www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Pope set to return to traditional liturgy

I think that perception is part of the problem. The Novus Ordo was NEVER envisioned by Vatican II. The Council promulgated a revised missal in 1964-65. The Novus Ordo was a creation of Paul VI in 1969 - well after the Council ended. If I were Orthodox, I would look at one man overriding the revisions of a Council, re-writing the litugy, re-creating the liturgical calendar, and I would be horrified.

Dear james,

Is it that bad? That is terrible!

My devious side would sue any priest who deviated from the Roman Missal. Deviation from the text is a breach of the Roman Missal copyright. Of course, I'm not that devious.

Prayer will cure these maladies.

Paul

Well, that's not quite true - there had been calls for a revision to the Liturgy for decades, including a desire for at least some, if not all, of the Mass to be in the vernacular.

I have a Missal from the 1950's which contains a "dialogue Mass", which is similar in style to the so-called "Novus Ordo" in that all the parts to be said by the People are in English. Quite radical at the time, I'm sure.

I am familiar with the dialogue mass. It still wasn't the Novus Ordo. There is a misperception among many people that the Council produced the Novus Ordo. It didn't. I think many people either are not old enough, or just don't remember the 1964 missal containing the changes mandated by the Council.

No, it wasn't the Novus Ordo, but it does show that there was a movement, long before Vatican II, to revise and update the Liturgy. And no, Vatican II did not mandate those changes. It didn't need to - they'd already been in the works before the Council was even a gleam in good Pope John XXIII's eye.

I agree with you that there had been discussion for some years before the Council about revising the mass. After much prayerful deliberation the Council did exactly that. In terms of rubrics, it wasn't much different from the Tridentine. But such things as multiple canons, or eucharistic prayers, were never considered either before or during the Council. This was strictly a Paul VI creation. Communion in the hand was another thing that I don't remember coming from the Council, but IIRC was allowed by Paul VI. I think it's unfair that the Council gets blamed for fuzzy direction and laxity in the liturgy, when I remember the Council decrees as being rather straightforward and strict. It seems to me that the interminable options that have lead to abuses came after the Council ended, and mostly from Paul VI. If good Pope Benedict decides to tighten up things in the mass a bit, I am solidly behind him.

IMO, it doesn't have to be an EITHER/OR
situation. If I had the authority, I would
erect the Tridentine Liturgy as a separate
independent Rite in addition to the "Novus Ordo"
and let the people attend whichever they prefer.
If the Catholic Church already has around 20
Rites (I think) what's one more?

antonius

Antonius,

Absolutly it does not have to be an either or type of action taken....however, in my area (and I believe MANY others) the Tridentine Mass has been degregated into a gheto kind of Mass that is rarely if ever served. In my Diocese only the Cathedral serves the Tridentine and that is only once a month at 12:30 in the afternoon; and then it is in the Chapel! Oh how I wish that there was a REAL choice of Mass to go to!

In His Name,
Stephen

Dear byzanTN,

I don't want to argue, but you are blaming PPVI again. Maybe you don't mean to, but that's not what I read in your post.

As I read the documents of VII, the council's decree on the Sacred Liturgy had a lot to say about WHAT the Roman liturgy should be. It did not say HOW to celebrate the sacraments. It seems the HOW was left up to the Roman curia with the approval of the Holy Father.

What I saw after the promugation of the reformed sacraments was deliberate abuse, but mostly a lot of confusion about how mass should be celebrated.

Some bishops didn't know what to do, so they did nothing, which contributed to abuses in the liturgy and much confusion and polemics among the faithful. It's always middle management's fault.

My parish priests serve a solid, by the Roman Missal, Holy Mass. The music needs improvement.
In charity, I know the choirs mean well. They need proper training.

I sympathize with Catholics that don't get the real thing when they attend mass. Pray and hang in there!

Peace to you.

Paul

Let me see if I understand, so now if people want a Protestant-looking mass with guitars and female servers they can attend any Roman Catholic parish, if they want the old liturgy they can attend the Tridentine parishes and if you have some Orientalist tendencies you can attend the Byzantine one?

High Church, Low Church anyone?

Paul, I do blame Paul VI for the many options in the Novus Ordo of 1969 which has led to abuses. I don't blame the Council, since most of those options were not in the Roman Missal it promulgated. The Vatican II mass is in the Missal of 1964, which was accepted and approved for use by the U.S. bishops. We used it here until the Novus Ordo came out in 1969.

"In the name of the Creator, and of the Redeemer, and of the Holy Spirit"?

Surely you mean "Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier".

Incognitus

ive been reading pope benedict xvi's book "spirit of the liturgy" its excellent. it is a must read !

the book basically covers the origins of the liturgy from our old testament roots, the theology of the liturgy and the liturgical abuse of the liturgy today. he grealy covers the eastern liturgies and well and applies his theological expertise to everything. its great. i wont give too much of it away !

Good post Mateusz.

I didn't want to get involved in this thread.

But I would suggest that anyone who wants to really know what Pope Benedict thinks about the question should read pages 159-170 of "The Spirit of the Liturgy", especially page 163.

My view: the "novus ordo" has Gregorian chant or polyphony as music, can (at the discretion of the celebrant) be mostly sung and have Latin, and faces whatever direction the legitimate authority legitimately dictates. That's the "novus ordo" the Seocnd Vatican council described, that's what Pope Benedict celebrates and seems to favor, and that's the Roman Mass I participate in.

What may or may not happen in your local Roman parish has nothing to do with the Order of Mass and has everything to do with parish- and diocesan- level policies and leadership (both lay and presbyterial).