3 April 2020

Palm Sunday (1)

The liturgies for Palm Sunday which are in use, de jure or de facto,  in the 'Roman Rite' of the Latin Church are:
(1) S Pius V
(2) Pius XII (1955)
(3) The Novus Ordo.

I am not going to say much about (3). I am going to explain why, in my opinion, (2) is as bad as, if not worse than, (3), and I will explain what was lost when (1) was displaced by (2).

A spin-off from this is: we need to understand that 'the Council' is not the problem; Hannibal Bugnini was put in place by Pius XII, and the mayhem which the pair of them created in 1955 was just the first stage of the deformation of the Roman Rite which some good people erroneously attribute to 'Vatican II'. Pius XII should not be thought of as a Hero of Tradition.

My own personal view is that I would not inconvenience myself in order to attend (2), which is what you will find in the Missal of 1962, mandated by Summorum Pontificum. If you can be happy with Bugnini, you might as well go to a decently performed staging of (3) ... the sort of thing which the Oratories manage so superbly. (Indeed, there are one or two details, such as a fuller provision of Readings at the Easter Vigil, where (3) is more traditional than (2).)

The Priestly Fraternity of S Peter have an indult to use (1) this year. I regard that as a positive move. I hope it is made permanent and universal. In one or two other places which I think I will tactfully not mention, (1) is happily in use. It was the rite employed when the SSPX began its mission in this country.

To be continued.

8 comments:

Brussels priest said...

I believe that the use of the older form for the Triduum has been given to everyone using the Vetus Ordo 'pro tempore'. I am not sure that it is an indult as such, but stand to be corrected.

We certainly benefit from this permission in the Institute of Christ the King and I seem to remember seeing photos in numerous churches last year of the older form in apostolates not served by the so called 'Traditionalist orders'.

What a sadness that so many faithful will be deprived of these rites this year.

E sapelion said...

Yves Chiron in his biography of Annibale Bugnini makes the case that Bugnini's role in the Pian Commission was that of secretarial organiser not of manipulator. Chiron found that Bugnini made few interventions in the meetings, and of course he had no direct access to Pius XII. So he can probably be acquitted of the errors of 1955, and perhaps be credited with their later correction.

Zephyrinus said...

Thank You, dear Fr.

100% agreed.

ccc said...

It was my understanding that SSPX used 1967 Tres Abhinc Annos from 1 NOV 70 to 29 NOV 70, tried the NO after that First Sunday of Advent and within 2 years reverted first, back to the 1967 Tres Abhinc Annos, and then to the 1962 version.

It is also my understanding that many people think the 1962 rite was preserved by the Agatha Christi indult, when it, in fact, preserved the 1967 emendations of Tres Abhinc Annos. Thusly, Britain is the only place in the world, where besides certain monasteries, the 1967 Mass is also indulted.

Pulex said...

Oh, how quickly we have become spoiled! In the 80s and 90s, and perhaps up to 2007, the traditionally minded faithful would have given everything just to have access to the Mass according to the 1962 Missal. Even after 2007 it is still unavailable in so many places. And now our yesterday heros Pacelli and Sarto have become the bad guys. To be sure, am quite happy with the availability pre-1955 rubrics. In fact one SSPX priest I know uses them throughout the year, not just during the Holy Week. However, it would be an opposite error (with respect to the errors of modern liturgists) to claim that the 1962 version is equal to or worse than that of 1969. Apart from some unfortunate details, there is the traditional Ordo Missae, signs of reverence towards the Blessed Sacrament, etc. These were the things the innovators did not dare or were not allowed to touch before "the Council". One should prudently continue to rediscover the sacred tradition in its fullness, but let's also be grateful for what we have received so far through the immense generosity of God.

Victor said...

@Pulex: mind you, our distinguished host was not speaking of the rite as such, only of the palm sunday liturgy.

Rubricarius said...

The SSPX from its inception exhibited a wide range of liturgical praxis. Generally speaking the French clergy coalesced around somewhere between 1965 and 1967 whilst the English and German members gravitated towards what one would term ‘pre-1956’. Thus England, Germany, the NE District of the USA, Australia and a few other places used the pre-Pius XII books. This variation in praxis was recognised, and sanctioned, in the first SSPX ‘General Chapter’ of 1976. There is a video of the SSPX’s first 25 years in the UK which shows for a minute or so the traditional rites of Palm Sunday, Maundy Thursday (at the wrong time) and Good Friday with a rare view of black planetis plicatis (from 00:17:50).

The old rites continued to be celebrated in a few, rare, locations most notably at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem (where they continued until the mid-1990s to be replaced by the Pauline rites at the traditional times). It would be a generalisation to claim everyone attached to the old rite was content with 1962. Personally I took the decision to avoid it from 1990.

For some of us ‘Pacelli and Sarto’ were never heroes.

Pertinacious Papist said...

The correspondence between Catholic convert, Evelyn Waugh, and London Archbishop Heenan over the liturgical changes of the 1950s is telling:

The first liturgical changes remarked upon by Waugh were the revisions of the Easter vigil in 1951 and the abbreviated new rite of Holy Week in 1955, with its changes, omissions, and “endless blank periods,” which left him “resentful of the new liturgy.” Other changes included the dialogue Masses of the 1950s, which were never made obligatory until the introduction of the vernacular in the 1960s, accompanied by persistent confusion occasioned by conflicting statements from Rome. “Repeatedly standing up and saying ‘And with you’ detracts from [the] intimate association” of uniting oneself to the action of the priest, he complained in 1965. Waugh lived through the Second Vatican Council, which nearly undid him.

One wag suggested that Waugh suffered “Death by Novus Ordo,” though the jest is more clever than accurate. Pope Paul VI’s New Mass was not promulgated until 1969; Waugh died three years earlier, about an hour after attending a private Latin Mass on Easter Sunday celebrated by his friend, Fr. Caraman. Yet, if the liturgy were understood as a “permanent workshop” of innovation — as it was by Fr. Joseph Gelineau, S.J., whom the chief architect of the new Mass, Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, described as “one of the great masters of the international liturgical world” — it would be accurate to say that Waugh’s bitter trial was an effect of the accelerating and seemingly interminable experiments in what he called “the new liturgy,” which he endured in the decade until his death the year after the Council ended.

Indeed, Waugh suffered immensely. In a 1965 letter to Archbishop Heenan, Waugh begged him, “Please pray for my perseverance.” He declared further that “every attendance at Mass leaves me without comfort or edification. I shall never, pray God, apostatize but church-going is now a bitter trial.” Even then, he kept his acerbic sense of humor, writing to Lady Diana Cooper, “If you see Cardinal [Augustin] Bea [in Rome], spit in his eye.” Several months later, he wrote to Msgr. Lawrence L. McReavy, asking, “What is the least I am obliged to do without grave sin? I find the new liturgy a temptation against Faith, Hope and Charity but I shall never, pray God, apostatize.” A year later, a month before he died, Waugh wrote to Lady Diana Mosley, “The Vatican Council has knocked the guts out of me.... I have not yet soaked myself in petrol and gone up in flames, but I now cling to the Faith doggedly without joy. Church-going is pure duty parade.” The Thursday after Waugh died, his daughter wrote to Lady Diana Cooper, “Don’t be too upset about Papa.... You know how he longed to die .... I am sure he had prayed for death at Mass.”

-- From my review in the New Oxford Review, posted with permission of NOR): http://pblosser.blogspot.com/2012/10/undone-by-permanent-workshop-review.html