What They Requested, What They Expected, and What Happened: Council Fathers on the Latin Roman Canon

Dr Kwasniewski presents the evidence that the Concilium used bait-and-switch tactics to put the venerable Roman Canon into the vernacular, which none of the Bishops had asked for or wanted.

From New Liturgical Movement

By Peter Kwasniewski, PhD

I've heard it said many times that in the mid-1960s, the Vatican was telling people that the Roman Canon would remain fixed, in Latin — and, only a short while later, brand new Eucharistic Prayers were rolled off the assembly line and the vernacular was allowed, if not virtually required. I was reminded of the subject by a post in which Fr. Hunwicke writes about Fr. Bryan Houghton’s Unwanted Priest:

Fr Houghton thought of retiring in 1964, when people started tampering with the Mass. “But I decided against [it]: the 1964 Mass had not touched the Canon — which in theory remained silent and in Latin. It was still possible to say the 1964 Mass with a certain amount of devotion. However, I wrote to the bishop handing in my resignation the day on which the Canon of the Mass was touched. He wrote back a charming letter in which he says: ‘Nobody intends to reform the Canon,’ and that ‘the bishops are there precisely to preserve it.’ Poor, dear Bishop! Little did he know what was going to happen.” Yet Bishop Leo Parker had attended all four sessions of the Council; if even he failed to realise the plots that were being hatched...

Re-reading this anecdote reminded me that I have always wanted to find out more about the bait-and-switch that occurred at and shortly after the Second Vatican Council. So I asked our resident expert on all things conciliar, Matthew Hazell, and he supplied me with the raw data that has been turned into this post (so, thank you Matthew!). You can blame any errors in the translations from Latin on me, as I quickly translated all of them for this post.

Although Matthew and I have not been able to source an official Vatican text that says, in the mid-1960s, that the Canon would remain fixed and in Latin, a substantial body of evidence exists in the Acta of Vatican II that certainly seems to indicate that such a guarantee was understood to be in place. Moreover, in the pre-conciliar vota (that is, the lists of desiderata sent in by bishops from all over the world, talking about what they’d like to see considered at the council), it is striking that even bishops who were happy for the entire Mass to be in the vernacular expressly exclude the Roman Canon. Mentions of the use of the vernacular in the Mass are either in connection with only the Mass of the Catechumens (referred to numerous times as the “teaching part of the Mass” or similar), or come with an “except the Canon” clause, as the following abundant examples demonstrate.

This evidence, taken together with my earlier article “The Council Fathers in Support of Latin: Correcting a Narrative Bias,” is more than sufficient to show that certain figures at the Vatican today are… how shall we say this politely?... telling fibs about Vatican II and the modest liturgical reform that was desired and agreed to.

ADA II.1

+ Leo Pietsch (aux. Seckau, Austria)

[100] De liturgia divina celebranda facultative in lingua vernacula, Sanctae Missae Canone excepto.

[That a faculty should be given for celebrating the divine liturgy in the vernacular, with the exception of the holy Canon of the Mass.]

+ Jean-François Cuvelier, C.Ss.R. (tit. Circesium) [Vicar Apostolic of Matadi, Belgian Congo (independent since 1960, known as Democratic Republic of the Congo since 1997)

[134] Petitur ut ordinariis concedatur facultas permittendi usum linguae vernaculae in missa, saltem pro prima parte i. e. usque ad Canonem, deinde etiam a « Pater noster » usque ad ultimum evangelium inclusive.

[A request is made that a faculty be conceded to ordinaries for permitting the use of the vernacular language in the Mass, at least for the first part, that is, up to the Canon, and then from the Lord’s Prayer up to the last Gospel inclusive.]

+ Félix-Marie-Honoré Verdet (aux. Nice, France)

[496] Optabile est, mea quidem sententia, ut in priore parte Missae sermo patrius amplitudine maiore fruatur, secluso omnino Canone. Epistula et Evangelium praecipue voce magna atque solemniter pronuntientur ea lingua quam fideles multo facilius intelligunt (translatio enim lectionum, ut opinor, tantam vim non habet ut loco usus patrii sermonis esse valeat).

[It would be choiceworthy, in my opinion, that in the first part of the Mass the local language enjoy a greater amplitude, altogether excluding the Canon. The Epistle and Gospel especially should be pronounced solemnly with a loud voice in that language that the faithful can most understand (for a {printed} translation of the reading, in my view, doesn’t have so much force that it prevails over the use of the local language {proclaimed}).]

ADA II.2

+ Patrick Collier (Ossory, Ireland)

[93] Ad fructuosiorem participationem fidelium in sacrificio Missae, nobis videtur esse necessarium habere usum pleniorem linguae vernaculae: id est omnia ante et post Canonem Missae in lingua vernacula, Canon Missae semper in lingua Latina.

[For a more fruitful participation of the faithful in the sacrifice of the Mass, it seems to us necessary to have a fuller use of the vernacular language: that is, everything before and after the Canon of the Mass in the vernacular language, but the Canon of the Mass always in Latin.]

+ Francisco Maria da Silva (aux. Braga, Portugal)

[625] [I]n administratione sacramentorum ac sacramentalium imo in Sancti Sacrificii Missae celebratione, excepto Canone, lingua vulgari uti possit.

[In the administration of sacraments and sacramentals as well as in the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass — with the exception of the Canon — the common language can be used.]

+ Jacques Mangers, S.M. (Oslo, Norway)

[637] Etiam aliae quaestiones vere actuales examinandae sunt, v. g. usus linguae vernaculae in functionibus liturgicis, etiam, in celebratione Missae, Canone excepto…

[Other current questions, too, should be truly examined, e.g., the use of the vernacular language in liturgical functions, even in the celebration of the Mass, except for the Canon.]

[677] Inter primaria media ad protegendam participationem fidelium in sacrificio Missae adhiberi potest introductio linguae vernaculae ad stabiles partes Missae ante Offertorium scilicet ad Gloriam, Lectionem, Evangelium et Credo. Reliquae partes Missae, praesertim in Canone, latine recitandae sunt.

[Among the foremost means for promoting the participation of the faithful in the sacrifice of the Mass may be advanced the introduction of the vernacular language to the stable parts of Mass prior to the Offertory, namely, the Gloria, the Lesson, the Gospel, and the Creed. The remaining parts of the Mass, especially the Canon, should be recited in Latin.]

+ Wacław Majewski (aux. Warsaw, Poland)

[706] Ad augendam activam participationem fidelium in Missae Sacrificio videtur mihi Gloria, Credo, Lectio et Evangelium in lingua [707] vernacula inducendum esse, lingua latina tantum in Canone necnon in mutabilibus Missae partibus esse servanda.

[For increasing the active participation of the faithful in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass it seems to me that the Gloria, Creed, Lesson, and Gospel should be done in the vernacular language, while the Latin language ought to be preserved only in the Canon as well as in the changeable parts of the Mass.]

ADA II.3

+ Guido Maria Mazzocco (Adria, Italy)

[22] Pars Missae quae elata voce a Sacerdote legitur, praesertim illa quae didactica dicitur, lingua vulgari, legenda, meo iudicio, videtur, ita ut omnes dare intelligant, sicut antiquo tempore intelligebant. Unica lingua latina, ubique terrarum, servari poterit [23] in Canone. Tali modo populus in divinis rebus, maxime animae necessariis, extraneus non teneretur.

[The part of the Mass that is read by the priest in an elevated voice, especially those that are called instructional, should be read in the vulgar tongue, in my judgment, so that all may understand, just as they understood in ancient times. One single Latin language, everywhere in the world, ought to be retained in the Canon. In such a way the people may not be bound by what is extraneous in divine things that are most necessary for the soul.] 

+ Giuseppe Bonacini (Bertinoro, Italy)

[105] De S. Missae Sacrificio: S. Missae Sacrificium ad pristinam simplicitatem reddatur, quo populus id altius intelligere et scienter participari possit. Quam ob rem lingua latina in Missa tantum quae dicitur «fidelium», vel potius in solo Canone servetur.

[The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass should be brought back to its pristine simplicity, by which the people may be able more deeply to understand it and knowingly participate. Nevertheless the Latin language should be kept in the Mass only for the part called “the Mass of the faithful,” or rather, for the Canon alone.] 

+ Danio Bolognini (Cremona, Italy)

[241] In Rituali et Pontificali linguae vernaculae usum augere, eo tamen modo ut lingua latina in formulis Sacramentorum et in S. Missae Canone retineatur.

[Increase the use of the vernacular in the Ritual and the Pontifical, yet in such a way that the Latin language is retained in the formulas of the sacraments and in the Canon of Holy Mass.] 

+ Felicissimo Stefano Tinivella, O.F.M. (Diano-Teggiano, Italy)

[247] Lingua vulgaris in Sacramentorum administratione et functionibus sacris, in Missa extra Canonem, imponatur ut christifideles vitaliter intersint.

[The vulgar tongue should be imposed in the administration of the sacraments and sacred functions, and in the Mass apart from the Canon, so that the faithful may be more vitally involved.] 

++ Angelo Paino (Messina, Italy)

[373] Servata lingua latina in canone Missae et in essentialibus relate ad sacramentorum collationem, optandum videtur ut partes quae ad fidelium instructionem sunt, lingua patria legantur eo fine ut populus attente et digne participet. Pari ratione revisenda videntur caeremoniae et ornamenta ecclesiastica quae non cohaerent nostrae aetatis exigentiis spiritualibus.

[The Latin language being preserved in the Canon of the Mass and in the essentials relating to the conferral of the sacraments, it seems better that the parts that are for the instruction of the faithful should be read in the local language so that the people may participate more attentively and worthily. For the same reason, it seems that the ecclesiastical ceremonies and ornaments ought to be revised which no longer conform to the spiritual needs of our times.]

ADA II.4

+ Paul Yoshiyuki Furuya (Kyoto, Japan)

[78] Exoptatur ut permittatur litare Sacrum in lingua vernacula, excepto Canone.

[It is greatly to be desired that the liturgy be offered in the vernacular language, except for the Canon.]

+ Lucas Katsusaburo Arai (Yokohama, Japan)

[90] De usu linguae vernaculae in tota Missa, canone excepto.

[On the use of the vernacular language in the whole Mass, except for the Canon.]

+ Ignatius Mummadi (Guntur, India)

[132] Nonne expedit uti lingua vulgari cuiuslibet regionis in Missa, exceptione facta evidenter de Canone?

[Would it not be profitable to use the vulgar tongue of whatever region in the Mass, with an obvious exception being made for the Canon?]

++ Joseph Mark Gopu (Hyderabad, India)

[134] Usus linguae regionalis in prima parte S. Missae augeri potest, praesertim quoad epistolam et evangelium sed non in Canone Missae.

[The use of the regional language in the first part of the Holy Mass can be increased, especially as to the epistle and Gospel, but not in the Canon of the Mass.]

+ Antony Padiyara (Ootacamund, India)

[184] Valde suadendum est omnes partes Missae excepto tamen Canone, lingua vulgari recitari, eo fine ut fideles active participent.

[It is exceedingly recommended that every part of the Mass except the Canon be in the vulgar tongue, to the end that the faithful may actively participate.]

+ Jean-Rosière-Eugène Arnaud, M.E.P. (vic. ap. Thakhek, Laos)

[379] Pour le bien des fidèles on souhaiterait d’avoir la permission d’user de la langue qu’ils comprennent, en dehors du Canon ou au moins jusqu’à l’Offertoire.

[For the sake of the faithful it would be desirable to be allowed to use the language they understand, outside the Canon or at least until the Offertory.]

Pietro Maleddu, O.F.M. Conv. (ap. pref. Ankang, China)

[594] Lingua latina in Officio Divina et in toto Canone Missae, excepto «Paternoster», retineatur.

[The Latin language should be retained in the Divine Office and in the whole Canon of the Mass, with the exception of the Lord’s Prayer.]

ADA II.5

+ Manuel António Pires (Silva Porto, Angola)

[126] 3. Usus linguae vernaculae in sacramentorum administratione, formula excepto. 4. Idem in celebratione sancti sacrificii Missae, Canone integro excepto. (Excepta tantum duplici consecratione?)

[3. The use of the vernacular language in the administration of the sacraments, except for the forms. 4. The same in the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the entire Canon excepted.]

+ Alphonse Joseph Matthysen, M. Afr. (vic. ap. Lac Albert, Democratic Rep. of Congo)

[185] Emploi de la langue vivante pour toutes les prières de la Messe sauf le Canon.

[Use of the living language for all prayers of the Mass except the Canon.]

+ John Reddington, S.M.A. (Jos, Nigeria)

[342] Ut in Missa, lingua vernacula a sacerdote utatur, usque ad Canonem.

[That in the Mass, the vernacular language be used by the priest, up until the Canon.]

+ Joseph Fady (Lilongwe, Malawi)

[367] Partes Missae quae vulgo Missa Catechumenorum nuncupatur, utpote, Christifideles et Catechumeni doctrina instruuntur, sola lingua vernacula a sacerdote legantur. Illa autem pars quae Canon nuncupatur, lingua latina a sacerdote legatur.

[The parts of the Mass that is commonly called the Mass of the Catechumens, insofar as the faithful and catechumens are instructed with teaching, are read by the priest solely in the vernacular. That part, however, which is called the Canon is read by the priest in Latin.]

+ Agostino Baroni, M.C.C.I. (vic. ap. Khartum, Sudan)

[460] Operam et studium iam contulimus ad partecipationem fidelium in celebratione Sanctae Missae obtinendam. Fortasse bonum est ut linguam vernaculam quoque permittatur in tota Missa, exceptione facta de Canone Missae, vel exceptione facta de prima parte Canonis Missae, i.e. a principio Canonis usque ad Pater Noster, ut fideles una cum Sacerdote a Pater Noster sese preparent in lingua vernacula ad Sanctae Communionis receptionem.

[We have now brought together both work and study for obtaining the participation of the faithful in the celebration of Holy Mass. Perhaps it is good that the vernacular language be likewise permitted in the whole Mass, an exception made for the Canon of the Mass, or an exception made for the first part of the Canon of the Mass, that is, from the beginning of the Canon until the Our Father, so that the faithful can prepare themselves for the reception of Holy Communion in the vernacular language.]

ADA II.6

+ Paul Hallinan (Charleston, U.S.A.)

[289] De Liturgia. — Ut fideles nostri melius comprehendere et ardentius amare Sacrum Sacrificium Missae tamquam supremum Actum Sacrificii possint necnon Deum glorificare et se habere ut membra Corporis Mystici Domini Nostri Iesus Christi, et ut principia participationis liturgicae inculcata in Instructione de Musica et Liturgia Sacra et in Littera Encyclica Mediator Dei celerius realizentur commendamus ut disputetur de utilitate textus Missae in linguis vulgaribus (canone excepto) tum pro fidelibus tum pro sacerdote.

Fideles nostri ferventer volunt participate active in liturgia S. Missae, interne, vocaliter et sacramentaliter. Nostra in dioecesi, usus librorum Missae ex parte multorum fidelium et, recentius, participatio vocalis praeclarae probationes de bona voluntate fidelium sunt. Nihilominus, difficile est pro aliquibus enuntiare vel faciliter comprehendere linguam Latinam; et propter hoc, quia ex stirpe Britannica-Saxone, Celtica, Germanica, vel Slavonica sunt, non possunt introire in dialogum plenum et profundum. Usus in Missa lecta linguarum vulgarium (in translatione approbata a Sancta Sede Apostolica) esset auxilium maximum — « tamquam colloquens cum sacerdote » (§ 31). Conservatio Sacrosanctorum verborum liturgiae in lingua Latina asseveraretur retinendo canonem in lingua Latina. Quilibet abusus translationis in parte residua Missae prohiberetur permittendo, in singula lingua, singulam translationem approbatam.

[Concerning the liturgy. That our faithful may better comprehend and more ardently love the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as the supreme act of sacrifice so as also they might glorify God and dispose themselves as members of the Mystical Body of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and that the principles of liturgical participation inculcated in the Instruction on Music and the Sacred Liturgy in the Encyclical Letter Mediator Dei may be more rapidly achieved, we recommend that there be debate concerning the usefulness of the text of the Mass [being] in the common language (except for the Canon), as much for the faithful as for the priest.

Our faithful fervently wish to participate actively in the liturgy of Holy Mass, internally, vocally, and sacramentally. In our diocese, the use of daily missals by a large part of the faith and, more recently, vocal participation are splendid examples of the good will of our faithful. Nevertheless, it is difficult for many to enunciate or easily grasp the Latin language; and on account of this, because they are from Anglo-Saxon, Irish, German, or Slavic roots, they cannot enter into a full and profound dialogue. The use in low Mass of the common language (in a translation approved by the Holy See) would be of great benefit — “like speaking with the priest.” The preservation of the most holy words of the liturgy in the Latin language would be most seriously asserted by retaining the Canon in the Latin language. Whatever abuse of translation [might occur] in the remaining part of the Mass would be prohibited by permitting, in any given language, one sole approved translation.]

(The foregoing submission from then-Bishop Paul Hallinan, later Archbishop of Atlanta, chairman of the US Bishops’ Liturgy Committee, member of ICEL, is of particular interest...!)

+ John Cody (Kansas City–St Joseph, U.S.A.)

[350] [O]b privilegia extraordinaria a S.P. Pio XII populo catholico concessa praesertim quoad ieiunium eucharisticum, Christifideles participationem magis activam in adsistendis Missis in dies habituros esse sperandum est, etsi isti responsiones in lingua latina generatim facere possint, videtur opportunum ut quaedani partes Missae (extra Canonem), v. g. epistola, evangelium (semper ex textu approbato a Sancta Sede), in lingua vernacula recitari possint. In aliis Sacramentis, Baptismi, Matrimonii, Extremae Unctionis, Confirmationis, recipiendis, plebs multum fructum haurire potest si ipsa verba (excepta forma sacramenti) in lingua vernacula prolata intelligant; hoc valet in primis pro conversis ad fidem.

[On account of an extraordinary privilege of Pope Pius XII conceded to the Catholic people especially as regarding the Eucharistic fast, a more active participation of Christ’s faithful in assisting at Mass in these days is customarily hoped for; and if these could generally make the responses in the Latin language, it seems opportune that certain parts of the Mass (outside the Canon), e.g., the Epistle, the Gospel (always from a text approved by the Holy See), should be recited in the vernacular language. In the reception of other sacraments — baptism, marriage, extreme unction, confirmation — the people can draw more fruit if the very words (except the form of the sacrament) were spoken aloud in the vernacular tongue; this would be especially good for converts to the faith.]

+ Richard Gerow (Natchez–Jackson, U.S.A.)

[378] In re liturgica: mihi videtur quod in bonum fidelium redundaret usus [379] amplior linguae vernaculae in actibus liturgicis. Exempli gratia: In Sacrosancto Missae Sacrificio, si ea pars quae extra canonem est, in lingua populi a celebrante diceretur, fideles ipsi melius, et devotius, in unione cum sacerdote, participes fieri potuerint caeremoniarum Missae. Et quoad breviarium a sacerdotibus quotidie legendum hoc, saltem in maiore parte, in lingua nativa legi poterit. Eadem dicenda de administratione Sacramentorum et Sacramentalium. Sacramenta sunt propter homines. Instituta fuerunt principaliter ut effectum haberent ex opere operato, sed etiam debent effectum secundarium producere ex opere operantis – et hic effectus melius haberetur si bene intelligerent fideles sensum verborum quae dicuntur.

[In matters liturgical, it seems to me that a more ample use of the vernacular language in liturgical actions would redound to the good of the faithful. For example: in the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, if the part that is outside of the Canon were said in the popular language by the celebrant, the faithful would be able to participate in the ceremonies of the Mass better and more devoutly in union with the priest. And as for the breviary that is to be read daily by priests, at least the major part could be read in the native language. The same should be said for the administration of [other] sacraments and sacramentals. For the sacraments are for the sake of men. They were principally instituted that they might have their effect ex opere operato, but they also ought to produce a secondary effect ex opere operantis — and this effect will be better had if the faithful well understand the sense of the words that are said.]

ADA II.7

+ Emilio Antonio di Pasquo (San Luis, Argentina)

[79] In Sancto Sacrificio usus linguae vernaculae in partibus non essentialibus: Orationibus praeliminaribus, Introito, Lectionibus, Evangeliis. Canon totus lingua latina recitetur.

[In the Holy Sacrifice, the use of the vernacular language in the non-essential parts: the preliminary prayers, the Introit, the Lessons, the Gospels. The entire Canon should be recited in Latin.]

+ José Maria Pires (Araçuaí, Brazil)

[132] Eadem ratione convenire videtur usus vernaculi in Sacrificio Missae excepta ea parte canonis a verbis Te igitur usque ad doxologiam.

[For the same reason the use of the vernacular in the Sacrifice of the Mass seems appropriate, except for the Canon from the words Te igitur through to the doxology.]

Ecclesiastical Province of Ribeirão Preto (Brazil)

[Comprised of the following: ++ Luis do Amaral Mousinho (Ribeirão Preto), + Lafayette Libânio (São José do Rio Preto), + José Varani (coadj. Jaboticabal), and + José Joaquim Gonçalves (aux. Rio Preto).]

[241] Linguam servare latinam in partibus tantum essentialibus seu fundamentalibus tum Missae tum Sacramentorum et Sacramentalium, ut sunt, v.g., Canon Missae et Formae sacramentales; in aliis autem, lingua uti vernacula, ut populus christianus facilius, melius ac maiore delectamine veram participationem habeat in actibus liturgicis.

[To preserve the Latin language only in those essential or fundamental parts of the Mass as well as of the other sacraments and sacramentals, namely, the Canon of the Mass and the forms of the sacraments; in other things, however, to use the vernacular language, that the Christian people may have active participation in liturgical actions more easily and with greater delight.]

+ Raúl Zambrano Camader (aux. Popayán, Colombia)

[461] Uti lingua vernacula in introductione Missae, in Offertorio, in actione gratiarum, licet in canone linguam latinam retineamus…

[To use the vernacular language in the introduction of the Mass, the Offertory, the thanksgiving, although let the Latin language be retained in the Canon…]

+ Críspulo Benítez Fontúrvel (Barquisimeto, Venezuela)

[553] Quod ad Sanctum Sacrificium Missae attinet, necesse est lingua vernacula Missam celebrare, excepto Canone, quem lingua latina reddere decet.

[As far as what concerns the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, it is necessary to celebrate Mass with the vernacular language, except for the Canon, which it is fitting to render in the Latin language.]

+ Launcelot John Goody (Bunbury, Australia)

[586] Quod usus linguae vulgaris in administratione omnium Sacramentorum permittatur, Pontificali ritu non excluso. Item, usus linguae vulgaris in Missa tam solemni quam quotidiana introduci posset, eo tamen sensu ut Canon Missae nonnisi lingua latina exclusive recitandum esset.

[That the use of the common language may be permitted in the administration of all the sacraments, not excluding the pontifical rite. Again, the use of the vernacular tongue may be introduced in both solemn and daily Mass, yet with the meaning that the Canon of the Mass would be recited exclusively in Latin.]

Thus for the preconciliar vota.
***
Some council interventions

At the Council itself, numerous bishops who were in favour of at least some vernacular in the Mass explicitly rule out a vernacular Canon in their spoken or written submissions, e.g.:

+Borromeo (AS I.1, p. 490)
++Jaeger (AS I.1, pp. 630-631)
+Jannucci (AS I.1, pp. 631-632)
+Devoto (AS I.2, pp. 71-73)
+Tou (AS I.2, pp. 90-91)
+Lebrun Moratinos (AS I.2, p. 245)
+Valerii (AS I.2, pp. 277-278)
***

Archival evidence from England

The Westminster Diocesan Archives, in which Matthew Hazell found a signed copy of the “Agatha Christie” indult (too bad, Uncle Arthur, it really does exist, even if you can’t find it in Rome!), is loaded with correspondence sent to Cardinal Heenan by discontented Catholics everywhere, complaining bitterly about the turning-around of the priest, the vernacularization, the music, and so forth.

As we can see in the selection of letters presented here (from 1963, 1964, 1966, and 1968), the Archbishop of Westminster reassured people that only part of the Mass would be in the vernacular — and then, once that was no longer the case, reassured them that at least the Latin Mass would not be completely abandoned and would be available in each diocese!

It is hard to imagine how horrible it must have been to have been a bishop at that time who loved the Latin liturgy. One can observe Heenan's ultramontanism turning his reason into jello.

***

Archbishop Staffa prophesies total vernacularization

Finally, it is worth noting that Archbishop (later Cardinal) Dino Staffa, in one of his conciliar interventions, perceived in advance the kind of arguments that reformers like Bugnini (see Reform, p. 112) would later make about a vernacular Canon:

Si vere lingua vulgaris est necessaria ad alendam pietatem fidelium, qui secus ecclesias deserunt, si linguae vulgaris usus omnino requiritur ad actuosam et fructuosam participationem sacrae Liturgiae, concludendum est, non tantum in lectionibus et aliis partibus, sed et in Canone et Consecratione linguam vulgarem esse adhibendam. (AS I.1, p. 428)

[If a truly vernacular language is necessary to foster the piety of the faithful, who would otherwise abandon the churches — if the use of this vernacular language is absolutely required for active and fruitful participation in the sacred liturgy — then it will be concluded that the vernacular language is to be used not only in the readings and other parts, but also in the Canon and Consecration.]

What is my conclusion from this preliminary gathering of information?

There’s a true narrative waiting to be written, but it’s not within the capacity of today’s progressive warlords.