Rites of the Catholic Church

[Aloysius]

inasmuch as "rite" refers to the ritual used, then Tridentine is a separate rite than Pauline or Anglican-use or Ambrosian et cetera. it is used with an indult within the Latin Sui Juris Church often refered to as the "Roman Rite"

now, Tridentine is very much related to Pauline. and Pauline is pretty related to Ambrosian. but they are all different rites used in the Latin Church.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Aug 16 2005, 10:43 PM']inasmuch as "rite" refers to the ritual used, then Tridentine is a separate rite than Pauline or Anglican-use or Ambrosian et cetera.  it is used with an indult within the Latin Sui Juris Church often refered to as the "Roman Rite"

now, Tridentine is very much related to Pauline.  and Pauline is pretty related to Ambrosian.  but they are all different rites used in the Latin Church.
[right][snapback]687285[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
The Church does not refer to the Trid as a separate rite.

[Aloysius]

umm... a rite is a ritual... are you telling me the Tridentine is not a different ritual than the Pauline or the Ambrosian et cetera? They are both in the Latin Church, the Pauline is the missa normativa for the Latin Church, and the Tridentine is done with an indult. How are they not different rites... where do you have the Church quoted as saying they are not different rites? I'm really confused about what you're arguing here.

The Tridentine Rite is clearly a separate rite, though obviously not a separate church, than the Pauline Rite which is used for the missa normativa.

So... how does the Church "not refer to the Trid as a seperate rite"?

[qfnol31]

I think there's actually legitimate debate over the Tridentine Rite as possibly separate.

[Aloysius]

how is the Tridentine Rite not a seperate rite? just because it is related to the Pauline Rite, it is still different.

EWTN lists Tridentine among the rites in the Latin Church.

[quote]• Roman - The overwhelming majority of Latin Catholics and of Catholics in general. Patriarch of this and the other Roman Rites is the Bishop of Rome. The current Roman Rite is that of the 1969 Missale Romanum, to be published in a third edition in 2001.
- Missal of 1962 (Tridentine Mass) - Some institutes within the Roman Rite, such as the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, have the faculty to celebrate the sacramental rites according to the forms in use prior to the Second Vatican Council. This faculty can also be obtained by individual priests from their bishop or from the Pontifical Council Ecclesia Dei.
- Anglican Use - Since the 1980s the Holy See has granted some former Anglican and Episcopal clergy converting with their parishes the faculty of celebrating the sacramental rites according to Anglican forms, doctrinally corrected.
• Mozarabic - The Rite of the Iberian peninsula (Spain and Portugal) known from at least the 6th century, but probably with roots to the original evangelization. Beginning in the 11th century it was generally replaced by the Roman Rite, although it has remained the Rite of the Cathedral of the Archdiocese of Toledo, Spain, and six parishes which sought permission to adhere to it. Its celebration today is generally semi-private.
• Ambrosian - The Rite of the Archdiocese of Milan, Italy, thought to be of early origin and probably consolidated, but not originated, by St. Ambrose. Pope Paul VI was from this Roman Rite. It continues to be celebrated in Milan, though not by all parishes.
• Bragan - Rite of the Archdiocese of Braga, the Primatial See of Portugal, it derives from the 12th century or earlier. It continues to be of occasional use.
• Dominican - Rite of the Order of Friars Preacher (OP), founded by St. Dominic in 1215.
• Carmelite - Rite of the Order of Carmel, whose modern foundation was by St. Berthold c.1154.
• Carthusian - Rite of the Carthusian Order founded by St. Bruno in 1084. [/quote]

EDIT: oops, I read that wrong, anyway as I started off saying [b]IF[/b] anglican-use is considered another rite, THEN Tridentine must also be considered a different rite.

[Cam42]

Properly speaking the Tridentine is not another Rite. It is the former Mass of Rome. It is the Mass that was the normative action of the Chruch from the 1570's to the 1960's. (Incidentally, that is only 390 years of 2000. The majority of the life of the Church has not used the Tridentine Mass.) It is not a separate rite in and of itself, as the Ambrosian Rite.

The reason being that the Ambrosian Rite (et. al.) grew from the Roman Mass. It was an authentic growth due to a regional aspect of the Church. The Anglican Rite is specific to those who have reverted from Anglicanism and wish to keep their own tradition.

The Tridentine Mass is neither of those things. The only reason that it is allowed is to satiate the needs of those who feel drawn to the pre-conciliar Mass. It did not grow organically from the Roman Mass, it was the Roman Mass. The Pauline Mass and the Tridentine Mass are part of the same Rite (the Roman Rite).

The concession that was granted by JPII is unheard of. He is allowing a reversion to a more primitive action, to satiate the wants of particular groups of people. It is the only time in history that the Church has allowed such a reversion. Pope St. Pius V, most certainly didn't allow for it to happen, although I am sure that there were some that were not in favor of his pronouncement.

I, for one, am not opposed to the idea of the Tridentine Mass, but the nomenclature that it is another Rite, is incorrect. It is the Roman Mass. However, it is not the Missa Normativa (or the Normative Mass). It is an indult granted for a specific purpose.

[qfnol31]

Pope St. Pius V allowed for all Masses older than 200 years to continue to exist. That's all that John Paul II allowed for, except in this case it was a little less specific.

What constitutes a new Rite?

[Aloysius]

is not the Pauline Mass a developement out of the Tridentine and as such the Pauline is a different rite than the Tridentine? the same way the Ambrosian developed from the Roman Rite.

I know the Tridentine is not a devlopement, it is the other way around, but that still means that they are different rites used in the Latin Church.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Aug 17 2005, 04:31 PM']is not the Pauline Mass a developement out of the Tridentine and as such the Pauline is a different rite than the Tridentine?  the same way the Ambrosian developed from the Roman Rite.

I know the Tridentine is not a devlopement, it is the other way around, but that still means that they are different rites used in the Latin Church.
[right][snapback]687997[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I don't think so. I think that the Pauline Mass is the reform of the Roman Mass. The Ambrosian Rite developed for a specific Church (diocese). It is a totally different scenario. One is speaking of the universal Church the other a specific church (diocese).

Are they different rites? No, they are the same. One is a reform and reconsititution of the other. They are not different rites, but the same. Both are the Roman Rite in the Latin Church, however, the Pauline Mass is the normative Mass and the Tridentine Mass is the indult.

[Aloysius]

I'm still not sure, but it really isn't all that important anyway. I mean, I understand that the Pauline Mass is related to the Tridentine because it developed out of it; but the Pauline Mass is also related to the Ambrosian Rite. It seems to me that even though the Tridentine is an older version, it can still be considered a different rite (it's not going away any time soon).

The Armenian Rite is an older version of the Byzantine, but it is generally considered a seperate rite because it is celebrated continually as the older version.

seeing as how under Ecclesia Dei the Tridentine has been re-established to be continually celebrated as the older version of the Roman Rite, it seems to be established then as its own rite in the same way the Armenian would be its own rite compared to the Byzantine.

I think you would be right if the Tridentine was intended to be completely done away with, but since it has been re-established and entire orders are devoted to it (FSSP) then it is to be its own rite continued as a non-dominant rite within the Latin Church...

[cmotherofpirl]

I have yet to set a document calling it another separate rite in the Church, to join the 22 other recognized rites.

[p0lar_bear]

This argument is a bit silly....

You are just using different definitions of the word "rite"

Cmom seems to be using "rite" as a separate Church (such as the Maronite Church). "Rites" according to this definition have their own hierarchy and many (though not all) have a Patriarch. You must petition to change from a Latin Rite Catholic to a Maronite Rite Catholic.

"Rite" can also mean just "ritual." So we have the Baptismal [i]rite[/i] or the Ordination [i]rite[/i]. Obviously, this is not refer to an separate Church, but to different rituals.

Using Cmom's definition, no the Tridentine isn't it's own rite. It does not get it's own hierarchy and will never have its own Patriarch. (So it is not like the Armenian rite). If you go to a Tridentine indult Mass, you are not governed by a different bishop than if you go to the regular Mass down the street. You cannot petition to become a Tridentine Rite Catholic.

Using the second definition, it is obviously a different ritual.

The Tridentine rite is a different rite in the same way that the Carthusian rite and the Ambrosian rite are different rites (or any of the rites in Al's post). They are rites within the Latin Rite. You cannot become a Tridentine Rite Catholic anymore than you can become a Dominican Rite Catholic...

[Aloysius]

thanks polar bear!.. that's all I'm saying

anyway, now that we've successfully de-railed this thread... the point was that saying the "Roman Catholic Church" generally excludes our entire eastern side.

[Norseman82]

Doesn't a priest need special permission/faculty to celebrate the the Tridentine Mass? I don't know, but with separate orders springing up like the Society of St. John Cantius that have Tridentine faculties, I wouldn't be surprised if someday it would be considered it's own rite.

[Aloysius]

it will never be a seperate sui juris church, but it is basically a different "rite" in the same way Ambrosian is a different rite. they are all governed by the Patriarch of the West, who happens to be the same person as the Pope (though that is technically a different office he holds, pope is universal guardian of doctrine and patriarch of the west governs over the rituals in the Latin Church)