We Interrupt This Program For This Special Bulletin
This just in...

Despite what The California Catholic Daily just reported on, priests really don't need "permission" from their bishops to celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass. Who says so? Rome, that's who.

Here's a bit from Catholic World News, followed by a rather disconcerting comment that was posted on the CWN site;

No more permission needed for Latin Mass, cardinal says

Rome, Sep. 14, 2007 (CWNews.com) - With the formal implementation of Summorum Pontificum, the Pope's motu proprio providing wider access to the 1962 Roman Missal, diocesan priests do not need permission to celebrate the Latin Mass, a top Vatican official has stated.

Cardinal Dario Castrillon-Hoyos-- the president of the Ecclesia Dei commission, which supervises Vatican outreach to traditionalist Catholics-- says that "from this point, priests can decide to celebrate the Mass using the old rite, without permission from the Holy See or the bishop."

In an interview with Vatican Radio on September 13, broadcast just before the motu proprio officially took effect, Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos explained that Pope Benedict's motu proprio affirms the right of any priest to use the "extraordinary form" of the Latin liturgy. "It is, therefore, unnecessary to ask for any other permission," he said.

Some diocesan bishops have cautioned their priests against using the 1962 Missal without explicit permission from the diocese. But the president of the Ecclesia Dei commission-- which would hear any appeals regarding the new liturgical rules-- contradicted that notion in his Vatican Radio appearance. While affirming the bishop's authority to resolve any liturgical conflicts within his diocese, the Colombian cardinal said that the bishop should exercise that power "without negating the right that the Pope has given to the entire Church."

Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos said that the motu proprio involves "no big change" in the liturgy of the Roman Church, since the older liturgy was never banned. Vatican II affirmed the freedoms of the faithful, he said, and one such freedom, which Pope Benedict has now confirmed, was access to the older liturgical form.

"Nothing is imposed on anyone" by Summorum Pontificum, the cardinal said. In allowing for greater use of the old Missal, he explained, Pope Benedict is merely "opening a possibility to the faithful who request it."

________________________________________________________________ Add A Comment

Posted by: Leo XIII - Sep. 15, 2007 10:33 AM ET USA
Such great fanfare over the motu proprio? It is doomed because liberals in chanceries all over the world will simply dig in until there is a new Holy Father. Never underestimate the power of entrenched bureaucracies. The Ancient Mass will never become established in my diocese because our force of 60's priests will quietly oppose it. It may take hold in a few places, but that will not be enough to catalyze the reform of the reform. Pessimistic? Yes. But realistic, I am afraid.

I hate to admit it, but there's a lot of truth to what Leo says. Unless The Holy Father sends a message (in Cavemanese: jump real high and stomp on their necks with both feet... figuratively, of course) he can count on transparent/phony lip-service and out-right disloyalty from a number of what his professed "loyal" bishops. This is what so-called collegiality spawns.

If a bunch of Protestant-mind set bishops want to play authority chicken with The Holy Father... bring it on. I for one would love to see Pope Benedict break out his Boomstick. (Can't you just picture His Holiness doing this to some of our more progressive bishops? In that light, that makes this scene all the more hilarious)

It's Here
Deo Gratias!

Thanks to New Catholic at Rorate Caeli for the links and translations. I've added emphasis only to the passages where I think it's obvious that the proverbial rubber hits the road.

First is the Summorum Pontificum, then is the Papal Explanatory Letter.


_________________________________________________
APOSTOLIC LETTER SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF BENEDICT XVI GIVEN MOTU PROPRIO

[INTRODUCTION: Unofficial Vatican Information Service Translation, amended where needed]

It has been the constant concern of the Supreme Pontiffs, and up to the present time, to ensure that the Church of Christ offers a worthy ritual to the Divine Majesty, 'to the praise and glory of His name,' and 'to the benefit of all His Holy Church.'

Since time immemorial it has been necessary - as it is also for the future - to maintain the principle according to which 'each particular Church must concur with the universal Church, not only as regards the doctrine of the faith and the sacramental signs, but also as regards the usages universally accepted by uninterrupted apostolic tradition, which must be observed not only to avoid errors but also to transmit the integrity of the faith, because the Church's law of prayer corresponds to her law of faith.' (1)

Among the pontiffs who showed that requisite concern, particularly outstanding is the name of St. Gregory the Great, who made every effort to ensure that the new peoples of Europe received both the Catholic faith and the treasures of worship and culture that had been accumulated by the Romans in preceding centuries. He commanded that the form of the sacred liturgy as celebrated in Rome (concerning both the Sacrifice of Mass and the Divine Office) be conserved. He took great concern to ensure the dissemination of monks and nuns who, following the Rule of St. Benedict, together with the announcement of the Gospel illustrated with their lives the wise provision of their Rule that 'nothing should be placed before the work of God.' In this way the sacred liturgy, celebrated according to the Roman use, enriched not only the faith and piety but also the culture of many peoples. It is known, in fact, that the Latin liturgy of the Church in its various forms, in each century of the Christian era, has been a spur to the spiritual life of many saints, has reinforced many peoples in the virtue of religion and fecundated their piety.

Many other Roman pontiffs, in the course of the centuries, showed particular solicitude in ensuring that the sacred liturgy accomplished this task more effectively. Outstanding among them is St. Pius V who, sustained by great pastoral zeal and following the exhortations of the Council of Trent, renewed the entire liturgy of the Church, oversaw the publication of liturgical books amended and 'renewed in accordance with the norms of the Fathers,' and provided them for the use of the Latin Church.

One of the liturgical books of the Roman rite is the Roman Missal, which developed in the city of Rome and, with the passing of the centuries, little by little took forms very similar to that it has had in recent times.

'It was towards this same goal that succeeding Roman Pontiffs directed their energies during the subsequent centuries in order to ensure that the rites and liturgical books were brought up to date and when necessary clarified. From the beginning of this century they undertook a more general reform.' (2) Thus our predecessors Clement VIII, Urban VIII, St. Pius X (3), Benedict XV, Pius XII and Blessed John XXIII all played a part.

In more recent times, Vatican Council II expressed a desire that the respectful reverence due to divine worship should be renewed and adapted to the needs of our time. Moved by this desire our predecessor, the Supreme Pontiff Paul VI, approved, in 1970, reformed and partly renewed liturgical books for the Latin Church. These, translated into the various languages of the world, were willingly accepted by bishops, priests and faithful. John Paul II amended the third typical edition of the Roman Missal. Thus Roman pontiffs have operated to ensure that 'this kind of liturgical edifice ... should again appear resplendent for its dignity and harmony.' (4)

But in some regions, no small numbers of faithful adhered and continue to adhere with great love and affection to the earlier liturgical forms. These had so deeply marked their culture and their spirit that in 1984 the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II, moved by a concern for the pastoral care of these faithful, with the special indult 'Quattuor abhinc anno," issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship, granted permission to use the Roman Missal published by Blessed John XXIII in the year 1962. Later, in the year 1988, John Paul II with the Apostolic Letter given as Motu Proprio, 'Ecclesia Dei,' exhorted bishops to make generous use of this power in favor of all the faithful who so desired.

[ONLY LEGAL ARTICLES OFFICIALLY TRANSLATED]

Our predecessor John Paul II having already considered the insistent petitions of these faithful, having listened to the views of the Cardinal Fathers of the Consistory of 22 March 2006, having reflected deeply upon all aspects of the question, invoked the Holy Spirit and trusting in the help of God, with these Apostolic Letters We establish the following:

Art. 1 The Roman Missal promulgated by Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the Lex orandi (Law of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite. Nonetheless, the Roman Missal promulgated by St. Pius V and reissued by Bl. John XXIII is to be considered as an extraordinary expression of that same Lex orandi, and must be given due honour for its venerable and ancient usage. These two expressions of the Church’s Lex orandi will in no any way lead to a division in the Church’s Lex credendi (Law of belief). They are, in fact two usages of the one Roman rite.

It is, therefore, permissible to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as an extraordinary form of the Liturgy of the Church. The conditions for the use of this Missal as laid down by earlier documents Quattuor abhinc annis and Ecclesia Dei, are substituted as follows:

Art. 2 In Masses celebrated without the people, each Catholic priest of the Latin rite, whether secular or regular, may use the Roman Missal published by Bl. Pope John XXIII in 1962, or the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970, and may do so on any day with the exception of the Easter Triduum. For such celebrations, with either one Missal or the other, the priest has no need for permission from the Apostolic See or from his Ordinary.

Art. 3 Communities of Institutes of consecrated life and of Societies of apostolic life, of either pontifical or diocesan right, wishing to celebrate Mass in accordance with the edition of the Roman Missal promulgated in 1962, for conventual or “community” celebration in their oratories, may do so. If an individual community or an entire Institute or Society wishes to undertake such celebrations often, habitually or permanently, the decision must be taken by the Superiors Major, in accordance with the law and following their own specific decrees and statues.

Art. 4 Celebrations of Mass as mentioned above in art. 2 may – observing all the norms of law – also be attended by faithful who, of their own free will, ask to be admitted.

Art. 5 § 1 In parishes, where there is a stable group of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly accept their requests to celebrate the Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962, and ensure that the welfare of these faithful harmonises with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the guidance of the bishop in accordance with canon 392, avoiding discord and favouring the unity of the whole Church.

§ 2 Celebration in accordance with the Missal of Bl. John XXIII may take place on working days; while on Sundays and feast days one such celebration may also be held.

§ 3 For faithful and priests who request it, the pastor should also allow celebrations in this extraordinary form for special circumstances such as marriages, funerals or occasional celebrations, e.g. pilgrimages.

§ 4 Priests who use the Missal of Bl. John XXIII must be qualified to do so and not juridically impeded.

§ 5 In churches that are not parish or conventual churches, it is the duty of the Rector of the church to grant the above permission.

Art. 6 In Masses celebrated in the presence of the people in accordance with the Missal of Bl. John XXIII, the readings may be given in the vernacular, using editions recognised by the Apostolic See.

Art. 7 If a group of lay faithful, as mentioned in art. 5 § 1, has not obtained satisfaction to their requests from the pastor, they should inform the diocesan bishop. The bishop is strongly requested to satisfy their wishes. If he cannot arrange for such celebration to take place, the matter should be referred to the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”.

Art. 8 A bishop who, desirous of satisfying such requests, but who for various reasons is unable to do so, may refer the problem to the Commission “Ecclesia Dei” to obtain counsel and assistance.

[I'm concerned over Articles 7 & 8. I can easily forsee this happening - if any given pastor refuses to celebrate the TLM for a "group of lay faithful", that same group can inform the local bishop. If that particular bishop decides to take no action enforcing this particular motu proprio, all that bishop has to do is forward it to the Ecclesia Dei Commission. From there, it'll die of loneliness. I have a nasty feeling that THIS is the loophole that priests and bishops who are hostile to the Latin Mass will use to squash it.]

Art. 9 § 1 The pastor, having attentively examined all aspects, may also grant permission to use the earlier ritual for the administration of the Sacraments of Baptism, Marriage, Penance, and the Anointing of the Sick, if the good of souls would seem to require it.

§ 2 Ordinaries are given the right to celebrate the Sacrament of Confirmation using the earlier Roman Pontifical, if the good of souls would seem to require it.

§ 2 Clerics ordained “in sacris constitutis” may use the Roman Breviary promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in 1962.

Art. 10 The ordinary of a particular place, if he feels it appropriate, may erect a personal parish in accordance with can. 518 for celebrations following the ancient form of the Roman rite, or appoint a chaplain, while observing all the norms of law. [In other words, a Bishop can erect a Latin Mass only parish if he so desires]

Art. 11 The Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”, erected by John Paul II in 1988, continues to exercise its function. Said Commission will have the form, duties and norms that the Roman Pontiff wishes to assign it.

Art. 12 This Commission, apart from the powers it enjoys, will exercise the authority of the Holy See, supervising the observance and application of these dispositions.

We order that everything We have established with these Apostolic Letters issued as Motu Proprio be considered as “established and decreed”, and to be observed from 14 September of this year, Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross, whatever there may be to the contrary.

From Rome, at St. Peter’s, 7 July 2007, third year of Our Pontificate.

_________________________________________________

Papal Explanatory Letter to the Apostolic Letter SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM

My dear Brother Bishops,

With great trust and hope, I am consigning to you as Pastors the text of a new Apostolic Letter "Motu Proprio data" on the use of the Roman liturgy prior to the reform of 1970. The document is the fruit of much reflection, numerous consultations and prayer.

News reports and judgments made without sufficient information have created no little confusion. There have been very divergent reactions ranging from joyful acceptance to harsh opposition, about a plan whose contents were in reality unknown.

This document was most directly opposed on account of two fears, which I would like to address somewhat more closely in this letter.

In the first place, there is the fear that the document detracts from the authority of the Second Vatican Council, one of whose essential decisions – the liturgical reform – is being called into question. This fear is unfounded. In this regard, it must first be said that the Missal published by Paul VI and then republished in two subsequent editions by John Paul II, obviously is and continues to be the normal Form – the Forma ordinaria – of the Eucharistic Liturgy. The last version of the Missale Romanum prior to the Council, which was published with the authority of Pope John XXIII in 1962 and used during the Council, will now be able to be used as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgical celebration. It is not appropriate to speak of these two versions of the Roman Missal as if they were "two Rites". Rather, it is a matter of a twofold use of one and the same rite.

As for the use of the 1962 Missal as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgy of the Mass, I would like to draw attention to the fact that this Missal was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted. At the time of the introduction of the new Missal, it did not seem necessary to issue specific norms for the possible use of the earlier Missal. Probably it was thought that it would be a matter of a few individual cases which would be resolved, case by case, on the local level. Afterwards, however, it soon became apparent that a good number of people remained strongly attached to this usage of the Roman Rite, which had been familiar to them from childhood. This was especially the case in countries where the liturgical movement had provided many people with a notable liturgical formation and a deep, personal familiarity with the earlier Form of the liturgical celebration. We all know that, in the movement led by Archbishop Lefebvre, fidelity to the old Missal became an external mark of identity; the reasons for the break which arose over this, however, were at a deeper level. Many people who clearly accepted the binding character of the Second Vatican Council, and were faithful to the Pope and the Bishops, nonetheless also desired to recover the form of the sacred liturgy that was dear to them. This occurred above all because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear. I am speaking from experience, since I too lived through that period with all its hopes and its confusion. And I have seen how arbitrary deformations of the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the Church.

Pope John Paul II thus felt obliged to provide, in his Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei (2 July 1988), guidelines for the use of the 1962 Missal; that document, however, did not contain detailed prescriptions but appealed in a general way to the generous response of Bishops towards the "legitimate aspirations" of those members of the faithful who requested this usage of the Roman Rite. At the time, the Pope primarily wanted to assist the Society of Saint Pius X to recover full unity with the Successor of Peter, and sought to heal a wound experienced ever more painfully. Unfortunately this reconciliation has not yet come about. Nonetheless, a number of communities have gratefully made use of the possibilities provided by the Motu Proprio. On the other hand, difficulties remain concerning the use of the 1962 Missal outside of these groups, because of the lack of precise juridical norms, particularly because Bishops, in such cases, frequently feared that the authority of the Council would be called into question. Immediately after the Second Vatican Council it was presumed that requests for the use of the 1962 Missal would be limited to the older generation which had grown up with it, but in the meantime it has clearly been demonstrated that young persons too have discovered this liturgical form, felt its attraction and found in it a form of encounter with the Mystery of the Most Holy Eucharist, particularly suited to them. Thus the need has arisen for a clearer juridical regulation which had not been foreseen at the time of the 1988 Motu Proprio. The present Norms are also meant to free Bishops from constantly having to evaluate anew how they are to respond to various situations.

In the second place, the fear was expressed in discussions about the awaited Motu Proprio, that the possibility of a wider use of the 1962 Missal would lead to disarray or even divisions within parish communities. This fear also strikes me as quite unfounded. The use of the old Missal presupposes a certain degree of liturgical formation and some knowledge of the Latin language; neither of these is found very often. Already from these concrete presuppositions, it is clearly seen that the new Missal will certainly remain the ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, not only on account of the juridical norms, but also because of the actual situation of the communities of the faithful.

It is true that there have been exaggerations and at times social aspects unduly linked to the attitude of the faithful attached to the ancient Latin liturgical tradition. Your charity and pastoral prudence will be an incentive and guide for improving these. For that matter, the two Forms of the usage of the Roman Rite can be mutually enriching: new Saints and some of the new Prefaces can and should be inserted in the old Missal. The "Ecclesia Dei" Commission, in contact with various bodies devoted to the usus antiquior, will study the practical possibilities in this regard. The celebration of the Mass according to the Missal of Paul VI will be able to demonstrate, more powerfully than has been the case hitherto, the sacrality which attracts many people to the former usage. The most sure guarantee that the Missal of Paul VI can unite parish communities and be loved by them consists in its being celebrated with great reverence in harmony with the liturgical directives. This will bring out the spiritual richness and the theological depth of this Missal.

I now come to the positive reason which motivated my decision to issue this Motu Proprio updating that of 1988. It is a matter of coming to an interior reconciliation in the heart of the Church. Looking back over the past, to the divisions which in the course of the centuries have rent the Body of Christ, one continually has the impression that, at critical moments when divisions were coming about, not enough was done by the Church’s leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity. One has the impression that omissions on the part of the Church have had their share of blame for the fact that these divisions were able to harden. This glance at the past imposes an obligation on us today: to make every effort to unable for all those who truly desire unity to remain in that unity or to attain it anew. I think of a sentence in the Second Letter to the Corinthians, where Paul writes: "Our mouth is open to you, Corinthians; our heart is wide. You are not restricted by us, but you are restricted in your own affections. In return … widen your hearts also!" (2 Cor 6:11-13). Paul was certainly speaking in another context, but his exhortation can and must touch us too, precisely on this subject. Let us generously open our hearts and make room for everything that the faith itself allows.

There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture. What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful. It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place. Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books. The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness.

In conclusion, dear Brothers, I very much wish to stress that these new norms do not in any way lessen your own authority and responsibility, either for the liturgy or for the pastoral care of your faithful. Each Bishop, in fact, is the moderator of the liturgy in his own Diocese (cf. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 22: "Sacrae Liturgiae moderatio ab Ecclesiae auctoritate unice pendet quae quidem est apud Apostolicam Sedem et, ad normam iuris, apud Episcopum").

Nothing is taken away, then, from the authority of the Bishop, whose role remains that of being watchful that all is done in peace and serenity. Should some problem arise which the parish priest cannot resolve, the local Ordinary will always be able to intervene, in full harmony, however, with all that has been laid down by the new norms of the Motu Proprio.

Furthermore, I invite you, dear Brothers, to send to the Holy See an account of your experiences, three years after this Motu Proprio has taken effect. If truly serious difficulties come to light, ways to remedy them can be sought.

Dear Brothers, with gratitude and trust, I entrust to your hearts as Pastors these pages and the norms of the Motu Proprio. Let us always be mindful of the words of the Apostle Paul addressed to the presbyters of Ephesus: "Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the Church of God which he obtained with the blood of his own Son" (Acts 20:28).

I entrust these norms to the powerful intercession of Mary, Mother of the Church, and I cordially impart my Apostolic Blessing to you, dear Brothers, to the parish priests of your dioceses, and to all the priests, your co-workers, as well as to all your faithful.

Given at Saint Peter’s, 7 July 2007

BENEDICTUS PP. XVI

Thanks to some Cave Readers, I am posting remarks from the great Father Z. (His comments are in "RED.")

Catholic Family News Attacks U.S. Military Archdiocese regarding Summorum Pontificum

CATEGORY: SESSIUNCULUM — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 11:21 am

Some time ago I posted about the response of the Archdiocese for the Military in the USA to requests to implement Summorum Pontificum.

In my opinion, as I wrote before, the Military Archdiocese responded in a pretty reasonable way. Essentially they said that because military personnel are not, by definition, fixed in a place indefinitely, thus they are not "stable", and they cannot constitute a group that is present continuously or in a stable manner over a reasonable period of time, it would not be reasonable to established celebrations of the TLM on a fixed or regularly scheduled basis. There is also the matter of shortage of priests. However, the Archdiocese said, very reasonably, that TLMs could be celebrated ad hoc, which really could be quite often if you think about it. The traditionalist publication Catholic Family News has published its own reaction to the Military Archdiocese. I am a little steamed about it. I think we might look at this with my emphases and comments.
Military Archdiocese Says No to Latin Mass [This title is duplicitous. The MilArchd. did NOT say "no" in an absolute way. As a matter of fact, it seems supportive of TLMs celebrated in an ad hoc manner.]

By Edwin Faust
Since the publication of the motu proprio “Summorum Pontifcum”, [Pontificum] requests have been made to the Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA, to provide Tridentine Mass at military installations. To demonstrate the widespread desire for such a provision, a petition was briefly posted on a Web site during the Veterans Day holiday in the U.S. and more than 150 military personnel signed the petition and added their heartfelt comments. [WDTPRS also advertised this petition. However, 150 people signed it… for how many military installations? I think there may be more than 150 installations in the USA alone!] This information was forwarded to the new archbishop, Timothy Broglio, who delegated the matter to one of his subordinates, Msgr. James Dixon, whose disappointing response appears (at the bottom) on this page. According to Msgr. Dixon, there will be no attempt made to implement the motu proprio in the archdiocese on the grounds that the military do not constitute a stable community. [Again, this is duplicitous. The MilArchd. is implementing the Motu Proprio according to the circumstances faced on military installations! If there can be no identifiable group continuously present at, say Fort Ipsidipsy, then it is hard to imagine how a Mass schedule can be permanently changed. On the other hand, Summorum Pontificum has a specific provision for Masses celebrated "occasionally", which does NOT mean "rarely", as it might sound to some ears in English. This means that Masses can be inserted into schedules without changing the permanent schedule of a base chapel. That is a way to implement Summorum Pontificum!] We cannot accept such reasoning, as it would also preclude celebrations of the Tridentine Mass on college and university campuses, where students also come and go; [This is like comparing apples with oranges. The military have an Archdiocese to see to the spiritual needs of their personnel and dependents. There is no diocese for college students. Also, students have a reasonable expectation of being at a school for a period of time according to their own choice, whereas military personnel are simply transferred.] yet, we have seen several such Masses being offered on a regular basis and attracting large followings. The refusal of the archdiocese also appears to presume that no such Masses can be offered without a request by what it considers a stable community. [That is a false statement. The MilArchd. said "the Archdiocese cannot stipulate as a requirement [NB: which does not exclude that it can be done!] to those assigning priest-chaplains that a certain installation must have a priest-chaplain able to celebrate the Mass and the Sacraments according to the 1962 Missal. ... It would also be appropriate for a military installation, where the priest-chaplain and the community desire to do so, to have a celebration of the Mass, announced beforehand, with servers and choir properly trained, for the edification of the faithful." That could be EVERY SUNDAY if they can make it work! But priests get reassigned and the population of an installation is shifting.] This is simply not the case, as in many locales Masses have been initiated by priests, even with the help of their ordinaries, and drawn many of the faithful. [This opens up the question of whether, according to Summorum Pontificum priests can simply schedule Mass on their own initiative without previously having received requests. I am inclined to think they can, but that opens up all sort of practical problems for the blow back the priest will probably get.] The community request appears to require a response, but not to be a sine qua non. [First, yes… according to Summorum Pontificum reasonable requests do require a response! They can’t be ignored. However, Summorum Pontificum also says that when the priest or bishop are unable or unwilling to acceed to the request… I repeat… unable… then everyone should contact Rome. However, the MilArchd seems to have provided for this already by saying that if people who want TLMs can get their act together with the priests, they by all means can have celebrations with the older Missal whenever they want!] In any event, there is a demonstrated widespread desire for the ancient Mass in all branches of the military. [A couple things. First, I don’t think that a petition with 150 names for the whole of the Catholic population reading blogs in the military constitutes "widespread" anything. However, my personal experience of meeting Catholic military personal here and abroad suggests to me that there could be very great interest, given some time and catechesis and careful attention to procedure, which is important in a military environment.] The previous ordinary, Archbishop O’Brien, refused implementation of the 1988 indult, despite repeated requests; his successor seems intent upon continuing this policy, [No! I don’t think that is fair. The MilArchd Vicar General wrote a pretty positive letter at the direction of Archbp. Broglio. He even said, "I would be happy to hear directly again from you on this subject with suggestions about how we can continue this great work."] suggesting that those who want the Latin Mass look elsewhere. [NO! That is not the whole story. Sure the MilArchd said that priests should let people where in the area the TLM is being celebrated, but he also said that TLMs could be celebrated ad hoc if people can get their acts together.] But this is not possible in many cases. My son, a cadet at the military academy at West Point, is restricted to post most weekends and, were he not, there is no Latin Mass available within a reasonable distance. His situation is quite common. [And let’s hope that, as more younger priests learn the older forms, cadets won’t face that in the future!] Despite its somewhat unctuous tone, Msgr. Dixon’s letter makes it evident that the military archdiocese has bent its mind, not to finding ways to provide Traditional Latin Masses, but to preventing them. [This is unfair and whiny. Nothing of the sort is "evident".] There is no provision in the motu proprio that allows an ordinary to send those who want the Tridentine Mass on a search through neighboring dioceses. [Nor is there any provision in the Motu Proprio that requires regularly scheduled TLMs outside of a regular parochial structure! Some flexibility and reason are needed.] And many in the military, for one reason and another, cannot travel far from their duty station. [So rather than whine, people should get busy and work something out! The MilArchd has said explicitly that TLMs CAN BE CELEBRATED. What is hard about this?] There have been generous responses to the Holy Father’s motu proprio, such as that of Archbishop Burke in St. Louis, who is providing training for those priests who wish to say the Tridentine Mass. [For priests who "wish" to do so.] Several workshops have also sprung up in various dioceses and those orders specially dedicated to offering the Tridentine Mass have been providing help to the many priests who want to learn this ancient and beautiful rite. There is no reason that the military archdiocese should not take steps to conform itself to the mind of the Holy Father [a grossly unfair statement] and satisfy the legitimate aspirations of those in its spiritual charge. The problem is not the lack of a stable community, [um… yes… it is] but the lack of good will in high places. [the writer simply desire to interpret the letter of the MilArchdVC in the worst possible light. However he raised a good point: Could not the MilArchd also provide possibilities for chaplains to learn the older form of Mass? Perhaps some thought could be given to that. The MilArchdVC Msgr. Dixon said he was open to suggestions. However, when people are determined simply to write unfair and poorly thought through attacks on the statement of the same MilArchd, one wonders just how long the MilArchd will keep that door open!] I would ask all of you who are reading this to please speak up for those members of the military who want the Tridentine Mass offered at major military installations. [But don’t speak to them along the lines of this article! Be reasonable, patient and prudent, not misreading the facts, but understanding that there is a lot of room to work in within that statement of the MilArchd for people of good will.] Below is the contact information for the Archdiocese for Military Services and the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei. There is also an interactive Web site offering information, updates and comments on this situation: milmotu.lyon.edu I have also included a brief sampling of the comments we have received from members of the military. These brave people in our military are willing to lay down their lives for us. Surely, it is not too much to ask that their shepherds provide them with the spiritual nourishment they need in the legitimate form in which they request it. [No disagreement there! The problem is how to get it for them without screwing everything up!]
• • • • • •

Taking Former Altar Boy's Top 10 AND RUNNIN' WITH IT!!
Click here to see his Top 10 reasons to hate the Moru Proprio

One thing I'll give Bishop Trautman... at least he brought up the Motu Proprio on his diocesan web site. He's batting .400, but at least he said something.

That's more than I can say for Roger Cardinal Mahony of Los Angeles. As of this date and time (11:00 EST, July 13, 2007), absolutely nothing on the Archdiocese of LA web site even makes the slightest of mentions of the most earth-shaking news to hit to Catholicism since Vatican II.

But they do have a listing (the very first on their menu) of various languages that Mass is celebrated in. If one counts "African-American" and "Native-American" Cultural Focus as languages, then Mass is celebrated in 31 languages... from American Sign Language to Vietnamese.

Shockingly enough... Latin isn't listed. They love saying how they do offer it in accordance with Ecclesia Dei, but it's location is uber-secret. I guess they're on double secret probation.

The Archdiocesan newspaper, The Tidings (or as I call it... Low Tidings) ran a story on the MP. They're batting .400.

My hometown diocese, San Diego (I grew up there), has zilch on their web site. I guess they're still busy selling off church property to pay for rapist "priests". But the diocesan paper, The Southern Cross, did mention the MP in a story from the Catholic News Service (the official news organ of the USCCB).

It was a rather terse snippet that summed up the release of the MP as essentially "[the Pope's] time-honored Vatican tradition: clearing his desk". From there, five whole sentences about the freeing of the Traditional Latin Mass. Hey, if Bishop Brom wants to ignore the runner on 3d, that's his call. But like I said... he's probably really super busy selling off church property. One must set priorities, you know.

The Diocese of Tucson is conspicuously silent as well. But they do have a link prominently displayed to report rapists "priests". Wow... I'm underwhelmed.

I'm genuinely surprised by the reaction of Archbishop Weurl of Washington, DC. I'll admit that I don't trust Archbishop Weurl... especially since his refusal to stand-up to pro-abortion "Catholic" politicians. But anyhow, the Archdiocesan web site states "We will be putting together a committee to revise the sacramental norms and facilitate implementation of the motu proprio by its effective date in September". Hmmm.... certain catch-words jump out at me. "Committee", "revise", "facilitate". Sheesh... why all the drama? In the words of a certain shoe company -- "just do it".

And in all fairness, I did come across more than one Diocesan web site that hasn't been updated since July, 6th, the day before the Motu Proprio was announced. I'll give 'em the benefit of the doubt in the meantime.

But you know... the news isn't all bad.

But the winner of the 1st Annual Vir Speluncae Catholicus "Gee, I'm Glad He's My Bishop" Award is His Excellency Michael Burbidge of Raleigh, NC.

News
Pope Benedict’s Apostolic Letter on the Roman Rite

On Saturday, July 7, His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI promulgated motu proprio the Apostolic Letter On the Use of the Roman Liturgy Prior to the Reform of 1970. (Summorum Pontificum).

The Most Reverend Michael F. Burbidge will meet with advisors to begin pastoral implementation of the Holy Father’s instructions. Directions given in the Apostolic Letter will be effective September 14, 2007, the feast of the Triumph of the Cross.

No double-talk, no catch phrases, no seminar-speak, just straight talk. "...begin pastoral implementation...". No committees being formed. No "ascertaining what constitutes a stable community". No searching for loopholes to end-run around The Holy Father.

There's only one thing I don't like about Bishop Burbidge being the Bishop of Raleigh... I got a nasty feeling that he'll be leaving us fairly soon (at least within 4 years). I can easily see him moving onto an Archdiocese one day soon.

Military Archdiocese Says No to Latin Mass

(Trust me, This BS Will NOT Stand! I Urge All Caveman Catholics to sign this Petition.)

Article from "Catholic Family News."

By Edwin Faust

Since the publication of the motu proprio “Summorum Pontifcum”, requests have been made to the Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA, to provide Tridentine Mass at military installations. To demonstrate the widespread desire for such a provision, a petition was briefly posted on a Web site during the Veterans Day holiday in the U.S. and more than 150 military personnel signed the petition and added their heartfelt comments. This information was forwarded to the new archbishop, Timothy Broglio, who delegated the matter to one of his subordinates, Msgr. James Dixon, whose disappointing response appears (at the bottom) on this page. (Go to the web site to read this letter.) According to Msgr. Dixon, there will be no attempt made to implement the motu proprio in the archdiocese on the grounds that the military do not constitute a stable community.

We cannot accept such reasoning, as it would also preclude celebrations of the Tridentine Mass on college and university campuses, where students also come and go; yet, we have seen several such Masses being offered on a regular basis and attracting large followings. The refusal of the archdiocese also appears to presume that no such Masses can be offered without a request by what it considers a stable community. This is simply not the case, as in many locales Masses have been initiated by priests, even with the help of their ordinaries, and drawn many of the faithful. The community request appears to require a response, but not to be a sine qua non.

In any event, there is a demonstrated widespread desire for the ancient Mass in all branches of the military. The previous ordinary, Archbishop O’Brien, refused implementation of the 1988 indult, despite repeated requests; his successor seems intent upon continuing this policy, suggesting that those who want the Latin Mass look elsewhere. But this is not possible in many cases. My son, a cadet at the military academy at West Point, is restricted to post most weekends and, were he not, there is no Latin Mass available within a reasonable distance. His situation is quite common.

Despite its somewhat unctuous tone, Msgr. Dixon’s letter makes it evident that the military archdiocese has bent its mind, not to finding ways to provide Traditional Latin Masses, but to preventing them. There is no provision in the motu proprio that allows an ordinary to send those who want the Tridentine Mass on a search through neighboring dioceses. And many in the military, for one reason and another, cannot travel far from their duty station.

There have been generous responses to the Holy Father’s motu proprio, such as that of Archbishop Burke in St. Louis, who is providing training for those priests who wish to say the Tridentine Mass. Several workshops have also sprung up in various dioceses and those orders specially dedicated to offering the Tridentine Mass have been providing help to the many priests who want to learn this ancient and beautiful rite. There is no reason that the military archdiocese should not take steps to conform itself to the mind of the Holy Father and satisfy the legitimate aspirations of those in its spiritual charge. The problem is not the lack of a stable community, but the lack of good will in high places.

I would ask all of you who are reading this to please speak up for those members of the military who want the Tridentine Mass offered at major military installations. Below is the contact information for the Archdiocese for Military Services and the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei. There is also an interactive Web site offering information, updates and comments on this situation:

These brave people in our military are willing to lay down their lives for us. Surely, it is not too much to ask that their shepherds provide them with the spiritual nourishment they need in the legitimate form in which they request it.

Archbishop Timothy Broglio Archdiocese for the Military Services, USAPost Office Box 4469Washington, D.C. 20017-0469Telephone: 202-269-9100Fax: 202-269-9022

Dario Castrillon Hoyos, Cardinal, PresidentPontifical Commission Ecclesia DeiPalazzo della Congr. Per la Dottrina della Fede00193 RomaPiazza del S. Uffizio, 11

Sign the Petition for the Restorationof the Tridentine Mass for theU.S. Armed Forces
go to: milmotu.lyon.edu

From the April 2008 Catholic Family News MPO Box 743 * Niagara Falls, NY 14302905-871-6292

Was It The Motu Proprio, Or Possibly Something Else?
Let the pouting of Roman Protestant bloggers begin!!

I came across yet another wimpy "Progressive" blog this fine morning, where the owner of such decided to attack my partner-in-crime, Former Altar Boy. Specifically, FAB's posting from yesterday entitled "Who Is More "Inside" the Church?"

Much like a drowning man clutching at a sword, the ever delusional and confused Tony over at "Catholic Tickle Fight" (or some such childishly named blog more befitting 12-yr-old girls at a sleep over) had to take his swipes at the FAB, Remnant columnist Brian Mershon, and the SSPX.

Now I realize that the Progressives are uber-pissed. And uber-pissed they should be. They just got smacked with a triple whammy of reality... and they don't like it one bit.

First, the Motu Proprio comes out. Then it slowly starts to dawn on them that this flirtation with Protestantism (AKA: The Spirit of Vatican II) just had it's punk card pulled. And to complete the hat trick, folks who have never set foot in an SSPX Chapel (like FAB) have the gall to point out that the SSPX is more in line with the desires of The Holy Father than the heroes of Roman Protestants everywhere; such as Cardinal Mahony, Bishop Trautman, Bishop Brown, etc, etc, ad nauseum. But hey, in all fairness to Tony, I never really did expect him to pay any attention to the obvious or to ever utilize common sense.

But the Gold Standard of Panic for Tony is when he stated "Protestants cannot be charged with the sin of separation. The SSPX can." What planet is this guy on? I guess he's never heard of the Protestant Revolt of the 1500's nor of the 30,000 and ever growing heretical and schismatic Protestant sects world-wide. Seriously folks... how is anyone suppose to take a blatantly stupid comment like the one Tony made, and still take him seriously? Simple - we can't.

But you know, this is exactly what FAB was pointing out. Ecumaniacs like Tony (and others Roman Protestant bloggers I've read the past few days) will give heretical Protestants a pass (if not a big ol' hug followed by a sloppy kiss), but will go after the SSPX with nothing short of what can best be described as blood lust.

Just so there's no confusion, be it known that I don't attend Mass as celebrated by the SSPX, I attend a Diocesan Mass. Does that still qualify me as a "Rad-Trad"?

And now it's time for some brutal honesty... if it weren't for Archbishop Lefevbre and the SSPX, there would have never been a Motu Proprio, an Ecclesia Dei Commission, or even a Latin Mass present day. It would have died decades ago. Archbishop Lefevbre kept it alive. And for that, we should all be eternally grateful to him. I know I am.

But you know what? I think I really know what caused The Spirit of Vatican II wimps to melt-down... their favorite whipping boy was right all along. And they're having a REALLY tough time dealing with it.

Oh, by the way... has anyone else noticed that initially it was everyone associated with the SSPX was considered excommunicated. Then the laity who attend a Mass as celebrated by the SSPX weren't considered such. Only the Clerics, Religious, and Third Order were considered excommunicated. Then another change from Rome came down, and the priests, Religious and Third Order weren't considered excommunicated, only the Bishops. Hmmm... in just a few short years, the numbers of those considered excommunicated by Rome went from one million down to just four.

It really isn't all that hard to see what's going to happen next. I can spot the obvious a mile away. Too bad Tony can't. But then again, he's busy kissing Protestant ass.

Where Will They Go When Their Favorite Whipping-Boy Is Vindicated?
Time for some common sense (and good old-fashioned honesty) to be exercised

Many of you have sent comments stating as much as "you know, Caveman... what you said is really making me think. I'm starting to believe that you're right". Others have sent comments basically telling me that I'm the scum of the earth.

What was the topic that's caused such controversy? It's when I stated that without Archbishop Lefevbre, the Traditional Latin Mass would have been smothered to death decades ago.

Just to be crystal clear, I don't attend Mass as celebrated by the SSPX, I attend a Diocesan Mass. But I absolutely have to be open and honest. For those of us who are eagerly awaiting the implementation of The Holy Father's recent Motu Proprio on the TLM, we're all honor bound to be grateful to Abp Lefevbre.

After all, gang... if it weren't for him, there would have never been an Ecclesia Dei Commission. No Ecclesia Dei Commission, no Motu Proprio. No Motu Proprio, no freeing of the Traditional Latin Mass.

But here's the main idea I want to convey -- the number of Faithful who have been considered "excommunicated" has been whittled down from 1,000,000 total, to just 4 individuals.

At first, it was anyone and everyone who was connected with the SSPX, but Msgr. Perl of the Ecclesia Dei Commission cleared that up years ago when he stated that the priests and laity weren't in a state of excommunication.

"The faithful who attend the Masses of the aforesaid Fraternity are not excommunicates, and the priests who celebrate them are not, either -- they are, in fact, suspended."

And more recently, Cardinal Castrillón stated on February 8, 2007 that "The priests and faithful of the Society have not been excommunicated. They are not heretics." Sheesh... does it get any clearer?

Now here's my big question.... who are the "I Hate The SSPX!" crowd going to screech against when the inevitable happens concerning the Society (who also happen to be their favorite whipping boy)?

Does anyone honestly believe that these folks won't be absolutely seething inside when the day comes that they have to refer to an SSPX priest as "Father" or an SSPX bishop as "Your Excellency"?

...And The Vatican Responds
To all those bishops who are resisting the Motu Proprio

I've posted about Archbishop Ranjith before. We sure could use a few hundred more like him.

From Fr. Zuhlsdorf 's What Does The Prayer Really Say?, check out what the #2 man at the Congregation for Divine Worship has to say -- (emphasis mine)

“The motu proprio Summorum Pontificum on the Latin Liturgy of July 7th 2007 is the fruit of a deep reflection by our Pope on the mission of the Church. It is not up to us, who wear ecclesiastical purple and red, to draw this into question, to be disobedient and make the motu proprio void by our own little, tittle rules. Even not if they were made by a bishops conference. Even bishops do not have this right. What the Holy Fathers says, has to be obeyed in the Church. If we do not follow this principle, we will allow ourselves to be used as instruments of the devil, and nobody else. This will lead to discord in the Church, and slows down her mission. We do not have the time to waste on this. Else we behave like emperor Nero, fiddling on his violin while Rome was burning. The churches are emptying, there are no vocations, the seminaries are empty. Priests become older and older, and young priests are scarce.”

And how I would love to see Archbishop Ranjith promoted to the #1 spot at CDW. Cardinal Levada can go back to San Francisco.

My Predictions For The Motu Proprio
History will repeat itself

The news reports are coming in fast and furious... even the Secretary of State for the Vatican has stated that the Motu Proprio's release is imminent.

OK, so what happens when it IS released? One thing you can bank on, things won't magically be fixed overnight. It took 40+ years for things to get this screwed-up... it'll take decades to get things back to even a semblance of what The Church once was. Especially in light that many of the hierarchy here in America pissed away any credibility they may have had when most of them decided to protect kiddie-raping "priests".

We can only shudder in horror as we try to fathom how long it will take to erase the damage done by Bishop Ifeelyourpain, Father Nospine and Sister Mary Liberated. And how many decades will go by before Cardinal Mahony's monstrosity of a "cathedral", otherwise known as The Raj Mahal, will eventually fall into disrepair?

Like I said, don't count on things getting squared-away any time soon. If anything, things will get worse (short term anyhow).

Here's why I say this ~ Many of the French and German bishops are on the verge of bolting. A number of American bishops are right behind them. We wouldn't be hard pressed to find Austrian, Canadian, Swiss or Australian bishops who also fall right in line with the "The Spirit of Vatican II is being dismantled by the right-wing throw-backs!" crowd. I know I'm not the only one who's caught wind of local "progressive" priests who've stated "[when the Motu Proprio comes out] I'll never allow THAT Mass to be said in MY parish!".

Bottom line, the Roman Protestants are uber-pissed, and they're about to pitch a hissy-fit of Biblical proportions. But fret not fellow bloglodytes... We've seen all this before. History has the nasty habit of repeating itself, you know.

I predict that when the Roman Protestants present day finally do jump ship, they'll take roughly one third of the world's Catholics with them. Much like the Protestant Revolt of the 1500's - Luther, Calvin, Zwingli and the rest of the Ecclesiastical Gangsters took roughly one third of Europe's Catholics with them. With that in mind, remember what we have from the Douay-Rheims Bible;

The Apocalypse of St. John (Revelation), 12:4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth.

Like I said, history has a nasty was of repeating itself.

A Tale Of Two Bishops, Part II
Catholicism is a dish best served centuries old

Did you ever notice that those who detest everything Catholic pre-1962, always rationalized their hatred of the SSPX by screeching "obedience to the Pope!"? Well... where's their obedience now?

Bishop #1 ~ From the Brian Mershon interview with Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X.

Q: Some within the Church continue to state the SSPX is in schism; how do you answer to the following question? When was the last time 6,000 schismatics prayed in Rome during the Year of the Jubilee in 2000? When was the last time schismatics sent a spiritual bouquet of 2.5 million rosaries to the Holy Father?

A: And we have an even better argument in the [Pope’s] letter that accompanies the motu proprio on the Mass where the Holy Father says it is an internal matter within the Catholic Church—in the Church.

It clearly states that it is not about a schism. It is about an interior dispute which requires an interior reconciliation within the Church.

So we have it from the word of the boss. Our Pope says it is not a schism.

Bishop #2 ~ The Official Statement from Bishop Trautman on Pope Benedict XVI’s apostolic letter “Summorum Pontificum” (with appropriate commentary from the learned Patrick Archbold of Creative Minority Report ;

Most Reverend Donald W. Trautman, S.T.D, S.S.L., Bishop of Erie, issued the following statement on July 9, 2007 regarding Pope Benedict XVI’s apostolic letter “Summorum Pontificum”:

The recent apostolic letter of Pope Benedict XVI on widening the use of the liturgical books of 1962 is prompted by his desire to reach out to those Catholics in schism [It seems that no matter how many times this gets corrected, they still say it. So it must be true.] because of their non-acceptance of the liturgical reforms of the Second Vatican Council. [Only the crazies you see, nobody who accepts V-II wants it.]

The Second Vatican Council, an ecumenical council of the Church [in case you didn't know], restored and adapted the liturgy recommending vernacular languages for the worship life of the Church [he must have forgotten about V-II mandating the retention of Latin, oops.] Pope Benedict, sensitive to those still clinging [what are the young clinging to?] to the Tridentine Latin Mass (the 1962 missal) and liturgical rites prior to Vatican II, now grants a more generous application of that former liturgy.

Since the Diocese of Erie already permits the celebration of the Tridentine Mass in two locations, St. Ann Parish in Erie and St. Bernadette Parish in Saegertown, I do not foresee a pressing pastoral need on the part of our people. [The diocese of Erie is composed of the thirteen counties of Northwestern Pennsylvania with a Catholic population of about 225,000. Geographically, it is the largest diocese in the state covering 9,936 square miles! Yup, two is plenty.]

In the future, I will be issuing diocesan norms to help apply and order the specifics of the pope’s letter. Priests who might want to celebrate the Tridentine Mass [before being banished to the smallest coal town in Pennsylvania] will be given a rubrical and Latin exam to comply with the pope’s own statement, “The use of the old missal presupposes a certain degree of liturgical formation and some knowledge of the Latin language.” [One can only imagine the type of exam that the good bishop will concoct...Please translate the entire Webster's dictionary into Latin, you have 30 minutes...starting now.]

Further, there will be need to ascertain that the common good of the parish prevails and to ascertain what constitutes a stable community [Oooh, the hurdles he will think up for this one!] of those requesting the 1962 missal. We must keep in proper perspective [read, "my perspective"] the pope’s more generous use of the liturgical rites prior to 1962. The pope himself has said: “It is clearly seen that the new missal will certainly remain the ordinary form of the Roman rite.”

As my partner-in-crime, Former Altar Boy, posted the other day;

At the end of an article on the Pope’s motu propio Summorum Pontificum in the bulletin at our Latin Mass chapel, was this warning:

“BE prepared for the following arguments and zingers in just about every article to be published on the Classic Roman Rite:

1. Anti-Semitic
2. Sexist
3. Roll back Vatican II
4. Priest turns back on people
5. No one understands Latin
6. No one attends Old Mass
7. Permission already exists
8. Ultra-conservatives
9. All who favor Latin Mass are SSPX ‘extremists’

10. Something about Mel Gibson.”

Watch your popular media and certain Catholic publications and see how close the author was.

If Bishop Trautperson were playing Major League Baseball, he'd be making $50 million a season. He's batting .400, and the Motu Proprio hasn't even been implemented yet.

De Nile Runs Through Boston As Well As Cairo
Everythingsjustfine, everythingsjustfine, everythingsjustfine, everythingsjustfine, everythingsjustfine, everythingsjustfine, everythingsjustfine, everythingsjustfine
Helmet tip to New Catholic over at Rorate Caeli

This will be the one and only time I'll ever refer to him as "Cardinal Sean". He's Cardinal O'Malley as far as I'm concerned. I personally don't care how hard he tries to come off as just one of the guys.

Anyhow, the good Cardinal tells the world on his blog that "This issue of the Latin Mass is not urgent for our country". What planet has he been on?

The good Cardinal seems to fixate on the SSPX. His spin on the upcoming Motu Proprio falls squarely on the so-called reconciliation between Rome and the Society. As Cardinal O'Malley stated on his blog;

The Holy Father is obviously most concerned about trying to bring about reconciliation in the Church. There are about 600,000 Catholics who are participating in the liturgies of the Society of St. Pius X, along with about 400 priest.

But by making the Latin Mass more available, the Holy Father is hoping to convince those disaffected Catholics that it is time for them to return to full union with the Catholic Church... The Motu Proprio is his latest attempt at reconciliation.

In my comments at the meeting I told my brother bishops that in the United States the number of people who participate in the Latin Mass even with permission is very low. Additionally, according to the research that I did, there are only 18 priories of the Society of St. Pius X in the entire country. Therefore this document will not result in a great deal of change for the Catholics in the U.S. Indeed, interest in the Latin Mass is particularly low here in New England.

I couldn't help but notice that His Eminence failed to bring up the multiple closings of Catholic churches in his Archdiocese. His Eminence failed to mention that the fastest growing denomination in New England is Mormonism.

His Eminence failed to even discuss that within his Archdiocese, there are "Catholic" politicians who consistently tell both the Cardinal and The Church to go to hell. His Eminence failed to bring up that it's his own "faithful" Catholics that keep putting the likes of abortion-loving, homosexual-pandering "Catholics" such as Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and Thomas Menino into office. Conspicuously absent was any mention of his predecessor who escaped just one step ahead of the DA's Office for protecting homosexual rapist "priests".

You know, it really is sad that the good Cardinal can't bring himself to be honest with us all and admit that The Church is in the self-destruct mode, especially here in America. Am I the only one who finds it odd that the good Cardinal didn't bring up the following;

Beyond a vague understanding of a need for "more vocations," most Catholics are perhaps unaware of the disaster facing the American priesthood. After skyrocketing from about 27,000 in 1930 to 58,000 in 1965, the number of priests in the United States dropped to 45,000 in 2002. By 2020, there will be about 31,000 priests--and only 15,000 will be under the age of 70, according to a study conducted by Dr. James R. Lothian of Fordham University.

The shortage of priests has created a problem previously unknown to modern Catholics: the priestless parish. Only 3 percent of the parishes in the US--a total of 549--were without a priest in 1965. In 2002 there were 2,928 priestless parishes, about 15 percent of all US parishes. By 2020, a quarter of all parishes, 4,656, will have no priest.

As one would expect, the priest dearth has been fueled by a collapse in the seminarian population. There were 16,300 seminarians in 1930 and 49,000 in 1965. By 2002 the number had plunged to 4,700: a 90 percent decrease. Without any students, countless seminaries across the country have been sold or shuttered. There were 596 seminaries in 1965, and only 200 in 2002.

Nor did His Eminence discuss this;

A 1958 Gallup Poll reported that three in four Catholics attended church on Sundays. A recent study by the University of Notre Dame found that only one in four now attend.

Only 10 percent of lay religious teachers now accept church teaching on contraception. Fifty-three percent believe a Catholic can have an abortion and remain a good Catholic. Sixty-five percent believe that Catholics may divorce and remarry. Seventy-seven percent believe one can be a good Catholic without going to mass on Sundays. By one New York Times poll, 70 percent of all Catholics in the age group 18 to 44 believe the Eucharist is merely a "symbolic reminder" of Jesus.

Should I be shocked that Cardinal O'Malley neglected to bring up how shabbily he treated the rightful aspirations of tradition-minded Catholics in his own Archdiocese? Just a few days ago, I asked "Is it any wonder that the majority of Catholics who were raised in the Mass of Paul VI look upon the Traditional Latin Mass as something freakish and to be avoided at all costs?"

But the Motu Proprio is all about the SSPX. Right, Your Eminence? As we use to say in the Marine Corps, you're either part of the problem or you're part of the solution. A blind man can see where Cardinal O'Malley falls.

To paraphrase the late, great Anna Haycraft; Cardinal O'Malley is taking something pure and strong, mixing it up with something weak and polluted, slashing it about, watching The Church fall apart around him and then congratulating himself on his progress.

Why 7-7-07?
Just curious.

I’ve been wondering why the Pope chose Saturday, July 7th, to promulgate his motu propio acknowledging the place of the still-valid classical Latin Mass* in the Church’s liturgical and recognizing the fact it was never banned by the last ecumenical council ("the 1962 Missal...was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted." -from the Pope's explanatory letter today).

I believe it was back in May, we were honored to have the Very Reverend Berg, Superior General of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, celebrate Mass at the catacombs, er, I mean mausoleum, where our bishop allows the classical Latin Mass. This was just prior to one of the rumored releases of the motu propio. The specific date fell on a Saturday. I asked Msgr. Berg if he thought the rumors had any validity. He admitted they were rumors, and said there was no knowing the mind of the Pope, but, he added that is was very rare for the Vatican to issue any documents on Saturday.

So, today’s release made me go, “Hmmmmm?”

I checked my missal and saw that July 7th was not the feast of any particular saint.

What’s up? A last minute promulgation before His Holiness left Rome on vacation to his summer quarters? No other days left? A slow news day? He shoots craps for fun?

Then I recalled a lecture a priest gave some years ago on numerology in the Bible, so I dug out my notes. I saw the number 7 was used for earthly completeness. For example, Christ created 7 sacraments because that’s all we’d need in this life. (In case you’re wondering, here are some others: 3 = stability; 12 = heavenly completeness; 30 = incomplete preparation; 40 = complete preparation.) Was His Holiness sending a hidden message on his thoughts about the classical Mass and earthly completeness?

Unlike Pope John Paul II the philosopher, Pope Benedict is a theologian. Would he have picked 7-7-07 for its symbolism? Or was it just happenstance?

I don't know, but I'm curious.

(*I’ve adopted this designation, rather than “traditional Latin Mass,” from some good reasons on Shawn Tribe’s “The New Liturgical Movement” blog. The Novus Ordo (“New Order”) is called the “modern Latin Mass.” Among other things, both Masses belong to the Church’s Latin Rite and both can be said fully in Latin.)

Top 10 Things They'll Say About the Motu
No, not David Letterman!

At the end of an article on the Pope’s motu propio Summorum Pontificum in the bulletin at our Latin Mass chapel, was this warning:

“BE prepared for the following arguments and zingers in just about every article to be published on the Classic Roman Rite:
1. Anti-Semitic
2. Sexist
3. Roll back Vatican II
4. Priest turns back on people
5. No one understands Latin
6. No one attends Old Mass
7. Permission already exists
8. Ultra-conservatives
9. All who favor Latin Mass are SSPX ‘extremists’
and
10. Something about Mel Gibson.”

Watch your popular media and certain Catholic publications and see how close the author was.

What Does The Nicolas Sarkozy Election And The Motu Proprio Have In Common?
More than you may realize

There's an absolutely fascinating article from The City Journal (of New York)entitled "Hope for Old Europe?"

Do yourself a rather large favor and read just this wee bit of the article;

In September of last year, Robert Redeker, a French philosopher, went into hiding after getting death threats for an op-ed piece he wrote on Islam. In his short piece for the conservative daily Le Figaro, Redeker argued that while Jesus was a “master of love,” Mohammed was “a master of hate.” Islam, he noted, was the only major religion for which war was integral to its theology.

Outside of a handful of intellectuals, like André Glucksmann, and a stray politician or two, Redeker had no defenders. When famed Al Jazeera personality Sheik Youseff al-Quaradawi, scourge of the Jews and crusaders, took to the airwaves to denounce the blasphemer, Le Monde echoed his condemnations. Yet just ten months later, Nicolas Sarkozy has been elected French president on a platform of affirming France’s Enlightenment heritage.

Sarkozy’s road to the Elysee Palace was paved not only by the mini-Intifada in the Paris banlieues, but also by a memorable public exchange about Islam. An intellectually confident Sarkozy, then the interior minister, debated suave, articulate Tariq Ramadan, the grandson and heir of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. With 6 million viewers watching, Sarkozy asked Ramadan, famed as an Islamic version of a Euro-Communist, if he agreed with his brother Hani Ramadan—who had argued, in line with Muslim law, that adulterous women should be stoned to death. Pressed to agree or disagree without obfuscation, Ramadan, his Western facade crumbling, said he favored a “moratorium” on such stoning. Sarkozy responded with anger, “A moratorium?” He went on to mock the Islamists’ leftist apologists. “If it is regressive not to want to stone women, I avow that I am a regressive.”

Yeah, I cringed a bit at the "affirming France’s Enlightenment heritage" bit, but even that aside, at least we have a European leader with the stones to stand up to the murderous moslems. Here's a European Head of State (other than the Pope) that's actually proud of his European Christian heritage. What a shocker. And forget about that "Old Europe" crap. Possibly, the "New Europe's" doo-dads are about to fall.

Even though the new French President isn't exactly going to be nominated as the Knights of Columbus Man of the Year, he's publicly stated "I am of Catholic culture, Catholic tradition, Catholic faith," in his 2005 book, "The Republic, Religions and Hope." "Even if my religious practice is episodic, I acknowledge myself as a member of the Catholic Church". Hey, at least the guy's up front.

He's also said in an April 21 interview with France's Catholic weekly, Famille Chretienne (Christian Family), he said Christianity had "seen the birth" of the French nation, and contributed "an immense patrimony of cultural, moral, intellectual and spiritual values." However, he added that he would not "call into question the institution of marriage" or support adoption rights for same-sex couples, and would also seek extended *palliative care [for incurable diseases] as an alternative to euthanasia. Rudy Giuliani, are you listening?

OK, all that neat stuff aside, it's pretty obvious that Sarkozy has the guts to be the political muscle for a Christian Re-Awakening of Europe. But I don't think it'll be a soulless one.

His Holiness Pope Benedict can be the religious muscle. He's planted the seeds of the theological and ecclesiastical version of "everything old is new again" phenomenon that's just started to catch on throughout the continent. That's right folks... that lil' ol' thang called the Motu Proprio, otherwise known as "Catholics acting like Catholics".

What Pope John Paul II and President Ronald Reagan were to the downfall of the former Soviet Union, Pope Benedict XVI and President Nicolas Sarkozy can be to the re-birth of a Christian Europe. If it's not too late, of course.

Our Lady of Covadonga, ora pro nobis.

*Relieving or soothing the symptoms of a disease or disorder.

I'm Not The Only One Who Sees The Melt-Down
Where's all that "obedience to the pope" talk I hear from the liberals?

As Benny16SurfRider pointed out to me today, Father Zuhlsdorf over at What Does The Prayer Really Say? also has a running series of posts concerning official responses to the Motu Proprio.

I gotta say this, yet again.... those in the past who screamed "obey the pope!" when it came to their rabid attacks on the SSPX, also happen to be the same ones who are one inch away from being totally out of control concerning the Motu Proprio.

While I'm at it... why is it that the liberals consistently refer to the both heretical and schismatic Protestants as "our seperated bretheren" are the same ones who sneer down their collective noses at the SSPX as if they're no more than scum?

So This Is What A Melt-Down Looks Like
Or does this fall into the "Hissy-Fit" category?

WARNING! Harsh language alert. Even more shocking, it's not me using the harsh words!

I want everyone to see the handiwork of one who has been excavemunicated. As many of you already know, there has been a bit of a... hmmmm, shall I say "disagreement"... between myself and another blogger concerning both myself and Former Altar Boy giving the lions share of the credit for keeping the Traditional Latin Mass alive over the past few decades to the SSPX.

As I've stated in the past, even though I attend a Diocesan Mass, I have to be honest enough to state that if it weren't for Abp Lefevbre and the SSPX, then the Traditional Latin Mass would have been smothered to death years ago. If it weren't for them, there never would have been an Ecclesia Deo Commission nor would there have ever been a Motu Proprio.

Folks, we gotta be honest, and give credit where credit is due. But anyhow, here's what greeted me this morning;
___________________________________________________________
General has left a new comment on your post "Was It The Motu Proprio, Or Possibly Something Els...":

Why do you keep defending SSPX? The rest of protestant christendom were raised as separated. SSPX is willfully separating now because they are a bunch of gay, schismatic corn-holers. Kevin, are you a gay, schismatic corn holer? Is that why you keep posting pictures of men in fairy suits?

Kevin, seriously, do you fantasize about gay sex? I think you do.

If you were in my platoon you'd never make it through you little panzy. Are you really a marine? Or just some poser, national guard wanna-be? The devil dogs I know don't have time for this nonsense of who faces what way during mass. The Marines I know have seen too much death to worry about some schismatic pansies in France who want to thumb their nose at the Holy Father.

Publish this comment.
Reject this comment.
Moderate comments for this blog.

Posted by General to The Lair of the Catholic Cavemen at 8:23 PM
___________________________________________________________
Be it known that only three bloggers know that my given name is Kevin (and now everyone does, but that's no problem), and all three of those folks have been banned from The Lair of the Catholic Cavemen for various reasons. Of the three, one is a woman, and even though we've had differences in the past, I'd like to think that she wouldn't conduct herself as posted above. I can eliminate her. So I have it narrowed down to just two. And of those two, one has pretty much dropped off the radar. I can eliminate him.

That leaves one. The same one who has attempted to use the National Guard reference before in a sorry attempt to insult me. BTW, nice job of degrading millions of those who have served their nation proudly as Guardsmen. Not that "General" has ever served. A First Phase Marine Corps Recruit is a hundred times more the man then "General" could ever hope to be.

"General" is a perfect example of the old saying we had in the Marine Corps; hell hath no fury like a non-combatant.

Let me say this to "General"... junior, you're a punk. I can't think of a better way to put it. Just "punk". You're a sad, pathetic excuse for a human being. You're a prime example of a "cyber-tough guy". There's no doubt in my mind that you'd never have the guts to talk trash to my face. You'd just quiver. So "General", the whole world now knows what a fraud and coward you really are. I can almost see you now crying into your pillow. In between pillow fights, that is.

BTW "General", did you notice that there's a time stamp on your message? I have SiteMeter, you idiot. I know exactly who and where you are.

The California Catholic Daily Just Doesn't Seem To Get It
How can such a 1st rate publication get this so wrong? Over and over and over

An interesting article from the CCD concerning Summorum Pontificum. Can anyone else spot the consistent screw-up? Here's a few snippets;

In response to Pope Benedict XVI’s motu proprio, Summorum Pontificum, San Diego’s Bishop Robert Brom has approved a weekday celebration of the traditional Latin Mass (Tridentine Rite).

Since the motu proprio’s publication in June, three (California) bishops now have expressed their willingness to accommodate those who desire to attend the Tridentine Mass.

In July, Monterey’s new bishop, Richard Garcia, said he would provide two, non-parish locations for the celebration of the Mass.

Orange diocese’s Bishop Tod Brown approved an additional Sunday Traditional Mass...

They Just Don't Get It, Do They?
It's about a lot more than just the Latin language

I'll admit it... I've cruised into more than a few "Conservative Novus Ordo" sites. And at more than a few, they all gravitate towards the notion that the MP is essentially all about placating those that simply want the Traditional Latin Mass. Or as one blogger categorized us - "Latin Lovers".

Good Lord, it's so much deeper than that. Even The Holy Father stated as much in the Letter of Explanation. Example:

We all know that, in the movement led by Archbishop Lefebvre, fidelity to the old Missal became an external mark of identity; the reasons for the break which arose over this, however, were at a deeper level.

Did anyone else catch that? "...at a deeper level." The Holy Father understands exactly why the SSPX did what they did. And The Holy Father knows it's much more than just a love of Latin. A LOT more.

The Holy Father also stated;

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

Anyhow, as PreVatII (where ARE you!!??) and I discussed today, the language in that particular paragraph is unprecedented, and refreshingly frank, talk coming from a Pope. In fact... it's stunning. Look at how the Pope words it -- "celebrations were not faithful", "deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear", "I am speaking from experience", "arbitrary deformations of the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the Church".

Or my personal favorite; "One has the impression that omissions on the part of the Church have had their share of blame for the fact that these divisions were able to harden."

When was the last time any of us even heard a pope speaking like that? Ladies and gents... this is a napalm run on the Dictatorship of Relativism. Roman Protestantism, you're days are numbered. Dare I say... what the Holy Father has just released is the biggest thing to happen to Catholicism since Vatican II.

Anyhow, as PreVatII also pointed out, the Holy Father has a wicked sense of humor. In the Holy Father's letter, check out the following (especially the last seven words in the last sentence);

In the second place, the fear was expressed in discussions about the awaited Motu Proprio, that the possibility of a wider use of the 1962 Missal would lead to disarray or even divisions within parish communities. This fear also strikes me as quite unfounded. The use of the old Missal presupposes a certain degree of liturgical formation and some knowledge of the Latin language; neither of these is found very often. [emphasis mine]

OUCH!!! Could it be that dumbed-down Roman Protestants and Father Moonbeam, Sister Mary Polyester and Bishop Limpwrist are directly in the Holy Father's sarcastic cross-hairs? Looks like it to me. Way to go Your Holiness!

Oh, and has anyone else noticed how some "Conservative Novus Ordo" sites are starting to sound like two-faced politicians who see the tide turning, now they're coming off as if they've been big proponents of the TLM all along. Mark my words, as soon as there's the slightest sign of trouble with this Motu proprio, they'll be the first to say "oh, I never thought the Latin Mass would work-out anyways".

Breakthrough with Society of St. Pius X Near?

A few days ago, I told my good buddy and fellow Marine, MSgt. Cavey, that I was watching some potentially great news regarding the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) and Rome. However, I got busy with some on-going overseas work, the Marine Corps Birthday Ball, answering a certain “James” regarding reparations for crack addicts, etc. But the last thing I needed was for Cavey to hunt me down over here in Hong Kong, and open up a can of whoop-ass on me!!

If the attached story from “Cathoilic.Org” is true, then Part II of the SSPX’s request may soon be answered. (Earlier, in 2007, the Holy Father freed the “Mass of all Time” with his Motu Proprio.) The lifting of the excommunications would open the path for future doctrinal discussions between the Society and Rome regarding the Second Vatican Council.

For those of you unfamiliar with the SSPX, they are the reason that we still have tradition today. They are the reason we have all those Traditional Orders such as the FSSP, ICKSP, et al. Without the SSPX, the Motu Proprio would never have been signed, nor would the Indult have been a factor around the world since 1984. Tradition would have died, and with it, the True Mass.

I, for one, believe that a day will come when Archbishops Lefebvre will be lifted to the altar as the Saint he is!

____________________________________
11/4/2008
http://www.catholic.org/
Will the excommunications soon be lifted against the Bishops consecrated by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer?

WASHINGTON, DC (Catholic Online) - The World Wide Web was abuzz today; at least that part of the community concerned with the ongoing efforts to heal the rift between the Society of St. Pius X and the Holy See. The interest arose from a report in a Spanish Blog with reliable sources within the ongoing negotiations.

One of the most accurate Weblogs in the United States reporting on news and activities concerning this ongoing relationship is Rorate Caeli, http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/. Catholic Online presents their report, not knowing of its absolute accuracy, but out of a recognition of the interest among our readers concerning this move toward reconciliation and past experience with the accuracy of the sources:

Decree for the removal of excommunications on the Pope's desk?

From (the) Spanish blog La Cigüeña de la Torre: “On the Holy Father's bureau stands a prepared decree which will lift that of the excommunication of 1988, which applied to the consecrating [Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer] and consecrated bishops [Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Alfonso de Galarreta, and Richard Williamson]. I mean removing the decree, and not absolving of the excommunication. The thesis of the subjective element, extenuating or mitigating of fault, and, therefore, of the penalty, according to Canons 1323, 4 and 7, and 1324, 1, 8, and 3, has prevailed.”

The information sounds highly credible, it matches recent events (including the Rosary Crusade), and Spanish conservative Catholic lawyer Francisco José Fernández de la Cigoña usually only posts on future events (such as the nomination of Bishops) when he is truly certain of the matter. Nonetheless, even if the information is accurate, there is no way of knowing when the Holy Father will sign the document, or when it will be made public.

The referenced canons of the Code of Canon Law (CIC) are the following:

Can. 1323 The following are not subject to a penalty when they have violated a law or precept:

4/ a person who acted coerced by grave fear, even if only relatively grave, or due to necessity or grave inconvenience unless the act is intrinsically evil or tends to the harm of souls;

7/ a person who without negligence thought that one of the circumstances mentioned in nn. 4 or 5 was present.

Can. 1324 §1. The perpetrator of a violation is not exempt from a penalty, but the penalty established by law or precept must be tempered or a penance employed in its place if the delict was committed:

8/ by a person who thought in culpable error that one of the circumstances mentioned in can. 1323, nn. 4 or 5 was present;

§3. In the circumstances mentioned in §1, the accused is not bound by a latae sententiae penalty.