Before the Council of Trent, how was the Mass celebrated?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BVMFatima
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BVMFatima

Guest
How was the Roman Catholic mass celebrated before the Extraordinary form?
 
In a similar way. The Council of Trent did not usher in a brand new Mass. Before Trent many dioceses and religious orders had their own Mass. What happened at Trent was that the Council decreed that if a diocese or religious order’s rite had not been in continuous use for the passed 200 years it was abolished. A result of the Council of Trent was that the rite used in Rome, the Roman Rite, became the standard rite used throughout the Latin Catholic Church. There are still a number of other rites in the Latin Catholic Church but the Roman Rite is the most widely used one.
 
Matthew_Holford said:
In a similar way. The Council of Trent did not usher in a brand new Mass. Before Trent many dioceses and religious orders had their own Mass. What happened at Trent was that the Council decreed that if a diocese or religious order’s rite had not been in continuous use for the passed 200 years it was abolished. A result of the Council of Trent was that the rite used in Rome, the Roman Rite, became the standard rite used throughout the Latin Catholic Church. There are still a number of other rites in the Latin Catholic Church but the Roman Rite is the most widely used one.
Click to expand...
Ofcorse, the Roman Church also uses the Ambrosian, Mozarabic, Carmalite etc.
 
BVMFatima said:
Ofcorse, the Roman Church also uses the Ambrosian, Mozarabic, Carmalite etc.
Click to expand...
I think it would be better to say the Latin Catholic Church rather than the Roman. The former is the technically correct name for the western Catholic Church. Of course, it is often called the Roman Catholic Church. If, though, we are talking about the Church’s various rites it might be less confusing if the term “Roman Church” was confined to referring to the Church in the Diocese of Rome.
 
Matthew_Holford said:
I think it would be better to say the Latin Catholic Church rather than the Roman. The former is the technically correct name for the western Catholic Church. Of course, it is often called the Roman Catholic Church. If, though, we are talking about the Church’s various rites it might be less confusing if the term “Roman Church” was confined to referring to t.he Church in the Diocese of Rome.
Click to expand...
I disagree and here’s why.
  1. The early Churches were named after there city, and the Church Peter established in Rome is the Roman church, Catholics of the Roman Church belong to the Diocese of Rome.
Sure the term " Roman Catholic " has been misused from Protestants and still is, however the Western Church has and always was called Roman, Latin can also be confusing because it can mean the Latin Mass correct?

Peter and paul preached to the Romans, not the Latins. Latin was a term used a little later because the Roman Church uses the Latin Language.

People say the term Roman Catholic is insulting, but the term Latin was also insulting when Greeks and Latins did not get along which is one reason why the Schism happend, but that’s another story.
 
The Roman Rite was (and is) used as a ‘standerd’ for the Latin (Western) Rites because it was the Rite used in Rome and therefor more ‘cerrect’ then the other Latin (Western) Rites. :gopray::nun1:
 
The Mass was relatively consistent in celebration from place to place, but there were obvious differences. The Council of Trent standardized, as others have said. On one hand, this was good, as it preemptively (or not so preemptively, maybe) stopped Protestantization. However, I sometimes wonder if this stomped out some venerable local customs and uses. On the whole, I think it was a good idea, however.
 
BVMFatima said:
I disagree and here’s why.
  1. The early Churches were named after there city, and the Church Peter established in Rome is the Roman church, Catholics of the Roman Church belong to the Diocese of Rome.
Sure the term " Roman Catholic " has been misused from Protestants and still is, however the Western Church has and always was called Roman, Latin can also be confusing because it can mean the Latin Mass correct?

Peter and paul preached to the Romans, not the Latins. Latin was a term used a little later because the Roman Church uses the Latin Language.

People say the term Roman Catholic is insulting, but the term Latin was also insulting when Greeks and Latins did not get along which is one reason why the Schism happend, but that’s another story.
Click to expand...
The term “Roman” is often used perjoratively by non-Catholics. Therefore, I avoid the term “Roman Catholic”. Another reason why I avoid this term is because I do not belong to the Church of Rome. That is limited to the territory of the Apostolic See of Rome under its pastor, the Bishop of Rome. I think you will also find that the Latin Catholic Church is the official name by which the western Catholic Church often refers to Herself (cf. Can. 1).
 
Matthew_Holford said:
The term “Roman” is often used perjoratively by non-Catholics. Therefore, I avoid the term “Roman Catholic”. Another reason why I avoid this term is because I do not belong to the Church of Rome. That is limited to the territory of the Apostolic See of Rome under its pastor, the Bishop of Rome. I think you will also find that the Latin Catholic Church is the official name by which the western Catholic Church often refers to Herself (cf. Can. 1).
Click to expand...
If you perfer this term shure, but the Early Church didn’t use it. I explained the history of the term but I guess you don’t agree with history.
 
BVMFatima said:
but I guess you don’t agree with history.
Click to expand...
That’s a little harsh conclusion. But either way, I think we can agree that the difference between “Roman Catholic” and “Latin Catholic” is purely a matter of semantics. Nothing more, nothing less. There’s no theological reason to prefer one or the other.
 
The_Scott said:
That’s a little harsh cionclusion. But either way, I think we can agree that the difference between “Roman Catholic” and “Latin Catholic” is purely a matter of semantics. Nothing more, nothing less. There’s no theological reason to prefer one or the other.
Click to expand...
I didn’t know I was being harsh, if so I apologize, I’m just expressing why I use the term and why the Church does also. Sure the Church uses the term Latin rite or Latin Church, that is because after the Protestant reformation, the term Roman was misunderstood to mean all the Churches in communion with Rome, that’s why the Church uses the term Latin Rite to express the fact that the Roman Church is a Latin Church that celebrates the Latin Rites.
 
The_Scott said:
That’s a little harsh cionclusion. But either way, I think we can agree that the difference between “Roman Catholic” and “Latin Catholic” is purely a matter of semantics. Nothing more, nothing less. There’s no theological reason to prefer one or the other.
Click to expand...
I didn’t know I was being harsh, if so I apologize, I’m just expressing why I use the term and why the Church does also. Sure the Church uses the term Latin rite or Latin Church, that is because after the Protestant reformation, the term Roman was misunderstood to mean all the Churches in communion with Rome, that’s why the Church uses the term Latin Rite to express the fact that the Roman Church is a Latin Church that celebrates the Latin Rites.
 
BVMFatima said:
If you perfer this term shure, but the Early Church didn’t use it. I explained the history of the term but I guess you don’t agree with history.
Click to expand...
I would be most obliged if you could direct me to the post where you explained the history. You made a rather disjointed post where you began numbering points with #1 but did not continue the numbering. The point you raised was that Roman Catholics belong to the Diocese of Rome. A point I seem to remember making, too. I cannot find where you explained how the adjective Roman applied to the Catholics of the Diocese of Rome was expanded to include the entire occidental Catholic Church.
 
tabycat said:
The Roman Rite was (and is) used as a ‘standerd’ for the Latin (Western) Rites because it was the Rite used in Rome and therefor more ‘cerrect’ then the other Latin (Western) Rites. :gopray::nun1:
Click to expand...
Can you please explain on what basis you make the claim that the Rite of the Diocese of Rome is more correct than that of other Latin Catholic dioceses or religious orders?
 
Matthew_Holford said:
I would be most obliged if you could direct me to the post where you explained the history. You made a rather disjointed post where you began numbering points with #1 but did not continue the numbering. The point you raised was that Roman Catholics belong to the Diocese of Rome. A point I seem to remember making, too. I cannot find where you explained how the adjective Roman applied to the Catholics of the Diocese of Rome was expanded to include the entire occidental Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
I am not going to debate you on something that is off topic because its against forum rules, but Catholics of the Western Church belong to the Church of the Roman Pontiff who is our patriarch correct?
 
BVMFatima said:
I am not going to debate you on something that is off topic because its against forum rules
Click to expand...
IIRC the debate was started by you saying that I used the incorrect name for the western Catholic Church. I am more than happy to observe forum rules and desist from further debate on this issue.
BVMFatima said:
but Catholics of the Western Church belong to the Church of the Roman Pontiff who is our patriarch correct?
Click to expand...
“I am not going to debate you on something that is off topic” presumably only applies after you have had the last word?
 
I never said it was incorrect, i just expressed why I do not use the term " Latin Catholic "
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top