Masses on Side Altars-EF

[HCC]

Hi Everyone,

I love entering a church or chapel with lots of side altars. Typically the sacred art surrounding the altar and just the altar itself, as a representation of Christ, is very uplifting.

Older people have described to me the days when the churches were full, confession lines packed and 15-20 masses going on at the same time. One woman said it was like a little taste of heaven and each time the people heard bells ringing from different altars, they would bow their heads, knowing a host had become the body and blood of our Lord.

Are simultaneous masses permitted at side altars now in the EF?

 

[callmeChris]

Wait a minuet… ‘back in the day’ more than one mass was being said in the SAME church at the SAME Time?

 

[HCC]

From Trent (and possibly before) to Vatican II, concelebration only occurred in the Latin Rite at an ordination.

How beautiful would that be to be in a church where many masses were going on at the same time? I say, very beautiful.

Is this custom still permitted under the Extraordinary Form today?

 

[MarkThompson]

Wait a minuet… ‘back in the day’ more than one mass was being said in the SAME church at the SAME Time?

Of course! People would mill around, shifting their attention from one Mass to the next when something interesting like the Consecration was going on.

 

[HCC]

Of course! People would mill around, shifting their attention from one Mass to the next when something interesting like the Consecration was going on.

Never heard anything about “milling around.” My understanding is, some were private masses being said at side altars and the congregation would be participating in the Mass at the high altar. Others were masses where people could participate at individual masses at various altars, all going on simultaneously, but each was participating in ONE MASS, not several. However, I’ve been told, when they heard the bells ring for consecration, there was generally a sign of reverence throughout the church.

 

[tbtcom1213]

My friends (two adult altar servers) who I serve the EF Mass with at church had enjoyed serving Masses at the Vatican while on vacation in Rome. Priests who worked in Rome or were visiting allowed my friends to serve their EF Masses said at the various side altars in Saint Peter’s Basilica. The only time bells may be used at side altar Masses is if there is no Mass being said at the high altar.

 

[MarkThompson]

Never heard anything about “milling around.” My understanding is, some were private masses being said at side altars and the congregation would be participating in the Mass at the high altar. Others were masses where people could participate at individual masses at various altars, all going on simultaneously, but each was participating in ONE MASS, not several. However, I’ve been told, when they heard the bells ring for consecration, there was generally a sign of reverence throughout the church.

That’s the way I’ve heard it, especially in the days of rood screens and no pews. By the way, here’s an example of synchronized Masses said simultaneously by 21 bishops. To me it looks horrible rather than beautiful, which is, I guess, why the Vatican banned the practice six years later.

 

[VetA]

Wait a minuet… ‘back in the day’ more than one mass was being said in the SAME church at the SAME Time?

as to what op said, idk, but there was a church i attended in massachucetts they had a ‘main’ church and then they had a basment with a smaller chaple, and they said back when the TLM was the only Mass they said they both would routeenly overfill.

 

[Angel_Bradford]

Hi Everyone,

I love entering a church or chapel with lots of side altars. Typically the sacred art surrounding the altar and just the altar itself, as a representation of Christ, is very uplifting.

Older people have described to me the days when the churches were full, confession lines packed and 15-20 masses going on at the same time. One woman said it was like a little taste of heaven and each time the people heard bells ringing from different altars, they would bow their heads, knowing a host had become the body and blood of our Lord.

Are simultaneous masses permitted at side altars now in the EF?

I don’t whether they were EF or OF, but I saw Mases being said on side altars in St. Peter’s…

 

[VetA]

That’s the way I’ve heard it, especially in the days of rood screens and no pews. By the way, here’s an example of synchronized Masses said simultaneously by 21 bishops. To me it looks horrible rather than beautiful, which is, I guess, why the Vatican banned the practice six years later.

what is a rood screen? and it doesnt look like it was a good idea, but i think they had good intentions

 

[malphono]

Never heard anything about “milling around.”

Nor have I. For that matter, I never saw anyone do that, either.

My understanding is, some were private masses being said at side altars and the congregation would be participating in the Mass at the high altar.

That’s pretty much it, but in general the majority were so-called “private” Masses which would normally began after (and end before) the Mass on the main altar.

Others were masses where people could participate at individual masses at various altars, all going on simultaneously, but each was participating in ONE MASS, not several.

Public Masses at side altars (or in side chapels) were always quite rare when Mass was in progress on the main altar. Such would usually be scheduled at an “off-hour” (as they are today) to avoid conflict.

However, I’ve been told, when they heard the bells ring for consecration, there was generally a sign of reverence throughout the church.

As another poster already mentioned, I don’t believe bells were used at “private” Masses offered when Mass was in progress on the main altar.

 

[Milesius]

Wait a minuet… ‘back in the day’ more than one mass was being said in the SAME church at the SAME Time?

At the Norman 11th Century Cathedral where I live there are at least 11 altars, 9 of them side by side and monks would say mas at these 9 altars at the same time.

 

[CDNowak]

what is a rood screen? and it doesnt look like it was a good idea, but i think they had good intentions

A Rood Screen is roughly the western equivalent of the Iconostasis.

 

[Aramis]

Wait a minuet… ‘back in the day’ more than one mass was being said in the SAME church at the SAME Time?

Yes. In a typical cruciform church, you’d have 3-7 altars…

      _____
     /  H  \
     |  A  |
+----+     +----+
|1             2|
+----+     +----+
     |     |
     |3   4|
     |5   6|
     |     |
     +-+ +-+

H would be the High Altar.
A was not always present, but if present, it was used for mass, and the High Altar usually was the altar of repose. A would be a freestanding altar below and in front of the high altar. One could not celebrate a mass on the main altar and the high altar simultaneously… but all the side altars could.

1 & 2 were extremely common locations for secondary altars.
3-6 are typical locations for additional secondary altars.

One cathedral once had 22 altars… and 21 could be holding simultaneous masses!

Note that multiple simultaneous masses in a single edifice is one of the abuses that V II called for an end to.

 

[MarkThompson]

what is a rood screen? and it doesnt look like it was a good idea, but i think they had good intentions

As CDNowak said, a rood screen blocked the sanctuary off from the people. (One theory of the later development of the communion rail is that it is a shorter version of the rood screen.) The result would be Masses that the congregation for the most part could neither hear nor see, so you can understand why it was especially important to have sacred art, side altars, and stained glass around as well as private devotions that people could actually engage in.

And obviously you’re right that these things were done with the best of intentions, but fortunately in modern times we have a clearer understanding of the value of full and active participation in the individual Mass.

 

[HCC]

That’s the way I’ve heard it, especially in the days of rood screens and no pews. By the way, here’s an example of synchronized Masses said simultaneously by 21 bishops. To me it looks horrible rather than beautiful, which is, I guess, why the Vatican banned the practice six years later.

Yes, but it’s also outside, in an unstructured environment, which, I agree, looks weird.

 

[HCC]

Yes. In a typical cruciform church, you’d have 3-7 altars…

      _____
     /  H  \
     |  A  |
+----+     +----+
|1             2|
+----+     +----+
     |     |
     |3   4|
     |5   6|
     |     |
     +-+ +-+

H would be the High Altar.
A was not always present, but if present, it was used for mass, and the High Altar usually was the altar of repose. A would be a freestanding altar below and in front of the high altar. One could not celebrate a mass on the main altar and the high altar simultaneously… but all the side altars could.

1 & 2 were extremely common locations for secondary altars.
3-6 are typical locations for additional secondary altars.

One cathedral once had 22 altars… and 21 could be holding simultaneous masses!

Note that multiple simultaneous masses in a single edifice is one of the abuses that V II called for an end to.

“Abuses?” Can you elaborate? So, this was something that “crept” in and was not allowable previously? Just developed over time?

This is all great information, please continue-I’m fascinated. Photos would be nice too. Thanks!

 

[giuseppeTO]

It is still a common practice. The Masses on the side altars are private altars said by priests and usually a server sotto voce. No bells are typically used unless the side altar is in a proper chapel.

I was just at St. Peters in Rome and at 7:30AM one morning, I counted 16 Masses being offered on side altars. Twelve were in the EF and four in the OF. There was, simultaneously, a Mass being offered in the OF by the Cardinal Secretary of State.

The Mass I attended (and served at) was a Mass in EF in the Clementine Chapel. We used bells since we were in a proper chapel.

 

[Famule]

That’s the way I’ve heard it, especially in the days of rood screens and no pews. By the way, here’s an example of synchronized Masses said simultaneously by 21 bishops. To me it looks horrible rather than beautiful, which is, I guess, why the Vatican banned the practice six years later.

Your previous post in this thread shows that you have never attended such a Mass. At a monastery, all of the monks that are priest say their own Low Mass early in the morning. Laity are able to attend their own Mass at a side altar or the Mass at the high altar. High Mass follows later in the morning. This would also be the case for other small groups of priests assigned to churches around the world. It is not horrible, but very beautiful.

As for your later post in this thread, I find it sad that people have such a misunderstanding of active participation that they feel like they have to be moving their lips and hands to be participating in the Mass. There is such a lack of understanding of the spiritual today.

 

[MarkThompson]

Your previous post in this thread shows that you have never attended such a Mass.

What you mean is, “It sounds like you have never attended such -]a/-] Masses. Do I presume correctly?”

Why indeed you do, thanks for asking.

As for your later post in this thread, I find it sad that people have such a misunderstanding of active participation that they feel like they have to be moving their lips and hands to be participating in the Mass. There is such a lack of understanding of the spiritual today.

There’s also a lack of understanding of what I said, unfortunately. I intended “active participation” in precisely the way our Holy Father has explained it. As far as I’m concerned, when you can neither see nor hear a Mass, it is pretty much impossible to actively participate. Apparently everyone else agreed, so they tore down rood screens and people were allowed to see what was going on. I’ve don’t think I’ve ever heard a TLM aficionado say, “I love not being able to hear it. Now think, if only they would hide it from my view and have several others going on at roughly the same time! Then I could really join myself to the liturgical action and pray the Mass, as Pius X and other popes have urged!”

Not to be too sarcastic here; my point is that we really have improved our understanding of what the laity’s role in the Mass is and what kind of participation is appropriate. I don’t mean which parts should people get to say; I mean which parts should people get to pray.