Tridentine or Novus Ordo: Which is 'Older'?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sailka
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Antonius_Lupus said:
Encyclical vs. A Constitution of the 21st Ecumenical Council of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

Hmmmm… 😃

Just a thought.
Click to expand...
One is not opposed to the other. The Second Vatican Council called for a renewal of the liturgy, not a return to more primitive forms. The Council did not call for the changes that Pius XII warned against nor did it call for most of the innovations that took place after Paul VI promulgated the New Rite.
 
Sailka said:
:coffeeread: The beautiful Tridentine Mass is perhaps too often called the Traditional Mass, even by Bishops. But how many know that it was formulated by the Council of Trent, to replace the too many ethnic and national and local versions, now threatened by the Reformation? It was the novus ordo’ of the 1500’s, but left out the “Kiss of Peace”/Sign of Peace begun by the Apostles.
Vivat Jesus Tony :nun1: :highprayer:
Click to expand...
Actually something to be aware of is that antiquarianism, the idea that if it is old it is better, isn’t necessarily the judge of what is traditional liturgically. The liturgical tradition was handed down from the Apostles and through the early Church. It was then largely codified by Pope St. Gregory the Great. So if you had to say where the traditional Mass was mostly formed, it would be with St. Gregory - which is why Rome is now referring at times to the Gregorian Rite (the traditional Latin Mass). Yes there were variations but they weren’t drastic variations before Trent.

The Novus Ordo, while integrating some things that are older for sure, isn’t older. It also integrated some Jewish prayers and it made some innovations. The thing is that just because something is old doesn’t mean it is good. Practices, prayers and devotions fall out of liturgical use over time for reasons and the liturgy develops organically in the life of the Church.

The fact is that the traditional Mass, now the EF, dates back to Pope St. Gregory the Great in its essential form. It had not been substantially altered until the Consilium created the Novus Ordo.

Pax Christi tecum.
 
This quote from Pope Pius XII is part of the Church’s rejection of antiquarianism/archaeologism:

“Just as obviously unwise and mistaken is the zeal of one who in matters liturgical would go back to the rites and usage of antiquity, discarding the new patterns introduced by disposition of divine Providence to meet the changes of circumstances and situation.”

Interestingly, this idea - that older is better - lends itself to a mindset that is very similar to Protestant errors: the early Church was pure and right, then all sorts of errors and mistakes came into the Church in the years after it, and now we have to rescue the Church from these things and return her to her ancient origins. The Protestant Revolters thought the same thing: the Church started out pure but then became encrusted with errors so we have to return to the most primitive form. This thinking leaves out the reality of the Holy Spirit as the soul of the Church, guiding her and inspiring her in time.

Yes some things can be changed in the liturgy and it is not to say every decision in time is right and good. It is to say, however, that just because something is ancient doesn’t mean it is right and good either. The essential core is part of Tradition however and that is what must be held and never be changed.

Pax Christi tecum.
 
:byzsoc:
Antonius_Lupus said:
Encyclical vs. A Constitution of the 21st Ecumenical Council of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

Hmmmm… 😃

Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Code: 
                                                       Amen, Brother.      All of us are Orthodox Apostolic Catholic   (except new ager modernists).     
                                                                                          The Vatican and Popes have Also told us formally to discover, return to our Eastern/Orthodox  roots. Will post when can find.      

                                                                                  Vivat Jesus.   Christe Eleison            Tony
 
strugglingalong said:
This quote from Pope Pius XII is part of the Church’s rejection of antiquarianism/archaeologism:

“Just as obviously unwise and mistaken is the zeal of one who in matters liturgical would go back to the rites and usage of antiquity, discarding the new patterns introduced by disposition of divine Providence to meet the changes of circumstances and situation.”

Interestingly, this idea - that older is better - lends itself to a mindset that is very similar to Protestant errors: the early Church was pure and right, then all sorts of errors and mistakes came into the Church in the years after it, and now we have to rescue the Church from these things and return her to her ancient origins. The Protestant Revolters thought the same thing: the Church started out pure but then became encrusted with errors so we have to return to the most primitive form. This thinking leaves out the reality of the Holy Spirit as the soul of the Church, guiding her and inspiring her in time.

Yes some things can be changed in the liturgy and it is not to say every decision in time is right and good. It is to say, however, that just because something is ancient doesn’t mean it is right and good either. The essential core is part of Tradition however and that is what must be held and never be changed.

Pax Christi tecum.
Click to expand...
Code: 
                                                                                            Exactly!   :)  To abbreviate, avoid extremes of oldest, newest.   Correct  Traditions must never be rejected, must be preserved.
                                                                                  Tony       Et cum tutuo
 
Sailka said:
Code: 
                                                                                            Exactly!   :)  To abbreviate, avoid extremes of oldest, newest.   Correct  Traditions must never be rejected, must be preserved.
                                                                                  Tony       Et cum tutuo
Click to expand...
Yes but the Church decides correct traditions, not a concilium in the 1960’s. But if something is old and has remained in the life of the Church over centuries, then it can be said to be a very important part of the liturgical tradition that cannot and should not be easily discarded or rejected by any one period of time. The issue here is what is old but has been accepted throughout the Church’s life…as opposed to what is just plain old but did not remain in the tradition.

Pax Christi tecum.
 
strugglingalong said:
Yes but the Church decides correct traditions, not a concilium in the 1960’s. But if something is old and has remained in the life of the Church over centuries, then it can be said to be a very important part of the liturgical tradition that cannot and should not be easily discarded or rejected by any one period of time. The issue here is what is old but has been accepted throughout the Church’s life…as opposed to what is just plain old but did not remain in the tradition.

Pax Christi tecum.
Click to expand...
The Core of the Mass has never been changed, in 2000 years. It has been developmental. I Well remember that Pre-Vatican II, canon law prohibited any instrumentation except Organ, normally. Post Vatican II now permits Mozart Mass (Excerpts) like the profound Missa Brevis, etc.

A major point is that the heavily researched Concilium of 1960’s did not discard or reject Traditional liturgy. It returned the Oldest forms, like congregation verbal cocelebration, Communion in hand (which I despise) as was obviosly done in First Century, etc, etc. The Tridentine Mass, far longer, and in Latin, and highly precise details is very much in place. All are required to kneel for Eucharist on Tongue only, Silently.
Code: 
                                                                                           Et cum tu tuo                                            :blessyou:                          Tony

                                                                                           I personally much prefer the earliest format Novus Ordo, For above reasons.  Eucharist  on Tongue Only, of Course, unchewed.
 
Antonius_Lupus said:
Encyclical vs. A Constitution of the 21st Ecumenical Council of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.
Click to expand...
What, in Sacrosanctum Concilium, supports the antiquarian movement? While it calls for restoration of some practices and liturgical acts “which have suffered injury through accidents of history” – such as the catechumenate for adults, the “prayer of the faithful”, the homily as part of the liturgy – it does not call for a full-scale “retreat” to the early centuries of the Church.
 
eelpis said:
The EF is from the 6th century the OF is from the 60’s (as are the hippies, who are old now:) )
Click to expand...
You know the math really isn’t that difficult. I too thought this was a strange thread, like asking if email is older than parchments.
 
Sailka said:
The Core of the Mass has never been changed, in 2000 years. It has been developmental. I Well remember that Pre-Vatican II, canon law prohibited any instrumentation except Organ, normally. Post Vatican II now permits Mozart Mass (Excerpts) like the profound Missa Brevis, etc.
Click to expand...
The core of Holy Mass isn’t what instruments are used or the music. The core that cannot be changed pertains to the actual matter and form of the Sacrament.
Sailka said:
A major point is that the heavily researched Concilium of 1960’s did not discard or reject Traditional liturgy. It returned the Oldest forms, like congregation verbal cocelebration, Communion in hand (which I despise) as was obviosly done in First Century, etc, etc. The Tridentine Mass, far longer, and in Latin, and highly precise details is very much in place. All are required to kneel for Eucharist on Tongue only, Silently.
Click to expand...
Actually the Concilium did discard and reject Traditional liturgy. Prayers that had been in use for centuries were replaced with new prayers. Prayers that had fallen out of use very quickly were brought back because of “scholarship” but that is not the basis for liturgical tradition. Communion in hand is a perfect example. The ancient church may have practiced it but over time the Church moved away from it as she deepened in her understanding of the Holy Eucharist. Bringing it back was not a good thing nor was it a necessary tradition.
Sailka said:
Code: 
                                                                                           I personally much prefer the earliest format Novus Ordo, For above reasons.  Eucharist  on Tongue Onluy, of Course.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what an “earliest format Novus Ordo” is but the earliest Novus Ordo originates in the 1960’s. The traditional Mass can be dated back to Pope St. Gregory the Great in the 6th century.

It sounds like to me you’re under the impression that all of the scholarship that ascertained practices and prayers of the ancient church legitimates the changes made for the Novus Ordo. What is left out is that:
  1. Never in liturgical tradition had an entire new rite been created by a commission of individuals. Liturgy has traditionally grown organically, not by sudden entire changes.
  2. The consilium did introduce novel things, such as the Jewish prayer “Blessed are You God of all Creation…” and the addition to the Our Father with the Protestant words “For Thine is the Kingdom etc.”
Pax Christi tecum.
 
Sailka said:
The Core of the Mass has never been changed, in 2000 years. It has been developmental. I Well remember that Pre-Vatican II, canon law prohibited any instrumentation except Organ, normally. Post Vatican II now permits Mozart Mass (Excerpts) like the profound Missa Brevis, etc.
Click to expand...
Pope St. Pius X gladly admitted bow-ed instruments (violin, cello, etc.); and while the organ is the traditional musical instrument to be used in the liturgy, the unadulterated human voice is the preferred musical mode!

And how many Ordinary Form Masses really use Mass settings by Mozart or any other classical composer? How often is polyphony heard in the Ordinary Form of Mass? Classical (or contemporary classically-inspired) music is found primarily in those parishes which are committed to the “reform of the reform”, as it were: reclaiming Catholic tradition within the context of the liturgical reform as Vatican II decreed it. Those parishes often celebrate Mass ad orientem, with Latin used (at least for the ordinary parts); they have communion rails, altar boys in cassock and surplice, more than two candles, and those on the altar even!
Sailka said:
A major point is that the heavily researched Concilium of 1960’s did not discard or reject Traditional liturgy. It returned the Oldest forms, like congregation verbal cocelebration…
Click to expand...
The congregation does not “concelebrate”. And the Consilium did shy away from the traditional liturgical practice of the Church, which is why maniples were made optional, and then the amice and cincture as well; that’s why there are now 13 EUCHARISTIC PRAYERS instead of one; that’s why we don’t sing music inspired by the musical tradition of the Church – chant and polyphony – but rather music from the 60’s and 70’s, performed in styles and with instruments that are inappropriate for liturgical worship of God; that’s why the long-standing tradition of receiving on the tongue was no longer enforced; that’s why so many actions of the priest were omitted, and their symbolism demolished.

The Mass I go to on a regular basis (the Ordinary Form) is not the Mass of the early Christians. We’re not facing east with our priest. We do not salute one another with a holy kiss. We’re not standing the whole time. We aren’t singing chants. We aren’t vigilant to ensure that non-Catholics don’t receive Holy Communion. (etc.)

The Extraordinary Form of the Mass isn’t the Mass of the early Christians either, but it is an organic development of that first liturgy. The Ordinary Form of the Mass is not an organic development, but a hodge-podge pieced together. It is a Mass, true enough, but it is not an organic product, it is a new construction.
 
japhy said:
What, in Sacrosanctum Concilium, supports the antiquarian movement? While it calls for restoration of some practices and liturgical acts “which have suffered injury through accidents of history” – such as the catechumenate for adults, the “prayer of the faithful”, the homily as part of the liturgy – it does not call for a full-scale “retreat” to the early centuries of the Church.
Click to expand...
I can only say that the Council didn’t support the antiquarian movement. However a lot of those influential in the Liturgical Movement eventually did espouse antiquarian ideas, basically the philosophy that what is ancient is pure and it has become damaged over the centuries and now it is the Consilium’s job, through scholarship, to discover what is lost and reclaim it to original purity. That view is similar to Protestantism’s error.

Yes, some things that were in use that were good could be regained if there was sufficient reason but they could not say “if it is ancient then we should bring it back” since that idea would be antiquarian.

A great book on all of this issue of liturgical development is Alcuin Reid’s book, The Organic Development of the Liturgy. It is excellent and very detailed.

Pax Christi tecum.
 
Sailka said:
:coffeeread: The beautiful Tridentine Mass is perhaps too often called the Traditional Mass, even by Bishops. But how many know that it was formulated by the Council of Trent, to replace the too many ethnic and national and local versions, now threatened by the Reformation? It was the novus ordo’ of the 1500’s, but left out the “Kiss of Peace”/Sign of Peace begun by the Apostles.
  • Vivat Jesus Tony :nun1: :highprayer:
Click to expand...
The TLM wasn’t “formulated” at Trent. In fact, the Mass in the form promulgated by Trent had changed very little from the 8th Century.

The Mass of Paul VI attempted “primitivism” – reaching back to elements of the primitive liturgy – inconsistently and with mixed results. It’s a tossed salad of elements; liturgical scholars have plenty to say about the four Eucharistic prayers. I understand the third Eucharistic prayer (which I like very much) is kind of a “Frankenstein’s monster” sewn together from several ancient sources . . .

I’m with Pius XII (who introduced his own changes into the TLM) in being cautious about uncritical primitivism that re-claims liturgical forms that pre-date the full development of the theology of the Eucharist.
 
Sailka said:
:rolleyes:
  • :coffeeread: Well, Yes. Apparently all Bishops and traditionalISTS label Tridentine Mass as traditional, ignoring that the Vatican II researched heavily Novus Ordo brought back some of the Earliest liturgy, prayers by the Priest from the First 2 Centuries. Like theSign/Kiss of Peace initiatiated by the Apostles, apparenntly. The Tridentine Mass had no congregational Sign of Peace.
Click to expand...
And what a RELIEF that was!
  • My # 5 also references some earliest Mass prayers of the Priest, abbreviated from those in the first 2 Centuries, brought back in the 1970’s Novus Ordo.
    Tony
Click to expand...
 
strugglingalong said:
Actually the Concilium did discard and reject Traditional liturgy. Prayers that had been in use for centuries were replaced with new prayers.
Click to expand...
So many prayers were removed, and while some of the scholarship did unearth prayers from old sacramentaries, those prayers were no longer part of the Roman tradition. Why were they restored? And several prayers were written from scratch… why?
strugglingalong said:
  1. Never in liturgical tradition had an entire new rite been created by a commission of individuals. Liturgy has traditionally grown organically, not by sudden entire changes.
Click to expand...
Certainly. Read “The Organic Development of the Liturgy” by Dom Alcuin Reid.
strugglingalong said:
  1. The consilium did introduce novel things, such as the Jewish prayer “Blessed are You God of all Creation…” and the addition to the Our Father with the Protestant words “For Thine is the Kingdom etc.”
Click to expand...
The Jewish prayer was part of the Passover ritual, so it wasn’t “novel” as in “new”, but “novel” in the sense of “was it ever used for the Eucharist?”

The “kingdom, power, glory” ending to the Our Father is found in the Didache; but again, the question is, was it used liturgically?
 
japhy said:
So many prayers were removed, and while some of the scholarship did unearth prayers from old sacramentaries, those prayers were no longer part of the Roman tradition. Why were they restored? And several prayers were written from scratch… why?

Certainly. Read “The Organic Development of the Liturgy” by Dom Alcuin Reid.

The Jewish prayer was part of the Passover ritual, so it wasn’t “novel” as in “new”, but “novel” in the sense of “was it ever used for the Eucharist?”
The “kingdom, power, glory” ending to the Our Father is found in the Didache
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top