So we have still nearly the entire paper of Father Gregory, because yesterday we have only discussed him. He was in the first moment was very, very disappointed, and then he heard our tapes and then he was reconciled. We did it well, we did it well here. We thank you very much for the kind suggestion you made. But no, we have touched only three points, and there are many, many, many points for the offertory. Chalice prepared before Mass, just on these days in memorials and funerals. I would ask, why? Why do you wish to prepare the chalice before the Mass? It was so in the Middle Ages, in many Gallican liturgies, and today still, until today, until yesterday, the Dominican state, for the best. And the Greeks are doing it, but why? an undue importance to the authority.

[01:10]

Yes, you are right. Therefore, it would not be necessary, and he says it too, oh no, he does not say it, that it's not necessary to make this big procession. It would be quite possible to let all on the table, and then in a very simple way the acolyte brings it to the priest without underlining it, you are right. But as a matter of fact, the procession doesn't in that way, take up any time. While somebody has to put out the corporal. Yes. The developmental thing. And really, from the standpoint of time, and it varies, of course, with the different priests, who I call being the consistent priests. But it's the pouring of the water into the thing, and putting the bread on, that can take up, you know, Therefore, if it is allowed to say so, you can prepare the chalices before the Mass.

[02:12]

We do it in Rome so, we do it in Maria Laxo, therefore the wine is already in it. And then it's not necessary to do it on the altar, but an acolyte or a deacon or somebody could do it on the table, very quickly, but you must do it. because you remember this custom solemnly already presented and explained and defended by St. Cyprian, and it was also the reason why we in the Rome Commission retained it, because such a custom was found in every liturgy since the second century, used also in the suppers of the apostles. It's a real, only a meal custom, what do you say, a meal custom of the Jewish people. But because the Jewish people and our Lord and the first community did it, we retained it with the symbolic meaning explained by St. Cyprian in his famous letter, 63 and so on. Therefore, we must retain it, but we must not emphasize it.

[03:13]

We've also put, see, the real reason we have a bread bag is for the people to put their bread in. You can do it. Yes, yes, you are right, it's not necessary. Here you have any liberty to make it shorter, not to emphasize it. But the prayers said by the priests in a certain way are prescribed. Again, we were fighting against these prayers until the last moment. I can tell Some bishops wished it, we were discussing, I said it already yesterday, if we were against the old prayers because they were not right, anticipation of the canon, and they wished to do nothing, to present it as St. Justin says it, put it on the altar, saying nothing. But then the difficulty was if we don't give some prayers, most of the priests will not think nothing.

[04:20]

Therefore, it's better to present some prayers." We could not find them. So finally, again, we were meaning it's better not to say nothing. And the Pope again insisted, you need some prayers. So, in the last day, when we came to the final, after two or three years, we could not find a solution. We heard the Pope wishes to introduce this prayer, penitential rite of oratorial prayers and communion prayers. In the morning, I came to the Cardinal Good, the Prefect, and said, oh, your Eminence, I think, you must not think the Pope has spoken. Oh, yes, yes, yes, but I hope, I believe, you must not believe the Pope has spoken. For me, as a small, little, not important consultant, We were laughing, the Cardinal and I. We came to the session, and then there was a very tense situation. The youngest bishop then came and said, nearly some weeks or some months consecrated, we are not here to say yes.

[05:33]

We are here to expose our bishop's sentence. Let us say again, expose our difficulties to the Holy Father, and then he may decide, and we shall obey." And in this situation, the bishops voted, the great majority, against these prayers. And then the two of them, the Cardinal was disappointed, and the Bognini went out, and It was very right, so the Pope then, in peace, said, no, I believe it is better. I believe he was right, after some years now. But you must not make a great thing of these prayers, but you cannot take them away. You cannot leave out. How would you leave, what would be the practical way of doing it, if you had them on the credence table, the chalices, and then the acolyte would put the water in?

[06:35]

Yes, or some deacon normally, but also the acolyte. The priest could still be sitting at the chair saying ...? He could, yes, and then the acolyte brings the things to the altar, as you did it this morning, and the priest came to the altar, and then he must say, Otherwise, you can disobey, and nobody will hinder you. But it is better to say something in silence, sometimes also aloud, if you wish. I never like to say it aloud. I have no problem with the blessed are you, Lord. Isn't there a little prayer for pouring the water? Yes, and the acolyte or the deacon, the priest who is putting in water must say this prayer. Okay, and then the priest, you could do it together, also per se, you know, two prayers, but it's important. There are many possibilities to be free, to say what you like to say, but this scheme per se must be taken.

[07:50]

Per se must be taken. And it's not so bad. The difficulty is only, again, this prayer, blessed be your Lord, again is an anticipation of the canon, because the canon is this, blessed you are, oh Lord, thanks to your arch-arist humans, oh, and gracias, Agimo, Stevie, we thank you. But nevertheless, it's changed in a wonderful way, and in the end, I don't know who finally made it. And blessed are you, Lord. that it may be for us that bread and wine are real, in a certain kind of epithesis, which per se must be said in the canon. In any way, it is not very happy. Therefore, Monseigneur Wagner, per se responsible for the order, me say, is me, you, to say the most terrible words about this terrible mess. What do the impenetrable obey? Perhaps with time insisting to change and so on. And therefore, because this is not a wonderful creation, say it, I would say say it in obedience, but don't emphasize it, don't say it aloud.

[09:01]

You can sing, you can remain in silence. Sometimes the silence is very nice, because people sometimes are protesting, we never have a silence. Here is the silence. I have a question about disability here in the monastery about the ministry of leaders and acolytes. What do you think of St. Helen Martin gives one? The institution of roles would then have to be much better. Yes, quite a lot. You are doing it. But I'm saying, given the ministry, the ministry itself, the acolyte, You could, but I don't see the necessity to. It's a very difficult question. Per se, it would be possible to give the ministerium by the bishop or the abbot to these people which normally reads.

[10:06]

I don't know. then you must practically give this ministerium to everyone. And then again you are introducing clerical offices in the community. Why? You don't need that. It is not a clerical status, you are right, but nevertheless we are agreeing you can read without this ministry. You can read, also a woman can read, you don't need. These ministries have no meaning because all what you give in these ministries, you can do it without a ministry. And people receive it only for two, three months to go on to become deacon. Nevertheless, we provided the possibilities to some mature man, Sakhistan and so on, who always are reading in the Parish Church, you can give this ministry by the Bishop, it's true, without any obligation that then he must be nourished by the Church, but to a man who always is reading in the Parish Church, where you don't have the possibility to change every day, but here you can change every day, you don't need it.

[11:23]

and to give to the entire community the ministry, to make them lectors, accolades, that would be, I would say, in a minor form, again, a clericalism. On the way to the next step, this is Abraham and Mavis Deacon. Nevertheless, you could say we need two... No. Everyone is changing. Therefore, you cannot say we need two lectors. No, I didn't mean that. I didn't mean to restrict. Therefore, because everyone can do it without a ministry, I would say don't give it. But you must give it to the people who become deacon and priest. It's a station, a step. I have a feeling that recently we went to the, we removed the insistent three pillars.

[12:28]

Then you had three people around the altar, plus the one beneath the tree. There was four people around there, you know, and it was not needed. But now I feel that we're doing just the opposite. Now we're only one, you know, only the Acolyte is there, and we're waiting for the Acolyte's job. You are waiting. But this morning you waited. And I had the impression it's very nice, very nice, because you are waiting preparing yourself and solemnly, in a certain day, in a certain solemnity. No, it's not too solemn. The priest sitting down, and this is one thing that we want to avoid, because in some ways he doesn't need a servant. You know, now that the Agha has become his servant, now, you know, Father Haydn was ready to go, and then he went back. No, because he was deliberating it, but he does not need a servant.

[13:34]

That is not a servant, that is a minister for the entire community, preparing this wonderful table in which we are eating and drinking. For example, remember in the old Good Friday, when after this first solemn prayer in silence and Fr. Reiffel made it in Maria Lafayette with the biggest solemnity according to the Order Romanus. Then some acolytes came and solemnly spread the, how do you say, the order, the propaganda order. It's not so bad. Yeah, it sounds too much like that. We are waiting for him and Fr. Martin could do the same thing, you know, with him and wait. No, no, but he can come in and open his book and go around and that's where the Red Scarf brings the, what's that, the troglodyte and one of the scouts over there, and he takes it and puts it in the handgun. But at the same time, you are gaining the possibility for the entire community to wait together with the priest in silence

[14:37]

not looking to it. Meanwhile, the acolyte is preparing the altar and the gifts, and we are all waiting, preparing in spirit, praying, we must prepare ourselves, that all this preparation could be the preparation of my soul to shine in the solemn celebration of the Eucharist. We have that tendency. No, no, no, it must not. like last week for me it was the very first Sebastian would come and I remember in the old kind of harbouring courtroom then you stand for the corporal and you have to hold it this way you know but when Sebastian makes it this way, Kermit comes right down and unfolds this way instead of you know this way there and unfolds so simple and you know and you know the entire thing is wrong ah so you think that the government is wrong yeah and you see and then For the corporeal, for example, in LARP we make it so.

[15:43]

It may be allowed to give the example of LARP because Van Ariffel is doing it still, at least from the background, because he himself don't wish to interfere anymore. Therefore we have no corporeals. we have normal altar clothes and then we put on these normal altar clothes and Kopparale before the Mass which covers the entire altar for all the celestials. Therefore, during the Mass there is no preparation of Kopparale anymore. The altar is before the Mass prepared. And then we are waiting until the gifts are brought. Lee brings them part of it and some of us brings the gifts to the author. I was reading one thing about one of the other kinds of increase also in that work.

[16:47]

Per se, you are right. Per se, there must be a deacon, because we don't have a deacon. Also in Maria Lack, we take a priest, assistant priest, who puts the water in the wine and who helps a little bit. But here, in this situation, my personal feeling is to wait together with the priest. The priest is waiting together with the community. Meanwhile, an acolyte, an assistant, you can say this assistant is more or less this assistant priest. You don't need for it really the priestly dignity, you can do it also as a lay monk. Therefore, this is very nice, it gives this happy feeling we have no hurry, we have time, we can prepare ourselves, we can pray. And the time is very short, and you don't need to see. But on the other side, you can see because there is also a symbolic presentation. You must prepare yourself. You are admonished by these symbols, by this preparation.

[17:54]

You are preparing yourself for the word, therefore he brings the book. You are preparing yourselves for the celebration, for the sacrament, therefore he brings the gifts. And then the priest comes and says a last word in silent praying. taking it for a moment, presenting it to God, or you can do it, presenting it to God, that it may become for us the food of life and so on. And then he immediately starts again, per se, the lavabo. We were fighting until the last moment against the Lavabo. Here, perhaps not the Pope, but some conservative people wished to introduce it, because it has no meaning. We washed our hands before, and we did not touch nothing, and therefore it's not necessary. But the symbolic meaning of this word was wished by so many that finally it was introduced again. against our dispositions to do it.

[18:57]

You did it yesterday, today not? Okay, fine, good. I believe you did not do it. But you did it, I have seen it, yes. And therefore you must do it. And then your invitation. And here Now somebody said, I don't know who said it, you perhaps? No, no, [...] no And for the amusement, how do you say amusement, for the great pleasure of the entire bus, we were fighting as much as we can fight, crying. He defends the Orat de Fratres, he, a very revolutionary progressive man, and I was against it.

[20:02]

We both lost our throats. Therefore, you see, there are different points. Finally, there is a compromise. You must say you cannot leave it out, as you are doing it. And then there is, per se, there must be the answer. In my monastery, in Germany, the bishops don't wish the answer. Therefore, we are only inviting, and immediately follows the secret. You said it too soon, or somebody said it too soon. Orate fratres, silence, continuation, without the answer. Because all these answers are German-French addition after the Ordo Romanus Primus. And in a certain way we were in our first preparation against these German-French elements, to go back to the old classic Roman liturgy. But then the conservative elements said, yes, we are agreeing, but not totally. some elements of the Middle-Age must be retained because they are not bad.

[21:06]

Perhaps there is some truth in it. It is not necessary to destroy the entire Middle-Age. He says there must be an invitation of Rathafratres, some angel, as it is always I don't remember his reasons, but in every way he is defending this introduction. For the moment we must retain it. Here, Gregory, Father Gregory, is more revolutionary. When bread and wine are on the altar, Celebrant immediately says prayer over the gift. No prayer over the gift. You cannot do that. No orate fratres, no prayer over the gift.

[22:08]

It would be very nice, and it was our intention to do so, but no, if you do so, then you go against the explicit last votation of this entire World Commission. Finally, we were discussing, per se, you must not know it, we were discussing, you are right, your idea is splendid, but then, after all this discussion, the Pope, and we were agreeing, we are ready to obey, Therefore, Pope and Commission were deciding so, and no, it would be very, very unlawful, unlawful, yes, unlawful, if you know, go back to things that were not accepted. Here is the difficulty. These ideas are all marvelous, but you cannot do it now, because we reacted. up on long discussions where we have seen the rightness of these positions. Okay.

[23:13]

Was that an April decision? Yes, yes. Therefore we were in a certain way against all these three subjective elements, penitential right, offertorium prayers, and communion prayers. All things are German-French additions. Nothing is old, nothing is classic. And here again, after discussion, so the bishops were a little bit divided, we must find the last decision. And in this last decision, the poor Pope said, also I have a voice. And he gave this last decision. And then we were finally agreeing. What do you mean you were agreeing that he had a last voice, or you were agreeing that he was right? No, the situation was so the bishops were divided. A certain majority was finally in our opinion, against these prayers. And in this decision, the Pope, perhaps influenced by some of his good friends, said, I wish to introduce and to retain these subjective prayers of the German Frankish, in just a notice terms about this German Frankish situation.

[24:26]

And then we were, the bishops, again, last time with their votation, majority voting against it, but ready to obey. And then the Pope says, no. after having regarded all, don't go with this small majority, but in the other way, by pastoral reasons. And I think he was. Today, after years, I think he was right. It's not so bad. But you must not make a great, how do you say, hurry of doing a great thing of these prayers, as he sometimes himself is doing it very wrongly, because his counselors are not good. When he is celebrating, he says aloud, and with the microphone you hear it in the entire St. Peter's Church, these private prayers. It's not necessary to say them aloud. Without microphone, nobody hears it in silence. don't realize that. Especially the prayers before communion must never be said aloud, but he says it in the microphone, you can hear it.

[25:35]

So if you can go on, it's the next point. You don't agree? No? Yeah, say your opinion. Say it. Well, I mean, it's a ridiculous thing, because it's just a feeling that I had. It's not going to go away. It's just that sometimes the Pope is so arbitrary, it seems to me. He's not arbitrary. No, no, [...] no. You can say it. But he is the entire group of people that he's called together to advise and to advise the bishops. When the entire group of people goes for one particular thing, and then they say, no... Yeah, you cannot say entire group. No, no, no. In this commission, first, the bishops, the majority have been for these prayers.

[26:44]

And then we, the consultants, were insisting, comparting, discussing, insisting in the bishops, finally a small majority was of our opinion, of the consultors. The younger people and so on, and perhaps also we saw more the historical situations. And therefore for years we could not find a unity. And finally the Pope, according to the rule of St. Benedict, did not choose the majority. mathematically, but he was tasting the power of other men. And so, he then said, if you are regarding the history, St. Justin says, gifts are brought, presented, then immediately over the gifts the Eucharistic prayer, nothing Oratio Supra Oblata, nothing Orato Fratres. Immediately over the gifts, the great Eucharistic prayer as the Oriental Church is still doing it, so we wished to have it too.

[27:48]

But then after the fourth century, you find in Rome the Oratio Supra Oblata, the first Then very quickly, in the Ordinus Romanum, you find these little additions, orate, fratres, and so on. And then you find, after the ninth century, these prayers, this terrible prayers going on, never, never enough, growing, growing. Pius V shortened it, only two or three. we took them away. But something, according to this entire always growing tradition, could be retained by pastoral reasons. You know, it's the argument of the Pope. He is following the tradition, following the tendency of this tradition, and creating prayers which are not so bad by pastoral reasons. No. A certain unity must be found for the scheme. You are free in other points, but not in the scheme.

[28:49]

Therefore, today, the entire world church is insisting to do so. Your English translation is insisting in the same point. It would be difficult now to go back to our decisions made by many consultants, by the same reason which you are feeling. Your feeling, although our feeling was so. But no, we must We must change, we must obey to enjoy our liberty in other points, but not here precisely. And again I would say, if you don't do it, then the entire celebration is made well, is okay. Terrible are things which are made in the underground, where other things are made, terrible things. If you don't do it, therefore, it's not so important. And nevertheless, also in this not important things, I would say it would be better to take the normal scheme and help ourselves with silence, not emphasizing it and so on.

[29:51]

And then, if you are having, we can go on, Eucharistic prayer with preface. Here he says only, on this day, memoria inferia, we always use Canon 2. If you allow it, I would say I don't see the reason to use every day Canon 2, as we are doing in my monastery. Here I prefer the custom of Sant'Anselmo, that we are changing every day, also in weekdays, because we have so many weekdays. This monotony for a great part comes from this custom that we in all our weekdays, and there are so many now, memorial days, the greater part of the year is only memorial days, that we always say this short Canon 2. Very nice, but too short, and always too much the same. Therefore I would say, why not sometimes very often Canon 4? which per se cannot be used on high feasts because you cannot change the preface for it.

[31:05]

Why is that? Because on Sundays you must use a special, greater preface. Per se, it's not excluded on normal Sundays to take Canon 4, but it's a preface. But you cannot take it on Christmas, on Easter. Because here there is a certain unity. In the beginning, it's especially Thanksgiving for the divinity itself and for the creation, and then the history of salvation in the canon itself. You would destroy the unity of this eucharistic prayer if you would take another preface for canon core. But nevertheless, you can say that in Rome, one day, Canon 1. Why not Canon 1? Roman Canon, which is very nice. Sometimes, you know, Canon 2, Canon 3, Canon 4. Then you have every day already for four days change. We find, I find, if we say no after so many years, again the Canon, a young lay liturgist, he says the Roman Canon is a potpourri galican.

[32:20]

a potpourri, you know it, a Gallican potpourri. And Louis Bougier and Dom Botteux are fighting against this expression. There are some limits in the Roman canon. It's not very perfect, but nevertheless, it's a wonderful thing, not abstaining its limits. Therefore, from time to time, to take it is very, very nice. Well, what would be the ideal planet for Saint Simon? three, or four, or the order of one. One, three, four. One, three, four. Two is too short on Sundays, I think. Nevertheless, if you have spoken too long, then you can also take Canon 2. Don't you think that the reason here for wanting to use Canon 2 the most is for the pure fact that it's shorter? OK. Stopwatch can read all four channels, especially... I'm not agreeing with that.

[33:29]

I'm just saying that I think that's the reason. It is purely the fact that a pistol evens war. We're beginning to get out of that. Marsili in Rome says, Canon 2 is a little bit too short. Canon 3 is nothing else than a classwork of a part of a magazine. exercise the paper of Father Fagargini. It's true, he made it. And therefore he says Canon 4 is the best. The second is destroyed because we changed the real canon of liberalism. It's no longer the same. Therefore in a certain way especially very often the preface is taken away, then it is really mutilated, destroyed. And Canon 4 is very well made, also by Baccarat. You know, we made it all together. Nevertheless, it's very well made. And Canon 1st. Therefore, Canon 2 and Canon 3, which are mostly used, are not so bad, not so good.

[34:34]

Nevertheless, also good. Therefore, changing, changing. But using all the 1 and 4. Is it so terrible to use another practice? Per se, also, again, it's not terrible. But nevertheless, it is against the explicit rubric, and it is against the tendency of the composer who wishes to have a totality. And this totality is not given. Nevertheless, you are right, in the canon itself, there is also a certain totality. You are beginning again, therefore, if you do it. Here, it is not so much the obedience. I like also the obedience to the Roman prescriptions, to the prescriptions of the universal church. But in these prescriptions, in these laws, there is some spiritual truth in it. It is prescribed because the intention of the composers, of the redactors, was to give this totality.

[35:38]

You know, I can tell you too, if it's not too long, we wish to have a fifth canon in the first beginning. And we propose for this fifth, the prayer of Saint Basil in the form of Alexandria. perhaps, according to the modern research, the oldest of the oriental canons. And we liked it very much. And then we were discussing, can we do that if we, with time, must translate it in modern languages? Then we have the explicit epictesis to change this bread and wine in body and blood of our Lord after the consecration. Can we say that in the presence of our faithfuls, We cannot because our papers would be scandalized. They are bowing down for the consecration and then still praying, send your Holy Spirit to me to change this breath in the body. It's difficult to explain it. Then we thought it would be possible perhaps to put this epiphysis before the consecration.

[36:57]

We cannot do that, because then our Oriental brothers will say, you terrible Latin people, you don't believe in the rightness, in the reality of our form. Therefore, we were voting 50-50, and then the Pope said, no, it's better not to do it. This was dangerous, perhaps with time. Because our actual theology tends to say consecration is made by the entire canon. where are two important points, epiphysis and consecration and nevertheless we are adoring already the gifts after the consecration, so for our occidental mentality, logical mentality, it is better to have the epiphysis before the consecration but here there is no difficulty and now in point six Our father, with introduction, immediately followed by, for thine is the kingdom.

[38:04]

You could say, in a certain way, we spoke about it already yesterday, discussing your points. In a certain way, for thine is the kingdom is already the embolism. In the first moment, we, the Germans, were proposing this form of our beloved Protestant Separated Brethren as the unique embolism. But then again, a certain traditional element wished to have some prayers which are in every Latin liturgy. Spanish, Gallican, Roman, and so on. Here again, I would say, why do you wish to suppress and liberate the North-Western and the East-West. Why? Why does he propose it? To shorten? No, there's no reason. Therefore, I would say again, why not take this old traditional form, which now is shortened.

[39:07]

It's not more so long, the sense-eye excluded, and so on. I would not counsel to omit this thing. And also, if somebody becomes a bishop, then you must also, in the presence of this bishop, omit. If you are changing in the presence of a bishop or some other dangerous person, then you are not sincere. You are not sincere. you cannot do it you cannot do it i think in the secrets and not do it in the in you know you must do all that's the same and i think again after our father and taxology first element immediately says the piece of the lot and all

[40:14]

exchange the pugs without the peace prayer. Here again, your feeling is right. You were fighting against these prayers. Subjective prayers made obligatory only by pious defeat. Until this time, it was quite free to do it. And she said many prayers. It was introduced, and we were discussing. And now after discussions, finally the decision was made to say one prayer aloud. And so that repeats prayer silently. Oh yes, you could. Even if a bishop or some other dangerous person was here. Well, I must say, I did not yet realize that you don't say it. Or did you say it? I don't know.

[41:15]

Oh, I see. Okay. Well, therefore, I beg your pardons. And then Lamb of God and Fraction, okay. And then immediately after Lamb of God or Breaking of Hosts, First Celebrant says, this is the Lamb of God or the formula he chooses. And all reply, Lord, I am not worthy. Therefore, he proposed to omit the Preparation Prayer. In a certain way, it's ridiculous to say this prayer. You are right. But nevertheless, the idea was, also perhaps the bonum commune, the common good is suggesting to do it. The idea was if we don't propose at least one or two prayers, the greater part of priests will not think nothing. The danger is to do it, it's really so. There is only a meal where we are sitting and eating and drinking together. Some remembering that we are doing, we must not fear the body of our Lord.

[42:21]

Nevertheless, it is a pricton mysterium, a terrible mystery. It's the body of our Lord. It's dangerous. Therefore I would say Say it in silence, give a moment of peace, of silence. The faithful are in a wonderful situation, they can pray what they like to pray. The first celebrant must say it. You can say it in peace, in silence. In Rome we are doing it very slowly and we have a moment of time. or the priest must wait to the Lamb of God until it is finished and so on. Again, I think in all these decisions which have been made against the opinions of these Havanguadis, of these progressive liturgists, there is some pastoral feeling.

[43:24]

And for the good of the entire church, it would be better that everyone is conforming himself to this pastoral feeling, doing it. It's not so bad. But you can protest against it. And he proposed no communion song on these days. But then he made a notice, given the number of communicants at Mount Sevio, a communion song is probably appropriate, and I think so. Again, I must say, our custom in Maria Lark is to sing in Latin still the antiphons of the new missal, according to the distribution of the Ordo Cantus Missae. Therefore, every day is given from the treasure of the old Roman gradual tradition a corresponding antiphon.

[44:26]

Corresponding to the Gospel of today, this Antiphon is changing from day to day, during the entire year. And you are singing the Antiphon in which you are singing a motif of the Gospel, realized in the Communion. Here we meet our Lord who heals us because we are blind. He touches us and He heals us because our faith is great. In the Communion, there's a wonderful realization of the mystery which we are celebrating. You have the tendency, so far as I have seen, to sing a canticle of praise, thanksgiving, or encountering the Lord, and because you don't have many, you have a feeling that it's always the same. Or is it not so? I'm not sure. Have you changed this? which is just public now, but this can, this Bordeaux was public before.

[45:32]

But the new Graduale Romanum is corresponding to the Ordo Cantus Missae. They are only printing what it is, Ordo Cantus Missae is set in numbers. The only difficulty is, it is in Latin. Therefore, again, you don't understand it. Yes, it's a difficulty. Oh, you are understanding it, but the people don't understand. So far I don't know the solution, but nevertheless I feel you cannot omit in this great assembly a song. Oh, you can? Yes, and sometimes also a silence could be very nice. Pious and edifying, it's an impressive silence, yes. Normally I would prefer this song. You are free. and in every case the silence after it. And then again, prayer after communion at the chair of the first celibate is quite possible. You are not obliged to go to the altar.

[46:34]

You couldn't do it. You must not. In Mirialak we don't go to the altar. The first celibate leaves the altar after having distributed Holy Communion, kisses it, goes to his chair, Remaining in silence of a sign, he sees the player. You have many possibilities to do that, what you are preferring. In our side it is very nice if you are going to the altar, inviting by this movement everyone to rise up. And then he is bringing it all together. The above arrangement involves a silent sign of the cross. omission of penitential rites, omission of offertory prayers, lavabo, pray brevon, therefore he is very strong against your practice and against what I was known to say, omission of embodiment prayer for peace, and prayer before communion.

[47:44]

The Abbot Primate liked the above arrangement very much and used it himself when he celebrated Mass for us. Therefore, you can't do it. And the primate was quite right. He cannot change immediately the right. And then he must say, as I am said, it was our opinion to do so. Your feeling is right. But my difficulty is, can you, after that we felt, we feel, after our feeling, can you still know after all these decisions go back? I don't believe that you can. you can't protest against this central authority. My question is again, I don't believe it is convenient to protest, because at least since the fourth century, you remember this African Council of 393 in presence of St. Augustine, non utantuo orationibus novica factis,

[48:51]

Nobody must use the new prayers, the Eucharistic prayer on the altar, without having discuss them with instructiores fratres, with brothers who are better instructors, or bishops. Therefore, Correggio fraterna. Don't use liturgical prayers. Don't do nothing on the altar without having discussed it with your brother, or the bishops, the priests. And this fraterna correggio robbery collection, during the centuries was given to a central authority. And this central authority, finally the Pope, the Congregation of the Knights, gave his entire, nearly his, nearly, not totally, his entire power to this commission composed by bishops of the entire world, held by consultants of the entire world. And he then finally gave some final decisions.

[49:53]

Couldn't we go against this fraterna correctio made in such a wonderful way according to our tradition? That would be the hope would be that this is not the end of the world. Yes, they laughed for quite a while. No, no, no, no. But for the moment I think it would be better for certain reasons also to give us a certain peace. I'm very surprised that people are constantly attempting and attempting and all the time attempting it and it never really comes alive. You are right. To help in this situation I would think at least for 5, 10, 20 years let us use this mess book which was made with so many difficulties. Especially because if you are using it really, you have so many possibilities for spontaneity.

[51:01]

Use them. But in these certain points, in these fundamental points, in the order of Mises, I would more or less, I guess, I would really follow the order of Mises given by the Pope. Do the penitential rite. Use it. And because we are sinners. I told you already, I don't know, sometimes I'm repeating things. I was speaking openly as a consultant against the penitential right, saying, yes, we need penance, but we must do it on Saturday night or in the morning of Sunday. And this wonderful Yugoslavian bishop, a Bavarian bishop, how do we say in English? A bishop of some 12 priestly dioceses and many, [...] many... Yes, peasants. Peasants, yes. He's himself a very strong man. He said to me, Father, I have my faithful only on Sunday with me, and I wish to do penance with them. That's good, because we can do penance if we do penance on Saturday night, but the people cannot do it.

[52:04]

They need it in the church, in the Mass itself, otherwise they don't do it. The tendency is now, for many who are using it, to dispense, right? It's enough, we don't need to go to confession. It's a new exaggeration. But the whole caste law, the whole literature, the whole world, and there was a transition of the center of influence, of energy, from monks to Buddhists. Pastoral feeling. Yes, you are right, but nevertheless we can say most of our liturgical principles was accepted. But it is true that in the last years the pastoral involvement was growing very strongly.

[53:07]

The liturgical movement, at least since the second war and since Assisi, the great conference, was made very pastoral, so pastoral that many now are protesting against element too much pastoral, and we are very often saying, we, the monks, we don't need these pastoral elements. Yes, in a certain way you can say so, but if you are celebrating the Sunday and also during the week with faithfuls, you must also accept this pastoral elements, you need them also yourself. But nevertheless, with time, perhaps after 20 years, you can discuss it again and then think, we, the monks, we have so many possibilities, Kompline and... Nevertheless, we took away prime, we took away Kompline. We have no more exam of conscience. When do we penance?

[54:08]

in our monastic tale today, the Psalms, but all this is too general. Here we have a moment where we every day in the Mass itself can make our exam and so on, and if we are doing it well, really, that would be the same as we did it 50 years ago when we must go to confession every week. was too much. Now every day we must go to confession, but every day we must at least think we are sinners, at mercy of this. Yesterday was not very good, and so on, and so on. Exam, very short. And then okay, we are prepared. The difficulty of this modern evolution is only, we don't need never anymore the confession. because this right is giving entirely sacramental absolutionist right. But this act, penitential right, is inviting us to do penance, to have an act of contrition.

[55:13]

And according to our traditional doctrine, with the act of contrition, every sin is taken away. Also big sins. Nevertheless, mortal sins must be confessed. But nevertheless, this act of contrition takes away the sins of what we are called part. Therefore, I would say again, more or less, let us follow this order with elasticity, using all this possibility to change, not to do the same, to change the words, to introduction. For example, if you are every day using another formula for the introduction to our father, it's quite right, because the missile itself gives at least three, four, five examples not to oblige us to do it, but he is a model. Do it so, so, and so. You can do it so, so, and so. Because the most of us are not able to do it, we have four formula.

[56:15]

But, you know, the monks must be able. The poor priests are not able to do it, but we are able to do it. Let us hope so. Father, in Europe, is there much preaching done from the chair? In Europe? Chair? No, no, no. The chair is finished. The chair or the pulpit. No, what do you mean? I don't know if we can see it. It says that you can preach from the chair or from the pulpit. One of the two. The bed is the bench. The person, a priest's chair. Normally in Europe, we are praying there where is the microphone. The microphone sometimes stays on the ambo, what do we say? pulpit, and sometimes stays on the chair. It's quite the same. It depends on the local situation sometimes. And sometimes we prefer the pulpit because we are nearer to the faithfuls. That is the only reason. You must have some contact. But never anymore from the big council.

[57:18]

What's that council? The big council, as we had it formerly. Three meters over the heads. Sometimes touching the Holy Ghost on the top. It's not likely that there will be once again something like a monastic greatness. Yes. It's difficult to say. The difficulties against the new missile are the difficulties especially of the Abbot of Hong Kong Po and the Cistercians who wish to have a monastic right. And this idea per se is not bad. And we could try to find this monastic right. Yes, many have these ideas. Only he took the way which is terribly false. He said, because we wish to have not the pastoral missile of Paul VI, we are retaining the monastic missile of Pius V. It was forbidden to him.

[58:23]

But for the moment there is no monastic right. Again, I ask you, where are the monastic elements you wish to have? I don't know. since we are in one sense the way that is the majesty, maybe the last holy and living way, and so our external existence is conditioned. Yes. Therefore, for example, you could say in a certain way, because we are praying the entire day, we must abbreviate the introduction. Yeah. That's true. You can say so. In short, yes. No, no, no. There is, so far as I know, there is no mass riot today with the exception of the Carthusians. And the Carthusians too were invited to reform their things and also say, because what they did are terrible French-German things.

[59:30]

Frankish German, medieval. And this rite of the Carthusians seems to us old, because he is older than Pius V, very venerable as the Cistercian rites. But all these rites, Cistercians, Dominicans, the Carthusians, are awful things of the Middle Age, of the 10th century already, very venerable. Also, these peoples must change to an older, a classic form. And therefore, the Dominicans already freely put it away. The Cistercians were not allowed to take all their minutes here as they wished. They can insist because they had a proper right. We never had a proper right. And Bonini and the Congregation say it's because you never, the Benedictines, had a proper right, therefore today you must follow, as you did it before, the Roman right. in Switzerland.

[60:34]

They had really a proper right already 20, 30 years ago. Also, they left it in the 16th, 17th century. But at least they restored it. Therefore, with a certain right, they can say, we wish to retain our monastic uses. Also here, the monastic use of the serpents are medieval, French, German, incense. They say, I don't kneel, very fine, only bowing. So, they start doing it. And here again, where are monastic elements? You could say, abbreviating, if you say, as somebody in these days said, we hear so much of the word of God. It's too much. Let us take it away. but I believe that you can never hear enough the word of God. Vigils, laws, mass, retractory, it's not too much. But you can do it as Father Raphael who reads the entire Holy Scripture in one, two years, in choir, mass, and retractory.

[61:45]

You can compose it together in a wonderful order. but this is one of his most wonderful works and always arranged in all the scriptures so that you are beginning individuals, continuing dinner, continuing supper, and sometimes continuing company, and so it's not too much. And where are monastic rights? For example, here for the prudential right, I would say to where is in our monastic daily life today still, after the renovations, a place for penance. Only in the mass. Privately, yes, but you must do this. The Council was insisting in the communitarian aspect of penance. You must do it. But you don't have it. You are right.

[62:48]

There is a real chapter. We could say, as we did before Vatican, ten years ago, you are not obliged to make them immediately after the Penitentiary. You made it already. Nevertheless, you must think to your faithfuls, who have not been present. You can say you must exclude the faithfuls, and you can do many things. But you don't wish to exclude the faithfuls. You, here, in Monsevier, you are insisting very much on inviting them. And therefore, penitential night, you are not insisting every day in this ideal, let us discuss our conscience. But you say it in various forms. You put an ideal, and you are able enough to confront yourself with this ideal today, love, compassion, is enough to say, did I have yesterday compassion? in this silence.

[63:49]

Therefore here, the penitential right could be made in so many different ways that it's not tiresome to do it. And therefore again I would say, let us try to follow these rights after so many difficulties, at least for 20 years. And let us hope that in these 10 and 20 years we can change what was not made well. and not retain it again 400 years as we did it with the missile of Pius V. There were special reasons, Protestant Reformation. The mentality today is entirely different. But it is for the moment also to fight against these accelerations of the progressives.

[64:39]

@Transcribed_v004
@Text_v004
@Score_JI