Possible changes you would like to see with the Extraodinary form?

[WhollyRoamin]

I only have one change I’d like to make. I’d like it to be offered in every parish on the planet. That is all.

 

[LUISV]

I’ve been thinking a lot about our wonderful Extraordinary form of the mass and how it may change in the future. Lets face facts, Pope Benedict wants a Reform of the Reform of the roman liturgy. The Extraordinary form at present may change in upcoming years and may possibly be merged with the Ordinary form at some future date to create an Uber Roman Rite of sorts.

Tradition. That is what we are really talking about here. The Roman Rite is, to put it bluntly, the rite used by the Pope. Thats it. He is the Patriarch of the West, all Bishops under him must use his rite unless otherwise authorized.

The EF is now a fixed rite. It is to be celebrated to the 1962 Missal. End of story. If you do not like it in its current form then you need to find a rite that best suites you.

The OF is a the current Uber Roman Rite. It was designed to be flexable and adaptable to any Catholic community from ultra orthodox to radicaly liberal. This mutability is what has most traditionalist in an uproar. It has lead to some extreme liturgical abuses. The ever popular puppet mass for one. I still can’t get my head around that one.

I’m trying realy hard not to go off on a tangent here so I’ll stop. But before I get off my soap box… The OF is not broken. Bishops have lost visibilty in their diocese and liturgical abuses have been allowed to occur. The OF will never be the Tridentine Mass nor should it be. Enjoy the TLM when you can get to it. Get involved in your OF parish to use a more solumn order to the OF.

 

[EasterJoy]

What Pope are we talking about? Blessed JohnXXIII or St Puis V?

Either and more, if the current Pope deemed the liturgy appropriate for our times: that is, if the foreseeable use would be an asset not provided by forms already available. I meant that if the current Pope wants to allow a missal approved by a previous Pope, let it be without changes. Let there be one Ordinary Form, which is the Mass “belonging” to the current Pope, and let all of the Extraordinary Forms be Masses that belonged to a particular time in the past.

My thinking is that it keeps Dr. Frankensteins from becoming liturgists. All Masses will have been in widespread use under some Pope at some time in the history of the Church. The only Mass a Pope would make changes to, then, would be the one he promulagated himself for the entire Church to use in his own time.

It isn’t that he couldn’t promulgate a changed version of a Mass promulgated by a previous Pope, of course, but that by custom he would not choose to do so.

 

[Robster7]

Here’s my 2 cents:

1. Have the priest say the Latin out loud with appropriate dramatic effect relative to what is being said (but don’t ham it up), and at a normal pace. Not flatly droning like a bored cop reciting a prisoner his miranda rites. Not like: “IntroiboalteraDeiadDeum…etc” at 100 words per minute.
2. Have congregation, not the server alone, make the responses out loud.
3. Use only one Cofiteor for priest and congregation together. We got 3 or 4; seems like unnecessary duplication. If you’re sorry, you’re sorry and don’t to keep saying it if you were sincere the first time.

 

[malphono]

Here’s my 2 cents:

1. Have the priest say the Latin out loud with appropriate dramatic effect relative to what is being said (but don’t ham it up), and at a normal pace. Not flatly droning like a bored cop reciting a prisoner his miranda rites. Not like: “IntroiboalteraDeiadDeum…etc” at 100 words per minute.

No argument. I, for one, have always agreed with that. (see my earier post in this this thread)

1. Have congregation, not the server alone, make the responses out loud.

This is missa recitata (aka “Dialogue Mass”) which, was a good idea but for some reason never quite caught on in the US.

1. Use only one Cofiteor for priest and congregation together. We got 3 or 4; seems like unnecessary duplication. If you’re sorry, you’re sorry and don’t to keep saying it if you were sincere the first time.

I have to agree: a single Confiteor is quite enough. Note, that the “second Confiteor” (before communion) was suppressed in the Missale Romanum of 1962 and I, for one, was not sorry to see it go.

 

[ziapueblo]

I’m just learning now about the differences between the OF and EF so if this question seems silly I apologize in advance I take it that the EF does not us the 1970 missal? Isn’t the 1970 missal a good thing because we are hearing more Sacred Scripture read to us at Mass?

The Tridentine Mass is beautiful, the Latin and the chanting, and I enjoy the use of incense! Why does the Novus Ordo not use incense as often?

Again, these may be silly questions, but I am only becoming more familiar with all this.

Thanks and God bless,
ZP

 

[ProVobis]

1. Have congregation, not the server alone, make the responses out loud.

As long as they don’t hold hands.

 

[Aramis]

Not counting the Eastern rites, there is no form before Vatican II in which there is something other than Latin written in it. (Except the Kyrie and the Hosanna, of course.)

Better check again… the Dalmatian “exception” …

newadvent.org/cathen/04606b.htm
In the Entry Dalmatia
Under the subheading Religion and Schools
"The right to use the Glagolitic language at Mass with the Roman Rite has prevailed for many centuries in all the south-western Balkan countries, and has been sanctioned by long practice and by many popes. "

newadvent.org/cathen/13155a.htm
And under Roman Rite, in the last paragraph:
“The language of the Roman Rite is Latin everywhere except that in some churches along the Western Adriatic coast it is said in Slavonic and on rare occasions in Greek at Rome (see RITES).”

That’s from the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia.

BTW, Glagolitic is another name for Old Church Slavonic.

 

[srp643]

I only have one change I’d like to make. I’d like it to be offered in every parish on the planet. That is all.

Oh come now Roamin, that doesn’t work because it would fill up the pews again. Your commonsense and reverence for what came down to us is most disturbing. Any more of that and you could excommunicate yourself.

 

[twf]

ziapueblo: Incense is optional in the OF Mass. Some parishes use it every single Sunday. Mine does. It’s the priest’s decision. An OF mass can be said ad orientum (priest facing Our Lord in the tabernacle and leading us in prayer…rather than facing us), with the use of incense, Gregorian chant, etc…the OF can even be sung in Latin…the vernacular (such as English) is simply an option that most priests have elected to use.

 

[ProVobis]

Better check again… the Dalmatian “exception” …

I’m sure there are other claims as well. I don’t have to guess where you attend Mass but where I grew up before the Vatican II Church, attending anything other than the Latin Mass was frowned upon. Look in the St. Joseph Missal, “Have I taken part in services other than those of my religion?” Guess how many people in the West actually believed anything other than the Latin Mass was Catholic?

 

[Aramis]

I’m sure there are other claims as well. I don’t have to guess where you attend Mass but where I grew up before the Vatican II Church, attending anything other than the Latin Mass was frowned upon. Look in the St. Joseph Missal, “Have I taken part in services other than those of my religion?” Guess how many people in the West actually believed anything other than the Latin Mass was Catholic?

Doesn’t make them right… just ignorant.

 

[ziapueblo]

ziapueblo: Incense is optional in the OF Mass. Some parishes use it every single Sunday. Mine does. It’s the priest’s decision. An OF mass can be said ad orientum (priest facing Our Lord in the tabernacle and leading us in prayer…rather than facing us), with the use of incense, Gregorian chant, etc…the OF can even be sung in Latin…the vernacular (such as English) is simply an option that most priests have elected to use.

Thanks-
So an OF can be done in Latin and vernacular is optional. We have a Church in our diocese that has a Latin Mass every Sunday. Is it possible that this is in OF? I guess the best way to find out is to ask the Pastor!

God bless,
ZP

 

[Tradycja]

I think we have had enough of “changes” the last 40 years to last us a LOOOOOONG time. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

 

[Volodymyr_988]

Better check again… the Dalmatian “exception” …

newadvent.org/cathen/04606b.htm
In the Entry Dalmatia
Under the subheading Religion and Schools
"The right to use the Glagolitic language at Mass with the Roman Rite has prevailed for many centuries in all the south-western Balkan countries, and has been sanctioned by long practice and by many popes. "

newadvent.org/cathen/13155a.htm
And under Roman Rite, in the last paragraph:
“The language of the Roman Rite is Latin everywhere except that in some churches along the Western Adriatic coast it is said in Slavonic and on rare occasions in Greek at Rome (see RITES).”

That’s from the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia.

BTW, Glagolitic is another name for Old Church Slavonic.

You forgot that the Chinese were allowed to use their “churchy” vernacular as well after Matteo Ricci traveled to China.

 

[weepixie71]

i think we should just leave the EF alone. it was good enough for a lot of very holy saints so it should be good enough for us.
the EF is not broke so dont fix it.

you can not make a mass that makes everyone happy. besides the mass is not about us being entertaining, or making mass easier for us to celebrate. its about God. His sacrifice. How He suffered for our salvation.

 

[ProVobis]

Doesn’t make them right… just ignorant.

Ignorance is not knowing what the new tax laws are, not whether some town in some foreign country has special permission to say their own liturgy. We’re all supposed to keep track of every one of 1 billion Catholics who have their own preference for liturgy?

 

[malphono]

Aramis:

Doesn’t make them right… just ignorant.

Ignorance is not knowing what the new tax laws are, not whether some town in some foreign country has special permission to say their own liturgy. We’re all supposed to keep track of every one of 1 billion Catholics who have their own preference for liturgy?

We have to keep in mind that the indult for the use of Glagolitic was not universal even in Croatia. Most of the churches use(d) the missale romanum in Latin.

While we’re at it, let’s also keep in mind that Glagolitic is Old Slavonic which is of course, a venerable liturgical language in its own right, although it is disliked (or feared) by some, for the same reasons many dislike and fear Latin). It is not modern Croatian, and is certainly not the “vernacular” tongue of Croatia or even of Dalmatia.

 

[Aramis]

Ignorance is not knowing what the new tax laws are, not whether some town in some foreign country has special permission to say their own liturgy. We’re all supposed to keep track of every one of 1 billion Catholics who have their own preference for liturgy?

Ignorance is not knowing, period. Not knowing that the church has 23 Churches Sui Iuris, each with different liturgies is ignorance. Ignorance is not itself a sin. (Willful ignorance, however, is, when it comes to the Rules and Teachings of the Church.)

The Holy Catholic Church has about 50-60 approved divine worship services (Ok, so about 15 are DL of St. Basil in different flavors, and 14 are DL of St John…)…

Including the EF, OF, Dominican Mass, Carmelite Mass, Carthusian Mass, Ambrosian Mass, Mozarabic Mass, Bragan Mass, 15 different versions of the DL of St. Basil, 14 different versions of the DL of St John Chrysostum, at least 5 versions of the DL of St James, 12 versions of the Chaldean Qorbono, The Etheopian and Eritrian DLs…

And that’s before accounting for the different approved translations… like the Roman mass in Church Slavonic or Greek, or the Ruthenian DL’s of St Basil and St John being allowed to be done in Church Slavonic, English, Spanish, Czech, and Hungarian. All this before vatican II.

The Church has always been diverse. And Vatican II did point out that that diversity was good and wholesome. A strength, not a flaw.

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Has the Sarum rite ever been done in English?

Wouldn’t that be closer to the EF than the Anglican use?

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 would the OF be like if EF lovers had been charged with coming up with it?

Is it possible to love the EF and be able to formulate a better OF?