Novus Ordo Mass and Consilium: Its Organization, Workings, Process, Replete With Graphs

Christiaan W.
Kappes 2009

1

PONTIFICIO ATENEO DI S. ANSELMO DE URBE
PIL FACOLT DI LITURGIA
THE CHRONOLOGY, ORGANIZATION, COMPETENCIES AND
COMPOSITION OF THE
CONSILIUM AD EXSEQUENDAM CONSTITUTIONEM DE SACRA
LITURGIA
Elaborato Scritto per la Commissio ad Lauream
04.V.2009
Studente: KAPPES Christiaan W.
Moderatore: FOLSOM Cassian, osb
Commissio: CARR Ephrem, osb; MAZZA Enrico; BARBA Maurizio
Christiaan W. Kappes 2009

2

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Well before the ending of the Second Vatican Council, in 1965, the Church had already
begun to chart its trajectory of reform in light of the principles of the Liturgy that were being
gleaned from Sacrosanctum Concilium. Pope Paul VI had already intimated his desires to initiate
liturgical reform, as soon as possible, to all of the moderators of the Second Vatican Council, in
1963. He then decided to entrust Giacomo Cardinal Lercaro with the task of setting into motion
a thorough and extensive reform of the Roman rite in order to materialize the desires expressed
by the Fathers of the Council.
1
It was this preliminary assignment of Pope Paul VI that would
eventually lead to Cardinal Lercaros formation of a group of prelates and experts that would
attempt to realize the desires of the Council Fathers for liturgical reform. This was to ultimately
happen through the establishment of an organ of the Holy See, known as the Consilium ad
exsequendam Constitutionem de sacra Liturgia.
Furthermore, this group of prelates and experts was charged with the task of evaluating
the theological and pastoral value of the Churchs liturgical inheritance in light of particular
theological and pastoral principles that were emanating from the Council itself. They had the
additional task of simultaneously respecting and preserving the roots of the newly reformed
liturgy within the universal, as well as the western, tradition of the rites of the Sacraments and
sacramentals.
In my Thesis ad licentiam The Missa Normativa: its history and principles as applied to
the Liturgy of the Word, one such rites revision was studied in depth. This study intended to
both chart the chronological process of the reforms of the rite of the Mass and to evaluate the
reforms of all the individual parts of the same Mass. This methodological study evaluated the
rite of the Liturgy of the Word in light of the principles of reform adopted by the Consilium
itself.
The initial work of this thesis looked forward to a fuller analysis of the entire rite of the
Missa Normativa in light of these same principles of the Consilium, in order to come to

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

3
conclusions about methodology used by the reforming periti, as well as to evaluate how
completely 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 the Commissio ad lauream to a
preliminary question, whose answer would serve to collocate the work of the Consilium (more
particularly Coetus X of the Consilium) within a larger context. The question that surfaced was:
What are the organizational structures and competencies of the Consilium? The answer to this
question was deemed important for understanding the technical aspects and day-to-day process
of reform that was a necessary preliminary to applying any theoretical principles of liturgical
reform of the actual rites themselves.
Therefore the subject of the present work is simple. It is an analysis of the available
literature, which indicates the organization and workings of the Consilium in order to permit a
more in-depth investigation into the theoretical and practical principles of liturgical reform as
adopted by the Consilium. Furthermore, this investigation=s results should be able to act as an
interpretive key to understanding how Coetus X of the Consilium approached its reform of the
Ordinary of the Mass. The Mass in question is known as the Missa Normativa, which can be said
to be the original attempt at reform of the rites of the Mass. This Normative Mass, of course,
was composed before any critique and refashioning of the Consiliums work. Interventions
followed the initial work of the Consilium via the Sacred Congregation of Rites and the
interventions of other agencies and individuals within the Roman Curia during the period in
question (1964-1967).
In summary, this paper should serve as a preliminary sketch of the basic chronology,
competencies and organization of the Consilium, in order to clarify its disposition within the
Church and Roman Curia. It also intends to make precise how the Consilium played its role in
the process of liturgical reform following the Second Vatican Council.
The work is divided into four parts: 1.) Chronology, 2.) Organization, 3.) Competencies
and Privileges, and 4.) Composition.

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

4
Consilium in order to understand when and how it obtained certain competencies in liturgical
reform.
The Organizational Chart is meant to give a detailed explanation of the roles and the
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 the
members and periti within the Consilium itself.

It should be noted that the materials used for this work are from a numerous variety of
studies. This work seeks to organize and decipher the numerous articles and piecemeal
descriptions of facets of the Consiliums beginnings, organization and work. Therefore, in
addition to the goal of understanding the Consilium itself, this work intends to organize
independent texts and accounts of the reform process in order to view the Consilium and its
workings with the utmost clarity. This research is of articles and documents that have been
difficult to understand in the past. Although these documents have been published for some
time, because they were often published in isolation, it has been difficult to systematize them.
The usefulness of many such documents in the overall reform process should also be a natural
result of the present work.


5
2.0 CHRONOLOGY OF THE CONSILIUM AD EXSEQUENDAM SACRAM
CONSTITUTIONEM DE SACRA LITURGIA

PRELIMINARIES TO THE CONSILIUM

10 October 1963

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

11 October 1963

Cardinal Lercaro then sought out A. Bugnini for a list of persons who, because of their
expertise, would be able to assist in the draft of an initial document outlining the upcoming
liturgical reform.
6
A. Bugnini, for the most part, wished to base the structure of the new
Commission on that of the preparatory commission for the Second Vatican Council. So, the

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 riforma
liturgica dal 1948-1970 (Analecta liturgica e sacramentum 21), Centro Studi S. Anselmo, Roma
1998, 224-225.
3
This was expressed to Cardinal Lercaro personally. See GIACOMO LERCARO, Lettere. 10
October 1964, in Lettere dal Concilio 1962-1965, ed. Giuseppe Battelli, Dehoniane, Bologna
1980, 177.
4
ANNIBALE BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica (1948-1975). Nuova edizione riveduta e arricchita di
note e di supplementi per una lettura analitica (Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia
38), CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma !1997, 68.
5
BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica, 74.
6

6
Consiliums structure receives its base and inspiration from this.
7
The structure had also been
proposed by F. Antonelli (secretary for the Sacred Congregation of Rites or SRC) as having
five 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 secretary
to the SRC.
9

12 October 1963

Bugnini provides Cardinal Lercaro with an acceptable list,
10
which includes experts who
will eventually also be members of the various coetus:
11

1.) A. M. Marlimorl raclicaI aIicalion of !"#$%&"'#()* ,%'#-.-)* (SC) in
chaler one.
2.) }. A. }ungmann raclicaI aIicalion of lhe decrees vilh regard lo lhe Mass
(ch. 2).
3.) C. Vaggagini & I. McManus raclicaI aIicalion of decrees on lhe
sacramenls (ch. 3).
4.) H. Schmidl lhe raclicaI aIicalion of decrees for lhe Divine Office (ch. 4)
5.) }. Wagner lhe raclicaI aIicalion of decrees on music and arl (ch. 7-8).
6.) A. Dirks lhe raclicaI aIicalion of lhe IilurgicaI year and furnishings (5,
7).
12

7.) I. onel LilurgicaI Iav.
13

7
8
9
FERDINANDO ANTONELLI, Promemoria sulla revisione dei libri liturgici in execuzione della
Costituzione Conciliare della Sacra Liturgia, in Sacra Congregazione per le Cause dei Santi,
Citt del Vaticano 1963, 7-8. This is as reproduced in: NICOLA GIAMPIETRO, Il Card. Ferdinando
Antonelli e gli sviluppi della riforma liturgica dal 1948-1970 (Analecta liturgica e sacramentum
21), Centro Studi S. Anselmo, Roma 1998, 214-215.
10
LERCARO, Lettere. 10 October 1964 , 177.
11
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

19-20, 25-26, 30 October 1963

These experts were made to work in secrecy consulting only with each other and Cardinal
Lercaro and A. Bugnini (acting as secretary). The same experts meet with Cardinal Lercaro on
October 30 to be able to present a two-pronged approach to respond to the Holy Fathers request:
(a.) a Motu Proprio, Primitiae,
14
which ought speak on the general outlines of the reform in
obedience to the Council, and (b.) an Instructio, which ought to determine particular juridical
and liturgical changes with regard to the Roman rite.
15
The Holy Father wanted a sort of Legge-
stralcio, which could anticipate the fuller legislative reforms that would eventually be enacted as
a result of the liturgical Constitution.
16
However, Msgr. Emmanuale Bonet, a noted jurist, was
unable to approve of the documents content. He would be very helpful in the coming years of
reform, but was exacting as a jurist.
17

17 November 1963

Arcadio Cardinal Larraona, Msgr. Martimort, Msgrs Fonet & Wagner, Fr. Antonelli,
who are on friendly terms, discuss together the best way to proceed with the process of liturgical
reform. Principally, however, these men are concerned with the schema as presented to be
approved definitively at the Council.
18

It was during this meeting and subsequent talks that planning and structure of a
preliminary organization was announced by Cardinal Lercaro to various scholars whom he
trusted. He invited these same men to be members of his Commissio specialis for preparing to
address the Normae circa executionem Constitutionis de sacra liturgia. This was merely meant

14
CONSILIUM AD EXSEQUENDAM CONSTITUTIONEM DE SACRA LITURGIA, Primitiae, in
Costituzione liturgica Sacrosanctum Concilium. Studi (Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae
Subsidia 38) CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma 1986, 98-101.
15
BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica, 68-69.
16
AIM-GEORGES MARTIMORT, Le rle de Paul VI dans la rforme liturgique, in Mirabile
laudis canticum. Mlange liturgique (Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia 60), CLV-
Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma 1991, 236.
17
BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica, 68, 81, 88.
18
FERDINANDO ANTONELLI, Diario. 17 November 1963, 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, 224.

8
to be a consultative body of trusted experts to assist in preparing the way for the eventual
liturgical reform that would be initiated after the definitive approval of the Constitution on the
Sacred Liturgy.
19

4 December 1963

At the close of the Second session of the Council, Pope Paul VI is unable to promulgate
the 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 final
approved 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 capable
of reforming the Roman rite liturgy in obedience to the desires of the Second Vatican Council.
As such, the Pope personally relayed his desires to the Secretary of State, Gaetano Cardinal
Cicognani, who verbally informed A. Bugnini of his desire that A. Bugnini be the secretary of
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 to
adequately confront the task of reform. The Commission needs to operate under the following
conditions: a.) autonomy: it is dedicated to liturgical reform alone as the preparatory
commission. b.) dynamism: any curial members in full-time curial positions are excluded, so as
to have full time periti. c.) international: a wide sampling of nations and cultures would
facilitate a more universal perspective.
22

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

19
AIM-GEORGES MARTIMORT, Le Cardinal Giacomo Lercaro (1891-1976). Souvenirs dun
liturgiste, in Mirabile laudis canticum. Mlange liturgique (Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae
Subsidia 60), CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma 1991, 383.
20
21
22

9
that experts would need to be utilized from both inside and outside the SRC for practical reasons.
On the other hand, he noted the same SRC would be indispensable as a resource for work already
done on liturgical reform, as well as for its competence in things regarding liturgical law and
order. However, in the end, it seemed necessary to avoid using the membership of the Conciliar
Commission itself for the new study groups, since the membership of the Conciliar commission
was of diverse academic backgrounds and from many far away places. These conditions did not
favor them being able to contribute to a serious program of liturgical revision of the book of the
Latin rite as ordered by the Council.
23

13 January 1964

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

Il Santo Padre, si benignamente degnato di istituire un Consilium ad
exsequendam 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 a
graphic further below).
25
Nonetheless, A. Bugnini considered this arrangement as merely the
establishment of the group having the job of preparing -not any Constitution of the liturgy
(which existed via Vatican II)- merely a selection of men for the parliament that will render the
Constitution operative.
26

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

23
ANTONELLI, Promemoria sulla revisione dei libri liturgici, 215.
24
25
ANNIBALE BUGNINI, 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

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 be
privately granted to the President. As such, he reserved to himself the final approval of any
plans for the future organ of liturgical reform.
!
CICOGNANI

= Secretary of State. As former Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, he was familiar
with the processes of previous liturgical efforts toward reform under Pius XII and John XXIII.
!
LARRAONA
GIOBBE
LERCARO

= The Membri of Costituente del Consilium, who operated by no by-laws; instead they were
expected 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 Congregation
of Rites in the area of liturgical reform, he was a logical choice.

27

11

15 January 1964

The first audience (1 adunanza)
28
of the Costituente of the Consilium takes place. They
meet to discuss and work out three main areas according to the planning of Cardinal Lercaro,
namely: 1.) The schema of the upcoming Motu proprio (i.e., Sacram Liturgiam);
29
2.) A working
outline 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 the
following structure, in his schema, namely that of a double phase of the reform process:
31
a.) first
reform of the liturgical books; b.) then those books particular to bishops and the liturgical code.
32

Phase 1

Five groups for revision of the Missal
Five 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 and a
special 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 of adunanze: ordinary & plenary.
See: BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica, 147.
29
This happened with the help of Cardinal Felici. See: MARTIMORT, LHistoire de la rforme
liturgique travers le tmoignage de Msgr. Annibale Bugnini, 214.
30
31
32

12

a.) When the Roman Missal, Roman Breviary, Roman Pontifical, Roman Ritual, Ceremonial of
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 nellambito
tecnico will give a final revision and judgment.
c.) The product of this process will go to the commissione liturgica, or Members of the
Consilium, for its definitive approval.
d.) If the Pontiff desires, this product could then be presented to the individual episcopal
conferences.

Although it was Cardinal Lercaro and A. Bugnini who were responsible for most of the
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 Conciliar
Commission 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 first
Coetus to begin liturgical reform, namely the revision of the Psalter. The Costituente agreed
upon 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.) Form Gruppi di studio
3.) Prepare an Instructio that illustrates the Motu proprio of 25 January 1964 and
determines also the work of the competent ecclesiastical territorial authorities with regard
to 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 work

33
34
35
Ibid., 14.

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 the
limits of the document.
37
The members of the Costituente are present at the joint discussions
leading up to the Motu proprio. There is some tension in having two separate versions and
visions of what it should look like (that of Lercaro-Bugnini & the SRC). This is resolved for the
most part in a joint series of discussions. The initial draft of the Motu proprio contained some
disagreeable parts, according to Cardinal Lercaro and A. Bugnini. This was rectified in the
second 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 the
new organ of liturgical reform. This list was approved by Paul VI and published in
LOsservatore Romano on 28 January 1964.
39

31 January 1964

The public announcement of membership and purpose of the Costituente of the
Consilium is revealed via LOsservatore Romano (31 January 1964).
40

13 February 1964

36
37
38
MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 20-21.
39
40
This obviously just refers to making the news public. It was not a revelation to those involved.

14
An official consultation takes place between Cardinal Larraona and some consultors of
the SRC. They summon A.M. Martimort and J. Wagner for their opinions on the Sacram
Liturgiam. There was a struggle at this time already, with regard to the power of the organ of the
Consilium. The SRC already had begun asserting its authority over the Consilium as a
consultative body.
41

15 February 1964
42

The second audience (2 adunanza) of the Costituente meets and proposed the membri
of the future Consilium ad exsequendam Constitutionem de sacra Liturgia. This list is presented
to Cardinal Lercaro and reviewed personally by Pope Paul VI.
43
It was during this private
audience with the Holy Father, that the situation concerning the SRC was cleared up as well.
Cardinal Lercaro was assured by Pope Paul VI of the independent nature of the Consilium.
44

Various matters of the Consilium and Motu proprio were taken up. Particularly, the Pope
approved of A. Bugninis amendments to the first published edition of Sacram 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 March
1964.
46
During this meeting the third audience (3 adunanza) is proposed and set for 11 March
1964, in order to propose a different coetus, and more immediately, to revise the Psalter due to
the pressure from clergy and prelates around the world. This was seen by the members of the
Costituente to be the last meeting among them as such since they had completed their mandate
after fulfilling all their duties in order to erect the body that would become known as the
Consilium.
47
Additionally, there was present Msgr. Pericle Felici, who, as an expert canonist,
ordered further retouching to the proposed Motu Proprio and Instructio which delayed once

41
42
A. Bugnini also composed his Promemoria on this day, which was to aid the Pontiff in
structuring an independent reforming entity from the SRC. See ANNIBALE BUGNINI, Consilium
ad exsequendam Constitutionem de sacra Liturgia. Promemoria circa linterpretazione della
Costituzione liturgica, Epherimides Liturgicae 107 (1993) 435-436.
43
44
45
ANNIBALE BUGNINI, Elenco delle correzioni inserite nel Motu proprio Sacram Liturgiam,
Ephemirides Liturgicae 106 (1992) 314-316.
46
47

15
again its publishing.
48

16 February 1964

Paul VI had already publicly announced that the upcoming instruction would have force
following the ordinary vacatio legis.
49
This was the first day of Lent in 1964. It was upon this
day that Sacram 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 F.
Antonelli is appointed as a member of the Consilium. This will become an important inclusion
of one of the more veteran members of the SRC, who will have much influence on the
documentation 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 the
Consilium. Cardinal Cicognani himself communicates the Pontiffs mind to Cardinal Lercaro
(technical first among equals
52
of Costituente) the following:

Mi onoro di comunicare allEminenza Vostra Reverendissima che, secondo le

48
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. Documenti
e sussidi, ed. A. Bugnini, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Citt del Vaticano, 1965, 54.
51
ANTONELLI, Diario. 17 November 1963, 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, 225.
52
There was no official President or Prefect of the group. Leadership customarily fell to the top
ranking Cardinal who was present.

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 Proprio
Sacram Liturgiam e prospetti chiaramente i compiti delle autorit ecclesiastiche
territoriali 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 dal
Consilium al Santo Padre.
53

This letter was considered, among those named to reform the liturgy, to be the virtual
Constitution (Costituzione) of the Consilium.
54
One outstanding feature of this document was
the 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 Sacred
Congregation of Rites to the perceived encroachments to its supreme authority in things
liturgical.
55
Perhaps this is why Cardinal Cicognani (former Prefect of the SRC) forbade the
newly constituted Consilium to work in the offices of the same SRC.
56
However, in obedience to
the Pontiffs wishes as conveyed by the letter de labore a Consilio praestando, the
Consilium named a relatively large number of experts to be the Fathers of the commission in
order to oversee the work of the various coetus.
57
It is interesting to note that F. Antonelli had

53
SEGRETERIA DI STATO DI SUA SANTIT, De labore a Consilio praestando, in Enchiridion
documentorum 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
56
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 Gut,
former Abbot Primate, (1968-1969). Members: Cardinal Gregory Perter Agagianian (Prefect of
the Propaganda Fide), Fr. Ferdinando Antonelli, O.F.M. (Secretary SRC), Cardinal Augustin Bea

17
also thought of some of the very same persons as eminently qualified for the task of liturgical
reform, as somebody representing the mind of the Conciliar Commission and the SRC.
58
He
came 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), Bishop
Ren Boudon (France), Archbishop Leo Byrne (U.S.A.), Bishop Gerald Carter (Canada),
Archbishop Toms Alberto Clavel Mndez (Panama), Cardinal John Patrick Cody (Archbishop,
U.S.A.), Cardinal Carlo Confalonieri, Cardinal William Conway (Archbishop, Ireland), Bishop
Leo De Kesel (Belgium), Archbishop George Dwyer (England), Bishop Jess Enciso Viana
(Spain), Archbishop Vicente Enrique y Traracn (Spain), Archbishop Pericle Felici (Curia),
Bishop Bernardo Fey Schneider (Bolivia), Cardinal Paolo Giobbe (Curia), Cardinal Valerian
Gracias (Archbishop, India), Archbishop Gordon Gray (Scotland), Archbishop Francis
Grimshaw (England), Bishop Emilio Guano (Italy), Archbishop Paul Hallinan (U.S.A.), Bishop
Anton Hnggi (Switz.), Bishop Juan Hervs y Benet (Spain), Archbishop Eugene Hurley (S.
Africa), Bishop Jos Clemente Carlos Isnard (Brazil), Bishop Fraois Kabangu (Zaire), Bishop
Franois Kervadou (France), Bishop Sndor Kovcs (Hungary), Archbishop Henri Jenny
(France), Bishop Franciszek Jop (Poland), Cardinal Arcadio Maria Larraona (Prefect SCR),
Bishop Ambrz Lazk (Czechoslovakia), Bishop Agostino Lpez de Moura (Portugal), Bishop
Joseph Malula (Zaire), Archbishop Ignazio Clemente Mansourati (Rome), Bishop Joseph Albert
Martin (Canada), Bishop Laurentius Satoshi Nagae (Japan), Bishop Karel Otcenask,
(Czechoslovakia), Archbishop Michele Pellegrino (Italy), Bishop Alfred Pichler (Yugoslavia),
Bishop Enrique Rau (Argentina), Cardinal Joseph Ritter (Archbishop, U.S.A.), Bishop Carlo
Rossi (Italy), Cardinal Laurean Rgambwa (Bishop, Tanzania), Cardinal Ral Silva Henrquez
(Archbishop, Chile), Bishop Otto Splbeck (Germany), Luigi Valentini (Priest, Rome), Bishop
Willem Van Bekkum (Indonesia), Bishop Willem Van Zuylen (Belgium), Bishop Hermann Volk
(Germany), Rembert Weakland, O.S.B. (Abbot Primate), Archbishop Guilford Young
(Australia), and Bishop Franz Zauner (Austria). Secretary: Annibale Bugnini, C.M.
58
ANTONELLI, FERDINANDO, Promemoria sulla revisione dei libri liturgici in execuzione della
Costituzione Conciliare della Sacra Liturgia, in Sacra Congregazione per le Cause dei Santi,
Citt del Vaticano 1963, 2-3. A. Antonelli mentions possible members as: Cardinal Larraona,
Cardinal Lercaro, Msgr. Grimshaw (Birmingham, U.K.), Msgr. Martin (Nicolet, CA), Msgr.
Zauner (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 the
various liturgical books he goes on to mention: Fr. De Gaiffier (Bollandist; to help with the
calendar), Msgr. Baldassarre Fischer (Trier; Psalter), Msgr. Cattaneo & Msgr Borella
(Ambrosian rite and Psalter), Dom Botte (Breviary), Abbott Van Doren (Breviary). For the
revision of the Ordo Missae: Cardinal Lercaro, P. Jungmann, Msgr. Martimort, Dom Botte,
Msgr. Wagner, Fr. Bugnini & Msgr. Cattaneo. Dr. Kahlefeld of Monaco & Don Jounel (Gospel
pericopes). Msgr. Martimort (concelebration). Fr. Gy & Msgr. Wagner, Msgr. McManus, Fr.
Vagaggini (Roman Ritual). In addition he recommend institutes and already existing liturgical
study groups (even monasteries) to be charged with some of the work to be done.

18

2 March 1964

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

ORGANIZATION OF THE NEWLY CONSTITUTED CONSILIUM AD EXSEQUENDAM CONSTITUTIONEM
DE SACRA LITURGIA

CARD. LERCARO
= President of the Consilium by Papal appointment
61

!

A. BUGNINI

= Secretary, who is also selected by Papal appointment
62

! !
CARLO BRAGA
GOTTARDO PASQUALETTI

= Under secretaries
63
personally selected by the President and Secretary.
64

59
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 the
Secretariat of State. See: MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 35.
63
C. Braga was appointed on 16 January 1964. G. Pasqualetti was appointed as archivists on 9
April 1964. See MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 41, 50. Eventually these appointments were
then followed up with the earlier mentioned under secretaries: R. Romano & C. Garcia del Valle.
64
BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica, 907. At its height their were never more than six to eight under
secretaries. For example: P. Marini, diocese of Bobbio; P. Gaston Fontaine, Canons Regular of

19

5.0 STAGE III: THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE OF THE CONSILIUM AS A
REFORMING ORGANISM
65

the Immaculate Conception; Franz Nikolach, Professor at University of Salzburg; P. John
Rotelle, OSA (who formed ICEL); Mons. Peter Coughlan, U.K.; Geri Broccolo, Archdiocese of
Chicago; P. Ignacio Calabuig, OSM, Professor of the Marianum; D. Carmelo Gracia del Valle,
Spanish; P. Hermann Grf, Verbite-Phillipines; Dr. Roman Rus, Slovenia; Marcello Olivi;
Domenico Santolamazza.
65
!"#$
!"#$%
&$'($)*(+
,-./- 0123"#2 !($214$5)
654$( &$'($)*(1$2


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 the
Pope, were to effectively work for the secretariate in preparing their schemata, etc.
67

11 March 1964
68

This was the date of the first adunanza generale. There were five cardinals present and
fifteen bishops, along with one monsignor, one abbot and two priests.
69
Cardinal Lercaro noted
that 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 clarify
Sacram Liturgiam and especially define the powers of the ecclesiastical territories with regard to
the liturgy, 4.) provide for a letter and spirit interpretation of the Council,
70
and 5.) examine and
answer 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 study
group 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
67
Eventually the periti (Consultors) would have an established term of office (voted by the
members or Fathers) of three years, which was renewable. See: BUGNINI, A. La riforma
liturgica, 168.
68
A verbale of the session has been published. See: PIERO MARINI, Il primo Periodo de attivit
del 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 of
episcopal 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 rubricism is
constrasted to the spirit of the Council.
71
72
This nomination by Cardinal Lercaro was unanimously acclaimed by the assembly. However,

21

In detail A. Bugnini explained that each Gruppo di studio would consist of seven
consultors. Following the preparation of a schema by the individual group working together, the
schema would be sent to twenty or perhaps even thirty periti to make a new redaction that would
be sent back to the Gruppo di studio. He also made explicit his plans at this meeting for the
doctrinal, 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 to
confer with the Pope on all matters of mutual interest or of necessity. Since Cardinal Lercaro
was one of the four Moderators of the Second Vatican Council, he was easily able to regularly
and 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 his
proposed plan for the practical workings of the Consilium.
76
The division and function can be
more or less separated into twelve stages for the definitive reform of any given section of the
liturgy that ought to undergo revision.
77
Furthermore, he makes a distincition between the
operative and the revisional groups that will be doing the reform. The operative groups will
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 the
general audiences of the members of the Consilium will take place once or twice a year.
79
The
general schema, as presented by A. Bugnini, is unanimously accepted by the plenary assembly at
the 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. See
73
Although such groups were initially desired, time constraints made them unpractical, and so the
idea was abandoned.
74
ANTONELLI, Diario. 17 November 1963, 225.
75
76
77
78
79
80

22

17 March 1964

The work of the Consilium is still seemingly disorganized. Because there are no
established bylaws by which the Consilium must operate, it finds itself making administrative
and directive decisions without a minimum quorum of Consultors present.
81
On this day, only a
third of the (already named) Consultors are present. Furthermore, it appears that the discussions
have no set time limits or rules of order. All seems to be done in an atmosphere which is
directed by the more dominant persons in the group. This brings serious questions into play
regarding the organization of the reform, insofar as the sessions with the Consultors are
concerned. F. Antonelli explains:

Mi dispiace del come stata cambiata la Commissione: un raggruppamento di
persone, molte incompetenti, pi ancora avanzata nelle linee delle novit. Discussioni
molto affrettate. Discussioni a base di impressioni: votazioni caotiche. Ci che pi mi
dispiace che i Promemoria espositivi e i relativi quesiti sono sempre su una linea
avanzata e spesso in forma suggestiva. Direzione debole. Spiacevole il fatto che si
reaccende sempre la questione dellart. 36 4. Mons. Wagner era inquieto. Mi dispiace
che questioni, forse non tanto gravi in s, ma gravide di consequenze, vengano discusse e
risolte da un organo che funziona cos. La commissione o il Consilium composto di 42

81
The Consilium attempted to explain the approval process of the plenary audiences thus:
1. Ea solummodo elementa praebentur quae quandam certitudinem ex parte Consilii
iam prae se ferunt; cetera, etsi pluries examinata et discussa, si nondum satis matura
visa sunt, simpliciter omittuntur. Proinde aliquae partes imperfectae, non completae
apparebunt: per studia successiva sunt adhuc complendae.
2. Coetus a studiis sunt Coetus Peritorum inter quos totus labor instaurationis divisus
est. Iuxta quandam generalem ordinationem, cardinem laboris Consilii praestant.
3. Expressiones Placuit Patribus, Patres suffragium dederunt, approbaverunt, lato
sensu accipiendae sunt, idest: mentemostendunt Consilii, non quaestionum
definitivam solutionem. In prosequendo labore, si nova exsugerent elementa, res aliter
statui poterit. 4. Post examen Consilii longa adhuc restat via ut problemata ad portum
pervenire possint. Superfluum praesertim est adnotare Consiliiiudicium nullum
vinculum constituere pro ultima et definitiva approbatione ex parte Supremae
Auctoritatis.
See CONSILIUM, Labores Coetuum a Studiis Consilii, in Ephemerides Liturgicae 79 (1965)
431-432.

23
membri: ieri sera eravamo 13, neanche un terzo.
82

Nonetheless, A. Bugnini properly functions as a secretary by animating the study groups
and handling the day-to-day business of communication. Essentially, his roles are to coordinate
and network with the following entities: the diverse Conferences of Bishops, other dicastries of
the Roman Curia, and he is to do so in person with the Pope. Furthermore, he is to coordinate
communication and work between the President and the Consultors, who work in the various
study groups.
83

20 March 1964

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

13 April 1964

The second and last adunanza ordinaria takes place. Interpretation of Sacrosanctum
Concilium was the main subject of discussion. The questions concerned the juridical and prudent
application of the norms set forth in the document, namely: with regard to reciting the office, in
what language certain rites were to be conducted, and some questions on matrimony and
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 Consultors
on 2 April 1964.
86

14 April 1964

82
FERDINANDO ANTONELLI, Note sulle Adunanze del Consilium 1, in Sacra Congregazione
delle Cause dei Santi, Citt del Vaticano 1964, 23. This was partially reproduced by:
GIAMPIETRO, Il Card. Ferdinando Antonelli, 228-229.
83
84
85
86

24
The first reunion of the Consulta, or the Relators, Secretaries (of the various Coetus) and some of
the more qualified Consultors in liturgiology, occurs with the President and Secretary. They
form a group of about fifty men who will be consulted about the work of the various Coetus 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 Mass
(Coetus X), which will be discussed at the first audience. It would be subsequently approved and
contains the following basic elements that will be important sources utilized for successfully
reforming 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 EXSEQUENDAM CONSTITUTIONEM DE SACRA LITURGIA, Quaestiones tractandae
6 (17 April 1964). Investigationes faciendae de Missali Romano recognoscendo, in La riforma
conciliare dellOrdo Missae, ed. M. Barba (Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia
120), CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma 2002, 265-271.

25
The second plenary meeting treats especially the episcopal conferences.
89
However, it is
important to note -for understanding of the Consiliums mode of functioning- the following: the
decisions, resulting from voting of the Fathers, on whatever subject did not ipso facto result in
something becoming liturgical law or a definitive reform. For instance, in a Consilium audience
on this date, the process of confirming the acts of episcopal conferences was delineated. After
the Fathers approved a final schema with regard to Episcopal Conference issues, it was
personally reviewed by the Pope. This Papal review occurred on the day following the last
discussion of the Consiliums internal audience (adunanza of 21 April). So the Consilum
members decision was personally not only reviewed, but was necessarily approved by the Pope.
Only then, following the Cardinal Presidents audience were he explained the Consilum
members decisions, did any decision enter into the schemata of future instructions.
90

Cardinal Lercaro presented, to those gathered, the general outlines of the organization,
which had already entered into operation. He organized forty Gruppi di studio, themselves
divided into settori or sezioni.
91

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

2 June 1964

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

18-20 June 1964

89
GIACOMO LERCARO, Principia seu normae ad confirmanda acta coetuum episcopalium a
Consilio approbata in coetu plenario dierum, in Ephemerides Liturgicae 107 (1993) 437-439.
90
91
92
BARBA, La riforma conciliare dellOrdo Missae., 63.
93

26
Although the ordinary audiences were deemed unsatisfactory and discontinued, the
seventeen Consultors were given permission to be at the audiences in the future to represent
especially 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 particular
schema to present, or were an expert on some schema that was to be explained and presented to
the Members of the Consilium.
95
Finally, a completed list of the membership of the Consilium
was 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 as
possible, there are complaints that, in reality, the experts are really not able to comment or reflect
upon 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 document
Inter Oecumenici, Cardinal Lercaro requested a private audience with the Holy Father at which
the SRC was also present.98 During the audience, both argued their positions on the
Constitution of the Sacred Liturgy. The Consilium prevailed, and from the conclusion of the
meeting, the Secretariat of State was to send a letter to the SRC informing it to approve
unconditionally the completed future instructions of the Consilium. The SRC was merely a
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 guise
of reform without consulting or notifying the Consilium. This is the famous incident of the SRC
(25 April 1964) changing the formula for distribution of Holy Communion before the Consilium

94
95
96
97
ANTONELLI, Diario. 20 June 1964, 230.
98
For the critique of the SRC and the official response of the Consilium, see SACRA
CONGREGATIO RITUUM, Osservazioni della SRC sugli Schemi della Concelebrazione e
Comunione sotto le due Specie, in Ephemerides Liturgicae 109 (1995) 138-145; CONSILIUM AD
EXSEQUENDAM CONSTITUTIONEM DE SACRA LITURGIA, Rilievi alle osservazioni della S.
Congregazione dei Riti circa il rito per la concelebrazione e circa il rito della Comunione sub
utraque specie, in Ephemerides Liturgicae 108 (1994) 217-219.
99
LERCARO, Lettere. 15 September 1964 , 256-257.

27
published its own instruction, which was to address -among many other things- this exact
change.
100

5-6 October 1964

The Gruppo di Studio (Coetus X) is officially erected during the plenary adunanza of the
Consilium. They will be responsible for the Ordo Missae.
101
The Missa Normativa will be nearly
exclusively 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 the
competancy of the group in face of opposition from various quarters of the Roman Curia (still
including the SRC).

7 January 1965
102

Due to continued challenges written to the Pope by the SRC during the reform process,
the Consilium received a reply to its 30 November 1964, which letter had requested a further
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 needing
the pro forma stamp of approval from the SRC) were guaranteed. In all the Consiliums
instructions and reformed rites, however, it was always the principle that the SRC lacked the
competency to change what was the essential substance of the documents, whether in its part or

100
VIRGILIO NO, Storia della Costituzione liturgica: Punti di riferimento, in Costituzione
liturgica Sacrosanctum Concilium, ed. Congregazione per il Culto Divino (Ephemerides
Liturgicae Subsidia 38), CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma 1986, 20.
101
JOHANNES WAGNER, Zur Reform des Ordo Missae: zwei Dokumente, in Liturgia opera
divina e umana.Studi sulla riforma liturgica offerti a S.E. Mons. Annibale Bugnini in occasione
del suo 70 compleanno, ed. P. Jounel -R. Kaczynski -G. Paqualletti (Bibliotheca Ephemerides
Liturgicae Subsidia 26), Edizioni liturgiche, Roma 1982, 271.
102
SEGRETARIA DI STATO DI SUA SANTIT, de competentia SRC et Consilii, in Enchiridion
103

28
whole. The competency of the SRC was limited to the correct language for promulgation and
references to canonical and liturgical changes with regard to liturgical or canonical codes of the
Church.
104

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

27 January 1965

A. Bugnini is inexplicably appointed as under secretary to the SRC,
106
seemingly to give
the Consilium greater voice within the SRC and to help resolve issues of opposition.
107
It is still
unclear as to whether or not this was an action to give A. Bugnini a greater voice within the
SRC, 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 official
observers from non-Catholic ecclesial Christian communities. They will not have voting rights,
or be official members, but will eventually be instrumental for consultation in a few restricted
areas.
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.
106
Viz., inexplicable, in the sense that the reasons were never given, and had to be inferred.
107
108
PIERO MARINI, 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. Eugene
Brand; Pastor Max Thurian.

29
22 September 1966
110

Cardinal Lercaro, noticing the inefficiency of only resolving business in general
audiences, requests -in a personal conversation with Pope Paul VI- approval of the idea of having
a consiglio di presidente, which newly created group will be added to the structure of the
Consilium. It will have a limited competency to deal with problems that cannot or should not
wait until the general audiences of the Consilium, namely:
111

1.) Urgent problems that are not ordinarily considered by the current administration of Consilium
(ex., examination of some documents, answers to episcopal Conferences on particular issues);
2.) Communication Problems by functioning as a intermediary between the Relatores of the
Groups and the Fathers of the Consilium. This means that the members of the consiglio di
presidente can be present at the meetings of the Groups;
112

3.) Practical problems of judging the maturity of the schemata prepared by the Groups of study
before going to the general audiences.

The Cardinal proposed that seven Members of the Consilium be elected from the
numerous voting Fathers to be his counsel. This was accomplished on 11 October 1966.
Ultimately, because of the distance from Rome of five of the eventual eight members, the
consiglio di presidente was a failure and did little.
113

110
By this time, the Consilium seems to have functioned rather routinely with voting on various
schemata. The Consultors would explain and debate before the Members their views and clarify
ambiguities, then, the Fathers (Members) would vote on the texts at hand. Of course, the
majority vote of the Fathers, as mentioned above, would resolve the question of the reform or
rejection of any one rite. The rejection of any one rite would then lead the Gruppo di Studio to
revisit the question. The group concerned would used the comments by the voting Fathers and
relation of the debates of the adunanza to guide the reformulation of their original proposal. See
the general description of the adunanze by: NICOLA GIAMPIETRO, Il Card. Ferdinando Antonelli
e gli sviluppi della riforma liturgica dal 1948-1970 (Analecta liturgica e sacramentum 21),
Centro Studi S. Anselmo, Roma 1998, 227-237.
111
112
This group only met a total of eight times: once in 1966, thrice in 1967 & 1968, and once in
1969. This internal body was confirmed by the Pope as to its existence and membership. Among
the members were: Boudon, Pellegrino, Splbeck, Enrique y Tarancn, Conway, Isnard,
Bluyssen. See: BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica, 169.
113

30
A second project, on this same day, was proposed to the Pope. This long project was to
enumerate the operational and ordinary rules of order and authority within the structure of the
Consilium. However, it was only realized (a summation of the modus operandi) as late as 15
April 1967, within the general audience of the Consilium. At this point, for various reasons, the
Pope privately refused to accept or approve either the canonical or juridical structure of the
Consiliums 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 several
procedural and organizational problems of the Consilium and informs the Holy Father of some of
the 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 to
be observers at the general adunanze of the Consilium. The Observers were Professor Raymond
George, on behalf of the World Council of Churches; Canon Ronald C. Jasper and Dr. Massey
Hamilton Shepherd representing the Anglican Communion; Rev. Friedrich Wilhelm Knneth of
the World Lutheran Federation, and Brother Max Thurian representing the Community Taiz.
116

114
115
FERDINANDO ANTONELLI, 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
CONSILIUM AD EXSEQUENDAM CONSTITUTIONEM DE SACRA LITURGIA, VII Sessio Pleanaria
Consilii, in Ephemerides Liturgicae 80 (1966) 402.

31
10 November 1966

Paul VI personally orders (in his audience with Cardinal Lercaro) that F. Antonelli is to
be made the person personally and directly responsible for compiling and organizing the material
for a regularization of the process of the reform within the Consilium itself and its operations.
This document detailing the mode of operation, discussion and approval of aspects of the reform
process is to be called a Statutum Consilii.
117

23 April 1967

By this time a regular method (at least de facto) seems to have been established in the
running of the adunanze. Normally it is A. Bugnini who has the responsibility of opening and
concluding official business business as efficiently and quickly as possible. All the material is
reviewed, but he is not particularly concerned to have in-depth discussions on any particular
thing or in any particular format. Secondly, it is Cardinal Lercaro who leads the discussions and
directs them -as a rule.
118
This organizational process is meant to put a halt to complaints and
confusion within and without the Consilium, and also to make precise the competencies and the
methods 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 to
Paul VI. In these he recommends not establishing any Statutes, so as not to give the
impression (among other reasons) that the Consilium is a permanent organ of liturgical reform.
120

117
FERNANDO ANTONELLI, Manoscritto informale dellUdienza avuta con Paolo VI il 15 luglio
1967, 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 ANTONELLI, 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
FERDINANDO ANTONELLI, Intorno allo Statuto del Consilium. Osservazioni generali, in Il
Card. Ferdinando Antonelli, 240-242:
Tenendo presenti queste premesse ci si pu domandare se non serebbe il caso di
accantonare il progetto di uno Statuto, che per la forza stessa del termine e per il suo
contenuto d limpressione di una istituzione pienamente, o per lo meno a tempo

32
Furthermore, any statutes approving the Consilium, on a juridical level, would have been deemed
as a novelty unique in the history of the Curia. This is because of the fact that, in the case of the
Consilium, the Fathers of the Consilium would (in these Statutes) design and place limits on
themselves (instead of the design and limits being placed upon them by an already existing
juridically established organ of the Holy See. The Holy Father would have only confirmed a
self-organized and delineated group as now being an official organ of the Holy See.
121
A rather
summary explanation of how the Consilium functioned, organizationally, is provided by F.
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. La
nomina 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

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 10
th
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 1967
until April of 1970, no significant changes in the organization, operation or methodology of
reform seem to have taken place. Therefore, in order to comprehend the function and methods of
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

6.0 ORGANIZATION OF THE CONSILIUM
124

(Presidente) President
125
20-30 bishops

(voting members)
(Secretario) Secretary
(Relatore) Relator
!
(Secretarius) Secretary
!!!!!!!!
Consiglieri
126

5-7 Members
127
Group1 Group2 Group3
128
(Consilium Presidentiae)
(a.k.a Consultors)

Section 1 of group 1 Section 2 of group 1, etc.
129

(Coetus peculiaris)
130

124
BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica, 79. Also should be kept in mind that this schema is a working schema. It is not a
real set of statutes or bylaws, but the result of consultation between the Cardinal president and secretary of the
Consilium. Non abbiamo uno Statuto, n un regolamento, nessuna legge scritta. L=avremmo voluto, ma non
l=abbiamo ottenuto... (Intervento of A. Bugnini to Consilium; 17 October 1967) This was said at the eleventh
adunanza. See op. cit., 193.
125
11 March 1964 at the first adunanza generale Cardinal Carlo Confalonieri was elected to the position of vice-
president. See BUGNINI, A. La riforma liturgica, 151.
126
Counselors are by presidential appointment. Their job is to offer observations apporto per scritto on difficult
questions, which consist of some few pages treated in the adunanze. However, more rarely, una tantum or
occasionally, they may be present at the invitation of the president to participate in the actual adunanze. They will
eventually consist of 30-40 experts from diverse places all over the world. They review and make observations on
the relazioni of the Consilium consultori. See MARINI, A Challenging Reform, 43.
127
Members of the Consilium are by direct Pontifical appointment. They are given the title: Consultori. See:
128
I.e., Known as Gruppi or Coetus

129
The names of the Consultors (i.e., Members of a Coetus or Group) were published for public dissemination.
However, those of the advisors (consiglieri; not member of a Coetus) were kept secret to avoid outside pressure.
This was prudent according to the Members of the Consilium, since the advisors lived outside of Rome and were not
dedicated to the task of the reform full-time, unlike many of the Consultors. See Elenchus Membrorum,
Consultorum, Consiliariorum, Coetuum a studiis, Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, Citt del Vaticano
2
1967.
130
This was composed of an expert or some few periti with a particular competency on a section that was being
treated by the larger Coetus. See: BARBA, La riforma conciliare dell Ordo Missae, 62.

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 step-
by-step process that occurs when any part of the liturgy is to be reformed. Each step represents a
theoretical part of the reform process.

1.) Each Group receives a liturgical book (or section thereof) to revise. It produces the first
relazione;
2.) The Group relays the relazione to the Secretary of the Consilium via its secretary;
3.) The Secretary relays the relazione to the President of the Consilium who allows Consultors
from outside of the original Group of the first relazione to study it, along with 20-30 consiglieri;
4.) The overall observations of the Consultors and consiglieri 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 first relazione along with the observations of
Consultors
131
and consiglieri to the secretery of the Group or Coetus;
132

7.) The Group or Coetus then produces a second relazione;
8.) The second relazione is conveyed and reviewed by the Secretary of the Consilum;
9.) With the permission of the President this second relazione is delivered to those will be called
the Fathers -or voting Members- of the Consilium. They must pass the item with a majority vote
for it to be considered approved. This meeting with a vote and discussion is called an adunanza.

131
A. Bugnini, as Secretary, organized a further Coetus Relatorum, or Consulta, whereby he was
able to gather the relatores from the various study groups and have them look over the work of
their peer groups. This was a great aid to revise, correct or perfect any proposed schema by a
Coetus in lieu of an upcoming adunanza plenaria. The idea was to facilitate a better schema that
would be discussed more easily at the adunanza and, of course, would be more likely to get a
placet vote. See BARBA, La riforma conciliare dell Ordo Missae, 62.
132
In reality, often the first relazione would be presented directly to the adunanze generali and
the Fathers would give a votazione 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 orient
them toward the desires or decisions of the Fathers on the unclear question. See: BUGNINI, La
riforma liturgica, 156.

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 & second relazione, which group
is responsible for then producing a Schema generale;
134

12.) The voting members of the Consilium (Fathers) review the general schematic in order to
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, A.
Bugninis plan for the Consilium had originally proposed a process (although never
actualized)
136
for arriving at the first relazione of whatever reformed rite of the liturgy.

1.) The Group would work together to prepare a proposed relazione.
2.) The schema would then be submitted to gruppi di studio.
137

3.) Eight separate groups would evaluate the schema (art, pastoral, theological, historic, stylistic,

133
Although this was mostly true, there were also interventions on the part of Paul VI and other
Congregations within the Curia. This happened, for instance, when the Consiliums work was
known by the SRC since both organizations shared members. When the SRC, for example,
offered criticisms or observations, it sometimes happened that Paul VI would order Cardinal
Lercaro to revise certain rites by sending them back to the various Coetus. See: BARBA, La
riforma conciliare dell Ordo Missae, 64.
134
With regard to the Instructio on this or that matter (e.g. Peculiare ius 8 February 1966), the
relazioni continued to be produced until the Consilium Fathers were satisfied with the document.
In this example on sacred music (Peculiare ius), there were nine redactions plus a tenth and final
one, which gained approval. See BUGNINI, La riforma liturgica, 164.
135
After the review of the Pope, his final adjustments or corrections would become part of the
published edition. This information (regarding the revisions) was relayed back to the Fathers of
the Consilium during their plenary sessions (adunanze). See (e.g.) MARINI, Il Consilium in
piena attivit in un clima favorevole, 100.
136
137
Ibid., 81.

37
musical, cultural and juridical).
4.) The final result of their addenda, when compiled and combined with the schema
138
by the
Group, led to the first relazione which would be submitted to the above mentioned process.

However, in the end, A. Lentini & other latinists in the Secretariat of State office, as well
as 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 canonists:
Msgr. Felici and Msgr. Bonet. Also it is important to note that, among those institutions of the
Consilium, there was another which did not last the five year process of reform, the Coetus
Consultorum (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 a
years time.
141
For this reason it was not included in the organizational chart of the Consilium on
page 35.
The Members (Fathers) of the Consilium were the most regular and effective facet of the
Consilium. Individuals, from among the short-lived group of Consultors (Consulta), were
effective as attachs to A. Bugnini in his meetings with other dicastries of the Roman Curia on
an ad hoc basis. Even after the Consultas dissolution individual relators or Consultors were
used to represent the thoughts or the mens of the Consilium when there were meetings various

138
Schema/Shemata: are the fascicles of both the minutes (verbali) of the reunions of the periti in
their proper group. They refer to the relazioni delivered to the Fathers for voting or the actual
outlines of whatever rite that the group is working on. The schemata might have supplementary
information (for instance, added by a relator or secretary), the results of internal voting among
the group, or details about particularly problematic issues. All the schemata had their own
chronological proper numbering. See BARBA, La riforma conciliare dell Ordo Missae:, 67.

139
140
It is important to recall that the Consulta is constituted from the Relators, Secretaries and
select experts in the science of liturgiology. They meet only in unison with the President and
Secretary 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.

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


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 denied
the ability to publish its reforms independently of the SRC. Furthermore, it was required to
consult the SRC in order to mutually agree upon the language of any decrees of the SRC before
they would be published and become binding on the Universal Church.
However, in addition, the Consilium approved several steps that it would follow in order
to realizing any reform on the universal level by means of a decree through the SRC. The
following process was decided:
143

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

Ordinary Adunanze: These session required mandatory attendance by those Members
of 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 a
Thursday affair twice per month in order to treat administrative questions and prepare for the
plenary audiences.
144
Since this organization only met twice and was then discontinued, it was

142
143
MARINI, P., Il Consilium in piena attivit in un clima favorevole, 102.
144
For summaries of the sessions, see MARINI, Il primo Periodo de attivit del Consilium:
prospettive e difficolt, 401-439.

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 various Coetus.
Although various individuals could be present at the invitation of the President, most commonly
the relatori of the Coetus 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 an
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 twice
a year and the dates were chosen such as would fit with the schedules of the bishop-Fathers of
the Consilium.
146

Relator: The relator was important for guiding the work of any one Group. As such he
would personally determine the number of gatherings necessary to produce a schema. Following
the meeting and the compilation of a schema, it would be the Groups (Coetus) secretary who
would send a copy of the material to the Secretary of the Consilium with a series of informative
notes on the status laboris to help the Secretary make sense of the information that was presented
in the redaction.
147
Furthermore, it was the duty of the relator to coordinate and invite sharing of
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 the
work of Coetus XIII (the Oratio fidelium) into their own schema for the Ordo Missae. This was
essentially worked out by the relators communicating with one another.
148

145
This system is also confirmed by: MARTIMORT, LHistoire de la rforme liturgique, 218-
219.
146
MARINI, Il Consilium in piena attivit in un clima favorevole, 98.
147
148
Ibid., 63.

40
Furthermore, it was generally the practice that each Coetus would need to discuss its own
principles and method of approaching the liturgical reform before beginning the actual practical
work of writing schemata of the new liturgical rites. This often took several sessions in order to
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 immediately
subject to his will. The canonical situation of the Consilium was nearly universally described as
precarious since its ultimate raison 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 in
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 independence
and power of the Consilium, he notes that the erection of the Consilium was much along the lines
of the pre-Conciliar commissions before the Second Vatican Council, which also operated and
discussed independently their subject matter, i.e., independent of the intervention of a curial
office with ordinary competency in that same material. Furthermore, the Consilium was
different from a dicastery in that it was not a legistlative body, but a study group subject to the
Pope. It also had the organizational difference of allowing its periti to directly participate (even if
not voting) in the general audiences.
151

149
PIERO MARINI, Attivit complessiva dei gruppi di studio del Consilium ad exsequendam
Constitutionem de sacra Liturgia (Gennaio1964-Marzo1965), Ephemerides Liturgicae 112
(1998) 297.
150
151
Ibid., 148-149. Typically it was only foreseen that the Relator of the Groups would be
represented, unless because of the material to be discussed. A particular expert would be invited
by the President or Secretary to be present at the general audience to be of use to the group.

41

Legislative Executive Powers

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

1.) The Consilium will write instructions (e.g., Communion under both kinds, Concelebration,
etc.) 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 with
regard to any instruction or document.
152

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

152
153
PAULUS VI, De competentia SRC et Consilium, in Enchiridion documentorum
instaurationis liturgicae 1963-1973 3/1, ed. S. Congregatio pro Cultu Divino, Marietti, Roma
1990, 116:
Compio [...] il venerato incarico di rispondere al quesito posto dallEminenza
Vostra 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 sia
delle questioni, sia dei testi liturgici, che lapplicazione della Costituzione Conciliare
De sacra Liturgia ora richiede; spetter alla S. Congregazione dei Riti promulgare,
dintesa col Consilium medesimo, gli atti che diano efficacia cononica alle norme ed ai
testi che esso viene preparando. Sembra opportuno riservare ai criteri discrezionali del
Consilium dare le necessarie disposizioni circa le singole attuazioni che sono in via di
esperimento, 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 e
universale, sar naturalmente riservata a cotesta medesima S. Congregazione; ma si
ravvisa lopportunit che il decreto relativo porti la firma anche dellEm.mo Cardinale
Presidente del Consilium, secondo la formola felicemente usata nella pubblicazione
della recente Instructio.
See also the initial treatment of this problem refereed to by this correspondence: Lettera della
Segreteria di Stato, 19 May 1964, n. 2656/64 &16 June 1964, n. 2656/64.

42
4.) With regard to vernacular translations, due to Inter Oecumenici n. 29, the Consilium was
given the authority to approve such translations.
154

5.) Furthermore, because the Fathers of the Consilium had voted to do so, the power of
personally (ex officio) confirming the acts of episcopal conferences was ceded to the person of
the President of the Consilium; without need to have recourse to the general audiences of the
Consilium Members.
155

Juridic Powers

1.) Following the publication of a document, any doubts (dubbi) would go to the
Consilium for the definitive answer.
2.) However, the Secretariat of State determined that the SRC had the right to publish the
official responses.
156

Indults

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

154
SACRA 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.) nomina
eorum qui coetui interfuerentur; b.) relationem de rebus actis: c.) exitum suffragationis
pro singulis decretis. Haec Acta duplici exemplari exarata, a Praeside et Secretario
coetus subscripta et sigillo debite munita, mittantur Consilio ad exsequendam
Constitutionem de sacra Liturgia.

155
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 to dubia in Notitiae.
157

43
However, with regard to concelebration, the indult to concelebrate was simultaneously
allowed to be granted by the SRC.
158

Publications

Initially, the Consilium published notes on the work of the various groups to be shared
among its own membership. These informative fascicles were called relationes.
159
The first two
were published in March of 1964. Permission for wider publication was granted personally to
Cardinal Lercaro in a private audience with Pope Paul VI on 8 March 1965.
160
This led to the
first publication of Notitiae by the Tipografia Vatican between January and April of 1965.
161

Notitiae became the official and uninterrupted medium of communicating the work of the
Consilium to parties interested in its work.

158
159
160
161
GIACOMO LERCARO, In nomine Domini, in Notitiae 1 (1965) 3-5.

44
8.0 COMPOSITION WITHIN THE CONSILIUM


45
8.1 FURTHER REPRESENTATION WITHIN THE CONSILIUM


46

9.0 CONCLUSIONS

Following the exposition of the chronology, organization, competency and composition
of 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 within
the organization of the Roman Curia. From the evidence provided, it seems quite obvious, in
light of the historical record, that the reform methodology and process was not consistent. May
it be asked, however, if it was efficient? After all, the five-year timeline for reforming the
major rites of the liturgy was successfully realized by the Consilium, which, at first glance,
supports a positive judgment about its efficiency. However, in the end only questions remain.
This is due to the fact that, without an objective criterion for judging the adunanze and their
workings, one must use merely subjective criteria for evaluating their efficiency. For example, F.
Antonelli used the criteria drawn from his experience in reforming the various rites of liturgical
books during the reigns of Pope Pius XII and John XXIII. Further, his criticism of the
Consiliums operation explicitly compared the Consiliums functioning to the normal
operationing procedure of curial agencies within the Vatican. However, this was precisely the
issue. The rules of order were intentionally not defined by approved bylaws or a
constitution. A. Bugnini, who had similar experiences and posts as his colleague F. Antonelli,
clearly judged the whole process to have been been efficient and proper. He unambiguously
wrote in his memoirs that the methodology adopted by the Consilium was flexibly organized,
and so reliable and successful in obtaining its aims.
However, despite the fact that the efficiency and methodological consistency of the
Consilium cannot be judged by procedural rules that were not part of its internal constitution,
several observations about its organization can be made.
First of all, the Consilium worked in a hierarchical manner, in imitation of previous
committees and curial agencies within the Roman Curia. The President, Secretery, etc., were all
familiar posts and offices. The voting members represented a typical sampling of prelates that
would also ordinarily constitute any agency within the Curia. The organ was obviously
immediately subject to the Pontiff, who also had a great personal interest in its work. The overall

47
structure, even if more loosely knit than curial agencies, for the most part, reflected the
organization 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 the
Consilium difficult to evaluate. The Consilium lacked any sort of formally approved set of
bylaws for its operation. It relied on working models of organization that were verbally approved
after consultation with the Holy Father. It was also innovative in selecting, for the most part,
nearly all of its own membership internally. Only the initial members were chosen by the Pope
himself (e.g., Cardinal Lercaro, A. Bugnini). Lastly, it had a remarkable flexibility to invent and
disband committees, or consultative bodies, according to the exigencies of the moment. Any
committee that the President or Secretary deemed useful and efficient was kept, any organization
that was deemed less useful was either neglected or disbanded. What is more, the work groups of
periti were given an extraordinary liberty for internal self-organization. They could choose
foreign locations for meeting and working and were able to meet as often as they pleased.
Furthermore, the Fathers of the Consilium itself were not required to either be present for debate
or vote on changes to the liturgical rites during the plenary adunanze. No quorum of members
(nor votes in absentia) was required for the accomplishment of any one task. Technically, all
work was divided up between various committees and members according to the prudential
judgments of the President, even if, in reality, the Secretary of the Consilium proposed,
organized and managed these important tasks.
Lastly, the representation within the membership of voting Fathers and periti, for
whatever reasons, did not seem to be very different or contrasting to curial agencies or previous
committees entrusted with liturgical reform. The organization was, for the greater part, western
European and heavily Italian. Its competencies were ill-defined, and were only clarified over
time, through both the interventions of Paul VI and the Secretary of State. In short, although a
factual description has been given of the ordinary and theoretical workings of the reform of the
various liturgical rites, not a few exceptions to this rule exist. Eventually, frequent interventions
into the work of the Consilium, especially by Pope Paul VI, interrupted any hopes of being able
to follow the initial paradigms for work and reform as proposed by Cardinal Lercaro and A.
Bugnini according to the schema that the Pope had orignally consented to at the beginning of the

48
reform process.
This study has been able to successfully locate and organize bits and pieces of
information that has been published on the Consilium and liturgical reform over the past fifty
years. Its contribution has been to organize this material clearly and arrange it in a convenient
way in order to understand more easily the process of liturgical reform following the Second
Vatican Council. This work serves as a preparation to begin a deeper and more profitable study
of the Missa Normativa of 1967. For it is this very Mass, which represents the first major
attempt of the Consilium to successfully reform a sacramental rite of the Latin Church. In order
to evaluate the method of such a reform, the present study serves as a prerequisite in order to
comprehend the complicated series of steps that resulted in the Normative Masses form and
celebration in 1967. This study seeks to prepare the groundwork to be able to accurately treat the
Missa Normativa in greater depth.


49

10.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY

10.1 Sources

10.1.1 Magisterial

FELICI, PERICLE. Entrata in vigore della Costituzione, in Verso la riforma liturgica. Documenti
e sussidi, ed. A. Bugnini, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Citt del Vaticano, 1965. 54.

PAULUS VI. Allocuzione del Santo Padre ai Padri conciliari, Acta Apostolica Sedis 56 (1964)
139-144.

PAULUS VI. De competentia SRC et AConsilium@, in Enchiridion documentorum
instaurationis liturgicae 1963-1973 3/1, ed. S. Congregatio pro Cultu Divino, Marietti, Roma
1990, 116.

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

________, Osservazioni della SRC sugli Schemi della Concelebrazione e Comunione sotto le due
Specie Ephemerides Liturgicae 109 (1995) 138-145.

SEGRETARIA DI STATO DI SUA SANTIT. de competentia SRC et Consilii, in Enchiridion

SEGRETARIA DI STATO DI SUA SANTIT. de labore a Consilio praestando, in Enchiridion

10.1.2 Liturgical

CONSILIUM AD EXSEQUENDAM CONSTITUTIONEM DE SACRA LITURGIA. Labores Coetuum a
Studiis Consilii, Ephemerides Liturgicae 79 (1965) 431-432.

________, Primitiae , in Costituzione liturgica Sacrosanctum Concilium. Studi (Bibliotheca
Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia 38) CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma 1986, 98-101.

________, Primitiae , in A Challenging Reform. Realizing the Vision of the Liturgical Renewal
1963-1975, ed. M. Francis J. Page K. Pecklers, tr. L. Cushley, Liturgical Press, Collegeville,
MN 2007, 162-167.

50

________, Quaestiones tractandae 6 (17 April 1964). Investigationes faciendae de Missali
Romano recognoscendo, in La riforma conciliare dellOrdo Missae, ed. M. Barba
(Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia 120), CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma 2002.

________,Rilievi alle osservazioni della S. Congregazione dei Riti circa il rito per la
concelebrazione e circa il rito della Comunione sub utraque specie Ephemerides Liturgicae 108
(1994) 217-219.
________, VII Sessio Plenaria Consilii, Ephemerides Liturgicae 80 (1966) 402.

________, Elenchus Membrorum, Consultorum, Consiliariorum, Coetuum a studiis, Typis
Polyglottis Vaticanis, Citt del Vaticano
2
1967.

10.1.3 Studies

ANTONELLI, FERDINANDO. Diario, in Il Card. Ferdinando Antonelli e gli sviluppi della riforma
1998, 224.

________, Intorno allo Statuto del Consilium. Osservazioni generali, 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, 240-242.

________, Manoscritto informale dellUdienza avuta con Paolo VI il 15 luglio 1967, 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.

________, Manuscritto aggiunto al Diario, 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, 238.

________, Note sulle Adunanze del Consilium 1, 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, 228-237.

________, Promemoria sulla revisione dei libri liturgici in esecuzione della Costituzione
Conciliare della Sacra Liturgia, in Il Card. Ferdinando Antonelli e gli sviluppi della riforma

51
1998, 214-221.

BARBA, MAURIZIO. La riforma conciliare dellOrdo Missae Il percorso storico-redazionale
dei riti dingresso, di offertorio e di comunione (Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia
120), CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma 2002.

BUGNINI, ANNIBALE. Consilium ad exsequendam Constitutionem de sacra Liturgia. Promemoria
circa linterpretazione della Costituzione liturgica Ephemerides Liturgicae 107 (1993) 435-436.

________, Elenco delle correzioni inserite nel Motu proprio Sacram Liturgiam,
Ephemerides Liturgicae 106 (1992) 314-316.

________, President of the Consilium, in Miscellanea liturgica in onore di Sua Eminenza
Cardinale Giacomo Lercaro2/2, Tournai, Decle 1966, 9-11.

________, La riforma liturgica (1948-1975). Nuova edizione riveduta e arricchita di note e di
supplementi per una lettura analitica (Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia 38), CLV-
Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma !1997.

GIAMPIETRO, NICOLA. Il Card. Ferdinando Antonelli e gli sviluppi della riforma liturgica dal
1948-1970 (Analecta liturgica e sacramentum 21), Centro Studi S. Anselmo, Roma 1998.

LERCARO, GIACOMO. Lettere dal Concilio 1962-1965, ed. Giuseppe Battelli, Dehoniane, Bologna
1980.

________, *In nomine Domini+, Notitiae 1 (1965) 3-5

________,Principia seu normae ad confirmanda acta coetuum episcopalium a Consilio
approbata in coetu plenario deirum, Ephemerides Liturgicae 107 (1993) 437-439.

MARINI, PIERO. A Challenging Reform. Realizing the Vision of the Liturgical Renewal 1963-
1975, ed. M. Francis -K. Pecklers, Liturgical Press, Collegeville, MN 2007.

________, *Attivit complessiva dei gruppi di studio del AConsilium ad exsequendam
Constitutionem de sacra Liturgia@(Gennaio1964-Marzo1965)+, Ephemerides Liturgicae 112
(1998) 289-309.

________, Il Consilium in piena attivit in un clima favorevole. (Ottobre 1964-Marzo1965),
Ephemerides Liturgicae 109 (1995) 97-158.

________, Il primo Periodo de attivit del Consilium: prospettive e difficolt (Marzo-Giugno
1964), Ephemerides Liturgicae 107 (1993) 401-439.


52
MARTIMORT, AIM-GEORGES, Le Cardinal Giacomo Lercaro (1891-1976). Souvenirs dun
liturgiste, in Mirabile laudis canticum. Mlange liturgique (Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae
Subsidia 60), CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma 1991, 377-388.

________, Le rle de Paul VI dans la rforme liturgique, in Mirabile laudis canticum.
Mlange liturgique (Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia 60), CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche,
Roma 1991, 233-250.

Vaticans No. 2, in Time Magazine, 25 August 1961. 26 November 1881-5 February 1962.
Cardinal under Pope Pius XII 12 January 1953.

NO, VIRGILIO. Storia della Costituzione liturgica. Punti di riferimento, in Costituzione
liturgica Sacrosanctum Concilium, ed. Congregazione per il Culto Divino (Ephemerides
Liturgicae Subsidia 38), CLV-Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma 1986, 9-24.

WAGNER, JOHANNES. Zur Reform des Ordo Missae, zwei Dokumente, in Liturgia opera
divina e umana.Studi sulla riforma liturgica offerti a S.E. Mons. Annibale Bugnini in occasione
del suo 70 compleanno, ed. P. Jounel -R. Kaczynski -G. Paqualletti (Bibliotheca Ephemerides
Liturgicae Subsidia 26), Edizioni liturgiche, Roma 1982 263-290.

Novus Ordo Mass and Consilium: Its Organization, Workings, Process, Replete With Graphs

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Novus Ordo Mass and Consilium: Its Organization, Workings, Process, Replete With Graphs

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Novus Ordo Mass and Consilium: Its Organization, Workings, Process, Replete With Graphs

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Christiaan W.

You might also like