New Instruction On Summorum Pontificum

[Lil Red]

[quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1305295887' post='2240833']
I think if the supply was better well known, the demand would increase a lot.

The fact that there were so many hoops to jump through just to 'get' the OF celebrated, coupled with the fact that some clergy either don't know or don't want to how to celebrate the OF; your supply is extremely (and to an extent, unfairly) narrowed.

I would advance the theory that if the supply was 'free-er', more easily accessed, the demand would increase. If seminarians were taught the OF and latin (not simply reccomended to learn it), one could agrue you would at least be in a better 'position' to offer it.

iono, I'm not communicating real well right now.. but these are my thoughts....
[/quote]

[Lil Red]

Fr. Z's thoughts: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/05/released-instruction-universae-ecclesiae-the-text-and-my-initial-observations/

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1305296314' post='2240834']
FSSP are only invited into a diocese...they will not come in unless your bishop gives permission.
[/quote]
The bishop is obligated to make the old Mass available, and if he has no qualified diocesan priests, the FSSP is always willing to come.
I think it's important to focus on the fact that it is the obligation of the bishop to accommodate those who wish to have the T.L.M. celebrated.

[Nihil Obstat]

FWIW (no link to my blog yet because Blogger is down for maintenance):

Analysis of Univerae Ecclesiae:

It's been out for a few hours now, and we've all had our chance to give it a quick once over. Fr. Z was lucky enough to be able to prepare his analysis in advance, so my remarks are necessarily going to be somewhat similar to his. I'm going to start at the beginning and address anything of interest that I see as we move along. I'm glad it's a short document; otherwise I wouldn't be able to finish the whole thing in time.

Introduction:
First of all, we see the use of my favourite phrase: Lex orandi, lex credendi. Never a bad thing to see that. The document refers to the very obvious fact that our sacramental practices [i]must[/i] be maintained for the sake of the entire Church.
After that we see a very brief history of the old Mass since Vatican II. Bl. John Paul II granted an indult (Quattuor abhinc annos), followed by a motu proprio (Ecclesia Dei) which allowed the Traditional Latin Mass to be said with permission from the ordinary, which was to be generously granted.
Next , §7, we find an explanation of why the Traditional Latin Mass seemed to be effectively forbidden after Vatican II, even though Summorum Pontificum states that it was never abrogated. "Such norms needed on account of the fact that, when the new Missal had been introduced under Pope Paul VI, it had not seemed necessary to issue guidelines regulating the use of the 1962 Liturgy." This may be a little bit of whitewashing; from what I hear, the Traditional Latin Mass was effectively forbidden for many of those years. However, since I didn't experience it myself, I'm willing to accept it.
I think that the last paragraph of §7 is especially important. "What was sacred for prior generations, remains sacred and great for us as well, and cannot be suddenly prohibited altogether or even judged harmful." This was quoting Pope Benedict in 2007. In my opinion this puts into their place those opinions that we are Latin Catholics are obliged to attend to Ordinary Form simple because it is Ordinary. I consider this opinion to be incorrect and harmful to those who are attached to the old Mass, or those who may in the future wish to know more about it. In fact, I think it can be argued based on these passages that, for those who are attached to the Traditional Latin Mass, it is in fact [i]a responsibility[/i] to attend. As we see in §8, the old Mass is "considered as a precious treasure to be preserved." Who is to preserve it but the priests and laypeople? It is not merely our right to attend Mass in this form, it is indeed our responsibility to see it made available as widely as possible.

The Responsibilities of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei:
This section is quick and interesting in that it specifically places the authority of Ecclesia Dei above the local ordinary in matters regarding the Traditional Latin Mass. We've been given recourse the Ecclesia Dei then, if our bishops are resistant to introducing the Extraordinary Form. I'm thinking at the moment of the time a couple hears ago (during the H1N1 scare) where my bishop temporarily suspended Communion on the tongue. The FSSP politely (and quite rightly) indicated that they could not comply with this directive (they cannot still, according to a section later on in this document), so the Traditional Latin Mass was suspended until that directive was lifted. I don't think this was appropriate on the part of my bishop, and now if something similar happens in the future, Ecclesia Dei has the authority to override him.

Specific Norms:
In §15 we see first a bit of directive as to what defines a "coetus fidelium", the group of the faithful mentioned in Summorum Pontificum. First, there is again no mention of numbers. As far as I'm concerned a group consists of three or more, and I believe that since both Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae decline to go into any detail, we are to assume that a small group carries just as much weight as a large one. In fact, according to §17.2, if a group is very small they are to approach the Ordinary (bishop), who is to make the Mass available for them at a particular church. Also, this group need not be composed solely of members of that particular parish.
As per §16, if a group of the faithful has a priest who is willing to say the Traditional Latin Mass for them, and this priest presents himself at a parish or oratory, he is to be given that opportunity by the pastor (within the reasonable bounds of the parish's regular schedule).
The only stipulation on groups of the faithful is that they may not "support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or [...] against the Roman Pontiff as Supreme Pastor of the Church." Not even those people who attend SSPX Masses can be said to belong to this. I don't even know why a group of sedevacantists/sedeprivationists, etc., would want to celebrate Mass within the Church, but there you go.
With regards for qualified priests, we see that a priest is considered qualified to say Mass in the Extraordinary Form if he is not impeded by canon law, has a basic knowledge of Latin so as to pronounce the words and understand their meaning, and have celebrated it in the past.
Furthermore (§21), we see that seminarians are to be given the opportunity to learn the Extraordinary Form, and we are also reminded of the obligation to be familiar with Latin. Sadly the knowledge of Latin is not currently a part of most seminary curricula, and I'm not sure what we can do right now to change that.
According to §24, the rubrics of the 1962 missal must be followed when celebrating that Mass. I figured this was self-evident, but just recently we heard about a parish in which the Traditional Latin Mass was celebrated with female altar servers. Thankfully this is clearly not permitted in the Traditional Latin Mass. This would also reaffirm the position of the FSSP with regards to the H1N1 issue I mentioned above.
However (and this was also self-evident, in my opinion), regarding the disciplinary norms connected to celebration, the 1983 Code of Canon Law is to be observed. If I'm not mistaken this includes such things as the Eucharistic fast, the number of times a person can participate in Mass in a single day, the wearing of veils etc..
According to §31, only Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life are permitted to ordain (minor or major) in the older form of the Mass. This was the case before, so nothing new here, although I have to admit that I don't understand the reasoning behind this. Would be nice if it changed sometime in the future.
With regards to the Easter Triduum, it is the right of the faithful to celebrate in the Extraordinary Form (§33), and if there is no church exclusively for their use, they are to be accomodated, "not excluding the possibility of a repetition of the celebration of the Sacred Triduum in the same church." This is what happened in my diocese, since the FSSP share a diocesan church.

So, that's how it is. It's a very good document, and it gives us a bit more legal weight when asking that the Traditional Latin Mass be celebrated regularly. It's important to note, like I said above, that not only is it our right to participate in the Extraordinary Form, it is in fact our responsibility to see that it is faithfully maintained. I think we should be proud of this responsibility. We are going to contribute to the liturgical renewal of the Church, and participating in the Traditional Mass is a perfectly legitimate means of doing so. Also important to remember is that Ecclesia Dei has immediate authority with regards to the old Form over our local bishops, so if they for any reason resist regular implementation of the Traditional Latin Mass, we have an advocate in Ecclesia Dei.

We should thank Ecclesia Dei and the Holy Father for this Instruction, and as always we should pray that the Traditional Latin Mass is made widely and regularly available across the entire world, for the sanctification of us and our brothers and sisters in the faith.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1305297836' post='2240842']
The bishop is obligated to make the old Mass available, and if he has no qualified diocesan priests, the FSSP is always willing to come.
I think it's important to focus on the fact that it is the obligation of the bishop to accommodate those who wish to have the T.L.M. celebrated.
[/quote]
yes, they are willing to come, but from what i understand (because of what's happened within my own diocese), they will not come into a diocese unless they have the support of the local bishop.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1305298034' post='2240846']
yes, they are willing to come, but from what i understand (because of what's happened within my own diocese), they will not come into a diocese unless they have the support of the local bishop.
[/quote]
They'd have to get approval from the bishop, yes.
What I'm saying though is that it's really not an issue of FSSP or not FSSP. The issue is whether or not the Traditional Latin Mass is celebrated. If a diocesan priest is not qualified, the bishop is obligated to go outside his diocese to find someone who is. For the faithful, it's not a big deal one way or another. We have a right (and a responsibility) to participate in the Traditional Latin Mass, and the bishop then has the responsibility to make it happen.
The charism of the FSSP is to make the old Mass available, so their feelings won't be hurt if the Mass is available without them.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1305298266' post='2240851']
They'd have to get approval from the bishop, yes.
What I'm saying though is that it's really not an issue of FSSP or not FSSP. The issue is whether or not the Traditional Latin Mass is celebrated. If a diocesan priest is not qualified, the bishop is obligated to go outside his diocese to find someone who is. For the faithful, it's not a big deal one way or another. We have a right (and a responsibility) to participate in the Traditional Latin Mass, and the bishop then has the responsibility to make it happen.
The charism of the FSSP is to make the old Mass available, so their feelings won't be hurt if the Mass is available without them.
[/quote]
oh, yeah, i don't disagree with you there.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1305298869' post='2240857']
oh, yeah, i don't disagree with you there.
[/quote]

[kafka]

[quote name='Brother Adam' timestamp='1305295082' post='2240830']
Yes, most people will always flock towards the easiest road. That does not mean that is what is best for them.
[/quote]
what?

attending a Latin Mass is easy. Living a moral life and a living in a good state of conscience in a severely evil and complex world is difficult. Fighting culture wars is easy, learning the essentials from Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scritpure and Sacred Magisterium, remaining faithful and true to them, even the ones we dont like is difficult. Reading Summorum Pontificum and yapping away about it is easy, reading encyclicals like Veritatis Splendor, living the realities, and explaining them to others is difficult. Following Jesus on the straight and narrow and becoming like a child: difficult. Reading Catholic blogs like Fr. Z barking about God knows what is easy. I went to a Latin Mass for five straight years and it was easy.

I am becoming like a child and it is difficult.

[Nihil Obstat]

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Skinzo' timestamp='1305292430' post='2240815']
Well don't count on Latin being in the seminaries. Canon 249 of the 1983 code actually requires that it be taught in the seminaries. . But the American bishops' norms for seminaries only state that it is "strongly recommended". And the Vatican approved that language a while ago.

S.
[/quote]
It's not taught in our seminary. We train most of the priests from western Canada, and many foreign seminarians as well. One of my classmates who is a seminarian from Manitoba told me that his bishop told them that he didn't want them to learn Latin specifically because that would make it impossible to offer the Latin mass. The only person that I know speaks Latin in my class is an older seminarian who has a degree in Latin. Whenever something in Latin comes up in class, everyone looks at him for a translation.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1305300924' post='2240871']
It's not taught in our seminary. We train most of the priests from western Canada, and many foreign seminarians as well. One of my classmates who is a seminarian from Manitoba told me that his bishop told them that he didn't want them to learn Latin specifically because that would make it impossible to offer the Latin mass. The only person that I know speaks Latin in my class is an older seminarian who has a degree in Latin. Whenever something in Latin comes up in class, everyone looks at him for a translation.
[/quote]
that is sad.

but priests can learn the Latin on their own for the EF.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='kafka' timestamp='1305295747' post='2240832']
iawtc.

Why cant we all just read Veritatis Splendor again instead of this focusing on this?
[/quote]
I just re-read it a couple of days ago. It was on my Moral Theology final exam.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[url="http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2011/05/forthcoming-book-release-pope-benedict.html"]Forthcoming Book Release: Pope Benedict XVI and the Liturgy, Anselm Gribbin[/url]

[kafka]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1305300741' post='2240870']

[/quote]


[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1305301109' post='2240874']
I just re-read it a couple of days ago. It was on my Moral Theology final exam.
[/quote]
amesome!!!

[dUSt]

[quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1305295887' post='2240833']
I think if the supply was better well known, the demand would increase a lot.
[/quote]
I think you may have missed my point. Maybe not.

I wasn't taking a position, I was simply pointing out the "reason" why the EF form may not be more widely available. I was explaining that my diocese does have the EF form available, but it is very poorly attended.

The concept of supply and demand is that if the demand is there, the supply will increase.

So, all I'm saying is if you want to have more EF masses available, then make sure the ones that [b]are[/b] available are so overcrowded that they are forced to provide more. I mean, why would a bishop make more EF masses available if only a handful of people attend the one that's already there?

[MIKolbe]

[quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1305306071' post='2240899']
I think you may have missed my point. Maybe not.

I wasn't taking a position, I was simply pointing out the "reason" why the EF form may not be more widely available. I was explaining that my diocese does have the EF form available, but it is very poorly attended.

The concept of supply and demand is that if the demand is there, the supply will increase.

So, all I'm saying is if you want to have more EF masses available, then make sure the ones that [b]are[/b] available are so overcrowded that they are forced to provide more. I mean, why would a bishop make more EF masses available if only a handful of people attend the one that's already there?
[/quote]
I think I may have missed 1/2 your point, of which I take under advisement.

That said, I would counter by saying it might be easier to fill up the pews if the only EF Mass was not 50 miles away from John Q. Parishoner. It might be easier to fill up the pews (and experience an increase in demand) if the supply wasn't so 'hidden' (for lack of a better word). Perhaps John Q. Parishoner will drive 30 miles out of his was to celebrate an EF, but 50 miles just makes it unfeasable for him.

But I see what you are saying, too.....

[dUSt]

[quote name='Brother Adam' timestamp='1305295082' post='2240830']
Yes, most people will always flock towards the easiest road. That does not mean that is what is best for them.
[/quote]
Not necessarily. The confession lines at my parish are usually about a 45 minute wait. Our priests give real penances. We have 8am-10pm adoration every day, which requires a lot of dedicated volunteers. Parking is limited, and 1/2 the people park about 5 blocks away to attend mass.

On the other hand, the parish down the street never has a line for confession. The priest always gives a very easy penance. Not a lot of volunteer commitments. Parking is ample. It's the easy road.

My parish always has at least 30-40 people standing up in mass because of overcrowding. The parish down the street fills up 1/2 the church.

So, people don't [b]always[/b] flock toward the easy road.

[dUSt]

[quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1305306432' post='2240901']
I think I may have missed 1/2 your point, of which I take under advisement.

That said, I would counter by saying it might be easier to fill up the pews if the only EF Mass was not 50 miles away from John Q. Parishoner. It might be easier to fill up the pews (and experience an increase in demand) if the supply wasn't so 'hidden' (for lack of a better word). Perhaps John Q. Parishoner will drive 30 miles out of his was to celebrate an EF, but 50 miles just makes it unfeasable for him.

But I see what you are saying, too.....
[/quote]
Well, the EF mass in question is within about 10 miles of maybe 10 different parishes. Maybe it's slightly less convenient, sure, but we're in Texas. People drive far, and are use to it.

[MIKolbe]

you neglected to mention the [i]Texan variant[/i].

my argument is invalid.