Here are some rapid notes after a first reading.  This should post appear after the embargo is lifted, after 1200h in Rome.

The Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of the Catholic Church in the People’s Republic of China.

The text is now ready in all the major languages, including Chinese in both simplified and traditional characters.

The text is not available in Latin.   It is dated to Pentecost Sunday.  

It is divided in two parts, a theological examination of the Church in China and guidelines for Pastoral Life

A recurring theme in the first part of the letter is suffering.  Benedict expresses his unity with the people, a great people with a long tradition, who are suffering.  At the same time as he looks at the particular situation of the Chinese people, he also underscores the Catholic tradition and the meaning of what it is to be a Church.

As in everything this Pope writes and says, he is concerned to speak to the Church herself, considered as the Church (ad intra) and also how the Church interacts with the word and fits in a particular social context (ad extra).  

The Church has had a painful experience in China for the last fifty years.  There were persecutions in the 1950’s and expulsions of foreigners.   Chinese Catholics became isolated and an official Church was established by the government to control religious activity.  Consecration of bishops without papal mandate in 1958 wounded the unity of the Church.  The Cultural Revolution (1966-76) was a time of great trial.  The 1980’s saw some openings and tolerance.   Faith had remained alive.  Some Catholic pastors were determined not to be too influenced by the government and opted to function in a clandestine way.  Others opted to work with the government Church some seeking also union with the Successor of Peter.  There remain those who believe the official Church is independent, which is not reconciable with Catholic doctrine.  In the climate of doubt, many Catholic priests and bishops have sought from Rome some counsel on how to proceed.  With this letter the Pope offers some guidelines for the life of the Church and the task of evangelization. (No. 2).

He recognizes their suffering, and the value of that suffering.  He knows that reconciliation cannot be accomplished overnight.  (no. 6).

Benedict repeats the words of Jesus in Luke 5:4, "Duc in altum... cast out into the deep".  In a way, this suggests to me that if missionaries cannot arrive in China, perhaps we need to make better use of tools of social communication in evangelization and promoting unity.  These words were also used by John Paul II in his letter about using the internet.  However, in this Letter, Benedict says, "Duc in altum" invites "us to remember the past with gratitude, to live the present with enthusiasm and to look forward to the future with confidence". (No. 3)  Again, in this phrase we see Benedict’s desire to establish continuity with the past, for the sake of a healthy present and future.

On practical matters, Benedict gives guidelines about the recognition of ecclesiastics by government authorities  and about the appointment of bishops.  

Again, Benedict stresses, as he has been doing in Italy, that the Church cannot replace the State.  The State and Church have different missions.  However, the Church must not be silenced. She has a mission to fulfill, to proclaim Christ.  It is not the Church’s primary task to to build a the most just earthly society.  However, she cannot be sidelined either.  (cf. Deus caritas est).  As a result, she does not wish for ongoing conflict with civil authorities, but she will not yield her rights when there is undue interference in "matters regarding the faith and discipline of the Church."

In language that seems to be proposed as a bridge, Benedict writes: "No one in the Church is a foreigner, but all are citizens of the same People, members of the same Mystical Body of Christ. The bond of sacramental communion is the Eucharist, guaranteed by the ministry of Bishops and priests."  The government is often concerned about "foreign" influence in China.

The Pope dwells on the need for reconciliation for the purpose of authentic communion, moving beyong the pain and personal positions and difficult experiences.  Force cannot be the model.  While charity must rule the God given ecclesial and hierarchical structure of the Church cannot be compromised.  The ministry of the Apostles is a sine qua non.   The State cannot place itself above the Church’s own authority to guide the ecclesial life of the faithful.  

Does collaboration with or recognition from civil authorities compromise communion with the universal Church?  Benedict responds that

"courageous safeguarding of the deposit of faith and of sacramental and hierarchical communion is not of itself opposed to dialogue with the authorities concerning those aspects of the life of the ecclesial community that fall within the civil sphere. There would not be any particular difficulties with acceptance of the recognition granted by civil authorities on condition that this does not entail the denial of unrenounceable principles of faith and of ecclesiastical communion." (No. 7).

Benedict applies a principle of subsidiarity, leaving it to the local bishop to determine in the precise local context how to balance these aims.  He stresses that the faithful must remain in union with the bishop.

Addressing the issue of bishops, Benedict speaks to a number of topics, including their formation.  The role of bishops is vital and no lay person can become the de facto head of a community.  Also, given the nature of the Petrine Ministry and the Apostolic succession and its ministry, "the proposal for a Church that is ‘‘independent’’ of the Holy See, in the religious sphere, is incompatible with Catholic doctrine."  

Even when bishops are consecrated without pontifical mandate, their consecration is valid. In the case of bishops who have not sought unity with the Holy See, their sacramental ministry is valid, but illegitimate.  

The Letter does not state that these bishops are excommunicated for being consecrated without papal mandate.  This seems to be a recognition of the need to consider the social context and difficult conditions of the Church in China.

The Letter reminds bishops that no bishop or groups of bishops in Episcopal Conferences can be subjected to civil authorities when teaching about faith and moral and the Church’s sacramental life. (no. 8).  

However, the present official "College of Catholic Bishops of China cannot be recognized as an Episcopal Conference by the Apostolic See: the ‘‘clandestine’’ Bishops, those not recognized by the Government but in communion with the Pope, are not part of it; it includes Bishops who are still illegitimate, and it is governed by statutes that contain elements incompatible with Catholic doctrine."

When the Pope approves the appointment of bishops, he exercises spiritual authority, strictly within the religious sphere, not political authority.  When appointing a bishop the Pope does not interfer with the internal affairs of a State.  Benedict hopes that some agreement can be reached so that the Holy See can be free to appoint bishops.  He is willing to work with the government to resolve questions regarding certain candidates and the publication of their appointments.

The section on practical guidelines, I will look at later.

At the end the Pope proposes that 24 May could be a future day of prayer for Catholics around the world in unity with the Church in China, with special reference to Our Lady, Help of Christians, venerated at the Shrine of Sheshan in Shanghai.

If you don’t subscribe to CWN, you ought to, even if only to show appreciate for Diogenes.   (My emphases.)

yet another motu proprio?

Posted by: Diogenes – Today 4:28 PM ET USA

Pope Benedict the XVI will soon release a moto proprio permitting the celebration of the Novus Ordo Mass without liturgical abuses, CWN has learned.

The 1-page document, accompanied by a 50-page explanatory letter, will allow individual priests to celebrate the Mass of 1969 according to the revised General Instruction for the Roman Missal. Bishop Ronald Mackerelperson criticized the relaxed rules that will permit the lawful celebration of the Novus Ordo. In a prepared statement, Mackerelperson said that the Holy See is overlooking the pastoral benefits of liturgical abuse. "When I see Mother Superior of the Erie Benedictine nuns in a polyester leotard performing a liturgical dance, I ask myself what could make the liturgy more relevant to Dick and Jane in the pews," he said.

Mackerelperson said that as a result of this kind of liturgical expertise on the part of the Benedictine nuns, he has appointed nuns as permanent administrators of most of the parishes in his diocese. The bishop predicted "pastoral chaos" if the liturgical abuse is outlawed. "Liturgy must be accessible to the young people and giving unregulated permission to priests to celebrate Mass according to the rubrics should not be tolerated," he complained.

Bishop Mackerelperson added the proposed motu proprio, if it is issued in the form being discussed by Vatican-watchers, would "disrupt years of careful liturgical training of priests and laity."

I will drink a glass of the Veuve in honor of this MP also.  Perhaps I will invite Diogenes and Bp. Mackerelperson to join me.   That would be an interesting evening.

On the blog of His Eminence Sean Card. O’Malley, we read an account of the meeting he attended in Rome concerning the Motu Proprio.  My emphases and comments.

From Cleveland I flew to Rome at the request of Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone to participate in a meeting discussing the Holy Father’s Moto Proprio about the use of the older form of the Latin Mass. [Very good!  A distinction!  Someone who understands that "Latin Mass" is any Mass in Latin, not the so-called "Tridentine" Mass.] There were about 25 bishops there, [Okay… was it 15?  Was it 30?  Was I right after all?  After correcting myself?] including the president of Ecclesia Dei Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, the prefect of Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments Cardinal Francis Arinze, several heads of bishops’ conferences as well as some cardinals [Yep… that’s Rome for ya….] and other residential bishops.

They shared with us the Moto Proprio and the Holy Father’s letter explaining it. We also had an opportunity to read the Latin document. We each commented on that, and then the Holy Father came in and shared [Ahhh… sharing….] some of his thoughts with us. The Holy Father is obviously most concerned about trying to bring about reconciliation in the Church. There are about 600,000 Catholics who are participating in the liturgies of the Society of St. Pius X, along with about 400 priest.  [I wonder where this figure came from.  Perhaps it came from the meeting.  Sometimes we hear of numbers as high as 1 million.]

The Holy Father was very clear that the ordinary form of celebrating the Mass will be the new rite, the Norvus Ordo. But by making the Latin Mass more available, the Holy Father is hoping to convince those disaffected Catholics that it is time for them to return to full union with the Catholic Church.  [But wait!  There’s more!   There are deeper reasons for this MP.]

So the Holy Father’s motivation for this decision is pastoral. He does not want this to be seen as establishing two different Roman Rites, but rather one Roman Rite celebrated with different forms. The Moto Propio is his latest attempt at reconciliation. [H.E. seems to want to limit the Holy Father’s move with a very narrow motive.]

In my comments at the meeting I told my brother bishops that in the United States the number of people who participate in the Latin Mass even with permission is very low. [Where in the USA?  It’s a big place.  Could Archbishop Burke have had a different experience?] Additionally, according to the research that I did, there are only 18 priories of the Society of St. Pius X in the entire country.  Therefore this document will not result in a great deal of change for the Catholics in the U.S. Indeed, interest in the Latin Mass is particularly low here in New England.  [Time will tell.  I have the impression that this expresses H.E.’s hope rather than his prediction.  But when you are a Cardinal Archbishop, those often coincide.]

In our archdiocese, the permission to celebrate the Latin Mass [Oooopppsss, a fumble on the 10 yrd line.] has been in place for several years, and I granted permission when I was in Fall River for a Mass down on the Cape. The archdiocesan Mass [...singular…] is now at Immaculate Mary of Lourdes Parish in Newton. It is well attended, and if the need arises for an extension of that we would, of course, address it. 

This issue of the Latin Mass [Oh my!  Another fumble at the 2!] is not urgent for our country, [I suspect it may be more urgent than H.E. may believe.] however I think they wanted us to be part of the conversation so that we would be able to understand what the situation is in countries where the numbers are very significant. [I think that the "1" for whom the shepherd described by Jesus left the "99" was "very significant".] For example, in Brazil there is an entire diocese of 30,000 people that has already been reconciled to the Church.

All in all an interesting report from His Eminence.   I am grateful that he posted it.

The solid Andrea Tornielli has a meaty piece in Il Giornale about the Motu Proprio.

Highlights:

1)  The MP will be released probably on 7 July.
2)  There will probably be no press conference to present the document.
3)  The Pope offers a letter with the document to explain his decison.
4)  The older rite was not abolished.
5)  It had been decided by a group of cardinals in 1982 that there should be more use of the 1962 Missale.
6)  The prayer about the "perfidis judeais" was already gone from that edition.
7)  When "stable groups" ("gruppi stabili") want the older Mass they can go to the parish priest (pastor).
8)  It will be the bishops role to help iron out problems, resolve difficulties.
9)  The old calendar and readings for Mass are preserved.
10) People can have not only Mass but all the sacraments in the old rite.
11) We don’t speak any longer of two rites, of Paul VI and of "Tridentine", but of one rite of the Latin church in two forms, ordinary and extraordinary.
12) The Pope explains in his letter that this is not a return to the past.
13) What happened after the Council was not supposed to be a break with the past.
14) Mass must be celebrated well in either form.
15) Card. Castrillon Hoyos explained the text.
16) The Pope came and they discused things for an hour.
17) In the last few months very few and very small changes were made to the text, as was explained on Wednesday.
18) In the last few weeks  Cardinal Lehmanand Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor brought up the point abut Jews being upset.
19) The French had expressed worry abou tht e "unity" of the Church, something they did not seem to wory about in the face of liturgical abuses in the Novus Ordo.
20) The Letter to the Chinese will be 28 pages. 
21) The Pope declares the full validity of the sacraments celebrated by both the official and clandestine Churches.

Great article!  Tornielli gets a thumbs up. 

n. 152 del 2007-06-29 pagina 17

Il Papa ai vescovi: via libera alla messa antica
di Andrea Tornielli
Per celebrare non servirà più il placet delle curie

da Roma

Benedetto XVI due giorni fa ha convocato a Roma i leader delle conferenze episcopali dei Paesi dove è più consistente la presenza dei tradizionalisti per presentare il Motu proprio che liberalizzerà la Messa preconciliare in latino e sarà pubblicato con tutta probabilità sabato 7 luglio, senza conferenza stampa di presentazione.
Il documento papale è accompagnato da una lunga lettera nella quale Papa Ratzinger spiega ai vescovi le ragioni della sua decisione. Il testo dichiara che l’antico rito romano non è mai stato abolito, come stabilì un gruppo di cardinali dell’ex Sant’Uffizio già nel 1982, e che dunque è possibile utilizzare il libro liturgico promulgato da Giovanni XXIII nel 1962, l’ultima versione dell’antica messa, già purgata della preghiera del Venerdì santo nella quale gli ebrei erano definiti «perfidis judaeis». Fino a oggi, secondo l’indulto già concesso nel 1984 da Papa Wojtyla, per ottenere questa celebrazione, i tradizionalisti dovevano chiedere un’autorizzazione al vescovo diocesano, il quale poteva concederla o meno. Dall’entrata in vigore del Motu proprio di Benedetto XVI non sarà più così: i fedeli – un «gruppo stabile» recita il testo – si rivolgeranno direttamente al parroco. Il vescovo dovrà eventualmente dirimere i problemi, stabilire come superare le difficoltà: il suo ruolo, come ha precisato il cardinale Segretario di Stato Tarcisio Bertone, rimarrà «centrale nelle disposizioni dell’ordine dele celebrazioni». Ma sia il vescovo che il parroco si muoveranno nell’ambito della nuova legge.
I tradizionalisti conserveranno il vecchio calendario e l’antica scelta di letture bibliche. Oltre alla Messa domenicale si potranno celebrare anche tutti i sacramenti con il vecchio rito. Non si parlerà più di due riti diversi, quello tridentino e il nuovo approvato da Paolo VI, ma di un unico rito della Chiesa latina in due forme: quella ordinaria, vale a dire la nuova Messa; quella straordinaria, rappresentata dalla Messa secondo l’antica tradizione.
Nella lettera di accompagnamento il Papa spiegherà ai vescovi che con questa decisione non si fa un salto nel passato. La stessa riforma liturgica voluta dal Concilio non era infatti da intendersi come una frattura. E Benedetto XVI spiegherà l’importanza che la liturgia sia ben celebrata sia nell’una che nell’altra forma.
Alla riunione hanno partecipato tra gli altri gli italiani Ruini e Bagnasco, i francesi Ricard e Barbarin, il tedesco Lehmann, l’inglese Murphy O’Connor, l’americano O’Malley, l’australiano Pell, lo svizzero Koch, l’indiano Toppo. Sono intervenuti i cardinali Bertone, per spiegare il senso dell’iniziativa, e Castrillón, presidente di «Ecclesia Dei», che ha illustrato il testo. Quindi il Papa si è unito ai presenti e ha discusso con loro per un’ora. Pochissime e poco rilevanti le modifiche apportate in questi mesi al testo, qualche precisazione è stata avanzata anche mercoledì pomeriggio. Nelle ultime settimane alcune resistenze erano arrivate in particolare dal cardinale Lehmann, che aveva parlato di un disagio delle comunità ebraiche, poi rientrato, dato che il messale autorizzato non conterrà l’abolita frase sui «perfidis judaeis», e dal cardinale inglese Murphy O’Connor. Mentre i vescovi francesi avevano in precedenza manifestato timori per «l’unità» liturgica della Chiesa: preoccupazione reale ma quasi mai evocata nel caso di abusi o frequenti stravaganze nelle celebrazioni col nuovo rito.
È infine ormai imminente la pubblicazione della lettera del Papa ai cattolici cinesi. Nelle 28 pagine di documento il Pontefice fornisce indicazioni per superare le divisioni tra le comunità clandestine e quelle ufficiali, dichiarando la piena validità dei sacramenti celebrati da entrambe.

On the website of the one of the worst, one of the most liberal newspapers in the USA, the execrable Minneapolis Star-Tribune, there is an informal poll:

Instant poll: Should the church allow wider use of the Latin Mass?

Pope Benedict has decided to relax restrictions that have existed since the 1960s.

          Yes No Don’t know   

Remember, a lot of clergy of that Archdiocese will be reading these results. 

Folks!   You have your marching orders.

CLICK HERE TO GO VOTE!

In the paper, there is a piece from the AP.  This is how the paper is shaping opinion:

Pope seeks wider use of Latin mass

Associated Press

Last update: June 28, 2007 – 9:16 PM

VATICAN CITY - Pope Benedict is proceeding with his plan to allow more churches to use the Latin mass.

The decision follows months of debate. Some cardinals, bishops and Jews have opposed any change to the current vernacular rite, voicing complaints about everything from the text of the old mass to concerns that the move will lead to further changes to the reforms approved by 1962-1965 Second Vatican Council.

To celebrate the Latin mass now, a priest must obtain permission from the local bishop. Roman Catholic leaders are anxiously awaiting the details of Benedict’s decision, to see how far he will go in easing that rule.

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Vatican secretary of state, told reporters Thursday that bishops will still have a "central role"—but he didn’t elaborate. Bertone called a return to the Latin mass a "great treasure."

In a 1988 document, Pope John Paul II urged bishops to be generous in granting dispensations to allow the Tridentine rite to be celebrated. But many proponents say bishops have been stingy—for personal reasons or because not enough priests can do it.

Benedict appears wary of ignoring tradition. This week, he changed the rules for the election of a pope, reinstating the rule changed by John Paul requiring a two-thirds majority for election of the pontiff.

In the 1997 book "Salt of the Earth" Benedict said it was "downright indecent" for people who are still attached to the Latin mass to be denied it.

ASSOCIATED PRESS

 

There is a very piece at The Paragraph Farmer (great name!) about liturgical music. 

You have all heard rotten music in churches, music which makes even the Campbell Soup jingle or the theme from Gilligan’s Island sound like Mahler.  Then there is the contemporary group who think their Boston. 

The Paragraph Farmer gets into "praise bands".  Read the whole piece at his place, but here is an excerpt.  (my emphases and comments.

In Catholic circles, praise band relocation off the grass and onto the carpet was aided and abetted by liturgists hell-bent on democratizing and de-clericalizing everything about the Mass "in the spirit of Vatican II," and never mind what the actual architects of Vatican II (such as a Polish prelate named Karol Wojtyla who later became Pope John Paul II) had to say. Some of those liturgists worked hand-in-glove with politically correct composers—sons of Salieri, every one of them —like the irksome Marty Haugen.

Now that praise bands are indoors, they have no intention of returning to the garages, basements, parking lots, and auditoriums from which they came.

As a result of the developments I’ve sketched above, and the fact that hymnody has fallen victim to the language wars, we now have a sorry situation indeed. But Anthony Esolen understands this phenomenon better than I do. Go read his comments at the link, and the classically literate followup to those comments. In brief, Esolen says that sentimentality, although valuable in its place, is neverthless destructive of genuine feeling. And there you have the problem put in yet another way: when power ballads intrude on the liturgy of heaven (which is what the Mass is), then what Esolen calls "the necessary hypocrisy of small talk" is wrongly raised to the status of a liturgical act.  [This puts it as well as anything I have ever read.  Sometimes we use the phrase "banalization".  This, however, introduces the concept of hypocrisy.   In ancient rhetoric, what was "apt" and "beautiful" (aptum et pulchrum) played a major role in communication.  These categories were also employed for theology and, therefore, prayer.  There is no room for hypocrisy in prayer.  The Roman style of liturgical prayer, in Latin, was not "small talk"however, concise it was.  There is not a trace of hypocrisy in any Latin oration I recall ever having read.  I cannot say the same for the lame-duck ICEL versions.]

Power ballad and praise band mediocrity is sometimes justified on the grounds that people need to be met "where they are" with lyrics to which they can relate. [Sound like the translation war and the Trautman proposal, "Trautmania".] This attitude is arrogant on two counts, in that praise band directors have abrogated to themselves an outreach task that properly belongs to the Holy Spirit, while also assuming that straightforward hymnody of the kind exemplified in, for example, "We walk by faith – and not by sight – No gracious words we hear – Of Him who spoke as none e’er spoke – Yet we believe Him near" is somehow less intelligible than what you hear in pop music. Mr. Tom Petty, if you please: "All the vampires – Walking through the Valley – Move west down – Ventura Boulevard – And the bad boys – Are standing in the shadows – While the good girls – Are home with broken hearts. "

Show of hands as to how many people outside California know that Petty is singing about the San Fernando Valley? And how about those vampires, hmmm….? (Bueller? Anyone?)

Like C.S. Lewis [and Fr. Z] wrote in a related context, we need meat, not just milk. Lewis wasn’t writing specifically to Catholics at the time, but that he should have to remind Christians whose faith lives are ordered around the eucharist of this fact is testimony to our own failures and the failures of some of our pastors.

WDTPRS has soldiered for years on the side of truth and beauty in liturgical translation.  We played a not insignificant role in process whereby the accurate translation of "pro multis" in the consecration of the Precious Blood went up the ladder for the Pope’s signature.  It is now a done deal: all vernacular versions must use some form of "for many" to translation "pro multis".

With a tip of the biretta to SP   o{]:¬)    I present a story from ADISTA (my translation, emphases and comments).

"PRO MULTIS" MEANS "FOR ALL".  IN GERMANY TWO PRESBYTERAL COUNCILS REFUSE THE VATICAN TRANSLATION
(Ludovia Eugenio)

ROTTENBURG-ADISTA The voting was carried out in a democratic way and gave a clear verdict: in the litugical formula for transubstantiation: they will continue to translate the Latin formula pro multis with the expression "for all", and not with "for many" as desired by the Pope.  The "disobedience" to the Vatican prescription to change the translation, desired by Benedict XVI and "commissioned" by him from the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments of Card. Francis Arinze, was – as the German press reports it these days – on the part of two German diocesan presbyteral councils, that of Rottenburg-Stuttgart, and of Augsburg.  Reacting to the letter which Arinze sent last October to the presidents of national episcopal conferences about this question, the Presbyteral Council of Rottenburg-Stuttgart, during a meeting which took place on 25 April last, voted in favor of maintaining the inclusive translation "for all", judging that of the Vatican, "for many", ambiguous "today being as it is". [Doesn’t this sound like the argument of H.E. Donald W. Trautman?]  "The promise of God’s salvation," according to the press release sent out by the same presbyteral council – applies to all persons.  This truth of faith is expressed in the clearest way in the formula "for all" in the prayer".  "The correct understanding" of the text does not depend on comments about it, [Again, this is the Trautmaniac line: a prayer must be easily and immediately understandable.  Thus, language must be closer to the lowest common denominator, rather than the higher, and translation must be changed often as the language shifts.  The problem is, of course, that you really can’t say anything meaningful that way.] the religious of Rottenburg affirmed: the original biblical text affirms that Christ died for all, and every man can and must decide to accept Jesus’ offer of salvation.  [A red herring: Liturgical translation is not equivalent to biblical translation.  The liturgical texts now constitute their own source and must be respected as such.  Liturgical translation focuses on what the pages of the Missale say, not the Bible, even when the liturgical text is rooted in Scripture.  This is especially important with even in the Catechism of the Council of Trent there was a specific paragraph about the "for all" question.]

A month before, the Presbyteral  Council of Augsburg expressed the same choice.  The diocesan presbyteral council asked Bishop Walter Mixa, to "promote with the Vatican and the German Episcopal Conference" the possiblity of continuing the translate the expression in the Missale Romanum "pro multis" with "for all".  Immediately after the vote, Fr. Florian Schuller, President of the Catholic Academy of Bavaria, addressed the presbyteral council, underscoring that the history of the central texts of the liturgy are "profoundly written in the conscience" and that a change such as that prescribed by Rome risks provoking polarizations and protests at the parish level: "That all priests all of a sudden go from ‘for all’ to ‘for many’ is, based on the experience of the last decades, rather unlikely".  [Since when have guys like this been worried about overnight changes that affect what people feel deeply?]

 

We are interested these days in accuracy of reporting on the details of the Motu Proprio.

I offer for your consideration….

...the finely crafted caption for a photo from Reuters

Pope Benedict XVI leads the Vespri’s mass at the St. Paolo’s Basilica in Rome June 28, 2007. Pope Benedict will tell Roman Catholic priests in coming days that they can say mass in Latin as a concession to traditionalists. (Alessandro Bianchi/Reuters)

The Holy Father was at St. Paul’s for Vespers, not Mass.  I am not worried about the Italian/English confusion in the caption.  Notice the description of "Latin Mass" as a "concession".

 

In another entry on this blog there are questions and comments about having the "Tridentine" Mass in the vernacular.   Apparently radio commentator Paul Harvey inaccurately launched some rumor about this.

"But Father!  But Father!", some of you are muttering.  "That sounds like a really good idea!" 

So, gentle readers … good idea?  Not good?  Latin only?  Could the vernacular be the best of both worlds?

One commentor in this blog said:

What would be so bad if the MP included the option for a priest to use the 1962 missal translated into the vernacular?

Wouldn’t such an option be a good way of introducing the post-Vatican II group to the Traditional Mass?

Another comment responded:

The oldies around here (like me) all remember “a translation” in the pages of some missal from some publishing house about 1962, but which version would we take?

No. It would be an unofficial translation if we did that. It’s not that all that simple. We’ve had our fill of ad hoc translations—that is precisely the point of doing Latin. We have to fix this shambles the liturgy is in.

That raises an interesting point.  It just so happens that for my WDTPRS article for this week’s 13th Sunday of Ordinary time, in which I scrutinize the Post Communion, I compared older version of the prayer.  It happens that this Post Communion was identical to a prayer in the 1962 Missale Romanum.   Here is an excerpt:

[T]oday’s Post Communion, which was in the 1962 Missale Romanum for the votive Mass of Our Lord Jesus Christ High and Eternal Priest. 

POST COMMUNIONEM (2002MR):
Vivificet nos, quaesumus, Domine,
divina quam obtulimus et sumpsimus hostia,
ut, perpetua tibi caritate coniuncti,
fructum qui semper maneat afferamus.

I like the chiasmus pattern.  A chiasmus is an “X” shaped figure of speech: AB-BA.  When the pairs are placed above each other, they form an X, like the Greek letter chi which looks like an “X”.  The AB-BA in divina quam obtulimus et sumpsimus hostia puts the feminine divina… hostia on the ends and then embeds the relative clause with two perfect verbs.  Elegant. 

Let’s dig at affero (or adfero) with our fabulous lexical shovel, the Lewis & Short Dictionary.  In its basic meaning, when applied to portable things affero is “to bring, take, carry or convey a thing to a place”.  Regarding news it is “to report, announce, inform, publish”.  Concerning reasons or excuses it means “to bring forwards, allege, assert, adduce”.  But in the Classical period it could, though rarely, mean “to bring forth as a product, to yield, bear, produce”.  Now we are getting somewhere.   The references provided in L&S are from the Vulgate and two of them pair affero with fructum (“an enjoying; proceeds, profit, income; fruit, consequence, result, return, reward, success”).  Coniugo means “to bind together, connect, join, unite; to unite, join in marriage or love”.  Think of English “conjunction” and “conjugal”.   The imagery of the prayer is nuptial.

Since this prayer remains as it appeared in the pre-Conciliar Missale Romanum, out of curiosity we can again consult those good old hand missals people carried to church stuffed with memorial and ordination cards.

The New Roman Missal (1945):
We beseech Thee O Lord that the divine victim
which has been our oblation and our food may give us life;
so that united with Thee in perpetual charity
we may bring fruit that remaineth forever.

The New Marian Missal (1958):
We beseech Thee, O Lord, may the divine hosts
which we have offered up and received, quicken us;
that, bound to Thee by an eternal love,
we may bear fruit that remains evermore.

I like that “quicken” for vivifico.  L&S likes it too, “to make alive, restore to life, quicken, vivify”.

Saint Andrew Daily Missal (1959):
We pray, Lord, let the offering and reception
of the divine victim vivify us,
that, united to You by perpetual charity,
we may bear an everlasting fruit.

Saint Joseph Daily Missal (1959 – New Edition 1961):
We beseech You, O Lord, that the Divine Victim
which we have offered and received, may give us life,
so that united with You in enduring bonds of love,
we may bring forth everlasting fruit.

And last, but least, the lame-duck version from

ICEL (1973 translation of the 1970MR):
Lord,
may this sacrifice and communion
give us a share in your life
and help us bring your love to the world.

That is what you will probably hear on Sunday at church.   On planet WDTPRS, however, it would be something like this

LITERAL VERSION:
May the divine sacrificial victim
which we have offered and received enliven us, O Lord, we entreat You,
so that joined to You by love everlasting,
we may bear the fruit which remains for ever.

If you are used to reading Sacred Scripture or liturgical texts in Latin your ears would have instantly perked up at the sound of “fructum qui semper maneat afferamus”, an allusion to John 15:16: “You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide (ut eatis et fructum adferatis et fructus vester maneat); so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.”

Okay… look at those versions.  

One of the advantages to having those prayers in Latin is that people were free to participate fully, consciously and actively at Holy Mass with the aid of whatever approved hand missal they chose.  It might even be interesting over coffee and doughnuts after Mass to compare your different versions and figure out what the differences were.

So, "Tridentine" Mass in the vernacular: good idea?

Here is something I wrote for the paper:

We won’t know the details of the Motu Proprio until it is promulgated, but we must consider several points.  When a major document comes from the pen of a Pope, I always look at what he is saying both to the Church (ad intra) and to the world (ad extra).  

By this Motu Proprio Pope Benedict will establish the older form of Mass as an extraordinary rite of the Latin Church, the Novus Ordo being the ordinary rite.  It will clarify that any priest can celebrate Holy Mass with the 1962 Missale Romanum in private.  Some traditionalists claimed that no priest needs permission, but this remained a disputed question.  It will also more than likely lay down that when a certain number of the faithful make a request, a priest, probably a pastor of a parish, will be able to celebrate the older Mass publicly without specific permission of the local bishop.  It is rumored that perhaps thirty people will be necessary for this.  The Motu Proprio will certainly protect the authority of diocesan bishops and religious superiors to oversee their priests and liturgies.  I heard once that if a bishop wanted to block public celebrations in some place or by some priest the Motu Proprio might require him to present reasons to the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”.  That is speculation.  Soon we will know for sure.  The Motu Proprio will more than likely spell out the role of the Pontifical Commission and what will happen if there are disputes between priests and bishops.

What will the results of this be for the Church herself (the ad intra dimension)?  First, Pope Benedict is working to re-root celebrations of Holy Mass in the tradition whence it emerged.  He has written that it was unreasonable that a rite of Mass so important to the Catholic Church for so long should suddenly be virtually forbidden.  He wrote in the past about how liturgy grows slowly and organically, from rites and cultures enriching each other.  The Novus Ordo, stitched together by experts on table tops, constituted a break in this process.  Derestriction of the older form of Mass will help to heal people hurt by the loss of the older rite.  Widespread celebrations will have an impact on the way the Novus Ordo is celebrated… and vice versa!  It cannot be otherwise.  This has already been happening.  The derestriction might help to heal the rift between the See of Peter and the SSPX, though there are also theological issues to work through (e.g., Vatican II’s document on religious liberty).

In 1988 John Paul II, in his own Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei adflicta, called for bishops and priests to be generous and to show respect to those who wanted older expressions of the liturgy.  Some did.  More didn’t.  Pope Benedict is confirming for progressivist priests and bishops that traditional Catholics are not just the nutty aunt in the diocese’s attic.  They have rights.  They have something valuable to contribute. The Motu Proprio might also be a historically important document: it will stress the rights of priests and laypeople rather than of the bishop.  In a way, I wager many people will find that their nutty old aunt, now that she’s back downstairs and mixing again, was a whole lot sharper and had more to contribute than they imagined.  Maybe there wasn’t much wrong with her all along.

Above all, the document will make concrete Benedict XVI’s desire for a “hermeneutic of continuity”.  A “hermeneutic” is a principle of interpretation, like a lens through which you examine a question.  In his 2005 Christmas address to the Roman Curia, His Holiness spoke of a “hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture” used by many after the Council.  This resulted in a terrible break with our tradition.  For many it is as if nothing good or worth preserving happened before Vatican II.   Pope Benedict is working to reestablish continuity with the past, though not uncritically, through a “hermeneutic of reform”.  Derestriction of the older form of Mass must be seen as part of his vision for this reform, this rebuilding of continuity with the Church’s tradition.

Rebuilding continuity with past leads us to consider what the Motu Proprio will say to the larger world (ad extra).   Pope Benedict is convinced that the Church has a right to her own language, symbols and identity.  She has a right to express them in the public square.   There has long been an effort to silence the Church in public debate.  If Catholics attempt to express themselves as Catholics, in a Catholic way and with Catholic concerns in politics, economics, academics and the arts, they are marginalized.  Politicians, for example, claim that although they may be Catholic, their Catholic faith won’t affect their voting on social or ethical issues.  These politicians perceive this faithless dodge as a way of remaining relevant.  Pope Benedict, however, while he defends the concept of properly understood laicality, brings issues to the public square in a decidedly Catholic way.  In Italy this has started to create some unrest.  The Italian bishops are rediscovering their voice in the piazza and the left is furious.

The Motu Proprio to derestrict the form of Mass that shaped Catholic identity for centuries is a major move in the Pope’s project to recover continuity with our tradition and therefore reinvigorate the Church in an ever more secularized and relativistic world.

It is important that we receive this Motu Proprio well.  We must be very gracious.  For decades many traditionalists and liturgical conservatives have been ignored or treated poorly.  Some have admittedly brought mistreatment upon all of us by their sour bleating, but we unquestionably are more sinned against than sinning.  We must be joyful and polite to those who have not shown us due respect.  Therefore, as I wrote in my Five Rules of Engagement …, we must not “strut” when this derestriction occurs.  Furthermore, if the Motu Proprio contains points we don’t favor, we must avoid whining about them or else keep our mouths shut.  This Motu Proprio will need to be implemented.  The progressivist ploy has always been to say, “Welllll … you see … we really need time to study this before we can implement it.”  During this interval if a traditional Catholic loudly bellyaches and is nasty, he will only do harm.

Remember too that priests are going to wind up caught between groups of lay people on the one hand and the bishop on the other.  Be very careful.  Consider the priest’s position.  A bishop or religious superior can show a priest displeasure in many ways.

Above all, before and after the release of the Motu Proprio we must get down on our knees and sing both Te Deum and Non Nobis.  Praise God and remember that this is really all about Him. Pray for bishops and priests:  they will implement the Motu Proprio.  Pray that their hearts may be open and their actions prudent.  This is a very joyful time, but you just might also add my own simple daily prayer: “Dear Lord, help me avoid doing harm today.”

This is too funny!   The Curt Jester offers a… well… you read it.  I tip my biretta!  o{]:¬)

I have too say, he nailed this!  Not quite sure what "MSM" is exactly, but it must have something to do with the modern liberally slanted media.  My emphases.

With the upcoming release of the Motu Proprio liberalizing the Tridentine rite you can expect a surge of articles in the MSM getting things wrong. As a service to the MSM I will give them a Motu Proprio boilerplate that they can arrange as they want with just the right spin, or is that rite spin, so that it fits into their normal templates. This boilerplate has enough mistakes and biases it make it indistinguishable from any other MSM article that will be appearing in the coming days.

• Some people feel nostalgic for the Latin Mass.
• In the Latin Mass the priest faces away from the congregation and prays, sometimes in a whisper, in Latin, a language unfamiliar to most of the world’s one billion Roman Catholics. Unlike in the new Mass which is celebrated in the vernacular with the priests facing their congregations.
• Because two generations of American Catholics are accustomed to hearing the Mass celebrated in English, it’s unlikely most will want to switch to a liturgy that is longer, more formal and celebrated in a language they don’t understand.
• Pope Benedict is taking the church back to before Vatican II and removing the reforms of the Council. Liberal, reform-minded Catholics are concerned about these rollbacks to progress made.
• Some prayer for the Tridentine liturgy are offensive to Jews.
• The Rev. <Insert Jesuit of choice> said <insert attack on the Tridentine rite>.
• The groundbreaking Second Vatican Council opened the door to worship in the local vernacular.
• The Latin Mass involves a diminished role for women as altar servers and eliminates progress made in women’s equality since Vatican II.
• These changes will only aggravate declining Mass attendance by introducing a liturgy not relevant to the times.
• Insert comment by former America editor Thomas Reese now a fellow at Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University. (Make sure you mention he was forced out of the editorship by Pope Benedict.) If you can’t get in touch with Thomas Reese for a direct quote just mention something about clash of cultures between conservative priests and liberal congregations.
• Pope Benedict has been receiving resistance from the Bishops in France, England, and Wales who worry about the change dividing the church.
• But liberals are deeply wary because a number of the rite’s adherents are associated with ultra conservative groups that oppose the radical reforms ushered in by the Council.
• The proponents of the old Latin mass are said to number no more than 2 percent of Catholics, and polls show that the majority of Catholics embrace the reforms of Vatican II. There seems to be no demand for it.
• Insert a comment from a proponent of the Tridentine Rite at the bottom of your piece.

Just mix and match and you will have a story ready to go to press in minutes. If you need some more fluff you can always mention once again how no one knows Latin anymore. You can always do a man in the street interview outside of a Catholic Church after Mass. Though contrary to what you might think don’t ask younger Catholics their opinion on this, look for someone with gray hair to get a good quote on why this change is bad.

Isn’t this just right?  I bet we can find some other things.

We could probably even come up with a sour-grapes template too.

Yesterday in a post about an ANSA story on the recent MP meeting I mentioned that ANSA made an error about the number of bishops present.  ANSA reported that some 15 bishops were present when I and others thought there were some 30 bishops.

ANSA was right and I, with others, was wrong.

So, kindly take note.  There were some 15 present and not 30.

This is from ANSA on the MP.  They spoke with Card. Bertone.  Here is an excerpt (my translation):

"Leaks in circulation during the autumn of last year about the first draft of the Motu Proprio hypothisized that a request by a certain muber of faithful would be enough to compel a priest [to celebrate] with the Tridentine rite.  The project of total direstriction of the Mass in Latin raised doubts and reservations in some bodies of bishop, especially among the French and Americans, fearful that the presence of two liturgical rites could in the end fracture the unity of national Churches and remove authority from the local bishops.  From last December, behind the scenes, various modifications were made to the original document, to grant to the bishops – or so it seems – to nevertheless have "the last word".

"The role of the bishop is central in the dispositions of the order of celebrations", the Cardinal Secretary of State, Tarcisio Bertone, explained today, commenting on the Motu Proprio.  With the restoration of the pre-Conciliar liturgy,  he added, it was desired above all to give homage to the "great riches of tradition".  The document of the Pope is not just an homage to the grand past of Latinity: it could also reopen the path toward a reconciliation of the Lefebvrite schism.

Le indiscrezioni circolate nell’autunno dello scorso anno sulla prima bozza di Motu proprio ipotizzavano che bastasse la richiesta di un certo numero di fedeli per obbligare un sacerdote al rito tridentino. Il progetto di totale liberalizzazione della messa in latino aveva suscitato le perplessità e le riserve di alcuni episcopati, in particolare quello francese e quello statunitense, timorosi che la presenza di due riti liturgici potesse alla fine incrinare l’unità delle chiese nazionali e togliere autorità ai vescovi locali. Dal dicembre scorso, dietro le quinte, sono state apportate diverse modifiche al documento originale, per consentire ai vescovi – a quanto pare – di avere comunque "l’ultima parola".

 "Il ruolo del vescovo è centrale nelle disposizioni dell’ordine delle celebrazioni", ha spiegato oggi il cardinale segretario di Stato vaticano, Tarcisio Bertone, commentando il Motu Proprio. Con il ripristino della liturgia pre-conciliare, ha aggiunto, si vuole sopratutto rendere omaggio alla "grande ricchezza della tradizione". Il documento del Papa non è solo un omaggio al passato grandioso della latinità: esso potrebbe anche riaprire la strada verso la ricomposizione dello scisma lefebvriano.

You may think the news about the Motu Proprio is great, but this is out of this world.

I think we can make some analogies with the derestriction of the older Mass, no?

In any event, this is very cool stuff, and a nice change from motumania!

NASA Mars Rover Ready For Descent Into Crater

 

PASAD