This past weekend I celebrated three 17th Sunday of the Year Masses in my parish of St. Anne in Richmond Hill. I chant all the priestly parts of the Mass and the music is the same for all three. It is middle of the road Ordinary Form music but a cantor chants the official Introit, Offertory and Communion antiphons in addition to the processional hymn and any other anthems.
For the most part, the congregation sings and speaks their parts which adds to the Solemnity.
We have lay lectors, male and female altar servers, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, male and female as well as Holy Communion under the form of the Precious Blood for those who desire to partake.
Of the three Masses, our 10:30 AM Mass also employs incense. Our parish is a young parish with many who are army families who have chosen to have large families, more than two children and some with eight and nine children. There are children and young people galore at Mass.
I love our Masses.
Then I had the Cathedral's EF High Mass for the 7th Sunday after Pentecost. I love that Mass too and for all the reasons that progressives in the Church despise it. The youthful schola chants superb Greogrian and Polyphony and one feels as though one is hearing the choirs of angels. The congregation is mute though. But all of us are swept up into the estacy of heaven and contemplate its glory which is the Magesty of God.
There are no lay ministries except for the schola and ushers and altar boys/men. The Cathedral uses a novelty of a laymen who reads the Epistle and Gospel simultaneously as the priest reads these silently at the altar. I chant the introductions to both the Epistle and Gospel and the first few words before going silent, then the lector takes over in English. I now EF purists don't like this and what I would prefer that the celebrant chant the Epistle and Gospel in English.
So I am conflicted. I love both forms of the Mass and see where improvements can be made in both forms to make each more like the other in the best of both.
What improvements would I mandate to the OF Mass? For the time being, three things:
1. Ad orientem modeling what is done in the EF Mass
2. Kneeling for Holy Communion with the option of intinction only for the Precious Blood if this Form of Holy Commuion is offered
3. Chanting of the Introit, Offertory and Communion Antiphons
What improvements would I make in the EF Mass? For the time being, three things:
1. The option of chanting the changing parts of the Mass in the vernacular except in the case of the Introit, offertory and communion antiphons in order to preserve Gregorian Chant and Polyphony for these parts of the Mass. Thus I would be suggesting that the Collect, Preface, Secret and Post Communion Prayers as well as the Epistle and Gospel be allowed in the vernacular.
2. The Secret and a few more lines of the Roman Canon spoken more audibly to include the actual words of consecration and the Doxology.
3. Installing the adult MC, after proper preparation and certification, as an official acolyte and allowing him to be an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion. On Sunday I distributed Holy Communion alone to over 200 people. This extends the length of the Mass unnecessarily. Two weeks ago when I had the EF Mass, 300 came to Holy Communion and only by the grace of God there was an additional priest available to come and assist me.
Let the sniping begin!
43 comments:
Why do the "changeable parts" in the vernacular? The translations are readily available in the Missal. I was able to do that when I learned to read. When attending an Opera the libretto gets us all through it just fine.
At the Cathedral Mass out of the almost 250 there maybe 50 had the translation!
Four Masses on a weekend? Isn't there a limit? The Eastern Orthodox Church is pretty strict about that---a priest may only celebrate one Divine Liturgy on the same altar in a given day. Their reasoning is that the sacrifice of Christ cannot be repeated in the same liturgical day. Also, with regard to distribution of communion at an EF Mass, couldn't some priests from the Cathedral help with that, like what I used to see in the old days when priests would come out of sacristy at communion time vested in surplice, cassock and stole?
One of my parish Masses was the Saturday night and my only Mass that day. No the Cathedral priests are not available. Under SP they exercise their right not to celebrate this Mass but the rector sees to it that it is provided in the cathedral parish.
Having a layperson read the readings is truly bizarre. That would be very off-putting to me, as a person who exclusively goes to the traditional mass. Usually, the priest reads the readings in English before the sermon, which solves the "problem" of not having enough printed translations available.
There's an old SSPX Mass video in a large parish Church in France packed with young families and the do what the Cathedral does.
"The Cathedral uses a novelty of a laymen who reads the Epistle and Gospel simultaneously as the priest reads these silently at the altar. I chant the introductions to both the Epistle and Gospel and the first few words before going silent, then the lector takes over in English."
Huh?
EF purist is it?
Gosh, who knew that the Mass needed "novelty"?
Castigate the SDPX for starting it. Now that PopeBenefict freed the EF Mass from the dungeon of be chained in time, its new found life in the 22st century was bound to bring about organic development or do you desire s museum?
That is the excuse of a weak person. "Some one else did it, so it's okay if I do it".
Do I desire a museum? Another weak response. Can't address the confrontation, so creates the extreme.
Why is it SO hard for priests to provide consistent Mass?
Perhaps when the traditionalists take over and occupy your cathedral, as they did with St. Nicholas du Chardonnet in France to which you refer, they can keep this peculiarly French custom of vernacular readings!
Father McDonald,
If there is that much demand, a good thing, I am sure there is an organization which would provide missals at no or minimal cost. I have never been to an EF where there was not an adequate supply
I thought the primary reason for the ordination of the deacon is to assist in the distribution of the Eucharist. I know they don’t do that in the ordinary form, but would it be wrong for them to do so in the EF?
My TLM parish provides a handout which has the changing parts of the Mass in English (in Color even!). Also has available the red TLM booklets.
In Eastern Orthodoxy, the ecclesiastical day runs sundown to sundown, following the Jewish custom. So a Saturday night liturgy begins Sunday the ecclesiastical day. I guess in the Catholic Church, it is midnight to midnight. I have wondered for instance if a church has a 4pm Mass Saturday and then a 7pm Mass Sunday, is that two different eccelisiastical days? (Reference to the 4 Masses of earlier).
And having a layperson read the lesson and the epistle is bizzare? Wonder where I have been?
Father McDonald,
First of all, thank you for continuing to celebrate the EF. You are a gem. One thought you should consider. Many of us attend the EF for precisely the reason no one is "tinkering" with it, trying to "improve" it. I love the thought of attending a Mass that my Irish ancestors would immediately recognize. I think if the saw the typical OF, they would think the Protestants had finally won the religious wars.
I have seen this bizarre Novus Ordo disease in the EF in the USA, where someone reads the Epistle and Gospel while the priest recites them in Latin silently. This "the-faithful-must-understand-everything" was precisely what led Bugnini to develope and encourage in the 1950's and 60' before the Novus Ordo came about, where a "commentator" from the pulpit would explain everything to the people as the Mass progressed.
In the first place if it is a high Mass these readings should be sung, and sung by the priest to God as a sacrificial offering. If the people do not understand the language of the Church and for some reason are unable to learn it, then there are plenty bilingual Missals or handouts can be made. The Mass is not a cerebral lecture, despite Bugnini and his Novus Ordo fabrication.
There are 2 much better alternatives if indeed the vulgar tongues are to be used at all. The reading can be recited in a vulgar tongue immediately after the Latin has be sung/said. The other way is to wait until the sermon, and read the 2 readings then at the start of the sermon in the vulgar tongue. In the EF, the sermon is not part of the Mass.
There is a strange idea in the Church that developed in the early 20th century that believes that people cannot participate "properly" in the Mass unless they are able to follow, analyze, and understand every word uttered in the Mass from an intellectual perspective. This idea can be found in the introduction of the hand missals among the laity and I wonder if this could be the first signs of the what was to become of the liturgy in the Church after Vatican II. Perhaps our ancestors worked harder to understand with the heart and not so much with the mind?
I wonder what St Maria Goretti, St Catherine of Sienna, or St. Dominic Savio did during the Mass? Did they have hand missals so that they could understand every word the priest was saying? Did they participate in an inferior manner than what we do today? Do we somehow understand how to participate at Mass in a superior way than they did?
I think we need to get away from the tendency to over analyze the liturgy and instead try to understand better how our Catholic ancestors participated, almost exclusively, in an interior manner at the Mass for 2000 years before had missals existed or the modern revolutions in the liturgy emerged. It is very easy to read the Mass readings/prayers before you go to Mass if you want to understand them, but I think its important to read the readings at Mass in the language that has the most powerful influence in the supernatural order since the readings are not only being proclaimed to us but to all of creation both visible and invisible. We know from various apparitions and exorcisms that Latin is far more superior in the supernatural order than English or French for example.
Father McDonald said..."The Cathedral uses a novelty of a laymen who reads the Epistle and Gospel simultaneously as the priest reads these silently at the altar. I chant the introductions to both the Epistle and Gospel and the first few words before going silent, then the lector takes over in English. I now EF purists don't like this..."
The movement within the Latin Church to introduce vernaculars into the Roman Mass gained tremendous traction decades prior to Vatican II.
Popes Saint Pius X and Pius XI authorized vernacular Masses.
But it was Pope Venerable Pius XII who opened the door wide to the Roman Liturgy's vernacularization.
The notion that prevailed throughout Rome and the Church was that it was imperative to make the Mass intelligible to the Faithful.
Holy Mother Church insisted that Her children need not remain as silent spectators at Mass.
Even Churchmen who were perceived as staunch right-wingers, such as Archbishop Lefebvre, insisted that the time had arrived to vernacularize parts of the Mass.
On June 6, 1965 A.D., Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre declared:
"Amidst all the antagonisms, exaggerations and discussions which have characterzsed this period of liturgical change, may a few reflections be outlined?
"Must we, however, conclude from these considerations that all these things should have been kept unchanged?
"The Council with temperance and prudence has answered otherwise. Some reform and renewal was needed.
"The first part of the Mass, intended for the instruction of the Faithful and a a means of expressing their faith, clearly stood in need of a means of achieving these ends more plainly and, in some way, more intelligibly.
"In my humble opinion, two of the reforms proposed for this purpose appeared useful: first the rites of this part and some vernacular translations.
"Let the priest draw near the faithful, communicate with them, pray and sing with them, stand at the lectern to give the readings from the Epistle and Gospel in their tongue, sing the Kyrie, the Gloria and the Credo with the faithful in the traditional divine melodies.
"All these are happy reforms restoring to this part of the Mass its true purpose. That is one of the most important ends to achieve in the liturgical renewal of this part of the Mass.
"Where the Sacraments and sacramentals are concerned, the use of the language of the faithful in admonitions may be useful since these concern them more directly and personally, but this is not the case with exorcisms, prayers and benedictions.
"The arguments for keeping Latin in those parts of the Mass which take place at the altar are, however, so strong that it is to be hoped that the days may shortly come when a limit will be set to the invasion of the vernacular tongue of this treasury of unity, of universality, a mystery that no human tongue can express or described."
Source: Lefebvre, Marcel. A Bishop Speaks: Writings and Addresses 1963-1975.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald said..."Now that PopeBenefict freed the EF Mass from the dungeon of be chained in time, its new found life in the 22st century was bound to bring about organic development or do you desire s museum?"
Father McDonald said..."What improvements would I make in the EF Mass? For the time being, three things:
1. "The option of chanting the changing parts of the Mass in the vernacular...the Collect, Preface, Secret and Post Communion Prayers as well as the Epistle and Gospel be allowed in the vernacular"
2. "The Secret and a few more lines of the Roman Canon spoken more audibly to include the actual words of consecration and the Doxology."
3. "Installing the adult MC, after proper preparation and certification, as an official acolyte and allowing him to be an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion."
======================================================================================
Father McDonald's plan to reform the TLM is on the mark.
To begin, as Pope Benedict XVI made clear when he promulgated Summorum Pontificum, there isn't any question that the Novus Ordo will remain as the Latin Church's primary Mass.
From there, reforms to the TLM are imperative to establish the TLM (the Novus Ordo will remain primary) as a normal part of parish life throughout the Latin Church.
As Father McDonald made clear, Pope Benedict XVI freed "from the dungeon...the TLM must not be "chained in time"...the TLM must not remain in, so to speak, a "museum."
Parts of the TLM must be vernacularized. The Faithful, 99.9999 percent of them, will not embrace an all-Latin Mass.
Additional reforms as indicated by Father McDonald would serve the TLM well.
The TLM does not belong to a handful of "traditionalists" who are determined to keep said Mass frozen in place...chained to a certain time in Church history.
The enrichment of the TLM (mutual enrichment), as Pope Benedict XVI insisted, is imperative and inevitable.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
I can’t view the EF as static as some traditionalists do, though I do think it should be preserved. Likewise I can’t see how the OF benefits from following every fad that comes along. Your modification of the EF doesn’t bother me nearly as much as the sloppiest OF Masses. I wish the TLM would be used more as a template to reform the OF.
"There is a strange idea in the Church that developed in the early 20th century that believes that people cannot participate "properly" in the Mass unless they are able to follow, analyze, and understand every word uttered in the Mass from an intellectual perspective."
A couple of thoughts...
One, the desire for a vernacular liturgy and translation of the Bible was growing in the late 14th and early 15th century. It is not an "early 20th century" concept.
The growing desire then for a liturgy and Bible translation in the common tongue seems to have arisen in tandem with the developing sense if the importance of each individual. In 1215, the Magna Carta - ahead of its time, to be sure - spoke to the rights of the king's subjects, something they enjoyed without reference to such rights being granted by a ruler. By 1689 the English had a Bill of Rights.
No longer thought of as mere spectators, the people in the pews - and their understanding of and appreciation for the rites and rituals of the Church began to grow. Erasmus wrote, "I utterly dissent from those who are unwilling that the sacred Scriptures should be read by the unlearned translated into their tongue, as though Christ’s teaching was so obscure that it could hardly be understood even by a handful of theologians, or as though the strength of the Christian religion consisted in men’s ignorance of it. The counsels of kings are much better kept hidden, but Christ wished His mysteries to be published as openly as possible."
With the rise in the sense of universal human rights, with the increase of education among the "common folk," with the nudgings of reformers, the notion that a liturgy and Scripture translation into the vernacular could be a valuable tool.
Add to that the printing press, and you have a "perfect storm" for the promulgation of the Scriptures in the common tongue and, without too much delay, the same for the rites and rituals of the Church.
Mr Thomas:
What you say is true, but you neglect the fact that the Novus Ordo is dated. Introducing the godess Reason into the liturgy as defined by active participation may have been seen as something desirable in the early 20th century, but by the 1970's that was passé. Post modernism did not at all worship Reason. The Novus Ordo is now the liturgical museum. The .0001% of Catholics who prefer the all Latin TLM are the mustard seeds for a renewed Catholic Church, the new Pentecost which never came with the Novus Ordo, and never will because of its man-centred worship.
MT,
Knock off the cutting and pasting and cherry picking to promote falsehoods regarding the Mass. The vernacular was permitted in portions of certain of the Rites of the Church such as Baptism and Matrimony, but not the Mass. Please explain Pius XII's demand that Mass remain in Latin in Mediator Dei. I would love to see you worm your way out of that one.
By the way, you never responded to John Nolan and me regarding the other 2 points we raised with you in another post, Mr. Dump and Run
For all the debate about the vernacular versus Latin, how about a compromise? We can go back to Aramaic,a common language in the times of Christ, or Greek, since the New Testament was written in that format.
Victor said..."The .0001% of Catholics who prefer the all Latin TLM are the mustard seeds for a renewed Catholic Church, the new Pentecost which never came with the Novus Ordo, and never will because of its man-centred worship."
The Church in Africa and Asia hasn't received that memo.
The Church/Novus Ordo is booming in holy fashion throughout Africa and Asia. The Holy People of God in those areas pack the pews. Seminaries are packed with holy men. Converts flock into the Church.
Vatican II and the Novus Ordo have enjoyed tremendous holy success throughout Africa and Asia.
Charismatic Catholics pack Novus Ordo Masses throughout Mexico, Central, and South America.
Unless reformed, the TLM will never become a normal part of parish life.
As Archbishop Lefebvre insisted at Vatican, the TLM was in need of reform...in the first place, vernacularization.
As Pope Benedict XVI declared, the Novus Ordo will serve as the Latin Church's primary Mass.
But if reformed — Father McDonald offered several suggestions in that regard — most important, vernacularized in various parts, the TLM could become a normal part of parish life.
But the Novus Ordo would remain as each parish's primary Mass.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mr Thomas:
I suppose you have read Cardinal Sarah about so much of the goings on in Africa with the Novus Ordo, of which he is critical. It is often more of a party-time than God-centred worship. But Islam is what is gaining there over the whishy-washy Catholicism of Vatican 2. Moreover, as American and European ideological colonialism conquers Africa, it is bye-bye to Catholicism as it has been in the West. "The Novus Ordo will serve as the Latin Church's primary Mass" to the extent there is a Church left in Africa and the West. As for Asia, you should heed Cardinal Zen with his EF Masses that set a good example of the New Evangelisation.
By the way, an interesting comment by Bugnini about the hatred of Latin in the Mass during the 1960's is not that it was hated because it was not understood, but because it was not the language of the nation, being of some foreign Romish country. I have experienced this in USA, that Latin is un-American. I suspect this still underlies much of the aversion to Latin more than anything else, as a pastor once told me who tried to introduce more Latin in the Novus Ordo.
MT,
You are bonkers. The OF has been a flop - Mass attendance is way down since the reforms of Vatican II. But you continue to pontificate, just like those old, lefty nuns, when confronted with the end of their religious orders, that the glories of their reformed religious life will any day result in vocations. In the real world, there is a practical saying: when you are digging a hole deeper, stop digging. If the Church was truly serious about reversing the continuing decline in Sunday Mass attendance, the Church would revisit the entire liturgical reform and consider jettisoning it.
In terms of the missions, my priest friends who worked in the mission fields of Africa and Asia said the vernacular Mass made life far more difficult for them and their flocks because of the myriad of dialects. Of course that wouldn't occur to you, at all.
You still have not answered my question regarding Pius XII's insistence in Mediator Dei that the Mass be in Latin. You really can never come up with a credible response when challenged.
Victor,
Methinks Bugnini was engaging in the big lie! I loved Latin and my Mom, a convert from Methodism loved the Latin and Gregorian chant. A good friend of mine who grew up in Holland said after Vatican Disaster II her parish there continued to chant parts of the Ordinary in Latin, and although a very liberal Catholic, she enjoyed singing it. There was no groundswell for the vernacular and people who espouse this view are engaging in revisionist history. No sale!
Powerful reasons existed as to why 2,147 Conciliar Fathers (to just four against) voted at Vatican II for liturgical reform.
Powerful reasons existed as to why everybody from liberal Father Joseph Ratzinger to traditionalist Archbishop Lefebvre insisted that the Roman Liturgy was in need of reform.
Archbishop Lefebvre called for the introduction of vernaculars into the Mass of the Catechumens.
He insisted that the Mass must be made intelligible to the Faithful.
2,147 Conciliar Fathers insisted that during Mass, "Christ's faithful, when present at this mystery of faith, should not be there as strangers or silent spectators;" (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy).
-- In 1943 A.D., Pope Venerable Pius XII authorized the German bishops to offer Mass in the vernacular.
For the German Church, Pope Venerable Pius XII also authorized a "new and simpler Latin Psalter for the Breviary...extensive use of the vernacular in the Ritual (for use in the Sacraments, Blessings, Exorcisms etc.)...celebration of the Easter Vigil ceremonies in the evening."
Pope Venerable Pius XII authorized vernacular Masses for the Church in Africa, India, China, New Guinea...
-
Popes Saint Pius X and Pius XI authorized vernacular Masses.
Years prior to Vatican II, Pope Venerable Pius XII had subject the Roman Liturgy to radical reforms that, in turn, opened the door to his successors to implement additional radical liturgical reforms.
Pope Venerable Pius XII had opened the Church to the Ecumenical Movement, which, in turn, influenced the Liturgical Movement.
Pope Venerable Pius XII introduced radical change to the traditional Eucharistic Fast.
"Traditional" Catholics, for the sake of the Church, must awaken to the reality that decades prior to Vatican II, Rome had introduced radical liturgical reforms...and that additional radical reforms were inevitable.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Victor, you are aware that Cardinal Sarah has insisted that "traditional" Catholics must accept the reality that the TLM must and will be subjected to reforms.
Cardinal Sarah has expressed his support for Vatican II/liturgical reform of the OF and EF.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
MT,
You continue to ignore Mediator Dei so your cut and paste machine is meaningless drivel
Mr Thomas:
"2,147 Conciliar Fathers insisted that during Mass, "Christ's faithful, when present at this mystery of faith, should not be there as strangers or silent spectators;" (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy)."
Being strangers or silent spectators at Mass seen as a defect is highly judgemental of the faithful and highly insulting to these true believers whose Faith surpassed all understanding of the liturgical reformers. These detached elitists in the Church, the liturgical movement gang in particular, made sure the constitution on the liturgy was voted on by the fathers as quickly as possible to avoid discussion which would otherwise have revealed the hidden ideological agenda and blatant untruths it contained. Pius XI only asked for antiphonal singing between choir and people to appease the critics of the "detached or silent spectators," not a deformation of the Mass which has caused the loss of millions of souls to God...the wrath of God awaits the Church for this as already seen by churches closing everywhere in the West as Novus Ordo Catholicism is extinguished; yet we see new TLM churches opening there too as those mustard seeds of great hope...
"...you are aware that Cardinal Sarah has insisted that "traditional" Catholics must accept the reality that the TLM must and will be subjected to reforms."
Of course. The EF needs its calendar of Saints updated, as well as perhaps give more readings for unassigned weekdays. Restoring sequences particularly for Christmas and other important feasts may be another option.
By the way, how many follow Cardinal Sarah's advice of turning to God instead of man for worship in the Novus Ordo.....even the pope seems to think man is more important than God by scolding Cdl Sarah for his suggestion.
MT,
Chew on this:
Though insisting on the primacy of Latin in the liturgy of the Western Church (cf. Mediator Dei, par. 60), Pius approves the use of the vernacular in the Ritual for sacraments and other rites outside the Mass. All such permissions, however, were to be granted by the Holy See, and Pius XII strongly condemned the efforts of individual priests and communities to introduce the vernacular on their own authority. He allowed the use of the vernacular in other rites and sacraments outside the Mass in the service for Baptism and Extreme Unction.
Chew yourself:
3. These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language.
Hmm, maybe there is a connection (speaking of a drop in church attendance since Vatican 2). In the 1970s, the Episcopal Church revamped their old 1928 Book of Common Prayer---one bishop even credited Vatican 2 for some of the changes they made. Even before their 1979 Prayer Book was adopted, Episcopal numbers were declining, but these days it is at an accelerating pace.
Victor said..."Being strangers or silent spectators at Mass seen as a defect is highly judgemental of the faithful and highly insulting to these true believers whose Faith surpassed all understanding of the liturgical reformers. These detached elitists in the Church, the liturgical movement gang in particular, made sure the constitution on the liturgy was voted on by the fathers as quickly as possible to avoid discussion which would otherwise have revealed the hidden ideological agenda and blatant untruths it contained."
Victor, I appreciate your point about silent spectators at Mass...that is, being judgmental about them.
But it is unrealistic to advance the notion that "detached elitists in the Church" tricked more than 2,000 bishops who approved the Constitution on the Liturgy.
Throughout his Pontificate — years prior to Vatican II — Pope Venerable Pius XII had approved radical liturgical reforms.
During the 1940s and 1950s, he responded in positive fashion to bishops in one country after another who had requested his permission to vernacularize the Mass.
When he tinkered with the traditional Midnight Eucharistic Fast, Pope Venerable Pius XII noted that "many Bishops from various countries have asked, in official letters, that this law of fast be somewhat mitigated."
In 1948 A.D., Pope Venerable Pius XII established the Pontifical Commission for the Reform of the Liturgy.
He placed Monsignor Bugnini on said Commission. In turn, Monsignor Bugnini and his colleagues concocted radical liturgical reforms that Pope Venerable Pius XII promulgated.
Throughout the 1940s and 1950s, everybody was aware that the Roman Liturgy had incurred radical reforms courtesy of Rome.
At the 1956 A.D. International Congress on Pastoral Liturgy held in Assisi, Pope Venerable Pius XII declared that the Holy Ghost had empowered the Liturgical Movement to reform the Roman Liturgy.
He noted the reform's radical nature.
Pope Venerable Pius XII, 1956 A.D: "If one compares the present state of the liturgical movement with what it was thirty years ago, it is obvious that undeniable progress has been made both in extent and in depth.
"The interest brought to the liturgy, the practical accomplishments and the active participation of the faithful have developed to an extent unthought of at that time.
"The chief driving force, both in doctrine and in practical application, has come from the
hierarchy, and especially from Our saintly Predecessor Pius X, who in his Motu Proprio Abhinc duos annos of October 23, 1913, gave the liturgical movement a decisive impetus."
Victor, the Conciliar Fathers were well aware that the reform of the Roman Liturgy had been underway decades prior to Vatican II.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
The "traditional" Catholic Web site Tradition in Action noted the following undeniable reality in regard to Pope Venerable Pius XII's radical liturgical reforms, as well as his support of the Liturgical Movement that, in 1956 A.D, he declared was inspired by the Holy Ghost:
(By the way, Pope Venerable declared also that the Holy Ghost inspired the Ecumenical Movement.)
==========================================================================
Pius XII Empowered Progressivists for the Liturgical Reform
Dr. Carol Byrne, Great Britain
https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/f083_Dialogue_10.htm
-- He condemned the abuses of the Liturgical Movement in Mediator Dei in 1947, but by 1956, having allowed the same (and worse) abuses to metastasize throughout the Church, he declared that “the liturgical movement has appeared as a sign of God’s providential dispositions for the present day, as a movement of the Holy Spirit in His Church.”
-- He upheld the necessity of Latin in the liturgy in Mediator Dei, but the authorized use of the vernacular increased considerably during his pontificate in many countries.
-- He taught that interior participation in the liturgy is of primary importance, but placed emphasis on the “activity” of the laity as the best means to achieve participation.
"He showed sensitivity to the faithful who preferred to pray silently at Mass, but indicated that their preference was not worthy of respect by promoting the “Dialogue Mass” for the whole congregation.
-- It is evident from this brief sketch that, for Pius XII, the liturgy had two faces, the traditional (sacred) and the modern (worldly), now differentiated, now enigmatically confused in Mediator Dei.
-- This explains how the message it contained was capable of being filtered through various prisms, with the result that the Pope is hailed by conservatives as a defender of Tradition and by progressivists as a friend of aggiornamento or adapting the liturgy to the demands of the modern world.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Victor, I appreciate the regard you hold for the TLM. I as well hold the TLM in high regard.
Along with Father McDonald, Cardinal Sarah has presented a beautiful peace plan that would end the Latin Church's liturgical war.
Below is part of Cardinal Sarah's 2017 A.D. address that marked Summorum Pontificum's 10th anniversary. The following is the way to liturgical peace:
"In his Letter to the Bishops that accompanied the Motu proprio, Pope Benedict XVI clearly explained that the purpose for his decision to have the two missals coexist was not only to satisfy the wishes of certain groups of the faithful who are attached to the liturgical forms prior to the Second Vatican Council, but also to allow for the mutual enrichment of the two forms of the same Roman rite, in other words, not only their peaceful coexistence but also the possibility of perfecting them by emphasizing the best features that characterize them.
"He wrote in particular that “the two Forms of the usage of the Roman rite can be mutually enriching: new Saints and some of the new Prefaces can and should be inserted in the old Missal….
"In parishes where it has been possible to implement the Motu proprio, pastors testify to the greater fervor both in the faithful and in the priests, as Father Rodheudt himself can bear witness.
"They have also noted a repercussion and a positive spiritual development in the way of experiencing Eucharistic liturgies according to the Ordinary Form, particularly the rediscovery of postures expressing adoration of the Blessed Sacrament: kneeling, genuflection, etc., and also greater recollection characterized by the sacred silence that should mark the important moments of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, so as to allow the priests and the faithful to interiorize the mystery of faith that is being celebrated.
"It is true also that liturgical and spiritual formation must be encouraged and promoted.
"Similarly, it will be necessary to promote a thoroughly revised pedagogy in order to get beyond an excessively formal “rubricism” in explaining the rites of the Tridentine Missal to those who are not yet familiar with it, or who are only partly acquainted with it…and sometimes not impartially.
"To do that, it is urgently necessary to finalize a bilingual Latin-vernacular missal to allow for full, conscious, intimate and more fruitful participation of the lay faithful in Eucharistic celebrations."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Get more deacons to help distribute Communion, no need for laypeople to distribute Communion at a Liturgy.
Am I to understand that the Cathedral priests, for ideological reasons, refuse to assist in the distribution of Holy Communion at an EF Mass, and are 'not available' for this reason alone? And how many are we talking about?
1
Mark Thomas tells us that 99.9999 per cent of Catholics will not 'embrace' an all-Latin Mass. How he arrives at this figure he does not say, but 0.0001 per cent is one in a million. If Fr Allan gets a congregation of 300 at his EF Mass, then applying MT's arithmetic means that there must be 300 million Catholics within travelling distance of Savannah cathedral. To put it another way, the 2011 census recorded that there were just over 4 million Catholics in England and Wales. If MT's statistics are to be believed, then the number of people who attend the traditional Mass could fit into a London taxicab!
Similarly, his claim that the Catholic Church is booming 'throughout Asia' is nonsense. The Church may indeed be doing well in those places where it has a historical presence, and that's a good thing. But whether you measure Asia geographically or demographically, 'throughout' is hardly borne out by the statistics.
The (solemn) OF Mass I attended on Sunday at the Oxford Oratory was in Latin except for the Scripture readings and the Bidding Prayers. There was a sizeable congregation, despite the fact that it is holiday time and the University is down. An earlier EF Low Mass is also well attended, as are the English Masses. Those who attend the Low Mass would not want it in the vernacular; those who attend the Solemn Mass have no hang-ups about Latin and if it were switched to the EF (as Birmingham did a few years back) would not complain.
Not long ago MT was quoting some remarks by Benedict XVI which implied that SP was simply a prudential concession to satisfy a few diehards, as if they were the Pope's only and final words on the matter. Now he is quoting Cardinal Sarah who sets the record straight, and who also quotes Benedict. Does this mean that MT has changed his mind? Or, in line with most cutters-and-pasters, he doesn't bother to read what he cuts and pastes?
I think it would be well to eliminate Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist and eliminate reviving Holy Communkon in the Hand. It would be well to have no music or singing during Holy Communion.
Post a Comment