The Mass in Slow Motion

The Procession and Entrance Song

I’d like to begin a series on the Mass explaining the meaning and history of what we do each Sunday. It is amazing how little Catholics know about or reflect upon what we do every Sunday. This is an attempt to add insight and understanding to our celebration of the Sacred liturgy.

The Procession and entrance song –  Something very remarkable happens at the beginning of every Mass. It is so normal to us that we hardly think of it. As the priest is ready in the back of Church to begin the Mass the congregation suddenly comes to its feet and sings a hymn of praise as the priest walks down the aisle. What is this? Surely they are not just welcoming “Father Smith” are they? No indeed. The congregation is welcoming Jesus who has taught that when two or three gather in his name that he is there in the midst of them. The priest represents Jesus and acts in the person of Christ. Therefore, through his Holy Orders the priest is configured to Christ and is a sacramental sign of the presence of Jesus. Jesus Christ is walking our aisle and we welcome him with a hymn of praise! It is quite fitting to recognize Christ who, robed in priestly vestments, arrives to minister to us in Word and Sacrament. So, don’t just see “Father Smith” see, rather, Jesus and let him minister to you.

Here is a little historical background to the development of the Entrance procession and music associated with it:

In the earliest days of the Church, and in the small, ruder buildings of the primitive Church under persecution, there could hardly have been much thought or possibility of formal processions. But by the 4thcentury after the persecutions against the Church ended, larger, and even sometimes large ecclesiastical structures arose. The sacristies (the place of preparation for the Clergy et al.) were usually located near the entrance of the buildings. This meant that the procession to the altar was now much longer and thus took on added significance and importance. Such a procession could hardly be conducted in absolute silence. Hence the addition of music was natural. But the organ had not been invented and instruments of any kind were generally not allowed due to their connection with pagan rituals. Music in the early Church was left entirely to the human voice and, hence, singing alone gave color to this entrance procession. The texts for these songs were taken essentially from the psalms. The verses of the psalm selected would be sung antiphonally during the procession to the altar. It often happened that an introductory verse (or antiphon) would be sung by one or a few voices to introduce the psalm. Gradually the Antiphons came to overshadow the psalm itself. The Antiphons became more and more complex and were increasingly given over to be sung by a specially skilled choir called the “schola cantorum” with only the psalm verses being sung by the people. There developed a practice of shortening the psalm to correspond to the arrival of the members of the procession in the sanctuary. Once they were in place the psalmodywas brought to an end with the Gloria Patri (Glory Be). Over time there was a reducing of the Entrance song to the following elements: An antiphon, drawn usually from scripture, only one verse of a psalm, a Glory Be and a repetition of the antiphon. Today there exists the option of: Singing this Entrance Antiphon, singing a hymn appropriate to the Liturgy or the season, or in the absence of song the Entrance Antiphon is used as a spoken or recited text.

The following video gives and example of the sound of the the Entrance antiphon (also called the Introit) as is was sung in the ancient Church and up to about 1965. It is Gregorian Chant and the text is

Gaudeamus Omnes in Dominino. Diem festum celebrantes sub honore Mariae Virginis de cujus solemnitate gaudant angeli et colaudant Filium Dei. Eructavit cor meum verbum bonum, et dico ego opera mea regi. Gloria Patri, et Filio et Spiritui Sancto Sicut erat in principio et nunc et semper, et in saecula saeculorum Amen.

(Let us all rejoice in the Lord, celebrating a feast in honor of the Virgin Mary concerning whose solemnity the angels rejoice and praise the Son of God. Psalm: My heart pours forth a good word and to the King I sepak my work. Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy SPirit. As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen)

Today this form of singing is replaced by an opening hymn in most parishes although the singing of such Introits is still encouraged and permitted.

The Altar is Reverenced

As the Entrance procession draws to its close something rather unusual happens! Upon entering the sanctuary, (the part of the Church where the Altar and Tabernacle are located) the priest and deacon enter the sanctuary and kiss the altar as a sign of reverence and veneration. Many of us who go to Mass all the time may hardly notice this gesture. But to someone observing Mass for the first time this gesture may seem quite unusual and raise questions. Why kiss an altar? Where did this gesture come from and what does it mean?

The significance of this kiss has had the following historical development: At first it was intended simply for the altar itself where the Sacrifice of the Lord would occur. Subsequently this idea was enlarged to include the understanding that the altar built of stone represented Christ himself, the rock, the cornerstone. (Cf. 1 Cor. 10:4). Later, as the relics of saints were ordinarily placed within the altar stone, the kiss was also seen as a salutation of the saint and through the saint the whole Church Triumphant.

But why is there a kiss, rather than a bow or some other salutation? The kiss was actually very common in ancient culture. The temple was honored by kissing the threshold. In pagan culture it was common to greet the images of the gods either by kissing it directly or throwing a kiss. Likewise it was not uncommon in the ancient world to kiss the family meal table with a kiss before the meal. Hence it was not surprising to find the practice brought into Christian worship.

Until the 13th century it was customary at Rome to kiss the altar only upon coming in for Mass and departing. However, in the later Middle Ages the kissing of the altar seems to have been multiplied. In the Tridentine Missal the altar was kissed numerous times:

• 1. At the beginning of the Mass
• 2. Any time the priest turned away from the altar, faced the people and addressed them. According to one explanation the priest does this on order to confirm his communion with the Church Triumphant in heaven and then turns to greet the Church on earth.
• 3. At the words ex hac altare participatione (Then as we receive from this altar…) in the canon.
• 4. Before the sign of peace. Again an explanation advanced is that the priest kisses the altar here in order to receive the kiss from Christ (whom the altar represents)  in order to pass it on to others.
• 5. Upon leaving the altar at the end of the Mass.

Today the altar is kissed only twice in conformity with the earlier tradition.

The design of  Altars has varied over the years. The current widespread practice of celebrating Mass facing the people has tended to require a rather simple table form to modern altars. But Mass facing the people is a rather recent phenomenon. Until very recently Mass was everywhere celebrated with the priest and people facing the same direction toward the East or at least toward  the Crucifix and tabernacle (if there was one on the altar). This meant that altar design could be much more elaborate. Altars tended to back up onto the apse wall and had a vertical dimension that was often quite splendid and decorative. (See photo at left).  The Second Vatican Council directed that new altars should be free standing, that is they should not be attached to the wall, allowing the priest to walk around all four sides. Tragically this led some to conclude that many beautiful older altars should be removed. This was not however what the Council directed;  only that new altars should not be attached to the wall. While this tends to imply a simpler design, it is not necessarily required that this be so since it is still possible to place ornate designs and an elaborate reredos in the area behind the altar if this is desired.

The following video shows the temporary transformation of a simple table altar to an altar more suited for the celebration of the Latin Mass in the extraordinary form. It is quite a dramatic transformation but done quite swiftly.

The Incensing of the Altar

Holy Smoke! What is all that incense about? The reaction is rather mixed when it comes to incense. So love it and some love to hate it. But the bottom line about incense is that it is a symbol of prayer. As the incense gently rises it images our prayers going up to God. As the incense slowly settles in is a fragrant symbol for God’s graces. And don’t fan that incense away! Take a breath! It is holy smoke. Like holy water that literally showers a blessing on us, so too does the fragrant incense, blessed by the priest bring us God’s blessings as we breathe it in. Perhaps it is a blessing best received in moderation but it is a blessing.

So here at the beginning of the Mass the priest may incense the Altar. Why? What is the history of this action and and what is our intention in using incense?

In the first place, the use of Incense is another way of showing prayerful reverence to the altar which is a symbol for Christ. This is done by circling the altar and swinging a smoking censor of fragrant incense . In addition to the altar, the Cross is also incensed at this time. The use of incense does not take place at every Mass. It is an option and although it may be used at the discretion of the celebrant, it tends to be reserved to special occasions and to more solemn feasts of the Church. The General Instruction indicates it is to be used “when the occasion warrants it.” In the old Latin Mass the use of incense was restricted to solemn and sung Masses. Today there are few restrictions on its use but ironically it is seen less often. Its use then, tends to be oriented to a heightening of the solemnity. As with so many externals, vestments, flowers, music, and the like, there is intended an aid to the senses in grasping the greatness of the feast. Incense lends itself especially to religious symbolism for prayer and such imagery is used in the 141st psalm: Let my prayers rise like incense before you O Lord...(Vs. 2). See also Rev. 8:4 “The smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended before God from the hand of the Angel.” It is therefore a sign of our prayers rising to God and His blessings descending upon us. The incensing prayer to be recited by the priest at the incensing of the gifts that was recited by the priest in the Extraordinary Form of the Latin Mass beautifully describes this image: “May this incense, blessed by You, ascend to You O Lord, and many your mercy descend upon us.” In addition, its burning symbolizes the burning zeal which should consume the Christian, the sweet fragrance is the odor of Christian virtue. Here too the prayers of the priest in the Solemn Latin Mass as he hands the thurible to the Deacon at the Offertory includes this image: May the Lord enkindle in us the fire of His love and the flame of everlasting charity. Amen.

The use of incense in the culture of the early Church was common in wealthier homes as its perfume was in demand. It was a strong part of burial traditions and it was a major component in both the Jewish Temple and in pagan worship. It was probably its connection with pagan worship that limited it use in early Church. However, with the virtual disappearance of paganism after the 4th century, incense found its way gradually into the Liturgy being carried especially in processions. By the 9th century incense was in use at least at the beginning of the Mass and by the 11th century there is explicit mention of the incensing of the altar. During the Middle Ages the use of incense at other points during the Mass was introduced. Likewise the objects of incense became more numerous. Now persons, relics, and the oblations were incensed as well as the altar. The Tridentine Missal prescribed that when incensed was used it was to be used at the following times:

• 1. The altar, cross, and celebrant are incensed at the beginning.
• 2. The Gospel is incensed just prior to its being sung.
• 3. At the offertory, the oblations, the altar, the cross, the priest, the deacon, subdeacon, choir, and the assembly are all incensed in this order.
• 4. The host and chalice after each consecration are incensed as they are held aloft.

Today, this “schedule” of incensations is retained with the exception of the incensation of the celebrant at the beginning. This is now done only at the offertory.

After incensing the altar the celebrant goes immediately to the chair.

The Sign of the Cross

Now comes a gesture that is very familiar to Catholics but to the unitiated may also seem odd, (a kind of shoeing away of flies or something) and words are said that are grammatically incorrect! I’ll explain that later.

Standing at the Chair the celebrant begins the Mass with the sign of the cross. This gesture is perhaps one of the most recognizably Catholic traditions in any ecumenical gathering. You can always tell the Catholics immediately by this instinctive gesture deeply ingrained in any Catholic.

The origin of this gesture goes back to the earliest days of Christianity where it seems to have been more of sign of the cross traced on one’s forehead. Tertullian is said to have remarked in the early 3rd Century, “We Christians wear out our forehead with the sign of the cross!” This practice probably developed from Scriptural allusions to the Tau or “T” marked on the forehead of those to be saved from destruction (Ex. 17:9-14; Ez 9:4, Revelation 7:3, 9:4, 14:1). Over the years of the first centuries the practice seems to have developed of adding fingers to this tracing action. Two fingers representing the two natures of Christ were added as an act of faith against the monophysite heresy. Further developments took place to enhance the gesture. Now, by the fourth century three fingers (thumb, index and middle finger) are used to represent the Trinity and the other two fingers are folded back to the palm to represent the two natures of Christ. With all these symbolisms going on with the blessing hand it next developed that a larger area than the forehead was crossed. Now the downward motion tended to extend to the breast and eventually the whole chest was signed by reaching out to the shoulders. By the 9th Century the way to make the sign of the cross was pretty well spelled out by legislation from Rome and the Popes. As you can see the sign of the Cross became more than a way to bless oneself, it also became a statement of faith in the Trinity and in the two natures of Christ.

In the western Church as the monophysite controversy died down the Trinitarian faith has tended to take precedence and came to be spelled out with these words: “In the Name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” to which all respond, “Amen.” Now have you noticed that this is not gramatically correct? Grammatically one should say, “In the names of the Father….Son and Holy Spirit.” But here too, going back to Scripture itself, the grammatical “error” bespeaks the truth that there is only ONE God, therefore one name, but there are three Persons in the One God.” So aren’t we clever here!

So the sign of the cross is an act of and a sign of Faith in the Triune God. It thus gives significance to all that is to follow in the Mass, placing it within the context of Faith. The Sign of the Cross is also a recollection of the Crucifixion. In this regard the Mass, as a making present of the once-for-all sacrifice of the Lord Jesus on Calvary, is especially suited to being opened by the sign of the cross. Lastly, and by extension, it is a visible movement into the Holy by all present since it puts demons to flight. Many of the Fathers of the Church speak of this aspect of the Sign of the Cross. For example, St. Cyril states that at the sign of the cross “demons tremble and angels recognize it. Thus the former are put to flight, while the latter gather about it as something pertaining to themselves.” (From his Catechetical Lectures). Historically the number of the signs of the cross throughout the Mass increased especially during the gothic period of the middle ages. The Old Latin Mass has a large number of signs of the cross. In the New Mass there has been the reduction of this number to two, one at the beginning the other at the end.

Now the last thing we should say about all this is that to make the sign of the cross is a bold gesture! In effect we are glorying in the Cross of Christ. We are not ashamed of it. Is this true for you? Many today are actually embarrassed by the cross. How is this you say? Well notice how they protest any time the Church articulates the demands of the Gospel. For example that we should turn away from sin, that babies  should be brought to birth and never aborted, that Euthanasia is wrong and that we cannot simply do whatever we please and call it good. Many immediately protest and speak of the need for greater compassion and less strict norms etc. And many Catholics, far from defending the demands of the Gospel refuse to hold up the cross for others to see. Instead, embarrassed by the demands of the cross they refuse to affirm its power and its demands. Be careful before you make that sign of the cross! It means something. It means that we cannot simply refuse the demands of being a disciple but rather glory in the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 Eastern Rite Catholics make the sign of the cross a little differently than Roman Catholics as depicted in this video:

The Greeting by the Celebrant

We continue our look at the Mass with the greeting of the celebrant. Earlier instalments of this series can be seen in posts below.

The celebrant standing at the Chair greets the assembled people in one of the following ways:

• 1.  The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.
• 2.  The grace and peace of God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ be with you.
• 3.  The Lord be with you.
• 4.  Peace be with you. (Only Bishops may use this greeting)

In each case the people respond: “And also with you.”

Here again, we hear it all so often we miss the point! But through his greeting the priest declares to the assembled community that the Lord is present! The greeting and the congregation’s response expresses the mystery of the gathered Church and that Christ Jesus is among us. For, as the Lord says in the Scripture, “Where two or three are gathered in my Name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matt 18:20) The greeting ritual is both theological and descriptive. Something powerful and wonderful has just been told to us. Therefore, informal additions by the clergy such as “Good Morning everyone” are not called for or helpful here. To announce to us that the Lord and his grace are both present and available to us is far better than some colloquial form of hello, remarks about the weather or the progress of the local sports team. We need to grasp the significance of what is taking place to see how inappropriate such light banter is at this moment. We are not just in any gathering, we are with the Lord and He with us and his grace and mercy are available to us! Indeed and in fact the Lord is present and ministering to us. The ritual does allow for the celebrant to add some introductory remarks after the greeting: After the greeting of the people, the priest…may very briefly introduce the faithful to the Mass of the day. (GIRM # 50) Notice the purpose of such remarks is to draw the faithful more fully into the feast they are celebrating or perhaps to announce the basic theme of the readings that are about to be read, or perhaps the mystery of the Eucharist that is about to unfold. Here again light banter about extraneous matters seems out of place. Rather, that the Lord is present and he is ministering to us and unfolding for us the mystery of his Grace is the most basic tone of this moment of greeting.

History – Originally it seems the Roman rite began simply with the readings. This was probably reflective of the very small congregations which gathered in homes or other places. There was little need for a formal greeting. However, as the Church emerged from persecution and communities became larger and processions longer, a greeting of some kind became more of a necessity. Augustine mentions in the City of God 22:8 “Salutavi populum” (I greeted the people) as he began Mass. Likewise, in solemn functions of the 7th century the first thing that happened when the Pope reached the Altar was a series of greetings for the co-liturgists (much as in our present day sign of peace). But in the Middle Ages the greetings came more and more to be paired down while rites such as prayers at the foot of the altar and other introductory rites were added. In the Tridentine Liturgy, the greeting was a simple Dominus vobiscum (the Lord be with you) but it was not proclaimed to the congregation until after the Kyrie and Gloria and immediately before the opening prayer. Today as is seen above, the greeting is restored but is still brief in nature. Further, the greetings include a richer drawing from the written greetings of Paul in the New Testament as well as the greeting by Jesus to his Apostles after his resurrection, “Peace be with you.”

The Penitential Rite

The Penitential Rite in general – Let us recall that we have just acknowledged and celebrated the presence of Christ among us. First we welcomed him as he walked the aisle of our Church, represented by the Priest Celebrant. The altar, another sign and symbol of Christ was then reverenced. Coming to the chair, a symbol of a share in the teaching and governing authority of Christ, the priest  then announced the presence of Christ among us in the liturgical greeting.  Now, in the Bible whenever there was a direct experience of God, there was almost always an experience of unworthiness and even a falling to the ground! Isaiah lamented his sinfulness and needed to be reassured by the angel (Is 6:5). Ezekiel fell to his face before God (Ez. 2:1). Daniel experienced anguish and terror (Dan 7:15). Job was silenced before God and repented (42:6); John the Apostle fell to his face before the glorified and ascended Jesus (Rev 1:17). Further the Book of Hebrews says that we must strive for the holiness without which none shall see the Lord (Heb 12:14). Thus is makes sense that, acknowledging the presence of the Lord and longing to see him more clearly,  we ought to repent of our sins and seek the Lord’s mercy. How can we, who enter the presence of the Holy not see more clearly our sins and desire to be free of them?

Thus, The priest invites them (the congregation) to take part in the penitential rite which the entire community carries out through a communal confession and which the priest’s absolution brings to an end. He uses these or similar words, Let us acknowledge our sins that we may worthily celebrate these sacred mysteries. The priest and people recall their sins and repent of them in silence. The penitential rite may take a number of different forms.

• A confiteor (I confess) recited by the priest and people together followed by the absolution
• A rarely used Miserere consisting of the following formula:
  • Lord We have sinned against you. Lord Have Mercy.
  • Lord Have Mercy
  • Lord show us your mercy and love.
  • And grant us your salvation.
• A Kyrie Litany. There are numerous forms for this given in the sacramentary which are not themselves seen as an exhaustive list since, once again, the directive indicates that “the priest (or some other suitable minister) makes the following or other invocations. Here is one sample:
  • You raise the dead to life in the Spirit. Lord have mercy.
  • You bring pardon and peace to the sinner. Christ have mercy.
  • You bring light to those in darkness. Lord have mercy.

History of the Penitential Rite. It is a rather surprising fact to many that, strictly speaking, there is no history to the penitential rite in the Mass prior to Vatican II. The inclusion of the penitential rite as a communal gesture is an innovation in the new order of the mass. “But Father, but Father!” you might say, “I remember the old Mass and hearing the priest and servers recite the confiteor and strike their chest three times!” True there was a confiteor in the Tridentine Liturgy but this was a private devotional gesture between the priest and the servers done at the foot of the altar which was actually prior to the actual beginning of Mass. Thus the introduction of this element into the Mass itself and as a communal gesture is new. Some have suggested a historical precedent may be found in Protestantism. Communal confession of sins was first introduced into protestant communion services of the 16th century. Others However, see its roots in the Eastern liturgies wherein a penitential act at the beginning of Mass is almost universal and very ancient in origin. The form of this practice varied however and was sometimes linked to the incensing at the beginning of mass. Even as early as the Didache (written ca 90-100 AD) a confession of sins is prescribed before the Sunday celebration of the Eucharist: “On the Lord’s day gather together, break bread and give thanks after confessing your transgressions so that your sacrifice may be pure. Let no one who has a quarrel with his neighbor join you until he is reconciled, lest your sacrifice defiled. For this is that which was proclaimed by the Lord, “In every place and time let there be offered to Me a clean Sacrifice’” Elements of the Penitential rite (the confiteor and the kyrie) do have a history and their histories will be dealt with separately below.

The History of the Confiteor (I Confess). The history of this part of the Mass is somewhat convoluted. The remote history may be found in the Western Liturgy  in the silent worship which the Pope made when he first came to the altar. Later (by the 7thcentury) this silent prayer became more elaborate with the directive being that the celebrant lie prostrate before the altar. Likewise, the nature of the prayer came to be more specified. The celebrant was directed to pour forth prayers for himself of for the sins of the people. The general term for this was the apologiae and may be called the forerunner of the confiteor. Thus a penitential theme is introduced. By the 11th century the Confiteor had developed as a specific dialogue between the Celebrant and those immediately around him. Thus he not only acknowledges his sinfulness before God but also before those who serve him and asks their mediation on his behalf. The actual text of the confiteor, was taken from those used in sacramental confession. The oldest confiteor formulas were simple and brief. For example here is an 11th Century version from Cluny, “I confess to God and before all His saints and you, Father, that I have sinned in thought word and deed through my fault. I ask you to pray for me. They confessed before God and the heavenly Church (i.e. the saints) as well as asking intercession from the Church on earth. In the Gothic period there grew a practice of listing some of the Saints by name. This is evident in the confiteor used in the Tridentine Mass. The shorter, simpler version of the confiteor now prescribed is closer to the oldest formulas although the angels and the Mother of God are still specifically mentioned in addition to the general phrase “all the saints.” Both versions can be compared HERE. One other difference today from the Tridentine Mass is that there is no longer a separate recitation of the confiteor for priest and the servers. Now the communal aspect of the act is stressed even while the personal aspect is retained: I confess.

The History of the Kyrie is much more complicated and will be covered in a  separate post.

Sometimes in the Extraordinary Form of the Mass there is a second recitation of the  Confiteor just prior to communion that may even be sung.

The Kyrie (Lord Have Mercy)

Now if I were to ask you if the Kyrie Eleison (Translated “Lord Have Mercy”) were part of the Penitential Rite most likely you’d say “Of course it is.” After all we are asking God’s mercy. But interestingly enough it serves more as an acclamation of praise both historically and liturgically as we shall see.

The History of the Kyrie – the Kyrie is often thought of as a part of the penitential rite but this is not necessarily the case. The General instruction describes it this way: “After the penitential act the Kyrie Eleison is begun unless it has already been used in the penitential act. It is a song in which the faithful acclaim the Lord and ask for his mercy therefore it is usually to be sung by all, that is by the congregation as well as the schola or cantor.” Hence the Kyrie may or may not be a part of the penitential rite. As we shall see in its origins, the Kyrie is historically more a hymn of praise than a penitential act.

The early history may be seen in pagan antiquity. There was the  custom of imploring the help of the gods with the phrase “eleison.” Likewise, the phrase was used in reference to the emperor. A singer would announce some praise of the emperor and the people would respond with this or another cry of homage. However, there are also scriptural roots in the Old Testament. For example, in the Greek translation of the O.T. (the Septuagint)  there are many phrases particularly in the psalms such as, “eleison me Kyrie.” (Have mercy on me Lord) (Psalm 6:2 inter al.) Also in the New Testament there are many places where the phrase is used: Son of David have mercy on us. This phrase is indeed quite common in the N.T. Nevertheless Kyrie litanies where not common in the Church until after the Age of Constantine (4th century) likely due to their connections with paganism. After the persecutions ended and paganism move to the background it was deemed appropriate to use these forms of courtly honor to honor the Lord.

The entrance of the Kyrie into widespread use in the Church may be described as follows. The practice was first reported in use in  Jerusalem wherein the phrase “Kyrie Eleison” was sung in response to a series of petitions sung by a deacon. This practice was noted both within Mass (where it took place after the Gospel) and outside of Mass (for example at Vespers). The practice was brought back to the West probably by returning pilgrims and it was considered widely appealing. Eventually its  use came to be quite universal in the Church. In some areas it was located at the beginning of Mass while in other areas it had its place after the Gospel. Eventually it came to be generally located at the beginning of mass. It was specifically introduced into the Mass by Pope Gelasius in the later half of the 5th century.  The form of the Kyrie was retained as a litany of praise and supplication before God and these prayers grew in elaborateness. You can see the Kyrie Litany of Gelasius HERE .

In a desire to simplify and shorten the liturgy, Pope Gregory the Great in the early 7th century removed the prayers and kept only responses Kyrie eleison and Christe eleison. First this was done only on ordinary days, leaving the prayers on more solemn feast. Later their use faded completely leaving only the responses. The Kyrie responses were said at first only by the people. But gradually the priest and the people began to alternate, responding back and forth with a nine-fold response (KKK,CCC,KKK). Gradually the singing of these became more elaborate and tended to be done by a choir of trained singers. In the Tridentine mass the Kyrie was recited by the priest alternating with the servers in the ninefold Kyrie. In solemn Mass it was also sung by the Choir or schola. But it was NOT considered part of the penitential rite which had take place at the foot of the Altar and was separated from the penitential rite by several things: the ascent of the altar steps, kissing the altar, possibly incensing it, making the sing of cross to begin Mass, reading the Introit (entrance song) and only then reciting the Kyrie.

Today it is returned to having the priest and people alternate in what is usually a sixfold Kyrie. There is also the option of introducing the Kyrie into the penitential rite in which case it is returned to its older litany-like form with certain petitions and/or praises attached to each Kyrie and Christe.

Complicated enough?? The Kyrie has somewhat of a dual personality. It may serve either as a penitential rite or a hymn of praise. However, even when it is used as a penitential act, we still give glory to God on account of his great mercy. The history of the Kyrie Litany gives rise to an appreciation of  the source of our practice today of the intercessory prayers after the Creed (sometimes called the “prayer of the faithful”). In fact, it should be remembered that the response “Kyrie Eleison” may in fact be made instead of “Lord hear our prayer.” More will be said of this later on.

Here is a polyphonic Kyrie, a Kyrie in Gregorian Chant, and a Modern Kyrie litany:

The Gloria

So we have gathered, acknowledged God’s presence in several ways (hymn of praise, incense, veneration of the altar and the greeting of the celebrant). We have examined our consciences and asked God to give us pure hearts and minds to praise him. At most Sunday Masses what comes next is a kind of outburst of praise called the Gloria (Glory to God in the highest!) Knowing and experiencing God’s presence and mercy brings forth joy and a desire to praise him. And so we sing:

Glory to God in the highest, and peace to his people on earth. Lord God, heavenly King,  almighty God and Father, we worship you, we give you thanks, we praise you for your glory. Lord Jesus Christ, only Son of the Father, Lord God, Lamb of God, you take away the sin of the world:  have mercy on us; you are seated at the right hand of the Father:  receive our prayer. For you alone are the Holy One,  you alone are the Lord, You alone are the Most High,  Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit,  in the glory of God the Father.  Amen.

The Gloria is a very old and venerable hymn sung by which the Church. It is sung by the congregation, or by the congregation alternately with the choir. If it is not sung it is to be recited by all in unison or alternately. It is sung on Sundays outside the Advent and Lenten seasons, as well as on solemnities and feasts and at special, more solemn celebrations. The text of the Gloria echoes the song of the angels at the Nativity. Further it praises and invokes both the Father and Son and concludes with a brief doxology to the Trinity.

History – The Gloria was not created originally for the Mass. It is and heirloom from the treasure of ancient church hymns. Indeed it is a precious remnant of a literature now mostly lost but once certainly very rich. These hymns imitated and borrowed from biblical themes. Indeed they may even be said to take after the tradition established by Mary who proclaimed her Magnificat by borrowing heavily from the biblical themes with which she was so familiar. So too Zacharia in his Benedictus. Few of these early hymns of the Church remain however. One other hymn which does remain is the Te Deum and it, unlike the Gloria has retained its existence apart from the Mass. The roots of the Gloria may be found as early as the 4th Century where a text very close to our present text is found. Likewise another text from the 7th Century is also very close. Again, this hymn was not originally part of the Mass but was probably sung as the Te Deum is today, as a thanksgiving hymn for feasts and celebration. It was sometimes included in the Mass as a hymn as early as the 6th Century and perhaps even earlier by some accounts. But definitely by the 6th Century Pope Symmachus permitted its use on Sundays and feasts of martyrs but only at a mass presided over by a Bishop. Pope Gregory allowed its use at the Easter Mass even if the Celebrant be only a priest. It was not until the 11th Century that the distinction allowing it only for Bishop’s masses was dropped. This was due to continual requests that it be allowed. Today, the Gloria is said at all masses of a festive character outside of penitential seasons.

A full analysis of the hymn could be a course in itself. However suffice it to say that it is understood to be a hymn of praise which is almost ecstatic in quality. This is not as well brought out in the present English translation for use in this country. However, a look at the Latin text (see appendix 2) is helpful. Lastly, it is well that the Gloria be sung if possible. Reciting the Gloria is comes in a very poor second. It is kind of like reciting the National anthem. We just don’t do this because the very festivity and honor of the song requires it be sung. The Gloria is like this. If at all possible it should therefore be sung. However this is not always possible and it ends up being recited. It should at least be recited in a vibrant and pious manner to avoid the possibility of the text becoming wooden and dull.

In the end, these introductory rites of procession, penance and praise all serve to establish the fact that we are in the presence of God. Casting aside our sin and sorrow we enter God’s presence with reverence, confidence and joy. Next we will pause to pray before we sit to attentively listen to God speak to us.

The following video shows the opening the movent of Vivaldi’s Gloria in D Major. Church music for the Baroque era became very elaborate with the use of orchestras and large choirs. Sometimes the Gloria and Credo of a Mass could last 20 Minutes or more. Also, the text of the Mass had become so well known and popular that it was not uncommon for settings of the Mass to set by the great composers as concert pieces sung outside of Mass. This was an era when the Church influenced the world much more so than today. Enjoy this festive opening movement of the Gloria in D by Vivaldi, a Catholic priest and composer from the early 18th Century.

The Opening Prayer

Now the priest says something odd: “Let us Pray!”  Haven’t we already been praying this whole time? Yes perhaps. But as we shall see this prayer was (and still is) traditionally called the “Collect.” It was thus named since its purpose was to collect all these opening prayers (and whatever other personal prayers we brought)  into one summary prayer. So, yes we have been praying and praising but the invitation still stands: “Let us pray!” ….Well? Don’t just stand there!….Pray! It is too common that we Catholics often don’t take the words of our liturgy seriously. They are just ritual words that don’t really register with us any longer. But listen to what the celebrant said: “Let us pray!” So perhaps we ought to actually bow our heads and pray. The celebrant is supposed to wait for a moment or two of silence but go right into the text. This is a shame. The rubrics clearly direct that we actually pause to pray. So pray, actually pray. The text that follows, said or sung by the celebrant serves to summarize or collect our individual prayers as well as to state or summarize a theme either of the season or the liturgy we have begun. Pray along with the celebrant, pray. 🙂

History. The basic body of the Collects of the Western Church developed and appeared for the first time in Sacramentaries in the time period between the third and sixth Centuries. It was during this time that there was completed the transfer of the Liturgy from Greek to Latin. Prior to this time the formulation of the prayers was left primarily to the celebrant who freely extemporized them usually following a common format. However, this seems to have caused difficulty in many cases especially as the Church spread far and wide. St. Augustine rather humorously remarks that catechumens who might be well educated should not laugh at or mock bishops and priests who might not be so eloquent in the wording of their prayers and might fall into “barbarisms” and “blunders” in their vocal prayers at Mass. Apparently it was not always so clear to the people what they were saying “Amen” to! By the 4th Century there may be found increasing conciliar resolutions that only texts which have been approved should be used at divine services. And so gradually these texts were composed and became increasingly binding upon the celebrant. Feast days, commemoration of the saints, and other celebrations all served as occasions for the composition of new collects. Over the centuries the number of collects within the Mass increased. Sometimes there were three collects to be said. Shortly before the Second Vatican Council the number was once again reduced to only one and this is still the rule today. Thus the opening prayer gains prestige by the fact that there is no second or third round of requests.

The posture of the people during this prayer has changed somewhat over the centuries. Originally they knelt just before the prayer. At the invitation “Let Us Pray” the Deacon or another minister would ask the people to kneel and pause for silent prayer. Presumably however, they stood for the prayer itself. Eventually this kneeling posture was carried into the recitation of the prayer itself. However, by the 4th Century, kneeling for the prayer began to decline. In 325 AD the Council of Nicea directed that this posture was to be replaced by standing during the Easter season out of respect for the risen Lord. This arrangement gradually spread to other Sundays in general, then to feasts, and finally to ordinary days and even to days within penitential seasons. Today the posture of standing for the prayer is maintained.

The term “collect” comes more literally from the Latin word “collecta” which refers to a people gathered or assembled for some purpose (in this case worship). Historically in Roman Church, the term referred especially to groups gathered for penitential processions. However, in time, due especially to Gallican influences, the term came to be understood as referring to the opening prayer which was a “gathering up” or a “summing up” of all the prayers of the people. The very function of summing up the prevents the contents of the prayer from being anything more than general in nature. The important matter here is that the community appears before God and by virtue of the priest, acting as its “mouthpiece” humbly and reverently directs its petitions toward God.

The Character of the opening prayer is one of petition. It can also be an act of adoration and thanksgiving. The prayers of the Roman Church are rather terse: brief and to the point. This shows a Roman preference for conciseness and clarity. This does not mean that they lack beauty. In fact they are widely regarded as masterworks of Latin Literature. However, they get right to the point. It is unfortunate that the beauty, clarity and brilliance of the Latin Collects has not been well represented by the present English translations. Help may be on the way in the new translations soon to come out. There are many qualities of the Roman Collect which could be mentioned but especially worth noting is the Latin love of antithesis. For example the following themes are often played against one another.

1. Human struggle and divine help.
2. Passing deeds or realities and eternal truths.
3. Earthly misery and eternal blessedness.

The People assent to the pray with their “Amen!”

So, when the celebrant says “Let us Pray….” We ought to pray. In the years ahead it is hope the new translations will unlock the hidden beauty of these beautiful collects for the average church-goer. Presently much is lost in the current translation and only available to those who read Latin. Here is an example of a Latin Collect and a rather literal translation of it:

Deus, qui fidelium mentes unius efficis voluntatis, da nobis id amare, quod praecipis, id desiderare, quod promittis, ut inter mundanas varietates,  ibi nostra fixa sint corda, ubi vera sunt gaudia.

O God who make the minds of the faithful to be of one accord, grant to your people to love what you command and to desire what you promise that, among the changes of this world, our hearts may be fixed there where true joys are.

The Congregation is Seated

After the opening prayer the congregation is seated for the first time. Sitting is the posture of learning. We have already remarked above on the commentary on the presider’s chair how in the ancient world teachers, including Jesus sat to teach. It is also true that their students also sat to learn.  Hence the congregation now sits in order to be instructed in God’s Word. Now the picture at the right shows a mighty strange looking congregation but it’s OK to have a little fun here.

The following video describes not  only the sitting posture but also standing and kneeling.

The Liturgy of the Word

Every now and then it will be claimed that the Catholic Church is not a “Bible Believing Church.” Further, that Catholics do not know the Bible. Both claims register false when we look at the Mass. The Mass is filled with Scripture and Catholics know a lot more Scripture than they think they do. We may not be the sort to quote Chapter and Verse numbers but we know the scriptures. If I start to tell the story of Zaccheaus climbing the tree, or of Lazarus being raised from the dead, or of the woman at the well, or the storm at sea, or begin to quote from the Epistles, Catholics know these passages IF they go to Mass regularly. Over the period of three years the whole of the New Testament is read in the Catholic Liturgy and most of the significant passages of the Old Testament. We read A LOT of Scripture in every Mass and Catholics know more of the Bible than they think they do.

Now that the Congregation is seated, it is time to listen attenively to God’s Word. We do this in a part of the Mass called the Liturgy of the Word which in the current form of the Mass consists of and Old Testament Reading, a Psalm, a reading from a New Testament Epistle, and a reading from the Gospels. Then follows the Homily, the Creed and the prayer repsonse. In effect, readings from scripture and the chants between the readings form the main part of the liturgy of the word. The homily, profession of faith, and general intercessions or prayer of the  faithful develop and complete it. In the readings, explained by the homily God speaks to his people of redemption and salvation and nourishes their spirit; Christ is present among the faithful through his word. Through the chants the people make God’s word their own and express their adherence to it through the profession of faith. Finally, moved by this word, they pray in the general intercessions for the needs of the Church and for the world’s salvation.(cf G.I.R.M. # 55)

History of the liturgy of the word. The beginnings of this service go back the synagogue and it therefore pre-christian in origin. The Apostles attended the synagogue and were thus familiar with it. The synagogue was distinct from the Temple. The Temple was in Jerusalem and it was there alone that blood sacrifices were offered. However, after the exile especially The Jews undertook the practice of meeting in their local areas to read scripture and praise the Lord. The gatherings (or synagogues) varied in size but tended to be small groups. In fact, as we know from Scripture, Jesus himself faithfully attended the synagogue and his Apostles continued to follow his example. We read in Acts 2:46, “Every day they devoted themselves to meeting together in the temple area and breaking bread in their homes.“

The Jewish synagogue service of the First Century may be described as follows. On appointed days, above all on the Sabbath, the community was  assembled. The Assembly was opened with the Shema which served as a kind of profession of faith. The Text of the Shema begins as thus: “Hear O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord alone! Therefore you shall love the Lord, your God with all your heart, and with all your soul and with all your strength…” (Deuteronomy 6:4) There was next a congregational prayer spoken by one of the members of the group appointed by the leader of the synagogue.    Passages from Holy Writ were then sung. There were two readings. The first was from the Law (Torah- the first Five books of the Bible) which was read according to a prescribed cycle of three years. Each days readings were thus prescribed much as they are today in our Lectionary. Thus, in a three-year period the whole of the Torah was read. The Second reading was from the Prophets (Nebiim). This reading was selected at will. At least by New Testament times, there seems to have been a homily also included after the readings. This is indicated in scripture (See Luke 4:16-20; Acts 12:15ff). The whole assembly concluded with the blessing of a priest (Levite) if one was present otherwise with a prayer.

The very early Christians continued to attend the Saturday Synagogue service. They celebrated the Eucharist elsewhere, usually in a home or “house-church” on Sundays. Rather quickly however, there was a falling out with the Jews who came to regard the “Nazarenes” as divisive and hence sought to expel them. Upon “leaving” Judaism, the Christians took the Synagogue service with them and combined it with the celebration of the Eucharist. Thus, we have the beginnings of the form of the mass we recognize today.

The Scripture readings in general. In the readings the treasures of the Bible are opened to the people; this is the table of God’s word. Reading the scriptures is traditionally considered a ministerial, not a presidential function. It is desirable that the gospel be read by a deacon or, in his absence, by a priest other than the one presiding; the other readings are proclaimed by a reader from among the laity. In the absence of a deacon or another priest, the celebrant reads the gospel.  The reading of the gospel is done with great reverence; it is distinguished from the other readings by special marks of honor. A special minister is appointed to proclaim it, preparing himself by a blessing or prayer. By standing to hear the reading and by their acclamations the people recognize and acknowledge that Christ is present and speaking to them. Marks of reverence are also given to the book of gospels itself. Among these are the kissing of the book, the signing of the page with the sign of the cross, and the use of incense. Likewise,  there may also be a special procession to the “Place of the Gospel” as well as the use of torch bearers to stand near the book during its proclamation. Not to be overlooked is the possibility of singing the Gospel where the skill of the priest or deacon permits it.

History of the cycle of readings. In the choice and number of readings in the liturgy a great variety has prevailed and still prevails. The different rites of the Church still have in use different cycles or readings. This is true as well with the revived Traditional Latin Mass which follows its own schedule of readings distinct from the new Lectionary. It is interesting to note however, that many protestant churches have been impressed with the new lectionary of the Catholic Church and make use of its schedule in their own services. One general rule seems to have always been that there be at least two readings one of which would always be from the Gospels. Likewise, the readings were always biblical. The arrangement of the synagogue service, as has been noted was taken into the Christian Church. It was adapted however. Now a Gospel reading was gradually paired with an Old Testament passage. However, at more festive times of the year such as Eastertide there seems to have been an increasing inclination to replace the Old Testament reading with one from the New Testament  other than the Gospel. This began to affect masses at other times of the year as well. However, at first there seems to have been merely the addition of a third reading resulting in a schema similar to the one we have today. However, for some reason this number dropped to two leaving the general schema as a reading from a New Testament Epistle and a Gospel reading. This remained the case until the liturgical changes of the Second Vatican Council which restored the three-reading schema. According to the testimony of the Fathers of the Church, the service of readings stressed reading the books of Holy Scripture straight through in the form of a “Lectio continua.”(That is to say, the passage this week picks up right where we left off last week.) However, strict adherence to this setup was not exacting. Just as is the case today, this system was often broken into by feast days whose occasion demanded a special and appropriate passage. These feast days tended to multiply and thus break up the continuous reading. Likewise, liturgical seasons played a role in shaping the lectio continua. Thus, through the centuries this strict lectio continua was eroded and became less recognizable although it still existed to some extent. Today, it has been restored to some extent. This is particularly true with regard to the Gospels. However, the first reading is chosen to back the theme of the Gospel and hence its selection is “arbitrary.” The epistles  have returned to a rather strict lectio continua both on Sundays and weekdays.

Today, the lectionary today provides for a three year cycle for the Sunday readings and a two year cycle for weekdays. The first reading comes from the Old Testament and is chosen to parallel the Gospel passage. The second reading is taken from the epistles of the New Testament and  sometimes from the book of Revelation. The Third reading of course is
taken from the Gospels. Each cycle relies especially on one of the Gospels. Cycle A relies on Matthew. Cycle B on Mark. Cycle C on Luke. All three of the cycles also draw on St. John’s Gospel. The weekdays draw from all the Gospels and Books of the Bible giving special emphasis to passages not covered on Sundays. The lectionary presents a broad sweep of the Scriptures. The Sundays readings alone present to the Catholic over 7000 verses of scripture over three years. Nearly the whole of the New Testament is covered in the Lectionary as well as the most significant portions of the Old Testament.

In the next post. We’ll talk a little more about the repsonsorial psalm.

This video depicts the Gospel being Chanted. It is rare today in most parishes to hear this but on Solemn Feasts it is appropriate if the Deacon is able to chant well.

Responsorial Psalm

We have already discussed how the Old Testament Reading, the Epistle and Gospel came to be in their place and how the number and variety of those readings varied over the years and even today in the various Rites and Forms of the Liturgy. Now we consider the Responsorial Psalm which has a history of its own.

In a way, if you were to walk into Mass for the first time you might find the presence of a sung psalm a bit odd. Here we are reading the Word of God and suddenly another song breaks out! What is going on here. Is it another reading, is it a prayer. What is its purpose? Well let us read and see.

The responsorial psalm or optional  “gradual”  comes after the first reading. The psalm is an integral part of the liturgy of the word and is ordinarily taken from the lectionary, since these texts are directly related to and depend upon the respective readings. The cantor of the psalm sings the verse at the lectern or other suitable place, while the people remain seated and listen. Ordinarily the congregation takes part by singing the response, unless the psalm
is sung straight through without response. If sung, the following texts may be chosen:

1. the psalm in the lectionary,
2. The Gradual in the Roman Gradual,
3. or the Antiphon or the psalm in the Simple Gradual

History – In the early Church there was a pattern to the psalm response much like our own today. That is to say, there was an antiphon or verse sung by all followed by extended verses of a particular psalm chosen for the day with the antiphon intervening every so often by way of a response. Many of the Fathers of the Church make mention of this format. St. Augustine makes explicit mention of the practice in his sermons; likewise, St. John Chrysostom and St. Leo the Great among others. In the early days, the psalm texts were sung in their entirety. This was true even of the lengthier psalms. (Today, there are usually selected  verses of the psalm used. It is rare that a whole psalm be sung unless it be brief in itself). The responsorial psalm was seen as an integral part of the liturgy with its own significance. This is in contrast to some of the other singing we have previously discussed such as the Entrance Antiphon (Introit) which was sung originally to cover a movement or fill a space of time and set a tone. In this way it existed for a purpose beyond itself. Here the chant has an importance in itself and does not exist to cover motion etc.  It was seen as a moment of pious meditation, a lyrical rejoicing after the word of  God had been received into the heart of the believer. Originally the deacon was the singer of this psalm and versicle. Later the task moved to the subdeacon & later still to the schola Cantorum (Choir).

It is interesting to note that when the singer mounted the lectern (or ambo, or pulpit) he did not go all the way to the top of the platform but rather stood on one of the steps just below the platform.This was once again due to the reverence given the proclamation of the Gospel which alone was proclaimed from the top platform. Since the singer stood on a step (“gradus“, in Latin) the psalm came to be known as a “Graduale.”

Over time the responsorial psalm began to shrink in size and lose its responsorial character. This seems to have happened for two reasons.

First the music for these chants began to become more and more elaborate. We saw this tendency with the Entrance Antiphon. The simple forms slowly gave way to other, more elaborate forms.  Thus, the antiphon which was intended for the people became more ornate and difficult and thus slipped from their grasp. Its execution fell more frequently to the schola. Likewise, as the antiphon became more elaborate it began to overshadow the verses of the psalm themselves which were sheered away slowly. Eventually only one verse remained along with the antiphon. This remained its form until the recent changes in the Mass at Vatican II.

A second factor seems to have been the dropping of the first reading from the Old Testament in the Sixth Century. By this time however the responsorial character of the psalm was well on its way out. Thus this effect may not be direct but may help explain that other factors were at work in the background.

Today the original responsorial format has been reintroduced as an option. This therefore returns to the more ancient practice and also makes the response once again a song or response of the assembly. However, the option still exists to use a Gradual in the from the Graduale Romanum which retains the  format of the Traditional Latin Mass instead of a responsorial format. This would generally have to be sung by a trained schola.

Pastoral Reflections – It is true to say that the Psalm is “another reading” in the sense that the psalm, like the other readings comes from the scriptures, the written Word of God. However, a caution is in order. The psalm should also be seen to enhance the prayer and praise that is integral to the Liturgy of the Word. Thus, it is not merely a “listening event” but also involves prayer and praise in the truest sense of the term.  The psalms were (and still are) the prayer book of the Jews and it is our prayer book as well. Hence, the psalm is prayer and not only “another reading.”

The title “responsorial psalm” is not given because there is a response or antiphon for the people to sing. The “response” referred to is the reflection of the assembly on the proclamation of the reading which just took place. The psalm is usually related in some direct way to the theme of the Old Testament reading (and by that very fact to the Gospel which is to come). Thus, the people “respond” to the Word of God, make it their own and proclaim it prayerfully. By its nature, the psalm is a song and should thus be sung if at all possible; especially on Sunday.

The option of using the gradual from the Graduale Romanum should not be forgotten. There is once again the need to remember that a glorious heritage of Gregorian Chants exists which belongs to faithful by their right. It is sad if this heritage is never heard or sampled. However, it will be admitted that these Chants are difficult indeed and require a skilled choir. This and the fact that they are  in Latin can make them less accessible. This usually means that the Graduals are seldom if ever done in the average parish. Again, a sad loss that a little extra training might overcome.

OK, so bottom line is once again the same: YOU’RE SUPPOSED TO PRAY. The Liturgy is not just some ritual to get through, it is a time of prayer. The Psalm response or gradule is meant to invite you into a prayerful response. Are you praying? Next time you’re at Mass, don’t miss the main point here.

The following video is of a Gradual. In the place of the more common “Responsorial Psalm” it is always permited to sing the “Gradual” which is an elaborate antiphon and one verse of the psalm. The one in this video is from the Vigil Mass for Christmas here is the text in Latin and an English Translation:

Hodie scietis, quia veniet Dominus, et salvabit nos: et mane videbitis gloriam eius. Qui regis Israel, intende: qui deducis velut ovem Ioseph: qui sedes super Cherubim, appare coram Ephraim, Beniamin, et Manasse.

Today you will know that the Lord is coming to save us: and tomorrow you shall see his glory. Thou that rulest Israel, hear us: thou that leadest Joseph like a flock, thou that sittest upon the Cherubim – appear Thou to Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasse.

Other Considerations about the Liturgy of the Word

In the last post in this series we focused on the Responsorial Psalm. This post will consider several matters related to the Liturgy of the Word.

The Place for the proclamation of the readings might seem obvious to you: the pulpit! But actually the place where it was proclaimed has wandered about as we shall see.  The place for the proclamation of the readings in the very earliest days of the Church is not specified. However, by the third and certainly the fourth centuries there is growing mention of an elevated place where the reader stood. Presumably this was so that the reader could more easily be heard and seen. Whether or not there was a desk or book stand upon the platform varied.  Later on however this developed into the common form of an ambo or pulpit as we know it today and as a general rule it was placed in the most convenient and suitable spot between the sanctuary and the nave or body of the church. It was from this spot that the readings were proclaimed for almost a thousand years.

However the practice began to end especially by the 10th century. The exact reason for this is somewhat obscure. However, the following factors seem to have played a role.

1. The was a long tradition of having the altar face east. Thus the priest, who faced the altar and the people who also faced the altar all faced east. There developed however a notion that the north was the region of the devil. (Some of the imagery evoked here is that the North at the time had a predominance of paganism. Likewise an imagery of the “coldness of unbelief” implied the North…and so forth).  Hence the Word of God was directed against the North. This meant that the deacon would face to his left (i.e. to the north) when singing the gospel. In low mass the priest did not leave the altar but moved to the left  (i.e. the north side of the altar) and angled a little bit to the left (to the north) and read the scriptures.
2. There was also the influence of the Low Mass sine populo (without a congregation) which was becoming more common as monasteries proliferated. In these Masses, the celebrant did not leave the altar and thus read the gospel at the altar. This practice eventually seems to have been taken over into masses with a congregation as well.
3. Nevertheless, all of this meant that the readings were no longer proclaimed by facing the people directly.  Thus the use of the lectern or ambo fades out in the early middle ages. Increasingly, these  were used more and more merely for preaching and so they are seen to move further out in to the nave.
4. Likewise, Latin became less and less understood by the people. This meant that the proclamation of the readings, still in Latin  was seen less and less as a vital communication and now was more of a ritual. Thus,  the readings were often read again in the vernacular at the beginning of the homily. Since the assembly was no longer vitally involved with the hearing of the proclaimed word in Latin, facing them was not seen as a central concern. Thus the raised pulpit or stand as decreased in importance.
5. One last factor is the emergence of an “epistle side.” At first both the Gospel and Epistle were read on one side. However, later on it became more common to give the Gospel special dignity and this led to its place of proclamation being considered special. The epistle ended up being proclaimed to other side of the altar or sanctuary (i.e. the right side) out of reverence for the Gospel.

Today the readings are returned to the ambo, or lectern (also called a pulpit. Of this lectern, the General instructions specify the following: “The dignity of the word of God requires that the church have a place that is suitable for the proclamation of the word and toward which the attention of the whole congregation of the faithful naturally turns during the Liturgy of the Word. It is appropriate that this place be ordinarily a stationary ambo and not simply a movable lectern. The ambo must be located in keeping with the design of each church in such a way that the ordained ministers and lectors may be clearly seen and heard by the faithful. From the ambo only the readings, the responsorial Psalm, and the Easter Proclamation (Exsultet) are to be proclaimed; it may be used also for giving the homily and for announcing the intentions of the Prayer of the Faithful. The dignity of the ambo requires that only a minister of the word should go up to it.” (GIRM 309)

The Lector. According to the Fathers of the Church a special reader was appointed distinct from the celebrant of the Mass. By the second century the position of lector was seen as a special position. It will be recalled the special training that would be necessary for the lector in an age where far fewer were able to read. Further, reading ancient manuscripts was a lot harder since modern punctuation was not yet in use. You’ve got to really know what you’re doing when there are no periods, commas,  quotation marks and the like! It is interesting to note that young boys were often used for this office. In many places they lived in special communities or schools and  received special training. It was a common sentiment that the innocence of youth was well suited to the proclamation of God’s word.  Nevertheless, the Gospel, due to its special prominence was still proclaimed by someone in higher orders. Over time however the reading of the epistle began to fall more and more to the sub-deacon during a high mass. In low mass the Epistle continued to be proclaimed by someone other than the celebrant. Nevertheless, over time this task transferred to the celebrant at low mass although it was still  done by the subdeacon at high mass. Today, the readings, except the Gospel have once again been returned to the laity. The General Instruction has the following to say about the reader, By tradition, the function of proclaiming the readings is ministerial, not presidential. The readings, therefore, should be proclaimed by a lector, (and the Gospel by a deacon or, in his absence, a priest other than the celebrant). In the absence of an instituted lector, other laypersons may be commissioned to proclaim the readings from Sacred Scripture. They should be truly suited to perform this function and should receive careful preparation, so that the faithful by listening to the readings from the sacred texts may develop in their hearts a warm and living love for Sacred Scripture (GIRM 59)

Pastoral Note: Are you listening? We are supposed to listen attentively to the Word of God as it is proclaimed! Our attention spans today are very poor however and it is easy for the mind to wander. Nevertheless, pay attention!. God is speaking when the Word is proclaimed! It is obvious too that Lectors and Deacons require special training and preparation so as to procalim well. After all, God is speaking through them! For those who read: If God is using you to speak, you had better prayerfully prepare. FOr those who listen: Are you listening? God is speaking.

The following Video is from the Byzantine Liturgy, the Epistle is Chanted in Aramaic. In the ancient world, prior to all these microphones, Singing was a way to get the word out. Singing carried better and farther. In the Roman Liturgy it is rare to hear the first two readings chanted thought they can. In the Latin Mass, in the solemn high form it is still directed that the subdeacon should chant the epistle. I couldn’t fine a good video of the epistle being chanted in the Roman rite (old or new) so I post this example from the Byazantine liturgy.

The Homily

The Homily – So now comes the part of the Mass that is often the most loved and the most hated moment. Preaching consistently well can prove to be a challenge for priests (and deacons) who often live very busy lives and are called to preach all week long at weekday masses, funerals and weddings, in addition to being thoroughly prepared to deliver “a barn-burner” every weekend. No excuses here, just explanations. The homily is obviously a critical moment in the Mass and there are high expectations  that the people of God will be edified and instructed. Sadly, Catholic priests do not have the reputation of being great preachers. We often think we are better than our people think we are. 🙂  One of the chief reasons people say they leave the Church is uninspired preaching compared to the relatively inspired and interesting preaching found in many non-Catholic denominations. There is work to do on improving our preaching to be sure but DON’T leave the Blessed Sacrament to go an sit in a “Word Church!” Even if the preaching is entertaining and informative it just isn’t worth the price of leaving behind Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament.   (Also, good preaching can be over-rated. Paul, according to his own words was not a great preacher (1 Cor. 2:1; 2 Cor. 11:5;  Acts 20:7ff) and yet he was the greatest evangelist the Church has known).

So, What is a Homily? Years ago we just called it a “sermon.” Yet, in recent decades the Church has preferred the term “Homily.” This is probably due to the communal nature that the ancient word homily evokes. Homily comes from the Middle English omelie, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin homilia, from Late Greek homilein, and emphasizes a more interpersonal “conversation”, or “discourse” The Greek work homilein means to consort with or to address a kindred or related people. The root word homos meaning “same” is included in the word homily. Hence, this is more than an impersonal address to crowd of people only vaguely known (i.e. a sermon or lecture). Rather, this is a family conversation, a conversation or address to kindred spirits who share much in common (at least we hope!)

History – This is a pre-Christian element in the Liturgy. It was part of the Jewish synagogue service.  It is recorded in scripture that Jesus Himself preached in the synagogue (cf. Luke 4:16-31) Likewise Paul makes use of the synagogue homily to proclaim Christ (e.g. Acts 13:14ff). The early Christians brought the synagogue service into the Mass and thus the homily was tied to the reading of the scriptures. The preaching of a homily was the particular duty of the Bishop but priests were also allowed to preach. In the fourth century in the east, it was the custom, if several priests were present for all of them to preach in turn and then, finally the Bishop (Whew!).  After the fall of Arius (A third Century priest-heretic who denied the divinity of Christ and widely disseminated his views leading countless others into error) priests were forbidden to preach in Alexandria and North Africa. Likewise, in Rome they were also forbidden. This restriction was variously applied and enforced in different areas. Perhaps it should be stated that  the priests of this time were not always the most learned of men. The seminary system as we know it today did not exist and there would be concerns  about the orthodoxy of the sermon as well as its effective delivery. In general then, preaching at Mass seems to have declined after the problems of the third century but it would not be fair to say that it disappeared entirely. This is especially true when we consider that in many of the well established areas of North Africa and Italy there was a bishop present in even the smaller towns.

By the beginning of the Middle Ages there was a strong return to preaching of the Word of God. However, the character and liturgical role was changing. It was modeled more on sermons outside of Mass. There was the rise of the mendicant preaching orders (eg. Franciscans and Dominicans) at this time and they preached outside of the liturgy in town squares and meetings. This form of preaching began to enter the churches and influenced the nature and content of the Homily which became less and less a textual explanation and applications of the readings and  more and more was replaced by a catechetical format in which and an exposition of the Creed, the Our Father and the Ten Commandments was often the focus. This practiced continued to be the norm as a general rule.

The present Instructions emphasize that the homily is a part of the Mass itself and seems to nod to both traditions above. Namely, the homily is not merely to be an explanation of the readings but also should explain the mysteries of faith related to the readings and the liturgy of the day applying them especially to the norms of Christian life (cf. Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy # 52.)

Norms- The homily should develop some point of the readings or of another text from the ordinary or from the proper of the Mass of the day, and take into account the mystery being celebrated and the needs proper to the listeners. The Homily is required on Sundays and holy days of obligation at all Masses that are celebrated with a congregation; it may not be omitted without a serious reason. It is recommended on other days, especially on the weekdays of Advent, Lent, and the Easter season, as well as on other feasts and occasions when the people come to church in large numbers. The homily should ordinarily be given by the priest celebrant.

The homilist must be an ordained member of the clergy. A deacon, a priest, or a bishop may preach. This is not merely a question of being learned, for many members of the laity are quite learned in theological matters. Rather, as Catholics we are convinced that  the sacrament of Holy Orders confers a unique charism and grace which empowers the priest to speak for God in a supernatural manner. The Third Instruction On the Correct Implementation of the Constitution on the SacredLiturgy has the following to say: “…the Purpose of the homily is to explain the readings and make them relevant for the present day. This is the task of the priest. and the faithful should not add comments or engage in dialogue or anything similar during the homily.”(Liturgicae instaurationes # 3, 2.)

Finally we might be end with St. Paul’s Instruction to Timothy regarding the preaching and teaching task of the clergy: Loquare quae decet sanam doctrinam (speak that which befits sound doctrine).

One of our Greatest Catholic Preachers was Bishop Fulton J. Sheen. Here he gives the homily on Matthew 6.

The Creed

If an outsider knowing nothing of Catholics were to walk in during the creed. He might think we are pretty smart. After All we say some pretty sophisticated stuff: Begotten not made, one in being with the Father and so on... We can sound pretty smart. But truthbe told there is often a lot of day dreaming going on during the Creed and many a Catholic would be hard pressed to say what the phrase above really means. But we ought to shake off the daydreams and pay attention to what we are doing. We are confessing our faith, a faith that many died for. The creed stands at the center of the Liturgy and fundamentally declares: I believe what we are celebrating here. I believe what we have just heard proclaimed in the readings and the homily. I believe in God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I believe what God has done for me and that it is possible for me to be saved, sanctified, and share in God’s glory. I standing here declare that I believe these things which we declare and celebrate.

The history of the Nicene Creeditself is a bit complex. The basic outline of the creed as we know it today was given at the Council of Nicea(325 AD). This does not exactly coincide with our present Credo. The text we have today was actually formally approved by the Council of Chalcedon(451 AD With one exception: the word, “filioque” which was added by the Council of Toledo in 589. The Eastern Church never accepted the insertion of this word ). Until this time there were slightly different versions in existence. With the approval of Chalcedon, the one version that we have today gained wide acceptance and use. Hence the creed at mass is a summary of faith expressed by the Councils of Nicaea (325) and of Constantinople (381) as ratified by the Council of Chalcedon (451).

The use of the creed was originally associated primarily with baptismal liturgies. At first it was in the form of questions. Later the whole creed was memorized and recited just before baptism. (One vestige of this is that the Creed is recited (at least in the Latin) in the first person singular: Credo (I believe)). It entered the Mass first in the East in the early 6th Century at least indirectly due to difficulties with heresies. It was ordered recited at every liturgy by the Timotheus, Patriarch of Constantinople between 511 and 517. This example was copied everywhere in the East.

Its entrance into the western Church came through Spain which was strongly influenced by Byzantium. It was recited just before the Our Father so that, before the Body and Blood of the Lord were received, the hearts of all might be purified by faith. Thus, with the Our Father, it was considered a prayer of preparation for communion. By the 8th Century is appeared in the Gallican (French) liturgy. Once again, a struggle against heresy seems to have been behind its adoption. Charlemagne obtained permission form Pope Leo III and introduced the Creed into the Mass at his palace and, largely through its influence, its use slowly spread throughout the Carolingian empire. From here it spread to England and Ireland, slowly.

Still, by this point it was not in the Liturgy at Rome. This greatly surprised the Emperor Henry II who, in 1064 heard Mass in Rome without the Creed. The Roman priests explained that, since heresy had never been a problem in Rome, it was not necessary to profess the Credo so often. But for some reason, Henry pressured to have the Credo included and Pope Benedict VIII directed it be included but only on Sundays and certain feasts.

The creed was recited by the whole congregation at first. But the text came more and more to be sung. Even so, simple melodies were employed. But they grew in complexity and gradually slipped from the people; especially as polyphony came more into use. Today, the preference is expressed in the norms that the people ordinarily be able to recite the Creed together. But, this does not forbid it’s being sung; even elaborately. However, as we have seen with other texts, a balance between congregational participation and preserving the rich musical heritage of the Church is presumed.

Pastoral Reflections. –

In contrast withthe Apostles’ Creed (in which the faith is asserted simply and forthrightly) the NiceanCreed is a characterized by its theological clarity and richness. It is a theological and polemical profession giving orthodoxy a clear exposition. But it must be recalled that the Creed’s purpose is not so much to oppose heresy as it is to unfold the contents of our faith. Hence the Creed, occurring as it does at the end of the Liturgy of the Word is seen as the joyous “yes” of the congregation to the message they have received. Tapering with this text, a text that martyrs died for is surely uncalled for.

The profession of faith is said by the priest and the people. At the words: “By the power of the Holy Spirit, etc” all bow. On the feasts of the annunciation and Christmas all genuflect. Despite this rather clear directive, this is not often done in the average parish. Once again, it is good to appreciate that the mystery of the incarnation is so wonderful that we, in reverence are to bow. Until the recent past, a genuflection was always called for, now a bow is the directive. Nevertheless, we are to indicate by our posture our awe of the mystery.

The English translation is basically pretty good but there are a few problems. In particular, the English translation seems to imply that Jesus became man only at his birth (which is not what the Latin says). This is no small error in an age which allows abortion. 

Notice the basic structure of the Creed: We believe in One God:

1. The Father Almighty
2. In Jesus Christ
3. In the Holy Spirit
4. The Church.

This structure shows figuratively how the Church under-girds the teaching about the Trinity. The Church is an object of faith! It is through the Church that the faith is given and hence she is the foundation of and the safeguarder of the Faith.

This Video is the Creed sung in Latin (Creed Setting V)

The Prayer of the Faithful

We’ve got to pray! Where would the world be today if the Church wasn’t praying? I don’t know if we’d be here to talk about it. I have always suspected that we have been saved from nuclear annihilation due to the fact that some of the Cloistered Sisters have been praying for us. Our prayers change world history. My parish Church is on a very prominent street in the Nation’s Capital. At one end of the street is the US Capitol, some blocks up East Capitol Street is my parish. And I always tell the parishioners that the most important building on East Capitol Street is NOT the US Capitol, it is Holy Comforter – St. Cyprian Parish. That’s because it is prayer that really changes things. The politicians up the street can only make a good difference if we’ve got their back. So the Church must pray and this brings us to the Prayer of the Faithful.

In the Prayer of the Faithful, the people respond in a certain way to the word of God which they have welcomed in faith and, exercising the office of their baptismal priesthood, offer prayers to God for the salvation of all. It is fitting that such a prayer be included, as a rule, in Masses celebrated with a congregation, so that petitions will be offered for the holy Church, for civil authorities, for those weighed down by various needs, for all men and women, and for the salvation of the whole world. As a rule, the series of intentions is to be

1. For the needs of the Church;
2. For public authorities and the salvation of the whole world;
3. For those burdened by any kind of difficulty;
4. For the local community.

Nevertheless, in a particular celebration, such as Confirmation, Marriage, or a Funeral, the series of intentions may reflect more closely the particular occasion.

It is for the priest celebrant to direct this prayer from the chair. He himself begins it with a brief introduction, by which he invites the faithful to pray, and likewise he concludes it with a prayer. The intentions announced should be sober, be composed freely but prudently, and be succinct, and they should express the prayer of the entire community. (GIRM 69-71)

History. – These prayers were very common in the early Church right about where we have them today. They followed the homily (recall the creed was not said in the earlier days as a rule). All the Fathers of the Church make mention of them. In the beginning this prayer was antiphonally recited by the priest and the assembly.
Over time the deacon took a more prominent role, announcing the whole intention and then the faithful responded; Kyrie eleison (Lord have mercy) or some other acclamation.

The prayers endured up until about the close of the patristic period (ca 9th Century). Their disappearance seems to coincide with  their evolution into a Kyrie Litany and their transfer to the beginning of the Mass. Here they eventually came to be regarded as an unnecessary appendage and were phased out by Pope Gregory (as we saw in an earlier post). In the west they were retained only on Good Friday. In they East they never were dropped. Today they have been restored to their original place in the Mass.

Pastoral reflections – They are called “general intercessions” since they extend beyond  the needs and concerns of the local assembly. Further, please note that they are NOT called the particular intercessions. What sometimes happens in more extemporaneous settings is that certain very particular needs get expressed and the list can become endless. Thus it is not appropriate here to pray, “For the friend of my Uncle Joe Smith’s sister who is recovering from hip surgery and is having a hard time due to her diabetes.” It is more appropriate to pray, “For all who are sick or struggling in at this time.” Keep it general folks, this is not the time for a full medical update on everyone’s cousin or sister.

To call them “prayer of the faithful” has some historical merit since catechumens and others were dismissed before the proclaiming of them. However, today it is more common to call them general intercessions since the whole Mass is really the prayer of the faithful.  The priest, through his opening prayer may link the intercessions to the reading and by his closing prayer may summarize them. This can help to place them in a clear context. To sing the intercessions where possible is a beautiful option       and surely of ancient practice. (Cf Music in Catholic Worship # 74)

The following video demonstrates the Prayer of the Faithful being sung. The text is in French but you’ll get the point. The congregation sings Kyrie Eleison (Lord have Mercy) and the cantors sing the petitions.

The Preparation of the Altar

And now we come to the heart of the matter. As important and precious as the Word of God is, it all points here: the Liturgy of the Eucharist. The Word became Flesh and dwelt among us, and now the Word we have heard, Jesus Christ will become the Flesh and blood we receive. . The weekly (actually daily) celebration of the Eucharist distinguishes Catholicism from  Protestantism, most of whom celebrate the Eucharist once a month or even less. For Catholics, it would be unthinkable to go to Mass on Sunday and not receive Holy Communion. It would be like coming to a dinner party, meeting and greeting all the other guests, exchanging news and then being asked to go home before the meal was ever served. No indeed, Christ gathers us not just to teach us but also to feed us on his Body and Blood, the necessary food without which we perish (cf John 6:53). Jesus has  prepared a table for us in the sight of our enemy the devil, our cup is overflowing (cf Ps 23).

At the Last Supper Christ instituted the paschal sacrifice and meal. In this meal the sacrifice of the cross is continually made present in the Church when the priest, representing Christ, carries out what the Lord did and commanded his disciples to do in his memory. Christ took bread and the cup, gave thanks, broke and gave to his disciples saying, “Take and eat this is my body. Take and drink this is my blood . Do this in memory of me.” The Church has arranged the celebration of the Eucharistic liturgy to correspond to these words actions of Christ:

1. In the preparation of the gifts, bread, wine and water are brought to the altar, the same elements which Christ used.
2. The Eucharistic prayer is the hymn of thanksgiving to God for the whole work of salvation; the offerings become the body and blood of Christ. It echoes the priestly prayer that Jesus spoke at the Last Supper and which John’s Gospel records extensively.
3. The breaking of the bread is a sign of the unity of the faithful, and in communion they receive the Body and Blood of Christ as the apostles did from his hands.

Focus – The focus of the Mass now shifts from the Lectern and the celebrant’s chair to the altar which is about to be prepared. This is a visual indication that a new part of the Mass is about to begin.

Nomenclature – In years past the Liturgy of Eucharistic was call the “Mass of the Faithful.” This was because only the baptized could be present during this part of the Mass. Catechumens could be present up to and including the intercessory prayers but were “dismissed” just before the Liturgy of the Eucharist began. Thus the Liturgy of the was traditionally referred to as the “Mass of the Catechumens.” This was the practice of the early Church and came under a general practice know as the “discipline of the  secret” (disciplina arcanis). In the early days of the Church it was the custom to withhold certain doctrines and aspects of worship from those seeking eventual membership in the church, out of fear that there would be blasphemy, persecution or interruptions in the divine service. The instruction was given before baptism but the full admission to the Mass was reserved. The practice of dismissing catechumens from the Liturgy of the Eucharist passed away during the middle ages but has been partially revived today as a facet of the R.C.I.A.

Preparations – It should be evident that the opening movements of the Liturgy of the Eucharist are essentially a practical matter. The altar is prepared and gifts are brought forward and offered. While there are prayers and some accompanying ritual gestures, it will be noticed that the rite is almost stark in its simplicity and very task oriented. But this does not mean it is without symbolism and as we shall see there has been an instinctive elaboration of the offertory to follow through processions and the like. This expresses a basic religious need, namely that in giving of the essentials of life for a sacrifice, the giver gives himself and so wants to be part of the act of  offering.

First the altar is prepared as the center of the Eucharistic liturgy. The altar is the center of the entire liturgy of the Eucharist. The style of the altar has varied much over the centuries, from elaborate baroque altars (see right) to those that resemble merely simple table (See above, right).  The present day directives indicate that the altar should ideally be freestanding (that is, not anchored up against a wall) and this in such a way that it can be easily circled and that the celebration can be carried on facing the people. This tends to point to a simpler design for the altar at least indirectly. Note that the altar is to be covered with a cloth.  The design and style of this cloth will vary with the design of the altar. The front may or may not be covered but the top surface of the altar is to be covered by at least one cloth. Surely there is a nodding to the meal experience here. We seldom eat a meal, at least formal ones, on a bare table top. The  altar cloths also make allusion to Christ’s burial cloth and thus also points to the sacrificial nature of the Mass. The rubric above seems to imply that the altar has been covered all along. Today the cloth is usually left upon the altar but in the earliest day’s it was more the custom to remove it after Mass. This is still done on Holy Thursday and Good Friday, but as a general rule, the altar stays covered even when it is not in use. The Altar in every Church should ordinarily be a fixed altar located in such a way as to be the focal point on which the whole congregation naturally centers. A fixed altar is one that is immovable.

A pastoral reflection on this would be that the altar, as well as the pulpit represent perpetual values that do not change  and hence their fixed location should reflect that fact. Likewise this will prevent us from the somewhat embarrassing temptation of moving them when they “get in the way” of some assembly or concert in the Church. Not all these norms can be perfectly observed in older Churches which have fixed altars from a previous period which are not free-standing but are attached to the back wall. The practice of placing within the altar, relics of the saints is to be maintained. As seen above, this is a traditional practice and it helps us to appreciate the communion of the saints which is most perfectly experienced in this life during Holy Mass and communion. On the altar are placed the corporal, the purificator, the Chalice, and the sacramentary. Each of these is discussed in turn.

The Corporal is a square linen cloth (usually 12 to 15 inches square) which is placed in the center of the altar along the back edge. It gets its name from the Latin word “Corpus” (Body) since it is upon this cloth that the paten and the chalice containing the Lord’s Body and Blood rest. The purpose of this cloth is to help in catching any small particles of the host or drops of the precious blood. At the end of the mass, the corporal is carefully folded so that any particles will  not fall to the ground or be scattered upon the altar cloth. This is important because, the Lord is contained even in the smallest particles of the sacred species and should be thus treated with the greatest reverence. The corporal normally rests on the altar only during mass and is reverently removed after communion. The picture at right shows a corporal upon which rests a chalice. The square covering over the chalice is called a pall (see below).

The purificator is another piece of cloth, more narrow than the corporal. This gets its name from the Latin verb “purificare” (To purify) since it is used to help cleanse the sacred vessels. Since, once again, we are handling the sacred Body and Blood of  Lord, a special cloth is used which will later be laundered in a special and reverent way. Note how every care is taken to reverently handle even the smallest portions of the sacred species.

The Chalice gets is name from the Latin (via the French) word Calix which means literally, “cup” but in English the word has the special meaning directed toward the special cup in which will be  contained the precious blood. Therefore, as a general rule it is not an everyday cup nor does it merely resemble one. Indeed, all the sacred vessels hold places of honor, especially the chalice and paten since they are used in presenting and consecrating the sacred species. They should be made of solid materials which are considered noble in a particular region. Likewise they should not be easily breakable. Understandably they should also be of a material that in non-absorbent at least  insofar as the inside of the cup. Lastly the sacred vessels  must be blessed by a bishop or a priest. This sets them aside for the Lord and they should never thus be used for profane purposes. Indeed, the form of the vessels should be suited to sacred use and be considered appropriate for divine worship. Use is not to be made of simple baskets or receptacles which are more ordinarily meant for use outside of sacred celebrations.  Simple pottery as a general rule would seem to be inappropriate. Consider that in our region, few people who held a formal dinner would think to set out pottery. This is a not a general practice in our region because it is considered inelegant. So much more so for the Mass, which is no mere cookout. It is also important to distinguish the sacred from the profane. Thus, Chalices that too much resemble secular wine glasses  or cocktail glasses might also need to be discouraged. This is at least the case with the principal vessel. There are judgement calls to be made here and thus the rules are not hard and fast, but open to some interpretation. Nevertheless there should be sensitivity to the congregations expectations and perceptions of what is used. “The Chalice should be covered with a veil, which may always be white.” Once the chalice is brought to the altar and readied for use, it is unveiled of course. The practice of covering the chalice is less often seen today. Nevertheless it is an ancient custom and emerges from reverence due the sacred vessels. Traditionally they were kept covered when not in use.

The Missal is the book containing the formulas and rites for the celebration of Mass together with the text of the ordinary (the texts which remain the same in every Mass) and the propers (the texts which vary with each Mass). It also contains masses for special occasions and various blessings. The Missal in the form we know it today does not contain the readings for the mass of the day. These are contained in a separate book called the lectionary. However, in times past, the readings too we included in the Missal. Generally in English we no longer refer to the book as the “missal” (Although its Latin title still remains “Missale Romanum”) but instead call it the “Sacramentary.” It is book used only by the celebrant. In the Older Tridentine Mass the Book was on the Altar from the beginning of the Mass to the end. But, in the Current liturgy the Altar is not formally “used” until the liturgy of the Eucharist. Hence, the placing of the Missal, which had formerly been at the celebrant’s chair for the Liturgy of the Word is another of showing again this opening of the second major portion of the mass whose focus of action is the Altar. The Missal is the authoritative source for all liturgical actions of the Mass and must be faithfully followed.  This is essential if the Mass is truly to be our source and sign of unity. The Mass belongs to the whole Church and not to an individual priest or congregation. Hence, to alter it is to move against the universal unity of the Church. There are many pastoral problems  that can arise due to tampering with the norms and directives or prayers in the missal.

The following video shows a rarer form of preparing the altar. In this case the altar cloth is brought by the clergy and placed on the altar, followed by two lay women who place the corporal and the purificator. I suspect this has been done following the consecration of the altar by a bishop. However the video may give some glimpse as to how this was done in the early Church when the Altar cloths were not placed on the altar until the offertory.

The Incensation of the Gifts

The Incensation of the gifts and altar. Holy Smoke! Here we go again. Out comes the incense. Actually, most Sundays in most parish you won’t see this. Incense as we have discussed before is used only on more solemn occasions in most parishes. There is no norm restricting it only to more solemn occasions but this does seem to be the case. Recall that incense is a symbol of prayer as we see from the Psalm “Let my prayer rise like incense and the lifting of my hands as an evening offering.” (Psalm 141:2) Incense is also a “burnt offering.”  In the Old Testament many of the animal offerings were either partially or wholly burned up in a fire. In effect, to burn something was to give it to God. The notion may seem primitive, but consider the basic facts. You put something in the fire and it is burned and much of it turns to smoke and rises up, that is goes up, to God. The rising smoke is a symbol of the gift going up to God. In the offertory context of the Mass this aspect of the burnt offering is most evident. Our prayers, and our sacrifices are going up to God as a fragrant offering. So this is holy smoke: a prayer and an offering.

So at this point in the Mass the gifts of the altar and the altar itself may be incensed. Afterward the deacon or other minister may incense the priest and the people.  Here too note something important. As we discussed earlier, we are not only offering bread and wine (and money) we are offering our very selves. Hence it is appropriate that the people be incensed along with the other gifts.

The priest puts some incense into the censer and blesses it silently with the sign of the cross. The altar is incensed in this manner:

1. If the altar is freestanding, the priest incenses it as he walks around it.
2. If the altar is attached to the wall, he incenses while walking first to the right side, then to the left side.
   
3. If there is a cross on the altar or near it,the priest incenses it before he incenses the altar. If the cross is behind the altar, the priest incenses it when he passes in front of it.

History – We have already discussed a good bit of the history of incensation. (HERE) This will largely suffice for here. However, there are some particulars of the incensations of the gifts that remain to be discussed. The History of the incensation of the gifts is first traced outside of the Roman liturgy.  It is most precisely the fruit of the Carolingian liturgy in Germany and France. As late as the 9th century the use of incense  at the offertory was unknown in Rome. There was the practice of burning incense in fixed stands as well as carrying it processions. However there was no elaborate incensing of the gifts such as we know it today. By the 11th century however, the act of incensation was a part of the offertory in Roman usage. With this act came to be elaborate prayers and recitation of psalms. There was a prayer when placing the incense in the thurible, while swinging it and even when handing the thurible back to the deacon or thurifer. In addition to the gifts, the celebrant other concelebrants, the deacon and the people are all incensed as well.

In the Extraordinary form of the Latin Mass the use of incense is restricted to solemn high, and high (sung) Mass. Today the use of incense is always an option. While it is no longer required at a solemn mass, it is also no longer restricted to that form either. In addition, the manner of incensing has been simplified a bit. Some of the more elaborate directives about the manner of swinging it have been dropped. In addition, the prayers are no longer prescribed.

Pastoral implications – The incense as we have seen is a traditional symbol of our prayers and offerings going up to God. Hence, it is a vivid symbol at the time of the offertory. Likewise, the incense being consumed is an allegory of our self-giving to God. The practice of incensing the priest and the people is first of all a sign of respect. It is also a visual image of the fact that we are united to our offering upon the altar. Bread and wine are offered but so are our very lives. The use of incense at this time should not be considered another offering of its own but rather as a compliment to that which has already been offered. And remeber, breathe in that incense it is blessed! It is holy smoke and to breath in some (obviously in moderation) brings blessing!

Here is a video of the gifts and altar being incensed in the Extraordinary Form (Latin) of the Mass:

The Priest Washes His Hands

Washing of the hands.- Didn’t Father wash his hands before Mass? What’ she doing that NOW for? Maybe he sneezed or something! Or maybe he accidentally touched something that was dirty?

Well, in modern times we place a great deal of emphasis on cleanliness. We have bacteria in mind and consider washings necessary to preserve good health and prevent the spread of sickness. But the ancient world knew very little of bacteria and washings to prevent disease. To the ancients washing was for the removal of dirt to be sure but it was also a symbol of purification. So when the priest washes his hands he says rather unusual words: “Lord wash away my iniquity and cleanse me of my sins.” Notice there is nothing in these words about the body at all. The washing of the hands is a symbol of the priest’s need to have his soul cleansed that he may undertake a holy task. He may or may not have dirty hands, but this is really not the essential point which is that he should have a desire for inward purification before daring so holy a task. It is thus an egregious omission to not wash the hands. The washing of the hands should never be omitted for reasons it is now hoped are obvious. The priest washes his hands at the side of the altar saying the prescribed prayer quietly. The minister pours the water.

The historyof this practice in indeed ancient. The Jewish faith prescribed many ritual washings and included were washings that took place at or in proximity to the meal. There was certainly a practical aspect to this washing in earlier days of the Mass. After handling the many gifts brought forward, the priest’s hands would easily be soiled and this washing thus had a practical aspect. However, some dispute this claim since the ritual sometimes took place before the offerings were brought forward. At any rate, today the rite has an essentially symbolic role wherein the priest recalls his need to be cleansed interiorly and that he shares in the need for forgiveness and redemption.

A Sometimes Humorous Look at the Liturgy of the Early Church

As you may know the Catholic Faith was illegal in the Roman Empire prior to 313 AD when the Emperor Constantine issued the Edict of Milan permitting the Christian Faith to publicly flourish. Prior to that time Church buildings as we know them today were rare. Mass was usually celebrated in houses.

Now careful here. These “houses” were usually rather large, with a central courtyard or large room that permitted something a little more formal than Mass “around the dining room table.”  I remember being taught (incorrectly) that these early Masses were informal and emphasized an informal communal quality and were celebrated facing the people. Well that isn’t really true. People didn’t just sit around a table or sit in circle, not at all. They sat or stood formally and everyone faced one direction: East.

In the drawing  above right you can see the layout of an ancient House Church from the excavated 3rd Century House Church at Dura Europos (Syria). Click on the picture for a clearer view. The assembly room is to the left and a priest or bishop is conducting a liturgy facing east at and altar against the east wall. A baptistery is on the right and a deacon is guarding the entrance door. The lonely looking deacon in the back of the assembly hall is there to “preserve good order” as you will read below. The Picture below left shows the baptistery of the Dura Europa House Church.

What is remarkable about these early liturgies is how formal they were even though conducted under less than ideal circumstances. The following text is from the Didiscalia, a document written in about 250 AD. Among other things it gives rather elaborate details about the celebration of the early Catholic Mass in these “House Liturgies.” I would like to print an excerpt here and make my own comments in [RED]. You will find that there are some rather humorous remarks in this ancient text towards the end.

Now, in your gatherings, in the holy Church, convene yourselves modestly in places of the brethren, as you will, in a manner pleasing and ordered with care. [So these “house liturgies were NOT informal Masses. Good order and careful attention to detail was essential].  Let the place of the priests be separated in a part of the house that faces east. [So, even in these early house Masses the sanctuary, the place where the clergy ministered was an area distinct from where the laity gathered. People were not all just gathered around a dining room table.]  In the midst of them is placed the bishop’s chair, and with him let the priests be seated. Likewise, and in another section let the lay men be seated facing east. [Prayer was conducted facing to the east, not facing the people].  For thus it is proper: that the priests sit with the bishop in a part of the house to the east and after them the lay men and the lay women, [notice that men and women sat in separate sections. This was traditional in many churches until rather recently, say the last 150 years.] and  when you stand to pray, the ecclessial leaders rise first, and after them the lay men, and again, then the women. Now, you ought to face to east to pray for, as you know, scripture has it, Give praise to God who ascends above the highest heavens to the east. [Again note, Mass was NOT celebrated facing the people as some suppose of the early Church. Everyone was to face to the east, clergy and people. Everyone faced one direction. The text cites Scripture as the reason for this. God is to the East, the origin of the light.]

Now, of the deacons, one always stands by the eucharistic oblations and the others stand outside the door watching those who enter [Remember, this was a time of persecution and the early Christians were careful only to allow baptized and bona fide members to enter the sacred mysteries. No one was permitted to enter Sacred liturgy until after having been baptized. This was called the disciplina arcanis or “discipline of the secret.” Deacons guarded the door to maintain this discipline], and afterwards, when you offer let them together minister in the church. [Once the door was locked and the Mass begin it would seem that the deacons took their place in the sanctuary. However it also seems that one deacon remained outside the sanctuary and maintained “good order” among th laity.] And if there is one to be found who is not sitting in his place let the deacon who is within, rebuke him, and make him to rise and sit in his fitting place…also, in the church the young ones ought to sit separately, if there is a place, if not let them stand. Those of more advanced age should sit separately; the boys should sit separately or their fathers and mothers should take them and stand; and let the the young girls sit separately, if there is really not a place, let them stand behind the women; let the young who are married and have little children stand separately, the older women and widows should sit separately. [This may all seem a bit complicated but the bottom line is that seating was according to Gender and Age: the men on one side, the women on the other, older folks to the front and the younger ones to the back. Also those caring for young children should be in a separate area. See – Even in the old days there was a “cry room!”] And a deacon should see that each one who enters gets to his place, and that none of these sits in an inappropriate place. Likewise, the deacon ought to see that there are none who whisper or sleep or laugh or nod off. [Wait a minute! Do you mean to tell me that some of these early Christians did such things! Say it isn’t so! Today ushers do this preserving of good order but the need remains!] For in the Church it is necessary to have discipline, sober vigilance, and attentive ear to the Word of the Lord. [Well that is said pretty plain and the advice is still needed].

Sobriety at the Sign of Peace

The Sign of Peace is ironically a matter over which there is significant dispute in the Church. Some love it just the way it is. Others hate and want it dropped. Still others like it but want it moved to a different part of the liturgy where it is fits better, perhaps at the beginning, perhaps before the offertory. Some see it as a very gregarious moment and leave their pew and move through the Church. Others stay put and just nod at others. What of this disputed moment, the sign of “peace?”

We do well first to examine the what the General Instruction of the Roman Missal says:

 The Rite of Peace follows [the Our Father and the Prayer “Lord Jesus Christ you said to your Apostles, ‘I leave you peace…’], by which the Church asks for peace and unity for herself and for the whole human family, and the faithful express to each other their ecclesial communion and mutual charity before communicating in the Sacrament. As for the sign of peace to be given, the manner is to be established by Conferences of Bishops in accordance with the culture and customs of the peoples. It is, however, appropriate that each person offer the sign of peace only to those who are nearest and in a sober manner. (G.I.R.M. # 82)

Other instructions in the Missal in the rubrics ( #’s 128 & 129) indicate that exchange of peace is shared “if appropriate” and that the celebrant “gives the sign of peace to a deacon or minister.” GIRM # 154 adds, The priest may give the sign of peace to the ministers but always remains within the sanctuary, so as not to disturb the celebration. (There are rare exceptions to this also listed there).

Hence we learn some of the following things about the sign of peace:

1. The purpose of the prayer and rite is that the Church asks peace and unit for herself and the whole world.
2. The faithful express to each other ecclesial communion and mutual charity before receiving Holy Communion.
3. It is for local Bishops conferences to issue norms regarding how this sign of peace is exchanged.
4. One should share the sign of peace only with those nearest to them. Hence the leaving of one’s pew is generally not appropriate.
5. The Sign of peace is to be shared in a sober manner. Hence loud greetings, lengthy conversations, back slapping, long  embraces and the like are not appropriate here. Sober need not mean a mere handshake (which might be silly for a married couple for example). But the greeting should be cordial and generally to the point.
6. There is no required expression that the faithful should say. But if something is said GIRM # 154 recommends: “The peace of the Lord be with you always.”
7. The priest is not to leave the sanctuary but is only to exchange the sign of peace with the deacon or other ministers nearest him.
8. The exchange of Peace is optional and is shared “if appropriate.” What would make it inappropriate is not clear but that is left to the discretion of the celebrant. There are times, such as in flu season, at special liturgies such as funerals, or when pressed for time that the celebrant may chose to omit the exchange of peace.

Way back in 1977 the Bishop’s Committee on Liturgy also issued some direction on the sign of peace which fills out some of this:

Neither the people nor the ministers need try exhaust the sign by attempting to give the greeting personally to everyone in the congregation or even to a great number of those present…Unless the sign of peace is clearly tailored to a specific occasion, such as a marriage, ordination, or some small intimate group, the more elaborate and individual exchange of peace by the celebrant has a tendency to appear clumsy. It can also accentuate too much the role of the celebrant or ministers, which runs counter to a true understanding of the presence of Christ in the entire assembly.” (Bishops Committee on the Liturgy: The Sign of Peace, 1977)

Hence both celebrant and congregation are cautioned against elaborating the sign of peace and are encouraged to sobriety. The sign of peace is not a “meet and greet” but rather it symbolizes the communion and peace of the whole Church in Christ. Because we are one in Christ and all members of the Body of Christ, to exchange the sign of peace with a few is to exchange it with all. Hence it is not necessary or even desirable (due to disruption) to greet large numbers or to leave the pew or begin conversations.

What is the History of the Sign of Peace –Among the early Christians the “kiss of peace”  was an important gesture to manifest love and unity, both within the liturgy and outside of it.  In numerous places Paul and others encourage the Christians to “greet one another with a holy kiss.” (Rom 16:16, I Cor 16:20, II Cor 13:12, and also I Peter 5:14) The location in the liturgy of this gesture has been various. Early on it seems to have been exchanged at the end of the service of readings just before the preparation of the gifts. This was in response to the directive of the Lord in Matt 5:23ff wherein we should be reconciled with our brethren before bringing a gift to the altar. In many Eastern Churches the sign was moved to the beginning of the liturgy where it still remains today in many of them. However in the Roman Rite, as early as the 6th Century it was moved to the place it is today. Pope Innocent I defended a practice of moving it after the Canon as a way that people could assent to what had happened. Then again, when Gregory the Great placed the Our Father after the Canon he also moved the sign of peace after the Our Father and it fit nicely according to commentators of the day since it echoed well the words “as we forgive those who trespass against us…” It has remained in this location ever since that time. In addition the sign of peace came to be regarded as a preparation for communion and was exchanged even when communion was received outside of Mass. It was exchanged by all who were to receive communion. Those who not going to receive communion were instructed not to exchange the kiss of peace. Later however, the kiss was exchanged by all. An interesting practice that developed was the use of the osculatorium. This was an elaborately carved board that was passed around the congregation and kissed by all. It was thus a way of sharing the kiss through the whole congregation. However, over time the exchange of peace declined and in the Latin Mass codified by the Council of Trent it was exchanged only at the Solemn Mass among the clergy. This is at least partly related to the declining frequency of reception of communion and various other factors such as the stylizing of the embrace. Today the whole matter has been restored more to its original scope. Pope Benedict has taken under study the possibility of moving the sign of peace to just before offertory. It seems doubtful however that it will in fact be move there since it has been at its current spot since the 6th Century. That’s a pretty long tradition to unseat.

A Pastoral Note– The profound communion we have in Christ and the peace for which we pray should not be understood in a shallow way. Peace here is not the shallow meaning of the world but the richer Hebraic understanding of shalom which is a wish for all possible prosperity, the state of a person who lives in complete harmony with nature, self, God and others. Christ is the source of all peace since it is He who enables every person to become fully human which is an absolute prerequisite for true peace founded on the truth of God and man. Our greeting of one another at this moment of the mass should not be construed as a mere “haver nice day” or “How ya doin?’” Given our membership in the Body of Christ, what He has just been accomplished on the altar, and the communion we are about to receive, we both wish and experience shalom. The greeting we extend is no mere human greeting, it is the greeting of Christ: “May the peace of the Lord be always with you.”

This video illustrates the Kiss of Peace in the Divine Liturgy of the Russian Orthodox Church. It uses the more ancient gestures of the “Holy Kiss” mentioned in scripture. Many Catholic clergy also use a more formal embrace than a hand shake when exchanging the sign of peace.

Truth in the New Translation Series # 5 – The Quam Oblationem

We have been exploring the new translation of the Roman Missal that will go into effect by Advent of 2011. It is the purpose of this series to show the value of the new translation by meditating upon the truths that it more accurately translates. These truths were never lost to the Church for the Latin texts have remained with us. However, most Catholics who do not read Latin have not been able to appreciate these beautiful truths since the  1970 translation currently in use omitted a great deal of the Latin meaning. With the new translation, much of this meaningful teaching is fully restored to the faithful. We are a little less than half way through the First Eucharistic Prayer (the Roman Canon). If you have missed previous installments of this series they can be viewed here: Truth in the New Translation Series

To be honest I had suspended this series since I had heard rumors that there were more changes come even to the ordinary texts that have already been published and are actually in use in certain parts of the world. However, after several weeks with no news in this regard, I have decided to reopen the series.

As with previous installments we note first the Latin text. Then the new translation, and then the 1970 rendering that is currently in use. There follows commentary that shows forth the improvements in the new translation.

LATIN: Quam oblationem tu, Deus, in omnibus, quaesumus, benedictam, adscriptam, ratam, rationabilem, acceptabilemque facere digneris: ut nobis Corpus et Sanguis fiat dilectissimi Filii tui, Domini nostri Iesu Christi.

NEW TRANSLATION: Be pleased, O God, we pray, to bless, acknowledge, and approve this offering in every respect; make it spiritual and acceptable, so that it may become for us the Body and Blood of your most beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

1970 TRANSLATION: Bless and approve our offering; make it acceptable to you, an offering in spirit and in truth. Let it become for us the body and blood of Jesus Christ, your only Son, our Lord

Imperative tone ameliorated– One of the significant problems with the translation currently in use is its imperative tone. We seem in many cases to be telling God want to do. The fact that we are asking is lost by frequent used of the imperative voice with nothing to moderate it. Hence the current version says “Bless and approve our offering; make it acceptable….” Are we telling God this or asking Him? In my conversation with fellow human beings I do not speak this boldly. I most often soften the imperative tone with words like “please” or “would you mind?” or “kindly” or “I would appreciate it if…” But the current translation from 1970 does none of this. It is not just a problem with this prayer, but is a problem all throughout the current Sacramentary. It comes off as very bold to speak in this manner and while it is true that the tone of voice of the priest can help, it still remains a very bold and inappropriate tone to use with God. The Latin text however is steeped in humility. The use of  quaesumus (meaning “we beseech” or “we humbly ask”) sets the humble tone. Then, instead of using the imperative voice for the verb form, the Latin more humbly renders it as “we humbly ask that you might see fit (digneris) to make this offering blessed, approved, ratified, spiritual and acceptable in every way.” Now my rather clumsy and legalistic translation is rendered more beautifully and still  accurately by the new translation as: Be pleased, O God, we pray, to bless, acknowledge, and approve this offering in every respect; make it spiritual and acceptable. But the main point to note in all of this is that the seemingly rather proud and imperious tone of the 1970 translation has been set aside and the more proper and humble, requesting tone of the Latin has been to restored to us. This is a much more appropriate manner in which to speak to God.

Oops, Forgot to Mention God– You may notice that the 1970 translation does not have the word “God” in it. But the Latin text states clearly, “Deus.” Now granted, it is understood that we are addressing God here and some may argue it was unnecessary to supply the word again. However, there is a theological matter to also consider. One of the current critiques of the Roman Canon is that in the epiclesis (the calling down of the Holy Spirit upon the offerings) the Holy Spirit is not mentioned explicitly. The other more recently composed Eucharistic Prayers follow the Eastern Tradition of mentioning the Holy Spirit explicitly. For example the Second Eucharistic Prayer says “Let your Spirit come upon these gifts to make them holy…..” The other Eucharistic Prayers have similar invocations. But the 1970 translation made matters worse by not mentioning God at all here. At least the Latin allows for us to possibly understand “God” here to mean “God the Holy Spirit”  While this is debatable it is also theologically important to acknowledge that every external act of the Trinity is always an act of the whole Trinity even if we intellectually attribute specific roles to specific Persons within the Trinity. Hence, saying “Deus” does not exclude the Holy Spirit who is God. But for that reason, the reassertion by the Latin text of the word Deus (God) was not without purpose. We are asking God, (perhaps here referring God the Holy Spirit, or at least inclusive of the Holy Spirit) to bless our oblation. It is good that the new translation re-includes the reference specifically to God.

Superlatives restored – The Latin text refers to Jesus as dilectissimi Filii tui (your most beloved Son). The 1970 translation seemed to have some sort of mysterious bias against these sorts of words. We saw this at the opening words of the Roman Canon where the word clementissime (most merciful) was dropped in reference to the Father. And now we seen dilectissimi dropped in reference to Jesus. The 1970 Translation also rather strangely adds the word “only” which is not in the Latin. Perhaps they were trying to capture the word “most beloved” without saying it? Strange. But the omission of these superlatives adds to the terse and somewhat flat quality of the 1970 translation. The Roman Canon is very charismatic and ecstatic in many ways. It uses an almost “flowery excess” at times. But this helps to call forth  a spirit of joyful prayer and humble gratitude that is quite lost in the 1970 version. Thankfully the new translation restores this sense and mood by translating the Latin accurately and beautifully: so that it may become for us the Body and Blood of your most beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

This piece is from the Vivaldi Gloria in D and the Latin text say simply Domine Fili unigenite, Jesu Christe (Lord Jesus Christ, only son of the Father). The piece is not as easy to sing as you might suspect. The timing and vocal  acuity necessary make it very difficult. This video is as visually beautiful as the music.