P
ProVobis
Guest
This same “better theological scholarship” which wanted to promote artificial birth control in 1967 was rejected by Paul VI, so you know.
- Status
D
diggerdomer
Guest
Where did he do this? Thanks.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
Oh come on that’s a red herring. What does birth control and Humanae Vitae have to do with this Thread?
J
JReducation
Guest
Novus ordo means new order, not new rite. The rite has never been changed. It is the right of the Apostolic See to change disciplines, establish norms and even approve new forms of the liturgy. Therefore, Benedict XVI calls it the Ordinary Form, since it is no longer new and it is the ordinary form of the Latin rite. This takes nothing away from the Extraordinary Form. How does it threaten the EF? We’re disturbing our own inner peace with these debates rather than achieving anything.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
M
Malkin71
Guest
Yes! The Church needs to promoted Latin in the Liturgy in the Roman/Latin Rite!
The O.F. needs the Latin Language during the prayers and the Consecration. The E.F. needs promoted by Rome ordering the Bishops to mandate training of all Priest’s and all Seminaries in the Seminarians to learn both E.F. and O.F. forms.
Also Rome needs to mandate that all Catholic schools make Latin a requirement in all grades. It will help if the Pope would celebrate the E.F. in public. E.g. Midnight Mass.
J
JReducation
Guest
We cannot demand that every priest learn and celebrte the Extraordinary Form, because Summorum Pontificum in article three liberates regular priests from it and leaves that decision to their major superiors and to the constitutions of the religious order, religious congregation and society of apostolic life. It is not for the Holy See to demand this of them. The Holy Father respects their autonomy and tries to preserve it, even in matters concerning the liturgy.
Therefore, we too should have the same respect for regular priests and religious life as the Holy Father expresses in this part of his decree.
If an individual community or an entire Institute or Society wishes to undertake such celebrations often, habitually or permanently, the decision must be taken by the Superiors Major, in accordance with the law and following their own specific decrees and statues. (Art 3)
As we can see from this statement, the rules and constitutions of the religious life must be observed by the major superiors of regular priests and regular priests must submit to the major superiors. We have to be careful not to demand that which the Church does not give us the right to demand.
That being said, it is important to remember that the document refers to the Tridentine mass as the Extraordinary Form and that it does not consider it the norm for the Latin Rite Church. When the Holy Father celebrates mass in public he is celebrating for the Latin Rite Church. The ordinary form of the Latin Rite is the appropriate form. If he were to celebrate mass using the extraordinary form, when he is celebrating for the Latin Church as one family, then he would be making a statement that this is the form for use in the entire Latin Rite, which is not the case. This is one form of the Latin Rite, but not THE form of the Latin Rite. In addition, the Motu Proprio also says that the EF is not to be used during the Easter Triduum, which is the highest holy day of the Church.
In Masses celebrated without the people, each Catholic priest of the Latin rite, whether secular or regular, may use the Roman Missal published by Bl. Pope John XXIII in 1962, or the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970, and may do so on any day with the exception of the Easter Triduum. (Art 2).
If you take the highest holy days of Christianity out of the equatioin, as he has done here, then the form is definitely not for universal use within the Latin Rite. There are restrictions, one being the Easter Triduum and the other being religious life.
It is equally important to remember that the bishops have no authority over half of the priests in the Latin Church, as they usually belong to one of the following and do not fall under his jurisdiction. He only ordains them. He has no voice in their formation or even the authority to ordain them without their superiors’ permission or refuse them ordination when they are presented by their superiors, because their superiors, even though they are not bishops, have the same authority as a bishopl. Priests who are members of one of the following do not fall under the authority of bishops: religious orders, religious congregations, secular institutes, societies of apostolic life and priestly societies. The bishop grants them faculties to preach, witness marriages and grant absolution in his diocese. That is the extent of his authority over them. Their formation is the responsibilitiy of their superiors. They must be formed in accordance to the rules of their institutes, as the Holy Father says in article 2. These rules and constitutions are approved by the Holy See.
I hope this helps a little.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
M
mick321
Guest
.I hope this helps a little.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Nice try, but I does not help, even a little.
“… In this war, things get confused out there, power, ideals, the old morality, and practical military necessity. Out there with these natives it must be a temptation to be god. Because there’s a conflict in every human heart between the rational and the irrational, between good and evil. The good does not always triumph. Sometimes the dark side overcomes what Lincoln called the better angels of our nature. Every man has got a breaking point…”
Many who have read Summorum Pontificum would agree that the Holy Father’s intent was to liberate the Tridentine Mass from the grip of bishops and others who – in violation of the letter and spirit of V2 – suppressed its use for nearly forty years. The notion he wanted to give cover to those who wish to further suppress the EF is laughable.
Sometimes it is useful to read a document in the order that the author chose to present it. As such, I have included the unedited text of Articles 1, 2, 3, and 4.
***Art. 1 The Roman Missal promulgated by Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the Lex orandi [Law of prayer] of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite. Nonetheless, the Roman Missal promulgated by St. Pius V and reissued by Bl. John XXIII is to be considered as an extraordinary expression of that same Lex orandi, and must be given due honour for its venerable and ancient usage. These two expressions of the Church’s Lex orandi will in no any way lead to a division in the Church’s Lex credendi [Law of belief]. They are, in fact two uses of the one Roman rite.
It is, therefore, permissible to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as an extraordinary form of the Liturgy of the Church. The conditions for the use of this Missal as laid down by earlier documents “Quattuor abhinc annos” and “Ecclesia Dei”, are substituted as follows:***
In Article 1, the Holy Father clearly and authoritatively declares that the 1962 Mass of Bl John XXIII is the extraordinary form of the liturgy of the Church. He goes on to give standing permission for the EF to be celebrated church-wide under much less restrictive conditions than had existed previously.
Art. 2. In Masses celebrated without the people, each Catholic priest of the Latin rite, whether secular or regular, may use the Roman Missal published by Bl. Pope John XXIII in 1962, or the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970, and may do so on any day with the exception of the Easter Triduum. For such celebrations, with either one Missal or the other, the priest has no need for permission from the Apostolic See or from his Ordinary.
Article 2 has to do with Masses celebrated without people. It clearly gives each individual Catholic priest standing authority to use the EF for any of his private masses – no other permission required. Private Masses are not celebrated during Easter Triduum. Public masses during Easter Triduum may be either OF or EF. Article two makes no reference to the formation of priests.
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. If an individual community or an entire Institute or Society wishes to undertake such celebrations often, habitually or permanently, the decision must be taken by the Superiors Major, in accordance with the law and following their own specific decrees and statues.
Article 3 states that Communities and/or Societies may celebrate the EF Mass for their own membership – within their own chapels – if they wish. It goes further to state that if Communities and/or Societies wishes to celebrate the EF mass on a regular basis, their Superior Major is free to immediately authorize use of the EF providing it is in accordance with the law and is consistent with their own decrees and statutes.
Art. 4 Celebrations of Mass as mentioned above in art. 2 may – observing all the norms of law – also be attended by faithful who, of their own free will, ask to be admitted.
Article 4 makes it possible for the faithful to participate in many of the thousands of private EF masses that are celebrated across the globe, every day.
The Holy Father did not issue Summorum Pontificum to remove the Tridentine Mass from any equation. Exactly to the contrary, it’s abundantly clear that he wanted to ensure that the EF would be more available to the Catholic faithful. Not less.
Your final paragraph paints a rather disturbing picture of what you describe as half the Catholic priesthood. Those who operate exclusively within cloistered organizations are not really the issue here. In fairness, their numbers should be backed out of the 50% figure. What is important is that priests who offer mass publicly are prepared to offer either form – by the book – whenever asked. That bishops are forced to ordain priests with questionable qualifications – then grant them access-on-demand to the faithful of the diocese – is unconscionable.
The ability to offer clean Catholic Masses – in both forms – should be a minimum standard of admission for anyone who wants to call himself a Catholic Priest.
.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
No priest is bound to offer the EF. You are mistaken in this comment.
Religious priests have further restrictions that may be in place.
The bishop is just performing the ordination in these cases, he has no right nor need to determine any qualifications as the religious superior is the local ordinary for those religious under his authority. All determiniantion of qualifications resides with him.
The practice of the EF is not a requirement for ordination. I think you need to study up on what is. This can be found in the Program for Priestly Ordination, 5th edition for what is required in the United States.
The Church does not agree with you on this.
M
mick321
Guest
Thank you Brother. I accept your word that this is how things are right now. These seem like issues that ought to be resolved - particularly as they apply to priests who offer public masses. My opinion only.
.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Why? Is it the priest or is it the “public” who determines the priest’s spirituality and his preference for the OF or the EF?
If the priest is asked to perform a public Mass, does he not have a right to decline.
I do not see what the offering of public Masses has to do with anything. Religious offer public Masses at places that the local bishop has no control over, all he has control over is the actual Mass. Those religious are not bound to ever offer the EF if requested as Summorum Pontificum does not apply. Such as the Masses at Franiscian University or one of our Carmelite Shrines.
I do not see any issues with the way things are right now.
M
Malkin71
Guest
We cannot demand that every priest learn and celebrte the Extraordinary Form, because Summorum Pontificum in article three liberates regular priests from it and leaves that decision to their major superiors and to the constitutions of the religious order, religious congregation and society of apostolic life. It is not for the Holy See to demand this of them. The Holy Father respects their autonomy and tries to preserve it, even in matters concerning the liturgy.
Therefore, we too should have the same respect for regular priests and religious life as the Holy Father expresses in this part of his decree.
If an individual community or an entire Institute or Society wishes to undertake such celebrations often, habitually or permanently, the decision must be taken by the Superiors Major, in accordance with the law and following their own specific decrees and statues. (Art 3)
As we can see from this statement, the rules and constitutions of the religious life must be observed by the major superiors of regular priests and regular priests must submit to the major superiors. We have to be careful not to demand that which the Church does not give us the right to demand.
That being said, it is important to remember that the document refers to the Tridentine mass as the Extraordinary Form and that it does not consider it the norm for the Latin Rite Church. When the Holy Father celebrates mass in public he is celebrating for the Latin Rite Church. The ordinary form of the Latin Rite is the appropriate form. If he were to celebrate mass using the extraordinary form, when he is celebrating for the Latin Church as one family, then he would be making a statement that this is the form for use in the entire Latin Rite, which is not the case. This is one form of the Latin Rite, but not THE form of the Latin Rite. In addition, the Motu Proprio also says that the EF is not to be used during the Easter Triduum, which is the highest holy day of the Church.
In Masses celebrated without the people, each Catholic priest of the Latin rite, whether secular or regular, may use the Roman Missal published by Bl. Pope John XXIII in 1962, or the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970, and may do so on any day with the exception of the Easter Triduum. (Art 2).
If you take the highest holy days of Christianity out of the equatioin, as he has done here, then the form is definitely not for universal use within the Latin Rite. There are restrictions, one being the Easter Triduum and the other being religious life.
It is equally important to remember that the bishops have no authority over half of the priests in the Latin Church, as they usually belong to one of the following and do not fall under his jurisdiction. He only ordains them. He has no voice in their formation or even the authority to ordain them without their superiors’ permission or refuse them ordination when they are presented by their superiors, because their superiors, even though they are not bishops, have the same authority as a bishopl. Priests who are members of one of the following do not fall under the authority of bishops: religious orders, religious congregations, secular institutes, societies of apostolic life and priestly societies. The bishop grants them faculties to preach, witness marriages and grant absolution in his diocese. That is the extent of his authority over them. Their formation is the responsibilitiy of their superiors. They must be formed in accordance to the rules of their institutes, as the Holy Father says in article 2. These rules and constitutions are approved by the Holy See.
I hope this helps a little.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
- Why can not Rome mandate that Catholic Schools and Seminaries require that Latin is a required course? It will help them with the Sciences and Language. In the Seminary Latin will help the Seminarians studying church documents and history.
- What is wrong requiring that the Seminaries require that both forms E.F. and O.F. be taught? There would be no excuse when the Seminarian is ordained a Priest that he can not say both forms in both Latin and English.
- Here in Pittsburgh Latin Mass Community the Easter Triduum is said according to the 1962 Missal.
- Diocesian Priests have to listen and obey their Bishop. Bishops have to answer to Rome.
- Any Priest can say the O.F. in Latin without permission if he chooses to do so.
- In the future Religious Orders may have to learn Latin and both forms.
J
JReducation
Guest
The reason why the Church does not make these demands of religious who are studying to be priests is because most religious orders, religious congregations, societies of apostolic life and secular orders are institutes of Pontifical Right. This means that they are excempt from the rules that govern the secular clergy. They do not answer to any bishop. Their major superior is their proper ordinary and their rule and constitution is their law.
Canon law makes provision for religious to follow their own law as long as that law is approved by the Holy See. Once it is approved by the Holy See, it cannot be undone until the next general chapter of the community.
If the religious superior says that there will be no EF or no OF in his community, he is the final authority and there is no appeal, because ther religious owe him obedience in all things, but sin. To disobey can get their faculties suspended. Religious superiors can suspend, even though they are not bishops and many are not even priests. As long as they hold the position of Major Superior, they are Ordianries. This includes provincials, abbots and generals.
It’s not as easy as it sounds to change these laws and to take away the autonomy of religious life, because religous life is a state of consecration. Even if a man is a priest, he is also a consecrated person, if he is a religious. As a consecrated person, he is bound to obey his superior, his founder, his rule, his constitution and his tradition as it has evolved from the founding the the religious family. We’re not as free as many people may think.
We have a brother in our community (not my house) who celebrates the EF. But to get permission to do so the council had to vote on it and the Major Superior had to uphold the vote of the council. The Major Superior can veto the entire council and the community, in a chapter, can veto the major superior and the council. The conditions are that he may celebrate the EF for any parish that asks for it. But he may not celebate it for the brothers without the permission of the superior. He may not make it the only form of the mass that he celebrates.
All this is very tricky. There are many rules at play simultaneously.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
JReducation
Guest
All the above is correct. But what I was trying to say is that religious orders determine how their members are formed. The are bound to the rules regarding the formation of priests and these rules do not include training in the EF.
Priests are not required to celebrate the EF or learn it. In the case of a priest who is also a religious, it is up to his religious community. There are some religious communities where only the EF is celebrated. There are others where only the OF is celebrated. It all depends of the statutes of the community. Obviously the community is going to serve those bishops who needs are consistent with the rules of the religious family.
Who said that their qualifications are questionable? The Major Superior is an ordinary. He is also the person responsible for determining if the candidate for ordination or vows qualifies. He has the same authority as a bishop. He’s just not a bishop. Usually he is a priest or a lay brother. But he is a canonical authority.
No religious can have access on demand to the faithful in any diocese. The diocese is separate from the religious institute. Religious who work in parishes are there are the invitation of the local bishop, not becaues they demand it. Religious may not enter a diocese without the permmission of a bishop. Once they are established in a diocese, they are autonomous. That is different.
We can’t make that a universal standard in the Latin Rite, because you can create a conflict between such a rule and the rules and constitutions of pontifical religious orders. For example, the Sons of the Holy Redeemer or the Carmelite Monks, only use the EF. Franciscans only use the OF. Such a law would mean that these communities would have to violate their own rules to which they have promised solemn obedience until death. You can’t mess with the rules of religious life wihtout a bull from the Holy Father. That is not easily granted, because it can destabalize a religious family. It’s not practical. You don’t want to undermine the charism of a religious family when it is not necessary to do so. The most practical thing you can do is give permission on a case by case basis, when religious are concerned, just as we do with Eastern Rite religious who belong to Latin Rite religious orders.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Religious orders also have their own official languages. For the O.Carm. Carmelites our languages are English, Spanish, and Italian.
Also if you are going to mandate these extra classes, what classes will be dropped? Even for the secular priesthood.
Right now the Masters of Divinity is a four year professional masters degree program. At the Washington Theological Union, the theologate I go to, the MDIV is 103 credits as it is.
M
malphono
Guest
I suppose one could also ask the question: how did the O. Carm manage in pre-conciliar days? There was the Latin and the (now most unfortunately moribund) Carmelite usage as well.
Might be interesting to ask one of the retirees as St Albert’s. 
P
Phemie
Guest
I think the answer to the original question is simply “The Church has an obligation to respond to the demand for the Extraordinary Form but no obligation to create a demand for it.”
F
FAB
Guest
The ordinary for my diocese put it this way. He does not have the extra resources (priest, facilites and money) to use specifically for the EF, however, any group who wishes to provide those resources are more than welcome to do so. Since all diocese must work tirelessly just to fill current position for parish priest, I suspect this is the attitute of most ordinaries.
Peace,
FAB
J
Joannm
Guest
Wow that was simply stated and makes the most sense. Thanks.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
In the pre-conciliar days no set degree was required for ordination. Now the M.Div. is required in the United States.I suppose one could also ask the question: how did the O. Carm manage in pre-conciliar days? There was the Latin and the (now most unfortunately moribund) Carmelite usage as well.
Also, while there is a Carmelite rite, the O.Carm. surrendered the rite to Rome in the early 70’s. The O.C.D. did so a couple of years before the O.Carm. did. Why this was done and why Rome accept it is a mystery because Rome did not request that it be surrendered, as far as I can tell.
Also I think there is a recognition by the Church today that priests need to be formed more in spirituality and pastoral counseling than in the past. These are areas where they will be working everyday. The celebration of the EF is not something that every priest will be doing nor does every priest want to do so.
J
JanetF
Guest
If we are going to go back to the traditional Mass, why wouldn’t we go all the way back to the first Mass which was said in Aramaic?
- Status