Rubrics to Be Observed

Canon 818 states: "Any contrary custom being reprobated, the celebrating priest shall accurately and devoutly observe the rubrics of his ritual books, and shall take care not to add other ceremonies or prayers at his own discretion." And canon 819: "The sacrifice of the Mass is to be celebrated in the liturgical language of each one's rite approved by the Church." Therefore Mass in general is to be celebrated according to the rite or rubrics assigned by the Church in the Roman Missal. But authors disagree somewhat about the solution of the question, which rite or which rubrics are in fact prescribed. Hence the matter must be explained more fully:

I. The object of the precept; concerning which the following points seem to be established.

1. The rubrics to be observed within Mass are preceptive. This assertion, which more recent authors commonly admit, is clear from the Council of Trent;¹ likewise from the Bull Quo primum tempore of St. Pius V,² placed at the beginning of the Roman Missal: "commanding and strictly enjoining upon all... in virtue of holy obedience, that they sing and read Mass according to the rite, manner, and norm which are now handed down by Us through this Missal, and that in the celebration of Mass they not presume to add or recite other ceremonies or prayers than those which are contained in this Missal." Canon 818 is added to this. The opinion which excepts certain lesser things is scarcely reconcilable with the words cited (St. Alphonsus, VI, 399).

2. It is disputed whether the rubrics to be observed outside Mass, that is, before or after Mass, are preceptive or merely directive. Moreover, with St. Alphonsus (VI, 399) and most more recent authors, it seems that one must say that they are generally merely directive, unless they present those things which are obligatory from the nature of the matter. The reason is that the Bull cited speaks only of rubrics to be observed in the celebration of Mass, and canon 818 speaks only of the celebrating priest.

3. In particular it is disputed - even among those who admit the assertions under 1 and 2 - whether the following are truly prescribed or not:³

a) The prayers assigned before Mass in the Roman Missal. Rather commonly, and rightly, it is denied that they are truly prescribed, because they are said to be "to be said according to the opportunity of the priest" (St. Alphonsus, VI, 410, doubt 2). The same must be said of the prayers assigned after Mass.

b) The washing of hands before Mass. This seems truly to be prescribed, namely by reason of reverence toward the sacrifice, and in view both of its spiritual signification (namely, of spiritual cleanness) and of the precept given in the Old Law. It obliges under venial sin; but from the nature of the matter under grave sin, if the hands are very unclean. After Mass, however, it can be omitted, since it is not prescribed (St. Alphonsus, VI, 409).

c) The prayers to be recited while the vestments are being put on. More commonly they teach that these are truly prescribed, because they seem morally to pertain to Mass (St. Alphonsus, VI, 410, doubt 2).

d) The canticle Benedicite. Some affirm that it is imposed, because in the Order of Mass it is said: "The priest says"; but rather probably it is not truly prescribed, because by the rubric of the Roman Missal⁴ it is equated with the other prayers assigned after Mass (cf. St. Alphonsus, VI, 410, doubt 2).

4. The Ceremonial of Bishops obliges just as the Roman Missal does. This is clear both from the three Bulls prefixed to it and from the declaration of the Sacred Congregation of Rites⁵ (St. Alphonsus, Examen ordinandorum, n. 112).

5. Responses of the Sacred Congregation of Rites present obligation if they regard rubrics to be observed within Mass; otherwise they are merely directive, unless the contrary is to be drawn from the tenor.

6. As regards custom against the rubrics, note:

a) Any custom contrary to the rubrics is reprobated (canon 818), and therefore is not reasonable (canon 27, § 2); nevertheless, when circumstances have changed, more probably it can become reasonable (vol. I, n. 194).

b) Custom cannot derogate from rubrics contained in liturgical books by way of prescription; but it can by way of connivance, or by force of the legislator's personal consent (vol. I, n. 193). Besides this, a usage contrary to the rubrics can be tolerated until it can conveniently be removed by the bishop (vol. I, n. 193). If a decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites contrary to the custom is added, the custom is of itself abrogated;⁶ if it cannot conveniently be removed, the Ordinary should propose the matter to the Sacred Congregation and await the response.

¹ Session 6, canon 13; session 22, decree on what is to be observed and avoided.

² 12 July 1570.

³ On the recitation of Matins with Lauds before Mass, see the treatise on the duties of clerics, n. 2.

⁴ Rite to be observed, title XII, n. 6.

⁵ Sacred Congregation of Rites, 8 January 1904 (Acta Sanctae Sedis XXXVI, p. 428).

⁶ Sacred Congregation of Rites, 17 August 1894, n. 3839.

II. The gravity of the precept. The precept or obligation of rubrics that are truly preceptive is grave from its genus. But the gravity of the matter must be judged not only from the quantity but also from the quality of the rites, as will be clearer from the corollaries. Moreover, one can sin against the precept by omission, addition, change, breaking off, and interruption.

1. Omission. Concerning this, notice with St. Alphonsus (VI, 404 sq.): 1. that the ordinary parts, that is, those which occur in every Mass (such as the principal prayers, Epistle, Gospel, etc.), oblige more gravely than the extraordinary parts (such as the Gloria, Creed, Commemorations); 2. that among the ordinary parts, those oblige more gravely which must be said or performed within the Canon, especially from the Consecration to Communion. With these points noted, with the Doctor mentioned we resolve:

a) It is grave to omit an essential or integral part; the Confession with the other prayers to be said at the foot of the altar; the Epistle; the Gospel; the principal prayers; the mixing of water in the chalice; the oblation of the bread and wine; the Preface; the Pater noster; the Libera nos; the breaking of the host and the mixing of it with the Blood; the purification of the chalice after Communion. Likewise in the Canon it is grave to omit any prayer whatever; or to change its words so that the sense is varied; or to omit some word such that, once it is removed, the remaining words do not make sense; or to omit, for example, ten names of Saints; or finally to omit several extraordinary parts together (St. Alphonsus, VI, 404, 405).

b) It is light to omit the washing of hands before Mass with the accompanying prayers; the prayers to be said while the priest clothes himself in the sacred vestments; the Psalm Judica; Kyrie; Gloria; Creed; Commemorations; or, in place of the proper Preface, Communicantes, or Hanc igitur, to take the said prayers as they occur in the common (St. Alphonsus, VI, 409).

c) An omitted part must always be supplied when it belongs to the essence or integrity of the Mass; likewise the mixing of water in the chalice, if it is noticed before the Consecration. For the rest, one who by error or forgetfulness has omitted something: if indeed it is light, should proceed; if it is grave and the error is noticed shortly afterward, that is, after a few words, he should resume what was omitted. Hence the Gloria or Creed are not to be resumed if the following prayers have already been begun; nor the Epistle, Gospel, Preface, or Communicantes, if he has taken one for another, unless, for example, he detects the error from the beginning of the false Epistle (St. Alphonsus, VI, 403).

2. Addition. a) It is a grave sin to add anything with the intention of introducing a new rite; likewise - even without the aforesaid intention - to add something notable (St. Alphonsus, VI, 411).

b) It is light to add: 1. a collect,¹ Gloria, Creed, Pater, Ave, or something similar; 2. at the elevation, even in a low voice, certain pious words;² otherwise, if it is done only mentally; 3. while the Gloria and Creed are being sung in Mass, to recite a canonical Hour from a book³ (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).

3. Change. It is light: 1. scandal being excluded, to change the office, that is, to celebrate a Mass which cannot be celebrated on that day; 2. not to sing in solemn Mass the things which are prescribed to be sung; 3. to pronounce the words in a voice other than that prescribed. This, however, is grave: a) when someone pronounces a notable part, especially of the Canon, or the words of Consecration alone, in so loud a voice that they can be heard at a great distance, for example forty paces; b) when the priest forms the words of Consecration so secretly that he cannot even hear himself, unless perhaps deafness or noise prevents hearing. The reason is that he exposes the sacrament to the danger of nullity (n. 24; St. Alphonsus, VI, 413-416). According to the Roman Missal:⁴ 1. those things which are to be said in a clear voice must be pronounced "neither... in a voice too loud, lest he disturb others who perhaps are then celebrating in the same church, nor so low that he cannot be heard by those standing around." 2. "But those things which are to be said secretly he should pronounce in such a way that he himself hears himself, and is not heard by those standing around."

4. Breaking off consists in this, that Mass begun is not continued but is dismissed. Moreover, breaking off can and must take place:

a) Before the Consecration: 1. if the priest before the Consecration notices that he is not fasting, and can withdraw without infamy or scandal; 2. if the church is polluted before the Canon; 3. if before the Canon it is known that a vitandus excommunicate is present and cannot be expelled (St. Alphonsus, VI, 353).

b) Before and after the Consecration: 1. if danger threatens, for example because of an attack by enemies, danger of death, or profanation; in which case the priest, according to the circumstances, should at once consume the sacrament or carry it with him while fleeing; 2. if, once the Consecration has certainly or doubtfully been performed, the priest fails; in which case the following should be observed: If the priest who fails is foreseen after some time - even after taking food or drink - to recover his strength, he should be awaited, so that he may complete the sacrifice. If he cannot complete the sacrifice, another should be sought - even one not fasting, if one fasting is lacking⁵ - who may complete the sacrifice, beginning where the other left off; if the other still lives and can communicate, and another consecrated Host is not available, the priest who supplies the Mass should divide the Host, and give one part to the sick man, and take the other himself⁶ (St. Alphonsus, VI, 355). If, however, Mass cannot be continued within an hour, it need not be completed, because the required unity is probably lacking; nevertheless it can - even after a longer time - be completed, because the said unity is also probably present (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.). If the sacrifice is not completed, the Host and chalice should be placed in the tabernacle, and on the next day they should be consumed by the celebrant before the purification.

5. Interruption is lawful: 1. if an instruction or sermon must be given, or certain things must be announced to the people, which is customarily done after the Gospel; 2. if a religious profession is made within Mass,⁷ or if it is permitted by liturgical law for another reason; 3. if necessity befalls the priest; 4. if one's neighbor falls into danger of death. But if this takes place before the Consecration, the priest can minister Baptism or Penance, Viaticum, and Extreme Unction to the dying person. If it occurs after the Consecration, he can confer Baptism or Penance upon him; he must defer the conferral of Viaticum and Extreme Unction until he has finished Mass, or at least has taken the Most Holy Blood; nevertheless Viaticum can be ministered if the dying person is so near that it is not necessary to take off the sacred vestments⁸ (St. Alphonsus, VI, 353, 354). Besides this, if the necessity of one's neighbor urges after the Consecration, "let the priest take care that the Sacrament meanwhile be guarded, or let him enclose it in the tabernacle; and after he has returned, let him continue Mass from the point where he interrupted it. If the Consecration has not been made, and a short delay has intervened, for example within an hour, let him proceed where he left off; but if the delay is longer, let him begin from the beginning."⁹

¹ Sacred Congregation of Rites, 27 March 1779, ad VI, n. 2514.

² Cf. Sacred Congregation of Rites, 6 November 1925, ad I (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1926, p. 21).

³ Sacred Congregation of Rites, 20 March 1869, ad IX, n. 3201.

⁴ General Rubrics, title XVI, n. 2.

⁵ Indeed, if no other is available, even an excommunicate, who in the case must, after grace has been recovered, complete the sacrifice.

⁶ Roman Missal, De defectibus, title X, n. 3.

⁷ Sacred Congregation of Rites, 27 August 1894, n. 3836; 5 June 1896, n. 3912.

⁸ Sacred Congregation of Rites, 19 December 1829, n. 2672, ad 1.

⁹ Aertnys-Damen, Theologia moralis, n. 259.

III. The excusing cause. One who because of illness or another cause cannot observe all the rubrics can nevertheless celebrate both privately and publicly, if he must omit or change only certain things that are of lesser importance, for example deep inclinations, genuflections down to the ground. If the matter is of greater importance, for example if the priest cannot approach the altar without a cane, or cannot celebrate except with both arms placed on the altar, privately indeed it is lawful to celebrate; publicly, provided the people are warned (St. Alphonsus, VI, 402). Finally, if the matter is wholly extraordinary, for example if the priest cannot celebrate except sitting or by briefly interrupting Mass or while continuously supported by another, a dispensation must be sought from the Holy See, or, for a transitory case, from the bishop.

Corollary I. In view of the things explained above, St. Alphonsus and most authors rightly teach with Benedict XIV¹ that "Mass should not be shorter than a third of an hour, nor longer than half an hour, because in a shorter space everything cannot be performed with due decorum, and in a longer space it would be tedious to those standing by. Hence we say that a priest who would finish Mass in under a quarter of an hour could with difficulty be excused from mortal sin, even if the Mass is among the shorter ones, or of St. Mary on Saturday; because in so brief a time he must necessarily commit two grave defects, one of grave irreverence toward the Sacrament, the other of grave scandal toward the people... But it is impossible for Mass to be completed in under a quarter of an hour without either words or ceremonies being omitted; or at least without the decency and gravity due to so great a Sacrifice being notably diminished. This must be carefully noticed; for someone perhaps will say that he pronounces the complete words of the Missal well and fulfills all the ceremonies of the Mass well. But although there may be someone so expeditious in tongue and movement that within such a time he would satisfy all the words and ceremonies of the Missal, nevertheless it is at least morally impossible that he celebrate without notably detracting, on the one hand, from the reverence to be offered by him toward the Sacrifice, and, on the other, without himself being the cause that the people assisting fail in the veneration which is owed to that same Sacrifice" (St. Alphonsus, VI, 400).

Corollary II. In conformity with the doctrine stated, St. Alphonsus (loc. cit.) notes with others that "bishops and prelates of regulars are bound under grave obligation to root out disgraceful and scandalous speed."

¹ De Sacrificio Missae, section 2, n. 217.

391. On defects occurring in celebration. - Defects occur in celebration when the prescribed rites are not observed. This can happen voluntarily or involuntarily, and voluntarily either without a just cause or from some necessity, in notable or in small quantity, so that the defect must be supplied or corrected, or not corrected nor supplied. Therefore several things must be inquired about these matters.

A. Can one celebrate who foresees that he will omit certain things on account of inability or forgetfulness; and are omitted things to be supplied?

Resp. The omission of lighter ceremonies or parts can be excused, such as, for example, genuflections down to the ground, profound inclinations, one or another commemoration, provided that scandal of the people is avoided and grave indecency is absent. - On the contrary, if greater parts must be omitted or there must be a notable departure from the rites, the priest cannot celebrate unless an indult has been obtained.

Hence 1) they permit celebration to a priest who cannot approach the altar without a cane, or who cannot elevate the host above his head, or who cannot stand erect and celebrates with his arms leaning upon the altar; at least if the people is warned.

2. One who from forgetfulness has omitted something and, when he has already progressed somewhat, remembers it, ought not to supply it, because he would disturb the order of the Mass; unless while praying secretly after a few words he noticed that he had omitted something, or unless he had omitted something of the substance of the sacrifice.

3. One who has recited the wrong gospel or epistle ought not to repeat it.

B. Can Mass be interrupted, and once interrupted must it be resumed?

Resp. To interrupt Mass of itself and deliberately is illicit; incidentally, however, it can be licit if a just cause is present, which, outside the canon, is required to be grave, once the canon has been begun more grave, and between consecration and communion most grave. And indeed:

1° Outside the canon it is licit:

a) For making a sermon or proclamations to the people, for receiving religious vows, for conferring sacred Orders; likewise for receiving the offerings of the people where the use exists; but not for reciting public prayers, beyond the rubrics, by inserting them among the other things. Thus also after the communion of the priest, communion is licitly distributed to the faithful, and a sermon can be held from the altar to the people before communion is distributed to them, or the profession or renewal of vows can be made before the communion of religious or nuns; but communion is not to be distributed outside the view of the altar or in the rooms of the sick (can. 868).

b) If a prince, bishop, crowd of pilgrims, or procession arrives on a feast day, on which otherwise they could not hear Mass; in which case, if the oblation has not yet been made, the priest can begin anew, so that they may hear the whole sacred rite. Or for a similar cause, as if otherwise a later solemn Mass could not be omitted without scandal.

c) If the church is polluted (can. 1173, § 2), - or if a vitandus arrives who cannot be expelled, unless grave inconvenience excuses from ceasing (can. 2259, § 2), - or if the priest remembers some impediment, for example that he is not fasting or in the state of grace, or is irregular or excommunicated, provided that the Mass can be left without scandal or grave discredit.

2° Even once the canon has been begun, indeed between consecration and communion, it is licit on account of grave danger of death or bodily integrity or profanation of the sacrament on the part of enemies or impious persons breaking in, or of impending flood or ruin of the church, for instance from fire or earthquake; likewise on account of urgent bodily necessity of the celebrant, and on account of grave spiritual necessity of the neighbor, namely, for ministering a sacrament to one dying. Nevertheless:

a) After consecration and before communion this will not be licit unless the dying person needs a necessary sacrament, namely Baptism or Penance, or even, if he cannot receive Penance, Extreme Unction; otherwise it is not licit to minister Extreme Unction, as also Viaticum, unless the dying person is nearby, so that the priest need not take off the sacred vestments.

b) To break off the sacrifice so that perhaps it cannot be completed will not be licit, unless on account of physical inability if the celebrant becomes so infirm that he absolutely cannot continue, or on account of danger so imminent that it cannot be avoided otherwise than by abandoning the sacrifice and the priest lacks time to complete it.

Let it be noted: 1) A priest interrupting Mass after the consecration must take care that meanwhile the sacrament be guarded, and therefore he should enclose it in the tabernacle, if one is present.

2. But if Mass must be altogether broken off after the consecration of one species, the priest can receive the consecrated host or take it with himself together with the chalice to be consecrated in another place; - but if he has completed both consecrations, let him receive both species at once if he can, or if he cannot, let him take them with himself to be received afterward in a safe place.

3. Mass interrupted before the consecration is not to be resumed if the priest becomes gravely ill or dies; - it is to be resumed from the beginning if the interruption is so notable that morally one action is not judged to persist, as if the priest had been absent for longer than one hour; in which case, if the oblation has already been made, new matter must be taken and the matter previously offered must be consumed after the Blood has been received; - on the contrary, it is to be resumed where the priest left off, if the interruption was shorter.

4. When Mass has been interrupted after the consecration of one species, it is to be resumed where it was left off; and indeed the very priest who began it, if he can, must complete it even if for this he would have to break the fast, because the precept of the integrity of the sacrifice obliges more than the precept of the fast; but if he cannot, let another approach, even if not fasting, or irregular or excommunicated, who divides the host and offers one part to that priest who began the sacrifice, if he can receive it. But if the priest fails after the reception of only the body of Christ, the chalice must be received by another.

5. A priest who has completed another's sacrifice cannot celebrate again, unless in a case in which the faculty of celebrating twice is present.

C. What must be done if a defect happens concerning the very matter of bread and wine?

Resp. Attention must be given to the practical rules established in the Missal:

1. As to a defect of bread, there it is read, de def., tit. 3, n. 4-7:

a) "If the celebrant before the consecration has noticed that the host is corrupt, or is not wheaten, after that host has been removed, let him place another and, after the oblation has been made, at least conceived in the mind, let him proceed from that place where he left off."

b) "If he has noticed this after the consecration, - even after the reception of that host, - after placing another, let him make the oblation, as above (i.e., at least conceived in the mind), and begin from the consecration, namely, from those words Qui pridie quam pateretur; and the former one, if he has not received it, let him receive after the reception of the body and blood, or let him hand it to another to be received, or preserve it reverently somewhere. - But if he has received it, nevertheless let him receive that which he has consecrated; because the precept concerning the perfection of the sacrament is of greater weight than that it be received by those fasting."

c) "But if this happens after the reception of the Blood, new bread must again be placed, and new wine with water; and after the oblation has first been made, as above, let the priest consecrate, beginning from those words: Qui pridie; and immediately let him receive both, and proceed with the Mass, lest the sacrament remain imperfect and so that the due order may be observed."

d) "If the consecrated host should disappear, either by some accident such as wind, or by miracle, or having been taken by some animal, and cannot be found, then let another be consecrated, beginning from that place: Qui pridie quam pateretur, after its oblation has first been made, as above."

2. As to a defect of wine, it is said in the same place, tit. 4, n. 3-6:

a) "If the celebrant before the consecration of the Blood, although after the consecration of the Body, notices that either wine, or water, or both are not in the chalice, he ought immediately to place wine with water, and after the oblation has been made, as above (i.e., at least mentally), to consecrate, beginning from those words: Simili modo..."

b) "If after the words of consecration he notices that wine had not been placed but water (or that it is corrupt), after the water has been deposited into some vessel, let him again place wine with water in the chalice, and consecrate, resuming from the aforesaid words: Simili modo..."

c) "If he notices this after the reception of the Body or of water of this kind, let him place another host to be consecrated again, and wine with water in the chalice, let him offer both, and consecrate and receive, although he is not fasting. - Or, if Mass is celebrated in a public place, where many are present, in order to avoid scandal he will be able to place wine with water, and after the oblation has been made as above, to consecrate, and immediately to receive, and to proceed with the rest." Let it be noted that this second mode is indicated merely subsidiarily, if scandal must be avoided; the first absolutely as to be used of itself, which moreover is proposed by St. Thomas, a. 6, ad 4: "If he has perceived this (i.e., that wine is lacking) after the reception of the Body, he ought to place another host to be consecrated again together with the Blood; and I say this for this reason, because if he were to say only the words of consecration of the Blood, the due order of consecrating would not be observed; and, as is said in Conc. Tol. VII (decr. 7, q. 1, resp. ad 1), 'Sacrifices cannot seem perfected unless they are completed in perfect order.' But if he were to begin from the consecration of the Blood and repeat all the following words (which shall be poured out for you and for many), it would not be fitting, unless a consecrated host were present, since in those words certain things occur to be said and done not only concerning the Blood, but also concerning the Body."

Let it be noted that water or corrupted wine is not to be spat out by a priest who detects it while he has it in his mouth, but is to be swallowed, both on account of the danger of casting out a particle of the host, and also on account of indecency.

d) From tit. 10, n. 13 there is added: "If it happens that the whole Blood is poured out after the consecration, if indeed something or a little has remained, let it be received... - But if absolutely nothing has remained, let him again place wine and water, and consecrate from that place: Simili modo..., the oblation of the chalice having first been made, however, as above" (namely, mentally).

3. As to a defect of either one, let it be noted:

a) "If the matter which would have to be placed on account of a defect either of bread or of wine could in no way be had, if this is before the consecration of the Body, one must not proceed further; - if after the consecration of the Body, or even of the wine, the defect of the other species is detected, the other already having been consecrated, then, if in no way it can be had, one must proceed, and the Mass must be completed, in such a way, however, that the words and signs which pertain to the lacking species are omitted. - But if by waiting for some time it can be had, one must wait, lest the sacrifice remain imperfect" (tit. 4, n. 8).

b) "If something poisonous, or something which provokes vomiting, has fallen into the chalice, the consecrated wine is to be placed in another chalice, and other wine with water is to be placed to be consecrated anew; and when Mass has been finished, the Blood placed aside is to be kept in a linen cloth, or tow, until the species of wine have dried, and then the tow is to be burned, and what is burned is to be thrown into the sacrarium. - If something poisoned has touched the consecrated host, then let him consecrate another, and receive in the way that has been said, and let that one be kept in the tabernacle in a separate place, until the species are corrupted, and when corrupted let them then be put into the sacrarium" (tit. 10, n. 6-7).

c) In doubt whether the matter, whether of bread or of wine, has already been validly consecrated, one must proceed in the same way as has been said concerning the case in which bread or wine after the consecration is detected to be lacking; because in doubt concerning the validity and integrity of the sacrifice the safer course must be taken, nor can the sacrifice be exposed to the danger of nullity or mutilation. But they dispute whether it must be consecrated again absolutely or under condition.

I say. With any contrary custom reprobated, the celebrating priest is to observe accurately and devoutly the rubrics of his ritual books, and to beware lest he add other ceremonies or prayers by his own judgment (Can. 818).¹

The reason is taken both from the Scriptures, which threaten a great penalty to him who does the work of the Lord negligently, and from the positive will of the Church. Therefore the Fathers of Baltimore, after they had said that no rite is employed in performing this sacrifice which can be thought empty without impiety, add: "We will and strictly command that all priests in these Provinces follow exactly all those things which are contained in the Roman Missal." - Cf. Conc. Plen. Balt. II, n. 357 and seq.

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1144, n. 116.

Question 1. Whether all the Rubrics of the Mass are preceptive? Resp. According to the common opinion, all the Rubrics which are observed within the Mass are preceptive, since they regard so sacred a thing. But they oblige under grave or under light sin, according to the gravity or lightness of the matter, as will be said below. But the Rubrics which are observed outside Mass, that is, before or after the Sacrifice, are commonly held as merely directive, as, for example, the prayers for preparation for Mass or thanksgiving; for other prayers can be recited. There is controversy, however, concerning the prayers which from the Rubric are to be recited while the vestments are put on; but with the common opinion it must be held, says St. Alphonsus, that their omission is venially culpable. Others, however, hold that this omission is free from all fault. - Cf. Conc. Plen. Balt. II, n. 358. - De Herdt, vol. 1, n. 2. - St. Alphonsus, n. 399 and seq.

Question 2. Whether a sick priest can 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 a sick celebrant even to use a cane if he needs it, etc. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 402.

Question 3. Whether the use of a small spoon for pouring water into the chalice is lawful for all? Resp. S. C. R., when the doubt had been proposed, responded that the Rubric must be observed. But this formula implies that the use of a small spoon is not prohibited, according to the response given to the Archbishop of Baltimore, 6 Febr. 1858. - Cf. Acta S. Sedis, vol. 3, pp. 600 and seq.

Question 4. Whether it is ever lawful to interrupt Mass? Resp. It is never lawful to interrupt Mass essentially, that is, so that the sacrifice begun remains truncated, unless a most grave or extreme necessity presses, as in the case of 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 in fleeing. But if he has completed both consecrations, let him immediately consume both species, if he can; or if he cannot, let him carry them with him, to be consumed as quickly as possible in a nearby place. But it is lawful to interrupt accidentally, namely, by inserting something for a just cause before the canon: 1°. because of a sermon after the Gospel, because prayers for the dead are to be recited, because the proclamations of Banns are to be made, or because a procession is to be received, etc.; 2°. for the sake of a crowd of pilgrims on a feast day, if otherwise they cannot hear Mass, and then, if the offertory has not been made, the priest can begin anew, so that they may hear the whole Sacrifice; 3°. if the priest remembers some impediment, for example, that he is not fasting or is not in the state of grace or is irregular, provided the Mass can be broken off without scandal or notice. Yet it is not lawful to interrupt, even accidentally, once the canon has begun, and a fortiori after the consecration has been completed, except for a most grave cause, for example, if a dying person must be baptized or absolved. But it is not lawful to administer other sacraments between the consecration and communion, because they are not of such great necessity, except for Holy Viaticum, which could be administered to a dying person who was nearby, so that the priest would not have to remove the sacred vestments. But for this also it is required that the celebrant not lose the altar from his sight. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 352 and seq.

At the first Communion of adolescents, brief sermons, commonly called Fervorini, can be held in Mass after the consumption; or for any other cause whatsoever. Dec. Auth. C. S. R. n. 3009.

Question 5. What is to be done if a priest, seized by illness or death, is unable to complete the Sacrifice? Resp. If the priest fails before the consecration, nothing is to be done by another priest, because the sacrifice properly was not begun. But if he fails after the consecration of even only one species, then another priest who is fasting, if one is present, must supply; if no fasting priest is present, let another even not fasting supply and complete the Sacrifice; because the precept of procuring the integrity of the sacrifice presses more gravely. Indeed even an irregular or excommunicated priest would have to supply. Yet if another priest could not be found immediately, after one hour has been interposed, probably he would no longer have to be sought, because moral union would be lacking, and consequently it would not be judged the same Sacrifice. But if a priest, seized by illness during the celebration, is able to complete the Sacrifice after some interruption, he himself will complete it better than another, even if he is not fasting. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 355.

Question 6. What is the Gregorian Thirty? Resp. The Gregorian Thirty, or Gregorian Masses, are Masses which, for thirty continuous days, after the example of Saint Gregory the Great, are celebrated on any altar for souls to be freed in Purgatory. Concerning this Thirty let the following things be noted. The practice of celebrating these Masses in the Church is approved. The confidence by which the faithful hold the celebration of thirty Masses as specially efficacious from the good pleasure and acceptance of divine mercy for the liberation of a soul from the punishments of Purgatory is pious and reasonable. S. C. Indul. 15 March 1884. The Thirty is not validly celebrated for the living; nor is it certain that an indulgence has been given for it. S. C. 24 Aug. 1888. An essential condition is that for thirty continuous days Mass be said for the soul whose liberation from Purgatory is implored. But it does not obstruct this that in the last three days of Holy Week an interruption occurs, provided that afterward the Masses are immediately said continuously. S. C. Ind. 14 Jan. 1889. A priest does not satisfy in a case in which on the same day twice or three times, either by himself (for example, on the day of the Nativity of the Lord) or through others, he resumes the celebration, so that all the Masses are celebrated within the space of thirty days. S. Off. 12 Dec. 1913: A priest who cannot celebrate by himself is bound to substitute another for himself who is to celebrate some Mass of the Thirty. One does not satisfy "the obligation, if he commits the thirty Gregorian Masses, distributed to several priests, to be all celebrated on the same day or within the space of a few days for the said intention." On days occurring in the Thirty on which a Mass of Requiem is permitted by the Rubrics, it can laudably be read, for the sake of piety toward the dead person, but it is not required for satisfying the burden of the Thirty that that Mass of Requiem be read. S. Off. 12 Dec. 1913. It is not required that the Masses be celebrated at the same altar. S. C. Indul. 14 Jan. 1889.

Question 7. By what rite is the sacrifice to be celebrated? Resp. In the celebration of Mass the priest, according to his own rite, must use unleavened or leavened bread wherever he offers the Sacrifice (Can. 816).

Question 8. In what language is the sacrifice to be celebrated? Resp. The sacrifice of the Mass is to be celebrated in the liturgical language of each one's own rite approved by the Church (Can. 819).

VII. QUESTION IV. Would one who should omit some part of the Mass sin mortally? ANSWER. The ordinary parts of the Mass are the confession, the introit, Dominus vobiscum, the collect, the epistle, the gospel, the offertory, the preface, the whole canon, and so forth. Not ordinary are the Gloria in excelsis, and so forth, the number of prayers, the Creed, the plurality of epistles, and so forth. He who deliberately omits a notable part of the canon sins mortally. He who should omit a light matter, even of the canon — say the name of one saint — would sin venially. He nevertheless who should deliberately omit something in the canon which would corrupt the sense would sin mortally. Nothing therefore is to be added and nothing omitted. But all things are to be pronounced clearly and distinctly. Many things would have to be said here of priests who are too hasty, who muttering within their lips truncate the words, who recite with a raised voice what is to be said with a lowered one, or the contrary. The congruous time for the celebration of Mass ought to be neither shorter than a third part of an hour nor longer than half an hour. The brevity of a compendium does not permit a fuller discourse upon this argument.