Rorate Caeli

Moved by hatred: the words of an enemy of the motu proprio - II

Fr Manlio Sodi, SDB, is one of the most influential "liturgists" in Italy - his name is widely mentioned from diocesan seminaries to documents of liturgical committees. His scholarly expertise is to be commended - yet, it does not mean that he is a man who loves truth. That is why he has chosen to dedicate himself to the Traditional liturgical books of the Roman Rite, and why he was chosen to write the introductions to all four reprints (the Missale, the Breviarium, the Rituale, and the Pontificale) to be published by the Vatican Publishing House (Libreria Editrice Vaticana) itself: he can then become the most authoritative source for the interpretation of documents he truly hates.

In the very first page of his book "The Missal of Pius V: Why the Latin Mass in the Third Millennium?", Sodi affirms (notice: the book was given imprimatur on July 12, five days after Summorum Pontificum - and Summorum Pontificum is the object of a whole chapter of the book) that the Missal of John XXIII was abrogated:

"The last edition of the Tridentine Missal was prepared under the pontificate of Blessed John XXIII, in 1962: it was to consolidate the last reforms effected by Pius XII in 1951 and 1955, in view of the Code of rubrics. It was this Missal which was abrogated with the publication of the Missal of 1970.
It would seem a strange thing: today, when Latin is not understood or studied anymore as it used to be, some ask, and even with forcefulness, for the return to a liturgy entirely in Latin, and even more, according to a rite which was abolished with the publication of the Missal of Paul VI"

"Abrogated"? For some reason, though he dedicated a whole chapter to Summorum Pontificum, Sodi decided to keep this false information on the first page of his book. As is well known, "the typical edition of the Roman Missal promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in 1962" was "never abrogated" (nunquam abrogatam - cf. Summorum Pontificum, art. 1).

It is also clear that Sodi wishes to put all the "blame" of the Missal of Blessed John XXIII on that "terrible" Pope, Pius XII: it is true, the 1962 Missal consolidates the alterations made since the Pontificate of Benedict XV, but the main changes were the ones determined by the Code of Rubrics itself - which, not mentioned by Sodi in this text destined to the general public, had been published in 1960 by Blessed Pope John as a work of his Pontificate. The Codex Rubricarum put in place by the motu proprio Rubricarum Instructum could not be published only as a supplement (as it had been the case with the reformed Holy Week), because every single Sunday and Feast had to be reclassified under the new "Class" system.

The information on what Pope was responsible for the new Code of Rubrics is very important for historical reasons: it seems unreasonable that Pope John would set a new Code of Rubrics which required a whole new edition of the Roman Missal only to have it completely disregarded in less than a decade.
More on the absurdities written by Fr Sodi on the chapter dedicated to Summorum Pontificum in the third part of this series.


  1. Anonymous12:23 PM

    Sounds remarkably like a condemned ( and certainly guilty) prisoneer protesting his innocence as he is being led to his execution... Good riddance!

  2. “...Comunque, ogni tipo di riflessione non potrà essere attuata con oggettività se non ci si confronta prima di tutto con il documento conciliare sulla Liturgia, la Sacrosanctum Concilium, e con la Costituzione apostolica di Paolo VI dal titolo Missale Romanum: un testo che si trova all’inizio di ogni Messale.

    È il confronto con questo ampio documento, di importanza fondamentale, superiore ad un “Motu proprio”, che si può percepire meglio sia l’esigenza di conoscere meglio la storia, sia ciò che è stato operato con il nuovo Messale, sia il completo superamento del precedente Missale. Le parole con cui si conclude la Costituzione apostolica risuonano oggi più che mai eloquenti: «Quanto abbiamo qui stabilito e ordinato (statuta et praescripta) vogliamo che rimanga valido ed efficace (firma et efficacia), ora e in futuro, nonostante quanto vi possa essere di contrario nelle Costituzioni e negli Ordinamenti Apostolici dei nostri Predecessori e in altre disposizioni, anche degne di particolare menzione e deroga».”

    (Fr. Manlio Sodi)


  3. Anonymous1:49 PM

    Is there any way we can stop this liar from writing the introductions to the books to be published?

  4. Anonymous4:37 PM

    This man should be sacked. Picking him to write the preface or introduction for this book was a deliberate act against the Traditional Mass. It was no accident.
    The Pope should step in and say "NO" to this man.

  5. Anonymous5:24 PM

    He might write a perfectly fine preface. If he does not, the preface will stand as testament to the point in history where the smoke of Satan was dispelled from the Church. A salutory reminder never to let the enemy of the Church near the Liturgy again. His name will be remembered for generations to come as an enemy of Christ. By his own words he will condemn himself. For every soul he turns away as a result of his words he will be held responsible. If I were him I would decline the privilege. Some things are just too important to get wrong, even if you are convinced of the truth of your position. Catholic culture for most of history is not on his side. He has good reason to excercise extreme caution.

  6. Anonymous6:35 PM

    Who gave it the imprimatur?

  7. Anonymous7:11 PM

    The imprimatur? Danilo Serena, Vicario Generale of Padova. Italy.

  8. Anonymous8:55 PM

    Poor Father Sodi, what he says in the citation quoted by Syriacus above, shows that, howsoever much he lauds the final words of Paul VI' Apostolic Constitution "Missale Romanum", he neglects to read that whole document to find out just what the Pope is willing to remain firm and stable: the 4 changes to the Missal which he wished to be made.

    But liturgists of Sodi's type don't bother with historical facts, they innovate whenever necessary for the proper liturgical experience!

  9. Yet one more reason to buy missals made by other publishing companies.

  10. Anonymous10:22 PM

    Annuntio vobis gaudium magnum;
    habemus Papam:

    Eminentissimum Dominum,
    Dominum Manlion Sodi,
    qui sibi nomen imposuit Judas

  11. Anonymous10:37 PM

    Il potere logora chi non ce l'ha!

  12. Anonymous12:22 AM

    "Finally, there is the fact which is all but fatal to the hope of cure that their very doctrines have given such a bent to their minds, that they disdain all authority and brook no restraint; and relying upon a false conscience, they attempt to ascribe to a love of truth that which is in reality the result of pride and obstinancy."

    - Pascendi Dominici Gregis


  13. Anonymous12:28 AM

    I did a little research into our firend Fr. Sodi.
    It's as I expected. He's a frustrated and embittered Vatican II cheerleader, Bugninist, almost aged 64. He's of the same generation of anothr man who shares the same views....Piero Marini whose almost 66.
    At least they are both old. They represent the Catholic past.
    Wonderful priests like Monsignor Guido Marini, 42 who loves the Tridentine Latin Mass, represents priests of the future.

  14. Anonymous1:59 AM

    I think the Ecclesia Dei Commision needs to be alerted and letters protesting his writing the forwards sent to the Vatican Publishing House. One very important point is he denies the Old Missal was never abrogated. If the EDC is alerted they will act.

  15. Anonymous7:46 AM

    Could you please post a link to where this book can be purchased.

  16. Seems like an honest man telling the truth unlike that old liar Ratzinger.


    Are you a Spirit of VII man, or a sedevacantist? Not that it matters, really - I'm just curious.

  17. Anonymous12:42 PM


  18. Anonymous2:17 PM


    Deus,qui inter summos Sacerdotes...

  19. Libreria Editrice Vaticana

    Città del Vaticano - cap 00120 - Via della Tipografia

  20. Anonymous10:21 PM

    He is wrong because nobody is asking for a return to a liturgy entirely in Latin, merely for it to be availble. You can find a Latin mass every sunday in London at westminster Cathedral, Farm Street, St Ethelredas, Spanish Place & the Oratory. The latter two have it in old & new forms. In england, Latin is encouraged by the Association for Latin Liturgy and the Latin Mass Society.
    However, some comments here are somewhat over the top. It is not "evil" to oppose Latin in the liturgY; it mis merely narrow minded. KBO,R

  21. Anonymous12:40 AM

    Dear Rorate:
    We live clearly in the age of the Judas Priest with so-called priests like Father Sodi and their liturgical antics that have precipitated through the "Novus Ordo Missae" the loss of faith of at least two generations of Catholics and still counting. Thank you that he is only writing prefaces, but he has no substance just like the advocates of the "Novus Ordo" mentality and the renegade spirit of Vatican II.
    Communion in the hand and the "Novus Ordo Missae" have reeked more havoc on church attendance and the loss of the one true faith than anything else since Martin Luther! Pray that Benedict XVI throws out these Judases before they do much more damage.
    God bless us all,
    j hughes dunphy

  22. Anonymous4:29 AM

    Actually, it is evil to oppose Latin in the mass, because such opposition was anathematised as heresy by the Council of Trent.

  23. Anonymous11:04 AM

    Who cares what this man thinks. Benedict XVI has confirmed that Quo primum was never aborgated so the missal of St. Pope Pius V can be used regardless of the status of the 1962 missal

  24. Anonymous11:33 AM

    If nyou really think that of Vatican II you cannot be an RC. ALL the councils of the church are definitive. PB XVI has made clear that the new & old forms are not different rites but different uses. You can face east whens celebrating the new form and for that matter, you can face east whilst celbrating the old form.What is importnat is celebrating ewerll and reverently whivchever you use. I have seen some dreadful celebrations of the old form in recent years.
    POpe B XVI is the true embodiment of Vatican II. He is no renegade as your post suggested. It seems that people on this site are ignorant of theology & church history and are filled with bile & bigotry. I say this as a firm orthodox traditionalist.

  25. Anonymous5:55 PM

    Quoting Trent i n that context is rather obscurantist. Mass in Latin has always been allowed. I think what seems to be at issue is whether you want the Tridentine or Normative USE. In England the traditional mass was the Sarum use and the Tridentine use was imposed by wiseman in 1850. The old English catholics who stayed faithful in penal times wanted the Sarum Use restored. The Tridentine form is just one of many in church history.
    I enjoy mass in Latin, usually in the normative from, but given the eveils in the world I think it is a bit silly to call poor Fr Sodi evel. I think he is probable wooly & msiguided and as narrow minded as some people who post on here!

  26. Anonymous12:08 PM

    Even if the TLM was not abrogated legally, bishops didn't allow it to be celebrated in many places around the world.

    Actually it doesn't matter whether the mass was or not abrogated, but how bishops and priests are going to apply the motu proprio and other future documents...

    Paper can have no power if discipline is not exercised. Laws, documents... once those who are in charge of them don't do their jobs, it remains as if nothing happened.

    Legally not abrogated. Just legally...

    ...and I have never seen a TLM.

  27. Anonymous8:28 PM

    Why the Latin Mass in XXI century?
    Yes, and why the Gospels and why the Sacrifice of the Mass in the XXI century?
    What a disgrace to have these bishops in the Vatican!

  28. How close is he to Cardinal Bertone also SDB


Comment boxes are debate forums for readers and contributors of RORATE CÆLI.

Please, DO NOT assume that RORATE CÆLI contributors or moderators necessarily agree with or otherwise endorse any particular comment just because they let it stand.


(1) This is our living room, in a deeply Catholic house, and you are our guest. Please, behave accordingly. Any comment may be blocked or deleted, at any time, whenever we perceive anything that is not up to our standards, not conducive to a healthy conversation or a healthy Catholic environment, or simply not to our liking.

(2) By clicking on the "publish your comment" button, please remain aware that you are choosing to make your comment public - that is, the comment box is not to be used for private and confidential correspondence with contributors and moderators.

(3) Any name/ pseudonym/ denomination may be freely used simply by choosing the third option, "Name/URL" (the URL box may be left empty), when posting your comment - therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to simply post as "Anonymous", making debate unnecessarily harder to follow. Any comment signed simply as "Anonymous" will be blocked.

Thank you!