Michael Voris on Summorum Pontificum and the lay of the land

Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV, reporting from Rome these last days, has a 15 March video in which he uses a phrase found rather frequently in these electronic pages.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Our Catholic Identity, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, The future and our choices and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to Michael Voris on Summorum Pontificum and the lay of the land

  1. Legisperitus says:

    Nice report, although…

    “Litergy” with an E? :(

  2. CJD89 says:

    I thought this was great! Father who do you think the Cardinal is that said there will be no more Novus Ordo in 50 years? [Wellllll.... I can think of who it isn't!]

  3. isnowhere says:

    Hope filled message… made me joyful.

  4. lacrossecath says:

    LOL, I caught LitErgy too.

    … When mysterious shadow Cardinal says No Novus Ordo, are we really talking about Rome taking it from a beta to a NO version 2, with concise rubrics ect? I know Fr Z probably can’t say most of what he knows, but this report made me feel better about the situation.

  5. contrarian says:

    This guy is growing on me. The message makes me very hopeful.

  6. theloveofwisdome says:

    Okay- so the Novus Ordo wont be around in 50 years…. I’d say more like 10 years. BUT… the real question is… will the TLM still be around?? I have a feeling this is not as good news as people think… I think the are planning some sort of hybrid mass.

    If they will make a hybrid mass- then fine so be it…
    But please!!! do not tamper in a substantial way with the mass of all ages!!!

  7. isnowhere says:

    @theloveofwisdome

    killjoy!

    I know what you mean. I hope you are wrong… I am sure you feel the same. If Fr. Hugh Benson got it right… we will have the Tidentine Mass at the end. ;-)

  8. BobP says:

    I believe Michael Davies already predicted its demise because of the declining rate of attendance. Probably one of the reasons they are changing the language to reflect better the Latin.

  9. Centristian says:

    The Roman Catholic Mass celebrated using any currently approved Missal is worthy of a proper celebration, and it has always seemed to me that Pope Benedict XVI is trying to stress just that, by his example, by his words, and by his acts.

    As it happens, the “extraordinary expression” of the Roman Rite, using the 1962 Missal, is always celebrated in proper Roman fashion, ad orientem, in Latin, with all due Roman solemnity as, indeed, befits the Roman Rite. But that Roman “form” of celebrating Mass ought to obtain with the Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI, as well. No need to go into the reasons why it is not; the history of the past 40 years tells us why it is not (at least not typically). Had there not been a new Missal made typical after Vatican II, however, the “form” of celebrating the 1962 Missal would certainly have deteriorated to resemble the typically seen “form” of the Novus Ordo Missae. The Novus Ordo Missae, as I see it, suffers mostly from arriving on the scene at the wrong moment in history, thus the book itself is regarded by some as the villain rather than as the victim.

    Will Paul VI’s Missal have been abrogated in 50 years time, with the 1962 Missal made typical again as the “ordinary form” of the Roman Rite? No, I don’t believe so. I don’t believe that the second reading, for example, will be (or ought to be) abolished, that the practice of offering the readings in the vernacular will be (or ought to be) abolished, or that the various Eucharistic Prayers (excepting the Roman Canon) will be (or ought to be) packed away.

    What I can imagine and hope, however, is that the traditional Roman “form” of the celebration of Mass will typify the celebration of the “ordinary expression” using the typical edition of the Missale Romanum of the day, whatever it happens to be. It is the way Mass is celebrated that seems to me to be the pressing liturgical issue of the day, not the Latin texts of the Novus Ordo Missae versus those of the 1962 edition of the Missal. The translations into the vernacular are another story, of course. Happily, however, that issue has been addressed.

    Periodically, we read here and elsewhere reports of cardinals and bishops arriving at their cathedrals (and other venues) wearing the cappa magna, but only when they celebrate a pontifical Mass using the ’62 Missal. Why? Why should they not arrive in cappa magna when pontificating according to the Novus Ordo Missae? Why not wear the tunic and the sandals and the buskins and the gauntlets, and all the rest, too? There isn’t any reason why they should dress and comport themselves one way when using one Missal, and another when using the other Missal. It’s the Mass of the Roman Rite they are celebrating, either way.

    The respect and veneration given to Mass celebrated according to the ’62 Missal should be accorded to every Catholic Mass. The traditional Roman trappings of the Roman Rite should not be seen only when the “Extraordinary Form” of that Rite is celebrated. It doesn’t even make any sense that such is the case. Considering that the Novus Ordo has been designated by the Church as the “ordinary form” of the Roman Rite, is it not logical that that form more than any other should, indeed, typify the traditional Roman “form” of Catholic liturgical worship?

    I observe that Pope Benedict only ever celebrates Mass using the Missal of Pope Paul VI, the typical edition that he has described as the “ordinary expression” of the Mass. He never opts to celebrate Mass with the ’62 Missal (at least never publicly). But when he celebrates the Novus Ordo Missae he does so using the traditional Roman form of the celebration of Mass (which would seem natural for the Bishop of Rome, but it was not always so, of course).

    Pope Benedict speaks of the two “expressions” of the Roman Rite enriching each other. What I have to imagine the Pope hopes for is that, one day, Mass will be celebrated according to the same, essential Roman expression of the liturgy, irrespective of which Missal is used, and that the Novus Ordo Missae, if you will, might be rescued from the abuse and neglect she has endured by endowing her celebration with the same Roman form that the “extraordinary expression” always enjoys. That is my hope, at least…that one day, every Catholic Mass will look, sound, and feel like a Mass of the Roman Rite again, no matter which text is used.

  10. tonyballioni says:

    In the end I think we will end up with the Extraordinary Form said in the vernacular, with some of the major prayers sung in Latin, and I don’t think its that bad of an idea. The simple fact is the vast majority of people would be unwilling to go back to the Extraordinary Form as it is said now on a permanent basis. I love it, and wouldn’t mind it, but I don’t think it is feasible. It is good to remember that vernacular language in the mass is not the work of the Antichrist. The scripture readings are in English, why not other parts?

    Also, this should not be read to be opposed to Latin remaining the liturgical language of the Latin Church. I am simply saying, an EF with more English would not be too bad.

  11. albizzi says:

    I bet this man is Card. Ranjith.

  12. david andrew says:

    Yeah, “litergy”. Edit fail, big time. . . perhaps Michael needs to have a little “sit down” with his staff.

    To the naysayers (Centristian, primarily): Let us not forget what Fr. Z has pointed out, and what the Holy Father seems to desire. There was a rupture in the organic development of the Mass, so perhaps in 50 years, with the gravitational pull of the TLM, the NO will not exist as we know it, but will perhaps be more like what “tonyballioni” describes. Who knows what grand designs the Holy Spirit has for the Church?

    We live in exciting times, whether that be for good or for worse. I, for one, am along for the ride, for as long as God sees fit for me to be on it!

  13. Childermass says:

    Give us the Mass of Vatican II! Streamlined 1962 with Latin Ordinary and vernacular Propers!

    That is what I hope will be the “typical” parish Mass of 2060—or much sooner.

  14. Scott W. says:

    12 responses and no comments about Voris’ hair, his bachelor degree, or his emotional state (in short anything but the actual content of his video)? My faith is restored.

  15. acroat says:

    The “right side” of the 1962 Missal is beautiful and would put an end to “clown mass”.

  16. JP Borberg says:

    “You can just hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth in old liberal’s nursing homes all over the western world”.

    I like it when people say stuff like that.

  17. Henry Edwards says:

    What I have to imagine the Pope hopes for is that, one day, Mass will be celebrated according to the same, essential Roman expression of the liturgy, irrespective of which Missal is used, and that the Novus Ordo Missae, if you will, might be rescued from the abuse and neglect she has endured by endowing her celebration with the same Roman form that the “extraordinary expression” always enjoys.

    We might well all join in that hope. However, I wonder if (and how) anyone can justify a reasonable expectation of its fulfillment during our lifetimes.

    What is a plausible scenario under which there could occur an evolution from typically casual and non-Roman celebration of the Novus Ordo almost everywhere now, to its typical celebration in the foreseeable future in a careful and reverent Roman manner almost everywhere?

  18. asophist says:

    I think the “litergy” may have been an intention pun to describe what the touchy-feely types try to make the mass into; compare to “synergy”. I may be wrong here – I couldn’t access the video, so am just guessing.

  19. Mitchell NY says:

    I often wonder if the NO Mass can be salvaged. Bishops cling to it as some sort of trophy and along with it the idea that comes the notion that it can be abused. It makes one wonder if it is even worth salvaging. Not for the integrity of the Missal itself but for the attitudes that are linked to it. Built from the beginning, its’ cutting, altering, and changing has had profound affect on the way people view Mass. It is not simply the times or young people would not walk away from the Tridentine Mass feeling a great love for it, or a sense of being drawn to it. They would show no interest if it were considered passe’. But Liturgy, and the Tridentine Mass is proving timeless, eternal. That is the affect of the 1962 Missal. Obedience is built into the soul of Catholics. If the Pope obliged us to use the 1965 Missal for all vernacular celebrations of Mass and said the NO was to be abrogated, 99% of Catholics would follow. Alot of stomping feet but they would follow. I bet there would be a huge shift in attitudes because the 65 Missal does not come with all the baggage. It is not “tainted” so to speak. It would be nice to have the 65 Missal for those who love the NO Mass and the vernacular and the 62 Missal every Sunday for at least 1 Mass. The continuity would be clearly visible and both forms would flow with one another rather than against. Then in 100 years Rome could get into intergrating both Missals. I pray the clarification document will draw the EF Mass more into the mainstream and really do hope it takes care to admonish those Bishops who continually obstruct celebration of the 1962 Missal. If it is true about Seminary formation including both forms of Mass than that is an excellent way to permanently anchor the 62 Missal to the Church, as it should be.

  20. shane says:

    The Roman liturgy is currently recovering from a very serious illness so any reforms to the 1962 Missal can wait for at least another 100 years.

    The Novus Ordo is a disaster but abolishing it right now would probably be the worst thing that could happen. I would hate to see my local Fr Trendy get his hands on the Old Mass.

    Let’s hope the upcoming Instruction from Rome will demand that seminarians be taught how to say the EF.

  21. Jon says:

    I was going to say what Mitchell said, but he said it first.

    Still, Henry asks, “What is a plausible scenario under which there could occur an evolution from typically casual and non-Roman celebration of the Novus Ordo almost everywhere now, to its typical celebration in the foreseeable future in a careful and reverent Roman manner almost everywhere?”

    I’m afraid I can’t foresee “an evolution” of this kind, as evolution implies change of a slow and gradual nature. I think only a repeal of all the sordid “instructions” and “permissions” of the past forty-one years, along with the imposition of a Benedictine General Instruction, would suffice to bring about what your hope.

    Then again, why bother? What is there about the Novus Ordo script, the work of Bugnini and his merry band with scissors and paste, worth preserving? If a wholesale switch to the TLM, even vernacular permitting, is too much, then certainly a return to the ’65, the only Mass with a real claim to being the Mass of the Council, is possible. But for the loss of Susie Servette, Mini Ministress, and his other liturgical bell-bottoms, Joe Pew would never know the difference.

  22. Giambattista says:

    I am glad Voris is doing what he is doing. We need people we can trust to tell it like it is who are not controlled bishops or those controlled by them.

    There is nothing more I would love to see than the Novus Ordo die in 50 years (I’m 44 I hope it happens a lot sooner than that :-)

    I sure hope the “instruction” helps us get a TLM in my area (Butler, PA). In the interim, thank God for the Byzantine Rite – I seriously don’t know what I would do without it!

  23. anilwang says:

    The NO isn’t going anywhere. Even if North America and Europe embrace TLM and reject NO, Africa and Asia (the places of highest growth) won’t embrace TLM.

    However, the NO of “The Spirit of Vatican II” will give up the ghost so to speak. 50 is too pessimistic, IMO. 20 years should be enough for the reverent NO envisioned in Vatican II to be the norm.

    The new Missal is a start. Restoring reverent music is the next item on the agenda along with the horrible “modern Church architecture” (see http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1346722?eng=y ). All we need is for Pope Benedict to live XVI to live 20 years more or for the next Pope to be like the current one (increasingly likely with the new conservative Cardinals and liberal Cardinals retiring) for “The Spirit of Vatican II” to be finally exorcised from the Church.

  24. Andy F. says:

    May the true spirit of Vatican II continue to guide Mother Church on her way to heaven.

  25. Elly says:

    anilwang- Why do you say Africa and Asia won’t embrace the TLM?

  26. Stephen D says:

    I was brought up with the TLM and was told, as a child, that the Mass could never be changed. The first NO I attended was a shock, it didn’t feel like a Mass and I immediately thought that this was going to have some long term negative effects. A few years down the road, the tabernacle disappeared to a side altar, the focal point became the celebrant’s chair, some odd things were being said in homilies etc etc. What a mess! Let’s get back to the TLM everywhere and always.

  27. Henry Edwards says:

    Jon: I think only a repeal of all the sordid “instructions” and “permissions” of the past forty-one years, along with the imposition of a Benedictine General Instruction, would suffice to bring about what your hope.

    I wonder whether either this – a new Benedictine OF missal – or a 1965 Mass, or a vernacular EF Mass, would suffice to yield “a typical celebration in the foreseeable future in a careful and reverent Roman manner almost everywhere”.

    All these are “easy” solutions, in that they could be implemented by a stroke of the papal pen. But the “hard” problem is with the priests and bishops who are responsible for liturgical abuse. Is there any reason to think that merely a new missal would reform such an abusive cleric?

    If not, the only real solution may be the biological one. In perhaps 20 to 40 years, when the young priests being ordained now are taking over as pastors and bishops (and no further clarifications of Summorum Pontificum are needed).

  28. Brooklyn says:

    Henry Edwards – a vernacular Mass automatically takes away the universality of the Mass. Take it from someone who lives in a city where Spanish is almost as prevalant as English. And it also causes a lot of friction between those who speak different languages. Latin brings us all together, as it did for nearly most of Church history.

    I also wonder why anilwang thinks that Africa and Asia wouldn’t embrace the TLM.

  29. Jon says:

    Henry: Is there any reason to think that merely a new missal would reform such an abusive cleric?

    Peter holds the keys. “Whatsoever you bind on earth…”

    Make deliberate departure from the rubrics, outside the danger of persecution and pending death, a mortal sin, and I think you’ll have, as the cowboy said of his trusty .45, “the Convincer.”

  30. Henry Edwards says:

    Jon,

    Don’t you think the mortal sin convincer would work best with those priests who are already doing a good job with the liturgy (and so don’t need that much convincing). Hmm . . . Offhand, I don’t recall ever hearing a serial liturgical abuser even mention the term “mortal sin”.

  31. Jon says:

    Henry,

    True enough, but didn’t one or two of those Younger Boys go on the “straight ‘n narrah” when they ran up against Mr. Pinkerton?

  32. JKnott says:

    I was hoping Father would post this.
    Michael Voris is doing excellent work in his apostolate. We need more men like him.
    Who cares about a rare spelling mistake.
    This is Lent guys!

  33. Jerry says:

    @Centristian

    As it happens, the “extraordinary expression” of the Roman Rite, using the 1962 Missal, is always celebrated in proper Roman fashion, ad orientem, in Latin, with all due Roman solemnity as, indeed, befits the Roman Rite.

    Liturgies don’t abuse liturgies, people do.

    How likely do you think it is that priests who willfully ignore the rubrics of the OF will suddenly adhere to them if forced to say the EF? If anything, I’d bet dollars to donuts there may be more abuses from those who resent having to say the EF.

    Also, consider that certain types of abuses are actually easier to get away with in the NO. With the canon being said silently, who (except perhaps the server) would know if priest were deviating from the prescribed prayers — or even mumbling “Mary had a little lamb…”?