Latin Novus Ordo … thoughts?
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,053
    CatherineS - Yes I can sympathise. I have the great advantage that we never use it at a sparsely attended weekday Mass, and on Sundays I am so far back in the church that I have time to refocus after the exchange. After all, in the OF we are standing for the Our Father, the peace, and the Agnus Dei. Then we kneel to focus our attention on the sacrificial victim, and our invitation to a foretaste of the heavenly banquet. The justification for the placement can be found here.
    [ADDED] If we, the congregation, allow ourselves to overrun into the Agnus Dei, we can be sure that our priest will omit the invitation to exchange the peace next week, and possibly the week after, and will phrase the next invitaion with some limiting directive, eg 'with those next to us'.
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,160
    I still don't understand why in the revisions, the very good work done by the Anglicans in both translations and music was not adopted and used in the OF.


    Because the USCC could not get copyright royalties.
    Thanked by 1toddevoss
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,160
    The current traditionalism is more extremist and in need of reform than any that existed in 1960.


    I thought you worked in an OF environment. If that's the case, how are you able to measure the 'current trad' mood?

    Were I to state without equivocation that 'the current progressivism is more extremist and in need of reform than that of the 1960 era' I would be expected to have some sort of support--like surveys, interviews.....
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,674
    How about they both need reform? We have a Trad mass. Most of the people are OK, but a few are still around from an irregular and off-the-wall extremist chapel that is now closed. Fortunately, the extremists are drifting away a few at a time. No one, not even the other Trads, seems to mind. However, there are plenty more like them in many other places, so my friends tell me.

    The thing I notice most, despite the Pharisaical hair splitting, is they haven't even attempted to implement reforms several popes told them to do over the last hundred years. For example, how many popes told them to develop singable Ordinaries so the people could sing the parts belonging to them? Hasn't happened.
    Thanked by 1toddevoss
  • I have mixed feelings about passing the peace. Everyone in the sanctuary passes the peace - celebrant, deacon, and all. So why shouldn't the congregation as well? That is, turning to one's immediate neighbour and saying quietly 'peace be with you' or pax tecum. And that's all! That is more or less what is done at Walsingham. Such a sharing of the peace is not disruptive but does pass the peace to all, though many choose not to share even in this. Such sharing of the peace is, theologically, a good thing to do. What is abhorrent is turning and greeting everyone around one, or, as happens in some places, running all over the place greeting and hugging everyone. This is NOT passing the peace - there is nothing peaceful about it.

    Time was, at Sarum (and likely elsewhere), when a 'pax board' was passed silently from the celebrant out and through the entire congregation or community of monks.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen toddevoss
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,674
    If we are going to keep that peace greeting, I believe it should be moved to another part of the mass.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,921
    I still don't understand why in the revisions, the very good work done by the Anglicans in both translations and music was not adopted and used in the OF.


    Because the USCC could not get copyright royalties.


    Is that a sound explanation?

    The USCCB may have gained a little financially from the regulation of Scripture texts. In the 1970s and early '80s, it was permitted to use Jerusalem Bible or RSV texts in Scripture readings at Mass, and when that option was abolished, the change may have profited USCCB slightly, but only slightly, since JB and RSV lectionaries were already pretty rare in the '80s.

    A financial connection isn't so obvious for the texts of the Order of Mass, since USCCB doesn't own them. They owned the 1960s transitional texts, but since ICEL has been in operation, they've owned most of the Mass ordinary.

    Does anyone have any information from that era to help settle the question?

    Thanked by 2CharlesW CHGiffen
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,602
    In a church overwhelmingly dominated by the descendants of people who had within living memory left a captive Ireland, the "Anglican" brand was long a deeply negative anti-endorsement. The sting is less strong now, courtesy of time and secularisation in the British Isles and North America.
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • ...I believe it should be moved...
    In the BCP the peace takes place before the offertory. And so it was in the Ordinariate Use until Divine Worship:The Missal came out. Then it was put, Roman style (somehow, you understand, this made it 'more Catholic'), after [corrected] Agnus Dei. I continue to think that before the offertory is the better and less disruptive place for it.
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,160
    a few are still around


    There are "a few" wombats in every parish, whether EF or OF. This is called 'humanity.'

    how many popes told them to develop singable Ordinaries so the people could sing the parts belonging to them?


    IIRC, the Popes specified Chant, which includes 'singable' Ordinaries. But the Popes never forbade the use of polyphony--and in fact, Pius X and Pius XII both recommended "chant OR polyphony". The PIP's were under no obligation to sing back then, and that remains the case, despite the hortatory flailing of cantors and organists.

    Finally, don't be too confident of the 'singable' English Ordinaries, most of which are banal, hackneyed, or ripoffs of Broadway stylings. There are a few gems--one of which I recall offhand is from Ari Esguerra.
    Thanked by 1Incardination
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,160
    but since ICEL has been in operation, they've owned most of the Mass ordinary.


    You're right. Brain-eclipse.

    As you know, "follow the money" is usually the Ockham's razor-simple answer. And of course the Bishops in English-speaking countries could have decided to avoid the Episcopalian translation because it was "Episcopalian." They had taken plenty of flak from the Awful Traddies about Prot influence over the Council and didn't need to light another bonfire.

    AND follow the money.
  • ...taken plenty of flak...
    Oh, what a difference a book cover and a title page make.That most of the contents of the BCP are/were Catholic should have been apparent to any sane person, but because they were in a 'Protestant' book all that counted for nothing. Now it is all enshrined in the very Catholic Book of Divine Worship:The Missal - and there are still those who continue to nay-say it. One can be forgiven for thinking that they are both irrational and unbalanced. Methinks that there are those who, if they saw a book containing the Extraordinary Form of the mass in a book whose cover and title page said CofE, they would shriek and call it 'Protestant' regardless of its content.
  • The Divine Worship Missal is an excellent vernacular Mass. It is a gorgeous translation and incredibly reverent.
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,341
    It is many many years since I last attended the new rite, but I would just remain kneeling after the canon and ignore the proffered hands... Reading my old rite Missal and kneeling through most of the Mass seemed to ward off those that poke and prod to shake everyone in the churches hand.

    I know quite a few N.O. places that do not have the Pax.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,674
    We had a pastor who would drop the peace greeting during the week. He kept it on Sunday since he thought the chancery would object if he dropped it on Sunday. I still think it should be moved. Perhaps to the general greetings and introductory rites. Since its nature has changed I see no reason to use the Tridentine placement as a model to follow.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw CHGiffen
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,674
    There are "a few" wombats in every parish, whether EF or OF. This is called 'humanity.'


    There are those who refuse to acknowledge that there was an actual Council of the Catholic Church at Vatican II. Ignoring a council you don't like and trying to go backward in time seems a bit pointless. That past many would like to revert to wasn't as idyllic as they think.
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,341
    Council of the Catholic Church at Vatican II.


    Now what did that council tell us we must do or believe that had not previously been covered? I also thought they went out of their way to give the impression it was not like the previous councils, and would not have binding statements.
    Thanked by 1francis
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,602
    Though Dei Verbum and Lumen Gentium are expressly dogmatic.
    Thanked by 2CharlesW CHGiffen
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,674
    It did all that, and left general confusion in its wake. There was a general decentralization of the church that was set in motion in the aftermath of that council. That was both structural and organizational. Two of the the objectives of that council that went a bit haywire in application were the objectives of reforming the liturgy and the desire of John XXIII to canonize Pius IX. Had John lived longer would the outcome have been different? I think perhaps so. In the hands of Paul VI chaos and confusion reigned. So now we have the post council trends of parties who want to reform the liturgy continuously and those who want to retreat to the past and pretend there were no legitimate calls for reforms. Neither extreme has served any of us well.
    Thanked by 1Joseph Michael
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,053
    what did that council tell us we must do
    "The Order of Mass is to be revised ..."
    Thanked by 2Liam CHGiffen
  • ...trying to go backward in time seems a bit pointless...

    As is trying to pass judgment on an entire segment of the Church because of some bad experiences you've personally had with "trads". The real point of "... a few wombats in every parish..." is precisely that - we've all had bad experiences with Catholics regardless of whether they are primarily EF or OF.
    Thanked by 2dad29 CHGiffen
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,341
    Though Dei Verbum and Lumen Gentium are expressly dogmatic.

    But don't as far as I see say anything new...
    "The Order of Mass is to be revised ..."

    Wonderful, but there is nothing we can do about it... Well I suppose we can boycott this "fabricated liturgy" and looking at Mass attendance this seems to be very popular choice. Pope Benedict wrote the following about the attempt,
    "In the place of liturgy as the fruit of development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over the centuries and replaced it – as in a manufacturing process – with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product."
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,602
    "But don't as far as I see say anything new..."

    Glad to know you don't think this is new, in dogmatic terms, but part of the dogmatic Tradition:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsistit_in
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,053
    Time was, at Sarum (and likely elsewhere), when a 'pax board' was passed silently from the celebrant out and through the entire congregation or community of monks.
    In the BCP the peace takes place before the offertory. And so it was in the Ordinariate Use until Divine Worship:The Missal came out. Then it was put, Roman style (somehow, you understand, this made it 'more Catholic'), before Agnus Dei.
    1/ Of course all Catholic Rites except the Roman place it before the Offertory.
    2/ The Traditional Roman Rite places it after the Agnus Dei, and thus after the fraction and that, I suspect, is a crucial difference.
    3/ We have sufficient evidence of bad conduct during the Medieval passing of the pax-brede to make the reformers wary.
    4/ Sarum had the celebrant kiss the pax-brede twice, once during the penitential rite, and then again after the fraction.
    5/ The EF Ritus Servandus still details the use of the pax-brede. or instrumentum pacis.
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,341
    Glad to know you don't think this is new, in dogmatic terms, but part of the dogmatic Tradition:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsistit_in


    Well since everything we read has to be read in light of Tradition...
    "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me."
    and
    "That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my Church"
    quite simple really. Although to be fair some people especially when sat in the limited oxygen environment of an aeroplane finds this a bit difficult to understand...
    "And I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery."
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,053
    except it be for fornication,
    Now if Canon Law took that into consideration, it would move us towards the discipline of some Orthodox Churches. A good move, in my view.
    BTW I don't see the connection between this and the topic of the thread, or even the purpose of the forum.
    Thanked by 2Liam CharlesW
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,674
    he real point of "... a few wombats in every parish..." is precisely that - we've all had bad experiences with Catholics regardless of whether they are primarily EF or OF.tt


    We don't have wombats in the S.E. United States, but if they are anything like the local Baptists, they can often be hell to deal with.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,674
    Wonderful, but there is nothing we can do about it... Well I suppose we can boycott this "fabricated liturgy" and looking at Mass...


    All liturgy is fabricated by someone at some time. Even the so-called Traditional Roman Rite had already undergone corruptions, additions, deletions, and such by the time of the post-Trent liturgy that some call "Traditional." The ancient faith, at least liturgically, has come closer to being preserved in Orthodoxy than in the western churches. I give them credit for that.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,921
    CharlesW mentioned:
    We had a pastor who would drop the peace greeting during the week. He kept it on Sunday since he thought the chancery would object if he dropped it on Sunday.

    I'm sure he knows this, but in case any readers don't: the congregational portion of the Greeting of Peace is, according to the rubrics, optional: that is, it is carried out if it is "appropriate". (Roman Missal, US edition, 2011, p. 667)
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,602
    The *invitation* to exchange the sign of peace is optional; but fwiw you can't actually prevent the congregation from exchanging it without the invitation....
  • On the sign of peace, ever since someone many years ago, said "the peace of christ" to me, that is what I always say. It is less "familiar" and literally more Christ-centered.
  • The one at St Matthew the Apostle n Washington was initiated with the new Missal in 1970 or whenever, and has been blessing many people, myself included, for many years. Only the Liturgy of the Word is in English. I prefer it to the EF Mass myself for the reason then Card. Ratzinger said--each part has its dignity. I served one presided by Card. Arinze, which was the most intentionally performed Mass I think I have ever seen--every motion was given full weight and dignity. I would wish that every Cathedral had one as a reminder of our union with the See of St. Peter.

    Kenneth
  • bhcordovabhcordova
    Posts: 1,078
    @toddevoss I always say 'the peace of Christ be with you'
  • In Brazil I learned to say "Paz de Cristo". So that's what I say. What are you supposed to say in the US?
  • bhcordovabhcordova
    Posts: 1,078
    Most people just say 'peace be with you'
  • Felipe Gaspar, yes, I see merit in this form of celebration. I hope it catches on.