Editorial - November 2007

In his book, The Mass and Modernity, (Family Publications 2006) Fr Jonathan Robinson of the Toronto Oratory discussed in detail the problems of the new rite. He analysed its spiritual, structural and ceremonial failings compared to the strengths of the Traditional Rite. Having drawn up a balance sheet of the ‘reform of the reform’, he was forced to admit he had no idea how the reform would be launched.

We now know. Pope Benedict has adopted the strategy of liberalising the use of the Missal of Blessed John XXIII, (which, as he states, was used throughout the Second Vatican Council and was never abrogated), and which has such strengths in clarity of doctrine, profundity of symbolism and beauty of ceremonial, as a challenge and a yardstick for new rite (forma ordinaria) celebrations.

More people who, “because of the actual situation of the communities of the faithful” normally attend the ordinary form will have the chance to attend Traditional Rite (forma extraordinaria) celebrations and carry back to their congregations news of a deeper, more fulfilling experience, plus the challenge to their pastor to introduce some of that depth into their local new rite celebrations. Pope Benedict points out that spiritual and satisfying celebrations of the new rite are possible, indeed “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.”

A new rite strengthened as much as possible can only be in the best long term interests of the Church – those faithful who have to use it or are committed to it cannot be abandoned. However, is it not possible that at some point in the future, when everything has been done to buttress the ordinary form that can be done, it will be realised that its fundamental failings are too great and too time-bound by the categories of the long-lost decade of the 1960s in which it was “fabriciated”? At that point, a free and flourishing extraordinary form – updated by the addition of new saints and a wider selection of Prefaces – will be a compelling pointer to the future. Whether it will then largely replace the ordinary form (which presumably as a valid rite would not be abrogated but continue as an option for those committed to it) or whether there would be some final merging of the forms with the Traditional as the dominant partner, who can say? That is well over the horizon of history.

For the moment, we have the not unexpected problem of uncharitable interpretations of the Motu Proprio and ideological resistance from certain bishops and groups of the faithful (The Tablet tendency!).

Regarding interpretation, Mgr Camille Perl of Ecclesia Dei confirmed in an interview in October with the Petrus news service that the commission is actively working on a document to give authoritative guidelines on applying the Motu Proprio.

One of the key questions that Ecclesia Dei will have to clear up is that of “stable groups”. First, it should be pointed out that the phrase does not appear in the official Latin text. An accurate translation of Article 5§1 is: “In parishes where there is continuously present a group of the faithful attached to the previous liturgical tradition, let the pastor willingly receive their petitions...”

A further problem is the reference to “parishes”. Some bishops have interpreted this as meaning that anyone who travels across a parish boundary to attend Traditional Rite celebrations should be discounted, and have shown great casuistry in ‘parsing’ the word “adhere”, used in the unofficial English translation instead of “attached”. Believe it or not, to be ‘attached’ to the Traditional Rite is not enough, to ‘love’ it, to want to ‘worship’ in it are not enough; a “stable group” – continuing in time and not recently established, and only composed of parishioners – must be able to show it has “adhered” fully, completely, (‘perversely’?) to the Traditional Rite before any consideration can be given to their request for celebrations of the Traditional Mass and Sacraments.

We must hope and pray that Ecclesia Dei will render such readings and restrictions redundant.

After all, wherever bishops have been generous in their provision for the Traditional Rite they have discovered that there is no dissension and a great gain in spiritual life, active lay life, vocations and even financial contribution(!) from the laity.

The inestimable gift of the forma extraordinaria is on offer to the whole Church; it would be folly not to take it up.