TLM Saturday evening = Sunday obligation?

[Br.Rich_SFO]

In the EF there is no Lectionary and Sacramentary as in the OF. Everything is integrated into the Roman Missal. You really can’t separate the Liturgical Calendar from the cycle of Readings.

This modern day concept of a modular plug and play Liturgy where you can make any changes to any element of the Mass without affecting any other element certainly has some advantages. But, where is the logic in trying to force this back into the EF of Mass - which just wasn’t designed to be manipulated this way.

In the OF what the Readings are don’t seem to matter too much. They will be different next year and different again the next. This past Sunday (4th Sunday in Ordinary Time) the Gospel of Matthew was read. “Blessed are the poor in spirit”. Next year we have Mark. Jesus has authority over the demons. In 2 years we will hear Luke. Jesus is sent to the Gentiles as well as the Jews.

So, we have God’s love of the poor, the authority of Jesus, and the fact that the Church will include Gentiles and Jews as themes in differing years.

Very different themes. But all of the other prayers of the Mass stay the same.

The Entrance Antiphon - “…that we may proclaim your holy name and glory in your praise”

Opening Prayer - “…help us to love you with all our hearts…”

None of the other prayers of the Mass reflect any of these themes.

In contrast to this in the EF of Mass it was Quinquagesima Sunday. The Gospel was from Luke (18:31-43). Jesus heals a blind man who says “Son of David, have mercy on me”. So, we have the power and the mercy of God as themes here.

The other prayers of the Mass seem a bit more connected to the Gospel than in the OF.

The Introit - “…deliver me in Thy justice, and save me.”

The Collect - “We beseech Thee, O Lord, graciously hear our prayers and releasing us from the bonds of our sins, guard us from all adversity”

The Gradual - “Thou art the God that alone dost wonders. Thou hast made Thy power known among the nations…”

These prayers show a connection with the Gospel Reading that would be lost if another, changing cycle of readings were imposed.

What I don’t seem to understand is why anyone even wants the Readings for the OF forced into the EF. What makes a cycle of Readings put together hastily in a Swiss hotel room in the '60s so much better than a cycle of Readings that has nourished countless Saints for 1000 years.

And where did this idea come from that everyone must use the same cycle of Readings? Does anyone wish to force their favorite Lectionary on the Eastern Catholics as well, replacing their own ancient cycle or Readings?

If it is just a matter of some sort of Unity among Roman Catholics then what about those parishes offering the Ambrosian Rite of Mass. Should we force them to switch to a 4 week Advent instead of their 6 week season just so they can have the same Readings.

Seriously, I have yet to hear a good argument for forcing everyone to use the new Lectionary. Actually, I haven’t even heard a bad argument for it either. Just a lot of people, most of whom seemingly having little or no interest in the EF of Mass, thinking it is a good idea - just because.

It is very probable that at some point in the future changes will be made to the Liturgical Calendar of the OF, the EF, or both of them in order to bring them into conformity with one another. But, as our own Holy Father has pointed out, the Liturgical Reforms following Vatican II were not organic. They were artificial and didn’t always follow the directives of the Council. It hasn’t even been 6 months yet. What is so wrong with just giving it a little bit of time before we start tinkering around with the Mass again - maybe even allow future changes to happen organically?

James

I don’t think we should ever make something “fit” where it was not meant to be. I asked why it was not possible to use the same readings to keep some continunity in the Western Church with the cycle of readings most Catholics are used to for the last 40 years. I have never “studied” the EF I grew up with it for the first 10 or so years. But never had the opportunity to really understand it liturgically. I suppose I’ll be doing some study in the near future. You have answered one of my questions. Why do we need to use the old Rites of Sacraments also?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

This was my thought. Why is this question in here?

Because it is a question about Liturgy and liturgical forms and Sacramental Rites and how the relate to each other. It’s not about the “Traditional” specifically. It’s about Liturgy and Sacraments. Originally it was about why can’t we celebrate the Sunday EF Mass on Saturday evening?

 

[AJV]

On the Traditional lectionary, this might be interesting. It’s a bit dry, but it’s quite interesting and comprehensive

 

[Chatter163]

I don’t think we should ever make something “fit” where it was not meant to be. I asked why it was not possible to use the same readings to keep some continunity in the Western Church with the cycle of readings most Catholics are used to for the last 40 years.

Actually this question should be posed in the opposite fashion, i.e., why were the readings and kalendar changed in 1969, breaking with had been done for many, many centuries? These were the innovations, and the old missal did not provide for what did not yet exist.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Actually this question should be posed in the opposite fashion, i.e., why were the readings and kalendar changed in 1969, breaking with had been done for many, many centuries? These were the innovations, and the old missal did not provide for what did not yet exist.

They were changed because the Church wanted to change them which the Church has the authority to do.

 

[Chatter163]

They were changed because the Church wanted to change them which the Church has the authority to do.

Did anyone here say differently? I am lost.

You asked why the EF could not be celebrated with the current kalendar and readings. I have explained, as have others, how the OF’s kalendar is different and does not always correspond to to EF. It is not merely a matter of opening the missal and the two being the same. But somehow you keep asking the same question over and over again, as if it is not being answered.

Then, when you imply a “continuity” issue regarding the EF and the past forty years, and it is pointed out the 1970 kalendar itself created major “continuity” issues vis-a-vis the last millenium, which was never questioned, you proclaim that the Church has the authority to change her kalenar and lectionary. I do not follow at all.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Did anyone here say differently? I am lost.

You asked why the EF could not be celebrated with the current kalendar and readings. I have explained, as have others, how the OF’s kalendar is different and does not always correspond to to EF. It is not merely a matter of opening the missal and the two being the same. But somehow you keep asking the same question over and over again, as if it is not being answered.

Then, when you imply a “continuity” issue regarding the EF and the past forty years, and it is pointed out the 1970 kalendar itself created major “continuity” issues vis-a-vis the last millenium, which was never questioned, you proclaim that the Church has the authority to change her kalenar and lectionary. I do not follow at all.

Because you asked! “why were the readings and kalendar changed in 1969, breaking with had been done for many, many centuries?” Then you called the changes “These were the innovations,” Which seemed to be to saying that they were somehow not proper or authorized changes.

By the way I’m no longer asking the questions that have already been answered. There is one however that I do not believe has been answered. Why did we need to go back and authorize the Old Sacramental Rites? Were the new Sacramental Rites somehow lacking or incomplete?

 

[Brendan]

I like the EF of the Mass. I don’t remember much about it because I was not that old when it stopped being the form of the normal Sunday Mass. What I don’t understand now is why in addition to the Mass we needed to go back to the old calendar and old Rites for the celebration of the Sacraments also?

Because the Lectionary is assigned to a particular form. If it is OK for a priest to just grab the OF lectionary and calendar and use it in the EF without a Vatican recognito, then it would be equally licit for a priest to use the EF calendar and lectionary in the OF, would it not.

As far as using the older Rites for the Sacraments, the Motu Proprio made it clear that the faithful have a right to ask for the celebration of the Sacraments in the old rite. That should be enough for all of us.

As to why, well, I can use a personal example. My daughter was baptized last year. The current English form of the Baptismal Rite does not have the clear Exorcism that the Old Rite does, That has been improved in 2002 Latin NO Rite, but that was promulgated in Latin and (like the 2002 Missal) there is no offical English translation with a recognito, so it can’t be used.

So our solution was to ask the priest to use the new NO Baptismal Rite in Latin, which has the explicit exorcism.

If Summorum Pontificum had been promulgated at the time, would could have also asked for the Old Rite of Baptism, which has the most explicit exorcism of all.

 

[James0235]

Why did we need to go back and authorize the Old Sacramental Rites? Were the new Sacramental Rites somehow lacking or incomplete?

Br. Rich,

We went back to the Old Sacramental Rites because the Church wanted to and the Church has the authority to allow them.

Seriously, I will see if I can answer this for you. I am much less knowledgeable about the other Sacraments than I am about the Mass (and this applies to both the Ordinary and the Extraordinary Forms).

I mentioned in my last post the concept of a modular Liturgy. And I do think that the 1970 Missal was designed this way. Any element can seemingly be changed without affecting the rest of the Mass. And anything can be added or deleted without much effect.

The one thing that comes immediately to mind is Marriage. I will admit that I have attended very few weddings according to the 1970 Missal and none according to the 1962. But, I have read up on them both.

Typically, Marriage according to the 1970 Roman Missal is performed in the context of a Mass. This is not always the case. But, when 2 Catholics are marrying I think it is the norm. And it seems to me that the “Marriage part” of the Mass is just plugged in to the rest to the Mass. This is an example of what I meant by modular. I am not saying it is bad. And it seems pretty efficient. You just add a few prayers and add the vows to an otherwise ordinary Mass and there you have it.

But, this wouldn’t work with the 1962 Missal. You could not just plug this element into the Mass as you could the 1970 Missal. It just wasn’t designed for it. With marriage in the older Form the exchange of vows actually precedes the Mass. That way their very first act as husband and wife become attending Mass together.

So, without access to the other Sacraments in the older Form this would pose a problem for a couple who attend the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite. They could not use the new Marriage Rite in the Old Mass. And this would leave them with only 2 options that I can see - Marrying without Mass or marrying during a Mass in the Ordinary Form.

If the Holy Father was going remove restrictions on the older Form of Mass then I think it was only natural that he remove restrictions on the other Sacraments as well. They were just designed to be used together.

That was just the first thing that comes to mind on the matter. But, I hope that it helps.

James

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Br. Rich,

We went back to the Old Sacramental Rites because the Church wanted to and the Church has the authority to allow them.

Seriously, I will see if I can answer this for you. I am much less knowledgeable about the other Sacraments than I am about the Mass (and this applies to both the Ordinary and the Extraordinary Forms).

I mentioned in my last post the concept of a modular Liturgy. And I do think that the 1970 Missal was designed this way. Any element can seemingly be changed without affecting the rest of the Mass. And anything can be added or deleted without much effect.

The one thing that comes immediately to mind is Marriage. I will admit that I have attended very few weddings according to the 1970 Missal and none according to the 1962. But, I have read up on them both.

Typically, Marriage according to the 1970 Roman Missal is performed in the context of a Mass. This is not always the case. But, when 2 Catholics are marrying I think it is the norm. And it seems to me that the “Marriage part” of the Mass is just plugged in to the rest to the Mass. This is an example of what I meant by modular. I am not saying it is bad. And it seems pretty efficient. You just add a few prayers and add the vows to an otherwise ordinary Mass and there you have it.

But, this wouldn’t work with the 1962 Missal. You could not just plug this element into the Mass as you could the 1970 Missal. It just wasn’t designed for it. With marriage in the older Form the exchange of vows actually precedes the Mass. That way their very first act as husband and wife become attending Mass together.

So, without access to the other Sacraments in the older Form this would pose a problem for a couple who attend the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite. They could not use the new Marriage Rite in the Old Mass. And this would leave them with only 2 options that I can see - Marrying without Mass or marrying during a Mass in the Ordinary Form.

If the Holy Father was going remove restrictions on the older Form of Mass then I think it was only natural that he remove restrictions on the other Sacraments as well. They were just designed to be used together.

That was just the first thing that comes to mind on the matter. But, I hope that it helps.

James

That is what I was looking for. Thanks! I did read and agree with the “plug-in” outline of the OF. Brendans post also helps explain the why of the Sacramental Rites.

 

[Magnum_V8]

I had posted this question because a nearby parish had scheduled a 4:30 pm Tridentine Mass for yesterday, 2/9/08.

We went to the Mass, not trying to fulfill the Sunday obligation, but because we wanted to go to it. I was just curious about its obligatory nature.

Anyway, we walked into the church, and the pastor was greeting people. He said that the local bishop told him he could not offer the Mass, because before Vatican II there was no Saturday vigil Mass. Since this Mass follows the pre-Vatican II calendar and rubrics, the bishop could not give the approval.

I told him I thought that he didn’t need approval from the bishop, that the motu proprio took care of that. He said, “no, we took a vow of obedience.”

I guess, technically, the bishop was right. But I don’t understand why it had to be considered a Vigil Mass, and not just the “Saturday after Ash Wednesday” Mass, or even a Mass commemorating the feast of St. Cyril of Alexandria.

The priest offered a Novus Ordo Mass for us, since we all gathered there for a Mass. I was worried that at the beginning of Mass he would make an announcement about it, but he didn’t, Deo gratias.

He did mention it in the homily, but tied it into the Lenten season. And what a homily it was. He said how there is ONE Mass, but two forms. He prefers the Tridentine, but that doesn’t mean the Novus Ordo is invalid. And he said that as a good Catholic, we should not make judgments as to which is better; they’re just different.

However, he said the Tridentine Mass puts a focus on the Sacrifice. He said we do not come to Mass to “get something out of it”, and its not supposed to be a joyful celebration; its not a show.

He concluded by saying that he’s got another request out to the bishop to change the parish’s 6:00 pm Sunday Novus Ordo to a Tridentine. So, we’ll see.

Please pray that our local ordinary opens his heart to this wonderful pastor’s request.

 

[AlexV]

The pastor doesn’t need the bishop’s “permission”. Summorum Pontificum gives pastors the right to make judgment calls; the bishop can’t infringe on those rights.

As for the whole Saturday evening issue, there is nothing to prevent a Saturday evening anticipated Tridentine Mass (and it’s done in many locales). That was a red herring excuse.