Pope Francis and the Latin Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter SubjectVerb
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Annuntio vobis that there is a diocesan Sunday TLM, in central Buenos Aires, which is on the regular, posted schedule of the parish. It is at Nuestra Señora del Carmen, Rodriguez Peña 840, C.A.B.A. Mass is at 9:00 A.M.; it is at the side altar on the left-hand side, which is ad orientem (actually the priest ends up facing due west, but the important part is that he is not facing the people).

Gaudium magnum I can’t call it, though, as only about five to eight people go. That is not a hyperbolic way of saying that “few” people go; I really mean, numerically, five to eight souls. For those who wonder why Pope Francis did not go wild opening Latin Mass Centers in Buenos Aires … it might be due to lack of demand.
Then if that is true I will ask the mods to remove my posts. I researched this thing very carefully and methodocally and was unable to find such a Mass. That coupled with numerous newspaper articles, Parish websites, Jesuit journals, FSSP and other Traditional Organization websites turned up nothing that would indicate such a Mass even existed and showed pretty clearly that no such Mass was even allowed.

Since there are numerous SSPX Chapels in Argentina including Buenos Aires that are self supporting I would have to disagree as to the lack of demand, however. The SSPX seldom shows up without a demand being present.
 
I think that we have to be careful not to go to extremes. First of all, no pope is superman and Jesus was not running for pope.

There are many important issues facing the new pope. He has to prioritize. While to the traditionalist the Extraordinary Form of the mass may seen like a priority, to a pope who takes the name Francis, it may not be on his top ten list of issues to deal with.

He is famous for not allowing anyone to call him Your Eminence, Your Excellency or chauffeur him around. He is Jorge or simply Father Jorge to the people of Buenos Aires.

He is very committed to the life of prayer, detachment from material things, and proclaiming the Gospel to the poorest of the poor.

He is committed to Christian unity with other Christians.

He loves his Jesuit order.

He is also very committed to the ideals of St. Francis of Assisi – commitment to preaching, penance, reform the Church from a triumphalist Church to a humble Church. It is very likely that he will focus on cleaning house inside the Vatican infrastructure.

I think he set the tone of his papacy with his greeting. The first thing that he asked the people to do was to pray with him, then pray for him. Both of these are gestures that the Seraphic Father did while he was superior general of our order.

His second gesture was his refusal to wear the typical red worn by popes as they come to the Loggia for their first blessing. It reflected his simplicity and the simplicity that he hopes to bring to the Church. We’ll be seeing less pomp and circumstance and greater simplicity.

His third gesture was walking past the papal limousine that was to take him to the hotel. Instead, he boarded the bus along with the other cardinals.

In addition, we must remember that the liturgical reform begun by Pope Benedict was not about imposing the EF on the Church. It was about cleaning the OF of the nonsense that people have inserted into it, so that it is what it’s meant to be, a prayer and act of worship. As an admirer of the Seraphic Father, I can see him continue this work.

Remember, St. Francis banned Gregorian Chant from his houses. The Tridentine Mass adopted by Trent and later tweaked by Pope Pius V, was originally celebrated by the Franciscans alone. No one else used it. Pope Pius inserted the Gregorian Chant and a few other details that were not there: prayers at the foot of the altar, a final Gospel, the preparation of the gifts at the offertory. When the Franciscans celebrated it, the mass did not have these components. There were few distinctions between the priest and the laity. The friars were not allowed to distinguish themselves as priests – those who were priests. Not all friars are priests.

After the reforms by Pope Pius V, the Franciscans never embraced these reforms and were not expected to do so. It was only later that some superiors insisted on adopting them. The adoption was never uniform to the entire Franciscan order.

The point that I’m making is not against the EF, but I’m trying to explain that if he is true to the vision of St. Francis, his focus will be in reforming the liturgy so that it is an act of worship, be it in the Ordinary or Extraordinary form. Rebuilding the Church is not about one form of the mass over the other, but about praying the mass as it should be prayed in any form and any rite.

I don’t know how true this is, but I heard that in using the EF in his diocese, his requirement was that it be celebrated as most Franciscan superiors insist that their friar priests do, using the current liturgical calendar and allowing non-ordained men or women read the epistle. I read this on some blog. You can’t always trust what you read on blogs.
If that is true then I am deeply saddened. This sort of experimentation is what got the Ordinary Form of the Mass into so many of the more horrific practices that happened over the years. Change things to make them more meaningful,relevant and most of all inclusive. That was the general order of business back in the day.

Of course, with the Holy Father being Jesuit such a thing should not surprise me. During those long ago days, the Jesuits were some of the more, how can I word this delicately, experimentally minded towards the Liturgy?
 
The SSPX seldom shows up without a demand being present.
Good point.

Whether the Pope makes the TLM a priority or not, the ultimate decision is still left up to the bishop. Per SP, this decision was extended to individual priests or parish pastors.
 
If that is true then I am deeply saddened. This sort of experimentation is what got the Ordinary Form of the Mass into so many of the more horrific practices that happened over the years. Change things to make them more meaningful,relevant and most of all inclusive. That was the general order of business back in the day.

Of course, with the Holy Father being Jesuit such a thing should not surprise me. During those long ago days, the Jesuits were some of the more, how can I word this delicately, experimentally minded towards the Liturgy?
Perhaps when he supposedly wanted lay persons to do the readings, he was not aware that that’s not how the EF works. Hopefully, after spending time in Rome, he’ll be informed that it’s not proper for lay persons to do the readings in the EF. He’s probably not had much exposure to the EF, but the FSSP have a parish in Rome, so he may be meeting eventually with the superior of the FSSP, or at least Ecclesia Dei. I wouldn’t worry too much about it, even though some here would like to see the EF become more like the OF, but that’s not likely to happen.
 
Actually the discussion was concerning the celebration of the Extraordinary Form Mass in the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires which was the only place under the authority of the Holy Father at that time and whether or not it was allowed. What happened in the rest of Argentina was not even relevant to the conversation as the Holy Father had no authority in those areas at that time.

I noted in my posts that there were indeed Diocesan as well as SSPX Masses throughout Argentina and that the Extraordinary Form of the Mass had been celebrated by several Argentinian Bishops.
 
Perhaps when he supposedly wanted lay persons to do the readings, he was not aware that that’s not how the EF works. Hopefully, after spending time in Rome, he’ll be informed that it’s not proper for lay persons to do the readings in the EF. He’s probably not had much exposure to the EF, but the FSSP have a parish in Rome, so he may be meeting eventually with the superior of the FSSP, or at least Ecclesia Dei. I wouldn’t worry too much about it, even though some here would like to see the EF become more like the OF, but that’s not likely to happen.
Are you really saying that he was not aware how the EF works?
 
Are you really saying that he was not aware how the EF works?
It’s a possibility only. I really have no idea, since it hasn’t been explained by him. I have to give him the benefit of the doubt, since we don’t know why, exactly. But even if he intentionally changed the Mass, so as to allow lay readers, then I still have no reason to think, as yet, that he’ll try to impose this rule on all celebrations of the EF. I could be wrong. A lot of folks, who are attached to the EF, would be upset about this, if a change were to be made to the 1962 missal. He doen’t seem like the type who would want to alienate people in this way.
 
Perhaps when he supposedly wanted lay persons to do the readings, he was not aware that that’s not how the EF works. Hopefully, after spending time in Rome, he’ll be informed that it’s not proper for lay persons to do the readings in the EF. He’s probably not had much exposure to the EF, but the FSSP have a parish in Rome, so he may be meeting eventually with the superior of the FSSP, or at least Ecclesia Dei. I wouldn’t worry too much about it, even though some here would like to see the EF become more like the OF, but that’s not likely to happen.
That is a very charitable way to say things, but I somehow doubt that it is factual. The Holy Father was born in 1936 when the Extraordinary Rite was celebrated. He became a Jesuit in 1958 when the Extraordinary Form was celebrated. He was ordained a Priest in 1969 within a month of when the Ordinary Form of the Mass was introduced…

Since he would have experienced the Extraordinary form of the Mass for the first 33 years of his life, including 11 years as a Religious, I somehow find it doubtful that he was unaware of how the Extraordinary Form works.

I would say on the other hand that since he had plenty of exposure to the Extraordinary Form of the Mass he would know pretty much exactly how it works. In fact, I cannot see how it could be otherwise.

Let me be clear, Pope Francis is my Pope and he has my support and devotion. I am not attacking him and I support him 100%. But making excuses that ignore reality and that make no sense do no good for anything and actually appear to be trying to excuse things that really cannot and should not be excused.
 
Perhaps when he supposedly wanted lay persons to do the readings, he was not aware that that’s not how the EF works. Hopefully, after spending time in Rome, he’ll be informed that it’s not proper for lay persons to do the readings in the EF. He’s probably not had much exposure to the EF, but the FSSP have a parish in Rome, so he may be meeting eventually with the superior of the FSSP, or at least Ecclesia Dei. I wouldn’t worry too much about it, even though some here would like to see the EF become more like the OF, but that’s not likely to happen.
The man is a scholar. He is not the only religious that adapts the EF to fit in with his community’s liturgical calendar. What we have to remember is that to religious superiors, their liturgical calendar cannot be tampered with, because it divides the community. A Jesuit bishop is still a religious. According to the Code of Canon Law of 1983, religious do not cease to be religious when ordained bishop. This was an experiment tried in the Code of 1917, which did not go over very well. It did a great deal of damage to the orders.

You can’t expect a regular bishop to function as a secular bishop. He is still a regular, not a secular. Just as pope he remains a regular, not a secular.
 
That is a very charitable way to say things, but I somehow doubt that it is factual. The Holy Father was born in 1936 when the Extraordinary Rite was celebrated. He became a Jesuit in 1958 when the Extraordinary Form was celebrated. He was ordained a Priest in 1969 within a month of when the Ordinary Form of the Mass was introduced…

Since he would have experienced the Extraordinary form of the Mass for the first 33 years of his life, including 11 years as a Religious, I somehow find it doubtful that he was unaware of how the Extraordinary Form works.

I would say on the other hand that since he had plenty of exposure to the Extraordinary Form of the Mass he would know pretty much exactly how it works. In fact, I cannot see how it could be otherwise.

Let me be clear, Pope Francis is my Pope and he has my support and devotion. I am not attacking him and I support him 100%. But making excuses that ignore reality and that make no sense do no good for anything and actually appear to be trying to excuse things that really cannot and should not be excused.
Okay, I see what you’re saying, and it makes sense. Then he probably did know what he was doing when he wanted lay persons to do the readings. Well, we’ll just have to hope that he doesn’t impose this on all celebrations of the EF. If he does this, then some trads will be running to the SSPX.

He’ll possibly consult with Pope Benedict Emeritus on the subject of the EF, and I would have to think that our former Pope would discourage any change to the celebration of the EF. Maybe I’m wrong.
 
Why is it that the Church gets a new pope with so many things that need attention and the focus here is on the celebration of the Extraordinary Form? Already we are seeing qualified statements such as “I accept him as my pope BUT…” I just don’t get it.
 
The man is a scholar. He is not the only religious that adapts the EF to fit in with his community’s liturgical calendar. What we have to remember is that to religious superiors, their liturgical calendar cannot be tampered with, because it divides the community. A Jesuit bishop is still a religious. According to the Code of Canon Law of 1983, religious do not cease to be religious when ordained bishop. This was an experiment tried in the Code of 1917, which did not go over very well. It did a great deal of damage to the orders.

You can’t expect a regular bishop to function as a secular bishop. He is still a regular, not a secular. Just as pope he remains a regular, not a secular.
You cannot expect a religious bishop to function a secular one, that is true. And no, we do not expect a religious to cease being a religious when they are ordained bishoip. However, the statement that other religious adapt the EF to fit with their communities is, in this case, irrelevant. If the reports of his adapting it are even accurate, he was not adapting it for a community of religious, he was adapting it for a diocesan parish. There is a significant difference. If people were coming to a religious community to attend the EF of the Mass and the calendar, etc. had been altered, that would be one thing. Perhaps, I could even see things being altered a bit if the Mass was being celebrated in a diocesan parish by a priest who was also consecrated religious. However, coming to a diocesan parish where the EF of the Mass was being celebrated by a secular priest is another thing entirely.

In addition, the Society of Jesus does not have the liturgical tradition that the Franciscans do, which means that any alterations along those lines would have been out of keeping with how they should have been done anyway. Therefore, using the liturgical norms preferred by St. Francis to explain the actions of a Jesuit Archbishop in a diocesan parish staffed by a secular priest does not add up. In short, if the reports are accurate, there is no good way to spin this. Hopefully, the reports are inaccurate and this is nothing but a bunch of hot air.
 
Why is it that the Church gets a new pope with so many things that need attention and the focus here is on the celebration of the Extraordinary Form? Already we are seeing qualified statements such as “I accept him as my pope BUT…” I just don’t get it.
I know it’s difficult to understand how some Catholics can be attached to the EF, and why they might have concerns. I hope that you’ll try to be more understanding of the situation, though. I don’t attend an EF, but I have sympathy and understanding for those who do. I think that most of the posters here have been quite respectful toward our new pope.
 
The 2nd one was great, the last one was scary :eek:
I agree…and I am afraid… Very afraid…The attempts of reform of the reform is what brought me and my husband back to the Church…I feel very lonely today…
I mean, even though I go to tridentine masses often, I am totally ok with novus ordo done revently like EWTN daily mass. But puppet masses? kids mass? I am from Latin America and they are very, very stuck in the 70s liturgically speaking down there. That is what kept me away from the Catholic Church for 30 years. When I went to church as a young person in the 80s it all just did not look and feel like something serious, dignified or worth believeing at all. Rock music? Dancing? I can do that better in a night club I thought. It all looked so silly to a "cool"teen like I was. And so I did. I left the church, and immersed in nightlife, sin and the like. Decades later, now here in America, I found a reverent catholic mass under pope Benedict, and I fell in love for Jesus and his Church again… The latin american church kept me away from the Church for decades. I will pray that Pope Francis does not show his roots too much liturgically…
Patricia
 
Why is it that the Church gets a new pope with so many things that need attention and the focus here is on the celebration of the Extraordinary Form? Already we are seeing qualified statements such as “I accept him as my pope BUT…” I just don’t get it.
Because to some people, their spiritual life flows from the Mass and the Eucharist. Some of those people are deeply affected in their spirituality by the EF of the Mass. If we are going to be of any assistance in the New Evangelization, our own spiritual house must be in order. Once cannot give, what one does not have.

I am not personally one who is attracted to the EF, but my spiritual life does indeed flow from the Liturgical prayer of the Church, the Mass and the Divine Office. As such, the pope’s thoughts on the Liturgy are of extreme importance to me. As Archbishop Sample recently and eloquently stated when asked whether or not the Liturgy could transform the culture:
Can a Mass be a form of evangelization and transform the culture?
I am solidly convinced that an authentic and faithful renewal and reform of the sacred liturgy is not only part of the New Evangelization — it is essential to its fruitfulness. The liturgy has the power to form and transform the Catholic faithful. We must live by the axiom lex orandi, lex credendi (the law of praying is the law of believing). What we celebrate in the Mass expresses the essential content of the faith, and it also reinforces our faith when celebrated well and with fidelity.
The liturgy both teaches us and expresses what we believe. If we do not get the sacred liturgy right, I fear that we will just be spinning our wheels rather than getting the New Evangelization going in the right direction. If we are transformed by the sacred liturgy, then we, as believers, can help transform the culture
It would be impossible for me to agree with Archbishop Sample more than I do on this area.

In addition, you could seek any number of statements and writings from Pope Benedict. Specifically, I would urge you to read his thoughts on beauty, and its importance for us as people of God. God is beauty, pure and simple. If our liturgy does not reflect the beauty and majesty of God, why would anyone be attracted to it, and how are we supposed to witness that beauty if we never see it? The moment when we meet God face to face in the Eucharist should be the most beautiful thing we see this side of Heaven. That is why it is such a frequent topic of discussion and also why so many people are curious about Pope Francis’ thoughts on the liturgy!

Combine this reality with many people on here being in parishes where the liturgy is bordering on atrocious and who are desperately hoping for Pope Benedict’s plan for the liturgy to be faithfully implemented, and things become deeply important to some people, me included.
 
Okay, I see what you’re saying, and it makes sense. Then he probably did know what he was doing when he wanted lay persons to do the readings. Well, we’ll just have to hope that he doesn’t impose this on all celebrations of the EF. If he does this, then some trads will be running to the SSPX.

He’ll possibly consult with Pope Benedict Emeritus on the subject of the EF, and I would have to think that our former Pope would discourage any change to the celebration of the EF. Maybe I’m wrong.
I would hope so and this is merely my opinion. The feeling of anti clericalism, which is a kind of nice way of saying that the Clergy in the past had been elevated too highly in the scheme of things and needed to be brought down a notch or two, was very very prevalent in those days, especially in Latin America… Jesuits in particular seemed to feel this way. One of the reasons that the Extraordinary Form was attacked and denigrated back then and up till now actually, is because in the minds of the reformers and many others by the way, the Extraordinary Form of the Mass itself **encouraged **clericalism by separating the Priest from the people. Put him on a pedastal so to speak. Everything from celebrating facing the Altar to the use of a dead language, dare I say it, Latin:bigyikes:to celebrate were all seen as ways of separating the Priest from the people and promoting clericalism.

Whether or not that is true is debatable and has been debated for years. Nonetheless, the Holy Father is known for not caring for clericalism and in fact opposing it. His humble lifestyle pretty much proves it as a matter of fact. In that vein he would in fact support things which brought the Priesthood and the people closer together and at the same time oppose those things which were perceived to create a separation.

Since the Holy Father does indeed have feelings of anti clericalism, I can certainly see that he would want changes in the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. That is of course considering that he wanted to have it around at all. Given every thing that I have been able to find I would lean towards the latter part of that statement.

Also we have to look at the fact that a great many feel that having two varieties of the same rite in fact creates a division within the Church and causes problems. There could actually be somemerit to that belief as well.

In the end, it really doesn’t matter. The Holy Father will do what he feels is best and that will be the course the Church will take in the future. Some people will accept that and others will not.

As for me, Pope Francis is my Pope. I will support him, and I will follow him.

Habemus Papum
 
The man is a scholar. He is not the only religious that adapts the EF to fit in with his community’s liturgical calendar. What we have to remember is that to religious superiors, their liturgical calendar cannot be tampered with, because it divides the community. A Jesuit bishop is still a religious. According to the Code of Canon Law of 1983, religious do not cease to be religious when ordained bishop. This was an experiment tried in the Code of 1917, which did not go over very well. It did a great deal of damage to the orders.

You can’t expect a regular bishop to function as a secular bishop. He is still a regular, not a secular. Just as pope he remains a regular, not a secular

It would appear from what you are saying then is that we should expect the Holy Father to run the Church as a Jesuit even though almost 100% of the Catholics in the world are not Jesuits, are not Religious and are in fact secular? Maybe I misunderstood you.

I hope so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top