Some Clarifications on the Celebration of the Mass
Communication of the Holy See Press Office, 11 July 2016
“A clarification is appropriate following media reports circulated after a conference held in London by Cardinal Sarah, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, a few days ago. Cardinal Sarah has always rightly been concerned about the dignity of the celebration of the Mass, in order to adequately express the attitude of respect and adoration of the Eucharistic mystery. Some of his expressions were, however, misinterpreted as if to announce new instructions different from those in effect in current liturgical norms and the words of the Pope regarding the celebration of the Mass facing the people and on the ordinary form of the Mass.”
“Therefore it is good to remember that the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani (General Instruction of the Roman Missal), that it contains the relative norms for the celebration of the Eucharistic which remain in full force. # 299 states: “Altare extruatur a pariete seiunctum, ut facile circumiri et in eo celebratio versus populum peragi possit, quod expedit ubicumque possibile sit. Altare eum autem occupet locum , ut revera centrum sit ad quod totius congregationis fidelium attentio sponte convertatur” (That is:” The altar should be built separate from the wall, in such a way that it is possible to walk around it easily and that Mass can be celebrated at it facing the people, which is desirable wherever possible. Moreover, the altar should occupy a place where it is truly the center toward which the attention of the whole congregation of the faithful naturally turns. The altar should usually be fixed and dedicated.”).”
“For his part, Pope Francis on the occasion of his visit to the Congregation for Divine Worship, had specifically mentioned that the “ordinary” form of the celebration of Mass is that provided for by the Missal promulgated by Paul VI, while the “extraordinary” form, which was allowed by Pope Benedict XVI for the purposes and in the manner he explained in the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, must not take the place of the “ordinary”.
“There are not, therefore, any new liturgical directives beginning next Advent as some have wrongly inferred from the words of Cardinal Sarah, and it is best to avoid using the expression “reform of the reform”, referring to the liturgy, as sometimes it has been a source of misunderstanding. This was the agreed view expressed during a recent audience granted by the Pope to the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation of Divine Worship.”
50 comments:
the forces of failure have triumphed again. Definition of insanity: keep doing what you're doing and expecting different results. I notice the false translation regarding that it is "desirable" to face the people is still being trotted out, notwithstanding that the rubrics themselves clearly state otherwise.
Yep. I was waiting for this. I imagine those with an agenda will do everything they can to downplay and undermine what Cardinal Sarah asked for.
Not unexpected, but thoroughly disappointing.
I'm just soooooo shocked and surprised Father aren't you. Just when Pope Francis was showing his orthodox side to.
I smell the stench of racism. The White men have put this Black African in his place.
Oh well it was a nice try Cardinal Sarah. Looks like the liberals will have their Mass and the Traditionalists will have theirs and never the twain shall meet.
Cardinal Sarah is the "Cardinal Kasper" of the moment, since the current Vatican approach to change is: make a shocking statement, issue a clarification, and then sit back and watch what happens. In many recent cases, this approach has been questionable. But perhaps, in this case, we can put it to our advantage.
Father Lombardi said that Robert Cardinal Sarah's comments about ad orientem worship were "misinterpreted". Father Lombardi added Father Lombardi added that "...and it is best to avoid using the expression ‘reform of the reform’ when referring to the liturgy, as it's sometimes been a source of misunderstandings.”
Were the comments attributed to Cardinal Sarah about ad orientem worship fabricated? Or was he quoted correctly?
Did Cardinal Sarah say the following? "When I was received in audience by the Holy Father last April, Pope Francis asked me to study the question of a reform of a reform and of how to enrich the two forms of the Roman rite."
Or was Cardinal Sarah's "reform of a reform" comment fabricated?
What is going on here?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Dialogue at 5:22 PLEASE do not involve our Church in Racism. You know very well
that this Church is for all Races. Cardinal Sarah would be very offended I imagine
by that comment. Nobody can call our Church a church who judges people by the
color of their skin. We are a Worldwide Church and we include all races. You know that sir.
I understand being upset about this decision. I am as well but the decision is not based
on Cardinal Sarah's race. You know that in your heart.
Any disagreement with Cardinal Sarah is obviously due entirely and exclusively to racism. At least that's what I've been told with respect to disagreeing with President Obama.
The racism angle is very good. I never thought of it. But remember when that racist Cardinal what was his name. Oh yes Cardinal Kasper, you know the pope's hand picked bishop to give an address at those bogus synods, I mean those Synoldal gatherings inspired by the Holy Spirit. You remember the ones where the documents were written before the synod met and the one were Cardinal Baldessari threw out other bishops personal mail in the trash. The same Cardinal Kasper who was proven not only to be a liar. A LIAR. But a racist. The terrible things he said about the African bishops. How dare the pope impose his personal views on a black man. By his actions he is opening a strong black man like Cardinal Sarah up to ridicule. Typical of the great white hope. Oh how I hope we can get beyond racial prejudice. Oh well maybe the next pope will be more respectful to the black race.
Anonymous @ 4:56:
L
O
L
Dialogue @ 5:40:
It's the Hegelian dialectic in action. That's how revolutionaries, like the present pope, lead. It's progressivism in action.
It is racist. After all, Blacks are supposed to jump and jive down the aisle and scream Hallelujah instead of Alleluia because white liberals demand that of them to be "authentically black." FYI, the African-American auxiliary of Chicago, Bishop Perry, regularly says Mass in the EF form much to the consternation of the liberal establshment. NO one is more rigid or doctrinaire than a liberal.
Sir I don't even know what "jump and jive mean" What a sad statement.
You offend our African American Catholics who read this blog.
I am about fed up with this Catholic Church that changes its beliefs and practices with every passing Pope.
What authority has the Holy See Press Office got over Cardinal Sarah? All written in the third person as well, Pope Francis made plain. Pope Francis is normally not shy of speaking for himself. Well, if I were priests I would totally ignore the Vatican Press office as being some faceless bureaucrat with no authority to make such a statement.
Also, since when has anybody taken notice of statements emanating from the Vatican in the past regarding liturgy?
In our parish, we nearly always hear EP II on Sundays--presumably because it's the shortest and the priest feels he has to make up time after the long-winded Bidding Prayers (Prayers of the Faithful). But GIRM 365 tells us EP II is 'more appropriately used on weekdays or in special circumstances'.
GIRM is ignored willy-nilly when it's convenient.
Anonymous,
Have you forgotten that Africans "should not tell us too much what we have to do".
anonymous, if you had any powers of discernment or comprehension, you would realize I was lambasting "liberals" for their narrow-minded and racist views of how African-Americans should worship. As an aside, there are African-Americans always in attendence at the Latin lirtugies (both OF and EF) that I attend.
The Vatican press office statement exhibits once again the infamous inaccurate English translation of GIRM #299--Fr. Z, Fr. Hunwicke, and the CDW itself have repeatedly emphasized that in the official Latin, the clause translated as "which is desirable wherever possible" does NOT modify the clause "can be celebrated at it facing the people".
But the good news may be that, in the current papacy, the correct interpretation of a Vatican press office statement is frequently the opposite of what it appears to say. Thus the surest confirmation of anything is typically its outright denial by the Vatican press office.
TJM, Sir a liberal did not make the statement "jump and jive" you did.
Henry,
I think this is the September 26, 2000 Vatican response to which you refer: "It is in the first place to be borne in mind that the word expedit does not constitute an obligation, but a suggestion that refers to the construction of the altar a pariete sejunctum and to the celebration versus populum. The clause ubi possibile sit refers to different elements, as, for example, the topography of the place, the availability of space, the artistic value of the existing altar, the sensibility of the people participating in the celebrations in a particular church, etc. It reaffirms that the position toward the assembly seems more convenient inasmuch as it makes communication easier, without excluding, however, the other possibility."
Anon at 2:31, TJM was obviously being sarcastic.
My concern is this: Pope Francis makes statements that are confusing or appear to contradict Church teaching and we are deafened by the silence that follows from the Vatican rather than provide some sort of clarification. Cardinal Sarah speaks and not only is there "clarification" but there is actual undermining of the cardinal in about two days. We have excused the lack clarification concerning Pope Francis' statements due, perhaps, to his isolation from the general media. This hypothesis is clearly now disproven. The only possible conclusion os that he is monitoring the media closely and allows the confusion to reign while swiftly correcting any cardinal or bishop that tries to make anything traditional more mainstream.
anonymous, grow up. I have been around liberals on matters liturgical for over 50 years. They are rigid, insufferable, and just like the communists try and segregate people by ethnicity, religion, class,and race. "Old people like Latin, young people want guitars at Mass, and blacks like negro spiritual music at Mass." Why? because we say so. Of course they are always wrong, i.e., see my remark on Bishop Perry of Chicago who says Mass routinely in Latin.
The baptized, by regeneration and the anointing of the Holy Spirit, are consecrated as a spiritual house and a holy priesthood, in order that through all those Works which are those of the Christian man they may offer spiritual sacrifices and proclaim the power of Him who hás called them out of darkness into His marvelous light. (LG 19)
Eclesiology of comunion was the geatest novelty of the Council Vatican II, at the image of the Most Holly Trnity. That's why the mass is celebrated with the altar at the center of the comunity, as Christ is the center of the Christian life. As the priest sais at the prayer over the gifts: "Pray, my brothers and sisters, that our sacrifice may be acceptable to God, the almighty Father."
TJM On July 11 at 9:04 you called the Catholic Church Racist. Perhaps if you have worked with liberals for 50 years then you are elderly. Perhaps you did not realize that in today's world the term "jumping and jive" in reference to African Catholics was offensive. With all due respect I am grown up and I am an African American Catholic. Your words were offensive. A liberal did not post that you did.
TJM... and sir one more point I might add Negro Spiritual music is quite different from "jumping and jive and shouting in the aisle" You have also offended Catholic Nuns earlier by calling them women who look like they should be in a Gay Pride parade.
And by the way I am not a liberal. I am a Christian that can express my opinions without being offensive. I pray that you are not a Priest.
Francisco, you make too much sense...
Anonymous, you continue to have reading comprehension issues. My point was not to attack African Americans but American liberals who will tell African Americans the kind of worship they should have, no giving a tinker's damn that people are people and can't be placed in arbitrary categories liberals come up with. Bishop Perry doesn't fit their preconceived notions so liberal Catholics in Chicago don't like him. I never referred to Catholics nuns that way. Again, you lack basic reading comprehension. I was referring to some Catholic priests who looked like they were in drag, rather than proper vestments.
Francisco, an over-the-counter Mass does not put the altar in the centre of the community; in those churches where the altar is centrally placed (e.g. Liverpool Metropolitan Cathedral) the priest only faces a quarter of the congregation. At least you acknowledge V2 'ecclesiology' as a novelty, in which case one is quite entitled to repudiate it.
By the way, the Orate Fratres which refers to 'my sacrifice and yours' is not a V2 novelty.
Anonymous, there's nothing wrong with Negro Spirituals, but they are not liturgical music and are out of place at Mass. One of the greatest ironies of the botched liturgical reform is that those who fabricated the Novus Ordo envisaged that priest and people would sing the Mass. Bugnini's Consilium believed that the practice of singing hymns at Mass was no longer justified and should end.
TJM Well sir I guess as you once called someone else... I am just an OBAMA DROOLER with a reading comprehension problem.
John Nolan We were not actually discussing music in the church. My issue was that I am an African American Catholic and our music was not called Negro Spiritual at first by TJM. He called our music "jumping and jiving and screaming in the aisle" I am simply letting him know to African Catholics anywhere in the world that stereotype is offensive.
Anonymous,
Granting that you have the authority to speak for African Catholics everywhere, I'm just wondering what you all find offensive about that phrase.
Anonymous Drooler obviously doesn't speak for Bishop Perry of Chicago a staunch proponent of the Latin liturgy
I find it odd that people with similar racial characteristics (skin colour, physiognomy and so forth) can be lumped together as if they share a common culture. So-called African Americans have little in common with the culture of that part of western Africa from which their ancestors hailed, and in which, by the way, slavery still persists as it had persisted long before any European set foot there.
In parts of Africa people move in procession with a swaying dance-like rhythm, and Cardinal Arinze was at pains to distinguish this from 'liturgical dance' imposed on the liturgy by trendy Europeans.
In the name of 'inculturation' western post-V2 'liturgists' imposed on Japanese Catholics the informal vernacular liturgy they were imposing on European Catholics; it did not go down well in Japan where formality and ritual have long been part of their culture. Did these soi-disant experts see themselves guilty of 'cultural imperialism'? Of course not - they were liberals.
The Japanese were quite capable of choosing for themselves which aspects of European culture they wanted to take on board, and this includes western classical music. One of the best recordings of the complete Bach cantatas is by a Japanese ensemble.
The Congolese 'Missa Luba' is justly admired as an example of how African rhythm and melody can inform liturgical music but liberals hate it a) because it was composed by a French missionary priest and b) because it sets the Latin text.
I've heard it said that the popular music styles that pervade most parish 'liturgies' in the English-speaking world came about because of a zeal for 'inculturation' - pop culture being the only thing that the masses understand. This is scant comfort for those of us who grew out of pop music at the age of 16. The year of Sgt Pepper was the year I discovered Schubert's Great C Major Symphony and never looked back.
However, a lifetime spent avoiding such lamentable manifestations of public worship hasn't been entirely wasted. Without the post-V2 horrors I might have become complacent and not taken a conscious effort to side with David against the (liturgical and musical) philistines. They are truly the curse of the age and concerning them I can say with Belloc 'caritas non conturbat me.'
Sir you apparently do not understand the lack of dignity in that Phrase.
You don't understand at all to even ask such a question.
Anonymous Drooler, are you a snowflake at a university, hiding in a safe room?
TJM I forgive you for all of the name calling. I am above that.
Your statements about our President and People who support him along with
Racist remarks about African Americans Speaks for itself. I really do hope that you are not a Priest.
I wonder what the Bishop of Chicago would think of the way you insult others especially Black
Human Beings.
TJM I am an African American Catholic who attends St. Peter Claver Church.
I don't know about your Snow Flake name calling or your university.
I also voted for President Obama. Now that you have met me Who are you?
no faithful, sentient Catholic would vote for Abortion King aka Obama. I now know to ignore your inane comments because you are not Catholic except in name only. Go to Confession
TJM President Obama has begged and begged your party to do something about guns.
They will not even allow a vote. Innocent children were slaughtered in a school, every week
hundreds are killed with guns that ARE not for hunting anything but humans. I agree Abortion
is horrible but the slaughter of children in a school is also horrible. President Obama is the one
who has tried to stop all of this. You have no right sir to judge me. You play God. You go to Confession.
From reading all of your posts for months back you have a lot to confess. How DARE YOU CALL THE PRESIDENT
OF THE UNITED STATES THE ABORTION KING. You go to confession.
Anonymous,
Asking questions is an important part of learning, and it's the key to dialogue. Dismissing people who are ignorant, and ignoring their desire to learn, accomplish very little in a conversation.
Anonymous,
I think we can all agree that mass murder, by whatever weapon, is evil. Can we also agree that abortion is murderous?
Dialogue: Certainly Abortion is murder. And true President Obama supports a woman's right to choose.
On the other side of the coin Individuals are allowed to purchase weapons that can kill hundreds in a matter of minutes... and that is murder That side states that "People have a right to choose killing weapons" Not guns for hunting but military guns for hunting humans. We see this happen almost weekly in our country. We are not even paying attention to it as we once did. Its just a fact of life that we are accepting.
With my work with children I have witnessed the horror that they will live with forever after the Sandy Hook Murders. Our schools today are almost like prisons because we are so worried. It has robbed children of security etc.... Its horrible to watch their eyes when we have practice drills and such. President Obama is the one who tried to stand up for these children and have some vote on guns. You know how that went. So for me that is the issue I am most focused on. We have to pick our battles. If you vote for one they favor abortion. If you vote for the other they do nothing about children killed in a school.
Of coarse abortion is horrible. So are 26 dead children, teachers and principals in a school. And nothing was done. Not even a vote. I am a teacher and I work with these children every day. They are the ones I am fighting for. I have to I am a teacher.
anonymous condemns herself with her own words: no one has the right to murder another. Guns didn't kill 84 people in Nice, a truck did. You are setting up a straw man to assuage your guilt over voting for a man who promotes murder of the unborn. When he was a senator in Illinois he even voted to deny the right of a baby to live that survived an abortion.
TJM I will listen to Anonymous 2. You should read what he says about a Faithful Catholic and how they should decide
to vote. I learned a lot. You will learn a lot. Read his post.
Anonymous @ 7:13, If you are a teacher, I feel sorry for our kids after reading your barely literate post.
Gene It is not wrong to pursue learning, for since it comes from God it is good as far as it goes, but it is far better to have a clean conscience and lead a virtuous life. Because some prefer to be learned than to be virtuous they make many mistakes and produce little or no fruit.
On the day of judgment we will not be asked what we have read, but what we have done, neither will we be asked how well we have spoken but how devoutly we have lived. The teacher's post was very moving.
Even if all the evils, which the worst human malice can invent, were said against you, what harm can they possibly do you if you pay no attention to them? Human judgment is often erroneous. My judgement is true, it shall stand and can never be overthrown. Trust in the Lord and value little those that insult teachers.
Well, this teacher's pursuit of learning was clearly a wild goose chase.
Post a Comment