Latin Mass “power of silence” raises UK Catholic decibels [Cdl Castrillon at Westminster Cathedral]

Reuters ^ | June 16th, 2008 | Sebastian Tong

[Mike Fieschko]

June 16th, 2008

Latin Mass “power of silence” raises UK Catholic decibels

Post a comment (2)

Posted by: Sebastian Tong

Tags: FaithWorld, catholic church, latin, pope benedict, traditionalists, united kingdom, vatican

Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos was at Westminster Cathedral in London over the weekend to lead one of the highest profile celebrations of the Roman Catholic Church’s old Latin Mass here since the 1960s. The Catholic hierarchy in England and Wales has been lukewarm about the prospect of the old rite being celebrated alongside Mass in English, so the cardinal’s presence was a clear reminder of what the Vatican wants.

Before the Mass on Saturday, Castrillon Hoyos met four journalists (myself included) to explain why Pope Benedict decided last year to promote wider use of the old Latin Mass. He praised the traditional Tridentine rite for its “power of silence,” an element of contemplation he said had disappeared from worship since the liturgical reforms of the 1960s. If his pre-Mass briefing is anything to go by, however, the Latin Mass also has a power to raise the decibel level among Catholics in Britain.

The Colombian-born cardinal, who is head of the pontifical commission Ecclesia Dei for relations with traditionalists, said the new form of the Mass had led to “abuses” that had prompted many to abandon the Church. So, he said, the pope wanted the older form to be offered again in all parishes (not only where a group of parishioners requested it, as originally said).

“The experience of these 40 years has not always been so good. Many people abandoned the sense of adoration (of God)…There is (now) an atmosphere that makes it possible for these abuses and that atmosphere must be changed,” he said in English. “It is not a matter of confrontation but of dialogue — fraternal dialogue — making efforts to understand the precious things contained in the new and the old rites.”

The cardinal added that Pope Benedict would soon clarify his motu proprio — the decree allowing wider use of the old Mass — to clear up confusion over issues ranging from the differences between liturgical calendars of the old and new rites, the use of vestments, ordinations to the sub-diaconate and the Eucharistic fast.

How polarising this issue can be within the Church was apparent even in that small group during the 45-minute interview.

Elena Curti, deputy editor of the Catholic magazine The Tablet, said many Catholics like herself were confused at the new emphasis on the old rite. It seemed to diminish the role of the laity, she said, and she asked the cardinal if this was a regression from the reforms of the Second Vatican Council of 1962-1965. The cardinal said no: “The Holy Father is not returning to the past but taking from the past a treasure to make it present today along side the richness of the new rite.”

Curti’s comments sparked a declaration from Damian Thompson, Daily Telegraph religion reporter and editor-in-chief of the Catholic Herald, that he “deplored” her comments.

“I’d like to very strongly distance myself from what Elena has said and to say that there is tremendous enthusiasm among younger Catholics for the motu proprio, that many Catholics are deeply grateful to the Holy Father for making the change and many younger Catholics regard this as an extremely exciting development,” Thompson said to the cardinal.

John Medlin, General Manager of the Latin Mass Society that organised the Mass and the briefing, felt obliged to intervene and ask for “charity around the table.” Thompson (pictured at left) kept up the same tone in his two reports on the meeting — “Latin Mass to return to England and Wales” and “Victory against the sandalistas” — and on his blog Holy Smoke (with partial transcript of the briefing). Since The Tablet is a weekly, we’ll have to wait until Friday to see what Curti writes.

The revival of the Old Latin Mass has been compared to a cultural revolution within the Catholic Church. It looks like it’s off to a rousing start.

Post a comment (2) |

Share

|

Trackback

Comments RSS

2 comments so far

June 16th, 2008 2:46 pm GMT	[…] report from another one of the reporters - Sebastian Tong of Reuters - at the briefing with Cardinal […] - Posted by Tong’s Report of Castrillon’s Briefing at Cornell Society for a Good Time
	June 16th, 2008 2:56 pm GMT	Are we to understand, Mr. Tong, that you disagree with the “tone” of Mr. Thompson? For myself, I’m extremely glad that he was present in this interview so that he might give voice what thousands of young people around the world do in fact feel, who are passionate about the “Gregorian Rite” - this demographic is the future of the Catholic Church. As for Elena Curti and her ilk - their days are numbered. Why? They have no children and they don’t enter the priesthood or religious life. - Posted by Iosephus

[Mike Fieschko]

"The Catholic congregation does not need to hear every single word of a ritual with vibrant immediacy (especially words that come back week after week). A Catholic who tries to listen attentively to every syllable of the Mass ... will be driven insane from this cascade of 'information' and have to be taken out of the church in a straitjacket."

"Since the 1960s, Roman Catholics have witnessed the evolution of the Solemn High Explanation Mass. In this type of liturgy, almost the entire service appears to be one continuous band of explanations spoken into a microphone."

[both quotes are Thomas Day, in Why Catholics Can't Sing]

[Ron Jeremy]

Elena Curti, deputy editor of the Catholic magazine The Tablet, said many Catholics like herself were confused at the new emphasis on the old rite. It seemed to diminish the role of the laity, she said, and she asked the cardinal if this was a regression from the reforms of the Second Vatican Council of 1962-1965. The cardinal said no:

Here it is, re-written: A dumbass feminist who wants to change the church to fit her beliefs, rather than find a new church like the Unitarians that already holds her beliefs, whined about the changes, but did so in her usual manner of not wanting to be obvious of the fact that she hates men.

[Religion Moderator]

Please do not use potty language on the Religion Forum.

[Ron Jeremy]

ok. sorry.

[kellynla]

BTTT

[livius]

Oh, but wait till you hear her actual remarks. She told the cardinal that Vatican II decided that we were all “priests, prophets and kings,” and that the old mass didn’t reflect this!!! What a dingbat. Aside from whatever attitudes she may have about men, she’s just stoooopid, like most of these people, and terminally full of herself.

[Pyro7480]

From Damian Thompson of the Telegraph:

There were four journalists at the press conference – Anna Arco of the Herald, a Catholic guy from Reuters, Elena Curti from the Tablet and me from the Telegraph. I was sceptical that the Cardinal really envisaged the arrival of the Gregorian Rite (his term) in “many ordinary Catholic parishes” and my jaw dropped – and heart leapt – when he said: “Not many – all.” Twice. Elena bristled and started talking about going backwards and said something along the lines of “but we [the laity] are now priests, kings and prophets”. At which point I told the Cardinal that I wanted to dissociate myself from her comments, that young people were increasingly delighted by the opportunity to experience the TLM and were very grateful for his efforts.”

As we left, three out of the four journalists kissed the Cardinal’s ring. Guess which one didn’t – but then I suppose she’s already a priest, king and prophet or whatever.

[Pyro7480]

Did you see that quote on Fr. Z’s blog or someplace else? I swear I saw it someplace else.

[Convert from ECUSA]

"Elena Curti, deputy editor of the Catholic magazine The Tablet, said many Catholics like herself were confused at the new emphasis on the old rite. It seemed to diminish the role of the laity"

What she meant was "seems to diminish the role of bossy feminazis from cowing everyone in the Church from doing things her way." Doubtless a CINO-but-actually-Unitarian-or-Whiskeypagan-at-heart. Lawsa, I get soooooo tired of these "church lady" types who think that they rule the Church ever since 1965. Eucharettes, cantorettes, lectorettes. If they don't like the Church, let them leave, the door works both ways. In contrast to Miz Curti, I see so many women in my parish who truly do help keep it running, but instead of flaunting their "liberatedhood" at the hiccup of a gnat, they go about doing deeds that speak more of their true Christian witness rather than always flapping gums like these "question-every-little-thing feminists" who are still ticked of that Pope Benedict hasn't immediately resigned, permitted "sister" Joan Chittister (pardon the expression) to be come Pope, and immediately ordain every Church-hating radical "nun" as "priest." OK, rant off.

[Notwithstanding]

When there was no such thing as concelebration,

even priests, prophets and kings

who attended Mass

worshipped

faithfully, devotedly, reverently and dutifully

under the leadership

of the priest serving at the altar.

There was no pretense that priests, prophets and kings in attendance deserved a special role at Mass. Oc course, the one priest clebrating had such a role, but the role was one of humility - as a servant.

It is ludicrous to claim that one is being prevented from humble service at the altar of God while at the same time claiming that such humble service is a position of power to which women are denied access.

The exercise of screaming a la Jesse Jackson “I AM somebody” or “God don’t make no junk” or “Darn it all, I AM A PRIEST PROPHET AND KING!”) might be a great spritual and therpaeutic excercise for those who are just realizing or overcoming an actual oppression.

But lay men and women have not been oppressed in any way.

[AnAmericanMother]

Amen, brother! Preach it!

These women convict themselves out of their own mouths when they refuse to just join the Unitarians or the Whiskypalians, who already do everything they want (and in the case of the Piskies, arguably have some colorable claim to apostolic succession, at least if the priest was ordained by an Old Catholic bishop).

They're not really interested in the doctrine, they just want to undermine the Catholic Church.

[Ransomed]

Hey don’t let the man get you down. I once had a bunch of posts pulled on the R. forum in a thread about homosexualists in the Church ‘cause I kept referring to small sticks/British smokes.

Freegards

[Convert from ECUSA]

"They're not really interested in the doctrine, they just want to undermine the Catholic Church."

Amen, sister! Preach it! In some "parishes" I've visited when I've traveled, it was very clear who really ran things, including the "mass." In one parish I visited a couple of years ago while on vacation, the token "priest" was clearly some kind of window dressing, everyone else was an usherette, eucharette, lectorette, etc. Politically correct bland-as-cold-white-rice "homily", on some "contemporary" topic variation on "social justice" or the "social gospel." After the "consecration" (which was done by the token priest in the proper language and way (obviously a concession to keep the minimum of kosher), the "priest" parked his backside on a chair by the "altar" and let a eucharette open the "tabernacle", take everything out, and start distributing. This particular parish had eucharettes trot down to the back of the "church" where the back half of was expected to turn their backs on Our Lord and boogie to the back to receive the "eucharist." Needless to say, I did not join the back turners, but let everyone else in the row out, where I proceeded to get right back on my knees while I prayed for grace not to call down lighting from Heaven and BBQ the lot of them. That was one of those cases where my attendance ended up being meeting my Sunday obligation and that was it. I had to go back to my hotel room to pray an intense Rosary for pardon for the place as well as for myself for wishing that the Lord would do a bit of Old Testament on them!

[Mike Fieschko]

Did you see that quote on Fr. Z’s blog or someplace else? I swear I saw it someplace else.

PMFBI.

Damian Thompson's blog post Traditional Mass for 'all the parishes' quotes Elena Curti:

Your Eminence, I think many Catholics are rather confused by this new emphasis on the Tridentine Rite, mainly because we were taught that the new Rite represented real progress, and many of us who have grown up with it see it as real progress, that there are Eucharistic ministers, women on the sanctuary, that we are all priests, prophets and kings. This new emphasis to many of us seems to deny that.

[emphasis supplied]

[livius]

I think it might have been on the New Liturgical Movements blog. What a ding-dong the woman - oh, excuse me, our local “priest, king and prophet” - is.

[livius]

The exercise of screaming a la Jesse Jackson “I AM somebody” or “God don’t make no junk” or “Darn it all, I AM A PRIEST PROPHET AND KING!”) might be a great spritual and therpaeutic excercise ...

LOL, bears repeating.

[RobbyS]

Smack-down! Atta boy, Damian.

[RobbyS]

Might cultivate obedience to lawful authority. Teresa of Avila managed to be a great reformer and yet always obedient. As a recognition of her real power, an archbishop once knelt for her blessing.

[RobbyS]

Ms. Curti is certainly old enough to remember that when the new mass was introduced, many,many Catholics were confused, because they saw no need for such sweeping changes. Jacques Maritain was one of them. Not confused, but puzzled. Translation into local languages was a radical enough change. Then there was the endless experimentation, where from parish to parish there was little consistency. One thing that is bound to happen because of the new policy is more uniformity in the way the new mass is celebrated.

[marshmallow]

Elena Curti, deputy editor of the Catholic magazine The Tablet, said many Catholics like herself were confused at the new emphasis on the old rite. It seemed to diminish the role of the laity, she said, and she asked the cardinal if this was a regression from the reforms of the Second Vatican Council of 1962-1965.

The Second Vatican Council? The one which said that "Latin is to be retained as the liturgical language"?

It's not a "regression from the reforms", dear. This is the reform mandated by the Second Vatican Council. The one which the Council Fathers actually intended.

Finally!