M
malphono
Guest
The Sarum usage was suppressed by Trent. If it’s done at all these days, (in whatever language), it’s eitherHas the Sarum rite ever been done in English?
(a) illicit, precisely because it was officially suppressed, or
(b) illicit (and perhaps invalid) because it was done by some priest in some church not in union.
As I understand it, the Anglicans borrowed some things from SarumWouldn’t that be closer to the EF than the Anglican use?
I prefer to leave the Latin in place, and the leave the EF as it is, perhaps with a tweak here and there, but nothing major.I think the EF is great–so great that people should be able to hear it in English.
Is it bad to desire such a thing?
I agree that it wouldn’t be great when it comes to chanting.
I can even imagine a 75% English and 25% Latin mass.
Would such a thing necessarily be bad?
What you suggest actually did exist in the the ill-fated “interim Missal” of 1965. About 15 minutes after it was promulgated, the liturgical “novelties” began to appear. So, yes, I can imagine it, but I’d rather not. It’d be kind of like a recurring nightmare.
There would have been no need for an OF.What would the OF be like if EF lovers had been charged with coming up with it?
I suppose so. PP Benedict XVI seems to be of that opinion.Is it possible to love the EF and be able to formulate a better OF?