Hybrid Mass


#1

I keep hearing rumors that the Holy Father is planning to issue some sort of new EF/OF hybrid liturgy, supposedly in 2013. I don’t place much credit in them – secrets seem hard to keep these days – but even so, I doubt they’re completely without merit, as rumors tend not to just spring up out a vacuum spontaneously. Has anyone heard anything more concrete/substantial about this, or about what such a hybrid liturgy might look like?

EDIT: apologies, this should’ve gone in Liturgy & Sacraments. I need to quit browsing CAF in multiple tabs. :rolleyes:


#2

oh i hope so. i wish we could move towards a much more traditional Mass.


#3

Are there any links regarding this, other than from that pseudo-Secavandist site?


#4

Where do you hear this? Because I delve down even into the historical dumpsters of the internet and I have never heard so much as a whisper of this except here at CAF.


#5

[quote="sw85, post:1, topic:309912"]
I keep hearing rumors that the Holy Father is planning to issue some sort of new EF/OF hybrid liturgy, supposedly in 2013. I don't place much credit in them -- secrets seem hard to keep these days -- but even so, I doubt they're completely without merit, as rumors tend not to just spring up out a vacuum spontaneously. Has anyone heard anything more concrete/substantial about this, or about what such a hybrid liturgy might look like?

EDIT: apologies, this should've gone in Liturgy & Sacraments. I need to quit browsing CAF in multiple tabs. :rolleyes:

[/quote]

The only other time I heard such a thing was on this forum. I don't put credence in them, but I would like to be pleasantly surprised. :)


#6

I hope and pray this is true. Something like EWTN's daily mass would be enough for me. And I'd really love it if the Magisterium would place a ban on CCM/"rock" masses. Hearing "My God's Not Dead, He's Surely Alive" during Mass had to be one of the most nauseating church experiences of my life.


#7

So then there would be three forms of Mass?

Would it be done to eliminate both forms of Mass?

No way would this eliminate demand for the EF Mass. In fact, it would be taken as a slap in the face by traditional Catholics who have been hoping and praying for a restoration of the Traditional Latin Mass for decades. To be told 5 years after SP that they will now have to go to a Frankenstein Mass that sticks parts of one form with parts of the other would only cater to a very few in the Church.

If anything, a revision of the OF to allow traditional options would be the only real possibility: Prayers at the Foot of the Altar, traditional Confiteor, traditional Offertory prayers, and traditional form of administering Communion ("Corpus Domini Nostri Jesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam aeternam. Amen"), various prayers in the old Mass that were excised, no more Communion in the Hand....

For avoiding confusion or for fear of casting doubt on the validity of the OF, they wouldn't allow things like: allowing the traditional cycle of readings/feast days, using the traditional form of the Roman Canon, returning the mysterium fidei to the consecration formula, etc.....

As far as things like: male-only altar servers, Latin, ad orientem, not using the chalice in distribution to the people, altar rails, no sign of peace among the people, Gregorian chant, Proper Antiphons instead of hymns, no EMHcs, etc... All of these things are optional already in the OF.

Nah, a hybridized Mass replacing both forms would be a disaster. A hybridized Mass added to the dual forms of Mass would cause confusion.


#8

With the 3rd edition of the Roman Missal out just a year? Besides which, doubtful that the Vatican is capable of keeping secret anything remotely as significant. And for those who express concern that the Mass of Paul VI was not an "organic development," it's hard to imagine how some kind of "hybrid" Mass could be anything but even less of an "organic" development.


#9

Is it possible we could refrain from using the word frankenstein to describe the Mass?


#10

We’re not. (?) It was used to describe an as-yet theoretical hybrid.


#11

I have seen such suggestions here at CAF but heard nothing at the churches at which I assist and seen nothing in our Archdiocesan newspaper or website.
The speculation on the website has pointed to ....eventually.....
No suggestion that such a shift might occur in the near future, merely that things might be slowly trending in such a direction with the changes we saw recently a portent of things to come.


#12

[quote="jeannetherese, post:11, topic:309912"]
I have seen such suggestions here at CAF but heard nothing at the churches at which I assist and seen nothing in our Archdiocesan newspaper or website.
The speculation on the website has pointed to ....eventually.....
No suggestion that such a shift might occur in the near future, merely that things might be slowly trending in such a direction with the changes we saw recently a portent of things to come.

[/quote]

I agree, I think we're in the "trending stage" right now.


#13

Well, that’s why I bring it up. I’ve seen vague mention of it at Fr. Z’s blog, brother JR mentioned it, and one or two other posters I’ve seen have mentioned it. It has to correspond to something, right? Even if it’s just a misunderstanding of something the Holy Father said, or something.


#14

It is not a mere rumor. This is the clear intent of some important figures in the Vatican, including the Holy Father.

Pope’s ‘reform of the reform’ in liturgy to continue

Pope Benedict XVI’s easing of restrictions on use of the 1962 Roman Missal, known as the Tridentine rite, is just the first step in a “reform of the reform” in liturgy, the Vatican’s top ecumenist said.

The Pope’s long-term aim is not simply to allow the old and new rites to coexist, but to move toward a “common rite” that is shaped by the mutual enrichment of the two Mass forms, Cardinal Kurt Koch, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, said May 14.

Cardinal Koch said “Summorum Pontificum” is “only the beginning of this new liturgical movement.”

“In fact, Pope Benedict knows well that, in the long term, we cannot stop at a coexistence between the ordinary form and the extraordinary form of the Roman rite, but that in the future the church naturally will once again need a common rite,” he said.

“However, because a new liturgical reform cannot be decided theoretically, but requires a process of growth and purification, the Pope for the moment is underlining above all that the two forms of the Roman rite can and should enrich each other,” he said.

However, I think we should not feel so anxious about any kind of a "Frankenstein rite" being born in our lifetime. I think Holy Church takes the long view on this, and that the mutual enrichment will happen on the order of decades or centuries. I would hope and pray that Holy Church is now wary of more "rupture" being perpetrated and causing more division and loss of faith. I trust that Holy Church will proceed wisely and in baby steps from this point forward.

That being said, I would love to see "traditional options" introduced for the OF. How great it would be to "trick out" an OF Mass so that it closely resembled an EF! See Windmill's post above for examples. The OF is known for its many options. Why not a few more that would appeal to those seeking a connection to tradition and mutual enrichment?


#15

This rumor has been widely trumpeted on various sedevacantist sites. The claim is that the hybrid Mass shows that the Vatican never had any intention of keeping the Extraordinary Form of the Mass for very lng and that SP was just a carrot to get the traditionalists back to the Church and once they were back, pull the rug out from under them.

Interesting reading if somewhat conspiracy theory oriented.


#16

I saw this on a trad site a long time ago. I can’t recall which one. However, I have never heard anything official on it. I’m talking almost a year ago.

Here is what I remember.

  1. It’s a 10 year plan to blend the two forms.

  2. No, Gregorian chant is not going to be the only form of music allowed, because many religious orders would not be able to celebrate it, as they are not allowed to use Gregorian chant. Gregorian chant retains its place of honor, but not the only form of liturgical music.

  3. No, the prayers at the foot of the altar would not return, unless there is a dispensation for those religious orders that never allowed them before Vatican II.

  4. Yes, Holy Communion can be distributed under both species at the bishop’s discretion, because Canon Law allows the bishop to make this judgment call. The formula for distributing Holy Communion would remain the current monastic formula, which is what we now use. It comes from the monastic life: priest: Corpus Christi – communicant: Amen. Would it be CITH or COTT, I don’t remember. Standing or kneeling? I don’t remember if they said anything about it in the post.

  5. Yes, there would be more Latin, but not everything would be in Latin. The readings, prayer of the faithful and some prayers would be in the language of the people.

  6. The option to face the people would remain.

  7. Nothing was mentioned about female servers.

  8. The current liturgical calendar would be used and changed in the future as needed. Nothing new there. The calendar has changed many times.

I can’t remember what else was in this article.

As I said, I have not seen or heard any other sources on this. It’s either rumor, wishful thinking or the best kept secret at the Vatican.

We know that the Holy Father did say that he would like to see some of the new saints on the EF calendar. We also know that religous orders that use the EF do not follow the EF calender. We follow the current calendar, because it creates a problem within the community, since not everyone in the community follows the EF. The calendar point is neither new nor a secret.

As to the mass on EWTN, that’s the Franciscan form of the OF. I highly doubt that Dominicans, Jesuits, Salesians or Carmelites would be too happy if it were imposed on them. It actually looks very much like the old Franciscan mass before 1962, except that the priest face ad orientem. We never had the prayers at the foot of the altar. Our confetior included St. Francis and the Canon included Francis, Clare, Anthony and Bonaventure. Those were the major differences. The other differences between the “old Franciscan form” and the “new Franciscan form” are minor: the vestments, women lectors, hymns, the calendar and the readings.

That’s all that I know about this. If I can find the link, which I believe I did post a long time ago, I’ll post it again.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV :christmastree1:


#17

Not a rumor, Br. JR, but truth direct from the Holy See. Check my previous link and this slightly more recent article.

The Pope’s ambition, a powerful blend of the Novus Ordo and the Old Rite, could sweep the Church


#18

I remain skeptical about the substance of this story. It smells too much of a rumor that gains new elements in each telling. We just implemented a major re-translation into English last year. Do I see all the books being thrown out any time in the next few years? No. Such a story will be huge and not easy to miss. Then it will take years to implement. I have serious doubts that Pope Benedict will take any such action, or that I will see such a thing in my lifetime.


#19

All the article said is what everyone knows. The Holy Father has said many times that the end should be a blend of the two forms. He has never publicly said, "Let's start this week."

This is not the same article I read. The one I read was on a traditionalist site and it was not too complimentary of the idea. Some of the comments in my list are my responses to their dreams such as "mandatory Gregorian chant for everyone". We never had that to begin with.

Another comment on their site was the uniform mass for the entire Latin Church, no exceptions. We have never had that in the Latin Church, either. The Latin Church has several rites, of which the Roman Rite is one of them. And there have always been many forms of the Roman Rite.

People were less mobile and there was no internet; therefore, people didn't know that there was a form other than what they saw at their parish. This does not mean that it did not exist. If you lived in a parish run by Dominicans, you did not have the Roman Rite. You had the Dominican Rite. Those who lived in a parish run by Franciscans had the Franciscan form of the Roman Rite. While those who lived in a parish run by diocesan priests, had the Tridentine Form of the Roman Rite. Those who lived in Toledo (Spain not Ohio) had the Mozarabic Rite and so forth.

I find it stunning that with all of the access to information that we have today, people are actually less informed. When people speak of the mass, they speak as if there is A SINGLE LATIN RITE and A SINGLE FORM of that rite. There never was such uniformity. I don't understand why people are calling for it now.

If we want to return to "the good old days," then let's go back to multiple Latin rites, including the multiple forms of the Roman Rite or we can go forward to a blend of the Tridentine Form and the Ordinary Form, leaving everyone else in peace.

In case there is someone out there who does not understand what I'm talking about, the Latin Church has several rites of which the Roman Rite is the most common. These Latin Rites are not the same at the Eastern Rites.

Have a blessed new year everyone!

Br. JR, FFV :)


#20

I would be happy with a mass that used reverent english, like the anglican rite uses. They don't say "you", it's thee and thou.

This is the Catholic Anglican rite, or usage.

Many people have no or little understanding of Latin, and no small children do.

And since the stroke my own Latin is pretty much gone.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.