B
- Status
L
LightBound
Guest
I have tried to find this answer here on past posts/threads, but I’m not finding an accurate answer (perhaps I didn’t look hard enough, though
). I have found posts that state back to the 1500’s (if that’s the case, what was Mass like before then) and most recently I just read a post that stated the Latin Mass is over 1500 years old. I thought the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom predated the Latin Mass as the form of Eucharistic Celebration…so, when did the Latin Mass really start?
). I have found posts that state back to the 1500’s (if that’s the case, what was Mass like before then) and most recently I just read a post that stated the Latin Mass is over 1500 years old. I thought the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom predated the Latin Mass as the form of Eucharistic Celebration…so, when did the Latin Mass really start?
P
ProVobis
Guest
Tough to answer your question. There is evidence that Latin was used in the Mass in the first century. Chances are, however, that it hardly resembled the EF or the Latin OF today. You’d almost have to study the history of each prayer inside the Mass. We know, for example, parts of the Canon don’t go all the way back to Christ because they include the names of saints and martyrs of the early centuries. But one can easily make the claim that the Latin Canon does go back to Pope Gregory.
R
Rich_C
Guest
The Roman Canon can be found in parts in the 2nd century, in whole by the 5th and was held by ancient Christians to be of Apostolic origin. By the time of Pope Gregory the Great (d. 604) the Latin Mass had taken the basic form it has today, with some of the oldest prayers like the Kyrie and Pater Noster. Between AD600 and AD1200 most of the rest was added, like the Gloria and Credo. The saint’s propers are of varying age, from before AD1000 to those written in the 20th century.I have tried to find this answer here on past posts/threads, but I’m not finding an accurate answer (perhaps I didn’t look hard enough, though
The whole thing was standardized in 1570 by Pope Pius V in the wake of the Protestant Revolt, in the form we have today. Small changes were made periodically (the last in 1962) but they are miniscule.
B
Brendan
Guest
Prior to Trent, the Latin Mass existed in similar, but slightly differing forms. There were slight variations int he rubrics or the specific words that were said. One area of a country would be slightly different from another, which differed again (slightly) by what was done in yet another area.
Trent condified the way it was done in Rome, so that all other areas\countries then followed the Roman texts and rubrics.
But even then, the changes were minor. The changes the English speaking world went through with the new translations were larger than the ones, say in France or Spain, went throught when the Tridentine Mass was promulgated.
Trent condified the way it was done in Rome, so that all other areas\countries then followed the Roman texts and rubrics.
But even then, the changes were minor. The changes the English speaking world went through with the new translations were larger than the ones, say in France or Spain, went throught when the Tridentine Mass was promulgated.
B
Brooklyn
Guest
Here is a link to an interesting article from the BBC about the Mass. They quote themselves from 2006, prior to the Summorum Pontificum:
Pope Benedict XVI is understood to have signed a universal indult - or permission - for priests to celebrate again the Mass used throughout the Church for nearly 1,500 years. The indult could be published in the next few weeks, sources told The Times.
Ruth Gledhill, The Times (London) 11 October 2006
Pretty amazing, don’t you think?
Pope Benedict XVI is understood to have signed a universal indult - or permission - for priests to celebrate again the Mass used throughout the Church for nearly 1,500 years. The indult could be published in the next few weeks, sources told The Times.
Ruth Gledhill, The Times (London) 11 October 2006
Pretty amazing, don’t you think?
L
LightBound
Guest
It is very amazing! While I attend the Mass in OF, I am fascinated with the ancient forms of the liturgy- be it the Latin Mass or the Divine Liturgy of the East. Thanks for your link!
L
LightBound
Guest
Thank you all for your responses (and others reading- feel free to add). As Brooklyn mentioned- pretty amazing! 
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
This is a misconception that “traditionalist” just won’t let go of.
B
Brooklyn
Guest
Really? Then I think you better let the BBC and others know how wrong they are. Here is a link you might find interesting. From that article:
Pope Benedict XVI is understood to have signed a universal indult - or permission - for priests to celebrate again the Mass used throughout the Church for nearly 1,500 years. The indult could be published in the next few weeks, sources told The Times.
Ruth Gledhill, The Times (London) 11 October 2006
Also, I do want to make a correction to my earlier post in which I cited the number of people killed in wars in the 20th and 21st Century. I had heard the figure of 1.5 billion from somone I thought was a good source. In doing some research, it seems the figure comes in from anywhere from 160 million killed in the 20th century to maybe 500 million killed. Much less than 1.5 billion, but still a horrendous figure and one that no other part of human history can even come close to.
J
JReducation
Guest
People often forget that there is a difference between liturgical and theological tradition and the rest of Catholic tradition.
Liturgical and theological tradition is eternal. There is much more to tradition. The liturgy has always been the summit of Catholic faith. That does not mean that the Tridentine Mass has been around for 1500 or more years. Actually, what became the Tridentine mass comes from an old missal that Pope Innocent III gave to Francis of Assisi. Francis was concerned that the rite being used in his diocese was too complicated and required too many books. There was no single rite in the Latin Church at the time.
Francis applied to Pope Innocent for a simpler rite so that his friars could celebrate mass anywhere and so that the friars’ mass would not be as complicated as that of monks. Pope Innocent gave him an old missal that had a very simple rite. The Franciscans used it for 300 years. Because of the rapid expansion of Franciscans and the Franciscan tradition, the rite also spread. In the meantime, the two other mendicant communities that were also growing: Dominicans and Carmelites, each had their own rites.
At the Council of Trent, the rite that the Franciscans had made so popular was adopted as the official rite of the Latin Church with some modifications, such as the addition of Gregorian Chant, which was not part of the Franciscan Form. A few years later Pope Pius V would edit it and finalize the adoption. But it was never imposed on the Franciscans. We continued to use the original version until 1963, without the prayers at the foot of the altar, without the last Gospel, without the lavabo and without Gregorian Chant, with dialogue between the congregation and the celebrant. Also, there was not Communion rail. One stood on line for Communion. If the mass was a conventual mass, one did not kneel for the consecration and everyone received in the hand as had been the tradition in the original form since 1209. Only the laity and women religious received on the tongue. Friars did not. Only the Poor Clares who followed the Benedictine Rule used Gregorian Chant. Poor Clares who followed the Franciscan Rule did not use it.
There is much more history to the Tridentine mass that many people do not know and there have been several forms that existed simultaneously until 1963. Alongside it, the Dominican and Carmelite rites grew and also evolved.
That’s the big picture.
Brooklyn, you’re claim that you were born into the Catholic tradition is does not change the fact that within the Catholic tradition there is a Carmelite tradition that predates Catholicism, a Benedictine tradition that goes back to the desert fathers. An Augustinian tradition that goes back to the 5th century and Franciscan and Dominican traditions that go back 800 years. Yes, those of us who were incardinated into those families do belong to a very old tradition. Try to tell the Church that these are not traditions with a life of their own, their own theology, liturgical practice and liturgical history and that they are not autonomous and the Holy See will hand you a copy of Vita Consecrata by Bl. John Paul II, which affirms that they are actual traditions that are essential to the Catholic tradition and that every Catholic must acknowledge them and show reverence for them, even if one is not incardinated into one of them. To dismiss any of them is to dismiss “an essential part of the Church’s identity and life,” said Bl. John Paul.
Please be more respectful of them and less dismissive.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
Liturgical and theological tradition is eternal. There is much more to tradition. The liturgy has always been the summit of Catholic faith. That does not mean that the Tridentine Mass has been around for 1500 or more years. Actually, what became the Tridentine mass comes from an old missal that Pope Innocent III gave to Francis of Assisi. Francis was concerned that the rite being used in his diocese was too complicated and required too many books. There was no single rite in the Latin Church at the time.
Francis applied to Pope Innocent for a simpler rite so that his friars could celebrate mass anywhere and so that the friars’ mass would not be as complicated as that of monks. Pope Innocent gave him an old missal that had a very simple rite. The Franciscans used it for 300 years. Because of the rapid expansion of Franciscans and the Franciscan tradition, the rite also spread. In the meantime, the two other mendicant communities that were also growing: Dominicans and Carmelites, each had their own rites.
At the Council of Trent, the rite that the Franciscans had made so popular was adopted as the official rite of the Latin Church with some modifications, such as the addition of Gregorian Chant, which was not part of the Franciscan Form. A few years later Pope Pius V would edit it and finalize the adoption. But it was never imposed on the Franciscans. We continued to use the original version until 1963, without the prayers at the foot of the altar, without the last Gospel, without the lavabo and without Gregorian Chant, with dialogue between the congregation and the celebrant. Also, there was not Communion rail. One stood on line for Communion. If the mass was a conventual mass, one did not kneel for the consecration and everyone received in the hand as had been the tradition in the original form since 1209. Only the laity and women religious received on the tongue. Friars did not. Only the Poor Clares who followed the Benedictine Rule used Gregorian Chant. Poor Clares who followed the Franciscan Rule did not use it.
There is much more history to the Tridentine mass that many people do not know and there have been several forms that existed simultaneously until 1963. Alongside it, the Dominican and Carmelite rites grew and also evolved.
That’s the big picture.
Brooklyn, you’re claim that you were born into the Catholic tradition is does not change the fact that within the Catholic tradition there is a Carmelite tradition that predates Catholicism, a Benedictine tradition that goes back to the desert fathers. An Augustinian tradition that goes back to the 5th century and Franciscan and Dominican traditions that go back 800 years. Yes, those of us who were incardinated into those families do belong to a very old tradition. Try to tell the Church that these are not traditions with a life of their own, their own theology, liturgical practice and liturgical history and that they are not autonomous and the Holy See will hand you a copy of Vita Consecrata by Bl. John Paul II, which affirms that they are actual traditions that are essential to the Catholic tradition and that every Catholic must acknowledge them and show reverence for them, even if one is not incardinated into one of them. To dismiss any of them is to dismiss “an essential part of the Church’s identity and life,” said Bl. John Paul.
Please be more respectful of them and less dismissive.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
S
sw85
Guest
Is it? The Tridentine Mass is just over 400 years old, but my understanding is that it itself wasn’t a substantial departure from the forms of the Mass typically employed prior to that point. Clearly it’s a misconception if by “Latin mass” we mean the Tridentine Mass, but it’s not clear to me that’s what was meant.
C
Cowboy2012
Guest
Fr Adrian Fortesue, in his “The Mass: A study of the Roman Liturgy” explains how the Mass of the Roman Rite is, at least in its basic structure and some of the prayers, is the most venerable(ancient)of all the Catholic liturgies. All true rites are to be respected and loved, but as to the oldest, the evidence points to the Roman Rite.
CB
CB
J
JReducation
Guest
The 1500 year old mass is that rite that Pope Innocent gave to the Franciscans. That rite was modified and codified in 1570. Only the Franciscans kept the original going until 1963. The Tridentine, which was produced by Trent and modified by St. Pius V is called the Tridentine to distinguish it from the original, which in those days was called, “the old mass.” It later became known as the Seraphic Mass and published in the Seraphic Missal. BCC does mention that the Tridentine Mass was codified in 1570 and that there are PARTS that go back centuries. But if you had asked any Franciscan, he could have told you that. He could have also told you that it was not used by the entire Latin Church in the year 1209. It was popularized by itinerant missionaries.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
T
triumphguy
Guest
Didn’t Saint Paul say the Latin mass, while he was writing the King Jame’s version of the bible of course?
B
Brooklyn
Guest
I apologize if I came off as dismissive of the different traditional orders in the Church. That is not what I meant, and I think we may be talking at cross purposes. You mentioned individuals such as JPII and Mother Teresa. When we think of them, we think of their ministries, not their orders. When I talk about the tradition that the SSPX follows, I am talking about liturgy, as you say, which has nothing to do with the Franciscans, Carmelites, etc. The SSPX is not a religious “order” as such. Yes, your Franciscan Order goes back to the 13th century, but I am talking about Catholic traditions in general, including the Latin Mass, which goes back 1500 years. When I speak of Catholic tradition, I am speaking of beliefs and practices, theology as you put it, not different orders.People often forget that there is a difference between liturgical and theological tradition and the rest of Catholic tradition.
Liturgical and theological tradition is eternal. There is much more to tradition. The liturgy has always been the summit of Catholic faith. That does not mean that the Tridentine Mass has been around for 1500 or more years. Actually, what became the Tridentine mass comes from an old missal that Pope Innocent III gave to Francis of Assisi. Francis was concerned that the rite being used in his diocese was too complicated and required too many books. There was no single rite in the Latin Church at the time.
Francis applied to Pope Innocent for a simpler rite so that his friars could celebrate mass anywhere and so that the friars’ mass would not be as complicated as that of monks. Pope Innocent gave him an old missal that had a very simple rite. The Franciscans used it for 300 years. Because of the rapid expansion of Franciscans and the Franciscan tradition, the rite also spread. In the meantime, the two other mendicant communities that were also growing: Dominicans and Carmelites, each had their own rites.
At the Council of Trent, the rite that the Franciscans had made so popular was adopted as the official rite of the Latin Church with some modifications, such as the addition of Gregorian Chant, which was not part of the Franciscan Form. A few years later Pope Pius V would edit it and finalize the adoption. But it was never imposed on the Franciscans. We continued to use the original version until 1963, without the prayers at the foot of the altar, without the last Gospel, without the lavabo and without Gregorian Chant, with dialogue between the congregation and the celebrant. Also, there was not Communion rail. One stood on line for Communion. If the mass was a conventual mass, one did not kneel for the consecration and everyone received in the hand as had been the tradition in the original form since 1209. Only the laity and women religious received on the tongue. Friars did not. Only the Poor Clares who followed the Benedictine Rule used Gregorian Chant. Poor Clares who followed the Franciscan Rule did not use it.
There is much more history to the Tridentine mass that many people do not know and there have been several forms that existed simultaneously until 1963. Alongside it, the Dominican and Carmelite rites grew and also evolved.
That’s the big picture.
Brooklyn, you’re claim that you were born into the Catholic tradition is does not change the fact that within the Catholic tradition there is a Carmelite tradition that predates Catholicism, a Benedictine tradition that goes back to the desert fathers. An Augustinian tradition that goes back to the 5th century and Franciscan and Dominican traditions that go back 800 years. Yes, those of us who were incardinated into those families do belong to a very old tradition. Try to tell the Church that these are not traditions with a life of their own, their own theology, liturgical practice and liturgical history and that they are not autonomous and the Holy See will hand you a copy of Vita Consecrata by Bl. John Paul II, which affirms that they are actual traditions that are essential to the Catholic tradition and that every Catholic must acknowledge them and show reverence for them, even if one is not incardinated into one of them. To dismiss any of them is to dismiss “an essential part of the Church’s identity and life,” said Bl. John Paul.
Please be more respectful of them and less dismissive.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
Also, the reason the Latin Mass is called the Tridentine Mass is because it was codified by the Council of Trent in the 1500’s, but it existed long before that time. Yes, there have been organic changes down through the years, the addition of saints and feast days, etc., but the Mass has essentially remained unchanged, and in fact, Pius V said it could not be changed. And it has not changed. What we call the Ordinary Form is a completely different Mass.
I think our problem is that we’re just not on the same page. But again, I do apologize if I seemed dismissive of anyone.
B
Brooklyn
Guest
Br JR, I have never heard these facts before anywhere. Can you give some backup for what you are posting?The 1500 year old mass is that rite that Pope Innocent gave to the Franciscans. That rite was modified and codified in 1570. Only the Franciscans kept the original going until 1963. The Tridentine, which was produced by Trent and modified by St. Pius V is called the Tridentine to distinguish it from the original, which in those days was called, “the old mass.” It later became known as the Seraphic Mass and published in the Seraphic Missal. BCC does mention that the Tridentine Mass was codified in 1570 and that there are PARTS that go back centuries. But if you had asked any Franciscan, he could have told you that. He could have also told you that it was not used by the entire Latin Church in the year 1209. It was popularized by itinerant missionaries.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
J
JReducation
Guest
If you read what I wrote about Francis and the missal, it will help you understand how and where the final form of the Tridentine mass came about. There are parts in the final form that go back to that missal that the Franciscans used. We have no idea how old that missal is. We know that it was not in common use in the 13th century. That’s why Francis asked for a simpler missal. What was in common use was more complex and apparently more ornate. Who actually used this simpler form, before the Franciscans made it popular, is a fact that we don’t know. Obviously, someone used it, because the missal existed, alongside several other forms.
The misconception is that the Tridentine Mass is older than the 16th century. Parts of it are older, such as the canon. Parts, were added, such as the last Gospel, prayers at the foot of the altar, lavabo and the form for the reception of Holy Communion. This was not as structured until the 16th century. The calendar itself was also changed so that the readings and seasons were reordered and new ones were added. The concept of Ordinary Time is an old Benedictine concept that the Franciscans introduced outside of the monastery and we have never stopped using it to this day, neither have the Benedictines. After Vatican II Pope Pau VI generalized it for the Latin Church.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
M
malphono
Guest
A bit off-topic, but as I’ve said before, while I’ve known many religious of various orders and congregations over the years, I’ve had little interaction with Franciscans of any stripe.
That said in preamble, please allow me a few questions:
(1) I have a copy (somewhere) of the pre-conciliar Breviarium Seraphicum OFM Cap. How much does that differ from the OFM beyond the kalendar?
(2) How many other versions exist and how much do they differ beyond the kalendar?
(3) I presume that the Caps had one, but just how many versions were there of the Missale Seraphicum and how do they differ from one another, again, beyond the kalendar?
(4) Assuming that they weren’t all destroyed in the post-conciliar purge, where might I get a copy of one? Perhaps you have a link to an on-line PDF?
B
Brooklyn
Guest
I am not as familiar with the history of the Franciscans as you are. I do know that the entire church used this Mass, though, not just the Franciscans.If you read what I wrote about Francis and the missal, it will help you understand how and where the final form of the Tridentine mass came about. There are parts in the final form that go back to that missal that the Franciscans used. We have no idea how old that missal is. We know that it was not in common use in the 13th century. That’s why Francis asked for a simpler missal. What was in common use was more complex and apparently more ornate. Who actually used this simpler form, before the Franciscans made it popular, is a fact that we don’t know. Obviously, someone used it, because the missal existed, alongside several other forms.
The misconception is that the Tridentine Mass is older than the 16th century. Parts of it are older, such as the canon. Parts, were added, such as the last Gospel, prayers at the foot of the altar, lavabo and the form for the reception of Holy Communion. This was not as structured until the 16th century. The calendar itself was also changed so that the readings and seasons were reordered and new ones were added. The concept of Ordinary Time is an old Benedictine concept that the Franciscans introduced outside of the monastery and we have never stopped using it to this day, neither have the Benedictines. After Vatican II Pope Pau VI generalized it for the Latin Church.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
I’m afraid most of the world has the concept that this Mass is 1500 years old. Here is a link to a Church website in Maryland which says the same thing:
History of the Latin Mass:
The Catholic Church used what is basically the Tridentine Mass for almost 1500 years (dating back to the time of St. Gregory in the 6th century), until the introduction of the Mass of Pope Paul VI following the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965). The Tridentine Mass was codified by the Council of Trent in the 16th century (hence the name “Tridentine”).
In 1984 Pope John Paul II authorized the return of the Latin Mass (with the local bishop’s approval). Later, on July 2, 1988 Pope John Paul II issued Motu Proprio "Ecclesia Dei” which decreed “(that) a wide and generous application” be given to earlier directives to allow the Tridentine Mass to be celebrated.
On July 7, 2007 Pope Benedict XVI issued, Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum which further facilitated the return of the Tridentine Mass.
Br JR, are you saying we all have it wrong?
- Status