American Papist has a good roundup on the rumors of the upcoming Moto Proprio giving wider permission for the Tridentine Rite. Anybody following Catholic news ever since Pope Benedict was elected will remember that we have been getting these stories steadily, though it certainly does look like the reports are much more credible this time.
Gerald Augustinus also has a roundup and I totally agree with him when he says:
A possible "liberation" of the Old Mass is a good thing, but the truly important issue is the "reform of the reform", the every(Sun)day Mass at your average parish.
It will be quite interesting to see the real document when it comes out as to the restrictions involved. To me this document signals a tacit acknowledgement of the failure of most bishops to respond to Quattuor abhinc annos and Ecclesia Dei recommending a "wide and generous " application of the directives of the 1984 indult. Wide and generous has not exactly been the reaction, rather more accurately "narrow and stingy" would be closer to the mark.
Though you have to wonder how more widely the Pian rite will be in most diocese even if it grants very generous permissions. I can hardly imagine it being more available in my own diocese than it already is. My parish church already has the indult Mass along with the new Mass partially in Latin. Most of the other parishes I am familiar with that celebrate the new Mass not exactly reverently, will be clamoring for the Tridentine rite.
I have thought at times about what would have happened if the Tridentine rite had never been replaced in the first place? I have a feeling that we would still have been treated to Clown and Polka Masses, only Ad Orientum and in Latin. This idea kind of gives me nightmares thinking of liturgical dancers at at High Mass.
7 comments
Agreed.
The bishoprics have been pretty narrow and stingy in allowing for the Latin Mass. Here in the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston, former Archbishop Fiorenza was insistant of eliminating the only Latin Mass after our Msgr. retired. But with the new archbishop, that beligerant attitude has been replaced with a reinforcement of keeping the Latin Mass.
I am consistently amazed at the level of hatred most bishops have for the Tridentine Mass.
What exactly are they afraid of?
What exactly are they afraid of?
Disclaimer: I have strong traditionalist sympathies. I would prefer Latin and gregorian chant in the liturgy.
Having said that, I would say that many bishop’s fears are about divisiveness. A legitimate concern as far as it goes. I won’t speculate how much foundation their is for that, but I happen to think there has been a liturgy war bubbling below the surface and occasionally breaking out now and then. Many of my trad buddies say this indult will be meaningless, but I happen to think it heavily tilts toward the trad camp. Offer a TLM in a diocese and the more traditional will vote with their feet.
I think our church is big enough now to suit two rites
Actually, many rites. Like Maronite, Byzanitne, etc. which, if you don’t stuff a sock in their mouths immediately, they will tell you all about it.
Scott W:
I admit to being on the traditionalist side as well. However, I was born in 1961, and so have NEVER witnessed a Latin mass (Of any kind). As I’ve watched this liturgical brushfire these past few years, I always come back to the same thought: Whay are they so afraid?
But as I’ve become more inquisitive and seen the “progressive” tendencies of the USCCB and their abysmal handling of the abuse crisis, I now see that what they are afraid of is that the people in the pews might see what a truly reverent Mass is, and demand more of it and revolt against such lunacies as “liturgical dance”. And that could only lead to demands for more adherence to real Catholic doctrine.
The slippery slope.
Alternatively, what they could be afraid of is the thought of actually having to learn some Latin…
I often wonder about the goals of some traditionalists with regards to the Missal of 1962. In 200 years, why would it make sense to an average Catholic to be using a 1962 Missal when a 2002 (or later) edition is available? It’d be like Catholics demanding we go all the way back to the Missal of 1570.
What is the long term goal?