What was the transition like?

[damooster]

I’m not asking this to cause any arguments or debates; it’s a genuine question.

I was just wondering what it was like to go from the Traditional Latin Mass to the Novus Ordo Mass. Was there a transition period where people were taught the NO Mass, and if so, what was that like? Or were missals distributed and it just happened??

I ask because I just read about Padre Pio, and it states that he and St. Escriva were the only two priests that were given permission to celebrate the TLM after the changes were made (I imagine because of their age?).

Thanks in advance.

 

[Phemie]

My memory may be faulty, after all, it’s been 44 years.

I recall learning the Mass responses at school during the lunch hour. Sister took us to her class and we went over them again and again. It’s not my recollection that our parents were given that kind of training if they were given any at all. One day we came to church and there were little yellow folders in the pews. These were the new ‘words’ we 'd be saying that day. I recall thinking that people were not saying things the way we’d been trained to say them so I made sure I spoke more loudly to kind of lead them. My poor mother was embarrassed and told me to shut up – though in kinder terms.

 

[puzzleannie]

I was in high school so can only give my own recollection of how things were done in our parish (Archdiocese of Detroit). The desctruction of the sanctuary was accomplished literally from one Sunday to the next in our new church, barely 10 years old, built with 20 years donations of working class people, after they had built a school first, the loving design of our late pastor. Imported marble altar rail literally trashed on a junk heap (we saw it being hauled away) a third of the hand carved pews similary hauled away, magnificent organ could not be moved from the abandoned choir loft but electronics were installed in the new spacious choir area to the left of the altar (which necessitated obscuringg St. Joseph’s side altar). Our organist-choir director quit within the year and was hired by a large affluent Methodist congregation so he could continue to support his family.

The changes in the mass were enacted through poorly printed “handouts” same with the (dreadful) songs. it was a couple of years before missalettes and hymnals were availble. There were pulpit and bulletin announcements to the effect that hey folks this is the way it is going to be, but except for perhaps one paragraph on the vertical vs horizontal dimension, and the priest praying with the people, not much on the “why” are we doing this. We got a bit more in our HS classes, but accompanied by such a wash of other new information (for instance hearing a priest say at a retreat our most commonly confessed sins are no longer sins–the ones still popular on the CAF morality forum), that it might have got lost in translation.

We were involved in school activities that involved frequent visits to other Catholic schools in the Diocese and Mass in those parishes or at diocesan wide events, and got a bit more acclimation and education, but not enough. the most notable visible change which did seem to happen almost overnight, in addition to moving choir areas, was the concommitent disappearance of the tabernacle and it relegation to a side altar or another location altogether and with that the lapse in genuflexion, exposition and adoration, holy hours, benediction, 40 hours and other Eucharistic devotions.

What I remember most are 2 things. One that changes happened in dribs and drabs over a few years and the perpetual frustration of almost every Advent some new tweaks being introduced, but never everywhere at once, so you got jumpy everytime you attended another parish, never knowing what to expect. I remember longing for one global change, then let’s just settle down.

The second is the feeling expressed almost universally among my generation, in HS and college campus ministries, and reinforced by the way all of this was presented by our teachers and such, that, since the Eucharist was no longer so honored and so central a presence in our churches that there was no longer any visible honor paid to the reserved sacrament, and therefore almost overnight it seemed, a conviction that it was therefore only a symbol, not a reality, of Christ’s presence. This, accompanied by the repetition of the theme that Christ is present most fully in the people, the assembly, and the diminution of the priest’s central role, is I am convince responsible for decline in belief in the Real Presence of the Eucharist which is so much a feature of Catholic writing, teaching and catechetics produced by many of my generation.

 

[damooster]

It’s not my recollection that our parents were given that kind of training if they were given any at all. One day we came to church and there were little yellow folders in the pews.

Being an adult must have been difficult with these changes. I mean, these were big changes.

 

[damooster]

The changes in the mass were enacted through poorly printed “handouts” same with the (dreadful) songs. it was a couple of years before missalettes and hymnals were availble. There were pulpit and bulletin announcements to the effect that hey folks this is the way it is going to be, but except for perhaps one paragraph on the vertical vs horizontal dimension, and the priest praying with the people, not much on the “why” are we doing this.

What was the atmosphere like as far as cooperation from the parishioners? Did you witness a lot of objection to the changes, and if so, were people pretty vocal about it, or did most people just go along with everything?

We got a bit more in our HS classes, but accompanied by such a wash of other new information (for instance hearing a priest say at a retreat our most commonly confessed sins are no longer sins–the ones still popular on the CAF morality forum), that it might have got lost in translation.

I can’t imagine what that was like, being told that one day the sins I used to confess were no longer sins!

The second is the feeling expressed almost universally among my generation, in HS and college campus ministries, and reinforced by the way all of this was presented by our teachers and such, that, since the Eucharist was no longer so honored and so central a presence in our churches that there was no longer any visible honor paid to the reserved sacrament, and therefore almost overnight it seemed, a conviction that it was therefore only a symbol, not a reality, of Christ’s presence. This, accompanied by the repetition of the theme that Christ is present most fully in the people, the assembly, and the diminution of the priest’s central role, is I am convince responsible for decline in belief in the Real Presence of the Eucharist which is so much a feature of Catholic writing, teaching and catechetics produced by many of my generation.

So, you did not appreciate the changes made by the Second Vatican Council?

 

[Don9of11]

The same thing is going to happen again with the new Roman Missal that will be coming out. I suppose it’s not as drastic as switching from Latin to English mass, but still changes that most of us may find difficult. In addition, many churches in NE Ohio are closing which is very hard for so many. The reasons for closing vary from a shortage of priest to people moving out to rural areas.

 

[Aramis]

I’m not asking this to cause any arguments or debates; it’s a genuine question.

I was just wondering what it was like to go from the Traditional Latin Mass to the Novus Ordo Mass. Was there a transition period where people were taught the NO Mass, and if so, what was that like? Or were missals distributed and it just happened??

I ask because I just read about Padre Pio, and it states that he and St. Escriva were the only two priests that were given permission to celebrate the TLM after the changes were made (I imagine because of their age?).

Thanks in advance.

As a child, I remember clearly different parts being in English every week in the early 1970’s. I remember also being able to understand what was going on because of it, and being less focused upon Dad’s hands as something to play with, because I could understand what was being said. I remember Fr. Bead Wilkes, OP, saying that there were changes coming again, and more readings.

The parish I was in had a free-standing altar already; it’s still in a position where it can be used either vs populem or “ad orientam” (it’s actually in the south end of the building, and had been for years).

Now, I don’t remember the 62 nor 65 missals, but I do remember teaching about why the two readings and a Gospel was happening.

 

[Dicerning]

I’m not asking this to cause any arguments or debates; it’s a genuine question.

I was just wondering what it was like to go from the Traditional Latin Mass to the Novus Ordo Mass. Was there a transition period where people were taught the NO Mass, and if so, what was that like? Or were missals distributed and it just happened??

I ask because I just read about Padre Pio, and it states that he and St. Escriva were the only two priests that were given permission to celebrate the TLM after the changes were made (I imagine because of their age?).

Thanks in advance.

You are asking a quesion on a subject that is approaching 50 years of age. BTW there are photos of Pio celebrating the Novus Ordo.

 

[Phemie]

The same thing is going to happen again with the new Roman Missal that will be coming out. I suppose it’s not as drastic as switching from Latin to English mass, but still changes that most of us may find difficult. In addition, many churches in NE Ohio are closing which is very hard for so many. The reasons for closing vary from a shortage of priest to people moving out to rural areas.

We all resist change, some more than others, but the coming change is minor compared to what happened in the 60s.

I hope they give the people the new translation of the Ordinary, side by side with the present translation, and give them a few months to familiarize themselves with it.
.
Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t think the average PIP is going to want a long theological explanation for the change, just a simple “The early translation was done quickly so that we could start using English as soon as possible. Unfortunately it was not as accurate a translation as it should have been and we’ve been a long time correcting that. Let us thank God that we finally have a translation that is faithful to what is said in Latin.”

 

[Dicerning]

The same thing is going to happen again with the new Roman Missal that will be coming out. I suppose it’s not as drastic as switching from Latin to English mass, but still changes that most of us may find difficult. In addition, many churches in NE Ohio are closing which is very hard for so many. The reasons for closing vary from a shortage of priest to people moving out to rural areas.

The translation of the new missal is nowhere near as drastic of change as the TLM to Novus ordo. Nowhere near.

 

[Dicerning]

I was in high school so can only give my own recollection of how things were done in our parish (Archdiocese of Detroit). The desctruction of the sanctuary was accomplished literally from one Sunday to the next in our new church, barely 10 years old, built with 20 years donations of working class people, after they had built a school first, the loving design of our late pastor. Imported marble altar rail literally trashed on a junk heap (we saw it being hauled away) a third of the hand carved pews similary hauled away, magnificent organ could not be moved from the abandoned choir loft but electronics were installed in the new spacious choir area to the left of the altar (which necessitated obscuringg St. Joseph’s side altar). Our organist-choir director quit within the year and was hired by a large affluent Methodist congregation so he could continue to support his family.

The changes in the mass were enacted through poorly printed “handouts” same with the (dreadful) songs. it was a couple of years before missalettes and hymnals were availble. There were pulpit and bulletin announcements to the effect that hey folks this is the way it is going to be, but except for perhaps one paragraph on the vertical vs horizontal dimension, and the priest praying with the people, not much on the “why” are we doing this. We got a bit more in our HS classes, but accompanied by such a wash of other new information (for instance hearing a priest say at a retreat our most commonly confessed sins are no longer sins–the ones still popular on the CAF morality forum), that it might have got lost in translation.

We were involved in school activities that involved frequent visits to other Catholic schools in the Diocese and Mass in those parishes or at diocesan wide events, and got a bit more acclimation and education, but not enough. the most notable visible change which did seem to happen almost overnight, in addition to moving choir areas, was the concommitent disappearance of the tabernacle and it relegation to a side altar or another location altogether and with that the lapse in genuflexion, exposition and adoration, holy hours, benediction, 40 hours and other Eucharistic devotions.

What I remember most are 2 things. One that changes happened in dribs and drabs over a few years and the perpetual frustration of almost every Advent some new tweaks being introduced, but never everywhere at once, so you got jumpy everytime you attended another parish, never knowing what to expect. I remember longing for one global change, then let’s just settle down.

The second is the feeling expressed almost universally among my generation, in HS and college campus ministries, and reinforced by the way all of this was presented by our teachers and such, that, since the Eucharist was no longer so honored and so central a presence in our churches that there was no longer any visible honor paid to the reserved sacrament, and therefore almost overnight it seemed, a conviction that it was therefore only a symbol, not a reality, of Christ’s presence. This, accompanied by the repetition of the theme that Christ is present most fully in the people, the assembly, and the diminution of the priest’s central role, is I am convince responsible for decline in belief in the Real Presence of the Eucharist which is so much a feature of Catholic writing, teaching and catechetics produced by many of my generation.

This is superbly written. BRAVO BRAVO I was a small of 3-5 years old during the change. I barely remember some things done differently but mostly due to my parish being slow on the transition. But along with the rejection of Humanae Vitae the drastic change in the Mass overnight significantly damaged the Church in regards to its source and summitt…which is…the Eucharist.

 

[PaulAndrew83]

They were not the only Priests given dispensation.

In Ireland in a place called Rathowen a very old Priest used to say the TLM till I think 1983.
There are other old Priests who gained a dispensation as well unless the Bishops were total modernist.

Paul

 

[PhilotheaZ]

I was a child when it happened, but I don’t remember much preparation. We just did what we were told and didn’t question why.

I do remember that I used to love using my Latin-English children’s hand missal before the changes, and that I loved looking at the Latin words on the left and comparing them to the English on the right, trying to figure out the exact meaning of each word by comparing where they occurred in the sentence, similarities between Latin and English words, etc. (OK, I admit that I was a bit of a linguistic nerd from a very early age; maybe that’s why I ended up studying French in college, and why I love the return of the Latin Mass.)

I do remember many of the words from the first English translation of the Mass. The English words we used when I was a child were VERY similar to the “new” translation that has recently been approved and that I hope will be introduced soon. If I were to recite from memory some of the prayers of the Mass I remember from my childhood when the English translation first came out, and if you were to compare them to the “new” translation, you would be amazed at the similarity. It makes me wonder why they took so long this time around. They could have picked up a copy of one of the worship aids from the very first Novus Ordo Masses and had their work done in about a week’s time. I guess they have to justify the translators’ salaries, royalty fees, etc.

 

[ProVobis]

I would like to add to the above comments, most of which are pretty accurate, that the transition period came in the midst of three assassinations, an escalating Vietnam War, and a changing sociological climate where Medicare and Medicaid came into being and more and more pro-abortion legislation was being signed. In my opinion Humanae Vitae was being rejected because ABC was still seen as the lessor of two evils. To what effect all of this has to do with liturgical changes, I don’t know, but I think it’s more than just a coincidence they happened at the same time.

 

[PhilotheaZ]

I would like to add to the above comments, most of which are pretty accurate, that the transition period came in the midst of three assassinations, an escalating Vietnam War, and a changing sociological climate where Medicare and Medicaid came into being and more and more pro-abortion legislation was being signed. In my opinion Humanae Vitae was being rejected because ABC was still seen as the lessor of two evils. To what effect all of this has to do with liturgical changes, I don’t know, but I think it’s more than just a coincidence they happened at the same time.

I think it was part of a wholesale rejection of authority, banalization of anything sacred, a general “watering down” of anything truly Catholic, anything holding us to a higher standard.

Not that use of the vernacular has to mean a loss of the sense of the sacred, but the translations were horrendous, and lost the sense of awe and mystery contained in the originals. I think it would be great if we could have a literal English (or other vernacular) translation of the Tridentine Mass (with no allowances for priests to ad lib), retaining its beauty and “other-worldliness” but more understandable to a generation that has difficulty with a foreign language.

 

[brotherhrolf]

I, too, was in high school and can echo Puzzleannie’s statement save that I was in the Archdiocese of New Orleans. It was every bit as rapid in my parish and was far more rapid at my Catholic boys high school where we had what would be recognizable as the NO by early 1968 and guitars and dreadfully sappy songs by September of 1968.

My parish church had a state of the art electronic organ which was not used after 1969. Ours was a brand new church consecrated in the spring of 1967. It had altar rails in the beginning which, of course, are long gone.

It was very difficult on the adults in my neighborhood. Almost all of us attended the “main” Mass at 10 on Sunday. When the guitars came, some moved to the 8 am Mass. When the guitars appeared at the 8 they moved to the Vigil Mass on Saturday where there were no guitars. Others could not stand what had happened and simply stopped going to Mass.

 

[tinalewis]

I’m not asking this to cause any arguments or debates; it’s a genuine question.

I was just wondering what it was like to go from the Traditional Latin Mass to the Novus Ordo Mass. Was there a transition period where people were taught the NO Mass, and if so, what was that like? Or were missals distributed and it just happened??

I ask because I just read about Padre Pio, and it states that he and St. Escriva were the only two priests that were given permission to celebrate the TLM after the changes were made (I imagine because of their age?).

Thanks in advance.

Thank YOU for a refreshing, interesting, intelligent question in this forum! And I love how it prompted a discussion among folks who “were there”. Thanks much!

 

[Lormar]

Here’s my recollection of it.

The first thing I remember was being happy that we didn’t have to cover our heads anymore.

It started out in 1965 by giving the responses in Latin. And then, before we could accustom ourselves to that, it took off like wildfire. The changes came so rapidly, that our heads were spinning. It got to the point that we hated going to Mass each Sunday for fear of what new thing would be foistered upon us. We had no instructions as to the “why” of the changes, only that our Holy Father wanted it and we had to obey.

Since I wanted to become a nun, I spent a lot of time visiting convents and making retreats. No matter where I went, the Sisters would say how tired the priests were with people complaining about the changes and the new Mass.

It was a hard decade to live through, and I often wonder how we retained any sanity at the end of it. You young people have no idea of how much everything changed - the world and the Church of 1960 bore no resemblence to the world and Church of 1970.

 

[ProVobis]

The changes came so rapidly, that our heads were spinning. It got to the point that we hated going to Mass each Sunday for fear of what new thing would be foistered upon us. We had no instructions as to the “why” of the changes, only that our Holy Father wanted it and we had to obey.

The changes came so rapidly that parishes were on different wavelengths, so to speak. Everything seemed to be out of synch. It also became popular to “parish shop” for something better or to see what the other guy was doing.

 

[malphono]

I was in high school so can only give my own recollection of how things were done in our parish (Archdiocese of Detroit).

Oh yeah. I was there during the debut of the Novus Ordo (not that what immediately preceded it was much better) and can say from experience that Detroit in those days was something else. With its then-Archbishop (and especially one of the two auxiliaries in particular) at the helm, it was in the vanguard of the post-conciliar liturgical free-for-all where offering Mass in Latin and/or ad orientem was considered almost a capital crime.