Yes, that Motu Proprio. The one about the old Mass, or what I suppose we must now learn to call the Extraordinary Form of the Mass.

	QUIZ QUESTIONS…
	!. What's this bit of clerical head-gear called so loved by the trads? 2. How much do you think one might cost new from CM Almy — outfitters to the Church and Clergy since 1892?
	Answers at bottom of the page

There's been a great deal of excitement about it, and a certain amount of horror. But, when the dust settles, what doe it actually mean? It seems to me that, when all's been said and done, more has been said by this Motu Proprio than has been done by it.

What the Motu Proprio is not…

First, a point about what the Motu Proprio is not. It's not an attempt to revive flagging Mass attendances or re-evangelise the church by returning to the liturgical spirit of the 1950s.

While it would be cruel to dismiss the belief that this is possible as delusional, the truth is that there is nothing but wishful thinking to support it. But only a few dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists hold this belief anyway. Certainly the Pope doesn't, and the Vatican doesn't, and it has nothing to do with their motivation for issuing the Motu Proprio.

What this means, of course, is that it is pointless to criticise the Motu Proprio by fulminating about how it will do nothing to address the concerns and needs of most Catholics, to recover the attention and allegiance of the lapsed, etc. That's not what it's aimed at.

So what is it for? Well, the pope's covering letter gives a number of reasons, which can be summarised as follows:

• A "good number of people remained strongly attached" to the old Mass, which was "familiar to them from childhood". But some young people have also rediscovered it, and appreciate it. So there is no reason to think that the desire for the old Mass will necessarily disappear with the passage of time.
• Celebration of the old Mass has become "an external mark of identity" for the Lefebvrist movement.
• This suggests that the church should endorse the old Mass, for two reasons:
• The old Mass should not be conceded to the Lefebvrists, especially as there are those who "accept the binding character of the Second Vatican Council, and are faithful to the Pope and the Bishops" but still want the old Mass.
• Endorsing the old Mass may assist in effecting a reconciliation with the Lefebvrists (or at least some of them) by removing an unnecessary point of disagreement.
• For some years, bishops have been free to authorise celebrations of the old Mass but some have been reluctant, precisely because the issue has become so politically charged. By establishing norms which allow the old Mass without requiring the bishop's specific permission every time, the Pope hopes to defuse this situation.

So there you have it. It's mainly directed to the situation of liturgical traditionalists — both schismatic and faithful. There's no suggestion that it's supposed to evangelise non-Christians, non-Catholics or lapsed Catholics.

OK. Having noted why anything is being done about this, what exactly is being done? A number of things are being done, but less than you might think from all the hoo-hah:

First, in Article 1 of the Motu Proprio we have a definitive declaration that the current Roman Missal is "the ordinary expression of the law of prayer" of the Latin Church, while the 1962 edition of the missal (the last before the major revisions following Vatican II) is the "extraordinary form". On account of its "venerable and ancient use" the extraordinary form is to "enjoy due honour". This wording seems to me to be carefully chosen to accommodate:

• the view that the extraordinary form has some kind of priority based on seniority
• the view that it is to be a museum piece, to be kept in a glass case and taken out now and then for dusting, and
• all views in between.

The following Articles flesh this principle out by laying down some norms about when the old Mass is to be used.

Private Masses…

Unlikely to become the norm

First, "private Masses". A "private Mass" doesn't mean one held behind locked doors. It means a Mass which is not celebrated for a congregation ("public Mass") or for a religious community ("conventual Mass").

Under Article 2, a private Mass can be celebrated in either form at any time (except during the Easter Triduum, i.e. from Holy Thursday to Easter) and without any special permission.

Despite a lot of speculation, the lockdown at Easter has nothing to do with the Good Friday prayer for the Jews. It's already the rule that private Masses cannot be celebrated during the Easter Triduum without special permission. This provision just means that the rule will still apply when private Masses are celebrated in the old form. The motivation is to ensure that, as far as practicable, all priests join in celebrating public and conventual Masses at Eastertime.

Given that the doors are not actually locked, can members of the public be admitted to private Masses celebrated in the old form? Yes, says Article 4, provided they "spontaneously request it". So a priest celebrating a private Mass in the old form is not to invite people to attend. But if they hear about it and ask him if they can attend, he can say yes.

Masses for Religious Communities…

What about conventual Masses, celebrated for a religious community - a convent, a monastery? Under Article 3, if a religious community wants to celebrate Mass in the extraordinary form in their own chapel, this is allowed. But if they want to do so "often" or "habitually" or "permanently", they need to get the permission of their own superiors - e.g. the provincial, the mother-house; the exact person who can give permission will depend on the rules of the religious community concerned.

Unlike the situation with private Masses, there is no rule allowing members of the public to attend conventual Masses celebrated in the old form. I suspect that this is because the pope doesn't want to cut across the various communities' own rules and practices in this regard.

Public Masses…

The real issue, though, is public Masses. Many of those who like the old Mass will want to go regularly, as their primary Eucharistic encounter. They can't be relying on private Masses that may not be publicised and the occasional conventual Mass; they want a public Mass in the old form, preferably on a Sunday morning.

At first glace, Article 5.1 seems to be for them: "In parishes where a group of faithful attached to the [extraordinary form] exists stably, let the pastor willingly accede to their requests for the celebration of the holy Mass [according to the 1962 Missal]".

There follow detailed rules about the respective roles of the parish priest, the bishop and the authorities in Rome in responding to these requests, when and how often the old Mass can be celebrated in response to these requests, who can celebrate it, etc. And there is a very clear policy in all these regulations in favour of granting these requests, rather than refusing them.

But there is one point which has been overlooked in most of the discussion that I have seen about this, and I think it means that these provisions will actually not operate very often.

Requests at parish level…

Article 5.1 refers to requests from groups in parishes. A "group of faithful" who request the old Mass under this rule all need to be members of the same parish, which normally means that they need to live in the parish.

There's no minimum group size, but the group needs to "exist stably", which I think means it has to be large enough not to depend on the continued involvement of one or two families in the parish. And, in practical terms, if they want a parish Sunday Mass, the group will have to be large enough to produce a congregation which will bear some comparison with the congregations attending the ordinary Sunday Masses in the parish concerned.

At present, the old Masses which are celebrated typically cater for a congregation drawn from quite a wide catchment area - certainly much wider than the typical parish. People who want the old Mass will go quite a long way to get it. My guess is that there will be few parishes capable of producing, from within the parish itself, a stable group large enough to justify a regular Sunday parish Mass in the old form. Most groups are going to be drawn from a much wider area than just one parish.

Requests at diocesan level…

Those groups can't ask a parish priest for the old Mass under Article 5.1. Instead, they can ask the bishop, under Article 10, to

• erect a personal parish which routinely uses the old form, or
• appoint a chaplain to minister to the group.

There's nothing in Article 10 to suggest that a bishop has to do either of these things, if asked; he is to do them if he "judges it opportune". There is no express provision for appeal to Rome if the bishop declines.

The Motu Proprio contains much language exhorting everyone to liberality and generosity of spirit in the application of its provisions, but in terms of concrete measures which might oblige a bishop grant a request under Article 10, there is very little. And the pope's covering letter stresses that bishops remain in control of their dioceses, and their authority is not diminished.

The end result is that most groups wanting a regular Sunday Mass in the old form will still need to persuade their bishops that it is "opportune" to provide it. Which, of course, is pretty much where they are at present.

What will bishops do?

If the bishop does grant the request, is there any difference between establishing an old form parish, and appointing a chaplain to minister in the old form?

There sure is. An old form parish would be a rare example of a non-territorial parish - it would (probably) cover the entire diocese, but its members would only be those who chose to be members. And, for those so choosing, it would be their primary Eucharistic community.

QUIZ ANSWERS…
!. It's called a Biretta 2. You can order yours online from CM Almy — outfitters to the Church and Clergy since 1892 and it will set you back $US125 ($AU143 at today's exchange rate). Click the Biretta to visit their on-line store.

But if the bishop simply appoints a chaplain, the people to whom he ministers remain members of their ordinary territorial parishes, which are still their primary Eucharistic communities. And, however much they might prefer to attend an extraordinary form Mass celebrated by the chaplain, they would be under the same expectation as any Catholic is to involve themselves in their parishes, support its activities, and participate in its Eucharistic and sacramental life. Whether they would all do so or not is another matter, but the symbolic significance of maintaining the relationship with the local parish is important.

Both the Motu Proprio and the covering letter are at pains to stress the unity of the Latin church and of the Roman rite and, from that point of view, establishing chaplaincies seems to make more sense than establishing separate old form parishes.

Conclusion…

The bottom line, then, is that there is less in the Motu Proprio than meets the eye. Most groups wanting the old Mass will cross parish boundaries, and they will need to approach the bishop, just as now. The bishop is encouraged, but not obliged, to accommodate them — again, just as now. The encouragement is perhaps a bit stronger, and the Motu Proprio may help to create a climate in which these requests are more readily granted, but I doubt that it means much more than that.

What are your thoughts on this commentary? You can contribute to the discussion in our forum.

Peregrinus can be contacted at: Peregrinus <peregrinus@catholica.com.au>

©2007 Peregrinus