What was the Mass like before Vatican II?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jeanne71350
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jeanne71350

Guest
I’m a teenager, so you’ll have to forgive me. My teachers have been talking about Vatican II, and I’m intrested in the differences from the Mass tody and the Mass back then. I know the whole thing was in Latin, you weren’t allowed to touch the host, and women had to cover their heads.

Can someone else tell me about the differences?

Thanks so much.

-Jeanne
 
jeanne71350 said:
I’m a teenager, so you’ll have to forgive me. My teachers have been talking about Vatican II, and I’m intrested in the differences from the Mass tody and the Mass back then. I know the whole thing was in Latin, you weren’t allowed to touch the host, and women had to cover their heads.

Can someone else tell me about the differences?

Thanks so much.

-Jeanne
Click to expand...
Lots of silence and meditation.
 
Lots of silence and meditation.
In other words, people were busy with their own prayers while the Liturgy went on before them.
 
You can probably attend one in your area to find out 🙂

ecclesiadei.org/masses.cfm

The general theme of the differences (IMO) is that the priest tends to physically focus more on the tabernacle in a Traditional Mass, whereas in the Ordinary Form Mass his physical focus is very clearly directed at the congregation.

I prefer the TLM, but both are equally valid. Equally beneficial to the souls of the faithful who partake… is a different story. 🤷
 
In addition to your offerings, Jeanne…

The priest said Mass with his back to the congregation, and many of the responses, though not all, weren’t made by the people but by the altar server, who was always male, Mass and the responses being in Latin. However, people had missals which had Latin on one page, and the vernacular, eg English on the facing page, so they were able to follow the Mass. Yes there was the reverence and the mystery…

People knelt for Communion along a Communion rail and waited for the priest to move across along the other side of the rail. You received on the tongue, from the priest only, with a patern or plate held under you chin, usually by an altar server. The congregation was not offered the chalice.

What have I missed?
 
Trishie said:
In addition to your offerings, Jeanne…

The priest said Mass with his back to the congregation, and many of the responses, though not all, weren’t made by the people but by the altar server, who was always male, Mass and the responses being in Latin. However, people had missals which had Latin on one page, and the vernacular, eg English on the facing page, so they were able to follow the Mass. Yes there was the reverence and the mystery…

People knelt for Communion along a Communion rail and waited for the priest to move across along the other side of the rail. You received on the tongue, from the priest only, with a patern or plate held under you chin, usually by an altar server. The congregation was not offered the chalice.

What have I missed?
Click to expand...
The angels leading the choir and hovering over the Altar ! 🙂
 
OnlyAmbrose said:
You can probably attend one in your area to find out 🙂

ecclesiadei.org/masses.cfm

The general theme of the differences (IMO) is that the priest tends to physically focus more on the tabernacle in a Traditional Mass, whereas in the Ordinary Form Mass his physical focus is very clearly directed at the congregation.

I prefer the TLM, but both are equally valid. Equally beneficial to the souls of the faithful who partake… is a different story. 🤷
Click to expand...
So do you call it the ‘tabernacle’ because God dwells in there?
 
diggingdeeper said:
So do you call it the ‘tabernacle’ because God dwells in there?
Click to expand...
:yup: :getholy:

It’s the same name used in scripture for the ‘meeting tent’ the Israelites used in the desert - the one where the Ark of God’s presence was kept and where Moses went to converse with God.
 
I_Believe said:
The angels leading the choir and hovering over the Altar ! 🙂
Click to expand...
:nope: The angels hover over every single altar whereon the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is offered, whether it’s TLM, Divine Liturgy or Pauline Mass.
 
If I were you, I would attend the Traditional Latin Mass, at least once, if only just to see how Catholics worshiped before the “reforms” of the Novus Ordo.

I prefer the Extraordinary Form (TLM) Mass, and am doing my best to convert those I know to attend it.
My teachers have been talking about Vatican II, and I’m intrested in the differences from the Mass tody and the Mass back then. I know the whole thing was in Latin, you weren’t allowed to touch the host, and women had to cover their heads.
Click to expand...
Also, if you actually read the documents of Vatican II, you will see that the things you see today weren’t necessarily called for by the Council.

Things like girl altar servers weren’t called for, receiving in the hand of the Eucharist was not called for, versus populum (facing the people) was not called for, and the Mass was only to have certain parts in the vernacular language, with the preservation of Latin and Gregorian Chant highly preferred and recommended!

Trishie:
You received on the tongue, from the priest only, with a patern or plate held under you chin, usually by an altar server. The congregation was not offered the chalice.
Click to expand...
Reception on the tongue is the normal way of receiving the Eucharist. The option for reception on the hand only exists as an indult/special permission is given by the Vatican.

Redemptionis Sacramentum (it’s a document calling for greater liturgical scrutiny, released in 2004, I think) calls for the use of the paten. It’s to safeguard any Particle of the Host from falling on the ground.
It can be found here:
adoremus.org/RedemptionisSacramentum.html
Also,
[93.] The Communion-plate for the Communion of the faithful should be retained, so as to avoid the danger of the sacred host or some fragment of it falling.

Also, the chalice is not required to be offered in the Novus Ordo Mass. It exists, like so many other things, as an option.

Also, while I have never witnessed one myself, I have heard that the Novus Ordo Mass, when celebrated according to the rubrics, looks and sounds an awful lot like the Traditional Latin Mass.
 
The TLM is beautiful. While I don’t have serious qualms over the NO Mass and attend it regularly, both the TLM and the Divine Liturgy of the Byzantine Church (the only Eastern Catholic liturgy I’ve attended) are definitely more efficacious, in my experience. They simply have a more solemn, Catholic feel to them and are more prayerful - both literally, in the sense of there being more formal prayer, and in the sense of those two services being more conducive to meditation and contemplation of God.

Stephen
 
Trishie said:
In addition to your offerings, Jeanne…

The priest said Mass with his back to the congregation …
What have I missed?
Click to expand...
That rather misses the point: it’s not a matter of the “priest’s back to the congregation.”

The EF liturgy was/is always offered ad orientem, and there are many theological reasons for, and nuances to, ad orientem celebration.

For example, one is that the celebrant and the congregation all face the same direction, which is fitting since the celebrant offers the Sacrifice in the name of the people. Another is that they all together face east (well, at least “liturgical East” depending on the physical placement of the church building) which is also fitting: the sun rises in the east and Jesus is “the Sun of Justice” and the “Light of the World.” And there are many others.

Also, keep in mind that, despite what has become the norm (i.e., the widespread use of the versus populum position), even the editio typica of the OF presumes ad orientem celebration. Admittedly it’s still rather rare, but the use of the ad orientem posture even in the OF, (along with the use of Latin, both of which are part of what has come to be called the “Reform of the Reform,”) is increasing, albeit very slowly.
 
Trishie said:
In addition to your offerings, Jeanne…

The priest said Mass with his back to the congregation, and many of the responses, though not all, weren’t made by the people but by the altar server, who was always male, Mass and the responses being in Latin. However, people had missals which had Latin on one page, and the vernacular, eg English on the facing page, so they were able to follow the Mass. Yes there was the reverence and the mystery…

People knelt for Communion along a Communion rail and waited for the priest to move across along the other side of the rail. You received on the tongue, from the priest only, with a patern or plate held under you chin, usually by an altar server. The congregation was not offered the chalice.

What have I missed?
Click to expand...
You missed a lot actually. A whole lot.
 
BayernAnhaenger said:
If I were you, I would attend the Traditional Latin Mass, at least once, if only just to see how Catholics worshiped before the “reforms” of the Novus Ordo.

I prefer the Extraordinary Form (TLM) Mass, and am doing my best to convert those I know to attend it.

Also, if you actually read the documents of Vatican II, you will see that the things you see today weren’t necessarily called for by the Council.

Things like girl altar servers weren’t called for, receiving in the hand of the Eucharist was not called for, versus populum (facing the people) was not called for, and the Mass was only to have certain parts in the vernacular language, with the preservation of Latin and Gregorian Chant highly preferred and recommended!

Trishie:

Reception on the tongue is the normal way of receiving the Eucharist. The option for reception on the hand only exists as an indult/special permission is given by the Vatican.

Redemptionis Sacramentum (it’s a document calling for greater liturgical scrutiny, released in 2004, I think) calls for the use of the paten. It’s to safeguard any Particle of the Host from falling on the ground.
It can be found here:
adoremus.org/RedemptionisSacramentum.html
Also,
[93.] The Communion-plate for the Communion of the faithful should be retained, so as to avoid the danger of the sacred host or some fragment of it falling.

Also, the chalice is not required to be offered in the Novus Ordo Mass. It exists, like so many other things, as an option.

Also, while I have never witnessed one myself, I have heard that the Novus Ordo Mass, when celebrated according to the rubrics, looks and sounds an awful lot like the Traditional Latin Mass.
Click to expand...
Very true, everything you said. Oh and EWTN aired a Novus Mass celebrated in such a fashion back in…November i think. It was from some oratory in England in honor of Cardinal Newman. I though it was a TLM during the Canon, and the rest of the Mass was very similar. They didnt use Gregorian Chant except for 1 instance, everything else was unfortunatel some some like drawn out very high or very low, gaudy, cant follow along at all piece of music. The Agnus Dei took like 7 minutes! So much for active and full participation.
 
jeanne71350, you’re coming of age at a fascinating moment in Church history. Here’s my Concise History of the Mass in the 20th Century:

    • The official language of the Church has been Latin for 17 centuries or so. It still is today. It enables people from all over the world to understand each other. (E.g., at Vatican II, Bishops from all over the globe gave their speeches to each other in Latin.)
    • In the late 19th century and early 20th century, some Priests started what came to be called The Liturgical Movement (LM). They wanted people to gain a greater appreciation of the Mass as it was celebrated then.
    • Along those lines, affordable, easy-to-use Sunday Missals, with Latin on left and English or other local language on right became common.
    • But, many people were skeptical of other LM ideas, such as increased use of local language instead of Latin, etc. Many people weren’t convinced that the proposed changes would have the desired effect.
    • During the Second Vatican Council and immediately afterwards, LM ideas carried the day. A new Mass was created, the Novus Ordo (NO/OF).
    • The result was that the old Mass (TLM/EF) was virtually forbidden for a generation. So, when I was your age, the traditional Latin Mass was virtually non-existent. 😦
    • Then, around 1984, the TLM was allowed by special permission of the local Bishop. Now, since 2007, thanks to a special executive order from Pope Benedict XVI, [Summorum Pontificum (http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/b16SummorumPontificum.htm), any Priest is entitled to celebrate the TLM, now called Extraordinary Form (EF).
    • This new, restored status of the TLM/EF is extremely threatening to some people. :eek: :confused: So, what we’re seeing from many now is a furious, mean-spirited reaction. Thus, we constantly encounter distorted descriptions of the old Mass. :rolleyes:
    • The big news: Thanks to Summorum Pontificum, people no longer have to rely on distorted, partisan descriptions. In fact, the partisans are upset because now people can see for themselves.
    • So, the plain truth is: As you explore this question, you’ll encounter tons of biased rhetoric intended deliberately to create a distorted image of the old Mass. Nobody likes to be laughed at; so ridicule is a very effective way to keep people away from TLM/EF.
    • Gotta ask yourself: What are the people who constantly run down the TLM/EF so afraid of? Why are they so anxious to keep you away from it? :hmmm:
    Trishie said:
    The priest said Mass with his back to the congregation,
    Click to expand...
    Typical rhetorical distortion intended to make a profound spiritual advantage of the TLM/EF appear silly or absurd. A more accurate description would be: The Priest celebrant and the faithful assisting at Mass all face God together.
    Trishie said:
    and many of the responses, though not all, weren’t made by the people but by the altar server, who was always male, Mass and the responses being in Latin.
    Click to expand...
    To fill out that rhetorically shaded picture: Audible vocalization of rote responses by laymen never used to be considered the main thing about Mass. People thought it was pretty much OK to leave that to the neighborhood boys. The lay adults were engaged by what they understood to be far more important: Joining their sacrifices to that of the Priest in silence and stillness, which used to be called “assisting at Mass.”

    (BTW, if feminist complaints about altar boys trouble you, there are lots of reasons for it. Also, keep in mind: all the neighborhood girls had a role in the choir that was quite comparable to the role of altar boys.)
    Trishie said:
    However, people had missals which had Latin on one page, and the vernacular, eg English on the facing page, so they were able to follow the Mass. Yes there was the reverence and the mystery…
    Click to expand...
    True enough. It’s outrageously ironic that when the words of the Mass got easier to understand, real appreciation for what happens at Mass seems to have been lost. In other words, sadly, the people who were skeptical of LM ideas were spot on.

    If you don’t believe me, take a poll after NO/OF Mass. Ask people who just listened to whole thing in their mother tongue:
    • What are the main parts of the Mass?
    • What was the most important action of the Mass? Who did it?
    • What does it mean to describe the Mass as a sacrifice?
    • What does in persona Christi, or English equivalent, mean?
    Trishie said:
    People knelt for Communion along a Communion rail and waited for the priest to move across along the other side of the rail. You received on the tongue, from the priest only, with a patern or plate held under you chin, usually by an altar server.
    Click to expand...
    See? Another attempt to use rhetoric to make a great advantage of the TLM/EF seem wrong-headed? The truth: To receive kneeling on the tongue is one of the most wonderful things about TLM/EF. Try it.

    In fact, although many Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (EMHC) at NO/OF don’t seem to realize it, saving The Precious Ten Minutes isn’t the most important thing. Ironically, one thing you’ll notice at TLM/EF is that, because EMHC don’t tramp up to altar to get hosts and chalices, Communion goes pretty quickly.
    Trishie said:
    The congregation was not offered the chalice.
    Click to expand...
    So what?
    Trishie said:
    What have I missed?
    Click to expand...
    Everything that people who approach TLM/EF with an open heart and mind perceive? :whacky:

    I’m sorry that you’re unable to appreciate TLM/EF, Trishie. However, I do pray that the tactics of distortion and ridicule, that have held sway for so long, won’t work any more.

    ASD​

    Traditional Latin Mass: Translation and Grammar
 
Trishie said:
and waited for the priest to move across along the other side of the rail.
Click to expand...
Wow I didn’t even notice that word “waited” until ASD commented.

Kinda like how you wait in line! Oh no!

It’s called logistics Ma’am.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top