Reading all this, no Father I'm soaking it all up. The Dominican liturgy is very interesting and unique. It offers a lot of enrichment to the ordinary form of the Roman rite as well as another great treasure chest of Christendom to be explored. Please keep up this work Father, I always look forward to posts about the Dominican rite.
Marvellous!
I am reading this, and I am fascinated by it. It is totally beyond me how and why the Dominican Order abandoned this beautiful and rich liturgy in favour of the Revised Roman Rite, which is now almost the only expression of our Latin Church's liturgy - especially when you keep in mind how everybody says that Vatican II called for a "back to the roots" and more liturgical diversity. You had it there - a liturgy much older than Trent and distinctly different from the "normal" Roman Rite, and you gave it up - for what?
I promise that I'm reading, Father, and trying to learn a bit! I've been in much contact with the Vocations Director for the Eastern Province; we'll have to see how that turns out...
God bless, Father.
Darn, why is that men interested in Dominican life always tell me that they are "investigating the Eastern Province." Is something wrong with the weather in California?
Aquí en Argentina somos muchos los que estamos interesados en la liturgia de la orden y leemos asiduamente sus posts. So please keep up this work, father! You 're very inspiring for us!
Dear Father Augustine,
You mentioned in a previous post that one should not trust rubric aids in English. Would you extend this same caution to the Bonniwell ceremonial book?
Father I am really enjoying your articles on the Dominican rite. We had a steady diet of the rite (daily - low and Sundays - Missa Cantata) with Fr. Joseph Fulton in Seattle at Blessed Sacrament Parish. I hope the rite returns someday. Thank you for the posts. They are very interesting.
For Philip: yes, I would check Bonniwell against the written rubrics and against what older priests tell you about practice. E.g., as I mentioned, his Altar Boy manual has the Roman way of lighting candles. Frankly, there was a lot of variation from place to place in the old days. I urge people to get a sense about the different variants so they don't get too neurotic about what the exact positions and gestures were.
For Paul. Something may again happen in Seattle, who knows? But I would keep an eye on what is happening down south of you in Portland. There may be some surprises in store. Fr. Anthony likes to keep people guessing. Right, Anthony?
Philip. Here's another one for you. At that link for the Dominican Ordinary there are problems. First, it says that the priest joins his hands for the Libera Nos. That is incorrect, they are extended. Then it has an odd section for the people's communion. It includes both the Confiteor and the (Roman) Ecce Agnus ... Domine non sum dignus. This is also wrong. The Dominican communion rite did not have the Ecce until 1958. And when it was imposed on us (it is actually from the Roman Priest's preparation!) the Confiteor was surpressed. They were never used together.
Cancel that "never" the last sentence of my last post. Never is a very long time. So who knows. But the text at the link is still odd.
Just another vote for yes, reading with interest, please keep them coming.
Dear Father
What is the likelihood that S.P. will effect a revival of the Dominican Use?
For my part, I would like to see a true restoration of the ceremonies and text of the OP rite with as many Romanisms removed as possible.
(Fr. Jordan TOP)
Dear Brother Father Jordan,
I am a historian, not a prophet, so I cannot answer your question. I know there is interest in the Rite among a good number of friars and that S.P. seems to have triggered some of it.
Whether they will have the energy to learn the Rite and the institutional conditions are such that it be more commonly used, only time will tell.
I do know that in my province and other places in the Order things are happening. But again I don't know enough yet to make predictions.
On the removal of Romanisms, I plan a short essay at the end of the series on this topic and why we adopted the Roman Rite (as ordinary use) in 1969.
Two comments:
I understand that the incense is never handled by the celebrant at Dominican Rite Masses; that the deacon puts in the incense for the Gospel when he gets to the lectern.
Secondly, you'll find that in GIRM 133 (latest version - section describing Mass without a deacon) "Those present turn towards the ambo as a sign of special reverence to the Gospel of Christ" and then GIRM 134 "At the ambo, the priest opens the book". In the old rubrics all turned once the passage had been announced by the deacon/priest. Now all turn before that: the widespread practice (that follows GIRM 133 and not the older practice) has people turning to follow the progression of the priest/deacon with or without the Gospel book.
I think, then, that the "Dominican" practice of turning for the Gospel is not at all "Dominican".
"from Europe,"
You are correct, the priest does not touch the incense during Mass. I don't believe I ever said he did. At all Dominican Solemn Masses I have attended, the deacon put the incense in before the departure for the lectern. Since the thurible is passed up to line from thurifer to subdeacon, to deacon, I don't see how the deacon could put in more incense at this point. It would be very awkward to pass the boat up with the thurible or to have a boat-bearer running around.
Nor did I claim that turning to face the Gospel is found only in the Dominican Rite. I am glad to hear that it is found in the New GIRM. Perhaps it will become more common among non-Dominicans.
Father, I read all of your articles with interest and appreciate them very much. Thank you and please keep up the great work!!!!!
Dear Fr Augustine many thanks for your great works so far. Perhaps, on account of your scholarly work we may be able to resurrect the rite in much the same way the Holy Father has done with the recent MP. What is the current position of our rite in the light of the MP? Does the Master of the Order have the power to stop friars from using the rite, or does ultimate authority with regard to the rite le with the Holy See? Considering the Fraternity of St Vincent Ferrer use the OP rite exclusively I would imagine the Holy See has control over who may use the rite. Could you clarify this please?
Adveniat Regnum Tuum!
Another reader here. I find this information fascinating: the subdeacon not holding the Gospel book, the use of the cross in the procession, the cross-like formation at the Gospel, and also the distinctive rubrics for the Credo, which I had never heard of. It must have been quite a sight to see the ministers kneeling in the triangular format!
Another thing that intrigued me was the mention of the sermon following the Credo. I had never heard of this practice. Was it common even outside of Dominican circles in earlier times?
Dear Br. Mannes,
I don't think that I have to do anything to "resurrect" the Rite. Frs. Patalano (Portland), Raftery (St. Thomas Aquinas College), and Fr. Anselm Ramelow (SF) all of my Western Province, are doing just fine. As is Fr. Paul-Bernard Hodal here at the Angelicum.
Mr. Houser,
Yes, the sermon was commonly given after the Credo in the Middle Ages, in Italy on which I have written much in _Cities of God_, it seems to have been the most common (other than outside of Mass. Personally, I think it makes more sense as the Credo is like the readings a presentation of Faith and fits better in the Foremass.
Maybe all this can be recovered again?
The Dominican Order always had a beautiful liturgical and monastic tradition. Unfortunatly except in very few places, it was destroyed by Vatican II.
But what was ruined by one generation, can be returned/restored by the next. Hopefully.
Adveniat Regnum Tuum!
"But what was ruined by one generation, can be returned/restored by the next."
This is certainly true, and I can think of no better example than the revival of monastic life in France after the Napoleonic era by Dom Gueranger--with its accompanying revival of chant.
Most observers in 1805, when Dom Gueranger was born, would have thought that monasticism in France was dead beyond any hope of revival. Dom Gueranger's attempt to revive it seemed to some like a crazy romantic's attempt to revive the dark ages in the "enlightened" nineteenth century. But Gueranger lived to see the monastic life he loved once again flourishing in France, and to see the ultramontane ideals he had fought for largely vindicated at the First Vatican Council.
Amazing revivals have happened in the Church's life before. By God's grace, may we be blessed to be part of a similar work. Vatican II is young yet; in 50 years we may appreciate it better, and see the post-conciliar crisis for the anomaly that it was.
Thank you very much from an English Dominican novice for a very interesting and informative series of posts.
Commenting by HaloScan
