 |
| from: Wikipedia.org |
A while back, perhaps over a year, New Liturgical Movement published a video of a 1962-Missal solemn Mass sung at St. Louis Abbey in St. Louis, Missouri. The celebrant was Fr. Edward Bunn, S.J., then-president of Georgetown University. The church of the abbey, a hideous house of heteropraxis, is entirely round inside and positions its altar at the center nave. Every Mass therefore would be versus populum, but the low candle sticks and thin, insipid crucifix dissuade one from entertaining the possibility that this is also meant to be ad orientem, in imitation of the ancient Roman basilicas. The tabernacle is directly behind the main—and the Rad Trad thinks, only—altar in the church. This novelty presented a difficulty for the servers and ministers, who at times seemed unsure as to whether they ought to genuflect before the altar or just bow, and whether or not they ought to genuflect before the tabernacle when passing it.
 |
| Things being done the rite way at St. Mary and the Martyrs (aka the Pantheon) in Rome, c. 2008 credit: orbiscatholic.blogspot.com |
In some ways they did the 1962 Mass differently from today. Note that the missal is transferred to the Gospel (really to the Offertory) position after the celebrant reads the gradual but before the ministers sit down. Today the book is moved when the celebrant rises to give the deacon the blessing for the Gospel reading. It would really be easier to return to the older practice of the celebrant remaining at the altar and reading along himself, but that can be a moot point in 1962-ville outside of some parishes, such as one where the Rad Trad once worshipped, that were doing the Latin Mass before the canonization of 1962 under Summorum Pontificum.
 |
| Archbishop Edwin O'Hara celebrating Mass at the consecration of Christ the King parish in Kansas City, Missouri in 1954. Construction on the parish, and its forward altar, began in 1952, presumably with episcopal approbation. |
From this we can see that the Liturgical Movement had a very powerful presence in the Church before vernacular and versus populum were explicitly expected by Rome or by national episcopal conferences. St. Louis Abbey was founded in 1955 by monks from Ampleforth Abbey in England. In nearby Kansas City Archbishop O'Hara had already celebrated pontifical Mass versus populum. The Jesuits entertained the Liturgical Movement long before it ever came to America, but the Society of Jesus must have felt very confident in the direction of things to have put the president of a major university on television to celebrate Mass facing the people. Although 51 years later we often tell ourselves it was a better time, this era's practices were directed toward the type of liturgy and ars celebrandi we have today. The use of Latin bound the celebrant to the text, but did not bind the architects of the church of the masters of liturgical ceremonies. Without any further delay, the Mass (starts around 18:00):
Perhaps this is an idiot question, but... I can't realize why "traditionalist movement" considers the 1962 Missal to be the last traditional Missal, while it is actually the first wholly reformed Missal (1955 Holy Week, 1960 Rubrics, 1962 Ritus Seruandus). It is clear that it is "pre-conciliar", but also that a great damage had already been done. So... why choosing THAT Missal?
ReplyDeleteI'm not waiting for any answer... It was just a thinking.
Sorry for my English, it is not my language.
Kyrie eleison
Your English is just fine!
DeleteThe uninspiring answer is that 1962 is what Lefebvre picked in 1983 so as to give Rome a strong report on his activities. Previously the French part of the SSPX used 1962, Econe used 1965, and everyone else (in the SSPX and in other groups) used pre-Pius XII. Most all diocesan priests and the Latin Mass Society of England used pre-Pius XII, too. Sadly, too many traditionalists think that if it is pre-conciliar it must be reverent and that is good enough. A focus on minimalism and validity trumps true worship in this mindset, which is why, outside of more academic circles, no one thinks twice about the year of the Missal.
Gratias tibi ago!
DeleteI wonder if we will see some day a true liturgical (but not just liturgical) restoration in the Church, if against "Bugnini 2.0" we choose "Bugnini 1.0" liturgical books (as FSSPX, Eccleia Dei and some scholars like Gherardini do); and also if we attemp to defend traditional liturgy from a mere juridical poin of view, and not from its essential (litrugical, theological and "sensitive") superiority -while, in addition, current legal status (SP) only allows the use of 1962 books.
This problem becomes heavier if we consider that the attempts to restoration are restricted to the Roman (="tridentine") rite, while the other ancient Roman uses, and Latin rites, are being left aside: you have sometimes talked about Sarum, but in Spain we have Mozarabic liturgy, which has been destroyed as well.
Looking at this situation, I really don't know if it will be any solution for Catholic liturgical life next years... Perhaps you have a different point of view. Let us pray God!
Kyrie eleison
My own appraisal of the situation is rather depressing. The loss of the pure Mozarabic liturgy (as opposed to that heavily modified, modernized variation used today) is regrettable, but I am not very familiar with the rite so I will not comment on it further.
DeleteWhile I think the new Roman liturgy and the current diocesan structure will implode on itself within two generations I cannot foresee a restoration of the old rite. Such an undertaking would involve a return to a spiritual outlook that has been de facto extinct for generations. I think we are headed towards something new. I may be wrong, but even if I am right we should still aim to preserve as much of the authentic Roman rite as possible in order to influence the future.
You're probably right: I think the Novus Ordo was dead since its very beginning too; the problem would be in that case what would be that "something new" (hybrid rite, or almost complete dissapearing of Catholicism, at least in Europe?).
DeleteWell, we must survive, with the help of God.
Kyrie eleison
PS: nor I am very familiar to Mozarabic rite (in my diocese there is just 1 Mozarabic Mass per year, and it is Nouus-Ordo-Mozarabic), but when I have attended to it I could notice how it has been destroyed -just as the Roman rite has been.
PPS: I don't want to distract you more time. So I'm gonna see the Pontifical High Mass you've put in the other post.
What is the right way(or timing) of transferring the Missal? Were there several ways(timings) for different editions of the old Missal?
ReplyDelete"This problem becomes heavier if we consider that the attempts to restoration are restricted to the Roman (="tridentine") rite, while the other ancient Roman uses, and Latin rites, are being left aside"
ReplyDeleteA friend of mine entered the traditional Carmelite monastery in WY (of Mystic Monk Coffee fame!) a few years ago, and his eyewitness account (this is while he visited before he entered) is that they continue to use the 1936 Carmelite Missal. Ergo, the real Holy Week! Reason given - 1936 was the last year the traditional Carmelite rite was revised before the Order adopted the Novus Ordo. My personal knowledge of other Western rites extends only to the Dominicans, and I do know that they had updated their books, unfortunately, to conform to the 1960 Novum Rubricarum.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteVery blessed man!
DeleteI know the Carthusians had a Missal similarly unchanged. They did not adopt any of Paul VI's changes until 1983, when the CDW forced them to do so. Imagine, an entire religious order had resisted the revolution for two decades! At least even in their reformed rite they kept the Canon as the only anaphora, albeit with the new institution words. I do not know if any of them have switched back.
Carthusians adopted other 3 eucharistic prayers...Their 1981 Missal is downlodable in entirety.
DeleteCouldn't a particular monastery still use the Tridentine Mass if it desired?
ReplyDeleteI realize this is a bit late, but as to St. Louis Abbey, the Church did then and still does contain numerous side altars.
ReplyDelete