Tuesday, June 5, 2012


Another kind of light bulb moment:

In terms of the "reform of the reform" of the Liturgy and the manner in which Pope Benedict is proceeding with this reform which to many people seems odd and unclear is this: "My... observation on all of this is what Pope Benedict’s MC said of him a few years back in terms of the “reform of the reform” of the liturgy–that the Holy Father’s style (I suspect meaning Joseph Ratzinger) is to propose not mandate. Certainly everything that he has proposed has created discussion here and elsewhere and for the past seven years or so of his papacy. Is this where “organic development” occurs first and isn’t it interesting that it isn’t done just in the realm of “bishops and their theologian advisers” but now with rank and file Catholics and their priests and parishes. Is this an example of post-Vatican II ecclesiology that will eventually lead to the Third Roman Missal which might be more in harmony with both missals (1970 and 1962) that preceded it. Just wondering? There is a genius in the Holy Father’s decision to make the 1962 missal a part of this conversation. This conversation here which includes the 1962 missal could never have taken place even six years ago. (Only a new generation of Catholics and an older generation of Catholics experiencing it for the first time or having a renewed experienced of it could enter into this discussion centered now on the "hermeneutic of continuity." But how could we have that discussion of continuity if no one knows about the 1962 missal first hand?)

Is this the look of the future new Third Missal to replace the 2012 Missal?


Gene W. (formerly Pin) said...

I think we need a Missal Defense Treaty in order to prevent the proliferation of more and more Missals. We are approaching an insane level of Missal deployment that could result in a policy of MAD...Missally Assured Destruction.
Haven't you ever heard of the Cuban Missal Crisis? There were so many different Missals in Cuba that our Catholic President was willing to go to war to get them removed...

ytc said...

Yessssss Father, I've been saying this over and over and over. There can be no revitalization of the OF if it is not compared and critiqued against the EF.

Sacrosanctum Concilium, after all, was concerned with a reform of the EF. If the product, the OF, is a less than desirable outcome overall--and you'd have to be a liberal 70-year-old pantsuit sister (or an "ex-priest") to think it isn't--then to correct its errors, large and small, we must look at the EF Missal.

I mean, that's just logical, isn't it?

And PrayTell is horrible, by the way. :) But I read it.

rcg said...

This is spooky. That was my wife's observation this morning. I knew she eyes int eh back of her head, but who knew she read tea leaves....

ytc said...

Gene, I think when Father is talking about a third Roman Missal, he really means a Missal that will replace the current Ordinary Form Missal altogether. So in the end of this hypothetical Missal Madness, there will be the same number of Roman Missals: two.

FATHER, BY THE WAY CHECK THIS OUT: http://www.ccwatershed.org/Campion/

Not related, but this is a very very very interesting project indeed and it would be fantastic if you bought it for your parish.

Anonymous said...

"Finally, the St. Edmund Campion Missal & Hymnal will contain an extraordinary and truly unique feature that will be revealed after publication."

Hmm . . . An announcement from Pope Benedict that THIS is the first publication of the new unified Roman Missal for both forms? To let the organic development recommended by Vatican II begin afresh!

Actually, being clairvoyant like Fr. McDonald, I can now predict that it will be a collection of the new OF prefaces officially approved for EF use.

Gene W. (formerly Pin) said...

ytc, Is this alleged new Missal a short range Missal or a long-range Missal? When might we expect its arrival?

ytc said...

Gene, this is hypothetical. We are talking about what it could look like given the current traddie trend of young priests and the rather widespread tightening up (but not of course without resistance...) in the Vatican.

I have no idea when this will happen, but I am pretty positive that the OF will not remain as it is for another 50 years.

ytc said...

Henry, I hope no new prefaces. Maybe only a few. Most of the OF prefaces are truly atrocious in literary quality compared to the EF prefaces.

The proliferation of prefaces in the OF has the same detrimental effect as the proliferation and outrageous number of readings in the lectionary: no one remembers them. Their thematic power thus fails to sink in.

If there are new prefaces, then they better be absolutely assigned for Masses, without any of the "you have 42 preface options today" crap.

Joseph Johnson said...

"Only a new generation of Catholics and an older generation of Catholics experiencing it (the EF) for the first time (I thought of myself here--older and experiencing it for the first time) or having a renewed experience of it could enter into this discussion centered now on the "hermeneutic of continuity." But how could we have that discussion of continuity if no one knows about the 1962 Missal first hand?

You hit the nail on the head and this is why it is such a BIG DEAL--why it is so ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL that the EF be easily accessible and widely available for more and more people to experience first hand throughout our Diocese! This is not some low priority extra thing that might be nice after we solve all of our other problems (many of which may always be with us--like the poor)! It is KEY. Anyone who says otherwise just doesn't "get it" the way you have. I think the libs "get it" and that is why they don't want more people to experience it first hand. This is why Cardinal Ranjith said that bishops who try to obstruct Summorum Pontificum are allowing themselves to become "instruments of the Devil."

I'm sure maybe you have already spoken favorably of how the EF has broadened your liturgical perspective among your brother priests, probably with mixed receptions by them. As a priest with a better grasp than most of the relationship of the EF and true liturgical reform, I implore you to become a tireless advocate among your peers to encourage and inform them of how critical it is that they learn to offer the EF and that they then offer it on a regular basis. I will pray for you and hope you can be influential with our clergy in a way that many of us laity can never be.