Please explain differences in Masses

  • Thread starter Thread starter HistoryTeacher
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
bear06:
In the spirit of unity I’ve got to say I’m not quite sure what you’re saying either. I’m betting you might be a mother/father of very young children who aren’t sleeping through the night. Oh yeah, that’s my excuse! 😉
Click to expand...
Bear06…I think you were addressing this comment to Podo?

If you were, his “excuse” is that he is 13 years old…

he is also my nephew.

Please keep his age in mind when responding to his posts. You all need to set an example of how to respond charitably (not directed at you bear06) and how to defend a position without attacking the other person.

He is an incredibly bright and faithful young man… but he still has much to learn. But so do the rest of us.

Malia
 
Feanaro's Wife:
Bear06…I think you were addressing this comment to Podo?

If you were, his “excuse” is that he is 13 years old…

he is also my nephew.

Please keep his age in mind when responding to his posts. You all need to set an example of how to respond charitably (not directed at you bear06) and how to defend a position without attacking the other person.

He is an incredibly bright and faithful young man… but he still has much to learn. But so do the rest of us.

Malia
Click to expand...
I did not realize his age. If I have said anything offensive then I apologize and ask forgiveness.:gopray:
 
40.png
jimmy:
I did not realize his age. If I have said anything offensive then I apologize and ask forgiveness.:gopray:
Click to expand...
Thanks for that Jimmy…

that was very kind of you:)

I just wanted to remind everyone that we have all kinds of members on this forum… and while there are some who deliberately try to start arguments and push people’s buttons, there are others who are legitimately seeking answers but may not ask the questions or defend their positions in a clear way… they need our guidance, charity, and benefit of the doubt… not hostility.

Malia
 
CatholicCrusade said:
::comes in without reading through the thread::

The Traditional Latin Mass is to last “in perpetuity” (Quo Primum). No Priest needs an indult to say the Mass of All Times

::walks out quietly::
Click to expand...

*Quo Primum Tempore *hardly establishes any such thing the canonical limitations and historical reality of the development of the Roman Missal belies such a fallacious interpretation.

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.

Source: Paul Cavendish, in an article for Altar No. 1, 1994 “The Tridentine Mass”. Cites Missale Romanum, Paris, 1572, British Library Catalogue 1475.bb. 15; Pontificale Romanum, Venice, 1572, British Library Catalogue C132.h.50.
 
Also of note is the suppression by the 1570 Roman Missal of a proper Mass entitled the “Immaculate Conception” for December 8th. Most pre-Trent missals have this Mass formula and give the introit Egredimini and the same collect as in the Mass proper Pius IX was to authorize three centuries later. In Pius V’s missal no mention of “immaculate” appears and in most of the early editions of the missal a proper is not even printed on December 8th for Our Lady’s Conception instead a rubric directs the celebrant to use the formulary given for the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin on September 8th and change the word “nativity” to “conception” in the collect. (Missale Romanum, Venice, 1481, British Library Catalogue IA19880; Missale Romanum, 1572, loc. cit).

Pope St. Pius V’s missal lasted only 34 years in it’s entirety before revision. Clement VIII’s missal lasted only 30 years after that. There doesn’t seem to be substantial differences in Urban’s missal, mainly a re-wording of the rubrics for clarity and a change in the calendar. Of course this missal was again modified by Benedict XV, which incorporated the changes of Pius X revision’s to the calendar and rubrics (e.g. the color of vestments within octaves, the number of Masses to be sung in Cathedral and Collegiate Churches when a feast and major feria coincided, rules regarding the choice of preface, and the choice of Mass formulary in Lent et al.) The major change brought about by this revision is the familiar green vestments on Sunday. Before this revision when Sunday’s and feasts coincided, the Sunday was commemorated in the festal Mass the color of the vestments therefore being red or white.

Pretty much the same development occured with the Breviary. The Bull establishing the Tridentine Breviary Quod a nobis called down the same wrath of the Apostles Peter and Paul upon any who dared to omitt, add, or change the Breviary of Trent in any manner whatsoever. On that score alone, the argument used for the ‘perpetuity’ of Quo Primum Tempore would cause us to reject the development to the Breviary in the same manner that the some use Quo Primum Tempore to reject the later revisions to the Roman Missal. Clearly we don’t reject the Clement VIII, Urban VIII, Pius X/Benedict XV, Pius XII (except some fringe sedevacanist groups) or the John XXIII (again some sedevacanists do) revisions to the Roman Missal. Since we accept the revisions of the Breviary and Missal up to this point, it’s simply arbitrary to not accept those revisions brought about by the pontificates of Paul VI and John Paul II. Indeed, Quo Primum Tempore simply does not and cannot mean what some claim it to in their protestations of the Vatican II era revisions given their practice of accepting all of the above mentioned reforms.
 
Feanaro's Wife:
Bear06…I think you were addressing this comment to Podo?

If you were, his “excuse” is that he is 13 years old…

he is also my nephew.

Please keep his age in mind when responding to his posts. You all need to set an example of how to respond charitably (not directed at you bear06) and how to defend a position without attacking the other person.

He is an incredibly bright and faithful young man… but he still has much to learn. But so do the rest of us.

Malia
Click to expand...
Excuse me, I know what Im talking about . Just because I’m 13 it makes no difference! That’s why you guys never listen to me because I’m 13!!!
Podo
 
40.png
Podo2004:
Have you ever been to a NO. Mass?
Podo
Click to expand...
There can be no truthful denying that the NOM was designed to please the protestant mainline sects, primarily Anglican and Lutheran. Nearly all that was exclusively Roman Catholic was expunged. The few things that remained were made optional.
It was intended to be a “universal christian worship service”, acceptable to both Catholic and protestant. It was a calculated risk to bring members into the “universal church” by removing the Catholic obstacles. You’ll have to decide if it was a success or failure in that regard.

Try, if you will, reading this factual comparison of the NOM and the TLM
coomaraswamy-catholic-writings.com/Traditional%20Mass%20vs.%20NOM.htm
It’s about 32 pages of direct comparisons, step by step from beginning of mass to the end.
It only covers the ordinary of the mass.
Then come back and discuss it.
The Readings also, were redone to expunge frequent references to hell, soul, angels, communion of saints, fate of the obstinate jew, and exclusive salvation.
God Bless
 
40.png
Podo2004:
Excuse me, I know what Im talking about . Just because I’m 13 it makes no difference! That’s why you guys never listen to me because I’m 13!!!
Podo
Click to expand...
As long as you have something to contribute, I promise to ALWAYS listen.
God Bless (13 yr olds, especially)
 
40.png
Franciscum:
Says who, you? Or the tiny minority of “tlm’ers” in the Church?

Think for just a moment how foolish your suggestion sounds…
Click to expand...
**Luke:18:8: …Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth? **(Meaning only a “tiny minority”?)

**Roma:11:5: Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant (**tiny minority) according to the election of grace.

What’s the point?
1. If we stay with the Mass of our history, will it cause us to lose our faith? Only if it caused the saints that assisted at this Mass for 1500 yrs to lose the faith. It seems to have promoted the faith.
2. Were the elect deceived by the TLM for 1500yrs? What Mass was being said in the time of Francis de Sales, Our Lady of Guadelupe, Lourdes, Fatima, Rose of Lima, LaSalette?
3. Only a “tiny minority” retain this Mass.

**The point is, the TLM is HISTORICALLY proven, and therefore proven safe for the faithful. That is the central point of the Trad Catholic. **
The NOM may be just as safe, but only time and statistics will tell…it’s unproven, and frequently open to easy abuse, some of it may go so far as to make it invalid. Such abuse is (relatively) unheard of by any priest dedicated to the TLM. It’s a lot of effort, and insincerity or false intent of desire for entertainment or catchy novelties has no place in their devotion to the TLM.
 
40.png
Podo2004:
Have you ever been to a NO. Mass?
Podo
Click to expand...
Yes. I’ve attended the NO all my life. The last 7 years or so, I’ve attended an indult Tridentine Mass. Occassionally, I’ll go to a NO Mass. Now, how about you? Have you ever been to a Tridentine Mass?
 
TNT said:
**Luke:18:8: …Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth? **(Meaning only a “tiny minority”?)

**Roma:11:5: Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant (**tiny minority) according to the election of grace.

What’s the point?
  1. If we stay with the Mass of our history, will it cause us to lose our faith? Only if it caused the saints that assisted at this Mass for 1500 yrs to lose the faith. It seems to have promoted the faith.
  2. Were the elect deceived by the TLM for 1500yrs? What Mass was being said in the time of Francis de Sales, Our Lady of Guadelupe, Lourdes, Fatima, Rose of Lima, LaSalette?
  3. Only a “tiny minority” retain this Mass.
The point is, the TLM is HISTORICALLY proven, and therefore proven safe for the faithful. That is the central point of the Trad Catholic.
The NOM may be just as safe, but only time and statistics will tell…it’s unproven, and frequently open to easy abuse, some of it may go so far as to make it invalid. Such abuse is (relatively) unheard of by any priest dedicated to the TLM. It’s a lot of effort, and insincerity or false intent of desire for entertainment or catchy novelties has no place in their devotion to the TLM.
Click to expand...

2004-(1500+33)=471

1.) Are you suggesting the “tlm” has been around since ~470ad?
Good Lord, the “tlm” as we know it was codified in the 1500’s…

2.) It’s laughable to suggest the Novus Ordo Mass is unsafe, and that it need to be tested by time and “statistics.”

3.) Abuse existed and exists today with the celebration of the “tlm.”
 
Good Lord, the “tlm” as we know it was codified in the 1500’s…
Click to expand...
YES, you don’t know your history. The TLM was codified in the 1500’s but it existed LONG before that!

In 1570, Pope St Pius V - in his Papal Bull *Quo Primum *- said that priests could use the Tridentine rite forever, “without scruple of conscience or fear of penalty”.

The TLM can be found in the reforms of Pope St. Gregory the Great (590-604). The Order of Mass as found in the 1570 Missal of St. Pius (Tridentine), apart from minor additions and amplifications, corresponds very closely with the order established by St. Gregory.
 
Franciscum said:
2004-(1500+33)=471
Click to expand...
1.) Are you suggesting the “tlm” has been around since ~470ad?
Good Lord, the “tlm” as we know it was codified in the 1500’s…
Click to expand...
I did not say Tridentine codified. So, there was no Latin Mass prior to 1500+? What, exactly were the rubrics used by Pius V say, in 1535 before he was pope? If not convenient, how about Innocent III? If not convenient, how about Pope St Gregory?
2.) It’s laughable to suggest the Novus Ordo Mass is unsafe, and that it need to be tested by time and “statistics.”
Click to expand...
I said it may be safe, but it has not been tested in the crucible of time, and it hasn’t. So far it’s off to a rocky start. Only 30% of NOM catholics believe in the transubstantiation. Only 25% of NOM catholics even attend the NOM every Sunday. 3 dioceses have bellied up under the NOM due to sex pervert priest /bishop law suits. 8+bishops of the NOM have resigned in disgrace. Confession is near Dead compared to the TLM attendee. Like I said, it’s got a tough hill to climb. For more, see Thread on persecution in MI and MA diocese.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=13822&highlight=detroit
3.) Abuse existed and exists today with the celebration of the “tlm”.
Click to expand...
And their names are: Fr…? and the ones dressed in clown suits were? and the ones using dancers around the altar are? And the ones playing havoc with the rubrics are?
 
40.png
Podo2004:
Excuse me, I know what I’m talking about. Just because I’m 13 it makes no difference! That’s why you guys never listen to me because I’m 13!!!
Podo
Click to expand...
Being 13 can and can’t make a difference…a lot of these people may have extensive knowledge…just because they’ve had more “life experience”…and made more mistakes and learned from them…but they have to admitt, that they probably were never as wise as you are when they were 13…and if they didn’t listen to you, would you be getting answers???🙂
P.S. I think everyone needs to a deep breath, and remember that this is a CATHOLIC website, and we should be brotherly (or sisterly) towards each other…just a thought…:whacky:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top