Monday, May 14, 2007

The Times

Ruth Gledhill has this article in today`s Times. The `opt-out clause` may be no worse than what has been said before about a bishop being able in certain cases to prohibit a priest from using this missal but, from what was said, there had to be a reason given for the prohibition other than that the bishop doesn`t like priests using this missal. I even heard it said that if a bishop wants to prohibit a priest he would have to apply to the Ecclesia Dei commission!

There is more on Ruth Gledhill`s blog. I liked the quotation from Christopher Gillibrand: 'For forty years, the Church has put into a traditionalist ghetto their often best informed, committed and practising Catholics. The day of liberation for the Latin Mass seems to be at hand,' he says.

Well it looks as if something might be happening soon. The champagne is in the fridge and waiting.

Pope set to bring back Latin Mass in face of opposition

Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent

The Pope is going ahead with plans to bring back the traditional Latin Mass in spite of objections from German bishops, sources have told The Times.
Pope Benedict XVI is understood to have signed an “indult”, or permission, that would allow Roman Catholics worldwide to celebrate the Tridentine Rite whenever they wished. At present the old rite can be said only with special permission from a diocesan bishop.
The return of the Tridentine Rite would represent a triumph for traditionalists and be an indication of the Pope’s determination to reinforce conservative Catholic doctrine as one of his most powerful weapons in the fight against secularism.
In Brazil last week the Pope made clear his conservative sympathies, emphasising that there could be no relaxation on the Church’s teaching on sexual ethics and abortion.
In a private audience with one leading traditionalist, Alice von Hildebrand, Pope Benedict said that he intended to publish the permission to celebrate the 16th-century rite this month.
The document had been expected earlier but is understood to have been delayed after a seven-page document of objections by German bishops was sent to the Pope.
Among other things, the Germans were anxious about a Good Friday prayer calling for the conversion of the Jews. A wider revolt by bishops’ conferences around the world would have seen off the indult, but in the end the Germans were isolated in their protest. However, when the permission is published, it is thought likely to exclude prayer for the conversion of the Jews, which leaders of the German and the British councils of Christians and Jews have spoken out against.
It could also include an “opt-out clause”, allowing bishops to prohibit it at a local level, which would placate both the German and the modernist French bishops.
Mrs von Hildebrand, 83, an author and lecturer who lives in the US, told The Times: “I know that the Pope favours the Tridentine Mass very, very much. I asked him if there was any chance that the permission would be given. He said it would be given in May.”
Mrs von Hildebrand, whose late husband was the theologian Dietrich von Hildebrand, added: “You should prohibit what is evil. But to prohibit holy tradition — that is something that goes against the tradition of the Catholic Church.” Another informed source said that the permission could not be guaranteed to be this month.


Anonymous said...

But that opt-out clause is ridiculous. Before: You can say traitional Mass only if your bishop allows it. After: You can say traditional Mass only if your Bishop doesn't disallow it. That's ludicrous. What's changed, really? They can't keep that clause in, surely.
Father, on another matter, why is your complete profile not what it says it is? All it does is state the bl----n' obvious. I thought it was going to tell us all about you - your background etc, what made you what you are, height, weight, eye colour, favourite colour etc. This sounds like a request for a link to a Father Brown Fan Club so I'll be quiet now.

Hebdomadary said...

"Opt-out" is such an "Anglican" lingo. It it were true, the document would be utterly meaningless. As for the conversion of the Jews, I can live without it. I'd rather pray for the conversion of the Roman Catholic Church.

John said...

I found the column next to the Tridentine one more amusing. More conspiracy theories about the Third Secret of Fatima :P

Apparantly the Pope's word on the matter just isn't enough for these "devout" catholics :P

Anonymous said...

The removal of the prayers for the conversion of the Jews would be very worrying. It would call into question the universality of the Gospel and lend support to the ‘two covenants’ heresy. It would also gravely weaken any hopes of ending the SSPX schism by signalling that the MP would only be a liturgical provision rather than an affirmation of doctrinal continuity between the pre and post conciliar Church.

Fr Michael Brown said...

Sweep, I agree that that would be ridiculous and I`m sure the Pope is aware of that. I hope that is the reason the whole thing has taken such a long time: that he is making sure that this legislation will really make a difference and not be swept under the carpet.

As for the profile I think a blogging priest ought to keep himself a bit of a mystery. I have featured in a photo on the blog and there are others on the parish website.

Fr Michael Brown said...

Aelianus and Hebdomadary, I quite agree. I realy can`t undrstand this fuss about the Good Friday prayer for the jews. If taken to its logical conclusion I imagine the whole Missal and indeed the whole practice of Christianity could be taken as being offensive to the Jews when we claim Jesus of Nazareth to be divine.

Fr Michael Brown said...

John, I couldn`t see the Fatima article you mention but it could concern the work of Fr Gruner who thinks there has been a plot to hide the `real` third secret of Fatima. At least he has never hi-jacked an airliner as happened a while back when a former Cistercian did so with the demand that the third secret be released. I must admit when the third secret was released a few years ago it was difficult to see why it had not been made public at the begining of the 1960`s as it was supposed to be. Sr Lucia vouched for the veracity of the released third secret but then of course we all know that the real Sr Lucia had been done away with and an imposter put in her place.

Anonymous said...

Fr., you disappoint me. I hoped your profile would be a parody of the type of interview the celebs do for the supplements! Joking apart - and I'm very glad you took it that way - I suppose one's real expectations of a blog profile would be things like where you were educated and how you came to the priesthood etc.
Never mind....

John said...

Ah Father, you're falling behind. The imposter was replaced six months earlier by another imposter, who was actually Benedict XV's daughter, who was keeping the second coming under wraps, and keeping the secret that daddy was actually a reincarnation of St. Peter.

Its all so simple when you think about it...

Anonymous said...

The so-called offending word ('perfidis' - invariably translated inaccurately as 'perfidious', as opposed to 'mis-faithful' as Knox preferred) was removed from the Missal in 1960 - so there isn't an issue anyway, since any MP will be in relation to the 1962 Missal which doesn't include the word.

If all references to Jews (who were and are 'mis-faithful' in a Christian context) were removed, we'd have precious little truly Christian material left - a number of scriptural texts would need to be excluded!

This whole thing is nonsense, conjured up by the liberals to deflect attention. Ignore it.