Vatican Issues Two Decrees: More Prefaces and Recent Saints in the TLM

Today, on the Feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its capacity as the successor to the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, issued two decrees updating the traditional Missale Romanum (1962): Quo Magis, by which seven prefaces are added, and Cum Sanctissima, by which provision is made for the celebration of Mass in honor of saints canonized after 1960. While the decrees themselves have been published only in Latin so far, the Congregation has offered informative “presentations” in several languages, including English (here and here). If you are looking for an accurate summary of all of these documents, with apposite quotations, I recommend Gregory DiPippo’s post at New Liturgical Movement.

I want to emphasize that the following are my initial reactions and observations. My first impressions are favorable, but the matter is complex and will need time for pondering and digesting. The first thing I would counsel is therefore patience. No one needs to panic that this is a “Trojan Horse” that threatens to destroy the integrity of the Vetus Ordo. The decrees look, to me, carefully thought through, and I know for a fact that they were drafted only after extensive consultation with individuals and organizations representing the interests of traditional Catholics.

1) Thirteen years after Pope Benedict XVI mentioned (in 2007) that the old missal might be expanded by new prefaces and new saints’ feasts, the CDF has now announced the way in which this can occur. The provisions bend over backwards to avoid stomping on anything already in the MR1962 general calendar. The principle of commemorations is generously applied (that is, no saint or feast or vigil will ever get “dropped,” and a lengthy list of 3rd-class feasts are declared inviolable). Put simply: no saint is removed from the calendar or bumped out by any other saint.

2) The celebration of saints canonized post-1960 is altogether optional: the Vatican is not requiring but permitting (e.g.) St. Maximilian Kolbe, St. Padre Pio, St. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross, or St. Elizabeth of the Trinity to be celebrated or commemorated on their appointed feastdays. We have to bear in mind that a very great number of saints canonized after 1960 lived, in fact, decades or centuries before the liturgical reform and are equally saints of the Tridentine Mass as any of the saints currently honored in the old general calendar. Indeed, Padre Pio, as a recent book details, was vehemently opposed to the liturgical reform as it played out in the 1960s until his death in 1968. We should bear in mind that the calendar of the traditional Roman rite is extremely “saint-friendly” and has always heartily accumulated feasts and commemorations, in contrast to the tradition-scorning mentality reflected in the general calendar for the Novus Ordo rolled out by Paul VI in 1969, from which over 300 saints (!) had been removed. Our attitude should be the opposite. We might echo the famous ad campaign: “Got Saints?”

(Admittedly, the thought of a well-meaning young priest who knows no better commemorating “St. Paul VI” at the TLM is enough to make my viscera twist and my flesh crawl, but I find it hard to imagine that any well-informed priest who has the “pulse” of a traditional congregation would even consider offering a TLM in honor of controversial saints of more recent times, let alone actually do it.)

3) Seven new prefaces have been added, but of these, three are neo-Gallican prefaces already contained in many editions of the MR1962, with their use now being unrestricted (oddly, the proper preface for Advent is not listed, yet it would remain permissible under the prior conditions), while the other four are based on ancient sources and have been redacted to harmonize with the other Tridentine prefaces in their phraseology. The texts of these four prefaces have not yet been released.

4) It took thirteen years to reach these decisions, and now that the decrees are published, the possibilities are repeatedly noted to be optional. This is how liturgical reform should be done: as Gregory DiPippo likes to say, “run the flag up the flagpole and see who salutes; if no one salutes, take it down.” This is a far cry from the slap-dash draconian imposition of the Novus Ordo under Paul VI. In fact, one might say the decrees represent a gentle encouragement for organic development: “Here are possibilities; use as they may be helpful,” and takes away the reproach that the MR1962 is frozen in pack ice.

From this point of view, the new provisions fit well with the worldwide movement to recover the pre-55 Holy Week and other glories of the old rite that were damaged under Pope Pius XII. We are looking at a living liturgy, not something that exists only in books printed in a certain arbitrary year, reflecting the mentality of the liturgical reformers of that period.

5) The decree about saints subtly notes that, on the one hand, it is to be left to the discretion of superiors (not to the celebrant on the spur of the moment) which provisions will be utilized; and on the other hand, that the traditional Roman rite has seen optional sanctoral and devotional Masses in the past: “throughout the post-tridentine period, and up till the rubrical reform carried out by Pope St. Pius X, the calendar included no less that twenty-five such so-called ad libitum feasts.”

Although it is quite true to say that one of the great boasts of the traditional liturgy is its stability, fixity, constancy, and predictability, it is also true that there have always been minor options at the discretion or choice of the celebrant. Some Commons feature alternative readings. Some saints can be either celebrated in full or mentioned as commemorations in a repeated Sunday formulary. Customs exist for the use of votive Masses, but as the very name implies, “votive” is a free-will offering; no one needs to say this or that Votive Mass on a given feria.

However, such small options fit into a larger pattern: once the priest commits himself to a given Mass, everything is spelled out ahead of time; there is no room for “pastoral adaptations,” for a “do-it-yourself” liturgy built up from modular blocks. In this respect, the new decrees do nothing to modify the strengths of the traditional Mass, nor do they bring it in any way closer to the Novus Ordo.

All this will need further reflection, to be sure, but I appreciate the modesty, discretion, and care that went into the decrees and provisions.