More hijinx about the Holy Father saying the old Mass

I hope the Holy Father does, in fact, say the older form of Mass whenever it pleases.

The Pope of Rome should be able to use the Roman Rite when it pleaseth His Holiness of our Lord.

The other day the story got out that SSPX Bp. Fellay said that the Pope says the older form of Mass.  As if he knows.  Riiiight?

The Catholic Herald has this with my emphases and comments:

So the Pope says the old Mass privately? Well, probably not

The Vatican seems to have denied the story in 2007. Plus, there is footage of the Pope celebrating Mass, in the Ordinary Form, in his private chapel

By Stuart Reid

According to Bishop Bernard Fellay, head of the SSPX, the Pope says the old rite of Mass privately. (Hat tip to Fr Z at WDTPRS.) [Hey… I just passed it along with observations.]

This story has been around for some time, but is it true? Probably not.  [And Mr. Reid knows, right?   I like Mr. Reid btw!]

So far as I can make out the story first appeared in Catholic World News on July 16, 2007. Beneath the headline “Pope Benedict uses older ritual for his private Mass”, CWN reported:

“Pope Benedict XVI, who recently issued a Motu Proprio allowing all Catholic priests to celebrate the old Latin Mass, uses the older ritual himself for his private Mass, CWN has learned.

“Informed sources at the Vatican have confirmed reports that the Holy Father regularly celebrates Mass using the 1962 Roman Missal.”

That story is still being presented as news today, but think about it for a moment. CWN says it “has learned” that the Pope says the old Mass. No, it hasn’t. All it has learned is that unnamed sources have “confirmed reports” that he does so. Not the same thing at all.

The day after CWN released its story, the Vatican declared that the story was not true.

According to the Catholic News Service (CNS):

“Claims that the Pope celebrates his private Mass using the Tridentine rite are incorrect, Jesuit Fr Federico Lombardi told Catholic News Service July 17.”

Fr Lombardi is the director of the Vatican press office, and seems an honest man. It is hard to believe anyway that if the rumours had been true, the Vatican (and therefore ultimately the Pope) would have denied them.  [I am developing sympathy for Fr. Lombardi, but I don’t think he knows anything about this… unless he is in the Pope’s chapel each morning.]

Fr Lombardi suggested that there may have been some confusion about the Pope’s liturgical customs because footage had been issued of the Pope saying Mass facing the altar in his private chapel, where the altar is against a wall.  [Puhleez… I think Bp. Fellay knows the difference between the older form of Mass and the newer.]

Here is a clip of the Pope saying Mass in his private chapel (though whether it is the one issued by the Vatican I do not know). The Mass is the Novus Ordo. The Pope is concelebrating in Italian, and a woman gives one of the readings. [Mr. Reid… what does that prove?]

Does that mean that Bishop Fellay is fibbing? Absolutely not. Bishop Fellay is an honest man. It may be however that from time to time, like so many of us, he believes what he wants to believe. [Fair enough.] Perhaps also passionate traditionalists are too fond of secrets. They tend to live in a world where nothing is as it seems. [Huh?  I think the same can be asserted about the liberals as well.] So the Pope says the old Mass “privately”, and therefore secretly.  [If this revolves around the word "secret" I think we will get lost in the weeds.  The fact is that Pope Benedict doesn’t have lots of visitors come each morning for his own Mass in the morning. I am not sure that that makes it "secret".]

Has CWS ever corrected its original story? I cannot find a correction. If I am wrong about all this, if Bishop Fellay is right and the Pope does say the old Mass privately, I will immediately post a correction. It may be, after all, that the Pope has started to say the old rite in private since the Vatican issued its denial.  [Do I hear an "Amen!"?]

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

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


  1. TJerome says:

    Well since we do know that His Holiness celebrated the EF publicly while a cardinal, it would seem more logical, that from time to time, that he would celebrate the EF privately while Pope.

  2. Vince K says:

    How does one clip prove that he doesn’t celebrate the EF? Besides the problem of trying to prove a negative, it obviously doesn’t follow he says the OF sometimes so he must say it all the time. The Pope has said the two forms are “mutually enriching” so it is not too far fetched to think that he alternates the forms. One explanation for Fr. Lombardi’s statement is that he was responding to those who thought he ALWAYS said the EF privately. He could have made this statement knowing that the Pope alternates which form he uses.

  3. Agreed, TJerome. There’s no reason to assume an all-or-nothing situation. A single instance of the Pope privately celebrating in the Extraordinary form wouldn’t prove that he always celebrates privately in the EF. Ditto the Novus Ordo. I would assume that he celebrates in both forms. Heck, he might even have a somewhat regular schedule, every other day, every Wednesday, who knows…

  4. The chances are slightly better that these pundits know what’s going on in the pope’s chapel than the pope’s bathroom, but I wouldn’t trust ’em on either.

    It’s also dorky to treat something privately done (and hence not easy to find out about but not impossible) as the same as something secret. I personally doubt that the pope would ever stoop to saying any Mass “secretly”, unless it were putting someone innocent in danger.

    OTOH, it’s a pretty standard stubborn German behavior to just do what you’re going to do, without feeling any particular need to advertise it. If the pope feels like saying an EF Mass some morning or most mornings, he just rolls into the chapel and says (or sings) it.

    And he’ll again say an EF Mass in public, whenever he’s good and ready to do so. Heck, he might just roll over to any church any day and do that, although he’d probably want to give Marini a little warning so they have the trained people in place on the altar. It wouldn’t surprise me a bit, especially after he’s got people more used to hearing Latin OF Masses these days.

  5. Venerator Sti Lot says:

    Very sensible comments, all, TJJerome, Vince K, and MatthewSiekierski. The hooha about this strikes me as bizarre and grotesque in the exteme (am I so out of touch?)! I would hope that the Holy Father celebrates EF and variously OF in Latin and in the many vernacular versions in languages he knows (does anyone in the wide world know how many that is?). Excuse me if I am tending toward off-topic, but the topic suddenly reminded me of interesting things I have read here in the past about biritualism, and this jolted me to wonder, is the Holy Father biritual? (It also makes me wonder whether anyone is multiritual: excuse my ignorance, but it is not simply a matter of ‘St. John Chrysostom/St. Basil’ in different languages, is it?)

    With apologies and thanks for any information!

  6. Geoffrey says:

    I would still like to know how Bishop Fellay would know.

    A number of years ago I recall hearing that Venerable Pope John Paul the Great privately celebrated Mass according to the 1962 Missal while at Castel Gandalfo, but it didn’t get nearly this much media attention!

  7. robtbrown says:

    It was common knowledge that Paul VI still was using the 1962 Missal when he celebrated privately. That didn’t seem to have much of an effect on the way mass was being celebrated in parishes.

  8. FranzJosf says:

    For over ten years I have been following the SSPX and Bishop Fellay very closely. Communications between Rome and Econe happen at both the official and the unofficial levels; the SSPX has friends and sympathizers within the Roman Curia. One thing I know to be true about Bishop Fellay: he does not say anything he does wish to say. Now it is possible that he is mis-informed, but I doubt he would say anything like this without being absolutely sure. In fact, given Romita, it may have been the intention of some close to the Holy Father to send this ‘reassuring’ message to the faithful of the SSPX chapels.

    Bishop Fellay is a learned man and wise in the highway and biways of human nature, and he is much more patient than a certain kind of Trad poster who wants everything to change by fiat this afternoon. He knows that the ebs and flows of human action and the results of action take time, like the tide.

    I have a high respect for Bishop Fellay as a man and as a prelate. Allowing for human error, he is a trustworthy man. I believe that he would not announce this fact unless he were absolutely sure it is true. (If you listen to any of his talks, he is very careful to separate rumor from fact.)

  9. shadowlands says:

    He’s the Pope, he can do what he likes. As long as he clears it with God, what authority does any man have to throw at him? Just opinions, powerless opinions, that will fade and die and be forgotten. The Mass’s, now their fruit will go on forever.

  10. kat says:

    LOL Shadowlands!
    “As long as he clears it with God…” That’s great.
    I think sometimes people forget the Vicar of Christ on earth has no one over him on this earth, in neither the spiritual or temporal realm! He answers truly only to God.

    Even thought he World Court and other fools think he should answer to them…but I digress.

  11. HighMass says:

    What is the real issue Here??? As stated He is the Holy Father, and if he chooses to Celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in the O.F. or the E.F. It is HIS Business. Don’t forget ALL the Popes Since the Council in there Private Chapel have said Holy Mass Facing the East “Ad Orientiem” and it is doubtful any Pope Since the council (Except Pope Benedict) have said the E.F.

  12. dcs says:

    Not only did CWS not issue a correction, they stood by their original story.

  13. asperges says:

    One, single, public celebration of the old rite by the Holy Father would forward the cause of the EF by light years. It is inconceivable that he will not do so at a point he feels is appropriate.

    I attach little credence to affirmations and denials as above. Both sides will distort the facts to suit. Just one public Mass, Holy Father, just one…. please.

  14. HighMass says:

    Asperges, AMEN!

  15. Jerry says:

    “He’s the Pope, he can do what he likes.”

    The Holy Father is subject to the same laws as the rest of us. While he does have the authority to change some of the laws, although not at his personal whim, he does not have the privilege of ignoring them. Even when he contemplates acting within the law he must be considerate of the potential ramifications of his actions. So, overall, I would say the pope has _less_ freedom to do what he likes than most of the rest of us.

  16. robtbrown says:

    The Holy Father is subject to the same laws as the rest of us. While he does have the authority to change some of the laws, although not at his personal whim, he does not have the privilege of ignoring them. Even when he contemplates acting within the law he must be considerate of the potential ramifications of his actions. So, overall, I would say the pope has less freedom to do what he likes than most of the rest of us.
    Comment by Jerry

    Not really. The pope who is the supreme legislator. He promulgates canon and liturgical law, so he can dispense himself from it whenever he wants.

  17. robtbrown says:

    Should be: The pope is the supreme legislator.

  18. Fr. Lombardi answering this question is like me addressing rumors that I kissed my wife on Saturday evening.

    The real mystery in my mind isn’t so much whether the Holy Father celebrates the EF or not, but why in God’s name Fr. Lombardi would give ANY answer at all, for one, and then once he made that mistake, why he would give an answer that didn’t also include, “The EF of Holy Mass is an entirely valid and venerable rite of the Church and has been for some fifteen hundred year now. This is true whether the Pontiff celebrates it publicly, privately or not at all.” In other words, “what difference does it make?” (I say that while also admitting that it would make a “difference” to me in that I would be delighted if he does celebrate the EF in public, mind you.)

    I find a couple of things hard to believe:

    One, that the Holy Father who issued Summorum Pontificam is going to let the prospect of left wing nuttiness preclude him from celebrating the E.F. – a liturgy he clearly holds in extremely high esteem.

    It’s also hard to believe he would feel the need to hide it if he does, as though it’s a source of scandal. I can see him not trumpeting it, I suppose, (not that I think that’s entirely wise) but now that the question has gotten a denial from Fr. Lombardi, I would not be at all surprised if the Holy Father either celebrates the EF in public, or at the very least plainly acknowledges celebrating it in private. Seems to me he almost has to, figuratively speaking.

    I’m a little surprised that he hasn’t done this already. Why? Because the present atmosphere is just too loaded, IMO. The implication now – false though it is – is that it is somehow scandalous, or at the least, remarkable for the Holy Father to celebrate the EF. That mindset needs to be cured and there’s only one way to do it, it seems.

  19. Vince K says:

    @Louie: Seeing that all of this happened over three years ago, I don’t think the Holy Father sees this as a pressing issue.

  20. Tom Ryan says:

    “Bishop Fellay is an honest man. It may be however that from time to time, like so many of us, he believes what he wants to believe.”

    That line indicates that the icy relations have thawed, somewhat. It’s like saying Bishop Fellay wants to be on the same side as the pope; that he empathizes with his situation but is blinded by his love for the Holy Father. Oh well, at least there was no mention of “Extreme Traditionalists” or “schismatics.”

  21. shadowlands says:

    Sorry, this following prayer is going rather off topic, but maybe also getting to the ultimate point….Eternal Father, we humbly offer Thee our poor presence, and that of the whole of humanity, from the beginning to the end of the world at all the Masses that ever have or ever will be prayed. We offer Thee all the pains, sufferings, prayers, sacrifices, joys, and relaxations of our lives, in union with those of our Lord Jesus here on earth. May the Most Precious Blood of Christ, all His Blood, Wounds, and Agony save us, through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. Amen. [This prayer should be recited daily, and be made known.]

  22. teaguytom says:

    If the Holy Father used to celebrate mass in the EF as an archbishop,why is it unthinkable that he use it for private masses? He IS the pope that liberalized it’s use for the church. It would be almost expected to hear of him celebrating his mass in the EF. The liberals are holding on to one last hope that this is all just to appease the rad trads and it will end with B16. The children want their summer of fun to last forever.

  23. “@Louie: Seeing that all of this happened over three years ago, I don’t think the Holy Father sees this as a pressing issue.”

    Hi Vince,

    The dust up started3 yrs ago, but Fr. Lombardi (according to the story) addressed it just last week.

    “Claims that the Pope celebrates his private Mass using the Tridentine rite are incorrect, Jesuit Fr Federico Lombardi told Catholic News Service July 17.”

  24. jaykay says:

    I think a lot of our “liberal” bros & sisses are still in strong denial about the validity of the 2007 MP, wherein HH affirmed that the older Mass was never abrogated. If any finding had held to the contrary they would have been perfectly satisfied of course. Therefore if HH decides to celebrate it in a private capacity it is an utterly logical development of his thinking that led to the issue of the MP in the first place (that there are 2 valid rituals) and shouldn’t cause the spoiled brats to go crying to Mummy. But they won’t make the connection… Anyway what the Holy Father celebrates in his *private* chapel is entirely his business. Pity it’s not taken as the standard practice but we live in hope.

  25. Henry Edwards says:

    asperges: One, single, public celebration of the old rite by the Holy Father would forward the cause of the EF by light years.

    I’ve said something like this myself in several posts, but I wonder if it really would have that much effect. For instance, on those bishops who are ignoring SP anyway, and probably don’t watch papal Masses on EWTN all that avidly. As compared, perhaps, with some “SP teeth” that might actually increase the number of TLM’s in parishes.

    The larger issue is that the Pope’s primary objective has to be improved celebration of the “normative Mass” that is attended by about 99.6% of Sunday Catholics. Hence the question as to how a papal TLM would support this over-riding objective. Would it help, or somehow hinder, the reform of the reform?

    At any rate, I think whether we’ll see TLM at the high altar in St. Peter’s depends on his estimate of how it will affect the liturgy for all Catholics, rather than on how it will promote the TLM for its own sake.

  26. Supertradmum says:

    Those who ignore the Pope on moral issues, ignore him on liturgical issues. Those seminaries and parishes which positively discourage the EF also are disobedient in other matters. What the Pope does simply does not concern the so-called liberal establishment.

  27. Maltese says:

    aspereges: One, single, public celebration of the old rite by the Holy Father would forward the cause of the EF by light years. It is inconceivable that he will not do so at a point he feels is appropriate.

    Exactly, couldn’t agree more, and therein lies the crux. But the problem with the reasoning that: “say it too soon, and it may cause scandal” train of thought, is that time is already wasting. I agree that the Pope is trying to be prudent; but methinks he is being too prudent. No doubt he doesn’t want to impose as did Paul VI (intoxicated in the early years, as he was, by Bugnini), but the Church is wallowing, and could use the strong example of an EF mass by our Pope.

    There is strong evidence that our Pope has read this book, Michael Davies was rest assured that he would be a great friend of Tradition; and, indeed, he has proven himself to be!

    I would actually be surprised if the Pope didn’t say the TLM in private!

  28. Pope Benedict XVI, in my humble opinion, offers the Papal Mass in the OF in the “spirit of the Tradition”, which is, in fact, the spirit of the EF.
    Since his installation as Pope, the Papal liturgies have changed drastically.
    No more the Archbishop Marini influences, but the Msgr. Marini.
    Subtle, maybe.
    Hard to distinguish for those who are not intimately involved with both Forma.
    That’s just my observation. It’s the interior and reverent celebration that matters.
    There may be a day, soon, where the full Papal Sacred Liturgy in the “usus antiquior” will be offered in all its splendor. I pray it is soon.

  29. Gulielmus says:

    One, single, public celebration of the old rite by the Holy Father would forward the cause of the EF by light years. It is inconceivable that he will not do so at a point he feels is appropriate.

    Of course the question arises, what is the “cause of the EF,” especially in the Holy Father’s mind? There are some who advocate a wholesale return to the TLM, but I respectfully submit that nothing the Holy Father has ever said indicates that that is a goal of his.

    (The Pope has been fairly clear that he is pursuing a reform of the reform. As was discussed here on a while ago by Fr Soetelo and others, his preface to Msgr Gamber’s book clearly called the improvised abuses of some priests a “banal, on-the-spot” product, not the Novus Ordo itself. And SP calls for each of the forms to influence the other, does it not?)

    Now if the “cause” is a more widespread availability, well, perhaps his public celebration of it would make a difference. But I imagine he knows how factions on both sides of the argument might misinterpret his actions. Bishop Fellay’s reasons for airing what I take to be speculation on the subject are somewhat inscrutable.

  30. Mitchell NY says:

    If the Holy Father says the Older Mass from time to time then that would qualify Bishop Fellay’s remarks. If he has never said it since becoming Pontiff then something is amiss. I would think it reasonable that from time to time the Pope may say the Tridentine Mass as maybe he simply does not like or agree with some of the daily Masses in the new Missal. He may feel personally that some days better represent a Catholic expression that is in his heart found in the Johannine Missal. He may like particular prayers or words. So it does seem plausible. And why not? It is a form of the Roman Rite and has never been abrogated. I do not know if there is some Papal rule that they he must say one Missal or the other. Maybe someone could enlighten me, but there probably is not precedent to fall back on as the Roman Rite to my knowledge has never had two “forms” before. What’s a Pope to do? All the more reason to just celebrate both forms of the Rite so that everyone finds their place, alongside the Pope, inside the Church. I bet all speculation would end about his personal Masses and would set equilibrium from the NO to Tridentine. Isn’t this inevitable anyways? Or will the Extraordinary Form never be seen in the Vatican as celebrated by our Holy Father?

  31. Mitchell: The Latin Rite has several forms: the Ambrosian, the Mozarabic, the rite of Braga (Portugal) as well as the 1970Missal and the 1962 Missal. There is no real problem here, unless there are aberrations/abuses.
    That’s the teaching of the Church, of Pope Benedict.

  32. catholicmidwest says:

    It doesn’t seem to have occurred to any of these so-called “experts” that perhaps the pope says it one way on some days and the other way on other days. Maybe he even says mass according to the other LEGAL rites that are in union with the church. He could do that, you know. HE is the pope. And those forms of mass are all LEGAL, including the Mass of 1962.

  33. tecumseh says:

    Comment by Geoffrey — 20 July 2010 @ 10:29 am…….

    Geoffrey catch up will you…..Bishop Fellay, just after the conclave……

    “Don’t ask how we know, but we know, the Cardinal McCormack and the Cardinal Of Scotland, with Cardinal Daneels, moved to vote Cardinal Martini”….

    Bishop Fellay, I think deliberately mixed up the name of Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor……and the Scottish Cardinal Keith O’Brien…in order to cover himself from leaking what is not supposed to be leaked by anyone…!!!!!

    As for Cardinal Cormac….he famously said on British TV News….”THEY….Have voted for THIS, man”…..??????

    “This man” is saying the Traditional Mass….

    Do you think he’d mind coming and saying a Requiem Mass in Scotland, the Scottish clergy are some of the most backward on the Planet…..a staunch supporter of the Traditional Mass from Scotland will be needing a Requiem in the not too distant future.

  34. “Perhaps also passionate traditionalists are too fond of secrets.”

    Mr. Reid has been known to accuse traditionalists of being “gnostic”. This seems to fit with his unfair assumptions about traditionalists.

  35. tecumseh says:

    Mr Reid is a “Good Egg”, and he is on the side of the Angels when it comes to the Traditional Mass.

  36. DARWIN says:

    all well and good if the Holy Father is celebrating the EF from in private. We all have to pray for him. There are ravening wolves out there ready to pounce anytime.

    Anyway, may i please ask for some help? the university where i go to will be celebrating it’s 400th anniversary next year (it was founded in 1611 by a Spanish Dominican, Philippines). I had the idea to request for a celebration of the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite during the quadricentennial year. The problem is i don’t know where to start. should i start a petition (most of my friends say they also want the Tridentine Mass) or ask the rector first? are the Dominicans friendly toward tradition? should i explain to other people the Holy Father’s SP?

    Thanks in advance!!! God bless!!!

  37. Geoffrey says:

    “Geoffrey catch up will you…”

    I don’t think I have ever been addressed in such a rude and disrespectful way in all my life.

  38. Joshua08 says:


    If they are Dominicans and willing to do an older form of Mass, perhaps they would prefer to exercise their right to their own Rite. The Dominican rite is something very important to Dominicans who are traditionally minded. Of course, different provinces will have different attitudes. But it would be wise to see if there are any priests who are willing to do it and at least informally ask the school. I certainly wouldn’t start with a petition…it makes it sound like a political thing. If they say they do not think there would be much interest, then a petition might be in order to show that there is. But I wouldn´t start with that.

  39. I honestly think the reason he hasn’t is because of all the foaming at the mouth (from just about every ideological corner) that the mere rumor of him offering the TLM privately has caused. Don’t get me wrong. I want him to offer the TLM publicly. However, I’m not so sure the aftermath will make even traditionalists happy. Perhaps it’s better that we wait ten to twenty years before a pope starts to offer the TLM publicly. Maybe the Church isn’t positioned properly yet. Remember folks. The novus ordo didn’t pop up out of thin air. It had been planned and crafted for decades. It will take decades to craft the return of the TLM.

  40. tecumseh says:

    Comment by Geoffrey — 20 July 2010 @ 9:30 pm…..

    Sorry about that Geoff, didn’t think that was all that robust an opening…..

  41. Ed the Roman says:

    Your skin must be this thick:


    to post here.

  42. Henry Edwards says:

    Regarding the ancient Dominican liturgy, largely unchanged since 1256:
    Return of the Dominican Rite
    News from the summer chapter: it has been decided to integrate the Dominican rite again as part of the normal formation at the Dominican House of Studies in Washington, D.C.

    Starting with 21 incoming novices this fall.

  43. Yes, Neal and Vince… You’re right! I didn’t read the piece closely enough. So… the bulk of Reid’s story concerns a denial that took place 3 years ago? Slow news year, eh? : )

  44. Henry Edwards says:

    Just so everybody gets it …..

    It was on July 17, 2007, before the implementation of Summorum Pontificum, that Fr. Lombardi denied that Pope Benedict was celebrating the TLM privately then.

    Even if the denial was true then — which is by no means certain — what does it say about whether he is celebrating the TLM privately now, 3 years after Summorum Pontificum?

    I suspect that we can all answer this question correctly.

  45. Venerator Sti Lot says:

    Two related and I hope not too lazy, but just honestly ignorant (though perhaps too broad) questions:

    1. What ‘protocols’ are there as to what Rites and forms of Rites would be celebrated where and when (and are there reliable internet resources to look such things up)?

    2. How far would such ‘protocols’, formal or ‘small-t traditional’, at present (and for how much of the foreseeable future) tend almost certainly to be ‘overruled’ in practice by what seem astonishing ‘liturgical-political prudential hothouse’ conditions?

  46. Henry Edwards says:

    “Plus, there is footage of the Pope celebrating Mass, in the Ordinary Form, in his private chapel.”

    Wow, this is really big news! A worthy leader for this riveting story.

    Hmm … I wonder whether I should inform Mr. Reid that I have a half-dozen DVD’s copied from EWTN broadcasts, showing the Pope celebrating the Ordinary Form, not just privately, but publicly in St. Peter’s Basilica. Maybe I can get a credit for this in a new CWN story. Think of the headline … POPE CELEBRATES ORDINARY FORM PUBLICLY!

  47. chironomo says:

    Concerning the Pope publicly saying the EF… it may not be a factor, but keep in mind that the 3 year self-imposed “comment period” is quickly approaching. I still am convinced that Benedict included that in the letter accompanying the MP for a good reason…I think it demarks the beginning of “Phase II” of the Pope’s plans for the EF, whatever those may be. It would not surprise me to see a public celebration of the EF sometime soon after the 3 year time period has passed…

  48. Joshua08 says:

    I find this ironic. The Province of St. Joseph is now teaching all their seminarians the Dominican Rite

    To “Venerator”
    In 1969 when the Dominicans requested to be able to use the Roman Rite (Novus Ordo) the permission they received included in it that the Dominican liturgy could be celebrated by any friar with permission of the Master General or his provincial. So the Dominican Rite not only never went away, Rome refused to kill it by throwing in an unasked for provision to allow it to stay. The Dominicans did a lot of Romanizing willingly in the 1950? and 1960’s anyways, which showed a change in the current (in the 19th century the chapters rejected such Romanizing tendencies or the idea that they should adopt the Roman Rite)…the changes that were made after Trent were largely forced by misguided bureaucrats in Rome

    But anyhow. It is ironic for three reasons

    1. The eastern Province (of St. Joseph) has traditionally been less attached to the Dominican Rite. The guides for that rite that came from that province (Bonniwell) include a lot more Romanizations than on the West coast. Most of these were minor (such as how to the light the candles…Roman is different than Dominican)

    2. The Dominican liturgy was before the Motu proprio allowed somewhat in the Western province, but I am unaware of any member of the Eastern province doing it

    3. As far as I can tell, the Western province has all or most of the regularly scheduled Dominican rite Masses

    So I find this refreshing for the Eastern Province to be doing this.

  49. irishgirl says:

    Amen to both your posts, nazareth priest!

  50. “Perhaps also passionate traditionalists are too fond of secrets. They tend to live in a world where nothing is as it seems.”

    And who are you sir? I have met many Catholics of who live in a fantasy world too.

    Maybe you are a neo-con who attends the New Mass and rashly dumps all those who call themselves Traditionalists into one camp. So hypothetically let’s say you are. I too could easily dump people into groups based on what they call themselves or what Mass they attend. I could look at the Catholics at my local parish who have no idea what the true faith is and are soaked in error and abuse. And since they attend the New Mass then by golly you must be like them since you too call yourself Catholic and attend the New Mass (in this hypothetical situation). I will then go ahead and use a single word to describe you all and attach negative connotations behind it. Maybe I can get a job at the Catholic Herald now!

    And unauthentic traditionalists don’t get a pass too; labeling everyone who attends the Novus Ordo has not true Catholics etc.

Comments are closed.