Implementing the Traditional (Pre-55) Roman Holy Week, Part 2 — Holy Thursday, Good Friday, and Holy Saturday

(Continuing from Part 1.)

Holy Thursday

You probably have most of the materials needed for Thursday even if you have never done the 1955 Holy Week, only that of Paul VI; if you do not have an ombrellino, silk can be placed over a more ordinary umbrella… the veil for the second chalice really ought to be plain white, and you need wide ribbon, but a white chalice veil turned inside-out does in a pinch. Practice tying a bow beforehand, and make sure that the ribbon is suitably wide, lest your two left thumbs get in the way.

The Pange lingua gloriosi ought to be sung in alternation (cantors-all or men-women); this becomes particularly acute when the people are used to intoning themselves only part of it and not really knowing the melody as well as they think, having learned it orally. But hopefully no one insists on going on to Tantum ergo when either one must wait briefly or return to the second verse… Some instruction may be needed; otherwise, more musically advanced parishes may choose a polyphonic setting of the text to conclude the hymn.

Remember that it is not especially Roman for the thurifers to ever walk backwards. It is also easier to walk the normal way. When arranging the altar of repose, think of your future selves; flowers do not belong right in front of the altar. While the ideal altar of repose is temporary, as splendid as it ought to be, and does not use a tabernacle, but rather a sort of urn, it must lock, and the altar of repose needs to be reasonably out of the way. A side altar must do for many of us, and it can be quite splendid as shown in another example from the Institute of Christ the King. 

If the Mandatum is sung, I personally do not feel scrupulous about singing any particular antiphons and especially all of them. The music is meant to cover the time of the washing, nothing more or less, but Holy Thursday presents a special case. Choral enthusiasts have heard or even performed the Maurice Duruflé harmonization outside of the liturgy. The chant (harmonized or otherwise) is popular, well-known, beloved. It is fairly easy for experienced congregations to join at least the response portion, with the schola taking the verses. This makes it hard to insist on singing another antiphon first; one certainly will not have time after.

But should the Mandatum be done at all? It depends. Some pastors in the West (Europe and North America) are sensitive to not only not having ecclesiastical subordinates as does a bishop or religious superior, or at least the dean of a cathedral chapter, but that the otherwise natural replacement are children, not the men of the parish, and so they do not wish to touch the feet of the altar servers, at least the minors. Since most servers are boys, or at least will be some part of the contingent necessary for the Mandatum rite, then it is easy to justify omitting the rite. It is also optional. Now, most of this is optional as it is, but if one had to cut one thing from this week, it would be the Mandatum, if it meant preserving everything else including Vespers of Thursday and Friday.

Moving on to the stripping of the altars: my reading is that ps. 21 and its antiphon are sung recto tono, not with the chant from Good Friday’s Matins. The psalm need not be repeated, nor the repetition of antiphon delayed, if the carpet, some of the candlesticks, etc. are not removed promptly, so long as the ministers have finished removing the altar cloths and the major part of the work is completed.

More considerations on the Divine Office will follow, but I would strongly encourage you to sing, even recto tono, Vespers after the main liturgy on Thursday and Friday; on all three days of the Triduum, one could celebrate None beforehand, although this is not strictly required.

Good Friday

One does not need black falls for the legilia or covers for the missal. Everything is “naked” on this day. But what applies to purple folded chasubles applies to the black worn on this sacred day. The Good Friday celebrant’s chasuble should be even more splendid than usual if possible.

If you have adoration lasting into the night of Thursday, ending at midnight per the rubrics common to all variations of the Roman rite, then you will likely wish to change the candles and followers at the altar of repose before beginning the Mass of the Pre-Sanctified.

The choirmaster must work with the celebrant to give the right pitches for the unveiling of the cross. Try to roll with what he sings, not what you planned to sing.

Just as on Sunday and on Thursday, the music for the adoration covers the adoration itself. It need not extend beyond this, and should not, only to the extent that a chant should finish logically and polyphony should finish in its entirety, omitting subsequent chants or polyphonic settings. For example, one may end the Reproaches with one final “Popule meus,” one should repeat the antiphon Crucem tuam, and one should sing the (entire) Crux fidelis, but one need not sing all of the chants just to sing them, if adoration has concluded.

The books are clear: the people adore by genuflecting on both knees three times as they approach the single large crucifix placed on a cushion. Permission was given, admittedly, to pass down the communion rail a crucifix which essentially eliminates this creeping to the cross. But it happens once a year. It replaces communion on this day. This rite was broken in bits first in 1955, and in 1970, doing what Thomas Cranmer and his ilk wished to do but as it turns out from the inside. Unless there is an unusually large congregation (not realistic in most churches attached to the traditional rite and to the traditional Holy Week ceremonies), I would not recommend skipping the creeping of the cross in favor of the permission to move down the altar rail with a crucifix to be kissed by the faithful, but this requires coordination with ushers.

Should the people remove their shoes? I am in favor of this, and it may happen anyway, as they copy the clergy.

The rest of the rite is quite straightforward, so long as the Vexilla Regis begins only when the procession departs to return to the main altar. I hardly wish to touch the prayer for the Jews, but most clerics will probably use the 2007 prayer preceded by the genuflection as with the other prayers (keep in mind that this is the original pre-Carolingian practice).

Make sure you know that the tool used to light and extinguish candles is brought to the altar of repose for the actual Mass of the Presanctified when candles are lit at the same time that the cross is adored and, importantly, that it is returned to the sacristy before Tenebrae.

Holy Saturday

The triple candle is not easy to make. I do not make it myself. Various ways of heating the wax to twist three candles together including a sous-vide machine and using a weight system may work. I find that it is most in the spirit of things to have three candles in one, as opposed to three candles in a candelabra attached to a pole.

If possible, I encourage using a different dalmatic than the one for the Mass as seen here in photos from Saint Mary’s Oratory in Wausau, Wisconsin. A nice lampas could work too. The priest’s chasuble for the vigil itself is also especially striking.

Prepare the list of readers in advance. Some readings can be done by a chanter from the schola, but others are followed by tracts or are preceded by one. I do not think that forcing at most a handful of clerics to sing twelve readings is an ideal to which we should aspire. Laymen who can sing should be pressed into service.

For the procession and the blessing of the font, it may be necessary to begin the tract as the celebrant prepares and the candle is removed. Otherwise, the tract will be so long with the ministers left waiting at the font. If the Palestrina setting is sung, there is a second part in polyphony, or one may sing the chant.

The Litany is tricky. First, it seems that it may be started as the celebrant begins to process from the baptistry; he need not be prostrating at this point, if he blessed the font. Otherwise, it makes sense to wait, when the font is not blessed.

All of the invocations are doubled, that is, from “Pater de caelis…miserere nobis” to “Santa Maria, ora pro nobis” all the way to the end of the Litany, with the invocations “Ut…te rogamus audi nos” (possibly — probably — excluding the Agnus Dei; see below). This is entirely foreign to anyone used to the 1960 or 1970 rubrics. I find it best for cantors to sing and to reply to themselves, that is, they sing all of the first “Santa Maria, ora pro nobis” by themselves, and so on and so forth. Then the people only reply to the second invocation. Why? In part, to not mess up and to stay together. The chant books have breath marks omitted from missals in the last set, and then the people clearly hear the plural invocations of the saints (some pairs of saints invoked together, the “All ye…” concluding each section…).

Further, the cantors alone should restart at “Agnus Dei…” and in my ideal world, they sing until “Parce nobis, Domine” etc. The last invocation is not sung with the same melody as in Mass XVIII, so it needs to be taught to the congregation ahead of Holy Week. (One can send links via email newsletters and the various apps for parish communications; it might be helpful to do a series with recordings. A handful of parishioners in the pews who are prepared can make a difference.)  I cannot tell from the rubrics or from the ceremonials if the Agnus Dei strophes or the “Christe, audi nos”/“Christe, exaudi nos” are also doubled. To me, I think that they logically are not, but everything else is, so it feels inconsistent. In any case, some instruction on the chant of the Litany is needed.

The pitch will almost inevitably drop when doubling. I recommend starting on B flat or at least A and to correct the falling pitch at each new set (certainly by “Peccatores”…).

For the solemn Alleluia, the choirmaster must work with the celebrant to give the right pitches. Try to roll with what he sings, not what you planned to sing. In this case, feel free to intone for the repetition if the celebrant takes you too high such that the next two, or even the current one, are out of range. With this in mind, ideally, the bulk of tracts are sung in one key, but the verse and final tract follow the last pitch of the final Alleluia, and so they may be in a different key if you choose a more comfortable key for the others.

I personally prefer to omit the Marian antiphon, even if on Saturday there is not much congregational singing to do. In a way, Christ is not yet risen! Also, recessing to organ music is much easier after singing for three to four hours, and besides, the antiphon comes back after Compline, not Vespers, and we should respect this even outside of obligatory prayer of the office in choir.

We will conclude the series with Tenebrae and the Divine Office.

Lumen Christi: Defending the Use of the Pre-1955 Roman Rite

The time has come for a serious conversation about the pre-1955 Roman Rite. Not as something eccentric, marginal, quixotic, but as the normative baseline for the sane “reset” of liturgical praxis so necessary after a century of wild experimentation.

There’s no escaping the truth: the Roman rite, once the serene inheritance of countless saints, was not abruptly overturned in the late 1960s, as the conventional narrative suggests. Rather, it was subjected to a process of gradual dismantling in the mid-twentieth century, prior to the coup de grâce delivered by Paul VI’s Consilium. Almost everyone who worked on the Holy Week reform also worked on the post-Vatican II reform; they proudly announced that the work they had begun under Pius XII had at last been completed under Paul VI.

Among the most significant turning points was the imposition of Pius XII's “restored” Holy Week in 1955. This was no gentle pruning or “restoration” but a momentous rupture, a deliberate reshaping of ancient ceremonies to fit the supposed mind of modern man, an attempt to reimagine and improve upon the past rather than receiving it humbly as the treasure it is. As a result, the 1962 liturgical books bear the wounds of earlier deformations and anticipate wounds yet to come.

It is for this reason that a new study written by a Benedictine oblate – Lumen Christi: Defending the Use of the Pre-1955 Roman Rite – is so important and timely. Lumen Christi confronts these uncomfortable truths, not in a spirit of nostalgia but in the name of intellectual honesty and historical clarity. Authentic liturgical development never came from panels of experts wielding scissors and glue; it emerged from the living faith of the Church, slowly refined in its expressions over the course of centuries.

In its magnificent Holy Week, its rich calendar, and its undiminished prayers and ceremonies, the classical Roman Rite, as found in missals released before World War II, is no museum piece left behind in the march of progress. It is the Latin Church’s living liturgy, still loved by many souls, and ripe for reintroduction wherever the usus antiquior is – or, in a happier future, will come to be – offered in our churches. What was sacred to our forefathers remains sacred and great for us today: such is the conviction that animates the pages of Lumen Christi.

With a panoply of historical, liturgical, canonical, and theological arguments, Lumen Christi helps readers to understand what is at stake in the restoration of the once and future Roman Rite, codified and canonized at the Council of Trent, and provides practical guidance in bringing it back to our churches and altars.

Here is the Table of Contents:

(You can look at the front matter and first pages of the book here.)

In the end, our task is simple: to emerge from the cave of modern liturgical innovations into the full light of tradition. This book is an indispensable roadmap for that journey.

Available in paperback, hardcover, or ebook, from Os Justi Press or from any Amazon site.

Let the restoration continue where it has taken root, and begin where it has yet to come!

Implementing the Traditional (Pre-55) Roman Holy Week, Part 1 — Introduction and Palm Sunday

This essay (which will be divided into three posts) is by the same anonymous author who contributed the series on the implementation of the pre-1939 (mostly the same as pre-1955) liturgy on every single day of the liturgical year. In that series, Holy Week is mentioned in broad strokes: which days to do first, and why.

Now let us consider the details of that rite. We shall not examine the “what to do” in detail, except where there is possible confusion, but rather the little things that have come up over years of celebrating the ancient Holy Week. This series transmits the lessons learned and what would have been nice to know years and years ago when first approaching the introduction of the classical Holy Week in a parochial setting. Some of what follows is in the realm of opinion, well-informed by books and by practice as it may be; but the goal is to give clergy, sacristans, MCs, and directors of sacred music food for thought.

In the end, I want to be clear: you can, and you should, celebrate the traditional Holy Week in parish churches even on a skeleton crew. 2020 and 2021 proved that this was possible. Plenty of evidence can be found on YouTube and on social-media platforms. But one cannot do this on a whim. It requires some planning, and that is the ultimate point of this series.

Why the traditional Holy Week of the Roman rite?

Why, indeed? A priest whom this author knows well puts it: the faithful like the Triduum, in the Novus Ordo that is, because it is the most Catholic part of the entire Novus Ordo, though they will not say this in so many words, without yet considering the degree to which it is more Catholic than the reformed rite of Pius XII and to which it has more in common with the classical Holy Week, or conversely the degree to which it retains elements of the Pian reform, and this even excluding the degree to which it declines towards or away from the ideal.

The Catholic nature is obvious, yet is somewhat obscured all the same when looking back to the 1955 rite, for one sees the catholicity even with no knowledge of the rites celebrated immediately “anterior” to the reforms initiated by the Second Vatican Council and is troubled in the same thought by the changes, even when one does not know explicitly that they are changes or that we should be bothered at all. For example, without getting too far ahead or off-track, one can immediately sense that the Litany of the Saints ought to be sung during the paschal vigil as one unified chant, not divided in two in order to do something else in between the two sections.

One is likely to be deeply moved by the character of the 1955 rites displaying in its way a deeper catholicity from even the best of the Novus Ordo, to say nothing of the typical celebration.  I recall my first brush with the Pius XII rites in my adolescence. The rite was celebrated in the afternoon of Good Friday. The black recalled a funeral, even though I had not yet been to a traditional Requiem Mass on any occasion (I had only read about it online), and the sober community mingling after the liturgy also called to mind the funeral customs of our own times.

Later, in my adolescence and into adulthood, when experiencing even the best of the Novus Ordo (ad orientem, Gregorian chant and especially sacred polyphony, three deacons reading the Passion without congregational participation, a second priest assisting in choir dress instead of Mass vestments, etc.), the wider flexibility in times permitted (a later hour may be chosen, per the rubrics, for “a pastoral reason”), actually worked against us: to celebrate the modern form of the presanctified liturgy of Good Friday in the evening (let us say at or after the customary dinner hour in most Western nations except for Spain), after a day jam packed with devotions, including the Stations of the Cross and confessions at noon celebrated for hundreds of people, instead of structuring those around the major liturgical office celebrated at a more dignified hour, meant that the liturgy became an afterthought, the loss of the funerary character even more apparent, already so from the get-go with the use of red instead of black vestments. Gregory DiPippo has expressed why this is so important and how it is indeed diminished in the changes made to the liturgy in 1970.

All of this is resolved when one finally attends the unreformed Holy Week. It is unambiguously Catholic. It is all tied to the Mass, the re-presentation of the Sacrifice of Calvary united to the offering of the Last Supper, in the expectation of the Resurrection and Ascension to come, all undergone by Christ that we too may share in new heavenly life. The rites are ordered and well-constructed even to the least knowledgeable observer. I would not say that I am jealous of those whose first and only experience of this sacred week is in the classical rite (some converts or children for example know only this rite, as unbelievable as that sounds), but there is something remarkable about this: they get to see possibly the most obviously Catholic rite that there is, in its depth, in its intensity. They have, up to this point, received nothing but the best, handed down as it ought to be.

Ceremonials and Other Books

The Brignoles community produces a handy volume taken from the 1951 edition of Fortescue (O’Connell), The Ceremonies of the Roman Rites Described, apparently, per the monks, with emendations conforming to the 2017 indult from the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei pertaining to the use of the ancient ceremonies.

Otherwise, the full Fortescue is available on the Internet Archive.

Francophones or those willing to grit their teeth should remember that Stercky’s Manuel de liturgie, volume 2, is the place to find the ceremonies of the various seasons and important occasions.

There are of course other volumes; Lawrence O’Connell’s The Book of Ceremonies is available from Corpus Christi Watershed; while relatively little in this volume pertains to Holy Week, as one must imagine that it was hardly celebrated solemnly with deacon and subdeacon even in American seminaries, the portion on the Forty Hours’ Devotion will clarify how to celebrate Mass on Holy Thursday after the consecration.

Other books are out there to complement these. Finally, one ought to follow Holy Week as provided for in the Memoriale Rituum designed for smaller churches with fewer resources and especially without the choral obligation of the Divine Office and conventual Mass, but the collective wisdom nowadays is to follow the ceremonies as prescribed for larger churches, cathedrals and those with a chapter of canons, making amendments as necessary to the shape of the building and to the personnel available, not omitting the rite or doing it radically differently as the preconciliar legislation envisions, wherein the Memoriale Rituum is obligatory in smaller churches. However, I believe that it is better to follow the full rite and to adapt a sung or solemn Mass to the circumstances of the available, qualified people and to the church building itself.

The Requisite Personnel

You might ask what I consider a skeleton crew: you need the priest. In the best of circumstances, you can find a priest or deacon and even a second minister to serve as subdeacon. He need not be in holy orders, although having two deacons or at least a second priest and a deacon lessens the burden on the principal priest.  (I am not going to address here whether laymen not in seminary or in holy orders can or should serve as subdeacon; that’s up to the priest in charge in the end). In any case, you obviously need at least one priest.

As to the servers:  you need four for the main functions of master of ceremonies, thurifer; and acolyte; a crucifer for Thursday, and  if one does not have a subdeacon, also for Sunday and Friday — this server can and will need to have other roles during the week — and then one or two capable of fetching and taking away things when they are needed or no longer needed. This could be the crucifer when he is not occupied, and one of these servers needs to carry the paschal candle during Saturday’s vigil.

Ideally, you have a second thurifer for Thursday, someone to carry the ombrellino, and torchbearers at the solemn Masses, at least two, up to eight. For Tenebrae, you need the minimum number of people who can sing the office competently including the readings; the same applies to the twelve prophecies of Holy Saturday, insofar as you will have not just a large number of readings but some which are quite long, and making just one person, or a few men plus the subdeacon if one is lucky to have one, sing everything tends to not work out very well in my experience. At least four men excluding the subdeacon is my preference, but you need to work with what you have and work up to what you prefer (all according to providence…)

Palm Sunday

First, the vestments. You need, in addition to the usual celebrant’s violet cope and chasuble, etc., two additional chasubles, then the ordinary deacon’s stole, plus two maniples.

If you are so lucky, you need three more deacons’ stoles and maniples for the Passion.

As to the shape and ornamentation of the chasubles, they can be whatever you prefer, all things being equal. However, the Roman or French forms cut short are the easiest to manage in my opinion, even though they are not truly folded. In these cases, you must have fabric for the broad stole worn by the deacon for the palm Gospel and then from the Gospel until the end of communion.

There are also fuller medieval or at least neo-Gothic forms, such as the forms preferred by English Benedictines and by the Solesmes congregation, of which I have given an example for another liturgical season; now, these are more elaborate, and the low Mass chasubles are not so elaborate, allowing for the possibility of rolling up a chasuble for the portions of the Mass where the deacon does so. Indeed, the truly folded chasuble is described in an earlier NLM article. This means that the separate piece of fabric is not necessary, although it may remain more convenient. 

The Saint Philip Neri and Spanish cuts are the least well-adapted to this context since the joints of the shoulders are blocked in the same way that a French chasuble pinned up, and not made short in the first place, gets in the way. Having worn a folded chasuble in the French style pinned up  as a straw subdeacon, it would be very difficult to wear such a vestment (that is, any form where the “folded” element is stiff and in the way of the shoulder joint) in my opinion. One needs to keep the arms pinned to the body when the hands are kept folded, but such a design impedes this; the arms are kept out at ninety degrees, closer to a yoga pose than to Christian worship. I hesitate to show an example of a Neri chasuble intended for contemporary liturgical celebrations of the ancient Roman liturgy, since the one which I have seen  is a commissioned piece from a relatively new studio (in other words, in both cases, I have a practical opinion to give, but also it is a matter of taste: de gustibus etc., and I do not wish to seem like I’m picking on someone).

Pins attached temporarily or snaps sewn onto the chasuble would be convenient if one chooses instead the Borromean form, which is softer like the Gothic chasuble; the soft fabric would not get in the way of the ministers’ arms. The vestment could be made with some skillful tailoring such that one can roll the deacon’s chasuble instead of purchasing a separate piece of material to serve as the broad stole.

The Ceremonies

For the first antiphon Hosanna Filio David and then for the distribution of palms, I strongly advocate making sure that the people have at least the antiphons as they do in the Ordinary Form. Giving the people the music, not just the text and translations, keeps them centered on the rite, even if they don’t sing, as this ceremony alone can last upwards of twenty minutes. It is easy to make the scores via some form of Gregorio (via an online editor or by using LaTeX in full, which is what I recommend) and to distribute them printed on copy paper; the chants are quite easy for the people to sing with the numerous repetitions.

Using the psalms given in the 1955 reform can work very well; you are still repeating the antiphons several times allowing for the popular participation described above. To me, there is a gap: should there be a doxology in these psalms? The office retains it, the Mass does not, and the 1955 reform treats it like the office. I leave it to each one’s judgement. You can use psalms, or you can make a repetition polyphonic. Between Palestrina, Victoria, and others, there are several approachable settings of one or both antiphons beginning “Pueri hebraeorum.” The important part is that Catholics in the choir (hopefully most members…) are able to receive palms without having to start the music only after the clergy, servers, and musicians do so; this depends on the size of the choir, its musical capabilities, and the arrangement of your church building.

I would also include the ferial tone of the dialogue of the palm-blessing preface in the material given to the congregation, as people tend to sing the usual solemn tone.

The choir should be in place to follow the clergy as they exit; there is time for this at the end of the prayers if the choir is singing in a gallery instead of from the chancel (sanctuary). For the procession, I personally do not feel scrupulous about singing any particular antiphons and especially all of them. Choose a selection of three or four and repeat; the people will probably not be able to follow very easily, so providing the text may be wise, but the music is probably unnecessary. However, you should give the faithful the chorus (in square notation, with translation)  of the Gloria, laus et honor, and you should give instructions for every musical element sung this week.

As an aside: henceforth, you should assume that I believe that the faithful should always be given some form of bilingual missals or books with square notation for the easier musical elements; Good Friday may be the only day where there is no congregational singing despite the ease of doing so, and Saturday presents little opportunities for it in the first place but on the other days, there is usually something to sing. The people are not an afterthought, and taking care of their participation through reading and singing fosters their prayerful participation. These ceremonies are too long to not do so.

The schola should walk ahead towards the end, in order to prepare for the door ceremony and the responsory, for which one may need to sacrifice a stronger singer to lead the clergy and people, positioned to do so while able to hear the end of the first chorus and the verses. Ideally, that singer can make it back for the Ingrediente, which lasts long enough for the clergy to change. In any case, the ministers should wait for the chant to end and for the introit to begin before they (the ministers, that is) start the prayers at the foot of the altar. The choir should start the responsory immediately after the subdeacon (crucifer) knocks on the door, returning to their usual place before the introit. By the way, finding a way to let sound out without cracking the door may be necessary. (There may be a window to open or some other interesting way to create a hole that doesn’t totally ruin the ceremony’s effect.)

The Passion should be sung by competent persons or omitted. Do not force a priest or deacon who cannot carry a tune to sing. Ideally, A or B flat is the reciting tone. The fewer sharps or flats, the easier it is to lose the key and then drop in pitch. By using A or B flat, or at least G, you also pitch this such that you do not need a true countertenor to sing the Synagoga and a true bass to sing the Christus. Those parts are simply noticeably higher and lower respectively than the Chronista’s.

If you do not already have one (or three), consider acquiring a legile, or rather three. This article is the folding wooden lectern especially used for the celebrant at Lauds or Vespers and for the ministers singing the Passion, so as to be both more Roman and to use something neater (in the sense of clean, not just fascinating or interesting) than a black metal music stand. These can be repurposed for the choirmaster and for the readings at Tenebrae; as noted above, one is customarily used by the celebrant of Lauds or Vespers in the true Roman fashion, as seen in the photo from the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest. For Sunday, you will want three falls, either in the simple fabric without trim used to cover the images; or in the same fabric as the vestments, the frontal, and the tabernacle veil; or otherwise in an appropriate fabric. It need not be “churchy”; too often, fabrics with ecclesiastical patterns look cheap despite being expensive.

Do not pay for such a lectern in an ecclesiastical-goods shop. Find a woodworker. Three can be had for less than the price of one from a catalog if done right. Consider that clergy somehow seem to always fall on the extremes of height, below or above average. My resting elbow drop, from the top of the elbow to the floor, is 48 inches (around 122 cm). This is a bit taller than the shortest examples available to purchase from a manufacturer of such goods off the rack; the surface is plenty big enough for the Passion books, a missal (for the Exsultet or the readings of the Paschal Vigil), etc.

Now, if you can’t do it yourself, and you can’t have someone do it locally in their home shop, then commission a quality woodworking company to make this article. There are several who could produce an excellent product if you give them photos and work patiently through the design process, although giving a recommendation is impossible without revealing too much about my own situation. Naturally, the stain should match or at least complement the other wooden pieces in the church, but otherwise the question of ornamentation such as knobs is up to you.

There are several ways of keeping the legs together (chains or hinges both work) which can be gleaned from internet searches; as to the fall: either its weight plus that of a book will keep it in place, or you can consider a clip that goes the width of the leather. In my opinion (only that), the fall should come to just above the floor in the front and in the back, without a break. It’s not a pair of trousers. In other words, the example from Gricigliano is perfect, except that the fall could be a bit shorter for my liking, but no harm is done otherwise. Plus, if you use the same fabric as the vestments, or at least something that complements those well, a fourth fall can be purchased so as to serve as the broad stole; in fact, it is somewhat easier to just have a separate piece of fabric than to take off, tie up, and put back on the fuller “Gothic” or even conical chasuble even if it could (should) be done.

In the next installment we will continue with Holy Thursday, Good Friday, and Holy Saturday.

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.

Practical Steps for Transitioning from the 1962 to the Pre-1955 Roman Rite—Part 3: The Divine Office

Click the following links for the earlier parts of this ongoing series: Part 1 | Part 2

I staked the claim that we must return to the 1939 office rather than the simple 1954 form, which happens to have a memorable rhyming slogan in English (“restore the ’54”). But I shall defend that claim, going into the weeds a little bit at the start of this article.

The Canticle of Canticles is primarily read at Matins of the Assumption octave, in an orderly manner over the eight days. (Some chapters are omitted due to the introduction of double feasts, but those could be omitted or the rubrics amended to require the readings of the octave, instead of the occurring Scripture.) In any case, under the 1950 office, chapter 1 of Canticles is no longer read; chapter 2 is still read, but on the Visitation, a less important feast added much later (although it is a feast commemorating a Scriptural event); chapter 3 is omitted if Saint Mary Magdalene is impeded (and 1960 omits even that), and chapter 8 is now omitted in the office of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Chapter 4 is read as the day is unimpeded on the general calendar, and the rest are omitted due to feasts as mentioned above. There is also no reason to read something written by the reigning pope in the office of one of the greatest Marian feasts. But let us move on to the transition, of which this series is supposed to be a guide.

The challenge of making changes in an entire community remains, and these are felt most acutely with the choir office, particularly if some of the office is sung in choir and the rest said privately. Thankfully, that is above my pay grade. Some suggestions for the reform of the office, and to an extent the Mass, are also applicable to priests belonging to a diocese and should be noted; in his own breviary, the diocesan priest might simply take up the whole old office, at least for the minor hours, working up to the full Lauds and Vespers, then Matins.

The simplest place to begin would be by praying the suppressed silent prayers before and after the Hours, which are either in the 1962 breviary as it is, can be put on a card, or are easily memorized; the Marian antiphon could then be added to the end of Lauds or the final day hour when said in a bunch following Lauds, not only Compline, or when Vespers is separated from Compline (and when no other pious exercise, sermon, or Benediction follows). Surely no cleric would decline the opportunity to invoke his Mother’s protection more often?

The feast of Saint Matthias is transferred to Monday if it conflicts with a Sunday of Lent; under Divino Afflatu, the I Vespers are still prayed in full, with a commemoration of Sunday.

Clerics in major orders (from the diaconate, if transitional, or according to the community’s constitutions, from the subdiaconate) who are obliged to pray the entire office could add the first psalm omitted at Lauds of penitential days to Prime, at least in private, though this may pose some difficulties for clerics who pray Prime with community members who are not so bound. That psalm is still in the breviary, and so are the suppressed verses of psalm 88 cut from Christmas, the Transfiguration, or Christ the King, whereas the canticle of Deuteronomy at Saturday Lauds is mutilated such that one could not pray the full text from a 1962 breviary.

From there, the clergy praying the full office could semidouble the antiphons of the minor hours and of Compline, including those sung with members who are not yet subdeacons (typically Prime, Terce, or Sext and Compline); the ferial preces could be prayed anytime the penitential Lauds are said or Vespers are of the feria of Advent of Lent. This change does not even affect the entire year, nor even every day within the seasons.

For those lucky enough to use older, original versions of the Liber Usualis in choir, praying the doxologies as printed for Compline is easy to implement without much thought, as the book is written that way! This would also apply to the other minor hours, of course, although the doxologies are rarely printed for offices other than festal Compline; for example, one has to learn that it changes during the season of Easter or on feasts (an asterisk printed in the breviary reminds the cleric of this).

Semidoubling the hours on Sundays (perhaps surprisingly, all Sundays are privileged but of semidouble rite, except for Low Sunday, which is double major, and the Sundays that are feasts, i.e. Easter and Pentecost, where there is no other Sunday, as well as Trinity, Christ the King, etc. fixed on Sunday) and at daily Compline (sometimes prayed with the faithful) is another easy step to take at public offices. Saint-Eugène-Sainte-Cécile in Paris already does this for most Sundays, and frankly it is easier anyway if you are introducing Vespers, since the psalm matches what is printed for the antiphon, particularly with Psalm 109; the priest intones the antiphon, which is the first words of the psalm, so the cantors continue with the psalm. At first, you could still follow the 1962 observance in omitting the commemorations and suffrages. Adding commemorations and suffrages according to the rubrics and the occurrences or concurrences of the calendar (including the Incarnation doxology for the commemoration of a lesser Marian feast) would be the last step.

That said, the commemorations can be somewhat complicated, particularly when octaves get involved, and figuring out the order is not always intuitive; one simply has to trust the Ordo while trying to learn the rubrics on the fly. For example, the order of commemorations for June 19, 2022 (Sunday within the octave of Corpus Christi) were complicated by the commemoration of the octave, and this is a point of the rubrics that was changed in 1911 to be more complicated than before, leaving it to be blown up in 1955 and in 1960.

For priests belonging to a traditional community, it would be better to work commemorations out privately and to mutually agree on them—say, starting at the community’s seminary—than to introduce them independently, with disagreements arising in different churches; the commemorations can be easy to forget or to execute incorrectly as well, as the rubrics for “Oremus” and the conclusions are not the same as at Mass. At the office, the celebrant sings “Oremus” before each collect, but this is not the case at Mass: it is sung before the first collect and then before the second, but not before subsequent collects. (I recommend a sticky note or an index card.)

In lieu of worrying about that first, restoring I Vespers where there is no conflict seems to be a more prudent choice; to pick at low-hanging fruit, Vespers of the vigil of Saint Lawrence is an anomaly easily fixed by saying I Vespers of the feast provided in the 1960 breviary. I would also suggest singing the traditional hymns of Vespers and Lauds of the Assumption, even with the 1950 collect and chapter for expediency, before moving on to the traditional prayers down the road.

Next, psalms for the feast should replace the ferial psalms of the minor hours on II class feasts. One would already have the necessary texts since the antiphons are from the Lauds already prayed, from the common or proper. Then one can celebrate I Vespers of all II class feasts, especially the feasts of Apostles, and add the commemorations of lower feasts (in occurrence at Lauds and, at first, in concurrence at Vespers, and going from there).

After this begins the a different kind of challenge: restoring texts that simply do not exist in a 1962 breviary or which would constitute a greater burden. The preces at the minor hours and the dominical preces of Prime and Compline are very short, but they were either removed or would require substantial pencil markings in a 1962 breviary if you wish to say them. The same is true for the suffrages. Praying Vespers of the Dead after canonical Vespers of All Saints on November 1 is trivial in the sense that the text is in the breviary, but praying two Vespers is an utterly foreign concept, and when Vespers of the dead is prayed on certain occasions, psalms are added towards the end which are found in the breviary, just not in the 1960 office of the dead. In other words, get a pencil.

Changing the chapter and the verse at Prime when called for by the older rubrics is simple enough and adds virtually no time to the office, but the texts would not necessarily be in a 1962 breviary (in fact, they mostly are not). Also, commemorating a lesser Marian feast commemorated at Saturday Vespers or at those of Sunday, requires memorizing the doxology if using a breviary (easy enough, admittedly); at least in all cases, one needs to create the chant score if using a Liber Usualis. (The omission of the doxology for all tones of the hymns where this happens on green Sundays, from Saturday evening to that of Sunday is a strange lacuna.)

Vespers sung by the seminarians of the FSSP

Unfortunately, Matins is probably the last significant change, because the readings, especially on Sundays, cannot be reconstituted from a 1962 breviary; you have to have an earlier edition, or, less ideally, your phone or a document created with the missing portions, but the thing is that the readings are not that long. Efficiently praying Matins with Lauds on a feast of nine lessons takes less than an hour; even taking into consideration apostolic demands, does one not have an hour to watch and pray? If not, we should fix this, and the faithful should support priests doing this according to their own abilities. (Both are easier said than done.)

Praying Matins is all the more easy considering the compromise psalter, of which the flaws are evident after only a few days of praying the Roman office of 1911/1954 (such as on July 9 and 10, 2022, with Our Lady on Saturday followed by a green Sunday with no doubles commemorated on either day). Nevertheless, the secular clergy would consider this office the most burdensome, not entirely without reason.

In contrast, praying the Athanasian Creed is, in theory, not especially burdensome for those who must pray Prime, but it does require paying attention to the commemorations of octaves and double feasts (these suppress the recitation of this creed) such that its reintroduction could come before adding commemorations at Mass or at the same time, depending on whether one is in a community that should try to pray in the same way or if one is alone (or with other diocesan priests) is in a parish. In other words, one could accelerate the restoration of one’s office at the same pace as, or a faster pace than, that of the public Mass. Mutatis mutandis for the suffrages already mentioned in the context of Vespers, which also occur, even more often, at Lauds.

Practical Steps for Transitioning from the 1962 to the Pre-1955 Roman Rite — Part 2: The Mass

See here for Part 1: https://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2025/06/practical-steps-for-transitioning-from.html

Before any kind of work can begin in earnest, one must have an ordo alongside the old books of liturgy and try to learn the rubrics. The well-established Saint Lawrence Press Ordo is slightly different from the web-based Ordo of Restore the ‘54, which has the new Assumption and Immaculate Heart offices, the Common of Holy Popes, and some changes to the calendar, like the feast of the Queenship of Mary on May 31, which bumps Saint Angela Merici to the next day. This is not a terribly important feast, but the problem is now that a new double of the II class interrupts a week routinely filled with some feasts: the Ascension, Pentecost, Trinity, etc. routinely fall on or around this day, and as a double of the II class, it eventually is transferred to a free day.

One could also simply ignore all but the changes to the Assumption and its octave and call it a day, as the Immaculate Heart Mass has become beloved among Catholics attached to not just the liturgy but to the devotional culture of the immediate pre-conciliar era. But having claimed that “1939” is the recension to which we ought to return, then we ought to explore why this is so, and while honoring Our Lady’s request to honor her Immaculate Heart on five first Saturdays is not something which I treat frivolously, nevertheless, she did not say that it must be with the votive Mass of the Immaculate Heart.

Attention must also be called to the rubrics of votive Masses, somewhat different than the 1962 rubrics, though not challenging as the SLP Ordo has a handy chart. The trouble is that a Requiem Mass or a votive Mass said on more solemn occasions (so, something more complex than the replacement of the ferial Mass per annum when votive Masses are permitted) have special rubrics for the orations, the Gloria, the Credo, and the precedence, all of which are vastly different from the 1962 rubrics, which are not necessarily straightforward or simple as it is.

If one has a sufficient command of French, then referencing the Manuel de liturgie et cérémonial selon le rit romain of Stercky (taking over for LeVavasseur) is indispensable in addition to the original Fortescue. (Vol. II of Stercky is found here.) These volumes are far more comprehensive than Fortescue(-O’Connell) and O’Connell combined, and the work should have been entirely translated a long time ago; they merit republication in French as well. Note that an excerpt in translation entitled Sacrificare, Ceremonies of Low Mass was published in 1946 and is currently available as an on-demand print, though it deserves a proper reprint from a reputable publishing house.

The Last Gospel is a unique, beloved feature of the traditional Mass; why would we not wish for this text to be said at the Mass of the Easter Vigil?

In all cases, it is perfectly wise to begin with the little details: the name of Saint Joseph is not in the canon. One can immediately begin bowing to the cross as required at the epistle corner; using the three tones of voice and two kinds of head bows and bows of the body respectively; always reciting the prayers at the foot of the altar and the Last Gospel—mostly the ordinary one from Saint John; praying the Confiteor before communion; finally, incensing the celebrant of a sung Mass after the Gospel. [Note 1]

Additionally, the priest should simply not sit down, and he should rise a little earlier, in order to read the epistle and gospel at solemn Mass, which essentially no one will mind; the faithful are listening to the chants. Finally, the priest should follow the traditional rubrics for the tones of the preface and Pater Noster, which happen to neatly correspond to the new categories of the 1962 office (in particular, simples are commemorations, simple votive Masses are IV class, and nothing else changes). 

These small changes get us to the situation immediately before 1960, as seen at this Mass of the XXIV Sunday after Pentecost from Ushaw College in England, now closed.

The pastor should also strive to say Mass pro populo on the required days, a table of which would be found in the various books covering the subject. Treating holy days, even suppressed ones, as something special is almost entirely lost, and this will have to be recovered as well. “Why can’t I have Mass said for Grandma Anne and Grandpa Lawrence on their name days?” Well, because the church considers saying Mass for the people under the pastor’s care one of his most important duties.

One can add the Credo for Apostles, Doctors, Saint Mary Magdalene, and the Holy Angels without touching the calendar or precedence and without making any other commemorations. Since there is already a preface of the Blessed Sacrament, the preface of the Nativity on Corpus Christi celebrated on Thursday or as an external solemnity can be used without difficulty, as there is already the possibility of avoiding the common preface or, on Sunday, that of the Trinity, and virtually no one would blink if the same preface was used on the Transfiguration.

As far as more significant changes go, I would of course start with Holy Week and the vigil of Pentecost. A wealth of material exists such that the rite can be celebrated correctly and with dignity; I am no fan of broadcasting all liturgies, but 2020 provided proof that you can celebrate the traditional rite in a parish church with a skeleton crew. It is also true that the most reformatory changes occurred with these days of the liturgical year, meaning it’s impossible to mix-and-match old and new (i.e., pre-55 and 1955-1969) in a satisfactory way.

Nevertheless, if one must be incrementalist, then the easiest place to begin is on Holy Thursday, where the rubrics of Mass would deviate only for the ministers, not for the schola (aside from the Agnus Dei, where the change from the ordinary way is in the Pian rite, not that which came before or after) or for the faithful, and at Tenebræ, usually anticipated as it is. Psalm 50 is still right there in the books, and the strepitus (the fun part, the noise at the end) is essentially never omitted. Good Friday is perhaps the next change, given that the day is unique no matter what, followed by the two more complex and very notably different days, Palm Sunday and Holy Saturday.

Further, if you have folded chasubles for Holy Week, then you can then use them the rest of the year, starting with Candlemas, to which minimal changes were made and which only apply after Septuagesima, which means that only the vestments change (except once every few years).

Replacing “Ite, missa est” with “Benedicamus Domino” in Advent and Lent or on the Ember Days of September, then adding proper Last Gospels on penitential weekdays where the festal Mass is said instead (even without touching the 1962 rubrics of the Lenten calendar precedence!—one thinks of Saint Joseph, the Annunciation, the privileged votive Masses, proper first-class feasts, and the Masses now permitted by the decree Cum sanctissima), would be easy steps to take next, followed by the reintroduction of proper Last Gospels whenever they occur, including when a feast falls on an ordinary Sunday. One might wish to begin earlier with Christmas day, given that its Gospel is already Saint John’s prologue and would otherwise have no Last Gospel. Can anyone protest too much? In fact, the Ordinariate has this privilege!

By the way, there is virtually no reason to ever justify the short form of Ember Saturday’s liturgy, no matter what rubrics one uses otherwise.

The commemorations of the Mass should be added progressively according to the difficulty for the celebrant and the people. These are straightforward on double feasts or when a double feast is simplified due to the Sunday: pray the collects of the (other) saints, then move to the epistle, unless there is an oratio imperata to be prayed by the order of the bishop or other authority (rare if not nonexistent outside of certain traditional communities).

It can become much more complicated at a votive Mass, including the “daily” Requiem Mass which has three orations; when a semidouble or simplex feast is commemorated; or during octaves or other occasions which have different prayers than those of the season (e.g. a day within the octave of All Saints has different prayers than the ones assigned for the time after Pentecost, and so on and so forth).

More will be said about these with respect to the office, but suffice it to say that one could start on the rare occasions when one makes only the commemorations of the season, gradually moving to commemorate feasts, both of which can already be done, at least in a limited way, at a 1962-compliant low Mass. It is probably unwise to start with Sundays or feasts with four collects, e.g., on June 26, 2022, the Sunday within the octave of the Sacred Heart, when, in pre-55 land, collects would be sung of the Third Sunday after Pentecost, of several martyrs, of the Octave of the Lord, and of the Octave of Saint John the Baptist.

That leaves the calendar itself and the other rubrics. Start with the “votive” Mass of the suppressed feasts, all found in the section for various places of the 1962 missal; the feast of Saint Joseph in Paschaltide is the votive Mass of Saint Joseph, so one could usually say this Mass on the third Wednesday of Eastertide without fuss.

If a feast of an Apostle or another II class feast falls on a Sunday and would have taken its place before 1962, one should follow that precedence, commemorating Sunday appropriately. Also, move the Apostles to Monday if there is a conflict, as is the case when October 28 falls on the Sunday which is the feast of Christ the King or when Saint Matthias falls on a Sunday of Lent.

The full vigils, including that of the Epiphany, will have to be last, if one does not already possess a pre-1955 missal. The same holds for the octaves which have proper texts for all or some of the days (in particular, the days within the octave of Saints Peter and Paul), but the Second and Third Sundays after Pentecost have no textual changes not found in a 1962 missal and can be restored quickly as the Sundays within the respective octaves of the Lord.

The pre-1939 recension is imperfect. It would perhaps be better, at conventual Mass, to celebrate ancient vigils instead of later feasts (on June 28, the vigil of Saints Peter and Paul and variously the feast of Saint Irenaeus or of Pope Saint Leo II) and on August 9 (the vigil of Saint Lawrence and the feast of the Curé d’Ars). Instituting the vigil and suppressing or moving around, again, feasts, or removing the vigil in the 1960 liturgy came at the cost of everything else, and a change to permit the vigil at conventual Mass (without having to duplicate the festal Mass) would have mirrored the rubrics for private Masses (I take the meaning of “private” to be the Mass said outside of the parish schedule, not as the “parochial Mass” in lieu of a conventual Mass, where there is no community, the sort of Mass that priests say right after Lauds in the monastery). Those allowed priests to choose the Mass ad libitum when a vigil or ferial day of Lent, or the Ember Days, was to be said, although public Masses, including the main Mass, really ought to be of the feast. [Note 2]

One final change: the Mass of the Rogation days has a unique Alleluia in the pre-1962 missal; the Alleluia with the verse Laudate Dominum is sung, but the form is not responsorial. Two Alleluias are sung as on other days of Paschal Time in the 1962 missal, for consistency.

Surveying the many differences listed above, we should bear in mind that there is no one order that must be followed in implementing them, nor a prescribed pace at which to move. The changes to be implemented in parallel with one’s breviary (to be described in the next post) can be mixed and matched. The order I have suggested, however, seems to be a good general order that makes logical sense. At a minimum, I have tried to lay out each element that will need to be restored to the traditional Roman Mass.

Notes

[1] This one is more controversial, as not every place received an indult for incense at sung Mass before the 1962 rubrics made it universal. But it is the expectation the world over, and further detaching sung Mass from solemn Mass was a step in the wrong direction.

[2] As an aside, though, the term “private Mass” is nebulous, having at least eight definitions and has consequences if the priest is saying a community Mass for his community, conventual or otherwise, or as the main parochial Mass. As noted earlier, a pastor would have had to say Mass pro populo on many feast days according to the former law.

Practical Steps for Transitioning from the 1962 to the Pre-1955 Roman Rite—Part 1: Introduction

The author of this series wishes to remain anonymous. He is an experienced master of ceremonies and chanter, intimately familiar with both the 1962 rubrics and the pre-1939 rubrics in ordinary parish contexts.

In the summer of 2022, almost as if to mark as well as the first anniversary of the lamentable papal motu proprio, Paul Cavendish and Peter Kwasniewski collaborated to produce and publish a much-needed summary of the changes made to the liturgy in three places:

1) the simplification of the rubrics outlined in Cum nostra hac ætate;
2) the introduction of the new rite of Holy Week in Maxima redemptionis nostræ mysteria;
3) the changes made in the reforms of 1960 and 1962, to the breviary and missal respectively.

This was followed by the publication of Dr. Kwasniewski’s The Once and Future Roman Rite, where he articulates a fundamental position on the inherently traditional and continuous nature of apostolic liturgy, critiques twentieth-century ruptures, and advocates total restoration of the Roman Rite. Dr. Kwasniewski formally plots the way forward with a final chapter on the pre-1955 liturgy, which deserves our thanks and consideration.

A green Sunday at the ICRSP seminary; these Sundays are perhaps the days outside of Holy Week where the 1955 and 1960 rubrics have the most impact for an ordinary parishioner in the pews.

Before proceeding, I should note that this essay takes for granted a reader’s knowledge of, or willingness to learn about the differences in the rubrics. This page is a good place to start.

I have a particular knowledge of the office, above all those which would be more routinely prayed in parishes, Vespers and Compline but also Lauds and the minor hours, as I have prayed the 1962 office with some regularity for nine years, and in private, I prayed a combination of Divino Afflatu, Tridentine Compline and festal offices, and a pre-1962 office with the 1962 precedence (Sunday Vespers, with semidoubled antiphons and all but the highest feasts reduced to commemorations); now my circumstances permit me to always use Divino Afflatu, so I do. [*Note]

It is also worth noting in passing that I have only rarely assisted at a Mass with no interpolations whatsoever from a previous edition of the missal; in my experience, a Mass exactly according to 1962 will be celebrated only by American diocesan priests ordained after 2007. I first discovered the traditional Mass via the FSSP, known for preserving the “extra” Confiteor before communion; then in the diocesan parish of my adolescence, the priest bowed to the cross as required. The Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, with which I am most familiar, is famous for “1962 in the hands of Frenchmen” and thus making popular a yet more traditional version of the “rite of Écône,” as described by the Rad Trad. In France, even priests who make their bows exclusively to the book are still incensed after the Gospel at sung Mass — J. B. O’Connell could not be clearer in indicating that this is abolished in the 1962 rubrics — and there is virtually always a Confiteor before the distribution of communion.

Altar cloths being put out on the altar on Good Friday as per the pre-1955 rubrics.

Also, this essay would not necessarily have been welcomed three or four years ago when it was easier to make changes, yet now many priests will feel pressure to toe the 1962 line lest they lose the right even to use that missal, even though, by the same token, now is a favorable time to act. I share their grief and distress, but I hope that they and the members of the flock assisting, such as masters of ceremonies or choirmasters, will read this with ideas for the future, if not for their own strictly private usage away from cameras and the internet, no matter what choice they make in the parishes.

It is somewhat trivial to explain why the Roman rite as it existed in 1954 is the point to which one should return: all of the essential practices are there, albeit with the weekly psalter rearranged by order of Saint Pius X, the antiphons created to accompany this new psalter, and even the new Mass for the feast and octave day of the Assumption instituted by Pope Pius XII. But explaining the extent of the damage even of the 1940s and 1950s is a thirty-minute conversation, without taking into account questions from your inquirer. A priest of my acquaintance who belongs to a traditional community explained it thus to a group of young people: “I don’t really know the details of the changes.” “We pray the 1962 breviary because we’re told to do so.” These are both reasonable answers given the demands of his apostolic activity and his state in life.

For the curious or daring person with some free time, one could prudently pray according to the 1910 office, then 1911/1954, and finally 1955/1960, in order to see what’s up, though looking at a hand missal from the 1940s will be the best most of us can do to see what happened to the Mass in the 1950s and early 1960s.

Precocious laymen might suggest that groups such as the FSSP and especially the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest have failed by sticking to 1962 entirely or by following certain things (e.g., the pre-55 Holy Week, the proper doxology of the hymn at Compline, some of the pre-1962 rubrics of the Mass) while following the 1962 calendar and rubrics in everything else.

On the other hand, their priests are subject not only to the bishop but to their superiors, and these parishes would attract people who know the difference. On the other hand, a diocesan bishop probably does not know the difference off the top of his head, and while his priests would have more freedom to act, they do not necessarily have the time to do the research and to transition the TLM community towards a more traditional observance.

Or do they? Can this be done? I believe this is possible, with careful planning and consideration both of the higher-level stakes (Rome, the bishop…) and of lower-level ones (the needs of the faithful).

In a parish well-known to this author, the pastor arrived and continued to follow the 1962 calendar (especially the precedence of Sundays over virtually all feasts), although the prayers of the foot of the altar and Last Gospel were always recited. Vespers strictly followed the 1962 rubrics, with the commemorations made according to the same.

Slowly but surely, suppressed feasts, like those of the first week in May (suppressed in 1960 as duplicates), came back along with vigils, like that of All Saints said the day before the feast. The Credo was restored to the feasts which previously required it before 1955 and 1960. Holy Week and the Pentecost vigil came back immediately; there is simply no reason to stick with the reformed versions (especially that of Pius XII, but also the version of Paul VI) if you really believe that it is worth reviving the traditional form of the Roman Rite. The priest introduced proper Last Gospels said on Sundays where the feast impedes a Sunday Mass or on certain other occasions required by the rubrics, then seasonal commemorations at Mass (that is, the prayers said after the main oration), and those of feasts; one of the genius aspects of the reforms of Pius X is this legal fiction elevating Sundays over most, but not all, feasts. Finally, the suffrages (the antiphon, versicle, and collect said per the rubrics: one is of “All Saints” sung most of the year; the other said in Paschal Time is “of the Cross”), then sanctoral commemorations (most all of the saints on Saturday evening and on Sunday are just dropped under 1962), and now semidoubled antiphons (intoned to the asterisk, followed by the psalm, then sung in full after the psalm) along with the precedence of the Divino Afflatu rubrics have been restored at Vespers.

So that’s what happened in this parish: a pretty full restoration of the Roman Rite. How, then, does one get there?

In the next three parts, we will look at the Mass, the Office, and the question of Posture. I shall refrain from a detailed treatment of the pontifical ceremonies, since that depends on acquiring a suitable pontifical and a willing bishop (already difficult enough), and the scope is simply too grand for such a series.

Such a transition can sometimes be confusing, as much as for the priest as for the faithful, and one would do well to briefly instruct from the pulpit and in the bulletin or at other appropriate times, such as on Saturday mornings, where there is more time to consider the finer details. Priests should remember a few things: one, that while one must be “all things to all men,” one should never act as if the audience is unintelligent and cannot, through some work, come to learn and appreciate these details according to their capacities.

Note

By the way, the translated general rubrics of the 1920 missal are also available in a beautifully-prepared PDF, though the rubrics to the office appear to be lacking; one gets very far, but only so, with a copy of Learning the Breviary by Fr. Hausmann, S.J. (not to be confused with Learning the New Breviary for the 1960 rubrics), since the Additiones et Variationes to the rubrics of Saint Pius V (under the form known as the Jubilee Rubrics issued in 1900), are what make the Divino Afflatu rubrics so complex.

“The Masses of Holy Week & Tenebrae”: A Publication to Assist in Pre-55 Services

Those who are blessed with access to Holy Week in the Tridentine Rite, that is, the rite celebrated for a thousand years and more prior to Pius XII’s changes in the mid-1950s, may find helpful a resource published by Os Justi Press, The Masses of Holy Week & Tenebrae, which contains the liturgy (in Latin with English translation) for Palm Sunday, the Triduum Masses, and the Office of Tenebrae, including the complete Gregorian chants. Summary rubrics are indicated. No page turning is required. The book features many medieval illustrations as well.

Ideal for scholas, for personal study, or as a congregational worship aid, the book is handsomely printed with readable type and weighs in at nearly 500 pages. The cost is $19.95. Bulk discounts are available (and for multiple countries, not just the USA) by contacting the publisher. The book is also available through Amazon, including all of its international sites.

The cover is shown above. Below are some sample pages; more may be found here. 

N.B.: The paperback’s illustrations are printed in grayscale, not in color. The hardcover is in color. Please be aware that these volumes are printed “on demand” rather than offset-printed, and, as a result, the binding is not sewn but glued.