• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

Pope Saint Paul VI (3 April 1969): “Although the text of the Roman Gradual—at least that which concerns the singing—has not been changed, the Entrance antiphons and Communions antiphons have been revised for Masses without singing.”

  • Donate
  • Our Team
    • Our Editorial Policy
    • Who We Are
    • How To Contact Us
    • Sainte Marie Bulletin Articles
    • Jeff’s Mom Joins Fundraiser
  • Pew Resources
    • Brébeuf Catholic Hymnal
    • Jogues Illuminated Missal
    • KYRIALE • Saint Antoine Daniel
    • Campion Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Repository • “Spanish Music”
    • Ordinary Form Feasts (Sainte-Marie)
  • MUSICAL WEBSITES
    • René Goupil Gregorian Chant
    • Noël Chabanel Psalms
    • Nova Organi Harmonia (2,279 pages)
    • Roman Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Catechism of Gregorian Rhythm
    • Father Enemond Massé Manuscripts
    • Lalemant Polyphonic
  • Miscellaneous
    • Site Map
    • Secrets of the Conscientious Choirmaster
    • “Wedding March” for lazy organists
    • Emporium Kevin Allen
    • Saint Jean de Lalande Library
    • Sacred Music Symposium 2023
    • The Eight Gregorian Modes
    • Gradual by Pothier’s Protégé
    • Seven (7) Considerations
Views from the Choir Loft

Trination on All Souls: My Thoughts

Fr. David Friel · November 3, 2015

AllSoulsAltar ANY THANKS to all the readers who took part in the lively discussion thread on my previous article. The question posed was whether the permission given to all priests to offer three Masses on All Souls’ Day should be interpreted as an encouragement to do so.

First, allow me to say that I view this question as one that has no definitive answer. The Church does not seem to have a clear statement on the subject anywhere. So, I consider this a matter on which reasonable minds can disagree.

Having said that, I also believe that the laws, documentation, and pastoral practice of the Church give us clues that lean in favor of one interpretation. Thus, my own answer to the question as posed is an unequivocal yes. I will endeavor at this point to explain why, while at the same time responding to some of the points raised in the discussion thread.

T THE OUTSET, let me acknowledge that the pastoral reality in many places is that priests binate, trinate, etc. very often (weekly, if not more frequently). I do so, myself, a couple of times a week on average, with the mix of weddings, funerals, daily Masses, and Sunday Masses in a busy parish. But let us also acknowledge that this is not a good thing. In many places, it is necessary for the good of the faithful, but the laws of the Church that limit priests in their offering of Masses exist for good reason.

The discussion of how often these limits are exceeded (whether through disregard or through genuine pastoral need) has no bearing, however, on the question being asked. The laws as they are written are very strict; they guard against bination quite strongly, with notable exceptions for All Souls’ Day and the Nativity of Our Lord. The fact that three Masses are permitted in the law only on two days of the whole liturgical year is a clear sign that there is something unique about these days.

All Souls’ Day is formally called the “Commemoration of All the Faithful Departed.” On the food chain of liturgical celebrations, a Commemoration falls very low. (Other examples of Commemorations would be saints’ days that fall in the strong seasons of Lent or Advent.) Above Commemorations, the Church observes Memorials and Feasts. Then, at the very top, there are Solemnities. Thus, it cannot be on account of the liturgical solemnity that priests are granted such special permission.

Exactly 100 years have passed since the bull of Pope Benedict XV authorized the trination on All Souls’ Day. The early 20th Century, of course, was a time very different from our own, and it would be unfair to impose certain modern considerations upon our evaluation of the permission this document granted. For this reason, I do not think that issues such as a vocations crisis or clergy “burn out” can be understood as the reasons for this exceedingly rare permission.

Nor do I get any sense that this provision is made so that more of the lay faithful can attend Mass on All Souls’ Day. While there is nothing wrong with that—in fact, that would be a wonderful thing—nothing in the law gives any indication that this is a motivating factor. I think, rather, that an argument made on these grounds would be another case of imposing modern preconceptions upon legislation from an earlier time.

From my perspective, the most convincing explanation for this unusual permission is that Holy Mother Church wants to extend herself as much as possible in support of the Holy Souls in Purgatory. The allowance for three Masses per priest, I believe, is an act of mercy meant primarily for the benefit of the Holy Souls. Of course, no one doubts that every Mass benefits the Church Militant and the Church Triumphant, too, but it would seem that the good of the Church Suffering is the reason for this legislation.

Another factor that supports this perspective is the presence in the Roman Missal of three separate Mass formulae for All Souls’ Day. Only this Commemoration and Christmas Day are afforded such a generous treatment in the missal. (The history of the three Masses for Christmas is entirely separate; a good summary is available here.) It would be unconvincing to suggest that these formularies are extra, or superfluous, since the missal does not make a habit of offering multiple Mass formularies just so that the priest may choose one he prefers (examples such as the Ritual Masses for Marriage and various Commons are distinct, inasmuch as they are not assigned to one particular day). Much more likely, these three sets of orations are provided because there is an expectation that they will be needed by a priest who is trinating.

For all of these reasons, I gladly trinate every November 2nd.

OPE JOHN PAUL II memorably recalled his first days as a priest in his book, Gift and Mystery, written on the occasion of his golden jubilee. The late great pontiff, ordained on All Saints Day 1946, writes about celebrating his first Masses on All Souls’ Day:

On that day, every priest may celebrate three Masses… So, in a sense, I celebrated three “first” Masses. It was a deeply moving experience. I celebrated the three Masses in the crypt of Saint Leonard, which, in Wawel Cathedral at Krakow, is the front part of the so-called episcopal cathedral of Herman… I chose this place for the celebration of my first Masses in order to express my spiritual bonds with those buried in that Cathedral…

This, then, was why I wanted to celebrate my first Masses in the crypt of Saint Leonard: I wanted to express my special spiritual bond with the history of Poland, a history symbolized by the hill of Wawel. But there was more. My choice also had a particular theological significance. As I said, I had been ordained the day before, on the Solemnity of All Saints, when the Church gives liturgical expression to the reality of the Communion of Saints—communio sanctorum. The saints are those who, having accepted the Paschal Mystery of Christ in faith, now await the final resurrection…

Few people were at those first Masses celebrated on the hill of Wawel: among others, I remember my godmother Maria Wiadrowska, my mother’s elder sister. The altar server was Mieczyslaw Malinski, who in a way made present the spirit and person of Jan Tyranowski, at the time already seriously ill.

Later, as a priest and bishop, I always visited the crypt of Saint Leonard with great emotion. How I would have liked to celebrate Mass there on the fiftieth anniversary of my priestly ordination! (Gift and Mystery)

I hope that this discussion has been beneficial. Above all, I hope that the prayers we offer during this month of November are beneficial for all our beloved dead.

Opinions by blog authors do not necessarily represent the views of Corpus Christi Watershed.

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: All Souls, Pope Saint John Paul II Last Updated: January 1, 2020

Subscribe

It greatly helps us if you subscribe to our mailing list!

* indicates required

About Fr. David Friel

Ordained in 2011, Father Friel is a priest of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia and serves as Director of Liturgy at Saint Charles Borromeo Seminary. —(Read full biography).

Primary Sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

President’s Corner

    PDF Comparison Chart • “Serious Problems with the Lectionary Translation”
    EARS BEFORE truly revolutionary changes were introduced by the post-conciliar reformers, Evelyn Waugh wrote (on 16 August 1964) to John Cardinal Heenan: “I think that a vociferous minority has imposed itself on the hierarchy and made them believe that a popular demand existed where there was in fact not even a preference.” We ask the kind reader— indeed, we beg you—to realize that those of us born in the 1940s and 1950s had no cognizance of Roman activities during the 1960s and 1970s. We were concerned with making sure we had the day’s bus fare, graduating from high school, taking care of our siblings, learning a trade, getting a job, courting a spouse. We questioned neither the nuns nor the Church.1 Do not believe for one instant any of us were following the liturgical machinations of Cardinal Lercaro or Father Bugnini in real time. Setting The Stage • To never question or resist Church authorities is praiseworthy. On the other hand, when a scandalous situation persists for decades, it must be brought into focus. Our series will do precisely that as we discuss the Lectionary Scandal from a variety of angles. We don’t do this to attack the Catholic Church. Our goal is bringing to light what’s been going on, so it can be fixed once and for all. Our subject is extremely knotty and difficult to navigate. Its complexity helps explain why the situation has persisted for such a long time.2 But if we immediately get “into the weeds” we’ll lose our audience. Therefore, it seems better to jump right in. So today, we’ll explore the legality of selling these texts. A Word On Copyright • Suppose Susie modifies a paragraph by Edgar Allan Poe. That doesn’t mean ipso facto she can assert copyright on it. If Susie takes a picture of a Corvette and uses Photoshop to color the tires blue, that doesn’t mean she henceforth “owns” all Corvettes in America. But when it comes to Responsorial Psalm translations, certain parties have been asserting copyright over them, selling them for a profit, and bullying publishers vis-à-vis hymnals and missals. Increasingly, Catholics are asking whether these translations are truly under copyright—because they are identical (or substantially identical) to other translations.3 Example After Example • Our series will provide copious examples supporting our claims. Sometimes we’ll rely on the readership for assistance, because—as we’ve stressed—our subject’s history couldn’t be more convoluted. There are countless manuscripts (in Greek, Hebrew, and Latin) we don’t have access to, so it would be foolish for us to claim that our observations are somehow the ‘final word’ on anything. Nevertheless, we demand accountability. Catholics in the pews are the ones who paid for all this. We demand to know who specifically made these decisions (which impact every English-speaking Catholic) and why specifically certain decisions were made. The Responsorial Psalms used in America are—broadly speaking—stolen from the hard work of others. In particular, they borrowed heavily from Father Cuthbert Lattey’s 1939 PSALTER TRANSLATION:
    *  PDF Download • COMPARISON CHART —We thank the CCW staff for technical assistance with this graph.
    Analysis • Although certain parties have been selling (!!!) that translation for decades, the chart demonstrates it’s not a candidate for copyright since it “borrows” or “steals” or “rearranges” so much material from other translations, especially the 1939 translation by Father Cuthbert Lattey. What this means in layman’s terms is that individuals have been selling a translation under false pretenses, a translation they don’t own (although they claim to). To make RESTITUTION, all that money will have to be returned. A few years ago, the head of ICEL gave a public speech in which he said they give some of “their” profits to the poor. While almsgiving is a good thing, it cannot justify theft. Our Constant Theme • Our series will be held together by one thread, which will be repeated constantly: “Who was responsible?” Since 1970, the conduct of those who made a profit by selling these sacred texts has been repugnant. Favoritism was shown toward certain entities—and we will document that with written proof. It is absolutely essential going forward that the faithful be told who is making these decisions. Moreover, vague justifications can no longer be accepted. If we’re told they are “making the translations better,” we must demand to know what specifically they’re doing and what specific criteria they’re following. Stay Tuned • If you’re wondering whether we’ll address the forthcoming (allegedly) Lectionary and the so-called ABBEY PSALMS AND CANTICLES, have no fear. We’ll have much to say about both. Please stay tuned. We believe this will end up being the longest series of articles ever submitted to Corpus Christi Watershed. To be continued. ROBERT O’NEILL Former associate of Monsignor Francis “Frank” P. Schmitt at Boys Town in Nebraska JAMES ARNOLD Formerly associated w/ King’s College, Cambridge A convert to the Catholic Church, and distant relative of J. H. Arnold MARIA B. Currently serves as a musician in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Charlotte. Those aware of the situation in her diocese won’t be surprised she chose to withhold her last name.
    1 Even if we’d been able to obtain Roman journals such as NOTITIAE, none of them contained English translations. But such an idea would never have occurred to a high school student or a college student growing up in the 1960s. 2 A number of shell corporations claim to own the various biblical translations mandated for Roman Catholics. They’ve made millions of dollars selling (!) these indulgenced texts. If time permits, we hope to enumerate these various shell corporations and explain: which texts they claim to own; how much they bring in each year; who runs them; and so forth. It would also be good to explore the morality of selling these indulgenced texts for a profit. Furthermore, for the last fifty years these organizations have employed several tactics to manipulate and bully others. If time permits, we will expose those tactics (including written examples). Some of us—who have been working on this problem for three decades—have amassed written documentation we’ll be sharing that demonstrates behavior at best “shady” and at worst criminal. 3 Again, we are not yet examining the morality of selling (!) indulgenced texts to Catholics mandated to use those same translations.
    —Guest Author
    “Music List” • 17th in Ordinary Time (Year C)
    Some have expressed interest in perusing the ORDER OF MUSIC I prepared for the 17th Sunday in Ordinary Time (27 July 2025). If such a thing interests you, feel free to download it as a PDF file. As always, the Responsorial Psalm, Gospel Acclamation, and Mass Propers for this Sunday are conveniently stored at the the feasts website.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    Communion • “Ask & You Shall Receive”
    All of the chants for 27 July 2025 have been added to the feasts website, as usual under a convenient “drop down” menu. The COMMUNION ANTIPHON (both text and melody) are exceedingly beautiful and ancient.
    —Jeff Ostrowski

Quick Thoughts

    Pope Pius XII Hymnal?
    Have you ever heard of the Pope Pius XII Hymnal? It’s a real book, published in the United States in 1959. Here’s a sample page so you can verify with your own eyes it existed.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    “Hybrid” Chant Notation?
    Over the years, many have tried to ‘simplify’ plainsong notation. The O’Fallon Propers attempted to simplify the notation—but ended up making matters worse. Dr. Karl Weinmann tried to do the same in the time of Pope Saint Pius X by replacing each porrectus. You can examine a specimen from his edition and see whether you agree he complicated matters. In particular, look at what he did with éxsules fílii Hévae.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    Antiphons Don’t Match?
    A reader wants to know why the Entrance and Communion antiphons in certain publications deviate from what’s prescribed by the GRADUALE ROMANUM published after Vatican II. Click here to read our answer. The short answer is: the Adalbert Propers were never intended to be sung. They were intended for private Masses only (or Masses without music). The “Graduale Parvum,” published by the John Henry Newman Institute of Liturgical Music in 2023, mostly uses the Adalbert Propers—but sometimes uses the GRADUALE text: e.g. Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul (29 June).
    —Corpus Christi Watershed

Random Quote

“Angularis fundamentum” is typically sung at the dedication or consecration of a church and on church anniversaries. For constructions too numerous to list in recent generations, it would be more appropriate to sing that Christ had been made a temporary foundation. A dispirited generation built temporary housing for its Lord, and in the next millnenium, the ease of its removal may be looked back upon as its chief virtue.

— Fr. George Rutler (2016)

Recent Posts

  • PDF Comparison Chart • “Serious Problems with the Lectionary Translation”
  • “Music List” • 17th in Ordinary Time (Year C)
  • Flor Peeters In A Weird Mood?
  • Communion • “Ask & You Shall Receive”
  • Jeff’s Mother Joins Our Fundraiser

Subscribe

Subscribe

* indicates required

Copyright © 2025 Corpus Christi Watershed · Isaac Jogues on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Corpus Christi Watershed is a 501(c)3 public charity dedicated to exploring and embodying as our calling the relationship of religion, culture, and the arts. This non-profit organization employs the creative media in service of theology, the Church, and Christian culture for the enrichment and enjoyment of the public.

The election of Pope Leo XIV has been exciting, and we’re filled with hope for our apostolate’s future!

But we’re under pressure to transfer our website to a “subscription model.”

We don’t want to do that. We believe our website should remain free to all.

Our president has written the following letter:

President’s Message (dated 30 May 2025)

Are you able to support us?

clock.png

Time's up