Would a 1966 Missal work at a Latin Mass?

[Rabbititus]

In the next month or so I plan on attending a 1962 mass for the first time. I think the church, which is about 40 mins to an hour away, uses paperback missals with only the ordinary in them, and I’d like to have something with the readings in it, as I comprehend biblical readings better when I can follow along with them. I don’t currently have a lot of money to buy a nice 1962 missal, but I do have two old ones: a 1942 “My Sunday Missal by Father Stedman” and a 1966 “St. Joseph Continuous Sunday Missal.” The Stedman missal is rather fragile so I don’t like the idea of using it for mass, so I was wondering if the 1966 missal would be okay to use. I realise the ordinary was revised in 1964, but it’s my understanding that the calendar and reading cycle would be the same.

So, would the 66 missal work if I really only want to use it to follow the readings?

 

[joelacour]

I have a 66 Missal and went to my first Tridentine Mass some years ago with that missal. The '66 Mass was the one that I learned on as an altar boy, so I thought I was OK. Almost, but not quite .

What was different:
a) Prayers at the foot of the altar. The Judica me is absent. Prayers begin with I will go into the altar of God… and continue the same in both the '66 and '62 missals

b) Everything but the Canon was in English. My Maryknoll Missal does have the Latin translations.

c) Many of the multiple Signs of the Cross during the Canon were replaced by one Sign.

d) Last Gospel is gone.

e) Lord, I am not worthy is said once, not thrice.

Readings are the same, Canon is the same. Movements of the Priest and servers are the same.

HTH

 

[Rabbititus]

Thank you! I think the 66 missal will probably work okay then. I can alway make cards with the Judica me and last gospel and simply stick them into the missal.

Neither missal has the entire ordinary in Latin, but the '66 missal does have all the mass responses in Latin in the back - another reason I sort of prefer to use it over the '42 missal.

 

[Chatter163]

Lord, I am not worthy is said once, not thrice.

Readings are the same, Canon is the same. Movements of the Priest and servers are the same.

Actually, the *Domine, non sum dignus *(Lord, I am not worthy) was still said three times until the new Order of Mass was begun on Advent Sunday, 1969.

And the movements of the priest were not quite the same, since the Liturgy of the Word and Eucharist were begun in 1965, and most places by 1966 were already using the chair for the Liturgy of the Word, and a free standing altar. Depending on the publisher, the diagrams and directions in a 1966 people’s missal would probably reflect this, which is a major difference from the priest facing the altar and remaining there for most of the Mass.

 

[Rabbititus]

The St. Joseph Continuous Sunday Missal doesn’t have a lot of illustrations (mostly modern graphic illustrations that sort of pertain to the different feast days). There are no diagrams of what the priest is doing, nor any real indication of his actions, other than the “sign of the cross” symbols interspersed in the text.

However, it does have directions for whether one is to sit, stand, or kneel. Would the 1966 notes about this be accurate? I suppose it’s not too important, as I would just do what everyone else does.