Universae Ecclesiae… Instruction on Summorum Pontificum.

The cat is out of the bag.

The Instruction is called Universae Ecclesiae and it will indeed be published very soon.  There is an embargo on the text until 12 noon Rome time 13 May, at which time I will offer some analysis of the document.  There will be a press conference on 13 May and it will be in the afternoon edition of L’Osservatore Romano, which is now on line, of course.

The text seems to be out and around.  Three people have offered it to me.  I have it.  I will honor the embargo, unless someone else breaks it.

Fishwrap is going to hate this.

It is not a perfect game for our side, but it is a no hitter.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Universae Ecclesiae and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

110 Responses to Universae Ecclesiae… Instruction on Summorum Pontificum.

  1. tjtenor2 says:

    You’re teasing us, Father! I suppose we lowly peons can wait an extra two days… [Informing, not teasing.]

  2. Deo gratias.

    The Vatican must be aware of the coincidence with the anniversary of the first apparition of Our Lady at Fatima, Portugal. I see this as a quiet gesture toward traditional Catholics and, perhaps, Our Lady herself.

  3. Nathan says:

    Father, considering the years we weren’t able to make it through the first inning, a no-hitter is a pretty exciting prospect.

    In Christ,

  4. Andrew says:

    I am disappointed to read that the text will not be published in Hungarian. Not fair!

    [LOL! You are so right.]

    Latin and Hungarian.

  5. Father, if as you say, “Fishwrap is going to hate this” then that is good enough for me!

  6. Young Canadian RC Male says:

    “It is not a perfect game for our side, but it is a no hitter.”

    This statement just killed about 60% of the joy I was going to have Friday. [Perhaps you don't understand what a "no-hitter" is.]

  7. contrarian says:

    Oh man…that’s an encouraging preview. Spill the beans!

    We promise we won’t tell.

  8. Lucas says:

    Young Canadian RC Male: Thats being a bit negative don’t you think? It should kill maybe 10% of the joy. If its a no hitter as Fr Z says then it should be really really good.

  9. Prof. Basto says:

    Today’s Bulletin of the Holy See Press Office confirms this news and makes public the schedule of events indicated above.

    The communiqué to journalists published in the bolletino deals with two documents: the PCED Instruction on Summorum Pontificum that will be released on May 13, 2011 at noon Rome time and also with a CDF Circullar Letter that will be published on May 16 containing directives that aims to help Episcopal Conferences in the drafting of National Guidelines on how to deal with cases of sexual abuse of minors by clergy.

    Regarding the PCED Instruction on Summorum Pontificum, the Holy See Press Release confirms that it will start with the words Universae Ecclesiae, that it will be released in Latin and also in Italian, French, English, German, Spanish and Portuguese translations, that it will be made avaliable to all journalists who are members of the Holy See Press Corps on May 13th at 10 a.m. and that the text will be under embargo until noon of the same date, when it will be made public (May 13th, 2011, noon Rome time).

    In the afternoon of May 13th, the edition dated May 14th of the Vatican Newspaper L’Osservatore Romano will circulate, and Instruction will be published in the said edition.

    Although the Press Release mentions no Press Conference for the presentation of the document, it infroms that the Holy See Press Office will release, together with the Instruction, an editor’s explanatory note (Nota redazionale) to the press (presumably prepared by the editors/redazione of L’osservatore Romano/Holy See Press Office).

    Source: http://press.catholica.va/news_services/bulletin/news/27401.php?index=27401&lang=en

    Full text of the Vatican Press Release in Italian, including not only the information regarding the PCED Instruction, but also reference to the second, CDF document on child abuse:

    “AVVISO AI GIORNALISTI

    Venerdì 13 maggio 2011 verrà resa nota dalla Sala Stampa l’Istruzione Universae Ecclesiae della Pontificia Commissione Ecclesia Dei sull’applicazione della Lettera Apostolica Motu Proprio data “Summorum Pontificum” di S.S. Benedetto XVI. L’Istruzione sarà pubblicata sull’edizione pomeridiana dell’Osservatore Romano, con data 14 maggio.

    Il testo dell’Istruzione – in lingua latina, italiana, francese, inglese, tedesca, spagnola e portoghese, sarà a disposizione dei giornalisti accreditati a partire dalle ore 10 di venerdì 13 maggio, con embargo fino alle ore 12. Con il testo dell’Istruzione verrà fornita anche una Nota redazionale.

    Lunedì 16 maggio p.v. la Sala Stampa pubblicherà la Lettera Circolare della Congregazione per la Dottrina della Fede, scritta per aiutare le Conferenze Episcopali nel preparare Linee guida per il trattamento dei casi di abuso sessuale nei confronti di minori da parte di chierici.

    La Lettera Circolare – in lingua italiana, francese, inglese, tedesca, spagnola, portoghese e polacca – sarà a disposizione dei giornalisti accreditati a partire dalle ore 10 di lunedì 16 maggio, con embargo fino alle ore 12. Con il testo della Circolare verrà fornita anche una Nota di Sintesi, a cura della Sala Stampa.”

  10. Legisperitus says:

    “Praecepit autem David universae ecclesiae: Benedicite Domino Deo nostro. Et benedixit omnis ecclesia Domino Deo patrum suorum, et inclinaverunt se et adoraverunt Deum et deinde regem.”

    1 Chron. 29:20

  11. PghCath says:

    Way to make a good day better, Father! As I see it, a number of pitchers who threw no hitters early in their careers went on to throw perfect games later. (Cy Young, Jim Bunning, Sandy Koufax, and Randy Johnson come to mind).

    We still may be in “brick by brick” mode, but it seems the bricks are getting bigger.

  12. PAT says:

    “It is not a perfect game for our side, but it is a no hitter.”

    Okay, so no hits, but someone made it at least to first base? Further than first? Any runs scored?

    I guess if the Fishwrap will hate it, maybe it’s at least better than a tie?

  13. Jack007 says:

    Shall we just take a collective deep breath…?
    Life, and Holy Mother Church, will go on.
    Meanwhile, its nice to know our favorite Internet padre is “in the loop”.
    Good score, Fr. Z! This is an advantage. Normally you ask for some time to digest breaking news. Now you’ll have time for some careful thought and analysis. I for one will be much more interested in your take, than the text itself.

    Jack in KC

  14. Bryan Boyle says:

    @PghCath: Yeah, I’m thinking the bricks are about the size of cinder blocks right now.

    If Fr. Z says the Fishwrap/birdcage liner will be upset, that’s good enough for me. I’m sure the polyester will be melting off the backs of the minions over there as they overheat and explode in flames shooting out of the brimstone oozing from their fingertips.

  15. dans0622 says:

    Maybe there was a walk but then the next batter hit into a double play. Maybe the pitcher decided to back somebody off the plate and “accidentally” drilled him in the ribs….then picked him off first base.
    I wonder what the score was… just 1-0? 20-0?

  16. Ernesto Gonzalez says:

    A no hitter is great news. I just hope there were no balks!

  17. DWB says:

    dans0622, maybe a little “chin music”?

  18. trad catholic mom says:

    I can’t wait!

  19. Glen M says:

    Having recently endured a ‘no hitter’ against my Blue Jays, it will be very nice to be on the winning side of one on Friday. I’ll spend the next forty eight hours wondering what the ‘imperfection’ will be. Friday is also the feastday of St. Robert Bellarmine (in the pre-V2 calendar). He was a counter-revolutionary; hopefully this document will be likewise.

  20. pyrosapien says:

    @Pat

    Okay, so no hits, but someone made it at least to first base? Further than first? Any runs scored?

    Pat, a no hitter is a good thing when it’s for your side. It’s when a single pitcher (or several pitchers combined) don’t allow the other team to make it to base by hitting the ball. It almost guarantees a shutout victory for your team (meaning the other team scores no runs). It is possible however for the other team to get base runners with “walks” and/or “errors”.

    A “Perfect Game” is when the pitcher(s) allows no base runners at all. No hits, No Walks, No Errors.

    :-)

  21. tzard says:

    No comments on the name? I think the name is excellent and hints to good things.

  22. pyrosapien says:

    @Pat

    Well, after reading your post again I realized that I was mistaken in thinking you didn’t understand what a no hitter was. Sorry for the unnecessary instruction…. LOL could someone please give me reading lessons!!

  23. Prof. Basto says:

    I assume Pater and you guys are using baseball analogies, which is unfair to Fr. Z’s global audience.

    Given the international, worldwide fame of this blog, one would expect analogies to be made regarding sports that have a wider audience.

    As is, I’m left somewhat in the dark regarding what is meant by the analogies.

    In te, Domine, speravi. Non confundar in aeternum.

  24. Nathan says:

    Are there any good cricket analogies, so our bretheren in the UK know what we’re talking about?

    In Christ,

  25. The Astronomer says:

    It is sufficient for me to know that Fr Z says that the ‘fishwrap’ will hate this. Going to carefully peruse their site over the coming week to see any signs of an “impending nutty.”

  26. Nathan says:

    Prof. Basto, sorry for the culturally unique references. I “no-hitter” is a rare occurrence and one of the top achievements for a baseball pitcher. In our major leagues, there are less than 10 of these a year, and our sports shows will celebrate one of these.
    A perfect game is the ultimate achievement for a pitcher and they occur very rarely, usually less than once every ten years or so.

    An imperfect football (aka soccer) analogy would be “the Instruction is a shutout with no shots on goal, but it is not a shutout where the ball did not cross midfield.”

    In Christ,

  27. bruno says:

    “VATICAN CITY — After weeks of speculation, the Vatican press office announced the release dates of two documents that had the Catholic blogosphere abuzz: the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s circular letter to bishops’ conferences on preparing guidelines for dealing with the sexual abuse of minors by priests; and an instruction on implementing Pope Benedict XVI’s authorization of wider use of the so-called Tridentine Mass.”

    I didn’t get the date right, but the date of the date!

  28. jmhj5 says:

    The feast of Our Lady of Fatima…..let her be a big part of this……
    God’s Blessing!

  29. AJ says:

    I got the date right!

    Grazie Mille Santita for this wonderful birthday gift!

    Now, hearing that the fishwrap is going to throw a nutty out of the document is an even more promising note! Thanks Fr. Z!

  30. dcs says:

    The problem is that a no-hitter is not necessarily a shutout, nor even necessarily a win. There have been 271 no-hitters in major-league baseball since 1876; 24 of them have not been shutouts, and 2 of them have been losses. (That is only counting games in which the team that pitched the no-hitter pitched at least nine innings — there have been games lost in which only eight innings were pitched, or that were shortened for one reason or another.)

    But I think Fr. Z means to say that this is a big win for our side.

  31. Alan Aversa says:

    Laus tibi, Christe, hodie et semper!

  32. s i says:

    ah-HA! I was right about the 13th YIPPEE!!! Can’t wait – a no hitter…fishwrap will hate it……….yeah, I can’t wait!

  33. mhinchi says:

    Huh, I thought the logic behind the motu propio in the first place was unity and to have the two rites ‘inform each other’.

    Now, we’re on a blog talking about who will hate this, and who has won…and who is on what side.

    Kind of interesting.

  34. Bryan Boyle says:

    And, as a reminder…let’s not forget that this will be the 30th (!) anniversary of the attempt on Blessed John Paul II’s life, either. I would like to think that he is smiling down on us, as the movement he put in motion is slowly, inexorably, progressing.

    May 13 is turning out to be a nexus of divine revelation in our time.

    Our good Holy Father, in contradiction to Gresham’s Law as applied to our Faith, is driving that spear of his “Marshall Plan” forward. Deo gratias.

  35. Glen M says:

    Prof Basto, are you not familiar with the World Series?

    (kidding..I know the history)

  36. thebigweave says:

    I TOLD you this would come out today, my birthday, I guess I was half right!

  37. Henry Edwards says:

    Nathan,

    Us folks don’t need no cricket analogies. For out global audience:

    – “The Fishwrap will hate it” is almost as good as it ordinarily gets.
    – A “no hitter” is as good as it ordinarily gets.
    – A “perfect game” is better than it ordinarily gets.

  38. JamesA says:

    Te Deum Laudamus !
    Thank you, Father, for the heads up. Looking forward to your analysis.
    I guess those of us who picked the Feast of Our Lady of Fatima were correct, huh ? ;- )
    Our Lady, pray for us !

  39. Nathan says:

    Henry, that is great! I defer once again to your wit and wisdom…

    In Christ,

  40. Deo volente says:

    The Holy Father gave up a couple of walks. It happens to the best. On the other hand, perhaps he struck out the side with 9 pitches in the ninth. That would be an awesome instruction indeed!

  41. crjs1 says:

    Very excited, but very confused as a Scot with the baseball analogy!!! Think I get it now, a ‘no-hitter’ is a good thing!!

  42. jasoncpetty says:

    . . . I thought the logic behind the motu propio in the first place was unity and to have the two [forms] ‘inform each other’.

    Well, duh, we have to say that, but we all hope it’s a one-way street. Just kidding.

    In all honesty, the point is that the NCR will hate this precisely because they are faithful to neither form, but rather are faithful to a distorted vision of one of those forms and absolutely opposed to any vision of the other outside of liturgical history books.

  43. Rich says:

    mhinchi,
    Let alone being concerned with whether the two rites “inform each other” in unity, there are those who wish that the older rite would have remained flushed down the memory hole. It makes sense then to say that there are differences between those who would like to see the two rights subsist, and those who would like the older rite to just go away.

  44. nanetteclaret says:

    Rich -
    And those of us who would like to see the newer rite just go away!

  45. pelerin says:

    I guessed that the expression used was a baseball expression so was none the wiser until I read the comments. I think I know what it means now although if it had been a cricket or football analogy I would have been none the wiser either. I did guess the right date though not really a guess as it seemed an obvious day to choose.

  46. John V says:

    @dcs
    Interesting stats. I feel obligated to make reference to what has been called the greatest game ever pitched, in which Harvey Haddix threw twelve perfect innings for the Pittsburgh Pirates against the Milwaukee Braves, only to lose 1-0 in the 13th following an error, an intentional walk [thus, at that point, still a no-hitter], and a ball hit over the fence that was recorded as a double because the batter passed the runner ahead of him (Hank Aaron, who mistakenly believed the ball had bounced over the fence, thus ending the game on a book-rule double, and went straight to the dugout after touching second base).

  47. John V: Yes. It is possible to lose a no-hitter. It is rarer than hen’s teeth, but it has been done. Much will depend on the PCED.

  48. Joseph-Mary says:

    I am encouraged by the advanced good news.

  49. inara says:

    on the feast of Fatima at NOON, no less…perfect!

  50. Carolina Geo says:

    To placate those who are clamoring for a football analogy: it’s like holding the opposing team to no touchdowns, although they might have a couple of field goal attempts. Oh, and no interceptions thrown either.

    :-P

  51. Iowander says:

    Apparently the analogy is good for building suspense. Is it wrong of me to hope that the only base runners given up were because of hit batsmen? Also, I’m trying to decide if an “error” would be a good or bad thing…

  52. Vox clamantis in deserto says:

    > An imperfect football (aka soccer) analogy would be “the Instruction is a shutout with no
    > shots on goal, but it is not a shutout where the ball did not cross midfield.”

    Thanks, Nathan, that’s better. :-) You mean something like a “normal” FC Barcelona match? :-)

    So…in the 60s our opponent began to play unfair. Our head coach was confused and mostly didn’t react correctly. The next coach was much more promising, but the vis maior decided just after a month that he was more needed somewhere higher in the club structure. He was replaced by another one, young and…yes, original. Our team did not play a spectacular football under him, but he did his best (although not without mistakes) to avoid a relegation – and he succeeded. And, what is equally important, he brought up many, really many very good young players. He remained a coach for a very long time, and he refused to resign when he got old and when the opponent intrigued against him. He persuaded a lot of supporters not to leave, although many of those who remained were not (and still are not) fully identified with the club. He became a legend, and I hope he will soon be introduced into the Hall of Fame.
    Now we have had a new coach for the six years. He prefers a different style, and many of the players brought up under the previous coach accept it. As they are becoming playmakers, the new style gets more and more effective. In fact, the preferred old-fashioned style of the current coach is wonderful – he understands that a game must be played (and not danced or performed or whatever). Nobody (except for a few old guys who didn’t catch the point, neither in a match nor in understanding the tactics) speaks of a relegation anymore. We have higher goals – to renew the forgotten glory of the club. It will probably take years, but we are heading in the right direction.

    And now, it seems we are going to win another very important match!

  53. Re: the quote from David above… There’s a certain soccer/football style called “giant killing”. :)

    (And yes, about all I know about soccer is from watching that anime last year. Don’t mock me!)

  54. James Joseph says:

    The only joy I have is kneeling at an altar rail.

  55. Andy Milam says:

    If it’s a no hitter, I’ll take it….

    Anything which liberalizes the EF more, I’m all for it….

  56. jflare says:

    Now that’s a new one: Correcting my understanding of baseball from a Catholic blog.

    I am now quite interested in hearing many more analogies to soccer. My education appears somewhat deficient…

  57. Huh, I thought the logic behind the motu propio in the first place was unity and to have the two rites ‘inform each other’. Now, we’re on a blog talking about who will hate this, and who has won…and who is on what side. Kind of interesting.

    The ultimate logic of the motu proprio is the same as any other weapon in the spiritual combat: to vanquish the enemies of the Church.

  58. Dear Fr. Z (Father, bless!):

    Thank you for giving us a ‘heads up’ as regards what is going on.

    Thank you, also, for keeping the confidences which enable you to obtain this advance knowledge. I am quite happy to wait until you are able to present this information.

    And, I believe that a Deo Gratias is in order, that we have such estimable websites as yours now. I remember the day when the only ones who were able to publish were the National Catholic Fishwrap. May God be praised that such days are now long gone.

  59. thereseb says:

    Life is too short for this little englander to learn baseball terminology from the combox. Are you trying to say it is bishop-proof?

  60. MichaelJ says:

    Huh, I thought the logic behind the motu propio in the first place was unity and to have the two rites ‘inform each other’

    I just re-read the Holy Father’s accompanying letter (on the EWTN website) and can find no hint of desire that the two rites “inform each other”. Unity, most definitely, but nothing even remotely suggesting that the Holy Father desires either ( or both) rites to change. Where does this speculation come from?

  61. Mundabor says:

    “No hitter” doesn’t seem very encouraging, but if damage is avoided we will at least be able to wait for better times without excessive fears.

    Mundabor

  62. frdanbecker says:

    A perfect game with 27 swinging strikeouts would be the universal supression of the OF in favor of the EF.

  63. Mundabor: Not encouraging? Do you jest?

    This is why I was looking for Cricket analogies to a no-hitter.

    Look at it this way. A no hitter would be sort of like a bowler in a cricket match taking all ten wickets, though not in both innings of a test match. Taking all ten in both of two innings would be something like a perfect game in baseball.

  64. frdanbecker: A perfect game with 27 swinging strikeouts would be the universal supression of the OF in favor of the EF.

    Or… perhaps – at least from one perspective – a perfect game on only 27 pitches? But I like the 27 straight K’s. Two records.

  65. dans0622 says:

    FrDanBecker,
    A “universal supression” seems like 27 bean balls to me. One, maybe two, serve a purpose. After that, dugouts will empty and a riot is sure to break out.

  66. amenamen says:

    No wonder some people are afraid.

    In the British navy, “to let the cat out of the bag” had a particular meaning. It meant that someone was about to be punished. They would take the cat o’ nine tails out of its red baize bag when someone was going to be flogged. On deck there was enough room to swing a cat.
    http://bluejacket.com/sea-service_discipline-flogging.htm
    Maybe a “no hitter” would be a disappointment?

  67. amenamen: Fine. Don’t trust me.

  68. Henry Edwards says:

    MichaelJ: Where does this speculation come from?

    google “wdtprs ratzinger 2003 letter older rite”

    I believe, though, that in the long term the Roman Church must have again a single Roman rite. The existence of two official rites is for bishops and priests difficult to “manage” in practice. The Roman rite of the future should be a single rite, celebrated in Latin or in the vernacular, but standing completely in the tradition of the rite that has been handed down. It could take up some new elements which have proven themselves, like new feasts, some new prefaces in the Mass, an expanded lectionary – more choice than earlier, but not too much, – an “oratio fidelium”, i.e., a fixed litany of intercessions following the Oremus before the offertory where it had its place earlier.

    Father Z explains:

    So, what is envisioned here is a kind of tertium quid that slowly but surely there would emerge over time from the “dialogue” between the older form and the newer form. Ratzinger is saying that the older, traditional form must be the basis, the starting point, for any eventual single Roman Rite, not the Novus Ordo. The Novus Ordo is perceived as a kind of bump in the road, perhaps, in the long route of the liturgy’s development. But there are points in the Novus Ordo which might be useful… perhaps we be useful… over time. Not right away…. eventually, as a matter of organic growth, not artificial imposition. The elements he suggests as useful are also in part ancient.

  69. amenamen says:

    Fr Z: I only meant that it would be a disappointment if no one gets flogged. [I don't see how someone being flogged is a matter for celebration. I am not at the stage of Dante in the Inferno where he can walk on the faces of the damned and be satisfied. Perhaps I am too soft.]

  70. Rob Cartusciello says:

    Hooray for the Feast of Our Lady of Fatima.

    Boo for not going with my hope for the new instruction’s title: No More Mr. Nice Guy…

  71. Centristian says:

    “I just re-read the Holy Father’s accompanying letter (on the EWTN website) and can find no hint of desire that the two rites “inform each other”. Unity, most definitely, but nothing even remotely suggesting that the Holy Father desires either ( or both) rites to change. Where does this speculation come from?”

    Well, apart from the quotes that Henry Edwards has provided, one could look to the Pope’s own liturgical leadership for evidence. When he celebrates Mass, now, he celebrates Mass according to its ordinary form, but in the way that Mass was celebrated when the extraordinary form was ordinary. He employs Latin and traditional altar appointments and vestments; his manner of celebration certainly takes its cues from the traditional Latin liturgy, and not from the more modern forms. He could go further in that regard, in my opinion (he could celebrate ad orientem, for one thing, at Masses outside of St. Peter’s), but certainly, one can see what he has in mind.

    I’ve often expressed my annoyance that some bishops and priests who celebrate both forms of Mass seem to reserve all the traditional “goodies” for the extraordinary form, allowing their celebrations of the ordinary form to be somewhat less traditional. I would that people would get out of the habit of acting as though only the extraordinary form may be celebrated with full traditional solemnity.

    If you’re a cardinal or a bishop who celebrates both forms and it is your habit to arrive at the celebration of the extraordinary form of Mass wearing a cappa magna, why would you not do that when celebrating the ordinary form of Mass, too? If you’ll wear all the traditionaly-styled vestments for the extraordinary form, why not form the ordinary form, too? If you use Latin for the ’62, why not use it when celebrating the current Missal, as well?

    Pope Benedict XVI doesn’t make that mistake. He has his altars appointed in the traditional way for the ordinary form. He wears fiddleback chasubles and other exquisite vestments when celebrating the ordinary form. He uses Latin when celebrating the ordinary form. There is Latin chant and polyphony when the Pope celebrates the ordinary form.

    The Pope’s manner of celebrating the ordinary form of Mass is certainly influenced by the manner in which Mass was always celebrated when the 1962 Missal was current, there is no question. And I think he is providing an example for the rest of the clergy when he does what he does.

  72. BobP says:

    >Or… perhaps – at least from one perspective – a perfect game on only 27 pitches? But I like the 27 straight K’s. Two records.<

    Reminds me of a story I read about two Yankee minor league teams playing one another. One of the scouts reported to the major league organization that "This ___ guy pitched the game of his life. Twenty-seven stikeouts and only one batter hit as much as a foul ball." The guy at the other end then responded: "Bring up the guy who hit the foul ball. We need hitters." :)

  73. MissOH says:

    My initial thought when Fr. Z posted a couple of days ago, was that the Feast of Our Lady of Fatima would be a great day, but when I realized it was this Friday I did not dare hope it would be so soon.

    Thanks for all of the explanations of a no hitter and perfect game. Since I come from a football & basketball family my grasp of the fine points of baseball are somewhat lacking.

  74. Young Canadian RC Male says:

    I’ve been out for a while so I haven’t had time to respond. I just wished Fr. Z. worded it 100% positively or used his famous “brick by brick” expression instead of adding a negative to the sentence. [I call 'em as I see 'em.] Yeah I’m a melancholic according to the 4 fluids personality test and tend to make things more negative than they seem and can panic easily with negatives. Ok 10% sounds like a deal.

    Is this follow up going to have the power it is supposed to? Regardless, GO SP and Universae Ecclesiae! WOOO TLM!!!!

  75. Mundabor says:

    Thanks Father,

    clearly my knowledge of baseball must be improved! ;) [Since baseball reflects divine mysteries and it is the game God loves most, I warmly agree.]

    I’ll wait for Friday, then, with much enthusiasm.

    I like the day by the way, 13th of May is certainly not a coincidence…. [Let's call it Divine Providence.]

    Mundabor

  76. Gaz says:

    Where is Julian Assange when you need him?

    (I maintain that the reason he ended up in so much trouble was that he started publishing the new translation of the Missal).

  77. Glen M says:

    Young Canadian RC Male, you remind me of some of my fellow Tiger Cats fans who are perpetually pessimistic.

    There, a football reference. Three down football for U.S. readers. You know…the more entertaining kind?

    If Father Z says the Instruction is like throwing a no-hitter we should be giving thanks, and maybe give him a Gatorade cyber-shower Friday morning.

  78. Dr. Eric says:

    Fr. Z seems to be hinting at an outstanding defensive game with the new Instruction coming out on Friday.

    In American football wouldn’t that be a shutout where the defense forces a three and out situation on every series of downs? And in case of a perfect game in baseball, in American football it would be like a turnover caused by the defense (interception or fumble recovery) on every series of downs. [BUT!... BUT!... the defensive squad can score. They suddenly become the offensive team when they score a safety or run back an interception. Furthermore, pitcher in baseball who gets a no-hitter can still lose the game. He could, for example, walk batters and walk in runs.]

  79. MichaelJ says:

    Thanks Henry and Centristan. I can certainly agree that in 2003, four years before the Motu Proprio, and about 2 years befor he became Pope, His Holiness certainly believed that there should be one Roman Rite. Whether he continues to believe this now that he is Pope, I do not know.

    I can also agree that his celebration of the Ordinary Form indicates that he believes that how it is commonly currently celebrated is lacking. [Right.] Again, I do not know if this is because he thinks that the OF must “borrow” elements from the EF because they are not present or if those elements were, and should have been, present from the beginning.

    Neither of these, though, indicate in any way that the intent (or one of the intents) of his Motu Proprio Summorium Pontificum was to get the two forms to influence each other. [I call it a "gravitational pull".]

    This may seem pedantic, but I firmly believe that attributing motives to the Holy Father above and beyond what he has so clearly statedis a dangerous game.

  80. Boanerges says:

    YESSSSS!!!! I called it! Feast of Our Lady of Fatima (and my birthday) Sorry, I’m excited by little things…

  81. Little things … like mustard seeds or a small band of disciples… can become big things.

  82. friarpark says:

    Just the fact that the Fishwrap won’t like it encourages me greatly.

  83. Thanks for the encouraging analogy Father! I can’t wait!

  84. Henry Edwards says:

    MichaelJ,

    Having at one time spent a good deal of time studying the mathematical works of Sir Isaac Newton — in their original Latin, even — I continue to find that the concept of mutual gravitational attraction illuminates by analogy many areas beyond the physical sciences.

    And not only qualitatively, but also quantitatively. Newton might have thought of an apple, but with a more refined and theological view let us think instead of a baseball. If it is thrown straight upwards, it and the earth exert upon each other a mutual gravitational attraction, indeed, by equal and opposite forces acting upon each other. As a result, the motion of the baseball is changed greatly, while the motion of the earth is changed only infinitesimally.

    Now replace the baseball and the earth in this model of mutual gravitational attraction by the OF and the EF, in whichever order seems most apt, and think of the relative magnitudes of their effects on each other. Hmm . . . I wonder how much Pope Benedict knows about gravitation and baseball. [Save the Liturgy, Save the World.]

  85. fiveleavesleft says:

    Nathan, and any other Brits.. here is my take on a rough cricket equivalent:
    A no hitter is like forcing the follow on in a test match – it happens occasionally and almost always means winning but as Ian Botham demonstrated in the 1981 ashes series there can be a reversal of fortune.

    A perfect game in my opinion would be the equivalent of all out for 0.
    The minimum pitches perfect game would be equivalent to all out for 0 in 1.4 overs.
    Father Z – the only thing about one bowler taking all ten wickets is it doesnt take into account the batting team’s run rate – . Losing in that situation would be quite ordinary, whereas losing having pitched a no hitter or forced a follow on, would be rather extraordinary.. ( and poor form).

  86. muckemdanno says:

    Plenty of pitchers have thrown a no-hitter but lost the game.

  87. muckemdanno says:

    I don’t believe a “no-hitter” will ever happen in this area, no matter how great a “pitcher” we have.

    Of course, I see through the jaded lens of being a Mets fan and a “traditionalist.” [A double whammy.]

  88. notredame1208 says:

    I am really excited about this. I just hope that the Holy Father explains the use of the term “Extraordinary” in connection with this form of Mass. I really see that as pivotal in the reform of the reform.

  89. Alan Aversa says:

    Will the press conference be streamed online? [It's baby steps for the Holy See and tech, I'm afraid.]
    Thanks

  90. Alan Aversa says:

    By the way, the Oxford English Dictionary defines “no-hitter” as:

    Baseball.
    A game (or occas. part of a game) in which a pitcher allows no base hits.

  91. Chris in Maryland says:

    B16 is the Energizer Bunny!! [This is a dicasterial, not papal, document. But Benedict approved it in the version he accepted. Only a papal document can contravene it.]

  92. chironomo says:

    Thank you Fr. Z for your information (and witholding of speculation) about this document. You are right about the NCR crowd going berzerk… certain other blogs are currently addressing this announcement with some of the most outrageous comments… they truly hate SP, they hate this upcoming Instruction, and they just cannot stand this Pope. There will be ‘wailing and gnashing of teeth” this Friday…be assured.

  93. Fr. Z.,
    Thank you so much for your updates and positive attitude on this topic. Will there be any direct implication for the SSPX? This is probably too specific a question. Can we get a baseball analogy? Is the instruction going to do an intential walk on the SSPX or will they be pitched to? Do they even come up to the plate?

  94. LauraL says:

    reading the comments here is great entertainment and a highly distracting… er, diverting! – occupation. I’ll be waiting until tomorrow to see what our beloved German Shepherd has to say – and I do hope the fishwrap will be disgusted because I feel as if I’m starving for lack of …

    or maybe it’s my own immaturity that causes me such impatience when I’m blessed to live in an area where the Mass in the Ordinary Form is celebrated decently and without glaringly obvious abuses, and those few that do occur are accidental (the priests at the chapel where I play are in their 80s, after all, and sometimes they have “senior moments”).

    But do tell us, Father, if you know, what is happening to the promise that our hymnody is going to be reviewed? I don’t know how much longer I can stand the coffeehouse dregs I’m instructed to play, week in and week out….)

  95. Centristian says:

    “The Vatican must be aware of the coincidence with the anniversary of the first apparition of Our Lady at Fatima, Portugal. I see this as a quiet gesture toward traditional Catholics and, perhaps, Our Lady herself.”

    As I read Summorum Pontificum, I see a document that allows greater freedom to the clergy to celebrate Mass using the 1962 Missal. The point of Universae Ecclesiae, I understand, is to offer some clarifications to (and possibly reinforcements of) the provisions of Summorum Pontificum.

    I was minded to ignore the Fatima stuff that some have posted, but because I’m now seeing a number of people reacting to news of this instruction with remarks about the clear connections between the instruction and Fatima, I have to ask: what is that about? Even before we got the date, people were predicting it would be published on the 13th because the 13th is the feast of Our Lady of Fatima.

    But what, I wonder, has Our Lady of Fatima got to do with an instruction on Summorum Pontificum? One individual commenting (at another blog) went so far as to say, “The link with Fatima is obvious…” It is? What in the Fatima narrative makes this connection so obvious?

    Apart from the coincidence of the date, what have the Fatima events got to do with the publication of the instruction on Summorum Pontificum in the year 2011? What is the “obvious” connection that I am completely missing? I don’t remember any buzz at the time that there was obviously a connection between Summorum Pontificum, itself, and Fatima, but somehow there is between the subsequent instruction on Summorum Pontificum and Fatima?

    Also, what has Our Lady of Fatima got to do with traditional Catholicism? I’m completely missing the connection between the one thing and the other.

  96. chonak says:

    Isn’t May 13 also Our Lady of the Blessed Sacrament? That seems more apposite than O.L. of Fatima.

  97. Brian K says:

    But what, I wonder, has Our Lady of Fatima got to do with an instruction on Summorum Pontificum?

    “I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul. …”
    –Msgr. Eugene Pacelli, the future Pope Pius XII

  98. Centristian says:

    “I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul. …”
    –Msgr. Eugene Pacelli, the future Pope Pius XII

    Still don’t get it. Is that quote absolutely verifiable, incidentally? There’s no citiation and it sounds improbable.

  99. Centristian says:

    Okay, a quick jog around the internet with that quote tells me what I need to know about where this supposed Fatima connection is coming from. Never mind, never mind, never mind. I rescind my query.

  100. Brian K says:

    Okay, a quick jog around the internet with that quote tells me what I need to know about where this supposed Fatima connection is coming from. Never mind, never mind, never mind.

    And despite the dismissal of the Fatima question in your mind, the Holy Father chose to publish this on May 13th, the feast of Our Lady of Fatima. Maybe he puts more into the connection than you do.

  101. The point is simple: Our Lady is the Mother of all of us in the Church, so it’s fitting to entrust big momentous things in the Church’s history to her care. Also, Fatima’s dates are now all associated with Mary saving the life of Blessed Pope John Paul II, so the current pope is humbly asking for help also. (Though the fact that it’s St. Servatius’ feastday, an “eisheiligen”, makes for a good joke about frost being over.)

    These feastday things aren’t going to be super deep and mysterious. Our pope is subtle sometimes, but he’s a very simple man in this kind of faith matter.

  102. Iowa Mike says:

    I can’t wait….I can’t wait….oooooooooooooo ANYTHING that annoys the crowd at fishwrap I must have…..I can’t, I can’t….. ooooo doggie :) :) ANNOY fishwrap…….oooo doggie.

  103. robtbrown says:

    Centristian,

    Notwithstanding whether or not the quote is verifiable, there was a lot of pressure on the Church in the early 20th century to Protestantize the priesthood, the Eucharist, and the liturgy. Pius XII saw a connection between that and Fatima.

  104. Henry Edwards says:

    Dr. Brown: there was a lot of pressure on the Church in the early 20th century to Protestantize the priesthood, the Eucharist, and the liturgy.

    Which certainly happened, in spades, later in the 20th century. Hmm . . . Not really being into this stuff, I wonder the prediction of this post-Vatican II calamity was the famous “third secret” that some are so fascinated by.

    But, of course, if we’re really serious about all this, perhaps we should credit Pope Leo XIII’s vision of these 20th century travails that allegedly led him to publish in 1888 his (long) prayer to St. Michael..

  105. nanetteclaret says:

    And then the Prayer to St. Michael after Mass was removed in the OF. Not surprising…

  106. Centristian says:

    “And then the Prayer to St. Michael after Mass was removed in the OF. Not surprising…”

    The Leonine Prayers were discontinued for use after Low Mass (they were never recited after any other form of Mass). There isn’t an ordinary form of Low Mass. Therefore it is more correct to say that they were removed in the EF.

    The connections being made between OL of Fatima and this new instruction are really stretching things, by the way, and that’s all I’m going to say.

    “ANYTHING that annoys the crowd at fishwrap…”

    That I can say “amen” to.

  107. robtbrown says:

    Henry Edwards says:

    Dr. Brown: there was a lot of pressure on the Church in the early 20th century to Protestantize the priesthood, the Eucharist, and the liturgy.

    Which certainly happened, in spades, later in the 20th century. Hmm . . . Not really being into this stuff, I wonder the prediction of this post-Vatican II calamity was the famous “third secret” that some are so fascinated by.

    I noted a few days ago that the text of the 3rd Secret published by the Vatican is written in prophetic language, figurative and symbolic. Although it may refer to future events, it is not a prediction. And so the image of the big city in ruins could very well refer to a Christendom that had become faithless and immoral.

    But, of course, if we’re really serious about all this, perhaps we should credit Pope Leo XIII’s vision of these 20th century travails that allegedly led him to publish in 1888 his (long) prayer to St. Michael..

    Those prayers after mass originally existed because of Roman Question, following the loss of the papal states. After the Lateran Treaty in 1929 , the intention was changed to be the conversion of Russia.

  108. robtbrown says:

    Centristian says:

    The connections being made between OL of Fatima and this new instruction are really stretching things, by the way, and that’s all I’m going to say.

    Important documents, papal or curial, are generally not written to be published on a certain feast. I doubt that when work began on Ecclesiae Universae, the intention was for that it be released on May 13th.

    On the other hand, when it was almost finished, and they stated considering the release date, I’m sure they noticed the co-incidence with anniversary of the first apparition at Fatima (May 13, 1917), attributing the timing to Divine Providence.

    BTW, Pius XII was ordained an archbishop on May 13, 1917.

  109. Centristian says:

    “Those prayers after mass originally existed because of Roman Question, following the loss of the papal states. After the Lateran Treaty in 1929 , the intention was changed to be the conversion of Russia.”

    My understanding is that the last part of that, while often repeated, is actually mythical. Following the concordat with Italy that defined the territory of the Vatican state, Pope Pius XI requested that the prayers recited after private Low Mass (formerly for the intention of the territorial independence of the Holy See) be recited for a new intention: the religious liberty of Catholic Christians living in Russia.

    Pius did not request that the prayers be recited for the “conversion of Russia.” That notion is a spontaneous manifestation of the paranoia and anti-Communist hysteria of the Cold War era tied up with a popular reaction to the Fatima phenomenon; it is not the historical truth, however. It’s just an enduring legend, a popular ghost.