Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
liturgy of the Roman Rite be revised. It did not decree a radical reform or an
entirely new rite. The Liturgy Constitution, SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM, reads:
"The rite of the Mass is to be revised in such a way that the intrinsic
nature and purpose of its several parts, as well as the connection between
them, may be more clearly manifested, and that devout and active
participation by the faithful may be more easily achieved. For this purpose
the rites are to be simplified, due care being taken to preserve their
substance; elements which, with the passage of time, came to be
duplicated, or were added with but little advantage, are now to be
discarded; other elements which have suffered injury through accidents of
history are now to be restored according to the pristine norm of the Holy
Fathers, to the extent that they may seem useful or necessary."4
There are some key passages in this text, and elsewhere in this conciliar
document, that must be examined in order to determine if the creation of a New
Order of Mass and the suppression of the traditional rite corresponds to the
express wishes of the Second Vatican Council, or if it is rather a rejection of
both that Council and the perpetual teaching and tradition of the Church:
1. The rite of the Mass is to be revised...
The revision of the ancient Roman Rite is prescribed, there is no mention of a
liturgical reform that will sweep away the old rite and replace it with a new one.
2. ... the intrinsic nature and purpose of its several parts ... more clearly
manifested...
The sacred mystery of the altar must be manifested more clearly, it must not be
obscured in ambiguities.
3. ... restored according to the pristine norm of the Holy Fathers.
Restoration means that the ancient structure and form are to be preserved, and
not be replaced with novel inventions.
In addition to these there are other passages of this document which express
the mind of the Council in those matters concerning the revision of the liturgy:
Finally, in faithful obedience to tradition, the sacred Council declares that
Holy Mother Church holds all lawfully recognized rites to be of equal right
and dignity; that she wishes to preserve them in the future and to foster
them in every way. The Council also desires that, where necessary, the
rites be revised carefully in the light of sound tradition, and that they be
given new vigor to meet the present-day circumstances and needs.5
www.fatima.org
www.fatima.org
In the Bull Quo Primum, Pius V did not institute a new rite of the Mass. Davies
demonstrates this by citing eminent authorities:
"... Father David Knowles, who was Britain's most distinguished Catholic scholar
until his death in 1974, pointed out" that:
The Missal of 1570 was indeed the result of instructions given at Trent,
but it was, in fact, as regards the Ordinary, Canon, Proper of the time and
much else a replica of the Roman Missal of 1474, which in its
turn repeated in all essentials the practice of the Roman Church of the
epoch of Innocent III, which itself derived from the Usage of Gregory the
Great and his successors in the Seventh Century. In short, the Missal of
1570 was, in all essentials, the usage of the mainstream of medieval
European liturgy which included England and all its rites.8
Although the rite continued to develop after the time of St. Gregory, Father
Fortescue explains that:
"All later modifications were fitted into the old arrangement, and the most
important parts were not touched. From, roughly, the time of St. Gregory
we have the text of the Mass, in order and arrangement, as a sacred
tradition that no one has ventured to touch except in unimportant
details."9
Fortescue continues:
"So our Mass goes back without essential change, to the age when it first
developed out of the oldest liturgy of all. It is still redolent of that liturgy,
of the days when Caesar ruled the world ... The final result of our enquiry
is that, in spite of unresolved problems, in spite of later changes, there is
not in Christendom another rite so venerable as ours."10
Father Louis Bouyer:
"The Roman Canon, as it is today, (written before Vatican II) goes back
to Gregory the Great. There is not, in the East or in the West, a
Eucharistic prayer remaining in use to this day, that can boast of such
antiquity. In the eyes not only of the Orthodox, but of Anglicans and even
those Protestants who have still to some extent, a feeling for tradition, to
jettison it would be a rejection of any claim on the part of the Roman
Church to represent the true Catholic Church."
Similarly, Kevin Starr in the San Francisco Examiner (April 15, 1978) explains:
It took the Latin Church 500 years to evolve a worship service equal to
this awesome, compelling leap to the Godhead through the Risen
Eucharistic Christ. For a thousand years Catholics prayed this way at
www.fatima.org
Mass. In the 16th Century Council of Trent, this 1000-year-old Mass was
standardized, codified, made the norm of the universal Church. Another
400 years went by 400 years of dignified, compelling worship...
In his recent work, The Eternal Sacrifice, Davies makes the important
observation that:
At no time in the history of the Roman Rite was there ever any question
of a Pope setting up a commission to compose new prayers and
ceremonies. The ceremonies evolved almost imperceptibly, and in every
case, codification, that is the incorporation of these prayers into the
liturgical books, followed upon their development ... particular prayers
and ceremonies were found in the Missal because they were being used in
the Mass, and not vice versa. Professor Owen Chadwick, one of Britain's
greatest historians, remarks: "Liturgies are not made, they grow in the
devotion of the centuries."11
The great Apostle Saint Paul was so zealous that he was responsible for almost
single-handedly Christianizing Europe. The wrath of St. Paul is invoked by St.
Pius V against anyone, even a Cardinal, Bishop or Priest, who dares to interfere
with the right of any Catholic Priest in good standing to celebrate the Tridentine
Mass.
1) does not promulgate a new rite but consolidates and codifies the
immemorial Roman Rite;
2) It extends its use throughout the Latin Church, except;
3) for rites having a continuous usage of over two hundred years;
4) and grants an indult to all priests to freely and lawfully use this Missal
in perpetuity;
5) The Bull specifies minutely the persons, times and the places to which
its provisions apply;
6) The obligation is confirmed by express sanctions.
Since that time, no Pope has ever himself formally decreed the abrogation or
obrogation of Quo Primum, and certainly no Pope has ever presumed to abolish
the traditional Roman Rite of the Mass. From this it should already be clear that
any priest of the Roman Rite is entitled to celebrate the traditional Mass
anywhere, at any time, in accordance with liturgical laws ... (and) the laity are
just as much entitled to assist at the traditional Mass as priests of the Roman
Rite are to celebrate it.
with divine and Catholic Faith, since it is set forth in the Profession of Faith of
Pius IV:
"I most steadfastly admit and embrace Apostolic and Ecclesiastical
Traditions and all other observances and institutions of the said Church ...
I also receive and admit the received and approved ceremonies of the
Catholic Church used in the solemn administration of the sacraments."13
www.fatima.org
www.fatima.org
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
2) It must specify who are the subjects of the law, and it must
specify where and when the law will be in force.
3) The law must be publicly promulgated in the manner specified by
law, by the competent authority.
It is manifestly evident from the above considerations that Pope
Paul'sMissale Romanum did not make the new Mass obligatory.
www.fatima.org