The Mass of 1965

  • Thread starter Thread starter stmaria
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

stmaria

Guest
The first act of the Counsilium to implement the Liturgy was the instruction* Inter Oecumenci *September 1964. adoremus.org/Interoecumenici.html
This instruction made the first changes in the Mass. This new Mass the *Ordo Missae, Ritus servandus *was promulgated in January 1965. It was translated into 205 languages.

This Order of the Mass is much closer to the intended fruit of Vatican II’s* Constitution on the Liturgy *than the New Mass of 1970. It is essentially the Tridentine Latin Mass in English with minor modifications. The Epistle and Gospel were read in the vernacular as well as many prayers. The Canon remained in Latin. Communion was given only on the tongue. Priest facing the people was optional and it was encouraged that the Tabernacle remain on the altar even if it were a small Tabernacle. This Mass was in effect until 1967 when more changes were introduced.

View this link to see the Mass of 1965
coreyzelinski.8m.com/1965_Mass/

Since this Mass fulfilled all that was required by the *Constitution on the Liturgy, *why wasn’t this Mass the final version to come out of the Consilium?
Would this Mass have satisfied the Traditionalists?
Would there be a SSPX if the Mass of 1965 had become the Novus Ordo?

*Reform of the Liturgy *page 104-115 explains the events of 1965.

“ There was unanimous agreement at this point that there should instead be a careful revision of the Ordo Missae so as to include in it whatever could be introduce without difficulty…the Ordo was published on January 27, 1965.” { It was also promulgated by Pope Paul VI }

It is clear from the following text that those wishing to reform the Mass had no intention of following the Constitution. They wanted a new rite of the Mass.

“ Some would have preferred to see the rite completely revised. The Consilium was of this opinion from the beginning, and it had even prepared a draft…. But the resultant Mass, partly in Latin, partly in the vernacular, was a hybrid, lacking in continuity… the vernaculars had to stop at the threshold of the Roman Canon…but a need was very quickly felt for having the entire liturgy in the vernacular…the Canon is a vital part of a living liturgy. It did remain in Latin for over two years from the beginning of the reform, but pastoral experience showed that a situation in which the celebration was half in the vernacular and half in Latin was intolerable…But how difficult it is to take an ancient building in hand and make it functional and habitable without changing the structure. Peripheral alterations are not enough; there had to be a radical restoration…the changes made in 1965 only showed up more clearly certain inconsistencies in rites, signs, and ceremonies that had become anachronistic…All this represented a truly courageous step in the direction of a complete reform.”
 
I wonder if a bishop could grant permission for this missal to be used. It would be very interesting to see!
 
It was the form of Mass used at my First Communion.🙂 Thank you, stmaria!
 
Its alright. Beats the NO, but the lack of Elizabethan English and all the prayers after the “Ite Missa est” are important, IMO
 
stmaria said:
The first act of the Counsilium to implement the Liturgy was the instruction* Inter Oecumenci *September 1964. adoremus.org/Interoecumenici.html
This instruction made the first changes in the Mass. This new Mass the *Ordo Missae, Ritus servandus *was promulgated in January 1965. It was translated into 205 languages.

This Order of the Mass is much closer to the intended fruit of Vatican II’s* Constitution on the Liturgy *than the New Mass of 1970. It is essentially the Tridentine Latin Mass in English with minor modifications. The Epistle and Gospel were read in the vernacular as well as many prayers. The Canon remained in Latin. Communion was given only on the tongue. Priest facing the people was optional and it was encouraged that the Tabernacle remain on the altar even if it were a small Tabernacle. This Mass was in effect until 1967 when more changes were introduced.

View this link to see the Mass of 1965
coreyzelinski.8m.com/1965_Mass/

Since this Mass fulfilled all that was required by the *Constitution on the Liturgy, *why wasn’t this Mass the final version to come out of the Consilium?
Would this Mass have satisfied the Traditionalists?
Would there be a SSPX if the Mass of 1965 had become the Novus Ordo?

*Reform of the Liturgy *page 104-115 explains the events of 1965.

“ There was unanimous agreement at this point that there should instead be a careful revision of the Ordo Missae so as to include in it whatever could be introduce without difficulty…the Ordo was published on January 27, 1965.” { It was also promulgated by Pope Paul VI }

It is clear from the following text that those wishing to reform the Mass had no intention of following the Constitution. They wanted a new rite of the Mass.

“ Some would have preferred to see the rite completely revised. The Consilium was of this opinion from the beginning, and it had even prepared a draft…. But the resultant Mass, partly in Latin, partly in the vernacular, was a hybrid, lacking in continuity… the vernaculars had to stop at the threshold of the Roman Canon…but a need was very quickly felt for having the entire liturgy in the vernacular…the Canon is a vital part of a living liturgy. It did remain in Latin for over two years from the beginning of the reform, but pastoral experience showed that a situation in which the celebration was half in the vernacular and half in Latin was intolerable…But how difficult it is to take an ancient building in hand and make it functional and habitable without changing the structure. Peripheral alterations are not enough; there had to be a radical restoration…the changes made in 1965 only showed up more clearly certain inconsistencies in rites, signs, and ceremonies that had become anachronistic…All this represented a truly courageous step in the direction of a complete reform.”
Click to expand...
“pastoral experience showed that a situation in which the celebration was half in the vernacular…”

Yeah, a whopping 4-5 years of experience. Heck, the whole thing was still new to everyone…
 
<>

The Leonine prayers were NEVER part of the mass.

They were prayers appointed to be said AFTER LOW MASS WAS OVER!

And, fwiw, their intention was changed not once but TWICE.
 
If it was important enough for His Holiness (Leo XIII) to decree it, it is important enough for us to continue.

I think it is a beautiful custom
 
drforjc said:
“pastoral experience showed that a situation in which the celebration was half in the vernacular…”

Yeah, a whopping 4-5 years of experience. Heck, the whole thing was still new to everyone…
Click to expand...
Actually it is worse than that. The Mass was promulgated in 1965 and that quote was made in 1965. The Consilium never had any intention to follow the Constitution on the Liturgy.
 
stmaria said:
Actually it is worse than that. The Mass was promulgated in 1965 and that quote was made in 1965. The Consilium never had any intention to follow the Constitution on the Liturgy.
Click to expand...
It led to a lot of liturgical instability if it wasn’t part of the instability itself. The Pope needed to do something to stop the creation of so many canons afterwards. Part of the reason for the Novus Ordo.
 
OutinChgoburbs said:
It was the form of Mass used at my First Communion.🙂 Thank you, stmaria!
Click to expand...
Me too! We then promptly moved overseas and they were using this missal but almost all in Latin. Only the readings and the homily were in the vernaculars. Unfortunately, when we got back to the US, the guitar Mass was firmly in place.
 
No changes were made to the 1965 Mass for two years because Pope Paul suspended any new revisions when he discovered that the Novus Ordo had already been completed without his (name removed by moderator)ut or knowledge.

*Reform of the Liturgy Page *151-152
“ General meeting October-December 1965, Monsignor Wagner, the realtor of study group 10, presented the complete schema of the Ordo Missae… During the meeting the Mass was twice celebrated in accordance with the new Ordo, first on October 29 in Italian [celebrant Father Bugnini] and then in French [celebrant P. Journel] …Unfortunately, the experiments became known…the press reported on them…the result was that work on the Ordo Missae was stopped until the Synod of 1967.” Footnote # 30 “From Cardinal Cicognani the Secretary of State, “I have the duty of informing you that since the Consilium in now studying the entire Ordo Missae…His Holiness wishes to know what kind of revision is being undertaken…His Holiness wishes the Consilium to exercise great caution both in organizing experiments in this area and, above all, in proposing innovations; the Holy See must be given timely notice of everything, so that under the responsibility and authority of His Holiness, it may study any possible changes proposed for the rite of celebration of the divine sacrifice.”
 
bpbasilphx said:
<>

The Leonine prayers were NEVER part of the mass.

They were prayers appointed to be said AFTER LOW MASS WAS OVER!

And, fwiw, their intention was changed not once but TWICE.
Click to expand...

Of course Pope John Paul II asked for the St. Michael prayer, at least, to be said by all parishes after Mass was over and all the priests/Bishops complied (NOT!)
 
I’d prefer this Missal being reverent Elizabethan English, but still, until it’s translated into Reverent Elizabethan English, I’d still take a High Mass of this Ordo 1965, with Chant, incense Ad Altare, anyday over the NO.
 
stmaria said:
The first act of the Counsilium to implement the Liturgy was the instruction* Inter Oecumenci *September 1964. adoremus.org/Interoecumenici.html
This instruction made the first changes in the Mass. This new Mass the *Ordo Missae, Ritus servandus *was promulgated in January 1965. It was translated into 205 languages.

*This Order of the Mass is much closer to the intended fruit of Vatican II’s Constitution on the Liturgy ***than the New Mass of 1970. It is essentially the Tridentine Latin Mass in English with minor modifications. The Epistle and Gospel were read in the vernacular as well as many prayers. The Canon remained in Latin. Communion was given only on the tongue. Priest facing the people was optional and it was encouraged that the Tabernacle remain on the altar even if it were a small Tabernacle. This Mass was in effect until 1967 when more changes were introduced…”

I remember this Mass as our parish was one of the first parishes to celebrate it. I don’t remember, however, if the priest was facing the people or facing the altar. I liked the music and it was quite meaningful. One could observe the parallels of it with the Tridentine Rite. But then it began to change, first in 1967, then more changes in 1968 and then more in 1969 until the entire Mass seemed totally at variance with what went before. I know my parents were getting tired of what was going on. My mother complained that there seemed to be a change every week. I also noticed many people who weren’t going to Mass anymore. By the time of 1972, and with three pastors (the last one being quite creative in his celebrations) almost half of the parish wasn’t attending any longer. But the younger ones thought it was ‘cool’. LOL
And here it is 40 years later and I still contend that we don’t have a Latin Rite anymore, but a ‘vulgar’ rite. It was a good idea for Pope Benedict to allow the Tridentine liturgy again. So many priests, bishops, and “with it” liturgists have made it their personal vendetta to treat the rest of us like pariahs because we criticized the Novus Ordo and how it was being conducted. Well, we were and are the body of Christ too and it was absolutely incorrigible for them to ostracize us as they did for these years.
Divine Liturgy is the ultimate of worship for Christian community. We should have taken lessons from our eastern Catholic brethren who still celebrate with the Byzantine Rite. Liturgy is not something that one ‘invents’ every Sunday. It develops over time into an organic whole which should reflect “Heaven on earth” which is what Liturgy is supposed to be doing.
Click to expand...
 
First let me say that was a very beautiful post.

I really believe that if, in 1964 , Catholics had been better informed about Vatican II the Mass of 1965 would be the Mass of today’s Church.
Just imagine if the internet had been available in 1964. Catholics would have been able to post on to the Vatican website and read for themselves the Constitution on the Liturgy.
When the Mass of 1965 was promulgated everyone would have said that the reform is over. The Constitution has been fulfilled. And when more changes kept occurring, Catholics would have immediately began asking questions.
We would have wanted to know who are these reformers that keep making changes? Who is this Father Bugnini and Fathers Wagner, Hanggi, Righetti, Vagaggini, Franq Jungmann ,P.M.Gy Bluyssen and others?
And why are there Protestant’s ministers at the meetings? Who is Anglican Canon Jasper and Reverend Massey Shepherd, Methodist Professor Raymond George, Lutheran Pastor Friedrich Kunneth, Lutheran Reverend Eugene Brand and Calvinist Frere Max Thurian of the Taize community and what exactly is their role?
Reports out of the Netherlands would have been posted immediately. Reports on Bishop Jean Bluyssen allowing the Holy Eucharist to be placed in the hand of those receiving communion and reports of the laity being allowed to distribute communion. All of this, no doubt, would have been shocking had it been well reported.
Here is a news story form 1966 that did raise a lot of attention. But had there been the internet and cable news, this would have been a huge scandalous story covered 24-7.
time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,835149-1,00.html
Time Magazine February 1966
“Last month Dr. Albert van den Heuvel of the World Council of Churches’ Youth Department told a Chicago audience that priests and ministers impatient at the slow pace of organized ecumenical progress are celebrating the Eucharist together and giving each other Communion. As many as 6,000 dedicated Catholic and Protestant laymen reportedly belong to ecumenical study groups in The Netherlands that periodically celebrate interfaith Communions; either a minister or a priest will preside, and the consecrated elements are given to all members present.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top