Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Bridging Tradition
VATICAN CITY (CNS) – Sometime soon, Pope Benedict XVI is expected to broaden permission to use the Tridentine Mass, a long-standing request of traditionalists who favor the rite used before the Second Vatican Council.
The move is aimed at ending a liturgical dispute which has simmered for more than 20 years. In the process, it could clarify how the pope intends to implement what he once described as a "liturgical reconciliation" in the modern church.
The pope will enunciate the new policy in a document to be released after more than a year of debate and discussion at the Vatican. The Roman Curia had mixed views on expanding the use of the Tridentine rite, and so did the world's cardinals and bishops – all of which has lent a certain drama to the outcome.
From the outside, allowing the old Mass has been seen primarily as a concession to the followers of the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who was excommunicated in 1988 for his intransigence on liturgical and other reforms of Vatican II.
But some Vatican officials believe that aspect has been overblown. More than making peace with Archbishop Lefebvre's followers, they said, the pope is trying to make peace with the church's own tradition.
One big clue to the pope's thinking came in his 1997 book, titled Milestones: Memoirs 1927-1977 and written when he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which he sharply criticized the drastic manner in which Pope Paul VI reformed the Mass in 1969.
The almost total prohibition of the old missal, which had been used for 400 years, was unprecedented in the history of the liturgy, he said in the book.
In effect, he said, "the old building was demolished" and a new one put in its place. Thus the liturgy ceased to be a living development and was treated as something manufactured by experts, which has caused the church "enormous harm," he said.
Even before he wrote those words, then-Cardinal Ratzinger had caused a stir when he said it made sense for the priest to celebrate Mass facing the same direction as the congregation, in the pre-Vatican II style, although he also said it would be confusing to turn the altar around once again.
Over the years, he has sharply criticized what he sees as a tendency for the worshiping community to celebrate only itself.
All of that led some to presume that, as pope, he would preside over a rollback of liturgical reform.
But the picture is not so clear-cut. As Cardinal Ratzinger, he said he considered the new missal a "real improvement" in many respects, and that the introduction of local languages made sense.
In one revealing speech to Catholic traditionalists in 1998, he said bluntly that the old "low Mass," with its whispered prayers at the altar and its silent congregation, "was not what liturgy should be, which is why it was not painful for many people" when it disappeared.
The most important thing, he said at that time, was to make sure that the liturgy does not divide the Catholic community.
With that in mind, knowledgeable Vatican sources say the pope's new document will no doubt aim to lessen pastoral tension between the Tridentine rite and the new Mass, rather than hand out a victory to traditionalists.
Under Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Ratzinger conducted the unsuccessful negotiations with Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988, before the archbishop broke off talks and ordained new bishops in defiance of the pope.
Cardinal Ratzinger insisted then that the Lefebvrists accept the new Mass and other major teachings of Vatican II. It's a position he has repeated in his ongoing contacts as pope with Lefebvrist leaders, sources said.
It was Pope John Paul who in 1984 first made it possible for groups of the faithful to worship according to the Latin-language 1962 Roman Missal, the last Vatican-approved missal prior to the post-conciliar reforms.
Pope John Paul set conditions for this special permission, or indult. The main requirement was that those who used the Tridentine rite must make publicly clear "beyond all ambiguity" that they do not call into question the validity of the new Roman Missal.
In 1988, Pope John Paul relaxed the conditions for the indult, but groups still had to accept the new Mass and were still expected to obtain the permission of their local bishop.
The role of the bishop in approving and overseeing use of the Tridentine rite has been a crucial issue in the recent debate. Last fall, when rumors were swirling that a bishop's permission would no longer be needed, the bishops of France issued a statement saying that the return of the pre-Vatican II Mass should be regulated and not left to "personal tastes and choices."
The French bishops also said traditionalist groups that use the Tridentine rite should be expected to give "an unequivocal gesture of assent to the teachings of the church's authentic magisterium," its teaching authority.
For these reasons, many will be looking at Pope Benedict's document not only for a liturgical verdict, but also for a sign of his reconciling skills.
Labels: Holy Father, Liturgy, Second Vatican Council, Society of St. Pius X
Friday, December 15, 2006
Excommunication & Vatican II
An update of this post. Any misunderstanding from the previous post is deeply regreted and I assure you that no malice was intended.
The use of excommunication is not called for in our day and age, especially 40 years after the Second Vatican II Council. Does the Church really think that it is necessary to impose truth using the law so that any opposing voice/movement within the Church has to be put down? The Second Vatican II Council refers to the Chuch as a "community". Indded so. She is a diverse community that spans across the globe; a melting pot of of believers that though are many, are one body, because of the one Bread twe all share. Through thick or thin, it is only together that the Church will grow. We read in the Gospel that "the darkness cannot put out the light". The light is the Truth and since the light cannot be put out, can't the Truth stand on it’s own?
The Second Vatican II Council, opened the way for ecumenism/reconciliation and open dialogue. It also put the term "excommunication and it's applications in a small closet- in the papal household- that should be rarely opened," Fr. Micheal Teo. So where has the ecumenism and reconciliation gone to 40 years on? If we (claim to) accept the Council, shouldn't we be living and practicing it especially when it comes to our fellow family members in the body of Christ?
In Thurston and Attwater's: Butler's Lives of the Saints, "Great care must be taken to show forth orthodox truth in such a way that if any herectics happen to be present they may have an example of charity and Christian moderation. No hard words should be used nor any sort of contempt for their errors shown."
Fr. Charles P. Conner, author of Defenders of the Faith in Word and Deed tells us that "a man can be charitable as he clearly, unambigiously teaches Catholic truth". Saint Ignatius was such a man and this was his aim.
Doctor of the Church, St. Peter Canisius also favoured peaceful coexistence (even with the Protestants). Now, this may seem as he trying to betray Rome, however, St. Peter Canisius felt (and did convince Rome eventually) that such was the way to win the intellectual battle that the Chruch had been losing (especially) after the Reformation.
Now, I am not implying that the Society is herectical (in fact, they can be more orthodox that many Catholic parishes all over the world). All I'm trying to do is to advocate some kind of Christian charity; for the love of God, it's not as if they're Masons. Looking back at history, we clearly see how both great Saints, Ignatius of Loyola and Peter Canisius dealt with similar situations.
It's funny when you look at how our seperate bretheren- Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists, etc...- are treated so well, yet our own CATHOLIC bothers and sisters are being treated as if they were complete strangers or worst, herectics... when they are the ones who are upholding orthodoxy. They recite the same Creed as we do too. Now, tell me which element(s) do they dissent to? Unlike the CTA, their actions aren't "in contrast with the Catholic faith due to views and positions held which are unacceptable from a doctrinal and disciplinary standpoint... irreconcilable with a coherent living of the Catholic faith," Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re. Neither are they Sedevacantists who believe in a Pope Pius XIII nor Masons trying to destroy the Catholic faith.
We cannot seperate eumenism from Christian charity. How can we expect to sit down and have honest, open dialogues whilst simultaneously passing condemnations and hurling labels such as "Schismatic", "Excommunicated", etc... You don't need a rocket scientist to tell you that such an approach won't work.
The best solution is to look at St. Ignatius's and St. Peter Canisius's 'true ecumenical' approaches.
Now, just to touch on the issue of the SSPX in Lincoln, NE, here's a first-hand account that was related to me via e-mail this morning (emphasis mine):
"We (SSPX) took care of Lincoln, NE from St. Mary’s (a SSPX church in KS) when that (excommunication) happened. The real reason was that we (SSPX) took a couple of young men from the Novus Ordo Mass whom the Bishop knew and who were televising our (SSPX) Mass on cable TV. We had only ten faithful at the Mass but the bishop felt threatened. The Bishop also had been a secretary to Cardinal Wright, the one who wrote us an official letter of praise in 1971 making us of pontifical right, and then was one of the three cardinals who condemned Archbishop Lefebvre in 1975 without giving him a trial or a chance to defend himself. Bishop Bruskewitz found nine thieves to condemn us with, just as Pilate found only two for Our Lord. I think it actually makes him look ridiculous in this era of reconciliation......"
Labels: Eucmenism, Society of St. Pius X
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Traditional Catholic bishops consecrated at Ecône in 1988
The controversial Episcopal consecrations of 30 June 1988 performed at Ecône, Switzerland, by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre with the support of Bishop Antônio de Castro Mayer. The Archbishop raised four traditionalist priests of the Society of Saint Pius X to the level of bishop in order that they might continue the work of the Society long after his death.
The Archbishop founded the Society in 1970 to maintain Catholic Tradition in the face of the changes sweeping through the Church following the Second Vatican Council (1962-65). After a turbulent eighteen years involving conflict with Church authorities and increasingly strained relations with Rome, the Archbishop performed the consecrations despite opposition by the Pope.
The Pope soon after issued a condemnation stating that the Archbishop and the four new bishops had incurred excommunication.
I feel that it isn't the 'Schismatic' Society of St. Pius X has caused disunity, but rather certain actions of the majority of the mainstream Catholic Church clergy and laity who have deviated from fidelity to apostolic tradition that has plunged the Church into this crisis. The duty the Church owes to the Society of St. Pius X is from the pain inflicted by the historically, procedurally and aesthectically awful implementation of the revised rite of the Mass after the Second Vatican Council. If wisdom that respected history, tradition, and sensitivity has prevailed, instead of the irrational exuberance that prevailed, there would have been a far better result and less division. I do understand the Society's position, and they deserve much sympathy in the process of reconciling.
Labels: Ordinations, Society of St. Pius X, Traditionalism, Video
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
