As a young priest studying Canon Law in Rome during the first three sessions of Vatican Council II, I had two different memories related to the implementation of the revised liturgy of the Mass there.
One was of a conversation with the pious layman who was the sacristan of the chapel where we lived: “Father”, he said to me, “the Mass in Italian is very nice, but . . . ” hesitatingly he continued. “since Our Lord spoke in Latin at the Last Supper, is it a good idea for us to change?”
The other was of the local newspaper: “For the second time,” it boasted, “Rome has changed to the vernacular for the Mass.” It referred to the fact that for the first few centuries, prayers in Rome were still in Greek before they began to be celebrated in the then local spoken language, Latin.
A lesson of these two little stories is that Vatican II was not the first major time that the Roman liturgy was changed and updated.
A landmark work of scholarship about the liturgy was the publication in 1948 of Missarum Sollemnia, a history of the development of the Roman Mass by Fr. Joseph A. Jungmann, S.J.. (A translation from the original German to English was published two years later under the title of The Mass of the Roman Rite; Its Origins and Development.)
In this masterwork, Father Jungmann traced the changes and development of the Mass through the centuries, explaining the factors and logic behind the continual changes in the prayers and the rite itself.
With the polarization in the Church today between those favoring the “Tridentine Mass’’—i.e. the rite used before the Vatican II liturgical reforms—and those using the revised rite promulgated by St. Pope Paul VI, one might think this was the first time in history that there was a major change!
It wasn’t the first, and it won’t be the last!
I was ordained in 1958; Pope Pius XII was still in office and the Mass was still in Latin. I celebrated Mass in Latin every day for the next six years or so, until the changes to the vernacular began to be made.
(I needed no missal for the unchanging prayers of the Mass; I knew them by heart.)
Personally, I have no issues about the language of the Mass—I’m certainly used to celebrating in Latin, English, or Spanish. I miss some of the beautiful Latin chants and hymns we used to use more frequently—and we still can use them, of course.
There have been some changes in the words of the prayers and a greater variety of them. I think that’s a good thing. Some gestures, postures, and vesture have changed as well, usually because their raison d’etre no longer exists.
It seems that some of the conflict and taking of sides about the rite of the Mass is really about Vatican II itself, accepting or rejecting its teachings. It’s really an issue of change and development.
Of course we all have fond memories of past practices, customs, and favorite things, but “time marches on” and change happens, for better or for worse. Not every change is positive growth; some changes are destructive. Clearly discernment is vital.
As a priest, I lived, studied, and worked in Rome 1962-1965. I was on the staff of Vatican II for the second and third of its four sessions. It was a wonderful, exciting, unforgettable time.
There was no great polarization at Vatican II. The Council was not sharply nor bitterly divided. It was a time of great grace and inspiration. It was a profoundly spiritual experience. It really was an aggiornamento.
17 October 2021