tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post6438930422969162730..comments2024-03-12T04:14:16.271-05:00Comments on The Rad Trad: The Parisian Missal II: Holy Week & PaschaThe Rad Tradhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00899289024837953345noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-42394051577108844602013-10-16T11:29:43.431-05:002013-10-16T11:29:43.431-05:00The canons of many Euopean collegiate churches may...The canons of many Euopean collegiate churches may wear pontificals. Two examples that come to mind are St Mary of the Martyrs (the Pantheon in Rome) and the Milanese Cathedral. Prior to the 1960s many canons could celebrated pontifical Mass from the faldstool in their dioceses. In Milan they still can. Here is one such example: http://orbiscatholicussecundus.blogspot.com/2012/09/in-memoriam-mons-angelo-amodeo_6205.html<br /><br />I met some of the priests of St John Cantius when I lived in Connecticut. St. John's has an affiliation with the liturgy department at the seminary in Cromwell, CT and their priests would come to my parish to celebrate the Latin Mass once in a while. I found them affable, easy going, and pastorally accommodating. The Rad Tradhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00899289024837953345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-39714962208304703362013-10-16T10:29:45.725-05:002013-10-16T10:29:45.725-05:00Ceremonial Master,
I quite agree. That is the po...Ceremonial Master, <br /><br />I quite agree. That is the point. I think no one who is ‘a canon’ is ever addressed as such, no matter the source of the status. I think the modern sense of a canonry as an honour is a (mild) mistake. They were simply the clergy who had duties under a rule in a church, as the regulars did in their churches, and some of them happened to be bishop’s cathedrals. Over time it became an pleasanter posting than being in charge of a parish. The costume must be quite late – they followed their bishop in wearing (some of) what he did. Is it the Lateran canons who can wear mitres? <br />I'm afraid I think sometimes these things just crop up, and they go on if nobody puts a stop to them. <br /><br />I wrote the rest of this last night. I may as well post it – might mean something to someone.<br /><br />The last feature I can think of I didn’t already mention is as seen in Shakespeare; ‘Sir Topaz’ the ‘parish clerk’ [ie, in holy orders] – still the legal term in anglicanism. (I’m not getting into the various Friars – early post-reformation references to formerly common feature of national life set safely abroad by a probable crypto-Catholic? Nope. Well, yes, Twelfth Night is in the same category, but we need that here. And there are other sources).<br />‘Sir’ as the title for the lower clergy. A translation of ‘Dominus’, or a local usage? Was it used elsewhere across Christendom? Scottish village schoolmasters used to be called ‘Dominee’ – representing the vocative form, and presumably not MA’s. The parish clergy used to be the village school teachers. Another survival? <br />Priests were ‘Sir [Christian name]’ if they were non-graduates – hence Fr Hunwicke’s quotation of the ‘Sir Christopher Trichy’ in Eamon Duffy’s books. <br />Amongst other things, it demonstrates that a priest accepting the honour of a knighthood was gaining no promotion in status. Of course, in the past it wouldn’t have happened. (The fighting orders were a different matter= monk-knights. Priest-monk-knights, too?).<br /><br />I am wondering if their parishioners called them ‘father’, or ‘Sir John’.<br /><br />Were the clergy who WERE Masters of Arts addressed as ‘magister’? Perhaps only in academic settings where that was the important distinction. In promoting S Edmund of Abingdom to be Archbishop, Gregory IX is supposed to have spoken of ‘Maister Edmund Abindon’. He was already a priest. But he was referring to him, not addressing him to his face. In fact, S Edmund will have been a Master of Theology – equivalent of Doctor/DD /STP. We know Dr Daniel Rock was known by the academic title. Was he addressed by it? I can only refer to the historical fiction of Bernard Cornwell. A priest in Spain introduces himself to the hero, declaring himself, ‘rector of the English college’ and that ‘the faithful call me Fr; you may call me Dr.’ Is that definitive? Don’t know. <br /><br />Back to Trollope. Not just superiors would use the job title. The Warden’s son-in-law calls him ‘warden’. The archdeacon’s wife calls him ‘archdeacon’. Everyone called the bishop ‘My Lord’ including obviously his wife. Every second character is a canon, but no-one calls them ‘canon’. It just isn’t done. They all had doctorates and that was the superior title. <br /><br />So this means what? <br />THE warden and THE archdeacon were unique figures with authority over their own area, but the canons were members of a collective body and no-one looked to them for leadership? That’s all I have. <br />PseudonymousposterJohnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12026854581183874101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-45265740757934803842013-10-16T09:20:45.559-05:002013-10-16T09:20:45.559-05:00Thanks for your replies.
If they were attached to...Thanks for your replies.<br /><br />If they were attached to a cathedral/collegiate church, I think it would be documented somewhere.<br /><br />PseudonymousposterJohn, the Augustinians and Premonstratensians are canons (regular), and I would add the canons of St. John Cantius, but I don't think any of them use insist on "Canon" in direct address like the Institute. From what I can tell, those called "Canon Doe" are only those who received the honor for special service in a cathedral or collegiate church.-https://www.blogger.com/profile/06595746236863350196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-44264309390307021562013-10-15T15:52:18.180-05:002013-10-15T15:52:18.180-05:00In principle reading gothic script is a matter of ...In principle reading gothic script is a matter of training, but Textura is indeed a complicated example, and I say that as somebody who actually writes down notes in gothic handwriting.<br /><br />The Caeremoniale shows some parallels to the office of other Latin rites, eg the Dominican, Norbertine office, who also have retained the responsory between chapter and hymn at vespers and the ninth responsory at matins, as also did Sarum and the Cologne breviary. Similar to Sarum there is also the offering of incense during matins on the most solemn feasts, the lectors wearing copes during the lesson they have to read.<br /><br />The BNF has scanned four Parisian missals from the early 13th to late 15th century which are on archive.org; due to the high quality of the scanning, the files are ~2GB in size.Protasiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13513744611326784368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-14525328679589142302013-10-15T15:17:52.899-05:002013-10-15T15:17:52.899-05:00I have found the Divine Office. I doubt I could do...I have found the Divine Office. I doubt I could do a post on it though. The time spent attempting to decipher the script would drive me mad. I will have to search out a missal on there, though. Thanks for the link!The Rad Tradhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00899289024837953345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-78281302381133675202013-10-15T15:15:24.872-05:002013-10-15T15:15:24.872-05:00You're most welcome!You're most welcome!The Rad Tradhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00899289024837953345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-59933049788999790982013-10-15T14:32:25.674-05:002013-10-15T14:32:25.674-05:00On gallica.bnf.fr you can find at least a Parisian...On gallica.bnf.fr you can find at least a Parisian breviary with notes from clearly pre-neogallicanist times (Breviarium notatum, like a modern Antiphonal). Perhaps they also have a Parisian missal, but I haven't checked yet.Protasiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13513744611326784368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-78243898701993351072013-10-15T07:03:21.255-05:002013-10-15T07:03:21.255-05:00* Another American practice is the positive mania ...* Another American practice is the positive mania for adding the job title to the surname, any job title. School principals seem extraordinarily keen on this. No British college principal would ever be known as 'Principal [surname]'. Except possibly in a list of dead predecessors. I think the designation [Job title] - [surname] can exist as a shorthand. A colloquial designation only. <br /><br />My favourite US thriller writer chronicling the dangers of life in New Jersey suburbia, Mr Coben - who occasionally gets his wording a little wrong - devotes a heartfelt section of one of his entertainments to an unnecessary excursus where one character tells another that while one can say 'Mr President', the right style for state level would be 'Governor Smith'. Wrong. Both are correct, but what IS wrong is the latter is not correct in speech. It's a designation or description. Call the man 'Mr. Governor' or call him 'Mr Smith'. I think a superior could omit the 'Mr' in either case. So there. We know this because, if nothing else, in his first Barchester novel, Trollope has a stranger call the central character 'Mr Warden'. <br />At first blush this just seems to be about protestants, but I wonder if post-reformation customs such as this preserve an older tradition. Anglican cathedrals used to sing the ‘Prayer Book’ services twice a day – the singers, boys and men were expected to do that, until ‘the state’ decided the boys really ought to be learning something else. But the point is, they sang both the services because that was what they had done up to the sixteenth century.<br /><br />Back in 1903, when Frederick Rolfe's novel was written, it was clearly envisaged that the secular clergy were referred to as 'Mr' - they were assumed to be Masters of Arts or the equivalent. Well maybe Rolfe was being a little old-fashioned. Only 'regulars' had 'Fr' as a title, although I think all clergy have been addressed as 'Fr.' in speech for, errmm, not sure how much time. I have lost count of the number of times I said in my anglican days 'Pray, Father, bless' (of the incense) to a man we hoped might have been in valid orders. <br /><br />So, I think it is wrong and the right form of address for any priest is always 'Father'. One cannot be looking for blue piping** in order to vary one's mode of approach. <br /><br />**[and 'some Italian cathedral'] - the use of the piping seems to echo cathedral canons. As does the hierarchical practice of the higher ups wearing even more blue so that at the very top, Mgr Wach wears only blue - is he 'canon' or 'Mgr', one wonders? But I thought the point was that, like the Premonstratensians, they had a livery, or coloured habit. This breaks down if they do not all wear the same, and some have marks of higher status. <br /><br />Having said this, I have noticed that the clergy serving churches almost never wear their piped cassocks and hardly ever the birettas with coloured poms. <br />PseudonymousposterJohnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12026854581183874101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-73339033378799933902013-10-15T06:06:44.616-05:002013-10-15T06:06:44.616-05:00Job titles and forms of address :
To weigh in and ...Job titles and forms of address :<br />To weigh in and suggest an answer to the off topic question, since this has interested me too, the word canon basically means 'rule' and is the same base or stem no matter in what ecclesiastical sense it is employed.<br />More than one order uses the term for its members - I can think of the Augustinians and Premonstratensians (they of the white habits and birettas) - they are regarded as secular and somehow not monastic, but still live under a rule. I think this is the basic sense for the person even when they are dignitaries. As members of a certain church body, there is supposed to be some common rule, but of recent centuries, only the privileges have been noticeable. <br />The Institute would appear to meet the criteria for having a rule chiefly in the sense that its members are bound not to say the novus ordo, and therefore to use the Usus antiq., as currently defined. The iffy part is that the positive content, if not the definition, of the rule will have changed around twenty years ago. The issue is simply, Can the Institute's operation be described as being under a rule, validly making them 'canons', where others such as the FSSP priests are not so called. They seem to do the same things. <br />- I should perhaps add that all of the Inst. priests I have met have been devout and hard-working (French-)men. They also have a steady supply of seminarians from around the world.<br /><br />I am however firmly convinved that the use of the word "Canon" as a form of address is wrong. A custom may have grown up - tho' hardly of 200 yrs standing - but it is etymologically wrong. It is a job description or title, but not something one can say to the person's face. {The worst example is the oleaginous anglican use "canon [Christian name]", (yuck) spilling over from "bishop [Christian name]" - simply an error of placement derived from the liturgical formula 'John, our bishop', or legal one, 'John, Bishop of somewhere'. The pretence of chumminess, combined with a right-in-your-face insistence on status. Typically very modern anglican. Yuck again} <br />Maybe the title confusion has come from the States* where I understand there is a large Inst. presence. <br />The best analogy I can think of is the characterisitc American use of the adjective 'Reverend' as a form of address. The US uses the same two adjectives 'Reverend' and 'Honourable' with names for certain classes of individual that Britain does, although for different groups, but 'Honorable' is never misapplied in the States as if it were a title or form of address. Because it's not. Neither word is. They are both epithets, descriptions really. And they can only be attached to the Christian name, never the surname - which is a mistake frequently now heard in Britain. The adjectives could theoretically be flipped into nouns - 'Your honour', is standard in the States, but not for the British users of the epithet, and 'Your reverence' is practically only comic. The only instance I recall is the comic character of a church employee in a popular sitcom with an exaggerated view of his pastor's status. [Mr Yeatman in 'Dad's Army' for those with access to online archives, etc. Or just a British tv licence.] <br /><br />You don't call monks 'Monk'; while they do have a customary form of address, but the word is not derived from their ecclesial state. <br />So, I think it is wrong and the right form of address for any priest is always 'Father'. One cannot be looking for blue piping in order to vary one's mode of approach. <br /><br />PseudonymousposterJohnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12026854581183874101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-28307161007559227182013-10-14T13:06:18.974-05:002013-10-14T13:06:18.974-05:00Have you been able to look at any much earlier e.g...Have you been able to look at any much earlier e.g late C16th /17th printed editions of the Paris Missal? I could find nothing on a quick search of Google Books - a nice clear 1620 Lyons edtion though. I haveread much about major ejection of old prayers and texts from the propers in favour of novelties, preference for scripture over eccelesiastical compositions. Thanks for your interesting and varied articles!Geoffreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09691561723031049470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-31689223572713635802013-10-14T11:35:37.123-05:002013-10-14T11:35:37.123-05:00Thank you for that, Protasi. Perhaps developments ...Thank you for that, Protasi. Perhaps developments in French politics led to the use of the dalmatic and tunicle on Good Friday in later editions (discarding as many uniquely Roman vestiges as possible).The Rad Tradhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00899289024837953345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-60100989217091317402013-10-14T11:34:07.005-05:002013-10-14T11:34:07.005-05:00Ceremonial Master,
I believe they received their ...Ceremonial Master,<br /><br />I believe they received their "canon" status through some Italian cathedral. Historically a "canon" is a clerical permanently stationed at a collegiate church (a church with a large number of clergy who sing the entirely liturgy publicly every day); a canon need not even be a priest, indeed prior to his election as Pope Innocent III, Lothar Segni was a deacon and canon of St Peter's basilica.<br /><br />I have never heard of calling a canon "Canon Smith" or anything of the like prior to the ICRSS. Usually one addresses a canon as Father Smith or Monsignor Smith. Of what church are they canons, I wonder? I have had the same experience talking to one of their priests as you have. I have also spoken to a former member of the Institute who says that the ICRSS has changed quite a bit since he left them over a decade ago.The Rad Tradhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00899289024837953345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-83867537911844467882013-10-14T10:40:12.378-05:002013-10-14T10:40:12.378-05:00RadTrad, sorry for an off-topic comment, but I'...RadTrad, sorry for an off-topic comment, but I'm not sure how else to contact you.<br /><br />I'm wondering, with your insight into history and the ICRSS, if you can know anything about canons and the title of "Canon." In all of my research, it seems to be a rare honorary title for work in a cathedral, but the ICRSS priests I know corrected me when I called them "Father" and asked to be called "Canon." Do you know why they would have the title "Canon"?<br /><br />Thanks for the "rad" blog!-https://www.blogger.com/profile/06595746236863350196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-2193790038077011992013-10-14T10:36:07.266-05:002013-10-14T10:36:07.266-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.-https://www.blogger.com/profile/06595746236863350196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-11016840837582023732013-10-14T05:58:30.111-05:002013-10-14T05:58:30.111-05:00According to the Caeremoniale Parisiense from 1668...According to the Caeremoniale Parisiense from 1668 on Google Books there are folded chasubles in the Parisian Rite. In the article on Ash Wednesday it reads "Ab hac die usque ad feriam quartam majoris hebdomadae, in missis de feria ministri utuntur planetis transversis." They are simply not used on Sundays. For Good Friday a black folded chasuble is proscribed and for Holy Saturday it is optional to use either a violet folded chasuble or dalmatic and tunicle.Protasiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13513744611326784368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-88984106278504263722013-10-13T21:16:26.377-05:002013-10-13T21:16:26.377-05:00Yes. Perhaps Roman 3:24 or 4:25Yes. Perhaps Roman 3:24 or 4:25The Rad Tradhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00899289024837953345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-82168157826689959732013-10-13T17:42:42.221-05:002013-10-13T17:42:42.221-05:00"Raised for our justification" is from R..."Raised for our justification" is from Romans, no?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-39074774713503397662013-10-09T12:44:17.730-05:002013-10-09T12:44:17.730-05:00I meant "far in beauty." Apologies, I ty...I meant "far in beauty." Apologies, I typed this up at an un-holy hour of the morning,<br /><br />I doubt there were still public penitent, but a similar rite existed in the Roman Pontifical until the 1960s, at which point that ceremony was also out of use.<br /><br />Yes, the Mandatum was adjustable given the setting. I should like to clarify that the dean of the cathedral or collegiate church washes the feet of 12 choir boys, not just any children. The idea is that the celebrant is serving those over whom he has a qualitative authority.The Rad Tradhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00899289024837953345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-74967037402677506432013-10-09T10:33:28.134-05:002013-10-09T10:33:28.134-05:00Were there still public penetants in the 19th cent...Were there still public penetants in the 19th century?<br /><br />"The Archbishop washes the feet of twelve clerics; the dean washes the feet of twelve boys; and the parish priest washed the feet of twelve paupers." This being an adaptation for the various circumstances of celebration (cathedral, parish church,...), correct? Interesting that it highlights yet again that there was never a single understanding of what the Mandatum is meant to represent.Marco da Vinhahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06092410765851812842noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3348523519788188753.post-34193839635790097872013-10-09T10:12:54.154-05:002013-10-09T10:12:54.154-05:00I think my brain just froze. I can't seem to g...I think my brain just froze. I can't seem to get the meaning of this - "There are two short collects—far is beauty and didactic quality from the Tridentine Roman rite". Are you saying the two collects are lacking compaired to their Tridentine counterparts?Marco da Vinhahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06092410765851812842noreply@blogger.com