Art 1. The Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the lex orandi (rule of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite. The Roman Missal promulgated by Saint Pius V and revised by Blessed John XXIII is nonetheless to be considered an extraordinary expression of the same lex orandi of the Church and duly honoured for its venerable and ancient usage. These two expressions of the Church’s lex orandi will in no way lead to a division in the Church’s lex credendi (rule of faith); for they are two usages of the one Roman rite.
Art. 2. In Masses celebrated without a congregation, any Catholic priest of the Latin rite, whether secular or regular, may use either the Roman Missal published in 1962 by Blessed Pope John XXIII or the Roman Missal promulgated in 1970 by Pope Paul VI, and may do so on any day, with the exception of the Easter Triduum. For such a celebration with either Missal, the priest needs no permission from the Apostolic See or from his own Ordinary.
Here we see Benedict taking it upon himself to declare, against tradition and without precedent, that the Roman Rite has two liturgical forms, a situation that has never existed before. The presumptuousness exhibited by him in attempting to predict a future of no division in the Church betrays the mind of a man who thinks he knows everything.
This authoritarian move by Benedict to undermine bishops in order to promote expanded use of his favored form of the liturgy is an exercise of raw, dictatorial, autocratic power, utterly lacking in collegiality.
Code of Canon Law
Chapter V: DISPENSATIONS
Canon 85 A dispensation, that is, the relaxation of a merely ecclesiastical law in a particular case, can be granted, within the limits of their competence, by those who have executive power, and by those who either explicitly or implicitly have the power of dispensing, whether by virtue of the law itself or by lawful delegation.
“And now, therefore, I say to you: Refrain from these men and let them alone. For if this council or this work be of men, it will come to nought:
But if it be of God, you cannot overthrow it, lest perhaps you be found even to fight against God. And they consented to him.”
Act 5:38-39
After 2-3 months, bishops should have had enough time to weigh and decide how to implement TC in their dioceses. 1-3 months from now will be a more decisive and informative period, IMO.
tomjaw writes:
The Sarum Use is a modified form of the Roman Rite, and is still authorised for use today.
Can you explain this? Is Sarum used anywhere? Didn't the English bishops give it up when the hierarchy was re-established?
Vespers is quite difficult from a mass, or any other celebration of the sacraments for that matter.
This idea of there has to be "One Rite" - this is the refrain of the whiny Italians - this is a total non sequitir. Doesen't eveyone know that there has been for centuries MANY diverse liturgies of the Catholic liturgy?
What appears to be shaking out is that most bishops in the U.S. are granting initial, provisional status-quo permission, which means hardly anything is changing right now.
I've not even once seen this conveyed as such... even though I follow mostly Traditionally-minded Catholic pages.BISHOPS JOIN RESISTANCE, REJECT FRANCIS
"Beautifying" the MoPVI would be exactly the opposite of what they want to do.
I think there should be one form only, the newer one, and let’s get cracking on making it as beautiful as it can be and is in many places.
Trying to improve matters is noble, but restricting the Roman Church to one liturgical form is not a Catholic ideal.
Pope Francis has seldom addressed any other group this harshly. To others such as unbelievers, dissenters and wayward politicians there is to be mercy, understanding and tolerance. He speaks of “going to the margins” and of compassion for the poor and morally lost. But to those attached to the Latin Mass comes this strong rebuke, with almost no room to maneuver in the Church they love. It is very shocking and saddening to me as a pastor of souls that such vitriol be directed at the flock I have long cared for.
What is lacking is a piercing pastoral analysis of what has brought us to this point in the first place. Why is it that so many Catholics of deep faith have grown weary of the “business as usual” Catholicism of our parishes and have felt the need to flee to an older iteration of the faith, in both liturgy and in theology [...]? [...]
Ours is a Church that has failed to ask the right questions and has therefore failed to flip the script of our culture’s lies and deceptions. We asked for bread. We got stones. And thus did some in the sheepfold seek bread elsewhere in the alternative Catholic communities made possible by Summorum Pontificum. And if some have fled to such havens with a goodly amount of undifferentiated bitterness it should be understood not as the bitterness of hatred, but rather as the bitterness of the desperate. [...]
What all of this points to is that the debates and controversies that we see now all around us are not going to go away until we start taking seriously the deep spiritual crisis that is at the core of every single one of them. And we are not going to get anywhere so long as we persist in seeking bureaucratic or “structural” solutions to what are at root deeply spiritual problems. [...]
There is only one path forward and it is my constant refrain: Vatican II’s universal call to holiness and the christocentric theological anthropology that animates it. [...]
“business as usual” Christianity is dead and that only a radical transformation of the Church into a cruciform, Christological icon of the descent into Hell will do.
To participate in the discussions on Catholic church music, sign in or register as a forum member, The forum is a project of the Church Music Association of America.