A Look at the 1965 Missal

[anon48198893]

After reading Monsignor Pope’s article from 2015, I feel greatly disappointed that Catholics were denied the opportunity to experience this version of the Mass.

Excerpt:

So let’s look at the 1965 Missal, the one that was actually published in the wake of the council and had its reforms in mind. Three introductory points will help:

1. There ARE changes in the Liturgy. The most significant is a wider (but not exclusive) use of the vernacular. Also significant is that the “Liturgy of the Word” was to be conducted facing the people and could be a task shared with qualified ministers. There was also some shortening of the prayers at the foot of the altar and the omission of the Last Gospel.

2. Otherwise, the general Mass remains unchanged. I don’t think a person from the year 1900, or even 1700, walking into Mass in 1966 would have been all that shocked. He would notice differences and hear less Latin, but the Mass would still be recognizable.

3. As for the Mass being celebrated “facing the people,” that seems to have proceeded on a track of its own. There is nothing in the rubrics or Ritus Servandus (Order of Celebration) of the 1965 Mass requiring the Eucharistic Prayer to be said facing the people. Even today, the rubrics presume that the priest is facing the altar and therefore must turn to face the people at certain points. My own memory is that Mass facing the people was introduced widely beginning in about 1967. It seems to have happened quickly throughout the country, but not in every parish or diocese all at once. I do not recall a big rebellion over it, and frankly a lot of people thought it was “neat” at first. As most of you know, I am not a fan of the Eucharistic Prayer being said facing the people. But the point here is to emphasize that the question of orientation proceeded on a track of its own and should not simply be associated with the Second Vatican Council (which merely permitted a practice that was already spreading) or with the Missal of a particular year. The current Missal still permits ad orientem, even though it is not widely practiced.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

After reading Monsignor Pope’s article from 2015, I feel greatly disappointed that Catholics were denied the opportunity to experience this version of the Mass.

I feel the same way, it would be great to experience it some day and several priests throughout the world are trying to return to this version of Novus Ordo.

As for the Mass being celebrated “facing the people,” that seems to have proceeded on a track of its own.

While all you wrote is true, it is also true that very early Churches were built “facing east” whether or not that would mean facing people or not- many of early Liturgies were celebrated Versus Populum too. I personally prefer Ad Orientem a bit more than Versus Populum, but both are valid and ancient practices.

 

[anon48198893]

Just for clarity, those were Monsignor Pope’s words.

Does versus populum have continuous usage since ancient times?

 

[ProVobis]

What would have been recognizable was the new communion formula to which we respond “Amen” and ultimately led to the elimination of the communion rail.

 

[OldCAFMember]

Understand that there was no 1965 Missal, per se. There was an interim Order of Mass, that was never intended to be permanent, but only until the full revision of the Missal.

As for Mass facing the people, this had indeed been started in a few liturgically trendy places even before the council, but for the most part, it appeared with the 1965 Order of Mass, precisely because of the focus of the Liturgy of the Word of God and the Liturgy of the Eucharist, terms that came about with the 1965 Order. So while there were a number of additional revisions made in 1967, Mass versus populum was already widespread by that point. Indeed, many people came to Mass on Sunday, 29 November 1964, the First Sunday of Advent, and found a table in front of their altar, as the new liturgical year brought these first rounds of reforms.

While on paper these early reforms look modest compared to what followed, I believe that a time traveler from 1900 would have been rather shocked to see the Mass in 1966, precisely because it would have looked and sounded so different from the Mass to which he was accustomed.

 

[CTBcin]

I have a Mass prayer book from around 1965 and it’s cool to look at. The interim Mass, in my opinion, is the perfect middle ground between the old and the new. In my opinion, it’s a shame we couldn’t have kept something like that.

 

[JimG]

What would have been recognizable was the new communion formula to which we respond “Amen” and ultimately led to the elimination of the communion rail.

My parish church, which was built several decades after Vatican II, and in a more modern stye, always had a communion rail. Even after the church was remodeled some years later, the communion rail was retained. It was a more modern version of a communion rail and did not extend all the way across both sides of the sanctuary. We still received communion from fixed stations on Sundays, but the rail was used on weekdays, whether communion was received kneeling or standing. It is still there!

 

[ELCore]

As for Mass facing the people, this had indeed been started in a few liturgically trendy places even before the council, but for the most part, it appeared with the 1965 Order of Mass, precisely because of the focus of the Liturgy of the Word of God and the Liturgy of the Eucharist, terms that came about with the 1965 Order.

I have a 1962 Latin-English Sunday missal entitled The Layman’s Missal (Helicon Press). That part of the celebration beginning immediately after the Collect is identified as “The Liturgy of the Word”, and that part of the celebration beginning with the Offertory Chant is identified as “The Eucharistic Liturgy”.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Does versus populum have continuous usage since ancient times?

Not continuous, but it’s ancient enough. I guess it’s as continuous as using vernacular.

 

[OldCAFMember]

Interesting. Would you be able to tell me which bishop gave the imprimatur, and on what date?

I have a 1962 Latin-English Sunday missal entitled The Layman’s Missal (Helicon Press). That part of the celebration beginning immediately after the Collect is identified as “The Liturgy of the Word”, and that part of the celebration beginning with the Offertory Chant is identified as “The Eucharistic Liturgy”.

 

[Rob2]

After reading Monsignor Pope’s article from 2015, I feel greatly disappointed that Catholics were denied the opportunity to experience this version of the Mass.

I am not disappointed .

I experienced that version of the Mass thousands of times .

I rejoiced when the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council called for a reform of the Eucharist .

I remember well that first Sunday in Advent in 1964 when we were first able to hear the Mass in English .

I welcomed the further reforms which were introduced later .

 

[Vico]

After reading Monsignor Pope’s article from 2015, I feel greatly disappointed that Catholics were denied the opportunity to experience this version of the Mass.

Excerpt:

So let’s look at the 1965 Missal, the one that was actually published in the wake of the council and had its reforms in mind. Three introductory points will help:

1. There ARE changes in the Liturgy. The most significant is a wider (but not exclusive) use of the vernacular. Also significant is that the “Liturgy of the Word” was to be conducted facing the people and could be a task shared with qualified ministers. There was also some shortening of the prayers at the foot of the altar and the omission of the Last Gospel.

2. Otherwise, the general Mass remains unchanged. I don’t think a person from the year 1900, or even 1700, walking into Mass in 1966 would have been all that shocked. He would notice differences and hear less Latin, but the Mass would still be recognizable.

3. As for the Mass being celebrated “facing the people,” that seems to have proceeded on a track of its own. There is nothing in the rubrics or Ritus Servandus (Order of Celebration) of the 1965 Mass requiring the Eucharistic Prayer to be said facing the people. Even today, the rubrics presume that the priest is facing the altar and therefore must turn to face the people at certain points. My own memory is that Mass facing the people was introduced widely beginning in about 1967. It seems to have happened quickly throughout the country, but not in every parish or diocese all at once. I do not recall a big rebellion over it, and frankly a lot of people thought it was “neat” at first. As most of you know, I am not a fan of the Eucharistic Prayer being said facing the people. But the point here is to emphasize that the question of orientation proceeded on a track of its own and should not simply be associated with the Second Vatican Council (which merely permitted a practice that was already spreading) or with the Missal of a particular year. The current Missal still permits ad orientem, even though it is not widely practiced.

Also communion under both kinds. Later in 1967 was the Second instruction for use of English Canon, simpler rubrics. Also, 1967 was the year of Eucharisticum Mysterium. That included instruction for reception of communion kneeling or standing and of both forms.

 

[ELCore]

Interesting. Would you be able to tell me which bishop gave the imprimatur, and on what date?

Francis Grimshaw, Archbishop of Birmingham (England), 16 August 1961.

The preface begins as follows:

This book is an English version of the Missel quotidien de Fidèles, edited by Father José Feder, S.J., and published by Maison Mame of Tours…

Rev. J.D. Chricthton was chairman of the editorial board, and Donald Attwater was general editor.

 

[twf]

We still receive kneeling at the altar rail at our cathedral. There are 7 Masses on Sunday and 4 on weekdays… at all Masses you may either process up the centre aisle to receive standing or along either side to kneel at the altar rail. I would say it’s about 50/50 at all Masses. Always been that way as far as I know.

 

[twf]

Did it include an expanded lectionary? That was also called for by the Council.

 

[anon48198893]

What does “reform of the Eucharist” entail?

I’m disappointed that I was unable to experience this interim Mass between traditional and contemporary.

 

[SMHW]

I find this seemingly recent interest in the “interim Mass” fascinating.

This was the Mass of much of my childhood. It is very possible that as a child I missed some of the adult cues, but it was my observation (or perhaps it was a lack of observation) that most of the adults took all the changes in stride. I suspect that, from the point of view of the laity, having the responses in the vernacular was considered the most radical change because something was required of them. Back in the first half of the 1960s there were still many Catholics who spent much of the Mass praying their private devotions so they would be most likely to notice changes in postures or changes in when they would have to make signs of reverence and would be less likely to notice changes in what the priest and servers did.

Years later, I remember my mother saying that she and most of the people she knew welcomed “all the changes.”

 

[anon48198893]

I think this is a yearning for the “Vatican II Mass,” whether actual or romanticized, among people who desire that bridge between tradition and modernity.

In a sense, it’s no different than young people craving the traditional Latin Mass; another devotion and service before our time.

 

[SMHW]

I think this is a yearning for the “Vatican II Mass,” whether actual or romanticized, among people who desire that bridge between tradition and modernity.

One of the things I have found fascinating is that for the longest time here at CAF people seemed to refuse to admit that the interim Mass even existed in the English speaking world! From what I’ve read here you’d think we had jumped from 1954 to 1974 overnight!

As we are all coming to acknowledge, there have been many incremental changes, with those occurring between 1964 and 1966 being particularly noteworthy.

(Obviously the changes in 1969 and beyond were pretty ‘noteworthy’ too. )

 

[YourNameHere]

I like the Mass today, just the way it is. No need to go back in time.