What Does The Prayer Really Say?
W D T P R S

I received an alarming note with a translation of a story in French from the site DICI about how His Excellency Most Reverend André Rivest, Bishop of Chicoutimi in Canada has a very different view of Summorum Pontificum than some other bishops, as… for example… the Bishop of Rome, Benedict XVI.

Over 100 people, perhaps as many as 130, requested the TLM from their pastor in accordance with SP 5.1.  The priest refused and consulted the bishop.  The bishop is refusing to help these people.  As a matter of fact, he is stating that he won’t implement SP in his diocese and that appealing to Rome is just a waste of everyone’s time because he, not the Pope, is in charge in that place.

The part I really like is where it is stated that the Pope says that the bishop must examine whether the persons requesting (not only the priests!) have a liturgical training and a ‘certain familiarity’ with the ‘extraordinary form’ of the Latin rite, as well as a good knowledge of the Latin language.   

No. Really.  That wasn’t a slip up.  Because it continues to say: "among the signatories, very few can meet these criteria.”

Unbelievable.

Perhaps we should have a look at what I received with my emphases and comments.

Canada: Bishop Opposes Motu Proprio
Dici
June 21, 2008

The bishop of Chicoutimi, André Rivest, is opposed to the Tridentine Mass and will not apply the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum in his diocese, in spite of the request addressed to the parish priest of Sacred Heart Church, Msgr Jean-Roch Gaudin by 130 faithful. This latter, in his parish bulletin, gave the good reasons for not applying the Motu Proprio. Here are some of the most significant excerpts:

“… A month ago, a petition signed by 100 persons was handed to me, requesting permission for one Mass a month in the ‘extraordinary form’, in one of the three churches of the parish, preferably the church of Christ the King. According to the Motu Proprio, I was entitled to grant the request.  [Indeed, yes.]

But as the signatories were hailing from various parishes of the diocese, and out of solidarity with the pastoral policy of the whole diocese, I thought it right to consult with Bishop André Rivest, the first Pastor of the diocese, and at the same time to give him the petition so that he may give a diocesan orientation on this issue.

Bishop Rivest consulted with his Presbyteral Council (composed of various priest of the diocese) on Monday, May 19 last, and the next day he phoned me and said he thought it good not to grant permission to celebrate Mass in the ‘extraordinary form’” in the diocese for the following reasons:

a. The Motu Proprio says: In parishes, where there is a stable group of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly accept their requests to celebrate the Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962” (art. 5, § 1). Neither in the parish of the Sacred Heart, nor in the diocese is there any stable group. The signatories of the petition do not constitute a stable group, a permanent group, a community as such, but a collection of persons from all over the diocese, and who, in their great majority, have no continual relationships between them.  [Remember what Card. Castrillon clarified… what WDTPRS has been saying all along: a group can be as small as three people.  Also, if there are over 100 who signed, that means that in the diocese, if not that parish, there are a signifant number of people who made a request.  Again, as Card. Castillon said, they need not be from the same parish.]

b. The bishop has the role of preserving the unity in the diocese and he has authority and responsibility over the liturgy and the pastoral care of the faithful. The permission to celebrate Masses in the ‘extraordinary form’ will be a source of division among priests and faithful, and the impact of such a celebration may well be negative.  [I see.  Without the slightest amount of actual experience, they have already decided.  That sure isn’t divisive… no no.]

c. Among the criteria put forward by the Holy Father in his Motu Proprio, the bishop must examine whether the persons requesting [!] and the priests themselves have a liturgical training and a ‘certain familiarity’ with the ‘extraordinary form’ of the Latin rite, as well as a good knowledge of the Latin language, [did you get that?  "the persons requesting" must be examined by the bishop to determine if they have enough familiarity with the rite and with Latin?] something which Pope Benedict XVI himself deems necessary for a fruitful celebration in ‘the extraordinary form.’ Now, among the signatories, very few can meet these criteria.”  [No. No.  No, again.  This is an entirely false reading of Summorum Pontificum.  On can understand that a priest must be idoneus, but this canonical requirement cannot be applied to the lay faithful.  Let’s just ask people what the Gospel reading was as they are leaving church after it was read in the vernacular in the Novus Ordo and see what sort of reaction you might get.  Let’s text priests as to what the texts say.  This is an obvious misreading… probably purposeful of Summorum Pontificum.  I have a hard time imagining that they could get this wrong by accident.]
 
And the parish priest concluded: “After having consulted with my parish team, I am in complete agreement with the stand taken by Bishop Rivest who has asked me to let you know his decision. Consequently, I do not allow the celebration of the Mass in its ‘extraordinary form’ in the parish of the Sacred Heart” and he added that “persons desiring to attend such a Mass” could go to a church in the city of Québec, 125 miles from Chicoutimi.  [Nice.]

In order to discourage any attempt at a recourse with the Ecclesia Dei Commission, as it is foreseen by the Motu Proprio, Msgr. Gaudin answered in advance: “It is not the pope who is the first person responsible for pastoral care and the liturgy in the diocese, but the bishop. And the popes usually respect this responsibility, unless there are some very, very, very serious reasons. The pope will certainly not intervene in this affair and will certainly not oblige our bishop to have a Tridentine Mass in the diocese. He will only ask him for additional information and respect his decision. The bishop will have lost time uselessly.”

Folks…. this is pretty bad.

This is a finger in the eye of the Pope, and you know which finger too.

I say… get to work and waste that bishop’s valuable time.

I suspect that people sending original printed material from that parish with these statements will receive a very interested hearing in Rome.

Also, see this.

We’re back and running.

Here is what has happened so far.

We upgraded from a 1GB server to a 2GB server, which gives the database more swap.

We are now also behind a "virtual IP address" which lives on a piece of equipment called a load balancer.

We also have switched physical locations.  Now we are hosted on the East Coast of the USA rather than the West.  This should make the blog faster for people in Europe (two fewer hops to reach us).

We have also upgraded the Wordpress software which makes this blog run.

As you may have noticed, at this point we still have the same theme.  The guy who did most of the work got it to function on the new version.

The present theme is still rather "heavy", but I know people like it.

I may switch themes now and then to see what the difference is for speed and the server load, but for now,... whew!

I need to get used to a new admin area and figure out what plugins may have been lost and which new ones might work. 

So far, however, I think we are now faster and ready for you readers to try to push us over the edge again!

Have at!

What Does the Prayer Really Say?   6th Sunday after Pentecost (1962 Missale Romanum)

... 

Now please flip open your own trusty copy of the Liber Sacramentorum Romanae Aeclesiae Ordinis Anni Circuli edited by Leo Cunibert Mohlberg, OSB (in other words the Gelasian Sacramentary and yes, it is “Aeclesiae”.) you find today’s ancient prayer in the second group of prayers for Sundays.  I noted that the Collect we examined last week was in the first group.  Today’s prayer survived the scissor and paste-pot wielding liturgical experts who, under the aegis of the late Fr. Annibale Bugnini, revised and shuffled the ancient prayers for the Novus Ordo.  With only slight changes, this prayer is still heard today on the 22^nd Sunday of Ordinary Time.

COLLECT - (1962 Missale Romanum):
Deus virtutum, cuius est totum quod est optimum:
insere pectoribus nostris amorem tui nominis,
et praesta in nobis religionis augmentum;
ut, quae sunt bona, nutrias, ac pietatis studio,
quae sunt nutrita, custodias.

In the 2002 Roman Missal it appears this way (variations underscored): Deus virtutum, cuius est totum quod est optimum, insere pectoribus nostris tui nominis amorem, et praesta, ut in nobis, religionis augmento, quae sunt bona nutrias, ac, vigilanti studio, quae nutrita custodias. But in the ancient Gelasian it is like this: Deus uirtutum, cuius est totum quod est optimum, insere pectoribus nostris amorem tui nominis et praesta, ut et nobis relegionis augmentum quae sunt bona nutrias ac uigilantia studium quaesomus nutrita custodias. However, the apparatus criticus at the bottom of the page, where variations in different manuscripts are listed, also suggests vigilanti studio. Thus, the Novus Ordo redactors attempted to restore the prayer in some respects to the version pre-dating by many centuries the “Tridentine” Missale Romanum, making also changes in style.  But they changed the conceptual grounding of the Collect by removing pietas.    

Your even trustier copy of the Lewis & Short Dictionary informs you that insero means “to sow, plant in, ingraft, implant.”  Virtutum is genitive plural of virtus, “manliness; strength, vigor; bravery, courage; aptness, capacity; power” and so forth.  Virtutum translates the Hebrew tsaba’, “that which goes forth, an army, war, a host.”  Tsaba’ is applied to hosts of angels, of soldiers, and the sun, moon and stars.   In the Sanctus of Holy Mass and in the great hymn called the Te Deum we echo the myriads of saints and angels bowed before God’s throne in the celestial liturgy: “Holy  Holy  Holy  LORD GOD SABAOTH…. God of “heavenly hosts”, or as the lame-duck ICEL version puts it, God “of power and might”.  “O mighty God of hosts” is a fair attempt at what Deus virtutum is saying.   We find in old translations of the Latin Vulgate Psalter that this address for God is rendered as: “God of hosts.”  The Holy See’s document which lays down the norms for liturgical translation, Liturgiam authenticam 51, says, “deficiency in translating the varying forms of addressing God, such as Domine, Deus, Omnipotens aeterne Deus, Pater, and so forth, as well as the various words expressing supplication, may render the translation monotonous and obscure the rich and beautiful way in which the relationship between the faithful and God is expressed in the Latin text.”  We must drill into these tougher phrases and not simply gloss over them.

Lame-Duck ICEL version (1973 translation of the 1970MR):
Almighty God,
every good thing comes from you.
Fill our hearts with love for you,
increase our faith,
and by your constant care
protect the good you have given us.

LITERAL TRANSLATION:
O mighty God of hosts, of whom is the entirety of what is perfect:
graft the love of Your Name into our hearts,
and grant in us an increase of religion;
so that You may nourish the things which are good
and, by zeal for dutifulness, guard what has been nourished.

Here are images having to do with armies and also with vine tending. On the one hand we have the God of hosts who guards the good things we have.  On the other, God grafts love into us and then nourishes it into growth.

Notice that we pray to God for an increase in “religion.”  Ancient Roman religio is a complicated term.  The word derives from the root lig- , “to bind”, hence, religio means sometimes the same as obligatio.  As our obliging L&S explains, Romans understood reverence for God (or their gods), the fear of God, “connected with a careful pondering of divine things; piety, religion, both pure inward piety and that which is manifested in religious rites and ceremonies; hence the rites and ceremonies, as well as the entire system of religion and wor