Here is a story from Aci Prensa. They are reporting that the Motu Proprio might come after Christmas.
Motu Proprio después de Navidad, Exhortación Apostólica en Enero
REDACCIÓN CENTRAL, 14 Dic. 06 (ACI).- Fuentes cercanas al Vaticano informaron a ACI Prensa que el Motu Proprio a través del cual el Papa Benedicto XVI concederÃÂa la indulgencia universal al Misal de San PÃÂo V podrÃÂa ser publicado después de Navidad; mientras que la Exhortación Apostólica Post Sinodal sobre la EucaristÃÂa verÃÂa la luz a mediados de enero.
Las fuentes confirmaron lo declarado a la prensa por el Cardenal Jorge Medina Estévez, quien recientemente participó de la reunión de la Comisión "Ecclesia Dei" –encargada del diálogo con el cisma Lefebvrista–, donde se revisó el borrador final del texto del Motu Proprio.
La indulgencia permitirÃÂa que la Misa de San PÃÂo V se celebre libremente, sin el requisito actual que exige el permiso explÃÂcito del obispo local. El Motu Proprio, sin embargo, no aborda el tema canónico de la Sociedad de San PÃÂo X, la organización cismática creada por Mons. Marcel Lefebvre.
La Exhortación Apostólica sobre la EucaristÃÂa, según las mismas fuentes, ya ha sido concluida por el Papa Benedicto XVI y se encuentra en proceso de traducción a los diversos idiomas en los que será presentada.
El texto, que verÃÂa la luz después del 15 de enero, según las fuentes, reafirma el "no" a los sacerdotes casados, impulsa el uso del latÃÂn en las celebraciones litúrgicas, e incluso solicita que los seminaristas aprendan el uso de esta lengua.
El texto también alentarÃÂa a la recuperación del canto gregoriano y la música polifónica sacra en reemplazo de la música moderna; lo que implicarÃÂa un retiro gradual de los instrumentos musicales "inadecuados" para la solemnidad y reverencia de la Celebración EucarÃÂstica.
Loading ...
Although machine-translators are infamously strange, Bablefish.com did a good job
this time:
CENTRAL WRITING, 14 Dic. 06 (ACI). – Sources near the Vatican informed to ACI Press that the Motu Proprio through as Pope Benedicto XVI would grant the universal indulgence to the Misal of San PÃÂo V could be published after Christmas; whereas the Apostolic Exhortation Post Sinodal on the EucaristÃÂa would see the light in the middle of January. The sources confirmed declared to the press by the Cardinal the Jorge Medina Estévez, who recently participated in the meeting of the Commission “Ecclesia Dei” – in charge of the dialogue with the Lefebvrista schism -, where reviewed the final rough draft of the text of the Motu Proprio. The indulgence would allow that the Mass of San PÃÂo V is celebrated freely, without the present requirement that demands the explicit permission of the local bishop. The Motu Proprio, nevertheless, does not approach the canonical subject of the Society of San PÃÂo X, the schismatic organization created by Mons. Marcel Lefebvre. The Apostolic Exhortation on the EucaristÃÂa, according to the same sources, already has been concluded by Pope Benedicto XVI and it is in process of translation to the diverse languages in which it will be presented/displayed. The text, that the light would see after the 15 of January, according to the sources, reaffirms “not” the married priests, impels the use of the Latin in the liturgical celebrations, and it even solicits that the seminaristas learn the use of this language. The text also would encourage to the recovery of the gregoriano song and sacred polifónica music in replacement of modern music; what would imply a gradual retirement of “inadequate” the musical instruments for the solemnity and reverence of the EucarÃÂstica Celebration.
Dear Fr. Z.
Where can I find your commentary on the (wonderful!) Collect for Dominica I of Advent ?
Thanks !
Here is a translation of the article:
The Motu Proprio after Christmas, the Apostolic Exhortation on the Liturgy in January. Redaccion Central, December 14th, 2006, (ACI).
Sources close to the Vatican informed the ACI press that the Motu proprio in which Pope Benedict XVI will grant universal permission for the Missal of Pius V may be published after
Christmas; while the Post-Synodal Exhortation on the Eucharistwill appear in the middle of January.
The sources confirmed what Cardinal Estevez stated to the press, who recently participated in the meeting of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, charged with dialog with the SSPX, in which the final version of the Motu Proprio was elaborated.
The Indult which should permit the Mass of St. Pius V to be celebrated freely, without the actual requirement which demands the explicit permission of the local bishop. The Motu Proprio, nevertheless, does not touch on the canonical
terms of the SSPX, the schismatic organization created by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
The Apostolic Exhortation on the Eucharist, according to the same sources, has already been finalized by Pope Benedict XVI and is being translated into the various languages into which it will be presented.
The text, which will be published after January 15th, according to the sources, reaffirms the “no†to the married priesthood, promotes the use of Latin in liturgical celebrations, and includes a request that seminarians learn the use of this language.
The text also supports the restoration of gregorian chant and sacred polyphony in order to replace modern music, it implies that there will be a gradual withdrawal of “inadequate†musical instruments in order to promote solemnity and reverence of the eucharistic celebration.
Deo gratias! (or should that be “gracias”!)
Hello All
It is looking better all the time. At risk of hair splitting,
does “after Christmas” mean after “Christmas season” or after “Christmas day”?
Any thoughts?
Brian
…Or after which Christmas?
“supports the restoration of gregorian chant and sacred polyphony in order to replace modern music, it implies that there will be a gradual withdrawal of “inadequate†musical instruments”. Mindful of the unthinking zeal with which the post-Conciliar “reforms” were carried out, I hope that such moderns as Mozart, Victoria, Faure and Tavener are safe.
And it was not the musical instruments themselves which were inadequate, but the anodyne faux-60’s folk idiom which quickly became the new standard – that, and the almost invariably inadequate musicians.
I’d think Christmas day would be very unlikely…
There’s the Mass, the Urbi et Orbi and the Christmas greetings to get through as it is.
I’ll second that “Deo gratias” for the Motu proprio. But as to the other, what about ad populum, Extraordinary Ministers that’ve become ordinary, little girls vested in bedsheets, and Holy Communion doled out like potato chips?
And I’m afraid I’m not so sure about “it was not the musical instruments themselves which were inadequate.” How about electric guitars and snare drums? “Caribbean Alleluia” on Easter Sunday, anyone?
Jon: I think the comment about “inadequate instruments”, refers to instruments not well suited to sacred music. The Council identifies one that is, of course. The pipe organ. But pianos, guitars, etc., are not well suited. Some instruments also have connotations not well harmonized with the sacred action of the liturgy. This may be what that comment is about.
And it was not the musical instruments themselves which were inadequate, but the anodyne faux-60’s folk idiom which quickly became the new standard – that, and the almost invariably inadequate musicians.
I doubt that any percussive instruments, including piano and guitar, should have a place at mass.
父: ã‚ãªãŸãÂŒèªÂã‚€ã“ã¨ãÂ΋§ãÂÂãªã„言語ãÂ΋‚るã‹
(Father: Is there a language that you cannot read?)
Awestruck….
I don’t want to be the pessimist today, but I’m not feeling great after reading this. First the indult was supposed
to come after the Holy Father met with Bishop Fellay, then it was coming for sure last Easter, then it was coming
last summer, then it was coming in October, then for sure it was coming in November, then it was going to be
a great gift at Christmas, now it will come in mid January! More and more, and I pray I’m wrong, I don’t think
this is coming at all — at least not as we envision it. At first, I thought it was just that the Pope didn’t
have the intestinal fortitude to stand up to the bishops. That’s been a problem of every post-concilliar pope.
Now, I’m wondering, maybe he just doesn’t care? Let’s face it, if he did, wouldn’t he have at least said one
traditional Mass by now? Wouldn’t he have sent such a strong symbollic message to his flock by saying an amazing
high Mass for all the world to see? A way of say, Hey, I’m the Pope and I’m saying this Mass, so it’s OK! Just
imagine all of the people who have been told by their local bishops how “devisive” the true Mass is who would
now know, straight from the Pope, that it is OK to be traditional! But nothing. No indult, no traditional Mass
at the Vatican, nothing. Again, praying that I’m wrong, but all evidence points to my fears.
Cathy: My Japanese is rusty, but thanks for the thought. Yes, there are plenty of languages I have not the slightest clue about. For example, I cannot read or grasp anything of Urdu. Nor of ancient Akkadian. But the European languages I can get around in, expect for Basque, Hungarian and Finnish.
How do you know that the Holy Father doesn’t pray the Traditional Mass already in private? Take heart and have hope.
RBrown: We can except tympany, I believe. Otherwise how would we have use of the Paukenmesse of Haydn? But you are certainly right about the piano and guitar. Part of the problem with those instruments, practically speaking, is that they cannot fill a large space easily without amplification.
David, a private Mass doesn’t send a message. Even if he did, it doesn’t tell his faithful that it should be
said anywhere and everywhere it’s desired. It doesn’t lead the way so that bishops aren’t the only voice out
there on this matter. We all think he has a fondness in his heart for tradition, but what is that really based
on? One meeting with Bishop Fellay? Again, I’m not trying to be disrespectful or negative, but prepared. I’ve
gotten my hopes up way too many times.
OK, just to say that I am basing my comments on some information from a priest of my acquaintance so it is a little more than just idle speculation on my part.
Oh, I don’t doubt his private Mass may be traditional. But that doesn’t negate the fact that he has yet to say
a traditional Mass in public. There’s a reason for that, and I can’t imagine it’s a good one.
Father,
“I think the comment about “inadequate instrumentsâ€Â, refers to instruments not well suited to sacred music. The Council identifies one that is, of course. The pipe organ. But pianos, guitars, etc., are not well suited. Some instruments also have connotations not well harmonized with the sacred action of the liturgy. This may be what that comment is about.”
I agree 100%. But wouldn’t it be easier (I say this with tongue only slightly in cheek)for Benedict to simply initital the below and reissue it under his own hand?
VI
ORGAN AND INSTRUMENTS
15. Although the music proper to the Church is purely vocal music, music with the accompaniment of the organ is also permitted. In some special cases, within due limits and with proper safeguards, other instruments may be allowed, but never without the special permission of the Ordinary, according to prescriptions of the Caeremoniale Episcoporum.
16. As the singing should always have the principal place, the organ or other instruments should merely sustain and never oppress it.
17. It is not permitted to have the chant preceded by long preludes or to interrupt it with intermezzo pieces.
18. The sound of the organ as an accompaniment to the chant in preludes, interludes, and the like must be not only governed by the special nature of the instrument, but must participate in all the qualities proper to sacred music as above enumerated.
19. The employment of the piano is forbidden in church, as is also that of noisy or frivolous instruments such as drums, cymbals, bells and the like.
20. It is strictly forbidden to have bands play in church, and only in special cases with the consent of the Ordinary will it be permissible to admit wind instruments, limited in number, judiciously used, and proportioned to the size of the placeâ€â€provided the composition and accompaniment be written in grave and suitable style, and conform in all respects to that proper to the organ.
~ Inter Sollicitudines
Motu Proprio of Pope St. Pius X on Sacred Music
November 22, 1903
Sorry, but as my finger hovered over “Submit,” a thought occured to me. Isn’t Pius’ MP still in effect? And if it remains in effect, is it in effect for both the TLM and the Novus Ordo? And if it’s in effect for only the former and not the latter, why is that, especially if, as has been rumored, the coming MP by Benedict refers to the TLM and the NO as simply two forms of the same rite?
Interesting to ponder.
There’s a reason for that, and I can’t imagine it’s a good one.
I respectfully submit that you are not in a position to make such a judgment.
What about the Breton language, Father? :-))
Doue ha mem bro
The motto of the Chouans would fought to recover our Catholic Churches,priests and faith during the French Revolution.
So there is a GOOD reason for the Pope not saying even
ONE public Tridentine Mass in 20 mounths?
Actions speak louder than words.
Dennis,
None of us are in a position to make such a judgment. So if one wants to imply that there isn’t a good reason for such an action taking place then the onus is on them (you) to prove such an assertion. It’s really a question of fairness and part of honest discussion which I think is far better than questionable speculation shrouded as truth. Yes, actions do speak louder than words. So, let’s start with our own actions first.
Vivat Iesus,
Stu
I have been looking forward to the post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation since last October! My worry is that the call for a greater use of Latin, Gregorian Chant, Sacred Polyphony, and the gradual withdrawal of pianos, guitars, tamborines, and the like will not come about so long as we have bishops, pastors, and “liturgy committees” with different ideas.
The Holy Father may not have celebrated the Pre-Vatican II Mass since his election, but before his election he did so.
Many “traditionalists” won’t be happy with anything short of the abolition of the Pauline Mass and the reintroduction of the Tridentine Mass. That, of course, will never happen — certainly not in one fell swoop. The Pope, however, must live in the real world, so his actions to repair the damage of the last 40 to 50 years will never satisfy those kinds of traditionalists. It will never be enough, will never be soon enough, for them.
Jeffrey
There is a reason the Pope has not said a public
Tridentine Mass. He is not incapable, legally or morally
of doing so. A process of deduction:
A) He does’nt want to
and/or
B) Someone else does’nt want him to.
Unless we assume that in the case of B) he is under great
moral pressure, there is no good reason for the Pope not
to publicly say a Tridentine Mass.
We are all in a position to make a judgement; we are
Catholics and he is our Pope.
You know, it really is sad how no matter what he may do, no matter how much he may free up the Old Rite, Pope Benedict, and it seems all popes from now on, will be a failure in the eyes of supposed “traditionalists.” I have seen more whining, more complaining, and more sniviling posted by certain people on these forums than I thought possible for people who claim to be willing to take up the cross and follow Christ.
THE OLD RITE IS ABOUT TO BE FREED! It is amazing how some people are still trying to put a bad spin on this. These same people who have demanded this this whole time, who are now finally getting what they want, are nevertheless sniviling and whining that the Pope isn’t celebrating it. It never ends! The Old Rite is about to be free up, and we just have more and more whining and complaining worthy of a five year old who isn’t satisfied no matter how much his parents try to help him. Contrast this approach with St. Pio of Pietrelchina, who had to endure persecution and slander from his own bishop, on a level far beyond anything that supposed traditionalists have to endure today. This man had to endure being called a fraud, who was prohibited from saying public mass, and many other things. And he never said one word, NOT ONE WORD, against his bishop. He humbly obeyed, and after his bishop died, the first thing he did was say a Requiem mass for him. No complaints.
I suggest to those whining on this board that you all start LIVING the mass by humbly obeying even in things you may not like, uniting your sufferings to the cross of Christ in union with the mass, rather than TALKING about it all the time.
Pope Benedict may free up the Old Rite. Or he may not.
Nothing has actually happened.
RBrown: We can except tympany, I believe. Otherwise how would we have use of the Paukenmesse of Haydn? But you are certainly right about the piano and guitar. Part of the problem with those instruments, practically speaking, is that they cannot fill a large space easily without amplification.
No to the tympany.
I consider the various masses by Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn, Bach. et al, to have been written for performance, not for worship.
I love Allegri’s Miserere, but I wouldn’t want to hear in during mass.
Many “traditionalists†won’t be happy with anything short of the abolition of the Pauline Mass and the reintroduction of the Tridentine Mass. That, of course, will never happenâ€â€certainly not in one fell swoop. The Pope, however, must live in the real world, so his actions to repair the damage of the last 40 to 50 years will never satisfy those kinds of traditionalists. It will never be enough, will never be soon enough, for them.
I agree than among Trads there is the choleric tendency never to be satisfied with whatever happens. Those of the Right long for Order that will never exist in this life. Those of the Left long for Freedom that will never exist in this life.
From reading JRatzinger’s works, my guess is that he will make certain changes to the Novus Ordo that will bring it closer to the Roman Rite.
Unless we assume that in the case of B) he is under great moral pressure, there is no good reason for the Pope not to publicly say a Tridentine Mass.
So say you. He might not want to at this time for reasons to which you aren’t privy. So once again, you are not in a position to judge. In other words, you lack the capacity in this case. Prove me wrong. State your credentials and how you can definitively say there is “no good reasonâ€Â.
Vivat Iesus,
Stu
Should be:
RBrown: We can except tympany, I believe. Otherwise how would we have use of the Paukenmesse of Haydn? But you are certainly right about the piano and guitar. Part of the problem with those instruments, practically speaking, is that they cannot fill a large space easily without amplification.
No to the tympany.
I consider the various masses by Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn, Bach. et al, to have been written for performance, not for worship.
I love Allegri’s Miserere, but I wouldn’t want to hear in during mass.
So there is a GOOD reason for the Pope not saying even ONE public Tridentine Mass in 20 mounths? Actions speak louder than words.
I wouldn’t want him saying it in public until the Motu Proprio is promulgated.
For true traditionalists on this site, listen up: don’t speak your mind. If you do, liberals who call themselves
trads will crush you. Not with facts, not with reason — only with statements that amount to “If you say one thing
negative about a Pontiff you’re schismatic and not Catholic.”
That’s how it works post Vatican II. One person says we can’t make a judgement on him not saying a traditional
Mass. Why is that? Do we not think? Are we apes? No, we’re thinking people. One person says trads won’t be happy
until the Novus Ordo is gone. So what? I won’t be happy until it’s gone, that’s for sure. Because the new mass
was not necessary. It hasn’t lent a thing to our Faith. In fact, I believe it’s helping destroy it. Does this
make me a sedevaticanist in your mind?
There’s a troubling trend lately with modern Catholics that they think papal infallibility means a pope can’t be
wrong, which is just silly. Of course a pope can be wrong. If not, then the Lord would have to want young
boys to be abused by priests, since JPII and B16 haven’t done anything to truly stop it. It’s still brushed
under the rug. Does this mean they’re not the pope? Of course not. But it does mean they, like all humans, make
mistakes. It is possible.
I think this is great and I pray that the reports are true.
Having said that, thinking long term, what happens after Our Holy Father is taken Home. Is it not true that those who are likeminded with the Pope in regards to the Liturgy are in the minority in the College of Cardinals?
We need to be praying for the coversion of Cardinals as well.
For those underwhelmed by this article, here is another way of looking at it:
First it was pure speculation. Then it was only rumors of an upcoming change. Then it was only rumors of an upcoming Motu Proprio. Then it was speculation that its only a rumor, and there is no sproof that the Pope is even doing anything. Then it was rumor that the speculation was groundless, because no one even had proof the Motu proprio even existed. Then it was speculation that the Motu Proprio would not be any different than the current indult. Then it was people getty weary and tired of all these rumors and speculations while no one even knew whether the Motu Proprio might exist. Then it was dread that the Frogs had torpedoed it before it would ever be released.
Etc., etc., etc.
NOW… we have Cardinals verifying that Ecclesia Dei had its FIRST EVER PLENARY SESSION, just to discuss this Motu Prorio — proving beyond any shadow of a doubt that it exists!!! — and by all indications. the Motu Proprio is more promising than we had dared to believe.
And finally, we have an indication that the Motu Proprio will be released some time between Christmas and the end of January.
That is NOT cause to be depressed. Hope is a virtue!
Here’s the latest from CWN. While there’s some good news in here, I hope they’re wrong on some accounts, such
as there’s no new news on communion with the SSPX, and every good part with Latin in the seminaries and chant is
all to be “requested” and “promoted.” Why not just say do it!!!???
Motu proprio “after Christmas,” CNA reports
Dec. 15, 2006 (CNA/CWNews.com) – Sources close to the Vatican have told Catholic News Agency that the motu propio by which Pope Benedict XVI (bio – news) would allow for the universal use of the Missal of St. Pius V may be published after Christmas, while the post-synodal apostolic exhortation on the Eucharist could come in mid-January 2007.
Sources confirmed the recent statements to reporters by Cardinal Jorge Medina Estevez, who told them after participating in a meeting of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, where the text of the motu propio was reviewed, that the document would come soon.
The declaration would allow the Mass of St. Pius V– often called the Tridentine Mass– to be celebrated freely, and do away with the current requirement to have the explicit permission of the local bishop. The motu propio does not address the canonical status of the Society of St. Pius X, the schismatic organization founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
The apostolic exhortation on the Eucharist, according to the same sources, has already been finished by Pope Benedict XVI and is being translated into the different languages in which it will be presented. The document, which sources say will be issued after January 15, reaffirms the Church’s commitment to a celibate priesthood, encourages the use of Latin in liturgical celebrations, and even requests that seminarians learn the language as part of their formation. It will also promote the recovery of Gregorian chant and sacred polyphonic music as a replacement to modern music, which would result in a gradual elimination of musical instruments that are “inappropriate†for the solemnity and reverence of the Eucharistic celebration.
I wouldn’t want him saying it in public until the Motu Proprio is promulgated.
Why not? Other bishops have celebrated them for their flocks, and His Holiness is the Bishop of Rome. . . .
In fairness to embittered traditionalists, I think many of us would follow in St. Pio’s footsteps re: our bishops. There are several bishops out there at whose Requiem Masses I would be quite eager to assist.
To what extent are persons favorably inclined toward the older rite available for appointment to positions of influence?(In all the years the FSSP has existed I don’t think any of its priests have become bishops).
I’ll be everyone on this site dinner — any pay for their plaintickets to be all in one location — the day an
FSSP priest becomes a bishop …
For true traditionalists on this site, listen up: don’t speak your mind. If you do, liberals who call themselves
trads will crush you. Not with facts, not with reasonâ€â€only with statements that amount to “If you say one thing
negative about a Pontiff you’re schismatic and not Catholic.â€Â
Man Overboard! Ready up the lifelines.
I don’t see any FSSP priests being made Bishops in the near future (although I would love to see it, and throw in an ICKSP Bishop as well!) but at the very least it would be nice to see the likes of Archbishop Burke, Archbishop Chaput, Bishop Finn, and Bishop Olmsted get the red hat (although as personal preference I would hate to see Bishop Olmsted be taken away from us here in Phoenix)
RBrown: “I consider the various masses by Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn, Bach. et al, to have been written for performance, not for worship.”
I guess I’ll just have to live with you being wrong about that!
Pius V began his papacy on January 7. Surely that’s the big Sunday!
Many “conservatives” are so terrified of the notion that
Vat 2 and the concilar popes could be wrong, that they
compensate emotionally by over-reacting. They are the
reverse image of sede-vacantists.
It is possible to critisize a Pope without believing
that The Gates Of Hell Have Prevailed.
Fr. Z, you’re 100% right on the composers! Here was our Mozart traditional Mass from this past sunday:
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Missa brevis in Bâ™Â
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Ave verum Corpus
Cristóbal de Morales: Peccantem me quotidie
Fr. Tomas Luis de Victoria: Ave Maria
Thomas Tallis: Salvator mundi
Francisco Guerrero motet
“If you say one thing negative about a Pontiff you’re schismatic and not Catholic.â€Â
If only certain kinds of traditionalists would say *one* thing negative about a Pontiff instead of the regular bashing and grousing and presumptuous criticism they offer . . . .
“Does this mean they’re not the pope?”
No, of course not. However, the important thing to remember is that no of us is the Pope either.
“It is possible to critisize a Pope without believing that The Gates Of Hell Have Prevailed.”
Yes, and it is also possible to criticise traditionalism and defend the Holy Father without being an Ultramontanist or a Modernist.
Jordan, you’re half right. I love that people defend the holy father as I do often.
But there’s never a reason to criticise tradition. Tradition in terms of our Faith
has nothing to be criticized. You can criticize certain people who are traditionalists,
but there’s noting faulty with tradition itself. However, everything is wrong with
modernism, which is why every pope before the second vatican council had to take
an oath against it.
Tradition is not the same thing as traditionalism. In fact, in one sense of the word (not the sense in which it is usually used in forums such as these), “traditionalism” is a proscribed heresy.
I don’t see how one could perform Bach’s Mass in B Minor in a liturgical setting. It’s just too long.
RBrown:
“I consider the various masses by Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn, Bach. et al, to have been written for performance, not for worship.”
Agreed! Absolutely. Those are concert pieces designed for listening pleasure. They are not liturgical.
Liturgical music is not really the point of this entry. But…
dcs: Arguing from the extreme isn’t too helpful. The Bach B minor was not written for use during Mass, obviously. There are many orchestral/choral settings which were written for use at Mass and they are appropriate liturgical music.
People should avoid applying “funnel vision” to liturgical matters. There are certainly boundaries, but there is no good reason simply to make music ever more narrow.
For true traditionalists on this site, listen up: don’t speak your mind. If you do, liberals who call themselves trads will crush you. Not with facts, not with reasonâ€â€only with statements that amount to “If you say one thing negative about a Pontiff you’re schismatic and not Catholic.â€Â
I don’t speak for others–only for myself. I don’t consider myself a Traditionalist. I am by training and inclination a Thomist, who thinks the liturgy should be in Latin (see Veterum Sapientia for the reasons). Further, I favor the Roman Rite over the Novus Ordo because I think it a better expression of the Eucharist, partly because of its emphasis on the Sacrifice.
There’s a troubling trend lately with modern Catholics that they think papal infallibility means a pope can’t be wrong, which is just silly. Of course a pope can be wrong. If not, then the Lord would have to want young boys to be abused by priests, since JPII and B16 haven’t done anything to truly stop it. It’s still brushed under the rug. Does this mean they’re not the pope? Of course not. But it does mean they, like all humans, make mistakes. It is possible. Comment by AC  15 Dec
That trend pre-dates the Council by many, many years. It is theological voluntarism that translates papal infallibility as being primarily an expression of governance over the Church.
To me the pope–any pope–is vaccinated against criticism by always acting within the framework of his predecessors. Once he begins talk (and subsequent work) concerning a new rite or New Church, then he is asking for trouble. And trouble is what happened.
But you’re wrong about BXVI not doing anything to stop the scandals. Although he is aware that it will take some time to reform those institutions that produced homosexual priests, he has already taken some ad hoc measures.
There is no official legnth of a Mass. When we have Bethoven, Back, Mozart, etc, it’s
during a solemn high Mass. People know it will be long. My wedding was nearly two
hours! And Padre Pio’s Masses, because of his constant crying and emotions, averaged
over three hours a Mass.
People should avoid applying “funnel vision†to liturgical matters. There are certainly boundaries, but there is no good reason simply to make music ever more narrow.
I was referring only to Bach’s Mass in B Minor, which was the only Mass setting he composed. I don’t have a position on any of Beethoven’s Masses since I’ve never heard any of them.
There is no official legnth of a Mass. When we have Bethoven, Back, Mozart, etc, it’s during a solemn high Mass.
Yes, but some Mass settings are still not appropriate because they force the celebrant to wait for the choir to finish before he can continue what he’s doing at the altar. And if I recall correctly, that is not permitted. That is why the Mass in B Minor is too long.
Well, I can’t see how that’s true. The indult Mass we assist at, the priest there
will continue to say Mass while the singing continues. Same at the extremely traditional
independent chapel we go to once in a while. The indult, obviously, observe the 1963
Missal. The chapel used the pre-1956 Missal. Yet both will continue the Mass regardless
of the singing.
There are some parts of the Mass that can be said while the singing is going on. For example, the first part of the Canon can be said during the Sanctus. But the Consecration can’t. So if the Sanctus is too long, the priest will be forced to wait until it’s over before he can say the Consecration. In certain Mass settings this problem is solved by splitting the Sanctus and saying the Benedictus after the consecration of the wine. I seem to recall Fr. Fortescue classifying this as an abuse, but I don’t remember the source.
Hope this helps. As always, take my words with a grain of salt — I’m a layman and no kind of liturgist.
dcs, Bach composed several mass settings. On the shelf next to this computer I have an album that includes mass settings in the following keys: F major, G major, G minor, and A major (BWVs 233-236). He also composed several additional settings of the Sanctus. Here’s more:
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Vocal/BWV233-242.htm
According to my liner notes, these masses were intended for Lutheran use (which distinguishes them from the B minor mass, commissioned by a Catholic nobleman if memory serves correctly). But they use the standard texts of the Kyrie, Gloria, and Sanctus, so they could certainly be used in a Catholic mass.
AC, Bach’s mass in B minor takes roughly 2 hours to sing through, depending on the tempos used. That’s just the Ordinary: Kyrie, Gloria, Creed, Sanctus, and Agnus Dei. The Gloria alone is 38-and-a-half minutes in the recording closest to hand at the moment (Eugen Jochum’s direction), and the Creed lasts for 36 minutes. I applaud your fortitude in kneeling through a 2-hour nuptial mass, but I’m not sure if that’s quite the point. I wonder if the reason that so many people say almost reflexively that the mass in B minor is inappropriate for liturgical use, is not because they fear long masses, but because the length and floridity of Bach’s setting would dominate the event and overshadow the parts of the mass that are more central. It is not infrequently cited as the greatest piece of music ever written. All the more reason to use it mass, you say. Maybe, but then again maybe the choir should never be as prominent as it would have to be if the mass in B minor were used liturgically.
Frankly, I’m with Rbrown here in disliking the liturgical use of symphonic music. But I’ll go a step further; I’m not even that big a fan of polyphony at mass. I love it — who wouldn’t? — but it seems to me that it often calls attention to itself in a way that Gregorian chant never does. I guess I should have been a Carthusian…
I would leave to hear some counter-arguments, though.
After I posted that I remembered reading somewhere that there are some discrepancies between Bach’s text, in the mass of B minor, and the Ordinary of the Mass. If the following is an accurate rendition of Bach’s text, you can pick them out here:
http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~wfb/cantatas/232.html
I count one difference in the Gloria, one in the Creed, and one in the Sanctus. The first two are fairly minor, but the change from tua to eius in the Sanctus actually seems pretty major. The prayer no longer addresses God. I suppose that could be changed back without affecting the music, since tua and eius have the same number of syllables, but the other changes — since they insert words into the Ordinary — would necessitate changes to the music as well.
So I guess those differences would disqualify it right off, all questions of length and musical suitability aside?
I have enjoyed reading the discussion about the propriety of using Mozart, Haydn and Schubert masses in our liturgies. I happen to agree with their use, and have had the privilege of singing many of these lovely masses while I was a member of Father MacAfee’s choir. My point though is that we should not forget how far we have come. It is wonderful can be can argue about such things! The freer use of the 1962 mass is in sight. We can see the light at the end of the tunnel. I hope that we will all keep praying for our Holy Father during this difficult time, and also for our bishops who can facilitate the implementation of the Moto Propio, when it comes out, or who can make very difficult.
This Motu Proprio is very good news for the Latin Church and for the Catholic communion at large!
One quick question that touches on issues very near and dear to Father Z’s heart:
Will priests be allowed to celebrate the Tridentine rite in the vernacular? In the USA, there was a very beautiful translation done in 1962.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/lmass/ord.htm
My sense is that by allowing the 1962 translation to be used, it will almost guarantee a more pervasive use of the Tridentine rite in all English-speaking countries. A lack of knowledge of Latin on the part of the clergy (and the faithful) might, on the other hand, inhibit its use.
My question would also apply to other churches around the world, of course (missions in Asia, Africa, etc etc.) . And I ask this as a great admirer of the Cyrillo-Methodian missionary tradition of (accurate) translation into the language of the people.
God bless from your friendly neighborhood Greek Catholic,
Gordo
And I ask this as a great admirer of the Cyrillo-Methodian missionary tradition of (accurate) translation into the language of the people.
As I understand it, there’s some debate over whether Old Church Slavonic was ever really the language of the people. It certainly wasn’t the language of all the Slavs, yet it was initially adopted by all the Slavs for their sacred rites, whether Roman or Byzantine.
Frankly, if a priest can’t learn the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin, I have to wonder whether he is qualified to offer the traditional Mass at all.
Gordo: Interesting question. I suspect something like that would be WAY down the road. However, I remember my old pastor at St. Agnes in St. Paul, Msgr. Richard Schuler, talking about that translation and the fact that he had used it at Nativity parish, also in St. Paul.
Bach composed several mass settings.
Ben, thank you very much for the correction.
As far as the vernacular is concerned, while an English translation of the 1962 Missal would certainly be preferable to the current vernacular Mass, I would hope that it would not become the norm. Even Vatican II held that “the use of Latin is to be retained in the Latin rites” and that the faithful ought to be able to sing the parts of the Mass Ordo that pertain to them in Latin. I don’t see how these worthy goals will be achieved if “the language of the people” becomes the norm.
Muslims and Jews don’t have any issues with using a sacred language. Why ought Catholics?
dcs,
I have seen a mixture of the vernacular and Latin done quite well before. So, I wonder whether it could be a point of accomodation to the needs of the faithful to gradually introduce the Latin, especially through the chant and the responses?
To be frank, the shift from the TLM to the Ordo of Paul VI was a nightmare in terms of applying change management principles to organizations! I would say that the reverse change in emphasis (from NO to TLM) should be managed much more carefully, with greater respect to the uncatechized sensibilities of both clergy and the faithful and without any loss to the positive momentum. The change to a renewed emphasis on the Tridentine rite is more than just an opportunity to reintroduce Latin into worship: it represents a seismic shift away from modern and empty experimentation to a very ancient and venerable form of Catholic worship. The Latin Church needs to RETRAIN the hearts, minds, bodies and souls of all concerned to worship the Holy Trinity according to its proper form. My concern is that without any form of accomodation to the vernacular, we may end up artificially creating barriers to people who desperately need this! Allowing this as a pastoral accomodation may silence what is perhaps on a popular level the strongest argument against restoring the Tridentine rite: “Nobody understands Latin!”
Father Zuhlsdorf, did I mention that I used to participate from time to time in Msgr. Schuler’s Tuesday Night “Underground Seminary”? :-) It was a marvellous educational experience! I hope he is doing well.
God bless and have a Merry Christmas!
Gordo
dcs,
One further point:
Your question: “Muslims and Jews don’t have any issues with using a sacred language. Why ought Catholics?” is an interesting one.
I suppose one could argue that the vital difference between Catholicism and Judaism or Islam is linked to our faith in the incarnation of the Divine Word: Did not the Son of God take flesh and “translate” Himself (following the principle of Divine Accomodation) into the visible language of humanity? The use of the (appropriately translated) vernacular in worship and teaching helps to fulfill the Church’s messianic mission Ad Gentes, “to the nations”. Judaism and Islam admit theologically to universal principles in mission (in varying degrees), but they both seem wedded to the notions that they are more or less bearers of an historic, ethnic culture (Jewish and Arabic) which is generally either imposed on other cultures or separated into an ethnic ghetto.
Catholicism is by its very nature “universal” and has an apostolic mandate to transfor the culture where it is planted.
Pace e’ bene,
Gordo
FYI – just heard from a fairly well-connected source that the Holy Father would announce his intentions re: the Tridentine Rite on Monday, January 8th. This same source will be in Rome at the time (for other reasons).
I’ll believe it when I see it. Still, isn’t ‘hope’ one of the virtues for which we constantly pray?
Please Holy Father, free the 1962 missal soon!
[b]I suppose one could argue that the vital difference between Catholicism and Judaism or Islam is linked to our faith in the incarnation of the Divine Word: Did not the Son of God take flesh and “translate†Himself (following the principle of Divine Accomodation) into the visible language of humanity? The use of the (appropriately translated) vernacular in worship and teaching helps to fulfill the Church’s messianic mission Ad Gentes, “to the nationsâ€Â. Judaism and Islam admit theologically to universal principles in mission (in varying degrees), but they both seem wedded to the notions that they are more or less bearers of an historic, ethnic culture (Jewish and Arabic) which is generally either imposed on other cultures or separated into an ethnic ghetto.
Catholicism is by its very nature “universal†and has an apostolic mandate to transform the culture where it is planted.[/b]
According to John XXIII, this universality of the Church drives the need for the use of Latin. I recommend that you read Veterum Sapientia.
Following the principles set down by the pope, I think would be better to have a Novus Ordo Latin mass than one in vernacular using the 1962 Missal.
Vernacular liturgy means vernacular culture. In these days vernacular culture means abortion and homosexual marriages in formerly Christian countries, and animism and polygamy in African countries.
Well, Jan. 8 is “after Christmas” in a real sense, since the Christmas season in the post-Vatican II calendar ends with Epiphany rather than the Presentation as it did once upon a time. But like you said, we’ll just have to wait and see.
I think Christmastide ends with the Feast of the Baptism of the Lord, in the new calendar.
From Veterum Sapientia, in which JXXIII quotes Pius XI:
“For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure to the end of time … of its very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular.”7
The vernacular language is by definition not universal. Therefore, it is easily understandable that since the vernacularization of the liturgy, missionary activity has been seriously mitigated.
From Veterum Sapientia, in which JXXIII quotes Pius XI:
“For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure to the end of time … of its very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular.”7
The vernacular language is by definition not universal. Therefore, it is easily understandable that since the vernacularization of the liturgy, the missionary activity encouraged by Ad Gentes has been seriously mitigated.
“I think Christmastide ends with the Feast of the Baptism of the Lord, in the new calendar.”
Oops, you’re right. I was unconsciously mashing Epiphany together with the Baptism — Epiphany has historically served as a feast of the Lord’s baptism.