Pray Tell and Liturgical Reform

+JMJ+

(This post is much longer than I thought it would be when I started, but I encourage you to read the whole thing.  And I must insist that this post is not, in any way, to be regarded as an affront or insult to the priesthood in general or to the priesthood of my brother, Fr. Charlie; nor as denigrating the piety or sincerity or faithfulness of Catholics like myself who regularly attend the Ordinary Form, like me.)

For the past several months, I have been reading and commenting at Pray Tell, a relatively new (September 2009, I think) blog about "worship, wit, and wisdom".  My personal liturgical and theological views seem a bit more "conservative" and "traditional" than that of the majority of the contributors to the blog.  Some of the commentors (on both sides of the divide) make scathing personal attacks and insults.  (I've been told I know more Latin than I know about the Catholic faith and liturgy, for example, and I assure you, I don't know very much Latin.)

Recently, in order to remind myself to write with charity, I began writing +JMJ+ at the top of my comments.  This was soon met with suspicion and a bit of a side-conversation.  Make of it what you will.

Since the blog's topic is primary liturgy, the new Roman Missal (third edition) is often the subject of posts and comments, especially the impending English translation of it.  Along with that comes a great deal of criticism about the Extraordinary Form (1962 Missal, since edited by Pope Benedict XVI) and its "liberation" through Pope Benedict's Summorum Pontificum.  For example, just this morning a post on the blog reads (with my emphases):

Evangelicals are crossing the Tiber to Catholicism. God bless ‘em. But why do I have this sinking feeling that some of them are way more Catholic than you or I would ever want to be? Watch for more support of the 1962 missal, I suspect.

I recommend you read the linked article.  I read it and didn't notice any particular indicators representing a particular support for the Extraordinary Form.  (Not that I would be opposed to such support; indeed, I would welcome it.)

Now, there's also an ongoing debate on Pray Tell about the Ordinary Form of the Roman Mass, specifically about the degree to which it embodies the Second Vatican Council's decrees on liturgical reform found in Sacrosanctum Concilium.  (This debate has a sub-thread which continually points out how the Extraordinary Form is, so far, un-reformed in regards to Sac. Conc.)  For example, Fr. Anthony Ruff, OSB, who has an editorial role at Pray Tell, made this comment in response to someone's remark about the pope's open-mindedness in promulgating Summorum Pontificum (with my emphasis):

Yes – but on the other hand: the bishops of the world begged the Pope not to do this; several conferences implored him. He did it anyway. While his act might seem generous, it is a generosity that cannot possibly be reconciled with the directives of the Second Vatican Council. Vatican II never intended that an unreformed rite would be existence alongside a reformed one. There is no way that the 1962 Mass meets the reformist requirements of the Council. This is a serious problem, in my view. And it is a problem that will compound as the anomaly continues in coming years and decades. How will they ever phase out 1962, as obedience to the Council would require?

I replied, in part, that

I think the 1962 Missal will be “phased out” by slowly but surely applying the reforms clearly expressed in Sacrosanctum Concilium to it. I don’t know how long it will take, I don’t know if I’ll live to see it, but I think the Pope believes that the E.F. and the O.F. are both in need of reform to a “middle way”. The E.F. was not intended to exist indefinitely without being reformed, and the O.F. — and perhaps I’m being wild here — was not the intended result of the reform.

Now, this final remark of mine — that the Ordinary Form liturgy as it exist in the books (and not merely as it is poorly celebrated in many places) might not be an accurate product of the liturgical reform expressed in Sac. Conc. and intended by the Council Fathers who approved that Constitution — is one which others have expressed on Pray Tell and one which is seems completely out of bounds.

I made a later remark where I compared Pope Benedict's act (of approving the 1962 Missal for celebration alongside the Ordinary Form) with Pope Paul VI's act (of approving the 1969 Missal), and asked why it was that the 1969 Missal is regarded as consonant/reconcilable with the liturgical reform expressed by the Council Fathers in Sac. Conc.:

Pope Paul VI, though he did not personally develop the Ordinary Form, approved and promulgated it. But does that necessarily mean it accurately captures the liturgical vision of the 2000+ Council Fathers? Is the way we account for the seeming disparity between certain statements or “decrees” in Sac. Conc. and their relative reception in the Ordinary Form Missal, simply to say that because the Consilium was charged with implementing Sac. Conc. and the Pope approved the final product, it’s official?

In other words, does it come down, ultimately, to the approval of the missal by Pope Paul VI?

Then why is the approval of the yet-unreformed missal by Pope Benedict XVI received differently? Fr. Anthony questions whether it is reconcilable with Vatican II, but some Catholics question how the Ordinary Form is reconcilable with Vatican II as well.

Now, I should make it clear here, as I do at Pray Tell, that:

I’m not calling the [Ordinary Form] invalid or heretical or any of that. I wouldn’t attend it weekly or daily if I thought so. [I should add that I wouldn't be writing a catechetical series on the new English translation of the Ordinary Form if I thought it was invalid or heretical!] I’m just saying it’s possible it’s not what the Council Fathers intended, and that it, like other liturgical reforms of history, may eventually be undone to some degree.

A particular liturgy, as a product of a particular reform, can be official and yet be found wanting or insufficient later and be "rolled back" or re-reformed.  It has happened in the history of the Church.

So how was my question about Paul VI's approval of the 1969 Missal received?  Fr. Anthony replied:

What a strange era we’re in! It is now acceptable to question the approved liturgy of the Church! This ought to be quite daring, and it ought to shock people because it’s bordering on dissent and disobedience. But it is now a commonplace. How did we get to that place? Very strange indeed.

The Council Fathers didn’t prescribe every detail, they laid out general principles. Consilium followed these, without a doubt. Consilium could have gone much further on many points, but they didn’t; they could have been more restrained on some points, but they weren’t. They made their decisions, and the Supreme Pontiff approved them. And so did virtually every single bishop of the Catholic world, all of whom were there for the council debates and decisions.

This chipping away at lawful reform as prescribed by an ecumenical council is scandalous. At least it should be.

I find this comment "shocking", since there are plenty of statements made on Pray Tell which are about dissenting from doctrines of the Church, but they often go unchecked and unadmonished by the editorial staff.  My comment is "shocking" because, as Fr. Anthony has said (on other occasions when I have brought up this unequal reception such comments receive) I am someone who is opposed to the dissenting and disobedient attitude portrayed by certain commentors.  In other words, as someone calling for assent, it is a "shock" to make a statement questioning the Ordinary Form in any way.

I think I need to defend myself and my question.  I am not questioning the Council, nor am I questioning the reform prescribed by the Council as found in Sac. Conc.  However, I am questioning certain facets of the liturgy produced by the Consilium (that is, the group assembled to carry out the liturgical reform).  Yes, their final decisions and the liturgy they produced was approved by the Supreme Pontiff, Paul VI.  But just because he approved them does not mean they were consonant or reconcilable with the liturgical reform as prescribed in the Council documents.  Is it true that "virtually every single bishop" approved the decisions of Consilium?  I thought only the Pope did.  What the bishops approved was the document Sac. Conc. in 1963, not the decisions of the Consilium nor the liturgy they produced in 1969.

I do not know if I can say, with Fr. Anthony, that "the Consilium followed the general principles of Sac. Conc. without a doubt."  There are certain principles and even decrees of Sac. Conc. that they did not uphold very well, and there are others that they adhered to, even to the point of going beyond them.  (I also question the process by which other changes with took place in the Ordinary Form after 1969 — like the rapid proliferation of Communion under both kinds to situations not envisioned by the Council Fathers and expressly forbidden by Rome at the time — but that is for another time.)

My overall question is: must the Ordinary Form (as it exists in the books) be accepted as an/the "accurate" interpretation of the principles and decrees on liturgical reform found in Sac. Conc., simply because Pope Paul VI approved it? (Again, I am not calling into question its validity or licitness.)

And if this "chipping away at lawful reform as prescribed by an ecumenical council is [or should be] scandalous", shouldn't the chipping away at other things said by the same council be decried as scandalous and shocking on Pray Tell as well?

So that's where I am for now.  The trailing part of this post of this will be posted as a comment on Pray Tell, where they don't need to hear all this backstory.

Tradition: Vox Ecclesiae

This is the Magisterial portion of works formerly listed on Books of Reasonable Price. I have split the page in two, to help me keep track of the source of the literature and because Magisterial documents have more "attributes" to keep track of than normal literature. The documents listed here are in reverse chronological order -- the ones I've completed recently are at the top.

Although the International Theological Commission (ITC) is not an official dicastery of the Vatican, the Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (William Cardinal Levada) is its ex officio president (previously held by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger); thus, I am including their works on this page. The documents produced by the ITC receive the approval of the Pope before they are published. The ITC serves an advisory role to the Vatican, and its documents are not considered authoritative teaching.

The Giga-Catholic web site has been instrumental for me in finding some of these documents; it contains, among other things, information about hundreds of Vatican documents: titles in Latin, descriptions, topics, authors, etc. For example, I can use this page and this page to guide me in my quest of reading the Vatican's writings on the Eucharist in the past 100 or so years.

Printing Caveat: If you want to print one of the documents linked below (via the MS Word links) in booklet form, please note that the paper size of the document is either B4 (257mm x 364mm) or ledger size (11" x 17"). However your printer does booklet-printing, make sure you make it aware that the document size and the paper size are not the same. The image here shows how to make this adjustment on my printer.

Currently being read:

• Encyclical Verbum Domini (On the Word of God in the Life and Mission of the Church) - Pope Benedict XVI (2010)

Next in the queue:

• Apostolic Letter Apostolos Suos (On the Theological and Juridical Nature of Episcopal Conferences) [MS Word, 95 K, 10pp] - Pope John Paul II (1998)
• Apostolic Letter (motu proprio) Sacram Liturgiam (Putting into effect some prescriptions of Sacrosanctum Concilium) [MS Word, 44 K, 3pp] - Pope Paul VI (1964)
• Instruction Tres Abhinc Annos (Second Instruction on the orderly carrying out of Sacrosanctum Concilium) [MS Word, 60 K, 4pp] - Sacred Congregation of Rites (1967)
• Instruction Comme le prévoit (On the Translation of Liturgical Texts for Celebrations with a Congregation) [MS Word, 80 K, 6pp] - Consilium for Implementing Sacrosanctum Concilium (1969)
• Instruction Varietates Legitimae (Fourth Instruction on the orderly carrying out of Sacrosanctum Concilium) [MS Word, 158 K, 15pp] - Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (1994)
• Norms For the Translation of Biblical Texts for Use in the Liturgy [MS Word, 53 K, 1p] - Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1997)
• Document Profile of the Synod of Bishops [MS Word, 212 K, 36pp] - Synod of Bishops, General Secretariat (2004)
• Document Propositiones [MS Word, 117 K, 16pp] - Synod of Bishops, XI Ordinary General Assembly (2005)
  
• Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles Laici (On the Vocation and the Mission of the Lay Faithful in the Church and in the World) [MS Word, 379 K, 54pp] - Pope John Paul II (1988)
• Also see this version (from CatholicCulture.org), which supplies the footnotes (missing from the Vatican's copy)
  
• Directory Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism [MS Word, 344 K, 45pp] - Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity (1993)
• Also available in two parts: I-III [MS Word, 203 K, 23pp], IV-V [MS Word, 199 K, 23pp]
• The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptized [MS Word, 216 K, 32pp] - International Theological Commission (2007)
• The General Instruction of the Roman Missal, third typical edition - USCCB (2002) [purchased]
  
• Directory General Directory for Catechesis (9781574552256) - Congregation for the Clergy (1998) [purchased]
• Directory National Directory for Catechesis (9781574554433) - USCCB (2005) [purchased]
  
• Directory Directory on Popular Piety and the Liturgy: Principles and Guidelines (9780819818812) - Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (2001) [purchased]
  

Finished:

1. Instruction De Musica Sacra (On Sacred Music and Sacred Liturgy) [MS Word, 138 K, 18pp] - Sacred Congregation of Rites (1958)
2. Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (On Christian Eduction) - Second Vatican Council (1965)
   
3. Decree Orientalium Ecclesiarum (On the Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rites) - Second Vatican Council (1964)
   
4. Letter to English-Speaking Conferences of Bishops [MS Word, 70 K, 8pp] - Jorge A. Cardinal Medina Estevez (2002)
5. Apostolic Constitution Humanae Salutis (Convoking the Second Vatican Council) - Bl. Pope John XXIII (1961)
6. Address Opening the Second Vatican Council - Bl. Pope John XXIII (1962)
7. Instruction Liturgiam Authenticam (Fifth Instruction on the orderly carrying out of Sacrosanctum Concilium) [MS Word, 235 K, 22pp] - Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (2001)
8. Decree Inter Mirifica (On the media of social communications) - Second Vatican Council (1963)
9. Encyclical Paenitentiam Agere (On the need for interior and exterior penance) - Bl. Pope John XXIII (1962)
10. Encyclical Redemptor Hominis (On the Redeemer of mankind) - Pope John Paul II (1979)
11. Document Considerations regarding proposals to give legal recognition to unions between homosexual persons - Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (2003)
12. Message To the participants in the Plenary of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (Concerning evolution and the origin of man) - Pope John Paul II (1996)
13. Address To the International Congress on Pastoral Liturgy (On the liturgy) - Pope Pius XII (1956)
14. Instruction Instructio (on the Ecumenical Movement) - Holy Office (1849)
15. Encyclical Divinum Illud Munus (On the Holy Spirit) - Pope Leo XIII (1897)
16. Encyclical Satis Cognitum (On the Unity of the Church) - Pope Leo XIII (1896)
    
17. Instruction Pastoralis Actio (On Infant Baptism) - Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1980)
    
18. Two documents on the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary
    • Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus (On the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary) - Pope Pius XII (1950)
      
    • Encyclical Deiparae Virginis Mariae (On the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary) - Pope Pius XII (1946)
19. Two documents on the Immaculate Conception
    • Apostolic Constitution Ineffabilis Deus (On the Immaculate Conception) - Pope Pius IX (1854)
      
    • Encyclical Ubi Primum (On the Immaculate Conception) - Pope Pius IX (1849)
20. Encyclical Quas Primas (On the Feast of Christ the King) - Pope Pius XI (1925)
    
21. Decree Apostolicam Actuositatem (On the Apostolate of the Laity) [MS Word, 130 K, 14pp] - Second Vatican Council (1965)
    
22. Encyclical Ecclesiam Suam (On the Church) [MS Word, 190 K, 24pp] - Pope Paul VI (1964)
    • Note: a better translation can be found here. I will soon replace my old Word document with a new one reflecting this more accurate translation.
      
23. Apostolic Letter Ministeria Quaedam (On First Tonsure, the Minor Orders, and the Subdiaconate) [MS Word, 57 K, 3pp] - Pope Paul VI (1972)
24. Constitution Auctorem Fidei (On the Errors of the Synod of Pistoia) [MS Word, 134 K, 16pp] - Pope Pius VI (1794)
25. Encyclical Nostis et Nobiscum (On the Church in the Pontifical States) [MS Word, 86 K, 7pp] - Pope Pius IX (1849)
    
26. Instruction Tra le Sollecitudini (On Sacred Music) [MS Word, 72 K, 7pp] - Pope St. Pius X (1903)
27. Encyclical Divini Cultus (On Divine Worship) [MS Word, 49 K, 3pp] - Pope Pius XI (1028)
28. Encyclical Musicae Sacrae (On Sacred Music) [MS Word, 88 K, 9pp] - Pope Pius XII (1955)
29. Document Music in Catholic Worship [MS Word, 91 K, 11pp] - USCCB (1972)
• Note: the online document is malformed, with paragraphs out of order, missing footnotes, and evidence of shoddy OCR (optical character recognition). My Word document fixes some of the errors, but I can't find any other online version of this document to get the missing footnotes from.
30. Chirograph for the Centenary of the Motu Proprio Tra le Sollecitudini [MS Word, 68 K, 5pp] - Pope John Paul II (2003)
31. Circular Letter Paschale Solemnitatis (Concerning the Preparation and Celebration of the Easter Feasts) [MS Word, 128 K, 14pp] - Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (1988)
32. Apostolic Constitution Paenitemini (On Penance) [MS Word, 74 K, 6pp] - Pope Paul VI (1966)
33. Christmas Address to the Roman Curia [MS Word, 80 K, 7pp] - Pope Benedict XVI (2005)
    
34. Encyclical Ut Unum Sint (On Commitment to Ecumenism) [MS Word, 253 K, 31pp] - Pope John Paul II (1995)
35. Apostolic Letter Spiritus et Sponsa (On the 40th Anniversary of Sacrosanctum Concilium) [MS Word, 65 K, 4pp] - Pope John Paul II (2003)
36. Decree Ad Gentes (On the Mission Activity of the Church) [MS Word, 171 K, 20pp] - Second Vatican Council (1965)
    
37. Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium (On the Church) [MS Word, 283 K, 32pp] - Second Vatican Council (1964)
38. Apostolic Letter Solemni Hac Liturgia (Credo of the People of God) [MS Word, 62 K, 8pp] - Pope Paul VI (1968)
    
39. Encyclical Humani Generis (On Some False Opinions Threatening to Undermine the Foundations of Catholic Doctrine) [MS Word, 76 K, 7pp] - Pope Pius XII (1950)
    
40. Apostolic Letter Salvifici Doloris (On the Christian Meaning of Human Suffering) [MS Word, 172 K, 19pp] - Pope John Paul II (1984)
41. Encyclical Mortalium Animos (On Religious Unity) [MS Word, 63 K, 5pp] - Pope Pius XI (1928)
42. Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (On the Right of the Person and of Communities to Social and Civil Freedom in Matters Religious) [MS Word, 73 K, 7pp] - Second Vatican Council (1965)
43. Declaration Nostra Aetate (On the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions) [MS Word, 44 K, 3pp] - Second Vatican Council (1965)
44. Decree Unitatis Redintegratio (On Ecumenism) [MS Word, 89 K, 9pp] - Second Vatican Council (1964)
45. Encyclical Quanto Conficiamur Moerore (On False Doctrines) [MS Word, 52 K, 4pp] - Blessed Pope Pius IX (1863)
    
46. Encyclical Singulari Quidem (On the Church in Austria) [MS Word, 69 K, 6pp] - Blessed Pope Pius IX (1856)
47. Bull Unam Sanctam (On the Authority of the Papacy) [MS Word, 38 K, 2pp] - Pope Boniface VIII (1302)
    
48. Encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi (On the Mystical Body of Christ) [MS Word, 192 K, 23pp] - Pope Pius XII (1943)
    
49. Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization [MS Word, 127 K, 7pp] - Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (2007)
    
50. Apostolic Constitution Veterum Sapientia (On the Promotion of the Study of Latin) [MS Word, 52 K, 4pp] - Pope John XXIII (1962)
    
51. Encyclical Spe Salvi (On Christian Hope) [MS Word, 157K, 19pp] - Pope Benedict XVI (2007)
52. Encyclical Supremi Apostolatus Officio (On Devotion of the Rosary) [MS Word, ? K, 4pp] - Pope Leo XII (1883)
    
53. Document Environment and Art in Catholic Worship [book] - USCCB (1978)
    
54. Curial Letter Sacerdotium ministeriale [MS Word, 50 K, 4pp] (On the Minister of the Eucharist) - Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1983)
• I thank Br. Rich, SFO, from Catholic Answers Forum, who translated this document from the Latin and the Italian.
55. Document The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church [MS Word, 295 K, 40pp] - Pontifical Biblical Commission (1993)
56. Four documents [MS Word, 92 K, 10pp] (On ordination of men only)
    • Declaration Inter Insigniores (On the Admission of Women to the Ministerial Priesthood) - Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1976)
    • Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (On Reserving Priestly Ordination to Men Alone) - Pope John Paul II (1994)
    • Curial Letter In Response to dubium concerning the teaching contained in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis - Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1995)
    • Letter Concerning the CDF Reply Regarding Ordinatio Sacerdotalis - Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (1995)
      
57. Lineamenta Historia Salutis (The Word of God in the Life and Mission of the Church) [MS Word, 271 K, 28pp] - Synod of Bishops, XII Ordinary General Assembly (2007)
58. Instruction Sancta Mater Ecclesia (On the Historicity of the Gospels) [MS Word, 79 K, 5pp] - Pontifical Commission for Biblical Studies (1964)
59. Encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu (On Promoting Biblical Studies, Commemorating the Fiftieth Anniversary of Providentissimus Deus) [MS Word, 103 K, 12pp] - Pope Pius XII (1943)
60. Encyclical Providentissimus Deus (On the Study of Holy Scripture) [MS Word, 105 K, 12pp] - Pope Leo XIII (1893)
61. Conciliar Constitution Dei Verbum (On Divine Revelation) [MS Word, 76 K, 7pp] - Pope Paul VI (1965)
62. Conciliar Constitution Dei Filius (On the Catholic Faith) [MS Word, 66 K, 7pp] - Vatican I (1870)
63. Apostolic Letter (motu proprio) Summorum Pontificum (On the Roman Liturgy Prior to the Reform of 1970) with the accompanying explanatory letter [MS Word, 84 K, 8pp] - Pope Benedict XVI (2007)
    • Also see the translation (with comparison) provided by Fr. Zuhlsdorf
      
64. Curial Letter Quattuor Abhinc Annos (Granting an indult for bishops to authorize celebration of Mass according to the 1962 Missal) - Congregation for Divine Worship (1984); with Apostolic Letter (motu proprio) Ecclesia Dei (Establishing the Ecclesia Dei Commission) [MS Word, 43 K, 3pp] - Pope John Paul II (1988)
65. Encyclical Mediator Dei (On the Sacred Liturgy) [MS Word, 232 K, 31pp] - Pope Pius XII (1947)
    
66. Document Responsa ad quaestiones (Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine on the Church) and Commentary on Responsa ad quaestiones [MS Word, 80 K, 8pp] - Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (2007)
    • Also see An Examination of Subsistit in: A Profound Theological Perspective [MS Word, 111 K, 10pp] by Fr. Karl Josef Becker, S.J. (2005)
    • Also see Christ's Church Subsists in the Catholic Church [MS Word, 55 K, 4pp] by Fernando Ocáriz (2005)
    • Also see The Ecclesiology of the Constitution on the Church, Vatican II, 'Lumen Gentium' [MS Word, 87 K, 9pp] by Cardinal Ratzinger (2000)
67. Curial Letter Communionis Notio (On Some Aspects of the Church Understood as Communion) [MS Word, 82 K, 7pp] - Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1992)
68. Document Notification (to Father Leonardo Boff) [MS Word, 51 K, 4pp] - Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1985)
69. Declaration Mysterium Ecclesiae (In Defense of the Catholic Doctrine on the Church Against Certain Errors of the Present Day) [MS Word, 80 K, 8pp] - Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1973)
70. Document The Eucharist and the Priest [MS Word, 47 K, 4pp] (A commentary on Ecclesia de Eucharistia) - Congregation for the Clergy (2003)
71. Joint Statement On The Mystery of the Church and the Eucharist in the Light of the Mystery of the Holy Trinity (with the Orthodox Church) [MS Word, 60 K, 6pp] - Secretariat for Christian Unity (1982)
72. Instruction Ecclesia de mysterio [MS Word, 143 K, 16pp] (On certain questions regarding the collaboration of the non-ordained faithful in the sacred ministry of the Priest) - Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (and seven other groups) (1997)
73. Declaration Dans ces derniers temps [MS Word, 39 K, 3pp] (On the Position of the Catholic Church on the Celebration of the Eucharist in Common by Christians of Different Confessions) - Secretariat for Christian Unity (1970)
74. Decree Sacra Tridentia [MS Word, 41 K, 3pp] (On the Frequent and Daily Reception of Holy Communion) - Sacred Congregation of the Council (1905)
75. Several Curial Letters [MS Word, 60 K, 7pp] (On the topic of Holy Communion)
    • Curial Letter On Communion in the hand - Congregation for Divine Worship (1985)
    • Curial Letter In Response to dubium on Communion in the hand - Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (1999)
    • Curial Letter In Response to dubium on the contempt for the Eucharist - Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts (1999)
    • Curial Letter On kneeling for Communion - Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (2002)
    • Curial Letter In Response to dubium on kneeling to receive Holy Communion - Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (2003)
76. Instruction In quibus rerum circumstantiis [MS Word, 58 K, 5pp] (On the admission of other Christians to the Eucharist) - Secretariat for Christian Unity (1972)
    • Note Dope le Publicazione (Interpreting In quibus rerum circumstantiis) - Secretariat for Christian Unity (1973) (appended to my version of In quibus rerum circumstantiis)
77. Encyclical Mirae Caritatis [MS Word, 72 K, 8pp] (On the Holy Eucharist) - Pope Leo XIII (1902)
78. Decree Eucharistiae Sacramentum [MS Word, 67 K, 6pp] (On the Rites of Holy Communion and Worship of the Eucharist Outside Mass), from the Liturgical Book De Sacra Communione et de Cultu Mysterii Eucharistici extra Missam - Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship (1973)
    
79. Circular Letter Eucharistiae Participationem [MS Word, 56 K, 4pp] (On Eucharistic Prayers) - Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship (1973)
80. Instruction Liturgicae Instaurationes [MS Word, 72 K, 7pp] (Third Instruction on the orderly carrying out of Sacrosanctum Concilium) - Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship (1970)
81. Instruction Inaestimabile Donum [MS Word, 59 K, 5pp] (On Worship of the Eucharistic Mystery) - Sacred Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship (1980)
    
82. Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum [MS Word, 262 K, 36pp] (On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided regarding the Most Holy Eucharist) - Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Francis Cardinal Arinze (2004)
83. Apostolic Letter Mane nobiscum Domine [MS Word, 77 K, 8pp] (On the Year of the Eucharist) - Pope John Paul II (2004)
84. Instruction Immensae Caritatis [MS Word, 59 K, 4pp] (On Faciliatating Reception of Communion in Certain Circumstances) - Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments (1973)
85. Apostolic Constitution Indulgentarium Doctrina [MS Word, 84 K, 8pp] (On the promulgation of the Revision of Sacred Indulgences) - Pope Paul VI (1967)
    • See also Jimmy Akin's Primer on Indulgences at Catholic Answers
86. Encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia [MS Word, 250 K, 20pp] (On the Eucharist in its Relationship to the Church) - Pope John Paul II (2003)
87. Instruction Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds [MS Word, 90 K, 9pp] - Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (2001)
    
88. Declaration Dominus Iesus [MS Word, 126 K, 12pp] (On the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church) - Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (2000)
    • Also see Answers to Main Objections Against Dominus Iesus, an interview Cardinal Ratzinger had with a German newspaper on September 22, 2000
      
89. Instruction Memoriale Domini [MS Word, 44 K, 4pp] (On the Manner of Distributing Holy Communion) - Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship (1969)
    • Norms En réponse à la demande (Letter granting to various Bishops' Conferences permission for Communion in the hand and laying down norms for its implementation) - Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship (1969) (appended this to my version of Memoriale Domini)
90. Joint Declaration On the Doctrine of Justification [MS Word, 95 K, 14pp] (with the Lutheran World Federation) - Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity (1999)
    
91. Decree On Justification [MS Word, 83 K, 11pp] - Council of Trent, Sixth Session (1547)
    
92. Instruction Eucharisticum Mysterium [MS Word, 147 K, 18pp] (On Eucharistic Worship) - Sacred Congregation of Rites (1967)
    
93. Instruction Musicam Sacram (On Music in the Liturgy) [MS Word, 91 K, 10pp] - Sacred Congregation of Rites (1967)
94. Conciliar Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium [MS Word, 128 K, 19pp] (On the Sacred Liturgy) - Pope Paul VI (1963)
95. Encyclical Mysterium Fidei [MS Word, 100 K, 12pp] (On the Holy Eucharist) - Pope Paul VI (1965)
96. Apostolic Letter Vicesimus Quintus Annus [MS Word, 92 K, 11pp] (On the 25th Anniversary of the Promulgation of Sacrosanctum Concilium) - Pope John Paul II (1988)
97. Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum [MS Word, 38 K, 3pp] (On the New Roman Missal) - Pope Paul VI (1969)
98. Letter Dominicae Cenae [MS Word, 147 K, 14pp] (On the Mystery and Worship of the Eucharist) - Pope John Paul II (1980)
    • Note: the English version on the Vatican's web site has a typo in section 11, where two paragraphs have been merged together and a footnote reference disappears. The copy at Adoremus does not display this error, and I used it to correct the Word document.
      
99. Instruction Inter Oecumenici [MS Word, 133 K, 14pp] (First Instruction on the orderly carrying out of Sacrosanctum Concilium) - Consilium for Implementing the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (1964)
100. Apostolic Exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis [MS Word, 303 K, 39pp] (On the Eucharist as the Source and Summit of the Church's Life and Mission) - Pope Benedict XVI (2007)
     
101. Encyclical Deus Caritas Est [MS Word, 164 K, 18pp] (On Christian Love) - Pope Benedict XVI (2006)
     

Confronting Tradition

Fr. Tim Finigan is a priest at Our Lady of the Rosary in Blackfen (near London). A UK paper, The Tablet, recently ran an article about the "divisions" being caused at that parish by Fr. Finigan's manner of celebrating Mass and his inclusion of one Mass in the Extraordinary Form every Sunday.

Fr. Finigan responds here; Fr. John Zuhlsdorf comes to his defense as well.

Please pray for Fr. Finigan and his parishioners.

I wish I had a Blackfen nearby...

Church Unity: SSPX to be regularized soon?

This would be phenomenal news. Just last week, the excommunication placed upon the four bishops who were consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988 was lifted. But the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) is not yet fully united to the Church.

But that could all be changing soon.

Diane of Te Deum laudamus has the roundup of posts. The blog Rorate Caeli is also likely to have up-to-the-minute updates on the matter.

Papal Nuncio Archbishop Thomas Gullickson on Reform of the Liturgical Reform

I'll just paste the first two paragraphs of his brief (11-paragraph) essay on Summorum Pontificum, worship ad orientem, and the "reform of the reform":

Pick up the Ball and Run!
Taking a Stance on the increasing Sentiment in favor of a Reform of the Liturgical Reform

Recently I happened across what I presume was a sports shoe commercial for television but of a very surreal sort built around a rugby theme. In the video the ball comes crashing through the front window of a restaurant and the next thing you know the men from the restaurant in business suits are joining in the game on the streets of the busy city outside. The video resembles as much urban warfare as it does a sport. I know rugby has become a genuine “thing” for boys and young men, replacing for our day and time the quest for the “red badge of courage” once to be gained in a forgotten type of warfare that was far from all-out for the civilian population but oftentimes mortal for the flower of a nation’s youth. In watching the video, the thought came to me that much of what goes on in the area of vernacular liturgy, its planning and celebration is not without parallels to the sport of rugby and its ethos. The incongruity of this thought is as shocking to me as watching the video “rugby” chase over cars, down alleys and onward through a bustling business district of town. The ethos of Divine Worship should be another.

Since the promulgation of Summorum Pontificum the calls for a genuine reform of that liturgical reform which we have netted over the past forty years have become more insistent but likewise more eloquent and credible as proponents clarify their positions and line up behind the Holy Father. The contrast to the at times rugby-like status quo presented by the Pope’s gentle hand and his balanced words, notably during his recent visit to France, has led me to draw my little parallel between what has been touted as a reform according to the mind of the Second Vatican Council but which many times over the years and even yet today rather seems to resemble rugby rules for picking up the ball and running with it, that is, if you dare. The liturgical renewal which many of us have experienced in many parts of the Western World is unfortunately tinged with an inclination on the part of the priest celebrants to protagonism and no small amount of bravado being shown by others (let’s point our fingers at some of the pop choirs, musicians and dancers, leaving aside people with feminist and other agendas who also occasionally attempt to highjack what we were taught was the work of all God’s people).

I strongly suggest you read the rest of the essay. Also check out Fr. Z's excellent commentary.

Ember Days: This Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday

What are Ember Days?

Since man is both a spiritual and physical being, the Church provides for the needs of man in his everyday life. The Church's liturgy and feasts in many areas reflect the four seasons of the year (spring, summer, fall and winter). The months of August, September, October and November are part of the harvest season, and as Christians we recall God's constant protection over his people and give thanksgiving for the year's harvest.

The September Ember Days were particularly focused on the end of the harvest season and thanksgiving to God for the season. Ember Days were three days (Wednesday, Friday and Saturday) set aside by the Church for prayer, fasting and almsgiving at the beginning of each of the four seasons of the year. The ember days fell after December 13, the feast of St. Lucy (winter), after the First Sunday of Lent (spring), after Pentecost Sunday (summer), and after September 14 , the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (fall). These weeks were known as the quattor tempora, the "four seasons."

Since the late 5th century, the Ember Days were also the preferred dates for ordination of priests. So during these times the Church had a threefold focus: (1) sanctifying each new season by turning to God through prayer, fasting and almsgiving; (2) giving thanks to God for the various harvests of each season; and (3) praying for the newly ordained and for future vocations to the priesthood and religious life.

Since the reorganization of the Roman calendar in 1969 after the Second Vatican Council, Ember Days are still retained in principle, but how and when they are to be observed is at the discretion of each country's Episcopal Conference. There is no longer set Mass readings for the Ember Days.

Another harvest feast is September 29, the Feast of the Archangels Michael, Gabriel and Raphael. Before the revision of the calendar, this used to be only the feast of St. Michael. In many countries this day was referred to as "Michaelmas" and is celebrated with traditional foods and customs.

By Jennifer Gregory Miller, 2003 (on CatholicCulture.org)

Learn more at The New Liturgical Movement (including proposals for a reintroduction of this ancient practice into the Roman Rite) and Fr. Z's blog, WDTPRS.

Scripture: Young Adult Bible Study

YOUNG ADULT BIBLE STUDY (AGES 20s – 30s)
Facilitator: Jeff Pinyan
Topic: The Letters of St. Paul to Us
(from the Second Reading at Mass)
St. David the King Church
1 New Village Rd., Princeton Jct.
Wednesdays, 7:30 – 9:00 PM
Study Notes Available Here

For the next several months, we'll be taking a weekly look at the letters of St. Paul that are read at Mass the following Sunday. The theme will not be "The Letters of St. Paul to the So-and-So's". It will be "The Letters of St. Paul to Us". I think it's especially poignant for young adults, because we are a lot like the church communities that Paul was writing to. They were fledgling, they were struggling, they had questions about their faith, they had temptations on every side... and Paul had the right words for them then. There's no reason to think that he doesn't have the right words for us now.

I'll be posting the study guide on my blog every Tuesday.

Liturgy: 19th Sunday in Ordinary Time (A)

(Soon I will get back to posting weekly Scripture reflections for each Sunday Mass. I think it's very therapeutic, and hey, it might have some spiritual benefit to you, my readers!)

Here's another post from a thread on CAF. The topic is "How can the collapse of the liturgy be reversed?" and the current flow of conversation is on the role of "liturgists" in the preparation and execution of the Mass. The first part of this is a quote from another user suggesting what it is the liturgist does: he takes care of the "practicals":

---

I don't know what the "practicals" are called in "Old Catholic language," but to me, it means which songs / hymns / Psalm / chant / meditation / prelude / Kyrie / etc., etc. will be done and what page they are on in the hymnals and who will actually play them and sing them.

Not to be a contrary voice, but the ideal is simply to sing what's Proper and Ordinary for that day! (This would require, of course, a choir that can sing Latin, and a congregation that has been taught to chant the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin... the way it should be.)

For example, we're approaching the 19th Sunday in Ordinary Time, year A. According to the Graduale Romanum, that means:

The introit (entrance antiphon and psalm) is Ps. 73:20,19,22,23,1. The antiphon is Respice, Domine, in testamentum tuum, et animas pauperum tuorum ne derelinquas in finem : exsurge Domine, et iudica causam tuam : et ne obliviscaris voces quaerentium te. The Psalm verse is Ut quid Deus repulisti in finem : iratus est furor tuus super oves pascuae tuae? In English, that's: "Have regard, Lord, to thy covenant, and forget not to the end the souls of thy poor : Arise, O God, judge thy own cause : and do not forget the voices that seek for You." and "O God, why hast thou cast us off unto the end: why is thy wrath enkindled against the sheep of thy pasture?"

Because we're in Ordinary Time, we use Missa Orbis Factor (XI), for Sundays throughout the year. The Graduale also recommends Stelliferi conditor orbis (Mass XIII) and Iesu Redemptor (Mass XIV) as alternate settings for Ordinary Time.

For the Gradual (a chanted replacement for the Responsorial Psalm, but using the same Psalm) we use Psalm 84:8,2. The antiphon is Ostende nobis, Domine, misericordiam tuam : et salutare tuum da nobis. The Psalm verse is Benedixisti, Domine, terram tuam : avertisti captivitatem Iacob. Those are "Show us, O Lord, thy mercy : and grant us thy salvation" and "Lord, thou hast blessed thy land : thou hast turned away the captivity of Jacob." That first one, Ps. 84:8, is actually used in one the Penitential Rite, Form B!

For the Alleluia verse, we hear Psalm 89:1: Domine, refugium factus es nobis a generatione et progenie. In English, that's "Lord, thou hast been our refuge from generation to generation."

The Offertory antiphon is Psalm 30:15,16. In Latin, In te speravi, Domine : dixi : Tu es Deus meus, in manibus tuis tempora mea. In English: "I have put my trust in thee, O Lord : I said : Thou art my God, my times are in Your hands."

The Communion chant takes its antiphon from John 6:52; this is sung with Psalm 110:1,2,3,4,5,6-7a,7b-8ab,9ab,9c-10a,10bc. (Each number N or range N-M is alternated with the antiphon, I believe.) The antiphon is Panis, quem ego dedero, caro mea est pro saeculi vita. ("The bread, which I will give, is my flesh for the life of the world.") The psalm verses... well, you can look up Psalm 110 (that's Psalm 111 for most English Bibles) for yourself. But let me share a key verse (in English)... "He hath given food to them that fear him. He will be mindful for ever of his covenant."

Have you sensed a theme in these chants?

"Have regard, Lord, to thy covenant, and forget not to the end the souls of thy poor : Arise, O God, judge thy own cause : and do not forget the voices that seek for You. / O God, why hast thou cast us off unto the end: why is thy wrath enkindled against the sheep of thy pasture?"

"Show us, O Lord, thy mercy : and grant us thy salvation. / Lord, thou hast blessed thy land : thou hast turned away the captivity of Jacob."

"Lord, thou hast been our refuge from generation to generation."

"I have put my trust in thee, O Lord : I said : Thou art my God, my times are in Your hands."

"The bread, which I will give, is my flesh for the life of the world. / He hath given food to them that fear him. He will be mindful for ever of his covenant."

And, to top it all off... what are the readings for this Sunday? 1 Kings 19, where Elijah finds the presence (and voice) of God not in the wind, the earthquake, nor the fire, but in a still small voice. Romans 9, where Paul talks about how to his kinsfolk, the Israelites, are "the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; theirs the patriarchs, and from them, according to the flesh, is the Christ". And in Matthew 14, just after the feeding of the multitude with loaves and fishes, which was a prefiguring of the Eucharist, Jesus comes to his apostles who are in a boat being tossed by waves in the night, and Jesus calms the waves and the wind.

Peter needed to learn to put his trust in Jesus, the Lord. We need to trust in his mercy for our salvation. He is our refuge; it is he who frees us; he will hear us. We need to be faithful to the New Covenant, as God is faithful to it for ever and ever; otherwise, we will find ourselves cast off. But if we are faithful, God Himself will provide food for us... and, at Communion, we hear Jesus's words about the "bread" we are eating, which is really his flesh... and this, in close connection to the miracle of the fishes and loaves that had just occurred.

I've shown you Year A's selections. In Year B, the gradual psalm is the same as the introit psalm, Psalm 73:20-19 as the antiphon and Psalm 73:22-23 for the verse. In year C, it's Psalm 32:12 for the antiphon and Psalm 32:6 for the verse; these are "Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord : the people whom he hath chosen for his inheritance." and "By the word of the Lord the heavens were established; and all the power of them by the spirit of his mouth." The Communion chant is the same for Year B as it is for Year A; in Year C, the antiphon is Matthew 24:46-47, "Blessed is that servant, whom when his lord shall come he shall find vigilant. Amen I say to you, he shall place him over all his goods" with verses taken from Psalm 33 (34 in English Bibles), which has verses such as "This poor man cried, and the Lord heard him: and saved him out of all his troubles" and "The Lord will redeem the souls of his servants: and none of them that trust in him shall offend".

As you can see, the theme pretty much remains the same in all three years.

So, no liturgist required! No one needs to "put together" the Mass, choosing the right hymns... the Church has already provided for us! If only we would accept what She so graciously offers! This coming Sunday is "Respice Domine" Sunday; every 19th Sunday in Ordinary Time is "Respice Domine" Sunday, when we should be praying "Lord, remember your covenant!" That's what the Church should be praying in its chants on this day.

And, before you ask, I didn't know any of this until a couple months ago. It was a big secret. Nobody ever told it to me.

Liturgy: Political correctness is a disease

This comes from a thread on the Catholic Answers Forum about Mass Settings (the music chosen for the Ordinary of the Mass). We eventually got to the topic of chant used in the Mass. Here is part of a post of mine; the first part is what someone else said, the rest is my response. The final paragraph is my chef-d'ouevre.

---

But I happen to know that our Catholic school just hired a new music teacher who is rumored to be "contemporary" in her approach to Catholic music.

It's dangerous to sink your anchor into the topmost level of the ocean floor... if you know what I mean. It's a bit ignorant (and maybe even disingenuous) to study the "moderns" without studying the "classics". Especially since the Church has been pretty straightforward about sacred music being such an invaluable treasure. Why bury that treasure? Why ignore it? Why deprive others of it?

Can you imagine a math teacher who doesn't do algebra because it's just so old? Or calculus because some white male invented it? (Oh, yeah, wasn't there that "new math" back in the 60's that didn't stick around too long...)

Or an English teacher who only taught neologisms and contemporary words (i.e. slang), and avoiding words which are very old or which come from (gasp!) other languages like Latin. A church "pastor" would need to be called something else, a college "campus" would need a new name, etc. (Those words are straight out of Latin.)

Or a history teacher who started with 1960. Or a geography teacher who only talked about recently-emerging countries, or neglected to talk about plate tectonics. Or a biology teacher who considers the Catholic monk Gregor Mandel's work on genetics to be out of date and instead dives right into DNA (but nevermind those two white males who discovered it, they're old fogies) and cloning.

It's preposterous.

This politically-correct disease will only make us slaves to politics (rather than people who can shape politics). But if we become historically-correct, we will not be "slaves" to history (which we are cannot escape) but will stop trying to rewrite it; we'll accept it, learn from it, and move on to shape the future.

Tradition: French priest denies universal jurisdiction of the Pope

A rather troubling report of a homily from the diocese of Chicoutimi reveals that a priest there said, during his homily against the Extraordinary Form of Mass and those who were requesting it, "Le Pape n'est pas l'évêque universel, c'est l'évêque de Rome!" In English, that's "The Pope is not the universal bishop, he is the bishop of Rome!" In any language, that's... well... false. (You could call it "heresy".) It's a flat-out denial of article 22 of Vatican II's Lumen Gentium:

The pope's power of primacy over all, both pastors and faithful, remains whole and intact. In virtue of his office, that is as Vicar of Christ and pastor of the whole Church, the Roman Pontiff has full, supreme and universal power over the Church. And he is always free to exercise this power.

... integre manente potestate Primatus in omnes sive Pastores sive fideles. Romanus enim Pontifex habet in Ecclesiam, vi muneris sui, Vicarii scilicet Christi et totius Ecclesiae Pastoris, plenam, supremam et universalem potestatem, quam semper libere exercere valet.

For more on this matter, see Fr. Z's post, the original blog's post (in French), and Fr. Z's earlier post on the poor response from the diocese to Summorum Pontificum.

Liturgy: The Pope's new clothes

Check out the vestments designed for the Pope to wear during World Youth Day!

(H/T to Fr. Z)

Tradition: Refounding and Restorationism

Here is yet another dangerous homily from Fr. Patrick Brennan on the occasion of the Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul. It pains me to hear him telling his congregation these things, because the dissent he feeds his parishioners will probably manifest itself as flat-out disobedience from them towards whomever is appointed their new pastor in a matter of months. My emphases are in bold; commentary is inside and outside of the homily.

1. A group called the Gnostics, they resisted Peter's leadership. They said he didn't have the right to be looked on as leader because of his denial of Jesus. And Paul, Paul also a flawed and sinful man. Paul persecuted the early Christians. The Acts of the Apostles tells us that Paul was right there participating when Stephen the deacon was stoned to death, was martyred. And yet Paul went on to become the first writer of the New Testament, and Paul more than anyone else in our history has taken Christianity and made it a livable spirituality, a way of life, a system of meaning that people can have conversions to. Peter and Paul, the "super-apostles", they really took the Jesus movement and ignited it. But two very human men. If they were here speaking today, I think both of them would say Jesus is the rock on whom we need to build our lives.

This is all quite fine: Jesus is the rock on whom we need to build our lives. Neither Peter (cf. 1 Pet. 2:4-5) nor Paul (cf. Col. 2:6-7) would say otherwise. Scripture also testifies that the Church founded by Jesus was built on the foundation of the prophets and apostles, and specifically Peter (petros = "rock", cf. Matt. 16:18-19), with Christ himself as the cornerstone (cf. Eph. 2:19-20).

2. John Cardinal Newman was declared venerable by John Paul II before he [Pope John Paul II] died [obviously]. That means he's on the way to canonization, to sainthood. By John Newman said something in the 19th century: he said there was not a papacy, and there were not bishops, while the Apostles still walked the earth. [More on this below] Other historians have picked up on that theory and say there probably was not a Bishop of Rome for 100 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. [Other historians recognize there were Bishops of Rome, like Clement.] Rome was governed by a group of priests, a group of elders, and Rome compared to the other churches in the East, was not even considered a church of great esteem early on. [When?] But then [when?] Rome began to take on a position of power and authority. Why? Because Peter and Paul, who were held in equal reverence and esteem, were martyred there. Rome was the city of Peter and Paul, the two heroes of the early Church.

What John Henry Cardinal Newman wrote in Development of Christian Doctrine, chapter 4 ("Instances in Illustration", section 3 ("The Papal Supremacy"), paragraph 2, was this:

For instance, it is true, St. Ignatius is silent in his Epistles on the subject of the Pope's authority; but if in fact that authority could not be in active operation then, such silence is not so difficult to account for as the silence of Seneca or Plutarch about Christianity itself, or of Lucian about the Roman people. St. Ignatius directed his doctrine according to the need. While Apostles were on earth, there was the display neither of Bishop nor Pope; their power had no prominence, as being exercised by Apostles. In course of time, first the power of the Bishop displayed itself, and then the power of the Pope. When the Apostles were taken away, Christianity did not at once break into portions; yet separate localities might begin to be the scene of internal dissensions, and a local arbiter in consequence would be wanted. Christians at home did not yet quarrel with Christians abroad; they quarrelled at home among themselves.

Cardinal Newman, interpreting (fallibly) the writings of the New Testament as well as the epistles of St. Ignatius, says that there was no "display" of a Bishop or Pope. That is true enough; there was display of the Magisterium of the Church at the Council of Jerusalem, though (cf. Acts 15). The Apostles were the "primitive" bishops, and there was no Pope until there was a church in Rome to have a Bishop! Newman is a bit off, since the Apostle John was still alive close to the end of the 1st century, and there is evidence of Clement being a successor of Peter in Rome long before John finally died. St. John himself laments that someone in a particular church is disregarding his (John's) authority there (cf. 3 John 9). Even earlier than that, Pauline and Petrine epistles refer to priests (presbuteroi, that is, "presbyters", also rendered as "elders") and bishops (episkopoi, that is "overseers"). I would guess that the language of "bishop" and "pope" was stressed more and more to distinguish between literal Apostles and the post-Apostolic leadership.

There is also literary evidence of Rome being held in high regard in the early (pre-Constantine) Church; one example is the epistle of St. Ignatius to the church in Rome, "worthy of God, worthy of honour, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of obtaining her every desire, worthy of being deemed [most] holy, and which presides over love, is named from Christ, and from the Father" of whom he goes on to say "Ye have never envied any one; ye have taught others. Now I desire that those things may be confirmed [by your conduct], which in your instructions ye enjoin [on others]." I do not know exactly how early Fr. Brennan was restricting his analysis.

3. But then some things began to shift, especially after the 4th century. Devotion to Peter, and the tradition about Peter, began to prevail over Paul. A tradition began to spread that indeed Peter was the first Bishop of Rome, and different powers that were assigned to different parts of the Church around the world began to concentrate on the Bishop of Rome, and we began to see emerge the papacy as we know it today, reaching its zenith in the Middle Ages.

Is this insinuating that the tradition that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome, which "began to spread" later, was a false one?

4. Now I don't intend this history to be a critique of the papacy. What I'm trying to present today on the Feast of Peter and Paul, is that Jesus did not start a rigid, monolithic institution. [Can we use some different adjectives, though? Jesus did start a single visible institution, with standards for membership and the potential for world-wide growth!] The Church is something that evolved and developed over history. And different roles, like the papacy, and the role of bishop, and the role of priests, evolved. [But there were always priests and bishops, unless Fr. Brennan is insinuating that the Eucharist back then wasn't what it is today (or even in the time of St. Ignatius). It is true that roles developed and evolved; for example, deacons didn't exist at the start.] And that same spirit of flexibility and evolution and development must be present in our Church too, if the Church is going to face the future, if the Church is going to be relevant in the future to younger people. [What happens if the Church becomes "relevant" to younger people... but becomes "irrelevant" to older people?] Flexibility, development, evolution.

There's going to be a contradictory theme to this homily: the Church evolved and developed, and the Church needs to continue evolving and developing, but some of that evolution and development needs to be erased. Essentially, we need to "evolve" and "develop" the Church back to how it was in the time of Saints Peter and Paul, but then continue evolving and developing. It's fine to "go back in time" 1950 years, but not to "go back in time" to 1950, basically. (Not that I advocate restoring the Church to what it was in 1950, but simply that recovering Church practices from the 1st century seems to take precedence over recovering Church practices from the early 20th century.)

5. I've mentioned before the work of Gerald Arbuckle, his great classic book, "Refounding the Church". [Subtitle: "Dissent for Leadership". I kid you not.] Arbuckle says in his book "Refounding the Church", in every age, the church has to go back to its founder and ask the question, "What was the founder about... Jesus?" Well he was about the reign of God. [And everything that reign entailed, not just the "social justice" aspect of it; salvation from sin was awfully high on his list.] In every era, the Church and parishes like ours, have to ask the question, "Okay, Jesus was about the reign of God... what structures, what systems do we need in 2008 to preach him and to preach his vision of the reign of God?" The Church needs to be evolving, the Church needs to be developing; this parish needs to be evolving, this parish needs to be developing. For ever-new challenges and new ages. As the parish ages, as we move into our 25th year as a parish.

I've just purchased this book (used copy for $3.50) from someone on Amazon. I'm curious to see how it renders dissent as leadership. If you get a chance, look at the sample pages Amazon has. It's got a three-page chart showing the differences between the pre-Vatican II, post-Vatican II, and "Restorationist" (explained below) mindsets. It is general and caricatured; it also assumes the "either/or" rather than "both/and" mentality. Here are some examples:

Of the "culture of the Church", it says: before Vatican II = closed; after Vatican II = open; restorationist = "closing to dialogue; fear of dissent". Just what type of dialog is this about?

Of the "structure and authority", it says: before Vatican II = "Hierarchical - vertical authority structures, under Pope; centralization of papacy, Curia; 'creeping infallibility'"; after Vatican II = "Hierarchical - collegial authority: Pope and bishops; local church restored; collaborative emphasis at all levels"; restorationist = "Desiring a milder form of pre-Vatican II structures". Perhaps the author did not read Lumen Gentium which says, in n. 22:

The college or body of bishops has for all that no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter's successor, as its head, whose primatial authority, let it be added, over all, whether pastors or faithful, remains in its integrity. For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, namely, and as pastor of the entire Church, has full, supreme and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.

I suggest you read the whole document, especially the explanatory note attached to it which clarifies the notion of collegiality it espouses.

A third example describes the liturgy this way: pre-Vatican II = "Latin; theatrical; congregation passive; uncreative; legalistic/rubrical"; after Vatican II = "Vernacular; simple; congregation active; creative"; restorationist = "Creativity not encouraged" (is that all?). Again, a reading of Sacrosanctum Concilium is in order.

Vatican II never desired to get rid of Latin from the Mass. Furthermore, the Church has been staunchly opposed to "creativity" and "experimentation" in the liturgy because it impedes the universality of the Rite and endangers the proper transmission of the faith to those present. Pope Paul VI said the completion of the liturgical reform in 1969 would put an end to experimentation. And as I mentioned in a previous post, the Church was on guard against abusive "creativity" even during the 1970s and 1980s. I also think "theatrical" better describes the "creative" Masses celebrated in the Ordinary Form, involving clowns, dancing, secular-sounding music, etc.

A fourth example about the priesthood describes the three-way transition as "Cultic" to "Preacher of Word; builder of believing/worshiping/justice-oriented community" to "Role: confused". As for their relation to the laity, the transition is "superior" to "co-operation" to "confused". I think, perhaps, the author is confused. Just what the author means by "cultic" is undefined (although perhaps covered in greater detail in the book). I would hazard a guess it does not include preaching or building of community. Does the preacher/builder definition include a sacramental aspect? I would sure hope so.

A final example describes the Eucharist this way: from "Holy Communion / Mass / Sunday obligation" to "Union of faithful, centered on the Eucharist, symbol and source of unity" to "Vatican II directions not developed; fear of inculturation at local levels". Now I'm confused! Did Vatican II really do away with the notions of "Holy Communion" and "Mass"? And it is not possible for the Eucharist to be the "union of faithful, centered on the Eucharist". The Eucharist has always been the "symbol and source of unity" -- the Eucharistic Sacrifice is the source and summit, as Vatican II put it, and the "source and center of Christian piety" as Pope Pius XII put it in Mediator Dei n. 201. Pope Leo XIII wrote an encyclical on the Holy Eucharist which described it as "the source and chief" (Mirae Caritatis, n. 6). As for the directions of Vatican II, Pope Benedict has recently called us to re-examine what Vatican II said about the Eucharist, particularly in Sacrosanctum Concilium, so I think we're headed towards a truer realization of the Vatican II "direction".

6. In the late 19th century the doctrine of Papal Infallibility was declared by Vatican I at the encouragement of Pope Pius IX. That doctrine teaches when the Pope speaks [teaches] on issues of faith and morals, we must listen, we must obey, we must conform. [Are those bad words?] At the time of the doctrine of infallibility being passed, there was another theory of infallibility on the floor of the First Vatican Council. And that doctrine of infallibility said this: Yes, there's this theory of the inerrancy of the Pope -- we're not going to deny that, we'll not take that on -- but another connotation of infallibility is: the Church will never fail. [I think the Church knew that the whole time. Do Matthew 16:18 and 28:20 ring a bell?] The Church is under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. We'll have problems, we'll have difficulties, we'll have challenges, we'll have growth spurts, but the Church of Jesus Christ will endure through the power of the Holy Spirit. [Amen!] I encourage us this morning to look at the value of both understandings of infallibility. The latter one I think is very livable and very existential: the Holy Spirit is with our Church. The Holy Spirit is with our Church. [The former one is also very livable, because it gives us assurance in the things our Church teaches us concerning the faith and morality.]

7. Quickly... Peter and Paul, equal in reverence in the early Church, have come down through history to represent two different sides of the Church. Peter obviously represents the organizational, institutional dimension of Church, Paul represents the dynamism of the Church. Paul writes a lot about charisms, he writes about the nature of community. John Paul II before he died, [obviously!] in an encyclical Redemptor Hominis, [see below] said the most scripturally accurate model of Church is the Church is a community of learners, a community of disciples. That's the model of Church that Paul preached. [The hierarchical Church is not an obstacle to the Church as a "community of disciples".] And the Church is more than just a community of disciples: the Church is sacrament to the world, herald, prophet, teacher, moral authority, agent of justice, agent of mercy. [And Bride of Christ, and Body of Christ, and Household of God.] We should never allow one image of the Church to prevail over other images of the Church. [So don't let images that may stress Her non-hierarchical nature overpower those images that make that hierarchical nature clear.] The fact that we celebrate the Feast of Peter and Paul together today is a lesson in itself that these many different sides of the Church must be held in a healthy balance and tension. Otherwise we get into mistaken notions of [the] Church.

Pope John Paul II has not released any encyclicals nor announced any canonizations after his death, just for the record. In Redemptor Hominis n. 21, he writes:

Indeed, the Church as the People of God is also-according to the teaching of Saint Paul mentioned above, of which Pius XII reminded us in wonderful terms -- "Christ's Mystical Body". Membership in that body has for its source a particular call, united with the saving action of grace. Therefore, if we wish to keep in mind this community of the People of God, which is so vast and so extremely differentiated, we must see first and foremost Christ saying in a way to each member of the community: "Follow me". It is the community of the disciples, each of whom in a different way -- at times very consciously and consistently, at other times not very consciously and very inconsistently -- is following Christ. This shows also the deeply "personal" aspect and dimension of this society, which, in spite of all the deficiencies of its community life -- in the human meaning of this word -- is a community precisely because all its members form it together with Christ himself, at least because they bear in their souls the indelible mark of a Christian.

I have no argument at all with what the Pope has written here. The minute the Church ceases being the community of disciples, She has ceased to be the Church founded by Jesus Christ. And as disciples of Christ, we are bound to "observe all that [he] has commanded [us]" (Matthew 28:20). That includes respecting the hierarchy of the Church; it's not like the Pope isn't a disciple!

Oh, and like Fr. Z, I really can't stand this trend of dropping definite articles from words like "Church", and "Eucharist".

8. I mentioned Gerald Arbuckle. Arbuckle in addition to introducing the notion of refounding the Church in every age, also coined the term "restorationism". He said beginning in the 90s, he felt there was a movement in the Church to push the Church back before Vatican II. [The extremist movement to overturn Vatican II is one thing; the "reform of the reform" movement, the "New Liturgical Movement", is another. The latter seeks to properly implement what Vatican II mandated regarding the liturgy.] Now remember why Vatican II was called: Vatican II, when I was in high school, was called an ad fontes movement, back to the fonts. Vatican II was an attempt to discover what was the nature of the Church of Peter and Paul. [While it did look to the past -- the whole history of the Church -- it was also concerned with aggiornamento, that is, "updating".] "We've become too institutionalized," the Council leaders said in the 1960s. "We're leading too much with the organization, with the institution; we've got to get back to the Church of Peter and Paul." [These are not exact quotes, of course, but when was this sentiment conveyed? Was this Pope John XXIII's vision? I'd say no.] Arbuckle is saying in this period of restorationism -- the 90s and the early 2000s -- some people are trying to push us back to the Council of Trent, back to the Council that articulated things in the 16th century. [Trent hasn't been abrogated or nullified. Vatican II quoted them. The Catechism quotes them.] I don't know if you saw in the local Chicago Catholic newspaper, The New World: the Pope is encouraging every parish to have a Latin Mass. [Amen!] Is that really the Church we want [choose your next words very carefully...] to return to? Arbuckle says at the heart of restorationism is nostalgia: nostalgia so that we don't have to do the hard work of refounding. [So if the Pope says it's not for nostalgia that he's doing this, but Arbuckle says it is, whom should I believe? Does Arbuckle know the Pope's mind better than the Pope himself?]

This is not the first time Fr. Brennan has contrasted "refounding the Church" with "restorationism". He wrote about it in his parish bulletin back in May 2005 as well. He is also hostile towards Latin, whether in the Extraordinary Form (which he caricatured in a previous homily) or the Ordinary Form. He openly questions here whether a Church which celebrates Mass in Latin, ad orientem, etc., is a Church worth having. If that Church returns, he seems to be asking, do we want to belong to it? The negative answer to that question results in schism, plain and simple.

Would he mind explaining what's inherently wrong with Mass in Latin in general, or with the Extraordinary Form in particular?

9. [Fr.] George Kane is offering a course this fall on the vision [and "Spirit", no doubt] of Vatican II. [If the budget gets approved, I'm sure it'll include actually looking at the documents!] I hope some of you will attend that course, and I'm grateful to [Fr.] George for doing that, but more than just the course in the fall, remember, John XXIII called Vatican II to open the windows of the Church because "it's gotten dusty in here", he said, and the Church needs fresh air. [That's for sure. Fresh air with a hint of incense!] The Church needs the movement of the Holy Spirit. I hope, Holy Family, that you will always keep the vision of Vatican II alive in this parish. John XXIII opened the windows; keep the windows open.

I am frightened to think what the subject matter of such a course will be. What sources will Fr. Kane use? The documents themselves, taken in context? That would be an eye-opener...