9 March 2009

UTRAQUISM again

Utraquism - not in the sense of the heresy that it is essential to receive the blessed Sacrament in both kinds, but as regards the problems of clergy who habitually use the Roman Rite in utraque forma - affects one in a couple of other ways. One is tempted to
(1) reintegrate into the OF the manners, not explicitly forbidden, of the EF. I have in mind, for example, the joining of thumb and forefinger after the Consecration of the Host; kissing the Altar before turning away from it. I have kept away from doing this because of a feeling that life is complicated enough already; and if, as well as keeping OF and EF distinct in one's mind and habits, one also had to juggle with 'my own personal improvement of OF', life would be even more complex.
(2) use the EF 'private prayers of the priest' (as at the Offertory and before Communion) in the OF. I have avoided this for the same reasons; also because it would have knock-on effects, such as the Host resting on the Corporal from the Offertory onwards. Above all, of course, it would be contra legem and would amount to creating one's own rite which would be neither OF nor EF.

4 comments:

rev'd up said...

What about maniple, burse and veil? Though not expressly forbidden USoA RC canon lawyers/liars have written vehemently against them.

What about kneeling? Though not expressly forbidden, in the USoA many RC bishops absolutely forbid kneeling during Mass at any time. I have myself been rebuked by a FSSP priest for kneeling during low Mass (I kept on kneeling anyway).

All things Novus Ordo are a slow acting poison. The cure is to quit cold turkey. Detox in only painful because of the whines of the ignorant who can either shape up or ship out. What can I say? I hate the OF because it smacks of both congregationalism and invalidity. I am of such a feeble mind and faith I only trust to the liturgical and spiritual legacy of triumphant Christian faith and practice - the Mass of the martyrs, confessors and doctors. The OF can make no such claim, only the Tridentine Mass can. The OF is surrender; the Tridentine Mass is victory.

James said...

I'm pretty sure the GIRM explicitly states that a veil over the chalice is perfectly appropriate.

Fr. Hunwicke,

How does integrating manners which have been passed down by the Church and have never been forbidden equate to "my own personal improvement of OF"? This line reads like it was written with a hermeneutic of discontinuity.

Maybe I didn't read closely enough a while back, but did you not write an article about certain liturgical aspects which have, over the course of time, gained a liceity without ever actually being rubrical?

Might just be me, but seems a little contrary.

Canon Jerome Lloyd OSJV said...

"I have in mind, for example, the joining of thumb and forefinger after the Consecration of the Host; kissing the Altar before turning away from it."

Good God man I'd have thought you above such considerations... The principle behind it is as good now as it was then... Unless your understanding of the Sacrament changes also with the Rites?!

Canon Jerome Lloyd OSJV said...

Sorry Father... I meant to say, I thought "we" traditionalists had mutually (but silently) agreed that whatever liturgical practice or principle that was not specifically "abrogated", "forbidden" or "unmentioned" (in the GIRM) IS permissable in the NO?!

(Doesn't the majority liturgical praxis of Anglo-Catholics rely on the above unspoken rubric...?!)