"Holy novelty!" is more like it. The liturgy shown has only a passing resemblance to the traditional Palm Sunday rite.
Which "man at work" magically knows from three photos? Try to be a tad serious.
Well, these three images, depicting red vestments and a "subdeacon of the cross", are indeed enough evidence to determine which rite was used. The several dozen additional pictures in the linked-to album - which Finbar seemingly missed - are further proof. No magic required!
I hasten to add that it is not my intention to spread negativity, but merely to point put that this is not the traditional Palm Sunday rite. I'm sure that it was an excellent "extraordinary form" liturgy, though personally I would be more impressed if the later revision had been celebrated with the same attention to detail that is shown here.
Man: The liturgy shown has only a passing resemblance to the traditional Palm Sunday rite.Ah, but if every Novus Ordo Mass in the world had at least a passing resemblance to this one, what a wonderful improvement that would be!
Man at work: Could you please explain what it is about the red vestments and the crucifer that mark the procession as sub-traditional?
This is the Palm Sunday from the 1955 Holy Week Rite. The 1955 Holy Week is the only approved rite for those using the Traditional Latin Mass. Red is worn for the blessing, distribution, and procession of palms. Then the vestments are changed to violet for the Mass. For whatever reason, many places often ignore some or all of the rubrics of this rite. The 1955 Holy Week changes were the first "baby steps" to liturgical changes following the Second Vatican Council, culminating in the Roman Missal of 1970.The Novus Ordo Holy Week has red used throughout the ENTIRE service, so this is definitely NOT a Novus Ordo Mass.For more information click on the following link:http://www.sanctamissa.org/en/resources/rubrical-guides/rites-of-holy-week.html
Anonymous,In the pre-1955 Palm Sunday liturgy, violet was worn for both the blessing of palms and the following Mass. The subdeacon of the Mass carried the cross during the procession; also, both he and the deacon wore folded chasubles for both parts of the liturgy instead of tunic and dalmatic. The blogger Rubricarius has a typically excellent post listing more substantial changes here.Henry,I quite agree. I think the efforts and good intentions (clearly in abundance in Melbourne, and not to mention their excellent taste in vesture!) of those who are so dedicated to the "extraordinary form" would be put to much better use improving the celebration of the 1970-2002 rite. I simply do not see the purpose in revisiting any of the preliminary 1950s or 60s revisions, knowing where they led: either one accepts the "finished product", or works towards restoring (at least) the pre-Pius XII rite.
Perhaps with Anglicorum Coetibus the patrimony of the Church of England may have an enriching effect on liturgical orthopraxis.
What a wonderful sight, except those yucky vestments of course.
I think those robes are pretty. They make those clergymen look more...priestly. And I'm glad people still recognize and celebrate Palm Sunday as everyone seemed to only know bunnies and eggs.
Post a Comment