Rorate Caeli

Don Nicola Bux on the Instruction and the Reform of the Reform

Relevant excerpt of an interview granted by Monsignor Nicola Bux, consultant to the Office of Liturgical celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff, to Italian daily Avanti, and published today:
At what point is the "reform of the reform" desired by Benedict XVI?

With this expression, which Ratzinger used when he still was the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, he meant that the reform that took place after the Council had to be resumed, and in some ways corrected there where, always using his words, the restoration of the painting had been too much, that is, by trying to clean, it had taken the risk of removing too many layers of color. He started this restoration through his own style. The Pope celebrates the liturgy in a subdued, not loud, way. He also wants the prayers, songs, and anything else not to be in exhibitionist tones. And two special actions in his liturgies that are obvious should be noticed: he places the Cross between himself and the assembly, indicating that the liturgical rite is not addressed to the priestly minister, but to Christ; and kneeling in the reception of Communion, indicating that this is not a supper, in the worldly sense of the word, but a communion with the body of Jesus Christ, that is worshiped first, in the words of St. Augustine, and only then eaten.

How many obstacles is the Motu proprio Summorum Pontificum on the pre-Conciliar Mass facing?

I believe that, currently, the obstacles are becoming feebler than at the time in which the Motu proprio was issued, in 2007. Through the internet, one can see how there is a discreet movement of young people who look for and, as much as it is possible, go to the Traditional Mass, also called the Latin Mass or Mass of All Time. And this, I believe, is a very important sign to gather.

It is clear that the pastors of the Church, first the bishops and then the parish priests, although often saying that we must be able to grasp the signs of the times, an expression very much in use after Vatican II, often fail to understand that the signs of the times are not defined by them, but they happen and are regulated mainly by young people. I think this is the most interesting symptom, because, if [only] the elderly, the adults, went to the Traditional Mass, one might harbor a suspicion that it is nostalgia. The fact that it is mostly young people who seek and participate in the Latin Mass is completely unexpected and therefore deserves to be read, understood, and particularly accompanied by the bishops.

I think the Pope acknowledges this and that is why he intends to make a further contribution through an instruction on the application of the motu proprio, to help everyone understand that, in addition to the new form of the Roman Rite, there is the ancient or extraordinary form.
[Tip and text: Papa Ratzinger Blog]

53 comments:

New Catholic said...

With all consideration I have for Mons. Bux, I believe he is slightly mistaken in his evaluation of the application of the motu proprio, at least when he considers that obstacles now are feebler. It would seem that the opposite is true: there were enormous advances in the first year of Summorum, but, in most of those places in which there was an unwilling ordinary or clergy, the situation has hardened against those who favor the Traditional Mass.

This is a general assessment, not an opinion of what happened to all groups in all places.

NC

Anonymous said...

The last paragraph is encouraging!

Giovanni A. Cattaneo said...

I tend to disagree with New Catholic. I actually do what he means by feebler attempts at holding it back. I can def see a shift as more Bishops begin to celebrate the Latin Mass and churches begin to turn back to being proper spaces for the Roman rite.

Also but most importantly more and more people in the pews are becoming aware that there is a choice now. Its as Father Z describes it very much a gravitational pull as TLM goes so does the NO liturgy.

Anonymous said...

When Monsignor Bux says that "the obstacles are becoming feebler than at the time in which the Motu proprio was issued, in 2007," I take him to mean that they are weaker now than before the Motu Proprio--for SP was not yet in force at the time when it was issued. And it cannot be denied that "Ecclesia Dei" put more obstacles in the way of the TLM than does "Summorum Pontificum."
Denis

wheat4paradise said...

Resistance to the Old Mass is from old, liberal bishops, whose time is passing away. The future is with young Catholics who, as Mons. Bux observes, are drawn to the reverence and beauty of the Old Mass.

Paul Haley said...

The concept that Summorum Pontificum is for those "who favor the Traditional Mass" must be changed for it is not the "smells and bells" that are important but what the Mass signifies - i.e., the unbloody sacrifice of Our Lord on Calvary - re-enacted by Our Lord through the actions of the priest on the Altar. Notice I said by Our Lord on the Altar, not "table". Until and unless the Holy See realizes that this concept has been ignored by vast majority of Catholics (sic) in the world, we have achieved nothing in terms of a true reform. My opinion for what it's worth.

Anonymous said...

I both agree and disagree with New Catholic. On the one hand, while the implementation of the MP is good in some places, there are indeed others and bishops where the opposition is no feebler.

On the other hand, I know some of those very places where there is little or no encouragement from bishop and pastors, but still there are plenty of faithful young priests going ahead and learning and celebrating the TLM.

As Fr. Bux suggests, the effect of current pastors and bishops is a temporary hangover from the (and their) past. The young priests and people will determine the future, Deo gratias.

M. A. said...

It is still extremely difficult to get the old Mass into the typical, local parish, and the fight will not get any easier. It certainly would make things a little easier were the Holy Father to offer the TLM himself.

We also need more trad priests. There are not enough around to even meet the current needs.

But the tide definitely has turned. Those old liberals should be alarmed.

Father G said...

"the effect of current pastors and bishops is a temporary hangover from the (and their) past. The young priests and people will determine the future, Deo gratias."

Exactly! This is what many bishops and older priests are terrified of...they see their world crumbling around them and there is nothing they can do about it.

benjoyce said...

What I see happening since about WWII and on, is a manifestation of the 3rd secret of Fatima, "apostasy from the top".

The Church failed to defend it's Dogma concerning how to be saved; "Outside the Church there is no salvation". The Dogma, like the ancient liturgy ended up being shelved. Ted Kennedy, in recent memoirs, boasts that a change in Church theology was influenced by his brother Robert, who, after an incident with Fr. Feeney and at the bequest of his father, Joe Sr., visited Archbishop Cushing. The persecution of Fr. Feeney ensued. Robert Kennedy had just been tossed out of St. Benedict's Center by Fr. Feeney for "backtalk" to a priest. Robert had demanded that heretics can go to heaven. Can "pro choice" people too and homosexuals committing sodomy? This persecution was a clarion call for liberalism to flourish, the signal for a council and its interpretation to institute mistakes.

What is needed for solid liturgy is faith. After WWII faith had dwindled and worldly prelates and laity found no attachment to great liturgy but prefered to have their ears tickled with bad liturgy, music, catechesis and sermons.

It's too bad that most of the traditional movement ignores apparitions of the Mother of God, post 1960, because the faith is coming back as a result and as the faith comes back, great liturgy will be demanded. Hence, the ancient Latin Mass, which in God's Providence was protected by being "shelved" by the Church after WWII (about 1965) will come screaming back by popular demand by the young, "who want the real thing". What will be shelved is the N.O., where transient whims were incorporated by an Ad hoc committee, who had a freemason as its head and six heretics as advisors.

Anil Wang said...

I'll have to agree that the obsticles are feebler. Back in 2007:
1 there were far more liberal cardinals and fewer conservative cardinals
2 a blind eye was placed on gross liturgical abuses like clown masses and liturgical dances
3 the rules for dealing with sex abuses and women "priests" were made stricker
4 there was no Anglican Ordinariate
5 TLM was sparsely implemented
6 The Russian Orthodox Patriarch did not yet say that since liturgy is taken seriously, there is now room for Ecumenical discussion. SSPX also progressed on those grounds.
7 there was no new Roman Missal.

Liberals lost the first 5 battles. While TLM is still less used than Eastern Catholic rites, it is now more likely that no matter where you live, you can find a TLM within driving distance.

Point 6 raises the stakes on the liturgy

Point 7 is the new battle ground for liberals and all indications are that they will ultimately fail here too despite their protests.

Liberals know the momentum is against them. We need to press forward while the momentum is on our side. At some point, the liberals will either give up, or go to "greener pastures" in the Anglican Communion, or accept the changes until the next Pope when they hope to regain the momentum. If the next Pope is like this one, the battle will be won.

Anonymous said...

Father G said: "Exactly! This is what many bishops and older priests are terrified of...they see their world crumbling around them and there is nothing they can do about it."

I have no sympathy for them. They destroyed our world in the sixties. Countless souls walked away from the Church never to return or, if they did, not to the Catholic Church but to some protestant sect.

Let their world crumble. Let them cry their crocodile tears. Let them walk around like the walking wounded playing the victim act.

Requiscat in pace!

Delphina

Mona said...

There is a running thread here:
The Liberal Clergy is indeed dying off - yet, be not fooled! It took a couple of centuries or more for them to finally get this far, and their successors will not give up. The liberals who want to bury The Ancient Mass and Faith will always be with us, and we must pray and be vigilant as The Church Militant.

Cruise the Groove. said...

Well from my own experience and I can only speak for my own experience, it seems that though there a number of bishops who put obstacles in the way of priests offering the TLM, there are also a number of bishops who don't put obstacles in priests way.

The problem with this latter situation is that though bishops do not actively hinder SP, there are many many priests who, for whatever reasons, do not want to learn the TLM.

For instance in one particular diocese I know of there are four priests who offer the TLM on any regular basis, this in a diocese of aprox. 200 priests, and the situation has been like this since 2007.
So what apparently is needed, in many dioceses, is not for the bishops to change, but for priests to change. Else many of the faithful who are attached to the TLM will have no recourse but to assist at FSSPX Mass's in many cases.
I am praying that the coming clarification mandates that there be at least one TLM in every parish by 2012.

Anonymous said...

I tend to agree with New Catholic here.

While there can be no dispute that in dioceses where bishops had a desire to obey the Holy Father the noose was loosened from the TLM, the bishops who are either outrightly disobedient or those who are just not eager to jump on the TLM bandwagon have become more creative at maintaining the pre-2007 status quo and in some cases worsen it.

Within the archdiocese of Toronto for example we have seen the following:

1. Discussions to provide the FSSP a dedicated parish collapsed completely;
2. One of the couple of priests offering the TLM was actually kicked out of the parish he was offering it in.
3. NO priests are promoting the NO Mass more aggressively. I saw a NO Mass seminar being offered to promote love of the NO Mass believe it or not in a fairly traditional parish.
4. There is absolutely no movement whatsoever towards teaching the TLM in Toronto seminaries, as far as I have heard. If someone has heard any different, I would love to be wrong on this point.

Ultimately, there are less TLMs offered in Toronto today than there were in June 2007.

If there was one gain however that cannot be denied even in Toronto it is that conservative NO priests will no longer automatically frown at the word that a TLM exists in a parish because they have accepted that "the option" is "legit". This is directly as a result of Pope Benedict's SP itself since the "conservative" priests still believe in obeying the Pope.

Neophyte

Traditional Catholic said...

In Light of the World, the Pope made it clear that his mandate of kneeling for communion was a personal wish, to let people know that "something special" is happening. He did say he was not going to mandate it for the universal Church. This makes me wonder how sincere he really is about the reform.

Anonymous said...

"...there is a discreet movement of young people who look for and, as much as it is possible, go to the Traditional Mass.

"The fact that it is mostly young people who seek and participate in the Latin Mass..."

Then the TLM should be offered at the World Youth Day gathering."

Tim

Anonymous said...

Msgr. Bux writes this:

"I believe that, currently, the obstacles are becoming feebler than at the time in which the Motu proprio was issued, in 2007."


If the good Monsignor would change the adjective "feebler" to , I could agree with him. Shortly after issuance of the m.p., various bishops tried differing tactics to restrict the application of the motu proprio. The P.C.E.D. responded to these one by one in favour of the ancient Mass and, indeed, the bishops have reacted to such clarifications by abandoning said tactics. But their opposition did not weaken; rather, the number of their tactics decreased from several (e.g. trying to make celebrants write Latin exams, restricting the meaning of 'cœtus', trying to interfere with our calendar re holydays of obligation) to just one. But that one tactic is not feebler but stronger. Today, they simply tell Latin Mass supporters that they lack the manpower and resources to offer our Mass. Meanwhile, they threaten potential celebrants of our Mass: no parish for you! How would *you* like to be a hospice chaplain forever!

Msgr. Bux might have been deceived by the rather sanguine reports from Una Voce International. The truth is that the m.p. resulted in an impressive but also very brief surge of new regular celebrations of the ancent Mass. After a surge of about eleven months, a trickle of new regular celebrations has resumed. So something must be done or else the motu proprio is a dead duck and will be seen as a failed project of His Holiness.

I like Msgr. Bux's new expression: An 'Instruction' may be better than a 'clarification' written by liberals in the curia.

P.K.T.P.

François said...

Awake, Catholic Brethren! SP is both opportunity and trap. Remote dioceses like mine have not even advertised SP- just put up a local version of Reform of the Reform, scheduled at 7.00 am sunday morning in remote corner of our island. Reform of the Reform! How can you buy such aberration? Blessed are those indeed 'within driving distances of TLM's'. And furthermore SP chains us to 1962, that impoverished twin of the Tridentine Missal, despoiled by the 1950's reforms.

Admittedly, though, the Reform of the Reform crowd and discourse are more dangerous. Montini with bells, smoke and maniple? No thanks. Give me dry martini anytime. NLM is a great champion thereof as i can see. One would really need a camberwell carrot to cope with it.


How can people take in such easy, cheap and £$:&^<< slogans as 'brick by brick', 'step by step', 'say the black, do the red'. Amazing. I'd rather be a pomeranian peasant struggling to harvest oval potatoes than live in such times. Good night all! Curtain! Exeunt!

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Cattaneo:

I am sorry but your view is not broad enough. Yes, it is, of course, true that the number of Traditional Latin Masses around the world is continuing to increase, as it did under the m.p. of John Paul II. But this increase is coming at a snail's pace, and not much faster than it did between 1995 and 2007.

Each diocese is the local section of God's people, in which and from which the Church exists. So the principal gauge for implementation of the m.p. is the diocese. What is mainly needed is not more Latin Masses in sees where they already exist but more sees having Latin Masses. The French hold-out bishops have defied the Pope almost totally. Since the m.p. was published, only ONE French Diocese gained every-Sunday Latin Masses (viz. Bayonne). But one has recently lost its Masses (Angoulême) for a net change of zero.

From 2007 to 2008, there was an important increase in numbers of sees having our Mass every Sunday but only in these few countries and then not since that time: the U.S.A., England, Germany, New Zealand. There have been more modest improvements in Ireland, Belgium and a few other countries.

Let's look at some facts, if you please. In the U.S.A., fully 25 dioceses have no every-Sunday T.L.M. to this day. In Mexico, only four or five dioceses in the entire country have our Mass on any basis at all. There is not even one T.L.M. every Sunday in all of Venezuela, Central America (all seven countries), the Caribbean (countless countries), Bolivia, Uruguay, the Guianas and so forth. In most Latin American countries, there is only one or two for the entire country (Peru, Ecuador, Argentina, Chile, Colomiba, &c.). This is the very heart of the Catholic Church! 46% of all faithful live in Latin America--almost half! Where are their Masses? Are they second-class Catholics?

Only one T.L.M. diocese (Fatima, not Lisbon) in all of Portugal. Zero for Catholic Malta. Two thirds of Polish sees don't have our Mass on any basis. Three-quarters of Irish sees don't have them every Sunday. Far more than three-quarters of Italian sees have NO Latin Masses. At least four-fifths of dioceses in the Philippines have no Latin Masses. Two-thirds of dioceses in Australia have no Latin Masses. I could go on and on. Need I? Last time I checked, the Philippines, Latin America, Portugal, Poland, Hungary, Slovenia, ITALY, Croatia, were supposed to be Catholic, no? What about Spain, with perhaps one-third of the dioceses having our Mass, or probably only one-quarter.

As for the Dominion of Canada, my own country? Four new sees got the T.L.M. after 2007. Since 2008, however, it was cancelled totally in one of them (Antigonish) and rolled back to one Sunday per month in the very central important Archdiocese of Winnipeg, ruled still by an old liberal (please retire early, Your Grace W.) We now have the T.L.M. every Sunday in 14 dioceses--14 out of 63. You do the math, my friend. 14/63 equals 22%. Mgr. Rivest of Chicoutimi has led the charge in defying His Holiness right to his face, and the other Canadian Bolshevik Bishops follow him.

Having a few more T.L.M.s in New Jersey (wherever that may be) or Arlington (never heard of it: in the U.S.A., I presume?) means little. We don't much need more where we already have them. We need them where we don't have them. Worldwide, we have every-Sunday T.L.M.s in about one-tenth of the dioceses. That's odd. The last time I checked, the soul of a Catholic in Indonesia or the Congo was worth as much to God as the soul of a Catholic in the U.S.A. or New Zealand. Or is this just a fiction? But even if it is a fiction, a very large per centage of dioceses in Western countries do not have our Mass. If that is success, I'd hate to see what failure looks like.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Dear Denis:

Thank you so much for pointing out that interpretation. Yes, if that is what he means, then he is correct, although a substantial change in episcopal obstruction only decreased for a single year from 2007 to 2008. But thank you for your incisive point.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Haley:

Well put. I suggest further that, from Article 1 of S.P., it can be inferred absolutely and without any equivocation that the T.L.M. is not only for those who are attached to it; rather, it is a treasure for tne entire Church.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Anil Wang makes mostly good points but writes this as well:


"Liberals lost the first 5 battles. While TLM is still less used than Eastern Catholic rites, it is now more likely that no matter where you live, you can find a TLM within driving distance."


Yes, more likely than it was before, but still not likelier than not. If you happen to live In Latin America, where nearly half of all faithful do live, it is likely that you will need to own your own jet to get to a T.L.M. on Sunday. If you live in Africa or Asia, you'll need to book a flight every week and you'll want extra pillows and a meal on board for the trip home.

P.K.T.P.

Louis E. said...

Neophyte,could the omission of the Archbishop of Toronto from the most recent consistory of new Cardinals have been a consequence of the lack of TLM-progress there?

Anonymous said...

"He started this restoration through his own style."

Is the Roman Liturgy is at the mercy of Papal style?

Tim

Cruise the Groove. said...

So I guess its pretty apparent SP has had made next to squat an imprssion on the Catholic world,
without concrete mandates.
Which Popes don't like to do these days.

thomas tucker said...

Trad Cath- the Holy Father is wise not to mandate kneeling. It would not help matters for him to mandate something that many, if not most, people would then ignore. Sad, but that's reality, and his influence is actually stronger in leading by example and recommendation than by issuing mandates.

Cruise the Groove. said...

"...and his influence is actually stronger in leading by example and recommendation than by issuing mandates."

thomas tucker,

That is why you so many Catholics recieving the Blessed Sacrament kneeling and on the tongue these days at NO Masses.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Tucker:

Not many are following the Pope's example, and some of those who are get persecuted or expelled.

The way to mandate kneeling is to restore Altar rails and instruct the faithful from the pulpit to kneel at the rails. It can be done: where there's a will, there is a way. Believe it or not!

But in my church, a good priest wanted to emulate the Pope and face a cross during the Mass. Teh problem is that he is using one of those spooky crosses with a corpus on each side so that the people are also facing the corpus. It looks really bizarre, as if there are two Christs. A better way would be to have a bare cross face the people and the corpus face the priest and then to have the corpus on the processional cross face the people during Mass. How fortunate we needn't worry about that in our T.L.M.s!

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Louis E.:

No, he was just too far down on the list to get the red hat that fast. He'll get one next time.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

"He started this restoration through his own style."

Is the Roman Liturgy at the mercy of Papal style?

Tim"

Nail gets hit on the head!

I'll add that arguing that "papal example" or "style" is going to turn around the liturgy is utterly naive, for the following simple reasons:

1) It assumes that the majority of Catholic clergy even care about what the Pope thinks or does

2) I can always say that I prefer the "style" of one Pope (say, John Paul II or Paul VI) to another (Benedict XVI for instance).

3) If something should be imitated simply because the Pope does it, then where would that leave us if a future Pope were to revert to a more liberal or creative way of "doing liturgy"?

4) Trying to revive a more "traditional" approach to the liturgy by making it a matter of "taste" or "style" runs counter to the very concept of what "tradition" is, or means

5) This Pope is on record as stating that the liturgy should stop being centered on the celebrant. Isn't it ironic, then, that he is trying to push his views of the liturgy (no matter how laudable) precisely by the force of HIS personal style or preference?

Pascal

Anil Wang said...

I'm shocked about TLM not being available in Latin America.

If you know Spanish, you can understand a great deal of the Latin mass without needing further instruction.

What's going on? Is it resistance from the Bishops? Priests? Or lack of interest from Priests? How reverent are NO masses in Latin America?

If Latin American NO masses are as reverent as they should be (I've seen some really good Ukrainian NO masses seem to have a heavy and positive Eastern Orthodox influence), I can understand the lack of interest, since the similarity between Spanish and Latin would actually work against TLM.

Or is it the opposite problem, that Protestants are making such great gains due to poor catechesis that Bishops and Priests think Protestantizing the mass is their only hope?

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Want:

Masses in Latin America are known for their gimmicks. A few years ago, at the Feast of the Ascension (no doubt translated to the wrong day, to a Sunday), a priest in Brazil ended his outdoors Mass--and his ministry as Parish Priest--by ascending into the Heavens with the help of a balloon. I'm not sure what his plan was but the balloon did not return to earth. It was soon covered by a pillar of cloud but I can't say if it was covered by a pillar of light in the evening.

Some days later, the balloon was found washed ashore--washed up, like the N.O. Liturgy itself. The celebrant obviously reached his goal and passed through the pearly gates, since his body was never recovered. He may be the only liberal in history to have entered into Heaven. Whether he'll be missed in Brazil is not known but we should, of course, always pray that all liberals go to Heaven as soon as possible.

While I doubt that the retired Cardinal Mahony could be induced to try the same method, one might invite him to share a cup of coffee out-of-doors and the table and chairs might happen to be sitting on a platform attached to balloons, and while this might not get him all the way to Heaven, it might transport him to an airport from which he could escape certain litigious pursuers. You never know.

As for my former Bishop, Remi De Rogue, I'd be inclined to hand him not the string gto a balloon but a line attached to a very fast motorboat. Then he would be more than wet behind the ears.

P.K.T.P.

Hugh said...

Anything the pope does for tradition is purely incidental to his main task of "reform of ther reform" which many misled neo-trads imagine is all about restoring what we have lost a la Pope St Pius X. Nothing could be further from the truth. The more this papacy continues the more it is evident, except to those who cannot see the reality for what it is, the pope is trying to reestablish the supremacy of the Novus Ordo. This is his desire and this is his objective. If some vestiges of tradition help him in this then he will use them. However, it is definitely not to reestablish the traditional order as many of you believe. He wants a new order that is at once postmodern but with a "living tradition". This has relatively little to do with what genuine traditionalists want & it certainly does not resemble anything in the mind of the saintly pope Pius X.

Louis E. said...

PKTP:
Arlington is just across the Potomac River from Washington DC...New Jersey is across the Hudson River from New Yotk and across the Delaware from Pennsylvania.

François said...

@Hugh

Hear! Hear!

1962 is not free from Bugninification but a lot more tolerable than 1970. Or whatever existed in the interim. We can only bewail the fact that Msgr Lefebvre officially opted for 1962 back in the 1980's-no doubt as a conciliatory move towards Rome. But what did Rome do? Yet, i've heard many SSPX priests retain certain pre-1962 practices.


But the real catch is indeed the 'Reform of the Reform'.

Anonymous said...

From Pascal

"It assumes that the majority of Catholic clergy even care about what the Pope thinks or does

"I can always say that I prefer the "style" of one Pope..."

"...then where would that leave us if a future Pope were to revert to a more liberal or creative way of "doing liturgy"?
-------------------------

Thank you. I agree with Pascal.

The notion (from Monsignor Bux) that the "reform of the reform" is rooted in Pope Benedict XVI's "own style" of liturgy compels me to believe that the crisis of the Roman Liturgy will continue well into the future.

During the past 40 or so years, the Roman Liturgy has been reduced to Pope Paul VI's "style...Pope John Paul II's "style"...Pope Benedict XVI's "style."

The "reform of the reform" — a bit of Latin, bit of Tradition, and a heaping of novelties — will leave us with little more than Novus Ordo II.

Yawn.

Let us simply return to the Traditional Roman Mass.

Tim

M. A. said...

"Or is it the opposite problem, that Protestants are making such great gains due to poor catechesis that Bishops and Priests think Protestantizing the mass is their only hope?"
________________

Anil,I believe you've put your finger on the problem. Pentecostalism is rampant throughout Latin America.

In our local parish (USA), a large group of Hispanic immigrants have their weekly prayer service of "praise and worship". Once, the blast of their boom-box when they turned on their CD of "praise" music almost gave me a heart attack. I kid you not.

Incidentally, I was not there to attend. I was there in an adjoining room to give a catechism lesson. One of the children did ask me if we could enter the church to attend the party!

I try, but it's like swimming upstream. That is why I welcome statements such as Monsignor Bux's. It's just a little bit of credible info I can pass on to my students. I know perfectly well about the Holy Father's desire for the "R of the R"; while not blind to that, I do welcome, for the sake of my students,what little bit of backup I can get.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Anonymous Canadian,

I am from New Jersey. And yes, having more TLMs in New Jersey does matter. Do you know why? Because we fought hard for them. Very, very hard for them. I have found many other places around the U.S. and around the world have an attitude of, "Oh, well, what can we do." New Jersey produces tough people and in this case, it pays off.

Anonymous said...

"He also wants the prayers, songs, and anything else not to be in exhibitionist tones."

How important this is!

For more than 10 years now, my family and I have been attending Mass at an Institute of Christ the King Church but things have gradually gotten out of hand. We have an excellent choir and a superb organist but therein lies the problem. The organist is not Catholic, so to him, the liturgy is simply an opportunity to "show off." There are two ladies who have excellent operatic voices, so they take turns giving "recitals" during Sunday High Masses, especially during Communion time. These are not always devotional songs but more often selections from secular works of Mozart, Verdi, etc. solely to test the vocal abilities of the singer. Besides being an offensive distraction, they also delay the Mass frequently. Talk about "exhibitionist tones"!
As a result, attending Mass there has become as intolerable as a NOM performance. The tail is wagging the dog.

Anonymous said...

Dear New Jerseyite:

I was not trying to insult New Jersey (although I was taking a jab at Americans for behaving so often as if only their country counts). I was only using some obvious overstatement to point to the fact that implementation of the m.p. has been extremely uneven throughout the world. People in other places have fought hard for their Masses too but, in some cases, they have encountered an episcopate that is implacably opposed to them on every count. Here in Canada, Mgr. Rivest of Chicoutimi has led the charge. He defies the Pope to his face and he gets away with it because the curia knowns that the Canadian episcopate, in general, is a little to the left of Stalin and Rome is afraid to act decisively against our bishops. Rome wants to move our episcopate gradually to the right; she does not want rebellion and open schism. We already have de facto schism here from our bishops. The U.S.A. bishops have always been much more moderate and, yes, more conservative than have the Canadian or, say, the Dutch or the French. So it is not only a matter of how hard locals have worked. Up here, most of us are just told NO! and our traditionalilst-leaning priests are openly threatened by their bishops: I now appoint you prison chaplain for life in a maximum-security institution. So there! What are ya gonna do about it, a^%$@*!

Of course, this is true in some places in the U.S.A. too but not in as many places. Let me put it in terms of statistics:

U.S.A.: 85% of dioceses have the T.L.M. every Sunday

Canada: 22% of dioceses have the T.L.M. every Sunday.

That's quite a difference, eh? (or, as you would say, huh?)


increase in Latin Masses under S.P.:

U.S.A.: 30%
France: 0%

Under S.P., enormous growth occured only in the following countries and only in the first eleven months or so from July, 2007:

U.S.A.,
New Zealand,
Germany,
England.

In 2007, only one-third of German sees had our Mass every Sunday. Today, three-quarters have it and all the hold-outs are in Lutheran areas having very few Catholics spread over large areas (except for Essen).

Something needs to be done. It is not Catholic to treat some faithful better than others based on race or nationality. There needs to be a rule from Rome for a minimum number of T.L.M.s per see even if not one single person asks for our Mass. I suggest a minimum of one every-Sunday T.L.M. per see over and above those requested in parishes under Art. 5 of S.P. I cannot for the life of me see how a bishop can respect Art. 1 of S.P. if he had zero every-Sunday T.L.M.s in his diocese. Here is what Article 1 says AND IT IS LAW:

The T.L.M. "MUST [emphasis added] be honoured for its ancient and veneralbe usage".

Now how can one honour something which is not present? Can I kiss the icon of Our Lady which was removed from my residence by my sister last Thursday? Are these only empty words? Does this Pope seek to deceive us? Is he a liar or a promise-breaker? I think not.

One per Sunday per see could be declared necessary as a norm at law. Of course, many bishops would 'willingly accept' (!) that but then say that, 'regrettably', they lack the manpower and resources to implement the norm. So sad. Therefore, to 'help' these poor sweet lovers of traditionalists, the Pope, who loves them so dearly for their defiance, will have no choice but to create one (or more) personal particular church(es) to come to their assistance. This will not mean paradise on earth tomorrow before breakfast but it would assure a gradual inclusion of our Mass and our charism as a universal norm in the Church for a small minority and also for the benefit of all, as it ensrhines the liturgical and disciplinary heritage of all. The solution is to implement a norm that could be realised slowly enough to save face for all the retiring communist bishops in our hierarchy.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Dear M.A.:

I had the unpleasant experience of arriving early one Sunday and seeing the tail end of our Parish N.O. The ministers were grinning from ear to ear like idiots and wearing those hilarious bathrobes. Once the bubblegum music was over, there was a little burst of applause, just so those attending would not forget that they were still at the circus.

While the New Mass is valid and does fulfil the four ends of prayer, its spirit is entirely Protestant and far worse than just that. It reminds one not of a dignified Anglican or Lutheran service but of a boring United Church of Canada or Presbyterian service or, in the case of the more charismatic affairs, of the worst thing on this earth: a Baptist or Pentecostalist rave. The Baptists and Pentecostalists somehow managed to conmbine insanity, emotion and bad taste all in one package. They are truly low, as our charismatics are completely unCatholic in spirit despite their good morals.

We in the traditionalist movement can be kind in person to the N.O. people but there is a limit to how much interaction we can have with them. Some of them, generally the leading performers of their show (and certainly not all of them), don't just dislike us; no, they hate our guts, and they hate our Mass and our charism with a fanatical passion. They don't care if they can ignore our Mass. That is not enough for them. They cannot sleep if our Mass is being offered at odd and inconvenient times when the church would otherwise be locked and closed. They can happily invite the Presbyterians to have their services in their parish churches but the Latin Mass they cannot abide.

That is why this talk of ghettos is nonsense. It is unrealistic to share the same parish churches with them. We need our own parishes and our own international diocese. Without that, we shall not have enough protection from their malice because they have the numbers and they have the money. The truth is that our Mass is not a threat to them. It is worse than that. The only threat to the New Mass is the New Mass. And that fact pains their hearts the most. We are hated because we are a constant reminder that their revolution has failed, not because our Mass is taking over. Our Mass could never take over unless the Pope were to force it on them, just as Paul VI forced the Bugnini Sing-along on us.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Don't worry overmuch, bloggers. The Nouvs Ordo Missæ is only nostalgia for ageing and childless hippies. Once they are gone, the Mass of All Ages will return. Owing to great improvements in medical science, we shall have to wait longer than we should for them to get out of our way. In five short years in the 1960s, their assinine ideas resulted in an enormous decline in church attendance. 75% attended before; 25% (far less in many Western countries) attended after. In France and in Canada, only 5% to 8% attend. Their ongoing liturgical workshop has not managed to bring back the crowds. Swtiching from Beatles tunes to Beebop won't do the trick. But the S.S.P.X cannot bring in the crowds either because it lacks the approbation and recommendation of the Pope and has done so now for over thirty years. Those who left left for good because too much time has elapsed to bring them back. The problem is that, as everyone sits around waiting for the fools to retire, our worlds is rapidly going atheist and secular.

P.K.T.P.

Jack said...

\\These are not always devotional songs but more often selections from secular works of Mozart, Verdi, etc. solely to test the vocal abilities of the singer.\\

And just what selections from Mozart's or Verdi's secular works have they sung? Can you be specific?

I have degrees in music.

I can assure you that Mozart's musical idiom for his sacred music is identical with that of his secular music.

There's nothing new in this.

In the Renaissance, the same piece would have Latin words for Church, French secular words for a banquet, and played on instruments at a faster tempo for dancing afterwards.

Anonymous said...

Jack,

This is my fourth attempt on this web site to persuade you to respond to your recommendation of the liturgical views of Father Robert J. Taft, S.J. Why will you not answer? Until you do, I think anyone reading your observations concerning the liturgy should take them with a grain of salt.

Again, my original post:

Jack,

On January 9th, you were singing the praises of a certain Jesuit by the name of Robert Taft, S.J. I wrote the following as a response, and you never answered (possibly because that particular string was shut down to further comments). Please answer so the board can understand from whence you come in terms of your liturgical and theological position.

You mean THIS Robert Taft, S.J??!!

"As such, I maintain that the Roman Catholic liturgical renewal in the wake of Vatican II was an overwhelming success, returning the liturgy to the people of God to whom it rightly belongs. The reform mandated by the council was not perfect, because nothing but God is perfect. But it was done as well as was humanly possible at the time, and we owe enormous gratitude and respect to those who had the vision to implement it."

AND

"My list of what was not done well or not done at all leaves aside the overly creative liturgies and other abuses that accompanied the reform. These were the fault of individuals, and not what Vatican II mandated. Nor does my list include anything the "reformers of the reform" want to reverse, like the celebration of liturgy in the vernacular, Communion in the hand, Mass facing the people or the removal of the tabernacle to a sacrament chapel."

AND

"Stuck in the aridity of late-medieval theology, the Catholic West has stalled the great movement of patristic ressourcement initiated in postwar France by authors like Yves Congar, O.P., Marie-Dominique Chenu, O.P., Jean Daniélou, S.J., and Henri de Lubac, S.J."

Giles

benjoyce said...

P.K.T.P

Don't blame the hippies. They were born roughly '38-'56

"Who done it" was the WWI and WWII generations. Paul VI b.'97, Bugnini b.'12, Cardinal Bea & Tisseraunt b. 1880's. etc.

What caused the hippies was the same thing that caused the Vat II phenomenon (the hippies parents and grandparents were the cause). The cause was a total repudiation of tradition passed to the younger generation. In '68, a hippie protesters sign read, "Like father, like son, like Hell!" The N.O. was officially unveiled the same year as Woodstock '69 and the violent campus protests.

What helped to change Fr. Ratzinger in 1968? A german "hippie", either with or with the new sacramental of "love beads", scaled the side of Ratzinger's classroom building, where through a broken window screamed, "We will destroy you!" Ratzinger concluded that something diabolical was going on.

The M.O. of the hippies was to break all ten commandments and call it freedom.

In any case. "Chill out Man," I still listen to Canned Heat

benjoyce said...

Many Parents in the sixties would claim that they still had tradition and were "old fashioned" BUT they had become worldly and secularization had taken firm hold. Catholic tradition was "losing gas" fast, by: no rosary, so scapular, no M. Medal and watching the Church prelates put asunder the DOGMA of "outside the Church there is no Salvation" helped a great deal. After all, this confirmed in many catholic minds, that "you don't have to be Catholic to be saved". Once this was in place in 1953, with the unjust "excommunication" of Father Feeney (assisted by the collusion of the Kennedy's with Cardinal Cushing) the canvas was wide open for the heresy of liberalism. The time was ripe for procuring liberal popes who can assist at the dismantling of Catholic tradition.

Is it true that Fr. Malachi Martin, the CIA, and Vatican Conclave Nobel Guard President, Scortesco, all concur, that "an international organization applied a little brutality" to the conclaves of '58 & 63. I am NOT an acedevacantist, but that wouldn't be the 1st time some demonic hanky panky put its nose in a conclave. (Scortesco, by the way, was found burned alive in bed a few weeks after publication of his tale)

Famed (?infamous) hippie '60's musicians, Paul Kanter b.41, of the Jefferson Airplane and Gerry Garcia b.42 of the Grateful Dead were Catholic in their youth. Kanter attended a strict Catholic Military school, Garcia regularly attended the Latin Mass in the Mission district of San Francisco. Both became raging apostates, and like VII, "blossomed" about 1965 when I was in 1st grade.

Were Kanter and Garcia really part of the cause or where they victims? Hard to judge.

M. A. said...

"While the New Mass is valid and does fulfil the four ends of prayer, its spirit is entirely Protestant and far worse than just that."
___________________

PKTP, I fully well know that, too; that is why we still travel to the nearest TLM for our obligation Masses. But I am teaching the children their catechism at the NO parish because I have been asked to, and I know it is God's will that I do it. I do not know how long I will be able to remain, but the fact that I am in the position that I am, is itself a small wonder. We must do good while we can, where it pleases God to put us. I fear that there are not many years left before God lowers the boom on this sinful world. It is an urgency with me to teach the children their catechism.

Dry martyrdom, anyone?

Anonymous said...

Benjoyce

Where did you read this:

"What helped to change Fr. Ratzinger in 1968? A german "hippie", either with or with the new sacramental of "love beads", scaled the side of Ratzinger's classroom building, where through a broken window screamed, "We will destroy you!" Ratzinger concluded that something diabolical was going on."

Delphina

Johannes said...

It is a shame and it is an excellent and a well-aimed tactic of our adversary to make us revulse from the cure. That men like von Balthasar, de Lubac and Daniélou have made faithful and good minds in the Western churches unwilling to return to the fathers.

Although - I agree completely concerning the sterility of the schoolmen's thought. It is really the same approach and merely a more ancient version of that of the Nouvelle Thélogie - only a different pagan philosophy as it's base. Even the way in which Aristotle was translated and read and discussed by disobedient students at European universities in the face of repeated prohibitions by several councils and even bishops of Rome. After the success of these experts (peritvs. . .) and their eventual ascendancy in the estimate of the bishops, the schoolmen took the fathers - men whose opinions and thought deserve profound consideration in and by themselves - and melted them down into systems, with Aristotelianism as the element. The ressourcement theology merely has a different element (several in fact depending upon the theologian you are reading) by which they fuse them.

I wrote a note concerning Sur les chemins de Dieu when I was a catechumen - that de Lubac selectively quotes several fathers to make them seem to hold a single opinion - his. Ressourcement theology is not the return to the fathers that we desperately, we unspeakably need and which alone could open up and allow a reunion with our unhappily separated brothers in the East. It was a monumentally wrong step in the right direction. Attempting to forcibly bring the works of the fathers to bear upon peculiarly modern problems is a misstep. We cannot sift the writings of the fathers through the sieve of current intellectual opinion. Such efforts are only of documentary value; which is why I find it so amusing that people still take the time to translate or read von Balthasar or de Lubac; their concerns are no longer live issues to us; they are sterile.

We cannot force the fathers to come to us - we must return to them. When we have men in the Western churches as devoted to and their thought as dominated by our fathers as the Eastern Orthodox are devoted to and their thought is dominated by the Greek fathers (particularly Basilivs Magnvs and the Gregorii) then - what shall keep us apart and who shall withstand us?

benjoyce said...

Delphina

I ment to say "with or withOUT love beads" (just mocking the pseudo-sacramental)

I know I read it somewhere about the time he was made Pope, I would guess, Latin Mass Mag. (just a guess) I just spent 20min combing Google for a quote and the closest I could come is:
http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2005/04/24/in_time_of_unrest_conflict_met_with_contemplation/


POPE IN THE MAKING
In time of unrest, conflict met with contemplation
By Charles M. Sennott, Globe Staff | April 24, 2005

MUNICH -- As campuses across Europe and America boiled with unrest in 1968, an intellectual star at one of Germany's most prestigious universities, the Rev. Joseph Ratzinger, saw the school's militant student movement turn on him with all its force.

A group of University of Tübingen students hell-bent on sacking the political and especially religious establishment of postwar Germany staged a wave of protests to disrupt the Catholic priest's lectures. One professor remembers a Marxist student shouting at one point, ''We want to destroy you!"

Despite the disruption, Ratzinger did not confront the student demonstra

Anonymous said...

Benjoyce

God bless you! Why didn't I think of doing that - "googling" the quote?

I will send some prayers your way!

Delphina

François said...

Johannes good point. Return to the Fathers.Recover the Patristic spirit. Not force it into the categories of post-modern life.

Lent is a good occasion to read the Fathers.

What we further need is to pray the Fathers and ask them their intercession. However it will be clear to any thinking or better right thinking catholic that there is a strong link between patristic thought and the monastic tradition. A sacred link. And that over the centuries the monks have been the most steadfast in resisting liturgical changes, except of course for the last half-century.

Whatever their critics may say, i find the works of Dom Marmion and Dom Casel infused with this liturgical-patristic spirit which is the spirit of authentic christianity. The Mind of the Church.