Update - and hopefully a return to more regular programming after July

It has been a fair while since the last update here - apologies! I have been busy both at work and on a number of liturgical projects. Some highlights:

• A few volumes have been added to the Acta Synodalia links section on the right hand of the page. The project to scan in and make available all the volumes of the Acta of Vatican II continues: it would be nice to be done or nearly done by the time the 60th anniversary of the Council's opening comes around next year, but I can't make any firm promises!

• A new links section has been added: Draft Schemata to be Discussed at the Conciliar Sessions (Vatican II). This will be made up of the four volumes of schemata, entitled Schemata Constitutionum et Decretorum de quibus disceptabitur in Concilii sessionibus, that were given to the Council Fathers so that they could examine them and prepare for the various discussions. These volumes do not officially make up part of the Acta Synodalia, but they are very much related.

• The 2004 Martyrologium Romanum, editio typica altera, which is the current edition of the martyrology for the Ordinary Form, has been added to the "Roman Rite: Latin typical editions" section in the left hand of the page. 

• I have updated the links to my books on the left hand of the page to include my recently-released title The Post-Communion Prayers of the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite: Texts and Sources. More information, along with a sample of pages, can be found at this post at New Liturgical Movement. 

• My recently-published article, "An English Bishop at the Second Vatican Council: George Patrick Dwyer and the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy" can be read in vol. 25, no. 1 of Antiphon: A Journal for Liturgical Renewal. This is an excellent journal, published three times per year, that I have read for a good while now, and if good scholarship on the liturgy is the sort of thing you'd be interested I would thoroughly recommend a subscription! The article itself is an annotated transcription of one of the Council notebooks of George Dwyer, at the time Bishop of Leeds, later Archbishop of Birmingham, that contains his handwritten account of the discussions on Sacrosanctum Concilium at the first session of Vatican II. It was a surprising amount of work to get this completed, and I am very happy that Antiphon accepted it for publication!

• The 13th Fota International Liturgical Conference scheduled for last year had to be postponed, along with many other things, but it will hopefully take place in Cork (Ireland) this July, circumstances permitting. I will be presenting a paper on the suggestions for the reform of the Mass lectionary in the vota of the Council Fathers and at Vatican II itself, and looking at whether or not the eventual post-conciliar reform of the lectionary was really carried out with the "spirit of the liturgy" in mind.

• Finally, the paper I gave at the 2019 Fota International Liturgical Conference, "A Historical Survey of the Reform of De Benedictionibus (1959-1984)" will be available later this year, along with the rest of the conference proceedings. Summaries of each day of the 2019 conference can be found at New Liturgical Movement.

I have also been working on various projects related to the lectionary and missal, including the Index Psalmorum, but I have not had as much time to devote to these as I would like recently - primarily because half of our house is due to be renovated over the summer, and the preparations for things like this always take up more effort than one expects. However, once both the building works and Fota XIII are finished, I hope to get back to blogging a bit more regularly!

Proceedings of Fota XI, and other updates

A few recent things to mention. First, the proceedings of the 11th Fota International Liturgical Conference have just been published in Psallite Sapienter: The Liturgy of the Hours. Copies can be ordered from the Smenos Publications website, or via e-mail (smenosbooks AT yahoo DOT co DOT uk); I think they are €25 (plus postage). The collection of papers is, as always with the Fota volumes, very interesting, and anyone who has a particular interest in the Breviary/Divine Office will be well-rewarded by reading them.

On a personal note, this volume marks the occasion of my very first published article, "The Proposals for Reform of the Roman Breviary in the Antepreparatory Period of Vatican II (1959-1960)" (preview here). So, I'm pretty pleased about that! As I examined almost 700 of the 2,150 vota of the future Council Fathers, writing this paper was a lot of work, but I think it turned out well. I also gave a paper entitled "A Historical Survey of the Reform of De Benedictionibus (1959-1984)" at this year's Fota conference, which will be published next year as part of the proceedings.

----------

Secondly, there have been some new links added under the headings at the sides of this blog, including (among other things) some of the Latin typical editions of the liturgical books for the forma ordinaria, as well as a couple of additions to the Acta Synodalia and Acta et Documenta material. Of particular note is that all sixteen volumes of the antepreparatory material of Vatican II are now freely available online. As almost all of these volumes were originally printed sub secreto, they are very scarce. If you want to know what the opinions and wishes of the bishops were before the Council, these are the primary sources to consult in the first instance.

----------

Thirdly, I should mention that my most recent book, The Proper of Time in the Post-Vatican II Liturgical Reforms (preview here), is currently available from Amazon (US, UK, Germany, France, Italy, Spain). The aim of the book is to allow easy comparison of the work of the Consilium on the prayers of the Missale Romanum with those found in the 1962 and 1970/2002 Missals. 

One of the various documents of Group 18 of the Consilium, Schema 186, deals with the reform of the orations contained in the Proper of Time of the Roman Missal, and gives draft texts for each day in this section. The Proper of Time in the Post-Vatican II Liturgical Reforms makes this corpus of prayers available for the first time and arranges it in parallel with the texts of the 1962 and 1970/2002 Missals. To aid in further study and research, each prayer is also keyed into the Corpus orationum, a collection of volumes that presents (in alphabetical order) every oration found in over 200 extant Latin liturgical books, and for each one gives its sources, uses and textual variations.

----------

Finally, I am currently working on the second printed volume of the Lectionary Study Aids series, the Index Psalmorum. This will comprise various comparative indices of the gradual chants and responsorial psalms/canticles from the OF and EF Missals, as well the various antiphons (introit, offertory, etc.). I am hoping that it will (finally!) be ready by Advent this year.

On Liturgical "Experts" and Selective Citations

The introduction that Benedict XVI has written for the recently-published festschrift on the occasion of Cardinal Müller's 70th birthday has drawn a few comments, specifically on what the Pope Emeritus has to say about the post-Vatican II liturgical reforms. An English translation of the full text can be found at Rorate Caeli, but here is the relevant extract:

In the confused times in which we are living, the whole scientific theological competence and wisdom of he who must make the final decisions seem to me of vital importance. For example, I think that things might have gone differently in the Liturgical Reform if the words of the experts had not been the last ones, but if, apart from them, a wisdom capable of recognising the limits of a "simple" scholar's approach had passed judgement.

Fr Anthony Ruff over at PrayTell has picked up Fr Matias Augé's blog post critical of these brief remarks of Benedict XVI, with Fr Ruff writing that it is "not quite accurate to claim that experts were the final authority on the reform of the liturgy". A citation from p. 383 of Annibale Bugnini's memoirs The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975 (Liturgical Press, 1990), detailing a handwritten note from Paul VI to Benno Cardinal Gut (at the time, Prefect of the Congregation of Rites), is given as evidence that Paul VI was intimately involved in the reforms at every stage.

However, Fr Augé and Fr Ruff are rather selective in their citations from Bugnini's memoirs. One of the other handwritten notes from Paul VI to Cardinal Gut detailed by Bugnini, regarding the lectionary, reads as follows (Reform, p. 420, my emphasis):

In the very limited time allowed me, I have not been able to get a complete and detailed grasp of this new and extensive Ordo lectionum Missae.
But because of the confidence I have in the skilled and devout individuals who spent a long time compiling it, and because of the trust I owe to the Congregation for Divine Worship, which has examined and corrected it with such expert care, I gladly approve it in the name of the Lord.
The feast of St. John the Baptist, June 24, 1969.

Paul VI, Pope

What else is this but an admission from Paul VI himself that he left the complete overhaul of the Roman Mass lectionary to the experts, merely rubber-stamping it at the end of the process? And why was he only "allowed" around one month to examine the OLM (he received the proofs in May 1969)?

From Bugnini's account, it is apparent that Paul VI involved himself more in the reform of, for example, the Order of Mass than some other aspects. But even here, the Pope had to fight against the experts in order to make sure that the new offertory formulas actually had the word "offer" in them (p. 371)! Moreover, even after his decision in 1966 that the Roman Canon was to remain unchanged in the reform (p. 450), the experts tinkered with the words of institution and made parts of the Canon optional. Again, in 1967, the Pope insisted that the words of consecration in the Canon not be changed, and the experts basically ignored him (p. 462).

With regards to vernacular translations of the Roman Canon, Bugnini also lets slip that in 1967:

The Holy Father had asked that the translations be ''faithful and literal,'' but in fact practically no liturgical commission was observing this criterion. (p. 168)

Yes, ultimately Paul VI was the final authority, insofar as he was required to approve and promulgate the reformed liturgical books. However, when one reads the whole of Bugnini's memoirs, in many respects Paul VI arguably comes across as negligent, naive, and often a prisoner of the liturgical establishment "experts".

In short, the "experts" may not have been the final de jure authority, but for large parts of the post-conciliar reform, they very much seem to have been the de facto one.

My letter in this week's Catholic Herald

I have had a letter published in this week's Catholic Herald - the only letter, in fact, that I have ever submitted to the magazine, so that's nice!

The subject is Fr Raymond de Souza's article in last week's issue about Cardinal Sarah's proposal for "liturgical reconciliation":

SIR – Fr Raymond de Souza raises the question of the lectionary in his article on “liturgical reconciliation” (Comment, July 21). He declares that the OF lectionary is an improvement because it “includes far more Scripture than the EF one”. However, bigger is not always better, and if this is the only—or even primary—justification for declaring the OF lectionary an ‘enrichment’, that is not good enough. A qualitative, rather than quantitative, analysis of the two lectionaries is required. 

Is it really, for example, an ‘enrichment’ that Ephesians 4:25-28, verses read every year in the EF (19th Sunday after Pentecost), and containing the well-known advice “do not let the sun go down on your anger” (v. 26), are nowhere to be found in the entire OF lectionary? Or that the parable of the talents (Matthew 25:14-30), read in the OF on the 33rd Sunday per annum in Year A, has an optional short form that omits any mention of the men with two and one talents, thereby completely gutting the parable?

Moreover, the “wide consensus that the OF lectionary is superior” is, in my own experience, not anywhere as common as Fr de Souza supposes. In the nine years since I converted to Catholicism, I have come across an increasing number of clergy and laypeople who are decidedly unsure about the supposed benefits of key aspects of the OF lectionary, such as the three-year Sunday cycle of readings. 

There is obviously a lot more that could be said on this subject - but the Herald do ask that letters are kept below 250 words!

It should be noted that Fr de Souza's original article (and his follow-up) spawned a lot of commentary online - Gregory diPippo at NLM; Joseph Shaw of the LMS (and also this); Fr Timothy Finigan on his blog (who was also kind enough to recommend the Index Lectionum); and Fr John Zuhlsdorf at WDTPRS, to name a few. I hope to be able to make my small contribution to the ongoing discussion about "mutual enrichment"/"liturgical reconciliation" very soon over at New Liturgical Movement.

Spanish Experimental Lectionary (1966-69)

Many apologies for the delay in blogging! Our house has needed a lot of work on it (but we knew this when we bought it, so that's fine), and I have also changed jobs, so it has been a little busy behind the scenes. However, I have garnered a fair amount of new material to share over the next few weeks.

Let us start with the Spanish Experimental Lectionary, in use from 1966-69 (PDF). The lections themselves were published in a small, hand-missal sized book, entitled Lectura continuada de la Biblia para el misal de los fieles: Textos, introducciones y comentarios (Barcelona: Editorial Litúgica Española, 1968). This volume was obviously designed for use alongside a hand-missal, and its late date of publication (the nihil obstat was given on 26th October 1968) is interesting, given that the Ordo lectionum Missae was published only seven months later.

The Spanish Bishops made use of the German experimental scheme, but made some changes to it. Other countries that did the same thing were the Dominican Republic, Venezuela, and Puerto Rica. Among these changes are the following:

• The addition of Graduals and Alleluia verses for each weekday in the scheme (with the exception of Alleluia verses for Advent and Pre-Lent; for weekdays in Eastertide the Aleluya Pascual replaces both the Gradual and Alleluia verse).


• There are some changes in the order of the Old and New Testament books read, along with adjustments made to the division of certain pericopes. Perhaps most notably compared to the German scheme, the Spanish scheme moves Acts and Revelation into Years I and II of Eastertide, with Ephesians, Colossians and Hebrews being moved to Time after Pentecost in Year I.


• The following books are added to the scheme in Time after Pentecost: 
• Year I: Titus (week 21, three pericopes);
• Year II: Deuteronomy (weeks 1-2, six pericopes), Ruth (week 4, three pericopes), Obadiah (week 24, one pericope), Nahum (week 25, one pericope).


• There are also some slight differences in the division and content of Gospel pericopes in Time after Pentecost (Appendix 2 in the PDF gives more details).

For those whose Spanish is better than mine, a PDF of the Introduction to the Lectura continuada can be found here.

Sacra Liturgia UK and Fota IX

The summer is upon us, and I shall be attending both Sacra Liturgia UK in London and Fota IX in Cork. The papers due to be delivered at both conferences sound fascinating, and I'm really looking forward to them! I'm also looking forward to meeting in real life a few people who I have only spoken to over the internet, as well as many others who are passionate about the Catholic Church and her liturgy.

By nature I am an introvert, so I can be a little shy at times, but if you are a reader of this blog or New Liturgical Movement and are attending either Sacra Liturgia or Fota (or both!), please introduce yourself to me and we can have a nice chat about liturgy-related things, life in general, or whatever you like!

A reminder of what I look like for those who want to talk
to me about lectionaries and other liturgical topics

I will also have a few copies of my book Index Lectionum: A Comparative Table of Readings for the Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms of the Roman Rite for those who are interested in looking at it in the flesh, as it were, and I might be persuaded to part with some of them at a discounted price... :-)

New Liturgical and Historical Resources for Download

It has been a little while since the last update, and I have gathered some more useful liturgical and historical resources over the last few months. So, here they are:

1. Dom Adrian Nocent’s proposal for an optional cycle of 2nd readings for Sundays per annum (PDF): Dom Nocent was a member of Group XI of the Consilium, the group responsible for the reform of the lectionary. In 1994, he wrote a book called A Rereading of the Renewed Liturgy, in which he advocated for several more reforms in the post-Vatican II liturgy, including an additional, optional cycle of 2nd readings for tempus per annum. The aim of Nocent's proposed cycle is to thematically link the 2nd reading with the 1st reading and Gospel, as in his opinion, the current structure of the lectionary makes it "impossible to use the second reading in the homily with any coherence." The PDF file gives Nocent's proposed readings, along with a short extract from Rereading in which he explains his proposal.

2. Permissions given by the Consilium for the use of ad experimentum lectionaries, 1965-69 (PDF): This has been in the sidebar for a little while, but is worth highlighting. Between 1965 and 1969, the Consilium gave permission to many countries regarding the use of ad experimentum lectionaries for use on weekdays and various occasions (such as confirmations, funerals, weddings, etc.). This PDF document is comprised of two tables that detail all the permissions recorded in Notitiae: the first table organised by date, the second alphabetically by country.

3. Text and Tables of the Consilium’s « Lectionaria particularia », Notitiae 4 (1968), 40-88 (PDF): Again, this has been in the sidebar for a little while, and links in with the "Permissions" PDF above. Some conferences of Bishops, instead of designing their own ad experimentum lectionaries, asked for permission to use one or more parts of the Consilium's lectionaria particularia, which ended up being printed in Notitiae 4 (1968). This document is a tabulation of the Consilium's experimental lectionary, which could be used on particular occasions, e.g. Confirmations, funerals, Masses with children, Masses on camping trips, etc.

4. The Resolutions of the International Liturgical Congresses, 1951-1953: Maria Laach, Ste. Odile and Lugano (PDF): These congresses held in the early 1950s give an insight into what certain members of the cutting-edge (at that time) of the liturgical movement were hoping for in terms of a future reform of the Catholic liturgy. There are a number of striking similarities between these resolutions and the post-Vatican II liturgical reforms.

5. Bishops of England and Wales, The Manual of Prayers: Authorized by the Hierarchy of England and Wales for Congregational Use (London: Burns & Oates, 1953) (PDF): This book, originally published in 1886, is a collection of devotional prayers for use with congregations. It is an interesting insight into what the English and Welsh bishops were encouraging parish churches to use in order to foster the devotional life of the faithful before the Second Vatican Council. (In my opinion, we in England and Wales could do with reviving the use of some of these prayers in parishes, before and after Mass!)

6. Mgr Derek Worlock (ed.), English Bishops at the Council: The Third Session of Vatican II (London: Burns & Oates, 1965) (PDF): This book, edited by the man who would later become Bishop of Portsmouth and then Archbishop of Liverpool, gives English translations of the speeches made by the English bishops at the third session of Vatican II, as well as talks by Mgr Worlock and press conferences given by the Bishops and periti.

Index Lectionum: A Comparative Table of Readings for the OF and EF - Now Available!

Matthew Hazell & Peter Kwasniewski (foreword)

Index Lectionum: A Comparative Table of Readings
for the Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms of the Roman Rite
(Lectionary Study Aids, vol. 1)

Lectionary Study Press, 2016. xxxviii + 232 pp.

Available from Amazon: USA $16.95; UK £11.99;
Germany, France, Spain, Italy €15,49 (+ tax)

The reason things have been a little quiet on the blog so far this year is because I have been busy finishing off work on the above book, the Index Lectionum. I am happy to announce that the book is in print and now available to purchase from Amazon!

What is the Index Lectionum? It is a new tool that aims to make the comparison of the lectionaries of the Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms easier than it has been up until now. All the readings at Mass in both forms of the Roman Rite have been arranged side-by-side in biblical order, with their use in each form documented. This book thus makes it possible to look up a biblical reference and quickly find out if it is used on the same day or celebration in the OF and EF, or where a reading in the EF has been transferred to in the OF, and so on.

Sample page from Matthew's Gospel
(click to enlarge)

Dr Peter Kwasniewski, professor of theology at Wyoming Catholic College and one of my colleagues over at New Liturgical Movement, has very generously contributed the foreword to the Index. He writes that:

[T]his Index also facilitates, in fact for the first time, fruitful scholarly comparisons between the old and new lectionaries... We have waited close to half a century for the opportunity to hold in our hands a single resource that indicates, with painstaking detail, just what the reformers added and, perhaps of far greater interest, what they chose to omit that had once been present in the Church’s worship. Thus equipped, we are at last in an optimal position to carry further the kind of comparative studies on the lectionary that Dr. Lauren Pristas has perfected in regard to the collects of the Mass. (p. vii)

The Index Lectionum is the first volume in the "Lectionary Study Aids" series of books: subsequent volumes will take up the use of the Psalms in the two Missals, as well as comparing the psalms and readings of the two forms of the Roman Office.

Sample page from Jeremiah
(click to enlarge)

For all those who love the Church's liturgy, the Index Lectionum is a vital comparative tool for further study of and research into the lectionaries of the Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms: their relationship to one another, their similarities and differences, and their respective pastoral advantages and disadvantages.

Contents of the Index Lectionum

Foreword: "Not Just More Scripture, but Different Scripture" (Peter Kwasniewski) (vii)

The Index Lectionum: An Introduction and User's Guide (Matthew Hazell) (xxxi)

Index Lectionum (1)

Appendix 1: Comparison of Sundays in the Proper of Time (181)

Appendix 2: Comparison of Proper of Time for Weekdays in Lent (191)

Appendix 3: Comparison of Saints' Days (195)

Appendix 4: Readings of the Commons of MR 1962 (218)

Appendix 5: Comparison of the OF and EF Commons (223)

Sacra Liturgia UK 2016

Registrations are now open for this year's Sacra Liturgia UK conference! Robert Cardinal Sarah, prefect of the CDWDS, will be giving the inaugural address, entitled "Towards an Authentic Implementation of Sacrosanctum Concilium", and many others, including Bishop Alan Hopes, Mgr Andrew Burnham, Dom Alcuin Reid, and Fr Uwe Michael Lang will also be speaking on various topics.

Click here to go to the registration page!

The conference runs from the 5th-8th July at Imperial College, South Kensington, London, with the liturgical celebrations being held at the London Oratory and Our Lady of the Assumption & St Gregory (the central church of the Ordinariate).

The cost is £100 for ordinary registrations, £65 for students (not including accommodation or meals). Great value for what is bound to be four days of immensely interesting lectures, and joyful, solemn liturgical celebrations!

Lots more information can be found at sacraliturgiauk.org.

I have booked my place, so if people want to have some lectionary-based conversations over a beer in London in early July, you now know where to come! :-)

The O Antiphons

Since it is the season, I thought I would share a talk I gave earlier this Advent to the Diocese of Hallam branch of the Ascent movement on the O Antiphons.

The O Antiphons: History, Theology, Spirituality (PDF)

Hope that you find the talk interesting, and also that you are all having a blessed Advent!

Interesting lectionary news from the Bishops' Conference of England and Wales

Some interesting news from the November plenary meeting of the English and Welsh bishops:

The Bishops' Conference agrees to seek the approval of the Holy See for the use of the Revised Standard Version (2nd Catholic edition 2010) and the Revised Grail Psalter (2010) in the preparation of a Lectionary for use in England and Wales. [link]

IMO, a good choice of translation for the biblical readings, but not a great choice (though a predictable one) for the psalter. The authorisation, even if only for optional use, of the Coverdale Psalter - which as far as I am aware can be used in the Ordinariate Use - would be preferable (and also thoroughly ecumenical!).

However, given that the RSV2CE is in use in the Ordinariate, and the Revised Grail Psalter (with adjustments) has already been authorised for use in other countries like the USA, one would have thought that the Holy See's approval would be fairly quick in coming. Perhaps in time for publication by Advent 2017?

This resolution is particularly interesting in light of the collapse of the International Commission for the Preparation of an English Language Lectionary (ICPELL), which was supposed to have produced a common lectionary for conferences where English is used in the liturgy (excluding the USA). For more on that saga, see the relevant posts on Fr Hugh Somerville-Knapman's blog.

Pinpointing the Origins of the Multi-Year Lectionary: (1) Heinz Schürmann

Note: This is the first post in an occasional series, which will look at proposals and suggestions made about the lections of the Roman Missal from before the Second Vatican Council, and ultimately attempt to pinpoint the origins of the idea of a lectionary with cycles for multiple years.

It is well-known that, with regard to the reform of the lectionary, Sacrosanctum Concilium 51 stated that a "more representative portion of the holy scriptures will be read to the people in the course of a prescribed number of years [intra praestitutum annorum spatium]". The Fathers thus did not specify exactly how this desire was to be practically implemented; like most of the other reforms, this was ultimately left in the hands of the Consilium. In the case of the lectionary, Group 11 of the Consilium¹ was responsible for producing what is used today in the forma ordinaria of the Roman Rite: a lectionary with a three-year Sunday cycle, and a two-year weekday cycle.²

Where did this desire for a multi-year cycle of readings for Mass come from? After all, it was not particularly controversial or much discussed at the Council itself.³ For the vast majority of the Council Fathers, it apparently seemed obvious that there should be more scripture read at Mass, and having it over more than one year was a sensible way of achieving this. Still, ideas like this do not just come from nowhere without having been previously discussed (even if only privately) by bishops, priests and liturgical scholars.

Our quest to find out more about the origins of this idea starts a decade before the Council. In 1952, the new (at that time) liturgical journal Liturgisches Jahrbuch published an article entitled "Eine Dreijährige Perikopenordnung für Sonn- und Festtage" by Fr Heinz Schürmann - who would, incidentally, later be a member of Group 11 of the Consilium. In this article, what he says about the order of readings in the Roman Missal is that it is Nachteil, a disadvantage, and suggests his own, three-year cycle.⁴ Below are download links to the German-language article, and my English translation of it.

• English translation: "A Three-Year Order of Readings for Sundays and Feast Days"
• Original German: "Eine Dreijährige Perikopenordnung für Sonn- und Festtage", LJ 2 (1952), 58-72.

Interestingly, Schürmann's proposed readings do not particularly exhibit the lectio semi-continua we see in the post-conciliar reforms, and neither is there the approach whereby each year is organised around one of the synoptic Gospels. Instead, his approach utilises Gospel pericopes with roughly similar meaning and content for each Sunday ("die Evangelienperikopen durch solche ungefähr gleichen Sinngehaltes zu ersetzen"), so there is an attempt at thematic consistency throughout each year of the cycle. The Epistle readings are, however, thematically linked to the Gospel, much like the Old Testament reading is linked to the Gospel in the Ordinary Form lectionary.

As we shall see, a number of suggestions were made about lectionary reform (and liturgical reform generally) in the 1950s. We shall look at some of these in the next post in this series, and afterwards go a little further back in time to trace the history of this particular reform.


NOTES

¹ The personnel of Coetus XI were as follows (cf. A. Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975 [Liturgical Press, 1990], p. 409 fn. 12.): relator: G. Diekmann (until June 1965), C. Vagaggini (after June 1965); secretary: G. Fontaine; members: H. Schürmann, P. Jounel, P. Massi, E. Lanne, H. Kahlefeld, and J. Féder (from Nov. 1965). There were also some members added to the group, presumably in 1966 when the work really got going: A. Rose, A. Nocent, A.-M. Roguet, K. Tilmann, H. Oster, J. Gaillard, H. Marot, and L. Deiss.

² In reality, it is a little more complicated than that (e.g. the Gospel reading on weekdays is the same in Years I and II), but this brief description will do for now!

³ For the Latin texts of the interventions of the Fathers dealing with SC 51, 24 and 35, see my resource Lectionary Reform at the Second Vatican Council (which can also be found in this blog's sidebar).

⁴ Interestingly, as a member of Coetus XI, Schürmann (along with Heinrich Kahlefeld) would later go further by championing the idea of a four-year Sunday cycle of readings: cf. Bugnini, Reform, p. 417.

The Consilium and ad experimentum lectionaries, 1965-69

A couple of new lectionary resources for you all!

Between 1965 and 1969, the Consilium gave permission to many countries regarding the use of ad experimentum lectionaries for use on weekdays and on occasions such as confirmations, weddings, funerals, etc. These permissions were detailed every so often in the journal Notitiae, which I recently had the opportunity to go through. My resource Permissions given by the Consilium for the use of ad experimentum lectionaries, 1965-69 collects them into two tables: one organised by date, the other organised alphabetically by country/diocese/order. It is perhaps surprising quite how many countries asked for and were given permission to experiment with the readings at Mass (around 60 countries/areas, as well as 5 dioceses and 3 religious orders)!

The weekday lectionaries were the first experiments in this area authorised by the Consilium, but from the beginning of 1967 permissions to use experimental sets of readings for particular occasions such as marriages and funerals started to be given. This culminated in the Consilium's Lectionaria particularia, published in its entirety in Notitiae 4 (1968), and tabulated in my resource Text and Tables of the Consilium’s « Lectionaria particularia ». There are ten sets of readings in total. Conferences of Bishops could ask permission - which would readily be given - to use some or all of the sets of readings contained in it.

Finally, a reminder that for more information on the experimental weekday lectionaries, you can see the posts and resources on the German and French schemes!

General update

It's been a little while since I've posted - sorry about that! - but there are a couple of reasons for this. Firstly, Gregory DiPippo and Peter Kwasniewski of the New Liturgical Movement very kindly and generously asked me if I wanted to become an occasional contributor to the site. So, I now also write for NLM every now and then! For those who are interested, here are the links to my first few articles:

• The U.S. Bishops' Interventions on the Liturgy at Vatican II
• The Acta Synodalia of Vatican II (1st Session) - Now Available for Download (the links to PDFs of the Acta for the 1st session of the Council can also be found in this blog's sidebar - look out for the remaining three sessions during this year!)
• "Advertising" the Lectionary - An Insight into its Reform
• "Mediator Dei? Never heard of it! Sacrosanctum Concilium's Disappearing Footnotes

Secondly, as I was about two-thirds of the way through with the third and final part of my postcommunions study, Fr Daniel McCarthy e-mailed me with some suggestions about how I could improve it, and Dom James Leachman of St Benedict's Abbey in Ealing, London, was kind enough to let me stay for a few days and consult the abbey library in order to gather the information I needed. Both Fr McCarthy and Dom Leachman are part of the Institutum Liturgicum based at Ealing - many thanks to both for their help, suggestions, and hospitality!

All this means that I am in the process of reworking the study into a single volume, with much more detailed information about the manuscript history of each prayer. I'm pretty excited about it, though the reworking is proving to be more time-intensive than I thought it might be at first (isn't it always the way?). Look out for more news about this project during the year!

Finally, with regard to the Lectionary - because, given the title of this blog, we are perhaps overdue for some more Lectionary study aids! - I have been busy compiling a few more resources that I'll post and talk about both here and at NLM over the next few weeks. 

PDF Download: C. Vagaggini, “The Canon of the Mass and Liturgical Reform”

Dom Cipriano Vagaggini, O.S.B., was one of the more influential members of Group 10 of the Consilium, the group responsible for the revision of the Ordo Missae. This revision was to involve, among other things, the composition of three new Eucharistic Prayers to sit alongside the Roman Canon. (For more information on how new anaphoras were transplanted into the Roman Rite, see the Adoremus article From One Eucharistic Prayer to Many: How it Happened and Why by Dom Cassian Folsom, O.S.B.)

As part of this work, Dom Vagaggini published a book called Il canone della messa e la riforma liturgica in 1966, and this was translated into English the following year under the title The Canon of the Mass and Liturgical Reform. In this book, Vagaggini went through what he saw as the ‘merits’ and ‘defects’ of the Roman Canon (perhaps unsurprisingly, the defects outnumber the merits by a ratio of more than 2:1), argued for the introduction of one or more new Eucharistic Prayers to ‘enrich’ the Roman Rite, and gave a couple of examples of what they might look like.

Vagaggini’s book is, in my opinion, one of the more important works contemporary to the post-Vatican II liturgical reform itself, and is illustrative of some of the attitudes of the reformers towards the liturgical tradition. Unfortunately it has been out of print for a good while, and, at the time of writing, second-hand copies of it are difficult to come by. So, I am happy to say that a PDF copy is now freely available by clicking the link below:

C. Vagaggini, The Canon of the Mass and Liturgical Reform (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1967) (PDF, 23.5 MB)

Also, since what we now know as Eucharistic Prayer III has its genesis in Vagaggini’s book above, I have also put together a side-by-side comparison of his “Canon B” (see chapter 4 in the book above) with EP III, which can be downloaded by clicking the following link:

Comparison of Eucharistic Prayer III with Dom Vagaggini’s draft “Canon B” (PDF)

There are more historical goodies and curiosities to come very soon, so watch this space!

ICEL and "The Problem of Exclusive Language": The 1980 Eucharistic Prayers Green Book

In 1980, ICEL issued a "Green Book" to the member and associate member Conferences of Bishops, proposing some revisions to the Eucharistic Prayers as they appeared in the Sacramentary at that time. (The term "Green Book" denotes texts that ICEL sends to Conferences for study and comment; after any comments/suggestions are incorporated into the text, ICEL re-issues it as a "Gray Book" for the Conferences to vote on it.) These revisions were described by John R. Page, then Executive Secretary of ICEL, as follows:

The proposed changes are designed to eliminate from these liturgical texts anything that has been judged to be exclusive or exclusionary, in particular, anything that may be considered discriminatory to women. (Eucharistic Prayers: For Study and Consultation, Green Book [ICEL, 1980], Foreword, p. 3)

To give some context for their work, ICEL provided a statement in the same book entitled "The Problem of Exclusive Language with Regard to Women". This statement makes for very interesting reading, and makes clear that ICEL's policy (at that time) of foisting inclusive language upon us all - a principle writ large in the rejected 1998 Missal translation - goes all the way back to the mid-1970s.

I have transcribed the foreword to the 1980 Green Book, along with the proposed emendations to the Eucharistic Prayers, and the Statement in its entirety (including the bibliography ICEL provided) - click here to download it as a PDF. Attached to the end of the PDF is an interesting 1982 letter from John Page to the Methodist theologian Geoffrey Wainwright, which happened to be in my second-hand copy of the Green Book.

As an aside regarding my last post of ICEL material, I have also updated the PDF of An Original Eucharistic Prayer: Text 1, since I have discovered that, though this original composition of ICEL was never given any sort of recognitio by Rome (and thus was never allowed for liturgical use), it was actually approved by eight Bishops' Conferences, and also made it, in a slightly edited form, into the Anglican book Common Worship as "Eucharistic Prayer G". So, I have added the Anglican text to the end of the document for the purposes of comparison.

Some history behind the 1998 Missal: ICEL's work in the early 1980s

One of the numerous reasons ICEL's 1998 translation of the Roman Missal was denied recognitio by the Holy See was the proliferation of original texts. (See this copy of Cardinal Medina Estévez's letter from March 2002 for more information on that.)

However, ICEL had been working on original texts for some considerable time before (this article on Adoremus gives a lot more background detail for those of you interested). Indeed, as early as the 1973 translation, there were alternative opening prayers provided alongside those that were translated from the Latin. The relation of these original compositions to the Latin texts were described in the foreword to the Sacramentary as follows: "The alternative opening prayers are not direct or faithful translations of the corresponding Latin text. They follow its theme or are inspired by it, but they are generally more concrete and expansive." Comme le prévoit n. 43 was cited as justification for their inclusion. ICEL continued to be enthusiastic about original English compositions, and we read in its 1980-81 report to the member and associate member bishops' conferences that:

In 1981 ICEL commissioned authors to compose a set of original presidential prayers. After reviewing these prayers in June, the Advisory Committee chose a number of authors to continue the project by composing alternative opening prayers loosely related to the readings of the day for Sundays and solemnities. In addition the Advisory Committee requested the composition of twenty alternative prayers over the gifts and prayers after communion which would be divided up among the liturgical seasons and take their themes from the seasons. This project will be reviewed by the Advisory Committee in November 1982. At that time a proposal will be made to print sets of newly-composed prayers for trial use in a consultation beginning with the 24th Sunday in Ordinary Time (11 September 1983) and continuing through Pentecost (10th June 1984). (Report of the Episcopal Board to the Member and Associate Member Conferences, 1980-81 [ICEL: 24 June 1982], pp. 7-8)

I have been fortunate enough to come across the book of these prayers in the wild, as well as some other historical curiosities - click on the links to download PDF transcriptions!

• Presidential Prayers for Experimental Use at Mass (ICEL: July 1983). This is the document referred to in the above quote from the 1980-81 report. In the event, the experiment ran from the 24th Sunday in Ordinary Time up to the Feast of the Holy Family in 1983 (11 Sept - 30 Dec). Those of you who have access to the 1998 translation may notice that some of the original compositions in this booklet were edited slightly and included in the 1998 Missal (e.g. 1983, 4th Sun of Advent, text A = 1998, 4th Sun of Advent, alternative opening prayer for Year A);

• An Original Eucharistic Prayer, Text 1: For Study and Comment (ICEL: May 1984). ICEL's creation of original texts also extended to the Eucharistic Prayer, though it seems from the lack of them in the 1998 Missal that original/new anaphoras never really got off the ground (not for want of trying!);

• Eucharistic Prayer of Saint Basil: Text for Consultation (ICEL: August 1985). Continuing the work of ICEL's Eucharistic Prayer subcommittee, this is not just a translation of the anaphora of St. Basil, but is a substantial "accommodation" of it, as a comparison with the actual text of the anaphora in use by, e.g., the Greek Orthodox, will demonstrate.
  (As a side note, the Consilium did give serious consideration to including the anaphora of St. Basil alongside the other new Eucharistic Prayers, but when it came to the vote a small majority of the members, backed by Paul VI, prevented this from happening - cf. A. Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975 [Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1990], pp. 458-462. Was ICEL attempting to stealthily introduce something its own members thought should have prevailed in the post-conciliar liturgical reforms...?)

I have a few other ICEL snippets to transcribe, so for those who are particularly interested in that sort of thing, look out for those soon!

The Synod on the family, and the Council that could have been...

Though the Second Vatican Council opened in 1962, there had already been plenty of work going on behind the scenes since 1959, the year Pope St John XXIII announced that there would be a council. Ten commissions and two secretariats were set up [1], along with a central commission headed by the Pope to follow and coordinate all the work. These commissions were responsible for putting together draft documents (known as schemas) that were to be the basis for discussion at the Council. Nine schemas were ready by the beginning of the first session (11th Oct – 8th Dec 1962).

One of the first schemas to be discussed was De fontibus revelationis (On the sources of revelation) and, after much heated debate, it was rejected by the Fathers on the 20th November by 1,368 votes to 822 (with 19 null votes). [2] Between the first and second sessions, this and the other schemas were radically redrafted and reworked into the conciliar documents as we know them today. But why were they rejected by a majority of the Council Fathers, and how do they compare to the final conciliar documents?

Fr Joseph Komonchak has provided English translations of five of the nine draft schemas (they can be found here and here), which gives non-Latin speakers an accessible insight into ‘the Council that could have been’. The links, with a little commentary, can also be found on the Unam Sanctam Catholicam blog.

To encourage people to read the draft schemas for themselves, I have provided some extracts from the schema “On chastity, marriage, family and virginity” that, with all the furore over the synod on the family, seem relevant. It is perhaps worth asking this question: if more of this draft schema had made it into, for example, Gaudium et spes, would this year’s synod be as concerning?

Extracts from the draft dogmatic constitution De castitate, matrimonio, familia, virginitate (On chastity, marriage, family and virginity)

6. [...] In addition, with supreme loathing, this Sacred Synod knows how many and how great are today’s detestable attacks against chastity, by which in countless manifestations of today’s culture, even if under the pretext of play, recreation, science, art or laudable beauty, souls redeemed by the blood of Christ are, in fact, constantly and almost everywhere, even within the family, being incited to evil—indeed, drawn into it. Therefore it urges all to arm themselves against such dangers by prayer, fasting, the sacraments of Penance and Holy Eucharist, and devotion to the Virgin Mary. They should also flee what are called ‘near occasions’. For how can they honestly pray “Lead us not into temptation” (Mt. 6:13) if they freely seek temptations? Mindful of the Lord’s words against those who scandalise, the Church has the right and the duty to oppose those who give scandal and especially the public corruption of sexual morality. [...]

14. This Sacred Synod knows how much the salvation of the mystical Body of Christ depends on a proper recognition of the divine order with regard to marriage. To defend it, in the first place it knows that it is its duty to condemn all the radical errors of those who maintain that marriage in its origin and constitution is some merely social phenomenon in constant evolution, without any natural or supernatural value; that it does not come from God and from Christ and is not subject to the power of the Church in the new economy of salvation. Likewise, it condemns those errors by which it is held that the marriage of Christians is either not a sacrament, or that the sacrament itself is secondary to or separate from the contract itself... It severely rejects the errors and theories by which the immutable divine order with regard to the properties and purposes of marriage is denied. And it refutes by name as a supreme calumny the assertion that the indissolubility of marriage does not come from God, but is a cruel invention of the Church, no less cruelly retained. Finally, it rejects the theories by which, in an inversion of the right order of values, the primary purpose of marriage is esteemed less than biological and personal values and conjugal love, in the objective order itself, is proclaimed to be the primary purpose.

20. Spouses are seriously prohibited from seeking so-called civil divorce as a proper dissolution, as if a valid bond before God could be dissolved by civil authority; indeed, neither is it licit for others directly and formally to cooperate in such a civil divorce. In no case and for no reason, even if it is not rarely serious and painful, is it licit for the faithful, while the sacred bond lasts, to dismiss a wife in order to take another, as the Lord himself clearly teaches (Mk. 10:11), though sometimes civil authority invalidly allows this. Occasionally, however, “civil divorce” while the bond endures and without contradiction of ecclesiastical authority, can be sought. So-called simple separation is not to be done lightly, without just, grave, and proportionate cause.

22. This Sacred Synod must severely condemn so-called “temporary”, “experimental” or “companionate” marriages. It also rejects as unworthy of a man, and especially of a Christian, those instructions by which through various methods a real hedonism in sacred and holy marriage is propagated. Rejected are theories by which a violation of marital fidelity is considered licit for spouses, either when the mutual love between the couple has failed or when the sexual impulse is falsely thought to be impossible to keep within the limits of monogamous marriage. It is also erroneous to state that civil authority itself never has the power to punish adulterers, with an equal penalty for both men and women. It also rebukes those who say—under the pretext of benefitting the Church no less—that mixed marriages are generally and in themselves to be fostered rather than tolerated. Also erroneous is the position that holds that a marriage can be declared invalid or dissolved solely because of a failure of love. Finally, this Sacred Synod most severely condemns so-called “free love”, by which, under a false pretext of constructing among men a new fraternity and society, sin is committed against the divine order and a deadly wound is inflicted not only on marriage but also on the family and society.

Notes

[1] The commissions were as follows: Commission on Bishops and the Governance of Dioceses, Commission for the Discipline of the Clergy and the Christian People, Commission for Religious, Commission for the Discipline of the Sacraments, Commission for Studies and Seminaries, Commission on Missions, Commission on the Apostolate of the Laity, Commission for the Oriental Churches, Liturgy Commission, and the Theological Commission. The two secretariats were the Secretariat for Communications Media and the Secretariat for Christian Unity. Cf. John XXIII, Apostolic Letter Superno Dei, 5th June 1960: AAS 52 (1960), pp. 433-437.

[2] Cf. Acta Synodalia I/3, pp. 254-255.

The Postcommunion Prayers of the Missale Romanum (1970/2002): Volume 2

I am happy to announce that Volume 2 of The Postcommunion Prayers of the Missale Romanum (1970/2002): Translations and Sources is complete!

Please click here to view and download it!

Volume 2 covers the Proper of Saints and the Commons (i.e. Dedication of a Church, B.V.M., Pastors, etc.). For more information on this project, please see the previous blog post on Volume 1.

I'm going to take a couple of weeks off from this particular project - it's surprising how much energy and concentration this sort of thing can take, and my university days of Coke-fueled, all-night essay writing are long behind me! - so work on Volume 3 will begin in earnest after Easter. Volume 3 will cover the remaining sections of the Missal: ritual Masses, Masses ad diversa, votive Masses and Masses for the Dead.

I hope that Volume 2 is as well received as the first, and that this continues to be an interesting and useful resource for those who want to begin/continue their own examinations of the orations of the post-conciliar Missal. It is clear that, at least in the Proper of Saints and the Commons, there are some common threads to the edits made to the source material (e.g. the elimination of intercedente pro nobis and similar phrases), and I hope in the future to provide a easy-to-read commentary on some of what appear to have been the Consilium's editing "policies" with regard to the postcommunion prayers as a whole. I have to finish Volume 3 first, though, so that's a little while off yet!

As always, you can comment on this post, or contact me by e-mail, if you have any comments, corrections, questions or suggestions regarding this project, or any of the Lectionary-based ones.

Lectionary Reform at Vatican II - the Council Fathers' Interventions

Over the last few weeks, I have gone through the Acta Synodalia to see exactly what the Council Fathers had to say about the section of Sacrosanctum Concililum that talks about lectionary reform:

The treasures of the bible are to be opened up more lavishly, so that richer fare may be provided for the faithful at the table of God's word. In this way a more representative portion of the holy scriptures will be read to the people in the course of a prescribed number of years. (SC 51)

I have compiled their spoken and written interventions regarding SC 51, as well as paragraphs 24 and 35, in one PDF document.

Click here to download it!

The interventions are, unsurprisingly, all in Latin. I plan on providing a parallel English translation later this year, but that will take a bit of time to put together. In the meantime, for those of you whose Latin is good enough (or who are willing to muddle through) you can read for yourself the interesting (and not-so-interesting!) things the Fathers of Vatican II had to say about the lectionary!