Rorate Caeli

The "Vatican Ordo for the Extraordinary Form"

From Summorum Pontificum Observatus (original in French):



The Ecclesia Dei Commission has just had an Ordo divini offici recitandi sacrique peragendi published by the Libreria Editrice Vaticana, whose elaboration was directed by Monsignor Pozzo, Secretary of the Pontifical Commission.

This Ordo, composed entirely in Latin, includes, as all documents of this type, the indication of the Divine Office to be chanted or recited and of the Mass to be celebrated on each day of the year.
... 
This Ordo starts on the First Sunday of Advent 2011.* The calendar of the feasts of the Temporal and of the Sanctoral rigorously follows the one in use in 1962 (for example, and contrary to the usage in several traditional places of worship, it forbids the use the organ on the Sundays in Advent, with reference to the Instruction De Musica Sacra, of September 3, 1958). It is obviously a Roman Ordo, that does not indicate the "national" feasts ... . On the other hand, it mentions the possibility of the use of the preface of Advent that existed in 1962 in all Dioceses in France, but not [included] in the Roman Missal.... 

The [Vatican Ordo]** solves the mixed [liturgical-disciplinary] question of the double Communion that may happen on the night and on the day of Christmas and Easter, authorizing it, according to the prescriptions of 1964 (this double communion is, in any event, practiced without any problem in all Traditional chapels).*** Yet in a "rigorist" sense it also solves the question of the Friday abstinence, by following not the legislation in place in 1962 (abstinence on all Fridays, except those that coincide with Feasts of obligation). It follows the discipline of the new Code of Canon Law in its "rigorous" interpretation (abstinence on all Fridays, except those that coincidewith "one of the days marked as solemnity", that is, the feasts of I Class, such as Friday in the Easter Octave). Taking these exceptions into consideration, on all Fridays the [Vatican Ordo] indicates (in bold, so that it cannot be ignored by anyone): Abstinentia.****
...
For which, paradoxically, the [Vatican Ordo] is more rigorous and closer to the traditional discipline than... the Ordo used by the Society of Saint Pius X and edited by the Monastery of Saint-François du Trévoux, which makes mention of the obligation of abstinence only on Fridays in Lent .

Rorate notes:

* Kind of late, they should be releasing the 2012-2013 Ordo - actually they should not only release it, those responsible must stop with this nonsense and always also make available the whole Ordo online, as the monks of Le Barroux and the priests of the Apostolic Administration of Saint John Mary Vianney have already been doing in the past few years (see our sidebar). It is a public service and a work of charity. For those who are interested, it can be bought at Pax Book.

** The original post says "Pozzo Ordo" - a name which displays a servility with which we are sure the Pontifical Commission would not agree.

*** Not at all; double communion on Christmas and Easter is still avoided in numerous places.


**** Naturally, Canons 1251 and 1253 are still in full force. 

15 comments:

  1. Cardinal Burke, God willing, will be our first American Pope!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jack B.1:59 AM

    A deeper solidification of the unfortunate '62 missal . . .

    ReplyDelete
  3. @ Jack B.

    I don't think that's the case. You can't really solidify what's already solid.

    Whether we like it or not, the '62 missal is the only one approved for use under S.P. The ordo simply reflects that.

    I happen to agree that the '62 missal is not the best, but for the moment it remains the only practical option. To "roll back the clock" even further would only serve to provoke even greater resistance than the ancient rites already face. Thus, for pragmatic and prudential reasons, the longed-for restoration of the pre-'55 rites and calendar will probably have to wait for a time when the whole situation is less tenuous than it is at present.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Does it mention the second confiteor?

    ReplyDelete
  5. That is unlikely, considering that it is not a matter that changes from day to day.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Eriugena10:56 AM

    The Ecclesia Dei Ordo recitandi was prepared in previous years by a man who is currently trying his Vocation with the Franciscans of the Immaculate. Indeed, the current FI Ordo looks very much the same, but uses the Franciscan calendar...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Fr. A.M.11:36 AM

    This is a good thing, but I hope that it is produced on time for next year.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I would concur with G.S, the 1962 missal may not be without its own faults but it's the best we can currently hope for. For His Holiness to confirm that the missal issued by Pope John XXIII was never abrogated is one thing, but their would need to be some serious and widespread will to restore the pre-1955 rites, of which the average pew Catholic under 70, even one sympathetic to the Latin Mass, has probably never heard of.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Prof. Basto8:49 PM

    The thing is that, even if the changes introduced from 1955 onwards were unfortunate, still the 1962 Missal remains part of the same tradition of what we now call the usus antiquor, that is, the traditional Roman Rite, dating back from the times of St. Gregory the Great, and, especially, from the codification wished by the Council of Trent and promulgated by St. Pius V.

    The minor reforms introduced in the Tridentine Missal under Ven. Pius XII and bl. John XXIII can be criticized, especially the Holy Week reforms, but they are as legitimate as other minor reforms, such as those introduced to the Tridentine Missal by Popes Clement VIII, Urban VIII, St. Pius X and Benedict XV.

    The great liturgical rupture only came under Paul VI, after the promulgation of the Second Vatican Council's Constitution on Sacred Liturgy, starting with the initial instructions issued from 1964 onwards, passing through the promulgation of the Ordo Missae 1965 and the period of experimentations and constant issuing of new liturgical guidelines, and culminating with the adoption of the altogether new liturgical books resulting from the work of the "Consilium", beggining with the Novus Ordo Missal of 1969/1970, the first to no longer contain in its initial pages the Apostolic Constitution "Quo Primum" of St. Pius V, instead containing only Paul VI's Constitution "Missale Romanum", and being numbered as a "first edition".

    Later came the 1975 "second edition", also under Paul VI, and finally, in 2000, John Paul II's "third edition" of the Novus Ordo Missal. The fact that the numbering of the editions starts with Paul VI's 1969 Apostolic Constitution is only additional proof of the rupture between the Missals issued from then onwards, on one hand, and the Missals that preceeded the Pauline liturgical reforms, on the other hand.

    Thus, the 1962 Missal promulgated by John XXIII is the current missal of the ancient and never abrogated form of the Roman Rite not because it is the best representative of the Gregorian/Tridentine liturgical tradition, but simply because it was the last Missal to have been issued before the liturgical rupture initiated by the Second Vatican Council. And the 1962 Missal is a legitimate representative of the tradition of the ancient Roman Rite.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Sunshine State1:33 AM

    I thought current Canon Law allows one to receive communion twice a day, as long as the 2nd instance is in the confines of the mass. Isn't the double communion issue not relevant now, or am I missing something?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Lapem1:58 AM

    1) What's the difference between the 1955 and 1962 missal? (I assume the 1955 missal is the one hinted at when speaking of the unfortunate or lacking 1962 missal)

    2) Where can I get one of them? (Europe)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Fr. A.M. said, "This is a good thing, but I hope that it is produced on time for next year."

    Yeah. This would be like publishing today's news two weeks from now. Gee, just can't wait to see what we missed.

    Matt

    ReplyDelete
  13. Pulex6:51 AM

    @ G.S.
    "To "roll back the clock" even further would only serve to provoke even greater resistance than the ancient rites already face."
    Hardly. Most of those who are against the return of the traditional form do not know all those differences or do not care about them. In fact, since the reforms by Pius XII and Bl. John XXIII were in force only for few years before the post-conciliar changes came they did not become customary and in some countries were never fully introduced. Some pre-1951 customs there survive even in Novus Ordo context (Easter Vigil in morning, blessing of water outside sanctuary, etc.).
    Anyway, every such Ordo is for one year only, and any possible 'restorations' once approved can be incorporated in the edition of the respective following year.

    ReplyDelete
  14. stanley swetz2:56 PM

    The article seems to imply parenthetically that the new ordo follows some new point of the 1958 Instuction on not allowing the use of the organ during Advent. This is not the case. Fortescue,Ceremonies of the Roman Rite,1930 p.271; O'Connell,Celebration of Mass, 1944 p.549; Wuest-Mullaney-Barry, Matters Liturgical, 1956 p. 55 along with the 1958 Instruction #81 and the new ordo say the same thing: no organ music during Advent.

    PS: Wuest-Mullaney-Barry, Matters Liturgical, 1956 p.55 says soft organ music during the consecration and elevations is allowed. The '58 Instruction beheaded that Roman tradition as well as the singing of a motet to the Blessed Sacrament directly after the elevation of the chalice which was explicitly approved of by Pope St. Pius X in his motu proprio on the restoration of sacred music in 1903. Now, according to the '58 Instruction, a sober and noble silence is to reign between the elevation of the chalice and Pater noster.

    ReplyDelete

Comment boxes are debate forums for readers and contributors of RORATE CÆLI.

Please, DO NOT assume that RORATE CÆLI contributors or moderators necessarily agree with or otherwise endorse any particular comment just because they let it stand.

_______
NOTES

(1) This is our living room, in a deeply Catholic house, and you are our guest. Please, behave accordingly. Any comment may be blocked or deleted, at any time, whenever we perceive anything that is not up to our standards, not conducive to a healthy conversation or a healthy Catholic environment, or simply not to our liking.

(2) By clicking on the "publish your comment" button, please remain aware that you are choosing to make your comment public - that is, the comment box is not to be used for private and confidential correspondence with contributors and moderators.

(3) Any name/ pseudonym/ denomination may be freely used simply by choosing the third option, "Name/URL" (the URL box may be left empty), when posting your comment - therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to simply post as "Anonymous", making debate unnecessarily harder to follow. Any comment signed simply as "Anonymous" will be blocked.

Thank you!