We know that at Kenrick-Glennon Seminary (USA) the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum has been well and properly received. How about other seminaries? What is going on?
Here is a note (edited by me) which I received from a seminarian at the Pontifical College Josephinum in the USA.
My emphases and comments.
I am a seminarian at the Pontifical College Josephinum and am writing to tell you about what the rector told seminarians in his talk on the Motu Proprio during one of our formation conferences as part of a series he is doing on Catholic tradition. He gave us what you call the party line, although somewhat adapted to a seminary setting. …
Here are the basics of the rectors talk… based on my memory and not on any sort of official document. My comments are in parenthesis. Here’s what he said:
- He (and the other priests here) kept/keep calling it the Tridentine Mass, not the extraordinary form. [Two points about this. If we say "Tridentine" Mass, everybody knows exactly what you mean even though it is a sloppy term at best. So, I can’t get worked up about this. However, when in a professional setting (such as a seminary), better terminology should be used as a matter of course.]
- He said he has been asked what he is going to do to implement the MP, which he thought was interesting because seminaries are not mentioned in the MP. [However, the MP says that priests must be idonei to celebrate this form of Mass if they are going to tackle it. Priests have to be idonei and able to function in their RITE. This form of Mass is part and parcel of the Roman Rite for which men in that seminary are being trained. Also, remember that the 1983 Code of Canon Law requires… it doesn’t suggest it… that seminarians be "very well trained" in Latin (bene calleant). The seminary has a duty to the seminarians to form them in this regard. Not to do so seems to me to be an injustice, since they are set up to train Catholic priests in the things they need for their ministry and spiritual lives.]
- The Pope’s accompanying letter is actually more important than the Motu Proprio itself because the MP is tersely worded and meant only to be a juridical document. [This is like saying that apples are more important than oranges.]
- I don’t recall his exact words, but he said that it is clear from the Pope’s letter that the MP is meant for those who were affected by the change of the liturgy after Vatican II (i.e. those of questionable unity, etc.). [That is clearly not the case. The MP is not limited in this way.]
- The MP does not intend to set up a parallel rite to the Novus Ordo. [Odd thing to say if they do not intend to train seminarians in the older form. If there truly are not two different Rites, but one single Roman Rite in two "uses", then the seminary which must train the men in the Roman Rite had better get crackin’ and also help with the older use. Or am I missing something?]
- The Pope expects that celebrations of the Tridentine Mass will be rare because the Pope writes that these celebrations presuppose a certain level of liturgical catechesis and knowledge of Latin, which aren’t often found in parishes, [Absurd. Simply absurd.]
- The whole tone of the MP is restrictive. (Yes that is what the rector actually said). [Ha ha! That’s actually so silly that it’s funny!]
- While priests may use the 1962 missal when they so choose, that these celebrations are to be in private and the faithful may only attend of their own volition. (I guess this was in opposition to public celebrations, which I am guessing he thinks must be asked for by the faithful). [How else will people attend any Mass than "of their own volition"? I have this image in my head of priests on horseback, roping and hog-tying people and dragging them into the chapel.]
- The Pope does not intend to encourage a general wider use of the 1962 Missal in the Church, rather this is a pastoral provision for certain members of the faithful [Again, this is silly. The Holy Father is clearly providing that there be more celebrations of the older form of Mass precisely so that healing of certain dimensions of the Church’s fabric and life can begin.]
- Priests are not to promote or proselytize parishioners for this form of Mass [I cannot imagine where he got that. It seems to me that priests are perfectly free to make recommendations about this, using prudence and correct information. What they are not free to do is disparage either use of Mass.]
- He seemed to think that the priest needs to know enough Latin to pronounce words correctly and know what he is praying. [Certainly it is true the priest must be able to pronounce the words properly (within reason, of course). That is a sine qua non for celebrating any Mass in any language. But "know what he is praying"? How much knowledge must he have? It is entirely reasonable to hope that all priests have a very good comprehension, at least in general if not in every detail. But consider this: I could probably scare pretty thoroughly 99/100 priests who know some Latin just by asking a few pointed questions about a couple hard terms in the Mass texts or precisely what some word is doing in a prayer. I rush to say, however, that if he couldn’t answer, he would still be idoneus as far I was concerned provided he could read the Latin in a decent way. I also repeat that seminaries are required by law to make sure that seminarians are very well-trained in Latin.]
- I may have misunderstood, but I he also seemed to say that the faithful who request the celebrations of weddings, funerals, and the other sacraments according to the older form also have to have knowledge of Latin. [He could not have said something that weird.]
- The Novus Ordo is actually closer to the Mass of the Apostolic age [LOL! Good one!]
- The Eucharistic Prayer of Hippolytus, which is the basis for Eucharistic Prayer II, is actually older than the Roman Canon. [This is a problem. The text we call the Apostolic Constitution of Hippolytus cannot possibly be an ancient anaphora. As a result, this cannot be the case. There is good scholarship on this now, which supercedes what most priests learned in rcent years. It is hard to blame any priest who repeats this. We need to get the word out.]
- The seminary version of we are already doing enough because we have Novus Ordo Latin Mass once a month [not often enough] (on Thursdays, not Sundays, I might add), Latin is taught here, which is not done at all seminaries, we sing the Salve Regina after vespers everyday, [that’s nice but… ] we sometimes use Latin hymns and sometimes sing the Sanctus, Agnus Dei, etc in the English Mass. So the seminary is doing what it can to help us with Latin. [The issue is not the language. The issue is learning the older form of Mass.]
- He mentioned that, in the past, deacons would spend the entirety of their last year learning the rubrics for Mass.[And this is a bad thing? Would that such attention was given to the rubrics of the newer form of Mass. My course would begin with the principle "Say the Black. Do the Red". Then there would be a check to make sure students were not wearing rose-colored glasses, which makes it hard to See the Red. The older form of Mass is certainly more precise than the newer, but… harder? Not once you get used to it. This isn’t exactly like learning about string-theory, after all.]
- Since the Josephinum is not operated by a diocese, it responds to the needs of all the bishops who send men here.[I think that the people at the Josephinum should consider that the HOLY FATHER has clarified that there is one Roman Rite in two uses. At the ordination for priesthood the rector or his delegate must stand up and declare that the candidates have been trained and are suitable for ordination. I think this ought to embrace training to say Mass in their RITE.]
- Basically the whole talk, in my opinion, was to justify why the Josephinum will not be doing anything. [Then pressure must come from both bishops, seminarians and… well… other interested parties.]
(Perhaps to imply that requiring students to learn this form of Mass would overburden them, or the faculty, or the seminary schedule) They will happily assist any bishops, in whatever way possible, who would like men trained in this rite, but as of present no such requests have been made by any bishop. These things suggest that the need is not great.
I just thought someone should know how the MP was received at the only Pontifical seminary outside Italy. The thing that disturbs me the most is that I know a lot of guys here will assume the rector is right and have a wrong idea about the MP.
I must return for a moment to the main point we should derive from this.
There is, at least juridically speaking, one Roman Rite, not two. The one Roman Rite is expressed in two uses. Seminarians for the Latin Church must be trained to use their Roman Rite. Thus, they ought to be trained for both uses and not just one.
The Motu Proprio presents us with many challenges. It has really changed the whole picture for the liturgical dimension of priestly formation.
The Motu Proprio is mostly about the rights of priests. Thus, it has great importance for seminaries. It cannot be ignored in seminaries.
Loading ...
What is the e-mail address at this seminary? Anyone?
Just one point of clarification, and someone can correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t the Salve Regina belong after Compline and not Vespers? That’s the way it is in my copy of the Divine Office. Clearly this person presenting this lecture didn’t have a clue.
Picking up on a minor point:
Hippolytus not an anaphora; glad to hear it, but do you have a reference for
the new scholarship?
(It’s also instructive to compare EPII with its supposed source. What
happened to all that stuff about trampling the devil under foot?)
What the rector says about bishops and seminaries is correct, of course. Rectors play their role, but bishops are essentially in charge of seminaries.
Bishops also make choices as to where to send their men for seminary training – let us just say that it is not a given. Bishops have in the past, regularly pulled their seminarians out of one seminary and started sending them to another. So a seminary’s program exists in response to what the bishops who supply it with seminarians want.
The beginning of encouraging this seminary to expand its vision is to find out what bishops send their seminarians there and find out their mind on the issue.
One thing I noticed is the reference to the Pope’s letter, rather than the actual MP; in this case,the seminary rector came out and said that the letter was MORE important than the MP! Since the latter is the actual legal document, it’s hard to see how this could be the case. Even in civil law, the terms of a contract – and not its titles, tables of contents, cover letter, etc. – are what matters.
I was at the meeting on the dreadful St Augustine memo, and many of the supposed “points” made at that meeting are repeated in this document – including reliance on the letter rather than on the MP. In fact, the few times the priest at that lmeeting mentioned the MP, he specifically referred to the letter. He said that he had only sent a “summary” of the MP itself to the bishop – I would assume this was the summary that is circulating in USCCB circles.
So I think there is something clear from this seminary report and from the meeting the other night: many bishops and authorities have probably not read the MP itself, are working on the basis of a summary, and are actually basing everything on their reading of the Pope’s cover letter rather than the MP.
Since the letter was not formally drafted legal text, it gives them much more room for weasel words. However, since the letter is also not the binding text, how can it be legitimate for them to base their actions on the cover letter?
Just one point of clarification, and someone can correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t the Salve Regina belong after Compline and not Vespers? That’s the way it is in my copy of the Divine Office. Clearly this person presenting this lecture didn’t have a clue.
Comment by Adam
In houses that only have lauds and vespers in common, it is not unusual that the Salve be sung after vespers.
What the rector says about bishops and seminaries is correct, of course. Rectors play their role, but bishops are essentially in charge of seminaries.
Bishops also make choices as to where to send their men for seminary training – let us just say that it is not a given. Bishops have in the past, regularly pulled their seminarians out of one seminary and started sending them to another. So a seminary’s program exists in response to what the bishops who supply it with seminarians want.
Comment by Elaine
The Josephinum is in Columbus, Ohio, a diocese whose metropolitan see is Cincinnati.
Link to the Board of Trustees:
http://www.pcj.edu/aboutus/trustees.html
I have it on good authority that men have been kicked out of the Josephinum for baing too traditional. Even if these rumors aren’t true, the informaiton in this post makes it seem at least like a possibility.
I have it on good authority that men have been kicked out of the Josephinum for baing too traditional. Even if these rumors aren’t true, the informaiton in this post makes it seem at least like a possibility.
Comment by Josiah
Any seminarian Latin-dissatisfied with the Josephinum might want to look into the Archdiocese of St Louis.
As someone pointed out in another thread, the various guidelines, restrictions, etc. are little else than a death rattle–the pope always wins.
To me it’s more than a bit funny–Papa Ratzinger, the little man with the gentle demeanor, big brain, and appetite for what is Catholic and catholic, has tossed a skunk in the middle the liberal picnic.
“He (and the other priests here) kept/keep calling it the Tridentine Mass, not the extraordinary form.”
The term “extraordinary form” is not an official name for it, really. It is referred to in the decree as “the Missal of Blessed John XXIII.” The distinctions of “ordinary” and “extraordinary” are clearly generic, and are meant to be in context. What’s more, I’m not sure they are being used as canonical distinctions in the normal sense. Indeed, the Pope could wake up tomorrow and (fulfill the dreams of many if he were to) decide to switch the distinctions for the two forms.
I’m not suggesting there is any harm in using the term to describe the traditional Mass. Neither is there any in eschewing it.
Father Z or anyone else:
Could someone kindly point me to the new scholarship on the Canon of Hippolytus? I am doing research in this area but am not up to date with the new stuff.
Thanks!
Fr. Z quoted and said: The Eucharistic Prayer of Hippolytus, which is the basis for Eucharistic Prayer II, is actually older than the Roman Canon. [This is a problem. The text we call the Apostolic Constitution of Hippolytus cannot possibly be an ancient anaphora. As a result, this cannot be the case. There is good scholarship on this now, which supercedes what most priests learned in rcent years. It is hard to blame any priest who repeats this. We need to get the word out.]
Of course, even if the alleged anaphora reconstructed from the Aspostolic Tradition of St. Hippolytus were older than the Roman Canon, it wouldn’t matter anyway. Fabricating a new anaphora almost out of whole cloth based on an ancient liturgical text that nobody has used for 1,700 years is just not the way to reform an ancient and venerable liturgy.
Anyway, Father, I would be very interested if you could direct us to the recent scholarship that overturns the commonly held belief about the alleged anaphora of St. Hippolytus. My pastor insists that the reason he almost always used Eucharistic Prayer II is because it is, so he claims, the oldest, and NOT because it’s so short and makes for a speedier Mass. (I’m not sure I believe him, here in our parish where every Mass has Unnecesary Ministers of Holy Communion even when we have less than 50 people at Mass — but that’s what he insists is his reason.)
Apologies if this question has already been addressed on a previous post, but how do we best describe the two forms of Mass in the Roman rite ?
I find “forma ordinaria” and “forma extraordinaria” a bit of a mouthful.
Equally, I can’t bring myself to talk about the Pauline and Johannine Missals.
The “Tridentine” Mass is very coomonly used, but is misleading.
Here in England, some people refer to the “immemorial” Mass, or Mass “of all time”.
Otherwise, the Traditional Mass.
But what about “vetus ordo” (as opposed to “novus ordo”) ?
“Usus antiquor” seems to be the preferred terminology, but in that case what do you call the modern Mass ?
The “classical” rite can’t be correct, in my opinion, because it’s not “classical” (which to me means ancient Greece and ancient Rome), and it’s not strictly a “rite” :
it is a usage in the Roman rite.
Or has this all been said before ?
Apologies if this question has already been addressed on a previous post, but how do we best describe the two forms of Mass in the Roman rite ?
I find “forma ordinaria” and “forma extraordinaria” a bit of a mouthful.
Equally, I can’t bring myself to talk about the Pauline and Johannine Missals.
The “Tridentine” Mass is very commonly used, but is misleading.
Here in England, some people refer to the “immemorial” Mass, or Mass “of all time”.
Otherwise, the Traditional Mass.
But what about “vetus ordo” (as opposed to “novus ordo”) ?
“Usus antiquor” seems to be the preferred terminology, but in that case what do you call the modern Mass ?
The “classical” rite can’t be correct, in my opinion, because it’s not “classical” (which to me means ancient Greece and ancient Rome), and it’s not strictly a “rite” :
it is a usage in the Roman rite.
Or has this all been said before ?
Claud,
There are a number of possibilities… Bradshaw’s book “The Search for the Origins of Christian Worship” is a must read and I might also mention an article in the September 2003 issue of “Theological Studies” by John F. Baldovin entitled “Hippolytus and the Apostolic Tradition: Recent Research and Commentary”.
Peace.
Being a former seminarian, I too have been in this enviornment of fallacy. My suggestion is attending the seminaries associated with St. Louis, Lincoln, or Rockford. Good Luck. I will be praying for you.
The Josephinum is in Columbus, but Columbus is its own diocese. The Archdiocese of Cincinnati does send its college seminarians there.
The St. Louis Seminary is Kenrick-Glennon Seminary, not Kendrick Seminary. It is named after the great Archbishop Kenrick of St. Louis and the famous Cardinal Glennon of St. Louis.
Just to clarify, the Josephinum is not under the control of any particular diocese, it is solely under the supervision of its board of trustees and ultimately, the Apostolic Nuncio to the USA, who approves all full-time faculty appointments.
Please pray for all the seminarians and faculty of the Josephinum, as many students are being actively and outrightly persecuted for their loyalty to our Holy Father and his M.P.
Just to clarify, the Josephinum is not under the control of any particular diocese, it is solely under the supervision of its board of trustees and ultimately, the Apostolic Nuncio to the USA, who approves all full-time faculty appointments.
Please pray for all the seminarians and faculty of the Josephinum, as many students are being actively and outrightly persecuted for their loyalty to our Holy Father and his M.P.
I was at the Josephinum a while back, and I can assure the readers that in that seminary, “Latin” Rite means the Mass in Spanish, pronouced with a Mexican accent. Some of the dullest music you have ever heard in your life, which the Spanish speaking seminarians detested, with good reason.
The St. Louis Seminary is Kenrick-Glennon Seminary, not Kendrick Seminary. It is named after the great Archbishop Kenrick of St. Louis and the famous Cardinal Glennon of St. Louis.
Comment by Michael
The obvious solution is to call it Kenron Seminary, even though that sounds a bit one of Ron Popeil’s gadgets.
The St. Louis Seminary is Kenrick-Glennon Seminary, not Kendrick Seminary. It is named after the great Archbishop Kenrick of St. Louis and the famous Cardinal Glennon of St. Louis.
Comment by Michael
One solution is to call it Kenron Seminary, even though that sounds a bit like one of Ron Popeil’s gadgets, not to mention a defunct energy corp.
Maybe it should be Glenrick Seminary.
ahhh….yep….EP II is definitely the same Anaphora as Hippolytus. No fabricated
liturgy here folks…its all ancient stuff…move along now…move along.
Hippolytus
We give you thanks, O God,
through your beloved Child Jesus Christ,
whom you have sent us in the last days as Savior,
Redeemer and Messenger of your will.
He is your Word, inseparable from you,
through whom you have created everything
and in whom you find your delight.
You sent him from heaven into the womb of a Virgin.
He was conceived and became flesh,
he manifested himself as your Son,
born of the Spirit and the Virgin.
He did your will, and,
to win for you a holy people,
he stretched out his hands in suffering to rescue from
suffering those who believe in you.
When he was about to surrender himself to voluntary suffering
in order to destroy death,
to break the devil’s chains,
to tread hell underfoot,
to pour out his light upon the just,
to establish the covenant, and manifest resurrection,
he took bread, gave you thanks and said:
“Take, eat, this is my body which is broken for you.”
In like manner for the cup, he said:
“This is my blood which is poured out for you. When you do this,
do it in memory of me.”
Remembering, therefore, your death and your resurrection, we offer you the
bread and the wine, we thank you for having judged us worthy to stand before
you and serve you.
And we pray you to send you Holy Spirit on the offering of your holy Church,
to bring together in unity all those who receive it.
May they be filled with the Holy Spirit
who strengthens their faith in the truth.
May we be able thus to praise and glorify you through your Child, Jesus Christ.
Through him glory to you and honor, to the Father and the Son, with the Holy
Spirit, in your holy Church, now and forever! Amen.
EPII
Lord, you are holy indeed, the fountain of all holiness. Let your Spirit come
upon these gifts to make them holy, so that they may become for us the body
and blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ.
Before he was given up to death, a death he freely accepted,
he took bread and gave you thanks, He broke the bread, gave
it to his disciples, and said:
Take this, all of you, and eat it; this is my body which will be
given up for you.
When the supper was ended, he took the cup. Again he gave you thanks and
praise, gave the cup to his disciples, and said:
Take this, all of you, and drink from it; this is the cup of my blood,
the blood of the new and everlasting covenant. It will be shed for you
and for all so that sins may be forgiven. Do this in memory of me.
Let us proclaim the mystery of faith….:
In memory of his death and resurrection, we offer you, Father,
this life-giving bread, this saving cup. We thank you for counting
us worthy to stand in your presence and serve you. May all of us
who share in the body and blood of Christ be brought together in
unity by the Holy Spirit.
Lord, remember your Church throughout the world; make us grow in love,
together with John Paul our Pope, {name} our bishop,a nd all the clergy.
Remember our brothers and sisters who have gone to their rest in the hope
of rising again; bring them and all the departed into the light of your
presence. Have mercy on us all; make us worthy to share eternal life with
Mary, the virgin Mother of God, with the apostles, and with all the saints
who have done your will throughout the ages. May we praise you in union
with them, and give you glory through your Son, Jesus Christ.
Through him, with him, in him, in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
all glory and honor is yours, almighty Father, for ever and ever. Amen.
Fr. Z,
Can you please comment on these reports about the Josephinum? I am very disturbed to hear these negative things as we have a dear friend studying there now. Our bishop will only send seminarians there. He used to teach there and we looked on the change as a huge improvement over St. Mienrad! Our son is trying to discern a vocation. He is still in high school. If what your readers say is true, Father, this poses some great issues for us! Can you confirm any of the reports of the way Latin as well as the TLM and the MP are treated there?
Thank you,
S
I am also at the Josephinum, and I can tell you the things presented here are very true. PLEASE pray for us, and for the Pontifical College. Things are pretty rough here.
Michael Anthony:
The Rockford diocese does not have a seminary, but they do send a few seminarians to Lincoln, NE’s seminary.
As for the Josephinum, maybe Bishops Baker, Choby and Corrado del Rio will pull some strings for the Traditional Latin Mass.
Michael Anthony:
The Rockford diocese does not have a seminary, but they do send a few seminarians to Lincoln, NE’s seminary.
As for the Josephinum, maybe Bishops Baker, Choby and Corrado del Rio, who are seminary trustees, will pull some strings for the Traditional Latin Mass.
The Church does not have a light switch for immediate reform. Some dioceses and seminaries will quickly accommodate themselves to BXVI. But others will want to hang on to the lardy liturgy of the past 30+ years.
But I will make a prediction: Sometime in the next 18 months there will be American bishops who express surprise at the demand for mass acc to the 1962 Missal. And the reason is that most priests (especially bishops) have almost no idea what’s in the mind of lay people–Lay people almost always defer to the clergy and seldom express their opinions. If they disapprove of a certain pastor, they’ll vote with their feet and start attending another church.
For example, this morning a woman in her 50’s told me she does not like churches without the tabernacle in the center. I would bet the farm that she never once said that to a priest or bishop. And if she had, it’s not unlikely that she would have been considered a rabble rouser.
What strikes me as amazing is that at the same time as all this is happening here at the Pontifical College Josephinum, the Society for Catholic Liturgy is holding their annual conference at the Josephinum. Some of my friends have told me that at least one priest who is visiting for this conference has celebrated in private the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite, which we are hoping we can sneak into over the weekend. Please pray for all seminary formators, that they may be given the guidance of the Spirit to embrace the traditions of the Church.
I am seminarian currently studying at the Josephinum. I attest to the fact that priests here openly refuse to accommodate the Holy Father’s MP. This weekend, there’s a big liturgical conference given by Rev. Dr. Alcun Reid titled “Benedict XVI and the Sacred Liturgy”. Word is that the priests here at the Josephinum were not looking pleased by what was said by Fr. Reid. Please pray for all seminarians here. We desire to see the Extraordinary form implemented in the Liturgy schedule and training, so that the deacons preparing for orders will be prepared to accommodate the faithful of his diocese who desire the Extraordinary form of the Roman Rite. If anyone would like to write the Nuncio, please feel free to do so. But please keep us in prayer.
Yes, the Josephinum is hostile to the TLM. You won’t get any seminarians likely to post that, because of fear of being caught.
Sad to say the Josephinum has intimidated the men into silence. I have a relative there. The climate is quite cold.
Cincinnati has guys there. Do you think that Bishop has some influence? Don’t doubt it.
I am seminarian currently studying at the Josephinum. I attest to the fact that priests here openly refuse to accommodate the Holy Father’s MP. This weekend, there’s a big liturgical conference given by Rev. Dr. Alcun Reid titled “Benedict XVI and the Sacred Liturgy”. Word is that the priests here at the Josephinum were not looking pleased by what was said by Fr. Reid. Please pray for all seminarians here. We desire to see the Extraordinary form implemented in the Liturgy schedule and training, so that the deacons preparing for orders will be prepared to accommodate the faithful of his diocese who desire the Extraordinary form of the Roman Rite. If anyone would like to write the Nuncio, please feel free to do so.Also, someone asked for the seminary address: 7625 North High Street, Columbus, Ohio 43235. Please keep us in prayer.
I am seminarian currently studying at the Josephinum. I attest to the fact that priests here openly refuse to accommodate the Holy Father’s MP. This weekend, there’s a big liturgical conference given by Rev. Dr. Alcun Reid titled “Benedict XVI and the Sacred Liturgy”. Word is that the priests here at the Josephinum were not looking pleased by what was said by Fr. Reid. Please pray for all seminarians here. We desire to see the Extraordinary form implemented in the Liturgy schedule and training, so that the deacons preparing for orders will be prepared to accommodate the faithful of his diocese who desire the Extraordinary form of the Roman Rite. If anyone would like to write the Nuncio, please feel free to do so. Also the seminary’s address is 7625 North High Street, Columbus, Ohio 43235. Please keep us in prayer.
The best recent work on the Apostolic Tradition is the translation and commentary in the Hermeneia series, here.
This, the first full-length commentary on this church order, was published in 2002, and has had a massive impact on perceptions regarding the Apostolic Tradition, the most important of which has been to move the consensus away from attributing this particular church order to Hippolytus. The writing itself is anonymous, of course, and though there is a title Apostolic Tradition among the works of Hippolytus, this is almost certainly not it, as quotations of Hippolytus’ work in other authors are not found in it. I did a fair amount of work (including a fairly contemporary translation) on the AT several years ago, when Hippolytan authorship was only “up in the air.” It seems to have flown out the window now.
Thanks Kevin!
I’d come across your translation of the AT before, but I didn’t know it was your work.
The problem with the seminaries who are supposed to train our priests, for the most part, do not have a clue about the Old Mass at all (much less the New). So, they are probably just not wanting to admitt that they too need training so they can in turn train. Of course if a seminarian wants to learn the Old Mass, he can easily acquire the materials to learn it on his own. Back when I was in the seminary, apart from languages, I had to learn everything on my own since the seminary was teaching most everything but what the Catholic Church taught – St. Mary’s in Baltimore! Bad days. I just cannot imagine what seminaries such as the pink palaces are thinking right now at this moment in the church’s history.
Matt Robinson: ahhh….yep….EP II is definitely the same Anaphora as Hippolytus. No fabricated liturgy here folks…its all ancient stuff…move along now…move along.
The question is not whether EP II is the same as Hippolytus. But rather whether the Hippolytus text is an ancient anaphora. As was falsely claimed when EP II was “sold” as an appropriate new EP.
I am a former seminarian from the Josephinum. I was
kicked out last year and I can say that things are
really bad at the Josh. We are told not to preach from
St. Pauls letters because he is sexist and “nobody wants
to hear that crap.” As well as being told “Don’t worry
about your spirituality, you’re only here to get your B.A.”
These examples are only the tip of the iceberg.
It is my opinion that the Josephinum uses scare tactics
to keep the seminarians in line and to keep the truth
from getting out to the public. Among the students it
is regularly encouraged to lie to the new men, Live In
guests and prespective donors about the true nature of
the seminary, which is not to make holy priests but to
make “docile” priests. PLEASE pray for my brothers
still at this place, and I also encourage you to write
the Nuncio, the rector, and your bishop about this
matter.
Stand in the Truth!!
DO NOT BE AFRAID – JPII
This website contains the email addresses of the rector & faculty of the Josephinum.
http://www.pcj.edu/aboutus/directory.html
I am also a former seminarian from the Josephinum.
I was there last year and I thought I was still stuck in
the 80’s. We had retreats that consisted of Bet Middler
being presented as the new St. John of the Cross and
Jesus was presented as nothing but subjective.
Traditional seminarians are forced into hiding and forced
to pray in secret. Any visible signs of traditionalism
are met with the utmost scrutany. Formation at the
Josephinum will go so far as to lie to your face to
get rid of traditional seminarians. Seminarians are told
to keep their heads down, and for good reason. Traditional
men should take great caution if they are going to go to
the Josephinum.
The good news about the Josepheum though is that they sent 35 seminarians to our M.P. celebration at Holy Family on September 14. On several sundays, there are usually a couple of seminarians who attend our traditional latin Mass. And our pastor has trained the transitory deacons who are assigned to our parish on how to celebrate the traditional Mass. After ordination, they have returned to us and have celebrated the Mass for us.
The Carthusians…at least the English house….sang the Salve Regina after Vespers, that was twenty years ago….if any one has an MP3 version, or a link as to where I might hear it I would be very gratefull. I spent some time “In Charterhouse” recently…..but at the wrong time to hear the Salve…..which is even better than the Cistercian style.
[This document may be of interest to the rector of the Josephinum.]
Twelve years ago, in 1995, at Our Lady of
Compassion School (predecessor to the present St John
Vianney School) in Maple Hill, Kansas, associated with
the Fraternity of St Peter, some of the parents who
were new to the Traditional Mass, asked what the
school handbook meant when it said that the grade
school teachers “must be traditional Catholics”.
There is no ambiguity in the term “orthodox Catholic”,
but a traditional Catholic can mean different things
to different people. I was associated with the school
at the time, & had a hand in the writing of an essay
in aid of a definition of the term.
Laymen wrote this document; the School Board
never even acted on it (although the priest who was
our chaplain at the time said he thought it was a good
statement of our position).
MAPLE HILL DEFINITION
A traditional Catholic is first of all an
orthodox Catholic, one who accepts unequivocally
everything that the Catholic Church believes and
teaches. A Catholic may be more or less
“conservative”, but orthodoxy admits of no degrees.
It is like being pregnant; either you are or you
aren’t. Either a man accepts the Gospel of Jesus
Christ, that is, the solemnly defined moral and
doctrinal teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, or
he doesn’t.
A traditional Catholic believes that the Pope,
the Successor of St Peter, has received from Christ
our Lord the authority to teach and to rule the Church
in His name, and submits himself to the Pope’s
authority. “Where Peter is, there is the Church.” A
traditional Catholic obeys the Pope, and acknowledges
that John Paul II reigns today as the true Successor
of St Peter. A traditional Catholic acknowledges the
authority of the local bishop appointed by the Pope to
rule the diocese in which he lives.
In the midst of the doctrinal and moral
confusion of the times in which we live, a traditional
Catholic hold with special firmness to those documents
of the Magisterium which condemn the errors which are
particularly characteristic of the modern world,
documents such as the 1864 Syllabus of Errors by which
Pope Pius IX condemned Liberalism*, the Encyclicals
Lamentabili and Pascendi of Pope St Pius X condemning
Modernism, the 1950 Encyclical Humani Generis of Pope
Pius XII which warned against the resurgence of
Modernism, and the 1968 Credo of the People of God of
Pope Paul VI, which restated and reaffirmed the
dogmatic definitions pronounced by earlier ecumenical
councils, especially the Council of Trent.
Cardinal Ratzinger, the head of the Holy Office, in a speech to the bishops of Chile a
few weeks after the episcopal consecrations carried
out by the late Archbishop Lefebvre in June, 1988,
spoke in these terms of the Archbishop’s concern for
the integrity of the Faith: “For Lefebvre, what is at
stake is the warfare against ideological liberalism,
against the relativization of truth.” A traditional
Catholic resists ideological liberalism and the
relativization of truth, believing with St Thomas
Aquinas that objective reality exists outside the
human mind, that the human mind can know this reality,
and that truth is the correspondence of the mind to
reality.
Additionally, in the midst of the crisis which
has been afflicting the Body of Christ since the close
of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, the term
“traditional Catholic” has come to be used to refer to
those who remain attached to the Traditional Latin
Mass, the so-called “Tridentine” Mass.
In the same 1988 speech referred to above,
Cardinal Ratzinger said about the Church’s worship:
“The liturgy is not a festivity; it is not a meeting
for the purpose of having a good time. The liturgy is
what makes the Thrice-holy God present amongst us; it
is the Burning Bush; it is the alliance of God with
man in Jesus Christ, Who has died and risen again.
The grandeur of the liturgy does not rest upon the
fact that it offers an interesting entertainment, but
in rendering tangible the totally Other, Whom we are
not capable of summoning. The essential in the
liturgy is the Mystery, which is realized in the
common ritual of the Church; all the rest diminishes
it. Men experiment with it in lively fashion, and
find themselves deceived, when the Mystery is
transformed into distraction, when the chief actor in
the liturgy is not the living God, but the priest or
the liturgical director.”
In 1969, Cardinal Ratzinger’s predecessor as head
of the Holy Office, Cardinal Ottaviani, who held this
office during the Second Vatican Council and during
the pontificates of Popes John XXIII and Paul VI,
wrote a letter to Pope Paul in which he forthrightly
said, “The Novus Ordo Missae–considering the new
elements, susceptible of widely differing evaluations,
which appear to be implied or taken for
granted–represents, as a whole and in detail, a
striking departure from the theology of the Holy Mass
as it was formulated by the Council of Trent, which,
by fixing definitively the ‘canons’ of the rite,
erected an insurmountable barrier against any heresy
which might attack the integrity of the Mystery.”
The families who established Our Lady of
Compassion School share these convictions of Cardinal
Ratzinger and Cardinal Ottaviani about the liturgy in
general, and about the liturgical changes of the last
few decades in particular. We acknowledge the
validity of the Novus Ordo Missae, when it is
celebrated using the matter and form prescribed by the
Pope, by a priest who has the intention of doing what
the Church does. We also acknowledge the validity of
the new rites of the other sacraments. At the same
time, we are convinced that the Tridentine rite of the
Mass is theologically, pastorally, and liturgically
superior to the new rite of the Mass. Because the
Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals, but
not impeccable in his prudential judgments concerning
the governance of the Church (that is to say, it is
possible for a Pope to make a mistake or to commit a
sin), we believe that this position is entirely
compatible with the religious assent of mind and will
which the Second Vatican Council declares the faithful
owe to the teaching authority of the Pope (Lumen
Gentium 25).
“Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is
put down in writing under the breath of the Holy
Ghost.”
“And Holy Tradition transmits in its entirety the
Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles
by Christ the Lord and the Holy Ghost. It transmits
it to the successors of the apostles so that,
enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may
faithfully preserve, expound, and spread it abroad by
their teaching.”
“As a result the Church, to whom the transmission
and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, does
not derive her certainty about all revealed truths
from Holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and
Tradition must be accepted and honoured with equal
sentiments of devotion and reverence.”
This citation from The Catechism of the Catholic
Church (page 26), promulgated in 1994 by Pope John
Paul II, is a reminder that Tradition with a capital T
refers to one of the two sources of Revelation,
namely, the truths revealed by God which were not
written down in the Bible. Tradition with a small t
refers to the various theological, disciplinary,
liturgical and devotional traditions, born in the
Church over time. Examples of these “small t”
traditions are Friday abstinence, priestly celibacy,
and the rites of the Mass. While a traditional
Catholic recognises the distinction between an
ecclesiastical discipline and the law of God, he is
convinced that the history of the Church in the years
since the Second Vatican Council shows that changes in
the Church’s discipline should be made only for the
gravest reasons, and not merely from a desire for
“aggiornamento”.
Pope John Paul II has said that the desire of the
faithful who remain attached to the Traditional Mass
is a “legitimate aspiration”, one for which the
pastors of the Church must show respect. The Ordinary
of this Archdiocese, Archbishop Keleher, has shown his
respect for this “aspiration” by giving his approval
to this school and to the apostolate of the Fraternity
of St Peter, whose priests are the school chaplains.
Other Catholic schools exist where the Mass is
celebrated in the new rite. They are readily
available for those who prefer to worship God by means
of the revised liturgy. It is not our responsibility
to tell other Catholics how they must pray. However,
this school exists in large part in order to maintain
and promote the Traditional Latin Mass. Any Catholic
who teaches at Our Lady of Compassion School must be
an orthodox Catholic, one who either shares these
convictions regarding the liturgy, or who, if he does
not share them, will not speak or act against these
convictions in the performance of his duties as a
teacher at OLCS.
This document is not meant to be an exercise in
barren polemics or to call into question the good
faith of other people. The unity of the Church must
be grounded in charity, first and foremost; it must
also be grounded in truth. We do not want to pretend
to be other than what we are, Catholics who love Christ our Lord, His immaculate
Mother, His Church, His vicar on earth, and the
liturgy which for a millenium and a half has been the
principal means employed by the Church to help men to
love and follow Christ better. We established this
school to share and to pass on our faith to the
children whom God has given us. We rely on God and
Our Lady of Compassion in this noble enterprise.
*Liberalism: “A philosophy that stresses human
freedom to the neglect and even denial of the rights
of God in religion, the rights of society in civil
law, and the rights of the Church in her relations to
the State. It was in this sense that Liberalism was
condemned by Pope Pius IX.” from Fr John Hardon’s
Modern Catholic Dictionary, 1980.
I knew a man who saw the beauty and truth in the
Classical Latin Mass and the Josephinum called him
“Evil.”
I attended the Josephinum back in the early ’90’s and it was a mess then, too. Sad to hear that the same nonsense is going on today that went on in my day. Thankfully, after having to endure a feminist nun lead evening prayer and give the final blessing “in the name of the creator, redeemer and sanctifier” and after having her smile to my face and then have me labelled behind my back as “rampantly clerical” and “rigid” I had the good sense to get out of there, take some time off to pray and recoup and then find another seminary. Now, after being ordained in 1993 and having my own parish in a small town, I am free from all that nonsense and able to offer Mass ad orientem and soon, with some more study, the Extraordinary Form. Still, it’s sad to hear this news about the Josh. Seminarians, we pray for you!
I too am a seminarian at the Josephinum. And I’m not exactly sure what those other guys are complaining about. The Liturgy here that I’ve experienced has been nothing but reverent. Yes, it is possible to be reverent without saying Mass in Latin. I have never felt intimidated about my own traditionalism. I love gregorian chant and the TLM and latin but I have not experienced any open hostility toward it either. The lecture notes presented aren’t exactly what I experienced. I didn’t feel that the rector was hostile. He wasn’t hopping around excited about the MP but I would say he seemed more ambivelant. I know there were crazy things that went on in the past, but there is more orthodoxy and orthopraxy than the other commentators let on. Oh, and I think it would be better to get the letter actually sent to the Bishops by the rector before everyone makes a final judgement. It has already been sent out I believe. Please keep all seminarians in your prayers.
As a current seminarian at the Josephinum, I can assure you that seminarians are actively being persecuted for being traditional and loyal to the Pope.
Please pray for us!
Oh, yes pcjseminarian, the Masses are of utmost reverence at the Josephinum,
or at least as much reverence you can pack into 20 minutes. Although it’s true that
crazy things went on there in the past, apparently you’ve been living in a cave
there because those things are still happening.
Also, you hit on an important thing. You said that the rector sent this response to
the bishops. In the rectors statement (according to the original source for this
post) he said that the rector was basing this statement on what the bishops have
requested, or lack thereof. So, is he just sending them back the same thing they
told him? I doubt it.
Actually, if the rector wished to be truthful than he would listen to the one
bishop that has given definitive input on the matter, and that would be the bishop
of Rome. You know, the bishop to which the PONTIFICAL college Josephinum belongs.
Loyaltothemagesterium,
COuld you elaborate a little on this persecution. As of yet I have not seen it or heard others speak of it. If it really is going on i’d like to know where so that something can be done. I have no problem bringing up conerns about formation to my bishop.
WHite martyr, how long ago did you attend the Josephinum?
Oh, one more thing letter to the bishops is not a response to them rather an explanation as to what is going on at the present time and an invitation to input on the implementation to the MP at least that is my understanding from the talk on tuesday. I think a little patience to see how this unfolds and what response the bishops have to the letter is wise.
Be careful if you answer pcjseminarian or provide him any information. Be careful of other pseudonymns as well.
Several of us are sure he’s a formator priest trying to do a little fishing to find out who would dare criticise
the Josephinum. Be careful. Be careful. Be careful.
The only postings here that try to describe the Josephinum as a tranquil place where there is no issue with
tradition and the TLM must be coming from priests writing anon. How do I know? Even seminarians who are not at all interested in the TLM are at least aware that the TLM is unwelcome on campus.
No one is being burned at the stake, but everyone is staying under the radar.
Fr. Z.
Haven’t talked to you in quite a while. Enjoy your website.
I see at least one person who has never read the article I published in Latin Mass Magazine on Hippolytus vs. Eucharistic Prayer II. Here is someone’s internet text of the article with commentary added:
http://65.108.168.229/wd/TradLatinMasses/Commentary/Distorting%20Hippolytus.htm
Thanks,
Ed Snyder
Anon,
Speculate all you want. But I assure you I am not a priest formator. (that’s exactly what a priest formator would say). I pray that we all keep an open and obedient heart in this matter. I pray for all seminarians especially my brothers here at the Josephinum.
MDS
This is getting strange. Time to move on.