A long-time reader and WDTPRSer GS sent this useful e-mail:
I just came across a concise roundup of currently published hand missals for the usus antiquior. Although the post is almost a year old, I don’t know of any new players in the field since then. The blog also refers to a Latin Mass Magazine article in the Spring 2008 issue. I know you’ve reviewed some of these, but this provides a very handy comparison of the various choices, and also a shortlist of changes made to the Mass from 1950-1962, plus Pope Benedict’s Good Friday prayer change.
The following missals are reviewed:
Saint Joseph Daily Missal: Bonaventure Press, 1953 reprint, no Latin for propers.
New Marian Missal: Mary Immaculate Queen Centre, January 1960 reprint, Latin/English for ordinary and some propers, by Father Sylvester Juergens, color illustrations in the original are reprinted in black and white.
Roman Catholic Daily Missal: Angelus Press, true 1962 Missal (newly typeset), Latin/English for ordinary and all propers, based on Father Juergens’ Ideal Missal 1962.
Daily Missal 1962: Baronius Press, true 1962 Missal (newly typeset), Latin/English for ordinary and all propers, based on the Daily Missal and Liturgical Manual (16th edition) published by Laverty & Sons, Leeds, in 1960; real Moroccan leather cover.
Saint Andrew: Bonaventure Publication, 1945 reprint, the author wishes the Angelus and Baronius missals had been based on this one.
My Sunday Missal: Neumann Press, republished this missal for Sundays and principal feasts "explained by Father Stedman", updated for the revised Holy Week, Latin/English ordinary and all-English propers, very small form factor.
In studying various hand missal translations while preparing the monthly "worship aid" for the First Friday High Mass at St. Augustine, it has become apparent to me that the translations, even in the missals of the same name, changed dramatically between 1940 and 1962. There were at least three versions of English translation of the St. Andrew Missal alone in that time, the last of which demonstrated that awful ICEL principle of translating the qui clause of the collect as "you" instead of "who" (not to mention the sterile-looking illustrations). It’s no wonder we ended up with the ICEL slop we got — there was a clear trajectory.