novus ordo mass and consilium: its organization, workings, process, replete with graphs

8/10/2019 Novus Ordo Mass and Consilium: Its Organization, Workings, Process, Replete with Graphs

1/52

Christiaan W. Kappes 2009

1

PONTIFICIOATENEO DIS. A NSELMO DEURBE PIL FACOLT DILITURGIA

THE CHRONOLOGY, ORGANIZATION, COMPETENCIES ANDCOMPOSITION OF THE

CONSILIUM AD EXSEQUENDAM CONSTITUTIONEM DE SACRA

LITURGIA

Elaborato Scritto per laCommissio ad Lauream04.V.2009

Studente: K APPES Christiaan W.Moderatore: FOLSOM Cassian, osb

Commissio: CARREphrem, osb; MAZZA Enrico; BARBAMaurizio


2/52


2

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Well before the ending of the Second Vatican Council, in 1965, the Church had alread

begun to chart its trajectory of reform in light of the principles of the Liturgy that were beingleaned fromSacrosanctum Concilium . Pope Paul VI had already intimated his desires to initiateliturgical reform, as soon as possible, to all of the moderators of the Second Vatican Council, 1963. He then decided to entrust Giacomo Cardinal Lercaro with the task of setting into motia thorough and extensive reform of the Roman rite in order to materialize the desires express by the Fathers of the Council.1 It was this preliminary assignment of Pope Paul VI that wouldeventually lead to Cardinal Lercaros formation of a group of prelates and experts that wou

attempt to realize the desires of the Council Fathers for liturgical reform. This was to ultimatehappen through the establishment of an organ of the Holy See, known as theConsilium adexsequendam Constitutionem de sacra Liturgia .

Furthermore, this group of prelates and experts was charged with the task of evaluatinthe theological and pastoral value of the Churchs liturgical inheritance in light of particultheological and pastoral principles that were emanating from the Council itself. They had tadditional task of simultaneously respecting and preserving the roots of the newly reformliturgy within the universal, as well as the western, tradition of the rites of the Sacraments ansacramentals.

In myThesis ad licentiam The Missa Normativa : its history and principles as applied tothe Liturgy of the Word, one such rites revision was studied in depth. This study intended both chart the chronological process of the reforms of the rite of the Mass and to evaluate treforms of all the individual parts of the same Mass. This methodological study evaluated trite of the Liturgy of the Word in light of the principles of reform adopted by the Consiliuitself.

The initial work of this thesis looked forward to a fuller analysis of the entire rite of th Missa Normativa in light of these same principles of the Consilium, in order to come to

1GIACOMOLERCARO, Lettere. 10 October 1964 , in Lettere dal Concilio 1962-1965 , ed.Giuseppe Battelli, Dehoniane, Bologna 1980, 177.


3/52


3

conclusions about methodology used by the reforming periti , as well as to evaluate howcompletely the principles of the Consilium were realized in the actual schemata of the Missa

Normativa , as a whole.

The results of the initial investigation, or thesis, led theCommissio ad lauream to a preliminary question, whose answer would serve to collocate the work of the Consilium (mo particularlyCoetus X of the Consilium) within a larger context. The question that surfaced wasWhat are the organizational structures and competencies of the Consilium? The answer to thquestion was deemed important for understanding the technical aspects and day-to-day proceof reform that was a necessary preliminary to applying any theoretical principles of liturgicreform of the actual rites themselves.

Therefore the subject of the present work is simple. It is an analysis of the availablliterature, which indicates the organization and workings of the Consilium in order to permitmore in-depth investigation into the theoretical and practical principles of liturgical reform

adopted by the Consilium. Furthermore, this investigation= s results should be able to act as aninterpretive key to understanding howCoetus X of the Consilium approached its reform of theOrdinary of the Mass. The Mass in question is known as the Missa Normativa , which can be saidto be the original attempt at reform of the rites of the Mass. This Normative Mass, of courswas composed before any critique and refashioning of the Consiliums work. Interventiofollowed the initial work of the Consilium via the Sacred Congregation of Rites and thinterventions of other agencies and individuals within the Roman Curia during the period question (1964-1967).

In summary, this paper should serve as a preliminary sketch of the basic chronologycompetencies and organization of the Consilium, in order to clarify its disposition within thChurch and Roman Curia. It also intends to make precise how the Consilium played its role the process of liturgical reform following the Second Vatican Council.

The work is divided into four parts: 1.) Chronology, 2.) Organization, 3.) Competencieand Privileges, and 4.) Composition.

The Chronological section is meant to present the essential historical moments of th


4/52


4

Consilium in order to understand when and how it obtained certain competencies in liturgicreform.

The Organizational Chart is meant to give a detailed explanation of the roles and th

principal characters responsible for liturgical reform.The Competencies section is meant to illucidate the actual potentialities of the Consilium

for reform on the legal and pastoral levels.The Compositional Charts are meant to illustrate the origin and representation of th

members and periti within the Consilium itself.

It should be noted that the materials used for this work are from a numerous variety o

studies. This work seeks to organize and decipher the numerous articles and piecemeadescriptions of facets of the Consiliums beginnings, organization and work. Therefore, addition to the goal of understanding the Consilium itself, this work intends to organizindependent texts and accounts of the reform process in order to view the Consilium and iworkings with the utmost clarity. This research is of articles and documents that have beedifficult to understand in the past. Although these documents have been published for somtime, because they were often published in isolation, it has been difficult to systematize themThe usefulness of many such documents in the overall reform process should also be a naturesult of the present work.


5/52


5

2.0 CHRONOLOGY OF THE CONSILIUM AD EXSEQUENDAM SACRAMCONSTITUTIONEM DE SACRA LITURGIA

PRELIMINARIES TO THECONSILIUM

10 October 1963

Pope Paul VI personally conveys his desires to four cardinals,2 who were the moderatorsof the Second Vatican Council, to produce a document that would bring into practical effesome decisions of the same Council with regard to the sacred liturgy.3 He entrusted GiacomoCardinal Lercaro with this task in order to present the document to the bishops before the end the second session of the Council.4 Furthermore, Cardinal Lercaro received a mandate from theHoly Father for organizing a post-Conciliar commission, which draft he entrusted to FAnnibale Bugnini. Cardinal Lercaro did so, already having had A. Bugnini in mind, as he wthe respective secretary of the Conciliar commission which led to the drafting ofSacrosanctumConcilium .5

11 October 1963

Cardinal Lercaro then sought out A. Bugnini for a list of persons who, because of the

expertise, would be able to assist in the draft of an initial document outlining the upcominliturgical reform.6 A. Bugnini, for the most part, wished to base the structure of the newCommission on that of the preparatory commission for the Second Vatican Council. So, th

2 I.e., to the newly appointed Cardinals of Paul VI: Cardinals Agagianian, Lercaro, Dpfner Suenens. NICOLA GIAMPIETRO, Il Card. Ferdinando Antonelli e gli sviluppi della riformaliturgica dal 1948-1970 (Analecta liturgica e sacramentum 21), Centro Studi S. Anselmo, Roma1998, 224-225.3 This was expressed to Cardinal Lercaro personally. See GIACOMOLERCARO, Lettere. 10

October 1964 , in Lettere dal Concilio 1962-1965 , ed. Giuseppe Battelli, Dehoniane, Bologna1980, 177.4 A NNIBALEBUGNINI, La riforma liturgica (1948-1975). Nuova edizione riveduta e arricchita dinote e di supplementi per una lettura analitica (Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia38), CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma! 1997, 68.5 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 74.6 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 68.


6/52


6

Consiliums structure receives its base and inspiration from this.7 The structure had also been proposed by F. Antonelli (secretary for theSacred Congregation of Rites or SRC) as havingfive bishops and eight periti .8 Incidentally, more or less the same structure of study groups was

conceptualized by Fr. A. Antonelli, who was secretary to the Conciliar commission and secretato the SRC.9

12 October 1963

Bugnini provides Cardinal Lercaro with an acceptable list,10 which includes experts whowill eventually also be members of the variouscoetus :11

!"# %" &" &'()*+,() - .('/)*/'0 '..0*/')*,1 ,2 !"#$%&"'#()* ,%'#-.-)* 345# *1/6'.)7( ,17"

8"# 9" %" 9:1;+'11 - .('/)*/'0 '..0*/')*,1 ,2 )67 *)6 (7;'(< ), )67 &'==3/6" 8#"

?"# 5" @';;';*1* A B" &/&'1:= - .('/)*/'0 '..0*/')*,1 ,2 " !?

7 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 74.8 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 74.9 FERDINANDOA NTONELLI, Promemoria sulla revisione dei libri liturgici in execuzione dellaCostituzione Conciliare della Sacra Liturgia , in Sacra Congregazione per le Cause dei Santi ,Citt del Vaticano 1963, 7-8. This is as reproduced in: NICOLAGIAMPIETRO, Il Card. Ferdinando

Antonelli e gli sviluppi della riforma liturgica dal 1948-1970 (Analecta liturgica e sacramentum21), Centro Studi S. Anselmo, Roma 1998, 214-215.10 LERCARO, Lettere. 10 October 1964 , 177.11 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 68.12 PIERO MARINI, A Challenging Reform. Realizing the Vision of the Liturgical Renewal 1963-1975 , ed. M. Francis -K. Pecklers, Liturgical Press, Collegeville, MN 2007, 2.13 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 2.


7/52


8/52


8

to be a consultative body of trusted experts to assist in preparing the way for the eventuliturgical reform that would be initiated after the definitive approval of the Constitution on thSacred Liturgy.19

4 December 1963

At the close of the Second session of the Council, Pope Paul VI is unable to promulgathe new document Primitiae due to continued problems with the composition of the document.Canonists perceive a need for further revisions (e.g., Giulio Bevilaqua), which prevents a finapproved version of the document.20

3.0 STAGE I: THE COSTITUENTE

3 January 1964

It is during this time that His Holiness Pope Paul VI decides to establish an organ capabof reforming the Roman rite liturgy in obedience to the desires of the Second Vatican CouncAs such, the Pope personally relayed his desires to the Secretary of State, Gaetano CardinCicognani, who verbally informed A. Bugnini of his desire that A. Bugnini be the secretary the group that would be responsible for the attuazione della Costituzione .21 A. Bugnini

immediately begins his work by proposing three main facets of the commission as necessary adequately confront the task of reform. The Commission needs to operate under the followiconditions: a.)autonomy : it is dedicated to liturgical reform alone as the preparatorycommission. b.)dynamism : any curial members in full-time curial positions are excluded, so asto have full time periti . c.) international : a wide sampling of nations and cultures wouldfacilitate a more universal perspective.22

These conditions, as suggested by A. Bugnini, were also independently supported by Antonelli in the SRC, who in his Promemoria of the work of the Conciliar commission noted

19 AIM-GEORGESMARTIMORT, Le Cardinal Giacomo Lercaro (1891-1976). Souvenirs dunliturgiste, in Mirabile laudis canticum. Mlange liturgique (Bibliotheca Ephemerides LiturgicaeSubsidia 60), CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma 1991, 383.20 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 70-73.21 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 63.22 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 74.


9/52


9

that experts would need to be utilized from both inside and outside the SRC for practical reasoOn the other hand, he noted the same SRC would be indispensable as a resource for work alreadone on liturgical reform, as well as for its competence in things regarding liturgical law an

order. However, in the end, it seemed necessary to avoid using the membership of the ConcilCommission itself for the new study groups, since the membership of the Conciliar commissiwas of diverse academic backgrounds and from many far away places. These conditions did nfavor them being able to contribute to a serious program of liturgical revision of the book of tLatin rite as ordered by the Council.23

13 January 1964

The first official communiqu from the Secretariat of State reaffirmed the verbacommunication of the Holy Father to A. Bugnini via Cardinal Cicognani. The letter relayed tfollowing:

Il Santo Padre , si benignamente degnato di istituire un Consilium adexsequendam Constitutionem de sacra Liturgia, compiacendosi in pari tempo di

annoverare tra i suoi membri le loro Eminenze Reverendissime i Signori Cardinali

Giacomo Lercaro, Arcivescovo di Bologna, Paolo Giobbe e Arcadio Larraona; e di

nominarne Secretario il Rev.mo P. Annibale Bugnini, della Congragazione della

Missione.24

Officially, the establishment of the Consilium was quite simple (a schema will provide graphic further below).25 Nonetheless, A. Bugnini considered this arrangement as merely theestablishment of the group having the job of preparing -not any Constitution of the litur(which existed via Vatican II)- merely a selection of men for the parliament that will render thConstitution operative.26

The schema below provides the basic organization of the initial structure, as referred t by Cardinal Cicognani:

23 A NTONELLI, Promemoria sulla revisione dei libri liturgici, 215.24 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 63.25 A NNIBALEBUGNINI, President of the Consilium, in Miscellanea liturgica in onore di Sua

Eminenza Cardinale Giacomo Lercaro , Tournai, Decle 1966, 11.26 BUGNINI, Presidente Del Consilium, 11.


10/52


10

DECISION-MAKING STRUCTURE OF THE CONSILIUM

POPE PAUL VI

The Holy Father himself coined the phrase Costituente del Consilium for the group.27 He expected to be personally kept abreast of developments by a series of audiences that would privately granted to the President. As such, he reserved to himself the final approval of an plans for the future organ of liturgical reform.

!

CICOGNANI

= Secretary of State. As former Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, he was familiwith the processes of previous liturgical efforts toward reform under Pius XII and John XXIII.

! LARRAONA

GIOBBELERCARO

= The Membri of Costituente del Consilium , who operated by no by-laws; instead they wereexpected to work out their proposal in a spirit of fraternal cooperation.!

A. BUGNINI

= Secretary of Costituente del Consilium. Given his many years of service in the Congregationof Rites in the area of liturgical reform, he was a logical choice.

27 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 64.


11/52


11

15 January 1964

The first audience (1adunanza )28 of theCostituente of the Consilium takes place. Theymeet to discuss and work out three main areas according to the planning of Cardinal Lercarnamely: 1.) The schema of the upcoming Motu proprio (i.e.,Sacram Liturgiam );29 2.) A workingoutline for the Consilium -which A. Bugnini explains via a rough draft (abbozzo ); 3.) A projection of future possibilities of the Consilium.30 It is here that A. Bugnini proposes thefollowing structure, in his schema, namely that of a double phase of the reform process:31 a.) firstreform of the liturgical books; b.) then those books particular to bishops and the liturgical code32

Phase 1

Five groups for revision of the MissalFive groups for revision of the Breviary

Three groups for revision of the commons (e.g., of Confessors, Virgins, etc.)

Phase 2

a.) Following phase one other commissions ought to be assembled for the episcopal books andspecial group for the martyrology. b.) The Caeremoniale Episcoporum ought to be designated as work on the Caeremoniale Romanum .

Conclusion

28

The custom in the Roman Curia was to have two kinds ofadunanze : ordinary & plenary.See: BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 147.29 This happened with the help of Cardinal Felici. See: MARTIMORT, LHistoire de la rformeliturgique travers le tmoignage de Msgr. Annibale Bugnini, 214.30 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 64.31 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 10.32 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 75.


12/52


12

a.) When the Roman Missal, Roman Breviary, Roman Pontifical, Roman Ritual, Ceremonial Bishops and Roman Martyrology are revised, then the schemata will be reviewd by Gruppi di

studio (theological, pastoral, stylistic, musical, etc.). b.) following the revision by these special groups of experts a supercommissione nellambitotecnico will give a final revision and judgment.c.) The product of this process will go to thecommissione liturgica , or Members of theConsilium, for its definitive approval.d.) If the Pontiff desires, this product could then be presented to the individual episcopconferences.

Although it was Cardinal Lercaro and A. Bugnini who were responsible for most of th planning and ideas with regard to the establishment of the Consilium, the primus inter pares among the three Cardinals present, was Cardinal Larraona (former president of the ConciliCommission on the Sacred Liturgy and Prefect of the Congregation of Rites).33

This meeting also resulted in the submission of names to the Holy Father for the firsCoetus to begin liturgical reform, namely the revision of the Psalter. TheCostituente agreedupon these names within this first session in order to begin the urgent work immediately.34

Cardinal Lercaro closed the meeting outlining the following as goals:35

1.) Propose names of periti 2.) FormGruppi di studio 3.) Prepare an Instructio that illustrates the Motu proprio of 25 January 1964 anddetermines also the work of the competent ecclesiastical territorial authorities with regarto liturgical reform.4.) Secure that the Constitution is applied in letter and in spirit.

16 January 1964

Carlo Braga is appointed the under secretary to A. Bugnini to help with the future wor

33 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 18.34 BUGNINI, Presidente Del Consilium, 13.35 Ibid., 14.


13/52


13

of the reform. As a member of the conciliar commission and editor of Ephemerides liturgicae ,he had the perfect experience for the upcoming task.36

25 January 1964

The Consilium is officially established via the Motu proprio , Sacram Liturgia ; however,the name of Consilium is not used and its competency is not juridically defined within tlimits of the document.37 The members of theCostituente are present at the joint discussionsleading up to the Motu proprio . There is some tension in having two separate versions andvisions of what it should look like (that of Lercaro-Bugnini & the SRC). This is resolved for tmost part in a joint series of discussions. The initial draft of the Motu proprio contained somedisagreeable parts, according to Cardinal Lercaro and A. Bugnini. This was rectified in thsecond version of the text initially published in LOsservatore Romano .38

28 January 1964

Furthermore there is the announcement of the persone that will officially constitute thenew organ of liturgical reform. This list was approved by Paul VI and published i

LOsservatore Romano on 28 January 1964.39

31 January 1964

The public announcement of membership and purpose of theCostituente of theConsilium is revealed via LOsservatore Romano (31 January 1964).40

13 February 1964

36 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 41.37 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 63.38 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 20-21.39 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 63.40 This obviously just refers to making the news public. It was not a revelation to those involve


14/52


14

An official consultation takes place between Cardinal Larraona and some consultors othe SRC. They summon A.M. Martimort and J. Wagner for their opinions on theSacram

Liturgiam . There was a struggle at this time already, with regard to the power of the organ of th

Consilium. The SRC already had begun asserting its authority over the Consilium as consultative body.41

15 February 196442

The second audience (2adunanza ) of theCostituente meets and proposed themembri of the futureConsilium ad exsequendam Constitutionem de sacra Liturgia . This list is presentedto Cardinal Lercaro and reviewed personally by Pope Paul VI.43 It was during this privateaudience with the Holy Father, that the situation concerning the SRC was cleared up as weCardinal Lercaro was assured by Pope Paul VI of the independent nature of the Consilium44 Various matters of the Consilium and Motu proprio were taken up. Particularly, the Popeapproved of A. Bugninis amendments to the first published edition ofSacram Liturgiam in the

LOsservatore Romano .45 Following this the Pontiff gave his complete approval of the list of periti to be published in the LOsservatore Romano , but it was only published on 5 March1964.46 During this meeting the third audience (3adunanza ) is proposed and set for 11 March1964, in order to propose a differentcoetus , and more immediately, to revise the Psalter due tothe pressure from clergy and prelates around the world. This was seen by the members of tCostituente to be the last meeting among them as such since they had completed their mandat

after fulfilling all their duties in order to erect the body that would become known as thConsilium.47 Additionally, there was present Msgr. Pericle Felici, who, as an expert canonistordered further retouching to the proposed Motu Proprio and Instructio which delayed once

41 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 20-21.42 A. Bugnini also composed his Promemoria on this day, which was to aid the Pontiff istructuring an independent reforming entity from the SRC. See A NNIBALEBUGNINI, Consiliumad exsequendam Constitutionem de sacra Liturgia. Promemoria circa linterpretazione del

Costituzione liturgica, Epherimides Liturgicae 107 (1993) 435-436.43 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 32-33.44 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 33.45 A NNIBALEBUGNINI, Elenco delle correzioni inserite nel Motu proprio Sacram Liturgiam,

Ephemirides Liturgicae 106 (1992) 314-316. 46 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 64.47 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 64.


15/52


15

again its publishing.48

16 February 1964

Paul VI had already publicly announced that the upcoming instruction would have forcfollowing the ordinaryvacatio legis .49 This was the first day of Lent in 1964. It was upon thisday thatSacram Liturgiam took effect.50

4.0 STAGE II: THE CONSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF THE CONSILIUM

27 February 1964

C. Braga delivers a letter from the Secretariat of State to F. Antonelli, wherein FAntonelli is appointed as a member of the Consilium. This will become an important inclusiof one of the more veteran members of the SRC, who will have much influence on thdocumentation and discussions.51

29 February 1964

Paul VI, due to his unwavering and positive interest in the Consilium and its work

conveys his desires to Cardinal Cicognani that he has in mind several explicit tasks for thConsilium. Cardinal Cicognani himself communicates the Pontiffs mind to Cardinal Lerca(technical first among equals52 of Costituente ) the following:

Mi onoro di comunicare allEminenza Vostra Reverendissima che, secondo le

48 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 69.49 PAULUS VI, Allocuzione del Santo Padre ai Padri conciliari , in Acta Apostolica Sedis 56(1964), 139-144.50

FELICI, PERICLE, Entrata in vigore della Costituzione , in Verso la riforma liturgica. Documentie sussidi , ed. A. Bugnini, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Citt del Vaticano, 1965, 54.51 A NTONELLI, Diario. 17 November 1963 , in Il Card. Ferdinando Antonelli e gli sviluppi dellariforma liturgica dal 1948-1970 (Analecta liturgica e sacramentum 21), Centro Studi S.Anselmo, Roma 1998, 225.52 There was no official President or Prefect of the group. Leadership customarily fell to the toranking Cardinal who was present.


16/52


16

auguste indicazioni del Santo Padre, le attribuzioni della Commissione per lattuazione

della Costituzione liturgica, di cui Presidente lE.V., sono le sequenti:

a.) suggerire i nomi delle Persone che dovranno formare i gruppi di studio per la

revisione dei riti e dei libri liturgici;b.) seguire e coordinare il lavoro dei gruppi di studio:

c.) preparare con sollecitudine una Istruzione che dilucidi praticamente il Motu ProprioSacram Liturgiam e prospetti chiaramente i compiti delle autorit ecclesiasticheterritoriali in attesa della riforma dei riti e dei libri liturgici;

d.) far applicare nella lettera e nello spirito del Concilio, che lha approvata, la

Costituzione, rispondendo alle proposte delle Conferencze Episcopali ed a quesiti che

vegano rivolti per la retta applicazione dell Costituzione.

Gli eventuali ricorsi contro le decisioni del Consilium e la soluzione di questioni particolarmente delicate e gravi o completamente nuove verranno defierite dalConsilium al Santo Padre. 53

This letter was considered, among those named to reform the liturgy, to be the virtuaConstitution (Costituzione ) of the Consilium.54 One outstanding feature of this document wasthe fact that it was never published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis . The editors of A. Bugninis biography of the liturgical reform attributed this to the well-known opposition of the SacrCongregation of Rites to the perceived encroachments to its supreme authority in thing

liturgical.55

Perhaps this is why Cardinal Cicognani (former Prefect of the SRC) forbade thnewly constituted Consilium to work in the offices of the same SRC.56 However, in obedience tothe Pontiffs wishes as conveyed by the letter de labore a Consilio praestando , theConsilium named a relatively large number of experts to be the Fathers of the commission order to oversee the work of the variouscoetus .57 It is interesting to note that F. Antonelli had

53 SEGRETERIA DI STATO DI SUA SANTIT, De labore a Consilio praestando , in Enchiridiondocumentorum instaurationis liturgicae 3/1, ed. R. Kaczynski, Marietti, Roma 1976, 45.54 A. Bugnini himself considered this date the birthday of the Consilium. See BUGNINI,

Presidente Del Consilium, 11.55 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 64.56 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 66.57 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 907-908. The list of all eventual members, with rights to vote,are as follows: Presidents: Cardinal Giacomo Lercaro (1964-1968) and Cardinal Benno Guformer Abbot Primate, (1968-1969). Members: Cardinal Gregory Perter Agagianian (Prefect the Propaganda Fide), Fr. Ferdinando Antonelli, O.F.M. (Secretary SRC), Cardinal Augustin B


17/52


17

also thought of some of the very same persons as eminently qualified for the task of liturgicreform, as somebody representing the mind of the Conciliar Commission and the SRC.58 Hecame to his own recommendations independently of any consultation with A. Bugnini.

(President Secr. Christian Unity), Bishop Willem Bekkers (Neth.), Giulio Bevilacqua, C.O(Priest), Bishop Jan Bluyssen (Neth.), Archbishop Tulio Botero Salazar (Colombia), BishoRen Boudon (France), Archbishop Leo Byrne (U.S.A.), Bishop Gerald Carter (CanadaArchbishop Toms Alberto Clavel Mndez (Panama), Cardinal John Patrick Cody (ArchbishoU.S.A.), Cardinal Carlo Confalonieri, Cardinal William Conway (Archbishop, Ireland), BishoLeo De Kesel (Belgium), Archbishop George Dwyer (England), Bishop Jess Enciso Vian(Spain), Archbishop Vicente Enrique y Traracn (Spain), Archbishop Pericle Felici (CuriaBishop Bernardo Fey Schneider (Bolivia), Cardinal Paolo Giobbe (Curia), Cardinal ValeriaGracias (Archbishop, India), Archbishop Gordon Gray (Scotland), Archbishop FrancGrimshaw (England), Bishop Emilio Guano (Italy), Archbishop Paul Hallinan (U.S.A.), Bish

Anton Hnggi (Switz.), Bishop Juan Hervs y Benet (Spain), Archbishop Eugene Hurley (Africa), Bishop Jos Clemente Carlos Isnard (Brazil), Bishop Fraois Kabangu (Zaire), BishFranois Kervadou (France), Bishop Sndor Kovcs (Hungary), Archbishop Henri Jenn(France), Bishop Franciszek Jop (Poland), Cardinal Arcadio Maria Larraona (Prefect SCRBishop Ambrz Lazk (Czechoslovakia), Bishop Agostino Lpez de Moura (Portugal), BishJoseph Malula (Zaire), Archbishop Ignazio Clemente Mansourati (Rome), Bishop Joseph AlbMartin (Canada), Bishop Laurentius Satoshi Nagae (Japan), Bishop Karel Otcenask(Czechoslovakia), Archbishop Michele Pellegrino (Italy), Bishop Alfred Pichler (YugoslaviaBishop Enrique Rau (Argentina), Cardinal Joseph Ritter (Archbishop, U.S.A.), Bishop CarRossi (Italy), Cardinal Laurean Rgambwa (Bishop, Tanzania), Cardinal Ral Silva Henrqu(Archbishop, Chile), Bishop Otto Splbeck (Germany), Luigi Valentini (Priest, Rome), Bisho

Willem Van Bekkum (Indonesia), Bishop Willem Van Zuylen (Belgium), Bishop Hermann Vol(Germany), Rembert Weakland, O.S.B. (Abbot Primate), Archbishop Guilford Youn(Australia), and Bishop Franz Zauner (Austria). Secretary: Annibale Bugnini, C.M.58 A NTONELLI, FERDINANDO, Promemoria sulla revisione dei libri liturgici in execuzione dellaCostituzione Conciliare della Sacra Liturgia, inSacra Congregazione per le Cause dei Santi ,Citt del Vaticano 1963, 2-3. A. Antonelli mentions possible members as: Cardinal LarraonCardinal Lercaro, Msgr. Grimshaw (Birmingham, U.K.), Msgr. Martin (Nicolet, CA), MsgZauner (Linz, AU). He notes the following as possible periti : Msgr. Martimort (Toulouse),Msgr. Wagner (Trier), Msgr. Frutaz (SRC), Fr. Bugnini ( Ephemerides Liturgicae ), Fr. Vagaggini(St. Anselm), Fr. Dirks (St. Sabina). When speaking of individual groups of study for thvarious liturgical books he goes on to mention: Fr. De Gaiffier (Bollandist; to help with th

calendar), Msgr. Baldassarre Fischer (Trier; Psalter), Msgr. Cattaneo & Msgr Borell(Ambrosian rite and Psalter), Dom Botte (Breviary), Abbott Van Doren (Breviary). For threvision of theOrdo Missae : Cardinal Lercaro, P. Jungmann, Msgr. Martimort, Dom Botte,Msgr. Wagner, Fr. Bugnini & Msgr. Cattaneo. Dr. Kahlefeld of Monaco & Don Jounel (Gosp pericopes). Msgr. Martimort (concelebration). Fr. Gy & Msgr. Wagner, Msgr. McManus, FVagaggini (Roman Ritual). In addition he recommend institutes and already existing liturgicstudy groups (even monasteries) to be charged with some of the work to be done.


18/52


18

2 March 1964

Cardinal Larraona and A. Bugnini are able to finalize the list of the members who wiconstitute the future Consilium.59 This list only needs to be presented directly to Pope Paul VIfor his personal approval. Thus, there is no Curial dicastery or Cardinal Prefect, under whocompetency the Consilium falls. From the very beginning, they have in mind a basic structurePresident, official Members, a Secretary, and Consultors.60

ORGANIZATION OF THE NEWLY CONSTITUTEDC ONSILIUM AD EXSEQUENDAM C ONSTITUTIONEM DE SACRA L ITURGIA

CARD. LERCARO= President of the Consilium by Papal appointment61

!

A. BUGNINI

= Secretary, who is also selected by Papal appointment62

! ! CARLO BRAGAGOTTARDO PASQUALETTI

= Under secretaries63 personally selected by the President and Secretary.64

59 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 35.60 BARBA, La riforma conciliare dellOrdo Missae , 58.61 His appointment was on 29 January 1964. See: MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 20-34-35.62

A. Bugnini received his official news of Lercaro appointing him on 2 March 1964 from thSecretariat of State. See: MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 35.63 C. Braga was appointed on 16 January 1964. G. Pasqualetti was appointed as archivists onApril 1964. See MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 41, 50. Eventually these appointments werethen followed up with the earlier mentioned under secretaries: R. Romano & C. Garcia del Vall64 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 907. At its height their were never more than six to eight undersecretaries. For example: P. Marini, diocese of Bobbio; P. Gaston Fontaine, Canons Regular


19/52


20/52


20

N.B. There was an explicit proposal for a certain number of prelates, around 20-30 bishops.66 The periti , although officially chosen by the Cardinal President and personally approved by thPope, were to effectively work for the secretariate in preparing their schemata , etc.67

11 March 196468

This was the date of the firstadunanza generale . There were five cardinals present andfifteen bishops, along with one monsignor, one abbot and two priests.69 Cardinal Lercaro notedthat the following would be the first tasks to be accomplished by the Consilium:1.) Suggest periti to the Pope, 2.) form the study groups, 3.) prepare an instruction to clarifySacram Liturgiam and especially define the powers of the ecclesiastical territories with regard tothe liturgy, 4.) provide for a letter and spirit interpretation of the Council,70 and 5.) examine andanswer questions of episcopal conferences.

A. Bugnini treated the following:71

1.) Informed the Fathers that there had already been formed and was currently working a stugroup on the Psalms since 15 February 1964.

2.) The immediate work was on concelebration and communion under both kinds.3.) The Commissio ordinaria was to be instituted.4.) Also Cardinal Carlo Confalonieri was nominated vice-president of the Consilium.72

66 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 35.67 Eventually the periti (Consultors) would have an established term of office (voted by themembers or Fathers) of three years, which was renewable. See: BUGNINI, A. La riformaliturgica , 168.68 A verbale of the session has been published. See: PIERO MARINI, Il primo Periodo de attivitdel Consilium: prospettive e difficolt (Marzo-Giugno 1964), Ephemerides Liturgicae 107

(1993) 401-439.69 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 150. A few of the membership of the Consilium were not ofepiscopal rank, yet still had the right to vote at the general audiences.70 There was a concern about a spirit of legalism in the reform process. The spirit of rubricismconstrasted to the spirit of the Council.71 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 151.72 This nomination by Cardinal Lercaro was unanimously acclaimed by the assembly. Howeve


21/52


21

In detail A. Bugnini explained that each Gruppo di studio would consist of sevenconsultors. Following the preparation of a schema by the individual group working together, t

schema would be sent to twenty or perhaps even thirty periti to make a new redaction that would be sent back to theGruppo di studio . He also made explicit his plans at this meeting for thedoctrinal, pastoral, juridical, etc. groups, which would never materialize.73 Only after this process would the schema be put before the Consilium to examine (among its membership).74

In practical terms (as opposed to some written rule) it is the office of the President tconfer with the Pope on all matters of mutual interest or of necessity. Since Cardinal Lercawas one of the four Moderators of the Second Vatican Council, he was easily able to regularand frequently communicate his mind to the Pope and discuss the progress of the Consilium.75

15 March 1964

A. Bugnini delivers a fifty-three page type-written notebook to the Holy Father with h proposed plan for the practical workings of the Consilium.76 The division and function can bemore or less separated into twelve stages for the definitive reform of any given section of thliturgy that ought to undergo revision.77 Furthermore, he makes a distincition between theoperative and the revisional groups that will be doing the reform. The operative groups w be the periti preparing the schema (twelve such settori are proposed), and eleven more specialist

groups to judge various aspects of the text (latinity, jurisprudence, etc.).78

He foresees that thegeneral audiences of the members of the Consilium will take place once or twice a year.79 Thegeneral schema, as presented by A. Bugnini, is unanimously accepted by the plenary assemblythe first public meeting of the Members of the Consilium.80

it seems that the Cardinal was inspired by A. Bugninis suggestion of him as a candidate. SeMARINI, A Challenging Reform, 42.73Although such groups were initially desired, time constraints made them unpractical, and so tidea was abandoned. 74

A NTONELLI, Diario. 17 November 1963, 225.75 BARBA, La riforma conciliare dellOrdo Missae , 61.76 BARBA, La riforma conciliare dellOrdo Missae , 58.77 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 79.78 BARBA, La riforma conciliare dellOrdo Missae , 58.79 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 86.80 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 46.


22/52


23/52


23

membri: ieri sera eravamo 13, neanche un terzo. 82

Nonetheless, A. Bugnini properly functions as a secretary by animating the study grou

and handling the day-to-day business of communication. Essentially, his roles are to coordinaand network with the following entities: the diverse Conferences of Bishops, other dicastries the Roman Curia, and he is to do so in person with the Pope. Furthermore, he is to coordinacommunication and work between the President and the Consultors, who work in the variostudy groups.83

20 March 1964

One of the only two Ordinary audiences in the Consiliums history takes place on thday, wherein there are present only fourteen members of the Consilium and four consultors (tnorm that was established for such meetings had been a minimum of seventeen consultors).84

13 April 1964

The second and lastadunanza ordinaria takes place. Interpretation ofSacrosanctumConcilium was the main subject of discussion. The questions concerned the juridical and prudenapplication of the norms set forth in the document, namely: with regard to reciting the office,

what language certain rites were to be conducted, and some questions on matrimony an blessings of the Roman Ritual.85 The Consilium, in preparation for the rite of concelebration,had already sent the mandate for working on the schema of that rite to Members and Consultoon 2 April 1964.86

14 April 1964

82

FERDINANDOA NTONELLI, Note sulle Adunanze del Consilium 1 , in Sacra Congregazionedelle Cause dei Santi , Citt del Vaticano 1964, 23. This was partially reproduced by: GIAMPIETRO, Il Card. Ferdinando Antonelli, 228-229.83 BARBA, La riforma conciliare dellOrdo Missae , 61.84 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 148.85 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 148.86 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 151.


24/52


24

The first reunion of theConsulta , or the Relators, Secretaries (of the variousCoetus ) and some ofthe more qualified Consultors in liturgiology, occurs with the President and Secretary. Theform a group of about fifty men who will be consulted about the work of the variousCoetus and

about instructions and important matters for review.87

06-17 April 1964

J. Wagner presents an outline for principles of future reform of the Order of Mas(Coetus X ), which will be discussed at the first audience. It would be subsequently approved ancontains the following basic elements that will be important sources utilized for successfulreforming any one particular rite of the Mass.

a.) Acta Commissionis preparatoriae, praecipue autem eius Declarationes

quae, quamquam non sint authenticae, tamen ut unanime consilium virorum hac in re

peritissimorum -cum episcoporum tum consultorum- magno valore gaudeant.

b.) Si casus fert, vota episcoporum in collectione Commissionis

Antepraeparatoriae: Acta et Documenta expressa.

c.) Omnia quae Sectio Historica SRC pro generali Liturgiae instauratione iam

praeparavit ac typis mandavit (Memoria sulla riforma liturgica cum quattuor

supplementis).d.) Elucubrationes auctorum probatorum, qui de Missali Romano reformando

iam multa sapienter scripserunt. Quamquam non omnes eorum positiones admitti

possint, Commissio tamen nostra vituperationem temporis venturi ne subeat, vota

eruditorum diligenter, serio et mature non expendisse. 88

17-21 April 1964

87 MARINI, Il primo Periodo de attivit del Consilium, 415.88 CONSILIUM AD EXSEQUENDAMCONSTITUTIONEM DE SACRALITURGIA, Quaestiones tractandae6 (17 April 1964). Investigationes faciendae de Missali Romano recognoscendo , in La riformaconciliare dellOrdo Missae , ed. M. Barba (Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia120), CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma 2002, 265-271.


25/52


25

The second plenary meeting treats especially the episcopal conferences.89 However, it isimportant to note -for understanding of the Consiliums mode of functioning- the following: tdecisions, resulting from voting of the Fathers, on whatever subject did notipso facto result in

something becoming liturgical law or a definitive reform. For instance, in a Consilium audienon this date, the process of confirming the acts of episcopal conferences was delineated. Aftthe Fathers approved a final schema with regard to Episcopal Conference issues, it wa personally reviewed by the Pope. This Papal review occurred on the day following the ladiscussion of the Consiliums internal audience (adunanza of 21 April). So the Consilummembers decision was personally not only reviewed, but was necessarily approved by the PopOnly then, following the Cardinal Presidents audience were he explained the Consilummembers decisions, did any decision enter into the schemata of future instructions.90

Cardinal Lercaro presented, to those gathered, the general outlines of the organizatiowhich had already entered into operation. He organized fortyGruppi di studio , themselvesdivided into settori or sezioni .91

In the future, when schemata of reformed rites will be presented and explained to thFathers, the Relator of any one group (Coetus ) will make the initial presentation. It is the job ofthe Relator to be present to explain the reformed rite and elucidate points that need to be clearup and to answer questions of the Fathers regarding the preparation, redaction and decision any one givenCoetus .92

2 June 1964

Members of the Consilium begin to network with other dicasteries (i.e., Congregation foSeminaries & Religious) in order to produce joint proposals for liturgical reform and instructioinasmuch as certain aspects would fall under the competency of these two dicasteries.93

18-20 June 1964

89 GIACOMOLERCARO, Principia seu normae ad confirmanda acta coetuum episcopalium aConsilio approbata in coetu plenario dierum , in Ephemerides Liturgicae 107 (1993) 437-439.90 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 152-153.91 BUGNINI, Presidente Del Consilium, 15.92 BARBA, La riforma conciliare dellOrdo Missae. , 63.93 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 63.


26/52


26

Although the ordinary audiences were deemed unsatisfactory and discontinued, thseventeen Consultors were given permission to be at the audiences in the future to represeespecially the cardinal president.94 Before this time, due to the existence of the ordinary

adunanze , the consultors were generally absent from the meetings, unless they had a particulaschema to present, or were an expert on some schema that was to be explained and presented the Members of the Consilium.95 Finally, a completed list of the membership of the Consiliumwas published. There were 41 Members, 142 Consultors, 30 advisors (consiglieri ), and three persons working in the secretariat. The total came to 206 members.96

Due to time constraints and external pressure to implement the reform as quickly a possible, there are complaints that, in reality, the experts are really not able to comment or refleupon the materials, which are seemingly rapidly read through.97

22, 24 September 1964

During the debates between the Consilium and the SRC in the wake of the documen Inter Oecumenici , Cardinal Lercaro requested a private audience with the Holy Father at whichthe SRC was also present.98 During the audience, both argued their positions on thConstitution of the Sacred Liturgy. The Consilium prevailed, and from the conclusion of thmeeting, the Secretariat of State was to send a letter to the SRC informing it to approvunconditionally the completed future instructions of the Consilium. The SRC was merely

promulgation tool from this time forward.99

It seems that this solution was deemed necessary,since, in previous months, the SRC had attempted to publish new liturgical law under the guiof reform without consulting or notifying the Consilium. This is the famous incident of the SR(25 April 1964) changing the formula for distribution of Holy Communion before the Consiliu

94 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 155.95 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 61.96 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 62.97 A NTONELLI, Diario. 20 June 1964 , 230.98

For the critique of the SRC and the official response of the Consilium, see SACRACONGREGATIO R ITUUM, Osservazioni della SRC sugli Schemi della Concelebrazione eComunione sotto le due Specie , in Ephemerides Liturgicae 109 (1995) 138-145; CONSILIUM ADEXSEQUENDAMCONSTITUTIONEM DE SACRALITURGIA, Rilievi alle osservazioni della S.Congregazione dei Riti circa il rito per la concelebrazione e circa il rito della Comunione subutraque specie , in Ephemerides Liturgicae 108 (1994) 217-219.99 LERCARO, Lettere. 15 September 1964 , 256-257.


27/52


27

published its own instruction, which was to address -among many other things- this exachange.100

5-6 October 1964

The Gruppo di Studio (Coetus X ) is officially erected during the plenaryadunanza of theConsilium. They will be responsible for theOrdo Missae .101 The Missa Normativa will be nearlyexclusively the work of this group, as far as its structure is concerned.

30 November 1964

The Consilium addresses a letter to the Holy Father asking him once again to clarify thecompetancy of the group in face of opposition from various quarters of the Roman Curia (stincluding the SRC).

7 January 1965102

Due to continued challenges written to the Pope by the SRC during the reform procesthe Consilium received a reply to its 30 November 1964, which letter had requested a furth

explication of the competancies and powers of the Consilium as a body of liturgical reform.103

Once again, the powers of the Consilium to propose and approve all its reforms (even if needithe pro forma stamp of approval from the SRC) were guaranteed. In all the Consiliumsinstructions and reformed rites, however, it was always the principle that the SRC lacked thcompetency to change what was theessential substance of the documents, whether in its part or

100 VIRGILIO NO, Storia della Costituzione liturgica: Punti di riferimento, inCostituzioneliturgica Sacrosanctum Concilium , ed. Congregazione per il Culto Divino (EphemeridesLiturgicae Subsidia 38), CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma 1986, 20.101

JOHANNESWAGNER , Zur Reform des Ordo Missae: zwei Dokumente, in Liturgia operadivina e umana.Studi sulla riforma liturgica offerti a S.E. Mons. Annibale Bugnini in occasionedel suo 70 compleanno , ed. P. Jounel -R. Kaczynski -G. Paqualletti (Bibliotheca EphemeridesLiturgicae Subsidia 26), Edizioni liturgiche, Roma 1982, 271.102 SEGRETARIA DISTATO DI SUA SANTIT, de competentia SRC et Consilii , in Enchiridiondocumentorum instaurationis liturgicae 3/1, ed. R. Kaczynski, Marietti, Roma 1976, 116.103 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 91.


28/52


28

whole. The competency of the SRC was limited to the correct language for promulgation anreferences to canonical and liturgical changes with regard to liturgical or canonical codes of tChurch.104

The Consilium specifically was granted the rights to:1.) Study any and all questions regarding liturgical texts and the application of the Constitutiof the Sacred Liturgy.2.) Have the right to co-sign all documentation that will be published in the name of thConsilium.3.) Approve experiments in single instances.105

27 January 1965

A. Bugnini is inexplicably appointed as under secretary to the SRC,106 seemingly to givethe Consilium greater voice within the SRC and to help resolve issues of opposition.107 It is stillunclear as to whether or not this was an action to give A. Bugnini a greater voice within thSRC, or to place him under the authority of the Cardinal Prefect of the SRC.108

23 August 1966

On this date the Secretary of State gives permission for the establishment of officia

observers from non-Catholic ecclesial Christian communities. They will not have voting righor be official members, but will eventually be instrumental for consultation in a few restricteareas.109

104 PIERO MARINI, Il Consilium in piena attivit in un clima favorevole. (Ottobre 1964-Marzo1965), Ephemerides Liturgicae 109 (1995) 102-103.105

Ibid., 103-109.106Viz., inexplicable, in the sense that the reasons were never given, and had to be inferred.107 MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 92.108 PIEROMARINI, Il Consilium in piena attivit in un clima favorevole, 110.109 See BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 206-207, where they are listed as: Rev. Ronald Jasper;Rev. Massey Shepherd; Prof. Raymond George; Pastor Friedrick-Wilhem Knneth; Rev. EugeBrand; Pastor Max Thurian.


29/52


30/52


30

A second project, on this same day, was proposed to the Pope. This long project was tenumerate the operational and ordinary rules of order and authority within the structure of tConsilium. However, it was only realized (a summation of themodus operandi ) as late as 15

April 1967, within the general audience of the Consilium. At this point, for various reasons, tPope privately refused to accept or approve either the canonical or juridical structure of thConsiliums internal workings. This schema was sent to the archives and never published.114

26 September 1966

In a personal audience with the Holy Father, Cardinal Lercaro recognizes severa procedural and organizational problems of the Consilium and informs the Holy Father of somethe same observations as F. Antonelli. As a result, the two agree to the following:

1. ...siano rivedute e fissate in modo pi preciso in un vero regolamento interno,

che regoli le funzioni e le responsabilit dei relatori, dei consultori, ecc.;

2. sembrato pure opportuno fissare con maggiore sicurezza alcune linee di uno

Statuto che definisca meglio lorganizzazione del Consilium (presidenza, Consiglio di

presidenza, Secreteria, Adunanze generali e particolari) e i criteri direttivi delle

sessioni. 115

6-14 October 1966

For the first time, the members of Christian, non-Catholic confessions were admitted t be observers at the generaladunanze of the Consilium. The Observers were Professor RaymondGeorge, on behalf of the World Council of Churches; Canon Ronald C. Jasper and Dr. MasseHamilton Shepherd representing the Anglican Communion; Rev. Friedrich Wilhelm Knneth the World Lutheran Federation, and Brother Max Thurian representing the Community Taiz.116

114 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 90.115 FERDINANDOA NTONELLI, Statuto del Consilium. Protocollo n. 594/67 , ed. N. Giampietro,Citt del Vaticano, 1967, 1. This was partially reproduced by GIAMPIETRO, Il Card. Ferdinando

Antonelli, 238-239.116 CONSILIUMAD EXSEQUENDAMCONSTITUTIONEM DE SACRALITURGIA, VII Sessio PleanariaConsilii , in Ephemerides Liturgicae 80 (1966) 402.


31/52


31

10 November 1966

Paul VI personally orders (in his audience with Cardinal Lercaro) that F. Antonelli is t

be made the person personally and directly responsible for compiling and organizing the materfor a regularization of the process of the reform within the Consilium itself and its operationThis document detailing the mode of operation, discussion and approval of aspects of the refo process is to be called aStatutum Consilii .117

23 April 1967

By this time a regular method (at leastde facto ) seems to have been established in therunning of theadunanze . Normally it is A. Bugnini who has the responsibility of opening andconcluding official business business as efficiently and quickly as possible. All the materialreviewed, but he is not particularly concerned to have in-depth discussions on any particulthing or in any particular format. Secondly, it is Cardinal Lercaro who leads the discussions adirects them -as a rule.118 This organizational process is meant to put a halt to complaints andconfusion within and without the Consilium, and also to make precise the competencies and tmethods of the Consilium for arriving at liturgical reform.119

9 May 1967

On this day the observations, suggestions and records of F. Antonelli are delivered tPaul VI. In these he recommends not establishing any Statutes, so as not to give thimpression (among other reasons) that the Consilium is a permanent organ of liturgical reform.120

117 FERNANDOA NTONELLI, Manoscritto informale dellUdienza avuta con Paolo VI il 15 luglio1967 , in Il Card. Ferdinando Antonelli e gli sviluppi della riforma liturgica dal 1948-1970 (Analecta liturgica e sacramentum 21), Centro Studi S. Anselmo, Roma 1998 , 239.118 FERNANDO A NTONELLI, Manuscritto aggiunto al Diario , ed. N. Giampietro, Citt del

Vaticano 1967. This is partially reproduced in GIAMPIETRO, Il Card. Ferdinando Antonelli, 238.119 GIAMPIETRO, Il Card. Ferdinando Antonelli, 240.120 FERDINANDOA NTONELLI, Intorno allo Statuto del Consilium. Osservazioni generali , in IlCard. Ferdinando Antonelli, 240-242:

Tenendo presenti queste premesse ci si pu domandare se non serebbe il caso diaccantonare il progetto di uno Statuto, che per la forza stessa del termine e per il suocontenuto d limpressione di una istituzione pienamente, o per lo meno a tempo


32/52


32

Furthermore, any statutes approving the Consilium, on a juridical level, would have been deemas a novelty unique in the history of the Curia. This is because of the fact that, in the case of tConsilium, the Fathers of the Consilium would (in these Statutes) design and place limits

themselves (instead of the design and limits being placed upon them by an already existin juridically established organ of the Holy See. The Holy Father would have only confirmedself-organized and delineated group as now being an official organ of the Holy See.121 A rathersummary explanation of how the Consilium functioned, organizationally, is provided by Antonelli in this document as well:

Membra (Consilii) non excedunt quinquaginta? Si proprio sicuri che un

numero cos elevato sia practicamente funzionale? Si cominci con 40, ora si va fino a

50. Ma ci che domanda pi attenta riflessione quanto viene stabilito per la nomina,

tanto dei componenti del Consilium quanto dei suoi Consultori e dei suoi organismi. Lanomina dei suoi componenti, compresi i Cardinali, la scelta dei quattro quinti viene fatta

dal Consiglio di Presidenza e al Papa spetta solo la conferma ( chiaro che se vuole pu

non confermare, ma in practica la scelta che determina). Il Papa poi pu scegliere

direttamente e nominare solo una quinta parte, compresi, ripeto, i Cardinali. Questo

sistema assolutamente nuovo e non altro che una continuazione del Concilio, cosa

che non ha precendenti nella storia, perch anche dopo Trento e il Vaticano I, terminato

il Concilio, fu la S. Sede che torn ad avere piena autonomia.

In otre il Consiglio di Presidenza, composto di sette Membri del Consilium, eletto dallo stesso Consiglio plenario. Anche il Vice-Presidente eletto dal Consiglio

plenario, e al Papa riservata soltanto la conferma. Si pensi al contrasto fra queste

nomine e quelle della Curia. Tutti i componenti dei singoli Dicasteri della S. Sede, dai

Cardinali ai Consultori, sono scelti e nominati direttamente dal Papa.

Dopo queste osservazioni al testo, sia consentito di rilevare che assolutamente

necessario disciplinare il sistema delle votazioni del Consilium. Con un numero cos

grande di membri e spesso con pareri molto discordi, indispensabile decidere i vari

punti con la votazione. Ma con quali criteri? Si richiede la maggioranza dei due terzi o

indefinito, e raccogliere le disposizioni pratiche necessarie in quelle Regole o Regolamento interno, di cui si parla agli articoli [...]e che sono ancora da formulare,come detto [...]

121 Ibid., 1-5.


33/52


33

la maggioranza assoluta? Quello poi che pi importa di fissare il sistema della

votazioni: votazioni per schede o votazioni per alzata di mano. 122

On the 10th

of April 1970, Pope Paul VI granted to the Consilium a last Papal audience before its dissolution, marking the end of its labors.123 It is important to note that, from 1967until April of 1970, no significant changes in the organization, operation or methodology reform seem to have taken place. Therefore, in order to comprehend the function and methods the Consilium, it is sufficient to provide its chronology up to 1967.

122 Ibid., 1-5.123 BARBA, La riforma conciliare dellOrdo Missae , XIX.


34/52


35/52


35

6.1 The process of approval of any given reformed liturgical books

After illustrating the organization above, this section intends to describe the actually ste by-step process that occurs when any part of the liturgy is to be reformed. Each step representtheoretical part of the reform process.

1.) Each Group receives a liturgical book (or section thereof) to revise. It produces the firrelazione;

2.) The Group relays therelazione to the Secretary of the Consilium via its secretary;3.) The Secretary relays therelazione to the President of the Consilium who allows Consultors

from outside of the original Group of the firstrelazione to study it, along with 20-30consiglieri; 4.) The overall observations of the Consultors andconsiglieri result in a judgment;5.) The judgment and observations are related to the Secretary of the Consilium;6.) The Secretary of the Consilium returns the firstrelazione along with the observations ofConsultors131 andconsiglieri to the secretery of the Group orCoetus; 132 7.) The Group orCoetus then produces a secondrelazione; 8.) The second relazione is conveyed and reviewed by the Secretary of the Consilum;

9.) With the permission of the President this secondrelazione is delivered to those will be calledthe Fathers -or voting Members- of the Consilium. They must pass the item with a majority vofor it to be considered approved. This meeting with a vote and discussion is called anadunanza .

131A. Bugnini, as Secretary, organized a furtherCoetus Relatorum , or Consulta , whereby he wasable to gather therelatores from the various study groups and have them look over the work oftheir peer groups. This was a great aid to revise, correct or perfect any proposed schema byCoetus in lieu of an upcomingadunanza plenaria . The idea was to facilitate a better schema thatwould be discussed more easily at theadunanza and, of course, would be more likely to get a

placet vote. See BARBA, La riforma conciliare dell Ordo Missae , 62.132In reality, often the first relazione would be presented directly to theadunanze generali andthe Fathers would give avotazione orientativa only to the parts of the schema of whatever rite.This votazione was designed to settle debates between the periti within the gruppo and orientthem toward the desires or decisions of the Fathers on the unclear question. See: BUGNINI, Lariforma liturgica , 156.


36/52


36

10.) The vote and corrections are made by the voting bishops (et alii );133 11.) The results are relayed to the Group who prepared the first & secondrelazione, which groupis responsible for then producing aSchema generale ;134

12.) The voting members of the Consilium (Fathers) review the general schematic in order send it to Paul VI for his review.135

6. 2 Theoretical organization of the work of each Group (Gruppo )

Before the aforementioned twelve steps the approval process for any given reform, ABugninis plan for the Consilium had originally proposed a process (although neve

actualized)136

for arriving at the firstrelazione of whatever reformed rite of the liturgy.

1.) The Group would work together to prepare a proposedrelazione .2.) The schema would then be submitted to gruppi di studio .137 3.) Eight separate groups would evaluate the schema (art, pastoral, theological, historic, stylist

133Although this was mostly true, there were also interventions on the part of Paul VI and othCongregations within the Curia. This happened, for instance, when the Consiliums work wknown by the SRC since both organizations shared members. When the SRC, for exampoffered criticisms or observations, it sometimes happened that Paul VI would order CardinLercaro to revise certain rites by sending them back to the variousCoetus . See: BARBA, Lariforma conciliare dell Ordo Missae , 64.134With regard to the Instructio on this or that matter (e.g. Peculiare ius 8 February 1966), therelazioni continued to be produced until the Consilium Fathers were satisfied with the documenIn this example on sacred music ( Peculiare ius ), there were nine redactions plus a tenth and finalone, which gained approval. See BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 164.135After the review of the Pope, his final adjustments or corrections would become part of th published edition. This information (regarding the revisions) was relayed back to the Fathers the Consilium during their plenary sessions (adunanze ). See (e.g.) MARINI, Il Consilium in piena attivit in un clima favorevole, 100.136BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 81.137Ibid., 81.


37/52


37

musical, cultural and juridical).4.) The final result of theiraddenda , when compiled and combined with the schema138 by theGroup, led to the firstrelazione which would be submitted to the above mentioned process.

However, in the end, A. Lentini & other latinists in the Secretariat of State office, as weas Abbot Carlo Egger, would merely personally check the documents for style and latinity.139 Furthermore, the juridical aspects were generally reviewed by two principal able canonistMsgr. Felici and Msgr. Bonet. Also it is important to note that, among those institutions of thConsilium, there was another which did not last the five year process of reform, theCoetusConsultorum (Consulta ).140 This group only met twice in the short lived ordinary sessions of the

Ordinaria (adunanza ). It was deemed ineffective and inefficient and was discontinued within ayears time.141 For this reason it was not included in the organizational chart of the Consilium o page 35.

The Members (Fathers) of the Consilium were the most regular and effective facet of thConsilium. Individuals, from among the short-lived group of Consultors (Consulta ), wereeffective as attachs to A. Bugnini in his meetings with other dicastries of the Roman Curia oan ad hoc basis. Even after theConsulta s dissolution individual relators or Consultors wereused to represent the thoughts or themens of the Consilium when there were meetings various

138Schema/Shemata: are the fascicles of both the minutes (verbali ) of the reunions of the periti intheir proper group. They refer to therelazioni delivered to the Fathers for voting or the actualoutlines of whatever rite that the group is working on. The schemata might have supplementaryinformation (for instance, added by a relator or secretary), the results of internal voting amothe group, or details about particularly problematic issues. All the schemata had their owchronological proper numbering. See BARBA, La riforma conciliare dell Ordo Missae: , 67. 139 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 81.

140 It is important to recall that theConsulta is constituted from the Relators, Secretaries and

select experts in the science of liturgiology. They meet only in unison with the President anSecretary of the Consilium. See MARINI, Il primo Periodo de attivit del Consilium , 415.This was also described on page 24 of the chronology section of this work.

141BARBA, La riforma conciliare dell Ordo Missae , 62.


38/52


38

dicastries of the Holy See (e.g., the SRC).142

6.3 Procedure for enacting any reform approved by the Consilium

As became obvious in the chronological section of the work, the Consilium was deniethe ability to publish its reforms independently of the SRC. Furthermore, it was required consult the SRC in order to mutually agree upon the language of any decrees of the SRC befothey would be published and become binding on the Universal Church.

However, in addition, the Consilium approved several steps that it would follow in ordto realizing any reform on the universal level by means of a decree through the SRC. Th

following process was decided:143

1.) The reform of a rite, when approved by the Fathers, is to be followed by an appropria period of experimentation (e.g., concelebration, communion under both kinds).2.) There would follow an approval and definitive text conjointly agreed upon by both thConsilium and the SRC.3.) The definitive approbation of the Pope and publication would occur. Publication was tresponsibility of the SRC.

Ordinary Adunanze : These session required mandatory attendance by those Membersof the Consilium present in Rome and seventeen Consultors (who were members of the SRC

Propaganda Fidei and some among the Consilium experts. These ordinary audiences were aThursday affair twice per month in order to treat administrative questions and prepare for t plenary audiences.144 Since this organization only met twice and was then discontinued, it was

142 BARBA, La riforma conciliare dell Ordo Missae , 62.143MARINI, P., Il Consilium in piena attivit in un clima favorevole, 102.144For summaries of the sessions, see MARINI, Il primo Periodo de attivit del Consilium: prospettive e difficolt, 401-439.


39/52


39

not included on the organizational chart. Its fate will be described in more detail below.

Plenary Adunanze : These were the officially scheduled meetings of all the Fathers,

along with the Secretary and President, to discuss and vote on the work of the variousCoetus .Although various individuals could be present at the invitation of the President, most commonthe relatori of theCoetus were present and individual periti to answer questions about this or that

schema which was of the same peritus = expertise.145 There was no minimum quorum of Fathers

in order to have a valid vote. Also, no official statutes were ever approved to determine if absolute majority or a two-thirds majority was necessary to pass any give schema.

As already mentioned beforehand, the audiences or meetings were scheduled about twic

a year and the dates were chosen such as would fit with the schedules of the bishop-Fathers the Consilium.146

Relator: The relator was important for guiding the work of any one Group. As such hwould personally determine the number of gatherings necessary to produce a schema. Followithe meeting and the compilation of a schema, it would be the Groups (Coetus ) secretary whowould send a copy of the material to the Secretary of the Consilium with a series of informatinotes on the status laboris to help the Secretary make sense of the information that was presentedin the redaction.147 Furthermore, it was the duty of the relator to coordinate and invite sharing o

information from the other pertinent Groups to his own group= s work. For example:Coetus X would need to share information and coordinate discussions on a harmonious integration of twork ofCoetus XIII (the Oratio fidelium ) into their own schema for theOrdo Missae . This wasessentially worked out by the relators communicating with one another.148

145This system is also confirmed by: MARTIMORT, LHistoire de la rforme liturgique, 218-219.146MARINI, Il Consilium in piena attivit in un clima favorevole, 98.147 BARBA, La riforma conciliare dell Ordo Missae , 63.148 Ibid., 63.


40/52


40

Furthermore, it was generally the practice that eachCoetus would need to discuss its own principles and method of approaching the liturgical reform before beginning the actual practicwork of writing schemata of the new liturgical rites. This often took several sessions in order

finalize the method and principles of the individual groups work.149

7.0 THE COMPETENCIES AND PRIVILEGES OF THE CONSILIUM

by the Pope personally invested the Consilium with certain powers that were immediatesubject to his will. The canonical situation of the Consilium was nearly universally described

precarious since its ultimateraison detre was due to the Paul VI= s desire for it to accomplish

certain ends that he expressed by personal wishes and requests (although often putting these writing).

A. Bugnini in no uncertain terms stated: il Consilium si pose al lavoro come se godesse della piena libert dazione .150 However, in the same description of the independenceand power of the Consilium, he notes that the erection of the Consilium was much along the linof the pre-Conciliar commissions before the Second Vatican Council, which also operated andiscussed independently their subject matter, i.e., independent of the intervention of a curioffice with ordinary competency in that same material. Furthermore, the Consilium wadifferent from a dicastery in that it was not a legistlative body, but a study group subject to tPope. It also had the organizational difference of allowing its periti to directly participate (even ifnot voting) in the general audiences.151

149PIERO MARINI, Attivit complessiva dei gruppi di studio del Consilium ad exsequendamConstitutionem de sacra Liturgia (Gennaio1964-Marzo1965), Ephemerides Liturgicae 112 (1998) 297.150BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 83.151Ibid., 148-149. Typically it was only foreseen that the Relator of the Groups would brepresented, unless because of the material to be discussed. A particular expert would be invit by the President or Secretary to be present at the general audience to be of use to the group.


41/52


41

Legislative Executive Powers

However, due to the attitude of the SCRs toward the Consilium, there was often frictioand interventions on the part of Congregation. Therefore the following formula was decided:

1.) The Consilium will write instructions (e.g., Communion under both kinds, Concelebratioetc.) on its own as an independent body as far as its content and substance.2.) Then, in mutual consultation, an agreed upon juridic formula will be decided upon wi

regard to any instruction or document.152

3.) The SCR reserves the right to authenticate or promulgate any instruction necessitating tsignature of the Prefect and Secretary of the SCR, while it is sufficient that only the President the Consilium should sign the same instruction or document.153

152BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 84.153PAULUS VI, De competentia SRC et Consilium , in Enchiridion documentoruminstaurationis liturgicae 1963-1973 3/1, ed. S. Congregatio pro Cultu Divino, Marietti, Roma

1990, 116: Compio [...] il venerato incarico di rispondere al quesito posto dallEminenzaVostra circa la competenza del Consilium rispetto a quella di cotesto sacro Dicastero;e posso confermare ci che stato stabilito; e cio: spetter al Consilium lo studio siadelle questioni, sia dei testi liturgici, che lapplicazione della Costituzione ConciliareDe sacra Liturgia ora richiede; spetter alla S. Congregazione dei Riti promulgare,dintesa col Consilium medesimo, gli atti che diano efficacia cononica alle norme ed aitesti che esso viene preparando. Sembra opportuno riservare ai criteri discrezionali delConsilium dare le necessarie disposizioni circa le singole attuazioni che sono in via diesperimento, affinch gli sia dato modo di giudicare quali forme migliori possano essere

poi definitivamente e autorevolmente approvate dalla Sacra Congregazione dei Riti. La

promulgazione dei Libri liturgici, I quali abbiano carattere ufficiale, permanente euniversale, sar naturalmente riservata a cotesta medesima S. Congregazione; ma siravvisa lopportunit che il decreto relativo porti la firma anche dellEm.mo Cardinale

Presidente del Consilium, secondo la formola felicemente usata nella pubblicazionedella recente Instructio.

See also the initial treatment of this problem refereed to by this correspondence: Lettera dellaSegreteria di Stato , 19 May 1964, n. 2656/64 &16 June 1964, n. 2656/64.


42/52


42

4.) With regard to vernacular translations, due to Inter Oecumenici n. 29, the Consilium wasgiven the authority to approve such translations.154 5.) Furthermore, because the Fathers of the Consilium had voted to do so, the power o

personally (ex officio ) confirming the acts of episcopal conferences was ceded to the person ofthe President of the Consilium; without need to have recourse to the general audiences of thConsilium Members.155

Juridic Powers

1.) Following the publication of a document, any doubts (dubbi ) would go to theConsilium for the definitive answer.

2.) However, the Secretariat of State determined that the SRC had the right to publish thofficial responses.156

Indults

On 3 July 1964, and again on 1 October 1964, the Pontiff approved and conceded th permission to the Consilium, on its own volition, to grant indults for experiments. This wconceded to the the Cardinal President of the Consilium to determine on his own.157

154SACRA CONGREGATIO RITUUM, Inter Oecumenici , in Acta Apostolicae Sedis 56 (1964) 877-900:

Acta competentis auctoritatis territorialis ad Apostolicam Sedem transmittenda,ut ab hac probentur seu confirmentur, ea quae sequuntur contineant oportet: a.) nominaeorum qui coetui interfuerentur; b.) relationem de rebus actis: c.) exitum suffragationis

pro singulis decretis. Haec Acta duplici exemplari exarata, a Praeside et Secretariocoetus subscripta et sigillo debite munita, mittantur Consilio ad exsequendamConstitutionem de sacra Liturgia.

155BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 148.156 See Lettera della Segreteria di Stato , 3 November 1964, n. 31126. However this was never published in the Acta Apostoicae Sedis nor even carried out in practice. Instead the Consilium published all its responses todubia in Notitiae .157BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 84.


43/52


43

However, with regard to concelebration, the indult to concelebrate was simultaneouslallowed to be granted by the SRC.158

Publications

Initially, the Consilium published notes on the work of the various groups to be shareamong its own membership. These informative fascicles were calledrelationes .159 The first twowere published in March of 1964. Permission for wider publication was granted personally Cardinal Lercaro in a private audience with Pope Paul VI on 8 March 1965.160 This led to thefirst publication of Notitiae by theTipografia Vatican between January and April of 1965.161

Notitiae became the official and uninterrupted medium of communicating the work of th

Consilium to parties interested in its work.

158 BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica , 85.159MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 93.160MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 94.161GIACOMOLERCARO, In nomine Domini, in Notitiae 1 (1965) 3-5.


44/52


44

8.0 COMPOSITION WITHIN THE CONSILIUM


45/52


45

8.1 FURTHER REPRESENTATION WITHIN THE CONSILIUM


46/52


46

9.0 CONCLUSIONS

Following the exposition of the chronology, organization, competency and compositioof the Consilium, it remains only to provide a synthesis of all these aspects.

The Consilium can best be said to have operated in a completely unique manner withithe organization of the Roman Curia. From the evidence provided, it seems quite obvious, light of the historical record, that the reform methodology and process was not consistent. Mit be asked, however, if it was efficient? After all, the five-year timeline for reforming thmajor rites of the liturgy was successfully realized by the Consilium, which, at first glancsupports a positive judgment about its efficiency. However, in the end only questions remai

This is due to the fact that, without an objective criterion for judging theadunanze and theirworkings, one must use merely subjective criteria for evaluating their efficiency. For example, Antonelli used the criteria drawn from his experience in reforming the various rites of liturgic books during the reigns of Pope Pius XII and John XXIII. Further, his criticism of thConsiliums operation explicitly compared the Consiliums functioning to the normaoperationing procedure of curial agencies within the Vatican. However, this was precisely thissue. The rules of order were intentionally not defined by approved bylaws or

constitution. A. Bugnini, who had similar experiences and posts as his colleague F. Antonelclearly judged the whole process to have been been efficient and proper. He unambiguouswrote in his memoirs that the methodology adopted by the Consilium was flexibly organizeand so reliable and successful in obtaining its aims.

However, despite the fact that the efficiency and methodological consistency of thConsilium cannot be judged by procedural rules that were not part of its internal constitutioseveral observations about its organization can be made.

First of all, the Consilium worked in a hierarchical manner, in imitation of previoucommittees and curial agencies within the Roman Curia. The President, Secretery, etc., were afamiliar posts and offices. The voting members represented a typical sampling of prelates thwould also ordinarily constitute any agency within the Curia. The organ was obviouslimmediately subject to the Pontiff, who also had a great personal interest in its work. The overa


47/52


47

structure, even if more loosely knit than curial agencies, for the most part, reflected thorganization and process of day-to-day function typical of the Roman curia.

Second, the unique notes that distinguish the Consilium are the very things that make th

Consilium difficult to evaluate. The Consilium lacked any sort of formally approved set bylaws for its operation. It relied on working models of organization that were verbally approvafter consultation with the Holy Father. It was also innovative in selecting, for the most panearly all of its own membership internally. Only the initial members were chosen by the Pophimself (e.g., Cardinal Lercaro, A. Bugnini). Lastly, it had a remarkable flexibility to invent andisband committees, or consultative bodies, according to the exigencies of the moment. Ancommittee that the President or Secretary deemed useful and efficient was kept, any organizati

that was deemed less useful was either neglected or disbanded. What is more, the work groups periti were given an extraordinary liberty for internal self-organization. They could choosforeign locations for meeting and working and were able to meet as often as they pleaseFurthermore, the Fathers of the Consilium itself were not required to either be present for debaor vote on changes to the liturgical rites during the plenaryadunanze . No quorum of members(nor votesin absentia ) was required for the accomplishment of any one task. Technically, allwork was divided up between various committees and members according to the prudenti judgments of the President, even if, in reality, the Secretary of the Consilium proposedorganized and managed these important tasks.

Lastly, the representation within the membership of voting Fathers and periti , forwhatever reasons, did not seem to be very different or contrasting to curial agencies or previocommittees entrusted with liturgical reform. The organization was, for the greater part, westeEuropean and heavily Italian. Its competencies were ill-defined, and were only clarified ovtime, through both the interventions of Paul VI and the Secretary of State. In short, althoughfactual description has been given of the ordinary and theoretical workings of the reform of t

various liturgical rites, not a few exceptions to this rule exist. Eventually, frequent interventiointo the work of the Consilium, especially by Pope Paul VI, interrupted any hopes of being abto follow the initial paradigms for work and reform as proposed by Cardinal Lercaro and ABugnini according to the schema that the Pope had orignally consented to at the beginning of t


48/52


48

reform process.This study has been able to successfully locate and organize bits and pieces o

information that has been published on the Consilium and liturgical reform over the past fif

years. Its contribution has been to organize this material clearly and arrange it in a convenieway in order to understand more easily the process of liturgical reform following the SeconVatican Council. This work serves as a preparation to begin a deeper and more profitable stuof the Missa Normativa of 1967. For it is this very Mass, which represents the first majorattempt of the Consilium

novus ordo mass and consilium: its organization, workings, process, replete with graphs

Documents