 |
|
Tridentine Ping List! |
|
Freepmail Frank Sheed if you want ON/OFF this list! |
|
To find posts to this Ping List, just search Keyword: "Tridentine" |
Posted on 11/05/2007 11:59:00 AM PST by maryz
CATEGORY: SESSIUNCULUM, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 1:25 pm
The highly estimable Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, His Excellency Most Reverend Malcolm Ranjith Patabendige gave an interview to Bruno Volpe of Petrus where you can find the original Italian.
Rorate has their own translation, but here is mine with my emphases:
Your Excellency, what kind of reception has Benedict XVI´s Motu Proprio which liberalized the Holy Mass according to the Tridentine Rite had? Some, in the very bosom of the Church, have got their noses bent out of shape…"There have been positive reactions and, it’s pointless to deny it, criticisms and oppositing positions, also on the part of theologians, liturgists, priests, Bishops, and even Cardinals. Frankly, I don’t understand this distancing from, and, let’s just say it, rebellion against the Pope. I invite all, above all shepherds, to obey the Pope, who is the Successor of Peter. Bishops, in particular, swore loyalty to the Pontiff: they must be consistent and faithful to their commitment."
In your view, what are these demonstrations against the Motu Proprio due to?
"You know there have been, on the part of some dioceses, even interpretative documents which inexplicably aim at putting limits on the Pope’s Motu Proprio. Behind these actions there are hidden, on one hand, prejudices>/b> of an ideological kind and, on the other hand, pride, one of the gravest sins. I repeat: I call on everyone to obey the Pope. If the Holy father decided he had to issue the Motu Proprio, he had his reasons which I share entirely."
The derestriction of the the Tridentine Rite by Benedict XVI appears to be the right remedy for the many liturgical abuses sadly recounted after the Second Vatican Council with the ‘Novus Ordo’...
"Look, I don’t want to criticize the ‘Novus Ordo’. But I have to laugh when I hear it said, even by friends, that in a some parish, a priest is a ‘saint’ because of his homily or how well he speaks. Holy Mass is sacrifice, gift, mystery, independently of the priest celebrating it. It is important, nay rather, fundamental that the priest step aside: the protagonist of the Mass is Christ. So I really don’t understand these Eucharistic celebrations turned into shows with dances, songs or applause, as frequently happens with the Novus Ordo."
Monsignor Patabendige, your Congregation has repeatedly denounced these liturgical abuses…
"True. However, there are so many documents which have sadly remained dead letters, winding up on dusty shelves or, worse yet, in waste baskets."
Another point: one often hears very long homilies…
"This is an abuse too. I’m against dances and applause during Masses, which aren’t a circus or stadium. Regarding homilies, they must be about, as the Pope has underscored, the catechetical dimension exclusively, avoiding sociologizing and pointless chatter. For example, priests jump onto some political point because they didn’t prepare their homily well, which really ought to be scrupulously worked on. An excessively long homily is synonymous with poor preparation: the right length of time for a sermon should be 10 minutes, 15 at most. You have to remember that the high point of the celebration is the Eucharistic mystery, without of course intending to downplay the liturgy of the Word, but rather to make clear how to carry out a correct liturgy."
Returning to the Motu Proprio: some criticize the use of Latin during Mass…
"The Tridentine Rite is part of the tradition of the Church. The Pope has duly explained the reasons for his provision, an act of liberty and justice towards traditionalists. As for Latin, I would underscore that it was never been abolished and, what is more, that it secures the universality of the Church. But I repeat: I urge priests, bishops, and cardinals to obedience, setting aside every kind of pride and prejudice."
I have a couple observations.
Archbp. Ranjith identifies resistance to Summorum Pontificum, that is, attempting to impose restrictions on the Pope’s wide provisions, as a manfestation of the sin of pride.
Ranjith firmly establishes that Christ is the true actor in the Mass. Thus, since He is the Actor, what He does in the liturgy (the Church’s texts and the our gestures defined by rubrics) is Christ acting and speaking through us. Our active participation, therefore, be characterized by active participation by active receptivity.
Since Christ is the true Actor, the priest needs to get out of the way and not impose too much his own personality on any liturgical action. The older form of Mass, in its precision of rubrics first and foremost, but also its gestalt tends to control the priest. The newer form of Mass frees him up in a way that is a little risky. Also, we could say that the ad orientem manner of saying Mass also helps to get the priest out of the way so that everyone can focus more fully on the Lord together.
About that phrase of "liberty and justice" towards "traditionalists". In an amazing coincidence I was reading this morning a new little book by a liturgist at the liturgical institute Sant’Anselmo in Rome, Andrea Grillo (born 1961) entitled Oltre Pio V... Beyond Pius V. Though I am not too far into this book, and probably won’t go much further, Grillo takes exception to the argument in favor of the provisions of Summorum Pontificum based on "freedom" of rites. I will look over that section again and maybe post some comments on it elsewhere. But it strikes me that Archbp. Ranjith knows precisely who, in Rome and around the world, is fighting the Motu Proprio and with what arguments.
Therefore, WDTPRS will continue to keep and eye on things and let people know what is going on. If I can’t always provide lots of analysis or review everyone you readers inform me about, I can at least put certain positive and negative positions in the spotlight. You can do your own digging and decide what is going on.
Archbishop Ranjith hits another one out of the park!
Rome’s fury: Motu Proprio mutiny ‘sinful’
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/ukcorrespondents/holysmoke/november07/romes-fury.htm
Posted by Damian Thompson on 05 Nov 2007 at 16:27
telegraph.co.uk
The Vatican has vented its fury at the mutinous response of liberal bishops and cardinals to the Pope’s liberation of the traditional Latin Mass.
Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith, Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship, has accused dioceses that try to sabotage the Pope’s Motu Proprio of “prejudices of an ideological kind” and “pride, one of the gravest sins”. Well said!
The archbishop does not name the prelates he considers to be in a state of “rebellion towards the Pope”, as he puts it. But one thing is clear: overall, the reaction of the Bishops of England and Wales to Pope Benedict’s ruling has been truly dismal.
This is just guesswork, but I wouldn’t surprised if Archbishop’s Ranjith’s remarks were directed partly at the Diocese of Portsmouth, whose “director of liturgy” Paul Inwood produced an appalling set of guidelines that tried to ban Catholics for asking for the traditional Mass.
Two other names that come to mind are Bishop Kieran Conry of Arundel and Brighton and Bishop Arthur Roche of Leeds, both of whom have written letters contrary to the letter and spirit of the Pope’s wishes.
Hat-tip to Petavius and the Rorate Caeli blog for alerting me to the archbishop’s interview, given to Bruno Volpe of the papal news website Petrus. Here are the money quotes:
“There have been positive reactions [to the Motu Proprio] and, it is useless to deny it, criticisms and opposition, even from theologians, liturgists, priests, bishops, and even cardinals. I frankly do not understand these rifts, and, why not [say it], rebellion towards the Pope. I invite all, particularly the Shepherds, to obey the Pope, who is the Successor of Peter. The Bishops, in particular, have sworn fidelity to the Pontiff: may they be coherent and faithful to their commitment…
“You know that there have been, by some dioceses, even interpretative documents which inexplicably intend to limit the Pope’s Motu Proprio. These actions mask behind them, on one hand, prejudices of an ideological kind and, on the other, pride, one of the gravest sins. I repeat: I call all to obey the Pope. If the Holy Father decided to promulgate the Motu Proprio, he had his reasons, which I fully share.”
Such ferocious comments by a senior figure in the Curia indicate that Rome is not prepared to stand by and watch liberal bishops ignore Pope Benedict’s decision to restore the former Tridentine Rite to full parity with the Mass of Paul VI.
Archbishop Ranjith, 58, a Dutch-born Sri Lankan, is a man after the Pope’s heart: he loves the traditional Mass and celebrates it in his private chapel. He speaks with a forthright eloquence rarely encountered among English bishops. Here is a taste of his style, from a recent address in the Netherlands:
“The Church cannot be the arena of confusion, philosophical or moral relativism, sophistry and casuistic dilution of the revealed truth which is the foundation of its Credo, the Word of God as revealed in the Sacred Scriptures and the Tradition of the Church and interpreted by the official magisterium of the Church and open dissent or public debate even in the name of the freedom of theological research.
“My mind goes back to the story of the construction or shall we say the attempted construction of the Tower of Babel. Its constructors felt confident that they could scale the heavens with their own resources and strength without God. Hasn’t that same spirit re-appeared perhaps in a more sophisticated form in the world and the Church today?”
Archbishop Ranjith is no fool: he is appalled by the stroppy, work-to-rule mentality of bishops who think they are popes in their own dioceses and have no intention of implementing a ruling they don’t like.
As for the identity of the unnamed cardinals, your guess is as good as mine. Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor of Westminster hasn’t said anything that could get him into trouble – but neither has he manifested the slightest enthusiasm for – or interest in – this crucial aspect of Benedict’s reform of the liturgy. He’s keeping his head down, as usual.
Posted by Damian Thompson on 05 Nov 2007 at 16:27
someone identified thusly says someone else is guilty of pride?!
This is not a self-appelation.
Moreover, this is not a title he has assumed for himself. Any holder of his office in the Vatican Curia assumes that title.
Were you under the impression he gave himself the title? ;-)
Thanks for the ping! I saw this on another forum, and came right here to see if you had seen it! I want him to talk to OUR bishop and priests in the Greensburg, Pa Diocese!
Understandably, he focuses on the English bishops -- but too many American ones are no prizes either. I wish he'd specifically mentioned those who say the MP only applies to other countries (not to mention any names) . . . well, maybe in his next broadside!
Maybe we could take up a collection to cover a trip to America for him — to a USCCB meeting perhaps! ;-)
did they sneak up on him and confer it?
Wow - that’s a fantastic article!
Count me in! :-)
For the record, the people in my parish, as far as I can tell, STILL don’t even know about the Motu Proprio!
I went to a meeting sponsored by our very hostile bishop and our even more hostile “diocesan liturgy director” to discuss the MP and I was appalled at all the snickering and downright disrespect for the Pope that the anti-MP crowd expressed. Our bishop wasn’t present; and while I like him in some other areas (he’s a nice person and very pro-life), I think that if he’s going to defy the Pope, he should at least come out and do so personally.
He has done exactly what he was not supposed to do: he has imposed a limit. A parish must have at least 50 registered members requesting the Mass to get any consideration. Of course, one parish got 200 signatures, and they still didn’t get the mass because their pastor is opposed and the bishop will not help. And the Pope’s message said nothing about registered members. There are downtown parishes that have large “stable” (that is, regular) congregations where there are virtually no registered members, although the people who attend contribute and support them. There are other people who have other reasons for keeping their membership in a parish other than the one where they regularly attend mass, particularly weekday mass. So does this mean they can’t apply for the MP? According to our bishop it does.
The “stable” group will be addressed in the document to come out from Rome shortly, but bishops and priests like those in my diocese will just find another way around it, because they already consider themselves an independent church and this is just confirming it.
"Listen, I don't need any encouragement, but my idea of heaven is a solid white night club, with me as the head liner, for all eternity . . . and they love me."
Fr. Dyer ticklin' them ivories in The Exorcist (1973)
“the Pope’s message said nothing about registered members...There are other people who have other reasons for keeping their membership in a parish other than the one where they regularly attend mass, particularly weekday mass. So does this mean they can’t apply for the MP? According to our bishop it does.”
The anticipated document from Ecclesia Dei is supposed to address this topic.
Be of good cheer; I suspect PCED will provide relief from these kinds of bishops who added layers of requirements to the Pope’s document.
|
|
Tridentine Ping List! |
|
Freepmail Frank Sheed if you want ON/OFF this list! |
|
To find posts to this Ping List, just search Keyword: "Tridentine" |
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
**Interview with Archbp. Ranjith: those who resist Summorum Pontificum guilty of the sin of pride**
I totally agree.
They are not ascribing to the oath of obedience to the Holy See that they took as priests and bishops.
Wow, this could be an uncharacteristically strong reaction from Rome. Of course, Rome has to share some of the blame, because they have taught the bishops to be disobediant, by continually allowing them to be.
The problem is in the fact that many Bishops of ill will still follow the Weakland doctrine. Weakland ignored explicit instructions from the Holy See not to wreckovate his Cathedral in Miluakee back in 2002, and nothing was done. That was a sign to every other progressive Bishop that when the Holy See puts out instructions like Redemptionis Sacramentum, they are DOA and nothing will be done.
I think the bishops learned this lesson very well and they are pretty confident that nothing will happen to them this time, either, no matter how defiant they are. We shall see.
It says nothing about his personal virtues or holiness.
Is there a problem?
It’s the applause that really makes me cringe! I’ve quoted it before — from that eminent liturgist (and the official ones could take a lesson here), Miss Manners: “If God wishes to applaud in church, He may. From anyone else, it’s inappropriate!”
I’ll be mailing a copy of this to Chaput.
Yes, he's still teaching at Fordham/Fordham Prep. He's also quite a prolific author and, if the titles are any indication, a faithful priest: Books by William J. O'Malley, S.J. at Amazon.com
Trust me- puritanical sensibilities are not the basis of anything I write
I’m not offended- just amused- if my amusement offends your (insert adjective here) sensibilities, my apologies.
Sincerely,
Will
Profound Denier of Puritanical Sensibilities, Inestimable Observer of Seeming Inconsistency, Verbose Fun-Poker at Religious Pomposity, Full Exerciser of Proffered Prerogatives, Exalted Tongue in Cheek Poster, Sincere Apologizer to Titular Defenders, Occasional Employer of Emoticons :)
Methinks you protesteth too much. The title may be pompous, the man is not evidently so, which is what you have said.
We have run into the same problem. Our pastor announced that he would begin saying the TLM soon, which I thought was his perogative, but the bishop has placed some obstacles, namely: forty families requesting it ( easily overcome ), but also some kind of six month preparation classes. So much for the spirit of the MP which I thought took the matter out of the bishops's hands.
“Methinks you protesteth too much”
Hey- I’m a ‘protestant’
Apparently unlike Rome, I take my titles seriously :)
I used to have a D&D character with a name almost that long ...
Yeah, like “will of the people.”
that’s only as a freeper
everywhere else I go by
“will. . . .of God”
please note the lower case ‘w’- that’s inestimable protestant humility at work
amen to that
A six month preparation class! For the congregation?
You folks need to get in touch with Rome. You’re absolutely right, that’s not his prerogative.
No. Not the congregation. The priest is supposed to prepare for six months, although he says he is pretty much ready. I think it is some kind of stalling tactic on the part of the chancery. This bishop has always been opposed to the TLM. This dioces has probably not seen a licit TLM mass in nearly forty years.
That’s ridiculous. I don’t think he has the right to demand that even of the priests, and I bet he’ll get slapped down.
Our anti-TLM bishop came out with some elaborate “test” he was going to administer to priests who wanted to say it. (Not that he cares about the virtually non-English speaking priests who come in and say the NO...) He never revealed the contents of this test to anyone, of course, so they couldn’t prepare for it.
However, in practice, the only priest who has taken it said that the bishop just listened to his reading of the page and said okay. This was after a bitter meeting on the subject, though, so maybe the bishop just decided it wasn’t worth fighting about. Or maybe he came to his senses, and yours will do likewise.
But the six-month course (taught by whom? the anti-TLM bishop?) sounds unreasonable. Our priest here is going to a one-week course presented by the Christ the King Institute and that’s more than sufficient.
BTW, do you mind metioning what diocese you live in?
Yes, I suggested that the pastor attend an FSSP workshop that is five days long. I don't know exactly what the bishop meant by six months but the priest has indicated that he could get around that. I don't think the TLM is on the front burner, with Advent and Christmas coming up, but I think this priest is serious about saying one mass per weekend in the extraordinary form, at some point in the near future. I wasn't there when the announcement was made ( I was attending the TLM in the adjacent diocese ) but according to my daughter he was asking his parisioners to have an open mind and get ready. The impression he gave then was that it would be easy to do, it was his decision, that parishioners had asked him to. Then, here comes this other stuff from the bishop. So, one gets the impression that there is at least a little hostility. My son told me that during choir rehearsal the topic came up, and " Why would we want to return to the dark ages?" was a response that met with some agreement. It will take a little time to get the appreciation happening, but it will eventually be all good. I am in Pueblo, Colorado.
It does sound positive. I think determined priests who know their rights will be able to do it, even if the bishop tries to put roadblocks in their way.
There is a fear-factor, as your son must have observed. That is, so many people have heard such negative stuff about the TLM from the “Spirit of VatII” crowd that they are really afraid that some awful thing is going to be imposed on them. Of course, it’s not being imposed on anyone, and if they don’t want to go, they don’t have to go, but they have been stirred up by some of the clergy who are opposed and as a result have this sort of “bogey man” image of the TLM.
There was some talk on Fr. Z’s blog of a priest in California who is giving some talks or classes in his parish entitled “The TLM for Dummies,” or some such thing, which are basically introductory classes presented in a non-threatening way for people who are curious but intimidated. I think that’s a great idea. Of course, there were the usual sour traditionalists who said they thought it was “irreverent,” although the priest presenting it is known to be a very holy and devout priest and obviously just wants to allay people’s fears and get past the “Dark Ages” image that some of them have been given.
Obviously, Christians for more than 1500 years attended this mass without the need for special elaborate preparation, other than basic catechesis, so I think it’s good to present it as a simple and natural part of Catholic life. One of the problems is the fact that traditionalists had to fight so hard to defend the TLM for so many years that I sometimes think we ourselves have developed a barrier mentality and are almost as bad as the NO folks in thinking of it as something “special” and only for a small, select group.
But as you say, things will eventually be good. It will become more normalized over the years, which I think is exactly what the Pope expects and wants to happen, particularly once people have had a chance to see it without the “special event” aura.
I live in St. Augustine, FL which was probably the first diocese to publicly announce restrictions, even though our bishop is really not bad and I think is loyal to the Pope. But many bishops are intimidated by their clergy, and he has a group of old-line modernist clergy in this diocese who are much more powerful than he is. However, he has been gradually modifying his stance, in practice if not in public statements, so it seems he has had time to think about it and perhaps realizes that his initial attitude really came across as rebellious and anti-Rome. I suspect a number of bishops who came out with bad statements at the start may gradually rethink things. And of course, there is a new set of guidelines due from the Commission at some time in the not too distant future, which will help, too.
You said on another thread that you read Cdl. O'Malley's blog (I checked it for a while when the MP first came out -- but otherwise too many pictures of him!); be sure and let me know if he seems to be softening! ;-)
ping
And then again...some won’t! LOL!
You failed to include Arrogant A** in your self proclamation.
Blessings!
Will
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.