N THE VERY FIRST document ratified by the Second Vatican Council, we find the following mandate (SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM, §23): “There must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them.” But during the season of Easter, the 1970 kalendar made an insanely confusing change: the numbers are all mixed up. For instance, in the traditional kalendar, this coming Sunday—27 April 2025,1 with the familiar “Quasi modo” INTROIT—is referred to as the 1st Sunday after Easter. But in the 1970 kalendar, this coming Sunday—27 April 2025, with the familiar “Quasi modo” INTROIT—is referred to as the 2nd Sunday of Easter. This confusion lasts all throughout Eastertide. For instance, next Sunday (4 May 2025) in the traditional kalendar is the Second Sunday after Easter. But in the 1970 kalendar, next Sunday (4 May 2025) is referred to as the Third Sunday of Easter. In the traditional kalendar, 11 May 2025 is the Third Sunday after Easter. But in the 1970 kalendar, 11 May 2025 is called “The Fourth Sunday of Easter.”
Did the good of the Church
“genuinely and certainly”
require this confusing change?
“SEP” Error • In light of all the changes, it’s not surprising errors crept in. I believe I may have found an error in the Simple English Propers (CMAA, 2011). Specifically, the ENTRANCE CHANT for this coming Sunday,1 which uses the wrong psalm:
The correct psalm is PSALM 80: “Exsultáte Deo adjutóri nostro; jubiláte Deo Jacob.”
I have no idea how this “typo” or “mistake” or “error” crept in. Perhaps there’s a reason they didn’t use PSALM 80—but that’s what been used for centuries. It’s also what’s assigned by the Ordo Cantus Missae (1970) as well as the 1974 GRADUALE ROMANUM:
If anyone can explain this, I’m all ears.
Addendum • Getting back to my initial theme … as far as I can tell, the traditional naming of the Sundays after Easter goes back many centuries. Below is an excerpt from 1066nimes|1066, a manuscript that was (perhaps) created sometime around the year 1066AD:
Vatican II said: “There must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them.” What specifically was “deficient” about the traditional naming system? Were millions of Catholics begging the pope to change it? This seems like yet another example of change for the sake of change.
What specifically changed in the year 1970 that made such tinkering necessary? How was the Catholic Church able to produce so many amazing and inspiring saints (for so many centuries) before that change was made? It seems like the ancient Christians got along just fine with the traditional naming system… Would Saint John Bosco have been a better saint if he’d experienced the new naming system? How about Saint Francis of Assisi? How about Saint Isaac Jogues? What about Bernadette Soubirous? What about Saint Andrew Bobola? They all seem to have been just fine.
One final time I ask: Did the good of the Church “genuinely and certainly require” that the 5th Sunday after Easter be changed to the 6th Sunday of Easter?
1 This Sunday has many names: (a) Low Sunday; (b) “Dominica in Albis” or White Sunday; (c) Octave Day of Easter; (d) Divine Mercy Sunday; (e) Quasi Modo Sunday; etc.
