Posted on 07/02/2024 5:04:54 AM PDT by Petrosius
CHARLOTTESVILLE, Virginia (LifeSiteNews) — The bishop of Richmond, Virginia is ending the Traditional Latin Mass in Charlottesville, Virginia, after the two-year permission given by Rome expires this week.
Bishop Barry Knestout informed Father Joseph Mary Lukyamuzi, the pastor of Holy Comforter Catholic Church in Charlottesville, that the “dispensation” granted in virtue of Traditionis custodes for the parish to offer the Traditional Latin Mass expires on July 5.
The bishop stated that he intends to renew the dispensation, but that until he receives the renewal, the parish cannot offer the old Mass. Instead, the Novus Ordo can be offered in Latin, Ad Orientem (facing east), an option already available for any priest not requiring special permission from the bishop.
Citing Traditionis Custodes, the bishop expressed his “confidence” that the pastor would lead the faithful toward the Novus Ordo as “the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.”
Per the bishop’s instruction, this past weekend saw the last Sunday Latin Mass on June 30. The parish will offer a final Tridentine Mass on Friday, July 5, at 6 p.m., as a votive Mass of the Sacred Heart. A parishioner told LifeSiteNews that Sunday’s Latin Mass was packed to overflowing.
In view of suppression of the old Mass, the pastor put out a questionnaire to parishioners asking how often families would attend a Novus Ordo in Latin ad orientem as a replacement of the Traditional Latin Mass.
The suppression of the Latin Mass in Charlottesville comes as reports from Rome confirm the Vatican is considering a more universal suppression of the Traditional Mass.
Vatican journalist Diane Montagna confirmed that a document further restricting the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM), backed by Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin, has been “presented to Pope Francis.”
According to “well-informed sources,” if published, the document would ban the offering of the TLM by all priests except those belonging to “approved ex-Ecclesia Dei institutes,” including the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP) and the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest (ICKSP).
The document would “prohibit bishops from themselves celebrating or authorizing” the TLM, and “suspend existing permissions” for the Traditional Mass apart from those offered by ex-Ecclesia Dei communities.
LifeSiteNews has received information indicating that a likely date for these expected restrictions is July 16, the anniversary of the implementation of Traditionis Custodes.
The Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter and the Society of St. Pius X both offer the Traditional Latin Mass within the Diocese of Richmond. These groups and other Latin Mass Catholics were targeted by the FBI in their infamous “Richmond memo” as “radical traditional Catholics” who were a danger because of such things as their conservative, pro-life views, dubbed “extreme” by the aggressively pro-abortion Biden regime.
Bishop Knestout of Richmond strongly condemned the FBI memo against traditional Catholics.
The good bishop is being a little disingenuous here. Such a form of the new Mass has in practice been forbidden for the past 50 years. If it had been available I do not believe that there would have been such interest in the old Mass. That said, I hope that all priests would take his words to heart and run with it, celebrating such a Mass in all the parishes.
“Richmond bishop halts only Latin Mass in Charlottesville while awaiting new dispensation from Rome”
I thought they got paid from local contributions?
Is it fair to say the biggest objection to the Tridentine Mass is its use of Latin? If not, what is?
Is the FUBI still arresting people for going to Latin Mass?
Dispensation is an exception from the law, not payment.
This isn’t Harry Potter. There’s nothing magical about saying words in Latin. The TLM is the rite.
See my post #7. This is about more than just Latin but the use of Latin highlights the universality and antiquity of the rites.
What does "in practice been forbidden" mean? Out of fashion and out of favor, sure.
Some bishops have attempted to ban, e.g., ad orientem, but the operative law from Rome (under the previous pontificate, but still in force AFAIK) is that a bishop cannot ban a licit option -- which ad orientem definitely is -- in the liturgy "just because he wants it that way". (Setting aside something like banning communion in both kinds due to the threat of a communicable illness.)
(On the topic of ad orientem specifically, the animus against it goes back to a passage in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal which was mistranslated from the Latin to say that "the celebration of Mass facing the people ... is to be preferred wherever possible". A careful study of the Latin genders of words shows that it clearly says "freestanding altars ... are to be preferred wherever possible" and the context refers to new construction, not requiring the wreckovation of old churches.)
If it had been available I do not believe that there would have been such interest in the old Mass.
The TLM fans will disagree with you on that one. For many people, you might be right.
Maybe I'm "too close to the action" as a church musician, but restoring Gregorian chant, traditional hymnody, ad orientem, and the use of the altar rail do a lot to make the NO tolerable.
Someone with some serious theologian chops needs to take Rome to task over this canard. If they're saying the TLM is not a perfectly valid and wholesome expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite" then they're basically saying the Roman Rite changed its lex orandi, changed into a new religion about 1965 or so.
And all of the world's sedevacantists are saying, "See! We told you so!".
Francis is just as upside down as the rest of the world’s leaders. How about priests saying it in Pig Latin. Adding this to the ever growing list of why I left the Catholic Church.
No, it is not.
If not, what is?
The "Tridentine" Mass much more perfectly exemplifies the Catholic teaching on the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, and on the truly sacrificial nature of the Mass (or Divine Liturgy, if you prefer that term) than the rite introduced by Pope Paul VI. Certain parties within the Church do not actually believe the Catholic Teaching on the Real Presence or the true sacrifice, and accordingly wish to eliminate the Mass which more perfectly exemplifies them.
(It helps that we are in the middle of downtown in a major city; nobody lives there, so if we are to have a congregation for Sunday Mass we need to be a little ... different.)
On the surface, though, it appears to be more like an excessive devotion to VCII, to the exclusion of and in opposition to everything else in Catholic history. Add to that the (actually highly debatable) claim that the NO is the Mass which implements the "vision" of VCII, and you get to where we are.
It hasn’t been forbidden to offer the Novus Ordo Mass in Latin. I attended such a Mass years ago in San Francisco when I was there for a conference. It was reverently done and I didn’t notice any errors in pronouncing the Latin, but still not the same as the Tridentine Mass.
Isolated exceptions do not invalidate a general rule. There may be a Latin Novus Ordo Mass here and there, but as a general rule it is not allowed and is not widespread, although I do admit that it is getting better.
I think both perspectives are valid.
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.