Skip to comments.More on Pope Benedict and the SSPX
Posted on 02/02/2006 1:14:56 PM PST by NYer
On the morning of Monday, February 13th, at 10:30 a.m. Rome time, all Cardinal members of the Roman Curia will reportedly meet to discuss the possibility of lifting the excommunication of the bishops ordained by schismatic bishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1988 and who are now the leaders of the Society of St. Pius X.
But according to Andrea Tornielli, the Vatican expert for the Italian daily “Il Giornale,” there could be more to the meeting. The Holy Father will also bring up the issue of how to make more available for pew Catholics the use of the Roman Missal of Pope Pius V, used before Vatican Council II.
In theory, the possibility of using the Missal exists, but requires the explicit approval of the bishops in each diocese. As a consequence, some Traditionalists faithful, even those who, unlike the SSPX, are in full communion with Rome, cannot participate in the pre-Vatican Mass because many bishops do not grant permission or grant it in very limited circumstances.
According to Tornielli, Cardinal Dario Castrillon, responsible for the negotiation with the Lefebvrists, and Cardinal Julián Herranz, responsible for the interpretation of legislative texts, have been working together for some time now in order to find a way to liberalize the use of the old missal. The final formula is not yet known.
Neither the meeting nor the existence of a formula are a guaranty that the Cardinals’ summit will come out with something concrete.
A similar meeting convoked by Pope John Paul on March 2001 ended up with the Pope saying that “the time is not ripe” for offering concessions to the Lefebvrists.
What exactly could the Pope do if bishops are against having a traditional Mass? Even if the SSPX were regularized, I can imagine that some bishops would argue that as the ordinary they had the authority to decide that such a Mass was noncanonical.
Doubtful this will be an issue. Considering that I reside in a diocese run by one of the most liberal bishops, he has accorded an Indult at one Church. If anything, their 'pride' will prevent them from disallowing it, simply to prove that more faithful prefer the NO liturgy.
It's great that he allows it. My bishop won't approve one even though there are 4 noncanonical chapels in the diocese. The bishop actually had a chance to have one as an Italian priest with a celebret from Rome is there, but he wrote a letter to the whole diocese that it was "illegal." San Francisco is even worse. (San Jose does have a monthly traditional mass on Saturday night, approved by the previous bishop)
Even Bishop Sullivan, now retired from the no longer quite so Dreadful Diocese of Richmond had TWO regular Latin Mass parishes; one is in Richmond, the other in Chesapeake. He was all over the map: some of the worst liturgical abuses I've ever witnessed also occurred in the DDR.
You can't always tell by how liberal they are. Take the Bay Area: Bishop Cummins from Oakland was considered to the left of Archbishop Levada and Bishop McGrath in San Jose, yet he was the only one who allowed a traditional Mass.
True. The very conservative Bishops Keating and Walsh of Arlington, VA never allowed an indult Mass; Bishop Loverde is very stingy with it. The late Cardinal Hickey of Washington, although with a slightly less 'conservative' reputation than Bishop Keating, established a Latin Mass parish. Cardinal McCarrick (not a terrible Bishop, but not the greatest reputation for being 'conservative') has maintained it. Uncle Wally was willing to let people do just about anything.
Our archbishop here in Houston has only allowed one Indult Mass per week, on Sundays at 8:00 a.m. in a downtown church. So no Indult Mass on other holy days, no baptisms confirmations, marriages or funerals in the old rite, in effect saying to them "You troglodytes can have your Tridentine Mass once a week as a sop to your unreconstructed sentiments, but you sure as heck can't be allowed to have whole liturgical life that way." Despite all these impediments, I hear that Mass is well attended (as are, I also hear, the Masses at the two SSPX chapels).
Cummins had a terrible reputation on homosexual and liturgical issues (his diocese had the infamous "clown Mass"), but for some reason, he allowed a traditonal Mass in Oakland. Archbishop Levada would not allow it at all, wouldn't even hear of it. I can only imagine his input into the current negotiations about the Mass.
I'll add to your commentary about Washington that under Cardinal Hickey, three Indult Masses were established, and have been maintained (at least the last time I checked) by Cardinal McCarrick.
Archbishop Burke here in St. Louis established an Oratory for daily Latin Mass, with High Mass on Sundays and Holy Days. Hearing about the state of things around the Nation, I feel fortunate.
You should, Archbishop Burke is the indult campion. His previous diocese had somethink like 7 weekly traditonal Masses and more that occured biweekly or monthly.
Yes, he never made any attempt to prevent the Indult. People come from the neighboring states of VT and MA to attend Mass. However .... (hope you saw this coming) .... the church is located in one of the worst sections of Troy, the priest who celebrates the Mass is homosexual and (I have it on good authority) that this Church is on the bishop's list of 'slash and burn' closings, planned for later this year. Until then, here is a link to the parish web site. Enjoy it while it lasts. Plenty of information and some outstanding photographs.
The Institute of Christ the King! EWTN ran a special when Bishop Burke came to consecrate it. Here are photos from the glorious event.
**but requires the explicit approval of the bishops in each diocese.**
Do any of you think that the bishops in the United States would approve this?
More information from CWNews.com. The full story is by subscription but this has some important information missing from the thread above. This is more than just a Universal Indult. It is one in which the SSPX would hopefully be regularized and under a Bishop answerable to Rome. I have heard Bishop Ripan's (spelling?) mentioned as a possibility.
Easy there. I was born in that neighborhood and baptized in that church!
I asked a local Associate Pastor in the Diocese of San Jose about what seems to be a prohibition against the Tridentine Mass. He said, one of the big problems is that there aren't that many priests around who remember or ever learned how to preside over the Pre-V2 Mass. A lot seem to have lost (or never had) their latin.
Bishop McGrath allows a traditional Mass at Our Lady of Peace on the first Saturday of each Month. Rob
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.