Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Does he or doesn't he?

Sorry, haven't put anything up for a few days.
The Catholic Herald online is debating whether or not the Pope uses the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite. Bishop Fellay says he does, Fr Lombardi says he doesn't.
My Italian isn't very good but I suspect Fr Lombardi actually means he doesn't do so every day, but the how does Fr Lombardi know? I don't think he attends the Papal Mass and the Pope's staff who do are faithful and discreet, don't let on what happens in his household including his chapel. It is rightly private and I am sure the Pope is right to want to keep it private.

However I would be very surprised if the Pope doesn't celebrate Mass in both forms of the Roman Rite. Three years on from the publication of Summorum Pontificum it seems ludicrous that all bishops and priests aren't familiar with both forms. The Roman Rite since 7/7/07 plural is "both, and" not "either, or", except for that small number of religious whose "charism" is to use one particular form.


Richard Collins said...

I am sure you are correct, Father. I pray that the HF will celebrate an EF Mass in public before long.

Friend said...

Dear Father,
You will be surprised to learn that the Holy Father celebrates Mass in Italian.

Richard Collins said...

Friend: I am sure he also celebrates Mass in German or Serbo Croat for that matter; the point is that the Italian, English, German Masses are all Ordinary Form.
What we want is for the Holy Father to celebrate the Extraordinary Form which is always in Latin.

Friend said...

You wrote "I am sure ... ". On what do you rest your being "sure" or could this be an example of the idle speculation which is becoming ever more frequent on Catholic Blogs?
You have the right "to want". But after nearly five and a half years of waiting for the so called "reform of the reform" many of us realise that this is not going to happen.

Joe said...

Yes, since SP the Roman Rite has two forms, and is "plural" in that sense. But one form has the status of "ordinary form" and the other the status of "extraordinary form"; and my view is that the relationship between the two is not symmetric.

Ecclesially, it is perfectly legitimate for those who have no attachment to the extraordinary form to only participate in celebrations of the ordinary form, without adopting a stance in relation to the extraordinary form.

But, ecclesially speaking, those with an attachment to the extraordinary form have to live a certain openness towards the ordinary form.

I wonder whether Pope Benedict, in publicly celebrating in the ordinary form, is trying to set an example in this regard? And might he be aware of the (unwarranted) significance that those with an attachment to the extraordinary form might read into an occasional or one-off celebration of that form on his part?

Fr Ray Blake said...

Joe, I agree.

No public celebtion just rumours.

The Lord’s descent into the underworld

At Matins/the Office of Readings on Holy Saturday the Church gives us this 'ancient homily', I find it incredibly moving, it is abou...