Maniple Madness

While reading a discussion about whether it is licit to use the maniple when celebrating Mass according to the current Missal, there came up, of course, the single line from Tres Abhinc Annos in 1967: “the maniple can always be omitted.” What I had been unaware of, however, was that the official version of the document in the Congregation for Divine Worship’s publication Notitiae has commentary in it.

This is the relevant commentary in Notitiae from 1967, Vol. 1 (p. 169):

Manipulus derivare videtur a mappula romana quae ad ornatum et ad utilitatem practicam adhibebatur. Ea utebantur Consules ad circenses aperiendos. Subdiaconus in Ordine romano I mappulam pontificis accipiebat et ingrendiens acclesiam scholae signum faciebat ut cantum ad introitum inciperet. Quandoque autem, diaconus calicem et patenam celebranti mediante mappula porrigebat (ex. gr. Ordo Stefaneschi, a. 1311).

Nostris temporibus manipulus factus est vestis sacra adhibita a subdiacono, diacono, presbytero et episcopo in ministerio Missae tantum. Tamen, nullius est utilitatis nec practicae nec aesteticae, eiusque significatio non percipitur; dum e contra gestus in actione sacra peragendos impedit.

My translation:

The maniple seems to derive from the Roman mappula which was employed for a decorative and practical purpose. Consuls used it to open the circus games. The subdeacon in the Roman Ordo I would take the mappula of the pontiff and advancing to the church would make the sign for the schola to being the chant for the introit. And the deacon would extend the chalice and paten to the celebrant with the mappula in the middle (ex. gr. Ordo Stefaneschi, a. 1311).

In our times the maniple has become a sacred vestment employed by the subdeacon, deacon, priest and bishop only in the celebration of the Mass. Nevertheless, it is of no use either practical or aesthetic, and its significance is not perceived; while on the contrary it impedes the carrying out of movements of the limbs in sacred action.

Interesting stuff!

4 Responses to “Maniple Madness”

Gravatar Jeffery BeBeau

Hey Dylan,

All that information looks familiar. I was as surprised as you when I discovered the commentary in Notitiae. If it was my copy of the Latin that has errors I be happy to hear where they are so I can correct them. I basically translated the information myself, but not trusting my translation to be as polished as your I let those with greater Latin skills tackle it.

Gravatar Dylan

There were only a few minor typographical errors. The Latin above has them corrected.

If I recall, there were pontificus => pontificis, Mostris => Nostris, and nullis => nullius.

Thanks again for bringing this commentary to light! I may have to read the rest of it to get a better grasp of how the reform of the Liturgy progressed.

Gravatar Jeffery BeBeau

Thanks Dylan,

I’ll get to the corrections as soon as I can.

Gravatar Jeffery BeBeau

I’ve undated that Latin. Thanks for the accurate translation of the Latin. I’m thinking of proving a English edition of the Expanded Notitae text, would you be interesting in helping with the translation of the rest?

Leave a Reply

Creative Commons License
By submitting a comment, you agree to place it under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

Powered by WP Hashcash