Rorate Caeli

Apostolic Exhortation, a name and a date

This morning's Bollettino gives notice of a press conference that will present the long waited -- for some -- Post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation "Sacramentum Caritatis": March 13th, 2007.

43 comments:

  1. Wow, a real date. I'm in shock.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous12:06 PM

    Let us, in the Lenten spirit, all pray for the best without imagining that all the damage of the last four decades and more will be undone overnight.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous12:12 PM

    I'm trying not to read too much into the name ("Sacrament of Love" can mean just about anything these days). Anonymous is right, let us hope and pray for the best, in a penitential spirit.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous12:30 PM

    Brideshead,

    Those are the opening words of the text. "THE SACRAMENT OF LOVE...". It gives no clue as to the content.

    Now, shouldn´t the press release also be announcing also the issue of another much awaited document?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous1:42 PM

    No, it's shouldn't, because the news of the Motu Proprio would completely eclipse the news of the Exhortation. That wouldn't make any sense. The Motu Proprio should follow not terribly long after.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous2:07 PM

    This might not be the time or place to raise the following questions (so please let me know if we should pursue them elsewhere), but here goes: I'm wondering more and more whether the sticking point with the motu proprio isn't the future status of the SSPX (if indeed the two are/will be related). My question is, how can a German pope who served in the war now be the one to bring back the SSPX, with its alleged fascist, anti-Semitic sympathies? Wouldn't the world press have an absolute field day with Benedict and the Church? And couldn't this almost hurt the cause of the SSPX in the long run? My wife and I regularly attend an SSPX chapel, so please don't misunderstand my concerns as being accusations of guilt. I just wonder, with the history of Williamson's remarks, the association of Paul Touvier, etc., whether it's politically possible for Benedict to welcome the return of the SSPX. Any comments?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous2:15 PM

    I think the Universal indult should be one thing (delivered in the awaited motu proprio), and then, following the necessary talks, the reconciliation of the SSPX and its juridical erection as an entity within the Church should be accomplished separately.

    Attatchment to the Classical Liturgy isn´t exclusive to the SSPX, and so the fate of both should not be united together.

    I hope, however, and pray, that those two goals - the freedom of the Mass of Ages, and the reconciliation of the SSPX - be, however separately, in the end, both acheived. And, with God´s grace, both things will be accomplished under the present Holy Father.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous2:58 PM

    'Those are the opening words of the text. "THE SACRAMENT OF LOVE...". It gives no clue as to the content.'

    Perhaps. On the other hand, the words DEUS CARITAS EST summarize the content of the pope's first encyclical. As a writer, Benedict seems to have an eye for detail and a sharp sense for literary nuance.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous3:05 PM

    Our local parish has recently established a "Worship and Prayer" commission that consists of three committees: Liturgy, Music, and Homiletic Reflection. There is a heavy emphasis on "active participation". I fear the worst. Please Lord, we need an Apostolic Exhortation with TEETH.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It would seem proper that the Exhortation comes first.In the text the Pope could state that there are two forms of the Roman rite and then lay the historical and theological grounds for the motu proprio which would follow after.JPII in his encyclical on the Eucharist condemned liturgical abuses but did not mention any specific ones .He said that another document would follow that would ,which of course was Redemptionis Sacramentum. But recall the draft that Cardinal Arinze sent to the Holy Father forbade altar girls,dancing during mass,communion under both species on Sunday etc.When it was leaked bishops sent in their protests and the draft was given a more wide distribution among the curia which gutted parts of it.It is still a good document but not what it could have been.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous3:16 PM

    From CatholicCulture.org: Before the reform of the General Roman Calendar [March 13] was the feast of St. Benedict [of Nursia] which is now celebrated on July 11.

    That makes a whole lot of sense!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous3:24 PM

    'Before the reform of the General Roman Calendar [March 13] was the feast of St. Benedict [of Nursia] which is now celebrated on July 11.'

    That's amazing. This cannot be a mere coincidence.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Did anyone else notice that the Biblical passage quoted in the opening of the "Deus caritas est" encyclical contains Archbishop Lefebvre's personal motto, "credidimus caritati"?

    ReplyDelete
  14. "Attatchment to the Classical Liturgy isn´t exclusive to the SSPX, and so the fate of both should not be united together."

    That is so true. Please try to remember it, Mr. Bunyan, and everyone else who thinks that the SSPX has a monopoly on tradition. The Latin Mass Society in England has been administering the Heenan indult since berofe the SSPX was founded. The Society of St. John Vianney was going its own way before the SSPX was founded. Heck, we've had the traditional mass here in San Diego for twenty-two years, since before the SSPX incurred their "excommunications" (yeah...right...excommunication my aunt Harriet). Talk to the FSSP, the ICK, the IPB, they stand to benefit just as much or more from an indult than the SSPX. This is about much more than JUST the SSPX.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous4:05 PM

    Hebdomadary et al, I don't disagree in the least. I've also been a big supporter of Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary and regularly attend a diocesan Latin Mass that predates the Indult (in addition to the SSPX chapel). But certainly all the talk leading up to the motu proprio would suggest there might be a connection, and, at any rate, I made my remarks conditional when I interjected "if indeed the two [the motu proprio and the regularization of the SSPX] are/will be related." My guess is that they won't be immediately connected, but that the liberalization of the Tridentine Mass will be used (among other purposes) as a way to negotiate the return of the SSPX.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous4:24 PM

    'Talk to the FSSP, the ICK, the IPB, they stand to benefit just as much or more from an indult than the SSPX. This is about much more than JUST the SSPX.'

    Not to mention the many of us who suffer through the hegemony of banality in NO parishes, who love our parish communities in spite of everything, and who want to stay there in hopes of a restoration of Tradition.

    ReplyDelete
  17. It is indeed a relief to finally have the date of the Apostolic Exhortation but in istelf that gives us no clue as to when, if ever we will the universal indult. The difference is that there HAD to be an Apostolic Exhortation in the wake of last year's Synod but, as the very term implies, a Motu Proprio is ENTIRELY DISCRETIONARY; and so far B16 has proved to be a very timid "German Shepherd." ! On the other hand if the Arch Priest of the NO, Marini, is finally removed from his post as rummoured last week then maybe, just maybe, the universal indult will see the light of day.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous5:15 PM

    Brideshead,
    Why not join said liturgical commitee and try to influence it for the good?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous5:50 PM

    Brideshead: not a coincidence but an inaccuracy. The Feast of the Transitus of St Benedict is on 21 March. (11 July is, and always has been, the feast of the Translation of his Relics.) 13 March will be simply the Tuesday in the third week of Lent. The Station is at St Pudentiana, and the introit is 'Ego clamavi': I cried, because thou hast heard, O God. That seems apt.

    Sorry to hear about your parish. I'm intrigued that active participation in the homily is being promoted. Now the 'assembly' is not only celebrating itself but preaching to itself. Roll on 13 March!

    ReplyDelete
  20. I cannot find some notes, I'm drowning in paper, but Cardinal Hoyes has said more than once that the question of the SSPX and the Mass are distinct issues as far as he is concerned.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Just a thought on the SSPX issue. As mentioned, any potential reconciliation will be a separate issue from the Moto Proprio. What the MP can accomplish is a statement of fact as to the position of the Traditional Rites within the Church and Her daily sacramental life. Reconciliation, on the other hand deals with issues of doctrine and the place of Vatican II.

    For my part, I think that an SSPX reconciliation is possible and will happen. Sadly, I think a large minority will not reconcile and there will be a falling away.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous6:20 PM

    Anonymous, I don't think that the committee is necessarily encouraging active participation in the homily (thankfully this isn't Linz); the stress is on "active participation" writ large. Horizontalism is the rule, yet hopefully not yet to extent of preaching to ourselves! :-)

    David, point well taken about trying to influence the liturgical committee. The NO establishment is deeply entrenched ... one would need to come well armed, i.e., with a strong Apostolic Exhortation. Praying and hoping ...

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous6:22 PM

    Yes, Hoyos considers the Mass and the SSPX to be distinct, but certainly they are related. It would be disingenuous to pretend otherwise, when both issues have been under simultaneous discussion since Fellay's visit to Castel Gandolfo. The Mass could be freed without the return of the SSPX, but that latter couldn't happen without the former.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "My question is, how can a German pope who served in the war now be the one to bring back the SSPX, with its alleged fascist, anti-Semitic sympathies?"

    I've always looked at it this way...German bishops played a large part in letting the 'Rhein flow into the Tiber', so it's only fitting a German rectifies the situation.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anonymous6:55 PM

    Of possible interest as we await the Apostolic Exhortation ... a critique of then-Cardinal Ratzinger's theology of the liturgy:

    http://tinyurl.com/2773u7

    ReplyDelete
  26. Nice of the Pope to release it on my birthday. I wish... I wish...
    oh, the anticipation!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anonymous8:22 PM

    Has anyone seen this? It purports to reveal the contents of the MOTU PROPRIO based upon a leaked version of the document.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/ukcorrespondents/holysmoke/march07/oldrites.htm

    +DR

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anonymous8:23 PM

    Here is a corrected link:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/ukcorrespondents/holysmoke/march07/oldrites.htm#comments

    +DR

    ReplyDelete
  29. A classic example of how rumors grow disproportionately once their original source is lost... Those four points are none other than the same which were presented by the Collectif pour la Paix Liturgique à Reims in their unsigned post of March 3 (which was published and translated elsewhere), so do not get too excited.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I suppose it's worth pointing out that these points are generally consonant with Mgr Schmitz's comments.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Yet, they are a mere translation of the Rheims post (which may well be an exact reproduction of the contents of the eventual document, of course -- but it should not be reported as some kind of breaking news...).

    Let us wait for the Exhortation and hope that it includes wholesome liturgical concepts -- but let us not forget that the eventual Motu Proprio was never announced by the Pope himself. We know the document exists, from several sources, but not if or when the Pope will decide to sign and publish it.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anonymous9:32 PM

    'We know the [Motu Proprio] exists, from several sources, but not if or when the Pope will decide to sign and publish it.'

    Hmmm ... not an encouraging thought, and yet it raises the hopeful question: is a Motu Proprio the only means by which the Traditional Mass could be restored?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Everybody keeps saying it, but I wanted to pitch my hat in as well. It is best for SSPX and best for the tridentine liturgy if they are seen separately. I'm certain SSPX would have it no other way. They want the whole Church to appreciate the depth and beauty of the TLM. They don't want their particular situation and history to obscure this appreciation.

    On a side note, however, for all my disagreements with SSPX, I am extremely grateful for their efforts to preserve this liturgical tradition. I look forward to the day when with a serene and clear conscience I can celebrate Mass with them. The thought of reconciliation makes me bristle with excitement.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Deo gratias! At last there seems to be some kind of progress. At least we'll soon know where we stand.

    The article about the supposed "leak" is just another synopsis of Msgr. Schmitz's statements from last week. Maybe someone thinks that he "leaked" the info. in making those statements.

    In the article, as usual, it's annoying to hear the phrases about the T.M. being "outlawed" and the priest with his "back to the people". But, I have to say that the line about the "arthritic 1960s trendies" is amusing.

    ReplyDelete
  35. For what it's worth, the Telegraph has a history of periodic and subtle, relatively sympathetic coverage of the Catholic Traditionalist movement. Several years ago, just before the CIEL UK Pontifical High Mass in St. James Spanish Place, they did an excellent half-page piece.

    ReplyDelete
  36. New Catholic:

    You are quite right that they are the same as the Rheims post. My point was that the Rheims post is consonant with Mgr. Schmitz's interview, which may indicate something about their reliability. When sources agree, this is generally a good sign. (Not conclusively so: they could be drawing on the same misinformed individual, and plans can change and so on.)

    Mr Mastai: I don't think we can object to the "effectively outlawed" line. Almost the entire hierarchy treated it that way for decades, and explicitly said that they believed it was forbidden. It wasn't legally outlawed, but effectively it certainly was.

    This does point up how far we have come. There really was a time when almost every bishop in the world would tell you that the traditional Mass had been forbidden by the Pope. Now, senior curial cardinals will say publicly that it never was. The next step, of course, is for the Pope to say the same thing...

    ReplyDelete
  37. Anonymous2:05 AM

    An interesting fact about Archbishop Lefebvre (according to Wikipedia) is that his father spied for British intelligence during the second world war and died in a concentration camp as a result; which doesn't fit in with classifying the SSPX as a Vichyite/fascist association. Any links their members have with such ideas is however a reason for bringing them into a regularised relationship with the Church, which would permit indulgence of such trends to be controlled and disciplined. The real difficulty with such arelation it seems to me is the question of how they are to get their bishops. Archbishop Lefebvre ended up consecrating his own bishops, because he felt he could not trust the Vatican to name bishops who would respect his positions about liturgy and theology rather than trying to stamp them out. He was quite right about this attitude of the Vatican at the time, and quite right about his positions being legitimate ones for Catholics to hold - whether he was right to consecrate bishops is a further point I won't enter in to; but the same problem would seem to arise for the present leadership of the SSPX. I don't think Rome would ever consent to an agreement that would let them name their own bishops; so regularising their situation would seem to require restoring their trust in Rome - something the proposed motu proprio will hopefully help to do. It would be good as well if their situation provokes a more general rethink of the way bishops are selected, something that is desperately needed.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I believe that the Archbishop's father had been active against German forces in France during the Great War. When the Nazis invaded, they arrested those whose names appeared on lists of such people from twenty years earlier, including him. He did indeed die in a concentration camp.

    This has little to do with whether most members of the SSPX now support the Vichy regime, or indeed with whether the Archbishop himself did. In my experience, most people who attend the traditional Mass in France do, whether they belong to the indult or the SSPX community. This doesn't mean that they sympathise with Nazism or Fascism, any more than Mgr Lefebvre did.

    ReplyDelete
  39. The big news?

    I think while we all recognize the importance of the Traditional Rite to the Church, most Catholics do not, and there are many times more of them than us. An exhortation strongly pressing priests to face back towards God during the Novus Ordo would have far more apparent and immediate impact than the freedom of the Traditional Mass.

    God Bless,

    Matt

    ReplyDelete
  40. lingua italiana, francese, inglese, tedesca, spagnola e portoghese

    This is what drives me nuts about Vatican announcments, pronouncments etc., there will be no copies available in the original Latin. Wow, Italian, French, English, German, Spanish and Portugese, where is the Latin!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Apostolic Exhortation...NSDAP: I see the link, SS...(PX): Bavarian boy conscript becomes Pope. If you look closely, Motu Proprio...becomes...Opium Torpor.

    It's a shign, shurely.

    Your 0-2 Bunion. First some crack about right-wing politics and Rush babies on another post, and now the spectre of Herr Schnicklegruber rises from the shallow trench.I don't think I have seen anyone inject so much politics, into so many threads, in so little time since I've been visiting RC.

    What is your major malfunction?

    If you keep it up, I might think you're a fraud and an agent provocateur, but "please don't misunderstand my concerns as being accusations of guilt."

    That would be akin to accusations such as "Rush-baby ditto heads with a little religion thrown in for good measure. Has tradition come to this -- that we identify with the Right in all things, even on the politics of the environment? Talk about "creepy!"

    ReplyDelete
  42. It is important to note that the Paix liturgique de Rheims post was based on a discussion on March 1 of this year in Rome between members of that group by Msgr. Camille Perl of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei. So as rumours go, this one comes from a pretty well placed source:

    http://www.paixliturgiquereims.org/article-5862759.html

    ReplyDelete
  43. Anonymous2:33 PM

    Simon-Peter,

    My remarks are sincere, however contradictory they might appear. Sorry if I've caused any anger or confusion. Basically, I'm a traditionalist in matters of the Church, but not necessarily a conservative in all my politics, especially when it comes to the environemnt (which, it seems, Catholics have a long history of defending). I admit it irks me sometimes when it's assumed that all commentators on these blogs share the same antagonism to Democrats and/or environmentalists. I worry that a lot of traditionalists are simply reactionary conservatives in all aspects -- cultural, social, political -- and that religious conservatism is merely par for the course. So I think it's good to inject some diversity of opinion into the conversation. I admit, I might have gotten in over my head lately with these tit-for-tat arguements, so will try to keep a low profile for a while. (At least you'll have to admit, I've continued to sign my posts, so you've been able to follow the thread of my remarks, however suspect they might appear to you).

    ReplyDelete