Tridentine Mass questions?

What is the difference between a High and Low Mass? Does the congregation sing the responses at a Tridentine Mass?

[quote=Tomosaki]What is the difference between a High and Low Mass? Does the congregation sing the responses at a Tridentine Mass?
[/quote]

To go through all the minor differences in a high or low mass would take a while but generally what you will find different is that at a High Mass everything is sung except the canon and there will be incense used (most likely) and there will be a Priest, Deacon and Sub-Deacon at the altar. There will also be a sign of peace but in a normal parish it usually does not leave the sanctuary. However if it is at a monestray they may use the Pax.

At a low mass everything is spoken and not sung and there is only a priest at the altar.

At some forms of the Tridentine Mass there are responses - this is called a dialogue mass.

At a Tridentine Low Mass, the proper way is for ONLY the altar boy(s) to give the responses. The rest of the congregation remains completely mute. If there are no altar boys, the Priest gives the responses to himself. I have actually witnessed this, and it is quite amazing.There are often prayers said after Low Mass, and I believe that the people may join in somewhat with those.

At a High Mass, only the choir, other clergy(if there are any), and altar boys should give the responses.:slight_smile:

A High Mass is a sung Mass with usually one priest and altar servers. When there is a priest, a deacon, and a sub-deacon it is a Solemn High Mass.

At a Tridentine Low Mass, the proper way is for ONLY the altar boy(s) to give the responses. The rest of the congregation remains completely mute. If there are no altar boys, the Priest gives the responses to himself. I have actually witnessed this, and it is quite amazing.There are often prayers said after Low Mass, and I believe that the people may join in somewhat with those.

At a High Mass, only the choir, other clergy(if there are any), and altar boys should give the responses.:slight_smile:

This is not correct in the present day. The Dialogue Mass was a common practice dating back to the 1920s and 1930s, and Rome provided fully for it in 1958, identifying five different levels of verbal participation by the congregation at both Low and High Masses. Thus, indult celebrations today, according to the 1962 missal, may certainly be, and often are, Dialogue Masses. It is a matter of local custom.

[quote=rwoehmke]A High Mass is a sung Mass with usually one priest and altar servers. When there is a priest, a deacon, and a sub-deacon it is a Solemn High Mass.
[/quote]

One priest with it being sung is a Missa Cantata. Other requirements must be fulfilled for it to truly be a High Mass.

This brings up a good point. There are no “levels” to the Novus Ordo. Thus, it solemnises everything or lowers more important feasts to the same level of Ordinary Time.

This is what I feel is missing from the new Mass. There is no way to have the Mass reflect the importance of the occassion. That is why Benedict would be my hero if he introduced NO High Mass.

That way, feasts could be properly recognised.

[quote=Chatter163]This is not correct in the present day. The Dialogue Mass was a common practice dating back to the 1920s and 1930s, and Rome provided fully for it in 1958, identifying five different levels of verbal participation by the congregation at both Low and High Masses. Thus, indult celebrations today, according to the 1962 missal, may certainly be, and often are, Dialogue Masses. It is a matter of local custom.
[/quote]

You can obviously tell that I prefer that the Mass not be a Dialogue Mass, and many Priests do, as well.:slight_smile:
Anyway, I don’t give the responses regardless.

[quote=Servus Pio XII]This brings up a good point. There are no “levels” to the Novus Ordo. Thus, it solemnises everything or lowers more important feasts to the same level of Ordinary Time.

This is what I feel is missing from the new Mass. There is no way to have the Mass reflect the importance of the occassion. That is why Benedict would be my hero if he introduced NO High Mass.

That way, feasts could be properly recognised.
[/quote]

This is not quite true. There are many times in the rubrics where it gives various options. The first option is always the highest and most solemn and the last is the lest. Thus while it does not make the formal distinction between Low, High, Solemn High of the first etc etc. It does provide for the options necessary to make clear distinctions between Solemnities and Feast of Our Lord and ferial days. However, it is encumbent upon the person in charge of the liturgy to be aware of the necessity of making the liturgical distinction in the method of the form of worship.

[quote=Servus Pio XII]This brings up a good point. There are no “levels” to the Novus Ordo. Thus, it solemnises everything or lowers more important feasts to the same level of Ordinary Time.

This is what I feel is missing from the new Mass. There is no way to have the Mass reflect the importance of the occassion. That is why Benedict would be my hero if he introduced NO High Mass.

That way, feasts could be properly recognised.
[/quote]

I’d like that too.
I dont know exactly what could be done with the NO to make a high mass, but id be up for finding out!

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.