New Sacramentary

[IntegraCatholic]

On the other hand, you’re right, we bow or genuflect at et incarnatus est, which is particularly bizarre because the Crucifixion and Resurrection are more important points in our faith, and the incarnation is not generally seen as a particularly solemn moment. (I tried once to find out why the practice developed this way, and just got people’s opinions that it was “beautiful” and so on).

This may be from the Franciscan influence on the Roman Rite. As you know, they stuck pretty much to the Roman Rite while the other mendicant orders had their own rites. St. Francis, of course, had a great devotion to the Incarnation. Also, see below.

The Incarnation really got the shaft, as far as I’m concerned: it gets a jarring, out-of-place nod during the Credo, yet has no anticipatory season, no octave, no vigil, and heck, not even a proper feast.

As someone else mentioned, it seems that the Incarnation is at the heart of everything we do. While in a sense the Crucifixion is more important than either the Resurrection or the Incarnation, we can’t really have it without the other two. The Incarnation is presupposed in every feast of our Lord. Just as God the Father has no feast day, for every Mass is offered to him, the Incarnation is recreated on the altar and therefore requires no particular feast. (Concerning the gradation of feasts or presence of them in the first place, consider that before Bugnini the Epiphany had a higher ranking octave than Christmas; that isn’t because it’s necessarily more important than Christmas, but with all the feasts that fall in the octave of Christmas, it required a lower-ranking octave to allow their celebration. I’m not 100% sure how that’s relevant, but it came to mind.)

 

[Brendan]

Blessed John XXIII called for us to open the windows of the church! Of course, essential truths are not compromised. The current translation is a more modern translation, but entirely accurate in the faith. Or are you implying that since the 70s the liturgy has been flawed in English speaking communities?

Actually, no it is not.

Take the Creed for example.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
one in Being with the Father.

Being is a statement of existance ( the verb ‘to be. As Catholics we know that there is no existance apart from the Father. As such, my chair is "one in being’ with the Father, as it does not exist APART from the Father.

But my chair is not of the same Essence as the Father, the same Substance. Only the Son and the Spirit are.

That is why the new, correct Creed, uses Consubstantial.

And it also puts us in line with the rest of the world’s Catholics is proclaiming this truth.

The French use "d’une même substance " (of the same substance), the Spanish use “consubstancial con el Padre”, the Italians “consustanziale al Padre”

Lest you think this is simply a Romance language thing the German use “eines Wesens mit dem Vater”, of one Nature with the Father.

So all the other Catholics in the world recognize this truth about the Nature of God, so should we.

 

[Phemie]

That is why the new, correct Creed, uses Consubstantial.

And it also puts us in line with the rest of the world’s Catholics is proclaiming this truth.

The French use "d’une même substance " (of the same substance),

Not in liturgy we don’t. The words of the Nicene Creed at Mass are “de même nature que le Père”.