Notre Dame de Rouen. The façade of the Gothic Church in France. Photographer: Hippo1947. Licence: SHUTTERSTOCK.

Wednesday 18 December 2019

The Great O Antiphons. 18 December.


Text from The Saint Andrew Daily Missal,
unless otherwise stated.



English: Christ is born.
Deutsch: Christi Geburt.
Artist: Lorenzo Lotto (1480–1556).
Date: 1523.
Current location: National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.
Source/Photographer: The Yorck Project: 10.000 Meisterwerke der Malerei.
DVD-ROM, 2002. 
ISBN 3936122202. Distributed by DIRECTMEDIA Publishing GmbH.
Permission: [1]
(Wikimedia Commons)


"O Adonai".
The Great O Antiphon for 18 December.
Available on YouTube at

18 December: Exodus iii. 2, xx. 1.

O Adonai,

et dux domus Israel,
qui Moysi in igne flammae rubi apparuisti,
et ei in Sina legem dedisti:
veni ad redimentum nos in brachio extento.

O Adonai,

and Leader of The House of Israel,
who didst appear to Moses in the flame of
the burning bush,
and didst give unto him The Law on Sinai:
come and with an outstretched arm redeem us.

V. Rorate.

“Rorate cæli desuper, et nubes pluant justium . . .”

“Ye Heavens, drop down from above,
and let the clouds rain down The Just One.”

Tuesday 17 December 2019

The Great O Antiphons.





“O Sapientia”.
The first of The Great O Antiphons.
Available on YouTube at


The following Text is from Wikipedia - the free encyclopaedia, unless stated otherwise.

The “O Antiphons”, also known as “The Great Os”, are Magnificat Antiphons used at Vespers of the last seven days of Advent in Western Christian Tradition. They are also used as the Alleluia Verses on the same days in The Catholic Mass.

They are referred to as “The O Antiphons” because the Title of each one begins with the Vocative Particle “O”. Each Antiphon is a name of Christ, one of His Attributes mentioned in Scripture. They are:


17 December: O Sapientia (O Wisdom);
18 December: O Adonai (O Lord);
19 December: O Radix Jesse (O Root of Jesse);
20 December: O Clavis David (O Key of David);
21 December: O Oriens (O Day Spring);
22 December: O Rex Gentium (O King of The Nations);
23 December: O Emmanuel (O With Us is God).



In The Roman Catholic Tradition, The O Antiphons are sung or recited at Vespers from 17 December to 23 December, inclusive. Some Anglican Churches (e.g. The Church of England) also use them, either in the same way as modern Roman Catholics, or according to a Mediæval English usage.


The following Text and Illustrations are from A CLERK OF OXFORD


The Anglo-Saxon “O Antiphons”:
“O Clavis David”.
Secrets and Songs.




Christ in Majesty, The Virgin and Saint Peter
(BL Stowe 944, f. 6, circa 1030).


We are now in the last days of Advent, The Season of The O Antiphons. These ancient Antiphons, sung at Vespers in the week before Christmas, still attract a remarkable amount of attention today - and, twelve hundred years ago, they attracted one Anglo-Saxon poet, who turned them into a series of short poems in English.

For the next few days, I want to post the Old English poetic versions of The O Antiphons, which are much more than translations of the Latin Texts: They are exquisite poetic meditations on the rich imagery of the Antiphons, responding to them in subtle and creative ways. In translating them, here, I've been astonished anew by their beauty and interest, and I hope you'll enjoy them as much as I do.

They survive in a Manuscript, known as The Exeter Book, an anthology of English poetry on all kinds of themes and in all kinds of forms: Elegies; Saints' Lives; Riddles; Wisdom Poetry; Philosophical Reflections; Laments; and many poems which resist classification.


The O Antiphons are the first poems in the collection, and they were probably composed some time earlier than the date of the 10th-Century Manuscript, perhaps around 800 A.D. They are anonymous, though once attributed by scholars to Cynewulf, and they long suffered from being lumped together with the poems which follow them in the Manuscript (which also concern Christ, so you will sometimes find them being called ‘Christ I’ or ‘Christ A’). However, they deserve to be treated, and appreciated, separately and on their own terms, as a collection of individual poems linked by their common source in The O Antiphons.

Last year [Editor: 2017], I Posted one of them (O Oriens/O Earendel), but, this year [Editor: 2018], I'll post my Translations of The Antiphons for the next five days. In the Manuscript, there are twelve Antiphons in total, some of which correspond to The Greater Antiphons, but the form of the collection as a whole is unique.

The first three Antiphons (O Sapientia, O Adonai, O Radix Jesse) do not appear, but this may be because the first few leaves of the Manuscript are lost. The last four, however, are there: O Clavis David; O Oriens; O Rex Gentium; and, O Emmanuel, as well as an additional eighth Antiphon used on 23 December in Mediæval English (and still in Traditional Anglican) usage, O Virgo Virginum.


English practice, therefore, had the Antiphons one day ahead. (The order in which they will appear here isn't that of the Manuscript, as the Antiphons are not in the order in which they are used Liturgically; today's Antiphon comprises lines 18-49 of the poem, which can be found complete HERE.)

So this is "O Clavis David". Here's the Antiphon, for comparison:



O Clavis David, et sceptrum domus Israel;
qui aperis, et nemo claudit;
claudis, et nemo aperit:
veni, et educ vinctum de domo carceris,
sedentem in tenebris, et umbra mortis.

(O Key of David and Sceptre of The House of Israel;
Who opens, and no one can shut,
shuts, and no one can open:
come, and lead the captives from the prison house,
those who dwell in darkness and the shadow of death.)




Eala, þu reccend ond þu riht cyning,
se þe locan healdeð, lif ontyneð,
eadga... upwegas, oþrum forwyrneð
wlitigan wilsiþes, gif his weorc ne deag.

Huru we for þearfe þas word sprecað,
ond m... ...giað þone þe mon gescop
þæt he ne ...ete... ...ceose weorðan
cearfulra þing, þe we in carcerne
sittað sorgende, sunnan wenað,
hwonne us liffrea leoht ontyne,
weorðe ussum mode to mundboran,
ond þæt tydre gewitt tire bewinde,
gedo usic þæs wyrðe, þe he to wuldre forlet,
þa we heanlice hweorfan sceoldan
to þis enge lond, eðle bescyrede.




Forþon secgan mæg, se ðe soð spriceð,
þæt he ahredde, þa forhwyrfed wæs,
frumcyn fira. Wæs seo fæmne geong,
mægð manes leas, þe he him to meder geceas;
þæt wæs geworden butan weres frigum,
þæt þurh bearnes gebyrd bryd eacen wearð.
Nænig efenlic þam, ær ne siþþan,
in worlde gewearð wifes gearnung;
þæt degol wæs, dryhtnes geryne.

Eal giofu gæstlic grundsceat geondspreot;
þær wisna fela wearð inlihted
lare longsume þurh lifes fruman
þe ær under hoðman biholen lægon,
witgena woðsong, þa se waldend cwom,
se þe reorda gehwæs ryne gemiclað
ðara þe geneahhe noman scyppendes
þurh horscne had hergan willað.




O Thou Ruler and Righteous King,
Who guards the locks, Who opens life
and the blessed way on high, and to others denies
the bright longed-for path, if their deeds have not earned it;
truly, we speak these words in need,
and entreat that He who made mankind . . .
[this next line is damaged]
. . . of sorrowful things, for we in prison

sit sorrowing, hoping for the sun,
for when The Lord of Life will open light to us,
become for us a source of strength in spirit,
and enfold our feeble knowledge in splendour,
and make us worthy, that He may admit us to glory,
who have had to come, wretchedly,
into this constraining World, cut off from our homeland.




Therefore may he who speaks the truth say
that He saved us, who had been led astray,
the Race of Men. It was a young girl,
a maiden free from sin, whom He chose as His Mother;
that was accomplished without the love of a man,
that the girl gave birth to a baby, became pregnant.
Nothing equal to this, before or since,
has ever in the World been a woman’s reward;
that was a secret, The Lord’s Mystery.

Spiritual Grace spread across the ground of all the Earth;
there many things were given light,
long-standing lore, through The Lord of Life,
which before had lain hidden in shadow,
the resounding song of the Prophets, when The Ruler came,
He who magnifies the secret of every speech
of those who earnestly desire to praise the name
of The Creator in eager manner.



This poem takes its main inspiration from the final line of the Antiphon: 'Those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death'. Its interest is in light and darkness, and in the language of secrecy and hidden things - especially geryne, 'mystery'. (Not to make the Advent Lyrics all about Tolkien - since tomorrow is 'O Earendel' - but I particularly noted the line þæt degol wæs, dryhtnes geryne, 'that was a secret, the Lord's mystery', because degol is the origin of the name Déagol, who was secretly murdered by Sméagol.)

The Key of David is to unlock not only the road to Heaven, but the secrets concealed on Earth. He will give us strength in mode, 'mind, spirit', and tydre gewitt tire bewinde, 'enfold our frail wits in splendour', as if limited human understanding is to be entirely wrapped and wound within limitless divine wisdom. Another Old English poem (Exodus), counselling on the interpretation of the scriptures, uses comparable language in its metaphor of the keys of the spirit:


Gif onlucan wile lifes wealhstod,
beorht in breostum, banhuses weard,
ginfæsten god gæstes cægon,
run bið gerecenod, ræd forð gæð.



If the interpreter of life, the guardian of the body, bright in heart, wishes to unlock ample benefits with the keys of the spirit, the mystery is explained and wisdom comes forth.

Our poet seems to imagine The Key of David working in a similar way.

What is unlocked by The Key is 'light', and in describing mankind as sunnan wenað, 'hoping for the sun', this lyric makes use of the Son/sun wordplay I mentioned recently - probably the earliest surviving example of the device in English poetry. This poem is about the opening of hidden knowledge, and appropriately for a poem, this opening is connected specifically to poetry itself, the bringing to light the truth of the witgena woðsong, 'the prophets' resounding song'.

As King David is both Prophet and Psalm-Singer, this takes us back to the opening of the Antiphon. The final lines promise that reorda gehwæs ryne, 'the secret of every utterance' will be magnified, and this utterance, the poem itself, is surely included. Thus we, in reading the poem, are encouraged to finish in union with poets and Prophets, as 'those who earnestly desire to praise the name of The Creator'.



Rejoicing in The Heavenly City (Stowe 944, f. 7).
The images in this Post are from The New Minster Liber Vitae, perhaps my favourite Anglo-Saxon Manuscript, which was made in Winchester, circa 1030. The massive Keys, in the pictures, above, belong to Saint Peter.

The Great O Antiphons. 17 December.


Text and Illustrations taken from The Saint Andrew Daily Missal,
unless otherwise stated.



English: Madonna and Child.
Deutsch: Sixtinische Madonna, Szene: Maria mit Christuskind,
Hl. Papst Sixtus II. und Hl. Barbara.
Artist: Raphael (1483 - 1520).
Current location: Gemäldegalerie, Dresden, Germany.
Source/Photographer: The Yorck Project: 10.000 Meisterwerke der Malerei.
DVD-ROM, 2002.
ISBN 3936122202. Distributed by DIRECTMEDIA Publishing GmbH.
Permission: [1]
(Wikimedia Commons)

O Sapientia.

The Boundless desire for The Coming of Christ, which is a feature of the whole of Advent, is expressed in The Liturgy with an impatience which grows greater, the closer we come to Christmas and, so to speak, to the World's end.

"The Lord comes from far" (First Vespers, First Sunday of Advent).

"The Lord will come" (Introit, Second Sunday of Advent).

"The Lord is nigh" (Introit. Third Sunday in Advent).

O Sapientia.

This gradation will be emphasised throughout the whole Season, ever more and more.

Thus, on 17 December, begin The Greater Antiphons, which, from their initial letters, are called "The O Antiphons", and which form an impassioned appeal to The Messias, whose prerogatives and glorious Titles they make known to us.

Dom Guéranger [Editor: He who was the author of "The Liturgical Year"] affirms that those Antiphons contain the "whole marrow" of The Advent Liturgy.

On account of their number, Honorius of Autun connects them with The Seven Gifts of The Holy Ghost, with which Our Lord was filled.



"O Sapientia.".
The Great O Antiphon for 17 December,
sung by The Dominican Student Brothers, at Blackfriars, Oxford, England.
Available on YouTube at

17 December: Ecclesiasticus xxiv. 5; Wisdom viii. 1

O Sapientia.

Quae ex ore Altissimi prodiisti,
attingens a fine usque ad finem,
fortiter suaviterque disponens omnia:
veni ad docendum nos viam prudentiae.


O Wisdom.

Who camest out of the mouth of The Most High,
reaching from end to end and ordering all things
mightily and sweetly:
Come and teach us the way of prudence.

Versicle: Rorate.

“Rorate cæli desuper, et nubes pluant justium . . .”

“Ye Heavens, drop down from above, and let the clouds rain down The Just One.”

The Commencement Of “The Great O Antiphons” On 17 December.


Text is from "The Liturgical Year",
by Abbot Guéranger, O.S.B.


Volume 1.

Advent.



The Church enters today on the seven days which precede The Vigil of Christmas, and which are known in The Liturgy under the name of The Greater Ferias.

The Ordinary of The Advent Office becomes more Solemn; The Antiphons of The Psalms, both for Lauds and The Hours of The Day, are Proper, and allude expressly to The Great Coming.

Every day, at Vespers, is sung a Solemn Antiphon, consisting of a fervent Prayer to The Messias, Whom it addresses by one of The Titles given Him in The Sacred Scriptures.

In The Roman Church, there are seven of these Antiphons, one for each of The Greater Ferias. They are commonly called The “Os of Advent”, because they all begin with that interjection, “O”.

In other Churches, during The Middle Ages, two more Antiphons were added to these seven; one to Our Blessed Lady, “O Virgo Virginum”; and the other to The Angel Gabriel, “O Gabriel”; or to Saint Thomas the Apostle, whose Feast comes during The Greater Ferias; it began “O Thoma Didyme”. [It is more modern than “O Gabriel”; but, dating from the 13th-Century, it was almost universally substituted for it.]


There were even Churches where twelve Great Antiphons were sung; that is, besides the nine we have just mentioned, “O Rex Pacifice” to Our Lord, “O Mundi Domina” to Our Lady, and “O Hierusalem” to The City of The People of God.

The Canonical Hour Of Vespers has been selected as the most appropriate time for this Solemn Supplication to Our Saviour, because, as The Church sings on one of her Hymns, it was in the evening of the World (“vergente mundi vespere”) that The Messias came amongst us.

The Antiphons are sung at “The Magnificat”, to show us that The Saviour, Whom we expect, is to come to us by Mary. They are sung twice, once before and once after The Canticle, as on Double Feasts, and this to show their great Solemnity.


In some Churches, it was formerly the practice to sing them thrice; that is, before the Canticle, before the Gloria Patri, and after the “Sicut erat”. Lastly, these admirable Antiphons, which contain the whole pith of The Advent Liturgy, are accompanied by a Chant replete with melodious gravity, and by Ceremonies of great expressiveness, though, in these latter, there is no uniform practice followed.

Let us enter into the spirit of The Church; let us reflect on the great day which is coming; that, thus, we may take our share in these, the last and most earnest, solicitations of The Church, imploring her Spouse to come, to which He at length yields.

Monday 16 December 2019

Why Restoring The Roman Rite To Its Fullness Is Not “Traddy Antiquarianism”.



A Folded Chasuble: A sign of Penance.
Abolished by Pope Pius XII.
Illustration: NEW LITURGICAL MOVEMENT


This Article is taken from, and can be read in full at, NEW LITURGICAL MOVEMENT

By: Peter Kwasniewski.

In a recent address, Archbishop Thomas Gullickson, Papal Nuncio to Switzerland and Liechtenstein, made a rousing case for “pressing the reset button” on The Roman Liturgy by abandoning a failed experiment and taking up again The Traditional Rites of The Catholic Church. He is giving us a brisk version of what the newly-published book, The Case for Liturgical Restoration, provides in much detail.

Then, with admirable candour, Archbishop Gullickson broaches the million-dollar question:
“I am avoiding the burning issue of setting a date for the reset. I used to think that going back to The 1962 Missal and to Pope Saint Pius X and his Breviary reform was sufficient, but the marvels of the pre-Pius XII Triduum, as we have begun to experience them, leave me speechless on this point. Perhaps the teaching of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI on the mutual enrichment of the two Forms will provide the paradigm for resolving the question of which Missal and which Breviary. My call for a return to the presently-approved Texts for The Extraordinary Form, then, is inspired by a certain urgency to move forward, to further the process. I do not feel qualified to take a stance in this particular matter of where best to launch the restoration”.

The position that has dominated the Tradisphere, for a long time, is that we should be content with 1962 as our point of departure for a healthy Liturgical future. After all, 1962 is the last “Editio Typica” prior to the upheavals occasioned by The Council; it is still recognisably in continuity with The Tridentine Rite; and it is enjoined upon us by Church authority in The Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum”.

In a contrasting position, Dom Hugh Somerville-Knapman, of “Dominus Mihi Adjutor”, urges that we must still take seriously the Constitution “Sacrosanctum Concilium” and that, accordingly, the 1962 Missal will not pass muster:
“I still see a validity in a mild reform in The Liturgy along the modest lines actually mandated by The Council: Vernacular Readings, setting aside the duplication of The Celebrant having to recite Prayers, etc., that were being sung by other Ministers, a less obtrusive Priestly preparation at the beginning of Mass, etc. And The Conciliar mandate for reform cannot be just forgotten as though it never happened; it must be faced and dealt with, either by reforming the reform made in its name, or by a specific magisterial act abrogating it. 
That is why the interim rites interest me – OM65 [The Ordo Missae of 1965] is clearly the Mass of Vatican II, while also clearly being in organic continuity with Liturgical Tradition. It left The Canon alone, as well as the integral reverence of The Liturgical action. Even Lefebvre was approving of it. What distorts our perception of OM65 is that we have seen fifty years of development since, and cannot help but see OM65 as tainted by what came after it.
Moreover, MR62 is a rather arbitrary point at which to stop Liturgical Tradition. For some committed Trads, this is an imperfect Missal, even a tainted one. Is a pre-53 Missal better ? Or a pre-Pius XII one ? Or maybe pre-Pius X ? Why not go the whole hog and argue for pre-Trent — after all, Geoffrey Hull sees the seed of Liturgical decay there ? We end up in a situation in which each chooses for himself on varying sets of idiosyncratic principles. It is ecclesiologically impossible.
The Catholic Church has a magisterial authority which establishes unity in Liturgy. That this has been sadly lacking for some decades is not an argument for ignoring magisterial authority altogether. Then, we may as well be Protestants”.

Dom Hugh is willing to admit that Bugnini and Co. were busy behind the scenes throughout the 1960s and early 1970s, plotting and eventually carrying out the rape and pillage of all that remained of The Western Liturgical Tradition.

He nevertheless thinks that, in the World outside the Politburo, the 1965 Missal was generally seen — and can still be seen today — as the reform that lines up with The Council’s “desiderata”. This, then, should be where the reset button takes us. (To brush up on what the 1965 Missal was like, read this account by Msgr. Charles Pope.)


A Missal from the Mid-60s: Trying to keep up with the changes

As far as I can tell, however, the purist 1962 and reformist 1965 positions are rapidly losing ground throughout the World, particularly as the Internet continues to spread awareness of the ill-advised and sometimes catastrophic reforms that took place throughout the 20th-Century to various aspects of the Roman Liturgy, with Holy Week looming largest. Since I, too, disagree with the 1962 and 1965 positions, I would like to make the case for returning to the last “Editio Typica” prior to the revolutionary alterations of Pope Pius XII: The Missale Romanum of Benedict XV, issued in 1920.

The principal argument, used to defend adherence to 1962, is that we should all do “what The Church asks us to do.” But who, or what, is “The Church”, here ? In this period of chaos, it is no longer self-evident that “The Church” refers to an authority that is handing down laws for the common good of the people of God.

From at least 1948 onwards, “The Church”, in The Liturgical sphere, has meant radicals, struggling to loose the bonds of Tradition, who have pushed their own agenda of simplification, abbreviation, Modernisation, and pastoral utilitarianism on The Church, with Papal approval — that is, by the abuse of Papal power.


These things are not rightful commands to be obeyed, but aberrations that deserve to be resisted — of course, patiently, intelligently, and in a principled manner, but nevertheless with a firm intention to restore the integrity and fullness of The Roman rite as it existed before The Liturgical Movement in its cancer phase took over at the top level and drove The Roman Rite into the dead end of The Novus Ordo.

For a long time, I sincerely tried to understand, appreciate, and embrace “Sacrosanctum Concilium”. But it was not possible, after reading Michael Davies, and later Henry Sire’s Phoenix from the Ashes and Yves Chiron’s biography of Annibale Bugnini, to see in this document anything more than a carefully contrived blueprint for Liturgical revolution. It contradicts itself on several points and takes refuge more often than not in massive ambiguities that were deliberately put there — and we know this based on documentary research, no conspiracy theories are needed.

For me, the evaporation of the validity of “Sacrosanctum Concilium” came from a deeper reflection, thanks to a lecture by Wolfram Schrems, on the meaning of its abolition of The Office of Prime. A Council that would dare to abolish an ancient Liturgical Office of uninterrupted universal reception vitiates itself from the get-go. Since none of the documents of Vatican II contains “de fide” statements or anathemas, the charism of Infallibility is not expressly involved.

Given their very nature, a bunch of practical pastoral recommendations can be mistaken, and there is ever-mounting evidence that the aims and means of the radical arm of The Liturgical Movement were grievously off-target.


The assumptions of The Council, about what “had to be done” to The Liturgy, misread the sociology and psychology of Religion. Their proposals for reform bought into modern assumptions that have not stood the test of time and had, indeed, already been effectively criticised before and during The Council. So, it seems to me somewhat immaterial that ‘65 better reflects the conflicting and, at times, problematic ideas of The Council.

Moreover, the idea that The 1965 Ordo Missae represents the implementation of “Sacrosanctum Concilium” is hard to sustain in the light of repeated statements by Paul VI that what he promulgated in 1969 is the ultimate fulfilment of The Liturgy Constitution (see here and here for examples culled by the selectively papolatrous PrayTell; I discuss the infamous addresses of 1965 and 1969 here). 1965 was presented publicly (though not always consistently) as an interim step on the evolutionary process away from Mediaeval-Baroque Liturgy to relevant Modern Liturgy.

The “moment of truth,” I think, is when students of Liturgy realise that the 1962 is extremely similar to 1965 in this respect: it was an interim Missal, in the preparation of which Bugnini, and the other Liturgists working at The Vatican, had changed as much as they felt they could get away with. Even assuming all the good will in the World, these Liturgists had experienced a triumph of renovationism with The Holy Week “reform” of Pius XII — a reform that was notable as a dramatic deformation of some of the most ancient and poignant Rites of The Church — and they were rolling along with the momentum. The abolition under Pius XII of most Octaves and Vigils, multiple Collects, and Folded Chasubles, “inter alia”, is part of this same sad tale of cutting away some of what was most distinctive and most precious in the Roman heritage.

This is why it is not arbitrary for Traditionalists to say that The Missal, circa 1948 — which means, in practice, the “Editio Typica” of 1920 — is the place to go. The reason is simple: Except for some newly-added Feasts (the Calendar being the part of The Liturgy that changes the most), it is in all salient respects The Missal codified by Trent. It is The Tridentine Rite “tout court”. For those of us who believe that The Tridentine Rite represents, as a whole and in its parts, an organically developed apogee of The Roman Rite, that it behoves us to receive with gratitude as a timeless inheritance (in the manner Greek Catholics receive their Liturgical Rites, which also achieved mature form in The Middle Ages), a pre-Pacellian Missal gives us all that we are looking for, and nothing tainted.


People like to point to “improvements” that could be made to the old Missal, but those who have lived long and intimately with its contents are usually the last to be convinced that the suggested improvements would actually be such. I have addressed some examples herehere, and here.


A Maria Laach Altar Missal from 1931.

Wait a minute, an interlocutor might say. Isn’t all this “Traddy Antiquarianism” ? Aren’t we guilty of doing the same thing we blame our opponents for doing, namely, reaching back to earlier forms while holding later developments in contempt ?

No, none of what I am proposing amounts to “Traddy Antiquarianism.” What is clear is that The Liturgical Movement after World War II went off the rails. Changes to The Liturgical Books, from that point on, were motivated by global theories about what is “best for The Modern Church,” which led to the abundant contradictions and ambiguities of “Sacrosanctum Concilium”, the Montini-Bugnini reign of terror, and the crowning disgrace of The 1969 Ordo Missae and other Rites of that period.

The point is not to go back indefinitely, but to take a Missal that is essentially the one codified by Trent and Pius V, with the kind of small accretions or small emendations that characterise the slow progress of Liturgy through the ages. As Fr. Hunwicke likes to point out, for many Centuries since Pius V, it is possible to take up an old Missal and put it on the Altar and offer Mass. The changes are so minor that the Missal is virtually the same from “Quo Primum” to the 20th-Century.


Saints come on and Saints come off, but even the Calendar is remarkably stable. After Pius XII’s reign, however, it is much harder for an “old” Missal and a “new” (i.e., 1955 Pacellian, 1962 Roncallian, 1965 Montinian) Missal to share the same ecclesial space; they cannot be swapped one for the other, including at some very important moments in The Church Year. This already shows, in a rough and ready way, that a rupture has occurred — and this, prior to The Novus Ordo.

Pope Saint Pius V’s condition that only Rites older than 200 years could continue to be used, after his promulgation of The Tridentine Missal, is another way to see that our argument here is backed by common sense. A Rite, younger than 200 years, old might seem like a local made-up thing, but a Rite that’s clocked up two Centuries of age, or more, has an “immemorial” weight to it — something not to be disturbed or replaced.

This, indeed, is the basic reason for the illegitimacy of The Novus Ordo; that which it replaced was not merely something older than 200 years, but something with a 2,000-year history of continual use that shows no momentous ruptures, but only a gradual assimilation and expansion.

But the 200-year rule of Pius V also suggests that the revival of something less than 200 years old need not be an example of Antiquarianism, but could be simply an intelligent recovery of something lost by chance, error in transmission, or bad policy. Thus, if certain Octaves and Vigils were abolished only a few decades ago, and if the rationale for this change deserves to be rejected, their recovery cannot be considered, by any stretch of the imagination, an example of Antiquarianism.


After all, as The Case for Liturgical Restoration points out (pp. 14, 16), The Old Testament gives us examples of Liturgical Restoration far more dramatic than the recovery of pre-Pacellian Rites is for us.

Antiquarianism or Archaeologism — often qualified with the adjective “False” — is the attempt to leap over Mediæval and Counter-Reformation developments to reach a putatively “original, authentic” Early-Christian Liturgy. The term does not correctly apply to setting aside Modernist, progressive, or utilitarian deformations.

How ironic if a move against false Antiquarianism were now to be targeted as being, itself, an example of the same ! Let us put it this way: Catholics have always been intelligently Antiquarian in that they care greatly for, and wish to preserve, their heritage, and seek to restore it when it has been plundered or damaged. The Liturgical Movement, on the other hand, presented us with the spectacle of an arbitrary, violent, and agenda-driven Antiquarianism. The two phenomena are as different as Patriotism and Nationalism.


Our situation in The Latin Church has achieved the clarity of a Silver-Point drawing:

(1) The modern Papal Rite, risibly dubbed The Roman Rite, has established itself as a pseudo-tradition of vernacularity, versus populism, informality, banality, and horizontality, as NLM contributor William Riccio described with gut-wrenching accuracy;

(2) The “Reform of the Reform,” on which hopeful conservatives during the reign of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI had gambled away their last pennies, is not only dead but buried six feet under;

(3) The Traditional Latin Liturgy, though by no means readily available to all who wish for it, is firmly rooted in the younger generations on all Continents and in nearly every Country, and shows no sign of budging. There are few Traditionalist Clergy who would not be content to use a Missal from the early part of the 20th-Century, even as there are plenty who, in moments of honesty, and with trustworthy friends, will admit they have problems with the ersatz Holy Week and the Pope Saint John XXIII Missal. To paraphrase C.S. Lewis: If you have made a wrong turn, the only way to go forward is to go back. That is the fastest way to get on.


In this Article, I explained why it is legitimate, praiseworthy, and indeed necessary, to seek The Restoration Of The Fullness Of The Roman Liturgy that was lost in the Post-War period. I am not touching on the more delicate and controversial question of what kind of permission, and from whom, is, or may be, required for utilising an earlier edition of the Missal.

It does not follow, simply because an earlier edition of the Missal is better, that anyone is “ipso facto” entitled to give himself permission to use it. But, regardless of permissions already in effect or still remaining to be ascertained, we should not see 1962 as a neighbourhood where Liturgical Life may settle down.

In comparison to the strife-ridden ghetto of The Novus Ordo, where opposing gangs of progressives and conservatives engage in a never-ending turf war, the 1962 status quo comes across as far safer, lovelier, more commodious. It is, nevertheless, a trailer park, a way station along the road to a better place.

This Article previously was Posted on Zephyrinus on 20 August 2019.

Sunday 15 December 2019

Reconciliation Of The Old Chapel Of The Visitation, In Puy-en-Velay, On The Feast Of Our Lady Of Mount Carmel. Hence, The French Revolution Failed. “Deo Gratias”.





This Article is taken from, and can be read in full at, FSSPX NEWS

On Tuesday, 16 July 2019, on The Feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, the former Chapel of The Convent of The Visitation, at Puy-en-Velay, recently acquired by The Society of Saint Pius X, was Reconciled with The Catholic Religion.

Built in 1655, The Visitation Convent Chapel was desecrated by the revolutionaries, who turned it into a mockery of a Court, judging and condemning to death many Priests, Religious, and Laity, for their Faith and their attachment to The Church.

A Blessed Day Under The Auspices Of
The Virgin Of Carmel And Notre-Dame Du Puy.

These sacrileges, these murders, and these successive profanations, which are so many grave offenses against God, prevented any Religious Worship in this Chapel, as long as it was not “Reconciled” by the Ceremonies provided in Church Ritual.

It was therefore not until 16 July 2019 that this building was restored to its first purpose by the current Prior of the Saint Francis Regis Priory, in Unieux, which serves the site. First, the outer walls are sprinkled with Holy Water, while reciting the “Miserere” (Psalm 50), then all enter the Chapel invoking The Saints of Heaven. Then Psalm 67 is Chanted. Each Verse is preceded by the Antiphon “Exsurgat Deus” [God rises and His enemies disperse, His opponents flee before His face]. Finally, the interior walls are sprinkled with Holy Water; The Mass of The Day can then begin.

The Sermon was an opportunity to evoke the Sanctity of this place, the memory of the daughters of Saint Jeanne de Chantal and Saint Francis de Sales who Sanctified themselves there, the blood shed by many Martyrs, and, of course, the importance of Puy.

A Blessed Day Under The Auspices Of
The Virgin Of Carmel And Notre-Dame Du Puy.

The Chapel of The Visitation is less than 300 metres from The Cathedral of Puy-en-Velay, which Blessed Pope Pius IX established as a Basilica in 1856.

Tradition has it that the Basilica of Puy was Consecrated by the Angels, the same Angels who Celebrate Our Lady of Mount Carmel, as the Introit of The Mass says: “Let us all rejoice in The Lord, Celebrating a Festival Day in honour of The Blessed Virgin Mary, on whose Solemnity the Angels rejoice and give praise to The Son of God.”

If Mass can be Celebrated again, the dilapidated state of the interior of the Chapel is a sorry sight. Major renovation work must be undertaken.

Donations should be addressed to the Saint François-Régis Priory – 31, rue Holtzer – 42240 Unieux, France.

(Source : La Porte Latine – FSSPX.Actualités – 07/30/2019)

Imperial Abbey Of Ottobeuren. Reichskloster Ottobeuren. Bavaria, Germany.


Text from Wikipedia - the free encyclopædia,
unless stated otherwise.



English: Imperial Abbey of Ottobeuren. The façade of The Basilica, designed by Johann Michael Fischer, has been hailed as the pinnacle of Bavarian Baroque Architecture
Deutsch: Reichskloster Ottobeuren.
Fassade der spätbarocken Basilika in Ottobeuren.
Erbaut von 1737-1766 von Simpert Kramer (bis 1748) und Johann Michael Fischer.
Русский: Оттобойрен.
Photo: 19. Mai 2004 / erste Veröffentlichung in Wikimedia Commons: 11. Juli 2005.
Source: Own work.
Author: Simon Brixel Wbrix
(Wikimedia Commons)

Wappen Kloster Ottobeuren.svg

English: Coat-of-Arms of Ottobeuren Abbey.
Deutsch: Wappen Kloster Ottobeuren.
Date: 16 April 2011.
Source:
Author:
Derivative work: OwenBlacker.
(Wikimedia Commons)


The High Altar at Ottobeuren Abbey
(Kloster Ottobeuren), Bavaria, Germany.
Photo: 18 April 2009.
Source: Own work.
Author: Mattana
(Wikimedia Commons)

Ottobeuren is a Benedictine Abbey, located in Ottobeuren, near Memmingen, in The Bavarian Allgäu, Germany.

For part of its history, Ottobeuren Abbey was one of the forty-or-so, self-ruling, Imperial Abbeys of The Holy Roman Empire, and, as such, was a virtually Independent State.

It was Founded in 764 A.D., by Blessed Toto, and Dedicated to Saint Alexander The Martyr. Of its early history, little is known beyond the fact that Toto, its first Abbot, died about 815 A.D., and that Saint Ulrich was its Abbot in 972 A.D.


Rococo Interior of Ottobeuren Abbey, Bavaria, Germany.
Photo: 4 October 2009.
Source: Own work.
Author: BobTheMad
(Wikimedia Commons)

In the 11th-Century, its discipline was on the decline, until Abbot Adalhalm (1082–1094) introduced The Hirsau Reform. The same Abbot began a restoration of the decaying buildings, which was completed, along with the addition of a Convent for noble Ladies, by his successor, Abbot Rupert I (1102–1145). Under The Rule of the latter, the newly-founded Marienberg Abbey was recruited with Monks from Ottobeuren Abbey. His successor, Abbot Isengrim (1145–1180), wrote “Annales Minores” and “Annales Majores”.

Blessed Conrad of Ottobeuren was Abbot, from 1193 until his death in 1227, and was described by The Benedictines as a “lover of The Brethren and of The Poor”.

In 1153, and again in 1217, The Abbey was consumed by fire. In the 14th-Century and 15th-Century, it declined so completely that, at the accession of Abbot Johann Schedler (1416–1443), only six or seven Monks were left, and its annual revenues did not exceed forty-six Silver Marks.


Altar of The Holy Cross,
Ottobeuren Abbey, Bavaria, Germany.
Photo: 17 April 2009.
Source: Own work.
Author: Mattana
(Wikimedia Commons)

Under Abbot Leonard Wiedemann (1508–1546), it again began to flourish: He erected a printing establishment and a Common House of Studies for The Swabian Benedictines. The latter, however, was soon closed, owing to the ravages of The Thirty Years' War.

Ottobeuren became an Imperial Abbey in 1299, but lost this status after The Prince-Bishop of Augsburg had become Vogt of The Abbey. These Rights were renounced after a Court Case at The Reichskammergericht in 1624. In 1710, The Abbey regained its status as an Imperial Abbey, but did not become a Member of The Swabian Circle.


Altar of Saint Benedict and Saint Scholastica
at Ottobeuren Abbey, Bavaria, Germany.
Photo: 17 April 2009.
Source: Own work.
Author: Mattana
(Wikimedia Commons)


The Baroque Pulpit at Ottobeuren Abbey
(Kloster Ottobeuren), Bavaria, Germany.
Photo: 18 April 2009.
Source: Own work.
Author: Mattana
(Wikimedia Commons)

The most flourishing period, in the history of Ottobeuren Abbey, began with the accession of Abbot Rupert Ness (1710–40) and lasted until its secularisation in 1802. From 1711-1725, Abbot Rupert erected the present Monastery, the architectural grandeur of which has merited for it the name of "the Swabian Escorial". In 1737, he also began the building of the present Church, completed by his successor, Anselm Erb, in 1766. In the zenith of its glory, Ottobeuren Abbey fell prey to the greediness of the Bavarian Government. In 1803, Ottobeuren became part of Bavaria. At that time, the Territory had about 12,000 inhabitants and an area of some 165 sq km (64 sq miles).


Basilica of Ottobeuren Abbey.
Photo: 21 May 2007.
Source: Own work.
(Wikimedia Commons)

In 1834, King Louis I of Bavaria restored it as a Benedictine Priory, dependent on Saint Stephen's Abbey, Augsburg. It was granted the status of an Independent Abbey in 1918.

As of 1910, the Community consisted of five Fathers, sixteen Lay Brothers, and one Lay Novice, who had, under their charge, The Parish of Ottobeuren, a District School, and an Industrial School for Poor Boys.


English: The Holy Ghost Organ, Ottobeuren Basilica, Bavaria, Germany.
Deutsch: Chorgestühl mit Heilig-Geist-Orgel (F10), Basilika Ottobeuren.
Photo: 3 March 2009.
Source: Own work.
Author: Johannes Böckh and Thomas Mirtsch.
(Wikimedia Commons)

Ottobeuren has been a Member of The Bavarian Congregation of The Benedictine Confederation, since 1893.

Ottobeuren Abbey has one of the richest music programmes in Bavaria, with concerts every Saturday. Most concerts feature one or more of the Abbey's famous organs. The old organ, the masterpiece of French organ-builder, Karl Joseph Riepp (1710–1775), is actually a double organ; it is one of the most treasured historic organs in Europe. It was the main instrument for 200 years, until 1957, when a third organ was added by G. F. Steinmeyer and Co, renovated and augmented in 2002 by Johannes Klais, making 100 stops available on five manuals (or keyboards).

The Web-Site of Ottobeuren Abbey can be found HERE
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...