Saint Joseph Sunday Missal 1967

  • Thread starter Thread starter japscarousel
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’ve never seen a 1967 Missal but here is some information about the changes throughout the 60’s:

latin-mass-society.org/somethings.htm

An exerpt:
…
Anyone who has seen a Roman missal from 1962 that has had all the ā€˜adaptations’ incorporated will see graphically the extent of the attack on the traditional liturgy. Page after page containing the Proper of the Mass showing manuscript deletions, scrawled insertions, signs of the Cross with X after X deletions bearing clear and public testimony to the deliberate and enforced dilution of the sacred and of those aspects particularly Catholic. And the abolition of the many references in the rubrics to genuflections during and after the Consecration with the obvious intention to diminish respect for the Real Presence. By 1967, the vandalised Missal of 1962 that was still being used as the basis for the celebration of Holy Mass, provided stark testimony on page after page, of the deliberate and sustained attack on the missal of every pope from John XXIII, going back through St. Pius X to St. Pius V in 1570 who promulgated it after the historic Council of Trent. A 400 year-old treasure, with a pedigree of nearly 2000 years being reduced to a hybrid of incongruous elements. Was there not something in the Liturgy Constitution of Vatican II about Holy Mother Church holding ā€œall lawfully recognised rites to be of equal right and dignity, that she wishes to preserve them in the future and to foster them in every wayā€, (n4); and ā€œthat any new forms adopted in some way grow organically from forms already existingā€ (n23).
…
 
I’ve never seen a 1967 Missal …
I haven’t either, but judging by the date it would probably reflect the ill-fated and short-lived ā€œinterim Missal of 1965ā€ in its 2nd incarnation (much worse than the original). If I recall correctly, it made its debut that year. Personally I wouldn’t bother with it.
 
On paper it was a Tridentine format, truncated in some places, and with all audible prayers in English and inaudible prayers in Latin. (Canon of the Mass went to English and audible in October, 1967.) On a pracical note it appeared more like the OF, in terms of how it was celebrated (versus populum, style of vestments, layout in missal, etc.) I have both altar and people’s editions of this.
 
I haven’t either, but judging by the date it would probably reflect the ill-fated and short-lived ā€œinterim Missal of 1965ā€ in its 2nd incarnation (much worse than the original). If I recall correctly, it made its debut that year. Personally I wouldn’t bother with it.
I’m not 100% sure, but I think this is the Missal which was allowed under the Agatha Christie Indult. Aside from its historical points of interest, however, I would join you in not bothering with it.
 
thanks for your response! But I am purchasing a sunday missal, was this ordo missae supposed to be the Vatican 2 mass, not the one we have today?

can a priest celebrate Mass with the 1965 ordo? I am thinking, for a community to be at ease with the 1962 missal, we must reverse the process. there would be a specific time where a priest would celebrate the 1965 missal, then after that they’ll arrive to the proper 1962 missal. do you think that it’ll be OK?
 
thanks for your response! But I am purchasing a sunday missal, was this ordo missae supposed to be the Vatican 2 mass, not the one we have today?

can a priest celebrate Mass with the 1965 ordo? I am thinking, for a community to be at ease with the 1962 missal, we must reverse the process. there would be a specific time where a priest would celebrate the 1965 missal, then after that they’ll arrive to the proper 1962 missal. do you think that it’ll be OK?
Vatican II didn’t really call for a new Mass. However, there was a commission appointed which produced the 1965 version. In retrospect, this version couldn’t be sustained for very long, though. There is no provision that allows the priest to say the 1965 Mass today and personally I wouldn’t see it as too beneficial.
 
Vatican II didn’t really call for a new Mass. However, there was a commission appointed which produced the 1965 version though. In retrospect, this version couldn’t be sustained for very long, though.
To be fair, the ā€œinterim Missalā€ of 1965 (in its first 1965 incarnation) actually did reflect much of what was in the Council document. That’s not to say it was actually used with the same intent for very long. šŸ˜‰ It quickly got looser and looser until the second incarnation of 1967 came about. At that point, it had essentially lost its character and was so stripped-down that it became nothing more than the precursor to the what is now called the OF. By that point, too, the liturgical free-for-all was in full swing.
There is no provision that allows the priest to say the 1965 Mass today.
Thank goodness for that. šŸ˜‰
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top