Card. Burke on Summorum Pontificum and worship as the key to reform. Fr. Z rants and agrees.

His Eminence Raymond Card. Burke, in this video interview with Raymond Arroyo of EWTN, in commenting on Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum speaks to something that I have been harping on incessantly for years.

I have been saying that we must revitalize our Catholic identity. We cannot do that if we don’t know who we are. We cannot know who we are or be who we are called to be without a proper liturgical worship of God. For there to be any renewal of the Church, a new evangelization – call it what you will – we must first of all revitalize our worship of God. This is why Summorum Pontificum was such a great gift. We cannot revitalize our worship without striving to reestablish continuity with how Catholic have always worshiped and brought petitions to God.

Here is my transcription of a key part of Card. Burke’s interview:

What the Holy Father… and I’m just reflecting now on what he himself has written… is tyring to communicate is the continuity of our Catholic faith down the centuries. Sadly, what happened after the Second Vatican Council was – an idea developed that we were forming a new Church and that everything that had gone on since the time of the first Chrsitians was all retrograde and in some way a defection from what was supposedly this Church of freedom and truth and joy. And what happened in the process is that the tradition was lost, especially in the sacred liturgy. There were many abuses and even the reform of the rite itself was so radical that people didn’t see sometimes how there was a continuity between what’s now called the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite and the Extraordinary Form. The Holy Father … and this is important not just for the sacred liturgy but is important for every aspect of our life … we can see it in catechesis, we can see it the moral life, we can see it in family life, religious life, priestly formation – no need to go into all of that. The Holy Father rightly has put his focus on the sarcred liturgy because this is the highest and most perfect expression of our life in Christ. And if we can reestablish in the celebration of the sacred liturgy a strong sense of the worship of God as God wants it, not my creation, but the gift of God, that sacred worship has been handed down to us in the Church through the centuries, we’ll get a lot of other things straightened out at the same time. It has to start with the sacred liturgy.

Hear the rest of His Eminence’s comments in the actual interview. There’s more.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Benedict XVI, Brick by Brick, Fr. Z KUDOS, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, The future and our choices and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

50 Responses to Card. Burke on Summorum Pontificum and worship as the key to reform. Fr. Z rants and agrees.

  1. Charliebird says:

    This is great reiteration of what the Holy Father is doing.

    HOWEVER…Arroyo cuts off the Cardinal (politely) during what could have been a very enlightening comment. The mutual enrichment of the two Forms, etc. The Cardinal was saying that the new [corrected, of course] translation was “a wonderful step forward, but there are other……” OTHER?! Was he about to allude to more things that a not-too-distant reform of the Novus Ordo may entail?! Does anyone know more?

  2. Tradster says:

    Are the pope, et al finally admitting that there really were ruptures after all? If so, it’s game, set, match for the SSPX! Then by rights there should be no further hold-up with accepting it back into full communion without all the silly, insulting, and discriminatory conditions and restrictions.

  3. St. Rafael says:

    And if we can reestablish in the celebration of the sacred liturgy a strong sense of the worship of God as God wants it, not my creation, but the gift of God, that sacred worship has been handed down to us in the Church through the centuries, we’ll get a lot of other things straightened out at the same time. It has to start with the sacred liturgy.

    The thing is that none of this will happen unless the Pope and the Vatican mandate certain changes. They just can’t lead by example or just propose an alternative. They have to mandate uniformity by force of law. For example, one of the biggest reforms needed in the liturgy is the restoration Ad Orientem worship. It was how the Mass was celebrated for centuries upon centuries as the tradition of the Church. The Missal of Paul VI even presumes Ad Orientem worship.

    Every priest must be forced to celebrate Mass Ad Orientem. It must be mandated as the official posture of the priest for Mass. The CDW or the Pope himself must mandate it by force of Church law. This is where administration and discipline come in. Teaching alone is not enough.

  4. Great comments by His Eminence. Unfortunately in many places, I still see the introductory speech, and the ab libbing of the introduction to the penitential rite.

  5. St. Rafael says:

    I have heard the Pope, Cardinal Burke, and many other bishops and cardinals talk about reform in the liturgy for years. however, that is the problem. I’ve grown kind of tired and sick of it over the years. All the hierarchy ever does is talk. Where is the action? Year after year goes by and they are always talking and talking about the need for reform, the need for restoration, and how things need to change, but they never actually mandate anything or force anything to change. There are a lot of things the Vatican has control over and can force on bishops in the liturgy. Where is the actual reforms? Where is the use of Church discipline? Where are all the actions to go with the words and speeches?

    The Pope, CDW, and the Vatican can do something about a new Roman Missal that can abrogate Paul VI. They can make reforms to the existing liturgy in the areas of Ad Orientem, Communion in the Hand, kneeling, altar rails, EMHC, altar girls, Latin in the Canon of the Mass, and other such things that can be forced and mandated.

    Benedict XVI has been Pope for 7 years and we still have altar girls. Altar girls. We can’t get rid of altar girls after 7 years.

  6. moconnor says:

    To get rid of them you have face down “altar girl mothers.” No mission to dangerous lands is more frightening to a priest.

  7. Joseph-Mary says:

    We had our FIRST Extraordinary Form of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass this morning, Monday August 13th!!! Thanks be to God our high altar was never torn out and today it was used, perhaps for the first time in over 40 years, by our new young priest who had taken it upon himself to learn this liturgy while in seminary. I had to hold back tears. We had a choir and it was glorious!

    Do not know when the next TLM at the parish will be, however. 9am on a Monday morning on the priest’s day off is not the most ideal of times although about 60 people came. It needs to somehow be worked into the normal Mass schedule of the parish….and we have two daily Mass every weekday so a way hopefully will be found to do this.

  8. @Tradster,

    You ask:

    Are the pope, et al finally admitting that there really were ruptures after all?

    My understanding, which comes only from what I read, and that mostly on this blog, of the issues of concern to the SSPX, is that they question certain teachings of the Second Vatican Council, not whether there were ruptures. Someone who knows much more about the positions of the SSPX and what they hold to be invalid from Vatican II would need to weigh in on the teachings. The fact that there were ruptures is pretty clearly the case. The rupture in the liturgy was obvious to me (even when I was Episcopalian) that it acted as a barrier to my approach to Catholicism just through the loss of sacred music. That was very much a personal issue, one arising from my need for access to sacred music within the liturgy to help me get outside of my intellect and open myself up to worshiping God.

    So, absent a fraternal correction from someone far more knowledgeable than myself on the subject (which I hereby invite), I suspect that simply recognizing that there were liturgical ruptures following the Council does not likely resolve the issues still separating the SSPX from unity with Rome.

    I hope that provides some help.

    Pax et bonum,
    Keith Töpfer

  9. Speravi says:

    The effect would be felt much more quickly if they were actually teaching it in the seminaries. Correct me if I am wrong, but exposure to the TLM in most seminaries is still very very limited. Is it not still possible, in most seminaries, for a young man to pass through 8 years of seminary formation without every having attended a single TLM? How many seminaries are actually offering substantial training in, and exposure to, the TLM? Many seminarians are very docile. They don’t want to be liberal, but if they sense that their rector or bishop so much as personally dislike the TLM, they are likely to keep their distance. Many laity do not read Catholic news. If priests don’t get interested, many won’t even hear about the significance of Summorum Pontificum.

  10. tgarcia2 says:

    moconnor is right St. Rafael. The church has it’s own politics and that includes parishes. You do NOT want to have people “kill” (via the collection plate and numbers) a parish by banning alter girls.

    The Church moves VERY slow, best to remember that ;)

  11. jhayes says:

    We had our FIRST Extraordinary Form of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass this morning, Monday August 13th!!! Thanks be to God our high altar was never torn out and today it was used, perhaps for the first time in over 40 years

    Is there a free-standing altar in front of it and, if so, was that free-standing altar removed for this occasion?

    There are not supposed to be two altars for the celebration of Mass in a sanctuary. It is allowable to keep the old altar if it is architecturally significant, but if there is a free-standing altar, that is where all masses are required to be celebrated, whether ad-orientem or versus populum.

  12. jhayes says:

    Sorry, forgot to close the italics.

  13. St. Rafael says:

    The problem with Summorum Pontificum and the TLM is that the bishops are opposed to it and they thwart any attempt to implement it. After 5 years, it’s still being effectively opposed and ignored. Seminarians are not being taught the TLM and they have to go out of their way to learn it on their own. Summorum Pontificum is clear that a priest does not need a bishop’s permission for the TLM, yet the bishops have set all sorts of roadblocks and ways to persecute priests who try to implement Summorum Pontificum.

    The only solution is that bishops must be suspended and removed from office over their abuses and disobedience to the Holy Father and Summorum Pontificum. Let’s see what happens with all this opposition from the bishops once a couple of bishops are suspended, removed, and replaced over the issue of Summorum Pontificum.

  14. jacobi says:

    “no need to go into all that”

    The Cardinal is being very tactful here. If the Pauline Mass of 1969 was a liturgical rupture, then what happened to the Mass in the next two decades amounts to a liturgical chasm, and produced the heterodoxy now prevalent , or even normal, amongst Catholics. And let’s face it, this did not happen by chance. There were people planning and directing events.

    All this highlights the need for the “Reform of the Reform” of the Novus Ordo and the re-establishment alongside it of the traditional Catholic Mass of St Pius V, the Tridentine Mass which all you priests should remember is a rite co-equal with that of the Novus Ordo, and for which you do not need permission to say!

  15. St. Rafael says:

    To get rid of them you have face down “altar girl mothers.” No mission to dangerous lands is more frightening to a priest

    @moconnor

    When we had real men in the priesthood that wouldn’t have been a problem. They would have told these mothers to get lost. Now we have all these effeminate men and Homosexuals in the priesthood. Real priests would show these women to the door and would tell all the other feminists in the Church to get lost and grow up.

    The pre-Vatican II priests of the American church commanded their parishes and everyone was in holy awe of them. The laity knew their place and these pastors and priests where in charge of their parishes. Men used to run society and men used to be the head of their families. Priests used to run their parishes and they weren’t afraid of telling the laity the truth in sermons and had absolute control over the decisions of the liturgy and parish life.

  16. JARay says:

    Last Wednesday was the feast of St. Mary of the Cross, Mackillop. our first canonised saint here in Australia. The parish school, adjacent to the church, brought most of the children in for the 9-00 am Mass. There was a Gloria and a Creed as well as the regular responses at Mass. It was abundantly apparent to all that the children did not know the Gloria, the Apostles Creed or the responses at Mass. I commented to one of the teachers on the lack of knowledge of the children of these prayers and I asked him what they were doing at the school to teach them these prayers. His reply was that since the children didn’t come to Mass anyway except at school Masses that was the reason for their lack of knowledge. He then complained to the headteacher about me criticising the children, who then complained to the priest about my criticism of the children! The whole point was that I was criticising the school itself and its complete lack of purpose in teaching prayers to the children.

  17. Supertradmum says:

    I have just been in a conversation with priests who are against the Tridentine Mass, and two laymen who are as well. These men and women see the TLM as disruptive to unity. I cannot convince them of the beauty and sublimity of the TLM. Is there a grace given to those of us who see this as the true Mass of the Ages? Is it merely “taste” or “bias”? I cannot understand the strong feelings against this greatest gift to all of us.

    It is the only way to unity, so why do people, priests included, fight this? I am more and more perplexed at the outward hostility among Catholics for the TLM. Sadly, three of the people who I know who do not like it and do not want it are Opus Dei members. Is there a connection?

    And, I am so tired of priests telling me that we must accept the “spirit of Vatican II”. This is a frightening development-the hardening of hearts against the Tridentine Mass.

  18. St. Rafael says:

    moconnor is right St. Rafael. The church has it’s own politics and that includes parishes. You do NOT want to have people “kill” (via the collection plate and numbers) a parish by banning alter girls.
    @tgarcia2

    The parishes are dead. There are no numbers. Only 25% of Catholics even attend Mass in the USA. Single digits in most other countries. The exact opposite would happen if a parish reintroduces tradition, reverence, and beauty with serious liturgical reforms. The numbers and collection plate would explode and go up. The parish would attract a significant number from other parishes and from the 75% of Catholics who don’t go to Mass or practice their faith.

  19. Midwest St. Michael says:

    SuperT,

    I have only assisted at one – (1) – EF of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

    It is my perception, after seeing all of the abuses and other options that seem to “dumb down” the Sacrifice in the OF, I would be much more at home if I were able to assist every week at this beautiful form of Holy Mass.

    Why precisely?

    Well, from my experience the OF seems (oftentimes) “man-centered” not centered on God. Certainly if some of those abuses and options were lessened the OF could be very beautiful (as we see on EWTN).

    Why can’t we worship God and have our focus on *Him* and not Fr. So-and-so (or the 15 EMoHC and other ems)?

    I have few options to assist weekly at a EF Mass. I live in the sticks. :(

    MSM

  20. Gail F says:

    I have no problem with the NO, but the second time I went to an EF mass, everything “clicked.” I understood for the first time what the NO mass was supposed to be doing! It seems to me that if parishes regularly celebrated both forms of the mass, the NO would inevitably become more the way it is supposed to be and less “my own private style” or (more common, at least in my experience) “mass the way our parish committee wants it.” There is a certain local expression of things that I’m sure is good, but there is way too much “tweak this and that just because we can” kind of thing. If you lose sight of the thing you are aiming for, of course you will most likely go in the wrong direction. And the wrong direction, even when people are pretty reverent, is a mass centered on the people.” There’s nothing wrong with understanding yourselves as “the People of God” and the “little flock” etc. etc. etc. but it is wrong when that’s more important than God.

  21. Maxiemom says:

    A step forward Cardinal Burke?? No, more like a step backward. We’ve returned to the much of the language used post Vatican II. [?] Can returning to all Latin be far behind with ultra conservatives in positions of authority? [ROLF!] My fear is further demise of the Church if we return to pre-Vatican II.

    I wonder how he got along for the almost 50 years since Vatican II. He must have been like a fish out of water.

    [Breathe deeply.]

  22. The exact opposite would happen if a parish reintroduces tradition, reverence, and beauty with serious liturgical reforms. The numbers and collection plate would explode and go u

    Would that it were so! However, the fact is that most scheduled EF Masses are under attended, even in areas where many OF Masses are crowded. And I have seen instances in which attendance in a parish declined when liturgical standards were raised, and then increased when (in response to complaints) they were lowered again.

    After forty years of disintegration, one might infer that the majority of Catholics do not seek tradition and reverence in liturgy. It’s the experience of many TLM devotees that convincing priests and bishops is not the greater problem; rather, it is “selling” traditional liturgy to our fellow Catholics in the pews. So the problem is not so simple as merely making the TLM (or a traditionally celebrated OF) readily available. The only solution I see is the slower and more difficult one of reeducating ordinary pew-sitters through reform of the normative Mass that the vast majority now attend. And I wonder whether this can done in the absence of mandatory requirements, which don’t appear to be on the horizon.

  23. wmeyer says:

    Henry, I am sure you are correct. We have suffered from 40+ years of poor or absent catechesis. It would be naive at best to suppose that the EF would attract a large following now, without there first being a renaissance in catechesis. We fall easily into impatience; the Church and the Holy Father are looking at the long term, while we tend to wish for immediate results. We must pray for an increase in vocations, that the newly ordained priests, who seem to have been better formed and trained than some, may lead us all to a better future in our parishes.

  24. TNCath says:

    Thank God for Cardinal Burke! As time goes on, his influence on the appointment of bishops to the Church in the U.S. should continue to grow as time goes on. It is no secret that he was instrumental in the appointment of Archbishop Cordileone to San Francisco. May his influence continue to bless the Church!

  25. muckemdanno says:

    Martial Artist, you say “The fact that there were ruptures is pretty clearly the case.” Fr Z seems to agree with you. He writes “We cannot revitalize our worship without striving to reestablish continuity” – obviously his presumption is that there has been a discontinuity. It’s impossible to “reestablish” something unless it has already been disestablished.

    However, this is not the position of the hierarchy, up to and including the the highest authorities in the Church. Cardinal Burke says right in this article “There were many abuses and even the reform of the rite itself was so radical that people didn’t see sometimes how there was a continuity .” You see, the problem, according to the hierarchy, is with people like you (and me, by the way) who perceive a discontinuity, a rupture, a break, whatever you call it. The Holy Father himself condemns this “hermeneutic of rupture.” He does not however, condemn the rupture itself. It is his position that there is no rupture. In your local diocese, the mass is just fine, the catechism is just fine, the seminary is fine. The official documents of the Church say that the great reform has been a rousing success.

  26. Dr Guinness says:

    As much as I hate to think about the it… When Benedict is called above, Cardinal Burke for pope?

  27. Therese says:

    “Cardinal Burke for pope?”

    Poland got a pope when Poles fought back against the evils of communism. Maybe God will give us one if we fight back against the culture of death.

  28. Ambrose Jnr says:

    Cardinal Burke is to be commended for his wise expositions, as usual.

    @Raphael: I completely agree that altar girls need to disappear, however, we should choose our battles wisely. Banning altar girls can be done later on…first of all, celebration and learning of the TLM should be made compulsory in all seminaries of the world, secondly communion in the hand should be banned in the whole church as a deplorable practice which has diminished reverence for God. Thirdly, the canon or EPIV should be made compulsory in Latin for all diocesan priests, after EPII and EPIII have been forbidden. Then, and only then, ad orientem for the 2nd part of the Mass should be made compulsory…finally, we can ban the altar girls. I believe all these other measures are more important currently.

  29. Speravi says:

    Ambrose Jnr,
    EPIV?

  30. Cantor says:

    Maxiemom – I appreciate your comment. Seriously.

    One of the realities of the “reform of the reform” is that the majority of American Catholics have grown up in the post-Vatican II world. I suspect that many of them would consider a wholesale change to the “good ol’ days” to be itself the Rupture. Much as I personally would like to see/hear more Latin, a return to altar boys and the ad orientam Mass, I believe that there must be respect for the customs and traditions as seen from both sides.

  31. Supertradmum says:

    Reflecting more on the frustrating conversations with Catholics who hate the TLM, I am coming to these conclusions. I wish Cardinal Burke would address these: one, we have created a monster called the “Clerical Layperson” who thinks the Mass is his or hers and will not give it back to the priest. These CLs want to run the liturgical show and too many priests are too happy to let them do so. Two, women refuse to accept the “male dominated” TLM which properly highlights not only God the Trinity, but the male priest. Three, if people are not participating , they do not think they are praying. Honestly, too many lay people do not know how to pray silently or quietly. If they are not singing or talking out loud, they are not praying, so they think. The last point is more serious and I do not make it lightly. It is this, that if a priest hates the TLM and discourages its promulgation, there is something seriously wrong with his spiritual life. Either he has fallen into heresy, or has some hidden sin. I hate to state that, but after many, many years of watching and listening to the anti-TLM stand from priests, I can only come to the conclusion that this hatred is from the evil one. If we are being so used by the evil one, we are in serious sin. I know, I was there a long time ago and there but the grace of God go I.

  32. asperges says:

    There is a long way to go. I had to attend a NO Mass last weekend at the parish church instead of the usual EF elsewhere. I felt like a visitor from another planet. People-centred, tedious hymns (with a sugary guitar/flute hymn machine), minimised liturgy and all the usual other irritations.

    There is no way this assembly would easily begin to understand ‘ad orientem’ or the old rite (no disrespect them: it would be as alien to them as this new form is to me). The rot has gone too deep. I wondered what my deceased parents would have though ever to see Holy Mass reduced to this.

    I simply wish with all my heart that the Holy Father would himself celebrate Mass in the old rite, not simply encourage it for others, even if only for some relatively minor occasion. The struggle for a better liturgy would be transformed overnight if he did. This is the most liturgical Pope we have had since Pius XII, but he is being held back. But we must trust to his judgement. He is nobody’s fool.

  33. Midwest St. Michael says:

    “My fear is further demise of the Church if we return to pre-Vatican II. ”

    Ah yes, the bad ol’ days of “pre-Vatican II.”

    The days that saw:

    +Nearly 80% Mass attendance of registered Catholics (25% at best today).
    +Seminaries that were full.
    +Many vocations to religious orders actually teaching the authentic faith to Catholic students.
    +Doctrinal clarity from Catholic pulpits, schools, universities, etc.
    +Beautiful and sacred art/architecture in our parishes that were ripped out and discarded in the name of the “Spirit of Vatican II.”

    Those bad old days?

    Seems to me we could follow the advise of our Blessed Lord and retrieve some of those days:

    “Therefore every scribe instructed in the kingdom of heaven, is like to a master of a house, who bringeth forth out of his treasure new things and old.” (Mt. 13:52)

    MSM

  34. Banjo pickin girl says:

    jhayes, at a Dominican rite Mass I attended recently, the new altar and reliquary beneath were removed so that the old high altar could be used unobstructed.

  35. Darren says:

    St. Rafael: I do not necessarily disagree with how you feel. But… have you written the Holy Father? Posts on here will really accomplish nothing in the matter, unless they inspire some to write. Have you written your bishop? The Holy Father?

    We have more traditional bishops being appointed (my diocese is such an example), and the newer and younger priests are in general more traditional. In time all will be corrected. A radical “firing” of bishops and priests who – while not fans of the EF – are not disobedient, would probably do more damage. They still celebrate the OF which is valid, even if flawed in its celebration.

    God is straightening things out. The church will not die as that is impossible. 50 years feels like forever to us. It is nothing to God who is in and out of time, and not bound by time. We have to do our part with the time we have, knowing full well that we may not live to see certain things. How many saints died before the fruits of their works were realized? Blessed Charles de Foucauld’s effects on the world outside of his little hole in Africa did not begin until some time after his death. If we remain faithful and die in Christ we will live outside of time to see it all in an instant, and be able to do our part to help thouse enslaved to time.

  36. irishgirl says:

    Amen to all of St. Rafael’s comments, and to Supertradmum on August 14th!
    ‘Clerical Layperson’-that’s a good one! It was due to the women ‘running the show’ and leading the pastor around by the nose that I quit the things I was doing in my previous parish (lector and cantor) and returned to the TLM exclusively. I couldn’t take it anymore! I was tired of seeing the priest allowing the women to walk all over him liturgy-wise.
    A plague on ‘Clerical Laypersons’ and all the other liturgical abuses in the Church!
    I’m with St. Rafael in that we have to have MEN in the hierarchy who are not afraid to wield the scourge (as Our Lord to the moneychangers in the Temple) and ‘clean house’! Why are some bishops and priests so unwilling to do it?

  37. wmeyer says:

    For any change to be successful, there must be catechesis. Before the change. This was done for the introduction of the new Missal, and although there was some grumbling, I saw no real upset. It was not done before the Latin Mass was taken from us so many years ago, which was a contributing factor in the sense of rupture.

    What passes for catechesis in many parishes is shameful; in some, it is heretical. So long as that is not repaired, any reform will be a struggle.

  38. Supertradmum says:

    Right now, if there are seven Catholics around a table, one hears seven different views of Catholicism regarding the Mass. Here they are: 1) the Traditional, orthodox Catholic who will only go to the Tridentine Mass; 2) the Traditional Catholic, orthodox, but who goes to both the Tridentine and NO-she is considered suspect by Number One; 3) the NO Catholic who is unhappy with the NO, but keeps on about the necessity for participating and who tolerates Numbers One and Two-wants mutual enrichment; 4) the NO Catholic who does not tolerate Numbers One, Two, or Three, and thinks we should all have the same rite and same Mass–I just heard this recently–thinks all variations are divisive; 5) the NO who wants to suffer with Jesus at the Mass and hates it but is a masochist; 6) the almost-radical leftist NO admirer who accepts the teachings of the Catholic Church, but wants some changes, like women deacons and married priests and loves happy-clappy and guitars as it reaches the people and “speaks to the culture”–arrghh; 7) the off-the-wall radical NO who is really a Protestant and is just waiting for all Christians to unite under one, big banner of false ecumenism with some watered down version of the Mass…usually involving banners for gay rights.

    Welcome to the Church in 2012. I shall pray for all priests who desire the TLM and are not allowed to say it….May more priests desire to say it.

  39. rhhenry says:

    Hey, Supertradmum,
    I’m somewhere in between #3 and #4. I prefer the NO (perhaps due to my unfamiliarity with the EF — a topic for another discussion), but I have no trouble *whatsoever* with the EF or with making the OF more reverent (e.g., getting rid of guitars at Mass, supporting long periods of silence at Mass, incense, etc. I may need to be better catechised (don’t we all?), but I don’t fit very neatly into the categories you proposed . . .

  40. Supertradmum says:

    How about three and a half? We need to pray very hard for priests to WANT to say the Mass. I do not think we can wait for many bishops to require this of their priests–not in this climate.

  41. rhhenry says:

    @Supertradmum: I think that’s a pretty fair assessment of where most priests and laypeople (at least in my circles) are. They want a more reverent OF, but are a bit confused, scared, unsure of, wary about the EF. No judgment passed, just an attempt at objectively evaluating the current situation . . .

  42. TomG says:

    henry edwards, supertradmum and rhhenry: How about the Anglican Use (if one has a parish in his/her area)? My wife and I are thinking about that as an option. Sacral language, awesome, transcending music: what’s not to like? And frankly, I don’t think the EF is ever going to appeal to the great majority of Catholics. The cross-pollination that Fr. Z. and others have spoken about is, to my mind, the perfect solution. I wonder if something like the AU isn’t a good place for that idea to germinate.

  43. rhhenry says:

    @TomG: My concern / confusion is over the appropriate use of the Anglican Use. Is the AU designed to eventually “pull” converts into the Roman rite (OF or EF)? If so, then one would expect its use to “die out” over a period of time (generations? years? centuries?), and supporting it by attending it from “outside” its tradition would seem to be working at cross-purposes with the intent of the Holy See.

    I fully support our Holy Father, but such details re: Ang. Coet. have constantly tugged at the back of my mind . . .

  44. TomG says:

    rhhenry: I really don’t think so; instead, I believe the AU will (and does) have its adherents, but in addition can serve those who seek a working model for what a completely faithful, transcendent Catholic liturgy can be like. Just my thoughts, anyway. I might add that while my roots are Anglo-Celtic, all those within what is called today the “Anglosphere” can enjoy “active participation” in the AU liturgy {:)}.

  45. Supertradmum says:

    Tom G, Anglican Usage is only in North America and Australia, and is very beautiful. It is rare. I went to one in Houston years ago. I was referring to recent conversations in England, by the way, with my imaginary seven types all at the table at once. Fits America. However, AU may be eventually superseded by the Ordinariate Mass being developed in Rome as we speak. However, I think the AU may last alongside another one for the vast majority of Anglo-Catholics who have not said the AU.

  46. Supertradmum says: I have just been in a conversation with priests who are against the Tridentine Mass, and two laymen who are as well. These men and women see the TLM as disruptive to unity. I cannot convince them of the beauty and sublimity of the TLM. Is there a grace given to those of us who see this as the true Mass of the Ages? Is it merely “taste” or “bias”? I cannot understand the strong feelings against this greatest gift to all of us.

    Well…kids who are fed nothing but candy recoil in horror at meat and vegetables.

  47. St. Rafael says:

    @Ambrose Jnr

    Getting rid of altar girls is an easy one. It’s part of the small stuff that should have been corrected already. It is an indult after all. It is a fairly recent one since permission was only granted in ’94. It is one of the most obvious breaks with tradition. Altar girls is small fries compared to bigger issues such as Latin in the liturgy and the Novus Ordo Missal itself.

    I believe getting rid of altar girls is the most easiest reform to do. Pope Benedict got Summorum Pontificum through, even though it was a hundred times more difficult than getting rid of Communion in the Hand or altar girls. The Holy Father has gotten a lot of hard things accomplished, yet he hasn’t removed smaller things or gotten rid of the easy ones.

  48. Bill Foley says:

    from Bill Foley

    Dear Tradster, who apparently is an apologist for SSPX, please pay attention to the following selection from an encyclical by Blessed Pope Pius IX. The parallel between the schismatic Old Catholics and SSPX is obvious; they both reject the teachings of a Vatican Council and refuse to submit to the magisterium of the Holy Father.
    GRAVES AC DIUTURNAE
    ON THE CHURCH IN SWITZERLAND
    ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS IX
    MARCH 23, 1875
    To Our Venerable Brothers the Bishops, to the Clergy, and to the Swiss People who enjoy Grace and Communion with the Apostolic See.
    Venerable Brothers, Greetings and Apostolic Blessing.
    The serious and long-lasting plots and efforts which the new heretics who call themselves Old Catholics use daily in your country to deceive the faithful and to tear them away from their ancient faith, urge Us, as a duty of Our supreme apostolate, to zealously devote Our paternal care and attention to protecting the spiritual welfare of our children. We are aware, and We sorrowfully deplore the fact, that these schismatics and heretics who enjoy the favor of the civil authority exercise the ministry of their wicked sect in the region of the diocese of Basel as in other regions of your country while the religious freedom of Catholics remains publicly oppressed by schismatic laws.
    Deceit Characteristic of Schism
    2. Having violently occupied parishes and churches with apostate priests, they have not neglected any deception or cunning to lead the children of the Catholic Church into wretched schism. Because it has always been especially characteristic of heretics and schismatics to use lies and deception, these sons of darkness are to be reckoned among those the prophet spoke of: “Woe to you deserting children who have faith in the shadow of Egypt. You have rejected the word and have hoped in trickery and rebellion.” They love to deceive the unwary and the innocent and to draw them into error by deception and hypocrisy. They repeatedly state openly that they do not in the least reject the Catholic Church and its visible head but rather that they are zealous for the purity of Catholic doctrine declaring that they are the heirs of the ancient faith and the only true Catholics. But in fact they refuse to acknowledge all the divine prerogatives of the vicar of Christ on earth and do not submit to His supreme magisterium.
    Condemnation of Errors
    3. In order to spread their teachings more widely, We know that some of them have been appointed to teach sacred theology in the University of Bern, hoping to be able in this way to gain new followers from the Catholic youth for their wicked faction. However, We have already reproved and condemned this deplorable sect which has produced from the old store of the heretics so many errors opposed to the principal tenets of the Catholic faith. This sect overthrows the foundations of the Catholic religion, shamelessly rejects the dogmatic definitions of the Ecumenical Vatican Council, and devotes itself to the ruin of souls in so many ways. We have decreed and declared in Our letter of 21 November 1873 that those unfortunate men who belong to, adhere to, and support that sect should be considered as schismatics and separated from communion with the Church.

  49. Ambrose Jnr says:

    @ Speravi: Sorry for the late reply. By EPIV, I meant Eucharistic Prayer number 4, the only one in decent Latin beside EP1.
    @ Raphael: I agree that juridically getting rid of the indult is easy, however, on the ground it would be a disaster, and unwise to alienate the crowd in favour of altar girls too abruptly…maybe getting a ban on any new altar girls would be strategically more sound.