One thing, though, that was eliminated in the Latin and English and remains eliminated in the new Mass (but gloriously restored in the Ordinariate's, Divine Worship, the Missal,) is the three fold "Lord, I am not worthy..."
THIS IS NOT USELESS REPETITION! IT HEARKENS BACK TO SAINT PETER'S THRICE DENYING JESUS AT THE PASSION AND HIS TRICE AFFIRMING HIS LOVE FOR JESUS AS JESUS QUIZZES PETER ABOUT HIS LOVE FOR HIM AFTER THE RESURRECTION.
IT IS VERY SCRIPTURAL FOR US TO SAY:
Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.
Domine, non sum dignus, ut intres sub tectum meum: sed tantum dic verbo, et sanabitur anima mea.
Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.
In addition to affirming our guilt and need for healing which mimics Peter's thrice denial and thrice affirming his love for the Risen Lord, it also ties into the three-fold "Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us." I am sure there were those in Bugnini's camp that wanted to do away with that "useless" repetition too. Fortunately they failed.
But where Bugnini and his ideologues failed, pastoral musicians succeeded in adding additional "Lambs of God" to "cover" the "action" of "breaking the Bread" and "pouring the Cup" at Mass, completely obfuscating the symbolism of the three-fold lamb of God and Domine, non sum dignus. Fortunately, I don't think adding Lambs of God occurs very frequently today by choir directors and musicians.
During this year of mercy, let us petition the Congregation for Divine Worship and Robert Cardinal Sarah to make a grand gesture in the liturgy for the begging of mercy by restoring to the Ordinary Form the Mass the following:
Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.
Domine, non sum dignus, ut intres sub tectum meum: sed tantum dic verbo, et sanabitur anima mea.
Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.
4 comments:
So many innovations in the Novus Ordo are bizarre. There's also the loss of the 9-fold Kyrie...sometimes Bugnini seemed to want to meddle just for the sake of meddling!
Other innovations suggest a more troubling agenda. The deletion of the mention of the saints from the Confiteor, and the invention of 'Eucahristic Prayers' which, unlike the Roman Canon, also omit mention of saints, are examples.
I'd encourage priests to re-introduce the 9-fold Kyrie, the 3-fold 'non sum dignus', and the full Confiteor into Masses. Is that breaking the rules? So was washing the feet of women--but now that's licit, after people (and the pope) did it anyway! Hagan lio!
And if there's any concern that this makes the liturgy too long, then skip the prayers of the faithful and the non-biblical doxology after the Our Father.
I agree on the return to the three-fold, Domine Non Sum Dignus, but we should also restore the 9 fold Kyrie for which glorious chant and polyphonic Kyries were compused. That is another "Bugnini Burger" special, an idiot change for the sake of change.
The nine-fold Kyrie is always used where the chant demands it, for example in Masses III, VI, IX and X. GIRM 52 says that each acclamation is usually (de more) sung or said twice but may be repeated several times, and not simply because the music requires it. So a nine-fold Kyrie is a clear option in any circumstances.
In any case the GIRM is descriptive rather than prescriptive and most of its so-called rubrics are merely suggestions or guidelines. This can open the door to sundry abuses, but also gives ample opportunity to restore elements of the Roman Rite.
The shortening of the Confiteor and the inclusion of 'cogitatione, verbo, opere et omissione' isn't exactly revolutionary (cf the Dominican and Sarum Uses); it is the fact that priest and people recite it together which represents a break with tradition.
John Nolan,
Unfortunately, even in papal masses, the nine-fold Kyrie is not used even when using the Gregorian Mass settings you cite.
Left-wing loonism at its finest.
Post a Comment