Liturgical and Prayer Books

Argument of the chapter

In the three articles of this chapter, in a simple order, there is treated first of liturgical books, then of litanies, finally of works of practical devotion or religious instruction.

In authentic editions of the Missal, Breviary, Ritual, Ceremonial of Bishops, Roman Pontifical, and other liturgical books approved by the Holy Apostolic See, let no one presume to change anything: if otherwise it has been done, these new editions are prohibited.

What an authentic edition is

88. 1. An authentic edition is that which the public authority, which here is the Holy See, so approves that it in some manner makes it its own. Thus the obvious sense, thus the common signification of authenticity, thus all interpreters of this Constitution whom we have seen. Therefore it designates that typical exemplar, prepared according to the norms of the Constitutions of the Supreme Pontiffs, and which other editions must imitate; in other words, "the original taken from the Sacred Congregation of Rites, or the authentic exemplar of the Cameral printing office, signed by the hand of the Secretary of the same Sacred Congregation and sealed with its seal."¹ Therefore a license of publishing given by the Ordinary, and testimony of conformity with the typical exemplar, does not suffice to confer authenticity on liturgical books.

But because it is repugnant that the same edition be at once authentic and corrupt, the words in authentic editions sound the same as: in the authentic text, or also: in books of which an authentic edition exists, and which are destined for liturgical use.

Other liturgical books. Concerning Euchologia

2. Other liturgical books are, for example, the Day Hours, the Offices of Holy Week, of the Blessed Virgin Mary, etc. Yet books of private devotion are not reputed liturgical in which, for the convenience of the faithful, certain parts of the Missal or Breviary are contained together with various other prayers. Wherefore, while the prior law was still in force, Euchologia which exhibited the Ordinary of the Mass, Sunday Vespers, the Office of the Dead, commonly used to report only the common approbation. These are governed by article 20.

What change is treated

3. The change of which there is question in the article is not made in the authentic exemplar itself, but, as is said at the end of the article, in new editions which disagree with the authentic one, and which certainly will not be authentic. Thus altogether Palmieri on this place.

And because the text is: "let no one presume to change anything," at the same time, on the one hand, even slight changes are attended to;² on the other hand involuntary "errata" are excused.³

Yet the authentic text is not judged changed because in a new edition, in their proper places, more things are extended and repeated than in the authentic one for the convenience of users.

What of chant?

Come now: by the motu proprio of April 25, 1904, that conformity, in the manner which will be proposed below in the appendix, must also be urged with respect to chant, so that no one can now approve liturgical books which contain chant differing from the typical edition. Cf. below, the appendix.

Sanction of prohibition

4. If otherwise it has been done, these new editions are prohibited. Those words, set forth simply, must be taken in the sense which we explained above. Therefore we are prohibited not only from liturgical use, or from paying the canonical hours from an edition of this sort, but also from simple reading, retention, etc.

What, if editions are conforming?

But if they have been new editions conforming to the typical exemplar, by the obvious sense itself we are taught that those books can be used, at least for private use.

With regard to private use

Yet they must be marked with the approval of the Ordinary, not to be conceded unless there is certainty concerning that conformity.

For although, on account of the special mention which is made of them in this article 18, you should be unwilling to place them in the genus of practical books of devotion, concerning which in article 20, nevertheless they cannot escape the force of article 41, which makes all writings in which religion is specially interested subject to previous censure, and of article 44, by which new editions of a work subject to previous censure must be approved. And indeed a liturgical book is so subject to censure that the typical exemplar cannot be published except by authority of the Sacred Congregation of Rites.⁴ Thus far concerning private use.

With regard to liturgical use

But it is less established whether the same can be said concerning the liturgical use⁵ of those books; or whether, on the contrary, in this part the sanctions of prior law have force.

For from prior law,⁶ the use of Missals, Breviaries, and parts taken from the Breviary was forbidden when they were published without a faculty to be obtained in writing, in the City from the Sacred Congregation of Rites, and outside the City (if an Inquisitor was lacking) from the Ordinary of the place. Moreover, the faculty had to make mention of a diligent comparison with the typical exemplar, and of the conformity found between each; and it had to be printed at the beginning or end of the book.

Moreover, for the more benign solution, which contends that even liturgical use is governed by this our Constitution, these things make:

a) Those books are not morally accustomed to have any other use than liturgical use. Therefore both the inscription of chapter VII, which, besides, distinguishes liturgical and prayer books, and the present article 18 chiefly intend this use. But this having been set down, unless you wish to accuse our Legislator of lack of skill, who, while he thinks to furnish to all rules clear and easy to know, would have handed down in this part only a maimed and imperfect law, which would have to be laboriously supplied from various Bulls and Decrees; unless, I say, you should opine so absurdly, you will have to say that the preceding Constitutions on the same matter, which is admitted to be touched of set purpose by the Constitution of Leo XIII, are antiquated.

b) To this, finally, practically looks the abolition of that law: that the special solemnities of approval which we have just recalled could now be passed over.⁷ But in this there is nothing inconvenient, nothing exorbitant, since today the Ordinary can easily compare a new edition with a genuine one. But it plainly accords with the character of the present law that the forms to be observed be rendered more simple.⁸

c) A way seems to have been prepared for this more benign law by decrees⁹ which began to prohibit less strictly the use of liturgical books which lacked formal approval.

d) Finally, very learned men defend this opinion as certain: C. Gennari,¹⁰ Planchard,¹¹ Pennacchi.¹²

Yet are these reasons such as make plainly improbable the manner of thinking of others, who think that the Constitutions of Urban VIII still have force? We by no means think so, provided they wish to contract the force of their opinion to liturgical use.

For the Constitutions praised above were written to take care lest the formula of praying and offering sacrifice which the Church uses be corrupted. Therefore someone could think that they proscribed editions destitute of certain solemnities merely in order to liturgical use.¹³

But then they would already seem to handle another subject than our Constitution, which concerns the prohibition and censure of books in general, and not the moderating of a particular use of certain books. Nor would they necessarily be weakened by the clause by which Leo XIII suppresses any other command of the Supreme Pontiffs concerning this matter (that is, concerning the object of the new Constitution). Indeed, as much as it is permitted to a private writer to conjecture these things, it seems sufficiently likely that the Sacred Congregation of Rites, if questioned concerning this doubt, would accommodate its response to this latter opinion.¹⁴

What if you recite from a prohibited edition

What if you recite the Breviary by using a prohibited edition? Since a sanction which the law has not expressed is not to be introduced, you seem to recite validly, or to satisfy the obligation, provided you recite according to the prescribed form. Cf. Monitore, VIII, 2, p. 209. For the use of an approved Breviary does not pertain to the intrinsic reason of the obligatory manner, since you can pay the Hours from memory.

Nor does that use of a Breviary not approved, provided you recite the prescribed prayers and all contempt is absent, seem to introduce grave sin, by which even vocal prayer would perish.

¹ Dilgskron, Anal. Eccl., 1897, p. 87, at the end.

² Pennacchi, cited work, n. 56.

³ The Sacred Congregation of Rites admits that errors have crept even into some editions of the City, April 26, 1834 (Collect. Prop. Fid., n. 1875).

⁴ Therefore we can by no means agree with the doctrine of the distinguished Pennacchi, n. 56, according to which those new editions would no longer require any previous license. We think this is sufficiently clear from the reasons given. Nor is this a gratuitous assertion, as Ephem. Liturg., 1898, p. 534, object. Cf. also Wernz, n. 111, note 72. But how the General of the Order of Carmelites of the ancient observance could publish his proper Ritual, cf. response of May 24, 1905, Periodica Nostra, n. 76, t. 2, pp. 14 and 16.

⁵ By which formula we also include the recitation of the Breviary prescribed for ministers of the Church.

⁶ For Breviaries and parts taken from it, this is established from the Constitution Divinam Psalmodiam of Urban VIII, January 25, 1631; for Missals, from the Constitution Si quid est of the same Pontiff, September 2, 1634.

⁷ No small praise of the present Constitution is that wise discretion, by which, from the suppressed General Decrees (which were set before the catalogue of the Index before the Mandate of Leo XIII), it retained some things, but omitted others which today are less opportune, or of which express mention has already become superfluous. Thus, for example, in place of the eight articles of § IV, articles 13 and 18 of our Constitution were substituted, which seem plainly to suffice for the intent. For controversies concerning Chinese rites, of which six articles treated, are today quieted, so that they do not need a special sanction. But as regards new Blessings, formulas of Exorcisms, and Rosaries, concerning which articles 1, 4, 8 treated: they can be considered as public rites or private devotions. Under the first aspect, it is sufficiently established today that sacred rites are a greater cause devolved exclusively to the Holy See. Therefore a special caution concerning them is no more desired than it ought to be expressly provided lest some private person found right or law in the Church. Under the other respect, they would be new devotions, which are governed by article 13. Therefore we can with impunity abstain from sayings too foreign in law, by which, for example, those things which Leo XIII abrogates in express words are said to have force because of a decree, and that one preceding in time, of the Sacred Congregation. We grieve that this was proposed in the excellent Ephemerides Liturgicae (1898), p. 583: "The conclusions brought in ...," so they say, "we inserted; because they are read in § IV of the Decrees of the Index, and therefore they were abrogated, and nevertheless by force of the Constitutions or Decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, they still have force." At the same time it appears that with no difficulty the strange consequences which are objected against the benign opinion of which in the text are avoided. Let it be lawful for us, with esteem for them preserved and from zeal for truth, to note these things in response to the most humane response which, pp. 521-534, the Ephemerides Liturgicae gave to the second of the two notes by which, in the second edition, pp. 71, 72, we had disapproved their manner of speaking.

⁸ Dilgskron, Anal. Eccl., 1897, p. 228.

⁹ Cf. Sacred Congregation of Rites, General Decree, April 26, 1834 (Decr. auth., n. 2716), inculcated again February 18, 1843 (Decr. auth., n. 2855), and a third time February 27, 1847 (Gardellini, n. 5066), and the Council of Avignon, title I, chapter 6, which Lehmk., II, 232, reports.

¹⁰ Monit., cited place, X, pp. 67, 68.

¹¹ Rev. Th. Fr., cited place, n. 65.

¹² A. S. S., cited place, n. 56, p. 338.

¹³ Therefore let the Ephemerides Liturgicae note again that we turn these things over with a mind not preoccupied, and that we oppose their conclusion less than their arguments.

¹⁴ Yet it could deservedly be objected that in the Constitution Quamvis of Urban VIII (June 16, 1634), Pontificals which are published without special faculty, etc., are prohibited in absolute words. But that in the most recent Collection of Rites there are inserted Decrees which refer to prior law by no means proves that those dispositions still have force. For there are several utilities of that insertion, even if some parts have been antiquated. Nor was there so much care in arranging that Collection that you could borrow a certain argument from the same.

Reason for writing about sacred chant

89. Our Most Holy Lord Pius Pp. X established new law concerning sacred chant; and because it is closely connected with the immediately preceding subject, it must here, as regards its publication, be recalled in a few words.¹

Summary of the acts; code of sacred music

I. Therefore, after by the motu proprio of November 22, 1903, he wrote a Code concerning sacred chant and restored Gregorian melodies to the Roman Church, by another motu proprio, April 25, 1904,² he established these principles:

1. Liturgical books cannot be approved which in chant differ from the authentic Vatican edition. Yet that variety can be introduced which the Roman commission on sacred chant has judged to be supported by probable authority (motu proprio, § d).

2. The Vatican edition is in the domain of the Holy See. Yet this, by imposing certain laws, will grant to suitable printers and publishers of every nation permission to print and publish it in whole or in part.

Instructions of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, August 11, 1905

II. According to these principles, the Sacred Congregation of Rites, by decree of August 11, 1905, published instructions which define all things more precisely in this manner:

Pontifical faculty for printing must be obtained

I. Publishers or printers of whatever place or region, who wish to print the Gregorian melodies contained in the Vatican edition, whether in equal form or larger or smaller, whether all or only some, shall take care first to obtain the faculty from the same Apostolic See.

Laws to be observed

II. By each of the publishers who has obtained a pontifical faculty of this sort, these things are to be most diligently attended to:

a) The form of the little notes and of the other signs of Gregorian chant must be preserved which the ancients established and the Vatican edition exhibits exactly.

b) Above all, nothing can be changed in the order in which the same little notes succeed one another for the various intervals of sounds.

c) Nor likewise in the manner in which the little notes themselves are joined for the diverse formulas of neumes, as they say.

d) The most absolute relation of the words of the sacred text to the little notes of the chant is also to be observed, so that each syllable lies wholly under its note or notes.

Faith must be made concerning agreement with the typical edition

III. Once the edition has been prepared and completed, it will be unlawful for anyone to publish it and to use it in sacred functions unless the Ordinary of the place has fortified it with a declaration, by which its agreement with the typical Vatican edition is established.

By the Ordinary from the report of censors

IV. But let the Ordinary not grant a declaration of this sort unless first censors skilled in Gregorian chant, after a most diligent comparison has been made, testify in writing, with conscience burdened, that the new edition altogether agrees with the Vatican one.

In which parts varieties are admitted, in which not

V. To those parts of the liturgical office which admit diverse chants according to the diversity of day or feast, as for example hymns and the Ordinary of the Mass, melodies can be adapted which are not found in the typical edition, and can be approved by the Sacred Congregation of Rites, with due conditions observed, especially those which are appended in § d) of the motu proprio of April 25, 1904.³ But in no way are varieties of tones or chants of this sort to be admitted in the remaining parts, for example in the Antiphons and Responsories either of the Office or of the Mass.

What of proper offices or newly conceded ones?

VI. But if there is question of proper Offices of some church or regular Order following the Roman rite, or of Offices newly granted, their Gregorian melodies, restored or arranged by skilled men, are likewise to be submitted to the approval of the Sacred Congregation of Rites; once this has been obtained, the Ordinary of the place, having been made certain, as above, concerning agreement with the originals recognized by the Sacred Congregation, will grant the required declaration.

Use of modern notes

VII. It can be tolerated that Gregorian chant be published in modern musical notes, provided the danger be carefully removed lest the order of the notes and neumes be disturbed in any way whatever. Therefore for these editions, for the convenience of the faithful, the Ordinary will be able to grant his approval if it has been established to him, according to articles 4 and 6, concerning faithful conformity with the typical edition or approved melodies.

Three exemplars to be sent to the Sacred Congregation

VIII. Whenever a book containing sacred chant or any liturgical melody is submitted to the Sacred Congregation of Rites in order to obtain approval, three exemplars are to be sent to the same.

Rights of the Holy See

IX. A Gregorian melody destined and recommended for liturgical use by the Sacred Congregation of Rites according to the aforesaid norms pertains to the sacred treasure or patrimony of the Roman Church, just as the text itself does. And so, when a new text is proposed or conceded to the faithful by the same, the chant corresponding to the text is reputed to have been conceded at the same time, so that no publisher or author can raise a complaint concerning the fact that the Apostolic See extends the same melodies to other churches.

Declaration, February 14, 1906

To these Instructions there was added the declaration of February 14, 1906, of this tenor:

Conformity with the typical edition is required in the form of the little notes and the manner in which they are joined

1. The form of the little notes of the chant must be preserved intact in such a way that all of those which have the same reason or signification, and therefore bear one and the same figure in the typical Vatican edition, likewise in another edition which can be approved by the Ordinary must necessarily be altogether similar and equal among themselves as regards form. And therefore signs which perhaps have been superinduced, with the Ordinary permitting, must in no way affect the form of the little notes, or the manner in which they are joined.

Confusion between typical notes and superinduced signs must henceforth be avoided

2. Although some edition has been recognized by the Ordinary or by the Sacred Congregation of Rites itself as in other respects, that is excepting signs, conforming with the typical edition, nevertheless it is necessary that henceforth it observe exactly the norms established above; insofar as, between typical little notes and signs which are added, confusion can no longer arise. Anything whatever to the contrary notwithstanding.

Decree of August 14, 1905

III. Moreover, by decree of August 14, 1905, the Sacred Congregation of Rites promulgated the typical edition of Gregorian chant, and, after recalling the laws which forbid books of Gregorian chant to be published without apostolic faculty or differing from the typical edition, manifested the wish of the Supreme Pontiff that the remaining liturgical books of the Roman rite be removed as soon as possible.⁴

These laws govern liturgical use

IV. These things which have been prescribed concerning chant refer in themselves to liturgical use, which the cited Instructions of August 11, 1905, n. IX, positively name; at the same time, however, the right of ownership which, in the same n. IX, the Holy See vindicates for itself in sacred chant approved by it must be observed.

¹ Cf. Periodica Nostra, t. 1, n. 10, p. 23 and following.

² In the same place, n. 68, p. 168 and following.

³ There no other condition seems to be required except that the varieties be indicated as supported by the authority of good codices.

⁴ Cf. Periodica Nostra, t. 2, n. 88, p. 38.

All litanies, except the most ancient and common ones, which are contained in Breviaries, Missals, Pontificals, and Rituals, and except the Litanies of the Blessed Virgin, which are customarily sung in the sacred House of Loreto, and the Litanies of the Most Holy Name of Jesus already approved by the Holy See, are not to be published without the review and approval of the Ordinary.

Which litanies are common

90. 1. The most ancient and common litanies are the Litanies of All Saints¹ and the Litanies of the Dying.

Litanies of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus

2. To the Litanies approved by the Holy See must now be ascribed the Litanies of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, which by decree of April 2, 1899, were approved for the whole Church.

Force of episcopal approval

3. The other Litanies which only a Bishop has approved can have only private use, so that publicly, even without the intervention of a sacred minister, they are prohibited from being recited in Churches or public oratories.

What if litanies are published without approval

4. Yet if the necessary approval is lacking, the use of a sheet or writing exhibiting Litanies is not prohibited. The general reason already repeated more than once returns. Thus the common opinion. But booklets or books of litanies which lack approval incur the reprehension of the immediately following article 20.

¹ These, with a few changes, recur in various sacred ceremonies, as in the Office of Holy Saturday, in Rogations, in sacred Ordination, etc.

Books or booklets of prayers, devotion, or religious, moral, ascetical, mystical doctrine and instruction, and others of this sort, although they seem to conduce to fostering the piety of the Christian people, let no one publish apart from the license of legitimate authority; otherwise let them be held prohibited.

What books, booklets are

91. 1. Observe that books or booklets are touched, but not sheets or writings, whether separate or inserted in periodicals, for example, to announce certain pious ceremonies. Thus also Pennacchi, n. 58.

Which are comprehended by the prohibition

2. Moreover, there is question of those works, as is established from the examples brought forward and from the words "although they seem to conduce to fostering the piety of the Christian people, etc.," whose end is immediately practical (not the mere exposition of doctrine) and is referred to religious or moral instruction: therefore Euchologia; catechisms strictly such, or understood more broadly, that is, those booklets which now not rarely are destined in place of a catechism, or together with a catechism, for forming the morals of boys (catéchismes de morale); ascetical books; books which propose meditations; but not books which contain sermons already given, if they are directed to another immediate end than that of forming piety, for example, a literary end, or for the use of other preachers.

Competent power

3. Apart from the license of legitimate authority. This legitimate authority, as will be more established from the rules concerning previous Censure, is regularly the Ordinary of the place where the work is published.

Concerning Euchologia which render Epistles and Gospels in the vernacular language. What if the Order of Mass is translated?

That Ordinary can also permit Euchologia which, as usage bears, contain versions both of the epistles and gospels of the year, and of the Order of Mass, the canon itself not excluded. The former is established from custom; the latter is drawn indirectly from a response of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, which declared that books of this sort "and their versions are reserved to the authority of Bishops."¹

Sanction of prohibition

4. Otherwise let them be held prohibited. Here, on account of the dangers of deceptions and hallucinations, a peculiar sanction is added, by which books or booklets are prohibited unless they have been approved by authority of legitimate censure.

Concerning books which lack an "Imprimatur."

What, therefore, if you meet with a book which before the Constitution of Leo XIII was once written to foster piety, but bears no "Imprimatur"?

As we said above, a sanction of this sort does not govern past acts, unless before the Constitution of Leo XIII a similar one existed.

But already before the said Constitution, books of piety were forbidden to be published without approval.

Yet that law was not urged with the same severity in every place, so that in several places it could have been softened by a certain benign usage. Thus, therefore, we shall say: If the book seems truly to have been published with a good intention, or is known as pious and useful, the defect of approval can by presumption be ascribed to a certain more benign custom,² so that it can be read with impunity. Commonly this will have to be judged so concerning good books of Belgium and France. On the contrary, in regions where errors and heresies were carried about under the appearance of piety, as in parts of Germany, a work of this sort which lacks positive approval is rather to be held as suspect and forbidden.

¹ August 4, 1877. Cf. Collectan. Prop. Fid., n. 1890. Nor can there be brought against this the brief Ad aures nostras of Alexander VII, January 12, 1661; for there he reprobates an entire Missal rendered in French, and in that form, as it seems, which would be adapted to liturgical use; nor the decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites in the Lingon case, June 6, 1851, which is no longer found in the Collection of Rites.

² Even today it can happen that in a certain diocese a usage obtains which differs from the law. Then the same thing must be said.

772. As regards worship, devotion, and liturgy, by a general rule, by the law itself there are prohibited:

1. "Books and booklets which narrate new apparitions, revelations, visions, prophecies, miracles" (as supernatural), that is, they do not report them in passing by the way, but professedly or in a notable part; "or which introduce new devotions" (notably different from ancient and approved ones), "even under the pretext that they are private, if they have been published without the prescriptions of the canons being observed" (can. 1399, § 5).

This holds for books published after 1897, for the law does not have retroactive effect. Books of prayers, devotion, or theological doctrine and religious, moral, ascetical, or mystical instruction are no longer prohibited: they can also be read and retained without approval. Likewise the canon does not hold for apparitions approved by the Church, such as those of the Immaculate Blessed Virgin Mary of Lourdes, the revelations of St. Bridget, St. Margaret Mary, etc.

But several novelties were reproved: the cult concerning the blood of Mary (January 13, 1875), the title of friend of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (May 4, 1892), the title of the Blessed Virgin Mary as Lady of the Sacred Heart because she exercises dominion over the Son (February 23, 1875), the special cult to be attributed to the Face of the Redeemer in the manner in which it was proposed by the priests of the Holy Face (May 4, 1892), the title of the penitent Sacred Heart of Jesus (July 9, 1893), the prayer for the dominion of Christ and Mary Immaculate over all creatures (June 19, 1895), the private cult of the divine hands of Christ (April 17, 1896, Index), the image of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus (May 27, 1891), the image of the Blessed Virgin Mary clothed in priestly vestments (April 8, 1916).

2. "Editions of liturgical books" (for example, the missal, breviary, ritual, pontifical, and ceremonial of bishops) "approved by the Apostolic See, in which anything has been changed, so that they do not agree with the authentic editions approved by the Holy See" (can. 1399, § 10).

3. "Books in which apocryphal indulgences, or those proscribed or revoked by the Holy See, are published" (can. 1399, § 11). Hence also small sheets with apocryphal indulgences are prohibited (can. 1388, § 1).

4. "Images printed in any way whatsoever" (by printing properly so called, engraving, photography, lithography, phototype, etc.) "of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Angels and Saints or other Servants of God, alien from the sense and decrees of the Church" (can. 1399, § 12).

Statues or painted images are not prohibited.³ Nor artistic images which have as their principal end to reproduce art; but pious images, destined for public or private worship. Nor simply images not approved, but new ones. Whether medals are comprehended is uncertain, because they are rather struck than printed.

³ These, for their admission in churches or use in worship, can fall under can. 1279.