Having established the environment in which the Council of Trent operated, let's take a good look at the results of the Council as it relates to the Mass. The council's doctrinal decisions on the Mass coincided with the reform decrees so that "the spirit of the faithful [may] be stimulated through visible signs full of religion and piety, for the contemplation of the invisible realities hidden in this sacrifice" (22nd session, 1562, Chapter V). The Council entrusted the revision of the Mass and its missal to the pope who, as we've already noted, entrusted it to a commission of peritii or experts. Sadly, none of their working notes have survived so we do not know the details of their considerations.
As Pius V noted, the reforms were to "restore the Missal itself to the pristine form and rite of the holy Fathers." We have already noted that the resources available for this were very limited. One immediate consequence was that the experts simply used the Missal of 1474 (Missal of the Curia) and revised it. The differences between that and several other extant missals were significant. One can only image the result were they to have used the Carthusian Missal still in use by the Dominicans and several local churches instead of the Franciscan model.
With the advent of the printing press the universal availability of a single Missal was a possibility. In fact, this may well have been what Pius V had in mind when he said that no one was to change the missal. It would also do away with the constant alterations that had taken place during the medieval period. This would not only ensure a certain stability in the Mass forms, but would also provide a consistent usage that would form a buffer against the claims of the Protestants. Thus, in a single action the Church united worship and teaching. The lex orandi, lex credendi (the rule of prayer is the rule of belief) became a reality throughout the Western Church. It should be noted, of course, that the Eastern Church was totally ignored in this process. Whether out of ignorance or out of respect is unknown. However, the promulgation of the Missal of Pius V was slowly implemented throughout the west, although not without considerable struggle and pain.
One brief note about the mutability (changability) of the missal. It is sometimes (mistakenly) thought that Pope St. Pius V precluded the possibility of ever making any future changes to the Missal through the statement in Quo Primum "We order and enjoin under pain of Our displeasure that nothing be added to Our newly published Missal, nothing omitted therefrom, and nothing whatsoever altered therein. ... We likewise order and declare that no one whosoever shall be forced or coerced into altering this Missal and that this present Constitution can never be revoked or modified, but shall for ever remain valid and have the force of law, notwithstanding previous constitutions or edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and notwithstanding the usage of the churches aforesaid, established by very long and even immemorial prescription, saving only usage of more than 200 years." This formulation, common in papal documents of the time, was designed to indicate the fact that this Missal was and remained subject only to the Holy Father. Clearly, changes made by Clement VIII (1604), Urban VIII (1643) or even later under Pius X (1914) were made with full understanding that the reservation of changes to the Holy Father was the intention of the directive and not the prohibition of any further change at all. Arguments that "the changes were always organic in nature" are spurious since one either prohibits all change or permits change. There can be no other position possible given the statements of Pius V. It has been the prerogative of the Holy Father to change the liturgy as he sees fit. In fact, to that end Pius established the Congregation of Rites to oversee the changes and implementation of the Mass.
The purpose here is not to cover the changes to the Mass in detail. We will note, however, that among the prime considerations was not only the elimination of all things superstitious that had crept into the Mass, but a unification of celebration that would be consistent wherever the Mass was celebrated (except for those places specifically exempt from implementing the Missal). Thus, there were rubrics (rules about celebration usually printed in red) that governed every detail of the Mass from how the altar was prepared to the way in which the various ministers vested to the position of hands and fingers during the various prayers. Curiously enough, the Missal of Pius V never prescribed a homily or sermon, although if the priest were to preach he was to remove his chasuble and descend to the nave where he would enter the pulpit (which is separate and distinct from the ambo) and preach.
As mentioned above, the missal of Pius V was not universally accepted. The best examples of this can be found in France where, for over a hundred years, from the second quarter of the eighteenth century to the middle of the nineteenth century, many French dioceses continued to use their own missals. Although these missals are called "neo-gallican" they had nothing to do with the Gallican Sacramentary. Although they faithfully followed the Roman Mass they departed in areas of readings and saint's days. These missals are important, not because of their disobedience to the pope, but rather because they greatly influenced later liturgical reforms. In the middle of the nineteenth century a battle over the missals ensued (much like we find today) and the "revisionists" (those who followed the Missal of Pius V) won out over the "traditionalists" (those who continued to use the local missals) and these local missals ceased being used.
A number of changes came about as a result of the Tridentine reform of the Mass. Perhaps the most significant was that typified by Charles Borromeo who noted that the laity were woefully ignorant of the Mass and that was because they were woefully ignorant of the religion. Thus there was a sweeping catechetical movement, inspired no doubt but the first universal catechism (Catechism of Trent) and swift development of local catechisms based upon it.
Mass attendance was, for the most part, limited to Sunday, although the French Court of Louis XV and Louis XVI did incorporate daily Mass. Many priests did not celebrate Mass on a daily basis and thus we see a shift away from the mindset that led to the development of the "mass priest" and from the superstitions associated with it. Arising at the same time, however, is another movement that continues to the present: Eucharistic Adoration. This devotion, although extant in many places, takes on new significance and adds lengthy periods of adoration. Since this particular area of worship was outside the control of the newly-established Congregation of Rites, it allowed for more personal expressions of piety and thus was the area most frequently changed and enhanced. The emphasis that had been placed on making changes to the Mass now took place in areas of private devotion.
Interestingly enough, polyphone, viewed with suspicion by the Tridentine reform, became the area for experimentation in the use of the vernacular and was used to create a festive atmosphere during the Mass and the Eucharistic adorations. Thus, the people continued to find expressions of faith that were consonant with their understandings and feelings.
Robert Cabié makes an interesting observation in his "History of the Mass":
"Church buildings, whether characterized by the sobriety of the classical style or by the exuberance of the baroque, share a number of common traits that made them suitable for such devotional gatherings and for the celebration of the liturgy in its peculiar Counter-Reformation forms. Churches, resembling large festival halls, have galleries and boxes, and the way they are decorated calls everyone's attention to the imposing reredos (ornamental or wood screens) located on the wall of the apse. In all the churches a very large tabernacle predominates; above it rise pillars or columns separated by paintings or designs that greatly extol all the values rejected by the Reformers.
"No longer is the altar the central focal point; its appearance is that of a long and narrow surface, hardly that of a table to be used for a meal. The Mass is celebrated at the altar by a priest wearing vestments that have become stiff and costly ornamental dress. His essential function is to bring about the real presence that the whole building honors. Above the tabernacle is a place constructed of gilded wood, on which the monstrance (or vessel) can be placed for 'exposition' of the blessed sacrament, unless a central permanent niche has been reserved for this purpose.
"With an undeniable pastoral design, everything was made ready for a court ceremony: just as at Versailles, Escorial, Potsdam, and the Schoenbrunn sumptuous feasts were prepared for the nobility and dignitaries of this world, so the most humble folks celebrate before the throne of the heavenly King, and their celebration leaves nothing to envy from celebrations glorifying earthly sovereigns. Here the faith and hope of all people are restored; here the faithful are renewed so that they may live according to God, despite the difficulties of daily life. As popular as these celebrations were, they also revealed a lack of authentic liturgical piety."
Thus, the changes following Trent were implemented, albeit slowly, around the world. They were not met with universal acceptance and joy and were, in fact, resisted in many areas. Eventually, however, the changes found their place in virtually every church and every heart. For nearly 400 years the Mass of Pius V was the standard form of worship for most Catholics. This Mass, with its evident grandeur and ritual formed and shaped many of the great saints of the Church, was exported to all parts of the world, and offered a view of Church that was formed and shaped in the crucible of the Protestant Reformation.
Yet the changes and reforms did not do all that the Church Fathers had wanted. Lay participation was still minimal, reserved to hearing the Mass as rather passive spectators. As in the era before the reform, the laity found their fulfillment in private devotions which, in turn, fueled their faith and helped them to attend Mass faithfully. Eventually, however, the forces that lead to change would burst through and even the Tridentine Mass would find itself being changed. In our next and final installment we shall examine those forces of change, both those that preceded Vatican II, and those that led up to Vatican II.