Can one parish celebrate both Extraordinary and Ordinary Forms?

[phil19034]

Wesrock:

In two cities I’ve lived in, there were churches that offered the OF normally and the EF at a specific time once a month. I haven’t personally been to one that does the EF every week. But as everyone’s said, a parish can do that.

This parish is not just the gold standard, it is the platinum standard. In a few years, I am giving some thought to relocating there, precisely because of that parish.

Looks like this parish used to be the home of a seminary. It’s a sad (and joyous at the same time) the seminary is moving. I’m sure the parish received many blessings from having the Seminary there.

But it’s nice to see the Seminary growing.

 

[phil19034]

Yes, in places where there is a stable community of Catholics asking for the Extraordinary Form, both forms are offered. Summorum Pontificum envisioned this.

What the encyclical did not call for is activist clergy who press to have the EF where a stable community does not exist… or proactively pushing it. Summorum Pontificum was a great act of mercy for those attached to the EF.

This is not completely true.

Summorum Pontificum grants a priest the ability to say the Latin Mass whenever he wants.

So a priest can offer the Latin mass to promote or build a stable community, if he wants to.

HOWEVER, what a priest CANNOT do is remove a necessary / well attended Ordinary Form Mass from the parish’s public Mass Schedule and replace it with a Extraordinary Form Mass when no one in the parish is asking him to do that.

I pray I’m making sense.

 

[kerberos]

Mine celebrates both, one after the other.

 

[godisgood77]

My apologies if that came off as provocative… I didn’t have the ability to invest more time in my response…

I’'m no expert, but have read Summorum Pontificum many times and watch it unfold over the past decade.

I’ll share this quote from Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI to demonstrate where I’m coming from…

in 2008, then Pope Benedict was asked, “What do you say to those who, in France, fear that the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum signals a step backwards from the great insights of the Second Vatican Council? How can you reassure them?”

Benedict responded: “Their fear is unfounded, for this Motu Proprio is merely an act of tolerance , with a pastoral aim, for those people who were brought up with this liturgy, who love it, are familiar with it and want to live with this liturgy”

I’m open minded to your opinion though… let me know your thoughts.

 

[phil19034]

My apologies if that came off as provocative… I didn’t have the ability to invest more time in my response…

I’'m no expert, but have read Summorum Pontificum many times and watch it unfold over the past decade.

I’ll share this quote from Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI to demonstrate where I’m coming from…

in 2008, then Pope Benedict was asked, “What do you say to those who, in France, fear that the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum signals a step backwards from the great insights of the Second Vatican Council? How can you reassure them?”

Benedict responded: “Their fear is unfounded, for this Motu Proprio is merely an act of tolerance , with a pastoral aim, for those people who were brought up with this liturgy, who love it, are familiar with it and want to live with this liturgy”

I’m open minded to your opinion though… let me know your thoughts.

Please see my previous post. What the Pope was saying here is that people have a right to the ordinary form. A territorial parish cannot become an exclusively EF parish, nor can the EF become the main form of the Liturgy of a territorial parish.

Now, that doesn’t mean that a territorial parish can’t theoretically have two EF Masses and 1 OF Mass on Sunday, but it does mean that Holy Thursday (night), Good Friday, & the Easter Vigil are going to be in the Ordinary Form.

Also, if a parish has seating for 500 for each mass, and attendance is as follows:

• 100 for 7am
• 300 for 9am
• 400 for 11am
• and a group of 100 want father to give the Latin Mass, Father can’t change the 11am to the Latin mass and make the 400 people attend the 7am and 9am Masses.

While he could make the 7am Mass the Latin Mass. It would also be bad form for him to change the 9am or 11am.

However, he also could cancel the 7am Mass and create a 1PM mass in Latin, if he couldn’t increase the number of masses.

However, if the church seats 1000 (with the same numbers):

• 100 for 7am
• 300 for 9am
• 400 for 11am
• and a group of 100 want father to give the Latin Mass
  Then, Father could have more wiggle room because it would be better for the parish if the 300 and 400 were merged

The Pope’s point was, the needs of the Ordinary Form must come first.

 

[godisgood77]

It is from the book Liturgy in the Twenty-First Century: Contemporary Issues and Perspectives… If you do a google search for these words it will pop up… Their fear is unfounded, for this Motu Proprio is merely an act of tolerance , with a pastoral aim, for those people who were brought up with this liturgy, who love it, are familiar with it and want to live with this liturgy

 

[godisgood77]

Sorry, I didn’t have my AP Style guide handy …

go here for a direct view… Apostolic Journey to France: Interview of the Holy Father during the flight to France (September 12, 2008) | BENEDICT XVI

Their fear is unfounded, for this "Motu Proprio’ is merely an act of tolerance, with a pastoral aim, for those people who were brought up with this liturgy, who love it, are familiar with it and want to live with this liturgy. They form a small group, because this presupposes a schooling in Latin, a training in a certain culture. Yet for these people, to have the love and tolerance to let them live with this liturgy seems to me a normal requirement of the faith and pastoral concern of any Bishop of our Church. There is no opposition between the liturgy renewed by the Second Vatican Council and this liturgy.

 

[godisgood77]

So a priest can offer the Latin mass to promote or build a stable community, if he wants to.

I respect your point of view on this, but I do not think you can find that idea in Summorum Pontificum.

It says this…

Art. 2. In Masses celebrated without a congregation, any Catholic priest of the Latin rite, whether secular or regular, may use either the Roman Missal published in 1962 by Blessed Pope John XXIII or the Roman Missal promulgated in 1970 by Pope Paul VI, and may do so on any day, with the exception of the Easter Triduum. For such a celebration with either Missal, the priest needs no permission from the Apostolic See or from his own Ordinary.

Art. 5, §1 In parishes where a group of the faithful attached to the previous liturgical tradition stably exists, the parish priest should willingly accede to their requests to celebrate Holy Mass according to the rite of the 1962 Roman Missal. He should ensure that the good of these members of the faithful is harmonized with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the governance of the bishop in accordance with Canon 392, avoiding discord and favouring the unity of the whole Church.

It does not envision a situation where a priest can celebrate the EF where a stable group of faithful who are attached to the EF does not exist… or, better said, for the priest to introduce it to the congregation in the absence of a request from the stable group of faithful.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Wesrock:

In two cities I’ve lived in, there were churches that offered the OF normally and the EF at a specific time once a month. I haven’t personally been to one that does the EF every week. But as everyone’s said, a parish can do that.

This parish is not just the gold standard, it is the platinum standard. In a few years, I am giving some thought to relocating there, precisely because of that parish.

Looks like this parish used to be the home of a seminary. It’s a sad (and joyous at the same time) the seminary is moving. I’m sure the parish received many blessings from having the Seminary there.

But it’s nice to see the Seminary growing.

I’ve never been clear on their relationship to the seminary. I think, though I cannot swear to it, that the seminary had some connection to nearby Belmont Abbey at some point, and may still. You will see seminarians at the parish from time to time, and they assist at the altar in various capacities. It is not a terribly large parish, and they have an elementary school. At one time I went there once a month or so (two-hour drive each way), but due to family considerations, and now the pandemic, I have not been there in several months, and it will probably be several months more. My father is gravely ill, and home has to be my top priority.
[/QUOTE]

 

[Lost_sheep2]

Mine does both, every day.

 

[DarkLight]

My current parish celebrates both. There’s 3 OF and 1 EF over the weekend. They actually even have it set up so there’s a moveable altar in the center as well as the altar attached to the wall. It’s pretty cool. They were both built together so they’re all of the same stone and it doesn’t look like the second altar is “added in”.

 

[phil19034]

phil19034:

So a priest can offer the Latin mass to promote or build a stable community, if he wants to.

I respect your point of view on this, but I do not think you can find that idea in Summorum Pontificum.

It says this…

Art. 2. In Masses celebrated without a congregation, any Catholic priest of the Latin rite, whether secular or regular, may use either the Roman Missal published in 1962 by Blessed Pope John XXIII or the Roman Missal promulgated in 1970 by Pope Paul VI, and may do so on any day, with the exception of the Easter Triduum. For such a celebration with either Missal, the priest needs no permission from the Apostolic See or from his own Ordinary.

Art. 5, §1 In parishes where a group of the faithful attached to the previous liturgical tradition stably exists, the parish priest should willingly accede to their requests to celebrate Holy Mass according to the rite of the 1962 Roman Missal. He should ensure that the good of these members of the faithful is harmonized with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the governance of the bishop in accordance with Canon 392, avoiding discord and favouring the unity of the whole Church.

It does not envision a situation where a priest can celebrate the EF where a stable group of faithful who are attached to the EF does not exist… or, better said, for the priest to introduce it to the congregation in the absence of a request from the stable group of faithful.

I’m not a Canon Lawyer, but from what I understand, that’s not the Canon Law works.

Canon Law and American Law are very different.

Additionally, Pope Benedict does NOT define “a group of the faithful.” How many people does a group have to be? Is 2 people enough? 20? 50? 200? One family could be considered a “group of the faithful” depending on someone’s point of view.

The priest is left with a LOT of discretion, assuming he is not placing one mass above another AND what he’s doing is for the good of his parish.

If he feels he has a stable group, he can offer the Mass, assuming he doesn’t do anything to break Canon Law or hurt the people attached to the Ordinary Form.

If he wants to grow the size of the Latin Mass group (for whatever reason) he can promote / advertise / etc.

If he wants to open Private Masses to the public, he can do that as well.

For example: I knew a priest who used to offer the Latin Mass on Saturday nights. While he advertised it, it was technically a “private mass” because he could cancel it on any given week if he had a wedding or funeral mass earlier in the day which prevented him from praying an additional mass that day. He would also potentially cancel it if he didn’t have a priest to pray the Saturday evening Ordinary Form Mass.

 

[godisgood77]

The priest is left with a LOT of discretion, assuming he is not placing one mass above another AND what he’s doing is for the good of his parish.

If he feels he has a stable group, he can offer the Mass, assuming he doesn’t do anything to break Canon Law or hurt the people attached to the Ordinary Form.

I agree with you… Summorum Pontificum did not attempt to litigate every detail. The priest does indeed have latitude. Although, the motu proprio was careful to make clear that both the EF and the OF are two forms of the same right and that the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Saint Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the lex orandi

My point was to try to bring forward Pope Benedict’s original intent behind liberating the EF…which was an act of tolerance with a pastoral aim. Its purpose was for the Church to react more effectively to those with an attachment to the Extraordinary Form. It does not consider a proactive approach where clergy bring the EF to the faithful… that is not to say that they can’t or shouldn’t, just that Pope Benedict did not envisage that in his wise letter or surrounding comments.

 

[phil19034]

It does not consider a proactive approach where clergy bring the EF to the faithful… that is not to say that they can’t or shouldn’t, just that Pope Benedict did not envisage that in his wise letter or surrounding comments.

Correct. And to be honest, most priests can’t proactively bring the EF to the faithful, even if they wanted to.

Reason:

• Priests are limited regarding the number of masses they can offer a day, without Bishop approval. For MOST diocesan priests, introducing a new public mass will often put them over the limit, unless they offer it only once a week.
• If adding an EF mass will put them over the limit, then they need to ask their Bishop for permission to pray another Mass, at which time the Bishop will ask the priest for justifications.