Thursday, October 8, 2015



Until the pope, the prefect for the congregation of Divine Worship or the head of Ecclesia Dei state otherwise, my pious opinion is that the following is still allowed (not mandated) for the 1962 Missal, pious opinions contrary to mine, notwithstanding which constitutes in my mind the mutual enrichment in part which Pope Benedict desired for the EF Mass:

  This Pontifical Commission sees no difficulty in the celebrant and ministers joining in the singing of the plainchant Gloria and Credo together with the schola cantorum and the congregation instead of reading them privately as directed by the Ritus Servandus. This usage was already admitted by the Church a relatively short time after the publication of the 1962 Roman Missal. The same holds true, mutatis mutandis for the Missa Cantata.
b) This Pontifical Commission sees no difficulty in the entire congregation's singing of the Pater Noster in all sung Masses.


In addition to above ruling of the Pontifical Commission of 26 March 1997, the following directives were also issued:
1. If the celebration of the Divine Office precedes Mass, the Prayers at the Foot of the altar may be omitted.

2. The rites accompanying the readings from scripture may be celebrated at the sedilia.

3. The readings may be proclaimed facing the people, whether in Latin or the vernacular and the celebrant is not required to read them or the Gradual chants separately.
4. Bidding Prayers may be offered after the Oremus, immediately preceding the Offertory.

5. The "Secret" prayer may be sung aloud.

6. The celebrant may sing the entire doxology Per ipsum, whilst elevating the Host over the chalice.

7. The Pater noster may be sung by all with the celebrant.

8. The final Blessing may be sung, and afterwards the Last Gospel may be omitted.

But the greatest needed influence is the EF's mutual enrichment of the OF Roman Missal. 

And as I have written before this is how it is done:

Keeping the Roman Missal in its entirety to include all the extra Eucharistic Prayers the following revisions to the Order of the Ordinary Form Mass are recommended:

(This is for a high or sung Mass):

1. The Official Introit in the EF fashion is chanted as the priests and ministers pray the traditional PATFOTA (which could be substituted with the EF's Asperges).  This does not preclude an additional hymn to accompany the procession to the foot of the altar.

2. After the PATFOTA is completed, the priest ascends the to the altar with his private EF prayers, incenses it while the choir begins the Kyrie and the Gloria. The rubrics are for ad orientem as in the EF for this part of the Mass.

3. The Liturgy of the Word is from the revised lectionary and in the same way as is normal in the OF although the Gradual is explicitly stated as an option to the Responsorial Psalm.

4. Following the homily, the Credo is changed with priest at middle of altar and followed by a sober prescribed Universal Prayer.

5. The traditional offertory prayers are offered as the choir chants the Offetory Antiphon and any other motet.

6. The Prayer over the Offerings is chanted aloud. 

6. The Roman Canon has a pride of place for Sundays and has the rubrics of the EF Mass included a soft-voice praying of it by the priest. The Per Ipsum is chanted in its entirety aloud with the rubrical signs of the Cross as in the EF.

7. The Rite of Holy Communion remains as is in the Ordinary Form but kneeling to be recommended as the pride of place way of receiving and on the tongue. 

8. The Concluding Rites as in the Ordinary Form.


Jan said...

Well, Father, if you are sure of your ground as regards the 1962 missal perhaps you could write to the Ecclesia Dei Commission in Rome and get their ruling. From information on Fr Z's blog a priest in France has already done that and was told that the Pater Noster is not to be sung by the congregation and that there should be no confeiteor before Communion.

From what I have read it seems that the rubrics of the 1962 missal now pertain and the changes that you prefer were superseded by Summorum Pontificum. For anyone interested they can be found here:


Vox Cantoris said...

Father, why don't you read to Ecclesia Dei and ask them if these previous notes still apply?

Jan said...

The International Federation wrote to the Ecclesia Dei Commission in 2012 and their letter is worth reading because they represent the largest and the oldest lay group that has worked for the preservation of the Traditional Latin Mass since 1965.

"Those who are “devoted to the usus antiquior” must continually and carefully ensure that this specific and narrow remit is not exceeded by those in Rome and elsewhere who desire to undermine the integrity of the Missal of 1962 by demanding the inclusion of some of the novelties which were introduced into the liturgy post-1962. The International Federation Una Voce was founded in early 1965, even before the Second Vatican Council had ended, and is by far the oldest organisation, lay or clerical, which is devoted to the usus antiquior. While other organisations and societies, clerical and lay, may also be devoted to the ‘usus antiquior’, none can match the 46 year history of the Una Voce Federation in its unswerving devotion to this cause. The Federation has played a unique role in being the first, and the continuous voice of the lay faithful in seeking adherence to the expressed wishes of the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council as declared in Sacrosanctum Concilium n.4:


Liturgical innovation and creativity is unwanted by the faithful and has consistently disturbed, angered and alienated them in the years following the Second Vatican Council. This must not happen again with the adulteration of the Missal of 1962. The International Federation accepts organic development but emphatically rejects liturgical innovation which is alien to the character, spirit, and integrity of the usus antiquior. The inestimable treasure of the ancient liturgy must not be undermined by novelty, reductionism, and destructive modernisation. Nothing describes the attraction of the usus antiquior more powerfully than the growing number of young Catholics world-wide, including many seminarians and young priests, who are discovering this ancient and deeply spiritual liturgy and are being captivated by it.

“Finally, in faithful obedience to tradition, the Sacred Council declares that Holy Mother Church holds all lawfully recognised rites to be of equal right and dignity; that she wishes to preserve them in the future and to foster them in every way.”
As I made clear in my Report to the PCED on 29th April 2008, I believe that Summorum Pontificum (and Quattuor Abhinc Annos [1984] and Ecclesia Dei Adflicta [1988] before it) should be interpreted according to the mind of the Legislator in his desire to redress, among other things, what many traditional Catholics believe to have been abuses of their legitimate aspirations. I believe those who seek to modify the directives of Summorum Pontificum to incorporate the changes post-1962 should be informed that they may freely avail themselves of the Novus Ordo in Latin where most of the various adaptations are already available, or can be adopted without any difficulty."

With due respect, Father, what you are suggesting - as pointed out by Una Voce - is available to you in the Novus Ordo Mass in Latin. By and large, the traditional orders of priests are sticking to the rubrics of the 1962 missal as can be seen from the Canons Regular making the rubrics available online at Sancta Missa.

When priests go ahead and introduce things not permitted by the rubrics of the 1962 missal this is grist to the mill for the SSPX who then dissuade people from attending EF Masses and this then undermines the object of Summorum Pontificum to bring people back into the Church rather than turn them away. Any changes will come from the Ecclesia Dei Commission and until such time the majority are sensibly following the rubrics of the 1962 Missal.


Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

For the most part, in my parish, those who attend the EF Mass, especially now that it is at one of our regularly scheduled OF times on Sunday have no history with the EF nor do they remember it when it was the Ordinary Mass.

Thus any continuity between the two is welcomed by them and I submit more people will come to love the EF Mass if there is some flexibility with it in terms of what I print above. It isn't that radical. Keep in mind there really is no such thing as a 1965 missal. It is the 1962 Missal with slight adjustments. And keep in mind too that the 1962 missal would have "canonized" the liturgical movement that led to some of the 1950 reforms, to include the Pater Noster.

Traditionalists shoot themselves in the foot when they don't want to do things that would expand the celebration of the EF Mass with the minor adjustments of the 1997 ED allowances.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

I might also add that our OF Mass at 12:10 PM is traditional, ad orientem for the Liturgy of the Eucharist and kneeling at the altar railing for Holy Communion. People like the vernacular, but once a month they get an entirely Latin Mass in the EF Form. It was a stroke of genius of Pope Benedict to allow the EF more liberally not only saving its form of the Mass with accompanying spirituality but saving Latin in the Liturgy. Once we have celebrated the EF several times at our 12:10 slot, that will open these people to more Latin in the OF Mass at this time.

Anonymous said...

The point is, Father, as Una Voce point out priests only have a choice between the 1962 or the 1970 missal: "The Holy Father, in Summorum Pontificum, could not have been clearer in stating what he means and meaning what he stated. He constantly refers to the Missal of 1962 OR the Missal of 1970. There is no ambiguity; it is a straight choice between one or the other. There is no in-between."

What you are suggesting is a hybrid that does not exist under Summorum Pontificum. Are you doing what you want rather than what the rubrics allow for? Or are you introducing those changes to appease those who prefer the Novus Ordo Mass?

In my experience, those who desire the Traditional Mass normally do have some former attachment to the Traditional Mass so it sounds to me that you are listening to others who don't. Therefore, the celebration of the EF in your parish is bound to flounder as people who truly desire the EF Mass will no doubt walk away if changes are introduced. Don't underestimate that people don't know the difference because they do and there are pleny of other Masses becoming available where the Mass is celebrated according to the rubrics of the 1962 missal and there is also the SSPX ...

I was interested to see that you have been warmly reported on Una Voce Georgia's website.


Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Jan, I celebrate the EF Mass by the book, but am open to what ED allows. Una Voce is a great organization but hardly the final word on ED. ED is as is the Congregation for Divine Worship and I still have not seen any document saying the 1997 permission is abrogated.

Anonymous said...

It is not just Una Voce but generally held that Summorum Pontificum supersedes the changes you refer to. Even the PCED CDs of the Mass available on YouTube have the priest saying the Pater Noster and the server responding.

Also, Father, there is no letter from Ecclesia Dei back to Una Voce saying that their interpretation of Summorum Pontificum is wrong so I think that speaks for itself.

Pope Benedict issued Summorum Pontificum for those who had an attachment to the Traditional Latin Mass. Therefore, if those in your parish do not have that attachment there is no need to offer the EF Mass in your parish. Pope Benedict approved the use of the 1962 Missal. Those who don't have an attachment to the TLM Mass, who want to see changes to the 1962 Missal, already have the Ordinary Form of the Mass available in Latin.

From experience, I know that people are beginning to say that they want priests from the Traditional Orders to offer the EF Mass. They feel that the Traditional Mass is being compromised by priests who say the Ordinary Form of the Mass. I and others have resisted that idea but unfortunately, when I read the changes you are suggesting: optional prayers at the foot of the altar, the Secret prayers no longer secret, bidding prayers and an optional last gospel then it is simply not the Traditional Mass. Plain and simple. And so I am beginning to think perhaps they are right. I realise you are suggesting the changes for what you see as good motives but really it is no different from priests who innovate with the Ordinary Form of the Mass and probably think they are doing it from a right motive. Perhaps the idea of priests offering both forms of the Mass is just not going to work at all.

I don't know if you are aware, Father, but, prior to Summorum Pontificum, the SSPX offered an earlier form of the Traditional Mass not the 1962 missal. Since Summorum Pontificum, however, they now follow the 1962 Missal. Any priest who introduced changes to the EF Mass then - unlike the SSPX - will not be offering Mass according to Summorum Pontificum and it will be a sad state of affairs where the SSPX are compliant while other priests are not. Believe me, Father, when I say it is getting increasingly harder to get people not to attend the SSPX Masses but if priests do innovate then it will become much harder until such time as the traditional orders can supply sufficient priests and by then it could be too late. I mean I see that only an hour and a half from Macon there is an SSPX chapel that has a number of Sunday Masses and weekday Masses as well. All the good work of Pope Benedict and Summorum Pontificum could well be undone if more care isn't taken. And I have to add that Una Voce has worked with lay people within the Church for 50 years and their work is also likely to be undone as well.


Anonymous said...

I have been attending EF Masses in four different churches (all diocesan, no SSPX) in the southeast. Three out of the four (including St Joseph) have the congregation chant the Pater Noster, and they do so quite vigorously. Father, I think you are on the right track. That is a minor organic development for the EF that will help those new to it to accalmate in a more positive way. That can hardly be compared to stripping the Offertory prayers, etc.


Anonymous said...

Mallen, as I recall you are all in favour of a dialogue Mass. The singing of the pater noster is against the rubriics of the 1962 Mass. All other priests are following the rubrics. As you can see from the videos of sung Masses only the priest chants the Pater Noster and it is actually quite beautiful.

It has also been confirmed by Ecclesia Dei to at least one priest in France that the Pater Noster is to be sung only by the priest. Says so also in the instructions for the 1962 sung Mass and on the sample videos only the priest sings - as I say quite beautiful. - EWTN at 48.00 - Training video - 31:34 at 54:59 - FSSP

Guidelines for Liturgical Services according to the 1962
Missale Romanum Music for High Mass Rev. Scott A. Haynes, S.J.C.
Canons Regular of St. John Cantius - Responses at the Pater Noster: The Celebrant alone chants the Pater Noster. At the end the choir sings the “sed libera nos a malo.” page 6

Mallen, out of interest, other than St Joseph's could you name the parishes where the Pater Noster is sung? Are there any traditional parishes where the Pater Noster is sung by the laity?


Marc said...

Mallen, I've attended different churches all over the country (15 parishes in 9 states) of various sorts (diocesan, Institute of Christ the King, SSPX, and FSSP). I have never heard a congregation join in the Pater Noster.

Jan, there are some groups out there that do not follow the 1962 rubrics for the Mass, choosing instead to follow older rubrics. The SSPX has a reputation for being a little odd with its rubrics, but they never used a pre-1962 form. They were using a post-1962 form, but they changed to using the 1962 (with their own modifications) during the life of Abp. Lefebvre.

But that is neither here nor there -- your overarching point is excellent and necessary to state. Priests, especially diocesan priests without specialized training and formation, should not be tinkering around with the Mass. If such priests have questions about how to offer the Mass, they should stop offering it until they have those questions answered by a traditional priest, and then they should follow that priest's direction. I am certain that a priest with questions about liturgics could call the local FSSP parish or their seminary and have the questions answered very quickly.

Anonymous said...

Marc, yes, I agree because that is what is deterring the faithful from attending the EF Masses provided by the diocese and no wonder they are being bypassed in favour of the SSPX if some priests don't follow the rubrics or haven't been trained properly to offer Mass. The priest who offers the Mass I attend went especially to a traditional parish to learn. He commented that those who are self-taught in his experience are not following the proper rubrics.

The interesting thing is that I attended a sung Novus Ordo Mass for many years which was very beautiful and never did the congregation join in the singing of the pater noster. Quite apart from anything else, the chant of the priest singing alone is quite beautiful. Some sung masses on the other hand are quite awful if the chant isn't right even if the congregation do sing along gustily as Mallen says.


Anonymous said...

Jan and Marc, In addition to St Joseph's, at the Basilica of St. Peter and St. Paul in Chattanooga the congregation chants the Pater Noster. At the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Savannah I have witnessed the congregation joining in at varying levels. These Masses are "by the book" and very beautiful. At St Francis de Sales in Mableton only the priest does it. And yes, it is quite beautiful too. That is an FFSP parish .


Marc said...

Mallen, I think you've already observed that there is a difference between the way things are done at the FSSP and at the diocesan Masses. The fact that the diocesan priests are doing this incorrectly and failing to properly instruct their people is the root of the problem here. One would not see this novelty amongst traditional priests because they properly instruct the people about how to participate.

So, it is not correct to say that those Masses are "by the book" since they are not. And part of being beautiful includes an observation and adherence to the rubrics of the Mass as they have been delivered to us.

My point is that diocesan priests should follow the rubrics if they are going to say the Mass. And they should tell the people how to properly participate.

John Nolan said...

I think that the 1997 'optional' elements cited by Fr McDonald (essentially the 1965 changes ordered by the Consilium in Inter Oecumenici the previous year) have been disposed of in a previous thread. Hankering after a version which was only in force for two years and departed significantly from the Roman Rite (already the priest is referred to as 'presiding') is somewhat akin to the attitude of those over at PTB who hanker after the 1998 Sacramentary with its inclusive language, alternative Collects and yucky pseudo-poetic replacement for the Exsultet.

Anonymous said...

Also, Mallen, the reason for the Pater Noster being reserved to the priest is that the Pater Noster is considered sacerdotal, that is pertaining to the priest, because they are the words of Christ and the priest acts in persona Christi.

Marc and John Nolan are both right - the SSPX even mentions on their blog that the 1997 amendments were to be pushed on to the traditional orders but that the International Federation Una Voce thrashed it out with the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei. Una Voce said if these changes were allowed to continue it would result in their people going to the SSPX so Ecclesia Dei acceded to that. Therefore what Una Voce says is correct: that with the promulgation of Summorum Pontificum the amendments have been struck out and the rubrics pertaining to the 1962 Missal are the norm - as shown on Sancta Missa, the website of the Canons Regular.

Thankfully ALL the dioceasan Masses I attend follow the rubrics of the 1962 missal and I wouldn't attend if they didn't. You can already see that Fr McDonald would like to introduce other amendments and where would that lead in the end? Altar girls even I suspect, lay readers, eucharistic processions.

As the International Federation Una Voce points out all those things are readily available in the Novus Ordo Latin Mass without trying to adulterate the Traditional Mass.


Anonymous said...

Just to add to my last comment this is what is stated on the SSPX website:

"The Ecclesia Dei Commission (in 2000) tried to impose on the different congregations under its jurisdiction a reform of the Old Mass to more align it with the New Mass. It wanted to impose the rubrics of 1964 or ‘65, which include a suppression of the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar, the Last Gospel, the Lessons, the Epistle …etc. Cardinal Castrillon, and especially Msgr. Perl, tried to impose this on all the Old Mass groups...

The laymen of Una Voce attempted to give some arguments in defense of the Old Mass, such as, "We are following the rite, the law…" and so on. The reply they received from Rome was "I am the boss... I am the representative of the pope. I have all powers to decide this question." Period. The final argument for Una Voce became, "If you do this, our faithful will go to the Society of St. Pius X." That was the big argument. Cardinal Castrillon accused Una Voce of blackmailing him. The faithful said, "No, it’s the fact." Thus, they were able to stop that reform."

The reforms mentioned above are the ones Fr McDonald would like to introduce. However, as can be seen lay people have already objected strongly to these changes and have said they will go to the SSPX if such changes were imposed. The purpose of Summorum Pontificum is to draw into the Church those that have a love of the old Mass, so any changes such as those suggested by Fr McDonald will have a deleterious effect and will only send more people off to the SSPX - the opposite of what Pope Benedict intended with Summorum Pontificum. Therefore, the diocesan approved Masses need to be faithful to the rubrics of the 1962 Missal and, therefore, faithful to Summorum Pontificum and if not wanting to do this it would be better to offer the Latin Mass in the Ordinary Form which has no prayers at the foot of the altar, can sing the Pater Noster, no last Gospel, and those who wish to attend the Extraordinary Form of the Mass can go elsewhere where it is offered according to the rubrics - and, voila, everyone is satisfied!


Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Jan, the norms that I would like to see are the very ones of 1957 which the 1962 Missal presumes as well as the 1997 ED allowances which I have posted which are not what you write but much more conservative.

No one yet has proven to me that the 1997 ED norms have been suppressed other than giving me pious opinion of this, that or the other groups they mention.

I want to hear it from ED and no one has pointed where I can find an official decree, no one! Stop giving me pious blabber! Give me just the facts and from the competent authority!

Anonymous said...

Father, I shouldn't need to remind you that you are the priest who is offering the Extraordinary Form of the Mass and, therefore, it is you who needs to be the one to be sure of his ground and whether he is following the rubrics or not. I have suggested to you that you write to Ecclesia Dei in Rome and get a ruling on this. If you are so sure of your ground then why don't you do that? I suggest it is because you know what the answer will be and you will find out that you shouldn't even have the lay people joining in the Pater Noster.

With due respect, I would think that the International Federation Una Voce, which has been promoting the Traditional Latin Mass for around 50 years - who are in correspondence with ED - are in the best position to know whether those norms are still in place. They say, no, they are not, that Summorum Pontificum supersedes the changes and that the 1962 missal is the norm. Can you point to any document that says their interpretation is wrong? No, you can't and the very fact that the majority of Masses are all following the 1962 rubrics show that you are indeed wrong - as I say even the CDs put out by ED - available on YouTube for you to look at - show the priest saying the Our Father and the server answering. Totally contrary to what your suggested changes are.

Can you point to any Extraordinary Form Mass in the country where there are bidding prayers, the prayers at the foot of the altar are not said, lay readers and no last Gospel in the Extraordinary Form of the Mass? If all these things are the norm - as you claim - then you shouldn't have any difficulty finding such Masses and edifying us all.