Help me distinguish the Mass

[AlexV]

Did I call anything a “mess”? Nope. Don’t mix apples and oranges.

Not every Tridentine Mass requires an Indult. It is the PROPER liturgy of the Apostolic Administration of St. John Vianney. Further, the vernacular Novus Ordo requires an Indult, so if you attend Mass in English, your Mass is by Indult.

Same as a Tridentine Mass!

The Novus Ordo Missae is not the normative Mass of the Roman Rite, except insofar as it is the most common by far.

But unless you use the 2002 Missale Romanum, if you use the Novus Ordo, remember…your Mass is by Indult.

 

[djrakowski]

Did I call anything a “mess”? Nope. Don’t mix apples and oranges.

No, but you responded to a comment I made about people terming the normative liturgy of the Roman Rite a ‘mess,’ and therefore, my comments stand.

Not every Tridentine Mass requires an Indult. It is the PROPER liturgy of the Apostolic Administration of St. John Vianney. Further, the vernacular Novus Ordo requires an Indult, so if you attend Mass in English, your Mass is by Indult.

Same as a Tridentine Mass!

The vast majority of us are not under the Apostolic Administration of St. John Vianney, and thus, your comment doesn’t apply.

The Novus Ordo Missae is not the normative Mass of the Roman Rite, except insofar as it is the most common by far.

That sort-of makes it the de facto normative Mass of the Roman Rite, does it not?

But unless you use the 2002 Missale Romanum, if you use the Novus Ordo, remember…your Mass is by Indult.

You’re splitting hairs a bit, it seems. I’ll take your word that the Novus Ordo in the vernacular is an indult (though I would like to have a document to reference), but the liturgy itself, apart from the translation, isn’t.

 

[AlexV]

The liturgy of the Roman Rite is in LATIN, which is the language of the Rite.

ANY vernacular in the Roman Rite is a concession by Indult.

Probably some 99% of American Roman Catholics attend an Indult Mass.

If you use “normative” mean what most people would call “most frequent/common/habitual”, fine.

But “normative” also has legal meaning (as does “typical” in liturgical contexts), and in this case it is inaccurate.

Saying the Novus Ordo is “normative” for Roman Catholics is offensive to the Church’s principal of the equal dignity of Rites and Usages. And that doesn’t depend on numbers.

 

[Titus]

And, while I can’t recall it’s exact name, don’t forget the (Solemn) Papal Mass, with rubrics and fanfare all its own.

The Valle Adurni blog has a great series of pictures of the Solemn Papal Coronation Mass, lasting several hours and probably the most solemn occasion in the Church until 1978.

valleadurni.blogspot.com/2006_11_01_archive.html

 

[djrakowski]

The liturgy of the Roman Rite is in LATIN, which is the language of the Rite.

ANY vernacular in the Roman Rite is a concession by Indult.

Probably some 99% of American Roman Catholics attend an Indult Mass.

I said that I’d take you for your word on this one. I simply asked for a document reference to back it up. And furthermore, the Rite itself isn’t an indult, but the celebration of it in the vernacular is an indult, correct?

If you use “normative” mean what most people would call “most frequent/common/habitual”, fine.

But “normative” also has legal meaning (as does “typical” in liturgical contexts), and in this case it is inaccurate.

I trust you’re correct in stating that the word ‘normative’ has a meaning specific to the liturgy, but it also has a common meaning, and that’s the sense in which I was using it. Your definition of ‘most frequent/common/habitual’ is a good definition of what I meant by the term.

Saying the Novus Ordo is “normative” for Roman Catholics is offensive to the Church’s principal of the equal dignity of Rites and Usages. And that doesn’t depend on numbers.

I suspect that it is offensive only to those who are seeking to take offense.

Of course, this was all within the context of my calling out a few of the posters for trashing the Novus Ordo as a ‘mess,’ when it is a valid celebration of the liturgy handed down to us by the Church, and is, using a common meaning of the word, normative. In other words, I was taking exception to the fact that some folks in this subforum seems to take delight in trashing the order of the Mass that is celebrated by the vast majority of Roman Catholics and the Pope himself, and that’s more than a little bit disrespectful.

 

[AlexV]

I don’t do people’s research for them.

I don’t produce documents like a trained monkey on command.

Alas, all too frequently these days…perhaps as we have suffered the loss of the sensus fidei so severely, let alone knowledge of our liturgical history…people think documents spell out every possible assertion, such that any eventuality in life can be handled by consultation of a magisterial document.

The language of the Roman Rite is Latin (with some Greek and some Hebrew). That wasn’t changed in 1963, 1970, or 2002.

Vernacular permissions have been widely granted since 1964 in the USA.

The average American experiences a 1985 translation of a 1975 Latin Missal, with a brief booklet of 1996 updates. The 2002 Missal is unused in the vast majority of American parishes.

The vast majority of American Roman Catholics attend an Indult Mass. Ironic, isn’t it?

 

[djrakowski]

I don’t do people’s research for them.

I don’t produce documents like a trained monkey on command.

Oh good heavens, I agreed with you, and just wanted to know where I could find some information about this indult. Try not taking offense so easily! I asked you if there was a document, and you seemed to have some knowledge that I don’t, so it seems reasonable that I would ask.

My goodness!

 

[MariaG]

I don’t understand some folks’ relentless obsession with trashing the normative Mass of the Church as a ‘mess.’ Feel free to criticize those who make the liturgy their personal playgrounds, and note specific abuses, but don’t paint the entire liturgy with this broad brush. It isn’t necessary, especillay considering that the OP had absolutely nothing to do with the Novus Ordo.

Beware the term “normative”. It is inaccurate and has no legal standing, unless meant strictly in the sense of the Mass most Roman Rite Catholics experience.

Did I call anything a “mess”? Nope. Don’t mix apples and oranges.

Not every Tridentine Mass requires an Indult. It is the PROPER liturgy of the Apostolic Administration of St. John Vianney. Further, the vernacular Novus Ordo requires an Indult, so if you attend Mass in English, your Mass is by Indult.

Same as a Tridentine Mass!

The Novus Ordo Missae is not the normative Mass of the Roman Rite, except insofar as it is the most common by far.

But unless you use the 2002 Missale Romanum, if you use the Novus Ordo, remember…your Mass is by Indult.

Don’t mix apples and oranges? If that is what drakowski was doing, then he was just trying to pick out the oranges from the apples since you first mixed them together by your comment that had little to do with the posters in this forum who somehow feel that to be a “Traditional” Catholic they need to bash the NO Mass, even when it is not the topic of the thread.

No, but you responded to a comment I made about people terming the normative liturgy of the Roman Rite a ‘mess,’ and therefore, my comments stand.
The vast majority of us are not under the Apostolic Administration of St. John Vianney, and thus, your comment doesn’t apply.
That sort-of makes it the de facto normative Mass of the Roman Rite, does it not?
You’re splitting hairs a bit, it seems. I’ll take your word that the Novus Ordo in the vernacular is an indult (though I would like to have a document to reference), but the liturgy itself, apart from the translation, isn’t.

The liturgy of the Roman Rite is in LATIN, which is the language of the Rite.

ANY vernacular in the Roman Rite is a concession by Indult.

Probably some 99% of American Roman Catholics attend an Indult Mass.

If you use “normative” mean what most people would call “most frequent/common/habitual”, fine.

But “normative” also has legal meaning (as does “typical” in liturgical contexts), and in this case it is inaccurate.

Saying the Novus Ordo is “normative” for Roman Catholics is offensive to the Church’s principal of the equal dignity of Rites and Usages. And that doesn’t depend on numbers.

How is that offensive?

It IS normative in the use that he used it. Whether or not there is a “legal” definition has little bearing on the content of his post.

Whereas indiscriminantly calling the NO Mass a mess should be offensive to all.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

Since this thread has devolved from a simple request for information into a heated discussion of who offended whom, I am closing it.