It happened: Traditionis custodes (TLM crackdown) (Note: discussion is on hiatus.)
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,448
    I wonder what the relative attendance is at churches which schedule similar numbers of 1962 and Latin NO Masses, such as the London Oratory (Brompton).
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,764
    @a_f_hawkins
    The London Oratory would not be a good choice as you will be comparing a TLM low Mass against a Latin Sung Mass with world class choir. The big question we need to ask is are their Sung Latin N.O. Masses following the GIRM? or are they a hybrid of the two forms.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,448
    On a Sunday yes, but not on a weekday -
    7.00am, 8.00am (Latin, 1962 Missal), 12.30pm, 6.00pm (Latin)
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • Don9of11Don9of11
    Posts: 699
    The big question we need to ask is are their Sung Latin N.O. Masses following the GIRM? or are they a hybrid of the two forms.


    The weekday and Sunday masses on EWTN are the closest I've been able to find for NO Latin like what I remember when I was growing up and my time singing in the choir. Last nights Friday 7-30-2021 evening mass was very beautiful. I didn't see a video of the whole mass online just the readings and homily.
  • CatherineS
    Posts: 690
    @Chrism has a good point, and one I've struggled with myself. I don't go to my neighborhood parish. I find it so incomprehensible and strange. I don't feel at home. But I've often thought there would be something very sanctifying in simply going there. The part of me that spends time evaluating liturgy as if I'm choosing a restaurant in New York is (to my mind) not Christian. Part of me desperately wants to just be Christian, and shake off the partisan politics and identity politics that are even straining friendships. The fruit of this in my own life needs to be a key. Am I growing in faith,hope and charity? Do I have access to a reliably Catholic confessor? Do I have (or need?) reliable spiritual frienships? Are those friendships bearing holy fruit (and not just comrades with whom to gripe about what's wrong with the Church)?
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,448
    @CatherineS - I recall a musician writing that he had been annoyed at a concert by someone behind him unwrapping sweets(candies US) and remonstrated with him between items. He received the reply "If you were listening to the music, you would not have noticed". He had to admit to himself that that was true.
    As a PIP at Mass I need to focus on what we are doing, not how we are doing it. For sure, that is easier if the liturgy is done well, but Screwtape can distract me by pointing out how well done it is. (Compare Augustine on music)
    Thanked by 3Elmar CHGiffen Chrism
  • Interesting legal analysis of Traditionis custodes by Cathy Caridi, an American canon lawyer who practices law and teaches in Rome.
    The Enormous Loophole in Traditionis Custodes (7/29/21)

    Caridi's analysis depends on the application of canon 18: Laws which establish a penalty, restrict the free exercise of rights, or contain an exception from the law are subject to strict interpretation. Candi proceeds to discuss various matters, including the problematic use of the phrase, "groups that celebrate according to the Missal antecedent to the reform of 1970" [emphasis added]. Since this Missal would be the Missal of 1965 promulgated by Paul VI, It would seem that TC doesn't apply to most TLM groups today.
    At this point, the scoffing will invariably begin. "Come on, you know that's not what Pope Francis meant!" Maybe it's not. But we can't know with compete certainty "what he meant"; we can only know with complete certainty what he actually said. And as canon 18 tells us, we cannot extrapolate, we cannot make assumptions, we cannot broaden the wording of a document like [Traditionis custodes], which limits rights. It would not only be presumptuous to do that; it would also be illegal.
    There are a number of other problems in TC. For example, the bishop of the diocese in which until now there does not exist one or more groups is apparently is free to authorize new groups willy-nilly and set them up in parochial churches without consulting anyone. Priests that want to celebrate the TLM need to seek permission, but what if it's the bishop that wants them to celebrate it? What is the bishop asks all of his priests to celebrate it? In this case it seems consultation with the Vatican isn't required.

    Caridi ends with this evaluation of the drafters of the document:
    It is simply inconceivable that this document, which affects so many Catholics around the world, was drafted and then reviewed/edited by genuine experts in church history and liturgy. On the contrary, [Traditionis custodes] gives the distinct impression that it was composed by only a single individual who (to be perfectly frank) didn't know what he was writing about, and didn't bother even to check the internet to make sure he got the historical facts straight - and then failed to seek the comments/input of officials in the appropriate Vatican offices (in this case the Congregation for Divine Worship, as well as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, particularly its section comprising the former Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei). In short, it looks to be the work of some writing in a hurry, someone who isn't accustomed to writing with precision. We can only wonder what the history of this document really is.
    Can anyone exclude the possibility that this reflects the work of the Holy Spirit protecting Holy Mother Church?
  • I have heard that the Mass according to the Sarum Use / Rite has never been under any restrictions and thus could be used when the TLM is prohibited. True?
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,448
    the Missal antecedent to the reform of 1970
    Wouldn't that be the editio typica of 1962 modified by the new rubrics laid down by Inter oecumenici and published as an editio typica in 1965, and further modified by Tres abhinc annos in 1967?
    AFAIK that Mass has never been celebrated since the 1984 promulgation of Quattuor abhinc annos.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,764
    @Ken
    I have a letter, yes we can use the Sarum, but we should ask the Ordinary for permission. Of course any layman can use any Divine Office, anytime. As the Sarum is not a strictly geographical Use it could be used anywhere.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Tom,

    How is the Sarum Rite not geographical?
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,228
    @Arthur: The letter is SO sloppily written that one wonders who shoved it under Francis' nose for signature (see, e.g., "Radar" in M.A.S.H.) It appears to be unenforceable as written and likely the same 'as received.' Perhaps it was the Holy Spirit!
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • OraLabora
    Posts: 218
    The letter is SO sloppily written that one wonders who shoved it under Francis' nose for signature (see, e.g., "Radar" in M.A.S.H.) It appears to be unenforceable as written and likely the same 'as received.' Perhaps it was the Holy Spirit!


    Was it poorly written, or just poorly translated? I assume it was written in Italian; my Italian is nowhere near good enough to evaluate if the English is an accurate translation or not, nor evaluate if it was well-written in Italian to begin with.

    Ora
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,198
    Ora, see the commentary Arthur discusses above, for a canon lawyer's explanation of what the document says and doesn't say.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,764
    @Chris
    How is the Sarum Rite not geographical?

    While the Sarum Use is the use of Sarum (Now Diocese of Salisbury) it long grew beyond the diocese, and eventually supplanted most of the other English Uses, Hereford, York etc. It was also used outside England in Wales, parts of Ireland, and appears to have been used in parts of Normandy and northern France. Why should it not be used in the British Dominions and British Commonwealth as well?
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,059
    Not if it has not been in a continuous custom of Roman Catholic use in those pink-bits places on that map.
  • bhcordovabhcordova
    Posts: 1,161
    Was it poorly written, or just poorly translated? I assume it was written in Italian; my Italian is nowhere near good enough to evaluate if the English is an accurate translation or not, nor evaluate if it was well-written in Italian to begin with.


    Would Pope Francis write it in Italian or Portuguese?
  • Elmar
    Posts: 505
    The document was first published in Italian and in English translation; this seems to imply (according to secular formal logic) that Italian was the original...
    Portugese? You didn't mean to say Esperanto?
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • francis
    Posts: 10,768
    Yes, I have been reading about the sloppiness and the rush through without crossing t's and dotting i's, etc., and even that it might not hold up as a legal doc.
    Thanked by 2Elmar tomjaw
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,198
    Why should [Sarum] not be used in the British Dominions and British Commonwealth as well?

    Is there any place in the Dominions or the Commonwealth where it could plausibly have been used in the past? To find a history of Sarum use outside Britain, I suppose we would need to find a colony or former colony in which diocesan clergy who had used Sarum had come to serve Catholic settlers. Was Sarum still used in Britain during the eras of colonial settlement (to North America, to the Caribbean, to Australia and New Zealand)?
  • Elmar
    Posts: 505
    Francis,
    I understand that this is about a hand-written manuscript of HH pope Francis himself - I knew that the Holy See still functions a bit like a medieval kingdom, but am nevertheless surprised that this still appears to be the way how official papal documents are created in the 21st century - where can one find this kind of information?

    [Sorry but this has a strong smell of an urban legend, unless of course evidence is available]
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,198
    hand-written manuscript

    Is there some misunderstanding about what motu proprio means? It doesn't refer to the manuscript: it just means that the letter was written at the Pope's initiative, and not in relation to some event (synod, council, etc.)
  • francis
    Posts: 10,768
    @elmar

    where can one find this kind of information?
    What information in particular?
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,764
    @chonak
    Is there any place in the Dominions or the Commonwealth where it could plausibly have been used in the past? To find a history of Sarum use outside Britain, ...

    The letter does not mention a geographical limit, so I would consider that we should not either. My diocese, and the churches I go to have never (as far as I know) celebrated the Sarum Use, although a handful of Anglican places within a few miles celebrated the Use on the site of their church. Would it really be a problem for say an American Parish to offer the Sarum Use?
    The Sarum Use has not been in normal use since good queen Mary, while I am sure that a handful of priests have celebrated the Use as well as plenty of Anglicans, over the last few centuries, I can't see how this is helpful to our argument. The question is does the local Ordinary approve and if he does just get on with it.
  • Elmar
    Posts: 505
    What information in particular?
    About what you wrote, francis:
    sloppiness and the rush through without crossing t's and dotting i's, etc.,
    The official publication is of course written on a [typewriter/]computer and 'usual' comments on the alledged hastiness of TC are about the content.

    What you write is, as chonac made clear, something that has nothing to do with TC being a motu proprio but seems to be suited to give it an extra 'dimension' by referring (without source given) to a hastily written manuscript - to what ends?

    So if this is meant as an even remotely serious argument ("might not hold up as a legal doc") please inform us at least where this piece of information comes from.

    Thanked by 1francis
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,059
    "Would it really be a problem for say an American Parish to offer the Sarum Use?"

    Most of the USA was never part of the English empire. So while it would not necessarily be a "problem", it would at least be a curiosity without historical rootedness; it would not be traditional in a meaningful sense.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,198
    Reviving a use that has never been practiced on this continent on a regular basis would be a somewhat artificial practice, so I can't imagine an ordinary approving celebrations except as a demonstration: i.e., not recurring.

    Are there any English parishes offering it on a recurring basis?
    Thanked by 1Elmar
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,198
    Elmar, when Francis wrote:
    sloppiness and the rush through without crossing t's and dotting i's, etc.,
    that's not something to take literally. It's an expression about carelessness, not a complaint about poor orthography.

    So if this is meant as an even remotely serious argument ("might not hold up as a legal doc") please inform us at least where this piece of information comes from.

    Again, the weaknesses of the document are described above in the short article Arthur mentioned, written by a canon lawyer and professor.
  • I think there are several churches of the Russian Orthodox Church, that are regularly using the Sarum Use in North America and in UK. They refer to themselves as Western Rite Churches, I believe. I only bought up the mention of Sarum Use in that much of it was associated in ages past with the Latin Tridentine Rite. And I believe that much of it was incorporated in the Tridentine Rite (or could I be mistaken?). The Sarum Use being at least 500 to 600 years older than the Tridentine Rite and it was well established and known through out Christendom during its golden age. It was marked by extreme ornamentation, elaborate ceremonies, the finest of vestments and all manner of liturgical fare, art and music within the various services.

    I realize that what I say next will seem heretical, and I do not mean to hurt anyone's sensibilities, however, I for one, truly do not believe that Francis is the legitimate pope or that the Church of Rome is no long authentically Christian and both are in a state of heresy. I believe that the TRUE Catholic Church is comprised of individuals scattered all through out the world. I apologize for my opinion, but this is what I believe.

    I have always thought and believed that the Latin Tridentine Rite Mass is beautiful and heavenly only in its full form which I have rarely witnessed; full Propers, Ordinary and other great sacred choral polyphonic music. Again, my opinion.
  • Elmar
    Posts: 505
    that's not something to take literally. It's an expression about carelessness, not a complaint about poor orthography.
    Thank you for the explanation, I was not familiar with this nice English expression!
    (mistaking the post as presenting additional argument/information to the sloppiness criticism, which is elaborated in the interesting article you mention, recommended by Arthur)
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • CatherineS
    Posts: 690
    @Ken, without getting into the other details, I do admit feeling that our worship of God seems to me most right and just when it is as you describe. Just judging by His Creation He seems a God who loves attention to detail, beauty, elaboration, ornament, music and so on. Look at the amazing variety and beauty He made! The singing of birds is astonishing. And He gave us such diverse skills for arts.

    When I am at a rare Mass that tries to point to that glory, wisdom, beauty and care for detail it feels like we worshippers are making a better effort. I know in His mercy He also loves our clumsier efforts, when we don't have the ability to do better. Surely also the hidden Mass held with bread crumbs in a prison cell is something profoundly Holy.

    But I've never felt as if the informal/casual/let's make this shorter liturgies are sufficient - neither pleasing to God nor good for teaching us. A bit like chucking a frozen dinner in the microwave for your wedding party.
  • Just judging by His Creation He seems a God who loves attention to detail, beauty, elaboration, ornament, music and so on. Look at the amazing variety and beauty He made! The singing of birds is astonishing. And He gave us such diverse skills for arts.

    Catherine,

    What a heart-warming sentiment. Thank you!
    Thanked by 2tomjaw CatherineS
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,059
    "The Sarum Use being at least 500 to 600 years older than the Tridentine Rite and it was well established and known through out Christendom during its golden age."

    That's a string of assertions. Not sure how it holds up to actual history. Sarum wasn't even the only local use in England. Unsure how well it was "known" in France, Iberia, Italian Peninsula, Central/Eastern Europe, Christian Africa and Christian Asia....
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,198
    There is an informational article about the history and usage of the Sarum Use at this website:
    https://orthodoxwiki.org/Sarum_Use

    Sad to say, I get the impression that the Anglicans and convert Orthodox who adopted it did so as an expression of their anti-Roman approach.
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,228
    @Elmar: 'crossing the "t's" and dotting the "i's" is the modern-day equivalent of "jots and tittles"--a phrase with which you are familiar, I'm sure.
    Thanked by 1Elmar
  • Chrism
    Posts: 869
    Is there any place in the Dominions or the Commonwealth where it could plausibly have been used in the past?


    I did some Internet research.

    The dying of Sarum (timeline 1 | timeline 2) corresponds roughly to the rising of English colonization. Might some vestigial Sarum priest have landed during the murky early history of the Americas, if not saying the old Mass in public then at least saying the old Office or using an old Ritual?

    1559 - Matthew Parker's invalid episcopal consecration
    1559 - Sarum rite abolished officially for the CoE - after this date, a CoE priest saying the Sarum Rite would be doing so illicitly.
    1576 - Sarum rite stops being taught for Catholic seminarians at Douai
    ca. 1600 - "The actual celebration of Mass ad usum Sarum could have disappeared
    entirely by the end of the sixteenth century" - James Joseph, p. 175
    1632 - Last Catholic Sarum manual reprint published at Douai

    As with extinct animals, there were rumors, of course. Fortescue had heard that Sarum was used during the reign of James II, but was unable to find a source. A 19th Century historian, Cox, claimed that during the 1745 Jacobite Rising, recusants in Derbyshire were alleged to be accustomed to a modified form of Sarum and surprised at Roman rituals being celebrated by French priests associated with the Bonnie Prince, but his source has not been found.

    Meanwhile, English colonial history (outside of the British Isles and France):

    1497 - John Cabot's expedition to Newfoundland - Italian Augustinian chaplain presumably celebrated the Roman Rite
    1576 - Martin Frobisher's expedition to Baffin Island, Canada - CoE service held
    1577-79 - Sir Francis Drake to Cape Horn, South America and California - CoE (Rev. Francis Fletcher)
    1583 - Humphrey Gilbert to Newfoundland - was initially a Catholic expedition but Catholic support fell apart before the voyage
    1584 - Roanoke Island - no mention of chaplain or priest
    1592 - Sir James Lancaster VI, expedition to India - no mention of a chaplain or priest
    1595 - Raleigh to South America
    1607 - Jamestown, start of permanent North American colonization. A recent theory based on slim evidence holds that one Gabriel Archer (1574-1610) was a clandestine Catholic priest, but again he would have been too old to learn Sarum at Douai.
    1620 - Calvert purchases land in Avalon Peninsula, Newfoundland - first attempt at Catholic colony
    1632 - Calvert granted a charter for Maryland - Fr. Andrew White, SJ, educated at Douai from 1597-1605, celebrated the first Mass, presumably therefore Roman Rite.

  • Liam
    Posts: 5,059
    The first Masses said in what became a number of English colonies in what became the USA were by Spanish and French priests.
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • Very interesting timeline, Chrism. I've learned much just from reading it, and hope to find out more.
    Thanked by 1Chrism
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,448
    I don't know what sources Fr Hunwicke got this from, but he wrote in 2019 :
    The Vicar of Kilkhampton, with chutzpah and wonderful faux naivete declared in 1584 that he had "never heard" of the Prayer Book. (The Sarum) Mass was still being said publicly in St Columb Major in 1590.
    https://liturgicalnotes.blogspot.com/2019/04/whatever-happened-to-sir-john-tregear.html
    And that of course is by Anglican clergy.
    Thanked by 2Chrism CHGiffen
  • Hawkins,

    Anglicans aren't wrong all the time!
  • The National Catholic Register interviews Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield, Illinois. He is a canon lawyer and "pushes back against reports that frame the Pope’s move as a full suppression of the extraordinary form of the Mass, or link the celebration of this rite to open dissent from the Second Vatican Council."
    Some folks think the traditional Latin Mass, the Missal of 1962, has been suppressed, but Traditionis Custodes doesn’t say that.

    Its main thrust is to give bishops responsibility for these matters, in contrast to Pope Benedict XVI, who, in his motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, used his papal authority to give all priests the faculty to say the extraordinary form.

    Pope Francis is basically saying that the bishop has liturgical oversight in his diocese. The Holy Father is not calling for the suppression of the 1962 Missal. If he were, he could have said, “I’m not allowing anyone to use the 1962 Missal.”

    He didn’t do that. He asked bishops to review the situation, and where the extraordinary form is fulfilling a pastoral need, to retain it.
    Bishop Paprocki Discusses ‘Traditionis Custodes’: Liturgical Unity Doesn’t Mean Liturgical Uniformity, National Catholic Register, August 4, 2021.
    Well worth reading. Also notable is his discussion of what it means to accept Vatican II.
    Thanked by 2a_f_hawkins tomjaw
  • ghmus7
    Posts: 1,478
    It is simply inconceivable that this document, which affects so many Catholics around the world, was drafted and then reviewed/edited by genuine experts in church history and liturgy. On the contrary, [Traditionis custodes] gives the distinct impression that it was composed by only a single individual who (to be perfectly frank) didn't know what he was writing about, and didn't bother even to check the internet to make sure he got the historical facts straight - and then failed to seek the comments/input of officials in the appropriate Vatican offices (in this case the Congregation for Divine Worship, as well as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, particularly its section comprising the former Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei). In short, it looks to be the work of some writing in a hurry, someone who isn't accustomed to writing with precision. We can only wonder what the history of this document really is.


    To me, the best explanation of this document is that the Holy Father was really wondering if he was going to come though his colon operation. It has been said that that explains the hastiness of the document, it's awkward arguments and contradictions. It is not the result of a long discussion and contemplation of the issues, but a quick statement of someone who was not sure of his future, and who needed to state something immediately.
  • ghmus7
    Posts: 1,478
    I wonder what the relative attendance is at churches which schedule similar numbers of 1962 and Latin NO Masses, such as the London Oratory (Brompton).

    The oratory has always enjoyed a full house, I lived in London near it for five years.
  • Chrism
    Posts: 869
    I have a letter, yes we can use the Sarum, but we should ask the Ordinary for permission.


    Longer term, the trouble with using Sarum to escape the restrictions of TC is that Sarum too falls under Sacrosanctum Concilium #3:
    Among these principles and norms there are some which can and should be applied both to the Roman rite and also to all the other rites. The practical norms which follow, however, should be taken as applying only to the Roman rite, except for those which, in the very nature of things, affect other rites as well.


    So just as there have been reforms of the other Rites, if Sarum rises from the ashes and develops a following, eventually they will come to Sarum and demand a revision of some kind, following the conciliar principles. Perhaps that reform would be splendid, but I think what would also be nice is some sort of universal historical/educational/diversity exception which applies to all rites equally, including the Roman, allowing the celebration of the pre-conciliar forms according to the principles laid down in Summorum Pontificum.
  • Don9of11Don9of11
    Posts: 699
    Has anyone read this article on Canon Law made easy website?
    https://canonlawmadeeasy.com/2021/07/29/the-enormous-loophole-in-traditionis-custodes/

  • Another interesting piece at NLM today, Traditionis Custodes, or Competing Concepts of Unity” — Guest Article by Dr. Tomasz Dekert. Dr. Dekert describes how the traditional liturgy constitutes a common experience of multiple peoples, classes and epochs. Although the meaning of the liturgy to these diverse participants is itself diverse, even unarticulable, the common experience is deeply unifying. The liturgical reform broke this connection of the liturgy to the tradition.
    As a result, a new face of “unity” was obtained, which is not rooted in the organic totality of the traditional ritual – this is practically non-existent in the reformed liturgy – but which is based on trust and obedience to the ecclesiastical authority (especially the Pope) and the post-conciliar liturgical order introduced by it. ... Opposition does not simply arise from disobedience, ... but from a different understanding of the fundamental principle of unity itself. And the fact that there has been a radical change in this area and the controversy it sparked was not caused by “traditionalists,” but by the post-conciliar reform itself. ...

    Traditionis Custodes consciously operates within the strictly narrowed framework of the above-mentioned new face of “unity,” which it elevates to the rank of absolute, central value. The projects of the “post-conciliar” Church and liturgy, precisely because of their foundation in acts of power, are understood here as a reality without alternative – ultimately (“in due time”, as Francis puts it in his letter to the bishops), one who will not accept them ... has no right to be in the Church and call himself Catholic – even if he or she was baptized, believes in all dogmas, leads a full prayer life and sacramental life, tries to do works of mercy and live the gospel.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,448
    Nothing AFAIK would inhibit Catholics from attending a Sarum Mass celebrated by Orthodox (Western Rite) clergy. Or have I missed something?
    Thanked by 2CharlesW tomjaw
  • I have not had a chance to look at the many hundreds of responses posted since I last checked in--though I intend to-- so forgive me if I am repeating. There appeared at Church Life Journal from Notre Dame a typically excellent article on Traditionis Custodes. I am always in the middle on everything. I don't like "movements" in the Church, but I also think that the Extraordinary Form adds a great deal to the spiritual life of a diocese. And I doubt that the motu proprio did anything except guarantee that the whole issue will continue on, perhaps for centuries, unless a successor finds a way to straighten it out.

    Peace.

    Kenneth

    https://churchlifejournal.nd.edu/articles/traditionis-custodes-was-never-merely-about-the-liturgy/
    Thanked by 2CharlesW a_f_hawkins
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,965
    Francis did nothing, as you say, to straighten out the issue. I think he made it worse.
This discussion has been closed.
All Discussions