From Fr. Neuhaus
One of the more deft moves in Benedict’s apostolic letter motu proprio, titled “Summorum Pontificum,” is in referring to the 1962 form of the Roman Rite as the Mass of Blessed John XXIII. It is not the Tridentine Mass or the Mass of Pius V but the Mass of John XXIII. It is the form of the Mass that was celebrated daily at the Second Vatican Council.
Benedict notes that, over the many centuries of the Roman Rite, popes have from time to time made modest changes. Pius V did so in 1570, John XXIII did so in 1962, and Paul VI did so in 1970, the last producing what is called the Novus Ordo. Benedict notes that John Paul II also made small but important emendations regarding references to the Jews in the Good Friday Liturgy. (More on that below.)
By associating the Latin Mass that is now universally approved with John XXIII, Benedict steals a card from the deck of liberals and progressives, for whom John XXIII is always “good Pope John,” in contrast to his successors. But this is much more than a deft rhetorical move. “Summorum Pontificum” is a thoroughly liberal document in substance and spirit, remembering that liberal means, as once was more commonly understood, generosity of spirit.
One of my readers queried the other day if it wasn’t in fact the 1962 missal that was used throughout the proceedings of the Council, and the answer is obviously yes. The Pope calling it the Mass of John XXIII was referring to the authorized missal and not I think making a "deft move." Though I do think it can be used rather creatively to call out opponents as being against the form of Mass approved by Pope John XXIII who called the council in the first place and the Mass used throughout Vatican II? Even that they are trying to roll back Vatican II. It is always ironically funny to hear liturgical progressives who decry organ music and Gregorian Chant (things actually encouraged by Vatican II) to hear them talk about roll back of Vatican II. Hey I would love to roll back to Vatican II and have Masses celebrated as intended.
Gerald has some wonderful pictures up of Fr. Fessio celebrating the new Mass. Many might think that how Fr. Fessio does celebrate the new Mass is in opposition to liturgical rules when the opposite it the fact.
8 comments
AJF — Bishops have no authority to change the rubrics. “In this diocese we will all do handstands during the consecration” — n’uh uh.
Jeff — How ’bout a movie poster for “MO 2 PROPRIO”?
Some years ago, at a pro-life conference that I attended, I was present when Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J. celebrated Mass (Roman rite, ordinary form) two or three times. I can tell you that there was at least one way in which Fr. Joseph DID “celebrate … Mass … in opposition to liturgical rules,” in the same way in which his fellow Jesuit priest, Fr. Mitchell Pacwa, S.J. violates the same rule.
These otherwise good, orthodox priests mistakenly think that they are free to change the wording of the “greetings” at the beginning of Mass. There are only three approved greetings — “The Lord be with you” being the simplest. Each Greeting is a direct quotation from the Bible, and each one would not be subject to being modified by a celebrant even if it were NOT a scriptural quote. How much more improper it is to try to modify the very word of God!
As I stated, Frs. Pacwa and Fessio both modify one or more of the greetings. I have written to one of them about it — to no avail. Maybe you can have better luck than I have had.
There are only four or five places in the Mass in which the rubrics tell the priest that he has permission to substitute “similar words” to those actually printed in the Sacramentary. The Greeting is NOT one of those places.
I am old enough to know that no priest ever dared to change audible words in the pre-conciliar rite (for which I was an altar boy). The first document of Vatican II (the Constitution on the Liturgy) forbade priests to add/change/delete anything, and this rule has been reiterated several times in the subsequent decades. How Frs. Fessio and Pacwa could be unaware of this (or, if aware, how they could mistakenly think that they can modify the Greetings) is a mystery to me.
Thanks for the opportunity to get this off my chest.
This is great! We really have to start calling the Latin Mass “The Mass of Vatican II” or “The Mass of John XXIII” Everyone who reads this, please, please please, repost that suggestion on as many blog comment pages as possible and lets see if we can’t help get this thing rolling a little faster (September is right around the corner).
Look, I’m in my early thirties, and before I first went to a “Mass of Vatican II” (see it’s working already), I bought most of the party-line clap trap. I didn’t even think ANY of it was going to be in English…that the homily would be in Latin…that the people there would be whipping themselves. What got me to go (besides my apoplexy at guitar Mass) was when an elderly lady who was part of the religious instruction dept, told me…when I was reflecting on the fact that things didn’t seem a solemn and they might be…that I “can clearly see that the Mass in English is better.” I told her, “No, I CAN’T see that, because I’ve never had the chance to judge.” When I came back the next week and told her that I had gone to a Triden…er…I mean, Mass of Vatican II. She asked how many people were there. I told her, standing room only (St. Agnes in NYC, btw), and she kind of grunted, then said something about the older people liking–but I jumped in and said, actually there were quite a few people my age…more, in fact, then the ones at our parrish, and they all brought there well behaved children (which is a nice contrast to the ones at our parrish w/their action figures and coloring books, and lazy, indulgent parents). Well that was the end of that conversation, she just moved on to something about Vatican II and its infinite wisdom…man I just wish I could have thought to mention that that WAS the Mass at Vatican II.
All in all, it just makes me laugh…it’s like that Who lyric…”meet the new boss…same as the old boss” So why don’t we all “get on our knees and pray (maybe to St. Pius X) WE DON’T GET FOOLED AGAIN!”
Jean-Luc Delacroix
(once and future bogger of “from gold to whetstone”…in fact I’m going to put it back up now.)
…sorry for the typos in that last one…I’m just so excited!
JLD
There is another unfortunate change, but it’s not just Fr. Fessio: the omission of the Kiss of Peace. As far as I’m aware, in the dioceses of the United States, the Kiss is an integral part of the Rite that may be omitted due to difficulties arising from “the physical condition or arrangement of those present, or if it would present a health danger.” I am not sure what reason Father Fessio (or other priests) have for leaving out this portion, especially since the “Sign of Peace should never be omitted due to the personal preference of the Priest.” Having attended several N. O. Masses said by Father Fessio and others in which this portion of the ritual is skipped, I can say that there was no physical impediment or fear of cross contamination. But that being aside, I do find the N.O. Masses celebrated by Fr. Fessio to be among the most reverent I have had the privilege at which to assist.
The Kiss of Peace is in fact optional. The rubric before the sign of peace says pro opportunitate: in so far as it is opportune or appropriate. The sign of peace is done at the discretion of the priest at that Mass.
Jeff–somebody had better tell the US Bishops that, then; since we’re obliged to obey our individual bishops, and those same bishops have declared that only in the circumstances mentioned above may it be omitted, isn’t it erroneous to allow the priest to make that decision personally?
About 15 years ago, we were members of a Milwaukee parish whose pastor was personally acquainted w/JPII, and who was a VERY orthodox Catholic priest.
He got it into his head to use “I believe…” at all the places in the (English) Creed where the Latin text was plainly first-person-singular, instead of using the theologoumenon of “we.”
So he was, effectively, a disobedient priest.
Thank God we knew him, and may he rest in peace.