Prayer of the faithful question

[MarkInOregon]

The word “norms” is just a synonym for “rules.” We simply tend to use the word norms in a liturgical context. Sometimes we might call them rubrics (but that word technically only applies to a norm that’s actually printed within the liturgical text using red letters because rubric comes from a word meaning red ink, but I digress…)

There are different norms/rules for Sundays and weekdays. They are just as you described–more is done on a Sunday.

Makes sense now?

Yes–I was confused because your original answer to my original question was – “The norms are the same for every Mass.” but as you state above there are different norms/rules for Sunday and weekdays–i.e. more is done on Sunday–so I think with regards to my original questions–the answer would be that for those items that we do–we don’t do them differently on a weekday.

Thank you for taking the time to respond I am sure you are very busy.

The peace of Christ,
Mark

Thank you for taking the time to respond.

 

[FrDavid96]

Yes–I was confused because your original answer to my original question was – “The norms are the same for every Mass.” but as you state above there are different norms/rules for Sunday and weekdays–i.e. more is done on Sunday–so I think with regards to my original questions–the answer would be that for those items that we do–we don’t do them differently on a weekday.

Thank you for taking the time to respond I am sure you are very busy.

The peace of Christ,
Mark

Thank you for taking the time to respond.

I understand now.

The norms on how the petitions are done (i.e. the actual method) is the same for Sundays and other days.

Now, within the norm itself there are still options. I don’t intend to be confusing here, but it’s necessary otherwise what I write won’t be true.

They might be spoken or sung. They should be done by a deacon, but if there is no deacon, someone else might do them.

What I originally wrote was in response to another poster who asked if there was a rule that allowed for people to call out individual petitions—a rule which might apply on weekdays but not on Sundays. That’s what I originally meant when I wrote that they are the same. Calling out individual petitions is not described (and therefore not allowed) on either Sundays or weekdays–that’s the same.

 

[John_Lilburne]

In post #6 it quoted the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) n. 71 with the intentions “from the ambo or another suitable place”.

But GIRM n. 138 is more explicit: “announces the intentions from the ambo or from another suitable place while facing the people”.

So announcing an intention from the third pew from the back cannot be a suitable place, the person will not be facing the people.

 

[porthos11]

While it’s good that the GIRM lays out the norms for the Prayer of the Faithful, I personally don’t think it has enough teeth.

It would probably be a better idea to lock the Prayer of the Faithful in stone, in an unchanging format as in the Byzantine liturgy, or multiple fixed forms as in Divine Worship incorporated into the Ordinary of the Mass, all with recognitio by Rome. That way, we avoid politicizing the General Intercessions or as mentioned earlier, turning them into the six o’clock news.

 

[FrDavid96]

While it’s good that the GIRM lays out the norms for the Prayer of the Faithful, I personally don’t think it has enough teeth.

It would probably be a better idea to lock the Prayer of the Faithful in stone, in an unchanging format as in the Byzantine liturgy, or multiple fixed forms as in Divine Worship incorporated into the Ordinary of the Mass, all with recognitio by Rome. That way, we avoid politicizing the General Intercessions or as mentioned earlier, turning them into the six o’clock news.

It’s a strange thing. The Prayers of the Faithful are truly a mess that needs to be fixed.

The Eastern Churches have it right, but then, they never lost the petitions as a regular part of their liturgical practice (e.g. the “Great Litanies”). The West lost them for a time, but then when they were restored, it was done without any understanding of their proper meaning.

I agree: we would be in a much better position if we simply had one form for the petitions with no variations. Unfortunately, I don’t think we’ll be seeing that anytime soon.

 

[porthos11]

It’s a strange thing. The Prayers of the Faithful are truly a mess that needs to be fixed.

The Eastern Churches have it right, but then, they never lost the petitions as a regular part of their liturgical practice (e.g. the “Great Litanies”). The West lost them for a time, but then when they were restored, it was done without any understanding of their proper meaning.

I agree: we would be in a much better position if we simply had one form for the petitions with no variations. Unfortunately, I don’t think we’ll be seeing that anytime soon.

Well, at least where the Latin church is concerned, the Ordinariates got it right. Divine Worship has five fixed forms which can be freely selected (and one or two of them are influenced by the Byzantine litany, up to and including the last response “To thee O Lord our God”). I can’t see where with a little conviction and willpower, the appropriate Roman authorities can’t backport the Ordinariate forms as fixed intercessions for the Ordinary Form of the Mass, with the appropriate translation adjustments (i.e. from Tudor English to contemporary English) as required.

The Ordinariates are extremely particular about their form of the Mass, and I’m told that in some cases, they had to resort to pleading and begging for some retentions, even if just as options, which is why it’s turning out so beautifully. I haven’t seen the same kind of care being given to our own Ordinary Form on a grand scale.