Odd, then, that the Mass was in the vernacular under great Popes such as Sts. Peter, Leo I and Gregory I.
errors condemned by Pope Pius XII (e.g., altar in form of table.
The Roman Rite does not require that the altar be in the form of a table.
259. At the altar the sacrifice of the cross is made present under sacramental signs. It is also the table of the Lord and the people of God are called together to share in it. The altar is, as well, the center of the thanksgiving that the eucharist accomplishes.[80]260. In a place of worship, the celebration of the eucharist must be on an altar, either fixed or movable. Outside a place of worship, especially if the celebration is only for a single occasion, a suitable table may be used, but always with a cloth and corporal.
261. A fixed altar is one attached to the floor so that it cannot be moved; a movable altar is one that can be transferred from place to place.
262. The main altar should be freestanding to allow the ministers to walk around it easily and Mass to be celebrated facing the people. It should be so placed as to be a focal point on which the attention of the whole congregation centers naturally.[81] The main altar should ordinarily be a fixed, consecrated altar.
263. According to the Church's traditional practice and the altar's symbolism, the table of a fixed altar should be of stone and indeed of natural stone. But at the discretion of the conference of bishops some other solid, becoming, and well-crafted material may be used.
The pedestal or base of the table may be of any sort of material, as long as it is becoming and solid.
264. A movable altar may be constructed of any becoming, solid material suited to liturgical use, according to the traditions and customs of different regions.
265. Altars both fixed and movable are consecrated according to the rite described in the liturgical books; but movable altars may simply be blessed. There is no obligation to have a consecrated stone in a movable altar or on the table where the eucharist is celebrated outside a place of worship (see no. 260).
266. It is fitting to maintain the practice of enclosing in the altar or of placing under the altar relics of saints, even of nonmartyrs. Care must be taken to have solid evidence of the authenticity of such relics.
267. Minor altars should be fewer in number. In new churches they should be placed in chapels separated in some way from the body of the church.[82]
Note that 260 distinguishes between an altar and a table and requires the use of an actual altar in places of worship.
Get back to me when you can address all 62 reasons.
General Instruction of the Roman Missal (4th Edition) (Prot. 0)
March 27, 1975
How many times do I have to tell you that you need not post post-conciliar instructions to me?
I ignore them, all of them.
After all, it was just a pastoral council. And I don't trust the "pastors" in charge at that time or even in this time.
The current norms, laid down on the basis of the intent of Vatican Council II, and the new Missal that will be used henceforth...
There's that Spirit of VC II again!
The Roman Rite does not require that the altar be in the form of a table.
You seemed to have missed the point here. It is not an argument about using tables as altars, but about liturgical errors that were condemend by Pope Pius XII. Here is what Pope Pius XII said in Mediator Dei:
"But it is neither wise nor laudable to reduce everything to antiquity by every possible device. Thus, to cite some instances, one would be straying from the straight path were he to wish the altar reduced to its primitive table-form; were he to want black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments; were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues in churches; were he to order the crucifix so designed that the Divine Redeemer's Body showed no trace of his cruel sufferings; lastly were he to disdain and reject polyphonic music or singing in parts, even where it conforms to regulations issued by the Holy See."So if you want to argue the point, then take it up with Pope Pius XII, not with the priests of Campos.
Latin was the Language of the Roman empire during St. Leo the Great's pontificate, so those in italy probably had the Mass celebrated in Latin(the vernacular). And it was a language of the intelligent during St. Gregory the Great's time. The good thing about an unchanging language is the lack of perversions that could hurt the liturgy. I thought the the Mass was celebrated in the Latin by Saints Pius V and Pius X?