 Lt. Cmdr. Allen R. Kuss, the Roman Catholic priest aboard USS Enterprise (CVN 65) administers the Sunday evening Catholic Mass service in the ship's multi-denominational Chapel (Oct. 5, 2003). "Novus Ordo Missae" (New Order of the Mass) and Mass of Pope Paul VI or Pauline Mass or Second Vatican Council Mass are terms used to refer to the Roman-rite liturgy of the Mass as revised by the Roman Catholic Church by decree of the Second Vatican Council. The changes were brought about in a new Missal (the book with the words and description of the liturgy) which was published in 1970.
Besides the actual changes in the text itself, which met with mostly small resistance from a few Bishops and Cardinals, the introduction of the Novus Ordo was acompanied by many changes in the way the text was acted out in various countries, which caused some controversy amongst many Catholics.
History and Motives for changing the Mass
The desire to change some or all of the Mass is usually traced to the modern Liturgical movement, most notably started by Dom Guerenger from the Abbey of Solesmes (although some critics say that the changes made by the 1970 Missal go against the original ideals of this movement). Originally this movement desired to correct what were perceived to be abuses that had crept into the celebration of the Mass, and to restore older practices which were thought to be better. This included a focus on repopularizing Gregorian Chant, and encouraging those in the congregation to join vocally in the prayers and chanting of the Mass.
Previous to this, the Missal had been subject to changes ever since it was codified by order of the Council of Trent: Pope Clement VIII made a general revision, [1] (http://www.catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/DocumentContents/Index/2/SubIndex/41/DocumentIndex/314) as did Pope Urban VIII ([2] (http://www.catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/DocumentContents/Index/2/SubIndex/41/DocumentIndex/403)). Other Popes added new celebrations or made minor adjustments. But it was the twentieth century that saw work begin on a more radical rewriting.
In response to desires expressed at the First Vatican Council (1869-1870), Pope Pius X (1903-1914) introduced a new arrangement of the Psalter for use in the Breviary, and forbade the use of the former arrangement from 1 January 1913 on. In the bull Divino afflatu,[3] (http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10divino.htm) by which he ordered this change, he stated that he had thereby made a first step towards a correction of the Roman Breviary and Missal, an aim for which he would soon set up a commission of experts. This bull was printed in all editions of the Roman Missal from then until 1970.
Pope Pius XII (1939-1958) brought out the first substantial revision of the portion of the Missal dealing with Holy Thursday, Good Friday, the Easter Vigil and the Vigil of Pentecost. The Mass of the Lords Supper was moved from the morning to the evening of Holy Thursday, making room for insertion into the Missal of a morning Chrism Mass. He inserted into the evening Mass the rite of the washing of feet, and for the first time made the text mention the giving of communion to the faithful, at which he abolished the recitation of the Confiteor (an anticipation of the 1970 general revision). The Good Friday service was moved from morning to afternoon; while the choir sang during veneration of the cross, the priest no longer had to read the same texts along with those near to him; communion was no longer reserved for the priest alone; and, among other changes, the 1970 revision of the Missal was anticipated by omitting the priests prayer before communion, Panem caelestem accipiam. The yet more numerous changes in the Easter Vigil service (which was no longer to be celebrated on Saturday morning) included the following: the triple candlestick on which one candle at a time was lit at the beginning of the service was abolished; newly invented rites were inserted, such as renewing baptismal promises (which could be done in the vernacular) and inscribing on the Easter candle the Arabic numerals of the year; the prayer for the emperor in the Exsultet was replaced by a newly composed prayer; eight Old Testament readings were omitted, another was shortened, and the priest was no longer obliged to read the other passages to himself, while someone else read or chanted them aloud; the Last Gospel (John 1:1-14) with which, before 1970, Mass customarily ended was already omitted in the revised Easter Vigil Mass, as also on Holy Thursday. At the Vigil of Pentecost, the traditional blessing of baptismal water, accompanied by the Litany of the Saints and six Old Testament readings, was omitted completely.
His short-lived successor, Pope John XXIII (1958-1963), apart from adding some feasts, made only two changes in the text of the Missal: he deleted from the Good Friday prayer for the Jews the word perfidi, and he added the name of Saint Joseph to the Canon (or Eucharistic Prayer) of the Mass. The second of these changes was particularly significant, since until then many had considered the Canon of the Mass practically untouchable.
One other trend was the desire for the vernacular language to be used in some or all of the Mass with the intention that the congregation might draw spiritual nourishment from it. This was especially desired for the readings from Scripture at Mass. In his encyclical Mediator Dei, 60[4] (http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_20111947_mediator-dei_en.html) Pope Pius XII stated that the use of the mother tongue in connection with several of the rites may be of much advantage to the people. But the Apostolic See alone is empowered to grant this permission. He gave a general permission to use the vernacular at the renewal of baptismal promises in the revised Easter Vigil.
Another major group was those who studied the origin and evolution of the liturgy, most famously Adrian Fortesque. This group desired the possible return of old practices they liked but which were dropped from the liturgy over time, such as:
- Receiving communion by the congregation under both the forms of the bread and wine
- Mass whereby the celebrant faces the people, as was done in olden times
- Incorporating a procession of the offerings, as was done in olden times
These same thinkers also sought the removal of what might be called the "accidents" of the evolution of the rite, such as:
- The Priest blessing the host and chalice after they were consecrated, puzzling for some, as it is Catholic faith that then the body and blood of Jesus are really, truly and substantially present at that point, although the sensible appearances are those of bread and wine.
- The dramatic shaping of the rite by secular music, causing the Priest many times during the rite to sit down and wait for long pieces of music to stop playing, also causing much of the prayers of the Priest to be said silently, etc.
Another trend however which is controversially said to have been a factor in the development of the Mass was that of ecumenism, or the desire to unify schismatic or separated, Christian denominations. Ecumenism was a main theme of the Council and is without evidence seen by many to have influenced the development of the changes applied to the Mass, although some critics of the changes claim that this was done by a false and evil ecumenism.
Textual changes in the 1970 Roman Missal
The Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum, [5] (http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0262r.htm) promulgating the 1970 Roman Missal, singled out for special mention the following changes:
1. Three new canons or eucharistic prayers were added to the single one that the Roman rite previously used. The only obligatory alteration to the traditional Roman Canon was that, at the consecration, the words “Mysterium fidei” were removed from the context of the words of Christ. They are now said by the priest as an introduction to an acclamation by the faithful.
2. The rites indicated in the Ordo Missae were “simplified, with due care to preserve their substance”; “elements which with the passage of time came to be duplicated or were added with but little advantage” were eliminated; and “other elements which suffered injury through accidents of history” were restored “to the earlier norm of the holy Fathers” (a phrase echoing Pope Pius V’s Bull Quo primum[6] (http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius05/p5quopri.htm)). The phrases here enclosed in quotation marks come from the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy.[7] (http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html) [8] (http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/v2litur.htm)
3. A much larger portion of the holy Scriptures is read to the people: the present three readings (four, if you count the Psalm) over three years of Sundays more than quadruple the previous two readings in a single-year cycle; and, in addition, a two-year cycle of readings from Scripture has been assigned to weekdays, which previously, except for Lent and a few other days, had only a repetition of the previous Sunday’s readings.
In addition to these three changes, the Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum, [9] (http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0262r.htm) mentions that the revision considerably modified other sections of the Roman Missal, such as the Proper of Seasons, the Proper of Saints, the Common of Saints, Ritual Masses and Votive Masses, adding that [the] number [of the prayers] has been increased, so that the new forms might better correspond to new needs, and the text of older prayers has been restored on the basis of the ancient sources.
The Mass of the Priest was brought more into line with the Mass of the Bishop, so that the first half of the Mass was optionally said from the Priest's chair, much as the Bishop would ? over ? his throne in the previous rite of the Mass. At the part of the Mass known as the "Offertory", where the wine and water are brought to the altar, this was allowed to be done as a procession. The Kiss of Peace ritual was extended to even a low mass and was extended so that the laypeople could be involved. Instead of the kiss/embrace technique as previously used, a handshake was allowed for this ritual.
Other changes
Vernacular language
Permission was granted for national conferences of bishops to authorize the use of vernacular languages in place of Latin. Almost immediately all conferences granted this permission and therefore almost all Masses throughout the world came to be celebrated in the vernacular, or local language, instead of Latin.
Communion under both kinds
The 1970 Roman Missal envisages the giving of Communion to the faithful under the appearance of wine as well as under the appearance of bread. The very few circumstances (GIRM (http://www.catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/documentText/Index/4/SubIndex/67/ContentIndex/175/Start/1), 242) in which this was at first permitted were gradually extended. As a result, in many churches it is availed of at every Mass. This is a return to a practice that had largely fallen into disuse in Western Europe even before the Council of Trent, and the revised Roman Missal therefore insisted that “Priests should use the occasion to teach the faithful the Catholic doctrine on the form of Communion, as affirmed by the Council of Trent. They should first be reminded that, according to Catholic faith, they receive the whole Christ and the genuine sacrament when they participate in the sacrament even under one kind and that they are not thus deprived of any grace necessary for salvation”. (GIRM (http://www.cfpeople.org/Books/GIRM/cfptoc.htm), 241)
The Priest's Orientation
Before the revision, priest and people generally faced in the same direction for the canon of the Mass. Most altars, topped with a tabernacle and often built against a wall or backed by a reredos, were designed with this orientation in view: that, when Mass was celebrated at the main altar, all would face the apse of the church, which was generally to the east. However, this was not universal: at the high altars in the major basilicas in Rome the Popes traditionally celebrated Mass facing the people, and even in small, but ancient, churches, such as that of the Four Crowned Saints in Via dei Santi Quattro, the altar was arranged so that the priest necessarily faced the people throughout the Mass. Indeed, the text of the pre-Vatican-II Missal (Ritus servandus in celebratione Missae, V, 3) expressly envisaged this orientation. Without imposing it, the 1970 Roman Missal called for it to be made possible: "The main altar should be freestanding so that the ministers can easily walk around it and Mass can be celebrated facing the people" (GIRM 1975,[10] (http://www.cfpeople.org/Books/GIRM/cfptoc.htm) 262). The 2002 edition of GIRM added a phrase declaring a freestanding main altar “desirable wherever possible" (GIRM 2002,[11] (http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/current/chapter5.htm#sect2) 299). The facing-the-people orientation, though by no means obligatory [12] (http://www.adoremus.org/12-0101cdw-adorient.html), has in practice become almost universal. Altars with the older orientation were either moved, or another altar (that was freestanding) was placed in front of the old one.
At four points the 1975 GIRM[13] (http://www.catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/DocumentContents/Index/4/SubIndex/67/DocumentIndex/1) (86, 107, 115, 122) prescribed that the priest should face the people, namely, for the opening greeting, for the invitation to pray (“Orate fratres”) before beginning the eucharistic prayer or canon of the Mass, when displaying the consecrated host before receiving and giving communion (“Domine, non sum dignus”), and when inviting to pray (“Oremus”) at the postcommunion prayer). The 2002 edition[14] (http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/current/chapter4.htm#sect1) (124, 146, 154, 157, 165) adds the point at which the priest gives the greeting of peace (“Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum”). The pre-Vatican-II Ordo Missae gave the same indications as the 1975 GIRM, except that it ignored the Communion of the people, mention of which was found in the Missal only in its Ritus servandus in celebratione Missae, X, 6, with an outline of the rite, not the full text.
GIRM directs the priest to face the altar at several points, exactly as in the pre-Vatican-II Ordo Missae. Usually, because of his orientation, this means he also faces the people.
Repositioning of the tabernacle
The change in orientation meant that, in general, the tabernacle cannot be on the altar at which Mass is celebrated. For its consequent placing, the 1970 Missal gives the direction: “In accordance with the structure of each church and legitimate local customs, the Most Blessed Sacrament should be reserved in a tabernacle in a part of the church that is truly noble, prominent, readily visible, beautifully decorated, and suitable for prayer” (GIRM, (http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/current/revmissalisromanien.htm) 314).
Resulting Practices subsequent to the publishing of the Missal
Many practices, not specified by the Missal, were then acted out from the period of 1970 to the present. These include:
- Allowing Altar Girls instead of only allowing Altar Boys
- Allowing lay people to read the readings
- Allowing lay people to distribute communion
- Allowing forms of music during mass that were previously forbidden, including the use of percussive instruments such as the piano.
Support of the revision
Among the remaining Catholics, there has been much support for the changes, both textual and as practiced. Supporters say that it is now easier to understand what is going on, which is more edifying and less boring. Supporters also like the variety of music options that they have. There is more chance for lay participation in the New Mass compared to the old, as the layperson can now read the readings, distribute communion, etc.
Criticisms of the revision
There are two distinct forms of criticism of the changes in the New Mass: criticism of the changes proposed and in the text in and of itself, and criticism of the way that text was acted upon in the subsequent period from 1970 to the present.
Criticisms of the text in and of itself
It should be noted that those who criticize the text in and of itself, are of a smaller minority then those who critize only what they call "abuses", coincidental changes in the way that text was acted out over time to the present day.
Invalidity: A very small minority believe that the New Mass, as translated into certain languages, is invalid (meaning that the consecration does not work, does not cause transubstantiation because in certain languages the phrase "pro multis" is translated into "for all" when previously it was translated into "for many", which this minority believes is the only correct wording that will cause the consecration to work. No known groups hold this position although it appears to be held by some indivuduals.
Most however, who critize the textual changes in and of themselves do so within the context of the history of the timing of the changes and the intentions of those changing it. Specifically, they believe the Mass was changed in the spirit of a false ecumenism, or desire of unity between Catholics and non Catholics, especially the Orthodox and Protestants (Ecumenism is defined as "true" traditionally if the desire is for non-Catholics to be united to the Church by actually becomming Catholics, a "false ecumenism" is defined as either the groups agreeing to live and work peacefully together, or, more rarely held, to actually create a generalized "super religion" which would encompass all those groups). This group feels that the Mass was changed primarily to make it less controversial to those groups. This is in contrast to past changes of ritual which were many times done to clearly distinguish the difference between a Catholic standpoint or belief and a heretical one. For example:
- Words and phrases that suggest that the bread and wine actually become the physical and living body and blood of Jesus seem to be reduced, or replaced with phrases which refer to other things. The occurences of the word "sacrifice" are reduced, and what are considered ambiguous phrases (especially in light of what phrases were previously used) such as "spiritual drink" and "table" are introduced.
- Actions which demonstrate the belief that the host really does become the body and blood of Jesus are reduced or eliminated, such as kneeling, carefully washing the fingers over the chalice with the intention that no particles of the host fall to the ground, careful washing of the chalice, the requirement that the inside of the chalice be made of gold or silver, the requirement that there be three layers of fabric under the chalice so that if any wine spilled it would be fully absorbed and not touch the altar, calling for the removal of the tabernacle (which is supposed to house the real body and blood of Jesus throughout the day) from the central place architecturally of the church to another "noble place", and so on.
Critics claim that these actions were done to tone down the belief in transubstantiation, which not believed by Protestants and other non-Catholics. They point to a controversial Gallup poll in the US which finds that regardless of the intention of the changes, the majority of Catholics polled no longer believe in transubstantiation.
One general issue involved here, which is also involved in criticisms of Vatican II, revolve around ambiguities in the text. Critics believe that the ambiguities were put there on purpose, and although they were often clarified by extra documents or letters, the ambiguities are de facto used by many to push for changes which the critics detest, without regard to the clarifications.
There are arguments around the intentions of the writers of the New Mass, such as stating that they fully intended to make the new Mass compatible with Protestant worship, so that it could be used by certain Protestant denominations. Most critics however feel that regardless of the real intentions of the writers the ambiguities of the text would lead to confusion and loss of the faith under the principle of lex orandi lex credendi.
Criticisms of practices introduced into the mass since 1970
The majority of critics are critics of certain practices which were introduced in various areas into the New Mass, which have become associated with the New Mass even though they were not specified by the text. As mentioned before, these include:
- Allowing Altar Girls instead of only allowing Altar Boys
- Allowing lay people to read the readings
- Allowing lay people to distribute communion
- Allowing receiving of communion into the hand, instead of into the tongue
- Allowing forms of music during mass that were previously forbidden, including the use of percussive instruments such as the piano.
- Encouraging the elimination of kneelers in churches
- Allowing married men to become Deacons (since they still cannot become Priests they permanently remain a Deacon)
- Stylisic changes in the design of vestments, which became much more simplified, using a plainer material, and incorporating modern designs, and dropping cross designs
- Architectural changes in the design of Churches, which became much simplified, using plainer materials, and incorporating modern designs, and dropping cross designs
Critics either do not aesthetically like these changes, or see them leading to a lack of belief that Jesus really does become physically present, exactly the same as when he was on earth in 33 AD, except under the appearance of bread and wine. To this genre of critics, the New Mass would be acceptable if it was celebrated without these elements. Supporters of the New Mass say that these elements were extraneous to the New Mass, and that if they are abuses or wrong should be eliminated. Critics agree, but the underlying argument between both sides is which elements or changes are good and which are wrong.
External links
A) Revision of the Roman Missal
- The file GIRMALL.HTM, available (also as GIRMALL.ZIP) on http://www.ewtn.com/library/indexes/CURIA.htm, (http://www.ewtn.com/library/indexes/CURIA.htm) contains – along with other material mostly pertaining to the United States alone – what can be called the official English translation of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 1975 edition, and of the Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum, by which the 1970 Roman Missal was promulgated, as well as an English translation of numerous Roman responses (until 1997) to queries about the revised liturgy.
- Ordo Missae of the 1970 Roman Missal, Latin and English texts, rubrics in English only (http://www.catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/TextContents/Index/4/SubIndex/67/TextIndex/9)
- General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 1975 edition (http://www.cfpeople.org/Books/GIRM/cfptoc.htm)
- General Instruction of the Roman Missal,1975 edition. (http://www.catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/DocumentContents/Index/4/SubIndex/67/DocumentIndex/1) (This version is frequently more literal that the official English translation.)
- General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 2002 edition (http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/current/revmissalisromanien.htm)
- Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Liturgy (http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html)
- Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum, promulgating the 1970 Roman Missal (Pope Paul VI) (http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0262r.htm)
- Quo primum, promulgating the 1570 Roman Missal (Pope Pius V) (http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius05/p5quopri.htm)
- Cum santissimum, promulgating the 1604 Roman Missal (Pope Clement VIII) (http://www.catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/DocumentContents/Index/2/SubIndex/41/DocumentIndex/314)
- Si quid est, promulgating the 1634 Roman Missal (Pope Urban VIII) (http://www.catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/DocumentContents/Index/2/SubIndex/41/DocumentIndex/403)
- Rubrical comparisons over several centuries (http://ordorecitandi.com/nav/CalendarComparisonMay2002.doc) (.doc format) (see OrdoRecitandi.com (http://ordorecitandi.com/))
- Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum (http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html)
B) Polemics
The Text of the Novus Ordo Mass (http://www.liturgies.net/Liturgies/Catholic/NovusOrdo.htm)
|
