Topic: What are the pope's powers when it comes to Liturgy?

[scamandrius]

Pope Francis has recently ordered parishes to start including women in the Rite of the Washing of the Feet on Holy Thursady following the Mass, saying that the people whose feet are washed should "represent" the parish.  When it comes to the Rites, Practices, and Liturgies of the Catholic Church, does the Pope have supreme unilateral power to change them, amend them, abolish them, elongate them, etc.?  The Second Vatican Council reformed the Mass and did that as a Catholic ecumenical Council and was not done strictly by John XXIII and followed up by Paul VI.  I know that Pius XII had instituted some reforms for the Rites of Holy Week, but I don't know how far those went to altering what had been celebrated prior. 

Can the Pope, for instance, say that the Canon of the Mass is now forever abolished?  Can the Pope decree that altar servers must "represent" the parish?  Can the Pope decide that the Crucifixes be removed in favor of crosses without the Corpus?  Are there limits? If so, what?

[Mor Ephrem]

Pope Francis has recently ordered parishes to start including women in the Rite of the Washing of the Feet on Holy Thursady following the Mass...

No.

[griego catolico]

Pope Francis has recently ordered parishes to start including women in the Rite of the Washing of the Feet on Holy Thursady following the Mass...

No.

scamandrius,

The washing of feet on Holy Thursday in the Roman Catholic Church is optional. A bishop or priest may omit it.

GC

[scamandrius]

Pope Francis has recently ordered parishes to start including women in the Rite of the Washing of the Feet on Holy Thursady following the Mass...

No.

http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2016/01/21/francis-changes-the-rules-women-can-have-their-feet-washed-on-holy-thursday/

This article says should, which is not the same as could.  I see potest clearly in the document.

[LenInSebastopol]

Are you looking for a bumper sticker size answer to your questions?
You came with an answer to your feet inquiry.
I do not understand the thrust of your query.

[scamandrius]

Are you looking for a bumper sticker size answer to your questions?
You came with an answer to your feet inquiry.
I do not understand the thrust of your query.

I'd like a nice thorough answer, please.  Do you ask this question of every post on OC.net or are you having  a bad morning? 

The question is:  What are the pope's limits, if any, on making any changes, reforms, addenda, etc. to the liturgical rites of the Roman Catholic Church? 

IS THAT CLEAR?

[Iconodule]

The question is:  What are the pope's limits, if any, on making any changes, reforms, addenda, etc. to the liturgical rites of the Roman Catholic Church? 

If we take the dogmatic definitions of Vatican I seriously, none.

[ErmyCath]

The question is:  What are the pope's limits, if any, on making any changes, reforms, addenda, etc. to the liturgical rites of the Roman Catholic Church? 

The short answer is that there are no limits.

This should be manifestly clear by the fact that a pope within the last century promulgated an entirely new Missal.  In addition to that, he promulgated new rites for every sacrament, a new Divine Office, a new book of blessings, and a new calendar with a new lectionary.  He even went so far as to allow for certain Holy Days to be shifted, such as Epiphany and Ascension moving to Sundays. 

With the minor exception of a group of "traditionalists," the Latin Church was changed in every aspect of its liturgical life at the command of the pope.

[scamandrius]

The question is:  What are the pope's limits, if any, on making any changes, reforms, addenda, etc. to the liturgical rites of the Roman Catholic Church? 

The short answer is that there are no limits.

This should be manifestly clear by the fact that a pope within the last century promulgated an entirely new Missal.  In addition to that, he promulgated new rites for every sacrament, a new Divine Office, a new book of blessings, and a new calendar with a new lectionary.  He even went so far as to allow for certain Holy Days to be shifted, such as Epiphany and Ascension moving to Sundays. 

With the minor exception of a group of "traditionalists," the Latin Church was changed in every aspect of its liturgical life at the command of the pope.

But wasn't the Novus Ordo and the development of the New Missal done in conjunction with the hierarchs of the Second Vatican Council so it wasn't really the product of two men, i.e. Popes John XXIII and Paul VI?

[Mor Ephrem]

The question is:  What are the pope's limits, if any, on making any changes, reforms, addenda, etc. to the liturgical rites of the Roman Catholic Church? 

The short answer is that there are no limits.

This should be manifestly clear by the fact that a pope within the last century promulgated an entirely new Missal.  In addition to that, he promulgated new rites for every sacrament, a new Divine Office, a new book of blessings, and a new calendar with a new lectionary.  He even went so far as to allow for certain Holy Days to be shifted, such as Epiphany and Ascension moving to Sundays. 

With the minor exception of a group of "traditionalists," the Latin Church was changed in every aspect of its liturgical life at the command of the pope.

But wasn't the Novus Ordo and the development of the New Missal done in conjunction with the hierarchs of the Second Vatican Council so it wasn't really the product of two men, i.e. Popes John XXIII and Paul VI?

It wasn't the product of two men, but neither was it the product of Vatican II. 

[ErmyCath]

The question is:  What are the pope's limits, if any, on making any changes, reforms, addenda, etc. to the liturgical rites of the Roman Catholic Church? 

The short answer is that there are no limits.

This should be manifestly clear by the fact that a pope within the last century promulgated an entirely new Missal.  In addition to that, he promulgated new rites for every sacrament, a new Divine Office, a new book of blessings, and a new calendar with a new lectionary.  He even went so far as to allow for certain Holy Days to be shifted, such as Epiphany and Ascension moving to Sundays. 

With the minor exception of a group of "traditionalists," the Latin Church was changed in every aspect of its liturgical life at the command of the pope.

But wasn't the Novus Ordo and the development of the New Missal done in conjunction with the hierarchs of the Second Vatican Council so it wasn't really the product of two men, i.e. Popes John XXIII and Paul VI?

A reform of the Missal was called for at Vatican II, just as it had been at Trent.  The actual reforming of the Missal after Vatican II was done by a committee, just as it was after Trent.

The recommendations are given from the committee to the pope, who has the sole authority to promulgate the Missal, as is made clear in the text promulgating the Missal -- Missale Romanum.

[LenInSebastopol]

Are you looking for a bumper sticker size answer to your questions?
You came with an answer to your feet inquiry.
I do not understand the thrust of your query.

I'd like a nice thorough answer, please.  Do you ask this question of every post on OC.net or are you having  a bad morning? 

The question is:  What are the pope's limits, if any, on making any changes, reforms, addenda, etc. to the liturgical rites of the Roman Catholic Church? 

IS THAT CLEAR?

To the external forms of the Church, as you clarified above, there are none, however the days of being a dictator are long gone and all else is done by committees, synods, studies and other collaborative/collegiate efforts. Is that succinct enough? Or is there another question or agenda?
Oh, and yes, pain makes for a difficult time, manifesting in being curt.

[ErmyCath]

There are committees used by popes.  There are studies and other things. 

That doesn't change the fact that the pope alone ultimately has the final decision.  As an illustration, we could recall that the studies and committees recommended the opposite conclusion of that made by Pope Paul VI in Humanae Vitae.

[LenInSebastopol]

There are committees used by popes.  There are studies and other things. 

That doesn't change the fact that the pope alone ultimately has the final decision.  As an illustration, we could recall that the studies and committees recommended the opposite conclusion of that made by Pope Paul VI in Humanae Vitae.

Thank you. I had to look that up and in so doing see that the Church found out, according to many Catholic sources, the Pope was right AND infallible in his encyclical!  Birth control (the pill, etc)  does violate Natural Law, contrary to the conclusions of the Church's Princes' studies.
Thanks, again.

[MalpanaGiwargis]

Pope Francis has recently ordered parishes to start including women in the Rite of the Washing of the Feet on Holy Thursady following the Mass...

No.

http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2016/01/21/francis-changes-the-rules-women-can-have-their-feet-washed-on-holy-thursday/

This article says should, which is not the same as could.  I see potest clearly in the document.

"potest" means "can." => Qui coetus constare potest ex viris et mulieribus, et convenienter ex iuvenibus et senibus, sanis et aegrotis, clericis, consecratis, laicis. ("This group can consist of men and women, and fittingly of young and old, healthy and sick, clerics, consecrated, [and] laity.")

[MalpanaGiwargis]

Regarding the original question, Pope Pius XII said in Mediator Dei:

“…the Sovereign Pontiff alone enjoys the right to recognize and establish any practice touching the worship of God, to introduce and approve new rites, as also to modify those he judges to require modification.” (no. 58)

This seems to be an explicit statement of what was de facto since the Council of Trent; I'm not sure if there is a similarly explicit earlier statement. I think such an attitude requires the definitions of papal supremacy and infallibility of 1870, so I rather doubt such an explicit statement of the pope's authority over the liturgy would be found.

Vatican II called for certain specific changes, but did not directly produce the new Missal of 1969. The "transitional" Missal of 1965 is the closest thing to the "Mass of Vatican II" - still essentially the Tridentine Mass, but with the changes mentioned by Vatican II - suppression of the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar and the Last Gospel, addition of an OT reading, some vernacular, etc. The revision of the Missal and the other books was entrusted to a special concilium by Pope Paul VI, who promulgated the revised books on his authority in Missale Romanum on April 3, 1969.

[Mor Ephrem]

Pope Francis has recently ordered parishes to start including women in the Rite of the Washing of the Feet on Holy Thursady following the Mass...

No.

http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2016/01/21/francis-changes-the-rules-women-can-have-their-feet-washed-on-holy-thursday/

This article says should, which is not the same as could.  I see potest clearly in the document.

"potest" means "can." => Qui coetus constare potest ex viris et mulieribus, et convenienter ex iuvenibus et senibus, sanis et aegrotis, clericis, consecratis, laicis. ("This group can consist of men and women, and fittingly of young and old, healthy and sick, clerics, consecrated, [and] laity.")

I wanted to say ^this, but I was worried about the backlash.  Scamandrius is, after all, a renowned Latinist. 

[Svartzorn]

What are the pope's powers when it comes to Liturgy?

Sorry, I tried to resist, but... answering the OP's question: he can fly, throw bolts of electricity and he also shoots lasers from his eyes.

[scamandrius]

Pope Francis has recently ordered parishes to start including women in the Rite of the Washing of the Feet on Holy Thursady following the Mass...

No.

http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2016/01/21/francis-changes-the-rules-women-can-have-their-feet-washed-on-holy-thursday/

This article says should, which is not the same as could.  I see potest clearly in the document.

"potest" means "can." => Qui coetus constare potest ex viris et mulieribus, et convenienter ex iuvenibus et senibus, sanis et aegrotis, clericis, consecratis, laicis. ("This group can consist of men and women, and fittingly of young and old, healthy and sick, clerics, consecrated, [and] laity.")

I know. I read and teach Latin.  My first learning of this was from an article where the changes were described as a should, which meant, to my mind, a command.  When Mor supplied the Latin text of the decree issued by Cardinal Sarah, i saw the potest.

[scamandrius]

Pope Francis has recently ordered parishes to start including women in the Rite of the Washing of the Feet on Holy Thursady following the Mass...

No.

http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2016/01/21/francis-changes-the-rules-women-can-have-their-feet-washed-on-holy-thursday/

This article says should, which is not the same as could.  I see potest clearly in the document.

"potest" means "can." => Qui coetus constare potest ex viris et mulieribus, et convenienter ex iuvenibus et senibus, sanis et aegrotis, clericis, consecratis, laicis. ("This group can consist of men and women, and fittingly of young and old, healthy and sick, clerics, consecrated, [and] laity.")

I wanted to say ^this, but I was worried about the backlash.  Scamandrius is, after all, a renowned Latinist.

Mor, you're an (edited). I teach Latin and classical Greek. I have never said that I was renowned. I am good at what I do, but I would NEVER claim renowned status. 

[scamandrius]

Regarding the original question, Pope Pius XII said in Mediator Dei:

“…the Sovereign Pontiff alone enjoys the right to recognize and establish any practice touching the worship of God, to introduce and approve new rites, as also to modify those he judges to require modification.” (no. 58)

This seems to be an explicit statement of what was de facto since the Council of Trent; I'm not sure if there is a similarly explicit earlier statement. I think such an attitude requires the definitions of papal supremacy and infallibility of 1870, so I rather doubt such an explicit statement of the pope's authority over the liturgy would be found.

Vatican II called for certain specific changes, but did not directly produce the new Missal of 1969. The "transitional" Missal of 1965 is the closest thing to the "Mass of Vatican II" - still essentially the Tridentine Mass, but with the changes mentioned by Vatican II - suppression of the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar and the Last Gospel, addition of an OT reading, some vernacular, etc. The revision of the Missal and the other books was entrusted to a special concilium by Pope Paul VI, who promulgated the revised books on his authority in Missale Romanum on April 3, 1969.

Thanks for the information.  And thanks for supplying the information without being a jerk about it like Mor and Len.



How many warnings have you received already for using such snarky ad hominems? Seeing that you still don't seem to get the message all these warnings are intended to communicate, I am escalating your warning status 25 points to a total of 38. Unless you want to keep receiving warnings, you are to cease resorting to personal attacks such as this and start relating to our posters in a much more consistently respectful manner. If you wish to appeal this warning, please PM me.

- PeterTheAleut
Section Moderator

[Mor Ephrem]

Mor, you're a jackass. I teach Latin and classical Greek. I have never said that I was renowned. I am good at what I do, but I would NEVER claim renowned status.

I know.  I claimed it. 

[scamandrius]

Mor, you're a jackass. I teach Latin and classical Greek. I have never said that I was renowned. I am good at what I do, but I would NEVER claim renowned status.

I know.  I claimed it.

I will claim what I earn for myself. I need nor desire any assistance from you.

[LenInSebastopol]

Regarding the original question, Pope Pius XII said in Mediator Dei:

“…the Sovereign Pontiff alone enjoys the right to recognize and establish any practice touching the worship of God, to introduce and approve new rites, as also to modify those he judges to require modification.” (no. 58)

This seems to be an explicit statement of what was de facto since the Council of Trent; I'm not sure if there is a similarly explicit earlier statement. I think such an attitude requires the definitions of papal supremacy and infallibility of 1870, so I rather doubt such an explicit statement of the pope's authority over the liturgy would be found.

Vatican II called for certain specific changes, but did not directly produce the new Missal of 1969. The "transitional" Missal of 1965 is the closest thing to the "Mass of Vatican II" - still essentially the Tridentine Mass, but with the changes mentioned by Vatican II - suppression of the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar and the Last Gospel, addition of an OT reading, some vernacular, etc. The revision of the Missal and the other books was entrusted to a special concilium by Pope Paul VI, who promulgated the revised books on his authority in Missale Romanum on April 3, 1969.

Thanks for the information.  And thanks for supplying the information without being a jerk about it like Mor and Len.

How many warnings have you received already for using such snarky ad hominems? Seeing that you still don't seem to get the message all these warnings are intended to communicate, I am escalating your warning status 25 points to a total of 38. Unless you want to keep receiving warnings, you are to cease resorting to personal attacks such as this and start relating to our posters in a much more consistently respectful manner. If you wish to appeal this warning, please PM me.

- PeterTheAleut
Section Moderator

Peter, I am a regular guy which to a Latin teacher means a jerk, however you are right. He just picked up on my pain-driven, curt response to what seemed like a complicated question; what was bothersome was the 'hidden agenda' behind the innocent query.
BTW, he'a also right, I am a jerk, as is known, so stating the obvious was a redundancy.

[scamandrius]

Regarding the original question, Pope Pius XII said in Mediator Dei:

“…the Sovereign Pontiff alone enjoys the right to recognize and establish any practice touching the worship of God, to introduce and approve new rites, as also to modify those he judges to require modification.” (no. 58)

This seems to be an explicit statement of what was de facto since the Council of Trent; I'm not sure if there is a similarly explicit earlier statement. I think such an attitude requires the definitions of papal supremacy and infallibility of 1870, so I rather doubt such an explicit statement of the pope's authority over the liturgy would be found.

Vatican II called for certain specific changes, but did not directly produce the new Missal of 1969. The "transitional" Missal of 1965 is the closest thing to the "Mass of Vatican II" - still essentially the Tridentine Mass, but with the changes mentioned by Vatican II - suppression of the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar and the Last Gospel, addition of an OT reading, some vernacular, etc. The revision of the Missal and the other books was entrusted to a special concilium by Pope Paul VI, who promulgated the revised books on his authority in Missale Romanum on April 3, 1969.

Thanks for the information.  And thanks for supplying the information without being a jerk about it like Mor and Len.

How many warnings have you received already for using such snarky ad hominems? Seeing that you still don't seem to get the message all these warnings are intended to communicate, I am escalating your warning status 25 points to a total of 38. Unless you want to keep receiving warnings, you are to cease resorting to personal attacks such as this and start relating to our posters in a much more consistently respectful manner. If you wish to appeal this warning, please PM me.

- PeterTheAleut
Section Moderator

Peter, I am a regular guy which to a Latin teacher means a jerk, however you are right. He just picked up on my pain-driven, curt response to what seemed like a complicated question; what was bothersome was the 'hidden agenda' behind the innocent query.
BTW, he'a also right, I am a jerk, as is known, so stating the obvious was a redundancy.

What hidden agenda?  It was a simple question, nothing more.

[LenInSebastopol]

Regarding the original question, Pope Pius XII said in Mediator Dei:

“…the Sovereign Pontiff alone enjoys the right to recognize and establish any practice touching the worship of God, to introduce and approve new rites, as also to modify those he judges to require modification.” (no. 58)

This seems to be an explicit statement of what was de facto since the Council of Trent; I'm not sure if there is a similarly explicit earlier statement. I think such an attitude requires the definitions of papal supremacy and infallibility of 1870, so I rather doubt such an explicit statement of the pope's authority over the liturgy would be found.

Vatican II called for certain specific changes, but did not directly produce the new Missal of 1969. The "transitional" Missal of 1965 is the closest thing to the "Mass of Vatican II" - still essentially the Tridentine Mass, but with the changes mentioned by Vatican II - suppression of the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar and the Last Gospel, addition of an OT reading, some vernacular, etc. The revision of the Missal and the other books was entrusted to a special concilium by Pope Paul VI, who promulgated the revised books on his authority in Missale Romanum on April 3, 1969.

Thanks for the information.  And thanks for supplying the information without being a jerk about it like Mor and Len.

How many warnings have you received already for using such snarky ad hominems? Seeing that you still don't seem to get the message all these warnings are intended to communicate, I am escalating your warning status 25 points to a total of 38. Unless you want to keep receiving warnings, you are to cease resorting to personal attacks such as this and start relating to our posters in a much more consistently respectful manner. If you wish to appeal this warning, please PM me.

- PeterTheAleut
Section Moderator

Peter, I am a regular guy which to a Latin teacher means a jerk, however you are right. He just picked up on my pain-driven, curt response to what seemed like a complicated question; what was bothersome was the 'hidden agenda' behind the innocent query.
BTW, he'a also right, I am a jerk, as is known, so stating the obvious was a redundancy.

What hidden agenda?  It was a simple question, nothing more.

You make a fine point lost on jerks, which frees you from all hidden agendas.
In your initial post you opened with several observations utilizing historical issues which, according to Aristotelian logic, would allow a jerk to assume there would be a direction you are moving towards.
Clearly you don't know, but us jerks make errors in our assumptions. Frequency allows us to recover quickly as we attempt to move on.

[wgw]

The question is:  What are the pope's limits, if any, on making any changes, reforms, addenda, etc. to the liturgical rites of the Roman Catholic Church? 

The short answer is that there are no limits.

This should be manifestly clear by the fact that a pope within the last century promulgated an entirely new Missal.  In addition to that, he promulgated new rites for every sacrament, a new Divine Office, a new book of blessings, and a new calendar with a new lectionary.  He even went so far as to allow for certain Holy Days to be shifted, such as Epiphany and Ascension moving to Sundays. 

With the minor exception of a group of "traditionalists," the Latin Church was changed in every aspect of its liturgical life at the command of the pope.

But wasn't the Novus Ordo and the development of the New Missal done in conjunction with the hierarchs of the Second Vatican Council so it wasn't really the product of two men, i.e. Popes John XXIII and Paul VI?

It wasn't the product of two men, but neither was it the product of Vatican II.

From what one reads on New Liturgical Movement, much of what people love to hate anout it was the product of Cardinal Bugnali and his associates.  There is a (presumably apocryphal) story about Eucharistic Prayer II being composed from the Anaphora of the Apostolic Tradition of St. Hippolytus over lunch in a trattoria...

[PeterTheAleut]

Regarding the original question, Pope Pius XII said in Mediator Dei:

“…the Sovereign Pontiff alone enjoys the right to recognize and establish any practice touching the worship of God, to introduce and approve new rites, as also to modify those he judges to require modification.” (no. 58)

This seems to be an explicit statement of what was de facto since the Council of Trent; I'm not sure if there is a similarly explicit earlier statement. I think such an attitude requires the definitions of papal supremacy and infallibility of 1870, so I rather doubt such an explicit statement of the pope's authority over the liturgy would be found.

Vatican II called for certain specific changes, but did not directly produce the new Missal of 1969. The "transitional" Missal of 1965 is the closest thing to the "Mass of Vatican II" - still essentially the Tridentine Mass, but with the changes mentioned by Vatican II - suppression of the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar and the Last Gospel, addition of an OT reading, some vernacular, etc. The revision of the Missal and the other books was entrusted to a special concilium by Pope Paul VI, who promulgated the revised books on his authority in Missale Romanum on April 3, 1969.

Thanks for the information.  And thanks for supplying the information without being a jerk about it like Mor and Len.

How many warnings have you received already for using such snarky ad hominems? Seeing that you still don't seem to get the message all these warnings are intended to communicate, I am escalating your warning status 25 points to a total of 38. Unless you want to keep receiving warnings, you are to cease resorting to personal attacks such as this and start relating to our posters in a much more consistently respectful manner. If you wish to appeal this warning, please PM me.

- PeterTheAleut
Section Moderator

Peter, I am a regular guy which to a Latin teacher means a jerk, however you are right. He just picked up on my pain-driven, curt response to what seemed like a complicated question; what was bothersome was the 'hidden agenda' behind the innocent query.
BTW, he'a also right, I am a jerk, as is known, so stating the obvious was a redundancy.

What hidden agenda?  It was a simple question, nothing more.

You make a fine point lost on jerks, which frees you from all hidden agendas.
In your initial post you opened with several observations utilizing historical issues which, according to Aristotelian logic, would allow a jerk to assume there would be a direction you are moving towards.
Clearly you don't know, but us jerks make errors in our assumptions. Frequency allows us to recover quickly as we attempt to move on.

Stop this back-and-forth on jerks and hidden agendas, both of you, for it's off topic and contributes nothing to this thread. scamandrius, any more posts from you that feed this tangent will be rejected.