Valid and Licit Missals

The Valid and Licit Missals

in these times of prolonged sedevacantism

Who decides to use which missal and with which jurisdiction?

 

Table of Contents:

1. Concern for Unity
2. Unity Remains
3. However… the reforms
4. The Liturgical Reforms under Pius XII and the Imposed Missals
5. The Imposition of the Missal of 1962 by John XXIII
6. The Doctrine of the Council of Trent on Ancient Missals
7. Usage among Faithful Catholics and the Acceptance of the Missal of 1962
8. Arguments for the Validity of the Missal of 1962: The Certain Harmlessness of the Imposed Liturgy

8.1. Harmlessness of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium

8.2. Thomistic Logical Argument

8.3. Universal Acceptance as a Sign of Harmlessness

Conclusion

 

 

1. Concern for Unity.

 

In the world of the current Catholic Church, bishops and priests use different missals. To maintain unity amongst us, which is one of the most important marks of the Church, to avoid disputes and exclusions of one from the other groups or priestly congregations, it is important to give to each the reason to which he is entitled, to use such and such a missal yes or no.

 

2. Unity Remains

 

Happily this unity of liturgy and prayers in the Church is perpetuated in the Latin part by the use of the missal called Tridentine or of Pius V, apart from the missals that were permitted before 1963, such as the Ambrosian and Dominican rite. We will not speak of the liturgy of our Eastern brethren, for with them the situation is simple, there was no will in Rome during the 20th century to reform their liturgies as there was for the Tridentine rite and they simply continue to celebrate as before the conciliabulum of 1962.

 

3. However… the reforms.

 

In the framework of the liturgical reflection that animates our priestly community, it is fitting to examine with precision and fidelity to Catholic doctrine the evolutions of the Roman Missal in the middle of the XXth century. This text aims to shed light, on the basis of verified historical facts and certain theological principles, on the question of the imposition of the Missal of 1962 by John XXIII, the prior reforms under Pius XII, as well as the doctrinal legitimacy of having recourse to earlier missals, in accordance with the tradition established by the Council of Trent and Quo primum. We will also address the acceptance of this missal by the Church until the 1970s, emphasising the certain harmlessness of the liturgy imposed universally, while adopting a perspective faithful to Catholic truth, which recognises the seat of Peter as vacant since the public heresy manifested in Lumen Gentium in 1964. The data presented here are accurate and in conformity with authentic sources, such as the decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites and precise historical analyses on liturgical simplifications.

 

4. The Liturgical Reforms under Pius XII and the Imposed Missals

 

Pius XII, whose pontificate extends from 1939 to 1958, initiated several liturgical reforms aimed at simplifying certain aspects of the calendar and rubrics, without however promulgating an entirely new missal. These changes, decided between 1947 and 1958, were integrated progressively into the existing editions of the Roman Missal, which then rested on the typical edition of 1920. Here, in an exhaustive manner and based on authentic decrees, are the principal liturgical impositions under his reign, which represent approximately 80 to 85 per cent of the subsequent simplifications of the calendar and rubrics:

 

It is a reasonable evaluation, derived from an exhaustive analysis of the authentic decrees: the decree Cum hac nostra aetate (23 March 1955) suppresses octaves and vigils; the works of the Liturgical Commission (1955-1958), approved personally by Pius XII, include the reduction of commemorations, the suppression of 70 feasts, and the principles of classification (cf. decree SRC of 16 November 1955, Maxima redemptionis nostrae mysteria). These elements materially constitute the major part (estimated at 80-85 per cent) of the rubrics of the Missal of 1962, the remaining 15-20 per cent being the post-1958 additions (suppression of the Confiteor, etc.). This proportion is confirmed by subsequent historical analyses but faithful to Vatican sources (for example, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, 1955-1958). Doctrinally, Mediator Dei (Pius XII, 1947, n. 59) authorises such pastoral simplifications without altering the essence.

 

Reform of the Paschal Vigil (1951): By the decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites of 9 February 1951, Pius XII authorises, on an experimental basis, the celebration of the Paschal Vigil at night, thus rediscovering an ancient tradition. This reform is made obligatory in 1952 for certain regions, but it remains a partial modification, not a complete missal.

Reform of Holy Week (1955): Promulgated by the decree Maxima redemptionis nostrae mysteria of the Sacred Congregation of Rites on 16 November 1955, this reform extends the restoration to the entire Holy Week. It includes simplifications such as the celebration of offices at more suitable hours (for example, the Mass of Maundy Thursday in the evening), and it is imposed universally from 1956. Contrary to certain erroneous mentions indicating 1952, the authentic sources confirm 1955 as the date of effective promulgation.

Decree on Octaves and Vigils (1955): The decree Cum hac nostra aetate of 23 March 1955 suppresses almost all octaves (retaining only those of Christmas, Easter and Pentecost) and most privileged vigils (limited to Christmas and Pentecost). These changes are integrated into the missals in use.

 

Other Simplifications (1955-1958): Pius XII personally approves a very strong reduction in the number of authorised commemorations (only one admitted at feasts of the first and second class, decision taken in 1955-1956 and confirmed in the schemas of 1958); the suppression of numerous feasts of saints (approximately 70 double or semi-double feasts, decided and approved in the decree of 1955 and the works of the Commission which he followed personally); a new classification of feasts into four degrees (first, second, third class and commemoration, principle approved by Pius XII as early as 1956-1957, replacing the old system of major doubles, doubles, semi-doubles and simples); the suppression of most third-class feasts on Sundays (principle decided under Pius XII, where second-class Sundays always take precedence over third-class feasts); the reduction in the number of lessons at ferias of Lent and Advent (passed from three to one in most cases, decision taken in 1956-1958); the suppression of prayers prescribed by the pope (oratio imperata) except in grave cases (decision approved by Pius XII in 1955-1956); and the simplification of the rules of concurrence between feasts (the broad lines, such as the absolute priority of first- and second-class feasts, fixed by Pius XII).

 

No complete missal was imposed by Pius XII as a new edition; his reforms are rubrical adjustments applied to the existing missal. These elements were already decided or expressly approved by him before 9 October 1958; they are not subsequent additions.

 

5. The Imposition of the Missal of 1962 by John XXIII

 

The Roman Missal of 1962, designated as the typical edition promulgated under John XXIII, represents a compilation of these prior reforms with additions posterior to 1958, representing approximately 15 to 20 per cent of the modifications. It was imposed by John XXIII by the apostolic constitution Rubricarum instructum of 25 July 1960, which approves the new Code of Rubrics, followed by the typical edition of the Missal promulgated on 23 June 1962. This missal incorporates the changes of Pius XII, but adds elements decided or modified after October 1958, such as the suppression of the second Confiteor before the Communion of the faithful; the suppression of the prayer Aufer a nobis and of the psalm Judica me at low mass in certain circumstances; the modification of the rubric for the last Gospel (no longer obligatory in case of blessing); the addition of the name of Saint Joseph to the Canon (by decree of 13 November 1962); and some additional suppressions of third-class feasts. This addition of the name of Saint Joseph to the Canon, although decided under John XXIII, had been supported previously by Don Giuseppe Sarto, who became Saint Pius X, by signing a petition that circulated at the beginning of the XXth century among the worldwide clergy, and where opinions on this addition were collected, according to historical anecdotes reported. Although materially good in large part, this missal reflects a step towards simplifications which, for some, prefigure subsequent innovations.

 

John XXIII, in imposing this missal, acts as a pope whose orientations raise grave questions as early as 1961, before the manifest heresies of Paul VI. That is why one can say, materially and without exaggeration, that a large part of the simplifications is indeed from Pius XII, but not the totality, and especially not the juridical promulgation nor the final edition.

 

6. The Doctrine of the Council of Trent on Ancient Missals

 

The Council of Trent, in its Session XXII (17 September 1562), affirms the authority of the Church over the liturgy. It is the bull Quo primum of Saint Pius V (14 July 1570) which specifies the permissions for ancient rites. Here is the exact pertinent text: “However, if a Church proves that its rite has more than two hundred years of continuous usage, it may retain it.” (Faithful translation from the Latin: “Si qua vero Ecclesia suum ritum plus quam ducentis annis continuatum probaverit, eum retinere licebit.”) This disposition permits the usage of missals prior to 1570 if their antiquity exceeds 200 years, and by extension, it protects immemorial liturgical traditions proved against arbitrary abrogations.

 

This doctrine, certain and sure, implies that the missals from before the reforms of Pius XII – such as the typical edition of 1920 or even earlier – remain licit if their usage is immemorial and proved. Thus, it is permitted, and even recommended to preserve liturgical purity, to continue to use these ancient missals, as most Catholics faithful to tradition do. This permission is not an opinion, but a logical consequence of Quo primum, which binds the Church to respect proved centenary customs.

 

But in principle one must hold to obedience to the (true) popes and it is the last one who decides according to the word of the Lord to Saint Peter, reported in the Gospel according to Saint Matthew (16, 19, Vulgate): “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven: whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

 

If one holds to this principle there remain two opinions: those who hold Pius XII as the last pope follow his liturgy, those who hold John XXIII as the last pope, follow the missal of 1962.

 

Then for those who follow more ancient missals which have more than 200 years, are in order with the principle of the Council of Trent mentioned above.

 

Those of our brethren in sedevacantism, who follow missals according to reforms which do not have 200 years, they have advanced arguments of infiltrations in the dicasteries, although the popes had the decisive word in imposing a missal. But in these times of crisis, one must not make a disease of it, to avoid enervating divisions in our collective combat against the worst enemies. These missals have indeed been permitted and imposed by true popes in the past. Let us tolerate these usages so as not to cause schisms for lesser matters, until a true pope eventually decides in this matter.

 

“Lesser matter” I say with reluctance, for let us be very serious in this affair of the Church for Saint Teresa of Avila declared: “I was so firm in the faith of the Church that I understood very well that, for nothing in the world, I would do anything against it nor against any truth of Holy Scripture; it seemed to me rather that I would put myself to die a thousand times rather than do it.” (Libro de la Vida Chapter: XXXIII)

 

The best, the surest and prudent attitude is in my humble opinion, to hold to the decisions of the last pope.

 

7. Usage among Faithful Catholics and the Acceptance of the Missal of 1962

 

Let us look more closely if among Catholics attached to the integral faith, usage varies, and rests on solid principles. Most have recourse to missals from before Pius XII to avoid any simplification perceived as a step towards modernity, thus preserving the octaves, vigils and feasts suppressed in 1955. In the United States, many Catholics use editions under Pius XII (such as 1955), considering his reforms as valid but preferring prudence in the face of cumulative changes.

 

However, certain Catholics, including eminent figures such as Mgr Marcel Lefebvre and Mgr Antônio de Castro Mayer, used the Missal of 1962 until the 1970s. Mgr Lefebvre, founder of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X, and Mgr de Castro Mayer, bishop of Campos, maintained it in their diocese or congregation, considering it imposed by a pope whose authority is recognised for that period, and accepted by the non-heretical Church. Until 1972 – approximate date where emerges the consciousness of the vacancy of the seat in the face of the innovations of Paul VI – all true Catholic priests of the Latin rite employed it, without major contestation. Currently some sedevacantist priests continue to use this Missal out of obedience to a pope and out of respect for the Church which permitted and used it – in the Latin rite – exclusively, and which cannot err in imposing a liturgy. Indeed let us look at the arguments more closely.

 

8. Arguments for the Validity of the Missal of 1962: The Certain Harmlessness of the Imposed Liturgy

 

If the entire Church accepted the Missal of 1962, imposed by John XXIII (whose orientations raise grave questions, although his disciplinary acts for that period are considered valid), this missal is good and licit. Here are the best arguments, founded on Catholic doctrine from before 1963:

 

8.1. Harmlessness of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium:

 

As the Vatican Council (1870, Pastor Aeternus) teaches, the Church is infallible in its ordinary teaching when it is universal. The unanimous theologians extend this to liturgical discipline: the Church cannot impose a liturgy harmful to the faith or sinful, for that would contradict its holiness (cf. Mediator Dei of Pius XII, 1947, which condemns subversive innovations but affirms divine protection over the liturgy). If the Missal of 1962 contained an intrinsic vice, that would contradict indefectibility; it can be imprudent per accidens, but not bad per se.

 

8.2. Thomistic Logical Argument:

 

According to Saint Thomas Aquinas (Summa Theologica, IIa-IIae, q. 33, a. 4), the Church, mystical body of Christ, cannot command what offends God. If the Missal of 1962 contained an intrinsic vice, its universal imposition until 1969 (before the Novus Ordo) would have been impossible without the Church failing, which is absurd. Ergo, it is safe.

 

8.3. Universal Acceptance as a Sign of Harmlessness:

 

The Fathers of the Church and theologians (e.g., Bellarmine) teach that the peaceful acceptance of a disciplinary law by the entire Church confirms its harmlessness. The Missal of 1962, used by all Catholic bishops and priests until the heresies of Vatican II, benefits from this guarantee.

 

Conclusion

 

May this reflection strengthen your priestly ministry in fidelity to Catholic truth and above all: keep us all in peace and mutual respect to well “close ranks” and remain united in this combat of titans from which we will emerge victoriously if, at least, we keep and develop the four notes of the Church, of which unity is the “formal cause” and which touches by consequence its very essence (see the four causes, physics of Aristotle and St Thomas). Concretely, let us accept that brethren use other Missals than ourselves without making a disease of it which would divide and play into the cards of our adversaries.

 

In opiniis libertas, in omnibus caritas.

 

With all my respect.