What do the ruberics of the new Mass actually require?

  • Thread starter Thread starter parvenu74
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

parvenu74

Guest
Many adherants to the older form of Mass decry the many abuses committed in the new Mass. But I’m curious about a different set of questions:
  1. What is actually required by the ruberics of the new Mass,
  2. Who can authorize an override to the ruberics published in the missal,
  3. Who is responsible for determining if Masses are being said to the letter of the instructions, and
  4. Is it proper for the laity to record unauthorized violations of the ruberics and report them to the local ordinary?
 
parvenu74 said:
Many adherants to the older form of Mass decry the many abuses committed in the new Mass. But I’m curious about a different set of questions:
  1. What is actually required by the ruberics of the new Mass,
  2. Who can authorize an override to the ruberics published in the missal,
  3. Who is responsible for determining if Masses are being said to the letter of the instructions, and
  4. Is it proper for the laity to record unauthorized violations of the ruberics and report them to the local ordinary?
Click to expand...
  1. Exactly what is written in the Missal…Say the Black, Do the Red.
  2. No one…there are a few variations that are permitted based on indults granted by the Holy See.
  3. Each bishop is the steward of the liturgy in his diocese. It is his responsibility to make sure it is done properly.
  4. Yes. Many times a bishop will have hundreds of parishes. If no one tells him something is wrong, he can’t do anything about it.
 
  1. Exactly what is written in the Missal…Say the Black, Do the Red.
  2. No one…there are a few variations that are permitted based on indults granted by the Holy See.
  3. Each bishop is the steward of the liturgy in his diocese. It is his responsibility to make sure it is done properly.
  4. Yes. Many times a bishop will have hundreds of parishes. If no one tells him something is wrong, he can’t do anything about it.
Click to expand...
Then why is this not being done? From what I’ve read, it’s an accepted fact that the “problem with the novus ordo Mass” is that there are too many abuses. Clearly there is a remedy for abuses, as you have outlined, but when points 3 and 4 break down, then what?
 
Great article in this months Homiletic and Pastoral Review on priestly narcissism.
 
parvenu74 said:
Then why is this not being done? From what I’ve read, it’s an accepted fact that the “problem with the novus ordo Mass” is that there are too many abuses. Clearly there is a remedy for abuses, as you have outlined, but when points 3 and 4 break down, then what?
Click to expand...
You write to your bishop. You write to the appropriate office in Rome. You pray. You pray for good bishops…this is working there are many many very good bishops in the US now…and every year, there are more appointed! You pray for seminarians and vocations…there are increases in vocations in many of these dioceses under these good bishops and the men being ordained are well-trained and very orthodox!
 
Unlike the 62 missal, the current missal has many “options” built in to it that must be considered before mass begins.

Start with the Entrance: choice of Hymn or Antiphon.
4 forms of the Kyrie, plus the option for alternate musical settings for any of them.
several options for the Goria.
2 options for the Creed. (Nicene-Constantinoplean with the Filioque, or the Apostles Creed for masses for youth)
Several options for the penitential rite, of which the confeitor is one.
7 Eucharistic Prayers (3 being special uses only)
3 different dismissals.

The largest problem I see with it is that some priests pick poor combinations for the edification of their parishioners.

So it’s no longer as simple as “say the black, do the red.” Close, though. “Pick your options, and for each, say the black, do the red, don’t get lost.”
 
Aramis said:
Unlike the 62 missal, the current missal has many “options” built in to it that must be considered before mass begins.

Start with the Entrance: choice of Hymn or Antiphon.
4 forms of the Kyrie, plus the option for alternate musical settings for any of them.
several options for the Goria.
2 options for the Creed. (Nicene-Constantinoplean with the Filioque, or the Apostles Creed for masses for youth)
Several options for the penitential rite, of which the confeitor is one.
7 Eucharistic Prayers (3 being special uses only)
3 different dismissals.

The largest problem I see with it is that some priests pick poor combinations for the edification of their parishioners.

So it’s no longer as simple as “say the black, do the red.” Close, though. “Pick your options, and for each, say the black, do the red, don’t get lost.”
Click to expand...
The problem is never the priests who use these legitimate options. It is the ones who add or subtract at will to these formulas; the ones who skip genuflections and use incorrect postures at the consecration etc. and the ones who ad-lib their own prayers within the Mass whenever they are so moved. If the gestures and the reverent attitude of the priest are the same, then the Mass appears very consistent when various options are used.
 
parvenu74 said:
Then why is this not being done? From what I’ve read, it’s an accepted fact that the “problem with the novus ordo Mass” is that there are too many abuses. Clearly there is a remedy for abuses, as you have outlined, but when points 3 and 4 break down, then what?
Click to expand...
Why are you suggesting that nothing is being done? That’s erroneous. Correction has taken place continually throughout the history of the Church.

The Church isn’t the US Army and it never has been. The Pope simply does not have, nor does he try to exercise the same sort of control over 1.2 B Catholics that the Secretary of Defense has over the military.

Your “accepted fact” sadly applies to both the Pauline and Tridentine Masses – not just one or the other.
 
Sure said:
The problem is never the priests who use these legitimate options. It is the ones who add or subtract at will to these formulas; the ones who skip genuflections and use incorrect postures at the consecration etc. and the ones who ad-lib their own prayers within the Mass whenever they are so moved. If the gestures and the reverent attitude of the priest are the same, then the Mass appears very consistent when various options are used.
Click to expand...
That’s not really true.

One Mass (for example) could have the rite of sprinkling, the use of incense and sanctus bells, communion under one species, no homily (weekdays), a celebrant with bad knees (no genuflecting), the use of the Roman Canon (fairly uncommon around here) etc. etc. and appear radically different than another Mass – yet not abusive in the least.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top