Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Matthew Hazell Profile picture
@M_P_Hazell
Sep 1, 2021 • 8 tweets • 7 min read • Read on X
Scrolly
(1/8) There seems to be this odd notion floating around among some that the term "novus ordo" is somehow automatically derogatory, or not a proper term, or that Paul VI only used it once, etc.
So, a short thread with where the Church has used "new order of Mass" or similar.
(2/8) Paul VI:
* address at consistory, 24 Mar 1976: vatican.va/content/paul-v… (pic 1 - the one generally cited)
* address at consistory, 28 Apr 1969: vatican.va/content/paul-v… (pic 2)
* address to the Consilium, 10 Apr 1970: vatican.va/content/paul-v… (pic 3)
(3/8)
* handwritten note of Nov 6, 1968, cited in Bugnini, Reform of the Liturgy (Liturgical Press, 1990), p. 383 (pic 1)
* General Audience, 19 Nov 1969: vatican.va/content/paul-v… (pic 2)
* General Audience, 26 Nov 1969: vatican.va/content/paul-v… (pic 3)
(4/8) Consilium ad exsequendam, Coetus X:
* Schema 90 (De Missali, 11), 26 Apr 1965, p. 3 (pic 1)
* Schema 113 (De Missali, 14), 9 Oct 1965, p. 4 (pic 2)
* Schema 170 (De Missali, 23), 24 May 1966, p. 7 (pic 3)
* Schema 258 (De Missali, 42), 21 Nov 1967, p. 6 (pic 4)
(5/8) Cong. for Divine Worship:
* Instr. "De Constitutione Apostolica", 20 Oct 1969, nn. 3, 6, 13, 19: Notitiae 49 (1969), pp. 418-423: cultodivino.va/content/cultod… (pic 1)
* Instr. "Decreto quo", 25 Jul 1969, n. 1: Notitiae 47 (1969), pp. 238-239: cultodivino.va/content/cultod… (pic 2)
(6/8)
* Documentorum explanatio, responses 14 & 15: Notitiae 48 (1969), pp. 403-404: cultodivino.va/content/cultod… (pic 1)
* and, for good measure, a "novus ordo" of readings at Mass: Ordo lectionum Missae, Praenotanda: n. 10 (ed. typ. 1969: pic 2), n. 58 (ed. typ. altera 1981: pic 3)
(7/8) This is all quite aside from the uses of "new order" with regard to all the other liturgical books (Confirmation, Penance, Christian Initiation, etc.)!
(8/8) Basically, "novus ordo" is not an automatic slur against the post-Vatican II Roman Rite, nor is it an improper term, nor was it only ever used "once".
So, if you want to use the term "novus ordo", go right ahead - and don't let anyone tell you otherwise!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Matthew Hazell

Matthew Hazell Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @M_P_Hazell

Matthew Hazell Profile picture
Aug 27, 2025
Liturgical silly season is upon us again — the so-called "Season of Creation" begins next Monday, apparently. So, what sort of things do these Laudato Si' "animators" want us to do in the liturgy? Let's have a quick look! (PSA: gird your loins) 🧵
From the "Laudato Si' Working Group" of the Irish Bishops Conference, we have these cringe-worthy bidding prayers, shot through with sentimentalism, completely unsuitable for liturgical use. (, p. 18) catholicbishops.ie/wp-content/upl…Image
The same group (p. 8, and also p. 21) proposes a new, rather questionable addition to the response «Et cum Spiritu tuo». 🤨 Image
Read 11 tweets
Matthew Hazell Profile picture
Jun 18, 2025
(1/10) "I don't like the capitalisation of the Tetragrammaton in the new lectionary because it reminds me too much of those lower-middle class thickos" is certainly a take.
And it's not the only one... 🧵 Image
(2/10) If you can't sing Alleluia properly without having an exclamation mark on the page (really?), then perhaps the problem is with you? Image
(3/10) The beginning of Luke's Gospel makes perfect sense in the ESV-CE. It's not "gobbledygook". Not entirely sure what the problem is supposed to be here. Image
Image
Read 10 tweets
Matthew Hazell Profile picture
May 1, 2025
The figures given here are not accurate. The average length of the Liturgy of the Word on Sundays (setting aside the very long passages of, e.g., the Easter Vigil) in the NO is 21.8 verses, compared to 16.8 verses in the TLM.
This increase is solely due to the extra OT reading...
... In fact, the Sunday readings from the NT epistles are *shorter* in the NO (5.8 verses) compared to the TLM (7.6 verses)!
(figures from E. Nübold, "Entstehung und Bewertung der neuen Perikopenordnung", 1986, pp. 192-193, 282, 334-335)
Indeed, Fr Gerard Sloyan, a prominent defender of the reformed lectionary, wrote that homilists are "frequently distressed by the brevity of the first and second lections": see "What Kind of Canon do the Lectionaries Constitute?", Bib. Theol. Bulletin 30 (2000), 27–35, at 33... Image
Read 10 tweets
Matthew Hazell Profile picture
Jul 11, 2024
(1/6) I recently came across an article from 1997, by Fr Edmund Hill, O.P. (1923-2010)—translator and scholar of St Augustine and who regarded himself as a Vatican II 'progressive'—on the psalms in the Liturgy of the Hours. Some interesting remarks!

Image
Image
Image
(2/6) On the censoring of the psalms, for example, Fr Hill has this to say (pp. 99-100): "I would voice my strenuous objection to the bowdlerisation of the psalms in both the Latin original of the breviary and in the English and doubtless all other translations..."
(3/6) "[I]n cutting out those verses, even those whole psalms, which are considered to be seriously sub-Christian in tone, we Catholics have simply followed in the steps of other Churches. But we have done it in a typically Catholic way..."
Read 6 tweets
Matthew Hazell Profile picture
Jun 12, 2024
No. First, Canon 766 limits individual bishops by making it clear that lay preaching in churches is something the conference of bishops has to sign off on first (which further requires the «recognitio» of the Dicastery for Bishops: see «Praedicate Evangelium», n. 110)...
Second, the liturgical law of the Church envisages lay preaching **outside of Mass** and only under certain conditions: see «Redemptionis Sacramentum», n. 161... Image
This derives from the 1997 interdicasterial Instruction «Ecclesiae de mysterio», Practical Provisions, art. 2, §§3-4 (), in which the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts was involved... vatican.va/roman_curia/co…
Image
Read 8 tweets
Matthew Hazell Profile picture
May 5, 2024
The problem is that the reformed Missal makes it very clear that this overwhelming choice and complication is a feature, not a bug, since complete Mass formularies for marriage are given merely «commoditatis causa», ("for the sake of convenience").
Image
To clarify: the TLM has one Mass, with one set of readings and one nuptial blessing.
In the NO, there are 3 Mass formularies (each with their own nuptial blessing and solemn blessing), plus a choice of 9 OT readings, 14 Epistles, 7 responsorial Psalms, and 10 Gospel readings.
If I have my maths right, all the options for nuptial Masses in the Novus Ordo (assuming 1 reading bef Gospel rather than 2) result in over 100 million possible combinations of prayers, readings & antiphons.
And that's before one considers the options in the Order of Mass itself!
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(