 |
| An Anglican Ordinariate Mass involving deacon and subdeacon |
I have learned from an inside source that when the bishops of the Anglican Ordinariate bishops met with Cardinal Roche last month, he ordered that they cease to utilize priests as deacons/subdeacons (and deacons as subdeacons) during solemn Mass but rather, if there is more than one priest, they must all concelebrate, and deacons may only function as deacons.
Prior to this, the Ordinariate had been following Catholic tradition by observing the distinction of offices in the liturgy with the classic triad of priest-deacon-subdeacon, which is part of the common liturgical patrimony of Catholics.
It is, moreover, perfectly theologically accurate, since each rank in the hierarchy builds on the one that came before it and thus, obviously includes its powers. That is why a bishop in the traditional pontifical Mass wears the vestments of all ranks: alb, tunicle, dalmatic, and chasuble.
The obsession with concelebration was critiqued at the Second Vatican Council in a major intervention by the Dominican archbishop and later cardinal Paul-Pierre Philippe, as reported at New Liturgical Movement earlier this week. The same article recounts the potent critique made of concelebration by Fr. Enrico Zoffoli—one of many critiques that have been made over the years (see here, here, and here for starters).
How could it harm anyone to let a priest exercise his inferior ministerial roles? Oh, but it's so hierarchical—that must be the problem in our age of simplification and synodality. Is it the nod toward the immemorial tradition of the subdiaconate? One would think that an office Latin Christians share in common with Eastern Christians would be privileged in this age of ecumenism. (For a full defense of the Minor Orders and the Subdiaconate, see my book Ministers of Christ: Recovering the Roles of Clergy and Laity in an Age of Confusion.)
The pettiness of this intervention is apparent. The Ordinariate is minuscule, so who cares? Evidently, the observant eye of Roche & Co. notices whenever there is the slightest deviation from the utopia of Bugnini's liturgical reform, and crushes it!
Let us hope for a time when this kind of nonsense is a bad memory rather than an active burden. Meanwhile, the intelligent and pious will know how to work around the unreasonable dictates of the still-lingering Bergoglian court.
The pettiness of this intervention is apparent. The Ordinariate is minuscule, so who cares? Evidently, the observant eye of Roche & Co. notices whenever there is the slightest deviation from the utopia of Bugnini's liturgical reform, and crushes it!
Let us hope for a time when this kind of nonsense is a bad memory rather than an active burden. Meanwhile, the intelligent and pious will know how to work around the unreasonable dictates of the still-lingering Bergoglian court.
