The 1974 notification Conferentium episcopalium, for instance, stated that whenever a vernacular translation of the new missal went into effect, from that point on “Mass, whether in Latin or the vernacular, may be celebrated lawfully only according to the rite of the Roman Missal promulgated 3 April 1969 by authority of Pope Paul VI.” The sole exception: Elderly priests who could not learn the new missal could request permission to continue using the old one, but only for private Masses. “Ordinaries cannot grant this permission for the celebration of Mass with a congregation.”

On the “never abrogated” topic in general, John Huels has noted that, “While the Missal itself was not explicitly abrogated, the freedom to use [italicized in the original] it was expressly abrogated,” by Paul VI’s apostolic constitution, Missale Romanum” (John Huels, “Reconciling the Old with the New: Canonical Questions on Summorum Pontificum,” The Jurist 69 (2008): 92–113, at 94). If a longer citation may be permitted, he went on to say: “If the freedom to use the 1962 Missal had not been abrogated, there would have been no need for the individual privileges (variously called a permission, faculty, or indult) permitting its use by those requesting it; any priest could have lawfully used it all along. There would also have been no need for this motu proprio. Thus, Pope Benedict must have something unique in mind when he says that the 1962 Missal was never abrogated. Either he means it was not explicitly [italicized in the original] abrogated by name; or perhaps he is saying that the 1962 Missal has continuously been used by those who were exceptionally so permitted and, in this sense, was never completely abrogated in practice. However, this is not the technical meaning of the term ‘abrogated’ in canon law” (p. 95).