Rubrics, rubrics, rubrics!

  • Thread starter Thread starter kk1727
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

kk1727

Guest
I noticed a rubrical deviation today at Mass. This Mass is said according to the 1962 Missale Romanum. One of the reasons I like this ordo missae is because of the strict rubrical directions which do not allow for improvisation. Unfortunately, it seems that there are those who wish to improvise anyway. The Mass today included the Confiteor, Misereatur, and Indulgentiam before the communion of the faithful. This is a rubrical deviation from the 1962 Missale Romanum. It exasperates me that even going to the traditional latin Mass, I’m still subjected to the wishes of others who think they know best how to regulate the liturgy.

In all fairness, this could simply be an oversight on the part of the celebrant or the coordinators of the liturgy. It seems to me though that since there was time taken to instruct the altar servers, one might expect them to actually look up pertinent rubrics of the Mass. There seems to be some overlooking on the part of the celebrants and coordinators for due rubrical instructions. If I can find De Musica Sacra and Rubricarum Instructum, is it too much to ask that those organizing the liturgy follow those same instructions?
 
40.png
kk1727:
If I can find De Musica Sacra and Rubricarum Instructum, is it too much to ask that those organizing the liturgy follow those same instructions?
Click to expand...
Yes it is too much to ask if you are motivated by piety and the others are motivated by egotism. If you celebrate Mass as an expression of your service to God and those you celebrate it with celebrate Mass as an expression of their creativity, you are doomed to remain at cross purposes.

Plus, you will find yourself outnumbered. As a result, Churchs will look more like auditoriums, Priests will act more like MCs, the faithful will seem more like an audience, in short, the kinds of changes that have taken place these past 40 years will continue to take place over our dead bodies. – Sincerely, Albert Cipriani the Traditional Catholic
http://www.geocities.com/albert_cipriani/index.html

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ReligiousPhilosophy/
 
Michael Davies (R.I.P.) wrote an article on this very subject in a recent issue of the Latin Mass Magazine. I haven’t read the article but it was discussed on the Yahoo! ctngreg group.

The rubrics governing the Communion of the Faithful are described in the Rituale Romanum, not the Missale Romanum. The Rituale Romanum was revised in 1962, apparently after the revision of the Missale Romanum, so the old Rituale was used for a brief time with the new Missale. Remember that the Communion of the Faithful, like the sermon, technically occurs during a suspension of the Mass.

Scott
 
40.png
kk1727:
I noticed a rubrical deviation today at Mass. This Mass is said according to the 1962 Missale Romanum. One of the reasons I like this ordo missae is because of the strict rubrical directions which do not allow for improvisation. Unfortunately, it seems that there are those who wish to improvise anyway. The Mass today included the Confiteor, Misereatur, and Indulgentiam before the communion of the faithful. This is a rubrical deviation from the 1962 Missale Romanum. It exasperates me that even going to the traditional latin Mass, I’m still subjected to the wishes of others who think they know best how to regulate the liturgy.

In all fairness, this could simply be an oversight on the part of the celebrant or the coordinators of the liturgy. It seems to me though that since there was time taken to instruct the altar servers, one might expect them to actually look up pertinent rubrics of the Mass. There seems to be some overlooking on the part of the celebrants and coordinators for due rubrical instructions. If I can find De Musica Sacra and Rubricarum Instructum, is it too much to ask that those organizing the liturgy follow those same instructions?
Click to expand...
Just goes to show that even with “strict rubrical directions” (or not), the Tridentine Mass is just as abusable as the Novus Ordo Mass…
 
40.png
smn:
Michael Davies (R.I.P.) wrote an article on this very subject in a recent issue of the Latin Mass Magazine. I haven’t read the article but it was discussed on the Yahoo! ctngreg group.

The rubrics governing the Communion of the Faithful are described in the Rituale Romanum, not the Missale Romanum. The Rituale Romanum was revised in 1962, apparently after the revision of the Missale Romanum, so the old Rituale was used for a brief time with the new Missale. Remember that the Communion of the Faithful, like the sermon, technically occurs during a suspension of the Mass.

Scott
Click to expand...
At issue appears to be the order of the Mass, and not the communion ritual per se.
 
40.png
Crusader:
At issue appears to be the order of the Mass, and not the communion ritual per se.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure how that follows. The ceremony of the Communion of the Faithful interrupts the Mass, which pauses after the Priest’s consumption of the Precious Blood and resumes with the prayer Quod ore sumpsimus. The Communion of the Faithful, like the processional, Asperges, sermon, and recessional, is not technically a part of the Mass.

To clarify, it’s my understanding that the Rituale Romanum, prior to its revision in 1962, read as follows:

*S: Confiteor Deo omnipotenti . . . *(as during the beginning of Mass)
P: Miseratur vestri omnipotens Deus, et dimissis peccatis vestris, perducat vos ad vitam aeternam.
S: Amen.
P: Indulgentiam, + absolutionem, et remissionem peccatorum vestrorum tribuat vobis omnipotens et misericors Dominus.
S: Amen.
P: Ecce Agnus Dei, ecce qui tollit peccata mundi.
S: Domine, non sum dignus ut intres sub tectum meum; sed tantum dic verbo, et sanabitur anima mea. (thrice)
P: Corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam aeternam. Amen. (to each communicant)

After its revision, it read:

P: Ecce Agnus Dei, ecce qui tollit peccata mundi
S: Domine, non sum dignus ut intres sub tectum meum; sed tantum dic verbo, et sanabitur anima mea. (thrice)
P: Corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam aeternam. Amen. (to each communicant)

Now, the question is whether or not it’s acceptable to use the older ritual. Does anyone have a copy of the Michael Davies article I mentioned above that would be willing to share or summarize it?

Scott
 
I’m a former postulant of the Society of Saint John Cantius. We used the “Third Confiteor” in our celebrations of the Tridentine Mass. As does nearly every Mass done by a Fraternity of Saint Peter priest.

It is allowed in the 1962 Missal, but it is optional. I’m not sure by what legal technicality, but it is.
 
Scott: Thanks for the information. I’ll look into this further and see what I can find. I’m not sure I’m buying the ‘suspension’ of Mass theory. Either it is permissible or it isn’t. There has to be a liturgical directive allowing it, otherwise its insertion into the Mass is a deviation from liturgical law.

DV: It simply isn’t good enough to claim it as an option but not be able to provide documentation. That’s how most of the abuses of the missa normativa get passed off on us as legitimate. I don’t accept that answer from those folks and I won’t accept that answer in this case. You may be entirely correct, however, so I’ll withhold judgement until I confirm things further.
 
Well . . . I’ve searched high and low and haven’t been able to come up with anything. I was unable to find any authoritative documents that would allow priests to deviate from the 1962 liturgical books in favor of a previous rite of communion. I could not find the afore alluded to article from Michael Davies. I sent out a couple questions to people that might (or might not know). It seems to me at this point that the 1962 Rituale Romanum ought to be followed and clearly isn’t in many cases. What makes this liturgical abuse acceptable to so-called traditionalists? I’m appreciative of the former beautiful prayers, the Latin, especially the Gregorian Chant and the smells and bells but it annoys me the same to suffer liturgical abuses whether I attend Mass said according to the 1962 liturgical books or current liturgical books. Isn’t it a sin for a priest to change the rite on his own authority? I just don’t get it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top