Before the 60's, was the Tridentine Mass celebrated perfectly perfect in every way?

[netmilsmom]

It is like when a human being breaks a bone. The area where the bone heals becomes the strongest part of the bone.

The Church will learn from the experiments of the aftermath of Vatican II and will rise in splendor for Her King.

Ken

I want you to know that Amy has made that point on a few threads and I did not agree.
Your analogy really says it all.

I get it! Thanks!

 

[az_4_faith]

Wow, this is great. This is the insight I’m looking for to learn about how the Mass was celebrated before the changes.

Let’s see, how can I put this without sounding like I’m speaking against the Tridentine Mass . . . because I’m not in any way . . .

It’s been my experience with my friends and acquaintances who are very pro-Tridentine Mass (and believe me, I am definitely NOT anti-Tridentine, I’m for Holy and Reverant liturgy - Tridentine or NO) express their disgust with the NO mass it’s always in the sense that the Tridentine Mass was the “end all”. Not that it wasn’t, but it’s always in the sense that I’ve stated in the thread – it was perfect, almost the way that a child would remember his birthday or Christmas, you know, the way the mind filters the faults and only remembers the best.

That’s what sparked my curiosity - was it always done properly, were there any faults, and finally, why was it above all things, abolished (well, suppressed almost to the point of abolition!). What was so wrong that the bishop’s forbid its form to most priests?

My biggest gripe anymore is the way the liturgy is so unpredictable no matter where we seem to go. It’s all about the priest and his personality.

So I started this thread to find out if the faithful had the same kinds of problems pre-Vatican II. Cause when I talk to some of my friends, they blame EVERYTHING on the NO Mass. They make it SEEM like the Church was perfect in her liturgies using the Tridentine Formula. I don’t know, my parents don’t shed much light on this for me. That’s why I though I’d throw this out to this forum, cause there’s alot more experience out there than what I have.

 

[lak611]

How about teach the students Latin and Greek in Catholic schools?

One other problem, though, in terms of making the Tridentine Mass more available. Most young priests would have to be taught Latin as well. In my parish, the pastor and the associate are both young and never learned Latin in seminary. The only priest in my parish who knows Latin is retired and in residence.

 

[netmilsmom]

One other problem, though, in terms of making the Tridentine Mass more available. Most young priests would have to be taught Latin as well. In my parish, the pastor and the associate are both young and never learned Latin in seminary. The only priest in my parish who knows Latin is retired and in residence.

So teach them them the Holy Mass first, then go from there.

 

[az_4_faith]

And why did the seminaries stop teaching Latin to their seminarians since Latin has been and still is the official language of the Church?

Are American seminaries unique in this or did seminaries worldwide stop teaching Latin?

Who in the heck made that decision?

 

[lak611]

So teach them them the Holy Mass first, then go from there.

They know the Pauline and are orthodox in how they offer it. No need for them to do any other kind of Mass.

 

[palmas85]

And why did the seminaries stop teaching Latin to their seminarians since Latin has been and still is the official language of the Church?

Are American seminaries unique in this or did seminaries worldwide stop teaching Latin?

Who in the heck made that decision?

Good question. Makes you think doesn’t it? How could you expect an entire generation of religious to be even remotely effective in a Church when they cannot even read its official documents without the help of translators.

And we already know what a fine job they’ve done with some of the translations.

 

[dessert]

Well the Tridentine Mass was in its nature not very open to error. All the prayers HAD to be said in order for the next prayer to make sense. Skipping any prayers or changing any prayers would create a domino effect and destroy the Mass.

For instance, the confiteor of the priest automatically led to the confiteor of the servers, then the Indulgentium Absolutionem, followed by the Kyrie which naturally preceded the Gloria. The Epistle had to be given in order for the Gospel to follow, directly after the Gospel the priest would give the homily which had to end with the Credo back at the Altar. Only after the Credo could the Canon start because of the symbolic transfer from the Word to the Eucharistic Liturgy, the Canon is like one huge long prayer book and if you skip anything the next lines seem random and out of place. After the consecration everything the priest says is a “que” for the people to get up, kneel, get communion, etc. Then the Ite Missa Est and final Gospel are neccesary because they teach the faithful in a deep and beauitufl way to…get their belongings and kids together its time to hit the road.

So no I dont think any Priests back then dropped prayers from the Mass, they could have mumbled them, they could have sped through it like a presider at an auction, they could have…well you get the picture.

But in reality the TLM was much more parishoner friendly than the N.O…because wherever you go, when the parish your visting serves the TLM you know exactly who you are. You know your a Catholic, and you know the man by the Altar is a Catholic. But most important of all you know that everything thats coming up (mumbled or not) is 100% organic certified Roman Catholicism, and you are not expected to have to step out of your religious beliefs for the sake of a ecumenical service, a happy clappy Mass, or a hippy priest.

And none of that Halloween mass stuff…

I was very young then but that is exactly how I remember it too.
That brings back all the memories, no wonder I never fell asleep I didn’t have time.

 

[palmas85]

One other problem, though, in terms of making the Tridentine Mass more available. Most young priests would have to be taught Latin as well. In my parish, the pastor and the associate are both young and never learned Latin in seminary. The only priest in my parish who knows Latin is retired and in residence.

They know the Pauline and are orthodox in how they offer it. No need for them to do any other kind of Mass.
Reply With Quote

Just so you know, in case you don’t already, the Pauline Rite is in Latin. Completely. 100%. Unbelievable huh? Yep, the whole thing is in Latin. What the Priest says at your Parish is the vernacular translation of the official Roman or Latin Rite.which is contained in the Missale Romanum:thumbsup:

Half of the problem is gone already, huh?

Now, the next step, would be for these young Priests to learn to read, well I guess they already know how to do that, the Latin. Since they already know the English translations, that will be a snap. And there you go. Problem solved.

As far as them then celebrating the Traditional Rite, it should only take a short while to learn the rubrics, which are much more strict than in th Pauline. I’m sure they will have no problem at all.

 

[dessert]

If I remember right there was no drinking of the cup of wine?
Do others remember this ? The host was smaller? but I like to feel Jesus in my hand now, I think this is a special treat and awsome. The one elder priest did all the communion, just like on going my way movie there were usually two or three priests we had three and the older could say mass fast and furious.return

 

[netmilsmom]

They know the Pauline and are orthodox in how they offer it. No need for them to do any other kind of Mass.

Oh I don’t know.
My pastor (May God Bless him and give him long life) is not yet forty. He learned the TLM. Why would any priest NOT want to learn it?

In some ways it’s like learning another Eucharistic Prayer.

 

[davy39]

Being a child of the 50’s, my memories of the latin Mass were these. The priest rattled through the latin prayers so fast, that you really had to be a pro to keep up with them. And I was one of the altar servers. Also, the prayers at the foot of the altar at the end of Mass were a joke, because he went so fast. But I do remember the High Mass at Christmas and Easter was very special and beautiful. At High Mass, the choir, which my mother and sisters were members of, always sang the Mass in F. The music was mighty and majestic, and was always very special to me. I can remember some the melody to this day, after 55 years. Later came the Gregorian Chant, which I didn’t like, but that’s another story. But yes, there really wasn’t much opportunity for the priest to change the words of the Mass.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

You know, getting back on topic, the reason I started this thread was to learn from those who are so adamantly opposed to the NO Mass whether or not their devotion to the Tridentine Mass is due to its form, disgust with the way the NO Mass is celebrated or simply out of nostalgia.

I didn’t expect the pre-60’s Tridentine Mass to be perfect, but I’ve never heard anyone ever say anything bad about it, other than folks saying they could never understand it.

One thing I found interesting is that a few folks said that if a priest skipped a part of the Mass, everyone knew it.

My question is: what would the people have done if a priest skipped a part of the Tridentine Mass? Would they have called him on it, or PUT UP WITH IT LIKE MOST EVERYONE DOES NOW??!!

When exactly this happened at the old Mass, we put up with it. As I may have said above Nothing essential was missed - no part of the consecration was left out.​

So the revised Missal is far from being uniquely liable to abuse - priests forget things, they turn over too many pages, all sorts of things can happen.

To read some people, one would almost think that the revised Mass was impossible to offer reverently. That’s a great injustice to the great majority of priests - those who are unfavourably noticed, are noticed because they are unusual: “Priest offers Mass reverently” is not news, & doesn’t attract photographs; “Bishop presides at clown Mass” is news, & does get photographed ##

Part of the reason that the NO Mass is so unappealing to many is because we have put up with priests who find it their personal playground (and bishops looking the other way).

I do think that this will pass eventually, that the pendulum swings both ways, and I find alot of hope in our newly ordained.

I’ve also noticed that alot of people a generation ahead of me, those in their 60’s and 70’s seem to be alot more tolerant of the abuses found in the NO Mass.

On balance, I think I prefer the revised Missal, simply because that is the Missa Normativa of the Latin Rite - & I’m not that old; I’ve been to both, & would rather do what the rest of the Church does. Either way, the Eucharist is the same single Offering made by Christ - take Him away, & all the piety, correctness & rubrics in creation are valueless. The frailties & sins of the priest & people are nothing, if He offers it - that is the really important thing, for His action is what makes our own poor activity valuable; “apart from [Him, we] can do nothing” - this least of all​

 

[Mom_of_5]

I went to Mass every day, sang in the choir and read out of the Missal. English on one side, Latin on the other. We followed along with the priest and as nearly as I can remember, the words did not change from what was in my Missal. If we were ever unhappy with anything in or of the CC, we did not talk about it, we did not rant nor did we ever correct the priests or nuns, telling them as some do now, that they are doing something against the rules or teachings of the Church. (magisterium) We were taught respect for priests, nuns, Bishops and of course we were in awe of the Pope.

Was it better then or now? I can say that I do appreciate some of todays CC over that of the 50’s. But, I also feel a bit of “longing” for the reverence of that time. Just walking into the church gave me a feeling of “holiness” that today’s church does not. As a very young girl, I loved paying visits at the church after school. The church was quiet and I could sit in front of my favorite statue, a beautiful Infant of Prague and try to imagine how the baby Jesus looked at a young age. I could pray and ask Jesus for certain favors. I talked to Jesus for 15 minutes or so, then ran home. I often wonder how many children have that opportunity to know Jesus in the same way I did.

Was the pre 60’s church perfect? Of course not, the CC is made of humans, there will never be a perfect church, just a church full of imperfect people striving for perfection. It was no more perfect than today’s, just different in its imperfections.

Love and peace,
Mom of 5

 

[AJV]

Well the Tridentine Mass was in its nature not very open to error. All the prayers HAD to be said in order for the next prayer to make sense. Skipping any prayers or changing any prayers would create a domino effect and destroy the Mass.

For instance, the confiteor of the priest automatically led to the confiteor of the servers, then the Indulgentium Absolutionem, followed by the Kyrie which naturally preceded the Gloria. The Epistle had to be given in order for the Gospel to follow, directly after the Gospel the priest would give the homily which had to end with the Credo back at the Altar. Only after the Credo could the Canon start because of the symbolic transfer from the Word to the Eucharistic Liturgy, the Canon is like one huge long prayer book and if you skip anything the next lines seem random and out of place. After the consecration everything the priest says is a “que” for the people to get up, kneel, get communion, etc. Then the Ite Missa Est and final Gospel are neccesary because they teach the faithful in a deep and beauituful way to…get their belongings and kids together its time to hit the road.

What, no thanksgiving??? [and Prayers after Low Mass- I know these are not required know, but aren’t they commonly said?]

But I disagree.The (prayers of the priest ascendng to the altar and the) Introit comes in the middle between the Indulgentiam and the Kyrie so one does not exactly lead to the other.

Also with regard to the Canon- though I don’t see why it would matter since it was not said aloud except for “Nobis quoque peccatoribus” -it is actually quite possible because of the rearrangement of the Canon. Not all the parts lead to one another-some do but individually : “Nobis quoque peccatoribus” logically follows “Memento etiam” and “supra quae propitio” logically mfollows “Unde et memores”

One could in fact say much the same thing of the NO building on your post

The Pentiential rite (including the Misereatur), followed by the Kyrie which naturally precedes the Gloria.
The Readings and psalm have to be given in order for the Gospel to follow.

Directly after the Gospel the priest gives the homily which has to end with the Credo

Only after the Credo can the Eucharistic Prayer start because of the symbolic transfer from the Word to the Eucharistic Liturgy.

The Eucharistic Prayer is like one huge long prayer book and if you skip anything the next lines seem random and out of place.

After the consecration The Lord’s prayer is logically followed by its embolism. The prayer for peace follows, building on the petition “da propitius pacem in diebus nostri”. The sign of peace logically follows the prayer, and the “Angus Dei” follows this linking with its last petition “dona nobis pacem” during which the priest fractions the Host and says his precommunion prayers.

The link with this prayer is “Ecce Agnus Dei” followed by the reception of communion by the priest saying his prayers and then the distribution of communion to the faithful. Skipping the ablutions, the Post communion prayer should follow communion, and since the Mass is concluded the priest blesses the faithful and says “Ite Missa est”. The Mass is ended, so those who wish to can go-…get the belongings and kids together since its time to hit the road to put it in your words

.

 

[steve_green_2]

The point isn’t how the Mass was said back in the day. The point is how it is said now. Whether at an SSPX church, an indult Mass or the various wildcat chapels that dot the landscape, it is said with reverence by priests who love it and faithful who appreciate it.

As for “banding together” with NO Catholics…nah. I’ll pass. You guys need to clean up your own house. It’s not my problem and I shouldn’t be expected to clean it up. You made your bed, now lie in it.

But here’s a suggestion, just because I love you in Christ. Tightening up the rubrics won’t matter at all with the NO. You need to eliminate the options. That’s what needs to be done more than anything. As long as you have your plethora of options…well, let’s just say creativity breeds irreverance.

Glad I could help.

very good post, indeed !!!

 

[netmilsmom]

Being a child of the 50’s, my memories of the latin Mass were these. The priest rattled through the latin prayers so fast, that you really had to be a pro to keep up with them.

And today there is post after post about the priest saying the mass in English at break neck speed.

However now it is filled with innovations in some places.

So really, which is better?

 

[Mom_of_5]

And today there is post after post about the priest saying the mass in English at break neck speed.

However now it is filled with innovations in some places.

So really, which is better?

Yes, get in and out as quickly as possible!! That was our mass before and some today as well as confession of yester-year. As I recall, the “fast mass” was more prevelant before the English mass. We are fortunate in our parish, with having marvelous priests not in a big hurry to end the mass. We get our monies worth! (so to speak!)

Love and peace,
mom of 5

 

[az_4_faith]

Yes, get in and out as quickly as possible!! That was our mass before and some today as well as confession of yester-year. As I recall, the “fast mass” was more prevelant before the English mass. We are fortunate in our parish, with having marvelous priests not in a big hurry to end the mass. We get our monies worth! (so to speak!)

Love and peace,
mom of 5

I have the same problem with my family wanting to always attend the “quiet” Sunday morning Mass because it’s the quickest.

Frustrates me to no end.

 

[palmas85]

Yes, get in and out as quickly as possible!! That was our mass before and some today as well as confession of yester-year. As I recall, the “fast mass” was more prevelant before the English mass. We are fortunate in our parish, with having marvelous priests not in a big hurry to end the mass. We get our monies worth! (so to speak!)

Love and peace,
mom of 5

The absolute fastest Masses I have ever been to a weekday Pauline Masses. They seldom go longer than about 15 minutes,