Posted on 04/20/2007 12:09:21 PM PDT by marshmallow
To the growing list of indications that something is imminent with regard to the long-awaited document from Pope Benedict XVI authorizing wider use of the pre-Vatican II Mass, I can add one item this week.
An April 3 letter from Cardinal Walter Kasper, who among other things heads the Vatican's Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with Jews, responds to concerns from the International Council of Christians and Jews about the pre-Vatican II Mass, in light of controversial passages it contains regarding Judaism. The last sentence of Kasper's letter, the text of which I have, is the key line: "While I do not know what the pope intends to state in his final text, it is clear that the decision that has been made cannot now be changed."
Kasper's language clearly indicates that something definitive has happened. It adds to the confirmation given by the Vatican's Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, on March 31 that a motu proprio from Benedict XVI, meaning a document under the pope's personal authority, on the pre-Vatican II Mass is coming.
Catholic publishers in Rome, anticipating the pope's decision, have already begun preparing new editions of the pre-Vatican II Mass books, called the "1962 Missal" because that was the last year prior to the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) in which an official liturgical book according to the old rite was issued.
Anyone who has ventured into the Catholic blogosphere recently is aware that speculation about the motu proprio has been at a fever pitch for months. One wag has even posted a list of the Top Ten signs that someone is in the grip of "motu-mania," including: "You have a calendar with all the likely feast days that the motu proprio might be issued marked," and, "You have written 500 blog posts, and 480 of them have been about the motu proprio."
In part, the frenzy has been stoked by a series of over-anxious news reports containing rumored release dates. A partial list includes October 2006, March 2007 (in conjunction with the pope's exhortation for the Synod on the Eucharist), Holy Thursday, and this past April 16 (Benedict's 80th birthday). The hot tip now is April 30, the feast of St. Pius V on the Roman calendar, or May 5, the feast of Pius V on the older calendar.
At the risk of raining on the "motu-mania" parade, however, it's worth noting that many experts believe this breathless anticipation will, in the long run, seem excessive in terms of the document's real-world impact.
For one thing, more than 40 years after the council, many priests are unfamiliar with the pre-Vatican II rite and may not rush to celebrate it even if authorized to do so -- if not for theological reasons, simply because they're already stretched too thin. For another, it's not clear how much pent-up demand for the pre-Vatican II Mass actually exists. Many Catholics enthusiastic for the old Mass already have access to it, in parishes and religious orders who celebrate the old Mass under the terms of a 1984 indult from the Vatican.
Most bishops, pastors and liturgical experts whom I've polled believe that with or without the motu proprio, the normal liturgical experience for the overwhelming majority of Catholics will continue to be the post-Vatican II Mass in the vernacular language. Estimates vary, but many say that they expect no more than one or two percent of Catholics worldwide to routinely attend the pre-Vatican II rite, even if they were given ready access to it.
As one American bishop put it to me, "We wouldn't have spent the last decade sweating blood over a new English translation of the Mass if we didn't think this was going to be the normal liturgical experience for most of our people."
Further, the motu proprio is unlikely to do much, at least in the short term, to end the break between Rome and the followers of the late French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The traditionalist Society of St. Pius X, founded by Lefebvre, claims roughly one million adherents worldwide, and trying to heal this rupture has been a top priority of both John Paul II and Benedict XVI.
Anyone who knows the leadership of the Society of St. Pius X realizes that the older Mass is merely one element of more sweeping reservations about the council. Above all, many traditionalists object to the council's teaching on religious freedom, ecumenism and inter-religious relations. Bishop Bernard Fellay, head of the Society of St. Pius X, has stated that he wants the pope to acknowledge a formal "right of dissent" from the teaching of Vatican II on these points. By itself, the motu proprio will not solve these problems.
In other words, the motu proprio may end up as a classic instance of one of those Vatican documents that unleashes a torrent of debate and commentary, but changes relatively little on the ground.
Be that as it may, there's no doubt the motu proprio will be a media sensation, because the older Mass has become the most potent symbol of tensions over the basic direction of the Catholic Church in the period since the Second Vatican Council (1962-65). In the court of broad public opinion, expanded access to the pre-Vatican II rite will be interpreted as a victory for the church's traditionalist wing, however the Vatican explains it.
Among the debates certain to swirl is a set of concerns regarding Jewish-Christian relations. The exchange between Kasper and the International Council of Christians and Jews, based in Germany, illustrates what's at stake.
Servite Fr. John Pawlikowski, an American, wrote to Kasper on March 29 on behalf of the executive body of the International Council of Christians and Jews. Pawlikowski, an expert in Catholic/Jewish relations at the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago, told Kasper that although the phrase "perfidious Jews" was lifted from the pre-Vatican II Mass by Pope John XXIII, the older Mass still contains other prayers for Jews, Muslims and other Christians that Pawlikowski called "profoundly demeaning."
"The expanded validation of such prayers," Pawikowski argued, "will rightly challenge Catholic integrity in terms of the proclamations of the last four decades," meaning advances in ecumenical and inter-faith relations, especially with Jews.
Pawlikowski's letter does not specify which prayers in the 1962 Missal his group finds objectionable. A Web site sponsored by the Center for Christian-Jewish Understanding at Boston College, however, offers a background document on the older Mass, along with a critical statement from a "Jews and Christians" group of the Central Committee of German Catholics. The two texts cite concerns widely voiced by experts in Catholic-Jewish relations.
For example, the Good Friday Mass contains a prayer "For the conversion of the Jews," which reads: "Let us pray also for the Jews, that the Lord our God may take the veil from their hearts and that they also may acknowledge our Lord Jesus Christ. … Almighty and everlasting God, You do not refuse Your mercy even to the Jews; hear the prayers which we offer for the blindness of that people so that they may acknowledge the light of Your truth, which is Christ, and be delivered from their darkness."
The background document on the Boston College site asserts that the prayer is problematic.
"The references to 'even the Jews,' 'their darkness,' and 'blindness' and for their conversion runs counter to the respect for ongoing Jewish covenantal life throughout historic time that was expressed in Nostra Aetate, 4," it says, referring to the Vatican II document on Judaism and other religions. "Similar problems might be found elsewhere in the Missal simply because it was uninformed by subsequent developments in Catholic understanding."
The document from the German group highlights other objections.
"The pre-conciliar Roman Missal is inseparably connected to the old lectionary," it states. "In its sequence of about 60 diverse formularies for the celebration of Mass for Sundays and holy days, there is no reading from the Old Testament for each Sunday, except in only three cases … This is blatant Marcionism, which devalues the first part of the two-part Christian Bible -- namely the Bible of Israel -- to insignificance."
The German group also questions the underlying worldview of the old Mass.
"Its theology and spirituality … contradicts much that was theologically central to the Second Vatican Council," it says. "This concerns, not least, the unique relationship between the Church and Judaism (see Lumen Gentium, 16 and Nostra Aetate, 4)."
These points, experts say, illustrate the reservations about the 1962 Missal at which Pawlikowski's letter hints.
In his brief reply, Kasper told Pawlikowski that he had already discussed such concerns with Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, head of the Vatican's Ecclesia Dei Commission which oversees use of the older Mass. Castrillon is a driving force behind the new motu proprio.
Kasper writes that he expressed the concerns of "many people engaged in the Jewish-Christian dialogue" to Castrillon.
"After a long conversation, it was reiterated that the use of the Missal does not represent principally a new situation," Kasper writes, "insofar as its use has been permitted over time in particular cases."
Kasper said he's not entirely sure what might be done about sensitive passages regarding Jews.
"The 1962 Missal does not have the term 'perfidious Jews.' I was unable to obtain a clear answer," Kasper writes, "with regard to the prayer for the Jews."
Kasper then closes with the sentence quoted above about the pope's decision no longer being open to debate.
Whatever form Benedict's final decision takes, the kinds of controversies reflected in this exchange will continue -- even if most Catholics, on most Sundays and in most parishes around the world, remain blissfully unaffected by them.
This political correctness has severely hindered the Church's missionary drive and has been one of the main causes of a vocations decrease.
That would be me.
But I hope the Pope will hurry up and issue his order before Frank Sheed has a Conniption and has to be hooked up to an IV Guinness drip.
I'm likely in the same group as you, but I have to say I'm enjoying all this handwringing on their part.
Simply put and at its root, the battle is between those who think (or feel in their heart of hearts) that 1965 C.E. was Year One of the Church, and those who think that 33 A.D. was year one of the Church.
I think you’re right (about the New Church monopoly) and they’re not quite as sanguine about it as they pretend (”ho-hum, don’t worry, nobody’s going to attend it anyway”). It’s well known that the French bishops have been doing everything they can think of to stop the motu propio, and they wouldn’t be going to all this trouble if they weren’t afraid of it.
**”The pre-conciliar Roman Missal is inseparably connected to the old lectionary,” it states. “In its sequence of about 60 diverse formularies for the celebration of Mass for Sundays and holy days, there is no reading from the Old Testament for each Sunday, except in only three cases …**
I would think the lack of OT readings would make them happy because for us Catholics we see many many prophecies in the OT about Our Lord which the Jews and others deny. And thus their lack would cause the Jews less offence.
I think the author is underestimating its impact. He’s right that things won’t change for most people in the short term. BUT I know offhand one local NO parish that is chomping at the bit for this to come out so that they can do the Latin Mass. There is solid support for it underground...and I think if priests get the feeling that Rome is going to back them up against their own bishops, we will start to see them coming out of the woodwork.
OTOH, it really DOES seem like the liberals are in a cold sweat over this. The lengths to which they will go...accusing the old Mass of Marcionism? LOL....now THAT’s funny!
ora pro nobis
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.... [hic!]
Already ordered two more barrels for the looooooonnnnnnnnngggggggggg weekend ahead.
Be still my heart!!!!!!!!!
Another confirmation of the Motu Proprio
CATEGORY: SESSIUNCULUM — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 7:18 pm
My good friend Mr. John Allen of the NCR*, in his weekly blurb has this interesting quote:
“An April 3 letter from Cardinal Walter Kasper, who among other things heads the Vatican’s Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with Jews, responds to concerns from the International Council of Christians and Jews about the pre-Vatican II Mass, in light of controversial passages it contains regarding Judaism. The last sentence of Kasper’s letter, the text of which I have, is the key line: ‘While I do not know what the pope intends to state in his final text, it is clear that the decision that has been made cannot now be changed.’”
We already had a confirmation from the Cardinal Secretary of State and other cardinals. Here is one more.
Many factors affect the Motu Proprio’s release. In fact, much of Mr. Allen’s article focuses on the fascinating issue of the objections Jewish groups and others have in fact expressed about some of the prayers in the pre-Conciliar Missale Romanum. Despite those objections, the decision has been made. This from the Holy See’s chief of interreligious dialogue with non-Christians, Card. Kasper.
Here are other interesting bits in Allen’s piece:
The hot tip now is April 30, the feast of St. Pius V on the Roman calendar, or May 5, the feast of Pius V on the older calendar.
Okay… that’s not really news, but it is interesting.
Mr. Allen is reporting/opining, based on his interviews, that the Motu Proprio won’t really make much difference, either to regular Catholics nor to the members of the SSPX.
First, not many priests know how to say it. Well… that could change fast.
Second,
As one American bishop put it to me, “We wouldn’t have spent the last decade sweating blood over a new English translation of the Mass if we didn’t think this was going to be the normal liturgical experience for most of our people.”
Third, the SSPX has more bones to pick than just the issue of the Missal being used.
Mr. Allen says:
In other words, the motu proprio may end up as a classic instance of one of those Vatican documents that unleashes a torrent of debate and commentary, but changes relatively little on the ground.
Maybe so…. maybe so. And maybe not. Just as a little yeast leavens the dough, so we have seen that the older form of Mass has created great interest among younger priests and laypeople. Their perception of “Mass” has changed subtly. The way these younger priests say Mass is affected by their learning about the older form. More widespread celebrations of the older form (and that will surely happen), will continue the cross-pollination.
You will want to read Mr. Allen’s article in it’s entirety.
* Yes, don’t be shocked: friend. It might have astonished the many to see the guys from the NCR and The Wanderer dining together and chatting.
True Catholics can avoid funnel vision and can be gentlemen.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I LOVE THE SOUND OF LATIN IN THE MORNING! IT SOUNDS...WELL...HEAVENLY!
OREMUS!
F
Yes, I agree. It's fun observing the leftists in a terrified dither.
Does your tagline say, “Dead rabbit”?
Have a Guinness.
Latin Mass ping!
Bump for later.
If I may point out just one of a multitude of lies throughout the piece:
"The pre-conciliar Roman Missal is inseparably connected to the old lectionary," it states. "In its sequence of about 60 diverse formularies for the celebration of Mass for Sundays and holy days, there is no reading from the Old Testament for each Sunday, except in only three cases … This is blatant Marcionism, which devalues the first part of the two-part Christian Bible -- namely the Bible of Israel -- to insignificance."
Oh really!
From the Propers, the readings specifc to each Feast Day for this coming Sunday in the traditional Roman Missal:
The Introit is from Psalm 32.
The Offertory is from Psalm 62.
And of course from the Ordinary, the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar are from Psalm 42.
Oh, but wait, their vaunted "new mass" [sic] does not have an Introit.
Or a proper Offertory.
Or Prayers at the Foot of the Altar.
OR EVEN AN ALTAR TO THE FATHER FOR THE SACRIFICE OF CHRIST ON THE CROSS but merely their heretical Cranmer table of "supper" and "celebration".
These pigs would not acknowledge the truth even if it fell on them!
I know what you mean!! How long has this been anticipated? You’ve gotta know that the pope has had this on his mind for years. Tell us already, tell the world!
Je ne sais quoi! Je parles francais depuis longs temps. Il ne y as pas de quoi! J’aimes des pommes de terres!
Ainsi soit-il!
Francois
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.