Skip to main content

Duties of Bishops in Canon Law - Liturgy

+
JMJ

After the publication of Universae Ecclesiae, the local ordinaries (ie Bishops) had to contend with the fact that the laity could haul their behinds into ecclesiastical court.

I know of at least one instance where the bishop stated that while the Pope has the authority to allow the use of the Tridentine Mass (... he used extraordinary form ...), the bishops have are responsible under Canon Law for the public celebration of the liturgy.

He went on to state that they didn't want it to be a source of ... wait for it ... division.

At that point it became a little ludicrous as His Grace pointed out that those attending the diocesan SP mass had to accept everything that went on at the other Churches.  He went on to explain a number of different ways in which the Mass is celebrated in various ethnic communities in the diocese.  The Tridentine Mass feeds our souls, these other masses feed their souls.

A little freaky as we have a complete breakdown of what it meant to be Roman Catholic and how we have hyphenated Catholicism.

So what are the responsibilities of a Bishop with regards to the liturgy etc?

You can find their complete canonical responsibilities here on the Vatican website.  Here are the canons to which I think the Archbishop was referring:
Can. 392 §1. Since he must protect the unity of the universal Church, a bishop is bound to promote the common discipline of the whole Church and therefore to urge the observance of all ecclesiastical laws.
Ok so he is to urge the observance of all ecclesiastical laws.  That's good to know, but the second article is even more telling.
§2. He is to exercise vigilance so that abuses do not creep into ecclesiastical discipline, especially regarding the ministry of the word {Tradical: ... the Mass}, the celebration of the sacraments and sacramentals, the worship of God and the veneration of the saints, and the administration of goods.
So the 'unity of the universal Church' is not about what particular liturgical abuse 'feeds' an individual's soul.  It is about ensuring that abuses do not creep into ecclesiastical discipline.

From what the Archbishop said, it almost seemed as if he believed that the Tridentine Mass was an abuse and danger to unity. 

I wish I had read this canon before that meeting in 2011.  I would have been able to ask some more pointed questions.

Talk about doublespeak and doublethink.

P^3



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment.  Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid.  No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein.  Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse?  The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin.  Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service.  It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized mass (ie the Novus Ordo Missae

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

Regarding Post: Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer no longer ... now Bishop Joseph Pfeiffer (Can't see this being a problem...)

 + JMJ   I've been watching the popularity of the post about Fr. Pfeiffer's attempted episcopal consecration and its continued top listing on the 'popular posts' list at the bottom of posts.  After some thought, I decided that I don't want to be responsible for anyone joining Fr. Pfeiffer's 'group', however unlikely that would be at this time. So I have reverted the article to the draft state. If anyone wants it reinstated, I would ask that they comment on this post with a rationale for reinstatement. P^3

Fr. Burfitt on Fr. Pfeiffer's Attempted Consecration

 + JMJ   Amidst the shadows cast by the publication of Traditionis Custodes, I am working on a map of the 'resistance' splinters to put their reaction in contrast with that of the SSPX.  In the midst of this, I just came across Fr. Burfitt letter on the attempted consecration. Breaking it down (see below)  items 2 and 3 are key.  Just as the consecrating bishop is 'doubtful', even if he hadn't muffed the first attempt, Fr. Pfeiffer remain doubtful and therefore this impacts those men is attempts to 'ordain'. There were rumours that Fr. Pfeiffer was seeking episcopal consecration for years as he cast about for various bishops (also doubtful) to help him achieve this goal. I wonder how he convinced the 'doubtful' bishop to provide (twice) the doubtful consecration. What a mess!  This creates a danger to the souls of his followers and wonder where it will end. Will he go full sede and have himself 'elected' pontiff as others have done before him

The Vatican and SSPX – An Organizational Culture Perspective

Introduction The recent and continuing interactions between the Vatican and the SSPX have been a great opportunity for prayer and reflection.  The basis for the disagreement is theological and not liturgical. As noted by Dr. Lamont (2012), the SSPX theological position on the four key controversial aspects of the Second Vatican Council are base on prior theological work that resulted from relevant magisterial pronouncements.  So it is difficult to understand the apparent rejection of the theological position of the SSPX.