical more than anything else, then we should have the courage to accept their request.
With regard to the timing and nature of the motu proprio, nothing yet is known. It is the Holy Father who will decide.
And when he does, we should in all obedience accept what he indicates to us and with a genuine love for the Church strive to help him. Any counter attitude would only harm the spiritual mission of the Church and thwart the Lord’s own will.
VALLE: Like many Catholics today, my wife and I have found that we leave the celebration of the Novus Ordo Mass on Sunday exasperated and perplexed rather than spiritually invigorated. Why?
RANJITH: In the celebration of the Novus Ordo we have to be very serious about what we do on the altar. I cannot be a priest who dreams in his sleep about what I will do at the Mass the following day, walk up to the altar and start celebrating with all kinds of novel self-created rubrics and actions.
The Holy Eucharist belongs to the Church. Hence, it has a meaning of its own which cannot be left to the idiosyncrasies of the single celebrant.
Every element in the liturgy of the Church has its own long history of development and significance. It is certainly not a matter of private "traditions" and so cannot be the object of manipulation by all and sundry.
In fact, Sacrosanctum Concilium does state that other than the Apostolic See and the bishops, where this is allowed to the latter by the former, "absolutely no other person, not even a priest, may add or remove or change anything on his own authority" (SC 22). Even then, we note much free-wheeling in liturgical matters in some areas of the Church today, basically due to an incorrect understanding of liturgical theology.
For example, the mystery of the Holy Eucharist has often been misunderstood or partially understood, leaving thus the door open to all kinds of liturgical abuses.
In the celebration of the Holy Eucharist, some place too much accent on the presidential role of the priest. But we know that the priest is really not the main agent of what happens on the altar.
It is Jesus Himself.
Besides, every liturgical celebration has also a heavenly dimension "which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem towards which we journey as pilgrims" (SC 8).
Others explain the Eucharist in a way that places the accent on its banquet/meal dimension, linking it to "communion." This too is an important consideration, but we should remember that it is not so much a communion created by those taking part in the Eucharist as much as by the Lord Himself.
Through the Eucharist, the Lord assumes us unto Himself and in Him we are placed in communion with all the others who unite themselves to Him. It is thus not so much a sociological experience as much as a mystical one. Hence even as "communion" the Eucharist is a heavenly experience.
What is more important is the sacrificial dimension of the Eucharist. Each time we celebrate the Eucharist we relive the sacrifice of Calvary, celebrating it as the moment of our salvation.
And this very fact also constitutes the unique dignity and font of identity of the priest. He has been instituted by Christ to celebrate the wonderful mystery of turning this corruptible piece of bread into the very glorified Body of Christ and this little bit of wine into the Blood of Christ, enacting the sacrifice of Calvary for the salvation of the world. And this has to be lived, understood and believed by the priest each time he celebrates the Eucharist.
Indeed, Sacrosanctum Concilium placed accent on the sacrificial and salvific effectivity of the Mass. The priest thus becomes another Christ, so to say. What a great vocation! And so, if we celebrate the Eucharist devoutly, then the faithful will reap immense spiritual benefit and return again and again in search of that heavenly nourishment.
VALLE: Some have contended that the solution to the liturgical crisis -- and at bottom the crisis of faith -- afflicting the Catholic Church today would be to implement the exclusive use of the Tridentine Mass, while others maintain that all we really need is a "reform of the reform," in other words, a reform of the Novus Ordo. What do you think?
RANJITH: An "either-or" attitude would unnecessarily polarize the Church, whereas charity and pastoral concern should be the motivating factors.
If the Holy Father so desires, both could co-exist.
That would not mean that we would have to give up the Novus Ordo. But in the interaction of the two Roman traditions, it is possible that the one may influence the other eventually.
We can’t say everything is completed and finished, that nothing new could happen. In fact, Vatican II never advocated immediate change in the liturgy. Rather it preferred change to "grow organically from forms already existing" (SC 23). As Cardinal Antonelli, a much revered member of the Concilium that undertook the revision of the liturgy after the Council, noted in his diaries, some of the liturgical changes after the Council had been introduced without much reflection, haphazardly, and made later to become accepted practice.
For example, Communion in the hand had not been something that was first properly studied and reflected upon before its acceptance by the Holy See. It had been haphazardly introduced in some countries of Northern Europe and later become accepted practice, eventually spreading into many other places. Now that is a situation that should have been avoided. The Second Vatican Council never advocated such an approach to liturgical reform.
VALLE: Lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi ("The law of praying (is) the law of believing, (is) the law of living"). Is it true that how we worship and pray influences what we believe, and that what we believe influences how we live? In other words, liturgy ultimately influences our moral life, does it not?
RANJITH: Yes. How can we convince the faithful to make sacrifices in their ethical and moral options, unless they are first touched and inspired by the grace of God profoundly? And such happens especially in worship when the human soul is made to experience the salvific grace of God most intimately. In worship, faith becomes interiorized and brims over with inspiration and strength, enabling one to take the moral options that are in consonance with that faith. In the liturgy, we should experience the closeness of God to our heart so intensely that we in turn begin to believe fervently and are compelled to act justly.
VALLE: What are some contemporary liturgical trends or problems that need correction?
RANJITH: One of these, as I see, is the trend to go for ecumenical liturgies in replacement of the Sunday Mass in some countries, during which Catholic lay leaders and Protestant ministers celebrate together and the latter are invited to preach the homily. Sunday Liturgies of the Word with the distribution of Holy Communion, which form is allowed in cases where a priest cannot be present, if turned into ecumenical events can give the faithful the wrong signal. They may get used to the idea of the Sunday without the Eucharist.
The Eucharist, as you know, makes the Church (Ed E. 21) and this is central to us Catholics. If it is so easily replaced by Liturgies of the Word, or worse still by so-called ecumenical prayer services, the very identity of the Catholic Church would be in question. Unfortunately, we hear also of cases whereby the Eucharist itself is being celebrated under various guises along with the Protestant pastors. This is totally unacceptable and constitutes a graviora delicta ("more grave offense") (RM 172).
Ecumenism is not something left to the ad hoc choice of individual priests. True ecumenism, such as the one espoused by Vatican II, comes from the heart of the Church. For example, the path to true ecumenism begins with serious reflection on the part of those who are deemed competent to engage in that type of reflection, such as the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity and the Holy Father himself. Not everyone has the competence to know in what way this delicate search for unity is to be perceived. It needs much reflection and prayer. Hence, liturgical novelty in the name of ecumenism should not be tried out individually.
A second disturbing trend is the gradual replacement of the Mass celebrated by a priest with a paraliturgical service conducted by a lay person. This of course can legitimately happen when no priest is available and facilities for the fulfillment of Sunday obligation are scarce. However, this is an exception, not the rule. What is dangerous is to marginalize the priest even when he is available and some lay pastoral leader team arrogates to itself tasks that are reserved for the priests. I mean by this the trend to get the lay leader to preach the homily instead of the priest, even when he is present, or to distribute Holy Communion, leaving the priest to sit idle at the altar.
We have to stress here that, as the Second Vatican Council affirmed, the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial priesthood "differ from one another in essence and not only in degree" (LG 10). And so it is gravely abusive to relegate to the laity the sacred obligations reserved to the priest.
What is unfortunate is the increasing tendency worldwide to laicize the priest and to clericalize the laity. This too is contra mentem ("against the mind" or "against the intention") of the Council.
There is also an increasing trend to shift the Sunday Mass to Saturdays almost as a "normal" practice. Rather than Sunday being the true day of the Lord, and so a day of spiritual and physical rest, there is a move to reduce its importance, making it become a day of worldly distractions. In Dies Domini, Pope John Paul II warned against this disturbing trend.
A final point I wish to make here concerns some practices introduced in mission territories, for example, in Asia, in the name of change, which are counter to its cultural heritage.
In some Asian countries we see a trend to introduce Communion in the hand which is received standing. This is not at all consonant with Asian culture. The Buddhists worship prostrate on the floor with their forehead touching the ground. Moslems take off their shoes and wash their feet before entering the mosque for worship. The Hindus enter the temple bare-chested as a sign of submission. When people approach the king of Thailand or the emperor of Japan, they do so on their knees as a sign of respect. But in many Asian countries the Church has introduced practices like just a simple bow to the Blessed Sacrament instead of kneeling, standing while receiving Holy Communion, and receiving Communion on the hand. And we know that these cannot be considered practices congruent with Asian culture.
Besides, the laity whose role today is being enhanced in the Church are not even consulted when such decisions are made.
All these situations do not augur well for the Church and we need to correct these trends, if the Eucharist we celebrate is to become, as St. Ignatius of Antioch affirmed, "medicine of immortality and antidote against death" (Eph. 20).
Anthony Valle is a theologian and writer who lives in Rome.
ANTHONY VALLE: Your Excellency, you have been generous in giving several interviews to the international press regarding liturgy since becoming the secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship. Some of your statements have been misinterpreted and aroused controversy rather than providing the intended clarity. Would you care to clarify anything?
ARCHBISHOP MALCOM RANJITH: What I wished to insist on in those interviews was that the post-conciliar reform of the liturgy has not been able to achieve the expected goals of spiritual and missionary renewal in the Church so that today we could be truly happy about it.
Undoubtedly there have been positive results too; but the negative effects seem to have been greater, causing much disorientation in our ranks.
The churches have become empty, liturgical free-wheeling has become the order of the day, and the true meaning and significance of that which is celebrated has been obscured.
One has to, then, begin wondering if the reform process had in fact been handled correctly. Thus, we need to take a good look at what had happened, pray and reflect about its causes and with the help of the Lord move on to make the necessary corrections.
VALLE: It seems as if Pope Benedict XVI will release a motu proprio to liberalize the use of the traditional or Tridentine Mass. Some hope that the Pope’s motu proprio will institute a juridical structure enabling priests to celebrate the traditional Mass without being unjustly harassed and persistently thwarted by, ironically, not people of other faiths or secular authorities, but by their own pastors and bishops. Is this hope for a new juridical apparatus realistic? Is such an apparatus necessary?
RANJITH: Well, there is this rising call for a restoration of the Tridentine Mass. And even certain leading figures of the elite have made public appeals for this Mass in some newspapers recently.
The Holy Father will, I am sure, take note of this and decide what is best for the Church.
You speak of the possible realization of new juridical structures for the implementation of such decisions. I do not think that this would be so much of a problem. Rather what is more important in all of this is a pastoral attitude.
Will the bishops and priests reject requests for the Tridentine Mass and so create a need for juridical structures to ensure the enforcement of a decision of the Pope? Should it go that way?
I sincerely do not hope so.
The appropriate question the shepherds have to ask themselves is: How can I as a bishop or priest bring even one person closer to Christ and to His Church?
It is not so much a matter of the Tridentine Mass or of the Novus Ordo. It is just a question of pastoral responsibility and sensitivity.
Thus, if the Tridentine Mass is the way to achieve an even better level of spiritual enrichment for the faithful, then the shepherds should allow it.
The important concern is not so much the "what" as much as the "how." The Church should always seek to help our faithful to come closer to the Lord, to feel challenged by His message and to respond to His call generously. And if that can be achieved through the celebration of the Novus Ordo Mass or the Pius V Mass, well, then space should be provided for whatever is best instead of getting down to unnecessary and divisive theological hair-splitting. Such things need to be decided through the heart and not so much through the head.
After all, Pope John Paul II did make a personal appeal in Ecclesia Dei Adflicta of 1988 to the bishops, calling upon them to be generous in this matter with those who wish to celebrate or participate in the Tridentine Mass. Besides, we should remember that the Tridentine Mass is not something that belongs to the followers of Archbishop Lefebvre only. It is part of our own heritage as members of the Catholic Church.
The Second Vatican Council, as Pope Benedict so clearly stated in his speech to the members of the Curia in December 2005, did not envisage a totally new beginning, but one of continuity with a renewed sense of enthusiasm and a new outlook that better responds to the missionary needs of the time.
Besides, we also have the serious question of the diminishing number of faithful in some of the churches in the Western world. We have to ask ourselves what happened in these churches and then take corrective steps as may be necessary. I do not think that this situation is attributable to secularization only. A deep crisis of faith coupled with a drive for meaningless liturgical experimentation and novelty have had their own impact in this matter. There is much formalism and insipidity visible at times.
Thus, we need to recover a true sense of the sacred and mystical in worship.
And if the faithful feel that the Tridentine Mass offers them that sense of the sacred and mystical more than anything else, then we should have the courage to accept their request.
With regard to the timing and nature of the motu proprio, nothing yet is known. It is the Holy Father who will decide.
And when he does, we should in all obedience accept what he indicates to us and with a genuine love for the Church strive to help him. Any counter attitude would only harm the spiritual mission of the Church and thwart the Lord’s own will.
VALLE: Like many Catholics today, my wife and I have found that we leave the celebration of the Novus Ordo Mass on Sunday exasperated and perplexed rather than spiritually invigorated. Why?
RANJITH: In the celebration of the Novus Ordo we have to be very serious about what we do on the altar. I cannot be a priest who dreams in his sleep about what I will do at the Mass the following day, walk up to the altar and start celebrating with all kinds of novel self-created rubrics and actions.
The Holy Eucharist belongs to the Church. Hence, it has a meaning of its own which cannot be left to the idiosyncrasies of the single celebrant.
Every element in the liturgy of the Church has its own long history of development and significance. It is certainly not a matter of private "traditions" and so cannot be the object of manipulation by all and sundry.
In fact, Sacrosanctum Concilium does state that other than the Apostolic See and the bishops, where this is allowed to the latter by the former, "absolutely no other person, not even a priest, may add or remove or change anything on his own authority" (SC 22). Even then, we note much free-wheeling in liturgical matters in some areas of the Church today, basically due to an incorrect understanding of liturgical theology.
For example, the mystery of the Holy Eucharist has often been misunderstood or partially understood, leaving thus the door open to all kinds of liturgical abuses.
In the celebration of the Holy Eucharist, some place too much accent on the presidential role of the priest. But we know that the priest is really not the main agent of what happens on the altar.
It is Jesus Himself.
Besides, every liturgical celebration has also a heavenly dimension "which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem towards which we journey as pilgrims" (SC 8).
Others explain the Eucharist in a way that places the accent on its banquet/meal dimension, linking it to "communion." This too is an important consideration, but we should remember that it is not so much a communion created by those taking part in the Eucharist as much as by the Lord Himself.
Through the Eucharist, the Lord assumes us unto Himself and in Him we are placed in communion with all the others who unite themselves to Him. It is thus not so much a sociological experience as much as a mystical one. Hence even as "communion" the Eucharist is a heavenly experience.
What is more important is the sacrificial dimension of the Eucharist. Each time we celebrate the Eucharist we relive the sacrifice of Calvary, celebrating it as the moment of our salvation.
And this very fact also constitutes the unique dignity and font of identity of the priest. He has been instituted by Christ to celebrate the wonderful mystery of turning this corruptible piece of bread into the very glorified Body of Christ and this little bit of wine into the Blood of Christ, enacting the sacrifice of Calvary for the salvation of the world. And this has to be lived, understood and believed by the priest each time he celebrates the Eucharist.
Indeed, Sacrosanctum Concilium placed accent on the sacrificial and salvific effectivity of the Mass. The priest thus becomes another Christ, so to say. What a great vocation! And so, if we celebrate the Eucharist devoutly, then the faithful will reap immense spiritual benefit and return again and again in search of that heavenly nourishment.
VALLE: Some have contended that the solution to the liturgical crisis -- and at bottom the crisis of faith -- afflicting the Catholic Church today would be to implement the exclusive use of the Tridentine Mass, while others maintain that all we really need is a "reform of the reform," in other words, a reform of the Novus Ordo. What do you think?
RANJITH: An "either-or" attitude would unnecessarily polarize the Church, whereas charity and pastoral concern should be the motivating factors.
If the Holy Father so desires, both could co-exist.
That would not mean that we would have to give up the Novus Ordo. But in the interaction of the two Roman traditions, it is possible that the one may influence the other eventually.
We can’t say everything is completed and finished, that nothing new could happen. In fact, Vatican II never advocated immediate change in the liturgy. Rather it preferred change to "grow organically from forms already existing" (SC 23). As Cardinal Antonelli, a much revered member of the Concilium that undertook the revision of the liturgy after the Council, noted in his diaries, some of the liturgical changes after the Council had been introduced without much reflection, haphazardly, and made later to become accepted practice.
For example, Communion in the hand had not been something that was first properly studied and reflected upon before its acceptance by the Holy See. It had been haphazardly introduced in some countries of Northern Europe and later become accepted practice, eventually spreading into many other places. Now that is a situation that should have been avoided. The Second Vatican Council never advocated such an approach to liturgical reform.
VALLE: Lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi ("The law of praying (is) the law of believing, (is) the law of living"). Is it true that how we worship and pray influences what we believe, and that what we believe influences how we live? In other words, liturgy ultimately influences our moral life, does it not?
RANJITH: Yes. How can we convince the faithful to make sacrifices in their ethical and moral options, unless they are first touched and inspired by the grace of God profoundly? And such happens especially in worship when the human soul is made to experience the salvific grace of God most intimately. In worship, faith becomes interiorized and brims over with inspiration and strength, enabling one to take the moral options that are in consonance with that faith. In the liturgy, we should experience the closeness of God to our heart so intensely that we in turn begin to believe fervently and are compelled to act justly.
VALLE: What are some contemporary liturgical trends or problems that need correction?
RANJITH: One of these, as I see, is the trend to go for ecumenical liturgies in replacement of the Sunday Mass in some countries, during which Catholic lay leaders and Protestant ministers celebrate together and the latter are invited to preach the homily. Sunday Liturgies of the Word with the distribution of Holy Communion, which form is allowed in cases where a priest cannot be present, if turned into ecumenical events can give the faithful the wrong signal. They may get used to the idea of the Sunday without the Eucharist.
The Eucharist, as you know, makes the Church (Ed E. 21) and this is central to us Catholics. If it is so easily replaced by Liturgies of the Word, or worse still by so-called ecumenical prayer services, the very identity of the Catholic Church would be in question. Unfortunately, we hear also of cases whereby the Eucharist itself is being celebrated under various guises along with the Protestant pastors. This is totally unacceptable and constitutes a graviora delicta ("more grave offense") (RM 172).
Ecumenism is not something left to the ad hoc choice of individual priests. True ecumenism, such as the one espoused by Vatican II, comes from the heart of the Church. For example, the path to true ecumenism begins with serious reflection on the part of those who are deemed competent to engage in that type of reflection, such as the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity and the Holy Father himself. Not everyone has the competence to know in what way this delicate search for unity is to be perceived. It needs much reflection and prayer. Hence, liturgical novelty in the name of ecumenism should not be tried out individually.
A second disturbing trend is the gradual replacement of the Mass celebrated by a priest with a paraliturgical service conducted by a lay person. This of course can legitimately happen when no priest is available and facilities for the fulfillment of Sunday obligation are scarce. However, this is an exception, not the rule. What is dangerous is to marginalize the priest even when he is available and some lay pastoral leader team arrogates to itself tasks that are reserved for the priests. I mean by this the trend to get the lay leader to preach the homily instead of the priest, even when he is present, or to distribute Holy Communion, leaving the priest to sit idle at the altar.
We have to stress here that, as the Second Vatican Council affirmed, the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial priesthood "differ from one another in essence and not only in degree" (LG 10). And so it is gravely abusive to relegate to the laity the sacred obligations reserved to the priest.
What is unfortunate is the increasing tendency worldwide to laicize the priest and to clericalize the laity. This too is contra mentem ("against the mind" or "against the intention") of the Council.
There is also an increasing trend to shift the Sunday Mass to Saturdays almost as a "normal" practice. Rather than Sunday being the true day of the Lord, and so a day of spiritual and physical rest, there is a move to reduce its importance, making it become a day of worldly distractions. In Dies Domini, Pope John Paul II warned against this disturbing trend.
A final point I wish to make here concerns some practices introduced in mission territories, for example, in Asia, in the name of change, which are counter to its cultural heritage.
In some Asian countries we see a trend to introduce Communion in the hand which is received standing. This is not at all consonant with Asian culture. The Buddhists worship prostrate on the floor with their forehead touching the ground. Moslems take off their shoes and wash their feet before entering the mosque for worship. The Hindus enter the temple bare-chested as a sign of submission. When people approach the king of Thailand or the emperor of Japan, they do so on their knees as a sign of respect. But in many Asian countries the Church has introduced practices like just a simple bow to the Blessed Sacrament instead of kneeling, standing while receiving Holy Communion, and receiving Communion on the hand. And we know that these cannot be considered practices congruent with Asian culture.
Besides, the laity whose role today is being enhanced in the Church are not even consulted when such decisions are made.
All these situations do not augur well for the Church and we need to correct these trends, if the Eucharist we celebrate is to become, as St. Ignatius of Antioch affirmed, "medicine of immortality and antidote against death" (Eph. 20).
Anthony Valle is a theologian and writer who lives in Rome.
Saturday, January 27, 2007
Jesuit Commentary on the Universal Indult
A Radio Vatican commentary from Father Eberhard von Gemmingen SJ, Director of German Speaking Programmes. The aristocratic Jesuit is often on German TV and was granted an early exclusive interview with the new Pope, who he studied under at the University of Tübingen.
Weekly Commentary
In all probability Pope Benedict will give the permission to celebrate again the traditional or Tridentine Rite. It would however be completely wrong if Catholics started to quarrel over this, some of them full of joy about this reversal, the others full of anger. It is to be noted that the Pope will not on any account reintroduce the old liturgy or even make it compulsory. He is only of the opinion that the prohibition of the classical Rite after the Council is in contradiction to Church tradition, because according to his conviction, Rites can be further developed but cannot be abrogated.
The whole thing is not about Latin and the celebration with the back to the people. The new Rite allows both. The exact differences between the old and the new Rite are minimal and are hardly recognizable if the new Rite, as permitted and when sought, is celebrated in Latin and with the back to the people.
In my opinion, our actual problem in Europe is that the Faithful find today’s Masses often banal with little mystery and at times also with arbitrary additions to the Rite. Christians with a sense of aesthetics wish for a more classical form and mystery. Behind this is probably also a longing for European language which links all together in a common culture. At that stage, one knew that a Catholic Mass in Lisbon was the same as the one celebrated in St Petersburg. One was spared any surprises. But let’s admit it, at that time millions took part in the Mass diligently and faithfully but have not understood anything and only prayed the Rosary. The German hand Missal, Schott was only known to German intellectuals because in other countries it did not exist (untrue!). The desire to assist at the Mass, actively and with understanding is good and very important. It is my opinion therefore that in todays world we priests should learn again to celebrate the mystery so that Faith, heart and reason are in used to equal measure. If we look at the growing Churches in Africa and Asia, the celebration of the correct Rite is a mere trifle. I can hardly imagine that anyone in these young Churches will want the old Rite.
Weekly Commentary
In all probability Pope Benedict will give the permission to celebrate again the traditional or Tridentine Rite. It would however be completely wrong if Catholics started to quarrel over this, some of them full of joy about this reversal, the others full of anger. It is to be noted that the Pope will not on any account reintroduce the old liturgy or even make it compulsory. He is only of the opinion that the prohibition of the classical Rite after the Council is in contradiction to Church tradition, because according to his conviction, Rites can be further developed but cannot be abrogated.
The whole thing is not about Latin and the celebration with the back to the people. The new Rite allows both. The exact differences between the old and the new Rite are minimal and are hardly recognizable if the new Rite, as permitted and when sought, is celebrated in Latin and with the back to the people.
In my opinion, our actual problem in Europe is that the Faithful find today’s Masses often banal with little mystery and at times also with arbitrary additions to the Rite. Christians with a sense of aesthetics wish for a more classical form and mystery. Behind this is probably also a longing for European language which links all together in a common culture. At that stage, one knew that a Catholic Mass in Lisbon was the same as the one celebrated in St Petersburg. One was spared any surprises. But let’s admit it, at that time millions took part in the Mass diligently and faithfully but have not understood anything and only prayed the Rosary. The German hand Missal, Schott was only known to German intellectuals because in other countries it did not exist (untrue!). The desire to assist at the Mass, actively and with understanding is good and very important. It is my opinion therefore that in todays world we priests should learn again to celebrate the mystery so that Faith, heart and reason are in used to equal measure. If we look at the growing Churches in Africa and Asia, the celebration of the correct Rite is a mere trifle. I can hardly imagine that anyone in these young Churches will want the old Rite.
Saturday, January 6, 2007
"Collegiality" no longer a smokescreen for Disobedience?
Another tip from Fr. Zuhlsdorf here:
"Pope picks up the phone in defence of the Old Rite"
BY MARK GREAVES
POPE BENEDICT XVI has spoken by telephone to a number of French bishops to persuade them to accept a wider use of the Tridentine Mass, it has been claimed.
The Pontiff brought French bishops who oppose the Tridentine Mass "to a reluctant but decisive change of view", according to the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter (FSSP), an organisation of Old Rite priests that the Pope strongly supports.
It is widely expected that a papal document will soon be released to allow priests to celebrate the Tridentine Mass - using the pre-Vatican II1962 Latin Missal - without the explicit permission of the local bishop, though probably only in the low-key setting of a "private" celebration. The document, which will be released motu proprio, or on the Pope's own initiative, has caused concern among bishops in France, where traditionalist groups are particularly active.
But efforts by the French episcopate to "torpedo" the initiative have failed, according to Videre Petrum, the FSSP's British newsletter.
"It is said that the mild but persuasive words of Pope Benedict, who personally spoke by telephone to many of the most intransigent enemies of tradition among the bishops of France, worked a sort of miracle, and brought them to a reluctant but decisive change of view, or at least to a recognition of the limits of disobedience," the newsletter said. Cardinal Jorge Medina Estevez, a former prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, said last month that the Vatican's Ecclesia Dei commission had discussed the document and would pass on its conclusions to the Pope.
The cardinal added that he did not expect the commission, set up in 1988 to oversee Vatican relations with traditionalists, to discuss the document any further.
Commentators say priests will be allowed to celebrate the Tridentine Rite without permission at "private Masses" that would be nevertheless be open to the public.
The proposed reform would put pressure on the bishops of England and Wales to adopt a more welcoming stance towards the FSSP, which currently has only two priests based in London.
"Pope picks up the phone in defence of the Old Rite"
BY MARK GREAVES
POPE BENEDICT XVI has spoken by telephone to a number of French bishops to persuade them to accept a wider use of the Tridentine Mass, it has been claimed.
The Pontiff brought French bishops who oppose the Tridentine Mass "to a reluctant but decisive change of view", according to the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter (FSSP), an organisation of Old Rite priests that the Pope strongly supports.
It is widely expected that a papal document will soon be released to allow priests to celebrate the Tridentine Mass - using the pre-Vatican II1962 Latin Missal - without the explicit permission of the local bishop, though probably only in the low-key setting of a "private" celebration. The document, which will be released motu proprio, or on the Pope's own initiative, has caused concern among bishops in France, where traditionalist groups are particularly active.
But efforts by the French episcopate to "torpedo" the initiative have failed, according to Videre Petrum, the FSSP's British newsletter.
"It is said that the mild but persuasive words of Pope Benedict, who personally spoke by telephone to many of the most intransigent enemies of tradition among the bishops of France, worked a sort of miracle, and brought them to a reluctant but decisive change of view, or at least to a recognition of the limits of disobedience," the newsletter said. Cardinal Jorge Medina Estevez, a former prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, said last month that the Vatican's Ecclesia Dei commission had discussed the document and would pass on its conclusions to the Pope.
The cardinal added that he did not expect the commission, set up in 1988 to oversee Vatican relations with traditionalists, to discuss the document any further.
Commentators say priests will be allowed to celebrate the Tridentine Rite without permission at "private Masses" that would be nevertheless be open to the public.
The proposed reform would put pressure on the bishops of England and Wales to adopt a more welcoming stance towards the FSSP, which currently has only two priests based in London.
Saturday, December 30, 2006
Internet petition AGAINST Tridentine Mass is a big flop.
Fr. Farinella thinks traditionalists believe Pope Pius VI to be "inspired by the devil".
Translation provided by Fr. Zuhlsdorf here.
CITTA’ DEL VATICANO - The collection of signatures launched on the internet by the priest and biblical scholar from Genoa Fr. Paolo Farinella against the return of the Mass in Latin – object of a long discussed possible Motu Proprio of Benedict XVI - and in defense of the choices of Vatican II is not having the successed that was hoped for. The object of the appeal was to gather at least 10,000 signatures to send to the Vatican, but over the almost two months since the launch the number of signers is just above one thousand.
There are just 1052 signers up to today, who have joined the first signer, namely the same Fr. Farinella, but it is necessary to count also the signatures which are clearly false, such as that of someone who mocking signed as none less than "Marcel Lefebvre, Archbishop of Dakar", ....
"The problem is not that the Mass is in Latin (today an anachronism)" he explained in his online appeal. "The true problem rests in the fact that the Mass of Pius is a banner raised by the traditionalists to bring about the complete abnegation of the ecumenical Council Vatican II and especially of Pope Paul VI, whom they consider schismatic and inspired by the devil." Thus, in reviving for them the old rite, "you make yourself an accomplice and supporter of an even greater schism because the disciples of Lefebvre don’t accept the authority of the Council". "You are the Pope and we recognize your authority in this matter," Fr. Farinella added. "But at the same time we say to you that you cannot do this thing you desire and you cannot contradict a council much less abrogate it as you are doing with the concession of exclusive use the Mass of Pius V."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)