The Consilium — Bugnini as Secretary

Sacrosanctum Concilium had to be implemented by someone. The Council Fathers had voted, in December 1963, for a constitution of principles — Latin retained, Gregorian chant given pride of place, no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely required them, and the whole work reserved to ecclesiastical authority. But a constitution of principles is not a Missal. The texts had to be drafted, the rites rebuilt, the books printed. On 25 January 1964, by the motu proprio Sacram Liturgiam, Pope Paul VI established the body that would do it: the Consilium ad exsequendam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia — the Council for the implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. He named Cardinal Giacomo Lercaro of Bologna its president and a Vincentian priest, Fr. Annibale Bugnini, its secretary. Here is a distinction that matters more than almost any other in this story, and one that careful Catholics must hold precisely: the Council gave the mandate; the Consilium made the rite.

A New Body for a New Rite

The Consilium gathered bishops and liturgical scholars from around the world, but its working engine was a set of specialized study groups — the coetus — each assigned a portion of the liturgy: the Order of Mass, the Offertory, the calendar, the lectionary, the Divine Office, the rites of the sacraments. Each group studied, debated, and drafted; Bugnini coordinated and carried the results forward; Paul VI approved. The structure was lawful and the authority real: the body acted under the Pope, and the rite it would ultimately produce is a valid and licit rite of the Catholic Church. That floor is firm and is not in question here.

What is a matter of legitimate historical judgment is the manner and the speed. A rite that had grown across some fifteen centuries was substantially rebuilt in roughly five years, from the Consilium’s first sessions in 1964 to the new Order of Mass of 1969. To its architects this was the overdue fulfillment of the Council’s mandate. To its critics — including some who sat inside the Consilium itself — it was the replacement of organic growth with deliberate construction, the very danger Pius XII had named in Mediator Dei and that Sacrosanctum Concilium had tried to fence with its rule against innovations not genuinely required.

Bugnini’s Hand on the Wheel

Annibale Bugnini was no newcomer in 1964. He had been secretary of the preparatory commission on the liturgy since 1960, and before that a central figure in the reforms of the 1950s. Now, as secretary of the Consilium, he stood at the precise point where the study groups’ drafts met the Pope’s signature — and that position gave him extraordinary leverage. He was, by wide acknowledgment, the indispensable man: the one who knew every file, drove every deadline, and framed how proposals reached Paul VI.

Even sympathetic insiders noticed how often the secretary’s preference prevailed. Aimé-Georges Martimort, himself a senior figure of the legitimate liturgical movement and a Consilium member, recorded instances in which decisions reached by the body were set aside and Bugnini proposed another course to Paul VI — which was the one adopted. The pattern was summarized, not by an enemy of the reform but from within its own ranks, as one in which “Paul VI approves what Bugnini wants.” This is not a charge of invalidity or of bad faith; it is a description of how power actually flowed through the commission.

❝

Paul VI approves what Bugnini wants.

— summarizing a pattern recorded by Consilium member A.-G. Martimort

An Insider’s Doubts

Louis Bouyer, who served as a consultor to the Consilium, left a withering account of how the work was actually done — not by serene scholarly consensus but by maneuver, with opposition managed and outcomes steered. Bouyer was no traditionalist firebrand; he was a distinguished member of the legitimate movement who had hoped for genuine renewal. His disillusionment is among the most credible testimonies we have, precisely because of where he sat.

The method itself troubled even friendly observers. Each study group, expert in its own narrow portion, reworked that portion according to scholarly theory and pastoral fashion — but no one stood guard over the organic wholeness of the rite as a living inheritance. The Mass was optimized part by part, and something was lost that no part-by-part optimization could preserve: the unity, density, and accumulated reverence of a liturgy no single generation had designed. That is a criticism of method and prudence, not of the Church’s authority to reform her worship, which is real and which the Consilium exercised under the Pope.

The Bishops Hesitate: The 1967 Synod

The Consilium’s work did not proceed unopposed, and the most telling check came from the bishops themselves. In October 1967, an experimental version of the reformed Mass — the so-called Missa normativa — was celebrated before the Synod of Bishops, and the bishops were asked to vote. The result was a clear signal of unease: of 187 voters, only 71 gave it unqualified approval; 62 approved it with reservations (placet iuxta modum), and the rest rejected it or abstained.

The lesson the Consilium drew was not to halt but to adjust and continue. The Missa normativa shown in 1967 was a draft, not the rite finally promulgated; it was revised, and the project moved toward 1969. But the bishops’ hesitation about the direction was unmistakable — and their reservations, like the warnings of Pius XII and the safeguards of the constitution, did not stop the work. The Consilium itself was folded, in May 1969, into the new Congregation for Divine Worship — with Bugnini carried over as its secretary.

By the close of the 1960s the Consilium’s labor was nearly finished. A new Order of Mass, a recomposed Offertory, additional Eucharistic Prayers beside the Roman Canon, a three-year lectionary, a revised calendar and Office — all bore the marks of the study groups and their tireless secretary. What remained was for the Pope to promulgate it. That came on 3 April 1969, and with it the most consequential liturgical change in a thousand years.