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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8

Author Topic: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?  (Read 2982 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Last Tradhican

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6293
  • Reputation: +3327/-1937
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
« Reply #75 on: December 02, 2020, 05:49:48 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on December 02, 2020, 05:41:04 PM
    The breviary is not as essential for the Church as is the Mass or Scripture.  We must give the pope (especially a saint...Pope Pius X) the benefit of the doubt, that he had his administration do adequate research to make changes necessary and consistent with Tradition.  We can all question him as much as we want, but the fact remains that the breviary is a secondary aspect of the Faith; it's not primarily related to doctrine/theology.
    Comparing the effect upon the faithful of the Pius X changes in the breviary vs the  invention of the dialogue mass, is like confusing a lightning bug with lightning. 
    Logged
    The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24

    Offline ElAusente

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 91
    • Reputation: +17/-19
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #76 on: December 02, 2020, 06:20:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on December 02, 2020, 05:41:04 PM
    No, the 1962 missal would override/delete the 58 instruction.  Pope John XXIII specifically said that the 1957 Holy Week liturgy was included in his 1962 missal.  He did not mention the 1958 music, so it's no longer applicable.
    .
    The breviary is not as essential for the Church as is the Mass or Scripture.  We must give the pope (especially a saint...Pope Pius X) the benefit of the doubt, that he had his administration do adequate research to make changes necessary and consistent with Tradition.  We can all question him as much as we want, but the fact remains that the breviary is a secondary aspect of the Faith; it's not primarily related to doctrine/theology.
    Why would it override the instruction? Otherwise, what’s the point of the SCR making decrees if the next missal wipes them out?
    Logged

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6293
    • Reputation: +3327/-1937
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #77 on: December 02, 2020, 06:26:12 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ElAusente on December 02, 2020, 06:20:54 PM
    Why would it override the instruction? Otherwise, what’s the point of the SCR making decrees if the next missal wipes them out?
    Normally a next missal would be like 400 years later, but after 1954 there was practically a next missal like every year.
    Logged
    The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24

    Offline ElAusente

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 91
    • Reputation: +17/-19
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #78 on: December 02, 2020, 06:37:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Last Tradhican on December 02, 2020, 06:26:12 PM
    Normally a next missal would be like 400 years later, but after 1954 there was practically a next missal like every year.
    Pope Pius V issued a typical edition in 1570. Pope Clement VIII issued the next typical edition in 1604. Urban VIII issued the next typical edition in 1634. Leo XIII issued the next typical edition in 1884. Pope Benedict XV issued the next typical edition in 1920. John XXIII issued the next typical edition in 1962. 
    Furthermore, the decrees of the SCR were not incorporated in new typical editions but still retained their force. It would be utterly impractical to put the entirety of decrees in new editions. Rules on the amount of beeswax that must be in candles, for example, were not added to the next typical edition. 
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6215/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #79 on: December 02, 2020, 06:50:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0


    • Quote
    Why would it override the instruction? Otherwise, what’s the point of the SCR making decrees if the next missal wipes them out?

    Because the pope has the final say.  The SCR serves the pope, who has the final say.  The SCR only has authority because the pope GIVES it authority.  If the pope issues a new missal which overrides the SCR, then that's his decision.
    .

    Quote
    Furthermore, the decrees of the SCR were not incorporated in new typical editions but still retained their force.
    Example?

    Quote
    It would be utterly impractical to put the entirety of decrees in new editions. Rules on the amount of beeswax that must be in candles, for example, were not added to the next typical edition.

    If the SCR was busy with the details of the % of beeswax, then that's not essential to a missal, whose purpose is how to say mass.  The SCR sounds like it was concerned with non-essential aspects of the liturgy, whereas a Pope is concerned with more high-level decisions.
    Logged

    Offline ElAusente

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 91
    • Reputation: +17/-19
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #80 on: December 02, 2020, 07:19:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on December 02, 2020, 06:50:15 PM

    Because the pope has the final say.  The SCR serves the pope, who has the final say.  The SCR only has authority because the pope GIVES it authority.  If the pope issues a new missal which overrides the SCR, then that's his decision.
    .
    Example?

    If the SCR was busy with the details of the % of beeswax, then that's not essential to a missal, whose purpose is how to say mass.  The SCR sounds like it was concerned with non-essential aspects of the liturgy, whereas a Pope is concerned with more high-level decisions.
    The official liturgical books are actually quite sparse in details. This is why the SCR exists: to answer rubrical questions because the liturgical books don’t say. Even the SCR doesn’t address every question, which is why you have to consult authors like O’Connell and Fortescue to know how to correctly celebrate liturgical things. Such authors, by the way, constantly refer to decisions of the SCR issued before the most recent typical edition. The first edition of Fortescue is available online, and he addresses this very question.
    Concerning the question of De musica sacra, does it seem probable that the dialogue Mass was introduced in 1958 with the intention of arriving at the NOM, only for the same liturgical innovators to put together a missal aimed at that same purpose but suppressing the previous instruction? Does history support the conclusion that the dialogue Mass was suppressed from 1962 to 1964 when the instruction Inter oecuмenici was issued? But Inter oecuмenici doesn’t give permission for the dialogue Mass either but rather assumes it
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6215/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #81 on: December 02, 2020, 07:30:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    The official liturgical books are actually quite sparse in details. This is why the SCR exists: to answer rubrical questions because the liturgical books don’t say. Even the SCR doesn’t address every question, which is why you have to consult authors like O’Connell and Fortescue to know how to correctly celebrate liturgical things. Such authors, by the way, constantly refer to decisions of the SCR issued before the most recent typical edition. The first edition of Fortescue is available online, and he addresses this very question.
    Concerning the question of De musica sacra, does it seem probable that the dialogue Mass was introduced in 1958 with the intention of arriving at the NOM, only for the same liturgical innovators to put together a missal aimed at that same purpose but suppressing the previous instruction? Does history support the conclusion that the dialogue Mass was suppressed from 1962 to 1964 when the instruction Inter oecuмenici was issued? But Inter oecuмenici doesn’t give permission for the dialogue Mass either but rather assumes it

    The 1962 missal is the last missal issued properly by a pope.  Anything after this is subject to confusion and legal gymnastics.  
    .
    It basically boils down to the 1962 missal (TLM) vs Pope Paul's 1969 missal (new mass), which is what +Benedict referenced in 2007 in his motu.  Everything else is overwritten, legally.
    .
    Too much time has passed and too many popes, for us to be arguing about what happened between 1962-1969.  That period of "innovation" is passed.  It's not approved, even by +Benedict's 2007's standards!
    .
    If the new-sspx is introducing post 1962 liturgical innovations, then shame on them!!!
    Logged

    Offline ElAusente

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 91
    • Reputation: +17/-19
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #82 on: December 02, 2020, 07:58:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • The first edition of Fortescue's The Ceremonies of the Roman Rite Described was published in 1918. When he was writing the last typical edition of the Missale Romanum was issued in 1884. If by that act Leo XIII voided all the previous decrees of the SCR, then Fortescue should not refer to decress published before 1884 as authoritative, yet he does constantly. On page 3 alone he refers to four decrees from the SCR, all before Leo XIII's typical edition.

    In his preface Fortescue tells how he sought to write a work to replace Dale's translation of Baldeschi, the standard liturgical guide in English at the time. One of the reasons he gives for wanting to replace Baldeschi is that it was published in 1839 "and there have been many decisions of the Congregation of Rites, since 1839" (xiii). He does not mention the new typical edition at all as a reason.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6215/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #83 on: December 02, 2020, 08:16:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    The first edition of Fortescue's The Ceremonies of the Roman Rite Described was published in 1918. When he was writing the last typical edition of the Missale Romanum was issued in 1884. If by that act Leo XIII voided all the previous decrees of the SCR, then Fortescue should not refer to decress published before 1884 as authoritative, yet he does constantly. On page 3 alone he refers to four decrees from the SCR, all before Leo XIII's typical edition.

    In his preface Fortescue tells how he sought to write a work to replace Dale's translation of Baldeschi, the standard liturgical guide in English at the time. One of the reasons he gives for wanting to replace Baldeschi is that it was published in 1839 "and there have been many decisions of the Congregation of Rites, since 1839" (xiii). He does not mention the new typical edition at all as a reason.

    Bringing this into the 20th century, can you give an example of a liturgical act which is from the SCR, but not contained in the 1962 missal?
    Logged

    Offline ElAusente

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 91
    • Reputation: +17/-19
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #84 on: December 02, 2020, 08:41:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on December 02, 2020, 08:16:53 PM
    Bringing this into the 20th century, can you give an example of a liturgical act which is from the SCR, but not contained in the 1962 missal?
    Better yet I can give you an example of a liturgical act in neither: how to serve Mass.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6215/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #85 on: December 02, 2020, 08:51:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    Better yet I can give you an example of a liturgical act in neither: how to serve Mass.

    Servers aren't required for the liturgical act of offering Mass.
    Logged

    Offline ElAusente

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 91
    • Reputation: +17/-19
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #86 on: December 02, 2020, 09:32:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on December 02, 2020, 08:51:25 PM
    Servers aren't required for the liturgical act of offering Mass.
    I was wrong about that anyway. I didn't realize the Ritus servandus was in the Missal. Regardless, the percentage of beeswax question is not contained in the missal. I don't have a 1962 Fortescue with me, so I can't see what the SCR references are, but I do specifically recall the beeswax SCR decree being cited.
    I believe prior to the 1917 CIC a server was actually required by law. Even under the 1917 CIC Mass without anyone present can only be done out of grave necessity, I believe.
    Of course, a lot depends on what you mean by "required." Do you mean legally required or the bare bones required to confect the sacrament?
    Logged

    Offline moneil

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 617
    • Reputation: +456/-43
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #87 on: December 03, 2020, 12:55:29 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    Servers aren't required for the liturgical act of offering Mass.
    Citing Matters Liturgical, The Collectoo Rerum Liturgicarum of Rev. Joseph Wuest, C.SS.R.  Translated by Rev. Thomas W. Mullaney, C.SS.R.  Re-arranged and Enlarged by Rev. William T. Barry, C.SS.R., S.S.L.  Eighth Edition, 1956:


    Quote
    186. The Server at Mass.  A priest is forbidden to celebrate Mass without a server to minister to him and to respond (c. 813, 1.)  This law was reaffirmed on Nov. 20, 1947 in the Mediator Dei of Pius XII and on Oct. 1, 1949 by the Congregation of the Sacraments.
    …
    d)  If no man or boy is available, a woman may for a just cause be allowed to make the responses, provided that she does this from a distance and that she does not come to the altar under any circuмstances …
    …
    e)  If no one is available to serve, it is permitted to celebrate without a server in the following instances only: if a host must be consecrated in order to administer Viaticuм; if those present would otherwise be unable to satisfy the precept of hearing Mass; if the absence of a server is due to something like an epidemic …
    c. 813, 1 is a reference to a canon, and to Paragraph 186 a.

    I recall as a server in the pre VII days (I was born in 1951) that a priest NEVER said Mass alone.  if a priest wanted to say a private Mass a server would be summoned from the parochial school, or one would be called at home and told to get to the church ASAP.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #88 on: December 03, 2020, 08:09:38 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • If there wasn’t a problem with the dialogue Mass, it’s inventors would not have needed to hide and conspire to get it approved.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6293
    • Reputation: +3327/-1937
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Dialogue Mass: Who offers it? Who doesn't?
    « Reply #89 on: December 03, 2020, 10:11:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ElAusente on December 02, 2020, 06:37:29 PM
    Pope Pius V issued a typical edition in 1570. Pope Clement VIII issued the next typical edition in 1604. Urban VIII issued the next typical edition in 1634. Leo XIII issued the next typical edition in 1884. Pope Benedict XV issued the next typical edition in 1920. John XXIII issued the next typical edition in 1962.
    Furthermore, the decrees of the SCR were not incorporated in new typical editions but still retained their force. It would be utterly impractical to put the entirety of decrees in new editions. Rules on the amount of beeswax that must be in candles, for example, were not added to the next typical edition.
    1570, 1604, 1634, 1884, 1920, 1962

    What was the age of the 1569 missal?
    What were the changes in 1570, 1604, 1634, 1884, 1920?
    What about the 1954 missal, that changed the entire Holy Week celebrations, cut them down to like 1/4 and changed the times?
    What about the 1965 missal?

    I have read in many places that one could walk into a mass in the 8th century with their 1945 Lasance Missal and would be right at home.
    Logged
    The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24
    Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8
    « previous next »