EF MASS
AU MASS
AUEF MASS (read further)
I was reading an article on the "New Liturgical Movement" blog that an Anglican priest, Fr. John Hunuicke, SSC who plans to cross the Tiber and come over to Rome is hoping that the Anglican Use Liturgy, AU for short, like EF and OF, should be a liturgy that will be very close to the Latin Rite's OF Mass but with Anglican style English and the customs that are generally now allowed in the Anglican Liturgy.
But Fr. John is also suggesting that Rome issue an Anglican Use Tridentine Mass! What that means is a true Tridentine Mass according to the 1962 missal, but with the laity's parts, heard and spoken, in Cranmerian English. Fr. John thus says that in doing so, the one Rome Rite would have four forms, the OF, EF, AU and AUEF. AUEF, AUEF, I love it! What do you think?
7 comments:
I would love that as an option. It is unfortunate that one can sometimes encounter an Episcopal liturgy that is "higher" than the Catholic liturgy. Hopefully, our new translation will correct that problem.
I have a good friend of the family who is a Anglican priest, the group he is affiliated with uses the 1928 book of common prayer. This liturgy is almost a direct translation of the Tridentine rite, but in a very polished form of english. It is a dignified and reverent service. I have often wondered why the Church did not do the samething, it makes sense to me.
I'm glad you explained AU as Anglican Use. Because while attending Auburn University (AU), the Roman Rite of the Mass was the furthest things from students minds back then unless you consider toga parties and well I guess that's greek anyway (ha! ha!).
I commend our Holy Father for opening the arms of the Catholic Church to those traditional Anglicans fleeing from further heresy imposed by their liberal progressive counterparts, but wouldn't this rite be used specifically for those Anglicans and not all Catholics as a whole. Would this be a valid Mass for all who attend? If so and the Pope validates, I agree, the more the merrier!
As one of the Anglican preparing to be fully united with the See of Peter I fully concur with Fr. Hunwicke.
As some history for those who have not had much contact with Anglo-Catholics. As the movement developed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, there was a strong desire to enrich the worship of the Book of Common Prayer; the Roman Mass (being what is now the E.F.) was used as the source resulting in books such as the English Missal which is de facto the E.F. translated into an hieratic English style.
Once the ordinariates are established, they will be aimed at former Anglicans but they will be fully Catholic jurisdictions with fully valid and licit Catholic Priests and therefore the Masses may be frequented by any Catholic who would fulfill his Sunday or Holyday precept.
I have been hoping that the Holy See would allow the 1962 missal to be celebrated using the vernacular for the people's responses and for what they hear. I think that this could be pulled off using also the current reformed Roman Calendar and lectionary. I think that it would be easier for Catholics who are so used to the vernacular now to appreciate the 1962 missal and perhaps even prefer it over time. Perhaps the Anglicans coming into the full communion of the Church will help lead the way.
Unlike many traditionally minded Catholics, I would not object in principle to a vernacular EF, assuming that the classical Latin form is preserved as the crown jewel of the Roman rite.
I would like it personally, at least as a change of pace. Without doubt, it would attract OF folks for whom the only barrier to the EF presently is the Latin, and who otherwise would prefer the beauty and reverence of the EF.
However, I fear that in the current culture and Church ethos, the EF would inevitably deteriorate as the OF has. The Latin language is not only a barrier to lay access for some, but a barrier to destructive clerical experimentation. After all, we’ve been down this road before. The 1965 Order of Mass was essentially a vernacular EF Mass, simplified at least as much as the Council Fathers envisioned, and indeed in some published editions was identified as the revision ordered by the Council.
However, once in the vernacular, the deterioration was rapid and seemingly inevitable. Utter chaos was the result, well before the Novus Ordo was promulgated. Indeed, the hope to restore order is regarded by some as one of Paul VI’s motives for introducing the Novus Ordo.
The result, ironically, of promulgating the Novus Ordo and abrogating (in practice, at least) the Tridentine Mass was to “save” the EF and preserve it in pristine form for resurrection now.
At any rate, my reading of Pope Benedict’s intent is that the role of the EF now is primarily to serve as a model for the reform of the OF, until the OF is perhaps 90% of the way from where it is now to the EF.
So my question would be, if the OF is celebrated with pretty much the same ceremonial and ars celebranda as the EF, does it not already satisfy any need for a vernacular EF. If so, why muddy the water?
That sounds like a great option and I bet would attract many, many people, not just Anglicans. It would also boost the EF because people will feel linked by the AUEF. The only odd one out may be the OF, which may not be the worst anyways. What a hermeneutic of contuinuity that would be, to have formal English once again as at least an option in the Roman Catholic liturgy. I hope the idea floats and gains traction. It is logical.
Post a Comment