Yesterday was the Novus Feast of Christ the King, the last Sunday of the liturgical year. In the Vetus Ordo, Christ the King is celebrated on the last Sunday of October. The feast was originally instituted to underscore that Christ is not just going to be King of the Universe after His Second Coming. He is also King NOW, of all social structures. The Feast was instituted as a counter to the deadly agenda of Communism. The fact that it was in October, underlines this.
However, the choice to move the observance of Christ the King to the End of the Year points to a different view of the meaning of the feast. But the calendrical change was not the only change. The content of the prayers changed. A comparison of the two different Collects, Vetus and Novus, is instructive.
Let’s have a quick review.
The Collect for Mass in the Novus Ordo is a new composition, similar in some respects to the Collect in the Vetus.
1970 Missale Romanum:
Omnipotens sempiterne Deus,
qui in dilecto Filio tuo, universorum Rege,
omnia instaurare voluisti,
concede propitius,
ut tota creatura, a servitute liberata,
tuae maiestati deserviat ac te sine fine collaudet.
Instauro is a wonderful word which deserves more attention: “to renew, repeat, celebrate anew; to repair, restore; to erect, make”. It is synonymous with renovo. Etymologically instauro is related to Greek stauros. Turning to a different L&S, the immensely valuable Liddell & Scott Greek Dictionary, we find that stauros is “an upright pale or stake.” Stauros is the word used in the Greek New Testament for the Cross of Jesus. Also the word immediately makes us think not only of the motto on the coat-of-arms of Pope St. Pius X, but also the origin of that motto Ephesians 1:10: “For he has made known to us in all wisdom and insight the mystery of his will, according to his purpose which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.” (Eph 1:9-10 RSV).
There have been, by the way, some changes in the Latin texts of this passage. The older Vulgate says “instaurare omnia in Christo” while the New Vulgate says “recapitulare omnia in Christo”.
Recapitulare is related to Latin caput (“head”) and was deemed by the scholars behind the New Vulgate as a better translation of the Greek anakephalaioô, “to sum up the argument.” This harks to the headship of Christ over the Body of the Church and expresses that He is the Final Statement, the Conclusion of All Things. At any rate, in 1925 and in the 1960’s when the older version of Vulgate was in use, the Collect had instaurare and not recapitulare.
Why all this electronic ink about recapitulare? The phrase, “renew/reinstate all things in Christ” points to the Kingship of Jesus. In everything that Jesus said or did in His earthly life, He was actively drawing all things and peoples to Himself. In the time to come, when His Majesty the King returns in gloria and maiestas this act of drawing-to-Himself (cf. John 12:32) will culminate in the exaltation of all creation in a perfect unending paean of praise. In the meantime, by virtue of baptism and our integration into Christus Venturus (Christ About-To-Come), we all share in His three-fold office of priest, prophet, and also king. We have the duty to proclaim His Kingship by all that we say and do.
We are to offer all our good works back to Him for the sake of His glory and the expectation of His Coming. This glorious restoration (instaurare) is possible only through the Lord’s Cross (Greek stauros). The Cross is found subtly in the midst of this Collect, where it is revealed as the pivot point of all creation (creatura).
LITERAL TRANSLATION:
Almighty eternal God,
who desired to renew all things
in Your beloved Son, the King of the universe,
graciously grant
that the whole of creation, having been freed from servitude,
may zealously serve Your majesty and praise You greatly without end.
1962 Missale Romanum:
Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, qui dilecto Filio tuo universorum Rege, omnia instaurare voluisti: concede propitius; ut cunctae familiae gentium, peccati vulnere disgregatae, eius suavissimo subdantur imperio.
LITERAL TRANSLATION:
Almighty eternal God, who desired to renew all things in Your beloved Son, the King of the universe, graciously grant that all the families of peoples, torn apart by the wound of sin, may be subject to His most gentle rule.
Let’s see them side by side:
| 1962 – Vetus Ordo | 1970 – Novus Ordo |
| Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, qui in dilecto Filio tuo, universorum Rege, omnia instaurare voluisti, concede propitius, ut tota creatura, a servitute liberata, tuae maiestati deserviat ac te sine fine collaudet. |
Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, qui dilecto Filio tuo universorum Rege, omnia instaurare voluisti: concede propitius; ut cunctae familiae gentium, peccati vulnere disgregatae, eius suavissimo subdantur imperio. |
| Almighty eternal God, who desired to renew all things in Your beloved Son, the King of the universe, graciously grant that the whole of creation, having been freed from servitude, may zealously serve Your majesty and praise You greatly without end. |
Almighty eternal God, who desired to renew all things in Your beloved Son, the King of the universe, graciously grant that all the families of peoples, torn apart by the wound of sin, may be subject to His most gentle rule. |
Sometimes people who run down the Traditional Latin Mass will say that the tone of the orations is too negative, since there is a regular emphasis on sin, guilt, propitiation, etc., and not even stress on the goal, the joy of Heaven. On the other hand, the Novus Ordo orations were edited to remove most of the negative references. They now stress eschatological happiness. The problem is that the prayers of the Novus Ordo don’t clearly help us understand how to attain that heavenly joy, while the prayers of the Traditional Latin Mass do. To obtain the happiness of Heaven, we must deal with sin, guilt, penance, propitiation, etc. Life isn’t just daisies and cuddly kittens.
Loading ...
Pingback: MONDAY AFTERNOON EDITION | BIG PULPIT
Thank you Father Z. It is interesting to me that the NO priest where I have been assisting at Mass, in his sermons, including this past Sunday, very often talks about the need to go to confession (even though his only regularly scheduled time is Saturday afternoon). Yet he rarely has us say the Confiteor at the beginning of Mass. When he talks about the faith, he is right on the money, but the way he celebrates Mass, suggests he is not. I am sure he is orthodox, but does not see or understand the way he celebrates Mass more or less contradicts what he says.
Please pray for Fr Carlos Martins. –
Ole Scratch is attacking him.
Interesting comparison, Father.
I, for one, personally think the 1962 MR is thematically superior. I would make two points:
1) The difference between ut tota creatura and ut cunctæ familiæ.
Saint Paul emphasis the cataclysmic effects of sin on the whole of creation, not just man. He writes to the Romans, ‘For we know that every creature [omnis creatura] groaneth and travaileth in pain, even till now’ (Rom. 8:22). Christ’s Kingship is over the entire universe – as both Collects emphasise – yet only the 1962MR incorporates all of creation. The 1970MR, Bugnini Rite (sorry!), places Christ’s kingship over all peoples. Of course, Christ came to save fallen man, not the sinful iguana, but all of creation ‘was made subject to vanity’ (Rom. 8:20).
I would also say that 1962MR’s emphasis over every creature’ harkens back to Adam’s dominion over ‘every creature’ (Gen. . Christ is the new Adam, and is the one who re-subjugates all of creation to himself. In fact, man only has (disordered) ‘dominion’ over woman because of sin (Gen. 3:16).
2) The difference between ‘derserviat’ (1962MR) and ‘subdantur’ (1970MR).
Based on a purely grammatical reading, the 1962MR is calling the faithful to an active service in Christ’s Kingdom and its building thereof. A good king is one who rules is kingdom, yes, and keep the peace by rule of law; but a good king is also one who actively delights in his subjects’ service for his kingdom. Is not Christ’s kingship the same? Our Lord asks us that we ‘should bring forth fruit’ in his service, not just to be passive subjects in a state of waiting for Christ’s return.
Added to this is the second verb in active voice, ‘collaudet.’ Again, my point is the same: it is an active service of praise; it involves the activation of our intellect and will. The 1970MR just has the feel of a kingdom of heavenly social welfare, whereby we just sit around, expecting Christ to come (no offence to anyone who needs genuine help from the state). Moved by grace and completed by grace, we can quicken the return of Christ by our active service in his honour.
My tuppence worth, at least.
I attended a Spanish language NO Feast of Christ the King Mass. A life size of statue of Christ clothed in purple with a golden crown was placed in the Sanctuary. (this statue is also displayed without the golden crown during Holy Week). Part of the sermon described the liturgical year as an annual cycle that embodies the whole story of creation, the Fall of man, redemption and the restoration of all things in and through Christ, liturgically culminating in this great Feast Day. Confession was also emphasized, especially as we are about to begin a new Liturgical new. At the end of Mass the Celebrant and a standing room only congregation gave a resounding 3 fold acclamation of “Viva Christo Rey!”. We left the Church as the steeple bell rang out with a certain sense of peace that despite all that is wrong in world, Christ IS King, we are in God’s good hands, and we have a chance in a new liturgical year to become better followers of Christ our King. I had also previously attended the TLM Feast of Christ the King. I have always found the placement of the Feast Day in the TLM calendar and the treatment of the variable number of Sundays remaining in the Liturgical year as somewhat of a let down, as if there is no real closure to the annual liturgical cycle. The connection of the Feast to the rise of Communism and October is lost on people today, and is perhaps now a diversion, when we have “Catholic” leaders who aid, abet and reward those who promote among other things, abortion. The prayers of the Novus Ordo may not measure up to the prayers of the Traditional Latin Mass, but the placement of the Feast in the Novus Ordo calendar does seem to make sense.
Thank you for the analysis, Father! Both of these prayers are quite good, though it is clear that the 1962 one better corresponds to the original purpose of the feast. If you have a moment to edit the article, I feel I should point out that the side-by-side comparison toward the end mislabels the two Collects.