Posted on 10/13/2008 3:58:50 PM PDT by NYer
A respected Italian journalist has called attention to an important struggle within the Roman Curia: a battle for control of the Vatican's chief liturgical office.
Andrea Tornielli of Il Giornale has written that Cardinal Franics Arinze, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, will soon be replaced by a Spanish prelate, Cardinal Antonio Canizares Llovera of Toledo. Although the same rumor has circulated in Rome for several months, the report takes added weight from Tornielli's report that the change will take place "in the coming weeks."
(Tornielli, a veteran Vatican-watcher, has excellent sources within the Vatican. In June he predicted that Pope Benedict would choose Cardinal Agostino Vallini, then the prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, to replace Cardinal Camillo Ruini (bio - news)as vicar for the Rome diocese. He also predicted that Archbishop Angelo Amato, who was serving as secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, would replace Cardinal José Saraiva Martins as prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints. Both of those appointments have now taken place.)
Tornielli also suggests that the current secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship, Archbishop Albert Malcom Ranjith Patabendige Don, will soon be named Archbishop of Colombo in his native Sri Lanka. However, the Il Giornale reporter speculates that rather than replacing both top officials of the Congregation for Divine Worship at the same time, the Pope will allow several months to pass between the two appointments.
Tornielli's report is credible in several respects. On November 1, Cardinal Arinze will be 76 years old: a full year beyond the normative retirement age for Catholic prelates. Archbishop Ranjith is highly regarded in his native country, and has strong contacts on both sides of the bloody conflict that has been dividing Sri Lanka. Under ordinary circumstances he would be a natural selection as Archbishop of Colombo. And the current Church leader in Sri Lanka's capital, Archbishop Oswald Gomis, is also nearing his 76th birthday and due for replacement.
However, the internal politics of the Vatican-- and in particular, the keen interest of Pope Benedict XVI (bio - news) in restoring a sense of reverence to the liturgy-- make the proposed appointments far from routine.
Archbishop Ranjith was brought to Rome in December 2005 by Pope Benedict. By all accounts he was the Pope's hand-picked selection, chosen to be a strong advocate for the traditional approach to liturgy. The Sri Lankan prelate has played that role with vigor, and ruffled some feathers in Rome with his outspoken comments about the need for greater reverence in the liturgy and the importance of restoring use of the traditional Latin Mass.
As Archbishop Ranjith has attained a high profile around the Vatican, traditionalists have nourished the hope that he himself might succeed Cardinal Arinze. Although it is unusual for the secretary of a Roman congregation to be promoted directly to the post of prefect, such a move would give unmistakable evidence of the Pope's determination to carry out what he has, in the past, called "the reform of the reform." On the other hand, if Archbishop Ranjith leaves Rome while Cardinal Arinze is still in office, many traditionalists will see the change as a setback for the cause of liturgical reform.
The rumored appointment of Cardinal Canizares adds yet another element of intrigue to the Vatican maneuvering. The Spanish cardinal, too, is perceived as a strong ally of Pope Benedict on liturgical questions. If he replaces Cardinal Arinze while Archbishop Ranjith still occupies the #2 post in the Congregation for Divine Worship, the leadership team will have a very strong conservative bent-- enough to dismay liberal liturgists, who still wield considerable clout around Rome.
In a move announced quietly on September 24, Pope Benedict appointed an entirely new group of consultors to the office of Pontifical Liturgical Celebrations. The new consultors had strong conservative credentials. And as the Catholic News Agency observed: "Also relevant to the appointments is the fact that all former consultants, appointed when Archbishop Piero Marini led the office of Liturgical Celebrations, have been dismissed since their appointments were not renewed."
Those appointments signaled the opening of a new chapter in what may be the key story of this pontificate: the battle for liturgical reform. The fresh rumors of impending change at the Congregation for Divine Worship indicate that the battle has been joined.
The drama continues ...
Ad Deum qui laetificat juvetutem meam.
If only someone had had the foresight to give the Pope the authority to fix issues like this!
Fixed it.
I would be highly gratified if Archbishop Ranjith replaced Cardinal Arinze.
Why is that?
I’m genuinely wondering as I know nothing about him.
Thanks for the info. It would be refreshing to see if the Vatican would lean a little bit more on certain American Ordinaries...
I post for only one reason.
I left FreeRep because of anti-Catholic bias among other anti-intellectual demonstrations.
Many believe that ONLY the Evangelical way is correct.
I say Jesus is only the correct way.
Let us not quabble as those who represent the Cross are killed each day and an anti-Christ candidate could be elected president.
No not THE anti-christ-don’t believe that way...”my little children...the antichrist spirit is among you now”(St.John).
Perhaps we can put back the altar rails again.
General Abrams, Clarence Thomas and Robert Bork (Among Others) decided as did you.
I believe as you except for on detail. Organized religion is the problem- -not the solution. (and no I have no anti-Catholic rants)
Only when the Catholic Church is not following the Bible. I do not mean that cruelly but there is a reason Protestants are called that. They are protesters(it is what the word means) and what they were protesting are the instances when they can prove through the Bible a fault in the teachings of the Catholic Church. Why do you think there are so many Protestant denominations, they do it to each other also.
Don't hold your breath. Although, the big problems are retiring one after another. There's another one or two that need to go before a massive change takes hold.
The funny thing is the younger people are yearning for the more quiet, orthodox approach. At least where I am that's the case.
Don't hold your breath. Although, the big problems are retiring one after another. There's another one or two that need to go before a massive change takes hold.
The funny thing is the younger people are yearning for the more quiet, orthodox approach. At least where I am that's the case.
It's rather curious that restoration of tradition and reverence would ruffle feathers. It is, after all, "tolerant" to an extent.
In the last five years at my parish, piece by piece the more reverent aspects of the Novus Ordo have reappeared - a veiled chalice, bells at the consecration, extensive use of the first canon, more and more people kneeling to give thanks after Mass, chanted prefaces and responses - it makes a difference.
How can there be a "struggle"? Doesn't the Pope simply appoint Vatican officials?
You mean only when you don’t think that the Catholic Church is following the Bible which you have interpreted yourself by your opinion and by your biases.
The Catholic Church does follow the Bible. It is the church instituted by Christ.
**It’s rather curious that restoration of tradition and reverence would ruffle feathers. It is, after all, “tolerant” to an extent.**
But my initial reaction to the title was that the U. S. Bishops who want to keep things very liberal would be right in the midst of the struggle.
Didn’t turn out that way in the article, however, since it was about something totally different. LOL!
Well, yes, but (you knew there had to be a "but")...
This particular topic isn't just anything, it's liturgy, or to be more specific Mass and the form in which it is said, what is considered to be the norms for expression, the limits and acceptances of music, the translation from the original, etc. This is the most public aspect of a faith that is at its heart all about private and personal revelation, devotion and expression. Where the problems come in is in trying not to split the faithful with a "one size fits all" approach. That's been done, both with the pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II church, and simply, one side or the other (traditional Latin Mass or modern Novus Ordo sans any sort of tradition) desires their style to take precedence, or at least be accepted. In the case of the Latin, at least have approval from individual bishops to simply be able to attend such a Mass has been a massive battle. It's up to the individual bishops to allow it.
One thing that seems to be lost in most arguments is that for the first 50 years after any council chaos reigns. We are in the last 10 years, or about two generations out, from an extremely disruptive council and there are some people in the church who firmly believe in the "spirit" of the council and what it wrought. Gradually, the leadership is being replaced via attrition rather than more disruptive methods. In that way, the tradition is being restored very gradually and is not "disruptive." That doesn't mean that certain members of the congregations don't make an issue out of their pet peeves.
We Catholics joke sometimes about the glacial pace at which the Vatican operates and in this day and age it's really egregious with attention spans being at knat levels, but there is some wisdom in taking time and being sure that things are done right. In this case, the pope is taking his time, praying over choices and giving the faithful a chance to absorb one change before making a second and having chaos rather than a smooth transition.
It sounds like Cardinal Canizares also shares the Pope’s views on the liturgy, so he’ll probably be fine also.
Knaturally.
I hear this a lot, but I think it paints with too broad a brush. If you have specific issues, criticize those, but any time there are many people who share a common goal, there will need to be a society, an organization, and rules. That is just a fact of human nature and it applies to all sorts of issues, not just religion. And just the fact of having an organization is neither good nor bad in itself, but obviously there can be good or bad elements to an organization.
confess, I must be thick headed or mental block-what do you mean?
What are your views on organized secularism?
that is cool!
consider,like minds gather together; we as people want a transcendent organized “religion” to pass on traditions beliefs,etc. Or the vacuum will be replaced by government religion in our present day.
VERY reasonable explanation.
There are some RC doctrines that are open to disagreement on as witnessed by the acceptance of the Byzantine-Ruthian Orthodox Church in union with Rome.Won’t bore you by doctrines,etc.
The RC tolerates alot of different view points within the RC Church. However, your point is valid.
We can only share our love for Jesus Christ because on the operating table and in heaven there is no denomination.
Born 1954.... as you would call it-born again 1976.
I rely on the Bible and the Catechism to know right from wrong. I find most priests helpful, but on occasion when one might say something that doesn’t ring true to me based on what I know of the divine revelation in Jesus Christ, I follow the deposit of the faith as authoritatively interpreted by the teaching office of the Church. I don’t rely on mere human opinion.
are you not aware that our Holy Father and his Bishops recognize the validity of the Orthodox Churches and our fellow brethren CAN receive Holy Communion?
Thus, some our the RC doctrines can be questions BUT not the essential ones. And an orthodox church, Byzantine, is an independent church in union with Rome.
” Why do you think there are so many Protestant denominations, they do it to each other also.”
Heresy (blindness) leads to confusion?
Heresy (blindness) leads to confusion?
Just as ignorance of history leads so many to repeat it. I've yet to see a modern argument against the Church that wasn't debunked in the four centuries after Christ.
If Protestants "do it to each other" then it is clear that they can prove nothing through the Bible but can only demonstrate private opinions and interpretations. Thus private interpretation can only be a source of division clouding the gospel revelation.
That is a very good phrase, bronxville, for what is happening to our country, it seems a good description of the step just before the ideological totalitarianism about to be imposed upon us by the left. When we no longer have organized religion in this country, and the due respect for it historically practiced by those who have every right not to engage in it, then we will no longer have a civilized society, and the forces of evil (ala Obama, ala Hitler) will take over to fill in the void. HOPE, CHANGE, but NO FAITH ALLOWED!
You may have confidence Ranjinth is one of the top men in the world, possibly among the top 10, with the intellect, faith, diligence, insight, and real guts, to clear the “smoke of Satan” from the Church. If you know Arinze, Ranjinth is the same quality of character and orthodoxy. Both on the Holy Father’s team 100% but also with the courage and minds to be of real help in the battle.
To put it in political terms, after the Council radicals managed to institute over the top reforms of the liturgy, forsaking Latin as the language of worship and replacing it with the vernacular. And not just ANY vernacular —in the case of English—but one that prefers flat speech over poetry. The structure of the mass was also altered, with the result that the “New Mass” is more like a Lutheran service than like the “Old” Mass. This was more or less imposed from the top from Rome, because they had the support of Pope Paul, and most American bishops just went along. An iconoclastic spirit informed these changes, and down at the parish level, many younger priests more or less
changed the forms even further, to taste, so to speak. Many Catholics were nonplused by these changes, and many simply stopped going to mass. A minority took up the reforms with enthusiasm, music was wrotten for the new style, and so by the time John Paul was elected pope, the new liturgy wad firmly in place.
John Paul himself did not necessarily go along with the new style, but as it became evident that the new style lent support to doctrinal changes, he began to have reservations, It was only after Ratzinger began his rise to power, however, that Rome began to turn away from radicalism in reaction to the excesses, and to the heterdoxy that went with it. Twenty years down the way, Ratzinger, now Benedict XVI, is able to make changes he has wanted all along, but as he is not one who hits people over the head, he is moving toward his goals by slowly putting like-minded people in important places. he seldom knocks heads, but he knows what he wants and since he is old, he is actually moving very quickly for a pope. “Liberals’ are nonplussed, because the man whom they called the Panzer Kardinal is actually a very nice man and the people have seen this. If ever a modern pope was chosen by the people of the Church, it was this man. The huge throng that attended John Paul’s funeral mass, virtually demanded that the Cardinals chose him, but —we may assume—he was not the choice of some Cardinals.
Thanks!
Mmmm, are you sure you wouldn't date it to Bernardin's death? That's when all the reverting moves really started. Not that this wasn't desired, but all the significant moves started happening after 1996, when Bernardin died. It always was rumored that he had more influence than the pope.
When Ratzinger was elected, I have some eyewitness accounts of Catholic high school teachers in the halls of a school screaming "NO, NO" and beating their heads against the wall. There are more people on the modern side that really don't like him than do. At least that's my experience.
Music to my ears! :)
Have you seen the new rules of the new Religion Moderator? It is now possible to avoid the nastiest comments.
Just wait till Obama signs the FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act), which he has promised will be the first thing he will do. It prohibits “intereference” with abortion from lower jurisdictions (states) and eliminates all conscience clauses. In other words, Catholic institutions and individual health care personnel will be forced to perform abortions or go out of business. How any Catholic can vote for this man is beyond me.
Canizares is very good. I think he’d be an excellent replacement. Spain has some truly excellent prelates, such as Cardinal Ruoco of Madrid. Of course, it also has a lot of liberal turkeys who are allies of Zapatero, but fortunately most of them are dying off.
Many churches have had their kneelers and altar rails taken out to accomodate new-wave catholicism.
Gnot funny.
(j/k)
“Organized Religion” is a secularist’s code word for Christianity, Orthodox Judaism, and certain tendencies among Muslims. It was chosen specifically because it excludes most new-age and pagan religions that have survived into the modern era. Originally, it was a way liberals to reject morals without alienating their new-age friends by opposing all religion.
As Satan’s war on the Church progressed through the sixties and into the nineties, more and more people became alienated from any Christian denomination, but still longed for some semblance of spirituality. Some pastors had the idea that by attacking other pastors in the name of opposing “organized religions,” they could win over these alienated people to their worship services without having to help such people reconcile with whatever it was that alienated them from Christianity in the first place. As an added bonus, these “converts” tend to stay away from their former denominations. This would mean more money, and a greater ability to point to all the people that the pastors had “won” for Christ.
Since most of the people who joined such congregations joined them out of spiritual longing, rather than simply habit of showing up each week, these churches started out initially highly socially conservative, at least among whites. Among minorities, their tendency to view the rest of Christianity as suspect, led quickly to radical, left-wing, and even overtly racist tendencies (The MSM, sadly, was devestatingly accurate when they insisted that Jeremiah Wright was not far from the mainstream.) But social liberalism is deftly insurgent in the anti-denominational congregations.
You haven’t heard that the man is just “spreading the wealth?” Some Catholics interpret this as social justice.
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.