ARTICLE II: ON THE RUBRICS

1332. - Priests ought to observe with the greatest care and solicitude the laws of the Church which pertain to the manner of celebrating Mass, since among all sacred things this is the most sacred of all, and therefore worthy of the greatest reverence.

1333. Questions. - Query 1° Are all the Rubrics of the Mass preceptive?

Resp. 1° According to the common opinion, all Rubrics which are observed within the Mass are preceptive, since they regard so sacred a thing. But they oblige under grave or under light obligation according to the gravity or lightness of the matter, as will be said below.²

Resp. 2° But some Rubrics which are observed outside the Mass, that is, before or after the Sacrifice, are merely directive, as e.g. the washing of hands after Mass and the prayers for preparation or thanksgiving.³

It is controverted as regards the prayers which by the Rubric are to be recited while the vestments are put on; but with the common opinion it must be held, says St. Alphonsus,⁴ that their omission is venially culpable.

Query 2° Can an infirm priest celebrate, although he cannot observe all the Rubrics?

Resp. Affirmatively, if he omits only a few and lighter ones, especially if he celebrates privately. Indeed several authors of grave note permit an infirm celebrant even to use a staff, if he needs it, etc.⁵

Query 3° Is it ever lawful to interrupt Mass?

Resp. 1° It is never lawful to interrupt Mass essentially, so that the Sacrifice begun remains truncated, unless a very grave or extreme necessity urges, as in the case of an imminent fire, or of an enemy rushing in to kill; for then the priest, omitting the Consecration of the chalice, could consume the Host already consecrated, or carry it away with him by fleeing. But if he has completed both Consecrations, he should immediately consume both Species, if he can; or if he cannot, he should carry them away with him to a nearby place to be consumed most quickly.¹

Resp. 2° It is lawful to interrupt accidentally, namely by interposing something for a just cause before the Canon: 1° on account of a sermon after the Gospel, on account of prayers to be recited for the dead (which nevertheless, just as also those which are prescribed by the Ordinary, must among us be recited before or after Mass²), on account of proclamations of Banns to be made, or on account of a procession to be received, etc. 2° In favor of a Prince arriving, or of a crowd of pilgrims on a feast day, if otherwise they cannot hear Mass. Then, if the oblation has not been made, the priest can begin anew so that they may hear the whole Sacrifice. 3° If the priest remembers some impediment, e.g. that he is not fasting, or that he is not in the state of grace, or that he is irregular, provided that the Mass can be broken off without scandal or note.³

Resp. 3° Nevertheless, it is not lawful to interrupt, even accidentally, once the Canon has been begun, and a fortiori once the Consecration has been completed, except from a very grave cause. Hence Mass can always be interrupted, indeed must be, if a necessary Sacrament is to be administered, i.e. Baptism and Penance; likewise Extreme Unction or Viaticum, when these are to be administered for this reason, because absolution could be given only doubtfully (n. 1226. q. 2°. R. 1°). Otherwise, between the Consecration and Communion, it is not becoming, unless there is question of Viaticum, and provided that in that case the celebrant ought not to take off the sacred vestments, nor lose sight of the altar.⁴ - Without a just cause, a notable interruption is mortal.⁵

Query 4° What is to be done if a priest, overtaken by illness or death, cannot complete the Sacrifice?

Resp. 1° If the priest fails before the Consecration, nothing is to be done by another priest, because the Sacrifice was not properly begun.

Resp. 2° But if he fails after the Consecration, even of only one Species, then another fasting priest, if he is present, must supply; if no fasting priest is present, another, even not fasting, should supply and complete the Sacrifice; because the precept of procuring the integrity of the Sacrifice urges more gravely. Indeed even an irregular or excommunicated priest would be obliged to supply. Nevertheless, if another priest could not be found immediately, after one hour has intervened, more probably he should no longer be sought, because moral union would be lacking, and therefore it would not be judged the same Sacrifice. But if a priest overtaken by illness while celebrating can complete the Sacrifice after some interruption, he himself will complete it better than another, even if he is not fasting.

1334. - Resolves. 1° It is illicit to celebrate with the head covered. This is established from c. Nullus de Cons. dist. 1. And indeed according to the common opinion it is mortal to celebrate the whole Mass with the head covered; but to celebrate with a skullcap (calotte) up to the Canon, contempt and scandal being excluded, is only venial; indeed probably it is without even venial fault, although it be done without dispensation up to the Canon only from a reasonable cause and in a private place, or even in a public place, if the reason is manifest to those present, and the priest cannot celebrate without notable inconvenience. Nevertheless it is illicit to celebrate the entire Mass with the head thus covered without Apostolic license. Thus expressly St. Alphonsus,² after others. - Craisson, Man. Jur. Can.³

2° It is illicit by common law to celebrate with a false head of hair (wig), because by it also the head of the celebrant is covered. Thus from the Decree of Innocent XI, in which moreover Bishops and Apostolic Nuncios are prohibited from granting this license.⁴ - But this prohibition has passed into desuetude in many places.⁵

3° A priest is not excused from venial sin who omits blessings, inclinations, genuflections, etc. ... Say the same of him who advertently does not genuflect to the ground, or contrary to the prescriptions of the Rubric changes the order of blessings, or performs these too hastily.

4° It is a grave sin, unless the lightness of the matter excuses, to omit the parts of the Mass which are called ordinary, or which are always recited or done. Hence Doctors commonly say that it is mortal to omit the Confession with the other things at the beginning of Mass, the Epistle, the Gospel, the principal Collects, the Offertory, the Preface, the breaking of the Host, and its mixing with the Blood.

5° It is mortal to omit in the Canon any prayer, or 10 or 8 names of the Saints (words?), or to change its words so that the sense is changed, or to omit some word by which, when removed, the remaining words do not make sense. - The same is to be said if the Pater noster or Agnus Dei is omitted; likewise concerning Libera nos; Domine, non sum dignus; and Quid retribuam; likewise concerning the purification of the paten and chalice after the consumption.¹

6° It is venial to omit one of the three principal Collects. If the first prayer has been omitted, it seems it is to be recited together with the Secret, not afterwards. It will not be mortal to omit other prayers which are added in the Mass besides the proper Collect.²

7° He sins venially who, contrary to the express prescription of the Rubric of the Missal, a) pronounces those things which are to be said secretly so softly that he does not hear himself (indeed gravely, if he pronounced the words of Consecration thus); b) those things which are to be said in a loud voice, softly, or so loudly that he disturbs other celebrants; c) those things which are to be said softly, loudly. Nevertheless there would be no sin in reciting those things which are to be recited in a subdued voice so that only the ministers hear them.³

8° To mutilate words or to interpose a syncopation, with the sense preserved and scandal excluded, is no more than venial.⁴

9° To omit extraordinary parts, namely those which are not said in every Mass, is only venial. - Thus commonly, unless so many parts are omitted that, taken together, they constitute notable matter. - Hence it will be only venial to omit the Gloria, Credo, Collects besides the proper one of the Mass, the Tract, or special things about the Preface or the Communicantes. - Thus commonly. - Likewise to celebrate a votive Mass or Mass of Requiem when this is not lawful according to the Rubrics is venial, unless it becomes mortal by reason of contempt or scandal. Thus, for example, you will with difficulty be excused from grave scandal if you read a Mass, at least a public one, of Requiem on the solemn feasts of Easter or of the Nativity of the Lord.¹

10° The washing of hands before Mass must be done at least under venial obligation, and under grave obligation if the hands are very unclean, on account of reverence for the Sacrifice. - But to omit the washing after Mass will be no sin.²

11° Although there is no sin in omitting the prayers before and after Mass, nevertheless a priest who approached to sacrifice without any other preparation would not be without some fault.³

12° A priest would sin if in the purification of the Chalice he used water alone, but only venially according to the common opinion.⁴ - Several also excuse a priest from venial sin if he is an abstainer from wine. Thus Tamburinus. - See more concerning the Rubrics and Ceremonies in the authors.

13° Whether it is mortal to celebrate with notable voluntary distraction, e.g. in those things which are recited in the Canon, and especially under the Consecration and Communion, is disputed. St. Alphonsus rather adheres to the affirmative opinion, because, as he says, the Sacrifice, besides the character of prayer, by force of which it would not be certainly mortal (cf. n. 402), has moreover the character of a most excellent worship of Religion, "to which he seems to bring grave irreverence, who, while he professes to worship God by a religious act, voluntarily" and notably "distracts himself."⁵

14° The following things are rightly admonished by the Fathers of the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore:⁶

"In celebrating the divine Sacrifice let pains be taken diligently, that all ornaments of altars and sacred vessels be clean; not foul corporals or purificators; not torn or unbecoming vestments; but let the garments of private attire lie hidden under the amice and alb so that they do not appear in an unbecoming or worldly manner; nor let anything be unworthy of the tremendous altar or the administration of the Sacraments."

"That all things be done according to order, and that the solemn rites of the Church be preserved whole, we admonish Rectors of churches that they diligently watch to eliminate abuses which have invaded ecclesiastical chant in these regions. Therefore let them take care that music serve the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the other divine offices, but not that the divine offices serve music. Let them know that, according to the rite of the Church, songs in the vernacular tongue may not be sung during the solemnities of Masses or solemn Vespers." (H) p. 403 and (15) p. 418.

1335. - Besides the Rubrics of the Missal, Breviary, Ritual, and other liturgical books, there are also decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, which likewise must be judged as the proximate rule of the same rites.¹ This is clear from what was said in n. 172. 4° and 173. q. 3°.

I. The Decrees of the S. R. C. can be distinguished as twofold, general and particular. See what was said in n. 173. q. 4°.

II. They are preceptive if either they are bare declarations or interpretations of Rubrics and concern a preceptive Rubric, or if they are in the rigorous form of a decree, i.e. they have some clause of command, as, e.g., he commanded it to be observed.² Otherwise they are only directive, nevertheless to be observed by all with due respect and to be preferred to any contrary opinion of authors.

III. That they oblige, they must be a) authentic (n. 173. q. 3. R. 1°), such as are all those which are had in the Gardellinian Collection (ib. q. 6°); nor is it enough that they were given by the Prefect or Secretary of the S. R. C. or by others outside the Congregation;³ b) if they are extensive, promulgated in the manner which we stated in n. 173. q. 5°.

IV. If any decrees are truly contrary to one another, one must stand by the later one. - But if some apparent discrepancy is had between the general Rubrics of the Missal and those which are noted in the Order of Mass, each Rubric is to be followed with equal form, reconciling, as far as possible, their dispositions; for the discrepancy ordinarily comes from the fact that what is expressly prescribed in one is passed over in silence or expressed more obscurely in the other. The same is to be said concerning a discrepancy which sometimes occurs between the Missal and the Ceremonial of Bishops; concerning which, however, it can also be said that the Ceremonial can be left to cathedral churches and others, for whose use it is prescribed.¹

I have said further that abuse alone is forbidden. Wherefore musical chant must be grave, decorous, sweet and pious, distinct, intelligible. Cer. Ep. L. I. c. 28. n. 12; Circular Letters of the Eminent Cardinal Vicar of His Holiness, 18 and 20 Nov. 1856, apud Anal. J. P., month of May 1857. Hence in it these abuses are to be reproved and guarded against: 1° lest whether in organ or song anything lascivious or impure be mixed in, such as music is to be kept away from churches; lest profane melodies be introduced, or those which breathe levity, or by excessive noise dissipate rather than foster and excite affections of piety; lest theatrical, military, or worldly songs or modulations be transferred to sacred concerts; so that from sacred music there be removed whatever is alien from its scope, and serves only the curiosity or pleasure of the hearers, or even the fame of the authors. 2° Lest the text be notably altered by mutilating, putting before, putting after, and altering the words and the sense of them, and by adapting them to the modulation in such a way that the music does not seem to serve the words and sense, but these to serve the music; which S. R. C. judged to need reform, 21 Feb. 1643. 1. n. 1285. 1432. For this reason Benedict XIV prescribes in the cited Constitution, § 9, that care is to be taken that the words which are sung be perfectly and plainly understood. 3° Lest those things which are sung under the introit, offertory, elevation, and communion be so prolonged that the celebrant, by waiting, is compelled to interrupt the Sacrifice and to linger distracted longer at the altar, so that music does not serve the Mass, but the Mass serves music. S. R. C., 21 Feb. 1643. 2. n. 1285. 1432; Benedict XIV, Const. cited, § 13.

The Ceremonial of Bishops, L. I. c. 28. n. 1, says that it is fitting that the organ be played while in Mass the Most Holy Sacrament is elevated, but with a graver and sweeter sound. De Herdt, ib. n. 113, 114.

Concerning the use of instruments, Benedict XIV notes these things in the cited Constitution: "If instruments sound continuously, and only sometimes ... rest for some moments, so that they may offer free space for hearing harmonic modulations and rippled ejaculations of voices ... but otherwise overwhelm and bury the voice of the singers and the sound of the words, the use of instruments of this kind is vain and useless, indeed forbidden and interdicted." Which instruments are forbidden, see apud the same Benedict XIV, Const. cited, § 11.

1336. - On custom against the Rubrics.

Query. What conditions are required that it be legitimate?

Resp. 1° That it be immemorial.² This is clear from various decrees of the S. C. R. and from c. Apostolici ministerii of Innocent XIII, 23 May 1723, according to De Herdt.³ - 2° That it not openly conflict with the Rubrics of the Missal, Breviary, Ceremonial of Bishops, or Roman Ritual, or also with the general decrees appended in the Missal and Breviary. - I said: that it not OPENLY conflict, etc.; for the S. R. C., according to De Herdt,⁴ permits and approves those customs which, although they plainly do not agree with the rules contained in the Missal, Breviary, Ceremonial, and Ritual, nevertheless do not openly conflict with the same, but rather concern a certain manner. 3° That it be laudable, i.e. not "contain a positive indecency which cannot becomingly be tolerated."⁵

"From these things it is clear," says De Herdt,⁶ "that very many customs are illegitimate, and therefore to be removed and corrected; which must be done the more if they regard clerics alone, so that, with the people scarcely attending or not caring much, they can be corrected; but if it is foreseen that wonder and scandal will arise in the people from the change to be made, one must proceed very prudently, and sometimes it is better to tolerate something, than to move disturbances, which sometimes are stirred up, even from a good cause, not without great harm to Religion. But truly legitimate and laudable customs ought not to be changed, and if the change would yield to someone's burden, or to wonder and scandal of the people, they cannot be changed at all."

on which, outside the case of an indult of remission, to be obtained by the Bishops from the S. C. C. or respectively from Propaganda Fide, Pastors and Ordinaries are bound to celebrate for the people, Pius IX (see n. 1322. II.) determined to be the following:

Namely, the Lord's days of the whole year; the Nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ; Circumcision; Epiphany; Resurrection with the two following ferial days; Ascension; Pentecost with likewise the two following ferial days; Most Holy Trinity; Solemnity of the Body of Christ and Invention of the Holy Cross, and also the feasts of the Conception, Purification, Annunciation, Assumption, and Nativity of the Virgin Mother of God; Dedication of St. Michael the Archangel; Nativity of St. John the Baptist; of Sts. Peter and Paul, St. Andrew, St. James, St. John, St. Thomas, Sts. Philip and James, St. Bartholomew, St. Matthew, Sts. Simon and Jude, and St. Matthias, Apostles of Christ the Lord; likewise St. Stephen, Protomartyr; the Holy Innocents; St. Lawrence, Martyr; St. Sylvester, Pope and Confessor; St. Joseph, also Confessor; and St. Anne, Mother of the Mother of God; the Solemnity of All Saints, and one of the more principal patrons in any kingdom or province, and another likewise more principal in any city, town, or village, where it happens that these patrons are had and venerated.*