| Part 1 Father John Zuhlsdorf Analyzes Its
Effects
By Annamarie Adkins
MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota, 6 JULY 2008 (ZENIT)
Benedict XVI's letter "Summorum Pontificum" on the traditional form
of the Mass has sparked an increased interest in the Latin-language
liturgy, especially among priests, says an expert on liturgical
translations.
Father John Zuhlsdorf, a former employee of the Pontifical Commission
Ecclesia Dei, is a noted authority on both liturgical translations and
the 1962 Missal. He also writes the "What Does the Prayer Really Say?"
column in the Wanderer newspaper, and is the author of a popular blog by
the same name.
In Part 1 of this interview with ZENIT, he spoke about new interest
in the traditional Latin Mass and various concerns raised regarding "Summorum
Pontificum."
Part 2 of this interview will appear Monday.
Q: Has there been much of a demand for the traditional Latin Mass
since the release of "Summorum Pontificum"?
Father Zuhlsdorf: No and yes. We have not seen hordes of the faithful
hammering on rectory doors to demand the older Mass. But there has been
a steady increase of parishes where the traditional Latin Mass is now
celebrated regularly.
The trickle is becoming a stream.
Initially, there were unrealistic expectations. Many who favor the
older Mass were overly optimistic that the floodgates would crash open.
The naysayers, often in positions of power, tried to stem the tide by
speaking very negatively, not only about the older Mass, but also about
the people who desire it.
Many diocesan bishops, incredibly, threw up unreasonable obstacles to
the good provisions the Holy Father generously promulgated. That
resistance is now crumbling under the scrutiny of the blogosphere and
pressure from the Holy See.
The other factor is that very many young priests want to learn the
traditional Latin Mass. For example, I hear that over 1,000 priests have
requested the new training DVD that the Fraternity of St. Peter made
together with EWTN.
Scores of priests are attending training workshops in Chicago and
Nebraska, in Oxford, England, and elsewhere, whenever they are offered.
As priests learn this form of the Mass, they will begin implementing it
in parishes.
Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, Benedict XVI's point man in these
matters, stated that the Holy Father hopes this Mass will be offered
widely, even if it has not been requested by the faithful.
University chaplaincies are being pushed by students to make the
traditional Latin Mass available. This trend will only increase on an
upward curve.
Q: The Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei is reportedly preparing a
document to clarify some ambiguities related to implementing "Summorum
Pontificum." What have been the main difficulties thus far that such a
document should address?
Father Zuhlsdorf: The document will probably clarify some terms in
the "motu proprio" that have been used by some diocesan bishops and
priests to block what the Holy Father is trying to accomplish.
For example, "Summorum Pontificum" says priests must be idoneus,
"capable, competent" to say Mass with the older book. Idoneus, a
technical term, refers to the minimum requirements for competence, not
to expertise.
Cardinal Edward Egan of New York, a distinguished canonist in his
day, correctly stated that idoneus, as far as the Latin language is
concerned, means that the priest must be able to pronounce the words
properly. That is the minimum.
Of course we hope for far more than that. But some bishops are
subjecting priests to exams in Latin before they determine whether he
can exercise his right to say Mass using the 1962 Missale Romanum, or
even in Latin with the Novus Ordo, that is to say, Mass in his own rite,
as a priest of the Latin Church.
Another issue is how large a group, a coetus, making a request for
the older Mass must be before the parish priest is required to act in
their favor. Those and other questions pertain to the interpretation of
the "motu proprio."
Practical questions have arisen as well. For example, the Holy See
should give direction about the relationship of the two liturgical
calendars. I think the Holy See should issue an "ordo" for the
traditional Mass, a yearly booklet indicating which Mass must be said
each day.
Clarifications about the style of vestments that may be used, or the
sort of music, could be useful. There are questions about Communion in
the hand or altar girls, how those fit with the spirit and the rubrics
of the pre-conciliar Mass.
Smaller details, for example about the so-called second Confiteor
before Communion, or some traditions people desire from before the 1962
Missal should be made clear.
This upcoming document, and its particular authoritative responses,
will help make the implementation of "Summorum Pontificum" orderly and
serene.
Q: You have argued that "Summorum Pontificum" is the centerpiece of
Benedict XVI's "Marshall Plan" for the Church. But the term "Marshall
Plan" implies rebuilding from the ground up. Can you describe this plan
and the role you believe the traditional Latin Mass fits within it?
Father Zuhlsdorf: Useful as they are, analogies limp. After World War
II the United States rebuilt war-ravaged Europe both for humanitarian
reasons, and also to help create trading partners and a prosperous
bulwark against Communism.
After Vatican II, many spheres of the Church were devastated, ravaged
by internal dissent, a loss of continuity with our tradition, and from
erosion by the secularism and relativism of the prevailing modern world.
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger had been concerned for years about the loss
of Christian identity, which is at the heart of Western Civilization.
Now Papa Ratzinger, I believe, is working to reinvigorate our Catholic
identity, within the Church herself among her members and spheres of
life, so that we can resist the negative influences of secularism and
relativism.
Only with a solid identity can we, as Catholics, have something
positive and healthy to offer to the world at large, a clear voice
offering important contributions in the public square.
Our identity as Catholics is inextricably bound together with the way
we pray as a Church.
To give shape and strength to our Catholic identity in these
difficult times, we need an authentic liturgical renewal, a renewal that
reintegrates us with our tradition, brings us into continuity with the
deep roots of our Catholic Christian experience of two millennia.
Contrary to the notions of most progressivists, "the Catholic thing"
did not begin in the 1960s.
Benedict XVI is guiding us to a healthier vision of the Church's
doctrine, history, public worship and our very identity as Catholics.
There can be no authentic change for a better future without continuity
with our past. Liturgy is the tip of the spear.
Part 2
Father John Zuhlsdorf Analyzes its Effects
By Annamarie Adkins
MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota, 7 JULY 2008 (ZENIT)Even though Benedict XVI’s
letter “Summorum Pontificum” on the traditional form of the Mass has
been in effect less than a year, it has already made an impact, says an
expert on liturgical translations.
Father John Zuhlsdorf, a former employee of the Pontifical Commission
Ecclesia Dei, is a noted authority on both liturgical translations and
the 1962 missal. He also writes the “What Does the Prayer Really Say?”
column in The Wanderer newspaper, and is the author of a popular blog by
the same name.
In Part 2 of this interview with ZENIT, he spoke with ZENIT about the
impact “Summorum Pontificum” has had on the life of the Church life one
year after its release.
Part 1 appeared Sunday.
Q: Benedict XVI stated in the letter accompanying “Summorum Pontificum”
that he hoped each form of the Mass
—
ordinary and extraordinary
—
would mutually enrich the other. In particular, he desired that the
extraordinary form would restore a sense of the sacred to the ordinary
form, or Novus Ordo. One year after “Summorum Pontificum,” have you seen
the extraordinary form exercise any "gravitational pull" on the Novus
Ordo?
Father Zuhlsdorf: Yes, we can see this “pull” at work in some places,
but there is a long way to go. Gravity exerts a steady pull, but
inertia, especially momentum in the wrong direction, must still be
overcome.
It has only been one year since the letter was issued, and only since
September that it has been in force. Initially there were flurries of
enthusiasm and vituperation, crowing and panic.
The text had to be read and absorbed. The Holy See had to clarify the
authentic wording. Problems and questions are still being identified. A
document with clarifications obviously remains on the drafting desk.
But the mere awareness of the provisions of “Summorum Pontificum” has
made an impact. “Personal parishes” are being established for use of the
older Mass and rites of sacraments. Books and training materials had to
be created. They are now starting to be published. All this takes time.
Also, the Holy Father changed the conversation about liturgy and certain
post-Conciliar practices by celebrating the Novus Ordo in a more
traditional way, by using historic vestments, by returning to
distributing Communion on the tongue to people kneeling, and so forth.
But the real pull of the older Mass and Benedict XVI’s efforts toward
continuity with the Novus Ordo will be felt in the future.
For example, time and time again younger priests tell me that after
learning the traditional Latin Mass they never say Holy Mass in the
Novus Ordo the same way. There are things you learn about priesthood and
Holy Mass from the traditional Latin Mass that you simply don’t pick up
from the Novus Ordo, especially as it is usually celebrated in so many
of our parishes and chapels.
How a priest says Mass affects a parish profoundly, at the level of
reverence, vocations, everything.
Even though Rome wasn’t destroyed in a day, neither will it be quickly
rebuilt. We have suffered a disastrous loss of basic priestly formation
in Latin and theology and the culture that goes with them. This will
take time to recover.
Seminaries need time to ramp up to meet the new needs the letter calls
forth. Seminarians are eager to learn. Who will do the teaching?
In parishes young people more and more desire a greater continuity with
the past. They are discovering their Catholic heritage and that they
have been robbed. Eventually they will hold the positions of influence
in parishes and Catholic schools.
On a concrete level, some bishops, priests, liturgists and musicians are
rethinking the value of some common post-conciliar practices.
For example, a few days after Benedict XVI started to distribute
Communion on the tongue to people kneeling, a bishop in the United
States did precisely the same thing for Corpus Christi.
They are reassessing the great advantages of Mass celebrated "ad
orientem," everyone facing the same direction toward the altar and the
Crucifix. Latin is being reappraised. Musicians are dusting off the
treasury of sacred liturgical music that has been hidden for decades.
The "motu proprio" is pulling, but there is still resistance, and
laziness. Time, patience and open minds are needed to get things moving.
The law of inertia in physics is that bodies in motion or at rest stay
that way until another force works on them. The "motu proprio" is such a
force.
Q: What have been some noteworthy, or perhaps unexpected,
developments in the Church related to “Summorum Pontificum” since its
release?
Father Zuhlsdorf: A noteworthy result must be the shift in attitude of
and about people who desire traditional liturgy.
For so long the ecclesiastical establishment looked down on and
marginalized more traditional Catholics, shoving them to the back of the
bus because of their attachment to our tradition. Some of the more
benign saw them as being like our family’s nutty but harmless aunt up in
the attic.
On the other hand, many traditionalists, perhaps out of the deep hurts
and disillusionment they felt after all the changes in the Church, the
silly season of illicit innovations, the ash-canning of our beautiful
churches, music, vestments, statues, devotions, you name it, wound up
with an enormous chip on their collective shoulder.
As time went by, many of them knew no other way to “negotiate” with
bishops and priests but simply to get in their face, make pushy demands,
and arrogantly tell them what to do. It got to a point where even
clerics who were open and sympathetic started to wince and back away
whenever traditionalists approached. And so the waters of good relations
froze.
Now, because some of the pain and alienation is starting to melt away in
the hearts of many traditionalists, now that they can simply have what
they should have been able to have all along, now that a little warm
sunshine is being beamed in their direction by the Holy Father and
others who share his vision, pastors of souls are starting to unclench
as well.
The ice is breaking up and the water is flowing again. This was not an
unexpected development. I fully believed this would happen because
traditionalists are mostly good people who love Holy Church and want the
best for their families, priests and bishops.
Bishops and priests, even when they are not personally inclined to
traditional things, are mostly good men who love their flocks and
sincerely desire their good. They all share common ground in what really
matters. What I am surprised by is that the breaking of the ice dam
—
though there is a long way to go yet
—
is happening so quickly.
I underestimated the warmth of the sunlight and the openness of hearts,
especially on the part of some bishops who, as a body, have not shown
themselves in the past to be very friendly to traditional liturgy. This
has made me rethink my own attitudes.
|