Mass of Paul VI

This article is about the revision of the Mass of the Roman Rite after the Second Vatican Council. For an explanation of its structure, see Mass (liturgy).

The Mass of Paul VI is a form of Mass in the Catholic Church, promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1969 after the Second Vatican Council (19621965). It is now the ordinary or standard form[1] of the Roman Rite Mass.[2]

The form of Mass in the Roman Rite during the preceding four centuries, 1570[3] to 1969, is called the Tridentine Mass (including the 1962 version which is now called the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite), while the various forms that succeeded each other in previous centuries are referred to as Pre-Tridentine Mass.


The current official text of the Mass of Paul VI in Latin is the third typical edition of the revised Roman Missal, published in 2002 (after being promulgated in 2000) and reprinted with corrections and updating in 2008. Translations into the vernacular languages have appeared; the English translation was promulgated in 2010 and was used progressively from September 2011. Two earlier typical editions of the revised Missal were issued in 1970 (promulgated in 1969) and 1975. The liturgy contained in the 15701962 editions of the Roman Missal is frequently referred to as the Tridentine Mass: all these editions placed at the start the text of the bull Quo primum in which Pope Pius V linked the issuance of his edition of the Roman Missal to the Council of Trent. Only in the 1962 edition is this text preceded by a short decree, Novo rubricarum corpore, declaring that edition to be, from then on, the typical edition, to which other printings of the Missal were to conform.

For details of the Order of Mass in the Mass of Paul VI, see Mass.


The Liturgical Movement of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, which arose from the work of Dom Prosper Guéranger, founder of Solesmes Abbey, encouraged the laity to "live" the liturgy, by attending services (not only Mass) often, understanding what they meant, and following the priest in heart and mind. It envisaged only minor reforms of the liturgy itself; the most important changes it sought affected the calendar. It also focused on promoting Gregorian Chant.

By the 1920s, the Liturgical Movement still did not advocate a full-scale revision of the rite of Mass. However it argued for changes to practices such as:

Another objective of the Movement was the introduction of the vernacular language (in particular, into the Mass of the Catechumens, i.e. the part of the liturgy which includes the readings from the Bible). This, it was believed, would assist the congregation's spiritual development by enabling them to participate in the celebration of Mass with understanding. Pope Pius XII, who had a particular interest in the liturgy, wrote in his 1947 encyclical Mediator Dei that "the use of the mother tongue in connection with several of the rites may be of much advantage to the people", though he stated at the same time that only the Holy See had the authority to grant permission for the use of the vernacular.[4] He granted permission for the use of local languages in the renewal of baptismal promises in the Easter Vigil service.

By this time, scholars had discovered how and when many elements of varied provenance had come to be incorporated into the Roman Rite of Mass and preserved in Pope Pius V's 1570 revision of the liturgy. In section 4 of Mediator Dei, Pope Pius XII praised the work of these scholars, while insisting that it was for the Holy See to judge what action to take on the basis of their findings. The commission established by Pope Pius V had not succeeded, because of the insufficient resources at its disposal, in achieving the aim attributed to it in Pope Pius V's bull Quo Primum, namely to restore the liturgy to "the original form and rite of the holy Fathers". For instance, the general intercessions or prayer of the faithful, of which a slight trace remained in the isolated single word "Oremus" (Let us pray), had not been restored to the Mass liturgy.

Beginnings of the revision

The Roman Missal was revised on a number of occasions after 1570: after only 34 years, Pope Clement VIII made a general revision, as did Pope Urban VIII 30 years later. Other Popes added new feasts or made other minor adjustments. It was not until the twentieth century, however, that work began on a more radical rewriting.

In response to a decree of the First Vatican Council (1870), Pope Pius X introduced in 1911 a new arrangement of the Psalter for use in the Breviary. In the bull Divino afflatu, he described this change as "a first step towards a correction of the Roman Breviary and Missal". A Society of St. Pius X site states that this revision of the Breviary "significantly unsettled" clerics and encountered criticism.[5] The laity will only have noticed the accompanying change whereby on Sundays, the Mass liturgy ceased to be generally taken from the proper or common (liturgy) of the saint whose feast fell on that day, and began instead to be that of the Sunday.

In 1955, Pope Pius XII made substantial changes to the liturgies for Palm Sunday, the Easter Triduum and the Vigil of Pentecost.[6] The Palm Sunday blessing of palms was freed from elements, such as the recitation of the Sanctus, that were relics of an earlier celebration of a separate Mass for the blessing, and the procession was simplified. Among the changes for Holy Thursday were the moving of the Mass from morning to evening, thus making room for a morning Chrism Mass, and the introduction into the evening Mass of the rite of the washing of feet. Changes to the Good Friday liturgy included moving it from morning to afternoon, and allowing the congregation to receive Holy Communion, which had been reserved to the priest; an end was also put to the custom whereby, at the communion, the priest drank some unconsecrated wine into which he had placed part of the consecrated host. There were more numerous changes to the Easter Vigil service:

At the Vigil of Pentecost, the traditional blessing of baptismal water, accompanied by the Litany of the Saints and six Old Testament readings, was omitted completely. These were still printed in the Missal, which, except for the replacement of the Holy Week liturgies, remained unchanged and was not considered to constitute a new editio typica superseding that of Pope Pius X, which was published by Pope Benedict XV in 1920.

Pope Pius XII decried those who would go back to ancient liturgical rites and usages, discarding the new patterns introduced by disposition of divine Providence to meet the changes of circumstances and situation. Doing so, he said, "bids fair to revive the exaggerated and senseless antiquarianism to which the illegal Council of Pistoia gave rise". He indicated as examples of what was to be rejected: restoring the altar to its primitive table form, excluding black as a liturgical colour, forbidding the use in church of sacred images and statues, using crucifixes with no trace of suffering, rejecting polyphonic music that conforms with the Holy See's regulations.[7]

Pope John XXIII, who succeeded Pius XII in 1958, added some new feasts and made some other changes to the liturgical calendar, as well as amending some of the rubrics. In his 1962 edition of the Missal, he also deleted the word "perfidis" (Latin: "faithless") from the Good Friday prayer for the Jews, and added the name of St. Joseph to the Canon of the Mass. The second change was particularly significant, as many had considered the text of the Canon to be practically untouchable.

Second Vatican Council and its immediate consequences

The liturgy was among the matters considered by the Second Vatican Council of 19621965. On 4 December 1963, the Council issued a Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy known as Sacrosanctum Concilium, section 50 of which read as follows:

The rite of the Mass is to be revised in such a way that the intrinsic nature and purpose of its several parts, as also 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 to the vigor which they had in the days of the holy Fathers, as may seem useful or necessary.[8]

Sacrosanctum Concilium further provided that (amongst other things) a greater use of the Scriptures should be made at Mass, and that vernacular languages should be more widely employed.

In 1964, Pope Paul VI, who had succeeded John XXIII the previous year, established the Consilium ad exsequendam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia, the Council for Implementing the Constitution on the Liturgy. The instruction Inter oecumenici of 26 September 1964, issued by the Sacred Congregation of Rites while the Council was still in session, and coming into effect on 7 March 1965[9] made significant changes to the existing liturgy, though the form of the rite was substantially preserved. Some sources speak of a "1965 Missal", but this generally refers to orders of the Mass that were published with the approval of bishops' conferences, for example, in the United States and Canada, rather than an editio typica of the Roman Missal itself. The changes included: use of the vernacular was permitted; the priest was allowed to face towards the congregation, if he wished, throughout Mass; there were some textual changes, such as omission of the Psalm Judica at the beginning, and of the Last Gospel and Leonine Prayers at the end. The 1967 document Tres abhinc annos, the second instruction on the implementation of the Council's Constitution on the Liturgy,[10] made only minimal changes to the text, but simplified the rubrics and the vestments. Concelebration, and Communion under both kinds had meanwhile been permitted,[11] and, in 1968, three additional Eucharistic Prayers were authorized for use alongside the traditional Roman Canon.

By October 1967, the Consilium had produced a complete draft revision of the Mass liturgy, known as the Normative Mass,[12] and this revision was presented to the Synod of Bishops that met in Rome in that month. The bishops attended the first public celebration of the revised rite in the Sistine Chapel. When asked to vote on the new liturgy, 71 bishops voted placet (approved), 43 voted non placet (not approved) and 62 voted placet iuxta modum (approved with reservations). In response to the bishops' concerns, some changes were made to the text. Pope Paul VI and the Consilium interpreted this as lack of approval for the Normative Mass, which was replaced by the text included in the book Novus Ordo Missae (The New Order of Mass) in 1969.[13]

On 25 September 1969, two retired cardinals, 79-year-old Alfredo Ottaviani and 84-year-old Antonio Bacci, wrote a letter with which they sent Pope Paul VI the text of the "Short Critical Study on the New Order of Mass", which had been prepared in the previous June by a group of twelve theologians under the direction of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.[14] The cardinals warned the New Order of the Mass “represented, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent."[15][16] The study that they transmitted said that on many points the New Mass had much to gladden the heart of even the most modernist Protestant.[17][18] Paul VI asked the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the department of the Roman Curia that Ottaviani had earlier headed, to examine the Short Critical Study. It responded on 12 November 1969 that the document contained many affirmations that were "superficial, exaggerated, inexact, emotional and false".[19] However, some of its observations were taken into account in preparing the definitive version of the new Order of the Mass.

1970 Missal

Mass celebrated at the Grotto at Lourdes, 28 July 2006. The principal celebrant displays the chalice immediately after its consecration.

Pope Paul VI promulgated the revised rite of Mass with his Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum of 3 April 1969, setting the first Sunday of Advent at the end of that year as the date on which it would enter into force. However, because he was dissatisfied with the edition that was produced the revised Missal itself was not published until the following year, and full vernacular translations appeared much later.[20]

Missale Romanum made particular mention of the following significant changes from the previous edition of the Roman Missal:

In addition to these changes, Missale Romanum noted that the revision considerably modified other sections of the Missal, such as the Proper of Seasons, the Proper of Saints, the Common of Saints, the Ritual Masses and the Votive Masses, adding that "[the] number [of the prayers] has been increased, so that the new forms might better correspond to new needs, and the text of older prayers has been restored on the basis of the ancient sources".

Other changes

Vernacular language

In his 1962 apostolic constitution Veterum sapientia on the teaching of Latin, Pope John XXIII spoke of that language as the one the Church uses: "...the Catholic Church has a dignity far surpassing that of every merely human society, for it was founded by Christ the Lord. It is altogether fitting, therefore, that the language it uses should be noble, majestic, and non-vernacular." But the only mention of the liturgy in that document was in relation to the study of Greek.[24]

The Second Vatican Council stated in Sacrosanctum Concilium, 36:[8]

1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.
2. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.
3. These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language.

While this text would seem to suggest only limited use of the vernacular language, its reference to "particular law" (as opposed to universal law) and to "the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority" (the episcopal conference) entrusted to the latter the judgment on the actual extent of its use.

Bishops' Conferences from all over the world soon voted to expand the use of the vernacular, and requested confirmation of this choice from Rome. In response, from 1964 onwards, a series of documents from Rome granted general authorization for steadily greater proportions of the Mass to be said in the vernacular. By the time the revised Missal was published in 1970, priests were no longer obliged to use Latin in any part of the Mass. Today, a very large majority of Masses are celebrated in the language of the people, though Latin is still used either occasionally or, in some places, on a regular basis. The rule on the language to be used is as follows: "Mass is celebrated either in Latin or in another language, provided that liturgical texts are used which have been approved according to the norm of law. Except in the case of celebrations of the Mass that are scheduled by the ecclesiastical authorities to take place in the language of the people, priests are always and everywhere permitted to celebrate Mass in Latin" (Redemptionis Sacramentum, 112).

The decision to authorize use of a particular vernacular language and the text of the translation to be employed must be approved by at least a two-thirds majority of the relevant Bishops' Conference, whose decisions must be confirmed by the Holy See.

Changes in the Order of Mass

The Order of Mass was previously regarded as consisting of two parts: the Mass of the Catechumens and the Mass of the Faithful. In the revised liturgy, it is divided into four sections: the Initial Rites, the Liturgy of the Word, the Liturgy of the Eucharist, and the Concluding Rites. There were some noteworthy textual changes in the first two sections, and the dismissal formula in the Concluding Rites (Ite, missa est) was moved to the end of the Mass; previously, it was followed by an inaudible personal prayer by the priest, the blessing of the people (which has been retained), and the reading of the "Last Gospel" (almost always John 1:114). The most extensive changes, however, were made in the first part of the Liturgy of the Eucharist: almost all of the Offertory prayers were altered or shortened. While previously the priest had said almost the entire Canon inaudibly, the words of the Canon or Eucharistic Prayer are now spoken aloud. The 25 signs of the cross that the priest used to make over the host and chalice during the Canon (15 of them after the consecration) have been reduced to a single sign shortly before the consecration. Aside from the introduction of an optional exchange of a sign of peace, the changes in the remainder of the Liturgy of the Eucharist are less notable.

Three new Eucharistic Prayers

As noted above, three new alternative Eucharistic Prayers were introduced alongside the Roman Canon, which had been the sole Eucharistic Prayer of the Roman Rite. After several writers had expressed dissatisfaction with the Roman Canon, the Benedictine scholar Cipriano Vagaggini, while noting what he called its "undeniable defects", concluded that its suppression was unthinkable; he proposed that it be retained but that two further Eucharistic Prayers be added. In response to requests from various quarters, Pope Paul VI authorized the composition of new Eucharistic Prayers, which were examined by himself and by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and which in 1968 he authorized for use.[25]

The Second Eucharistic Prayer is an abridgement of the Roman Canon with elements included from the Anaphora of the Apostolic Tradition, most notably in its proper preface and in the Epiclesis.[26] The Third Eucharistic Prayer is a new composition, longer than the Second Eucharistic Prayer, and contains Alexandrian, Byzantine, and Maronite elements. Its structure follows the Roman Canon. It is based on the 4th-century Anaphora of St Basil.[27] Eucharistic Prayer IV is roughly based upon the Anaphora of St Basil, with, among other things, the epiclesis moved before the Institution narrative.

Communion under both species

In the 13th century, Thomas Aquinas said that, since not all Christians, in particular the old and the children, can be trusted to observe due caution, it was by then "a prudent custom in some churches for the blood not to be offered to the people, but to be consumed by the priest alone".[28] A council at Lambeth in 1281 directed that the people were to be given non-consecrated wine.[29] The Council of Trent taught that only the priest who celebrated Mass was bound by divine law to receive Communion under both species, and that Christ, whole and entire, and a true sacrament are received under either form alone, and therefore, as regards its fruits, those who receive one species only are not deprived of any grace necessary to salvation"; and it decreed: "If anyone says that the holy Catholic Church was not moved by just causes and reasons that laymen and clerics when not consecrating should communicate under the form of bread only, or has erred in this, let him be anathema."[30] While the Council had declared that reception of Communion under one form alone deprived the communicant of no grace necessary to salvation, theologians admitted that receiving under both forms may confer a greater grace either in itself (a minority view) or only accidentally (the majority view).[29]

When the 1970 Roman Missal allowed laypeople to receive Holy Communion by communicating in both species of bread and wine, it insisted that priests should use the occasion to teach the faithful the Catholic doctrine on the form of Communion, as affirmed by the Council of Trent: they were first to be reminded that they receive the whole Christ when they participate in the sacrament even under one kind alone, and thus are not then deprived of any grace necessary for salvation. The circumstances in which this was permitted were initially very restricted, but were gradually extended. Regular distribution of Communion under both kinds requires the permission of the bishop, but bishops in some countries have given blanket permission for the administration of Communion in this way.

Liturgical orientation

Altar of Santa Cecilia in Trastevere, as arranged in 1700. It is one of many churches in Rome whose altar, placed at the western end of the church, was positioned so that the priest necessarily faced east, and so towards the people, when celebrating Mass. The first Roman churches all had the entrance to the east.[31]

From the middle of the 17th century, almost all new Latin-rite altars were built against a wall or backed by a reredos, with a tabernacle placed on the altar or inserted into the reredos.[32] This meant that the priest turned to the people, putting his back to the altar, only for a few short moments at Mass. However, the Tridentine Missal itself speaks of celebrating versus populum,[33] and gives corresponding instructions for the priest when performing actions that in the other orientation involved turning around in order to face the people.[34]

It has been said that the reason the Pope always faced the people when celebrating Mass in St Peter's was that early Christians faced eastward when praying and, due to the difficult terrain, the basilica was built with its apse to the west. Some have attributed this orientation in other early Roman churches to the influence of Saint Peter's.[35] However, the arrangement whereby the apse with the altar is at the west end of the church and the entrance on the east is found also in Roman churches contemporary with Saint Peter's (such as the original Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls) that were under no such constraints of terrain, and the same arrangement remained the usual one until the 6th century.[36] In this early layout, the people were situated in the side aisles of the church, not in the central nave. While the priest faced both the altar and east throughout the Mass, the people would face the altar (from the sides) until the high point of the Mass, where they would then turn to face east along with the priest.[37]

In several churches in Rome, it was physically impossible, even before the twentieth-century liturgical reforms, for the priest to celebrate Mass facing away from the people, because of the presence, immediately in front of the altar, of the "confession" (Latin: confessio), an area sunk below floor level to enable people to come close to the tomb of the saint buried beneath the altar. The best-known such "confession" is that in Saint Peter's Basilica, but many other churches in Rome have the same architectural feature, including at least one, the present Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls, which is oriented in such a way that the priest faces west when celebrating Mass.

Without requiring priests to face the people throughout the Mass, the guidelines established by the current Roman Missal request that versus populum orientation be made an option: "The altar should be built apart from the wall, in such a way that it is possible to walk around it easily and that Mass can be celebrated at it facing the people, which is desirable wherever possible."[38] Accordingly, altars that obliged the priest to face away from the congregation have generally been moved away from the apse wall or reredos, or, where this was unsuitable, a new freestanding altar has been built. This, however, is not universal, and in some churches and chapels it is physically impossible for the priest to face the people throughout the Mass.

The rubrics of the Roman Missal now prescribe that the priest should face the people at six points of the Mass.[39] The priest celebrating the Tridentine Mass was required to face the people, turning if necessary his back to the altar, eight times.[40] The priest is still expressly directed to face the altar at exactly the same points as in the Tridentine Mass. His position in relation to the altar determines, as before, whether facing the altar means also facing the people.

Repositioning of the tabernacle

In the second half of the 17th century it became customary to place the tabernacle on the main altar of the church. When a priest celebrates Mass on the same side as the people at such an altar, he sometimes necessarily turns his back directly to the tabernacle, as when he turns to the people at the Orate, fratres. While there is no stipulation forbidding that the tabernacle remain on the principal altar of the church—even should the priest say Mass facing the people—the revised Roman Missal states that it is "more appropriate as a sign that on an altar on which Mass is celebrated there not be a tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved," and there that it is "preferable that the tabernacle be located":

a. either in the sanctuary, apart from the altar of celebration, in an appropriate form and place, not excluding its being positioned on an old altar no longer used for celebration;
b. or even in some chapel suitable for the private adoration and prayer of the faithful and organically connected to the church and readily noticeable to the Christian faithful.[41]

The Missal does, however, direct that the tabernacle be situated "in a part of the church that is truly noble, prominent, conspicuous, worthily decorated, and suitable for prayer."[42]

Other matters

A procession is now allowed at the Offertory or Presentation of the Gifts, when bread, wine, and water are brought to the altar. The homily has been made an integral part of the Mass, instead of being treated as an adjunct, and the ancient Prayer of the Faithful has been restored. The exchange of a sign of peace before Communion, previously limited to the clergy at High Mass, is permitted (not made obligatory) at every Mass, even for the laity. "As for the actual sign of peace to be given, the manner is to be established by Conferences of Bishops in accordance with the culture and customs of the peoples. However, it is appropriate that each person, in a sober manner, offer the sign of peace only to those who are nearest" (GIRM 82). "While the Sign of Peace is being given, it is permissible to say, The peace of the Lord be with you always, to which the reply is Amen (GIRM 154). In countries of European tradition, a simple clasping of hands is most common, though sometimes family members will exchange a kiss on the cheek, especially in Latin countries. In countries such as India, the sign is given by bowing with joined hands.

Criticism of the revision

There are two distinct forms of criticisms of the liturgical reform: criticisms of the text of the revised Missal, and criticisms of ways in which the rite has been celebrated in practice.

Criticisms of the text of the Missal

Critics of the revised liturgy (many of whom are traditionalist Catholics) claim that its specifically Catholic content is markedly deficient compared with that of the liturgy as it existed prior to the revision. The more moderate critics believe that the defects can be rectified by a "reform of the reform" rather than by a wholesale return to the Tridentine Mass. Others regard the revised rite as so seriously defective that it is displeasing to God, or even objectively sacrilegious.[43]

Critics make the following claims:

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, later Pope Benedict XVI, said of abuses in celebrating the liturgy: “In the place of liturgy as the fruit of development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over the centuries and replaced it – as in a manufacturing process – with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product.”[44][45] But of the revision of the Roman Missal he wrote: "There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture."[46]

Similarly, Pope John Paul II said of the Paul VI revision of the liturgy: "This work was undertaken in accordance with the conciliar principles of fidelity to tradition and openness to legitimate development, and so it is possible to say that the reform of the Liturgy is strictly traditional and 'in accordance with the ancient usage of the holy Fathers'."[47]

Some critics believe that any liturgy celebrated in a language in which the phrase "pro multis" (Latin for "for (the) many") in the words of consecration of the Paul VI Roman Missal was translated as "for all", as in the initial English translation, was sacramentally invalid and brought about no transubstantiation. In a circular issued on 17 October 2006,[48] the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments recalled the 1974 declaration by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that there is no doubt whatsoever regarding the validity of Masses celebrated using "for all" as a translation of "pro multis", since "for all" corresponds to a correct interpretation of Christ's intention expressed in the words of the consecration, and since it is a dogma of the Catholic faith that Christ died on the Cross for all. However, the Congregation pointed out that "for all" is not a literal translation of the words that Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24 report that Jesus used at the Last Supper and of the words used in the Latin text of the Mass: "for all" is rather an explanation of the sort that belongs properly to catechesis. The Congregation told the episcopal conferences to translate the words "pro multis" more literally. The revised English translation therefore has "for many" in place of "for all".

Whether or not the liturgical changes (together with the other changes in the Church that followed the Second Vatican Council) have caused the loss of faith that has occurred in Western countries is disputed.

Some traditionalist Catholics argue that the promulgation of the revised liturgy was legally invalid due to alleged technical deficiencies in the wording of Missale Romanum.[49]

Some of them claim that the changes in the Roman Rite of Mass were made in order to make it acceptable to non-Catholics.[50] French philosopher Jean Guitton said that Pope Paul VI's intention was to assimilate the Catholic liturgy to the Protestant:[51] "The intention of Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy — but what is curious is that Paul VI did that to get as close as possible to the Protestant Lord’s Supper ... there was with Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or least to correct, or at least to relax, what was too Catholic, in the traditional sense, in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist Mass."[52][53]

Criticisms of practices

Criticisms have also been directed against practices followed in the celebration of the revised rite. Some of these are authorised by official Church documents (such as the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) and the Code of Canon Law), whereas other have not. Officially approved practices which have been criticized include the following:

Other practices which arose because of changes of taste are criticized; These include the use of plainer vestments with simple designs and no lace, and innovative architectural designs for churches and sanctuaries. Criticism is also directed at the removal of kneelers and altar rails from some churches, and the use of non-traditional music, sometimes accompanied by percussion instruments.

Many critics regret the general abandonment of the use of the Latin language and Gregorian Chant, and allege that this development was not authorized by the Second Vatican Council. The Council's Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, stated both that "since the use of the mother tongue ... frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended," and that "particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites".[59] Redemptionis Sacramentum[60] confirms an option to use Latin, but some view an option, instead of an obligation, as insufficient to preserve the language.

On Gregorian chant, the adaptation of which to languages other than Latin is widely considered to be aesthetically defective, Sacrosanctum Concilium[8] said: "The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services. But other kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations, so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action".

Some critics see these changes as due to, or leading to, a loss of reverence. Some of them would consider the revised liturgy acceptable, if some or all of these changes were removed or were addressed though catechesis. However, many traditionalist Catholics regard the revised rite as inherently unacceptable.

Revision of the English translation

On 28 March 2001, the Holy See issued the Instruction Liturgiam authenticam.[61] This included the requirement that, in translations of the liturgical texts from the official Latin originals, "the original text, insofar as possible, must be translated integrally and in the most exact manner, without omissions or additions in terms of their content, and without paraphrases or glosses. Any adaptation to the characteristics or the nature of the various vernacular languages is to be sober and discreet." The following year, the third typical edition[62] of the revised Roman Missal in Latin was released.

These two texts made clear the need for a new official English translation of the Roman Missal, particularly because the previous one was at some points an adaptation rather than strictly a translation. An example is the rendering of the response "Et cum spiritu tuo" (literally, "And with your spirit") as "And also with you".

A fresh English translation, prepared by the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) was adopted by English-speaking episcopal conferences and received confirmation from the Holy See.

The text of this revised English translation of the Order of Mass is available,[63] and a comparison between it and that at then-present in use in the United States is given under the heading "Changes in the People's Parts".[64]

Most episcopal conferences set the first Sunday in Advent (27 November) 2011 as the date when the new translation would come into use. However, the Southern African Catholic Bishops' Conference (Botswana, South Africa, Swaziland) put into effect the changes in the people's parts of the revised English translation of the Order of Mass[65] from 28 November 2008, when the Missal as a whole was not yet available. Protests were voiced on grounds of content[66][67][68] and because it meant that Southern Africa was thus out of line with other English-speaking areas.[69] One bishop claimed that the English-speaking conferences should have withstood the Holy See's insistence on a more literal translation.[70] However, when in February 2009 the Holy See declared that the change should have waited until the whole of the Missal had been translated, the bishops conference appealed, with the result that those parishes that had adopted the new translation of the Order of Mass were directed to continue using it, while those that had not were told to await further instructions before doing so.[71]

Names used for the Mass of Paul VI

In its official documents, the Church identifies the forms of the Roman Rite Mass by the editions of the Roman Missal used in celebrating them. Thus, in his motu proprio Summorum Pontificum of 7 July 2007, Pope Benedict XVI referred to this form of the Roman Rite Mass by linking it with "the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970".[72]

The names "Mass of Paul VI" and "Pauline Mass" are equivalent to this.

In advance of the 1969 decision on the form of the revision of the liturgy, a preliminary draft of two sections of the Roman Missal was published. The section containing the unvarying part of the Mass is called Ordo Missae (Order of Mass) since at least 1634.[73] In a speech he gave in 1976, Pope Paul VI unremarkably referred to this revised section as "novus Ordo Missae" (the new Order of Mass), novus being Latin for "new".[74] Later, some began to use "Novus Ordo Missae", or simply "Novus Ordo", as a specific composite term for the entirety of the revised rite of Mass. Traditionalist Catholics often use it in a pejorative manner, and sometimes employ it as a blanket condemnatory term for the present-day Church ("the Novus Ordo Church"). However, "Novus Ordo" appears in no official Church document as a term for the revised form of the Roman Rite Mass.

In his letter to bishops which accompanied his 2007 motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, Pope Benedict XVI wrote that "the Missal published by Paul VI and then republished in two subsequent editions by John Paul II, obviously is and continues to be the normal Form – the Forma ordinaria – of the Eucharistic Liturgy".[75] Since then, the term "ordinary form" is often used to distinguish this form of the Roman Rite of Mass from the Tridentine Mass, the 1962 edition of which Pope Benedict declared in his motu proprio to be an authorized "extraordinary form".[76]


  1. "The Missal published by Paul VI and then republished in two subsequent editions by John Paul II, obviously is and continues to be the normal Form – the Forma ordinaria – of the Eucharistic Liturgy" (Letter of Pope Benedict XVI to the Bishops on the occasion of the publication of Summorum Pontificum, paragraph 5).
  2. Motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, article 1
  3. Date of publication of the papal bull Quo primum and the first edition of the Tridentine Missal
  4. Pius XII. "Mediator Dei". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  5. Pascal Thuillier, "Saint Pius X: Reformer of the Liturgy" in The Angelus, September 2003
  6. "Liturgical Revolution". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  7. "Encyclical ''Mediator Dei'', 62-64". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  8. 1 2 3 "Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum Concilium". 1963-12-04. Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  9. "''Inter oecumenici''". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  10. "''Tres abhinc annos''". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  11. "''Ecclesiae semper''". 1965-03-07. Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  12. Christiaan W. Kappes, "Consilium's liturgical reform of the Missal of St. Pius V: "Normative Mass" (1967) before the "Novus Ordo Missae" (1969)
  13. Kappes, p. 3
  14. "Archbishop Lefebvre gathered together a group of 12 theologians who wrote under his direction, A Short Critical Study of the Novus Ordo Missae often called the Ottaviani Intervention." A Short History of the SSPX
  15. Hardon, John (1971). Christianity in the twentieth century. Doubleday.
  16. Coomaraswamy, Rama (1981). The destruction of the Christian tradition. Perennial Books.
  17. Ottaviani, Alfredo (1971). The Ottaviani Intervention: Short Critical Study of the New Order of Mass. TAN Books & Publishers.
  18. text of the Short Critical Study
  19. Christophe Geffroy and Philippe Maxence, Enquête sur la messe traditionnelle (with preface by Cardinal Alfons Maria Stickler), p. 21).
  20. Smolarski, Dennis (2003). The General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 1969-2002: A Commentary. Collegeville (MN): Liturgical Press. ISBN 0814629369.
  21. Missale Romanum. The internal references (SC) are from Sacrosanctum Concilium.
  22. The Apostle Paul typically concludes his letters to his missionary communities with an admonition to the faithful to greet each other with the kiss of peace.
  23. Felix Just, S.J. (2009-01-02). "Lectionary Statistics". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  24. "Apostolic Constitution ''Veterum sapientia''". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  25. Barry Hudock, ''The Eucharistic Prayer: A User's Guide'' (Liturgical Press 2010 ISBN 978-0-8146-3287-1), p. 34. 2010-10-15. Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  26. "Daniel J. Castellano, The Composition of the Second Eucharistic Prayer". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  27. Thomas A. McMahon, ''The Mass Explained'' (Carillon Books 1978 ISBN 978-0-89310-042-1), p. 63. Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  28. "''Summa Theologica'' III, q. 80, a. 12". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  29. 1 2 "Patrick Toner, "Communion under Both Kinds" in ''Catholic Encyclopedia'' 1908". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  30. "Council of Trent, Session XXI, The Doctrine of Communion under both kinds and the Communion of little children, chapters I and III and canon 2". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  31. Helen Dietz, "The Biblical Roots of Church Orientation" in Sacred Architecture, vol. 10. Retrieved 20 July 2013.
  32. The edition of the Roman Missal revised and promulgated by Pope Pius V in 1570 (see Tridentine Mass) still did not envisage placing the tabernacle on an altar; it laid down instead that the altar card containing some of the principal prayers of the Mass should rest against a cross placed midway on the altar (Rubricae generales Missalis, XX - De Praeparatione Altaris, et Ornamentorum eius).
  33. Latin versus does not mean "against", as does English versus; it means "turned, toward, from past participle of vertere, to turn" (The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition, 2000)
  34. Ritus servandus in celebratione Missae, V, 3
  35. "For whatever reason it was done, one can also see this arrangement (whereby the priest faced the people) in a whole series of church buildings within Saint Peter's direct sphere of influence"(Joseph Ratzinger: The Spirit of the Liturgy)
  36. "When Christians in fourth-century Rome could first freely begin to build churches, they customarily located the sanctuary towards the west end of the building in imitation of the sanctuary of the Jerusalem Temple. Although in the days of the Jerusalem Temple the high priest indeed faced east when sacrificing on Yom Kippur, the sanctuary within which he stood was located at the west end of the Temple. The Christian replication of the layout and the orientation of the Jerusalem Temple helped to dramatize the eschatological meaning attached to the sacrificial death of Jesus the High Priest in the Epistle to the Hebrews" (The Biblical Roots of Church Orientation by Helen Dietz).
  37. "Msgr. Klaus Gamber has pointed out that although in these early west-facing Roman basilicas the people stood in the side naves and faced the centrally located altar for the first portion of the service, nevertheless at the approach of the consecration they all turned to face east towards the open church doors, the same direction the priest faced throughout the Eucharistic liturgy" (The Biblical Roots of Church Orientation by Helen Dietz]).
  38. General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 299
  39. The six times are:
    • When giving the opening greeting (GIRM 124);
    • When giving the invitation to pray, "Orate, fratres" (GIRM 146);
    • When giving the greeting of peace, "Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum" (GIRM 154);
    • When displaying the consecrated Host (or Host and Chalice) before Communion and saying: "Ecce Agnus Dei" (GIRM 157);
    • When inviting to pray ("Oremus") before the postcommunion prayer (GIRM 165);
    • When giving the final blessing (Ordo Missae 141).
  40. The eight times are:
    • When greeting the people ("Dominus vobiscum") before the collect (Ritus servandus in celebratione Missae, V, 1);
    • When greeting the people ("Dominus vobiscum") before the offertory rite (Ritus servandus, VII, 1);
    • When giving the invitation to pray, "Orate, fratres" (Ritus servandus, VII, 7);
    • Twice before giving Communion to others, first when saying the two prayers after the Confiteor, and again while displaying a consecrated Host and saying "Ecce Agnus Dei" (Ritus servandus, X, 6);
    • When greeting the people ("Dominus vobiscum") before the postcommunion prayer (Ritus servandus, XI, 1);
    • When saying "Ite, missa est" (Ritus servandus, XI, 1);
    • When giving the last part of the final blessing (Ritus servandus, XII, 1).
    Though the priest was required to face the people and spoke words addressed to them, he was forbidden to look at them, and was instructed to turn to them "dimissis ad terram oculis" ("with eyes turned down to the ground") Ritus servandus, V, 1; VII, 7; XII, 1.
  41. General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 315 (footnotes and citations omitted).
  42. General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 314
  43. (PDF), a publication of the Society of St. Pius X, a canonically irregular association of priests.
  44. Rowland, Tracey (2008). Ratzinger's faith: the theology of Pope Benedict XVI. Oxford University Press.
  45. Kocik, Thomas (2003). The reform of the reform?: a liturgical debate : reform or return. Ignatius Press.
  46. Letter to the Bishops on the occasion of the publication of Summorum Pontificum
  47. "Apostolic Letter ''Vicesimus quintus annus''". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  48. "Letter to Heads of Episcopal Conferences". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  49. "Dossier on the Novus Ordo Missae: August 1997 Newsletter". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  50. Studies in comparative religion, Volumes 1314. '. Perennial Books. 1979.
  51. Archived 25 September 2009 at the Wayback Machine.
  52. Laurent Cleenewerck, ''His Broken Body: Understanding and Healing the Schism Between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches'' (Euclid University Press 2008|), p. 421. Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  53. Francisco Radecki, Dominic Radecki, CMRI, Times: The Twenty General Councils of the Catholic Church and Vatican II and Its Aftermath (St. Joseph's Media 2004), page not specified
  54. I.e., deacons, priests and bishops.
  55. General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 101
  56. Redemptionis Sacramentum 154160
  57. "Letter from the Congregation for Divine Worship". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  58. "Female Altar Servers". 2004-02-03. Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  59. Section 36. "Particular law" refers to decisions by national or regional Episcopal Conferences, ratified by the Holy See.
  60. "Liturgiam authenticam". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  61. The "typical edition" of a liturgical text is that to which editions by other publishers must conform.
  63. "Roman Missal". USCCB. 2011-11-27. Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  64. A pastoral response to the faithful with regard to the new English Language Mass translations Archived 8 March 2009 at the Wayback Machine.
  65. "''Liturgical Anger'', an editorial by Gunther Simmermacher". 2008-12-24. Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  66. "Letter by Fr John Conversett MCCJ". 2008-12-24. Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  67. Coyle IHM. Mass translations: A missed opportunity
  68. SABC response 3 February 2009 Archived 16 July 2011 at the Wayback Machine.
  69. "Letter by Bishop Dowling". 2009-01-18. Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  70. Clarification on the Implementation of the New English Mass Translation in South Africa Archived 16 July 2011 at the Wayback Machine.
  71. "Motu proprio ''Summorum Pontificum'', article 2". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  72. In the original Tridentine Missal published by Pope Pius V in 1570 (page 233 of the first printing of that Missal facsimile reproduction in Missale Romanum. Editio Princeps (1570), Libreria Editrice Vaticana 1998, ISBN 88-209-2547-8) this section was called Ordinarium Missae (the Ordinary of the Mass); but at least since Pope Urban VIII's revision in 1634, and possibly even Pope Clement VIII's in 1604, the term used is Ordo Missae (the Order of Mass).
  73. "Concistoro segreto per la nomina di venti Cardinali, 24 maggio 1976". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  74. "Letter to the Bishops that accompanies the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  75. "Motu proprio ''Summorum Pontificum'', article 1". Retrieved 2012-10-15.
A) Revision of the Roman Missal
B) History
C) Analysis
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 11/17/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.