It’s not the end of the world. Those places which took to heart Pope Benedict’s Motu Proprio should now turn to phase two of what Pope Benedict hoped would happen, that the Ancient Mass would inform the Post Vatican II Mass.
Do you want to preserve Gregorian Chant and Latin: Chant the propers from the 1974 Roman Gradual (which, by the way, has the post Vatican II gradual for the new lectionary).
Chant the parts of the Mass in Latin and if you want some vernacular as Vatican II desired, chant the changing parts in the vernacular.
With your bishop’s approval, celebrate the Mass ad orientem. My creative take on the current Introductory Rite is that it could take place at the foot of the altar through the Confietor and absolution, the priest ascends the altar for the Kyrie and the Gloria with the Collect at the Epistle Side. Of course all of this could also be done from the chair.
The Credo could be from the center of the altar or the chair to include the Universal Prayer.
The Concluding Rite could be from the altar, with the Collect at the Epistle Side and the blessing and dismissal from the center.
Of course the Liturgy of the Word would be in the vernacular but with a Latin Gradual and from the ambo. For some peculiar reason, at outdoor Masses at St. Peters, two ambos are used with the Old Testament and Epistle read from the ambo on the Epislte side and the Gospel on the Gospel side. That could happen in a normal parish church too.
All of this would follow scrupulously the General Norm of the Roman Missal and its rubrics.
Kneeling for Holy Communion would be maintained.
The choreography of the Mass would follow the EF’s sensibilities. That could easily be implemented in the Vatican Post II Mass.
23 comments:
At most NO Masses there is a lot of chatter before, during and after Mass, by the people and even by the Presider too. He may even start his homily with a joke, definitely comment about the upcoming football game in the afternoon. The emphasis is on how we make connection with each other, how well we get along. Not much structure, variety is the spice of ordinary life. Well, it is the Novus Ordo after all. The use of ordinary language, improvised liturgical gestures combined with the light hearted delivery of the presider immerses the Mass in lukewarm liquid modernity. Nothing much is left to remind one of Catholic Tradition.
Ordinary chatter at a TLM almost never happens. Preparation for Mass may start with the Rosary. A uniquely Catholic prayer. After low Mass the Leonine prayers remind us to ask for the intercession of the Virgin Mary, St Michael, and ask the Sacred Heart of Jesus to have Mercy on us before returning to the secular world protected by Divine Providence. In contrast, the closing hymn at a NO Mass is likely to be an old Lutheran or other Protestant composition or worse a Marty Haugen tune.
I have been to a family member's funeral Mass at an Episcopal Church. They knelt for their communion and used some Latin.
The NO and the TLM really convey the idea two different religions. Catholic Tradition went with the bath water.
Whining? More outrage at a manifest injustice by the Shepherd in Chief. Here is what Archbishop Gullickson who was to celebrate the Mass at the Basilica in DC had to say:
On the moves against the Traditional Mass, “It’s all about the Violence”: “Why would anyone pretending to be of Christ’s Church lash out at the lambs?” (by Archbishop Thomas E. Gullickson)
Here is a well stated point about the post Conciliar revolution. I read this on The New Liturgical Movement.
"There can be no clearer sign that the post-Conciliar revolution is totally uninteresting to the rising generations, and knowing this, grows deathly afraid, and resorts to doing by force what it cannot do by persuasion. One of the most famous things that St John Paul II ever said was also one of the simplest things he ever said: “Do not be afraid!” I am not a saint, but I make bold to repeat the same words: Do not be afraid. A dying revolution is not a dead revolution; it can still strike out and cause pain, and will likely do so. But in the very act of doing so, it confesses that it has failed and is dying. Do not be afraid. The revolution is over."
This explains the callous motu proprio quite well.
God bless you Father for trying, but I think the previous three comments confirm it: You can publish your "continuity/compromise" suggestions as much as you like, but the people who read this blog just aren't very interested. It isn't because of anything about you--it's bigger.
We know that the "reformed liturgy" has no future.
The pope's motu proprio is more "dead on arrival" than Humanae Vitae ever was!
Humanae Vitae won sympathy for rebellious Catholics from atheists, feminists, agnostics, hedonists and scores of people who, otherwise, had no interest in the Catholic faith. Traditiones Custodes won sympathy from millions of Catholics who, otherwise, had no interest in the Traditional Latin Mass.
Humanae Vitae was a matter of moral and natural law. Leading cardinals, bishops and theologians are arguing that since Traditiones Custodes only deals with a disciplinary matter regulating a form of the liturgy that it will never become law if it is not "received"--and not too many dioceses seem very eager to "receive" it.
Humanae Vitae triggered a hardening against the Church and widespread disobedience to a type of "Catholic" who thrives on disobedience. Traditiones Custodes has triggered a determination to defend our liturgical heritage by Catholics determined to obey the Church and will not be driven out because of the overreaching mistakes of one pope. And these Catholics are reproducing and creating vocations--vocations that will embrace and nurture tradition, long after this papacy is just an embarrassing memory.
The Traditional Mass IS the future of our Church, probably a smaller Church, but a Church more devoted and stronger in its faith. All the rest of these "compromises" with the child of the Consilium is just silliness. Passing silliness.
Thomas Garrett,
If the OF were celebrated as it is at the Brompton Oratory and St. John Cantius, many of us would not have a problem with the OF but it is extremely rare that the OF ever is celebrated that way. Also the clergy associated with those churches are orthodox and take the liturgy very seriously and do not view it as something to be shaped to suit them.
TJM,
All well and good and I am always glad to hear about these kinds of Novus Ordo Masses, but as many of us realize, such Masses are often called "unicorn" Masses, because sometimes it seems that they are as hard to find as a unicorn.
I am not saying this as an absolute, but it seems to be the case that the Novus Ordo, for all its flaws, has one that is particularly troublesome: Something about it seems to just INVITE deviations. It just seems to be systemically flawed. The great "New Springtime" of Vatican II never happened, but instead had quite an opposite effect. All the nonsense that came afterward and the great falling away of so many souls was dormant already in the Pre-Conciliar Church--I do not deny that. But the "cure" has been about as effective as treating a sinus infection with mustard gas.
Pope Francis, without using the specific words, has made it clear that he demands a "New Church" that he believes the Council mandated and that Church is radically, drastically, diametrically different than the Church that came before and it demands a liturgy that reflects that difference. The disdainful, insulting remarks he can't restrain himself from making about Traditionalists make no attempt to hide what he believes. I can't share his beliefs, however, because the God I worship doesn't contradict himself and doesn't teach us one thing for 2000 years and then shift gears because he got hip.
I am glad there are priests like those at the Oratory and Fr. McDonald and others who take the Mass seriously and demand reverence. But that's just part of being Catholic. It sure isn't a fruit of Vatican II, no matter how much we insist it is.
Something is seriously wrong and we MUST face it. What Francis did two weeks ago was a symptom. It was also a "tell". The Revolution IS over and no ecclesial "red guard" can force it to work.
Thomas Garrett,
I agree with what you have stated, a reverent OF which looks and feels in continuity with the EF is a rare bird.
Hubris is all I can say with regard to Francis and his ilk. Nothing worked out like they envisioned and they are angry, bitter, and mad as hell that we don't like their product. In the business world, the OF would have lasted a few years before a course correction would have occurred, because businesses do not like failure. Remember New Coke?
I greatly respect what priests like Father McDonald is trying to do, but he is a rare bird. Many of the older priests, in particular, are heavily invested in the liturgical failure and will not change course even if it mean emptier churches.
I grew up during the liturgical wars and never understood the need for a "reformed" Mass. By the time I was 10 I could chant 5 Latin ordinaries by heart. It was not difficult, at all. I will admit this here, but the only change I approved of was the dropping of the Last Gospel and the reordering of the dismissal rite. That at least made logical sense, but the rest, did not. Armed with a Missal, you could actually participate in the Mass even if you were not a Latinist.
I hope I live another 10 years or so to see the epic failure I believe is coming. There is a demographic sinkhole out there and the EF is the only place where that sinkhole does not appear to be a concern because so many young families seem to favor the EF.
With respect, Father, I think absolutely *no* permission is needed to offer the 1970 Missal ad orientem.
That said, if versus populum started to disappear from a parish, the pastor could expect complaints, and if they reached the bishop's ears, he may have something to say.
I offer the 1970 version of the Mass ad orientem every Sunday at 9 am; no complaints as far as I know. I didn't ask permission because none was needed.
Father Fox,
Where did you get such good, common sense?
Russia, Ohio is very practical. Fr Fox allowed a TLM for one of our parishioners who died suddenly Sunday afternoon, two weeks ago. My wife and the Altar Rosary Society catered the reception after the burial. She has remarked how beautiful the tiny church is and how nice the parish hall is. She was quite impressed. Thank you, Fr Fox.
Sophia here: This treacherous move by Pope Francis against Traditional Catholics-in fact against the entire Church because of it's divisiveness -has been very painful to experience. But I have been thinking about what Pope Paul VI had to endure. I have so much empathy for him. Only 3 years after the conclusion of the Council, he admitted poignantly but incontrovertibly "that the Church was engaged in a process of self-destruction." Then on the Feast of SS Peter and Paul in 1972, he explained why- "By means of some fissure the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God". Incontrovertible indeed! Based on those words, what a burden he must have carried for the rest of his life! Imagine 6 years of managing guilt, grief, regret!
The Novus Ordo Missae is not defined by the vernacular or versus populum any more than the Tridentine Mass is defined by the Low Mass. A common misapprehension on the part of their respective devotees.
Sophia Paul VI made no attempt to reverse the disastrous path launched by his hubris
Sophia,
Some people will dismiss this as sensationalistic tripe or something from the tin-foil hat file, but the exorcists who tried to exorcise Annalise Michel in Germany taped the dialogues and they have been translated into English. Part of that can be found here:
https://diabolicalconfusions.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/the-entire-case-history-of-anneliese-michel-the-real-emily-rose-warning-shocking-content/
Now I am not sure about this, but I believe there is a point in the exorcism where the demon is compelled to tell the truth to the exorcist. If that is the case, one of the demons said that Paul VI wanted to restore the old Mass, but that forces in the Vatican had him boxed in to where he could do nothing.
I have been very hard on Paul VI sometimes, but if this is the case, I have nothing but compassion for a pope whose pontificate was the beginning of a huge free-fall.
The claim that a demon can be "compelled" to tell the truth is probably not true.
The transcript of the exorcism of Anneleise Michel shows the exorcist, after demanding they tell the truth, repeatedly catches them (the demins) in lies.
In the Preanotanda to the Rite of Exorcism, the Church counsels the exorcist not to truth anything the demon says.
5. "The exorcist will be on his guard against the arts and subterfuges which the spirits are wont to use in deceiving the exorcist. For often times they give deceptive answers and make it difficult to understand them, so that the exorcist may tire and give up, or so it might appear that the afflicted one is in no wise possessed by the devil..."
The devil's purpose is to sow discord and mistrust. Is it not likely that he would do so regarding the most sacred and powerful rite of the Church, the celebration of the Eucharist?
The real question is how many parishes actually have copies of the Graduale (or Simplex) to do the actual propers for Liturgy? I'm guessing barely a handful.
I would think Satan would encourage the use of the OF since it’s done the work for him!
Thanks for the info Fr. K.
Thanks for the astute observation, TJM.
The Roman Gradual in its entirety can be found on-line and there is an English version too.
https://www.ccwatershed.org/2014/02/17/1974-graduale-romanum-now-online/
Sophia here. You are quite right TJM, true repentance involves not only acknowledgement of what we have done/are responsible for- but also that we make restitution as far as we are able to do so. Pope Paul VI certainly fulfilled the first half of that both admirably and unequivocally. However, he failed to take the next step/the second half of true repentance, to make restitution as far as he was able. He failed to reverse the implementation of changes he recognized would be responsible for destructive outcomes for Holy Mother Church. For that he deserves our ire. Until quite recently I focused on the latter half and was bitterly angry about it. My anger was fueled by the fact that he would have had very strong support for reversing some or all of it, if only he had had the courage, the will, to do so. He would have had the support and encouragement of the likes of a Cardinal Ottaviani and an Archbishop Lefebvre who had persisted in holding on to Thomism and the Moral Theology of St. Alphonsus Liguori and had begged for the continuation of the Latin Mass. He would also have been bolstered by close allies such as the then Bishop/Archbishop ('77) Joseph Ratzinger and Theologians Henri de Lubac and Hans Urs von Balthasar who had initially bought into the Modern Theology and the "Spirit of Vatican II". However they had seen where it was heading, put the brakes on, and backed away from it. But at this point, I try to focus on the courage it took for him to not only write- but more importantly- to stick by Humanae Vitae despite the slings and arrows directed at him from even friends and allies within The Church!
Sophia here: So far Pope Francis has made no acknowledgement that so many positions he has taken and decisions he has made -including this egregious Motu Proprio- has had a devastating impact on the Church, let alone expressed any intention to redress them.
I have been encouraging people to make a Novena to the Holy Spirit for our own Bishop Stephen Parkes and many, many other Bishops throughout the U.S. and the rest of the world, to continue to discern how vitally important this "Mass of the Saints" is to the life of Holy Mother Church and to have the courage to act accordingly. Pray that Bishop Parkes will align his decision with those of his brother Bishops who have already taken the bold stand that not only those priests already celebrating this Mass- but all priests in their dioceses who would henceforth desire to do so- have their permission to celebrate it! Amen.
I am not interested in *anything* any demon supposedly said.
In sacred scripture, our Incarnate Lord told them to shut up; it didn't matter whether they seemed to be telling the truth or not. We don't listen to them, we listen to Jesus!
Fr. MARTIN Fox - A great story is told in the early midrash on the Creation Accounts about the Tempter speaking.
One of the rabbis imagined that, in the conversation between Eve and the serpent, the Tempter gently nudged Eve so that her shoulder brushed against the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. "See?" the serpent said, "God told you that you would die if you so much as touched the tree. But you did touch it and . . . well, you have not died!"
Hence, when the Lord visited the garden after the fall, He spoke with Adam and He spoke with Dve, but the serpent, having used the gift of language for evil, was not permitted to make a sound....
Post a Comment