Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Using the Chalice Pall
ROME, NOV. 27, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.
Pursuant to our observations on the use of the chalice pall (Nov. 13), a reader commented: "How you respond to liturgical inquiries might be enhanced by your becoming more familiar with versions of the Missale Romanum from 1962 and before. Although there are no current rubrics for the use of the pall, questions about proper use could be more adequately examined according to historical usage rather than 'common practice' or one's own 'common sense.'
"I think your questioner below was looking for something more 'authoritative,' shall we say. In the Missale Romanum of 1962, the pall is not removed during the epiclesis, but only when the time came for the consecration of the wine. Further, after the consecration, every time the pall is removed there is a genuflection, and every time it is replaced, there is a genuflection. It would seem that history might provide us some guidance here."
Our correspondent is, of course, correct in saying that reference to practice before the current reform can be most useful in interpreting some current doubts. And I have often been enlightened by reference to liturgical texts and manuals from that period.
These texts have also recovered much of their actuality, now that the possibility of celebrating Mass according to the 1962 missal has been universally extended.
Our reader's observations, however, also show the difficulty involved in deciding if a rubric from the 1962 Roman rite may be applied "tout court" to the present celebration or if it is no more than a useful rule of thumb.
Thus, for example, the rule that there is a genuflection every time that the pall is removed or replaced, certainly does not apply to the present form of Mass. The present form clearly specifies the genuflections to be made during Mass.
Since the use of the pall is no longer obligatory, the earlier norms are not legally binding for when the pall happens to be used for the present rite. The earlier norms, however, can indicate the maximum possible use of removing the pall only for the consecration of the wine.
Therefore, even though the earlier norms can be a useful guide we must necessarily have recourse to other criteria such as custom and common sense in interpreting their use for the present rite.
Indeed, many liturgical rubrics originated as custom and common sense and only gradually became fixed as precise and exact norms.
Pursuant to our observations on the use of the chalice pall (Nov. 13), a reader commented: "How you respond to liturgical inquiries might be enhanced by your becoming more familiar with versions of the Missale Romanum from 1962 and before. Although there are no current rubrics for the use of the pall, questions about proper use could be more adequately examined according to historical usage rather than 'common practice' or one's own 'common sense.'
"I think your questioner below was looking for something more 'authoritative,' shall we say. In the Missale Romanum of 1962, the pall is not removed during the epiclesis, but only when the time came for the consecration of the wine. Further, after the consecration, every time the pall is removed there is a genuflection, and every time it is replaced, there is a genuflection. It would seem that history might provide us some guidance here."
Our correspondent is, of course, correct in saying that reference to practice before the current reform can be most useful in interpreting some current doubts. And I have often been enlightened by reference to liturgical texts and manuals from that period.
These texts have also recovered much of their actuality, now that the possibility of celebrating Mass according to the 1962 missal has been universally extended.
Our reader's observations, however, also show the difficulty involved in deciding if a rubric from the 1962 Roman rite may be applied "tout court" to the present celebration or if it is no more than a useful rule of thumb.
Thus, for example, the rule that there is a genuflection every time that the pall is removed or replaced, certainly does not apply to the present form of Mass. The present form clearly specifies the genuflections to be made during Mass.
Since the use of the pall is no longer obligatory, the earlier norms are not legally binding for when the pall happens to be used for the present rite. The earlier norms, however, can indicate the maximum possible use of removing the pall only for the consecration of the wine.
Therefore, even though the earlier norms can be a useful guide we must necessarily have recourse to other criteria such as custom and common sense in interpreting their use for the present rite.
Indeed, many liturgical rubrics originated as custom and common sense and only gradually became fixed as precise and exact norms.
posted by Chipi Buenafe at
9:24 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home