Universal Indult

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1088998' date='Oct 11 2006, 12:40 PM']
Well, I think the veracity of the article is the most important point of the thread. The article isn't about whether the Pope would be favorable to a wider indult, but that he in fact has signed one.

But, whatever, I made my point.

As for the "universal indult", I don't believe it's practical. In "The Ratzinger Report", the Holy Father specifically notes that for a wider indult, the limits have to be clearly defined, so as not to infringe on the reformed order of Mass, which remains legitimate and normative. A "universal" indult doesn't allow for that clear definition, at least not if it's understood as an unlimited concession.

If the Holy Father does somehow grant a wider permission, I don't think it will eliminate all episcopal oversight on the local level, because the Bishop has to protect the right of his people to worship according to the normative rite of their particular Church. If a Priest is offering 1 Mass a week according to the Pauline order, I don't think that will fly; the Pope has continually defended the legitimacy and primacy of the new Missal.

If I had to guess, I think the Holy Father would issue a document that recommends Bishops permit the Tridentine Mass in stronger terms, without imposing anything new.
[/quote]
What about the effect of an indult on the Novus Ordo? Would we see a more faithful application of that rite?

[Groo the Wanderer]

I would like to see the Latin Mass reinstated, but not at the expense of the Mass in the vernacular. They should co-exist, methinks, and let the parishoners decide which to attend.

That said, if the Latin Mass is indeed returned, I would like to see:
1. all the pomp and sacredness returned as well...I miss incense and altar servers (not acolytes) that do not wear tennis shoes *grr*
2. the priest should continue to face the congregation...that is the original setup and was only turned around because of the celebration of Mass in the catacombs. Facing the confregation also more fully signifies the participation of the ordinary folks in the sacrifice that is the Mass.
3. a fix of the 'abuses' in the vernacular Mass, especially a return of the holy and sacred trappings

Edited October 11, 2006 by Groo the Wanderer

[Era Might]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' post='1089000' date='Oct 11 2006, 11:44 AM']What about the effect of an indult on the Novus Ordo? Would we see a more faithful application of that rite?[/quote]
I don't think so, because the problems with the Liturgy are not about the rite, but about a generation of Priests and people who have lost what it means to celebrate the Liturgy. Pope Benedict expressed this nicely in his EWTN interview:

[quote]Generally, I would say it was not well implemented; the liturgical reform, because it was a general idea. Now, liturgy is a thing of the community. The community is representing itself and so with the creativity of the priest or of the other groups they will create their own liturgies. It is, more the presence of their own experiences and ideas than meeting with the Presence of the Lord in the church. And with this creativity and self-presentation of the community is disappearing the essence of liturgy. Because in essence we can go over our own experiences and to receive what is not from our experience, but is a gift of God. [b]And so, I think we have to restore not so much certain ceremonies, but the essential idea of liturgy-- to understand in liturgy, we are not representing ourselves, but we receive the grace of the presence of the Lord with the Church of the heaven and of the earth. And the universality of the liturgy, it seems to me, is essential. Definition of liturgy and restoring this idea would also help to be more obedient to the norms, not as a juridical positivism, but really as sharing, participating what is given to us from the Lord in the Church.[/b][/quote]
The Tridentine Mass should be available for those who prefer to worship according to that Missal, not necessarily to "fix" problems in the Church. I think it's up to the Bishops to educate their Priests about the true character of Liturgy, and clean up any mess in their diocese. Otherwise, the presence of the Tridentine Mass will just drive out voices favorable to reform, leaving the Priest free to introduce anything he wants, because the only remaining parishioners will be those who welcome excessive Liturgical abuse.

Edited October 11, 2006 by Era Might

[Cam42]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' post='1089000' date='Oct 11 2006, 10:44 AM']
What about the effect of an indult on the Novus Ordo? Would we see a more faithful application of that rite?
[/quote]

That depends on the priest. Priests typically don't listen to the faithful very well when it comes to the application of the Liturgy. Most people, if you ask them, want the Mass celebrated according to the Rite, ie. the rubrics. Those that do, tend to have a more faithful Liturgy and those that don't tend to fall into "personalism."

I think that those who celebrate the Mass accoding to the Old Rite will do it because they are asked and those that don't will either defy their parishoners or simply have no interest.

Is that scalding? You bet, but it is truthful. Perhaps we need a little "scalding" of the "personalist mentality." Then perhaps some healing can take place and they can follow today's reading and become more open to the changes which take place. Not everyone needs to be circumcised....now do they? Not everyone needs to be subjected to "personalism."

[Pio Nono]

JMJ
10/11 - Twenty-seventh Wednesday

Cardinal George, in an address here at Mundelein last year, told us straight out that the Holy Father told him to expect a universal indult such as is reported here. It's been no real secret for months now.

And the Holy Father signs things in secret and releases them later all the time - Benedict XVI signed his first encyclical on Christmas Day, but it wasn't released until a month later, on the feast of the Conversion of St. Paul.

[Era Might]

Yes, the Pope signed his first Encyclical on Christmas day, but it wasn't a secret:

[quote]The encyclical, entitled Deus Caritas Est ("God Is Love"), was officially signed by Pope Benedict on Christmas Day. [b]Two days earlier the director of the Vatican press office, Joaquin Navarro-Valls, had told reporters that the document would be released in January.[/b] He did not specify a date, except to say that it would be after the feast of the Epiphany, which was observed in Italy on 6 January.

-[url="http://www.cathnews.com/news/601/28.php"][u]Source[/u][/url]-[/quote]
The Holy See itself let the public know that a document was in the works, and would be released. This is how it usually happens.

The media gets abuzz over a "new document" every couple of months. One month has the Pope anathemetizing Limbo, the next month has him reconciling with the SSPX. It's not based on anything but recycled rumors.

The story may be "no real secret", but if that were the case, why didn't the London Times simply provide something substantial from Cardinal George or Cardinal Zen? This is a classic example of a rumor based on nothing more than second-hand reporting of second-hand reporting. There's not a single quote in the article from anyone who claims to know anything. The only quote is from someone who acknowledges the possibility.

I can't wait to find out what's next. "Pope Set to Baptize Martian Colony!"

By the way, the author of the article, Ruth Gledhill, was on top of the Limbo story last week:

[quote]The Pope will cast aside centuries of Catholic belief later this week by abolishing formally the concept of limbo, in a gesture calculated to help to win the souls of millions of babies in the developing world for Christ. [/quote]
That was October 4th, exactly one week ago. Does today constitute "later this week"? Where is the Pope's formal abolishment of Limbo?

[Fides_et_Ratio]

Comparing this with the Limbo thing isn't exactly the same. The Theological Commission DID suggest that the Pope abolish Limbo formally. Pope Benedict XVI didn't utter one word about his intentions on that matter... it was all media speculation that had NO sources for the Pope making such a pronouncement at this time (all were quotes from him from way before his election).

The universal indult (though rumored for quite some time), is actually being focused on more and more by those in Rome. I've heard from more than a few priests who are there that Liturgy is a serious concern of the Holy Father (he's polishing up a document on Liturgy as we speak that had begun under JPII... the universal indult could very well be included in that) and rumors about SSPX reconciliation very much relate to the universal indult.... many SSPXers would be more willing to come back to the Church if they didn't view the Tridentine Mass as being "oppressed out of existence". And while, yes, many people cite quotations from his recent books, this time many priests in Rome are abuzz with the news of an indult.


Aside from all that... in my understanding, wouldn't the indult be granted to the Bishops? And encourage them to encourage and allow more celebrations of the Tridentine Mass when asked by priests?

[Era Might]

That's fine if people are "abuzz", but the responsibility of a journalist is to give facts. Like I said, if this is such an "open secret", how hard is it to get someone to say something about it? If Cardinal Zen and Cardinal George are suppodedly going around telling people about a "secret" document, why not give them a call and get a comment?

If the article was about "buzz", it would be fine. But it said flatout that the Pope signed a new document.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

Even if it was signed, it still has to be released. Not all documents are signed and released simultaneously. If it was signed, it will be released soon.

If the signing was misinformation, then we may have to wait.

I was honestly expecting the indult to come with the document on the Liturgy that I mentioned before.

[Era Might]

The reason why this is so important is because what the media reports affects public perception. When the media reported that the Pope was attacking Islam, many people cheered, and then when he clarified what he was REALLY saying, he was accused of backtracking and appeasing.

If there is no "universal indult", the commentary will start that he backtracked and doesn't want to offend people, blah blah blah, when there was nothing in the works in the first place.

It's not so much a matter of "misinformation", but NO information. NOBODY is quoted, not Cardinal Zen, not the Priest from London, not Cardinal George, nobody. It's basically a report on what someone else is reporting, and apparantly that person who originally reported it doesn't provide any real quotes either, or else they would probably be quoted by the London Times.

Edited October 11, 2006 by Era Might

[Ash Wednesday]

I hope that something of this sort will eventually happen.

I loff zee pabst!

[Veritas]

[quote name='Pio Nono' post='1089068' date='Oct 11 2006, 10:43 AM']
JMJ
10/11 - Twenty-seventh Wednesday

Cardinal George, in an address here at Mundelein last year, told us straight out that the Holy Father told him to expect a universal indult such as is reported here. It's been no real secret for months now.

[/quote]

+

That's pretty rockin' PN. I miss all the inside stories you guys always had/have! I just ate a pizza with blood-orange italian soda from Italy (you can buy it from Target now). Ah....Roma. Speaking of which, Mama B told me you'll be there for the canonizations, and having dinner with her this weekend! Blessings on your travels! Pray for us!

[Theologian in Training]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1089187' date='Oct 11 2006, 03:52 PM']
The reason why this is so important is because what the media reports affects public perception. When the media reported that the Pope was attacking Islam, many people cheered, and then when he clarified what he was REALLY saying, he was accused of backtracking and appeasing.

If there is no "universal indult", the commentary will start that he backtracked and doesn't want to offend people, blah blah blah, when there was nothing in the works in the first place.

It's not so much a matter of "misinformation", but NO information. NOBODY is quoted, not Cardinal Zen, not the Priest from London, not Cardinal George, nobody. It's basically a report on what someone else is reporting, and apparantly that person who originally reported it doesn't provide any real quotes either, or else they would probably be quoted by the London Times.
[/quote]

I agree, however, I searched more about this and it is also on the "front page" of [url="http://www.catholicnews.com/"]http://www.catholicnews.com/[/url] and things don't usually make it to that unless they have some weight. All I know is it will take me a very long time to learn Latin, I know barely any.

God Bless

[Akalyte]

I hope it happens. I'm personally tired of all the liturgies invented by the liberals. Careless, ugly, socialistic parishes. ughh. I'm real tired of seeing parishes designed to glorify "the band".

Lack of reverance, treating the eucharist like cookies and chips. hardly anyone bowing or kneeling, tabernacle no where to be found, seperate chapels for the tabernacle with stools without kneelers. The band practicing the guitars, drums and flutes. No silence, boring same ol' confusing homilies.

Hopefully these things can be prevented or "cut down", If a universal indult is granted. I go to Church to escape the world. I dont want to go to church for a social gathering and band. This is what ive experienced in many parishes. The only masses ive seen done right are the ones on ewtn and in the vatican, and luckily i found a parish ran by the Oratori of Saint Phillip Neri which happens to say the new mass correctly.

But it's just sad so many abuses and misenterpretations have been made since the new mass was put into action.

[Niccolò]

[url="http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0605776.htm"]http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0605776.htm[/url]

[quote]Canadian Archbishop James Weisgerber of Winnipeg, Manitoba, told Catholic News Service Oct. 10 that Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, head of the Congregation for Clergy, had spoken briefly to Canadian bishops about the expected step.

"It sounded to me like it was a sort of concession somebody has made," the archbishop said.

Archbishop Weisgerber said the new indult was apparently motivated by a desire to bring comfort to older people who may miss the old rite. But in his archdiocese, he said, the few people asking for it are "young people who never experienced it."[/quote]

Hmm...very interesting...so true too, I'd say that the majority of the congregants at the TLM I attend here in San Diego weren't around before Vatican II.

I'll believe it when I see it, but this is the most buzz I've seen about the Universal Indult, so it gives me reason to hope!

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='Niccolò' post='1089353' date='Oct 11 2006, 05:58 PM']
[url="http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0605776.htm"]http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0605776.htm[/url]
Hmm...very interesting...so true too, I'd say that the majority of the congregants at the TLM I attend here in San Diego weren't around before Vatican II.

I'll believe it when I see it, but this is the most buzz I've seen about the Universal Indult, so it gives me reason to hope!
[/quote]
well, I think that the reason young people like the more traditional stuff is that we've seen the lack of substance to these new ways. When our own priests don't implement VII properly, of course kids'll gravitate towards the TLM. It's got meat. But I think a well done N.O. (which I've never seen) would probably be really engaging and substantive.

[Era Might]

Yah, I'm not sure why some people seem to think the indult was originally for old people, and not for everyone. This was clearly not the intention of Pope John Paul II. Why else was the FSSP created if not to facilitate the future preservation of the Tridentine Sacraments?

If the Holy Father does issue a document, I'm sure he'll touch on that. His defense of the Tridentine Missal was always motivated by respect for the Missal itself, and not for nostalgia. He has pointed out in the past that Liturgical pluralism has precedent in the west.

[son_of_angels]

Some of you have written about the need for bishops to teach the faithful more about the liturgy in order to effect positive change. This is ridiculous. Every time an abuse occurs, or a disciplinary change, or whatever the call is always for "catechesis." What this means for the faithful is that no action is really going to be taken, or that some document is going to produced, in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council, which only a theologian could interpret in an orthodox manner, but which also stirs up controversy and rumours amongst the enemies of the Church. "Catechesis," even if it were properly instituted, is generally useless for accomplishing change at all anyway. Rather, catechesis only is effective when a group of people is already wanting/pursuing change, as in RCIA, etc. Otherwise, it is usually outside the scope of most ordinary Catholics' range of time or talent.

If positive changes are going to occur IMO, it must be in the form of concrete action: replacement of bishops, alterations to Canon Law, creation of new disciplines, or, at best, setting up programs for the synods and conferences to enforce on their members. It must be concrete. It must be real. The "catechesis" solution is one which only ever existed in the idealistic notions of the Second Vatican Council Fathers, and one which is really just a way of ordaining theologians to supremacy. It is ridiculous.

If, on the other hand, the strictures of the Mass, including a return to Latin, are observed and enforced, there is little reason why the ideological worms eating at our hierarchical core should not be removed. It worked in Trent, but, just like a toggle switch, was turned back off by the post-Conciliar frenzy, returning us to the worst forms of pettiness and political posturing.

[Era Might]

Catechesis is the most important element in Liturgical reform. The point is not simply to get Priests and people to obey the norms ("juridical positivism" as Pope Benedict called it), but to convert hearts so that they see that Liturgy is "participating [in] what is given to us from the Lord in the Church."

The norms are clear on the universal level, but it has to change on a local level. The Pope issuing decree after decree is not going to change hearts. He has to rely on his Bishops and Priests bring what the Church teaches and make it real.

Liturgy in the west began to deteriorate long before the Council. Why? Because Priest and people had lost the sense of what Liturgy is. They needed to be renewed and catechized, so that Mass was no longer a rote ritual, but a living act of worship. In came the Second Vatican Council.

The problem before the Council and the problem after the Council are cases of opposite extremes. Whereas the Liturgy was once too rigid and celebrated in a spirit of slavish obedience and duty, now it is subjective and has no foundation or limits.

As the Holy Father has reminded us, we need to get back to basics, and start living and teaching an authentic Liturgical praxis.

It's not a question of Latin or how many times the sign of the cross is made during Mass, but taking the Liturgy and entering into it with a spirit of communion with the universal Church, and respecting its norms because we are a communion, and not a federation of individualistic narcissists.

Edited October 11, 2006 by Era Might

[Maria]

Catechesis does not just involve creating obscure documents. When faith education basically stopped happening in the public schools here, our diocese started implementing a faith education program, and adopted the motto 'Proposing Jesus Christ Today'. Every year we have a Faith Enrichment Conference, etc. I do agree that our diocese could use some work on the liturgy, but otherwise, we seem solid (well, aside from Fr. John Walsh... Cardinal Turcotte is a lot bigger on teaching than on disciplining).