Chasubles in the Extraordinary form

  • Thread starter Thread starter jbelokur
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jbelokur

Guest
I was wondering if anyone knows why there was a change in the style of vestments in the change over from the Latin right to the Novus Ordo? The reason I ask this is during an Extraordinary form mass the priest or principle celebrant is easily distinguishable from those other priest that are con-celebrating and those deacons that are assisting during mass. However during a Novus Ordo mass the Principle priest and other priests/deacons wear basically the same thing. This doesn’t bother me so much when I can’t distinguish between priests but when visually the deacon and priest are identical I have big problems there. What do you all think?
 
jbelokur said:
I was wondering if anyone knows why there was a change in the style of vestments in the change over from the Latin right to the Novus Ordo? The reason I ask this is during an Extraordinary form mass the priest or principle celebrant is easily distinguishable from those other priest that are con-celebrating and those deacons that are assisting during mass. However during a Novus Ordo mass the Principle priest and other priests/deacons wear basically the same thing. This doesn’t bother me so much when I can’t distinguish between priests but when visually the deacon and priest are identical I have big problems there. What do you all think?
Click to expand...
There wasn’t a “change” officially in the style of chasuble, at the very least. The gothic chasuble was in use for centuries before the Novus Ordo Missae. The cut of the chasuble has evolved over centuries and the Latin style was a modification of what we would call the gothic. The maniple was made an optional vestment in 1967 and then gradually fell out of use.

And there was no switch from the Latin “right” (sic) to the Novus Ordo. Both are forms of the same Latin Rite, ie, if you were a Latin Rite Catholic before the promulgation of the Pauline Mass, you were a Latin Rite Catholic afterwards, unless you went through the procedures of switching to one of the sub juris Churches.
 
Fistly, just so you know, I just converted to Catholicism in 2007 so I’m relatively new to the actual goings on. That said, as I have experienced great and extremely bad Novus Ordo Masses, and as I have grown more and more interested in the Extraordinary form via our Holy Fathers Motu Proprio and books like Sacred Then and Sacred Now, and as I’ve watched many Extraordinary Form masses on EWTN and elsewhere I have noticed that they seem to stick to the Latin cut while the Novus Ordo masses have the Gothic cut.

Secondly, sorry about my sloppiness with terminology I was being lazy, I normally stick to the terms set forth by our Holy Father, differentiating between the masses by using the terms Extraordinary Form, and Ordinary Form. I’ll quit being lazy.
 
The Roman Chasuble was in general use in the 40’s. However, the Greek Chasuble came into use in the 50’s and was gaining in popularity by the time of VII. I think it an accident of timing that it came into general use and the Roman Chasuble became a rarity at the same time as the OF became the OF.
 
jbelokur said:
I was wondering if anyone knows why there was a change in the style of vestments in the change over from the Latin right to the Novus Ordo? The reason I ask this is during an Extraordinary form mass the priest or principle celebrant is easily distinguishable from those other priest that are con-celebrating and those deacons that are assisting during mass. However during a Novus Ordo mass the Principle priest and other priests/deacons wear basically the same thing. This doesn’t bother me so much when I can’t distinguish between priests but when visually the deacon and priest are identical I have big problems there. What do you all think?
Click to expand...
Strictly speaking, in the EF there are no concelebrants, except at an ordination. Generally, if the person is wearing sleeves then he is a deacon. From what I’ve seen, in the NO in the USA, often deacons don’t even wear the dalmatic which makes it easier to spot them.

The Gothic style was intiated int he last century, placed on a sort of probation in the early 20th, to be under certain regulations at the discretion of local bishops, and if there would be no ‘astonishment’ on the part of the faithful. Full permission without any restrictions was only given in the 1960’s for that style.
 
in a “solemn high mass” of the latin rite, prior to the novus ordo (new order) the priest would wear a regular chasuble, while the deacon and subdeacon would have distinct markings on the back. in its relationship to Christ, it recalls the seamless garment of Christ believed to have been woven by mary. on calvary the soldiers cast dice for it. have a good year. (alih)👍
 
The Gothic Style Chasuble had been in use during the middle ages.

I’ve seen photos from around 1920 of gothic cut chasubles in use.

The Fiddlebacks, as the more common ones are known, were the normative form, but not the only one.
 
AJV said:
Strictly speaking, in the EF there are no concelebrants, except at an ordination. Generally, if the person is wearing sleeves then he is a deacon. From what I’ve seen, in the NO in the USA, often deacons don’t even wear the dalmatic which makes it easier to spot them.

The Gothic style was initiated in the last century.
Click to expand...
By which I meant the style was revived, in the 19th century
 
The reason I ask this is during an Extraordinary form mass the priest or principle celebrant is easily distinguishable from those other priest that are con-celebrating and those deacons that are assisting during mass.

**There is no concelebrating (except at a mass of the ordination of priests) in the Extraordinary Form.

Hence there is no “principle [sic] celebrant,” and no "
other priest that are con-celebrating" as only one priest celebrates.

Furthermore, there would be only ONE deacon (acting as such) and one sub-deacon, not “those deacons.”**
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top