Rorate Caeli

The Instruction - I
Non-Roman rites and uses: a small sample of things to come,
the risk of a return to the "indult" mentality

The day before yesterday, in a post long gone, and yesterday, we were (unjustly) accused of being alarmist because we tried to warn our readers that the clarification instruction on the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum (henceforth, "the instruction") has been, at least in its latest draft, rewritten in a way that is unexpectedly and unjustifiably restrictive. Unexpectedly, because since the very first reports on the intruction, in August-October 2007, it had always been seen, and presented by several Vatican sources, as an instrument to make the application of Summorum Pontificum wider and to destroy the ridiculous roadblocks placed by several bishops regarding the wide rights recognized by that text. Unjustifiably, because, if anything, what Summorum needs is a firmer assurance of its application, and not increasing difficulties.

"Where are the texts of this instruction draft?", some have asked. "This is all rather vague," others have affirmed. And at least one report has simply denied any such intentions in the intruction. We can only thank those friends who, though discreetly, confirmed by other means what our sources had told us.

The text of the draft may still be altered; the general restrictive intentions, however, cannot be denied. Together with Messa in Latino, we can add the following:
We have learned, up to the present moment, at least two relevant points of the Instruction. Both points should not be seen as minor, since they are indicative of the generally restrictive tone of the text. For several reasons, and because time is necessary to digest unseemly news, only the first point will be discussed in this post.

And that is: in its current draft, the Instruction definitely "clarifies" that the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum is applied exclusively to the Roman Rite, in the strictest interpretation of the word. Therefore, not to the non-Roman Latin Rites: the clearly minoritarian or even forgotten Mozarabic, Braga, or Sarum rites. But the rule would apply also to the not few religious who have tried to rediscover their Traditional rites or uses: Dominicans and Carmelites, in particular, but also Carthusians, Norbertines... What is surprising is that the extension of the spirit of the motu proprio to other Western rites and uses had always been assumed, and the official response that it would not apply to religious uses, demanding a proper clarification, had indeed been one of the very causes of the instruction.

This restrictive rule would in particular (and would seem thus planned, considering the complications of the Italian Church) exclude the application of the motu proprio to the Traditional Liturgy of the largest diocese in the Old World, and third with most Catholics in the world: Milan. Excluding the enclaves of Roman Rite, the motu proprio would be void in the Archdiocese and in the Ambrosian zones of the Diocese of Lugano, Switzerland.

For over five million Catholics in that area, and for religious priests dedicated to their rites or uses, the rules to be applied would not be those of Summorum (the Traditional Liturgy as a right of priests and groups of faithful), but only Ecclesia-Dei-like privileges and concessions, granted by the liturgical authorities of the Archdiocese (in the case of Milan) or the Superiors (in the case of the orders).

Why such a restriction? In legal terms, nothing seems to demand it: the text of Summorum is sufficiently ambiguous that it can be interpreted in both ways, even though it makes reference to the Roman Missal, Breviary, and Rite, and restrictive rules are, in general, applied in a limited way (odiosa limitanda, favorabilia amplianda). Moreover, such a rule would openly contradict the official response of the Pontifical Commission 'Ecclesia Dei' (in the case of open application of Summorum to the Ambrosian Rite, cf. here).

This first major point of the instruction has, thus, a clear repressive and punitive intention. Its sense would be extremely dangerous: that the Traditional liturgies of the West, rather than being encouraged (as the letter of the motu proprio makes clear), must be contained, regulated, oppressed. Not a clear declaration of rights, but a bureaucratic web of limited privileges and concessions: this small example seems to set the general new tone regarding the Traditional Liturgy.

75 comments:

awatkins69 said...

Our Lady, Destroyer of Heresies, pray for us!

Anonymous said...

To all of you who doubt that the Pope is yeilding to the liberal clergy, what other prove do you all need?

I believe Our Holy Father is a liberal as well.

I feel betrayed by all of this.

Lord Jesus have mercy for we perish.

Anonymous said...

To all of you who doubt that the Pope is yeilding to the liberal clergy, what other prove do you all need?

To me the Pope is a liberal as well.

I feel betrayed by all of this.

Lord Jesus have mercy for we perish.

watch cell phone with bluetooth camera said...

I admire the valuable information you offer in your articles. I will bookmark your blog and have my children check up here often. I am quite sure they will learn lots of new stuff here than anybody else!

Anonymous said...

N.C.:

Is it your contention that the leak of this information (assuming that it is information) is a trial balloon?

If so, I can see your point.

However, it still makes no sense. The reason is that the m.p. has had little effect since 2008. Its opponents have mostly found ways to deny our Mass, and Rome lacks the manpower to bring all the opponents into line. It seems that the P.C.E.D. is going after them one-by-one in an incredibly slow process.

I will certainly be disappointed if the clariifcation fails to fortify the m.p. But I don't think that we shall suffer much loss; rather, we shall fail to move forward, or at an even slower rate. This is tiresome; no, it's stupid.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

I am in shock.
2:00 a.m. and all I can do is to sit and look at the screen and ask the Almighty and Our Lady to help the faithful in this times where the prophecies of Our Lady of La Sallete are so obviously coming to pass.

Pastor indignus said...

Where is Cardinal Burke in all of this?

It is hard to believe that he has not seen the text of the instruction. He is an expert canon lawyer. He is also a great promoter of the traditional Mass.

I am sure he, or those close to him, at least know of these rumours; please, Cardinal Burke, intervene in the cause of right!

ABC 123 said...

Still a lot of ambiguity and hearsay. If this is true, I don't however think that it would affect the Dominican, Franciscan, etc. 'rites'.

Cardinal Tettamanzi is no friend of traditional liturgy so perhaps there was some political influence that was in play.

As for the others, perhaps there is some caution because these rites are rarely in use and there is a greater danger of improper celebration and priestly eccentricity forcing them on people. The Mozarabic rite is barely done anywhere in Spain, even in the newer form. The Sarum rite would have to basically be entirely resurrected, as far as I know it is almost never done.

New Catholic said...

ABC: we mentioned that it is nearly a non-issue for those rites. It is a major issue for religious uses and for the Ambrosian Rite. It is also a potent symbol of the return to the "indultarian" mentality.

The post stands by itself. NC

Anonymous said...

Did St Pope Pius V not proclaim that this Mass could never be declared invalid? Didn't Pope Benedict XVI declare that it had never been abolished?

Anonymous said...

Never mind Cardinal Burke. I'm hoping that Cardinal Canizares Llovera, Prefect for Divine Worship, can step in. He is even more conservative than Burke and this is his area. Let's hope that they both take action. But this, again, is to absurd to believe possible. I repeat: S.P. is a dead letter anyway, so why attack it?

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

This would not in fact apply to the Premonstratensian / Norbertine rite / use. The General Chapter of the Order never abolished it or restricted its use - and indeed it was used after the liturgical reforms and before SP by members of the Order.

Johnny Domer said...

The thing that worried me from the getgo was the decision to postpone the decision until after the three year period when bishops were supposed to send in their reports about how the experience of the TLM in their dioceses was going. I'm pretty sure that my late bishop wouldn't have been exactly falling over himself to paint a rosy picture of things, and I'm guessing most bishops worldwide weren't either. Further, there are probably a lot of bishops in crucial regions (France, Milan, etc.) who reeeeally dislike the old Mass. Maybe the Holy Father feels he should at least reflect their dislike in SOME fashion...I don't know.

One thing to remember in your personal prayer for this intention: the late Abbé Quoex offered the final sufferings of his life for the intention of the Motu Proprio, which was issued a few months after his death. Surely, if the good father is in heaven, he would fiercely intercede on our behalf for this intention in heaven. There is nothing wrong with private prayer to a person you believe to be in heaven, so I know I'll be asking for his intercession.

Anonymous said...

I just can't see where the restriction is, having read the text carefully. Of course a regulation is needed, where two non novus ordo rites exist - in Milano they had always their own rites, so where is the restriction. Too much scaremongering I would say.

Gideon Ertner said...

Okay... if this is the sort of issue that is at stake, like PKTP I really don't see the need to be unnecessarily alarmist.

It was always clear that SP referred to the Roman Rite - specifically, the Roman Missal of 1962. Whether or not that included the non-Roman uses of that rite was not entirely clear, and it is still not clear from this news whether the non-Roman uses (as opposed to rites) are going to be excluded from the scope of SP by the clarification.

As for the non-Roman western rites (of which there are only two: Ambrosian and Mozarabic, NOT the Bragan, which is a Roman use), we must be perfectly honest and admit that the application of SP to them was not in accord with the text of SP, but rather with its spirit.

SP clearly states that its scope is the Roman Rite. By an old tradition the three Western Rites have been considered seperately and governed by their own respective laws. This is a legal matter: if the Holy Father wanted SP to concern the other two rites as well, he should have explicitly said so. The fact that he didn't probably means that he did not think any adherents of these two rites would be interested, or it may represent a legal oversight.

Regardless, the application of SP to the Ambrosian and Mozarabic rites would now require the promulgation of one or two new Motu Propria (? - my Latin is horrible). We may think that the Holy Father should do this, and maybe he will, but it really doesn't concern SP as such and so is rightly outside the scope of the clarification.

Gideon Ertner said...

"Lord Jesus have mercy for we perish."

"And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith?"

Brian said...

the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum is applied exclusively to the Roman Rite, in the strictest interpretation of the word. Therefore, not to the non-Roman Latin Rites . . . But the rule would apply also to the not few religious who have tried to rediscover their Traditional rites or uses: Dominicans and Carmelites, in particular, but also Carthusians, Norbertines...

The wording here reads as if Summorum Pontificum is applied to the Traditional religious rites, i.e., that SP does extend, for example, to the ancient Dominican Rite.

Am I missing something?

TradPoster said...

Anon 10:04 -
The fact that something was not abolished does not mean that it was not under restricted use nor that it cannot be returned to heavy restricted use in the future.

New Catholic said...

Gideon, look at the forest, the whole forest... This might be just one tree...

Anonymous said...

As a priest I believe the most important issue in this instruction is that they clarify that Holy Communion must be given only on the tongue at traditional Masses.

If the instruction allows Holy Communion in the hand, then we will lose many priests from saying the Traditional Mass publicly, and many of the faithful will cease attending Masses in which this happens.

If this issue is left vague or not clarified, then Holy Communion will continue to be given in the hand at many Traditional Masses which will cause great confusion and division as many traditionalists will not attend these Masses. It will then play into the hands of liberal / "conservative" clergy and bishops who will use it as the litmus test to further mix the rites and argue against other traditional practices.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Ertner quotes Holy Scripture:

"Lord Jesus have mercy for we perish."

"And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith?"

Let me respond:

"We are fearful, Lord, because the threat is coming from INSIDE the boat."

Those who occupy the Sacred Offices of Holy Church to protect Her are betraying Her. The threat is NOT the storm outside the boat; the threat is that those who occupy the place of the Apostles are taking a pick-axe to the foundation of the boat.

Giles

Crouchback said...

If your house was on fire, you'd call the fire brigade, and ask them to quickly restrict the spread of the fire.

Why would the Church want to restrict the Mass..???

This is the question that needs to be asked....WHY..??

benedictambrose said...

AN URGENT PLEA!

I really think the most practical and constructive thing we can do - spiritual weapons aside - is to organise ONE, simple, respectful petition online that EVERYBODY who is concerned to see the motu proprio protected, promoted and strengthened could happily sign.

It should be short and to the point, but is must, I think, contain: an expression of gratitude to HH for the provisons of SP, an expression of the good it has already achieved, an earnest pleading for it not to be weakened just as it most needs support to tackle the resistance it faces in so many places, a promise of prayers for the Holy Father (like the rosary bouquets) - and it must be couched in terms to which anyone with a commitment to the old rite could sign. This is why it must be respectful of the Holy Father and demonstrate true filial piety, as well as being an urgent plea.

I am not in a position to set this up myself - I think it would take a powerful blog like this one to set it up and effectively to promote it - but I will support it every way I can.

Just think what a SINGLE, powerful electronic petition signed by tens of thousands of the faithful could achieve: as a demonstration of strength of feeling, as a token of the outpouring of prayers, as a pledge of support for the Holy Father.

PLEASE, editors of this blog, consider this idea - you (in collaboration with other such sites) would be marvellously placed to achieve this potentially wonder-working enterprise!

--Benedict Ambrose

Anonymous said...

I am sorry, but all this commotion because of rumors? We are sounding an alarm based on hearsay, even if it comes from messainlatino blog.
I would stand by P.K.T.P. and just see what happens.
The MP has been an absolutely DEAD letter in South America, particularly in my country, Argentina. Why bother for something is already ignored by local bishops?
Here, if you want the TLM the only places are the SSPX and some independent.

Anonymous said...

Never mind Cardinal Burke. I'm hoping that Cardinal Canizares Llovera, Prefect for Divine Worship, can step in. He is even more conservative than Burke and this is his area. Let's hope that they both take action.

Cañizares Llovera? The main endorser of the Neocathecumenal Way liturgy? The one who reversed all the corrections which Cardinal Ranjith imposed on them? The one who said that in their Masses "There are no liturgical anomalies; everything is in full compliance of the guidelines of the Ordo Missae What I have really seen there are Eucharists celebrated without any hurry, with a great faith, and where you can perceive the joy and the thanksgiving for the gift which is being bestowed in the Eucharist."? That one? I don't think so. He may be conservative, but he is a "reform of the reform" guy, 100%. Tradition is not his cause.

LeonG said...

"and Rome lacks the manpower...."

Correction - "will power"

Henry said...

”The reason is that the m.p. has had little effect since 2008. . . . S.P. is a dead letter anyway”

Indeed, “This is tiresome; no, it's stupid” to keep seeing head-in-the-sand statements like this. Anyone who obsessively writes negative stuff like this needs to quit staring at his computer monitor, get out and take a look at the Church on the ground where people actually worship at Mass.

It may or not be true that TLM statistics have not changed so much since 2008. But TLM presence and atmosphere has changed in many places in dramatic ways that are not measured by statistics.

Before Summorum Pontificum, one got episcopal permission for a TLM and announced it publicly with great fanfare. Now, it’s not such a big deal. A young priest who wants to learn and celebrate the TLM just goes ahead and does so. I personally know of several priests learning or already saying the TLM without consulting their bishop or anyone else.

Just 3 miles from my home, a TLM is celebrated daily and Sunday in a parish church, but without any announcement anywhere, neither in print nor on the internet. Not so long age, 3 digits were required to state the number of miles to the nearest TLM.

No effect? Dead letter? Piffle!

Gideon Ertner said...

"We are fearful, Lord, because the threat is coming from INSIDE the boat."

And Jesus saith unto them: So bloody what?

Gideon Ertner said...

look at the forest, the whole forest... This might be just one tree...

No it's not, it's just a bush. Even if there are several bushes they would not a forest make.

Anonymous said...

How does one contact the relevant congregations and curial offices with a respectful but concerned letter, urging support of the Summorum Pontificum?

Anonymous said...

Editors:
I did not have an email address to contact you at so I thought I would just write this comment instead.
But I wanted to ask if you could begin a Rosary Crusade for the Holy Father and the freedom of the Old Latin Mass. Perhaps, you could encourage other bloggers to do the same.
Ultimately, all these problems can be fixed through her help, we just need to ask for it. Just as St. Dominic defeated Albigensianism, we must defeat Modernism.
I only ask because I know you have a solid readership and could more easily spread the message. At Marquette University, where I attend school, we need clarification for the usage of the Latin Mass. A more restrictive document will only make things worse.
In His Name,
Adam Ryback
adam.ryback@marquette.edu

Jack O'Malley said...

Gideon Ertner,

I've never seen a plural form of motu proprio (it is probably it's own plural, like moose, sheep, swine) but as it is in ablative case (an ablative absolute, so-called) the plural would be motibus propriis. Though I suppose that could mean a single document written from several motivations. Perhaps Summorum was. ;-)

Rather like Suetonius' De vita Caesarum Englished as On the lives of the Caesars, which if re-Latined would mean that each Caesar had several lives. Go figure.

Anonymous said...

Fr. Z posted some excellent advice yesterday:

If you are concerned about what might happen to Summorum Pontificum, pray and fast. Don’t whine. Don’t panic. Don’t fret. Don’t behave like a suddenly headless chicken.


Do what a committed Catholic warrior would do for a cause that is dear.


- Go to church and spend time before the Blessed Sacrament every day until this resolves one way or another.
- Ask Jesus to either stop the Instruction or to make Summorum Pontificum even better.
- Pray the Rosary for the Holy Father.
- Ask our Blessed Mother to move the Holy Father to keep Summorum Pontificum strong, to make it even stronger.
- Pray to the Holy Father’s guardian angels constantly during the day asking them to strengthen him and to weaken his many enemies, some of them very close to him.
- Fast and offer your hunger – real hunger, don’t fool around if you are going to do this - for the Holy Father’s well-being and firm resolve.


Be prudent about fasting, of course, especially if others rely on you and you have health concerns. But if you are young and healthy, fast.

chiapet said...

'No effect' does not equal 'little effect.' I see people calling for charity in the other thread, and we get this.

I tend to agree with PK, and my head is well away from any holes in the ground and my eyes work just fine. Statistics and observation are a pretty darn good way to get a general picture of the situation on the ground.

Robert said...

Could someone tell me what is going on in plain english.

sacerdos said...

An online-petition is not a bad idea at all. The news will spread all over the internet and many, many blogs and sites will refere to it. This can become major. We have to do everything within our power now. We can pray and do the petition at the same time. Our voice needs to be heard. We can't let the liberals win. So Rorate: please consider the petition

Kathleen said...

It is simply foolish to fail to understand that there is a war going on.

And those that would trample the Faith into the dust, and have been doing a fine job of it for decades, have been set back on their heels in the last few years.

The Moto, the forcing through of the reform of some of the worst of the N.O., pushes for greater reverence in how, even in the N.O., one should interact with the Blessed Sacrament.

That element is shocked and furious. They were convinced that they had it all under control and it was just a matter of time until they strangled the last dying embers of the Faith and finished the substitution of their abomination.

We are witnessing the opening salvos of their new offense launched in response.

And it is only going to get worse.

Much worse.

What needs to happen now is that those that would not hand victory over cheaply need to put their shoulders to the wheel. Both on the temporal and spiritual front.

Anonymous said...

These are common sense measures. The Pope has freed the older form of the Roman rite for use. The other rites are not directly his concern, nor his purview. Other usages are governed by their own ordinary. So for the religious orders, it is up to their general, not due to an old Ecclesia Dei mentality, but precisely because he is the head of the group. The man who is in charge of the Roman rite (the Pope) has allowed the free usage of the older form of the Roman rite. If the other old usages are to be allowed, the person to do it is the head of the group which has that particular usage- the diocesan ordinary or religious general.

-MS

Anonymous said...

There doesn't seem to be much time remaining in which to influence the outcome. I wish you would release everything you have right away, that we may respond forthwith with the appropriate measures.

Anonymous said...

Is possible to attend mass in the extrordinary form only and lose your soul?
Is it possible to attend the new mass and go to heaven?

Cruise the Groove. said...

"Could someone tell me what is going on in plain english"

Robert,

Nothing that we know of for absolute surity yet.

We must wait until the Clarification comes out to know for sure.
Meanwhile we must pray that Almighty Gods Will be done in this matter.

Scott Quinn said...

What does this mean for the Anglican Ordinariate? If they are left alone this could be a major problem within the rest of the Church.

Anonymous said...

The NEO CATS get their deformed liturgy, and we will get restriction. The West is doomed. I think we all know that is the case. We in the West deserve the worst of retributions.

Johannes said...

This is worse news than I could have expected. I have become only lately firmly attached to the Ambrosian or Milanese Rite. I cannot see why there is this indeed unexpected attack on the historical pre-Tridentine Latin rites. No. I can. I do. But still - they are willing to have a thousand (made-up and self-styled) liturgies (from disco masses in Austria to clown masses in Flanders, to the more conservative cheese-hat masses of the United States of America) in hundreds of languages but no more than one - even when the others are demonstrably more ancient than the present Roman vsvs antiqvior - in Latin?

It speaks though. Why must they and where is the need to take measures against the implementation of non-Roman Latin rites if every man, woman and child - religious, priest and laity - in the Western churches is unspeakably pleased and content with the Novvs Ordo?

Br. Jason, OSSM said...

Have you forgotten this post?

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2010/02/pced-responds-use-of-traditional.html

Ecclesia Dei alredy said that the MP doesn't apply to religious orders. I don't know what the fuss is about.

Christopher J. Paulitz said...

PKTP: "I repeat: S.P. is a dead letter anyway, so why attack it?"

A dead letter produced nearly 1 in 5 churches in the Diocese of Arlington to start a Sunday TLM. Before SP, there was ONE Mass.

SP isn't perfect, but to call it dead, which means there's no good fruit coming from it, is a bit idiotic.

M. A. said...

"Is possible to attend mass in the extrordinary form only and lose your soul?
Is it possible to attend the new mass and go to heaven?"
_________________________________

Let me take a stab at this one:

Is is possible to attend Mass in the "extraordinary form" only and save your soul? Is it possible to attend the NO and go to hell?

Like some here, I, too, am tired of writing. But I will do penance, and pray.

Tom the Milkman said...

@anon 17:41

Yes

and

Yes.

"Now abideth faith, hope, charity; but the greatest of these is charity."

Anonymous said...

"SP isn't perfect, but to call it dead, which means there's no good fruit coming from it, is a bit idiotic."

Well said!

Barbara

prof. basto said...

S.P. is not dead letter today. It at list kickstarted the application of the now defunct provisions of Ecclesia Dei in those places where those provisions were not applied when in force.

My city now has a weekly Sunday TLM in the business centre area, while in the whole of the city no TLM celebrated in communion with Rome existed in the past.

For us that value being in full Communion with Rome (and for all that longed for juridical, authoritative recognition that the usus antiquor is still a liturgy that can be celebrated by any priest despite the promulgation of the Novus Ordo), S.P. is a wonderful gift.

Let the pope not undercut the most precious single act of his whole pontificate

Kathleen said...

Robert said...
Could someone tell me what is going on in plain english.


There appears to be an attempt to potentially significantly limit access to the pre-Novus Ordo masses within non-Roman Latin Rites.

This would impact entire geographic regions like Milan, Italy and Lugano, Switzerland along with priests within religious orders.

It would also be the classic liberal move of getting the camel's nose under the tent flap. We must expect that it is just an opening move.

What we must not do is just sit and wait.

We must pray, yes.

But we must, as in any great struggle, and this is a great struggle, work as if it were all on our shoulders while praying as if it all depends upon God.

We have the right as faithful Catholics to respectfully plead our case to the authorities.

And we must do so.

Useful addresses include the following:

His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI
Palazzo Apostolico
Via del Pellegrino
00120 Città del Vaticano

His Eminence Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone
Segretetia di Stato
Palazzo Apostolico
00120 Città del Vaticano

His Eminence Cardinal William J. Levada.
Congregazione per la Dottrina della Fede
Piazza del S. Uffizio 11
00l20 Città dek Vaticano

Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei"
Piazza del S. Uffizio 11
00l20 Città del Vaticano

His Excellency The Most Reverend Pietro Sambi
Apostolic Nuncio to the United States
3339 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20008-3687

Anonymous said...

This would all but end the SSPX reconciliation plan for Rome. Lets hope this ain't so, it would be a giant step backwards especially for the Dominicans which have many priests which would like to return to the Old Dominican Rite.

Anonymous said...

I spent the better part of the afternoon reading the Grand Jury Report of the Philadelphia District Attorney regarding the unfolding sex scandal within the Philadelphia Archdiocese.

http://www.phila.gov/districtattorney/PDFs/clergyAbuse2-finalReport.pdf

You simply have to read this to believe it! There is no way I could attempt a paraphrase that would do it justice. The report is long, but do yourself a favor and read it. It will shake you to the core! And keep in mind while you are reading it, that this is the type of leadership we are dealing with when asking for SP clarification – Philly is not an isolated case!

After reading this report I have become absolutely convinced that the sex scandal and the suppression of the TLM are connected. I’m not going to waste the ink here, but it would not be hard to demonstrate this evil, which permeates the Philadelphia Archdiocese, goes the whole way to the Vatican.

The past few days I have been fired up about the SP “clarification” and thinking what I am going to do about it (i.e. write a letter and etc.). After reading this report I’ve decided to do nothing. To think these are the types of people we are begging for the TLM?!?!

Given what I read about the leadership (in the DA’s report) of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, I have a crystal clear understanding of why senior Roman Catholic leadership (i.e. at least 2 cardinals in Philly, not to mention those in the Vatican) hate the TLM and everything associated with it. They stand convicted with any reminders of the Faith (I was going to say “traditional Faith”, but is there any other?).

The Church has one hell (in a literal sense) of a mess on its hands. Even if most diocesan priests were to start saying the TLM, I doubt I’d want to be around them after reading that Philadelphia is now investigating 37 more priests – and they are only doing this because this whole blowout happened. Of course, having all these priests start saying the TLM might cause an interior conversion for them – God knows that the Novus Ordo isn’t working for them! The TLM sounds like a good place to start rehab to me!

I am reminded of Psalm 145 “...[2]put not your trust in princes: [3] In the children of men, in whom there is no salvation.” Only an act of God is going to get the Church out of this mess, not letters from the faithful.

This morning I was entertaining the idea of writing a letter for a “good” SP clarification. After reading the Philly DA’s report, I could now care less what the “clarification” says because in the end SP really involves diocesan priests. While I know there are some good ones (I have no idea how they can continue to exist within the evil dioceses), I don’t have the time or energy to play these games with hell incarnate.

I’m just going to wait and see what happens and not get excited one way or the other.

Long-Skirts said...

AMBIGUITY

One day Assisi
The next day Latin
One day The Way
Some use a paten.

Some let ministers
Eucharistic-chick
Hand out Our Lord
So you can have your pick.

Sometimes bongos
Assembly on their feet
Holding hands in the air
Kneelers obsolete.

One Holy Catholic
Apostolic Church?
Good for some let others run
In circles as they search.

For we are all approved
Don't ever rock the boat --
Like those who open schools have classes
Teaching souls to float.

Saintly Thomas More
Could’ve had it all
Private Latin Masses
Behind a purpled wall.

But no he chose the scaffold
Where truth and lie collide

Heads were cut --

Entrails gut -

Ambiguity couldn’t hide!

Christopher J. Paulitz said...

Long skirts -- awesome!

Anonymous said...

Henry:

You are talking through your hat. You need to come out of the sunshine and have a look at the facts on your computer. It is very rare for priests simply to proceed with Latin Masses. I am in direct contact with several around the world who ae AFRAID to offer Latin Masses even sine populo on weekdays--so they don't.

It is the numbers that tell the tale, whether you like it or not. The numbers of added T.L.M.s has dropped to a trickle since the summer of 2008. I know because I keep the figures. Also, S.P. was only really effective in Germany, the U.S.A., England and New Zealand; and less so in a few other places, like Ireland. It has had very little effect at all in most countries. In France, since the cancelleation in Angouleme, there is a net change of zero dioceses having every-Sunday Latin Masses since 2007. The Canadian bishops--my bishops--open defy the Pope on the m.p. He should start deposing them but he will not. The m.p. helped in Latin American in 2007 and 2008 but not since then very much at all: not in 2009 or 2010. It's like swimming backwards.

The S.P. did make a difference for its first eleven months. I've said that repeatedly. But it has made very little difference since them. We need a clarification that can move us forward. But if we get restriction instead, things will likely continue as they are; they won't likely worsen.

Those are the facts. Of course I will be very disappointed if the liberals manage to sabotage the m.p. but I think it a setback, not a diaster. I wish letters could help this late in the game but I think that prayer would be more effective right now. Benedict XVI knows exactly what he's facing and will turn to our Lady before signing anything.

P.K.T.P.

Christopher J. Paulitz said...

PKTP, your most recent explanation is drastically different than your first when you called the MP a dead letter. I can agree with much of what you just wrote.

Mar said...

I have found the following hymn to be helpful in times like these, esp. 6,7,8. Yes, I know the words were written by an Anglican. :)

1. For all the saints, who from their labours rest,
Who Thee by faith before the world confessed,
Thy Name, O Jesus, be forever blessed.
Alleluia, Alleluia!
2. Thou wast their Rock, their Fortress and their Might;
Thou, Lord, their Captain in the well fought fight;
Thou, in the darkness drear, their one true Light.
Alleluia, Alleluia!
3. For the Apostles’ glorious company,
Who bearing forth the Cross o’er land and sea,
Shook all the mighty world, we sing to Thee:
Alleluia, Alleluia!
4. For the Evangelists, by whose blest word,
Like fourfold streams, the garden of the Lord,
Is fair and fruitful, be Thy Name adored.
Alleluia, Alleluia!
5. For Martyrs, who with rapture kindled eye,
Saw the bright crown descending from the sky,
And seeing, grasped it, Thee we glorify.
Alleluia, Alleluia!
6. O blest communion, fellowship divine!
We feebly struggle, they in glory shine;
All are one in Thee, for all are Thine.
Alleluia, Alleluia!
7. O may Thy soldiers, faithful, true and bold,
Fight as the saints who nobly fought of old,
And win with them the victor’s crown of gold.
Alleluia, Alleluia!
8. And when the strife is fierce, the warfare long,
Steals on the ear the distant triumph song,
And hearts are brave, again, and arms are strong.
Alleluia, Alleluia!
9. The golden evening brightens in the west;
Soon, soon to faithful warriors comes their rest;
Sweet is the calm of paradise the blessed.
Alleluia, Alleluia!
10. But lo! there breaks a yet more glorious day;
The saints triumphant rise in bright array;
The King of glory passes on His way.
Alleluia, Alleluia!
11. From earth’s wide bounds, from ocean’s farthest coast,
Through gates of pearl streams in the countless host,
And singing to Father, Son and Holy Ghost:
Alleluia, Alleluia!

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Paulitz:

I wrote that S.P. HAS BECOME a dead letter, not that it was from its inception. Also, the situation in Arlington, which is an anomaly, by the way, did have somethign to do with a change in bishops in that see, even if there was a delayed reaction.

It is true that dioceses which ALREADY HAVE T.L.M.s every Sunday are slowly getting more under S.P.--as they did under Ecclesia Dei. The problem is entirely with those dioceses which do not have even one one on the every-Sunday basis. The P.C.E.D. is going after the rebellious bishops of those sees one by one but they resist to the last and it is taking forever to pursue them. Thirty bishops in the U.S.A. fall into this category; in Canada, most do; in France, there is simply no progess in terms of new dioceses having their first every-Sunday Masses (about fifteen bishops hold out and have held out successfully since 2007). The vast majority of Italian bishops have kept the m.p. right out of their sees--on ANY basis.

The m.p. worked for a while but has stopped working long ago. What is needed in the coming clarification is a fortification through interpreting Article 1. None of the minutiæ in the later Articles matters much by now. It is Article 1 that counts. What is the legal meaning of this clause?:

the T.L.M. "must be honoured for its venerable and ancient usage".

I am sorry but that is NOT the mild platitude it seems to be. Not a chance. It is a time bomb. It has a canonical meaning and I'd like to know what it is. To whom is the clause addressed? I argue that it is addressed to EACH diocesan bishop and that it applies equally to every diocese. How can the ancient Roman Mass be honoured if it is not offered? Interesting question. How often must it be offered, even when nobody requests it? Interesting question. I have argued that, when read with certain other laws, it means taht, as a norm at law, the T.L.M. must be offered *at least* (not at most) once every Sunday in every diocese in the world. Of course, it will take much time to achieve this, given limited resources, so the Holy See might have to use its universal authority to 'help' the process. Dear Bishop, I weep for you, for you have been unable to offer this Mass. Therefore, I send you a priest from the F.S.S.P.--Your Papa, Benedict XVI.

It could very well be that the reported restrictions are indeed true but are a distraction from something good and something far more wonderful. Remember that Benedict the Sixteenth (and not just 'Benedict') knows that he must deal with the bastards in the French episcopate and the cry-baby liberals in the Italian episcopate. He must give them a bone to gnaw on while they weep quietly in the corner. If the coming clarification is mainly good, they will want to sell it as restrictive to get it past the liberal bishops. Old trick.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Prof. Basto:

I agree that S.P. has been a wonderful gift but its effect is now almost gone. In Italy, there are well over 200 dioceses. How many of them have EVEN ONE every-Sunday T.L.M.


Regarding my last post, I admit that I was thinking as I was typing. I didn't realise what this MIGHT be until then. It may very well be a 'preparation' for a largely good clarification. Bloggers: be ready for this. Read the clarification intelligently when it comes. There is indeed a good chance that it will include a bone--a distraction--to keep the embattled liberals happy, or at least from weeping too much.

Again, my fingers are waiting on comment on Rome's interpretation of Article 1, if there is to be one. If he gives that "honour" real teeth in required numbers of Masses per diocese, it will be a dream come true regardless of what is not said about the almost-defunct Mozarabic Rite.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Dear Kathleen:

Aside from split infinitives and using impact as a verb, what is the real effect in Lugano?

In the early 1990s, it had an every-Sunday T.L.M. very briefly, like a candle just lit and then put out immedatiely. This was not an Ambrosian Rite Mass but the 1962 Roman Mass.

Very recently, it finally gained an every-Sunday 1962 Mass (perhaps four years ago). Then, last year, this was cancelled. It was replaced by a Latin Mass (perhaps Ambrosian) which is only offered on some Sundays. Poor Lugano has never had much and what you don't have cant' be taken away. I wish it were otherwise. I watch the situation in Lugano often and pray much for the traditionalists there. I believe that they also used to have Vespers every Saturday.

The Ambrosian Rite can be offered at Lugano but so can the 1962 Roman Mass. So, if the Ambrosian Mass is cut out of this m.p., they could still ask for the Latin Mass we all have--or wish we had.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

PKTP

Do the Anglicans such as TAC face this much opposition? I wonder if the bishops opposed to the TLM would oppose The English Missal also?

Greg in Arlington diocese

Anonymous said...

Mr. Quinn:

This will have no effect on the Anglican ordinariates. They can help us a bit in the old countries of the British Empire but will not be present in continential Europe or Latin American (yes, I know, with some tiny exceptions).

So, you see, the U.S.A. actually gains by having been part of the Empire! Too bad they left. I guess we can forgive them even if they cannot pronounce words such as out, about, and lout, the last of which is useful when referring to liberal bishops.

P.K.T.P.
Member, Monachist League of Canada

Anonymous said...

Has the question ever been resolved if a member of a secular (third) order can recite the traditional breviary to fulfill their obligation?

Bill M said...

Looking like SSPX is right after all.
I'll wait this one out by praying and writing letters. God's will be done

Anonymous said...

Dear Greg in Arlington:

The liberal bishops don't like the TAC people one bit but they have to deal with them in the new ordinariates. It saddens me to see the naïvété over on the Anglo-Catholic blog. The moderators and powers-that-be over there are good people and will make excellent Catholics. However, they have no idea what they are facing in the bishops' conferences. They think that the Catholic bishops love them and want to come out and play in the sunshine. That is why so many of the incomers are looking more and more like neo-conservatives and NOT like real traditionalists. They think that, if they become neo-cons, sort of Anglican copies of Fr. Fessio or even worse, all will be well. How totally wrong they are. Their best friends are Latin Mass traditionalists but they don't realise this yet and they will have to learn it the hard way. Many of the TACers are hesitant about coming too close to marginalised Latin traditionalsts: it is our liberal bishop who control the sacred places to which the incomers will need to repair for Mass in many places.

Our bishops are passionately in love with womanpriest but cannot say so openly. They are also passionately in love with Canterbury and that heretic, Rowan Williams the Druid. They regard the incoming TAC as members of a 'fascist fringe', a sort of politically incorrect abomination. But our bishops cannot show their true colours on this because Benedict XVI likes the TAC and he rather likes men such as the very civilised Bishops Mercer and Wilkinson. So our bishops have to bite their tongues and bide their time. They will smile to the new personal ordinaries but then manœuvre to keep them marginalised by offering them few good venues for their Masses, and at poor times. The Canterburians will applaud quietly in the background and thank our bishops warmly. Long live œcumenism!

As for all the liberal clerics, they are smiling villains who oil themselves across the 'stage' every Sunday in their hideous sauna suits. A pox on the lot of them.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Dear Greg in Arlington:

The liberal bishops don't like the TAC people one bit but they have to deal with them in the new ordinariates. It saddens me to see the naïvété over on the Anglo-Catholic blog. The moderators and powers-that-be over there are good people and will make excellent Catholics. However, they have no idea what they are facing in the bishops' conferences. They think that the Catholic bishops love them and want to come out and play in the sunshine. That is why so many of the incomers are looking more and more like neo-conservatives and NOT like real traditionalists. They think that, if they become neo-cons, sort of Anglican copies of Fr. Fessio or even worse, all will be well. How totally wrong they are. Their best friends are Latin Mass traditionalists but they don't realise this yet and they will have to learn it the hard way. Many of the TACers are hesitant about coming too close to marginalised Latin traditionalsts: it is our liberal bishop who control the sacred places to which the incomers will need to repair for Mass in many places.

Our bishops are passionately in love with womanpriest but cannot say so openly. They are also passionately in love with Canterbury and that heretic, Rowan Williams the Druid. They regard the incoming TAC as members of a 'fascist fringe', a sort of politically incorrect abomination. But our bishops cannot show their true colours on this because Benedict XVI likes the TAC and he rather likes men such as the very civilised Bishops Mercer and Wilkinson. So our bishops have to bite their tongues and bide their time. They will smile to the new personal ordinaries but then manœuvre to keep them marginalised by offering them few good venues for their Masses, and at poor times. The Canterburians will applaud quietly in the background and thank our bishops warmly. Long live œcumenism!

As for all the liberal clerics, they are smiling villains who oil themselves across the 'stage' every Sunday in their hideous sauna suits. A pox on the lot of them.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Another anonymous posted this on an earlier post and I thought I would take the liberty to repost it here.
I think is a good idea.

Let us defend Summorum Pontificum against the Trojan Horse:

"for those who may be in the know, do e-mails actually make a difference - it's not like we're contacting our senators here?

Or another idea, perhaps it would be better to make appeals to FSSP and the SSPX superiors to make a public statement or outcry -- God knows that they have a better chance of being heard.

18 February, 2011 02:32"

Anonymous said...

Dear Bill M.:

If Rome slaps down the loyal traditionalists in this coming clarification, to paraphrase Obi Wan Kenobi, the S.S.P.X will become more powerful than the Pope can possibly imagine. The S.S.P.X is like a control value: it keeps Rome on track.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Dear Anon. 2.32:

The F.S.S.P. are too cowed by now to make any outcries about anything. As for the S.S.P.X, it can only gain if the Pope slaps down the regularised traditionalists.

I am more amd more wondering what the purpose of these leaks might be. This Pope knows how to keep things quiet because he is a German, and Germans and Englishmen know how to keep secrets, whereas Frenchmen and Italians (God bless them) find that to be impossible. So the leak is deliberate.

One possibility is that Rome is trying to get us all to react with horror so that the liberals will figure that the clarification is a bad thing for us. In all likelikhood, there will be at least one consolation prize in the clarification for the cry-baby Italian bishops and the nastier and more vicious French prelates. Remember that even S.P. had a consolation prize for the liberals. It was the clause saying that the lections at a Latin Mass may be delivered entirely in the vernacular tongues. Few celebrants dared try doing it and so it had little effect. But why, then, is it there?

I'd want to read the m.p. before passing judgement on it because, sometimes, negative things can be inserted merely to keep the liberals from rebelling. We need to see what the overall effect is.

P.K.T.P.

benedictambrose said...

In re the motu proprio appeal - thank you! It's beautifully crafted. I have signed and distributed.

--Benedict Ambrose

Mona said...

Yep, as said above: The Pope is a Liberal. I pray for him, and pray for full Restoration of Holy Mother Church.
This ambiguity trend in all things Vatican II and its aftermath, is the old, "frog in th water" story, which is the gradual conditioning of the souls to death unnoticed.
S.P. was just another tactic to absorb those who wish more than one TLM per week (or month)(or less) to become assimilated back into the novus ordo "celebration, sacraments, and newspeak" which is the increasing;y warm water slowly killing the soul.
Pope Pius X, ora pro nobis.
Queen of The Most Holy Rosary, ora pro nobis.

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure how the exclusion of other pre-conciliar Missals will affect lay traditionalists. No matter where you live, including Milan, you can presumaby be part of a parish group which petitions for a 1962 Latin Mass. Also, most priests, including religious, can presumably have the freedom to use the 1962 Latin Missal, regardless of their right to use the pre-conciliar Carmelite one.

In the case of religious uses, a right to use one would presumably depend on that use's status. For example, the Norbertine Rite was never abrogated but only discontinued in general. The m.p. nowhere restricts the uses of these other Missals: it merely neglects to comment on them. They might be available in future to the extent that they have been in the recent past.

Adherents to the Ambrosian Rite might be disappointed because laics are attached to this Rite, not only members of religious institutes. So they cannot cite Article 5 of S.P. to get a new Ambrosian Mass in some parish church at Milan. True enough but if their Mass was also never abrogated, they may have a right of access to it by recourse to other laws.

I don't want to dismiss N.C.'s worries too easily, however. There is some cause for concern, again in regard to religious. Can the Trappists of Aachen, for example, use the m.p. to return to their pre-conciliar liturgy? They might have to use parallel means. But S.P. could still affect them (positively) indirectly. Why? Because if the 1962 Mass was never abrogated, then it becomes questionable if their pre-conciliar Mass proper to their institute was ever abrogated.

I suppose that some religious could use S.P. to return not to a pre-conciliar religious Use but simply to the 1962 Roman Missal. This would apply especially to those who never had a special use for their institute.

P.K.T.P.

Long-Skirts said...

Mona said:

"Vatican II and its aftermath, is the old, "frog in the water" story, which is the gradual conditioning of the souls to death unnoticed."

Sadly, Mona, you are so right!! Today there are none so blind!!!

LEAP SHEEP

Litto froggy cross da pond
Hope some fairy's got a wand
Hit you hard up-side yo head
Shed some light...yo brains is bread.
You ain't got sense, no nuffin'
Brains is made of bran-flake muffin.
Wolfy-sheep done called you near
Ups you hopped, ran like a deer.
Him brother froggies followed too
And jumped right in wolf-sheepy's stew.
Then there you be all puffed with pride
And one by one them froggies died.
Then wolfy-sheep, he called,"My sons?"
And wolfy-sheep, his meal all dones,
Says, "Litto frog get outa' hea'.
Tomorrow bring yo sistas dea'."
And litto frog, he hop away
'Cause litto frog, he do obey.
And litto froggy hopped, hopped, hop,
Tumbled, tripped into Frog Pop.
And froggy Pop asked, "What you say?"
Said litto frog, "I do obey,
And all my litto brothers, too,
They helped the wolf make sheepy stew.
"Then froggy Pop, him hung him head,
And took him son away and led
Him hoppin' down the woodsy lane
And put in froggy's hand his cane
All shiney white to help him see...
...nuffin'.

Anonymous said...

03:32 Secular Third Order,
Of course you can fulfill your obligation with the old breviary. Of this there is no question. It is our birth right. The old liturgy comes with the TLM, it is our heritage, live it, love it.

I am assuming 'old breviary' to mean that which was in place before V2. In other words you want to drop the wretched Liturgy of Hours for the 1962 Breviary. Go for it.

If you mean the Breviary of Saint Pius the Tenth, certainly you can say it in private.

Jerry, TOSF