A worship aid with four-part harmony on the hymns!

A worship aid with four-part harmony on the hymns!

Is there any other (sensible) way?

The best of all possible worlds.

Ha! Forgive me: I don't know why, but Candide popped into my mind as I read your complimentary words, Kathy. This ordination, though, and all of which it is the fulfillment are certainly not satire! It may be one of the most profound events in the Church in five hundred years.

The Alleluia is interesting...

...on several counts...

We have been observing the 'gesimas' these past several weeks and using the tracts (full Palmer-Burgess versions!) instead of alleluya. It seemed fitting to me that we should sing alleluyas on Candlemas and at this historic ordination. I suspect, though, that this was a bow to the 'ordinary time' custom of the Roman usage that is normal at this point in time.

On another count -Oh! If only we would be using the Palmer-Burgess alleluyas! Our rector and our choirmaster, both of whom I genuinely esteem, are aware that I abhor these cute little happy-clappy triple alleluyas which do not belong at mass, even though the rest of the Roman Catholic Church jolly well does them anyway thank you. We, of all people, should hold to our custom of singing one alleluya (as found in the AUG, or one of the simpler Gregorian ones) with its jubilus at mass. This custom was broken last fall when we suddenly started doing these trendy terse triple alleluyas. I hope that liturgical taste and our own heritage will be restored soon. I must say it again: a triple alleluya (with jubilus!) is unique to the Easter Vigil. In fact, there is a remarkable and profound symmetry which inheres only during the Triduum between the three Ecce lignums of Good Friday, the three lumen Christis which begin the Easter Vigil, and the three (rather elaborate!) alleluyas that acclaim the Easter gospel. At all other masses there is but one alleluya with its all-important jubilus, which is an ecstatic sigh of love and praise for the sacred Name of Yah-weh.

Yes, I know that.
Our choirmaster is an admirer of his and, I believe, studied with him.
For me, though, it will take far more than Marier's provenance to legitimise this tacky custom. (And, I think that Dr Marht would agree in this matter.) Nor do I mean any disrespect for Marier! He did so very many things that were good and commendable, but this wasn't one of them.

(deleted)

Which hymnal does this Ordinariate community use? the 1940? the 1982?

I hope they'll post a link to the video soon!

As is nearly always the case with televised Masses, I wish the commentators would have hushed up and let us listen to what seemed to be very beautiful music.

I thought of the triple Alleluia too.

It is funny you mention that. Due to limitations of time, the Gradual & Tract for our Candlemas were set to Anglican chant (Franciscan’s schola director trained on the organ at Calvary Episcopal in Pitt).

...which hymnal...

The unofficial official hymnal is the 1940, though we supplement it with various items from time to time. I look for a day when we will have our own hymnal, which, no doubt, would be The Hymnal To Put All Others In The Shade. However, I think that this is not a priority at this time and will be quite a while off. There is, as most probably are aware, some few unfortunate selections in the 1940, but we know what they are and how to avoid them.

I'm sure that some do.
What is your town? (Do I remember correctly that it is Boston?)
And who is the patron of your ordinariate parish?
Do you worship there?
In all honesty, there are a few things about the 1982 that are improvements. Mostly with regard to the liturgical section, though the demotion of Gloria to an optional 'canticle' is most unfortunate, ditto that of Agnus Dei to but one of several choices for a 'fraction anthem'. Then, there is the vexatious presence of two rites, the second of which (besides being the cute Anglican version of what we Catholics have finally, and happily, kissed good-bye) is now, with the adoption of Divine Worship: the Missal, totally redundant (as in not licit). There are a number of really good additions to hymnody. Praetorius' Ach Herr, du allerhochster Gott comes to mind as matched with an Ascension text. A goodly selection of plainchant hymns is commendable, as is the graduation from quavers to note heads (could we hope that the next edition will graduate to square notes? Probably not. The 1906 English Hymnal will never be bested on this count!). There are some awfully unfortunate things (such as no. 599) that I shant mention; and the omission of Dulce Carmen as the tune for 'Alleluia, Song of Gladness' really smarts, as do a few other absences. And, the fonts and layout (which hath about them a 'board room' look) are not nearly as pleasingly ecclesiastical in appearance as those of the 1940. (Nor, I suspect, were they meant to be!) Too, in too many instances there has been a lamentable messing around with language.

MJO, as a note: I believe the alleluia was mandated by the powers-that-be. I could be mistaken. I missed listening in, so am hopeful to hear some of this today!

You know, it’s just wrong that they didn’t respect the Ordinariate liturgy on that one...

I know of other times and places where a simple Triple Alleluia has been done in the Anglican Use, without the influence of such "higher-ups". And (re: "patrimony") a lot of Catholic-ish Episcopal and Anglican parishes do so as well.

So it's not like it was some unprecedented foisting of Modernist Romish practices on the "pure Anglican" (ha ha) liturgy. (Not that I think it was a good idea. I would prefer Palmer Burgess.)

...foisting...

Well, foisting is foisting, whether it is precedented or undprecedented.
And, speaking of such, the matter at hand has, truth be known, been 'foisted' as well on Roman rite liturgy for quite some time now. I yet haven't figured out how anyone who knows what a real alleluya is can sing these cheap little ditties with a straight face.

Plus, the original foisting, at least in places that took up or thought of taking up the offer of the Ordinariate, was because people thought they had to adopt the new missal. (Fr. Hunwicke explained it that way.)

That and perhaps they just don’t like it...

I also think it doesn’t play into their brand of ecumenism. It’s funny: incorporating Anglican traditions (which were mostly inherited from Sarum anyways) made the Mass more traditional, e.g. Septuagesimatide. The result is the opposite of what some seem to want: the church becoming more like the Protestant communions.

The closing of the Our Father with “For thine is the kingdom” comes to mind. The 1928 and 1979 American Prayer Books also include explicitly Byzantine prayers.

Deacon Frtiz' observations are cogent. There always remained a small-but-influential element in the post-Henrician Church of England that was 'high church' and Catholic-leaning. (And we mustn't forget that as late as James II there was a real possibility of a second Catholic restoration.) Archbishop Laud (from whom we get the Laudian coverlet) was one such, as were the marvelously spiritual Caroline divines. Oxford movement Anglo-Catholicism is indeed an outgrowth of XIXth century efforts to 'restore' the English Church to its true roots and identity. It should not be overlooked, however, that this XIXth century development did not happen in a vacuum, nor without historical antecedents. Too, I will add to the deacon's comments that there was as much loyalty to Sarum precedent as there was aping of current Roman practice in the Anglo-Catholic tent. These were two, often at-odds, streams of praxis in Catholic minded Anglicanism. Truth be known, Catholic piety and theology were never completely stanched in post-Henrician times. I think that only now in our very own day are we seeing the final victory of the anti-Catholic parties who have snubbed their noses definitively at the other two so-called 'branches' (Roman and Orthodox) of the Church in matters of ordination and morality, managed to silence or chase off all opposition, and who, every day, become more theologically bankrupt. And this, of course, is what has led to Anglicanorum Coetibus and the ordinariates.

Did no one tell EWTN that the Liturgy would probably last three hours? I'm sure glad some one posted the rest of the Liturgy, including the Bishop's remarks, on the internet!

Part of me wonders if the TV director thought the procession around the church was the recessional for the Mass itself, and so cut away during it.

For a bishop's consecration? They do tend to run long.

Would someone post a link to the recorded video on the net?

What wonderful news!

Says he with a rood-faced grin.

Before long, Adam may well have rood the day he posted that picture.