Yesterday I wrote that the long-expected Instruction on Summorum Pontificum is on its way.
Unfortunately, the comments under that entry are… shall we say… not well-focused.
Under this entry, however, I hope for something far better.
Here is task for you, if you chose to accept.
If you could contribute three essential points to such an Instruction, what would they be?
These would be the most important points, sine quibus non, without which this document should not be issued.
Make them practical, concise and realistic.
That means suggestions like “Make all priests celebrate only the Extraordinary Form!”, or “Eliminate the Novus Ordo!” are simply dumb. You may have a rich fantasy life, but those won’t appear in such an Instruction on this planet.
Also… do not engage each other. Leave each person’s comment entirely alone. Don’t correct anyone, respond to anyone, react to anyone, mention anyone, agree with anyone else. At all. Just post your own points. Period. I trust that’s clear.
Those of your with practical experience of working with the provisions of Summorum Pontificum will have especially good observations.
THINK, then post.
REMEMBER: Summorum Pontificum and an Instruction are NOT solely about YOUR DIOCESE or even YOUR COUNTRY. These are documents for the whole Church, though clearly the issues they address burn hotter in some places than in others.
Point 1:
Point 2:
Point 3:
Loading ...
1. Every diocese will instruct its seminarians and its priests in the celebration of the EF and the NO.
2. If multiple masses are offered, at least one should be EF. In English Speaking areas, for example, EF will take precedence before Spanish, Igbo, Portuguese, Polish, Esperanto Masses.
3. Every Diocese will be required to provide the resources to every parish that doesn’t have the means to purchase the items necessary for the celebration of both forms of the Mass. For Parish’s that do have the means, they will be given a list of what is necessary, and will be overseen as necessary. Bottom line is, bishops will get involved in implementing BOTH forms correctly.
1) Bishops should promote the EF in their diocese by taking a leadership role and offering an EF mass regularly at their cathedral.
2) a stable group could be as small as 20 or 30 registered parish members.
3) Cathechisis should be an ongoing and intergral part the the EF promotion and continuation.
#1 Stipulate that at least one priest per diocese be trained in the exrtaordinary form.
#2 At least one Mass per diocese per month be offered in the extraordinary form (maybe at different locations each time)
#3 Bishops and priests (and the faithful) be catechized at to the importance of the EF and the benefits it would have on the Novus Ordo especially as it is outlined in true adherence to Vatican II documents.
I live in a rural diocese and when you suggest an EF to a priest or bishop its like its not even on their radar. Our bishop recently told me that he was too busy promoting “full and conscious and active participation” to worry about EF Masses.
1) Every Bishop should be required to offer the EF in their diocese on at least a monthly basis at the Cathedral. This must be a Mass that fulfills the Sunday obligation. The Bishop of course could delegate this task, but the Mass must be at the Cathedral.
2) Every diocese should have a training program in place offered at convenient times (online would be acceptable) so that priests can easily learn the EF. The Bishops conferences could set up online training modules.
3) All priests should be required to learn the EF as part of their ongoing professional development (I know that the priesthood is not a job, but a vocation, and that priests operate in persona Christe, but ongoing training and professional development ought to be required of priests, as it is of all responsible people with important jobs). Each priest should be required to complete the necessary training within a reasonable frame of time (4 years from the start of the policy?)No priest should be forced to celebrate this Mass if he is unwilling, but the successful completion of the training program ought to be mandatory for continued pastoral work in the dioceses. Priests who refuse to complete the training will forfeit ability to be promoted within the hierarchy, or operate as pastors or administrators of parishes.
1. There will be a study set up with clear guidelines as to how a reconciliation between the old liturgical calendar and the new will be reconciled. (for “bi-formal” priests, two sets of readings/two different feasts makes for an added strain in sermon prep. It also creates schizophrenic congregations: celebrating completely different feasts on the same day (not a healthy situation)).
2. While the stable group requirement will remain, it will be defined to mean any group of any number in the parish (it need not be a minimum number). (this will allow the EF to be promoted, even in parishes which have lost, for the most part, the sense of the sacred. These parishes need the EF the most anyway. Hopefully it will reintegrate parishes in which “traditionalists” have left because they could not tolerate the irreverent liturgies)) By allowing such a definition, priests will be strongly encouraged to learn the EF; seminaries will likewise be “strongly encouraged” (I doubt the Holy See will mandate seminaries to instruct in the EF (sadly)).
3. There will be clarifications in regard to OF elements entering the EF, namely, reception of communion in the hand, the use of married Permanent Deacons as Ordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, the use of the vernacular (especially in regard to the “lectionary”), and the use of women as acolytes. (if the EF will be promoted in less traditional parishes, these issues will come up; they should be addressed before the abuses occur).
#1 EF Masses should be no more than one hour’s commute from any part of the diocese.
#2 Weekly EF Masses should be the norm, even if they are weekday or anticipatory. If this is not possible in a diocese then a monthly EF to make ones Sunday Obligation is preferred to a monthly weekday Mass.
#3 Push those altars back so that priests can offer both the OF and the EF as the rubrics expect them to. It’s hard to turn to someone if you are already facing them.
#1 Each Deanery within a Diocese will be required to have one of its Churches offer at least one EF Mass on a Sunday morning.
#2. A minimum of 10% of the Diocesan Appeal Monies will be directed to the instruction of Priests in the EF Mass.
#3. On The Anniversary Date of the Promulgation of Summorum Pontificum, every Bishop in The Latin Rite will be required to promote The EF by establishing a Day of Instruction and Public Celebration at which he will officiate ;and this will be a yearly event.
I have no concept of how an “Instruction” typically reads, so pardon my clumsiness:
1. The diocesan ordinary will require those priests who approach him with a desire to celebrate Mass using the Missal of 1962 to demonstrate proficiency in Latin pronunciation and in the rubrics of that rite before permitting them to celebrate in the Extraordinary Form at a public venue.
2. The diocesan ordinary will instruct his clergy who desire to celebrate Mass according to the 1962 Missal to refrain from celebrating solemn forms of the same unless and until he is able to do so worthily, with properly trained and rehearsed ministers, attendants and choir. In cases where such are lacking, a celebrant should be commanded to restrict his celebration to the forms known as “Missa Lecta”, “Missa Recitata”, and (where possible) “Missa Cantata”.
3. The diocesan ordinary will instruct clergy celebrating according to the Missal of 1962 to take care that solemnity be preserved, however without making of the celebration a nostalgic museum piece. Use of the 1962 Missal does not imply that the clock stopped in 1962 and it should not be imagined that all accidentals employed–vestments (or styles of vestments), paraments, music and so on–must have their origins in a time before the Second Vatican Council in order to be legitimately used.
All things to the contary notwithstanding. Given at Rome…
1.) Training for all seminarians in the EF (and if I had it my way it would be in the Mass that is suitable for their region/order i.e. Dominicans learn Dominican Mass, Toledo-ians in Spain Learn the Mozarbic, Lyonese Priests learnt he Lyonesian Mass, etc and in England and her former colonies the Sarum Rite)
2.) Readings in Vernacular (by laymen) for Low Masses, Sung in the Vernacular (by deacons/subdeacons) for Masses with music
3.) End of Silent Masses Dialog Masses at minimum with option for Deacons to serve at the altar in Low Masses
Now if there were a complimentary document for the OF I would want to see these three things on the list
1.) Propers must be used
2.) Ad oreintem a must
3.) Return of Altar Rail (and Rood Screen, where possible) and communion on tongue
1) All Seminaries be required to instruct seminarians in the EF
2) Yearly Regional Workshops must be given for existing priests wishing to learn or practice the EF (Neighboring Dioceses can collaborate resources for a single workshop). Dioceses must ensure that a certain proportion of their priests attend each workshop
3) Each Diocese must offer an EF Mass at least once a month (after a certain grace period for items 1 & 2 to kick in. Weekly EF should be strongly encouraged.
Of course, sad to say, the above implementations would mean nothing without some provision for independent review that the above is implemented in good faith. Clearly there are too many instances of doing as little as possible to give an appearance of compliance
1. Right of any priest denied permission to offer the TLM to petition the Holy See and that a remedy be that the priest may transfer to a diocese more accepting of the mass.
2. Requirement that all parishes be required to poll members as to interest in the TLM and if x number respond favorably that a regularly scheduled TLM be established.
3. That all priests be trained to say the TLM within two years.
#1 – SP applies to ALL Western rites (from what I’ve heard a religious order has begun using their former missal and the Ambrosian rite has been allowed to use their pre-revised rite)
#2 – Each diocese should have at least one EF Mass weekly (monthly, in worst case scenario), with the requirement for a stable group remaining, yet constituted a number so small that it would be difficult to prohibit;
#3 – Emphasis on catechesis, so as to better understand the EF and also the differences between the EF and OF.
(1) Given that the so called extraordinary form of the Roman Rite is, in paralell with the ordinary form of that rite, one of the liturgical uses of the Roman Rite approved by ecclesiastical authority for the whole of the Latin Church, universally (as opposed to particular local or personal rites, such as the Ambrosian Rite, the Anglican Use of the Roman Rite, the Rite of Braga, rites particular to religious orders etc), all Latin Church seminaries arround the world are required to provide teaching and training to its seminarians in both the celebration of the ordinary and the extraordinary form.
In connection with the above, the Holy See further insists on the faithful observance by all seminaries of the already existing norms of general Canon Law that require the teaching of the Latin Language to all Latin rite seminarians before ordination, and no candidate to Holy Orders shall be ordained unless those responsible for his formation certify in writing that he has acquired knowledge of Latin at least sufficient for him to be able to read and understand the Liturgical Books printed in the official language of the Church.
(2) The norm of article 5 §1 of the Motu Proprio, according to which “where there is a stable group of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly accept their requests to celebrate the Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962”, does not preclude the possibility of the parish priest deciding to celebrate or (to allow/direct the celebration by his assistant priests) of public Masses prayed in the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite, even if the parish lacks a stable group. The norm of art. 5 §1, therefore, in enjoining the pastor to accept requests when there is a stable group, does not exclude the possibility of a decision taken by the parish priest on his own accord to have the TLM celebrated in his parish for the good of his subjects, even when no requests are made.
Furthermore, as from the first Sunday of Advent falling in the year of Our Lord 2012, whenever in a Latin Church parish church more than one Mass is said on a Sunday, one of the Masses must be said in the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite.
(3) The norms contained in the Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei adflicta having been abrogated and replaced by those contained in the Apostolic Letter Summorum Pontificum, the Holy See reprobates the attitudes prevailing in certain dioceses, in which the Bishops attempt to preclude the legitimate discharge by every priest of the option of celebrating in the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite. Furthermore, Bishops cannot preclude parish priests from accepting requests for public Masses made under art. 5 §1, and every such act of obstruction constitutes an act of disobedience against the express commands of the Roman Pontiff and the authority of the Holy Apostolic See, punisheable in accordance with the general norms of penal canon law.
Point 1: Every diocese should hold a catechetical symposium in 4 geographical areas of the diocese, to educate the faithful on the extraordinary form.
Point 2: There should be a plan starting with the incoming class of seminarians moving forward to educate on the extraordinary form (core cirrculum) and sacraments of the 1962 rituale; as an elective for seminarians currently in a course of studies.
Point 3: Every dean should provide the Ordinary a list of three priests in his deanery who would be an asset in celebration of the EF. The choice, once made should allow for that priest to immerse himself in the 1962 rituale so that the sacraments can be administered when the need arises.
Provide answers to the following articles of Summorum Pontificum:
Clarification of Art. 5, § 1, namely, must the group of faithful petitioning the celebration of the EF liturgy at a given parish be composed of members of the same parish and is the “stabiliter exsistit” a reference to the group’s past or merely a reference to their future commitment? (In paroeciis, ubi coetus fidelium traditioni liturgicae antecedenti adhaerentium stabiliter exsistit, parochus eorum petitiones ad celebrandam sanctam Missam iuxta ritum Missalis Romani anno 1962 editi, libenter suscipiat.)
Clarification of Art. 5, § 2, namely, does it mean that there can be no more than one Sunday EF celebration per parish? (Celebratio secundum Missale B. Ioannis XXIII locum habere potest diebus ferialibus; dominicis autem et festis una etiam celebratio huiusmodi fieri potest.)
Clarification of Art. 5, § 3, namely, can one individual request and be granted an EF Mass for a special occasion, such as a requiem Mass for one’s deceased parent? (Fidelibus seu sacerdotibus id petentibus, parochus celebrationes, hac in forma extraordinaria, permittat etiam in adiunctis peculiaribus, uti sunt matrimonia, exsequiae aut celebrationes occasionales, verbi gratia peregrinationes.)
1. Clarify that in parishes that have multiple Masses, that one of these should be in the EF tradition and then have the backing of the bishop to support the pastor who changes the OF Mass to an EF Mass.
2. Clarify the use of the vernacular for the Liturgy of the Word (Mass of the Catechumens) and the use of the OF lectionary and how to blend that with the EF calendar. Allow the readings to be read from the ambo as in the OF without a duplication in Latin at the altar. Clarify the use of a lay lector for the EF Mass. Also can the antiphons be in English since these are scripture too, especially in the low Mass.
3. Clarify the ad orientem possibility for the OF Mass
#1. Rome (or Ecclesia Dei) will offer more resources for the proper training of priests in the OF.
#2. Rome (or Ecclesia Dei) will send out a letter to determine what the bishops need in every diocese to help them to properly implement SP.
#3. A group or commission of lay faithful, and perhaps priests, to be set up in every diocese to be a support (rather than a thorn in the side) for the local bishops, to help them to implement SP. In other words, the lay faithful can offer their time and energy, as well as prayers and sacrifices, to help the bishops (if a way can be found to help insure that charity and respect for the local ordinary would prevail, even if he is not sympathetic to SP or the TLM).
Point 1: Clarify (really clarify!) the role of the Bishop in the celebrations of the EF within their Diocese.
Point 2: Establish a structure for the training of all priests in both the EF and NO as part of seminary training.
Point 3: Encourage the celebration of at least one EF Mass every Sunday at every parish once training is established by a given date (4 years hence?)
1. The Cathedral of every diocese should celebrate at least one Sunday Solemn High Mass in the Extraordinary Form once a month at the regularly scheduled Mass time.
2. Every diocesan department of liturgy should offer training for musicians and anyone else interested in the Extraordinary Form.
3. Efforts should be made for at least one diocesan-wide celebration of the Extraordinary Form at least once a year.
1) Seminaries are to instruct ALL seminarians in the EF (Mass and Sacraments) over the course of at least 3 courses, with a regular offering of the EF in seminaries
2) Practical, concrete, clear directives on “mutual enrichment” for the EF and OF.
3) Establish the beginnings of a means of reconciling the two calendars.
Point 1: Clarify the calendar. What is to be done with respect to the various feast day differences, etc., especially when solemnities are transferred, and with regards to more recently canonized saints. I don’t know the best answer, but I think some uniformity can be issued from Rome.
Point 2: Ensure that seminarians are trained in both forms of the Roman Rite.
Point 3: Clarify certain points of liturgical development and interpretation. For instance, are the texts of the old Missal to be considered only as the liturgical norms existed at the time of their promulgation, or can some authentic liturgical development be considered?
1. All major seminaries must offer equal hours of training in both forms of Mass. No priest will be allowed to be ordained who cannot proficiently say the Extraordinary Form of Mass. This requirement will be required to be met by all dioceses in the world by the beginning of Advent, 2012.
2. All dioceses shall set up offices to train priests who want to learn the EF. No priest who wants to learn the EF shall be turned away, and no bishop shall hinder in any way any priest who wants to learn the EF or says the EF.
3. Any parish pastor who receives a request from an associate pastor or other priest under his jurisdiction to say the EF at his parish will be required to oblige the request and cannot hinder his associate in any way.
1. Stable group = 3 persons per each Latin Rite parish.
2. Immediately implement ALL past Benedictine reforms to the OF in each Latin Rite parish, while providing the reasons for why this is being done (continuity, unity, logistics, Tradition, Catholic Identity and so forth) no options. Closely follow the Pope’s example and instructions in future reforms as they come down with the ultimate goal being…
3. Full implementation of SP by 9-14-2012 in every Latin Rite parish with at least one EF Sunday Mass each week. Those that are behind or have done nothing so far, it’s time to get busy. Papa Benni’s been patient log enough:) If his initiative is further ignored, iiii. send in the Anglicans.
Point 1: All Seminarians in Priestly Formation must be instructed in the Celebration of the Ordinary Form and the Extraordinary Form.
Point 2: All Bishops in their respective See’s must promulgate a program of instructions for Priest to celebrate the EF. This promulgation is a duty and obligation for all Bishops who made a special vow to obey Peter and his Successors.
Point 3: For a 3 year duration starting from the Promulgation of this Document, all Clerics under the Roman Rite must be able to celebrate not only the Ordinary Form but also the Extraordinary Form. Only through a special dispensation can this point be excused after careful review and approval from the CDW.
I thought about making all 3 points for the mandatory training of seminarians for the EF. But I wanted to have fun and play administration since there is no video game called SIM BISHOP…LOL.
Thanks for the responses so far.
At this point, I urge everyone to review the guidelines I gave in the main entry at the top.
I would LOVE to see these articles contained in a clarification document:
1. SP refers to the use of the 1962 liturgical books as an “extraordinary expression” of the single Roman Rite. “Extraordinary” must not be interpreted in a strictly juridical sense that would in any way restrict or limit its presence as a living and esteemed usage in the Church today. “Extraordinary” is merely descriptive as a means to distinquish from the “ordinary expression” as the currently more common usage.
2. As both the extraordinary and ordinary expressions of the one Roman Rite are equal and valid usages (see Letter to Bishops, 7 July 2007), all clergy of the Latin Church sui juris must be competant to celebrate the Eucharist and other sacraments in both expressions (idonei esse debent).
a. Ordinaries are to ensure that clergy are trained in both expressions. Remedial formation is to be given priority in the care of on-going clergy formation.
b. Those responsible for seminaries are to ensure that formation in both the “ordinary” and “extraordinary” expressions is fully integrated in seminary life and curriculum. No candidate is to be admitted to sacred orders who cannot celebrate the Roman liturgy in the fullness of its two expressions.
c. As certain orders, congregations, and institutes may possesses charisms that emphasize one liturgical expression over another, exemptions from 4.b are reserved to the Congregation of the Clergy or the Congregation for Religious.
3. Although the reconciliation of the movement lead by Archbihsop Marcel Lefebvre continues to be a goal for which all Catholic must earnestly pray and sacrifice, SP is to be understood as part of greater programme of “an interior reconciliation in the heart of the Church.” (see Letter to Bishops, 7 July 2007) To this end, frequent celebrations of the Roman liturgy are to be undertaken by ordinaries in their cathedral and principal churches, especially on solemnities, as models for liturigical celebration in parishes and oratories subject to the ordinary.
Point 1: Canon 249 is to be rigorously enforced.
Point 2: Every seminarian is to assist at at least one EF Mass per week during the academic year.
Point 3: Readings may be spoken or sung in the vernacular at EF Masses.
Point 1. Accessibility. Every cathedral shall offer an EF Mass daily and Sundays, and an EF Mass shall be offered each Sunday in each deanery-sized subdivision of each diocese.
Point 2: Preparation. Every newly ordained diocesan priest shall have been trained to offer the Roman Mass in the extraordinary form.
Point 3. Attraction. The Sunday EF Mass shall be celebrated with the ceremony and participation appropriate to the Day of the Lord.
Comment 1a: Cathedral leadership to set an example for the diocese; exemplary EF liturgy in the cathedral will affect both OF and EF liturgy throughout the diocese. Desirable would be an exemplary sung Mass weekly, solemn Mass monthly, pontifical Mass perhaps quarterly in the cathedral.
Comment 1b: Working to promote the EF during the last 3 years has convinced me the “stable group” issue is less critical than it seemed initially. In dioceses where Catholics are thinly spread, rather than have a weekly EF Mass in every parish where there is a small group desiring it, it may well be better for contiguous parishes to pool both people and resources (e.g., musical) to make exemplary EF liturgy reasonably accessible to a critical mass of participants sufficient for an active EF community.
Comment 2. EF preparation of new priests will take care of Catholic identity and continuity with tradition (for both EF and OF) in the long run. A young priest who learns the EF becomes a new priest, both liturgically and theologically.
Comment 3. Point 3 would exclude a silent low Mass as a sole Sunday EF offering, and suggests instead a sung Mass with incense when appropriate, with the congregation encouraged to join in singing the Ordinary, Pater Noster, and dialogue responses, and with the reading of the Epistle and Gospel at the altar in the vernacular permitted where desired.
This point bears on attraction “attraction” because experience promoting the EF shows that such things are powerful in attracting newcomers—particularly dynamic young families, the best and the brightest—to the EF. That is, glorious Sunday Masses with all the smells and bells, beautiful music, and the kind of active participation that Vatican II (and early 20th century popes) actually called for—the congregation chanting especially the Gloria and Credo (perhaps sometimes leaving the Kyrie, Sanctus, and Agnus Dei for more elaborate choir chants). New young Catholics are especially enthusiastic about singing the Pater Noster (a definite “mutual enrichment”). And I have (initially very reluctantly) come to realize that just the readings in the vernacular—at the altar rather than repeated from the pulpit—can do much to relieve the “Latin turn-off factor” for EF newcomers. (Actually, for these folks the problem is not the lack of the readings in the vernacular, but rather the “dead time” while they are being chanted in Latin, with people who have not yet learned to follow a missal or handout.)
I would like to see specific instructions about how the Novus Ordo can and should incorporate elements of the TLM- specifically, ad-orientem worship and the offertory of the traditional mass.
Point One… Make sure that no matter what Mass we are attending that we know not to communicate without regular confession
Point Two…. Use the word extraordinary and write in the way it should be seen EXTRA TO THE ORDINARY MINISTER OF THE EUCHARIST or written as EXTRA-ORDINARY. The use of good English in place of the hyphen would be A’O.
Point Three….. Do as Paul the sixth asked the priest in the Vernacular and the People in Lation
(1) Updated calendar, reflecting newly-canonized saints (since 1962).
(2) Prefaces from the Ordinary Form.
(3) Readings: establish whether new lectionary can be used; vernacular vs. Latin (personally, I think reading the readings twice is redundant and silly. People have missals. Choose one or the other).
Point 1: All diocesan seminarians of the Latin rite and seminarians for the Anglican Ordinariates are henceforth to be properly trained in both Forms of the Mass.
Point 2: Such training is likewise to be made available to all present priests of dioceses of the Latin rite and of the present Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham. All Ordinaries of such dioceses and the Ordinariate are to be or be made competent in their roles in the celebration of both Forms.
Point 3: Henceforth, all altars set up for the celebration of the Divine Liturgy according any legitimate Form or Use of the Latin rite are to permit ad orientem celebration.
Elaboration:
1. Every present and future diocesan seminarian, as well as men in formation for the Anglican Ordinariates, shall be expected to be capable of serving, celebrating, or otherwise assisting with a Mass in the Extraordinary Form, whether High, Sung, or Low, to the same level of competence expected of them in regards to the Ordinary Form. To that end, they shall be expected to be capable of celebrating Mass in the Ordinary Form in Latin. They shall be expected to celebrate every given Mass in accordance with pastoral prudence and available resources. Likewise, men in formation to be permanent deacons are to receive training appropriate to their possible liturgical roles.
2. In addition, training is to be offered, in accordance with the competencies of the relevant individuals and resources available, to all priests of the Latin rite in the celebration of Mass in the Extraordinary Form. Similar training is to be offered to all such priests in the celebration of the Mass in the Ordinary Form in Latin. All present and future serving Ordinaries are henceforth obliged to ensure their own competency in all relevant manners of participation in the Extraordinary Form and are to be competent or acquire competency in the celebration of Mass in the Ordinary Form in Latin.
3. It is henceforth entirely forbidden, without the express permission of the Holy See, for the establishment of a permanent or semi-permanent set up of any church or chapel properly belonging to the Latin rite not to reasonably permit celebration of the Mass ad orientem. Such places where Mass is celebrated where it is not reasonably possible to celebrate Mass ad orientem are to be altered if at all possible as soon as is possible in all prudence. Situations wherein such alterations are not possible are to be reported to the ordinary, who, having investigated all such reports personally or through a vicar, shall inform the Congregation for Divine Worship, to which is reserved, in consultation with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the right to pronounce authoritatively on such matters. The faithful are reminded that it is not required that versus populum celebration ever be possible at any altar whatsoever.
Three essential clarifications I would like to see (not necessarily the top three, but nonetheless essential):
1. The announcement of a ten-year plan to coordinate the calendars where coordination is possible, including the integration of recently canonized saints into the old calendar, and the inclusion of suppressed feasts and seasons at least as options in the new calendar. Ten years, because things as massive as this should take time, and not be done hastily. The “calendar committee” should not necessarily work to come up with a unified calendar, but at least work to eliminate some of the glaring clashes (having to change antependia between Masses on Septuagesima, et c.)
2. Ministeria quaedam and in particular the subdeaconate. Restoring the subdeaconate to its proper place. Clarifying the rubrics for using “straw subdeacons”
3. clarification that the traditional posture for Holy Communion and the traditional reservation of the role of altar servers to males is to be observed in all celebrations of the Extraordinary Form.
1: That at least one parish in every diocese that is easily accesible via public transit or main roads becomes a center for the EF and offers this form of the mass once a week. The EF shall be offered both as a Saturday vigil (for people that work Sundays) and once during the normal Sunday rotation.
1a. The hours of the Tridentine Latin mass on the Sunday shall be of normal church-going hours and shall not be done at any other time later than 12pm./12:30pm. (This is because from what I’ve seen with regards to the TLM on this and other blogs/sites, a tactic often used to discourage it, is to offer it at unconventional/inconveinent times.)
2: In the TLM parishes, an extensive high-quality training program shall be administered to altar servers for the Latin Mass, and there shall be no age limit to the servers that serve the mass.
2a. There shall be no women or girls altar serving at the TLMs due to the tradition of this form. Girls, with the permission of the pastor of each parish, can still be allowed to serve Novus Ordo masses.
2b. For the period of the first five years after this document, Once an EF is established in a parish, a representative assigned by the Vatican who is well-versed in the EF shall assess the servers and priest as to whether they are competent to hold the mass. This representative can either be a papal nuncio, a bishop who is found by the Vatican/Papal nuncio to be well-versed in the EF, or a well-versed priest in the diocese who has celebrated the EF prior to Summorum pontificum II. After the period of five years, priests who are competent in the EF and/or parish staff well versed in the EF will then be allowed to conduct an annual evaluation of their servers and other priests who celebrate the EF to ensure the tradition of the mass is said and kept intact after the initial evaluation.
Note : A great program out there is the Knights of the Altar, which has requirements for every stage of the training and gives rewards to the servers. In addition it requires spiritual reading and formation which can be quite useful for fostering vocations among men.
3: Outside of the assigned EF parish, if another EF is to be established in another parish of the diocese, the requirements henceforth are
I. A priest competent in celebrating the EF and
II. willing to train servers in his parish in the EF or has parish staff with extensive training in the EF who can properly train the servers.
III. a “stable group” which is defined as three or more people who request that the EF be done in the parish. If the members of said group are male, men who desire to be the servers , or any member of holy orders who will participate in the EF can be counted in the stable group.
3a. If all conditions are met as in 3. The bishop of the diocese must allow for the EF to occur in that parish outside of the assigned EF parish, after the evaluation in 2. Any valid discrepancies or denials of permission prior to or after, the visitation of the representative in 2. can and will be brought forth to the CDF which will investigate the matter fully and render its decision in the matter.
1) Clarify that Section Six of the motu proprio means “also” when it says “etiam” (ommitted from the English translations), and therefore the intention of the Section is to encourage the Epistle and Gospel to ALSO be read in the vernacular at the pulpit after they have been read/sung for real in Latin at the altar.
2) Emphasize that 1965 missal practices such as the congregation singing the Pater Noster are prohibited, and that the 1962 missal must be used with only rubrics and directives in place in the year 1962, not after.
3) Require a bishop to establish a “hub” parish (ideally a personal parish) in each diocese where daily TLMs are offered by a priest in residence and full access to training by any interested clergy in the diocese may be obtained there conducted or overseen by that priest in residence.
1. Offer a minimum of one EF Mass per Sunday and Holy Days of Obligation, with no restrictions as to maximum.
2. Bishops and pastors should reach out to their laity with the welcome offer of EF Masses rather than waiting until a “stable group” approaches them.
3. Bishops and priests should go beyond the EF by learning and offering all sacraments in the Traditional forms.
Point 1: How is a priest to proceed in the case of a diocese/ bishop (thank God, not my own), who refuses to allow the EF or makes testing and regulations so difficult that it is almost impossible to read the Mass in the Extraordinary Form.
Point 2: Clarification of rubrics. I learned to read the Mass in a soft voice and I have heard others in a rather strong voice. The second seems to be the case in my area of the country. Is it local tradition? What is correct?
Point 3: Is the Holy Father truly asking, as I have read, each parish have one Sunday Mass in the EF.
1. That SP includes all Latin rites and as for Latin rite religious orders, it will establish criteria by which the masters of the order will make their rulings on use use of the EF by its members.
2. That the number of people that make up the “coetus” cannot be defined by any bishop but that the decision is with the pastor and it will have criteria by which the pastor will make his decision.
3. That any bishop who has a problem with a pastor’s implementation of SP must take up the problem with the PCED without exerting any pressure on the pastor. Only the PCED is in measure of stating the “mens” of the legislator or making any judgement on its meaning or correct application.
don Jeffry
1) Each Ordinary to be *required* to provide opportunities for formation in the traditional form of the sacraments – not just the celebration of Holy Mass – to his priests and seminarians, and appropriate courses to be available for permanent deacons (or those in formation).
[This doesn’t mean he has to organise stuff, just publicise and provide funding, coverage etc. so they can attend. At this point, anyway.]
2) Promotion of High Mass or at least the Missa Cantata with full ceremonies as the norm. Consequently: the clergy need to learn how to sing their parts and fulfil different roles (hence the above formation for deacons); training should be provided for cathedral organists/choir directors etc. and subsequently to local musicians. Priests or their delegates should learn all the servers’ roles (or be at least given copies of Fortesque), so that they can then teach them.
3) Clarification on the use of the vernacular for the readings and on calendar issues.
1 do it now
2 do it regularly
3 do it reverently
I know, cheeky, just tired of the stalling
1) The Holy Father should appoint one of the FSSP priest to become Bishop as so he can oridante more FSSP priest without restriction.
2) New seminarian would be given a choice to chose, NO or EF, they should expose themselve to both before accepting.
3) Every City should be given one or two Churches to form a EF community, given for towns in country side, multiple smaller town can have one EF community.
I have spoke with my pastor of EF, sadly not every church can be use for EF, most need major renovation, special requirement, East Altar, Altar higher that the pews, just to name a few problem facing today Church, we have a very healthy EF community, but do not have our own Church, we are sharing with N.O., every mass we has to put away the communion kneeler, a part from that, our poor priest has to kneel, whenever the N.O ladies come around and open up the Tabernacle, it is a blessing that we have grown, double in size since I first join ( the largest in Canada Today), pray for us so as God will grant to us a Church.
1) Train all seminarians in the performance and theology of the EF Missal and Ritual.
2) Clarify which language the readings may be read or sung in at what points during the Mass.
3) Clarify the pastor’s prerogative to introduce it to his parish without being first petitioned by a stable group of the faithful.
Most of these are good comments.
Obviously #1, which has been repeated many times, is that all seminarians need to be instructed in how to say the EF Mass, and I would add, “demonstate proficiency”. They have to do as much for the OF… by “demonstrating proficiency”, this would be a step towards tying together a few loose ends that always seem to slip away from seminary formators: A) making sure that they do indeed have a facility with the Latin language, B) helping seminarians realize the tradjectory between the EF Mass of old and the OF Mass of today… I call it “applied liturgics” with respect to how it grounds all the liturgical education and formation into a lived experience of continuity, rather than lip service (or outright rupture) to the past. Seeing and experiencing this tradjectory up close is perhaps the best reason to do this requirement– even if they were to never say it publicly, they would at least inculcate, hopefully, the attitudes in their OF training, C) if one can say the EF Mass and the OF Mass in the vernacular, then it is almost no additional training or effort to be able to say the OF Mass in Latin, D) it adds a little bit of ‘polish’ to seminarians. The Army doesn’t march because they line up in rows and walk in step when they are on the battlefield… they do this extravagant ritual it because it trains the mind and the heart to be attentive to command and precise in response, and, heck, because it is also a ‘right of passage’ containing within it a standard language/culture of courtesy. Seminarians will need to work at it when it comes to passing their “Mass Test” and other final exams before ordination.
#2: I like what folks are saying about requiring the Mass at the Cathedral on a regular basis, and if possible, with the expectation that the bishop, as ‘chief liturgist’ personally celebrate it, as an example to the diocese. The Cathedral is probably the only place that can reasonably be expected to do this by formal instruction. Throughout the world, there will be caches that simply don’t have the resources to do it right… save it for the bishops who should a) know better, b) who will have this in front of them as one of their responsibilites. And as a nice side effect, c) it will apply a “natural selection” process to those who might be selected bishops in the decades to come… if you can’t or won’t or don’t say the EF Mass, then you are not able to carry out this responsibility and will likely not selected for the office in the first place
#3: (I haven’t seen this one yet) All vernacular missals, in addition to containing texts and selected readings for the OF Mass in Latin (essentially the Missale Brevis), will also contain texts and selected readings for the EF Mass (obviously in Latin).
1. Instruct / obligate Ordinaries to create (and act upon) a simple, diocesan-wide system that allows those interested in the EF to make their wishes known directly to the Bishop, (thereby bypassing recalcitrant pastors) perhaps even allowing for respondents to remain anonymous, (online?) in any case supplying zip code or parish in order to meet the needs going forward on a regional basis.
2. Clarify what represents a “stable group” in real terms; e.g. X number of people in a geographic area of X size…
3. Set in motion the “liturgical instruction” that the Council insisted upon (SC 7) by obligating every Seminary to form priests and deacons in both the EF and OF, and every Diocese to offer instruction in the EF and OF as is proper to the laity, all with a focus upon “mystagogical catechesis.”
NB: I am writing this without having read any of the other comments.
1. SP, Art 1: They are, in fact two usages of the one Roman rite. If pastors are to be able to grant requests of a stable group of the Faithful, per Article 5, then the instruction ought to clarify that all seminaries in the Roman Rite shall train seminarians to celebrate both forms as part of their formal program of study.
2. SP, Art 5: In parishes, where there is a stable group of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly accept their requests to celebrate the Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962, and ensure that the welfare of these faithful harmonises with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish… The instruction needs to clarify what a “stable group of faithful” means, preferably in consonance with the dubia issued by PCED.
3. SP, Art 3: Communities of Institutes of consecrated life and of Societies of apostolic life, of either pontifical or diocesan right, wishing to celebrate Mass in accordance with the edition of the Roman Missal promulgated in 1962, for conventual or “community” celebration in their oratories, may do so. The instruction should specify that the uses and rites of certain orders (e.g., Carmelite, Domincan, Ambrosian) in use in 1962 are acceptable for use under the provisions of SP.
In Christ,
The clarification should include:
#1 the creation of committee to reconcile the old and new calendars and lectionaries. The committee will be given a reasonable deadline. (3-5 years?)
#2 strong reminder (with sanctions?) that bishops and pastors cannot impede the celebration of the EF mass.
#3 establish regional programs for training in the EF so that all priests, seminarians and deacons who desire to learn the old mass will have the opportunity to do so.
The reports have proven the TLM is a very good thing fo the whole church that is why:
1. Every priest shall have the right to celebrate both forms privately AND PUBLICLY without requiring permission to any authority
2. Every priest must learn to celebrate the TLM and every bishop must celebrate one TLM per month in his diocese.
3. Every parish shall have a TLM every sunday.
1. All Priests, as part of their ongoing formation must learn to celebrate the EF. All Seminarians must learn the EF before they are ordained.
2. Priests have a right to schedule a regular Mass in the EF form even if the people do not request it.
3. Requests for funerals and other sacraments must be respected by the Pastor.
Haven’t read the comments.
What I’m hoping for:
Point 1) Require all seminaries to offer training in both forms or, even better, require all seminarians to be trained in both forms (SC 14-17).
Point 2) Clarification regarding the so-called dialogue Masses (preferably in favor of them, see SC 30).
Point 3) Some announcement regarding the unification of the calendar (admittedly a long-shot).
and from the rich-fantasy-life file: Point 4) wholesale restoration of the minor orders.
1. Clarify what minimum Latin is required on part of priest – some “Nuchurch”-type bishops want to impose PhD levels in Latin as an end run around SP.
2. Clarify if different rules apply to parishes run by orders. St Peter Chanel in Hawaiian Gardens, CA has orthodox OF’s and *had* an EF until local order head decided EF isn’t part of their “charism” and unilaterally told stable group of faithful to get stuffed. If that’s what an orthodox parish can do, you can imagine what it’s like in all the (much more numerous in LA) heterodox ones.
3. Clarify 1962 rubrics apply – some of bishops referred to in 1. are, I believe, discussing EMHC’s, Altar girls, lay people wandering around the Altar generally, as possible directives where they can’t outright suppress an EF.
Point 1- The terms “Ordinary Form/Novus Ordo” and “Extraordinary Form/Traditional Latin Mass” are to be respectively replaced immediately with the terms “Missa Simplex” [in English, Simple Mass], and “Missa Complex” [in English, Complex Mass] in all official documents and verbal references. The terms “Ordinary Form” and “Extraordinary Form” are superseded, and their use is henceforth reprobated.
Point 2- All diocesan cathedrals, parishes, seminaries, chapels, mission churches, and religious institutes will offer at least one Missa Complex on every Sunday and Holy Day of Obligation. Missa Complex Cantata (High Complex Mass) is the preferred form, and priests and pastors are expected to make the maximum effort to take the necessary preparations and actions to provide for High Complex Masses. If only a Missa Complex Recitata (Low Complex Mass) is possible, the preferred form will be a Dialogue Low Complex Mass, where the priest audibly recites most prayers, and congregants are encouraged to recite the responses assigned to the servers. NB- This mandatory Sunday/Holy Day Missa Complex is to be offered at a time which is convenient, timely and opportune for the faithful; i.e., it is not to be relegated to early morning, late evening or night hours, when it is inconvenient or would require unusual effort for the faithful and their families to attend. Leaders of religious institutes may apply for relief from this requirement to the [appropriate Vatican dicastery] when good reason for such exceptions exist, in the opinion of the religious superior of the institute or orders desiring such an exception.
Point Three- The “Missale Romanum, A.D. 1962” is to be used for all celebrations of the Missa Complex in the Latin Rite. Celebrants, pastors, and Masters of Ceremonies will take care that all applicalbe rubrics will studied, understood, and complied with by all participants (“Say the Black, Do the Red”). “Ceremonies of the Roman Rite” by Adrian Fortescue will be the principal reference for the preparation and conduct of all Complex Masses in English-speaking countries. The [appropriate Vatican dicastery] will arrange for translation of Fortescue into Latin as an “editio typica” for the Universal Church, and subsequently into all vernacular languages of the faithful, as soon as practically possible.
1. Clarification that all seminarians and priests (excepting senior priests) must be competent to celebrate both the Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms of the Roman Rite (Mass and Office), and must be competent in ecclesiastical Latin. For existing priests, there should be a period for learning and catechesis of several years from the instruction.
2. Clarification on what is meant by mutual enrichment vis-a-vis the calendars, the Lectionary, the Good Friday prayer for the Jews, vernacular readings, dialogue Masses, communion in the hand, female laity on the altar, lectors, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, the third Confiteor, and the modern Prefaces. How will these elements practically work?
3. Clarification on what role the bishop has vis-a-vis S.P. as chief liturgist of his Church, and promoting unity within his Church.
1. No women in the Sanctuary.
2. Acknowledge the twenty minute low Mass as a legitimate organic development and a good thing that has its place in the economy of worship. End the tyranny of the priestly caste who will settle for nothing less than a 75 minute Mass, even on a random ferial Tuesday when some of us have work or hockey tickets. Catechize about a “metaphysics of participation,” the relationship between the Bishop’s Mass in the Cathedral and those of his priests in the parishes, and the hierarchy within the temporal and sanctoral cycles.
3. No women in the Sanctuary.
1. All seminarians trained in both Rites.
2. Each parish should make every effort to ensure that, at minimum, one Sunday Liturgy to be conducted in the EF once a year (or twice a year)?
3. All parishes must have their sanctuary arranged in a manner that permits appropriate celebration of either Rite.
1) As many people have mentioned, I think each Deanery or at least Vicariate sized area of a dioceses should have an EF Mass every Sunday and Holy Day, in the late morning. People should not have to commute outside that area, let alone outside the diocese. This obligatory EF Mass should not be construed as forbidding other masses at other times of day on Sunday, nor at other parishes, etc. Mandatory seminary training would be a huge coup in the long run, but I doubt it will be mentioned.
2) Clarify the “questionable” points of Summorum Pontificum. For example, say for sure that (as long as he provides at least the one “default” Novus Ordo on Sundays and Holy Days) a pastor is allowed to otherwise establish public EF Masses and not just private. Clarify how big a group is needed, and what other sorts of requirements and processes are to be carried out to “demand” an EF Mass (for example, even if there were 30 faithful in a parish who wanted it…if there was an EF parish right down the street, I don’t think they’d have a right to demand one in their parish specifically, there should be a process for determining how reasonable demands are, and for appeals, etc). Clarify that the EF has an internal consistency and that things like altar girls or EMHC’s are contrary to it.
3) Mention things Summorum Pontificum didn’t. It didn’t mention Holy Orders in the Old Rite, though many bishops have subsequently participated in that on various occasions. Clarify the canonical status or effect of things like first tonsure and the old Minor Orders in groups like the FSSP. Deal with the other Western rites and usages. Possibly broach the topic of how exactly experimentation can be allowed with the question of calendar, lectionary, wider usage of the vernacular ala 1965, usage of previous versions of the books ala pre-1950 Holy Week, etc…but don’t bind any one solution on everyone. If a parish with both wants to use a merged calendar of some variety, fine, but a personal parish for the TLM should be able to continue using the traditional calendar if they want, etc.
1. All priests and seminarians will learn and be proficient in Latin. This will enable them to a) offer the EF when necessary and b) teach parishioners how to say (or sing) their parts (Gloria, Creed, Agnus Dei, etc.) properly in the OF, as requested by the document of Vatican II, “Sacrosanctum Concilium” (Chapter II, 54, second para.). Thus all members of the parish, no matter what language they speak, can say (or sing) these parts together, at the same time. (This will avoid the “babel” which occurs when everyone says the Our Father in his or her own language, at the same time, at bi-lingual OF Masses.)
2. All churches will be required to have a choir which sings Gregorian Chant, thus fulfilling the requests of “Sacrosanctum Concilium” (Chapter VI, 116.) One choir will sing for both the EF and the OF. They will follow the guidelines set forth in “Sacrosanctum Concilium,” specifically Chapter VI, 121, third para.: “The texts intended to be sung must always be in conformity with Catholic doctrine.”
3. All priests will be required to celebrate Mass ad orientem. All churches will be required to (re)install altar rails and all parishioners will receive on the tongue, kneeling at the altar rail, for both the EF and the OF. There will be no EMHCs and no “altar girls” at either the EF or the OF.
4. The liturgical calendars will be reconciled. Epiphany will be celebrated on January 6th, Ascension Day on Ascension Thursday, Epiphanytide will be restored, as will Septuagisima, Sexagesima, and Quinquagesima Sundays. The Circumcision of Jesus will return to January 1st (following the account in the Bible) and the doctrine of Mary, Mother of God will be the focus of the Annunciation, which will become a Holy Day of Obligation. Many of these changes will restore the Liturgical Calendar to that which the rest of Christendom follows, making it easier for “separated brethren” to return to the Church. New saints will be added to the calendar as necessary.
OK, for the sine quibus non:
1) Address the NO/EF calendar mess. (I would prefer the EF enrich the NO as much as practical.)
2) Require seminaries to provide instruction in Latin and the EF.
3) Strongly encourage EF celebrations at Sunday Mass in the diocesan cathedral.
1. If a stable group of parishioners does not exist in a parish, it shall be the duty of the pastor to extend an invitation to all parishioners to form a stable group under his direction. In order to promote the group’s formation, a weekly TLM shall be held in the parish at a convenient time, preceded by or followed by an hour of instruction on why the TLM is important for every parish and for the Faith.
2. Every bishop shall be required to provide training for every priest and seminarian in the diocese on offering the TLM. Within 5 years, all priests must be trained and proficient.
3. Every altar shall be arranged to promote celebration of the TLM, including the position of the altar, having at least 3 steps leading up to the altar, having a centrally placed Tabernacle, and replacing of any and all altar rails mistakenly demolished. These changes must be in place within 5 years.
This is tough. I’m not sure I have three or at least three that would properly go in such a communication.
1. Both the NO and EF are integral parts of the liturgy of the universal church. No priest (in good standing and appropriately incardinated etc. etc.) may be prohibited from celebrating either.
2. Every newly ordained priest must demonstrate proficiency in both forms.
This one probably not in the communication, but ‘wink, wink, nudge, nudge’ through the network:
3. No existing priest will be considered for a Bishop’s mitre unless he has demonstrated both the ability and willingness to celebrate both forms.
Point #1: primacy of Latin solves the issue of what language to use when two or more languages are common in a parish. Rather than requiring priests to master multiple languages it would be best to simply let everyone learn the Latin and memorize what it means in their preferred language.
Point #2 Primacy of chant: why cannot the Bishops find and send around to all the parishes someone trained in chant to teach chant to the choirs.
Point #3 By honoring the primacies of Latin and Chant there WILL be unity among all Catholics in form of worship. Unity is a good thing so everyone ought to favor it.
Perhaps not so learned and well put as others, but it sure seems that obedience to the instructions in this document would improve unity by putting everyone on the same page. pun intended
1) Clarification of use/merging/segregation of differing calendars and readings, with development of recommendations of same afforded to monasteries (i.e. let the monks figure that out and make recommendations to Rome for universal use of optional or blended calendar).
2) Clarify the next bench mark in the process (what else are the Bishops going to be expected to achieve in three more years, etc).
3a) Allow a new use of the ‘High Mass with a Bishop present’ which has the same elements as the ‘Low Mass with a Bishop present (Coram Episcopo)’ which would allow unfamiliar bishops a way to familiarize themselves and integrate themselves into the celebration of the EO form.
3b) Develop deacon training materials as a priority, for example their roles in: 1) High Mass as deacon, sub deacon, or MC, 2) Missa Cantata as a cleric or MC, 3) Low Mass as assistant minister of Holy Communion.
3c) Allow a streamlined path to the order of Acolyte so that competent non-cleric MC can chant the Epistle.
Item(s) ‘Three’ doesn’t really make the mark of your question’s ‘three critical issues‘, but the implementation of SP would benefit if the instruction referenced them as a priority.
1. Clarify the issues with the differing calendars
2. Clarify the non-rubrical issues such as repeating the readings in the vernacular, the ability for the congregation to engage in the responses or sing the Ordinary, and definitely the issue of the gender of altar servers.
3. Create an allowance for a schola to sing the propers and ordinary at a Low Mass. Non-singing priests stifle the offering of sung and high Masses.
Point 1: Across the board preparation and training, consisting of a) proper training for both forms of the mass in all seminaries, b) Making sure all current priests are familiar with the requirements for mass in the EF, and c) making sure training is available, via workshops and materials for the faithful as well.
Point 2: Clarification on what extent the vernacular may be involved, specifically regarding the readings (and which translation(s) would/could be used in those cases
Point 3: Clearly define “a stable group,” based on a % of the parish population (remember 20-30 parishioners means two different things in different parishes of varying size)
1 No later than September 14, 2012, training in the celebration of the EF shall be made available to all seminarians by their seminaries and to all ordained priests by their dioceses or orders, as applicable. Superiors shall not countenance any delays in such training other than for the gravest causes.
2 If a group of twelve or more of the faithful request of their pastor the scheduling of a regular Mass in the EF for all Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the pastor shall make all reasonable accommodation to such group, whether that is scheduling an EF Mass in the parish or referring the parishioners to a nearby parish.
3 As of September 14, 2011, all construction or renovation of churches and chapels shall be conducted in a manner conducive to celebration of the EF
1. It is not a sufficient response to a legitimate request for the EF for a pastor to tell parishioners interested in the EF, “Go to the FSSP parish. That’s where the EF is held in this diocese.”
2. On the flip side, parishioners have the right to request the EF, but they do not have the right to bully, demand, or intimidate pastors or ordinaries into providing an EF when the pastors/ordinaries have determined that sufficient resources are not yet available for the implementaion of SP.
3. In those areas where such resources for the implementation of SP currently are unavailable, ordinaries and pastors will make every effort to get up to speed within a reasonable amount of time.
I am going to be radical here, but the reason is, that we need some big flexibility if we are going to mainstream the EF, and make it viable as a ‘typical’ parish Mass, which I would like. So here goes:
1. Permit a ‘semi-high Mass’; that is, where the priest chants the ordinary of the Mass, the prayers if he chooses to, and the Epistle/Gospel if he chooses to. This will allow many intimidated priests to sing parts of the Mass, but yet recite the Epistle and Gospel.
2. Allow the Epistle and Gospel to be recited in the vernacular, at the ambo, just like in the NO. It would allow a more seamless transition between the two Masses.
3. I believe people would accept the EF as a typical weekday Mass, IN PLACE of the NO, except for one problem. The NO, with a homily and 50 communicants, is a 30 minute Mass. The EF is 40 to 45 minutes, and ordinary people cannot accept that today. So I’ll be radical and say, the priest should be allowed in low masses, to omit the prayers at the foot and the last Gospel. (The length of the Mass was part of the reason that before the Council , priests did Masses for the dead so often, because they were shorter – so I’m told).
Remember, folks, it’s unlikely there will be anything in this instruction which appears to further restrict the authority of the local ordinary. Nor will there be any unworkable pie-in-the-sky.
Herewith my top three:
1.) Some provision to require training for seminarians and the availability of training for other priests. Seems like this is on nearly everyone’s list.
2.) Clarification on the question of post-’62 innnovations, e.g. altar girls, communion-in-the-hand, etc. Traditional practices could be formally defined as norms applicable to celebrations of the Extraordinary Form.
3.) Codification of some of the recent interpretations of the P.C.E.D. addressing the vague spots in S.P. e.g. composition of the infamous “stable group”, the right of a priest to initiate a scheduled E.F. Mass without any requests from the laity, the question of the Triduum, and of course the dreaded vernacular readings…
1. Any pastor may choose to initiate a regular public Mass in the Extraordinary Form regardless of the existence of a stable group that requests it.
2. A priest who believes that he has been penalized for acting in accordance with his rights under Summorum Pontificum and the present Instruction may seek redress with the Ecclesia Dei Commission.
3. The manner of receiving Holy Communion in the Extraordinary Form is kneeling and on the tongue.
Notes before reading the comments:
1. Make the 2 forms of Mass in Summorum Pontificum more clearly and well known in parishes.
2. Implement the Ordinary Form (OF), the Mass of Vatican II, in LATIN AND the vernacular AS CALLED FOR in Sacrosanctum concilium – 4 Dec. 1963.
3. Prohibit the dialogue Mass in the Extraordinary Form (EF), unless there are no altar servers or convent, so as to help insure the Extraordinary Form and Ordinary Form do not coalesce into 1 form and negate Summorum Pontificum 07/07/07.
Notes after reading comments:
1. Maintain the Traditional and Scriptural (1 Cor 14) hierarchical Catholic Church, especially in the liturgy. Pray the Holy Father re-inserts the word vir (man) in the Canon that currently allows altar girls. (Women in the Sanctuary may help to foster, aid and encourage the women as priests effort, directly or indirectly. Wittingly or unwittingly.)
2. Provide that all seminarians learn both forms of Mass, but also provide that they may, in good conscience, offer only 1 form as a priest. The result may mean that an EF priest may have to offer Mass in more than one parish.
3. Pray for the instruction regarding the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum.
Thanks be to God.
1. No women in the sanctuary for EF Masses.
2. No diluting of the EF with NO practices.
3. Communion on the tongue, kneeling, for both EF and NO, for the entire Church.
I have no idea. But reading through this has really clarified for me that there is a lot more to implementing this than saying, “Have at it!”
1. While maintaining the calendar of 1962, develop Masses for some saints cannonized since then of the status of St. Pio or St Maximillian Kolbe. These Masses could electively be said on their feast days; they would not manditorally replace feasts or commemorations of the 1962 calendar.
2. Require the Propers to be said in Latin at the altar.
3. Clarify the status of the 1958 Instruction “De musica sacra et sacra liturgia” regarding diologue Masses.
The Bishop should let people know that the EF is an option. It’s amazing how few people know this, mostly because it’s completely ignored. Maybe a diocesan survey that gets past the pastors.
1. Within 5 years of the publishing of this document, Every Parish is to have a EF Mass offered Daily with the following stipulations.
a. The principal Mass of the day is to be in the EF, and if possible a Solemn Form with full servers is to be done. If that is not possible a Missa Cantata is acceptable. A Low Mass on Sunday is absolutely not appropriate for the Lord’s Day. You may have more than one celebration of the EF on any day.
b. During Low Masses it is permissible to have the congregation respond during the prayers at the foot of the altar.
c. Bishops are to offer a Pontifical High Mass on All Solemnities and Holy Days of Obligation (Sundays count as Solemnities)
2. Seminarians are to be equally trained in both forms of the Roman Rite..
a. Seminarians must have the exact same amount of access to Masses in the EF as the OF. For example. If Mass is offered 10 times a week in the OF, the EF should equal that.
b. They are also to be trained in the theology and ritual of the older Liturgical books.
3. A stable group is no longer defined by numbers, but anyone who desires for the EF at a parish. All requests must be handled immediately, and if possible at the parish requested.
a. The Tabernacle and altar from this point forward are to be in the center of the Church, and Communion Rails are to be in all Churches.
If there is any disobedience to any of the following norms, it is a canonical crime with immediate removal of faculties which can be restored by the Supreme Pontiff or whomever he delegates. Given in Rome…
1. Ad Orientem Celebrations worldwide.
2. Communion on the tongue and in the kneeling position for the faithful who are bodily able.
3. Personal Ordinariates in the worldwide communion to be established for the Extraordinary Form. This would help ensure that the faithful who not only find the Extraordinary Form efficacious, but also the traditional way of life, are properly cared for. From the Personal Ordinary to the priest to other parish employees, all would be for the restoration and preservation of the E.F. Anglicanorum Coetibus to be used as an example.
Regarding the laity:
1. Educate the young in Gregorian Chant and good music and make it exciting to learn. A twelve year old, who is exceptionally musically talented will be eighteen in a short six years. He can lead a choir. He can cantor properly. Have retreats. Make it free. Make it fun. Make it social.
2. Train organists (at the church’s expense).
2. Hire good choir directors who read music well. Teach the choir directors both forms. Make it simple. Don’t give too many options at the beginning. It can get confusing. Advertise well, so that they don’t find out about the “clinic” a week after it has taken place.
1. Every diocese, or for large dioceses each deanery, should have at least one Sunday mass said in the EF (which may be on Saturday night after 5PM or on Sunday before 8PM). The diocese is required to supply the official liturgical books. A selection of acceptable editions follows. No other editions may be used.
2. In every diocese, or for large dioceses each deanery, there should reside at least 2 priests at any given time who are prepared and trained to say the EF.
3. The EF must be said in accordance with the official text (see #1) and may not be abbreviated, added to, subtracted from or changed from the text in those books. Faithful who witness aberrations are invited to write to the Congregation of Worship & the Sacraments. In cases where the freedom of the faithful to have the EF celebrated, and celebrated properly, in their diocese has been judged, by the CDWS, to be limited by significant textual, administrative or liturgical abuses, the bishop will be contacted personally & directly and required to remedy the situation immediately or explain his failure to do so to both the CDWS and to the Roman Pontiff in person within six (6) weeks. Arrangements for travel must be made at the cost of the diocese AND lay members of the diocese MUST be informed of the expense.
1. Definitions and clarifications
a) A major gap occurred when Bishops and Pastors declared there are no stable groups and no net new EF happened ipso facto. To that end, stability needs to be defined:
– Stable EF community begins with the Cathedral where at least one Mass per week/month will be offered in the EF. High Mass EF at the Cathedral for Christmas and Easter are essential for the diocese.
– Stable community is: any number of parishoners and this may be elected for additional Masses for said group in addition to regularly scheduled Masses including funerals and marriages and ordinations. Pastoral option is accommodation, not obfuscation.
– Stable offering of the EF is: A minimum of each deanery will have at least one standing EF Mass to be offered during normal Sunday Mass scheduling (not sidelined for Feb 29 leap year or late afternoons only, etc.)
– Stable EF requires Sacraments and Holy Day liturgies to be available in the EF in each diocese.
– Stability of meeting the Sunday obligation requires readily available published Masses, access to sacramental instruction and ongoing catechesis regarding both the OF and EF
– Stability of EF applies also to Mozarabic, Dominican, Abrosian, etc. according to other stability criteria where these ritees have historically been available and to other diocese where migrants or immigrants compose a stable community.
b) Define use of existing Church structure (w/ w/o rails), ambo, etc.
c) Define Ability to have more than one Mass per weekend/weekday in EF and right of a Pastor to erect such a schedule
d) Define Pastor does not have right to discourage EF if a priest from his parish or deanery is able to offer EF
e) Define participation: calendars, postures, vernacular use, prayers at the foot and final Gospel, Lector and Acolyte formation specifications, and any mutual enrichment EF and OF can share immediately.
2. (Ongoing) Formation Lack of priestly training in Latin Rite OF and EF is not an excuse. Each diocese (or archdiocese in collaboration with its suffragans) will plan for training of all priests and seminarians to be able to offer the OF and EF before next Semianrian class enters. In the interim, EF learned priests/bishops may float intra-diocesanally (??) in mission to meet the needs for EF until each deanery is properly empowered to offer EF Masses. Summer EF workshops are encouraged. Refusal to implement is an act of disobedience (come to Rome to explain yourself with your ordinary).
3. Catechesis Everyday pew-sitting parishoner catechesis is key. Regularly available programs should be readied, begun and repeated for all parishoners to attend sessions and readily obtain guidance documents and other multimedia formats that explain the EF, relate the EF and OF in Tradition not opposing one another, introduce prayers, chant and other participatory responses in Latin so that fulfuillment of EF and OF may enrich one another. Materials should be guided by Rome to slice through National and local committees. Requirement should be before Advent of 2011 to take advantag eof work to be done for English-based Missal changes.
I understand priests and bishops to be quite busy people already. They have no need for another “unfunded mandate”. Sooo….
1. Require all bishops and leaders of the various orders (Franiscans, Dominicans, etc..) to collaborate with their priests over the next 6 months to discern the state of their diocese/order. Discern the needs the diocese/order needs to fulfill to better enable wider use of Extraordinary Form. Report in writing to Rome, via each country’s Apostolic Nuncio, regarding the resources that would needed to be reallocated to enable the EF.
2. Require all bishops and others to develop (and begin implementing) plans that will enable routine use of Extraordinary Form in each parish, provided that a reasonable demand can be found within the diocese.
3. Require all bishops, as part of this plan, to include resources for teaching Latin and Chant to priests and laity; that all concerned may learn to more truly PRAY the Mass in a language that is not their native tongue.
It’s simple: If we don’t make a high priority of preparing our Church for wider use of the Latin Mass, we’ll get mostly balking and grousing about the impositions of some “traditional idiots” who can’t see past 1962…..
1. Announce steps towards a common Sanctorale for the two calendars, and possibly some reconciliation of the differences in the Temporale.
2. All seminaries to include mandatory training in the EF, training also to be made available to any priests already ordained who wish.
3. Clarification on use of vernacular &c.
I agree with Inkstain (copied below), but for (3) I would say that as a bare minimum every bishop must ensure that his diocese has an EF Mass on every day of obligation (Sundays and Holy Days).
1) All Seminaries be required to instruct seminarians in the EF.
2) Yearly Regional Workshops must be given for existing priests wishing to learn or practice the EF (Neighboring Dioceses can collaborate resources for a single workshop).
3) Each Diocese must offer an EF Mass at least once a month (after a certain grace period for items 1 & 2 to kick in).
Part I. Restatement of Summorum Pontificum and the Pope’s happiness with the exponential growth of interest in the Extraordinary Form since 2007.
Part II. Establishing under universal canon law the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae reserved in a most special way to C. and his successors, for anyone who publicly proposes any modification to the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite for any reason whatsoever prior to September 14, 2047.
Part III. Authorizing the Ecclesia Dei Commission to erect personal Apostolic Administrations anywhere in the world.