Press title for full interview:
Bishop Earl K. Fernandes of Columbus, Ohio on vocations, the Latin Mass, Abp. Vigano, and developing a prayer life
“There was nothing ideological about [the traditional Latin Mass],” says the Bishop of Columbus, Ohio, in a wide-ranging interview, “we wanted to offer the Mass to meet the pastoral need of the people. It is a beautiful part of the Church’s tradition.”
CWR: YOU HAVE CELEBRATED THE TRADITIONAL LATIN MASS?
Bishop Fernandes: When I grew up in the 70s, the parishes had guitar Masses and liturgical dance. My father had a fondness for the Latin Mass. When I went to medical school, there was a Latin Indult Mass offered nearby. I liked the Gregorian chant, as well as its peace and quiet. I’d go to the English Mass as well, depending on what my schedule was.
When I finished up my doctorate in 2007, Archbishop Pilarczyk asked me to study the Latin Mass so I could help with the celebration of it. There was nothing ideological about it; we wanted to offer the Mass to meet the pastoral need of the people. It is a beautiful part of the Church’s tradition.
23 comments:
He's a true shepherd, the guys in Charlotte and Detroit are wolves in sheep's clothing.
Well the situation on the ground can be different in each locale.
big benny, no it is not if you are truly Catholic and not some leftwing loon masquerading as a Catholic bishop. We are a Universal Church, not a local one. Vatican II demanded that the Latin Mass be preserved, and St. John XXIII said in Veterum Sapientia that Latin "is the language which joins the Church of today," not prior centuries. You sound a lot like Fr K!
Well to be fair they can still have a new rite latin mass with traditional trimmings.
Interesting historical synopsis…
https://churchlifejournal.nd.edu/articles/how-the-novus-ordo-mass-was-made/
By Yves Chiron
We’re a universal church but the situation on the ground (ie the context / tensions / history etc) of the local church is different everywhere. There clearly were elements of the trad movement that was problematic eg the far right connections.
Vatican II didn’t demand that the 1962 missal be preserved. It called for the rites to be reformed - which included greater use of the vernacular, albeit with care that the faithful be familiar with the ordinary parts pertaining to them in Latin (chant).
In a less well known section, it also gave bishops the right to stipulate particular masses in the vernacular.
It's not just about aesthetics. That's simply stepping wrong at the first foot-fall.
Nick
It also said Gregorian chant is to have pride of place, followed by polyphony... few years later, Pope Paul said we'd have to totally give up on Gregorian chant. Whoops!
It also said there were to be no changes which the good of the Church did not both genuinely and certainly require. That opens about 1,000 cans of worms.
It also said Latin was to be retained, to the point that the Council Fathers scorned those who said it would lead to 100% vernacular Masses (which the Council in no uncertain terms did not countenance)--and yet those "prophets of doom" were proven right in less than ten years.
You're playing catch-up, benny.
Nick
It also said Gregorian chant is to have pride of place, followed by polyphony... few years later, Pope Paul said we'd have to totally give up on Gregorian chant. Whoops!
“The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman Liturgy: therefore, under normal circumstances, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services. But other kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations, so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action.”
It didn’t exclude other types if music, including modern. Indeed of the three experimental masses demonstrated to the V2 bishops, one was a simple mass with hymns.
Paul VI never said we’d have to give up on chant. In fact he continued to reiterate the need to maintain chant in the years following the changes.
benny,
How many parishes have you been to that give Gregorian chant "pride of place"? Or use it at all? I'm not talking exclusive use--just use, let alone primary use? Even my parish, with its altar rail, all-male servers, and post-Mass St. Michael prayer, rarely uses it.
"One was a simple [M]ass with hymns."
As far as I know, the experimental Masses were presented to the Synod of Bishops, not the Council itself. But this just makes clear the Consilium didn't bother to follow Sacrosanctum Concilium some four years after its promulgation.
"Paul VI never said we’d have to give up on chant."
Paul VI absolutely did say that, a week before the Novus Ordo was implemented much more strictly than the Tridentine reform ever was. The same remarks show that Sacrosanctum Concilium's language requiring the retention of Latin was already dead.
"No longer Latin, but the spoken language will be the principal language of the Mass. The introduction of the vernacular will certainly be a great sacrifice for those who know the beauty, the power and the expressive sacrality of Latin. We are parting with the speech of the Christian centuries; we are becoming like profane intruders in the literary preserve of sacred utterance. We will lose a great part of that stupendous and incomparable artistic and spiritual thing, the Gregorian chant."
Please, let's not re-hash the same ground that spirit-of-V2ers were already repulsed from decades ago.
Nick
big kenny aka K,
What did Paul VI do to promote Gregorian Chant? Nada, other than issue some little booklet that was ignored and then he did nothing to the ignorers
How many parishes have you been to that give Gregorian chant "pride of place"? Or use it at all? I'm not talking exclusive use--just use, let alone primary use?
Well most (to some extent) these days to be honest. But I live in London with multiple Latin masses available, plus Westminster Cathedral with a daily said Latin mass with solemn sung English mass with sung Latin ordinary, plus sung morning / evening prayer.
As far as I know, the experimental Masses were presented to the Synod of Bishops, not the Council itself. But this just makes clear the Consilium didn't bother to follow Sacrosanctum Concilium some four years after its promulgation.
There were three experimental masses with a selection of bishops attending each. Read Yves Chiron, a critic of the reform’, interesting account. I tried to find it online again but couldn’t.
Paul VI absolutely did say that, a week before the Novus Ordo was implemented much more strictly than the Tridentine reform ever was.
The Tridentine reform took much longer to implement due to the slowness of communication etc compared to nowadays. But even so Trent left it to the pope to decide how to interpret and implement the reforms but even ten it took around 100 years to take root eg the formation of seminaries.
It’s only 60 years since V2 and there is a corrective course underway from the initial experimentation phase. There’s much more Latin / chant / sacred music and solemnity than 10-20 years ago.
Yes Paul VI lamented that Latin would no longer be the principal language of the mass but he sought to preserve it as a sacred language, particularly in regard to the sung office.
“Pope Paul VI promoted the use of Latin and Gregorian chant in the Catholic Church, particularly in his later years, even while overseeing the shift to vernacular languages in the Mass. He acknowledged the beauty and spiritual power of Latin, sought to preserve it as a sacred language, and issued documents like the booklet Jubilate Deo to encourage teaching the faithful Latin chants for common singing.”
I btw don’t forget he’s a saint!
Actually I gave the Yves Chirion link above…
https://churchlifejournal.nd.edu/articles/how-the-novus-ordo-mass-was-made/
TJzM if you want to blow a gasket take a look at this Scottish church and watch a rather “interesting “ mass complete with crystal glass goblet and rose bowl for vessels if you can:
https://www.churchservices.tv/viewpark
Scroll down to recordings.
Also worth catching is end of adoration vid with priest giving benediction wearing a football shirt / cardigan.
It’s almost enough to turn me into a TLM-er!
benny,
No need to fill up these comment pages with your serial responses. We have enough of that already.
In any event, I'm not surprised that London, a metropolitan area of nine million people or so, and the capital of the country where the first permissions to celebrate the TLM after implementation of the NO were granted, and whose ordinary has not (AFAIK) canceled any diocesan TLMs), and where the Oratory has a strong presence thanks to St. Henry Newman, would have multiple Latin Masses available. But this is hardly representative of the liturgical diversity available to most Catholics in the English-speaking world, let alone the fact that the cathedral has NO Latin Masses--which most bishops the world round do not countenance.
So, it's dependent on the whim of the ordinary, not on anyone taking Sacrosanctum Concilium at its word.
Nick
The bishops also roundly criticized and (fittingly) Cardinal Heenan of Westminster, who after attending the experimental messes that those Masses were, said that Catholic congregations would dwindle to women and children. He was largely right, where (1) they haven't disappeared completely or (2) are traddy Masses, TLM or otherwise.
Nick
Benny boy, instead of taking a hagiographic paraphrase disconnected from the reality of the situation, look at the man's own words quoted above. Otherwise, you'll have to go and sit with Mark Thomas in the "completely ignores anything that disagrees with his own baseless position" section.
Anyway, being a saint doesn't mean making all of the right decisions for the church's governance.
Nick
That's beside the point. The amount of time it took to communicate after Trent had nothing to do with the prudence and wisdom shown in allowing Catholic rites of antiquity to continue in use unless the bishop and cathedral chapter opted for the Tridentine rite. The amount of time it took to set up seminaries is even less to the point.
Sadly, the rush to embrace "Modern Man" meant such wisdom was not followed in the 1960s.
"there is a corrective course underway from the initial experimentation phase. There’s much more Latin / chant / sacred music and solemnity than 10-20 years ago."
Except in the dioceses where recently-appointed bishops are banning such things. So much for a corrective course, unless it's correcting back to the 1970s.
Nick
Indeed. It hardly commends the project.
Nick
Post a Comment