The Construction of the New Mass: "Concelebration" (Latin Mass 2003 Winter)

7/30/2019 The Construction of the New Mass: "Concelebration" (Latin Mass 2003 Winter).

1/5


2/5

Winter 2003 1

Contents

Features

8 Roman Landscapeby Alessandro Zangrando

10 Seeking Bad Adviceby Donna Steichen

16 A Matter of Preference?by Thomas A. Droleskey

20 Facing up to F.A.C.E.by Christopher A. Ferrara

Departments

28 Liturgy: Concelebration: Restoration or Innovation?by Father Romano Tommasi

32 Scripture: The Bible and Historical Criticism The First of Two Pby Robert A. Sungenis

36 Sermon: Watch with Himby Father Calvin Goodwin, F.S.S.P.

38 History: The Middle Ages Rediscoveredby Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

42 Biography:David Goldstein: One Tough Catholicby Steve OBrien

48 Literature:Nathaniel Hawthorne and Roman Catholicismby Claudio R. Salvucci

52 Education:Restoring Catholicism in the Land of Saints and Schoby Father Alan Wilders

54 Book Reviews:The Catholic Church and Historyby Hilaire Bellocreviewed by Matthew M. Anger

Islam Unveiledby Robert Spencerreviewed by H. W. Crocker III

The Martyrdom of Edmund Campion and His Companionsby William Cardinal A

reviewed by Michael Davies

64 Liturgical Life:The Founding of a Traditional Parishby Alan L. Craig

Homeschooling

68 The Importance of the Imaginationby Laura Berquist

72 Not Suitable for Childrenby Susan Lloyd

74 Mathematics and the Grandeur of Godby Marie Siobhan Boland

A Final Thought

76 Compromise or Principle?by Patrick Delaney

Publisher: Keep the Faith, Inc.Editor-in-Chief: Father James McLucas

Managing Editor: John W. BlewettAssociate Editor: Thomas E. Woods, Jr. Art Director: Ronald W. Lawson

Contributing Editors

Father Calvin Goodwin, F.S.S.P.Ronald P. McArthur

ContributorsElizabeth Altham s Matthew M. Anger s Father William Ashley

Father Ignacio Barreiro s Bishop Eugenijus BartulisFather David R. Becker s James Bemis

Father Jerome Bertram, O.P. s Laura BerquistMarie Siobhan Boland s Patrick Buchanan

Father James B. Buckley, F.S.S.P. s Neri CapponiFrancis Carey s Matthew Childs s John Clark

William Coulson s Thomas J. Craughwell s H.W. Crocker, IIILeo Darroch s Michael Davies s Michael de Tar, M.D.Brett Decker s Patrick Delaney s William Doino, Jr.Thomas A. Droleskey s Father Raymond V. Dunn

Alice Thomas Ellis s Father Evaristus Eshiowu s Edwin FaustChristopher Ferrara s Father Sean Finnegan

Father Kevin Fitzpatricks James K. FitzpatrickFather Robert Fromageot, F.S.S.P. s John Galvin

Lord Brian Gill s Cecile Bolling von GoetzRichard Cowden Guido s Norris Harrington

Father Brian Harrison, O.S. s Father Ignatius HarrisonKathleen Howley s Kenneth Jones s Father Peter Joseph

Hermann Kelly s Joseph Kung s Susan LloydJames Lothian s Dino MarcantonioFather Anthony Mastroeni s Thomas McArdle

Andrew J. McCauley s D. Q. McInerny s Diane MoczarFather John Mole, O.M.I. s Thomas Molnar

John Muggeridge s Anne Roche MuggeridgeFather Gerald Murray s George Neumayr s John Neumayr

Steve OBrien s Julia Ann OSullivan s James PatrickFather John Perricone s Jonathan Peters

Robert Phillips s Father Joseph Ponessa s John C. RaoFather Chad Ripperger, F.S.S.P. s Michael Rose

Jeffrey Rubin s Claudio R. SalvucciMsgr. Rudolf Michael Schmitz s Msgr. Richard J. SchulerVirginia Seuffert s Janet Smith s Father Russell E. Smith

Thomas Gordon Smith s Joseph Sobran s James SpencerAlfons Cardinal Stickler s Donna Steichen s Duncan Stroik

Robert A Sungenis s Steven Terenzio s Jeffrey TuckerDaniel Van Slyke s Alice von Hildebrand

Tom J. Walsh, M.D. s Bruce Walters, M.D. s David WhiteFather Alan Wilders s David Williams

Father W. Ray Williams s Charles M. WilsonKieron Wood s John Wooten s Alessandro Zangrando

The Latin Mass: A Journal of Catholic Culture is publishedquarterly in March, June, September and December by Keepthe Faith Inc. Donations to The Latin Mass are tax-deductiblein the United States. Simply make out a check to Keep theFaith, Inc., and write The Latin Mass on the memo line. Theviews expressed by The Latin Mass contributors are not nec-essarily those of the publisher, the editors or Keep the Faith,Inc. Please address all subscription requests or questions to:The Latin Mass Keep the Faith, Inc. 50 So. Franklin

Turnpike, Ramsey, NJ 07446-25460HONE s &AX

Subscription Rates: YEAR n FOUR ISSUES IN #ANADA 53 YEARS n EIGHT ISSUES IN #ANADA 53 YEARS n TWELVE ISSUES IN #ANADA 53Overseas: $50.00/year (U.S. dollars)Single copy price: $7.25 (includes first class postage)

Letters and articles: Address all editorial mail, submissions,

letters to the editor, advertising inquiries to:The Latin Mass

391 E. Virginia TerraceSanta Paula, CA 93060E-Mail: [email protected]

Manuscripts should be submitted in manuscript and if pos-sible in electronic format as a Microsoft Word document. Wedo not return unsolicited manuscripts. Letters to the editormay be edited for length or clarity.

Copyright 2003 Keep the Faith, Inc.

On the cover and inside the back cover:Crucifixion by Simon Vouet. The reproduction onthe inside back cover is designed for display.

Winter 2003


3/5


4/5

29Winter 2003

LiturgyConcelebration: Restoration or Innovation?

means that several priests recite the

words of consecration at the same

time.3 This was the practice at

ordinations according to the Roman

Pontifical as reformed by St. Pius V,

and had been the case from at least

the thirteenth century (the era of St.

Thomas Aquinas) up to the Council.The fact that the Holy See consid-

ered this as the definition of concele-

bration can be easily demonstrated by

the odd response given by the Holy

Office to a query regarding Oriental

or Eastern rite concelebrations. The

Latin Church did not recognize, or

have any recent memory of, what can

be calledceremonial concelebration.

This phrase refers to many priests

saying different parts of the Mass(the Divine Liturgy in the East), but

only one would actually consecrate

the host and chalice.

Therefore, in the Orient, there was

a celebration of the Divine Liturgy

in which priests demonstrated that

they were in communion of faith

and ecclesial union by receiving

Holy Communion together at the

same Mass, but they didnotrepeat

the words of consecration together.

When asked if this activity could

be considered concelebration, the

Holy See responded in the negative.

The Holy Office response insisted

that the words must be said by each

individual celebrant.4 Therefore,

when the Council restored con-

celebration (via the Consilium), it

really only imposed the medieval

Latin Church ritual of co-consecra-

tion of the host and chalice by several

priests (which occurred only at theordinations of priests and bishops).

This was the only permitted method

of concelebration in the Latin Church

until 1965.

Therefore, the question must be

asked: was the Consiliumsrestora-

tion really returning to the Fathers

or was it yet another historical aber-

ration? Did Vatican IIs Consilium

(the committee appointed to renew

the liturgy) restore the Roman rite

and its method of concelebration?

Once again we are forced to take

a jog down the memory lane of

history.

First of all, the term Roman rite

is predicated on the Latin Churchs

ritual following the transition fromGreek to Latin (circa A.D. 380).

Therefore, one must be careful in ap-

pealing to pre-fourth century sources

as proof of co-consecration (concel-

ebration). Incredibly, however, there

is no evidence of co-consecration

of host and chalice among the early

Fathers of the Church. References

to Clement of Rome (c.95), Ignatius

of Antioch (c.105), Justin Martyr

(c.158), and Hippolytus of Rome(c.200) all prohibit co-consecration

of host and chalice as occurs in the

new Mass since, as some even explic-

itly admit within

their writings, the

celebrant made

up the words of

the Eucharistic

Prayer, or Canon.

Therefore,

without yet having the benefit of a

set missal, each celebrant would have

said the Scriptural words of consecra-

tion in a slightly different manner,

which accounts for the different

consecratory formulae in the various

Oriental and Occidental (Western)

liturgies.5 Thus, we are left with

the Apostolic Fathers doing ritual

concelebration only, while the Canon,

or at least the consecration, was done

by one bishop or priest only.6

Moreover, we are given theimpression by St. Gregory the Great

that he knew nothing about the prac-

tice, especially through the testimony

of St. Fortunatus.7 In all liturgical

literature from the apostolic until the

medieval period one would look in

vain to find a single reference to an

example of sacramental concelebra-

tion, or co-consecration.8

The fifth to the eighth centuries

can be considered the Golden

Age of our Latin liturgy. TheLiber

Pontificalis tells us only some detail

of ceremonial concelebration, during

which celebration all the priests

have an individual paten.9 Strangely,

this practice was not restored by the

Consilium.10

The text from this period that most

clearly unmasks the Consiliums

neglect of history when pursuing the

restoration of the liturgy comes

from the quasi-official ceremonial

books of the papal liturgy known as

the Ordines Romani. In these texts

we are told that the Pope, by himself,

says the Eucharistic Prayer, while all

concelebrants bow profoundly in

silence and remain silent until theend of the Canon.11 Remember, this

was the Roman liturgy before foreign

elements (French or Gallican) were

said to have been

introduced and

thus, according

to the Consilium,

deforming the

original purity

of the Roman

liturgy. In fact, it is only after the

Gallican period that we see any evi-

dence that concelebrants actually said

the Canon of the Mass, particularly

the words of consecration, along with

the bishop or the Pope.12 In fact, this

phenomenon of co-consecration is

often attributed to the rise of scholas-

ticism and the theological explication

that a priest only celebrates when he

consecrates.13

Lastly, even by traveling to the

Orient and viewing eastern liturgiesthat date from the post-apostolic pe-

riod of the second to ninth centuries,

we find absent any type of co-conse-

cration. Only in the Constantinople

of the ninth or tenth century can we

even attempt to demonstrate that the

Canon was recited by the concel-

ebrants. Even today, nearly all of the

Oriental Churches have retained their

traditional non-consecratory concel-

there is no evidence of

co-consecration of host and

chalice among the early

Fathers of the Church.


5/5

Winter 200330

Liturgy Concelebration: Restoration or Innovation?

ebration. The bishops andpriests merely share someof the prayers of the Massin common while the maincelebrant says the Canon orthe consecration of the breadand wine. It is only due

to pressure from the LatinChurch that Orientals reallybegan to adopt the Romanpractice of co-consecrationof bread and wine. This isthe practice that exists withthe Uniate or Greek Catho-lics, and has possibly beenthe impetus for the samepractice with some RussianOrthodox and Armenians.14

The conclusion here isthat there is not even an Ori-entalprecedent for the restored riteof concelebration as imposed by theConsilium.The only precedent wasthe Latin practice of co-consecrationthat had been used only for ordina-tions since the thirteenth century, andwas never even mentioned before theeighth century.15Rather, a seeminglylater medieval practice was imposedon the Latin Church. Again, the irony

is that if theperiti (experts of theConsilium) had followed their ownprinciples, concelebration shouldhave been viewed as a corruption of

the original Roman rite. This samemedieval development was imposed

on the Uniates or Greek Catholics es-pecially under Benedict XIV.16 Fur-thermore, the reformers never tookinto account that the Latin Churchhad a tradition of priests concelebrat-

ing only with bishops, andnot with other priests!17

In effect, it must besadly admitted that the LatinChurch never actually wentthrough a restoration ofthe rite of concelebration

according to the Traditionof the Fathers18 as the Ro-man Missal claims. Rather,it is another example of howa few experts decided toinflict their personal prefer-ences on the Church, andunder the guise of history tofind favor and acceptance oftheir arbitrary introductionof a novelty. An esteemed

scholar of the ByzantineLiturgy, Robert Taft,19 hassaid it best regarding this so-calledreform in the Latin Church. It haslong been a theological device toturn eastwards in search of support-ing liturgical evidence for what onehas already decided to do anyway.Something like this was at work incertain pre-Vatican II discussions onthe possibility of restoring concelebra-tion in the Roman rite.20

Fr. Romano Tommasi received his

Licentiate in Sacred Theology (S.T.L.)

from the Pontifical University of San

Anselmo in Rome.

the irony is that if the

periti (experts of theConsilium) had followed

their own principles,

concelebration should

have been viewed as a

corruption of the original

Roman rite.

Notes

1 See 1983 Code of Canon Law (Latin Church), canons 946-48.

2 DOCUMENTS ON THE LITURGY 1963-1979, Conciliar,Papal and Curial Texts, International Commission onEnglish in the Liturgy, The Liturgical Press, Collegeville1982. DOL 1 (Sacrosanctum Concilium, n. 57.1).

3 EPHEMERIDES LITURGICAE, commentarium bimestrede re liturgica, Roma, 1887ss: Indice Ephemerides liturgi-cae 1887-1986, Edizioni Liturgicae, Roma 109 (1998) pp.138-139. Piero Marini, IL IN PIENAATTIV IN UN CLIMA Favorevole (Ottobre 1964-Marzo1965).

4 ENCHIRIDION SYMBOLORUM, ed. H.Denzinger, H.,-P. H..Unermann, Herder, ed., Freiburg i. Br 1991. See#3928: Decr. S. Officii, 8 Mart. (23 Maii) 1957De validaconcelebratione.

5 JUNGMANN, JOSEPH, The Mass of the Roman Rite:its origins and development, 2 vol. New York, BenzingerBrothers, 1951 (1st English edition. Trans. Francis A.Brunner). vol. 1, p. 296. pp. 30-31.

6 SCIENTIA LITURGICA, Manuale di Liturgia, ed. professoridel Pontificio Istituto Liturgico S. Anselmo, 5 vol., Piemme,Casale Monferrato 1998. Edizione Italiana. (vol 3, pp.309-310).

7 ZOFFOLI, ENRICO,La Messa Unico Tesoro e la suaConcelebrazione (pro manuscritto), Roma , Arti GraficheG.A.D.I snc, 1991, pp. 7-9.

8 SCIENTIA LITURGICA, Manuale di Liturgia, ed. profes-sori del Pontificio Istituto Liturgico S. Anselmo, 5 vol.,Piemme, Casale Monferrato 1998. Edizione Italiana. (vol 3,

pp. 308). Available in English as theHandbook for Liturgi-cal Studies published by Pueblo. Here St. Anselmos facultyadmit that concelebration is not necessarily an ancient

practice.

9 Ibid., pp. 310-11.

10 BUGNINI, A.Reform of the Liturgy 1948-75, Collegeville,Minnesota. The Liturgical Press, 1990 (1st English edition.Trans. Matthew J. OConnell), p. 28.

11 manuscript LES ORDINES ROMANI DU HAUT MOYENAGE II, LES TEXTES (Ordines I-XIII), SPICILEGIUMSACRUM LOVANIENSE, ETUDES ET DOCUMENTSFASCICULE 23, cura Universite Catholique et Colleges

Theologiques O.P. et S. J. de Louvain, Michel Andrieu, 18,Rue Juste Lipse, Louvain 1971. Ordo I], # 88 (Latin only).

12 SCIENTIA LITURGICA, vol. 3, p. 311.

13 Taft, Robert F. Beyond East and West: Problems in Liturgi-cal Understanding(2nd revised edition). Pontifical OrientalInstitute: Rome, 1997. P. 125-132.

14 Ibid., 111-118.


16 ZOFFOLI, ENRICO,La Messa Unico Tesoro,p.12.


18 INSTITUTIO GENERALIS EX EDITIONE TYPICATERTIA CURA ET STUDIO CONGREGATIONIS DECULTU DIVINO ET DISCIPLINA SACRAMENTORUMEXCERPTA, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Citta del Vaticano2000. General Instruction of the Roman Missal A.D. 2000,no. 9.

19 Archimandrite Robert Taft, S.J.

20 Taft, Robert F. Beyond East and West: Problems in Liturgi-cal Understanding(2nd revised edition). Pontifical OrientalInstitute: Rome, 1997. P. 111.

Documents

The Construction of the New Mass: "Concelebration" (Latin Mass 2003 Winter)