Why would that aspect of it have changed? Being a Vigil, it's transitional into the Feast itself. During the Easter Vigil itself, there is no Mass. Now, Easter Mass typically follows close behind it, if the Vigil itself is celebrated near midnight, but they're distinct things. Even in the pre-Pius XII version, the Vigil itself was held on Holy Saturday morning, followed by the Mass of the Resurrection ... whereupon Trads everywhere greet one another with "Happy Easter" on Holy Saturday, as if Christ had risen on the Second Day, rather than the Third. Timing of the Easter Vigil was in fact a nonsensical abuse and the Pius XII move back to its proper time was quite welcome. In fact, if you look at his text introducing the changes, he's referring almost exclusively to the time (and the accompying fasting changes that are necessary if you're going to have evening Masses now, e.g. for Holy Thurday). I'm not convinced that Pius XII had much of anything to do with the reform of the Rite, since he suffered a catastrophic health collapse in 1954, and many of those around him testified that he was not running things from about that time until the end of his pontificate. It would be as if Bergoglio in his current state of health were behind some major "reform" of the NO, where you'd know that he had precious little to do with it, given that he can barely function.
Topic: Theology of the reformed Easter Vigil (Read 2786 times)