This last Sunday in October in the traditional Roman Rite, is the Feast of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the King. In the new rite it, as you know, it was moved to the last Sunday of the liturgical year in the flurry of liturgical changes issued by Pope Paul VI in his motu proprio Mysterii Paschalis.
At this time of year in both the traditional and revised liturgy, the Mass begins to focus on the four last things and the eschatological theology that is a reality for humanity. This last Sunday of October was the date chosen for this relatively new Feast, it was instituted by Pope Pius XI in his 1925 encyclical letter Quas Primas in response to growing nationalism and secularism and to the radical and violent anti-Christian secularism of communism. The title of the feast was "D. N. Jesu Christi Regis" (Our Lord Jesus Christ, King) and preceded the Feast of All Saints and then All Souls, intentionally. Christ comes as King, is joined by His Holy Saints and then all the Holy Souls, where He reigns for eternity. The last Sunday in October is also known in protestant circles as "Reformation Sunday" and the Pope was providing with clarity, the Social Kingship of Christ in this world through the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and to reject the blasphemy, apostasy and heresy of Martin Luther.
From a few years ago ....
Liturgically speaking, the sung Proper of the Mass, the Introit, Gradual, Alleluia, Offertory and Communion of both Missals are the same. The Collect, Secret/Super Oblata and the Postcommunion are quite different, and Father Z takes these apart and highlights the change emphasis as a result of these changes.
The scripture readings are different. According to the Roman Missal of 1962, we read an Epistle from the Letter of St. Paul to the Colossians, 1:12-20 while the Gospel is that of St. John 18:33-37. In the Revised Lectionary for the Ordinary Form, we read in Year A for the Lesson, Ezekiel 34:11-12,15-17; the Epistle is from the First Letter of St. Paul to the Corinthians 15:20-26,28 and the Gospel is from St. Matthew 25:31-46. In Year B, our current year as this is written, we will read the Lesson from the prophet Daniel 7:13-14, the Epistle from the Apocalypse of St. John, 1:5-8 and the Gospel is from St. John, 18:33-37. In Year C the Lesson is II Samuel 5:1-3, the Epistle is St. Paul's Letter to the Colossians 1:12-20 (as in the EF, above) with the Gospel from St. Matthew 25:31-46. The Responsory and the Gospel verse vary, if sung from the Graduale Romanum, 1974, they are static as in the Proper referred to above.
In the last paragraph of Father Z's article while finding it hard to "find fault" with the new prayers he goes on to write that
At this time of year in both the traditional and revised liturgy, the Mass begins to focus on the four last things and the eschatological theology that is a reality for humanity. This last Sunday of October was the date chosen for this relatively new Feast, it was instituted by Pope Pius XI in his 1925 encyclical letter Quas Primas in response to growing nationalism and secularism and to the radical and violent anti-Christian secularism of communism. The title of the feast was "D. N. Jesu Christi Regis" (Our Lord Jesus Christ, King) and preceded the Feast of All Saints and then All Souls, intentionally. Christ comes as King, is joined by His Holy Saints and then all the Holy Souls, where He reigns for eternity. The last Sunday in October is also known in protestant circles as "Reformation Sunday" and the Pope was providing with clarity, the Social Kingship of Christ in this world through the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and to reject the blasphemy, apostasy and heresy of Martin Luther.
From a few years ago ....
Liturgically speaking, the sung Proper of the Mass, the Introit, Gradual, Alleluia, Offertory and Communion of both Missals are the same. The Collect, Secret/Super Oblata and the Postcommunion are quite different, and Father Z takes these apart and highlights the change emphasis as a result of these changes.
The scripture readings are different. According to the Roman Missal of 1962, we read an Epistle from the Letter of St. Paul to the Colossians, 1:12-20 while the Gospel is that of St. John 18:33-37. In the Revised Lectionary for the Ordinary Form, we read in Year A for the Lesson, Ezekiel 34:11-12,15-17; the Epistle is from the First Letter of St. Paul to the Corinthians 15:20-26,28 and the Gospel is from St. Matthew 25:31-46. In Year B, our current year as this is written, we will read the Lesson from the prophet Daniel 7:13-14, the Epistle from the Apocalypse of St. John, 1:5-8 and the Gospel is from St. John, 18:33-37. In Year C the Lesson is II Samuel 5:1-3, the Epistle is St. Paul's Letter to the Colossians 1:12-20 (as in the EF, above) with the Gospel from St. Matthew 25:31-46. The Responsory and the Gospel verse vary, if sung from the Graduale Romanum, 1974, they are static as in the Proper referred to above.
The rupture of dates was never asked for or anticipated by the Council Fathers, but nonetheless, accepted. Pope Paul VI's argument change has some sense to it, perfectly so, if it were a new feast and had not already existed on the calendar on the Last Sunday of October. Christ comes as King at the end of time symbolized by the end of the Church year but that was not the purpose of the feast. Pope Pius XI had a reason for instituting this feast as discussed above and if he believed that it was the eschatological dimension that was necessary to associate with it, he would have done so. In the traditional Roman lectionary, that eschatological event is the Gospel for the Last Sunday after Pentecost and it flows seamlessly into that of the First Sunday of Advent so the debate is moot, it is there. The feast was instituted to tell us, now, in this secular world that Christ is King of the Social Order in the here and now, not just in that which is to come.
In the last paragraph of Father Z's article while finding it hard to "find fault" with the new prayers he goes on to write that
"The change of placement of the feast and the change of theology of the prayers probably reflect the soft approach to Communism adopted by Rome in those years, called ostopolitik."When we compare the prayers, there is a clear reduction of emphasis on "triumphant language and imagery " It was as if "the writers of the newer prayers did not want to give the impression that Christ was to be accepted as Lord and King by political entities in this earthly existence."
"All change is bad from its very nature. It is full of evil; it unsettles and disturbs; it is full of the world; it is the very spirit of the world; and nothing worse can be said of it."It is truly unsettling that one Pope would come along only 45 years later and change what a previous Pope had instituted. In so many things over the last 60 years, this is just one more thing that we have endured - a tinker, tinker mentality that had nothing to do with the Second Vatican Council or its Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. The impact of all of this and the evidence of the failure is all around. Look at our own culture, our own countries -- here in Canada, the United States of America, Europe and what do we see? There is no cure to any of these ills without a return by all of us and what we must proclaim:
Christ Vincit, Christus Regnat, Christus Imperat!
