Jeffrey Miller

From Fr. Neuhaus

One of the more deft moves in Benedict’s apostolic letter motu proprio, titled “Summorum Pontificum,” is in referring to the 1962 form of the Roman Rite as the Mass of Blessed John XXIII. It is not the Tridentine Mass or the Mass of Pius V but the Mass of John XXIII. It is the form of the Mass that was celebrated daily at the Second Vatican Council.

Benedict notes that, over the many centuries of the Roman Rite, popes have from time to time made modest changes. Pius V did so in 1570, John XXIII did so in 1962, and Paul VI did so in 1970, the last producing what is called the Novus Ordo. Benedict notes that John Paul II also made small but important emendations regarding references to the Jews in the Good Friday Liturgy. (More on that below.)

By associating the Latin Mass that is now universally approved with John XXIII, Benedict steals a card from the deck of liberals and progressives, for whom John XXIII is always “good Pope John,” in contrast to his successors. But this is much more than a deft rhetorical move. “Summorum Pontificum” is a thoroughly liberal document in substance and spirit, remembering that liberal means, as once was more commonly understood, generosity of spirit.

One of my readers queried the other day if it wasn’t in fact the 1962 missal that was used throughout the proceedings of the Council, and the answer is obviously yes. The Pope calling it the Mass of John XXIII was referring to the authorized missal and not I think making a "deft move." Though I do think it can be used rather creatively to call out opponents as being against the form of Mass approved by Pope John XXIII who called the council in the first place and the Mass used throughout Vatican II? Even that they are trying to roll back Vatican II. It is always ironically funny to hear liturgical progressives who decry organ music and Gregorian Chant (things actually encouraged by Vatican II) to hear them talk about roll back of Vatican II. Hey I would love to roll back to Vatican II and have Masses celebrated as intended.

Gerald has some wonderful pictures up of Fr. Fessio celebrating the new Mass. Many might think that how Fr. Fessio does celebrate the new Mass is in opposition to liturgical rules when the opposite it the fact.

Baronius Press, the London based Catholic book publisher, warmly welcomed the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum issued on Saturday 7th July by Pope Benedict XVI. As the only publisher in the world of a Church approved 1962 Latin Missal1, they already sell thousands of Traditional Latin Missals each year. They are expecting celebrations of the rite of 1962 to increase as a result of the Moto Pproprio and are expecting sales to increase significantly.

“Everyone at Baronius Press is exceedingly pleased that the Holy Father has issued this decree, which Catholics who are attached to the Traditional latin Mass have been keenly anticipating for several months now” commented Baronius Press’s Editor John Newton.

“A general misconception is that the Traditional latin Mass is only attended by the older generation. In fact, most of our sales of the 1962 Missal are over the internet, to the generation born after the Vatican Council. With this announcement today, we feel that the increasing popularity of the Traditional latin Mass has been given a marked boost.”

To commemorate Summorum Pontificum Baronius Press, will publish a special “Motu Proprio” edition of their 1962 Missal on 14th September, the day the Motu Proprio will be implemented.

“Pope Benedict wisely speaks of the Missal of 1962 and that of 1970 as being two aspects of one and the same rite. The Missal issued by John XXIII at the beginning of the Council had already been influenced by the scholarship of the orthodox Liturgical Movement and actually anticipates many of the reforms called for by the Second Vatican Council. There are points of contact between the two forms, and hopefully this Motu Proprio will also encourage sacred and beautiful celebrations of the Missal of 1970 in line with the Council’s vision, and using Gregorian chant which was prescribed by the Fathers of Vatican II.”

Copies can be pre-ordered at baroniuspress.com and will be shipped as soon as printing has been completed (Sept/Oct 2007).

Jimmy Akin goes through Summorum Pontificum with lots of commentary as to what the provisions mean and some of the points where there is still some ambiguities.

Reuters does a "FACTBOX-Use of Latin in the Roman Catholic Church" and as a reference uses the schismatic Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen.

When you see a headline like "St. Charles Borromeo serves fresh, homemade Eucharist every week" you have got to laugh since it sounds like a Madison Avenue ad campaign pitch. For those who have a skeptical mind like mine you will be glad to know that the recipe they use will result in valid matter for the Eucharist.

LIVERMORE — "Give us this day our daily bread" may be what Catholics pray at Mass before receiving the Eucharist, but for many churches, the prayer should go more like this: "Give us this day our daily machine-manufactured Holy Communion wafer."

However, the bread baking ministry at St. Charles Borromeo Church in Livermore is sticking to the original.

If done right there is of course nothing wrong with this practice of involving a large part of the parish in producing Communion hosts. The only caveat is that I would think homemade bread would be much more susceptible to crumbs and that even more special care would be required in distributing it. This is problematic considering that it is rather rare to see the use of Patens. You might have a dozen Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, but no one to help ensure that the Eucharist is not dropped.

Thinking about this I do wish that every parish used patens. My own parish does and I think that it emphasizes the reality of the Eucharist and its sacredness. To take such care accentuates the truth that the every particle of the Eucharist fully contains the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus. When I see the paten holder raise the paten up closer to my chin as as receive the Eucharist on the tongue it does once again remind me of the sacredness of the Eucharist. I do find it rather odd that there has been so much attention paid to involving members of the parish during the Mass, yet something so obvious such as having people on hand to hold a paten is overlooked. Or maybe they are just paten pending.

Here are just some of the headlines.

• ADL Calls Vatican Prayer for Conversion of Jews ‘A Theological Setback’ and ‘A Body Blow to Catholic-Jewish Relations’
• Church split feared as Pope backs return of ‘anti-Semitic’ Latin Mass
• Latin Mass May Damage Catholic-Jewish Relations
• Will pope reintroduce anti-Semitic mass?
• Pope to revive ‘anti-Semitic’ Mass
• Concerns rise about anti-Semitic mass

Via Fr. Jay Toborowsky is this Zenit Story (emphasis added).

Several media reports erroneously contend that the letter could in effect
reinstate a prayer offensive to Jews from the Good Friday liturgy of the Tridentine Mass, which dates back to 1570. The prayer stated: "Oremus et pro perfidies Judaeis" (Let us pray for the perfidious Jews).

On the first Good Friday after his election to the papacy in 1959, Pope John XXIII eliminated the adjective "perfidious" from the prayer. Since then the expression "Let us pray for the Jews" has been used. That same year, he also eliminated from the rite of baptism the phrase used for Jewish catechumens:
"Horresce Jusaicam perfidiam, respue Hebraicam superstitionem" (Disavow Jewish unbelieving, deny Hebrew superstition). Also eliminated were similar formulas for those converting from idolatry, Islam or a heretical sect.

The 1962 missal was promulgated with an apostolic letter issued "motu proprio" by John XXIII "Rubricarum Instructum."

The missal does not make reference to "perfidious Jews." On Good Friday in 1963, John XXIII underlined the importance of this decision when the old formulation of the prayer for the Jews was read. The Pope interrupted the liturgy and asked that that the liturgical invocations begin again from the beginning, following the new text.

The Roman Missal adopted by Pope Paul VI in 1969, and put into effect in 1970, reformulated the prayer. It reads: "Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant."Almighty and eternal God, long ago you gave your promise to Abraham and his posterity. Listen to your Church as we pray that the people you first made your own may arrive at the fullness of redemption."

For the media once again it is much ado about nothing. Especially since the 1962 missal is not to be used during the Easter Triduum anyway.

As Fr. Z. notes about this:

4. The issue the Triduum and this reasonable restriction has nothing to do with the prayer about the Jews on Good Friday. This is simply a matter of what the Church’s logical practice is based on the sacred nature of those Triduum liturgies. The Jews were not part of the equation. Remember also that the 1962 Missale Romanum is used for the Triduum in those places where it will be permitted to use the older form at that time. The 1962 edition and not some earlier edition before the changes to those Good Friday petitions.

With the final arrival of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum on the "Roman liturgy prior to the reform of 1970" I had a little laugh and love the irony of it so far being only available in Latin. Though the explanatory letter is available in multiple languages including English.

I immediately went to Fr. Z site and of course he has a great summary of what Summorum Pontificum does and will later be poting a critique of the English translation of the explanatory letter since he says it softens some of what the Latin text says.

The USCCB does have a translation up in PDF form.

Having pondered at length the pressing requests of these faithful to our Predecessor John Paul II, having also
heard the Fathers of the Consistory of Cardinals held on 23 March 2006, having pondered all things, invoked the
Holy Spirit and placed our confidence in the help of God, by this present Apostolic Letter we DECREE the
following.

Art. 1. The Roman Missal promulgated by Paul VI is to be regarded as the ordinary expression of the law
of prayer (lex orandi) of the Catholic Church of Latin Rite, while the Roman Missal promulgated by St
Pius V and published again by Blessed John XXIII as the extraordinary expression of the law of prayer
(lex orandi) and on account of its venerable and ancient use let it enjoy due honor. These two
expressions of the law of prayer (lex orandi) of the Church in no way lead to a division in the law of
prayer (lex orandi) of the Church, for they are two uses of the one Roman Rite.

It will be nice when we have an accurate translation since as Phil Lawyer points out it should be "Law of belief" not "Law of Prayer." No doubt this isn’t the only error.

Contrary to some rumors in the last couple of days this permission does not expire in three years, but instead that the Holy See will then be requesting an account of their experiences.

One thing that strikes me after reading Summorum Pontificum and the cover letter and of having read the letter he wrote to the people of China last weak that the Holy Father is certainly a wise pastor. One of the things people so often hit him with was his mainly academic experience and lacking experience in parish life or his short time as the Bishop of Munich. For one I always thought it silly to say that someone who was prefect of the CDF for a considerable amount of time would lack pastoral experience. The CDF is quite pastoral and certainly doesn’t hang every dissident theologian by their thumbs for some theological nonsense, but spends considerable time to protect both the Church and the rights of the individual. Everything the Pope has written since his first encyclical onward has shown his pastoral sensitivities and he restores the true meaning of pastoral. Unfortunately a bishop saying he is doing something for pastoral reasons is usually a weasel word for saying he is going to do nothing about it. Pope Benedict XVI though is a true pastor in that he is protecting his flock and this means to actively protect them and to lead the Church.

The implementation of Summorum Pontificum is set for Sep 14th the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross.

I can say that I was quite glad to finally take down my Motu Proprio Random Date Generator. The constant drumbeat of dates that the document was to be issued on has made many quite skeptical even as today approached. Since my parish has the both the Indult Mass and the new Mass celebrated prayerfully I have been mainly awaiting the arrival as the Motu Proprio for the good of the Church. What I am really waiting for is the "reform of the reform." We will be seeing much better translations of the Mass within the next year or two and I think that will go far in retrieving some of the dignity of the new Mass. Having a increased celebration of the Roman Missal published by Pope Blessed John XXIII I think will help to lead in this reform. Though so many issues that people have with the Roman Missal promulgated
by Pope Paul VI are side issues not mandated and are in fact largely alien to it. For example not praying the Mass Ad Orientum was never abolished and priest such as Fr. Fessio celebrate the new Mass that way and this requires no permission.

It is quite obvious the Holy Father will not be taking in sharp turns on the new Mass. The Barque of Peter is quite large and making sharp turns is bound to unsettle things and not always for the better. Many tried this exact navigational turn in the aftermath (not the result) of Vatican II to the detriment of the Church. As the Holy Father says in the cover letter.

This occurred above all because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the
new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently
led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear. I am speaking from experience, since I too lived
through that period with all its hopes and its confusion. And I have seen how arbitrary deformations of the liturgy
caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the Church.

Today is a day to rejoice and to give thanks. Once again we should look at Fr. Z’s 5 Rules of Engagement for after the Motu Proprio is released. In addition I think Fr. Powell, OP has some wise advice.

6) Do not expect that every priest in the Church is ready, willing, and able to celebrate the TLM. Most of us have had no training in the mechanics of the TLM. No training in the theology of the TLM. No training in the spirituality of the TLM. In fact, most of us know pretty much nothing about the TLM. We will need time. AND, quite frankly, we will need $$$ to get trained, so if you want the TLM celebrated, get ready to help finance the summer’s worth of work it will take to get us post-VC2 priests up to snuff.

7) Do not assume that b/c a priest says no to celebrating the TLM that he is a heretic or that he is opposed to the TLM or that he is simply holding out on you. I’ve already heard folks gearing up to use the M.P. as a "test" of orthodoxy or loyalty, e.g. "We’ll see if Fr. X will celebrate the TLM like the pope says to." This sentiment is exactly what the "spirit of Vatican Two" liturgical professionals are predicting, by the way.

Fr. Powell also has a humorous and unfortunately probably prophetic take on The Six Stages of Dissenting from the M.P.

Update: Fr. Z has a translation of a statement by papal spokesman, Fr. Federico Lombardi which coincides nicely with my hope.

In any case, the Pope wishes that the coexistence of the two forms of the rite will bring both of them not into opposition or exclusion of each other, but that each will mutually enrich the other, on the one hand with a greater depth concerning the sacred nature of the celebration, and on the other with a greater variety and modes of expression of (the rite’s) elements.

Blog by the Sea also has a nice summary.

Update: The Vatican Information Service has some non-officail English translations.

Summorum Pontificum

Explantory Letter on Summorum Pontificum