60 Years of Sacrosanctum Concilium: What Did Vatican II Really Say About the Liturgy?

This December (2023) marks the 60^th anniversary of the Second Vatican Council’s release of Sacrosanctum Concilium (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy), solemnly promulgated by Pope St. Paul VI on Dec. 4, 1963. This document is considered one of the crowning jewels of the Second Vatican Council, though it has often been misunderstood, misinterpreted and maligned as either too progressive or too traditional. 

Nonetheless, this liturgical constitution still remains one of the most influential and yet unfulfilled documents of the entire Second Vatican Council. In its pages it preserves the rich beauty of our Catholic liturgical tradition while simultaneously highlighting the need for measured liturgical reform that is able to communicate more effectively the paschal mystery of Christ. 

Above all, Sacrosanctum Concilium speaks profoundly about the importance of the liturgical life, reminding us that “the liturgy is the summit toward which the activity of the church is directed” (SC 10) because “our savior instituted the eucharistic sacrifice of his body and blood…in order to perpetuate the sacrifice of the cross throughout the centuries until he should come again” (SC 47). 

Because every sacrament of the church is an experience of Christ’s suffering, death and resurrection, the Second Vatican Council insisted that both the clergy and laity must have a better and more robust understanding of the central role that liturgy plays in their Christian lives.

Unfortunately, many people – both laity and clergy – have not read this Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy and therefore fail to understand both its intentions and its importance. Instead, many common and erroneous assumptions exist about “what Vatican II said.” Some of these misinterpretations are very specific, while others assume general attitudes and mentalities. 

For instance, many will often use the Second Vatican Council as a scapegoat to explain why the liturgy “needs” to be stripped down and without ceremony. This mentality believes that the liturgy must be as utilitarian and pragmatic as possible, effectively removing any element of beauty, mystery, or awe. 

Masses that are celebrated according to this principle usually have no chanted prayers, no incense, no beautiful or artful vessels or vestments, no truly sacred music and generally lack a concrete sense of deep prayerfulness. This rather depressing liturgical landscape is a faulty interpretation of the Second Vatican Council’s teaching on the sacred liturgy. In many ways, it is directly opposed to what the council fathers so strongly emphasized about the importance of our participation in the liturgical life – a participation which is, first and foremost, interior and spiritual.

Let’s look at a few common misinterpretations, followed by what Sacrosanctum Concilium actually says. I have personally heard the claim that “Vatican II did away with Latin in the liturgy.” While Vatican II made much more room for the use of vernacular languages in the liturgy, it never abolished the use of the mother tongue of the church but encouraged its preservation and use. 

The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy declared that “the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites” (SC 36). Additionally, the constitution said that “steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or sing together in Latin those parts of the ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them” (SC 54). 

In 1974, Pope St. Paul VI sent a booklet of simple Latin chants as a gift to every bishop in the world in order to foster this desire of the Second Vatican Council – a gesture that, unfortunately, was largely ignored due to prevailing ideologies and misinterpretations.
Another claim I have often heard in one form or another is that “Vatican II did away with chant and all that stuffy organ church music.” While there is no accounting for some people’s musical taste, our opinions about music have very little to do with what the church desires for her liturgy. 

Sacrosanctum Concilium admitted other kinds of music and instruments to the liturgy with the requirement that they be “suitable for sacred use” and in “accord with the dignity of the temple” (SC 120). In other words, those things which are novel and secular are never to be introduced into the sacred liturgy – an abuse that occurs all too frequently. 

The constitution goes on to say that “the church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy” (SC 116) and that “the pipe organ is to be held in high esteem, for it is the traditional musical instrument which adds a wonderful splendor to the church’s ceremonies and powerfully lifts up man’s mind to God and to higher things” (SC 120). 
Finally, the constitution reminds composers of sacred music that “the texts intended to be sung must always be in conformity with Catholic doctrine; indeed, they should be drawn chiefly from holy Scripture and from liturgical sources” (SC 121). Many major church music publishers often fall woefully short of this requirement.

Finally, an erroneous claim I have frequently heard is that “Vatican II did away with having fancy churches, altars, vestments, chalices, etc.” In reality, Sacrosanctum Concilium devoted an entire section to sacred art and sacred furnishings in churches. In it, the term “noble simplicity” is used – a term which is not meant to be understood as the stripping away of style or decoration. Rather, this term is drawn from the desire of the council fathers that sacred art “should strive after noble beauty rather than mere sumptuous display” (SC 124). 
This is far from advocating that churches should be whitewashed boxes and sacred art should be amateur and simplistic. Instead, the constitution is advocating for having truly inspired art and designs of the finest materials – not cookie-cutter catalogue designs that are mass-produced with tacky and cheap ornamentation. 

The church has always been one of the most prominent patrons of fine art and it was of great concern to the council fathers that “mere sumptuous display” of cheap ornament does not replace true artistic genius.  

Sixty years have gone by since the promulgation of Sacrosanctum Concilium, and yet many of the principles of this formidable document of Vatican II are yet to be realized. Far from advocating for the stripping down and simplification of the liturgy, this 1963 Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy compels us to understand more profoundly the role of the liturgy in our lives and our continual need for liturgical formation. This has been written about most recently by Pope Francis in his Apostolic Letter Desiderio Desideravi, directed to the clergy and laity on the liturgical formation of the people of God. In next month’s column, we will explore this letter.