One of the things that I think would help the Ancient Mass in the best sense of the word is to allow the Liturgy of the Word to be expressed as it is in the Modern Mass.
As an aging priest, when I celebrate the Sung Ancient Mass, at no point do I sit down throughout the Mass.
That’s what I like about the Modern Mass. I sit down and listen to the readings prior to the Gospel.
So, my suggestion is that the Liturgy of the Word be celebrated in the AM as in the MM. No longer does the priest need to read the Scriptures at the altar in Latin. After the Collect, he goes to his chair and a reader reads the Epistle in the vernacular with the conclusion “The Word of the Lord” and the congregation’s response “Thanks be to God.”
The Gradual is chanted by the schola and there is no need for the celebrant to have to recite it also, although quietly.
The Gospel is proclaimed as it would be in the Solemn Sung Mass, facing northward but away from the altar.
That’s it.
Now for the gravitational pull on the AM on the MM:
I will focus just on the Introductory Rite which in the MM is a disaster.
As the Official Chant from the Roman Gradual is chanted either in the original Latin or the Vernacular, the priest and ministers approach the foot of the altar for the traditional, but modified, Prayers at the Foot of the Altar. The only modification, though is combining the priest and ministers’ Confiteor into one recitation. Then they ascend to the altar for the priestly kiss and then incensing if used. As soon as the Entrance Chant is completed, without introduction, every goes directly to the Kyrie that returns to its 9-fold expression, followed, if prescribed, by the Gloria.
Then the Collect is prayed, with the traditional “The Lord be with you” preceding it.
The only other change would be to the “Lord, I am not worthy” which becomes three-fold again.
There you have it.
12 comments:
I like it!
Your proposal is actually consistent with Byzantine Divine Liturgy in most places. Russian Patriarchal Churches don't sit, we Byzantines really shouldn't either, but that's a topic for another day.
Father Robert Prevost, as Pope Leo XIV, as well as decades prior, has been on board with the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.
Pope Benedict XVI declared that Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI would remain cemented as the Latin Church's primary Mass. I do not have any reason to doubt that.
Given the Mass as offered by Pope Leo XIV, I am not sure as to why anybody would reject worshiping in said manner. Are there "Novus Ordo" Catholics who would fight against Mass as offered by Pope Leo XIV?
Are there "traditional" Catholics who would refuse assist at such a Mass?
Is liturgical peace not possible via the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI as offered by Pope Leo XIV?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
If Pope Leo approves and celebrates clown 🤡 or puppet Masses, I would not go and I would leave if I were there.
Mark Thomas,
If the ancient Mass can be replaced wholesale (something that was not called for by Vatican II), why cannot the modern Mass be moderately modified?
Anthony, you can count me on board with any reforms that Holy Mother Church may institute in regard to the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.
=======
Anthony, I appreciate, for example, the liturgical reforms that Father McDonald has proposed. Perhaps the Church will embrace said reforms.
=======
Anthony, in regard to..."If the ancient Mass can be replaced wholesale (something that was not called for by Vatican II)..."
Even such "traditionalists" as New Catholic (Rorate Caeli) acknowledged that the Vatican II Fathers had intended to move the Church far beyond the TLM.
It was Pope Venerable Pius XII who, in earnest, had launched the radical reform of the Roman Liturgy. He had authorized Monsignor Bugnini to help accomplish that task.
Throughout the 1950s, and during the Council, such influential Church figures as the future Pope Benedict XVI, for example, had worked to reform the TLM in major fashion.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas,
Were there those who wanted a substantial reform? Yes. But they are not the council. There were also those who were opposed to a major reform. The reform called for by the council is that which was agreed to and is outlined in Sacrosanctum Concilium; and that reform is quite modest compared to what came latter. It does not get us much beyond the reform of 1965.
MT Suit,
If the Novus Ordo is wonderful, holy, holy, packing them into the pews in far greater numbers than used to attend Mass prior to Vatican II and dropped down from Heaven, how could you possibly want to reform it?
"Throughout the 1950s, and during the Council, such influential Church figures as the future Pope Benedict XVI, for example, had worked to reform the TLM in major fashion."
This is a boldface lie and you have nothing to support this ludicrous, false, statement.
Father, I'm sorry and I don't mean any disrespect, but you're wrong. All this "continuity" and "gravitational pull" and everything else that suggest a liturgical compromise is just pure fanatasy. It's not going to work. The Church is either going to be all one thing or all another. What it IS right NOW isn't working, so I tend to go with the what it is going to become, after this current experiment finally collapses under its own dead weight. I might not live to see it, and neither might you, but all this "mutual enrichment" talk is just a lot of bosh. A contrived, un-authoritative liturgy can, in no way, "enrich" an organically developed liturgy that held sway for centuries. I know you have the best of intentions, but you're wrong. God bless you, but you're just plain wrong.
I have to admit to being a bit torn on this point.
Divine Liturgy in my Church, as is the case in about all, is celebrated in the vernacular.
Church Slavonic does have a unifying effect within the Slavic world. To me, Latin can and should continue to serve a similar purpose.
At the same time, and outside of the common parts, I do see value/accessibility in introducing some vernacular.
However, given the endless tinkering with the NO, and the resultant malaise that inspires a shrinking audience in so many places (and where ideologues are ordinaries), might it be best to issue a moratorium on changes to the '62 missal - to protect it? One can always read the epistle/gospel prior to attending.
Jerome Merwick,
The irony is, the Vetus Ordo IS noble simplicity, embodied in One Canon and One set of Introductory Rites. I had a priest friend who was a peritus at V II. He spoke Latin like a vernacular. He said the proposed revisions to the Vetus Ordo were originally supposed to be quite modest, i.e. the 1965 Missal.
He also said if John XXIII who LOVED Latin (Sapientia Veterum) would never have allowed the "reforms" to get out of control like they did with Paul VI and the Bugnini brigade. Paul VI was a weak man, and it is a total joke that he was canonized. His canonization actually was a political statement, not a religious one. I think the Novus Bogus (the sacrament of disunity) should be scrapped and we should return to the Vetus Ordo whether it is entirely in Latin or not, so that once again, it reigns as the great, universal Rite it once was.
Appreciated. As I said, the Church is either going to be all of one thing or all the other. We probably won't live to see it, but the game is just about over for the 60's experiment. To be sure, your peritus friend spoke the truth. It is nauseating as we witness the most anti-Vatican II people you could imagine actually INVOKING the council as their license to destroy, since they are certain (and not entirely wrong) that most Catholics haven't bothered to read the documents (I suspect many of these iconoclasts haven't read them either). It's like looking at some of the most racist of our black "leaders" invoking Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. as an excuse for their perpetual black rage and victimhood, when you know darned well that's not what King was about--you soon realize they have likely never read Dr. King either. We seem to live in an age of fraudulent invocation.
Jerome Merwick,
You are spot on. The fraudsters are having a hard time since the fraudsters no longer have Pope Francis nor Joe Biden around, the very worst of the political Left. You and I may not see it, but Catholicism and the US will recover from these forces of evil.
Post a Comment