I like paragraph 19, ordering the pro-EF Faithful not to "help or give their name to" bodies which impugn the validity or legitimacy of the OF, or are hostile to the Roman Pontiff. This does not, of course, in any way refer to bodies which, while deeming the OF to be both unquestionably valid and canonically legitimate, consider it to be an inferior form of the one Roman Rite. The Ecclesia Dei Commission does not, unfortunately, have any direct jurisdiction over the whole body of the Faithful, otherwise it might usefully have required that those Faithful who strongly prefer the OF should not question the legitimacy of the EF (did I read somewhere that the Tablet's Rome correspondent does question the lawfulness of Summorum Pontificum?) and should not be hostile to the Roman Pontiff. That would provide what we English call a level playing field. Other jolly old English phrases refer to cats and pigeons, and sauce for ganders.
But perhaps I'm wrong; perhaps Ecclesia Dei does have a broader jurisdiction. Para' 8a says that the purpose of Summorum Pontificum is "Liturgiam Romanam in Antiquiori Usu, prout pretiosum thesaurum servandum, omnibus largire fidelibus". Omnibus is not qualified by a clause such as "those who want the EF"; omnibus is just omnibus. The English crib is clearly a bit worried by this, because it translates largire as "offer" ... rather in the manner of the wretched waiter who sidles up to you just when you're leaning over the table to share a conjugal confidence with your wife and "offers" you the pepper: "offer" so often means "take it or leave it but it's here if you want it". But largiri [here we draw a veil over the IV Form error of the Roman official who forgot that largior is a deponent verb] means to give bountifully ...to lavish. This document makes clear that the EF is to be lavished upon, not a minority with a preference for it, but "all" the Faithful.
Isn't that rather thought-provoking? Am I right or am I right? Come to think of it, the very first sentence of UA talks about making the riches of the Roman Liturgy "propiores" to the Universal Church.
Surely PCED, as an organ of the Roman See, has 'full, supreme and universal jurisdiction over the whole Church' which can always be exercised unhindered?
ReplyDeleteI cannot wait to meet you in July when you come to the "colonies" You write so eloquently. Thank you for your wonderful blog. English may be a dead language by the time you get here. I just read the above, but exactly not sure what you said. Oh, well, I throw my lot in with the Anglican Use anyway. GB johnofthecrumbs
ReplyDeleteDear Father, I have always found it helpful to back to the official language used to get the meaning. On one occasion I found that a translation widely used in the English speaking world, of an Allocution by Pope Pius XII, was wrong and led at least one international scholar who relied on the English, to make a very significant mistake. Your understanding of the Latin is surely right and very helpful for us to understand the full force of UE.
ReplyDeleteWhat's sauce for the goose, eh? Well done.
ReplyDeleteI've begun using the same tactic with the proponents of same-sex "marriage" and "marriage equality": retorting that the defense of (traditional) marriage and the natural family is the great civil-rights and social-justice cause of the 21st century. Have not yet had a coherent response to that assertion.
Congratulations and welcome :)
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of ‘old English phrases’, wasn’t that icon of London transportation formerly referred to as an Omnibus…? Further, not having a door, anybody could just hop on? And, having two decks catered to both the ordinary and the extraordinary? And the driver had his back to…
ReplyDeleteWell, let’s not strain the analogy…
I really missed you. Hope you had a good rest.
ReplyDeleteAm I right or am I right?
ReplyDeleteOf those two comprehensive alternatives, I would say you are most definitely right, Father - especially so when one reads the probatior expressions of the Latin text.
I was so gratified by the Instruction that I was moved to offer on my own blog a (somewhat cod) piece of Anglican Patrimonese in response. But I won't try your the indulgence of your readers with that here.
"largiri means to give bountifully ...to lavish"
ReplyDeleteInteresting. A few years ago one of my students would use the term "larging it" (the first g being hard, the second g usually dropped) to refer to expansive behaviour (usually drink-fuelled). He was a skateboarder, and I presume the term came from that sub-culture.
I assumed it was derived from the English "large", but the switch from soft to hard g seemed unlikely. Is it possibly derived from Latin?