I tip the biretta to FA o{]:¬) who sent the following:
Today’s telegiornale RAI TG2 at 1PM reported the contents of today’s Angelus pretty accurately, consideng the outlet. What struck me as unusual was that they announced the derestriction of TLM "nei prossimi giorni" ("in the upcoming days"), and in the headlines at that! Then the report included images of the SSPX in Rome during the Jubilee with comments on the likely contents of the MP.
Strange because at the Angelus the Holy Father said nothing even remotely connected to it. However, the journalist commented that since the Pope spoke of St. John’s uncompromising resolve to preach the thruth as an example of what the Church should always do unfazed by earthly powers, the MP could be seen as a sign of that resolve on behalf of Rome and as Pope Benedict’s interpretation of defense of the rights of "minorities"!
Here is a link to the video. In the lead up to the video (which is not in the video itself), the announceress said "nei promissimi giorni… in the upcoming days". The video says, "nella settimana entrante … next week".
The story speaks about how at least 30 of the faithful will be able to have the older form of Mass without going to the bishop. They will be able to ask it directly from the parish priest.
Loading ...
Darn. For some strange reason I can’t get that working on my Mac. :(
While we have to wait to see (read) what the MP actually says, I have been thinking about how to promote the TLM in light of Father’s “5 Rules on Engagement”. Also considering all of the “dumb articles” that will be coming out about the MP, would publishing a FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) list be helpful?
Maybe 10 questions and answers that would cover questions about what Vatican II actually said, the old chestnuts of the priest’s back to the people, the use of Latin, etc.
While not part of the MP (maybe), tie-in the use of sung Masses with use of propers, antiphons instead of the typical 4-hymn sandwich common in most parishes.
I anticipate that there will be considerable resistance to those in the pews who wish to have the TLM in their parishes. Having an easy to read tip sheet might be helpful. What questions should be in the Top 10?
I can only see this 30 person deal as creating more problems. Why 30? What if 28 want it? I fail to see
why the pope would impose any restrictions on the old rite at all given that it’s the whole issue of restrictions that
make the MP so necessary. In any event, we’ll no doubt be better off after the MP than we are now.
Just pray that the Priests will offer it willingly.
Keep praying and it will happen.
Mr. Day: Amy Welborn, of the Open Book blog, is preparing just such a tip sheet. People ought to have a look at it and pass appropriate suggestions, as she admits it’s an unfinished work until the thing comes out.
Somerset,
Thanks. I remember that. Amy’s effort was geared towards journalists so that they could avoid “dumb articles” like what Father Z listed earlier.
I can see all sorts of legalistic complications. Do the 30 have to live within the parish, or attend mass there regularly. Can you sign the petition at one church or just about any petition you come across.
I wonder if we will see petitions signed by Archbishops Bugnini & Cramner, Pope Pius V etc. like a certain anti MP tradition did………
I can see all sorts of legalistic complications. Do the 30 have to live within the parish, or attend mass there regularly. Can you sign the petition at one church or just about any petition you come across.
I wonder if we will see petitions signed by Archbishops Bugnini & Cramner, Pope Pius V etc. like a certain anti MP tradition did………
Here’s an idea: perhaps he will title it “Do not be afraid of your office”, or “Simon son of John, do you love me more than these”, or “ZEAL for thy house consumes me”?
In reading various website comments about the Moto Pripio, I am surprised at the number of them that suggest the people will be “demanding” the Latin Mass from their priests. Will it not be the worst thing for the Traditional Rite if priests with no calling for this Mass are forced to celebrate it? Will it not lead to all kinds of hybridizations of the Old with the New?
Will the MP also preserve the culture of the Traditional Rite; for example, the Minor Orders and the dignity of women outside the Sanctuary.
Hi
For some reason nobody has commented about this specific blog entry. Who is speaking in that “quote”?…and MOST of all, what are the details of this “upcoming days” announcement?
Too bad babelfish doesnt do videos, then again I cant imagine how bad a translation that would be.
The following is my speculation.
I think that the number 30 refers to the minimum number of registered parishioners in one diocese who must petition for the TLM in order for the parish to be obligated to allow a TLM.
That is, at 30 and above registered parishioner petitioners, the pastor of that parish can not refuse to allow the TLM. He probably can refuse to provide a priest – at which point the group of petitioners will have the right to “bring in” a priest willing to say the mass. “bringing in” a priest probably involves the mediation of Ecclesia Dei.
The number 30 will likely have no bearing on the right of all priests to say the TLM if they so choose. So if a parish has less than 30 registered parishioners interested in a TLM, they won’t have the right to a TLM, but if there is a priest there who is willing to say it, then there would be no problem.
I have begun to worry. Although I am fortunate enough to attend an FSSP parish, what will happen in the local “hey, we’re a with-it, swingin’ groovy” parish if they are allowed a Mass according to the ’62 missal? Will they have Eucharistic Ministers distributing Communion? Altar girls? (and I have no deep animosity toward female servers at the NO Mass, though I think it has an impact on the priesthood). Will the celebrating priest feel compelled to change “pro multis” to “pro omnia”? My sincerest hope is that access to a properly celebrated Missal of 1962 will inspire the congregations to demand more sobriety in the NO liturgy. Is it too much to ask, Lord?
I dont believe that a priest will be obliged to celebrate the TLM if 30 persons request it,I believe a priest who wishes to celebrate a parochial mass must have at least 30 parishioners wanting it.I do not believe the parish priest should be obliged to offer the TLM if he does not wish too.The whole idea of the MP ,I thought,was to allow the priest the freedom to say the TLM without obstacles .The parochial mass is the problem.I believe the MP will say that the norm in a parish must still be the NO unless the bishop allows otherwise.The TLM would be an exception-that is if a parish has 5 masses on Sunday only one could be the TLM.The difficulty would be changing one of the masses from NO to TLM.I wont have that problem because I alrerady have a scheduled Latin NO mass at noon,which after the MP,will become a TLM.Over two years I have conditioned the parish to a Latin NO mass.I started it every other week at another time,then once a monthe,then I changed the Mass schedule and created a new time for the Latin NO. I dont believe in forcing anyone to say or attend a TLM mass,I would hope that gradual acclimation to it as a part of a parish liturgical schedule will win converts. People who want the TLM should go to those parishes which will have them.They also shoud show their support monetarily-that is important to a pastor.
I think if a priest says a TLM and fewer than 30 people are there, he won’t need permission, unless the bishop finds out, in which case he will need the permission of 30 bishops, unless it is requested by a parish in an advertisement.
Or is it– if a priest says a TLM in the forest and nobody is around, are the words of consecration still audible?
I say let’s just wait and see what the document says… the Latin version, of course. :-)
I would hope that there would be an element of clerical freedom so that the various clerical nutcases would not feel compelled to despoil the old mass as a desperate act of spite. Let the MP give us laypeople the chance to discriminate between between the quick and the dead, to let then have their novus ordo as their plaything and let them (and them alone, for once) to stew in its juices.
After all the online posting here, news reports in the media and else where, if the MP does not come “soon,” “in a few days,” “before the Pope’s vacation,” “SUBITO,” there are going to be alot of angry people around. Rome and the rest of us, are going to look very foolish, and the liberals will be the ones to have the last laugh. No doubt, they will be the ones enjoying, ” the fruit of the vine, and the work of human hands!”
The Tg2, literally, didn’t say “in the upcoming days” , it said actually “in the upcoming week”. The new week (Italian count) just begun, and till Sunday included the MP might appear. My person guesses for the date or release are Fri 29 and Sat 30 . However, we’ll see… Maybe in a year we’ll be still here trying to guess a date… ;-)
Syriacus: In the lead up to the story on the tg2 at 1300h yesterday, Sunday, which I watched, the woman/speaker/talking head said “nei prossimi giorni … in the upcoming days”. In the video story itself we hear “nella settimana entrante … next week”.
One thing I have not seen mentioned is how the m.p. in effect puts the question to each bishop: ‘Will I(!)celebrate the 1962 Mass?’ It is a large question to face, while looking at the priests who look to you… .
Yes, Sir. It’s just because I couldn’t listen , online, to the lead-up… Viva il PadreZeta! :)