Novus Ordo v Tridentine Rite

Discussion in 'Non-Anglican Discussion' started by Aidan, Apr 12, 2016.

  1. Aidan

    Aidan Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    952
    Likes Received:
    603
    Country:
    N Ireland
    Religion:
    Traditional RomanCatholic
    within Roman Catholicism there appears to be a growing movement( or perhaps it's just more vociferous) of people riling against the Novus Ordo form of Mass which they claim is invalid. What's your opinion of this debate?
     
  2. Lowly Layman

    Lowly Layman Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    1,939
    The old order was flawed; so is the new one. Sounds like an internal squabble. We have enough of our own without weighing in others'. Jmo
     
    Botolph likes this.
  3. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,248
    Likes Received:
    1,440
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    I find claims about the 'validity' of the rite less than helpful and perhaps even a tad divisive. What does the term even mean? It seems to carry an implication that there is some sort or formula that makes the magic work.

    Dom Gregory Dix suggested that there are the four actions of the Mass - Take - Offer - Break - Distribute - and that this action in the liturgy should indeed see some sort of replication in the daily lives of all Christian people.

    Jesus said 'Do this as my anamnesis'.

    In the History of the Church, since the very beginning there have been many variations in the liturgy (laos-ergon - the people's work). Fundamentally the people gather mindful of the great sacrifice that has wrought our salvation, and together in faith we commit ourselves to the life of Christ, and we do that which he has asked us to do - and in this holy mystery we know, we believe, we trust, we find Jesus in bread and wine, in friend and stranger, and we go forth carrying within us the seeds of this new kingdom.

    As such the rite is merely the vehicle by which we do this together within the 'ordered community of faith'. This does not mean that there is not a worthwhile discussion to be had about what is helpful and what is distractive within the rite.

    Let everything be done for the Praise and Worship of Almighty God, and of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, and for the edification of the people.

    A view of God that embraces a notion of Jesus assessing the rites, and determining that he will not be present here because they are using the 'wrong rite' is obscure and disfiguring. What makes the rite 'valid' has little to do with what we do, and much to do with what God does. It is one of the reasons which I personally feel that Anglican rites should restore the epiclesis more prominently - not to make the rite work better - but rather that people might understand more clearly that it is not about particular words said in the correct order. That kind of thinking is more like hocus pocus rather than Hoc est corpus meum.

    Our brethren across the Tiber are still coming to terms with praying in the vulgar tongue. Remember it took us 100 years or more to get BCP, and today we don't look all that liturgically settled.
     
    Theistgal, Lowly Layman and Aidan like this.