Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Mass of 1964  (Read 2416 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lover of Truth

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8700
  • Reputation: +1158/-863
  • Gender: Male
Mass of 1964
« on: August 29, 2012, 12:14:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Does anyone have the text of the Mass of 1964 and the date it was promulgated?
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church


    Offline Belloc

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6600
    • Reputation: +615/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #1 on: August 29, 2012, 12:24:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • my priest does, found it in storage......unlikely will let me borrow it....it is mainly hte TLM, but in English, told there are some changes in rubrics more to the NO........sorta a hybrid......
    Proud "European American" and prouder, still, Catholic


    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1158/-863
    • Gender: Male
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #2 on: August 29, 2012, 01:45:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Belloc
    my priest does, found it in storage......unlikely will let me borrow it....it is mainly hte TLM, but in English, told there are some changes in rubrics more to the NO........sorta a hybrid......


    Thanks, I think I found it but it is the 1965 version.  It gets confusing, 1955, 1958, 1961/2 1965, 1967, 1969.  But not part of a diabolical plan?

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

    Here is the consecration for that "mass":

    FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL COVENANT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH: WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS.

    They still retained "The Mystery of Faith" part but it was already changed to "for many".  

    I would like to see a comparison of all the different 1960 versions on the Mass.

    Anyone have the 1967 version?
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline Sunbeam

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 246
    • Reputation: +277/-2
    • Gender: Male
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #3 on: August 29, 2012, 02:58:40 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Lover of Truth
    They still retained "The Mystery of Faith" part but it was already changed to "for many".


    OH YEAH? CHANGED FROM WHAT?

    Offline Belloc

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6600
    • Reputation: +615/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #4 on: August 29, 2012, 03:07:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Lover of Truth
    Quote from: Belloc
    my priest does, found it in storage......unlikely will let me borrow it....it is mainly hte TLM, but in English, told there are some changes in rubrics more to the NO........sorta a hybrid......


    Thanks, I think I found it but it is the 1965 version.  It gets confusing, 1955, 1958, 1961/2 1965, 1967, 1969.  But not part of a diabolical plan?

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

    Here is the consecration for that "mass":

    FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL COVENANT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH: WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS.

    They still retained "The Mystery of Faith" part but it was already changed to "for many".  

    I would like to see a comparison of all the different 1960 versions on the Mass.

    Anyone have the 1967 version?


    my 1958 Missal states "many" and not "for all" like in NO...

    what is the deal with "many", in a short nutshell? should it be "few"?
    Proud "European American" and prouder, still, Catholic


    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18177
    • Reputation: +8276/-692
    • Gender: Male
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #5 on: August 30, 2012, 01:28:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Lover of Truth
    Quote from: Belloc
    my priest does, found it in storage......unlikely will let me borrow it....it is mainly hte TLM, but in English, told there are some changes in rubrics more to the NO........sorta a hybrid......


    Thanks, I think I found it but it is the 1965 version.  It gets confusing, 1955, 1958, 1961/2 1965, 1967, 1969.  But not part of a diabolical plan?

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

    Here is the consecration for that "mass":

    FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL COVENANT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH: WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS.

    They still retained "The Mystery of Faith" part but it was already changed to "for many".  

    I would like to see a comparison of all the different 1960 versions on the Mass.

    Anyone have the 1967 version?


    You're making  mistake.

    I have a friend who owns a 1570 missal, and it has "for many" in it, that is, pro
    multis
    (it has no English - it's all Latin), as do all traditional missals before Vatican
    II. It was the mistranslation of the USCCB that introduced "for all" even while the
    1970 "original" new mass in Latin has "for many." I've seen French and Spanish new
    mass missals printed after 1970 that have "for many" also. It was mainly a USA
    problem to have "for all" in English, and then it spread around from America.

    Notice too, they only "got away with it" for a few decades before the Vatican
    caught up and put a "stop" to the abuse, but the stop is just window dressing,
    because it isn't enforced, and a lot of bishops worldwide continue to use "for all,"
    in defiance of the Roman directive. B16 is a paper tiger.
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1158/-863
    • Gender: Male
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #6 on: August 30, 2012, 11:53:02 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Lover of Truth
    Does anyone have the text of the Mass of 1964 and the date it was promulgated?


    Only two thumbs down for that?

    Nice weather we are having.
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline Belloc

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6600
    • Reputation: +615/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #7 on: August 30, 2012, 11:55:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • could not resist giving you a one up thumb..... :alcohol:

    that said, not seeing any issues with "many", for all, most definately!
    Proud "European American" and prouder, still, Catholic


    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1158/-863
    • Gender: Male
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #8 on: August 30, 2012, 11:58:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Sunbeam
    Quote from: Lover of Truth
    They still retained "The Mystery of Faith" part but it was already changed to "for many".


    OH YEAH? CHANGED FROM WHAT?


    I'm sorry it was changed to "for all" from "for many".  Or from "for many" Big difference.

    Some people might just be grasping the English language and not be familiar with proper etiquette.

    "OH YEAH? CHANGED FROM WHAT?"

    Might more properly be worded as follows:

    "Is that so?  Can you tell me what "for many" was changed from?"

    This may help you in your future interactions with others who might be more disposed to respond in a positive way to any concern you might have.

    God's speed.  
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline Sunbeam

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 246
    • Reputation: +277/-2
    • Gender: Male
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #9 on: August 30, 2012, 08:02:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Lover of Truth,
    I note your reprimand and your lesson to correct what you seem think are my inadequate grasp of the English language and my unfamiliarity with “proper etiquette”. OK, since I had forgotten about your thin skin, I apologise for my use of rough language.

    But because you appear not to have grasped the point of my comment, let me elaborate.

    You provided this link: http://www.coreyzelinski.8m.com/1965_Mass/ which leads to what is labelled as: “Ordinary of the Mass in the English Language : Missale Romanum 1965 ... in accordance with the new revised liturgy as directed by Vatican Council II".

    With reference to that text, you asserted “They still retained ‘The Mystery of Faith’ part but it was already changed to ‘for many’.” (My emphasis)

    I assume that, in that assertion, the pronoun “it” is meant to refer to the English equivalent of the phrase "pro multis" as it occurs amongst the Words of Consecration for the chalice, which words, in fact, are set out in the text as follows:

    FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL COVENANT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH: WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS. (My emphasis again.)

    As we all well know, “FOR MANY” is the English rendering of the Latin “pro multis”. We also well know that, in the Roman rite, the Words of Consecration for the chalice have ALWAYS included the words “pro multis”. Although it is hardly necessary for me to point it out, this fact is proven by reference to the Roman Catechism (1566), or, for example -- going back another half millennium -- by reference to the Leofric Missal (9th-11th century) preserved at the Bodleian Library in Oxford. (See: Leofric Missal. If you scroll down to Folio 63 verso, you will find the Words of Consecration for the chalice at the top of the page, and, on the third line down, you will read: ...qui pro vobis & pro multis...)

    So it is clear that, in the 1965 text to which you have drawn attention, other than it being translated into English, there was NO CHANGE to the expression "pro multis". Therefore, your assertion that “it was already changed to ‘for many’” was false. I do not suggest for a moment that it was deliberately so: rather it was a careless mistake. Nevertheless, in attempting a correction, you make another careless mistake when you try to tell us that “it was changed to ‘for all’ from ‘for many’”.

    The very evidence you have presented contradicts you, so I respond: OH YEAH? WHO ARE YOU KIDDING?

    Read it for yourself: the 1965 missal that you cite has “FOR MANY” -- the English equivalent of the ancient words “pro multis”.

    The fact is -- if memory serves me right -- it was in 1967 when the first attempt to alter the meaning of the Words of Consecration by way of translation became public knowledge, and it was this that set Patrick Henry Omlor on writing his tour de force: “Questioning the Validity of the Masses using the New, All-English Canon”.  Even so, at that time, “pro multis” was translated as “for all men”, and it was only later (presumably to appease the pedants in the feminist lobby) that this expression was reduced to “for all”.

    In brief: as much as we may deplore the outcome of Vatican II, it doesn't do to misrepresent the associated facts, especially for one holding himself out to be a "lover of truth".

    Offline RomanCatholic1953

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10512
    • Reputation: +3267/-207
    • Gender: Male
    • I will not respond to any posts from Poche.
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #10 on: August 30, 2012, 11:05:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • View of the Priest saying Mass on November 22, 1964.  Priest still faced
    East.


    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1158/-863
    • Gender: Male
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #11 on: September 05, 2012, 08:30:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: RomanCatholic1953
    View of the Priest saying Mass on November 22, 1964.  Priest still faced
    East.


    Thanks for this.

    I'm trying to get the date and the differences from all the different forms of the Mass during the '60s.  

    Can anyone point me in the right directions.  I initially thought it was changed in 1964, but now am wondering if it was changed in 1965.

    It changed in 1961/2 and in 1967 and again in 1969.  What was the date of the other change(s)?  

    Also when "for all" and "for all men" was universally used "except in French" was Rome unawared of this?  Has universal salvation been implied by the false popes who worship with heretics and never tell them to return to the Church.  And in fact forbid us from proslytizing Jєωs, and the Greek orthodox?  Have they told us the martyrs of the past did not die for the Catholic Faith but rather for religious liberty and Ratzinger understands it?  Let me know if I am missing anything.

    Note in advance that I'm not trying to hurt anyone's feelings or get them mad.
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1158/-863
    • Gender: Male
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #12 on: September 05, 2012, 08:34:36 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/05May/may3mas.htm

    Not long ago, I celebrated my tenth anniversary as a Roman Catholic priest. There are many memories of that blessed day. It has been nice to review the pictures of the ceremonies and to recall the moment of ordination when I was made a priest of God. It was at that time I was given the power to offer Holy Mass, to bless, and to forgive sins. I remember with special joy my first blessing given as a priest. It was bestowed on my parents.

        In order to enkindle some of the spark I received on that day, I took some time in the stillness of my parish church to review the ordination ceremonies. The wording of that holy rite is truly inspiring. In a sermon for my anniversary Mass I reviewed with my parishioners the meaning of those words. I also reviewed with them the mutilated form of the ordination rite in the novus ordo church. The differences are not just striking in what the words do or do not say, they are shocking and even worrisome.

    Changes Here Too

        Why did the Innovators find it necessary to change everything sacred in the Church? Tampering with the Mass was not their only nefarious deed. They left us an empty shell of worship of God by taking away the Sacrifice of the Mass and replacing it with the Abomination of Desolation. Their efforts produced a liturgy with severely doubtful validity all the while destroying the sacred tradition of Latin as the official language of the Church. They didn't stop here. A major butcher-job was done on the Rite of Ordination to the Priesthood. Since most people rarely see an ordination, the seriousness of this has perhaps gone largely undetected. We cannot be silent about it any longer.

        By 1967 the novus ordo was introduced and the Tridentine Latin Mass was abolished. Major announcements were made and most of us sat by as we watched our Mass being destroyed. Do you know the date of the change in the sacramental rites? Perhaps not. There were no announcements made, no write-ups in parish bulletins or diocesan papers. The new Roman Pontifical was made official in 1978. It was prepared by the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL), the same group responsible for the changes in the Mass. In Chapter Eleven we find the new rite of Ordination Of A Priest. In twelve pages of wide-spaced type, one can read how a man is made a priest in the new rite. The modern ordination is simplified to the extreme. If it is stretched out with singing and a sermon it could probably take about an hour. My ordination took nearly three.

        Besides reducing the wording of ceremonies, they have also taken some of the preparatory orders away. As of 1978, Tonsure was eliminated and the only Minor Orders are Lector and Acolyte. From here the candidate for the modern priesthood jumps to the Diaconate and then to the Priesthood. Abolished also is the Order of Subdiaconate. Tonsure, Porter, Exorcist and Subdiaconate were not superfluous steps to the priesthood. Each communicated a future responsibility that the candidate would face as a priest. Why was it necessary for them to be eliminated? Hasn't the new rite cheapened the respect the new candidate should have for the priesthood?

    Essence of Ordination Meaning Missing

        Why is a man made a priest in the Catholic Church? The chief reason is to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The traditional rite explains this clearly. In the words of the bishop to the ordinand, the office of the priesthood is explained according to the traditional understanding of what we know a priest should be:


    "Dearly beloved son, as you are now about to be consecrated to the office of the Priesthood, endeavor to receive it worthily, and when you have received it, to fulfill its duties blamelessly. The Priest is ordained to offer Sacrifice, to bless, to guide, to preach and to baptize. With great awe should one advance to so high a state...."
        Here is how the office of the Priesthood is explained by the bishop according to the 1978 rite:


    "My son, you are now to advance to the order of the prebyterate. You must apply your energies to the duty of teaching in the name of Christ, the chief Teacher. Share with mankind the word of God you have received with joy. Meditate on the law of God, believe what you read, teach what you believe, and put into practice what you teach. . . . In the memorial of the Lord's death and resurrection, make every effort to die to sin and to walk in the new life of Christ."
        There is no subtle difference here. The Catholic priesthood is to be distinguished from any other ministry because it is a sacrificing priesthood. The Catholic priest offers up the renewal of the Sacrifice of Calvary. He offers God back to God for the good of mankind. Holy Mass is not merely a memorial of the Lord's death, nor does the Mass have anything to do with Christ's Resurrection. The essence of the priesthood -- that it was established to offer the Sacrifice of the Mass, the unbloody renewal of Calvary -- is missing from the new rite. This is important as we consider a point later in the ceremonies.

    The Form of the Rite

        From the catechism we know that all Sacraments must have proper matter, form and intention. If any of these is defective, there is no Sacrament. For example, to attempt to baptize with motor oil would be invalid because oil is improper matter for baptism. Even if the proper words are used and the minister has the proper intention, there would be no Sacrament of Baptism because there was improper matter (one of the three essential elements) used. It was oil and not water.

        By the intention necessary for each Sacrament is usually meant what is expressed or implied by the minister of the Sacrament. In the new ordination rite, the intention of the bishop has already been seen in his address to the candidate. Another important consideration is the intention of the recipient. For all Sacraments except the Holy Eucharist, the intention of the recipient can also block the validity of that Sacrament. In the 1978 rite, the intention of the candidate is publicly proclaimed in a question and answer form from bishop to candidate. See if you can read where the candidate declares that he is receiving the sacrificing priesthood:


    Bishop: "My son, before you proceed to the order of presbyterate, declare before the people your intention to undertake this priestly office. Are you resolved, with the help of the Holy Spirit, to discharge without fail the office of the priesthood in the presbyteral order as a conscientious fellow worker with the bishops in caring for the Lord's flock?"
    Candidate: "I am."

    Bishop: "Are you resolved to celebrate the mysteries of Christ faithfully and religiously as the Church has handed them down to us for the glory of God and the sanctification of Christ's people?"

    Candidate: "I am."

    Bishop: Are you resolved to exercise the ministry of the word worthily and wisely, preaching the Gospel and explaining the catholic faith?

    Candidate: "I am."

    Bishop: "Are you resolved to consecrate your life to God for the salvation of his people, and to unite yourself more closely every day to Christ the High Priest, who offered Himself for us to the Father as a perfect sacrifice?

    Candidate: "I am."

    The Form is Also Changed

        To this point we have reviewed the expressed intention for which a man is ordained. The matter of the Sacrament of Holy Orders is the imposition of hands by the bishop on the ordinand. This is done in silence and is one of the most inspiring parts of the ceremony. The traditional rite and that of 1978 are the same one at this point. But the form of the Sacrament is different.

        In 1948, Pope Pius XII defined once and for all which words of the traditional ceremony are to be considered the essential form. Changing these in any way would invalidate the Sacrament. It is important to note that the pope never changed the word s. He defined the words that were already in the ceremonial for many centuries. The form of the Sacrament in the traditional ceremony is:


    "Grant, we implore Thee, almighty Father, to this Thy servant the dignity of the Priesthood, renew within him the spirit of holiness, that he may keep the rank in Thy service which he has received from Thee, and by his conduct afford a pattern of holy living."
    The form in the 1978 rite is:


    "Hear us, Lord our God, and pour out upon this servant of yours the blessing of the Holy Spirit and the grace of the power of the priesthood. In your sight we offer this man for ordination: support him with your unfailing love. We ask this through Christ Our Lord. Amen."
        The nature of the priesthood is that which is explained in the publicly expressed intention of the bishop. To which form of the priesthood is the candidate ordained in either ceremony?

    Further Missing Elements

        After the candidate is made a priest, he receives the uniform of his office. The 1978 form calls for the bishop to arrange the stole of the newly ordained and place the chasuble on him without any prayers. The traditional rite uses these prayers:


    For the Stole: "Receive the yoke of the Lord, for His yoke is sweet, and His burden light."
    For the Chasuble: "Receive the priestly vestment whereby charity is signified; for God is well able to give thee an increase of charity and its perfect works."

    Next the hands of the newly ordained are anointed with oil. The traditional rite has the bishop say:


    "Be pleased, O Lord, to consecrate and hallow these hands by this anointing and our blessing That whatsoever they bless may be blessed, and whatsoever they consecrate may be consecrated and hallowed, in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ."
        The 1978 rite:


    "The Father annointed our Lord Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit. May Jesus preserve you to sanctify the Christian people and to offer sacrifice to God."
        Next the traditional rite has the bishop present a chalice containing wine and water to the newly ordained upon which is placed a paten with an unconsecrated host. As the ordinandi touch these, these words are said by the bishop:


    "Receive the power to offer Sacrifice to God, and to celebrate Mass, both for the living and the dead, in the name of the Lord."
        The 1978 rite has none of these prayers.

        Lastly, toward the end of the Ordination Mass in the traditional ceremony, the bishop lays his hands upon the ordinandi saying:


    "Receive the Holy Ghost; whose sins thou shalt forgive, they are forgiven them: and whose sins thou shalt retain, they are retained."
    Following this the bishop unfolds the chasuble saying:


    "The Lord clothe thee with the robe of innocence."
        The 1978 rite has neither of these prayers.

        The 1978 rite is conspicuous for what is missing, especially in some of the essential wording of the ceremony. The priesthood in the modern church is proceeding along a decidedly different path than that which the Church has taken for centuries.

        Just where will that path lead us all?

    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1158/-863
    • Gender: Male
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #13 on: September 06, 2012, 10:55:18 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I think I finally got the date I was looking for and the changes that were made (optional) during this version:

    The vernacular language could be used, except in the Canon of the Mass, which had to be prayed in Latin (until 1967, that is), if the priest desired. The Last Gospel, which had been mandated by Pope Saint Pius V when he issued the Missale Romanum of 1570, thereby codifying a de facto practice that had been observed by priests in many parts of Europe as a private devotion as they left the sanctuary at the conclusion of Holy Mass dating back to the Twelfth Century, was eliminated. The Leonine Prayers, which were made "optional" in the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition that was promulgated by Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII in 1961 were eliminated. The priest could also face the people, if he wished, a revolutionary change that became institutionalized universally in the life of Roman Rite Catholics attached to the counterfeit church of conciliarism with the implementation of the Novus Ordo service on November 30, 1969. In other words, the changes inaugurated on November 30, 1964, are very similar, although not entirely identical, with those that are to be included in "Extraordinary Form 2.0," [Tom is talking about the changes Ratzinger wants to make to the 1961/2/2007 version] if you will.  


    http://christorchaos.com/NextStopOnTheMotuMadnessMerry-Go-Round1969AndBeyond.html
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1158/-863
    • Gender: Male
    Mass of 1964
    « Reply #14 on: September 06, 2012, 10:57:14 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The nature and the extent of the changes contained in the Ordo Missae of 1965 were bound to--and did in fact--bewilder many ordinary Catholics. This is why the following announcement was inserted into the parish bulletin of Saint Matthew's Church in Norwood, Ohio, a facility that is now Immaculate Conception Church, which operates under the auspices of the Society of Saint Pius V, to tell the sheep just to do what they were told as a revolution unfolded before their very eyes and with their own "full, active and conscious participation:"

    Today is the First Sunday of Advent and the beginning of the Church's new liturgical year. Today we begin our "New Liturgy". Beginning today many parts of Holy Mass will be said in English. We ask each of you to do your very best to join the priest in the prayers of the Mass. Leaflets with the official text of these prayers were given most of your last Sunday. (For those of you who were unable to obtain your copies last Sunday, you may obtain one at the bulletin stands today.) For the Masses with singing (including the 9:45 a.m. High Mass), you are asked to use the cards found in the pews. Kindly stand, sit and kneel, according to the directions on your leaflet or the card. At the Masses today, seminarians will be on hand to help and guide you in this new participation. We wish to thank Msgr. Schneider, Rector of Mt. St. Mary's Seminary, for his kindness in sending us his students; and also the young men themselves for their generosity in helping us. We know that it will take a while (perhaps even months) before we have this new method of participating in Holy Mass perfected; we earnestly ask each one to cooperate loyally and faithfully to the best of his or her ability to make the public worship of God in St. Matthew Parish a true and worthy "sacrifice of praise." [Historical note: the Mount Saint Mary's Seminary referred to in the bulletin was known as Mount Saint Mary's Seminary of the West, located in Norwood, Ohio.]

    http://christorchaos.com/NextStopOnTheMotuMadnessMerry-Go-Round1969AndBeyond.html

    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church