![o{]:)](http://www.wdtprs.com/blog/wp-images/topimage.JPG)
Vatican Press to reprint the 1962 Missale Romanum?
Do I believe my eyes?
It looks as if the Libreria Editrice Vaticana is going to put out an edition of the 1962 Missale Romanum.
This would be a serious way for the Holy See to give concrete support to the implementation of Summorum Pontificum. In sense, it would be a gesture that goes beyond benign tolerance of the older form of Mass into even positive support for its growth.
“Autori: M.Sodi…” ...Mmmh, does it tell you something, Father? :-/
Comment by Syriacus — 21 October 2007 @ 2:10 pm“Three different printings of Pius V’s Roman Missal, with minor variations, appeared in 1570, a folio and a quarto edition in Rome and a folio edition in Venice. A reproduction of what is considered to be the earliest, referred to therefore as the editio princeps, was produced in 1998.[^ ISBN 88-209-2547-8; publisher: Libreria Editrice Vaticana; introduction and appendix by Manlio Sodi and Achille Maria Triacca ]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tridentine_Mass
Comment by Syriacus — 21 October 2007 @ 2:16 pm“MONUMENTA LITURGICA PIANA”
Sulla linea dei “Monumenta Liturgica Concilii Tridentini” la presente collana (= MLP) propone l’edizione anastatica dei sei libri liturgici secondo l’ultima editio typica realizzata all’interno del progetto della “Riforma Piana” (ad eccezione del Caeremoniale). L’edizione – cartonata e a due colori – dei sei libri liturgici segue lo stesso ordine dei MLCT e sarà completata dalla indicizzazione delle formule dei 6 volumi dei MLCT e MLP.
1. Pontificale Romanum. Editio typica (1961-1962). Edizione anastatica e Introduzione, a cura di M. Sodi e A. Toniolo (in stampa).
2. Missale Romanum. Editio typica (1962). Edizione anastatica e Introduzione, a cura di M. SODI e A. TONIOLO, pp. XXVI + 1096, € 59,00.
3. Breviarium Romanum. Editio typica (1962). Totum (in preparazione).
4. Rituale Romanum. Editio typica (1952) (in preparazione).
5. Indicizzazione delle formule dei 6 volumi della collana MLCT e MLP.
Chi prenota l’intera collana ha diritto allo sconto del 27% sul prezzo di copertina (diffusione@lev.va); i volumi saranno pubblicati uno all’anno, nel mese di settembre.
? Those who order the entire series will will be entitled for a 27% discount on the selling price (diffusione@lev.va); the volumes will be published each year in the month of September.
http://www.liturgia.it/lit_lev.html
Comment by Syriacus — 21 October 2007 @ 2:21 pmSyriacus: M. SODI
YIKES!
A couple weeks ago in Rome I picked up he vile little book, Il Messale di Pio V. It was a condescending screed intended to put people off any interest in the older Mass.
If this is the same Manlio Sodi, I must ask what role he had in this edition and what sort of introduction it would be. His vile little book was merely a sort of blind panegyric of the newer form of Mass while deprecating the limitations of the pre-Conciliar form.
And if this is an “edizione anastatica” I wonder if it will have the rubrics in red.
Some investigation is in order.
Comment by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf — 21 October 2007 @ 2:30 pmIf it’s only going to cost €59 then I doubt that it’ll be a proper altar missal with ribbons, red rubrics, etc… I suspect it’ll be some kind of paperback facsimile edition for scholarly rather than liturgical use.
Comment by Zadok the Roman — 21 October 2007 @ 2:36 pmL’edizione – cartonata e a due colori
It looks like it will be with 2 colors, I hope red and black.
Comment by Dan O — 21 October 2007 @ 2:56 pmhttp://www.edizionimessaggero.it/ita/catalogo/scheda.asp?ISBN=978-88-250-1946-9
YIKES truly..!
“...Comunque, ogni tipo di riflessione non potrà essere attuata con oggettività se non ci si confronta prima di tutto con il documento conciliare sulla Liturgia, la Sacrosanctum Concilium, e con la Costituzione apostolica di Paolo VI dal titolo Missale Romanum: un testo che si trova all’inizio di ogni Messale.
È il confronto con questo ampio documento, di importanza fondamentale, superiore ad un “Motu proprio”, che si può percepire meglio sia l’esigenza di conoscere meglio la storia, sia ciò che è stato operato con il nuovo Messale, sia il completo superamento del precedente Missale. Le parole con cui si conclude la Costituzione apostolica risuonano oggi più che mai eloquenti: «Quanto abbiamo qui stabilito e ordinato (statuta et praescripta) vogliamo che rimanga valido ed efficace (firma et efficacia), ora e in futuro, nonostante quanto vi possa essere di contrario nelle Costituzioni e negli Ordinamenti Apostolici dei nostri Predecessori e in altre disposizioni, anche degne di particolare menzione e deroga».”
(Fr. Manlio Sodi)
ex: http://www.zenit.org/article-11446?l=italian
Comment by Syriacus — 21 October 2007 @ 4:07 pmSOUR GRAPES OSCAR/NOBEL AWARD!! to Don Manlio: “La riedizione di questi libri – personalmente ne curo una nella collana “Monumenta Liturgica Piana”, edita dalla Libreria Editrice Vaticana (diffusione@lev.va) – sarà un momento importante per verificarne i limiti rispetto agli attuali libri liturgici, e per apprezzare meglio la liturgia riformata secondo le indicazioni del Vaticano II.”
Comment by Syriacus — 21 October 2007 @ 4:22 pmThis is interesting, since the last time I checked the Libreria Editrice Vaticana online store, they weren’t even printing the 2002 Missale Romanum in Latin.
It is good to see the Vatican doing something to help promote the older form.
Comment by Roman Sacristan — 21 October 2007 @ 5:08 pmThis is interesting, since the last time I checked the Libreria Editrice Vaticana online store, they weren’t even printing the 2002 Missale Romanum in Latin.
I think that might due to the Holy See resigning itself to the fact that celebrations of the so-called “ordinary form” in Latin will now be rare, now that we have the papal motu proprio on the traditional mass and sacraments. People who want a Latin celebration might as well go the whole hog and opt for the older form. The newer form is geared to the vernacular, whatever the conciliar document on the sacred liturgy says.
Comment by Andrew — 21 October 2007 @ 7:30 pmApparently it can be purchased at http://www.paxbook.com/algorithmiS/servusPrimus?iussum=monstraScriptumEditum&numerus=31595
Comment by Demerzel — 21 October 2007 @ 8:01 pmI’m glad the Vatican is publishing the Tridentine Missal. As stated above by all, it’s a great sign the Church is serious about the Liturgical elevation of the Mass of St Pius V. At the same time, I won’t be buying a Missal from the Editrice. As Father Z said, their stuff tends to be of lousy quality. In fairness, so is most publications out of Europe. Been there, done that.
PS. “Derestriction” is not a word. :-)
Comment by ** Matt ** — 21 October 2007 @ 9:17 pmNot sure where to put this, so I’ll ask it here. Hopefully, Father or one of you is able to reply.
Since we are discussing the Pius V Missal, where does the permanent-deacon of today fit into the rubrics of the Tridentine Mass? The deacons referred to in the Missal refers to the transitional deacon, the seminarian on his way to full ordination. There was no such thing as a “permanent deacon” when the Tridentine Rite was in force. How does the present-day deacon participate in the Tridentine Mass according to its Rubrics?
Seriously curious. Thanks.
Comment by ** Matt ** — 21 October 2007 @ 9:29 pmMatt
With current neomodernist tendencies prevailing, when interpreting words like “permanent” and “in perpetuum” you should know by now that they can mean anything at all.
Comment by LeonG — 21 October 2007 @ 9:46 pmA deacon is a deacon.
Comment by dcs — 21 October 2007 @ 10:15 pmwhere does the permanent-deacon of today fit into the rubrics of the Tridentine Mass?
The permanent deacon should fit in quite well. In fact, now that we have permanent deacons, it should be much easier to offer the solemn form of the old use. I know some Tridentine chapels that technically have enough priests to offer the solemn high Mass, yet they prefer to keep one of the priests in the confessional to hear confessions during it instead.
Comment by James G. — 21 October 2007 @ 10:44 pmThanks, Leon and James. Just wondering how the “non-existent” deacon of the Tridentine Mass would fit in with the deacon of today.
As far as dcs’ smarmy comment, it was quite unhelpful and didn’t even address the question.
Thanks again, gents.
Comment by ** Matt ** — 21 October 2007 @ 11:06 pm** Matt ** writes:
As far as dcs’ smarmy comment, it was quite unhelpful and didn’t even address the question.
I apologize if my comment sounded “smarmy”; it wasn’t meant to be. My point was that there is no difference, as far as Mass is concerned, between a permanent deacon and a transitional one. A deacon is a deacon. It is even hard to see how a “permanent” deacon is really permanent since there are conditions under which he can be ordained to the priesthood (for example, if a married permanent deacon’s wife dies, or if he was never married at all).
The FSSP parish in Georgia has two “permanent” deacons and has Solemn Mass every Sunday.
Hope this helps.
Comment by dcs — 21 October 2007 @ 11:12 pmWhat do you do for a sub-deacon if you have a solemn 1962 Mass?
Comment by Roman Sacristan — 21 October 2007 @ 11:16 pmRoman Sacristan “What do you do for a sub-deacon if you have a solemn 1962 Mass?”.
Usually a Priest stands in as sub-deacon (and indeed as deacon). For example, I assisted at a solemn Mass a few weeks ago: three priests celebrated; one as priest, another as deacon and the third as sub-deacon.
Comment by David — 21 October 2007 @ 11:29 pmSmarmy or not, a deacon is a deacon. Period.
Unfortunately only a few of the permanent deacons have had the slightest interest in the TLM. I’ve always felt that one of the great ironies of the post-conciliar liturgical and ecclesial revolution was that at the same time as a new Missal was being introduced whose rubrics greatly diminished the delineations between lay and clerical liturgical roles, the idea of a permanent diaconate was being revived!
After 35-40 years of this, no wonder people are confused!
Post-Summorum Pontificum, maybe we need a “permanent subdiaconate” too ;-)
Comment by maynardus — 21 October 2007 @ 11:36 pmThank you, DCS. I do appreciate your clarification, and no hard feelings. :-)
I understand there were deacons prior to Trent but the Fathers decided to suppress that form of Orders. If so, why? Something irregular about their position…? For the history of the Tridentine Mass, there was no such thing as the deacon of today, so I am more than curious how he would fit in in today’s Extraordinary Mass.
As for a permanent deacon later becoming a priest, here is Los Angeles, a permanent deacon remains one!
Roman Sacristan wrote, “What do you do for a sub-deacon if you have a solemn 1962 Mass?”
What an irony. LOL No deacon ( the deacon was really a priest or Transitional Deacon—seminarian on his way to full Holy Orders ) before, yet there was a sub-deacon. Today, there is no sub-deacon, but we do have deacons. Hey, I guess that is where we can use the PD of today. ;-)
Thanks, guys.
Comment by ** Matt ** — 21 October 2007 @ 11:36 pmOops – my comment was intended to read “only a few of the permanent deacons I’ve known have had the slightest interest in the TLM…”
Too much champagne after the Red Sox’ win I guess…
Comment by maynardus — 21 October 2007 @ 11:42 pmI believe an instituted acolyte can stand in for a sub-deacon as well.
Comment by pat — 21 October 2007 @ 11:42 pmmaynardus wrote, “Post-Summorum Pontificum, maybe we need a “permanent subdiaconate” too ;-)
Hey, that sounds cool. Why not?
Comment by ** Matt ** — 21 October 2007 @ 11:43 pmPat has said it above. I am an Instituted Acolyte and I have been given to understand that I can fulfil the position of sub-deacon
Comment by John Rayner — 22 October 2007 @ 12:36 amJst to make it clear once more, since there still seem to be some misunderstandings: There is only one diaconate, Trent didn’t suppress anything. Men are ordained deacon. If they go on to be then ordained priest is a different question and a matter of policy, if you will. As long as they are deacons, there is no difference between a transitional and a permanent one as far as the sacrament of Holy Orders is concerned (there are some juridical differences, which do not enter here). The transitional or permanent refers to an intention for the future, it is by no means an ontological differentiation. So permanent deacons of today can not only act as deacons (and subdeacons) in the TLM, it is especially proper that they do so.
Comment by Berolinensis — 22 October 2007 @ 2:52 amIn truth, everyone in Holy Orders is a deacon, even bishops. When a deacon is ordained as a priest, he does not lose anything that he had received from God when he was ordained a deacon, and when a priest is ordained a bishop, he does not lose anything that he had received from God when he was ordained a deacon or ordained a priest. Everything a bishop or a priest was when he was a deacon is still there, still belongs to him, and always will be proper to him even if, God forbid, he falls into grave sin and is defrocked.
Comment by Jordan Potter — 22 October 2007 @ 7:52 amFrom Rorate Caeli, after mentioning that 18 days ago the new director of the Vatican Publishing House, Don Giuseppi Costa SDB, had indicated they had no plans to reprint the Missale Romanum 1962:
“The series ‘Monumenta Liturgica Piana’, at the care of Manlio Sodi, SDB, and Alessandro Toniolo, started with this year’s volume, the Missale Romanum (1962) – surprised, Don Giuseppe? The Pontificale Romanum (Editio typica 1961-1962) is in the process of being printed. The Breviarium Romanum (1962), in one volume (Totum), will probably be published in 2008, and the Rituale Romanum (1952), probably in 2009.”
Comment by Henry Edwards — 22 October 2007 @ 8:29 amFormerly, one who had been tonsured at least could act as subdeacon, but without the maniple and he would not hold the paten. So it would seem a small matter for an instituted acolyte to step in.
Why not revive all the minor orders too?
As to the new book, we’ll see what comes of it. Fortunately we don’t have to wait 10 years for the USCCB to translate it in accordance with Liturgiam Authenticam.
Comment by Scott Smith — 22 October 2007 @ 9:23 amFor what it is worth, there were so-called permanent deacons concurrent with the Old Missal. Besides the fact that there were permanent deacons as the Roman missal developed even into the Middle Ages (think of St. Francis of Assisi), there were some after even up to Vatican II as well. Granted they were uncommon. For instance, monasteri