Below my commentary is a video of the 1962 Roman Missal celebrated in 1964 at St. Louis Benedictine Abby Church. It is not the 1965 Missal. When you watch the video (the three images below are screenshots) pay particular attention to the Roman Canon. There is a microphone of the altar and the Roman Canon, while prayed in an audible low voice, is audible to the congregation. But it is clear that the priest is not directing any of the Roman Canon toward the congregation. It is clear that this is a prayer to God even though the priest faces the congregation.
Vatican II asked for a modest or conservative, but traditional, updating of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The 1970 Roman Missal and its later reforms is not what Vatican II requested. This Missal and subsequent reforms go way beyond what the Fathers of Vatican II desired.
They wanted some simplifications, or nobel simplicity. I suspect they were thinking about Pontifical Masses in this regard not your normal/typical parish Low or High Mass.
They wanted some vernacular but Latin and Gregorian Chant maintained. I think the Scriptures in the Vernacular would be the first logical change and perhaps the changing parts of the Mass and the private prayers of the priest.
Useless repetition being removed is a bit of a head scratcher. The Confiteor with an additional absolution after the priest receives his Holy Communion would be useless in my mind as it was already prayed at the Foot of the Altar. I also believe the Rite of Holy Communion could have eliminated the Lord I am not worthy for the priest and then again for the laity. It could have reduced it to one set for priest and laity together. In this regard, after the priest prayed his private preparation prayers, he would take the Host and paten with his left hand and turned to the congregation to declare “Ecce Agnus Dei” with all saying the Dominos non sum dignus three times while beating the chest with the right hand. Then the priest turns to the altar to complete the sacrifice with his consumption of the Holocaust. Then Holy Communion is distributed to the laity.
While this 1964 Mass at the St. Louis Benedictine Arch abbey is the 1962 Roman Missal, it is celebrated facing the people but in the way the TLM was and is historically celebrated at the papal altars of St. Peter’s and St. John Lateran. This would have been a reasonable adjustment to the Tridentine Mass if the 1962 Roman Missal had remained in tact but with minor adjustments I suggest above:
12 comments:
I have seen this video before - the wanton destruction of the Roman Rite was swift and cruel - the Church still has not recovered those losses and may never - but lazy, old lefties are fine with it
I believe I've seen this before as well. I'll have to come back to this later.
In the Orthodox Church, the anaphora (Canon) was prayed silently except for the words of institution as well. The more current feeling, that isolates the faithful a bit. While the silent "canon" still exists, often, there's a microphone or the words are prayed audibly but, as you rightly suggest, Fr., they aren't directed towards the faithful. This model makes sense to me. God hears all between the whispers to the shouts. The faithful are somewhere in between.
V2 never required that the priest face the people. That was Paul VI's personal addition.
Father McDonald, Pope Saint Paul VI taught that Mass was reformed in line with Sacrosanctum Concilium.
Same with Pope Saint John Paul II. He had taught:
"The reform of the rites and the liturgical books was undertaken immediately after the promulgation of the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium and was brought to an effective conclusion in a few years thanks to the considerable and selfless work of a large number of experts and bishops from all parts of the world.
"This work was undertaken in accordance with the conciliar principles of fidelity to tradition and openness to legitimate development; and so it is possible to say that the reform of the Liturgy is strictly traditional and in accordance with “the ancient usage of the holy Fathers”.
Pax
Mark Thomas
Mark T,
Regarding most of your above quotes; and your dozens, if not scores of recent quotes…
Well, as it was said circa 60 years ago in a notable British trial:
“Well, he would say that, wouldn’t he?”
P.
PS - let’s imagine you got yourself a job as journalist/reporter in Rome reporting on the Vatican in 2023 and then till well into the next pontificate; okay?
Now, please, answer this question, if you want to:
Who would you, if you HAD to, choose as your inside informant? A very high level Cardinal OR some obscure young, unknown Monsignor working, say, in records or something similarly low level? And why?
A very similar question, in the secular world, was actually asked for potential recruits to………in the 70s to early 90s.
Mark Thomas,
Have you read Sacrosanctum Concilium? If you had you would know Paul VI lied and subsequent popes have perpetuated that lie. Benedict XVI said the Novus Ordo was a made up on the spot hodgepodge and issued Summorum Pontificum to subtly show the Novus Ordo’s deficiencies when compared to the TLM. I know you don’t get it because it would involve reasoning instead of blind obedience to failure
Gregorian chant is mandated/recommended in the Council documents. The Popes permited variance eversince to the detriment of Catholic community worship. Much of current Catholic church music is not oly schlocky it is downright sacriligeous in words, notes, and slovenly delivery. Care about the Mass is something the Powers-be do not have. Music at Mass at the very least must respect the occasion. I know milliós of dollars have been invested and the profit are der to the publishers. However, this is no justification to continue with the present situation.
The title of the post touches on a topic, the appeal of Protestantism to the Catholic hierarchy, that seems at the root of Vatican II and the NO. Exactly why that was so widespread and profound is puzzling and how it was so well coordinated to the extent that there was a parallel Vatican II that pressed changes, worldwide!, that appeared nowhere in the actual document. If there is anything that makes even skeptical people such as myself wonder about a conspiracy, that is it.
Mark Thomas,
I take it you have not read Sacrosanctum Concilium! Sad that you prefer ignorance to knowledge - holy, holies
TJM,
The quote machine evidently hasn't added SC to its play list.
ByzRus,
LOL!
ByzRus,
Like the rest of the sentient, Mark Thomas glossed over Father McDonald's thesis:
"Vatican II asked for a modest or conservative, but traditional, updating of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The 1970 Roman Missal and its later reforms is not what Vatican II requested. This Missal and subsequent reforms go way beyond what the Fathers of Vatican II desired."
I guess he believes Father McDonald is lying, a very insulting position for a visitor to this Blog to take. I am getting tired of this lack of respect for Father McDonald, but that's a Liberal for you
Post a Comment