Holy Father Says Old Mass Privately Says Bishop Fellay
#31
MagisterMusicae Wrote:What would be more prudent is for the Pope to offer a public Papal Recited Mass (much like Popes occasionally did before).

I've never heard of a "Papal Recited Mass" before. What exactly is this, Magister?
Reply
#32
(07-16-2010, 08:49 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: It should be remembered that the Pope says a private Low Mass just like any bishop would, so this is easy for him to do, just as Popes have done for centuries.

The Solemn Papal Mass is an entirely different matter. We are not just talking about a Solemn Pontifical Mass. The ceremonies are hugely complex and require dozens of people from various ranks (some of which no longer exist). For the Pope to celebrate such a Mass would end up setting a brand new precedent in how these positions are filled. In the last 500 years of the Church, no Pope has offered the traditional Mass like a Solemn Pontifical Mass, so if the Pope were to do this it would be a huge break from tradition.

Thus, the Pope has to go about this prudently. Eventually we will likely see such a solemn ceremony, but it is not as simple as it seems.

What would be more prudent is for the Pope to offer a public Papal Recited Mass (much like Popes occasionally did before). Barring that, the Pope could arrange for a Cardinal to offer a Solemn Pontifical Mass at which he would attend at the throne. His presence alone would make the statement many are desiring.

At the same point, clearly the Pope has made himself clear that the traditional Mass is of undeniable spiritual value with his Motu Proprio.

As Bishop Fellay said and wrote, the Church is a huge ship. We are seeing the Pope and others recognizing we're headed the wrong direction, and making a course correction, but a shop does not turn on a dime. If sudden moves are made without prudence, the result could be many more leaving the Church than would if things were repaired with some prudence and thought. Imagine how many people would voluntarily cut themselves off from the Sacraments if some of the drastic measures we think are needed were implemented.

When I was young we used to go crabbing. You throw some nicely rotting chicken on a line to the bottom of the river and then when a crab grabs on, you very slowly and gently pull it up and when you're just below the surface you nab the crab. If you pull too hard the crab lets go, if you do nothing, you don't catch any crabs. Similarly, if you want to make a liberal Catholic into a good Catholic, tugging will just get him to leave, while slow steady changes he may not like, but which don't push him over the edge, may eventually convert him.

This is very true.
"Not only are we all in the same boat, but we are all seasick.” --G.K. Chesterton
Reply
#33
(07-16-2010, 08:49 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: As Bishop Fellay said and wrote, the Church is a huge ship. We are seeing the Pope and others recognizing we're headed the wrong direction, and making a course correction, but a shop does not turn on a dime. If sudden moves are made without prudence, the result could be many more leaving the Church than would if things were repaired with some prudence and thought. Imagine how many people would voluntarily cut themselves off from the Sacraments if some of the drastic measures we think are needed were implemented.

Exactly this is what we should look for, the acknowledgment that we all are in the same ship.
Reply
#34
Quote:He cited a chancellor of the Diocese of Trier. He has made known that 80% of the priests in the diocese deny the real presence of Christ in the Host.

Not trying to derail, but:

1. How was this determined?

2. Why don't they do something about it?
Reply
#35
(07-16-2010, 11:32 PM)artificial person Wrote: Here's a quote for you.

Denouncing those who oppose Vatican II: "We must be on guard against minimizing these movements. Without a doubt, they represent a sectarian zealotry that is the antithesis of Catholicity. We cannot resist them too firmly."
(Citation Info: Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, Ignatius Press, 1987, pp. 389-90; German original: Katholische Prinzipienlehre, 1982)

How telling!
Reply
#36
(07-17-2010, 02:15 AM)Joshua Wrote: I've never heard of a "Papal Recited Mass" before. What exactly is this, Magister?

Recited Mass is basically another term for Low Mass.  A Low Mass said by a bishop or even the pope is not that different from a Low Mass said by a priest, so the problem of all the vacant positions and elaborate ceremonies could be avoided.
Reply
#37
(07-17-2010, 09:38 AM)damooster Wrote:
Quote:He cited a chancellor of the Diocese of Trier. He has made known that 80% of the priests in the diocese deny the real presence of Christ in the Host.

Not trying to derail, but:

1. How was this determined?

2. Why don't they do something about it?

I don't know about #1, but on #2: what would you do?  There's already a shortage of priests, so they can't afford to fire 80% of them.  And if the number of heretical priests is really that high, pushing too hard could cause a schism that leaves the real Church 1/4 the size of the breakaway one, perhaps even without a presence in many dioceses.  How many Catholics would think the breakaway church was the true one, just based on the size of its bandwagon?

Maybe that's what needs to happen, unpleasant as it would be.  I don't know, but I don't think it's an easy call.  Especially when the ravages of time are shifting the balance already, without an open battle.  Twenty years from now, a pope will be able to say a Low Mass without anyone batting an eye, and there won't be a large mass of priests and religious of a certain generation who are just itching to split from the Church over some slight.  I realize that leaves Catholics poorly served in the meantime (assuming that a priest who doesn't believe in the Real Presence can't possibly have the right intention to do a valid consecration?), but if you fire all the heretics and leave them without priests at all, that's not great either.
Reply
#38
Here's a little more:

The Reform of the Roman Liturgy' (Msgr Klaus Gamber)

Where the Modern Liturgy went wrong

By Michael Davies

In his second Epistle to the Thessalonians St. Paul admonished them to stand fast and keep the traditions which they had learned either by word of mouth or from his epistles (II Thess 2:14). Writing in the fourth century, St. Jerome observed: "the best advice that I can give you is this: Church traditions - especially when they do not run counter to the faith - are to be observed in the form in which previous generations have handed which we have received from the fathers of old".

The principle enshrined in these quotations had been implemented consistently by every Pope until the pontificate of Pope Paul VI.

The significance of the Reform of the roman liturgy with its servere critique of the new Mass derives not so much from what it says but from who says it. As Cardinal Ratzinger expressed it, Msgr. Gamber was "the one scholar, who, among the army of pseudo-liturgists, truly represents the liturgical thinking of the center of the Church." Quite an endorsement of three cardinals, Oddi, Stickler and Ratzinger.

In his preface to the French edition of Msgr. Gamber's book, Cardinal Ratzinger has this to say on the subject of post-conciliar renewal:

"What happened after the Council was something else entirely: in the place of liturgy as the fruit of development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it - as in a manufacturing process - with a fabrication, a banal on -the-spot product. Gamber, with the vigilance of a true prophet and the courage of a true witness, opposed this falsification, and, indefatigably taught us about the living fullness of a true liturgy". What, then, does this true prophet have to say about a reform which is, in reality, a continued revolution? "The pastoral benefits that so many idealists had hoped the new liturgy would bring did not materialize. Our churches emptied in spite of the new liturgy (or because of it?), and the faithful continued to fall away from the Church in droves." And again: "In the end, we will all have to recognize that the new liturgical forms, well intentioned as they may have been at the beginning, did not provide the people with bread, but with stones."

Canon 214 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law states that the faithful are entitled to the prescriptions of their own rite. Many of the faithful of the roman rite find it impossible to recognize what takes place in their parish churches each Sunday as their own rite, despite the fact that the Vatican II liturgy constitution ordered that all existing liturgical rites should be preserved and fostered in every way. Cardinal Ratzinger has remarked: " Today we might ask: is there a Latin Rite at all any more? Certainly there is no awareness of it. To most people the liturgy appears to be something for the individual congregation to arrange."

I hope this is in context. I don;t have this book nor is my scanner working so this is the best I could do.
tim
Reply
#39
(07-16-2010, 09:08 PM)spasiisochrani Wrote:
(07-16-2010, 08:49 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: It should be remembered that the Pope says a private Low Mass just like any bishop would, so this is easy for him to do, just as Popes have done for centuries.

The Solemn Papal Mass is an entirely different matter. We are not just talking about a Solemn Pontifical Mass. The ceremonies are hugely complex and require dozens of people from various ranks (some of which no longer exist). For the Pope to celebrate such a Mass would end up setting a brand new precedent in how these positions are filled. In the last 500 years of the Church, no Pope has offered the traditional Mass like a Solemn Pontifical Mass, so if the Pope were to do this it would be a huge break from tradition.

I've seen this argument before, and I don't think it's persuasive.  The pope is a diocesan bishop, and he needs to be able to celebrate a Solemn Mass like other bishops can.  If "the ceremonies [of a Solemn Papal Mass]...require dozens of people from various ranks (some of which no longer exist)", then the rubrics need to be changed to adapt to reality. The answer is not to say that the Pope is now unable to celebrate a Mass with even the level of solemnity that is available to an ordinary bishop.


Perhaps some rubrical change is reasonable, but any change would be an inherent violation of nearly a thousand of years of tradition and custom. The whole problem that got us into this mess in the first place was what some felt were "rubrical changes to adapt to the times and reality". Obviously if there is some grave reason to change the custom or law, then by all means, but convenience and the satisfaction of a few people is not a good reason.

Tradition and custom have made the Solemn Papal Mass much different from that of a Bishop. We can't just ignore that tradition and custom to have some Papal Mass that will please a few traditionalists. When Bishop Slattery offfered the first Solemn Pontifical Mass at the National Shrine in many years, he did so with all the proper ministers and rubrics, because it sets an example. If the example is a hybrid Mass or some simplified Mass, we never get the example of doing it correctly.

At the same point, in the past, the Pope rarely celebrated public Mass anyway, and even more rarely did he celebrate a Solemn Papal Mass. These grand ceremonies were generally reserved for the most solemn occasions because of the difficulty of doing them (in an age where the Church had the resources and only a few lone voices objecting to the grandeur of the ceremony). There is famously a video of Pope John XXIII offering such a Mass where Enrico Cardinal Dante, the longtime Papal Master of Ceremonies is directing the Pope at the consecration what to do, with the other assistant giving him contrary direction based on a Pontifical Mass. Preparing such a ceremony takes a man who is an expert at it and can make at least a half-dozen other men experts on it, who can then make the fifty or so ministers involved reasonably confident and certain of what they are to do.

Having worked for many years behind the scenes of preparing solemn ceremonies for a parish including some episcopal ceremonies, I can tell you that to do something like this right takes weeks or even months of preparation in some cases. When the ceremonies become more common, then it can take a week or a few days to prepare, perhaps, but doing ceremonies correctly is not as easy as it seems.

Given the way Rome works and the workload already on Msgr. Marini, even if the Pope wanted to make it a priority to set up a Solemn Papal Mass, with substitutions for the missing positions, I can't imagine that it would take less than a year to prepare all of the details, and I would imagine with all of the variations and customs I have seen, it probably would take far longer to make sure the ceremony could be done in the traditional manner. The research alone into how to do the ceremonies would probably take a year, since most anyone who has been involved with such a ceremony, aside from seeing a grainy video which is difficult to use, is very likely dead.

However, a Papal Low Mass, could be done without too much difficulty (and was more common in the past -- nearly anytime the Pope said Mass, it was a Low Mass), or as above, the Pope could attend on the throne, a Pontifical Mass of a Cardinal. As Beatifications are now customarily done by the Pope, with Mass celebrated by a Cardinal, this could be an opportune time to do this. The rubrics for this are much simpler and easier to learn, and it solves the whole problem of waiting until the Papal Mass could be done correctly.
Reply
#40
(07-17-2010, 10:45 AM)cgraye Wrote:
(07-17-2010, 02:15 AM)Joshua Wrote: I've never heard of a "Papal Recited Mass" before. What exactly is this, Magister?

Recited Mass is basically another term for Low Mass.  A Low Mass said by a bishop or even the pope is not that different from a Low Mass said by a priest, so the problem of all the vacant positions and elaborate ceremonies could be avoided.

I personally try to avoid the term "Low Mass" because the term "High Mass" is not an accurate term for what it is typically used and Recited is the proper translation from the Latin. The Latin terms for the various forms of the traditional Mass are: Missa Recitata (Recited Mass), Missa Cantata (Sung Mass), Missa Solemnis (Solemn Mass). Until 1963 a Bishop was not permitted to celebrate Mass as a normal Priest, so he could offer only a Pontifical Recited Mass or a Solemn Pontifical Mass.

Many of us understand a Solemn Pontifical Mass includes the Bishop as Celebrant, Deacon, Subdeacon and Assistant Priest along with all the other inferior ministers. A Pontifical Recited Mass is like a typical Low Mass, but adds two chaplains to the bishop who serve effectively as an unvested Deacon and Subdeacon.

The Pope would typically celebrate a "Low Mass" in the same way as a bishop, except Cardinals or Bishops would typically be his chaplains. In fact, there still is a small group of minor prelates (Monsignori) who are "Chaplains to His Holiness" and whose primary duty was to assist the Pope with such a Mass.

The ceremonies for such a Recited Mass are nearly identical to that of a regular Bishop, so this eliminates the problems I discussed above. Aditionally, since it was rare for a public Mass of the Pope to be a Solemn Papal Mass, the Papal Low Mass would also be more in keeping with custom.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)