26 February 2010

Post Scriptum

Some jolly contributions in the Iocositas Episcopalis thread. And Joshua is still unloading good stuff in re Christi Sacerdotis.

MISPRINTS
You may have noticed that I gave another run to one of my most boring hobby-horses, errors and misprints in Latin liturgical texts, with a prophesy that new texts for Christus Sacerdos would be full of them. Joshua then provided the already current Spanish texts. I have not been through them with a fine toothcomb, but I did look at the Collect. Where (see earlier post) I was mystified by ex eius memoriale participatione. I have now peeped into the Third Edition of the Roman Missal, where the same collect is the collect of the Votive. It is clear that the Spanish text is a howler: it should read ex eius memorialis participatione.

I'm unsure whether to be gleeful after being proved right so expeditiously, or saddened that the Holy See can't bring itself to employ competent Latinists. What on earth do they think the Faithful pay their Peter's Pence for?

I wonder if those who are keenest on saying the black precisely and doing the red exactly take the view that one is obliged to pray ungrammatical and incomprehensible gibberish when it 'imposed' by 'authority'.

S JOSEPH IN THE CANON
Those interested should read the thread attached to my post of November 13 2009. The Editio Typica of the 1962 Missal was dated June; S Joseph entered the Canon in December. So "Authentic 1962" has no S Joseph.

There seems to be quite a lot of disobedience of the strict rule of the Church here. All the more distressing because the Canon is so sacrosanct.

Despite the points made by Pastor in Valle, I am not completely convinced that it really matters ...

10 comments:

AndrewWS said...

MISPRINTS:

Don't you mean "with a propheCy"?

Rubricarius said...

I would like to know whether the 'Zee' bows to the Cross at Oremus and the Holy Name etc. Bows to the cross disappear in the 1962 MR (when the celebrant is at the side of the altar) but most 1962 performers still make them.

It strikes me as really like a game. One rule of the game is to pretend the Council is the cause of the problem, so '1962' becomes a sort of gold standard. However, that has to dressed up as much as possible as the old rite hence bow to the Cross, Confiteor before communion etc.

It is interesting how something (supposedly) declared 'typical' in June 1962 by a private decree of SRC can contain the name of St. Joseph that resulted from Nove hisce temporibus on 13 December of the same year. Perhaps those learned experts were able to divine the mind of John XXIII?

Fr John Hunwicke SSC, said...

Oops! I do indeed mean -Cy.

GOR said...

While I have always being an advocate of following the rubrics as faithfully as possible, I don’t believe a fetish was made of it pre-Vat II. One did one’s best and if a bow here or a Sign of the Cross there was missed, well it was not the end of the world. Carry on and try to do better the next time. The cardinal rule was to say the words of Consecration exactly and correctly. I don’t think priests agonized over minor issues – except perhaps when the bishop was celebrant or in attendance and then recourse might have been made to Fortescue/O’Connell to avoid any embarrassing missteps.

In general, the desire to celebrate the Mass properly was already conveyed by the priest’s ‘Statement of Intention’: “Ego volo celebrare Missam…iuxta ritum sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae…” Thus, any subsequent errors, whether of omission or commission, would be unintentional and infirmitatis humanae causa.

But with the laissez faire attitude after Vat II and the introduction of choices (even regionally distinct ones) at various parts of the Mass, ‘Do the Red’ went by the board. If I have choices here, why not there? And eventually ‘there’ became ‘everywhere’ – resulting in the mess we’re in today. Thus, some are rubrically rigorous in an attempt to return to a ‘simpler’ time when we didn’t have these problems – or at least, less of them.

But while you can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube, as they say, there must be standards. There is work to be done. The calendar issues between OF and EF is one such work and the ‘informing’ of one by the other - as the Holy Father envisioned - will take time to evolve. Unfortunately, given the pace of Rome, some of us may not see it in our lifetime!

Edwin said...

Call me pernickety, but I thought it was a fine-toothed comb. I have never combed my teeth in my life. Lovely blogs, though - keep them coming. +E

Joshua said...

ROTFL, Your Lordship! Even Homer nods, it seems...

Joshua said...

Speaking of mucked-up Latin, there was the occasion in Australia, it must've been in about 1965, since the Per ipsum was sung aloud in Latin, when a Mass was televised, and the priest singing that doxology sang not just the black but the red as well.

It has often been said that one benefit of the Latin was that no priest had sufficient command of the language to be able to make spontaneous changes to the text - whereas in English, no one fears to modify the words...

Of course, no one bothers to ask the faithful, who would rather have Mass than the latest nonsense made up by an ill-educated celebrant.

GOR said...

The old joke in clerical circles Joshua, was of nuns reciting the Office and joyfully proclaiming: "Hic non dicitur. Gloria Patri et Filio et..."

Sir Watkin said...

O.E.D. has "fine tooth" and does not seem to recognise "fine toothed". The phrase is used adjectivally, a usage for which there are innumerable parallels.

On the recitation of rubrics: I'm reminded me of the colonial bishop, who having mastered an African language less than perfectly allegedly dismissed his flock with the words, "The blessing of God Almighty, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, be amongst you and remain with you always. Amen. Please do not take this leaflet away with you."

one benefit of the Latin was that no priest had sufficient command of the language to be able to make spontaneous changes to the text

Hmmm. It's not that difficult to improvise in Latin, especially if you are familiar with the rhythms and phrases of the liturgy.

Rubricarius said...

GOR said...
The old joke in clerical circles Joshua, was of nuns reciting the Office and joyfully proclaiming: "Hic non dicitur. Gloria Patri et Filio et..."

Believe it or not many years ago I witnessed an SSPX priest read the rubric in the missal on Ember Saturday in the Pentecost Octave about not saying 'Flectamus genuaFlectamus genua' etc!