The Church’s authority to “revive” (i.e., re-establish on the calendar) feasts that were previously suppressed follows from a basic principle: the liturgy is ordered by the Church’s hierarchy, and changes to the liturgical calendar belong to specific offices in accord with canon law. In practice, revival is reserved to the supreme ecclesiastical authority for feasts of the universal Church, while diocesan bishops may provide certain local feast days within limits. 1 2 3 4

The key principle: liturgical authority belongs to the Church, not individuals

Canon law grounds liturgical order in the Church’s governance:

• Only the Church’s authority orders and guides the sacred liturgy—specifically the Apostolic See and (according to law) the diocesan bishop. 2
• When celebrating sacraments, the liturgical books approved by competent authority must be observed faithfully, and no one may “add, omit, or alter anything” on their own authority. 3
• Even when the Code does not define particular rites, liturgical law in force generally remains in force unless contrary to the canons—supporting continuity and lawful procedure rather than ad hoc changes. 5

So, if someone “revives” a suppressed feast by simply deciding to celebrate it again, that is not the correct category. The Church requires the feast to be restored by the competent authority, with proper liturgical legislation/book approval. 2 3 5

What canon law says about establishing, transferring, and suppressing feast days

The most direct canon is Canon 1244:

• “It is only for the supreme ecclesiastical authority to establish, transfer, and suppress feast days and days of penance common to the universal Church” (without prejudice to another canon not needed here). 1
• Diocesan bishops may decree special feast days or penance days for their dioceses or places, but only in individual instances. 1

Why this answers “revive suppressed feasts”

If a feast was suppressed for the universal Church, re-establishing it amounts to “establishing” a feast day again—precisely the act reserved to the supreme ecclesiastical authority under Canon 1244 §1. 1

If a feast was suppressed universally but a community wants something similar locally, a diocesan bishop’s power (Canon 1244 §2) is not a “revival of the universal feast” but the erection of a new diocesan/local feast day (an individual instance). 1

Who is competent, and how does authority work in practice?

Canon 838 clarifies the allocation of liturgical authority:

• The Apostolic See orders the liturgy of the universal Church and publishes liturgical books, exercises vigilance that regulations are observed, etc. 2
• The diocesan bishop lays down binding liturgical regulations within competence. 2
• Episcopal conferences prepare vernacular versions and approve/publish books for regions after confirmation by the Apostolic See (relevant when liturgical texts are involved). 2

Therefore: the legal “seat” for calendar-level decisions about universal feast days is the Apostolic See (as supreme ecclesiastical authority), while bishops can legislate within their diocesan competence. 1 2

Examples of revival by competent authority (not ad hoc)

A direct example is in Mysterii Paschalis (1969), where Pope Paul VI recalls earlier papal decisions to revive liturgical celebrations:

• It notes that Pius XII had decided to revive, in the Church of the West, during Paschal Night, a solemn vigil (a revival within the liturgical life, connected to Christian initiation and the renewal of covenant). 4

This illustrates the Church’s logic: the liturgical calendar and celebrations can be revived—but through official ecclesiastical decisions by competent authority, not by private initiative. 4 2 3

Limits: what if the faithful (or a parish) want the old feast back?

Private restoration is not permitted

Because liturgical books approved by competent authority must be observed faithfully, a community cannot simply decide to return to a former suppressed feast by its own authority. 3

Popular piety may keep memory, but must not create confusion with liturgy

The Directory on Popular Piety and the Liturgy gives a caution relevant to any “revival” happening alongside previous liturgical reasons:

• It instructs that when feasts were transferred, pastors should ensure that the reasons for the transfer are not nullified in pastoral practice; one should celebrate the liturgical feast on the new date while continuing the old date in popular piety. 6
• It warns that practices that ignore this harmony can lead to duplication, confusion, and disorder. 6

So, even when a feast is not on the liturgical calendar as before, the faithful may have legitimate devotion—but that devotion must respect liturgical norms and not replace or contradict the Church’s regulated celebration. 6 3

Different ways “revival” can occur (and which authority is involved)

“Revive” can mean more than one thing. The Church’s authority differs depending on the mechanism:

Re-establishing the feast in the universal calendar

This corresponds to “establish” under Canon 1244 §1, hence reserved to the supreme ecclesiastical authority for feasts “common to the universal Church.” 1

Creating a local feast for a diocese (a true local “resumption” in practice, but legally a different act)

Canon 1244 §2 allows a diocesan bishop to decree special feast days in individual instances. This is not the same as reinstating a universal feast, but it can produce a local liturgical celebration with parallel pastoral value. 1

Allowing certain commemorations in specific liturgical contexts

A related example (not exactly “revival,” but a legal mechanism for adding honor without restoring a full calendar feast) appears in a CDF note on Cum sanctissima (2020) for the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite:

• It states that an ad libitum commemoration of an occurring saint may be made when the saint appears in a specified proprium or future supplement (citing n. 6 of the Decree). 7

This shows that the Church can regulate ways of honoring saints/feasts beyond the standard universal calendar entry, but only through lawfully specified permissions and norms. 7 2 3

Conclusion

The Church can revive suppressed feasts, but the competence is strictly juridical:

• For feasts common to the universal Church, re-establishing them falls under the “establish” function, which Canon 1244 §1 reserves to the supreme ecclesiastical authority. 1
• The liturgy is ordered by the Apostolic See and, within competence, by the diocesan bishop, and no one may alter liturgical texts or celebrations on their own authority. 2 3
• Pastoral practice must preserve harmony between liturgy and popular devotion, avoiding confusion or duplication when feast dates have been transferred or changed. 6

In short: revival is real and possible, but it must happen through the competent ecclesiastical authorities and approved liturgical norms. 1 2 3 4