BOOK RECEIVED: 1962 Parish Ritual – HUZZAH!

Preserving Christian Publications has reprinted a 1962 Parish Ritual.  Hooray!   This book includes what the Collectio Rituum had but it includes more items and moments useful for parish life.  It’s like the British Sacristy Manual, but it is set up for use in these USA.


I am so glad to see this book!  WELL DONE!

Just a while ago I had a post in which I dealt with the Collectio Rituum and what the priest had to say in Latin and what he could say in English.  The problem is, while the later, post-62 versions of the Collectio were available, the 1962 wasn’t.  And there were significant changes by 1965 in what had to remain in Latin.

This volume solves the problem.

Fairly sturdy cover, to the point of being a little stiff.  But it will be durable.

Two ribbons.

This supremely useful book should be ready at hand in every sacristy.  It has common blessings, the rites of sacraments, the prayers for the blessing of Holy Water, for the lifting of censures, for burials and for visits to the sick and the dying.

In the inside cover are emergency forms of sacraments, etc.

In the back, there is the rite for the blessing of Holy Water.  Of course, traditional Catholics are using and, therefore, blessing Holy Water all the time.  As a matter of fact a couple short hours ago I did so myself before Sunday Mass, which has an Asperges.   But people wanted Holy Water back in the day, and so the rite was quickly found in the book.

I note with a bit of a cringe the train-wreck name of the long-time dominating liturgist, in the spirit of V2 liturgist, the late Freddy McManus.  Oh well, being an editor isn’t that hard.

Notice this… the New Latin Psalter was replaced in this volume by the Vulgate Psalter!  HURRAY!

Not so auspicious a beginning, but entirely trivial, is the typo on this page – the first of the intro.  Can you find it, like Waldo?

See how practical this is.  From the onset it indicates the stole color.  The rubrics are translated.  If something can be said in English, you are double columns.  When something must be said in Latin, there is only one column (a small type English translation at the bottom in the footnote area).

I think Homer’s editor might have nodded here.  The Rite indicates “White Stole” but the rubric goes on to say, “The priest, vested in surplice and violet stole…”.

There are a few little things to correct in the subsequent printing.

The rites for FORTY HOURS!   If there were a parish moment to be revived far and wide, I would have to be FORTY HOURS DEVOTION, specifically intended for prayer to avert disaster and/or beg forgiveness from God.

Common and happy rites.  I am glad they call it “Churching”.

Here is one people might not know about!

I enjoyed paging about in this new volume and exploring, reviewing things I haven’t done or haven’t done for a while.

This is a really tool for a priest.  Every priest should have this, just as a carpenter has a hammer and measure on his belt.

UPDATE: Be aware before you get out there in the sanctuary for Benediction, that there is a problem with the Divine Praises.  It is as if they referred to an old version that didn’t yet have a couple additional titles.


About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Hard-Identity Catholicism, Just Too Cool, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, REVIEWS and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Charles E Flynn says:

    In the second paragraph on page iii, what should be “Collectio Rituum” becomes “Collectio Riruum”.

    A search at Google for “collectio riruum”:

    About 50,100 results (0.56 seconds)
    Showing results for collectio rituum
    Search instead for collectio riruum

  2. KateriK says:

    Second paragraph – second sentence: Riruum. Should be Rituum.

  3. This is a positive development. That being said …

    Back in the day, a priest would have in the pocket of his cassock, a small vial of the “Oleum Infirmorum,” as well as a tiny volume known in the US as the “Priest’s New Ritual.” Measuring 3 by 4.25 inches, and half an inch thick, it contained essential texts for “Administration of the Sacraments and Various Blessings.”

    Sometimes you can find them on eBay …

    … although mine is a 1940 edition published in Baltimore, from when they still used the Vulgata (as the 1947 edition linked above probably used the Pian Psalter). I got mine as a gift from a friend who had two in his library, but a priest might benefit even more from something that fits in his pocket.

    All in good time.

  4. maryelangdon says:

    Fr. Z. Look up Fredrick McManus whose name appears on the book you are promoting.. He was head of liberal post V2 group bringing in changes to Mass etc. Called FLDC ( Federation of local Diocesan Commissions.) Associated with NCCB.

  5. WmHesch says:

    What’s the “Blessing and Dedication of a Child” for, or where would it fit in?

    Seems like something cool to do when they’re 4 or 5 and might remember it.

    There was a Blessing of Children on the Feast of St Anthony of Padua in the old Seraphic (Franciscan) Rituale.

  6. I don’t think the the later liturgical career of an editor (McManus) is any reason to reject this book. [Who did that?!?] That would be the ancient ad hominem fallacy.

    On the other hand, as a historian, I find one aspect of this book very interesting (again, not to say it is not useful). That the rubrics on the Latin side of the page are all in English shows that at least a decent number of priests in 1962 were so Latin illiterate that they could only “say the black and do the red” if the red were in English.

    It reminds me of the intervention by Cardinal Spellman at Vatican II that priests should be allowed to pray the Office in the vernacular so that they knew what they were saying, but that Mass should still be in Latin because . . . well I don’t know. Perhaps because the people all knew Latin. [Spellman, if memory serves, also put up the money for the translation system during the Council because his Latin was deficient. Card. Cody, on the other hand, a bishop at the Council, was so fluent that he could speak at length extemporaneously.]

    This is not about whether the Office should or should not be in Latin—I say it in Latin when not celebrating publicly in vernacular—or about what language the Mass should be in—I say the old rite in Latin and the new rite in both languages. My point is that much of the move to vernacular happened because priests of the 1950s (and earlier) seem to have been Latin illiterate—able to mouth the words but not read and understand the rubrics or even the “black letter” texts themselves. Research I have done in the archives of my Order in Rome confirms this impression.

    Again, this is a historical observation, not a policy statement. And bravo to Preserving Christian Publications for the reissue.

  7. WmHesch says:


    Due to WWII, there certainly was some Latin illiteracy in the years before the Council… some of the Orders mitigated Latin proficiency because 1st year seminarians were older (as in mid-20’s vs. 17 or 18) when they entered in the late 1940’s. I heard that first-hand from a priest ordained in 1956 who still says our TLM every morning.

  8. “I don’t think the the later liturgical career of an editor (McManus) is any reason to reject this book. [Who did that?!?] ”

    Although not explicit, that this was the implication of the comment by “maryelangdon” or it at least so seemed to me. If not, I am happy.

    [BTW…if you want some fascinating reading, must as autopsy reports are often fascinating, read Msgr. Schuler’s “Chronicle” of the music/liturgy war after Vatican II. Do a search on McManus, too. Find it online HERE.]

  9. Fr. Jim B says:

    Just received my copy today. It brought a tear to my eye. Why did we ever toss out such beauty and forsake such spiritual potency? I’ll put it to use as often as I can. Step by step, little by little.

Comments are closed.