Here's a rather surprising little fatwa (but wonderful if it's true) from Fr. Z, allegedly based on Sacrosanctum Consilium, one that I would love to see vindicated:
But...I have heard that permission for vernacular in the Office was allowed even before the Council. Though if we're going to invoke past practice like that, why couldn't a priest also use the 1967 Ferial Lectionary at the Old Mass?
I guess the difference is that the exceptional Office permissions were/are for private recitation only (public celebration would still have to be in Latin).
It also is a bit odd that Fr. Z is invoking the near-universal permission for vernacular Liturgy of the Hours and applying it to the Old Rite. I'm not sure how the law overlaps here.
If I were a priest, I'd ask my bishop or superior first. But I wouldn't have any qualms once my bishop or other superior said it was okay.
I wonder, would it have to be a translation only of 1962? Or could a bishop give permission (in private recitation) even for older books? What about older Latin forms? I have heard cases of traditionalist priests being given permission to use even the Breviary of Trent, so...maybe. I hope, I hope, I hope.
I suppose… suppose that a cleric today with permission to fulfill his obligation using the vernacular (which I think is all clerics these days) could also fulfill his obligation with the English version of the older office. Odiosa restringenda and all that.I would love this to be true, though I'm hesitant to believe it. I mean, the Mass has also been allowed in the vernacular now...but that applies to the New Mass. I doubt someone without explicit Vatican permission (I'm hoping some of the Anglican Ordinariates get this) would be allowed to use even approved translations for the Old Mass (Summorum Pontificum made specific provision only for the Lessons to be in the vernacular).
But...I have heard that permission for vernacular in the Office was allowed even before the Council. Though if we're going to invoke past practice like that, why couldn't a priest also use the 1967 Ferial Lectionary at the Old Mass?
I guess the difference is that the exceptional Office permissions were/are for private recitation only (public celebration would still have to be in Latin).
It also is a bit odd that Fr. Z is invoking the near-universal permission for vernacular Liturgy of the Hours and applying it to the Old Rite. I'm not sure how the law overlaps here.
If I were a priest, I'd ask my bishop or superior first. But I wouldn't have any qualms once my bishop or other superior said it was okay.
I wonder, would it have to be a translation only of 1962? Or could a bishop give permission (in private recitation) even for older books? What about older Latin forms? I have heard cases of traditionalist priests being given permission to use even the Breviary of Trent, so...maybe. I hope, I hope, I hope.
3 comments:
In private --- and I speak as a "pragmatic realist" here, not as a follower of rules for the sake of rules --- you can use any version of the Office you want. It's not like anybody else is going to know unless you tell them, anyway. Seeing that laics don't have any obligation to say the Office, but do it solely out of personal choice or discipline, there's no question of fulfilling any obligation here, anyway. Just do what you do in the way that works best for you.
As to approved vernacular translations of the Old Mass (I assume you mean the "transitional Missals" from 1965-1968, since these are the only Vatican-approved translations of the Old Mass in existence), I don't ever recall the Vatican rescinding permission to use the vernacular; they just seem to have fallen into disuse after the Novus Ordo came upon the scene.
It actually surprises me that no-one has yet raised the question with Rome, though this might be because they were so short-lived that nobody really had a chance to become attached to them; when we consider that the lines were then drawn between "Latin" and "Vernacular" camps after the NO, it's as though these Missals were simply forgotten. It seems only within the past few years (after the Motu) that people have actually begun to remember them again as a kind of "via media" (which they are), and so the question may present itself in the future. I'm certainly curious as to what that response might be.
"Seeing that laics don't have any obligation to say the Office, but do it solely out of personal choice or discipline, there's no question of fulfilling any obligation here, anyway. Just do what you do in the way that works best for you."
I know, for the laity.
But I'm excited for the possibility for clergy for some reason.
Would anyone know where one could get a copy of one of the 'transitional missals'? I have not seen any in my searches online.
Post a Comment