Asked about the status of those detailed instructions, Cardinal Castrillon told Catholic News Service that his office had completed its work and passed the draft on to the pope, who would make the final decision about its publication.The bad news is that Cardinal Castrillon has clearly been annoyed by some people pestering him with further demands. Cf. CNS Cardinal: Some not satisfied even after pope's Tridentine Mass decree (H/T Rorate Caeli)
I agree with the comment by New Catholic that there are also some bishops who could be criticised for their opposition to the expressed will of the Holy Father, but I think that we should listen carefully to Cardinal Castrillon. There is a battle going on in the Church over this issue, including, I should imagine, a lot of subtle but intense machinations at the Vatican. We do need to be supportive of those who, like the good Cardinal, have bent over backwards to give us encouragement.
Cardinal Castrillon's various addresses on the occasion of his visit to London (see the Latin Mass Society website for the texts) were generous and very helpful for those attached to the usus antiquior. His Eminence stuck his neck out for us and although we may not always feel that things are moving fast enough, it is important to appreciate the difficulties of his situation.
Fr Z's rules of engagement are a good summary. Eg.
Speak less of our rights and what we deserve, or what it ought to have been, as if we were our own little popes, and more about our gratitude, gratitude, gratitude for what God gives us.
10 comments:
AMDG
Dear Father Finigan,
Excellent article and a timely reminder of how we collectively are failing to realise that the MP has changed our juridical and pastoral situation.
All those who prefer the Old Rite (Extra-ordinary use) must be prudent in our comments on-line and in our letters to Parish Priests and Bishops.
We must leave behind the grumbling and sourness as seen so often the "The Mass of Ages" and publications like "Christian Order".
Now the MP has confirmed that the Sacrifice of the Mass according to the Extraordinary Use may be offered by any priest of the Roman Rite who has sufficient understanding of Latin and the Liturgy we can pray the Mass with the priest.
In caritate Xp.,
Bryan Dunne
Sorry, I don't quite agree. Millions of souls will continue to be influenced badly by the conciliar and post-conciliar novelties for years/decade/generations/centuries to come if we wait for "accentuating the positive" approach to take effect. We need to encourage people - including bi-ritual priests! - to abandon ASAP all the conciliar and post-conciliar novelties, by explaining why the all the novelties are wrong and so impoverished compared to Tradition and its greatest expression, the only form/use of the Roman rite of Mass, as codified by St Pius V.
I think in the months leading up to "Summorum Pontificum" and in the months since its promulgation, some people have had, and continue to have, impossibly high expectations. "Summorum Pontificum" was indeed a landmark, and, in the context of Pope Benedict's wider vision of reform, the liturgical landscape has changed. Some priests seem to have got the hang of the concept of mutual enrichment more quickly than others.
However, it was clear that not very much would happen all at once, all over the place.
Unfortunately, some people have taken somewhat off the cuff remarks too literally, such as the response of Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos to journalists regarding the old form of Mass during his visit to Westminster :
"not in many parishes - in all parishes !"
I could't agree more that as many Catholics as possible, in as may parishes as possible, should be able to experience the spiritual riches of the "old" Mass. The ideal is to reintroduce the old form into normal parish life, but it's going to take a very long time !
There is no point in ignoring the practical difficulties :
The old "Indult" mindset is with us yet, and will not be easily overcome. Many people seem still to be labouring under the old "Ecclesia Dei adflicta" rules, even though these no longer apply.
I can understand their frustration.
On the other hand, there is no point in ignoring the realities. You have to work with what you've got. There are bishops who are less than enthusiastic about "Summorum Pontificum". Rome knows this. There are insufficient numbers of clergy, and Rome knows this. And the number of traditional Catholics is comparitively small. Rome knows this as well.
I can understand people, in their frustration, taking more extreme positions. But there is no point in demanding the impossible.
Things will get better, but will take even longer if the cautious Benedictine reform is derailed.
It is an old saying that you can never please some people. It is an old saying because its true.
When Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos visited Westminster, there were even critics who said his cappa magna was too short, for heaven's sake ! (Actually, it wasn't his cappa magna.)
"Summorum Pontificum" was an extraordinary (sorry, no pun intended) admission by the supreme legislator that the "old" Mass had never been abrogated. It seems almost miraculous that it has been liberated from its former shackles.
The old policy of discontinuity, of rupture with the past, which was widely enforced in the wake of Vatican II, was undoubtedly a mistake. It was wrong. The Pope himself condemned this hermeneutic of discontinuity in his speech to the Roman Curia in December 2005.
But you can't undo the mistaken policies of forty years overnight, or in one year, or even in ten years. And you must first have a new policy in place, the policy of continuity. It needs to be given time if it is to succeed, time, and hard work and much prayer.
And that means loyalty to the Pope who is doing what he can, (the Pope who on his visit to France has just reminded everyone that no-one in the Church is to be made to feel de trop,) and gratitude to those who are helping, for what has been, and is being, most wonderfully achieved. The last thing we need is for them ever to feel their hard work is a thankless task.
Fr,
Could't agree more. This should be posted on every tradcath blog in existance. LMS is exemplary in this regard and its members if they take LMS advice would never do anything to annoy Cardinal Castrillon. Non-members should follow Fr. Z's advice as you say.
I sympathise with Fr. Lawler's plight and that of his parishioners, but NOT with his disobedience. He should have kept himself squeaky clean on that issue. My prayer now is that his behaviour will not damage the trad cause in Rome. I should think the LMS will distance themselves from him for fear of this.
Jane
'gratitude, gratitude, gratitude' and patience, patience, patience.
I'm not sure I really understand, Fr Tim. Would you mind explaining for those of us who might be a bit thick (myself) or Hard of Understanding. ? It seems fairly straightforward to me: Pope makes suggestion. Church either follows or ignores. Obedience versus Disobedience.
Am I missing something to the power of 100. ?
The context to this, of course, is that many, many, many of us have asked for these reforms and been roundly told to er-- how can I put this politely - to go away.
This is an interesting development, I must say.
Bernadette - the Holy Father said that the older form could be used. He did not make it compulsory. Where legitimate requests have been denied, it is quite in order to complain and take the matter to Ecclesia Dei if necessary. But Cardinal Hoyos spoke of further and, presently, unrealistic demands.
Anthony - Laity are in the enviable position of being able to attend only old rite Masses. Parish priests have to decide whether it is better to continue in parish ministry or to retire and only celebrate the old rite.
Summorum Pontificum allows for one Mass on a Sunday in the usus antiquior. If I went beyond that, it would be open to any parishioner to complain that I have broken the current law of the Church.
That being said, we do what we can. I normally celebrate Baptism and the Sacrament of Extreme Unction in the older form and will encourage next year's wedding couple to choose this option. I also introduce into the newer form anything from tradition that can be legitimately argued for. The double genuflection following the example of Archbishop Ranjith is the most recent example.
I agree with you entirely that souls are being influenced badly by post-conciliar novelties. I'm trying to bring tradition to some of the vast mass of the faithful who cannot yet see why it is so important. This can only really be done within the life of the parish.
I think most of us assumed it was not compulsory, Fr Tim, but part of a wider liturgical reform.
Perish the thought any of us might want to banish those super guitar ditties of a Sunday morning. Oh no.
We know it's a long haul. We just didn`t realise it would be THIS long.
Thanks for the update.
Please may we have proof of 'sourness' in 'Mass of Ages'?
Jane
May I humbly add that the greatest problem around the motu proprio, is not necessarily putting it into practice but that the Holy Father (God Bless him and protect him from his enemies) does not want to address the two completely different theologies of the new liturgy and the older one. I do think that, although with good intentions, the Pope is massively wrong to suggest that the two masses are different forms of the same rite. A glance at the memoirs of Bugnini's vandalism of the Roman liturgy will convince anyone of this.
It seems that we are still in the endemic of the immediate post-Vatican II era, of "let's leave all the hard questions aside and concentrate on what unites us. Strawberry fields forever!" I can understand where Mr. Ozimic is coming from (although I would phrase it a different way!). The hard questions the SSPX proposes still need to be answered. Someone totally unsympathetic to Archbishop Lefebrve once said - he threw a bone which Rome could neither swallow or cough up.
Post a Comment