Posted on 02/21/2007 8:14:51 PM PST by Pyro7480
On Sunday 18 February 2007, Msgr. Michael Schmitz of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest offered a Missa Cantata at Old St. Mary's in Washington, DC. During his sermon, Msgr. Schmitz spoke of the apparent contradiction between God's law (or justice) and God's love, and how there really isn't an incompatibility between the two. His sermon was excellent, and he received a lot of positive feedback from congregation at the coffee and donuts hour after Mass.
The following evening, the Monsignor spoke at the Washington, DC Bureau of the American TFP. His lecture was on "The Classical Roman Rite and the Renewal of the Liturgy." Another attendee of the lecture gave an excellent summary:
"His talk was very good and was recorded. He took some questions afterward with the recorder shut off. He responded to a question of the abomination of Communion in the hand by laying it at the feet of Pope Paul VI - a moment of weakness (I call it a Pontificate of weakness). He gave a very good talk on the TLM and how it will resurrect the church when it is more widely performed. He likened the church to a frozen giant who has been paralyzed for 40 years. He also characterized the TLM as the beating heart of the church and the Novus Ordo as a weakening of this beating heart. He explained that if the devil was intent on attacking the church that he would do that by introducing the abuses that we have experienced since the Second Vatican Council and weakening the beating heart of the church."
"He spoke for about an hour and he struck me as a very solid traditional priest, very much convinced that the only way to re-sanctify the church was through the widespread use of the TLM, whose graces invigorate Holy Mother Church, and the eventual disappearance of the Novus Ordo."
"For my money, he puts a lot of faith in Benedict XVI to turn this all around, due to his great love for the ancient liturgy, as expressed in his many writings. It was the only part of his talk that was dismaying to me. If he (B-XVI) is that passionate about restoring the Mass, he should hold Bishops and Cardinals accountable for its implementation." (Source)
I consider it a blessing that I was not only present for the Mass, but also the lecture. Msgr. Schmitz is truly a priest according to the order of Melchisedech.
Catholic ping!
Glad to hear it. Msgr. Schmitz gave an excellent talk on tradition that I attended.
I have attended the Latin Mass in our community but am not ready to go there all the time. I like the readings, etc. in English. I would love a cross between the two. I really think Novus Ordo could work if there were just some really strong, holy, reverent priests to take back the parishes. Maybe I'm dreaming.
The epistle and Gospel during the Traditional Latin Mass are read again in English typically at Masses in the U.S. before the sermon. Is that not the case where you go?
It was really not so pleasant. Communion was beautiful and almost made me cry. I couldn't follow along in the little book because I couldn't hear Fr. Bucholtz at all. He doesn't use a mike and we basically stood/sat/kneeled according to what others were doing. It wasn't until I heard the bells that I figured out where we were. This was a weekday Mass, not a Sunday Mass.
We'll give Sunday a shot one day. First I want to make it up the hill to the Byzantine Rite church. We shared a priest with them for awhile and he was fabulous. I really hated to see someone else come in. I miss the reverence.
Nope, you're not. That's what I have experienced over the last 20 years at my parish. It's wonderful, and I prefer to hear and understand the readings. I also like the fact that my young daughter can understand what is being said.
It's tragic that this opprotunity is being willfully denied so many.
One of the problems with the Tridentine Rite is that it was actually in a period of good, sound revision when Vatican II struck. The mass you describe is one of the rushed, dead-silent or whispered low masses that gave the rite such a bad name. In the 1950s, there was an attempt to encourage priests to celebrate it reverently, audibly and with participation of the people in the responses. The Gospel and Epistle were usually read in English at some point. This was also the heyday of the revival of Gregorian, which had actually fallen into disuse before that and had been replaced by sappy hymns which are little different from those of today.
Unfortunately, the radical changes of Vatican II and the imposition of the NO short circuited all this legitimate change. Furthermore, while the NO may be a little lame, the things that were done in the name of the NO and VatII were even worse and I think were nearly fatal to people's liturgical sense. It would be hard to improve this under current conditions.
There was a missal issued in 1965 that was a sort of bridge between the NO and the Tridentine Rite that wasn't bad. And then a few years later, they dropped the bomb.
One of my concerns with the revival of the Tridentine Rite is exactly what it will be like if revived on a large scale. I hope we don't go back to the hasty, careless masses found at many parishes (where I lived, at least). I would like to see something where the ordinary was in Latin and the propers were in (good) English. And I would also like to go back to the old calendar and cycle of readings, because I think the current one is too much of a shotgun effect.
Anyway, that's my wish-list...
Good luck with the Byzantine Rite. It's quite beautiful although very different, and in recent years, Eastern Catholics have made an attempt to clean up their liturgy and bring back the splendor of the full Byzantine liturgical cycle and liturgy.
BTTT
But you have the issue of the high mass and the solemn mass taking so much time . . . and people at our parish joke about Monsignor standing in the narthex with a stopwatch -- no Mass goes over 57 minutes.
I understand his concerns, because he has 4 services to juggle, with the Sunday School sandwiched in between. If something runs long, the whole thing kind of grinds to a halt. Especially the parking . . .
We have a serious parking problem, which is really a blessing . . . but not while you're hunting for a space! The church has two large parking lots on one side, and two smaller ones on the other, plus parking on the main road (the side road is too narrow to park on). The 10 o'clock Mass has all the lots full, plus the main road for two country blocks on both sides, plus the gas station/country store parking lot catty-corner to the church, plus any flat area off three side roads that is handy . . . thank goodness for a 4WD SUV with high clearance! Ash Wednesday was jammed, and my husband saw Monsignor out front in his cassock directing traffic!
It's Lent.
Giving up "pope bashing" would be a good way to cultivate humility during this season.
The following is "pope bashing"?
If he (B-XVI) is that passionate about restoring the Mass, he should hold Bishops and Cardinals accountable for its implementation
There's nothing "bashing" about that statement. Do you disagree?
Time can be a concern, but a decently celebrated High Mass can be done in an hour (and used to be). This is particularly true if Communion is efficient (people kneeling along the communion rail and only the priest moving) and there are no extraneous activities. Our average Sunday NO runs over an hour simply because they now stick all sorts of things into the Mass - catechumens running in and out, elderly ladies waving chalices, etc. Not to mention the horrible hymns that go on forever! And Easter Midnight Mass, which I used to love, has turned into a circus.
Still, I get really annoyed when I see Catholics crawling over each other to get out of the church before the priest has even left the altar. Increasingly, most of them don't even go back to the pew after Communion. Forget about this antiquated nonsense of making your thanksgiving!
The following were the statements which caught my attention :
1)He responded to a question of the abomination of Communion in the hand by laying it at the feet of Pope Paul VI - a moment of weakness (I call it a Pontificate of weakness).
2)For my money, he puts a lot of faith in Benedict XVI to turn this all around, due to his great love for the ancient liturgy, as expressed in his many writings. It was the only part of his talk that was dismaying to me. If he (B-XVI) is that passionate about restoring the Mass, he should hold Bishops and Cardinals accountable for its implementation
Again, criticism of or offering unsolicited advice to the Pope is not a sign of a humble disposition.
During Lent, the first and principal thing which needs to be "turned around", is our own sinfulness.
Our church doesn't have a communion rail! I wish it did -- it was so much more efficient in our former church which had the rail extending around 3 sides of the altar. The celebrant took one side, and the priest or deacon assisting took the other, and the two lay chalice bearers (vested like altar servers) followed along behind. The ushers had it all organized so that the rails filled up from the back of the sides, and people stood up and headed for the pews as soon as they received - and the ushers would have a line standing and wave them on as soon as possible. It was remarkably efficient, and everyone received from the hands of a priest (or deacon). And it wasn't a small church -- my hubby was head usher and did the count, and there were usually between 3 and 400 people at the 11:15 service.
It is rather disturbing to think that this priest hopes that the Novus Ordo will eventually disappear. What grounds does he have for believing this? While a small minority of Catholics would attend TLM if the pope grants the universal indult, the great majority would not. And the majority of priests and bishops would not celebrate the Tridentine Mass if they were given the option of doing so.
The fact is that neither form of the rite is perfect. The Tridentine Mass can be said well or poorly, just as the newer form of the rite can be said well or poorly. Both forms of the rite are open to abuses--different abuses, to be sure, but abuses nonetheless. On the other hand, the Sacrifice that is offered in either form of the rite is the same. It is the same Christ. The fruits of the Mass are the same. One does not receive more graces from attending a Tridentine Mass than from attending a Novus Ordo Mass. One does NOT become holier from attending the former as opposed to the latter.
Finally, there are many good things about the Novus Ordo, such as the permission for concelebration and for Communion under both kinds, the inclusion of a third reading from the Old Testament, the restoration of the Offertory Procession, the opportunity for people to actually make responses during the Mass, etc. A reform of the reform is what is needed, not a return to 1562.
He believes this based on Pope Benedict's writings as Cardinal Ratzinger. The Monsignor thinks the "reform of the reform" will be the first step. The Novus Ordo, in its current form, is not a sustainable option for the the Latin Rite of the Church, due to the many abuses.
Sloooooooow motion does not equate to piety. Make provision for crisply said Tridentine Masses that need last no longer than 30 minutes or so, depending on the length of the sermon.
One of the discarded glories of the pre-Vatican II Catholic Church was the remarkable number of people with busy lives who could manage to be daily communicants. The elder Mayor Daley of Chicago started every day with Mass. So did AFL-CIO President George Meany. So did many thousands of others. To the extent that Trads in the pews demand each and every bell and whistle multiplied by three wherever possible, dragging the Mass out to the bitter end hours after it begins, they make the piety of others more difficult to carry on. There is nothing wrong with silent prayers by the celebrant. That is why God invented missals complete with the choreography to keep one's attention on the appropriate prayers. The altar boys respond on behalf of the people as it should be (often in apparent silence as well). The choir is not necessary at every Mass. When choir performances are scarcer, they are better appreciated. Rosaries are also available for those who prefer that form of worship at Mass and the choreography also focuses those praying the rosary on the Mass at well. Some prayed at the foot of the Cross, then as now.
Why on earth does silent prayer or anything but deadly sloooooow motion give the Mass a bad name?
There is also an underlying and very old American theme present in the controversies between slooooooow motion and crisp Masses. The Irish brought to these shores a Church of silence and one in which quick Masses were the norm because of their ancestral experiences of persecution at the hands of the Prods in Ireland. This love of silence and speed was not typical of those Catholics of continental European ancestry whose ancestors passed on grander traditions of greater use of liturgical music, fancier Churches, more extensive artwork and loooooooonger liturgies. Most bishops here were, for a very long time, Irish by ancestry and the non-Irish chafed under their rule for such cultural reasons.
I don't want to rule anyone. I do want crisply said Masses available for Masses of obligation and for daily Masses for that matter. I thought that the way the Novus Ordo was shoved down our collective throats a few decades ago with all the gentility and courtesy of the assassination of the Romanovs (to show there was no going back) was one of the key factors (one among many but a strong one) in instigating a strong desire to return to the Tridentine. What we do not need, as we return to the Triodentine, is the same sort of ecclesiastical fascism that was used in the late 1960s.
Many Catholics know no Mass other than Novus Ordo. It is the focus of their spirituality. It should be retained as a convenient option without having the status of the normative Mass of the Church. It should be allowed in every Church appropriately designed and equipped. Any complaints or resistance by traditionalists or by "traditionalist" (the latter being the schismatic platoon) ought to be disregarded particularly if the resistance questions the validity of the Novus Ordo. When quality tells and IF very few continue to attend the Novus Ordo, then and only then should its availability wane (minimum trial of several decades).
Let those who want the Mass that lasts for ages have pride of place as the 11 AM Sunday Mass or whatever would be the last Mass of Sunday morning, preceded by one Novus Ordo Mass and one or more crisply said Tridentine Masses. Additionally, let the Masses of significant occasions (First Communion, nuptial, confirmation, ordination, installation of bishops, funerals of pastors or bishops) be the grand productions with Gregorian Chant, Mozart, Palestrina, et al.
If you prefer the long, sloooooow Mass, so be it and may you be accommodated. Just don't expect everyone else to attend those loooooooong Masses which is just as much an offense as the imposition of Novus Ordo on us all several decades ago.
Thank you for posting. I look forward to seeing the lecture on youtube.
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.