Vatican II

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mgray82
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The default for the EF was Mass 8 up to about 1970, I understand. I don’t know why you thought a history lesson was apt. The default for the OF is bland folky modern hymns; everything before 1970 ditched. It is the norm.

Is the experiment done yet?
Sigh. Mass 8 (De angelis) isn’t even “Gregorian” chant. It dates from the 17th century. Mass 11 (Orbis factor) is the standard Mass for Sundays per annum. Personally I’m sick of choirs taking the easy way out by using Mass 8 all the time and passing it off as Gregorian chant. It’s only claim to fame is that it is well known so most folks can chant along with it.

The history lesson was to correct the erroneous assumptions in your post for the benefit of others who may be curious and come to CAF to actually learn something factual rather than myths about what tradition actually consists of.

One of those myths is that the OF Mass somehow killed chant. As chant was never obligatory for all Masses in the EF, the fact is rather that it was modern fashions and not the OF that made chant rare. That, coupled to the fact that Latin is no longer taught.

What makes you think that badly composed hymns would never have made it into the EF if the OF had never been promulgated?
 
So badly-composed hymns didn’t actually make it into the Latin rite until the OF came along?
 
So badly-composed hymns didn’t actually make it into the Latin rite until the OF came along?
Terrible music and totally adulterated “chant” was around long before Vatican II. Vatican II didn’t introduce the notion of music that followed the popular fashions of the era.

Some of the stuff after V-II is indeed pretty bad and I can say its the same in French. How EF there are some nice non-chant hymns that are appropriate. But then some of the chant before the Solesmes reforms was pretty awful.

Our era doesn’t own the monopoly on poor taste. I think you are confusing nostalgia for a particular time and place with “tradition”. I’m fortunate enough to worship in a conventual chapel where Gregorian chant is used daily (and Mass 8 is used very rarely). I therefore don’t blame the OF Mass for sloppy liturgy, I blame disengagement of clergy and laity from genuine Catholic tradition which, it may surprise you to learn, didn’t die at the Council.

That is a product of modern times that has greatly affected all the liturgical churches. You should see what low-church Anglicans have done to their liturgy if you think the OF Mass is bad.
 
This is similar to the topic of ugly art then?

Such “art” was already before the Council as a reaction to L’art saint-sulpice.

Blessings!

🙂
 
AFAIK, the practical norm before 1970 was Missa VIII. That was the default for the less-than-able choirs. Now, because there was some bad music at Mass before that time does not excuse all the bad music that now is the norm.

We’ve had an iconoclasm. The fruits have been rotten. The one good thing is that the modernist genie is now out of the bottle and his works, now, all can see.

If you love the Church pray for the reconciliation of the SSPX. It would put modern Cranmers on notice and they’ll either quiet down OR go into schism themselves and then, some decades from now, we might be able to attend mass without wondering about what we’re seeing.
 
If you love the Church pray for the reconciliation of the SSPX. It would put modern Cranmers on notice .
My friend, we love the Church and we do hope that the SSPX will convert to the Holy See’s point of view.

Having said that, there is a problem with this statement, which I have pointed out elsewhere and which I will continue to point out.
  1. The SSPX is a society apostolic life of 500 men. It pales by comparison to the Dominicans, Salesians, Franciscans, Carmelites, Augustinians and Opus Dei who number over one million. Except for Opus Dei, the other outrank the SSPX, because they are religious orders, not societies of apostolic life. That leads us to the next point.
  2. If and when the SSPX converts to the mind of the Holy See, it will also have to accept canon law and Church tradition. It will have no power or voice over those who are above it in rank and rights.
  3. It has been offered a prelature. If it accepts the prelature, it will be similar to Opus Dei. It has the freedom to move around, train its own priests and have its own apostolate. However, the Prelate cannot simply walk into a diocese. He must coordinate with the diocesan bishop. That’s in Canon Law. He is a bishop talking to another bishop. They are equals, with one exception. The diocesan bishop has authority over the territory, not the prelate. His authority is limited to his priests, religious and the laity who follow him.
  4. The Prelature will no longer be like the current SSPX. Currently, the SSPX works with faithful of like min. The prelature will be an open diocese without boundaries. Its advantage is that it can serve people around the world. Its disadvantage is that it will have to serve people who dissent as well as those with like minds Once it’s canonically erected, the Prelature has a duty to serve not only the EF on Sundays, but to run soup kitchen, shelters, dialogue with dissenters, participate in deanery meetings with the local clergy and religious, and it cannot ask any diocese or any religious community to take care of this or that, because its not in there charism. It will have to fit it into its charism, like any diocese or will have to work out contracts with dioceses and religious, who can disagree with the SSPX’s positions on certain points. But if it wants the backing that it needs for its social ministry, it will have to accept these folks on their terms or it will have come up with an army of volunteers to run all of these different ministries. That leads to the next point.
  5. To believe that the SSPX Prelature can and will do all of this is to place an unreasonable burden on a small community of 500 men. That’s not fair to them.
  6. To expect others to come to their rescue on their terms, is unfair to others. There are many diocesan priests and religious clergy, religious brothers and religious sisters who are ready to work with the SSPX clergy as partners, not as their subordinates and will not tolerate intimidation by the SSPX or the laity that follows it.
  7. The very idea that if the SSPX converts to the Holy See’s position the rest of us had better be on notice is idle language, disrespectful and highly unjust. While the SSPX saw trouble and created its own bubble by commiting a crime against the Church, ordaining four bishops without a papal mandate, there have been thousands and thousands of faithful diocesan priests, religious priests, brothers and sisters who stayed inside. We have been faithful. We have been obedient even when we disagreed and when we knew that the orders we were being given would lead to catastrophe, but we vowed obedience and obedient we have been. We have struggled with dissenters among us and taken the brunt for their indiscretions. The majority of us are never seen or heard of by the laity, but it does not mean that we’re not here doing our part for the Church. Even if you don’t see us, what we do benefits you.
  8. The fact that we celebrate one form or the other of the mass, does not make us less Catholic or less orthodox than the SSPX. The FSSP is doing much better in numbers than is the SSPX. The FSSP, the ICRSS, the Canon of St. John Cantius, the Franciscans of the Immaculate, ArchibishopThomas Wenski an many other diocesan and religious who celebrate the EF enjoy a good relationship with the Holy See, the laity and work in partnerships with other clergy and religious brothers and sisters. They also have to deal with the masses, which the SSPX does not have to do at the current moment, but will have to, if it becomes a prelature.
  9. If it becomes a prelature, no one is on notice. The priests of a prelature and the prelate have not canonical authority outside of the members of the prelature. Priests who belong to societies of apostolic life have no authority over any brother or sister who belongs to a religious order of solemn vows, nor over any deacon or priest that is incardinated under the jurisdiction of another bishop. The very idea of a prelature is to give the Society room to move around and do its ministry without interfering in the life of the rest of the Church. It keeps the Society contained, but not in restraints. It makes it available for those who wish to have it, but it limits its authority only to those who are part of the prelature. It cannot go over to the Dominicans and Franciscans and try to convert them. They will end up with another suspension for intimidating those who are above them in station.
The kind thing to do is to avoid such statements. When they fail to come to fruition, there will be people who will have taken you seriously and they will be disappointed either with the Church or the SSPX, because their expectations were unrealistic, but did not know it. If they repeat this statement in front of those of us who have been around and suffered the struggles of these last 50 years, the reaction is going to be one of indignation and hurt. We don’t deserve to be dismissed as if we’re not as good or as intelligent as the SSPX. We’ve done the best we can with the little we have.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV 🙂
 
Wow, J.R.

What a great, clarifying post.

It certainly puts things into proper perspective.

Thank you so much for taking the time to write this.
 
AFAIK, the practical norm before 1970 was Missa VIII. That was the default for the less-than-able choirs. Now, because there was some bad music at Mass before that time does not excuse all the bad music that now is the norm.

If you love the Church pray for the reconciliation of the SSPX. It would put modern Cranmers on notice and they’ll either quiet down OR go into schism themselves and then, some decades from now, we might be able to attend mass without wondering about what we’re seeing.
As much as I hate to add to what Brother has so ably written, I can’t help but recall the words of the Holy Father back when he wrote Spirit of the Liturgy. He said of the liturgy that there can be no question of going back. The negotiation with the SSPX is not a signal of anything other than the mercy of the Church and its desire to always reach out. I do not see any circumstance that this will have any impact on Church music. Those decisions are always made on the local level.
 
You misunderstand me.

I do not expect the reconciliation of SSPX to start a counter-revolution, by their persons, or anything like it. They are a small body and many Catholics haven’t a clue who they are or what they represent.

What I mean is the mere occurrence of their being welcomed back will filter, as a sign, back to the rectories, palaces and seminaries that, hmm, maybe it’s safer now to express a preference for rigour and the Tridentine mass. Or even a politic move.

I would hope it would also be a sign that orders for jazzy vestments and EMHC sashes should be put on hold. For a few hundred years. Things like that. 😃
 
He said of the liturgy that there can be no question of going back.
Well, there are rumors that prefaces and saints will be added soon to the EF calendar. And maybe more churches will be air-conditioned as well. 🙂
 
As much as I hate to add to what Brother has so ably written, I can’t help but recall the words of the Holy Father back when he wrote Spirit of the Liturgy. He said of the liturgy that there can be no question of going back. The negotiation with the SSPX is not a signal of anything other than the mercy of the Church and its desire to always reach out. ** I do not see any circumstance that this will have any impact on Church music. Those decisions are always made on the local level.**
In large countries the conference of bishops usually appends the General Instructions in the missal with these rules. If there is nothing in the GIRM, then the local bishop can decide on his own. The documents that have come out of the Vatican on this question are advisory, not legislation. There is very little universal legislation on this question. There is a lot by way of advice from the Holy Fathers and the SCDW.

This is really a local issue. The Vatican does not want to get involved in every local problem, if it can avoid it. It has more important things to do than worry about us.

As far as going back to the Tridentine mass as the ordinary form of the Latin Church, as the Holy Father said,“It ain’t gonna happen.” We may get another hybrid 25 years down the road or we we have two forms of one rite for years to come.

Why can’t we go back to the Tridentine mass for everyone? For the same reason that some traditionalists don’t want the Mass of Paul VI. People have been exposed to something that meets their spiritual needs. The Church is not going to yank it out from under them. That was done once and did not work out too well.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV 🙂
 
You misunderstand me.

I do not expect the reconciliation of SSPX to start a counter-revolution, by their persons, or anything like it. They are a small body and many Catholics haven’t a clue who they are or what they represent.

What I mean is the mere occurrence of their being welcomed back will filter, as a sign, back to the rectories, palaces and seminaries that, hmm, maybe it’s safer now to express a preference for rigour and the Tridentine mass. Or even a politic move.

I would hope it would also be a sign that orders for jazzy vestments and EMHC sashes should be put on hold. For a few hundred years. Things like that. 😃
I don’t think that will happen for a number of reasons.
  1. Canonically, a prelature has a life of its own that has nothing to do with the rest of the Church. That’s the whole idea of a prelature. Otherwise, they can just bring the SSPX in as another FSSP and blend it with the mainstream. The prelature keeps it away from the mainstream, but accessible to those who want to be part of it. No one is going to look to what the prelature is allowed to do as a signal that the rest of us have to do the same or that the Holy Father wants us to do the same.
  2. The Holy Father would have to issue a direct command to the diocese and religious orders, if he wants these changes. Otherwise, nothing has to change. The Holy Father’s personal preferences are his by right, but they don’t have to be mine. Having lived with Bavarian Franciscans, I can tell you that I hate Bavarian food. He probably loves it.
  3. A sign to put on hold the "jazzy vestments and sashes for the EMHC it will not be. Those are not choices that the Vatican controls. Those are controlled either by the bishop or the religious superior. That’s the principle of subsidiarity.
I think that you’re envisioning a Church government from the top down. The Catholic Church has never been governed that way. Our doctrinal and moral decrees are from the top down. Our policies and procedures are at the local level and have always been.

It was not until 1917 that the Church actually composed a code of canon law to govern from the top down. She found out that she had included much in the code of 1917 that she could not enforce. The code was rewritten in 1983 in a more practical manner. In reality, the code of 1983 goes back to the Middle Ages where bishops worked with each other and did very little with the pope. Everything happened locally. It only went up when necessary. Remember the hearings for Henry VIII’s plea for an annulment. The pope only got involved when it became evident that the trial could not be held in England. Luther was the same case. The pope only became involved when it was evident that the damage had spread beyond the reaches of the local bishops.

Life will continue in the local parishes and the local bishops will have to deal with these things in their own diocese.

By the way, just as an aside. We have the EF in my community, but I prohibited the fiddleback vestments. You and I have different tastes in vestments. Our brother who celebrates the EF wears a Roman chasuble. I don’t like the fiddlebacks. I never have. 🤷 Besides, it looks horrible with a grey cowl sticking over it. We don’t wear an amice. The amice has always been optional for friars and monks.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV 🙂
 
Sigh. Mass 8 (De angelis) isn’t even “Gregorian” chant. It dates from the 17th century. Mass 11 (Orbis factor) is the standard Mass for Sundays per annum. Personally I’m sick of choirs taking the easy way out by using Mass 8 all the time and passing it off as Gregorian chant. It’s only claim to fame is that it is well known so most folks can chant along with it.
We just did Mass XIV yesterday. I am thankful that we do the appropriate mass chants based on the liturgical calendar. Did I tell you I’m chanting now (or trying to)? 🙂

I have to admit though that some of the Masses are not so melodic to the ear. 😦
One of those myths is that the OF Mass somehow killed chant. As chant was never obligatory for all Masses in the EF, the fact is rather that it was modern fashions and not the OF that made chant rare. That, coupled to the fact that Latin is no longer taught.
I agree that if the EF became the norm there would be abuses and inconsistencies for sure, but the point is today, we are not all near Benedictine monasteries and the places where one is most apt to find chant within a mass is in the EF.
 
The Liber Usualis is only usually applicable to the EF Mass although you can find most of the required chants for the OF Mass at least for years A and C in it. The licit and current chant books for the OF Mass are the Graduale Romanum and the Graduale Simplex. The former is for accomplished choirs and contains most of what the Liber Usualis has but adapted to the OF Mass and the three-year cycle of Gospel readings. The entire Kyriale of the Liber and all of the Credos are there.

Even better is the Graduale Triplex which is identical to the Graduale Romanum but also includes above and below the staff, the neumes of Laon and St. Gall respectively for a more accurate interpretation of the Chant (for the EF fans, there’s the Graduel Neumé of Solesmes).

The Graduale Simplex contains simpler chant settings for the propers, borrowing somewhat on the antiphons and psalm tones of the Divine Office, along with a simplified Kyriale. It’s intended for smaller churches with a less experienced choir.

You see Gregorian chant for the OF, or for the modern Liturgy of the Hours for that matter, is not dead. It’s alive and well courtesy of the Benedictines of Solesmes and their “Atelier paléographique” who publish all the required books which are used throughout the Church.

In my province there are choirs in Montreal, Sherbrooke (to which I belong), Quebec City and Chicoutimi that use chant regularly at OF Masses; plus there are others in Ontario and elsewhere.

The EF is not required for Gregorian chant. Nor was Gregorian chant the exclusive music of the EF; many popular vernacular hymns were often sung at the EF. Therefore the EF will not guarantee chant’s return any more than the OF will assure its demise. There’s no guarantee that if the EF became normative again that all of its music would be chant, nor any guarantee that no banal popular hymns would creep in. One mustn’t confuse the form of the Mass with its musical selections, nor must one falsely assume that modern hymns wouldn’t creep into the EF Mass, given modern trends, if it became normative. There is nothing in the EF Mass rubrics that I know of, that prevent a sung Mass with popular hymns “selected” by the local conference of bishops as happens now, except perhaps for the Ordinary; but then the Ordinary can be recited too.

Music has nothing to do with the form of the Mass. In fact by the 17th century chant had been completely adulterated and unrecognizable with many additions and accretions of dubious quality. Chant was revived in the mid-late 19th century by the monks of Solesmes under the direction of Dom Prosper Gueranger. Pius X commissioned the first Graduale Romanum, Vatican Edition, in 1908 which Solesmes produced. It was therefore at the beginning of the 20th century that Gregorian chant underwent a revival and re-application to the Mass. What we know as Gregorian chant at the Mass today comes from that 1908 gradual with refinements along the way. We cannot for sure say that the way chant is sung today is identical to how it was sung in Carolingian times. It is a modern interpretation of it. Which doesn’t take away from its beauty or historical significance.

But it’s wrong to assume that chant as it is sung since the early 20th century represents exactly chant how it was sung in Carolingian times or earlier when most were composed. There were many controversies and schools of interpretation when it underwent its revival in the 19th century, in particular the major conflict over the Mocquereau and Pothier schools of interpretation (the latter “won” and formed the basis for the new chant books of the 20th century).

A little bit of rigorous historical research would put paid to the theory that the EF is somehow the cure-all for today’s musical banality or for that matter for liturgical abuse in general. The EF is what it is today because it is lovingly preserved by societies like the FSSP. Not because it is the EF.
I don’t know how much extra time you have, but you really should consider setting up a website and giving lessons on this stuff via skype and webcam. 👍
 
Why can’t we go back to the Tridentine mass for everyone? For the same reason that some traditionalists don’t want the Mass of Paul VI. People have been exposed to something that meets their spiritual needs. The Church is not going to yank it out from under them. That was done once and did not work out too well.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV 🙂
As much as I would love to see us all go back to the EF, I agree with you. It would cause the same type of turmoil because just as some of us are very much attached to the EF, some are very much attached to the OF.
 
By the way, just as an aside. We have the EF in my community, but I prohibited the fiddleback vestments. You and I have different tastes in vestments. Our brother who celebrates the EF wears a Roman chasuble. I don’t like the fiddlebacks. I never have. 🤷 Besides, it looks horrible with a grey cowl sticking over it. We don’t wear an amice. The amice has always been optional for friars and monks.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV 🙂
I assume by “fiddleback” you mean true fiddleback and not Roman chasuble (incidentally, more a fiddlefront, for it isn’t a fiddleback at all). Most people call Roman chasubles fiddlebacks, which they are not. =p So you are making the differentiation here, yes?

I agree, I find fiddlebacks hideous while I find well-proportioned Roman chasubles in good fabrics gorgeous. I generally hate what passes for “Gothic” chasubles now since they are enormous balloons more like trashbags that reach the floor, but when they are sized correctly, and especially in something heavy like Pope Benedict’s velvet for Pentecost this year, they are quite beautiful as well.
 
I assume by “fiddleback” you mean true fiddleback and not Roman chasuble (incidentally, more a fiddlefront, for it isn’t a fiddleback at all). Most people call Roman chasubles fiddlebacks, which they are not. =p So you are making the differentiation here, yes?

I agree, I find fiddlebacks hideous while I find well-proportioned Roman chasubles in good fabrics gorgeous. I generally hate what passes for “Gothic” chasubles now since they are enormous balloons more like trashbags that reach the floor, but when they are sized correctly, and especially in something heavy like Pope Benedict’s velvet for Pentecost this year, they are quite beautiful as well.
I’m talking about the actual fiddleback. I think those are a distraction, because they’re so ugly. I was teasing Brother. When we were talking about celebrating the EF once in a while, we had to get what we needed, but we had to keep it Franciscan too. We were looking at vestments and he showed me the fiddleback. My immediate thought was, “I wouldn’t be caught dead standing next to your in that thing. Is distracting as heck, because it’s so ugly.” But I didn’t say it that way. I just looked at it and said, “You asked me for permission to celebrate the EF on occasions and I said, yes. Don’t push your luck.”

Then he found the Roman, with in my opinion looks more like a guitar, but people call it a fiddle. I don’t like it’s shape either, but what the heck. Even a superior has to detach once in a while. I drew the line at the brocade, angels, biblical scenes stuff like that. He’s a brother who is serving his brothers as a priest. He’s not a wall in the Sistine Chapel. We can do without the fresco. We got some really nice ones without anything, just a simple gold cross and the seasonal colors.

The poor salesman didn’t know what to think of me. Then he wanted to sell us albs and amise I kept explaining that we don’t wear an amise. It’s not required. You can wear an alb with a hood or just leave the cowl over the vestment. Besides, I thought we had alb with a hood. We did. It’s just a little long. That’s easy to deal with.

The large chasubles that you call balloon are the ones that I purchased for the OF. I love them. Their very austere looking.

This was the problem with the vestments for the EF. The old Franciscans had their vestments made for them. They were regulation, but very simple. Today, you have to get them through company. I know people who sew, but they ask for a pattern and I couldn’t find one. The companies that produce these vestments produce vestments that are very heavy, elaborate, fancy, expensive and even regal. That’s another place where I drew the line. No lace with albs. An alb is a white tunic of muslin with no lace, not designs, nothing. It should look like a nightgown. The older friars wore the lacy ones, because the sisters made them. They were practically free.

Brother looks pretty good. We invited a few friends over for the EF on the Feast of St. Bonaventure. One lady was a little upset because the priest was not wearing shoes and his feet were dirty.

If the man never wears shoes, of course his feet are going to dirty. :doh2:

The one one who wears shoes it me, because I’m diabetic. The guys wear flip flops outside of the house and are bare inside the house.

I expected to hear a screech because the brothers receive CITH. But no one said anything.

The mass was beautiful. Of course, there was no Gregorian chant, but we sang some of the oldies but goodies in Latin. The grandfather of one of the brothers has an old hymnal with the oldies but goodies. It even has the plain chant for the parts of the mass.

We had to cheat, because in the EF calendar, Bonaventure is not a major feast. In the Franciscan calendar, it is. We did the high mass for Bonnie.

We have to see when we do the next one. We have three solemnities coming up in August: St. Clare, St. Maximilian and the Dormition of Mary. One of those we’ll do in EF. Probably the Dormition. The missal has a mass for the Assumption. Same difference… It doesn’t have St. Maximilian and St. Clare is a minor feast for Catholics. What’s wrong with people? 😃

Reduced Anthony, Bonaventure and Clare to minor feasts. Don’t even mention Maximilian. Four of the greatest Franciscans that ever lived. C’mon folks. Step it up. They should all have a high mass with all the bells and whistles. I won’t even mention the fact that St. Francis is a third class feast and celebrated only one day, not three like the Triduum. Be still my heart. :bighanky:

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV 🙂
 
:confused:

Brother, why do you receive CITH in the EF? Are you following the 1962 Missal or a Franciscan missal?
We never followed the 1962 missal. That’s the Roman missal. We always had our own form. Quo Primum did not apply to Franciscans, Dominicans, Carthusians, Carmelites, Benedictines or Jesuits. All of us had our over version (today called form) of the Tridentine mass.

Depending on where your province was founded that’s how you received communion. All of the provinces that flowed out of Assisi, received CITH. The reason was very simple. When the first priest joined the order he could not very well insist that the founder and father of the order kneel and receive communion from him. Remember, Francis was never a priest. However, he was an ordinary. He had all of the rights and authority of bishop. A lowly priest cannot ask his ordinary to kneel before him. It sets them apart. If his ordinary is not a priest, he can’t ask him to be his deacon or subdeacon either, because they don’t share in the ministerial priesthood. You have to accommodate to the culture of the community. The custom began of CITH standing. The brothers genuflect, stand and receive.

That’s why St. Pius V had to dispense the Dominicans and other major religious orders from QP. QP would place the priest outside of the congregation. That’s fine, if the congregation is laity. Thee is a distinction between laity and religious. That’s already accepted by everyone. It was not fine for the monks, friars and Jesuits, because they had no such distinctions in their orders. Some were priests and some were not, bit deal. The priests had no special place, no special rights and were not be as anonymous as possible. These traditions were old and in the case of the Jesuits, they were not old, but they were powerful and St. Ignatius had set them up so that they had all of the benefits and privileges of the old orders, but none of the obligations. Whatever was allowed for a Benedictine or Franciscans, had to be allowed to a Jesuit. Whatever was demanded of a Benedictine or Franciscan cannot be demanded of a Jesuit. We all know that this is the way that the Holy Spirit wants it.

We have these differences between the EF celebrated by a religious and celebrated by a secular. The difference becomes more pronounced if it’s celebrated inside the religious house. When you celebrate in a parish church, even if you’re religious, the bishop owns the church. You must comply with is policies. When it’s in your chapel, the bishop can’t even walk into your chapel, never mind regulate it. The superior decides what’s Catholic. He goes by the traditions of his community.

Does that help?

Fraternally,

Br.JR, FFV
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top