At the end of February, representatives of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops were in Rome to meet with various Vatican dicasteries including officials at the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.
It is confirmed that the Recognitio for Canada has been granted and that the Congregation is "insisting" that the Missal be implemented on Advent I.
The actual formal decrees will take place and the announcement through the regular channels is to be made shortly.
I have opined here, based on irrefutable sources, that the delay has been due to the CCCB desire to have Rome canonise their disparate kneeling postures across Canada and to force many of the rest ofus off of our knees.
It remains to be seen if Rome has agreed to this request in the GIRM; we will know soon enough.
It is normal that each national bishops conference would submit adaptations. Some Saints may only be on a national calendar and the liturgies for these days would need their own Proper, separate and distinct from each other. This was common as well in the usus antiquior Missal as any perusal in the back will usually contain a supplement for the United States, Canada, Great Britain and even specfic dioceses. The delay, however, seems to indicate that the Canada's bishops have asked for something more controversial or else, logic would indicate that the approval would have come last year, around the same time as the recognitio for Great Britain and the United States.
I could be wrong, but my opinion is that the CCCB got the smack-down on this and that the definitive English language General Instruction on the Roman Missal is the one approved for the United States and that the priests and bishops who have eliminated or reduced the traditional form of kneeling are in for a surprise.
The other fact; notwithstanding their own posturing, the CCCB will not be able to delay the GIRM or Missal in English while awaiting for its Quebecois equivalent.
(For more on this topic, click on the Roman Missal medallion to the left.)
A corporal work of mercy.
Click on photo for this corporal work of mercy!
9 comments:
Very interesting. I got another email from the CCCB Liturgy fellow who was unsure if he'd answered my query regarding the new Missal's implementation (he had).
He said this time that the Missal was to be released at Advent 2011. This time there was suggestion of possible delay due to pending approval of the Calendar of propers.
JP, there will be no delay. Rome has "insisted" on Advent I; perhaps they should not have obfuscated for the past few years. Let them panic now after they've played their delaying games.
I can tell you that the "kneeling" matter was addressed at the CDWDS and I expect even higher in the Vatican. Whether or not they will agree with the "adapation for Canada" is not known. I suspect not thought I have no word yet.
Let us see the Canadian GIRM.
My hunch, the GIRM approved for the U.S. is the definitive English translation and Canadians better get in line.
A neighbouring parish has been using the US GIRM for several years now, right down to the Nicene Creed every week. They also kneel right up to the Great Amen, which is not the norm for the diocese (we aren't in Toronto).
It will be interesting to see just what changes in the next year.
I suspect our bishop will wait until the last moment to implement anything, and I don't think our priest will take the initiative. It is so frustrating.
Another issue which I am concerned about is the issue of liturgical music. In the US, England/Wales Numbers 48; 74; 87 in the GIRM state the order for music. 1) Romano Gradual 2) Gradual Simplex 3) other sources of chant and antiphons. (please check the documents for the actual wording). However, in Canada, numbers 1 & 2 above are are no. 1; and 2) suggests a suitable song taken from CBW; and 3) suggests a liturgical song suited to the sacred action or season, approved by CCCB. Do you realize what that means - Gather, etc. We really need to pray about this as this will be liturgically devastating. Most of CBW is not appropriate liturgically. As Pope Benedict says, "good campfire music".
Any concrete thoughts?
I'd imagine that the CBW will be updated to conform to the new Roman Missal, or at least restricted (using the current CBW but prohibiting the worst offenders).
How much resistance there will be to updating the music will be another story. Music carries emotional weight, so people who could accept the new GIRM and Roman Missal might put up a fight over a change in music.
But this is a fight that must be won, precisely because music has such emotional weight.
Hello TMR,
Your comment is very appropriate as to what has gone wrong for all these years, the options and the false understanding that the hymn, the fourth option is the norm.
Have you seen the Chant Cafe Blog? There is a lot of good work going on there about this matter including the soon to be published Simple Propers in English to attempt to overcome this.
I am not familiar with the document that says a hymn from CBW is first. It that the "Ordo", it would certainly not by the GIRM, the General Instruction on the Roman Missal. If that is what is published, it is clearly wrong, because the 1975 GIRM also refers states "Mass opens with the Entrance song" and that is the problem. Canto was incorrectly translated into English as "song", it does not mean song, it means "chant" which is corrected in the new U.S. and U.K. GIRM.
Along with the kneeling, I don't think the CCCB has been successful in changing this.
We must work to bring back the Propers to the Ordinary Form. It can be done, first in English in psalm tone and it can be then followed by the hymn. Or the hymn can occur and then the antiphon can be sung while the priest inceneses the altar as done at St. Michael's Cathedral.
There is much work to do.
Thanks for reading and writing.
Hello Anil,
Yes, you are right, it is a fight to be won exactly because the music can make or ruin the liturgy. You can have a priest say Mass totally in conform with the rubrics, "do the red, say the black" but a liturgically ignorant cantor or "song leader" can discredit it.
CBWII is a far superior hymnal to III. The third edition forces upon us inclusive language even to Christmas carols and the psalm texts came from the then unapproved NRSV throwing much of the excellent Somerville psalms from CBWII away.
I suspect there is not going to be a CBWIV for a a while, too much money for parishes. What the CCCB has published is a supplement for the pews. It will have the universal ICEL chant Mass and three new Canadian compositions. I am disappointed that they did not restore Father Somerville's original Good Shepherd Mass, the Gloria and a small change in the Sanctus, from 1965, but perhaps it was a copyright issue. That Mass was written for the "tridentine" liturgy in English for that "transitional" Missal, though then as children we were told that it was the "new" Mass, so I guess the Novus Ordo is the "new, new Mass."
I'm not impressed with the title of the hymn additions in the supplement, though I admit, I have not seen it first hand yet. Here is a link to it:
http://www.cccbpublications.ca/site/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage.tpl&product_id=1679&category_id=682&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=176&lang=eng
I doubt you will find anywhere in it, the Propers.
For that, we need to look to other options such as The Chant Cafe which I referred to above.
God bless.
My apologies for the lack of clarification. The Canadian adaptations read approximately: Nos. 48; 87.... The options for the Entrance chant (communion chant) 1) the antiphon and psalm fro the Graduale Romanum or the Graduale Simplex; 2) a suitable song taken fro CBW; 3) a liturgical song that is suited to the sacred actio , the day, or the season, and is approved by the CCCB or the diocesan Bishop.
I've been exposed to some of the choices for the new supplement - more of the same. Sad!
Now compare this to the US/UK GIRM and it is easy to question if we have read the church documents on music.
Post a Comment