Pope Extends Overhaul of Vatican's Liturgy Department

  • Thread starter Thread starter pnewton
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tantum_ergo said:
Good. While we made great strides in the renewal from 2011, too many parishes still have not implemented Sacrosanctum Concilium as was envisioned in the documents themselves.
Click to expand...
It’s been a while since I last attended a parish Mass where the missal wasn’t followed. Inasmuch as a parish is following the missal, it has implemented Sacrosanctum Concilium. The missal is the product of Sacrosanctum Concilium, therefore if you follow the missal, you are implementing SC necessarily.

SC did say that Gregorian chant had to have “pride of place” in the liturgy. It has. SC does not say that Gregorian chant has to be in the liturgy in every place. In the neighbouring diocese (I live right on the border of two dioceses), where I sing in a Gregorian schola, “pride of place” means that having Gregorian chant is a special event in a parish. Our schola rotates around parishes, and besides Mass in parishes, we do Mass in care facilities, solemn Vespers, accompany at funerals, and give recitals. When we sing, it’s announced in advance in the parish bulletin, or in the local paper. But it would be out of reach of the resources of all the parishes to do it every Sunday, other than the very simple settings of the Kyriale. But again, that is optional, not required. Otherwise Gregorian chant is used at high liturgies in the Vatican, in some cathedrals, and in most Benedictine monasteries. So it does have a certain pride of place.
 
I note there are two women that will be included. This is a positive move for having more of a role of women in the Church, especially in an area where they could contribute so much. It was only last year that the Pope announced that women could be included in the washing of the feet.
 
OraLabora said:
It’s been a while since I last attended a parish Mass where the missal wasn’t followed. Inasmuch as a parish is following the missal, it has implemented Sacrosanctum Concilium. The missal is the product of Sacrosanctum Concilium, therefore if you follow the missal, you are implementing SC necessarily.

SC did say that Gregorian chant had to have “pride of place” in the liturgy. It has. SC does not say that Gregorian chant has to be in the liturgy in every place. In the neighbouring diocese (I live right on the border of two dioceses), where I sing in a Gregorian schola, “pride of place” means that having Gregorian chant is a special event in a parish. Our schola rotates around parishes, and besides Mass in parishes, we do Mass in care facilities, solemn Vespers, accompany at funerals, and give recitals. When we sing, it’s announced in advance in the parish bulletin, or in the local paper. But it would be out of reach of the resources of all the parishes to do it every Sunday, other than the very simple settings of the Kyriale. But again, that is optional, not required. Otherwise Gregorian chant is used at high liturgies in the Vatican, in some cathedrals, and in most Benedictine monasteries. So it does have a certain pride of place.
Click to expand...
You’re fortunate. (And please I invite you to my parish where the GIRM is not followed in many places and has not been for the past 7 years --no penitential rite, no Gloria at all during the year, no Creed at all during the year, and ad libbed Eucharistic prayers, among other things). Maybe I’m simply unlucky in my residences through the Northeast lo these many years (I had no problems during the time I lived in the South and Southwest), but since the 1990s (probably not coincidentally in the same diocese then as I am now, sigh) I had never been exposed to such liturgical, ah, liberties in such abundance. Honestly had I been told of this and not experienced it myself, I would have been skeptical and thought the person telling me was at best doing some embroidering and at worst was some kind of nutcase. Guess the Lord’s idea was to keep me from being cynical and judgmental in letting this happen to me now. (That and letting me hopefully work off some Purgatory time on earth).

I didn’t mention chant myself. . .I’d like to hear some as opposed to none but right now I’d settle for just hearing a Mass that did adhere to the GIRM.
 
SyroMalankara said:
“Left the Church” is quite an understatement - more accurately, charged with 10 counts of abusing minors, plead guilty to one, was barred from ministry, started a non-denominational group after the Bishop told him to cease, was subsequently laicized by Pope BXVI for his sexual crimes, and then excommunicated for starting a non-catholic community.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dale_Fushek
Click to expand...
Thank you. I was not aware of his sexual crimes.
 
MODERATOR NOTE

This thread is wandering, please return to the topic of the original post
 
I am looking forward to hearing more about this topic as the new liturgists develop some strategies and plans, and perhaps a timeline for new implementations. We are indeed fortunate to have Pope Francis encouraging development of the liturgy. Of course, I’m still waiting for an update to the Breviary (Liturgy of the Hours) as it has been years (decades) since translations were addressed there, so maybe we’ll have some developments there as well.

And while I’m no hater of the NAB (though for home reading I refer the RSV, the older not the new) a new English version of the NAB might be helpful as well, since the gospels and epistles are taken from there. Truly, there is a lot for the people to work on.
 
Is the Confiteor still supposed to be part of the Mass? It’s literally been several years since I’ve heard it said at Mass.
 
Bataar said:
Is the Confiteor still supposed to be part of the Mass? It’s literally been several years since I’ve heard it said at Mass.
Click to expand...
It is one of the licit options. There are other licit options.
 
If we’we expressing hopes, while still recognizing that that the Bishops have legitimate authority and better knowledge than me and knowing I’ll be obedient to their wisdom on the matter, I’d like to see a return to as orientum during the Eucharistic Liturgy as the norm (not rigidly mandated, but encouraged to be used as the norm when and where feasible) and a greater use of Latin, all within the ordinary form as it is now. No changes to the rites or anything as prescribed for the ordinary form, just clarifications on intent. I’m not really concerned with life teen masses, charismatic masses, or contemporary music (so long as the music is relevant). I’be seencharismatic services with contemporary music performed while the priest himself at the same time kept to many traditional elements, including incense (procession, over the gospel around the altar, etc…), chanting, and just overall with a very high degree of (perceived by me, anyway) reverence you’d think you would normally associate with a very traditional community.
 
Tantum_ergo said:
I am looking forward to hearing more about this topic as the new liturgists develop some strategies and plans, and perhaps a timeline for new implementations. We are indeed fortunate to have Pope Francis encouraging development of the liturgy. Of course, I’m still waiting for an update to the Breviary (Liturgy of the Hours) as it has been years (decades) since translations were addressed there, so maybe we’ll have some developments there as well.

And while I’m no hater of the NAB (though for home reading I refer the RSV, the older not the new) a new English version of the NAB might be helpful as well, since the gospels and epistles are taken from there. Truly, there is a lot for the people to work on.
Click to expand...
There has been a revision of the NAB.

From the USCCB-
The New American Bible, Revised Edition (NABRE)
Released on March 9, 2011, the New American Bible, Revised Edition (NABRE) is the culmination of nearly 20 years of work by a group of nearly 100 scholars and theologians, including bishops, revisers and editors. The NABRE includes a newly revised translation of the entire Old Testament (including the Book of Psalms) along with the 1986 edition of the New Testament.
 
Oneofthewomen said:
There has been a revision of the NAB.

From the USCCB-
The New American Bible, Revised Edition (NABRE)
Released on March 9, 2011, the New American Bible, Revised Edition (NABRE) is the culmination of nearly 20 years of work by a group of nearly 100 scholars and theologians, including bishops, revisers and editors. The NABRE includes a newly revised translation of the entire Old Testament (including the Book of Psalms) along with the 1986 edition of the New Testament.
Click to expand...
Which version is used liturgically in the USA? NAB or NABRE?
In Canada we use the New Revised Standard Version: Catholic Edition.
 
twf said:
Which version is used liturgically in the USA? NAB or NABRE?
In Canada we use the New Revised Standard Version: Catholic Edition.
Click to expand...
Not entirely sure. This is what I found at the USCCB website, so it looks like we are NOT using the revised edition, or at least not yet.
Since May 19, 2002, the revised Lectionary, based on the New American Bible is the only English-language Lectionary that may be used at Mass in the dioceses of the United States, except for the current Lectionary for Masses with Children which remains in use.
Click to expand...
The 1970 edition of the New American Bible is used in the Scripture readings and canticles of the Liturgy of the Hours (except the Benedictus, Magnificat, and Nunc dimittis.)
Click to expand...
 
Tantum_ergo said:
And while I’m no hater of the NAB (though for home reading I refer the RSV, the older not the new) a new English version of the NAB might be helpful as well, since the gospels and epistles are taken from there.
Click to expand...
This makes sense to me. I have always found the NAB to be more readable, a good thing for reading to the laity, though the RSV is more precise, and I tend to favor very literal translations, even if they are stilted.

I would not look to a lot of changes. The thing I like is the make up, having a broad range of Catholics, then a very solid Cardinal Sarah as prefect.
 
Oneofthewomen said:
Not entirely sure. This is what I found at the USCCB website, so it looks like we are NOT using the revised edition, or at least not yet.
Click to expand...
You are correct. In the US, the Lectionary is based off of the NAB. The Vatican made some changes tothe NAB text tobring it into Vatican standards.

Particularly of note is Luke 1:28. NAB states "Hail, favored one!"The Vatican required that the Lectionarytexts use “Full of Grace”

The RSV-CE and*RSV-2CE have been approved by the Vatican without any changes.
 
Brendan said:
You are correct. In the US, the Lectionary is based off of the NAB. The Vatican made some changes tothe NAB text tobring it into Vatican standards.

Particularly of note is Luke 1:28. NAB states "Hail, favored one!"The Vatican required that the Lectionarytexts use “Full of Grace”

The RSV-CE and*RSV-2CE have been approved by the Vatican without any changes.
Click to expand...
“Full of grace” is in the new American Lectionary, but I don’t recall it having been the driving force. The main issue was inclusive language, where proper masculine terms were used especially where strong references to Christ were present, or key theological themes. Key example: Galatians 4:4-7. The NAB 1986 says we “received adoption…no longer a slave but a child…a child then an heir.” All of these have been corrected to read “sons” (adoption as sons…no longer a slave but a son…a son then an heir."
 
porthos11 said:
“Full of grace” is in the new American Lectionary, but I don’t recall it having been the driving force. The main issue was inclusive language, where proper masculine terms were used especially where strong references to Christ were present, or key theological themes. Key example: Galatians 4:4-7. The NAB 1986 says we “received adoption…no longer a slave but a child…a child then an heir.” All of these have been corrected to read “sons” (adoption as sons…no longer a slave but a son…a son then an heir."
Click to expand...
FYI - The example you gave does not reference Christ. As the adoption we receive in Christ applies to both genders, a gender neutral word could be used. It would be less literal, more dynamic, but just as accurate.

The whole “full of grace” issue is a nod to tradition. “Grace” is better than “favor,” but the uniqueness of the word makes the rest open to other ideas. If memory serves correct, it is something like “Hail, one having been graced,” though that makes no sense in English.
 
pnewton said:
The whole “full of grace” issue is a nod to tradition. “Grace” is better than “favor,” but the uniqueness of the word makes the rest open to other ideas. If memory serves correct, it is something like “Hail, one having been graced,” though that makes no sense in English.
Click to expand...
It is closer to " Hail, one who has beencompletely given grace", it’sPassive*voice ( she did not do the act, but it was done TO her), Perfect ( it was completely done), Past participle, (it was already done,*and continues to be so) :cool:

Charitoo can be either*grace, or favor. *But the vast majority of translations of the charitoo roots are translated as ‘grace’, such as Act 6:8 Stephanos, de pleres charitos

In*Acts, it is an adjective, not a participle, so it denotes that, at that moment, St. Stephan was filled with grace.
 
Brendan said:
It is closer to " Hail, one who has beencompletely given grace", it’sPassive*voice ( she did not do the act, but it was done TO her), Perfect ( it was completely done), Past participle, (it was already done,*and continues to be so) :cool:.
Click to expand...
In grammar, “perfect” means the effect is on-going and does not imply completeness. Also, grace is a verb here, not a noun.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top