More evidence the universal indult is immanent?

theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21364512-2702,00.html

For an article apparently written by someone obtuse about the matter, it looks like especially good news.

“Benedict wrote in his memoirs, My Life: Memories 1927-1977, published when he was still a cardinal: ‘I was stunned by the ban on the ancient missal.’”

I think they called it, er,… obedience?

What intrigues me is the new terminology to be introduced. “Ordinary Universal Rite” and “Extraordinary Universal Rite”. It speaks directly to my previous thread about terms. Personally, I’m in favor.

It might not satisfy those who insist that the Tridentine rite be given absolutely equal status; “extraordinary”, after all, is the same word used to describe lay people who have been deputized to assist in distributing communion in times of grave need–which most people associate with the common abuse of “Eucharistic ministers”.

When people ask me what I mean by “Extraordinary minister of Holy Communion,” I reply, “That means that, ordinarily, we shouldn’t be using them.”

But happily, the word “Universal” is also part of the term. But unlike the even less satisfactory term “universal indult”, what is being called universal is not the *exceptionality *of the rite but the rite itself. “Extraordinary Universal Rite” both gives the Tridentine rite its due honor as a Roman rite worthy to be celebrated everywhere, and relativizes it to the rite of Vatican II

I think this use of “extraordinary” is someone’s little joke.

However it the current situation people have the right to expect that a Mass will be NO unless described otherwise, and if Mass is to be celebrated a priest should use the new rite unless there is a reason for a TLM.

I was thinking the same thing. I’m sure that the Novus Ordo gang will still manage to find something in the language to prevent trads from thinking that they actually won something. It’s too bad for Catholicism it has come down to that. Sad really.

In all fairness to the priests, most of them wouldn’t be able to say the Old Rite. I’m definitely not calling them stupid but, let’s face it, it does take a lot of study and a lot of work to get the TLM right. It takes altar boys that want to learn the Latin and assist the priest in parishes. And it takes a congregation that knows when to stand and kneel and sit without being instructed to. Let’s be realistic, one can’t just impose the Old Rite the same way the New Rite was imposed. (According to one priest, it only took him only three weeks to learn how to say the New Rite back in 1969. What’s there to learn, really?)

Thankfully, there are many seminarians who are preparing to say the TLM. So things do look good for the near future. People supporting the TLM do seem to be growing, even if many of them prefer some kind of vernacular.

Why does there have to be a “reason” to use the TLM if a universal indult is granted? If it is granted, then any priest will be able to celebrate it without permission from his bishop.

:rotfl:

This almost made me cry. Our music director told our pastor that we would be singing the “Kyrie” during Lent. The pastor then said that he hates Latin. :mad: Double foul there…

It’s true that a universal indult wouldn’t make the Tridentine rite pop up all over the place. However, it might lead to “Tridentine rite” electives being offered in some mainstream seminaries, and it might create a “market” for FSSP and other groups to broaden access to ritual workshops.

Or maybe someone could sell a “kit” for the “do-it-yourselfer” priest who wants to learn the Latin and the rite.

As far as finding altar boys who are eager, in my experience this shouldn’t be hard to do. The old rite has an “awesomeness” for kids that the new rite simply doesn’t have.

Bob I don’t understand I have missed something here. I thought the Council of Trent said this could never happen.

I found it only takes about two months for someone to say the Latin responses and follow the TLM with no problem if they have never attended before.

I heard the same today in email from a friend, that a Priest threw a fit because the organist played some songs in latin from a sheet he gave them of songs he wanted to be played durng the Lenten Season and fired the organist.
Alot more to the story, but trouble is brewing down in southern California from reading the story.

Is it really that deep. Ive been to a Orthodox synagouge where the service was in Hebrew and a Coptic service where it was in Arabic. Does it really matter?

Pope St. Pius V promulgated the Tridentine Missal. Once again, it is basic Catholic understanding that popes cannot bind their successors in matters of discipline, and subsequent popes, even prior to the time of VII, made changes to the missal. Granted, they were not as wholesale and encompassing as the Pauline Rite, but they were nonetheless changes. It is theoretically (please observe that caveat and understand we’re talking about a hypothetical situation here) that the Holy Father or one of his successors could suppress a rite altogether. They possess that authority.

Even as someone who loves the NO Mass, I think some are taking a negative view of the future. I think that there will be broader use of the Tridentine Rite and I think it will have a beneficial effect on the celebration of the Pauline Rite. Let’s pray for the Holy Father.

I was being fascetious, of course. The Novus Ordo, however, basically didn’t think much of the Council of Trent. Defiance would be a much better word.

Double foul because the Kyrie isn’t actually Latin?

By the way, one of the kids at a Catholic school was asked by a ridiculing nun what “kyrie eleison” meant, challenging his knowledge in knowing the TLM. He replied “Domine, miserere nobis.” Close enough. :thumbsup:

Very good answer! :slight_smile:

The Novus Ordo, being a missal, is incapable of expressing its opinion on the Council of Trent. Nothing in it is contrary to Trent. I suspect that you mean “Novus Ordan,” in which case this is simply more jingoistic and inflammatory bilge. I don’t know a single Catholic who would identify themselves as “Novus Ordan” anyway, but would simply call themselves Catholic (and properly so). There are probably those within that category who DON’T have much use for the council of Trent, but if you read Church history [edited by moderator] that’s always been the case and there are those who are formally IN the Church, but not “in the heart of the Church.” I don’t personally know any serious Catholics who disregard any Church council.

And then it might be withdrawn. Particularly if the bishops feel that their authority is being undermined.

NO in the vernacular is the current default, normal, ordinary, whatever you want to call it rite. If the indult is granted and a priest can give a good reason for celebrating a TLM in that particular case - it is the feast of St Jerome, or it is a second Mass in a parish where there is great demand for the TLM, or the congregation is multi-lingual, or it is an academic congregation that will take the trouble to master the Latin - then it will be seen to be used responsibly and will stick. If priests start celebrating the TLM for every Mass in defiance of the bishop’s known opinions, then the indult might not last long.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.