Rorate Caeli

Reminders of important Pontifical Masses

1. On March 3 at 11:00 A.M. Eastern Time, the Chapel of the Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary of the FSSP in Denton, Nebraska will be consecrated by Msgr. Fabian Bruskewitz, Bishop of Lincoln, Nebraska. The consecration of the chapel, and the Solemn Pontifical Mass that will follow, will be done in the presence of His Eminence William Cardinal Levada, who will also preach the homily. The ceremony is expected to last about 5 hours and will be aired live on EWTN.

Also present will be Bishop Edward J. Slattery of the Diocese of Tulsa, Oklahoma;Bishop James C. Timlin, Bishop Emeritus of the Diocese of Scranton; Bishop Robert W. Finn of the Diocese of Kansas City - St. Joseph; Abbot Philip Anderson, OSB, of Our Lady of the Annunciation Monastery and Father John Berg, Superior General of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter. (Source.)

2. Edward Cardinal Egan will offer Solemn Pontifical Mass according to the Missal of 1962 on March 25, 2010, the Feast of the Annunciation, 7:30 PM, at the Church of the Holy Innocents in NYC. To our knowledge this makes Cardinal Egan the first cardinal from the USA to publicly offer Mass according to the 1962 Missal since 1970. The Mass setting will be Tomas Luis de Victoria's Missa de Beata Mariae Virginae.

The Mass will be in commemoration of the 15th anniversary of the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae.

For more information about this Mass, which is sponsored by the Agnus Dei Council of the Knights of Columbus, please visit this webpage: Pontifical Mass for Life.

3. On Saturday, April 24, 2010 at 1 P.M., His Eminence Dario Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos will offer Solemn Pontifical Mass on the high altar of the Great Upper Church of the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception. The Mass will be sung in commemoration of the fifth anniversary of the installation of Benedict XVI as the Pope. (Source.)


24 comments:

  1. Anonymous5:11 PM

    Didn't Cardinal O'Connor offer the Mass acc. to 1962 missal back in the 90s?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Didn't Cardinal O'Connor offer the Mass acc. to 1962 missal back in the 90s?

    I could be mistaken but the mass I recall from then was celebrated at St. Patrick's Cathedral by the late Austrian Cardinal whose name escapes me at the moment. He was the Vatican librarian for many years and an outspoken champion of the traditional rite of the Roman Church.

    Of course Card. +O'Connor gave his blessing for the event.

    In ICXC,
    John

    ReplyDelete
  3. That would be Alfons Cardinal Stickler (RIP).

    ReplyDelete
  4. Absolutely amazing. Does anyone know if the EWTN website will allow one to watch the recording afterward? My days are quite occupied, but it would be a nice way to spend the evening.

    On another note, it is my understanding that Cardinal McIntyre would offer the TLM at St. Basil's well into the 1970's. I doubt it was a scheduled Sunday Mass, more likely the parish priest capitulating to the desires of the Emeritus Metropolitan. Nevertheless, Cardinal Egan's offering of the TLM is wonderful news.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous10:02 PM

    what time would it be in the Philippines... day and time...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous11:51 PM

    Please update your posting to include a reminder for the Pontifical Mass to be offered by Darío Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos on the 24th of April in Washington DC at the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception.
    http://www.thepaulusinstitute.org/press-release.htm

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous1:42 AM

    I have the NY one on my calendar. Now is a good time to remind a friend about this Mass or encourage a newcomer to discover it. If we could all bring just one, the next time the space will have to be St. Patrick's. Thank you, Cardinal. Although I would have liked to see it during your tenure.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Karl from the Philippines7:58 AM

    to: anonymous from the philippines

    it will be aired on march 4, 2010 at 12am

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous5:37 PM

    Pope will suggest, not order, liturgical changes: chief Vatican liturgist

    http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=5608

    ReplyDelete
  10. Levada's sermon at the consecration of the Fraternity's seminary chapel is a lecture, reminding the FSSP to make certain they keep in line.

    He suggests what the extraordinary form (what a misnomer!)can import from the ordinary, but not vice versa.

    The entire tone was not one of joy, but one of admonishment.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous7:57 PM

    I wonder why Bishop Conley of Denver was not present. He is a great friend of the TLM.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous8:02 PM

    Is it just me, or did Cardinal Levada intentionally insult the entire FSSP in his address during the consecration of Our Lady of Guadaloupe chapekl in Denton, NE.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Just finished watching the EWTN Special on the Solemn Pontifical Mass for the Celebration of the Chapel of St. Peter and St. Paul at the FSSP Seminary in Denton, NE. Some observations follow.

    Bishop Bruskewitz was his usual energetic self and the FSSP Choir was simply fantastic. The reverence displayed by those in attendance was almost palpable.

    The Chapel was beautiful in a simple sort of way but I would have much preferred images of St. Peter and St. Paul as a backdrop for the main altar. Just a matter of taste, though.

    And the we come to the homily given by Cardinal Levada, the new President of the Ecclesia Dei Commission. When he got to the point of both forms enriching one another and the statement of some new canons from the Missal of Paul VI being inserted into the Extraordinary Form I nearly threw my shoe at the TV. When will they ever learn?

    My conclusion is that they just don't get it. Those of us brought up and nurtured in the so-called Extraordinary Form like it just the way it is or was. No changes, please, no "enrichments" from the banal product that is the NOM. Just let us have the TLM and go away and leave us alone.

    It's kind of like the Health Care bill before Congress and the reaction of the American Populace to that bill - WE JUST DON'T WANT IT! Get it? No, I guess you don't. But, then, we can throw the bums out of Congress next election but with the hierarchy we're left with what we've got.

    I have to admire the FSSP for restraining themselves in the presence of this Prince of the Church. They did a great job despite the comments of this deplorable man. The fact that he was supposedly sharing with us the sentiments of Pope Benedict XVI scares me greatly. That he is President of the Ecclesia Dei Commission and Prefect of the CDF does not bode well for us who cherish Tradition, IMHO.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The state in which Levada left the Portland, Oregon Archdiocese glaringly demonstrates this man's lack of any moral authority to lecture anyone. It would have been best for him to witness the ceremony and remain silent. The sterility of his leadership is in stark contrast to the fertility of the representatives of Catholic Tradition surrounding him at the consecration ceremony.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous12:06 AM

    "I wonder why Bishop Conley of Denver was not present. He is a great friend of the TLM."

    He was invited and send his blessings. He was not able to attend due to a conference in Denver that conflicted with the date of the consecration.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous12:08 AM

    Levada is 73. Hopefully, the Holy Father will appoint a replacement in about 16 months.

    ReplyDelete
  17. There is, after all, a way to solve the problem with recalcitrant members of the hierarchy like Levada and Bertone. Why do I say these two - because in my mind they are out to further the modernist agenda and Bertone, in particular, has so much power as Secretary of State that he can subvert the attempts of the Holy Father to bridge the gap between Traditional Catholics nd the NO establishment.

    To illustrate - we were told by the commentator at the Solemn Pontifical Mass that Cardinal Levada was going to deliver a message from the Holy Father himself. But, then, Cardinal Levada read a message from Bertone to Levada supposedly containing the Holy Father's message. But it won't wash, my friends, because the Holy Father has too much class to rain on the FSSP parade.

    So, what to do? Easy. Make Bishop Fellay a cardinal and then appoint him Secretary of State and at the same time make Bishop Tissier de Mallerais the Prefect of the CDF and Discipline of the Sacraments. Those two men will bring along with them the staff they need to fix things accodring to Tradition while at the same time being eminently pastoral to those caught in the NO establishment. The other two SSPX bishops will attend to the needs of the FSSPX while Fellay and de Mallerais are otherwise occupied.

    All talk of the FSSPX not having faculties or canonical status will cease. If the Holy Father refuses to act in this manner, evil men will continue to stand in the way of his attempt to heal divisions in the Church. Things like altar girls, communion in the hand, lay eucharistic ministers, clown masses, balloon masses, "earth-day" masses, "youth-day" masses will shortly become things of the past. Pastors and prelates who do not tow the line will be summarily removed from their positions and replaced with ones that will do what is necessary to restore Tradition in the life of the Church. The "new springtime" will finally be achieved.

    Impossible, you say? Well, yes, I'd have to agree because I am not convinced that the Holy Father is on our side. Only firm and resolute action on his part will convince me that he really wants to cure the divisions in the Church.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "Well, yes, I'd have to agree because I am not convinced that the Holy Father is on our side."

    Paul:

    No one can seriously claim that Pope Benedict XVI is a "Traditionalist". If by being "on our side" means that he is a Traditionalist or even "leaning to Traditionalism", then no, he is not.

    What he HAS done is to make it easier to be a Traditionalist, much easier than at any time since 1970.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous5:21 PM

    Anonymous, apparently more than a few are taking offense at Cardinal Levada's homily. But I listened to the whole thing, and IMHO anyone who took offense brought their offense with them.

    Levada is reminding the FSSP that their true charism lies not in antiquarianism or liturgical exactitude but in professing and striving for unity of faith among the whole Catholic world. That doesn't deny the worth of the EF or their particular charism, it only stresses that their value to the Church is not to be found facing inward. Levada is doing the equivalent of giving a bridal couple a pointed reminder that marriage is not about Hallmark-card "luv" but about living for the sake of the other.

    He cited an OF preface, he said, because of its applicability to the occasion at hand. Could he have found one from the EF to quote? Maybe; he could probably have found one from the Liturgy of St. Basil too. But at root the complaints are not about his ability to preach (sadly unworthy of a shepherd, if this wooden homily is typical). The complaint really amounts to an assertion that an OF preface is too "unclean" even to reference in a homily within the walls of an FSSP chapel, something that says more about the complainant than it does about the text.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Carlos Antonio Palad said...

    If by being "on our side" means that he is a Traditionalist or even "leaning to Traditionalism", then no, he is not.

    With great respect, Carlos, what I meant by my statement "on our side" is that he believes what the Church has always held, taught and professed to be true from apostolic times. That is my definition of a traditional Catholic. In his case he is caught between the proverbial rock and hard place, having on the one hand to contend with us and our constant criticism and on the other having to deal with the modernists who, it seems, are constantly pushing their agenda. He deserves our prayers as he tries to navigate these turbulent waters.

    ReplyDelete
  21. craig said...

    The complaint really amounts to an assertion that an OF preface is too "unclean" even to reference in a homily within the walls of an FSSP chapel, something that says more about the complainant than it does about the text.

    Baloney. Only a modernist would insist on a preface from a fabricated liturgy being inserted into the Traditional Mass. And, to do this while the FSSP is in celebratory mood using their own preface from the Mass of the Consecration of a Church "says more about the complainant than it does about the text."

    ReplyDelete
  22. Craig,
    Either you have no understanding of the history of the FSSP or you’re just plain obtuse.

    First of all, the reason why 14 million precious dollars had to be raised by the faithful for a new seminary was because, despite dozens of bishops that the FSSP approached to purchase already existing seminaries, not a one would sell them to the FSSP. The refurbishing of an existing structure would have cost a fraction of what would be the final tab in Denton. Justice – the post-conciliar way!

    What should have been an unambiguously joyful occasion – the consecration of a new seminary chapel (the first one in decades) – was used by His Eminence as an opportunity to lecture the assembled traditional clergy and seminarians about their need for unity and, by implication, the relative parity of the New Mass. The seminary was born out of the spiteful animosity of your post-conciliar rite bishops.

    Hey, Craig, NEWS FLASH: all of those FSSP priests and seminarians are there because they want no part of what they consider to be a deficient ritual. Levada knows that: thus, the long faced lecture. But thank you for continuing his lecture here.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous3:55 PM

    1. Paul Haley, you're making my point for me. Newsflash: Levada didn't use the aforementioned OF preface to replace any part of the EF liturgy, he referenced it in his homily. Like I said, you act as if one drop of the OF defiles the place. I half-expected some of you to call for re-consecration.

    2. Sean, I have nothing against the FSSP wanting to concentrate on the EF as their stock-in-trade. I don't think Levada does either. The question is whether FSSP and similar groups (hence the reference to Anglicanorum Coetibus) intend to be separate in liturgy while united in other aspects, or separatist altogether. If you've got a problem with a sermon calling for unity among Catholics, don't take it up with me: take it up with our Lord.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anonymous3:44 AM

    Craig said in part and I quote, "...their value to the Church is not to be found facing inward....but about living for the sake of the other."

    If you understood per V2 teaching you would grasp the Catholic call to reach out and convert the world. The grace from the Tridentine Rite is made for that, it empowers holy pastors to save souls. Reference Catholic history.

    The FSSP are quiet because of their misguided sense of obedience which the 'obedient' NO take full advantage of and beat them down.

    Some posters think Cardinal Levada is orthodox others think he is closer to a heretic. Just one more example of ambiguity that divides the Church. The two rites can't mix.

    ReplyDelete

Comment boxes are debate forums for readers and contributors of RORATE CÆLI.

Please, DO NOT assume that RORATE CÆLI contributors or moderators necessarily agree with or otherwise endorse any particular comment just because they let it stand.

_______
NOTES

(1) This is our living room, in a deeply Catholic house, and you are our guest. Please, behave accordingly. Any comment may be blocked or deleted, at any time, whenever we perceive anything that is not up to our standards, not conducive to a healthy conversation or a healthy Catholic environment, or simply not to our liking.

(2) By clicking on the "publish your comment" button, please remain aware that you are choosing to make your comment public - that is, the comment box is not to be used for private and confidential correspondence with contributors and moderators.

(3) Any name/ pseudonym/ denomination may be freely used simply by choosing the third option, "Name/URL" (the URL box may be left empty), when posting your comment - therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to simply post as "Anonymous", making debate unnecessarily harder to follow. Any comment signed simply as "Anonymous" will be blocked.

Thank you!