From what I hear, liturgies in the Ordinary Form in most dioceses are abysmal although there are bright spots here and there.
Let’s say that Pope Francis’ MP is successful in eliminating the celebration of the 1962 Missal in most dioceses, what’s a bishop to do to make sure that liturgies in a particular diocese are consistently beautiful, inspiring and uplifting with a powerful ethos of reverence and transcendence.
Working with the General Instruction of the newest incarnation of the 1970 Roman Missal as well as its rubrics, what can a bishop do to be as harsh as Pope Francis was with his MP killing the 1962 Roman Missal but using their authority in a harsh way to improve the new Mass?
He hasn’t “killed” the 1962 Missal just yet, although it is quite clear that he intends that as an end result.
PF won’t be able to accomplish this. Does he really think priests under 40 who celebrate the EF will just say, ok? They look around and see liturgical abuses galore with the OF in which no corrections are given. Time is not on PF’s nor his minions side
A bishop could require the use of the Missal Romanum, Editio typica tertia and prohibit the use of all vernacular translations including the ICEL, and require the use of Prex Eucharista I (The Roman Canon), and prohibit select options, like the sign of peace. That would certainly meet the letter of the MP, but maybe not the intent. But hey, at least it wouldn’t be the TLM. Didn’t SC indicate that Latin was to be retained and chant was to have pride of place; that has to be followed because it is from VII, right?
Chuck in PA,
Of course, NOT. It’s “different, “ reasons!
Bishops, when they visit parishes and celebrate Mass, conform to the liturgical style which is normative to that parish. Yes, in most cases it leaves a lot to be desired, but to start laying the law down risks emptying the pews even further. In general, people like what they are used to.
Post a Comment