C
CradleRC58
Guest
???
You wrote in post 127 iirc
"But they did pray the Rosary because they didn’t follow along in the Mass due to not being able to and Latin had much to do with it. "
- Status
You wrote in post 127 iirc
"But they did pray the Rosary because they didn’t follow along in the Mass due to not being able to and Latin had much to do with it. "
P
ProVobis
Guest
Good question, seeing that he signed none of the documents.
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
Yeah, people did pray the Rosary
OH wait, that’s a lie I made up.
OH wait, that’s a lie I made up.
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
He died before it was closed and as stated in the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, there would be time for experimentation.
Apparently the changes were approved by Pope Paul VI who even wrote a new missal for it.
Apparently the changes were approved by Pope Paul VI who even wrote a new missal for it.
S
stpurl
Guest
Jim, I believe you sincerely think that because you knew some people who told you back when you were a kid that they did X at Mass because, "I can’t follow that Latin stuff’, that this was the experience of the majority of people attending the Mass in the 1950s. It is natural especially for children to think that what they see, and do, and hear, and say, is what ‘everybody does’.
But for example, my current parish situation is extreme. If I were to go around and say that my experience is the norm for people who attend the OF, because it IS my experience and those of family and friends etc., you would, rightly, tell me that I cannot possibly expect that the majority of people at the OF would have that kind of extremely different experience.
Isn’t it possible that, for whatever reason, whether it was your own young misunderstanding coupled with perhaps misunderstandings of those who talked to you (perhaps some were the ‘cool boys’ who wanted to be Rebels without a Cause’ and not into all the ‘fussy Latin stuff’ that the ‘cool people’ of the late 50s and early 60s were already saying were passe, on the way out, etc) led you to think that this was the experience of the majority of people, when it really wasn’t?
But for example, my current parish situation is extreme. If I were to go around and say that my experience is the norm for people who attend the OF, because it IS my experience and those of family and friends etc., you would, rightly, tell me that I cannot possibly expect that the majority of people at the OF would have that kind of extremely different experience.
Isn’t it possible that, for whatever reason, whether it was your own young misunderstanding coupled with perhaps misunderstandings of those who talked to you (perhaps some were the ‘cool boys’ who wanted to be Rebels without a Cause’ and not into all the ‘fussy Latin stuff’ that the ‘cool people’ of the late 50s and early 60s were already saying were passe, on the way out, etc) led you to think that this was the experience of the majority of people, when it really wasn’t?
C
CradleRC58
Guest
Did he ? Apostolic Constitutions hold quite a bit of weight don’t they ?
"We have given careful thought, We now, in the full consciousness of Our Office and in virtue of Our authority, decree and command the following:
Responsibility for enforcement
- Bishops and superiors-general of religious orders shall take pains to ensure that in their seminaries and in their schools where adolescents are trained for the priesthood, all shall studiously observe the Apostolic See’s decision in this matter and obey these Our prescriptions most carefully.
- In the exercise of their paternal care they shall be on their guard lest anyone under their jurisdiction, eager for revolutionary changes, writes against the use of Latin in the teaching of the higher sacred studies or in the Liturgy, or through prejudice makes light of the Holy See’s will in this regard or interprets it falsely."
Veterum Sapientia
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
It wasn’t just my experience alone, but what Bishops and priests complained about, which led the Pope to call for the reforms
But again, I’m done arguing about it
It was all a myth a lie some of us Catholics made up
But again, I’m done arguing about it
It was all a myth a lie some of us Catholics made up
S
stpurl
Guest
Jim, Nobody is calling you a liar, nobody is saying you made this up. People sometimes said the rosary during a Low Mass. But the reason behind the devotion of saying the Rosary during a Low Mass was not "in case you can’t follow the Latin’.
The GIRM does not have as a valid option in it, "The priest will not pray the Creed/baptismal promises at Sunday Mass’.
However, are there cases where a priest actually does not say the Creed or baptismal promises during Mass?
Yes, there are.
One can argue, this is illicit (one is correct). However, it does not invalidate the Mass itself.
And there can be more than one reason the Creed is omitted.
The elderly priest who forgets to say it is a far cry from the not elderly priest who deliberately does not say it because he feels it’s just too rigid and divisive. The intentions are almost polar opposites, but the end result: The Creed is not said on a Sunday: is the same, right?
So you knew a few people who found Latin hard and decided to pray a rosary. There were also people. . .a lot more people actually, who found the Latin just fine, but had a devotion to our Lady, who studied the Mass, studied the Papal works which stressed Marian devotion, and so on some Sundays, said a rosary (along with probably many other devotions as well as reading the Mass prayers, etc) on the same Sunday.
So you have the same results, people praying a rosary at a Sunday Mass in the 1950s, but you have reasons for doing so which can again approach polar opposites.
The GIRM does not have as a valid option in it, "The priest will not pray the Creed/baptismal promises at Sunday Mass’.
However, are there cases where a priest actually does not say the Creed or baptismal promises during Mass?
Yes, there are.
One can argue, this is illicit (one is correct). However, it does not invalidate the Mass itself.
And there can be more than one reason the Creed is omitted.
The elderly priest who forgets to say it is a far cry from the not elderly priest who deliberately does not say it because he feels it’s just too rigid and divisive. The intentions are almost polar opposites, but the end result: The Creed is not said on a Sunday: is the same, right?
So you knew a few people who found Latin hard and decided to pray a rosary. There were also people. . .a lot more people actually, who found the Latin just fine, but had a devotion to our Lady, who studied the Mass, studied the Papal works which stressed Marian devotion, and so on some Sundays, said a rosary (along with probably many other devotions as well as reading the Mass prayers, etc) on the same Sunday.
So you have the same results, people praying a rosary at a Sunday Mass in the 1950s, but you have reasons for doing so which can again approach polar opposites.
Last edited:
C
CRV
Guest
Mediator Dei 1947 - #105-109, especially #108 "Many of the faithful are unable to use the Roman missal even though it is written in the vernacular; nor are all capable of understanding correctly the liturgical rites and formulas. So varied and diverse are men’s talents and characters that it is impossible for all to be moved and attracted to the same extent by community prayers, hymns and liturgical services. Moreover, the needs and inclinations of all are not the same, nor are they always constant in the same individual. Who, then, would say, on account of such a prejudice, that all these Christians cannot participate in the Mass nor share its fruits? On the contrary, they can adopt some other method which proves easier for certain people; for instance, they can lovingly meditate on the mysteries of Jesus Christ or perform other exercises of piety or recite prayers which, though they differ from the sacred rites, are still essentially in harmony with them.
continued below
continued below
Last edited:
C
CRV
Guest
First part I’d typed - got delayed, so I tried to cut it to past again, but instead I’d lost it. Will attempt to post the same info again. Apologies.
Concerning the praying of the Rosary during Mass prior to Vatican II.
Decree of Pope Leo III 1885
ASS 19 [1886-87] ← pdf file opens. Scroll down to page 48 , Dubium V and it’s response.
Google Translation:-
There is no doubt V. In the same decree of the Rosary, it is commanded that if in the morning,
and Litany of the list, observed during the prayers finished, ask
so whether these are the words ought to be understood, that the Rosary is one and the same
is said to be in the time of which the Mass is being celebrated; or, rather, to be celebrated before Mass, the Rosary and Litany of the service and later on shall be repeated, as it is usual in the Palentina to the diocese?
As Secretary of the Congregation for the relation of the same set down here below, and Sacred Scripture, the desire of the other exquisitoque of Appius. Masters of Ceremony
so the proposed doubt, as a reply, he thought, that is to say:
I. To the affirmative.
1 to 1. Provided the first stage.
To 3. In the affirmative.
To 4. Consult SSmum.
Reply to V In the affirmative to the first part; Negatively to the second.
Concerning the praying of the Rosary during Mass prior to Vatican II.
Decree of Pope Leo III 1885
ASS 19 [1886-87] ← pdf file opens. Scroll down to page 48 , Dubium V and it’s response.
Google Translation:-
There is no doubt V. In the same decree of the Rosary, it is commanded that if in the morning,
and Litany of the list, observed during the prayers finished, ask
so whether these are the words ought to be understood, that the Rosary is one and the same
is said to be in the time of which the Mass is being celebrated; or, rather, to be celebrated before Mass, the Rosary and Litany of the service and later on shall be repeated, as it is usual in the Palentina to the diocese?
As Secretary of the Congregation for the relation of the same set down here below, and Sacred Scripture, the desire of the other exquisitoque of Appius. Masters of Ceremony
so the proposed doubt, as a reply, he thought, that is to say:
I. To the affirmative.
1 to 1. Provided the first stage.
To 3. In the affirmative.
To 4. Consult SSmum.
Reply to V In the affirmative to the first part; Negatively to the second.
Last edited:
S
Sean
Guest
The thing is though today people don’t pay attention at mass babies are eating food, people are praying the rosary, nobody knows the meaning of what is said it is just a bunch of memorized mumbles for most people and some people don’t even speak English and are at the English mass. We are in the same position we were in 50 years ago when the council started we need serious change.
G
GordonP
Guest
The only responses were an occasional “Et cum spiritu tuo” and “Amen”. Unless you grew up in one of the few parishes that celebrated the uncommon dialogue Mass.
This indicates that they attended dialogue Mass.
Dialogue Masses were the exception, not the rule. By far most Masses were of the “mumbled” variety. Very little was audible to the congregation.
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
They were born in the 1920s and 1930s so it is possilbe they could have attended both at some point. It is also possible that my father knew the responses because he was just able to follow along since his missal had both English and Latin, either way they loved it and were heartbroken over the changes, so much that I was raised on the 8am Sunday, plain, not a lot of singing, quiet Mass every single Sunday after the changes started.
This is why it bothers me when I hear people say “everyone” hated or would never go back to that time because that is just not true.
I also knew a woman who on her deathbed refused an offer to have a priest called because, in her words, “the Church I grew up with and loved is gone”.
She was wrong, the Catholic church is still the Catholic church but that was her perception
Last edited:
J
JimG
Guest
Sorry I haven’t read the whole thread but there seem to be a lot of reminiscences here. I recall being an altar server for quite a few years, reciting the responses to the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar. Yes, I knew what they meant because when I wasn’t serving, I was reading them in the missal, in English. After so many Masses, I could recite them in Latin or English. It all made sense. Some years later, I realized that I had not only absorbed the responses, but the priest’s parts as well. I could mutter the Judica me Deus to myself when dealing with difficult people.
P
Phemie
Guest
Would have been very difficult for him to do so.JimR-OCDS:
Good question, seeing that he signed none of the documents.
P
ProVobis
Guest
My guess is that he spent most of his papal time finalizing the 1962 Missal, the first typical edition since 1920.ProVobis:
Would have been very difficult for him to do so.JimR-OCDS:
Good question, seeing that he signed none of the documents.
O
OraLabora
Guest
Most likely he would have delegated most of that to underlings, just like Paul VI did with the new Missal and Pius X with the new Divine Office and Vatican Edition of the Roman Gradual. He would have reviewed and approved of course, but I doubt he would have been spending most of his time actually revising the Missal.
In fact, I think the person who was responsible for the 1962 revision was none other than the one many love to hate, Annibale Bugnini…
In fact, I think the person who was responsible for the 1962 revision was none other than the one many love to hate, Annibale Bugnini…
P
ProVobis
Guest
You are correct. In fact AB had begun the Mass reforms as early as 1948, if not before. Was a lot of it experimental, I don’t know.
S
StValentineFriend
Guest
How funny. Every single person I know who experienced the Mass prior to 1965 has told me the same thing- they miss it and it hurts them so much that they cannot go back to that. Interesting that we’ve had opposite feedback.
Ditto. Every person I know who has experienced both forms all prefer the Latin Mass.CilladeRoma:
How funny. Every single person I know who experienced the Mass prior to 1965 has told me the same thing- they miss it and it hurts them so much that they cannot go back to that. Interesting that we’ve had opposite feedback.
- Status