« Digging through the footnotes... | Main | Another take »
March 13, 2007
Summing up
...for now. I'm going to be out of the ..er..office until early afternoon, so this will have to do.
First, as regard to abuses, let's get one thing clear - the norms for the celebration of the Mass are clear. They are everywhere. They are in the General Instruction for the Roman Missal, and they are in Redemptoris Sacramentum (2004)
Just a few samples from RS, in case you've forgotten:
[112.] Mass is celebrated either in Latin or in another language, provided that liturgical texts are used which have been approved according to the norm of law. Except in the case of celebrations of the Mass that are scheduled by the ecclesiastical authorities to take place in the language of the people, Priests are always and everywhere permitted to celebrate Mass in Latin
Reprobated, therefore, is any practice of using for the celebration of Mass common vessels, or others lacking in quality, or devoid of all artistic merit or which are mere containers, as also other vessels made from glass, earthenware, clay, or other materials that break easily. This norm is to be applied even as regards metals and other materials that easily rust or deteriorate
59.] The reprobated practice by which Priests, Deacons or the faithful here and there alter or vary at will the texts of the Sacred Liturgy that they are charged to pronounce, must cease. For in doing thus, they render the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy unstable, and not infrequently distort the authentic meaning of the Liturgy.
Etc.
This AE is a useful and important catechesis on the Eucharist. As I said in a previous post, the language and orientation is clearly focused: on the powerful, passionate love of Christ poured out in the Cross, in which we are invited to join ourselves. The importance of beauty in properly and powerfully imaging this great mystery and gift. The importance of fidelity to the ritual, of not putting ourselves and our egos at the forefront. The true nature of active participation.
The point is...if think about the Eucharist properly, the rest follows.
Theology matters.
Who can blame us, though, for hoping that behind the scenes, at some points, bishops are being hauled in and read riot acts of one sort or another...
Fr. Z was at the press conference. Watch his space for more.
Oh, and what has the secular media pulled? You guessed it -
Reuters: CATHOLIC POLITICIANS CAN'T BACK GAY MARRIAGE
Sigh.
(Remember, comments are moderated now. That means anything posted between now and 2 won't appear right away. So don't post repeatedly, please.)
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
Comments
Reuters is perhaps picking up on the Italian press which headlined S.C. in the context of the Pope's call for 'Eucharistic consistency' i.e. Catholic politicians ought to make laws not opposed to Catholic faith. Italy is embroiled with the question of legalising so-called civil unions.
Posted by: Marc at Mar 13, 2007 11:26:19 AM
Except in the case of celebrations of the Mass that are scheduled by the ecclesiastical authorities to take place in the language of the people, Priests are always and everywhere permitted to celebrate Mass in Latin.
So does this mean that if a Mass is not specifically "scheduled by the ecclesiastical authorities" (and who might this refer do - ordinaries, pastors?)"to take place in the language of the people", any priest has carte blanche to celebrate in Latin. And does this assume that celebrating in the language spoken by the people now requires a kind of special indult? So if my local priest decides to just publish a schedule of Masses without specifically designating them as "English" Masses, he can celebrate them in Latin? Please say it ain't so.
Posted by: Dan Crawford at Mar 13, 2007 1:03:11 PM
If I didn't know better, I'd think the Reuter's headline was a spoof.
Posted by: F C Bauerschmidt at Mar 13, 2007 2:52:09 PM
Priests are always and everywhere permitted to celebrate Mass in Latin.
Dan, this is nothing new. Any priest can celebrate the new rite in Latin any time -- the Latin text is right there in the Sacramentary. The question is whether there is a desire on the part of the parish to have Mass celebrated in Latin or any other language other than the predominate language of the parish. This would require sufficient demand to ensure attendance equivalent to the other scheduled Masses, training the people to respond and sing in Latin and an additional musical repertoire. If all that is present, no additional permission is required -- it's up to the pastor.
Posted by: Eric at Mar 13, 2007 2:57:26 PM
I'm a little confused -- is your sigh in response to the Reuters column just a reaction to the fact that the Church's position is nothing new? At the very least, I grateful that the pope is reminding everyone that this isn't a "gray area."
Posted by: Bill Q at Mar 13, 2007 3:10:59 PM
Bill:
In a lengthy, theologically rich document, Reuters goes searching for and leaves no stone unturned in finding a political angle to mention.
Which isn't even *directly* mentioned in the document (see para 83).
Posted by: amy at Mar 13, 2007 3:14:34 PM
Dear Amy:
Yes, we have the GIRM.
Yes, we have Redemptoris Sacramentum.
Has this made a tinker's damm of difference? No!. Why not? Because Rome has not enforced them!
C'mon, we've all seen A Man For All Seasons. And we all remember that qui tacet consentire -- silence gives consent.
By its silence, by taking no action against MahonyFest, Rome shows that it approves of it.
By taking no action against the music of Haugen & Haas and their ilk, Rome shows that it approves of it.
I could go on and on, but ... you get the point.
Sometimes you have to take a whip of cords into the marketplace. With this document, Rome is refusing even that.
Posted by: PMcGrath at Mar 13, 2007 8:30:09 PM
PMcGrath,
Enlightened soul that you are, your post says it all!.
Peace to all
Posted by: ohevin at Mar 13, 2007 11:15:20 PM
Considering that a good many people have proved able to ignore both natural consequences and the cold wet troutsmack of reality, I don't really see how anything short of a Swiss Guard Death Squad would work. Heck, if the Pope fired bishops these days, they might well refuse to go. Or sue the Vatican. Or run off and start yet another schism.
Maybe things would have been different if something had been done sooner. But it wasn't, and it's a little late for what-ifs.
So it seems that the Church is working like the Internet -- ignore the dead nodes and work around them. Maybe they'll eventually come back up and start working. If they won't, they'll be replaced in the course of normal maintenance. It's a very slow approach, and it's frustrating to us, but it will get the job done eventually.
Posted by: Maureen at Mar 14, 2007 11:30:35 AM
