The Mounting Threat of Coercive Concelebration

I have been hearing from clergy who are telling me that, within their religious communities, in schools or houses of formation, in parishes, and in other situations, the campaign is intensifying to forbid priests from offering their own daily Masses (when they are otherwise free of obligations to celebrate Mass with and for a congregation) and to compel them to concelebrate with confreres. We first got wind of this back in July 2017 when a document circulating around Colleges in Rome attempted to intimidate clergy into concelebrating, contrary to their canonical rights. The inimitable Fr. Hunwicke commented on it and related matters extensively in a series called “Concelebration in the Roman Colleges.”

Clearly, the modernists and progressivists are fuming and plotting against the young priests going to side altars to “say Mass,” or the parochial vicars who set up dignified altars in their rooms for their day off, or the clergy who with curious consistency absent themselves from the sacramental jamborees that pass for special occasions like the Chrism Mass. They can see the writing on the wall. There comes a time when the threat of tradition becomes felt in earnest, and all kindness, real or simulated, is laid aside. It is indeed a threat to the postconciliar house of cards that many have substituted for the rock-solid Church of Christ and its perennial doctrine and liturgy.

The older generation, still paddling and sputtering in a lake of Kool Aid, wants to thwart the revival of private Masses [1] above all because these Masses are so often in the usus antiquior. Thus, two canonical offenses are committed at once: an action against the Code of Canon Law, and an action against the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum and its authoritative applications in Universae Ecclesiae.

Let us, them, be as clear as we can be. It is impossible to force a priest to concelebrate, even to establish that he should “as a rule” do so. It is still more impossible to exclude the usus antiquior for a priest’s “private” Mass — that is, when he is not scheduled to offer Mass in public with a congregation. [2]

1. Canon 902 guarantees the right of each priest to celebrate individually with the sole condition that the individual offering of the Holy Mass not take place in the same church or oratory in which another concelebration is taking place. (NB: Some English translations simply say “in which another celebration is taking place.” The Latin, however, is clear: non vero eo tempore, quo in eadem ecclesia aut oratorio concelebratio habetur.) Thus, having many simultaneous Masses at side altars is fully permissible even according to the 1983 Code.

2. Canon 904 recommends the daily offering of the Holy Mass by priests “since, even if the faithful cannot be present, it is the act of Christ and the Church in which priests fulfill their principal office [munus].” The standard English translation of the 1983 Code translates munus as “function” in this canon, which translation is not felicitous.

3. Canon 906 prohibits a priest from offering the Holy Mass “without the participation of at least some member of the faithful” — “except for a just and reasonable cause.” It is clear from context that the fulfillment of the recommendation of Canon 904, that is, the recommended daily offering of the Holy Mass by priests, is a just and reasonable cause.

4. These canonical points are well supported by n. 31 of the Encyclical Letter Ecclesia de Eucharistia of John Paul II, which says, inter alia:

If the Eucharist is the center and summit of the Church’s life, it is likewise the center and summit of priestly ministry. For this reason, with a heart filled with gratitude to our Lord Jesus Christ, I repeat that the Eucharist “is the principal and central raison d’être of the sacrament of priesthood, which effectively came into being at the moment of the institution of the Eucharist.” … We can understand, then, how important it is for the spiritual life of the priest, as well as for the good of the Church and the world, that priests follow the Council’s recommendation to celebrate the Eucharist daily: “for even if the faithful are unable to be present, it is an act of Christ and the Church.” In this way priests will be able to counteract the daily tensions which lead to a lack of focus and they will find in the Eucharistic sacrifice — the true center of their lives and ministry — the spiritual strength needed to deal with their different pastoral responsibilities. Their daily activity will thus become truly Eucharistic.

5. They are also supported by n. 80 of the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis of Benedict XVI:

The Eucharistic form of the Christian life is seen in a very special way in the priesthood. Priestly spirituality is intrinsically Eucharistic. … An intense spiritual life will enable him [the priest] to enter more deeply into communion with the Lord and to let himself be possessed by God’s love, bearing witness to that love at all times, even the darkest and most difficult. To this end, I join the Synod Fathers in recommending “the daily celebration of Mass, even when the faithful are not present” (Propositio 38). This recommendation is consistent with the objectively infinite value of every celebration of the Eucharist, and is motivated by the Mass’s unique spiritual fruitfulness. If celebrated in a faith-filled and attentive way, Mass is formative in the deepest sense of the word, since it fosters the priest’s configuration to Christ and strengthens him in his vocation.

Both of these magisterial documents renew the recommendation of the daily offering of the Holy Mass even when a member of the faithful cannot be present. It is, of course, important always to bear in mind that the Holy Mass is never in fact offered “alone,” for there is always the participation of the choirs of angels and of the communion of the saints.

6. In connection with the Mass of Paul VI, The General Instruction of the Roman Missal provides rubrics for the offering of Holy Mass when only one minister participates (nn. 252–272), and for the offering of Holy Mass without the participation of a minister (n. 254). There would be no point in furnishing such rubrics were this situation not anticipated as a normal occurrence in the life of clergy.

Priests who find themselves victims of the attempt to exclude private Mass or to require concelebration should resist by respectfully — and, if necessary, repeatedly, and in writing [3] — pointing out the provisions in Church law, as summarized above, avoiding attribution of motives or rancor, and leaving the judgment of hearts to Almighty God. Since we know there are wicked men in high places, at times this self-defense may precipitate a larger confrontation. Such confrontations are never pleasant affairs but they can be occasions of greatly-needed clarification on the limits of authority and obedience, and even moments of grace in discerning whether a given pastoral or community situation is sustainable over the long term.

A number of good men in high places have given this advice to individuals: Be strong and stand your ground: esto vir, esto sacerdos Christi. No one ever has a right to contradict universal legislation. As long as that legislation remains in force, and no exceptions have been expressly granted by law, it is binding on all without exception. This has always been the mind of the Church.


NOTES

[1] I am aware of the limitations of the term “private Mass,” especially because any Mass is a social and public act by its very nature, but it is still a useful term, the meaning of which everyone readily grasps.

[2] The recent letter of the Grand Master of the Knights of Malta similarly violates the rights of laity and clergy.

[3] Bullies rarely want to write anything down on paper, because they either know or have an intuition that if they write down their demands, they can be challenged canonically, and defeated or embarrassed. So a key defense is to insist that any demand or request be put into writing, so that one can be certain of what is being requested and why. If they will not do so, then one can claim one did not understand what they were asking or had not been given a sufficient reason or had doubts in one’s conscience about the validity of their requests, etc.

Visit www.peterkwasniewski.com for events, articles, sacred music, and classics reprinted by Os Justi Press (e.g., Benson, Scheeben, Parsch, Guardini, Chaignon, Leen).

“Manifold and Marvellous Workings of Grace”: Anne Catherine Emmerich on the Blessed Sacrament

As I mentioned on Monday, Angelico Press has released a new series of volumes on Anne Catherine Emmerich (12 volumes, to be precise, available in paper and cloth) that contain by far the most complete and accurate translation into contemporary English of her visions. The volumes are conveniently divided into themes, so that, for example, one who wishes to read everything the mystic has to say about the Blessed Virgin Mary may find it all in volume 8.

And here, if I may, I should like to insert a note to readers. I was frankly astonished to see in the readers' comments the level of negativity that was directed toward Anne Catherine Emmerich in particular, and toward mystical visions in general. It is perfectly obvious, on the one hand, that some people can get carried away with such things and thereby fail to hold fast to the fundamentals of the Faith (as some other rare specimens might get carried away with liturgical finery or exquisite dogmatic distinctions); but it is also no less obvious that some have developed a disdainful attitude towards the rich Catholic history of mysticism, reminiscent in fact of the skeptical mindset of so-called "scientific reason" and the contempt for subjective devotion found in the first wave of the Liturgical Movement, by which it eventually vomited forth the rationalistic, linear-modular, didactic, symbol-bereft, unimaginative, and utterly unmystical modern liturgy, under the ill effects of which all Latin-rite Catholics are, to one degree or another, suffering.

Personally, I am not wedded to mystical visions as if they were Gospel truth or as if one "had to read" them in order to be saved, or any such nonsense. I simply find them (at their best) refreshing, intriguing, thought-provoking, insight-begetting. They help me to make connections that I hadn't made before; they lead me back to the sources of the Faith with renewed appreciation. Can one not approach such writings with theological open-mindedness, and with an innocent enjoyment of religious literature? Must we reject the use because of the abuse? Shall we dismiss a surprisingly large part of the medieval Catholic heritage because it disturbs our tidy conception of a catechetical, rubrical, juridical, and scholastic universe? One thinks naturally of the glorious visions of St. Gertrude the Great, one of the greatest saints of the Benedictine order. I am sure that Our Lord would not have honored her by placing seven rings on her hand — a golden circlet on each finger, and on the signet finger, three — if He had thought she did not deserve it; and it would seem that her larger monastic family willingly concurs with the Lord by honoring this saint with three sets of special antiphons for Vespers I, Lauds, and Vespers II, something unique, as far as I know, in the entire Antiphonale Monasticum.

Today I would like to share some striking passages from volume 11, Spiritual Works and Journeys: The Nuptial House, Vineyard, Sufferings for Others, the Church,  and the Neighbor, in which Anne Catherine speaks about the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Most Blessed Sacrament. As will become evident, she was at once powerfully drawn into these mysteries with burning desire, as well as painfully aware of the irreverence, lukewarmness, and routine neglect that surrounded these great gifts of God in her own day. The parallels to our times will not be hard to see.

It is also beautiful to note, throughout these volumes, how much Anne Catherine's visions were linked to the liturgical calendar and the sanctoral cycle in particular. She seemed to have internalized the calendar to such an extent that its themes and rhythm became the guiding lines of her interior world. She intensely lived the very mysteries re-presented in the sacred liturgy, not only the mysteries of Our Lord, but also those of all of His saints, who are present to us in a special way on their feasts.

I once had a beautiful revelation on this point, in which I learned that seeing with the eyes is no sight, that there is another — an interior sight — that is clear and penetrating. But when deprived of daily communion a cloud obscures my clear inward sight. I pray less fervently, with less devotion. I forget important things, signs, and warnings, and I see the destructive influence of exterior things that are essentially false. I feel a devouring hunger for the blessed Sacrament, and when I look toward the Church I feel as if my heart were about to escape from my breast and fly to my Redeemer. (p. 9)

In the vineyard were many beautiful houses, all in the very best order inside, although on the outside the weeds grew up to the doors and almost as high as the windows. I saw in them ecclesiastics — dignitaries of the Church — reading and studying all sorts of useless books. But no one took the least care of the vineyard. In the middle of the latter stood a church with several farmhouses around it, but there was no way to get to it — all was covered with rank weeds, even the church was as it were tapestried with green. The blessed Sacrament was in the church, but no lamp hung before it. The bishop appeared to be away. Inside the church — even there — was no clear passage. All was overgrown with weeds. It made me sad. I was told to set to work, and I found a two-edged bone knife like a reaping-hook with which to prune the vine, a hoe, and a basket for manure. The work to be done was all explained to me. It was hard at first but afterward became easier. (pp. 30–31)

On the feasts of the holy peasant Isidore many things were shown me on the importance of celebrating and hearing Mass, and I saw how great a blessing it is that so many are said though even by ignorant and unworthy priests, as it averts all sorts of dangers, chastisements, and calamities from humankind. It is well that many priests do not realize what they do, for if they did they would be so terrified as not to be able to celebrate the holy sacrifice. I saw the marvelous blessings attached to hearing Mass. It facilitates labor, promotes good, and prevents loss. One member of a family returning from Mass carries home a blessing to the whole house and for the whole day. I saw how much greater is the advantage attached to hearing a Mass than to having one said without assisting at it. I saw all defects in the celebration of Mass supernaturally supplied. (pp. 95–96)

Her desire for the blessed Sacrament becomes more violent. She languishes, laments the privation of her daily bread, and cries out in ecstasy: “Why dost Thou leave me thus to languish for Thee? Without Thee I must die! Thou alone canst help me! If I must live, give me life!” — When she awoke, she exclaimed: “My Lord has told me that I now must see what I am without him. Things are changed—I must become his nourishment, my flesh must be consumed in ardent desires.” (p. 96)

On the feast of Pentecost (May 21st) the pilgrim, who had witnessed Anne Catherine’s anguish and tears on the preceding evening, found her this morning radiant as a spouse of Christ, breathing but joy and holiness: I have been in the cenacle with the apostles, and I have been fed in a way that I cannot express. Nourishment under the form of a wave of light flowed into my mouth. It was exceedingly sweet but I know not whence it came. (p. 96)

I felt as if I were wandering among the starry heavens. These vessels of God are of every variety of form and appearance, but all are filled with Jesus Christ. The same law governs all, the same substance pervades all though under a different form, and a straight line leads through each into the light of the Father through the cross of the Son. I saw a long line of royal females extending from the Mother of God, virgins with crowns and scepters, though not earthly queens, souls who had preceded or followed Mary in the order of time. They seemed to serve her as the twenty-four ancients serve the Most Holy Trinity. They were celebrating the feast by a marvelously solemn movement severally and all together. I can compare it only to beautiful music. The angels and saints advanced in one or many processions to the throne of the Most Holy Trinity like the stars in the sky revolving around the sun. And then I saw down on the earth innumerable processions corresponding to the celestial ones, also celebrating the feast — but how miserable! how dark! how full of breaks! To look upon it from above was like looking down into the mire — still there was much good here and there. (p. 102)

Again I felt those pains like fine rays falling upon me, piercing me in all directions like threads of silver. Besides, I had to carry, to drag so many people along that I am all bruised; so that not a bone in my body is not, as it were, dislocated. When I awoke, the middle fingers of both hands were stiff, bent, and paralyzed, and my wounds have pained intensely all night long. I saw in numerous pictures the coldness and irreverence shown the blessed Sacrament, by which I understood the guilt of those who receive it unworthily, negligently, and by routine; and I saw many going to confess in very bad dispositions. (p. 104)

I beheld the manifold and marvellous workings of grace by means of the blessed Sacrament as a light shining over all its adorers. Yes, even they who think not of it receive a blessing in its presence. (p. 104)

I beheld pictures referring to the defects in divine worship and how they are supernaturally repaired. It is hard for me to say how I saw it, how the different scenes blended and harmonized, one explaining another. One thing was especially remarkable — that the failings and omissions in divine worship on earth only increase the indebtedness of the guilty. God receives the honor due Him from a higher order. Among other things I saw that when priests have distractions during the sacred ceremonies, Mass, for instance, they are in reality wherever their thoughts are — and during the interval a saint takes their place at the altar. These visions show frightfully the guilt of carelessly celebrating the holy mysteries. Sometimes I see a priest leaving the sacristy vested for Mass; but he goes not to the altar. He leaves the church and goes to a tavern, a garden, a hunt, a maiden, a book, to some rendezvous, and I see him now here, now there, according to the bent of his thoughts, as if he were really and personally in those places. It is a most pitiful and shameful sight! But it is singularly affecting to behold at this time a holy priest going through the ceremonies of the altar in his stead. I often see the priest returning for a moment during the sacrifice and then suddenly running off again to some forbidden place. Such interruptions frequently last a long time. When the priest amends, I see it in his piety and recollectedness at the altar, etc. In many parish churches I saw the dust and dirt that had long defiled the sacred vessels cleared away, and all things put in order. (pp. 111–12)

I saw in all places priests surrounded by the graces of the Church, the treasure of Jesus Christ’s merits as well as those of the saints; but they were tepid, they were dead. They taught, they preached, and offered the holy sacrifice most slothfully. … Mass badly celebrated is an enormous evil. Ah! it is not a matter of indifference how it is said! I have had a great vision on the mystery of holy Mass and I have seen that whatever good has existed since Creation is owing to it. (pp. 116–17)

To purchase this volume, go to its page at Angelico Press.

Good News in Norwalk, Connecticut: Daily Traditional Mass

(Cross-posted from the Society of St. Hugh of Cluny.)

Starting September 5th, at St. Mary’s Church the daily morning Mass will be a Traditional low Mass. The time will be changed to 7:30 am, Monday to Friday. Deo gratias! This is the kind of thing we need to see happening everywhere, so that authentic liturgical renewal may flourish (dare one say, irreversibly?)

Father Richard Cipolla announced the change today on the St. Mary’s website:

The Traditional Roman Rite of the Mass lies at the very heart of Saint Mary’s parish. Since Father Markey introduced it in the parish some seven years ago, it has become integral to the very existence of this parish both in spiritual ways and in eminently practical ways. The Solemn Mass on Sunday has brought so many new people to the parish and continues to be a source of inspiration and genuine prayerful worship to all who assist at the Mass. The Traditional Mass, also known as the Extraordinary Form, is a gift from God via Pope Benedict to St. Mary’s.

When God gives someone a gift He expects it to be used for His glory and to be part of the missionary effort of the Church to bring the Good News of Jesus Christ to the world. In our case, I have decided that this gift needs to be used even more deeply in the parish than up to this point. After much thought and prayer, I have decided that the daily morning Mass will be celebrated in the Extraordinary Form. The time of the Mass will be moved to 7:30 a.m. to allow more people who go to work early to attend Mass. The readings will be in English. The quiet simplicity of the Low Mass will enrich us all. Cardinal Sarah’s book on Silence specifically mentions the silence of the Canon in the Extraordinary Form as something very good for the worshipping community. Most of our parishioners will notice little change, since we celebrate the daily Novus Ordo Mass in continuity with the form of the Traditional Mass. This change will also enable more of our parishioners to experience the beauty of the Extraordinary Form and enrich their understanding of the worship of the Church in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

In no way should this change to the daily celebration of the Extraordinary Form be interpreted as a “return to the past”. As Pope Benedict said: “What was sacred then is sacred now.” We live in the now, not in the past. And we look to the future with confidence that the presence of the Extraordinary Form at St. Mary’s will be a force within the Church to worship God in the Spirit, the God of Truth, Beauty and Goodness. The return to the Tradition of the Church is absolutely necessary in an age of spiritual amnesia within the Church that has sapped her strength to be who she is: the presence of Jesus Christ in the world.

Your support, as always, is very important to me. Let us pray for each other and our beloved parish church dedicated to Mary most Holy.

Father Richard Gennaro Cipolla

Pastor

St. Mary’s is truly one of the gems of the East Coast