Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Fellay  (Read 2184 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Ekim

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 791
  • Reputation: +818/-103
  • Gender: Male
Fellay
« on: February 26, 2014, 05:13:06 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Monday, February 24, 2014

    Reform of the Reform - Not Impossible
    By Bishop Peter J. Elliott, for New Liturgical Movement

    I have become uneasy with the words “reform of the reform”. It is hard to find a better expression, “enrichment” perhaps. But now that the concept and project of the reform of the reform is under attack in NLM, let me speak frankly. Permit me to offer counsel to those who announce the total failure of the post-conciliar liturgical reform, claiming that a reform of it is impossible and insisting that the Extraordinary Form is the only answer.

    Let us be realistic. If you want the Extraordinary Form to become the Ordinary Form, reflect on the millions of people who come to vernacular Masses in our parishes around the world, in many countries and cultures. Would they easily embrace a Latin Low Mass with a server answering? And let us not forget the priests. This is why some pastoral realism is required. But let me put out a challenge - a reform of the Extraordinary Form would first be required - and I note that this has been suggested in terms of the Vatican Council’s “full, active and conscious participation.”

    We know would that reform would look like. We already have it at our fingertips. It would be a Latin dialogue Mass, said or sung ad orientem, with the readings in the vernacular. Then questions arise about some other changes set out in Sacrosanctum Concilium. In the context of the wider Church another issue inevitably emerges: could the Extraordinary Form be said or sung in the vernacular?

    Several years ago I was surprised to hear this proposed during dialogue over lunch with Bishop Fellay and Australian priests of the Society of St Pius X. I then began to speculate about pastoral problems among their young people. Unlike our young people who discover the Extraordinary Form and are drawn to its sacred beauty in increasing numbers, the Pius X young people have grown up with it, and yet they are aware of the wider vernacular Church beyond their cocoon.

    Some might argue that, in the Anglophone world, the Novus Ordo has been rescued by the better ICEL translations. Mass not only sounds different but the atmosphere in our churches has undergone subtle and positive changes. Of course I do not refer to parishes where the priest still babbles or barks, or to celebrants who play with the liturgy, a few even exhuming the 1998 ICEL texts.

    What needs to be discerned is whether this re-sacralising trend will endure and develop, for it is a major achievement of the reform of the reform that can be traced back to Blessed John Paul II (the Vox Clara committee), then developed so well by Benedict XVI in his wider project. This is why I do not want to see the gains of the reform of the reform project, fragile as it often is, broken or derided by triumphalist rhetoric, or pushed aside by an impatience that dismisses the whole Paul VI reform as beyond salvation.

    Twenty years ago, while working in the Roman Curia, I began writing Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite. At a Una Voce meeting in Rome, I told the late Mme de Saventhem of my project to present Novus Ordo ceremonial precisely, interpreted according to the continuity with our tradition. With disarming charm the gracious lady exclaimed, “My dear Monsignor, that is an impossible task!”

    Well, impossible or not, Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite appeared, and was immediately denounced or ignored by the US liturgical establishment. An angry priest from Eyrie PA even claimed it was out of print. However, gradually the book emerged from concealment in seminarians’ cupboards, and now it may be found on top of their desks, and it is even cited in class by their professors. So those of us who have already worked for elements in a practical reform of the reform can see some progress, slow but steady, and welcomed by the young.

    However, the integrity of the two forms needs to be preserved and respected, even as the two are meant to influence each other in these times. My hypothesis about a reform of the Extraordinary Form would also be constrained by that current approach.

    Please let us keep this important conversation realistic, patient and moderate. The gift of Summorum Pontificuм and Pope Benedict’s vision should not be compromised by loudly proclaiming the total failure of the Paul VI post-conciliar reforms. Sweeping claims and an imprudent triumphalism do no credit to some advocates of the Extraordinary Form. Nor is the Ordinary Form respected or supported by those who grumble about the new ICEL translations and others who draw absurd conclusions from a simpler papal liturgical style.

    Polemics also demean and discourage those of us who are still working to enrich the liturgy that is celebrated in most Roman Rite churches around the world. However, to maintain Pope Benedict’s Pax Liturgica, we all need much patience, and often that is hardest virtue on the Christian journey.
    Ben Yanke Posted Monday, February 24, 2014
    Share
     



    Home
    View web version
    Powered by Blogger


    Offline Maria Auxiliadora

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1424
    • Reputation: +1360/-142
    • Gender: Female
    Fellay
    « Reply #1 on: February 26, 2014, 07:06:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • "Conservatives" are just retarded liberals but this article is pure idiocy. I believe what he says about +Fellay because C. Canizares Llovera quoted him (+F) as saying: 'We just came from the Abbey near Florence. If ABL had seen the Mass as celebrated there, he would never had taken the step he did'. I think it was +Williamson who just used this quote in a recent talk but that statement was posted on Ignis Ardens at the time.

    Anyhow, I think the "mutual enrichment" (hybrid missal) is still coming because the idea was always to come up with "one". Cardinal Ratzinger in his book, "The Spirit of the Liturgy", explains that two rites are 'too difficult to manage and eventually they will have to be merged into one'.

    The Romans abhor the 1962 Missal and Summorum Pontificuм is the vehicle to take it to its proper burial. When (if) it comes out, the 1962 will be obsolete. "Conservatives" will be happy with that. Traditionalists will keep or return to the pre-1955.

    I just found the reference http://archives.sspx.org/superior_generals_news/what_bishop_fellay_really_said_to_cardinal_canizares_about_the_new_mass_1-21-2013.htm

    The love of God be your motivation, the will of God your guiding principle, the glory of God your goal.
    (St. Clement Mary Hofbauer)


    Online Ekim

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 791
    • Reputation: +818/-103
    • Gender: Male
    Fellay
    « Reply #2 on: February 27, 2014, 05:02:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • "The Pius X kids...Coming out of their cocoon." Is also a revealing statement as to how modern Bishops think about the families that attend the Masses offered by the SSPX.  It also shows how such Bishops no longer think the world is something dangerous that requires parental guidance.  So much for "In the world, not of the world."

    Offline bowler

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3299
    • Reputation: +15/-1
    • Gender: Male
    Fellay
    « Reply #3 on: February 27, 2014, 08:51:27 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The article quoted below with my answers, notes in red:

    Quote
    Let us be realistic. If you want the Extraordinary Form (the Latin Mass, TLM) to become the Ordinary Form, reflect on the millions of people who come to vernacular Masses in our parishes around the world, in many countries and cultures. Would they easily embrace a Latin Low Mass with a server answering? ….. (it's 1962 all over again)


    But let me put out a challenge - a reform of the Extraordinary Form would first be required (it's 1962 all over again)

     …..

    We know what that reform would look like. We already have it at our fingertips. It would be a Latin dialogue Mass, said or sung ad orientem (=facing East, or facing the altar ), with the readings in the vernacular.(it's 1962 all over again)
     
    In the context of the wider Church another issue inevitably emerges: could the Extraordinary Form be said or sung in the vernacular?(of course, it's 1962 all over again. We'll do that next in 1965)

     

    Several years ago I was surprised to hear this proposed during dialogue over lunch with Bishop Fellay and Australian priests of the Society of St Pius X. (the SSPX has been doing the "Dialogue Mass said or sung ad orientem, with the readings in the vernacular" in France and Germany, and in the USA wherever they have schools, like St. Mary's Kansas. They have been indoctrinating the children for some time now. It's 1962 all over again).  I then began to speculate about pastoral problems among their young people. Unlike our young people who discover the Extraordinary Form and are drawn to its sacred beauty in increasing numbers, the Pius X young people have grown up with it, and yet they are aware of the wider vernacular Church beyond their cocoon. (no problem, Bp. Fellay has already taken care of that)


    The "Dialogue Mass said or sung ad orientem, with the readings in the vernacular" coming to your SSPX Chapel soon!

    Offline bowler

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3299
    • Reputation: +15/-1
    • Gender: Male
    Fellay
    « Reply #4 on: February 27, 2014, 09:10:53 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The author of the article, Bishop Peter J. Elliott, is now the Auxiliary bishop of Melbourne, Australia. A Novus Ordo "Bishop". What he is proposing as far as changing the Novus Ordo is good, steps in the right direction. HOWEVER, it is not good for traditionalists who use the 1962 missal and the pre-1954 Pius XII missals.

    The direction of the Ecclesia Dei trad groups is clearly declared in the article, it is exactly what happened in the 1960's, the Latin mass morphed yearly till it was the Novus Ordo. However, these naïve priests (to give them the benefit of the doubt) believe that they can "get it right" this time. Unfortunately, Bp. Fellay thinks the same thing.

    It is 1962 all over again in the SSPX, and the vast majority of the SSPXers will end up like their parents in 1962 did in 1969, having their children loose the faith, and they finding nowhere to go but their local "reverent" Novus Ordo SSPX mass, or the local parish  "reverent" Novus Ordo  mass.

    It is 1962 all over again

       


    Offline bowler

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3299
    • Reputation: +15/-1
    • Gender: Male
    Fellay
    « Reply #5 on: February 27, 2014, 03:03:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • From "Dialogue Mass" by Rev. Fr. Edward Black, SSPX



    "Most of these changes, unprecedented and far-reaching as they were, passed unnoticed by the average layman. However, papal-approved liturgical change was the daily bread of the priests for half a century before the Council (being equal in length to the entire priestly life of many of them) and had become all too familiar. This surely explains why the post-Conciliar reforms met with little clerical resistance but indeed were largely received with enthusiasm or equanimity much to the bewilderment of the Faithful. The survival of the traditional liturgy was due largely to the efforts of laymen to whom the New Mass and the notion of radical change to the sacred liturgy was a tremendous shock. They had the very greatest difficulty in finding priests prepared or interested in celebrating the Traditional Mass for them since the direction in which things were moving had been clear for years." END

    It is about change![/b]  Priests have become so accustomed to change that they make all manner of changes themselves to the way the mass is celebrated at each chapel (even some at the SSPX chapels). This was unheard before. It is a novelty. It is not normal. What goes round comes round, and the next priest will change again what the prior priest did. and on and on it goes, the laity riding the wave of change.