Monday, July 11, 2022


 The first two images are from this past Sunday's Mass. The Ordinariate's Roman Missal goes by after Trinity (not Pentecost for some reason) and the Reformed Roman Missal of most Catholics has a revised/reformed way to number the Sundays far inferior from the Ordinariate's way!

But look at how the pages are printed and what is and what isn't included. The Reformed Missal of most Catholics is truncated and not complete (read on below).


Please note how the Ordinariate's Roman Missal is fuller and richer. It includes the full Introit with the Gloria Patri as it would be in the 1962 unreformed Missal. The Gradual, Alleluia and Offertory antiphon are included, but completely gone from the Reformed Roman Missal of most Catholics.

Let's look at the offertory prayers. The older form found in our unreformed 1962 Roman Missal are in the Ordinariate's Roman Missal but in English, archaic as it is. It also includes the prayer for incensing the altar, completely gone in the Reformed Roman Missal of the majority of Catholics. Please note the longer version from the 1962 Roman Missal for the blessing of the water to be mixed with the wine, completely missing in the Reformed Roman Missal of the majority of Catholics. Please note too, the calling down of the Holy Spirit, completely absent in the normal Roman Missal.

Please note the longer version of the lavabo and the Suscipe, not to be found in the Reformed Roman Missal of most Catholics.

This is the Offertory from the Reformed Roman Missal of the majority of Catholics, truncated and impoverished with no traditional option!

This is the Ordinariate's Roman Missal with the prayer following the "Our Father." Please note who is included in this prayer which is expunged from the Reformed Roman Missal of the majority of Catholics:

 And the Last Gospel! Guess who has it and guess who doesn't! SAD!

Why in the Name of God and all that is Holy can't the majority of Catholics have included in their Reformed Roman Missal what the Ordinariate Catholics get to have? Isn't it a bit unfair and completely wrong for the Pope to indicate that having only the Reformed Missal for the majority of Catholics establishes liturgical unity that isn't present when the 1962 Unreformed Missal is used but it does exist when the Ordinariate's Missal which follows the 1962 unreformed Roman Missal more closely, does???


rcg said...

The Last Gospel had a profound effect on me when I heard the TLM after so many years. It was dramatic and I think would be invaluable to introducing Catholics to their historical Mass.

Tom said...

While Fr. McDonald is correct in se of the superiority of the Anglican Use Catholic Missal to the Novus Ordo English language Missal, it is not correct per se.

The Anglican Use Missal is limited for use only at Anglican Use Masses and for those who prefer traditional (or Tudor) style English as used in the 1660 Book of Common Prayer in England or 1928 edition in America.

Otherwise, those who prefer contemporary style English use the 2011 English translation of the Roman Missal (the previously so-called Ordinary Form).

The Novus Ordo English language Missal used in England has feasts for most of the saints for Anglican Use Catholics but in the 2011 translation. That is the preference of an overwhelming majority of Anglican Use Catholics in England, who got away from the idea of traditional-style language at Mass. The latter is more a preference in America and thus for the Anglican Use Missal.

For those American Anglican-use Catholics who prefer contemporary-style language, there is only one saint in the American edition of the 2011 translation; namely, St. Elizabeth Ann Seton. Thus, for those who want a contemporary style language Ordinariate Mass, including those saints in the English tradition, they would have to import a copy of the British 2011 Novus Ordo Missal or specially produce a supplement of those English saints.

TJM said...

Father McDonald,

I have not studied the Ordinariate Missal as you have. What are the key differences between that Missal and the TLM? If the differences are not notable, then why exclude Catholics from the TLM?

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

I am not saying we need archaic English or the added Anglican developments in the Liturgy after King Henry VIII separated the Church of England from Rome.

The Ordinarite’s Mass is what Vatican II requested. Useless repetition is eliminated. The lectionary is expanded and is basically the Modern Reformed Missal’s lectionary. They keep the Roman Canon for Sundays and an “alternate” canon (our # 2) for weekdays.

The rubrics for the Canons are more like the 1962 Unreformed Missal. Double genuflections at the consecrations and after the Per Ipsum. And the priest kisses the altar when turning to the congregation. Ad orientem is allowed explicitly as well as kneeling for Holy Communion.

Lay lectors and Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communioin are allowed, male or female.

Also the appendix of the Ordinariate Missal allows for the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar and the same order of the Introductory Rite as in the 1962 Unreformed Missal.

Without changing completely our English Roman Missal, the elements of the Ordinariate’s Roman Missal that come from our pre-Vatican II unreformed Mass could easily be incorporated.

Why this hasn’t happened is beyond me.

TJM said...

Father McDonald,

Maybe the better solution would be to go back to the TLM with an expanded lectionary

Tom said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rcg said...

I like TJM’s suggestion, although that would need some consideration of seasons and feasts, mobile and not.

The more I consider the idea of vernacular Mass the more unworkable it seems. Fr McDonald comments on the archaic form of the Anglican missal but the alternative is a Babel of custom missals adapted to the almost unlimited and ever changing English language. This is the role of the priest and of educated laity and is a good use of the homily. It is also a productive investigation for the regular laity to explore their Faith.

John Nolan said...

The reason for numbering Sundays after Trinity is that it was carried over from the pre-Reformation Use of Sarum. The Roman custom is preferable since Pentecost is much the older feast. Those familiar with the Dominican Rite will note that it starts the numbering from the Sunday after the octave of Trinity.

As for the dog's breakfast which is the Ordinariate missal, there is no evidence that Vatican II envisaged a rite in mock-Tudor English with a plethora of options. I, for one, could not live with the Coverdale psalms.

Mind you, I don't like the vernacular Mass full stop and rarely attend it.

P Dan Long said...

Hi Fr.
Im new to your blog but agree with many of your comments.
How can I email you or contact you privately? I don’t use Facebook….