The Archbishop of Cincinnati, Most Reverend Daniel E. Pilarczyk, has issued his statement and his norms regarding the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum.
Here is the cover letter.
My emphases and comments.
September 5, 2007
I am certain that you have heard or read about the Motu Proprio, Summorum Pontificum, recently promulgated by the Holy Father, allowing for the more general celebration of Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal. Previously, permission was required by the diocesan bishop for the celebration of the preconciliar liturgy. Now, priests, after meeting certain requirements and certain conditions, [Here is the open salvo.] may celebrate Mass according to the 1962 Missal without the permission of the local ordinary.
As the chief liturgist [A distinct element of The Party Line.] of the Archdiocese of Cincinnati, it is my responsibility to ensure that fidelity to the liturgical rites [Which also include making sure there are no abuses of rubics in the Novus Ordo, there are no improper uses of Form III for penance, etc.] of the Church is maintained. Therefore, I am attaching norms for the celebration of Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal. It is imperative that priests understand that this form of celebration is the extraordinary form and should not be construed as an option equal [I think this is a misinterpretation. There are two uses of the Roman Rite. I don’t think "extraordinary" implies "inequality".] to the ordinary form of Mass according to the Roman Missal in use since 1970 (current Missal). After meeting the conditions outlined in the attached document, [We must look at these, below.] priests may privately celebrate the extraordinary form, and under certain pastoral situations, publicly celebrate it; however, the ordinary form of the Mass is the primary and normal way of celebrating Mass.
It is my expectation that the attached norms be diligently followed. The Worship Office will assist priests in their understanding of the norms and provide further information as needed. While the effective date for the Motu Proprio is Sept. 14, 2007, the conditions set by the Holy Father and by me, as Archbishop, are to be met prior to any celebration of the extraordinary form of Mass. If you are already receiving requests for the preconciliar liturgy, know that there are two parishes, Sacred Heart, Cincinnati and Our Lady of the Rosary, Dayton, that already celebrate Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal.
May God continue to bless you abundantly in your ministry.
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Most Reverend Daniel E. Pilarczyk,
Archbishop of Cincinnati
I find the tone of this statement to be very lofty indeed, even a little menancing.
Let’s see the norms.
My emphases (some also in the original for headings) and comments.
Norms for the implementation of the
Apostolic Letter in the form of motu proprio –
Archdiocese of Cincinnati
Introduction: The Holy Father, in reaching out to Catholics who have “an attachment to the preconciliar liturgical forms” (BCL Newsletter, May/June 2007), expanded the use of these liturgical forms through his recent Motu Proprio, Summorum Pontificum. Summorum Pontificum holds the weight of law and takes effect on September 14, 2007. The most significant change outlined in this apostolic letter is that permission by the diocesan bishop [I find it interesting that this is the "most significant change".] is no longer needed in order for priests to celebrate Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal (preconciliar liturgy). However, the Holy Father laid down several conditions in his Motu Proprio which must be met in order for the celebration of Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal to occur. Additionally, as chief liturgist [The Party Line] of the diocese, it is the local ordinary’s responsibility to ensure that liturgical norms [whose?] are followed whether Mass is celebrated according to the ordinary form (current Roman Missal) or the extraordinary form (1962 Roman Missal). If a priest desires to celebrate the extraordinary form of Mass in the Archdiocese of Cincinnati he must meet the following conditions:
1) A priest may celebrate the extraordinary form of Mass (according to the 1962 Roman Missal) privately if:
a) He demonstrates a sufficient knowledge and facility of the Latin language. (Summorum Pontificum, [SP], Art. 5.4) [Much will depend on what "sufficient" means. The outstanding canonist His Eminence Edward Card. Egan explained that the word idoenus indicates an ability to pronounce the words properly. It does not mean expertise. Note carefully that what His Excellency wrote here is NOT what Art. 5.4 really says. 5.4 actually says: "Sacerdotes Missali B. Ioannis XXIII utentes, idonei esse debent ac iure non impediti. … Priests using the Missal of Bl. John XXIII, ought to be capable and not impeded by law." No one disputes that it is best that a priest know Latin well, but this article should not be forced to say something it does not say.]
b) He demonstrates a sufficient ability to observe the rubrics of the 1962 Roman Missal. (SP, Art. 5.4) [See above.]
c) He demonstrates such abilities before a committee established by the Archbishop. [Nobody expected the Cincinnati Inquisition! Let the intimidation begin!]
NB: While Summorum Pontificum allows the priest to celebrate the extraordinary form of Mass without the permission of the Ordinary, the Ordinary has the responsibility to see that all liturgy is celebrated in the proper manner and worthily; this is why showing competency is required. [Will there be such a committee to test priests who use the Novus Ordo? If not, then this might constitute an unreasonable double-standard.]
NB: Frs. Giles Pater, [who was at St. John Fischer in Newtown, OH, which does not have the older Mass] David Robisch, [who at least was at St. Mary’s in Hyde Park, OH, which does not seem to have the older form of Mass on the schedule.] and Timothy Kallaher [who has an MA in Latin from Xavier Univ.] have agreed to serve on the committee to certify that a priest has demonstrated the ability to celebrate in the extraordinary form. Priests interested in the extraordinary form should contact a member of the committee with any questions. [NB: there are two parishes in this Archdiocese where the older Mass is celebrated. It does not seem, from what I can dig up, that these three priests have anything to do with those celebrations or parishes. I may be entirely wrong about this, of course.]
NB: A private Mass is one that is not publicized. The faithful may attend this Mass if they, “of their own free will,” ask to do so. (SP, Art. 4) Additionally, it is expected that at least one person is present as a server. The extraordinary form may be celebrated privately at anytime except during the Sacred Triduum. (SP, Art. 2)
2) A priest may celebrate the extraordinary form of Mass (according to the 1962 Roman Missal) publicly if:
a) “In parishes, where there is a stable group [here is the point of attack] of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition” the members of this group request for him to do so. (SP, Art. 5.1)
NB: A “stable group of faithful” means a significant number [No, it does not. The word in the Latin is coetus. There is NO implication in coetus that the number must be "significant", that is, "large". A coetus can be very small. The Motu Proprio does not require a minimum number. To impose one would be outside the provisions of the Holy Father.] of the faithful who have been celebrating this form regularly, or who have been desirous of this form over the years, [Does this also improperly impose a length of time the coetus has been around? It sure sounds like it.] and who of their own free will requested the extraordinary form of Mass. Such a Mass may be publicized only if a “stable group” has requested that the extraordinary form be celebrated. A priest, on his own, may not simply decide to publicly celebrate the extraordinary formwithout such a “stable group.” [Remember that the priest himself can be part of the coetus and, truly, a coetus can be quite small.]
b) He meets the qualifications laid out above (1a, 1b, 1c).
NB: If a priest is unable to meet the request of the group because he does not meet the conditions required to celebrate the extraordinary form of the Mass, he should recommend them to a parish where it is already being celebrated. (cf. SP, Art. 5.1) [This is NOT what Art. 5.1 says. Go look.] Currently, there are two parishes in the Archdiocese of Cincinnati that celebrate the extraordinary form of Mass: Sacred Heart, Camp Washington, and Our Lady of the Rosary, Dayton.
NB: In order to have an updated list of parishes where the extraordinary form of the Mass is being celebrated, pastors are asked to inform the Worship Office if they provide regular extraordinary form celebrations. [That is entirely reasonable.]
NB: The names of the priests who have been certified by the committee mentioned above will be made public so that these priests will be available to celebrate in this extraordinary form if local priests are not available. [Hmmm… und if your name iz not on zee list, und you are caught saying zat Mass?? ] 3) The extraordinary form of Mass may be celebrated on Sundays only if the following conditions are met:
a) A stable group of faithful have made such a request.
b) Only one such Mass is celebrated. It is not the intention of Summorum Pontificum to arbitrarily [?] take one of the current Sunday Masses and substitute Mass in the extraordinary form merely for the sake of variety. [What a strange thing to say.]
c) The priest celebrant meets all of the qualifications laid out above (1a, 1b, 1c).
4) If the extraordinary form of Mass is celebrated, the liturgy is celebrated according to the calendar and Lectionary of the 1962 Roman Missal. However, “in Masses celebrated in the presence of the people in accordance with the Missal of Bl. John XXIII (1962 Roman Missal), the readings may be given in the vernacular using approved texts.” (SP, Art. 6)
5) The celebration of the sacraments in the extraordinary form may take place if:
a) The celebrant has demonstrated the ability to do so. He must meet the same qualifications as laid out in 1a, 1b, 1c.
b) The faithful request such sacramental celebrations (i.e. Baptism, Marriage, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick) to be celebrated in the extraordinary form of the sacraments. (SP, Art. 5.3)
c) The pastor has granted permission after attentively examining the various ramifications [?] of such celebrations. (SP, Art. 9.1)
For further study and information, a [flawed] translation of the text of the Motu Proprio, along with the accompanying letter of the Holy Father can be found at the Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy (BCL) website: www.usccb.org/liturgy. Additionally, the May/June 2007 BCL Newsletter was dedicated to providing information regarding the interpretation and implementation of the Motu Proprio. This newsletter can also be found on the same website.
Time and more information will allow us to see if these norms simply step on the toes of the provisions in Summorum Pontificum or if they actually grind a heal into the whole foot.
Much will depend on the men chosen as Archdiocesan Inquisitors who will sit on judgment of priests who show any interest in the older Mass. If this isn’t an tactic of sheer intimidation, and I really hope it is not intended that way, will those priests be in a position by background or inclination to render a reasonable judgment?
I don’t want to prejudge the men selected for the committee. I am sure they are sound and dedicated priests with great love of the older form of liturgy and who will be friendly toward all those who need to be examined. This committee has no track record yet.
The question remains of the double-standard: Will all priests be subjected to inquisitions to see if they are following the rubrics or are sufficiently capable with the English language? How about foreign priests working in the area? When certified will they be given an Ausweis?
Also, if there is such strict liturgical oversight now, are there now or will there persist, say, improper celebrations of the sacrament of penance with Form III (so-called "general absolution")?
I am just musing about the wider implications.