Canon Law Conference in Rome May 5th-9th

Last week I was away in Rome at the annual conference of the Canon Law Society of Great Britain and Ireland. This being the 50th anniversary of the Society the meeting was held at Rome in the Casa La Salle. This was an impressive building with a very attractive church which seemed to be built to accomodate hundreds of De La Salle brothers. Here is a shot of the nave. The large figure on the back wall is that of St Jean Baptiste de la Salle.

However liturgical madness had broken out on the sanctuary. Just when you think you`ve seen it all this happens. It didn`t look so bad when the seats were being used. However it was comfortable and as we know that is what liturgy should be above all else. We carpet out churches to make them `comfortable` so I suppose the next logical step is to introduce armchairs.

In the background of the above shot you can see one of the fine side altars all of which had a reliquary of a saint or blessed of the de la Salle brothers. I had gone to the conference hoping to be able to use the new found freedom to celebrate the Extraordinary Form. A number of other priests at the conference had the same idea. I took a small altar missal and altar cards but another priest had even brought vestments. In the event, although the Canon Law Society were helpful, I never tried it. I wanted to hear what the celebrants at the main conference Masses had to say. On the first day we had Cardinal Arinze as main celebrant and preacher. He mentioned the problem of liturgical abuse but added, tongue in cheek, that of course it doesn`t happen in Britain or Ireland: I imagine he was recalling the response to the 1997 Vatican document On certain questions regarding the collaboration of the non-ordained faithful in the sacred ministry of priest where a certain senior English bishop announced that the document did not apply in England of course. Here`s a picture from that Mass.

At the other two Masses we had Archbishop Stankiewicz, Dean of the Roman Rota and Cardinal Foley Grand Master of the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem. On Wednesday we attended the papal audience where the Patriarch of the Armenian Apostolic Church addressed the Pope. I did manage to slip into Gammarelli`s to buy a plain white silk Roman vestment from their curiously small selection of available vestments. Business must be good however. When Fr Zielinksi asked how long it would take for them to make a gilet he was told between one year and fourteen months! The last time I went with a priest who asked the same question it was only a six month wait. However it is true what they say: Rome`s vestment shops are latching on to the liturgical style of Pope Benedict and almost all now have some form of Roman vestment to sell or more traditional Gothic style vestments too.

More on the Diocesan Administrator

I was concelebrating at a Mass yesterday. When the main celebrant came to the part of the Eucharistic Prayer where the diocesan bishop is to be mentioned he prayed for our diocesan administrator, who is a priest. My practice has been to exclude any reference to the DA as the See is vacant. So I went scurrying back to do some research and seek out the views of eminent canonists.

The General Instruction on the Roman Missal (GIRM) for 2003 says:

The diocesan bishop or anyone equivalent to him in law must be mentioned by means of this formula: una cum famulo tuo Papa Nostro N. et Episcopo (or Vicario, Prelato, Praefeto, Abbate) (together with our servant N., our Pope, and N. our Bishop [or Vicar, Prelate,Prefect, Abbot)."

However the diocesan administrator is not the equivalent to a diocesan bishop as seen in canon 368 which refers to holders of stable offices even though the diocesan administrator has nearly all the faculties of the diocesan bishop according to canon 427.1. Thus I think it is incorrect to include the DA in the canon as he is not the holder of a stable office. I`m sure a DA needs prayers too but I think it confuses things to mention him there and the omission in the canon of the ordinary`s name brings home the notion that we are sede vacante.

The Catholic Herald on the Holy Days issue

From this week`s Catholic Herald:

Bishops insist on uniformity for Masses on Holy Days

By Mark Greaves

2 May 2008

Traditionalists expressed their dismay this week after it emerged that Epiphany, the Ascension of the Lord and Corpus Christi must be celebrated on Sunday in both forms of the Mass.

The three Holy Days of Obligation were moved to Sunday two years ago but some Catholics still observe them on Thursday by attending Mass in the extraordinary form.

However, the Bishops' Conference of England and Wales announced that the day of obligation must remain the same whichever form of Mass is celebrated.

The decision to announce the news in a brief statement on the liturgy department website without any consultation has provoked anger among some Catholics.

The statement says that the bishops' conference submitted a dubium (a query) to the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei but does not include the text of the question or of the response.

Mgr Andrew Summersgill, general secretary of the bishops' conference, said the bishops had wanted to clear up doubt about which calendar should be followed - a question originally raised by a publisher of the 1962 Missal.

He quoted the response from Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, the head of Ecclesia Dei, who said the decision to move the Holy Days applied to "all of the faithful".

He said: "Since these Holy Days [Epiphany, Ascension and Corpus Christi] are to be observed by all of the faithful, priests who celebrate according to the 1962 Roman Missal for the benefit of the faithful 'attached to the Latin liturgical tradition' should also celebrate these Holy Days on the prescribed Sundays.

"Some Catholics, however, have seen the move as an attempt to crack down on traditionalists and make them conform to the rest of the English and Welsh Church.

They argue that forcing traditional Masses to conform to the new calendar may push alienated Catholics towards schismatic groups such as the Society of St Pius X (SSPX).

One message on a traditionalist website said: "I will be going to the SSPX on Holy Days despite the fact that I believe they are in schism and would rather have nothing to do with them."

Fr Michael Brown, parish priest at St Mary of the Rosary at Forest Hall, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, said the decision would make "a lot of people unhappy", especially since there did not seem to be any consultation with groups such as the Latin Mass Society (LMS) and Una Voce. Until now the LMS has been advertising Masses on the feast days of Epiphany, Ascension and Corpus Christi, and these have been well attended by Catholics annoyed at the decision to abandon the weekday obligations.

It is still possible for the LMS to schedule votive Masses on the Thursday but all Catholics are obliged to observe the feast day again on the Sunday.

An official from Ecclesia Dei said the faithful had no choice but to accept their bishops' decision since there could never be "two standards" for the two forms of the Roman rite.

He said: "Once the bishops ask for Holy Days to be celebrated on certain days and these are agreed with the Holy See, I as a priest may not agree with it, but once it's done I must accept it. What a traditionalist is basically saying is: 'Others want to celebrate these Holy Days on these particular days, and I'm saying I can't do that.' Well, I'm sorry, it doesn't work that way, it would mean there were two standards. They're obliged to keep to the Holy Days that have been agreed upon."

He said there was "no problem" with celebrating the feast day during the week, but added: "The obligation has been moved and so they should celebrate them on [Sunday] like the rest of the Church. It's simply a matter of logic."

Epiphany, Ascension and Corpus Christi were dropped as weekday obligations in July 2006 because of "diminishing observance".

Critics said the obligations had been abandoned without any attempt to consult lay Catholics but the bishops' conference insisted that there had been an "extensive process of consultation over many years".

John Medlin, chairman of the LMS, said: "The Latin Mass Society is studying the situation and for the moment has no further comment to make."

Apart from Sundays, which are Holy Days of Obligation for all Catholics, the Church in England and Wales has seven other days when Mass attendance is compulsory, one more than America, Ireland and even staunchly Catholic Poland.

Some countries, such as Australia, Canada and the Netherlands, have only two. Vatican City observes all 10 Holy Days.

Any change to the Holy Days of Obligation is not supposed to alter the Church's liturgical calendar. Feast days remain the same but, in the case of Epiphany, Ascension and Corpus Christi, the obligation to attend Mass is moved to the following Sunday.

Some better news: extraordinary form may also be celebrated "even if it is not specifically asked for or requested".

This article from the NLM blog cheered me somewhat after the news about Holy Days, especially the Cardinal`s declaration that the Holy Father wants the Extraordinary Form to become a normal part of parish life. I hope this DVD becomes available in the UK too.

As for the assertion that the EF may be said even if not asked for, then I can imagine some responding by saying `Of course. The Motu Proprio allows any priest to say a private Mass` but this doesn`t seem to be what the Cardinal is saying as he goes on to say that priests should make it available so that everyone may have access to this treasure of the ancient liturgy of the Church. The long-awaited document of clarification from the Ecclesia Dei commission should be an interesting read.



Important Assertions by Cardinal Castrillón

by Gregor Kollmorgen


As noted in the post on the new FSSP and EWTN training DVD for the usus antiquior, this DVD also contains an introduction by Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, which can be viewed online here.



Provided that the translation is accurate (it is almost impossible to make out what the cardinal is actually saying in Italian under the voiceover), His Eminence is making some important assertions in this statement. While these are obviously not legally binding, they are still significant considering the cardinal's position, and may give a hint at some of the contents of the forthcoming clarifications by His Eminence's commission on the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum.



The first interesting point the cardinal makes - which was of course already obvious from Pope Benedicts accompanying letter, but is consistently being downplayed by opponents of the extraordinary form - is that that the use of the 1962 missal is a gift not only for so-called traditionalists, but "for the whole Catholic Church".



The second - and here the accuracy of the translation is especially important - is that Cardinal Castrillón says that if there are faithful requesting the older form of the Mass from priests, they, by the will of the Vicar of Christ, must accept the petitions".



The third point I want to note, and possibly the most important one, is that His Eminence says that the extraordinary form may also be celebrated "even if it is not specifically asked for or requested". This supports the interpretation advanced by Fr Tim Finigan and many others, which in my opinion is the unequivocal result of applying the normal methods of legal interpretation. An interpretation, however, which is contested by opponents of the usus antiquior, and the contrary of which (i.e. a requirement that the forma extraordinaria only be said if a group of faithful requests it) is expressly contained in many guidelines by bishops or entire bishops' conferences. Cardinal Castrillón even goes farther by asserting that in such cases where there are no specific requests by faithful, nevertheless the priests "should make it available so that everyone may have access to this treasure of the ancient liturgy of the Church".



This leads to the last point I would like to highlight which is His Eminence's declaration that "the Holy Father wants this form of the Mass to become a normal one in the parishes".A very welcome message from His Eminence indeed.



Here is a transcript I made of the entire passage of the introduction by Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos:


It [the older form of the Mass] is not a gift merely for the so-called traditionalists, no, it is a gift for the whole Catholic Church.



And because it is a gift freely offered that the Holy Father is making, he makes it by means of this marvelous structure, the Church, which comprises the parishes, the priests, and the chaplains in the chapels where the Eucharist is celebrated. And they, by the will of the Vicar of Christ, must accept the petitions and the requests of the faithful who want this Mass, and they must offer it to them. And even if it is not specifically asked for or requested, they should make it available so that everyone may have access to this treasure of the ancient liturgy of the Church. This is the primordial goal of the motu proprio, a spiritual and theological richness.



The Holy Father wants this form of the Mass to become a normal one in the parishes, so that in this way young communities can also become familiar with this rite.

Ascension Thursday: a canonically correct but unfortunate clarification.

So far I`ve not said anything about the unfortunate decision to include in the transfer of various Holydays to the nearest Sunday the Extraordinary Form. Many people were unhappy about this decision which came out last year,(and not just those attached to the Extraordinary Form) as they saw it as another loss of something distinctive about being a Catholic. It is also irritating that Ascension day is no longer forty days after Easter as scripture tells us and that Epiphany is no longer the twelfth night of Christmas. I hope one day this decision may be reversed.

The Catholic Herald has obtained the text of the decision by Ecclesia Dei. It reads:

With regard to the question of Holydays of Obligation, you state that your understanding is that "the Holydays of Obligation established by the Bishops' Conference of England and Wales and confirmed by the Apostolic See under Canon 1246 are to be observed by the whole Church in England and Wales in celebrations of both the Ordinary and the Extraordinary form of Mass." I understand that in England and Wales the Feasts of the Epiphany of the Lord, the Ascension of the Lord and the Body and Blood of the Lord have been transferred to the nearest Sunday with the approval of the Holy See. Since these Holydays are to be observed by all of the faithful, priests who celebrate according to the 1962 Roman Missal for the benefit of the faithful "attached to the Latin liturgical tradition" should also celebrate these Holydays on the prescribed Sundays.

The new calendar for the feasts is here on the bishops` website. This article appears today on Zenit.

Here is an article by Dr Alcuin Reid which appears in the Catholic Herald today:

There is no doubt that bishops, with the consent of the Holy See, enjoy the power to transfer Holy Days of Obligation to another day or to dispense their obligation; both the 1917 Code of Canon Law (canon 1247) and the 1983 Code (canon 1246) foresee these possibilities. Indeed, in England before the Council the obligation to attend Mass on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception was dispensed, though it was celebrated on December 8th each year.

Many of us will recall the impassioned debate in the Catholic press and beyond when the Bishops of England and Wales recently transferred the feasts of the Epiphany, Ascension and Corpus Christi to the nearest Sunday. It is said that earlier, when Cardinal Hume was presented with this proposal, he blocked it with the retort: “Secularism has gone far enough!” After his death the bishops judged the move to be apposite.

The pastoral reasons for the bishops’ decision are clear: modern urban life can render it very difficult to get to Mass on Holy Days, and even more so in rural areas where priests are fewer. An alternative can be argued: if it is truly impossible given the obligations of one’s state in life or one’s location to get to Mass on Holy Days, one is dispensed by that impossibility and there is no need to tamper with the liturgy because of such modern exigencies. Yet conversely again, regularly relying on a dispensation could mean many people never celebrating profoundly significant feasts of the liturgical year. One may prefer that the bishops had not transferred the feasts, but one can follow their rationale in so doing.

Catholics who worship according to the usus antiquior – the more ancient use of the Roman rite (sometimes called the “traditional Latin Mass”) – are understandably reluctant to accept the modernization of the liturgy or any steps that appear to move in that direction. This may be seen by some as a weakness. Whether it is this or whether it is a healthy distrust of unnecessary change, it is a reality that must be taken into account by the Church’s pastors. Pope Benedict’s decree last year that the ancient use had “never been abrogated” and that it was freely to be available to all who wished it were greeted by such groups with profound joy and reassurance. It was a profoundly pastoral measure.

The announcement last week of the canonically correct clarification obtained by the English bishops from Rome that “priests who celebrate according to the 1962 Roman Missal for the benefit of the faithful…should also celebrate these Holydays on the prescribed Sundays” is not such a pastoral measure. Yes, one can understand the desire for feasts to be kept by all on the same day. And yes, one can understand the annoyance of some modern liturgists and even bishops by those attached to the usus antiquior who have at times been somewhat smug about retaining the feasts on the original days. However, whilst these may be concerns, there are others to be taken into account.

The first is that those who worship according to the usus antiquior are most often deeply attached not only to the form of the rite but to the riches of the whole liturgical year. They would usually make the effort to be at Mass on the “extra” days whether it was strictly of obligation or not. By all means let the bishops remove the “weekday” obligation if they think it unduly onerous. But this does not necessitate their insistence on the transfer of the liturgical celebration of the feasts in the older use. For the transfer impoverishes the liturgical ‘diet’ that will now be on offer. What Mass will the priest say on the Thursday before Ascension “Sunday,” as in the more ancient use a “votive” Mass of the Ascension is simply not possible? It would in any case be ludicrous to extinguish the paschal candle after the Gospel on Thursday symbolising the departure of our Lord’s resurrected body only to do so again on Sunday! Are we to have two Epiphanies? Are the feasts of All Saints, Sts Peter and Paul and the Assumption to be repeated on a Sunday or a Monday after their observance the previous day? And what of their proper vigil days that are integral to the older use? What offices are to be celebrated? Then there is the issue of the occlusion of the liturgical texts of the Sundays that the transferred feasts will displace. Alas this “clarification” serves to deprive the faithful of some of the very liturgical heritage Pope Benedict sought to protect.

The second is that the liturgical life of the Catholic Church has always borne witness to unity in diversity, but not uniformity. Eastern and Western Catholic rites have utterly different calendars. Different uses of the Roman rite have had significant variations even, in the case of Religious Orders, in the same cities. The Ambrosian rite of Milan had no Ash Wednesday. Yes, it may seem a bit untidy to have some celebrating Epiphany on one day and some others a few days later, but there is surely no sin in it? After all, the calendar of the more ancient use, last issued in 1962, celebrates many feasts on different days from that of that of the modern use, and not without good reason. It must be said plainly that there is no overriding liturgical reason that these feasts cannot be celebrated on their original days in the usus antiquior.

Nor is there a pastoral necessity; indeed pastoral considerations suggest the opposite. The Holy Father was clear in his explanation of Summorum Pontificum that one motivation for its promulgation was the promotion of unity within the Church. This measure will without doubt be seen as another obstacle in the path of reaching that unity with those who find themselves in an irregular situation, such as the Society of St Pius X. We might think that they should not react thus, but some shall: that is a pastoral reality. There may even be people scandalised by this change who turn anew to the SSPX.

The timing of the bishops’ announcement is unfortunate: made but a week before Ascension and less than a month before Corpus Christi, what are clergy and faithful who have made plans for Masses on those days to do? It is also a little unclear, for a press-release referring to a response to a question put to Rome, but not publishing the question itself or the response given, has no binding canonical status. Nor would it appear that the bishops have formally decreed that this change is to be observed: certainly no decree of the English and Welsh bishops has been published. Such publications are necessary before obedience to the change is required.

Whilst our Fathers in God certainly have the canonical right to decree such a change, perhaps in this instance they might be so kind as not to do so, for the pastoral and liturgical reasons mentioned above, amongst others? St Paul’s letter to the Ephesians teaches us that we should, as children, obey our parents (including, by analogy, our spiritual fathers, the bishops), and as faithful Catholics we should do so. However he also adds the admonition: “Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.”

Dr Alcuin Reid is a London-based liturgical scholar. His new edition of Adrian Fortescue’s “The Early Papacy” has recently been published by Ignatius Press.

The Priest: a Messenger of Joy.

I enjoyed this from Pope Benedict`s homily at the ordinations to the priesthood at the weekend. It is easy to be demoralised but this helps to focus the mind. From VIS

Benedict XVI examined the first reading, the passage in the Acts of the Apostles narrating the persecution in Jerusalem against the first Christian converts, the scattering of the disciples including Philip's flight to Samaria, and his preaching being welcomed there "with great joy".

"Bringing the Gospel to everyone, that everyone may experience the joy of Christ and that there may be great joy in every city; what could be more beautiful than this? What could be greater? What could create greater enthusiasm than helping to spread the Word of Life throughout the world, than communicating the living water of the Holy Spirit? Announcing and bearing witness to this joy: this is the very heart of your mission", said the Pope to the ordinands.

"These are elemental words for all priests", he told them. "To collaborate in other people's joy - in an often sad and negative world - the fire of the Gospel must burn within each of you, the joy of the Lord must live in you. Only then will you be able to convey and multiply this joy, bringing it to everyone, especially those who are sad and disillusioned".

John Senior

A while ago I was sent a meme about my favourite books and I mentioned The Restoration of Christian Culture by John Senior as a book that has influenced me greatly. At the time it was out of print but and copies were going second hand for about £100 so I`m delighted to see it is back in print again and available through Family publications for £16.95.

Bede Chair of Catholic Theology: Official Announcement

Here is the announcement from the diocese of Hexham and Newcastle, released today.


The Bede Chair of Catholic Theology:

Professor Lewis Ayres, an English lay Catholic theologian currently teaching at Emory University in Georgia U.S.A, has been appointed as the first Bede Chair of Catholic Theology in Durham University.

Professor Ayres is also an active member of his local parish and has a real commitment as a catechist. It is hoped that he will be able to take up his new responsibilities in the new academic year 2009.

A number of diocesan trustees, representatives of the Sisters of Mercy (Oaklea) and other clergy and people from the Diocese were present at the public presentations at the beginning of the two day interview process on 20-21 April.

Very many thanks to Fr Michael Campion, Mr Austin Donohoe and Mr Paul Murray for their hard work in acquiring the necessary funds for this particular initiative in Durham University. It is a remarkable achievement.

Thanks also to Archbishop Vincent Nichols and Jim O'Keefe for their participation over the two days of Interviews. We look forward to welcoming Professor Ayers and his family into the diocese.

The return of the papal states?

Another article from today`s Telegraph. If Italy is to be broken up then maybe the middle bit might like to become the papal states again.

Italy must be broken up, says Berlusconi's wife

By Malcolm Moore in Rome
Last Updated: 1:37am BST 26/04/2008

Silvio Berlusconi's wife added her voice yesterday to the growing calls for Italy to be partitioned.

In an interview with La Stampa, Veronica Lario, 51, said: "Italy has never been well-suited to being a single country, and has never matured enough to become one. There is no longer any value in a unified Italy."

Cabinet posts may go to the Northern League, which wants independence from Italy’s South.

Ms Lario, a former showgirl, married Italy's prime minister-elect 18 years ago after catching his eye on a television show. Since then, she has rarely courted publicity, but does run Il Foglio, an influential newspaper.

The prospect of a devolved Italy has grown significantly in recent weeks since the Northern League, a secessionist party, won strong support in the general election.

Umberto Bossi, its volcanic leader, has repeatedly threatened to "take up arms" against the "corrupt" politicians in Rome who divert the wealth of Italy's North to the impoverished South.

Ms Lario disclosed that she was a fan of Mr Bossi and added it was time for Italy to stop being "snobbish" about the League, whose politicians are frequently coarse and populist.
advertisement.

"This is a disillusioned country, even after Berlusconi's victory," she said. "The League expresses concrete demands from the most productive part of Italy, which is tired of dragging the rest of the country and does not find itself represented by the Left-wing."

Mr Berlusconi, who will find it difficult to maintain a majority in parliament without the League's support, is likely to make Mr Bossi a cabinet minister. He could also appoint Roberto Calderoli, Mr Bossi's second-in-command, as deputy prime minister.

In the past, Mr Calderoli has called for immigrants to be shot in their boats and for a national pork-eating day to defy Islam.

"If the people have voted for Mr Calderoli," said Ms Lario, "that gives him credibility".

Oh well

Today`s Mandrake column in the Daily Telegraph has the following interesting information:

Short list to succeed Cardinal Murphy O'Connor

By Tim Walker

Last Updated: 1:22am BST 26/04/2008

The candidates to succeed Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor as Archbishop of Westminster have been whittled down to three.

Mandrake hears that the names on the official list - the terna - are Archbishop Vincent Nichols, Archbishop Peter Smith and Bishop Arthur Roche.

"It will disappoint those who were hoping for someone outside of the current crop of bishops," whispers my man at Archbishop's House.

"Benedict XVI is not, however, obliged to pick one of the names that Archbishop Faustino Munoz, the Papal Nuncio, submits to him so we will have to wait and see."

Traditionalists had hoped that the next archbishop would have been chosen, like Basil Hume, from outside the episcopacy of England and Wales and Mandrake understands that George Pell, the Australian cardinal, had been lobbying the Pope for such a move.

This led to speculation that either Abbot Hugh Gilbert, of Pluscarden Abbey in Scotland, or Fr Aidan Nichols, a Dominican Friar, were in the frame.

The Most Rev Nichols, the Archbishop of Birmingham, considered the favourite, is supported by Lord Alton, while the Rt Rev Roche, the Bishop of Leeds, is backed by John Gummer, the Catholic convert MP.

The Most Rev Smith, the Archbishop of Cardiff, won admirers with his lobbying of parliament over legislation on euthanasia and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill.

Cardinal Murphy O'Connor is expected to stand down early next year

Lefebvrists snub Pope's call for unity

Having seen bishop Fellay in action a few months ago when he came to Gateshead for the opening of the SSPX church there, this comes as no surprise to me. He did not give the impression he was a man about to seek reconciliation with the Holy See. I was quite disappointed by him: having been led to believe he was the moderate face of the SSPX, he appeared no less extreme than bishop Williamson. At least things are becoming more sharply defined with the SSPX now as they call for the rejection of the Second Vatican Council. Clearly this cannot going to happen. How can the Church reject a General Council? What happens to the indefectibility of the Church? The best way forward is that outlined by pope Benedict on December 22nd 2005 when he called for the council to be understood and interpreted according to a `hermeneutic of continuity`. It appears that the schismatic nature of the SSPX is clearer now.

However, of course, many will agree with some of bishop Fellay`s points about Summorum Pontificum. It is true that there has been in some quarters an underwhelming response: in some places in the world bishops have arranged for a Extraordinary Form Mass to take place in their cathedral, in others it has been generally ignored and swept under the carpet. I was speaking to a young Polish student recently who spent a year in a seminary in Poland. He told me that the Polish bishops have done very little to expedite Summorum Pontificum and that if a seminarian expresses an interest in the Extraordinary Form this counts against his progress in the seminary. Clearly this is wrong: it should now be the task of seminaries to ensure that all students are trained in the Extraordinary Form.

On a brighter note there are rumours flying about that the extravagantly named Transalpine Redemptorists, a body under the aegis of the SSPX, are seeking reconciliation with the Holy See.

Here is the article from the Catholic Herald:

Lefebvrists snub Pope's call for unity

By Mark Greaves

25 April 2008

The head of the Society of St Pius X has said that full communion with the Catholic Church cannot happen until Rome rejects some of the reforms of the Second Vatican Council.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior general of the SSPX, ruled out the reconciliation sought by Pope Benedict XVI in a letter to his estimated one million followers last weekend. He said that "the time for an agreement [with the Vatican] has not yet come". His announcement ends hopes that Benedict XVI's liberation of the traditional Latin Mass would clear the way for reconciliation after more than two decades of near-schism.

The Pope's Motu Proprio, published in July, granted priests everywhere the freedom to celebrate the "extraordinary form of the Mass in the Roman rite".

It was hoped that this would pave the way towards unity with traditionalist groups which had strongly objected to the suppression of the "Tridentine" Mass in the wake of the Second Vatican Council.

But Bishop Fellay said in his letter that a change to the Church's liturgy needed to be accompanied by a substantial reversal of its doctrine.

The Motu Proprio was "not accompanied by logically co-related measures in the other areas of the life of the Church", he said in a French-language letter.

"Nothing has changed in Rome's determination to follow the Council's orientation, despite 40 years of crisis, despite the deserted convents, abandoned rectories and empty churches," Bishop Fellay said.

"The Catholic universities persist in their ramblings, the teaching of the Catechism remains unknown at the same time that the Catholic school does not exist anymore as particularly Catholic," the Swiss-born bishop wrote.

He also complained of "brutal resistance" to the Motu Proprio from whole groups of bishops. It is understood that Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, head of Ecclesia Dei, believes the statement is only a modest setback and is determined to bring the SSPX back into the Church.

But other Vatican officials are much more pessimistic about the prospect of reconciliation. One Vatican source said he believed the society was a sect closer to Calvinism than Catholicism.

One of the main doctrinal obstacles to re-union is the refusal of some in the society to accept that the Jews cannot be blamed for the death of Christ - a declaration made by the Second Vatican Council document Nostra Aetate.

Bishop Fellay made clear in his letter that the SSPX would not end its dialogue with the Vatican and would continue "on the path defined in the year 2000" when its bishops met Cardinal Castrillon on a pilgrimage to Rome.

He also said that the SSPX would continue to appeal to Benedict XVI to overturn the excommunications of its leaders in 1988 after its founder, the French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, ordained four bishops against Rome's wishes.

His letter will disappoint many Catholics who believed that the Pope's Motu Proprio would lead to the SSPX becoming re-united with the Church. The Motu Proprio allowed priests to celebrate the traditional Mass without the permission of a bishop and was partly aimed at bringing traditionalist groups back into the Church.

On the day it was made public Bishop Fellay expressed his "deep gratitude" to the Pope and said he had created "a favourable climate" in which to consider disputes over doctrine.

However, signs that the SSPX did not feel ready to re-join the Church emerged in February when it accused Benedict XVI of caving in to "foreign pressures" by amending the Good Friday prayer in the extraordinary form of the Mass.

The Pope removed a reference to the "blindness" of the Jews and an appeal that they "be delivered from darkness" and that God "may take the veil from their hearts".

Bishop Richard Williamson, one of the four excommunicated bishops of the SSPX, said he believed the amendment was "anti-Semitic".

Fr Arnaud Sélégny, the general secretary of the SSPX General House in Menzingen, Switzerland, confirmed that the SSPX was not ready to be reconciled with Rome until the Church repudiated some parts of the Second Vatican Council.

He said that the society was "satisfied" with the Pope's Motu Proprio, but added: "On all the points where we have special difficulties, there is no change. These novelties [of the Second Vatican Council] are continuing to infect the body of the Holy Church."

He admitted that it might seem "optimistic" to expect the Church to reject some of the Council's documents.

However, he said it was impossible to conceive that the Church would not eventually reject teaching that was "against its tradition" - and predicted that it would do so in 10 or 20 years.

He said the post-conciliar era was a crisis period in Church history similar to the Great Schism, when the removal of the papacy to Avignon, France, led to the election of more than one pope.

"These big crises in the Church always last for 70 years," he said. "That's why I think that in 10 or 20 years - at about 2030 - [the current crisis] will be finished."

Bede chair of Catholic Theology at Durham

One of the things Bishop Dunn set himself to do was to raise money to finance a chair of Catholic theology at Durham University. A couple of days after his death it was announced that £2.1 million had been raised to achieve this. Durham University announced it here. Recently candidates were interviewed for the post. It has just been brought to my attention that James Mawdsley has an account of the interviews for the four candidates on his very sound blog. You can read it here. He writes:

Of the four candidate's for the new Bede Chair at Durham University's Centre for Catholic Studies, three of the candidates seem to favour a hemeneutic of rupture over a hermeneutic of continuity when it comes to understanding the Church's relation to its past. Sentire cum Ecclesia is not their way: they want to build something new which is in conflict with the Church of former generations. This apparently sets the Church Militant in conflict with and judgement upon the Church Triumphant. If this is unfair to Profs. Beattie, McPartlan or O'Leary then maybe someone can explain why. So Prof. Ayres looks like the best candidate.

UPDATE: I understand that Prof. Ayres got the job.

FURTHER UPDATE: I`d never heard of Fr Joseph O`Leary but he appears to be a controversial character to say the least. For more click here on the Pertinacious Papist blog

Confirmations in the Extraordinary Form

I received this press release from the Latin Mass Society today. John Medlin hopes that more bishops will follow the example of Westminster and Northampton. I expect new bishops nowadays have to be Motu Proprio friendly so I hope the new bishop of Hexham and Newcastle whoever he will be will be open to this.

24 April 2008

* Westminster bishop to confer Traditional Latin Rite Confirmations

Bishop George Stack, auxiliary bishop in Westminster, will administer Confirmations in the Traditional Latin Rite at St James’s Church, Spanish Place, London W1 on Saturday, 15 November at 11.00 am at the request of Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, Archbishop of Westminster. This will be the fifth consecutive year that Westminster auxiliary bishops will have conferred Confirmation in the Traditional Rite. Last year in November 2007, a record 54 candidates received the sacrament at the hands of Bishop John Arnold – 50 children and 4 adults.

Also in November 2007, Bishop Peter Doyle of Northampton became the first diocesan bishop of England and Wales to administer Traditional Rite Confirmations when he confirmed 7 candidates during a pastoral visit to Our Lady of Perpetual Succour Church, Chesham Bois, Bucks on Sunday 18 November 2007. Bishop Doyle also celebrated Sunday Mass in the Traditional Rite on that occasion.

John Medlin, General Manager of the Latin Mass Society, said, “There is no sign of slackening of demand for Traditional Rite Confirmations – in fact the opposite. The numbers are increasing every year and I expect this trend to continue after Pope Benedict’s Motu Proprio. We hope it will not be long before bishops all over England and Wales respond to pastoral demand for Mass and the Sacraments in the Traditional Rite. Those attached to the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite are very grateful to Cardinal Cormac and the Westminster auxiliary bishops for making provision for the Traditional Mass and Sacraments.”

At St James’s, Spanish Place, in November 2007, a packed congregation of 600 family and friends were led by the St James’s choir in singing the Veni Creator Spiritus and other traditional hymns. During the anointing, the choir sang polyphony and plain chant. After the anointing, Bishop Arnold led the congregation in the Divine Praises and then conferred Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament.

After the Confirmations, at a reception, Julian Chadwick, Chairman of the Latin Mass Society, thanked Bishop Arnold for his pastoral concern and led the assembly in a traditional roof-raising round of applause. Bishop Arnold then spoke informally and cut the special Confirmation cake with many parents taking photographs. Later, the bishop mixed with the parents and children whilst everyone enjoyed the refreshments provided by the LMS.

Note:
Parents who require Traditional Confirmation for their children in November 2008 should contact the LMS office for full details of how to register.
. . . . ENDS . . . .

For further information, please contact John Medlin, General Manager, or James Murphy, LMS Office Manager, on (T) 020 7404 7284; (F) 020 7831 5585;
(E mail) thelatinmasssociety@snmail.co.uk