Bishops' resistance to motu proprio begins to emerge

Vivicat! News, opinion, commentary, prayer and reflections from a personal Catholic perspective ^ | 29 August 2007 | Teófilo

[Teófilo]

Folks, I am saddened to see that various bishops across the nation are beginning to concoct roadblocks to the motu proprio authorizing every priest of the Latin Rite to celebrate the Mass of Blessed Pope John XXIII as the extraordinary expression of the Mass -- the so-called "Tridentine Latin Mass" according to the 1962 Missal.

I am not going to mention any names. That's not my style. However, I've received first-hand information that a bishop of a small U.S. diocese, during the weekly diocesan TV broadcast, discouraged a curious young interviewer to even attend the Tridentine Mass, even asserting that the motu proprio only applied to "preexisting groups." Since no such groups currently exist, His Excellency reasons that the motu proprio doesn't apply to him. The fact that he has bent over backwards to prohibit the celebration of the Tridentine Latin Mass in his diocese and to sideline those Catholics who express a legitimate pastoral need to worship in that rite, forcing those Catholics to go elsewhere to receive spiritual sustenance according to their needs and temperament, remained unaddressed. In other words, said bishop is the reason why there are mp ondulted Tridentine Latin Masses celebrated in his diocese and now feels that the motu proprio reinforces his stance.

I am not a canonist or a liturgist. In my defense, I will say that I can read and follow an argument and based on that alone, I humbly submit that the bishop is wrong. His reading of the motu proprio contradicts both the spirit and the letter of this document, as well as the expressed desires of the Holy Father on this matter.

The fact of the matter is that, in my opinion, the motu proprio wrestled away from the bishops the power to grant or withold permission to celebrate the now extraordinary form of the Liturgy from priests of the Latin Rite under their jurisdiction. Without wishing to lecture bishops, I humbly submit that the motu proprio represents a direct appeal to all bishops to change their mindsets and attitudes regarding the celebration of this rite. Bishops are bound to think "How do I make this happen and sustain it" and not "What canonical or liturgical subterfuges I still can utilize to derail the celebration of the extraordinary form of the Latin Rite."

The motu proprio is clear: all priests of the Latin Rite are free to celebrate this extraordinary form of the Eucharist, and groups of the Catholic faitful wishing to worship in said rite are free to come together, worship, and associate around. I humbly submit that any other interpretation that undermines this basic finding is untrue to the wishes of the Holy Father. What is left for bishops and other local ordinaries to do is to ensure that the extraordinary form of the Latin Rite be celebrated appropriatedly and knowingly. Although I recognize that this might take some time as interested priests face a training curve to learn or relearn the old rubrics, unsympathetic bishops should not take advantage of the situation to enact liturgical and canonical requirements that would, in fact, stop the celebration of the Mass of Blessed John XXIII in their dioceses for the foreseable future.

Canon 212, ss 3 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, which is now part of the mission of charter of Vivificat!, states:

Christ's faithful have the right, indeed at times the duty, in keeping with their knowledge, competence and position, to manifest to the sacred Pastors their views on matters which concern the good of the Church. They have the right also to make their views known to others of Christ's faithful, but in doing so they must always respect the integrity of faith and morals, show due reverence to the Pastors and take into account both the common good and the dignity of individuals.

The motu proprio itself exhorts the faithful to notify Rome in case of local inaction.

Where am I going with this? Let us pray that the Holy Spirit continues to enlighten our bishops and that our bishops be docile to the promptings of that same Spirit and in the same spirit of prayer and humility, I exhort my fellow Catholics who prefer to worship under this liturgical form to have their pens or word processors ready and ask from their Pastors that their individual dignity and pastoral needs be satisfied, all in a spirit of respect and reverence and Christian charity.

[Teófilo]

Typos. Blunders. Mine.

[Teófilo]

PING!

[livius]

"What canonical or liturgical subterfuges I still can utilize to derail the celebration of the extraordinary form of the Latin Rite."

Sadly, that's exactly how a great number of bishops see it. I live in Florida, where ALL of the bishops recently signed on to the bizarre restrictions initially imposed by the Bishop of St. Augustine (or his "diocesan liturgist," actually, a diocesan priest who is known to be hostile to the TLM).

[Claud]

I am not going to mention any names. That's not my style. However, I've received first-hand information that a bishop of a small U.S. diocese, during the weekly diocesan TV broadcast, discouraged a curious young interviewer to even attend the Tridentine Mass, even asserting that the motu proprio only applied to "preexisting groups."

Since His Excellency ostensibly went public with these comments on TV, I'd think it would be totally within your rights to mention him by name. Assuming the source is accurately describing what he said, of course.

[maryz]

His reading of the motu proprio contradicts both the spirit and the letter of this document, as well as the expressed desires of the Holy Father on this matter.

I devoutly hope Rome is tracking the bishops' responses to the MP! And I think it's likely, since apparently the Pope put a lot of time and effort into dealing with obstreperous bishops who were against its issuance. I don't think he's a quitter!

[Teófilo]

Since His Excellency ostensibly went public with these comments on TV, I'd think it would be totally within your rights to mention him by name. Assuming the source is accurately describing what he said, of course.

The information is accurate, I just choose to refrain from mentioning is name out of respect for the office and the man who holds it. Yeah, I know, my choice may be questioned, but there it is.

This is a very personal choice I am making. I rather talk about the deed than about the person.

-Theo

[Claud]

Fair enough. I’m not gonna tell you how to run your show, just throwing my opinion out there. :)

[PAR35]

The information is accurate, I just choose to refrain from mentioning is name out of respect for the office and the man who holds it.

Why show any respect for a bishop who doesn't seem to show any respect for the Pope.

Or, to put it another way, if you respect the Bishop, shouldn't you be trying to emulate the conduct he is modeling?

[magisterium]

There are well-placed sources that state that, simultaneously with writing the MP, Benedict also drafted a promulgation for an Apostolic Administration for the old rite, and that it even now sits in his desk drawer. Personally, I think that Benedict will guage the reaction of these bishops over a not-too-long timeframe (say, two years at most), and if they are still dragging their feet or otherwise creating obstacles, he will not hesitate to go to Plan B (or Step 2, depending on how much of a chess game this is!) and implement the AA. If the bishops want to go down that road, then Benedict just might take the whole thing away from them entirely. But he will have his way with this, and he knows he doesn't have decades to play around with these guys. He will see the secure resurrection of the TLM through in his lifetime, and will not leave a mess for his successor to deal with.

One way or the other, boys. Which will it be?

[Teófilo]

Why show any respect for a bishop who doesn't seem to show any respect for the Pope. Or, to put it another way, if you respect the Bishop, shouldn't you be trying to emulate the conduct he is modeling?

I respect the bishop because, even in his weakness, he is a successor of the apostles and an anointed of God, and I will not raise my hand against God's anointed.

-Theo

[roamer]

I found these dated in July - I think they are part of this thread.

• 07/14/2007, Did Bishop Skylstad really say that to the Vicar of Christ?, courtesy of L.A. Catholic

  • 07/13/2007, The Language of Tradition, courtesy of OpinionJournal - from The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page

[maryz]

Thanks for the links — I don’t know how I missed the WSJ article!

[roamer]

Thanks for the links — I don’t know how I missed the WSJ article!

 

Welcome.  Here is another link...

A Mickey Mouse Mass!
http://cathcon.blogspot.com/2007/08/mickey-mouse-mass.html

We need all the Blessings and Graces that we can get while we can get them.

I can't even imagine what's next.

[maryz]

I can't even imagine what's next.

Don't even try . . . After Mickey Mouse, I think I'll just lie down with a cool cloth on my head! ;-)

[rrstar96]

Show me a diocese where: the 1970 Mass is said “by the book” and with the greatest reverence; priestly homiletics and character are first-rate; vocations are strong; Catholic schools are uncompromising in teaching solid Church doctrine; Mass attendance is high; and loyalty to the Holy Father and the Magisterium from clergy, religious, and laity is unquestionable; and I will show you a bishop you has moral authority to question his restoring the 1962 Mass.