Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by wahern 15 days ago
The modern mass can be done ad orientem. The switch of orientation was only permitted, not required, in the Novus Ordo.

Most of the changes people associate with the Novus Ordo were completely optional and often not even expected to have become so common. This is why all the popes have been exasperated, to varying extents, with the Latin Mass movement. Literally nothing prevents dioceses from celebrating the Novus Ordo mass in Latin, ad orientem, chanting, etc.

1 comments

Why would the Papacy be exasperated with the Latin Mass movement if it's merely celebrating one of the allowable options?

(Genuine question, I'm sure I lack all context.)

What's colloquially called the Latin Mass is the Tridentine Mass, which among other things uses a different calendar, including different biblical readings each week (a smaller selection of biblical passages than the Novus Ordo uses). So it's not just a variation of the Novus Ordo, though the Novus Ordo could be performed in a way that satisfies the vast majority of traditional-minded parishioners. It's exasperating because certain ideologues behind the movement are elevating small changes into pseudo-doctrinal issues that have a tendency to lead to schism. The Orthodox churches have fractured over the centuries over calendar related issues, for example. It's fundamentally traditionalism for traditionalism's sake, which is a little ironic because in many respects the Novus Ordo reverts the mass to an older form more similar to the practices of the church over a millennia ago, as well as more similar in some respects to Orthodox masses.

If the Latin Mass advocates were serious, they'd engage with the Novus Ordo. For example, seek more uniformity--the Novus Ordo has too many optional variations, which means the mass might have different prayers in one geographic area than another, whereas the Tridentine Mass is more uniform. (See, e.g., https://lms.org.uk/missals) The fact they don't betrays some of the underlying motivations and dynamics.

Another aspect mostly unrelated to the mass itself was the Second Vatican Council deemphasisizing the role of clerics and religious--nuns, religious sisters, etc. That's a whole 'nother thing, but it's a significant factor behind the movement. It's far more understandable, but again can be addressed directly, without the subterfuge.

All institutional religions struggle with the tension between traditionalists and reformers; it's a form of politics. What has made the Roman Catholic church almost singularly unique has been it's ability to hold together so many people across diverse cultures and geographies. What's playing out now has played out many times before, though obviously the Roman Church has not always been successful at avoiding schism. Notably, though, it continues to keep in mind undoing previous schisms, and some choices made by the Second Vatican Council were focused on reconciliation, both with Protestant but also Orthodox churches. For example, the change in biblical readings seems to have been aimed at Protestantism--the readings in the US are coordinated through a group that includes representatives from, IIRC, Methodists and Episcopalians. Being less doctrinaire about some of the prayers in the Tridentine Mass was a way to affirm the validity of Orthodox rites.

Very interesting, thank you for the thoughtful explanation!