Universal doesn’t mean uniformity. Like I said, there is a certain extent of leeway that must be allowed. I’m not saying that there should be a liturgical free-for-all at the altar. Bro. JR have provided wonderful examples. For a Liturgy to be truly living and for it to continue to develop, there must be allowances for a little innovation.
There are several things to point out here;You’re both right. There have to be rubrics for each rite and each form within the rites. At the same time, there has to be room for local customs.
As much as people like to say that the EF is “custom safe” that’s soooooooooooo not true. I’m wondering if the people saying this are Americans. Before Vatican II the Latin Church had four rites and 7 forms. That’s first. Second, even within the one ordinary or normative form, there were details that were very particular to certain countries and cultures.
Even today, the EF has what I call details that vary from one place to another because of local circumstances, resources or whether the priest is secular or religious. There is no such thing as a static way of celebrating mass.
That being said, there are rubrics that must be followed. Each form has its rubrics and each rite does too. People need to comply with them.
Recently, I received a PM from a poster on TC Forum who told me that the attended the EF mass celebrated at his parish, which is an FSSP parish. Apparently, the gentleman was serving. They had a visiting priest. The gentleman noticed that the priest said the prayers audibly and waited for the congregation to respond.
When he brought the water and dish for the lavabo the priest picked up the chalice and nodded away the dish. He did not wear an amice and the mass that he celebrated was not the mass of the day. He held the host with all fingers, not with the thumb and index finger. He told me that the congregation was a little confused, because they couldn’t find that mass in their missal.
The gentleman knew something that the congregation did not know or had not been told. The priest belonged to one of the Franciscan obediences. I’m not sure which, because the gentleman did not know. He just recognized the chord with the knots and the cowl over the vestments. The obediences have little differences that most people would not notice unless they are used to a secular priest such as a Diocesan or FSSP.
My guess is that the priest was following the Franciscan liturgical calendar. That would explain why the congregation could not find the mass in their missal. You have to know where to look. That day happened to be the Solemnity of St. Clare, which must be celebrated as a high mass, if you’re going to use the EF and must have three readings, Gloria and Creed, if you’re using the OF. Even if you’re at an OF mass, that day, your missalette is useless, because it’s not in there. St. Clare is a minor holy day in the Latin Church and not on the calendar in most Eastern Churches, unless the priest is a Franciscan.
Then there have always been certain cultural details that are reflected in more and in less obvious ways. If you’re in Spain or the Philippines, there are very Spanish customs in their celebration of the EF, the way they build churches, their music, even holy days, which the Spanish culture holds very dear.
The congregation is allowed to stand around the altar at retreat houses and masses celebrated in the chapel of religious. In that case, if the religious superior is male, he can allow this or the law of his religious community may demand this. Notice that I said the chapel, not the parish. Parishes are a little tricky. Normally, they do not belong to the religious who administer them. In those cases, if the community has customs of its own, it may use them. If it has its own liturgical calendar and books it may use them and the parishioners adapt, but something like standing around the altar is not done, because it cannot be done without havoc. The number of people at mass is much larger.
Diversity due to local cuture and religious traditionas of orders and congregations are always going to be part of our liturgical life. The rubrics, as they are written, allow for these differences without people going crazy.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
But these developments should afford a genuine advantage and be approved by the Vatican.
Please say this is some joke I did not get.Not really I’m sure people can be trained to say the NO reverently
BTW - It is for posts like this that I changed my signature.
I think we’re getting away from the thread here a little bit. I hope Mr. Thomas Casey would oblige us by splitting the topic, I think this is an interesting thread of discussion.
True, I will go back to watching now
Thanks for the well typed explanation.You’re both right. There have to be rubrics for each rite and each form within the rites. At the same time, there has to be room for local customs.
As much as people like to say that the EF is “custom safe” that’s soooooooooooo not true. I’m wondering if the people saying this are Americans. Before Vatican II the Latin Church had four rites and 7 forms. That’s first. Second, even within the one ordinary or normative form, there were details that were very particular to certain countries and cultures. The difference was that we did not have internet, iPods, too much TV and people didn’t travel as much as we do today. People did not know much outside of their parish or their diocese.
Even today, the EF has what I call details that vary from one place to another because of local circumstances, resources or whether the priest is secular or religious. There is no such thing as a static way of celebrating mass.
That being said, there are rubrics that must be followed. Each form has its rubrics and each rite does too. People need to comply with them.
Recently, I received a PM from a poster on TC Forum who told me that the attended the EF mass celebrated at his parish, which is an FSSP parish. Apparently, the gentleman was serving. They had a visiting priest. The gentleman noticed that the priest said the prayers audibly and waited for the congregation to respond.
When he brought the water and dish for the lavabo the priest picked up the chalice and nodded away the dish. He did not wear an amice and the mass that he celebrated was not the mass of the day. He held the host with all fingers, not with the thumb and index finger. He told me that the congregation was a little confused, because they couldn’t find that mass in their missal.
The gentleman knew something that the congregation did not know or had not been told. The priest belonged to one of the Franciscan obediences. I’m not sure which, because the gentleman did not know. He just recognized the chord with the knots and the cowl over the vestments. The obediences have little differences that most people would not notice unless they are used to a secular priest such as a Diocesan or FSSP.
My guess is that the priest was following the Franciscan liturgical calendar. That would explain why the congregation could not find the mass in their missal. You have to know where to look. That day happened to be the Solemnity of St. Clare, which must be celebrated as a high mass, if you’re going to use the EF and must have three readings, Gloria and Creed, if you’re using the OF. Even if you’re at an OF mass, that day, your missalette is useless, because it’s not in there. St. Clare is a minor holy day in the Latin Church and not on the calendar in most Eastern Churches, unless the priest is a Franciscan.
Then there have always been certain cultural details that are reflected in more and in less obvious ways. If you’re in Spain or the Philippines, there are very Spanish customs in their celebration of the EF, the way they build churches, their music, even holy days, which the Spanish culture holds very dear.
Again, we must allow for these diversities and at the same time, we must follow the rubrics for both forms. The example of the dancers and the people in the sanctuary is a violation of the rubrics in most countries. Only certain countries have been given permission to have dance during mass.
The congregation is allowed to stand around the altar at retreat houses and masses celebrated in the chapel of religious. In that case, if the religious superior is male, he can allow this or the law of his religious community may demand this. Notice that I said the chapel, not the parish. Parishes are a little tricky. Normally, they do not belong to the religious who administer them. In those cases, if the community has customs of its own, it may use them. If it has its own liturgical calendar and books it may use them and the parishioners adapt, but something like standing around the altar is not done, because it cannot be done without havoc. The number of people at mass is much larger.
Diversity due to local cuture and religious traditionas of orders and congregations are always going to be part of our liturgical life. The rubrics, as they are written, allow for these differences without people going crazy.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
I don’t think that you have said anything different from what I said.
Not being there, I can’t imagine the physical setting. Let’s use the example from a parish where I teach scripture. The tabernacle is on the wall and the altar is in front, but not attached to the wall. The priest stands between the tabernacle and the altar.
No worries, just wanted to clarify