www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Pope set to return to traditional liturgy

i am not finished reading the book yet but from my interpretation thus far, he really stresses that while being true the eucharist is a communal meal, the modern mass has lost alot in its essence of worship God and worshipping the body and blood of christ and the mass in its current structure has lost its direction and focus on worship to God, and the traditional structure had this element.

ByzanTN,

I think you're referring to the Missal of 1965. The reforms of 1964 were merely preparatory for the 65 missal. (The only real difference between the 64 "missal" and the 1962 one were the deletion of the Leonine prayers (at the end of low Mass) and the allowance of the vernacular for certain parts of the Mass.) I, too, like the 65 missal and see it as fulfilling the need of reform in the Roman Mass. I have read many of Rev. Dr. Pius Parsch's books on the liturgy. Most of the reforms he called for in the 1940s-50s were implemented in the 65 missal (e.g. Shortened prayers at foot of altar, the lessons said facing the people, prayer of the faithful, offertory procession, and deletion of the "last Gospel"). However, I do think an expanded lectionary would be a nice addition to this missal.

When discussing the 1965 missal it is important to recognize that even this missal underwent a reform in 1967, which, amongst other things, removed the symbolism of the signs of the cross in the canon, the practice of the priest holding his thumb and forefinger together, and decreased emphasis on the second ablutions after Holy Communion. IMO, the 1967 reforms were mis-guided and just an attempt to turn the true reform into the Novus Ordo.

Pax tecum,

Adam

My copy of that missal has a 1964 copyright date, but you are right in that the 64/65 missal is the same. Even with the 1967 revisions, I still view the 1969 Novus Ordo as being a pretty major departure from the 64 missal. On top of the liturgical changes, the entire liturgical calendar was restructured. I guess one of the things that bugs me is that so many today think the Council produced the Novus Ordo of 1969. I am old enough to have witnessed all that so I know better. I would have to agree with you on the 64/65 missal. It was actually pretty good.

Here is what the Missale Romanum 1965 looked like. It's very beautiful... the new revision which comes out supposedly next year will resemble this.

http://www.coreyzelinski.8m.com/1965_Mass/

I appreciate interest in what His Holiness may or may not do vis-a-vis the Tridentine and Novus Ordo forms of celebrating the Mass and understand that a news item on this topic is a legitimate posting in the Church News forum. Certainly, there is relevance in knowing what is happening in our Sister Church, especially when rumors abound with regard to potential changes in the Liturgy of one of our own Churches.

However, one needs to wonder if the topic has now been more than sufficiently explored and if it isn't time for this thread to end. There are countless Latin boards out there with thousands of posters anxious to discuss, dissect, agonize, and hypothesize on the possibilities. This site, blessedly, exists for the meritorious purposes of understanding, exploring, discussing, debating, educating, and being educated about the Eastern and Oriental Churches, Catholic and Orthodox. In that, it is, as we have noted previously, pretty much unique and does what it does rather well, not perfectly, but far better than any other claiming to be of this ilk.

May I suggest that those feeling a need to further pursue this topic take it to a more appropriate venue? I loved the Tridentine Mass, respect the Novus Ordo as a legitimate and holy celebration of the Sacrifice, and wish only the best for my Latin brothers and sisters in resolving the liturgical concerns that endlessly appear to afflict their Church; but, as an Eastern Christian, my own spirituality is not intrinsically tied to their resolution of these issues.

I will pray for them, but if I want to see 4 pages of thread on a topic such as this, I go to Catholic Answers or elsewhere. As I don't expect the Tridentine or Novus Ordo Masses to be celebrated in my temple, I don't expect their history, form, validity, or future to be debated or decided in our sanctum.

Many years,

Neil

As a Byzantine, I am very interested in what the Latin Church does. As I have often said before, they are the 500-pound gorilla on the block, and what they do affects us if not directly, indirectly. It's been my observation that whatever happens with them tends to spill over and affect us in some way, too. We do not live in splended Byzantine isolation. Our bishops belong to the same bishops conference as the Latin bishops. Although seriously outnumbered by Latins, it seems that there is an influence on our bishops and some of the conference agenda items show up in our churches as well. I know we like to proclaim our independence from the Latin Church, but that independence is sometimes more wishful thinking than reality.