'Augustinian Thomists' and 'Whig Thomists': Tracey Rowland and her critics

Christopher Blosser, in "Critical Responses to Tracey Rowland's 'Culture and the Thomist Tradition: After Vatican II" (Against the Grain, May 22, 2011), offers an overview of the debate between Catholic "neoconservatives" and some of their critics (here, particularly, Rowland).

Freely admitting that his "outlook as a new Catholic convert [going on two decades ago] was largely shaped by Richard Neuhaus, Michael Novak and George Weigel -- appreciators of John Courtney Murray, SJ -- and as such, participants in an ongoing debate with Dr. Rowland, David Schindler, Alisdair MacIntyre that has been characterized by Dr. Rowland herself a conflict between "Whig Thomists and Augustinian Thomists."

Helpfully, he encourages readers unfamiliar with Rowland to read her two-part interview with Zenit:

• Part I: Benedict XVI, Vatican II and Modernity: Tracey Rowland on the Pope's Interpretation of the Council (July 24, 2005).
• Part II: Benedict XVI, Thomism and Liberal Culture: Tracey Rowland on the Church's Response to Modernity (July 25, 2005).

The main discussion of Christopher Blosser's overview, however, turns on Tracey Rowland's much-discussed book, Culture and the Thomist Tradition: After Vatican II (Routledge, 2003).

Blosser writes:

According to Rowland, the Whig Thomists maintain that the Thomist tradition can be reconciled with the culture of modernity and that "liberalism is the logical outgrowth of the classical-theistic synthesis", while Augustinian Thomists contend that "the liberal tradition represents its mutation and heretical reconstruction, and they tend to agree with Samuel Johnson that the devil -- not Thomas Aquinas -- was the first Whig." (For a more substantial examination of the precise sense in which Thomas was heralded as the harbinger of "Catholic Whiggery", see: Aquinas:"First Whig?" Religion and Liberty September 21, 2005).

So, as you can see, possessing this bias I was not predisposed to like Rowland. Nonetheless, I did find it to be stimulating reading and a text I'll return to time and again in future explorations of this debate.

Read more >

Related:

• R.J. Neuhaus, "The Liberalism of John Paul II" (First Things, May 1997).
• Jason Paul Bourgeois, review of Tracey Rowland's Culture and the Thomist Tradition: After Vatican II

How to fight, and not fight, the Good Fight

An analogy employing the elements of a football game and team coach. What are the winning and losing strategies?

One could easily write an entire book on the sort of thing discussed in this video -- how those whose business it is to shepherd the sheep to the safety of the fold, along with many of the sheep, often prefer to distract themselves with banalities and irrelevancies rather than talk about the real threat of hell and what one must do to be saved.

An inconvenient truth ...

"Transcript: Al Gore Got ‘D’ in ‘Natural Sciences’ at Harvard" (CNS News, May 24, 2011).

Update: Hey, but he won the NOBEL PRIZE! (What does that tell you about our times?)

What's a good priest to do?

The erosion of faith has advanced so far in some quarters of the Church, that even some priests have begun scratching their heads and asking - 'What are we supposed to do?' Michael Voris comments on a letter from one such priest in "Priests in Pain" (RealCatholicTV.com, May 24, 2011).

The elusive truth about those sex scandals

Have you seen "Weigel about the huge ( ____ ) in the John Jay Report" (WDTPRS, May 24, 2011), where Fr. Z asks: "Did you see the analysis by George Weigel about the John Jay Study? I am just getting to it. Weigel makes good points for National Review Online."

Here are the opening two paragraphs with enumerations inserted:

The American narrative of the Catholic Church’s struggles with the clerical sexual abuse of the young has been dominated by several tropes firmly set in journalistic concrete:

1. that this was and is a “pedophilia” crisis;
2. that the sexual abuse of the young is an ongoing danger in the Church;
3. that the Catholic Church was and remains a uniquely dangerous environment for young people;
4. that a high percentage of priests were abusers;
5. that abusive behavior is more likely from celibates, such that a change in the Church’s discipline of priestly celibacy would be important in protecting the young;
6. that the Church’s bishops were, as a rule, willfully negligent in handling reports of abuse;
7. that the Church really hasn’t learned any lessons from the revelations that began in the Long Lent of 2002.

But according to an independent, $1.8 million study conducted by New York’s John Jay College of Criminal Justice, commissioned by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and released on May 18, every one of these tropes is false.

Read more >

About your comments

I noticed Fr. Z's problems with this item too: "The software that scans for spam has become more restrictive. Sometimes it will pull completely innocent comments into the queue. Sorry."

Recently I visited the "SPAM" tab under the "Comments" heading in my blog editor, and I was dismayed to find that nearly two-thirds of the comment pulled off into that queue were not spam but perfectly legitimate. I have not idea why they were flagged as spam.

In any case, I've tried to restore as many of these as I could find, if belatedly. My apologies to anyone who might have thought I simply filed his comments unceremoniously in the trash bin. I didn't. I will keep closer tabs on that proverbial round file.

Dutch Salesian priest on board of pro-pedophilia group till 2010

Superior says man-child "relationships" are not necessarily damaging

• Toby Sterling, "Shock after Dutch priest endorses pedophilia" (MyWay. May 21, 2011).
• See also Rorate Caeli's acerbic reading of this news.

[Hat tip to Nina Bryhn]

Jansenist echoes in the Bugninian reform?

I was looking through some archival material and stumbled upon this little history of liturgical errors by Father Laurent Demets, FSSP, based on the seminal work of Dom Gueranger. It is the first of an undisclosed number of lectures given five years ago by Fr. Demets to an Una Voce in Naples, Florida, and posted online under the title, "The Liturgical Stake" (Rorate Caeli, March 25, 2006).

I have extracted two passages in following. The first claims that, according to Dom Gueranger, some earlier pontifically authorized attempts at liturgical reform proved "disastrous" (Dom Gueranger's word). The second argues that Jansenist influences on 17th and 18th-century French liturgical deviations adumbrate key elements of the Bugninian reform following Vatican II.

Fr. Edmond Bourque, RIP

Tridentine Community News (May 22, 2011):

We are saddened to report the passing on May 5 of a priest friend of the Extraordinary Form in this region. Fr. Ed Bourque was the principal substitute celebrant of the Windsor Tridentine Mass for many years. Many of our readers remember him from this region’s first High Funeral Mass, for Windsor Tridentine Mass Association leader Murray Harris in 2006. Fr. Bourque had a masterful grasp of the rubrics of the Tridentine Mass, and some might wonder why. Below we reprint a portion of his obituary, in which it is revealed that he taught Latin, though during his years of service to us he never mentioned this. He was also conversant in French, leading to his involvement in various French Catholic ministries.

“After his ordination on April 25, 1959, at Fall River MA, for the Missionaries of Our Lady of La Salette, Father studied Moral Theology at the Angelicum University in Rome. Upon his return to Canada, Father was a teacher of Moral Theology, Latin and Religion at both the Major and Minor Seminaries of the Missionaries of La Salette. From 1966 - 1969 he was Novice Master for the La Salette's. From 1969 - 1974 he returned to teach at the Minor Seminary in Enfield. In 1974 - 1985 Father was the Hospital Chaplain at Hotel Dieu Hospital in Windsor. From 1985 - 1992 he was elected Vicar Provincial for the La Salette Community. From 1992 - 2001 he was appointed Pastor of St. Joseph Parish, River Canard. From 2001 - 2004 upon his retirement he served as Hospital Chaplain at Hotel Dieu Hospital in Windsor. During his past seven years of retirement, Father has graciously assisted in many local parishes most especially at La Paroisse St. Jerome in Windsor and in our local French Schools.”

Réquiem ætérnam dona ei, Dómine, et lux perpétua lúceat ei. Requiéscat in pace. Amen.

Special Ascension Thursday Tridentine Mass
at St. Paul Church, Thamesville, Ontario

For the first time in over 40 years, St. Paul Church in Thamesville will host a Mass in the Extraordinary Form for the Feast of the Ascension on Thursday, June 2 at 7:00 PM. Built in 1903, St. Paul is located at 9 Alice Street, northeast of Chatham, and is now part of the merged North American Martyrs Parish. Celebrant for the Mass will be North American Martyrs pastor Fr. John Johnson, and music will be directed by Wassim Sarweh.

Eastertide Propers Variations for Weekday Masses

Those who attend our weekday Masses may have noticed some variation in the structure of the Propers during this Easter season. Today we will examine how the Propers differ in the three principal liturgical seasons of the year: Septuagesima-Lent, Eastertide, and the remainder of the year.

Many Saints’ Feast Days do not have complete Propers of their own. Instead, they might specify custom Collect(s) to be used with one of the Masses from the “Commons” Propers. For example, there are Commons for a Confessor (who is a) Bishop, a Confessor not a Bishop, of a Holy Woman not a Martyr, etc. In the altar missal, there is frequently a Collect (Opening Prayer) unique to the Saint, and sometimes a Secret and Postcommunion that are also unique. Each Collect is designated with a “P” if it is proper to (custom for) the Saint, or “C” if it is drawn from the Commons. One confusing point: Often Postcommunions are marked “C” even if they incorporate the name of the Saint of the day if the rest of the prayer is from the Commons. Celebrants are best off flipping the book to the Collects for the day, even if they are marked “C”, and not relying on the Commons’ Collects.

In addition to the Collects, occasionally the Epistle or Gospel may be unique to the Feast and not from the Commons. Thus the Commons may be overridden with Propers to a varying extent.

In Septuagesima and Lent, the usual Alleluia is replaced by a Tract. In Eastertide (Easter Sunday through Ember Friday in Pentecost week), the Gradual and Alleluia are replaced by the Lesser and Greater Alleluias, double Alleluias with two verses from Scripture. An Alleluia is also added to all of the Antiphons, that is, the Introit, Offertory, and Communion.

During the Octaves of Easter and Pentecost, the Sequence of Easter Sunday or Pentecost Sunday, respectively, is repeated at the weekday Masses. During certain seasons, the usual Common Preface employed with most Saints’ Feasts is replaced by the seasonal one. During Eastertide, for example, the Preface of Easter is used instead.

All of the above needs to be taken into account when certain Saints’ Feast days occur in a period that might be within Lent or Eastertide one year, and outside it in another. Similarly, the rules apply if a certain Saint’s Mass is celebrated as a Votive Mass on another day of the year, such as a November Saint being celebrated during Eastertide.

By tying the Propers, including the Readings, to a particular Saint’s (or Commons) Feast, the Extraordinary Form creates and preserves a theme for that Feast. The Ordinary Form follows a similar structure for its Propers, including the use of Commons, although certain Feasts have varying Readings depending on which Readings Cycle the current year is.

“Propers Awareness” will help you follow the Mass, and the thinking of the Church, better. This is a key reason why we expend the effort to produce Propers Handouts; it makes living the Church calendar a core part of your participation at Mass.

Tridentine Masses This Coming Week

Mon. 05/23 7:00 PM: Low Mass at St. Josaphat (Feria [Celebrant may choose a Votive Mass])

Tue. 05/24 7:00 PM: High Mass at Assumption-Windsor (Daily Mass for the Dead with Absolution at the Catafalque)

[Comments? Please e-mail tridnews@stjosaphatchurch.org. Previous columns are available at www.stjosaphatchurch.org. This edition of Tridentine Community News, with minor editions, is from the St. Josaphat bulletin insert for May 22, 2011. Hat tip to A.B.]

A liturgical reformer's memoirs (1940's - 1970)

Msgr. Nicola Giampietro's The Development of the Liturgical Reform: As Seen by Cardinal Derdinando Antonelli from 1948 to 1970, (Roman Catholic Books, 2010), relates the Fernando Cardinal Antonelli's involvement in and contribution to the liturgical form from the 1940's until 1970s.

He was an influential member of the Commission for Liturgical Reform established by Pope Pius XII in 1948. He later served as the Secretary for the Liturgical Commission of the Second Vatican Council. He was a member of the post-conciliar Consilium and was appointed Archbishop Secretary of the Sacred Congregation for Rites in 1965. As Alcuin Reid points out in his review of the book at the Amazon site linked above, the Concilium wages a political battle for control of the liturgical reform against the Congregation for Rites.

The publication of Msgr. Giampietro's book allows us to listen in to yet another voice and perspective in the conversations unfolding during those critical years during and after the Council.

At the end of the Concilium's first meeting, Antonelli observed:

"I am not enthusiastic about this work. I am unhappy about how much the Commission has changed. It is merely an assembly of people, many of them incompetent, and others of them well advanced on the road to novelty. The discussions are extremely hurried. Discussions are based on impressions and the voting is chaotic. What is most displeasing is that the expositive Promemorias and the relative questions are drawn up in advanced terms and often in a very suggestive form. The direction is weak."

As the Consilium's work proceeded, Reid notes, Antonelli's concerns about its competence, its predilection for innovation and its consuming haste, grew. After several years with Consilium he wrote that the liturgical reform was becoming "more chaotic and deviant":

"That which is sad...however, is a fundamental datum, a mutual attitude, a pre-established position, namely, many of those who have influenced the reform...and others, have no love, and no veneration of that which has been handed down to us. They begin by despising everything that is actually there. This negative mentality is unjust and pernicious, and unfortunately, Paul VI tends a little to this side. They have all the best intentions, but with this mentality they have only been able to demolish and not to restore."

Antoneilli observes that Bugnini "always had the backing of Paul VI," but that "his greatest lacuna was his lack of any theological training or sensibility."

What we get in Msgr. Giampietro's book, says Reid, is not a revisionist history of Vatican II, but rather part of the history of the liturgical reform and of the Council itself.

"The older rite is here to stay" - analysis of Universae Ecclesiae by Alcuin Reid

From the Catholic Herald via Fr. Z, who writes:

There is a piece on The Catholic Herald‘s site (full disclosure: I write regularly for CH now) about Benedict XVI’s provision in Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae by Alcuin Reid who reedited Fortescue/O’Connell Ceremonies of the Roman Rite Described.

My [i.e., Fr. Z's] emphases and comments.

The Pope has made clear the older rite is here to stay

By Dr Alcuin Reid on Friday, 20 May 2011

It may seem rather odd that Pope Benedict XVI?has expended so much energy on rules about the use of the old “Latin Mass” – after all, it would appear that most Catholics are content with the modern liturgy in the vernacular. [Which, to date, they really have never experienced. The new translation will help to change that. But... quaeritur...] Why, then, yet another set of rules from Rome in this Instruction?

The answer is found in the fact that, as the Instruction insists, the older rites are a “precious treasure to be preserved,” and that the Holy Father wants to offer this treasure “to all the faithful”, not as a quaint museum piece but as a living source of life and grace for the whole Church of today and into the future. All laity, clergy and religious should have access to its diverse riches. [The clear implication is that all should be exposed to the traditional Form.]

These latest rules envisage the inclusion of recent saints and some new texts in the older liturgy. They even foresee new editions of the missal and other liturgical books of the older rites: the older liturgy will continue to exist [attention...] and develop as it has over the centuries up until the Second Vatican Council. But it cannot, however, now have certain modern practices (altar girls, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, etc) imposed on it. Its integrity is guaranteed. [NB: He doesn't seem to think that the inclusion of new texts puts its "integrity" at risk. Neither do I, depending on the texts, of course. How can the inclusion of new saints harm its integrity? How can the option of some additional prefaces be harmful?]

Of course, there are historical realities behind this Instruction and the 2007 Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum which it clarifies. [1] In the first place there is the controversy over the liturgical changes that followed the Council. [Many changes were not foreseen by the mandates of the Council Fathers. But... quaeritur...] Were they a legitimate development or did they involve a rupture with tradition? Neither of these documents settles that question, but the Instruction does, significantly, speak of the development of the Missale Romanum “until the time of Blessed Pope John XXIII” and of the “new Missal” approved for the Church in 1970 by Paul VI. [Sounds rather like a rupture. No?] This authoritative recognition of a clear distinction between the two – both of which, the Instruction maintains, must be seen to be legitimate and valid – does admit a clear “difference” between that of Paul VI and what came before. Discussion of the implications of this will continue. [Ever since Summorum Pontificum came out, I have argued that the Pope provided a juridical solution to the relationship of the EF and OF, but he did not settle the issue of whether there were two distinct rites. In Universae Ecclesiae, which moves the discussion into more theological grounds, with its reference to Summorum Pontificum as part of the Holy Father's Magisterium, perhaps we are moving closer to an answer.]

Liturical mosh pit

The latest issue of New Oxford Review features a robust give-and-take between readers, responding to Arthur C. Sippo's earlier review, in the March issue of NOR, of Fr. Nicola Giampietro's The Development of the Liturgical Reform: As Seen by Cardinal Derdinando Antonelli from 1948 to 1970, and Mr. Sippo, in turn, responding to readers of his review.

The five reader's letters to the editor, along with Mr. Sippo's response, are offered here because they represent lively defenses of positions that are live options today. Your comments are invited, but please remember to be charitable -- especially where you may find yourself easily provoked, since the language (particularly Mr. Sippo's) does get a bit heated. Also remember to read Alcuin Reid's excellent review of Fr. Giampietro's book on the above-linked Amazon site.

Letters to the Editor

Liturgical Reform & the 'Protestantization' of Catholic Liturgy

I appreciate the NOR’s habit of publishing articles that offer different perspectives on such topics as liturgical reform. In his review of The Development of the Liturgical Reform: As Seen by Cardinal Ferdinando Anto­nelli from 1948 to 1970 by Fr. Nicola Giampietro (Mar.), Arthur C. Sippo is right in his overall perspective that liturgical reform predates Vatican II. In fact, the liturgy has been evolving for almost 2,000 years. However, never before in the history of the Church was a liturgy of venerable use arrogantly dismissed, as happened in the wake of Vatican II.

Sippo writes that, according to Cardinal Antonelli’s memoirs, it’s not the case that the post-Vatican II reform was a “Protestantization” of the liturgy, as “radical traditionalists” allege. It’s interesting to note, however, that, according to Alfons Cardinal Stickler, Pope Paul VI himself wanted to “assimilate as much as possible of the new Catholic liturgy to Protestant worship.”

Sippo writes that “improved historical scholarship and the patris­tic renaissance” of recent years has “given birth to a new consciousness of the liturgy as a dynamic participation of the faithful in the prayers and rites of the Church.” I would counter that the Novus Ordo Mass has diminished historical traditional rites, has created a wholesale vacuum in terms of vocations and converts, and has almost entirely diminished the central purpose of Holy Mass, that of sacrifice. On this point, Msgr. Bru­nero Gherardini has said, “In all truth Modernism hid itself under the cloak of Vatican II’s hermeneutic…. The new rite of Holy Mass practically silenced the nature of sacrifice, making of it an occasion for gathering together the people of God.... The eucharistic gathering was given the mere sense of sharing a meal together ...” (The Ecumenical Vatican Council II: A Much Needed Discussion). Lest one think Msgr. Gherar­dini’s words are the rantings of a “radical traditionalist,” one should note that Gherardini has served as a canon of St. Peter’s Basilica, under­secretary for the Pontifical Academy of Theology, professor at the Pontifical Lateran University, and editor of Divi­nitas, a leading Roman theological journal.

Sippo concludes, “After forty years of the Pauline missal, we will be soon using a new Roman missal that will try to return the literary majesty to the Mass that the earlier reform had abandoned in favor of more colloquial and contemporary language.” This will be the equivalent of repainting a Ford Pinto: A repainting of the exterior does not the engine remake. Related to this point, Msgr. Gherardini writes, quoting Msgr. Domenico Bartolucci, master of the Sistine Chapel at the time, that the Novus Ordo “was born without music, I would even say with a poorly concealed aversion to music,” which opened the door to “amateurism, to poor taste, to superficiality…. There will soon be available a new translation of the various texts [of the Mass], certainly improved regarding some verses, but I will not marvel at all if for other passages there will be more problems than in the first edition resulting from certain exegetical or historical-theological eccentricities....”

Hijacking of the New Evangelization?

"A roll call of Catholic stars" (Rorate Caeli, May 19, 2011):

The Bollettino of the Holy See Press Office publishes today the names of the consultants named for the new Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization - the crème de la crème of the who's who of the upper crust of the Church of our days: they include the Vicar General of the Personal Prelature of the Opus Dei, Mons. Fernando Ocáriz, Kiko Argüello, the famous founder of the Neocatechumenate, Fr. Julián Carrión, President of Communion and Liberation, and stars of the Catholic sisterhood, such as Sister Sara Butler, Professor of Dogmatic Theology at Mundelein (known as a great defender of the Church's doctrine on female ordination, that should be recognized), and Sister Mary Lou Wirtz (right), President of the International Union of Superiors General.

Can't you just feel the new "New Springtime" arriving?

Who's minding the store? Nothing against Mons. Fernando Ocáriz and a couple others here, but what's up with the rest? At best this looks like a list of consultants put together by some bureaucrat fashionably concerned with a politically correct and undiscriminating across-the-board representation of incommensurable factions nearly certain to guarantee the balkanization of the Church's mission to evangelize.

Related: "Sister Sara Butler now against womens' ordination" (A Catholic Life, March 9, 2007).

Dr. Janet Smith goes public on theology of lying

Janet E. Smith, "Fig Leaves and Falsehoods: Pace Thomas Aquinas, sometimes we need to deceive" (First Things, June/July, 2011).

[Hat tip to Janet Smith]

Univérsæ Ecclésiæ: The Clarification on Summórum Pontíficum

Tridentine Community News (May 15, 2011):

Ever since Pope Benedict XVI published his Motu Proprio, Summórum Pontíficum, on July 7, 2007, freeing any priest to celebrate the Tridentine Mass without requiring the permission of his bishop, there has been expectation of a follow-up document clarifying some issues raised by the Motu Proprio. In the intervening time, it had been reported that the former President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclésia Dei, Dario Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos, had prepared a Clarification and was waiting for the Holy Father’s approval. After Cardinal Hoyos’ retirement, it was reported that Msgr. Guido Pozzo, the new Secretary and effective leader of the PCED, had worked on a document. There was widespread concern a few months ago that the new document was too restrictive; an on-line petition to the Holy Father to intervene was available to be signed by those concerned. Subsequent reports stated that the message had gotten across to the Holy Father, who modified the Clarification before permitting its publication. How much of this actually transpired is beyond our knowledge.

On Friday, May 13, 2011, the mystery was put to rest with the publication of the Clarification, officially called the “Instruction on the application of the Apostolic Letter Summórum Pontíficum of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI given Motu Proprio”, and to be known by the Latin title Univérsæ Ecclésiæ, “to the whole Church.” Below we comment on some highlights of the document, which will take its place beside Ecclésiæ Dei Adflícta and Summórum Pontíficum as a landmark step in the further renewal of the Tridentine Mass in the life of the Church.

Article 15 supports the notion of cross-diocesan Tridentine Mass groups. The Windsor Tridentine Mass Association which administers the Extraordinary Form Masses at Assumption Church has been a living example of this from the day of its founding in 1991 by a joint group of Canadians and Americans. It is interesting that Rome recognizes the viability of this operational model.

Article 16 seems to make it almost obligatory for a pastor to permit a Tridentine Mass at his parish when the essential resources are available and a request has been made.

Article 17.2 seems to support the use of appropriately outfitted churches when they are available. It is a shame to see certain Tridentine Masses celebrated in humble or excessively modern facilities when a more fitting church or chapel is available nearby.

Article 21 is perhaps the most significant in the document:

“Ordinaries are asked to offer their clergy the possibility of acquiring adequate preparation for celebrations in the forma extraordinaria. This applies also to Seminaries, where future priests should be given proper formation, including study of Latin and, where pastoral needs suggest it, the opportunity to learn the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite.”

Such a strongly-worded exhortation has far-reaching implications for the future of the Tridentine Mass. With the longest and most far-reaching experience in this region in every aspect of organizing and celebrating the Extraordinary Form dating back to 1991, our joint group of volunteers and priests from Assumption-Windsor and St. Josaphat will heed this call by offering training services to the Diocese of London, the Archdiocese of Detroit, the Diocese of Lansing, and the three regional seminaries.

Article 25 makes it clear that Saints and Prefaces will be added to the 1962 Missal, and that the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei will administer the process. With a uniquely accurate and growing set of Microsoft Word®-based Propers and Chant Sheets that will facilitate the creation of a master Missal which can be extended over time, we will offer our work to the PCED.

Article 28 clarifies the ban female altar servers and Communion in the hand in the Extraordinary Form.

Article 31 is the one part of the document likely to be unpopular, in that it restricts use of the traditional rites of Ordination to the orders devoted to the Extraordinary Form, such as the Fraternity of St. Peter. This may be intended to prevent the perception of there being two classes of priests within a diocese.

Article 32 says that those obliged to pray the Breviary may use the 1961 books, but may not pray the vernacular version. An important point for those affected, and an important clarification as Baronius Press is about to publish a Latin/English edition of the traditional Divine Office.

Article 33 confirms our ability to hold the Sacred Triduum at a church (or cluster) that also offers it in the Ordinary Form. Universal Church Law trumps diocesan norms.

Article 34 allows orders with their own historic liturgies, such as the Norbertines and Dominicans, to use them.

Article 35 clarifies that we are to use the 1961 Rituále Románum and Colléctio Rítuum for blessings and certain Sacraments, and not the 1964 editions.

The Introductory Notes may be found at:
http://press.catholica.va/news_services/bulletin/news/27408.php?index=27408&lang=en

The Instruction itself is at:
http://press.catholica.va/news_services/bulletin/news/27407.php?index=27407&lang=en

Click on “Inglese” on the above pages to get the English versions.

We request your prayers for Pope Benedict XVI, under whose reign the Extraordinary Form continues to gain ground.

Tridentine Masses This Coming Week

Mon. 05/16 7:00 PM: Low Mass at St. Josaphat (St. Ubaldus, Bishop & Confessor, and St. Simon Stock, Confessor)

Tue. 05/17 7:00 PM: Low Mass at Assumption-Windsor (St. Paschal Baylon, Confessor)

[Comments? Please e-mail tridnews@stjosaphatchurch.org. Previous columns are available at www.stjosaphatchurch.org. This edition of Tridentine Community News, with minor editions, is from the St. Josaphat bulletin insert for April 26, 2011. Hat tip to A.B.]