When did we start reading OT in mass?

[mo3]

I attend a Catholic graduate school and a professor stated: “We never read the Old Testament during mass before Pope Pius XXII.” (he was pope 1939 to 1958)

Is this true?

Where can I find official Church documents to prove / disprove this?

 

[jrsmith]

soo…I guess you never heard of Vatican II?

Vatican II added a third reading…before that there were only 2, or at least only 2 for the usual sunday mass…feast days, etc would of course occasionally include old testament readings prior to Vatican II.

That’s not to say that there wasn’t a lot of scripture in the Mass before Vatican II…three examples of scripture taken out would be Psalm 42 (said at the beginning of the Mass), Psalm 26 (said when the Priest / Bishop is washing his hands), and John 1 (said at the end of every daily mass)

For comparison see here for a pre Vatican II Missal: mysite.verizon.net/missale/

 

[japhy]

I attend a Catholic graduate school and a professor stated: “We never read the Old Testament during mass before Pope Pius XII.” (he was pope 1939 to 1958)

Is this true?

No, it’s not true. First of all, the earliest liturgies of the Church only had the Old Testament to read from!

This page shows you some of the contents of the 1962 Roman Missal. You can see that there are readings from the Old Testament (although much less than the New Testament).

The prayers of the 1962 Missal are heavily steeped in the Psalms, by the way. The Iudica Me and Lavabo, for example.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

The very earliest Christians (Catholics) still attended Sabbath services at the temple (which became our Liturgy of the Word), they than celebrated the passion and resurrection on Sunday (Liturgy of the Eucharist).

As others have said, previous lectionaries did not have as many readings per Sunday Mass, but Catholics have always read from the OT at Mass. And of course, the other prayers during Mass are almost all Biblically based.

 

[uxordepp]

Quoting the 1962 Missal will not help much, as this was published several years after Pius XII

 

[malphono]

Quoting the 1962 Missal will not help much, as this was published several years after Pius XII

That makes no difference. It’s cycle of readings predates it more than 400 years.

 

[malphono]

No, it’s not true. First of all, the earliest liturgies of the Church only had the Old Testament to read from!

This page shows you some of the contents of the 1962 Roman Missal. You can see that there are readings from the Old Testament (although much less than the New Testament).

The prayers of the 1962 Missal are heavily steeped in the Psalms, by the way. The Iudica Me and Lavabo, for example.

It’s also interesting (to me at lest) to note that the Ambrosian and Mozarabic Rites have traditionally had three readings: one from the OT in addition to the Epistle and Gospel.

 

[patsydtr]

I attend a Catholic graduate school and a professor stated: “We never read the Old Testament during mass before Pope Pius XXII.” (he was pope 1939 to 1958)

Is this true?

Where can I find official Church documents to prove / disprove this?

Just so you will be clear…there has never been a Pope Pius XXll (that is twenty-second for those of you who are unfamiliar with Roman Numerals) Your professor must have meant, Pope John XXlll. ( twenty-third)

 

[mo3]

Just so you will be clear…there has never been a Pope Pius XXll (that is twenty-second for those of you who are unfamiliar with Roman Numerals) Your professor must have meant, Pope John XXlll. ( twenty-third)

You are correct. This was a typo. I meant Pope Pius XII. He was definitly talking about Pope Pius XII and not John XXIII.

God Bless.

 

[mo3]

soo…I guess you never heard of Vatican II?

Vatican II was after Pope Pius XII. Maybe the professor meant the original Pope Pius I. Not sure if his statement is still true.

God Bless.

 

[malphono]

Vatican II was after Pope Pius XII. Maybe the professor meant the original Pope Pius I. Not sure if his statement is still true.

No, it had to be Pius XII, who issued the encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu on Sacred Scripture. Some work on the “revised” Latin Psalter etc was done during his reign, so he is remembered for things Biblical.

FYI, PP S Pius I reigned from 140-155 AD.

 

[SMHW]

I attend a Catholic graduate school and a professor stated: “We never read the Old Testament during mass before Pope Pius XXII.” (he was pope 1939 to 1958)

Is this true?

Where can I find official Church documents to prove / disprove this?

In what kind of context was this statement made? It’s obviously not literally accurate but are you sure it wasn’t meant to be hyperbole?

 

[mo3]

In what kind of context was this statement made? It’s obviously not literally accurate but are you sure it wasn’t meant to be hyperbole?

It was definitely not hyperbole. His point was that the Church ignored the Bible until Pope Pius XII and Vatican II. I don’t believe this is an accurate statement and I am trying to prove my point. He made this statement to help prove his point. I don’t believe his statement and I don’t believe his point either.

He was also trying to say the Church was not teaching the Bible to the lay people before that time, which is mostly true.

 

[japhy]

It was definitely not hyperbole. His point was that the Church ignored the Bible until Pope Pius XII and Vatican II.

That’s utterly false. See St. Thomas Aquinas’ Catena Aurea. See the proceedings of the Council of Trent (which refer to Scripture over and over).

He was also trying to say the Church was not teaching the Bible to the lay people before that time, which is mostly true.

And the supporting evidence is found where?

 

[malphono]

mo3;6411380:

It was definitely not hyperbole. His point was that the Church ignored the Bible until Pope Pius XII and Vatican II. I don’t believe this is an accurate statement and I am trying to prove my point. He made this statement to help prove his point. I don’t believe his statement and I don’t believe his point either.

That’s utterly false. See St. Thomas Aquinas’ Catena Aurea. See the proceedings of the Council of Trent (which refer to Scripture over and over).

Yes, it’s utterly false, no question about it. But as I’m sure you are painfully aware, this is a very common attack by the “children of Vatican II” against all that came before their agenda.

mo3;6411380:

He was also trying to say the Church was not teaching the Bible to the lay people before that time, which is mostly true.

And the supporting evidence is found where?

There isn’t any, but I don’t have to tell you that. Apparently the “professor” was unaware of Divino Afflante Spiritu, among other things.

 

[mo3]

That’s utterly false. See St. Thomas Aquinas’ Catena Aurea. See the proceedings of the Council of Trent (which refer to Scripture over and over).

And the supporting evidence is found where?

I know being raised Catholic, and 12 years of Catholic school in the USA, I was not taught much about the Bible. This was something that was lacking. Most USA churches did not have Bible studies. It is much better now.

 

[japhy]

There isn’t any, but I don’t have to tell you that. Apparently the “professor” was unaware of Divino Afflante Spiritu, among other things.

Well, DAS was from Pope Pius XII. But luckily, his predecessors wrote about Scripture too.

 

[japhy]

I know being raised Catholic, and 12 years of Catholic school in the USA, I was not taught much about the Bible. This was something that was lacking. Most USA churches did not have Bible studies. It is much better now.

Just because there weren’t Bible studies doesn’t mean there was no Scriptural teaching. I’d expect some homilies and sermons were based on Scripture, no!?

 

[porthos11]

In any case, it’s false that we never read the Old Testament in the Extraordinary Form. Several Mass formularies do use OT readings (such as those for several weekdays in Lent), in which case they are called Lessons.

 

[mo3]

Just because there weren’t Bible studies doesn’t mean there was no Scriptural teaching. I’d expect some homilies and sermons were based on Scripture, no!?

I was not saying there was “no” scripture teaching. Outside of mass, bible study was minimal before Vatican II and shortly thereafter until changes began to be implemented. Most religious education was from the Baltimore catechism and such. It was not about learning the Bible.