FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: What was the TLM Mass like in America Circa 1965-1968?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
The 1960's were before my time as I was born in 1978, but I was doing some research on the troubling things going on within the Church during the tumultuous 1960's.. Did anyone experience the TLM and the scandalous things that went on during this time frame?? I realize the current 1962 TLM Missal, that most Traditional groups use today was also promulgated during 1962-1965, but what happened right after VII closed??
I'll take a few guesses and if I'm wrong please jump in and correct me.

1. By 1966 the priest stopped facing east and some Latin was said in English??
2.  In 1967 tables were introduced and used widespread?
3.  By 1968 most of the Canon of the mass was said in English? I'm assuming this varied by Diocese?

What other strange and heretical things during Mass might have occurred at this time??
Well, I was born in 1963, so my memory of that period is unreliable.  I do remember my sister and I, circa 1966 or 1967, tickling the exposed feet of women kneeling in the pew in front of us.

We were not deliberately trying to be conciliar.

:owl:
Prayers at the foot of the altar including the St Michaels prayer for protection. Thats a big one.
My earliest memories in the late 60s were first, the confusion of my folks. My first recollections of Mass was that it was said in english and probably until I was about 10 or 11, I can remember traveling all over the state of MI to maybe 20 or 30 different churches for either Sunday of Holy Day Masses - most of the time walking out some time within 1 to 30 minutes after mass started with my folks leading the way.

That was a time when I recall some new seminarians who were friends of the family left the seminary or priesthood all together along with literally thousands of others. In a nutshell, priests and nuns  - as well as the tons of previously faithful Catholics from all over the world were leaving the Church in droves. This helped add to the mass confusion that ruled the day.

Well what was happening was my folks were seeking and searching for the Mass they were raised with to hand down the faith to us, their children, but found that everywhere they looked, the NO was either taking hold or had taken over completely - which about completely drove my folks out of the Church all together...............then in the early 70s, enter Fr. Bonfil.  http://www.sspxseminary.org/who-we-are/s...story.html and enter Fr. Feeney, Fr. Altenbach and probably a dozen more who let my folks know they were not crazy.

Shoot, I'm gonna stop here - - - suffice to say that most of the "Faithful" welcomed the revolution that was happening, pretty much the same as many do to this day.


(04-16-2010, 09:25 PM)Stubborn Wrote: [ -> ]Shoot, I'm gonna stop here - - - suffice to say that most of the "Faithful" welcomed the revolution that was happening, pretty much the same as many do to this day.

i don't think that most of the faithful actually welcomed the changes.  some may have welcomed them but i think most were just used to "pray, pay, and obey" so they stayed in the Church and adapted, telling themselves the Church must be right. 

the father of a friend of mine had a nervous breakdown in 1969 or 1970 and the psychiatrist attributed it largely to his distress over the changes in the Mass.  i doubt he was the only Catholic so upset by it all. 

but there were no other options for most people.  he must have been dead fourteen years or more before we had an Indult in this archdiocese and it was a long way away from us.  Indults didn't begin until 1993, as i recall. 

your parents were very fortunate to be somewhere where they eventually found priests who said the TLM.  many people don't have access to one even today.

(04-16-2010, 11:02 PM)GeorgeT Wrote:Aw, man, Stubborn. Just when it was getting good. I love hearing stories from back in those days. Times were tough, spiritually, and you had to fight hard to wet your pallete at the trough of holiness. Your parents were heroes. To think of what we may have lost were it not for peolpe like them and the holy priests and bishops who served them. They will be vindicated in the end,

lol, I had to stop or that post would have ended up being a book.
(04-17-2010, 04:05 AM)i.p.i. Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-16-2010, 09:25 PM)Stubborn Wrote: [ -> ]Shoot, I'm gonna stop here - - - suffice to say that most of the "Faithful" welcomed the revolution that was happening, pretty much the same as many do to this day.

i don't think that most of the faithful actually welcomed the changes.  some may have welcomed them but i think most were just used to "pray, pay, and obey" so they stayed in the Church and adapted, telling themselves the Church must be right. 

the father of a friend of mine had a nervous breakdown in 1969 or 1970 and the psychiatrist attributed it largely to his distress over the changes in the Mass.  i doubt he was the only Catholic so upset by it all. 

but there were no other options for most people.  he must have been dead fourteen years or more before we had an Indult in this archdiocese and it was a long way away from us.  Indults didn't begin until 1993, as i recall. 

your parents were very fortunate to be somewhere where they eventually found priests who said the TLM.  many people don't have access to one even today.

You are absolutely right.....there was the other side of the coin and many people started seeing psychiatrists, "Counseling" was becoming vogue and nervous breakdowns and family troubles were happening all over the place.

I understand what you mean re: "there were no other options.." - pretty amazing how efficiently the TLM was replaced. 
I do nor know what was in the US, but the Universal Church approved the vernacular (using text by the National Conferences of Bishops and the Holy See)
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congre...am_en.html

Calling this heretical is schism.

Also on that time the people facing altar was approved.

In practice most priest kept the Latin and the 'East' facing altar. Major problem was that the discipline in the Liturgy was totally relaxed. Some priest developed new rites, the unity of the Liturgy was abolished.  In Hungary the 1970 New Mass meant order, and that was enforced at least until the eighties. In the Church where I attended Masses the altar was the original (priest facing the altar, his back toward the people) the communion kneeling and to the tongue, always the Confiteor and the Roman Canon, and only those received communion who confessed their sins at least monthly.

When I came to the US I was surprised that everyone is herded to the communion, with minimal opportunity for confessions. The communion into hand was still optional. The communion in both species at least over here (Midwest) was introduces only in the nineties, together with the altar girls.

Otherwise all this is approved by the universal Church, calling the heresy is explicit schism. No one outside of the Magisterium has the right to deny the authority of the Universal Church.


(04-16-2010, 03:07 PM)crusaderfortruth3372 Wrote: [ -> ]The 1960's were before my time as I was born in 1978, but I was doing some research on the troubling things going on within the Church during the tumultuous 1960's.. Did anyone experience the TLM and the scandalous things that went on during this time frame?? I realize the current 1962 TLM Missal, that most Traditional groups use today was also promulgated during 1962-1965, but what happened right after VII closed??
I'll take a few guesses and if I'm wrong please jump in and correct me.

1. By 1966 the priest stopped facing east and some Latin was said in English??
2.  In 1967 tables were introduced and used widespread?
3.  By 1968 most of the Canon of the mass was said in English? I'm assuming this varied by Diocese?

What other strange and heretical things during Mass might have occurred at this time??
Historically in 65, the Mass of Paul VI came out. It was not the current Mass. It had some changes to the 62 Missal with the addition of some English and some changes, but the people in the pews could recognize it. For a comparison see EWTN daily Mass it is pretty close. Then in 70, the changes came fast and furious, all of which you all know. The people started to leave out in a trickle in 66 or so, but it was more like they were sleep walking and many slowly drifted away. In 70 the flood gates opened and they ran away to stay ahead of the flood. I can only speak for my contemporaries, those formed prior to the changes, we left out. Some tried to reach out to us, and play the guilt card, and for some us it worked, but it only postponed their exodus, when they had children, and the scandals hit, it was katie bar the door. I was asked personally in the late 60's early 70's to return. They said I could be a leader and help with the Liturgy, to make it relevant to the young. I told them I didn't know enough Latin. I was being pointed with the remark. A contemporary got conned in to being a Lector but when the scandal hit he pulled his whole family out. He calls them "pe pe squeakers" now. I have said this before there are many who have said to me they will not return until the Mass is brought back. This is not said in meanness but more often in tears. My general impression is they long for the Church but can not reconcile themselves with the current situation. This is not only an accusation to the Church at large but to those in the Traditional Movement. Where are the workers  to pick the low hanging fruit, before it rots? I answer they are too busy arguing amongst themselves, ostensibly about ecumenism versus evangelization, which they have no want to do.
tim
(04-17-2010, 11:59 AM)timoose Wrote: [ -> ]Historically in 65, the Mass of Paul VI came out. It was not the current Mass. It had some changes to the 62 Missal with the addition of some English and some changes, but the people in the pews could recognize it. For a comparison see EWTN daily Mass it is pretty close. Then in 70, the changes came fast and furious, all of which you all know. The people started to leave out in a trickle in 66 or so, but it was more like they were sleep walking and many slowly drifted away. In 70 the flood gates opened and they ran away to stay ahead of the flood. I can only speak for my contemporaries, those formed prior to the changes, we left out. Some tried to reach out to us, and play the guilt card, and for some us it worked, but it only postponed their exodus, when they had children, and the scandals hit, it was katie bar the door. I was asked personally in the late 60's early 70's to return. They said I could be a leader and help with the Liturgy, to make it relevant to the young. I told them I didn't know enough Latin. I was being pointed with the remark. A contemporary got conned in to being a Lector but when the scandal hit he pulled his whole family out. He calls them "pe pe squeakers" now. I have said this before there are many who have said to me they will not return until the Mass is brought back. This is not said in meanness but more often in tears. My general impression is they long for the Church but can not reconcile themselves with the current situation. This is not only an accusation to the Church at large but to those in the Traditional Movement. Where are the workers  to pick the low hanging fruit, before it rots? I answer they are too busy arguing amongst themselves, ostensibly about ecumenism versus evangelization, which they have no want to do.
tim


Tim,

Thanks a bunch for that well thought out response... It does help me grasp things better. :)

I also recall seeing a photo of Fr. Andrew Apostoli being ordained by Bishop Sheen in 1967 and saw the free standing table by that time although the vestments and rubrics seemed similar to what they use with the TLM Mass... I'm guessing that Mass was half in Latin & half vernacular??
Pages: 1 2 3