MarkB,

Thank you for posting to this article.

Fr. Zuhsldorf is certainly welcome to his opinion. I personally found the reasons he gave unconvincing.

Remember, too, that Fr. Zuhlsdorf has never been a Pastor; and he probably never will be (he recently entered his sixtieth year). He doesn't seem to understand the importance of Dubia such as the one posted by Andris Amolins (above) for those of us who work “in the trenches.” My understanding is that Fr. Zuhlsdorf is incardinated in an Italian Diocese in which he has never been stationed—apologies if I have missed something here. Perhaps I should say that I am unaware of him serving officially in the Diocese in which he's incardinated.

For myself, I think the Dubia was quite welcome and important; and I think it's very cool that Ecclesia Dei is responding to stuff like this.

Fr. Z formerly served on the staff of PCED, so it's fair to say he is in a position to comment knowledgeably about its work and, more broadly, about what may happen when people submit questions on liturgical matters to Roman offices.

I really have to wonder about the issues submitted; they can't all have arisen in the questioner's parish.

He could have obtained answers to some of them by reading Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae more attentively; and he could have answered some by consulting people who have followed the music-related issues surrounding the EF.

I think Fr. Z is right on the money. Given who's in charge, and their (at the very least perceived) antipathy toward anything "traditional," you had better be darn sure you really need that dubium answered right now before you ask it. You might not like the answer you get, and it will be difficult to ever go back once the question has been answered.

The CCW commentary states that the instructions for chanting as published in the Graduale 1908 are still in force. Does there exist a solid i.e. dependable English translation of those Latin instructions?

I believe it's identical to the "Preface to the Vatican Edition" found at the front of the Liber. The PCED response to dubium no. 24 seems to affirm that "different methods" are acceptable. 25 clarifies that the text of the chant must conform to the official liturgical books.

First of all, credit where credit is due. The links to the dubia and answers were first posted on https://www.leforumcatholique.org/message.php?num=857491.

The question is whether the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei has the power to overturn that

Does not seem to me that PCED has overturned that. It just says, as does De musica sacra, that Solesmes signs are permitted. After 1908, most books were printed by Solesmes and, as it seems, accepted by Church authorities. This would imply that they fulfill the requirement about "force and meaning of the notes". I am not so sure about M. Peres. But now, some sing also in 'semiologically informed', some - in 'mensural' way, some use 'Medicean' editions. In addition, we have newly restituted melodies in the Graduale novum. PCED wisely did not wish to enter the fray.

As to the question whether PCED is acting ultra vires, compared with the permissions of earlier forms of Holy Week, etc., the freedoms in musicological questions seem a small thing.

Remember, too, that Fr. Zuhlsdorf has never been a Pastor; and he probably never will be

Also, although you are technically right that he's not a pastor, to say he's not in the trenches is quite mischaracterization of what he does day-to-day.

Fr. Z formerly served on the staff of PCED, so it's fair to say he is in a position to comment knowledgeably about its work

Let me be clear: I don't deny he worked for Ecclesia Dei and probably knows a ton about what went on there during the 1990s (although my understanding is he was never an overseer in that Pontifical Commission).

And I made clear he is welcome to his opinion.

My only point was that one who has served as a Pastor has a completely different point of view, which is also worthy of consideration.

I am glad Andris Amolins posted this stuff—I think it has value.

Neither the clergy can ask dubia (in English? seriously?), nor the commission answer them. Not a single instance of "Serventur decreta"! (i.e. "we don't want to add anything, please go ask some rubricist for interpretation of the existing norms")

@chonak I did, but this is much more verbose and "educational" than the traditional response.

Most interesting to me was the response having to do with the "third Confiteor," which PCED finds "licit" but ONLY in those places where it is already a practice.

Of course, but Fr Z's personal relationship is primarily with Cdl Arinze from his years in Rome.

That doesn't make any sense as a reason for his incardination there, because when he was ordained there in 1991, the titular was Sebastiano Cardinal Baggio and from 1993-2005 the titular was Cardinal Ratzinger.

Madison? I don't think so.

Jahaza, neither of us know the back-story on Villetri-Segni--but I'd look for a connection between that Diocese and Mgr. Schuler (RIP) of St Paul, MN. The good Monsignor was Z's "sponsor", so to speak.