from Rorate Caeili
Vatican II and the Re-emergence of the Traditional Latin Mass
It is often assumed that there is a deep and
irreconcilable tension between allowing the continued celebration of the
traditional Latin Mass and the Second Vatican Council. After all, the reform of
the liturgy was itself set in motion by the Vatican II document Sacrosanctum Concilium. Thus, Pope Francis
stated in his apostolic letter Desiderio Desideravi, “I do not see how it is possible to say that one
recognizes the validity of the Council — though it amazes me that a Catholic
might presume not to do so — and at the same time not accept the liturgical
reform born out of Sacrosanctum Concilium, a document that
expresses the reality of the Liturgy intimately joined to the vision of Church
so admirably described in Lumen Gentium.” It was for this reason, Pope Francis explained, that
he felt it “his duty” to issue his motu proprio Traditionis Custodes, restricting the
celebration of the traditional Latin Mass.
Lionel : Pope Francis, D.C
Rosary Rally author on this web blog and traditionalists who read the weblog Rorate Caili continue to nterpret Vatican Council II irrationally and still consider it the norm.
In fact, however, a close review of the documents of
the Second Vatican Council support a far more generous allowance for
celebration of the traditional Latin Mass than that permitted by Traditionis
Custodes.
Lionel: Pope Francis is correct. Vatican Council II
interpreted irrationally by the whole Church is a break with the past
exclusivist ecclesiology. So if the D.C Rosary Rally - author does not accept
Vatican Council II interpreted rationally, he cannot correct Pope Francis.
Sacrosanctum Concilium envisioned a
more modest reform of the liturgy than the Novus Ordo Missae that was
ultimately approved by Pope Paul VI some five years later. Sacrosanctum
Concilium called for the continued use of Latin in the Mass, stated
that Gregorian Chant “should be given pride of place in liturgical services,”
and decreed that “there must be no innovations” to the Mass “unless the good of
the Church genuinely and certainly requires them.” A Catholic today desiring
Latin and Gregorian Chant in the Mass has no real option other than to attend
the traditional Latin Mass.
Lionel : True but when the
ecclesiology of the Church can be changed with the irrational interpretation of
the Council, then for the popes and the Left, even liturgy can be changed. When
the Church no more holds the traditional strict interpretation of the dogma
extra ecclesiam nulla salus, since there are ‘exceptions’ in the text of
Vatican Council II, then ecumenism can be changed and the old ecclesiocentric
Roman Missal is now obsolete.
_______________
There is an even more fundamental inconsistency between Traditionis Custodes and Vatican II, however. Lumen Gentium, a principal document of Vatican II, declared that “[t]he laity have the right, as do all Christians, to receive in abundance from their spiritual shepherds the spiritual goods of the Church, especially the assistance of the word of God and of the sacraments.” While some may contend that the Novus Ordo Missae is superior to the traditional Latin Mass, the latter is still a “spiritual good of the Church” and a valid sacrament. Pope Benedict XVI, in his letter accompanying Summorum Pontificum, was surely correct to characterize the traditional Latin Mass as part of “the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer.” And he was undoubtedly right to note in Summorum Pontificum itself 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.”
Thus, the only conclusion to be drawn from Vatican II is that it is a “spiritual good of the Church.” As such, the faithful have the right to the traditional Latin Mass “in abundance.”
Lionel: Yes but there is the
liberal interpretation of Vatican Council II. This is a private interpretation
of Vatican Council II with a fake premise but it became the official
interpretation. On the other hand, no one interprets Vatican Council II
rationally to correct Pope Francis and take the Church back to Tradition.
Rorate Caeili wants to be politically correct with the Left.
____________
It is perhaps true that, as John Cavadini, Mary Healy, and Thomas Weinandy wrote in their five-part series on the traditional Latin Mass, “the Council Fathers saw themselves as revitalizing the Roman rite, and thus they did not anticipate the continued celebration of its unrevised form.” But by their own account, once it became clear to Pope John Paul II in the mid-1980s that the Old Mass was not going away and could not be suppressed, he made more and more generous provision to allow its celebration. This development accelerated under Pope Benedict XVI with his Summorum Pontificum, issued in 2007, which allowed priests to celebrate the TLM without requesting permission. In so doing, both popes were acting in a manner consistent with Vatican II’s vision for the Church, and its instruction regarding access to valid sacraments.
Cavadini, Healy, and Weinandy state that Pope Benedict XVI’s “hope that these two rites will not lead to a division in the Church now appears overly optimistic.” Pope Francis also appealed to the notion of unity in his letter accompanying Traditionis Custodes, stating that he intended to reestablish “a single and identical prayer that expressed [the Church’s] unity.” Pope Francis cited responses to a questionnaire to the Bishops regarding the implementation of Summorum Pontificum, which “reveal[ed] a situation that preoccupies and saddens me, and persuades me of the need to intervene,” namely that the traditional Latin Mass “was exploited to widen the gaps, reinforce the divergences, and encourage disagreements that injure the Church, block her path, and expose her to the peril of division.”
For one thing, there is reason to doubt that
celebration of the traditional Latin Mass really did lead to division.
Reporting by Diane Montagna indicates that the responses to the survey of Bishops
were mostly favorable to Summorum Pontificum, especially in countries (France, the United States, and England)
where the traditional Latin Mass is most widely celebrated. This is borne out
by the fact that the overwhelming majority of dioceses which previously allowed
celebration of the traditional Latin Mass have elected to continue it after Traditionis. Monsignor Charles
Pope, cited authoritatively by Cavadini, Healy, and Weinandy
on the celebration of the Mass before 1970, offers an accurate perspective on the reality on the
ground prior to Traditionis Custodes: “Here in
Washington, D.C., the extraordinary form has existed peacefully alongside the
ordinary form in approximately 10 of our parishes . . . Whatever tensions do
exist, they are minor and not so different than the tensions that emerge from
the diverse mosaic of ethnic communities.” Few people have more intimate,
ground-level knowledge of traditional Latin Mass communities than Monsignor
Pope, who has been closely involved with such communities in Washington, D.C.
for decades and currently serves as the diocesan coordinator for the
traditional Latin Mass in the Washington, D.C. Archdiocese.
Lionel : There is division in
the whole Church which,they choose,knowingly or unknowingly. They choose not to
interpret Vatican Council II rationally and bring unity with the Magisterium over the centuries. So now the Creeds, Councils and
Catechisms have been changed when they refer to invisible cases of the baptism
of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as being visible exceptions for traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed etc. There is
division in the salvation doctrine and there is a general new theology in the
Church.
Continued
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2024/04/vatican-ii-and-re-emergence-of.html#more
Posts
