FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Is the 1962 Missal the Tridentine Mass?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Is the 1962 Missal the Tridentine Mass?


(Note: This is a question that I find interesting purely from an academic point of view. I defer judgement on the merits of reforms to the Mass to the reader.)


The Traditional Latin Mass - today officially referred to as the “Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite” - as many different names by which it is referred. “Mass of Ages,” Usus Antiquior (my personal choice, although a tad pretentious) etc. One of the most popular names is the “Tridentine mass,” so chosen because of the obvious connection between the Mass and the bull Quo Primum issued by Pope St. Pius V at the conclusion of the Council of Trent.


Is the traditional latin mass that we all know and love really the mass of St. Pius V or of the Council of Trent. In its essential elements - yes. In fact the Mass of St. Pius V is nearly identical to the Roman missal of 1474, which was presumably similar to the usage of the mass that had existed for centuries in Rome. However, there are a number of differences between the Missal of 1570 and that of 1962 that are worth commenting on. Strictly speaking, the “Tridentine Mass” has not been celebrated since 1604. Let us examine the ways this mass has evolved over time.


Changes in the Mass from 1570 to 1962:

• In the 1570 missal, the priest is instructed to kneel upon entering the church and recite a verse from Psalm 65: “I will go into thine house,” before the five psalms in preparation for Mass. The prayer of St. Ambrose is said by the priest in its entirety and not divided into equal sections for different days of the week.

• In the 1570 missal, in the absolution rite after the confiteor, the term “all sins” is included. “Misereatur...omnibus peccatis; Indulgentium... omnium peccatorum”

• In the 1570 missal, the verse Dirigatur Domine... is to be said by the priest while he incenses the altar before the saying the Introit, and while incensing it before the offeratory. (suppressed by Clement VIII)

• In the 1570 missal, at sung mass, the Kyrie is to be said at the center of the altar.

• In the 1570 missal, the name of the king is mentioned in the Canon of the Mass.

• In the 1570 missal, the words "As often as you do these things..", the Haec quotiescumque, are said whilst the celebrant elevates the chalice, not afterwards. This reflects the older sense of the elevation as act of offering as opposed to adoration.

• In the 1570 missal, at the end of High Mass the Priest gives a triple blessing of the type now reserved to prelates.

• In the 1962 missal, the Prayers at the foot of the altar and the last Gospel are suppressed on a number of occasions.

• In the 1962 missal the Celebrant no longer reads certain parts of the mass when they are proclaimed by other ministers (i.e. the Epistle and Gospel at High Mass.)

• In the 1962 the confiteor before the people’s communion is suppressed.

• The Holy week ritual is drastically different in the 1962  missal (due to the 1955 Holy Week reforms.) The details of these changes are beyond the scope of this article, but suffice to say that they are very different from those contained in the Tridentine missal.

• In the 1962 Missal the name of St. Joseph is inserted into the Canon

• Numerous other changes in the gestures and actions of the celebrant are present between the two missals, alterations introduced by a number of different Popes.



The greatest differences between the two missals come in the calendars. That being said, the 1962 calendar is actually closer to that of St. Pius V than the ones followed in the 18th and 19th centuries, when the calendar became full of the Feasts of various Italian Confessors. The ranking system of feasts was changed completely by John XXIII.


These resources show the calendars of the two missals.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tridentine_...dar_itself


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Rom...ar_of_1962


Noticeably, the current calendar suppresses the majority of octaves of feasts and a number of vigils.


So, we see that on the whole the Mass remained mostly unchanged from St. Pius V to Paul VI, however perhaps it is inaccurate to refer to the TLM as the “Tridentine Mass.”

Interesting post, and I agree that it's problematic to use "Tridentine mass" as a shorthand due to those reasons. The "TLM" term is also problematic due to its vagueness and lack of exactitude.

What we really mean is simply the modern form of the Roman mass, as politically incorrect as that is due to what it implies about the Mass of Paul VI. Laszlo Dobszay explains why it does not make sense to call the Mass of Paul VI "Roman;" but that it is most accurately the successor to the Neo-Gallican mass. I read his explanation in an article form I can't find at the moment, but here's a link to it in an excerpt from a book:

http://books.google.com/books?id=FYpD7C7__TYC&pg=PA21&lpg=PA21&dq=dobszay+pauline&source=bl&ots=IEM4YzEYJm&sig=b1jJ--GZKXoGGgYNh3dzWh8Yt8s&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7n5MUdzuOYyG9QTBx4GoDg&ved=0CHwQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=neo-gallican&f=false

I think it's true the words we use have a degree of power over the frames in which our thought and argument are naturally formed, and it's interesting that what is really the modern Roman mass is universally called the traditional Latin mass or the Tridentine mass, which on the get-go relegate it to an antiquarian, almost archaeological frame. Of course the alternative of "Extraordinary Form" is an equally loaded term.

Anyways I'm not even a novice on liturgical matters, but the topic brought that Dobszay to mind. I'm sure others will have much better insights.
Actually it is the Mass of Trent. There will always be small changes and in 500 years there are quiet a few, but they are revisions, not making it a different Mass. I had the opportunity to proof read the Masses from 1570, 1910, 1911, 1955, 1962, and the Sarum Rite.These did not contain the prayers for vesting or prayers after mass but only the Mass that the faithful would hear and see. There is very little change between them except the Sarum which has a bit more. If you go to Divinum Officium and go their Sancta Missa then scroll down to the bottom for compare. You can then pick two Masses and compare them line by line. The Sarum has been omitted.

tim
(03-22-2013, 12:23 PM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]Actually it is the Mass of Trent. There will always be small changes and in 500 years there are quiet a few, but they are revisions, not making it a different Mass. I had the opportunity to proof read the Masses from 1570, 1910, 1911, 1955, 1962, and the Sarum Rite.These did not contain the prayers for vesting or prayers after mass but only the Mass that the faithful would hear and see. There is very little change between them except the Sarum which has a bit more. If you go to Divinum Officium and go their Sancta Missa then scroll down to the bottom for compare. You can then pick two Masses and compare them line by line. The Sarum has been omitted.

tim


The changes are obviously quite minimal - it is interesting to see what has changed though. I find some of the things included in the 1570 missal intriguing if nothing else. That being said, the 1570 and 1962 missals are probably as different as the 1570 was from the many local usages of the mass which it replaced.
It is SUBSTANTIALLY the same Mass, though differing in small, rather unimportant details. Even altering the canon (adding St. Joseph to the canon) is not a substantial change, though it wreaked havoc later.
(03-22-2013, 11:38 AM)DoktorDespot Wrote: [ -> ]Is the 1962 Missal the Tridentine Mass?

Yes.  We also call it "the traditional Latin Mass, or simply (as I prefer) "the traditional Mass." 
(03-22-2013, 01:59 PM)ImpyTerwilliger Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-22-2013, 11:38 AM)DoktorDespot Wrote: [ -> ]Is the 1962 Missal the Tridentine Mass?

Yes.  We also call it "the traditional Latin Mass, or simply (as I prefer) "the traditional Mass." 

I understand that. I was just illustrating some of the differences between the Missal of St. Pius V and the Missal of John XXIII.
TLM, Tridentine, EF, etc. We all know what Mass is being mentioned.

I prefer Gregorian Rite is we are to narrow it down to a single term.
I'm partial to one that isn't used Vetus Ordo. It has synmetry with Novus Ordo.

tim
I prefer the term "Roman Mass." As opposed to "Ecumenical Mass," or perhaps, "Lord's Supper."
Pages: 1 2