Throughout the history of the
Church, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass has been celebrated
in various manners within different Traditions and
Rites of the Church. A categorization of the major
liturgies throughout Church history can be divided
into three types:
- Mass of Pope Paul VI commonly known
as the Novus Ordo or Ordo Mass
- Mass of the Council
of Trent commonly known as the Tridentine
Mass
- Masses or liturgies that were
celebrated before the Council of Trent or
Pre-Tridentine Liturgies.
This page strives is to
give as an objective view of the history of the
Liturgy of the Mass in miniature form from the
mind of the Church. Its goal
is not to represent the mind of anyone person or
group of people from this web site. I have
tried to condense about 1,975 years of liturgical
history on to this one web page. Emotional e-mails
on the content of the page will be ignored. Constructive
criticism with objective suggestions for modifications will be considered.
For an in depth reading of the development of
Liturgy of the Mass, from Our Lord's time to Present
day, check out the New
Advent article on this issue.
For non-Catholic Christians: This is one of those
areas where we, in the Church, occasionally have
a few mini family fights; not on doctrine or teachings
but on spiritual preferences.
Whether one has a preference for attending the [Novus Ordo or Ordinary Form of the Mass]
or the [Tridentine or Extraordinary Form of the Mass] both the previous and current Pope have asked the clergy and faithful not to politicize one form over another.
Both Forms of the Mass provide the same sacramental grace to the faithful. |
Sources:
- New Advent for detail
- Wikipedia for
outline information only and myself.
The
Origin of the Mass
The Western Mass, like all Liturgies,
begins, of course, with the Last Supper. What Christ
then did, repeated as he commanded in memory of Him,
is the nucleus of the Mass. Many scholars believe that
when Christ instituted the Last Supper, he did so in Aramaic. As soon as the Faith was brought to the West
the Holy Eucharist was celebrated here, as in the East.
At first the language used was Greek. Out of that
earliest Liturgy, the language being changed to Latin,
developed the two great parent rites of the West, the
Roman and the Gallican. It should be noted the question
of the change of language from Greek to Latin is less
important than if might seem. It came about naturally
when Greek ceased to be the usual language of the Roman
Christians.
Of these two
the Gallican Mass may be traced without difficulty. It
is so plainly Antiochene in its structure, in the very
text of many of its prayers, that we are safe in accounting
for it as a translated form of the Liturgy of Jerusalem-Antioch,
brought to the West at about the time when the more or
less fluid universal Liturgy of the first three centuries
gave place to different fixed rites.
The origin of the
Roman Mass, on the other hand, is a most difficult question,
We have here two fixed and certain data: the Liturgy
in Greek described by St. Justin Martyr (d. c. 165),
which is that of the Church of Rome in the second century,
and, at the other end of the development, the Liturgy
of the first Roman Sacramentaries in Latin, in about
the sixth century. The two are very different. Justin's
account represents a rite of what we should now call
an Eastern type, corresponding with remarkable exactness
to that of the Apostolic Constitutions. The Leonine and
Gelasian Sacramentaries show us what is practically our
present Roman Mass. How did the service change from the
one to the other? It is one of the chief difficulties
in the history of liturgy.
Over time medieval variants and developments
of the Roman Rite gradually drove out the Gallican Use
of the liturgy.
A uniform Roman Missal
With the Council of Trent (December
1545 - December 1563), came uniformity in the old
Roman Rite and the abolition of nearly all the medieval
variants. The Council of Trent considered the question
and formed a commission to prepare a uniform Missal.
Eventually the Missal was published by Pius V by the
Bull "Quo
primum" (still
printed in it) of 14 July 1570. It is Pius V's
Missal that is used throughout the Latin Church, except
in a few cases where he allowed a modified use that had
a prescription of at least two centuries. This exception
saved the variants used by some religious orders and
a few local rites as well as the Milanese and Mozarabic
liturgies. Clement VIII (1604), Urban VIII (1634), and
Leo XIII (1884) revised the book slightly in the rubrics
and the texts of Scripture. Pius
X has revised the chant (1908.) But these revisions leave
it still the Missal of Pius V. There has been since the
early Middle Ages unceasing change in the sense of additions
of masses for new feasts, the Missal now has a number
of supplements that still grow, but
liturgically these additions represent no real change.
This liturgical standardization was
one of the most important and widespread one for its
time and is still in use to this day.
Vatican II and the Revision
and Promotion of the Sacred Liturgy
Vatican Council II was opened
under Pope John XXIII in 1962 and closed under Pope Paul
VI in 1965.
One of the first issues considered
by the council, and the matter that had the most immediate
effect on the lives of individual Catholics, was the
revision of the liturgy. The central idea was from the
Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy:
"Mother Church earnestly desires that all the faithful
should be led to that fully conscious and active participation
in liturgical celebrations which is demanded by the very
nature of the liturgy. Such participation by the Christian
people as a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation,
a redeemed people (1 Pet. 2:9; cf. 2:4–5), is their
right and duty by reason of their baptism." (Sacrosanctum
Concilium 14)
Vatican II went much further in encouraging "active
participation" than previous Popes had allowed or
recommended. The council fathers established guidelines
to govern the revision of the liturgy, which included
allowing the very limited use of the vernacular (native
language) instead of Latin. As bishops determined, local
or national customs could be carefully incorporated into
the liturgy.
Implementation of the Council's directives on the liturgy
was carried out under the authority of Pope Paul VI by
a special papal commission, later incorporated in the
Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of
the Sacraments, and, in the areas entrusted to them,
by national conferences of bishops, which, if they had
a shared language, were expected to collaborate in producing
a common translation.
Some
in the Church felt at home with the vernacular but resented
the inaccurate translations that occurred in 1974. The
original translations of 1969 were faithful to the Latin
original. It was when ICEL got involved in the 1974
translation that scholars seriously complained. Since
then, there have been better translations and relations
between ICEL and the Holy See have improved. Some say
the situation was made worse when bishops failed to insist
upon their diocesan priests follow Vatican directives
on celebrating the sacraments. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now
Pope Benedict XVI, when he was Cardinal Prefect
of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (Holy
Office) frequently criticized priests and bishops
who failed to observe the norms as appended in GIRM
(General Instructions on the Roman Missal).
Others have said that certain aspects
of Vatican II "Sacrosanctum Concilium" were
never or poorly implemented. e.g. SC 36, 47 - 50, and
101.
Others at the same time did not feel
comfortable with the revised liturgy and preferred the
Tridentine liturgy.
It must be noted that the promulgation
of the Novus Ordo Missal by Paul VI did not replace the
Tridentine Mass also known as the Mass of the Council
of Trent. The Tridentine Mass to this day is celebrated
around the world. They are just two different but both
valid liturgical rites for proper celebration of the
Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
The current official text of the Mass
of Paul VI is the typical
edition of the Roman Missal promulgated in 2000 and
issued in Latin in 2002. Two earlier typical editions
of the revised Missal were issued in 1970 (promulgated
in 1969) and 1975.
Displeasure
by some of the faithful with the Mass of Paul VI.
The Society of St. Pius X (which is
sometimes referred to simply as "SSPX")
was born out of conservative opposition to the liturgical
changes that followed
the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965). Members
in the SSPX had rightful aspirations for the Tridentine
liturgy more than the Ordo Mass of Paul VI.
The
Society was founded in 1970 by the French Archbishop
Marcel Lefebvre. By 1987, Archbishop Lefebvre was 81.
In Catholic doctrine, only a bishop can ordain men to
the priesthood and he has to do it with the approval
of the Holy See.
At that point, if Lefebvre died, the
SSPX would have become dependent upon non-SSPX bishops
to ordain future priests - and Lefebvre did not regard
them as properly reliable and orthodox. Lefebvre argued
that his consecrations were necessary because the traditional
"Tridentine" form of the Catholic Liturgy and
sacraments would become extinct without bishops and priests
who were properly trained. The passing down of the Tridentine
Missal through history to the
next generation would be in jeopardy. Some who followed
him as well as some SSPX members today implicitly believe
that without the Tridentine Mass in the Church, the Church
wouldn't have the "really" Mass. This, of course, is
erroneous.
Pope John Paul
II, through Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Benedict XVI),
had been working to reconcile their differences on this
issue. Lefebvre announced his intention to consecrate
a successor to the episcopacy with or without the approval
of the Holy See. After being warned not to do this by
Pope John Paul II, he was excommunicated along with the
consecrated bishops. The notification to the faithful
on this issue follows:
Taken from the Vatican
web site:
APOSTOLIC LETTER
"ECCLESIA DEI"
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF
JOHN PAUL II
GIVEN MOTU PROPRIO
1. With great affliction the Church has learned of the
unlawful episcopal ordination conferred on 30 June last
by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, which has frustrated all
the efforts made during the previous years to ensure
the full communion with the Church of the Priestly Fraternity
of St. Pius X founded by the same Mons. Lefebvre. These
efforts, especially intense during recent months, in
which the Apostolic See has shown comprehension to the
limits of the possible, were all to no avail.(1)
2. This affliction was particularly felt by the Successor
Peter to whom in the first place pertains the guardianship
of the unity of the Church,(2) even though the number
of persons directly involved in these events might be
few. For every person is loved by God on his own account
and has been redeemed by the blood of Christ shed on
the Cross for the salvation of all.
The particular circumstances, both objective and subjective
in which Archbishop Lefebvre acted, provide everyone
with an occasion for profound reflection and for a renewed
pledge of fidelity to Christ and to his Church.
3. In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the
Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance
for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination
of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally
perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which implies
in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes
a schismatic act.(3) In performing such an act, notwithstanding
the formal canonical warning sent to them by the Cardinal
Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops on 17 June last,
Mons. Lefebvre and the priests Bernard Fellay, Bernard
Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso
de Galarreta, have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication
envisaged by ecclesiastical law.(4)
4. The root of this schismatic
act can be discerned in an incomplete and contradictory
notion of Tradition. Incomplete, because it does not
take sufficiently into account the living character
of Tradition, which, as the Second Vatican Council
clearly taught, "comes
from the apostles and progresses in the Church with the
help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in insight
into the realities and words that are being passed on.
This comes about in various ways. It comes through the
contemplation and study of believers who ponder these
things in their hearts. It comes from the intimate sense
of spiritual realities which they experience. And it
comes from the preaching of those who have received,
along with their right of succession in the episcopate,
the sure charism of truth".(5)
But especially contradictory is a notion of Tradition
which opposes the universal Magisterium of the Church
possessed by the Bishop of Rome and the Body of Bishops.
It is impossible to remain faithful to the Tradition
while breaking the ecclesial bond with him to whom, in
the person of the Apostle Peter, Christ himself entrusted
the ministry of unity in his Church.(6)
5. Faced with the situation that has arisen I deem it
my duty to inform all the Catholic faithful of some aspects
which this sad event has highlighted.
a) The outcome of the movement promoted by Mons. Lefebvre
can and must be, for all the Catholic faithful, a motive
for sincere reflection concerning their own fidelity
to the Church's Tradition, authentically interpreted
by the ecclesiastical Magisterium, ordinary and extraordinary,
especially in the Ecumenical Councils from Nicaea to
Vatican II. From this reflection all should draw a renewed
and efficacious conviction of the necessity of strengthening
still more their fidelity by rejecting erroneous interpretations
and arbitrary and unauthorized applications in matters
of doctrine, liturgy and discipline.
To the bishops especially it pertains, by reason of
their pastoral mission, to exercise the important duty
of a clear-sighted vigilance full of charity and firmness,
so that this fidelity may be everywhere safeguarded.(7)
However, it is necessary that
all the Pastors and the other faithful have a new awareness,
not only of the lawfulness but also of the richness
for the Church of a diversity of charisms, traditions
of spirituality and apostolate, which also constitutes
the beauty of unity in variety: of that blended "harmony" which
the earthly Church raises up to Heaven under the impulse
of the Holy Spirit.
b) Moreover, I should like to remind theologians and
other experts in the ecclesiastical sciences that they
should feel themselves called upon to answer in the present
circumstances. Indeed, the extent and depth of the teaching
of the Second Vatican Council call for a renewed commitment
to deeper study in order to reveal clearly the Council's
continuity with Tradition, especially in points of doctrine
which, perhaps because they are new, have not yet been
well understood by some sections of the Church.
c) In the present circumstances I wish especially to
make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and
fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked
in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre,
that they may fulfil the grave duty of remaining united
to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church,
and of ceasing their support in any way for that movement.
Everyone should be aware that formal adherence to the
schism is a grave offense against God and carries the
penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church's law.(8)
To all those Catholic faithful who feel attached to
some previous liturgical and disciplinary forms of the
Latin tradition I wish to manifest my will to facilitate
their ecclesial communion by means of the necessary measures
to guarantee respect for their rightful aspirations.
In this matter I ask for the support of the bishops and
of all those engaged in the pastoral ministry in the
Church.
6. Taking account of the importance and complexity of
the problems referred to in this document, by virtue
of my Apostolic Authority I decree the following:
a) a Commission is instituted whose task it will be
to collaborate with the bishops, with the Departments
of the Roman Curia and with the circles concerned, for
the purpose of facilitating full ecclesial communion
of priests, seminarians, religious communities or individuals
until now linked in various ways to the Fraternity founded
by Mons. Lefebvre, who may wish to remain united to the
Successor Peter in the Catholic Church, while preserving
their spiritual and liturgical traditions, in the light
of the Protocol signed on 5 May last by Cardinal Ratzinger
and Mons. Lefebvre;
b) this Commission is composed of a Cardinal President
and other members of the Roman Curia, in a number that
will be deemed opportune according to circumstances;
c) moreover, respect must everywhere be shown for the
feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical
tradition, by a wide and generous application of the
directives already issued some time ago by the Apostolic
See for the use of the Roman Missal according to the
typical edition of 1962.(9)
7. As this year specially dedicated
to the Blessed Virgin is now drawing to a close, I
wish to exhort all to join in unceasing prayer that
the Vicar of Christ, through the intercession of the
Mother of the church, addresses to the Father in the
very words of the Son: "That
they all may be one!".
Given at Rome, at St. Peter's. 2 July 1988, the tenth
year of the pontificate.
Joannes Paulus PP. II
Taken from the Vatican web site:
PONTIFICAL COMMISSION "ECCLESIA
DEI"
The Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei" was
instituted by John Paul II with the Motu Proprio promulgated
July 2nd, 1988, following the schismatic gesture of the
illegal episcopal ordinations carried out by Archbishop
Marcel Lefebvre at Econe in Switzerland.
The Apostolic Letter indicates the goals of the commission.
They are to collaborate with bishops, with the dicasteries
of the Roman Curia and with other interested circles
in order to facilitate the full ecclesial communion of
priests, seminarians, communities or individual men and
women religious linked, to date, in various ways, to
the Fraternity founded by Msgr. Lefebvre who desire to
remain united to the Successor of Peter in the Catholic
Church, conserving their spiritual and liturgical traditions
in the light of the Protocol signed May 5th, 1988 by
Cardinal Ratzinger and Msgr. Lefebvre.
The commission has played a twofold role using the special
faculties which the pope has granted it:
1. to regularize the canonical situation of a certain
number of religious communities of a traditionalist nature
which already exist but without recognition on the part
of the Church by giving them a canonical form corresponding
to their charism. Moreover, an ecclesial integration
has been found for a number of traditionalist priests
who had not been incardinated.
2. To collaborate with local bishops with a view to
satisfying the numerous groups of faithful linked to
the Latin liturgical tradition which request a regular
celebration of the Holy Mass in keeping with the 1962
rite in their dioceses; these groups exist in Europe
(France, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, England, Italy),
America (the United States, Canada, Argentina, Chile)
and Australia.
In this case, the commission
can indicate to the local bishop a way to meet these
faithful or advise them of the need to "respect
the just aspirations of these faithful."
The commission has a president,
Cardinal Angelo Felici, a secretary, Msgr. Camille
Perl, and several assistants. A group of "permanent experts" composed
of representatives of the dicasteries concerned offer
their advice and expertise.
The
outcome and current view of the Church.
While in no way commenting on the Mass
of Pope Paul VI and its validity if said correctly
by the priests of the Church, the above Vatican
documents make it clear that the faithful in
the Church who have been attached
to some previous liturgical and disciplinary forms
of the Latin tradition, have rightful aspirations.
[ * ] [
I Pope John Paul II ] wish to manifest
my will to facilitate their ecclesial communion by
means of the necessary measures to guarantee respect for
their rightful aspirations.
A commission goal was to:
To collaborate with local bishops
with a view to satisfying the numerous groups of faithful
linked to the Latin liturgical tradition which request
a regular celebration of the Holy Mass in
keeping with the 1962 [ Tridentine ] rite in
their dioceses;
That said, the Church is aware that
every member in the Church has a different spiritual
journey and to some various extent a different religious
and catechetical upbringing. She also cherishes all Her
Traditions and does not pit one Latin tradition against
another. For both these reasons the Church views BOTH
Latin liturgies, Novus Ordo and Tridentine, as equally
valid while meeting the various spiritual needs of the
faithful.
To this day, Pope Benedict has had
a strong interest in fulfilling the goals of the commission
and is ready to allow a wider use of the Tridentine Mass.
One that would not require the permission of a bishop.
Although a majority of people in America
attend an Ordo Mass said in the vernacular, I believe
it would be beneficial for the faithful
to attend a Tridentine Latin Mass as well as the
Ordo Mass said in Latin.
It is also my prayer that if Pope Benedict
allows for a wider use of the Tridentine Mass, especially
in America, that he also look into providing for the
priestly training for current seminarians and current
priests in the Tridentine liturgy so that they would
be able to celebrate either Latin Traditions.
To my knowledge, there is no training
in the Tridentine Latin liturgy at most Catholic seminaries
in America, acknowledged by the Holy See, with
the except of seminaries of the Priestly Fraternity of
St. Peter.
It's my hope this will change.
NEW FROM
THE VATICAN:
July 7,
2007 - More liberal use of the Tridentine Mass while
retaining the Ordo Mass (the ordinary liturgical
norm for the Church): From
EWTN Click
here.
|