Changes to the Roman Missal brought about by Cum Sanctissimum (1604 Clement VIII)
1570 Roman Missal: Rubric directing the celebrant upon entering the church to kneel and recite a verse from Ps. 65: Introibo in domum tuam; in holocaustis reddam tibi vota mea, quae distinxerunt labia mea, before reciting the further antiphon, Ne reminiscaris, and the five psalms in preparation for Mass.
1604 Roman Missal: First antiphon suppressed (omitted).
1570 Roman Missal: The prayer of St. Ambrose, Summe Sacerdos, is not divided into parts.
1604 Roman Missal: The Summe Sacerdos is divided into sections for various days of the week.
1570 Roman Missal: The general rubrics are not numbered. Within the general rubrics there is no mention of ringing a bell, incense or torchbearers.
1604 Roman Missal: The general rubrics are numbered. Ringing a bell, incense and torchbearers are included in the rubrics along with additions such as RG XX describing the preparation required for the altar.
1570 Roman Missal: After the Confiteor the words “all sins” appear in the absolution rite. (Misereatur...omnibus peccatis; Indulgentiam ...omnium peccatorum)
1604 Roman Missal: The words “all sins” do not appear in Clement VIII’s Missal.
1570 Roman Missal: At High Mass the verse Dirigatur Domine ... is to be said by the celebrant while he incenses the altar before saying the Introit and again when the altar is incensed during the Offertory.
1604 Roman Missal: This rubric is suppressed in the Missal of Clement VIII.
1570 Roman Missal: The Kings name is mentioned in the Canon.
1604 Roman Missal: This rubric suppressed.
1570 Roman Missal: The words “As often as you do these things...,” (Haec quotiescumque) are said while the celebrant elevates the chalice.
1604 Roman Missal: The rubrics order the above words to be said after the elevation instead of during.
1570 Roman Missal: At the end of High Mass, the celebrant is directed to impart three blessings not one: one at the epistle corner, one in the center, and one at the gospel corner of the altar. (“In missa solemnia... ter benedicat populo, primo a cornu Epistolae dicens, Pater, secundo ante medium altaris dicens, Et Filius, tertio a cornu Evangelii dicens, Et Spiritus Sanctus...”)
1604 Roman Missal: This rubric suppressed and triple blessings reserved for prelates.
Source: Paul Cavendish, in an article for Altar No. 1, 1994 "The Tridentine Mass". Cites Missale Romanum, Paris, 1572, British Library Catalogue 1475.bb. 15; Pontificale Romanum, Venice, 1572, British Library Catalogue C132.h.50.
Also of note is the suppression by the 1570 Roman Missal of a proper Mass entitled the “Immaculate Conception” for December 8th. Most pre-Trent missals have this Mass formula and give the introit Egredimini and the same collect as in the Mass proper Pius IX was to authorize three centuries later. In Pius V’s missal no mention of “immaculate” appears and in most of the early editions of the missal a proper is not even printed on December 8th for Our Lady’s Conception instead a rubric directs the celebrant to use the formulary given for the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin on September 8th and change the word “nativity” to “conception” in the collect. (Missale Romanum, Venice, 1481, British Library Catalogue IA19880; Missale Romanum, 1572, loc. cit).
Pope St. Pius V's missal lasted only 34 years in it's entirety before revision. Clement VIII's missal lasted only 30 years after that. There doesn't seem to be substantial differences in Urban's missal, mainly a re-wording of the rubrics for clarity and a change in the calendar. Of course this missal was again modified by Benedict XV, which incorporated the changes of Pius X revision's to the calendar and rubrics (e.g. the color of vestments within octaves, the number of Masses to be sung in Cathedral and Collegiate Churches when a feast and major feria coincided, rules regarding the choice of preface, and the choice of Mass formulary in Lent et al.) The major change brought about by this revision is the familiar green vestments on Sunday. Before this revision when Sunday's and feasts coincided, the Sunday was commemorated in the festal Mass the color of the vestments therefore being red or white.
Pretty much the same development occured with the Breviary. The Bull establishing the Tridentine Breviary Quod a nobis called down the same wrath of the Apostles Peter and Paul upon any who dared to omitt, add, or change the Breviary of Trent in any manner whatsoever. On that score alone, the argument used for the 'perpetuity' of Quo Primum Tempore would cause us to reject the development to the Breviary in the same manner that the some use Quo Primum Tempore to reject the later revisions to the Roman Missal. Clearly we don't reject the Clement VIII, Urban VIII, Pius X/Benedict XV, Pius XII (except some fringe sedevacanist groups) or the John XXIII (again some sedevacanists do) revisions to the Roman Missal. Since we accept the revisions of the Breviary and Missal up to this point, it's simply arbitrary to not accept those revisions brought about by the pontificates of Paul VI and John Paul II. Indeed, Quo Primum Tempore simply does not and cannot mean what some claim it to in their protestations of the Vatican II era revisions given their practice of accepting all of the above mentioned reforms.
1570 Roman Missal: Rubric directing the celebrant upon entering the church to kneel and recite a verse from Ps. 65: Introibo in domum tuam; in holocaustis reddam tibi vota mea, quae distinxerunt labia mea, before reciting the further antiphon, Ne reminiscaris, and the five psalms in preparation for Mass.
1604 Roman Missal: First antiphon suppressed (omitted).
1570 Roman Missal: The prayer of St. Ambrose, Summe Sacerdos, is not divided into parts.
1604 Roman Missal: The Summe Sacerdos is divided into sections for various days of the week.
1570 Roman Missal: The general rubrics are not numbered. Within the general rubrics there is no mention of ringing a bell, incense or torchbearers.
1604 Roman Missal: The general rubrics are numbered. Ringing a bell, incense and torchbearers are included in the rubrics along with additions such as RG XX describing the preparation required for the altar.
1570 Roman Missal: After the Confiteor the words “all sins” appear in the absolution rite. (Misereatur...omnibus peccatis; Indulgentiam ...omnium peccatorum)
1604 Roman Missal: The words “all sins” do not appear in Clement VIII’s Missal.
1570 Roman Missal: At High Mass the verse Dirigatur Domine ... is to be said by the celebrant while he incenses the altar before saying the Introit and again when the altar is incensed during the Offertory.
1604 Roman Missal: This rubric is suppressed in the Missal of Clement VIII.
1570 Roman Missal: The Kings name is mentioned in the Canon.
1604 Roman Missal: This rubric suppressed.
1570 Roman Missal: The words “As often as you do these things...,” (Haec quotiescumque) are said while the celebrant elevates the chalice.
1604 Roman Missal: The rubrics order the above words to be said after the elevation instead of during.
1570 Roman Missal: At the end of High Mass, the celebrant is directed to impart three blessings not one: one at the epistle corner, one in the center, and one at the gospel corner of the altar. (“In missa solemnia... ter benedicat populo, primo a cornu Epistolae dicens, Pater, secundo ante medium altaris dicens, Et Filius, tertio a cornu Evangelii dicens, Et Spiritus Sanctus...”)
1604 Roman Missal: This rubric suppressed and triple blessings reserved for prelates.
Source: Paul Cavendish, in an article for Altar No. 1, 1994 "The Tridentine Mass". Cites Missale Romanum, Paris, 1572, British Library Catalogue 1475.bb. 15; Pontificale Romanum, Venice, 1572, British Library Catalogue C132.h.50.
Also of note is the suppression by the 1570 Roman Missal of a proper Mass entitled the “Immaculate Conception” for December 8th. Most pre-Trent missals have this Mass formula and give the introit Egredimini and the same collect as in the Mass proper Pius IX was to authorize three centuries later. In Pius V’s missal no mention of “immaculate” appears and in most of the early editions of the missal a proper is not even printed on December 8th for Our Lady’s Conception instead a rubric directs the celebrant to use the formulary given for the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin on September 8th and change the word “nativity” to “conception” in the collect. (Missale Romanum, Venice, 1481, British Library Catalogue IA19880; Missale Romanum, 1572, loc. cit).
Pope St. Pius V's missal lasted only 34 years in it's entirety before revision. Clement VIII's missal lasted only 30 years after that. There doesn't seem to be substantial differences in Urban's missal, mainly a re-wording of the rubrics for clarity and a change in the calendar. Of course this missal was again modified by Benedict XV, which incorporated the changes of Pius X revision's to the calendar and rubrics (e.g. the color of vestments within octaves, the number of Masses to be sung in Cathedral and Collegiate Churches when a feast and major feria coincided, rules regarding the choice of preface, and the choice of Mass formulary in Lent et al.) The major change brought about by this revision is the familiar green vestments on Sunday. Before this revision when Sunday's and feasts coincided, the Sunday was commemorated in the festal Mass the color of the vestments therefore being red or white.
Pretty much the same development occured with the Breviary. The Bull establishing the Tridentine Breviary Quod a nobis called down the same wrath of the Apostles Peter and Paul upon any who dared to omitt, add, or change the Breviary of Trent in any manner whatsoever. On that score alone, the argument used for the 'perpetuity' of Quo Primum Tempore would cause us to reject the development to the Breviary in the same manner that the some use Quo Primum Tempore to reject the later revisions to the Roman Missal. Clearly we don't reject the Clement VIII, Urban VIII, Pius X/Benedict XV, Pius XII (except some fringe sedevacanist groups) or the John XXIII (again some sedevacanists do) revisions to the Roman Missal. Since we accept the revisions of the Breviary and Missal up to this point, it's simply arbitrary to not accept those revisions brought about by the pontificates of Paul VI and John Paul II. Indeed, Quo Primum Tempore simply does not and cannot mean what some claim it to in their protestations of the Vatican II era revisions given their practice of accepting all of the above mentioned reforms.
No comments:
Post a Comment