Archbishop Paul J. Hallinan, chairman of the U.S. Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy, welcomed the changes in the liturgy approved in Rome including the vernacular in the canon.

The archbishop’s statement follows:

The strong sentiments of a majority of American priest and laymen are the background. Overwhelming votes by the American bishops are the instruments which have bolstered the cause of the vernacular. And this week the action of the Holy See has answered the hopes of a truly revitalized liturgy for our American parishes.

The surprise announcement, granting permission for the vernacular in the Canon of the Mass, -was no surprise to the teams of bishops, priests and lay specialists who have been working on the liturgy. In November 1966, the United States hierarchy asked for this permission along with seven other points. The others were granted almost immediately. But the Canon request was neither approved nor disapproved. Correspondence which I had with Cardinal Lercaro and other Roman officials, as well as Archbishop John F. Dearden’s visit to Rome earlier this year, indicated a general step forward was being considered. It was clearly understood that the initiative of the large American hierarchy had spearheaded the vernacular program.

With the Church moving steadily toward the liturgical renewal, it is not surprising that the emphasis of the new instruction is on concerted, authorized actions rather than individual innovations.

The Dutch bishops had submitted a request with a Dutch text, and the Caribbean bishops had acted as the Americans. Although the French bishops have been considering the move, it is understood that no action had been taken to get the permission.

Since October 1962 when the Vatican Council began, the American role in liturgy has been dynamic. Among the experts who prepared the draft for the Council were Father Frederick McManus of Catholic University of America, and Father Godfrey Deiekmann of Saint John’s University. Council fathers from the United States spoke on both sides of the vernacular question, but as the debate continued and preliminary voting during the first and second sessions, the American sentiment began to congeal. Two weeks before the final dramatic vote on the Liturgy (the first of Vatican II’s documents), the United States bishops met in Rome and voted to extend the English Masses begun in American churches the first Sunday of Advent 1964. Later the three key orations of the Mass (the Collect, Prayer over Offerings, and After Communion) were included.

Frantic efforts were evident in the preparation of suitability and experimentation, the 1964 version was made up of existing missal texts with scriptural readings form the Confraternity translation. There was considerable dissatisfaction, some of which was quite useful; much of it however was linked to that resistance to change which is so evident among many people.

Meanwhile one of the most far-reaching movements was well under way. Ten English speaking hierarchies authorized the long-range preparation of an International English text in 1963. Theologically and scripturally authentic, this translation has the additional contributions of literary and dramatic stylists, and musicians. Samples have twice been sent out to thousands of interested people, and their comments and criticisms carefully considered.

Then the bishops took home to study this mimeographed text along with three other existing missal versions. There is much polishing still to be done on the text before its final approval by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, and the Consilium.

It is probable that the vernacular Canon will be ready the first Sunday of Advent 1967. The other changes (violet vestments for Requiem Masses, no maniple, changes in rubrics, etc.) will be effective June 29.

The use of the vernacular has become for the proponents of the liturgy somewhat of a touchstone. It is certain that some Catholics, who have never read or received instructions on the meaning of worship, see the use of English simply as a modernization, or an easier way, almost a gimmick. But actually, the vernacular was introduced by Vatican II as a dynamic instrument toward “the full, conscious and active participation of the people.” (par.14).

Pastors are directed, in the Constitution on the Liturgy, to see that “the faithful take part (in Mass) knowingly, actively and fruitfully” (par.11) The rites must be “within the people’s powers and comprehension, (34) and both texts and rites must “express more clearly the holy things which they signify.” (21)

During the spirited debate of the first two conciliar sessions, the fathers, by overwhelming vote, went farther. The vernacular was approved first for the scriptural readings, and then some prayers and chants. Later other parts were permitted in the mother-tongue, and now the Canon (from the Holy, Holy, Holy to the Lord’s Prayer), the great action of the Eucharist, will be clearly expressed so the text and rites will truly express “the holy things that are signified.”