Sacramentary

SACRAMENTARY. - Name that in the early Middle Ages designated the book containing the formulas used by the bishop or the priest in the celebration of the Eucharist and in the administration of the Sacraments: collect, oratio super oblata (secret), preface, canon, oratio ad complendum (postcommunion), oratio super populum.

1. ORIGINS

1. Nomenclature

The term derives from sacramentum, which in ancient Christian Latin has several meanings, but directly designates the Sacrament par excellence, the Eucharist. With the same meaning as sacramentum, mysterium is sometimes used, and this explains why one occasionally finds liber mysteriorum for liber sacramentorum. From sacramentum came sacramentarium and liber sacramentorum. The first title is the more common; the second was used by Pope Adrian to Charlemagne (Jaffé-Wattenbach, I, p. 303). These terms, in themselves generic, corresponded perfectly to the content of the volume.

2. The first euchological collection

In the primitive Christian assemblies there were no books of any kind, except the Old Testament, that is, psalms, law, prophets. Later the Letters of St. Paul, the Gospels, the Acts and the other books of the New Testament were added. The synaxes began with a reading, at first continuous, then chosen according to circumstances or feast days. At a certain point the reading was interrupted by the one presiding, who, under the impulse of inspiration, formulated a prayer of praise and thanksgiving to God, gathering up the intentions of those present (1 Cor. 14:16; Justin, I Apol., ch. 67). The initial schema of this oratio must have been very simple. It derived directly from the apostolic tradition, which in turn had drawn its fundamental elements from the Jewish milieu. These elements, enriched by Christian thought, developed gradually according to the talent, sensitivity and temperament of the celebrant.

Alongside Sacred Scripture, the most frequent and most beautiful euchological formulas thus began to be fixed, among which in the first place the doxologies: the letter of St. Clement (d. 101 [?]; S. Colombo, SS. Patrum Apostolicorum opera, Rome 1938, pp. 135-41) certainly has a eucharistic inspiration; the prayer of St. Polycarp (d. 156; ibid., pp. 452-53) probably reflects the liturgical improvisation of the era. The works of the Fathers and ecclesiastical writers of the first centuries (Origen [d. 255], Novatian [d. 258?], St. Cyril of Jerusalem [d. 386], St. John Chrysostom [d. 407], St. Augustine [d. 430]), the Gnostic writings, the apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, and even the funerary inscriptions contain numerous liturgical eucharistic formulas, in all likelihood used or composed for the ordinary synaxes (v. LIBRI LITURGICI).

The principle of a single formulary, drafted for all the Churches according to a common and traditional schema, had been an inviolable law in the first three centuries. In the 4th century a singular phenomenon occurred throughout the West: almost suddenly the principle of uniqueness was abandoned and every Mass of the Temporal and Sanctoral cycles was endowed with its own formulary.

Some have seen in this movement a natural evolution. Around the invariable anaphora a certain number of variable parts of imprecise character would have crystallized little by little. In time some would have fallen into disuse, others shifted, and the schema of the Roman Mass of the 5th century would have been formed (cf. A. Paredi, I Prefazi ambrosiani, Milan 1937, pp. 7-8). Other authors, on the other hand, hold that this was a genuine liturgical revolution accomplished in Rome between 380 and 420, but presumably through the work of Pope Damasus (366-384; Bourque, op. cit. in bibl., p. 37), who by assigning the variable formulas to the Masses would have completed the work of restoration and embellishment of the Christian cemeteries and of the cult of the martyrs. Later generations would have preserved a vague memory of the Damasan reform, forgetting its precise object. To this would refer the liturgical activity that the sources of the 6th-7th century attribute to him (MGH, Gesta Pontificum Romanorum, I, pp. 83-84).

3. The "libelli missarum"

The S. is a book composed of various libelli missarum, with which every Church was provided for the normal conduct of worship. Characteristic is the episode of Sidonius Apollinaris, who, invited to celebrate on the occasion of a great feast, and having had his own libellus taken away, improvised with such eloquence that the faithful believed they were hearing an angel (St. Gregory of Tours, Historia Francorum, II, 22).

The episode shows that the libellus was commonly used even for solemn Masses, and not only for private celebration, as some scholars have maintained (A. Ebner, Iter Italicum, Freiburg im Br. 1896, p. 359). At first the libellus took the place of every other liturgical book, gathering together the formularies necessary for a given Church. Later, in the full period of the S., the libelli replaced the S. for missionary or itinerant priests, and contained the ordinary, a certain number of votive and common Masses, and the ritual of certain Sacraments.

The first kind of libelli must have flourished particularly in Rome. The liturgical history of the Eternal City, up to the second half of the 4th century, shows that in the tituli only what today would be called the Temporal was celebrated, and that quite reduced. The cult of the saints is exclusively local, and takes place around the tombs of the martyrs. For this reason the depositio martyrum and the depositio episcoporum add the topographical indication to each feast. Outside these feasts, the two documents recall only the Natale Domini, a feast common to all the tituli, and the Natale Petri de cathedra, which for contemporaries needed no further specification. Finally every titulus celebrated the Dedicatio. From this one can easily reconstruct what the libellus missarum of a titulus could contain: an embryonic temporal, one or two Masses of the Sanctoral and some benedictiones. The libellus of a cemetery church comprised the Masses of the martyrs honored there.

The exception ended up becoming the rule during the 5th century. The sermones of St. Leo show a strong development in the liturgical cult with the ever more frequent participation of the pontiff. The practice became general that the same saint was celebrated simultaneously in all the tituli. A book with the formularies of the Masses the same for all became necessary. Thus one arrives at the end of the 5th century, the era of the first great collections known under the name of S., which supplanted the libelli.

II. THE SO-CALLED LEONINE SACRAMENTARY

1. The manuscript

The manuscript still preserved at the Chapter Library of Verona is in uncial letters and consists of 138 folios. Most scholars (Delisle, Thompson, Duchesne, Feltoe) consider it to be from the beginning of the 7th century. E. A. Lowe specifies: second half of the 6th century (cf. Codices latini antiquiores, IV. Italy: Perugia-Verona, Oxford 1947, p. 32). Only this last author says it was executed at the school of Verona: others (Beer, Traube, Bishop, Cabrol) lean toward Spain, Africa, Bobbio and Luxeuil.

2. Content

The Leonine is a collection of about a thousand euchological formularies composed for the various needs of the liturgical cult. Some are most elegant in concept and form, others poor and shallow in thought. All are characteristic for their technical cursus. Out of 1030 endings, 927 metrical cadences have been detected. An artistic peculiarity that tends to disappear in later s. Leonine formularies are found in the other s.: thus the Gelasian has 107 of them, the Gregorian 118, the Missale Romanum 35.

The formularies are grouped according to the various liturgical occasions, but not without confusions. Each group (section) consists of collects, secrets, postcommunions, prayers super populum; furthermore one or two prefaces; a characteristic of the Leonine, which has 167 of them. The sections are preceded by a title, which seems to refer to the cortological circumstance; or they are introduced by the simple word item alia (missa?). They are arranged according to the order of the civil year, that is, by months, a thing altogether original, since the other s. have the traditional arrangement of the ecclesiastical year.

In the months poorer in cortological recurrences, it would seem that the compiler filled the gaps by inserting groups of masses for various circumstances, but in an arbitrary manner. Thus it is explained why in Apr. there are formularies for the common of martyrs, for the Easter season and the dedication of churches; in July prayers and preces for day, morning and evening; in Sept. prayers for the consecration of bishops, deacons, priests, virgins. There are then prayers and prefaces of a rather polemical character, e.g., against false confessores mingled with the true ones, against adversaries (subdoli operarii) against whom one must be on guard as against wolves.

A notable disorder appears in the prayers of the feasts. Thus in April, in the common of martyrs there is a prayer to St. Tiburtius, whose feast falls in August, two feasts de confessoribus, a secret for St. Lawrence, also celebrated in August, and a formulary de apostolis. In May, in the Masses of Pentecost, the Hanc igitur precedes the collect, instead of following it; in November two formularies de natali s. Andreae are placed before his vigil.

But this disorder, according to A. Chavasse (op. cit. in bibl.), is only apparent, and would conceal a real order, the perception of which would singularly illuminate the composition and origin of the entire compilation. That is, the fact that the various libelli were not dismembered according to content, but remained intact and juxtaposed, constitutes an excellent means today for identifying them, dating them and assigning their authorship to the various authors.

3. Author and date

The peculiarities mentioned clearly show that the Leonian is not an official liturgical book. Certainly it never served at the altar. It is a private compilation, made by a private individual, for a private purpose. A collection of materials of diverse provenance and of different epochs. Countless hypotheses have been advanced concerning the author and the date of composition. Here are the principal ones: a) author St. Leo the Great (440-61). Thus thought the first editors, followed by Quesnel, by Tomasi and in part by Probst. Certainly there is no lack of expressions that betray the style and phraseology of St. Leo (C. Callewaert, St-Léon le Grand et les textes du Léonien, in Sacris erudiri, 1 [1948], pp. 35-122). b) Composition after Simplicius (468-83) and before Gelasius (492-96). Thus the authors (Muratori in particular) who see a dependence of the Gelasian on the Leonian. c) M. Rule thinks that the Leonian had three different redactions: one under St. Leo (440-61), the second under Hilary (461-68), the third under Simplicius (468-83). d) F. Probst would date it between 483 and 492, with groups of earlier formulas (St. Leo and St. Damasus). For certain orations he admits that the author may have transcribed separate libelli. e) B. Capelle and C. Coebergh (cited in the bibliography) see the hand of Pope Gelasius in several places. f) R. Buckwald makes St. Gregory of Tours (6th cent.) its author and considers the Leonian to be the draft of the Gelasian. g) A. Chavasse (cited in the bibliography) assigns a good number of formularies to Pope Vigilius. h) L. Duchesne places it between 537 and 590, basing himself principally on certain political events of that period. i) C. L. Feltoe, and after him E. Bourque, plausibly hold that the Verona manuscript is the archetype and the only copy that ever existed. Bourque's conclusions, today generally accepted, are: 1) the Leonian collection contains formularies ranging from 440 to 560, apart from some formulary perhaps more ancient. 2) The Verona manuscript is the archetype: the physiognomy of the collection, the disorder, the false divisions, the transpositions, the marginal and textual notes denote a first-draft redaction; a copy would certainly have eliminated the cruder errors. 3) The Leonian seems to be a unicum, even though certain isolated formulas (never an entire series) are found in other sacramentaries. The identical formulas are explained by the fact that the libelli used at Rome were not unknown to foreigners (pilgrims) and ended up being inserted into liturgical books. 4) The compiler's first purpose was to make a reduced, selected collection, choosing among the saints venerated at Rome only the most representative ones. Something intermediate, therefore, between the libelli missarum and the sacramentaries properly so called. The second purpose would have been to make of the collection a source from which to draw later. Proof of this is found in the use of sigla and in the Tironian notes of the manuscript. 5) The materials used are of purely Roman origin (the conjecture that the Leonian is of Ravenna origin, already advanced by some scholar and recently reproposed with a wealth of detail by G. Lucchesi, Nuove note agiografiche ravennati, Ravenna 1943, p. 71 ff., has not met with favor). The anonymous compiler who put them together had a great veneration for the Roman liturgy. Could one not think of one of those pilgrims of whom other works survive, such as the epigraphic sylloges? 6) The Leonian is neither a sacramentary nor a pre-sacramentary, because it was composed after 560, when a sacramentary already existed at Rome. But with all its defects it has immense value because it has preserved true jewels of the ancient Roman liturgy and constitutes the transitional term between the libelli and the sacramentaries.

III. GELASIAN SACRAMENTARY

1. Content

The Gelasian is an official book, the first Roman sacramentary; Reg. 316 is its most notable manuscript (v. illustrations under the entries comite and MEROVINGIAN SCRIPT). It is divided into 3 books. The first contains the Temporal, that is, the masses from Christmas Eve to the octave of Pentecost, the rites of Ordinations, of the catechumenate, of the blessing of the oils, of the font and of the consecration of virgins. The second gathers the masses of the Sanctoral from St. Felix confessor (Jan. 15) to St. Thomas (Dec. 21), eight formularies of masses in natal. plurimorum sanctorum, and 5 de adventum (!) Domini. In the third are found 16 orationes et preces cum canone per dominicis diebus, the Canon, a collection of benedictiones super populum post communionem, votive masses, various blessings (aque spargendae in domo, aquae exorcizatae ad fulgura, pomorum, arboris) and several formularies of prayers for the dead.

2. Author and date

Stripped of all its superstructures, mostly Gallican, of the 6th-8th centuries, in Reg. 316 there is substantially found again the original sacramentary composed at the end of the 5th century. This is clear from the historical data, from lexical peculiarities and from the content. Certain expressions such as consignatio, to indicate confirmation, the special formula of Communion, the Hane igitur without diesque noxtras, the absence of a determined number of Sundays after the Epiphany and Pentecost, parallel expressions and analogies between the Gelasian and the Rule of St. Benedict (written probably between 535 and 547) are indications of a pre-Gregorian liturgy. Moreover the liturgy of the ancient Gelasian corresponds perfectly to the organization, the discipline and the institutions in force in Rome in the 6th century. Thus the masses of the Lenten scrutinies, the three masses of Holy Thursday, the mass in reconciliatione poenitentia, the missa chrismatis and the missa ad vesperum, reduced to a single one in the time of St. Gregory, the two orations before the secreta (the first suppressed in the 6th century), the five masses of Advent introduced in the second half of the 6th century.

The additions or variations made to the ancient Gelasian are: in book I, the pre-Lent, some retouchings of the penitential rites, the denuntiatio pro scrutinio on the Monday of the third week of Lent, some retouching of the ordo baptismi of the vigil of Pentecost, in the rite of ordinations, where there is a whole series of Gallican rubrics, finally retouchings of the missa chrismalis of Holy Thursday, the ordo for the blessing of the paschal candle and the rite of the dedicatio ecclesiae. In book II, which is the part that has remained purest, the sanctoral is almost intact: only the four feasts of the Virgin and the two feasts of the Holy Cross have been added there. In book III the Canon has been inserted, which is the one reformed by St. Gregory, and some formula of blessing.

These interpolations all have a Gallican character and were made on several occasions. A first revision can be placed around 550, that is, after the arrival in Gaul of the sacramentary. The masses of Advent and the rites of the Minor Orders are from that period. A second revision must have taken place after St. Gregory (590-604) and before Pope Sergius (687-701), when the Canon and the Marian and Cross feasts were introduced. Third revision around 700, barely half a century before Reg. 316 was written.

The Gelasian is a papal sacramentary. A careful examination of the content and of the sources brings its composition to the end of the 6th century. From the Liber Pontificalis (written around 530) it is known that Gelasius (492-96) fecit... sacramentorum praefationes et orationes canto sermone (Lib. Pont., I, p. 255). It is very probably a matter of the systematic collection of liturgical formulas, which Pope Gelasius compiled on the basis of the numerous libelli missarum of the Roman sanctuaries and of the Lateran collections, to which tradition and liturgical history have without lying preserved the name of its author.

3. The "8th-century Gelasians"

Having entered Gaul shortly before the middle of the 6th century (Bourque, cit. in bibl. p. 199), the Gelasian Sacramentary had a great diffusion there, supplanting the books of the old Gallican rite. However the genuine Roman text had to undergo adaptations for the French Churches. Around 750, probably at the impulse of King Pepin, a syncretistic sacramentary was drawn up, which took the Gelasian as its basis, but with the addition of elements drawn from the Gregorian, already penetrated into France, and from other local sacramentaries. To this composite type of sacramentary liturgists usually give, after Bishop, the name of "8th-century Gelasians"; others prefer the designation "old Gelasians" for the ancient ones and "late Gelasians" for this new type which continued to remain and to be reproduced even after the 8th century.

To the Gelasian type is connected the Missale Francorum (cod. Reg. Vat. 257), written near Liège at the end of the 7th century, edited by Tomasi (Opera, VI, pp. 341-68) and by Muratori (Lit. Rom. vet., II, pp. 661-758). Wilmart considers it of the beginning of the 8th century. Initially (6th century) it was a pontifical with the rite of ordinations; later some formularies of masses and the pre-Gregorian Canon were added. Gallican elements are not lacking either.

national library, ms. lat. 12048, composed in 770-80, unpublished. Comparative study by P. de Puniet in Ephem. lit. 1934-38. 2) Angoulême, National Library, ms. lat. 816, late 8th or early 9th century, ed. P. Cagin, Angoulême 1920; analytical index by F. Combaluzier, in Ephem. lit., suppl. to fasc. III, 1952. 3) St. Gall, ms. 348, around 800-20, ed. C. Mohlberg, Münster in Westphalia 1930. 4) Rheinau, Zurich Library, ms. 30, early 9th century, used by Gerbert, in Monum. vet. lit. alem., I, Sankt Blasien 1779, pp. 362-99. 5) Fulda, 10th century, ed. G. Richter-A. Schönfelder, Fulda 1912. 6) Rossianum, Vatican Library, Ross. lat. 204, 11th century, ed. G. Brinktrine, Freiburg im Breisgau 1930. 7) S. triplex (Gelasian, Gregorian, Ambrosian) (Zurich Library C. 43), ed. Gerbert, op. cit., I, pp. 1-240; analysis and history in DACL. VIII, 233 ff. 8) Sacramentary of Berlin 125 (Phill. 1667), late 8th or early 9th century, unpublished, study by P. de Puniet in Ephem. lit., 43 (1929), pp. 91-1909, 280-303; 46 (1932), pp. 379-95. 9) Palimpsest Sacramentary (Rome, Angelica Library), 8th century, description by C. Mohlberg, Rome 1925. 10) Echternach, Paris, National Library, ms. lat. 9433, late 9th century. 11) Montecassino, ms. 271, dated 760-70. 12) Prague, Chapter Library O. LXXXIII, 8th-9th century, ed. A. Dold-L. Eizenhöfer, Beuron 1949. 3. Studies: E. Bourque (cited above), pp. 171-298; DACL, VI, coll. 747-77; C. Mohlberg, Note liturgiche. Elementi per precisare l'origine del S. Gel. del sec. VIII, in Rend. Pont. Ac. Rom. Arch., 7 (1931), pp. 19-33; id., Note in alcuni S., ibid., 14 (1940), pp. 131-79; B. Capelle, Le pape Géluse et la Messe romaine, in Rev. d'hist. ecclés., 40 (1939), 22-34; A. Chavasse, Les Messes quadragésimales du Gelasien, in Ephem. lit., 63 (1949), pp. 257-75.

IV. GREGORIAN SACRAMENTARY

1. Contents

It varies according to the different manuscripts, but substantially it has this arrangement: the temporal and sanctoral cycles are fused together and begin with Christmas Eve. There follow the feasts of St. Stephen, St. John, the Holy Innocents, the Epiphany, the Purification (Feb. 2), the Annunciation (Mar. 25), the Sundays of pre-Lent, those of Lent, Holy Week with certain blessings for the catechumens, six lessons on Holy Saturday and the blessing of the font, the octave of Easter, the greater litanies on Apr. 25, the Ascension, Pentecost with its octave, the four Ember days of the fourth month, the feast of St. John the Baptist, of the Sts. Pie-

Peter and Paul, of St. Lawrence, the Assumption, the Nativity of the Virgin on September 8, the ember days of the seventh month, the four Sundays of Advent with the ember days of the tenth month, prayers of dedication, of ordination, of anniversaries, various prayers and blessings.

2. Author and date

From the 9th century the tradition is constant in holding the Gregorian to be the work of St. Gregory (590-604). This authorship is today universally admitted, after the contrary theses of A. Gevaert and G. Eckhart have been rejected.

The oldest testimony goes back to the end of the 7th century. St. Aldhelm (d. 709), bishop of Sherborne, who lived in Rome from 687 to 701, relates that St. Gregory placed in the Canon the names of St. Agatha and St. Lucy side by side (De laud. virg., 42: PL 39, 142). The archbishop of York, Egbert, is even more explicit when in a writing of 735-36 he attributes to St. Gregory the composition of an antiphonary and a missal (PL 89, 441), which he had seen at St. Peter's. The testimonies of the following centuries are abundant.

Internal criticism confirms these data, now established in history. The date of Easter on April 3 and of Pentecost on May 22, and the general arrangement of the calendar year in the Gregorian, ensure that the Sacramentary was composed for 595. In that year Gregory gathered in synod 23 bishops and 35 presbyters of the urban tituli in which important liturgical reforms had been carried out.

3. Character

A simple comparison between the Gelasian and the Gregorian shows that the reform, while remaining on a perfectly Roman line, is profound and complete. It was not limited to the formal part of the missal, but extended to the schemas of the formularies and to the substance of the formularies themselves. Probably, like Gelasius, the Pope had the libelli missarum of the various tituli collected and worked on these. One of the main concerns was to abbreviate and to make something practical. For this reason he inserted the sanctoral into the temporal, noticeably reduced the number of prefaces (267 in the Leonine, 54 in the Gelasian, 25 in the Paduensis, 10 in the Hadrianum), and of the festal embolisms of the Canon. St. Gregory did not hesitate to depart even from tradition, when the aim he wished to achieve with his arrangement required it. Thus in the series of the communion of Lent, he replaced five antiphons taken from the psalms with as many taken from the Gospel of the day, in order to underline the baptismal idea.

To the orations super populum he gave the form of ordinary collects, modifying the original character of blessing.

The feasts common to the Gelasian and the Gregorian are 35, those proper to the Gregorian 28, of which about ten are the eponyms of the Roman tituli; 15 feasts of the Gelasian are not found in the Gregorian.

The work of St. Gregory was therefore not a pure compilation. But the ideas and the style of the great reformer are found throughout the whole, as also in certain formularies, for example in the mass of St. Agatha, of the Friday of Passiontide, in the preface of Christmas, in the communicantes of the Ascension and of the Epiphany.

4. The Hadrianum

In the 7th-8th century the original Gregorian (A) underwent additions, shortenings and rehandlings. Toward the end of the 8th century Charlemagne (v.), with the intention of introducing the Roman liturgy throughout the Empire, asked Pope Adrian (771-95) for a sacramentary to serve as a norm. The Pope, between 784 and 791, sent him the Liber sacramentorum a sancto dispositus praedecestore nostro deifluo Gregorio papa. The codex remained as the typical exemplar in the imperial Library of Aachen and numerous copies were made of it (B). The new Hadriano-Gregorian, or more simply Frankish, Sacramentary was introduced into Gaul, gradually replacing the pre-existing Gelasian and Gregorian sacramentaries. But the newcomer did not fully correspond to Gallican needs. Therefore the imperial adviser Alcuin (d. 804) extracted from the sacramentaries used until then certain formularies, forming a supplement, which he added to the manuscript that had come from Rome. To the supplement he prefixed a prologue (the «praefatiuncula»: Hucusque) in which Alcuin set out the criteria used in the compilation. The Frankish sacramentary furnished with the Alcuinian supplement spread rapidly (C); however some Churches, for greater convenience, composed their own supplements (D), while others, to make the book still more practical, began to write the formularies in the margin or to insert them in the text (E) until in the 10th century the insertion was complete, and the sacramentary with the supplement formed an organic whole (F).

At this point (it had appeared sporadically already from the 7th century) this last type became established. To the formulas for the use of the celebrant are added the readings and the chants, forming a composite book that combines completeness with practicality. It marks the decline, then the definitive end of the sacramentary, to leave the way free, in the 12th century, for the plenary missal, forerunner of our Missale romanum (v. MESSALE). - See plate XCVI.

Adrianum without supplement: Cambrai, ms. 164 (9th cent.), ed. H. Lietzmann (Münster in W. 1928). C) Adrianum with regular supplement; Vat. Ottob. 313, Reg. 337 (9th cent.), served as the basis for the editions of Muratori and Wilson; Paris, Bibliothèque nationale 12050 (9th cent.), ed. U. Ménard, Paris 1641, reproduced in PL 78, 26-240. Cologne, Cathedral Library 137 (11th cent.), ed. G. Pamelius, Cologne 1571. D) Adrianum with irregular supplement: Mainz, Seminary Library (9th cent.), ed. A. Dold, Beuron 1919. Verona, Cathedral Library, cod. LXXXVI (81) and XCI (86) (9th cent.). E) Adrianum with incipient fusion; Florence, Biblioteca nazionale XXXVI, 13 (10th cent.), Ivrea, Cathedral Library, 86 (St. Warmond, end of 10th cent.), cf. L. Magnani, Le miniature del s. d'Ivrea, Vatican City 1934. Biblioteca Vaticana 3806 (10th cent.), ed. A. Rocca, 1596. F) Adrianum with complete fusion: Biblioteca Vaticana 4770 (10th-11th cent.), Montecassino, cod. 339 (11th cent.), Biblioteca Vaticana 3548 (11th cent.), paired with the S. Fuldense (10th cent.), Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana D. 84 (10th cent.); it is a plenary missal. 3. Studies. Bourque (cited above), pp. 299-304; F. Cabrol, Grégorien (Sacramentaire), in DACL. VI, coll. 1776-96 (with extensive bibliography up to 1925); H. Lietzmann, Auf dem Wege zum Urgregorianum, in Jahrb. für Liturgiewissenschaft, 9 (1929), pp. 132-38; H. Schmidt, De lectionibus variantibus in formulis identicis Sacramentariorum Leoniani, Gelasiani et Gregoriani, in Sacris erudiri, 4 (1932), pp. 103-73.

Annibale Bugnini