The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon, or to be carried about, but that we should duly use them. And in such only as worthily receive the same, they have a wholesome effect or operation: but they that receive them unworthily, purchase to themselves damnation, as Saint Paul saith. (The Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion).
Other than shopping (which I can no longer afford this month) another favourite pastime of mine is complaining. A few questions here: Mass coram Sanctissimo was abolished in May 1967 (rightly - it's modern and quite ridiculous), see Eucharisticum Mysterium for the general gist of it. So what authority do Traditionalist parishes look to for having Quarant 'Ore? My guess would be Summorum Pontificum...yet Summorum Pontificum specifically designates the ''liturgical'' books of 1962 to be in force, that is, the only canonical ''Extraordinary Form'' of the Roman Rite. So I would hope (though I wouldn't hold my breath, knowing the parish I have in mind) that Traditionalist parishes would, if they looked to the Motu Proprio as their raison d'être, that they would stick rigidly to the liturgical books of 1962 in the liturgy of the Quarant 'Ore -I have such things as no Last Gospel, Benedicamus Domino, no Credo in the Missa pro Pace etc in mind here. Of course if they followed pre-'62 rubrics they would be just as disobedient as the avant-garde liberals they look down their noses at...for being dissonant...
Of course this opens up a floodgate of other questions pertaining to Canon Law and Liturgy here...if Eucharisticum Mysterium abolished Mass coram Sanctissimo, why would Benedict XVI want to render that previous legislation void by promulgating Summorum Pontificum? It is too reminiscent of Big Brother for me, you know O'Brian's discourse about Doublethink and pulling out truth and lies out of oblivion just so long as they are necessary, or convenient, for the Party. If it suited the S.R.C to abolish Mass coram Sanctissimo 40 years ago it must have suited Benedict XVI's purposes to bring it back from oblivion. And which legislation do we follow? It just seems to me that legislation from on high in the Catholic Church is rather tenuous and not worth really taking seriously. Clearly Trads don't bother - but like to think that they do because it suits their purposes, that is, feeling all smug and superior to the Modernists. I'm just me, and I enjoy ridiculing both their tastes - because I think that neither does anybody any favours. The revival of a more holistic and traditional liturgical theology and Tradition in the Roman Church cannot be achieved by recourse to six altar candles and a crucifix, or gradines, or polyester lace cottas anymore than it can be achieved by recourse to the liturgical books of 1962. It ought to be a grass-roots endeavour; drink the health of the Roman Pontiff, the great Patriarch of the West, but don't take any notice of him - he has clearly failed. But be honest about it...
Other than shopping (which I can no longer afford this month) another favourite pastime of mine is complaining. A few questions here: Mass coram Sanctissimo was abolished in May 1967 (rightly - it's modern and quite ridiculous), see Eucharisticum Mysterium for the general gist of it. So what authority do Traditionalist parishes look to for having Quarant 'Ore? My guess would be Summorum Pontificum...yet Summorum Pontificum specifically designates the ''liturgical'' books of 1962 to be in force, that is, the only canonical ''Extraordinary Form'' of the Roman Rite. So I would hope (though I wouldn't hold my breath, knowing the parish I have in mind) that Traditionalist parishes would, if they looked to the Motu Proprio as their raison d'être, that they would stick rigidly to the liturgical books of 1962 in the liturgy of the Quarant 'Ore -I have such things as no Last Gospel, Benedicamus Domino, no Credo in the Missa pro Pace etc in mind here. Of course if they followed pre-'62 rubrics they would be just as disobedient as the avant-garde liberals they look down their noses at...for being dissonant...
Of course this opens up a floodgate of other questions pertaining to Canon Law and Liturgy here...if Eucharisticum Mysterium abolished Mass coram Sanctissimo, why would Benedict XVI want to render that previous legislation void by promulgating Summorum Pontificum? It is too reminiscent of Big Brother for me, you know O'Brian's discourse about Doublethink and pulling out truth and lies out of oblivion just so long as they are necessary, or convenient, for the Party. If it suited the S.R.C to abolish Mass coram Sanctissimo 40 years ago it must have suited Benedict XVI's purposes to bring it back from oblivion. And which legislation do we follow? It just seems to me that legislation from on high in the Catholic Church is rather tenuous and not worth really taking seriously. Clearly Trads don't bother - but like to think that they do because it suits their purposes, that is, feeling all smug and superior to the Modernists. I'm just me, and I enjoy ridiculing both their tastes - because I think that neither does anybody any favours. The revival of a more holistic and traditional liturgical theology and Tradition in the Roman Church cannot be achieved by recourse to six altar candles and a crucifix, or gradines, or polyester lace cottas anymore than it can be achieved by recourse to the liturgical books of 1962. It ought to be a grass-roots endeavour; drink the health of the Roman Pontiff, the great Patriarch of the West, but don't take any notice of him - he has clearly failed. But be honest about it...
As the famous, late, Fr. Alfred Hope Patten used to say when introducing new praxis "As is the custom in this church..."
ReplyDeleteIn other words making it up as you go appears to de rigueur in circles other than Anglo-Catholic ones.
I don't quite understand all of what you write in the above. But i can assure you, that Quarant'ore has never been abolished, and is still expected to be held each year in parish churches, even in parishes which normally follow the new ''Ordinary'' Roman Rite. As for Coram Sanctissimo, I celebrated my first Mass in Roma ''coram Sanctissimo'' as was then the custom. Technically it recently been abolished, but permissions were granted to continue this practice, and custom prevailed over law anyway. As for the Last Gospel, which you seem to indicate was abolished in 1962, i can also assure you on this point, that the Last Gospel is obligatory in nearly all Masses celebrated according to the Missale Romanum 1962. I celebrate the Old Rite Mass only, and know for sure, that the Last Gospel is definitely still LEGALLY well and alive in the ''Forma extraordinaria''.
ReplyDeleteAre ya havin' a bad week, P.?
ReplyDeleteIt's okay.
It'll get better.
Promise:-)!
Prayers for you!
Concerning complaining, well, I can understand that as I'm a complainer too.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, does anyone really have any hope that the Roman Church will sort all this out? Can anyone really see the Pope and his cronies admitting they got it all wrong? And as for a "grass-roots endevour", how exactly is that supposed to happen when the vasy majority of Catholics probably couldn't care less or would outright oppose "going back to the past"?
Seems like a fool's hope.
In the 1962 Mess the last Gospel is omitted:
ReplyDeletea) at all Masses when Benedicamus Domino is sung e.g. Maundy Thursday and when a procession follows after Mass;
b) at the third Mass of Christmas;
c) on the 'Second Sunday of Passiontide' at the celebration when suitable material is blessed in honour of the Lord's entry into Jerusalem;
d)at the Chrism Mass;
e)at the Mass of the Easter Vigil;
g) at Requiems when the Absolution follows;
g)at certain Masses following some consecration rites in the Pontifical.
Patricius,
ReplyDeleteYou sound a bit bitter about traditional things.
It does not seem, based on the posts you write, that you are Catholic or that you respect anything Catholic.
Whatever confusion there might be regarding the 1962 vs. the more modern liturgical books, I can assure you that there is *much* more confusion in the head of the person who writes all these posts.
If the Western Patriarch (or the Church), as you say, has failed, then stop writing about them!!!
Why do you waste so much time talking, thinking and posting about such things that are worthless (according to you)???
Sorry to say, but you do not make much sense at all.