Liturgical Changes At Our Lady Of The Atonement

From a visitor:

This was in the bulletin:

Beginning Dec. 3, 2017, the first Sunday of Advent, we will begin to conform our liturgy to the Divine Worship Missal. We have new pew missal booklets that conform to the Altar Missal.

Several men will be in the Narthex after each Mass to present the changes to the liturgy and to answer questions. Please stop by to chat with them.

My thoughts:

The changes that are forthcoming will be in order to conform to the Divine Worship Missal. What's confusing is that the pew missals were updated in 2016 precisely for that purpose. Indeed the front cover of those booklets proclaims "The Order of Mass according to the Divine Worship Missal". Apparently, what wasn't changed is the rubrics concerning when to kneel or stand. This begs the question, why not? If the DWM was formally issued, what right did we have to pick and choose? From what I understand, the posture at Mass in the Anglican Use Mass is no different from the Novus Ordo. I searched for a copy of the DWM, and I found this.

I briefly scanned it. One thing I noticed was on page 19, under "The Peace", it says "The people may offer one another a sign of peace". Although practiced at OLOW, the sign of peace has never been part of the liturgy at Atonement, and was omitted in the revised pew missals of two years ago. Again, why? What right did Dcn. Orr or Fr. Phillips have to alter this? A greeting of peace is also prescribed in the BODW.

While searching rubrics, this article from Chuck Wilson came up.

In that, I found this:

The responsibility of conferences of bishops to make necessary decisions on matters left to them by the was reiterated. "8.... They are to decide on .... the faithful's movements, standing, kneeling, and sitting during Mass; . . . how the sign of peace is to be given; . . . " (SC Divine Worship, Instruction , 20 Oct 1969).

I've stopped watching football when they started taking a knee. I have often wondered if the players knew why they were taking a knee. I have to say, at least Fr. Lewis is clearing up some of the house-blend confusion by conforming to what is actually put forth by the Catholic Church!

I'm still puzzled at the use of intinction at the big Texas parishes. My understanding of the USCCB position is that communicants are to choose whether to receive in the hand or on the tongue. Intinction makes receiving on the hand problematic at best, since it presumably leaves a spot of Christ's Blood on the hand whose disposition may not be certain. Does anyone know how intinction squares with the USCCB? (I assume it must be OK if church supply firms sell intinction sets.)