Restore the Old Mass
by Robert Moynihan
[This article originally appeared an an editorial in the May 4, 2004 issue of Inside the Vatican (www.InsideTheVatican.com). For subscription information, call 1-800-789-9494]
"By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept when we remembered Zion. We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof. For there they that carried us away captive required of us a song: and they that wasted us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion. How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land? If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy."
(Psalms 137: 1-6 (KJV))
On April 23, the Congregation for Divine Worship issued a 60 page instruction, Redemptionis Sacramentum, ("The Sacrament of Redemption"). It is the result of long and serious deliberations on how the Mass is being celebrated today in the Church, and sets forth a standard of solemnity to be followed everywhere. (Even in Rome, I would hope: a couple of weeks ago at the Church of San Giovanni dei Fiorentini, I heard "Danny Boy" played during Communion).
No one can deny the desire on the part of the authors of this instruction to impart a sense of the sacred to the new Mass.
But after studying the catalogue of the "do's and don'ts" in the document, one senses a reluctance on Rome's part to get to the root causes of the problem: namely, the new Mass itself.
There have been books written on what's missing in the new Mass, by Cardinal Ratzinger among others, and the authors of this instruction are aware of these studies. But they do not pinpoint the real source of the 40-year secularization of the Mass. The problem is that the new Mass attracts and "enables" abuses because it was intentionally shaped to diminish the "transcendent" and emphasize the "profane" dimension.
The new Mass has turned out to be a rite too rapidly produced and too influenced by the rampant secularization of the 1960's. Patching it up is a vain effort.
At least in this one area it is possible for the Church to take decisive action.
The successor of Peter can even tomorrow issue a solemn decree more or less as follows "The cries of God's people are at last heard; the winter is over, the true springtime is come; the ancient, holy liturgy of the Roman rite, cherished by so many saints, will, with no further delay, be restored in all the churches of Christendom..."
Then the Pope would set forth the steps by which innovation, experiment, and individual artistry would come to an end and the ancient sacrificial offering of the Mass — in all dignity and solemnity — would be restored. Some would argue that such an action would be a grave mistake, that making such a liturgical change would both "impede ecumenical progress" and "further confuse the faithful."
I understand these arguments and feel their force.
But I am persuaded that the restoration of the old Mass, with its simple solemnity and rich symbolism, would not offend non-Catholics, as is feared, but attract them and attract them profoundly.
And I am persuaded that the restoration of the old Mass would not "confuse" the faithful, but would "galvanize' them, deepening their Christian faith, confirming them in the love of God and their neighbor. And this, in fact, is what the bishops at Vatican II most deeply desired.
I am convinced that the restoration of the old liturgy would be a consolation to many, who have attended the new Mass, not to "participate more fully" in the new liturgy, but, out of obedience to a Pope and hierarchy which has asked them to "give up" the Mass they love.
I am persuaded that the restoration of the old Mass would be a "festival day," a day of universal celebration and, as such, would mark the beginning of a great renewal in Church life."
Some will argue that such a restoration would be disrespectful toward Pope Paul VI, who promulgated the new Mass in 1969.
I disagree. Paul VI himself was hesitant about the new Mass, as he was about so many things. He approved it half-heartedly. It is said that after he attended a "trial run" of the new Mass, he said, "But where is the mystery? The mystery is gone!" He himself felt something was missing in the new Mass, but promulgated it anyway.
In April I had a conversation with Fr. Jean Marie Charles-Roux, 90, one of the priests who celebrated Mass for Mel Gibson in Rome during the filming of The Passion of the Christ. Charles-Roux was ordained in the 1950's. He knew Pius XII, John XXIII, and Paul VI personally, In 1971, after celebrating the new Mass for about 18 months, he asked Paul VI to receive him at Castel Gandolfo. Paul agreed. Charles-Roux said to Paul: "For 18 months I have celebrated the new Mass, but I cannot continue. I was ordained to celebrate the old Mass, and I want to return to it. Will you permit me to do so?" And Paul said: "Certainly, I never forbade celebration of the old Mass; I have only offered an alternative."
The alternative has become the norm, and the perennial liturgy of the Latin West is celebrated in only a few chapels here and there, almost furtively, as if in hiding, as if in a time of persecution.
So let us read the sign of the times and restore the liturgy of the ages, the liturgy of Gregory the Great and St. Augustine of England, of Boniface and Bernard, of Francis and Clare, of Aquinas and Bonaventure, of Ignatius and Bellarmine, of Newman and Chesterton, and our own parents and grandparents.
Let us preserve from oblivion the beautiful and holy liturgy which we inherited from our forefathers, that our posterity may thank us for having the courage to do what is fitting and just in an age of iron and lead.
***
Robert Moynihan is the editor of Inside the Vatican magazine
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Filipino Nuncio to Haiti Gives First Hand Account of Earthquake
First-hand Account of Destruction Jan 13, '10 10:05 PM | for everyone |
Port au Prince, Haiti, Jan 13, 2010 / 01:21 pm (CNA).- Speaking with the Vatican's Fides news agency, the Apostolic Nuncio to Haiti, Archbishop Bernardito Auza, described the devastation in the streets of the capital Port-au-Prince. He reported on what he had observed of the situation of religious and government officials in the area and described widespread destruction.
Archbishop Auza stated his observations of the situation in the capital to Fides, saying, "Port-au-Prince is totally devastated. The cathedral, the archbishop's office, all of the big churches, all of the seminaries have been reduced to rubble."
The nuncio said that the resident priest at that cathedral had informed him of the likely death of Archbishop Joseph Serge Miot as he was buried under rubble along with hundreds of priests and seminarians. Other news reports confirmed that the archbishop did pass away in the earthquake.
Auza reported that many government buildings had been razed. All of the Ministry buildings but one were on the ground, as were the Presidential Palace and the schools.
"Parliament with the Senators, the schools with the children, the supermarkets were reduced to nothing," the nuncio stated.
The nuncio had made his way across the city to see the Haitian President and "express his condolences and solidarity" and found that, because they had been outdoors, he and his family had been saved although their home had crumbled.
People who live in front of the collapsed U.N. headquarters had reported to Auza that the head of that mission, Hedi Annabi, was trapped inside with hundreds of others.
The nuncio said that he had returned to his residence later in the morning to find "Priests and Sisters in the street, no longer with homes. The Rector of the seminary saved himself, as did the Dean of studies, but the seminarians are under the rubble. You hear yells everywhere from underneath the rubble."
"The CIFOR (according to Fides, an institute of study for religious men and women) collapsed with students inside that were participating in a conference. The office of the nuncio resisted (the earthquake), there was no one injured, but all of us are in shock!" he said.
"So many things were broken, including the tabernacle, but we are more fortunate than others. Many relatives of the personnel are dead, their houses destroyed. Everyone is asking for help. We will have a problem with water and food before long. We cannot go inside and stay there for very long because the ground continues to shake, so we're camping out in the yard."
ERECTION OF A PERSONAL TRIDENTINE PARISH IN THE DIOCESE OF CUBAO
ERECTION OF A PERSONAL TRIDENTINE PARISH IN THE DIOCESE OF CUBAO | for everyone |
Dennis Raymond P. Maturan
Founding Chairman
Ecclesia Dei Society of St. Joseph
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
5,500 Participants Attend the National Congress of the Catholic Clergy 2
The 2nd National Congress of the Clergy opened today at the World Trade Center (WTC) with over 5,200 priests in attendance, 400 of whom are walk-ins. Martial music from a brass band lent a festive air to the event, greeting the participants at the entrance of WTC which was decorated with multicolored banners.
Veneration of the relics of the patron saint of priests, St. John Mary Vianney—his stole and his breviary—preceded the Eucharistic celebration presided by His Excellency, Most Rev. Edward Joseph Adams, Apostolic Nuncio to the Philippines.
The congratulatory message from the Vatican, signed by the Secretary of State Tarcisio Cardinal Bertoni, was read by Chairman of the CBCP Episcopal Commission on the Clergy Florentino Lavarias, Bishop of Iba. The message exhorted the priest-participants to “embrace more fervently the three evangelical counsels of poverty, chastity and obedience” which have been set as the “surest road to the desired goal of Christian perfection” on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the death of St. John Mary Vianney.
Veneration of the relics of the patron saint of priests, St. John Mary Vianney—his stole and his breviary—preceded the Eucharistic celebration presided by His Excellency, Most Rev. Edward Joseph Adams, Apostolic Nuncio to the Philippines.
The congratulatory message from the Vatican, signed by the Secretary of State Tarcisio Cardinal Bertoni, was read by Chairman of the CBCP Episcopal Commission on the Clergy Florentino Lavarias, Bishop of Iba. The message exhorted the priest-participants to “embrace more fervently the three evangelical counsels of poverty, chastity and obedience” which have been set as the “surest road to the desired goal of Christian perfection” on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the death of St. John Mary Vianney.
Monday, January 25, 2010
ERECTION OF A PERSONAL TRIDENTINE PARISH IN THE DIOCESE OF CUBAO
Dennis Raymond P. Maturan
Founding Chairman
Ecclesia Dei Society of St. Joseph
Tridentine Mass at Jaleville Paranaque
Starting the 31st of January 2010, Septuagesima Sunday, the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass according to the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite shall be offered in the Jaleville Chapel {please see attached location map} at 10 o'clock in the morning on the following dates:
Last Sunday of each month {January to December 2010}
23rd of May 2010 {Solemnity of Pentecost}
13th of June 2010 {External Solemnity of the Sacred Heart}
15th of August 2010 {Solemnity of the Assumption}
3rd of October 2010 {External Solmenity of the Most Holy Rosary}
So far, these are the fixed dates for the celebration of the Extraordinary Form. Other dates may be added to this list, specially during the solemn seasons of Lent {with Passiontide} and Advent.
For further information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at +639162290128.
Ad Jesum per Mariam,
Miguel Ramirez y Madarang
In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas
JALEVILLE SUBDIVISION LOCATION MAP
• Jaleville Subdivision is on the same avenue {Quirino Avenue} as ST. PAUL’s COLLEGE of PARAÑAQUE, ST. ANDREW’s SCHOOL, ANDREW’s CATHEDRAL, and BAMBOO ORGAN CHURCH.
• Coming from the NORTH, it’s on the RIGHT. Coming from the SOUTH, it’s on the LEFT
• The subdivision has TWO BIG BLACK GATES with a big stone marker in the middle with the words “JALEVILLE” vertically placed on it.
Last Sunday of each month {January to December 2010}
23rd of May 2010 {Solemnity of Pentecost}
13th of June 2010 {External Solemnity of the Sacred Heart}
15th of August 2010 {Solemnity of the Assumption}
3rd of October 2010 {External Solmenity of the Most Holy Rosary}
So far, these are the fixed dates for the celebration of the Extraordinary Form. Other dates may be added to this list, specially during the solemn seasons of Lent {with Passiontide} and Advent.
For further information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at +639162290128.
Ad Jesum per Mariam,
Miguel Ramirez y Madarang
In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas
JALEVILLE SUBDIVISION LOCATION MAP
• Jaleville Subdivision is on the same avenue {Quirino Avenue} as ST. PAUL’s COLLEGE of PARAÑAQUE, ST. ANDREW’s SCHOOL, ANDREW’s CATHEDRAL, and BAMBOO ORGAN CHURCH.
• Coming from the NORTH, it’s on the RIGHT. Coming from the SOUTH, it’s on the LEFT
• The subdivision has TWO BIG BLACK GATES with a big stone marker in the middle with the words “JALEVILLE” vertically placed on it.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Philippine Feast of the Holy Child
Sto. Niño Feast
By Josephine Darang
MANILA, Philippines - The Filipinos’ love and devotion to the Christ Child is phenomenal. This will again be manifested yesterday, january 17,2010, when churches in every town and city hold Masses and processions.
In Cebu City, people will hear Mass at the Pilgrim Center across the Basilica de Sto. Niño while others will light candles in the church or touch the image.
Cebuanos and guests will then dance the “Sinulog” to the beat of drums and shouts of “Pit Señor! Viva Sto. Niño!” Going to Cebu for the fiesta is a panata for devotees wishing to thank Him for answered prayers.
Historical accounts say before Ferdinand Magellan arrived in Cebu in 1521, Sinulog was danced by the natives in honor of wooden idols and anitos. Magellan introduced Christianity, giving the Sto. Niño as a baptismal gift to Hara Amihan, wife of Cebu’s Rajah Humabon and who became Queen Juana.
During the 44 years between the coming of Magellan and Legazpi, natives danced the Sinulog but this time as a sign of reverence to the Sto. Niño, who is now enshrined in the San Agustin Church. The church later became the Basilica Minore del Sto. Niño.
Procession
The Congregacion del Santissimo Nombre del Niño Jesus will hold its 31st grand procession of at least 400 Sto. Niño images on Jan. 31, at 3 p.m. The procession will begin at the Philtrade Center on Roxas Boulevard and end at the Quirino Grandstand.
The procession highlights the Fiesta del Sto. Niño 2008 that opened Jan. 21 with an exhibit and Holy Mass at the PNB Financial Center. Exhibit hours are 9 a.m.-9 p.m. Novena Masses are at 7 p.m.
Mounting the exhibit are fiesta chair Deo Pamilar; Ricky Miranda, president; Jing Chua, chair; Ben Farrales, founding chair; and members of the board.
Sto. Nino de Pandacan
The venerated image of the Child Jesus in Pandacan, Manila, Philippines.
HISTORY OF THE STO. NIÑO DE PANDACAN
In ca 1600, several children were playing beside a carabao den in the middle of the pandan plantation close to a small lake (lubluban). While they were playing, they discovered a beautiful image of a child beside the lubluban. They were delighted to find a doll which resembled their features. With much excitement, they informed their parents and the town elders about the said doll. Without any time to waste, the elders went to the site and saw the image. They discovered that the beautiful image that the children found wasn't a doll but the Sto. Niño, the patron of Pandacan.
The townsfolk informed the Franciscan friars that resided at the Sampaloc Parish because those friars were the ones assigned in handling the pastoral care of Pandacan then. The image was brought by the locals to the Sampaloc church to be taken care of and for people to venerate. One day, the image mysteriously disappeared from the Sampaloc church. Strangely enough, the Sto Niño was later found back at the lubluban and was brought back to the Sampaloc church. This happened several times. The Sto. Niño kept on disappearing, but was always found at the lubluban later on.
The Franciscans finally realized that the Sto. Niño wanted to remain beside the lubluban in Pandacan. So, they decided to build the image a small "Visita" (chapel) on the exact site where He was found. They also developed the lubluban into a well to make it usable for the people who lived there.
Still, the mystery of Sto Niño de Pandacan never ceased. After the parish was formally established in 1712, there were several miracles attributed to the image. One of the first miracles was the story of Doña. Josefa Andrade who was cured from her paralysis after taking a bath at the well. Since then, more and more miracles happened through the intercession of the image and the water coming from the well.
HISTORY OF THE STO. NIÑO DE PANDACAN
In ca 1600, several children were playing beside a carabao den in the middle of the pandan plantation close to a small lake (lubluban). While they were playing, they discovered a beautiful image of a child beside the lubluban. They were delighted to find a doll which resembled their features. With much excitement, they informed their parents and the town elders about the said doll. Without any time to waste, the elders went to the site and saw the image. They discovered that the beautiful image that the children found wasn't a doll but the Sto. Niño, the patron of Pandacan.
The townsfolk informed the Franciscan friars that resided at the Sampaloc Parish because those friars were the ones assigned in handling the pastoral care of Pandacan then. The image was brought by the locals to the Sampaloc church to be taken care of and for people to venerate. One day, the image mysteriously disappeared from the Sampaloc church. Strangely enough, the Sto Niño was later found back at the lubluban and was brought back to the Sampaloc church. This happened several times. The Sto. Niño kept on disappearing, but was always found at the lubluban later on.
The Franciscans finally realized that the Sto. Niño wanted to remain beside the lubluban in Pandacan. So, they decided to build the image a small "Visita" (chapel) on the exact site where He was found. They also developed the lubluban into a well to make it usable for the people who lived there.
Still, the mystery of Sto Niño de Pandacan never ceased. After the parish was formally established in 1712, there were several miracles attributed to the image. One of the first miracles was the story of Doña. Josefa Andrade who was cured from her paralysis after taking a bath at the well. Since then, more and more miracles happened through the intercession of the image and the water coming from the well.
Sto. Nino de Cebu
My own version of the image of the Holy Child Jesus of Cebu, intrumental in the evangelization of the Philippines.
History
The discovery of the Philippines is linked to Spain's glorious chain of conquests. On September 20, 1519, a fleet of five galleons commanded by Portuguese Navigator Ferdinand Magellan at the service of the king and queen of Spain set sailed from San Lucar de Barrameda to search for the Spice Islands. They did not find the spice island, instead they landed in Limasawa, a small island south of Leyte in the central part of the Philippines. Magellan took possession of the islands and named it after King Philip of Spain.
Magellan's expedition headed for Cebu and found the island very hospitable. He made Cebu the base of his exploration, Christianization and conquests. King Humabon and Queen Juana of Cebu gave him a warm reception and embraced Christianity as well. As gratitude to his hospitality, Magellan agreed to fight with king Humabon who was at war with the neigboring tribe, Mactan. Unfortunately, Magellan was killed in the battle. His men returned to Spain, and that same expedition has set the record to be the first to circumnavigate the earth.
Spain sent another expedition to the Far East Region. An Augustinian priest, named Andres Urdaneta, a world-known cosmographer who lived inside the monastic walls of the Augustinian monastery in Mexico was summoned to lead the expedition. On November 21, a memorable expedition left Mexico for the Philippines and arrived in Cebu on April 27, 1565.
DISCOVERY OF THE IMAGE OF THE SANTO NINO
Because of Cebuanos suspicion that their return is bringing retribution to Magellan's death, another battle broke out. But heavy artilleries and huge cannons forced the natives to flee to the mountain leaving behind their villages burnt to the ground. As Spanish soldiers inspected the burnt village, one soldier found an image of the Child Jesus under the pile of ashes unscathed inside the wooden box.
As earlier authenticated entry in the Journal of Pigafetta, clerk in the Magellan expedition, explains the origin of Santo Nino: "On the day Queen Juana was baptized by Father Pedro Valderama, chaplain of that expedition, Pigaffeta himself presented her with the Image." The same Image now lies in the Basilica del Santo Nino and become a favorite destination for millions of pilgrims each year. For four and half centuries now, the Image of Santo Nino continues to make wonders in the lives of many Filipinos. On the third Sunday of each year, in Cebu, millions flock to the streets for a colorful festivity, honoring and placing the Island and the entire Philippines under His Patronage.
During the last World War, a bomb fell inside the Church but the Image was recovered unscathed. It was one of the numerous miracles and powers attributed to the Holy Image.
In 1965 the historic Santo Nino Church was renovated for the observance of the Fourth Centenary of the Christianization of the Philippines held in Cebu City. It was during the centennial celebration that the Sacred Congregation of Rites elevated the Santo Nino Church to the rank of Basilica Minore with all the rights and privileges accruing to such title.
History
The discovery of the Philippines is linked to Spain's glorious chain of conquests. On September 20, 1519, a fleet of five galleons commanded by Portuguese Navigator Ferdinand Magellan at the service of the king and queen of Spain set sailed from San Lucar de Barrameda to search for the Spice Islands. They did not find the spice island, instead they landed in Limasawa, a small island south of Leyte in the central part of the Philippines. Magellan took possession of the islands and named it after King Philip of Spain.
Magellan's expedition headed for Cebu and found the island very hospitable. He made Cebu the base of his exploration, Christianization and conquests. King Humabon and Queen Juana of Cebu gave him a warm reception and embraced Christianity as well. As gratitude to his hospitality, Magellan agreed to fight with king Humabon who was at war with the neigboring tribe, Mactan. Unfortunately, Magellan was killed in the battle. His men returned to Spain, and that same expedition has set the record to be the first to circumnavigate the earth.
Spain sent another expedition to the Far East Region. An Augustinian priest, named Andres Urdaneta, a world-known cosmographer who lived inside the monastic walls of the Augustinian monastery in Mexico was summoned to lead the expedition. On November 21, a memorable expedition left Mexico for the Philippines and arrived in Cebu on April 27, 1565.
DISCOVERY OF THE IMAGE OF THE SANTO NINO
Because of Cebuanos suspicion that their return is bringing retribution to Magellan's death, another battle broke out. But heavy artilleries and huge cannons forced the natives to flee to the mountain leaving behind their villages burnt to the ground. As Spanish soldiers inspected the burnt village, one soldier found an image of the Child Jesus under the pile of ashes unscathed inside the wooden box.
As earlier authenticated entry in the Journal of Pigafetta, clerk in the Magellan expedition, explains the origin of Santo Nino: "On the day Queen Juana was baptized by Father Pedro Valderama, chaplain of that expedition, Pigaffeta himself presented her with the Image." The same Image now lies in the Basilica del Santo Nino and become a favorite destination for millions of pilgrims each year. For four and half centuries now, the Image of Santo Nino continues to make wonders in the lives of many Filipinos. On the third Sunday of each year, in Cebu, millions flock to the streets for a colorful festivity, honoring and placing the Island and the entire Philippines under His Patronage.
During the last World War, a bomb fell inside the Church but the Image was recovered unscathed. It was one of the numerous miracles and powers attributed to the Holy Image.
In 1965 the historic Santo Nino Church was renovated for the observance of the Fourth Centenary of the Christianization of the Philippines held in Cebu City. It was during the centennial celebration that the Sacred Congregation of Rites elevated the Santo Nino Church to the rank of Basilica Minore with all the rights and privileges accruing to such title.
Sto. Nino de Tondo
The venerated image of the Holy Child Jesus at His altar in Tondo, Manila, Philippines.
History of Sto. Niño de Tondo Parish Church
By: Ms. Rose Marie Mendoza
The Convent in Tondo, one of the first structures built by the Spaniards in Luzon, was accepted by the Provincial Chapter on May 3, 1572, with Lubao, Betis and Calumpit as its visitas. Its first parish priest was named Fr. Alonzo Alvarado, OSA, with Fr. Pedro Holgado, OSA as his assistant. In 1575, its jurisdiction extended to Naga (Navotas), Misic (the small island Maysilo), and Bulacan and became its visitas. In 1578, its friar, Fr. Geronimo Marin, helped arrange peaceful dialogues and acted as intermediary between Lacandola and Maestro de Ocampo Juan de Salcedo in Navotas.
The Tondo convent housed the Franciscans when their monastery got burned in 1583. It served as a Studium Grammaticae in 1587 because the San Agustin monastery was being rebuilt following a fire. By 1591, the convent of Tondo had two priests to minister to the 6,000 souls in the towns of Navotas and Tambobong (Malabon).
The convent of Tondo suffered from “lack of comfort” due to its dependence on donations from the provincial treasury. Unlike others, it did not have any estates from which to draw income. On the other hand, it was the only house available near Manila for visiting priests. The state of the convent “was very much abused and in dire need,” thus, on December 12, 1597, the council fathers warmed visitors not to stay long at the convent. Furthermore, the visitors were ordered, under severe penalties, to refrain from staying in the house for more than twelve hours. Visitors arriving at dinnertime had to leave the next day before lunchtime.
Despite its poor economic status, the house received aspirants to the Augustinian Order as early as 1597, and in 1599, its jurisdiction extended to the visitas of Navotas, Tambobong (Malabon) and Caloocan. However, three days after the council meeting of that year, the father provincial relieved Tondo from paying its yearly collection because “its alms are few and the visitas are many, and most importantly, because we don’t have a house yet and need to build one since there is only one room.” The prior was allowed to buy a garden for vegetables near the convent, which would help pay the 200 pesos due to the Manila fund.
It is believed that the construction of the first stone monastery started in 1611 under the term of Fr. Alonzo Guerrero then parish priest. In 1620, the house of Tondo was relieved from its ten percent contribution to Manila due “to the needed repair works of the convent and the church.” The same resolution was approved the following year because the prior had to provide assistance to the father provincial who was then residing in Tondo.
The convent was mortgaged by Fr. Antonio de Ocampo in 1625 for 800 pesos for the improvement of the house facilities, like the dining room and the staircase. The construction of the church and the convent were believed to have been completed in three years.
In 1641, the church was damaged during the upheaval of the Sangleys and the prior had the church repaired and water cisterns were installed. The church was damaged again during the earthquake of 1645. After the new repairs, the Church and the convent looked very strong and magnificent, all made of masonry and of beautiful architecture. Unfortunately, both buildings were ordered to be pulled down in 1661 by Governor Sabiniano Manrique de Lara who was fearful that the Chinese pirate Koseng (Koxinga) who was coming from the island of Hermosa (Formosa, Taiwan) might fortify himself inside the building. In the same year, the convent suffered so much during the war of Sangleys that it was no longer self-sufficient. The reconstruction of the buildings started that year using the income from various community properties. The house was relieved of all taxes in 1692 to help rebuild the church and the convent. A curious not is that according to an anonymous document dated 1695, that well of the convent of Tondo had produced some minor marvels.
The building were believed to have been completed by 1695, the end of the term of the dynamic Fr. Duque, or at least not later than 1741, because in that year the council fathers resolved that since of the Provincial funds have been spent in the reconstruction of the church and the convent (of Tondo), it is proper and fair that the house pays back to Manila from its own properties. However, should the Tondo House need it in the future, the rent would be returned. In the meantime, everyone agreed on the need for the priests to have little comfort.
The convent was enlarged in 1728 and a budget of two thousand pesos was drawn from the funds of the province in 1731. Fr. Fernando Sanchez reminded the fathers in 1732 of the high cost of the project and that only with the help of the province can it be carried out. The façade and the two towers that were about to fall were built in 1734. This was done during the term of the Province Fr. Diego Bergano. To somehow help in the financing of the project, each banca crossing the estuary that opened at the convent property was charged a quarter of a peso.
The building were damaged again by the earthquake of 1740 and repaired the next year. It was declared a regular house in 1759 and given the administration of the visitas of Maysilo as it had been determined in the meeting of 1754.
The church was heavily damaged by the earthquake of June 3, 1863 and was rebuilt for the third time by Fr. Manuel Diez Gonzalez. The restoration was completed by Fr. Casimiro Herrero minister of Tondo from 1874 to 1880. He must have followed the plans of architect Luciano Oliver designed in 1873. Steel framing was used for the media naranja dome and iron sheets for the roofing, the first time these materials were used in the country. According to Castaneda, Condrado Gregorio took over the construction from Oliver and indicated his intention to use aramadura de hierro. The iron has to be importedfrom England. This was the first edifice to include in its plans the use of iron sheets and was favorably acted upon by the Junta Consultativa and the Inspeccion General de Obras Pulbicas.
The Cemetery was constructed by Fr. Mariano Gil during his priorship from 1889 to 1898. Architect Gregorio N. Santos designed the fence. The walls were made of stone from Guadalupe and Meycauayan. The Project cost 2,150 pesos. The organ costing 12,000 pesos was ordered from the renowned Amezua Organeros of Barcelona, Spain. It was installed in 1983 and had one main keyboard with 56 keys and a peladier with 19 keys and four combinations. The main molave door was bought by Fr. Pablo Alvarez for 140 pesos in 1898.
During the Japanese occupation of the Philippines, church services were held in the house of Primo Arambulo family at Santiago de Vera Street when the Japanese engineering corps was based in the church. During the last day of the Japanese occupation the church served as sanctuary to thousands of refugees who poured into its compound from the North Harbor area which was razed by the retreating Japanese.
The present church has one main central nave and two aisle linked by solid columns. It measures 65 meters long, 22 meters wide, and 17 meters high. The Ionic pilasters and massive buttresses supporting the discordant domes of the bell towers are reminiscent of the Neo-Classical style, typical for its scanty ornamentation. Blind arched openings contrast with rectangular voids and triangular canopies. Twin towers flank the façade. The triangular pediment is characterized by straight lines and a rose window.
History of Sto. Niño de Tondo Parish Church
By: Ms. Rose Marie Mendoza
The Convent in Tondo, one of the first structures built by the Spaniards in Luzon, was accepted by the Provincial Chapter on May 3, 1572, with Lubao, Betis and Calumpit as its visitas. Its first parish priest was named Fr. Alonzo Alvarado, OSA, with Fr. Pedro Holgado, OSA as his assistant. In 1575, its jurisdiction extended to Naga (Navotas), Misic (the small island Maysilo), and Bulacan and became its visitas. In 1578, its friar, Fr. Geronimo Marin, helped arrange peaceful dialogues and acted as intermediary between Lacandola and Maestro de Ocampo Juan de Salcedo in Navotas.
The Tondo convent housed the Franciscans when their monastery got burned in 1583. It served as a Studium Grammaticae in 1587 because the San Agustin monastery was being rebuilt following a fire. By 1591, the convent of Tondo had two priests to minister to the 6,000 souls in the towns of Navotas and Tambobong (Malabon).
The convent of Tondo suffered from “lack of comfort” due to its dependence on donations from the provincial treasury. Unlike others, it did not have any estates from which to draw income. On the other hand, it was the only house available near Manila for visiting priests. The state of the convent “was very much abused and in dire need,” thus, on December 12, 1597, the council fathers warmed visitors not to stay long at the convent. Furthermore, the visitors were ordered, under severe penalties, to refrain from staying in the house for more than twelve hours. Visitors arriving at dinnertime had to leave the next day before lunchtime.
Despite its poor economic status, the house received aspirants to the Augustinian Order as early as 1597, and in 1599, its jurisdiction extended to the visitas of Navotas, Tambobong (Malabon) and Caloocan. However, three days after the council meeting of that year, the father provincial relieved Tondo from paying its yearly collection because “its alms are few and the visitas are many, and most importantly, because we don’t have a house yet and need to build one since there is only one room.” The prior was allowed to buy a garden for vegetables near the convent, which would help pay the 200 pesos due to the Manila fund.
It is believed that the construction of the first stone monastery started in 1611 under the term of Fr. Alonzo Guerrero then parish priest. In 1620, the house of Tondo was relieved from its ten percent contribution to Manila due “to the needed repair works of the convent and the church.” The same resolution was approved the following year because the prior had to provide assistance to the father provincial who was then residing in Tondo.
The convent was mortgaged by Fr. Antonio de Ocampo in 1625 for 800 pesos for the improvement of the house facilities, like the dining room and the staircase. The construction of the church and the convent were believed to have been completed in three years.
In 1641, the church was damaged during the upheaval of the Sangleys and the prior had the church repaired and water cisterns were installed. The church was damaged again during the earthquake of 1645. After the new repairs, the Church and the convent looked very strong and magnificent, all made of masonry and of beautiful architecture. Unfortunately, both buildings were ordered to be pulled down in 1661 by Governor Sabiniano Manrique de Lara who was fearful that the Chinese pirate Koseng (Koxinga) who was coming from the island of Hermosa (Formosa, Taiwan) might fortify himself inside the building. In the same year, the convent suffered so much during the war of Sangleys that it was no longer self-sufficient. The reconstruction of the buildings started that year using the income from various community properties. The house was relieved of all taxes in 1692 to help rebuild the church and the convent. A curious not is that according to an anonymous document dated 1695, that well of the convent of Tondo had produced some minor marvels.
The building were believed to have been completed by 1695, the end of the term of the dynamic Fr. Duque, or at least not later than 1741, because in that year the council fathers resolved that since of the Provincial funds have been spent in the reconstruction of the church and the convent (of Tondo), it is proper and fair that the house pays back to Manila from its own properties. However, should the Tondo House need it in the future, the rent would be returned. In the meantime, everyone agreed on the need for the priests to have little comfort.
The convent was enlarged in 1728 and a budget of two thousand pesos was drawn from the funds of the province in 1731. Fr. Fernando Sanchez reminded the fathers in 1732 of the high cost of the project and that only with the help of the province can it be carried out. The façade and the two towers that were about to fall were built in 1734. This was done during the term of the Province Fr. Diego Bergano. To somehow help in the financing of the project, each banca crossing the estuary that opened at the convent property was charged a quarter of a peso.
The building were damaged again by the earthquake of 1740 and repaired the next year. It was declared a regular house in 1759 and given the administration of the visitas of Maysilo as it had been determined in the meeting of 1754.
The church was heavily damaged by the earthquake of June 3, 1863 and was rebuilt for the third time by Fr. Manuel Diez Gonzalez. The restoration was completed by Fr. Casimiro Herrero minister of Tondo from 1874 to 1880. He must have followed the plans of architect Luciano Oliver designed in 1873. Steel framing was used for the media naranja dome and iron sheets for the roofing, the first time these materials were used in the country. According to Castaneda, Condrado Gregorio took over the construction from Oliver and indicated his intention to use aramadura de hierro. The iron has to be importedfrom England. This was the first edifice to include in its plans the use of iron sheets and was favorably acted upon by the Junta Consultativa and the Inspeccion General de Obras Pulbicas.
The Cemetery was constructed by Fr. Mariano Gil during his priorship from 1889 to 1898. Architect Gregorio N. Santos designed the fence. The walls were made of stone from Guadalupe and Meycauayan. The Project cost 2,150 pesos. The organ costing 12,000 pesos was ordered from the renowned Amezua Organeros of Barcelona, Spain. It was installed in 1983 and had one main keyboard with 56 keys and a peladier with 19 keys and four combinations. The main molave door was bought by Fr. Pablo Alvarez for 140 pesos in 1898.
During the Japanese occupation of the Philippines, church services were held in the house of Primo Arambulo family at Santiago de Vera Street when the Japanese engineering corps was based in the church. During the last day of the Japanese occupation the church served as sanctuary to thousands of refugees who poured into its compound from the North Harbor area which was razed by the retreating Japanese.
The present church has one main central nave and two aisle linked by solid columns. It measures 65 meters long, 22 meters wide, and 17 meters high. The Ionic pilasters and massive buttresses supporting the discordant domes of the bell towers are reminiscent of the Neo-Classical style, typical for its scanty ornamentation. Blind arched openings contrast with rectangular voids and triangular canopies. Twin towers flank the façade. The triangular pediment is characterized by straight lines and a rose window.
Rome Hosts Lefebvrists
SSPX Bishop Bernard Fellay
Last October 26 -- for some -- Rome will openedtheological talks on the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) with representatives of the Society of St. Pius X, followers of the Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
By Robert Moynihan, reporting from Rome
"Nam oportet et haereses esse, ut et qui probati sunt, manifesti fiant in vobis." ("For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.") —1 Corinthians 11:19
Doctrinal Talks Begun
The first official theological discussions ever between Vatican officials and representatives of the Society of St. Pius X began on Monday, October 26.
The talks were private and closed to the press.
The reason? So that they can be "extremely honest and frank," I have been told.
The Society of St. Pius X became famous in January this year, when the excommunications of its four bishops, all consecrated without papal permission in 1988 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and immediately excommunicated, were lifted by Pope Benedict XVI.
The "Vatican side" will include Archbishop Guido Pozzo, the new secretary of the Ecclesia Dei Pontifical Commission; Archbishop Luis Ladaria Ferrer, secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF); Dominican Father Charles Morerod, secretary of the International Theological Commission and consultor with the CDF; Archbishop Fernando Ocariz, Vicar General of Opus Dei and consultor with the CDF; and Jesuit Father Karl Josef Becker, also a CDF consultor.
The meeting will take place at the Palace of the Holy Office, which is where the CDF is housed. That is the building just to the left of Bernini's colonnade which prior to the Second Vatican Council was known as "The Holy Office of the Inquisition. "
“The conversations will focus on open doctrinal questions and will remain confidential. A statement will be released at the conclusion of the meeting,” Father Federico Lombardi said when the meetings were announced.
After Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications of the four Lefebvrist bishops, the Vatican issued a statement on February 4, 2009, outlining a series of conditions that the Lefebvrists must meet including “full recognition of the Second Vatican Council” and of the magisteriums of all the Popes since Pius XII.
On March 10, Pope Benedict XVI published a letter to the bishops of world in which he explained the reasons for lifting the excommunication, noting that “until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.”
Despite this warning, the Lefebvrist bishops ordained a group of priests at the end of June, which prompted a statement from the Holy See’s Press Office reiterating what the Pope said in his letter to the world's bishops.
"I would be very surprised if that happened," one Vatican official said to me this past week. "More likely is a more drawn out discussion, with meetings scheduled every so often for an extended period of time. But anything could happen. It will be up to the participants to decide how to proceed."
How does the Vatican side view the upcoming dialogue? Is one possible outcome the wider use of the "old Mass," which the Society of St. Pius X celebrates exclusively? Could these talks lead to a much wider use of the "old Mass" throughout the Church?
The answer isn't completely clear, but it seems that Rome, under Pope Benedict, is, in fact, profoundly supportive of the old liturgy. This seems evident from in the short but interesting interview below.
The website Messainlatino. it recently published this interview with Msgr Pozzo (the translation is by Gregor Kollmorgen, of The New Liturgical Movement):
Monsignor, a widespread restrictive interpretation of the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum argues that the papal provision is primarily if not exclusively, directed towards those groups and institutes that were already attached to the traditional form, and is not, by contrast, intended in any way to promote the extraordinary form. But Cardinal Dario Castrillón Hoyos said in London in June 2008 that the Pope would actually like to have the "Gregorian Rite" in all parishes. What is your opinion?
Msgr Guido Pozzo: The Motu Proprio is addressed to all the Catholic faithful who desire the extraordinary form of the Roman liturgy, not just to those who, prior to its promulgation, were attached to the ancient form of the Roman rite. Certainly it does intend to accommodate these latter and to heal old wounds, but the purpose of the document is also to allow the spreading of the extraordinary form, for the benefit of those who do not know it yet (being too young to have had it experienced) , or of those who rediscover with joy the Mass of their youth. The ever-increasing spread of this liturgical treasure, the Church's patrimony, can bring many benefits, spiritual and vocational, also through the mutual enrichment between the two forms of the Roman rite.
The Pope's letter accompanying the motu proprio refers to a term of three years, after which reports of the bishops will be collected to assess the situation. That may mean, as some argue, that the liberalization of the old Missal stipulated by the motu proprio is to be understood ad experimentum, or at least that at the end of this evaluation there may be restrictions regarding the the extraordinary form, such as for instance the return to a regime similar to that of the indults of 1984 or 1988?
Msgr Pozzo: The three-year term simply refers to a balance of the first three years of application. If there turn out to be serious difficulties, appropriate remedies will be found, always keeping in mind the essential purpose of the motu proprio.
From many places, obstacles opposed to the implementation of the motu proprio have been reported. We, too, have experienced them... What should an adequate group of lay people who find themselves in such situations of difficulty do to obtain a weekly Mass in the extraordinary form? And in what way can the Commission Ecclesia Dei intervene?
Msgr Pozzo: The answer is already written in the motu proprio: ask the parish piest and possibly look for a priest ready [to say the old Mass]. Should this prove impossible, it is necessary to turn to your bishop, who is called to seek an appropriate solution. If even this way no satisfaction of the request is obtained, write to the Commission Ecclesia Dei, which, however, deals with the bishops, who are naturally our interlocutors: they are asked for an assessment of the situation, to see what the actual difficulties are and how to find a remedy.
Changing the subject, have you seen the results of the Doxa survey commissioned by Paix liturgique and us?
Msgr Pozzo: Yes, I was given a preview a few days ago. These figures are truly remarkable and encouraging, especially that absolute majority of practicing Catholics who, at least according to the poll, regard the coexistence of the two forms of the Mass in the parishes as perfectly normal. I understand that a copy of the survey has also reached the Holy Father.
Thanks again Monsignor, and keep up the good work.
What does the Society of St. Pius X expect from these talks?
In his most recent "Letter to Friends and Benefactors, " the Superior General of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX), Bishop Bernard Fellay, speaks about the upcoming doctrinal talks with the Holy See. Here is the text of the letter, which I publish without further comment, except to bold-face the passage most relevant to the upcoming talks:
SUPERIOR GENERAL’S LETTER TO FRIENDS AND BENEFACTORS #75
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
The enthusiastic response to the Rosary Crusade we encounter throughout the world fills us with consolation and prompts us to take up this theme once again with you. If we are petitioning Heaven with this multitude of Aves, it is because the hour is indeed grave. We are sure of Our Lady’s victory because she herself foretold it, but the events that have been unfolding for nearly a century—since this triumph was announced at Fatima—oblige us to suppose that all kinds of other woes could yet befall mankind before this victory.
Yet the rules given at Fatima by the Mother of God were quite simple: if the world does not convert, it will be punished: “There will be a second war, more terrible than the first.” The world did not convert. And God’s answer was not long in coming. Since the Second World War, the world still has not converted. And if people think Russia has converted, they will have to explain to us in what it has converted, and to whom— economic liberalism?
Almost one hundred years later, we observe that the world has surely not become better; quite the contrary. The war of the unbelievers rages harder than ever, but it has taken an unexpected turn: the demolition of the Church is being carried out especially by subversion, by infiltrating the Church. Our holy Mother the Church is in the process of being transformed into a pile of spiritual ruins while the exterior façade remains more or less intact, thus deceiving the multitude about its real condition. And it has to be admitted that this subversion acquired an unexpected increase of efficacy on the occasion of the Second Vatican Council. It doesn’t take an advanced degree in theology to figure this out; today it is an historical fact.
What part of the responsibility should be attributed to the Council itself? This is a difficult question, but it is clear that this Council was not without effect, and its consequences have been well and truly disastrous. Because of it, the Church fell in step with the world. “We, too, in fact, we more than any others, honor mankind,” said Paul VI at the Council’s conclusion. And the man-centered orientation of Vatican II was harped on by John Paul II. But this orientation is indeed odd for the Church of God, supernatural in its essence, having received from Our Lord Jesus Christ not only its constitution and means, but first and foremost its end, which is nothing else than the continuation of His own redemptive and salvific mission: “Go into the whole world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he who does not believe shall be condemned.” (Mk. 16:15-16).
And now, here is the tragedy: the divine mission of the Church has been replaced by a purely human one. It is a great mystery that leaves one astounded. Salvation now comes second, to say the least.
Few men—very few men, unfortunately—understand that the terrible crisis of the Church since the Second Vatican Council is a chastisement more terrible than any other, for this time the catastrophe is spiritual: what is wounded, what is noiselessly killed in the midst of an indifference worse than death, are souls. The loss of grace in a soul is the most terrible harm that can happen to it because it makes no noise, it is not felt. And the voice of the watchmen has fallen silent. The call to conversion, to penance, to the flight from sin, temptations and the world has given way, if not to indulgence, then at least to sympathy with the world. There is a real will to make peace with the modern world.
The mission of salvation has given way to a new sort of humanitarian mission; it is a matter of helping men of every condition and religion to live well together on earth.
There is no doubt that everything connected in the message of the Blessed Virgin of Fatima, what is referred to as the Secret of Fatima, has not yet come to an end. Certainly, what we are living is per force part and parcel of the events that will end one day, eventually, with the triumph of Mary. What will happen? How will we recognize it? In any case, it will at least entail the conversion of Russia according to the very words of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
In 1917 at Rome, the foes of God were celebrating the 200th anniversary of Freemasonry and the 400th anniversary of Protestantism with parades of special violence against the Holy See. The demonstrators boisterously proclaimed the reign of Satan over the Vatican and the Sovereign Pontiff. Maximilian Kolbe, still a seminarian, witnessed these painful events and said:
This mortal hatred of the Church, of Christ, and of His Vicar on earth is not just an outburst of misguided individuals, but rather a systematic action that proceeds from the principle of Freemasonry: the destruction of all religion, but especially the Catholic religion. [Pisma Ojca Maksymiliana Marii Kolbego franciszkanina, Niepokalanow, maszynopsis, 1970; English tr. from The Immaculata Our Ideal, by Fr. Karl Stehlin (Warsaw, 2005), p. 39]….
Is it possible that our enemies should deploy so much activity so as to attain superiority while we stay idle, or at best apply ourselves to prayer without getting to work? Might we not have more powerful arms—the protection of Heaven and of the Immaculate Virgin? The Immaculata, victorious and triumphant over all heresies, will not yield to the advancing enemy if she finds faithful servants obedient to her command: she will bring off new victories even greater than can be imagined. We have to put ourselves like docile instruments into her hands, employing all lawful means, getting the word out everywhere by the diffusion of the Marian press and the Miraculous Medal, and enhancing our action by prayer and good example. [Testimony of Fr. Pignalberi reported during the process of canonization] .
He founded the Militia of the Immaculata just a few days after the October 13th apparition of Our Lady at Fatima, when the great miracle of the sun took place. It was in fact on October 16, with six fellow seminarians, that he consecrated himself to the Immaculate Heart of Mary for the purpose of leading the whole world to God by the Immaculata.
One cannot but be struck by the affinity between the message of Fatima and the response of the Polish Franciscan while reading his act of consecration:
O Immaculata, Queen of heaven and earth, Refuge of sinners, our most loving Mother, to whom God deigned to entrust the entire order of mercy, behold I, N., an unworthy sinner, cast myself at Thy feet and humbly ask Thee to deign to accept me completely and utterly as Thy property and possession; and do with me as it pleases Thee: all the faculties of my soul and body, my entire life, my death and my eternity. Dispose of me as Thou willst, so that what has been said of Thee might be fulfilled: ‘She will crush the head of the serpent,’ and also, ‘Thou alone hast vanquished all heresies throughout the world.’ Make of me an instrument in Thy immaculate and merciful hands, which serves Thee, in order to increase reverence for Thee as much as possible in so many fallen-away and lukewarm souls. Thus the benevolent reign of the Sacred Heart of Jesus will spread more and more. For whatever place Thou enters, Thou shalt implore upon it the grace of conversion an d sanctification, for all graces come to us from the Sacred Heart of Jesus only through Thy hands. [Scritti di Massimiliano Kolbe, new ed. (Rome: ENMI, 1997), Vol. I; Eng. version, The Immaculata Our Ideal]
Very dear faithful, it is in this same spirit that we launched the Rosary Crusade. But prayer is only a part of it: let us not forget the other two very important elements, penance and devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. By mortification, we wish to make reparation for the insults given to Mary, and in union with her sorrowful Heart we wish to associate ourselves as closely as possible to the sacrifice of the Cross of our Lord, because by it our salvation is effected. Thus we are at the heart of the message of Fatima: “God wishes to introduce devotion to my Immaculate Heart.” Perhaps not enough emphasis is given to this aspect, which seems to us even more important than the consecration of Russia and which is the second condition indicated by Mary to the pope for her triumph: consecrate Russia and promote devotion to her Immaculate Heart.
In this month of October we are going to enter into a new phase in our relations with the Vatican, that of the doctrinal discussions. What is at stake is very important, and we recommend them to your prayers. Undoubtedly that also is a part of our Crusade, and obviously this intention is included in the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary we all desire. That also completely outstrips all our own powers, and it would be folly pure and simple to undertake such an enterprise were it not sustained by the power of the supernatural means such as prayer and penance.
We do not want to conclude this letter without also thanking you for your generosity, which enables our work to develop throughout the world. There is one thing, though, that slows us down: the harvest is abundant, but workers for the harvest are lacking. Our Lord has already said it and has shown the remedy: pray for vocations! How we should like to come to the aid of all the faithful who only have the Mass once a month, or only on Sundays, unable to benefit from normal pastoral care… Yet the good Lord has gratified us this year with 27 new priests, and we expect an even slightly larger number next year. But even that is not enough, so great is the demand worldwide.
You are deeply thanked for all your efforts. May God reward you with the abundant graces and blessings we implore on you all, your families, your children. May Our Lady of the Rosary, the Immaculate Heart of Mary, protect you.
On the Feast of the Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, October 11, 2009.
+ Bernard Fellay
Superior General
LITURGY. The motu proprio Summorum pontificum
Paul VI celebrating the Solemn Ambrosian Rite
Nova et vetera
Benedict XVI has signed and published the document that liberalizes the use of the Roman Missal edited by Pope John XXIII in 1962. An interview with Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, president of the Pontifical Commission «Ecclesia Dei»: «The first wrong evaluation is to say that it is a return to the past. That isn’t so»
Interview with Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos by Gianni Cardinale
The motu proprio Summorum pontificum by Benedict XVI that in practice liberalizes the use of the Roman Missal of 1962 was finally published on 7 July. The motu proprio, that will come into force on 14 September, establishes that the Roman Missal promulgated by Paul VI in 1970 is the ordinary expression of the lex orandi of the Catholic Church of Latin rite. The Missal promulgated by Saint Pius V and re-edited by Blessed John XXIII must, therefore, be considered as extraordinary form. In no way, therefore, is a division in the «law of the faith» created since it is a matter of «two uses of the single Roman rite». It is hence lawful to celebrate mass according to the typical edition of the Roman Missal of 1962. To this purpose, the motu proprio of Benedict XVI indicates new rules that replace those established by the previous documents, Quattuor abhinc annos of 1984 and Ecclesia Dei of 1988, in which the indulgence was granted whereby the so-called Tridentine mass could be celebrated, but only with the consent of the local bishop. From 14 September onwards instead no priest or rector can impede the celebration of the mass of Saint Pius V in his church, on condition that the faithful who ask for it also have a priest willing to do so, provided he be suitable and not legally impeded. Not only that. The motu proprio also lays down that the parish priest may grant the license to use the older ceremony in the administration of the Sacraments: of Baptism, Confession, Matrimony and the Anointing of the Sick. Ordinaries (bishops and religious superiors) are also granted the faculty of celebrating the Sacrament of Confirmation.
The document is accompanied by a Letter, addressed to the bishops of the world, in which among other things Benedict XVI makes clear that «there is no contradiction between the one and the other edition of the Missale Romanum». And gives the reminder that in the «history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no break», stressing that what was sacred for previous generations «cannot suddenly be altogether forbidden or even harmful».
30Days asks the Colombian Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, president since 2000 of the Pontifical Commission «Ecclesia Dei» (as well as Prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy from 1996 to 2006), to illustrate the more important points in the motu proprio Summorum pontificum.
Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos
Your Eminence, what is the significance of this motu proprio that liberalizes the use of the so-called Missal of Saint Pius V?
DARÍO CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: When, after Vatican Council II, there were changes in the liturgy, substantial groups of laity and also of churchmen felt uneasy because they were strongly attached to the liturgy in force for centuries. I am thinking of the priests who for fifty years had celebrated the so-call mass of Saint Pius V and who suddenly found themselves having to celebrate another, I am thinking of the faithful for generations accustomed to the old rite, I am also thinking of children like the altar boys who suddenly found themselves lost in serving mass with the Novus ordo. So there was uneasiness at various levels. For some it was also of a theological nature, people who retained that the old rite expressed the sense of the sacrifice better than the one brought in. Others, not least for cultural reasons, were nostalgic for the Gregorian and the great polyphonies that were a treasure of the Latin Church. To aggravate everything there was the fact that those who felt the uneasiness blamed the changes on the Council, when in reality the Council itself had neither asked nor foreseen the details of the changes. The Mass that the Council Fathers celebrated was the Mass of Saint Pius V. The Council had not asked for the creation of a new rite, but a greater use of the vernacular and greater participation by the congregation.
Agreed, that was the air one breathed forty years ago. But today the generation that showed that unease no longer exists. Not just that: clergy and people have grown accustomed to the Novus ordo, and in the great majority of the cases are very comfortable…
Cardinal Ratzinger celebrating Solemn High Mass in the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Exactly, in the great majority, even if many amongst them don’t know what went missing with the abandonment of the old rite. But not everybody has grown used to the new rite. Curiously even in the new generations, both of clerics and laity, interest and respect for the earlier rite seems to be blooming. And they are priests and ordinary faithful who sometimes have nothing to do with the so-called Lefebvrians. These are facts about the Church, to which pastors cannot remain deaf. That is why Benedict XVI, who is a great theologian with a deep liturgical sensibility, has decided to promulgate the motu proprio.
But wasn’t there an indulgence already?
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Yes, there was an indulgence already, but already John Paul II had understood that the indulgence had not been sufficient. Not least because some priests and bishops were reluctant to apply it. But above all because the faithful who wanted to celebrate with the old rite must not be considered second-class. They are faithful whose right must be recognized to attend a mass that has nourished the Christian people for centuries, that nourished the sensibility of saints like Filippo Neri, Don Bosco, Saint Teresa of Lisieux, Blessed John XXIII and the servant of God John Paul II himself who, as said, understood the problem of the indulgence and hence already had in mind to extend the use of the 1962 Missal. I must say that in the meetings with cardinals and with the heads of ministries, in which this provision was discussed, resistance was really minimal. Pope Benedict XVI, who followed the process from the beginning, has taken this important step already conceived by his great predecessor. It is a Petrine provision emanated out of love for a great liturgical treasure, which is the mass of Saint Pius V, and also out of a pastor’s love for a considerable group of faithful.
But there has been resistance also from spokesmen of the episcopate…
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Resistance that according to me derives from two mistakes. The first wrong evaluation is to say that it is a return to the past. That is not so. Also because nothing is taken away from the Novus ordo, which remains the ordinary way of celebrating the single Roman rite; while those who want it are granted the freedom to celebrate the mass of Saint Pius V as extraordinary form.
That is the first mistake of those who oppose the motu proprio, and the second?
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: That it’s a matter of decreasing episcopal power. But that is not so. The Pope has not changed the Code of Canon Law. The bishop is the moderator of the liturgy in his own diocese. But the Apostolic See is entitled to shape the sacred liturgy of the universal Church. And a bishop must act in harmony with the Apostolic See and must guarantee the rights of every believer, including that of being able to attend the mass of Saint Pius V, as extraordinary form of the rite.
Yet it has been claimed that with this motu proprio Ratzinger «is mocking the Council» and «giving a slap in the face» to his predecessors Paul VI and John Paul II…
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Benedict XVI is following the Council, that did not abolish the mass of Saint Pius V nor asked for it to be done. And he is following the Council that urged that the voice and the legitimate desires of the laity be listened to. Those who claim these things should see the thousands of letters that have come to Rome asking for the freedom of being able to attend the mass to which they feel so attached. And he is not going against his predecessors who are widely quoted both in the motu proprio and in the letter written by the Pope that accompanies its publication. Pope Montini immediately granted the possibility of celebrating the mass of Saint Pius V in some cases. John Paul II, as I have already said, meant to prepare a motu proprio similar to that now published.
Isn’t there also some apprehension that a small minority of believers may impose the mass of Saint Pius V on the parish?
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Those who say that obviously haven’t read the motu proprio. It’s clear that no parish priest will be obliged to celebrate the mass of Saint Pius V. Only that if a group of the faithful, having a priest disposed to say it, asks to celebrate this mass, the parish priest or the rector of the church can’t oppose it. Obviously, if there are difficulties, it will be up to the bishop to act in such a way that everything takes place with respect and I would say commonsense in harmony with the universal Pastor.
But is there not the danger that with the introduction of two forms, the ordinary and the extraordinary, within the Latin rite there may be liturgical confusion in parishes and in dioceses?
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: If things are done in line with simple commonsense there’s no danger. And for that matter there are already dioceses in which masses are celebrated in several rites, since there are communities of Latin, Ukrainian Greek-Catholic or Ruthenian, Maronite, Melchite, Syro-Catholic, Chaldean faithful, etc… I’m thinking for example of some dioceses in the United States, like Pittsburgh, which take this legitimate liturgical variety as a treasure, not as a tragedy. Then there are also individual parishes that host rites different from the Latin, also of Orthodox or Prechalcedonian communities, without it causing scandal. So I don’t see any danger of confusion. On condition, I repeat, that everything takes place with order and mutual respect.
There are also those who believe that this motu proprio inflicts harm on the single rite that the Council Fathers wanted…
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: If it is clear that the Roman rite remains single, albeit it can be celebrated in two forms, let me remind you that in the Latin Church there has never been one single rite for everybody. Today for example there are all the rites of the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome. And also in the Latin rite there are other rites apart from Roman one, such as the Ambrosian or the Mozarabic. The mass of Saint Pius V itself, when it was approved, did not annul all the earlier rites, but only those that could not boast at least two centuries of existence…
And the mass of Saint Pius V was never abolished by the Novus ordo?
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Vatican Council II did not do so, and afterwards there has never been any positive action that established so. Thus formally the mass of Saint Pius V has never been abolished. It is odd however that those who vaunt themselves as authentic interpreters of Vatican II give an interpretation of it, in the liturgical sphere, so restrictive and so little respectful of the freedom of faithful, making that Council seem even more coercive than the Council of Trent.
The motu proprio doesn’t establish a minimum number of faithful necessary for requesting permission to celebrate the mass of Saint Pius V. Yet in the past it was rumoured that a minimum of thirty believers was being considered…
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: This is the glaring demonstration of how much disinformation has been set about on this motu proprio by people who have not read the drafts or who, in interested fashion, wanted to influence its drafting. I followed the whole process that led to the final draft and as I remember no minimum limit of faithful, neither thirty, nor twenty, nor a hundred ever appeared in any draft.
Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: The Pope could not summon all the bishops of the world, and so he convoked some prelates, particularly interested in the question for a variety of reasons, representatives from all the continents. He presented the text to them allowing the possibility of making observations. All those partaking had the chance to speak.
Were there changes to the text of the motu proprio as it had been prepared in the light of that meeting?
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Small changes in wording were asked for and so introduced, no more.
What prospects may this motu proprio open with the Lefebvrians?
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: The followers of Monsignor Lefebvre have always asked for the possibility for any priest to celebrate the mass of Saint Pius V. Now that faculty is officially and formally recognized. On the other hand the Pope repeats that the mass that we all officiate each day, that of the Novus ordo, remains the ordinary mode of celebrating the single Roman rite. And hence neither the value, nor even less the validity of the Novus ordo can be denied. That must be clear.
Will the motu proprio increase the responsibility of the «Ecclesia Dei»?
CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: This Commission was founded to gather in the laity and the churchmen who abandoned the Lefebvrian movement after the unlawful episcopal consecrations. And in fact it has then also striven for dialogue with the Fraternity of Saint Pius X itself in the prospect of full communion. Today the motu proprio is addressed to all those believers attached to the mass of Saint Pius V, and not only to those of let us say Lefebvrian origin. And this obviously presupposes very much more ample work for us.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Pope's Filipino Representative (Nuncio) to Haiti gives First-hand Account of Destruction Jan 13, '10 10:05 PM
Port au Prince, Haiti, Jan 13, 2010 / 01:21 pm (CNA).- Speaking with the Vatican's Fides news agency, the Apostolic Nuncio to Haiti, Archbishop Bernardito Auza, described the devastation in the streets of the capital Port-au-Prince. He reported on what he had observed of the situation of religious and government officials in the area and described widespread destruction.
Archbishop Auza stated his observations of the situation in the capital to Fides, saying, "Port-au-Prince is totally devastated. The cathedral, the archbishop's office, all of the big churches, all of the seminaries have been reduced to rubble."
The nuncio said that the resident priest at that cathedral had informed him of the likely death of Archbishop Joseph Serge Miot as he was buried under rubble along with hundreds of priests and seminarians. Other news reports confirmed that the archbishop did pass away in the earthquake.
Auza reported that many government buildings had been razed. All of the Ministry buildings but one were on the ground, as were the Presidential Palace and the schools.
"Parliament with the Senators, the schools with the children, the supermarkets were reduced to nothing," the nuncio stated.
The nuncio had made his way across the city to see the Haitian President and "express his condolences and solidarity" and found that, because they had been outdoors, he and his family had been saved although their home had crumbled.
People who live in front of the collapsed U.N. headquarters had reported to Auza that the head of that mission, Hedi Annabi, was trapped inside with hundreds of others.
The nuncio said that he had returned to his residence later in the morning to find "Priests and Sisters in the street, no longer with homes. The Rector of the seminary saved himself, as did the Dean of studies, but the seminarians are under the rubble. You hear yells everywhere from underneath the rubble."
"The CIFOR (according to Fides, an institute of study for religious men and women) collapsed with students inside that were participating in a conference. The office of the nuncio resisted (the earthquake), there was no one injured, but all of us are in shock!" he said.
"So many things were broken, including the tabernacle, but we are more fortunate than others. Many relatives of the personnel are dead, their houses destroyed. Everyone is asking for help. We will have a problem with water and food before long. We cannot go inside and stay there for very long because the ground continues to shake, so we're camping out in the yard."
Monday, January 11, 2010
Erap longtime adviser UP dean De Guzman, 79 - INQUIRER.net, Philippine News for Filipinos
Link The late Raul de Guzman is my Mom's (Sylvia Policarpio Maturan) 1st cousin, please remember him in your prayers.
Friday, January 8, 2010
Second Aim of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum: The Reform of the Reform
Second Aim of the Motu Proprio: The Reform of the Reform
Paix Liturgique Newsletter
Contents of our letter 2 - 8 January 2010
The increasing availability of Msgr Nicola Bux’s book The Reform of Benedict XVI [1] is an opportunity for us to depart somewhat from our usual focus on the application of the motu proprio “Summorum Pontificum” and to take stock of the “reform of the reform” that the Holy Pontiff has initiated in liturgy. It is also the occasion to consider what sort of relationship will slowly emerge between the two forms of the Roman liturgy.
The first aim of the motu proprio “Summorum Pontificum” is clear: to make it possible for the traditional Mass to be celebrated in every parish where it is requested. The MP will only truly be applied when we shall see the ten o’clock Sunday Mass celebrated in the ordinary form and the eleven o’clock Mass in the extraordinary form, or the reverse, in the cathedrals of Dublin or Detroit, as well as in the cathedrals of Boise or Aberdeen. In a word: as far as the MP’s application is concerned, we are still on the starting line.
A – The “Reform of the Reform” Project
The second aim of the MP, though implicit, is nonetheless obvious because of all that Cardinal Ratzinger has said on the subject in the past and because of the wish expressed in the 2007 text: a “mutual enrichment” of the two forms, which from that point coexist officially. Enrichment: everybody knows that the more obviously “rich” form is that which benefits from an uninterrupted, ten-centuries long tradition (or even seventeen-centuries long for its essential part, the canon), and whose doctrinal and ritual value is at least similar to that of the other great Catholic liturgies. In his book, Nicola Bux writes: “Comparative studies demonstrate that the Roman liturgy in its preconciliar form was far closer to the Oriental liturgy than is the current liturgy.” This is so much the case that no one can seriously contemplate denying that the form that needs to be enriched/transformed first and foremost is the liturgy that was hastily contrived forty years ago. Indeed, as Nicola Bux points out, “[one] has to admit that the Mass of Paul VI is far from containing all that is found in the missal of Saint Pius V.”
It has thus become customary to call “reform of the reform” this project of enrichment/transformation of Paul VI’s reform with a view to making it more traditional in content and form. Although it would be an exaggeration to say that the reform of the reform is only on the order of a pious wish, one must nevertheless fully understand that it is only—somewhat like the extraordinary form—at its beginnings.
Two preliminary observations about this future process come to mind:
1. The reform of the reform, as the expression indicates, concerns only the reform of Paul VI. It in no way involves an alleged “parallel” transformation of the traditional form of the rite. There is no comparison between the two forms in their relation to tradition or in their ritual structure. Fiddling with the traditional rite would truly sink it and everyone would come away a loser: the reform of the reform would see its backbone collapse. In any event, Cardinal Ratzinger has already clearly and prudently rejected the idea. [2]
2. Add to this that the reform of the reform does not seek to implement a series of reforms through laws and decrees with a view to establishing a third missal halfway between the Tridentine missal and the new one (not to mention that the latter is much more of an indefinite, diverse and open-ended collection than a “missal” in the traditional sense). Cardinal Ratzinger in the past, Pope Benedict XVI today, is averse to implementing a process of authoritarian and continual reforms akin—though in reverse—to what was done under the reform of Paul VI. The point is rather to undertake a gradual narrowing of the gap, the missal of Paul VI becoming progressively closer to the traditional missal. The new liturgy’s characteristic of being malleable at will allows this to occur effortlessly: its non-normative character paradoxically permits it to be infused with the traditional norm it lacks. One may legitimately wonder whether, at the end of the process, it will preserve any interest besides that of serving as a steppingstone to the traditional liturgy...
B – The book by Nicola Bux
The import of this book’s publication is due first of all to its author’s stature. Msgr Nicola Bux, professor of liturgy and sacramental theology at the Ecumenical-Patristic Institute of Theology of Bari in Italy, is a consultor for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and for the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, consultor too for the Bureau of Liturgical Celebrations for the Supreme Pontiff, advisor to the journal Communio, author of many books (notably Il Signore dei Misteri. Eucaristia e relativismo—The Lord of Mysteries: Eucharist and Relativism [Siena: Cantagalli, 2005]) and of many articles (e.g. “À soixante ans de l’encyclique Mediator Dei de Pie XII, débattre sereinement sur la liturgie”—“Sixty Years After Pius XII’s Encyclical Mediator Dei. On the Liturgy: A Debate Without Prejudice,” Osservatore Romano, 18 November 2007). And he is one of the most influential partisans of the reform of Paul VI’s reform.
Others deserve to be named in his company, such as Fr. Alcuin Reid (The Organic Development of the Liturgy [Saint Michael’s Abbey Press, 2004]), Fr. U. Michael Lang (Turning Towards the Lord. Orientation in Liturgical Prayer [Ignatius Press, 2004]), Msgr Nicola Giampietro (who published the memoirs of Cardinal Antonelli, Apoc 2004), Bishop Athanasius Schneider (Dominus est. It Is the Lord [Newman House Press, 2009]), Fr. Aidan Nichols (Looking At the Liturgy : a Critical View Of Its Contemporary Form [Ignatius Press, 1996]), and Dom Mauro Gagliardi (Liturgia, Fonte di Vita [Fede&Cultura, 2009]), not to mention the initiatives promoted by Father Manelli and the Franciscans of the Immaculate and, of course, the daily action of such important prelates as Archbishop Ranjith, Archbishop Burke, Cardinal Cañizares, et al.
Msgr Bux’s book also benefits from three forewords: one by the famous Italian journalist Vittorio Messori (author of the Ratzinger Report, an interview with then Cardinal Ratzinger) for the Italian edition; one by Marc Aillet, bishop of Bayonne, for the French edition; another by the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship himself, Cardinal Cañizares, for the Spanish edition.
For Nicola Bux, the crisis that wounded the Roman liturgy is due to its no longer being centered upon God and his adoration, but on people and the community. “At the beginning is adoration, and therefore that is where God is (...) The Church stems from adoration, from the mission of glorifying God,” Joseph Ratzinger had written on this subject. The crisis in liturgy begins the moment it ceases to be an adoration, when it is reduced to the celebration of a specific community in which priests and bishops, instead of being ministers, that is, servants, become “leaders”. This is why today “people are requesting more and more respect to ensure a private space of silence, with a view to an intimate faith participation in the sacred mysteries.”
The order of the day, then, is once again to teach a clergy wounded in its ritual praxis and consciousness that liturgy is sacred and divine, that it comes down from above as does the liturgy of the heavenly Jerusalem in the Apocalypse. “In this connection, there ought to be efforts made to find out why, despite appearances, the vernacular is at the end of the day unsuccessful in making the liturgy understandable.” The priest needs to be taught once again how to carry out the holy mysteries in persona Christi, in the Church, as its minister, and not as the coordinator of an assembly that is closed in on itself, which is what he has become.
C – The Reform Of the Reform Project:
Leading By Example Rather Than By Legislative Texts
Despite the seriousness of the conclusion reached by Msgr Bux in particular and by the “Pope’s men” in general—a conclusion that is in keeping with the Holy Father’s thinking in the matter—none of them wants laws and decrees designed to overturn everything in an authoritarian manner, as did those of the Bugnini era. Even though the Church today is quite ill, liturgically speaking, they prefer to act with the sweet medicine of example: the Supreme Pontiff’s example in the first place, then that of those bishops who will be willing to show the example as he does.
And so Benedict XVI multiplies corrective nudges that seem only to affect trifling matters, to be sure; after all, the liturgy is made up only of a collection of details: the very dignified manner of pontifical celebrations; the beauty of the liturgical vestments from St. Peter’s sacristy, which the pontifical master of ceremonies, Msgr Guido Marini, is using once more; the placement of large candlesticks on the altar, which diminish the theatrical effect of facing the people; above all, the distribution of Communion on the tongue, kneeling.
It is up to the bishops to follow suit in their liturgical celebrations. It is a matter of public knowledge that Cardinal Carlo Caffarra, Archbishop of Bologna, one of Italy’s theologically solid bishops, has recently decided in an April 27, 2009 ruling that “in view of the frequency with which irreverent attitudes are reported in the act of receiving the Eucharist,” he was deciding “that from this day forward, in the metropolitan church of San Pietro, in the basilica of San Petronio and in the shrine of the BVM of San Luca in Bologna, the faithful are to receive the Consecrated Bread only from the hands of a minister directly onto the tongue.”
For their part both Bishop Schneider and Dom Mauro Gagliardi [3] ask for a strong reminder that the “normal” way is that of Communion in the mouth, and that Communion in the hand is only a “tolerated” way, even though it has remained the most widespread way for a good long time. Such an encouragement is very important for the rebirth of faith in the real presence. Respect for the divine and for the holy is expressed through signs of reverence, again according to Msgr Bux.
Yet, other points too are constantly brought up by the partisans of the reform of the reform; to wit:
—1. Encouragement to reduce the number of concelebrants, and even of concelebrations: “When it [concelebration] becomes to frequent, the mediating function of each priest as such is obscured.”
—2. Slow reduction of the manifold optional parts of the Mass (particularly the Eucharistic prayers, some of which present doctrinal problems).
—3. Reintroduction of elements of the extraordinary form that encourage the sense of the sacred and of adoration, such as genuflections, kisses on the altar, the very ancient signs of the cross in the Canon: “The sacred is also expressed in signs of the cross and genuflections” (N. Bux).
—4. And much else besides: a reminder that the kiss of peace is a sacred action and not a manifestation of middle-class civility; the massive reintroduction of the liturgical language that is Latin, etc.
Lastly, and above all, one mustn’t overlook the encouragement given to the priest to celebrate facing the Lord, at least during the offertory and the Eucharistic prayer. “The most visible indicator of the liturgical reform,” says Msgr Bux, “was the change in the priest’s position with respect to the people.” In light of these words, one can legitimately reckon the beginning of the reform of the reform from the time when the Pope and the bishops will commonly celebrate towards the Lord.
D – The Spearhead of the Reform of the Reform Project
In his book, Nicola Bux notes that the key of the new liturgy as it left the offices of Bugnini—the author of the liturgical reform—is adaptation to the world. This is the point on which Bux’s thinking, in unison with that of the reform of the reform partisans, is at its most radical: the essence of Catholic liturgy is to be “as a permanent critique that the Church addresses to the world, while the world continually seeks to convince her to belong to it.” Therefore one must bear in mind that revolution is not reform: “the reform cannot be understood as a reconstruction attempt according to the tastes of a specific time.”
That is why Msgr Bux quotes at length, and comments on, the “Ottaviani Intervention” published soon after the Council by Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci. “They deplored,” he recalls in approval of the two Italian cardinals, “the absence of the normal finality of the Mass, that is to say, propitiatory sacrifice.” Indeed it would take a blind man not to notice that the new rite of the Mass has a de facto effect of immanentizing the Christian message: the doctrine of propitiatory sacrifice, the adoration of the Real Presence of Christ, the specificity of the hierarchical priesthood and generally the sacred character of the Eucharistic celebration are expressed in a far less tangible way than in the traditional rite. That is why attempts to reintroduce the prayers that best express its sacrificial value (see, e.g., the book amounting to a manifesto along these lines by Fr. Paul Tirot, OSB: Histoire des prières d’offertoire dans la liturgie romaine du VIIe au XVIe siècle—History of the Offertory Prayers in the Roman Liturgy From the Seventh to the Sixteenth Century [Edizione Liturgiche, 1985]) into the new Missal are on the rise today.
If, therefore, there is a point on which one can expect legislation to promote the reform of the reform project, it is certainly this: the possibility of introducing the traditional Roman Offertory prayers into the ordinary celebration.
In sum, if this plan were truly to take shape, the inverse situation to what happened between 1965 and 1969 might eventually develop: to that time of brutal transformation when everything changed in a ‘progressive’ direction might correspond a period of slow evolution during which everything would change in a resacralizing direction.
Such an implementation of the reform of the reform would thus be truly reformative, in the traditional (and quite demanding!) sense of the term ‘reform’. It would proceed by ‘contamination’, to use a term familiar to historians of the liturgy when they mean to speak of one liturgy’s influence over another. In this case, it would be that of the traditional liturgy on the new.
In fact, one might even claim that the extraordinary form is perhaps the only chance to save the ordinary form in the long term, precisely by enabling it to become less and less ordinary. It might then become a step by which to reach the extraordinary liturgy. In any event, it would in no way compete with the extraordinary form, but would rather provide it with a far more favorable environment for its dissemination and its affirmation as the official form of reference.
[1] Until an English version is published, Msgr Bux’s book is available in its original version from its Italian publisher, Piemme.
[2] During the 2001 liturgical days of Fontgombault, Cardinal Ratzinger had stated that there was no question, doubtless for a long time, of touching the Tridentine missal, essentially because its presence and life today could serve as a goad to an evolution of the new missal. This “line” is today clearly that of the Congregation for Divine Worship and of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, which hold that the introduction of the new lectionary into the traditional rite is impossible, for example. The only adjustment of the traditional rite that can be envisioned, according to the Roman liturgists, might be the introduction of a few new prefaces.
[3] Interview granted to zenit.org on December 21, 2009.
Paix Liturgique Newsletter
Contents of our letter 2 - 8 January 2010
The increasing availability of Msgr Nicola Bux’s book The Reform of Benedict XVI [1] is an opportunity for us to depart somewhat from our usual focus on the application of the motu proprio “Summorum Pontificum” and to take stock of the “reform of the reform” that the Holy Pontiff has initiated in liturgy. It is also the occasion to consider what sort of relationship will slowly emerge between the two forms of the Roman liturgy.
The first aim of the motu proprio “Summorum Pontificum” is clear: to make it possible for the traditional Mass to be celebrated in every parish where it is requested. The MP will only truly be applied when we shall see the ten o’clock Sunday Mass celebrated in the ordinary form and the eleven o’clock Mass in the extraordinary form, or the reverse, in the cathedrals of Dublin or Detroit, as well as in the cathedrals of Boise or Aberdeen. In a word: as far as the MP’s application is concerned, we are still on the starting line.
A – The “Reform of the Reform” Project
The second aim of the MP, though implicit, is nonetheless obvious because of all that Cardinal Ratzinger has said on the subject in the past and because of the wish expressed in the 2007 text: a “mutual enrichment” of the two forms, which from that point coexist officially. Enrichment: everybody knows that the more obviously “rich” form is that which benefits from an uninterrupted, ten-centuries long tradition (or even seventeen-centuries long for its essential part, the canon), and whose doctrinal and ritual value is at least similar to that of the other great Catholic liturgies. In his book, Nicola Bux writes: “Comparative studies demonstrate that the Roman liturgy in its preconciliar form was far closer to the Oriental liturgy than is the current liturgy.” This is so much the case that no one can seriously contemplate denying that the form that needs to be enriched/transformed first and foremost is the liturgy that was hastily contrived forty years ago. Indeed, as Nicola Bux points out, “[one] has to admit that the Mass of Paul VI is far from containing all that is found in the missal of Saint Pius V.”
It has thus become customary to call “reform of the reform” this project of enrichment/transformation of Paul VI’s reform with a view to making it more traditional in content and form. Although it would be an exaggeration to say that the reform of the reform is only on the order of a pious wish, one must nevertheless fully understand that it is only—somewhat like the extraordinary form—at its beginnings.
Two preliminary observations about this future process come to mind:
1. The reform of the reform, as the expression indicates, concerns only the reform of Paul VI. It in no way involves an alleged “parallel” transformation of the traditional form of the rite. There is no comparison between the two forms in their relation to tradition or in their ritual structure. Fiddling with the traditional rite would truly sink it and everyone would come away a loser: the reform of the reform would see its backbone collapse. In any event, Cardinal Ratzinger has already clearly and prudently rejected the idea. [2]
2. Add to this that the reform of the reform does not seek to implement a series of reforms through laws and decrees with a view to establishing a third missal halfway between the Tridentine missal and the new one (not to mention that the latter is much more of an indefinite, diverse and open-ended collection than a “missal” in the traditional sense). Cardinal Ratzinger in the past, Pope Benedict XVI today, is averse to implementing a process of authoritarian and continual reforms akin—though in reverse—to what was done under the reform of Paul VI. The point is rather to undertake a gradual narrowing of the gap, the missal of Paul VI becoming progressively closer to the traditional missal. The new liturgy’s characteristic of being malleable at will allows this to occur effortlessly: its non-normative character paradoxically permits it to be infused with the traditional norm it lacks. One may legitimately wonder whether, at the end of the process, it will preserve any interest besides that of serving as a steppingstone to the traditional liturgy...
B – The book by Nicola Bux
The import of this book’s publication is due first of all to its author’s stature. Msgr Nicola Bux, professor of liturgy and sacramental theology at the Ecumenical-Patristic Institute of Theology of Bari in Italy, is a consultor for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and for the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, consultor too for the Bureau of Liturgical Celebrations for the Supreme Pontiff, advisor to the journal Communio, author of many books (notably Il Signore dei Misteri. Eucaristia e relativismo—The Lord of Mysteries: Eucharist and Relativism [Siena: Cantagalli, 2005]) and of many articles (e.g. “À soixante ans de l’encyclique Mediator Dei de Pie XII, débattre sereinement sur la liturgie”—“Sixty Years After Pius XII’s Encyclical Mediator Dei. On the Liturgy: A Debate Without Prejudice,” Osservatore Romano, 18 November 2007). And he is one of the most influential partisans of the reform of Paul VI’s reform.
Others deserve to be named in his company, such as Fr. Alcuin Reid (The Organic Development of the Liturgy [Saint Michael’s Abbey Press, 2004]), Fr. U. Michael Lang (Turning Towards the Lord. Orientation in Liturgical Prayer [Ignatius Press, 2004]), Msgr Nicola Giampietro (who published the memoirs of Cardinal Antonelli, Apoc 2004), Bishop Athanasius Schneider (Dominus est. It Is the Lord [Newman House Press, 2009]), Fr. Aidan Nichols (Looking At the Liturgy : a Critical View Of Its Contemporary Form [Ignatius Press, 1996]), and Dom Mauro Gagliardi (Liturgia, Fonte di Vita [Fede&Cultura, 2009]), not to mention the initiatives promoted by Father Manelli and the Franciscans of the Immaculate and, of course, the daily action of such important prelates as Archbishop Ranjith, Archbishop Burke, Cardinal Cañizares, et al.
Msgr Bux’s book also benefits from three forewords: one by the famous Italian journalist Vittorio Messori (author of the Ratzinger Report, an interview with then Cardinal Ratzinger) for the Italian edition; one by Marc Aillet, bishop of Bayonne, for the French edition; another by the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship himself, Cardinal Cañizares, for the Spanish edition.
For Nicola Bux, the crisis that wounded the Roman liturgy is due to its no longer being centered upon God and his adoration, but on people and the community. “At the beginning is adoration, and therefore that is where God is (...) The Church stems from adoration, from the mission of glorifying God,” Joseph Ratzinger had written on this subject. The crisis in liturgy begins the moment it ceases to be an adoration, when it is reduced to the celebration of a specific community in which priests and bishops, instead of being ministers, that is, servants, become “leaders”. This is why today “people are requesting more and more respect to ensure a private space of silence, with a view to an intimate faith participation in the sacred mysteries.”
The order of the day, then, is once again to teach a clergy wounded in its ritual praxis and consciousness that liturgy is sacred and divine, that it comes down from above as does the liturgy of the heavenly Jerusalem in the Apocalypse. “In this connection, there ought to be efforts made to find out why, despite appearances, the vernacular is at the end of the day unsuccessful in making the liturgy understandable.” The priest needs to be taught once again how to carry out the holy mysteries in persona Christi, in the Church, as its minister, and not as the coordinator of an assembly that is closed in on itself, which is what he has become.
C – The Reform Of the Reform Project:
Leading By Example Rather Than By Legislative Texts
Despite the seriousness of the conclusion reached by Msgr Bux in particular and by the “Pope’s men” in general—a conclusion that is in keeping with the Holy Father’s thinking in the matter—none of them wants laws and decrees designed to overturn everything in an authoritarian manner, as did those of the Bugnini era. Even though the Church today is quite ill, liturgically speaking, they prefer to act with the sweet medicine of example: the Supreme Pontiff’s example in the first place, then that of those bishops who will be willing to show the example as he does.
And so Benedict XVI multiplies corrective nudges that seem only to affect trifling matters, to be sure; after all, the liturgy is made up only of a collection of details: the very dignified manner of pontifical celebrations; the beauty of the liturgical vestments from St. Peter’s sacristy, which the pontifical master of ceremonies, Msgr Guido Marini, is using once more; the placement of large candlesticks on the altar, which diminish the theatrical effect of facing the people; above all, the distribution of Communion on the tongue, kneeling.
It is up to the bishops to follow suit in their liturgical celebrations. It is a matter of public knowledge that Cardinal Carlo Caffarra, Archbishop of Bologna, one of Italy’s theologically solid bishops, has recently decided in an April 27, 2009 ruling that “in view of the frequency with which irreverent attitudes are reported in the act of receiving the Eucharist,” he was deciding “that from this day forward, in the metropolitan church of San Pietro, in the basilica of San Petronio and in the shrine of the BVM of San Luca in Bologna, the faithful are to receive the Consecrated Bread only from the hands of a minister directly onto the tongue.”
For their part both Bishop Schneider and Dom Mauro Gagliardi [3] ask for a strong reminder that the “normal” way is that of Communion in the mouth, and that Communion in the hand is only a “tolerated” way, even though it has remained the most widespread way for a good long time. Such an encouragement is very important for the rebirth of faith in the real presence. Respect for the divine and for the holy is expressed through signs of reverence, again according to Msgr Bux.
Yet, other points too are constantly brought up by the partisans of the reform of the reform; to wit:
—1. Encouragement to reduce the number of concelebrants, and even of concelebrations: “When it [concelebration] becomes to frequent, the mediating function of each priest as such is obscured.”
—2. Slow reduction of the manifold optional parts of the Mass (particularly the Eucharistic prayers, some of which present doctrinal problems).
—3. Reintroduction of elements of the extraordinary form that encourage the sense of the sacred and of adoration, such as genuflections, kisses on the altar, the very ancient signs of the cross in the Canon: “The sacred is also expressed in signs of the cross and genuflections” (N. Bux).
—4. And much else besides: a reminder that the kiss of peace is a sacred action and not a manifestation of middle-class civility; the massive reintroduction of the liturgical language that is Latin, etc.
Lastly, and above all, one mustn’t overlook the encouragement given to the priest to celebrate facing the Lord, at least during the offertory and the Eucharistic prayer. “The most visible indicator of the liturgical reform,” says Msgr Bux, “was the change in the priest’s position with respect to the people.” In light of these words, one can legitimately reckon the beginning of the reform of the reform from the time when the Pope and the bishops will commonly celebrate towards the Lord.
D – The Spearhead of the Reform of the Reform Project
In his book, Nicola Bux notes that the key of the new liturgy as it left the offices of Bugnini—the author of the liturgical reform—is adaptation to the world. This is the point on which Bux’s thinking, in unison with that of the reform of the reform partisans, is at its most radical: the essence of Catholic liturgy is to be “as a permanent critique that the Church addresses to the world, while the world continually seeks to convince her to belong to it.” Therefore one must bear in mind that revolution is not reform: “the reform cannot be understood as a reconstruction attempt according to the tastes of a specific time.”
That is why Msgr Bux quotes at length, and comments on, the “Ottaviani Intervention” published soon after the Council by Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci. “They deplored,” he recalls in approval of the two Italian cardinals, “the absence of the normal finality of the Mass, that is to say, propitiatory sacrifice.” Indeed it would take a blind man not to notice that the new rite of the Mass has a de facto effect of immanentizing the Christian message: the doctrine of propitiatory sacrifice, the adoration of the Real Presence of Christ, the specificity of the hierarchical priesthood and generally the sacred character of the Eucharistic celebration are expressed in a far less tangible way than in the traditional rite. That is why attempts to reintroduce the prayers that best express its sacrificial value (see, e.g., the book amounting to a manifesto along these lines by Fr. Paul Tirot, OSB: Histoire des prières d’offertoire dans la liturgie romaine du VIIe au XVIe siècle—History of the Offertory Prayers in the Roman Liturgy From the Seventh to the Sixteenth Century [Edizione Liturgiche, 1985]) into the new Missal are on the rise today.
If, therefore, there is a point on which one can expect legislation to promote the reform of the reform project, it is certainly this: the possibility of introducing the traditional Roman Offertory prayers into the ordinary celebration.
In sum, if this plan were truly to take shape, the inverse situation to what happened between 1965 and 1969 might eventually develop: to that time of brutal transformation when everything changed in a ‘progressive’ direction might correspond a period of slow evolution during which everything would change in a resacralizing direction.
Such an implementation of the reform of the reform would thus be truly reformative, in the traditional (and quite demanding!) sense of the term ‘reform’. It would proceed by ‘contamination’, to use a term familiar to historians of the liturgy when they mean to speak of one liturgy’s influence over another. In this case, it would be that of the traditional liturgy on the new.
In fact, one might even claim that the extraordinary form is perhaps the only chance to save the ordinary form in the long term, precisely by enabling it to become less and less ordinary. It might then become a step by which to reach the extraordinary liturgy. In any event, it would in no way compete with the extraordinary form, but would rather provide it with a far more favorable environment for its dissemination and its affirmation as the official form of reference.
[1] Until an English version is published, Msgr Bux’s book is available in its original version from its Italian publisher, Piemme.
[2] During the 2001 liturgical days of Fontgombault, Cardinal Ratzinger had stated that there was no question, doubtless for a long time, of touching the Tridentine missal, essentially because its presence and life today could serve as a goad to an evolution of the new missal. This “line” is today clearly that of the Congregation for Divine Worship and of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, which hold that the introduction of the new lectionary into the traditional rite is impossible, for example. The only adjustment of the traditional rite that can be envisioned, according to the Roman liturgists, might be the introduction of a few new prefaces.
[3] Interview granted to zenit.org on December 21, 2009.
Ntra. Sra. de Guadalupe de Cebu
The original image of the Patroness of Cebu, Philippines, Our Lady of Guadalupe de Cebu.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)