Some very good news in my inbox this afternoon. Earlier this year, there was a bit of a storm in a teacup over the celebration of the usus antiquior in England and Wales on Holydays that have been transferred by the Bishops to the nearest Sunday. (See Coverage of Holydays fiasco). On his visit in June, Cardinal Hoyos made some comments relevant to the question. (See: Cardinal Castrillon clarifies Holyday question.)Now the Latin Mass Society has obtained a formal response from the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei. The New Liturgical Movement has posted the full text of the reply and the LMS press release. The PCED points out that the matter is still under study and that the present response should be taken without prejudice to further clarification to be issued by the Commission.
The key points of the response are:
1. The legitimate use of the liturgical books in use in 1962 includes the right to the use of the calendar intrinsic to those liturgical books.This is a welcome clarification which will set some people's minds at rest. It is perfectly all right to celebrate the Epiphany and Ascension, for example, according to the usus antiquior on the traditional days, as many parishes have chosen to do. This is in fact a good introduction for many people to the Traditional Latin Mass.
2. While in accordance with Canon 1246 §2 of the Code of Canon Law the Episcopal Conference can legitimately transfer Holydays of obligation with the approbation of the Holy See, it is also legitimate to celebrate the Mass and Office of those feasts on the days prescribed in the calendar of the liturgical books in use in 1962 with the clear understanding that, in accordance with the legitimate decision of the Episcopal Conference, there is no obligation to attend Mass on those days.
3. Thus, in accordance with nn. 356-361 of the Rubricae Generales Missalis Romani of 1962, it is appropriate to celebrate the external solemnity of Holy Days on the Sunday to which they have been transferred by the Episcopal Conference, as has been customary in many other countries hitherto.
It should be noted that the celebration of the feast again on the Sunday as an external solemnity is "appropriate" and therefore not obligatory.
3 comments:
This good news appears to have spread across several blogs. Good for the blogsphere. And good for the Latin Mass Society for submitting its dubium.
With the caveat that this clarification is issued "without prejudice" (as the lawyers like to say) to future decisions from Rome about the calendar, in this context "it is legitimate" seems to me to mean only one thing : it is lawful to celebrate the "old" Mass using the Roman calendar intrinsic to the 1962 Missal.
The competence of the bishops' conferences appears to apply only to the transfer of the obligation, not the Feast itself.
I always doubted there was any law which permitted bishops' conferences to transfer, alter or suppress Feasts in the 1962 Missal.
The Bishops' Conference of England & Wales will, I feel sure, wish to clear up any earlier doubts by publicising this clarification on its own website.
It would appear that a future conflation of the calendars, if any, could come only from Rome.
.
Not obligatory - that seems the meaning of the text, but is it possible?
For the new Mass the bishops can not only remove the obligation to attend Mass on a certain day, but move the feast itself: the old feast day becomes a feria. Right?
But with the old Mass, contrary to what they imagined, they can only remove the obligation. Why?
Of course I'm delighted that Rome is preventing the bishops from tampering with the Traditional Mass; only such protection from Rome will make it clear to the SSPX and others that coming back to Rome is not suicidal. But I don't understand the principle. Is it just a fudge?
Joseph - the celebration of the feasts on Sundays in the usus antiquior as an external solemnity would be in addition to the celebration of the feast on its proper day.
With the NO calendar, there is explicit provision for moving feasts to Sundays and the Liturgy of the Hours has an alternative running order depending on which choice is made.
Post a Comment