Talk:Pre-Tridentine Mass

message: The table uses the terms from the Hoppin book, which is a well-respected history of medieval music, a topic which necessitates a lot of discussion of the development of the mass. The Catholic Encyclopedia gives the date of coinage of the world "mass" as mid-4th century, and initially only with the idea of dismissal; before that names varied; we could use Eucharist or Liturgy if you prefer. The Catholic Encyclopedia clearly discusses a reduction of the number of readings and that two or three were typical somewhat after 400. If you have a source that disputes any of this, then you can mention that in the article (i.e. "so-and-so disputes that there were ever three readings in the Mass"), but please do not delete the table entirely. Rigadoun 16:47, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comparison table

message: Instead of making personal attacks and attributing actions to motives ("hate-filled") that some might think indicate a log in his own eye, would Smith2006 kindly provide citations to support at least some of the unverified statements in this section.  Not all the section's questionable statements have been marked as requiring verification: take the reference to "Eucharistic Prayers" (in the plural): I thought only one was in use in Rome in 400 (the year in question).
Lima 11:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: in Micrologus (Bernold of Constance, d. 1100) that we first find the Confiteor quoted as part of the introduction of the Mass. The form here is: "Confiteor Deo omnipotenti, istis Sanctis et omnibus Sanctis et tibi frater, quia peccavi in cogitatione, in lucutione, in opere, in pollutione mentis et corporis. Ideo precor te, ora pro me." The Misereatur and Indulgentiam follow, the former slightly different, but the latter exactly as we have it now (De eccl. observ., xxiii, in P.L., CLI, 992). In the "Ordo Romanus XIV" (by Cardinal James Cajetan in the fourteenth century, Mabillon, op. cit., II, 246-443) we find our Confiteor exactly, but for the slight modification: "Quia peccavi nimis cogitatione, delectatione, consensu, verbo et opere" (ib., p. 329)."
Smith2006 says the term "Mass" was not yet used in 400 for what was later called the Liturgy of the Fathful or of the Eucharist.  In his article on the Liturgy of the Mass, Fortescue says that the first certain use of the word "Missa" (Mass) was in 397 and comments: "It will be noticed that missa here means the Eucharistic Service proper, the Liturgy of the Faithful only, and does not include that of the Catechumens.  Ambrose uses the word as one in common use and well known."  Another head-on contradiction.
When Smith2006 says: "The 'Eucharistic Prayers' in Rome" - where did he get the idea that there were several? - "were composed of the same prayers, be it in a different sequence, as the present day Roman Canon", he is going against not only the Fortescue we can check on but also renowned liturgical scholars who half a century later had even more information at their disposal than Fortescue had.  In his two-volume work Missarum Sollemnia - Eine genetische Erklärung der römischen Messe (Herder, Vienna 1949), Josef Andreas Jungmann, S.J., speaking of the Canon of the Mass, says that in 400 ("at the start of the fifth century") the Roman Canon did not have the Communicantes, the Hanc igitur, nor the post-consecration Memento etiam and Nobis quoque ("Fehlen würde also von unserem heutigem Kanon zu Beginn des 5. Jahrhunderts nur Communicantes, Hanc igitur sowie nach der Wandlung Memento etiam und Nobis quoque" - volume I, page 71).  Hermannus A. P. Schmidt, in his Introductio in Liturgiam Occidentalem (Herder, Rome-Freiburg-Barcelona 1960) is less clear-cut, saying only that these and certain other parts of the Canon (which Jungmann, who is more precise, dates to before the year 400) appeared in the fourth and fifth centuries, namely the period (after the legalization of Christianity) of what Schmidt called the "Basilica Mass" (page 352).  These two liturgical scholars therefore agree with each other and with the Fortescue that I can check, but disagree with Smith2006 and with what Smith2006 attributes to a Fortescue that I cannot check.  I trust the three liturgical scholars whom I can check.  I must regretfully say that I find it extremely difficult to have any trust in Smith2006, who clearly is no liturgical scholar.
Lima 16:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Critique" 

message: There wasn't a uniform pre-Tridentine rite. The Sarum, York, Hereford, Rouen, Cologne rites were all variants of the Roman rite, as was the Use of the Papal Curia that evolved into the Tridentine rite. Joseph Jungmann wrote in his "Mass of the Roman Rite" that the rite of Mass used in the parishes of the Diocese of Rome even differed slightly from that used in the papal household.
Every diocese had its own variant of the Mass. The scope of the article
is broader than just what happened in Rome because the Roman rite, as used in Rome didn't exist outside its gates.--68.45.161.241 20:55, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rome

message: "We decided to entrust this work to learned men of our selection. They very carefully collated all their work with the ancient codices in Our Vatican Library and with reliable, preserved or emended codices from elsewhere. Besides this, these men consulted the works of ancient and approved authors concerning the same sacred rites; and thus they have restored the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers. When this work has been gone over numerous times and further emended, after serious study and reflection, We commanded that the finished product be printed and published" (Pope Pius V, Bull Quo primum).  Lima 08:47, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest that our friend examine the 1474 Missale Romanum. It has significant divergences from the 1570 Missal, such as its addition of Psalm 42 to the ordinary of the Mass and the elimination of certain feasts, etc.
--Pravknight 04:13, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did Pius V revise the Missal? 

message: All of the following were given in a somewhat useless fashion in the EL section. They were removed by User:Drmies; I have put them here (which appears to be a more proper place) in case somebody is interested in checking the matter as this could help improve this article. 
===Scholarly works===
*.
*, based on Adrian Fortescue's The Mass: A Study of the Roman Liturgy.
* by a renowned liturgist.
*.
*.
*.
*: the liturgical reforms of Pope Gregory I in about 600.
*: the liturgical reforms promoted by Charlemagne in about 800.
*: a discussion of the ceremonies of the medieval Church of Lincoln.
===Roman Missal before 1570 and precedents===
*.
*;  vol. 2.
*.
* 
*.
* Missale Romanum Mediolani, 1474, Henry Bradshaw Society (snippets only)
* Manuscript missal of before 1225 in the Real Academia de la Historia, Spain (Biblioteca Digital)
===Pre-1570 Missals used outside Rome by local variants of Roman Rite===
*.
*. An Irish Missal differing slightly from other uses of the Roman rite because St. Patrick and St. Gregory the Great are commemorated in the Canon of the Mass.
*: the Hereford Missal.
*,  Vol. 2 (60): the York Missal in Latin.
*,  vol. 2.
*.
*. With introd. and notes;  another link.
*: eight pre-Tridentine variants of the Roman Mass side by side with the Tridentine Mass for comparison.
*.
*. 
*.
*.
*.
*, Alternative link.
*, Alternative link.
*, Alternate link.
*.
*: the Sarum Missal.
*.
*.
*; alternate edition.
*. Compared with later Medieval English Usages of the Roman Mass.
*. Contains the ordinary of the medieval Use of Uppsala, Sweden.
*Comments of Helge Fæhn on the characteristics of the medieval Use of Nidaros as found in the surviving missals of the Archdiocese of Nidaros.
Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk | contribs)  02:10, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential sources 

message: *.
*. An Irish Missal differing slightly from other uses of the Roman rite because St. Patrick and St. Gregory the Great are commemorated in the Canon of the Mass.
*: the Hereford Missal.
*,  Vol. 2 (60): the York Missal in Latin.
*,  vol. 2.
*.
*. With introd. and notes;  another link.
*: eight pre-Tridentine variants of the Roman Mass side by side with the Tridentine Mass for comparison.
*.
*. 
*.
*.
*.
*, Alternative link.
*, Alternative link.
*, Alternate link.
*.
*: the Sarum Missal.
*.
*.
*; alternate edition.
*. Compared with later Medieval English Usages of the Roman Mass.
*. Contains the ordinary of the medieval Use of Uppsala, Sweden.
*Comments of Helge Fæhn on the characteristics of the medieval Use of Nidaros as found in the surviving missals of the Archdiocese of Nidaros.
Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk | contribs)  02:10, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Pre-1570 Missals used outside Rome by local variants of Roman Rite

message: :de:Michael Fiedrowicz, The Traditional Mass: History, Form, and Theology of the Classical Roman Rite, 2011. Veverve (talk) 03:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A reliable source which could be used