How do Jesuits go about saying the E.F.?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GloriousOrder
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Friends :),

With Summorum Pontificum now being the law of the Church, diocesan priests may celebrate the E.F. very freely. Our Holy Father’s forthcoming instruction on this motu proprio is giving people a lot of expectations. This new “freedom” might not apply 100% to the various religious orders which abjured their own Rites in the 1960’s, but what about the Jesuits (who are a Society of Apostolic Life)? Can a Jesuit priest who decided to study Latin in addition to Philosophy and Theology freely celebrate the E.F.?

Knowing that St. Ignatius’ noble Society is based very strictly on army-like obedience, might the prior, provincial, or superior general simply order a Jesuit priest to abjure from the T.L.M.? Would an S.J. have to comply with his order, S.P. being in effect as it is? How does this work with the Companions of our Lord I.H.S.? 🙂
They did not need an indult or Summorum Pontificum to enjoy a right they were guaranteed until the end of time, to paraphrase a man who put it aptly.

No bishop or Pope or any man may prevent a priest from using the missal of Pope St. Pius V.
 
They did not need an indult or Summorum Pontificum to enjoy a right they were guaranteed until the end of time, to paraphrase a man who put it aptly.

No bishop or Pope or any man may prevent a priest from using the missal of Pope St. Pius V.
Not at all. In fact the Missale of Pius V was superseded as early as 1604 with the edition of Clement VIII. Currently, no edition prior to the Missale of John XXIII (1962) is permitted to be used.
 
Not at all. In fact the Missale of Pius V was superseded as early as 1604 with the edition of Clement VIII. Currently, no edition prior to the Missale of John XXIII (1962) is permitted to be used.
I’m sure you knew what I was refering to. Hairsplitting does not serve to further any discussion. I’m sorry if I was unclear, though.
 
The Dominicans already have a section on their website dedicated to the promotion of the pre-conciliar Dominican Rite. the Carmelites also have the Carmelites in Wyoming, the Benedictines, Clear Creek Monastery, both of which celebrate the pre-conciliar Form. The interest is growing. I would say the Jesuits may be one of the last to adopt the pre-conciliar form, since they are the most liberal of the major religious. But ti would be in the interest of all religious to rediscover their pre-conciliar forms, if they are to repair the rupture that has taken place.

op-stjoseph.org/preaching/dominican_rite/home/

carmelitemonks.org/

clearcreekmonks.org/
The Carmelites in Wyoming are not part of the Carmelite Order. They are of diocesen right, that is they are under the local bishop. I am not certain that they are celebrating the Carmelite Rite, I think they do the EF. Technically as they are not part of the Carmelite Order they do not have the right to celebrate the Carmelite Rite.

The Carmelite Hermits in Lake Elmo, Wisconsin, are a part of the Carmelite Order and are experimenting with the celebration of the Carmelite Rite.
 
They did not need an indult or Summorum Pontificum to enjoy a right they were guaranteed until the end of time, to paraphrase a man who put it aptly.

No bishop or Pope or any man may prevent a priest from using the missal of Pope St. Pius V.
No pope may bind a future pope in matters of discipline. The form of the Mass is a matter of discipline.
 
I’m sure you knew what I was refering to. Hairsplitting does not serve to further any discussion. I’m sorry if I was unclear, though.
I thought it would be more fun than just pointing out that in fact any pope is capable of utterly abolishing the Trdientine Mass, and binding all priests of the Church never to say it through Holy Obedience. But you knew that, right?

Anyway, countless discussions have been held on the topic (look for “Quo Primum” in the search box). Quo Primum simply does not bind popes, which is why tons of popes, including Pius V himself, have made changes to the Missal despite Quo Primum’s admonition that “no one can ever change anything, the wrath of Peter will be upon you” and so on. One pope cannot bind future popes on changeable disciplines such as the external forms of the liturgy, nor would that even be desirable.

This not the topic of this thread, however, so I’ll leave it at that, and if you’d like to continue discussing it I’d be happy to join you in a new thread or a revival of an old one.
 
I would say the Jesuits may be one of the last to adopt the pre-conciliar form, since they are the most liberal of the major religious. But ti would be in the interest of all religious to rediscover their pre-conciliar forms, if they are to repair the rupture that has taken place.
This is not possible, since most religious orders do not have a rite of their own. There are the: Carthusian, Dominican and Carmelite Rites.

Forms are not rites. There are forms that are proper to some of the major orders of men, such as the Franciscans, Trinitarians, and Augustinians.

The Jesuits are not part of this group. The Society of Jesus is indeed an order; but it is not one of the major orders. The major orders are monastic or mendicant. Jesuits are neither. They are Clerks Regular. Clerks regular never had a conventual tradition. They never lived in convents, friaries or monasteries, which is where you would find a very structured liturgical life.

The Society of Jesus celebrated whatever form was available in the diocese where they found themselves. This was the beauty of the Jesuit foundation. It liberated male religious from the disciplines of conventual life while preserving the vowed state. They had the spiritual benefits of the vowed life and the privilege of solemn vows without the obligations that the other orders have. This is why people often find them so “liberal”. People often expect them to be like other religiuos. That was not the vision of St. Ignatius. His vision was that they be like secular priests, but in vows. Their attachment to each other is a rather loose one. They are really attached to the Superior General who governs like a head of state.

Notice that they do not have their own breviary or missal. They use the Roman breviary and missal. The same is also true for the congregations of religious men: Redemptorists, Salesians, Marists, Marianists, Trinitarians (the American congregation, not the order), Josephites, and other.

What I’m trying to say is that for most male religious, there is no liturgical tradition to go back to, because they followed whatever the universal Church was doing.

Even among the orders, the Franciscans have a diversity of forms, because we’re not monastic. The vision was to be free of monastic discipline. Every province and every Franciscan obedience developed its own form according to culture and resources. The younger Franciscan obediences, such as the Franciscans of the Renewal, Franciscans of the Eternal Word, Franciscans of the Sacred Heart, etc adopt one of the pre-existing forms from one of the original obediences or simply use the universal form with the Franciscan calendar.

When we speak of rupture, we have to careful not to assume that there was ever such a strong liturgical unity in the Roman Church. That was not the case at all. The situation is that most lay people in the USA are used to Diocesan clergy. Diocesan clergy follow the universal form. The lay faithful in the USA thought that mass was the same for the entire Roman Church.

In Europe and Latin America, where they have had a stronger presence of religious and a greater diversity of religious families, they never had the vision of “one size fits all.” Pardon the expression. I couldn’t find a better one. Catholics in those countries have been exposed to many forms and many rites, religious, Roman and Eastern. To them, walking into one church and seeing a priest wearing purple on a given Sunday while the priest up the street wore white was very common. This diversity started to disappear when the Novus Ordo came into existence. That’s actually when you began to see more uniformity in places such as Europe, South America and the European colonies. What happened with the birth of the Novus Ordo was the birth of a common liturgical calendar, even though major religious orders have kept their own liturgical calendars. Those that kept their liturgical calendars, set aside their rite or their form for the Novus Ordo, now called the Ordinary Form.

As we try to recover our roots, many religious communities are going back to their rite or form when and where they are allowed to do so. But that’s only the case for those that have one to go back to.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
I thought it would be more fun than just pointing out that in fact any pope is capable of utterly abolishing the Trdientine Mass, and binding all priests of the Church never to say it through Holy Obedience. But you knew that, right?

Anyway, countless discussions have been held on the topic (look for “Quo Primum” in the search box). Quo Primum simply does not bind popes, which is why tons of popes, including Pius V himself, have made changes to the Missal despite Quo Primum’s admonition that “no one can ever change anything, the wrath of Peter will be upon you” and so on. One pope cannot bind future popes on changeable disciplines such as the external forms of the liturgy, nor would that even be desirable.

This not the topic of this thread, however, so I’ll leave it at that, and if you’d like to continue discussing it I’d be happy to join you in a new thread or a revival of an old one.
Ok, thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top