Ask a Question - or - Return to the Faith and Spirituality Forum Index

Question Title	Posted By	Question Date
What part of the Mass is more traditional?	Linda	Thursday, September 30, 2004
Question: Dear Brother; In your answer to Jesse on Tues. the 28th you state: "I might add, that some elements the Missal of 2000 are MORE traditional and MORE ancient than the so-called Tridentine Mass." Which elements of the missal of 2000 are more taditional and ancient than the Tridentine mass?" At the church I attend the priests never say the consecration or Eucharist prayer that is the better translation of the prayer that was said in the Mass of 1962. They always pray the Eucharist prayer III which is shorter but leaves out the beauty of the Eucharist prayer I. We also never hear the I Confess prayer. If it wasn't for an occasional mass in another parish that say both of the above prayers, my children would never hear them said. I don't mean to be negative about the Mass in English, I believe it is a valid mass but rarely said reverently. Also I noticed that when the priests face the people they tend to entertain, talk to the people. They make eye contact with the people and even nod when the prayer is to be addressed to God. It's very distracting so what I do is look away from the priest. Not every Mass is said like this. There are a few who use the latin for the Holy, Holy prayer and the Lamb of God prayer, don't look at the people when praying to God and use the I Confess and Eucharist prayer I. The Mass is valid no matter which Eucharist prayer the priest chooses but why always the shorter prayer? Please tell me the more traditional and ancient parts in the English mass?
Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OLSM+ Dear Linda: First we have to separate that which is actually part of the Mass and that which has been perpetrated upon it. The issue of how well the Mass has been translated into English, whether priests are chatty and entertain, one's preference on which Eucharistic prayer to use, things omitted by priests, things added by priests, and any and all other abuses and innovations have nothing whatsoever to do with the subject at hand about the need to reform the Tridentine Mass and the improvements made in the Vatican II Mass. The reforms that were needed, include the following, quoted from Sacrosanctum Concilium (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy): 50. The rite of the Mass is to be revised in such a way that the intrinsic nature and purpose of its several parts, as well as the connection between them, may be more clearly manifested, and that devout and active participation by the faithful may be more easily achieved. For this purpose the rites are to be simplified, due care being taken to preserve their substance. Parts which with the passage of time came to be duplicated, or were added with little advantage, are to be omotted. Other parts which suffered loss through accidents of history are to be restored to the vigor they has in the days of the holy fathers, as may seem useful or necessary. 51. The treasures of the Bible are to be opened up more lavishly... 53. The "common prayer" or "prayer of the faithful" is to be restored after the gospel and homily... Then Pope Paul VI offers some specifics in his Missale Romanum that obrogated the Roman Missal of 1962 with the Roman Missal of 1970: In the Roman Rite the first part of this prayer, known as the Preface, has indeed acquired many different texts in the course of the centuries; but the second part, known as the Canon, assumed an unchanging form about the fourth or fifth century... Besides enriching the Eucharistic Prayer by providing a larger selection of Prefaces (some drawn from the more ancient traditions of the Roman Church and some newly composed) we have decided now to add three more Canons (anaphoras) for use in that prayer. Their purpose is to emphasize different aspects of the mystery of salvation, and to express a variety of motives for giving thanks to God. I do not personally know which prayers are "more ancient" and which are not, but since I do not believe Pope Paul VI is a liar I take him at his word. The bottomline is that the current Mass is just as holy and just as reverent as the "Tridentine" Mass. One only needs to look at the Masses said at EWTN. Those Masses are the current Mass, NOT the Tridentine Mass, yet have great beauty, reverence, and holiness. Most of the parishes I have visited have had great reverence in the current Mass and rarely use Eucharistic Prayer III. I know there are many parishes where that is not the case, but we need to keep things in perspective. If we find our parish Masses irreverent or lack-luster, the problem is NOT the Mass, the fault is the Celebrant. Do not blame the Mass for something the Celebrant is doing or not doing. It sounds to me that the problem is your parish priest, because it ain't the Mass itself. Pray for him. Other issues, like the quality of the English translation are issues that will be worked out eventually. Be patient, the Church works slowly. God Bless, Bro. Ignatius Mary Footer Notes: This forum is for general questions on the faith. See specific Topic Forums below: Spiritual Warfare, demons, the occult go to our Spiritul Warfare Q&S Forum. Liturgy Questions go to our Liturgy and Liturgical Law Q&A Forum Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) Questions go to our Divine Office Q&A Forum Defenfing the Faith Questions go to our Defending the Faith Q&A Forum Church History Questions go to our Church History Q&A Forum

Question Title

Posted By

Question Date

What part of the Mass is more traditional?

Linda

Thursday, September 30, 2004

Question:

Dear Brother;

In your answer to Jesse on Tues. the 28th you state:
"I might add, that some elements the Missal of 2000 are MORE traditional and MORE ancient than the so-called Tridentine Mass." Which elements of the missal of 2000 are more taditional and ancient than the Tridentine mass?"

At the church I attend the priests never say the consecration or Eucharist prayer that is the better translation of the prayer that was said in the Mass of 1962. They always pray the Eucharist prayer III which is shorter but leaves out the beauty of the Eucharist prayer I. We also never hear the I Confess prayer. If it wasn't for an occasional mass in another parish that say both of the above prayers, my children would never hear them said.

I don't mean to be negative about the Mass in English, I believe it is a valid mass but rarely said reverently. Also I noticed that when the priests face the people they tend to entertain, talk to the people. They make eye contact with the people and even nod when the prayer is to be addressed to God. It's very distracting so what I do is look away from the priest. Not every Mass is said like this.

There are a few who use the latin for the Holy, Holy prayer and the Lamb of God prayer, don't look at the people when praying to God and use the I Confess and Eucharist prayer I. The Mass is valid no matter which Eucharist prayer the priest chooses but why always the shorter prayer?

Please tell me the more traditional and ancient parts in the English mass?

Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OLSM+

Dear Linda:

First we have to separate that which is actually part of the Mass and that which has been perpetrated upon it.

The issue of how well the Mass has been translated into English, whether priests are chatty and entertain, one's preference on which Eucharistic prayer to use, things omitted by priests, things added by priests, and any and all other abuses and innovations have nothing whatsoever to do with the subject at hand about the need to reform the Tridentine Mass and the improvements made in the Vatican II Mass.

The reforms that were needed, include the following, quoted from Sacrosanctum Concilium (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy):

50. The rite of the Mass is to be revised in such a way that the intrinsic nature and purpose of its several parts, as well as the connection between them, may be more clearly manifested, and that devout and active participation by the faithful may be more easily achieved.
For this purpose the rites are to be simplified, due care being taken to preserve their substance. Parts which with the passage of time came to be duplicated, or were added with little advantage, are to be omotted. Other parts which suffered loss through accidents of history are to be restored to the vigor they has in the days of the holy fathers, as may seem useful or necessary.
51. The treasures of the Bible are to be opened up more lavishly...
53. The "common prayer" or "prayer of the faithful" is to be restored after the gospel and homily...

Then Pope Paul VI offers some specifics in his Missale Romanum that obrogated the Roman Missal of 1962 with the Roman Missal of 1970:

In the Roman Rite the first part of this prayer, known as the Preface, has indeed acquired many different texts in the course of the centuries; but the second part, known as the Canon, assumed an unchanging form about the fourth or fifth century...
Besides enriching the Eucharistic Prayer by providing a larger selection of Prefaces (some drawn from the more ancient traditions of the Roman Church and some newly composed) we have decided now to add three more Canons (anaphoras) for use in that prayer. Their purpose is to emphasize different aspects of the mystery of salvation, and to express a variety of motives for giving thanks to God.

I do not personally know which prayers are "more ancient" and which are not, but since I do not believe Pope Paul VI is a liar I take him at his word.

The bottomline is that the current Mass is just as holy and just as reverent as the "Tridentine" Mass. One only needs to look at the Masses said at EWTN. Those Masses are the current Mass, NOT the Tridentine Mass, yet have great beauty, reverence, and holiness.

Most of the parishes I have visited have had great reverence in the current Mass and rarely use Eucharistic Prayer III. I know there are many parishes where that is not the case, but we need to keep things in perspective. If we find our parish Masses irreverent or lack-luster, the problem is NOT the Mass, the fault is the Celebrant. Do not blame the Mass for something the Celebrant is doing or not doing.

It sounds to me that the problem is your parish priest, because it ain't the Mass itself. Pray for him.

Other issues, like the quality of the English translation are issues that will be worked out eventually. Be patient, the Church works slowly.

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary

Footer Notes: This forum is for general questions on the faith. See specific Topic Forums below:
Spiritual Warfare, demons, the occult go to our Spiritul Warfare Q&S Forum.
Liturgy Questions go to our Liturgy and Liturgical Law Q&A Forum
Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) Questions go to our Divine Office Q&A Forum
Defenfing the Faith Questions go to our Defending the Faith Q&A Forum
Church History Questions go to our Church History Q&A Forum