Ordinariate mass, Traditional latin mass and ordinary mass

[gohjedrek]

I can’t wrap my head around this topic, is the ordinariate mass more similar in liturgy to the TLM or to the ordinary mass?

 

[catholic03]

The Ordinariate for former Anglicans uses a book called Divine Worship: The Missal.

It is an adaptation of the Book of Common Prayer, the original Anglican service book.

Divine Worship: The Missal is a form of the Roman Rite and it is approved by Rome so that former Anglicans can preserve their use of ‘King James’ English in the liturgy and their other traditions whilst being in full union with Rome.

The Ordinariate Mass that uses this special Missal is not the Ordinary Form or the Extraordinary Form (Latin Mass) but is nonetheless Roman.

When celebrated versus populum I would say that the Ordinariate Mass resembles the Ordinary Form said in archaic English. Again, there are other differences and ultimately the Book of Common Prayer was a major influence on the new Divine Worship Missal as well.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I have never assisted at an Ordinariate Mass but would very much like to.

I have attended the conservative Anglican 1928 BCP Mass and, I’m not going to kid you, I would prefer it to the OF (Novus Ordo), if it were under Roman Catholic auspices — priest facing the altar, kneeling for communion (I did not receive), traditional vestments. If there has to be a vernacular Mass, that’s what I’d prefer to see it be like. Very nice. Would have been nicer if it had been a certainly valid Sacrifice of the Mass (the priest maintained that his orders would be considered valid by RC), in union with the Holy Father. (This particular priest was very “papist” but did not swim all the way across the Tiber before he died, fairly young man, died far too soon.)

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Ordinariate Mass is like a very formal OF in English where one kneels at the altar rail for Holy Communion.

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

I’ve never been to an Anglican/Episcopal liturgy nor have I ever been to an Ordinariate Mass so I couldn’t tell you whether the Ordinariate Mass more resembles the Ordinary Form or Extraordinary Form in practice.

I found this online copy of Divine Worship: The Missal and after a cursory review of it I think it has aspects that are closer to the Extraordinary Form, other aspects that are closer to the Ordinary Form, and yet others that are wholly unique. Dare I say it’s a sort of via media between the Ordinary and Extraordinary Form.

Like the Extraordinary Form it has the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar (Judica Me and dual Confiteor) using the traditional Confiteor that mentions “Blessed Michael the Archangel, Blessed John the Baptist, the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul”, etc. Also like the Extraordinary Form the Confiteor is said in tandem between the priest and the people instead of once in unison, but unlike the Extraordinary Form the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar appear optional, and if they are not said then an entirely different “Penitential Rite” is said that doesn’t appear to resemble either the Extraordinary Form or the Ordinary Form (and this “Penitential Rite” comes after the Creed instead of before the Collect).

The traditional prayers of the priest as he ascends the Altar (“Aufer a nobis” and “Oramus te Domine”) are not present, presumably because these prayers are too sacrificial in nature or otherwise too popish (they mention “entering the Holy of Holies” and being forgiven of his sins “by the merits of [the] Saints, whose relics are here”) for the Anglican patrimony from which the Ordinariate Mass came.

The “Collect for Purity” appears to entirely replace the traditional Introit, which is optional in the Ordinary Form and mandatory in the Extraordinary Form.

The Ordinariate Kyrie resembles the Ordinary Form’s duplicate Kyrie rather than the Extraordinary Form’s triplicate Kyrie.

Unlike either Form there’s a “Summary of the 10 Commandments.”

Like the Ordinary Form the readings are not read by the clergy. This online missal says “reader” but doesn’t specify if that’s a traditional lector of minor orders or a layperson.

Like the Extraordinary Form everyone genuflects (not bows) at “and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man” during the Creed. Also like the Extraordinary Form there is a Sign of the Cross at the conclusion of the Creed.

[Continued…]

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

[…Continued]

Like the Ordinary Form there are Prayers of the Faithful, but these appear to be more scripted like the Extraordinary Form’s Preces Feriales which aren’t said during Mass rather on penitential days in the Breviary. They don’t appear to be as impromptu or ad libbed as in the Ordinary Form (you can find them at the end of the online missal). These Prayers of the Faithful are followed by the aforementioned unique “Penitential Rite:”

Facing the People, the Deacon or Priest says:

Ye that do truly and earnestly repent you of your sins, and are in love and
charity with your neighbours, and intend to lead a new life, following the
commandments of God, and walking from henceforth in his holy ways:
draw near with faith, and make your humble confession to Almighty God,
meekly kneeling upon your knees

The People kneel. Silence may be kept, and then the Priest, facing the altar, begins as follows and the People join in saying:

ALMIGHTY God,
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
maker of all things, judge of all men:
We acknowledge and bewail our manifold sins and wickedness,
which we from time to time most grievously have committed,
by thought, word, and deed, against thy divine majesty,
provoking most justly thy wrath and indignation against us.
We do earnestly repent,
and are heartily sorry for these our misdoings;
the remembrance of them is grievous unto us,
the burden of them is intolerable.
Have mercy upon us,
have mercy upon us, most merciful Father;
for thy Son our Lord Jesus Christ’s sake,
forgive us all that is past;
and grant that we may ever hereafter
serve and please thee in newness of life,
to the honour and glory of thy Name;
through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

This is followed by another unique section: “The Comfortable Words”, which are four short sections of the New Testament:

Hear what comfortable words our Saviour Christ saith unto all who truly
turn to him.

Come unto me, all ye that travail and are heavy laden, and I will refresh you.

God so loved the world, that he gave his Only Begotten Son, to the end that
all that believe in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Hear also what Saint Paul saith:

This is a true saying, and worthy of all men to be received, that Christ Jesus
came into the world to save sinners.

Hear also what Saint John saith:

If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the
righteous; and he is the propitiation for our sins (and not for ours only, but
for the sins of the whole world).

There is an option to use either the traditional offertory prayers of the Extraordinary Form or those of the Ordinary Form.

Like in the Ordinary Form the “Secrets” are said aloud.

Like in the Extraordinary Form the Sanctus is concluded with the Sign of the Cross.

[Continued…]

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

[…Continued]

Like the Ordinary Form the Roman Canon (Eucharistic Prayer 1) is optional. In its stead the priest may say the “Alternative Eucharistic Prayer”, which unfortunately looks identical to Eucharistic Prayer 2. There are no options that appear like EP3 or EP4. If the Roman Canon is used then, like in the Extraordinary Form, the priest genuflects twice after the consecration: once before the elevation and once after.

Like in the Ordinary Form the Doxology of the Lord’s Prayer is said.

Like in the Ordinary Form the Peace is shared among all the faithful and not just the clergy.

Here follows another unique section called “the Prayer of Humble Access:”

Then the Priest, bowing profoundly, says with all who shall receive Communion:

WE do not presume to come to this thy Table,
O merciful Lord, trusting in our own righteousness,
but in thy manifold and great mercies.
We are not worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs
under thy Table.
But thou art the same Lord whose property is always
to have mercy.
Grant us therefore, gracious Lord,
so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ,
and to drink his Blood,
that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his Body,
and our souls washed through his most precious Blood,
and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us. Amen.

As in the Ordinary Form the Domine non sum dignus is said only once and in unison between priest and people.

When distributing communion the priest has the option of using either the formula of the Extraordinary Form (“The Body/Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life”) or that of the Ordinary Form (“The Body/Blood of Christ”).

As in the Ordinary Form communion is administered under both species.

Unlike either the Extraordinary or Ordinary forms communion is followed by a unique prayer of thanksgiving:

ALMIGHTY and everliving God,
we most heartily thank thee for that thou dost feed us,
in these holy mysteries,
with the spiritual food of
the most precious Body and Blood
of thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ;
and dost assure us thereby
of thy favour and goodness towards us;
and that we are very members incorporate
in the mystical body of thy Son,
the blessed company of all faithful people;
and are also heirs, through hope,
of thy everlasting kingdom,
by the merits of the most precious death and Passion
of thy dear Son.
And we humbly beseech thee, O heavenly Father,
so to assist us with thy grace,
that we may continue in that holy fellowship,
and do all such good works
as thou hast prepared for us to walk in;
through Jesus Christ our Lord,
to whom, with thee and the Holy Spirit,
be all honour and glory, world without end. Amen.

Like in the Ordinary the Dismissal follows the Final Blessing (it’s the other way around in the Extraordinary Form).

Like the Extraordinary Form Mass is concluded by the Last Gospel, which comes from the prologue to St. John’s Gospel, and similarly everyone genuflects at “and the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.”

 

[peter26]

I am a member of the Ordinariate and used to attend the Ordinariate Mass twice a week. I have also attended the TLM several times when it has avaliable in my area.

Overall, I would say the Ordinariate Use is more similar in spirit to the Tridentine. The language is much more penitential than the NO, and a lot more emphasis is put on the unworthiness of the people to recieve (for instance the Prayer of Humble Access). The people kneel for much more of the service, including the confession. The full Canon of the Mass (EP I) must be used on Sundays. The people recieve kneeling at the altar rail (or the step of the Sanctuary). The words on giving Communion are the same as the Tridentine (except in English). The ceremonial is a lot closer to the Tridentine, including often the use of traditional vestments, servers in black cassock and surpluce, incense, veiled chalices and so forth. Ad Orientum celebration, while not universal, is more common than in the NO. The music is also a lot more traditional. On the side of being more similar to the NO, it is in English, albeit Elizabethan English, and the stucture of the Liturgy of the Word largely follows the NO model.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Overall, I would say the Ordinariate Use is more similar in spirit to the Tridentine. The language is much more penitential than the NO, and a lot more emphasis is put on the unworthiness of the people to recieve (for instance the Prayer of Humble Access). The people kneel for much more of the service, including the confession. The full Canon of the Mass (EP I) must be used on Sundays. The people recieve kneeling at the altar rail (or the step of the Sanctuary). The words on giving Communion are the same as the Tridentine (except in English). The ceremonial is a lot closer to the Tridentine, including often the use of traditional vestments, servers in black cassock and surpluce, incense, veiled chalices and so forth. Ad Orientum celebration, while not universal, is more common than in the NO. The music is also a lot more traditional. On the side of being more similar to the NO, it is in English, albeit Elizabethan English, and the stucture of the Liturgy of the Word largely follows the NO model.

Am I the only one who thinks, when viewing the Ordinariate Missal, that the post-Vatican II “reform of the liturgy” was made far more complicated than it had to be? “Hey, look at what those Anglican guys do, it’s pretty sweet, maybe we could just take this, tweak it here and there, and there you go, you’ve got your reformed liturgy!”.

I love it! Assisting at an Ordinariate Mass is on my short list of things to do, sooner rather than later.

I would also add, and maybe I’m just looking at this through Anglo-American goggles, that this liturgy is actually the product of a culture where the beauty of the English language is prized, whereas in the Roman Missal (whether Tridentine or Novus Ordo), English is just an afterthought, just one more language into which the Mass has to be translated. And I know that the Church of Rome, at least among some of those in its highest echelons, does not exactly burst with love over the Anglo-Saxon culture and mindset. (The Irish could hardly be expected to.) The Anglosphere loves and respects its own culture (of which language is an inseparable part) because, well, it’s us, that’s what we are.

 

[gohjedrek]

I have attended the conservative Anglican 1928 BCP Mass and, I’m not going to kid you, I would prefer it to the OF (Novus Ordo), if it were under Roman Catholic auspices — priest facing the altar, kneeling for communion (I did not receive), traditional vestments. If there has to be a vernacular Mass, that’s what I’d prefer to see it be like. Very nice. Would have been nicer if it had been a certainly valid Sacrifice of the Mass (the priest maintained that his orders would be considered valid by RC), in union with the Holy Father. (This particular priest was very “papist” but did not swim all the way across the Tiber before he died, fairly young man, died far too soon.)

It might be an episcopal or anglican continuum church, they use a different BCP from the CoE and the mass is generally more traditional than in CoE. As to the priest not joining the RC church, perhaps he didn’t like the liturgy of NO, didn’t like the authority of having to submit to the dogmas of the RC church or it could be that he would be a layman in the RC church. I think it’s a huge hurdle to clear, especially those who are clergy more so than the layman. Interestingly, I have found traditional anglicans, even those in CoE parishes, have a good relationship with the RC church, such as being in tune with the happenings in Rome and quoting the Vatican during their homilies.

“Blessed Michael the Archangel, Blessed John the Baptist, the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul”

Yes, the saints are mentioned in the Penitential Rite.

“Penitential Rite” is said that doesn’t appear to resemble either the Extraordinary Form or the Ordinary Form (and this “Penitential Rite” comes after the Creed instead of before the Collect).

The Penitential Rite comes before the Collect and the Collect before the Creed in the Ordinariate parish that I attend.

The traditional prayers of the priest as he ascends the Altar ( “Aufer a nobis” and “Oramus te Domine” ) are not present, presumably because these prayers are too sacrificial in nature or otherwise too popish (they mention “entering the Holy of Holies” and being forgiven of his sins “by the merits of [the] Saints, whose relics are here”) for the Anglican patrimony from which the Ordinariate Mass came.

Yes the traditional prayers weren’t mentioned when the priest ascends the Altar. In that regard, there is similarity to the NO mass.

The Ordinariate Kyrie resembles the Ordinary Form’s duplicate Kyrie rather than the Extraordinary Form’s triplicate Kyrie.

In the mass book, it’s duplicate Kyrie, but in mass I attended, Kyrie eleison is done thrice, then Christe eleison thrice, followed by another three Kyrie eleison.

 

[gohjedrek]

Unlike either Form there’s a “Summary of the 10 Commandments.”

Ah I think my parish, doesn’t have the summary.

Like the Extraordinary Form everyone genuflects (not bows) at “and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man” during the Creed. Also like the Extraordinary Form there is a Sign of the Cross at the conclusion of the Creed.

Yes, didn’t know that it’s the similar to Extraordinary Form, but everyone were supposed to genuflect at that point during the creed, but I think only a few observed it in reality.

Like the Ordinary Form the Roman Canon (Eucharistic Prayer 1) is optional. In its stead the priest may say the “Alternative Eucharistic Prayer”, which unfortunately looks identical to Eucharistic Prayer 2. There are no options that appear like EP3 or EP4. If the Roman Canon is used then, like in the Extraordinary Form, the priest genuflects twice after the consecration: once before the elevation and once after.

I think the ordinariate mass I attended, they used EP1 if I am not mistaken.

Here follows another unique section called “the Prayer of Humble Access:”

The prayer of humble access is interesting, as it is staple in the anglican church and is an elaborate version of the prayer said in the NO mass.

When distributing communion the priest has the option of using either the formula of the Extraordinary Form (“The Body/Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life”) or that of the Ordinary Form (“The Body/Blood of Christ”).

I think the former is used, similar to the anglican church. May the body and blood of Christ preserve onto you everlasting life. Amen. I think it’s more similar to the EF in this regard.

Unlike either the Extraordinary or Ordinary forms communion is followed by a unique prayer of thanksgiving:

I can visibly recall this prayer being mentioned at the end of communion in the anglican church, but it’s somewhat mentioned in the ordinariate in a hymn that goes like this:

"Be known to us in breaking bread, but do not then depart; Saviour abide with us, and spread thy table in our heart. There sup with us in love divine, thy body and thy blood, that living bread, that heavenly wine, be our immortal food.

I am not too sure if it’s the same, but it’s mentioned after communion.

I think the final blessing is similar to the OF mass then.

 

[gohjedrek]

Overall, I would say the Ordinariate Use is more similar in spirit to the Tridentine. The language is much more penitential than the NO, and a lot more emphasis is put on the unworthiness of the people to recieve (for instance the Prayer of Humble Access). The people kneel for much more of the service, including the confession. The full Canon of the Mass (EP I) must be used on Sundays. The people recieve kneeling at the altar rail (or the step of the Sanctuary). The words on giving Communion are the same as the Tridentine (except in English).

I think the Ordinariate Use is more reverent in prayers (penitential rite, humble access) to the OF. Interestingly, I felt there was more active participation of singing hymns in the church by the layman. The hymns used were particularly long and similar to the anglican church, especially the introductory and recessional hymns. There was more kneeling, I think that goes hand in hand with the longer duration of the mass. Ad Orientum is used in my parish, but the priest faces the audience couple of times to give announcements as well as to sing the recessional hymn and angelus at the end of the mass. I think it’s safe to say the structure is largely similar to EF but the language used is in old english, even then it is an old-school version of OF.

Am I the only one who thinks, when viewing the Ordinariate Missal, that the post-Vatican II “reform of the liturgy” was made far more complicated than it had to be?

The churches that wanted to join the Ordinariate opened the doors towards creating the Ordinariate Missal, but there were minor adjustments that they needed to change, especially the eucharistic prayers. And they then kept all the traditional parts, because of this the Ordinariate Mass became more distinct from the NO Mass and also more friendly towards ex-anglicans from a high-church history.

I love it! Assisting at an Ordinariate Mass is on my short list of things to do, sooner rather than later.

The Ordinariate needs more people and it can be also be said of the TLM. The issue is more the case of convenience than the liturgy, people would rather go to the church next door, usually the NO mass instead of travelling all the way to either the Ordinariate or TLM.

And I know that the Church of Rome, at least among some of those in its highest echelons, does not exactly burst with love over the Anglo-Saxon culture and mindset.

Catholicism in the Anglosphere has a really beautiful history, beginning from St Augustine of Canterbury all the way in the early 600s. I think someone made a comment about how if St Augustine was alive today, would he align to the Catholic church or the Anglican Church? I think the answer is obvious. It’s the history that brings people back like myself. St John Henry Newman, is also another influential figure of the Ordinariate, he was the forerunner of the anglo-catholic church. Without him and the tractarians, there wouldn’t be the ordinariate today.

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

@gohjedrek,

Thanks for sharing your experiences. I’d be interested in attending an Ordinariate Mass some day should I find myself near one. Last I checked there weren’t any here in Northern California.

My comparison was done strictly on the actual words I read in that online ordinary I found (which itself may very well have inaccuracies, and is certainly far from authoritative), and I compared what is actually allowed for in the Ordinariate Mass to what is entirely absent from the Ordinary Form. In this regard I didn’t consider the usual superficial trappings like ad orientem celebration, all-male altar servers, the use of a communion rail, etc. because all of these things are not intrinsic to the E.F. (indeed there are plenty of parishes that employ such in the celebration of the O.F.)

This is why I compared things such as the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar, the dual Confiteor, the traditional Offertory, the longer Formula for Distribution of Communion, the Last Gospel, etc. These are all things that no matter how “traditional” an Ordinary Form celebrant is he cannot employ such in his celebration of the Ordinary Form. With this in mind it looks to me like the Ordinariate Mass, as like many things “Anglican”, could in theory run the gamut. Whether the Mass more resembles the OF or EF will depend entirely on which of the explicit options provided for in Divine Worship that the celebrating priest selects: it can be the most reverent of Novus Ordos or the most English of TLMs.

 

[AngelusDomini]

The Ordinariate Use is neither the OF not the EF but worked from a source which Cranmer created from the Rites used in Britain at the time, primarily the Sarum.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

It might be an episcopal or anglican continuum church, they use a different BCP from the CoE and the mass is generally more traditional than in CoE. As to the priest not joining the RC church, perhaps he didn’t like the liturgy of NO, didn’t like the authority of having to submit to the dogmas of the RC church or it could be that he would be a layman in the RC church. I think it’s a huge hurdle to clear, especially those who are clergy more so than the layman. Interestingly, I have found traditional anglicans, even those in CoE parishes, have a good relationship with the RC church, such as being in tune with the happenings in Rome and quoting the Vatican during their homilies.

It was a very conservative “continuing Anglican” church, in discussing them with my family, I likened them to “an Anglican SSPX”. The priest had issues with Apostolicae curae (nullity of Anglican orders) but was very “Romish”, biretta, cassock, traditional vestments, and so on. I really don’t think he would have needed a lot of RC seminary instruction to become an RC priest. He insisted that he had valid orders through the Old Catholics, which I have no real reason to doubt, but these things have to be decided by the Church, not by me. It would not hurt anything, in receiving Anglican priests into the Church, to look at their orders, their lineage, the ordinal used in their ordination, and see whether the orders could be valid in their particular case. The prospect of being re-ordained is irritating to many Anglican priests.