Msgr. Perl of the Pont. Comm. “Ecclesia Dei”: we are drafting an instruction on the interpretation of Summorum Pontificum [Fr. Z]

There is an interesting piece on Petrus.

My translation and emphases.

Mass in Latin, a “Petrus” exclusice – Msgr. Perl of the [Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” speaks up: "Too many disobedient bishops and priests, a clarification on the Pope’s Motu Proprio under consideration

by Bruno Volpe

CITTA’ DEL VATICANO - “It is true, **we are drafting an instruction-document on the correct interpretation of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, which derestricted the Mass according to the liturgical books of St. Pius V as they were modified by Bl. John XXIII.” So did Msgr. Camille Perl, Secretary of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” affirm in an exclusive interview with Petrus. He added, “Even though it is not a Congregation, we have received the faculty to prepare this document to define some aspects of the papal Motu Proprio among which, for example, the meaning of “stable group” (gruppo stabile). We have therefore to clear up what is meant by “stable group”, precisely how many people have to ask their own parish priest (parroco) to celebrate Mass with the pre-Conciliar rite.”

Q: Msgr. Peter, is this instruction needed because of various protests raised by bishops and priests who are contrary to the new norms concerning access to Mass with the Tridentine rite?

“The situation is in the plain sight of everyone. In any event, after the Pope’s Motu Proprio it was reasonable to foresee opposing reactions. Some people showed enthusiasm, others not. Still, it would be enough to consider that the Pope’s Motu Proprio didn’t fall out of the sky, but is the fruit of a long process.”

Q: So why do some bishops and many priests not accept it?

You’d have to ask them. Personally, I believe that the problem is of a more general nature. Today, in many spheres of society, the sense of obedience and respect of authority has been lost. Few truly are, so to say, able to obey."

Q: So the Tridentine rite of St. Pius V, characterized by liturgical beauty and spirituality, was never abolished by the Church…

Absolutely not. The Second Vatican Council never canceled out the previous Missal. I hold that Pope Benedict XVI has done well to derestrict it, thus underscoring the value of a patrimony, a jewel of the Church. I don’t want to make comparisons between the Mass of Pope Paul VI and the previous Mass, for that wouldn’t be right. But historically is it not well-advised blot out the value of tradition."

Q: Regarding liturgical abuses, defined as “at the edge of the bearable” by Benedict XVI himself in the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, there are always more…

“You’re telling me!” And no one manages to eliminate them, precisely because, as I was saying, there no longer exists a sense of respect for authority. The liturgy cannot be imposed, but it seems right to affirm that after the Second Vatican Council, and by this I obviously don’t mean to give out any opinion of condemnation, the Mass sometimes was transformed into something emotional, as if its true worth as sacrifice and gift was put aside. It was thought that the new might be better, that the new is always better. This happens also in daily life… new shoes are thought to be better than the old ones…".

Q: Finally, a clarification: The faithful in communion with the Pope and the Church of Rome can assist at Masses of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X or do they incur an excommunication?

"Those who assist at a Mass of the SSPX are absolutely not excommunicated. The liturgy is valid, even if they are considered schismatic. Moreover, the liturgy of the Orthodox is also valid for Catholics."
In a way, the interviewer wasted his precious questions on things that we already know.

About that last point: Msgr. Perl is not saying something in contrast to the Cardinal President of the Commission. He is just saying that even if the SSPXers were schismatic (he isn’t saying they are) Catholics would still be able to go to a Mass without incurring the censure.

Still, the golden nuggets in this interview are these:

[LIST]
*]the Commission is considering interpretive guidelines for Summorum Pontificum
*]the Commission has competence to issue such guidelines
*]that competence supersedes that of individual diocesan bishops
*]the Commission interprets the Motu Proprio
*]the Commission is very aware of those who are opposing the Motu Proprio (“in plain sight”)[/LIST]And on the level of Msgr. Perl’s opinion:

[LIST]
*]in this day and age few people are capable of true obedience
*]many bishops and priests speaking and acting against the Pope’s provisions are showing disobedience
*]just because something is newer it is not therefore better[/LIST]I have known Msgr. Perl well since 1989.

He is a very good man for this position in these times.

I am glad he is speaking his mind about these issues.

Full entry…

And on the level of Msgr. Perl’s opinion:

[LIST]
*]in this day and age few people are capable of true obedience
*]many bishops and priests speaking and acting against the Pope’s provisions are showing disobedience
*]just because something is newer it is not therefore better[/LIST]I have known Msgr. Perl well since 1989.

So noted.

Too bad the Vatican wasn’t as patient or tolerant with dissenting priests and bishops when the Novus Ordo was forced down everyone’s throat.

Wow, it is nice to read that Rome understands the disobedience that is going on in some parts of the Church. Also, it is great that they are releasing a ‘guideline’ for Summorum Pontificum.

“About that last point: Msgr. Perl is not saying something in contrast to the Cardinal President of the Commission. He is just saying that even if the SSPXers were schismatic (he isn’t saying they are) Catholics would still be able to go to a Mass without incurring the censure.”

How do you read that?!?!? First of all, no one has said that simple attendance incurred excommunication. That was always a slippery slope, not an automatic plunge. Also, recognizing the validity of the Mass offered by them (and by the Orthodox) does not mean that it is alright with the Holy See to attend Mass there or support the SSPX OR the Orthodox (and the SSPX would CERTAINLY have something to say if the Holy See said that it was permitted to the RC faithful to attend upon the Divine Liturgy of the Orthodox). Msgr. Perle hasn’t said that at all!

I was under the impression than an Orthodox DL did not fulfill the Sunday Obligation, but since it was a valid Eucharist, in times of necessity or other reasons (like certain places in the east where there is intercommunion) etc. the faithful could receive communion there. Likewise, I thought we could attend any Christian worship service, as long as we don’t partake of their communion if it is not valid.

I would treat the SSPX in a similar way. The question is not validity, but licitness and the fulfillment of the Sunday Obligation.

From the Norms on Ecumenism, it seems Orthodox Churches do not meet the Sunday obligation:

  1. Since the celebration of the Eucharist on the Lord’s Day is the foundation and centre of the whole liturgical year,120 Catholics—but those of Eastern Churches according to their own Law121—are obliged to attend Mass on that day and on days of precept.122 It is not advisable therefore to organize ecumenical services on Sundays, and it must be remembered that even when Catholics participate in ecumenical services or in services of other Churches and ecclesial Communities, the obligation of participating at Mass on these days remains.

[FONT=Arial][size=2]It seems to me the same policy would apply to the SSPX–if you go and participate you are not excommunicated, but you still need to meet the Sunday Obligation.
[/size][/FONT]

In the excerpt you pulled from the Norms of Ecumenism, the wording “services” was used, not Liturgy. Ecumenical services could be termed as “Praise and Worship”, would it not?

Great News!!! Those who try to eliminate the Tridentine Mass will find that much harder to do thanks to this clarification.

Now that we can celebrate this liturgy without hindrance, all we need to do is spread the word about this wonderful Mass…

This was Father Z’s comment. Since he was the one who translated the document from Italian, I think he knows what he’s talking about. He probably added the note because the sense of what Msgr. Perl was saying doesn’t come out as clearly in English.

It would also seem inconsistent with the Vatican’s more recent statements for him to leave open the possibility that the SSPX is in schism.

It is most sad that out of this piece of good news, the SSPX bashers choose to come out of the woodwork and keep spreading untruths and dirty politics. What fun that must be for them.

Reminds me of Ecclesia Dei when they read only the “juicy” parts and didn’t bother with the real thrust of the encyclical.

So sad that you engage in these tactics of slandering people as bashers (but typical, you spin because there is no substance) No one has bashed the SSPX. Only facts have been stated.

I, for one, HAVE read the whole of the document. Still says the opposite of what YOU would have it say regarding the SSPX.


It is most sad—kinda reminds me of sharks after blood.

Only as it exists in the mind of those who have difficulty reading the text before them. In point of actual fact, no one has bashed the SSPX.


If may not be acknowledged–yet it remains–no matter what it is called —how one perfumes it–how it is disguised–bashing and prejudice are still that.

No, in reality, it’s a figment of the imagination of those who don’t like to hear the truth.

“Oh look, there’s a cow!” (“cow” starts oinking)

“Um, I think that’s a pig.”

“Why, oh WHY, do YOU hate cows so much!?!?!?!”


More disguised JKirkLVNV.

True. I wouldn’t be surprised to see them marching in front of one of the SSPX chapels one of these days. They would be more productive in making their Novus Ordo Masses more reverent.

More? Same thing from the opposite side

“The Catholic Church teaches that homosexual activity is a grave sin.”

“Why, oh WHY, does the Catholic Church hate gays so much?!?!?! Why, oh WHY is the Church homophobic?!?!?!?”

More?

“The Catholic Church teaches that she has no authority to ordain women to the priesthood.”

“Why, oh WHY, does the Catholic Church hate women so much!?!?!?!? Why, oh WHY is the Church so mysogenistic?!?!?!”

No one has bashed anyone, just as the Church does not hate gays, is not homophobic, does not hate women and is not mysogenistic.

No, in reality, it’s a figment of the imagination of those who don’t like to hear the truth.

Speaking of the truth, maybe you’d like to reread that part of the Council of Trent banning any new rites to be introduced into the Church… A little louder please.

Ah, Bob, typical. You take a tiny bit of information and expand it to fit your argument, whether it will or not. You know full well that Trent meant that new rites could not be added illegally, without reference to the proper authority. That means priests or bishops cannot hive off and do their own thing. It did not say or mean that the proper authority could not alter the rites or establish new ones. If it did, then several pre-VII popes have incurred anathema. That may be your understanding of events, but it is hardly the Church’s.
Speaking of truth, maybe YOU should reread Trent.


You’ve brought an interesting pt. While they are prominant in wandering about in this forum waiting to strike—over at the Liturgy and Sacraments forum with all the discussion on abuses–some of them are rarely found. They do the talk of the NO “properly done” --yet trip on the walk of speaking on its behalf.

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.