New Page 1

Vatican II: Sacrosanctum concilium, or The Const. on the Sacred Liturgy. All.

The twenty-first century, the time we have been called upon to live and work, is full of many forms of turmoil both in civil society and within ecclesial life. One of the sectors of turmoil within ecclesial life is, unfortunately, the liturgy.

Some fly the flag of “progressive,” not restraining themselves from introducing any new thing or change to the liturgy. Some fly the flag of “traditionalist,” considering the Novus Ordo Mass to be invalid. And between these two extremes, there are many nuances, not all of which are healthy for Catholic life.

Since the end of the second Ecumenical council held in the Vatican (Vatican II, 1962-1965), it seems at first glance that the only things that have remained resembling the Catholic Church as it was just before the council were the buildings, most aspects of the hierarchy, the Bible, and a few other details. The greatest eclipse of the past occurred in the Liturgy.

The results? The churches stand relatively empty, with an estimated 10% or 20% Sunday Mass attendance among Catholics. Catholic families seem to have fallen apart, except for a very small percentage of families that follow Church teaching and practice. The seminaries have been evacuated, high school seminaries closed, the priests in general don’t know Latin much less Greek or Hebrew and in general attain their degrees by fulfilling very low standards. Priests are quite uneducated, and easily swayed by movements such as Marxism, Eastern Religions, pantheism or New Age. After years, perhaps an entire childhood curriculum, of Catholic education, today’s youth generally know astonishingly little about their faith.

The list could go on, but these simple snapshots, irrefutable for their obvious evidence, lead many to ask serious questions: whatever has happened since the close of the council to the present has birthed ill fruit. What evil tree has spawned this?

All of this leads us to face the fact that discussions regarding the Liturgy run the risk of becoming heated debates and uncharitable arguments. As we progress through the topic, it is important for all to maintain the proper focus: that of constructively cultivating our spiritual lives and assisting our participation in the mission of the Church, not necessarily that of entering into combat with those who disagree with us.

This is the reason why today’s topic must follow a clear course: we will discuss the nature of the Liturgy, considering what all the Ecumenical councils have said about it, in harmony with Vatican II; we will discuss the place of God and man in the Liturgy; we will discuss issues of liturgical variety and other Catholic rites; and we will expose a number of errors and heresies found in our time.

The first cycle of the Deposit of Faith Series is concerned mostly with introductory and general topics. Hence we have seen “revelation” and “scripture” in general, without studying the concrete books of the bible, which will be done later. Today’s unit serves as an introduction to the sacraments. Each one of the sacraments will be duly studied in later units.

This unit concludes the first four introductory themes, which are: revelation, Trinity, Scripture and Sacraments. The next four units will serve as general introductions to other fields: moral theology, spiritual theology, the theology of the Church’s mission, and canon law. These four are founded upon the previous four, much as action follows being.

Liturgy. The continuation of the work of salvation achieved by the Paschal Mystery of Christ, our High Priest; it is celebrated publicly in the Church.[2]

Rite. 1. The diverse liturgical traditions in which the one catholic and apostolic faith has come to be expressed and celebrated in various cultures and lands.[3] Examples include the Roman Rite, the Ambrosian Rite (both are considered Latin Rites), Byzantine, Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, Maronite and Chaldean, all of which are Catholic. It will be left for the more curious to explore these different rites, an exercise which would exceed the limits of this small introduction.

So much could be said about the liturgy, and, more specifically the sacramental liturgy, that the gentle reader must be reminded that this is an introduction, and only an introduction, with the hopes that each will continue good research on his own hereafter.

The Nature of the Liturgy. The Church stresses the distinction between the theological elements of what we believe in and about the liturgy, and the practical aspects which can be called norms or laws. As regards the first of these, she has stressed these points about the liturgy:

1. It has a goal or finality: “For it is the liturgy through which, especially in the divine sacrifice of the Eucharist, ‘the work of our redemption is accomplished.’”[4]

b. it makes them a holy temple of the Lord, a dwelling place for God in the Spirit[5]

c. Stand as a sign and witness to the world, to attract all into “one fold and one shepherd”[6]

3. The liturgy is centered on the “sacrifice and sacraments,”[7] and all activity in the Church is in turn centered on the liturgy,[8] even such tasks as preaching to non-believers. It is the center and goal of all her apostolic work.[9]

4. Christ is present in the Church especially through her liturgical celebrations.[10] This is why, for example, “when anybody baptizes it is really Christ himself who baptizes.”[11]

5. It has an interior form: “The Liturgy, then, is rightly seen as an exercise of the priestly office of Jesus Christ.”[12]

6. It foreshadows and even participates in the eternal, heavenly liturgy.[13] This is one reason why the images of saints are so prominent in Catholic temples, and why we invoke their names continually throughout our liturgical prayers.

7. The Liturgy calls for interior participation: The faithful should come properly disposed, hearts in tune with words, and cooperating with grace. The spiritual life consists of more than just the Liturgy: we must pray, mortify ourselves out of love for Christ, and, as a recommendation, participate in devotions.[14]

8. The Church governs the liturgy, the liturgical books are to be observed, and no one may add to, detract from or change said books.[15]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church begins discussing the sacraments by examining the liturgy. And it begins discussing the liturgy by asserting that the liturgy is the work of the Holy Trinity.[16]

The Father is the source and goal of the liturgy. The Liturgy offers fitting worship to God, the source of all blessing; “blessing is a divine and life-giving action, the source of which is the Father.”[17] In the liturgy, “the divine blessing is fully revealed and communicated. The Father is acknowledged and adored as the source and the end of all the blessings of creation and salvation.” This is why it is so important to pray frequently, meditating upon creation and God as Creator, meditating upon salvation and one’s own sinfulness. Unless these realities are deeply reflected upon, all attendance to the holy Liturgy can only be superficial.

The Son of course is the Father’s greatest gift to us through the Incarnation. Vatican II reminds us that “just as Christ was sent by the Father, so also he sent the apostles… he willed that the work of salvation which they preached should be exercised[18] through the sacrifice and sacraments, around which the entire liturgical life revolves.”[19] The Son worked our salvation during his earthly life, and still does through the Church, specifically by the sacraments, and those things related to them. In Christ all the angels and saints participate in the eternal heavenly liturgy.[20]

The Holy Spirit “prepares the Church to encounter her lord: he recalls an makes Christ manifest to the faith of the assembly. By his transforming power, he makes the mystery of Chris present here and now.”[21] Everything that is transformation and change in the spiritual life is by the Spirit’s power. He gave us the words of Scripture (“He has spoken through the prophets”) which we ceaselessly employ in the Liturgy. The Liturgy of the Spirit is the work of salvation, the encounter of Christ and the Church, which was only foretold and foreshadowed by the Spirit in the ancient Jewish liturgy before the time of Christ’s paschal mystery. The “memory” in “do this in memory of me” is in fact the remembrance of the Spirit, who “‘recalls’ to the assembly all that Chirst has done for us.”[22] His power makes Christ present especially by his transforming of the bread and wine. He unites us into his communion.

Therefore, there is no such thing as “our Liturgy.” It is the Trinity’s work, in which we participate. By part-icipate, it is indicated that our role is only that of a part, of sharers, through the Church, in the action of the Trinity.

1. When someone wants to “celebrate creation” or show love for the earth and make corresponding liturgical adaptations, what kernel of truth have they apprehended? Where does their error lie?

2. If someone says, “The Liturgy is there for us all to express the talents of the community,” what would the proper reply be, in line of principle?

The Church has received the sacraments of Christ; the Church therefore governs them. The Church has the authority to reform the Liturgy, as was the intention of the Constitution on the Liturgy of Vatican II, and as was done by the instituting of the Tridentine order of the mass, mandated by Trent, and instituted by Pius V.[23] And the same authority that instituted the Tridentine mass or any other catechism, sacramentary or canon law can revoke these, given of course that those things pertaining to natural, eternal and divine law go without contradiction.

As for the current law of the Church, the following canon is in place,[24] yet it can hardly be said that it is observed faithfully:

Can. 846 §1. In celebrating the sacraments the liturgical books approved by competent authority are to be observed faithfully; accordingly, no one is to add, omit, or alter anything in them on one’s own authority.

And other norms scattered throughout the part on the sacraments re-state the obligation to observe the liturgical books. For example, we read, “Baptism is administered according to the order prescribed in the approved liturgical books, except in the case of extreme necessity…”[25] Expressions are repeatedly used such as, “… according to the prescripts of the liturgical books.”[26]

Especially through the post-Enlightenment age in Western Civilization, a romantiziced, eventually subjective, version of Christianity penetrated the ethos of countless souls, groups and communities. This relativist subjectivism has been a chronic sickness for Catholics ever since, with profound reaches into approaches to liturgical observance,[27] especially in the popular disposition to overlook, even intentionally, the liturgical law of the Church.

1. When a couple comes to their wedding mass to celebrate Holy Matrimony, and they wish to introduce one or more elements which are not in the liturgical books, what reply must they be given?

2. What reply can be given to someone who says that the Novus Ordo Mass is invalid, since Pius V said that the Tridentine Mass was to be observed “in perpetuity”?

What to think about rock bands, bongos, guitars, electric synthesizers, recorded hymns played back, and other such oddities in the Mass? Much could be said in this section alone, but let’s just look at a few norms from Musicam Sacram (hereafter MS),[28] promulgated by the Sacred Congregation of Rites on March 5, 1967, and still is not superseded by posterior legislation. Being a particularly important issue of our day, let us detain ourselves a bit longer on this detail.

MS begins referring to the norms of the Vatican II constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium. These are the basic norms established there:

1. Music is to help the prayer be more pleasing, to promote the unity of minds, or to confer greater solemnity upon the sacred rites.[29]

2. The Latin is to be retained, yet the vernacular may be admitted on certain occasions.[30]

3. “The treasury of sacred music is to be preserved and cultivated.”[31] It remains to be discussed whether the wholesale jettison of Gregorian Chant fulfills this norm.

4. Seminaries and novitiates should attach special importance to musical training; even higher institutes of sacred music are to be established.[32] There are few if any of these so far, leaving space for great initiative.

5. “The Church recognizes Gregorian chant as being specially suited to the Roman liturgy. Therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services.”[33]

6. Religious singing should be cultivated also on a popular level, especially due to the aptness of such song for Catholic devotion.

7. “The pipe organ is to be held in high esteem in the Latin Church, for it is the traditional musical instrument, the sound of which can add a wonderful splendor to the Church’s ceremonies an powerfully lifts up men’s minds to God and higher things. But other instruments may be admitted for use… with the consent of the competent territorial authority… only on condition that the instruments are suitable, or can be made suitable, for sacred use.”[34] It is important here to distinguish that there are, therefore, instruments apt for the liturgy and those not apt for the liturgy even though they are great for other forms and uses of music.

This is where Musicam Sacram picks up. It describes nuances in types of music corresponding to the solemnity or simplicity of the celebration. It states, “No kind of sacred music is prohibited from liturgical actions by the Church as long as it corresponds to the spirit of the liturgical celebration itself.”[35] So one needs to work from the nature of the liturgy to see what type of music is apt.

For example, does toe-tapping music help one apprehend the sacrifice of Christ on the altar? Do drums introduce one to the serene contemplation of God? Does dancing and wiggling one’s rear transform one, through the power of the Spirit, into a greater likeness to the Son of God by grace? Does the cocktail lounge piano background music during the offertory dispose one more for the self-offering to God or for another relaxing drink at the club?

As for the singers and musicians themselves, we read, “The priest and his ministers, because of the sacred order they have received, hold a special place in these celebrations, as do also – by reason of the ministry they perform – the servers, readers commentators and those in the choir.”[36] All those involved, in other words, are servants of the mystery.

Therefore it highly appropriate for the nature of the Liturgy that the musicians be there where most Church’s put them: out of sight, behind the congregation to support it instead of in front, facing the congregation to entertain it. MS further states that if there are women in the choir, they should be outside of the sanctuary, which is the space dedicated to the priestly office.[37]

Also therefore, it is illogical to applaud at liturgical celebrations for good performances. Applause has been reserved in the Latin rite as a manifestation of assent, as when a man is proposed for ordination before he is ordained, or when a bishop takes possession of a diocese.

MS goes on to discuss what points of the Mass are appropriate for full-congregation sung responses, such as acclamations, hymns, psalms, and so forth, careful to assert also that there must be a reverent silence, not because we want “dumb spectators,” but to enhance “active participation” (see the section on this below in the apologetics section).[38]

There are norms stating that the musical settings of the Our Father require approval from the competent authority (mostly the local Bishop) for use in the Mass. Further norms deal with the singing of the Liturgy of the Hours and of devotional music.

“Those instruments which are, by common opinion and use, suitable for secular music only, are to be altogether prohibited from every liturgical celebration and from popular devotions.”[39] Of course, dealing with music is not like dealing with math, and prudential discernment is called for here. Later norms by the bishops have prohibited the use of recorded music; as music is itself part of the act of worship, it is to be performed and not just electrically reproduced. The implication is beautiful: the important part of music is to perform sacred music, not so much just the hearing of it. “Sing a new song to the Lord,” the Psalm commands us.

Music, sculpture, architecture, stain glass, paintings, mosaics, frescos, relieves all form liturgical art. “The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art.” Let us protect it all with wisdom and faith.

1. Which instruments may fall under the prohibition of MS 63 (see footnote 39)? Which instruments are “by common opinion and use” more apt for liturgical music? Why?

The Practical Norms Regarding the Liturgy: Where to Find Them, What to Do with Them.

Today there is much confusion, indeed much distress and tears, caused by liturgical abuse. Most of us know cases of those who have even left communion with the Catholic Church on account of one or more abuses. Yet to most of us it is quite obvious, as Jesus Christ founded the Catholic Church and no other making her the barque of salvation, that it would be better, in truth and in charity, to address an imperfection than to abandon Catholicism.

So where does one go to find the sources of liturgical norms? The list could go on and on, but, given the official Catholic literature that’s out there today, the following can serve as a guide and solid starting point.

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal. It is referred to popularly as the GIRM. Since all Catholic life points to the liturgy, and then to the sacraments, and ultimately to the Eucharist who is God himself, it seems best to start here. This document is the list of norms regarding the celebration of the Holy Mass.

Addressing a number of liturgical abuses, especially in the Mass, the Holy Father, in his latest Encyclical on the Eucharist, Ecclesia de Eucharistia,[40] mandated the promulgation of Redemptionis Sacramentum[41] on March 25^th of 2004.

The footnotes alone from these two documents offer mountains of research material regarding the sacraments.

Every sacramental book comes with not only the rite of the celebration of the sacrament, but also with concrete norms on how they are to be observed. For example, when one brings communion to the sick in the Hospital, a service widely offered by volunteer laity from many parishes in our day, they should follow the rites and indications of the liturgical book established for that purpose.

There are other good books out there commenting liturgical law, answering questions and offering the proper nuances. For example, Msgr. Peter Elliot’s book, Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite,[42] or his smaller Liturgical Question Box,[43] shed plenty of well-informed light on the observing of the rites. He worked in the Vatican for more than ten years, became an expert in liturgical issues, and is now serving the faithful in the Diocese of Melbourne, Australia.

Then there is the important Ceremonial of Bishops,[44] which deals with precisely what it’s title says, adding in other details of the liturgy and liturgical observance.

For more theological reflections on the Liturgy, Cardinal Ratzinger has plenty, such as The Spirit of the Liturgy,[45] or A New Song for the Lord.[46]

These texts are good ones to start with, and again, if the reader is looking for more, please refer to the hundreds and hundreds of footnotes you will find within. It is the humble opinion of this author that it would behoove the Church to compile all of its liturgical laws into one place much as was done with the synthesis of Canon Law in 1913. Many of the current day ambiguities and even contradictions in Church Law could be easily avoided.

A wonderful publication and web site dedicated to liturgical questions is the Adoremus Bulletin.[47]

These writings from Rome carry official weight, containing both theological principles and practical norms (for most I have linked web sites in English):

1. How can liturgical abuses be attended to in a way which is both effective and full of charity and truth?

2. How can we help ourselves and others, both clergy and lay, be better informed about the norms of Catholic liturgy?

“The liturgy is mad up of unchangeable elements divinely instituted, and of elements subject to change.”[55] This is one of the key principles the Council adhered to when, in December of 1963, they promulgated the reform of the sacred liturgy.

But what happened? Instead of a reformation, we seem to have gotten a deformation. The liturgy was “experimented with,” casting all doubt upon the Church’s adherence to Apostolic tradition. Forms of the liturgy were used to even attack Rome, criticize the reigning Holy Father, and undermine basic tenets of the faith. Strong modernist currents emptied the liturgy of its spiritual richness. Everything was seen from clown masses, to masses with the blessing for homosexual partners, to the sacrament of anointing offered to none of those even close to their final weakness or sickness, to absolution without confession, and much more.

Many groups, such as those who followed Bishop Lefebvre, and even our local Bishop Sandborn (the Societies of Pius X and Pius V respectively, without going into other splinter groups spawned by these), held that the Church had abandoned tradition. And, much like Martin Luther cried, “Sola Scriptura,” so now Lefebvre and others cried “Sola Traditione,” and they even rejected the validity of the reigning Pope as the legitimate successor of Peter.

Therefore today we see popular currents of those who strive to describe the turmoil in the Church as a question of extreme right and extreme left. In fact, however, that’s not the problem. The problem is the obedience of faith. Peter is the Rock, and whoever adheres to him in obedience based on faith, will never go astray. It’s not a question of left or right; it’s a question of unconditional loyalty to the successor of Peter – again, out of faith, and not out of a manipulative sort of pride or superiority complex – who is the rock upon whom the Church rests, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail, by promise of Christ.

The many abuses that came after Vatican II are regularly attributed to Vatican II. But Aristotle, long ago,[56] proved that to say that one thing was caused by another just because it came after it is illogical. Yes, evil things have arisen since Vatican II, but the Council itself is a gift from the Spirit, protected from all error in matters of faith and morals, and a revolution whose real content has still not even been discovered. The world has not yet begun to see Vatican II. The causes of evil come from elsewhere, obviously from Satan and from his agents, both demons and men.

If the liturgy is the salvific work of Christ extended through time and space through the Church’s continual celebration of his Paschal Mystery, there can only be one liturgy, for there is only one Christ.

“The use of the Latin language, with due respect to particular law, is to be preserved in the Latin rites.” The use of the vernacular was to be applied only to some parts of the liturgy, like the “readings, some prayers and chants.”[57] Translations from the Latin, when used in the liturgy, require approval from the competent ecclesial authority.

Latin was introduced precisely to help the faithful more widely understand the liturgy, in the early centuries of the Church. Originally the Church did and taught everything in Aramaic, Hebrew, and mostly Greek.[58]

Latin is therefore adhered to, to some degree, for a different reason: for the precision of the non-vernacular language, for the union with the saints it expresses regarding the eighteen plus centuries that preceded our day, for the brilliance and perfection of the Gregorian Chant so adapted to the particular characteristics of Latin, and for other such reasons.

Some wish to hold that the liturgy of the Catholic Church is the manifesting of the particular talents and gifts with which God has blessed each of the faithful. Defining the liturgy in this way reflects a partial truth and in a distorted light.

It is true that the faithful are called to employ their talents, each according to their gifts, in worshipping God. But even though some individuals, such as readers, singers or musicians, exercise their talents during liturgical celebrations is not sufficient reason for us to define the liturgy as such.

Since the Liturgy has as its principle agent the Trinity, and the Church only participates in God’s liturgical work, this error pretends to make man the agent of the liturgy.

On the contrary, God is the agent, and the liturgy consists in the saving power of his paschal mystery,[59] not of man’s acts. Indeed, in the Church, “the human is directed toward and subordinate to the divine, the visible to the invisible, action to contemplation, and this present world to that city yet to come, the object of our quest.”[60]

Vatican II states that this is “to be considered before all else,”[62] given the Liturgy’s pride of place in the spiritual lives of the faithful.

At first glance, then, one would think that the more activity a person does in the liturgy, and the more parts of the person involved in the liturgy, the better. And so the logical conclusion is that during the entire liturgy, the entire congregation would have to be singing and dancing, so that there would be more activity, and it would be full rather than attending to one part of the person.

But let’s go to the actual promulgation of the Council in the Chruch’s official language, Latin:

Quae totius populi plena et actuosa participatio, in instauranda et fovenda sacra Liturgia, summopere est attendenda: est enim primus, isque necessarius fons, e quo spiritum vere christianum fideles hauriant; et ideo, in tota actione pastorali, per debitam institutionem, ab animarum pastoribus et sedulo adpetenda.[63]

This active participation of the whole people must be very much attended to, so as to establish and promote the sacred liturgy: it is the first and even necessary source from which the faithful truly draw the Christian spirit; and therefore, in every pastoral action, through the proper instruction, it should be pursued very diligently by the pastors of souls.

1. The word “actuosa” is used, not “activa.” Both come from the word actus, meaning driving, moving, movement, which in turn comes from ago, agree, egi, actum:[64] to drive something as one would to cattle or sheep, and which also means, by derivation, to do.[65] This word actuosa is translated as “active” by Flannery. The two Latin words are similar but do not mean the same thing. The -osa ending is a typical Latin ending added to nouns, when turning them into adjectives, to indicate “fullness.”[66] The -iva ending makes a noun and adjective and adds the nuance of belonging or connectivity.

Activa therefore would mean “belonging to or pertaining to movement.” Actuosa would mean “fullness of movement.” Activa furthermore carries the sense of being transitive,[67] meaning that the term has an object or referent, and this is not so with the term “actuosa.”

The result is that, in order to have a fullness of movement, distinct from a transitive action related to the human person’s movement, that motion must be interior. Therefore the council asks us to be fully active interiorly in the Liturgy. This is confirmed by the context of the document, where it asks that “the faithful come to it [the liturgy] with proper dispositions, that their minds should be attuned to their voices, and that they should cooperate with divine grace lest they receive it in vain.”[68]

It is therefore illogical to use these words to promote many forms of liturgical abnormalities, completely foreign to the long tradition of liturgical practice in the Catholic Church, such as liturgical dance, the parsing of a passage so a greater number of readers can be involved, the permutation of the liturgy into a type of theater, and so on.

After considering the precise wording of the text, it would be most convenient, in lieu of a theological reflection, to refer to Cardinal Ratzinger’s discourse on this topic. In his masterful book, The Spirit of the Liturgy,[69] he dedicates a whole section of one chapter to the question of Active Participation.[70]

He restates the question, “But what does this active participation come down to? What does it mean that we have to do?” Unfortunately, the immediate application many drew from these words were that “as many people as possible, as often as possible, should be visibly engaged in action.” But if we are participating in something, in reality we are forming a part of a single whole. This whole is the liturgical action, which is the true worship of the whole Christ, head and body. It’s all Christ’s prayer.

He states, “This oratio [Latin for prayer] – the Eucharistic Prayer, the “Canon,” – is really more than speech; it is actio [Latin for action] in the highest sense of the word. It is the “action of God which takes place through human speech.” That is, we are to participate in “the action of God himself.” This is a “prayerful approach to participation,” for by our prayer, we unite ourselves to the Incarnation, and even to the Death and Resurrection, of the Son of God.

All this is why the Post-Conciliar document Musicam Sacram, already amply cited in this unit, states, “This participation should be above all internal, in the sense that by it the faithful join their mind to what they pronounce or hear, and cooperate with heavenly grace.”[71]

Do you want to be active in the Liturgy? Find silence, still your soul, and pray; for you will find the God who made all things outside of you when you turn to your interior in humility and faith.

Next Topic, Suggested Reading. (Virtuous Reality: Conscience, Morality and Virtue)

[1] Rev. 19:1-8

[2] Cf. CCC 1066-1068.

[3] CCC, Glossary (Archbishop William J. Levada), verbum Rites.

[4] SC, 2.

[5] SC, 2

[6] SC, 2; cf. Jn 10:16.

[7] SC, 6.

[8] SC, 9.

[9] SC, 10.

[10] SC, 7.

[11] SC, 7; St. Augustine, Tractatus in Ioannem VI, 1, 7.

[12] SC, 7.

[13] SC, 8.

[14] SC, 11-13.

[15] Cf. CCC 850. More on this below under “Authority.”

[16] CCC 1077-1112.

[17] CCC 1078. This is why priests bless, for their spiritual paternity; and why parents bless their children.

[18] Some translations, such as Flannery’s, translates “exercised” by “set in train.” Personal note: I find the former hardly clearer.

[19] SC, 6.

[20] CCC 1090.

[21] CCC 1092.

[22] CCC 1103.

[23] Pius V, Quo Primum, July 13, 1570. cf. http://www.unavoce.org/quoprim.htm.

[24] Cf. Code of Canon Law: Latin-English Edition, New English Translation, Canon Law Society of America, Washington, 1989. (NB: The Code was promulgated by Rome in 1983.)

[25] CIC, 850.

[26] CIC, 853.

[27] Cf. Nichols, Aidan, Looking at the Liturgy: a Critical View of its Contemporary Form, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1996, pp. 35-37.

[28] http://www.adoremus.org/MusicamSacram.html.

[29] SC 112.

[30] SC 36 and 113.

[31] SC 114.

[32] SD 115.

[33] SC 116.

[34] SC 120.

[35] MS 9.

[36] MS 13.

[37] MS 24.

[38] MS 16-17.

[39] MS 63; cf. SC, 120.

[40] Translating to “The Church from the Eucharist,” which can be found in English on the Vatican’s web site here: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/special_features/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_20030417_ecclesia_eucharistia_en.html

[41] Translating to “The Sacrament of Redemption,” which can be found in English on the Vatican’s web site here: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html.

[42] Peter J. Elliot, Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite: the Eucharist and the Liturgy of the Hours, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1995, pp. 360.

[43] Peter J. Elliot, Liturgical Question Box: Answers to Common Questions about the Modern Liturgy, Ignatius Press, 1998, pp. 189.

[44] The Ceremonial of Bishops, International Commission on the English in the Liturgy. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1989.

[45] Ratzinger, Joseph Card., The Spirit of the Liturgy, tr. John Saward, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 2000, pp. 232.

[46] Ratzinger, Joseph Card., A New Song for the Lord: Faith in Christ and Liturgy Today, tr. Martha M. Matesich, Crossroad Publishing Company, New York, 1996.

[47] Cf. www.adoremus.org.

[48] Cf. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_20111947_mediator-dei_en.html.

[49] Cf. http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P6SACLIT.htm, or http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/p6saclit.htm.

[50] Cf. http://www.adoremus.org/Interoecumenici.html.

[51] Cf. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_03091965_mysterium_en.html.

[52] http://www.adoremus.org/MusicamSacram.html.

[53] http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_24021980_dominicae-cenae_en.html.

[54] http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html.

[55] SC, 21.

[56] Cf. Topica, Sophistic Refutations

[57] SC, 35.

[58] Cf. Patrick Madrid, Why Is That in Tradition?, Our Sunday Visitor Press, Huntington, IN, 2002, pp. 179-181.

[59] SC, 6.

[60] SC, 2. Stress added.

[61] SC, 14. Text cited from Trans. Austin Flannery, Vatican II: the Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, New Revised Edition, Costello Publishing Company, Northport, NY, 1998, p. 8.

[62] This is Flannery’s translation. Another translation reads, “In the restoration and development of the Sacred Liturgy the full and active participation by all the people is the paramount concern, for it is the primary, indeed the indispensable source from which the faithful are to derive the true Christian spirit.”

[63] Sacrosanctum Oecumenicum Concilium Vaticanum II, Constitutiones Decreta Declarationes, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Vatican City, 1993, p. 14.

[64] These are the four principal parts of the verb, much like in English we have “begin, beginning, began, begun.”

[65] Cf. D.P. Simpson, Cassell’s Latin Dictionary: Latin-English, English-Latin, Macmillan, New York, NY, 1968, verba actus, ago.

[66] Charles E. Bennett, New Latin Grammar, Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers, Inc., Wauconda, IL, 1999, p. 112; reprint of the 1908 Allyn and Bacon edition.

[67] Cf. Lewis and Short Latin Dictionary.

[68] SC, 11; cf. 2 Cor 6:1.

[69] Joseph Card. Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy, tr. John Saward, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 2000, pp. 232.

[70] Ibid., pp. 171-177.

[71] MS 15, Citing cf. SC 11.