Cardinal Sarah praises ad orientem worship, suggests appendix to Roman Missal [CWN]

[Sirach2]

The topic has waned into one aspect of the OP’s article, focusing on A.O. worship. Did anyone notice the other grievances of Cardinal Sarah in the article?
“Citing the teaching of Pope Francis, Cardinal Sarah** criticized the attitude of priests** who make themselves the focal point of the liturgy.”
The truth is that Pope Francis did NOT criticize priests. Cardinal Sarah read more into his words than the Pope actually intended.

Similarly, the *ars celebrandi *involves “praying before God with the community, but as you would normally pray.” On the contrary, “when priests celebrate in a sophisticated, artificial way and abuse gestures, it is not easy to inspire awe.” So if I am too rigid, I don’t let others enter the mystery" and “if I am a showman, the protagonist in the celebration, I don’t let others enter into the mystery.” Source

It was a general comment of instruction to priests, used merely as a contrast to what is the most noble manner of preaching. I do not read Francis’ words as “criticism of priests” in any way whatsoever. Cardinal Sarah seems to have taken much of Francis’ words into his own misconstruction. [Maybe it was due to incorrect interpretation of language from the translator’s perspective.] This is how things get blown out of true proportion.

 

[ringil]

I might be misunderstanding what the Cardinal is saying but, the liturgy is the action of the Father.

In the Mass, the Eucharistic prayers are not to Jesus, but to the Father and the priest is en persona, Jesus praying to the Father.

Also, God dwells in us all, so it is then fitting that Jesus i.e. the priest faces the people as Jesus faced the Apostles at the last supper and prayed to the Father for the bread and wine to be transformed into His body and blood.

Jim

I do see your thoughts regarding the veracity of the versus populum, but I can see valid theological reasoning for ad orientum as well.

I don’t believe that we need divisiveness here. There is room for either approach.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Wrong.

Priests have the freedom to offer the Traditional Latin Mass whenever they please, as long as they also offer the Mass of Paul VI according the the pastoral needs of the congregation.

A priest has the freedom to offer the TLM if there is a group of faithful seeking it.

He can’t tell the Bishop, that he’s going to offer the TLM with no one in the parish desiring it, which is the point I’m making.

Also, such a priest would get reassigned outside of parish duties by the Bishop, should such a even priest exist, which was really nothing but a hypothetical scenario presented.

No priests serves in the diocesan parishes without the consent of the Bishop.

Jim

 

[ProVobis]

A priest has the freedom to offer the TLM if there is a group of faithful seeking it.

Not necessarily although it may help. The whole point of SP is to give freedom to priests to say the EF without approval from the bishop. Certainly the bishop can attempt to suppress the EF altogether for whatever reasons, perhaps economic ones, but that seems contrary to the important document issued by Pope Benedict XVI.

And I will bow out of any further discussions on the matter.

BTW, I’m not sure the EF MUST be said “ad orientem” as there are places where congregations sit in front of, to the side of, and in back of the altar. I’ve attended one of these myself.

 

[R_H_Benson]

A priest has the freedom to offer the TLM if there is a group of faithful seeking it.

He can’t tell the Bishop, that he’s going to offer the TLM with no one in the parish desiring it, which is the point I’m making.

Also, such a priest would get reassigned outside of parish duties by the Bishop, should such a even priest exist, which was really nothing but a hypothetical scenario presented.

No priests serves in the diocesan parishes without the consent of the Bishop.

Jim

That simply isn’t correct. SP gives priests the freedom to offer the TLM at their leisure as long as all the pastoral needs of the parish are being met. As for your hypothetical about the bishop reassigning a priest who chooses to offer the TLM mass without a community who asked for it, I could see this happening if the priest forced the TLM on an unwilling flock and offered no alternative. However, as long as the priest meets the pastoral needs of the faithful by offering the Mass of Paul VI, there is absolutely nothing juridical (other than perhaps extraordinary intervention by the bishop) that forbids him from also offering the TLM whether the community asked him for it or not. This is very clear in SP. Of course there are many who simply choose to ignore this (I’m talking about the kind of people who will fight tooth and nail for a contemporary guitar Mass but get all up in arms when a priest wishes to offer the Roman Rite according to the 2,000 year old organic tradition of our Church).

 

[JimR-OCDS]

That simply isn’t correct. SP gives priests the freedom to offer the TLM at their leisure as long as all the pastoral needs of the parish are being met. As for your hypothetical about the bishop reassigning a priest who chooses to offer the TLM mass without a community who asked for it, I could see this happening if the priest forced the TLM on an unwilling flock and offered no alternative. However, as long as the priest meets the pastoral needs of the faithful by offering the Mass of Paul VI, there is absolutely nothing juridical (other than perhaps extraordinary intervention by the bishop) that forbids him from also offering the TLM whether the community asked him for it or not. This is very clear in SP. Of course there are many who simply choose to ignore this (I’m talking about the kind of people who will fight tooth and nail for a contemporary guitar Mass but get all up in arms when a priest wishes to offer the Roman Rite according to the 2,000 year old organic tradition of our Church).

A priest can not force a TLM on the parish when the parishioners are not asking for that Mass, which is the point I was tying to make, my fault for not posting it correctly. Sorry !.

If a priest offers the TLM and there is a desire in the parish for that Mass, and there has to be enough people. The Bishops have already put a minimum requirement and it varies according to the individual Bishops, but if only three people request the TLM, the Bishop can refuse. In fact I believe Pope Benedict’s mandate allowed for this requirement.

Also, one of the problems with the TLM in the parishes where it’s celebrated, the majority of the people attending, are not members of that parish. In fact, in my old parish, people were going to the TLM who were well outside of the dioceses and the scheduling of the TLM caused a problem for the parishioners who did not want to attend that Mass, nor pay for the the heating and electric bill non-parishioners were running up with the TLM. Long story but the TLM no longer exist at that parish due to no priest being available.

Jim

 

[twf]

It does not serve any good purpose to debate this and win one’s point about saying the EF, since there is rarely a stable community in any large parish that desires it. Due to the shortage of priests, many parishes have been closed and united into one large parish serving several communities. Priests are often assigned to administer, not only their own parish, but others in the vicinity.

Given the restriction that priests may celebrate one mass daily, except for another funeral mass, and three on Sunday, no priest has the luxury of praying an additional private mass on their own initiative. They must also announce the intention of celebrating the EF mass in the bulletin ahead of time, and cannot suddenly impose an it upon the congregation out of a personal impromptu desire to do so. The parish must be served first and foremost with the OF.

We just received notice this week in my diocese of the priests’ assignments. You will quickly note the many priests who are assigned to additional parishes. We really need to pray for our priests! Seriously, while folks may win the argument on the “lawfulness” of celebrating the EF, it is virtually nil in practical reality.

I’m not debating hypotheticals. That may be your experience but it isn’t mine. In my Archdiocese (Vancouver), the EF is offered weekly at at least 3 or 4 parishes and daily at at least one parish. I know of at least two places that regularly offer Novus Ordo Ad Orientem as well. We have been blessed with solid archbishops who have emphasized reverence and tradition in the liturgy, and we have a wonderful seminary run by the monks of a Benedictine abbey…vocations have thus been steady. At the cathedral itself the EF isn’t offered nor is Ad Orientem the norm, but Latin, chant and incense and other traditional trappings are the norm. The cathedral has 7 packed masses every Sunday- served by 6 priests. It is also one of several parishes in the archdiocese where receiving communion kneeling at the altar rail is the norm.

 

[Brendan]

Could the bishop forbid Ad Orientem in the OF?.

The answer to that is no he cannot. This came up when Bishop Foley of Birmingham, AL attempted to regulate the liturgy so that EWTN could not celebrate the Mass ad orientem.

The Franciscans of the Eternal Word appealed to Rome, and Rome ruled that Ad Orientem is a normative practice of the Church, and thus cannot be prohibited.

What the Bishop COULD prohibit was the broadcast of such liturgies. So the priests at EWTN could continue to say the Mass ad orientem, but such Masses could not be televised.

 

[Sirach2]

I’m not debating hypotheticals. That may be your experience but it isn’t mine.

Then how can you direct that parishes in the US which have a scarcity of priests, ought to be on their toes to freely offer a TLM? It is, as I said, practically non-existent here. In my diocese, there is only ONE parish that offers the TLM for the entire geographic area of the diocese.

Did you read the priests assignments in my diocese? This is only one of several dioceses in the States who face such hardships. Maybe it’s because we are more populated, or have fewer men entering the seminary, whereas the predominant age of our clergy is soon to be ready for retirement. We face a crisis in our diocese that will impact the faithful in the near future. It is well documented, and we have held many diocesan-wide “listening sessions” to try to gain insight how to handle it. I’m at a loss to understand how you have not heard of this in Canada, for we have news broadcasts that mention more and more parishes closing, and angry parishioners raising cain. I’ve seen Cleveland following suit, as well.

 

[Sirach2]

I’m not debating hypotheticals. That may be your experience but it isn’t mine. In my Archdiocese (Vancouver), the EF is offered weekly at at least 3 or 4 parishes and daily at at least one parish.

At first hand, while it may be gratifying for you to boast, I do not believe 3 or 4 parishes out of 85 presents a greater portion of latin masses in your diocese than it does similarly in the US. I stand by my research, that there are scant or next to none available in major dioceses.

Not only are TLM’s scant, many have been “discontinued” as you will note on this listing from Ecclesia Dei.

There may be many reasons for this in each diocese, and I won’t speculate on those I’m not familiar with — but whether it is the lack of a “stable group” who desire it, or the lack of priests to celebrate it, then the phenomenon is pretty much universal.

Again, this is not a huge concern to me, when compared to what we are facing soon with the many priests who will reach retirement age, without new seminarians to replace them.

 

[outremer]

I think one’s position on ad orientem really shines light on his/her entire theological worldview.

Priest and People facing the Risen Lord together.

• or -

Priest turning his back on the people.

That speaks volumes.

 

[Sirach2]

I think one’s position on ad orientem really shines light on his/her entire theological worldview.

Priest and People facing the Risen Lord together.

• or -

Priest turning his back on the people.

That speaks volumes.

You would be hard pressed to find a majority of bishops/priests/magisterium/faithful who would agree with you. If THAT theology, as you expressed it, was a better one, wouldn’t you expect that the Church would have changed it, since 99% of parishes are celebrated in the first option?

 

[Sirach2]

I think one’s position on ad orientem really shines light on his/her entire theological worldview.

Priest and People facing the Risen Lord together. [Ad Orientem]

• or -

Priest turning his back on the people. [Still Ad Orientem]

That speaks volumes.

Both positions are the same, but I think we understand your meaning.

IF that theology, as you expressed it, is the better one, wouldn’t you expect that the Church would change it by now? As it is, 99% of parishes celebrate “lawfully” in the V.P. position. You suggest that maybe the faithful/priests/bishops/magisterium are someone not using proper theology?

 

[Sirach2]

Correction to my post #49, where I posted the wrong link for Ecclesia Dei. This is the correct link. The discontinued masses I had mentioned were mostly noticeable in California.

 

[outremer]

Both positions are the same, but I think we understand your meaning.

IF that theology, as you expressed it, is the better one, wouldn’t you expect that the Church would change it by now? As it is, 99% of parishes celebrate “lawfully” in the V.P. position. You suggest that maybe the faithful/priests/bishops/magisterium are someone not using proper theology?

Meaning that depending on how a person identifies a position, I guarantee it is an outlier of their theological worldview.

 

[Sirach2]

Meaning that depending on how a person identifies a position, I guarantee it is an outlier of their theological worldview.

Whenever one aligns his position with what has lawfully been appointed by the Church, then no other view but that of the Church is held by a practicing Catholic who is obedient to the Church, regardless of personal preferences.

 

[R_H_Benson]

At first hand, while it may be gratifying for you to boast, I do not believe 3 or 4 parishes out of 85 presents a greater portion of latin masses in your diocese than it does similarly in the US. I stand by my research, that there are scant or next to none available in major dioceses.

Not only are TLM’s scant, many have been “discontinued” as you will note on this listing from Ecclesia Dei.

There may be many reasons for this in each diocese, and I won’t speculate on those I’m not familiar with — but whether it is the lack of a “stable group” who desire it, or the lack of priests to celebrate it, then the phenomenon is pretty much universal.

Again, this is not a huge concern to me, when compared to what we are facing soon with the many priests who will reach retirement age, without new seminarians to replace them.

The Traditional Latin Mass community is alive and growing in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, with over 17 priests (young priests, for the most part) in the Archdiocese who currently celebrate it as well as many seminarians who are very interested in learning it and celebrating it after their ordinations. I find this to be interesting because Archbishop Chaput, though a conservative amongst the American bishops, really has little love or appreciation for the old Mass.

It has also been my observation that the TLM community is also growing in the neighboring Diocese of Harrisburg, PA.

In terms of Church documents, Summorum Pontificum is young. Not even 10 years old. And if one compares the number of TLMs offered in America in 2005 with the number offered in 2015, there is a massive upward trend. And the trend continues to go up as Catholics (and many many young Catholics like myself) are discovering the sublime liturgical heritage of our Church that has been hidden from us for 50 years.

The return of the TLM is not being championed by white haired old priests, but by young people - both priest and laity.

 

[Sirach2]

The Traditional Latin Mass community is alive and growing in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, with over 17 priests (young priests, for the most part) in the Archdiocese who currently celebrate it as well as many seminarians who are very interested in learning it and celebrating it after their ordinations. It has also been my observation that the TLM community is also growing in the neighboring Diocese of Harrisburg, PA.

I find a discrepancy in your reporting, for the Ecclesia Dei link I posted shows only five parishes in Philly - one was moved to an existing parish, the other was cancelled. That may be true that 17 priests are “capable” of celebrating it, but perhaps they are not part of a parish that has this mass on a regular basis.

Harrisburg has only three parishes that have a Sunday TLM; two were discontinued.
The link is current, dated April, 2015, so I have no reason to doubt their statistics.

 

[Phemie]

The Constitution of the Sacred Liturgy clearly states that the norms are set by the conference of Bishops along with the local Bishop, according to Church law.
Jim

GIRM 390 lists those things which are in the purview of the Bishops Conference to determine and the orientation for the celebration is not on the list.
390.
It is for the C

 

[R_H_Benson]

I find a discrepancy in your reporting, for the Ecclesia Dei link I posted shows only five parishes in Philly - one was moved to an existing parish, the other was cancelled. That may be true that 17 priests are “capable” of celebrating it, but perhaps they are not part of a parish that has this mass on a regular basis.

Harrisburg has only three parishes that have a Sunday TLM; two were discontinued.
The link is current, dated April, 2015, so I have no reason to doubt their statistics.

TLMs are offered on occasion at the Cathedral Basilica of SS. Peter and Paul as well. There is a large TLM community at Our Lady of Lourdes Parish, as well as a fairly large group attached to the “official” Archdiocesan TLM offered at St. Edmonds (I have found that the celebrant of this Mass often varies amongst the priests who are capable of saying the TLM), and the TLM at Our Lady of Mt. Carmel is always full. As one who lives in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia and who has experienced the vibrancy of the TLM community here first hand, I feel that I speak with more authority on the issue than an Ecclesia Dei link. My interaction with the seminarians of the Archdiocese also greatly encourages me.

As for Harrisburg, in May there was a TLM added at Mary Gate of Heaven Parish in Myerstown, PA on one Sunday every month that is not yet reflected in the April 2015 statistics.

Regardless, what is your goal in denying an objective upward trend in the overall number of TLMs offered?