FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Restore the minor orders!
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
cgraye, I suppose you have a point that I couldn't just restore the minor orders on my own authority. I'd seek permission from the Pope to do it generally first. If denied, I'd try again on the pretext of establishing my own clerical society (like the SSPX) or seminary dedicated to the traditional liturgies. And that also doesn't work out, I could still restore the minor orders by building a seminary and giving it to the Institute or the Fraternity, on condition that they allow me to use their structure to ordain my own diocesan clergy.

In the mean time, I'd at least be able to use the instituted ministries provided for by the Novus Ordo. One of my first acts as bishop would definitely be to require all servers and lectors to be instituted to the office by the bishop, after attending a series of workshops on how to properly perform those roles.

cgraye Wrote:EVERY Sunday?   Even in prior times, wasn't this reserved for more special occasions?

Yes; depending on how far you go back, many bishops didn't even live in their dioceses, or only celebrated Mass of any sort once a year. But as I always say, solemn Mass ought to be the norm for all clergy. The bishop must lead by example, and that would mean solemn pontifical Mass every Sunday. I'll add solemn Lauds and Vespers to that as well.

With an order of Canons Regular at the Cathedral you could have an incredible liturgical life there--Perpetual adoration, the hours, Masses at the side altars, continuous availability of confessors!

The Cathedral could also have Porters as consecrated "bouncers" to protect the holy things from desecration.  Then the Cathedral could remain open 24-7-365.
(01-24-2011, 01:25 PM)Christus Imperat Wrote: [ -> ]In HK's imaginary diocese, I imagine a lot of traditional young men, without vocations to the priesthood, being interested in the diaconate.

I really can't imagine that, unless those orders were open to married men.
(01-24-2011, 01:32 PM)The_Harlequin_King Wrote: [ -> ]Yes; depending on how far you go back, many bishops didn't even live in their dioceses, or only celebrated Mass of any sort once a year. But as I always say, solemn Mass ought to be the norm for all clergy. The bishop must lead by example, and that would mean solemn pontifical Mass every Sunday. I'll add solemn Lauds and Vespers to that as well.

That's commendable, and if I were a bishop, I would certainly celebrate a solemn pontifical Mass on special days.  But that's like a three-hour affair, and I can't imagine too many people being up for that every single week.  A lot of trads don't even like regular solemn Masses weekly due to the length and "business" of it.  Not that I agree with that - I'm just saying that I don't think many people would be coming to that.  Though perhaps enough people would attend occasionally from far enough distances to have a good number of people there every week.  I'm still not sure this would be practical, however.
I believe it's possible to celebrate solemn pontifical Mass in one hour 30 minutes if you have ministers who are very familiar with the rubrics. The important things are that:

1.) The bishop is actually celebrating Mass at the cathedral himself, not leaving it to a rector.

2.) He's being served by a full staff of ministers, so people can see the sacrament of Order being implemented to its fullest; neither all priests, nor all laymen.

3.) The musical tradition of the Church, particularly plainchant, is being used.

Doing all those 3 things requires a solemn pontifical Mass, but it need not be overly complicated.


cgraye Wrote:I really can't imagine that, unless those orders were open to married men.

Unfortunately, it seems the USCCB limits the permanent diaconate to men aged 35, whether celibate or married. Especially with that in mind, I have no scruple against ordaining married men to the diaconate. Either way, I'd make sure that every parish has at least 2 deacons for every priest. I'd aggressively recruit from men who are already serving the Church. There's no reason why all the lay apologists and religious ed instructors can't be approached on the subject of diaconate, at least.
(01-24-2011, 05:23 PM)The_Harlequin_King Wrote: [ -> ]I believe it's possible to celebrate solemn pontifical Mass in one hour 30 minutes if you have ministers who are very familiar with the rubrics.

I doubt it.  Even a regular solemn Mass takes about that long, and there are things that kill a lot of time, like the vesting.  I guess people don't really have to be there for that, but it's really a part of the overall experience in my opinion.  You wouldn't want to downplay the solemnity of such an occasion by getting it done as fast as possible.

Quote:1.) The bishop is actually celebrating Mass at the cathedral himself, not leaving it to a rector.

2.) He's being served by a full staff of ministers, so people can see the sacrament of Order being implemented to its fullest; neither all priests, nor all laymen.

3.) The musical tradition of the Church, particularly plainchant, is being used.

Doing all those 3 things requires a solemn pontifical Mass, but it need not be overly complicated.

It seems like this could still be accomplished with a solemn Mass in the presence of the bishop, with the bishop celebrating himself on special occasions.  That would also have the advantage of granting those special occasions a greater degree of solemnity.

cgraye Wrote:Unfortunately, it seems the USCCB limits the permanent diaconate to men aged 35, whether celibate or married. Especially with that in mind, I have no scruple against ordaining married men to the diaconate. Either way, I'd make sure that every parish has at least 2 deacons for every priest. I'd aggressively recruit from men who are already serving the Church. There's no reason why all the lay apologists and religious ed instructors can't be approached on the subject of diaconate, at least.

If you included married men that might be possible, but it seems that having a mostly married clergy that way is rather at odds with the tradition of the Latin church.  And while I agree that permanent deacons are important and have been unfairly neglected at times, I'm not sure the same can be said for the minor orders.  They do seem to have been intended as stepping stones of sorts to the major orders.
cgraye Wrote:It seems like this could still be accomplished with a solemn Mass in the presence of the bishop, with the bishop celebrating himself on special occasions.  That would also have the advantage of granting those special occasions a greater degree of solemnity.

I suppose that's a fair compromise. Sure beats the bishop staying at home or in the office.
(01-25-2011, 12:34 AM)The_Harlequin_King Wrote: [ -> ]
cgraye Wrote:It seems like this could still be accomplished with a solemn Mass in the presence of the bishop, with the bishop celebrating himself on special occasions.  That would also have the advantage of granting those special occasions a greater degree of solemnity.

I suppose that's a fair compromise. Sure beats the bishop staying at home or in the office.

I think we worry too much about whether "the people will come."  That's their choice.  I know if the Bishop was offering a Pontifical Solemn Mass I would be going!  But suppose 50 people come; they will all receive the grace of God.  Would the Bishop be glorifying God?  That's the important question.

Cgraye I think does have a good point about the "untraditionalness" of married clergy.  I think the preference for the permanent diaconate should remain for celibate men or maybe widowers. 

The permanent diaconate is back one way or the other, but I'm not sure the Church has really settled what she is doing with the diaconate.  I read elsewhere that Canon Law still indicates that perfect continence is the law for the clergy, yet I have a feeling married deacons don't know this or wouldn't accept it.  I think the Pope will eventually have to make new legislation for deacons (with or without ideas like HKs, since as we've pointed out, the deacons are already there).  I believe the East has abstinence rules for certain times for its married clergy.

If you have a seminary which is attracting many vocations, I would think that you accept the unmarried men first.  Maybe HK has a different opinion though.

Part of the larger picture of second order clergy is the reinvigoration of monastic life.  For liturgical reasons, monks may be raised to various orders below the priesthood, though of course their ministry outside of the monastery would be very limited.  In an ideal world, you would perhaps have permanent celibate deacons from the traditional religious orders too, like the Franciscans and Dominicans, or even the Jesuits. 
Christus Imperat Wrote:If you have a seminary which is attracting many vocations, I would think that you accept the unmarried men first.  Maybe HK has a different opinion though.

If seminaries are full, sure. Slots should be given to unmarried men first. But implementing Holy Orders to its fullest at the parish level is more important than whether or not clerics are celibate, in my opinion. When you have just one priest and a gaggle of old ladies (even if they're nuns) staffing the parish in the interest of only allowing celibate men into the major orders, then you've let the ideal become the enemy of the good.
On second thought:

cgraye Wrote:Even a regular solemn Mass takes about that long, and there are things that kill a lot of time, like the vesting.  I guess people don't really have to be there for that, but it's really a part of the overall experience in my opinion.  You wouldn't want to downplay the solemnity of such an occasion by getting it done as fast as possible.

Now that I think about it, a priest's solemn Mass doesn't take any longer than a sung Mass (Missa cantata) with incense as long as the ministers know what they're doing. For pontifical Mass, the vesting would still be completed by the time Mass is scheduled to start. I've never personally attended a pontifical Mass in the traditional rites, but as I understand it, the bishop's vesting is traditionally done in a chapel while the hour of Terce is sung. I know some places have the bishop vest at the throne, but that's only in the absence of a "suitable chapel"; so that's not necessarily a part of the viewing experience, and it's not part of the scheduled Mass time.

In short, I don't think it devalues the liturgy in any way if the pontifical Mass doesn't play out with as much pomp as, say, the one broadcast from the National Basilica in Washington, D.C. last year. What's important is that the bishop himself is leading an example for other priests to follow. And in addition to the main pontifical Mass, all other Masses at the cathedral ought to be solemn, all the time. There's no excuse for it to be otherwise, at least if you have an order of canons regular in residence.

Quote:And while I agree that permanent deacons are important and have been unfairly neglected at times, I'm not sure the same can be said for the minor orders.  They do seem to have been intended as stepping stones of sorts to the major orders.

On this subject, I envisioned the minor orders being attained by any boys or men who actively serve in the liturgy in any way, including the ushers (porters) and choristers. For men who continue to serve the liturgy in a limited way without advancing to priesthood or diaconate (the choir director, for example), they may become subdeacons. My citation from Trent bears repeating here:

Council of Trent, 23rd Session Wrote:CHAPTER XVII. In what manner the exercise of the minor orders is to be restored.

That the functions of holy orders, from the deacon to the janitor,-which functions have been laudably received in the Church from the times of the apostles, and which have been for some time interrupted in very many places,-may be again brought into use in accordance with the sacred canons; and that they may not be traduced by heretics as useless; the holy Synod, burning with the desire of restoring the pristine usage, ordains that, for the future, such functions shall not be exercised but by those who are actually in the said orders; and It exhorts in the Lord all and each of the prelates of the churches, and commands them, that it be their care to restore the said functions, as far as it can be conveniently done, in the cathedral, collegiate, and parochial churches of their dioceses, where the number of the people and the revenues of the church can support it; and, to those who exercise those functions, they shall assign salaries out of some part of the revenues of any simple benefices, or those of the fabric of the church,-if the funds allow of it,-or out of the revenues of both together, of which stipends they may, if negligent, be mulcted in a part, or be wholly deprived thereof, according to the judgment of the Ordinary. And if there should not be unmarried clerics at hand to exercise the functions of the four minor orders, their place may be supplied by married clerics of approved life; provided they have not been twice married, be competent to discharge the said duties, and wear the tonsure and the clerical dress in church.

Nowhere does it say they must be transitional, but transition to the subdiaconate for long-serving parishioners may be logical.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12