Cardinal Arinze on The World Over

[Defensor_Fidei]

Raymond Arroyo interviewed Cardinal Arinze tonight and they covered parts of Redemptoinis Sacramentum, including Altar boys, EMHCs, communion in the hand etc. It was a great interview and the encore will be Sunday at 5:00pm eastern time.

-Ted

 

[rcn]

As he did last time he talked to the Cardinal, Arroyo spent too much time on topics on EWTN’s “liturgical agenda”, but not of much interest to the general public. Many of his questions were in the form of “statements” which Arinze was able to see through quite easily.

I thought he did a good job of dismissing the question on “ad orientem” - he stressed that altars must allow Mass to be said facing the people, and left it at that. When asked about wider use of Latin in the Mass, he said that while Latin is still the official language of the Church, priests should not switch existing vernacular Masses into Latin on a whim - the pastoral needs of the people must be considered. He acknowledged that large numbers of Catholics do not understand Latin and would not benefit from its use. Regarding the TLM, the Cardinal stressed that it is still up to individual bishops to decide whether to allow it - and only if a sizable group with sincere motives requests it. He refused to predict the future of the TLM.

All in all, a good interview. I like the way the Cardinal thinks.

 

[D.O.M]

rcn:

As he did last time he talked to the Cardinal, Arroyo spent too much time on topics on EWTN’s “liturgical agenda”, but not of much interest to the general public. Many of his questions were in the form of “statements” which Arinze was able to see through quite easily.

I thought he did a good job of dismissing the question on “ad orientem” - he stressed that altars must allow Mass to be said facing the people, and left it at that. When asked about wider use of Latin in the Mass, he said that while Latin is still the official language of the Church, priests should not switch existing vernacular Masses into Latin on a whim - the pastoral needs of the people must be considered. He acknowledged that large numbers of Catholics do not understand Latin and would not benefit from its use. Regarding the TLM, the Cardinal stressed that it is still up to individual bishops to decide whether to allow it - and only if a sizable group with sincere motives requests it. He refused to predict the future of the TLM.

All in all, a good interview. I like the way the Cardinal thinks.

I watched the interview with Cardinal Arinze as well last night. I think that perhaps we watched two different interviews! Cardinal Arinze did not “dismiss” the question on “ad orientem” he said that any priest has the option to celebrate Mass “ad orientem”. He stressed that Vatican II called for altars to be situated in a way that the Mass COULD be celebrated facing the people, but individual priests had the choice which way to celebrate the Mass.

As far as celebrating the Novus Ordo in Latin, he thought that it would be very good for parishes to offer one of the Sunday Masses in Latin so that individual parishioners could choose whether they wanted Mass in the vernacular or in Latin.

What about his comments about receiving the Eucharist on the tongue versus in the hand? I thought that this part of the interview was very interesting! He spoke about the differences in regards to reverence, and also the likelyhood of abuses occuring when people receive in the hand.

If EWTN has a “liturgical agenda” it is only to celebrate the Mass as it is supposed to be celebrated, with reverence, dignity and beauty and don’t forget first and foremost as a sacrifice. As a member of the “general public” I found the interview with this very important Cardinal in our Church extremely interesting!

 

[pnewton]

D.O.M.:

IAs far as celebrating the Novus Ordo in Latin, !

Sorry I missed the interview. I have one question for those who saw it. Did the Cardinal use the term Novus Ordo?

 

[Defensor_Fidei]

pnewton:

Sorry I missed the interview. I have one question for those who saw it. Did the Cardinal use the term Novus Ordo?

Not that I can remember. It will be on again on Sunday 5:00pm eastern. That mean 1:00pm here on the left coast.

-Ted

 

[pnewton]

Defensor Fidei:

Not that I can remember. It will be on again on Sunday 5:00pm eastern. That mean 1:00pm here on the left coast.

-Ted

Thanks. I will try to have it recorded since I will be at work.

 

[Defensor_Fidei]

rcn:

As he did last time he talked to the Cardinal, Arroyo spent too much time on topics on EWTN’s “liturgical agenda”, but not of much interest to the general public. Many of his questions were in the form of “statements” which Arinze was able to see through quite easily.

I thought he did a good job of dismissing the question on “ad orientem” - he stressed that altars must allow Mass to be said facing the people, and left it at that. When asked about wider use of Latin in the Mass, he said that while Latin is still the official language of the Church, priests should not switch existing vernacular Masses into Latin on a whim - the pastoral needs of the people must be considered. He acknowledged that large numbers of Catholics do not understand Latin and would not benefit from its use. Regarding the TLM, the Cardinal stressed that it is still up to individual bishops to decide whether to allow it - and only if a sizable group with sincere motives requests it. He refused to predict the future of the TLM.

All in all, a good interview. I like the way the Cardinal thinks.

I am glad EWTN has a liturgical COUNTER agenda.

 

[rcn]

pnewton:

Sorry I missed the interview. I have one question for those who saw it. Did the Cardinal use the term Novus Ordo?

He noted that at the time of the Council of Trent, that the mass that we now call “Tridentine” could have been called the “Novus Ordo”. He did not use the term again. My impression was that he wished to make clear that their is only ONE Latin Rite mass, and that only in recognition of the wishes of a few has the Pope granted the permission for the pre-VII mass to be used.

To address some other posts - please do not misunderstand me. I watch a lot of EWTN programming, and I am glad that they are solidly orthodox. However, whenever Arroyo interviews a Cardinal such as Arinze or Ratzinger, he always asks about Latin, ad-orientem and the TLM. Whether this is EWTN’s agenda or his own personal agenda, I do not consider these things relevant to the overwhelming majority of Catholics and parishes. The impression I got from this interview was that Arinze does not either.

The interview will be replayed as follows:
Sunday, Feb. 13 - 5 PM Eastern
Monday, Feb. 14 - 10 AM Eastern, 11 PM Eastern

 

[Nota_Bene]

Defensor Fidei:

Not that I can remember. It will be on again on Sunday 5:00pm eastern. That mean 1:00pm here on the left coast.

-Ted

2:00pm PST

 

[Defensor_Fidei]

2:00pm PST

Thank you.

 

[pnewton]

rcn:

Whether this is EWTN’s agenda or his own personal agenda, I do not consider these things relevant to the overwhelming majority of Catholics and parishes.

Bear in mind that EWTN (like this forum) is not watched by the majority of Catholics. The appeal of these media outlets are more toward the seriously-minded Catholic. This may skew the audience and therefore the slant somewhat. The good Cardinal is a minister over the whole flock.

 

[Bill_A]

Cogito Ergo Sum,

 

[pnewton]

Yeah! I caught a re-broadcast Monday morning. What a man of passion the Cardinal is! He was thorough and solid. His answers would definitely put many arguements here to rest (for those who respect church authority). I found myself enlightened on on or two items.

Thank you, EWTN.

 

[oat_soda]

As far as celebrating the Novus Ordo in Latin, he thought that it would be very good for parishes to offer one of the Sunday Masses in Latin so that individual parishioners could choose whether they wanted Mass in the vernacular or in Latin.

first off, reguardless of what arinze says, latin is to preserved in the latin rite and a priest can celebrate latin any time he wants. this is just his expert opinon

Redemptionis Sacramentum
[112.] Mass is celebrated either in Latin or in another language, provided that liturgical texts are used which have been approved according to the norm of law. Except in the case of celebrations of the Mass that are scheduled by the ecclesiastical authorities to take place in the language of the people, **Priests are always and everywhere permitted to celebrate Mass in Latin.**200

I thought he did a good job of dismissing the question on “ad orientem” - he stressed that altars must allow Mass to be said facing the people, and left it at that.

first off, no where in VII’s document of the liturgy SC did it say that mass should be said facing the people. the construction of altars detached from the wall allows for incesnse around the altar and the mass to be said versus populum so the faithful can participate more easily. but, with microphones now, this is uncessisary. cardinal ratzinger is totally pro versus orientem and states that it is the NORM.

ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/RATZINTV.HTMCardinal: Versus orientem, I would say could be a help because it is really a tradition from the Apostolic time, and it’s not only a norm, but it’s an expression also of the cosmical dimension and of the historical dimension of the liturgy. We are celebrating with the cosmos, with the world. It’s the direction of the future of the world, of our history represented in the sun and in the cosmical realities. I think today this new discovering of our relation with the created world can be understood also from the people, better than perhaps 20 years ago. And also, it’s a common direction – priest and people are in common oriented to the Lord. So, I think it could be a help.

 

[pnewton]

oat soda:

first off, reguardless of what arinze says, latin is to preserved in the latin rite and a priest can celebrate latin any time he wants. this is just his expert opinon first off.

Yes, unless a Mass is designated by the bishop or pastor to be in a specific language. It my be his opinion but his is the highest ranking opinion available, short of the Holy Father. The Supreme Court gives opinion, but when they do, none of ours override them legally.

He did say that altars must be constructed to allow the priest to face the people, not that the priest must do so. He also dismissed this a very minor problem.

 

[oat_soda]

He did say that altars must be constructed to allow the priest to face the people, not that the priest must do so. He also dismissed this a very minor problem.

no where officially does the church say that altars must be constructed free standing. it might encourage it, but a new church can be built with a high altar. in fact, the church i go too still uses it for the normative mass and i use to attend a fssp run parish which only had a high altar. cardinal arinze is speaking off the cuff or he doesn’t know what he is talking about which i doubt.

Inter oecumenici

#91. It is better (praestat ut) for the main altar to be constructed away from the wall so that one can move round it without difficulty, and so that it can (peragi possit) be used for a celebration facing the people.

 

[kmktexas]

pnewton:

Yes, unless a Mass is designated by the bishop or pastor to be in a specific language. It my be his opinion but his is the highest ranking opinion available, short of the Holy Father. The Supreme Court gives opinion, but when they do, none of ours override them legally.

He did say that altars must be constructed to allow the priest to face the people, not that the priest must do so. He also dismissed this a very minor problem.

s

Even then, the propers of the Mass (Gloria, Kyrie (Greek), Agnus Dei etc.) can be said in Latin. The Cardinal said that Latin shouldn’t be done on a whim if the people can’t access the Latin portions of the Mass. Even our very liberal OCP missal has the Latin propers - buried, but they are there. If our music ministers spent a fraction of the time rehersing the sung Latin responses as they did teaching us the newest “we are Church” song, we would all know these prayers.

 

[Fortiterinre]

What I liked most about this interview was the Cardinal’s practical response to issues that we in the U.S. like to think of as needing a black or white answer, e.g., “Does the priest have a right to celebrate Mass in Latin? Facing ad orientem?” Etc. I think Arinze was careful to say that this strict language about rights was not applicable and that the pastoral well-being of the people was the most important in terms of choosing among these legitimate options. Vernacular and Latin are both good, ad orientem and facing the people are both good, but different situations will influence what should be chosen, and it is definitely not up to the individual priest, especially in light of previous instruction from pastor or bishop. I would be fine if my parish’s 10:30 Mass went to Latin and ad orientem, but the majority of the congregation probably wouldn’t and so it should not be done. The question of free-standing altars is similar; it is not mandatory that 100% of new altars be constructed free-standing, but the concerns of a majority of parishioners who would be alarmed at the appearance of a brand new High Altar absent any Vatican announcement would have to be taken into account.

 

[Jakub]

Cardinal Arinze responses were OK, but do think that the majority of American Bishops actually follow Rome’s instructions ?

Being a retired municipal supervisor I would discipline, suspend or terminate someone who did not comply with instructions, period.

Enough of double talk, discipline, suspend-terminate in accordance to the applicable rules.

james

 

[oat_soda]

from what i have read on this thread, cardinal arinze is sounding like a politician. he’s trying not to offend anyone, weather they be traditional or progressive in terms of the liturgy. he shouldn’t be a politician but a leader. ratzinger has vision and a direction where he see’s where the liturgy should be going. arinze has none. he’s dissapointing. unless ratzinger is elected pope, i don’t see things improving in the church.