The development of the Tridentine Form

  • Thread starter Thread starter GangGreen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rich_C said:
True, there wasn’t uniformity in the Roman Mass until Trent, but of the other variations, only 2 or 3 were older than 200 years. Those 2 or 3 were allowed to survive without changes (in Milan and Toledo)…
Click to expand...
Actually, about a dozen.

The Dalmation (which paralleled the Roman, but was in Slavonic)
The Mozarabic
The Bragan
The Ambrosian
The Sarum (which was retained as an extraordinary use in the UK by both Catholic and Anglican)
The Benedictine (which differs in the hours and calendar, but not the mass text)
The Carmelite
The Carthusian
The Cistercian
The Dominican
The Norbertine/Premonstaterian

All of these had their own calendars except the Dalmatian; most of them have unique missal texts. The Mozarabic, Bragan, Ambrosian, and Dominican differed from Rome by trent in the order of Mass - Ambrosian used the 3-reading pattern (now mirrored in the Roman OF), the Dominican has the preparation of the gifts before the mass begins. The Dalmatians, while keeping the Roman Calendar, didn’t always update the translation of the missal with the Roman reforms.

The Franciscans had a couple adaptations to the Roman - but never considered a separate rite, in part because St. Francis demanded the use of the Liturgy of Rome. The OFMC had a couple additional additions. (Those are still used, but now are added to the OF for both the OFM and OFMC.) Likewise, the Servites have adaptations, not a separate rite. None of these had distinct calendars, nor distinct mass texts, nor distinct hours texts; the all simply added festal propers to specific feasts.
 
Aramis said:
the Dominican has the preparation of the gifts before the mass begins.
Click to expand...
This isn’t unique to the Dominican rite. In the Middle Ages, there was a widespread fad of preparing the gifts - specifically, the water and wine - before the beginning of the Mass or somewhere after the beginning of the Mass, so all that’s left for the priest to do during the Offertory proper is to recite the prayer/s (Suscipe, sancte Pater / sancta Trinitas …) We have both versions in the Dominican Rite: during solemn Masses, the chalice is prepared between the Epistle and the Gospel, while it was done before Mass during low Masses.

Come to think of it, had this become the standard custom, we could have had the Latin analogue to the Byzantine Proskomedia.
 
One problem with tracking the various surviving Monastic rites is that the Monastic Rites were little known outside their own monastic communities.

The Friary rites and uses are much better known - in part, because the friars are often “among the people”. But they’re still little known.
 
GangGreen said:
Everything I’ve read about the ancient Masses is so vague that it’s not that easy to put together that clear of a picture of what it was like. There’s too much taking something that this guy wrote, and something that this guy wrote, and saying well the Mass was like this. The Mass could have also been different where St. X was compared to St. Y and still more different somewhere else. There are references to the Roman Canon made since at least the 3rd or 4th century, it could back even prior to that. None of us know for sure.

As far as I’ve read much of what we see in the EF was at the very least codified by Pope St. Gregory the Great for the Roman Mass. Then by AD 1000, the Roman Mass wasn’t all too much different than we see today in the EF. From what I understand, there weren’t that many changes in the Mass between that time and Trent.
Click to expand...
The origin of the Roman Mass has two certainties: the second century Liturgy in Greek of the Church of Rome is described by St. Justin Martyr (died circa 165 A.D.) and the Latin Liturgy of the first Roman Sacramentaries of about the sixth century. The first is like an Eastern type almost exactly like the Apostolic Constitutions. It is not known how this change occurred. There was a change of language from Greek to Latin and Latin is terse compared with Greek so that explains some of the change. There was a early influence from Carthaginian (Carthage) and Gallican (Cappadocia).

http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showpic&id=1368
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/galle...w.byzcath.org/forums/gallery/19/full/1368.jpgbyzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showpic&id=1368http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showpic&id=1368
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top