Practical Steps for Transitioning from the 1962 to the Pre-1955 Roman Rite — Part 4: Postures and the Guise of a Conclusion

Click the following links to see the earlier parts in this series: Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

American traditionalists like to sound off about how there are no strict rubrics for the lay faithful. This is true as far as it goes, but virtually all authorities (such as editors of hand missals and of ceremonials) agreed that if the people did anything, they should follow the rubrics for the clerics. In other words, rubrics are normative, if not strictly binding. Of course, one cannot do the impossible and is excused from the difficult, but we self-selecting traditional Catholics can do better for the greater glory of God and for the edification of other faithful.

It would be especially good to work on the posture of the acolytes, which goes hand-in-hand with that of the choir at key moments like the Canon or the orations on certain days of the year, most often at the Requiem Mass, since this is sung more often in parishes than the ferial Masses. This in turn will influence the people’s gestures such that they correspond better to the liturgical action, better drawing the distinction between festal or dominical and penitential.

But there is one rubric that does demand attention. The liturgical books could not be clearer that, on Good Friday, the priest, the ministers, and servers take off their shoes and proceed to the back. They genuflect on both knees three times before kissing the cross. The faithful do exactly the same. This is something that was detested by Thomas Cranmer at the English Reformation; we would do well to carry out perhaps the most elaborate form of adoration in the Roman rite, which is not known (unlike the Byzantine liturgy) for its full-body prostrations.

As to the last elements, the pontifical ceremonies and the ritual, the former is out of pastors’ hands unless they find a willing bishop, although the pontifical Mass itself has very few changes except for those made in the entire 1962 liturgy, e.g. the omission of the Judica me, etc. on certain days. The Pontificale Romanum and the Cæremoniale Episcoporum govern that form of the Mass, to which no changes were made, apparently due to error or oversight on the part of Rome. Thus, one is unquestionably free to celebrate using these older books. Plus, you either do a pontifical ceremony, or you do nothing. There is no middle ground of transition.

Archbishop Sample celebrating Candlemas in Rome with the traditional ceremonies; it is worthwhile to invite a friendly bishop to rediscover the riches of his heritage.

The Ritual presents particular challenges, since the vernacular editions were sometimes substantially different in the 1950s and in 1962, and the permissions granted to all priests (versus bishops or religious of an order or congregation) did not exist before; however, if one acquiesces to using the Latin alone, then one can use virtually any edition for the ordinary prayers and blessings; those seriously interested should follow the Hand Missal History project, which promises to detail the history of the vernacular in the rituals over the last several centuries.

It bears repeating that there is no one pace to match, one calendar to follow, although I personally think that the order outlined in this four-part series is sound and can be adapted most easily to the needs of parishes, religious communities, and seminaries of societies of apostolic life, for private usage if not public usage in these difficult times. It’s not my neck on the block, so moving glacially would not especially disturb me, although I hope that the actual experience of celebrating the traditional Holy Week, or even watching it online, and reading articles and books on the pre-55 Roman Rite, has by now convinced even the most reluctant traditional or trad-adjacent priest of the supremacy of the majestic traditional Roman Rite celebrated without the ever-accelerating and ever-burgeoning changes of the twentieth century.

I should address some final concerns. I advocate for celebrating the pre-Pius XII liturgy because it is the fullest approved expression of the Roman rite following the reforms of Saint Pius X; this is important, because the John XXIII breviary has at its heart the Pius X psalter. This is the familiar office for traditionally-minded clergy, and there are many beloved things in these liturgical books, particularly the 1927 Mass and Office of the Sacred Heart.

In addressing arguments from both progressives and conservatives, we acknowledge that the 1960 rubrics have the flaws which we already criticize in the Novus Ordo. These flaws prompt us to take up the non-deformed books, yet without being in a situation where we are, as it were, making things up on the fly, as we go along; for that would be just a different version of tinkeritis or optionitis.

Integrity is important; we should not try to make up a new calendar, a new system of precedence, or a new breviary with the Jubilee rubrics of 1900 (and so, with the historical cursus psalmorum)—on our own authority. We should not follow some hybrid forever out of mere convenience, or flip-flop between rubrics. Those who are serious should restore the ceremonies and follow the rubrics of a definite edition such as the 1939 missal, and then stick to it.

In case this was not clear, I reiterate that the times are strange, if not dangerous. Who knows what will happen tomorrow? This is an evergreen question, but with certain technological developments, both bishops and Roman curial officials can, and do, micromanage, with ease. Nor should people do things which gravely offend them or which require disobedience in a sort of slimy way. I encourage people—the clergy above all—to do these things quietly and with great love for the Lord and for their people, but without dissimulation or other troublesome behaviors that cannot bring victory.

I pray that one day, every community that currently uses or has previously used the usus antiquior will be able one day to do so according to the integral editions when the right moment comes. Until then, we take it step by step, brick by brick.