What is with the 3rd Century?

[Mary_Henley]

Catholic Church History
Theological Humanism (1517-1648) IV. The Catholic Reformation (1521-85)
37. Liturgical Renaissance

IV
The Catholic Reformation
37. LITURGICAL RENAISSANCE
A. Liturgical Charges
(1) THE MISSAL
Great diversity of usage had developed during the Middle Ages when individual dioceses and religious orders followed their peculiar modifications of the basic Latin Rite. The Council of Trent “clearly distinguished between truth and error and declared the objective character of the Mass. . . . A special commission . . . took another course by establishing the wished-for uniform missal. . . . The new missal had, in round numbers, 150 days free of feasts, not counting octaves. This was achieved by retaining only those feasts which were kept in Rome itself up to the eleventh century. Of the countless feasts later introduced, especially under the influence of the Franciscans, only a small number were preserved, and a few of these of saints outside Italy. . . . Besides the memorial days of the four Latin Fathers who were alone acknowledged in the Middle Ages, those of the Greeks were also included This book was to be from then on the standard in every church and no changes were to be made therein. Only churches which could demonstrate a two-hundred years’ custom for their own usage, were permitted to retain that usage.”
Pope St. Pius V, in sanctioning a revised Missale Romanum by a bull of July 14, 1570, prescribed its use wherever the aforementioned custom had not been proved to the contrary. Dominicans conserved their Missal, while the Franciscans renounced their peculiar usage’s. With few exceptions, the new Missal was adopted by the majority of the regular and secular clergy. It made obligatory recitation of the Introibo and Confiteor at the beginning of Mass, and of the Placeat and St. John’s Gospel at the end, thus completing the evolution of the Mass to the twentieth century, although minor rubrical revisions have since been introduced. Pope Sixtus V by a decree of January, 1588, set up the Congregation of Rites to supervise the new changes, but in the view of some liturgists a period of liturgical rigidity ensued. Clement XIII (1758-69) prescribed the Preface of the Trinity for Sundays, and Leo XIII (18781903) ordered prayers to be said after Low Mass. From 1661 to 1897 there was a prohibition by the Index of translations of the Canon of the Mass into the vernacular, and in place of the Missal the “prayer-book” took its place in the hands of most of the literate laity, until the twentieth century."


Bold type is my addition

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Oh please…I continued to hear this here…The Tridentine Mass orginated at Council of Trent. No it did not…I mean some here are actually stripping away its entirely and saying it was created by man not by God. In fact the Traditional Mass goes back further to the time of Moses. Please read the Council of Trent…as a Catholic you have to believe their magisterial teaching.

The general structure of the Mass remains unchanged since the time of Justin the Martyr – that is, there is a Liturgy of the Word and a Liturgy of the Eucharist. How these are implemented varied greatly until at least the 8th century when a certain amount of stabilization took place in the West (it happened earlier in the East).

The Roman Canon was certainly reasonably complete by the 5th century and would have been recognizable from the late 4th century. That is the most ancient part of the Tridentine Mass. However, the Mass codified by Trent, while finding the vast majority of its roots in the Masses from the 8th to the 16th century, was unique to Trent in that it was codified and no longer malleable by the local bishops and priests – something that had not happened prior to Trent.

Deacon Ed

 

[pnewton]

The general structure of the Mass remains unchanged since the time of Justin the Martyr – …

The Roman Canon was certainly reasonably complete by the 5th century and would have been recognizable from the late 4th century.

Thanks again, Deacon. I actually snickered aloud at the thought of the Mass going back to Moses. I tried to picture the Real Presence of Christ before the incarnation.

 

[Godefridus]

I wub you Deacon Ed.

 

[Uxor]

Well, sort of. When one restores what was lost it may be consdiered legitimate. As I said, there are only three items that were restored from the past.

Correct.

He specifically refers to wholesale restoration “at all costs” which is not what took place. However, he also addresses this as a discipline – and no pope can bind a future pope in matters of discipline.

Deacon Ed

Thank-you Deacon Ed for your response. I would like to continue addressing along this topic, if you don’t mind responsing now and then.

 

[Uxor]

Thanks again, Deacon. I actually snickered aloud at the thought of the Mass going back to Moses. I tried to picture the Real Presence of Christ before the incarnation.

Hahahaha…because you don’t understand the Mass silly.

 

[pnewton]

Hahahaha…because you don’t understand the Mass silly.

Yes, stupid me. I guess I do not understand anything. It is a shame one must be so highly intellegent to be able to see the true light and follow all the teachings of all time and be able to tell when the pope and bishops start screwing up.

I wish I could be smart enough to be traditional.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

I wub you Deacon Ed.

As long as you don’t wub me the wong way

Deacon Ed

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Thank-you Deacon Ed for your response. I would like to continue addressing along this topic, if you don’t mind responsing now and then.

Sure – I’m here to serve.

Deacon Ed

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Catholic Church History
Theological Humanism (1517-1648) IV. The Catholic Reformation (1521-85)
37. Liturgical Renaissance

IV
The Catholic Reformation
37. LITURGICAL RENAISSANCE
A. Liturgical Charges
(1) THE MISSAL
Great diversity of usage had developed during the Middle Ages when individual dioceses and religious orders followed their peculiar modifications of the basic Latin Rite. The Council of Trent “clearly distinguished between truth and error and declared the objective character of the Mass. . . . A special commission . . . took another course by establishing the wished-for uniform missal. . . . The new missal had, in round numbers, 150 days free of feasts, not counting octaves. This was achieved by retaining only those feasts which were kept in Rome itself up to the eleventh century. Of the countless feasts later introduced, especially under the influence of the Franciscans, only a small number were preserved, and a few of these of saints outside Italy. . . . Besides the memorial days of the four Latin Fathers who were alone acknowledged in the Middle Ages, those of the Greeks were also included This book was to be from then on the standard in every church and no changes were to be made therein. Only churches which could demonstrate a two-hundred years’ custom for their own usage, were permitted to retain that usage.”
Pope St. Pius V, in sanctioning a revised Missale Romanum by a bull of July 14, 1570, prescribed its use wherever the aforementioned custom had not been proved to the contrary. Dominicans conserved their Missal, while the Franciscans renounced their peculiar usage’s. With few exceptions, the new Missal was adopted by the majority of the regular and secular clergy. It made obligatory recitation of the Introibo and Confiteor at the beginning of Mass, and of the Placeat and St. John’s Gospel at the end, thus completing the evolution of the Mass to the twentieth century, although minor rubrical revisions have since been introduced. Pope Sixtus V by a decree of January, 1588, set up the Congregation of Rites to supervise the new changes, but in the view of some liturgists a period of liturgical rigidity ensued. Clement XIII (1758-69) prescribed the Preface of the Trinity for Sundays, and Leo XIII (18781903) ordered prayers to be said after Low Mass. From 1661 to 1897 there was a prohibition by the Index of translations of the Canon of the Mass into the vernacular, and in place of the Missal the “prayer-book” took its place in the hands of most of the literate laity, until the twentieth century."


Bold type is my addition

Yes, as your quote so aptly shows, the Council of Trent engaged in a humble codification of the liturgy which epitomizes the term, “organic development.”

God bless the Council of Trent!

 

[Mary_Henley]

Apostolic Constitution on New Roman Missal Allocution Letter by Pope Paul VI
MISSALE ROMANUM
April 3, 1969

APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION ON NEW ROMAN MISSAL
Issued by His Holiness, Pope Paul VI
MISSALE ROMANUM

The Roman Missal, promulgated in 1570 by Our predecessor, St. Pius V, by decree of the Council of Trent,(1) has been received by all as one of the numerous and admirable fruits which the holy Council has spread throughout the entire Church of Christ. For four centuries, not only has it furnished the priests of the Latin Rite with the norms for the celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, but also the saintly heralds of the Gospel have carried it almost to the entire world. Furthermore, innumerable holy men have abundantly nourished their piety towards God by its readings from Sacred Scripture or by its prayers, whose general arrangement goes back, in essence, to St. Gregory the Great.
Since that time there has grown and spread among the Christian people the liturgical renewal which, according to Pius XII, Our predecessor of venerable memory, seems to show the signs of God’s providence in the present time, a salvific action of the Holy Spirit in His Church.(2) This renewal has also shown clearly that the formulas of the Roman Missal ought to be revised and enriched. The beginning of this renewal was the work of Our predecessor, this same Pius XII, in the restoration of the Paschal Vigil and of the Holy Week Rite,(3) which formed the first stage of updating the Roman Missal for the present-day mentality.
The recent Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, in promulgating the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium, established the basis for the general revision of the Roman Missal: in declaring “both texts and rites should be drawn up so that they express more clearly the holy things which they signify”;(4) in ordering that “the rite of the Mass is to be revised in such a way that the intrinsic nature and purpose of its several parts, as also the connection between them, can be more clearly manifested, and that devout and active participation by the faithful can be more easily accomplished”;(5) in prescribing that “the treasures of the Bible are to be opened up more lavishly, so that richer fare may be provided for the faithful at the table of God’s Word”;(6) in ordering, finally, that “a new rite for concelebration is to be drawn up and incorporated into the Pontifical and into the Roman Missal.”(7)
One ought not to think, however, that this revision of the Roman Missal has been improvident. The progress that the liturgical sciences has accomplished in the last four centuries has, without a doubt, prepared the way. After the Council of Trent, the study “of ancient manuscripts of the Vatican library and of others gathered elsewhere,” as Our predecessor St. Pius V indicates in the Apostolic Constitution Quo primum, has greatly helped for the revision of the Roman Missal. Since then, however, more ancient liturgical sources have been discovered and published and at the same time liturgical formulas of the Oriental Church have become better known. Many wish that the riches, both doctrinal and spiritual, might not be hidden in the darkness of the libraries, but on the contrary might be brought into the light to illumine and nourish the spirits and souls of Christians.
… In this revision of the Roman Missal, in addition to the three changes mentioned above, namely, the Eucharistic Prayer, the Rite for the Mass and the Biblical Reading, other parts also have been reviewed and considerably modified: the Proper of Seasons, the Proper of Saints, the Common of Saints, ritual Masses and votive Masses. In all of these changes, particular care has been taken with the prayers: not only has their number been increased, so that the new texts might better correspond to new needs, but also their text has been restored on the testimony of the most ancient evidences. …
In conclusion, we wish to give the force of law to all that we have set forth concerning the new Roman Missal. In promulgating the official edition of the Roman Missal, Our predecessor St. Pius V presented it as an instrument of liturgical unity and as a witness to the purity of the worship the Church. While leaving room in the new Missal, according to the order of the Second Vatican Council, “for legitimate variations and adaptations,”(15) we hope nevertheless that the Missal will be received by the faithful as an instrument which bears witness to and which affirms the common unity of all. Thus, in the great diversity of languages, one unique prayer will rise as an acceptable offering to our Father in heaven, through our High-Priest Jesus Christ, in the Holy Spirit…

PAUL VI, POPE

(C)

Christ the same, yesterday, today, and forever!

 

[RobedWithLight]

I also read where Mason leaders heralded Vatican II, the New Mass…I have to find it, if you don’t have that info or know of it.

“But you can’t hide the fact that there are strong resemblances between the the meeting place configuration of your local lodge and many of the new churches.” That scares me…I’ve never been to a lodge…do you have any pictures?

So where have you read it? Mere allegations are meaningless if not corroborated and supported by hard evidence. As another forumer here remarked, statements like these are eerily reminiscent of Jack Chick and Alberto Rivera.

 

[Uxor]

So where have you read it? Mere allegations are meaningless if not corroborated and supported by hard evidence. As another forumer here remarked, statements like these are eerily reminiscent of Jack Chick and Alberto Rivera.

I did read that and not of Jack Chick or Alberto Rivera.

You might want to read or even catch on EWTN interviews with Dr. Alice von Hildebrand regarding the enemies in the Church. There are other books she meantions by an Italtian priest, Don Luigi Villa of the diocease of Brescia, “…who at the request of Padre Pio devoted many years of his life into the possible infiltration of both Freemasons and Communists into the Church.” She stated because of the testimony of ex-Communists like Bella Dodd and the study of Freemasonic documents, one can see their agenda has been carried out “…the exodus of priests, nuns after Vatican II, dissenting theologians not censured, feminism, the pressure put on Rome to abolish priestly celibacy, immorality in the clergy, blasphermous liturgies…”, radical changes, like Pope Benedict’s book Milestones. She says "Only a blind person could deny that many of the Enemy’s plan have been perfectly carried out."
She also stated Christ did not promise us perfect leaders, but that the gates of hell would not prevail. Exactly what is happening. I don’t understand this mindset we should ignore what is going on or what has happen since Vatican II and if you speak about it you are demonized as a bad catholic. I would certainly not ignore anything bad happening in my own personal life or family and would try to correct it immediately.
Nobody is judging any one Pope, Bishop or Priest their heart, soul, spirituality, that is for God to judge. But we can talk about enemies in the church and their agenda and what it has caused.

Paul said to wake up from our sleep…Chapter 13

11 And that knowing the season; that it is now the hour for us to rise from sleep. For now our salvation is nearer than when we believed.

 

[Uxor]

---

Deacon_Ed:
adoremus.org/JPIIadlim1198.html
In 1998 the Pope addressed all the bishops of the US for their Ad Limina visits. He spoke to them how to interpret Vatican II>

**It is also to realize that not all changes have always and everywhere been accompanied by the necessary explanation and catechesis. As a result, in some cases there has been a misunderstanding of the very nature of the Liturgy, leading to abuses, polarization, sometimes even grave scandal.” **

“The challenge now,” he continues, “is to move beyond whatever misunderstandings there have been and to reach the proper point of balance, especially by entering more deeply into the contemplative dimension of worship, which includes a sense of awe, reverence and adoration which are fundamental attitudes in our relationship with God.”
**
Kneeling is a sign of adoration, not standing.**

“It is subjective in that it depends radically upon what the worshippers bring to it, **but it is objective in that it transcends them as the priestly act of Christ himself to which he associates us, but which ultimately does not depend upon us.” **

**The core is not the sense we are the people of God, feeling united with each other or spiritual bonding. **

But, full participation does not mean that everyone does everything. Since this would lead to a clericalizing of the laity and a laicizing of the priesthood, and this was not what the Council had in mind.”

**Yet active participation does not preclude the active passivity of silence, stillness, and listening: indeed, it demands it. Worshippers are not passive, for instance, when listening to the readings or the homily or following the prayers of the celebrant and the chants in music of the Liturgy. These are experiences of silence and stillness, but they are in their own way, profoundly active. In a culture that neither favors nor fosters meditative quiet, the art of interior listening is learned only with difficulty. Here we see the liturgy, though it must always be properly inculturated, must also be counter-cultural.” **

"The use of the vernacular has certainly opened up the treasures of the liturgy to all who take part, but this does not mean that the Latin language, and especially the chants which are so superbly adapted to the genius of the Roman Rite, should be wholly abandoned."

Sounds to me like the Mass is not being said properly according to Vatican II and should be said more in align with the Traditional Mass.

[Edited by moderator per rule: *Do not paste articles from web sites into a post. If you wish to reference an article on the web, link to its web address, instead.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

I’ve allowed Uxor to have several quotes from the article she cited, but please only copy and paste 3 paragraphs from articles to which you have provided a link. Thank you.

 

[Uxor]

I’ve allowed Uxor to have several quotes from the article she cited, but please only copy and paste 3 paragraphs from articles to which you have provided a link. Thank you.

Jean, Thank-you. I 'll remember in the future to post only 3 paragraphs from articles.

 

[BobP123]

Jean, Thank-you. I 'll remember in the future to post only 3 paragraphs from articles.

Just keep them coming. We’re learning a lot from them.

 

[Uxor]

Just keep them coming. We’re learning a lot from them.

Something very interesting I discovered about the restored rite of the Sign of Peace. 3rd Century on…The Sign of Peace could only be given by orthodox Catholics in good standing. Pagans and those not baptized could not share in Christ’s peace. They couldn’t even be admitted into the Church during the sacred mysteries…Those that committed mortal sin were placed in the back of the church, closed off, or even outside and were also denied the Sign of Peace. Only after the completion of formal canonical Penance during Lent could they receive absolution on Holy Thursday and then take their place with the congregation.Also men and women did not sit together in the congregation and only exchanged the sign of peace among their gender (still practiced by Judaisms and some Orientals)

Since the new modern rite was restored supposively to the traditions of the Fathers women and men should not be sitting together and those that are in mortal sin and unbaptized should be sitting in the back completely closed off or outside. All we got was a hand-shake. I wonder too about the penance they had to do. I thought these documents were carefully studied?
.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Something very interesting I discovered about the restored rite of the Sign of Peace. 3rd Century on…The Sign of Peace could only be given by orthodox Catholics in good standing. Pagans and those not baptized could not share in Christ’s peace. They couldn’t even be admitted into the Church during the sacred mysteries…Those that committed mortal sin were placed in the back of the church, closed off, or even outside and were also denied the Sign of Peace. Only after the completion of formal canonical Penance during Lent could they receive absolution on Holy Thursday and then take their place with the congregation.Also men and women did not sit together in the congregation and only exchanged the sign of peace among their gender (still practiced by Judaisms and some Orientals)

Since the new modern rite was restored supposively to the traditions of the Fathers women and men should not be sitting together and those that are in mortal sin and unbaptized should be sitting in the back completely closed off or outside. All we got was a hand-shake. I wonder too about the penance they had to do. I thought these documents were carefully studied?
.

Well, sort of…

The Kiss of Peace (remember, we’re dealing with a Semitic culture and a kiss on both cheeks was traditional) was given between people of the same rank. Thus, bishop to bishop, priest to priest, deacon to deacon. When it got to the deacons the catechumens (unbaptized) had already been excluded from the liturgy and only the faithful and the order of penitents remained. They would exchange the kiss between the orders. Further, it was only with those right around them (maybe four or five people total).

Deacon Ed

 

[Uxor]

Well, sort of…

The Kiss of Peace (remember, we’re dealing with a Semitic culture and a kiss on both cheeks was traditional) was given between people of the same rank. Thus, bishop to bishop, priest to priest, deacon to deacon. When it got to the deacons the catechumens (unbaptized) had already been excluded from the liturgy and only the faithful and the order of penitents remained. They would exchange the kiss between the orders. Further, it was only with those right around them (maybe four or five people total).

Deacon Ed

But also those in a state of grace. I don’t see the point of re-introducing a rite and changing its historic meaning to a mere hand-shake but at the same time justify the rite by saying we want to celebrate as the early christians did and as pure.