The pre-conciliar dialogue mass: the bridge to the 1970 Roman Missal?

[fnr]

I have recently learned that during the masses held during the Second Vatican Council, the majority of them were held as “dialogue masses.”

From America, November 3, 1962:
“In Rome and within the Council itself, one had ample evidence before the discussions ever opened that the Church had already begun to “update” its liturgy. As Fr. Frederick R. McManus, former head of the American Liturgical Conference and a consultant to the Council, remarked in an authoritative background story for the NC News Service, the many Sunday evening Masses throughout the Eternal City testify to what has been slowly growing in recent years. He pointed also to the fact that the daily Mass opening each general session of the Council is a “dialogue” Mass. In other words, the congregation of bishops and others in attendance respond in unison and, in some places, pray along with the celebrant, who offers the Holy Sacrifice facing the people.”

From America, November 24, 1962:
"Council Fathers who wish to speak must present their names three days in advance. At the beginning of each day’s meeting—after Mass, which has become by custom a dialogue Mass—the names of the day’s speakers are read out in the order in which they are to address the Council. "

Here’s an image from around the time:
http://conciliaria.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/cover.jpg

It seems to me very likely that this form of worship, which was still a TLM, established in the bishops an appreciation for the communal response which is now found in the Ordinary Form of the mass today. From a bulletin report that followed the council’s 11th general meeting (October 31, 1962):
"It reported that although the Fathers said the dialogue Mass ought to be promoted, “it was noted that the faithful should not be deprived of those moments of recollection which favor personal piety.”

The dialogue mass was not a form widely practiced in the U.S., but was common in Europe.

 

[edwest2]

Pope Benedict:

"In the first place, there is the fear that the document detracts from the authority of the Second Vatican Council, one of whose essential decisions – the liturgical reform – is being called into question.

"This fear is unfounded. In this regard, it must first be said that the Missal published by Paul VI and then republished in two subsequent editions by John Paul II, obviously is and continues to be the normal Form – the Forma ordinaria – of the Eucharistic Liturgy. The last version of the Missale Romanum prior to the Council, which was published with the authority of Pope John XXIII in 1962 and used during the Council, will now be able to be used as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgical celebration. It is not appropriate to speak of these two versions of the Roman Missal as if they were “two Rites”. Rather, it is a matter of a twofold use of one and the same rite.

“As for the use of the 1962 Missal as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgy of the Mass, I would like to draw attention to the fact that this Missal was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted. At the time of the introduction of the new Missal, it did not seem necessary to issue specific norms for the possible use of the earlier Missal. Probably it was thought that it would be a matter of a few individual cases which would be resolved, case by case, on the local level. Afterwards, however, it soon became apparent that a good number of people remained strongly attached to this usage of the Roman Rite, which had been familiar to them from childhood. This was especially the case in countries where the liturgical movement had provided many people with a notable liturgical formation and a deep, personal familiarity with the earlier Form of the liturgical celebration. We all know that, in the movement led by Archbishop Lefebvre, fidelity to the old Missal became an external mark of identity; the reasons for the break which arose over this, however, were at a deeper level. Many people who clearly accepted the binding character of the Second Vatican Council, and were faithful to the Pope and the Bishops, nonetheless also desired to recover the form of the sacred liturgy that was dear to them. This occurred above all because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear. I am speaking from experience, since I too lived through that period with all its hopes and its confusion. And I have seen how arbitrary deformations of the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the Church.”

Source: vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2007/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20070707_lettera-vescovi_en.html

Peace,
Ed

 

[Ad_Orientem]

Very interesting and disturbing photo. Could you please shrink it, though, so I don’t have to scroll sideways to read posts?

I would distinguish between “the 1970 Roman Missal” and how it’s done. Was “facing the people” actually legislated in 1969/70, or did it just spread and take over? For that matter, has it ever been officially and formally made normative, or just de facto?

 

[agnes_therese]

Very interesting and disturbing photo. Could you please shrink it, though, so I don’t have to scroll sideways to read posts?

Why “disturbing”? It’s apparently in some type of arena, not a church, so we don’t know the circumstances of the priest facing the people.

 

[ProVobis]

The dialogue mass was not a form widely practiced in the U.S., but was common in Europe.

FWIW, my dad was teaching me the Latin responses when we attended Mass in London in the early 50’s. How could one ever forget “Et cum spiritu tuo”?

 

[OraLabora]

Very interesting and disturbing photo. Could you please shrink it, though, so I don’t have to scroll sideways to read posts?

I would distinguish between “the 1970 Roman Missal” and how it’s done. Was “facing the people” actually legislated in 1969/70, or did it just spread and take over? For that matter, has it ever been officially and formally made normative, or just de facto?

Facing the people was done all the time pre-Vatican II. In particular at St. Peter’s where versus populum and ad orientem are the same direction, but also in monasteries where the community aspect was and continues to be emphasized.

But since you ask, in the Roman Missal of 1970 in its Y2K revision, facing the people was not legislated as obligatory, but as desirable, as plainly stated in the General Instructions of the Roman Missal:

1. The altar should be built apart from the wall, in such a way that it is possible to walk around it easily and that Mass can be celebrated at it facing the people, which is desirable wherever possible. The altar should, moreover, be so placed as to be truly the center toward which the attention of the whole congregation of the faithful naturally turns.[116] The altar is usually fixed and is dedicated.

So there is really nothing disturbing about that picture. Especially since even in the old form of the Mass, celebration facing the people was permitted in some circumstances.

institute-christ-king.org/latin-mass-resources/common-misconceptions/

 

[edwest2]

Very interesting and disturbing photo. Could you please shrink it, though, so I don’t have to scroll sideways to read posts?

I would distinguish between “the 1970 Roman Missal” and how it’s done. Was “facing the people” actually legislated in 1969/70, or did it just spread and take over? For that matter, has it ever been officially and formally made normative, or just de facto?

The priest facing the people was not even suggested by Vatican II.

catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=1145

"In his outstanding book, “Spirit of the Liturgy,” Cardinal Ratzinger wrote of the ancient and venerable practice of offering the Holy Sacrifice ad orientem, in which both priest and people face east:

“It has been the practice in the entire Church, East and West from time immemorial. Contrary to a prevailing misconception, there is no evidence for celebration of Mass versus populum in the first nineteen centuries of the Church’s history, with rare exceptions.”

“Despite all the variations in practice that have taken place far into the second millennium, one thing has remained clear for the whole of Christendom: praying toward the east is a tradition that goes back to the beginning. Moreover, it is a fundamental expression of the Christian synthesis of cosmos and history, of being rooted in the once-for-all events of salvation history while going out to meet the Lord who is to come again.”

Peace,
Ed

 

[fnr]

Very interesting and disturbing photo. Could you please shrink it, though, so I don’t have to scroll sideways to read posts?

Would that I could! The photo doesn’t come out so large on the original web site!

I would distinguish between “the 1970 Roman Missal” and how it’s done. Was “facing the people” actually legislated in 1969/70, or did it just spread and take over? For that matter, has it ever been officially and formally made normative, or just de facto?

Based on the Wikipedia entry, the practice became approved in part in 1922 by the Vatican. However, it seems like the practice goes back much earlier. Here’s a quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia’s entry on liturgy (which itself is a pre-conciliar publication):
In the Apostolic Fathers the picture of the early Christian Liturgy becomes clearer; we have in them a definite and to some extent homogeneous ritual. But this must be understood. There was certainly no set form of prayers and ceremonies such as we see in our present Missals and Euchologia; still less was anything written down and read from a book. The celebrating bishop spoke freely, his prayers being to some extent improvised. And yet this improvising was bound by certain rules. In the first place, no one who speaks continually on the same subjects says new things each time. Modern sermons and modern ex tempore prayers show how easily a speaker falls into set forms, how constantly he repeats what come to be, at least for him, fixed formulæ. Moreover, the dialogue form of prayer that we find in use in the earliest monuments necessarily supposes some constant arrangement. The people answer and echo what the celebrant and the deacons say with suitable exclamations. They could not do so unless they heard more or less the same prayers each time. They heard from the altar such phrases as: “The Lord be with you”, or “Lift up your hearts”, and it was because they recognized these forms, had heard them often before, that they could answer at once in the way expected.

 

[godisgood77]

Interesting… marking this for later.

 

[Ad_Orientem]

Would that I could! The photo doesn’t come out so large on the original web site!

Open the image in Microsoft Paint (in Windows Vista or later, type “paint” in the start menu search box; in all versions of Windows, right-click on the image’s icon and select “edit”). Click the “resize” button. Click “percentage,” then maybe put in 20. Save and upload.

 

[Ad_Orientem]

Facing the people was done all the time pre-Vatican II. In particular at St. Peter’s where versus populum and ad orientem are the same direction, but also in monasteries where the community aspect was and continues to be emphasized.

What do you mean by “all the time,” that it was the norm? Since what year? To clarify, I was referring to the decades immediately preceding Vatican II. The latest scholarship shows that Mass facing the people is a 20th c. innovation. In places like St. Peter’s where the priest faces away from the reredos to face East, the congregation used to face East with the priest. So it was not an enclosed circle as it is today.

 

[edwest2]

What do you mean by “all the time,” that it was the norm? Since what year? To clarify, I was referring to the decades immediately preceding Vatican II. The latest scholarship shows that Mass facing the people is a 20th c. innovation. In places like St. Peter’s where the priest faces away from the reredos to face East, the congregation used to face East with the priest. So it was not an enclosed circle as it is today.

I was there before Vatican II and the priest did not face the people.

Peace,
Ed

 

[GangGreen]

In the Roman Rite ad orientem was the norm for many many many centuries going back even to the early Church. This had great symbolism in representing that Jesus would return from the East.

Anyway,
VII (SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM)
Doesn’t say anything about versus populum
It only says that the vernacular could be used in more instances, not exclusively
It says that use of Latin is be preserved
It says that Gregorian Chant had a pride of place
It says that the pipe organ is to be held in high esteem and other instruments may only be used if they are suitable for divine worship
It doesn’t say anything about doing away with any part of the Mass
it doesn’t say to remove communion rails or distributing communion in the hand

The main thing I get out of SC is that there was a desire for more participation of the faithful. One of the main ways they were supposed to go about this was with education.

With zeal and patience, pastors of souls must promote the liturgical instruction of the faithful, and also their active participation in the liturgy both internally and externally, taking into account their age and condition, their way of life, and standard of religious culture. By so doing, pastors will be fulfilling one of the chief duties of a faithful dispenser of the mysteries of God; and in this matter they must lead their flock not only in word but also by example.

If you teach the faithful the Mass, they will more fully be able to participate, whether that’s internally by offering their prayers along with the priest or externally by saying the responses along with the the servers or singing with the schola.

Additionally, this education was to go beyond just the laity but to the clergy themselves. This obviously points to the clergy who were probably not well trained in understanding the liturgy and who would abuse it.

 

[ProVobis]

They heard from the altar such phrases as: “The Lord be with you”, or “Lift up your hearts”, and it was because they recognized these forms, had heard them often before, that they could answer at once in the way expected.

[/INDENT]

FWIW, the “Dominus vobiscum,” the “Orate Fratres,” “Ite Missa Est” had been said versus populum (having turned towards the people, not facing the people). I suspect the rubrics prescribed this versus practice as the priest at this moment invited a response from the servers or congregation, which were specifically intended toward the priest. The cum populo responses OTOH (Sursum corda/Habemus ad Dominum, Amen, etc) were toward God with the priest.

 

[OraLabora]

What do you mean by “all the time,” that it was the norm? Since what year? To clarify, I was referring to the decades immediately preceding Vatican II. The latest scholarship shows that Mass facing the people is a 20th c. innovation. In places like St. Peter’s where the priest faces away from the reredos to face East, the congregation used to face East with the priest. So it was not an enclosed circle as it is today.

Sorry, poor choice of words on my part. I meant to say that Mass facing the people existed before Vatican II. One example was monastic communities where indeed it was “all the time” for specific communities. But rather in the wider church, it existed also.

 

[Chatter163]

The Dialogue Mass movement began in Europe, especially Belgium, France and Germany, during the 1910s and 1920s. It grew in the US in the 1920s and 1930s with the “pray the Mass” missal movement. (Remember that people’s Latin-English hand missals and, for that matter, the ability of the general population to read, were both still relatively new, having emerged in a widespread state during the second half of the 19th century.) The Dialogue Mass was tolerated and occasionally even encouraged by the Holy See during the 1920s and 1930s. It received more official status in 1958 with the promulgation De Musica Sacra, which outlined five levels of participation. The Dialogue Mass advanced rapidly in some dioceses from the 1930s onward (especially in the American Midwest), but less so in others. Gerard Eller’s 1942 bookThe Dialogue Mass tracked the increasing popularity of the practice, but also noted that it varied by diocese. Some bishops promoted it, while others did not.

 

[Phemie]

I never experienced a dialog Mass before Vatican II and I don’t think that was limited to my parish. Each summer my parents took us to explore the neighbouring provinces and Mass everywhere was the same: silence in the pews. That’s why in my area people didn’t take readily to the ‘new Mass’ even though it was in the vernacular: they were being asked talk in church, something that was foreign to them. I remember the adults having a very hard time with that; the children less so.

 

[ProVobis]

I never experienced a dialog Mass before Vatican II and I don’t think that was limited to my parish. Each summer my parents took us to explore the neighbouring provinces and Mass everywhere was the same: silence in the pews. That’s why in my area people didn’t take readily to the ‘new Mass’ even though it was in the vernacular: they were being asked talk in church, something that was foreign to them. I remember the adults having a very hard time with that; the children less so.

I think the Cantata Masses were more open to dialog, but most Masses had been Lecta (Low) Masses and without microphones, only the ones in front could hear the priest.

 

[SMHW]

FWIW, my dad was teaching me the Latin responses when we attended Mass in London in the early 50’s. How could one ever forget “Et cum spiritu tuo”?

I wasn’t born until the late 1950s so I really don’t have much in the way of memories of Mass prior to 1962. But I don’t ever remember my home parish having a Mass that wasn’t a dialogue Mass. Of course that didn’t mean the parishioners always answered the prayers.

 

[janeway529]

In the “Dialogue Masses” you also see the beginnings of concelebration, which did not exist pre-Vatican II, and which most people take for granted today.