1962 Tridentine Calendar

  • Thread starter Thread starter childofmary1143
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

childofmary1143

Guest
Recently I was curious to see if FSSP priests or any priest who says the Indult mass on a daily basis would celebrate the mass for Saint Padre Pio.

Sadly I found out that it doesn’t get said.

I want to say how much I love the TLM and its reverence. However we are not living in 1962, we are living in 2007 and I would hardly think its an abuse or wrong to honor canonized saints who have feast days honored in the NO mass.

Reverence is not limited to 1962.
 
childofmary1143 said:
Recently I was curious to see if FSSP priests or any priest who says the Indult mass on a daily basis would celebrate the mass for Saint Padre Pio.

Sadly I found out that it doesn’t get said.

I want to say how much I love the TLM and its reverence. However we are not living in 1962, we are living in 2007 and I would hardly think its an abuse or wrong to honor canonized saints who have feast days honored in the NO mass.

Reverence is not limited to 1962.
Click to expand...
Actually, if you spoke with a Priest who complies with the terms of the indult issued by the Church he has no choice, He has to adhere to the 1962 Missal. No options, no deviations nothing. He cannot use a previous Missal or any subsequent Missal. Therefore no feasts established after that Missals publication are allowed under the terms and conditions of the indult. If he deviates the Church can revoke his right to say the Traditional Mass. Pretty cool huh? Don’t blame the Priest, blame the terms of the indult.

Or better yet blame the Bishops who insisted on the restrictive form in which the Traditional Mass is required to be celebrated.
 
Actually, wherever the Mass of a saint in the Martyrology is allowed according to the 1962 rubrics, a priest can use the Mass from the Commons…the 1962 liturgy is living.
 
AlexV said:
Actually, wherever the Mass of a saint in the Martyrology is allowed according to the 1962 rubrics, a priest can use the Mass from the Commons…the 1962 liturgy is living.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that only that which was in force at the time the Missal was published is allowed. Nothing that came later.
 
Commission Ecclesia Dei disagrees (ask them, as I did); the thing is the liturgical books of no age are “dead”…the Missal of 1962, like that of 2002, allows for this sort of thing…the problem is, the 1962 Missal has so few free days.

A Votive Mass could also be celebrated.
 
AlexV said:
Commission Ecclesia Dei disagrees (ask them, as I did); the thing is the liturgical books of no age are “dead”…the Missal of 1962, like that of 2002, allows for this sort of thing…the problem is, the 1962 Missal has so few free days.

A Votive Mass could also be celebrated.
Click to expand...
I’ll have to check that. I don’t doubt you, but it flies directly in the face of everything that I’ve been told and heard since the Indult started. It has nothing to do with the Missal being dead, it has to do with the calendar. Thats the reason they continue to use the 62 calendar instead of incorporating the new calendar, which if I’m understanding what you are saying they could do…

I could see a votive Mass though, that shouldn’t conflict with anything.
 
It doesn’t touch or effect the 1962 Calendar; it makes use of rubrics already in the Missal or Breviary.

Here’s an even better example.

In 1962, the African Martyrs were beatified, not canonized (= 1964).

They were in the proper calendars for many locales in 1962, and had a proper liturgy.

Nobody would say that because in 1962 they weren’t canonized, we should pretend and still call them “Blessed”.

Of course we would call them saints…even if we still used the 1962 texts, since plenty of saints are called “beati” in the liturgy, even when they’re not Blessed.

So, rubrically, on a day that permits “any Mass” (and there aren’t really many), you can always do a Votive Mass, and, if it’s the canonized saint’s day of death (= automatic insertion in the constantly changing Martyrology), it can be a festal Mass with Gloria.
 
AlexV said:
It doesn’t touch or effect the 1962 Calendar; it makes use of rubrics already in the Missal or Breviary.

Here’s an even better example.

In 1962, the African Martyrs were beatified, not canonized (= 1964).

They were in the proper calendars for many locales in 1962, and had a proper liturgy.

Nobody would say that because in 1962 they weren’t canonized, we should pretend and still call them “Blessed”.

Of course we would call them saints…even if we still used the 1962 texts, since plenty of saints are called “beati” in the liturgy, even when they’re not Blessed.

So, rubrically, on a day that permits “any Mass” (and there aren’t really many), you can always do a Votive Mass, and, if it’s the canonized saint’s day of death (= automatic insertion in the constantly changing Martyrology), it can be a festal Mass with Gloria.
Click to expand...
thanks for that update Alex however Saint Padre Pio isn’t a martyr so he couldn’t be done?
 
childofmary1143 said:
thanks for that update Alex however Saint Padre Pio isn’t a martyr so he couldn’t be done?
Click to expand...
It’s called a martyrology but it lists the saints, beginning with the saint of the say and then the martyrs. You can also have an appendix to the martyrology for your local saints.
I’m interested though in another question: I think St. Pio’s feastday is on Septemeber 23 when there is a III Class feast in the Traditional calendar. I’m not sure whether according to the General rubrics (no 302, c) it would be allowed on that day-barring that he is the patron. Would it be then, that a votive Mass would be celebrated on the first free feria after that date?
 
Here is the real issue, practically.

Very few days are empty in the 1962 Calendar.

For example.

May 3, in the 1962 Martyrology, remains the Finding of the Cross. The Mass of the Finding is in the 1962 Missal, in the Appendix. The OBLIGATION to celebrate that feast was dropped effective May 3, 1961. But the feast was still permitted, as before, with the proper Mass…and May 3 was “empty” and allowed the festal Mass, with commemoration of Ss. Alexander and companions. Ditto, incidentally, May 6 John at the Latin Gate, May 8 Apparition of Michael. Both were retained in the editio typica, and the days left empty for their optional celebration as festal Masses.

September 23 is harder. Linus is the required universal feast. But September 24 would permit it, as a Votive Mass, with commemoration of BVM Ransom.
 
AlexV said:
Here is the real issue, practically.

Very few days are empty in the 1962 Calendar.

For example.

May 3, in the 1962 Martyrology, remains the Finding of the Cross. The Mass of the Finding is in the 1962 Missal, in the Appendix. The OBLIGATION to celebrate that feast was dropped effective May 3, 1961. But the feast was still permitted, as before, with the proper Mass…and May 3 was “empty” and allowed the festal Mass, with commemoration of Ss. Alexander and companions. Ditto, incidentally, May 6 John at the Latin Gate, May 8 Apparition of Michael. Both were retained in the editio typica, and the days left empty for their optional celebration as festal Masses.
Click to expand...
Off topic, but I was just curious, which Order’s appendix are you referring to? Or is this Appendix something other than the “pro aliquibus locis” section with regard to the “main” (I mean, basic universal standard) missal?
 
Off topic, but I was just curious, which Order’s or Diocese’s appendix are you referring to? I had messaged 2 Traditional priests on another forum soem months back-one in Latin America and the other in the UK, and asked them to check their altar missals and they told me that the texts had only been retained where they occured in the weekday votives.
 
AlexV said:
THE editio typica, the Vatican Press 1962 Missal.
Click to expand...
Sorry to be dense but I was looking at the scans one of the priests sent me: in the Appendix (for the UK) it goes from St. Maugold on April 27 to Bl. Martyrs of England and Wales, and it isn’t among those in the ‘pro aliquibus locis’ section. What does this Appendix contain and why doesn’t his missal have it?
 
For material in appendices, different Missals, even of the same date, can vary quite widely. Just the way it is. No Missal can be “complete” for every saint or mystery in the Martyrology that has a proper liturgy. The appendix you describe is specifically British. Hence these feasts wouldn’t be there.
 
I should have added that there wasn’t any other appendix in the book. I don’t know who published it but it is 1962 (St. Joseph in the Canon, and the Kalendrium has the new rankings).

So the Appendix you were refering to earlier was for the USA? Or bound in with the USA editions?

Also aside form the feasts you mentioned, what other texts are in that Appendix?
 
AlexV said:
Here is the real issue, practically.

Very few days are empty in the 1962 Calendar.

For example.

May 3, in the 1962 Martyrology, remains the Finding of the Cross. The Mass of the Finding is in the 1962 Missal, in the Appendix. The OBLIGATION to celebrate that feast was dropped effective May 3, 1961. But the feast was still permitted, as before, with the proper Mass…and May 3 was “empty” and allowed the festal Mass, with commemoration of Ss. Alexander and companions. Ditto, incidentally, May 6 John at the Latin Gate, May 8 Apparition of Michael. Both were retained in the editio typica, and the days left empty for their optional celebration as festal Masses.

September 23 is harder. Linus is the required universal feast. But September 24 would permit it, as a Votive Mass, with commemoration of BVM Ransom.
Click to expand...
I noticed that in the Tridentine Missal certain days have more than one Mass for a Saint.

e.g. on Jan. 18 is the feast day of St. Peter’s Chair at Rome which is a double major and certainly takes preference. But after the propers for that mass shoes St. Prisca, Virgin, Martyr which is not as important feast day.

Now couldn’t the same be done with St. Linus and St. Padre Pio on Sept. 23
 
No, the same can’t be done. Some days have options, and others don’t.

Sep. 23 is Linus universally. Unless your locale has a higher feast, it’s Linus and nothing else.

Note, too, some missals’ appendices have a proper Mass for a saint who doesn’t have a proper Mass in the main body of the Missal.

So, for example, Bernard on August 20 is taken from the Common. But the Appendix has a proper Mass that is allowed as an option. This is discussed in the rubrics.
 
childofmary1143 said:
I noticed that in the Tridentine Missal certain days have more than one Mass for a Saint.

e.g. on Jan. 18 is the feast day of St. Peter’s Chair at Rome which is a double major and certainly takes preference. But after the propers for that mass shoes St. Prisca, Virgin, Martyr which is not as important feast day.

Now couldn’t the same be done with St. Linus and St. Padre Pio on Sept. 23
Click to expand...
Are you quoting from a pre-1962 missal? According to those rubrics, in some places, on occasion of festivity two conventual Masses were allowed. Common practise with two feasts or ferias with proper Masses (like in Lent) coinciding was celebrate one of higher rank and commemorate the second.
So for example if St. Thomas Aquinas fell in Lent the practise would be before the changes of 1955, to say his Mass but add the collect, secret, postcommunion of the feria and say as the Last Gospel the Gospel of the feria.
However, two conventual Masses could be said: one of St. Thomas and the other of the feria without the commemorations.
Though I’m not fully sure St. Prisca was an applicable situation. In any case, her collect would be given on account of commemoration and also a Mass given (or a direction to the Common) in case she was “bumped up” to a Double of the I or II Class.
I’m pretty sure that two conventual Masses would normally also not be allowed according to the pre-1955 rubrics for the sitaution with St. Pio.

However, according to the 1962 rubrics, there is only usually one conventual Mass. And ordinary commemorations, etc. are curtailed.

There is a difference, also, between celebrating a feast if it is inscribed in the local calendar and if one is celebrating it by virtue of it occurring in the martyrology at that date. If St. Pio was inscribed in a local calendar as a particular feast of the III Class, his Mass would be able to be celebrated on September 23.
If celebrated by virtue of it occurring on that date in the martyrology, it can only be celebrated on a day of the IV Class which would be, as AlexV pointed out, September 24, barring it is a Sunday or Ember day
 
AJV said:
Are you quoting from a pre-1962 missal? According to those rubrics, in some places, on occasion of festivity two conventual Masses were allowed. Common practise with two feasts or ferias with proper Masses (like in Lent) coinciding was celebrate one of higher rank and commemorate the second.
So for example if St. Thomas Aquinas fell in Lent the practise would be before the changes of 1955, to say his Mass but add the collect, secret, postcommunion of the feria and say as the Last Gospel the Gospel of the feria.
However, two conventual Masses could be said: one of St. Thomas and the other of the feria without the commemorations.
Though I’m not fully sure St. Prisca was an applicable situation. In any case, her collect would be given on account of commemoration and also a Mass given (or a direction to the Common) in case she was “bumped up” to a Double of the I or II Class.
I’m pretty sure that two conventual Masses would normally also not be allowed according to the pre-1955 rubrics for the sitaution with St. Pio.

However, according to the 1962 rubrics, there is only usually one conventual Mass. And ordinary commemorations, etc. are curtailed.

There is a difference, also, between celebrating a feast if it is inscribed in the local calendar and if one is celebrating it by virtue of it occurring in the martyrology at that date. If St. Pio was inscribed in a local calendar as a particular feast of the III Class, his Mass would be able to be celebrated on September 23.
If celebrated by virtue of it occurring on that date in the martyrology, it can only be celebrated on a day of the IV Class which would be, as AlexV pointed out, September 24, barring it is a Sunday or Ember day
Click to expand...
Yes the missal I was quoting is a St. Joseph’s Daily Missal copyrighted in 1959 published by Catholic Book Publishing
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top