Talk:Divine Worship: The Missal

Direction of Celebration

Is the Anglican Use Mass generally celebrated versus orientem, or is versus populum also possible? What do rubrics and practice say? The German Wikipedia page pretends that the Divine Worship Mass is celebrated "ad Orientem, as in the Anglican High Church [not generally true ...] and the Extraordinary Form", and proves this via footnote with a picture from the Atonement Church in Houston [not quite a proof for the general practice].--Oudeístalk 16:50, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@Oudeís:, the rubrics in Divine Worship: the Missal actually permit celebration of the mass either way, but ad orientum seems to be the preferred practice of most ordinariate congregations.

BTW, the Divine Worship is the official title of the "liturgical books of the Anglican Tradition" that the Vatican has promulgated for the ordinariates erected under the apostolic constitution Anglicanorum coetibus for former Anglicans who retain their Anglican liturgical customs. The term "Anglican Use" was used informally by some Catholics who used the former Book of Divine Worship before the erection of the ordinariates, but never appeared in any official Catholic document or liturgical book, and the magisterium seems to be trying to stamp it out. Norm1979 (talk) 01:04, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

@Norm1979: That's not what "magisterium" means. There were liturgical norms promulgated by the Roman congregation on the liturgy that didn't use the term—but never officially disapproved of the term, either. As seen below, the term "Anglican Use" persists in official and common parlance to present; "Divine Worship" only properly applies to the current set of Anglican Use texts. ~ Pbritti (talk) 02:04, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

RFC: terminology

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Proposing editor indeffed for WP:DE, so discussion and any chance of proper procedure is gone. Another discussion may be opened here or elsewhere should other editors have comments. ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:07, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

---

What is the name of the liturgy/rite that has been in use by the three Personal Ordinariates since Advent 2015? Elizium23 (talk) 07:20, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

• Anglican Use for the liturgical use (as it is not its own rite) with Divine Worship as an official alternative title. This is in conformity with both current US Ordinariate literature ([1], [2]) and independent reliable sources (EWTN 2017, CNA 2017, CNA 2019, Boston College 2022). Of note was a brief attempt by some involved in the production of the new missal to buck the name "Anglican Use" (hence the name "Divine Worship"; see this Q-&-A and this infosheet). However, it's clear this effort failed to gain traction and didn't receive lasting support within the ordinariates themselves. The Divine Worship books are best understood as a series within the Anglican Use rather than an independent liturgical use themselves, as evidenced by the newer sources. ~ Pbritti (talk) 07:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

  Rather helpfully, this August 2022 article from The Pillar specifically applies "Anglican Use" to the 2015 missal. "Divine Worship" is an absolute must as an alternative name but it is not exclusive in official approval nor independent sourcing. ~ Pbritti (talk) 08:18, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

• I don't see why you need a full-blown thirty-day formal RfC for this, when I see no indication that WP:RFCBEFORE has been observed, let alone exhausted. Continue to discuss by all means, just not with a {{rfc}} tag at the top. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 14:30, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
• Divine Worship. All official texts and regulations uniformly refer to this terminology. Almost all of the post-2015 sources Pbritti is citing also exclusively use it -- one goes so far as to say "THIS IS NOT AN ANGLICAN USE RITE. (Dr. Clint Brand, emphasis mine)" The Ordinariates are also carefully avoiding other terms containing "Anglican" as well. Elizium23 (talk) 09:36, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

  We have Dr. Brand's statement, which is almost eight years old, and a contemporaneous pamphlet as the only direct sources on "Anglican Use" being deprecated. However, the US Ordinariate still uses the term in their literature (as linked above) and independent reliable sourcing uses it as well as recently as 2022. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:59, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.