I saw again videos from Mass of Ages. They are very good and I recommend them. I’m puzzled by their choices of whom to speak with. But… hey.
This is one of the most powerful things I have ever seen about the differences between the Vetus and the Novus. This is from the second of the series, which I saw when it came out… but this is burned into the mind. As a priest who has celebrated the Vetus from his day of ordination in 1991 and has also celebrated the Novus in places “suburban”, if you get my drift”, and Italian, if you get my drift, and even as well as it possibly could be in the most Roman of styles at St Agnes in St Paul in its hayday, who worked in the Pontifical Commission and who has been writing on these issues since the early 90’s … I know what I’m talking about.
This is a must see and, if you are ever in a situation when you have to explain the differences, a must share.
Remember.
Please understand that Summorum Pontificum was a JURIDICAL solution for a thorny problem of how to ensure that Latin Church priests could say the Vetus Ordo. Saying that Roman Rite had “two forms” was a JURIDICAL solution. It was not a theological and liturgical-historical solution.
Loading ...
I suggested many times to the Mass of Ages folks that you should be interviewed for their videos. They responded by requesting contact info. I referred them to your blog. I guess that didn’t pan out . . . unfortunately.
Amazing, so much lost, and yet even the most whittled-down suburban Sunday Mass with an infestation of EMHC, plus all the other innovations and theatrics, can still easily rival a sung High Mass in length … although they (the former) are helped along by “choirs” interjecting at every possible junction in the Mass with some jarring ditty where naturally ALL the versus MUST be sung.
Saying that Roman Rite had “two forms” was a JURIDICAL solution. It was not a theological and liturgical-historical solution.
Thank you, Fr. Z, for pointing this out. I was greatly puzzled about this right when SP was first issued, and gradually became blase about the problems…until Francis issued TC. At that point, I realized the “juridical solution” instituted by one pope could be reversed by another pope, so, perhaps we really NEED a theological and/or liturgical solution.
Although one might make arguments about whether the Novus Ordo should just cease to exist already, there are too many people who like it (or at least think they do) for that to be a plausible solution. Given that, what would be a liturgical solution for the Vetus Ordo?
I have a suggestion: make it the normative rite of a “Vetus Latin Rite” eparchy, appoint and anoint a cardinal to be the bishop / patriarch / eparch of this new eparchy, and give it the same rights as all the other ancient Churches that have their own eparchs. Officially name the Vetus liturgy a distinct “rite” of the Church. Establish it as being historically / liturgically distinct from the Novus Rite. The Vetus Latin rite has as much reason to exist as do the other ones. Rome doesn’t (officially) claim that all these other rites damage the “unity” of the Church, no, Rome boasts how enlightened she is to let them exist. When the old eparch dies, the new one isn’t appointed by Rome, he is selected by canonical election of the synod of the eparchy itself, and then must be confirmed by Rome when he sends notice wishing to be in communion with the Roman Pontiff. (I don’t know if eparchs have the right to select suburban bishops of the eparchy, (and then submit for Rome’s assent), but they should.)
This is not a perfect solution, for example it would (partly) get the pressure off Rome as to worries about the inbred abuses of the Novus Ordo that traddies keep raising. For another it would greatly diminish the long-term incentive for Rome to keep Latin as a living language within the Roman Church. And it would do little to help out the many priests who are priests of Novus Ordo bishops, who want to stay that way, but want to say the Vetus Ordo mass (and sacraments). So, far from perfect.
But it would lock into place (short of a pope taking on the highly debatable attempt to actually supress an ancient rite belonging to an established eparchy) the Vetus rite mass, instead of leaving a Francine successor to further marginalize it into oblivion.
By the grace of God I’ve been largely confined to the N.O. for about 15 months now, having moved to a rural area and not being able to afford to drive up to the city as frequently as I would like (which would be weekly, but anyway…).
During these months I have moved around a little and, in separate districts within the same Diocese, I have frequented 5 separate churches, in 3 separate parishes, encountering 6 different priests.
I could say a lot. A lot of a lot, though I shan’t. The N.O. is obviously valid which, technically, makes it, I suppose, the second best thing in the universe: the unbloody manifestation of the Creator of all things, right there, in front of you.
I personally regard Vatican Council II as a punishment from God – the worst punishment: bad priests – and if one reads Sr. Lucia’s last interview (St. Stephen’s, 1957), where it was anticipated that in a couple of years the Third Secret would be revealed, her comments, when held against these sixty-one miserable years past, are illuminating; that is, they give aperture in advance, when held up against the six decades past. They are a key to the Secret’s content, which is almost certainly along the lines I just suggested.
The N.O. is the work of the hands of men, and whilst obviously the Holy Ghost allowed (and tolerates) it, God does not like the works of the hands of men. It is the centre-piece of Newchurch which (and bearing in mind the number of parishes I’ve been part of recently), has wholly lost the holy Fear of God, the first Gift of the Spirit.
The Almighty is just and vengeful, promising to punish an unfaithful people unto the third or even fourth generation. Sixty-one years is about 2 1/2 generations, so we likely have some time to go before restoration.
I am grateful to be immersed in the N.O. as, apart from being enlightening, it is very good at inflating one’s vainglorious pride and, thus, hopefully, tearing it asunder.
May God have mercy on His Church; and also on me.
Mi Iesu, misericordia!
Pingback: THVRSDAY AFTERNOON EDITION • BigPulpit.com