In his remarkable homily on the "forth" [sic] Sunday of Lent, Cardinal Cantalamessa said: "I have great respect for the venerable Eucharistic Prayer of the Roman Canon, and love to use it occasionally, being the one with which I was ordained a priest.".
"Occasionally". What the General Instruction says is that this Prayer, Prayer I, is: "semper adhiberi potest". It does not say that about any other Eucharistic Prayer. It goes on to recommend it (opportunius dicitur) in Masses where there is a proper Hanc igitur provided; on festivals of Saints and and Apostles which get a mention in this Prayer; and on Sundays.
[It recommends that Prayer II, the ultra-brief pseudo-Hippolytan prayer, be used (opportunius sumitur) on weekdays.]
I don't know what the total number of days when Prayer I, the Roman Canon, would be used if these recommendations of the Instructio were followed ... but I think it comes to something rather more than "occasionally".
In any case, it rather looks as though the Roman Canon is the 'fall-back' canon to be used unless there are pressing reasons for using another one.
So that is what the Novus Ordo itself actually recommends.
"Occasionally", indeed. [The three languages in which this homily was published offer these versions: of the English "occasionally": ancora qualche volta; a veces; encore parfois.]
It is noticeable that friends of the Novus Ordo, such as Cantalamessa, are very shy about playing their own favoured game according to its own recommended rules.
11 comments:
From what i have heard and seen over the years, it would seem that very many priests and bishops never use the Canon Romanus in the Novus Ordo Missae, whilst others use it seldom, for it seems to have acquired an aura of the ''forbidden'', a reminder of and relapse into the outlawed authentic Roman Mass. I have never celebrated the new Mass, but a friend of mine who does celebrate it , admits to only ever using the short prayer 2 on weekdays, and on sundays number 3. He says that there is a sort of understanding, that the ancient Canon Romanus is ''not done'', being a relic of a condemnable past.Cantalamessa's phrase ''ancora qualche volta'' sounds actually quite condescendant to the italian ear, and means not so much ''occasionally'' as '' still once in a long while''. :(
Father,as a Sacristan I have noted the virtual extinction of the Roman Canon.Even on Solemnities such as Christmas, I have known Priests to use the Second Eucharistic prayer .
Father, "occasionally" indeed. I attend a NO Mass regularly and, though clown-masses are suppressed and the "service" is generally sedate, the Roman Canon is seldom heard. I recall having read somewhere or other that the Roman Canon (due to its divine sacrifice) was so inimical to the ecumenical reformers that it was not even included in the original proposal, but P. Paul VI demanded its retention. And, by the fact of its presence within the NO Rite, it legitimizes the other EPs by virtue of "ex adjunctis". That may be technically correct (IDK), but considering how seldomly ("occasionally") it is used, the practical effect is lost. As a side note, I find EP IV verbose, tedious and patronizing (toward God!).
My own experience is that EP1 is used at times of particular solemnity, such as Christmas Midnight Mass, The Easter Vigil, or other occasions which provide a particular 'hanc igitur'. I do not sense any note of distaste or condemnation from clergy, but there is a perception that it is too long for general use. This perception is fed by a misplaced desire to keep the laity entertained with constant external activity. And so many extraneous additions have crept into many parochial masses in the NO (none of them in the Missal, nor envisaged by V2) that EP2 has become the most regular routine choice of many celebrants, with EP3 being chosen by those celebrants who do feel the need for a somewhat greater emphasis on the sacrificial offering at the heart of the Sunday liturgy. EP4 has effectively disappeared, I am given to understand because of its unfashionable 'sexist' use of the noun "Man" and make pronoun for humanity.
Meanwhile, I heard Catherine Pepinster (ex-editor of The Tablet) on Radio defending the decision of King Charles to maintain the tradition of the anointing during his coronation rite being a secret or private act. She argued that we need such elements if _mystery_ at the heart of faith and religious ritual to remind us that there are realities which transcend the mundane, before which we do well to fall silent. Is she, perhaps, coming round to the same view of The Reality at the center of The Mass?
Every now and then one encounters a parish priest who will use the Canon on the feast day of a Saint who is mentioned in it but even that is quite rare. At my parish I have heard it only on Holy Thursday a couple of times but absolutely no other day of the year. What Albertus said about it having taken on the air of something 'forbidden' seems to me to be absolutely correct.
Another priest friend of mine, a sardinian, used to use only the Canon Romanus in his Novus Ordo Masses, for, he used to say, it is the most beautiful and most meaningful, and the fsithful deserve to get a proper Mass for their money! However, he made the unhappy acquaintance with the quasi-heretical Neo-Catechumenal Way, and since then has never used the Canon Romanus again, saying that ''it is full of heathen and old-testament ideas of sacrifice!'' which, of course, is what Kiko and Carmen teach. How is it that this group has never been excommunicated?
This (like the aversion to chant and Latin) illustrates what a sick joke is the assertion coming from Rome that the Missal of Paul VI is the unique expression of the Roman Rite. What happens in most parishes falls far short of the stipulations in the General Instruction on the (modern) Roman Missal, let alone the prescriptions of the Council Fathers.
Then there are absurdities such as this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpeY_mKnHoA
tolerated by Cupich in Chicago. A bottle of malt whisky is on offer for anyone who can find 'rock with us as we roll with you' among the post-communion prayers of the Pauline Missal.
Worse still, Amont, I heard from a friend of a bishop using EP2 on Easter Sunday this year. Has he never even bothered to read the General Instruction to the Novus Ordo missal?
As for the Canon Romanus being 'full of heathen and old-testament ideas of sacrifice', the New Testament is incomprehensible without the Old!
PM I made a specific point in drawing the Ordo to the attention of all our priests this year.Even then,there was only grudging acceptance.(One new priest admitted he had only ever used Incense 3 times in 30 years of priesthood).Ye gods....
For a number of years I have tended to use the Roman Canon rather than the alternatives. I have received little comment from The Faithful but some people have expressed gratitude that they have been able to hear it once again.
There was an old parish priest who strictly used EP1 every Sunday and little bits of Latin and had lace in his vestments. Recalling that helped me in following the old Mass when I got the chance. There's the Redemptorists on the other hand. Once preachers of fearsome missions, now its variously endless gay pandering among their remaining priests and on at least one occasion putting a football reference into whichever EP Fr was using. An SSPX chapel might be strict 1962, but is a place of refuge when most priests are either gone mad or seem beaten and just follow the Company Line.
Post a Comment