Pictures of the Tridentine Latin Mass/Churches

[Tom444]

Psalm45:9:

Sigh, I feel like such a freak… :crying: When I tell people I like the Tridentine Mass. I mean it’s natural to think that the people my age wouldn’t understand, but neither do the adults. They don’t get how I like all the Latin, the Chants, and the incense.

I can certainly identify with that. When I was young, my mom told me horror stories about how Mass used to be, but in retrospect, she still would have been too young to really understand the Mass while it was still said entirely in Latin. I suppose that growing up in the middle of the liturgical changes (I don’t want to call them reforms) of the 1960s would give one a skewed perspective on the liturgy. On the other hand, the TLM was completely “new” to me when I came back to the Church a year and a half ago. I still have trouble following everything, but it just seems to me that this is how the Mass was supposed to be celebrated.

The funny thing is, I have a few friends who at least have a favorable opinion of the TLM, but my older relatives mostly think I’m nuts for preferring it. I just wish I could go more often. Sadly, I haven’t made it to a Latin Mass (same church as ScottyPGH posted) all semester; getting there and back by bus means that going Mass there takes out a 3 1/2 hour chunk of my Sunday, and I often can’t afford that. Heck, I’d be happy if I could make it there once a month. At least I should be able to go pretty much every week over the summer.

 

[Scotty_PGH]

Psalm45:9:

Sigh, I feel like such a freak… :crying: When I tell people I like the Tridentine Mass. I mean it’s natural to think that the people my age wouldn’t understand, but neither do the adults. They don’t get how I like all the Latin, the Chants, and the incense.

The only way to truly get them to understand is to bring them with you. Whatever you do, don’t feel like a freak. You are blessed to assist in the Mass the way it was celebrated for centuries. It is famously referred to as “the most beautiful thing this side of heaven.”

 

[Elzee]

Kathy - a lot of us will be praying …is there anything else we can do to support you? Send letters to somewhere in Boston where they will get forwarded on to Rome? A special ‘address’ in Vatican City that perhaps is used to denote correspondence in regard to your request?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Lux in Tenebris:

The Tridentine Mass (so called) does not “date” from the 1500’s. It was codified in the 1500’s under Pope St. PiusV. You may read the Apostolic Letter Quo Primum, online. This is the form of Mass that in its essentials goes back to a much earlier time. Possibly to the beginning.

Actually I do not think anyone traces the Tridentine Mass to the beginning, for one thing Latin was not in use in the beginning. The earliest prayers in a Liturgy are in the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom (the Eucharistic Liturgy in use by the Byzantine rite Churches).

What happened with Quo Primum was that Pope St Pius V forced the Liturgy of Rome, the Tridentine Mass, on all of the Latin Church unless the rites could be proved to be of an older date. This is why many religious orders kept their own rites, such as the Franscians and the Carmelites just to name two.

The Tridentine Mass of the time, was known as the Novus Ordo, as it was the New Order of its day. It has since been modified and changed. I am pretty sure that the prayers at the foot of the altar, the Last Gospel, and the pray to St Michael the Archangel were additions to it. So to say that the 1962 Missal is the same one that Pope St Pius V codified is an untruth.

 

[RSiscoe]

ByzCath:

The Tridentine Mass of the time, was known as the Novus Ordo, as it was the New Order of its day. It has since been modified and changed. I am pretty sure that the prayers at the foot of the altar, the Last Gospel, and the pray to St Michael the Archangel were additions to it. So to say that the 1962 Missal is the same one that Pope St Pius V codified is an untruth.

The only addition was the Leonine Prayers which take place after mass, which includes the St. Michael prayer. Everything else was the same.

Cardinal Ratzinger - now Pope Benedict XVI: *“I was dismayed by the prohibition of the old missal, since nothing of the sort had ever happened in the entire history of the liturgy. The impression was even given that what was happening was quite normal. *
**
*”[we had been led to believe that] the previous missal had been created by Pius V in 1570 in connection with the Council of Trent; and so it was quite normal that, after four hundred years and a new council, a new pope would present us with a new missal. But the historical truth of the matter is different. Pius V had simply ordered a reworking of the Missale Romanum then being used, which is the normal thing as history develops over the course of centuries. *

*"Many of his successors had likewise reworked this missal again, but without ever setting one missal against another. It was a continual process of growth and purification in which continuity was never destroyed. There is no such thing as a “Missal of Pius V”, created by Pius V himself. **There is only the reworking done by Pius V as one phase in a long history of growth. The new feature that came to the fore after the Council of Trent was of a different nature [than the Novus Ordo" (Milestones, Cardinal Ratzinger).

 

[Psalm45_9]

I am praying for one of two options: either the decleration of a Tridentine Rite with the Western Church or that priests will have the freedom to decide if they want to celebrate the Novos Ordo or the Tridentine form of Liturgy.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Psalm45:9:

I am praying for one of two options: either the decleration of a Tridentine Rite with the Western Church or that priests will have the freedom to decide if they want to celebrate the Novos Ordo or the Tridentine form of Liturgy.

I wouldn’t hold your breath for either one.

The best that could happen is a personal prelature like Opus Dei has, but then Opus Dei can only enter diocese with the approval of the local bishop.

To have a new “rite” they would either need to set up competing dioceasen structures or allow the bishops to set up TLM parishes like the Anglican Use parishes.

The second case I do not think would happen as it would remove the decision from the bishops. It is their diocese after all, they are the supreme pastor of the diocese, the decision for the TLM is rightfully theirs.

In the Byzantine rite Churches we have three Liturgies for the Eucharist. They are the…

Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom
Divine Liturgy of St Basil the Great
Divine Liturgy of St James

The Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom is our normal liturgy. The Divine Liturgy of St Basil the Great is done on the Sundays during Great Lent and on St Basil the Great’s Feast Day, it is identical to St John Chrysostom’s except for the priest’s prayers. The Divine Liturgy of St James can be done only twice a year (I think) one on his Feast Day and the other day I am unsure of.

But my point with this is that it is proscribed by tradition and in the typicon (liturgical calendar) when each of the Liturgies is used. The priest can not pick and choose.

I do not think that there has ever been a time in the Church were a priest could pick and choose which rite of the Eucharist he would use.

 

[Benedictus]

ByzCath:

The best that could happen is a personal prelature like Opus Dei has, but then Opus Dei can only enter diocese with the approval of the local bishop.

No, the best that could happen is that there would be a personal Apostolic Administration set up for adherents to the traditional Mass, just like the Apostolic Administration of St. John Vianney in Brazil.

To have a new “rite” they would either need to set up competing dioceasen structures or allow the bishops to set up TLM parishes like the Anglican Use parishes.

The second case I do not think would happen as it would remove the decision from the bishops. It is their diocese after all, they are the supreme pastor of the diocese, the decision for the TLM is rightfully theirs.

Well, some nice bishops have set up TLM parishes already.

There are already overlapping jurisdictions. Consider the military archdiocese in the U.S.

But I think that you are right that it is unlikely we’ll see a personal apostolic administration or a similar structure for the TLM unless the S.S.P.X gets their act together and rejoins the Church (which is unlikely to happen until Bishop Williamson dies).

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Benedictus:

No, the best that could happen is that there would be a personal Apostolic Administration set up for adherents to the traditional Mass, just like the Apostolic Administration of St. John Vianney in Brazil.

Yes you are right on that, but again, I wouldn’t hold my breath for that one either.

Well, some nice bishops have set up TLM parishes already.

Yes there are, God bless them too!

This is just like the Anglican Use parishes.

There are already overlapping jurisdictions. Consider the military archdiocese in the U.S.

This is not true really. People in active military service are under the jurisdiction of the military archdiocese not the local dioceses. No civilian is under the military archdioceses jurisdiction, so in essence while the geographical territory might overlap the actual populations they cover do not.

But I think that you are right that it is unlikely we’ll see a personal apostolic administration or a similar structure for the TLM unless the S.S.P.X gets their act together and rejoins the Church (which is unlikely to happen until Bishop Williamson dies).

Why would this rely on the SSPX reuniting? The Church already has orders such as the SSPX, the FSSP and the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest.

Why would the Church “spit in the face” (so to speak) of these faithful religious orders and set up the SSPX in such a way?

 

[Benedictus]

ByzCath:

Why would this rely on the SSPX reuniting? The Church already has orders such as the SSPX, the FSSP and the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest.

Why would the Church “spit in the face” (so to speak) of these faithful religious orders and set up the SSPX in such a way?

It’s been widely rumored (perhaps even confirmed) that the S.S.P.X was offered an apostolic administration (or some equivalent structure), as was the Society of St. John Vianney. Why faithful Catholics attached to the T.L.M. haven’t been offered such a sturcture? I don’t know. It’s possible that it would upset too many bishops.

It’s also possible that the F.S.S.P. hasn’t asked for or doesn’t want such a structure. The other T.L.M. groups are fairly small in comparison or limited in scope.

I really don’t know what the best solution is. I really hope something is done to make the traditional Mass and sacraments available to more people.

 

[Podo2004]

He’s facing CHRIST!! Leading his people to CHRIST! (that’s the tabernacle he’s facing in that photo) , front and center, in every Catholic church for centuries (up until the demolition after Vatican II).

“Facing the people” is turning his back on Christ - and making the priest and the people the center of attention, a social hall “Let’s chat” (Protestant theology). The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is US worshipping HIM, not eachother. The Priest, as in the worship in the temple, is the one privileged (sanctified) to stand on “holy ground” (the sanctuary), therefore, the altar rail. A VISIBLE SIGN that we are not the “high priest” who is privileged to enter the “Holy of Holies”. Only the priest can utter the words of consecration and bring God down to us from heaven!

Michael Cumbie, from St. Joseph Communications , Covina, CA has some wonderful tapes about the significance of the Tridentine Mass as compared to temple worship, the Faith of our Fathers.
Every act, every motion, every item is MOST significant.

www.saintjoe.com

Blessings,
Angel

You really don’t know a thing do you? CHRIST IS EVERYWHERE!!! NOT JUST IN THE TABERNACLE! So facing the people means he’s giving us the word and Jesus practically! There is no need to face the tabernacle. Have you guys ever thought that God wanted Vatican II instead of leaning to your preferences? I mean if he opposed it, then it wouldn’t be there now would it. And by proclaiming the word (which if you look in the bible, his apostles never had their backs talking to the people) Jesus becomes much more alive in the mass compared to the old mass. And it’s not a chat session because people should listen to the word(means be quiet in prayer and refection unless required to respond to the priest), , sing when needed and prepare themselves for recieving Jesus at the eucharist. Protestants chat as you say, we don’t(even in the Novus ordo, the only ones that talk are the ones who don’t listen or aren’t educated)
Podo

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Benedictus:

It’s been widely rumored (perhaps even confirmed) that the S.S.P.X was offered an apostolic administration (or some equivalent structure), as was the Society of St. John Vianney. Why faithful Catholics attached to the T.L.M. haven’t been offered such a sturcture? I don’t know. It’s possible that it would upset too many bishops.

It’s also possible that the F.S.S.P. hasn’t asked for or doesn’t want such a structure. The other T.L.M. groups are fairly small in comparison or limited in scope.

I really don’t know what the best solution is. I really hope something is done to make the traditional Mass and sacraments available to more people.

I have heard of these “rumors” but I do not buy into them.

For a couple of years now it has been “rumored” that the Vatican is going to allow priests the choice of which Mass they want to say.

I just don’t listen to “rumors”. I wait for the Truth.

 

[tom.wineman]

Podo2004:

That mass is scary…(AHH!!)
I still don’t see the use of the priest talking to the wall instead of the people and the fact that the altar is facing the wrong way…
Podo
(my opinion)

Could be he is talking to God and leading the people.
A good shepherd always walks ahead of the sheep
and they follow. As Jesus mentioned a few times
" Follow Me ".

In days gone by the priest faced east towards the holy land where Jesus died and rose and will come again. Most churches were built to accommodate that tradition.

 

[Subrosa]

Podo2004:

You really don’t know a thing do you? CHRIST IS EVERYWHERE!!! NOT JUST IN THE TABERNACLE! So facing the people means he’s giving us the word and Jesus practically! There is no need to face the tabernacle. Have you guys ever thought that God wanted Vatican II instead of leaning to your preferences? I mean if he opposed it, then it wouldn’t be there now would it. And by proclaiming the word (which if you look in the bible, his apostles never had their backs talking to the people) Jesus becomes much more alive in the mass compared to the old mass. And it’s not a chat session because people should listen to the word(means be quiet in prayer and refection unless required to respond to the priest), , sing when needed and prepare themselves for recieving Jesus at the eucharist. Protestants chat as you say, we don’t(even in the Novus ordo, the only ones that talk are the ones who don’t listen or aren’t educated)
Podo

Actually, the ancient tradition was for everyone to face east, the direction of Jerusalem, where Jesus manifested and lived. Facing Jerusalem was meant to indicate a “movement toward God.”

This tradition was lost long ago in the west, but the eastern churches still do it.

Here’s an article by the new Pope, then Cardinal Ratzinger:
ratzinger.it/miscellanea/direzione_altare.htm

Ave Maria,
Subrosa

 

[Swiss_Guard]

Podo2004:

You really don’t know a thing do you? CHRIST IS EVERYWHERE!!! NOT JUST IN THE TABERNACLE! So facing the people means he’s giving us the word and Jesus practically! There is no need to face the tabernacle. Have you guys ever thought that God wanted Vatican II instead of leaning to your preferences? I mean if he opposed it, then it wouldn’t be there now would it. And by proclaiming the word (which if you look in the bible, his apostles never had their backs talking to the people) Jesus becomes much more alive in the mass compared to the old mass. And it’s not a chat session because people should listen to the word(means be quiet in prayer and refection unless required to respond to the priest), , sing when needed and prepare themselves for recieving Jesus at the eucharist. Protestants chat as you say, we don’t(even in the Novus ordo, the only ones that talk are the ones who don’t listen or aren’t educated)
Podo

You really need basic catechesis about the Holy Eucharist. True, Christ is everywhere, but he is especially present in the Eucharist as Pope Paul VI wrote in his encyclical Mysterium Fidei.

---

39. This presence is called “real” not to exclude the idea that the others are “real” too, but rather to indicate presence par excellence, because it is substantial and through it Christ becomes present whole and entire, God and man.

(41) And so it would be wrong for anyone to try to explain this manner of presence by dreaming up a so-called “pneumatic” nature of the glorious body of Christ that would be present everywhere; or for anyone to limit it to symbolism, as if this most sacred Sacrament were to consist in nothing more than an efficacious sign “of the spiritual presence of Christ and of His intimate union with the faithful, the members of His Mystical Body.” (42) (emphais mine)

---

(41) Cf. Council of Trent, Decree on the Holy Eucharist, c. 3.
(42) Pius XII, Encyclical letter Humani generis; AAS XLII (1950), 578.
vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_03091965_mysterium_en.html

The Holy Eucharist is the central mystery of our faith. It is a serious error to diminsh as just another way of Christ being present. This is not personal opinion, it is the teaching of Holy Mother Church as stated by Pope Paul VI.

---

You also err in your assessment of the Mass of Paul VI compared to the Tridentine Mass. It is incorrect to say something wouldn’t have happened if God didn’t want it to happen. God doesn’t want sin to happen but He allows it in His providence. I’m not saying God didn’t want Vatican II to happen, but you can’t claim since Vatican II happened God wanted it. Using this logic, God wanted priests to abuse teenage boys because it wouldn’t have happened if He didn’t want it to happen.

---

You also claim the Mass of Paul VI is superior because the word of God is proclaimed. The word of God is also proclaimed in the Tridentine Mass. The priest reads the epistle and Gospel in English before the sermon. Christ is just as alive in the Tridentine Mass as He is in the Mass of Paul VI.

---

As for the Apostles facing the people, how do you know which way they faced when offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass? This is mere speculation on your part.

---

While you are correct about the Mass of Paul VI not being a chat session, you do a disservice to the Tridentine Mass by brushing it off as an archaic relic of the past. Both Masses are the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary and should be spoken of with reverence.

---

Please get more catechesis about the Holy Eucharist and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass before you make such erroneous claims.

 

[Genesis315]

Podo2004:

You really don’t know a thing do you? CHRIST IS EVERYWHERE!!! NOT JUST IN THE TABERNACLE! So facing the people means he’s giving us the word and Jesus practically! There is no need to face the tabernacle. Have you guys ever thought that God wanted Vatican II instead of leaning to your preferences? I mean if he opposed it, then it wouldn’t be there now would it.

Correct me if I’m worng, but nowhere does any Vatican II document talk about turning the priest around. It may even still be an option in the new GIRM, but I’m not sure.

 

[MaryRose35]

Podo2004:

You really don’t know a thing do you? CHRIST IS EVERYWHERE!!! NOT JUST IN THE TABERNACLE! So facing the people means he’s giving us the word and Jesus practically! There is no need to face the tabernacle. Have you guys ever thought that God wanted Vatican II instead of leaning to your preferences? I mean if he opposed it, then it wouldn’t be there now would it. And by proclaiming the word (which if you look in the bible, his apostles never had their backs talking to the people) Jesus becomes much more alive in the mass compared to the old mass. And it’s not a chat session because people should listen to the word(means be quiet in prayer and refection unless required to respond to the priest), , sing when needed and prepare themselves for recieving Jesus at the eucharist. Protestants chat as you say, we don’t(even in the Novus ordo, the only ones that talk are the ones who don’t listen or aren’t educated)
Podo

Podo,

Your posts have been particularly obnoxious and immature. They come across much like the words of a smart mouthed teenager. This made me check out your profile. Just as I suspected, you are a smart mouthed teenager playing on the internet who has no idea about anything with regards to Church history, tradition, or the problems facing the Church.

 

[dumspirospero]

Im right there with you my friend…I always hear…“but you weren’t even born into the TLM…you don’t really know what it was like to be a Catholic back in those days, etc…”…you know what, yes I do…I know what it is like to be a traditional orthodox Catholic…and my true love is the TLM…most of these people that tell me this kind of stuff are the heterodox Catholics who think I am way, way to conservative because of my views on birth control, women’s ordination, same-sex marriage, etc…so I just brush it off and find great relief in my personal views and convitctions. I really should have been born in the 30’s or 40’s…I am so old fashioned LOL
Psalm45:9:

Sigh, I feel like such a freak… :crying: When I tell people I like the Tridentine Mass. I mean it’s natural to think that the people my age wouldn’t understand, but neither do the adults. They don’t get how I like all the Latin, the Chants, and the incense.

 

[Sean_O_L]

Angels Wathcin wrote:

“Facing the people” is turning his back on Christ - and making the priest and the people the center of attention, a social hall

That, of course, is an opinion.

On the other hand, a priest is always an “Alter Christus”, who, when facing the people, is facing the same way as Christ.

Not only that, but when Christ said: “Do this (or “these things”) in commemoration of Me” He was NOT positioned with His back to the Apostles, was He?

Moreover, they all were recling in couches.

Hmmmmmmm !

Now, I am NOT advocating those “things” - but, if the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit in matters of vital importance (Faith and morals - which includes the sacrament of the Eucharist) mandates a liturgy - then, I think, that there is a matter of obedience involved.

 

[Sean_O_L]

ByzCath wrote:

The Tridentine Mass of the time, was known as the Novus Ordo, as it was the New Order of its day. It has since been modified and changed. I am pretty sure that the prayers at the foot of the altar, the Last Gospel, and the pray to St Michael the Archangel were additions to it. So to say that the 1962 Missal is the same one that Pope St Pius V codified is an untruth.

And this is nicely backed-up by one of Catholic Answers posters, Keith Kenney of “Sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam” in his file

In Perpetuity?

Changes to the Roman Missal brought about by Cum Sanctissimum (1604 Clement VIII)

1570 Roman Missal: Rubric directing the celebrant upon entering the church to kneel and recite a verse from Ps. 65: Introibo in domum tuam; in holocaustis reddam tibi vota mea, quae distinxerunt labia mea, before reciting the further antiphon, Ne reminiscaris, and the five psalms in preparation for Mass.

1604 Roman Missal: First antiphon suppressed (omitted).

1570 Roman Missal: The prayer of St. Ambrose, Summe Sacerdos, is not divided into parts.

1604 Roman Missal: The Summe Sacerdos is divided into sections for various days of the week.

1570 Roman Missal: The general rubrics are not numbered. Within the general rubrics there is no mention of ringing a bell, incense or torchbearers.

1604 Roman Missal: The general rubrics are numbered. Ringing a bell, incense and torchbearers are included in the rubrics along with additions such as RG XX describing the preparation required for the altar.

1570 Roman Missal: After the Confiteor the words “all sins” appear in the absolution rite. (Misereatur…omnibus peccatis; Indulgentiam …omnium peccatorum)

1604 Roman Missal: The words “all sins” do not appear in Clement VIII’s Missal.

1570 Roman Missal: At High Mass the verse Dirigatur Domine … is to be said by the celebrant while he incenses the altar before saying the Introit and again when the altar is incensed during the Offertory.

1604 Roman Missal: This rubric is suppressed in the Missal of Clement VIII.

1570 Roman Missal: The Kings name is mentioned in the Canon.

1604 Roman Missal: This rubric suppressed.

1570 Roman Missal: The words “As often as you do these things…,” (Haec quotiescumque) are said while the celebrant elevates the chalice.

1604 Roman Missal: The rubrics order the above words to be said after the elevation instead of during.

1570 Roman Missal: At the end of High Mass, the celebrant is directed to impart three blessings not one: one at the epistle corner, one in the center, and one at the gospel corner of the altar. (“In missa solemnia… ter benedicat populo, primo a cornu Epistolae dicens, Pater, secundo ante medium altaris dicens, Et Filius, tertio a cornu Evangelii dicens, Et Spiritus Sanctus…”)

1604 Roman Missal: This rubric suppressed and triple blessings reserved for prelates.