Tridentine Liberalization Rumors Abound

Tridentine liberalization rumors continue to bubble to the surface. The Cafeteria is Closed blog had this piece on the latest rumors: More concrete rumors about Tridentine liberation

Here's the meat of that piece:

1) The document will definitely be a Motu Proprio. (That means it will be from the Pope and not a document of a Congregation or joint document issued by different dicasteries.)

2) At the beginning of November it was in its final draft, after four revisions.

3) During the third week of November it was suggested that the document might come out in about three weeks. This would put it around… well… now.

4) It will authorize private celebration of Mass with the 1962 Missal by any priest as he chooses. Public Masses will be regulated by the bishop.

5) What a "private" Mass is will be defined in the document. A number will be established for what constitutes a "private" Mass. Provided the group is that size, no permission of the bishop will be necessary.

6) If I understand it right, and I admit I might be confused, there might be something in the document about greater numbers of people (than what would constitute a "private" Mass) being allowed to attend without the bishop’s permission so long as a Mass in the Novus Ordo is first provided for those who want it. I am not sure about this element, but it might be a prudent solution. If I am right about this element of the document, the idea would be to ensure that a priest doesn’t simply stop offering people the chance to attend the Novus Ordo and thus force everyone to go to the older form. See what I mean?

7) The document will stress the obligation of bishops to be "generous" in allowing the older form of Mass to be offered publicly with language much strong than that in the Motu Proprio "Ecclesia Dei adflicta" of John Paul II.

I'm a bit disappointed if this rumor is accurate, in so far as still needing permission from the local ordinary for non-private Tridentine Rite Masses. What if the local ordinary isn't Tridentine friendly? What if the local ordinary believes that one indult Mass in a small, cramped chapel (such as the Serra Chapel at the Mission San Juan Capistrano, in the Diocese of Orange, for instance) is suitable enough to accommodate the needs of his diocese?

I'm basically asking what to do if your bishop is Bishop Tod David Brown?

What if the Tridentine indult Mass in your diocese is only offered at 8:00 A.M. on Sundays and non-transferred Holy Days, as in Orange County, California?

The indult Tridentine Mass in the Diocese of Orange is attended by 300+ persons every Sunday, and 450+ on the first Sunday of every month. The Serra Chapel is designed to hold approximately 120 persons. Many of the faithful drive from as far as 50 miles away to attend the Tridentine indult Mass there because it is the closest one in their area. The Mass is at 8:00 AM, and they should plan to arrive up to 45 minutes early if they plan to get a seat!

It seems to me that strong words encouraging more generosity won't be enough to prevent a bishop like Bishop Tod Brown who has already ended the celebration of an indult Tridentine Mass in one parish, and cracks down on kneeling after the Angus Dei and agrees that parishioners who continue to kneel after the Agnus Dei are not fit to serve the parish in any official capacity or through parish associations like the Legion of Mary, the Altar Guild, or the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, but who ignores the fact that about five parishes in his diocese stand through the consecration (and don't even have kneelers in the church) from continuing to thwart the celebration of the Tridentine Mass. How can a bishop who demands that kneeling communicants stand, even demeaning them, if he deems it necessary, and tolerates Halloween Masses and Barney Blessings, but doesn't correct a priest for telling his parishioners that their continued kneeling after the Agnus Dei was serious disobedience and mortal sin and invites over fifty people to leave both the parish and the Diocese of Orange until the Los Angeles Times does a cover story about the situation, be trusted to be generous in allowing public celebration of the Tridentine Mass?

But, I digress... and there are more "concrete" rumors to mention.

The Wanderer recently published an interview with Fr. Joseph Fessio, and Brian Mershon has published highlights of the interview in this article: False ecumenism, excessive dialogue... Fr. Fessio calls it "nonsense" and a "smokescreen"

The entire article is worth reading, but here are some highlights:

Q. How significant do you believe the Pope's address to the Curia in December 2005 was for the outline of his pontificate — that is, "the hermeneutics of reform" or what some call "continuity" versus the "hermeneutics of rupture"?

A. He repeated on December 22 what he said in his original address. His plan is to implement Vatican II in light of 2,000 years of Tradition.

He is obviously aware of the liturgical discontinuity.

At the same time, he knows that rapid changes cause consternation in the pews and in some cases, people even the leave the Church. Therefore, the modifications he might undertake most likely will be measured and well thought out.

Unfortunately for traditionalists, he fears to disturb the sensibilities of people in the pews again — even if it is to correct things that were clearly mistakes. He knows that people have left the Church due to these changes before and is cautious out of concern they might do the same thing again. Those who love tradition are at a disadvantage.

However, the papal Masses from day one have been different with more chant, more polyphony, and more Latin.

Archbishop Ranjith is a very important appointment. As the secretary for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, he performs more of the day-to-day tasks. I also think that the appointment of a new secretary of state is significant. He can count on Cardinal Bertone.

The Pope has reportedly already written the post-synodal exhortation and has written a motu proprio too. I don't know what is in them. But at the 2001 Fontomgbault Conference, Cardinal Ratzinger said he thought the Holy See should let the Traditional Roman rite coexist with the Novus Ordo to show continuity.

Q. With the public protest by the French bishops and priests against the supposedly imminent document freeing the Traditional Latin Mass, do you personally believe this document will be issued? Do you have any predictions as to when?

A. I know through a person the Holy Father had spoken to that by September 10, he had written it, and it was in its third draft. I hope he recognizes in this resistance a reason for being clear and firm in the motu proprio.

He is a gentleman though, so it might affect him. He should know this is going to be a big issue with some of the bishops, but I hope that is not a deterrent.

The only people who seem to object are feminists and liberal bishops.

I hope the response is gentle firmness, but with no adjustments to the motu proprio.

Q. What do you expect to see from the post-synod document? Any more fixes for the Novus Ordo? Encouraging ad orientem celebrations, more Latin, and maybe Gregorian chant?

A. I am hoping these will be in one or both of the two documents, but I have no knowledge whether or not this is the case.

There is some hope that with the Bertone appointment, who is someone he knows well, will support him with his positions.

A New Label

Q. Please clarify for our readers your personal view on the Traditional Latin Mass. Would you offer it if it is freed up by the Pope for all Latin rite priests?

A. I don't like calling it the "Traditional Latin Mass" because I think the way I celebrate the Novus Ordo Mass is traditional. I've been thinking about trying to introduce a new label: the Vetus [Editor's Note: "old"] Ordo. I have objections to both the Novus Ordo and the Vetus Ordo as they are at present. I think it is normal for there to be gradual, organic change in the Mass. Vatican II called for this, but it was hijacked. The Novus Ordo goes beyond the kind of development both liturgical history and Vatican II sanction.

Because I'm a priest, I don't have the most critical problem facing a layman: uncertainty about how Mass will be celebrated, unless one attends a Vetus Ordo Mass. So I have always preferred the lonely moderate position of celebrating the Novus Ordo in the most traditional manner.

Q. If the Traditional rite is freed, would you offer it publicly and daily/weekly at Ave Maria University?

A. As to what will happen at Ave Maria University, that depends on a number of factors: what the motu proprio permits or encourages; what the university community desires; and what those in charge decide. I'm not the one responsible for the liturgy at Ave Maria University.

Here's my favorite line: "The only people who seem to object [to the liberalization of the Tridentine Rite] are feminists and liberal bishops."

Any thoughts?

Comments

[Philippus]

I'm confident the the Pope will come with a document that will be appropriate and just. Any move towards more tridentine masses such be applauded. However, one should bear in mind what it will NOT do, namely:

- satisfy everyone on the conservative side, as even a complete and compulsory return to the Tridentine mass would not be enough - something that is clearly not going to happen in the first place. There will be vocal comment from disappointed people no matter what.

- prevent bishops from acting like Tod Brown. Do not kid yourself; even if a bishop would have no choice in the matter of the kind of mass being said, there will always be other ways for a Bishop to steer (or frustrate) parishes that want to do things differently. The only solution in those cases is not general action from Rome (as with this Motu Proprio) but specific (e.g. name a new nuntio in Iran, so that a certain see becomes free again.)

- prevent local priests from questionable practices such as the halloween Mass. Many people will want a more reverent mass, but if their local priest thinks differently, it needs to be dealt with by his Bishop, if he so chooses. If not, well, one can only pray....

Conclusion of this analysis is that it will still come down to the local levels: priest and bishop. Just as there are ways to hold very reverent and inspiring masses in the Novus Ordo (and Novus Ordo masses can be said in latin too, as done in my parish), there will always be ways to go in the other direction as well. Rome can steer things in the right direction, and this will certainly help, but I think a great many people expect more from this than it can deliver.

[carolg]

As much as I am hopeful I tend to wonder if Philippus is right. Tod Brown's will is fixed against tradition. If there is any loophole he can point to deny the folks of Orange County the Latin Mass, he'll take it without a care for who doesn't like it. His past behavior allows us to predict this. Ultimately, the Latin Mass represents a theology he doesn't hold. So, unless his hands are tied and he is forced to allow it, he will try and stop it.
Sadly, I acknowledge that as Bishop he has this authority even as I know he will miss use his authority. I do have faith that God will turn this around for a greater good and I hope to work with others to be a part of that. One older man said to me quite confidently that by the Bishop denying the mass to so many he is ensuring that 50 years from now it will be the only mass around.

[anthonypadua]

A. I don't like calling it the "Traditional Latin Mass" because I think the way I celebrate the Novus Ordo Mass is traditional.

You're kidding, right? You celebrate a Mass that goes back an astounding 36 years and you think it's traditional? There is spent popcorn in local theaters that's older than your so-called "tradition."

I'm starting to suspect that the good Father is part of the problem, not the solution...

[Angela]

Fabulous post, Thomistic -
We can always count on you to cover the bases. Your time and effort is always greatly appreciated.
Thank you

[Patrick]

If the rumor about priests being freed to offer the Tridentine Mass as a private Mass turns out to be true, it may actually be a wise move by Pope Benedict XVI. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the bishop need not know who is offering the Tridentine Mass as a private Mass. This may frustrate a hostile bishop's ability to identify Tridentine friendly priests. If the Tridentine Masses are included in the official schedule, a hostile bishop can make things difficult for the priest.

For a short time during the 1990s, I attended a private Tridentine Mass in Torrance, CA. An old, retired priest had been offered a spare room in the parish rectory. The retired priest said his private Mass (Tridentine Low Mass) on Sunday afternoon. The doors of the church were left open, and people who wandered in were free to attend. The pastor had no problem with it. After awhile, it attracted a small crowd. I heard about it through the grapevine, and drove 20-30 minutes from West Los Angeles to attend this Mass. Unfortunately, a well-meaning (but in this case imprudent) conservative Catholic newspaper publicized the Mass. The auxilary bishop for the area (Cardinal Mahony's diocese) turned up one day and the ax fell. I assume Cardinal Mahony leaned on the auxilary bishop, and the auxilary bishop leaned on the pastor. The pastor told the retired priest to leave the rectory (he needed the room back).

I have also seen what they can do to a bishop. The pastor of the parish which I attended while growing up was an auxilary bishop in Los Angeles. This bishop served under three cardinals of the Los Angeles Archdiocese (McIntyre, Manning, and Mahony). He is a good, faithful servant of the Church and a fine leader. I believe his parish was the last in the diocese to move the altar forward so the priest could celebrate Mass facing the people (he was probably forced to it). Until his retirement he offered the Novus Ordo in Latin on Sundays in the most reverent manner possible. He delivered good orthodox sermons. The church was not vandalized after Vatican II. In the 1990s, the church was exactly the same as it was when I received my first communion there in 1965. He did his best to reign in abuses by priests under his charge. This good bishop would tell a priest not to do something (which was an obvious abuse) and the priest would appeal to Cardinal Mahony who would tell the good bishop to leave the priest alone. Some of the liberal priests began to slander the good bishop by implying that he was ill. It was like something from the Stalinist Soviet Union. If you don't agree with our plans you must be insane...off to the mental hospital or gulag with you. When this bishop reached mandatory retirement age he was quickly cast aside by Mahony. If they can do things like this to a conservative bishop trying to celebrate the Novus Ordo reverently, imagine what they will do to a poor priest who wants to add the Tridentine Mass to the schedule. This is a difficult situation for the Holy Father.

[Richard Gruen: The Tridentine Why Should It Be Up To A Bishop To ...]

...have such power to stop it!!!!!! In Kenosha, Wisconsin a atholic Priest said; "I don't have to get any permission from any Bishop to say A Tridentine Mass."

A point to be made here is; why does our Pope leave it up to Bishops to allow the Tridentine Mass??? We all know that Bishop Brown is deadly against kneeling and latin Masses. So, do you honestly think he will not fight against seeing the Tridentine Masses in the county of Orange??? You bet he will do everything in his power to stop the Tridentine Masses. Tod Brown is so far to the left he would allow the evilnes of Barney characters to serve masses than to allow true honest spirituality in churches.
Read Father Martin's books on the evil from within the Catholic church. It will wake you up... maybe!!!!!

[Some Day]

I warn everyone of this.
There will be observation among the new and young priests who use the Tridentine rite when allowed.
They will not be promoted.
Don't ask me how I know.

[A Simple Sinner]

Some Day,

That is fine, we won't ask you, and we won't worry. Even if true, what is a priest to do? NOT celebrate a beautiful rite and spiritualy feed the faithful to ensure "promotion"?

Even if one concedes you have some sort of special insider information like you frequently claim you do, what is one to do? Good and holy priests do what is right because that is what good and holy priests do.

No fear little flock!

[Some Day]

Not that I don't like the TR.
Ofcourse I do. You lack the concept of beauty in your soul if you don't.
Just warning to be prudent.

[A Simple Sinner]

Of course the 800 pound gorilla sitting in the sanctuary wearing chancel slippers and a cope still is with us! What do I mean?

If today the Latin Mass is totally allowed by any priest wanting to offer it, or even MANDATED that it be used in parity to the new rite or exclusively, what does this do to the some 1M+ folks who are in extra-ecclesial, non-canonical situations.

More specifically, where does this leave folks like the SSPX who have taken it upon themselves to consecrate their own bishops and remove themselves from the jurisdiction of the local ordinary?

There is still much work to be done.