PROBLEMS IN
THE LITURGY
GERARD MONTAGUE, D.D.
St. Patrick's College, Maynooth
THE NEWMAN PRESS
WESTMINSTER
MARYL/\ND
© Copyright by Gerard Montague, 1958.
NIHIL OBSTAT
imprimi potest
JOSEPHUS A. CARROLL,
CENSOR THEOL. DEPUT.
►P IO ANNES CAROLUS,
ARCHIEP. DUBLINEN., HIBERNIAE PRIMAS.
DUBLIN!· DIE 6e FEBRUARII 1958.
,,ΓίΣΧ ,N THE RE,,UDUC OF ’«ELAND
' BRO'VNE AND NOLAN LIMITED, DUBLIN
and first published in 1958.
FOREWORD
These Problems have been selected from amongst the
questions discussed in the pages of the Irish Ecclesiastical
Record during the past fifteen years. For the most part
speculative, academic discussions have been avoided and
the emphasis has been placed on practical rubrical cases,
but attentive consideration has been given to the liturgical
background of the rubrics. Every effort has been made
to take full cognisance of recent Decrees and decisions of
the Holy See, including those available up to the time of
going to press.
My sincere thanks are due to those students of the
theology classes here and to my colleagues who assisted
in correcting proofs, compiling the index, etc. and I wish
to express a special word of appreciation to the secretarial
and printing staff of Messrs. Browne and Nolan Ltd., who
showed patience and perseverance far beyond the call of
duty.
Gerard Montague.
St. Patrick’s College,
Maynooth.
CONTENTS
Section I
THE MASS
PAGE
When is the ‘Asperges ’ ceremony obligatory ?
Blessing of water for the ‘Asperges ’ ceremony
Rubrics to be observed at the beginning of low Mass
Celebration of Mass without a server
Tones of voice at low Mass
....
Tone of voice obligatory' for the celebrant at Mass
May hymns be sung by children at low Mass ? .
Liceity of singing Christmas carols during Benediction
at sung Mass ......
Announcements during Offertory of Mass .
Rubrics to be observed at the ‘ Qwi Pridie ’
Rubrics at Mass
......
May the bell be rung at Mass ‘ Coram Sanctissimo ' ?
Communion with Hosts consecrated at the same Mass
May Holy Communion be distributed after midnight
Mass
Rubrics to be observed at Communion of Mass and when
binating ........
Newr fasting rules and bination .
.
.
.
.
Vernacular prayers at Mass
.
.
.
.
.
Why is the De Profundis said after low Masses in Ireland ?
When may one omit the prayers after Mass ?
Difficulties in interpreting the Rubrics concerning the
omitting of the prayers after Mass
Omitting the prayers after Mass ; particular examples
Sign of the Cross at conclusion of Leonine Prayers
Duration of Mass
.......
Oscula obligatory at High Mass ?
The chant of the Ordinary of the Mass
Liceity of organ accompaniment during the Penitential
Seasons
•·
VII
2
3
4
10
13
13
16
18
20
21
23
25
28
33
35
39
40
42
43
43
•··
vin
CONTENTS
PAGE
Tone of voice at High Mass .
Rubrics to be observed during the Credo at a solemn
High Mass
......
The chant at solemn High Mass
.
.
.
.
Choir of seminarists at High Mass ....
The Offertory procession........................................
Application of the fruits of the Mass
Missa pro Populo on the feast of Patron
Obligation of the Missa pro Populo on a transferred feast
May a solemn Exequial Mass be celebrated on a trans
ferred feast or a month’s mind on a suppressed
holyday ? .......
Intention of a Requiem Mass .....
Obligation to apply an Exequial Mass for the deceased
Liceity of a custom contrary to the Rubrics governing
Requiem Masses
......
Formulary' to be used for the Requiem Mass on month’s
mind of a priest .....
Privileged Requiem Masses
.....
Privileged Requiem Mass in minor oratories
Choice of prayers in the Missa Quotidiana Defunctorum .
Use of incense at a sung Requiem Mass .
Obligation to chant the entire Dies Irae
Solemn Requiem Mass celebrated on Sunday
Colour of vestments for a Requiem Mass .
The antiphon Trium Puerorum after Requiem Mass
Low Exequicl Mass on a privileged fcria
May Mass be celebrated in a hospital ward ?
Liceity of celebrating Mass in a sick-room
Midnight Mass at Christmas .....
Communicating the sick before or after midnight Mass
The new Rubrics and Votive Masses
Devotions in the morning of the First Friday
Formularies for Votive Masses of the Assumption and of
the Sacred Heart
......
The Gloria in Votive Masses of the Blessed Virgin
Proper Mass of St. Patrick
.
.
.
.
.
45
46
47
47
48
52
55
58
59
59
61
62
64
66
69
70
71
72
74
75
76
76
77
79
80
82
84
85
86
88
89
CONTENTS
IX
PAGE
Votive Masses of Irish saints .....
90
Celebration of the Mass of a Beatus ....
92
Mass for the Propagation of the Faith
...
93
Votive Mass for golden jubilee .....
95
Ordo to be followed in the oratory of the Sisters and in
the secondary oratory of an institution
.
.
95
Obligation of chaplain to celebrate conventual Mass
of nuns
........
98
Obligation to recite an oratio imperata in a nuptial Mass
and in the Mass of the Sacred Heart on the First
Friday........................................................................ 100
Substitution for the Oratio Imperata
.
.
.101
When must the prayer of the Blessed Sacrament be added
in the Mass ?
.
.
.
.
.
.102
Assistance of the bishop at various functions ; a prelate’s
right to have chaplains
.....
104
Liturgical privileges of a domestic prelate
.
.
107
Choir dress of minor prelates .
.
.
.
.109
Private Mass of an Abbot
.
.
.
.
.Ill
Participation in solemn Mass according to the Dominican
lite
................................................................................ 112
Certain replies from the Sacred Congregation of Rites
concerning Mass, etc.................................................. 113
Section II
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
Rubrics Regarding Communion, Benediction, Reservation.
Obligation to recite prayers before and after distributing
Communion
.
.
.
.
.
.
.117
Rubrics to be observed at reception of Holy Communion
118
Danger of infection through purifications after
Communion of faithful
.
.
·
.
.120
How should a ciborium be purified outside Mass?
.
120
Purifying Communion cloth................................................. 121
Keeping records of confraternity Conununions .
.
122
Observance of due order by communicants
.
.
123
Bringing of Holy Communion to the sick .
.
.124
X
CONTENTS
PAGE
Must a special blessing always be given to those who
accompany the Blessed Sacrament carried to the
sick ?..······
Rubrics to be observed when Holy Communion is brought
to the sick in religious institutions
Rubrics to be observed when Holy Communion is
brought to several sick in hospitals
May sacred particles formerly consecrated be transferred
to a new ciborium .....
Reservation of the Blessed Sacrament at side altar
Obligation to use the canopy in Blessed Sacrament
procession
.......
Conditions for exposition ......
Exposition after Mass
......
Benediction may not be given at the beginning of a period
of exposition
.......
Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament in a classroom
Rubrics of genuflections at Benediction service and for
custody of the Blessed Sacrament
Preaching during the Holy Hour
....
Prayers in the vernacular before the Blessed Sacrament
Approval for prayers and hymns to be used at the Holy
Hour
........
Ringing the bell at Benediction
....
Why incense is not blessed at Benediction .
The Divine Praises ......
Correct pronunciation of ‘ blessed ’ .
.
.
Is it lawful to place a small Host in the monstrance for
solemn Benediction ......
127
127
130
132
133
136
136
137
138
139
140
142
145
148
149
150
150
152
152
Section III
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
Conditional baptism of an adult convert from heresy
Rubrics of the ceremony of reception of a convert
A new name in Confirmation .
.
.
.
.
Extraordinary ministers of the Sacrament of Confirmation
in danger of death .....
Marriage ceremonies
154
156
158
159
163
CONTENTS
XL
PAGE
When and by whom may the nuptial blessing be given
166
Persons to whom the nuptial blessing may be given
.
167
Blessing for expectant mother .
.
.
.
.168
Celebrating a wedding jubilee ; double-ring ceremony ;
ring worn by professed religious
.
.
.169
The matter and form of Tonsure and the Minor Orders
171
When should the prayer Pro Ordinandis be added in the
Mass ? Correct form of the Mandatum to be read
at an ordination
.
.
.
.
.
.173
Nocturn imposed at ordination .
.
.
.
.175
Rubrics of the sick call
.
.
.
.
.176
Rubric for the administration of Extreme Unction
.
179
May the Apostolic Blessing in articulo Mortis be ad
ministered to persons in danger of death from
external causes?
. .
.
.
.
.180
Colour of stole to be used in blessings
.
.
.183
Rubrics of the funeral service .
.
.
.
.184
Funeral ceremonies
.
.
.
.
.
.187
Significance of the absolution ceremony at requiem
functions........................................................................ 189
Rubrics of the Requiem Office in choir .
.
.
191
The use of wreaths at funerals
.
.
.
.191
History of funeral ‘ offerings ’ .
.
.
.
.194
Erection of cross in cemetery
.
.
.
.197
When Exequial Mass is omitted ; blessing of deathbed
habit................................................................................ 198
Translations of the Ritual
.
.
.
.
.201
1 ranslation of Et cum spiritu tuo
....
205
Notes on recent Decrees ......
207
Section IV
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
Special Feasts and Devotions
THE DIVINE OFFICE
Chair of Unity Octave
....
May ashes be brought from the church on Ash-^BESfedncsday ?.....
210
212
•XII·
CONTENTS
PAGE
Objection to the practice of taking home blessed ashes .
214
The ‘ Rorate ’ Masses ; the ‘ sepulchre ’ during Holy
Week........................................................................... 216
The reform of the Holy Week ceremonies .
.
219
Are the Holy Week ceremonies obligatory in all parochial
churches ?
.......
225
Symbolism of candles used at the Office of Tenebrae .
228
History of the Holy Thursday Mass
.
.
.
229
Obligation to renew the Paschal Candle ; Rubrics of the
new Holy Saturday ceremony .
.
.
.231
Incensation of Paschal Candle .....
235
Rubric for Flectamus Genua
.....
236
No obligation to bless the font on the vigil of Pentecost
237
Obligation of the October devotions
.
.
.
238
Is it desirable that a special feast in honour of the First
Person of the Holy Trinity be instituted ? .
.
240
Acts of consecration to the Sacred Heart .
.
.
242
The consecration of the family to the Sacred Heart .
245
Devotion to the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus
.
.
246
Devotion to the ‘ Christ of Limpias ’
...
248
Liceity of a certain devotion in honour of the Holy Face
249
Gospel of the genealogy on the feast of the Nativity of the
Blessed Virgin Mary
251
The new feast of the Immaculate Heart of Mary
. 254
Liceity of devotion to Mary, the Virgin Priest
.
. 256
Use of the invocation Mary, Queen of Ireland
.
. 257
Devotion in honour of Our Lady of Fatima
.
. 258
History of the feast of St. Patrick
.
.
960
■I
• 99
CONTENTS
XIII
PAGE
1 he recitation of Matins and Lauds before Mass
Obligation of choral recitation of the Office
Correct interpretation of the Encyclical Mediator Dei .
Detailed Rubrics of the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin
Liceity of photographs of ceremonies
Arguments for practice of photographing ceremonies .
Rubrical directions in the Encyclical Musieae Sacrae
Disciplina
283
284
286
289
291
292
295
Section V
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
Foundation-stone of a church ....
Re-dedication of renovated church
Blessing or consecration of a church extension
Crosses in consecrated church ....
May the ‘ Holy Souls ’ be the titular of a church ?
Church without a titular
....
When should titular feast of a particular church be
celebrated ?......
Holy Water stoups
.....
May a war memorial be erected in a church ?
Commemorative inscriptions
....
Erection of two sets of Stations of the Cross in the same
church
........
Statues and images of the saints may be placed in the
sanctuary ........
May the image of a beatified person be placed in the
sanctuary ? .......
May flags be placed in churches ?
Altars of unapproved form
.
.
.
.
.
Obligation of having a Communion cloth
Communion cloth obligatory
.
The Communion patina ......
Use of patina for the Communion of the server
Liceity of using an altar-stone which docs not contain
relics
.......
300
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
310
310
311
312
314
315
316
319
321
322
323
324
.XIV
CONTENTS
PAGE
Use of short formula for re-consecrating altar-stones .
Use of the Antimension
....
.
The altar crucifix .....
A hanging crucifix .....
Relie of the True Cross at an altar ; crucifix affixed to
the tabernacle .....
Altar-cloths and flowers on the altar during Mass
.
Protective covering for the altar
.
Plants on the altar
....
.
Antependium obligatory
....
The altar frontlet .....
.
Electric light as sanctuary lamp
.
Candles for exposition
....
.
Requirements in altar Missal
Cover for Missal stand ....
Corporal on exposition throne .
.
Canopy for Blessed Sacrament throne
Tabernacle to serve as a throne for the Blessed Sacrament
Liceity of a hinged pyx ...
.
The chalice paten .....
Size of a chalice
.....
Necessity for re-consecration of chalice
.
Shape of monstrance
....
.
Material for vestments
.
A modern material suitable for vestments .
.
Use of faculties to bless vestments
.
How should the stole be adjusted ? .
.
The aumbry for the Holy Oils
.
Electric bells ......
.
Blessing of bells
.....
.
Notes on recent replies from the Sacred Congregation
concerning devotions, etc. .
.
327
329
331
335
336
337
339
339
340
341
342
343
344
344
345
345
346
347
348
348
349
350
353
355
357
358
359
360
361
361
Section VI
INDULGENCES
Conditions for the gaining of indulgences .
.
.
357
CONTENTS
Xv
Plenary indulgences : more than once a day
Indulgence attached to the Apostolic Blessing
Imparting the Papal Blessing .....
Papal Blessing at the end of a Retreat
The Angelus
........
Recitation of Kyrie eleison in litanies ....
Use of ejaculation at the Elevation at Mass
Indulgenced ejaculation ......
Conditions for gaining the indulgence of the Holy Hour
Translation of Latin prayers
.....
Conditions to be fulfilled in gaining the indulgences of
2nd November .......
Office and indulgences on 2nd November
Indulgenced visits on 2nd November
Indulgence for visit to a cemetery during octave of AU
Souls
........
Conditions to be fulfilled in gaining the indulgences of
the Portiuncula .......
Indulgence for the first Saturday
....
The Irish indulgenced feasts
.....
May invalids gain on other days the indulgences attached
to the receiving of Holy Communion on the First
Friday of the month? .....
The Stations of the Cross
.....
Renovating the Stations of the Cross
Conditions to be fulfilled in gaining the indulgences of
the Way of the Cross
.....
Conditions to be fulfilled in the use of a crucifix to gain
the indulgences of the Stations of the Cross
Correct formula for blessing of rosaries and crucifixes .
Conditions attached to faculties to bless and indulgence
rosaries, etc.
·......
Obligation to use the correct formula for a blessing
Doubt regarding formula of blessings
Rosary indulgences .......
Communication of the Rosary indulgences
Certain common practices in the recitation of the Rosary
37o
371
372
375
377
37q
3δθ
3δι
3&1
384
3 84
385
386
387
389
391
393
395
397
401
402
4q4
40β
409
411
413
414
416
419
xvi
CONTENTS
PAGE
May a string rosary' or a single decade rosary be blessed ?
Conditions for gaining the Rosary indulgences
.
422
Rosary rings ........
423
Indulgences of the Rosary', etc.
....
424
Indulgences attached to rosaries
....
425
The Rosary of the Dead
.....
426
Recitation of Rosary’ before the Blessed Sacrament exposed
428
The early Irish monks and the Rosary
.
.
.
429
Indulgence for Rosary' of the Seven Dolours
.
.
431
Indulgences attached to scapulars
....
432
Correct material for scapulars .....
434
Faculties for enrolling in scapulars ....
435
The scapular medal
.
.
.
.
.
.437
Wearing the scapular medal
.....
439
Replacing the Miraculous Medal
.
.
.
.441
ABBREVIATIONS
zL.-I.lS'.—Acta
Aposlolicae Sedis.
Addit, et Var.—Additiones et Variationes in Rubricis Missalis.
Rit. Serv.—Ritus Servandus in Celebratione Missae.
Rub. Gen.—Rubricae Generales Missalis.
Rit. Rom.—Rituale Romanum.
S.R.C.—Decrees of Sacred Congregation of Rites.
SECTION 1
THE MASS
WHEN IS THE ‘ASPERGES’ CEREMONY
OBLIGATORY ?
In Fortescue’s Ceremonies of the Roman Rite (Father O’Connell’s
edition (1943), p. 79) it is stated: * By universal Church law, in all
cathedral and collegiate churches, the ceremony of sprinkling the
clergy and people with lustral water should take place before the
chief Mass on Sundays.’ Does this law bind regulars who are obliged
to conventual Mass and choral recitation of the Divine Office? Does
It bind when the Mass is not a solemn one?
Asperges.
Only in cathedral and collegiate churches is the asperges
ceremony certainly of obligation. In these churches the sprink
ling with holy water must be carried out each Sunday before
the high Mass or the Mass which replaces the solemn Mass.
For all other churches the ceremony is optional. Neither the
Missal nor the Caeremoniale Episcoporum imposes a definite obliga
tion, but the Sacred Congregation of Rites published in 1899
the following question and reply :
Utrum in Ecclesiis Collegialibus aspersio aquae benedictae de precepto
sit praemittenda Missae Conventual! quae canitur in Dominicis, sive cum
Diacono et Subdiacono, sive absque sacris Ministris ? Et utrum in Ecclesiis
non Collegialibus eadem aspersio praefatis diebus saltem fieri possit ?
Responsum: Affirmative ad utramque partem.1
The most obvious and now most commonly accepted interpre
tation of this decision is that the asperges ceremony is obligatory
only in cathedral and collegiate churches and is always optional
in all other churches whether parochial or the churches of
regulars.2 Older commentators were inclined to urge the
importance of the obligation at least for parochial churches,3
but this view is not followed by modern writers. There is,
1 S.R.C. 4051 ; Caer. Epis., ii, cap. xxxi, n. 3 : ' Quia ... in omnibus
Dominicis per annum solet fieri aspersio aquae benedictae. . . .’
* Vide De Carpo Moretti, Caeremoniale (1932), p. 308; Haegy, Ceremonial
(1935), i, p. 154.
3 E.g. De Hcrdt, Sacrae Liturgiae Praxis, iii, par. 137; Apud Wapelhorst,
Compendium Sacrae Liturgiae (1915), p. 130. Bouvry, Romsce, etc. : ‘Absque
culpa haec benedictio et populi aspersio omitti nequeunt, cum quasi pertineant
ad Missae principalis substantiam. . .
2
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
therefore, a soundly established probable opinion that in the
churches of regulars the ceremony is optional even before a
solemn conventual Mass. Worthy of special mention is the
opinion of De Amicis :1
Legitima interpretatio rubricarum, ex praesenti disciplina, haec est : asper
sionem aquae benedictae esse quidem praeceptivam in ecclesiis cathcdralibus
et collegiatis, fortasse et in regularium, saltem si consuetudo vigeat, in quibus
de more missa solemnis agitur singulis diebus dominicis ; in aliis vero, et
ubi missa vel legitur vel cantatur sine ministris, posse quidem fieri, sed ex
obligatione nequaquam.
BLESSING OF WATER FOR THE ‘ASPERGES’
CEREMONY
Must the holy water for the Asperges ceremony be blessed immedi
ately before the principal Mass ? Would it be correct to use holy
water blessed on the previous evening or on some other convenient
occasion ?
Regarding the Ordo ad Faciendam Aquam Benedictam, the Roman
Ritual directs :
Diebus Dominicis et quandocumquc opus sit, praeparato sale et aqua
munda benedicenda in ecclesia vel in sacristia ...2
The Caeremoniale Episcoporum lays down the rule that holy
water should be renewed each week3 and the rubrics of the
Missal imply that this renewal will take place on Sundays :
Die Dominica, in Sacristia praeparato sale ct aqua benedicenda, Sacerdos
celebraturus Missam vel alius ad id deputatus, Alba vel Supcrpcllicco indutus
cum stola circa collum ... *
It is clear, therefore, that the liturgical books presuppose
that the blessing of water will ordinarily take place on each
Sunday. The reasons usually given by rubricists for these
rubrics may be summarized :
Benedictio aquae singulis dominicis facienda est ct quoties opus est, sive
ad vitandam facilem ipsius corruptionem ct cum materiis sordidis com
mixtionem, sive ad significationem baptismatis, cuius memoriam Ecclesia
singulis dominicis renovare intclligit.5
Hence, the rubrics direct that it is preferable that the blessing
1 Caeremoniale Parochorum, ii, p. 15.
2 Rit. Rom., tit. viii, cap. ii.
’ Lib. i, cap. vi.
4 Ordo ad Faciendam Aquam Benedictam.
5 De Amicis, Caeremoniale Parochorum, Tour, ii, cap. ii, Art. I.
THE MASS
3
be carried out publicly in the church, and so normally it would
be performed by the celebrant of the principal Mass. There
is, however, no obligation to carry it out in this way ; the
blessing may be given in the sacristy by any priest and at any
convenient time. Care should be taken to renew the holy water
at least each week ; there is no authority for the practice of
diluting it ‘ minore tamen quantitate ’ as is permitted in the case
of baptismal water or in the case of the holy oils.
RUBRICS TO BE OBSERVED AT THE BEGINNING
OF LOW MASS
Is it lawful for a priest after he has opened the missal to pause at
the middle of the altar, e.g., to call to mind his intentions or say some
prayer before descending to begin Mass?
Pauci.
The rubrics direct that the celebrant on arrival at the
altar should first arrange the chalice and missal on the altar.
Deinde rediens ad medium Altaris, facta primum Cruci reverentia, vertens
se ad cornu Epistolae, descendit post infimum gradum /Utaris, ut ibi
faciat Confessionem.
If, before he has begun Mass, the Elevation during a Mass or
actual Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament takes place, he
should kneel wherever he is until that action has been concluded.
Apart from this case the celebrant should not pause appreciably
at this stage before beginning the celebration of Mass. The
rubrics presuppose that he will have already completed his
preparation and, therefore, no prayer is to be recited now ;
also in the course of his preparation he will have formulated
his intention regarding the application of the ministerial fruits
of the Mass, and he will have an opportunity of recalling that
intention at least momentarily at the Memento vivorum.1 Hence
any notable pause before the beginning of Mass would not be
necessary, nor2 is the practice to be recommended.
1 Ritus Servandus, ii, 4.
’Ibid, viii, 3. Vide O’Connell, op. cit., i, p. 42.
mentis, i, p. 590.
Cappello, De Sacra
4
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
CELEBRATION OF MASS WITHOUT A SERVER
The Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments issued on 1st
October, 1949, an Instruction for the guidance of local Ordinaries
who wish to seek an Apostolic Induit for the celebration of Mass
without a server. The Instruction points out that support for the
rule of canon 813, prohibiting the celebration of Mass without a
server, is to be found in the following words of the Encyclical
Mediator Dei : ‘ Though it is clear from what We have said
that the Mass is offered in the name of Christ and of the Church
and that it is not robbed of its social effects though it be cele
brated by a priest without a server, none-the-lcss, on account of
the dignity of such an august mystery, We desire and We urge—
as Mother Church has always commanded—that no priest
should approach the altar unless there is at hand a minister
who will serve him and make the responses, as canon 813 pre
scribes.’ The server represents the assembly of the faithful,
according to the opinion of St. Thomas—‘ (minister) gerit personam
totius populi catholici.' This is clear from the very ancient custom
of the Church according to which the priest performed the
sacred mysteries with the assistance of deacons and of other
ministers and the responses were made by all the people. Mass
celebrated by a priest alone with one minister is of later origin.
It is proved also by the universal agreement amongst liturgists
and moralists. Moreover certain parts of the Mass (prayers,
‘ confiteor,’ ‘ orate fratres ’ with the response ‘ suscipiat ’ and
many vcrsiclcs, etc.) arc in the plural number in order to show
the presence of a minister assisting the priest. Besides, it is
most becoming that the priest in celebrating should have the
co-operation and the prayers of a minister who will assist him
in fulfilling the rite and will come to his aid by making pro
vision in the case of any unforeseen physical difficulty. The
custom of celebrating Mass without a server or even with no
one present seems to have originated in monasteries.
The law requiring the presence of a server at Mass admits
of a few exceptions which liturgists and moralists have unan
imously reduced to the following cases : (a) If Viaticum must
be administered to an invalid and no server is at hand ; (b) if
the people must fulfil the precept of hearing Mass ; (c) during
the time of an epidemic when a server cannot easily be found
and the priest would otherwise have to abstain for a notable
period from celebrating ; (d) if the minister leaves during the
Mass, even between the Offertory and the Consecration, in
which case reverence for the Holy Sacrifice demands that its
celebration be continued even in the absence of the server.
THE MASS
5
Apart from these eases, for which there is the unanimous consent
of authors, only by an Apostolic Induit, especially in missionary
countries, is there derogation from the law.
It should be borne in mind that in preference to having no
minister at all one may have a server who is not fully com
petent, provided that he can fulfil the principal ceremonies
such as presenting the cruets, transferring the missal and ringing
the bell. Except in the eases of necessity enumerated above,
the presence of a server is required by virtue of canon 813.
In accordance with the rubrics of the missal a cleric is to be
preferred to a lay person and only persons of the male sex
should serve. All authors agree that women, even nuns, arc
forbidden under pain of mortal sin to minister at the altar.
In earlier times the Church required that only clerics who had
received first Tonsure should serve private Masses, and it was
only through necessity that in the course of time the Church
allowed the services of lay persons, especially of boys, to be
availed of. Boys should be carefully instructed so that they
may suitably discharge this important duty.
In the ease of necessity, in the absence of a man, canon 813
allows the serving of Mass by a woman on condition that she
answer from a distance and on no account approach the altar.
The Decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites state : pro
hibendum quoque est, ut nulla femina ad altare praesumat accedere aut
presbytero ministrare aut intra cancellos stare sive sedere. A woman,
therefore, may answer only from a distance, and before the
Mass everything should be arranged at the altar for the con
venience of the celebrant, as is usually done in the chapels of
nuns. A just cause is required for availing of the services of a
woman. To the induits which are granted by the Sacred
Congregation for celebrating without a server the following
clause is always added :
Ut ad mentem canon 813, nedum pueri edoceantur de modo inserviendi
s. Missae sed etiam fideles, ipsacque mulieres addiscant quomodo possint
Missae inservire, legendo responsiones sacerdoti celebranti reddendas.
Recently the Holy See has inserted another clause from ■which
there must be no derogation, namely dummodo aliquis fidelis Sacro
assistat. The Apostolic Sec is the sole judge of the sufficiency
of the causes set forth in each case of a petition for the faculty
to celebrate Mass without a server.1
The above Instruction—other sections of which refer to the
conditions to be fulfilled concerning Apostolic Induits for
1 A.A.S., 3rd October, 1949, p. 493, et seq.
g
»
g
S
3
H
g
|
K
g
g
!
I
H
g
8
|
g
E
S
3
K
B
g
S
$
g
I
6
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
domestic oratories, for the use of a portable altar and for the
reservation of the Blessed Sacrament in private chapels—has
for its general purpose the restoration of discipline which may
have been injured by recent wartime expedients. It is worthy
of note that the causes mentioned expressly in the Instruction
as justifying the celebration of Mass without a server cover
only the recognized eases of real necessity. In recent times
many writers have shown an inclination towards a more lenient
interpretation of the obligation and have been inclined to admit
as excusing causes the private devotion of the priest, the
spiritual loss to the priest or to the faithful who wish to communicate, etc. The question has been discussed on numerous
occasions;1 in the American Ecclesiastical Review for 1946 the
arguments both for the stricter and the more lenient views
have been set forth fully and clearly by Father Walter Curtis
and Father Patrick O’Brien respectively. Defending the stricter
interpretation Father Curtis concludes : ‘ . . .in face of the
explicit and grave command of the Church that a server be
had at Mass, celebration without a server devotionis causa is not
permitted but is seriously forbidden. Nor has sufficient weight
of authority or argument been advanced to make probable the
opinion that devotion alone is a grave cause excusing from the
norm of canon 813.’2 On the other hand Father O’Brien,
having set out to refute the case formulated by Father Curtis,
states his conclusions as follows:3 ‘We conclude, therefore,
that from the extrinsic authority quoted and from the intrinsic
probability of the arguments adduced it is certainly probable
that a priest may, ex devotionis causa tantum, celebrate Mass
without a server, seclusa negligentia. We will recall here the
necessity for using a relative moral diligence to provide a server
and the necessity of undergoing some inconvenience if a server
may thus be obtained, c.g. by waiting for a reasonable time
until someone is free to serve the Mass. We do not think that,
without an induit, Mass can be so celebrated habitually, because
of the danger of laxity and negligence that may creep in.’
However reluctantly, we must conclude that the stricter
view has the greater intrinsic probability and extrinsic authority
and would now seem to conform most closely with the present
Instruction1 and with the words of the Holy Father—
1 E.g. /. E. Record, 1941, p. 460.
* November, 1946, p. 375.
’ Loe. cit. p. 447,
4 Cf. Case (c) in Instruction *. .
tempus se abstinere a celebrando.’
et secus sacerdos debeat per notabile
Tl IE MASS
. . . Ob huius tam augusti Mysterii dignitatem, volumus atque urgemus—
quod cctcroquin semper praecepit Mater Ecclesia—ut nullus sacerdos ad
altare accedat, nisi adsit minister, qui ei inserviat eique respondeat. . . .
Again, in the concluding paragraphs of the Encyclical
Mediator Dei the Pope emphasizes the importance of finding
and training Mass servers:1 ‘ Try in every way with the means
and helps that your prudence deems best, that the clergy and
people become one in mind and heart, and that the Christian
people take such an active part in the liturgy that it become a
truly sacred action of due worship to the eternal Lord in which
the priest, chiefly responsible for the souls of his parish, and
the ordinary faithful arc united together. To attain this pur
pose, it will greatly help (Jiaud parum profecto conferet} to select
carefully good and upright young boys from all classes of
citizens who will come generously and spontaneously to serve
at the altar with careful zeal and exactness. Parents of higher
social standing and culture should greatly esteem this office
for their children. If these youths, under the watchful guidance
of the priests, are properly trained and encouraged to fulfil the
task committed to them punctually, reverently and constantly,
then from their number will readily come fresh candidates for
the priesthood. The clergy will not then complain—as, alas,
sometimes happens even in Catholic places—that in the celebra
tion of the august sacrifice they find no one to answer or sen e
them.’
TONES OF VOICE AT LOW MASS
What tones of voice should be observed in saying low Mass?
Should there be two: the clear and the secret; or three tones: the
clear, the moderate and the secret? From the way in which authors
are divided on the question, evidently there are grounds for doubt.
Most rubricians state that there are three tones—vide O’Connell,
O’Callaghan, Wapclhorst, etc. On the other hand some hold that
there are only two tones, c.g. Aertnys {Compendium Liturgiae Sacrae)
quotes for this opinion the Rubricae Generales Missalis and a decree
of the Twenty-second Session of the Council of Trent. Moreover,
many moral theologians, e.g. St. Alphonsus, Gcnicot, Prümmer,
Wouters, Marc and Jorio are on the same side, holding that there
are only two tones to be used. Are any of these ‘ approved ’ in the
sense of canon 733?
Studens.
Canon 733 :
In Sacramentis conficiendis, administrandis ac suscipiendis accurate
serventur ritus et caeremoniae quae in libris ritualibus ab Ecclesia probatis
praecipiuntur.
1 Translation by Father Ellard, pars. 199, 200.
8
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Needless to say, the Code docs not grant approval to any com
mentator ; in the present context the ‘ approved book ’ from
which we must seek guidance is the Missal. Obviously, as our
correspondent points out, the question is not to be resolved
by a counting of commentators on either side.
The Rubricae Generales Missalis (cap. xvi), under the heading :
1 De his quae clara voce aut secreta dicenda sunt in Missa,' mentions
only these two tones. The rubrics list the parts of the Mass
to be said in the clear voice (including amongst these Orate
fratres, Nobis quoque peccatoribus, and Domine non sum dignus,
but not including the Sanctus except implicitly as part of the
Preface) and then direct (Alia omnia dicuntur secreto' This rubric
is the point d'appuis of the argument for the use of only two
tones, yet if we consider it in its context it docs not appear to
have been intended as a definite direction on the question.
From the wording of the very next rubric it seems that the
solution is not just so clear cut : ‘ The priest should take care
that what is to be said in the clear voice be pronounced dis
tinctly and becomingly, not too quickly for he should be able
to attend to what he is reading, nor too slowly lest it be tedious
to his hearers. The voice should not be so raised that he
disturbs others who may be celebrating in the church at the
same time nor so subdued that he cannot be heard by those
around ; it should be moderate and dignified {sed mediocri et
gravi) that it may arouse devotion and be suited to the hearers
that they may understand what is read. The things to be
said in the secret voice arc to be so pronounced that he hears
himself but is not heard by those around.’ The supporters
of the view that three tones of voice are intended can base
their arguments on this reference to a moderate tone {mediocri
et gravi) and also on various detailed directions in the Ritus
Servandus.
Throughout the Ritus Servandus detailed instructions arc given
on the tones of voice to be used : In nomine Patris, etc., is to be
said in an ‘ intelligible ’ voice, the antiphon Introibo in a ‘clear ’
voice, the Kyrie, Gloria, Oremus, prayers, epistle, etc., in an
‘ intelligible ’ voice, as also is the blessing. The Preface is to
be said in a * suitable and intelligible ’ voice {convenienti et
intelligibili voce), but the Sanctus in a ‘ moderate’ voice {inclinatus
voce mediocri prosequitur) ; the Orate fratres, Nobis quoque pecca
toribus, and Domine non sum dignus arc to be said in ‘ a slightly
raised voice’ {voce aliquantulum elata). Λ third version of these
rubrics is found in the Ordinarium Missae where the celebrant is
directed to pronounce the Orate fratres in a voice ‘ paululum
THE MASS
9
elevala ’ and it is implied that the Sanctus is to be said in the same
‘ clear ’ voice as is the Preface.
Obviously the differences in terminology arc due to the fact
that the Rubricae Generales, Ritus, etc., are the work of many
hands. The Ritus Servandus was incorporated in the Missal
published under St. Pius V (1566-72) and was probably based
on the Ordo Missae compiled by John Burckard and published
about 1502.1 The Rubricae Generates also appeared in 1570,
and, perhaps, owed something to the Directorium of Ciconiolanus
published about 1539.
The detailed directions scattered
through the Ordinary of the Mass have been amended more
than once, e.g. under Pius V, Urban VIII and Benedict XV.
Hence it is not surprising that modern commentators can find
grounds for divergent views. Acrtnys is scarcely justified in
declaring’
. . . nescio quo fundamento neque quo fine Auctores vocem triplicem
distinguant,
and, with a similar vehemence which does not strengthen his
arguments, F. Xavier, S.J., in the Ephemerides Liturgicae2 states
at great length the case for two tones only. Their argument
from the Decree of the Council of Trent, Session XXII, cap. 5,
seems irrelevant. In this context the Council was not concerned
with fixing a detailed rubric of the Mass. The Lutheran
reformers, as part of their attack on ceremonies, had introduced
the use of the normal speaking voice for the eucharistie prayer,
whereas in the Roman Church the Canon of the Mass had been
said secretly from before a.d. 700. Trent decreed :
Cumque natura hominum ca sit, ut non facile queat sine adminiculis
exterioribus ad rerum divinarum meditationem sustolli ; propterea pia
mater Ecclesia ritus quosdam, ut scilicet quaedam submissa voce, alia vero
elatiore in missa pronunciarentur, instituit.
Similarly it is irrelevant to argue that, for example, the Orate
fratres should be said in the clear {mediocri} voice because it was
formerly Orate fratres et sorores and therefore was meant to be
heard by all and not only by the celebrant’s assistants. This
formula is not now used and where it did occur, for example
in a fourteenth-century Sarum Ordinary, the rubric directed
that it should be said ‘ humili voceM
1 Vide Legg, Tracts on the Mass, p. 249.
'Compendium Lilurgiae, p. 11, footnote.
« 1928, p. 337. ‘
* Legg. op. cil. In Ordo Itebd. S. Instauratus the rubric prescribes 'clara et
eleuata voce ’ for the Orate Fratres, but this rubric is not to be applied to the
Missal.
10
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Wc must conclude that the better opinion is that the accumu
lative evidence of the Rubricae Generales, Ritus Servandus, etc.,
shows that three tones of voice are intended : the clear, intel
ligible voice for the parts which the congregation should hear
and follow, i.e. scriptural pericopes, etc. ; the secret voice for
the Canon and more sacred parts which pertain more to the
priest’s action ; the moderate voice for four short passages.
The Orate fratres is said in a moderate voice because it is closely
associated with the Offertory’ and secret prayers ; the Sanctus
in the same voice because it leads directly into the Canon ;
the Nobis quoque peccatoribus because it is an interruption of the
silence of the Canon, not loud but reverently subdued, and
similarly the Domine non sum dignus is pronounced in a moderate
voice for reasons of reverence and because also of its personal
application to the priest.1 Rubricists generally do accept the
view that three tones of voice should be used and that the view
that only two tones with varying pitch {mediocri voce) are pre
scribed presupposes a degree of precision in the rubrical direc
tions and of subtlety in their interpretation which for historical
reasons would be too much to expect.
TONE OF VOICE OBLIGATORY FOR THE CELEBRANT
AT MASS
Is there a grave obligation to observe the loud tone of voice at
Mass? Should the celebrant of a Mass for the people continue to
use the loud voice when other priests have begun Mass on neighbour
ing side altars?
P.P.
Sacerdos autem maxime curare debet, ut quae clara vocc dicenda sunt,
distincte et apposite proferat, non admodum festinanter, ut advertere possit
quae legit, nec minis morose ne audientes taedio afficiat ; neque etiam vocc
nimis elata ne perturbet alios qui fortasse in eadem ecclesia tunc temporis
celebrant ; neque tam submissa, ut a circumstantibus audiri non possit, sed
mediocri et gravi ; quae et devotionem moveat et audientibus ita sit accomodata, ut quae leguntur intclligant.1
1 The direction that the voice be only slightly raised for the Orate fratres,
Sanctus and Domine non sum dignus may in part be due to the fact that in sung
Masses the choir usually is chanting at these times. When the rubrics direct
that the celebrant be heard by the * circumstantes ' they mean those around
the altar not merely the server, or ministers ; this direction is given for cases
where several priests arc celebrating at the same time and it is envisaged that
each Mass will have its own small congregation. Again, the Amen al the end of
the Orates fratres is to be said * submissa voce ’ ; is this voice the ‘ moderate ’
or the * secret ’ tone ? Rubricists can discuss the question. It is unreasonable
to expect the Rubrics to do so always with minute precision.
’ Rub. Gen., xvi, 2 ; Vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 3 et scq.
THE MASS
11
The rubrics governing the use of the different tones of voice
by the celebrant at Mass are preceptive and, therefore, may not
be habitually disregarded without sin. The obligation of these
rubrics is, needless to say, in a particular ease to be interpreted
in accordance with their purpose and the circumstances of the
celebrant. The purpose of the rubrics is that the celebrant so
moderate both the speed and tone of his voice that he read
intelligently those parts of the Mass which must be read aloud
and that the congregation be enabled to follow his reading with
understanding. The rubrics, therefore, describe the loud tone
as clara, intclligibilis et conveniens.'1 If the celebrant reads clearly
with due attention to punctuation and accentuation, the con
gregation will have little difficulty in following the Mass
intelligently. When other priests arc celebrating near by one
must bear in mind that the law of charity is superior to the
positive directions of the rubrics. In these circumstances it is
not correct for a celebrant to continue Mass in a loud, highpitched voice. Since at the present time many members of
the congregation will most probably be using missals, it is
necessary only that they hear a few words pronounced by the
celebrant ; with the guidance of a few words indicating that
the celebrant has begun the prayers, epistle, Pater noster, etc.,
they have little difficulty in following the Mass intelligently.
Hence the celebrant should be careful not to disturb other
priests ; above all, he should avoid a high-pitched tone which is
irritating to others and is unnecessary and unrubrical. Such
excessive zeal for the rubrics which is inconsiderate and irritating
to others is, as always, ill-informed.
MAY HYMNS BE SUNG BY CHILDREN AT
LOW MASS ?
Is it necessary to obtain the permission of the Ordinary of the
diocese in order to have hymns sung by the children during low
Mass?
Religiosus.
In accordance with the rubrical directions in the encyclical
Musicae sacrae disciplina (1955) in non-solcmn Mass and in functions
that arc not fully liturgical hymns may be sung in the vernacular
provided that they arc not literal translations of the Latin
texts. In practice, therefore, singing in the vernacular is
permissible at low Mass provided that (a) the Ordinary consent
1 Ritus, vii, 8 ;
iv, 2.
12
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
to the practice, (6) the hymns sung are not simply translations
of liturgical prayers and hymns, and (t) the texts of these hymns
have the approbation of the Ordinary.1 In general, from
several decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, it is clear
that singing at a low Mass2 is not necessarily forbidden. Latin
hymns may be sung by the congregation or, at the suitable
times, the Gloria and Credo.3 Regarding the times at which
the singing may take place, an Instruction issued on 2nd
February, 1912, by the Cardinal Vicar of Rome directs :
‘ During low Masses, motets may be sung, and the organ may
be played, as the rite permits. It is, however, important to
observe the rule that voices and organ shall only be heard
during those times when the priest is not reciting aloud, viz.,
besides the time of Preparation and Thanksgiving, from the
Offertory to the Preface, from the Sanctus to the Pater and from
the Agnus to the Post-Communion, the singing being suspended,
if Holy Communion be given, for the recital of the Confiteor
and the Ecce Agnus Dei.'
*
This direction has no binding force
outside Rome, nevertheless it offers useful guidance.
The Sacred Congregation has always forbidden vernacular
singing at functions which arc strictly liturgical,5 and has
permitted it at low Mass only when a lawful custom has already
been established or when the Ordinary consents. The following
question and response were published on 31st January, 1896 :
An in parochiali Ecclesia a fidelibus intra Missam cani possint iuxta anti
quum morem a nonnullis annis interruptum preces vel Hymni liturgici
vernacula compositi in honorem Sancti vel Mysterii cuius festum agitur ?
Rtsp. Affirmative, de consensu Ordinarii quoad Missam privatam. Negative,
quoad Missam Solcmnem sive Cantatam. e
II
____
1 O’Connell, Celebration of Mais, iii, p. 63 ;
I
■
■
I
■
■
■
1 S.R.C. 3880. 4125, 4325.
3 Vide Z. E. Record, June, 1938, p. 660.
1 Catholic Church Music, p. 31.
1 E.g. S.R.C., 31 Mart. 1909. Bouscaren, also D. 3496, ‘ Cantica in
vernaculo idiomate in functionibus et officiis liturgicis solemnibus non esse
toleranda sed omnino prohibenda ; extra functiones liturgicas servetur
*consuetudo. Vide Vermcersch, Periodica, v (1911), p. 69. Cf. Encyclical :
Musicae Sacrae Disciplina.
• S.R.C. 388.
Haegy, op. cit., i, p. 166.
THE MASS
LICEITY OF SINGING CHRISTMAS CAROLS DURING
BENEDICTION OR AT SUNG MASS
During the Christmas season in many churches carols are sung
during Benediction or at High Mass. May other carols in Latin
be sung on these occasions ? In particular, is it permissible to sing
an English version of the Adeste Fideles during exposition of the
Blessed Sacrament ?
Cantor.
Cantica in vernaculo idiornate in functionibus et Officiis liturgicis
solemnibus non esse toleranda, sed omnino prohibenda ; extra functiones
liturgicas servetur consuetudo.1 This decision rules out all chanting
in the vernacular at high Mass or sung Mass. Vernacular
hymns may be sung before the Blessed Sacrament exposed,
provided that they are not translations of prayers or hymns
used in the liturgy, such as the Te Deum. Such liturgical hymns
must always be sung in Latin, if the Blessed Sacrament be
exposed ;2 carols do not pertain to the liturgy ; the Adeste Fideles
is certainly not a liturgical hymn, and there is no regulation
forbidding the chanting of an English translation of it during
exposition. It is interesting to note that Dom Stephen, O.S.B.,
in his booklet, A Study on the Origin and Development of the 'Adeste
Fideles,' has thrown a good deal of light on the question of the
authorship of this very popular hymn. Most probably the
author was an English layman, John Francis Wade, who lived
in exile at Douay in the eighteenth century. He was a professor
of Latin and also augmented his income by making copies of
motets, etc.,3 for the use of his fellow-exiles from England. The
Adeste Fideles was composed shortly before 1744; the author
died in 1786.
ANNOUNCEMENTS DURING OFFERTORY
OF MASS
May an assistant priest read the Epistle and Gospel of the
Sunday in English while the celebrant recites them at the altar? May
he then continue to make parish announcements, etc., during the
1 S.R.C., 3496, ad I; Cf. Encyclical, Sacrae Musicae disciplina (1955).
* Solemn ’ functions includes both high Mass and the Missa Cantata. (Private
reply to Gregorian Institute, Paris, June, 1956.)
’ S.R.C., 3537, ad 111.
3 Vide Ephem. Lit., 1948, p. 396; 1949, p. 101. The carol Stille .Yacht.
heilige .Yacht, which rivals the Adeste in popularity, was composed in 1818 in
Oberndorf, near Salzburg, by Father Joseph Mohr.
14
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Offertory and while the Mass continues until the beginning of the
Canon? Are not the congregation bound to attend to the Offertory
of the Mass rather than to the announcements?
Lone Ranger.
With the permission of the Ordinary it would be quite
lawful for an assistant priest to read the Epistle and Gospel of
the Mass in the vernacular while the celebrant recites them at
the altar. This practice is, indeed, prescribed in many dioceses
and has been frequendy recommended as a step towards the
introduction of the Missa Dialogata. On the other hand it has
sometimes been urged1 that this custom is contrary to a decree
issued by the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda on 29th
March, 1829. The Congregation was asked :
An licitum sit in Missa parochiali post lectum in lingua Latina evangclium
illud legere alio ritu ct alia lingua ct quod minister recitat alta voce et vulgari
idiomate Gloria, Credo, etc. ?
The reply was :
Non licere ct ad mentem. Mens est : Solum evangclium, si parochus
illud populo exponit, posse lingue vulgari praemitti.8
Clearly the mind and purpose of this reply was to forbid the
introduction of any customs which tended towards a vernacular
liturgy. Hence the celebrating priest was forbidden to read
in the vernacular the Epistle and Gospel in the Mass, i.c. in
the course of his celebration, as an official part of the Mass.3
The decree has never been interpreted by local ecclesiastical
authorities as excluding all readings of the Epistle and Gospel
in the vernacular, and recent induits (1956) have derogated
from it. The Third Council of Baltimore, prescribed that the
Gospel be read in English at every Mass on Sunday. More
over, in 1938, instructions were issued in the dioceses of Paris
and Malines directing that the recitation in the vernacular
of the Epistle and Gospel at the same time as the celebrant
says them in Latin is permitted, provided the reading is
done by a priest, a religious or a teacher ; it may not
be done by a woman, even a religious, or by the whole
congregation.4 The practice may conduce considerably to a
better understanding of the Mass by the laity, but the decision
as to its feasibility in any particular place should be left to the
local Ordinary. On the other hand the reading of notices,
1 Donnelly, American Ecclesiastical Review, 1941 (August), p. 119.
1 Collectanea, N. 805. Vide Gasparri, De Sanctissima Eucharistia, ü, 851.
1 L. Rudolf, O.S.B., apud National Liturgical Week (American), 1941, p. 62.
4 Les Questtons Liturgiques et Paroissiales, 1938, p. 166 Cf. Induit to French
Bishops, 11 Oct. 1956—Celebrant may repeat Epistle and Gospel in the
vernacular.
THE MASS
15
etc., during the Offertory is less desirable and inevitably must
be a distraction. It cannot be said, however, to interfere with
the attention of members of the congregation to such a degree
as to invalidate their assistance al this portion of the Mass. The
arrangement is not, of course, the ideal one and is justifiable
only when it is simply unavoidable because congregations are
large and many public Masses must be celebrated in a limited
time. Again in this matter the directions of the local Ordinary,
who is the competent judge of particular needs and circum
stances, should be observed.
RUBRICS TO BE OBSERVED AT THE ‘ QUI PRIDIE'
Is there any authority for the practice of purifying the index finger
and thumb on the purificator before saying the Qui pridie!
Pauci.
It may not always be necessary for the celebrant to purify
his fingers before he takes up the host to be consecrated. In
the Ritus Servandus in Celebratione Missae he1 is directed that if
it is necessary he should do so by wiping the index finger and
thumb of each hand on the corporal—‘ extergit, si opus fuerit,
pollices ct indices super Corporale.’ For the celebrant to rub
his fingers on the purificator would, obviously, be both incon
venient and unrubrical, and it docs not seem that there is any
authority for the practice.12
RUBRICS AT MASS
At the consecration of the host at Mass many priests rest the
forearms only on the altar, and keep the elbows in front of the altar,
not resting on it. Is this practice correct?
Sacerdos.
The rubrics for the celebrant at Mass prescribe:3 ‘When
he has finished the words Accipite et manducate ex hoc omnes, he
places his elbows on the altar and standing with head bowed,
he pronounces the words of consecration distinctly, reverently
and inaudibly over the host. . .
Commentators are all
agreed in interpreting the phrase ‘ cubitis super Altare positis ’
as meaning the forearms. Van der Stappcn writes :4
1 viii, 4.
a O’Callaghan, Ceremonies of Low Mass (12th edit.), p. 102.
3 Ritus Servandus, viii, 5.
‘Van dcr Strappen-Crogacrt (1946), ii, p. 92.
16
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Hostiam accipit iterum inter pollicem et indicem dexterae manus, eatnque
tenet utraque manu ... et mox cubitos ponit super Altare, non integros
ad nodum usque, sed ita ut pro medietate ponantur super plicatures laterales
anterioris partis Corporalis ; . . . Caput inclinat profunde, et etiam
humeros, quantum necesse est ut cubiti reponi possint super Altare. Pedes
tenet unitos et aequaliter dispositos.
It is certainly incorrect for the celebrant to withdraw so far
from the altar that only his wrists are resting on it when he
bows for the consecration ; on the other hand it is not necessary
actually to place the elbows on the altar, because it would not
be easy to bow low in that position. The history of the present
rubric is bound up with the mediaeval controversy concerning
the precise moment of the consecration of the Host. Up to the
twelfth century or later it was a common practice to raise the
Host aloft while pronouncing the words of consecration. The
Host was raised at the words accepit panem, etc., and was clearly
visible to the people while the words of consecration were
pronounced. Towards the end of the twelfth century fears
arose that the faithful may be guilty of material idolatry by
worshipping the Host before the consecration. A synod of
Paris presided over by Odo of Scully (1196-1208) directed :
Praecipitur presbyteris ut cum in canone inceperint qui pridie tenentes
hostiam ne elevent cum statim nimis alte, ita quod possit videri a populo sed
quasi ante pectus detineant donec dixerint Hoc est corpus meum et tunc elevent
eam. ...1
The present rubric evolved from such decrees and its purpose
of keeping the Host reverently concealed while the celebrant
bows for the words of consecration is fulfilled in the most
dignified and effective manner if the celebrant is careful to
keep not only his wrists but his forearms on the altar at that
moment.
MAY THE BELL BE RUNG AT MASS
‘ CORAM SANCTISSIMO ’ ?
Is it, under any circumstances, permissible to ring the bell at Mass
when the Blessed Sacrament is exposed at another altar in the church ?
For example, in convent chapels where there is perpetual exposition,
may the bell not be rung at Masses celebrated on the side-altars?
C. A.
Decree No. 3157 of the Sacred Congregation of Rites con
tains a reply in the negative to the query :
1 Vide V. L. Kennedy, * The Moment of Consecration ’ in Mediaeval
Studies, 1914, vol. vi, p. 121.
THE MASS
]7
An observari possit usus qui viget in Belgii Dioecesibus, campanulam
pulsandi intra Missam, durante Sanctissimi Sacramenti expositione? saltem
in casu quo altare ubi celebratur Missa ? ad latere sit Altaris maioris ubi fit
expositio, et ita removeatur periculum irreverentiae erga Sanctissimum
Sacramentum patenter expositum.1
Eleven years later, in 1878, a further decree2 forbade the
ringing of the bell when Mass is said at the altar of exposition.
These decrees were in conformity with the Clementine Instruc
tion for the Forty Hours’ Prayer.3 Guardini, in his com
mentary on that Instruction, quotes, but disagrees with, the
opinion of Cavalcrius who would admit a custom by which
the bell is rung but only at the elevation of a solemn Mass
celebrated at the altar of exposition. The reason why the
decrees and all authorities excluded the sounding of the bell
at all Masses at other altars was that the faithful would thereby
be distracted from their adoration of the Blessed Sacrament.
However, a decree issued in 1902 and forbidding the practice
in a Missa Cantata is not now included in the official collec
tion ; the rubrics of the Missal and of the Caeremoniale Episco
porum do not give any ruling for solemn or for pontifical Masses.
On the occasion of the International Eucharistic Congress in
Rome, in 1922, the question was raised whether the bell should
ever be rung at the Sanctus and elevation of pontifical and
solemn Masses. A decision was given in the following terms :4
Sacra Congregatio, audito specialis Commissionis suffragio, quibusdam
casibus a communi regula iam exceptis per Decreta edita n. 3157, n. 3448,
et n. 3814, inspecta praxi communi et antiqua, perpensis rationibus quae
in casu aeque militant pro Missis privatis et aliis solemnioribus ; nempe
Christifidclim attentio, laetitia, devotio, fidei catholicae professio in veram
ac rcalem Jesu Christi praesentiam in SSma Eucharistia, eorumque con
sociatio angelicis choris ad laudandum Deum et adorandum ; quum neque
obstet praenotatum silentium, quod sicut in aliis caeremoniis, suppletur in
casu per expressas Rubricas quae non distingunt inter Missas privatas et
Missas solemniores, neque has excludunt, proposito dubio ita respondendum
consuit : Affirmative, et ad mentem.
The mind of the Congregation is that, where a contrary custom
has existed, this interpretation of the rubrics should now be
accepted and the practice followed of arousing the attention
and devotion of the faithful immediately before the Consecra
tion by sounding the bell or giving some other suitable signal.
I'hc decision docs not distinguish between solemn and pontifical
Masses celebrated in the ordinary way and those celebrated
—
-—
a
1 Mechlinien, 5th September, 1867, ad x.
3 S.R.C. 3448, Societatis Jcsu.
• S.R.C. vol. iv, p. 52 (Clem. Instr.) xvi).
< S.R.C. 4377.
18
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
coram Sanctissimo. Hcncc, many commentators in interpreting
this rely on the principle ubi lex non distinguit nec nos distinguere
debemus, and they regard as admissible the custom of ringing the
bell at the Sanctus and elevation of solemn Mass celebrated at
the altar of exposition.
To sum up : (a) The degrees state clearly, and all authors
agree, that the bell should not be rung at any low Mass said
during the time of exposition whether at the altar of exposition
or at a side altar ; (Z>) similarly it seems clear that the bell
should not be rung at a solemn or sung Mass celebrated at a
side altar ; (r) when solemn Mass is celebrated at the altar of
exposition there is extrinsic probability for each opinion.
Many1 rubricists hold that even in this case the bell should
not be rung ; others, however, argue that in this case the
faithful would not be distracted from the adoration of the
Blessed Sacrament, the ringing of the bell would only arouse
their devotion and, therefore, it is lawful to observe this prac
tice. In these circumstances, the custom of the place may
safely be followed ; where the custom exists of ringing the bell
at the Sanctus and elevation of a solemn Mass celebrated at the
altar of exposition, that custom may be lawfully continued.
COMMUNION WITH HOSTS CONSECRATED AT
THE SAME MASS
In the encyclical Mediator Dei the Holy Father recommends
strongly that Communion should be received during Mass with Hosts
consecrated at the Mass. In places where the number of communi
cants is constant, e.g. in a religious house or even in a rural community,
is there any obligation to consecrate a ciborium every morning in
order that those present may communicate only from Hosts conse
crated during this particular Mass?
Religious.
In his encyclical on the Liturgy, Mediator Dei, the Holy
Father after rejecting the error of those who would hold that
the Communion of the faithful is necessary to the integrity of
the sacrifice and who would erroneously regard the Communion
of all present as the culminating point of the Mass, goes on to
emphasize the Church’s desire that those present at Mass
1 E.g. Contra are Moretti, O’Connell. Stcrcky ; Pro arc De Amicis, Ephem.
Lit., 1921, pp. 282, 294; 1947, p. 83.
THE MASS
19
should communicate, and says : ‘ Moreover, our predecessor,
Benedict XIV, wishing to emphasize and throw fuller light
upon the truth that the faithful by receiving the Holy Eucharist
become partakers of the divine sacrifice itself, praises the
devotion of those who, when attending Mass, not only elicit a
desire to receive Holy Communion but also want to be nourished
by Hosts consecrated during the Mass, even though, as he him
self states, they really and truly take part in the sacrifice should
they receive a Host which has been duly consecrated at a
previous Mass. . . . Now it is very fitting, as the liturgy lays
down, that the people receive Holy Communion after the priest
has partaken of the divine repast upon the altar ; and as wc
have written above they should be commended who, when
present at Mass, receive Hosts consecrated at the same Mass.
. . . Still, sometimes there may be a reason, and that not
infrequently, why Holy Communion should be distributed
before or after Mass and also reasons why—even at Mass and
immediately after the priest has received the Sacred Species—
that Hosts consecrated at a previous Mass should be used. In
these circumstances the people duly take part in the Eucharistic
Sacrifice and frequently they can in this way more conveniently
receive Communion. Yet, although the Church strives to meet
the spiritual needs of her children, they for their part should
not readily neglect the directions of the liturgy and as often as
there is no reasonable cause against it, should aim at acting
in everything so that the living unity of the Mystical Body may
be more manifest at the altar.’
This is simply a re-statement of the principle which guided
the traditional practice of the Church up to the seventeenth
century. According to the ordinary laws of the Church Holy
Communion was distributed during Mass and from Hosts
consecrated at the same Mass. During the medieval period
the Blessed Sacrament was reserved only in the few particles
set aside for the Communion of the sick. Large numbers of
Hosts were consecrated and reserved for Communion only on
l'cria IV and I'eria V of Holy Week. By the beginning of the
sixteenth century, however, large ciboriums were commonly
used ior the consecration of Hosts sufficient in number for
communicating the faithful on two Sundays. After the Council
of 1 rent and as a reaction to some of the Protestant errors the
distribution of Communion outside Mass became more and
more usual. In the eighteenth century (1737-52) a controversy
arose concerning the obligation of the celebrant of Mass to ad
minister Communion to the faithful who asked for the sacrament
20
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
during Mass.1 In this connection Pope Benedict XIV in
1742 issued to the Italian Ordinaries the Instruction Certiores
effecti. The Pope pointed out that while Masses at which the
celebrant alone communicated were valid and lawfid, priests
who culpably refused to allow the faithful to communicate at
their Masses were to be reprehended. On the other hand the
faithful could not demand Communion at every Mass—
Fideles . . . cavebunt nc sibi iniuriam factam querantur si quandoque,
pro tempore loco et personis, Episcopus minime opportunum censuerit a
sacerdote celebrante Eucharistiam distribui iis qui adstant, quibus scilicet
eo ipso tempore facilis ct obvia suppetit ratio ad eamdem mensam accedendi
pluribus aliis locis cuivis instructam.
In 1741 the Sacred Congregation of Rites in a reply stated :
In Missa defunctorum, scu in paramentis nigris non ministratur Eucharstia per modum sacramenti extrahendo pyxidem a custodia ; potest tamen
ministrari per modum sacrificii, prout est quando fidelibus praebetur com
munio cum particulis infra eamdem Missam consecratis.
This reply, however, is not now contained in the authentic
collection of decrees and has been abrogated by a general decree
issued in 1868.2
Clearly, from the words of the Encyclical, communicating of
the faithful with Hosts consecrated at the same Mass is coun
selled merely. In religious communities where it can easily
be done the counsel should be followed ; certainly such com
munities should avoid the practice of receiving Communion
habitually before or outside Mass. In parochial churches there
arc many other considerations which may easily excuse from
any attempt to observe the ideal arrangement. Some authors
suggest,3 convincingly, that Communion received during Mass
by means of Hosts consecrated in the same Mass is more effica
cious both ex opere operantis and also because this closer
participation in the symbolic rites of the sacrifice is calculated
to evoke in the communicants a clearer realization of the unity
of the Mystical Body of Christ and thereby inspire dispositions
ensuring a more fruitful reception.
MAY HOLY COMMUNION BE DISTRIBUTED
AFTER MIDNIGHT MASS?
May Holy Communion be distributed immediately after the mid
night Mass which is celebrated at Christmas? If the Mass is a sung
Mass is this practice permissible?
pp
1 Vide Luigi Palladini, C.M., * La Controversia della Communione nella
Missa,' in Sliicellanea Liturgica.
* S.R.C., 3177.
’ Vide, Raimund Hammer, in Periodica, 1952.
TUE MASS
There is no objection to the practice of distributing Holy
Connnunion immediately after midnight Mass. According to
the general law Holy Communion may be given only during
the hours when Mass may be celebrated.1 In those churches
and oratories where Mass is lawfully celebrated at midnight
and Holy Communion distributed,2 the distribution may be
postponed until immediately after the Mass if it is more con
venient or advisable to do so.
The celebrant of a solemn or a sung Mass may not, while
wearing the Mass vestments, distribute Holy Communion imme
diately before or after the Mass. Holy Communion may be
given by another priest immediately after a sung Mass, but if
the celebrant wishes to do so he should first retire to the sacristy
and remove at least the maniple and chasuble. Since after
midnight Mass the distribution is taking place in connection
with the Mass, it should begin as soon as possible after the Mass,
without any unnecessary delay.3 It is noteworthy that now all
communicants even at midnight Mass must be fasting for three
hours from solid food and alcoholic drinks and for one hour
from non-alcoholic drink (except water).4
RUBRICS TO BE OBSERVED AT COMMUNION
OF MASS AND WHEN BINATING
(1) When Communion is to be given to the faithful during Mass,
is it correct for the celebrant, after he has completed his own Com
munion, to wipe the edge and side of the chalice or with his left
forefinger to remove any traces of the Precious Blood before he
covers the chalice with the pall?
(2) Is there any justification for the rather common practice, when
a priest is binating, of raising the chalice to his lips at the Offertory
of the second Mass and drinking any drops of the precious Blood
which may have remained from his first Mass ?
Religiosus
(1) ‘If there arc communicants at Mass, the priest after
taking the Blood and before drinking the wine and water genu
flects, and puts the consecrated particles in the pyx . . .’ [Ritus
Servandus').6 All rubricists add the direction that the celebrant,
1 Canon 867.
2 Canon 821,
2, 3; 867, § 4, and Canon 869. Decision of the Pont.
Com. for Interpretation of the Code, 16th March, 1936 ‘sacra Communio
distribui possit in Missa, quae sive turc sive apostolico induito celebratur media
nocte Nativitatis Domini.’
3 Cf. O'Connell, Celebration of Mass, ii., p. 166.
4 Motu Proprio. Sacram Communionem (19 March. 1957). Sick persons may
take non-alcoholic drinks and true and proper medicine, whether liquid or
solid without any limitation of time before Communion.
ΰ x, n. 6
22
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
before he takes up the consecrated particles, should cover the
chalice with the pall. The rubrics as ordinarily interpreted
safeguard sufficiently due reverence towards the consecrated
species and at the same time leave no room for practices which
would merely engender scrupulosity. It would not be correct
for the celebrant to use the purificator to wipe his lips before he
turns to distribute communion nor may he wipe the edge of
the chalice with his fingers or with the purificator. The puri
ficator is not blessed and it is not intended that it should come
into direct contact with the consecrated species. On the other
hand, the rubrics concerning the form, blessing and washing
of the pall make sufficient provision for the case where the pall
comes into contact with the edge of the chalice which is moist
with the Precious Blood. The underneath surface of the pall
which touches the chalice must be of linen, quite plain and
washable.1 After use its first washing is to be carried out by a
priest or by a person in major orders. Hence it is not correct
to insert cardboard to stiffen the pall since cardboard cannot
be washed ; the pall should be stiffened only with starched
linen or less preferably with celluloid which has a washable
surface. It may perhaps be recommended that, after the dis
tribution of communion, when the pall is removed from the
chalice, care should be taken that the surface which has been
in contact with the edge of the chalice should not touch the
altar-cloths before it has properly dried.
(2) Again, the practice described in the query is unnecessary
and cannot be justified in accordance with the rubrics. An
instruction on the rubrics to be observed in bination was issued
in 1868.2 It directed that at the conclusion of the first Mass,
after the last Gospel, the celebrant should uncover the chalice and
Si itaque Divini Sanguinis gutta quaedam supersit adhuc, ea rursus ac
diligenter sorbeatur. . . . Quod nullomodo omittendum est, quia Sacrificium
moralitcr durat et super extantibus vini speciebus, ex divino praecepto
compleri debet.
Gradually, however, a custom has grown up against this in
struction ; it has become customary that, when the second
Mass must be celebrated elsewhere, the celebrant purifies the
chalice immediately after the communion in his first Mass,
without waiting to consume the few remaining drops of the
Precious Blood which would have formed after the last Gospel.
In 1947 the Archbishop of Trent submitted a request for the
1 Vide: S.R.C. 4174; Collins, Church Edifice and Its Appointments, p. 216;
Callewaert, De Sacra Liturgia, i, p. 38 ; Directions for Use of Altar Societies, η 5θ’
1 S.R.C. 3068.
H
THE MASS
23
authentic interpretation of the words ‘ quin calicem purificct ’
occurring in the second part of the instruction, i.e. when both
Masses arc said in the same church, must the celebrant, after the
last Gospel, consume the few drops then formed or may he
simply neglect them ? The Sacred Congregation replied on
1st July, 1947 :
Servari posse praxim de qua in petitione : id est, sacerdos, in casu, non
oportet ut sorbeat Sanguinis guttas in calice exstantes, quamvis hoc facere
possit.1
This reply cuts the ground from under the reason alleged in the
original instruction ; clearly it is not true that the essence of
the sacrifice depends on the completion of the communion as
otherwise all the hosts and every particle of them consecrated
at the Mass would have to be consumed. Hence there is no
obligation on the celebrant to uncover the chalice at the end
of his first Mass to consume the few remaining drops of the
Precious Blood. If he has distributed communion to the faith
ful, he may conveniently do so at the conclusion of the com
munion or he may disregard the few drops that may meanwhile
have collected. Certainly he should disregard these few drops
at the Offertory of his second Mass, when he should, in accord
ance with the rubrics, pour in wine while holding the chalice
over the corporal. These few drops pertain to the first Mass
and they will lose their consecration on being absorbed in the
much greater quantity of unconsecrated wine which is poured
in at the Offertory.
NEW FASTING RULES AND BINATION
Do the new instructions concerning the Eucharistic fast involve
any change in the rubrics to be followed by a priest who must
celebrate two Masses on Sunday? Is the celebrant now bound to
purify the chalice with water at the first Mass and consume the
ablution or may he continue to follow the practice of not purifying
the chalice at all at the first Mass when both Masses are in the same
church or of not consuming the ablution at the first Mass when they
are in different churches?
In the Constitutio Apostolica de Disciplina servanda quoad leiunium
Eucharisticum, 1 Christus Dominus ’ (16th January, 1953) norma
η. IV directs
[Sacerdotes] qui bis vel ter Missam celebrant, ablutiones sumere possunt,
quae tamen, in hoc casu, non vino sed aqua tantum fieri debent.2
‘Vide Ephem. Lit., 1948, p. 284; I. E. Record, December, 1948, p. 1115'A.A.S., 1953, p. 24; Cf. I. E. Record, March, 1953, p. 235.
24
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
The Instruction of the Holy Office which gives an authentic
interpretation of the Constitution states :
. . . Omnes sacerdotes qui bis vel ter sunt Missam celebraturi, possunt
in prioribus Missis cluas ablutiones a rubricis Missalis praescriptis sumere,
sed tantum adhibita aqua, quae quidem, iuxta novum principium, ieiunium
non frangit. Qui tamen dic Nativitatis Domini vel in Commemoratione
omnium fidelium defunctorum tres Missas sine intermissione celebrat, quod
ad ablutiones attinet, rubricas observare tenetur.
Si vero sacerdos, qui bis vel ter Missam celebrare debet, per inadvertentiam vinum quoque in ablutione sumat non vetatur quominus secundam
et tertiam Missam celebret.1
J
Both these documents state that priests who arc binating or
trinating ‘ ablutiones sumere possunt ' not ‘ debent? Hcncc priests
remain free to follow the instruction which formerly governed
these circumstances, namely the instruction issued by the Sacred
Congregation of Rites in 1858. In the most recent (1952)
edition of the Rituale Romanum this instruction is published
unchanged, without even any reference to the reply given in
1947 permitting the purification of the chalice immediately after
the Communion instead of postponing it until after the last
Gospel. According to this instruction a priest who celebrates
two Masses in different places is directed to purify the chalice
with water at the first Mass but to refrain from consuming the
ablution.3 The water used to purify the chalice should, accord
ing to his circumstances, either be kept until Mass on the
following day, when it will be used at the purification of the
chalice (that is, if the priest will return there again for Mass)
or absorbed with cotton or hemp and burned, or put into the
sacrarium if there is one, and left to evaporate or poured into
the piscina. No doubt this instruction will in due course be
brought into line with the new decree, but meanwhile it has
not been abrogated and the celebrant may still follow it.
On the other hand, the celebrant of two or more Masses may,
if he wishes, avail of the new instructions. Hcncc, if he cele
brates two Masses with an interval between them, he may at
the first Mass purify the chalice with water alone and consume
the ablution since water does not now break the Eucharistic
fast. If through inadvertence he takes wine in the ablution he
may nevertheless celebrate the second Mass, if he is bound to
its celebration. If, on the other hand, he takes the wine inten
tionally he is no longer fasting and except in a case of necessity
he should refrain from celebrating a second Mass until at least
1 Ibid., p. 31.
1 Rit. Rom., tit. v, cap. 5.
THE MASS
25
three hours have elapsed when he could again celebrate,
e.g. an evening Mass, suppositis supponendis. Again, it may
happen on Christmas morning that a priest intending to
celebrate three Masses from devotion merely, not from any
obligation, takes wine even unintentionally with the ablutions
at his first Mass ; he should then abstain from celebrating a
second Mass. If two or more Masses are said without any
interval as on All Souls’ Day or Christmas Day, the ablutions
should not be taken and the rubrics prescribed in the missal
should still be observed. If the celebrant were to take an
ablution even in water only at the first or second Mass he
would violate these rubrics in a grave matter although he remains
fasting, but if he takes wine also in the ablution he is no longer
fasting and may not celebrate subsequently a Mass of devo
tion.1 The motu proprio, Sacram Communionem requires only
three hours fast from alcoholic drink (e.g. wine)—a mitigation
of the rule of the Apostolic Constitution, Christus Dominus, and
when an interval of three hours occurs the celebrant may and
should take the ablutions in wine and water at his first Mass.2
VERNACULAR PRAYERS AT MASS
I presume that it is permissible for the congregation, for example
at a children’s Mass, to recite in the vernacular prayers from the
Missal. May they recite all the prayers of the Ordinary of the Mass,
including the Offertory prayers and those of the Canon? May they
say the Our Father while the celebrant is reciting the Pater Noster?
And may they make the responses in the vernacular, e.g. to the
Dominus Vobiscum and Orate Fratres?
_
Pedagogus.
We would not agree that either of the proposed practices
may be easily approved. The decisions of the Sacred Congre
gation of Rites concerning the Dialogue Mass deal with the
reciting of prayers in Latin and for the most part do not take
cognizance of any custom by which the faithful would recite
vernacular translations of the Mass prayers. The following
decrees arc, however, pertinent to the present question :
(1) N. 4235 : Prayers and liturgical hymns, e.g. Introit,
Communion, the hymn Lauda Sion, may not be chanted in the
vernacular during private Mass.
(2) N. 4397 : It is forbidden for the congregation at Mass to
pronounce aloud the ejaculation Dominus meus el Deus meus at
the elevations of the Host and Chalice.
1 Periodica, 1953, Fasc. I, p. 67: Sacram Communionem (19 March, 1957).
’ Replies of Holy Office, 4 August, 1957.
26
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
(3) N. 4375 : “ The practice cannot be approved according
to which the faithful assisting at Mass read aloud the Secrets,
the Canon and even the words of Consecration, all of which
except a very few words of the Canon should, according to the
rubrics, be read secretly by the priest himself; nor can the
faithful who assist at Mass be permitted something that is
forbidden by the rubrics to the priests celebrating, who say
the words of the Canon secretly, for the sake of greater
reverence towards the sacred Mysteries and to increase the
veneration, humility and devotion of the faithful : hence, the
practice described above is to be reprobated as an abuse, and if
it has been introduced anywhere it is to be entirely removed.”
(4) The Sacred Congregation was asked in 1935 whether the
following customs could be sustained : (a) In seminaries and
religious houses and in some parishes a custom has become
established whereby the faithful together with the server make
the responses in private Masses provided that no confusion is
occasioned ; (A) In some places, at low Mass the people recite
aloud and together with the priest, the Gloria, Credo, Sanctus,
Benedictus and Agnus Dei. The Sacred Congregation, having
heard also the Liturgical Commission, replied that in accord
ance with Decree 4375 it is for the Ordinary to decide whether
in individual cases, in view of all the circumstances, namely,
the place, the congregation, the number of Masses which arc
being said at the same time, the proposed practice, though in
itself praiseworthy, in fact causes disturbance rather than
increases devotion. This can easily happen in the case of the
practice mentioned in the second question, even without passing
judgment on the reason alleged, namely, that the low Mass
is an abbreviated sung Mass.1
It must be emphasized that whatever theoretical conclusion
is reached concerning the liccity of the public recitation of the
Mass texts by the congregation, the practical decision on what
should be done in any particular church depends on the judg
ment of the local Ordinary. Also, the Roman decrees referring
this question to the discretion of the Ordinary do not envisage
a Dialogue Mass in the vernacular but only that the prayers
be said in Latin. The decision given in 1922 (N. 4375) certainly
rules out the possibility of the people’s reciting aloud either in
1 Vide Periodica, xxv (1936), p. 43. Father Hanssens, S.J., writing on the
Dialogue Mass in 1936, remarks : ‘ Infinita est copia dissertationum, dis
ceptationum, aliorumquc scriptorum quae de usu ct ritu missae dialogatac his
quindecim ferme annis edita sunt. Non omnia multum ad solutionem
quaestionis contulerunt.* In the years since 1936 the spate of writings on this
subject has been unabated. Obruimur scriptis.
THE MASS
27
Latin or in the vernacular the prayers of the Canon, the Offer
tory prayers or any other parts which the celebrant must, in
accordance with the rubrics, recite in secret. The earlier decree
excluding the chanting of translations of liturgical hymns such
as the Gloria, etc., docs not necessarily prohibit the recitation
of such translations, but the better interpretation seems to be
that what may not be chanted in the vernacular should not be
recited in the vernacular. Similarly it seems to be implied in
the decrees that if the people make the responses they should
do so in Latin. “According to the pars exposition of the decrees
the people arc said to respond to the celebrant and to recite
together with him (‘ cum illo ’ ; ‘ una cum ’). Certainly the very
notion of a ‘ response ’ supposes a common language, and unity
in prayer is ordinarily achieved by the use of one tongue.”1
The rubrics of the Ritus Servandus in Celebratione Missae in three
places1
2 direct that those present may respond with or in place of
the server—at the Confiteor, ‘ Cum minister et qui intersunt {etiamsi ibi
fuerit Summus Pontifex') respondent Confiteor ’ ; at the Kyrie Eleison,
‘Si minister, vel qui intersunt Celebranti non respondeant . . . ’ ; at
the Orate Fratres, ‘ Et responso a ministro vel a circumstantibus
. . .’ These responses, needless to say, must be in Latin.
Hence if, at a Mass for children, the congregation recite
aloud prayers from the Missal, they may not say either in Latin
or in the vernacular any prayers which are said secretly by the
celebrant such as the Aufer a nobis, Munda cor meum, Offertory
prayers, and prayers of the Canon. Nor may they use the
vernacular to respond directly to the celebrant. Some authors
suggest that they could make the responses to a reader who
would recite aloud a vernacular version of what the celebrant
is saying at the altar. May the people recite translations of
the other parts of the Mass, the Introit, Gloria, Credo, etc. ? The
better opinion seems to be that even this practice cannot be
easily approved, since it runs contrary to Decree N. 4235 and
certain decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda
forbidding this practice to the server and forbidding even the
reading of the Gospel text in the vernacular except in prepara
tion for a sermon.3 There is, nevertheless, a sufficiently strong
extrinsic authority for a milder interpretation of these decrees ;
many authors would justify the view that the Ordinary may
approve of the practice, especially at a Mass for children who
1 Father Donnelly in American Ecclesiastical Review, 1911 (vol. 105), p. 117.
1 N. III. IV, and \ II
3 Vide Donnelly, loc. cit ; /. E. Record, March, April, 1942. Canon 813
requires that the server respond; Vide Ephem. Lit., 1934. Battistini.
28
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
cannot easily be taught to recite Latin prayers intelligently.
Even most enthusiastic advocates of the vernacular Dialogue
Mass agree, however, that the Pater noster is traditionally reserved
to the celebrant alone.1 Within the limits determined by the
decrees, the local Ordinary can best decide how the congre
gation should assist by the recitation of prayers, etc., at Mass.
The guiding principle always adhered to by the Sacred Con
gregation of Rites in replying to questions on the Dialogue
Mass is fully stated in Decree 4375 as follows :
Quae per sc liccnt, non semper expediunt ob inconvenientia quae facile
oriuntur, praesertim ob perturbationes quas sacerdotes celebrantes et fideles
adstantes experiri possunt cum detrimento sacrae actionis et rubricarum.
Quapropter expedit ut senetur praxis communis. . . .
It must be borne in mind that ‘ active ’ participation may
remain external and contribute little to interior piety ; the
public recitation by the entire congregation of prayers at Mass
may easily become for some persons a burden and an obstacle
to their genuine internal union with the sacrifice which the
priest offers at the altar.
Efficientius et verius cum celebrante Missam concelebrat qui per totam
Missae celebrationem illi respondet, quam qui cum eo quasdam formulas
recitat ad partem dumtaxat non-Sacramcntalcm Missae pertinentes.3
‘ They also arc to be commended who strive to make the
liturgy, even in an external way, a sacred act in which all who
arc present share. This can be done in more than one way,
when, for instance, the whole congregation in accordance with
the rules of the liturgy either answer the priest in an orderly
and fitting manner, or sing hymns suitable to the different
parts of the Mass, or do both, or finally in High Masses when
they answer the prayers of the minister of Jesus Christ and also
sing the liturgical chant. ... It is to be observed also that
they have strayed from the path of truth and reason who, led
away by false opinions, make so much of accidentals as to
presume to assert that without them the Mass cannot fulfil its
appointed end.’3
WHY IS THE DE PROFUNDIS SAID AFTER LOW
MASSES IN IRELAND?
The custom of reciting the De Profundis after low Mass seems to
be altogether unknown outside Ireland. Why arc we bound to
say it and for what intention is it said—is it said simply for the
souls of the faithful departed or specifically for those who in the penal
’ E g. Shepherd in Orale Fratres, 1910, p. 21H ; vide also Ellard, The Dialogue
Mass. p. 207.
1 Hanssens, Periodica, 1939, p. 72.
*
’ Encyclical Mediator Dei, translation by Ellard.
29
THE MASS
times were deprived of the ordinary suffrages of the Church? I have
heard a preacher explaining that it was recited for the souls of those
Irish people who died for the Faith, but this explanation is not
convincing—Iniuriam facit martyrio qui orat pro martyre.
Hibernicus.
The custom of praying for the dead immediately after i\iass
is not an exclusively Irish one. In 1893 in a reply to the Arch
bishop of Port Louis (Mauritius) the Holy See recognized1 a
local custom described in the following terms :
... in quibusdam Ecclesiis usus invaluerit recitandi post Missas privatas
quae pro animabus in Purgatorio detentis, in Altari privilegiato celebrantur,
plures preces Indulgentiis ditatas, scilicet : De Profundis, actus fidei, spei, et
caritatis, Sacratissimum Cor Alariae, ora pro nobis et Orationem pro defunctis.
In Australia after certain Masses the De Profundis is recited in
the vernacular—a custom which may obviously have been
introduced by Irish priests.
The almost complete lack of written evidence on the point
makes it difficult to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion regarding
the origin of our Irish custom. The question was discussed in
the earliest numbers of the I. E. Record2 and that discussion
was summarized in 1935.3 The solutions then offered were :
(a) That it was introduced and authorized by the Holy See
as a substitute for the numerous Masses and suffrages for
which innumerable endowments were founded by the piety of
the faithful in former times, and which were taken away from
the Church at the time of the Reformation ; (Z>) That the custom
had prevailed in Ireland of observing abstinence on Wednes
days, Fridays and Saturdays, and the Holy Sec in response to a
request of the Irish bishops commuted the Wednesday abstinence
to the recitation of the De Profundis after low Mass ; (c) That
the practice arose during the wars of the Confederation and
against Cromwell in the seventeenth century, as a suffrage for
the souls of those who had been interred without the riles of
Christian burial.
The last of these three explanations seems to have been
merely a guess and it is not consistent with the slight evidence
available. Similarly the second suggestion seems also to be
unfounded. The only prayers mentioned in connection with
the commutation of abstinence arc the Rosary, the Litany of
the Blessed Virgin and the Pater and Ave. For example in the
decrees of the dioceses of Waterford and Lismore in 16774
” 1 S.R.C.~3805.
« 1865, p. 585; 1866, pp. 529 and 586;
81. E. Record, May, 1935, p. 536.
4 Spicilegium Ossoriense, ii, p. 235.
1867, p. 43.
30
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
reference is made to a brief of Pope Clement X empowering
the bishops to dispense from the obligation to abstain from
flesh-meat on Wednesday and from eggs on Friday. It was
first decided that those who wished to avail of this privilege
should recite twice weekly the Rosary or the Litany of the
Blessed Virgin, or the Pater and Ave. This regulation gave
rise to difficulties and scruples, hence it was decided that the
obligation should be fulfilled by having one Mass celebrated
and giving alms (£1) to the poor, or priests fulfil it by the cele
bration of a votive Mass of the Holy Spirit and the litanies of
the saints, or the poor by the recitation of the Rosary. Similarly
an earlier decree of a Provincial Synod of Armagh1 (1660)
allowed the use of milk on Fridays to those who recited five
times the Pater and Ave. Nowhere have we found a reference
to the De Profundis in connection with such commutations. It
would seem that the first suggested explanation is the most
acceptable and that the substitution of the De Profundis for other
suffrages for the dead was really derived from certain pre
Reformation practices.
It was not until the medieval period that the De Profundis
(Psalm CXXIX) was closely associated with prayer for the dead.
It was included in the Office for the Dead as early as the ninth
or tenth century but other psalms such as Dominus regit me
(Psalm XXII) or Dilexi quoniam exaudiet Dominus (Psalm CXIV)
sometimes suggested themselves as more appropriate. Where the
Cluniae custom of reciting the fifteen gradual psalms daily was
followed, the first five were usually said for all the faithful living,
the second five for all the faithful dead, and the last five for all
recently deceased.1
2 Psalm CXXIX was the first of the last group
and sometimes was recited alone with special collects for the
dead. Hence both in liturgical sendees and in popular devo
tions the De Profundis came to be regarded as the most appropriate
prayer for the dead.3 It held this position in the Sarum Pro
cessional and according to the version of the Sarum Rite followed
in Winchester at the end of the fourteenth century it was pre
scribed that the De Profundis be recited after the high Mass.4
It is worthy of note that the Sarum Rite commonly prevailed
1 Ibid, p. 196.
5 Vide Bishop, Liturgica Historica, p. 114.
3 Father Thurston, S.J., in Month, 1918, p. 358. Similarly when the Peni
tential Psalms were grouped Psalms VI, XXXI, and XXXVII were said
together, then Psalms I. and CI, and finally, for the dead, Psalms CXXIX and
CXL1I.
* Thurston, loc. ciu Cf. customary of St. Peter’s, Westminister, and St.
Augustine’s, Canterbury (XIV°). H.B.S. edition. Pp. 387 and 427.
infi XT. u ;
THE MASS
in many parts of Ireland before the Reformation. In English
sources there are many examples of wills in which the testators
established funds for the celebration of Masses and directed
that in connection with such Masses the De Profundis was to
be recited for the repose of their souls. For example John Baret
at Bury St. Edmunds in 1467 directed that the psalm was to
be said after the Gospel in Masses for his requiem ; Thomas
Hobson Clarke in 1528 directed in his will that the De Profundis
was to be inserted after the Lavabo—this was the most usual
custom.1 The following example from the Testamenta Eboracensia is typical of such testamentary directions : ‘ an honest
prest to synge at the altar of our said Lady daily by the space
of vii yeres xxxvli. and I will that what prest shall serve it every
day when he hath saide masse that he shall stand affore my
grave in his albe and ther to say the psalme of De Profundis with
the Colettes and then caste holy water opon my grave.’1
2 No
doubt similar customs prevailed in Ireland and when the pious
foundations and endowments were plundered there naturally
arose the practice of supplying for such suffrages by the recital
of the De Profundis at the end of Mass.
The custom does not seem to have been firmly and universally
established until towards the end of the seventeenth centurv.3
Amongst the diocesan decrees enacted for Waterford and Lis
more in 1677 it is stated :
4
Ubi viget consuetudo ut Sacerdotes recitent coram populo Litanias B.V.M.
sciant hoc se praestare debere antequam induantur Casula, idemque obser
vandum est in aspersione aquae benedictae, inque recitatione Psalmi De
Profundis.
And in the statutes for the diocese of Ossory published on 11 th
May, 1676, is the regulation :
Non dicatur Psalmus De Profundis, aut Litaniae cum Casula ne vulgus
existimet partes esse sacri.4
In the first draft of the Dublin Diocesan Statutes of 1686 the
clergy were required ‘ both at Mass and when they recite the
De Profundis after Mass to pray for the King and all the royal
family.’ In the many diocesan statutes which at the close of
the seventeenth and the beginning of the eighteenth centuries
1 Ibid.
’ Apud Wordsworth and Littlchalcs : The Old Senice Books of England, p. 49.
1A canon of the Synod of Clonmacnois in 1624 may be interpreted as
referring to the custom, but it is not sufficiently clear : ‘ Orent, nominatim
parochi inter missarum solcmnia pro defunctis suis parochianis, et maxime
pro bencmeritis de republica et suis benefactoribus.’ (O'Renehan Collection,
>, p. 148).
4 Spicilegium Ossoriense, iii, p. 101.
32
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
prescribe the recitation of the Litany of the Blessed Virgin Mary
or Pater and Ave at the close of Mass no reference is made to
the De Profundis nor is there any record of any communication
with the Holy Sec on the subject. Apparently it was simply
by then accepted as the established custom. We presume that
the primary intention for which the prayer is now said is the
repose of the souls of all the faithful departed.
A recent number of the Archivium Hibernicum1 contains the
text of the Bull granted by Pope Paul V in 1618 in favour of
the students of the Irish college at Bordeaux, and in it we find
the regulation that the students
sub finem omnium orationum ct prccum semper et ubique, imo finita missa,
et post singulas refectiones, psalmum De profundis unanimiter recitabunt.
The corresponding statutes in other Irish colleges on the Con
tinent do not contain any such reference to the De Profundis.3
For example, the rules of the college at Toulouse founded about
the same time as that at Bordeaux, namely, about 1603, direct :
Missa cum animi attentione ac devotione audita, omnes, juxta expressam
Fundationis clausulam, simul cantabunt psalmum Exaudiat te Dominus, etc.,
cum Oratione : Quaesumus omnipotens Deus, etc., pro rege christianissimo tunc
temporis regnante.
The rules for the colleges at Douai and Antwerp simply pre
scribe in general terms prayers for living and deceased bene
factors, nor is there any evidence that the custom followed in
the college at Bordeaux was a local French practice. Pope
Paul V is said to have sanctioned the ringing of the ‘ De profundis
Bell ’ in the churches of Rome.’ Hence it is not surprising to
find him explicitly permitting or suggesting the use of the De
profundis after Mass to the students of the college at Bordeaux.
The students who returned to Ireland from this college would
naturally have continued the custom at home if it were not
already an established practice there.
Although the obligation to recite the De profundis has become
established by force of custom, it has been strengthened in more
recent times by local statutes. The Maynooth Statutes for 1900
repeat the words of earlier synods :
. . . consuetudines pias illas quae adeo invaluerunt in Hibernia, Psalmum
De profundis post singulas missas recitandi . . . omni cura servandas et pro
movendas existimamus.
1 1950.
1 Vide Archiiium for 1947, 1949. O’Boyle, Irish College of Paris and Irish
Colleges on the Continent.
1 Bonniwell, History of Dominican Liturgy, p. 313. The practice of ringing
a bell to remind the people to pray for the dead was begun in Naples about
1546 and was observed in Milan and elsewhere in Italy in the seventeenth
century.
THE MASS
33
Visiting priests who have at least a quasi-domicilc in this country
are certainly bound to observe the custom. Even those priests
who have not any domicile and are visiting the country only
for a short time would seem to be bound to the practice just as
they are bound to recite an Oratio imperata prescribed by the
local Ordinary. A writer in the American Ecclesiastical Review1
suggests that American priests when passing through Ireland
would be bound to recite the De profundis only for reasons of
propriety after Masses which are somewhat public or only if
they arc satisfied that the law commuting founded Masses
ordains that the prayers be said by priests from abroad. Although
historically it is not clear that the recitation of the De profundis
is a commutation of foundation Masses, nevertheless the better
opinion seems to be that visitors arc bound, in accordance with
legal axiom Locus regit actum, just as they would be obliged to
recite a litany or any other special prayer prescribed by the
local Ordinary.
‘Any local regulations governing public
worship, in so far as these regulations are within the competence
of the local authority and do not conflict with the general
law, are to be observed by visiting priests.’2
WHEN MAY ONE OMIT THE PRAYERS AFTER MASS ?
On what occasions are the prayers after Mass omitted ? May one
or must one omit them on such occasions ?
_,
Michael.
The prayers prescribed by Pope Leo XIII are of obligation
after all private low Masses ; and it is strongly recommended
that the invocation Cor Jesu Sacratissimum be added.3 It has
been authoritatively decided that these prayers may be omitted
after conventual low Mass,1 after the votive Mass of the
Sacred Heart which is celebrated on the first Friday of the
month,5 and after the first and second Masses on Christmas
Day and on 2nd November if the celebrant says three Masses
without leaving the altar.β They may not be omitted after an
ordinary parochial Mass.7
11929, p. 415.
* Z. E, Record, 1937, p. 517. A plenary indulgence, under the usual condi
tions may be gained if the psalm is recited daily for a month.
’.4.Λ.£, xvi, 240, 6th January, 1884. The direction was renewed by
Popes Pius X and Benedict XV.
< S.R.C. 3697.
* S.R.C. 4271.
‘ S.R.C. 3855, 3705, 3936. They arc omitted completely if the last Mass is
sung, even if the celebrant leaves the altar momentarily to take part in the
processional entry for the sung Mass.
’ S.R.C. 3957.
Z—1593
34
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
On 20th June, 1913, the Sacred Congregation of Rites was
asked whether in view of the above exceptions granted in
favour of Conventual Masses, etc., the Leonine prayers could
be omitted after every Low Mass which could be regarded as
solemn by reason of its being the occasion of a first Communion
ceremony, a general Communion, a Confirmation, an Ordina
tion or a Marriage. The reply was in the affirmative, provided
that the Mass be celebrated with some solemnity or that it be
followed immediately and in due conformity with the rubrics
by some sacred function or pious exercise without the celebrant’s
leaving the altar.1
Hence the prescribed prayers may be omitted (1) after every
low Mass which may be regarded as solemn or as really taking
the place of a high Mass. On this score they may be omitted
after a conventual Mass, after the votive Mass on the first
Friday, after a low exequial Mass which is followed imme
diately by the Absolution ceremony, after the Masses which
are celebrated according to the Memoriale Riluum on Candlemas
Day, Ash Wednesday, Holy Thursday, and Holy Saturday,
after Masses in connection with a first communion or a general
communion, and after a votive Mass pro sponsis. (2) When
there is no special solemnity attached to the Mass, the prayers
arc to be omitted if it is followed immediately by some solemn
sacred function carried out directly by the celebrant of the
Mass. The better opinion is that these two conditions of
solemnity and continuousness must be taken together.2 Firstly,
it is necessary that there be some solemnity in the function :
in 1887 it was decided that the prayers may not be omitted
because of some small function or merely because Holy Com
munion must be distributed after the Mass. Secondly, it is
necessary that the celebrant should not retire to the sacristy
before the ceremony. For example, they may be omitted if a
Benediction service follows immediately on the Mass, provided
that the celebrant of the Mass also officiates at the Benediction
and that he does not meanwhile retire to the sacristy.3
Some rubricists maintain that the two conditions arc to be
taken disjunctively, and that the Leonine prayers may be
omitted on every occasion when the celebrant performs any
function without leaving the altar : they may, therefore, be
1 4305, 20th June, 1913. They would be omitted also on the occasion of
a religious profession, or a Mass said in connection with jubilee celebrations,
etc.
11. E. Record, 1934. Ephcm. Lit., 1931. p. 302, and 1933. p. 538.
* Ephern. Lil., 1933, loc. cit. O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 208.
Vavasscur-Stercky, i, p. 500.
THE MASS
35
omitted if Holy Communion is distributed immediately after
Mass. This opinion, however, is contrary to the decrees published
by the Sacred Congregation of Rites in 18871 and 1916,2 and
also to a private reply given on 23rd November, 1932.3 An
explicit exception has been made in favour of the occasion on
which there is a general communion (c.g. at the end of a retreat),
because such a communion has a special importance and
concerns the whole congregation, not merely one section of it.
The Leonine prayers, therefore, are to be recited after every
low Mass except when there is some solemnity in the Mass or
in a subsequent function which takes place immediately. These
exceptions to the general law must be interpreted strictly,4 and
cannot be extended to cover cases which have no solemn or
distinctive character.
DIFFICULTIES IN INTERPRETING THE RUBRICS
CONCERNING THE OMITTING OF THE PRAYERS
AFTER MASS
Are the two clauses of S.R.C. 4305 to be taken disjunctively ?
The wording of this decree is * Si Missa cum aliqua solemnitate
celebretur, vel Missam quin celebrans ab altari recedat, immediate
ac rite subsequatur sacra functio seu pium exercitium. . .
Why
should ‘ vel ’ preceded by a comma be read as ‘ et ’ ? VavesseurStercky and Brehm interpret the clauses of the decree as disjunctive.
In regard to the decisions of S.R.C. of 1887 (3682), 1916 and 1932,
which are cited to prove that the Leonine prayers may not be omitted
if Holy Communion is given after Mass, may I observe :
(1) D. 3682 is prior to D. 4305 and in any case is concerned with
the moment at which the Leonine prayers should be said;
(2) The responses to queries Π and III of S.R.C., June 2, 1916,
were suppressed when the official volume of the decrees was published
in 1927. In any case these queries of 1916 were ambiguous and the
solutions given to them were ambiguous also;
(3) The private reply of 1932—never officially published—does not
prevent the principle enunciated in D. 4305 from being applied to the
case of the distribution of Holy Communion after low Mass.
1 3682.
i A.A.S., 1916, p. 227. ‘An preces post Missam omittere debeat Sacerdos,
qui Sacrum facit in Oratorio cuiusdam Communitatis Religiosae, dum ipsa
Communitas vel lectioni meditationis, vel alteri Missae assistit, vel ad reci
piendam Sacram Communionem accedit, vel pias preces in communi recitat ?
An liceat Preces omittere in fine Missae quae celebratur in altari Sanctissimi
Sacramenti si immediate post eam Sacra Communio administranda sit ?
Rufi, ad utrumque Negative.
1 Polotcn. Vide Ephem. Lit., 1533, p. 537.
‘ Canon 9.
36
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
As the addition of prayers in the vernacular to Mass is an accretion
and anomalous, I think I am right in saying that the best modern
rubrical authorities tend to interpret the decision of such a Decree
as 4305 as widely as possible, not strictly as you suggest.
It seems, unfortunately, that the reasons for the stricter inter
pretation are in the present state of the law the better founded
and that the celebrant of a low Mass should recite the Leonine
Prayers, even on those occasions when he must immediately
afterwards distribute Holy Communion to some members of
the congregation. The point really at issue is the correct inter
pretation of the decision published 20th June, 1913 (D. 4305).
The exact words of that Decree were as follows :
An attentis S.R.C. Decretis n. 3697, Ordinis Min. Capuecinorwn, 7 dcccmbrii
1888 ad III, de Missa Convcntuali sine cantu, et η. 4271 Baoiritn., 8 junii
1911 ad II de Missa votiva lecta S. Cordis Jesu, prima feria cuiusvis mensis,
etiam aliqua similis Missa lecta, ex. gr. occasione primae communionis, aut
communionis generalis, sacrae confirmationis vel ordinationis aut pro sponsis
haberi possit uti solemnis ; eique applicari valeant praefata decreta quoad
Preces in fine Missae, a Summo Pontifice praescriptas, omittendas ? Affirmative,
si Missa cum aliqua solemnitate celebretur, vel Missam quin celebrans ab
altari recedat, immediate ac rite subsequatur aliqua sacra functio seu pium
exercitium.1
Clearly this decision has been given not in favour of every
low Mass, but only for those celebrated on some special occa
sions—‘ etiam aliqua similis Missa lecta.’ The distribution of
Holy Communion docs not concern the whole congregation,
since ex hypothesi there is no question of a general Communion.
Hence it seems to be more correct and more in conformity with
the Decree for the celebrant to recite the Leonine prayers for
the whole congregation before he proceeds to a function which
concerns only those who wish to communicate.2
Moreover, Decree 4305, which is uniform with other decrees
such as n. 3697 and n. 4271, contains an exception to the
general law, and is, therefore, to be strictly interpreted. It
establishes an exception rather than confers a favour and hence
comes under the rule of strict interpretation.3
Huic regalac subsunt leges . . . sive particulares sint sive etiam universales,
quae, . . . veram nonnam exceptionalem constituunt, nonnam scilicet non solummdo
ab alia lege communi et generaliori, ... in eadem materia lata diversa sil,
sed et exorbitans sive derogans, quaeque proinde quamdam singularitatem
juris, non necessario tamen anormalitatem contineat.4
1
1913, p. 311.
1 Ephem. Lit., 1916, p. 454 (Dr. Piacenza) ; ibid., 1931, p. 303.
’ Canon 19.
4 Michicls, Nomae Generales, i, p. 449 ; Vcrmcersch, Epitome (1938), p. 119.
THE MASS
37
This opinion is supported by a number of explicit decisions
which have been issued by the S.R.C. and all of which still
retain their force. It is true that the precise purpose of Decree
3682 (23rd November, 1887) was to decide the time at which
the Leonine Prayers should be said, but clearly it is there
assumed that the prayers are to be recited even when Holy
Communion must be distributed.1 This decision was repeated
in a reply published on 7th December, 1900,2 and it has not
been abrogated by the 1913 Decree (4305).
. . . Leges posteriores ad priores trahendae sunt ct his quantum fieri
possit conciliandae.3
Decree 4305 must be interpreted in conformity with such
earlier decisions and its meaning is clearer also in the light of
replies given after 1913, notably those issued in 1916.
The replies which were published in the Acta Apostolicae
Sedis on 2nd June, 1916, have not been suppressed. They were
not included in the official collection of the Decrees of the
Sacred Congregation of Rites published in 1927. The second
of these queries was obscure because of the use of the words
omittere debeat, while the third was ambiguous because it did not
state clearly whether Holy Communion was to be distributed
after Mass by the celebrant or by another priest. It is, however,
erroneous to conclude that every reply that is omitted from the
official collection is eo ipso suppressed. In the preface to the
official collection it is clearly stated that those decrees firstly
are omitted
quae circa idem subtectum undecumque relatum, saepius repetita supervacuo
et otiose locum tenere compertum sit
and thirdly those
quae sccum ipsa aut cum certo Rubricarum praescripto confligerent.
*
The 1916 replies explicitly referred back to the earlier Decree,
4305—
et demur Decreta, praesertim Decretum de precibus in fine Missae recitandis
diei 20 Junii, 1913.
*
This fact combined with obvious defects in the questions and
1 S.R.C. 3682. ‘ Utrum preces praescriptas in quibusdam casibus, nempe
vel alicuius parvae functionis vel communionis distribuendae peracta demum
ista adnexa Missa caeremonia recitare liceat ; an subsequi Missam ipsae
temper immediate debent ? Res[>. . . . recitandae sunt immediate expleto
ultimo Evangclio.’
1 /f./l.S., 1900, p. 632. Brunen.
’ Canon 23.
‘Vol. i, p. xiv. Callcwacrt, De Litureia Univertim. p. 136.
lA.A.S., 1916, p. 227.
38
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
replies, sufficiently explains their omission from the official
collection. The conclusion that the replies arc thereby sup
pressed is unwarranted. The revocation of a Decree is not to
be presumed ; it must be proved and in this case the weight
of evidence favours the contrary opinion.1
In 1932 the Sacred Congregation of Rites dealt with the
following questions :
1. An decretum dici 20 junii 1913, n. 4305 interpretationi authenticae
dici 23 november 1887, η. 3682, derogaverit?
2. Et quatemus negative, num decretum dici 2 junii 1916 vcluti abrogatum
censendum sit, an vero vigeat ctiamnum tum hoc ultimum, tum praecedens
anni 1887?
The replies were :
Ad. 1. Negative.
Ad. 2. Negative ad primam partem, affirmative ad secundum.
rescripsit et declaravit, dic 25 novembres, 1932.
Atque ita
These replies were published privately in the periodical Unitas
in the province of Porto Alegre, Brazil, and are to be found also in
the Ephemerides Liturgicac, 1933, p. 537. They certainly indicate
that the decrcss issued in 1916, despite their defects, cannot be
completely ignored.
On the precise meaning of Decree n. 4305 rubricists arc not
in complete agreement. I believe that the stricter view is
more correct ;2 it is in accordance with the soundest principles
of canonical interpretation and in conformity with the explicit
indications which we have of the mind of the Sacred Congre
gation. These prayers were in the first instance prescribed by
Pope Leo XIII, and that direction was renewed by Pope
Pius X and Benedict XV. In 1930 Pope Pius XI, when direct
ing that in future they be offered for Russia, showed clearly
that like his predecessors he attached considerable importance
to them.3 There may be good arguments for the opinions of
those modern rubrical authorities who hold that the Leonine
Prayers arc an anomalous accretion, but until the question is
decided by the Holy Sec the existing rubrics arc to be accepted
as they stand, although one may wish that the obligation be
interpreted away as frequently as possible.4
1 Ephem. Lit., 1933, p. 539 (P. Battistini, C.M.).
1 Cf. Acrtnys, Compendium Sacrae Liturgiae, p. 90 ; Ephem. Lit., 1913, p. 736.
’.L.-1.S.. 1930, p. 300.
* Cardinal Lcrcaro, Archbishop of Bologna, on 22nd July, 1955, obtained
from the Sacred Congregation of Rites a special induit permitting a celebrant
who has preached a homily during Mass to omit the Leonine prayers after
the Mass.
THE MASS
OMITTING THE PRAYERS AFTER MASS;
PARTICULAR EXAMPLES
(1) If on a Sunday instead of a Missa Cantata there is a low Mass
at which the choir sing the Asperges and some hymns in Latin or in
the vernacular, can it be maintained that this low Mass takes the
place of a Missa Cantata and that, therefore, the Leonine prayers
should, or at least may, be omitted? When the choir sing the Asperges,
Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus and Agnus Dei (only) should these
prayers be left out?
(2) Is the omission of the Leonine prayers after the first Friday
(low) Mass of the Sacred Heart facultative or obligatory? What
is the force of the decree published on 8th June, 1911?
L. A.
(1) It docs not seem that the Leonine prayers may be omitted
merely because hymns or even the liturgical texts arc sung by
the choir during the Mass. These prayers are of obligation
after a low Mass unless it is celebrated with some solemnity
or can be classified as one of the exceptional cases admitted in
the decrees of the Sacred Congregation.1 The Rubrics of the
Missal make only one explicit reference to a ‘ Sung Mass ’
without deacon and subdeacon:2 ‘On occasions when the
celebrant sings Mass without deacon and subdeacon, the Epistle
is chanted by a reader. ... The Gospel, however, is sung at
the gospel corner by the celebrant himself, who also sings :
Ik, missa est, or Benedicamus Domino, or Requiescant in pace, as the
case may be, at the end of Mass.’ In many places now, for
example throughout France, the Leonine prayers are omitted
after all public Masses on Sunday and it may be contended that
a parochial Mass celebrated in the circumstances described in
the query has some special solemnity attached and that, therefore,
the prayers are not necessary. This would not seem, however,
to be strictly in conformity with Decree 3957.
(2) . . . omissio precum ciusmodi nunquam praescribitur . . . sed tantum
permittitur . . . nisi loci Ordinarius, iustis de causis, illas praecipiat.3
The decree published on 8th June, 1911, simply stated that in
relation to these prayers the special votive Mass of the Sacred
Heart could be considered as having the same privilege as the
conventual and solemn Masses mentioned in Decree 3697. In
making specific exceptions to the obligation of reciting the Leonine
prayers the Congregation has always avoided the expression
‘ omitti debeant ’ -the omission is facultative not obligatory’.
1 Vide I. E. Record, January', 1934, May and October, 1944.
1 Rubricae vi, 8, trans, in Laws of Holv Mass (Francis).
3 Ephem. Lit., 1929, p. 122.
40
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
SIGN OF THE CROSS AT CONCLUSION OF LEONINE
PRAYERS
Is it correct for the celebrant to sign himself at the conclusion
of the Leonine prayers?
Student.
No. There is no justification either in the liturgy' or in
the directions of rubricists for this practice. The sign of the
cross is not prescribed at the conclusion of liturgical functions.
The symbolical significance of the sign of the cross makes it
appropriate rather for the beginning of the sacred function
which is begun and carried through in the name of the Most
Holy Trinity. In particular the rubrics of the Missal pre-suppose
that immediately after concluding Mass the celebrant will
begin in thanksgiving the recitation of the antiphon Trium
Puerorum, etc. :
Finito Evangclio Sancti Joannis, discendcns ab altari,
actione dicit Antiphon Trium Puerorum cum reliquis.
pro gratiarum
Canon 818 states :
Reprobata quavis contraria consuetudine, sacerdos celebrans accurate
et devote servet rubricas suorum ritualium librorum, caveatque ne alias
ceremonias aut preces proprio arbitrio adiungat.
The rubrics imply that there is an obligation, needless to say
binding sub veniali, to recite the antiphon with the canticle
Benedicite, etc.1 If the celebrant has not memorized it he should
read it after he has unvested at the beginning of his thanks
giving. The general obligation to make some thanksgiving
after Mass is imposed by canon 810—
w
Sacerdos ne omittat ad Eucharistici Sacrificii oblationem sese piis precibus
disponere, coque expicto, gratias Deo pro tanto beneficio agere.
DURATION OF MASS
i
■
J
■
E
■
K
I
I
A number of manuals of moral theology state that to celebrate
Mass in notably less than half an hour could hardly escape being a
venial sin, because such haste would impede devotion and make the
observance of the rubrics impossible. But I know a number of
excellent priests who celebrate Mass in twenty minutes habitually
and who seem to have no scruple on the matter. Are some manuals
unduly exacting in this matter? They quote St. Alphonsus and other
doctors for the view that to say Mass in a quarter of an hour could
scarcely be excused from mortal sin. Do theologians still accept this
view ?
Velox.
1 O’Connell, op. cit., p. 137.
THE MASS
41
The rubrics of the Missal prescribe I1
Sacerdos maxime curare debet ut ea quae clara voce dicenda sunt, distincte
et apposite proferat, non admodum festinanter, ut advertere possit quae
legit, nec nimis morose, ne audientes taedio afficiat.
Most theologians follow the opinion of Pope Benedict XIV and
St. Alphonsus in commenting on these rubrics. The former12
warns priests against the habit of celebrating Mass too slowly.
He quotes with approval both St. Philip Neri’s rebuke to those
who would indulge in long meditations while celebrating and
also the advice of Cardinal Bona :
Omnia verba, quae sive elata sive submissa voce proferentur, dare, dis
tincte, ferventer et absque ulla festinatione pronunciabis, nihil interim mente
revolvens : quantumvis bonum te sanctum videatur, quod a propria et
litterali verborum significatione alienum sit, ut te menti Ecclesiae conformes,
quae omnes Missae preces, lectiones, et sententias magno cum delectu ad
Sacerdotis et adstantium et devotionem selegit.
Benedict XIV therefore reaches the reasonable conclusion that
‘ in accordance with the unanimous opinion of writers at least
twenty minutes should be given to the celebration of Mass
and it should not exceed half an hour.’3 St. Alphonsus points
out that, if less than a quarter of an hour is given to the offering
of the sacrifice, there would be danger both of grave irreverence
in neglect of the rubrics and of grave scandal to the faithful :4
Ncc facile quis mihi persuadebit, sc communiter cum sensu pietatis, et
sine multis imperfectionibus, intra horae quandrantem finire sacrum.5
While these general principles should be borne in mind, it is
neither wise nor desirable to seek to determine too precisely
how many minutes should be devoted to the discharge of this
sacred function, in relation to which account must be taken
of many individual and personal considerations. A celebrant
who has acquired facility in reading Latin and who is careful
to avoid all unnecessary delays could with ease and without
incurring the risk of cither irreverence or of scandal celebrate
Mass in twenty minutes.® Deliberate slowness is not a virtue.
On the contrary, to prolong unduly the celebration of Mass will
1 Rubricae Generales, xvi, 2.
1 De Sacrosancto Missae Sacrificio, lib. iii, cap. xxiv, n. 3.
* Ibid.
‘ ‘. . . difficulter posse excusari a mortali sacerdotem, qui infra quandrantem Missam absolveret, etiamsi Missa sit ex brevioribus vel de Sancta Maria
in Sabbato ; quia in tam brevi spatio committere debet duos graves defec tus,
alterum gravis irreverentiae erga sacramentum ; alterum gravis scandali
erga populos.’ Theol. Mor., lib. vi, n. 347.
4 Gobatus apud Benedict, xiv, loc. cit.
•Vide e.g. Prummer, Theol. Mor., iii, par. 292 : ‘ Ergo sacerdos curet, ut
ad minus 20 minuta impendet celebrationi Missae privatae [ordinariae]
neque excedat semihoram.’
42
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
more probably engender in the celebrant affectation or scrupu
losity and be for his congregation a source of wearisome
distractions.
OSCULA OBLIGATORY AT HIGH MASS
The incense spoon, thurible, etc., are not kissed at Benediction
when they are presented to the celebrant; is it permissible to omit
such ceremonial kisses also during high Mass? The kissing of objects
is an outmoded method of expressing respect for the person receiving
them and if this custom could be discontinued the rubrics of High
Mass would be greatly simplified and, perhaps, more dignified?
Cappellanus.
The rubrics and decrees clearly prescribe the ceremonial
kissing of the celebrant’s hand and of any object which is pre
sented to the celebrant. Even when the deacon holds a higher
position or dignity in the church than does the celebrant he
must render these honours because they are directed not
towards the person of the celebrant but towards his sacred office.
Gavantus briefly explains the symbolism of these ceremonies :
■'■■■■■IM —
ft
Osculum rei quae porrigitur fit ad fidem ct dicitur osculum fidci ; osculum
vero manus est ad venerationem. ...1
Truc, the usage is medieval and may seem little in harmony
with the spirit of our time ; one may have the same feeling in
relation to other detailed actions in the liturgy
*,
hence it is
useful to recall the thought expressed by Romano Guardini :
‘ The individual has to renounce his own ideas and his own
way. He is obliged to subscribe to the ideas and to follow the
lead of the liturgy. To it he must surrender his independence ;
pray with others and not alone ; obey, instead of freely disposing
himself. ... It is furthermore the task of the individual to
apprehend clearly the ideal world of the liturgy. He must
shake off the narrow trammels of his own thought. ... It
goes without saying, therefore, that he is obliged to take part
in exercises which do not respond to the particular needs of
which he is conscious ; ... he must at times—and this is
inevitable in so richly developed a system of symbols, prayer
and action—take part in proceedings of which he docs not
entirely, if at all, understand the significance. All this is particu
larly difficult for modern people who find it so hard to renounce
their independence. . . . The requirements of the liturgy can
be summed up in one word, humility. Humility by renuncia
tion ; that is to say by the abdication of self-rule and selfsufficiency.’ (In The Spirit of the Liturgy, p. 41.)
* Pars II, Tit. IV (x).
THE MASS
43
THE CHANT OF THE ORDINARY OF THE MASS.
In chanting the Ordinary of the Mass is it correct to use the
Gloria from one arrangement and the Kyrie, etc., from different
arrangements or must all be taken from the same Mass?
In the Gradualc Romanum after Credo IV the following
rubric occurs : ‘ This Ordinary is not meant to be a matter of
hard and fast rule : chants from one Mass may be used together
with those from others, Ferial Masses excepted. In the same
way, in order to add greater solemnity, one or more of the
following Chants ad libitum may be employed.’ Hence the Kyrie
may be taken from one Mass and the Sanctus, etc., from another ;
on ferias, however, only the appointed Masses, namely Nos.
XVI and XVIII, may be used. The use of polyphonic chants
is not entirely excluded, provided that the music be of suitable
and worthy character. ‘ [These] qualities arc possessed in an
excellent degree by the classic polyphony, especially of the
Roman School, which reached its greatest perfection in the
fifteenth century owing to the works of Pierluigi da Palestrina,
and continued subsequently to produce compositions of excel
lent quality from the liturgical and musical standpoint. The
classic polyphony agrees admirably with Gregorian Chant, the
supreme model of all sacred music, and hence it has been found
worthy of a place side by side with the Gregorian Chant in
the more solemn functions of the Church. . . . The liturgical
text must be sung as it is in the books without alteration or
inversion of the words, without undue repetition, without
breaking syllables, and always in a manner intelligible to the
faithful who listen. ... It is not lawful to keep the priest at
the altar waiting on account of the chant or the music for a
length of time not allowed by the liturgy. . . . The Gloria and
Credo ought, according to the Gregorian tradition, to be rela
tively short.’1
LICEITY OF ORGAN ACCOMPANIMENT DURING
THE PENITENTIAL SEASONS
I understand that the rubrics and decrees of the Sacred Congregation
of Rites forbid organ accompaniment for solemn Mass and Vespers
de tempore during Advent and Lent, with the exception of Gaudete
and Laetare Sundays. In my church these decrees are completely
ignored; the organist plays gaily away in every Mass throughout the
1 Aiotu Probrio of Pius X, pars. 4. 9, 23.
H
44
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
year. Whose duty is it to call attention to the point? I believe that
it is tolerated to play the organ during the actual singing when the
choir is weak but not outside the time of singing. But I doubt that
my choir could claim that help, as they can render polyphonic items
without accompaniment with apparent ease.
Liturgicus.
On Sundays of Advent and Lent, except Gaudete and Laetare
Sundays, at Masses and Vespers de tempore the organ may be
played only if it is necessary to sustain the voices of the choir
and only during the actual singing.1 On all feast days and on
all other Sundays throughout the year the organ may be played.
On the ferias of Advent and Lent, except those immediately
following Gaudete and Laetare Sundays, it is recommended but
not prescribed that the organ remain silent.2 The Caeremoniale
Episcoporum prescribes :3
In omnibus Dominicis, cl omnibus festis per annum occurcntibus in quibus
populi a senilibus operibus abstinere solent, potest in ecclesia organum ct
musicorum cantus adhiberi,
and a decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites published
on 2nd September, 1741,4 decides :
Organa non silent quando Ministri Altaris, Diaconus scilicet ct Subdiaconus.
utuntur in Missa Dalmatica ct Tunicclla, licet color sit violaceus.
During the last three days of Holy Week, from the end of the
Gloria on Holy Thursday until its beginning in the Mass of
Holy Saturday, the organ may not be used even to accompany
the voices of the singers at any liturgical function.5 Even on
Gaudete and Laetare Sundays the organ may be played only at
Sung Mass and at the Major Hours of the Office, but not at
the other Canonical Hours.0
The obligation of insisting on the observance of these rubrics
rests with the rector of the church and his Ordinary. An Instruc
tion issued by the Cardinal Vicar of Rome in 1912 contains a
useful example of the application of these principles in the
diocese of Rome:7 ‘The Reverend Parish Priests, and
Superiors of Churches and Chapels, must carefully study the
ecclesiastical regulations regarding sacred music, and see to
it that they are made known to choirmasters, organists and
‘Carr. Epis. lib. i, cap. xxviii ; S.R.C. 4265 (September, 1911).
’ Caer. Epis., loc. cit. n. 13.
* Loc. cit.
‘ S.R.C. 2365 ad 4.
» S.R.C. 3515, 3535. 4067.
• S.R.C. 2245.
’Vide Catholic Church Music (published by Burns Oates and Wasbbourne),
p. 26.
45
THE MASS
singers on whom they will impress the extreme importance of
obedience in this respect. They will be held directly responsible,
together with the choirmaster, for any transgression which
unfortunately is liable to occur in their churches.’ Obviously
the choirmaster can best judge whether or not his choir needs
the assistance of the organ. Except during the last three days
of Holy Week, the organ may always be used for sustaining the
voices even when polyphonic music is rendered.
There arc, of course, no such precise rules governing the use
of the organ at non-liturgical functions, but on these occasions
also certain principles stated by Pope Pius X in his Molu Proprio
on ecclesiastical music should be borne in mind.1 ‘Although
the music proper to the Church is purely vocal, music with
the accompaniment of the organ is also permitted. ... As
the chant should always have the principal place, the organ
or instruments should merely sustain and never oppress it. It
is not permitted to have a chant preceded by long preludes or
to interrupt it with intermezzo pieces. The sound of the organ
as an accompaniment to the chant in preludes, interludes and
the like must be not only governed by the special nature of the
instrument, but must participate in all the qualities proper to
sacred music.’
TONE OF VOICE AT HIGH MASS
Is it possible for the celebrant at High Mass to pronounce the
words of the Canon in a voice so subdued that he may hear himself
but not be heard by the deacon?
Student.
The General Rubrics of the Missal direct that those
prayers which are to be said in a low tone of voice should be
heard only by the celebrant himself and not by others in the
vicinity :
Quae vero sccrcto dicenda sunt, ita pronuntiet, ut ct ipscinet sc audiat,
et a circumstantibus non audiatur.1
2
It is generally agreed3 that the celebrant would not be at fault
if the secret prayers were heard by the server only or by others
who were close by on the predella or steps of the altar, but
they certainly should not be heard by the congregation or by
1 Ibid. p. 10.
* Ruh. Gen. Mis., xvi, 2.
3 Cappello, De Sacramentis, i, p. 829 (1938 edition)
Ceremonies (Bruce, 1944), p. 65.
O’Connell, Book of
46
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
those assisting at any distance from the altar. This applies
especially to the Canon and to the words of Consecration,
although to read aloud the prayers of the Canon would not be
more than vcnially sinful unless there is danger of scandal or of
contempt of the rubrics. The words of Consecration are to be
pronounced attente, continuate, distincte, reverenter et secreto.1 These
words arc the form of the sacrament and, therefore, unless he
be prevented by some extrinsic impediment (e.g. deafness, or
the noise made by the congregation) the celebrant should hear
himself: otherwise he may endanger the validity of the sacra
ment. The other prayers of the Canon must be really pro
nounced, articulated by the organs of speech and not merely
read mentally or with the eyes only.2 It is not necessary that
he hear every word distinctly ; it suffices if the words are
perceptibly pronounced and the celebrant can assure himself
at least by internal hearing that his prayer is vocal.
RUBRICS TO BE OBSERVED DURING THE CREDO
AT A SOLEMN HIGH MASS
When, outside the feasts of the Nativity and Annunciation, the
choir is singing the Credo in a solemn Mass, are the masters of
ceremonies, the acolytes, the thurifer and the congregation supposed
to kneel at the verse incarnatus est . . . ?
Pauci.
In the General Rubrics of the Missal it is prescribed :3
(Celebrans) gcnullectit in die Annuntiationis B. Mariae ct in tribus Missis
Nativitatis Domini, quando cantatur in Choro v Et incarnatus est ct aliis
diebus, si sedeat cum cantantur ea verba, non genuflectit, sed caput tantum
profunde inclinat apertum ; si non sedet, genuflectit. Ministri semper
gcnuflectunt cum Celebrante, praeterquam Subdiaconus tenes librum ad
Evangelium, ct Acolythi tenentes candclbra. . . .
In accordance with these rubrics all those who are standing
should kneel when the words El incarnatus est of the Creed arc
sung.4 But if the members of the congregation or of the choir,
:cremonics, acolytes, etc., have already become
should not kneel during the chanting of this verse,
d, they merely uncover and bow, except on the
: Nativity of Our Lord and of the Annunciation.
ndus.
loc^ciL; O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, ii, pp. 4, 101 ; Ephem.
xvii, 3. Cf. Catr. Epis., ii, viii, 53.
29. Vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, iii, p. 67 ; Hacgy,
634.
ΑΊ
THE MASS
THE CHANT AT SOLEMN HIGH MASS
At a High Mass is it necessary that all the Proper (Introit, Gradual,
Offertory, etc.) of the Mass be sung by the choir? May any of these
chants be omitted and, if not, must the special settings given in the
Liber Usualis always be used for them?
Cantor.
At a High Mass the parts which must be sung by the choir
arc : Introit, Kyrie, Gloria, Sequence, Gradual, Tract, Credo,
Offertory, Sanctus, Benedicius, Agnus Dei, and Communion.1
Numerous decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites emphasize
the obligation of singing the full text of those parts which belong
to the Proper of the Mass. It is not necessary to observe the
full chant in each case, but it suffices if the entire text is recited
in a clear, intelligible voice to the accompaniment of the organ.12
When the Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus and Agnus Dei arc being sung
the organ may be used to supply alternate verses ; but the
complete text of the Credo must be sung.3 On those occasions
on which the organ may not be used at all, e.g., during the
penitential seasons or at a Requiem Mass, all the liturgical
texts must be chanted in full.4 The singing of vernacular
hymns by the choir during a High Mass or a Missa Cantata is
expressly forbidden.5
CHOIR OF SEMINARISTS AT HIGH MASS
At the incensation of the choir during solemn Mass is it
permissible for the thurifer to incense seminarists per modum unius
after the deacon has incensed the priests present?
Anxius.
The brief rubrics in the Missal regarding the order to
be observed in the incensation of the choir at Solemn Mass are
as follows : ‘ The celebrant is incensed by the deacon who then
incenses the choir and the subdeacon who is holding the paten.
The deacon is himself incensed by the thurifer and the thurifer
afterwards incenses the acolytes and the people.’0 Similarly the
Caeremoniale Episcoporum directs that if the bishop is not present
1 S.R.C. 2424, 2994, 3365, 3624, etc.
1 Carr. Epis., i, xxviii.
5 S.R.C. 3365.
4 S.R.C. 3108.
5 S.R.C. 3880; Vide Afotu Proprio of Pius X (1903).
Disciplina.
4 Ritus Servandus, vii, 10.
Cf. Musicae Sacrae
48
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
or if he merely presides at the Solemn Mass the deacon must
incense all those who are in choir.1 For a Pontifical High Mass
more detailed instructions are given : the deacon incenses first
the bishop who celebrated, then the assistant priest and deacons,
the dignitaries present in the choir, according to their due order,
each of the prelates and canons being incensed, and finally he
incenses the subdeacon of the Mass. He then surrenders the
thurible to the thurifer, who continues the incensation of the
others who may be in choir, priests and seminarists, and in the
last place incenses the general congregation.2
Except at a Pontifical High Mass, therefore, seminarists who
are in choir must always be incensed by the deacon of the
Mass. This incensation should be carried out per modum unius.3
THE OFFERTORY PROCESSION
With reference to the recommendation in the encyclical Mediator
Dei that the faithful receive in Holy Communion Hosts consecrated
at the particular Mass which they attend, does this provide an argu
ment in favour of the practice by which intending communicants
would put breads into the ciborium? I do not know whether it is
ever done in this country, but I have seen the ceremony carried out
in other countries. It is sometimes arranged that persons who intend
to communicate come up in procession at the Offertory and put breads
into a ciborium held at the altar-rails by the priest. Is this form of the
ancient Offertory procession now generally admitted?
Liturgist.
The encyclical makes only a passing reference to the custom
by which the faithful present the bread and wine to the
ministers at the altar, and since he refers to it as having only a
remote or extrinsic connection with the sacrifice one can scarcely
say that the Holy Father explicitly recommends it. On the
contrary, the encyclical emphasizes the real intimate part which
the faithful take in offering the sacrifice through their union
with the priest spiritually rather than by any liturgical action.
In explaining the sense in which the faithful arc said in the
Canon of the Mass to offer the sacrifice (‘ Pro quibus tibi offerimus
vel qui tibi offerunt ’) the Holy Father says : ‘ Firstly the more
remote reasons arc these : namely that frequently the faithful
assisting at Mass join their prayers alternately with those of the
1 Lib. i, cap. xxiii, n. 26.
* Carr. Epis., lib. i, cap. xxiii, n. 27 ct scq. Vide O’Connell, op. cit. iii,
p. 43. Martinucci, Manuale Caer., 1911, p. 83. Stehle, Episcopal Ceremonies,
p. 284.
* S.R.C. 2791 ad 4 (3rd August, 1839), Bobien.
THE MASS
49
priest ; and sometimes—a more frequent practice in ancient
times—they offer to the ministers of the altar the bread and
wine to be changed into the body and blood of Christ ; and
finally by giving alms in order that the priest may offer the
divine Victim for their intentions. But there is also a more
intimate sense in which all Christians, especially those present
at the altar are said to offer. . . . The unbloody immolation,
in which at the words of consecration Christ is made present
on the altar in the state of Victim, is performed by the priest
and by him alone acting in the person of Christ, not in so far
as he is the representative of the people. It is because the
priest places the divine Victim on the altar that he offers It to
God the Father as an oblation for the glory of the Blessed
Trinity and for the good of the whole Church. Now the faithful
participate in the oblation understood in this limited sense in
their own way and in a twofold manner, namely by offering the
sacrifice both through the hands of the priest and to a certain
extent in union with him. . . . Hence the whole Church can
truly be said to offer the victim through Christ. But the con
clusion that the people offer the sacrifice with the priest is not
based on the fact that, being members of the Church no less
than the priest himself, they carry out a visible liturgical rite,
for this is the privilege only of the minister who has been divinely
appointed to this office—rather it is based on the fact that the
people unite their prayers of praise, petition, expiation and
thanksgiving with the prayers or with the intention of the
priest, even of the High Priest that they may be presented to
God the Father in one and the same offering of the Victim and
by a visible sacerdotal rite.’ When he discusses the means by
which active participation of the faithful in the Mass may be
promoted, the Holy Father mentions the Dialogue Mass and
High Mass, but makes no mention of an Offertory procession
and adds the warning that not all the faithful are capable of
understanding correctly the liturgical rites and formulas. ‘So
varied and dissimilar arc the talents and characters of people
that all cannot be moved and attracted to the same degree by
community prayers, hymns and sacred actions.’1
The encyclical thus gives only a very qualified support to
the custom of the Offertory procession where it exists and
cannot be said to recommend the introduction of the practice
elsewhere. Frequently, advocates of this innovation put forward
the arguments that it was the practice in the primitive Church
1 Mediator Dei—vide translation by Father Ellard, S.J.
50
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
and that it serves to impress upon the faithful the real purpose
of the Offertory rite in the Mass. The validity of both these
contentions may be challenged. For example, Dom Capelie1
concludes his brief survey of the history of the Offertory in the
Mass by remarking : ‘ . . . the Offertory procession . . . docs
not go back to the first centuries. It is not, and never was, an
essential part of the Mass. In letting it fall into abeyance, the
Church has therefore sacrificed nothing essential. She has
rather gone back to primitive times, when the matter for the
sacrifice was brought forward quite simply by the deacons, and
received by the priest, after which began immediately the
Eucharistic Canon which was to offer and consecrate it to God.
The Offertory therefore is now restored to the position of being
a purely spiritual act on the part of the faithful.’ Modern
writers on liturgical history have great difficulty in determining
the historical position of the Offertory procession or of any ritual
offering of bread and wine by the faithful during Mass. Until
comparatively recent years, manualists generally followed the
opinions of the liturgists of the seventeenth and eighteenth cen
turies and assumed that some such offering by the faithful was
part of the Offertory and that by its suppression a primitive rite
had been lost. It is only in the past thirty years that this
‘ traditional ’ view has really been critically examined, after
non-Catholic writers had put forward the thesis that it was
from the primitive offering of gifts by the faithful that the idea
of the Mass as a sacrifice evolved. Catholic theologians, notably
Dr. J. Coppens, Dr. Callcwacart and Father Haussons, S.J., in
their studies have shown that on both historical and theological
grounds the Offertory must be distinguished from the strictly
sacrificial action of the Mass. Dr. Coppens, S.J., in his opus
culum L'offrande des fidèles dans la liturgie eucharistique ancienne
proves :2
(1) que l’offrande des dons n’est pas un rite primitif, (2) qu’antericurcmcnt
a l’introduction de l’offrande et indépendamment de cette cérémonie, le
mystère eucharistique fût considère par l’Eglise comme un vrai sacrifice.
L’offrande est venue s’ajouter à la messe d’abord comme un rite de charité,
puis comme un participation active au sacrifice eucharistique lui même.
The offering thus developed from the charitable practices asso
ciated with the Agape, of giving food and alms to the poor and
contributing to the clergy.
In an essay on ‘ The Function of the Offertory Rite in the
1 New Light on the Mass, p. 25.
* Summary in Retue d'Histoire Ecclesiastique, 1927, p. 399; Cf. Steuart,
Development of Christian Worship—vide Clark : loc. dt.
THE MASS
51
Mass’ Father Alan Clarke1 has examined the modern views
both on the history and theological significance of the Offertory
procession. He says : ‘ Those writers, who attach an over
whelming importance to the ritual oblation of the elements by
the faithful and sec in it the core of the “ ideal ” Offertory rite,
arc really adequately answered by the fact that such an oblation
docs not exist nowadays (except in one or two isolated instances)
and that as ritual it did not exist for at least the first century
of the Church’s existence.’ He goes on to point out that the
obligation on the faithful to provide the materials for the
sacrifice may have easily been recognized from the beginning,
but it is not until the middle of the third century that we have
clear evidence of a ritual presentation of the elements. At the
beginning the presentation may have been made as a separate
rite outside Mass ; certainly in the fourth century the elements
were brought up at the Offertory in the Roman rite and probably
also in the other Western rites. In Rome the practice was
kept at least on greater feasts until the close of the Middle Ages.
In the East the faithful brought their oblations to the sacristy
before the Liturgy and the deacons brought them from the
sacristy at the Offertory. After the fourth century there is no
trace of the ritual Offertory procession in the Eastern rite. ‘ It
is true that in due course the provision of bread and wine
took on the signification of the participation of the faithful in the
sacrifice at which they were assisting, and hence opened the
way for a ritual presentation of the elements as being a more
effective way of symbolizing that participation, but the faithful
obviously participated in the offering of the Mass prior to the
introduction of a ritual presentation. It is, therefore, quite
clear that the ritual presentation of the gifts, even the express
provision of those gifts by the people, does not belong to
the essential Offertory rite.’2
Modern devotional writers emphasize the symbolic character
of the ancient Offertory procession and, as our correspondent
reminds us, in some places attempts have been made to re-enact
this rite by a purely symbolic offering or procession of the
faithful. The ancient Offertory procession, etc., was a real
offering which in course of time was interpreted as symbolic of
the internal dispositions of the offerers. If one attempts to
revive it as a merely symbolic ceremony then its value as a real
action is lost. It is a symbolism of another age and it has not
1 Ephrm. Lit., 1950.
1 Loc. cit.
52
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
been generally preserved by the Church. The aim of engender
ing the proper dispositions in the faithful may nowadays be
attained more effectively by other means. The warnings con
tained in the encyclical Mediator Dei make clear that even
Catholic writers have not always avoided the error of dis
approving of Masses offered without any congregation and that
some have accepted the mistaken view that it is only with the
active participation of the laity that Mass can be offered in the
truly traditional manner.
Moreover, there are many practical difficulties against the
carrying out of any such ritual oblation in our churches to-day.
Needless to say, no such innovation could be introduced without
the explicit approval of the local Ordinary. Father Bugnini,1
commenting on the practical difficulties inherent in these
symbolic ritual oblations, justly remarks :
$
Ipsa Ecclesia quae per tot saecula in sacramentis administrandis quibus
dam usa est caeremoniis et ritibus, novissime mavult ab illis abstinere ob
respectum ad exigentias sociales hodiernas. . . . Haec omnia sunt bona si
cetera adsunt, nempe si fideles magnopere sint parati ad illa intelligcnda, ut
illis participent conscii de momento horum rituum. Si, per instructionem
religiosam assiduam, tota paroecia vel communitas habitualiter vitam liturgicam vivat, tunc hae peculiares functiones quae intimiorem requirunt rerum
et spiritus liturgicus intelligentiam, suum ferent spiritualem fructum ; secus
adslantes in admirationem vel contemptum movebunt.
APPLICATION OF THE FRUITS OF THE MASS
Is the ‘ Memento ’ of the Mass (or remembrances made during
it), independently of any applications of the Mass made during it,
efficacious of itself to apply any fruits of the Mass to those remem
bered?
W. N. S.
Ex hypothesi no part of the ministerial fruits of the Mass is
here in question. Hence the question really is : docs remem
brance at the Memento give a person any share in the special
fruits which go to those who by their presence or otherwise
are closely associated with the offering of this particular Mass ?
1 his special fruit comes ex opere operato to all the secondary
offerers of the sacrifice in proportion to their degree of co
operation, remote or proximate, in the actual offering of the
Mass. A member of the faithful is to be regarded as partici
pating in this fruit if he may be described as coming under
one of the following headings :a12
1 Ephem. Lil., 1953, p. 167.
2 Cappello, De Sacramentis, i, § 564.
THE MASS
53
(1) qui petit celebrationem Missae ; (2) qui curat ut Sacrum fiat ; (3) qui
dat stipendium sacerdoti celebranti ; (4) qui Missas fundatas relinquit ;
(5) qui panem et vinum aut sacras vestes aliavc utensilia ad Missam neces
saria suppeditat ; (6) qui sacerdoti celebranti inservit ; (7) qui Missae
assistit.
It would seem that some act or external association with the
Mass is necessary and that, therefore, persons who arc merely
mentioned in the Memento do not eo ipso share in this fruit
although they may be spiritually or mentally associated with
the offering. The words of the Memento Vivorum in the Canon
clearly imply the need for such actual participation. The
following is a modern French translation which is an accurate,
critical rendering of them t1
Souvcncz-vous, Seigneur, de vos serviteurs et de vos servantes . . . et de
tous ceux qui nous entourent : vous connaissez leur foi, vous avez éprouve
leur attachment. Nous vous offrons pour eux, ou ils vous offrent eux-mêmes,
ce sacrifice de louange pour eux et pour tous les leurs : afin d’obtenir la
rédemption de leur âme, la securité et le salut dont ils ont l’espérance ; et
ils vous adressent leurs prières, à vous Dieu éternel, vivant et vrai. . . .
The phrase ‘ Pro quibus libi offerimus vel qui libi offerunt ’ designates
under a double aspect those present ; the words ‘ Pro quibus tibi
offerimus ’ were inserted in the tenth century when the custom
of the faithful actually bringing their oblations to the altar
was dying out. Pro se suisque omnibus may be understood as
meaning that the faithful take their part in offering for them
selves and for all their relatives or rather for themselves and for
all the company of the faithful. The second interpretation may
be the more accurate, nevertheless there is at least good
extrinsic authority for the view that those who assist at a Mass
may, as the secondary offerers of the sacrifice, apply their share
in the special fruit to others.
‘ In addition to the priest who, in the person and by the
priestly power of Christ and as the deputed minister of the
Church, makes the sacrificial oblation, all the faithful who arc
present participate in a special way in the offering of the Mass.
They arc real though secondary offerers. They all share,
suppositis supponendis, in the ex opere operato fruits of the Mass.
Independently of the intention of the celebrant they share in
the general benefits which flow from every Mass to the universal
Church. Likewise each of them obtains also, in due measure,
a share in what are called the special fruits of the Mass at which
they assist. And this latter share may be applied according
to the recipient’s intention, for the benefit of others, for the
1 L'Ordinaire de la Masse, Dom Bothe et C. Morhman.
54
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
living and for the souls in Purgatory.’1
Cappello states :2
Qua admissa, sequitur duplici sensu posse fideles, ex. gr. pro alio Missam
audire, tum quatenus fructum ex opere operantis percipiendum et alteri
applicabilem ei donant, tum quatenus fructum specialem ex opere operato
ei applicant.
As Prümmcr puts it :3
Iste fructus [j/wûi/ü] oritur et ex opere operato et ex opere operantis, atque
nihil obstat, quominus fideles hunc fructum aliis deputent. In hoc sensu
potest quis dicere alii : Ego pro te audiam Missam. Talem applicationem
producere optimos fructus per se patet. Si quis exsistit in aliqua ecclesia,
in qua plures Missae insimul dicuntur, et si tunc se coniungit spiritualiter
cum singulis sacerdotibus celebrantibus, videtur percipere fructus speciales
omnium istarum Missarum.
I
I
I
■
Hence it may safely be held that a person mentioned in the
Memento may, through the intention of those who assist at
the Mass, gain a share in the special fruits accruing to them
ex opere operato. It is the much more probable and common
opinion that the celebrant may not apply to others any part of
the personal, very’ special fruit which comes to himself through
the Mass.4 It may, however, be held that the priest as a
member of the faithful is not excluded from the special fruit
coming to the hearers of the Mass and that he may, without
prejudice to the application of the ministerial fruits or any
diminution of the personal fruits, direct to others his share in
the special fruits. De la Taille, for example, holds : ‘. . . the
infinite price of the Victim is paid out in a measure propor
tioned to the devotion of the offerers. First and primarily in
proportion to the general devotion of the Church ; secondarily
and cumulatively, in proportion to the devotion of the cele
brant, of the person giving the stipend and finally of those
present at the Mass (amongst whom the servers at the altar
are pre-eminent). . . . One should note that the person giving
the stipend may also assist at the Mass and so offer under a
double title; and since the devotion with which the stipend is
given is different from the devotion with which the Mass is
heard, one fruit may be garnered in virtue of the former title,
another in virtue of the latter. The same may be said of the
priest who, besides acting as minister of the whole Church,
and also offering the gifts of the person who gives the stipend,
can also at the same time offer the sacrifice as a member of
the faithful. This is indicated in the Canon of the Mass by the
x McCarthy, I. E. Record, March, 1943, p. 202.
3 Op. cit., § 578.
3 Thcol. Mor., iii, § 243.
4 Vide Denzinger, Enchir. Symbol., n. 1108.
·Η^ι: '
■MH
the mass
55
words of the commemoration cither of the living or of the dead.
Again just as each of these could offer the Mass under different
titles but for the same intention, so also any one of them could
offer the Mass under one title for this intention, under another
for that. For example, the same person could direct his inten
tion as giving the stipend towards one end and as assisting at
Mass towards another end. Or the priest could have one
intention as presenting the offered gifts of the person giving
the stipend, and this would naturally be the principal inten
tion, as the stipend provides the material for the sacrifice and
so initiates its existence, while he could also have another
intention as assisting at the Mass.’1 One must deny the parity
in the two examples here cited by De la Taille. The person who
gives the stipend and also hears the Mass is in both cases a
secondary offerer, but the two roles assigned to the priest are
those of being both the celebrant and the hearer of his own
Mass. Hence, prescinding from such over-subtle distinctions,
it would seem that as far as the celebrant is concerned, persons
who are merely remembered in the memento do not share in
any ex opere operato fruit of the Mass ; ‘ the remembrance is
rather a form of impétration which derives special value from
its association with the Mass—the iinpetratory fruit of which
is said to be inexhaustible.’ Cardinal Bona says of it : ‘ The
Sacrifice of the Mass is limited in all its effects except impétra
tion ; all admit that this is infinite, because it docs not so much
denominate something that is definitely produced by the Sacri
fice, but rather consists in the excellence and intrinsic worthiness
of the Sacrifice itself, as objectively moving Almighty God to
grant what is asked for ; though He docs not grant it in every
case, but only when He judges it to be conducive to our
*
salvation.
MISSA PRO POPULO ON FEAST OF PATRON
In the Ordo the list of days on which the Missa pro populo must be
said now includes ‘ Festum Patroni loci.’ When was this feast added
to the list? Does it mean that parish priests are bound to celebrate
for their people on the feast of the Patron of the diocese as well as
on the feast of the Patron of the parish?
Parochus.
In February, 1918, the Commission for the interpretation of the
Code stated that the Code had made no change in the list of
1 Mystery of Faith (trans. Carroll-Dalton).
56
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
suppressed feasts on which the Missa pro populo binds. Many
petitions were addressed to the Holy See for the republication
of this list and in December, 1919, the Sacred Congregation
of the Council published the list which included the feast of
the Patron of the country and the feast of the Patron of the
place.1 In the Ordo for the Universal Church published at
Rome, the following phrase is inserted at the end of the list of
feasts on which the Missa pro populo is of obligation :
Animarum rectores Missam pro populo applicare tenentur etiam in Festis
Patronorum principalium et in aliis Festis suppressis quae respective in loco,
vel ex iure vel ex induito, olirn sub utroque praecepto celebrabantur.
This direction is in accordance with a decision given by the
Sacred Congregation of the Council in 1930 that the Mass pro
populo must be said on suppressed feasts which were formerly
of obligation in virtue of particular law.2 In 1897 the Sacred
Congregation of Rites published the following question and
response :3
Num Parochi Missae Sacrificium pro populo celebrare debeant non solum
in Festo primario principalis Patroni propriae Parochiae ; sed etiam in
Festo primario Patroni praecipui totius Dioecesis ? Res[>. : /Mfirmative,
ad primam partem ; ct etiam ad secundam, si hoc alterum Festum cele
bretur cum reriatione, saltem de iure.
That is, the Mass pro populo need not be applied on the feast
of the diocesan Patron unless that feast is a suppressed holyday ;
on the other hand, the obligation remains to celebrate the Mass
on the feast of the properly constituted Patron of the place in
which the parish is situated. The ‘ Patronus loci ’ is not
normally attached to a parish only but to a ‘ place,’ i.c. a
country, province, city, town, village or diocese :
'
Pro Patrono praecipuo loci intelligcndus est Patronus civitatis aut oppidi,
etc., vel etiam in illius tantum defectu, Patronus Dioecesis quoniam nempe
alteruter legitime electus iuxta Constitutionem Urbani VIII vel ab imme
morabili assumptus in singulis locis celebrandus est sub ritu duplici primae
classis cum octava.
*
‘ The principal Patron of a place is the one most special to the
place, and it is only when a particular place has no special
Patron of its own that the Patron of the diocese is to be regarded
as the principal Patron of that place. In places which have
a Patron proper to themselves one is not bound to celebrate
«
1 In the Ordo for Ireland, the feast of the Patron of the place was not
included in the list of abrogated feasts until 1943 ; the obligation here referred
to is. needless to say, much older.
’ Vide trans, in Bouscaren, Canon Law Digest I, p. 256.
’S.R.C. 3957 ad II (May, 1897).
* S.R.C. Decreta, v, p. 375.
THE MASS
57
the feast of the Patron of the diocese, unless it has been the
custom to celebrate it throughout the whole diocese as a
double of the first class with octave.1 In Ireland, it is now the
established rule, as stated in the Irish Ordo (p. xvi) to celebrate
the feast of the diocesan Patron throughout the whole diocese
because (a) usually particular localities have not their own
Patron and (6) it is a custom praeter legem. This obligation to
celebrate the feast of the Patron does not carry the obligation
of applying the Mass pro populo on that day.
Therefore, we conclude that a parish priest is certainly bound
to the Mass pro populo on the feast of the Patron of the place,
only if the Patron has been properly constituted as such. A saint
must have been chosen either by immemorial custom or by
the election of the people with the approval of their ecclesiastical
authorities and ratification by the Holy See. Many places in
Ireland have not Patrons thus properly constituted ; the name
of the saint associated with the parish is often the name only
of the Titular of the parochial church. There certainly is no
obligation of having the Missa pro populo on the feast of the
Titular of the parish church. Must the Missa pro populo be said
on the feast of the Patron of the diocese ? The answer to that
question depends on the historical fact whether the feast of
the diocesan Patron is a suppressed holyday. The suppressed
feasts referred to in the Code and listed nominatim in the 1919
Decree are feasts which were abrogated after the Decree of
Urban VIII, published in 1642. By the general law the
patronal feast of the place, city, town or village, remained a
holyday of obligation but the patronal feast of a diocese was
not recognized as such in the 1642 Decree. In many dioceses,
however, the feast of the Patron was a holyday made of obliga
tion by particular law. The Ordo in use in Ireland marked in
every year until 1755 as holydays in the various dioceses the
feasts of their respective Patrons. In 1755, Pope Benedict XIV,
in response to many petitions, granted a dispensation in respect
of the obligation of refraining from servile work on these and
on a number of other holydays. In 1778 Pope Pius VI removed
the obligation of attendance at Mass on these days ; the patronal
feasts were thus abrogated completely. In connection with the
induit of Pius VI the following Decree from the Sacred Con
gregation of Propaganda was issued in 1778 and was published
in the Irish Ordo in 1790 and for many years subsequently :
* Vide I. E. Record, 1935, p. 315. The Decree ‘ Cum nostra ’ (23rd March
1955) suppressed the octave of the patronal feast.
58
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Relato . . . dubio : Utrum nempe iis diebus in quibus reducta in Hibernia
festa recurrunt, Parochi debeant Missae Sacrificium agere, idemque pro
populo oflere ? EE. Patres decreverunt, Parochos aliosque curam animarum
exercentes in quolibet ex reductis festivis, tum ad celebrandam, tum etiam
ad applicandam pro populo Parochialem Missam ut antea, omnino teneri.1
The list of diocesan Patrons is now given in the Ordo and there
is no doubt but that in Ireland all parish priests arc bound to
apply the Missa pro populo on the patronal feasts of their
respective dioceses, unless they are dispensed by virtue of an
Apostolic induit.
OBLIGATION OF THE MISSA PRO POPULO ON A
TRANSFERRED FEAST
Does the obligation of saying the Missa pro Populo bind on
the transferred feast of the Annunciation ?
Pastor.
Concerning the Missa pro Populo, paragraphs two and three
of canon 339 state : ‘ On the feast of the Nativity and if any
feast of precept fall on a Sunday it suffices that the pastors
apply one Missa pro Populo. If a feast is transferred so that on
the day ad quern not only are the Office and Mass of the feast
celebrated, but also the obligations of hearing Mass and
abstaining from servile work are observed, the Mass for the
people must be applied on the day ad quern otherwise it is to be
applied on the day a quo' Hence, the principle is that the
Missa pro Populo is to be transferred only if the external solemnity
of the feast has been transferred ; if only the liturgical celebration
is transferred the Mass must be applied on the date of the feast.
On the feast of the Annunciation the obligations of hearing
Mass and abstaining from servile work do not arise, also cogni
zance must be taken of certain pre-Code decisions regarding this
particular feast. In 1858 the Sacred Congregation of Rites in
reply2 to a query from the diocese of Langres (France) decided
that when the feast of the Annunciation fell on Holy Thursday
the Missa pro Populo should be applied on that day and should
not be transferred, although the Office and Mass of the Annunci
ation are celebrated on the Monday after Low Sunday. In
France, at that time, the feast of the Annunciation was already,
in accordance with the 1802 Concordat, a suppressed feast. It
would seem, therefore, that this pre-Code discipline still prevails
and is in conformity with the principle laid down in canon 339.
1 Vide Archbishop Walsh in I. E. Record, 1901, p. 50, et seq.
» S.R.C. 3189.
THE MASS
59
Hence when Holy Thursday falls on 25th March the Missa
pro Populo is to be applied only on that day ;l only the liturgical
celebration of the feast of the Annunciation is transferred to
the Monday of Low week. If the feast of the Annunciation
were to fall on Good Friday, then the Missa pro Populo which
cannot be celebrated on 25th March (Good Friday) must be
omitted for that year.12
MAY A SOLEMN EXEQUIAL MASS BE CELEBRATED
ON A TRANSFERRED FEAST OR A MONTH’S MIND
ON A SUPPRESSED HOLYDAY?
(1) May a solemn Requiem Mass presente cadavere be celebrated
on the transferred feast of the Annunciation ?
(2) May a solemn Requiem Mass on the occasion of a month’s
mind be said on the feast of the Invention of the Holy Cross?
Pastor.
(1) Similarly, a solemn Exequial Mass is forbidden on a
transferred feast only if the fol iation of the feast is also trans
ferred. The liturgical transference of the Office and Mass of
a feast docs not carry with it the prohibition of a privileged
Requiem.3 Hence a solemn Requiem Mass even praesente
cadevcre is prevented on 25th March, but it may be celebrated on
the feast of the Annunciation transferred to the Monday of
Low week.
(2) No. The feast of the Finding of the Holy Cross is a
suppressed holyday, which is now celebrated as a secondary
double of the second-class. According to the rubrics4 of the
Missal the privileged Requiem Mass for the month’s mind is
prevented on all holydays, even suppressed.
INTENTION OF A REQUIEM MASS
Ts there any regulation or decree against celebrating a Requiem
Mass, when the celebrant is ignorant of the intention, merely because
the rubrics permit a Requiem Mass on that day? It seems incon
gruous to say a Requiem Mass for what may possibly be an intention
for recovery of health, etc.
Catafalque.
1 S. R. Concilii, 24 April . . . ‘ quando transferuntur tantummodo Officium
ct Missa, tunc applicatio Missae pro populo fit in ipso dic festo impedito.’
Cf. Reply, Burgi S. Sepulcri et aliarum, 12th December, 1913.
’Vide Cappello, De Sacramentis, i, p. 637 ct scq. (1939 Edit.).
’S.R.C. 4274; 3755. Ephem. Lit., 1939, p. 79; 1941, p. 99. O’Connell,
Celebration of Mass, i, p. 147.
4 Addit, et Var., iii, 6.
60
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Canon 833 states :
Praesumitur oblatorem petiisse solam Missae applicationem ; si tamen
oblator expresse aliquas circumstantias in Missae celebratione servandas
determinavit, sacerdos eleemosynam acceptans, cius voluntati stare debet.
It is to be presumed that the donor of a stipend is concerned
only with the application of the Mass. The ministerial fruit
is the same in all Masses ; therefore, a celebrant fulfils his
obligation substantially by the application of any Mass of
whatever quality. The obligation to observe any reasonable
conditions explicitly prescribed by the donor is per se binding
only sub levi.1 When no such conditions have been expressed
or when the celebrant docs not know whether the Mass is being
applied for the living or for the dead, he certainly discharges
his obligation fully by the application of any Mass.
The importance of observing an express wish of the donor
was emphasized in an early decree of the Sacred Congregation
of Rites—N. 2461, 3rd March, 1761.
Diebus quibus dici possunt Missae votivae privatae vel defunctorum
Sacerdos ad illas obligatus ratione fundationis vel accepti manualis stipendii,
propriae obligationi non satisfacit dicendo Missam de die occurente : expressa
enim voluntas testatorum vel postulantium, dummodo sit rationibilis, debet
adimpleri.
Subsequent decisions which may be cited in this context arc :
(1) Λ reply of the Congregation of Rites published on 13th
October, 1856 : ‘ Is it permissible for priests to use black vest
ments and to celebrate a Requiem Mass in order to fulfil an
obligation which they have undertaken of celebrating pro mois ?
In the affirmative, provided that the donor of the alms has not
prescribed otherwise.’ A decision of the Sacred Congregation
of Indulgences on 2nd April, 1840 : ‘Whether a priest satisfies
the obligation of celebrating Mass for a deceased person by
observing the ferial rite or that of any saint, even though it is
not a double or semi-double ? In the affirmative.’
The above reply from the Sacred Congregation of Rites
(October, 1856) was not included in the authentic collection
of decrees, but it was referred to in a decision given by the
Sacred Congregation of the Council in 1895.2 Although that
decision, which concerned the application of an exequial Mass,
is not ad rein to the present question, it docs emphasize the
distinction between the application and the celebration of a
Mass, and that even when black vestments arc used the fruit
1 Vide Cappello, De Sacramentis, i, p. 691 (Edit. 1938) ; O’Connell,
Celebration of Afass, it p. 60.
1 A.A.S., vol. xxviii, p. 125.
THE MASS
61
of the Mass may be applied pro vivis. On 13th June, 1899, the
Sacred Congregation of Rites stated that the obligation of
celebrating a Mass for deceased persons was satisfied by applying
a Mass in conformity with the Office of the day, but added :
sed consultius est ut quantum fieri possit, intentioni eleemosynam erogantis
satisfiat per Missam vel de Requie, vel votivam.1
Hence it is clear that the obligation to follow the wishes of the
donor is an accidental one and failure to observe it does not
vitiate the fulfilment of the obligation arising from the acceptance
of a stipend.2 A fortiori, when the celebrant has not been made
aware of any such particular conditions, he certainly discharges
his obligation fully by applying any Mass.
OBLIGATION TO APPLY AN EXEQUIAL MASS
FOR THE DECEASED
May one avail of the privileges attached to a funeral Mass only
on condition that the Mass is applied for the soul of the deceased ?
Would it be permissible to celebrate a funeral Mass on a Sunday or
double feast without applying the Mass to the soul of the person who
is being buried?
The celebrant of a funeral Mass is not bound to apply the
ministerial fruit of the Mass to the soul of the deceased unless
he has accepted a stipend to do so. The Rubrics of the Ritual3
prescribe the celebration of an cxequial Mass as an integral
part of the obsequies, and in this celebration the appropriate
prayers with mention of the name of the deceased are to be
used. These requirements of the rubrics, however, do not in
any way affect the application of the ministerial fruit of the
Mass. Hence the following decision has been given by the
Sacred Congregation of the Council :4
An sacerdos in exsequiis persolvendis Missam celebrans, non recepto stipendio,
debeat pro ipso defuncto, vel potius pro aliis petentibus et eleemosynam
offerentibus sacrificium applicare queat ?
R.—Negative ad primam partem ; Affirmative ad secundum.
The liturgical privileges attached to the Exequial Mass arc,
therefore, not contingent on the application of the Mass. It
1 4031.
: Decretum Generale. S.R.C. 1343.
‘Per celebrationem Missarum de
Festo satisfieri dictis obligationibus (i.c. Anniversaria et Missas de Requiem
relictis ex dispositione testatorum) et suffragari cutn iisdem Indulgentiis.
’
1 Rit. Rom., tit. vii, cap. 1, n. 7, cap. Ill, n. 18.
* Collectanea S.C. de Drop. Fide, ii, n. 1895.
62
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
must be borne in mind, however, that other Requiem Masses
which may be celebrated between death and burial arc privi
leged only on condition that they are applied for the deceased.
‘ In a church or public chapel where a solemn funeral is
taking place, “ private ” Requiem Masses as in die obitus may
be said on the day of burial, provided that the sacrifice is applied
for the dead person, but not if any Office occurs which excludes
Requiem Masses. “ Private ” Requiem Masses may also be
said at choice on any one day between the death and burial
of a dead person in semi-public chapels which serve instead
of a church or public chapel ; and also daily throughout the same
period in semi-public chapels which do not take the place of
a church or public chapel, and even in the strictly private
chapel of the deceased’s house, provided that the body is
physically present in the house where the chapel is. . . ,’1
Rubricists generally1
2 interpret these rubrics as meaning that
the necessary condition that the Mass be applied for the dead
person holds good in respect of all these privileged Low Masses.
LIGEITY OF A CUSTOM CONTRARY TO THE
RUBRICS GOVERNING REQUIEM MASSES
If an anniversary Mass is liturgically impeded it may be anticipated
or postponed only if it is a sung Mass. In many parts of Ireland
it is held that by custom the same privilege holds in favour of a low
Mass. Is it possible to have such a custom contrary to the rubrics;
in particular would it be lawful by virtue of custom to celebrate as
privileged a Requiem low Mass on a day on which the rubrics permit
only a sung Mass?
C.C.
It is now generally accepted by canonists that liturgical law
may be affected by custom.3 Even customs contrary to the
rubrics are, in the light of the legislation of the Code, admis
sible. Formerly the older liturgists held that it was not possible
to have a lawful custom contrary to the rubrics. Their argu
ment was based both on the general preceptive character of the
rubrics and on the words of official decrees, etc. In particular
in relation to the rubrics of the Missal the following documents
1 Addit, et Var. in Rub. Miss., cap. Ill, n. 5. Translation by Father Fmnrk
n The Laws of Holy Mass.
4 Vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, I, p. 149.
3 Vide Ephem. Lit., 1939, p. 140; Callewaert, De Sacra Liturgia Universim
(1944), p. 146; Oppenheim, Institutiones in Sacram Liturgiam (1939), Tom. iii
p. 141 ; O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 30.
’
THE MASS
63
were commonly cited : In the Bull with which he promulgated
the present Missal Pope Pius V directed :
Mandamus ac districte omnibus et singulis Ecclesiarum praedictarum
Patriarchis, Administratoribus aliisque personis . . . Missam juxta ritum,
modum ac normam quae per Missale hoc a Nobis nunc traditur, decantant
ac legant.*
1
Decree N. 9 of the Sacred Congregation of Rites declares :
Consuetudines, quae sunt contra Missale Romanum, sublatae sunt per
Bullam Pii V . . .et dicendae sunt potius corruptelae.
Many other decrees of the same Congregation may be cited
against customs,2 and the typical edition of the present Missal
is prefaced with a decree of approval containing the abrogating
clause :
contrariis non obstantibus quibuscumque, etiam speciali mentione dignis.’
It can be shown, however, that many decisions of the Sacred
Congregation against customs were aimed at the extirpation of
particular abuses which were not presented as formally estab
lished customs or against the insertion of changes in the liturgical
books. That such decisions are not necessarily of universal
application is recognized in the reply given by the Sacred Con
gregation on 11 th September, 1847, to the question :
An décréta S.R.C. dum eduntur derogent cuicumque contrariae invéctae
consuetudini, etiam immemorabili et, in casu affirmativo, obligent etiam
quoad conscientiam. Rcsp. ; Affirmative; sed recurrendum in particulari.4
In some decrees also the Sacred Congregation expressly admits
the force of custom.6 Customs, therefore, contrary to the
rubrics are not absolutely precluded but neither, on the other
hand, are they to be easily admitted :
Consuetudines etiam immemorabiles, quae contra rubricas allegentur
nullo modo per coniccturas, sed concludentissime probari debent.®
Prescription in favour of the custom must be established in
accordance with canon 27 and other relevant canons, namely
canons 5 and 25 to 30 of the Code. By virtue of canon 818 all
customs contrary to the rubrics to be observed in celebrating
Mass arc reprobated. In matters of small moment, however,
some customs arc universally recognized, e.g. the custom con
trary to wearing the surplice under the Mass vestments or the
’Bull, Quo primum tempore ; Cf. Briefs of Urban VII and Clement VIII.
1 E.g. 3839, 2993, 2370, 1812, 1040, etc.
3 25th July, 1920. Decree included in sixth edition post typicam (8th
September, 1952).
* 2951.
'
"~J
‘E.g. 2935, 3248, 4270.
•S.R.C., 19th November, 1639.
64
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
custom by which the chalice may be prepared by a sacristan
for the celebrant of a low Mass. A custom by which a low
Mass is substituted for a solemn Requiem on an anniversary
celebration may, perhaps, have been lawfully established. It
has certainly never been expressly reprobated by a decision of
the Sacred Congregation and in Ireland the custom could
have easily arisen as an extension of the privilege granted, in
1862, by a Rescript permitting on some days an exequial low
Mass instead of a Solemn Mass. Whether or not it is a lawful
custom in a particular place is a question of fact. If a doubt
arises about the liceity of any such particular custom which is
contrary to the rubrics, the local Ordinary may decide against
its continuance or alternatively he may have recourse to the
Holy See. The Sacred Congregation has reserved to itself the
right to decide in favour of tolerating a custom contrary to the
rubrics and about which a question has been raised. This
principle is stated in a reply given on 17th September, 1822,
a reply which in accordance with canon 2 of the Code still
retains its force z1
Quomodo sc gcrcrc debeant Magistri Caeremoniarum aliique, qui vident
in Ecclesiis non peragi functiones iuxta Rubricas nec observari Decreta et
Resolutiones Sacrae Rituum Congregationis ?
Resp. Adeundus loci Ordinarius qui stricte tenetur opportunis remediis
providere ut Rubricae ct S.R.C. Decreta rite serventur ; siquid vero (dubii
occurat, recurrendum ad eamdem S.C. pro declaratione.
FORMULARY TO BE USED FOR THE REQUIEM
MASS ON MONTH’S MIND OF A PRIEST
Is it correct to say that the first of the Masses for 2nd November
should always be used when a privileged Mass is celebrated for a
priest? The rubrics do not give very detailed instructions on the
question, and I understand that there is a custom, fairly generally
observed, of using the ordinary Mass in Die obitus with the appro
priate prayers on the month’s mind of a priest.
Curious.
The rubrics of the Missal prescribe (a) that except on 2nd
November the Mass to be said for all lay persons on the day of
burial is the Missa in die obitus and that the same Mass with the
appropriate change in the prayers should be said on the third,
seventh and thirtieth days after death or burial ; (Z>) that, for
those who have received the priesthood, on the day of burial
» 2621.
THE MASS
65
the first of the three Masses for 2nd November should be cele
brated, with prayers chosen from the Orationes diversae pro De
fundis. It may, therefore, be inferred that for priests the same
Mass should be celebrated also on the third, seventh and
thirtieth days. This is the most obvious inference from the
rubrics ; it is the practically unanimous opinion of rubricists
and is in close conformity with the mind of the rubrics. The
rubric immediately after the Mass in die obitus states : ‘ In die
tertio, septimo et trigesimo depositionis defuncti dicitur Missa
ut supra. . . .’ Clearly defuncti here must be understood con
sistently with the rubric given before the Mass, and in that
context it denotes only lay persons, excluding priests for whom
according to the rule this Mass is not to be said.
Amongst commentators on the rubrics the following may be
cited in support of this interpretation : Vavasseur—Haegy
(Stcrcky) z1 ‘ On doit aussi prendre la première de ces trois
Messes du 2 novembre, avec des oraisons appropriées pour les
funérailles, les services des 3e, 7% et 30e jours ct les anniversaires
du Souverain Pontife, des Cardinaux, Évêques, ct des Prêtres.
Acrtnys :1
2 ‘Prima formula adhibenda est . . . in dic obitus
scu depositionis ct in die tertio, septimo, trigesimo ac anniversario
et post acceptum mortis nuntium Papae, Cardinalis, Episcopi
et Sacerdotis.’ O’Connell :3 ‘The first Mass of All Souls’ Day
is used not only on that day but also for any privileged Mass,
public or private, of a priest or higher ecclesiastic . . . using,
however, in every “ privileged ” Mass the prayer proper to the
person for whom the Mass is being celebrated.’ De CarpoMoretti :45 ‘ . . .in die obitus ... in dic opportuniori post
acceptum mortis nuntium ct diebus tertia, septima et anni
versaria ab obitu . . . dicitur unica Oratio. Si defunctus fuerit
Summus Pontifex sumitur Missa quae primo loco posita est in
dic Comm. Omn. Fid. Dcf. cum Orationibus propriis quae
habentur inter Orationes diversas pro Defunctis. Idem servatur
pro defunctis Cardinalibus, Episcopis ct Sacerdotibus. . . .’
Ephemerides Liturgicae.^ ‘. . . Ergo ad mentem rubricarum >
etiam in dic III, VII et XXX ab obitu seu depositione Summi
Pontificis, etc., eadem prima Missa cum propriis orationibus
dicenda est.’
The rubrics expressly direct that the first Mass on All Souls’
1 Cérémonial (1935), i, p. 441.
2 Compendium Liturgiae Sacrae (Marctti, 1936), p. 123.
3 Celebration of Massi i, p. 137.
4 Caeremoniale (1932), p. 332.
5 August, 1921, p. 341.
4—1993
66
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Day must be used for priests not only on the day of burial but
also on the anniversary. Hence, to use it also on these other
similarly privileged occasions is the most obvious and con
sistent course. Commenting on the older rubrics which pre
vailed before the approval of the new Requiem Missal on 25th
July, 1919, Van dcr Stappen,1 Wapelhorst2 and Gavantus3
followed the same opinion, recommending that the special Mass
be celebrated for higher ecclesiastics on all privileged occasions.
The last named, Gavantus, advances the following explanation
for this rule : ‘ Ecclesia enim hac agendi ratione summis digni
tatibus vult etiam post mortem aliquam distinctionem tribuere,
quia, quae raro adhibentur pretiosa reputantur neque quoti
diana vilescunt consuetudine.’
PRIVILEGED REQUIEM MASSES
I
■
Are the days privileged for Requiem Masses to be interpreted
strictly or freely?
(1) Is the day between death and burial privileged?
(2) May the thirtieth day be taken as a day or two before or after
the actual date? If a person dies on Monday, 2nd December, may
the Month’s Mind be celebrated on the Monday four weeks—30th
December? Would that day, the twenty-eighth, be privileged? Or
again, if people asked that it be celebrated on 2nd January, the thirtyfirst day, would that day be privileged? Would 31st December be
privileged in this case?
(3) Must the anniversary be celebrated on 2nd December, or may
it be fixed (with privilege) a day or two before or after that date?
(4) What is the force of opportuniori in the clause opportunioro die
post acceptum nuntium! Is the privilege limited to the very first day
convenient to the priest personally or to the very first dies non
impedita!
Parochus.
' In a church or public oratory where the obsequies of the
deceased are solemnly performed, provided that the sacrifice
is applied for the deceased, private Requiem Masses pro die
obitus may be said on the day itself unless there occurs an
impeding Office. Similarly, such private Masses may be offered
in semi-public oratories which take the place of a church on
one day at choice between death and burial. In semi-public
oratories which do not take the place of a church and in strictly
1 Sacra Liturgia (1911), ii, Q_. 313.
* Compendium Sacrae Liturgia/ (1915), par. 30.
’ Thesaurus Sacrorum Rituum, P. LV, tit. xvii.
THE M/XSS
67
private oratories of the house of the deceased, private Masses
may be offered daily between the time of death and burial
provided that the body is physically present in the house where
the oratory is erected.’1
From these rubrics the following conclusions are clear :
(1) (a) In churches or public oratories where the obsequies
are celebrated, the only day that is privileged for the offering
of private Masses is the day itself of the funeral. On that day,
except it be a Sunday or feast of precept, the Commemoration
of All Souls, a double-feast of the first or of the second class or
a privileged fcria, vigil, or octave, in addition to the exequial
Mass, private Masses may be offered for the soul of the de
ceased. (A) In semi-public oratories which take the place of
a church,12 any one day at choice between death and burial
is privileged for the offering of private Masses. It does not
seem to be necessary that the funeral take place from the semi
public oratory in order that the privilege may be availed of,
but the privilege certainly ceases on the day of burial. A more
recent decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites has decided
that the Mass may not be said after the burial, even though
the exequial Mass itself has been postponed.3 (c) In Semi
public oratories wliich do not take the place of a church or
public oratory and in strictly private oratories of the house of
the deceased, each day between death and burial is privileged
provided that the body is physically present in the house.4
It should be noted that, if during the period between death
and burial there occur any days on which the Missa Quotidiana
defunctorum is permitted, then in any church or oratory private
Requiem Masses for the deceased may be celebrated, but the
formula always to be chosen is the Mass pro die obitus with one
prayer.
1 Addit, et Var. in Rub. Mis., iii., 5. It is true that the rubric say’s, ‘ where
the obsequies arc carried out solemnly,’ but this must be interpreted in
accordance with the circumstances of the place. The conditions of tiw rubric
are fulfilled if by virtue of an induit or by reason of the fact that it is pro
paupere the exequial Mass is only a low Mass.—Ephcm. Lit., 1939, p. 168.
1 When does a semi-public oratory take the place of a churçh or public
oratory'? In the I. E. Record for January, 1942, it was suggested that cither
of the two following descriptions could be accepted, (a) Λ semi-public oratory
which takes the place of a church is one that has its door opening on the public
street or communicating directly with it ; or (b) it is an oratory in which,
although it is not open to the public, the canonical hours are recited.
•4372, Hildesien, 16 junii, 1922.
4 It is not clear from the punctuation of the nibric whether or not the
presence of the body is necessary in order that the privilege hold for semi
public oratories. Rubricists are divided on the question ; either opinion
may be safely followed.
68
\
.
<1
*
j·
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
(2) According to the customary interpretation of the rubrics
the days between death and burial arc regarded as a single
unit.1 The terminus a quo, therefore, for the calculation of the
Month’s Mind may be any day during that period ; the actual
day of death may or may not be counted and similarly the day
of burial may be included or excluded at one’s convenience.
Hcncc, if a person died on 2nd December and was buried on
4th December, the privileged day for the celebration of the
Month’s Mind would be either 31st December, or the 1st,
2nd, or 3rd January. The commemoration on 1st January,
would, of course, be prevented by the feast of the Circumcision,
and it may also be excluded on 2nd January by reason of the
celebration on that date of the feast of the Holy Name. The
Mass for the thirtieth day may be anticipated on the twenty
eighth or twenty-ninth day after the death only if it is a sung
Mass and also if the celebration of the Month’s Mind on one
of the properly assigned dates is prevented for liturgical reasons
and this is the nearest day.2 It should be noted that on the
occasion of the Month’s Mind, only one Mass is privileged in
any church or in an oratory that is at least semi-public ; there
is no privilege in favour of its celebration in a private oratory.3
(3) Similarly, in calculating the anniversary day one may
take as starting-point the day of death or any of the subsequent
days until the day of burial inclusive. If the anniversary Mass
is liturgically impeded then, if it be a sung Mass, it may be
anticipated or postponed provided that it be held on the day
nearest to the actual date which is free for its celebration. Alter
natively, the anniversary may be celebrated as a foundation
anniversary or as an anniversary in the wide sense. For this
the date may be fixed either by the will of the deceased or by
the wishes of his relatives, but in order that the Mass enjoy any
privilege it must be celebrated every year, not merely occasion
ally,4 and it must be a solemn or at least a sung Mass.
(4) The Mass for the most convenient day after receipt of
authentic news of the death need not be celebrated on the very
first liturgically free day. It may be said on the day that is
most convenient to the celebrant, and the privilege retains
its force no matter how long an interval elapses before the
occurrence of such a convenient day. This is the most common
1 Vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 151 ; S.R.C. 2482—‘dies iii,
vii, ct xxx posse numerari a dic obitus sive a die sepulturae, iuxta diversae
Ecclesiae consuetudinem.’ Cf. S.R.C. 3753 Decretum Generale.
* Vide O’Connell, loc. cit; Addit, et l'ar., iii, 6.
3 S.R.C. 4096. 4194; Vide Z. E. Record. 1936, p. 637.
4 S.R.C., 16 maii, 1939; Ephem. Lit., 1939, p. 110.
the mass
69
opinion of rubricists j1 it is based on the wording of the present
rubric—opportuniori die post acceptum mortis nuntium. The rubric
now certainly allows greater freedom to the celebrant in choosing
the day for the celebration of the Mass than was formerly per
mitted, e.g. an earlier decree published on 2nd December, 1891,2
grants the privilege only for the first day that is liturgically
free. The rubric of the modern Missal, on the other hand,
permits the celebrant to avail himself of the privilege on the
day that best suits his own convenience.
PRIVILEGED REQUIEM MASS IN MINOR ORATORIES
Where there are, besides the principal oratory, several minor
or secondary oratories, is it permissible to have a privileged anni
versary Requiem Mass in each, servatis servandis, or is this permission
restricted to the principal oratory?
Anxius.
‘ On the third, seventh, and thirtieth day and on the
anniversary day of the death or burial of the dead ... in
any church there is permitted one Requiem Mass, sung or
even low, for the deceased person provided that there does not
occur a Sunday or feast of precept, the Commemoration of All
Souls, any double feast of the first or of the second class or a
privileged feria, vigil or octave.
‘ Similarly, one sung Mass may be celebrated on the day
which, apart from the real anniversary of the death or burial,
is held as the anniversary day cither because of a foundation
or because on that day each year are commemorated all the
deceased members of a particular community.’3
In connection with the celebration of anniversary Masses the
rubrics mention only churches, but in accordance with canon
1191 the same rules should be applied to public oratories and
to the principal semi-public oratories of institutions. Secondary
semi-public oratories arc not certainly included in these rubrics,
and more probably an anniversary Requiem Mass is not
privileged when it is celebrated in such an oratory.4 The minor
’ O’Connell, loc. cit ; Stcrcky, Ceremonial, i, p. 449.
’S.R.C. 3755. ‘. . . Missa celebrari poterit pro prima tantum vice post
obitum vel cius acceptum nuntium, a locis dissitis, die quae prima occurrat
non impedita. . . .’ The condition a locis dissitis has also been omitted in
the present rubric and is no longer necessary.
* Addit, et Var. in Rub. Miss., iv, n. 6 and 7.
4 O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 152.
70
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
oratories in institutions do not enjoy the favour of law.1 In
many matters affecting the calendar to be followed they arc
placed on the same level as private oratories. Hence, for
example, the private Requiem Masses which are permitted in
strictly private oratories on the days intervening between death
and burial are permissible also in a semi-public oratory which
does not replace a church. Similarly the anniversary Requiem
Mass, whether it be said or sung on the proper anniversary day
or the Mass sung on the anniversary in the wide sense, is not
privileged in a private oratory and must be regarded as not
enjoying any certain privilege in a secondary semi-public
orator}·.2
CHOICE OF PRAYERS IN THE MISSA QUOTIDIANA
DEFUNCTORUM
Father X says a * daily ’ Requiem Mass when the rubrics permit.
Sometimes he applies this Mass for the living; sometimes he is not
sure whether it is for the living or the dead. May he freely adopt the
following choice of prayers in both these instances:
(а) say the three prayers as given under the Missa Quotidiana; or
(б) say Deus, veniae largitor first; the second ad libitum; the third
Fidelium; or
(c) say the first and second ad libitum; the third Fidelium!
Missionary.
Only one prayer now need be said and suffices.3 The celebrant
may, if he wishes, say three, choosing them to conform most
probably to the intentions of the donor. The actual application
of the Mass is, needless to say, not affected by the choice of
prayers. In these circumstances Father X would be justified
in following any of the courses suggested, but I should
not agree that the third course is to be recommended.
Since he is unaware of the nature of the intention, the celebrant
could always safely presume that the donor would not be
unwilling that in a Mass celebrated according to his intention
the prayers should be for the faithful departed in general. Hence
the prayer Fidelium alone could be said or the prayers could be
taken simply as they are found in the Missa Qjiolidiana. The
second suggested choice is, however, preferable. The prayer,
‘Corona, De Locis, p. 83. E[>hcm. Lit., 1921. p. 230. S.C.R. 4192—the
feast of the titular is to be celebrated as privileged only in the principal
oratory of an institution.
* Vide Periodica (Vermcersch), ii, p. 26.
’ Vide Decree ‘ Cum nostra,’ for reform of the Rubrics, 1955.
THE MASS
71
Deus, veniae largitor, may be said alone because, as the prayer
for deceased relatives, it will most probably correspond to the
donor’s intentions. If other prayers arc added, the second may
then be ad libitum and the third, Fidelium. In the circumstances
stated in the query, the celebrant has no knowledge to guide
him in his choice of prayers and the rubric directs
deficiente vel ignorata designatione (prima dicitur), Oratio Deus, neniae
largitor.1
A writer in the Ephemerides Lilurgicae makes the following
succinct statement on the point :2
Si deficiat vel ignoretur designatio personalis (non nominalis tantum)
defunctorum, id est si Missa applicanda sit non pro defunctis sed pro vivis,
vel ignoretur utrum Missa applicanda sit pro vivis an pro defunctis, pro
omnibus an pro aliquo vel aliquibus defunctis, primo loco dicenda est oratio
Deus, veniae largitor pro defunctis fratribus, propinquis et benefactoribus.
USE OF INCENSE AT A SUNG REQUIEM MASS
Is it correct to use incense at the Offertory and Elevation of an
cxequial Mass which is celebrated as a Sung Mass without Deacon
or Subdeacon?
L. W.
Except by apostolic induit the use of incense is not
permitted at a sung Mass which is celebrated without deacon
or subdeacon.3
The Congregation of Sacred Rites has on
several occasions forbidden the use of incense at a sung Mass
even when the Blessed Sacrament is exposed.4 A decree issued
on 18th March, 1874, in this matter gives a general direction,
the exact words of which arc :
In Missa quae cum canlu sed sine Ministris celebratur inccnsationes omnes
omittendae sunt ; si vero dum haec Missa cantatur SSmurn Sacramentum
super Altare est expositum, inccnsationes in Missa pariter omittendae sunt;
et SSmurn Sacramentum inccnsatur tantum postquam in throno fuit colloca
tum ct antequam deponatur.5
In a subsequent reply the Sacred Congregation refused to
admit a custom contrary to this direction. The following
question had been submitted :
An saltem ubi sit consuetudo tolerari possit usus incensi in Missis quae
cantantur sine Ministris Sacris, si hi inveniri non possint ?
1 Addit, et Var. in Rubricis Missalis, iii, 10.
1 1922, p. 208.
’O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, iii, p. 203. Vavasscur-Stcrcky (1935), i,
p. 693.
‘
‘937, 3611, 3697, 3328
» 3328.
Ί2
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
The reply was
Negative sine speciali induito.1
The induit permitting the use of incense is frequently given
to bishops in their quinquennial faculties. Ordinarily, however,
such an induit is given only for Masses celebrated on Sundays
or on important feasts ; usually it is not given for Requiem
Masses. The privilege of using incense at a sung Mass is not
included in the general quinquennial faculties of bishops in
Ireland and hence, unless a special induit has been obtained
for a particular place or diocese, it remains unlawful to use
incense at a sung Mass. That such an induit has been obtained
should not be easily presumed. At an cxequial function, there
fore, in which the Mass is a sung Mass without the assistance
of sacred ministers, incense may be used only at the Absolution
ceremony after Mass and again at the graveside.
OBLIGATION TO CHANT THE ENTIRE DIES IRAE
Is there any justification for the practice of omitting the six verses
of the Dies irae beginning with ‘ Quid sum miser . . . ’ at a sung
Requiem?
Kieranus.
Decrees 39202 and 39563 concerning the Dies irae prescribe ;
Sequentiam dicendam esse semper in Missis Defunctorum, quandocumque
hac fiant in cantu, atque etiam in Missis lectis quae sunt de diebus privilegiatis, hoc est, diebus obitus, III, VII, XXX et anniversario ; in reliquis
autem ad libitum.4
In 18475 the Sacred Congregation refused approval for the
custom of not chanting at a sung Requiem the entire sequence
and directed :
Vcl non celebrandas Missas Defunctorum, vel canenda esse omnia quae
precationem suffragii rcspiciant.
In a further reply in 1857 e the Congregation answered in the
affirmative to the question :
Num verba illa precatio suffragii includant Sequentiam Dies irae, quae vix
vocari potest oratio vel precatio?
In 1854, however, the Bishop of Saint-Bricuc had made a petition
1 S.R.C. 3611 (9th June, 1884). Cf. S.R.C. 3697 (7th December, 1888).
'Utrum Capuccini licite possint inccnsationcs Altaris perficere in Missis
Conventualibus vcl aliis Missis quae sine Ministris paratis vcl sine cantu
celebrantur ? ’ Resp. * Negative.’
• 1896.
’ 1897.
‘ By the general Decree Cum Nostra (3rd March, 1955), the Dies irae is now
of obligation only in an exequial Mass and in one Mass on 2nd November
• 2959.
• 3051.
THE MASS
73
pro speciali gratia dispensationem super Sequentia Dies irae cantanda ob
angustiam temporis, et defectum Cantorum, praesertim in Ecclesiis ruralibus.
The Sacred Congregation replied that the Dies irae must always
be said in Requiem Masses which have only one prayer, but
the chanters may omit some strophes.1 This reply was usually
interpreted as meaning that the stanzas which did not contain
a prayer could be omitted, i.e. in practice the hymn could be
reduced to the last stanza Huie ergo, etc., since the first seventeen
stanzas describe the Last Judgment. The reply given in 1854
has, however, certainly been abrogated ; it is not included in
the official Decreta Authentica published in 1898-1900 and is
not in conformity with subsequent decisions given in 1857,
1896 and 1897, the last-mentioned decree being also addressed
to Saint-Brieuc. The bishop of the neighbouring diocese of
Quimper asked permission to omit the Dies irae on the occasions
when funerals were being held with little solemnity, and the
Sacred Congregation replied in 1928, Non expedire. Rubricists2
arc now unanimously of the opinion that the entire Dies irae
must, in accordance with the rubrics and decrees, be chanted
at an exequial sung Requiem ; the practice of omitting a
portion of it is an abuse.
There remains the question whether it is necessary to sing
the entire sequence with the prescribed plain-chant notation
or whether portion of it may be chanted rccitatively with a
simple psalm-tone. Some authors have suggested that part of
it may be recited rather than sung. Λ writer in the American
Ecclesiastical Review many years ago said : ‘If some necessity
should suggest a recitation of a part of it (rather than an integral
singing of it) the part recited should be recited in a high and
intelligible tone of voice, the organ meanwhile playing in order
to sustain the voice.’3 This procedure would not be contrary
to die rubrics provided that the text is sung or recited in its
entirety, without omissions. The Caercmoniale Episcoporum pre
scribes :4
In Ofiiciis Defunctorum organa non pulsantur : in Missis autem, si musica
adhibeatur, silent organa cum silet cantus.
If the organ is used at a Requiem Mass it must be only to
accompany and to sustain the voices of the singers ; it may not
be played alone at any time during the liturgical function.5
1 Old decrees, n. 5092.
’ Vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, iii, p. 53 ; 1 lacgy, i, p. 443.
* 1907, p. 201.
‘Cap. xxviii, lib. i, n. 13.
‘ Sangiorgio, Lillurgia del’ Organista, p. 373.
74
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
SOLEMN REQUIEM MASS CELEBRATED ON SUNDAY
Could we have a Requiem High Mass, praesente cadavere, at
the 12 o’clock parochial Mass on Sunday? There are two parochial
Masses in the church, at 9 o’clock and 12 o’clock. The 9 o’clock
Mass is said by the parish priest and is offered pro populo, and the
people receive Holy Communion at it. The 12 o’clock Mass is said
by the curate and is attended by the majority of the parishioners.
Puzzled.
Yes, an cxcquial Requiem Mass could be celebrated by
the curate in the circumstances described in the query. When
the body is present a solemn or sung Requiem Mass is per
missible on the day of burial except on (a) a primary double
feast of the first class of the Universal Church j1 (ό) the feast of
the Dedication or of the Titular of the church or of the Patron
of the place ;2 (c) during solemn Exposition of the Blessed Sacra
ment, or on a day on which the parochial Mass or conventual
Mass must be celebrated, or a Mass must be celebrated in
conformity with a special liturgical function, e.g.,3 the blessing
of candles on 2nd February. In Ireland the cxcquial Mass which
takes place, praesente cadavere, may be celebrated as a low Mass
except on feasts which are doubles of the first or of the second
class, feasts of precept or on privileged feriae, vigils or octaves.4
The principal point in the present query is whether a Requiem
Mass is excluded in the case by a parochial obligation, i.e.,
whether the public Mass celebrated by the curate at 12 o’clock
and at which the majority of the parishioners fulfil their obliga
tion of assisting at Mass on Sunday must be regarded as the
* parochial ’ Mass.
The term Missa paroecialis is variously interpreted by canonists
and liturgists. Broadly speaking a Mass may be called
' parochial ’ if it is said at a fixed hour in a parish or succursal
church, or if it is celebrated by any priest to enable the people
of the parish to satisfy their Sunday obligation.5 A more
restricted interpretation is, however, to be applied in the present
context. On 28th November, 1884, the Congregation of Sacred
Rites in replying to a query gave the following definition :
1 Addit, el Vari. in Rub. Miss., iii, 4.—An cxcquial Mass would be per
missible on the Feriae II and III after Pasch and Pentecost.
1 Loc. cit. Also for religious on the feasts of the Titular or Founder of the
Religious Institute or Congregation.
* Addit, et Var., iii, 12.
* Rescript S. C. Prop., 29th January, 1862 (vide Irish Ordo, p. x).
* I. E. Record, March, 1935, p. 305; O’Connell, Celebration of Mass ii
d. 120.
’ ’
the mass
75
Parochialis Missa appellanda est quam Parochi diebus festis etiam abrogatis
tenentur applicare pro populo.1
The parochial Mass is here identified with the Mass which on
appointed days the parish priest must offer and apply pro populo
in accordance with canon 466. While from other replies of
Sacred Congregation it is clear that this definition need not be
universally2 imposed, nevertheless liturgists are unanimously
of the opinion that it must be applied in the interpretation of
the rubric here governing the celebration of the Requiem
Mass.3 The precise words of the relevant rubric are :
Quaelibet tamen Missa Defunctorum, etiam in dic aut pro die obitus . . .
prohibetur . . . quoties urgeat obligatio Missae cuiuslibet conventualis vel
parochialis, cui per alios Sacerdotes satisfieri nequeat.4
Clearly Missa parochialis here means the Missa pro populo. Hence,
since the parish priest has personally discharged his obligation
by applying the first Mass for his people, the curate may, in
due conformity with the rubrics, celebrate the second Mass
on Sunday its an cxcquial Mass.
COLOUR OF VESTMENTS FOR A REQUIEM MASS
A priest has only a set of white vestments; may he say a Requiem
Mass for a deceased person, on a day on which a Requiem Mass is
allowed?
P.P.
In the General Rubrics of the Missal it is prescribed that
black vestments are to be used in all Offices and Masses of the
Dead, except when on the Commemoration of the Faithful
Departed Requiem Mass is celebrated in the presence of the
Blessed Sacrament exposed.6 In this exceptional case violet
vestments should be worn. In addition these rubrics, which
in regard to the use of black vestments as symbolic of mourning
date at least from the twelfth century, arc supported by explicit
decisions of the Holy Sec. A general decree issued by the
Sacred Congregation of Rites in 1868 states : 1 Missas defunct
orum celebrandas esse omnino in paramentis nigris.’® These
13623·
! E.g. 3887, ‘ . . . quoad Missam Parochialem, cam Oflicio dici con
formem esse debere quando peragenda sit cum applicatione pro populo?
implies that the parochial Mass is not necessarily the Missa pro populo.
’O'Connell, loc. cit; Blat : De Rebus, i, p. 134; Van dcr Stappen,
Liturgia, ii, p. 4 ; Hacgy, Manual de Litturgie, i, p. 445 ; W uest-Mullaney,
Matters Liturgical, p. 364.
* Addit, et Var., iii, 12.
‘ Rub. Gen., xviii, 6 ; and Addit, et Var., x.
•3177.
76
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
rubrics arc not merely directive but arc undoubtedly perceptive
and so impose an obligation. Theologians are agreed, however,
that the obligation is per se light.1 A violation of the canon of
colours may per accidens be grave by reason of the scandal thereby
caused as, for example, if one were to celebrate on Easter Sunday
in black vestments. Hence, if there is no danger of scandal,
any reasonable cause would justify the celebration of a Requiem
Mass when only white vestments are available. If it is altogether
impossible to obtain black vestments throughout the year, then
it may be permissible to celebrate occasionally, not habitually,
in white vestments the Missa Quotidiana Defunctorum.
THE ANTIPHON TRIUM PUERORUM AFTER REQUIEM
MASS
During Paschaltide should Alleluia be added to the antiphon
Trium Puerorum after a Requiem Mass?
„
Student.
Yes ; Alleluia should be added to the antiphon after every
Mass throughout Paschaltide. The antiphon should be said
in full before the canticle only when the Office of the day is of
double rite. If the rite of the Mass differs from that of the
Office (e.g. if the Mass of a major fcria is celebrated on a double
feast or if an cxequial or anniversary Mass (double rite) is
said on a simple feast), the celebrant may or may not double
the antiphon as he chooses, but it is more correct to act in
accordance with the rite of the Office.2
LOW EXEQUIAL MASS ON A PRIVILEGED FERIA
May a low funeral Mass be celebrated on the Monday of Holy
Week? The Ordo (Nota Hebd. Sanct.) states that an exequial Mass is
permitted on the privileged feriae of Holy Week but the rescript for
Ireland (Rescript. S.C. Prop. 1862), excludes a ‘Missa Privata
exequialis.’
R. P.
Only an exequial Mass is permitted on a major privileged
fcria and to have its special status the cxequial Mass should
normally be a solemn Mass, with deacon and subdeacon, or at
least a sung Mass. If. however, the deceased may be described
1 Vide Cappello, De Sacramentis, i. par. 811 ; Pruinnicr, Manuale Theologiae
Moralis, iii, 298 ; Gcnicot. Theologia Moralis, ii, 218 ; Lchmkuhl, Theologia
Moralis, ii, 317 ; O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 257.
1 Ephem. Lit., 1939, p. 146; 1941, p. 60; Van dcr Stappcn-Crogaert,
Caeremoniale (1946), ii, p. 131; S.R.C. 4011.
hw
: ’ii· -·
THE MASS
77
as a poor person then a low funeral Mass may be celebrated
with all the privileges of a solemn Mass. In Ireland we have
an induit which permits a low exequial Mass even for a person
who was not poor, on greater double and double feasts, but it
does not permit it on doubles of the first or of the second class
or on privileged ferias, or vigils or during privileged octaves.
In some dioceses it may be claimed that by legitimate custom
this permission has been extended to some of these days excluded
in the rescript ; in England by virtue of rescripts granted in
1847 and 1864 a low funeral Mass has all the privileges of a
solemn or sung exequial.1 Hence, on the Monday of Holy
Week a private funeral Mass could not lawfully be celebrated
in Ireland except where it can be claimed that a legitimate
custom of so doing prevails or when it can be said that the
deceased or his relatives who must bear the expense of the
function arc poor—a condition that may be widely interpreted.
MAY MASS BE CELEBRATED IN A HOSPITAL
WARD ?
May the celebration of Mass in a hospital ward be easily permitted?
Does the phrase in canon 822, § 4, ‘ nunquam autem in cubiculo '
completely exclude it?
Cappellanus.
Canon 822, § 4, states :
Loci Ordinarius . . · licentiam celebrandi extra ecclesiam et oratorium
super petram sacram et decenti loco, nunquam autem in cubiculo, concedere
potest iusta tantum ac rationabili de causa, in aliquo extraordinario casu et
per modum actus.
Commenting on this canon Coronata says :
Quod dicitur de prohibita Missae celebratione in cubiculis ne extenderis
ad cubicula domorum hospitalium ubi plurcs et multi simul infirmi degunt.
In talibus domibus et cubiculis non solum permitti solet celebratio in altari
poriatili, sed aliquibus in locis ibi erigitur verum ct proprium oratorium
scmipublicum.2
Certainly canon 822, § 4, excludes the possibility of Mass in
an ordinary bedroom and the prohibition has often been
repeated. Pope Pius X granted to the religious of the Order
of St. Camillus in 1905 a special faculty to celebrate Mass in
sick-rooms,3 but such permission is not normally obtainable
’Vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 145.
1 De Sacramentis, i, p. 231.
’Reference in Ephem. Lit., 1948, p. 179. ‘ La Messe dans la chambre des
Malades.’
78
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
even from the Holy See. The objections to having Mass in an
ordinary sick-room do not, however, apply to a hospital ward.
In a hospital ward arrangements ensuring due decorum and
reverence for the sacrifice can more easily be made, and in the
circumstances where a number of people arc permanently
confined to bed the celebration of Mass for them on the occa
sion of a day of special devotion may be a source of spiritual
consolation and profit to their souls.
The question is to be decided by the local Ordinary who
may give the permission. Certain decisions of the Sacred
Congregations indicate the considerations which are to be borne
in mind when there is question of permitting the celebration of
Mass outside a church or oratory. In 1926 the Sacred Con
gregation of the Sacraments1 refused to allow the celebration
of Mass praesente cadavere in the house and room in which death
has occurred except the permission was granted in an extra
ordinary case and for a just and reasonable cause. An
extraordinary case was described as the occasion of the death
of the Bishop or Ordinary of the place or of a person dis
tinguished for his sendees to the Church, to the nation or to
the poor. In official annotations added to this reply the
secretary of the Congregation pointed out that before the Code
the interpretation given authoritatively to its missionaries by
the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda was that the cele
bration of Mass outside a sacred place ‘ was not permitted for
the sake of devotion but was permitted through necessity.’
The Code requires that the reason for the permission must be
just and reasonable and that it be granted only per modum actus
and in an extraordinary case. The gravity of the cause or
necessity is to be taken in moral estimation. The reason for
these strict views is given in the concluding paragraph of the
secretary’s notes : “All are aware that there is a certain
tendency and propensity among the faithful to withdraw from
sacred places even the most sacred ceremonies of the Church.
. . . It is an attempt to laicize—if that word may be permitted
—the ceremonies of the Church, to rob them of their accidental
sanctity.’2
In recent times, however, the Holy See has more easily
permitted the celebration of Mass outside a church or oratory.3
In addition to these arguments arising from concessions made
in accordance with the general law of the Church, we must
‘3rd May, 1926; A.A.S., xviii, p. 388.
1 Trans, in Bouscarcn, Canon Law Digest I, p. 390.
’ E.g., in faculties to military chaplains, 1935, 1939. Vide Bouscarcn.
Ί
THE MASS
79
bear in mind that in Ireland an immemorial custom sanctions
in many dioceses the practice of celebrating Mass in private
houses and that in this country the considerations suggested by
the secretary of the Congregation of the Sacraments are not
applicable.1 Hence we believe that the local Ordinary may,
without great difficulty, have sufficient cause for permitting on
occasion the celebration of Mass in a hospital ward.
LICEITY OF CELEBRATING M/X.SS IN A SICK-ROOM
Is it lawful to celebrate Mass in a room which is not normally
a bedroom but one to which an invalid in bed has been brought for
a short time?
Sacerdos.
Apart from a special apostolic induit it would seem that
the only grounds on which the local Ordinary could permit
the celebration of Mass in a sick-room would be an immemorial
custom which has not been reprobated. In 1919 the Com
mission for the Interpretation of the Code decided that the
faculty of celebrating Mass in a private house is to be inter
preted by the Ordinary restrictively in accordance with canon
822, §4.2 The Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments, in
1924, in a letter addressed to the Ordinaries of Italy, pointed
out ‘ that the faculties of Ordinaries in this matter are rather
limited, and may not be exercised except in an extraordinary
case, nor without just and reasonable cause, which must be
inspired by the highest motives connected with divine worship
and the spiritual welfare of the faithful.’3 The purpose of this
letter, however, was to guard against the celebration of Mass on
the occasion of some profane celebration or to add solemnity
to a political ceremony. In practice the Holy Sec has made
many individual concessions in favour of the sick or for the
offering of Mass in a room in which a death has just taken
place. For example, in 1905, Pope Pius X granted to priests
of the Order of St. Camillus the faculty to celebrate Mass in
sick-rooms,4 and, in 1926, the Sacred Congregation of the
Sacraments permitted, in ‘ extraordinary cases,
*
Mass praesente
cadavere in the house and room in which death has occurred ;
an ‘ extraordinary case * was described as the death of the
1 Cf. Canon Mahoney, Questions and Answers, ii, p. 384.
1 Vide Bouscarcn, Canon Law Digest, i, p. 385.
’Ibid., p. 386.
‘Note in Etdicin. Lit., 1948, p. 179.
βθ
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Bishop or Ordinary of the place or of a person distinguished for
his sendees to the Church, to the nation or to the poor.1 In
many parts of Ireland a legitimate custom extends this per
mission to cover the celebration of such a Mass on the occasion
of the death of an ordinary parishioner provided that proper
arrangements can be made and due reverence and decorum be
observed. In some places similar customs may prevail in
favour of celebrating in a sick-room and the Ordinary may
tolerate the continuance of such a custom. The general
practice of the Holy See is to make concessions only in favour
of the dying or for a particular reason, e.g. if a priest wishes to
celebrate for his father or mother who is dying. Rubricists
generally suggest as an alternative that the Mass be celebrated
in a room immediately adjoining the sick-room and arrange
ments made that the invalid assist at it as fully as possible.
MIDNIGHT MASS AT CHRISTMAS
In a public church served by religious it has been the custom for
a number of years to have solemn Mass at midnight and immediately
after it two other Masses. Most of the congregation remain in the
church for the three Masses as most of them receive Communion
which is distributed after the high Mass. Does the present legis
lation and interpretation of recent decrees allow the celebration of
three Masses in these circumstances? Even if it does not strictly
conform to the law, may the custom be continued on the grounds
that otherwise the faithful will be surprised and disappointed?
Nuper-Electus.
This practice can scarcely be approved, although it would
seem that the custom described in the query docs not certainly
contravene the general law. On the 5th March, 1954, Cardinal
Massimo Marsimi, President of the Code Commission, declared
that since canon 821 docs not mention the pre-Code (1908)
restrictions, these arc no longer binding. A number of early
(seventeenth century) decrees of the Sacred Congregation of
Rites explicitly forbid the practice of celebrating other Masses
immediately after the midnight Mass. For example : Decree
N. 1584, ad II :
An Sacerdos, qui in nocte [Nativitatis Domini] celebravit Missam
solemnem, possit immediate celebrare privalim reliquas duas Missas : vel
potius teneatur cxpectarc auroram ? Resp. : Negative : id ct alligatis
rationibus abunde probetur, ct praxi universalis Ecclesiae conforme Romanae
magistrae comprobatur.
1 Vide I. E. Record, November, 1951, p. 425 ; Clergy Review, 1948, p. 280.
THE MASS
81
Similarly Decree N. 208G :
An post Missam solcmncm decantatem in nocte Nativitatis D. Nostri
Icsu Christ liceat successive celebrare Missas privatas, nec non Sacram
Eucharistiam Chrisiifidclibus illam deposcentibus exhibere ?
Resp. :
Negative.1
Hence § 2 of canon 821 makes it quite clear that in virtue of
the common law only the parochial or conventual Mass may be
celebrated at midnight. In 1907 Pope Pius X granted a special
privilege for the celebration of three Masses (by the same priest),
in the oratories of religious houses and of pious institutes. In
the following year the Holy Office dealt with the following
dubia concerning this induit :l2
(1) An indultum importet facultatem tres Missas, vel unam tantum pro
rerum opportunitate celebrandi etiam apertis Oratoriorum ianuis ?
(2) An indultum Oratoriis concessum extendi possit ad ecclesias Religio
sorum quae publico fidelis populi usui inserviunt ?
Responsoria : Ad I. Negative.
Ad II. Negative, salvo tamen Religiosorum privilegio in media
nocte Missam celebrandi.
No mention of these restrictions was made in canon 821, § 3,
yet many commentators have continued to hold that they still
bind. It is true that a few authors in seeking justification for
a milder view have argued (e.g. Schaeffer in De Religiosis) that
since the restriction ianuis clausis has not been explicitly included
in Canon 821, § 3, it no longer binds. That the restrictions
remained was, however, the view of Gcnicot, Noldin,Merkclbach,
’ Prummcr, Vermeersch, Davis and Woutcrs.3 Coronata, who
supports the minority view writes :4
Si admittatur, ut admittunt aliqui, publica oratoria domorum religio
sarum, etiam ianuis apertis, uti nunc posse privilegio quia Codex anteriores
restrictiones non reportavit ; non videtur ratio cur a privilegio excludendae
sint ecclesiae religiosorum, quae vix differunt ab oratoriis publicis ipsorum
ct eodem iurc reguntur.
Cappello5 also, in an attempt to find a way out of the 1908
replies, makes the amazing suggestion that the law would be
fulfilled if the principal door of the church were closed. Com
mentators generally agree that when the three Masses are
celebrated in the oratory of a religious house, a few visitors,
friends, relatives, etc., of the community may be admitted,
unless the local Ordinary rules to the contrary; Vermeersch,0
lCf. S.R.G. 752, 781, 1683, 1761, etc.
M..4..Ç., 1909, p. 1*16.
’ Cf. W. J. Conway in I. E. Record, December, 1953, p. 426.
1 De Sacramentis, p. 202.
4 De Sacramentis, vol. i, § 793.
* Epitome luris Canonici, vol. ii, § 97.
82
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
for example, extends this concession even to the churches of
religious :
. . . ut liceret tamen, ianuis clausis, celebrare missas istas in religiosorum
ecclesia, si non quilibet populus sed selecti tantum fideles admitterentur.
Cardinal Massimi’s reply concerns only the first of the 1908
decisions and means that all may be admitted when the three
Masses are celebrated in the oratories of religious houses.
Commentators (e.g. Father Bligh, S.J., in Nouvelle Revue Theologique, February, 1955) argue that the logical inference is
that the second part of the pre-Codc restrictions has also dis
appeared and that, therefore, the three Masses may be celebrated
even in the public churches of religious ienais apertis. That
conclusion would derogate substantially from § 2 of canon 821.
Hence although doubts may remain, it still seems to be the
safer opinion that restrictions apply still to the public churches
of religious in so far as three Masses are not there permitted.
Λ privilege granted in the general law to religious must be
understood in the sense of the authentic interpretation given
to it and in a way that does not create a prejudice against other
interests. The Cardinal’s reply was not published in the Acta
and is not to be interpreted too widely.
Hence in the circumstances described in the query since
obviously abuses would easily arise from any invidious selection
of these few persons who would be invited to remain for the
Masses celebrated after the High Mass it would seem to be
advisable that the practice of celebrating the extra Masses
should be discontinued.
COMMUNICATING THE SICK BEFORE OR AFTER
MIDNIGHT MASS
When at Christmas, midnight Mass is celebrated in the oratory
of a hospital may the celebrant, at Mass or immediately before or
after the Mass, go around the wards bringing Holy Communion to
the sick who are in bed?
Perplexus.
Canon 867
4'*
§ 4.
Sacra communio iis tantum horis distribuatur, quibus Missae sacrificium
oflerri potest, nisi aliud rationabilis causa suadeat.
Canon 821 permits the distribution of Holy Communion when
midnight Mass is celebrated at Christmas in religious or pious
THE MASS
83
houses. A private reply1 from the Code Commission interpreting
canon 8G7 states ‘ in the Mass which is celebrated on Christmas
night in parochial or conventual churches Holy Communion
may, without any apostolic induit, be distributed, when in
the judgment of the Ordinary there is reasonable cause for so
doing.’ Hence there is no doubt but that the celebrant could
during Mass communicate sick persons who are within sight
of die altar. Canon 858 states :
Sacerdoti celebranti non licet Eucharistiam intra Missam distribuere
fidelibus adeo distantibus ut ipse altare e conspectu amittat.
A particular decree2 published by the Sacred Congregation of
Rites in 1847 permitted the celebrant to bring Holy Communion
during Mass to a sick person in an adjoining room from which
the altar could not be seen but where the voice could be heard
of the priest celebrating at the altar—
. . . deferri potest sacra Communio non solum in toto valetudinario sive
a parte antea sive a parte postea Altaris ; sed etiam in aliquibus cubiculis,
cx quibus, etsi Altare non videatur, tamen vox Sacerdotis celebrantis auditur.
This particular reply was given in favour of the Order of St.
John of God ‘ attentis peculiaribus circumstantiis ’ and although
it probably has not been abrogated neither does it derogate
from the general law stated in decrees published in 1829, 1844and 18733 and now established by canon 858.4 In any event
to communicate one or two patients in the immediate vicinity
of the oratory probably would not satisfy the difficulty described
in the query.
Hence we do not think that the celebrant of the Mass would
be justified in visiting the sick-rooms during the Mass. If
Communion is brought to the sick in the hospital on the occasion
of the midnight Mass the distribution must have some con
nection with the Mass. It should, therefore, be carried out by
the celebrant immediately before or after the Mass. If he
celebrates a low Mass the celebrant may do so while wearing
all the Mass vestments. If, on the other hand, the Mass is
celebrated as a sung or as a solemn high Mass the celebrant
should leave aside at least the chasuble and maniple before he
proceeds to distribute Holy Communion in the hospital wards.
‘Code Commission, 10th July, 1919, to the Bishop of Tuguegaro (Philip
pines); Vide Bouscarcn, Canon Law Digest, i, p. 410.
2 3322, Ordinis S. Joann is de Deo.
1 S.R.C. 2672, Fiorentina ; 2885, Lanuen ; and 3448, Societatis Jesu, respec
tively4 Vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, ii, p. 164; Haegy, Ceremonial, ii,
p. 65 ; Cappello, De Sacramentis, i, par. 4-13 ; A. Coronata, De Sacramentis,
i, par. 339.
84
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
THE NEW RUBRICS AND VOTIVE MASSES
In what respects are the rules for votive Masses changed by the
recent decree for the reform of the Rubrics ?
The effects on the rubrics for votive Masses of the decree
Cum nostra are clarified by the rules published at the beginning
of the Ordo iuxta Kalendarium Universalis Ecclesiae for 1956. The
changes are : (a) Solemn votive Masses pro re gravi et publica
simul causa are now prevented during the octaves of Easter and
Pentecost and on any days on which they are prevented they
arc not commemorated. Secondly, in such a solemn votive
Mass, a second class double feast is not commemorated, (ά) Sung
votive Masses pro re non gravi are in future permitted on the day
before the Epiphany and during the days immediately following
the feasts of the Epiphany, .Ascension, Corpus Christi and the
Sacred Heart for these octaves have been abolished, (c) Private
votive Masses arc permitted in the periods which were formerly
the octaves of Corpus Christi and the Sacred Heart, but they
remain prohibited from 2nd-5th and 7th-13th January, and
from the Friday after the Ascension until the vigil of Pentecost,
inclusive, (d) Privileged votive Masses : (1) Mass of the Sacred
Heart on the first Friday is prevented as formerly, but from
2nd-5th January it is replaced by the Mass of the Circumcision,
not by the Mass of 30th December, and immediately after the
Ascension by the Mass of the Ascension not as previously by
the Mass of the Sunday within the former octave of the Ascension ;
when it is prevented, the votive Mass is not commemorated.
Only in a sung Mass is the Credo included. (2) Mass Pro Sponsis
is now permissible on 5th January and on the days immediately
following the Epiphany and Corpus Christi ; in this Mass the
occurring feast is to be commemorated and the Preface is
always the Common or seasonal Preface ; when it is prevented,
the Mass Pro Sponsis is always commemorated under one con
clusion with the prayer of the day. (3) Mass for the Propagation
of the Faith may now be fixed on the day before the Epiphany
and days within former octaves. In future the Credo will be
included only if the Mass is sung ; this is the only change
affecting our celebration of the Mass for the Propagation of
the Faith on 2nd December in Ireland.
Concerning the commemoration of a prevented votive Mass,
difficulties have arisen. The rule given in the new Ordo reads :1
1 Ordo Regulae, iii, p. xix.
THE MASS
85
His diebus (i.c. Dominicis I classis, in duplicibus I classis, etc.) in Missa
cantata dici currentis, cLsi convcntuali, non additur, sub unica conclusione
cum prima oratione, oratio de Missa votiva impedita. . . .
The old rubric has simply been negatived by the insertion of
‘ won,
*
hence the rule is now awkwardly worded and verbose.
Amongst the queries answered by the Sacred Congregation of
Rites on 2nd June, 1955,1 is the question whether a prevented
votive Mass should be commemorated, and the reply is : Affirmative
si oratio praescribatur sub praecepto ; Negative, si oratio permittatur
dicenda ad libitum. The reply goes on to state that in the Forty
Hours’ Prayer or during any other period of Exposition, the
prayer of the Blessed Sacrament is to be said only in Masses
celebrated at the altar of Exposition. The rubrics in the Ordo
make it clear that this commemoration of the Blessed Sacrament
is to be made in the first place before any other prayers pre
scribed by the rubrics or imperatae and, if it is a commemoration
of a prevented votive Mass of the Blessed Sacrament, it is to
be made under one conclusion with the prayer of the day.
The Masses for the Forty Hours—the Masses of the Blessed
Sacrament for Exposition and Deposition and the Mass Pro Pace
on the middle day of the Prayer—are prevented during the
octaves of Easter and Pentecost, as arc all solemn votive Masses
pro re gravi.
DEVOTIONS IN THE MORNING OF THE FIRST
FRIDAY.
Is it permissible to celebrate the proper votive Mass of the
Sacred Heart on the first Friday in those churches where no special
devotions are held beyond the fact that on that morning special
facilities are provided to enable the faithful to receive the Sacraments
of Confession and Holy Communion?
The relevant clause in the Decree of Pope Leo XIII, on
which the present rubrics are based, directs : ‘ That in all
churches and oratories where on the first Friday of each month
special exercises of piety in honour of the Sacred Heart are,
with the approval of the local Ordinary, carried out in the
morning, a votive Mass of the Sacred Heart may be added to
these exercises. . . .’2 It is clear, therefore, that there must be
some exercises distinct from the Mass ; that they must be
performed in the morning, and that, in accordance with the
M./1.5., lune, 1955.
’S.R.C. 3712, 28th June, 1889.
86
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
general law, they must be approved by the local Ordinary.
The special exercises may consist in the recitation of an Act of
Reparation or of Consecration, Litany of the Sacred Heart, or
other prayers, or in Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament for a
brief period before or after Mass.1 The approbation of the local
Ordinary' is required before any prayers may be added to the
Mass, but that approval may be given once and for all for the
churches of the diocese. Rubricists arc agreed that a general
Communion in honour of the Sacred Heart would of itself be
sufficient as a special exercise.2
Hence, if all, or practically all, the congregation attend the
Mass on the first Friday in order to receive the Sacraments in
honour of the Sacred Heart, the priest is justified in celebrating,
with due observance of the rubrics, the privileged votive Mass
of the Sacred Heart. The general Communion alone, without
the addition of any extra prayers, suffices as a special exercise
of piety in honour of the Sacred Heart. Where, in accordance
with the provisions of the Constitution, Christus Dominus, evening
Mass is permitted on the first Friday, die votive Mass may
be celebrated in connection with special evening devotions.
I
I
FORMULARIES FOR VOTIVE MASSES OF THE
ASSUMPTION AND OF THE SACRED HEART
I
1
[
j
2
Many priests now wish to offer votive Masses of the Assumption
of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Is it permissible to do so, using the Mass
for 15th August ? For a Votive Mass of the Sacred Heart on the
First Friday must one use the present Mass of the feast, or would it
be permissible to vary the devotion by occasionally using one of the
older Masses still to be found in older editions of the Missal ?
Senex.
I
S
I
I
v
The new Mass of the Assumption may not be celebrated as
a votive Mass except by virtue of an Apostolic Induit. The
only feast Masses of the Blessed Virgin Mary which may be
used as votive Masses are those of the Immaculate Conception
and of the Seven Dolours.3 In 1939 the Sacred Congregation
of Rites in reply to the question concerning which votive
Masses should be said in honour of the Assumption, Nativity,
Purification, Visitation, etc., of the Blessed Virgin directed
dicatur una ex quinque votivis Missis B.M. Virginis in Missali Romano
iuxta congruentiam temporis.
1 Vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 101. Aertnys, Compendium
Liturgi at Sacrae, p. 113.
’ Loe. cit.
• Vide Rub. Miss. ; O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, vol. i.
THE MASS
Hcncc to honour the Assumption one should say with that
intention the common votive Mass of the Blessed Virgin using
the formulary assigned as appropriate to the season. If the
Mass is celebrated by the direction or permission of the Ordinary
as a solemn votive Mass pro re gravi, the Gloria and Credo are
included ; if it is celebrated as a simple votive Mass, the Credo
is omitted and the Gloria is said only if it is celebrated on a
Saturday. The Preface is the Preface of the Blessed Virgin
with the phrase Et Te in veneratione.
'fhe Mass of the feast of the Sacred Heart, Cogitationes,
must be used for all votive Masses of the Sacred Heart ; it is
the only formulary now approved.*
1 This is clear from the
terms in which Pope Pius XI in the Decretum Generale issued
on 29th January, 1929, approved the new Office and Mass.
. . . illudque in universa Ecclesia, ab utroque Clero et a quibuslibet recita
tioni Offici divini iuxta Romanum ritum adstrictis, adhiberi iussit ; servatis
rubricis. Contrariis non obstantibus quibuscumque, etiam speciali mentione
dignis.
From the eighteenth century the feast of the Sacred Heart
has been celebrated in many dioceses with proper Offices and
Masses. In 1765 Pope Clement XIII approved the Mass
Miserebitur with a corresponding Office for use in Poland, and
in the following year the same Mass was approved for Rome
and for several other dioceses. In 1778 Pope Pius VI approved
for Portugal a different Mass Egredimini, and this Mass with
its Office was adopted in some Belgian and French dioceses.
When in 1856 Pope Pius IX inserted the feast of the Sacred
Heart in the calendar of the Universal Church with the rite
of double major, the Mass Miserebitur was chosen for general
use although the second Mass was allowed in particular places.
Pope Leo XIII raised the rite of the feast to the grade of a
secondary double of the first class and finally Pope Pius XI
directed that it be celebrated as a primary double of the first
class with a privileged octave of the third order.2 The formulary
for the new Mass Cogitationes borrows its Epistle from the Mass
Egredimini and its Gospel from the earlier Mass Miserebitur but
its Collect, Secret, etc., emphasize more explicitly the idea of
reparation to the Sacred Heart.3
1 Vide Ephem. Lit., 1929 ; /I.J.5., 1929 ; Nouvelle Revue Theologique, 1929.
1 This octave has been suppressed by the Decree Cum Nostra (23rd March,
1955) simplifying the rubrics.
’ In the course of time as many as ten Masses of the Sacred Heart have
been approved of, either for the universal Church or for particular dioceses
or religious orders (Vide Clergy Monthly, 1956, p. 161).
88
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
THE GLORIA IN VOTIVE MASSES OF THE
BLESSED VIRGIN
Should the Gloria be recited in all private votive Masses of the
Blessed Virgin or is its use confined to the Saturday Masses? For
example, if one celebrates the Mass of the Immaculate Conception as
a votive Mass, should the Gloria be said ? Why is there a special rule
for Saturday?
Religious.
In Missis Votivis Gloria in excelsis non dicitur, etiam tempore Paschali vcl
intra Octavam, nisi in Missis beatae Mariae in Sabbato, et Angelorum :
et nisi Missa Votiva solemniter dicenda sit pro re gravi . . . dummodo non
dicatur Missa cum paramentis violaceis. (Rubricae Generales VIII, n. 4.)
Item Gloria in excelsis dicitur in Missis de quolibet festo quae infra ipsius
Octavam simplicem dicuntur ; et in aliis Missis quae ritu festivo . . . cele
brantur, dummodo colorem violaceum non requirant. (Additiones et Varia
tiones in Rub. Missal VII, n. 1.)
Admittedly these rubrics are not entirely free from ambiguity.
Some writers have understood the term ‘ Missis beatae Mariae
in Sabbato ’ as designating the formula of the Masses in which
the Gloria is to be said and have, therefore, held that the Gloria
is to be recited only if the votive Mass is one of the five Saturday
Masses of the Blessed Virgin. The better interpretation, how
ever, would seem to be that in any votive Mass of the Blessed
Virgin which is celebrated on a Saturday the Gloria should be
said. Decree N. 1814 of the Sacred Congregation of Rites
seems to make this provision more explicitly :
■<· 7
\
An in Missis votivis B.M.V. quae celebrantur in Sabbato dicendus sit
Hymnus Gloria in excelsis Deo ? Resp. : Affirmative, etiamsi non fiat Officium
de ea.
Tins would seem also to be the better interpretation of Decreturn Generale 3922, § V, n. 2, although admittedly it is not the
only possible meaning :
In Missis Votivis de B.M.V. quae celebrantur in Sabbatis pcr annum ct in
Sabbatis Adventus, dicatur Hymnus Gloria in excelsis, etiamsi Officium non
sit de ca : nunquam vero dicatur extra Sabbatum, nisi infra octavas eiusdem
beatae Virginis ; etiamsi talis Missa celebretur cx legato, neque obstante
consuetudine etiam immemorabili. Sacerdos, vero, qui cx induito quotidie
celebrat Missam Votivam dc B.M.V. Gloria in excelsis dicat in Sabbato, uti
supra, haud vero infra octavas eiusdem beatae Virginis.
I
;
λ
It is clear that the recitation of the Gloria is not a consequence
of the fact that the Office is Dc Beata Maria in Sabbato, but
is due to the fact that the Mass is being celebrated on a Saturday,
and any Mass of the Blessed Virgin celebrated more votivo on a
Saturday carries the Gloria which should be omitted on any
THE MASS
89
other day of the week. Hence, if one says the Mass of the
Immaculate Conception as a private votive Mass on a Saturday
the Gloria must be included.1
The reason for attaching this special privilege to a Mass of
the Blessed Virgin on a Saturday is that from the earliest
medieval times Saturday has been specially dedicated to devotion
to Our Lady. 2 Ofthc abundant reasons suggested by liturgists for
this dedication of Saturday those mentioned by Durandus were
the most frequently quoted, c.g., in the Sarum Missal. The first
of these reasons is the popular belief that a statue of the Blessed
Virgin in a church in Constantinople was miraculously unveiled
each Friday evening and could be seen until after Vespers on
Saturday. The second reason was that Our Lady was the only
person to keep her faith in Our Lord during the Saturday
between His death and resurrection. Thirdly, Saturday, as the
day opening on Sunday was regarded as a symbol of Mary,
Gate of Heaven. Fourthly, St. Peter Damien, in the eleventh
century, expressed the thought : ‘ Sabbath signifies rest, for one
reads that God Himself rested on that dav. Is it not then
fitting that the same day should be dedicated to the Blessed
Virgin, in whom the divine Wisdom chose its abode and rested
as on a couch of holiness ? ’ The custom of celebrating a votive
Mass of Our Lady on Saturday was already known by the end
of the eighth century and was definitely established in the
liturgy by the thirteenth century.
PROPER MASS OF ST. PATRICK
I find that there is a ‘ proper ’ Mass of St. Patrick, but with the
following restriction: ‘adhibenda in iis tantummodo dioecesibus pro
quibus licentia specialis concessa.’ May this Mass be used by
religious who have their own Ordo but who, in accordance with the
common law, are bound to observe the feast of the Patron of the
place?
Festina lente.
Quoad Festa locali, quae a Regularibus . . . servanda sunt, ipsi uti debent
Officio et Missa Clero sacculari concessis, nisi eadem Festa ab ipsis Regulari
bus iam habeantur cum Oflicio et Missa magis propriis :3
Also a reply given by the Sacred Congregation to the
Barnabites (Clerks Regular of St. Paul) in 18564 stated that where
‘Vide Ephem. Lil., 1948, p. 116.
5 Vide Gougaud, Devotional and Ascetical Practices in the Middle Ages, ch. iv.
’Decree N. 4312 ad V issued by the Sacred Congregation of Rites on
28th February, 1914.
‘3011.
90
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
the Clerks Regular celebrated a feast with an Office from the
Common and now a proper Office had been granted to the
diocese, the Regulars should use this proper Office
. . . dummodo in concessione Officii facta Dioecesi, Regulares explicite
non excludantur.
The proper Mass of St. Patrick was granted to all the dioceses
of Scodand and to those Irish dioceses from which application
has been made. The induit granted to the archdiocese of
Dublin on 16th April, 1931,1 docs not explicitly exclude
Regulars from the use of the Mass, 1 Egredere de terra tuad Pre
sumably the privilege was granted in similar terms elsewhere
and, therefore, in any diocese in which the privilege is enjoyed
religious may avail themselves of it.
It is worthy of note that the same induit granting the proper
Mass of St. Patrick also directs that in the Office the Gospel
and Homilies should be taken from the Common of Evangelists
with the Rcsponsorics assigned for a Confessor Pontiff. Hence
religious or others who make use of the proper Mass must also
make this adjustment in their Office, since in the Breviary the
Gospel and Homilies for St. Patrick’s feast are taken from the
Common of Confessor Pontiff.
VOTIVE MASSES OF IRISH SAINTS
The rubrics state that a votive Mass may be celebrated in
honour of any canonized saint, whose name is inscribed in the Roman
Martyrology. May the Irish ‘ saints ’ whose cult has been approved
(e.g., by S.R.C., 17th June, 1902) be considered as canonized aequipollentert
Anxius.
K
13
Canonization is a final, definitive sentence of the Roman
Pontiff declaring that a particular servant of God must be
considered now as a member of the Church Triumphant and
to this individual must be given public, ecclesiastical veneration
by the Universal Church.2 By the decree of Pope Urban VIII,
published on 5th July, 1634, all questions regarding canoniza
tion were reserved to the Holy See.3 Normally beatification
or canonization is the result of a process by which the Cause is
investigated per viam non-etdtus. In extraordinary cases all these
1 Published in The Dublin Diocesan Supplement to The Ordo, p. 164.
1 Wcrnz-Vidal, Ius Canonicum, îv, p. 553.
’ Constitution, Coelestis Hierusalem. Pope Alexander III had already, in
1170, reserved beatifications to the Holy See.
THE MASS
91
preliminary examinations arc omitted and the cause is advanced
per viain cultus. In these cases equivalent beatification or
canonization takes place when a decree is issued recognizing
the immemorial cult of the saint and the universal acceptance
of the facts of his heroic virtues, miracles or martyrdom.1
Pope Urban VIII made provision for such exceptional cases in
which it was proved that veneration had been shown to the
saint by prescribing that the cult should be approved if it were
shown to have arisen
ex induito summorum Pontificum, vel permissione sacrae Congregationis,
vel per communem Ecclesiae consensum, vel per immemorabilem temporis
cursum, aut per Patrum virorumque sanctorum scripta, vel longissimi
temporis scientia atque tolerantia Sedis Apostolicac vel Ordinarii.’
In April, 1902, the Most Rev. Dr. Healy, then Bishop of
Clonfert, in the name of the Bishops of Ireland, petitioned the
Holy See for formal recognition of the cult of twenty-five Irish
saints namely, SS. Albert, Assach, Carthage, Colman (Cloyne),
Colman (Dromore), Colman (Kilmacduagh), Comgall, Conleth,
Declan, Aidan, Eugene, Fachanan, Fclim, Finian, Finbarr,
Flanan, Jarlath, Kieran, Kevin, Laserian, Macnissc, Macartan,
Muredach, Nathy, Otteran. The petition was based on the
principle that a Cause must be regarded as an excepted case
if the Sacred Congregation has already permitted some public,
ecclesiastical veneration to the servant of God.1
*3 It could be
proved from authentic documents that for each of the saints
named, except SS. Eugene, Finian and Declan, the Sacred
Congregation of Rites had already granted an Office and in
the recitation of the Office, according to Pope Benedict XIV,
‘stat supremum pondus ecclesiastici cultus.’4 In addition, the
immemorial cult of SS. Eugene, Finian and Declan was proved
by the fact that their names had been inscribed in the ancient
Irish Martyrologies, by the references to them in the Acts of
the Bollandists, and by their universal veneration which had
been tolerated by the Apostolic Sec and by local Ordinaries.
The objections raised by the Promoter Fidei were satisfactorily
answered5 and, therefore, in a decree approved by Pope Leo
XIII on 17th June, 1902, the Sacred Congregation of Rites
formally admitted the Cause of these twenty-five Irish saints
1 Wemz-Vidal, op. cit., p. 554. Canon 2125 ct scq.
’Decrees of Urban VIII, Fontes Cod. ; Benedict XIV, De Beatif.catione et
Canonizatione, lib. ii, cap. xvii, p. 1.
’ Benedict XIV, loc. cit. The Oflices of the Irish Saints had been recognized,
e.g., in 1741, 1747, 1771, and especially in 1867.
4 Loc. cit. Vide /. E. Record, 1902, p. 370.
*/. E. Record, loc. cit., also 1916, p. 309.
92
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
as an excepted ease under the decrees of Pope Urban VIII.
Their cult as saints was thereby definitively approved.1 In
the following year approval was granted for the historical
lessons and eulogies in the Martyrology for these saints and also
for SS. Brendan, Celsus, Columba, Canice and Cataid.12
The rubrics of the Missal direct that a votive Mass may be
celebrated of any canonized saint whose name is inscribed in
die Martyrology.34 It is not sufficient that the name appear in
an approved Martyrology,1 because the Martyrologies, compiled
originally as private collections, contain many errors. Before
a votive Mass can be celebrated in honour of a servant of God
it is necessary that in some manner beatification or canonization
will have been conferred ; the Irish saints whose cult has been
formally recognized in the Roman decrees have been canonized
eaquipollcntcr, and, therefore, their Masses may, servatis servandis
be celebrated.
CELEBRATION OF THE MASS OF A BEATUS
In a diocesan school under the control of a Congregation of
Brothers, a secular priest is chaplain and follows the diocesan Ordo.
May the chaplain, without an induit, celebrate the Mass of a Beatus
of the Brothers’ Congregation on a double feast?
Lone Ranger.
The chaplain may say the Mass of the Bealus provided
only that an Apostolic Induit for its celebration has been granted
to the religious community which he serves. The Mass of a
beatified person may be celebrated only in the place for which
the privilege has been granted. Canon 1277 prescribes :
*
’
In album Sanctorum canonice relatis cultus duliac debetur ; Sancti coli
possunt ubique et quovis actu eius generis cultus ; Beati vero non possunt,
nisi loco et modo quo Romanus Pontifex concesserit.
j 1
1 Cf. canon 2134.
2 1st November, 1903. Vide I. E. Record, 1904, p. 80. The revised Irish
supplement was published in 1916. That the decree, Constat de caste excepto,
is sufficient for canonization is clear : ‘ Sacra Congregatio respondet vel
pro confirmatione sententiae vel quod sufficienter constat dc casu ab Urbani
decretis excepto : quo sacrae congregationis responso a summo Pontifice
comprobato absolutum dicitur super casu excepto judicium.’ -Benedict XIV.
Op. cit.» lib. ii. cap. xvi, 2. Sometimes an Apostolic Brief has been issued
in confirmation of the sentence of the Sacred Congregation, hut this is not
necessary—‘ non est de substantia sed ad majorem tantum solemnitatem.’
3 Rubric at the end of the set of votive Masses which may l>c used as
Conventual Masses.
4 Benedict XIV, op. cit., lib. i, cap. xliii, 14.
if
i
THE MASS
93
When he celebrates Mass in a church or public oratory or in
the principal chapel or semi-public oratory of an institution,
a priest must follow the calendar of the place.1 If according to
the calendar of the place votive Masses or other Masses are
permitted, all priests whether secular or regular may say these
Masses, in accordance with the prescriptions of the rubrics
and the decrees.2
In the principal chapel or’ oratory of a school which is
entrusted to religious, the calendar of the Order or Congre
gation should be followed if it has a proper calendar.3 If there
is no such religious calendar, the diocesan calendar is to be
followed, with the addition of any feasts which have been
granted by the Holy See either to the whole Congregation or
to a particular community within the Congregation. Where a
special or local feast is being celebrated, any priest saying Mass
in the oratory of the religious must say the Mass of that feast.
Hence, even if the feast be that of a Beatus merely, the Mass
should be celebrated in accordance with the rubrics and with
the rite appointed in the Apostolic Induit for the celebration of
the feast. Without such an Apostolic Induit the Mass of a
Beatus could not be celebrated at all, and without an additional
induit the Mass of a beatified person may never be used as a
votive Mass. It is not necessary, however, that the celebrant
have a personal induit for the celebration of the Mass of a
Beatus ; it suffices that the Mass is permitted according to the
calendar of the place in which he celebrates.
MASS FOR THE PROPAGATION OF THE FAITH
What is the obligation of the votive Mass for the Propagation
of the Faith as celebrated on 2nd December?
Missionarius.
In 1922 the Commission appointed to arrange for the
third centenary of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide
petitioned the Holy See that the votive Mass for the Propaga
tion of the Faith might be celebrated once a year in every
diocese on a day fixed by the Ordinary. I he petition was
granted in the following terms :
1 Addit, et Vari, in Rubricis λ lissai is, iv, 6.
’ Ibid.
’S.R.C. 4312.
94
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Sanctissimus Dominus Noster Pius Papa XI . . . benigne annuit ... ut
praedicta Missa votiva de Propagatione Fidei cum Gloria ct Credo celebrari
possit semel in anno diebus ab Ordinario cuiusque loci designandis, exceptis
tamen Festis duplicibus I et II classis, Dominicis maioribus, nccnon Octavis I
et II ordinis ...1
The mention of the Gloria in the original decree on 22nd March
was an obvious error, which was corrected by a note inserted
in the Acta Aposlolica Sedis in May of the same year. It was then
pointed out that the Mass should be celebrated in violet vest
ments and without the Gloria. The precise meaning of this
decree was the subject of a great deal of discussion. It must be
borne in mind that in the older Missals the votive Mass Pro
Propagatione Fidei was included in the section ‘ Missae pro
aliquibus locis ’ and according to the rubrics it could be used
only in dioceses where the Society for the Propagation of the
Faith had been established.2 In the typical edition of the Missal
issued by the authority of Pope Benedict XV in 1920 this Mass
was transferred to the section ‘ Missae Votivae ad diversa ’ and
all restrictions on its use as a votive Mass were removed. The
decree then empowers the Ordinary to prescribe this Mass as
the Mass of the day on one day in the year and that too on a day
on which a private votive Mass is precluded, e.g. an ordinary
double feast or a minor Sunday. Also, on the day fixed by the
Ordinary the Credo is included in the Mass ; on any other
occasion on which the Mass is celebrated as a private votive
Mass the Credo is not said, because it is not mentioned in the
Missal in the Missa pro Propagatione Fidei. In accordance with
this decree the Irish bishops designated 2nd December as the
day for the special votive Mass Pro Fidei Propagatione in all the
dioceses of Ireland and formal notification of this fact was
inserted in the Ordo for 1923. The reason why the Credo was
inserted on tliis special occasion was that the original petition
for the induit envisaged that the celebration of the Mass for
the Propagation of the Faith would be an occasion for the
assembly of the clergy of a diocese ‘ quo magis clerus ad sacras
missiones fovendas excitentur.’
'Vide, Comment in I. E. Record (1922), p. 538.
1 Ephem. Lit. (1922), pp. 182, 304.
The Mass for the Progagation of the Faith was first approved by Pope Pius
VI in 1787, for the use of missionaries. In 1841 Pope Gregory XVI approved
its use in every diocese in which the Society for the Propagation of the Faith
was established, and a revised text of the Mass was published the following
year. Pope Pius IX renewed this approval in 1872.
In conformity with the General Decree for the simplification of the Rubrics
(‘ Cum nostra,’ 1955), the Creed should not be said but should be included
only in a sung Mass.
THE MASS
95
On 17th November, 1922, the Sacred Congregation of Rites
‘ in order to remove all ambiguity ’ published the following
decree I1
Missa votiva pro Fidei propagatione non est praeceptiva, sed indultiva, et
celebrari potest die pro cunctis et singulis dioecesis locis communiter ab
Ordinario designanda in quibusvis Ecclesiis et Oratoriis etiam privatis, et
ab omnibus Sacerdotibus, cum omnibus Commemorationibus et Orationibus
ritui duplici maiori et minori congruentibus . . .
The induit is facultative in the sense that the Ordinary need
not avail of it, but once the Ordinary has fixed a day', as in
Ireland, all priests who are bound to follow the diocesan calendar
must celebrate the Mass. It is not the application, but only
the celebration of the Mass Pro Propagatione Fidei which has been
decreed.2
VOTIVE MASS FOR GOLDEN JUBILEE
What Mass should be said for the golden jubilee celebrations of
St. Patrick’s Church on 5th April?
Ranger.
To celebrate the jubilee of the opening of a church, a votive
Mass of the Titular may, with the approval of the Ordinary,
be sung as a solemn votive Mass pro rc gravi. The prayer
Pro gratiarum actione may be put in under one conclusion with
the prayer of the Mass. This Mass would be prevented onlyon a Sunday or double feast of the first class or on a privileged
fcria or vigil, or within the octaves of Easter (or of Pentecost.)
ORDO TO BE FOLLOWED IN THE ORATORY OF THE
SISTERS AND IN THE SECONDARY ORATORY OF
AN INSTITUTION.
In a college conducted by religious priests a community of
Sisters takes charge of the domestic arrangements. The Sisters have
a separate house on the college grounds and a special oratory, where
the Blessed Sacrament is reserved. One of the Fathers celebrates
Mass there daily. Which calendar should he follow in the oratory,
the diocesan or the calendar of the college (religious)?
Anxius.
The correct solution of the question depends upon die
actual status of the Sisters’ community both in relation to their
» 4379.
‘ I. E. Record, 1930, p. 78.
96
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
own congregation and also in relation to the college, i.e., whether
the Sisters’ house constitutes a fully established independent
house or is really part of the college. In the latter case, which
we will first discuss, the priests of the college when celebrating
Mass in the oratory of the Sisters should follow their own
religious calendar. We are here assuming, in accordance with
the facts stated in the query, that the oratory is part of the
college, although it is reserved exclusively for the use of the
Sisters. The house of the Sisters may, in that case, be described
as a ‘ strictly filial ’ house of their Congregation ; that is a
‘ house which docs not constitute its own distinct community,
nor possess its own property but is, as it were, a member of the
principal house, being entirely dependent on it and governed
by a superior delegated at will by the superior who resides at
the principal house.’1 Nevertheless, in accordance with the
decision given by the Code Commission in the interpretation
of canon 1267, the Blessed Sacrament may be reserved in their
oratory because the Sisters constitute a family distinct and
separate from the other persons in the college.12 The oratory
of the Sisters is, however, a secondary oratory of the college.
The secondary oratories which, with the permission of the
Ordinary,3*arc erected in a religious or pious house are semi
public oratories, but they do not enjoy all the privileges attached
to the principal oratory. By the general rule the calendar of
the place is of obligation in a semi-public oratory,1 but a decree
of the Congregation of Sacred Rites, published on 22nd May,
1896, restricted this rule to the principal chapel of institutions
where there are secondary oratories.6 In conformity with this
decree the present rubrics of the Missal prescribe that the
calendar of the place is to be follow'cd in churches, public and
semi-public oratories and in the principal chapel of semi
naries, colleges and pious communities.6 Hence, in this respect,
secondary semi-public oratories are placed on the same level
as private oratories. When he celebrates Mass in such oratories
a priest is not bound to conform to the calendar of the place,
but may use his own calendar. It is the more common opinion
amongst liturgists7 that the celebrant should in these circum
stances prefer his own calendar, in accordance with the principle
1 Bouscarcn, Canon Law Digest, i, p. 278.
1 Op. ciL, p. 601. Vcrmcersch, Epitome luris Canonici, ii» p. 414 (edit. 1936).
3 Canon 1192, § 4. Coronata, De Ijocis et Temporibus Sacris, p. 83.
♦ Ephan. Lit., 1921, p. 230. Vermccrsch, op. at., p. 353.
*3910.
• Addit, tt Var. in Rub. Missalis, iv, 6.
7 Ephem. Lit., loc. cit., p. 321.
THE MASS
97
that Mass should be celebrated in conformity with his Office.1
An instruction of the Congregation of Sacred Rites approved
by Pope Benedict XV, on 12th January, 1921, contains the
following direction :
In oratoriis privatis calendarium proprium celebrantis tenet locum
calcndariii ecclesiae in qua Missa celebratur; idque etiam circa Missam
defunctorum servabitur.12
This decree, which dealt with an induit to blind priests, need
not be taken as establishing a strict rule by which the celebrant
in a private oratory must follow his own calendar. There remains
a solidly probable opinion that he may choose cither the calendar
of the place or his own, and that he may follow cither when he
wishes to celebrate a private votive or a Requiem Mass.3
In the present query', this question of choice does not arise.
Since the oratory is seemingly a college oratory, then the
calendar to be used in it is the calendar of the religious institute
which controls the college.4 For the priests of the college this
is their own calendar. If a member of the local diocesan clergy
were to celebrate Mass in the Sisters’ oratory, he would be free
to follow his own diocesan calendar, or, less preferably, that of
the religious institute.
If, on the contrary, it is true that the Sisters’ residence is
absolutely distinct from and materially independent of the
college in which a few of the Sisters arc employed, so that the
Sisters here constitute a proper religious community, then their
oratory must be regarded as a principal oratory. The calendar
to be followed in such an oratory would then be that of their
own congregation or the local diocesan calendar,5 and must
be used even by the priests of the college who have only the
spiritual care of the Sisters, but have not charge of the place
or of the oratory. This last point is clear from the decision
published by the Congregation of Sacred Rites on 11th February,
1910. The following question had been submitted : In a
boarding school conducted by a teaching congregation of
Sisters there are two oratories served by two members of the
Canons Regular of the Latcran to whom the bishop has entrusted
the spiritual care of the Sisters and of their pupils. May these
religious use the ordo proper to their congregation of the Canons
Regular ?
1 Rub. Missalis Rom., i ; * Missa quotidie dicitur secundum Ordinem Officii *
2 4363, Sect. II f.
• Ephem. Lit., loc. cit.
‘S.R.C. 4252, 4248, 4233, 4151, etc.
1 With due recognition of any feasts granted to the Sisters by special induit
of the Holy Sec (S.R.C. 4312).
1993
5—
98
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
The reply was : In the principal public or semi-public
chapel negative ; in the second chapel, which may be regarded
as private, affirmative, in accordance with the decrees Urbis el
Orbis, 9th December, 1895, and Ruthenen, 22nd May, 1896.1
In this case the community of Sisters was not in any way
dependent upon the religious priests who had been appointed by
the bishop to celebrate Mass and attend to their spiritual welfare
and, therefore, the diocesan calendar was the only correct
calendar to be used in their principal oratory.2
OBLIGATION OF CHAPLAIN TO CELEBRATE
CONVENTUAL MASS OF NUNS
An Order of enclosed religious (nuns) with a non-papal clausura
are bound to the recitation of the full Divine Office and claim an
obligation to a Conventual Mass according to their own calendar.
This Mass is always a low Mass. On certain days—e.g., the Vigil
of Pentecost—the Superioress is unwilling to have the Prophecies,
etc.
(1) May the chaplain then say a private Mass?
(2) May he say a Requiem or votive Mass on days when such a
Mass is forbidden only if there is an obligation of a Conventual
Mass?
(3) Is he bound to say Mass according to the Ordo of the com
munity?
(4) If he is bound to celebrate the conventual Mass may Holy
Communion be distributed after the hour of Terce in the Office and
immediately before the Mass?
C APPELLANUS.
(1) The conventual Mass is an integral and the most important
part of the Officium Divinum. Canon 610 of the Code of Canon
Law states drat in all religious houses where there is an obliga
tion to recite the Divine Office in choir, it must be observed
daily if there arc at least four religious in the house who are
bound to choir. The obligation may remain even for a smaller
number if the constitutions of their institute so impose it. The
general law, therefore, docs not impose the obligation of choral
recitation but rather presupposes that such an obligation will
have been prescribed by the constitutions of the religious
institute. The second paragraph of the same canon, however
explicitly prescribes that Mass must be celebrated daily in
1 S.R.C. 4248 (11th February, 1910).
'Ephrm. Lit., 1910, p. 266.
THE MASS
99
conjunction with the Divine Office in choir.1 This obligation
to have Mass in conformity with their Office binds gravely
communities of men but has by this canon been mitigated
somewhat for communities of women. The canon directs only
that ‘ as far as possible ’ Mass corresponding to the Office of
the day be celebrated according to the rubrics in the religious
houses of women. In a reply published on 20th May, 1923,
the Commission for the Interpretation of the Code decided
that the conventual Mass should be celebrated, not only in
the religious institutes of monastic nuns of solemn vows, but
also in the house of religious women of simple vows who by
virtue of constitutions approved by the Holy See arc bound
to choir duty.1
2
The chaplain, therefore, of religious who are bound to the
Divine Office in choir should celebrate Mass as a conventual
Mass in conformity with the Office unless his superior, the
Ordinary, decides in particular cases that to do so is not practic
able.3 In religious communities the conventual Mass may be
a low Mass ;4 the hour of its celebration is fixed by the rubrics.
The conventual Mass is to be celebrated : (1) after Terce on
feasts of double or semi-double rite, on Sundays and during
octaves ; (2) after Sext on feasts of simple rite and on ferias ;
(3) after None if the Mass de tempore is celebrated during Lent
and Advent, on Quarter Tense days and fasting vigils.5 On
the Vigil of Pentecost the conventual Mass should be cele
brated after None and must be preceded by the Prophecies.
No other Mass may be celebrated on that day6 and it has been
expressly forbidden to celebrate the Mass of this vigil in choir
without the Prophecies, after the manner of a votive Mass.7
(2) Hence if on the Vigil of Pentecost or any other occasion
the chaplain to women religious is prevented from celebrating
the conventual Mass in accordance with the rubrics, he should
celebrate his Mass as a low Mass outside choir. If the Mass
must be celebrated in the presence of those bound to choir
then it should take place before the Office is recited or when
an interval has elapsed after the choral obligation has been
fulfilled because it has no connection with the Office. A private
1 Canon 610 ; Vide Crcuscn, On Religious Men and Women in the Code, p. 225;
O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 122.
’Vide Bouscarcn, Canon Law Digest, i, p. 320.
’ Rub. Gen. Missalis, ante tit. i, tit. iv, 3 ; S.R.C. 3862, 3919.
4 S.R.C. 3757.
* Rub. Gen. Missalis, xv, 2.
* Rubrics of the Calendar—Rub. Gen. Breo. et Addit, et Var. in R.G.B.
’S.R.C. 2731.
100
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Mass may not be celebrated at the choir altar while the Canonical
Hours are being recited.1
(3) The chaplain must follow the Ordo of the community
which he serves whether they have a proper calendar or use
the local diocesan calendar with the addition of certain proper
feasts.2 Therefore, he may not celebrate a votive Mass or a
Requiem in choir except on those days on which according to
the calendar such a Mass is admitted or (as sometimes in die
case of a Requiem Mass) prescribed as the conventual Mass.3
(4) On 19th January, 1906, the Congregation of Sacred
Rites dealt with the following question :
An Sacerdos sacris vestibus Sacrificii indutus possit administrare Sacram
Communionem, data rationabili causa, ante vel post Missam solemnem aut
cantatam aut etiam Convcntualem, sicuti permittitur ante vel post Missam
privatam ?
The decision was Negative.4 There is no room, therefore, for
further discussion in this question. Holy Communion may be
distributed immediately before a private Mass5 but in con
nection with a solemn, sung or conventual Mass Holy Com
munion may be distributed only' during the Mass, after the
celebrant has consumed the Precious Blood. The conventual
Mass should be begun immediately after the Canonical Hours
as directed by the rubrics.6 There is to be no interruption in
the service—in the General Rubrics of the Breviary it is pre
scribed that the major antiphon of the Blessed Virgin Mary is
to be omitted at the end of the Hour which immediately precedes
the Mass.7
OBLIGATION TO RECITE AN 0RATIO IMPERATA
IN A NUPTIAL MASS AND IN THE MASS OF THE
SACRED HEART ON THE FIRST FRIDAY.
In the extracts from the rubrics of the Missal which are given in
the Latin Ordo it is stated that an oratio imperata should be omitted
in solemn votive Masses pro re gravi (p. xiii., par. 23). Is it correct,
therefore, to omit it in a nuptial Mass and also in the privileged Mass
of the Sacred Heart which is celebrated on the first Friday of the
month?
p. C.
<5:
1 S.R.C. 3814, etc.
1 Rub. Gen. Missalis, tit. iv ; S.R.C. 4312.
* Addit, et Var., iii, 2.
‘ 4177, n. 3.
4 Canon 846.
• Rub. Gen. Mirsalis, loc. cit.
'Rub. Gen. Brer., xxxvi, n. 3. Decree Cum Nostra, 1955.
101
THE MASS
Λη oratio imperata which is ordered pro re gravi must be said
on both of these occasions. In a nuptial Mass, an oratio imperata
which is not pro re gravi, must be said unless there arc already
four prayers prescribed by the rubrics ; in the privileged Mass
of the Sacred Heart, an oratio imperata which is not pro re gravi
should be omitted.
The votive Mass Pro Sponsis is a privileged Mass but must
not be considered as a solemn votive Mass pro re gravi.1 It is
privileged in as much as it may be celebrated on certain days
on which a private votive Mass would be prevented but the
nuptial Mass is only of simple rite and has at least two prayers.2
Hence even an oratio imperata which is ordered modo ordinario will
usually be recited, i.c., unless it is excluded by reason of the
number of commemorations required by the rubrics. A prayer
which has been ordered pro re gravi must always be inserted in
the nuptial Mass.
The privileged Mass of the Sacred Heart, on the other hand,
has all the privileges of a solemn votive Mass celebrated ‘ pro
rc gravi et publica simul causa,’3 except that it has not now
(cf. 1955 Decree) the Creed unless it is sung. Hence, even
when this is only a low Mass, an oratio imperata should not be
said unless it has been prescribed pro re gravi. A prayer which
has been ordered pro re gravi must be said in every Mass except
double feasts of the first class, the vigils of Christmas and
Pentecost and Palm Sunday.4
SUBSTITUTION
FOR
THE
ORATIO
IMPERATA
When the oratio imperata is Contra Persecutores Ecclesiae
is it correct to substitute the collect Pro Papa for the imperata on the
twenty-third Sunday after Pentecost because the Postcommunion of
the Sunday is identical, but for one word, with the imperata?
‘ When several prayers are to be said, two of which are
identical, one must be changed for a different one, taken from
die Common or Proper. The same rule applies to the secrets
and postcommunions.’ (Rub. Gen. Missalis, vii, 8.) Two
prayers arc considered to be identical if they arc couched in
practically the same terms or if the petitions in both are the
same although there may be verbal differences in other parts
of the prayers.
1 Addit, et Var., ii ;
’S.R.C. Dccrctum
* Addit, et Var., ii, 3
‘ Addit, et Var., vi,
S.R.C. 2582 (3rd March, 1818).
Générale, 3922 ad vi ; Addit, et lar., vii.
; vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 102.
4
102
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
The postcommunion Qttaesumus Dominus Deus nosier {Contra
Persecutores Ecclésial) is identical with the postcommunion of the
twenty-third Sunday after Pentecost, and in this case the oratio
imperata is simply omitted ; i.e. not only the postcommunion
but also the collect and secret prayer arc omitted.1 Similarly
the prayer Pro pace cannot be said on the feast of St. Irenaeus
(28th June) because its secret prayer is identical, except for the
mention of the saint’s name, with the secret of the Mass of
St. Irenaeus (Decree N. 3164).
WHEN MUST THE PRAYER OF THE BLESSED
SACRAMENT BE ADDED IN THE MASS
In the introduction to our diocesan Ordo vjc find the following
statement : * In qualibet Missa quae celebratur ad altare ubi SSmum
Sacramentum statim post Missam exponatur pro publica causa et
perdurante expositione in omnibus Missis tam cantatis quam lectis . . .
addi debet sub altera conclusione. . . . Oratio SSmi Sacramenti post
Orationes a Rubricis praescriptas.' Will you kindly explain when
and under what conditions the prayer should be added?
Vicarius Co-operator.
The rubric cited in this query is based on the decree issued
by the Sacred Congregation of Rites on 11th January, 1928.2
The full text of this decree was as follows :
‘ The following questions have been submitted to the Sacred
Congregation :
‘ I. Whether, outside the time of the Forty Hours’ Devotion,
the prayer of the Blessed Sacrament is to be said in every Mass
celebrated at an altar at which immediately after the Mass the
Blessed Sacrament is to be exposed for a public cause, provided
that the Mass or a commemoration occurring in the Mass be
not of an identical mystery of Our Lord ?3
‘II. Whether in such a Mass this prayer is to be said under
a second conclusion, even on the more solemn feasts of the
universal Church and is it to be placed after the prayers pre
scribed by the rubrics but before the Collects commanded by
the local Ordinary ?
‘HI. Whether, outside the time of the Forty Hours’ Devotion
1 Vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 179.
« A.A.S., 1928, p. 90.
1 The Mass is of an identical mystery of Our Lord if it is a Mass of the
Passion, of the Cross, of the Most Holy Redeemer, of the Sacred Heart or of
the Precious Blood. The prayer of the Blessed Sacrament may be said on
‘ Passion ’ Sunday which does not immediately commemorate the Passion.
THE MASS
103
while exposition and adoration of the Blessed Sacrament for a
public cause is going on for some time apart from any other
sacred function, the prayer of the Blessed Sacrament should be
added in all Masses whether sung or low even on the more solemn
feasts of the universal Church, provided that the Mass or a
commemoration occurring in die Mass be not of an identical
mystery of Our Lord and with the exception of the Masses on
All Souls’ Day ?
‘ Reply : The Sacred Congregation, having consulted the
Code Commission, replied in the affirmative to all these ques
tions, in accordance with the intention of the decree Romana,
or the Instruction concerning Masses celebrated during the
Forty Hom's’ Prayer (27th April, 1927). . .
The question remains whether the prayer should be inserted
in the Mass when on an ordinary Sunday or Holy-day a simple
Benediction service follows the Mass. In other words, in the
ordinary Benediction service is the Blessed Sacrament exposed
for a public cause as is required by the first paragraph of this
decree or does the Benediction constitute prolonged exposition
and adoration for a public cause in the sense of the third
paragraph ? In this context it is the cause, not the manner of
exposition, that is the deciding factor, for ‘ public ’ exposition,
i.e. in the monstrance, may take place for a private cause.*
1
Canon 1274 states that public exposition may be held only for
just and grave causes praesertim publica and with the permission
of the Ordinary.
What constitutes a public cause ? A writer in the Ephemerides
Lilurgicae suggests :
Ceterum expositio SS. Sacramenti tam privata seu cum pyxide quam
publica seu cum ostensorio fieri censetur ex publica causa, si fiat ut populus
aut aliqua communitas seu congregatio ad virtutum actus excitetur et ad
devotionem erga SS. Sacramentum accendatur.2
Cappello writes :
Certe causa publica ea est, quae tangit totam communitatem aut maiorem
eius partem ; ex. gr. pluvia petenda, serenitas postulanda . . . morbus,
bellum, alia quaevis tribulatio repellenda, dummodo per se vel per accidens
communitatem attingat ; . . . demum causa sufficiens est, ut fideles a vitiis
avertantur et ad virtutum actus excitentur ac frequentius in ecclesia conveniant
ad Deum exorandum. Igitur causa publica in praxi vix abest.3
Hcncc it can easily be maintained that the ordinary Bene
diction is usually held for a public cause. But it may be objected
’Vide De Amicis, Caeremoniale Parochorum, p. 341 ; Also I. E. Record, 1940,
p. 432.
11930, p. 255.
’ De Sacramentis, i, p. 360.
-
104
'—
'
-T
c
T■
*
*
^<^e^L->
· —J
V -arUl«—&”£>
-JI Kjljg^JJ
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
that for the ordinary Benediction the Blessed Sacrament is not
exposed for a sufficiently long period to constitute exposition
and adoration in the sense of the decree. Many authors hold
that for exposition properly speaking the Blessed Sacrament
must remain in the monstrance for at least half an hour or for
the time required for a procession of the Blessed Sacrament.1
They hold that the circumstances contemplated in the decree
arc those in which the celebrant leaving the Blessed Sacrament
exposed retires from the sanctuary’ and returns some time later
for the Benediction service. Strictly speaking, however, the
decree does not specify any duration for the exposition and
apart from the time involved there may be a special solemnity
attached to a Benediction. Hence I would hold that when
Mass is followed by an ordinary Benediction service probably
the prayer should not be added in the Mass, but on solemn
occasions, e.g. the feast of Christ the King, when exposition
with the reciting of special prayers and concluded at once by
Benediction, takes place immediately after Mass, without the
celebrant leaving the sanctuary, the prayer of the Blessed Sacra
ment should be inserted in the Mass. On such special occasions
even though the Benediction service takes much less than half
an hour it is conjoined with the Mass, not merely at the wish of,
or for the convenience of the celebrant or of the congregation
but in order to give special prominence to the prayers recited
before the Blessed Sacrament exposed or to signalize a special
feast-day.1234
ASSISTANCE OF THE BISHOP AT VARIOUS FUNC
TIONS ; A PRELATE’S RIGHT TO HAVE CHAPLAINS
(1) May a bishop have two altar servers merely instead of chaplains
to assist him when he gives Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament in
a parish church or convent chapel?
(2) Is a bishop permitted according to the rubrics to sing a Missa
Cantata"?
(3) Are domestic prelates entitled to have chaplains when they are
in the sanctuary at a Pontifical Mass or on the occasion of a funeral
of a priest?
(4) How many chaplains should accompany a bishop who is present
in the sanctuary for such functions?
Voice in the Wilderness.
1 E.g. Vcrmecrsch ; Vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 282.
* Cf. Decree Cunt nostra, 1955 ; the prayer is now said only in a Mass
celebrated at the altar of exposition.
■
b
THE MASS
105
(1) Needless to say, neither in the liturgical books nor in
approved commentaries is it contemplated that the bishop
should give Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament in the circum
stances envisaged in this query. The Caeremoniale Episcoporum
deals1 with only one case in which the bishop officiates at
Exposition and Reposition of the Blessed Sacrament, namely,
at the solemn function of Corpus Christi when, of course, he
will be assisted at least by a deacon and subdeacon. It is true
that in the celebration of a low Mass the bishop may rely upon
the assistance of one or two altar servers who need not be clerics,
but Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament is of its nature a
public function, and it is clearly in accordance with the mind
of the decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites that at such
functions the bishop should always have the assistance of sacred
*ministers.
This mind was clearly expressed in a decree issued
to tHc rectors of churches in Rome in 1902, and inserted on
30th December, 1911, in the official Collection of the Decrees
of the Sacred Congregation.3 In that decree detailed directions
arc laid down, in order that when bishops or cardinals are
invited to take part in sacred ceremonies, the honours and
privileges proper to their dignity may be duly accorded to them.
Amongst its prescriptions the following are closely relevant to
our present purpose :
Sacri Ministri aliique inferiores operam praestituri numero adsint, qui
Liturgiae legibus praescribitur ; singuli vero suum officium probe calleant.
Ac maiores quidem Ministri, in pontificalibus purpurati Patris, in aliqua sint
Ecclesiae dignitate constituti ; minores vero saltem Clerici. . . . Haud
par est, invitari Episcopos ad Pontificalia sive Missae sive Vesperarum ubi
nulla aequa suppetat ratio verae Solemnitatis, aut ubi non ante fuerit cautum
diligenter, ne forte, peragendis iis ritibus, vel angustia loci obstet vel inscrvientium conditio vel impar numerus. Quapropter Sacra Congregatio monet
omnes et singulos Ecclesiarum Urbis Rectores, ut ad episcopalis dignitatem
tutelam, quae circa Templi decus et amplitudinem, quae circa solemniorum
Festi rationem, Sacrorum Ministrorum aliorumquc inserventium qualitatem
et numerum superius praescripta sunt, ea convenienter aptent iis casibus,
in quibus invitare Episcopum cupiant, sive ad sacra illa Solemnia, sive etiam
ad Missae privatae celebrationem, aut ad benedicendum populo cum
Augustissimo Sacramento, aut ad huiusmodi alia.
Particularly is it prescribed that a Cardinal should not be
invited except for a solemn occasion for which due preparations
have been made.
sint omnia rite parata atque disposita, ita ut purpuratus Pater, eo quo decet
honore et cultu excipi, tractari dcducique possit, retentis ad unguem sacrorum
rituum praescriptis et Caeremoniarum regulis.
1 Lib. ii, cap. xxxiii.
’E.g. 219, 3540, 3576, etc.
5 4284.
■
106
PROBLEMS IN THE LIT
In the rarer eases in which a Cardinal may be asked to imparl i
to the faithful Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament,
illud curae esto, ut Ministri sacri sint in aliqua Ecclesiae dignitate constituti;
inferiores autem Clerici et numero et qualitate commendabiles.
This decree is directed to the rectors of churches in Rome
and makes explicit mention only of the conditions prevailing
in the City ; nevertheless its subsequent inclusion in the
authentic Collection of Decrees shows that it is now meant also
to provide guidance in similar circumstances elsewhere.
(2) A bishop is not permitted by the rubrics to celebrate a
Missa Cantala, i.c. a sung Mass, without the assistance of sacred
ministers. In 1870, the following dubia were submitted from
the diocese of Eric (Province of Philadelphia) :
I.—An Dominicis et aliis Festis, Sacerdote absente qui hoc officio per
fungitur, Missam ultimam cantatam in sua Cathedrali (Episcopus) solui
celebrare possit? II.—An (Episcopus) rogatus a fidelibus ut Missam canta
tam pro Defunctis solus celebret, eorum precibus annuere debeat ?
To both the Sacred Congregation replied : Negative.1 On the
same occasion as well as in a number of other decrees the Sacred
Congregation2 decided that, when a bishop celebrates Solemn
Pontifical Mass it is not sufficient that he be assisted by the sacred
ministers of the Mass ; he must, in addition, have an assistant
priest and deacons in accordance with the prescriptions of the
Caeremoniale Episcoporum.3
(3) The only liturgical privilege which the rubrics accord to
a domestic prelate is the right to use the bugia when he celebrates
a Solemn Mass, or a low Mass with some solemnity, or when he
officiates at Vespers and similar solemn functions. ‘ In availing
himself of this privilege the domestic prelate would, of course,
have the assistance of a chaplain to hold the hand-candle.
When he is present merely at solemn functions a domestic
prelate has not the privilege of being assisted by a chaplain ;
he has, however, the right of precedence before all other priests
and individual canons ; he salutes the cross and the bishop
with a profound bow and is incensed with two double swings
of the thurible.
(4) At a Solemn Mass or at a Pontifical Mass celebrated by
1 S.R.C. 3223, cf. Ericn, 3315.
« E.g. 3507, 3529, etc.
1 Lib. ii, cap. ix.
4 * Insuper concedimus, ut omnes et singuli Praelati Urbani seu Domestici,
etsi nulli Collegio adscript!, ii nempe, qui tales rcnunciati, Breve Apostolicum
obtinuerint, palmatoria uti possint (non vero canone aut alia pontificalia
supellectili) in Missa cum cantu, vel etiam lecta cum aliqua solemnitate
celebranda ; itemque in Vesperis aliisque solemnibus functionibus.’ Motu
Proprio, Piio X, 1905, S.R.C. 4154.
THE MASS
107
another bishop, if the bishop of the place presides on the throne
vested cither in cappa magna or in cope and mitre, he should
have as attendants at least three chaplains—an assistant priest
and two assistant deacons. In the cathedral all three chaplains
should, if possible, be members of the diocesan chapter and
should wear the choir dress appropriate to canons ; elsewhere,
if canons arc not available, three priests vested in surplice
should assist. Additional attendants should also be at hand to
assist at his vesting and also there should be servers who will
minister the missal, the bugia, the mitre and the cross. At a
Solemn Requiem Mass if the bishop occupies the throne he is
similarly assisted by a priest and deacons who, if they have the
right to do so, wear the canonical insignia. When he does not
wear the cappa magna or vestments, the bishop may not occupy
the throne. He takes then the first place in choir or occupies
a faldstool in the sanctuary and has no chaplain, in the strict
sense, but is assisted only by a master of ceremonies. Similarly
at Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament the bishop may preside
attended by two or three chaplains and take his part in the
inccnsation or he may assist in rochctt and mozetta only.
In the latter case he has not the services of a chaplain ; he may
occupy the first place in choir or may kneel at a prie-dieu
placed before the altar behind the celebrant.1
LITURGICAL PRIVILEGES OF Λ DOMESTIC PRELATE
What are the prescriptions concerning the dress and the liturgical
privileges of a Domestic Prelate? In particular, when he celebrates
a High Mass should a Monsignorc have an assistant priest and make
use of the bugial
M. C.
Strictly speaking, the title ‘ Domestic Prelate ’ may be applied
to any of the members of the Roman Prelatical Colleges, that is,
the Prelates who assist at the Pontifical throne and the Protono
taries Apostolic of whom there arc four grades. In ordinary
usage, however, the title is given only to prelates who are not
Protonotarics, ‘ Prelates di mantcllellaj and it is in this sense that
we understand the query. A Domestic Prelacy is an honorary
dignity conferred by reason of personal merit ; such prelates
arc nominated by a Papal Brief ; their title is personal and the
appointment is for their lifetime. On receiving notification of
’Vide Stcrcky, Pontificales, i, p. 256;
Caeremon.
Martinucci, tome iii, Manuale
108
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
his appointment, a new prelate is immediately entitled to wear
the dress described in the Brief of appointment and to avail of
any other privileges which may thereby have been conferred
upon him. The rules governing the dress of prelates are stated
in the Motu Proprio of Pope Pius X, Inter multiplices (1905), and
in the Apostolic Constitution of Pope Pius XI, Ad incrementum
decoris (1934).
According to the latter document the choir dress of domestic
prelates is described as follows1 :
constat veste talari violacei coloris cx lana vel serico iuxta anni tempora, cum
cauda, nunquam tamen explicanda ; reflexus in manicis, margines vetis,
nec non mantcllctti torulus, ocelli et globuli erunt serici et rubini coloris.
Zona cum mappis erit serica et violacea ; violacea quoque erunt collare et
caligae. Calceamenta fibulis erunt ornata. Bircto omnino nigro flocculus
imponetur violacei et pileo, item nigro, circumducetur chordula violacea
cum flocculo eiusdem coloris. Rocchcttum opere phrygio seu reticulato
ornabitur, cui si quid supponatur in manicis, eiusdem coloris esse debebit ac
reflexus vestis. Quinam autem sit color violaceus adhibendus, definitur
decreto S. C. Cacrcmonialis dic 24 lunii, 1933, lato, cui omnino standum est.
The Decree of the Sacred Congregation of Ceremonies here
cited circulated a sample of the violet colour to be used in
prclatical robes ; it is a red, not blue violet.1
2 The correct dress,
therefore, now is a violet cassock of wool or silk according to
the seaons, with a train which is never let down, and violet
mantcllctta of the same material ; the cuffs arc lined with red
and the buttons should be red with red trimmings on the button
holes. The cincture and tassels are violet, and the black biretta
and skull-cap arc trimmed with violet and ornamented with a
violet tuft.34 The use of red trimming on the biretta is now con
fined to Protonotaries Apostolic. The patent leather shoes are
adorned with gold buckles ; the rochet is ornamented with lace
or crochet work, and on the sleeves the foundation for this work
should be of the same colour as the cassock. ’ The ‘ habitus
pianus, in civilibus tantum adhibendus ’ consists of a black
soutane, trimmed with red, a violet cincture, violet rabbat and
socks, buckled shoes, black biretta with violet tuft and a ferraiolo
of plain, purple silk. The mourning costume which is to be
worn when the Holy See is vacant consists of a black choir
cassock, cincture, mantcllctta and plain rochet.
1 Ad incrementum decoris. Sect. I, § vii.
1933, p. 341.
* Formerly a red tuft was used ; cf. Inter multiplices, ii, n. 16, but this is
now reserved to Protonotaries. The Sacred Congregation of Rites decided
in 1919 that the episcopal biretta may not be adorned with a red tuft ( 4 1 S
1919, p. 177).
.
_
\ · ♦ ·»
4 Vide McCloud, Clerical Dress and Insignia, p. 176.
THE MASS
109
When he wears his prelatical robes, a domestic prelate takes
precedence over all priests and individual canons and he is
debarred from assisting as chaplain or as a canon at the episcopal
throne.1 When he vests for the celebration of Mass or the
administration of the sacraments or sacramcntals, the domestic
prelate should put on the vestments over the rochet. He may
not put on the vestments at the altar nor may he use the Canon
Episcopalis. The only liturgical privilege accorded to the
domestic prelate at the altar is the use of the bugia when he cele
brates Mass (high Mass or low Mass), with some solemnity,
and when he is the officiant at solemn Vespers. The bugiabcarcr vested in surplice and, if desired, the cope, takes the
place of the Master of Ceremonies at the Missal during Mass,
on the right hand of the celebrant when the Missal is at the
Epistle corner and on his left hand from the Gospel until after
the Communion. At Vespers he assists at the right hand of the
officiant when the latter intones the antiphons and hymn or
chants the prayers. When a domestic prelate assists in choir
at a solemn function, he is incensed with two double swings of
the thurible.
Belonging to a lower grade of Monsignori are Prelates di
mantellone who arc honoured with this title not because of
personal merit, but by reason of the office which they hold in
the Papal Court or Congregations. In choir they wear a violet
cassock and mantellone (a longer garments than the mantcllctta) ;
they may not wear the rochet and they have no liturgical
privileges. Their outdoor dress is a black cassock with violet
trimmings, black skull-cap and black silk fcrraiolo.
CHOIR DRESS OF MINOR PRELATES
(1) If a Papal Chamberlain is present in the sanctuary at the Forty
Hours’ Prayer and takes part in the procession should he wear a
surplice over his purple cassock?
(2) Should Domestic Prelates wear a purple or a black cassock
at a funeral?
(3) How should a Domestic Prelate dress if he delivers the funeral
sermon?
(4) Are Monsignori free to dress as such outside their own diocese
or country?
(5) If Religious priests take part in the procession at the Forty
Hours’ Prayer should they wear a surplice over their religious habit?
Exile of Erin.
1 Vavasscur-Stercky, Pontificatus, ii, §413.
1 10
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
(I) The term ‘Papal Chamberlain’ or the title ‘ Monsignore ’
may be used to denote minor prelates of several different grades :
(fl) Protonotaries Apostolic belong to the highest college of
prelates in the Roman Curia, and have precedence immediately,
after bishops. Of these there are four grades, each with slightly
different privileges—Protonotaries de numero participantium ;
Supernumerarii ; Protonotaries ad instar participantium ; and
Titular Protono taries. Participantes are the seven actual mem
bers of the Roman College and Supernumerarii arc the canons
of the patriarchal basilicas in Rome. Titular Protonotaries do
not rank as members of the Papal household ; they have no
special privileges in Rome and outside Rome their prelatical
dress is black only—black cassock and black man toiletta. They
do not wear violet, and oftentimes have their privileges only
while they hold a particular office, for example, as Vicar General
or Vicar Capitular. Protonotaries ad instar participantium are
nominated by the Pope and arc given all the liturgical privileges
of the Participantes. Their choir dress consists of purple cassock
with train, rochet with red cuffs, purple mantelletta and black
biretta with a red tuft. When they celebrate pontifical Mass
they may wear a pectoral cross and ring.
(Z>) Domestic Prelates (Prelates di mantelletta) arc either
members of the Papal household who have the honour ratione
ojficii or by reason of their position in the Roman Curia or they
arc persons on whom the honour has been conferred ratione
personae. Their choir dress consists of a purple cassock, rochet
with red cuffs, purple mantelletta and a black biretta with a
purple tuft.
(c) Prelates di mantellone are members of the Papal household
and personal attendants of the Pope. Their choir dress consists
of a purple cassock without a train, a purple mantellone (the
mcntcllone is longer than a mantelletta), and a black biretta
with purple tuft. They do not wear the rochet and they have
no liturgical privileges although they arc called Monsignori.
When they assist at a liturgical function they may wear the
surplice instead of the mantellone.1
Hence, in the particular cases submitted : (1) If a Protonotary
Apostolic or a Domestic Prelate is present in the sanctuary for
the Forty’ Hours Prayer he should wear his choir dress—purple
cassock, rochet and mantelletta—and in that dress he may
take his place in the procession.2 A Papal Chamberlain whose
'Vide McCloud, Ecclesiastical Dress; Stercky, Pontificales, ii ; O’Leary,
Pontificalia ; Martinucd, Manuale Caeretn., iv.
1 Vide Caermoniale Episcoporum, ii, cap. xxxiii, n. 11.
THE MASS
111
choir dress docs not include the rochet should put on a surplice
when he assists at a function before the Blessed Sacrament
exposed.1
(2) At a funeral a Domestic Prelate should wear his ordinary
purple choir dress with rochet and mantelletta. Only for the
death of the Pope do Domestic Prelates or Protonotaries wear
mourning, which consists of a black cassock, rochet without
lace and a black mantelletta.
(3) Similarly the Prelate who preaches the funeral sermon
wears his ordinary choir dress. The preacher’s stole is not worn
for a funeral panegyric.
(4) Prelates may use their ordinary choir dress everywhere
except that ‘ black ’ Monsignori may not use prelatical dress in
Rome. Λ Prelate who is also a canon should, at capitular
functions, wear the insignia of a canon, not those of a Prelate.
Outside Rome a Protonotary Apostolic requires the permission
of the Ordinary if he wishes to celebrate pontifical Mass ; in
an exempt church he must have the permission of the superior
of the church. He may not use pontificals—pectoral cross,
bugia, mitre, etc.—at a Requiem Mass.
(5) Decree N. 3193 of the Sacred Congregation of Rites
directs that if Religious take part in the Corpus Christi pro
cession not in a corporate body but dispersed through the pro
cession they should wear the surplice. Religious who join the
procession in a body need not wear the surplice over their
habit. Λ recent decision of the Sacred Congregation of Rites
(28th January, 1948)1
2 states that when a Religious preaches in
the presence of the Blessed Sacrament exposed he should wear
a surplice and, outside Rome, a white stole.
PRIVATE MASS OF AN ABBOT
Do the rubrics allow an abbot four candles at Mass and a chaplain
when he celebrates Mass in a church or oratory outside his monastery?
Exile of Erin.
An early decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites (27th
September, 1659)3 deals explicitly with this question. The
decree regulated the use of pontifical privileges by abbots, and
in regard to their private Masses even in their own monasteries
it states :
1 Cf. S.R.C. 2079.
2 Ephem. Lit., 1951, p. 262,
31131 ad 21.
112
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
In missis privatis quoad indumenta, ceremonias, ministros, altaris ornatum
ct benedictionis largitionem, a simplici Sacerdote non discrepent, ac proinde
sacras vestes induant in Sacristia, neque utantur Cruce pectorali, unico sint
contenti ministro, aquam cum pelvi ct urceolo argenteis sibi ministrari non
sinant, duasque tantum candelas super Altare adhibeant.
A previous decree had stated emphatically the general principle :
(Abbatibus) privatim celebrantibus numquam a simplici Sacerdote, vel
in minimo cos discrepare permissum est.1
More recent legislation has modified somewhat these decrees.
Canon 325 specifics the rights of abbots to the use of pontifical
insignia—they may wear the pectoral cross, ring and violet
zuchetto, even outside their territory, and according to Canon
811, § 2, an abbot who has received the episcopal blessing may
wear the ring and zuchetto when he is celebrating Mass. Also,
in the general rubrics of the Missal2 it is directed that when
vesting for Mass an abbot assume the stole and maniple in the
manner in which a Bishop does so, and at the end of Mass he
gives his blessing with a triple sign of the cross.3
Apart from these express exceptions, an abbot when cele
brating privately follows the rite of a simple priest.1 There
should be only two candles lighting, and the general law (canon
812) docs not allow of his having an assistant priest ‘ sola honoris
aut sollemnitatis causa.’
PARTICIPATION IN SOLEMN MASS ACCORDING
TO THE DOMINICAN RITE.
May two diocesan priests act as Deacon and Sub-deacon at Solemn
High Mass sung by a Dominican priest in a Dominican (Mission)
Church?
May a Dominican priest act as Deacon or Sub-deacon at a Solemn
Mass sung by a diocesan priest or bishop?
Ranger.
There is no prohibition against priests of the Roman rite
participating as sacred ministers in a .Solemn Mass celebrated
according to the ‘ Dominican ’ rite or vice versa against the
participation of a Dominican priest in a Roman Mass. ‘ The
Dominican rite does not constitite a rite separate and distinct
from the Roman, as the Ambrosian and Mozarabic do, for it is
merely a Roman rite of the thirteenth century. It is called
‘S.R.C. Ill ad 5.
2 Rit. Sm.9 tit. i, n. 4, T.C. xii, n. 8.
3Cf. Ebhm. Lit., 1932, p. 401 ; cf. S.R.C. 13th June, 1902.
4 Stcrcky, Pontificales, ii, 384.
THE MASS
113
Dominican, because that is a short and convenient term to
designate a mediaeval Roman rite which was used principally
but not exclusively by the Order of St. Dominic. Hence, this
liturgical use is as truly a Roman rite as is the liturgy used almost
universally in the Latin Church.’1 Hence, apart from the
practical difficulties which may arise from the divergencies of
the two ceremonials, no obstacle need be raised to the co-opera
tion by priests of the Roman rite in a Dominican Mass. In
1896, the Sacred Congregation of Rites decided2 that in a
parish in which the Roman rite was observed that rite should
still be followed even when clerics of the Ambrosian rite were
called in to assist at ceremonies. The celebrant of the Mass is,
however, bound always to follow his own rite in accordance
with the rubrics. ‘All priests, both secular and regular, must
celebrate the Masses, even if they are proper to regulars, accord
ing to the Calendar of the church or public chapel in which
they arc celebrating ; but not with the rites peculiar to particu
lar Orders or Churches.’3
CERTAIN REPLIES FROM THE SACRED CONGREGA
TION OF RITES CONCERNING MASS, ETC.
Amongst a number of replies published by the Sacred Con
gregation of Rites, 13th June, 1950, the following are of special
interest :
1. When, on board a ship, there is a fixed public oratory,
the Calendar to be followed by those who celebrate Mass there
is the Calendar of the Universal Church, not the Calendar of
the port at which the ship is registered. Decree N. 4069 (4th
.March, 1901) decided that a permanent chapel on board ship
is to be regarded as a public oratory, but a non-permanent
chapel has only the status attached to a portable altar. Hence
some rubricists1 favoured the opinion that in a permanent
public chapel the Ordo to be followed was that of the home port
of the ship. The present decision disposes of that opinion, and
notv, in a permanent chapel, the Universal Calendar must be
used. If, however, a priest celebrates at an altar which is
erected temporarily for the occasion, he may and, by preference,
should, follow his own Calendar and celebrate Mass in accord
ance with his Office.
1 Bonniwell, O.P., A History of the Dominican Liturgy, p. 1.
» 3930.
’ Addit, et Var., iv, 6.
‘ Vide I. E. Record.
114
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
2. In a Mass celebrated before the Blessed Sacrament exposed
the celebrant should not genuflect before he ascends the altar
after the Confiteor ; but, when he arrives on the footpace, he
should genuflect immediately before saying Oramus te, Domine,
and again immediately after that prayer. Hitherto, many
authors have held that the priest, and in Solemn Mass the
sacred ministers also, should genuflect before ascending the altar
after the prayers at the foot of the altar.1 That view is now
rejected. Father O’Connell describes the correct procedure :a
‘ Having ascended the altar after the preparatory prayers, the
Celebrant genuflects, lays his joined hands on the altar and
recites the prayer Oramus te and kisses the altar as usual. Then
he genuflects and goes to the missal.’ And for Solemn Mass :
‘ On arriving at the table of the altar, after the preparatory
prayers, the Sacred Ministers genuflect. The Celebrant when
doing so places his hands on the altar ; the Deacon and Sub
deacon genuflect with hands joined.’
3. When the feast of a local Patron or of the Titular of a
church is accidentally transferred until after the following
Sunday, the external solemnity may be held on the Sunday
following the dies translata. The rubrics permit the external
solemnization on a Sunday of a local feast ‘ quod infra praece
dentem hebdomadam occurrerit.' The present decision authentically
clarifies this rubric. For example, if the feast of a local Patron
occur in Holy Week and is, therefore, transferred until after
Low Sunday, its external celebration may take place on the
second Sunday after Easter.
4. When the Mass of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Eternal High
Priest, is celebrated coram Sanctissimo, the commemoration of the
Blessed Sacrament must be omitted because of the identity of
the mystery celebrated in the Mass, namely the Priesthood and
Sacrifice of Christ, with the mystery of the Passion. Decree
N. 3924 (3rd July, 1896) lists the other mysteries of the Passion
which are to be considered as identical with the Blessed Sacra
ment and, therefore, exclude this commemoration :
Commemorationem SSmi. Sacramenti, ob identitatem Mysterii solum
modo omittendam esse in Festis Passionis, Crucis, SSmi. Redemptoris, SSmi.
Cordis Icsu, ct Pretiosissimi Sanguinis.
5. When the external solemnity of a feast, the Mass of which
carries a Sequence, is transferred to a Sunday, the Sequence
need not be recited in low Masses. Λ Sequence is not obli
gatory in low Masses on days within the octave of a feast,
1 Vide Ephem. Lit., 1950, p. 362.
• Celebration of Mass, ii, p. 183; Op. cit., iii, p. 194.
THE MASS
115
except within the octaves of Easter and Pentecost. The force
of the present decision is that, when the external solemnity of a
feast is celebrated on the Sunday within the octave, the Sequence
remains optional in low Masses on that day.
6. The Credo is not to be added to the Mass on Holy Saturday
or on the Vigil of Pentecost, even when there is a commemora
tion, c.g., of the Dedication of the church, which normally
would carry with it the recitation of the Creed. The Creed is
excluded from the Masses of Holy Saturday and the Vigil of
Pentecost because it would be recited in the Baptism ceremonies
which arc supposed to take place on those days. Before the
recent reform, baptisms seldom took place in the ceremonies for
the solemn blessing of the font, yet the Sacred Congregation
here insists that the ancient tradition must be preserved and
that the Credo may not be incorporated in the Mass.
7. Where a solemn funeral is taking place, private Requiem
Masses as on the day of burial may be said, provided that they
arc applied for the deceased. It is now asked whether such
private Masses are permissible only when the Exequial Mass is
a sung Mass or whether they are allowed also when the Exequial
Mass is a low Mass pro defuncto paupere. The reply is :
Missa exsequialis lecta pro paupere acquiparatur Missae exsequiali
cantatae, et iisdem gaudet privilegiis.
In Ireland this authentic interpretation of the rubrics must
be considered in relation to the special induit granted to this
country on 29th June, 1862. The Irish bishops petitioned that
in iis locis in quibus ob inopiam Sacerdotum Missa solemnis celebrari non
possit legi possint etiam in festis duplicibus Missae Privatae de Requie
praesente cadavere.1
This request was granted except for doubles of the first and
of the second class, feasts of precept and privileged ferias, vigils
and octaves. Hence, when the Exequial Mass is a low Mass
either by virtue of this induit or by reason of the fact that the
deceased was poor, private Requiem Masses for the deceased
arc permissible in accordance with the rubrics. This privilege
is not affected by a Decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites
in 1942 which emphasized that the Exequial Mass should always
be sung :2
In exsequiis autem, si Missa celebretur, semper—nisi de pauperibus
agatur—fiat in cantu, reprobata invalescente praxi eam legendi absque
1 This privilege differed slightly from the one granted to Scotland and
extended at the request of the Vicars .Apostolic to England in 1847. The
Scottish and English privilege allowed low Mass when an Exequial Mass
could not be sung.
‘W., 1942, p. 205.
116
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
cantu etiam cum funus externam induit pompam. Quandocumque vero ex
rationabili causa funebris functio ritu breviori aut simpliciori agi contingat,
ea tamen gravitate ac pietate peragatur, quam non minus reverentia
sacrorum quam populi aedificatio requirit.
8. The rubrics prescribe that Requiem Mass is to be cele
brated with only one prayer when it is celebrated in conjunction
with a Requiem Office of double rite, and the antiphons of the
Office arc to be doubled when the Office is ‘ solemnly cele
brated.’ When are the Requiem Office and Mass to be
considered as of double rite, and what constitutes ‘ solemnity ’
in the Office ? The reply is :
Voccm ‘ solemnitcr ’ auctores censent esse interpretandam ‘ in cantu,’
ideo . . . Officium et Missa Defunctorum censentur celebrari sub ritu duplici
die 2 novembris et quoties Officium solemnitcr canitur, idest cum sacerdote
parato.—Solemnitas datur non a populi concursu neque ab apparatu externo,
sed a sacerdote parato.
I
,
\
The Requiem Office and Mass are, needless to say, of double
rile on the day of death or burial, on the anniversary and other
privileged occasions.
On other occasions the Office is
‘solemnly’ celebrated if it is sung and, if the assisting priest
wears vestments, namely surplice, stole and, if he wishes, the
cope. A Mass said in connection with this sung Office, even a
low Mass, will be of double rite and hcncc will be correctly
celebrated with one prayer,1 even though it is the Missa quoti
diana. It is not correct, therefore, to state that the Missa
quotidiana may always have three prayers ; if sung or said in
connection with an Office celebrated under double rite it will
have only one prayer. It is not necessary that three nocturns
of the Office be sung ; one nocturn (chosen according to the
day of the week) may be sung under double rite. Even in the
Missa quotidiana one prayer now (since 1955 Decretum) is always
sufficient.
SECTION II
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
Rubrics Regarding Communion, Benediction,
Reservation
OBLIGATION TO RECITE PRAYERS BEFORE AND
AFTER DISTRIBUTING COMMUNION
Again, where the Blessed Sacrament is reserved at a side altar,
if Holy Communion is distributed from that altar outside Mass at
the same time as the celebrant at the high altar distributes Com
munion from a ciborium consecrated during his Mass should both
priests recite the prayers prescribed for the minister before and after
distributing Communion? Should both give the final blessing?
Ordinarily an assistant priest should begin to distribute
Holy Communion only after the celebrant of the Mass has
begun and should cease doing so before the celebrant finishes.
In this case even when he distributes the Communion from an
altar other than that on which Mass is being celebrated, he
docs not say any of the prayers prescribed for recitation before
or after the distribution. The Misereatur, etc. will be recited by
the celebrant of the Mass and the blessing will be given at the
conclusion of the Mass. If, however, the assistant priest begins
the distribution from a side altar before the Communion of the
Mass, he should proceed as in distributing Communion outside
Mass, i.c. he should have the Confiteor recited by a server and
pronounce the Misereatur, Ecce Agnus Dei, etc., in a low voice.
If, at the Communion of the Mass, the celebrant takes part in
the distribution, these prayers arc not repeated, but the function
should be concluded as in Communion during Mass, i.c. the
celebrant of the Mass returns to the altar nihil dicens and does
not give his blessing until the end of the Mass. The assistant
priest should then on his return to the side altar recite the
0 Sacrum convivium and the prayer Deus qui nobis or Spiritum
tuum. He docs not give the blessing unless the Mass has already
been concluded. The assistant will give the blessing after
replacing the ciborium only if the Mass has already been con
cluded and the final blessing given. The older liturgists,
Gavantus, Merati, Bauldry, etc., attributed a great deal of
importance to the blessing and held that in no case should
communicants be allowed to depart without receiving the
117
118
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
blessing after Communion, A decision of the Sacred Congie
gation of Rites regarding Communion outside Mass states :l
Versiculi ce Oratio Deus qui nobis, sunt de preccpto ; benedictio autem
semper danda est (unico excepto casu, quando datur immediate ante vel
post Missam defunctorum) sub formula Benedictio Dei, etc.
If the celebrant brings to an end the distribution of Com
munion, then the blessing is not given until the end of Mass—
‘ quia illam datums est in fine Missae.’2· If, however, the assistant
priest docs not finish distributing until after the blessing has
been given in the Mass or if the Mass is a Requiem Mass, he
may regard his distribution of Communion as a separate function
and conclude it by giving his blessing with the formula Benedictio
Dei, etc. Commentators on the rubrics do not envisage the
circumstances described in the query. Hence we think that the
assistant priest must rely on his own judgment to determine
in his own case whether the distribution of Communion from
the side altar is really an independent function or is connected
with the distribution in the Mass.
RUBRICS TO BE OBSERVED AT RECEPTION OF
HOLY COMMUNION
May persons who are not clerics, e.g. students and members
of a religious community, kneel on the predella to receive Holy
Communion? If it is permissible, it would be very convenient to do
so when Holy Communion is distributed during a High Mass.
Interested.
To receive Holy Communion at the altar is the privilege
of clerics. Λ server of the Mass, although he be a layman,
and not wearing soutane and surplice, may also kneel on the
footpace to receive the Blessed Sacrament.3 In the rubrics to
be observed according to the Roman Missal when Holy Com
munion is distributed during a private Mass, no distinction is
made between clerics and the laity.
Si qui sunt communicandi in Missa . . . minister ante cos extendit
linteum scu velum album, et pro cis facit confessionem. ...4
Such a distinction was, however, made in the prescriptions of
the Memoriale Rituum. When preparations arc being made for
the Mass on Holy Thursday, ‘ an oblong cloth is to be extended
first before the clerics, and later (unless another is available)
1 3792.
1 Ritus, x, 6 ; Vide Wucst-Mullancy, Matters Liturgical, p. 105.
1 S.R.C. 4271, 4382.
* Ritus Screandus in celebratione Missae, lit. x, n. 6.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
119
over the sanctuary rails during the Communion of the faithful.’1
Again, in the directions for the actual ceremony, it was stated
* the clerics receive Communion at the altar, then the men
and women at the rails, a cloth being extended before their
breasts.’*2 Similarly the Roman Ritual, in the details of the
rite to be observed when Holy Communion is distributed outside
Mass, directs :
. . . ad communicandum accedit, incipiens ab iis qui sunt ad partem
Epistolae ; sed primo, si Sacerdotibus, vel aliis ex clero danda sit communio,
iis ad gradus Altaris genuflcxis praebeatur, vel si commode fieri possit, intra
sepimentum Altaris sint a laicis distincti.3
In the Caeremoniale Episcoporum, where the ceremony of distribution of Holy Communion during solemn Mass is described,
no distinction is made but it is indicated that on occasions on
which there arc large numbers of communicants, the celebrant
need administer the Sacrament only to the ministers and other
clerics and officials,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ceteri vero de parochia utriusque sexus communicari poterunt in alio altari,
scu capella, ad hoc praeparata. ...1
Finally, in a decree published on 26th March, 1359, the
Sacred Congregation of Rites rejected the suggestion that, in
order to accommodate large crowds, Holy Communion should
he distributed within the altar rails or at the steps of the altar.
The Congregation directed :
Praestare in casu, ut plura genuflexoria sive scamna linteo mundo contecta
hinc inde a cancellis circularim seu in quadrum intra Ecclesiam ordinentur.
• · ·5
Hence all those who arc not clerics should receive Holy Com
munion at the altar rails. The server of the Mass is privileged
because he has the right to receive before all other lay persons
and so may receive at the altar. If there is no communion
rail, servers should kneel at the entrance to the sanctuary
holding the communion cloth for the faithful.®
* Tit. iv, cap. i.
2 Loc. cit., tit. iv, cap. ii, n. 17. Cf. rubric in new Ritus Simplex : ‘ Fideles
vero accipiunt Sacramentum ad cancellos.’ It would be invidious to debar
non-derical religious from receiving Communion in the same place as clerical
members of their institute.
3 Hit. Rom., tit. v, cap. ii, n. 4.
‘ Lib. II, cap. xxix, n. 3 and cap. xxx, n. 5.
3 3086.
•Vide Ephem. Lit., 1934, p. 413 ; O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, iii, p. 138,
ii, p. 158. The Communion rail has been in use since the fifteenth century.
Originally it was merely a barrier between the nave and the sanctuary
(/. E. Record, 1938, p. 666). In a rescript containing a private reply given
to the Coadjutor Bishop of St. Boniface (Canada) on 31st March, 1954, the
S.C.R. did not approve of the custom by which the spouses at marriage
receive Communion within the sanctuary.
'
I
I
;
I
120
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
DANGER OF INFECTION THROUGH PURIFICATIONS
AFTER COMMUNION OF FAITHFUL
Some medical authorities maintain that leprosy may be trans
mitted through saliva and, therefore, a priest is risking infection if
after distributing Holy Communion to such persons he purifies his
fingers over the chalice in the ordinary way and consumes the
purifications. A similar danger may exist in connection with other
highly infectious diseases. May the priest avoid these risks by
purifying his fingers only in the mundatory bowl even during Mass?
Missionaries.
In 1909 the Superior General of the Rcdcmptorisst
pointed out to the Sacred Congregation of Rites the special
danger of contracting leprosy in purifying the ciborium in the
usual way after Holy Communion had been distributed in
leper hospitals and asked that special safeguards should be
provided. The Sacred Congregation gave the following
directions : ‘ Let there be ready on the altar a little vase with
water and a cloth or cotton, and let the purification of the
ciborium, performed in the usual manner, be poured into this
vase, and afterwards as soon as possible let it be thrown into
the sacrarium.’1 Rubricists, generally, direct that after the
Communion of persons who have any contagious disease the
patena should be purified into the mundatory bowl, not into
the chalice or ciborium ; even small particles which are
obviously particles of the Host should be disposed of in this
way. Similarly, rubricists direct that if at any time during the
distribution of Holy Communion the celebrant’s fingers become
moist through contact with the tongues of communicants he
may, and if there is any danger of transferring infection, he
should, return to the altar, wash his finger and thumb in the
mundatory bowl and dry them before he proceeds with the
distribution. After he has distributed Communion to persons
who arc suffering from leprosy, the celebrant may, therefore,
even during Mass, purify his fingers only in the mundatory
bowl, and afterwards the contents of the bowl should be poured
down the sacrarium.
HOW SHOULD A CIBORIUM BE PURIFIED OUTSIDE
MASS ?
If it is necessary to purify a ciborium outside Mass how should
one dispose of the minute particles put into the mundatory bowl?
Capellanus.
1 Bouscarcn, Supplement, 1941, p. 6.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
121
The rubrics take no cognizance of the purification of a
ciborium outside Mass. Rubricists generally hold that such a
dry purification or purification with water only may not be
carried out except in a ease of necessity or for a sufficiently
grave cause.1 Needless to say, a dry purifying should not be
allowed to happen frequently with the same ciborium, because
a wet purification is sometimes necessary in order to cleanse
the ciborium properly. Although an unpurified ciborium
which docs not contain particles large enough to be given in
Holy Communion is not treated with all the marks of respect
reserved for the Blessed Sacrament, nevertheless, a priest when
carrying out the purification should vest in surplice and white
stole. The contents of the ciborium arc purified into the mun
datory bowl ; and when in the course of time these minute
particles have dissolved, the water from the bowl is to be put
down the sacrarium or into a fire. During the relatively long
period necessary for the disappearance of the particles the bowl
should not be kept in the tabernacle but in a suitable, safe
place. If the bowl is covered to prevent all danger of spilling
its contents, it may safely be left on the altar or in a locked
cupboard in the sacristy. If there are present any rather big
fragments which may take a long time to dissolve, these may,
at the time of purifying, be put into a small pyx and kept in the
tabernacle until they can be consumed at the proper time by
the celebrant of Mass.
PURIFYING COMMUNION-CLOTH
When a Host falls on the Communion-cloth is it necessary for
the priest to wash the cloth afterwards?
Sacristan.
If the Sacred Host falls on the Communion-cloth then
the rubrics prescribe that the cloth is to be carefully washed
and the water thrown into the sacrarium.2 It is clear from the
general context of the rubric that this ablution is to be per
formed by the priest. The words diligenter lavetur, however,
do not necessarily indicate that there should be a triple
washing.3
‘Vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, ii, p· 126.
’ De Defectibus, x, 15.
’ O’Connell, op. cit., i, p. 237.
122
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
KEEPING
RECORDS
OF
CONFRATERNITY
COMMUNIONS.
In the outside churches of this parish we have confraternities
which consist in a monthly Communion. Would it be in order that
promoters should keep a written account of those who receive? I
ask this in view of recent discussions about freedom in going to Holy
Communion.
Puzzled.
Ii;
On 8th December, 1938, a reserved instruction was issued
by the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments and addressed to
‘ the Most Excellent and Most Reverend Archbishops, Bishops,
Ordinaries of places and major Superiors of Orders and clerical
religious institutes, on the daily Communion which is usual
and almost general in seminaries, colleges and communities,
including religious ones, and on the abuses to be guarded
against in connection therewith.’1 Lest in the widespread
practice of frequent and daily Communion there may be a
danger that some persons acting through human respect or
under moral compulsion receive the Blessed Eucharist un
worthily, the Sacred Congregation in this Instruction pre
scribes definite safeguards. In general there must be easily
available full facilities for confession with complete liberty of
conscience, and when Holy Communion is being received all
those things are to be avoided which create greater difficulty
for a young person who wishes to abstain. The Instruction is
primarily concerned with the precautions to be observed in
communities where frequent Communion is practised, but it
must also be applied to other groups such as confraternities.
The paragraphs relevant to the present query may be quoted
in full as follows :
‘ In communities of boys and girls there should never be an
announcement of a general Communion with special solemnity,
and even outside communities, the very name “ general Com
munion ” should cither not be used at all or its meaning should
be carefully explained : namely, that all arc invited to the
Holy Table, but no one is obliged to approach, on the contrary
each individual is entirely free to abstain from it. . . .
‘ When Holy Communion is being received, all those things
arc to be avoided which create greater difficulty for a young
person who wishes to abstain from Holy Communion, but in
such a way that his abstinence will not be noticed ; hence
1 Vide Bouscarcn, Supplement to the Canon Law Digest, p. 97.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
123
there should be no express invitation, no rigid and quasi
military order in coming up, no insignia to be worn by those
who receive Communion, etc. . . .
‘ Promoters and directors of gatherings of young people which
arc convened, for example, in public schools, for the sake of
receiving Holy Communion, must take notice that in such
gatherings there are dangers akin to those which exist in com
munities, and they must employ all means for removing them,
not only by announcing that each one is free to receive Com
munion or not, and by supplying sufficient opportunity for
confession, but also by striving to remove all circumstances
which might expose those who do not receive to astonishment
from others, as was said above.’
It would obviously be contrary to this instruction to base
the records of a confraternity on the fact of whether or not a
member receives Holy Communion on a particular occasion.
While all arc invited to approach the Sacrament on these
occasions, each must be perfectly free to abstain from doing
so and his abstinence must not be noted.
OBSERVANCE OF DUE ORDER BY
COMMUNICANTS
In view of the instruction of the S. C. Sacr. (8th December, 1938)—
‘ there is to be no rigid and quasi-military order in coming up, no
insignia to be worn by those who receive Holy Communion . . .’
is it still of obligation that clerics should approach in due order in
accordance with Rom. Rit., tit v, c. 2, n. 4, and S.R.C., 30th January,
1915? Likewise should deacons wear stoics?
Anxius.
The instruction referred to need not be understood as touch
ing upon or derogating from the present prescriptions of the
Roman Ritual. Its purpose, as explained above, was to ensure
that persons, especially young people, should never because of
the extrinsic circumstances attached to the distribution of Holy
Communion on particular occasions, find it more d ifficult to
abstain from reception of the sacrament. Clearly, such diffi
culties may arise if those in charge in communities, school
groups, confraternities, etc., insist too strictly on the observance
of a disciplined processional order or on the wearing of badges,
medals or other confraternity insignia. The due order pre
scribed in the Ritual, however, need not injure this full liberty
124
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
of conscience.1 The rubrics, especially the direction that
deacons should wear surplice and stole when communicating,
can and should still be observed in a manner which conforms
with the purpose of the instruction, namely, that none be
forced even indirectly to receive the Blessed Eucharist un
worthily. Similarly the reply of the Sacred Congregation of
Rites, which was published on 30th January, 1915, retains its
force since it cannot be said to impose any rigid, quasi-military
order upon clerics or others who approach to receive Holy
Communion.2
BRINGING OF HOLY COMMUNION TO THE SICK
(1) In bringing Holy Communion to the sick extra Missam a
distance of 140 yards in the open air has to be walked between the
chapel and hospital building. Is it sufficient to have the ciborium
covered with the humeral veil, or must the unibrellino be also used?
At present one server carrying light and bell accompanies the priest.
(2) May a nursing brother who has to be on duty in the infirmary
during Mass receive Holy Communion there when his patients do so?
Religiosus.
(1) When the Blessed Sacrament is carried to the sick under
the circumstances described in the query, the umbrellino must
be used. It would seem that there is such an obligation from
the reply given by the Sacred Congregation of Rites on 7th
February, 1874.3 The following question was submitted by
the Superior-General of the Order of St. John of God :
An recitato ad Altare Confiteor, Miseratur, Ecce Agnus Dei, Domine non sum
dignus, possit permitti quod Sacerdos cum Pyxide sine velo humerali deferat
ad infirmos sacram Communionem, saltem a duobus candelas deferentibus
comitatus ct adhibita etiam umbella si fieri potest, praesertim si ab /Vitari
distent infirmi ?
1 The Ritual, loc. cit., directs : ‘ Postea ad communicandum accedit,
incipiens ab iis qui sunt ad partem Epistolae ; sed primo, si Sacerdotibus,
vel aliis ex clero danda sit communio, iis ad gradus Altaris gcnuflcxis prae
beatur, vel, si commode fieri possit intra sepimentum Altaris sint a laicis
distincti. Sacerdotes vero ct Diaconi communicantes utantur stola coloris
albi vel eiusdem coloris ac Sacerdos qui ministrat.’
• Roma, /I.J.5., 1915, p. 71—‘Nomine ministri altaris vel sacrificii missae
venit quilibet clericus vel laicus, missae ad altare inserviens, qui praeferendus
est ceteris in distributione sacrae Synaxcos cauto tamen, ut laico inservient,
praeferantur clerici, ct clericis minoris ordinis alii in maiori ordine constitutii
aut personae quae superiori polleant dignitate liturgice attendenda per se
(uti regum) vel per accidens (uti sponsorum in missa pro benedicendis
nuptiis),’ i.c. This decree simply decides that, celais paribus, the server should
receive Holy Communion before any others, but a lay server should not
precede a cleric, etc.
» 3322.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
125
The reply was :
Nihil obstat ; dummodo tamen in delatione SSmi Sacramenti umbella
omnino adhibeatur.
It must be noted that the case contemplated in this particular
decision was that in which Holy Communion was brought to
the sick by the celebrant during Mass.1 Hence the prescribed
prayers were said at the altar and the humeral veil was not worn
over the chasuble, but in the reply, the Sacred Congregation
insists that the umbella be used.*12 It is not necessary that two
acolytes be in attendance with lights ; one suffices. In the
Roman Ritual it is prescribed that when a priest is bringing
publicly the Blessed Sacrament to the sick :
Praecedat semper acolythus, vcl alius minister deferens lanternam.3
(2) Strictly speaking, an attendant in the infirmary may not
lawfully receive Holy Communion there when the sick do so.
This opinion is based on the general rule of canon 869 and on
the more recent decision published by the Sacred Congregation
of the Sacraments on 5th January, 1928. Canon 869 states
that Holy Communion may be distributed wherever Mass may
be celebrated, unless the local Ordinary for a just cause and in
particular cases has forbidden it. An obvious exception to this
rule is made in favour of invalids.4 According to canon 822, § 4,
the local Ordinary, or in an exempt religious institute, the
major Superior can, for a just and reasonable cause in any
extraordinary circumstance and per modum actus, grant permission
for the celebration of Mass outside a church or oratory, in a
suitable place, but never in a bedroom. On 5th January, 1928,
the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments dealt with the
following questions which had been submitted to it by the
Bishop of Mondovi in Piedmont :
‘ I. May the faithful who live in mountain hamlets be given
Holy Communion in a sacred place whenever the Blessed
Eucharist is brought to the sick, or, since there is question of
so sacred a matter, may this be done in a decent and suitable
place along the way, when they arc unable on that day to go
to the church ?
Wide I. E. Record, April, 1943, p. 274.
1 Haegy, Manuel de Liturgie el Ceremonial, ii, p. 58. ‘ Si l’on porte la com
munion avec solemnity, on peut faire prendre le dais. S’il n’y avait per
sonne pour porter rombrellino, le prêtre pourrait le porter lui-même. Dans
ce cas, il renfermerait le custode dans une bourse de soie, suspendue a son cou
ct l’attacherait de manière qu’elle ne puisse tomber ni s’ouvrir.’ Cappello
De Sacramentis, i, 455.
3 Rit. Rom., tit. v, cap. 4, n. 13.
4 Canons 847-850.
126
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
‘ II. May Holy Communion and the Sacrament of Con
fession be administered to those who are in the house of the
sick person ?
‘III. Should these Sacraments be administered in the above
circumstances to those who arc advanced in years, or who arc
ill of some disease ? ’
The replies were : ‘ I. In the affirmative according to canon
869 conjoined with canon 822, § 4, that is, provided the
Ordinary of the place grants the faculty according to the
provision cited, namely, for each case and per modum actus.
‘ II and III. As regards Communion the answer is provided
for in the reply to I . . ,* 1
From these replies, as also in the annotations by the secretary
of die Sacred Congregation officially published with them, it
is clear that those who arc in the house of the sick person may
receive Holy Communion there if a suitable place is available,
i.e., a hall or other apartment in which Mass could be celebrated,
with the Ordinary’s permission, although in fact the celebration
docs not occur. They may never, however, receive the Sacrament
in a bedroom.2
The infirmarian may not, therefore, receive Holy Communion
in his patient’s bedroom, but with due permission he may do
so in any convenient room in which Mass could be celebrated.
It is not required that Mass ever be actually celebrated there.
A few authors, however, hold that when there is question only
of giving Holy Communion to one person, a more lenient
interpretation of the law is admissible. Crcusen, for example,
writes :
Il faut bien noter aussi que la communion ne pourrait pas être distribuée
dans la chambre a coucher (in cubiculo) du malade, mais par exemple dans
une chambre voisine, convenablement disposée ou ornée pour cette circons
tance. Il nous semble toutefois qu’on ne peut interpreter aussi sévèrement
cette condition quand il s’agit que de donner la communion, surtout a une
seule personne, que il s’agissait de la celebration du S. Sacrifice. Tout autre
serait le cas ou plusiers personnes, surtout étrangères a la maison, viendraient
y recevoir la communion . . .3
If there is a sufficient reason for doing so this opinion could
safely be followed.
» A.A.S., 1929, p. 79.
1 The Ordinary may delegate habitually his power to grant this permission
to celebrate or to administer the Eucharist in a private house. (Vide canon
199.) Where by immemorial custom, as in many parts of Ireland, the practice
is lawful, Mass must, nevertheless, be celebrated only in a decent, suitable
place.
• Nouvelle Rerue Theologique, tom. Iv, p. 389.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
127
MUST Λ SPECIAL BLESSING ALWAYS BE GIVEN TO
THOSE WHO ACCOMPANY THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
CARRIED TO THE SICK?
Is there an obligation to give a blessing with the ciborium to
one or two persons who have accompanied the Blessed Sacrament
brought to the sick in a religious house?
Capellanus.
The following private reply was given by the Sacred
Congregation of Rites on 5th February, 194G î1
Monialibus in proprio oratorio rite distributa sacra Eucharistia extra
Missam, pergit statini sacerdos, assumpto velo humerali, ad infirmas in
cubiculis carum communicandas ; quo facto, ad oratorium regreditur, et
post preces praescriptas benedictionem eisdem monialibus cum pyxide,
antequam in tabernaculum reponitur, impertitur. Unde quaeritur :
1. Utrum, post sacram Communionem in oratorio distributam, benedi
cantur adstantes, mox cum Sanctissimo benedicendae, manu Sacerdotis ?
Resp. Affirmative.
2. Quatenus affirmative ad primum, utrum reponatur pyxis in taber
naculum ante eiusmodi benedictionem ? Resp. Sufficere ut sacerdos, in
partem Evangelii se retrahens, fideles manu benedicat quin sacram pixidem
in tabernaculum reponat.
As to the question of whether the blessing with the ciborium
should always be given in these circumstances the obligation is
by no means certain, nor does it seem to be the correct proce
dure if Holy Communion must be distributed in the oratory
after the chaplain has returned from the sick-room. The above
merely private reply does not explicitly deal with the question,
yet in its statement of the case accepts without objection the
fact that the chaplain blesses with the ciborium both those who
have accompanied him to the sick and those who have remained
in the oratory. Hence it may be admitted that to give the
blessing in these circumstances is a correct procedure.
RUBRICS TO BE OBSERVED WHEN HOLY COM
MUNION IS BROUGHT TO THE SICK IN
RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS
When immediately before or after Mass in a convent chapel,
Holy Communion is to be brought to a sick nun, the chaplain is
accompanied by two sisters who carry candles and ring a hand-bell.
Should he observe all the rubrics prescribed in the Ritual for the
1 Vide Clergy Review (1946), p. 493.
128
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
bringing of Holy Communion publicly to the sick? In particular,
may he wear the Mass vestments and on his return to the chapel bless
with the pyx those who have accompanied him? Would this blessing
be given if Holy Communion is to be distributed immediately after
wards (i.e. extra Missam) to those who are in the chapel?
Neo-Cappellanus.
In accordance with the rubrics of the Roman Ritual and
with the Code of Canon Law normally Holy Communion is
to be brought publicly to the sick.1 The right, as well as the
duty, of doing so pertains to the parish priest. It is his exclusive
prerogative to carry the Blessed Sacrament publicly outside the
church to communicate the sick who arc in his parish.1
2 In the
Roman Ritual a detailed description is given of the ceremonies
to be observed on such an occasion. The bells of the church
are to be rung in order to warn the people that the Blessed
Sacrament is about to be brought to the sick and the parishioners
arc exhorted that as many as possible should accompany their
pastor to the house of the sick person and on his return journey
to the church. Special indulgences arc granted to those who
thus publicly pay homage to the Blessed Sacrament, particu
larly to those who carry lights in the procession, and on their
return to the church they arc given a special benediction before
the Pyx is replaced in the tabernacle.34
* The actual procession
is described in the Ritual :*
Praecedat semper acolythus, vcl alius minister deferens laternam. Noctu
autem hoc Sacramentum deferri non debet, nisi necessitas urgeat : sequantur
duo clerici, vcl qui eorum vices suppleant. . . . Succedant deinde deferentes
intorticia. Postremo Sacerdos Sacramentum gestans elevatum ante pectus
sub umbella, dicens Psalmum Miserere, et alios Psalmos et Cantica.
When, for a just and reasonable cause, Holy Communion must
be brought privately to the sick any priest may do so without
ceremony.6
In Ireland the Blessed Sacrament is always brought privately
to the sick. Even the practice mentioned by ‘ Neo-Cappellanus *
and observed in most convents in this country cannot be con
sidered as a public ceremony. It does not fulfil the require
ments of the liturgical procession described in the Ritual and,
therefore, need not be regulated in strict conformity with all the
rubrics governing such a procession.® In 1903, for example,
-5
15$
1 Canon 847 ; Rit. Rom., tit v, cap. iv, n. 6.
1 Canon 848, 462 ; Rit. Rom., loc. cit., n. 7.
3 Rit. Rom., loc. cit., n. 26 ; Enchiridion Indulg., N. 143.
4 Ibid., n. 13.
* Canon 849 ; Rit. Rom., loc. cit., n. 8.
•Cappello, De Sacramentis, i, p. 289; I. E. Record, 1916, p. 281.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
129
the Sacred Congregation of Rites decided that women could
not take the place of clerics in the public procession when the
Blessed Sacrament is borne publicly to the sick.1 In a convent,
however, there need be no objection to the practice whereby
the chaplain is preceded to the sick room by a nun who shows
the way and rings a bell to give warning of his approach, while
after him there follow one or two others, who carry candles,
even when these are not necessary, in order to give light, but
arc rather an admirable mark of respect to the Blessed Sacra
ment. Such customs are laudable as practical efforts to render
due honour and reverence to the Blessed Sacrament, but they
are not equivalent to the liturgical procession.
On the other hand neither is the chaplain bound to observe
those rubrics which are of obligation only when the Blessed
Sacrament is borne publicly. On his way to the sick-room he
may, if there is time, recite the Miserere or, if he so wishes, any
psalms and hymns in honour of the Blessed Sacrament. All
the prayers to be recited in the sick-room beginning with the
Pax huic domui and concluding with the prayer Domine sancte are
of precept as are also the rubrics to be observed in the adminis
tration of the Sacrament.1
2 At the conclusion, if particles
remain in the ciborium or pyx, benediction is to be given to the
sick person and while returning to the chapel the chaplain may
recite privately the psalm Laudate or any other appropriate
psalms or hymns. When he returns to the chapel he may
replace the ciborium or pyx in the tabernacle immediately
without giving any blessing, because the benediction here pre
scribed by the Ritual is intended only for those who have
accompanied the Blessed Sacrament in the public liturgical
procession. It may, however, be given.3 There is no certain
obligation to recite the versicle, response, and prayer as pre
scribed by the general rubric4 (i.e. Panem de caelo, etc., with
the prayer Deus qui nobis), but it is to be recommended that he
do so before he closes the door of the tabernacle.5*
8 If Holy
Communion is to be given immediately (i.e. extra Missam)
then even this prayer should be omitted, because except during
Paschaltidc it must be recited after the distribution.0 The rite
1 4127 (11th December, 1903).
’ Rit. Rom., tit. v, cap. iv ; Cappello, op. cit., p. 397 ; O’Kane-Fallon,
Rubrics of the Roman Ritual, cap. xiv.
* Cf. S.R.C. 2383 ; Gasparri, De Sanctissima Eucharistia, ii, p. 352.
* Rit. Rom., loc. cit., n. 24. Vide Question infra.
8 O’Kanc-Fallon, par. 814, ct seq. ; 1. E. Record, 1912, p. 430; Dunne
The Ritual Explained, p. 64.
8 Rit. Rom., loc. cit.
6—1993
130
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
of administering Holy Communion extra Missam is concluded
by the personal blessing of the celebrant;1 several decrees of
the Sacred Congregation of Rites expressly prohibit him from
bringing it to a close by giving benediction with the ciborium.2
When he brings the Blessed Sacrament to the sick-room,
normally the chaplain should vest in surplice and stole (white
or the colour of the Office of the day) and should wear the
humeral veil while carrying the ciborium.3 In a religious
house it would not suffice to carry the Blessed Sacrament
secretly to the sick-room and to wear only the stole over one’s
outdoor dress when administering the Sacrament—that custom
is justifiable only when one goes privately to attend invalids
in their own homes. Outside Mass, Holy Communion may be
distributed by a priest wearing all the Mass vestments only
immediately before or after a Low Mass. The celebrant may
not do so immediately before or after a High Mass or a Con
ventual Mass ;4 and according to the general law he should
not administer Holy Communion during Mass to those who arc
so distant that he loses sight of the altar.5 If he must go out
of the chapel to communicate a sick person immediately before
or after Mass the chaplain may vest in alb and stole ; since the
ceremony is not directly connected with the Mass he should not
wear the maniple or chasuble.6 A black stole should never be
used even when he intends to celebrate or has just celebrated a
Requiem Mass.7
!
RUBRICS TO BE OBSERVED WHEN HOLY COM
MUNION IS BROUGHT TO SEVERAL SICK IN
HOSPITALS
e
If Holy Communion is to be distributed to a number of sick
persons who are in different wards in a hospital, is it sufficient to
place a properly prepared table on each landing or corridor on which
several wards open? The chaplain then recites the prayers before
and after the actual distribution only at this table. In each ward
he says only Ecce Agnus Dei and Domine non sum dignus (once)
before proceeding to give Communion to those in the ward.
Neo-Cappellanus.
j
i
I
,S
>
KÏ
J*
«
1 Rit. Rom., The blessing is not given when black vestments arc worn.
>E.g. 2543, 2725, 3237,3308.
9 Rit. Rom., tit. v, cap. iv, n. 6 ; Vide O'Kane-Fallon, op. cit.
4 S.R.C. 4177.
4 Canon 8G8.
· S.R.C. 3158 ; O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, ii, p. 165 ; O’Kanc-Fallon,
par. 710; contra Hacgy, Manuel de Liturgie, i, p. 289.
• S.R.C. 3177.
THE BLES!
131
On January 9, 1929, the Sacred Congregation of Rites
issued a detailed instruction on the rite to be observed when
Holy Communion is distributed in a hospital to several invalids,
each of whom is in a separate room. The purpose of the instruc
tion is explicitly stated :
Quo breviori cl faciliori ratione sacra Communio pluribus infirmis minis
trari valeat. . . . [and it directs] Quando sacra Communio distribuitur
pluribus infirmis, qui in eadem domo, vel in eodem hospitali, sed in distinctis
cubiculis degant, Sacerdos vel Diaconus ministrans, in primo tantum cubiculo
recitet plurali numero omnes preces ante infirmorum Communionem
dicendas iuxta Rituale Romanum, tit. iv. cap 4; in aliis autem dicat cubiculis
tantummodo preces : Misereatur tui . . . Indulgentiam . . . Ecce Agnus Dei
, . ., semel Domine non sum dignus . . . Accipe frater (soror) . . . vel Corpus
Domini nostri Jesu Christi ... ; et in ultimo cubiculo addat versum : Dominus
iobiscum, cum suo responsorio et cum sequente oratione plurali numero
dicenda: Domine sancte . . ., ibique, si qua particula consecrata superfuerit,
benedictionem eucharistica»! impertiatur, ac tandem reliquas preces
praescriptas in Ecclesia de more persolvat.1
Before the publication of this instruction a priest distributing
Holy Communion in these circumstances was bound to repeat
all the prayers (including the Asperges me, etc., and the final
prayers) in each room.2 Now there is extended to the universal
Church the faculty to use a simplified rite which previously
could be used only by those persons who had a special Apostolic
Induit. In order that the Instruction be fully observed, there
fore, there should be in each apartment a table covered with a
white cloth and on which two lighted candles arc placed.3
The minister should recite the opening prayers only in the first
room and not until he reaches the last room are the concluding
prayers to be said and the benediction given. A finger-bowl
should be provided to enable the minister to purify his fingers
after administering Holy Communion in each room because
he must cover the ciborium and wear the humeral veil when
carrying the Blessed Sacrament from room to room. This
procedure is preferable because it conforms exactly to the
rubrics and it ensures with greater certainty reverence for the
Blessed Sacrament.
Nevertheless the practice described by ‘Neo-Cappellanus*
* can
not be rejected as inadmissible. Those rubricists who permit it4
rely on an argument from parity with the custom admitted by
the Sacred Congregation of Rites in 1874, namely that in a
hospital Holy Communion may be brought by the celebrant
’.•I..1.5’., 1929, p. 43.
* Ephem. Lit., 1927, p. 32 ; 1929, p. 15; I. E. Record, 1929, p. 536.
* Rit. Rom., tit. iv, cap. v, nn. 10, 11; O’Kane-Fallon, op. cit., par. 817
4 E.g. Hacgy, op. cit., ii, p. 65 ; Cf. i, p. 563.
132
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
during Mass to those invalids who, although they were in
separate rooms and could not sec the altar, could hear his voice
during the Mass.1 The decree by which this custom was
recognized was granted in favour of those who must attend the
sick in hospitals and it is by no means certain that it has now
been implicitly abrogated by the general law of the Code.2
There remains a probable opinion that it may still be availed
of in hospitals and that, therefore, the invalids in various wards
arc sufficiently present to the minister of Holy Communion if
they can hear his voice when he is reciting the prayers. While
this opinion may lawfully be followed, there remains the practitical objection that to carry an open ciborium from room to
room is not sufficiently reverent to the Blessed Sacrament.
MAY SACRED PARTICLES FORMERLY
CONSECRATED BE TRANSFERRED TO A
NEW CIBORIUM?
Fathers A and B celebrate daily Masses in a populous provincial
town. Father A, after administering Holy Communion, frequently
has a small number of Hosts left in the ciborium—about a dozen.
He leaves them there. But Father B, when administering Holy
Communion in the succeeding Mass, regards this practice as very
discourteous and asserts that Father A should transfer these Hosts
to the newly consecrated full ciborium and purify. Kindly state
which is the correct procedure in courtesy and rubrics.
Rector.
In the Rubrics of the Roman Ritual it is prescribed3
Sanctissimae Eucharistiae particulas frequenter renovabit (parochus).
Hostiae vero seu particulae consecrandae sint recentes ; et ubi eas conse
craverit veteres primo distribuat, vcl sumat.
In the Code of Canon Law where this prescription is repeated
the purpose of it is stated—‘ ita ut nullum sit periculum corrup
tionis ’—and there is added the direction that the instructions
of the local Ordinary concerning the renewal of particles are
to be carefully observed.4 In Ireland, we have such instructions
given clearly in the Maynooth Statutes :5
1 S.R.C. 3322.
* Blat, Commentarium Textus Codicis, iii, par. 188—‘ Et. videtur nunc temporis
esse implicite revocatam reap. S. Congregationis . .
Contra, Vcrmcersch,
Epitome, ii, par. 138; Cappello, op. cit., i, par. 443.
1 Rit. Rom., tit. v, cap. i, n. 7
* Canon 1272.
* M.S., n. 339 (1927). Cf. Caer. Epis., I, vi, n. 2, and more recent Instruction
issued by the Congregation of the Sacraments—S.R.C. 1929, March 26.
Sect, iii, n. 4.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
133
Ad periculum corruptionis evitandum hostiae consecrandae sint recentes,
et consecratae renoventur octava quoque dic ; sacra ciboria et pyxides
eadem occasione purificentur. Novas consecratas hostias non licet cum
veteribus miscere.
It is true that the practice which is expressly forbidden in
the law is the placing of fresh particles in a ciborium with those
formerly consecrated. All the older particles should be dis
tributed or consumed and the ciborium purified before new
hosts are placed in it.1 Neither can the other practice, which
Father B suggests, namely, that the older particles be trans
ferred to the top of a fresh ciborium, be easily admitted.
Commentators generally forbid it,2 but a few would allow it if
the number of such particles is small and there is moral certainty
that they will be distributed without delay.3 In general,
therefore, it is to be recommended that the safer course should
be followed, i.c., that formerly consecrated particles should
never be mingled with those more recently consecrated. The
older particles, if they cannot be distributed, should be con
sumed. The rubrics always admit of the celebrant’s consuming
even a large number if that is necessary in order that the
ciborium be emptied.4 Father Λ, therefore, if he deems it
necessary cither in charity or courtesy to his colleague, may
consume the remaining particles and purify the first ciborium.
RESERVATION
OF
AT
THE BLESSED
SIDE ALTAR
SACRAMENT
In a church in which pontifical ceremonies are held occasionally,
is it necessary to reserve the Blessed Sacrament permanently at a side
altar?
Concerning the tabernacle in which the Blessed Sacrament
is reserved, the Roman Ritual prescribes :
Hoc autem tabernaculum conopaco opertum, atque ab omni alia re vacuum,
in Altari majori vel in alio, quod venerationi et cultui tanti Sacramenti com
modius et decentius videatur sit collocatura ; ita ut nullum aliis sacris func
tionibus, aut ecclesiasticis officis impedimentum afferatur.6
1 Vavasscur-Stcrcky, Manuel de Liturgie (1935), i, p. 558. O’Kanc-Fallon,
Rubrics of the Homan Ritual, GOO.
1 E.g. Gasparri, De Sanctissima Eucharistia, ii. 1015. ‘Nunquam hostiae
noviter consecratae cum veteris consecratis misceantur ; nec veteres con
secratae superimponantur noviter consecratis.’ Acrtnys, Compendium Sacrae
Liturgiae, p. 58.
’Cappello, De Sacramentis i, 413. Vavasscur-Stcrcky, loc. cit.
•O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, ii, p. 127 footnote.
‘Tit. v, cap. i, n. 6.
134
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
The canons of the Code give more explicit directions regarding
the custody of the Blessed Eucharist : ‘ The Blessed Sacrament
should be kept in the most prominent place of honour and
therefore generally on the high altar, unless there is another
altar more conveniently situated and better suited for the
veneration and worship of the Sacrament. In cathedral,
collegiate and conventual churches in which choir functions
are held at the main altar, in order that there be no interference
with the ecclesiastical services, it is suitable that the Blessed
Sacrament be kept as a rule, not on the high altar, but in
another chapel, or on another altar.’1 From the wording of
the canon it is clear that no strict obligation is here imposed ;
opportunum est conveys rather a recommendation. The reasons
arc firstly, where choir functions are held regularly at the high
altar, there may arise occasions when such functions would
have to be interrupted in order that one have access to the
Blessed Sacrament, e.g. for the bringing of the Viaticum to the
sick ; secondly, the rubrics of episcopal functions sometimes
prescribe that the bishop sit with his back to the altar, hence
there would be danger of seeming disrespect to the Eucharist,2
and also it is not becoming that the same reverence, namely
a genuflection, be paid at the same time both to the Blessed
Sacrament and to the episcopal Ordinary. The difficulty in
relation to pontifical functions can be avoided if the Blessed
Sacrament is transferred to another altar only for the period
of the actual ceremonies. This course is recommended in the
Caeremoniale Episcoporum :
. . . Altare ubi est Ss. Sacramentum . . . diversum esse solet ab altari
majori, et ab eo, in quo Episcopus, vel alius est Missam soleinnein celebra
turus. Nam licet sacrosancto Domini Nostri Jesu Christi Corpori, omnium
Sacramentorum fonti, pracccllcnlissimus ac nobilissimus omnium locus in
ecclesia conveniat, neque humanis viribus tantum illud venerari, et colere
umquarn valeamus quantum decet tenemurque ; tamen valde opportunum
est, ut illud non collocetur in majori vel in alio altari in quo Episcopus vel
alius solemnitcr est Missam seu Vesperas celebraturus ; sed in alio sacello,
vel loco ornatissimo, curn omni decentia et reverentia ponatur. Quod si in
altari majori, vel alio in quo celebrandum erit, collocatum reperiatur, ab eo
altari in aliud omnino transferendum est, ne propctcrca ritus et ordo Caere
moniarum qui in huiusmodi Missis, et Officiis servandus est, turbetur.3
This direction would seem to require that the Blessed Sacrament
&
1 Canon 1268.
1 S.R.C. et RR. (Casertana, November, 1596), ‘Tabernaculum SSmi
Sacramenti in cathcdralibus non debet esse in altari majori propter functiones
pontificales quae fiunt versis renibus ad altare : in parochialibus vero et regu
laribus ecclesiis debet esse in altari majori regulariter tanquam digniori.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
135
be removed before even an ordinary Solemn Mass, but the
presence of the Blessed Sacrament in no way upsets the rubrics
of a Solemn Mass.
In 1875 the Sacred Congregation refused to allow the Blessed
Sacrament to be kept permanently on the high altar in the
cathedral of the diocese of Sibenik (in Dalmatia, now Yugo
slavia). But this was a particular decision given in reply to a
question submitted by the Vicar-Capitular during an inter
regnum in the diocese and submitted
attenta peculiari structura Ecclesiae Cathcdralis Sebenicen, et seculari
consuetudine in ea vigente.1
Hence the decision does not necessarily bind elsewhere. There
is no doubt but that the Blessed Sacrament may be kept at the
high altar even in a cathedral church, but due reverence requires
that on the occasions of pontifical functions the Sacred Species
should be transferred to another altar or chapel. In non
cathedral churches, it is certainly not correct to reserve the
Blessed Sacrament at a side altar merely for the sake of being
‘liturgical.’2 It is above all necessary in every church that the
altar of the Blessed Sacrament be easily distinguished, specially
honoured and situated where the faithful have proper facilities
for their private devotions before the tabernacle.
‘ It is left to the prudent initiative of pastors to see to it that,
especially in churches situated in large cities, the altar where
the tabernacle which contains the Blessed Sacrament is be easily
distinguished by the faithful from all other altars, by some
certain and conspicuous mark, for the sake of avoiding irrever
ence towards it ; and pastors should for this purpose instruct
the faithful that when they enter a church, they should show
the greatest reverence, as is only right, to the Blessed Sacra
ment.’3 It is certainly very regrettable and very much contrary
to the canonical prescriptions that in some of our churches the
Blessed Sacrament altar is cither in an inconspicuous part of
the church or is eclipsed by the importance given to the image
or shrine of a saint, even of the Blessed Virgin.
1 S.R.C. 3335.
1 Vide Collins, Church Edifice and its Appointments, p. 04 ; Gasparri, Eucharistia,
ii, par. 985.
2 Instr, of S.C.Sacr. (26th March, 1929); Vide Bouscarcn, Canon Law
Digest, i, p. 367. GT. Decree De Tabernaculo, 1 Jun. 1957 (A. AS., 22 Julii).
136
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
OBLIGATION TO USE THE CANOPY IN BLESSED
SACRAMENT PROCESSION
Is the canopy of obligation in a small school or hospital chapel,
where the Sisters and their pupils are the only persons present at the
end of the Forty Hours devotion, when the Blessed Sacrament is
taken in procession?
Voice in the Wilderness.
The Roman Ritual directs that in the Corpus Christi pro
cession of die Blessed Sacrament, the celebrant should proceed
‘sub umbellam comitantibus Ministris.’1 The Caeremoniale
Episcoporum prescribes that the canopy be used2 and this
prescription is repeated in the Clementine Instruction.3 If a
suitable canopy is not available or if the restricted space of the
chapel docs not allow of the use of a canopy, then the umbella
may be used.1 Always when the Blessed Sacrament is borne
outside the sanctuary in procession, the canopy or umbella must
be carried. This is a distinctive mark of respect reserved to
the Blessed Sacrament,5 and it is of obligation.6 Gardellini,
in his commentary on the Clementine Instruction7 states :
Certum est quod Sacramentum in Processione sub baldachino deferri
debet et sub umbellam in subsidium ut cum festinanter defertur ad infirmos
aut asportari debet per vias augustas.
CONDITIONS FOR EXPOSITION
Please explain the occasions on which Benediction may be
given with the monstrance as distinct from the general law stated in
Canon 1274. What would constitute ‘ a just and grave cause,
especially a public one,’ on which episcopal permission or that of the
Ordinary could and should be based? Would the feast-day of a nun
be sufficient cause, or the novena of a community of nuns before
some feast? When is exposition of the Blessed Sacrament permitted?
Is the practice of exposition on certain days, first Fridays and others,
for some hours after Mass, to be considered as in conformity with
Canon 1275?
______
J. K.
1 Rit. Rom., tit. x, cap. v., n. 3. Cf. Mem. Rit., tit. iv, cap. i.
1 ii, cap. xxxiii.
3 n. xix.
* O’Connell, Rubrics of the Forty Hours Prayer, p. 35.
s S.R.C. 2379, 2647, 2808. The general decree issued on 27th May, 1826
(N. 2647), tolerates the custom by which relics of the True Cross may be
similarly honoured, but forbids this mark of respect to be paid to the relics
of saints.
* S.R.C. 3322—’ Umbella omnino adhibenda est in delatione SSmi
Sacramenti.’
’ xix, n. 17.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
137
Canon 1274, § 1, states that public exposition with the
monstrance may take place during Mass and at vespers on
Corpus Christi and during the octave of that feast
aliis vero temporibus nonnisi cx justa ct gravi causa praesertim publica et dc
Ordinarii loci licentia, licet ecclesia ad religionem exemptam pertineat.
In 1927 the Code Commission decided that the words ‘ public
exposition’ in Canon 1274 include also the Eucharistic Bene
diction which is usually given with the Blessed Sacrament openly
exposed in the ostensorium. The cause justifying the local
Ordinary in authorizing public Benediction or exposition must
be a ‘ just and grave,’ but not necessarily a public cause—‘ prae
sertim publica.’1 A public cause is generally described as one
concerning the spiritual welfare of the community, as, for
example, to give an opportunity for special prayers for peace
or for some special graces as in a novena or retreat. The Code
does not require that the cause be always a public one, since the
primary purpose of the devotion is to render honour to the
Blessed Sacrament. The reasonableness and gravity of odier
causes are relative to local circumstances and the local Ordinarv
must be the judge of these conditions. Authors generally do
not recommend that Benediction or exposition should be too
easily permitted, because over-frequent repetition tends to lessen
rather than to increase the appreciation of the faithful for tliis
devotion. The feast-day of a particular nun is not usually
regarded as a sufficient cause, but the celebration of a silver or
golden jubilee may be so regarded. The conclusion of a special
novena may be a just cause, especially if the novena were
associated with some special devotions. General permission is
usually given, e.g. in diocesan statutes, for Benediction or
exposition on first Fridays in connection with the privileged
Mass of the Sacred Heart and, in accordance with Canon 1275,
where the Forty Hours’ Prayer cannot be carried out, the
Ordinary may once and for all appoint certain days on which
exposition for some hours may be held. For all these cases the
permission of the Ordinary must be expressed cither in a general
or in a particular concession ; the permission may not be
presumed.
EXPOSITION AFTER MASS.
When there is Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament for one or
two hours after Mass, may the Exposition begin at the Communion
of the Mass, as at the Forty Hours Prayer?
Γp
1 Vide, Vcrmccrsch, Epitome, ii, § 599 ; Cappello, De Sacramentis, i, p. 359.
By a rescript issued on 27th May, 1911, the Sacred
Congregation of Rites replied in the negative to the first part
of each of the following questions :
Si extra Expositionem XL Horarum, el Festum SS. Corporis Christi,
fieri contingat expositio SS. Sacramenti immediate post Missam, Hostia
debeatne intra hanc Missam consecrari vel accipi possit Hostia iam prius
consecrata ?
Et quatenus affirmative ad secundam partem :
Utrum Hostia iam antea consecrata poni possit in Ostensorio ante puri
ficationem ct ablutiones, vel exspectari debeat usque ad expletum ultimum
Evangelium ?1
Hence, except for the Forty Hours Prayer or for Corpus
Christi, when Exposition immediately follows Mass the Host
to be exposed need not be consecrated in the Mass and the
Exposition may not begin until after the last Gospel.
BENEDICTION ΜΛΥ NOT BE GIVEN AT THE
BEGINNING OF A PERIOD OF EXPOSITION
May Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament be given at the
beginning of a period of Exposition? Frequently at the beginning
of a period of Exposition (e.g. as on Passion Sunday) a large congre
gation is present and many of these people will not be able to return
for the final Benediction in the evening. Is it permissible to carry
out the Benediction ceremony then or at some time during the day
without bringing the Exposition to a close?
Interested.
KJ
To have Benediction at the beginning or during a period
of Exposition would not be in conformity with the decrees of
the Sacred Congregation of Rites, and so would not be lawful.
Benediction must be given only at the conclusion of the Exposi
tion when the Blessed Sacrament is being replaced in the
tabernacle.
On 11th July, 1857, the Sacred Congregation expressly for
bade the practice of blessing the faithful with the Blessed
Sacrament at the beginning of Exposition.2 Because of special
local circumstances the custom was allowed to remain in the
diocese of Salzburg,3 but by a subsequent decision it was
made clear that this permission could not be extended to other
1 4269 ad x ct xi.
» 3058.
’3287.
139
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
places.1 Benediction during a period of Exposition was pro
hibited by a decision published on 25th September, 1882 :2
‘ During Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament Bencdication
may not be given in the evening and the Blessed Sacrament
immediately rc-cxposed again until the following morning.’ On
every occasion on which the Blessed Sacrament has been placed
in the monstrance, the Exposition is public and must be
brought to a close by the ceremony of Benediction.3
BENEDICTION OF THE BLESSED SACRAMENT IN
A CLASSROOM.
Our convent oratory is small. On special occasions at the
end of the retreat or on the last day of term it is desirable that the
children of the day-school attend Benediction, would it be permissible
to give Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament from a temporary
altar erected in the study hall?
C APPELLANTS.
The liceity of giving Benediction with the Blessed Sacra
ment in these circumstances is not clear ; neither, on the other
hand, would it be certainly and necessarily unlawful. The
question should, therefore, be submitted to the ruling of the
local Ordinary. Canon 1274 states :
In ecclesiis aut oratoriis quibus datum est asservare sanctissimam Eucharis
tiam, fieri potest cspositio privata seu cum pyxide ex qualibet iusta causa
sine Ordinarii licentia ; expositio vero publica seu cum Ostcnsorio die festo
Corporis Christi et intra octavam fieri in omnibus ecclesiis inter Missarum
solemnia et ad Vesperas ; aliis vero temporibus nonnisi ex iusta ct gravi
causa praesertim publica et de Ordinario loci licentia, licet Ecclesia ad
religionem exemptam pertineat.
The Commission for the Interpretation of the Code has decided :
(1) that the churches referred to in this canon arc only those
which arc permitted to keep the Blessed Sacrament;4 and
(2) that ‘ public exposition ’ includes Benediction with the
monstrance.5 While it is contrary to its decrees'5 that the Blessed
Sacrament should be brought from the church except in solemn
procession or for the communion of the sick, the Sacred Con
gregation has reluctantly admitted particular customs by which
Benediction was given outside the church. For example, in
particular cases toleration has been granted to the practice of
‘S.R.C. 3308.
’S.R.C. 3558.
’S.R.C. 3713.
4 Vide Bouscarcn, Canon Law Digest, i, p. 602.
4 Bouscarcn, loc. cit.
1927, p. 161.
4 E.g. 610.
1922, p. 529.
140
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
blessing the people of a house or city on the occasion of bringing
the Blessed Sacrament to the sick,*
1 and in the course of the
Corpus Christi procession Benediction may be given once or
twice at outdoor altars, if such is the established custom.2 The
rubrics of the Ritual3 forbid that the Blessed Sacrament be
brought to the sick merely for the purposes of adoration or
devotion or under any such pretext. An early decree of the
Sacred Congregation insists that at the conclusion of a solemn
procession Benediction must be given from the altar of the
church and may not be given from the porch.4
It is clear, therefore, that while Benediction with the Blessed
Sacrament should be given only in a church or oratory where
the Blessed Sacrament is reserved, at least temporarily, contrary'
customs have, nevertheless, been admitted. The Sacred Con
gregation has never expressly recognized a custom by' which the
Blessed Sacrament is brought to an outside altar merely for the
purpose of Benediction, without a solemn procession, but the
practice has been accepted and approved by' local authorities
on certain special occasions, such as Eucharistic Congresses. In
the case under discussion it would certainly be within the
competence of the local Ordinary to permit Benediction in the
study' hall per modum actus. When being brought from the
oratory to the study-hall the Blessed Sacrament is not brought
beyond the precincts of the religious house the Ordinary may,
therefore, in his prudent judgment more easily decide that there
arc, on some special occasion, sufficient reasons to justify the
permission.
RUBRICS OF GENUFLECTIONS AT BENEDICTION
SERVICE AND FOR CUSTODY OF THE BLESSED
SACRAMENT
Regarding Benediction and the custody of the Blessed Sacrament,
what arc the rubrics on the following points: (1) Genuflections:
When the lunette is contained in a closed pyx is it necessary to genu
flect twice before one puts it into the monstrance, i.e. on opening
the tabernacle and again on uncovering the pyx? (2) Where the entrance
door to a convent oratory in which the Blessed Sacrament is reserved
gives onto a corridor and is in part glass should persons passing along
the corridor genuflect in front of the closed door?
Cappellanus.
1 2690, 3059 ad 18.
» 3086 ad 4.
’ Rit. Rom., tit. iv, cap. iv, n. 5.
* 1784.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
141
Rubrical authorities are almost unanimous in holding
that the celebrant at Benediction should not make more than
two genuflections when he takes the lunette from the tabernacle
and places it in the monstrance ; it makes no difference whether
the lunette is or is not encased in a closed custodia. In expres
sing this opinion, Dr. Long,1 for example, relies on an argument
from the rubrics of the Rituale Romanum (tit. v. cap. ii) which
prescribe only two genuflections when the priest returns to the
altar to replace the ciborium after the distribution of Holy
Communion. Amongst the few rubricists who directed that
three genuflections should be made, Van der Stappen and
Gallcwaert were noteworthy, but now Canon Crogaert who, in
1946, brought Van der Stappen’s Caeremoniale up to date, says :
[Celebrans] aperit ostium Tabernaculi, ct genu dextrum flectit ; tum
extrahit Custodiam, et deponit super Corporale, ac Tabernaculum claudit
. . . Deinde aperit Custodiam ct (absque gcnuflcxioncj lunulam cum SS.
Hostia accipit et collocat in sphaeram Ostensorii . . .
Clearly the better opinion is that there should be only two
genuflections ; and, similarly, after the Benediction, when the
lunette is put back into the custodia and replaced in the taber
nacle, there should be only two genuflections.
Decree N. 877 of the Sacred Congregation of Rites directs :
Semper cl a quocumque coram SS. Eucharistiae Sacramento esse genu(lectcndum ;
and Decree N. 3402 :
Genuflectcrc debent unico genu etiam mulieres, quoties transeunt ante
SSinuni. Sacramentum in tabernaculo reconditum.
Clearly the genuflection is prescribed for all persons who come
into the presence of the Blessed Sacrament or who pass in front
of a tabernacle in which the Blessed Sacrament is reserved.
The regulation, therefore, would not apply to persons passing
along a corridor outside the chapel ; such people arc not, by
the common estimation of men or by any legal test, in the
presence of the Blessed Sacrament although they may be able
to see the tabernacle through the glass door or partition. If the
door is open then persons passing the entrance can be considered
as passing the tabernacle and so should genuflect ; when the
door is closed there docs not seem to be any obligation on them
to do so and a minor reverence, c.g., a bow or, in the case of
men, to uncover, seems to be a more suitable expression of
respect. It was not until 1570 and the Missal of Pope Pius V
that genuflecting to the Blessed Sacrament was formally recog
nized and prescribed in the rubrics ; it was probably adopted
1 Z. E. Record, October and December 1933.
142
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
from court etiquette and in ecclesiastical functions was first used
as a mark of reverence to the bishop ‘ in signum jurisdictionis.’
Ordo Romanus XIV directs as an act of adoration of the
Blessed Sacrament at the elevation of the Host and Chalice at
Mass that the celebrant bow his head only. The genuflection
is nowadays an act of adoration and an expression of one’s
faith in the Real Presence and as such can have a true meaning
and value only when one is actually in the presence of the
Blessed Sacrament. The Raccolta1 makes this distinction
between the genuflections to be made before the tabernacle and
the marks of respect to be paid by those who pass the church :
(a) Fidelibus, qui obsequium debitae genuilexionis erga Ssmum. Eucharis
tiae Sacramentum in tabernaculo reconditum rite praestiterint, recitantes
hanc vel similem ejaculatoriam precem : Jesus, my God, I adore You present
in the Sacrament of Your love, conceditur : Indulgentia trecentorum dierum ;
...(c) si vero, ecclesiam vel oratorium ubi sanctissimum Sacramentum
asservatur praetereuntes, aliquod externum obsequium praestiterint : Indul
gentia trecentorum dierum.
PREACHING DURING THE HOLY HOUR
Would it be true to say that a Holy Hour which is not clearly in
honour of, and in which reference is not made to the Passion of Our
Divine Lord, is wrongly conducted? In conducting the Holy Hour
may a priest preach twice for periods of about twelve or fifteen
minutes? If such sermons or sermonettes are lawful, must the central
theme always be the Blessed Sacrament, if the monstrance is to
remain unveiled?
Predicator.
After the institution of the Feast of Corpus Christi by Pope
Urban IV2 in 1264 the external cult of the Blessed Sacrament
grew apace. The customs of holding processions in honour of
the Blessed Sacrament, of having solemn Exposition—which later
developed into the Benediction Service—and of visiting churches
in order to adore the Blessed Sacrament, were introduced3 and
developed, so that the Real Presence of Our Divine Lord in
the Blessed Sacrament has become the central dogma of the
Church’s devotional life. Pope Urban IV and later Popes
1 Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, n. 146.
’ ** In memoriam institutionis adorabilis Sacramenti SS. Eucharistiae a
Divino nostro Redemptore Jesu Christo factae ante suam dolorissimam
Passionem.’ (Constit. Transiturus, 11 th August, 1264).
* Some mode of Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament in processions, etc.,
was known before the time of Urban IV. but not in such a manner that the
Sacred Host could actually be seen. Vide Catalanus, Coer. Episcop, ii, xxiii.
Gardcllini : Comm, in Instructionem Clcmcnlinam, v. 9.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
143
Martin V and Eugene IV granted indulgences to those who
assisted at the Procession of the Blessed Sacrament or at the
Divine Oilice on the Feast of Corpus Christi,1 but the custom of
praying for an hour in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament
was not recognized by any grant of indulgence until the six
teenth century. When the devotion of the Forty Hours Prayer
was introduced into Rome, Pope Clement VIII, in a.d. 1592,
granted an indulgence to all the faithful who would during this
devotion spend an hour in prayer before the Blessed Sacrament.2
Subsequently, however, Pope Paul V3 altered this concession
to an indulgence which could be gained by all who, after
receiving the Sacraments, visited a church where the Blessed
Sacrament was exposed for the Forty Hours Prayer and there
‘ pro eo temporis spatio quod illis commodum fuerit,’ prayed
for peace, for the extirpation of heresy, and for the exaltation
of the Church. Similar indulgences were attached to visits to
the Blessed Sacrament exposed during Carnival time.
On 14th February, 1815, Pope Pius VII granted a plenary
indulgence to be gained under the usual conditions by the
faithful who, on Holy Thursday or on the Feast of Corpus
Christi spent an hour in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament
in commemoration of the institution of this Sacrament. A
partial indulgence of three hundred days could be gained by
the performance of the same pious practice on any Thursday
throughout the year.1 Finally Pope Pius XI, on 21st March,
1933, conceded a plenary indulgence under the usual con
ditions to all who participate in the ‘ Holy Hour ’ devotion
before the Blessed Sacrament on any day of the year ; those
who do not fulfil the other conditions of reception of the sacra
ments and prayers for the Pope’s intentions may gain a partial
indulgence of ten years by their practice of this devotion whether
in public or in private.5
In the decree of indulgence given by Pope Pius XI which is
now incorporated in the official collection, Enchiridion Indulgenti
*
arum
explicit reference is made to the relation of the devotion
of the Holy Hour to the Passion of Our Divine Lord.
lam diu investum est largiusquc in Christianum populum inductum piud
illud precandi genus, quod vulgo * Horam Sanctam ’ vocant, quodque eo
potissimum spectat, ut Icsu Christi Passionem ct Mortem in fidelium animos
1 Vide Collectio Indulgentiarum—Mocchegiani, n. 284.
’Loc cit., §291.
• Iz>c. cit., § 292 in a.d. 1606.
‘ Loc. cit. Vide Bcringcr, Les Indulgences (1924), i, p. 350.
'A.A.S., 1933, p. 171.
•N. 168.
144
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
revocet et ad flagrantissimum cius amorem, quo ductus divinam Eucharistiam
suae Passionis memoriam instituit, meditandum colcndumque ita eos excitet,
ut sua cctcrorumque hominum admissa cluant atque expient.1
It is not here implied that in order to gain the indulgence there
must be, when the Holy Hour is conducted publicly, an explicit
reference to the Passion, nor does the history of the devotion
justify such a conclusion. The practice of the hour of adoration
once each month is prescribed for the members of many pious
associations and confraternities, which have for their object the
promotion of devotion to the Blessed Sacrament. In particular
for members of the Arch-confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament,
it is recommended that in their Holy Hour they follow the
method of recalling the four purposes of sacrifice, i.e., that the
hour be divided into four periods for the offering of prayers of
adoration, thanksgiving, reparation and petition. Meditations
on the Passion would very naturally suggest themselves, but it
would scarcely be true to say that without such explicit references
the hour of adoration is not properly conducted.1
2 The essential
relationship of the Eucharist to the Passion of Our Divine Lord
is succinctly expressed in the prayer of the Blessed Sacrament :
Deus qui nobis sub Sacramento mirabili memoriam Passionis reliquisiti. . ..
'Fhe custom of preaching short sermons during the exposition
is quite lawful, and has become the most commonly-observed
method for the conduct of the Holy Hour in public. The
purpose of such ferverinos must always be to direct the devotion
of the faithful to the Blessed Sacrament, and care must be taken
that their attention is not distracted from the Real Presence.
It follows, therefore, that if the monstrance is to remain unveiled
during the sermon, the central theme must be the Blessed
Sacrament.3 Also in these circumstances the sermons should
not be prolonged. Admittedly, there is no general prohibition
»
1 A.A.S., loc. cit.
- 1 he devotion in honour of the Blessed Sacrament must not be confused
with the practice of the * Holy Hour,’ at midnight on Thursdays in commemo
ration of the Passion and, in particular, of the Agony in Gethsemane. This
latter practice takes its origin from a revelation made to St. Margaret Mary
Alacoquc, and is promoted chiefly by the Arch-confraternity of the Holy
Hour which was founded at Paray-le-Monial in 1829. The weekly * Holy
Hour ’ to which members of this confraternity bind themselves need not be
spent in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament, but is an hour spent during
the night Thursday-Friday in prayer and meditation on the Passion. (Vide
Beringcr, op. cit. ii, n. 144; i, p. 350.)
3 S.R.C. 3728 ad 2, * Expositionis SSmi Sacramenti et coram Eo Missam
celebrandi (occasione Novemdialis) consuetudo, in qua fit post Evangelium
praedicatio Verbi Dei, tolerari potest ; apposito tamen velamine ante
SSmum Sacramentum cum habetur concio.’ (Montis Regalis, 10th May,
1890.)
• L
d/î.
TUE BLESSED SACRAMENT
145
against preaching before the Blessed Sacrament exposed, apart
from the prescription found in the Clementine Instruction for
the ordering of the Forty Hours Prayer in Rome,1 nor has the
Sacred Congregation of Rites necessarily forbidden a sermon
on the Holy Eucharist while the monstrance is unveiled,12 but
it is the more common opinion amongst rubricists that when a
full sermon is preached even on this subject, the Blessed Sacra
ment should be veiled.3 The reasons arc the practical difficulties
that, on the one hand the people should not be seated for a
long period in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament exposed,
and on the other hand they should not be expected to remain
kneeling throughout the time of a full sermon. Beyond these
general considerations, no strict rule can be stated for regulating
precisely the duration of the sermonettes which may be deemed
permissible. Certainly if the monstrance is to remain unveiled,
the preaching should be concerned directly with devotion to
the Holy Eucharist.
The following discussion of the question by Gardellini may
provide useful guidance :
. . . nulla notanda censura est consuetudo habendi conciones, quae
magis congruunt circumstantiis, Sacramento velamine tecto et sedente
populo : sed nullatenus sedere populo permittendum esset, si conciones
haberentur coram Sacramento nullo velamine tecto. /Vtque en alia ratio,
propter quam in Oratione Quadraginta Horarum vel nullae omnino habendae
conciones, vel quam brevissimae, quibus excitetur circumstantium devotio
ad Sacramenti venerationem. Non enim, ea durante, licet ante Thronum
veluin apponere, quo Sacramentum abscondatur aspectus ; et vetitum est
populo scannis aut sedibus uti, quum omnes ante conspectum Domini genuflcxi manere debeant. Quamobrem si huiusmodi permittantur colloquia,
hacc respondere debent cum rcali Eucharistiae praesentiae, tum religioni
adstantium adorationi etiam corporis compositione incumbentium : sed
ctiain consulendum est aliquorum infirmatati ne prolixa nimis Condonatorum
oratione diu permanere genullexi cogantur.4
PRAYERS IN THE VERNACULAR BEFORE THE
BLESSED SACRAMENT
(1) Is it permissible to recite prayers in the vernacular from
approved prayer books during private and public exposition of the
Most Blessed Sacrament?
(2) If so, by approved prayer books is one to understand not
merely prayer books approved by one’s own Ordinary but those
1 Section xxxii.
«3728—Vide I. E. Record, 1937, p. 432 and p. 504.
* E.g. Fortcscue-O’Conncll, p. 265 ; Wapelhorst, Compendium Sacrae
Liturgiae ; Gasparri, De Sacra Eucharisla, ii, § 1045; Van dcr Stappcn, De
Sacra Liturgia, iv, § 183.
4 Gardellini, S.R.C., vol. iv, p. 121.
146
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
having the approval of any Ordinary? Do the same rules apply to
approved leaflets, the Benedictionale, etc.? During the Novena to
the Holy Ghost, for example, may the Veni Creator or the Veni Sancte
Spiritus be recited in Latin or the vernacular during exposition?
(3) When the Rosary has been offered for a departed soul may the
De Profundis be also added (in Latin or vernacular) during exposi
tion?
Joannes.
(1) Yes. When the Blessed Sacrament has been exposed
and before the Tantum ergo Sacramentum is chanted, any approved
prayers either in honour of Our Lord or in honour of the Blessed
Virgin Mary or of the Saints may be recited in the vernacular.1
(2) ‘Approved ’ prayers are those which have been approved
either by the Holy Sec or by one’s own Ordinary.1
2 In England,
for example, the Manual of Prayers has been approved by all
the bishops, who have also approved of the prayers found in
the collection entitled Garden of the Soul.34 In Ireland the
book most commonly used at the Benediction sendee is the
Benediclionale. From this compilation one may recite at any
time the prayers formally approved by the Holy See ; other
prayers which it contains should be used only in accordance
with the direction or permission of the Ordinary. It contains
properly authenticated versions of the prayers but is not an
authoritative collection. Hence only those prayers which have
the formal approbation of the Holy See or of the bishops may be
used without further reference to the Ordinary. Vernacular
prayers may not be recited immediately before the actual
Benediction, i.e. after the Tantum ergo Sacramentum and the prayer
of the Blessed Sacrament have been chanted.1
Similarly, the hymns which arc sung in the presence of the
Blessed Sacrament must have the episcopal approval.5 Appro
bation cannot be given for the singing of liturgical chants in
the vernacular.® The Veni Creator and the Veni Sancte Spiritus
are liturgical texts. Hence, if they arc sung, they must be
chanted in Latin, not in the vernacular. It docs not seem,
1 S.R.C. 3157, 3496, 3537, etc.
’Canon 1259.
• Vide Fortcscue-O’Conncll, Ceremonies of the Roman Rite (Vllth cd.),
pp. 230, 238.
• S.R.C. 530 (23rd March, 1881).
4 Cf. Clergy Review, 1942, p. 192. The following hymns in the vernacular
have received episcopal approval in England for use during Exposition:
‘Jesus my Lord, my God, my AH’; ‘ Sweet Sacrament Divine * ; ‘ Soul of
my Saviour ’ ; * O Bread of Heaven,’ ; ‘ Jesus, the only Thought of Thee * :
‘ O Godhead hid, Devoutly I adore Thee.’
• S.R.C. 3537.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
147
however, that there is a strict prohibition against reciting in the
vernacular translations of such texts.*
1 Amongst the decrees of
the Sacred Congregation of Rites, n. 3157 (31st August, 1867)
allows the recitation of approved prayers in the vernacular
during Exposition ; n. 3530 (23rd March, 1881) forbids their
recitation immediately before the Benediction and directs that
any antiphons or litanies which are chanted must precede the
Tantum ergo ; n. 3537 (27th February, 1882) permits the chanting
of vernacular hymns
dummodo non agatur de hymnis Te Deum el aliis quibuscumque liturgicis
precibus, quae nonnisi latina lingua decantari debent.
Hence, Decree η. 4268 (27th May, 1911) which in reply to the
question whether Litanies, Pater Noster or Salve Regina may be
chanted or read in the vernacular during Exposition refers back
to numbers 3157 and 3530, but docs not mention n. 3537, may
be interpreted as not prohibiting the recitation of translations of
liturgical prayers. Only the chanting of such texts in the
vernacular is expressly forbidden.2 While this interpretation is
admissible it should, however, be noted that in the first part
of the reply to the questions submitted on 27th February, 1882
(n. 3537) the Sacred Congregation refused to admit the practice
of reciting vernacular hymns after Mass. The question had been
asked :
Num liceat Sacerdoti celebranti, ante vel post expletum Missae Sacrificium,
publice recitare preces vel hymnos in lingua vernacula, v.g. Novemdiales
B. Mariae Virginis vel alicuius Sancti, coram SSmo Sacramento publice
exposito ?
The reply was :
Affirmative, quoad preces tantum.
This reply, nevertheless, does not necessarily prohibit the
practice of reciting approved3 translations of liturgical hymns
during Exposition which has no connection with Mass or with
any other liturgical function.
(3) Apart from those prescribed in liturgical functions (e.g.
versiclcs, etc., in the Divine Office or in the conclusion of the
Forty Hours’ Prayer), special prayers for the dead are not
permitted during Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament ; hence,
if it is desired to recite the De Profundis after the Rosary, this
should be done before the Blessed Sacrament is exposed. The
xVide Vcrmeersch, Periodica, vi, p. 62.
'S.R.C. 3537.
tai
1 Inaccurate translations of the liturgical prayers must not be used. For
example, one often hears an English version of the prayer to die Holy Spirit
in which the phrase recta sapere is mistranslated ’ truly wise.’
148
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Sacred Congregation has allowed such prayers coram Sanctissimo
only where the practice was already an established custom
(Decree n. 2856—‘ Praxim seu consuetudinem, quatenus revera
existât tolerari posse ccnsuit.’).1 A subsequent decree, however,
has declared that where no such custom existed the practice
of reciting, during Exposition, the Miserere with the conclusion
Requiem aeternam and prayer Fidelium Deusis not to be introduced.2
APPROVAL FOR PRAYERS AND HYMNS TO BE USED
AT THE HOLY HOUR
Is it necessary that in conducting a Holy Hour one make use only
of prayers and hymns which have been approved by one’s own
Ordinary? Does it not suffice that the prayers, etc., are found in
booklets which have the approval of other Ordinaries? Are the
words ‘ episcopal approval ’ and ‘ approval by one’s own Ordinary ’
to be understood in the strict sense?
Joannes Π.
Amongst several decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites
governing the use of vernacular prayers and hymns in the
presence of the Blessed Sacrament exposed, the following may
be noted as being most closely relevant to the present question.
(1) N. 3157 (31st August, 1867) :
Quaeritur : An liceat adhibere publicam quarumdam precum recitationem
vulgari sermone conscriptarum coram Sanctissimo Sacramento exposito ?
R. Affirmative ; dummodo agatur de precibus approbatis.
(2) N. 3496 (21st June, 1879) :
Cantica in vernaculo idiomate in functionibus et Officiis liturgicis solemnibus non esse toleranda, sed omnino prohibenda ; extra functiones liturgicas
senetur consuetudo.
(3) N. 3537 (27 th February, 1882) :
I
Num liceat generaliter ut chorus musicorum (idest Cantores) coram SSmo
Sacramento solemniter exposito decantet hymnos in lingua vernacula?
R. Posse ; dummodo non agatur de hymnis Te Deum et aliis quibuscumque
liturgicis precibus, quae non nisi latina lingua decantari debent.
I···
That the required approval for prayers, etc., must come from
the local Ordinary is clear from the general principle stated in
canon 1259—
t
7Ί
*
11
Orationes et pietatis exercitia ne permittantur in ecclesiis vel oratoriis sine
revisione et expressa Ordinarii loci licentia, qui in casibus difficilioribus rem
totam Sedi Apostolicae subiiciat.
The most reasonable and generally accepted interpretation
of this canon, however, is that it is applicable only when there
1 S.R.C., Fiorentina, 18th February, 1843.
‘S.R.C., 3616 (12th August, 1844).
149
TUE BLESSED SACRAMENT
is question of the introduction of new prayers or of pious
exercises not yet established by common usage.1 Provided
that they do not pertain to novel devotions and provided, too,
that their use in his diocese has not been forbidden by the local
Ordinary, prayers and hymns suitable for the Holy Hour
devotion may be used if they have been approved by any com
petent ecclesiastical authority.
Hence the prayers found in normally approved handbooks
may be used ; moreover, many of these prayers are translations
of indulgenced prayers. All indulgcnccd prayers have been
formally approved by the Holy See.2 That approval and the
indulgences remain attached to the translations of such prayers
into any language provided that the accuracy of the translation
is vouched for cither by a declaration of the Sacred Penitentiary
or by authentication from any Ordinary of a place where the
language of the translation is the vernacular.3 Hence, when
conducting the Holy Hour devotion, priests may draw such
indulgenced or other customary prayers from commonly used
compilations or booklets which have been properly authenti
cated and approved by any Ordinary.
RINGING THE BELL AT BENEDICTION
Are there any rules concerning the ringing of the bell at Bene
diction ?
C APPELLANTS.
There arc
Benediction.
custom alone
bell is to be
suggests :
no rules concerning the ringing of the bell at
Its use is entirely a matter of custom, and local
can provide guidance on the manner in which the
rung.
De Amicis in his Caeremoniale Parochorum
In multis locis campanula pulsatur dum benedictio impertitur ; usus
servari potest. In hoc casu consulimus duobus temporibus fieri, scilicet in
principio et statim post benedictionem aut ter uti ad elevationem in missa.
*
1 Vcrmccrsch, Epitome luris Canonici (1938), ii, 580; Coronata, Institutiones
hiris Canonici (1931), ii, 834, footnote, p. 155: * Torrubiano Ripoli docet
sufficere quod preces sint approbatae a qualibet autoritate ecclesiastica,
salvo semper iurc Ordinario loci in sua diocesi determinatas preces prohibendi.
Quae opinio probatis videtur, licet in canone sermo sit de Ordinario loci
non simpliciter de Ordinario; Wernz-Vidal, Ius Canonicum (1934), iv, De
Rebus, 406 : ‘ Textus canticarum ecclesiasticarum nequaquam arbitrarie
sunt eligendi, sed doctrinae catholicae sint conformes atque ritui sacrae
functionis sive devotionis, cui destinantur, nccessc est fideliter respondeant,
fideles ad devotionem excitent atque digni sint domo Dei. In functionibus
extraliturgicis textus cantionum, quae lingua vulgari permittuntur, desu
mendi sint ex piis riteque probatis catholicorum libris vel ad tramites turis
particularis sint approbati.
* Enchiridion Indulgentiarum (1952).
’Canon 934.
‘
« P. 350.
150
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
WHY INCENSE IS NOT BLESSED AT BENEDICTION
Why must the blessing of the incense be omitted before one
incenses the Blessed Sacrament?
Cappellanus.
Incense is not blessed when the Blessed Sacrament alone is
incensed, because the purpose of this incensation is different
from our purpose in incensing human persons and objects.
Incense is offered in honour of the Blessed Sacrament as an act
of adoration. The inccnsations of material objects such as the
altar, the crucifix, the book of the Gospels, the oblations at
Mass, candles, etc., which are being solemnly blessed, are meant
not only to honour these things used in the liturgy but especially
to signify their consecration and purification rendering them fit
to be used in the divine service. Similarly, the ministers and
congregation arc honoured in different degrees by the use of
incense at Mass in order that they may be purified from the
slightest stain of sin and thereby made less unworthy to offer
the sacrifice. The blessed incense is then used as a sacramental
just as is Holy Water. These ideas were fully expressed in a
tenth-century blessing for incense :
Aeternam ac justissimam pietatem deprecamur, Domine ... ut bene
dicere digneris haec timiamata vel incensi speciem ... ita ut ubicumque
fumus eius pervenerit extricetur ct effugetur omne genus demoniorum . . .
Sit nobis odor consolationis, suavitatis et gratiae, ut fumo isto effugetur omne
fantasma mentis ct corporis, ut simus Pauli apostoli voce bonus odor
Deo. ...1
THE DIVINE PRAISES
What is the origin of the Divine Praises? Why are they recited at
the conclusion of Benediction?
P.P.
The Divine Praises have been commonly ascribed to Father
Louis Felici who is said to have composed them about 1797.2
Father Felici was a Jesuit, but during the years while the
Society remained suppressed he acted as chaplain to mariners
for whom he founded a sodality at Rome. He also edited small
1 Apud D.A.C.L. Art. ‘Encens.’ Gavantus, Thesaurus Rituum^ Pars. II,
Tit. VII: ‘ incensantur omnes quia Christus communicat aliis odorem
suum. (S. Thomas) ... et quia, quae fecit Sacerdos pertinent ad omnes.
(Durand. Cap. 31.) Item thurificatio représentât diffusionem gratiarum
spiritualium in capite et ab co ad membra.’
1 Vide Dom Mauri, O.S.B., in Efihem. Lit. (1890), pp. 481 et scq. ; Father
Thurston in The Month for 1918, pp. 510-13.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
151
books of devotion, and in one of these, published about 1797,
the Divine Praises in their original form were given as an act
of reparation for blasphemy. It is not clear whether Father
Felici was himself responsible for the compilation or whether
he was merely publishing an older prayer. The Divine Praises
were meant as reparation for the common blasphemies of the
mariners, and since such people do not frequently blaspheme
the Holy Spirit, no mention is made of the Third Person of the
Holy Trinity. In 1847 Pope Pius IX specially commended
the prayer, and consequently the Cardinal-Vicar of Rome
ordered that it should be recited after High Mass and the last
Mass in all churches of the city on Sundays and Holydays and
after Benediction. The ejaculation in honour of the Imma
culate Conception appeared about 18591, and the phrase
Blessed be His most Sacred Heart was approved by Pope Leo XIII
in 1897. The praise of St. Joseph was at first a local addition
used in many places ; for example, it was used in Siena in the
last century, and was finally added to the Divine Praises by
Pope Benedict XV in 1921.1
2 Although the Divine Praises were
originally compiled by private authority, they have been
accepted and indulgcnccd by the Church and without an
apostolic induit further additions could not now be made to
them.3
The recitation of the Divine Praises at the conclusion of
Benediction is not prescribed ; the obligation arises entirely
from the local custom. In 1871, the Sacred Congregation of
Rites4* permitted the insertion of these invocations cither in
Latin or in the vernacular immediately before the actual bles
sing with the Blessed Sacrament or immediately after the
blessing. The first custom, i.e. the reciting of the praises imme
diately after the prayer Deus qui nobis, is observed in some
places, c.g. in Belgium.6 By permitting this custom the Sacred
Congregation has made a special exception in favour of the
Divine Praises ; no other prayers may be inserted between the
prayer of the Blessed Sacrament and the actual blessing. The
Roman custom and the custom followed in these countries is to
recite the Divine Praises after the blessing. The indulgences
now attached to the recitation are :β (λ) an indulgence of three
1 It was separately indulgcnced in 1878.
’23rd February, 1921.
* Ephern. Lit., 1921, p. 98. 1949, p. 230 ct seq.
43237.
4 Van der Slappcn-Crogacrt, Caeremoniale II, p. 444.
* Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, n. 696.
152
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
years ; (b) an indulgence of five years if these prayers are said
publicly ; (c) a plenary indulgence under the usual conditions
if these Praises arc said daily for a month.
CORRECT PRONUNCIATION OF ‘ BLESSED ’
What is the correct pronunciation of the word ‘ Blessed ’ in
the Divine Praises and in the Hail Mary?
Capellanus.
This question has been discussed more than once and
would seem to be insoluble.1 While authoritative dic
tionaries favour the pronunciation ‘ blest ’ on the other hand
received practice justifies the alternative ‘ blessed.’ It does
not help to attempt a distinction between the adjective
and the past participle ; in cither case both pronunciations are
permissible. Although it will not bring this vexed question
nearer to a solution we will express a preference for the mono
syllabic ‘ blest ’ in the Divine Praises and the Hail Mary ; the
more ‘ impressive ’ use of ‘ blessed ’ seems rather outmoded.
IS IT LAWFUL TO PLACE A SMALL HOST IN THE
MONSTRANCE FOR SOLEMN BENEDICTION?
Recently on a first Friday when I had celebrated the privileged
Votive Mass of the Sacred Heart in anticipation of Benediction, I
found that no large Host had been consecrated for the lunette. Was
it correct to place a small Host in the monstrance and proceed to
give Benediction in the ordinary manner? Instead of doing so,
could I have given simple Benediction with the ciborium? In giving
simple Benediction, should I carry out at least one incensation of the
Blessed Sacrament?
S. M. J.
Provided that there is no danger of scandal, it would not be
unlawful to place a small Host in the monstrance for Benedic
tion. At least it would not be contrary to any explicit rubric,
but the procedure is by no means to be recommended. Obvi
ously the purpose of solemn exposition in the monstrance is
that the faithful, while adoring the Blessed Sacrament may
actually look upon the consecrated Host. The Homan Rilual
directs that the celebrant of the Mass on the feast of Corpus
11. E. Record, 1932, p. 423, vide Oxford Dictionary.
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT
153
Christi should so place the Blessed Sacrament in the monstrance
for the procession
ut per vitrum seu crystallum, quo ipsum tabernaculum circumseptum esse
debet, exterius adorantibus appareat.1
If a small Particle is put into the monstrance, this purpose is
simply not fulfilled except for those who are in the immediate
vicinity of the sanctuary. Moreover, since the lunette will
have been constructed to hold a large Host, the procedure
irreverence.
Hence the more correct course of action would have been to
give simple Benediction with the ciborium. For this simple
Benediction immediately after Mass, it would not be necessary
for the celebrant to put off the chasuble, but he should leave
aside the maniple. Six candles must be lighting on the altar ;
the altar cross should be left in its position. The celebrant
spreads a corporal as usual, and opens the door of the tabernacle.
The ciborium may be brought forward so that it may be visible
to the worshippers, but it must not be taken out of the tabernacle
except for the actual Benediction. The use of incense is optional ;
if it is used, two incensations should take place, firstly when the
tabernacle has been opened, and again during the chanting of
the Tantum ergo.2 Hymns may be sung, but it is necessary' that
the Tantum ergo with the versicle response and prayer of the
Blessed Sacrament be chanted immediately before the Benedic
tion.3 For the Benediction the celebrant must put on the
humeral veil. When the blessing has been given, the ciborium
should be replaced directly in the tabernacle ; the doors of
the tabernacle may remain open while the Divine Praises are
being recited and a concluding hymn chanted. Such a simple
Benediction may certainly be given on any day for a just cause,
even without the permission of the Ordinary.4
1 Rit. Rom. Tit., x, cap. v, n. 2. Cf. Reply of Code Commission. 6th March,
1927. ‘An Sub nomine expositionis publicae veniat etiam benedictio eucharistica
quae palam exposito SS. Sacramento in oslcnsorio, impertiri solet ? Affirmative.
» S.R.C. 2957, 4202. Vide O’Connell, op. cit., p. 238.
’S.R.C. 3402 ad 1. Vide Stcrcky, Manuel de Liturgie (1935), vol. ii, p. 122.
4 Canon 1274.
SECTION III
THE SACRAMENTS AND
SACRAMENTALS
CONDITIONAL BAPTISM OF AN ADULT CONVERT
FROM HERESY
When baptism is administered privately and sub conditione to an
adult convert from heresy should all the ceremonies be omitted? In
particular, is there not an obligation to carry out the ceremonies
following on the actual baptism, i.e., the anointing with chrism, and
the presenting of the white garment and of the lighted candle?
Moot Point.
Canon 755, § 2, now empowers the local Ordinary to allow,
for a grave and reasonable cause, that the rite for infant baptism
be used in the baptism of adults. Furthermore, according to
canon 759, §2, the Ordinary may allow private baptism when
the sacrament is conferred conditionally on an adult convert
from heresy. Private baptism in this case is conferred without
any ceremonies. There docs not seem to be any basis for the
suggestion that it should comprise the final ceremonies of the
Ritual ; neither in the Roman Ritual nor in the Code of Canon
Law is there to be found justification for any such distinction
between the ceremonies which precede and those which come
after the actual baptism.1
When baptism is administered with all the rites and cere
monies prescribed by the Ritual it is called ‘ solemn baptism ’ ;
if any of these rites is omitted then it is ‘ private baptism.’2
Canon 759, § 1, described a particular form of private baptism—
that administered to an infant in danger of death—and it pre
scribes that, if the minister be a priest or deacon, he should,
omitting all the preparatory ceremonies, proceed immediately
to the actual baptism ; after that, if there is time, he should
perform the concluding ceremonies. The Roman Ritual
describes fully how the minister should act in such cases of
necessity.3 Clearly, the only reason for omitting the earlier
' V’dc λ ermcerseh, Epitome luris Canonici, lib. ii, 41 ; Cappello, De Sacramentis, lib. n,.cap. in, I75 . O’Kane-Fallon. Rubrics of the Roman Ritual, vii.
* Canon 737 ; Rit. Rom., tit. ii, cap. i, n. 3.
1 Rit. Rom., tit. u, cap. ii, n. 29.
154
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
155
ceremonies is that there is danger that the subject may die before
the rite of baptism is completed, and hence the minister is
instructed to confer at once the essential sacrament. He should
then add the final ceremonies, and later the other ceremonies
can be supplied. Usually these ceremonies will be postponed
until the subject has been restored to normal health. * Si
supervixerit, suppleantur alii ritus omissi.’1 Certain decisions
of the Sacred Congregation of Rites explicitly confirm the view
that the only reason why the first ceremonies are omitted,
although the final ceremonies arc to be performed, is that there
would be danger in the delay.12 The ceremonies are not to be
considered as an appendix to, but rather as an integral part of,
the baptismal rite and, therefore, may be omitted only in so
far as the necessity demands.3 An Instruction of the Sacra
Congregatio de Propaganda Fide emphasizes the obligation
of performing the ceremonies as far as possible lest baptized
children be deprived of the great spiritual fruits
quae ex adhibitis super cos sacris caeremoniis in eorum animabus ex Ecclesiae
institutis multiplices derivantur.4
The ceremonies which precede the actual baptism arc no less
important than those subsequent to it.
If the Ordinary allows the conditional baptism of an adult
convert from heresy to be performed privately, then the dis
pensation applies to all the ceremonies. There is no reason
for restricting it only to the ceremonies prior to the actual
baptism. These ceremonies arc omitted not because there is
danger in delaying the actual administration of the sacrament,
but by virtue of the dispensation which applies equally to the cere
monies subsequent to the baptism. For Ireland an induit was
granted in 1905 (and renewed in 1916 for ten years) by virtue
of which the Ordinary could permit private baptism without
ceremonies of an adult convert whose previous baptism was
doubtful.56 The induit extended to this country permission to
use the short formula already approved for use in England where
it was directed that in such cases private baptism was to be
1 Rit. Rom., loc. cit.
’S.R.C. 2607, 2743, and adnotationcs to D. 2607 in vol. iv p. 198) of the
authentic collection of the Decrees of the S.C.R. ; Cong. S. ΟίΓ.. 5th
September, 1877. A similar direction is given for the application of the short
formula in Extreme Unction ; Canon 947 : Rit. Rom., tit. v, cap. i. n. 12.
’ Rit. Rom., lit. ii, cap. ii, n. 29, ‘ ne pereat antequam baptismus perficiatur.'
Cong. S. Off., 5th September, 1877 (Fontes iv, 1053) ; Benedict XIV,
Const. Omnium sollicitudinum (Fontes i, 838) ; O’Kane-I'allon, cap. vii.
‘In 1775, Fontes iv, 1053.
6 Mqynooth Statutes (1900), Appendix, p. 14.
156
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
conferred omnino absque caeremoniis.1 This induit was not renewed
in 1926 because it was no longer necessary. The faculties now
granted in the general law in the Code of Canon Law arc
sufficient.1
2 It is sometimes prescribed that this conditional
private baptism is to be administered with lustral water and
without any ceremonies. The use of lustral water is not pre
scribed in the general law ; probably there is not a grave
obligation to observe this particular direction.34
It should be noted that when an adult convert is baptized
absolutely or when the infant children of non-Catholic parents
arc baptized conditionally, all the ceremonies prescribed by
the Roman Ritual are to be observed fully.
RUBRICS OF THE CEREMONY OF RECEPTION OF
A CONVERT
In the rite for the conditional Baptism of an adult convert the
Rituale directs : ‘ Sacerdos aquam ter infundit, etc.’ Should baptismal
water be used, if it is conveniently obtainable, or failing that, should
holy water be used in preference to ordinary water ? Should not the
ceremony begin with the recitation of the Veni Creator ?
Sacerdos.
Canon 759, § 2 :
Extra mortis periculum baptismum privatum loci Ordinarius permittere
nequit, nisi agatur de haereticis qui in adulta aetate sub conditione baptizentur,
The only source cited for this paragraph in the Fontes of the
Code is an Instruction of the Sacred Congregation of Propa
ganda (30th August, 1775) which dealt with the private baptism
of children whose parents were unwilling to have the ceremonies
carried out in full. Missionaries were instructed to use, if
possible, consecrated water1 even when they baptized such
children at home. Again, in the case where baptism is ad
ministered in danger of death, the Ritual prescribes that, if
possible, baptismal water is to be used.
Si infans, vcl adultus aegrotus adeo graviter laboret, ut periculum immi'
neat, . . . Sacerdos omissis quae Baptismum praecedunt, cum baptizet. . . .
Si non habeatur aqua Baptismalis, et periculum impendeat, Sacerdos utatur
aqua simplici.
1 Cone. I. Westmon (1852), Decr. xvi, 8.
1 O’Kane-Fallon, cap. v, 443.
* I. E. Record. December, 1937.
4 Fontes VII, 4569 : ‘. . . ritus et caeremoniae consuetae per Rituale
praescriptae in actu collationis Baptismi adhibeantur, aqua si fieri poterit per
vos benedicta quod facile praestare poteritis.’
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
157
It would seem, therefore, that when a priest administers the
sacrament even in private baptism he should, if possible, use
baptismal water. When, with due authorization he confers
conditional baptism ‘ /nivat ini et absque ceremoniis ’ on an adult
convert, a priest should use baptismal water, if it is convenient
to do so. Probably in this case the obligation binds only sub
veniali. ‘ St. Ligouri says : “ In baptismo privato probabile est
licere uti aqua non consecrata.” It is practically certain then,
that the obligation of using consecrated water in private baptism,
is at most sub veniali, but all are agreed that it is at least laudable
to use it when it can be had.’1 Needless to say, the water used
in conferring the sacrament, although it were only common
water, should be put down the sacrarium or otherwise properly
disposed of.
There does not seem to be any established custom in Ireland
requiring that holy water be used in preference to common
water. In England, the First Synod of Westminster (1852),
in deciding that converts from Protestantism should be con
ditionally baptized, added :
Huiusmodi baptismus non fiat publice sed omnino privatim cum aqua
lustrali et absque caeremoniis.12
The use of holy water in private baptism was an established
custom in many countries on the Continent.3 The Synod of
Thurlcs (1850) had no similar statute, and Father O'Kane, in
the first edition of Noles on the Rubrics (1867), stated : ‘ In
Ireland there is no induit as far as we know, authorizing the
omission of the ceremonies of adult baptism in the case of con
verts ; or the substitution for them of those prescribed for
infants. The provincial synod of Dublin, in 1853, has the
following decree on the subject:4 “Cum acatholici sub con
ditione sunt baptizandi, ritus in rituali pro baptismate adult
orum praescripti sunt adhibendi.” ’ In 1888 the Archbishop of
Dublin circulated to the clergy of his diocese an instruction on
the baptism of adult converts in which he directed : ‘ Water
being obtained from the baptismal font, conditional baptism
is administered.'5 It was not until 1905, in response to a
petition from the Maynooth Synod of 1900, that an induit was
granted for the use in Ireland of the very short form employed
in England for the conditional baptism of adult converts.6 In
1 O’Kane-Fallon, Notes on the Rubrics, § 366.
’Decreta XVI, n. 8.
3 Vide Instructions sur le Rituel, by Bishop of Toulouse (1749), vi.
*/.’& Record, 1888, p. 852.
’Appendix to 1900 Statutes, p. 14.
158
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
none of these documents was the use of lustral water mentioned
and there docs not seem to be any reason for believing that its
use was the established custom in Ireland, nor is there now any
obligation to use it.
The ceremony for the Reception of a Convert is based on the
Instruction issued by the Holy Ollice on 20th July, 1859. Rubri
cists have added the necessary rubrical directions and the rite
should be carried out as it is arranged in properly approved
rituals. In England the form inserted in the Ordo Administrandi
in 1915 begins with the chanting or recitation of the Veni Creator
and concludes with the Te Deum and the priest imparts his
blessing to those present. In Ireland two arrangements are
approved ; one follows closely the English ceremony with
Veni Creator and Te Deum, the other is a shorter rite which omits
these hymns. The priest may choose either version of the rite
and may, therefore, according to the Ritual*1 he uses, insert or
omit the Veni Creator and Te Deum.
OHMA
Λ NEW NAME IN CONFIRMATION
When, in obedience to the recent Decree on the Sacrament of
Confirmation, a parish priest confirms a person who is in danger of
death should he impose a new ‘ Confirmation ’ name? Also, the
Ritual directs that before he proceeds to administer the Sacrament the
priest should explain to those present se vero collaturum esse illam
jure per S. Sedem delegato. Is it still necessary to observe this rubric
when the priest acts, not in virtue of a special induit, but in accord
ance with the new Decree?
Parochus.
The rubrics of the Sacrament of Confirmation do not prescribe
that a new name is to be imposed upon the subject, but the
custom of doing so has been formally recognized by the Sacred
Congregation of Rites. A Decree published in 17492 declared
that a person who is being confirmed may request that a new
name may be added to his baptismal name when the bishop
says the form JV. signo te signo Crucis, etc. Rubricists recommend
that the bishop should follow this custom especially if the name
conferred in Baptism was not a Christian name.3 Obviously
the practice need only be observed when the person receiving
1 Vide Rituale, published by Μ. H. Gill, 1945 ; and Appendix ad Usum
Cleri Hiberniae, published by Dessain, 1950.
’2404, ad VII.
1 Vide Nabuco, Pontificalis Romani Expositio, tom. i, p. 44 ; De Amicis
Caeremoniale Parochorum (1948), pp. 488, 581.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
159
the sacrament has reached the use of reason and can choose
the name for himself. A priest who administers the sacrament
may undoubtedly impose a new name if the subject desires it.
When a newly-baptized infant in danger of death is confirmed,
only the baptismal name need be used.
The recent instruction requires that a priest, before he pro
ceeds to administer the sacrament, should explain to all those
present that the ordinary minister of this sacrament is the
bishop and that he is now about to confer it by virtue of dele
gation from the Holy See.1
EXTRAORDINARY MINISTERS OF THE
SACRAMENT OF CONFIRMATION
IN DANGER OF DEATH
The Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments issued,2 in
October, 1946, an important decree regarding the administration
of the Sacrament of Confirmation to persons who are in danger
of death. The preamble of the decree recalls to mind some
previous legislation contained both in the Code and in former
instructions of the Holy See on the Sacrament of Confirmation.
Confirmation is not necessary by necessity of means for salvation,
but it is the source of excellent and ample blessings for the
increase of both grace and glory. Hence, those who are in
charge of souls are to take care that all persons who have reached
the use of reason receive it, and it may even be conferred before
that age if an infant is in danger of death, or if for just and grave
causes the minister judges its administration to be expedient
(canons 787 and 788). Nevertheless, many children and even
adults die without this sacrament. In the Oriental Church the
custom prevails of conferring Confirmation on infants with
Baptism ; this custom was formerly observed also in the Latin
Church and still obtains in some countries. Canon 788, how
ever, gives the common law of the Latin Church. (The Decree
here refers to the Instruction issued by the Sacred Congregation
of the Sacraments on 20th May, 1934, and to those of the
Sacred Congregation of Propaganda on 4th May, 1774, and
of the Holy Office, July, 1888.) The reason why many fail to
receive this sacrament is the scarcity of bishops. The bishop
1 . . . circumstantes admoneat, quod nullus alius, nisi Episcopus, Con
firmationis ordinarius minister est ; sc vero collaturum esse illam iurc per
S. Sedem delegato.
1 A.A.S., vol. xxxviii, n. 11, 3 oct., 1946, p. 349.
160
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
is the sole ordinaiy minister of Confirmation (canon 782), and
the Holy See has always taken care that its administration
should be reserved to the bishop as a right and duty proper to
him. Ί he Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments has always
made provision for its conferring with solemn ceremony. In
cases of necessity it has happened that priests who were ecclesi
astical dignitaries were appointed by the Holy See to act as
extraordinary ministers. Such a priest was bound to carry out
this function with appropriate ceremony and to explain to the
people that he did so by virtue of a special faculty, the bishop
being exclusively the ordinary minister. After mature con
sideration by the Sacred Congregation of the question submitted
to it by the Holy Father on the need of children and adults who
arc dying without this sacrament, the present decree has been
issued, following an /Xpostolic Mandate, and it has had full
force from 1st January, 1947. ‘ To make provision, therefore, for
the spiritual condition of so many infants, youths and adults of the Faith
whose lives may be endangered by grave illness and who would certainly
die without having received the Sacrament of Confirmation, if the
observance of Common Law were to be urged in all its strictness, this
Sacred Congregation has deemed it necessary to seek out a remedy and
to make it available for this compelling reason that opportunities of
receiving Confirmation may be provided for such large numbers of the
faithful.'
The following prescriptions arc then enacted by the Decree :
1. By a general Induit of the Apostolic Sec the faculty of
administering the Sacrament of Confirmation is conferred, only
in the cases and under the conditions here enumerated, on the
following priests as extraordinary ministers (canon 782, § 2) :
(a) Parish priests having their own territory, i.c. ‘ Local ’ parish
priests ; ‘ personal ’ and ‘ family ’ parish priests arc explicitly
excluded unless they also have a territory. (6) Vicarii as
described in canon 471 and Vicarii Oeconomi (canon 472).
(c) Priests to whom the full care of souls with all the rights and duties
of parish priests arc exclusively and permanently assigned in a definite
territory having its own church.
2. The above-named ministers can confer Confirmation
validly and lawfully per se ipsi, personally, on the faithful who
arc residing in their territory, not excepting persons who live
in places exempt from parochial jurisdiction ; therefore, semi
naries, hospitals, invalids’ homes, and other institutions of
every kind, even religious, no matter how they may be Otherwise
exempt (canon 792), provided that these faithful by reason of
grave illness arc in real danger of death from which it is foreseen
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRA MENTALS
161
they may die (‘ dummodo hi fideles ex gravi morbo in vero
mortis periculo sint constituti ex quo decessuri praevideantur ’).
Outside these limits such ministers act wrongly and the sacrament is null,
and moreover the penalties of canon 2365 are incurred.
3. This faculty can be used within or outside the episcopal
city whether the See is filled or vacant, provided that the bishop
is not available or is legitimately impeded from personally
administering the sacrament and no other bishop in communion
with the Holy See, even a titular bishop, can be had without
grave inconvenience.
4. Confirmation is to be conferred in accordance with the
discipline prescribed by the Code and according to the rite
prescribed by the Roman Ritual ; and no stipend may be
accepted on any title (‘ gratis vero quovis titulo est conferenda’).
5. If the persons to be confirmed have the use of reason, in
addition to the state of grace some disposition and instruction
is required that they may receive this sacrament fruitfully. The
ministers are, therefore, to instruct them, that each according
to his capacity may know what is necessary and have the inten
tion of receiving this sacrament as conferring strength of soul
(‘ad robur animae conferendum’). In case of convalescence,
those whose duty it is are to sec they be diligently taught by
timely instruction the mysteries of Faith and the nature and
effect of this sacrament (canon 786). Reference is also made
to the Instruction of the Holy Office published 10th April, 1916,
and to the Roman Catechism.
6. According to the prescription of canon 798 the extra
ordinary minister is to enter the Confirmation in the parochial
register of Confirmations, inscribing his own name and the
names of the person confirmed (and if this person be not a
subject, also his diocese and parish), of the parents and sponsor,
the date and place and finally the words : ‘ This Confirmation
was conferred in virtue of an Apostolic Induit owing to danger
of death arising from grave illness.’ (‘ Confirmatio collata est ex
Apostolico Induito, urgente mortis periculo ob gravem con
firmati morbum.’) The Confirmation is also to be entered in
the Baptismal Register in accordance with canon 470, §2. If
the person confirmed belongs to another parish, the minister
must personally and as soon as possible send the ‘ parochus
proprius ’ an authentic document informing him of the subject
of the administration of the sacrament and containing all these
data.
7. Extraordinary ministers arc to send on each occasion to
their own diocesan Ordinary' authentic information concerning
7—1993
162
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
the Confirmation conferred by them, adding all the circum
stances of the case.
8. It is the duty ol the local Ordinary to make known and to
explain fully the prescriptions of this Decree, in the way he
deems most effective, to these extraordinary ministers, so that
they may be fully competent to fulfil this onerous office.
9. The local Ordinary must also annually, at the beginning
of the new year, send to the Sacred Congregation a statement
on the numbers confirmed by the extraordinary ministers of
his jurisdiction and the circumstances under which they
administered the sacrament.
10. This Decree came into force on 1st January, 1947.
The second section of the Decree consists of the quotation
of the relevant canons of the Code—Canons, 732, 734, 766,
780, 781, 782, 785, 787, 793, 794, 795, 796, 797, 1079, 800,
2365, while the third section gives the full text—with rubrics
and prayers—of the rite to be observed. This rite will be
found in the Roman Ritual.—Titulus iii, Ritus servandus a Sacerdote
Sacramentum Confirmationis aegroto in periculo mortis constituto adminis
trante vi Apostolico indulti.
The purpose of this Decree is to ensure that no person who
is in danger of death through sickness, even if he has not yet
reached the use of reason, should be allowed to die before
receiving the sacrament of Confirmation, because the person
who receives this sacrament obtains great graces to strengthen
his soul and when he leaves this life will enjoy greater glory in
heaven. The present Decree is a development of the Instruction
issued by the same Sacred Congregation on 20th May, 1934.1
That Instruction superseded two previous ones: namely, an
Instruction issued by the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisi
tion in 1888 and the Instruction contained in the Editio Typica
of the Roman Ritual of 1925. It contained an authentic inter
pretation of canon 788, namely, that in the Latin Church
Confirmation could not be conferred on those who have not
reached the use of reason except in the circumstances mentioned
in that canon. It also expanded slightly the following canons :
Canon 781 (the Instruction adds these words) : ‘ It is never
lawful to administer Confirmation without chrism, nor to
receive the chrism from heretical or schismatical bishops ’ ;
Canon 786 (the Instruction adds the following explanation of
the words sufficienter instructus) : ‘ Sufficiently instructed ; that is
according to his capacity, upon the nature, dignity, effects
1 zl./I.S., 1935, p. 11; Vide Bouscaren : Canon Law Digest, ii, p. 74 ; i,
Periodica, 1935, p. 30.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
163
of the Sacrament, and the requisite dispositions for its worthy
reception.’ According to this earlier instruction the Sacred
Congregation desired that the faculty should be conferred only
on those who had received an ecclesiastical dignity such as
Protonotories Apostolic. The present decree takes no account
of any such restriction. The rite contained in modern editions
of the Rituale Romanum is in accordance with tills (1934)
instruction and the present decree.
MARRIAGE CEREMONIES
Is it correct for the priest who assists at a marriage to wear a cope ?
Again, is it correct to hold the ceremony within the sanctuary and to
admit there, not only the bride and groom, but also the witnesses
and attendants ?
C. K.
If die marriage ceremony takes place immediately before
Mass celebrated with nuptial blessing and if the priest who
assists at the marriage will also be celebrant of the Mass,
certainly a cope may not be worn. Decree 3158 of the Sacred
Congregation of Rites clearly prescribes the vestments to be
worn in these circumstances :
Si immediate sequitur Missa, Sacerdos praeter Albam et Stolam induere
debet etiam Planctam.
This decision corrected the rubrics of many local rituals which
had directed the priest so assisting at a marriage to wear the
alb, stole and, sometimes, the maniple. The purpose of the
decision that he should also wear the chasuble is to emphasize
the close connection between the marriage ceremony and the
Mass in which the nuptial blessing is given. The Decree, how
ever, is not really relevant to the case when the marriage takes
place apart from Mass or when the priest who assists at die
marriage will not be the celebrant of the Mass. The Roman
Ritual prescribes : Parochus Matrimonio adjuturus . . . supcrpelliceo et stola alba indutus . . . The Pontifical directs that
when a bishop assists he should wear a white cope over the alb,
white stole and pectoral cross. Hence, many rubricists1 have
concluded that the right to wear a cope for the marriage rite is
exclusively the privilege of a bishop and may not be usurped
by a priest. Nevertheless, this interpretation cannot be insisted
1 E.g. E/illcm. Lit., 1900 and 1942, p. 182; Hacgy, Ceremonial. ii, p. 87;
Contra: O’Connell (American rubricists), Hook of Ceremonies, p. 436; WuestMullaney, Matters Liturgical.
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
upon too rigidly. Undoubtedly, legitimate local custom can
sanction the use of the cope by a priest at the marriage rite.
In Ireland, the custom does not seem to be widespread; it
is not mentioned in O’Kane-Fallon,1 the fullest commentar)’
on Irish customs, but provided that it is not excluded by local
statutes, it is permissible. The practice seems to be more
common in England perhaps, because in that country, by
virtue of a special induit not available in Ireland, a nuptial
blessing may be given even outside Mass. Canon Mahoney2
points out that the correctness of the practice is implied in the
regulation by which the English bishops in 1898 forbade the
use of the cope only at mixed marriages. He adds : ‘ Even
when the nuptial blessing is not given, there is no proliibition
of wearing a cope at a Catholic marriage ; there is nothing
liturgically absurd in wearing it when officiating at the admini
stration of a sacrament : the Ritual, for example, prescribes
a copc for the rite of adult baptism.’
The possibility of establishing the custom of introducing the
spouses into the sanctuary has been much discussed in recent
years. In past centuries a common custom was that the marriage
took place at the church-door and the bride and bridegroom
then advanced to the altar to receive the nuptial blessing. That
they should be kneeling close to the altar while they receive the
blessing is certainly implied in the rubrics of the Missal and of
the Pontifical. The rubrics of the Missal direct :
Dicto Pater noster Sacerdos antequam dicat Libera nos stans in cornu Epistolae
versus Sponsum et Sponsam ante Akare gcnuflexos, dicit super cos. . . .
Although the Cacremoniale Episcoporum explicitly forbids the
presence of lay persons within the sanctuary, the Pontificale,
on the other hand, states as follows the rubrics to be observed
when a bishop presides at a marriage :
(Pontifex) ascendit ad altare . . . sedet super faldistorio, ante medium
altaris allato, renibus ipsi altari conversis. Vocantur Sponsus et Sponsa,
qui debito venerationis actu accedentes coram Pontifice gcnuflcclunt ;
muliere ad sinistram viri stante.
Amongst rubricists there is a diversity of opinion. O’ConnellFortescue, Haegy, and O’Kane-Fallon following closely the
regulations of the Caeremoniale Episcoporum and of decrees of the
Sacred Congregation of Rites direct that the bride and bride
groom remain outside the sanctuary both for the marriage
ceremony and for die Mass with the nuptial blessing.3
1 Rubrics of the Roman Ritual, p. 553.
* Questions and Answers, n. 709.
’ Op. cit.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
165
Martinucci-Menghini allows them to kneel on the predella
or steps of the altar for the marriage ceremony and also to
return to that position for the prayers of the blessing, although
they should assist at the remainder of the Mass outside the
sanctuary. Λ similar direction is given by Van der Stappcn, De
Amicis and Father Dunne.1 De Amicis would also permit the
presence in the sanctuary of the witnesses, etc. :
Contrahentes vero, decenter vestiti, accedunt ad altare, sponsus ad dex
teram sponsae. (Ante altaris gradus adstant ab utraque parte utriusque
testes ; ante altare in aliqua distantia adstant quoque parentes ct propinqui
quorum praesentia nuptias cohonestari dccct.)
Nabuco2 directs that kneelers be placed for the bride and
bridegroom a short distance from the altar steps and justifies
this arrangement saying :
Stricto jure sponsi ad altare accedunt pro matrimonio ct pro duabus
benedictionibus intra missam, reliquo tempore ad loca sua recedunt extra
presbyterium. Usus tamen receptus est prout exposuimus, nam si genu(lexoria locentur extra chorum, sponsi tenentur ter ad altare accedere,
praeterea extra presbyterium nequeunt Eucharistiam recipere.
Dr. Long, when he discussed the question,3 concluded : ‘ Con
sidering the state of the question, it must be clear that a priest
has sufficient authority if he should decide to place the newlymarried couple within the sanctuary.’ Canon Mahoney says
of it : ‘ Our own preference is for the custom of introducing
them within the sanctuary. It is clearly permitted by many
writers, it is in accordance with the directions of the rubrics
and it is an added solemnity which many Catholic couples
value very highly indeed. There can at least be no doubt
that the custom should be continued wherever it exists, even
though it may be in the strict sense of the words, perhaps,
contra legem.’ Hence we may conclude that it is certainly
within the competence of the priest in charge of the church to
decide on the practice to be followed. The contracting parties
may certainly be accommodated within the sanctuary and
even at the steps of the altar for the actual marriage ceremony
and for the nuptial blessing. During the marriage rite the
witnesses may stand close by also within the sanctuary but
retire outside the altar rails for the Mass. On 31st March,
1954, the Sacred Congregation of Rites in a private reply to
the Coadjutor Bishop of St. Boniface (Canada) admitted the
custom by which the spouses may kneel on the top step for the
’Dunne, Ritual Explained, p. 132; De Amicis, Caeremoniale Parochorum
Van dcr Stappcn, Caeremoniale.
* Espositio Pontificalis Romani, iii, nota 188.
E. Record, 1938, p. 84.
166
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
marriage ceremony, but decided that they should not receive
Communion there, nor should they remain in the sanctuary
for the nuptial Mass. The priest responsible for deciding the
question will certainly bear in mind that it is desirable that if
this procedure is recognized as the established custom, it should
be observed for all marriages when the parties so desire, without
social distinction.
WHEN AND BY WHOM MAY THE NUPTIAL
BLESSING BE GIVEN
The Votive Nuptial Mass is forbidden on a number of feasts. May
the Nuptial Blessing be given on these days? If the Blessing must be
postponed, is it necessary that the Mass be celebrated and the Blessing
given by the priest who officiated on the occasion of the marriage.
Historicus.
The rubrics of the Roman Ritual direct :
Parochus curct ut sponsi, celebrato matrimonio, benedictionem solemnem
accipiant, quae dari eis potest. . . . solum in Missa, servata speciali rubrica
ct excepto tempore feriato.1
The Nuptial Blessing given in Mass consists of three prayers,
two of which arc recited after the Pater Nosier and the third
immediately before the prayer Placeat Sancta Trinitas. Without
an Apostolic Induit it may not be given outside Mass.2 It is
not necessary, however, that the Mass be the ‘ Missa Votiva
Pro Sponso ct Sponsa.’ The blessing is excluded only during
the tempus clausum (i.e., from the First Sunday of Advent until
the Feast of the Nativity inclusive, and from Ash Wednessay
until Easter Sunday inclusive).3 Even during these periods the
Ordinary may for a just cause permit it. The privileged votive
Mass, on the other hand, is prevented on all Sundays and feasts
of precept, on doubles of the first and second class, on privileged
ferias and vigils and within the octaves of Easter and Pentecost.
When the special Mass is prevented, but the blessing is allowed,
then the blessing must be incorporated in the Mass of the day
and the prevented votive Mass is to be commemorated by the
prayer Pro Sponsis recited under one conclusion with the prayer
of the Mass.
1 Rit. Rom., tit. vii, cap. i, n. 16 ; cf. canon 1101, 1.
* Vide Appendix, Rit. Rom.
’ Can. 1108. It may not be given on 2nd November, nor for a * mixed ’
marriage. Both parties must always be present and, unless custom sanctions
the contrary practice, it may not be repeated if one of the parties has already
received it.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
167
It is not necessary that the priest who officiated at the mar
riage also celebrate the Mass and give the blessing. Canon
1101 states :
Sollemnem benedictionem ille tantum sacerdos per se ipse vel per alium
dare potest qui valide ct licite matrimonio potest assistere.
The priest who can validly and lawfully assist at the marriage
may have the Mass celebrated and the blessing given per alium.1
PERSONS
TO
WHOM THE NUPTIAL
MAY BE GIVEN
BLESSING
Among some clergy here a discussion has arisen about the lawful
ness and propriety of having nuptial Mass for, and giving the nuptial
blessing to, a pregnant bride. Some priests encourage such people
to avail themselves of these privileges on the grounds of their special
need of grace.
Pastor.
The Roman Ritual in conformity with the Code directs :
Parochus curet ut sponsi, celebrato Matrimonio, benedictionem solemnem
accipiant, quae dari cis potest etiam postquam diu vixerint in matrimonio.__ 2
In Pfe-Tridentine law persons who were married without
receiving the nuptial blessing were forbidden to consummate
the marriage until they had actually received the blessing.
The last trace of this rule is found in the decrees of the Council
of Trent, which exhort newly married persons not to live together
before the blessing is received.3 Present legislation or custom
do not contain any such prohibition. On the contrary, even
those who have lived together for a long time may receive the
blessing and, therefore, it is implied that the nuptial blessing
may be imparted to a person who is already pregnant.4 No
where in the rubrics or decrees of the Sacred Congregation is it
implied that the nuptial blessing should not be imparted, even
to a spouse who is guiltily pregnant before marriage. The
nuptial blessing is a sacramental to which the Church attaches
great importance, because in proportion to the dispositions of
’Cappello, De Matrimonio, 710; cf. canons 462, 1095; Vcrmccrsch,
Epitome luris Canonici, ii, 408.
* Rit. Rom., Tit. vii, cap. i, n. 16. Cf. canon 1101.
’ Sess. XXIV, cap. i. ’ Practcra eadem Sancta Synodus hortatur, ut
conjuges ante benedictionem sacerdotalem, in templo suscipiendam, in eadem
domo non cohabitent.’ The rubric that the blessing may be given only in
a church has been deleted in recent editions of the Ritual.
4 Vide Chelodi, Jus Matrimoniale, p. 161 ; Gasparri, Tractatus Canonicus de
Matrimonio, ii, p. 158 ; O’Kanc-Fallon, Rubrics of the Roman Ritual, p. 545.
The blessing, needless to say, cannot be given for a mixed marriage.
168
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
those who receive it grace may be gained ex opere operantis
ecclesiae. The obligation of ensuring that the blessing is obtained
falls primarily on the parish priest and he should, except when
there is danger of grave scandal, strive to give all persons con
tracting marriage, even a pregnant bride, an opportunity of
receiving it.
BLESSING FOR EXPECTANT MOTHER
When an expectant mother comes for the * mother’s blessing,’
what blessing should be given?
Subscriber.
I
The blessing, Benedictio Mulieris Praegnantis, now given in
the Roman Ritual, Titulus viii (Ritus Celebrandi Matrimonii
Sacramentum'), Caput v, may be used in these circumstances.
The rubrics add that this blessing is to be given ‘ in periculis
partus,'' but this condition is not to be interpreted as meaning
‘ in periculo mortis.' Childbirth is always accompanied by a
certain degree of anxiety and danger and the fact that the
expectant mother asks for the blessing provides sufficient
justification for imparting it.
It is true that this blessing is a comparatively recent addition
to the Roman Ritual.1 It was not inserted before the present
century'. In earlier times apparently it was felt that the Church
had made sufficient provision for the contingencies of child
birth in the nuptial blessing, the special Benedictio Thalami and
in the use of certain sacramcntals such as the Agnus Dei. Amongst
the special petitions made by the Pope when he blesses the small
wax figures, each fashioned in the form of a lamb and known
as Agnus Dei, is a prayer that women who piously use them may
be preserved from all harm in bearing children and favoured
with a happy delivery. In recent times both the Benedictio
Thalami and the use of Agnus Dei with this intention have more
or less fallen into desuetude. Hence the Benedictio Mulieris
Praegnantis has been incorporated into the Roman Ritual. This
blessing had for a long time its place in local rituals. It is to
be found in the Ordo Administrandi published in Ireland in
1812, and it there has the rubric ‘ de cuius periculo dubitatur' It
is also found in the Ritual of Toulon. In his Instructions sur le
Rituel the bishop of Toulon2 gives it the title : ‘ Prières pour une
1 Vide Martcne, De Antiq. EccL· Rit., ii, p. 127.
’ Bishop Joly de Choin, vi, p. 265.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRA.MENTALS
169
Femme Encicnte, principalement si elle est en peril. He directs :
Lorsqu’ une femme encicnte a recours aux prières de l’Eglisc, pour demander
a Dieu un accouchement heureux, le curé . . . dira pour clic les prières
suivantes, durant lesquelles elle sera à genoux.
It is clear, therefore, that in accordance with the history and
customs attaching to this blessing it may be used and even
repeated in the ordinary case of pregnancy where there is no
special reason for fearing a proximate danger to the Life of the
expectant mother.1
CELEBRATING A WEDDING JUBILEE ; DOUBLE-RING
CEREMONY ;
RING WORN BY PROFESSED
RELIGIOUS.
(a) Is there a special blessing for persons who are celebrating
the silver or golden jubilee of their marriage? If there is such a
formula, may the blessing be imparted during Mass in the same way
as the ordinary nuptial blessing?
(ό) Is the * double-ring ’ ceremony, for which people now often
ask, recognized in the Ritual; if so, must both rings be blessed?
(c) In many Orders and Congregations of women members who
have made their final profession wear a ring. Is it correct for them
to wear it on the left hand on an analogy with the marriage ring?
Liturgist.
(a) There is now an approved rite for the celebration of the
jubilee of a marriage. The most recent edition of the Rituale
gives prayers for such an occasion. This new blessing is based
on the Benedictio Mulieris post partum and on the rite sanctioned
by the Holy See in 1914 for the imparting of the nuptial
blessing outside Mass. Hence the blessing of jubilarians begins
with the recitation of Psalm 127, Beati omnes, qui liment Dominum.
Before and after the psalm, the antiphon Ecce sic benedicetur homo
qui timet Dominum is recited. Then after the ordinary vcrsiclcs,
Mitte eis ; Domine exaudi, Dominus vobiscum, etc., the prayers :
Praelendc Domine (vide rite approved 11 th March, 1914) and
Omnipotens sempiterne Deus (cf. blessing of a mother after child
birth). The Te Dcum is recited with its vcrsiclcs and three
prayers—the Collect and Postcommunion from the Mass Pro
gratiarum actione and the prayer of the Holy Ghost. Finally,
the priest imparts his blessing with the usual formula Benedictio
1 Vide Mahoney, * Questions and Answers,* i, p. 397, Australian Ecclesiastical
Review, April, 1954.
170
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Dei omnipotentis and sprinkles holy water. During the blessing
the husband and wife may kneel with hands joined as a token
of fidelity.
The blessing is given after the last Gospel of the Mass, and
the Mass celebrated on the occasion has the same privileges as
the Nuptial Mass. There may be said the votive Mass of the
Blessed Trinity or the Mass of the Blessed Virgin with the
prayers Pro gratiarum actione under one conclusion.
(ό) The ‘ double-ring ’ ceremony is recognized in some local
rituals ; it is not mentioned in the Rituale Romanum nor is it an
established custom in this country. Hence without appro
bation not only of the local Ordinary but also of the Holy See
it could not now be incorporated into our marriage rite. The
custom is apparently of Spanish and of comparatively modern
origin. In the earliest times the ring now given in marriage
was associated with the prenuptial sponsolia and was given as a
pledge of the endowment which the future husband promised
to confer upon his spouse. Martcnc1 describes in detail a rite
used in the Greek Church, In subarrhalionc Nuptiarum, in which
rings were conferred on both parties. There is also a sixteenth
century Bordeaux Ritual which recognizes the custom in the
marriage rite.2 It is chiefly, however, through the influence
of the Spanish Ritual of Toledo that the custom has been
established in many dioceses on the American continent. In
1881 the Sacred Congregation of Rites gave the direction :
‘ Nihil innovetur,’ in reply to the following query submitted
from the diocese of Guayanna (Republic of Venezuela)
Num in solemni Nuptiarum benedictione servandus sit ritus benedicendi
arrhas et duos anmilps, prout in appendice ad Rituale Romanum in Manuali
Toletano praescriptus?3
f
The Rituale Toletanum’ directs that during the marriage
rite the priest blesses two rings as well as the arrhae—thirteen
pieces of gold or silver coins. The rings are blessed with three
prayers—Benedic, Domine hos annulos ; Creator et Conservator
generis humant, and Benedictio Dei Patris omnipotentis. The priest
with an appropriate prayer places the first ring on the ring
finger of the bridegroom’s right hand and the bridegroom places
the second ring on the ring finger of the bride’s right hand.
In Germany also in recent times the double-ring ceremony has
become the established practice. The new ritual for Germany,
1
1
3
4
De Antiquis Ecclesiae Ritibus, i, p. 387.
Vide Villien, History oj the Sacraments»
S.R.C. 3531.
Vide Spanish-Latin Ritual published St. Anthony Guild Press, 1948.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
171
approved on 21st March, 1950, gives a marriage rite which
comprises six acts,1 the first being the blessing of two rings.
The prayer for the blessing is the usual prayer Benedic, Domine
hos annulos or as an alternative the prayer Creator el conservator
humani generis. After the interrogation there follows the arrhatio cum
annutis when each party puts the ring on the other’s finger with
the words : * In the name of the Father and of the Son and of
the Holy Ghost : wear this ring as a token of your fidelity.’ In
Germany this rite is an innovation whereas the Rituale Tole
tanum has behind it a long tradition.
(c) The rubrics of the Pontifical in the ceremony for the
blessing and consecration of virgins direct :
Pontifex accipiens annulum cum dextera sua et dexteram manum Virginis
cum sinistra manu sua, et mittens annulum ipsum digito annulari dexterae
manus Virginis, desponsat illas Jesu Christo.
It would seem, then, that nuns or sisters who are professed
religious should wear their ring not on the left hand but on the
right. In every ease in which ecclesiastics are permitted or
directed to wear a ring it must be worn on the right hand.2
THE MATTER AND FORM OF TONSURE AND THE
MINOR ORDERS
The Constitution on the Sacrament of Orders issued a few years
ago makes it clear that the essential matter and form of the sacrament
do not lie in the traditio instrumentorum. In the Minor Orders is the
traditio nevertheless still to be regarded as the essential part? ^Tiat
words and actions constitute the matter and form of Tonsure and of
the four Minor Orders?
M. C.
The rite for each of the Minor Orders follows the same
general plan :
(1) An address or instruction to the candidates ;
(2) Delivery of the instruments or insignia of their office ;
(3) An exhortation to the faithful to pray and finally a prayer
for the ordinati.
Theologians arc agreed that in each case the proximate
material of the Order is the traditio instrumentorum and the form
is the words said by the bishop on that occasion.3 For the
1 Vide Orate Fratres, September, 1951 ; La Maison Dieu, n. 25.
‘ Catalanus, Pontificale Romanum. Apparently the custom by which religious
wear a ring in token of final profession first became common in Spain.
’ E.g. Cappello, De Sacramentis, ii, p. 134.
172
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
several Orders, therefore, the proximate matter and form arc :
(λ) Ostianatus the handing over of keys, not necessarily the
actual key's of the church, with the form Sic agite quasi reddituri
Deo, etc.
(ό) Lectoratus— the delivery of a book of the lessons, a missal,
a breviary or a bible, with the form, Accipite et estote verbi Dei
relatores, etc.
(c) Exorcistatus—the delivery of a book of exorcisms, a missal,
ritual or pontifical, with the form, Accipite et commendate memoriae,
etc.
(rf) Acolythatus—the matter and form arc twofold : (i) the
handing over of the candlestick and candle with the words,
Accipite ceroferarium cum cereo, etc. ; (ii) the handing over of the
empty cruet with the form, Accipite urceolum, etc.
It is necessary only that the subject validly receive the instru
ments, either immediately by touching them while the form is
said, or at least receives them mediately. For example, in the
Gclasian Sacramentary it is directed :
Acolythus quum ordinatur ab episcopo quidem doceatur qualiter se in
officio suo agere debeat : sed ab archidiacono accipiat ceroferarium cum
cereo, ut sciat se ad accendenda luminaria ecclesiae mancipari : accipiat
et urceolum vacuum ad suggerendum vinum in eucharistia corporis Christi.1
For Clerical Tonsure the essential part of the rite is that the
candidate’s hair is tonsured and that he savs at the same time
the formula : Dominus pars hereditatis meae, etc. The Sacred
Congregation of Rites directed that the custom by which the
bishop also says these words should be retained,2 but the
Pontifical merely prescribes ‘ quilibet cum tondetur dicit : Dominus
pars' etc. The ceremonial clothing with the surplice was not
added to the rite of Tonsure before the twelfth century.
In the Roman Church from the earliest times the Minor
Orders were conferred with the simplest possible ritual.3 The
candidates to be appointed were simply instructed in their
duties and presented with the insignia of their office. The cere
mony was not always public nor always carried out at the altar.
It was in the Gallican Rite during the seventh and eighth
centuries that the ceremonies were elaborated and these de
veloped ceremonies have been incorporated in our present
Pontifical. The forms used now at the traditio instrumentorum are
to be found with a few unimportant changes in the Gclasian
1 Vide Wilson, Gelasian Sacramentary, p. 145.
« S.R.C. 2682.
3 Morinus, Ordinatio, in, p. 108 ; Puniet, Roman Pontifical, p. 108 ct seq.;
Oppenheim, Institutiones, ix, p. 118; Molien, Liturgie des Sacraments, p. 408.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTAL3
173
Sacramentary. It is clear that throughout the western Church
from the beginning of recognition of the Minor Orders the same
delivery of the insignia with the imperative formulas was estab
lished as the matter and form of the Orders. Similarly the
formula recited at the reception of Tonsure is found in the
Gregorian Sacramentary and in all the ancient pontificals.
Many different customs prevailed concerning the manner in
which the Tonsure was worn, (i) Until the seventh century
the Celtic clergy observed what they called the ‘ tonsure of
St. John ’—they shaved the top of the head only and allowed
the hair to grow long on both sides ; (ii) the ‘ tonsure of St.
Paul ’ was also common—simply a close cropping of all the
hair ; (iii) the ‘ tonsure of St. Peter ’ was eventually universally
adopted—it was taken to symbolize Our Lord’s crown of thorns.
But in all its variations the tonsure had the same juridical effect
and significance ; it was a rite signifying submission to the
Church, abandonment of the world and dedication to the
service of God. The Code now describes clerics ‘ qui per primam
saltem tonsuram divinis ministeriis mancipati sunt' (canon 108).
WHEN SHOULD THE PRAYER PRO ORDINANDIS BE
ADDED IN THE MASS ? CORRECT FORM OF THE
MANDATUM TO BE READ AT AN ORDINATION
(1) Should the prayer Pro Ordinandis be added in the Mass when
only Tonsure and Minor Orders are conferred? The rubrics of the
Missal, which prescribe that the prayer be said in collatione Ordinum,
seem to make no distinction between Major and Minor Orders.
(2) When the Mandaturn is being read before the conferring of
Tonsure only, ought the word suspensus be omitted since only clerics
could have incurred suspension? Similarly, when religious are being
ordained by the local Ordinary with dimissorial letters from their
own Major Superiors, is it necessary to say sine licentia sui Episcopi
or should sui Superioris be substituted?
Lector.
The prayer Pro Ordinandis should be inserted in the Mass
only on those occasions on which Major Orders are being
conferred. This is clear from the rubrics of the Pontifical and
is the unanimous opinion of rubricists. The Pontifical pre
scribes1 the prayer only for those occasions on which one of
1 Tit. ill, ct seq ; Vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass,i, p. 170: HaegyStcrcky, Ceremonial des Ordinations (1937), p. 29.
174
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
the Major Orders is being conferred ; it is not mentioned in the
sections dealing with the Minor Order.'. The Minor Orders
have no essential connection with the Mass. They may be
conferred outside Mass provided that the ceremony takes place
in the morning.1 Hence in the general rubrics of the Missal
when it is directed that
In consecratione Episcopi et in collatione Ordinum in Missa de die dicitur,
sub unica conclusione cum prima Oratio propria quae habetur inter Missas
votivas . . .*
only those Orders which must be conferred during Mass are
referred to. The prayers Pro Ordinandis given in the Pontifical
arc reprinted for the sake of convenience in the Missal and
they arc there designated as the prayers to be recited In Collatione
Sacrorum Ordinum. They are to be said only at the conferring
of Sacred Orders and the Pontifical defines clearly the term
Sacred Orders—
Sacri ct majores Ordines sunt, Subdiaconatus, Diaconatus ct Presbyteratus.1
23
In the circumstances described in the query the word
suspensus should be omitted. Since Tonsure is not an Order,
the obligation to read this archdeacon’s admonition, when
Tonsure only is conferred, is somewhat doubtful. The better
opinion would seem to be that it should be read.4 If it is read,
then any words which do not apply in the particular case
should be omitted. For example if the Tonsure is not given
in connection with Mass, the final phrase nisi Missa finita, etc.,
should not be said.5 Similarly the word suspensus should be
omitted if there arc no clerics present to receive Orders, just
as in the sacramental Absolution the word suspensionis is omitted
if the penitent is a lay person and the word is therefore, not
applicable.
The term sui Superioris should never, however, be substituted
for sui Episcopi. The whole phrase ‘ sive ex aliena dioecesi
oriundus, sine licentia sui Episcopi ’ is applicable to religious
and seculars alike. This is clear from the provisions of the Code
of Canon Law.® Canons 965 and 966 of the Code provide
(1) that the bishop to whom a religious superior should send
dimissorial letters is the bishop of the diocese in which is situated
13;
1 Canon 1006, § 4, and Rubrics of Pontifical.
2 Addit, ct Var.9 tit. vi, n. 2.
3 De Saaris Ordinibus in Genere,
4 O’Leary, Ceremonies of Ordination, p. 10 ; Hacgy-Stcrcky, op. cit.. Hi. 65.
5 Vide /. E. Record, November, 1940, p. 480.
• Ihe rubrics are in accordance with the prescriptions of the general law
and do not take cognizance of special induits.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SAGRAMENTALS
175
the religious house to which the subject belongs ; (2) that if he
send them to another bishop he must have the permission of
the diocesan bishop, unless the latter is absent or will not be
holding ordinations at the prescribed time or if the diocese is
vacant. These facts must be conveyed to the ordaining prelate
hy an authentic communication from the local episcopal curia.
Hence even when the local Ordinary ordains either secular or
religious subjects, the full text of the mandatum should be read
as it is found in the Pontifical, because it is intended as a safe
guard against irregularities from any source.
NOCTURN IMPOSED AT ORDINATION
What is the precise obligation attached to the ‘ penance ’ imposed
by the bishop at the end of the ceremony of ordination to the sub
deaconship?
Alumnus.
Decree N. 4117 of the Sacred Congregation of Rites :
Verba Pontificalis Romani Nocturnum talis diei intclligcnda sunt de unico
Nocturno fcriali, vel de primo Dominicae, ut in Psalterio, id est duodecim
Psalmorum, cum suis /kntiphonis de tempore, quem Episcopus ordinans
designare potest . . . Insuper ex Decreto eiusdem Sacrae Congregationis,
N. 4042 . . . ‘ Pro Nocturno talis diei intelligendus est Nocturnus ferialis, vel
primus Festi aut Dominicae in Psalterio prouti Ordinatio in Feria, Festo
aut Dominica habita sit.
It is further defined that the psalms alone of the nocturn suffice ;
the invitatory psalm, hymn and lessons need not be recited.
Hence, on a feria the nine psalms of Matins, or on a feast day
the three psalms of the first nocturn, are alone enjoined. It is
generally held that the obligation binds only in fidelity and
sub nullo peccato.
Non constat de ulla obligatione sub peccato, aliquid ex his oneribus
implendi. Ita recepta interpretatio.1
Some modern writers2 have attempted to interpret the words
of the Pontifical as implying some obligation sub veniali. A
writer in L'Ami du Clergé says :
Nous pensons aussi que, en droit strict (juridiquement parlant) la prescription
ou imposition fait par l’évêque consécratcur n’oblige pas sub peccato. Mais
nous pensons aussi que, ‘ moralement parlant ’ il sera difficile de soustraire à
l'accomplissement de cette obligation sans commettre un péché au moins léger
Such an argument carries little conviction ; an obligation
binding sub pcccalo must be clearly recognizable as such.
1Vermeersch, Epitome luris Canonici, ii, par. 279.
1 L'Ami du Clergé, 1949, p. 46; Ephem. Lit., 1949, p. 229.
176
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
RUBRICS OF THE SICK CALL
hi
. ·
(1) Is it permissible on a sick call to administer the sacraments
in the order, Confession, Extreme Unction, Holy Viaticum? Some
times, for example, when no table has been prepared for the pyx, it
would be more convenient for the priest to follow this order and at
other times, as when the patient is barely conscious, it would seem to
give a better opportunity of preparing him for the reception of
Viaticum.
(2) Is it necessary to recite the Confiteor three times when the
sacraments and the last blessing are given one immediately after the
other? Since the repetition of the Asperges is not prescribed it seems
to me that neither should the Confiteor be repeated.
(3) Should the last blessing be repeated each time a person is
anointed, for example, in the case of a very old person who receives
Extreme Unction almost once a month?
Curate.
(1) Normally, in accordance with our present Rituale, the
sacrament of Extreme Unction is conferred only after the
sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist. The rubrics of the
Rituale Romanum direct : ‘According to the general practice of
the Church it is especially to be observed that, if there is time
and if the condition of the sick person permits, the sacraments
of Penance and the Eucharist are to be administered before
Extreme Unction.’1 Admittedly this order is not always the
most convenient procedure, and many writers hold that it
neither has the strongest tradition nor is the most logical.
Cappello commenting on this rubric writes :
Ccrtc grave non est ministrare extremam unctionem ante Viaticum ; imo
nec leve, si causa rationabilis, quaecumque ea sit, illud suadeat. Quidam
censent verum praeceptum de hac re non haberi, ideoque, etiam deficiente
peculiari causa, nullum per se esse peccatum.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
177
Cum cnim extrema unctio sit perfectio et consummatio poenitentiae, uti com
muniter appellatur a Patribus, quae peccatorum reliquias abstergit . . .
non sine rationabili causa poenitentiae coniungebatur, ut per utrumque sacramentum
homo perfecte expiatus, sine ulla animae sorde caelestem panem degustaret.
This custom has always continued to be observed by certain
religious Orders who did not use the Roman Ritual, for example
the Dominicans. In 1879 the Sacred Congregation of Rites
declared that it was permissible for members of the Cistercian
Order to receive Extreme Unction before Viaticum according
to their own Rituale.1 In recent times this practice has tended
to become more common. In addition to the older arguments
already cited in its favour modern writers point out that Extreme
Unction is the sacrament of the sick, while Viaticum, the
Eucharistic food for the last journey of the soul, is meant as
the immediate preparation for death. Dom Lambert Bcauduin
writes :2
Le viatique a en vue la mort chrétienne du fidèle. À ce moment supreme du
passage de la vie à la mort, l’Eglise veut, en assurant à scs enfants la com
munion au corps du Seigneur, lui donner le remède de l’immortalité et le
gage de la vie éternelle. L’Extrcme-Onction, au contraire, a en vue la
maladie du chrétien ... et n’a aucun rapport direct avec la mort.
Hcncc in certain recent induits granting the use of the ver
nacular in the administration of the sacraments approval is
given for the placing of Extreme Unction before Viaticum.
In Ireland, where such customs or concessions cannot be
availed of, the sacraments should be administered in the order
prescribed by the Ritual unless a proportionate cause justifies
their inversion. It now seems certain that a grave cause would
not be necessary. For example, if the patient is barely con
scious and the priest hopes that by receiving Extreme Unction,
he will be more fully aroused and prepared for reception of
the Eucharist, there may be sufficient cause. The convenience
of the minister would not suffice, but there may be sufficient
reason for the inversion if the minister believes that in the
difficult circumstances where no proper provision for the pyx
has been made, he can in this way best safeguard the Blessed
Sacrament from all danger of irreverence.
(2) According to the present rubrics of the Roman Ritual, the
Confiteor is to be recited at least three times during the complete
sick call, but these rubrics do not envisage that the minister of
the sacraments ordinarily recite it three times. For Viaticum
it must be said in Latin, cither by the patient, or by someone
else in his name ; only if there is no one else to recite it, does
’S.R.C. 3486.
* In Aiaison-Dieu, n. 15, p. 118.
178
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
the minister supply the recitation. For the sacrament of
Extreme Unction the Confiteor must be said, either in Latin, or
in the vernacular, and since usually the sick person or one of
the attendants recites it in the vernacular, the obligation should
seldom devolve on the minister. For the Apostolic Blessing in
articulo mortis the rubrics prescribe that the Confiteor be recited
‘ al) uno e Clericis astantibus ’ : in practice this usually means
that the minister himself must recite it in Latin. Certainly
the Confiteor must be repeated as an integral part of the for
mula for the Apostolic Blessing. The Sacred Congregation of
Indulgences decided this point in reply to the question :
Utrum ncccssc sit, tribus vicibus recitare Confiteor, quando administratur
sacrum Viaticum, Extrema Unctio, ac Indulgentia in mortis articulo imper
titur ? Response : Affirmative, justa praxim ct rubricas.1
In the use of the formula prescribed for the indulgence, needless
to say the safer course must be followed, but it is not so clear
that there is an obligation to repeat the Confiteor for Extreme
Unction conferred immediately after Viaticum. The Con
gregation of the Holy Office replied in 1851 to the question
whether one recital would suffice where the two sacraments and
the last blessing were given together :
Si immineat necessitas conferendi unum post aliud immediate, licere
semel in casu : secus repetatur.
i:Vl
Again, the purpose of this decision is to safeguard the integrity
of the indulgence form. It may, however, be argued that since
for the really urgent case the Ritual had already provided the
short formulas for the sacraments and the blessing, the case
of necessity which the Congregation here had in mind is the
ordinary practical necessity when all the ‘ last ’ sacraments
are conferred together.2 The rubrics of the Roman Ritual and
the commentaries of the older rubricists simply did not envisage
the circumstance where these sacraments would be conferred on
the same occasion except as a case of necessity. Hence there
docs not seem to be a certain obligation on the minister to recite
the Confiteor three times in the course of a sick call. Probably
one recitation would suffice for the sacraments, but in con
nection with the indulgcnccd blessing on the princ’ple tutior pars
sequenda est, it is advisable to repeat the Confiteor where there is
no induit to the contrary.
Recent rescripts from the Holy See3 permitting the use of the
1 Cappello, op. cit., § 292.
* De Angelis, De Indulgentiis, § 164 f.
• Maison-Dieu, nn. 25, 38. The new vernacular appendix to the Rituale
granted for North American dioceses also contains a section entitled ‘ Last
Rites given without interruption.’
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTAL
179
vernacular in the administration of the sacraments have, for
example in Germany and France, cleared up these difficulties.
The Ritual for Germany {Collectio riluum ad instar appendicis
ritualis Romani pro omnibus Germaniae dioecesibus) approved in 1950
contains a special section entitled Ritus continuus infirmum muniendi
sacramentis extremis. In this rite the order is as follows : salu
tation of the minister {Pax huic domui), asperges, introductory
prayers (i.e. Introeat, Exaudi), sacramental confession, the Con
fiteor, the anointing (including a short reading from the Gospel,
e.g. the story of the healing of the son of the centurion, a short
litany and a prayer replacing the three prayers after the anoint
ing), administration of Viaticum {Paler, Ecce Agnes Dei, Domine
non sum dignus, communion, Domine sancte Pater, 0 sacrum con
vivium, Deus qui nobis) and finally the prayer Clementissime and
the Apostolic Blessing. In the rite for Viaticum the Pater nosier
and a short admonition in preparation for the communion are
inserted after the Indulgentiam and before the Ecce Agnus Dei.
When a bilingual ritual was granted to the French dioceses in
1947 no mention was made of the use of the vernacular in
administering Viaticum. Hence a new rescript was sought
later. This was granted on 30th October, 1953, and amongst
other concessions states explicitly :
Quod autem attinet ritum continuum ministrandi Sacramenta infirmis,
eisque Benedictionem apostolicam impertiendi, omnia observentur quae
singulis Sacramentis sunt propria, iuxta ritum iam approbatum et concessum
. . . praetermissis tamen versiculis et precibus quae secus essent iterandae,
uti v.gr. benedictio in introitu sacerdotis, Confiteor, etc. quae semel recitari
possunt.
The same rescript directs that in the Ordo administrandi Sacram
Communionem infirmis the rubric concerning the Confiteor
should be identical with that in Extreme Unction and therefore
permit the use of the vernacular—
Postea facta de more confessione generali latino vel vulgari sermone, sive
ab infirmo, sive eius nomine ab alio . . .
RUBRIC FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF EXTREME
UNCTION
In the rubrics for the administration of Extreme Unction, the
priest is directed to say the antiphon Asperges me Domine, etc. What
exactly is indicated by the ‘ etc.’; is the first verse of the Miserere or
the Gloria Patri to be recited?
Rubricist.
180
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
The rubrics of the Ritual direct the minister of Extreme
Unction that on his entry to the sick-room :
deposito Oleo super Mensam . . . aegroto crucem pie deosculandam porrigit ;
mox in modum crucis aqua benedicta eum, et cubiculum ct circumstantes
aspergit, dicens Antiphonam : Asperges me, Domine, etc.1
Hence, the minister should recite only the antiphon Asperges
me, Domine, hyssopo et mundabor : lavabis me et super nivem dealbabor.
He does not add either the Gloria Patri or any portion of the
Miserere. In this respect, the rubrics governing the blessing
before Extreme Unction differ from those to be observed when
the Asperges rite is carried out before the administration of Holy
Communion to the sick. The Ritual explicitly prescribes2 that,
before communicating the sick person, the minister should,
when blessing the room, recite the Asperges antiphon, the first
verse of the psalm Miserere, the Gloria Patri and Sicut erat, and
repeat in full the Asperges antiphon.
MAY THE APOSTOLIC BLESSING IN ARTICULO
MORTIS BE ADMINISTERED TO PERSONS IN
DANGER OF DEATH FROM EXTERNAL CAUSES ?
I have hitherto understood that the rubrics of the Ritual required
that the last Blessing could be given only to those who were suitable
subjects for Extreme Unction, i.e. those who are in danger of death
through sickness. Is this correct or may the Apostolic Blessing be
validly administered also to persons who are in danger from external
causes and consequently are entitled to receive Holy Viaticum?
Dumus.
According to recent directions of the Holy Sec the Apostolic
blessing in articulo mortis may be validly and lawfully administered
to persons who are in danger of death from external causes.
Canon 468, § 2, empowers and directs priests who arc assisting
the sick to impart to them this indulgcnccd blessing. ‘ To the
parish priest or to any other priest who assists the sick the
faculty is granted of imparting according to the form prescribed
in the approved liturgical books the Apostolic benediction with
indulgence in articulo mortis. He should not omit this blessing.’3
The directions of the Holy See now make it clear that the
last blessing is not restricted to the sick, neither should it be
1 Rit. Rom., tit. vi, cap. ii, 4.
1 Rit. Rom., tit. v, cap. iv, 15.
• C.I.C. canon 468.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAM ENT A US
181
omitted in the ease of any person who is in danger of death
from external causes and so is entitled to receive Holy Viaticum.
It is true that from the prescriptions of the Roman Ritual
and of the Code of Canon Law it would seem that the Apostolic
blessing could be used only in favour of the sick. The Ritual
states :
Benedicto Apostolica cum indulgentia plenaria in articulo mortis cum
soleat impertiri post Sacramenta Poenitentiae, Eucharistiae ct Extremae
Unctionis illis infirmis qui illam peterint, dum sana mente ct integris sensibus
erant, seu vcrisimilter petiisent, vel dederint signa contritionis. ...1
In this and in the subsequent rubrics dealing with the blessing
the Ritual envisages only the ordinary case in which it would
be administered to a person who has just received the last
Sacraments. Like Extreme Unction, therefore, the Apostolic
blessing would be given only to a person who is in danger of
death through sickness. Similarly the words of the Bull Pia
Mater, by which Pope Benedict XIV empowered bishops to
delegate this faculty to their priests, imply that the subject be
‘ aegrotus,’ ‘ infirmus,’ ‘ in extrema agone laborans.' 2 Nowhere,
however, was this condition explicitly prescribed nor was it
necessary that the subject should first have received the sacra
ments of Penance, Eucharist, and Extreme Unction. In 1775
the question was submitted to the Sacred Congregation of
Indulgences :
Benedictio in articulo mortis cum applicatione indulgentiae plenariae
potestne, si sit periculum in mora, concedi tum valide, tum licite, iis qui
etiam culpabiliter non fuerunt ab incepto morbo Sacramentis refecti vel
Poenitentiae, vel Eucharistiae, vel extremae Unctionis, vel nullo horum,
subitoque vergunt ad interitum ?
The reply of the Congregation was :
Affirmative ad formam Bullae Benedicti XIV.3
Furthermore, on 10th August, 1841, the Sacred Congregation
of Propaganda, in reply to the Vicar Apostolic of Tonkin,
explicitly decided that if possible the plenary indulgence in
articulo mortis should be administered to those who were con
demned to death either when they were actually being led to
execution or on the day on which they were to suffer that
penalty.1 Finally, amongst the faculties granted by the Sacred
Consistorial Congregation at the beginning of the second world
1 Rit. Rom., tit. vi, cap. vi, n. i.
’ Vide Collectanea S. Congregationis de Propaganda Fide, n. 1134 ; also O KaneFallon, Rubrics of the Roman Ritual (1932 edition), n. 928.
1 Decreta S. Congregationis indulgentiarum, η. 237.
4 Collectanea Decretorum S. Sedis, η. 1074.
182
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
war to major army chaplains, wc find the following directions :
‘ When fighting Ls imminent or actually begun :—
‘ (a) Priests must remember that even though they be not
approved for confessions they have the faculty to absolve, as
being in danger of death, all soldiers immediately before the
battle or while actually engaged in it, giving a particular absolu
tion from all sins and censures, and the injunctions which should
be given.
‘ (ό) Priests may absolve from all sins and censures howsoever
reserved or notorious, by a general formula or common absolu
tion, without previous oral confession, but after an act of
contrition duly made, when cither because of the number of
the soldiers or of the want of time their confessions cannot be
heard individually, and after such absolution may admit them
to Holy Communion by way of Viaticum. They should not
fail to inform the penitents that absolution so received will be
of no benefit unless they arc properly disposed, and that they
remain bound to make a complete confession in its proper
time.
‘ (c) Finally, priests may give the Apostolic blessing with a
plenary' indulgence using this formula :
* Ego, facultate mihi ab Apostolica Sede tributa. Indulgentiam plenariam
ct remissionem omnium peccatorum vobis concedo in nomine Patris ct Filii
et Spiritus Sancti. Arnen.
c Since on account of the war even cities which are called free
or open arc exposed to aerial attacks, lest the faithful be deprived
of the resources of religion in danger of death priests may, when
there is danger of death during the aforesaid attacks, absolve
them from all sins and censures though reserved and notorious
even by' a general formula . . . and give them the Apostolic
blessing with the plenary indulgence mentioned above.’*1
It should be borne in mind that certain conditions must still
be fulfilled by the subject who wishes to benefit by' the indul
gence. The plenary indulgence is gained not at the time when
the blessing is received, but only in articulo mortis. It is necessary
that at the moment of death the dying person have the dis
positions of sorrow for sin, fervent love of God and resignation
to His Will,2 so as to accept death from His hand, and that he
1/I.4.S., vol. xxxi, n. 16, p. 710; Translation in Bouscarcn, Canon Law
Digest Supplement, 1941, p. 70 ; Subsequent decisions by the Sacred Peniten
tiary on 10th December, 1910 (.4..I.S., vol. xxxii, p. 571) and 25th March,
1944 (.4..4.S., vol. xxxvi, p. 155), have explained more fully the conditions
under which Sacramental Absolution is to be given in a general manner to
many people simultaneously.
1 Vide Bull, Pia Mater; also Beringer, Les Indulgences (edition 1925), n. 1027.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
183
invoke at least mentally the Holy Name, ‘ Jesus.’1 Though the
indulgence can be gained only once in life, the blessing may be
repeated as often as the person is placed in a new danger of
death.
COLOUR OF STOLE TO BE USED IN BLESSINGS
We are not accustomed here to have a procession on 2nd February.
The candles are blessed and distributed to the faithful before Mass.
May this blessing be carried out by the celebrant when he is vested
for the Mass in white vestments? For practically all the ordinary
blessings the Ritual prescribes that one may wear a white stole, or a
stole of the colour of the day; hence I presume that it is not necessary
to put on a violet stole for the blessing of the candles.
Perplexed.
The special blessing of candles according to the formula
prescribed in the Missal for use on 2nd February may be carried
out only as a preparation for the procession. It is by no means
certain that this blessing is a constitutive blessing.2 From the
text of the prayers it would seem that it is merely invocative ;
the candles are blessed only for the occasion, and hence an early
decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites directs that the
candles should be distributed only to those who intend to go
in procession.3 As in the case of the blessing of the palms on
Palm Sunday, the rubrics envisage only one set of circumstances
in which the special blessing of candles may be held apart from
the procession, namely, when the Blessed Sacrament is exposed
for the Forty Hours’ Prayer and the procession could not take
place because of the danger of irreverence.4 The procession,
therefore, may not be omitted at will.5 If it cannot be held,
neither should the special formula found in the Missal for
blessing candles on 2nd February be recited. Instead, if it is
desired to bless candles without holding the procession, a
blessing from the Ritual should be used.
The formula to be found in the Roman Ritual (tit. ix,
cap. viii) may be availed of on any occasion for the blessing
* S.C.Indul. : ‘. . . invocatio saltem mentalis SS. Nominis Jcsu est
conditio sine qua non pro universis Christifidelibus qui in articulo mortis con
stituti indulgentia plenariam assequi volunt vi huius benedictionis . . .’
(N. 1078 in Collectanea .S’. Sedis.)
* Ephetn. Lit., 1921, p. 121 ; 1937, pp. 65 and 130.
’S.R.C., 585 n. : ‘ In Purificationis B.M.V. die distributio candelarum
fiat tantum interessentibus processione.’
‘S.R.C. 2621 (17th September, 1822).
‘Vide Fortcscuc-O’Conncll, Ceremonies of Roman Rite (7th edition), p. 250
note 4.
184
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
of candles.1 When it is used on the feast of the Purification,
white vestments should be worn because white is the colour for
the Office and Mass of the day. It is not, however, correct
to say that the Ritual prescribes that a white stole be worn for
all the ordinary blessings. The general direction contained in
the Roman Ritual regarding the colour of the stole to be used
in blessings is as follows :
In omnia benedictione extra Missam, Sacerdos saltem supcrpcllicco ct
stola coloris tempori convenientis utatur, nisi aliter notetur.8
The smaller ritual, Collectio ex Rituali Romano, which is commonly
used in Ireland directs for most of the usual blessings that one may
wear Stola alba vel coloris diet. This general permission to use
a white stole for most blessings is not derived from the rubrics
of the Roman Ritual, but is, nevertheless, supported by the
unanimous opinion of rubricists.1*34 For the individual blessing
the rubric concerning this detail is directive, rather than pre
ceptive.1 The rules generally to be followed in the choice of
a stole for blessings have been aptly summarized as follows:5
‘ If no colour is indicated in the Ritual : (fl) it is always
lawful to use the colour which is required by the nature of the
case, namely, that corresponding to the saint or mystery in
honour of which the blessing is given ; wherefore if the greater
part of the formula consists of an absolution or an exorcism, a
violet stole should be worn ; (ό) it is always lawful to use the
colour of the day except when violet is required for an absolution
or exorcism ; (c) it is lawful also to choose a white stole when
no other is required by the nature of the ease, or when there is
doubt about the colour prescribed, or in general when the
blessing is performed outside a church and it is difficult to
provide a stole of any other colour.’
,JI
RUBRICS OF THE FUNERAL SERVICE
(1) Must the Absolution be read after an exequial Mass when
the funeral will not take place until the afternoon? May the Absolu
tion be postponed until the time of the funeral? When the Mass is
1 Various other formulae for the blessing of candles arc given in the Roman
Ritual : (a) for use on the feast of St. Blaise (tit. iv, n. 7) ; (b) for use by
members of the Society of the Most Holy Rosary and (c) in honour of St.
Raymond Nonnatus (reserved). Cf. S.R.C., 1st February, 1924.
1 Rit. Rom. tit. ix, cap. i, n. 6.
* E.g. Catalanus, Commentarium in Rit. Rom., viii ; Van der Stappen, De
Sacra Lilurgia, iv, q. 333.
4 Callcwaert, De Sacra Liturgia Universim.
* Cappello, De Sacramentis, i, § 119.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
185
the ordinary second Mass on a Sunday, may the Leonine prayers be
omitted because the Absolution ceremony immediately follows the
Mass ?
(2) Is it correct to omit the In paradisum when the body is not
brought for burial immediately after the Absolution ceremony?
(3) Is it correct for the celebrant to say prayers in the vernacular
for the deceased immediately after the Mass and before the
Absolution?
Sacerdos.
(1) After the exequial Mass, the Absolution should be given,
even when the funeral docs not take place until the afternoon.
Later in the day the Absolution may be repeated on the occasion
of the funeral, but it is not necessary to repeat it. The rubrics of
the Roman Ritual state
Finita Missa Celebrans . . . facit
Absolutionem, and Decree N. 3748 also makes it clear that the
Absolution should be carried out after the exequial Mass. After
a Requiem Mass which is not the funeral Mass, e.g. a Requiem
Mass on the third, seventh or anniversary day, there is no
obligation per se to have the Absolution ceremony at all, but
after the cxequial Mass it is of obligation. Except at the funeral
of a prelate2 it is not permissible to have several Absolutions
consecutively immediately after Mass, but it is not contrary to
the rubrics or decrees to repeat the Absolution later in the day
when the funeral actually takes place.
It would not be correct, however, to hold the Absolution
ceremony immediately after and in connection with the Sunday
Mass, even when the Mass has been offered for the deceased.
Several decrees3 insist that the Absolution may not be given
in connection with any Mass which is not a Requiem. An
cxequial Requiem Mass may be celebrated on a Sunday ;1
for a poor person it may be a low Mass, but, since it is to be
followed immediately by the Absolution given by the celebrant
of the Mass, Leonine prayers should be omitted.5 If, however,
the ordinary Sunday Mass is celebrated, or on the more solemn
feasts when the cxequial Mass is prevented, the Absolution
ceremony must take place independently of the Mass. In this
case the Absolution should be carried out only in the afternoon
’Tit. vii, cap. iii.
1 Carr. Epis., lib. ii, cap. xi, n. 13. * Si aderit in ecclesia lectus mortuorum,
scu castrum doloris, ct Missa celebrata sit pro anima alicuius Summi Pontificis,
vel S.R.E. Cardinalis, scu Metropolitani, aut Episcopi proprii, scu Imperatoris
vel Ducis magni, aut Domini loci, conveniens est, ut fiant absolutiones. . . . ’
’S.R.C., 2696, 3014, 3570, 3946, 4130, etc.
‘ Addit, et Var., in Rub. Missalis, tit. iii.
‘S.R.C. 3697; vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 207.
186
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
when the funeral takes place ; or if it must be given in the
morning, it should, if possible, be given by a priest other than
the celebrant of the Mass. If no other priest is available, the
celebrant of the Mass should recite all the prayers at the con
clusion of the Mass in the ordinary way and retire to the
sacristy to remove the Mass vestments. After a suitable delay
he may, wearing a surplice, stole and black cope, give the
Absolution. A coffin or catafalque should not be set up before
the altar during the celebration of a Sunday or feast Mass;
the coffin should be put into position before the altar, and other
necessary preparations made for the Absolution only after the
Mass and when the celebrant has retired from the altar. *
(2) In the Roman Ritual the rubric immediately preceding
the In paradisum reads :
Finita Oratione, corpus defertur ad sepulcrum, si tunc deferendum sit :
dum autem portatur, vel in eodem loco, si tunc non portetur, Clerici cantant
Antiphonam ‘ In paradisum.’
A similar rubric precedes the Ego sum and Benedicius—
Deinde etiamsi corpus tunc ad sepulcrum delatum non fuerit, Sacerdos
prosequatur Officium, ut infra, quod nunquam omittitur ; et intonat
Antiphonam : ‘ Ego sum.’
Hence, after the Absolution, if the body is not taken at once for
burial, the antiphons In paradisum and Ego sum with the Bene
dictus vcrsicles and prayers are to be said or sung in the church.
This procedure most closely conforms to the rubrics.
It must, however, be remembered that the practice of adding
on the In paradisum in the church has arisen from custom. In
1832 the Sacred Congregation of Rites published the following
question and reply :
Quamvis Rubrica Ritualis titulo de Excquiis praescribat Responsorium :
In Paradisum, etc., tum decantari debere quum cadaver ad sepulcrum
defertur ; in Civitate tamen Brixien. ob sepulchred distantiam usus invaluit
praedictum Responsorium cum aliis precibus decantari tempore absolu
tionis. Hinc quaeritur : Utrum usus an Rubrica servari debeat ? Response :
Posse continuari, iuxta consuetudinem aliarum Ecclesiarum.
Hence whether or not the In paradisum is to be said apart from
the funeral really depends on established custom ; the general
custom in Ireland is that it is always said or chanted imme
diately after the Absolution. If there is no such custom, then
the celebrant should, immediately after the Absolution, recite
the Ego sum, Benedictus and concluding exequial prayers,1 these
are never omitted, even when the funeral is postponed. The
1 Vide Haegy, Ceremonial. i, §§ 701, 709; ii, § 185; De Amicis, Caeremoniale Parochum, p. 328; Wapclhorst, Compendium, p. 500.
TUE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
187
In paradisum is a processional antiphon, hence some authors1
suggest that if the funeral is not taking place at once the body
should be borne to the porch of the church while the In para
disum is said, and in the porch the Ego sum and other prayers
prescribed for the graveside may be finished. These prayers
need not be repeated again at the funeral, but the whole funeral
service or the service beginning with the In paradisum may be
repeated later in the day in the same or in a different church.
(c) Yes. Prayers in the vernacular may not be inserted in
the actual Absolution service but may be recited before or
after it.
. . . postquam ritus absolutionis persolutus est . . . vel ad summum
interfici Officium inter et absolutionem, ut fit pro funebri Oratione post
Missam solcmncin et ante absolutionem ad castrum doloris.2
This is also the correct moment for the preaching of a panegyric
if one is permitted. The Maynooth Statutes direct :3
Si vero oratio funebris pro aliquo defuncto cum debita licentia habenda
est, in ecclesia a sacerdote recitanda est post ultimum cvangelium, et orator
nec stolam nec supcrpelliceum deferat, sed tantum vestem talarem ; peracto
sermone fit absolutio.
FUNERAL CEREMONIES
1. At a funeral with low Mass is the priest who celebrates the
Mass bound to perform all the funeral rites, or can any priest conduct
the funeral ceremonies?
2. Is the grave to be blessed at each funeral, although the
cemetery has already been blessed?
3. Can the funeral rites be conducted in Latin, and afterwards in
English, on the same occasion?
Rubrics.
(1) The Absolution pro Defunctus which takes place immediately
after the cxequial Mass forms virtually one ceremony with the
Mass.1 Hence the rubrics5 and also the decrees of the Sacred
Congregation of Rites0 clearly direct that the Absolutio is to be
carried out only by the celebrant of the Mass. To pronounce
the Absolutio immediately after the Mass without having first
celebrated the funeral Mass is an episcopal privilege which
could not be exercised by any priest. Normally the funeral
1 E.g. Van dcr Stappcn. Vide Crogaert, Caeremoniale, ii, p. 322.
1 S.R.C., 3790; Cf. Caer. Epis. I, cap. xxii. n. 6; II, cap. xi, n. 10.
S.R.C., 2888.
1N. 330 (1927).
*1. E. Record, 1916, p. 500; June. 1936.
* Rit. Rom., vi, cap. iii, n. 7 ; Caer. Ep., ii, cap. xxxvii ; Rub. Miss., xiii, 4.
• 3029 ad 10, 3798 ad 2, 3066.
188
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
will take place after the absolution rite. In the rubrics of the
Rituale Romanum1 it is presumed that the place of burial will
be close at hand and, therefore, that the celebrant of the Mass
will also perform the burial rite at the graveside. If, however,
the cemetery be distant from the church the celebrant should,
after the Absolutio, recite in full the prayers for the burial. These
latter prayers may afterwards be repeated at the graveside
by another priest who would begin with the antiphon In
Paradisum.2
(2) In a decree dated May 27, 1846, the Sacred Congre
gation of Rites has dealt with the following questions :3
(a) An sepulcrum quod novuin foditur in coemeterio rite benedicto, prima
tamen vice benedicendum sit ?
(b) Si negative ad primum, an igitur praescriptio haec tantum respiciat
cryptam seu sepulcrum lapideum in coemeterio vel Ecclesia aedificatum,
non autem simplicam foveam in Ecclesia effossam ?
The replies were ‘ Negative ad primum ; affirmative ad
secundum.’ It is not necessary, therefore, to bless the grave
at each funeral if the cemetery has been already blessed. But
a stone tomb erected in a church or blessed cemetery must be
blessed on the first occasion on which it is used because in its
construction new materials have been used. It is necessary
also to bless a grave which has been newly lined with masonry?
If, in due accordance with canon 1205, § 2, a grave or vault
is situated in a blessed or consecrated church, then it must be
specially blessed.
(3) Except in those places where a vernacular Ritual has
been authorized by induit it is not permissible, according to
the general law of the Church, to use vernacular prayers in
the burial service. Several decrees of the Sacred Congregation
of Rites forbid unauthorized use of the vernacular in liturgical
services.6 Although the burial rite extends from the beginning
of the Absolution until the final prayers in the sacristy when the
celebrant has returned, nevertheless it may be claimed that in
Ireland a legal custom has sanctioned the general practice of
reciting prayers in English at the graveside immediately after
the interment, and such prayers may be complete or partial
translations of the Latin funeral service. In the diocese of Cork
a vernacular service drawn from both the Ritual and the Missal
has, at least since 1860, been approved for recital after the
UV ll-
‘Tit. vi, cap. iii, n. ii.
H
1 Van Dcr Stappen, De Sacra Liturgia, iv, 272.
» 3400.
* Cf. S.R.C. 3542 (4th September, 1880); Van Der Stappen, iv. 271.
» E.g. 3113, 3496, 3530 ad 2, 3975.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
189
Latin prayers. Elsewhere the Ordinary could allow the custom
of adding vernacular prayers to continue and could approve
a translation of the Ritual prayers which may be used.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ABSOLUTION CEREMONY
AT REQUIEM FUNCTIONS
What precisely is the significance of the incensations and the
sprinkling with Holy Water at the ceremony of ‘Absolutio Defunct·
orum'l It is certainly difficult to see the value of such rites when
they are carried out at a catafalque merely absente cadavere.
M. C.
Incense.—The use of incense at funerals is probably the first
instance of its being introduced into a Christian ceremony.
Incense had been used extensively by the pagans in the worship
of their gods and by the Jews in the services of the Temple.
Hence at first the Christians refrained from using it in their
divine services but they were not slow to adopt the practice of
burning incense around a corpse. Doubtless, it served the
twofold purpose—the merely utilitarian purpose of counteracting
the malodour of corruption since the Christians did not bury
their dead with undue haste as did the pagans, and the incense
also suitably signified respect for the body which had been the
temple of the Holy Ghost. The use of incense in this way was
already by the end of the second century well established as an
integral part of the cxcquial rite. Tcrtullian in his Apologeticum
ad Genies when pointing out that Christians take their place
normally in everyday life, says : ‘ We certainly buy no frankin
cense. If the Arabians complain of this, let the Sabeans be well
assured that their more precious and costly merchandise is
expended as largely in the burying of Christians as in the fumi
gating of the gods.’ And in his De Idolatria, in treating of
covetousness and idolatry, he declares : ‘If the self-same
merchandise—frankincense, I mean—and all other foreign pro
ductions used as sacrifices to idols are of use likewise to men
for medicinal ointments, to us also over and above, for solaces
of sepulture. . . . ’ Later in the medieval period incense like
every other material thing used in divine worship came to be
blessed and was constituted a sacramental signifying the puri
fication of a person or thing from the influence of the demon.
The various reasons and symbolic purposes now assigned for
the practice of incensing the corpse may be summed up : (a) to
counteract the malodour of corruption ; (ά) to show respect for
190
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
the body of the deceased who has partaken of the sacraments
and shared in the Communion of Saints ; (c) to remind us that
prayer is profitable for the dead ; () to signify that the deceased
has gone to God in the odour of good works and freed from the
influences of Satan.
Holy Waler.—The rite of aspersion with holy water was not
part of the early Christian obsequies. The Church suppressed
as superstitious the various funeral libations of the pagans. Yet
for the early Fathers water was frequently regarded as a symbol
of death ; this notion was naturally suggested by the symbolism
of baptism—the old sinful man wras buried in the waters of
the font. For example, St. Gregory of Nyssa, in pointing out
that we can participate in salvation only in so far as we imitate
the actions of Christ, asks how can this be done. It is not
possible to be buried in the earth but water can take the place
of the earth. The figure of our death and burial in Christ can
be realized in our immersion in water. Similarly for St. Ambrose,
baptism was the true verification of the sentence pronounced
in Genesis against the sinner, 'Terra es el in terrain ibis' This
death was accomplished in the baptismal font where water
took the place of earth. Hence he declares
Fons quasi sepultura est. Mors ergo est, sed non in mortis corporali»
veritate, sed in similitudinem ; cum enim mergis, mortis suscipis et sepulturae
similitudinem : crucis illius (Christi) accipis sacramentum.
Probably when the custom of sprinkling the body of one of
the faithful with water \vas first introduced by the Christians
it was meant to symbolize his death and burial in Christ and
to recall to mind his reception of baptism.1
Later the water was first blessed before it was used in the
exequial rite.1
2 The first explicit mention we have of the use
of holy water in obsequies is in an eighth-century Gelasian
Sacramcntary.3 Possibly it may have been used in the sixth
century at the blessing of graves. St. Gregory of Tours (596)
records that he blessed the grave at the funeral of St.
Radcgundis, but in the Leonine Sacramcntary no cognizance
is taken of any such ceremony. Most probably the rite of
1 Vide Bcinnacrt, ‘ Symbolisme de l’eau dans le baptême ’ in Maison-Dieu
(η. 22), p. 94, et seq.
1 The earliest evidence we have for the use of holy water as such is from
the East. The Apocryphal Acts of Peter (Syria, c. a.d. 170) and the Acts of
St. Thomas (Edessa, c. a.d. 200) relate that water was blessed (a) to heal the
sick ; (6) to repel demons. In the West the first certain evidence we have for
the blessing of water—‘Aquae spargendae in domois in the Gelasian
Sacramcntary'. Vide Richctti, Storia Liturgica, iv n. 305
3 Zurich MSS., Rheinau 30.
•'Û
191
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTAL
sprinkling the corpse and grave with holy water really came
from non-Roman sources in France and Spain. In Ireland
and in many other countries there is a popular custom that
everyone who visits the house where a body is awaiting burial
sprinkles the deceased with holy water. No doubt for the
faithful this is understood as repelling all evil from both soul
and body of their departed friends. It is a long-standing
custom ; Walafrido Strabo writing in the eleventh century has
aptly summarized the motives inspiring it : ‘Just as the Chosen
People obeying the legal enactments were purified by blood so,
too, the new Christian people born again in the Sacrament
of Baptism are rightly sprinkled with blessed water so that as
the blood of the lamb was placed on the doorposts to repel
the striker so the persons and houses of the reborn are protected
by the aspersion with water.’1
RUBRICS OF THE REQUIEM OFFICE IN CHOIR
It seems to be the practice, at least in some places, for all the clergy
present in choir at the Requiem Mass to stand for the ninth lesson.
Is this correct in all cases? And what are the rubrics covering this
point ?
Anceps.
At a Requiem Office the person presiding should not read
the ninth lesson.2 It is certainly inorc in conformity with the
rubrics that all the lessons be read by the lectors, and that the
clergy present in choir should remain seated even during the
reading of the ninth lesson. In many places, however, custom
has sanctioned the practice by which the ninth lesson is read
by the officiant. If that custom is observed, then those in choir
should stand when the officiant reads the lesson.3
THE USE OF WREATHS AT FUNERALS
I have seen it stated that the use of wreaths at funerals is contrary
to the mind of the Church. I should be grateful if you would discuss
this question and answer in particular the following questions :—
(1) Has the Church given any directions about the use of wreaths?
(2) Would a priest be justified in dissuading his people from con
tinuing this custom?
Red-letter.
1 Migne, P.L., cxiv, col. 963.
*Carr. Epis., lib. ii, cap. x; Cf. Vavasecur-Stcrcky, ii, 164; Moretti,
pars, i, chap. ix.
* Martinucci, lib. i, cap. ii.
192
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
The use of funeral wreaths is a Christian adaptation of a
pagan Roman custom. In the beginning of the Christian Era
the faithful generally regarded it with disfavour, but it was
never completely abandoned. In Tcrtullian’s time the placing
of flowers and wreaths on coffins and graves was considered
to be an undesirable relic of paganism.1 Nevertheless the custom
survived, and in the third and fourth centuries, when it had been
dissociated from pagan uses and superstitions, was widely
practised. Certainly by the fourth century the use of funeral
wreaths was accepted even amongst Christians without question.
Prudentius mentions it with approval,1
2 and St. Jerome refers
to it as the established custom.3*
Apparently the custom gained approval in the first instance
through the practice of crowning virgin martyrs with triumphal
garlands. Frequently, wealthy Christians after the fashion of
their pagan neighbours had their private tombs in their gardens,
and in popular speech paradise was commonly described by
Christians as a beautiful garden. Hence in the Catacombs
around the tombs of the martyrs and other faithful frequently
there were carved representations of garlands and baskets of
flowers. At first, flowers were placed only on the tombs of the
martyrs—which also served as altars. It is not clear when the
custom developed of placing them on the tombs of the ordinary
faithful. Flowers and wreaths of evergreens were also interred
with the bodies as symbols of the Christian confidence in the
doctrine of die resurrection of the body.1
In the later half of the fourth century there was a strong
reaction against the use of wreaths and flowers at funerals. St.
Ambrose protested against it :6
Non ego floribus tumulum cius aspergam, sed spiritum cius Christi odore
perfundam. Spargant alii plenis lilia calathis, nobis lilium est Christus.
St. Augustine® points out that while this custom is a source of
consolation to the living, it does not benefit the souls of the
departed. We owe to the lifeless bodies of the faithful departed
the duty of interring them with reverence, but to their immortal
souls we have more important obligations which must not be
forgotten.
Despite the opposition of the Fathers the custom of using
1 De Corona, x ; P.L. ii, 89.
s Peristephanon, hymn iii ; P.L. be, col. 356.
3 F.pist. 26, Ad Pammachium ; P.L. xxfl, col 642
«Durandus
vii; Martenc, De Antie/uis Ecclesiae Ritibus, iii, 14.
* Dc Obitu Valentiam; P.L. xvi, col. 1376.
• St. Augustine, De cura pro mortuu gerenda; P.L. xli, col. 26.
'J!»
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
193
funeral wreaths persisted. In the medieval period this custom
naturally received many varied expressions in different coun
tries. In England, for example, in parts of Devon and Cornwall
there still exists the custom that a wreath consisting of a wooden
hoop with two half-circles crossing and covered with flowers
and ribbons is carried before the bier of an unmarried woman
and later placed near the grave.1 Always, flowers were used to
symbolize the innocence of the deceased and as an expression
of faith in the resurrection. In the present Rituale Romanum the
symbolic meaning of the practice is recognized. The Ritual
mentions funeral garlands only in the rite for the burial of
infants. There2 it is prescribed that in the preparation for burial
of the body of a deceased child
imponitur ci corona de floribus seu de herbis aromaticis et odoriferis, in
signum integritatis carnis et virginitatis.
We may conclude, therefore, that the use of wreaths at
funerals is not necessarily opposed to the mind of the Church.
For Catholics the custom when practised in due moderation
need not be condemned. Nevertheless it is also true that the
fashion of having an extravagant display of wreaths at funerals
has in more recent times been popularized by non-Catholic
sects. In the Continental countries it was encouraged by the
Masonic sects, because such lavish displays were meant as a
defiant contrast to the simplicity of the Church’s funeral rite.
Hence in some places the use of funeral wreaths has been for
bidden by local ecclesiastical authorities as an abuse practised
by those who rejected ecclesiastical burial, e.g., in the Arch
diocese of Mechlin (Belgium) the practice was forbidden in
1887, ‘ tamquam abusivus et a paganismo innovatus,’ and the
clergy were admonished to guard against its introduction, and
where it already existed, to eliminate it.3 In the general law
for the universal Church there is no prohibition against the
custom. In 1893 the Archbishop of Goa, Patriarch of the
Indies, submitted to the Sacred Congregation of Rites the
question :
Prohibendusne erit usus contegendi ramis et floribus tumulos qui eriguntur
in Ecclesiis occasione funeralium ?
1 G. C. Alston, Art. ‘Garlands’ in Cat. Eruy; Catalanus, Commentarium
in Rituale, cap. vii, tit. vi.
! liituale Romanum, tit. vii, cap. vii.
• Cited in Van tier Stappen, De Sacra J.iturgia, iv, q. 278. More recently
(1945) this statute has been modified to read: ‘Usui coronas in exequiis
fidelium ferendi non est farendum. In funere autem clericorum et per
sonarum religiosarum talis praxis tolerari non potest.’ Vide ‘ Ni Fleurs, ni
couronnes ’ in Lais Questions Liturgiques et Paroissales, 1947, No. 3.
8—1893
194
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
The reply was Tolerariposse.x In 1896 the Sacred Congregation
forbade the custom by which wreaths brought in for funerals
were allowed to remain hanging on the walls of the church.1
2
Obviously, there were many reasons for objecting to the latter
practice.
The moderate use of wreatlis is an appropriate mark of
respect to the dead and affords a consolation to their bereaved
relatives. Due vigilance must be exercised lest the faithful follow
the example of their non-Catholic neighbours who indulge in
extravagant displays. Catholics should remember that they
have still more important obligations towards their dead, and
that for themselves they will have a surer, more lasting, source
of consolation in their belief in the dogma of Purgatory and in
their practice of efficacious prayer for the souls of their departed
friends. A priest would be justified in discouraging the use of
wreaths if it is impeding a greater good, e.g., the offering of
Masses for the dead. It would not be true to say that the
practice has been condemned by the Church ; the regulations
laid down by local Ordinaries in other countries do not amount
even to a direction for priests in places where circumstances
are altogether different. The Irish national statutes state clearly
the general principles which may be followed by a priest when
he is directing the faithful in such matters :
Hortamur fideles ut gravibus impensis et vanae et inani pompae occasione
funerum non indulgcant, sed potius opera caritatis peragant, Missas cele
brandas prcccsquc fundendas curent, quibus animae defunctorum adiuventur.3
HISTORY OF FUNERAL ‘OFFERINGS’
fr-
Is it correct to say that the practice, common in many parts of
Ireland, by which the faithful contribute to a special collection on
the occasion of a funeral—the ‘ Offerings ’—originated during the
penal days?
N. P.
'4
«I
I
The custom of making ‘ Offerings ’ on the occasion of a
funeral is very much older than our penal times. From die
earliest times, although burial was regarded as a spiritual
function, the Christians had their funeral agapae at which the
poor were given hospitality and alms distributed in memory
of the deceased. On these occasions offerings were also made
to the clergy. ‘ To remove all suspicion of simony the Church
1 S.R.C. 3804 ad 6.
2 S.R.C. 3909 (22nd May, 1896).
3 Mqynooth Statutes, 3271(1927).
I
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
195
from time to time forbade the clergy to demand such offerings,
but it was never forbidden to accept what the relatives or
friends of the deceased spontaneously offered. Tertullian says
that there is no scriptural precept for oblations for the dead,
but that they were authorized by tradition, and custom con
firmed the practice of making them.’1
The Fourth Council of Carthage excommunicated those who
prevented the Church from receiving such offerings. Various
mediaeval councils up to the twelfth century repeated the pro
hibition against demanding offerings but permitted clerics to
accept those freely given.2 During this period the motive under
lying the practice of making funeral offerings had changed with
the introduction of the notion that almsgiving was not only
beneficial to, but even necessary as a suffrage for, the souls of the
departed. The change in the Christian attitude towards death
is reflected in the development of the funeral service : ‘In the
eyes of the first Christians initiation by Baptism, Confirmation
and the Eucharist was a sign of predestination, a pledge of a
glorious resurrection with the elect in the new Jerusalem. . . .
Whoever was numbered amongst the true Israelites could not
conceive the least doubt about the result of the Judgment. This
attitude is affirmed with remarkable clarity in two very ancient
chants fortunately retained in the present rite—the responsorium
Subvenite sancti Dei said at the expiry and at the entry of the
body into church, and the antiphon In Paradisum chanted at
the departure from the church.’3 From the time of St.
Augustine the faithful became more conscious of the need of
praying for deceased friends and ceased to regard the burial
service as a sort of canonization. Hence offerings were gener
ously made for the relief of departed souls.
In medieval England, in addition to the ‘ mortuary,’ a tax
exacted by the clergy on the score that the deceased may not
1 Vide Ferry, Stole Fees (Dissertation, Catholic University, Washington),
p. 24 : * Besides tlie offerings which were ordinarily due to the proper pastor
of the deceased on the occasion of funerals, custom in some localities sanctioned
gifts from the personal property of defunct parishioners. Thus in England
during the Middle Ages, the custom of “ mortuaries,” that is the gift of the best
or second best possession of the deceased, compensated for the fact that the
minister's fee was very small. Analogous to this practice was the so-called
“Jus Luctuosa ” that obtained in Portugal and elsewhere by which the pastor
was entitled to choose for his personal use the best garment, a gold vessel or
some other movable possession of the deceased ’ (p. 32).
* a.d. 398. The Councils of Meaux (ninth century), Ravenna (eighth
century), Bourges (eleventh century), Westminster (twelfth century), Fourth
Latcran (a.d. 1215).
• H. R. Philippeau, Sur la Liturgie dee funérailles in Questions Liturgiques
et Paroissiales, 1951, η. 5.
■■■■i
196
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
have paid all his tithes, there were important offerings both in
money and in kind.1 No doubt similar customs were observed
in Ireland, especially in the northern province where, in the
later Middle Ages, the Rite of Sarum was followed.1
2 Sometimes
these offerings were made at the Offertory of the funeral Mass
but an English council in the eleventh century directed
that the ‘ soul-scot5 (later called the ‘ soul-shot ’) should be
received at the open grave.3* The reforms of the Council of
Trent eliminated all such offerings during Mass, and the Ritual
of Pius V, while fixing obvious safeguards against the suspicion
of simony, recognized the right of the clergy to accept the
funeral tax fixed by the Ordinary or by laudable custom.1 In
Ireland where funeral taxes were not commonly fixed, the
custom of receiving offerings continued. A statute of a Synod
of Tuam in the seventeenth century mentions the practice :
Hoc sacrum concilium statuit ct dcccmit quod media pars oblationum
spontanearum in funeribus aut exequiis defunctorum, qui sibi elegerint
sepulturam in monasteriis aut ecclesiis regularium, cedat loco sepulturae sibi
electo, ct alia pars proprio defuncti parocho. . . . Hoc autem decretum ct
statutum est studio pacis conservandae inter utrumque clerum saccularem
et regularem . . . ct donec haec quaestio de oblationibus in funeribus
defunctorum factis decisa fuerit in curia Romana.5
A Provincial Synod of Armagh in 1624 gives directions con
cerning the division of the offerings. Certainly in the Province
of Armagh the practice was never reprobated but it has been
allowed to continue as a lawfully established custom.6
it
at
I
1 Vide Thurston, The Memory of the Dead ; Gasquet, Parish Life in Medieval
England ; Moorman, Church Life in England in XIHth Century.
2<. . . Nec in exorcismis, aut benedictionibus aut in Sacramentorum
ad ministr a tionibus, aliae adhibeantur caeremoniae quam a Sancta, Catholica
et Apostolica R. Ecclesia, admissae vel comprobatae juxta legitimum et
receptum ritum Ecclesiae Ardmachanac, quae usum etiam Sarisburiensem
passim in hac provincia ct per totum fere regnum hactenus toleravit . . .*
(* Consultatio Ecclesiae ’ circa 1647 or 1649, published Renehan in Collections
on Irish Church History, vol. i, p. 121).
3 Council of Eanham in England, 1009.
1 Cf. Rituale Romanum (tit. vi, cap. i, n. 9) Districte prohibetur ne quis sepulturae
vel exsequiarum seu anniversarii mortuorum causa, quidquid exigat ultra id quod in
dioecesano laxarum indice statuitur. Cf. canon 1234, 1235, C. I. C. Coronata,
De Locis et Temporibus Sacris, p. 247.
5 a.d. 1631. Renehan, op. cit., p. 496, n. 4.
• Renehan. p. 149, n. 25, in Decreta et Statuta Observanda in Civitate et Dioecesi
Cluanensi, collecta ex Provincialibus multis Ardmachanis, October 7, 1624. Catalanus,
Rituale Romanum (1757, p. 388), comments : * Fateor quidem retinendas
laudabiles consuetudines, sed pateri nihilominus cogor harum consuetudinum
praetentu, venatos non simul vel pauperum defunctorum haeredes a Parochis
ad funeris impensas . . . atque hae sunt importunae exactiones, quae occasi
onem dedare saccularibus Magistratibus Principibusque ut de re funerea
Leges ferrent, Neapoli, Florentiae, Mediolanac aliisque in locis . . ?
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTAL·}
197
ERECTION OF CROSS IN CEMETERY
What are the requirements governing the erection of a cross in a
graveyard? Must the cross be for the greater part at least of wood,
and is it necessary that it carry a figure of the Crucified?
Sacerdos.
The Maynooth Statutes prescribe :
Crux in medio coemeterii erigatur ; ad eius pedem vel alibi intra coeme
terium, preces pro defunctis saepe ut fundant fideles adhortandi sunt1
The cross erected in the centre of the cemetery may be of wood,
metal, stone or any other suitable material such as concrete.
For the actual blessing ceremony wooden crosses without the
figure of Christ must be erected, but these are necessarily of a
temporary character and should be removed when the blessing
has been completed. Nabuco writes :*2
Cruces lignac apponendae pro solemni benedictione sunt natura sua transi
toriae, nec praescribitur a rubricis ut in perpetuum imponentur humi ;
amoveri proinde debent die sequenti benedictioni ; nam cruces non benedi
cuntur et benedictio haeret loco. Expedit tamen ut, finita benedictione, in
medio ubi posita fuit crux maior lignea, aedificetur alia crux lapidea ornata
et peralta, ad cuius basim sculpetur nomen episcopi qui coemeterium dedicavit
cum dic dedictionis et alia digna ad perpetuam rei memoriam.
Obviously a wooden cross is not to be recommended because
it is exposed to the destructive effects of the weather.
It is not clear that there is an obligation to have a crucifix.
A cross without an image certainly fulfils the legal prescription ;
on the other hand a crucifix may more satisfactorily meet the
purpose of reminding the faithful to pray for the dead. Schulte
directs3 ‘ that over the principal gateway of the cemetery there
should be a cross and that the centre of the cemetery is to be
marked with a large crucifix of stone, metal or wood.’ In the
general law neither cross nor crucifix is prescribed ; the rubrics
of the Roman Ritual merely state that where a person has been
buried temporarily outside consecrated ground
interim semper crux capiti illius apponi debet, ad significandum illum in
quo Christo quievisse.4*
Hence, if there is no explicit direction from the local Ordinary ,
one may choose cither a cross or a crucifix. The modern
practice seems to favour the use of a crucifix. It may be of
interest to note that St. Charles Borroinco gives the following
instructions :6
*N. 320 (1927)....................
* Pontificalis Romani Expositio, ii, p. 197, n. 9.
5 Benedicenda, p. 53.
4 Tit. vi, cap. i, n. 24.
* Acta Eccles. Mediolan., lib. i, p. 503.
198
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Ad ostia autem maioris a fronte exstructi summa parte quae extrinsecus
est sacrosanctae crucis imago exprimatur ; in extremo crucis affixa imagine
capitis aut cranii hominis mortui.
In medio situ crux cx aurichalco aut marmore aut aliquo lapide confecta
collocetur quae in columna marmorea lapideavc seu in pila structili suffulta
aliquo decenti integumento operiatur, aut a ligno alte erecta constituatur.
The placing of a representation of a skull at the foot of the cross
was commonly a reference to Golgotha or to the ancient tradi
tion that Adam was buried in the hill on which the Crucifixion
took place.
WHEN EXEQUIAL MASS IS OMITTED;
BLESSING OF DEATHBED HABIT
Where it is an established custom to conduct a funeral directly
from the house of the deceased to the cemetery or when the relatives
of the deceased simply refuse to have the coffin brought to the Church,
is it permissible to celebrate the exequial Mass, absente cadavere, on
the day of the funeral? Should a shroud or ‘ habit ’ to be used for
dressing a dead person be blessed and if so what formula of blessing
should be used?
Neo-Parochus.
II
•I
C
Canon 1215 states that unless there is a grave reason to the
contrary, the bodies of the faithful must, before interment, be
taken to the church where the funeral service prescribed by
the liturgical books should be duly observed. Commentators
point out that the obligation is a grave one from which only
very important reasons would excuse and a contrary custom
cannot be easily admitted. It is agreed that the bringing of the
body to the church and the holding of the absolution service
is more important than the celebration of the Office and Mass.1
If the body is being brought for burial in consecrated ground
it is not so essential that the minister accompany the funeral
to the graveyard. The right to ecclesiastical burial is not merely
a private right and cannot be upset merely because of the wishes
of individuals.
Hinc si quis in testamento aliove modo statuerit proprium cadaver esse
sepeliendum absque ritibus ecclesiasticis aut cum nonnullis tantum, huiusmodi clausula esset spernenda utpote contraria iuri publico idcoquc tanquam
non adiecta habenda. Idque multo magis obtinet, si consanguinei vel
heredes impediant sepulturam ecclesiasticam aut unum aliumve ritum
praetermittendum velint.2
1 Vide Venneersch, Compendium luris Canonica, ii.
Canonici, ii.
’Cappello, loc. cit., p. 411.
Cappello, Summa luris
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
199
In 1919 the Commission for the Interpretation of the Code
decided that the danger of offence to the faithful or clergy did
not constitute a grave cause and added that the custom of not
bringing the bodies of the faithful to the church before burial
is to be condemned.1
Nevertheless it may happen that there exists a grave excusing
cause. In 1920 the problem arising from such a case was pro
posed from the diocese of S. Sebastian (Rio de Janeiro). In
that diocese the bodies of the faithful could not be brought to
the church because the civil laws required that burial take
place within twenty-four hours after death and the cemeteries
were far distant from parish churches ; the parish priests,
therefore, were accustomed to hold a burial service at the house
of the deceased and the Holy See was asked for a direction on
the rubrics to be observed. The Sacred Congregation of Rites
replied : ‘ (I) As far as possible the Roman Ritual and Canon
1215 are to be observed. (2) The family of the deceased should
be informed that a funeral with an exequial Mass can be held,
according to the rubrics and Decrees, even though the body
is only morally present. . . . ’2 The Decrees referred to in this
reply were especially the general Decree given on 2nd December,
1891 (S.R.C. 3755) and a reply given in February, 1893 (S.R.C.
3767) ; these decisions imposed a restriction by which the body
could not be considered as ‘ morally ’ present, for the purposes
of an exequial Mass, beyond two days after death. This restric
tion was not explicitly mentioned in the Additiones et Variationes
to the rubrics of the Missal and many rubricists held that it
was no longer in force after 1914. A new Decree was issued,
however, in 19423 reaffirming the restriction. It is clear that
the right to celebrate the privileged exequial Mass when the
body is only morally present persists only for two days after
the death, unless the Mass is liturgically prevented. If. for
reasons other than those arising from the rubrics, the Mass is
postponed for more than two days, then it has not the privileges
of the exequial Mass but has those attached to the Mass cele
brated ‘ opportuniori die post acceptum mortis nuntium.
*
Hence, in the circumstances described in the query, if for
grave reasons beyond ecclesiastical control the custom of not
bringing the body to the church has to be tolerated, the priest
should, at the house of the deceased or at the cemetery, read the
Absolution and other prayers of the Ritual in so far as may be
1 Vide Bouscarcn, Canon Law Digest, i, p. 569.
’S.R.C. 4357—I. Trans. Bouscaren, loc. cit.
’Vide /. E. Record, 1943, p. 425 (June) and July.
200
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
practicable.*1 Within two days of the death, a Requiem Mass
may be celebrated using the formula and all the privileges of the
exequial Mass and followed by the Absolutio ad tumulum {cadavere
moraliter praesente). Obviously the parish priest must take care
that by allowing these suffrages in the church he is not really
encouraging the custom of conducting the funeral directly from
the house to the cemetery.
The custom of clothing the body after death in a religious
habit is, no doubt, a development from the medieval practice
of deathbed religious profession. In the early Middle Ages as a
reaction against the pagan practice of unceremoniously disposing
of a corpse the Christians evolved an elaborate ritual for the
preparing of the body for burial. By the tliirteenth century this
ritual had fallen into desuetude, but it had become customary
for lay persons to make the monastic profession on their death
bed and so to earn the right to be buried in the religious habit.
Commonly the Benedictine habit was so conferred, but the
Cistercians, Premonstratensians, and later the Franciscans,
Dominicans and Carmelites all granted the favour to those who
asked for it. Lay persons who had been admitted to profession
in their last moments were designated as monachi ad succurrendum
(or sorores) and were enrolled amongst those who benefited by
the suffrages and good works of the monks. The Franciscans
and Dominicans popularized the practice very widely after the
thirteenth century ; the monks of St. Bernard on the other hand
always discouraged it.2 The sixteenth-century reformers
opposed it as a superstitious practice and an empty formula.
It was not a mere formality, however, but was meant to
symbolize a real conversion and where possible a full act of
profession was required from the dying person. The custom
has continued in these times mainly because members of the
Third Orders of St. Francis and St. Dominic and Oblates of
St. Benedict commonly make provision for their clothing at
death in the habits of these Orders. Also persons who have been
enrolled in the Brown Scapular commonly wish to be buried
in a Carmelite habit of which the scapular is the most important
feature. In practice ordinarily the person to be clothed in the
habit will have in life been enrolled in the scapular or in the
appropriate Confraternity and no blessing of the shroud is
necessary. In the Ritual the blessings used by the Church arc
1 Cf. Dunne, Ritual Explained, p, 97.
1 Vide Gougaud, Devotional Practices in λ-fiddle Ages, chap, vi ; Philippcan,
• La toilette funebré ’ 'Paroisse et Lil,, 1952, η. 2, ct in Maison-Dieu, i). Brady,
I. E. Record, November, 1952.
1
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTAI2J
201
invariably prayers for the spiritual and temporal welfare of the
person who will use these inanimate objects and so arc scarcely
applicable to a dead person. However, on the score that he is
fulfilling now the wishes expressed by the deceased during life,
a priest who has the necessary faculties could bless a religious
habit with the prescribed formula or the formula used for
blessing a scapular or preferably, on an analogy' with the sprink
ling of the coffin during the funeral sendee, he could simply
make the sign of the cross over the habit and sprinkle it with
holy water.
TRANSLATIONS OF THE RITUAL
On 28th November, 1947, the Sacred Congregation of Rites
granted a petition from Cardinal Suhard, Archbishop of Paris,
for authorization of the use of the French language in certain
portions of the Ritual for the administration of the sacraments.1
The principal provisions of this Decree arc : (1) in the sacra
ment of Baptism, Latin alone is used in the pronouncement of
the exorcisms, all the forms of anointing and blessing and in
the actual form of the sacrament ; (2) In Extreme Unction,
Latin is used only for the prayer of the imposition of hands, for
the anointings and the prayers following them ; (3) In Matri
mony, only the blessing of the ring and the formula Ego coniungo
vos .. . must be said in Latin and if the nuptial blessing is
given outside Mass it may be read in French ; (4) At Funeral
Services, the prayers and Absolution must be said in Latin,
but other prayers in the vernacular may be added in accord
ance with the directions of the Ordinary. The authorization
of this bilingual Ritual is simply an application of the Decree
of the Council of Trent (Session XXIV, Cap. vii) :
Ut fidelis populus ad suscipienda sacramenta majori cum reverentia, atque
animi devotione accedat, praecepit sancta Synodus episcopis omnibus, ut
non solum, cum haec per se ipsos erunt populo administranda, prius illcrum
vim, et usum pro suscipientium captu explicent, sed etiam idem a singulis
parochis pie prudenterque etiam lingua vernacula, si opus sit, et commode
fieri poterit, servari studeant ...1
On 21st March, 1950, the Sacred Congregation approved
the first volume of a Ritual for the use of the German dioceses
under the title : Collectio ritium ad instar appendicis ritualis Romani
pro omnibus Germaniae dioecesibus.3 The volume, published by
1 Questions Liturgiques el Paroissiales, 1918, p. 98.
'Ephem. Lit., 1949, p. 121.
* Ephem. Lit., 1951, p. 115.
*>
202
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Pustct, Ratisbon, contains the rites for the administration of
the sacraments and for the burial service. This Ritual, which
has been under preparation by a German liturgical commission
since 1940, goes much farther in its use of the vernacular than
docs its French counterpart.1 For the Communion of the sick,
the only parts which must be said in Latin are Ecce Agnus Dei,
Domine non sum dignus, Corpus Domini, vel Accipe Frater ; for
Extreme Unction, the prayers after the anointings may be said
in the vernacular, and for the Apostolic Benediction, Latin
must be used only for the formulas Dominus noster Jesus Christus
and Per sacrosancta. . . . The most notable change is made in
the Funeral Service, Latin remains compulsory only for the
Subvenite, Non intres, Libera with its vers’des and prayer and for
the blessing of the grave. In addition there arc many German
texts which arc not translations from the Latin but are new
explanations of the rites. For example, after the actual Baptism
and before the anointing with chrism there is inserted an
explanatory word : God has caused thee to be born again of water
and the Holy Spirit and has given to thee remission of thy sins and He
now anoints thee with the chrism of salvation in Christ Jesus, our
Saviour. There arc also many new rubrics. The order of
ceremonies in a full sick-call is Confession, Extreme Unction,
Viaticum and the Apostolic Blessing. Into the rite of com
municating the sick there is inserted the Pater nosier and a short
embolismus announcing the Communion and into the rite of
Extreme Unction one may insert a reading from the Gospel
(the curing of the centurion’s son), and a short litany modelled
on the third part of the litany of the saints. If no particles
remain in the pyx the priest, after communicating the sick
person, recites in the vernacular the antiphon O Sacrum con
vivium and the prayer of the Blessed Sacrament before giving
his blessing. There arc several additions to the burial service ;
in the ccmetary the Benedicius is followed by the Paler nosier and
other prayers in the vernacular concluding with a prayer to
the Blessed Virgin. For the obsequies of children the rubrics
direct : Latina lingua si in ecclesia fiat, latina vel vulgari si extra
ecclesiam. In the marriage ceremony, Ego conjungo vos is omitted
and replaced by a declaration by the priest that he confirms
and blesses the marriage contracted by the parties.
Many of these additional prayers and rites are borrowed from
local German rituals. The use of such local rituals has persisted
in many dioceses in Germany since the Aufkldrung, and the Holv
1 Vide Maison~Dieu N. 25, p. 83.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTAL
203
See has now recognized many of these local customs in order
to obtain a much-needed measure of uniformity. Because of
the difficult, disturbed conditions in Germany and the necessity
of establishing order out of chaos many concessions have been
made which were refused to the French clergy. In 1954, at
the request of the American Hierarchy, approval was given
for the use of English in the administration of the sacraments ;
the American bilingual ritual follows closely the German
model. In general such a privilege must be carefully handled ;
the use of Latin, amongst other obvious advantages, serves to
remind the faithful of the homage rendered in liturgical prayers,
that their primary object is to honour God to whom they are
directed ; they arc not intended primarily for the edification
or instruction of the faithful. Moreover, if prayers in the
vernacular arc not recited carefully they may prove a much
less effective stimulus to devotion than prayers in Latin which
arc understood at least in a general way. On the other hand,
for example, it would undoubtedly be a great consolation to
mourners to hear and understand fully the burial sendee. Father
O’Connell, speaking of the translation of the Missal prayers,
points out another obvious difficulty.1 ‘ The language difficulty
is also considerable, as the genius of the Latin tongue is very
different from that of the Anglo-Saxon. Latin, with its sup
pression of the article and often of prepositions, is characterized
by ellipses, and is capable of expressing much in few words. To
reproduce this terseness in English, to preserve the balance,
euphony and rhythm that result from the use of the cursus in
the earlier Latin prayers is well-nigh impossible. . . . Any
translation is but an approximation capable of indefinite
perfectibility.’
This difficulty may be illustrated by a few passages from
translations of the Canon of the Mass given in popular missals
for the laity. Monsignor Knox in his newly published trans
lation of the Canon2 renders some of the more difficult passages
as follows : Conclusion of Te igitur and beginning of Memento :
* On all alike have mercy, our Pope, and our bishop, and all
right-thinking folk that hold the Catholic and apostolic faith in
reverence. . . . Remember all who here stand about me ;
their faith, Lord, thou hast tried, their love thou knowest.’
The Quam oblationem : ‘An offering blessed and dedicated, a
sacrifice truly done, worthy of our human dignity and thy
divine acceptance—this, O God, do thou make of it, body and
1 Collectanea in honorem, L. Mohlbcrg, ί, p. 381.
1 Holy Week Book, published Burns Oates, 1951.
204
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
blood that shall be, for our sakes, of thy own well-beloved
Son. . .
Conclusion of the Unde et memores : ‘ . .a victim
most holy, a victim without spot ; bread so holy, it brings
eternal life, healing draught that shall preserve us evermore.’
In the so-called ‘ Knox Missal ’ the translators of the Canon
(O’Connell and Finberg) conform more closely to the versions
familiar to us in the missals of Dom Lcfebre, Dr. Fortescue,
Fathers Lasancc and Stedman and in the Dominican trans
lation. The phrase of the Memento under discussion is rendered
‘ whose faith and devotion arc known to thee ’ the Quam obla
tionem : ‘ We pray thee, God, be pleased to make this same
offering wholly blessed, to consecrate it, and approve it, making
it reasonable and acceptable so that it may become for us the
Body and Blood. . .
and the conclusion of the Unde el
memores : ‘ . . .a sacrifice that is pure, holy and unblemished,
the sacred Bread of everlasting life and the Cup (Chalice) of
eternal salvation.’
The merits of these translations may be judged in the light
of the opinions of established authorities. For example, Dr.
Christine Mohrrnann, commenting on the Latin of the Canon,1
says :
Il est très remarquable que même les reminiscences bibliques ont été trans
formées, qu’elles ont adaptées a ce style hiératique, très équilibré. Ainsi
par example ... la formule : panem sanctam vitae aeternae et calicem salutis
perpetuae, tournure d’un parallélisme parfait, qui n’est que transposition
liturgique de la tournure biblique : Ps. cxv, 13 calicem salutis accipiam . . .
This allusion is obviously lost in Monsignor Knox’s rendering.
Again, in his exegesis on a new translation of the Canon into
French, Dom Botte2 points out that ‘ fidei cultoribus ’ refers to
orthodox bishops who have the function of guarding the true
faith, and so it is construed in French
tous ceux qui, fidèles à la vraie doctrine, ont la garde de la foi catholique.
Also it is pointed out that devotio is to be understood objectively,
not as subjective feelings of devotion, and in this case, perhaps,
‘ love ’ or ‘ attachment ’ is the better version. The precise
nuance to be attached to the word rationabilem is uncertain.
Dr. Mohrrnann would support the translation ‘ reasonable ’ ;
Dom Botte, on the other hand, argues that while in the fourth
century redaction of the Canon the word described a spiritual
offering, by the fifth century it had come to mean one made
1 Maison-D'uu„ N. 23, p. 18.
’ Maison-Dieu, N. 23, pp. 37 ct scq. Cf. Jungmann, Missarum Solemnia, ii,
p. 230.
’ ’
; -
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
205
in accordance with the law, juridically valid, and so he tried
to convey this idea by translating it
la rendre parfaite et digne de vous plaire ct qu’elle devienne ainsi . . .
(Note that ut is here translated by the consecutive conjunction
tt.) These few points illustrate the many p'tfalls to be avoided
by the translator of liturgical Latin. The translation, if it is
to convey the overtones of the original, must not be too precise
and too easily comprehensible. . . . Some element of obscurity
or ambiguity cannot be eliminated—at best the Missal will
and must always remain the book of the “ mystery of faith.” ’x
Monsignor Knox seems to have erred in this respect when he
translates the response Et cum spiritu tuo, by ‘And with you,
his minister.’ Dom Botte aptly expresses this important con
sideration in relation to all translations of liturgical texts :
4 Et cum spiritu luo ’ par exemple, ou c per omnia saecula saeculorum ’ devaient
paraître étranges à des Romains de culture purement classiques, qui n’étaient
pas initiés à la langue de la Bible. Puisque le traduction est destinée a produire
sur la lecture moderne la même impression que l’original produisait sur les
premiers lecteurs, il fallait garder ces elements, au risque d’entendre dire :
4 Ce n’est pas ainsi qu'on s’exprime en français.’ Ce n’était pas ainsi non
plus qu’on s’exprimait en latin. Si les auteurs du canon ont voulu garder
les termes memes de Γ Ecriture, nous n’avions aucun droit d’expurger leur
œuvre sous prétexte de purisme linguistique. Un texte chrétien doit se
traduire en langue chrétienne ct non dans une langue profane.5
TRANSLATION OF ET CUM SPIRITU TUO
A review in the I. E. Record contains the remark that the translation
'And with you his minister ’ misses the overtones of the response
‘Et cum spiritu tuo' What are these overtones, and what would you
consider to be a correct translation of the response ?
Liturgist.
‘And with you his minister ’ is, of course, not a translation but
an interpretation of the response. It is an interpretation which
seems to carry a wrong emphasis because it emphasizes the
distinction between priest and people whereas the greeting,
Dominus vobiscum and its response were obviously meant to
1 Father O’Connell, loc. cit.
’ Loc. cit. Of the Latin language Pope Pius XII has said (address to
Carmelite Teachers), ' Proh dolor, Latina lingua, gloria sacerdotum, nunc
languidiores usque ct pauciores habet cultores . . . Enimvero Latina lingua,
itemque et Graeca, cui tot ecclesiastica scripta, iam a prisco Christiano aevo,
commissa sunt, thesaurus est incomparandac praestantiae ; quare sacrorum
administer qui eam ignorat, reputandus est lamentabili mentis laborare
squalore.’ (.-1./1.S., 1951, p. 737.)
206
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
express the closest union between the parties. ‘ El cum spiritu
tuo ’ is an intensification of the greeting and implies a certain
quality, a degree of feeling that is not easily conveyed in trans
lation. In the new German Appendix to the Ritual it is ren
dered : ‘ Undrnit deinern Geiste, and in the new French Appendix :
'Et avec votre esprit: These versions arc not improvements on
our 'And with thy spirit.' Neither will we make any advance by
translating it 'And with thee ' (or you), rather do we lose a certain
nuance of depth and intimacy. Admittedly the dictionary mean
ing of ‘ spirit ’ or ‘ spiritus ' docs not suffice ;1 the phrase must
be considered in the light of its scriptural background—even
Monsignor Knox uses it in his translation of the conclusion of
II Timothy (and of Galatians and Philippians)—and with
recognition of the fact that as a popular salutation it found its
way into the liturgy at a very early period. Such a popular,
scriptural greeting when enshrined in the liturgy not only of
the Mass but also of the Sacraments and of the Divine Office
where it must be said even in private recitation, is not to be
interpreted in a strictly literal manner. Wc arc not concerned
merely with deciding how a modern English speaker would
reply to the greeting ‘ The Lord be with you,' rather we are con
cerned to retain a depth of meaning to which he may be quite
insensitive. In the last century French rubricists made the
mistake of translating Amen by the paraphrase Ainsi-soil-il. That
it was a mistake to do so is now generally recognized, because
the strong Hebrew asseveration has been replaced by an
awkward expression only partially conveying the meaning of
the original. Similarly, it would be better that Et cum spiritu
tuo should be left untranslated rather than that it should be
replaced by an inadequate phrase.1
2 The Latin response would
really be understood by most ordinary layfolk as expressing
union with the priest in the Lord. The language of the liturgy
need not always be interpreted in a dry literal way appealing
only to the understanding. As Dorn Bernard Botte points out :
Le vrai langage humain, ce n’est pas le texte muet d’un livre qui transmet
des idées abstraites aussi claires que possible ; c’est la parole vivante qui
résonne dan’s l’air et qui traduit toutes les emotions de la personne humaine.
Ce langage n’est pas seulement intellectuel, mais aussi affectif.3
Many liturgical formulas must be impoverished if their content
1 Even apart from any mystical implication (cf. St. Chrysostom) the word
must be interpreted with reference to its scriptural background.
2 If a suggestion may be made wc would suggest the translation : ‘And
in your heart too (also).*
3 La Maùon Dieu. n. 32, p. 23.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTAL»
207
is to be reduced to what can be expressed with the precise
accuracy one associates with modern business.1
NOTES ON RECENT DECREES
(d) The Rubrics of the Pontifical for Episcopal Consecration :2 The
minister of Episcopal Consecration is a bishop and for the
validity of the Consecration one bishop would suffice. From
the earliest times it has been the almost unanimous ecclesi
astical tradition that for greater solemnity and security in the
sacrament two assistant bishops should attend also, although
the Holy Sec may in particular circumstances dispense from
this provision. It has not, however, been clear from the rubrics
of the Roman Pontifical whether these assistant bishops are
actually co-operating co-consecrators or arc merely witnesses
of the Consecrat’on. Hence, various modes of procedure have
been observed by the assistant bishops in different places. In
some places the assistants pronounced only the words Accipe
Spiritum Sanctum as the rubrics expressly enjoin, and they did
not recite the subsequent prayer and Preface ; in Rome, the
assistant bishops said submissa voce the prayer Propitiare and the
Preface following on the imposition of hands, but they did not
pronounce everything which the Consecrator recited or sang
from the beginning to the end of the sacred rite. Hence, in
order to establish uniformity of practice an Apostolic Con
stitution, issued by Pope Pius XII on 30th November, 1944,
directs : The two assistant bishops arc to be regarded as
consecrating and are to be called Co-Consecrators ; not only
do they touch the head of the Bishop-Elect, saying Accipe
Spiritum Sanctum, but they should have the intention of confer
ring together with the Consecrator Episcopal Consecration,
and they should recite the prayer Propitiare and the whole
subsequent Preface, and likewise throughout the. whole rite
they should recite submissa voce everything which the Con
secrator reads or sings, except the prayers for the blessing of
the pontifical vestments put on during the rite of Consecration.
The force of this Constitution is simply to make authori
tatively clear that the rubric given in the Pontifical immediately
lJungmann suggests : ‘Wc render its full meaning by saying simply :
“And with you too ” ’—but later he comments : ‘ Wir werden das El cum
spiritu tuo am bcslcn so verstchen, das die Gcmeinde mit dicscm ihrem Jawort
dein Priester zwar nicht erst cine Berchtigung oder Vollmacht erteilt, wohl
abcr, das sic crncut ihn als ihren Sprcchcr anerkennt, under dessen 1'uhnmg
sic in heiliger Gcmeinschaft Gott nahen will.’ (Missarum Sollemnia, i, p. 452.)
’.4./1..9., vol. xxxvii, η. 5, p. 131 (21st May, 1945).
208
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
before the Examtn, namely, Assistentes vero Episcopi submissa voce
dicunt quaecumque dixerit Consecrator, is a general rubric to be
observed throughout the whole Consecration. Hence the CoConsccrators must submissa sed clara voce recite the following
prayers, etc. : (1) The Examen, Antiqua sanctorum Patrum, to the
end of the examination; (2) The instruction Episcopum oportet',
(3) The invitation Oremus, fratres carissimi ; (4) The three blessings
during the Litany ; (5) Accipe Spiritum Sanctum ; (6) The prayer
Propitiare, Domine, and the whole Preface following it; (7) The
first stanza of the Veni Creator and the formulas for the anointing
of the head and hands, including the antiphon Unguentem and
Psalm 132 ; (8) The formulas for the delivery of the crosier,
ring, the book of the Gospels, the mitre and the gloves ; (9) the
antiphon Firmetur and the prayer at the enthronement. There
is no obligation on the Co-Consecrators to recite the formulas
for the blessing of the pontifical insignia, because these blessings
arc usually carried out before the ceremony of the Consecration
begins. When by a special Apostolic Induit the Consecrator is
assisted not by bishops but only by two priests not in episcopal
Orders, these assistants recite all the prayers and observe all
the rubrics as prescribed for the Co-Consecrating bishops.1
(b) Changes in the Rubrics of the Roman Pontifical : A decree2
issued by the Sacred Congregation of Rites on 20th February,
1950, makes the necessary emendations in the rubrics of the
Roman Pontifical consequent upon this Constitution and upon
the Apostolic Constitution Sacramentum Ordinis (30th November,
1947)3 which determined the Form of the sacrament of Holy
Orders in the dcaconship, priesthood and episcopate.4 The new
rubrics require that the Form of the sacrament always be
recited ; it may not be chanted even when the rest of the Preface
in which these operative words are contained is chanted.
Secondly, in the consecration of a bishop, the co-consecrating
prelates should impose hands successively after the principal
consecrator, not simultaneously with him.
The changes in detail arc : (1) Deaconship : In the general
rubrics the phrase which attributed the imprinting of the
character to the traditio instrumentorum is now deleted. The
B
h
«Si
‘Vide Moretti, De Sacris Functionibus, vol. iv, p. 109; Nabuco, Pontificalis
Romanis Expositio, tom. i, p. 242. Vide Infra the changes in the Pontifical
consequent on this Constitution and on the subsequent Constitution Sacra
mentum Ordinis (1947).
1.4..4.S., 1950, pp. 448-55; I. E. Record, September, 1950, pp. 267-72
’ 4..4.S.. 1948, p. 5.
* Cf. ‘ Constitutio Apostolica De Duobus Episcopis qui Episcopali Consccrationi Adsunt’ (Λ.<4aS1., 1945, p. 131). Cf. supra.
THE SACRAMENTS AND SACRAMENTALS
209
words of the Form, Emilie in eos . . . gratiae tuae munere roborentur,
which conic immediately after the imposition of hands must be
recited with the right hand extended and sine canlu. When the
ceremony takes place at low Mass, the whole Preface is recited
and the present prohibition of the chant will not involve any
change. During the remainder of the Preface the ordaining
prelate should keep his hand extended, but a new rubric inserted
after the words munere roborentur makes it clear that this extension
is not necessary for validity. The subsequent rubric for the con
ferring of the stole now describes the new deacons as ‘ Ordinali,'
whereas in the rubric formerly in the Pontifical they were still
referred to as ‘ Ordinandi,' until after they had received the book
of the Gospels.
(2) Priesthood : The new rubrics prescribe that the sacramental
Form, Da quaesumus, omnipotens Pater . . . suae conversationis
insinuent, be recited sine canlu and all die rubrics occurring after
this Preface now describe the recipients of the sacrament as
‘ Ordinati.' Hitherto in the Pontifical they were not called
‘ Ordinali ' before the delivery of the chalice and paten.
(3) Episcopate : The ‘ assistant bishops ’1 are now called ‘ coconsecrators ’ and a new rubrical direction is given for the
imposition of hands. The Pontifical formerly prescribed : Con
secrator et assistentes Episcopi ambabus manibus caput Consecrandi
tangunt dicentes : and rubricists directed that all three should
impose hands and pronounce simultaneously1 the formula Accipe
Spiritum Sanctum. The new rubric directs that the consecrating
prelates impose hands successively, each pronouncing when he
does so the Accipe Spiritum Sanctum, and it requires that the
‘ assistant bishops ’ have the intention of conferring, togcdicr
with the consecrator, episcopal consecration ; they must recite
the prayer Propitiare and the whole subsequent Preface and,
likewise, throughout the whole rite they should recite submissa
voce everything which the consecrator reads or sings, except the
prayers for the blessing of the pontifical vestments which are
to be imposed during the rite of consecration. Finally, it is
prescribed that the Form of episcopal consecration—Comple in
sacerdote tuo . . . caelestis unguenti rore sanctifica—must be recited,
not chanted.
1 Vide Nabuco, Pontificalis Romani Expositio, i ;
Catremon, tom. iv, tit. i, cap. 4.
Martinucci, Manuals
SECTION IV
THE LITURGICAL YEAR:
Special Feasts and Devotions
THE DIVINE OFFICE
CHAIR OF UNITY OCTAVE
Is there an obligation to call the attention of the faithful to the
* Church Unity Octave ’ which is announced in the Irish Ordo as
running from the 18th to the 25th of January? It is stated in the
Ordo that this Octave, approved by Pope Pius X, was enriched by
indulgences and extended to the Universal Church by Pope Benedict
XV. What are the indulgences attached to it and what are the special
spiritual exercises prescribed for its observance?
Parochus.
The week of prayer for the re-union of all Christians under
the Holy Sec is now properly known as ‘ The Chair of Unity
Octave.’1 This devotion was first established in 1908 by a
clergyman of the Episcopal Church in America, Rev. Lewis T.
Wattson, founder of the Society of the Atonement. In October,
1909, the members of the Society of the Atonement made
corporate submission to the Holy See and were received into
the Church ; in 1910 their founder was ordained to the priest
hood and becoming known as Father Paul of Graymoor attained
universal recognition as an apostle of re-union. On the occasion
of the conversion of the members of the Society of the Atone
ment St. Pius X sent a special blessing to the Octave of Prayer
for Unity and in 1915 Pope Benedict XV decreed official
recognition of the Octave as a form of prayer for the Universal
Church and attached indulgences to the recitation of the special
prayer which had been composed by Father Paul. During the
next ten years Father Paul strove to have the observance of the
Octave made obligatory with a status similar to that of the
October devotions. In 1925 with the support of a great number
of prelates he petitioned Pope Pius XI for an increase in the
1 Ft. Paul of Graymoor, by David Gannon, S.A. Leaflets on the history
and prayers for the Octave arc generously distributed front the National
Office, Chair of Unity Octave, Grayinoor (Peekskill), Garrison, New York.
210
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
211
indulgences and also asked that the votive Mass Ad Tollendum
Schisma be privileged during the octave, that there be special
commemorations at Lauds and Vespers of the Divine Office and
that the feasts of St. Peter’s Chair at Rome and of the Con
version of St. Paul be raised to the rite of doubles of the Second
Class. The Holy See, however, declined to take such unusual
steps and it was pointed out that devotions such as the October
devotions were not prescribed until they had already become
universally observed. The observance of the octave is strongly
recommended but it is not prescribed ; similarly in 1936 the
Irish Bishops granted approbation for the announcement of
the Octave in the Ordo and for its observance in their dioceses
but there is no general direction making the devotion obligatory.
In 1927 the Sacred Congregation of Rites gave to the Church
Unity Octave the more distinctive title Chair of Unity Octave.
The purpose of this new title was to distinguish it from other
ecumenical movements for Christian unity, some of which were
coining into being under non-Catholic auspices, and also it was
desirable to make clear that the intention of the Octave is the
union of all Christians under the See of Peter. In particular
the devotion founded by Father Paul must be distinguished
from the Universal Week of Prayer observed at the same time as
The Chair of Unity Octave. The Universal Week of Prayer was
begun in 1934 by a French priest, the Abbé Paul Couturier, in
co-operation with a Russian Orthodox student, Serge BolshakoiT.
In order not to offend non-Catholics by emphasizing the Petrine
claims the founders of the Universal W eek of Prayer stated their
aims in a vague, non-committal way as the ‘ re-union of
Christians in the manner best pleasing to Christ.’ The observ
ance of this week of prayer has attained a certain popularity
amongst non-Catholic sects but it is not in conformity with the
principles laid down in the Encyclical Humani Generis and in the
Instruction issued by the Holy Office in 1949 on the Ecumenical
Movement.
The indulgences for the Chair of Unity Octave granted in
1915 and confirmed in 1927 were temporarily withdrawn in
1938 when no mention of them was made in the first edition
of the Preces et Pia Opera Indulgentiis Ditata. However, in 1946
in response to a petition from the Superior of the Society of
the Atonement Pope Pius XII restored the indulgences in favour
of those who took part in the exercises of the Octave in any
church or public oratory. In the 1950 and in the current
(1952) edition of the Enchiridion Indulgentiarum the indulgences
are granted without any reference to participating in public
212
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
exercises. Hence the faithful may now gain an indulgence of
300 days each day during the Octave (January 18 th—25 th) by
reciting even privately the approved antiphon, versiclc and
response and prayer and al the close of the Octave they may
gain a plenary indulgence under the usual conditions. The
intentions fixed for each day of the Octave are : January 18fA,
The return of all Christians to the one Fold ; January \9th, The
return of all Oriental dissidents ; January 20th, The submission
of Anglicans ; January 2\st, The return of Lutherans and other
Protestants in Europe ; January 22nd, The conversion of Ameri
can Protestants ; January 23rd, The return to the sacraments of
all lapsed Catholics ; January 24th, The conversion of the Jews ;
January 23th, The missionary conquest of the world for Christ.
Apart from the special prayer (wliich is taken from the Common
of the Mass, Domine lesu Christe, qui dixisti Apostolis tuis, etc.) no
special exercises are required ; where the local Ordinary has
not sanctioned or prescribed public devotions during the Octave
it would suffice to urge the faithful to receive Communion and
to pray for these intentions, especially by use of the indulgenced
prayer.
MAY ASHES BE BROUGHT FROM THE CHURCH
ON ASH-WEDNESDAY?
In many Irish parishes the custom is firmly established by which
those who come for the distribution of the ashes ask for some ashes
which they bring home to members of their families who cannot
come to the church. Is this custom lawful?
Parochus.
We believe that where this custom is firmly established it may
be tolerated and there is no obligation on a priest to attempt
to eradicate it if to do so would probably offend his people.
On the other hand, the custom is really contrary to the rubrics
and the introduction or spread of it must not be encouraged.
Liturgical writers arc reluctant to approve of this custom ; for
example, when this question was discussed in these pages in
1936 it was pointed out ‘ . . . the blessed ashes arc a sacra
mental and “ In Sacramentalibus conficiendis seu administrandis
accurate serventur ritus ab Ecclesia probati.” ’ Nevertheless, the
practice has not been condemned in any of the liturgical decrees.
On the only occasion on which the question was expressly
referred to the Holy Sec, the Sacred Congregation declined to
» I. E. Record, 1936, p. 527.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
213
give a decision. In 1892, the Archbishop of Colombo (Ceylon)
asked for a direction concerning certain practices customary
in his diocese. He said :
Apud Christianos huius Archidiocccscos Columbi Ceylani, a longo tempore
usus invaluit sacros cineres . . . domi, ad instar cuiusdam sacramentalis
adhibendos, sccum auferendi. Cineres autem illos mutuo sibi frontibus
imponunt, illis corpus suffricant, ad morbos pellendos, et ad malas potestates
effugandas per domos spargunt, ct in puteos demittunt, imo aegrotantibus
ad instar remedii dcgluticndos tradunt.
The reply of the Sacred Congregation was : ‘ Non esse inter
loquendum.’ This was certainly not a condemnation of the
practice.1
More recent decrees (in 1922 and in 1924)*2 state that with
die approval of the local Ordinary' the ashes which have been
blessed on Ash-Wednesday may be distributed on the first Sunday
of Lent. These decrees arc sometimes interpreted as implying
dial for those who cannot come to the church on AshWednesday the proper procedure is to receive the ashes in
church on the following Sunday. Again, writers who are
opposed to the custom of taking ashes home invoke Decree
N. 1367 as forbidding a priest from going to the houses of the
faithful to distribute the ashes. Actually this decree admits
of a much narrower interpretation since it was a reply to a
parish priest assuring him that it was not lawful for a religious
to bring the ashes to houses in his parish.3 It is not clear that
there is any general prohibition against the bringing of ashes
by the parochial priests to people in their own homes. A
practice which may easily be a lawfully established custom.
Historical arguments really favour the custom of bringing
blessed ashes home from the church. It was not until the
eleventh century that all the faithful began to accept the ashes ;
before that period only public penitents came to the church
to receive the ashes and to begin their penances.4 A blessing
for the ashes was not common until the twelfth century when
it was becoming common practice to introduce blessings for
every material thing used in the Church’s services. Already
the custom of carrying away the ashes had become common
and it has remained widespread in many Catholic countries.
Λ writer in a recent number of Paroisse et Liturgie3 (published
‘Collectanea S. Congr. Propaganda 2197. This reply is not included in
the Official Collection of Decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites.
’Vide I. E. Record, 1924, p. 222. S.R.C. 4368, 4373.
3 Vide Mahoney, Questions and Answers, ii, p. 348.
♦ D.A.C.L., Art. : ‘ Cendres * (Dom Cabrol).
4 1952, n. 2, p. 124.
214
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
at Abbaye de Saint-Andre, Bruges) discusses the question in
reply to a query from a parish in the diocese of Malines where
the practice has become so common that only comparatively
few people are coming to the church to receive the ashes. He
says :
En apparence, ce souci de faire participer à la distribution des cendres
toute la famille légitimement absente est très beau. Mais trop facilement
cette coutume peut devier. Elle est tout d’abord un fruit evident de l’indivi
dualisme religieux actuel, qui préféré ne pas s'afficher en public de ce genre,
ou il faut se compromettre ; elle risque de plus de faire cvolcur le sacramental
en superstition.
The danger of superstitious practices cannot be ignored and
there is also the danger of encouraging laxity in persons who,
though they could easily attend in church, prefer to send others
for the ashes. Apart from these considerations and if the custom
is observed in favour of the sick or others who are reasonably
prevented from attending, we believe that it need not be
forbidden.1
OBJECTION TO THE PRACTICE OF TAKING HOME
BLESSED ASHES
Presumably the people want to take the ashes home to have the
benefits of the sacramental. But this seems to me to be a sacramental
which not only needs to be created by the blessing, but needs to be
administered and the minister is the priest and no one else. Hence
it would seem that, since a lay person cannot administer the sacramental
to anyone, the ashes at home are useless, except, as in the case of the
sick, they are administered there by a priest. I cannot see that blessed
ashes, even though the blessing is apparently constitutive, have any
significance or effect apart from the liturgy. I fear that the taking
home of the ashes is more a superstition than an intelligent act of
piety.
Hibernicus.
Sacraincntalia sunt res aut actiones quibus Ecclesia, in aliquam sacramen
torum imitationem, uti solet ad obtinendos cx sua impetratione effectus,
praesertim spirituales.**
ihe effects of the sacramcntals arc produced indirectly through
the good dispositions they inspire in those who use them and
through the prayers which the Church attaches to them. The
efficacy of sacramcntals is to be attributed primarily to these
*/. E. Record, 1917, p. 420.
* Canon 1144.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
215
prayers of the Church (canon 1144) ; the prayers of the Church
arc never vain, yet in a particular case a sacramental may not
produce its full ciTcct because of a lack of disposition in the
subject, or because of some other obstacle as when a temporal
favour sought through use of the sacramental is not really con
ducive to this person’s eternal salvation. Vcrmecrsch com
menting on the Church’s power to bless things even with a
constitutive blessing says i1
Quare ipsa positio signe sacri ab Ecclesia iam effectus quosdam, maxime,
spirituales, instrumcntaliter exigere videtur, cui efficaciae, quae magis stricte
est cx opere operato, efficacia orationis Ecclesiae deinde adicitur. Iu fit ut
res consecratae et benedictae virtutem spiritualem inchoative adiscantur ; id
est, vi benedictionis inducitur in rem benedictam permanens relatio rcalis
ad Deum, omnis auxilii auctorem, qua auxilii collatio a Deo vel quasi exigitur
vel imperatur. . . . Consecratas et benedictas esse res vel personas quas
Ecclesia benedicit vel consecrat non ambigitur, ita ut res permanenter bene
dictae constitutiva benedictione, re vera possideant inchoativam istam
virtutem supcrnaturalern. . . .
The purpose for which ashes are blessed is clearly expressed
in the prayers of blessing—it is to obtain for those on whom
the ashes are sprinkled the grace of true repentance, health of
soul and body, humility and true compunction of heart. Un
doubtedly, as our correspondent points out, the full bestowal
of these graces can be hoped for only when the ashes are properly
conferred by a priest, the appointed minister of the sacramental.
In the traditional division of sacramcntals the blessing and
administration of the ashes comes under the heading ‘ Tinctus'2
Hence persons who bring home the ashes to have them dis
tributed by lay people cannot hope to gain the full fruit of the
sacramental but may, nevertheless, gain some graces ex opere
operantis and it does not follow that their practice is merely
superstitious. The Holy Sec has refrained from condemning
such practices because the faithful may through them sincerely
seek health of soul and body. If people scatter the ashes over
their land, etc., merely as a charm to obtain temporal favours
they should be instructed that such practices are superstitious.
* Let preachers and pastors admonish less educated persons
that they must not attribute too great efficacy to sacramcntals,
nor think that these of themselves can avail much, without
any pious dispositions on the part of the recipients. Let them
especially reprehend those who use these sacred things like
charms, such as heathens have, to preserve them from the wrath
1 Commentarium luris Canonici, ii, p. 317. Cf. Cappello, De Sacramentis, i, § 99.
* The traditional division : Orans, tinctus, edens, confessus, dans, bene
dictus.
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
of God even when they arc sunk in the mire of the most hideous
vices.’1
It would seem that the blessing of ashes, like the blessing of
candles on the feast of the Purification and of palms on Palm
Sunday, should be described as intermediate between an
invocative and constitutive blessing. Van dcr Stappen so
described them
. . . benedictiones rerum intermedias ; illae nempe quibus benedicuntur
res, ut istac speciali modo instrumenta fiant salutis animae et corporis ; tales
sunt benedictiones aquae, salis, candelarum, cinerum, palmarum, etc.
*
On the other hand a writer in the Ephemerides Litutgicae3 states
that such blessings are merely invocative :
Benedictiones autem candelarum dic secunda Februarii, cinerum initio
Quadragesimae et ramorum in Dominica Palmarum, sunt sacerdotales, non
reservatae, verbales, solemnes et invocativae, ut per se patet.
More recent writers tend to place such ‘ intermediate ’ blessings
in the category of constitutive blessings, e.g. De Amicis say's :4
Cum autem nonnullae dentur benedictiones, quae nec stricte constitutivae,
nec simpliciter invocativae dici posse videantur, a quibusdam scriptoribus eae
intermediae dicuntur, uti benedictio aquae, salis, candelarum, etc., quae
ad solum pium usum adhibentur. Videntur eae nihilominus ad benedictiones
constitutivas reduci posse.
In so far as they partake of the character of things blessed with
a constitutive blessing the ashes may serve as a sacramental
even apart from their administration by a priest, but on the
other hand there rests on the priest an obligation to see that
they arc safeguarded from all superstition or irreverence and
arc used only for pious purposes.
THE
'RORATE' MASSES;
THE ‘SEPULCHRE’
DURING HOLY WEEK
(1) What are the Rorate Masses which are said in some places
daily during Advent?
(2) Is it correct to refer to the altar of repose where the Blessed
Sacrament is reserved from Holy Thursday until Good Friday morn
ing as the ‘Sepulchre
?*
Lone Ranger.1
2
1 Aptid Connell. C.SS. R., Sacramentals, p. 26 (Decree N. 350, II Council of
Baltimore). Cath. Ene., xiii, p. 293. Lcclcrq, ‘All the sacramentals have not
the same efTcct ; this depends on the prayer of the Church which does not
make use of the same urgency nor have recourse to the same divine source
of merit/
2 Litureia Sacra* iv.
3 1920, p. 105.
4 Caeremoniale Parochorum* p. 514 (1948).
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
217
(1) The Mass Rorate is the votive Missa de Sancla Maria in Sabbato,
which is to be used during Advent ; an almost identical formu
lary is used for the Mass of the Wednesday of Quarter-tense in
.Advent. Because of its Gospel pcricope, Missus est, i.e. St. Luke’s
account of the Annunciation, particular importance has from
mediaeval times been attached to the celebration of this Mass.
On the Wednesday of the Advent Quarter-tense, special
solemnity surrounded the chanting of the Gospel and in
monasteries homilies were delivered on the Missus est. Soon
the popularity of the votive Mass led to its being used frequently
either as a novena in preparation for Christmas or even daily
during Advent.
In 1713 the Sacred Congregation of Rites acknowledged the
custom of such an novena in Catania and directed that for the
purposes of the novena the votive Mass of the Blessed Virgin
could be chanted even on a Sunday or the feast of St. Thomas
provided that the conventual Mass was not on that account
omitted.1 In 1718 the privilege of including the Gloria and
Credo in the votive Masses of the novena was granted to the
Friars Minor :
Ut in omnibus Ecclesiis praedicti Ordinis, in quibus hactenus in novemdiali
ante Nativitatem Domini Missa solemnis votiva B.M.V., quae incipit Rorate,
absque Gloria et Credo celebrari consuevit, in posterum iisdem diebus eadem
Missa cum Gloria et Credo celebrari possit et valeat. ... *
The custom of daily celebration of the votive Mass throughout
Advent was not so widespread. It was firmly established, how
ever, at least in Poland, and in 1744 the Sacred Congregation
in reply to a query from the diocese of Cracow declared :
Tolerari potest Missa votiva cantata B.M.V. toto tempore Adventus,
exceptis solemnioribus Festivitatibus, dummodo cantatur sine Gloria . . .
et sine Credo, non omissa Missa Conventuali.1*3
A few years later, in a petition from the Polish Province of the
Discalccd Carmelites, the practice of having the daily Rorate
Mass is described as an immemorial custom :
In Regno Poloniae cum maxima solemnitate et concursu populi cantatur
ab immemorabili tempore in Adventu Domini singulis diebus Missa : Rorate,
votiva B.M.V. ...
J
On this occasion the Sacred Congregation decided that this
daily Mass could not be considered as a votive Mass pro re
gravi et publica simul causa, ‘ sed haberi dumtaxat poterit, ut
mera populi devotio.’ In accordance with the mediaeval
custom, the Rorate Masses arc usually celebrated before dawn
1 2223, 9th December, 1713.
’ 2238, 12th September. 1718.
3 2378, 22nd August, 1744.
218
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
or certainly at an early hour, because the solemn votive Mass of
the Blessed Virgin which did not replace the ordinary con
ventual Mass had to be chanted before Prime.1
(2) To refer to the altar of repose as the ‘ Sepulchre ’ is really
an anachronism, although the Sacred Congregation of Rites
has declared that where it is the established custom such a term
may be used.*
12 It is now, however, forbidden to seal the urn
after the manner of a sepulchre or to chant the antiphon Sepullo
Domino when the Blessed Sacrament is being placed inside it.3
In vol. iv 4 of the Decrees of the Sacred Congregation there is
published a long and detailed annotation relevant to this
question. It is there pointed out :
Per sc loquendo significatio pro repositione SS. Sacramenti in (feria V
in Coena Domini) est valde impropria ; quia tam in Ecclesia mors Salvatoris
nondum celebrata est, quam scpulchri Christi memoria non recolitur, ncc
Rubricae Missalis ct Caeremonialis Episcoporum remote quid innunt dc
Christi scpulchri repraesentatione.
The term may, however, be applied in a wide sense, just as in
the final prayer for their consecration the chalice and paten
are called ‘ Corporis ct Sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu Christi
novum sepulchrum.’ In general the tower or other receptacle
in which the Blessed Sacrament was reserved was often referred
to as the ‘ Sepulchre.’ It is an ancient tradition that Mass
should not be celebrated on Good Friday, but a general com
munion took place on that day, the Eucharist having been
reserved from the Mass of Holy Thursday. Since it was pre
scribed that after the Mass of Holy Thursday the altar was to
be washed, this reservation had to take place elsewhere. Some
times the consecrated particles were kept in the sacristy,5 hut
by the tenth or eleventh century it had become customary to
prepare a special place where the Blessed Sacrament could be
kept and where incense was offered and lights burned until
Good Friday morning.0 Hence originated our Altar of Repose.
The Easter Sepulchre had really an altogether different pur
pose and significance. Its origin was due to a devotion, popular
in England and elsewhere, by which the burial and resurrection
of Our Lord could be dramatically represented. On Good
Friday, at the conclusion of the ceremony of its veneration, the
‘S.R.C. 2417, 29th January, 1752.
1 S.R.C. 2873. In the reformed rubrics for Holy Week the term is avoided,
but the Blessed Sacrament on Holy Thursday evening may still be reserved
cither in a tabernacle or in a special urn.
3 Ibid.
4 Page 419, Suffragium, Super Deereto, 3939.
* E.g. Ordo Romanus Primus ; Vide Dix, Delectiori of Aumbries, p. 24.
• E.g. Larfranc's Directory of Bee., * locum decentissime praeparatum.’
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
219
cross was carried in procession to the sepulchre, washed with
wine and water and placed therein. On Easter morning, with
a great deal of dramatic ceremony, symbolic of the Resurrection,
the cross was taken from the sepulchre. By the thirteenth
century the custom had been introduced in some places of
placing with the cross in the sepulchre a consecrated host ;
the burial then was postponed until after the ‘ Mass of the Pre
sanctified.’ In England, in the fifteenth century, this was a
most common practice, and it was natural that with the develop
ment of the public cult of the Blessed Sacrament lights and
incense should be burned and other marks of respect rendered
at the sepulchre.1 It was perhaps through confusion of this
popular devotion of the burial of the cross with the practice
of reserving the Blessed Sacrament in a special manner that
the term ‘ Sepulchre ’ came to be applied rather incongruously
to our present altar of repose.2
THE REFORM OF THE HOLY WEEK CEREMONIES
L'Osservatore Romano, on 27th November, 1955, carried the
text of a decree of the Congregation of Rites reforming the
Holy Week functions and also an official Instruction on the
implementation of the decree. By virtue of this decree the
new Ordo for Holy Week must be observed from 25th March,
1956 (Palm Sunday), by all persons who follow the Roman
rite ; it replaces exclusively the rubrics of the Missal and of
the Memoriale Rituum. Persons who observe other Latin rites
(Dominican, Carmelite, etc., etc.) are not bound to accept the
new Ordo except in so far as it prescribes the times at which
the Holy Week functions are to be celebrated. The decree is
clearly a response to certain views which were discussed in
detail at the International Congress of Liturgical Studies held
at Lugano in September, 1953.3 This simplification of the
liturgy is not merely a return to earlier forms, but rather an
adaptation consciously moulded to suit the spirit of our times.
‘ It is precisely when Christian life sets out, with genuine and
youthful zeal, to make a new start, that external forms are
deliberately simple.’4 In the earliest times the sacred triduum
1 Vide Bridgett, History of the Eucharist in Britain ; Thurston, / ent and Holy
li'eek ; Corblet, Eucharistie Histoire·, Tyrer, Historical Surrey of Holy JIreek.
’ In Italy and Spain the altar of repose is known by the term * Monumento ’ ;
in France it is variously called 4 Saint-sepulcrc,’ ‘ Tombeau ’ or * Paradis.’
’Vide,
Maison Dieu, n. 37 ; Ephemerides Liturgicae, 1945, fasc. iii ; Paroisse
et Liturgie, 1955, η. 2; Worship, November. 1953.
4 Father Jungmann, S.J., in Worship, January, 1955, 'Church Art.’
220
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
from Good Friday to Easter was set apart for the commemoration
of the mysteries of Christ crucifixi, sepuilti, suscitati. For St.
Augustine, as for St. Ambrose, the idea of the triduum had its
origin in Sacred Scripture and did not rely on the appropriate
symbolism of the liturgical rites.1 ‘ The Scriptural foundation
of the Paschal triduum is the typology of Jonas and of the re
building of the Temple in three days ; that is to say, the
statement by Christ Himself that His death and resurrection
were inseparably conjoined : it is the same Temple that is
destroyed and then raised up again after three days, the same
Saviour who dies and rises again in the mystery of one single
Pasch. . . . And it is this Pasch of Christ dead and risen again
which, as St. Ambrose emphasizes, the Church celebrates
jointly by the fast and mourning of Friday and Saturday and
by the joy of the Eucharistic festival during the night of
Easter. . . .’1
2 The new arrangement of the liturgical services
with the Adoration of the Cross at 3.0 p.m. on the Friday, the
full observance of the fast on Friday and Saturday culminating
in the celebration of the Eucharist during the night of the
Resurrection, aims at etching clearly on the minds of the
faithful this fundamental teaching of Scripture on our redemption
by Christ who died, was buried and rose again for our salvation.
The celebration of the Eucharist on the evening of Holy Thursday
and the Communion of the faithful on Good Friday were
historically later additions ;3 these customs arc now to be revived
‘Ci
1 ‘ Si nous admettons que la liturgie de Jerusalem au IV siècle a inspiré
pour toute Γ Église le développement des fêtes de l’année liturgique nous ne
voulons pas dire que tout le monde a accepte aussi son esprit. L’idée
palestinienne de faire de la liturgie une reconstitution historique et de com
memorer concrètement les divers episodes de l'histoire sacrée a sans doute
été imitée partout mais le style, la mentalité, l’esprit de la célébration palestiennc
ne se sont pas repandus de la même manière. . . . À Jerusalem la célébration
était très évocatrice, parlant à la l’imagination et à la sensibilité. . . . Ailleurs
les grandes fetes anciennes, classiques, étaient plus dogmatiques, symboliques,
sacramentelles et mystiques. ... En d’autres termes : on ne commémore
pas seulement historiquement, expressivement, superficiellement l’cpisode
sacré, mais on le synthétise sous une idée soteriologique, un leitmotiv, de
sorte que cet episode s’accomplit encore en nous par le Christ, comme il
s’est accompli une fois dans le Christ.’ Herman Schmidt, S.J., ‘ L’esprit
et Histoire du Jeudi-Saint ’ in La Maison Dieu, n. 37, p. 74.
* Père Gy, O.P., ‘ Sainte Semaine et Triduum Pascal’ in Ia Maison Dieu,
n. 41, p. 9.
3 * Toutefois au temps de S. Augustin, la messe du Jeudi-Saint se dit après
le souper. ... Ce n’est portant pas une coutume ancienne conservée
uniquement “ in liturgisch hochwcrtigcr soit ” mais une habitude récemment
introduite, inspirée par le meme souci d'imitation littérale qui, vers la même
époque, fit adapter les récits de l’institution de l’anaphorc eucharistique aux
textes bibliques.’ Eloi Dekkers, O.S.B., ‘ L’Église Ancienne A-T-Elle Connu
la Messe du Soir? ' in Miscellana Liturgica in Honorem L, Cuniberti Mohlberg,
i, n. 70, p. 248.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
221
because of their pastoral value, although it has been argued
that cult of the Eucharist and especially Communion on Good
Friday do not logically fit into the ceremonies of the Triduum
Sacrum.1 Liturgical rites are not to be judged merely from the
logical viewpoint, but rather on the basis of how, in accordance
with the needs and customs of the times, they conduce to
raising men’s hearts and minds to God. The preamble to the
new decree emphasizes the importance of this pastoral approach :
Etenim sacrosanctae hebdomadae liturgici ritus, non solum singulari
dignitate, sed et peculiari sacramcntali vi et efficacia pollent ad christianam
vitam alendam, nec aequam obtinere possunt compensationem per pia illa
devotionum exercitia, quae cxtraliturgica appellari solent, quaque sacro
triduo horis postmeridianis absolventur.
The new Ordo is to be observed from Palm Sunday (now
designated Dominica Secunda Passionis) ; throughout Holy
Week no commemorations are admissible in the Office and at
Mass all orationes imperatae are also excluded. Hence even the
commemoration of the election or consecration of the bishop
as well as any other prayers prescribed pro re gravi arc pro
hibited. For the last three days of the week in public celebration
of the Office in choir or in common, i.e. by persons not bound
to choral recitation, Matins and Lauds may not be anticipated
except in cathedral churches, Vespers are omitted on Thursday
and Friday, and Compline is omitted on Holy Saturday. In
private recitation all the canonical hours must be said according
to the rubrics. This means that the public Office commonly
known as ‘ Tenebrae ’ ceases. ‘ Tenebrae ’ was never a liturgical
term, but was merely a conveniently descriptive term for
Matins and Lauds celebrated with all the medieval symbolism
by which the lights were gradually extinguished and the final
commemoration of the Passion was chanted in complete darkness.
The public celebration of Matins and Lauds must now be
held in the mornings of Thursday, Friday and Saturday ; its
ceremonial loses immediately its symbolic force and it will
become an exclusively clerical function. Only in cathedrals
where the Holy Oils are to be blessed on Thursday morning
may ‘ Tenebrae ’ be celebrated on Wednesday evening. On
Holy Saturday the final Miserere is dropped from Lauds ; after
the antiphon Christus factus est . . . the Pater Noster is recited
silently with a concluding prayer, ‘ Concede, quaesumus . . . ut
qui Filii tui resurrectionis devola exspectatione praevenimus. . .
‘Vide discussion between Doni Capello and Father J ungmann, La Maison
Ditu, n. 37.
am®’*·'!®·- · ■■ ■,;-
222
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Similarly in each of the Minor Hours and in Vespers of Saturday
the final Miserere is omitted. Hitherto Vespers have been
recited in choir on Holy Thursday after the solemn Mass and
on Good Friday after the ‘ Mass of the Pre-sanctified ’ ; liturgic
ally the arrangement was not a happy one and it is now to be
discontinued. Priests who assist at the solemn functions on
Thursday evening and Friday afternoon are absolved from the
recitation of Vespers ; similarly, after the Vigil celebration on
Holy Saturday, Compline is omitted because obviously it could
not be put in after the Lauds have been incorporated in the
Vigil Mass.
The times fixed for the different functions are : (a) Dominica II
Passionis—solemn blessing of palms and procession in the
morning ;1 (b) Fcria Vin Cena Domini—Mass for the consecration
of the Holy Oils in the morning ; Mass in Cena Domini in the
evening between 4.0 and 9.0 p.m. ; (c) Feria VI in Passione el
Morte Domini—solemn liturgical function (the anomalous title
‘ Mass of the Pre-sanctified ’ has been dropped) in the after
noon about 3.0 p.m. and certainly not later than 9.0 p.m. ;
(d) Vigilia Paschalis—vigil is to begin at a suitable time so that
the Mass will be celebrated about midnight ; the local Ordinary
in individual churches (not in the whole diocese) may permit the
Vigil to begin earlier, but not before darkness and certainly not
before sunset. The wording of this rule represents a minor
change from the 1953 decree which specified that the Vigil
could not begin before 8.0 p.m. ; for these latitudes the meaning
is much the same.
The Instruction accompanying the decree gives the points to
be emphasized in pastoral directives to the faithful and adds
rubrical notes on the proper carrying out of the ceremonies.
Amongst the latter the following details may be noted : (1) On
Palm Sunday and during all the days of Holy Week if the
ceremonies are carried out solemnly, i.e. by a celebrant assisted
by a deacon and subdeacon, the celebrant should not read
those parts which are read or chanted by the deacon, sub
deacon or lector. Hence the celebrant must not now read the
Passion when it is chanted by deacons nor the epistle and
gospel on Thursday, etc. (2) Distribution of the palms need
not take place on the Sunday ; the faithful may bring the
palms (or receive them at the door of the church) and should
1 Vide Decree of 23rd February, 1957 emending the times · on Sunday
where evening Mass is largely attended, the blessing of palms and procession
may be held in connection with it.
r
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
223
hold them during the blessing, and procession.1 (3) The altar
of repose may be decorated with veils and lights, but in accord
ance with the decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites
* plane commendatur severitas quae liturgiae horum dicrurn
convenit.’ The decrees forbid the use of black veils or the
display of relics or pictures at the place of repose ; it may be
ornamented with lights and flowers, but with due moderation,
since an over-lavish display of flowers, etc., would not be
consonant with the spirit of the season. The faithful are to be
invited to visit the Blessed Sacrament there reserved, but the
adoration formally ceases at midnight when commemoration
of the institution of the Eucharist gives way to the memory of
the Passion and Death of Our Saviour. (4) The baptismal font
will not be blessed again on the vigil of Pentecost, therefore
provision must be made for all the baptisms which will take
place during the year. (5) On Thursday and Saturday Com
munion may be distributed only during or immediately after
and in connection with Mass and on Friday only during the
liturgical function, excepting, needless to say, Communion to
the sick and dying. Where private Masses are permitted on
Holy Thursday, they must be celebrated in the evening between
5.0 and 8.0 p.m. (6) The Eucharistic fast is to be observed in
accordance with the prescriptions of the Apostolic Constitution
Christus Dominus. This regulation definitely abrogates the 1952
Ordinationes for the Easter Vigil and removes the anomaly
arising from the fact that the Easter Vigil had a special rule
for the Eucharistic fast differing from the rule for evening
Masses. The position now is that both the priest who celebrates
and the faithful who communicate at the Eucharistic functions
on Thursday, Friday or Saturday must be fasting from solid
foods for three hours and from liquids for one hour ; water no
longer breaks the fast at any time. Λ complete fast from
alcoholic drinks must be observed from the previous midnight
except that at meals a moderate amount of non-spirituous
alcoholic drink (such as beer or wine) may be taken. The
faithful may calculate their three-hour and one-hour periods
from the time of actually receiving Communion ; the celebrant
must calculate his fast from the beginning of Mass, but on Good
Friday, since there is no Mass, he may follow the same rule
as other communicants. Priests who celebrate midnight Mass
on Saturday may celebrate Mass again on Easter Sunday
morning and, if necessary, binate.
1 The blessing has been simplified and the procession gains new importance ;
on Palm Sunday, Fcria III and Feria IV the readings of the Passion have
been shortened, i.e., beginning at Getlisemani.
Γ········
224
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Communion of the faithful on Good Friday has been hitherto
expressly forbidden since the seventeenth century. Most pro
bably the ‘ Mass of the Pre-sanctified ’ owed its origin to a
desire to provide for communicants on this day.1 The custom
may have come in during the sixth century ; the earliest certain
evidence for it is that it was known in Constantinople in a.d.
615. In the Western Church it is first mentioned in the Gelasian
Sacramentary, and the earliest Roman Ordos direct that all
communicate at the Good Friday service. Yet, already in the
ninth century, the observance of the custom was on the wane,
perhaps because it was becoming common to receive the sacra
ment of Penance before every Communion, and moreover the
practice of frequent Communion had in general declined.2
Gradually during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the
practice died in most places and the decree of the Congregation
of the Council in 1622 merely confirmed and regularized the
general practice that the celebrant alone communicated. At
the Lugano Conference some speakers maintained that the true
Communion of Good Friday was that received on Thursday
evening : ‘ Communier à la Coena Domini, c’est communier le
Vendredi-Saint.’3 It was felt that logically cither the Com
munion service should be eliminated or that the faithful should
communicate along with the celebrant. Neither was evening
Mass on Holy Thursday known in the earliest times. It did
not become customary until about the fourth century ; St.
Augustine, in the African Church, is the earliest witness to it
and the practice does not seem to have persisted generally
after the eighth century. In the Gelasian Sacramentary, which
gives substantially the Roman rite of the sixth century, wc
find three Masses assigned for Holy Thursday. The first is a
Missu lecta during which the reconciliation of penitents took
place. The second is the Missa Chrismatis, a feast Mass, con
taining the blessing of the Holy Oils ; the third is the Missa ad
Vesperum. The Gregorian Sacramentary has only one Mass,
and consequent upon general acceptance of the Gallican edition
of this Sacramentary towards the end of the eighth century
the custom of multiplying Masses on Holy Thursday
disappeared.
At Lugano the suggestion was actually made that the cere
mony of the Mandatum or Washing of the Feet be incorporated
It
1 Vide Frcre, Historical Survey of Holy li eeA.
2 Cf. Decree of Latcran Council 1216.
3 Vide H. Vanderhovcn, * La Communion des fidèles le Vendredi-Saint ? 1
in Paroisse el Liturgie, 1955, η. 2.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
225
into the first part of the Mass. The new Ordo, however, merely
revises the rubrics for this ceremony and the Instruction directs :
‘ Where the washing of the feet takes place, as an illustration
of Our Lord’s command concerning fraternal charity . . . the
faithful should be instructed on the profound significance of
this sacred rite and that it is appropriate that they should on
this day practise generously works of Christian charity.’ The
decree makes provision for administration of baptism during
the Paschal Vigil and for the rubrics to be observed if many
children arc to be baptized. It is doubtful whether in our
climate even the most enthusiastic liturgist would take the
responsibility of advising people to bring infants for baptism
at midnight. The official Instruction suggests, finally, that
provision at suitable times be made for popular devotions which
may be now displaced by liturgical ceremonies, e.g., the blessing
of houses usually performed on Holy Saturday may be carried
out before or after Easter. In many churches the devotion of
the ‘ Three Hours ’ will be displaced. This devotion, begun
in the seventeenth century in Lima (Peru) by Father .Alonso
Messia, is typical of those popular devotions which took the
place of the liturgy and which, while edifying and efficacious,
yet had not the sacramental value of the Church’s official
worship.1
ARE THE HOLY WEEK CEREMONIES OBLIGATORY
IN ALL PAROCHIAL CHURCHES
I understand that the new form for the Holy Week services is of
obligation where these ceremonies are held. But is there an obligation
to hold them in all parish churches, or where there are two churches
in a parish to hold them in both ?
Parochus.
Until the recent reform the general law has been that the
ceremonies of the last three days of Holy Week arc of obligation
1 * La liturgie n’est pas une chose invariable ; clic s’est faite petit à petit. . . .
La liturgie porte le caractère du temps dans lequel elle s'est faite. . . . Nous
constatons également au cours des siècles une déviation vers des aspects
accidentels : l’essentiel en a été souvent plus ou moins recouvert, au point
de devenir méconnaissable. Il ne faut pas oublier non plus que dans ΓÉglise, la
conception de la dévotion en général change; celle-ci était autre dans l’antiquité,
autre au moyen ages et autre encore de notre temps.’ J. Lowe, C.SS.R.»
‘ La Reforme Liturgique du Triduum Sacrum ’ in Les Questions Liturgiques
et Paroissiales, 1954, n. i, p. 9.
$—im
226
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
only in those churches in which the Ollicc must be recited in
choir or to which a congregation is attached.1 Hence they arc
obligatory only in cathedral, collegiate and parochial churches.
The ceremonies may be held in other churches in which the
Blessed Sacrament is reserved and the local Ordinary may
impose such an obligation, but they may not be held in churches
in which the Blessed Sacrament is not habitually reserved. Con
cerning parochial churches, however, the obligation imposed
by the general law has been binding only in those places where
the ceremonies could be carried out in solemn form according
to the rite of the Missal and with the assistance of deacon and
subdeacon. To use the rite of the Memoriale Rituum and to
have the services carried through by one priest has been a
privilege which the parish priest need not avail of ; he would
be bound to do so only if the obligation were imposed by the
local Ordinary or by local legislation. The Memoriale Rituum
has been available only for parochial churches, including
subsidiary or succursal churches in a parish ; without an
apostolic induit it may not be used elsewhere. The new decree,
Maxima redemptionis nostrae mysteria of 16th November, 1955,
reforming the Holy Week functions changes this position in so
far as it directly imposes the obligation of observing the simple
rite wherever sacred ministers are not available for the solemn
form. The official Instruction published with the decree states :
‘Ί
Ubi copia habeatur sacrorum ministrorum, sacrae functiones hebdomadae
sanctae cum omni splendore sacrorum rituum peragantur. Ubi vero sacri
ministri desint, adhibeatur ritus simplex, servatis rubricis peculiaribus, ut
suis locis notatur.
*1
*
Hitherto the use of the Memoriale Rituum, which was drawn up
for the smaller parish churches of Rome, was only recommended
by the general law ; now the simple rite is placed on the same
level as the solemn function with rubrical directions for it given
pari passu throughout the new Ordo Hebdomadae Sanctae Instauratus
and in the new Memoriale or Ritus Simplex (1957) all the
rubrical details are fixed. Hence, it would seem that there is
now an obligation to carry out the ceremonies even in parish
churches where only one priest is available. In subsidiary
parish churches they may also be held, but they are not obligatory
except by direction of the local Ordinary. It also follows that
derogating from decree n. 3390, wherever the ceremonies may
be held,, for example in public or semi-public oratories, the
simple rite may, if necessary, be permitted without an apostolic
induit. Ina word, the ceremonies are of obligation in cathedral
1 /. E, Record, March, 1948.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
227
and parochial churches and if sacred ministers arc not available,
the simple rite must be used.1
It should be noted that the rubrics for the simple rite do not
require that the Mass on Holy Thursday and Holy Saturday be
sung ; it is also directed that if it is sung incense must be used
on Holy Thursday, although the celebrant is not assisted by
deacon and subdeacon. It is not necessary that this use of
incense at a Missa cantata be sanctioned by custom or by
induit ; it is now prescribed. Another innovation in the simple
rite is that certain texts may now be sung by the celebrant.
Formerly the celebrant was forbidden in following the Memoriale
Rituum to sing any portions of the text. Decree n. 3505 of the
Sacred Congregation of Rites gave a negative to a request to
do so. This rule was modified in the 1920 edition of the Memoriale
Rituum in which in a number of instances the rubrics gave to
the priest the option ’ legit vel cantat.' The new rubrics now
direct that he sing or recite : the Gospel before the procession
on Palm Sunday2 and on Holy Saturday the Lumen Christi,
Alleluia, and the antiphon to the Benedictus in Lauds at the end
of the Mass. It is interesting to note that wherever in the new
Ordo the full text of a psalm is printed, the new Latin translation
of the psalms is given. This is true for psalms xxiii and xlvi
which are to be chanted during the distribution of palms and of
psalm cxlvii for the procession on Palm Sunday ; still more
important is the use of the new version for psalm cl which is
now the psalm for the Easter Lauds on Holy Saturday. In
the absence, however, of a clear direction imposing this new
version, it cannot be maintained that the choir who chant
these psalms have a strict obligation to follow it. The choir
would be justified in keeping to the old version in their manuals,
despite the fact that the Ordo tacitly recommends the new
version.
’In a private reply given to the Cardinal-Archbishop of Tarragona on
22nd February, 1956, Cardinal Cicognani answered ** Yes ’ to the question
' May one carry out the ceremonies of the Triduum without the assistance
of sacred ministers in non-parochial churches, in virtue of the general decree
on Holy Week and without having an Apostolic Induit ? ’ (Vide Paroisse
et Liturgie, 1956, p. 4B9.)
* Vide Ritus Simplex Sunday, ii, 21 ; Vigil ii, 19; iii, 9.
228
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
SYMBOLISM OF CANDLES USED AT
OFFICE OF TENEBRAE ;
THE
It is almost a universal custom in Ireland that when candles are
placed on the ‘hearse’ for the Office of Tenebrae, one of bleached
wax is put in the topmost position. Is this practice correct? What
is the symbolic significance of the ceremony of gradually extinguish
ing all the other candles at this Office?
Interested.
Thc rubrics afford no justification for the practice of
placing a white candle in the central place on tiic ‘ hearse ’ for
the Office of Tenebrae. The Caeremoniale Episcoporum prescribes :
a Jatcre Epistolae ponitur candelabrum triangulare, accommodatum ad
sustinendos quindecim cereos cerae communis, singulos ponderis unius librae,
vel circa. ...1
The incorrect practice mentioned by ‘ Interested ’ has arisen,
perhaps, from a misunderstanding of the symbolism underlying
the gradual extinguishing of the candles. There is no foundation
in tradition for the fanciful explanation that the ceremony is
symbolic of the desertion of our Lord by His Apostles.
The origin and precise meaning of this ceremony are some
what obscure. The earliest Roman custom for which we have
evidence2 was that the Office of Holy Thursday was recited in
the basilica of St. John Latcran, which was fully lighted. On
Good Friday the lights were extinguished in the course of the
Office—a third part being put out at the end of each nocturn.
On the vigil of Easter the Office was recited in darkness. The
Ordo of St. Amand directs that on Good Friday one light be
kept until the end of the Benedictus ; this was then hidden behind
the altar until the following day. Probably the Romans
intended that the Office be chanted in darkness merely as a
sign of mourning and also, perhaps, as symbolic of the triumph
of the powers of evil to which our Lord referred—Luke xxii.
1 Lib. II, cap. xxii, n. 4.
* Ordo Romanus Primus. IX0 vide Mabillon’s Museum Italicum II. The
Ordo of St. Amand also IX° directs : ‘. . . inchoat ad matutinum antiphona
in primo psalmo, tuta lampada de parte dextra, in secundo psalmo de parte
sinistra ; similiter per omnes psalmos usque VI aut VII, aut in finem evangelii, reservetur absconsa usque in Sabbato Sancto.’ In Sabbato Sancto
‘ tantum una lampada accendatur propter legendum.’ Vide Duchesne,
Christian Worship; Battifol, History of Roman Breviary, p. 93 (edit. 1912).
In the MSS. of Einsicdlcn (Einsiedlcn 326), IX°, it is directed that on Holy
Saturday morning, ‘ accendunt duo regionarii per unumquemque hisculas de
ipse lumine quod de VI fcria abscunditum est . . .’
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
229
53 : ‘ Sed haec est hora vestra et potestas tenebrarum.’ The
somewhat dramatic ceremony of extinguishing the candles
was probably a Frankish development. Regarding the number
of candles used, great diversity of practice existed in various
places.1 In Rome fifteen candles were placed before the altar,
but elsewhere sometimes only seven or as many as seventy-two
were used. According to the rites of Sarum and York twentyfour or twenty-five candles were lighting. Probably it was for
merely utilitarian reasons that the final candle was kept alight,
but in the later mediaeval period this ceremony was inter
preted as a symbol of the Resurrection of Christ.
HISTORY OF THE HOLY THURSDAY MASS
I have seen it stated that the custom of celebrating three Masses
on Holy Thursday persisted until the pontificate of Benedict XIV.
Can such a statement be sustained historically?
Historicus.
There arc no traces after the ninth century of the custom of
celebrating three solemn Masses on Holy Thursday ; certainly
there does not seem to be any evidence to support the statement
that this custom persisted down to the pontificate of Benedict
XIV. Already, in 1624, the Sacred Congregation of Rites had
forbidden the celebration of a second Mass in the same church
on that day.2 Pope Benedict XIV rejects the view put forward
by some authors that all priests had the faculty to celebrate
Mass privately on Holy Thursday provided that these private
Masses took place before the solemn Mass of the day. He
says :3
Verum non intelligimus, quid causae esse possit cur Decretis non pareamus
Sacrae Congregationis Rituum Apostolica auctoritate confirmatis, quae
disertissime vetant, ne quis diebus illis tribus privatas Missas celebret.
His words by no means imply that in his time the custom of
having three solemn Masses on Holy Thursday still prevailed.
Originally Mass was not celebrated at all from Palm Sunday
until Easter Sunday, but very soon an exception was made in
favour of Holy Thursday, in order that the institution of the
’Vide Martcne, De Antiquis Ecclesiae Ritibus, lib. Ill, cap. xiii, lib. IV,
cap. xxii ; Tyrer, Historical Survey of Holy Weet, p. 82.
’ 980·
’Benedict XIV, Ofiera Omnia viii—De Sacrosancto Missae Sacrificio, lib. ïii,
cap. iii, 10.
230
·<
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Blessed Eucharist might be celebrated. St. Epiphanius, in the
fourth century, writing on the Lenten fast mentions this excep
tion in some churches in the East: ‘And in some places the
worship of the dispensation [i.c. the Eucharist] is celebrated on
Thursday at the ninth hour.’1 The custom of celebrating two
Masses on that day seems to have begun in Jerusalem1
2 and to
have been made known in the West through Etheria’s account
of her pilgrimage there towards the end of the fourth century—
the Peregrinatio Silviae. In Jerusalem both Masses were cele
brated in the afternoon, after the ninth hour, but in Africa, by
the end of the same century, the practice was recognized by
which two Masses were celebrated on Holy Thursday—one in
the morning and the second in the evening after supper. A
canon of the Third Council of Carthage (a.d. 397) enacts: ‘ Ut
sacramenta altaris non nisi a jejunis hominibus celebrentur,
excepto uno die anniversario quo Coena Domini celebratur.’
St. Augustine also, without approving, admits the existence of
the custom.3 The practice developed in many parts of the
Western Church, and in the Gelasian Sacramcntary, which gives
substantially the Roman rite of the sixth century, we find three
Masses assigned for this day. The first is a Missa lecta—the
rubric expressly excludes the use of chant or of the versicle
Dominus vobiscum—and during this Mass the reconciliation of
penitents took place. The second is the Missa Chrismatis, a feast
Mass containing the Blessing of the Holy Oils. The third Mass
is the Missa ad Vesperum. Celebrated immediately after and in
conjunction with supper this third Mass had no collect nor
introductory chants or lessons ; it began immediately with the
preface.4 The latest reference we have to this short evening
Mass is in a German monastic Ordo of the eighth century.5
The Gregorian Sacramcntary has only one Mass for Holy Thursday,
the Missa Chrismatis ; neither in the Gallican nor Spanish rites
was any provision made for more than one Mass on that day.
After the introduction of the Frankish edition of the Gregorian
Sacramcntary, circa a.d. 790, and the consequent almost universal
acceptance in the West of the Romano-Gallican rite, the
custom of multiplying Masses on Holy Thursday disappeared.
Our present Evening Mass formula is not later than the eighth
1 St. Epiphanius, Exposition of the Faith, c. xxii (a.d.c. 375).
s Vide Tyrer, Historical Survey of Holy Week, p. 92 ; Dix, Shape of the Liturgy,
p. 441·
"■ "
3 Ep. ad. Januarium I, iv (xviii).
* Martene, De Divinis Officiis, p. 272 ; De Antiquis Monachorum Ritibus,
lib. iv, cap. 13.
3 Martene, loc. cit. ; Dix, op. cit.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
231
century and is seemingly derived from the Gregorian Sacramentary.1
The Introit is taken from the Mass of the previous Tuesday,
and the Collect was originally appointed only for Good Friday,
where it is still read after the first lesson. The formulas for
the proper Communicantes, Hanc igitur and Qui ffridie are found
almost identical in both the Gelasian and Gregorian Sacramentaries. Originally the Gloria, Credo and Agnus Dei were said
ratione solemnitalis only when the bishop celebrated for the
consecration of the Holy Oils.2 The Pax was usually omitted
on this day, but it was retained in Paris and in the Sarum and
other medieval rites it was given by kissing the ampulla con
taining the Chrism.
OBLIGATION TO RENEW THE PASCHAL CANDLE
RUBRICS OF THE NEW HOLY SATURDAY
CEREMONY.
Is it necessary to purchase a new Paschal Candle every year in
order to carry out the Holy Saturday ceremony according to the new
Ordo"! May one use again the candle used last year although it is
already marked with the cross, date, etc.?
Parochus.
According to Decree N. 3895 of the Sacred Congregation
of Rites :
Cercus Paschalis non est renovandus quotannis ex toto ; sed potest et
debet renovari tantuin, cum pars accendenda non sufficiat pro toto tempore
Paschali.
".
The new Ordo for Holy Saturday does not abrogate this decree ;
it was always believed that a valid blessing was attached to the
Paschal Candle in the course of the Holy Saturday ceremony,
and that position has not been changed. Formerly in the
Missal the Exsultet was entitled ‘ Benedictio Cerei,' but now in
the new Ordo it is more correctly described Praeconium Paschale
and the title Benedictio Cerci is assigned to the prayer Veniat
quaesumus with the rite of inserting the grains of incense. The
Exsultet has, from the fourth or fifth century, been designated
as * Benedictio Cerei and regarded as a real blessing ; in Alenin's
1 Gregorian Sacramentary, edit. H. A. Wilson; Schuster, Sacramentary ii.
p. 199.
'
1 Cf. Ordines Romani, Migne, P. L., 78. Martene, De Divinis Officiis. I.oc.
cit. The reason for the omission of the Pax is given by Martene in the words
of Alcuin : ‘A pacis osculo abstinetur ad vitandum salutationem pestiferam
qualem Judas proditor exercuit.’
232
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
supplement to the Gregorian Sacramcntary and in the Gelasian
Sacramentary the prayer Venial quaesumus occurred as the con
clusion of the Exsultet and it was not until the twelfth century
that it was erroneously transposed and used separately as a
blessing for incense. In the medieval period, frequently, such
objects : candles, incense, etc., were blessed repeatedly each
time they were used. Amongst later rubricists Gavantus
objected to the use of a Paschal Candle which was used pre
viously and had been blessed already—
Pessime faciunt ii, adcoquc non imitandi, qui absque ulla cerei refectione
(ut fit in multis ecclesiis) semper eumdem cereum, donec totus fuerit con
sumptus, benedicunt.1
His objection, however, was not supported by the decision of
the Sacred Congregation in 1896. It is not correct to say that
now, in the new rite, the blessing by the prayer Veniat quaesumus
has been restored to the celebrant, since in the earliest versions
of the rite this prayer was chanted by the deacon and by it
the Paschal Candle was blessed, not in the sense of being
rendered sacred by a constitutive blessing, but rather in the
sense of being solemnly offered to God with praise and thanks
giving by the deacon who chanted the Exsultet concluding with
Veniat quaesumus. Hence the offering or blessing could be
repeated over the same candle without destroying the symbolism
of the rite. Undoubtedly, in its primary significance, the Paschal
Candle was associated with the sacrament of Baptism because
originally it was introduced as the necessary light when the
sacrament was conferred during the night of the Paschal Vigil.
Soon it was recognized as a symbol of the risen Christ and
hence by the seventh century there had arisen the custom of
marking on the candle A and O and a cross which at first were
traced with chrism and later incised. That the same candle
was used in successive years is indicated by the fact that in
many medieval churches there was an abuse by which these
symbols were not incised but were drawn on a parchment which
was wrapped around the candle. In the course of time this
ceremony dropped out and now the incisions have been restored
with a new formula Christus heri et hodie. The rubrics arc silent
on the question of how the Paschal Candle should be disposed
of after the feast of the Ascension. Only the Memoriale Rituum·
directed that it be removed from its stand and lighted again for
the blessing of the font on the Vigil of Pentecost. Some authors1
*3
1 Vide Commentarium published by Ephemerides Liturgicae, 1951, p. 22
(note).
3 Mem. Rit., vi, cap. ii, § 7, n. 6.
TUE LITURGICAL YEAR
233
conclude from this rubric that the candle should be kept in
the baptistry throughout the year and in medieval times when
this was commonly done the candle was lighted at every
baptism ; this custom has continued into modem times.1 In
Rome apparently the earliest custom was that the candle was
broken up into small portions of wax which were stamped as
Agnus Dei. The decision of the Sacred Congregation that the
Paschal Candle need not be renewed each year not only
saves unnecessary expense but also ensures that the candle
will be used only at Paschaltide with its own distinctive symbol
ism. Hence, although in the new rite the candle is inscribed
with the date, etc., it may be used again and again.
NOTES
(1) ‘Exsultent divina mysteria.'—The precise meaning of the
opening stanza of the Exsultet-.—‘ Exsultet iam Angelica turba
caelorum : exsultent divina mysteria : et pro tanti Regis victoria, tuba
insonet salutaris ’—has long puzzled translators. Amongst recent
English translations the following are noteworthy : (a) The
Dominican Missal has ‘Let the heavenly band of angels now
rejoice ; let the divine mysteries be joyfully celebrated ; and
let a sacred trumpet proclaim the victory of so great a king.’
(6) In the ‘ Knox Missal ’ it is rendered : ‘ Now let the angelic
heavenly choirs exult ; let joy pervade the unknown beings
who surround God’s throne ; and let the trumpet of salvation
sound the triumph of this mighty King.’ (c) Monsignor Knox
in his more recently published Holy Week Book translates it :
‘Joy for all heaven’s angel citizens, joy in the secret council
chambers of God : in praise of this royal Conqueror let the
trumpet sound deliverance.’
Dom B. Capelle, after careful research on the origins of the
Exsultet, attributes it to St. Ambrose and suggests that the text
should be corrected to read ‘ resultent divina mysteria.' i.e. ‘ the
divine mysteries arc proclaimed/2 Dr. Fischer3 rejects both
1 Commentarium cit.f p. 23 *. . . verbum “ consecrare ” in praeconio idem
est ac “ offerre.” *
Dom Jean Juglar, O.S.B., in Ephemerides Lilurgicae, 1951, pp. 184, 186 :
‘La bénédiction n’est point seulement action descendante de Dieu sur
une personne ou une consécration. Elle est aussi, et premièrement, action
montante de l'homme vers Dieu, pour Lui rendre graces, c’est-a-dire une
eucharistie . . . la “ Benedictio Cerci ” répond pleinement a l’idée biblique
de bénédiction sous ses deux aspects de bénédiction montante et de bénédiction
descendante.’
Vide La Maison Dieu ( 1952), n. 32, p. 146.
’Vide Questions Liturgiques et Paroissiales (1949), p. 39.
1 Opusculumj published 1947.
234
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
these suggestions and holds that the Exsultet is of Gallican origin
although it owes much to St. Ambrose, and that the phrase
‘ exsultent divina mysteria ’ refers to the angels. Now in the
current issue of the Ephemerides Lilurgicae, Dr. Christine
Mohrmann, in an illuminating essay1 on the problem, shows
that ‘ divina mysteria ’ arc, doubtless, the angels and the text
should not be altered. Dr. Mohrmann points out that the first
part of the Exsultet consists of three balanced stanzas referring
to the rejoicing in heaven, on earth {Gaudeat et tellus . . .) and
in the Church {Laetetur et mater Ecclesia). She adopts the ex
planation of Dom Fischer that ‘ misteria ’ was simply the common
script for ‘ ministeria,’ and shows how that fact came to be true.
In Christian Latin writers ‘ Minister,’ in the sense of ‘ angel,’
was used frequently in Biblical contexts, usually with the genitive
Dei ; but it was not commonly used in this sense in current
speech. It is a common linguistic development that an abstract
word becomes used in a concrete sense and so ‘ ministerium ’ in
the sense of ‘ minister ’ became usual. The normal shortening
of the first syllable soon made ‘ ministerium ’ into ‘ mysterium.'
Even when it was still written ‘ ministerium ’ the word was pro
nounced ‘ misterium ' and in this form was eventually estab
lished in our text. Hence Dr. Mohrmann concludes that
‘ exsultent divina mysteria ' is the correct reading and describes
the rejoicing of the angels of God.
(2) Time at which ‘ Benedictus qui venit ’ should be chanted :
In a recent issue of the Ephemerides Liturgicae the following
question is discussed :2
Si quod SSmo. Sacramento motetum elevationem subsecuturum est,
daturne tunc facultas versum * Benedictus qui renit ' concinendi ante eleva
tionem ?
The writer of the reply, E C—V, states that the practice of
chanting the Benedictus before the elevation is an abuse directly
opposed to the law of the Caeremoniale Episcoporum (lib. II, cap.
viii, nn. 70, 71)
(ante elevationem) Chorus prosequitur cantum usque ad Benedictus qui renit,
etc. exclusive . . . Elevato Sacramento, chorus prosequitur cantum Benedictus
qui renit, etc.
and the rubrics of the Graduate Romanum, Decree N. 4364 of the
Sacred Congregation of Rites, fixed this rubric of the Graduate,
on 14th January, 1921, and added :
Haec autem Rubrica inviolabiliter observetur, quibuslibet contrariis non
obstantibus, in omni Missa cantata tum vivorum, tum defunctorum, sive
cantus gregorianus, sive cantus alterius cuiusvis generis adhibeatur.
* 1952, p. 274.
» 1951, p. 268.
235
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
Nevertheless the practice is becoming more generally recognised
as a lawful custom. In his Molu Proprio on sacred music, Pope
Pius X directed : ‘As the texts that may be rendered in music,
and the order in which they are to be rendered, are determined
for every liturgical function, it is not lawful to confuse this order
or to change the prescribed texts for others selected at will. . . .
It is permissible, however, according to the custom of the
Roman Church, to sing a motet to the Blessed Sacrament after
the Benedictus in a Solemn Mass.’1 To anticipate the Benedictus
can scarcely be regarded as ‘ confusing, the order of the chants.
(3) Portable Altars : The following questions and replies have
been issued by the Sacred Congregation of Rites :2 The Arch
bishop of Trent asked whether it is lawful to follow the custom
whereby ‘ fixed altars ’ which are consecrated apart from the
consecration of the church are treated as ‘ portable altars ’ and
consecrated by the short formula permitted by induit for the
consecration of altar-stones. It is urged that while the rubrics
determine the minimum necessary dimensions for an altar
stone there is no prohibition against regarding the whole table
of the altar as an altar-stone. Secondly, the Archbishop asked
whether, in the consecration of a church, it is permissible for
the convenience of the people to anticipate on the previous
evening the part of the ceremony which takes place outside
the church and so, on the morning of the consecration, to begin
with the entry to the church and the antiphon, Pax aeterna, etc.
The Sacred Congregation has replied :
Nihil impedit altare portatile posse componi quasi esset fixum. Altare
consecratum in casu, licet materialiter fixum, est liturgicc portatile seu
mobile, idcoquc potest, quin amittat consecrationem, transferri, et separari
a stipitibus.
Ad II. Negative sine speciali induito.
INCENSATION OF PASCHAL CANDLE
Docs the rubric for the restored Easter Vigil (caput III, n. 13)
mean that the deacon or celebrant should incense the Paschal Candle
in much the same way as the coffin is incensed at the Absolutio after
a Requiem Mass? ‘ Circumiens cereum pashcalcm etiam illum thurificat ’ seems to imply this. Since the Paschal Candle is the symbol
of the Saviour would it not seem more suitable to incense it in the
same way as the Gospel book is incensed at High Mass, namely,
with three double swings?
Missionaries.
1 Par. fl,
1 Ephem. Lil., 1952, p. 112.
236
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
In the first (1951) edition of the Ordo Sancti Sabbati the rubric
to be observed by the deacon immediately before he chanted
the Praeconium Paschale was :
. . . vadit ad legile, ... ct ponit super eo librum et inccnsat ; deinde,
circumiens ccrcum paschalem, etiam illum iterato thurificat.
This rather vague direction was emended in the second (1952)
edition and in the 1956 Ordo by the omission of the word iterato.
The rubric as it now stands must be interpreted in accordance
with the general directions concerning incensations. Decree
N. 4057 of the Sacred Congregation decides :
Thurificatio SS. Sacramenti publice expositi, Canonicorum, Crucis Altaris,
Sacrarum Imaginum, libri Evangcliorum ante cantum Evangclii in Missa
solemni, Episcopi, Celebrantis . . . facienda est duplici ictu in quolibet
ductu ; at ad thurificationcm Altaris, et ad solemnem Benedictionem
Candelarum, Cinerum, et Palmarum, non praescribuntur ductus duplici ictu.
Hence it would seem that the Paschal Candle should be incensed
with three single swings and it is appropriate that the celebrant
should, when making the incensation, move around the Candle.1
RUBRIC FOR FLECTAMUS GENUA
In the new instructions for the Holy Saturday ceremony in small
churches it is stated that before the prayers after the prophecies the
celebrant says both the Flectamus genua and the Levate; is this now
to be taken as the general rule to be observed on Quarter-tense days,
etc., when the Flectamus genua occurs?
P.P.
«I
o
M
The Phus servandus2 directs that on Ember days and on other
days when several prayers are to be recited with their accom
panying prophecies (the celebrant) . . . says, Oremus, Flectamus
genua, and . . . genuflects, and rises at once while the server
answers in the same tone of voice, Levate. This rubric remains yet
unchanged in the new (1953) typical edition of the Missale
Romanum. The special direction given in the new Ordo for
Holy Saturday, namely that the celebrant himself says Levate,
applies only to that ceremony and does not affect the Missal
rubrics. According to the rubrics of the new Ordo, the con
gregation sits during the reading of the prophecies, stands
immediately before each prayer and so genuflects with the
priest and rises again at his direction, whereas at Low Mass,
‘Vide O’Connell, Ceremonies of Holy II 'eek, pp. 64, 110; * Ritus Simplex
directs : “ Facta eidem debita reverentia, cereum inccnsat.” ’
———
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
237
the congregation remains kneeling during the reading of the
prophecies and prayers ; the server’s response Levate is addressed
to the priest alone.
NO OBLIGATION TO BLESS THE FONT ON THE
VIGIL OF PENTECOST
In accordance with the new rite for the Holy Saturday ceremony,
the baptismal font need not be blessed again at Pentecost. Is there
still a grave obligation to bless the font at Pentecost in a subsidiary
church in the parish where it was impossible to carry out the Easter
rite?
P.P.
In early times, baptism was conferred at the Vigil of
Pentecost on those catechumens who, for various reasons, could
not receive it at Easter. Hence the custom was introduced of
blessing the baptismal font on the Vigil of Pentecost. ‘ Now,
where the Paschal Vigil has been restored, it would be incon
gruous to remove from the font after the Paschal period the
water blessed so solemnly with renewal of baptismal vows, etc.,
and at Pentecost to bless without ceremony the baptismal
water for the greater part of the year.’1 Hence the rubrics
governing the new Ordo Sancli Sabbali direct the omission of
the blessing at Pentecost—
in vigilia Pentecostes, omissis lectionibus seu prophetiis, aquae baptismalis
benedictione et litaniis, inissa etiam convcntualis, seu solemnis vel cantata,
absolute incipitur ab Introitu. . . .
One may still avail of the concession granted in Decree No. 4057
of the Sacred Congregation of Rites :
Posita vera necessitate deficentiac Sacerdotis, super quo conscientia Parochi
onerata mancat, idem Parochus de benedicta aqua ex principali Paroecia
asportet in aliam.
If no other priest is available to bless the font in a subsidiary
church on Holy Saturday and the parish priest is conscientiously
convinced that this is the case, he may supply the font in a sub
sidiary’ church from the principal church. Since this is done in
connection with the new Holy Saturday rite, it would not be
correct for him to bless the font in the church on the Vigil of
Pentecost.
‘Vide Ephem. Lit., 1952, p. 96.
238
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
OBLIGATION OF THE OCTOBER DEVOTIONS
Is it correct to say that the ‘ October Devotions ’ are no longer
of obligation ? The following statement occurs in Dom Bede Lebbe’s
commentary on the Mass : ‘ In 1885 Leo XIII had specified the aim
of the October devotion. It was certainly a question of the difficulties
surrounding the Church, but more especially of the tense situation
which, since the taking of Rome in 1870, confronted the Italian
Government and the Pope. The obligation of this public recitation
of the Rosary would last just as long as the crisis existed. . . . From
what has been said, it follows that the recitation of the Rosary in
October ceased to be obligatory when the Lateran Treaty of 11th
February, 1929, had re-established peace between the Pope and Italy.
It may be continued, of course, but it is no longer anything but an
optional devotion, as are, for instance, those of the month of May
or First Fridays of the month.’ (The Mass, p. 167.)
Curious.
It docs not seem that the late Dom Lebbe’s interpretation
of the relevant decrees is correct. Certainly, we would by no
means agree that the October Devotions are now optional or
that it is within the competence of individual Ordinaries or of
rectore of churches to omit them. It is true that the intention
to which Pope Leo XIII primarily directed these devotions
was the settlement of the ‘ Roman Question,’ nevertheless the
devotions had also a wider purpose. This fact is clear from the
terms of the successive decrees by which the devotions were
prescribed.
In 1883 and 1884, when the devotions were prescribed only
for the month of October, in those years mention was made of
many other considerations besides the difficult political situation.
The first of these Rosary documents was a letter published by
Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide on 16th July, 1883,
prescribing : (1) That five decades at least of the Rosary and
the Litany of Loreto be recited every day from the 1st October
to 2nd November in all parochial churches ; (2) That the same
devotion be carried out in other churches and oratories dedicated
to the Blessed Virgin in accordance with the Ordinary’s direc
tions ; (3) That it is desirable that Mass should be said or
Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament given in connection with
these exercises. The special reason given for these devotions
was
a Datorc omnium bonorum auxilium impetrandum in tot ac tam gravibus
necessitatibus, quibus Christiana respublica in praesens versatur.
On 1st September in the same year Pope Leo XIII in his
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
239
Encyclical Supremi Aposlolalus extended the devotion to all
public churches, and in doing so pointed out the need for these
prayers :
Perspicitis Ecclesiae labores dimicationesque diuturnas et graves, Christi
anam pietatem, publicam inorum honestatem, fidemque ipsam, quae sum
mum est bonum virtutumque ceterarum principium, majoribus quotidie
periculis videmus oppositam. Item difficilem conditionem variosque angores
Nostros non modo cognoscitis sed. ...
In the second Encyclical issued the following year (30th August,
1884), the Pope directed the continuance of the devotions,
saying :
Agitur enim et nunc de ardua magni momenti re, de inimico antiquo et
vaferrimo in elata potentiae suae acie humiliando ; de Ecclesiae eiusque
Capitis libertate vindicanda ; de iis conservandis tuendisque praesidiis in
quibus conquiescere oportet securitatem et salutem humanae societatis.
His Holiness also mentioned a special reason for Italy where
there was an epidemic of cholera. The Encyclical concludes :
Caelestis autem Patrona per Rosarii preces invocata adsit propitia, efficiatque, ut sublatis opinionum dissidiis et re Christiana in universis orbis terrarum
partibus restituta, optatam Ecclesiae tranquillitatem a Deo impetremus.
Finally, a decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites (dated
20th August, 1885) prescribed the continuance of the October
Devotions in that year and in succeeding years. This decree
speaks of the purpose for which the custom has been established :
Quod sane speciali Dei providentia praecipue institutum est ad potentissimum caeli Reginae praesens auxilium adversus Christiani nominis hostes
exorandum, ad tuendam fidei integritatem in dominico grege, animasque
divini sanguinis pretio redemptas e sempiternae perditionis tramite eripien
das. . . . Quapropter Sanctitas Sua quaccumquc duobus praeteritis annis
constituit de mense quo solemnia celebrantur beatae Virginis Mariae a
Rosario, hoc pariter anno, et annis porro sequentibus praecipit et statuit
quoadusque rerum Ecclesiae rerumque publicarum tristissima haec perdurent
adjuncta, ac de restituta Pontifici Maximo plena libertate Deo referre gratias
Ecclesiae datum non sit.
Clearly when ordering these devotions the Holy Sec had in
mind also the needs of the universal Church, and only the Holy
See can decide that the necessity for these special prayers no
longer endures.1 The decree of the Sacred Congregation of
Rites was renewed in 1886 and 1887 :
ut qua gratia apud Deum pollet, praesentium malorum horrendam
tempestatem, everso satanae imperio, depellat, triumphatisque religionis
hostibus exagitatam Petri mysticam navem optatae tranquillitati restituat.
On 15th August, 1889, Pope Leo XIII directed that the Prayer
to St. Joseph should be added to the October Devotions. Pope
» Vide Ephem. Lit., 1930, p. 524.
240
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Pius X in tiic Encyclical E Supremi apostolatus (4th October,
1903), recalling in a general way the difficulties and tasks wliich
lay before him at the beginning of his pontificate and especially
mentioning the necessity of freedom for the Church, prescribed
that the October Devotions were to be continued. Hence it
is abundantly clear that the October Devotions continue to be
of obligation until the Holy See directs otherwise. It is perhaps
significant that the present Holy Father in the Encyclical
Mediator Dei does not mention these devotions although he
expressly approves of the ‘ prayers usually said during the
month of May in honour of the Blessed Virgin, Mother of God.’
The mere fact that October remains1 a month specially dedicated
in honour of the Blessed Virgin and that the prayers of the
devotions arc still indulgenced would not prove any obligation
to continue the special devotions.
IS
IT DESIRABLE THAT A SPECIAL FEAST IN
HONOUR OF THE FIRST PERSON OF THE HOLY
TRINITY BE INSTITUTED?
Why have we no feast which as such honours God the Father to
thank Him for all his benefits to us? Is it true that it is impossible
that there should be such a feast, or has the question ever been
discussed?
Philosophical Student.
In the Liturgy we adore the Most Holy Trinity, but we also
honour each of the Divine Persons by commemorating those
things pertaining to each Person or which by appropriation
are attributed to each. To the Father are appropriated the
functions of creation and government of all creatures. The
Liturgy, it is true, sometimes ascribes these functions to the
other Persons of the Most Holy Trinity as, for example, in the
Nicene Creed,
•I
Et in unum Dominum Jcsum Christum . . . per quern omnia facta sunt
M 1
or in the Veni Creator. These variations in the Liturgy serve to
emphasize the fundamental fact that all works ad extra arc com
mon to the three Divine Persons, but because our creation and
total dependence on God are usually appropriated to the Father
the official worship of the Church is generally directed to the
Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit. It is with this
formula that the official prayers of the Church are normally
1 Fanfani, De Rosario, p. 127 (note).
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
241
concluded and such a fundamental law of the Liturgy was
formulated in the canons of the Councils of Hippo (c. 393) and
Carthage (c. 397) :
Ut nemo in precibus vcl Palrcm pro Filio, vel Filium pro Patre nominet.
Et cum altari assistitur, semper .ad Patrem dirigatur oratio.
It must not be thought that this traditional formula implies
in any way inequality between the Persons.
Aequaliter tamen individuae Trinitati sacrificium laudis offertur tam
Patri quam Filio quam utriusque Spiritui : quorum sicut indivisibilis est
maiestas, sic indivisibilis adoratio. Qua propter illa possunt non indiscrete
distingui, cum dicitur : aeterno Deo vivo et vero. . . . Totius igitur indivi
duae Trinitatis indivisa est adoratio quae principaliter exhibetur in sacrificio.1
There is no inconsistency here : in the one case we honour
God in three Divine Persons, in the other we call to mind the
special mission of the Second Divine Person as our Redeemer
and of the Third Divine Person as our Paraclete.2 In his
encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi, Pope Pius XII corrects the
error of those who by misunderstanding the liturgical formula
seek to lesson the dignity of Christ : ‘ . . . some would have it
that our prayers should not be directed to the person of Jesus
Christ, since our Saviour, as Head of His Mystical Body, is only
“ mediator of God and men.” But that too not only' is opposed
to the mind of the Church and to Christian usage but is false.
. . . Though it is true especially in the Eucharistic Sacrifice
. . . that prayers are very often directed to the eternal Father
through the only-begotten Son ; nevertheless it occurs not
seldom even in this sacrifice that prayers to the divine Redeemer
also are used. For after all every' Christian must know full well
that the man Christ Jesus is also the Son of God and God Himself.’3
No special feast is celebrated in honour of the Father because
liturgical feasts are primarily concerned with the work of our
redemption and sanctification, which arc attributed not to the
Father but to the Son and to the Holy Spirit. In recent times
the suggestion that a feast to honour the Father should be
established has been sometimes put forward, but the idea is not
a new one. After the institution of the feast of the Most Holy
Trinity, which was only' accepted in Rome with the greatest
reluctance, a petition was submitted, probably from Spanish
sources, to Pope Innocent XII requesting that a feast in honour
of the Eternal Father should be celebrated on the fifth Sunday
after Easter. After examination by the Congregation of Sacred
‘Innocent III quoted apud : Oppenheim, Institutiones in Sacram Lifurgiam
(1941), tom. vi, p. 233.
‘Vide Callcwacrt, De Sacra Lilurgia Universim, i, p. 17.
* Par. 88 in English translation.
242
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Rites, the petition was rejected. Pope Benedict XIV*
1 sum
marizes the reasons for its rejection : The Church has always
prudently abstained from the establishment of such a feast. In
the course of time others would seek for the institution of a feast
of the Son not as the Word made flesh but as proceeding from
the Father, and also a feast of the Procession of the Holy Spirit.
Hence there could arise the error of denying the unity of the
Divine essence and of admitting more than one nature in God.
The Church has always been careful not to admit any prayer
to the Father or to any one of the Divine Persons which did not
also make mention of the other two Persons. In the Litanies
immediately after the invocations of the Divine Persons singly,
there is added Sancta Trinitas, unus Deus ; hymns which celebrate
the Son or the Holy Spirit are always concluded by a doxology
in honour of the Holy Trinity. The feast of Pentecost is not
in honour of the Holy Spirit as one of the three Divine Persons,
but rather commemorates the descent of the Paraclete upon
the Apostles. Similarly, the feasts of Christ really'· celebrate
the graces and mysteries in the life of the God-Man, of the Word
Incarnate. The reasons for the institution of these feasts of
Christ are stated by Cardinal Thomasius :2
Una ad tollendum desidiam negligentiorum hominum : altera ob conse
crationem ipsam certorum dierum ex patratis mysteriis, et tertia ad reno
vandum memoriam celebriorum beneficiorum Divinorum in ecclesia.
None of these reasons can be urged in favour of a feast in honour
of the Father ; and, finally, such a feast might be followed by
petitions for others in honour of the Eternity of God, the Omni
potence of God, etc. To celebrate in such a manner the divine
attributes would not accord with Christian usage and tradition
and might easily lead to confusion and error in doctrine.
Ipsa mutatio consuetudinis, etiam quae adjuvat militate, novitate per
turbat quapropter quae utilis non est, perturbatione infructuosa consequenter
noxia est.3
ACTS
OF
CONSECRATION
HEART
TO
THE
SACRED
Is there still an obligation to recite the Act of Consecration on the
Feast of the Sacred Heart, or may one use instead the Act of
Reparation ?
Neo-Sacerdos.
1 De Beatificatione et Canonizalione, P. II, lib. iv, cap. 31.
1 Apud Benedict XIV', loc. cit.
* St. Augustine, Ad. Quaestiones Januarii.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
243
The use of the Act of Consecration on the feast of the Sacred
Heart is now optional, and one may substitute for it the Act of
Reparation. On a First Friday, if the privileged votive Mass of
the Sacred Heart has been celebrated, the Leonine prayers may
be omitted, even though the celebrant leaves the sanctuary for
a brief interval before he proceeds with the Exposition and the
reciting of the Act of Reparation. This privilege is attached
to the special votive Mass of the Sacred Heart, celebrated on
first Friday, because it takes the place of a solemn Mass.1
It may, perhaps, be useful to deal briefly with the history of
the various Acts of Consecration now recited after Mass in the
course of the year : (1) The Act of Consecration of Ireland to
the Sacred Heart was first prescribed by the Archbishops and
Bishops of Ireland on 22nd January, 1873. On that date the
Irish Hierarchy, with Cardinal Cullen at their head, issued a
pastoral letter deploring the acts of sacrilege and irréligion then
commonly taking place in Italy, Germany and Spain, and in
the concluding paragraph of the letter they stated : ‘And since
the enemies of the Church have refused to allow the Sacred
Heart of our Divine Lord to be invoked by the victims of their
persecuting laws, how better can we show our grief for His
injured honour, and our love for His suffering Church, than
by the solemn consecration of Catholic Ireland to the Most
Sacred Heart of Jesus? To this act of devotion and reparation
we now invite you.’2 The solemn consecration of Ireland to
the Sacred Heart took place on Passion Sunday, 30th March,
of that year, and since then the act has been recited annually
on that Sunday.
During the second half of the nineteenth century, especially
in 1870, and in 1875, there were many petitions to the Holy
Sec for the consecration of the world to the Sacred Heart. Pope
Pius IX was unwilling to sanction any public act of consecration,
but invited all the faithful to consecrate themselves privately
on 16th June, 1875, the second centenary of the revelations
made to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque. The public consecration
of the world was finally ordered by Pope Leo XIII in his
Encyclical Annum Sacrum, 25th May, 1899.3 The consecration
was carried out on 11th June (Sunday after the Feast of the
Sacred Heart), 1899; the special prayer, Jesu dulcissime,
Redemptor humani generis, composed by Leo XIII, was recited in
churches throughout the world. Pope Pius X, in 1906, directed
1 Vide O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i, p. 102.
E. Record (1873), p. 206.
’ A.A.S. (1899), vol. xxxi, p. 6'10·
244
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
that this act of consecration be renewed every year on the Feast
of the Sacred Heart.1 In 1925 Pope Pius XI adopted the same
prayer for the act of consecration of the human race to Christ
the King. On this occasion mention of Islam and the Jews was
inserted by the phrases :
Rex csto corum omnium, qui in tenebris idololatriae aut islamismi adhuc
versantur, eosque in lumen regnumque tuum vindicare ne renuas. Respice
denique misericordiae oculis illius gentis filios, quae tamdiu populus electus
fuit ; et Sanguis, quo olim invocatus est, nunc in illos quoque redemptionis
vitaeque lavacrum descendat.
This new version of the prayer was circulated to all bishops
on 17th October, 1925, with the direction that it was to be
recited solemnly on the last day of the Jubilee year2 and in the
Encyclical Qiias Primas (11th December, 1925) it was prescribed
that the solemn Act of Consecration be renewed each year by
being recited with the Litany of the Sacred Heart before the
Blessed Sacrament exposed on the feast of Christ the King.
In 1928, Pius XI explained in his Encyclical Miserentissimus
Redemptor the purpose of this new consecration : ‘Among the
different practices which directly accompany devotion to the
most Sacred Heart assuredly the foremost is the Act of Conse
cration by which we offer to the Heart of Jesus both ourselves
and all that belongs to us, recognizing that all we have comes
to us from the infinite charity of God. ... At the beginning
of the century . . . the whole human race, which belongs by
inherent right to Christ, was consecrated to His Most Sacred
Heart by our predecessor, then happily reigning, Leo XIII.
. . . These auspicious and happy beginnings we ourselves
through the great goodness of God brought to completion when
we instituted at the close of the Jubilee year the feast of Christ
the King. ... By that act we not only brought forth clearly
into the light of day the fact of the supreme dominion of Christ
over all things, . . .we also experienced beforehand the joy
of that most happy day when the whole world will submit
joyfully and willingly to the sweet yoke of Christ the King.
Wherefore we commanded that, together with the celebration
of this feast, there should be renewed annually the Act of
Consecration, and this we did in order to obtain more surely
and in greater quantities the fruits of such a consecration, and
to bind with Christian love in the communion of peace all
peoples to the heart of the King of kings.’3
» A.A.S. (1906), p. 569.
’
(1925), p. 542.
’Translation, American Ecclesiastical Review (1928), p. 59.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
245
On 28th April, 1926, the Sacred Congregation of Rites stated
in reply to a question that renewal of the Act of Consecration
was no longer of obligation on the feast of the Sacred Heart,
but that if it were renewed the new version of the prayer should
be used.1
THE CONSECRATION OF THE FAMILY TO THE
SACRED HEART
In a letter addressed to Father Matthew Crawley-Boevy of
the Missionaries of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, on
the occasion of the Golden Jubilee of his ordination, the Holy
Father warmly recommends the practice of consecrating families
to the Sacred Heart.
Hoc vero peculiari modo cupimus ut nempe Christianorum familiae Cordi
lesu consecrentur, * ita quidem ut, imagine cius illustriore loco aedium
posita tanquam in throno, vere Christus Dominus intra domesticos catholi
corum parietes regnare videatur ’ (Bened. XV Epist. * Libenter tuas ’). Quae
quidem consecratio non inanis ac vacuus est ritus sed a singulis postulat, ut
eorum vita christianis praeceptis conformetur, ut incenso iidem erga sanctis
simam Eucharistiam amore ferveant, et quam saepissime caelestem participent
mensam, utque per supplices Deo adhibitas preces ac piae paenitentiae opera
enitantur quam maxime suae non modo, sed ceterorum etiam saluti prospicere.1
This devotion owes its origin and spread to Father Crawley
of the Piepus Fathers. Pope Pius X granted indulgences for
this practice in 1908, and in 1913 a special induit increasing
these indulgences was granted to the bishops of Chile. Pope
Benedict XV, in 1915, extended these increased indulgences
to the whole world.3 The indulgences now granted are : (1) The
members of the family, on the day of the consecration, may by
reciting the act of consecration gain an indulgence of seven
years, or a plenary indulgence under the usual conditions ;
(2) On the day when this consecration is renewed each year,
the members of the family may, if they recite the act of conse
cration, gain an indulgence of three years or a plenary indulgence
under the usual conditions.4 The same indulgences may be
gained by members of other institutes (a religious community,
parish, or school, etc.), both on the day of consecration and on
its anniversary. The Sacred Penitentiary on 1st March, 1918,
'A.A.S. (1926) p. 319.
M.ÆS. (1919), p. 24.
’ Deringer, Iss Indulgences, i, § 675.
4 Precei et Pin Opera (1952), N. 705.
246
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
decided that for the gaining of the indulgences the following
conditions must be observed : (1) Each family must be conse
crated at home ; it would not suffice to carry out the ceremony
in the church for all the families of the parish ; (2) The ceremony
must be carried out by a priest ; the local Ordinary can decide
the circumstances under which a lay person could perform it ;
(3) It is necessary to make use of the prescribed formula, to be
found in the Ritual.
DEVOTION TO THE EUCHARISTIC HEART OF
JESUS
I note that in the most recent editions of the Raccolta there are no
indulgenced prayers in honour of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus.
Older editions contained many such prayers and ejaculations; what
is now the status of this devotion?
M. C.
• J
►
'Q
All the indulgenccd prayers in honour of the Eucharistic
Heart of Jesus were omitted from the 1950 edition of the Preces
et Pia Opera and arc absent also from the current (1952) edition.
Former editions of the Raccolta carried in all sixteen such prayers
—twelve ejaculations and four longer prayers—practically all
being in French. They were prefaced by a declaration of the
Sacred Congregation of Indulgences concerning devotion to
the Eucharistic Heart :
‘ The worship of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus in the
Eucharist is not to be understood as being substantially different
from that which has long been given by the Church to the
Sacred Heart, but only as an especial manifestation of worship,
love and grateful submission of soul because of that act of
supreme love by which the most loving Heart of Jesus instituted
the adorable Sacrament of the Eucharist, remaining with us
until the end of the world.’ The reasons why this section has
been omitted from the Preces et Pia Opera remain a subject for
speculation ; most probably the indulgences have been with
drawn simply because the devotion to the Eucharistic Heart
was merely a special devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and
the provision of a separate section in the Raccolta may be mis
leading. On many occasions in the past the Holy Sec has
shown anxiety lest this devotion be misunderstood, although it
has been approved by Popes Leo XIH, Pius X, Benedict XV
and Pius XI.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
247
The devotion to the Euchartistic Heart began in France
during the nineteenth century. In 1868 Pope Pius IX granted
an indulgence for an ejaculation in honour of the Eucharistic
Heart and two other prayers were indulgenced by Pope Leo XIII
in 1899. Nevertheless, in 1891, the Holy Office disapproved
of new emblems of the Sacred Heart in the Eucharist, and
added : ‘ The worship of the Sacred Heart of Jesus in the
Eucharist is not more perfect than the worship rendered to the
Eucharist itself and is not different from the worship rendered
to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.’ The devotion thus understood
would not have a proper object. In 1903 Pope Leo XIII estab
lished at the church of St. Joachim, at Rome, a special Arch
confraternity of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus and gave it as its
object ‘ to offer in a special manner adoration, gratitude and
love to the Heart of Jesus for the institution of the Eucharist.’
On 28th March, 1914, the Sacred Congregation of Rites,
relying on the earlier decision of the Holy Office, decided that a
church could not be dedicated in honour of the Eucharistic
Heart and that an image or statue with that title could not be
placed on the altar. This decision was repeated in July of the
same year and the Congregation added :
titulum Cordis Icsu eucharistici permitti tantum posse in approbatis sub co
titulo confratcrnitatibus ; nunquam eum esse recognoscendum et admitten
dum in sacra liturgia.1
Neither of these replies is now included in the collection of
Decreta Authentica S. Congregationis Rituum. In the follow
ing year Cardinal Meri
*}'
del Val, Secretary of the Holy Office,
in a letter addressed to the Cardinal Archbishop of Paris, ‘ to
remove doubts and allay anxieties,’ states the mind of the Holy
See concerning this devotion :
Mens est ut firma ct immutata remanere debeant Decreta Sanctae Sedis
quoad emblemata, imo etiam quoad partem liturgicam devotionis erga Cor
Icsu Eucharisticum ; attamen devotio ipsa erga Cor lesu Eucharisticum
haberi debeat ut approbata ab Apostolica Sede in sensu declarationis quae
continetur in ultima Collectione Indulgentiarum anno 1898 edita; . . .
(plane consequitur) devotionem erga sacratissimum Cor Icsu Eucharisticum
nedum unquam a Sancta Sede improbatam haud fuisse, quin immo pluries
positive recognitam : hoc tamen omnino ct non alio sensu, nova vero circa
eam emblemata, imagines, titulos ac festivitates liturgicas ideo potissimum
vetitas fuisse, nc forte, simplicium animis, novitatis amore captis, devotionem
ipsam in erroneos vel minus opportunos sensus deflectentibus, res tam sancta
obloquendum dicteriis exponeretur.
*
Nevertheless, in 1921, the Sacred Congregation of Rites did
approve pro aliquibus locis a special Office and Mass in honour
1
1914, pp. 146, 382; Vide Eucharistia (1947), p. 322.
’ Acta, 1915, p. 205.
248
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
of the Eucharistic Heart, to be celebrated on the Thursday
within the octave of the Sacred Heart. In the Breviary lessons
for this feast it is emphasized that the devotion is directed
towards the Sacred Heart of Our Lord giving us in the Eucharist
a special proof of His love, and the Decree mentions as a second
purpose the promotion of frequent Communion. The sixth
lesson of the feast concludes :
Benedictus autem decimus quintus, Pontifex maximus, devotionem erga Cor
Jesu Sanctissimum, Eucharistiae nobis prodigens Sacramentum, probavit.
Quo vero salutaris haec pietas ulteriora acciperet incrementa, et uberiores
in fidelibus produceret fructus, idem summus Pontifex Officium et Missam
propriam in honorem Eucharistici Cordis Jesu concessit.
The devotion is liable to be misunderstood as a devotion in
honour of the Heart of Our Lord in the Eucharist. Father
Jansen has pointed out1 that nine out of ten of the faithful
would say that by this devotion
leur intention est d’honneur le cœur de Notrc-Scigneur dans la sainte hostie,
ion cœur dans son état eucharistique, bref, son cœur ‘ sacramental.'
Some of the approved prayers may suggest this interpretation
and, as Father Jansen points out, not only the faithful but also
some preachers have thus interpreted the devotion. Probably
it was in view of these considerations and also taking into
account the somewhat superfluous character of the devotion
that the Sacred Penitentiary has now withdrawn indulgences
from its special prayers. A reviewer in the Ephemerides Lilurgicae
remarks :
Nunc autem praevaluit pristina sententia parum expedire novum titulum
Cordis Jesu Eucharistici, qui semper peculiari explicatione indigebat, idcoquc
penitus expunctus est e novissima collectione indulgentiarum.2
DEVOTION TO THE ‘ CHRIST OF LIMPIAS ’
May one expose for veneration an image of the Head of Our Lord,
commonly known as the * Christ of Limpias.’
Patricius.
Special devotion to the Sacred Head of Our Divine Lord
has been explicitly condemned by the Congregation of the
Holy Office.3 Hence, in accordance with this decree and with
1 Nouvelle Revue Theoloeique, 1927, p. 112 et seq.
1 1950, p. 391.
’ 18th June, 1938. A.A.S., vol. xxx, p. 226.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
249
the prescriptions of canon 1279, an image of the Sacred Head
should not be exposed for veneration. It may be contended
that the devotion to the Christ of Limpias is devotion, not to
the Sacred Head, but to the Passion of Our Lord. If that is so
and if it is considered prudent to encourage this devotion, then
it should be represented by a crucifix. The peculiar charac
teristic of the crucifix at Limpias is that, unlike most crucifixes,
it represents Our Lord, not as dead upon the cross, but as in
His death agony.1 /X reproduction of this crucifix could, with
permission of the Ordinary, be exposed for veneration, but the
exposing of a statue of the Head alone may easily be mistaken
by the faithful as encouragement for devotion to the Sacred
Head.
LICEITY OF A CERTAIN DEVOTION IN HONOUR
. OF THE HOLY FACE
Is devotion to the Holy Face of our Saviour still recognized? If
so what prayers are approved for it? In particular is the Litany of
the Holy Face as printed on the enclosed leaflet approved or in
dulgenced? I notice that the leaflet, which was printed on the
Continent, does not bear an imprimatur, yet it is being commonly
circulated.
Primus.
The leaflet to hand does not bear any mark of official appro
bation. Its publication, therefore, is contrary to the prescriptions
of canon 1385, § 2, and it is unlawful for anyone to circulate it.
The ‘ Litany of the Holy Face ’ and other prayers which it
contains arc not included in the present recognized collection
of indulgenced prayers, Enchiridion Indulgentiarum (published in
1952), nor are they to be found in any of the earlier editions of
approved collections.
It must be made clear that the Holy Sec has never formally
approved of a special direct cult of the Holy Face of Our Divine
Saviour, although recognition has been granted to a confra
ternity bearing the title ‘Archconfraternity of the Holy Face.’
In 1892 the Congregation of the Inquisition (now merged in
the Congregation of the Holy Office) issued a decision and a
direction concerning such a devotion. The question had been
1 This devotion arose when miraculous happenings were alleged in con
nection with the crucifix at Limpias (Province of Santander, Northern Spain),
in March, 1919.
"J
250
to
JO
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
submitted whether there could be approval or at least per
mission for a special cult of the adorable Face of Our Divine
Redeemer, differing from the traditional devotion in honour of
the image of the Holy Face. The reply decided that it was not
expedient, and there was added a detailed explanation of the
mind of the Sacred Congregation. That explanation may be
summarized as follows :—
‘The Holy Sec in the Briefs of 16th December, 1884, and
30th March, 1885, by which indulgences were granted to the
sodality erected at Tours under the title of the Holy Face, by
no means intended to favour much less to approve in any way
a special, distinct cult of the adorable Face of Our Redeemer.
The only recognized devotion is the traditional one in honour
of the image of the Face of Our Divine Redeemer or of copies
of that image, so that the faithful by contemplation on and
veneration of that image may recall to memory the Passion of
Christ and may arouse in their hearts sorrow for their sin and
a desire to make reparation to the Divine Majesty.’1
The Confraternity of the Holy Face was founded by the
Archbishop of Tours in 1884, and in the Apostolic Briefs of
December, 1884, and March, 1885, indulgences were granted
to its members.12 The principal objects of the Confraternity
were to render homage to the image of the Adorable Face of
Our Lord as represented on the veil of Veronica and thereby
to excite acts of faith, reparation, etc. The primary feast of
the Confraternity is the feast of St. Peter, Titular of the Vatican
Basilica in which the veil of Veronica is preserved, and special
devotions of reparation arc to be carried out on those days on
which, according to the Roman custom, the veil of Veronica
is exposed for veneration. The statutes of this Confraternity
were revised in accordance with the instruction of the Congre
gation of the Inquisition in 1892, and subsequently approved.3
On 15th January, 1893, the same Congregation recognized the
liceity of the cult of the image of the Sacred Face as observed
in a chapel of the Confraternity at Verona under the circum
stances expressed in the petition, namely, that it be carried out
caute sub directione ac dependentia Ordinarii ne sit in Oratorio ct in piis
exercitiis publice peragendis aliquid quod sapiat cultum directum ct specialem,
omnibusque iuxta cultum Romae traditionalcm conformatis. ... 4
λ
1
xxv. (1892), p. 719. Cf. A.S.S., xxvi (1893), p. 318.
1 It was raised to the status of an Archconfratemity in 1885.
3 Bcringer, Ijes Indulgences (1924). ii, p 156. In 1897 the Congregation
decided that the supposed revelations to Sister Marie de Saint-Pierre of the
Carmel of Tours regarding this devotion could not be accepted as authentic.
4 4.5.S., xxvi., loc. cit. The Congregation of Priests of the Holy Face
was founded by M. Dupont in 1876.
i"
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
251
Hence the existence of or the pious practices of the Confraternity
of the Holy Face do not imply any approval for a direct, special
devotion.
Similarly, it is, perhaps, here opportune to note that the
Holy Office has more recently (18th June, 1938) forbidden the
introduction of a special devotion to the Sacred Head of Our
Lord Jesus Christ.1 This decision has been given in accordance
with the canons of the Code of Canon Law and also with
explicit reference to the general instruction issued on 26th May,
1937. On that date the Holy Office published a direction on
the necessity of excluding new forms of worship. It first recalled
the warning of the Council of Trent on the dangers that may
arise from abuses in such matters, and in particular the demand
of Pope Pius IX who, in 1875, by his supreme authority decreed
‘ that writers who exercise their talents upon subjects savouring
of novelty, and who under the guise of piety try to promote
unaccustomed forms of devotion even through papers and
magazines, be warned to cease from these activities, and to
consider the danger which they incur of drawing the faithful
into error even regarding the dogmas of the Faith and of giving
to those who hate religion the opportunity to disparage the
purity of Catholic doctrine and of true devotion.’ Finally, the
instruction urges bishops to exercise the strictest vigilance
against any such abuses, for . . . ‘ these new forms of worship
and devotion, often enough ridiculous, usually useless imitations
or corruptions of similar ones which are legitimately established,
arc in many places, especially in these recent days, being daily
multiplied and propagated among the faithful, giving occasion
to great astonishment and to bitter aspersion on the part of
non-Catholics.’
GOSPEL OF THE GENEALOGY ON THE FEAST OF
THE NATIVITY OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY
Many priests must wish that some other extract from the Gospels
had been taken instead of the long catalogue of names that we read
on the feast of Our Lady’s Nativity. Has not the Bobbio Missal
(dating from the seventh century and certainly written by an Irish
scribe) a short way of meeting the difficulty, a way which may possibly
find favour nowadays? The ancestry of Our Lady is there curtailed
as follows:
‘Vide Bouscaren, Canon Law Digrst, Supplement, pp. 167 and 149.
canon 1259, 1261, 1279 and 1324.
Cf.
252
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
’ Lictio Sancti Evengelii secundum Mattheum. Liber generacionis
iesu christi fili dauid, filii abraham: abraham genuit isaac, isaac
autem genuit iacob iacob autem genuit judam et fratres eius et alius
iudas genuit iosep uirum mariae de qua natus est christus.’
S.
%
The genealogical list was inserted in the Mass formula of
this feast during the mediaeval period. The custom probably
began in Gaul about the tenth century. The feast of the
Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary was first celebrated in the
Eastern Church; it was probably of Byzantine origin.1 In
the Greco-Slav Church it is now celebrated as one of the more
solemn feasts and in the Moscow Menologium (‘ Vitae Sanct
orum omnium qui ab Ecclesia Greco-Russica coluntur ’)2 there
is to be found a very detailed account of the ancestry of Mary.
The apocryphal ‘ Protoevangilium of James ’ which, dating
perhaps from the middle of the second century, purports to
relate the circumstances of the birth of the Mother of God,
was received enthusiastically in the East. About the fifth
century there appeared in the East also ‘ The Gospel of the
Nativity of Mary,’ written by the Pscudo-Matthew in reliance
on the earlier apocrypha. The popularity of these works gives
some indication of the existence of devotion in honour of the
Nativity of the Blessed Virgin. The feast was celebrated in the
fifth century in Constantinople where Justinian had erected
a church in honour of St. Anne.
The apocrypha were not, of course, the source of the devotion
and were not, in fact, received in the West. They were rejected
by St. Jerome and Pope Gclasius I forbade the practice of
reading from them at liturgical functions. The feast of Mary’s
Nativity was not certainly established in the Roman calendar
before the time of Pope Sergius I (687-701). According to the
Liber Pontificalis it was celebrated in Rome in the seventh century,
but there arc records of an earlier celebration in Gaul, where it
is mentioned in the earliest manuscript of the Gelasian Sacra
mentary'.3 Hence it would seem that this feast came to Rome
through Eastern and Gelasian channels.
The earliest Gospel Lectionary, the Capitulare Evangeliarum of
Wurzburg (eighth century’), contains no reference to the Nativity
1 Vide Dictionnaire d'Archéologie Chrétienne et de. Liturgie, art. ‘ Marie ’
(Leclercq). Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. vi ; Schuster, Sacramentary, vol. v ;
Martene, De Antiquis Ecclesiae Ritibus, lib. iv., cap. xxxiv.
* Moscow, 1852, apud., Martinov, Annus Ecclesiasticus Greco-Slavicus,
• MSS. Verona, Regina 316.
J
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
253
of die Blessed Virgin.1 Provision, however, was made for it
in the group of lectionaries which date from about the end of
the eighth or the beginning of the ninth century. A typical
example of such lectionaries is found in the Harleian MSS. or
Codex Aureus (Brit. Mus. MS. Harl. 2788). It is interesting to
note that the Gospel formula there assigned to the feast of the
Nativity of the Blessed Virgin is drawn from the first chapter
of St. Luke’s Gospel (verses 39-47)—‘ Exsurgens Maria ... in
Deo salutari mco.’ The same Gospel text is given in the Codex
Ottoboniensis, which probably had its origin in Paris in the first
half of the ninth century. It is in a ninth- or tenth-century
manuscript from Passau (Southern Bavaria) that we first find
the Gospel of the Genealogy appointed for the feast of Mary’s
Nativity.2 The Gospel Exsurgens Maria ... is there trans
ferred to the vigil of the Assumption, and the first sixteen verses
of St. Matthew’s Gospel are assigned to the Mass of the Nativity.
A later group of MSS.3 of the tenth and eleventh centuries
retains both Gospels for the Nativity, the Genealogy being given
as an alternative. But in those which were most strongly
affected by Gelasian influences, the Gospel of the genealogy
alone is appointed, e.g. the Parisian MSS., Paris Bibl. Nat.
MS. 262, the Gospel capitulary of which dates from the tenth
or eleventh century.
The Bobbio Missal does not make any mention of the feast,
but it prescribes the Genealogy as the Gospel for the feast of the
Nativity of our Divine Lord.1 As our correspondent points
out, the genealogical list is there given in a very much abbrevi
ated form. It must be borne in mind that the Bobbio Missal is
probably the earliest collection which merits to be described
as a full Missal, i.e., a collection which contains both prayers
and lessons. At that period the Sacramcntary and Lcctionary
were written and used as distinct books. Hence the compiler
used many devices to bring his work within compact limits.
Throughout the Missal he uses many abbreviations for the most
frequently occurring words ; he omits almost completely the
lessons from the Prophets and the usual introductory formulae
of lessons and sometimes reduces the text of the lessons to a
’Vide Frcre, Roman /Calendar (Oxford, 1930), p. 133; Roman Lectionary
(Oxford. 1934), pp. 62, 187, 212.
’MSS. Munich, MS. 16003.
’MSS. London, British Museum MS., Harl. 2821 ; Paris Bihl. Nat.,
MS. 9390 ; London, British Museum MS., Egerton 608 ; Paris Bibl. Nat.,
MS. 10438.
v
’The Bobio Missal dates from the seventh century and admittedly came
under Celtic influences.
254
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
few verses. The genealogical catalogue was a mnemonic list
which could easily be recited from memory by the reader, and
so was omitted by the scribe. We cannot, therefore, conclude
that the list was in practice reduced to these few verses.1
The Gospel of the Genealogy has also in recent times been
assigned to the vigil of the feast of the Immaculate Conception.
The reasons why it is appropriate to these feasts of the Blessed
Virgin Mary have been aptly summarized as follows by Cardinal
Schuster :
‘ The genealogical tree of Jesus Christ, which has a mnemonic
and representative character, although with several gaps, carries
with it a far deeper theological meaning than that of a mere
historical detail, for it confirms the divine promise made to
Abraham and to David—namely that from their race would
be born the Mcssias. For He willed not only to have the Virgin
Mary for His Mother but He so disposed that His forefather
should be Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, etc. Thus the reality
of His human nature being proved without a doubt, men would
realize that the Word had truly assumed their flesh in order
to raise it up to the throne of God.’2
THE NEW FEAST OF THE IMMACULATE HEART
OF MARY
Is the new devotion in honour of the Immaculate Heart of Mary
identical with the older devotion in honour of the Most Pure Heart?
If so, does the publication of the new Mass abrogate the use of the
Mass formerly given in the missal for the feast of the Most Pure
Heart of Mary as granted pro aliquibus locis"?
Acies.
Needless to say devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary
is essentially identical with the devotion formerly practised
under the title of devotion to the Most Pure Heart of Mary.
The material object is the physical heart of Mary as a symbol
of her virtues and love ; the formal object is the singular excel
lence and perfection of the Mother of God, her love for God
and for her Divine Son and her maternal compassion for men.
Some early indications of a devotion in honour of the Heart of
Mary may be found in the writings of St. Bernard and in those
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
255
and was initiated by St. John Eudes. In 1644 he wished to
have the feast of the Most Pure Heart of Mary celebrated on
20th October as the patronal feast of his congregations of priests
and nuns. The Holy Sec refused in 1699—although the Papal
Legate in France had approved it—to approve of the Office
and feast, but many French bishops allowed its celebration in
their dioceses on 8th February.1 By 1672 it was celebrated
throughout France ; in Italy the apostle of the devotion was
the Jesuit, John Peter Pinamonte (1632-1702).
The first Papal sanction for the feast was granted by Pope
Pius VI in 1787 when he permitted the nuns of Notre-Dame de
Corbeil to celebrate it as a double of the first class on 22nd
August. In 1799 the same Pope conceded the feast to some of
the churches of the diocese of Palermo. It was not until 1805
that a general papal approbation was granted. Pope Pius VII
gave the faculty for the celebration of the feast of the Most Pure
Heart of Mary on the Sunday after the octave of the Assump
tion, to all the dioceses and religious institutes which petitioned
for it.1
2 The Mass was the same as that used on the feast of
Our Lady of the Snows (5th August), i.e. the Mass Salve from the
Common of the Feasts of the Blessed Virgin. The Confraternity of
die Immaculate Heart of Mary was established in the church
of Notrc-Dame-des-Victoires by the Abbé Desgenettes in 1836.
Through this confraternity and also through the devotion in
connection with the ‘ Miraculous Medal ’ the cult of the Most
Pure Heart spread rapidly.3 In 1855 the Sacred Congregation
of Rites approved a special Office and Mass for the feast ; one
of the censors of the Congregation insisted that the title ‘ Most
Pure Heart ’ be preferred to that of ‘ Immaculate Heart.’
Finally Pope Pius XII, in 1944, to commemorate the special
consecration of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary,
extended the feast to the whole world, to be celebrated on
22nd August as a double of the second class, with a special
Office and Mass—
ut, opitulante Beata Dei Genitrice, cunctis gentibus pax, Christi Ecclesiae
libertas praestaretur, peccatores vero, propriis reatibus expediti, omnes
denique fulcies in puritatis dilectione, virtutumque exercitio solidarentur.
The new feast was fixed on 22nd August in order that feast
1 Vide Campana, Meirea vd Cultu Cattolico, ii, p. 169.
1 Holwcck, Art. Cath. Ency.
3 The foundation and growth of many religious congregations who adopted
the devotion, caused its rapid spread, e.g. the Congregation of the Immaculate
Heart of Mary, founded by Ven. Francis Libcrmann in 1843 and amalgamated
with the Holy Ghost Fathers in 1848 ; the Piepus Fathers—Congregation of
the Hearts of Jesus and Mary—founded 1805, and a number of smaller con
gregations. (Vide Campana, op. cit., p. 230.)
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
offices may not be unnecessarily multiplied. It was appointed
as a double of the second class because a feast of lower rite
would be ousted by the Octave Day of the Assumption. It was
decided that die Office and Mass approved by Pope Pius IX
would not be suitable for a feast of this rite extended to the
universal Church since there were already some secondary
feasts of the Blessed Virgin, e.g. of Our Lady of Lourdes, and
of the Seven Dolours, which had fully proper Offices and
Masses.1 Hence, of the Office of the Most Pure Heart of Mary
the only parts that were retained in the new text were : (a) the
Antiphon to the Magnificat ; (b) the prayer, but ‘ immaculati ’
is now inserted instead of ‘ purissimi ’ ; (c) the fourth and fifth
lessons in the Second Nocturn from the sermon of St. Bernardine
of Siena. In the Missal an almost completely new text has been
prepared. The new Introit, Adeamus is taken from the Epistle
to the Hebrews, not from a psalm. The new epistle is from
Ecclesiasticus not from the Canticle of Canticles, and the new
gospel from St. John recalls the maternity of Mary in relation
to men. In the prayer, secret and post communion the word
‘ immaculate ’ replaces the words ‘ most pure.’
The new Office and Mass thus gives a new orientation to the
cult of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the former Offices
and Mass for the feast arc now replaced. Where by special
’ure Heart of Mary was already
!d now be used. Even where the
: was already granted by special
iw Mass replaces it. In the new
use as a votive Mass during the
but the Mass of the Immaculate
:brated as a votive only where a
d.
TO MARY, THE VIRGIN
JEST
e lawfulness of devotion to Mary,
). Is this title permissible? In 1906
ia, Virgo Sacerdos, ora pro nobis ’
gence does not seem to be in any
authentic collection since 1938. Again, in 1915, the Holy Office
decided that the use of images of Our Lady clothed in priestly vest
ments was not permissible. Lastly, a prayer in the Raccolta had the
following words, ‘ and thou, thyself a priest at the altar ’ (1935 edit.,
p. 483), but, in the 1938 edition, these words were omitted.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
257
In the writings of the later Fathers a few references arc
to be found to the Blessed Mother of God as the ‘ Virgin Priest.’
St. Epiphanius in a homily in praise of the Blessed Virgin has
the phrase, ‘ Mary priest likewise and altar . . . who gave
to us the heavenly bread, Christ, unto the remission of sins.’1
And St. John Damascene salutes Mary as ‘Priest of God.’2
The title ‘ Priest ’ was not understood of the Blessed Virgin
Mary in the strict sense as of one who offered an external sacrifice
to God, but was applied in a wide sense to Our Blessed Lady
who was the Mother of our Pligh Priest, who offered Him in the
temple and who, above all, stood by the Cross when He offered
the sacrifice of our redemption.3
The cult of the Blessed Virgin Mary as the Virgin Priest
cannot now, however, be regarded as an approved devotion.
On 8th April, 1916, the Congregation of the Holy Office issued
the decree : ‘ Imaginem Beatae Mariae Virginis vestibus sacer
dotalibus indutae esse reprobandam.’1 In 1927 an article
dealing with this devotion appeared in the Palestra del Clero,
published at Rovigo in the diocese of Adria (Northern Italy).
On 10th March, of that year, the Holy Office addressed a
letter to the Bishop of Adria informing him that in conformity
with the decree issued on the 8th April, 1916, this devotion
was not approved and was not to be propagated.5 Later, in
explanation of this statement, Rev. P. Hugon, O.P., sent die
following note to the editor of the periodical concerned :
Les informations que je viens de recevoir confirment la Lettre à votre
Evoque. Le S. Office veut qu’il ne soit plus question de la dévotion à la
Vierge Prêtre. Les explications données dans votre revue semblent suffisantes
et vous n’avez plus à revenir sur cette article. . . . C’est répondre aux
intentions du Saint Office que de laisser dormir entièrement cette question
que les âmes peu éclairés pouvaient ne pas comprendre exactement.e
USE OF THE INVOCATION MART, QUEEN OF IRELAND
Would it be permissible to use in public prayers the invocation
Our Lady (or Mary), Queen of Ireland, pray for usl
Curiosus.
1 Hom. v ; P.G. xliii, 497.
1 Migne ; P.G. xlviii, 22.
3 Borzi, Maria Coremdemptrix, p. 58. Cf. P. Belon apud Campana, Maria
ntl Culto Cattolico (Mariclti, 1933), ii, p. 726. * Maria non è sacerdote . . .
Ella non offri il sacrifico della croce, come ncanche ora non offre il Sacrificio
della Messa. Ma esse è la Madré dei Sacerdote. Gesu è nato sacerdote,
non lo è diventato in seguito.’ (Report of the Marian Congress in the diocese
of Saint-Brieuc (Britanny) in 1910.)
•A.A.S., 5th May, 1916.
’ Apud Bozri, p. 55.
4 Loc. cit.
10—1993
258
PROBLE.MS IN THE LITURGY
The invocation Our Lady, Queen of Ireland, pray for us has
not been formally approved and would seem to be too narrowly
restricted for use as a public prayer. Pope Pius XI concluded
his broadcast address to the Eucharistic Congress in 1932 with
the words ‘ Finally . . . We now impart . . . Our Apostolic
Benediction, which We unite with Our prayers to the Blessed
Virgin Mary, Queen of Ireland.’ No doubt the Pope wished to
pay tribute to the pre-eminent place which the Blessed Virgin
holds and has through centuries held in the hearts of the Irish
Catholic people. ‘ . . . one might say that in the devotion of
the Irish to the Mother of God there is a consistency, a dis
interested character and popular continuity that are remark
able.’1 Yet the liturgy already justifies the title Queen of heaven
and earth. For example, on the feast of Our Lady of Mount
Carmel the communion antiphon begins, ‘ Regina mundi dig
nissima . . . ’ and in the Mass of the Seven Dolours (September)
the Gradual reads ‘ Stabat sancta Maria, caeli Regina et mundi
Domina, juxta crucem . . .’ In the liturgy the title ‘ Queen’ is
usually attributed to the Blessed Virgin in a metaphorical sense,
meaning that Mary excels all other creatures in her dignity
and understanding {Regina Angelorum}. in her zeal {Regina Apostol
orum} in her fortitude and all other virtues {Regina Martyrum,
Regina Omnium Sanctorum}, etc. Recent writers on Mariology
have put forward various interpretations of the nature of Mary’s
Queenship in a proper sense; some base it on the Blessed Virgin’s
position as Mediatrix of graces and hold that it implies simply
that in the distribution of grace Mary has special influence
with her Divine Son ; others take it in a wider sense based on
the prerogatives of Our Lady as Co-redcmptrix and therefore
would give to the Blessed Virgin the power ‘ to direct us to
salvation in modo congruo post Christum.'' It is simply a difference
of emphasis, but for our present purposes it suffices to note that
the liturgy fully confers on the Blessed Virgin the title ‘ Mary,
Queen of heaven and earth,’2 in the feast of the Queenship
established in 1954.
DEVOTION IN HONOUR OF OUR LADY OF FATIMA
May one direct the evening devotions expressly in honour of
Our Lady of Fatima?
Is the devotion in honour of Our Lady of Fatima to be regarded
as identical with that in honour of the Immaculate Heart of Mary?
P.P.
1 O'Carroll, This Age and Mary, p. 154.
3 Marian Studies, iii, p. 218. ; Cf. Roschini, Compendium Mariologiae, p. 316.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
259
Private devotion to Our Lady of Fatima may, with due
precautions, be permitted ; such devotions could not be intro
duced into the Benediction service without the express approval
of the Ordinary. The approval given by the Holy See to this,
as to all private revelations, means simply that the Church
does not oppose belief in it ; the faithful arc allowed to believe
in it with due caution. In recent times the devotion to the
Immaculate Heart of Mary has been associated closely with
devotion to Our Lady of Fatima, just as devotion to Our Lady
of Lourdes has been intimately connected with the Immaculate
Conception.
The devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary
seems to be unknown in the first narrative of Fatima ; the
Blessed Virgin appeared as Our Lady of the Rosary and
the theme of the Immaculate Heart is a later addition.
This is the conclusion reached in a recent exhaustive study of
Fatima by Father E. Dhanis.1 The book is published in
Flemish and we give here the brief summary of his con
clusions as stated in the Clergy Monthly for August, 1949 :
‘ Father Dhanis has objectively, respectfully and sympathetically
examined the available documents and traced the history of the
secret of Fatima. The history briefly comes to this. In the
interview's of the children in 1917 by Canon Fonnigao there is
mention of a secret but no word of the Immaculate Heart.
Jacinta shortly before her early death on 20th February, 1920,
alluded to a secret which seemed to imply the announcement
of approaching calamities. In 1927, Lucia was asked by her
spiritual director to write down some of her spiritual experiences,
particularly some special revelations she had received on 10th
December, 1925, and 15th January, 1926, about devotion to the
Immaculate Heart of Mary. In this report Lucia, for the first
time, apparently, says that Our Lady of Fatima spoke of devo
tion to her Immaculate Heart. Ten years later, in 1938, shortly
after her first reports on Fatima to the Bishop of Leria (1936-7),
she began to ask the bishop that he request the Holy Father
to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart. Finally, in her
accounts of 1941, she reveals two parts of the secret (a third
still remaining undisclosed) ; and herein the Immaculate Heart
forms the central theme.’ 'These private revelations were not
the cause but were at most the occasion for the consecration
of the human race to the Immaculate Heart of Mary which
was carried out by the Holy Father in 1942. Devotion to the
Immaculate Heart has a long history. In the seventeenth
1 Bij de verschijningen en het geheim van Fatima ; cf. Father Martindale’s
The Message of Fatima.
260
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
century it was envisaged as an expression of the Christian life
through devotion to Mary, but gradually it came to be centred
on the love of the Blessed Virgin for mankind.1 The object of
this devotion is described in the Decree establishing the new
feast :
Hoc porro cultu Ecclesia Cordi Immaculato Beatae Mariae Virginis
debitum honorem tribuit, cum sub huius Cordis symbolo Dei Genetricis
eximiam singularemquc sanctitatem, praesertim vero ardentissimum erga
Deum ac lesum Filium suum amorem, maternamque erga homines divino
Sanguine redemptos pietatem devotissime veneratur.2
Prayers in honour of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, either
the liturgical prayers or the special act of consecration, could
with due approval be used at Benediction ; but it is surely
desirable that the faithful be instructed concerning the solid
theological foundation of this devotion which is independent
of any private revelations.
HISTORY OF THE FEAST OF ST. PATRICK
What information is available regarding the development of the
feast of St. Patrick in Ireland ? The following facts are known
to me. The feast was inserted into the universal calendar of the
Latin rite under the influence of Father Luke Wadding, O.F.M.,
about 1625, when he was acting as consultor to the Sacred Congre
gation of Rites and a member of the commission for the reform of
liturgical books set up by Pope Urban VIII. It was the same Pope
Urban who in 1642 limited the right of bishops to establish new
holydays. In Ireland we keep St. Patrick’s Day instead of St. Joseph’s
Day as a holyday of obligation. When was this arrangement first
sanctioned? It may be noted in this connection that it was Urban
VIII’s immediate predecessor, Gregory XV, who in 1621 declared
St. Joseph’s Day a holyday of universal obligation. Any further
information on the origin, rise and development of our national feast
would be welcome.
Hieernicus.
<1
The second part of this query—when did the feast of St.
Joseph cease to be a holyday of obligation in Ireland ?—presents
little difficulty. The Apostolic Constitution, Universa, of Urban
VIII (13th September, 1642) fixed thirty-five feasts of universal
obligation, including the feast of St. Joseph and in addition
recognized that the feast of the principal patron saint of the
• >1
1 Vide Questions Liturgiques et Paroissales, 1919, p. 105. I. E. Record, 1949
p. 80.
* Decree of 4th May, 1944. Gf. Epistula Pii XII, .4..4.S., 1948, p. 106.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
261
kingdom or province and of the principal patron of the city
or parish may be obligatory in particular places.1 All these
feasts were of strict obligation in Ireland down to the middle
of the eighteenth century. The feast of St. Patrick was observed
throughout the country and in each diocese the feast of the
local patron was a holyday of obligation. Frequent representa
tions were made to the Holy Sec by the Irish bishops to have
the number of feasts of obligation reduced. The first concession
was made by Pope Benedict XIV in a letter dated 15th
December, 1755, and addressed : Venerabilibus fratribus Archieps.
el Epis. Regn. Hiberniae.1
2 The concession was in regard only
to the obligation of refraining from servile work. The Pope
relaxed that obligation on nineteen days (including the feast
of St. Joseph) reducing the number of fully obligatory holydays
to seventeen (of which St. Patrick’s Day was one). Pope
Benedict refused to grant exemption from the obligation of
hearing Mass on these holydays on which permission was given
to work but private letters from Rome encouraged the bishops
to dispense from the law on their own responsibility. The Irish
bishops pointed out that in Ireland where the faithful had to
travel long distances to Mass the dispensation from die pro
hibition against servile work really did not give much relief;
hence on 29th March, 1778, Pope Pius VI dispensed with the
obligation of assisting at Mass on the feast of St. Joseph and on
all other retrenched holydays except Easter Monday and
Pentecost Monday. Pope Pius further dispensed from both
obligations on three feasts which had not been mentioned in
the dispensation of Pope Benedict—namely the feasts of the
Conception, Purification and Nativity of the Blessed Virgin
Mary. There remained, therefore, fourteen days of full obliga
tion. In 1829, Pope Pius VIII suppressed the obligations
attaching to the Mondays of Easter and Pentecost and in 1831
Pope Gregory XVI in response to repeated requests from the
Irish bishops removed all those of the feast of St. John the
Baptist. Consequent on these dispensations the feast of St.
Joseph remained a retrenched holyday in Ireland, after the
publication of the Code of Canon Law (canon 1247).
For proof of the existence of the feast of St. Patrick prior to
the seventeenth century wc must rely on the evidence contained
in the decrees of local councils and on the contents of liturgical
1 The feast ol (he Conception of the Blessed Virgin was added by Pope
Clement XI in 1708.
2 Vide Archbishop William Walsh in I. E. Record, 1881, p. 115, and 1901,
pp. 50, et scq.
262
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
books. Few ancient Irish liturgical books arc available and in
using the evidence from these sources we must bear in mind
that the mere mention of the saint’s name is not in itself an
indication of a feast any more than a Mass at the end of a
missal would be. We can draw our conclusions legitimately
only when a Mass of St. Patrick is listed in the sanctoral cycle
or an Office occurs among the Offices of the other saints.1 The
first liturgical calendar for Ireland was granted in 1741.1
2 ‘ It
was then found that none of the feasts of Irish saints except
the three patrons had attained really nation-wide significance
and that not even for the feasts of the three patrons suitable
propria could be produced from Irish sources. . . . The local
character of the veneration of native saints in Ireland (except
for the three patrons whose cult, however, attained really
national significance only through the Anglo-Normans) accounts
also for the paucity of Offices of Irish Saints in Ireland. The
custom of celebrating the feast of a (native) saint through a
proper Office and Mass was introduced into Ireland as a foreign
custom and apparently met with little enthusiasm on the part
of the natives. . . . The very fact that the first official
Officia Propria in Ireland were not issued for an individual
diocese but for the whole country is significant indeed. Up
to the beginning of the (twelfth-century) reform Ireland was
just one diocese ; the titular of Armagh, the oldest “ metro
politan ” see of Ireland, is accordingly the national patron, as
Felire Oengusso calls him Patriae apsal Herenn.’34 Colgan1
declares that four feasts were celebrated in honour of St. Patrick,
(a) On 17th March, Natale Sancti Patricii is mentioned in the
Martyrologies of Bede, Usuard, Notkerus Balbulus, Hermannus
Greven, Franciscus Maurolicus, Salisbury, Tallaght, Gorman,
Donegal and in various calendars ; (ό) 5th April, Baptismus
Alagni Patricii coepit in Hibernia or Baptisma Patricii venit ad
Hiberniam—apparently a celebration of the beginning of St.
Patrick’s mission in Ireland ; (c) 6th April, Memoria Ordinationis
S. Patricii—mentioned in the Martyrologies of Tallaght and
Donegal. This may be a reference to St. Patrick’s episcopal
consecration ; () 9th and 10th June, Inventio {or Translatio)
SS. Patricii, Brigidae ct Colombae—a feast celebrated with an
1 Cf. Seitz, Der Verehrung des hl. Joseph apud Filas, S.J., The Man Nearest
to Christ.
2 Dr. John Hennig in Mediaeval Studies, vol. vit, 1945.
3 The following quatrain is found at 17th March : ‘ The flame of a virginal
sun. The apostle of virginal Erin, may Patrick with many thousands, be the
shelter of our wretchedness.’ Trans, in Gougaud.
4 Triadis Thatmaturgae Acta (1647), p. 232.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
263
octave. Colgan (p. 193) also publishes as from an Armagh
breviary the Officium Proprium for the feast on 17th March.
The antiquity of this celebration and its nation-wide character
is witnessed by the Vita Tripartita and by a reference in the Book
of Armagh. According to a note in the Book of Armagh the
first of the honours due to St. Patrick by the monasteries and
churches of all Ireland was the celebration during three days
and three nights in mid-spring with every kind of good food
except flesh of the festival of his ‘falling asleep.’*
1 There can
be little doubt that the so-called Tripartite Life, forming, as
it does, three homilies with appropriate texts and setting, was
intended to provide sermons, or the material of sermons, for
the three days of the celebration. ‘ The Book of Armagh is
evidence from the early part of the ninth century and the Vita
Tripartita dates probably from the end of the ninth or the be
ginning of the tenth century. There arc many eulogies of St.
Patrick in the earliest Irish writings, e.g. Sccundinus (Sechnall)
in his hymn written in the fifth century and inserted in the
Antiphonary of Bangor about the end of the seventh century
confers on him the title Magister Scottorum : Cummian, in his
letter written about a.d. 632 or 633, speaks of Sanctus Patricius,
noster papa ; and in the Catalogus Sanctorum Hiberniae com
posed in the eighth century, Patrick is given as the chief of the
first order of Catholic saints.2 In the life of St. Gertrude of
Nivelles written about a.d. 670 there is mention of St. Patrick’s
natale on 17th March; the Calendar of St. Willibrord (be
ginning of the eighth century) fixes the feast on 17th Marell—
this entry appears in the Berne MS. (which proceeds from Metz)
and in the Gellonc and Rheinau Martyrologies. The name of
St. Patrick also appears in the calendar of the Leofric Missal
and in the Bosworth Psalter. ‘ The absence of his name would
probably have been exceptional in any calendar of insular
connection in the early part of the eighth century.’3 In the
Annals of the Four Mastci's there arc frequent allusions to the
Eve of St. Patrick indicating a day of special ceremony and the
chronicler, Marianus Scottus, in the eleventh century uses the
words ‘Missa Sancti Patricii’ to denote the festival of 17th
March. The Corpus Missal (usually classed as of the twelfth
century), as also the Rosslyn Missal (thirteenth or fourteenth
century), has each a proper Mass of St. Patrick. The Rosslyn
Missal may have been written for the cathedral church of
1 Kenny, Sources of Irish History, vol. i, p. 342.
1 Gougaud, Christianity in Celtic Lands, p. 47.
’ II. A. Wilson in the H.B.S. edition of the Calendar of Willibrord.
264
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Downpatrick, where John de Courcy—‘Sancti Patricii special
issimus dilector ct venerator ’*—restored the cult of St. Patrick
circa 1180. The Collect there given is apparently based on an
earlier form and has been shortened, possibly by Jocelin. A
still shorter form appears in the Kilcormic Missal (fifteenth
century) and would seem to be the basis of the present Collect.
‘ No other Celtic saint has been so much venerated in Ireland
nor from so remote a period.’*
12
There is clearly abundant testimony to the celebration of the
feast of St. Patrick prior to the twelfth century. After that
period we find in local conciliar decrees some explicit evidence
of what Dr. Hennig has described as Anglo-Norman influence
in favour of the national feast. In the Provincial Decrees of
Dublin one statute of Archbishop Alexander de Bicknor (most
probable date being 1321) directs that the feast of St. Patrick
is to be observed as a double outside Lent cum regimine chori.
The text of the statute runs :34
In medio pectoris nostri beati Patricii Hibernie apostoli ct patroni memo
riam revolvimus qui divina disponente demencia populum Hibernicanum
ad fidem convertebat, nonnulla cciam monasteria et ecclesias suis construxit
temporibus ct multimodis choruscavit miraculis : cuius doctrina vita ct
sanctitate Hibcrnicana fulget ecclesia aliisque multis insigniis decoratur et
privilegiis. . . . Idcirco dignum prorsus arbitramur ut fidelis populus prona
voluntate tam excelsi, tam gloriosi patroni nostri memoriam cordialius
rememoret ad divinam misericordiam pro peccatis impetrandam. Sacri
presentis approbacionc concilii ordinamus ct statuimus quod qualibet hebdo
mada extra quadragesimam solempnis fiat commcmoracio sanctissimi Patricii
patroni per totam provinciam Dublin, in aliqua feria vacante cum regimine
chori : ct quod dies exitus sui ab hoc ergastulo sanctissimus sub duplici festo
perpetuis temporibus celebretur.
The condition cum regimine chori docs not necessarily imply
feriatio in foro but that it was de facto a holyday in the full sense
is clear from a statute enacted subsequently by Archbishop
Minot in 1367. Archbishop Minot admits abuses and the
difficulty of preserving the law forbidding servile work if holydays occur too frequently. Hence he permits rural work on the
feasts of Saints Anne, Catherine and Thomas the Martyr, but adds
quoad festum sancti Patricii et prefati domini Johannis prodecessoris nostri
quoad festum conccpcionis beate Marie virginis ac feriam sextam parasccvcs
in suo robore duraturis.
*
‘Jocelin, Vita S. Patricii·, vide H. Lawlor in Introduction to H.B.S.
edition of Rosslyn Missal.
1 Gougaud, op. cit.
’ ' Provincial Statutes of Dublin ’ edited by Father A. Gwynn, S.J., in the
Archivium Hibernicum, vol. xi, 1944. I am indebted to Father Gwynn for
drawing my attention to this statute p. 82. Archbishop Bicknor also directs
’ (festa) translacionis sancti Patricii quodlibet sub novem ledonibus solempniter in ecclesiis per totam provinciam nostram cclcbre(n)tur.*
4 Archivium Hibernicum, xi, p. 103.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
265
From these decrees it is clear that the feast of St. Patrick was
celebrated as a holyday of full obligation in the province of
Dublin during the fourteenth century ; it would appear both
from the eulogy with which Archbishop Bicknor prefaced his
statute and from the legislation which Archbishop Minot
deemed necessary that this was a new custom in the province.
On the other hand the feast may have for a long period been
celebrated cum feriatione in choro, but custom or abuses had
introduced servile work on this as on other holydays. Dr.
Renehan in his Collections on Irish Church History published a
transcript of the Consultatio Ecclesiastica purporting to give the
synodal decrees of the province of Armagh. The fourth chapter
contains a decree issued by Primate Dowdall in a Provincial
Council held in Drogheda in 1556 which abrogated the law
forbidding servile work on a number of feast days on which
priests are still bound to celebrate Mass. A note to this statute
adds : ‘ This same law is said to have been made at the Synod
of Kells, 1142.’1 There follows a list of holydays still to be
observed according to the usage of Armagh, including, needless
to say, the feast of St. Patrick.
Father Luke Wadding sets down in the Annales Minorun2
the following account of his petition for the establishment of
the feast.
(In Comitiis Generalibus Mantuae celebratis anno 1390 die 26 mensis
Maii decretum est) ut in universo Ordine dic xvii Martii recitaretur officium
divinum de Sancto Patritio Hiberniae Aposto!o, ritu festorum novem lec
tionum. Alias monui, me reperisse in Kalendariis, et libris choralibus
nostrae sodalitatis nomen, ct memoriam, huius sancti Confessoris, quod ab
his Comitiis, ut rcor, sumpsit originem. Quid autem moverit Patres, ut
huic sancto Antistiti peculiarem cultum indicerent, omissis aliis multis sanctis
Confessoribus, variarum gentium rXpostolis, ct Provinciarum Patronis, plane
nescierim, nisi fortassis Hiberni Patres in Comitiis ita ungerent, ampliori
honari suae gentis Magistri hoc ratione consultari. Ego quidem. . .humiliter
rogavi Sanctissimum Dominum Urbanum VIII · . ·
The feast was first inserted in the universal calendar as of
semi-double rite. In 1854 the Irish Hierarchy petitioned that
it be raised to double rite and their petition was granted by
Pope Pius IX in 1859. Almost everywhere the feast was cele
brated on 17th March, but in a few places in France St. Patrick
was commemorated on 16th March ; in Paris the local calendar
1 Pp. 134, 435. Even in the eighteenth century there was a diversity
amongst diocesan customs regarding holydays. Some dioceses in the south
and west did not avail of the dispensation granted by Pius VI—Vide Renehan,
p. 3IB.
’Torn, ix, p. 113 (3rd edition).
266
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
at the beginning of the nineteenth century assigned the Wed
nesday after Low Sunday for the celebration of his feast.1
The scientific evaluation of the authorities, primary and
secondary’, to which we have here referred must be left to
historians. We have sought to put down all the evidence we
have found ; no doubt many important references and allusions
have escaped us. There appears, however, to be a sufficient
body of evidence to justify the statements that the feast of St.
Patrick was celebrated in the Office and Mass from the sixth
century throughout Ireland and that at least from the fourteenth
century the feast was celebrated as a holy'day of obligation.
Since 1930 the Holy Sec has granted to a number of Irish dioceses
the use of a Proper Mass of St. Patrick—‘ Egredere de terra
tua.’
GENERAL DECREE SIMPLIFYING THE RUBRICS OF
THE BREVIARY AND OF THE MISSAL
This general decree, published by the Sacred Congregation
of Rites on 23rd March, 1955,2 has for its purpose to render the
recitation of the Breviary more fruitful for priests engaged in
the active apostolate. This simplification comes as a response
to many petitions submitted to the Holy' Sec in recent times.
Some of the suggestions made to the Sacred Congregation would
have radically changed the structure of the Divine Office, c.g.
it was sometimes proposed that there be a distinction made
between the choir Office and the private Office by dropping
in private recitation those parts {Responsoria, versicles, etc.) which
their full expression only in public celebration of the Office, or
again that for secular priests only Matins, Lauds and Vespers
should remain of obligation while the recitation of the Day Hours
would be an optional devotion. It is one of the merits of the
present decree that, although the Divine Office has been
substantially shortened and simplified, its essential structure
has been safeguarded. This decree governs the Office of the
Roman Rite both in public and in private recitation and
affects not only the calendar of the Universal Church, but also
all local and national calendars.
1 Vide O'Hanlon, Lives of the Irish Sainis, vol. viii, p. 825. The saint com
memorated on the 16th March may have been Patrick of Auvergne (Averncnsis
or Hivcrnensis) or as the Bollandists state (Tom. ii, Mar. xvi, p. 417) early
Martyrologies sometimes on 16th March commemorated, .S’. Patricii, Vigilia
but later Vifi/ia was replaced by dtfrosilio.
j
Μ.Λ-S., 20th-22nd April, 1955, p. 218 ct seq.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
267
1. Changes in the Calendar: The rite of ‘semi-double’ is
suppressed. Days which have had semi-double rite are now
to be celebrated as simples, except the vigil of Pentecost which
is raised to double rite. In the present Breviary semi-double
rite is assigned to Sundays, to certain vigils and octaves and
to the feasts of some saints. Hence the decree gives detailed
instructions for each one of these classes :
Sundays : Ordinary Sundays will now have double rite,
although the antiphons need not be doubted. If the Sunday
Mass and Office arc impeded, they are not to be anticipated
or taken up again during the following week. Hitherto if the
second Sunday after Epiphany or the twenty-third Sunday
after Pentecost were impeded by Septuagesima or the last
Sunday after Pentecost respectively, they had to be celebrated
on the previous Saturday ; also the Sunday within the octave
of Christmas, if prevented by a feast, was resumed during the
week, and in addition any Sunday during the year, if superseded
by a feast, had its Mass celebrated on the first minor feria,
simple feast or common octave day which occurred during the
following week. A minor Sunday is, as formerly, impeded by
any feast of a mystery or title of Our Lord and the Sunday is
only commemorated, never transferred.
In future all the Sundays of Advent, Lent and Passiontide,
Low Sunday and Pentecost Sunday will be celebrated as
doubles of the first class and will have precedence over every
feast. There is a change here in the status of the second, third
and fourth Sundays of Advent since they will not in future
yield to double feasts of the first class ; but, if such a feast falls
on one of these Sundays, a parochial or private Mass of the
feast is permitted.
Vigils : The number of vigils is reduced to seven, namely the
privileged vigils of the Nativity and Pentecost and the common
vigils of the Ascension, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin,
and of St. John Baptist (23rd June), SS. Peter and Paul, and
St. Lawrence. The vigil of Pentecost becomes a day of double
rite, although the antiphons arc not doubled—//: vigilia Pentecostes
nihil innovetur; the vigil of the Nativity retains its unique simple
double rite and the remaining vigils are of simple rite and a
common vigil is ousted by a Sunday. Comment: The vigils
which arc suppressed arc those of the Immaculate Conception
and of All Saints and seven vigils of feasts of the Apostles.
Canon 1252 states that the general law prescribes fast and
abstinence on four vigils during the year, namely the vigils of
Pentecost, the Nativity, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin
268
* wl
» U
> KJ
κι
*
problems in the liturgy
and All Saints. Presumably, as indicated in the Ordo for the
Universal Church, the obligation of fast and abstinence does
not remain on the eve of All Saints, since the Mass and Office
and liturgical commemoration of the vigil have been suppressed.
Octaves : The former elaborate division of octaves into three
orders, etc., is abolished and all octaves arc suppressed except
those of the Nativity, Easter and Pentecost. All the day’s
within the octaves of Easter and Pentecost arc raised to double
rite, cannot be ousted and do not even admit commemora
tions of occurring feasts. Days within the octave of Christmas
are to be of double rite without any change in their Office.
The simple octave days of St. Stephen, St. John, and the Holy
Innocents and the vigil of the Epiphany are all suppressed and
their place taken by simple ferial Offices with hymns, capitula,
short rcsponsories, vcrsicles and prayer from the Office of the
Circumcision. The Te Deum is to be said on these ferias and
the doxology and verse of the Nativity and the Mass of the
Circumcision is to be celebrated each day with Gloria, but
without the Credo or proper Communicantes. White vestments
should be worn and the Preface of the Nativity said ; private
votive or requiem Masses arc excluded.
Similarly, since the octave of the Epiphany is suppressed,
the Office on each day from 7th to 12th January inclusive is
a simple ferial Office, with ferial psalms, three lessons from
Scripture Occurring, but with the capitula, short rcsponsories,
prayer, hymns, etc., taken from the Office of the Epiphany.
At Mass white vestments should be worn, the Gloria recited
and the Preface of the Epiphany' which is proper to the Mass
formula said ; the Credo and the special Communicantes of the
Epiphany are omitted. The Office and Mass for the 13th
January, formerly the octave day of the Epiphany, arc un
changed except for a new title designating this day as ‘ Com
memoration of the Baptism of Our Lord ’—a title derived from
the Gospel pcricopc for the day, John i, w. 29-34. For the
feast of the Holy Family the only change is that it must always
be celebrated on a Sunday even when the Epiphany and 13th
January fall on Sunday; if the 13th January be a Sunday,
the feast of the Holy' Family is celebrated on that day without
any mention of the Commemoration of the Baptism of Our
Lord or of the Sunday. If, however, the feast of the Holy
Family is celebrated on a Sunday between 7th and 12th January,
the Sunday should be commemorated as formerly. When
13th January is a Sunday, the beginning of the first Epistle to
the Corinthians is anticipated on the previous Saturday; no
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
269
other change is mentioned in the rule for Scripture Occurring
on these days after the Epiphany and therefore the readings
from the Epistle to the Corinthians will begin on the Monday
after the feast of the Holy Family or at latest on Saturday,
die 12th.
In a similar way the days from the Ascension until the vigil
of Pentecost are kept as simple ferias with all the proper parts
of the Office and Mass, including the doxology in the hymns
and the verse in Prime, taken from the feast ; the Office of the
Sunday after the Ascension is unchanged, except that there
will now be no commemoration of the former octave of the
Ascension. On the other hand, in the case of the days im
mediately after the feasts of Corpus Christi and of the Sacred
Heart, all traces of the former octaves are dropped. The
Office of the Sunday after each of these feasts is unaltered, but
the days formerly within the octave are now to be observed as
ordinary ferias without any mention of the feasts preceding them.
Saints' feasts : All feasts of saints formerly of semi-double rite
are to be reduced to simples and all feasts of simple rite are to
be merely commemorated in Lauds only without any historical
lesson in Matins. On the major non-privileged ferias of Lent
and Passiontidc, a choice is permitted between the ferial Office
and the Office of any occurring feast which is not higher than
major double or ordinary double rite. A double feast of the
first or second class must be celebrated.
Commemorations : In the Mass and in the Office, both in
occurrence and in concurrence, the following commemorations
must always be made :
(a) Any Sunday ;
(/>) A first class feast ;1
(c) Ferias in Advent and Lent ;
(J) Ferias and Saturday of September Quartertense ;
(e) The Major Litanies (i.c. on 25th April).2
Other commemorations are admitted only after these obligator}’
commemorations have been made and they are admitted
according to the following rules :
(1) No commemoration is admitted on the following occasions :
(a) On Sundays of the first class (i.c. Sundays of Advent,
Lent and Passiontidc, Low Sunday and Pentecost
Sunday);
1 Since the rules for transference of feasts have not been abrogated, the
circumstance can scarcely arise in which a first-class double must be com
memorated merely.
s The litanies on Rogation days are ‘minor’ litanies.
270
Ai
1
■
? U
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
(ffi) Ou first class feasts ;
(c) On privileged ferias (i.c. Ash Wednesday and first
three days of Holy Week) ;
() On privileged vigils (i.c. vigils of Nativity and of
Pentecost) ;
(e) In any sung Mass;
(/) In any solemn votive Mass. Comment: Since the
decree distinguishes between sung Masses and
solemn votive Masses, clearly it is meant to
include under this head those privileged votive
Masses which may be celebrated as low Masses with
the privileges of solemn votive Masses, e.g. the Mass
of the Sacred Heart on first Fridays.
(2) Only one commemoration is admitted :
(a) On second class feasts ;
(ό) On Sundays throughout the year.
(3) Only two commemorations arc admitted on all other
days, whether feasts or ferias.
Comment : Compulsory commemorations must always be
made, no matter when they occur ; for example, even on a
double of the first class, an occurring Sunday must be com
memorated. When they have been made, other commemora
tions are added only if there is room for them in accordance
with the rules governing the number of commemorations on
ordinary Sundays, on second class or on ordinary feasts. For
example : the prayer to be said on the anniversary of the
election or consecration of a bishop is prescribed by the rubrics
and, therefore, is omitted on a first class Sunday or feast, in a
sung Mass, etc. ; it is inserted in a second class double if there
is no compulsory commemoration before it and on other feasts
if there are not two previous commemorations. A commemora
tion under one conclusion with the prayer of the Mass (e.g. of
a prevented votive Mass) counts as one with that prayer and
so is not counted separately when one calculates the number
of commemorations. There may never be more than three
separate prayers in all.
A commemoration docs not bring with it its own doxology
in the hymns or its proper verse in Prime ; in the Mass it does
not carry the Credo or a proper Preface. However, during the
days after the feasts of the Circumcision, Epiphany and Ascension
respectively, the doxology and verse proper to the feast are used.
Changes in the Office : The following prayers arc omitted :
(a) Pater, .-Ire and Credo before and after the Office and when
they occur between the Hours ; this applies to the Offices
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
271
of Holy Week and also to the Office for the Dead ; (h) The
Pieces Dominicales, Suffragium and Commemoratio de Cruce ; (e) Preces
fcriales except in ferial Offices on the Wednesday and Friday
of Advent, Lent and Passiontide and on the Wednesday, Friday
and Saturday of Quartertense in September ; when they occur,
the Preces feriales are said only in Lauds and Vespers, not in
the small Hours ; (J) The Athanasian Creed except on Trinity
Sunday. The induit and indulgence of the Sacrosanctae are now
gained by recital of the major antiphon of the Blessed Virgin.
Must this antiphon be said kneeling ? The rubrics are that in
public recitation of the Office one kneels for the major antiphon
except on Sundays (from first Vespers), and during Paschal time.
Only first and second class doubles and Sundays have now
first Vespers, whether completely or from the capitulum ;
other Offices arc not even commemorated in the second Vespers
of the previous day. Only Sundays and doubles of the first
class remain wholly solemn feasts. In feasts of the second class
and in doubles of Our Lord and of the Blessed Virgin, the
psalms in the day Hours arc from the feria, while in Matins,
Lauds and Vespers, the antiphons and psalms proper to the
feast are used;1 Compline remains of the Sunday. In other
feasts all the psalms are of the feria, except in those few cases
in which special antiphons and psalms are assigned for the
major Hours. Lessons from Scripture Occurring, if they are
ousted on their proper days, arc not transferred, but simply
omitted, even if they are the ’ beginnings ’ of books or epistles.
In the hymn Isle Confessor, there is no longer an alternative
third verse, but always one says, ‘ Meruit supremos laudis honores.'
Changes in the Missal : The Common prayers assigned for
different seasons of the year, i.c. .1 Cunctis, Prayer for the Pope
or Church, etc., arc abolished, as is also the prayer Fidelium on
the first free Monday of the month or of any week. An oratio
imperata prescribed by the Ordinary modo ordinario (not pro re
gravi) is omitted as formerly and also now on all Sundays, in
all sung Masses, and when three prayers are prescribed by the
rubrics. Hitherto the rule has been that such an oratio imperata
should be said unless there arc four prayers prescribed by the
rubrics. In a votive requiem Mass, if it is sung, there is only
one prayer ; if it is a low Mass, three prayers may be said. The
Dies irae is of obligation only in an exequial Mass and on the
Commemoration of All Souls ; on this latter occasion it is to
be said only once, in the first or principal Mass by the celebrant
1 Cf. e.g., the feast of St. Agnes.
272
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
of three Masses. The Credo is said only on Sundays, doubles
of the first class, feasts of Our Lord, of the Blessed Virgin, of
Apostles and Evangelists and of Doctors and in solemn votive
Masses which arc sung. It is never said by reason of a com
memoration. The decree explicitly directs that the Credo be
included in solemn votive Masses ‘ in cantu 5 ; since, strictly
speaking, a solemn votive Mass must be a sung Mass, this
qualification must be understood as excluding those privileged
votive Masses which even when read have the privileges of
solemn Masses. Hence the Credo would not be said on, e.g.
the privileged votive Mass of the Sacred Heart. Again, a com
memoration does not bring a special Preface ; the Preface is
proper to the Mass or to the season or is the common Preface.
No commemoration is now made by a special last Gospel ;
the beginning of the Gospel of St. John is always to be recited
except in the third Christmas Mass (in which the first Gospel
is the Initium S. Euangelii secundum Joannem) and in the Mass of
Palm Sunday (when the Gospel for the Blessing of the Palms
must be said). In the new calendar the number of simple
feasts is greatly increased, hence the new rubrics permit that
on ordinary ferias during the year the Mass of any com
memorated saint may be chosen in preference to the ferial Mass
and it should be celebrated ‘ more festivo,’ i.e. with Gloria and
with not more than two commemorations.
FURTHER CLARIFICATIONS OF THE REFORMED
RUBRICS OF THE BREVIARY AND MISSAL
ACCORDING TO THE DECREE CUM NOSTRA
(23rd MARCH, 1955)
KI
After the publication on 23rd March, 1955, of the Decree
Cum nostra for the simplification of the rubrics, many questions
were submitted to the Holy See for the clarification of details.
The Ephemerides Liturgicae (Fasc. i, 1956) published a number
of replies made to the queries of Father Joseph Pizzoni,
C.M., of the Pontifical Academy and in Paroisse et Liturgie1
there was published another set of replies to somewhat more
practical queries submitted by the master of ceremonies in the
cathedral of Bayonne. Amongst the replies to Father Pizzoni,
the following arc of interest :
1. The Sundays of Septuagesima, Sexagesima and Quinqua
gesima are now doubles of the second class.
1 N. vi, 1955.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
273
2. Within the octaves of Easter and Pentecost on the davs
/
from Wednesday to Saturday, which have now been raised to
double rite, the antiphons to the psalms in Matins, Lauds and
Vespers may be, but they need not be, doubled (‘ Possunt sed
non debent'). The reason why doubling is not insisted upon is,
of course, because in existing editions of the Office books the
antiphons are not printed in full before the psalms.
3. According to the decree, nothing is to be changed for the
days within the octave of the Nativity. This means that :
(a) Sunday occurring between 25th December and 28th is to
be put back to the 30th as hitherto ; (Z>) the feast of St. Stephen
is to be commemorated in the second vespers of the Nativity ;
(c) doubles of the second class (St. Stephen, St. John and
Holy Innocents) retain the Sunday psalms in the day hours ;
() the feasts of St. Thomas and of St. Silvester have first vespers
at least commemorated ; (e) if the beginning of the epistle to
the Romans is prevented on 29th December, it is to be trans
ferred. All these arrangements, therefore, remain untouched as
exceptions to the general provisions of the decree.
4. The commemoration of St. Anastasia remains in the
second Mass for Christmas despite the general prohibition of
commemorations on doubles of the first class.
5. Commemorations are not to be made in a sung Mass.
Hence on the ferias of Lent, Passiontide and Quartertense and
on common vigils, an occurring feast is to be commemorated
in the conventual Mass of the day, only if the Mass is read, not
sung ; similarly if a double feast of the second class concurs
with a common vigil (i.e. of Ascension, Assumption, St. John
Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, or St. Lawrence) in the feast Mass
the vigil is to be commemorated only if the Mass is read ; in
a sung votive Mass a minor feria is not commemorated.
6. Since proper hymns are no longer to be transferred from
the hours to which they have been assigned, so too, proper
antiphons, if impeded, arc not to be transferred. This would
apply, for example, to the proper antiphons for first Vespers
of the Holy Family, of St. Joseph or of St. John Baptist ; if
they arc prevented in first Vespers, they are not transferred to
Lauds or second Vespers.
7. Although ordinary double Offices no longer have first
Vespers, the antiphon from first Vespers may be used in Lauds,
etc., if it is necessary to avoid the repetition of an identical text :
the principle nunquam bis de eodem and the old rules for obviating
repetitions arc to be observed.
8. In future, Vespers and Compline for the Office of the
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Commemoration of All Souls will not be said on 1st November
after the second Vespers of All Saints, but will be said only on
2nd November. Hence, if a feast of first or second class double
rite is celebrated on 3rd November, its first Vespers will oust
the Vespers of All Souls.
9. The new feasts of St. Joseph the Workman (1st May) and
of the Queenship ol the Blessed Virgin Mary arc both secondary
feasts ; therefore, an exequial requiem Mass would not be
excluded on cither of these days. The new feast of St. Joseph,
unlike the former feast of the Patronage which it replaces, is
not to be ranked amongst the ‘ festa feriata'
10. In Masses of simple rite and in votive Masses the celebrant
may still add prayers chosen ad libitum, but the total number
is not to exceed three.
11. On minor ferias the conventual Mass may be a votive
or a Mass of a saint commemorated in the Office.
12. The rules regarding the Preface arc to be strictly inter
preted. Hence a ‘ proper ’ Preface docs not mean one that is
merely appropriate to the Mass. It follows that the Preface of
the Nativity is no longer said in the Mass of the Transfiguration
or of Corpus Christi ; the Preface of the Apostles is not to be
said for canonized Popes, or for the Anniversary of the Creation
or of the Coronation of the Pope.
13. An oratio imperata pro re gravi must be omitted on a Sunday
of the first class (i.c. Sundays of Advent, Lent, Passiontide,
Easter Sunday, Low Sunday and Pentecost). Since the number
of prayers must never exceed three, then if three arc prescribed
by the rubrics and there is an oratio imperata pro re gravi, this
oratio imperata is to be put into the third place and the last of
the rubrical prayers omitted.
Private replies to Bayonne : Amongst these the following arc
of interest : (a) Should the antiphons to the Benedictus and to
be doubled on Sundays ? Antiphonac duplicari
debent, (ό) In the Mass of a feast which has
rcfacc and which is celebrated on a Sunday, the
cc is said ; the Common Preface is also to be said
for the feasts of the Transfiguration, Corpus Christi and in the
Common of Popes, (c) In cases where St. Paul is commemorated
on feasts of St. Peter and vice-versa the two prayers are considered
as being only one.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
275
CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO RECITATION OF THE
SACROSANCTAE ; PRIVILEGE OF ANTICIPATING
OFFICE
(1) Can the indulgence attached to the Sacrosanctae be gained by
religious who recite it after the Officium ParvumA The Raccolta uses
the words ‘
. the faithful who recite this prayer after saying the
Divine Office no mention is made of the Officium Parvum.
(2) Can the benefits granted by Pope Leo X for saying the prayer
Sacrosanctae after the Divine Office be gained by religious, etc.,
who say this prayer after their Office? The Raccolta says: ‘ Clerics
in Holy Orders and priests who, having completed the Divine Office
. . . no mention is made of the extension of the benefits to the
* faithful.’
(3) If priests as members of the Eucharistic League or other
similar society have the privilege of anticipating Matins and Lauds
at noon, must they have a sufficient cause for availing of it? May
a priest anticipate Matins and Lauds at 1.0 p.m. even though he does
not belong to such a society, or if he does but is not a very active
member?
P. B.
(I) and (2) In the current (1952) Enchiridion Indulgentiarum the
benefits attached to the recitation of the Sacrosanctae arc stated
as follows :
Indulgentia trium annorum. Eamdcm indulgentiam acquirere possunt
fideles, qui post divinum Officium, quovis titulo recitatum, supra relatam
orationem devote recitaverint.
(Clericis in sacris constitutis ct sacerdotibus, qui, expleto Officio divino,
supra relatam orationem flexis genibus, nisi aliquod obstet impedimentum,
recitaverint, Leo X defectus ct culpas in eo persolvendo ex humana fragilitate
contractas induisit.)
Ihc indulgences of the Sacrosanctae may now be gained only in
connection with the Divine Office and arc not associated with
the recitation of the Officium Parvum. Pope St. Pius X (on 2nd
December, 1905) attached an indulgence to two other prayers—
‘ 0 Clementissime Jesu, gratias ago libi . . .' and ‘ Benedictum sit
cor amantissimum . .
The indulgence could be gained by
reciting cither of these prayers after either the Divine Office
or the Officium Parvum. But this grant was withdrawn when the
official collection of Preces et Pia Opera Indulgentiis Ditata was
published in 1938 ; neither of these prayers now appears in the
Raccolta. That the Sacrosanctae should be associated only with
the Divine Office is not in accordance with the history of the
devotion, and some commentators hold that the privilege of
remission of the faults committed during the recital of their
276
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Office may still be gained by persons bound to the recitation
of the Officium Parvum.1
The prayer has been commonly attributed to St. Bona
venture, but that tradition does not seem to be well founded.2
The first concession made in its regard was by Pope Leo X in
1513 to the Friars Minor of St. Francis. The Pope granted
quo) The reproduction of such pictures in the public
press or in the cinema is very undesirable. It is not in accordance
with due reverence that our most sacred rites, even the Blessed
Sacrament, should be so depicted for the eyes of the merely
curious or of those seeking entertainment.
When there is question, not of actual ceremonies, but of
taking studio ‘ shots ’ of the Mass, etc., objections from the
first source would obviously not arise and we need consider
only the desirability of representing sacred rites on the screen.
We have here no authoritative decision to guide us, hence it
is entirely a question of opinion. Certainly we object to the
introduction of ‘ shots ’ of Catholic ceremonies, especially of
their most sacred parts, merely to heighten the dramatic effect
or box-oflicc appeal of a film-story. That such scenes may
edify or instruct the faithful is not a convincing excuse. ‘ The
motion picture is viewed by people who are seated in a dark
theatre and whose faculties, mental, physical and often spiritual,
arc relaxed.’2 In such an atmosphere it is more probable that
they will induce in the audience a false or even mawkish
religious sentiment rather than genuine spiritual edification.
Besides, there is the more fundamental objection that the pre
sentation of religious services with the characteristic dramatic
emphasis on their subjective value may obscure in the minds
of the faithful the essential objective value of the Church’s rites
and ceremonies. As the present Holy Father has emphasized
in his recent encyclical on the liturgy’, we must bear in mind that
the primary purpose of solemn liturgical functions is the
worship of God, not the edification of the faithful ; hence in
the liturgy there is no room for the unctuous rendering of
public prayers nor for self-conscious sanctimonious deportment.
Seldom arc screen representations
of sacred functions by actor
«
’Apparently these were the objections which Cardinal Marchet ti-Selvaggiani
had in mind when he issued his decree for the churches in Rome—‘ absolute
vetatur, ut non modo in ecclesiis, sicut etiam in oratoriis, exprimantur photographicac imagines, sive adhibita luce magnesiaca, sive apparatibus cinematographicis. . . .*
5 Pope Pius XI, in Encyclical Vigilanti Cura, 1936.
294
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
‘priests’ free from such defects.1 It docs not follow that all
films and pictures of religious ceremonies should be excluded.
The judgment regarding the limits within which they arc
admissible and regarding what will offend the religious suscep
tibilities of the faithful can most safely be left to the local
Ordinary. We have suggested that pictures should never be
taken of the Sacred Host. The liturgical laws, which prescribe
that the tabernacle and sacred vessels must be veiled when they
contain the Blessed Sacrament and those which forbid solemn
Exposition without explicit permission of the local Ordinary,
surely express clearly the mind of the Church on this point,
Films or illustrations such as those mentioned by our corres
pondent and intended solely for the instruction of the faithful
are obviously not exposed to all the objections we have urged
against ordinary films.2 They will presumably be shown and
studied in an atmosphere different from that of the cinema.
We do not, however, need close-ups of every detail of the
ceremonies nor is it necessary to reduce sacred rites to the
commonplace. If such pictures arc to attain their purpose of
engendering in the minds of the faithful genuine intelligent
appreciation of the sacrifice of the Mass, the Mysterium fidei,
they will not suffer any loss by respecting that element of
mystery which is germane to all true worship of God. No doubt,
if properly controlled by ecclesiastical authority, these films can
serve a very useful purpose. A better case can, perhaps, be
made for the photographing of some parts of Papal and
Pontifical functions, because of the unique character of such
ceremonies and the fact that many of the faithful will never
have an opportunity of actually attending them.
υ
IDS
azi
1 The following verdict on film priests is perhaps not entirely irrelevant to
this context : * like other heroes of the cinema, the priest-hero is made to a
measure, made for very popular consumption. He is fitted with the glamour
of being a fine fellow ; usually he bears an Irish name and has a Celtic
capacity for rapid changes of mood ; he is a humorist, a realist and a dreamer.
. . . The priest-hero of the screen may strike us as a too superficial ambassador,
but he travels far, and has enough good qualities to make us a good advertise
ment in many quarters where our credit, through ignorance, stands so low
that we have nothing to lose.’—Rev. Neil Kevin, I. E. Record, October, 1942,
p. 257.
1 May I remark that the illustrations in Lefevre’s How to Understand the
Mass are not photographs ; the photograph in McEvoy’s The Sacrifice We
Offer arc accurate and arc well reproduced. We know nothing of the film
rcfTcred to in the query.
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
RUBRICAL
295
DIRECTIONS IN THE ENCYCLICAL
MUSICAE SACRAE DISCIPLINA
The encyclical on Sacred Music, dated 25th December,
1955,1 comprises four sections; it deals with the history of
sacred music, with the principles governing sacred art in general
and music in particular, with practical directives on strictly
liturgical music and vernacular singing and finally with the
promotion of sacred music by means of training of choirs,
instruction of seminarists, and the encouraging of societies for
this purpose. Here we arc concerned principally with the
third section which lays down the rules governing the use of
music at liturgical functions and deals with the question of
vernacular singing at church services. The doctrinal principles,
as given in the second chapter of the Encyclical, may be sum
marized as follows : the Church docs not claim any special
competence in determining the aesthetic and technical laws of
music, but is concerned only in preserving it from whatever
would make it less worthy to serve in divine worship. Sacred
music must, therefore, conform to the same norms as govern
all religious art. Art, like all human activities, must be judged
according to its conformity and harmony with man’s last end
which is God ; art must have for its object to express by means
of human works the infinite beauty of God, whose image it
should reflect. The adage ‘ art for art’s sake ' must not be
falsely interpreted as meaning that art is subject to no other
laws than those of art itself ; the freedom of the artist is not
stifled or curtailed, but is rather ennobled and perfected by his
acceptance of the divine law. Sacred art requires that the
artist be inspired by faith and by the love of God. The artist
who has no faith or who in his conduct has turned awav from
God should not engage in sacred art, for his works can never
inspire that faith and piety which is becoming to the temple
of God. The artist of strong faith and of worthy Christian
conduct is welcomed by the Church as a useful helper in the
apostolic ministry. These lawrs and rules of religious art apply
especially to sacred music, which has an honoured place in the
actual performance of divine worship. Music reaches its
highest dignity in its association with the Mass and with other
liturgical functions, especially the recitation in choir of the
Divine Office. Also worthy of esteem is that religious music
which is used at non-liturgical services. Vernacular hymns
' A.A.S., 1956, pp. 5-25.
296
E
•I
Î
I
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
serve to teach the truths of the catechism, to help healthy
recreation, to add solemnity to religious assemblies and to
bring spiritual joy and profit into Christian families. Sacred
music is, therefore, an efficacious means for the apostolate of
souls.
The third section of the encyclical then lays down the
practical rules for liturgical music. Liturgical music must
have the three characteristics demanded by St. Pius X—
holiness, artistic merit and universality. This holiness, which
excludes everything that savours of the profane, is a charac
teristic of Gregorian chant in which the melodies are aptly
fitted to the text so as to give the words added force and efficacy
to penetrate the minds of the hearers. Hence, following the
wise regulations of St. Pius X and Pius XI : ‘ Wc also wish
and prescribe that in the sacred ceremonies of the liturgy this
chant be most widely used, and that every care should be taken
for its performance correctly, with dignity and piety.’ Uni
versality, that all the faithful may realize the unity of the Church,
requires that the Gregorian chant be inseparable from the
Latin words of the sacred liturgy. The Holy See has granted
certain exceptions in this matter, but these privileges are not
to be extended to other regions or developed beyond their
defined limits. Even in those places where such exceptional
permissions may be used, the Ordinary and pastors of souls
must take care that children are trained in at least the simpler
and more common Gregorian chants and that they learn to
use them at liturgical functions ‘ in order that in this matter
the unity and universality of the Church may be ever more
clearly manifest.’ In those places where there is a centennial
or immemorial custom that at solemn Mass after the liturgical
chants in Latin have been completed popular hymns may be
sung in the vernacular, this custom may be permitted to con
tinue if, in the opinion of the Ordinary, it cannot be uprooted.
But the vernacular chants may not be literal translations of
the liturgical texts. The words of the Latin chants should be
understood by the choir and the people ; the Council of Trent
directed that frequently the faithful should be instructed in the
texts read at Mass. This instruction is now greatly facilitated
by the fact that missals in the vernacular are easily available
in almost every country.
In recommending and praising Gregorian chant, the
Encyclical docs not exclude from the liturgy all polyphony.
Everyone knows that the masterpieces of polyphony—especially
those composed in the sixteenth century—arc in every respect
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
297
worthy accompaniments of the sacred rites. In the course of
the centuries true polyphonic art declined into what was
profane, but in recent times it has been revived and contemporary
musicians arc studying to emulate the art of the older masters.
The Church looks with favour on these efforts, for the Church
‘ has always cultivated and fostered artistic development,
accepting in the service of religion whatever is good and beautiful
in the creations of the human mind throughout the centuries,
provided that the liturgical law's are observed.’ Prudent care
must be taken to avoid turgid, redundant polyphony which
obscures the liturgical texts, holds up the sacred ceremonies,
or, by debasing the talents of the choir, only disfigures sacred
worship.
The same rules apply to the use of the organ and other musical
instruments. Amongst the instruments which have their place
in church, the organ is pre-eminent, for it is remarkably
adapted to chant and to the sacred rites. Other instruments
may be used provided that there is nothing profane, too noisy
or too ostentatious about them. The most suitable is the violin
and other stringed instruments ; the violin, either alone or in
unison with other strings or with the organ, has an ineffable
power to express the sadness or joy of the soul. One should
not attempt what is beyond the talents and resources at one’s
disposal, lest the result would not be worthy of divine worship
or of sacred assemblies.
Popular hymns in the vernacular van' a great deal according
to national tastes and characteristics and to local customs. In
order that the people derive spiritual profit from them they
must express correctly Catholic doctrine, be free from pre
tentious verbosity, be short and simple, yet marked by genuine
religious dignity and gravity. They may not, without per
mission of the Holy See, be used at solemn Mass, but at nonsolemn Mass they can usefully assist the people to unite them
selves with the offering of the Holy Sacrifice. In functions
which arc not fully liturgical these hymns can be very helpful
in instructing and inspiring the piety of the people in pro
cessions, pilgrimages, congresses, etc. They are especially
useful for the instruction of children and young people in
Christian doctrine. Local Ordinaries arc earnestly exhorted to
promote with all zeal and care such popular hymn-singing.
Qualified persons should be found to publish collections of
hymns in order that the people may learn them ; catechists
should make use of such hymns, teaching them to the children
with the hope that they will displace popular songs, which arc
298
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
oftentimes so objectionable. This section of the encyclical
concludes with advice to missionaries to remember that in
mission countries also, popular hymns in the vernacular, side
by side with the liturgical chant, are a powerful aid to the
apostolate.
The fourth chapter of the Encyclical adds a few practical
directions on how these aims may be attained. In cathedrals
and the larger churches there should be a schola caniorum which
serves as a model for other churches. Where this is impossible,
a group of boys should be recruited, or as a last resort there
may be a mixed choir, provided that the groups of men and
women are separated. Other means to be employed for the
promotion of sacred music are the teaching of its theory' and
practice to students for the priesthood and the establishing of
confraternities for the cultivation and the popularizing of the
chant, etc.
Commentary : The rubrical prescriptions, therefore, of the
Encyclical arc : (a) Liturgical texts must be sung in Latin ;
the people are to be instructed so that they may understand
the Latin words. (/>) In solemn Mass no vernacular singing is
allowed ; the Ordinary may tolerate the continuance of a
custom by which vernacular singing takes place after the
liturgical texts have been sung in Latin. If, by special induit,
it is permitted to sing the liturgical texts in the vernacular,
nevertheless, even in these places, care must be taken to teach
the simpler, more common Gregorian chants, e.g., Gloria and
Credo, (c) In non-solemn Mass and in functions that are not
fully liturgical, hymns may be sung in the vernacular, provided
that they are not literal translations of the Latin texts. (<7) Instru
mental music may be provided by use of the organ, the violin,
and other instruments which arc not to noisy and have not
profane associations. The use of the term ‘ solemn Mass ’ will
doubtless give rise to discussion amongst commentators ;1 docs
it include a Missa Canlata without ministers ? The better
opinion would seem to be that it does, because it would seem
that one of the purposes of the Encyclical is to check the tendency
in France and Belgium to adopt the vernacular to sung Mass
modelled on the Deutsches Hochant or German High Mass.2 In
'Vide Maison Dieu, n. 45; Paroisse et Liturgie, 1956, η. 2; Clergy Monthly,
March, 1956.
1 On 1st June, 1956, in a private reply to the Director οΓ the Gregorian
Institute at Paris the Sacred Congregation declared that * solemn ’ functions
referred to in the encyclical arc to be understood in the wide sense and so
include both solemn Mass and the Missa Cantata. (Vide Paroisse et Liturgie,
1956 p. 488.)
ή;
THE LITURGICAL YEAR
299
this Mass the celebrant intones the Gloria, etc., in Latin, but the
choir continue it in German. The Encyclical, therefore, clearly
directs that while such practices have been authorized for
certain places, they arc not to be extended to other regions.
Also it insists that even where vernacular versions are permitted,
they may not be literal translations. The encyclical also checks
the movement to fit vernacular words to the Gregorian melodics
in the Ritual and other liturgical books. The fact that it is
permissible to sing vernacular hymns at * functions not fully
liturgical ’ leaves the way open for the use of such hymns at
solemn Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament, although this is,
in some respects at least, a liturgical service.1 Of processions,
perhaps only those of 2nd February, 25th April, Palm Sunday
and Corpus Christi need be regarded as ‘ fully liturgical ’ ; in
the case of the last-named, custom has already sanctioned, in
many places, the use of vernacular religious hymns as preferable
to the uninspiring silence of the processions. It is to be hoped
that one effect of the encyclical will be a response to the Holy
Father’s exhortation that suitable religious hymns be collected
and published, so that the faithful may easily learn them and
frequently sing them.
atque ita fiat ut plebs Christiana iam hie in terris illud laudis canticum cancre
incipiat, quod in aeternum cantabit in caelo ; ‘ Sedenti in throno ct Agno
benedictio ct honor ct gloria ct potestas in saecula sacculorum.’
1 Vicie Paroisse et Liturgie, 1955, η. 5.
SECTION V
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND
FURNISHINGS
FOUNDATION-STONE OF Λ CHURCH
Must the inscription on the foundation-stone of a church be in
Latin and, if so, is there a prescribed formula?
Parochus.
The rubrics do not prescribe that a foundation-stone should
carry any inscription. Many rubricists suggest that there
should be carved on the stone an inscription giving the date
on which the stone was laid, the name of the prelate who carried
out the ceremony, the name of the parish priest or any other
facts worth recording ad perpetuam rei memoriam. There is no
compelling reason why any such inscription should be in Latin.
No inscription is necessary, nor is it prescribed in the rubrics
that memoranda such as current coins and an attest of the
blessing be inserted into or with the foundation-stone. The
rubrics of the Pontifical simply direct :
. . . lapis in Ecclesiae fundatione ponendus, qui debet esse quadratus
ct angularis. . . .
Monsignor Nabuco1 states that the following details are
binding concerning the foundation-stone according to the
rubrics of the Pontifical :
‘(1) The corner-stone must be a real stone, natural stone,
and not a synthetic or concrete one, much less a brick.
‘ (2) It must be square. Square here is to be understood in
the sense of eight rectangular corners, that is oblong or square.
If the foundations of the church arc of stone, the corner-stone
will be of the same size as the other stones, as it is one of the
stones of the building.
‘ (3) The rubrics do not say where the stone is to be placed,
but they determine that it be angularis, that is, a corner-stone.
Naturally the most important corner of the church will be the
chosen place.
‘ (4) Neither do the rubrics say whether the stone is to be
placed in the inside or outside of the wall. In many of the
1 In Liturgieal Aris Quarterly, August, 1913, p. 79.
300
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
301
more strictly designed churches, the stone is placed on the
outside, and this seems to be the most appropriate place so as
not to interfere with internal decoration.
* (5) It is by no means necessary that the corner-stone be
chronologically the first stone of the church, thus obliging the
bishop to go right down to the foundations to place it. The
best place would seem to be one course above the ground, on
the outside part of the wall, so that it can be seen by people
who pass by and serve as a perennial testimony of the church's
beginning in Christ.
‘ (6) The rubrics prescribe that the bishop make six crosses
with his hammer on the six sides of the stone. But as the bishop,
during the ceremony, is quite unable to make such crosses,
they should be carved previously on the six faces of the stone by
a mason. The bishop with his hammer will then simply go
over the six crosses previously carved.’
Monsignor Nabuco suggests that, although it is not necessary,
a cavity may be prepared in the lower face of the stone for a
metal box containing the attest, etc. It must be borne in mind,
however, that the only distinctive mark required by the rubrics
is that a cross be carved on each of the six sides of the stone.
Rubricists1 agree that the corner-stone should be placed in the
wall of the sanctuary ; in a cruciform church it may be placed
where the walls of the apse and transept meet and preferably
on the Gospel side.
It is certainly contrary to the rubrics to use a small stone as
a sort of symbolic corner-stone which can easily be moved
around during the blessing ceremony and is finally inserted
and sealed into a larger stone. This custom apparently arose
from the recommendations123of Martinucci, who suggests that a
small cube about 8χ8χ8 inches be used, and with it grew up
the practices of inserting memoranda into the cavity of the
larger stone with the symbolic corner-stone—customs which
though not contrary to, are praeter rubricas. The foundationstone should be a real corner-stone and an integral part of the
building.
1 Vide Martinucci, Liber Pontificalis, vii ; Moretti, De Sacris Functionibus,
vol. iv ; Schulte, Benedicenda, p. 4 ; Collins, The Church Edifice and Its Appoint
ments, p. 13.
3 Vide Nabuco, loc. cit. : ‘ It is interesting to note that the rite of the
Pontifical, as it now stands, is exactly from beginning to end the very same
rite composed by Durandus in 1291 for the Pontifical of his Diocese of Mende.’
302
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
RE-DEDICATION OF RENOVATED CHURCH
Is it necessary to re-dedicate a church which has undergone
extensive repairs? A new roof has been put on our church and portion
of the walls has been rebuilt. On the day of its reopening would it
be necessary to have a solemn ceremony of blessing the church again
and would it be correct to celebrate the Mass of the Dedication of a
Church as a votive Mass on the same occasion?
Anglo-Hibernian.
,3
'1
I
A church does not lose its consecration or blessing unless it
has been totally destroyed, or the greater part of the walls has
collapsed, or the Ordinary has in accordance with Canon 1187
turned the building over to profane uses.1 In particular the
Sacred Congregation of Rites has decided the following cases :2
(1) If in a re-construction the whole wall, apse and roof were
removed and re-built with some additions the church must be
re-consecrated ; (2) If successively, at different times notable
additions were made and the old walls were taken down in
sections and re-built the consecration is not lost provided that
not more than say two-fifths of the walls were dismantled at
one time ; (3) Similarly consecration is not lost if the whole
interior of the church is renovated, the plastering removed and
new plastering done or the walls lined with marble slabs;
(4) Consecration is not lost if the whole front of the church is
pulled down and re-built, but the Pontifical makes provision
for a special blessing for the new front. Even if the church is
thus considerably enlarged and provides more accommodation
re-dedication is not necessary unless the new portion is clearly
greater than that part of the old edifice which still remains.
In general the Code forbids the unnecessary repetition of the
consecration or blessing, yet if a serious doubt arises the dedi
cation may be repeated ad cautelam. Such a doubt may arise,
for example, if a new transept or extension has been added so
that the capacity of the church is now doubled.
Cum perpetuae sint per se cum consecratio tum ipsa benedictio prohibetur
earum iteratio, si de alterutra legitime constet. In dubio autem ‘ peragatur
ad cautelam/ i.e. iteratio permittitur.
In practice it has always been the constant tradition of the
Church to repeat the consecration or blessing when any reason
able doubt has arisen.
In the circumstances described in the query it docs not seem
1 Canon 1170; Vide Ziolkowzki, The Consecration and Blessing of Churches.
2 S.R.C. 3269 ad 2 ; 3372 ; 3501; 3545; 3584.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
303
probable that the church needs to be re-dedicated. The local
Ordinary may, however, judge it advisable to permit the solemn
blessing to be repeated. If the church was formerly consecrated
and now grave doubts have arisen, since the ceremony of
re-consecration cannot be easily undertaken the question could
be referred to the Holy See with a petition for a sanation if
necessary.
The correct Mass to celebrate in connection with the blessing
and re-opening of the church is the Mass of the saint or mystery
in whose honour the church has been blessed. By permission
or direction of the Ordinary this Mass may be celebrated as a
solemn votive Mass pro re gravi. The Mass of the Dedication
of a Church, Terribilis est locus iste, is usually celebrated (as a
votive Mass) only in connection with the actual consecration
of the church but again the Ordinary may permit its use as a
solemn votive Mass pro re gravi on the occasion of the re-opening
especially if the church is a consecrated one. It may be useful
to point out that if it is decided that re-dedication is necessary
and on the morning of the re-opening it is imperative, in order
to provide for the needs of the faithful, that Mass be celebrated
in the church before the blessing ceremony can take place, the
Ordinary may, by virtue of Canon 822, § 4, permit such an
early Mass or Masses.
BLESSING OR CONSECRATION OF Λ CHURCH
EXTENSION
When a church is enlarged must the new portion be specially
blessed or consecrated?
PztROCHUS.
An extension need not be blessed provided that it is not
greater than the original blessed or consecrated church. The
blessing or consecration of a church is not lost even when the
whole church is rebuilt by the renewal of parts at different times
provided that not more than half the walls arc renewed at any
one time.1 When a new sanctuary or any other addition which
is not more extensive than the original is made to a church, no
ceremony of dedication is necessary. There is no blessing for
a portion merely of a church. In the appendix to the Roman
* Many, De Ixcis Sacris, p. 66 ; Callcwacrt, De A tissai is Romani Liturgia I,
p. 20; S.R.C. 3269 ad II, 3326 ad I.
304
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Pontifical, there is a rite approved by the Sacred Congregation
in 1887 for the blessing of a New Front of a Church and the
Erection of a Cross thereon. The reasons for which this rite is
permitted are not clear, but it would seem that since it is made
up largely of excerpts from the Solemn Blessing of a Cross the
rite is directed chiefly towards the erection of a new cross on a
church rather than towards the blessing of part of a church.
CROSSES IN CONSECRATED CHURCH
In a consecrated church is it correct to have two of the con
secration crosses in the porch, one on either side of the doorway?
Parochus.
Concerning the crosses on
rubrics direct :
a
consecrated
church
the
Item depingantur in parietibus Ecclesiae intrinsecus per circuitum duo
decim cruces circa dcccin palmos super terram, videlicet tres pro quolibet,
ex quatuor parietibus.
Commentators arc agreed that it is permissible to have the
more convenient arrangement by which two crosses arc placed,
one at each side of the main altar and two others one at each
side of the main entrance while the remaining eight arc placed
on the side walls. This arrangement was recognized in a
decision of the Sacred Congregation of Rites concerning a
church in which some of the consecration crosses had been
destroyed.1 The Congregation directed :
Depingantur iterum Cruces in Ecclesia, quarum sex in parte dextera,
sex aliae in sinistra appareant : ita tamen ut duae sint prope Altare maius
ct duae prope Ecclesiae ianuam.
!
*
·
This is the received practice. Commenting on the rubric,
très pro quolibet ex quatuor parietibus, Nabuco with justification
remarks :
In praxi hacc rubricarum pars nunquam, ncc Romae, observatur ; neccsse
esset apponere cruccm super januam principalem, ct aliam ad posticam
altaris partem. Usus receptus est optimus legis interpres in casu.2
1 S.R.C. 3157 ad IV·
2 Pontificalis Romani Expositio II, nota 21, canon 1165, §3: ‘Sollemni
ronsccrationc dedicentur ecclesiae cathédrales ct quantum fieri . . . paroccialcs.’
This obligation has not always been fulfilled even concerning some of the
greatest cathedrals—many of the mediaeval Gothic cathedrals were never
consecrated because they were not completed, e.g. the Cathedral at Rhcims
was not consecrated until 1937 and that at Lyons until 1936.
305
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
MAY THE ‘HOLY SOULS’ BE THE TITULAR
OF Λ CHURCH?
A church in this territory is named ‘ Holy Souls Church.’ It was
at the request of one of the donors that it was so named and there
arc no written records to show that any permission or dispensation
which may be required for the use of this title was obtained. Is it
correct to name ‘ Holy Souls ’ as the titular of the church and, if so,
when should the feast be celebrated?
Sinn Féin.
The titulus is the name by which a church is known and
distinguished from other churches.1 It is permitted to take as
title for a church any person, mystery or sacred thing that may
be the object of public worship. Hence one may choose as
titular : (λ) the Holy Trinity or any Person of the Trinity,
(/») our Lord or any of the Mysteries of His life, or sacred things
pertaining to His life, e.g. the true Cross ; (c) the Blessed Virgin
under any of the special titles, prerogatives or mysteries in
relation to which public devotion may be held in honour of
the Mother of God ; () the angels, the angels guardian or any
one of the angels whose name is known to us ; (e) any canonized
saint whose name is found in the Martyrology or in any
approved supplement ; (/) an important event in the life of a
saint, e.g. conversion of St. Paul.1
2 Without an apostolic induit
which may only with difficulty be obtained, beatified persons
arc not to be chosen,3 nor for the future may saints of the Old
Testament period be selected.1
It is clear, therefore, that the Holy Souls could not be
properly named as the titular of a church. The Souls in
Purgatory are not an object of the public veneration of the
Church. November 2nd is set aside as a day of special inter
cession for them, as the Commemoration of All Souls, but
while their aid may be sought in private prayers, it is never
invoked in the public, liturgical prayer of the Church. Hence
a titular should now be correctly chosen, since ‘ The Church
of the Holy Souls ’ does not constitute a proper title. Every
1 ‘ Ecclesiae enim quamvis principaliter dedicentur Deo, tamen v.g. ex
specialibus mysteriis vel sanctis in quorum memoriam et honorem sunt
fundatae, titulum obtinent.’ (Wcrnz, Ius Canonicum, iii, n. 439.)
2 Ayrinhac, Administrative Legislation in Code, p. 15; Collins, Church Edifice
and Its Appointments, p. 28 ; Many, De Locis Sacris, p. 54 ; Gasparri, De Sacra
Eucharistia, i. p. 92 ; Vcrmecrcsh, Epitome luris Canonici, ii, p. 334 (edit. 1934) ;
Callcwacrt, De Breviarii Romani Liiurgia, p. 265.
3 Canon 1 168, § 3.
2 S.R.C. 1978.
3Θ6
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
church, whether consecrated or blessed, must have its own
tide,1 and after the dedication of the church has taken place
the title may not be changed.2 The title should be chosen by the
Ordinary or with his approval on the occasion of the laying of
the foundation stone, and confirmed at the dedication or solemn
blessing of the church. The title so adopted cannot be changed
except by virtue of an apostolic induit.3
In the present case, since a title was not validly imposed in
the first instance, the church should be blessed by a priest
having the necessary permission from the Ordinary and a suit
able titular chosen. It does not seem that recourse to the Holy
See would be necessary, because the reasons ordinarily prevent
ing a change of the title of a church do not hold here. On
several occasions the Sacred Congregation of Rites has rejected
the petitions of bishops who sought authority to change the
titles of churches.1 In an annotation to such a refusal sent to
the Bishop of Treviso (Province of Venice),5 in 1834, the follow
ing explanation is given :
Nam . . . unaquaque Ecclesia ab illius Sancti nomine, cui dedicata fuit
suam accipit appellationem ; . . . inanis Titularis mutatio esset, relictis vel
unico vel pluribus quovis modo constitutis, et alio illis subrogatio ; simul
autem iniuriosa nimis esset haec Titularis mutatio cum nulla sit ratio alium
prae illo inducere.0
Where no proper titular has been previously chosen the question
of the suppression of the cult of one saint with the substitution
of that of another docs not arise and, therefore, it would seem
to be within the competence of the Ordinary to have the church
now blessed in the name of a suitable titular and to appoint the
appropriate day for the celebration of the feast.
ί·
CHURCH WITHOUT Λ TITULAR
9
r^!
In the parish to which I have recently been appointed the church
is very old and I cannot find any traces of its ever having had a
Titular. In the archives there is no reference to the name of any
particular saint; nor is there amongst the people any tradition con
cerning a Titular. Must a Titular now be chosen and if so, by whom
may the choice be made?
Neo-Parochus.
1 Canon 1168.
* Ibid.
3 Vcrmcersch, loc. cit.
4 S.R.C. 2719 2853, etc.
3 S.R.C. 2719; (Tarvisina).
4 Gardellini, S.R.C., iv, p. 341.
307
In the ceremony of solemn blessing or dedication of a church
provision is made for the insertion in the prayers of the name of
the particular mystery or saint chosen as the Titular of the
church. It is difficult to understand, therefore, how a church
could ever have been properly blessed without any reference to
a Titular. Every church, whether consecrated or merely blessed,
must have a title. The title is chosen by the local Ordinary
or with his approval at the laying of the foundation-stone of
the church and finally adopted when the church is formally
dedicated or blessed. After the dedication, the Titular of the
church cannot be changed, or others added as Go-Titulars
without permission from the Holy See.1 A saint whose name
is added to the title of the church merely by popular devotion
does not receive the liturgical honours due to the Titular.
Si addatur tantum ex devotione populi, non est titulus liturgicus, licet ab
co denominetur ecclesia.2
When the title of a church is completely unknown, probably
the most obvious explanations are : (1) cither the church was
never solemnly blessed but received only a simple blessing,
possibly at the closing years of the penal era ; or (2) the title
conferred on the church by a solemn dedication many genera
tions ago has simply been forgotten. The question should be
referred to the local Ordinary who may in turn feel that it
should be submitted to the Sacred Congregation of Rites.
Possibly the Ordinary may decide that there is a reasonable
doubt whether the church was ever solemnly dedicated and
may direct that this ceremony should now be carried out and
a Titular be properly chosen. On the other hand, a careful
examination of local customs and traditions mav reveal traces
of a traditional belief concerning the title of the church. There
may be sufficient grounds for accepting this title with full effect
liturgically, because there is no question here of the popular
devotion choosing the title, but only of the title being indicated
through popular tradition.
WHEN SHOULD TITULAR FEAST OF A PARTICULAR
CHURCH BE CELEBRATED
The Titular of a church is Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal,
When should the titular feast be celebrated, and what Mass should
be said on that day?
M. C.
1 Canon 1198.
3 Many, De Locis Sacris, p. 56.
S.R.C. 2719.
308
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
\\ here the feast of the Miraculous Medal is by privilege
observed, this titular is celebrated on 27th November, elsewhere
the titular feast of this church of Our Lady of the Miraculous
Medal should be celebrated on the feast of the Assumption and
the Mass should be the Mass of that feast. The feast of the
Manifestation of the Immaculate Virgin under the title of the
Miraculous Medal is not celebrated except by privilege. It
was instituted in 1894 by Pope Leo XIII, to be celebrated by
the Priests of the Congregation of the Mission, on 27th November,
as a double of the second class, and other religious congregations
or dioceses who have received the privilege may celebrate it as
a double major. The special Mass is also celebrated in the
chapels of communities of the Sisters of Charity. The following
decree, published in 1787, by the Sacred Congregation of Rites,
dearly directs that in such a case, where a church has for title
a particular mystery of the Blessed Virgin Mary of which a
special feast is not universally celebrated, then the titular feast
of the church is the feast of the Assumption :x
1. Provincia Arrabidcnsis ducentis ab hinc annis initium habuit supra
Montana Arrabidae, ubi adest Conventus sub titulo B. Mariae Virginis de
Arrabida, cuius titulo memorata Provincia a suo exordio condecoratur.
Populus tum Lusitanus tum externus magnam devotionem profitetur erga
eamdem B.M.V. Attamen usque nunc Festum B.M.V. non celebratur ut
titulare praefatae Provinciae . . . quapropter . . . petitur ut in tota Provincia
recitetur impostorum de Beata Maria Virgine titulari eiusdem Provinciae
Officium. ... 2. In Conventibus Dominae nostrae da Bouviage, Dominae
nostrae em Caprarica, etc., non rccitur usque nunc Officium de suis titularibus :
ideo humillime petitur ut impostorum recitetur in memoratis Conventibus
de titularibus eorum.
Resp.—Ad 1 et 2. Nihil innovari ; et Festum Assumptionis B.M.V.
habendum esse pro titulari Provinciae, eiusque conventuum qui titulum
gaudent eiusdem B.M.V. absque adiuncta denominatione alicuius Mysterii,
de quo Festum speciale celebratur.
HOLY WATER STO U PS
It has been suggested that we should remove the old holy-water
fonts and replace them with modern * sprinklers ’ that give only a
drop at a time. Are such sprinklers generally recommended?
Anglo-Hibernian.
1 S.R.C. 2529. Vide Van dcr Stappen, Sacra Liturgia, i, p. 224. Haegy,
Ceremonial, i, p. 224. The question may be raised whether it is permissible to
designate Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal as a Titular except where the
celebration of the feast is permitted in the local calendar. Decree N. 3876
ad V seems to exclude a titular whose feast docs not occur in the Martyrology
or at least in a local supplement to the Martyrology.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
309
The rules laid down by St. Charles Borromeo apdy sum
marize the customs of the Church regarding the holy-water
stoups. ‘ The vessel intended for holy water shall be of marble
or of solid stone, neither porous nor with cracks. It shall rest
upon a handsomely wrought column and shall not be placed
outside of the church, but within it and as far as possible to
the right of those who enter. . . . [This vessel] shall not be
fastened to the wall, but removed from it as far as convenient.
A column or base will support it and it must represent
nothing profane.’1 Obviously the holy-water stoups should
not be outside the church where they cannot be easily kept
clean but should stand in the church or porch. In small
churches they may be conveniently set into the wall but in
larger churches they will be more accessible if they are stood
upon pedestals about three feet high. The modern brass con
tainers by which holy water is dispensed drop by drop have
little to recommend them. They are ugly, awkward for people
to touch when large crowds arc entering the church and above
all they represent a complete departure from the Christian
tradition of the symbolism of the cleansing font. Traditionally
the holy-water stoup has been akin to the baptismal font and
the use of this sacramental of blessed water served to remind
us of the cleansing waters of Baptism. ‘A new appreciation of
“ holy ” water is badly needed, lest secondary notions get the
best of this beautiful sacramental. Its origin seems to be the
cantharus, a running-water fountain in the atrium of the basilica
which was set up for lustral purposes, i.e. to cleanse face, hands
and feet before entering the church. . . . The lustral character
seems to have vanished from the mind of the lai tv . . . otherwise they would sense that it is not exactly logical to take the
sacred lustral water that should renew our baptismal spirit
(when sprinkling ourselves we make an act of contrition pro
nouncing the sacred words also used at baptism : In the name
of the Father, etc.) after Mass when we leave the church (reason :
we need cleansing from the dust of venial sin, before we partici
pate in the Great Mysteries, but after participation we arc, or
at least ought to be, clean). If it is not a purely mechanical
habit that makes us do so many th’ngs, it is probably the
thought of gaining the indulgence which induces us to repeat
a less sensible rite. We may, however, gain as much of the
indulgence promised, if we do the rite once in its right place
and with greater devotion.’2
1 Apud Anson, Churches—Their Plan and Furnishings, p. 152.
1 H.A.R., footnote in Peter Anson’s book. p. 153 (American edition).
310
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
MAY A WAR MEMORIAL BE ERECTED IN A
CHURCH ?
The following question and response has been published by the
Sacred Congregation of Rites (20th October, 1922): ‘Utrum in
ecclesiis apponere liceat tabulas cum inscriptionibus et nominibus
fidelium defunctorum, quorum corpora inibi tumulata non sunt nec
tumulari possunt iuxta canoncm 1205?’ Responsum'. ‘Non licere
iuxta alias resolutiones et ad tramitem decreti S.R.C. in 733 et can.
1450.’ How does this reply affect the liceity of erecting a war
memorial?
Georgius.
It is permitted to erect a memorial tablet in a church only
in memory of those persons who, in accordance with canon
law, may be buried in the church. Canon 1205 states that the
only persons who may be buried in a church arc residential
bishops, abbots or prelates nullius in their own churches, the
Roman Pontiff, royal persons and cardinals. In 1641 the
Sacred Congregation of Rites decided that it was not lawful
to put up in churches the epitaphs of ecclesiastical dignitaries,
with their busts or statues, even when they belonged to the
family that had founded and endowed the church. It is not
permitted, therefore, to erect a memorial plaque in honour of
a deceased parish priest or even to the memory of the founders
or benefactors of the church. Canon 1450, § 1, simply states
that in future no right of patronage may be established on any
title. In accordance with this canon, in 1922, the Sacred
Congregation decided that it would not be lawful to erect in a
church tablets with inscriptions and names of persons who arc
not and who may not be buried there. To erect a war memorial
in a church would certainly be contrary to these canons and
decrees if individual names arc inscribed on it.
COMMEMORATIVE INSCRIPTIONS
In our church on the stained-glass windows and on little tablets
under the Stations of the Cross there are inscriptions asking for
prayers for the donors. Are these permissible?
P. K.
It is generally agreed amongst commentators1 that there is
no prohibition against tablets or inscriptions in a church such as
1 Vide I. E. Record, 1932, pp. 644-6 ; 1940, p. 644.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
311
' Pray for the donor.’ It would even be permissible, if it is con
sidered desirable, to mention the names of benefactors, living
or deceased. In 1641 the Sacred Congregation of Rites decided1
that it was not lawful to put up in churches the epitaphs of
ecclesiastical dignitaries with their busts or statues, even when
they belonged to the family that had founded and endowed the
church. A more recent decree in October, 1922,2 forbade the
erection of tablets with inscriptions and the names of the faithful
departed who arc not and may not be buried in the church.
These decrees clearly envisage something more elaborate than
brief inscriptions on stained-glass windows or on small mural
tablets. ‘ This legislation is principally directed against an
abuse of the rights claimed by founders and patrons of churches.
It should be noted that the latest decree does not enjoin the
removal of tablets already in existence, lest offence should be
given to relatives. The law is a salutary check on a practice
which, if unrestricted, would convert a parish church into a
mausoleum.’3 It is advisable that : The rector of a church
always refer questions of this kind to the local Ordinary and
follow his instructions. If there is question of erecting suitable
small commemorative tablets, the following observations of
Peter Anson offer useful guidance : ‘ Brass or white marble
tablets arc seldom satisfactory and generally an eyesore. Painted
wood tablets have the advantage of costing less, and if the
lettering is done by a capable sign-writer, arc an effective
decoration. They can be adorned with gold and colours.’
Obviously it would be an abuse to have in a church a great
many such inscriptions, the effect of which may easily be both
ugly and distracting.
ERECTION OF TWO SETS OF STATIONS OF THE
CROSS IN THE SAME CHURCH
In our leper settlement the nave is reserved exclusively for the
lepers and contains Stations of the Cross. The transepts which are
used by other persons arc completely railed off from the nave. Would
it be lawful to set up Stations of the Cross separately in one or both
of these transepts?
Missionarius.
The prohibition against the erection of two sets of stations
1 N. 733.
’ N. 4376.
’Peter Anson, Churches, Their Plan and Furnishing, p. 216.
312
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
of the Cross in close proximity has long been abrogated.
Amongst the Monita necessaria ad recta ordinandum devotum exercitium
Viae Crucis1 published by the Sacred Congregation of Indul
gences on 3rd April, 1731, it is stated :
4. In eadem Ecclesia aut pio loco ad majorem populi commoditatem utile
erit duas Vias Crucis erigere unam nempe pro viris, alteram vero pro feminis :
quum vero una extra Ecclesiam erigitur, altera quoque erigatur semper in
Ecclesia, ita tamen ampla, quae sufficiat ad vitandam confusionem ; ut
tempore pluviae aut alterius impedimenti peragi nihilominus possit tam
sanctum exercitium.
Pope Pius IX removed the last limitation of distance between
sets of the stations when he permitted the erection of a Way
of the Cross even in places where the Franciscans had a church
in which the stations had been already erected.2
STATUES AND IMAGES OF THE SAINTS MAY BE
PLACED IN THE SANCTUARY
Is it correct to place a number of statues of saints around the high
altar? Where no side altars can be dedicated to these saints it is
sometimes sought to honour them by putting their images in the
sanctuary. Is such a practice allowed?
Patricius.
« ·'
I
·>
J#
uI
The Caeremoniale Episcoporum recommends that for the greater
feast-days statues or images composed of silver or other precious
metal and of suitable size should be placed on the altar between
the candlesticks.3 Statues of plaster and similar materials are
not recommended, but there exists no prohibition against placing
suitable statues either in the sanctuary or on the altar. /X
statue should never be placed on top of the tabernacle, nor in
the place which the altar cross should occupy.1 Only those
images which represent Our Lord, the Blessed Virgin, and
canonized saints may be exposed. They must conform to the
traditional usage of the Church. Canon 1279 states : ‘(«) With
out the approval of the Ordinary, no one is permitted to place,
or to cause to be placed, in any church, including those exempt,
or in any other sacred place, an unusual image or picture ;
(6) The Ordinary shall not approve sacred images to be exposed
to the veneration of the faithful that do not conform to the
1 D. 100, S. Congr. Indulgent.
2 D. 496, S. Congr Ind., vide De Angelis, De Indulgentiis.
3 Caer. Epis., Lib. i, rap. xii, n. 12.
< S.R.C. 2613, 2740’.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
313
approved usage of the Church ; (c) The Ordinary shall not
allow in churches or other sacred places representations which
are dogmatically incorrect, or arc not executed with proper
decency and respect, or which may be an occasion of error to
ignorant people.’ Without an Apostolic induit, it is forbidden
to expose for veneration an image of a beatified person,1 but
where the Mass of the Beatus is already permitted by an induit,
then an image may be placed on the altar.2 It is also forbidden
to have two statues of the same saint for worship in a church
or two statues of the Blessed Virgin Mary, both of the same
title.3 Several statues of Our Lady are permitted provided
that each is under a different title, and in this connection it
should be noted that statues of Our Lady of Lourdes and of the
Immaculate Conception arc permissible together, since they
are under two really distinct titles. On a side-altar, it is
customary to place a statue of the saint in whose honour the
altar is dedicated.
Regarding the advisability in general of erecting a great
many statues in a church, the following quotation contains both
useful criticisms and suggestions :4
* On the whole, our statues are poor and are not at all com
plimentary to the holy persons whom they pretend to represent.
With remarkable frequency, one may find plaster-casts from
the same foreign moulds. Statutes of this well-known type
have no architectural qualities ; only by courtesy can they be
described as works of ecclesiastical art. Surely those who install
them and those who worship them are not insensitive to the
glaring vulgarity of the colouring, and in their own pious
meditations they do not visualize holy persons as such smooth
faced, characterless, doll-like, languid, feebly sentimental
individuals. Piety looks beyond the symbol at the reality, but
on the other hand the more circctivc the symbol, the greater
the stimulus to piety. In truth, these statues have been thrust
upon us, and we can advance many comforting excuses for our
good-natured tolerance ; statues are customary, and these arc
better than nothing, arc moreover useful as occasions for votive
candle stands ; and then it is more convenient and economical
to purchase a ready-made article from a furnisher, than to go
1 S.R.C. 1097, 4330.
» S.R.C. 1130, 1156 : ‘ Si de Beato Missam celebrari alicubi indultum fuerit,
licet etiam Imaginem necnon votivas tabellas exponere super Altari.*
1 S.R.C. 3732, 3791 : ‘ dummodo Beata Maria Virgo de Lourdes nuncupata
representetur cum omnibus apparitionis adjunctis.
‘ Dom Roulin quoted apud Collins, Church Edifice and Us A/>f>oiittmen(s,p. 152.
314
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
to the trouble and expense of having one specially designed by
an artist.
‘ Good taste and the sense of fitness dictate that the furnishing
and ornamentation of a church should be designed to form one
harmonious whole, with the altar, the hallowed site of the
Sacrifice, and the Presence for which the building exists, as
the focal point. A church overcrowded with miscellaneous
articles purchased from the manufacturer or inflicted by mis
guided benefactors is an exhibition of disorder in confusion,
usurping unity in variety. Before introducing a new statue,
one should consider whether it is really needed, whether it will
blend or clash with the surroundings, what purpose will it
serve in relation to the whole. In doubt as to correct liturgical
practice, one can never go far wrong in followang the example
of what is acknowledged to be the best.’
MAY THE IMAGE OF A BEATIFIED PERSON BE
PLACED IN THE SANCTUARY?
May the statue or picture of Blessed Oliver Plunket be placed
in the sanctuary or on an altar?
R. P.
Beatification permits the cult of a blessed person within the
limits of place and manner prescribed by the Holy See.1 What
is allowed in the veneration of any beatified person is determined
by the Pope in the decree of beatification or in subsequent
decisions. If permission is given merely for the display in the
church of an image or statue of the blessed, it must be under
stood that the picture or statue is to be placed on the walls of
the church, not in the sanctuary or on an altar.
Quod ubi indultum fuerit per Sedem Apostolicam, imagines, simulera,
pictasque tabellas in Ecclesiis poni et coli posse in parietibus tantum, non
autem super Altari collocandi facultas censeatur.1
*3
In those places, however, in which the Oflicc and Mass (or at
least the Mass) of a beatified are permitted, his image may he
placed over an altar although without a further explicit induit
the altar may not be dedicated in his honour.3
The honours decreed for Blessed Oliver Plunket on the
occasion of his beatification (23rd May, 1920)4 were :
1 Canon 1277, § 2, * Reati (coli) non possunt, nisi loco et modo quo Romamu
Pontifex concesserit.’
1 S.R.C. 1130 ad II.
3 S.R.C. 4330. Canon 1201, §4.
4 /1..4.5, 1920, p. 239.
315
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
. . . ut venerabilis Olivcrius Plunket beati nomine in posterum nuncupetur,
eiusque corpus et lypsana scu reliquiae publicae venerationi proponantur,
non tamen in sollemnibus supplicationibus deferendae ; itemque permittimus,
ut imagines eiusdem Servi Dei radiis decorentur. Praeterea . . . ut de eo
quotannis recitetur Officium dc Communi unius Martyris ... et Missa
propria ... in dioecesibus Hybcrniae atque Australasiae nec non in Ecclesiis
atque Oratoriis Conlcgii aliorumque Institutorum Hybemorum in hac
Alma Urbe Nostra exsistentium.
Hence in all the dioceses of Ireland and of Australia and NewZealand the statue or picture of Blessed Oliver depicted with
the halo of sanctity may be placed over an altar or in the
sanctuary.
MAY FLAGS BE PLACED IN CHURCHES?
Is it permissible to place in a church national or military flags,
although these have not been blessed?
National flags and military standards which have been
blessed may certainly be placed in the church ; if they have
not been blessed the practice of placing them in the church
may, nevertheless, be easily tolerated.1 On this question
ecclesiastical law has in recent times been considerable modified.
The Sacred Congregation of Rites, in 1867 (14th July, Decree
N. 3679), declared :
é
Non licere admittere nisi vexilla religiosa et pro quibus habetur formula
benedictionis in Rituali Romano.
In 1911, however, the Apostolic Delegate in America submitted
to the Holy See the question whether the national flag of the
United States could be permitted in the church during religious
ceremonies and on the occasion of funerals. The Congregation
of the Holy Office replied that provided that there be no dis
respect resulting in relation to the Church or to the Sacred
Liturgy, there is no objection.2 Hence some American liturgists
recommend that it is very fitting to display permanently
both the national and the papal flags in the sanctuary.3 Re
garding the positions of the flags it is suggested that the following
regulations should be observed : (a) If the flags arc placed in
the sanctuary, the national flag should be on the Gospel side
cither fastened to the wall or standing in a holder, with the
1 De Carpo-Morctti, Caeremoniale, 2263.
1 American Ecclesiastical Review, 1911, P· 590.
’ Collins, Church Edifice and Its Appointments, p. 190.
316
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
papal flag in a corresponding position on the Epistle side ;
(Z>) If they arc placed in the body of the church the positions
should be reversed, that is, the papal flag should be on the
northern or right-hand side.1
Finally, in 1922 (15th December), in response to many
requests for direction on this question, the Sacred Congregation
of Rites issued the following instruction : ‘ When the emblems
or banners do not belong to societies which are manifestly
contrary to the Catholic religion, nor represent the condemned
tenets of the same, and when the emblems or banners them
selves do not contain any symbol which is in itself forbidden
and condemned, they may be admitted into churches. And
when the blessing of the aforesaid emblems or banners is peace
fully requested as a friendly gesture and tribute to the Catholic
religion, this blessing may be conceded, using the formula of
the Roman Ritual.’2
Hence no difficulty in relation to the rubrics need be raised
against the acceptance of the national flag, or army colours or
standards into church. The American custom of also dis
playing the papal flag is unknown in Ireland and is scarcely
to be recommended.
2
ALTARS OF UNAPPROVED FORM
I-
V
? 'U
What precisely does the Holy Father mean in his encyclical
Mediator Dei by the words ‘ qui priscam altari velit mensae formam
restituere ’? Is he referring to the altars consisting of a slab of marble
supported by columns which are usually erected in the ciborium-type
altars? These altars are to be found in the basilicas of Rome itself
and in many cathedrals and churches throughout the world. Or
does he refer to cube-shaped altars of smaller proportions which were
used in the Church in the first centuries? My contention is that the
Pope appears to mean the latter, since I can hardly imagine that
oblong-shaped altars standing free from the wall and surmounted by
a ciborium or baldachin can be considered as being inspired by
‘ excessive enthusiasm for the past.’
Rubricist.
In the absence of an authoritative clarification of these words
it is difficult to assess the meaning of the Holy Father’s reference
to ‘ table altars.’ Firstly, to relate them to their context : the
1 Ibid.
s This instruction was issued in 1922, but was not published in the Ada
until 26th March, 1924. Vide Ada, vol · vi, 1924, p. 171. Also Bouscaren,
Canon Law Digest, i, p. 581.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
317
reference occurs at the end of the first part of the encyclical.
In the index to the encyclical the substance of the paragraph
in which it occurs is described :
Studium antiquitatis utilissimum :
non tamen antiquitas unica norma
and the paragraph immediately following is summarized :
Quare reprobanda est insana quaedam antiquitatis cupiditas, qua reno
vantur errores Pistoriensium.
The Pope states :
/\d sacrae Liturgiae fontes mente animoque redire sapiens ac laudabilissima
res, est, cum disciplinae huius studium, ad eius origines remigrans, haud
parum conferat ad festorum dierum significationem et ad formularum, quae
usurpantur, sacrarumque caerimoniarum sententiam altius diligentiusque
pervestigandam : non sapiens tamen, non laudabile est omnia ad antiquitatem
quovis modo reducere.
Itaque, ut exemplis utamur, is ex recto aberret
itinere, qui priscam altari velit mensae formam restituere ; qui liturgicas
vestes velit nigro semper carere colore ; qui sacras imagines ac statuas e
templis prohibeat ; qui divini Redemptoris in Crucem acti effigies ita con
formari iubeat, ut corpus eius acerrimos non referat, quos passus est, cruciatus ;
qui denique polyphonicos, scu multisonos concentus reprobet ac repudiet,
etiamsi normis obtemperent ab Apostolica Sede datis . . . Haec enim cogi
tandi agendique ratio nimiam illam reviviscere iubet atque insanam anti
quitatum cupidinem, quam illegitimum excitavit Pistoriense concilium
itcinquc multiplices illos restituere enititur errores, qui in causa fuere, cur
conciliabulum idem cogeretur . . .
“Ancient table-form ’ naturally suggests the earliest altars
which resembled the table at which Our Lord celebrated die
Last Supper or the wooden domestic tables on which the
apostles must have celebrated Mass. In the first three centuries
the altar was either a plain cube-shaped table, usually about
three feet square, ol wood or stone, or the form derived from
the stone slabs placed over the martyrs’ tombs in the Catacombs.
The table altar served to bring to mind the fact that the Eucharist
was both a sacrifice and a communal banquet. After the Peace
of Constantine, the large altars erected in the Roman Basilicas,
raised as they were on pillars over the confessio of an aposde or
other martyr and surmounted by a ciborium, marked a con
siderable development and elaboration of the early primitive
structures.
With their subsequent adaptations elsewhere
to suit the various types of architecture—Romanesque, Gothic,
etc.—these Basilican altars have been accepted and copied as
the perfect models of correct, rubrical altars. His Holiness
most probably has in mind the error of those who would seek
to return not to the basilica-type altar, but to the earlier, bare,
primitive table altar.
In 1937 the Bishop of Linz, Austria (Province of Vienna),
found it necessary to rebuke extreme liturgists in his diocese who
318
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
wished to turn the altar around and celebrate Mass facing the
congregation, to remove the tabernacle from the altar and to
reserve the Blessed Sacrament in a safe in the wall, to have the
faithful receive Holy Communion standing and to forbid the
recitation of the Rosary during Mass.1 Clearly the Holy Father
in his encyclical has in mind some of these errors, but he has
not forbidden the celebration of Mass versus populum, and it is
unlikely that his words refer to altars constructed in this way.
To celebrate Mass facing the people is per se lawful, but it is
contrary to custom, and the practice may not be introduced by
private authority.12
. . . Ecclesiam nunc vero permittere tantum hunc morem circa posi
tionem altaris, et ideo neminem posse neque debere hunc morem publice com
mendare.3
The reference to the heretical Synod of Pistoia is a further
indication of the type of modern error which His Holiness
wishes to condemn. The Bishop of Pistoia in 1794, Scipio
Ricco, following Jansenist principles, prescribed that there
should be only one altar in each church and that it should not
be ornamented with flowers or relics, condemned processions
in honour of the Blessed Virgin and of the saints, the Rosary, the
Way of the Cross and the cult of images. The most extreme
application of these principles was made by Jubé, the Curé
d’Asnieres.4 In his church he had only one altar which, outside
Mass, was completely bare ; even during Mass it was covered
only with one cloth and had neither crucifix nor candles. Wc
are not aware of any examples of such extreme disregard of the
rubrics of the Missal in modern times, but, in 1942 and 1943,
ecclesiastical authorities in Germany expressed anxiety about
a tendency amongst liturgical extremists to treat the rubrics
in an arbitrary fashion.5 The Archbishop of Fribourg censured
those who wished to dispense altogether with the use of black
vestments and who exaggerated the part which the laity should
take in the offering of the Sacrifice. A circular letter to the
hierarchy of Greater Germany, issued in 1943 by the Archbishop
of Breslau at the direction of the Holy Sec, also condemns the
tendency to upset the rubrics on the plea of returning to the
practices of the earliest ages of the Church. It is reasonable
1 Vide Periodiea, 1937, p. 163.
• Vide Maison-Dieu, No. 5, p. 116 (Assembly of French Hierarchy, June,
1945).
3 Cardinal Schuster apud Roulin, Nos. Eglises, p. 538.
« Vide Gueranger, Institutions Liturgiques, ii, p. 250 ; Rousseau, Histoire
du Mouvement Liturgique, p. 33. Jubé left his parish in 1717
4 Maison-Dieu, No. 7 (1946).
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
319
to conclude that this extreme enthusiasm for antiquity con
demned by the Holy Father led in some places to attempts to
set up altars modelled on the most primitive table altars. Hence
it would seem that our correspondent is justified in holding
diat the Holy Father is not condemning the modern plain
rubrical altars, but rather the tendency to return to the primitive
cube-shaped altars of the pre-Nicenc era.
OBLIGATION OF HAVING A COMMUNION
CLOTH
Re communion cloth—since of late I have heard it said this cloth
is not obligatory and again ‘ not necessary/ and even ‘ prescribed
but not obligatory! I wish to know has there been any recent change
in the Instruction of March, 1929. Is the obligation of having a
communion cloth per se grave? Does its violation entail any penal
ties? If we may compare the obligations of the cloth and the patina—
which obligation would be greater? Is it more important to have a
cloth than a patina? For those who wish to have a reason (apart
from the Instruction) for the necessity of the cloth—would you please
state such, if any.
Sacerdos.
From the Instruction issued by the Congregation of the
Sacraments on 26th March, 1929, the following relevant passage
may be quoted : ‘In distributing Holy Communion to the
faithful, in addition to the white linen cloth spread before the
communicants, according to the Rubrics of the Missal, the
Ritual and the Bishops’ Ceremonial, a paten should be used,
which should be silver or gilded metal, but not engraved on
the inside, and which should be held by the faithful themselves
under their chins, except in the case where Holy Communion
is given by a bishop, or by a prelate in pontificals, or in a solemn
Mass, when a priest or deacon who is in attendance may hold
the paten under the chins of the communicants.’1
Hence, so far from abrogating the previously existing rubrics,
the Instruction confirms them. The obligation of having the
communion cloth is the older and primary obligation and the
cloth may not be dispensed with although the patina now pre
scribed is used. The older Rubricists have generally regarded
the communion cloth as very important, and where the number
of communicants is large, the obligation of some such safeguard
1 Missal, Rit· Cel, x, n. 6 ; Rit. Rom., tit. iv, cap. ii ; Caer. Epis., lib. ii,
cap. xxix, n. 3«
320
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
is undoubtedly a grave one. 1'he patina was first introduced
as a substitute for the communion cloth and it was not at first
generally approved but merely tolerated. In 1876, the Sacred
Congregation of Rites was asked whether metal patens might
be used to replace the linen charts which were held by com
municants. The Congregation replied that the practice need
not be discontinued, but added that neither should the use of
the linen charts be forbidden.1 Although this reply did not
give approval for the practice, nevertheless, since it was not
directly adverse, the custom of using metal patinas became
more widespread. Rubricists, however, continued to recom
mend that the communion cloth should be retained ; the use
of the patina instead of the cloth could be, at most, tolerated
where it was already customary. Van dcr Stappen, for example,
wrote :
Loco mappae Communionis cuius usus prac omnibus aliis rebus cornmandandus ct retinendus est, licite uti possunt communicantes aliqua patena
grandiori inaurata ...1234
And De Amicis directed :3
Toleratur discus metallicus nullo panno lineo contectus quod in com
pluribus ecclesiis adhibetur. Verum antiqua disciplina nihil aliud ad
Eucharistiam accipiendum adhibuit, nisi solum linteum ; quapropter magno
pere ecclesiarum rectores hortamur, ut disco cuicumquc metallico deinceps
prorsus valedicant.
The Instruction issued in 1929 made it clear that the patina
is not meant to replace the communion cloth. Hence more
recent writers have emphasized the necessity of using the cloth.
Where there arc only a few communicants it would still be lawful
to use the communion cloth alone.
Si sacerdos intra Missam paucis fidelibus sacram Communionem
administret per particulas non in pyxide sed super patenam positas, sufficere
videtur linteum seu velum album in gcnuflexorio ante altare Ss. Sacramentum
extensum, aut si Missa celebretur in alio altari ubi illud linteum deest, linteo
lum ad instar magnae pallae super tabellam ligneam vel chartam crassam
positum, quod singuli communicantes suo mente supponant.1
Writing of the obligation of using the patina, Cappello says:5
Verius non agitur de vero praecepto.
etiam levissima excusat . . .
Ceterum quaelibet causa,
1 Bouscarcn. Canon Law Digest, i, p. 362.
2 N. 5658 in Gardcllini, Appendices Decreta Authentica. This reply was
expugned in the new collection of decrees and was, therefore, regarded by
some as abrogated. I hat such an opinion was erroneous is proved by the
reference to it in the 1929 instruction.
* Sacra Liturgia, iv, Q_. 194.
4 Caermoniale Parochorum (1913), î, p. 35.
& Ephem. Lit., 1930, p. 74.
321
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
Hence it would seem that the communion cloth is still to be
regarded as the more important provision. Nevertheless, the
patina has now been prescribed as an additional means of
safeguarding the Blessed Sacrament from all danger of irrever
ence and it is undoubtedly of obligation. The reasons for its
use arc cogently set forth in the earlier part of the 1929 Instruc
tion :1 ‘ But to prevent particles falling to the ground, either
directly or from the communion cloth, when the priest gives
Communion to the faithful, a very prudent practice has arisen
during nearly the last fifty years of using a small paten made of
metal, which is placed under the chin of the communicant.
For particles arc held in such a paten more easily and safely
than on the communion cloth and they can more easily be seen
and picked up by the priest. ... In the administration of the
Eucharist, care is to be taken that no fragments of the conse
crated hosts be lost, since in every one of them the entire Body
of Christ is present. Hence, care must especially be taken that
particles be not easily separated from the hosts and fall to the
ground where, alas, they should be mixed witji the dirt and
trodden under foot.’
SAFEGUARDING THE COMMUNION CLOTH
Since the introduction of the patina for the use of communicants
we have dispensed with the communion cloths because they were often
soiled and untidy.
P. K.
‘ In distributing Holy Communion to the faithful, in addi
tion to the white linen cloth spread before the communicants,
according to the rubrics of the Missal, the Ritual and the
Bishops’ Ceremonial, a paten should be used . .
Un
doubtedly the obligation to have a communion cloth still
remains, and is the primary obligation.3 The cloth should not
now be held by the faithful, but should be laid along the top
of the altar rail or communion bench. If the cloth is put into
position only for the time of Mass and Communion it will not
quickly become stained or untidy ; where the communion
rails arc straight the cloth can be easily spread by means of a
light wooden roller. If the cloth is fastened only at one end of
1 De Sacramentis (1938), i, p. 497.
3 Vide Bouscarcn, Canon Law Digest, i, p. 362. Annotations to Instruction
of S. Congr. Sacr., 1929.
3 Directions for Altar Societies, p. 50.
12—1993
322
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
the rails, then it can be unrolled along their full length when
required and immediately after the Communion rolled up
again by means of such a suitable roller.
THE COMMUNION PATINA
If the patina is placed securely upon a rectangular card covered
with linen (similar to a chalice-pall but larger and rectangular in shape
with slots to hold the patina) is it still necessary to have a communion
cloth on the altar-rail?
Sacerdos.
A patina placed on a linen board as described in the query
would not be an acceptable substitute for the communion cloth.
The suggestion is not really a new one, because it recalls to
mind the linen cards rather like large palls which were com
monly used before 1929. The 1929 Decree of the Sacred
Congregation of the Sacraments which prescribed the use of
the patina emphasized that the metal plate is to be used in
addition to the communion cloth. The rubrics of the Missal,
of the Roman Ritual and of the Caeremoniale Episcoporum1
expressly direct that a clean linen cloth should be spread before
the communicants. Rubricists2 are unanimous in insisting on
the gravity of this obligation when there arc a number of com
municants. The communion cloth probably had its origin
from the dominicale, the white cloth with which women, at least,
covered their hands when in the early centuries the Sacred Host
was received in the hand. From about the ninth century the
faithful have received Communion directly on the tongue and
the white cloth was spread on the bench or rail at which they
stood ; the custom of receiving in a kneeling position did not
come in until much later.3 The cloth was retained as a reminder
that the Eucharist is a sacred banquet, but in time this signifi
cance was practically forgotten and the cloth was regarded as
a safeguard to prevent the Host from ever falling to the ground.
Hence the cloth was often replaced by the more efficient pre
caution of having a linen card or a metal plate which the
communicants held under their chins. This practice was
tolerated by the Sacred Congregation of Rites in a reply given
1 Rit. Striandus, x, n. 6 ; Rit. Rom., v, cap. iii ; Caer. Epis., lib. ii, cap.
xxix, n. 3.
'
1 E.g. vide Collins, Church Edifice and its Appointments ; Cappello, De
Sacramentis, i ; Callcwaert, De Sacra Liturgia, etc.
3 Vide Gavantus, Thesaurus Rituum, i; Eucharistia (M. Brillant), etc.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
323
in 1876,1 and it then became widespread. In 1929 the Sacred
Congregation decided to adopt the use of the metal patina and
to prescribe it not as a substitute for the communion cloth but as
an additional precaution. It is prescribed that the patina be
of silver or gilded metal not engraved on the inside so that it
may be more easily purified. Since 1929 the custom of using
a linen pall alone has fallen into desuetude except in the case
where the Mass server alone communicates or where there are
only a few communicants. As a general rule the fact that the
patina is surrounded by a linen chart would not justify one in
dispensing from the communion cloth and a patina so encased
in linen would be more difficult to purify.
USE OF PATINA FOR THE COMMUNION OF THE
SERVER
Is it necessary to use the patina if the server alone is receiving
Holy Communion during Mass ?
Exile.
The use of the patina in the distribution of Holy Com
munion was prescribed by the Sacred Congregation of the
Sacraments in the following words : ‘In distributing Holy
Communion to the faithful, in addition to the white linen
cloth spread before the communicants, according to die Rubrics
of the Missal, the Ritual, and the Bishops’ Ceremonial, a paten
should be used which should be of silver or gilded metal, but
not engraved on the inside, and which should be held by the
faithful themselves under their chins, except in the case where
the Holy Communion is given by a bishop, or by a prelate in
pontificals, or in a solemn Mass, when a priest or deacon who
is in attendance may hold die paten under the chins of the
communicants.’2
When at Mass the Blessed Sacrament is administered to the
server alone there is no obligation to observe this rubric, which
concerns only the distribution of Holy Communion to the
faithful generally. The purpose of the law is to prevent irrever
ence to the Blessed Sacrament, which w'ould be caused if small
particles were allowed to fall to the ground. Where only a few
communicants are present or where the server alone com
municates, adequate prccaudons can be taken although the
1 N.5658 in Appendices Decreta Authentica.
« S.C. Sacr., 26th March, 1929. Trans. Bouscaren, Canon Law Digest, i,
p. 362.
324
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
patina is not used. It would suffice, for example, in these
circumstances if a linen cloth were spread for the few communi
cants or if a large pall or card covered with linen were used.1
The celebrant may not, however, allow the communicants to
hold the consecrated paten which has been used in the cele
bration of Mass nor may they make use of the chalice veil,
burse or purificator instead of the linen cloth.*
12 It is forbidden
also for the celebrant when distributing Holy Communion from
a ciborium to carry the paten in his left hand and in this manner
attempt to place it under the chins of the communicants.3
LICEITY OF USING AN ALTAR-STONE WHICH
DOES NOT CONTAIN RELICS
Many altar-stones in use in Ireland from time immemorial have no
cavities or relics of any kind, although they are properly marked with
five crosses. Was there an induit in force in Ireland at one time grant
ing power to consecrate altar-stones without any relics ? If so, would
such altar-stones still be valid and lawful ? May the crosses marked
on such old stones be taken as sufficient indication that they were
consecrated at some time in the past ?
Chaplain.
It is extremely unlikely that the Irish bishops ever had an
induit to consecrate altar-stones without relics, as the Holy
Sec has never dispensed from the rite of inserting relics. This
is explicitly stated in an instruction appended to Decree N. 2777
of the Sacred Congregation of Rites :
. . . si a cctcris ritibus observandis in nova Altarium consecratione dis
pensavit aliquando Sedes Apostolica, nunquam a ritu dispensavit repositionis
Reliquarum et a caeremoniis necessario in hoc observandis.4
>
* «·
□
In the past the induit would not have been sought in any case,
for two reasons. Firstly, many of the older theologians con
sidered that the insertion of relics was not necessary for the
valid consecration of an altar-stone. St. Alphonsus, who does
not himself subscribe to this view, says5 that it is the more
common opinion and is held by Suarez, Laymann, Lugo,
Palaus, etc. These theologians argued that there was no clear
precept commanding the insertion of relics in altars and that
4 Ephem. Lit., 1930, p. 73.
1 Cappello, De Sacramentis, i, p. 479 (edit. 1938)
* S.R.C. 12th August, 1854.
4 S.R.C., Rhcdonein, 1837.
4 Theol. Moral., lib. vi. cap. iii, dub. iv, ad 3.
flï ·· i :
4
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
325
the prayer Oramus te Domine was to be understood conditionally
—a rubric in some early Missals directed that this prayer was
to be said only if there were relics in the altar.1 Secondly, the
special faculties granted to Irish bishops in accordance with
the Formula Sexta contained the following permission :
N. 15—Celebrandi Missam quocumque loco decenti ... et super altari
portatili etiam fracto aut lasso et sine Sanctorum reliquiis. . . . *
Hence it is not surprising that in Ireland, as in other countries
under the jurisdiction of the Congregation of Propaganda,
many altar-stones were used which had been anointed and
consecrated without relies. By virtue of their special faculties
bishops could delegate priests to use an altar-stone in which
there was no sepulchre, and in this country this delegation was
commonly given with the ordinary faculties of the diocese, just
as permission to binate was and is given.
By a general Decree of the Sacred Consistorial Congregation
on 25th April, 1918, the faculties of Formula Sexta were with
drawn ; hence bishops arc no longer empowered to grant this
concession.1
*3*5Also the present law is clear from canon 1198, § 4 :
Turn in altari immobili tum in petra sacra sit, ad normam legum liturgicarum, sepulcrum continens reliquias Sanctorum, lapide clausum.
It is not now lawful for a priest to continue for an indefinite
period to use an altar at which there are no relics.1 The defect
must be remedied without undue delay. To obtain relics
immediately and have the altar-stone properly consecrated
may, in practice, be impossible and in the meantime, while the
necessary arrangements arc being made, a priest would certainly
be justified in continuing to use the defective altar. In 1837
the Bishop of Rennes reported to the Holy See that many
altar-stones in his diocese had no relics, and received in reply
a detailed instruction specially approved by Pope Gregory XVI.
The instruction emphasized the necessity for relies and, recal
ling to mind a decision given in an earlier ease, directed that it
would not suffice to insert the relies without ceremony; the
1 St. Robert Bellarminc held that the insertion of the relies did not pertain
to the essence of the consecration, but by precept of the Church was a pre
requisite. The various decrees declaring the necessity of re-consecrating an
altar which had lost its relics did not necessarily imply that relies must be
present for a valid consecration. I^iyinann, for example, held that though
relies may not be necessary, an altar which had lost its relics was desecrated by
reason of the serious character of the fracture of the sepulchre.
’ Vide Konings-Putzer, Comm, in Facul. Apostat., p. 420, also Arsdekin, S.J.
(1696), Thcol. Tripartita, tom. ii, pars, ii, tract ii, cap. v—Facultates Missionum.
5 Vide Bouscaren, Canon Law Digest, i., p. 72.
‘S.R.C. 3674. Vide I. E. Record, 1920, p. 420; 1926, p. 652.
326
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
bishop must insert the relies with all the ceremonies prescribed
for that part of the consecration of an altar I1
Si . . . Sanctissimo Domino placuerit, Reverendissimus Episcopus Rhedonensis posset dispensari ab integra consecratione facienda omnium Altarium,
de quibus in precibus ; attamen in eo quod respicit Reliquias, indulged
nequit ut Altaria reputet reconciliata cum sola ac simplici Reliquiarum
reposiUone, quin caeremoniae serventur ad hunc ritum ordinatae.
The instruction suggested that the Bishop should consecrate
the stones privately and have them distributed gradually in
order to avoid scandal—
Ad hunc autem timorem (i.e. scandali) vitandum Episcopi conscientiae et
prudentiae relinquitur statuendum illud temporis spatium, quod necessarium
putabit ad praedicta omnia sedulo perficienda.
Again, in 1885, when Dr. McCormack, Bishop of Galway,
sought permission to use a short form in re-consecrating portable
altars he received a rescript from the Sacred Congregation of
Propaganda in the following terms :
SSmus. Dominus Noster Leo . . . benigne induisit ut altaria quae nova
indigent consecratione sensim sine sensu consecrentur, prudenter capta
occasione nullo temporis limite Episcopo Oratori praescripto. ...3
Hence the period of time necessary to replace defective altar
stones must be left to the prudent judgment of the Ordinary,
and meanwhile these stones may be used in so far as is necessary
to avoid scandal, etc.
Even if it be necessary, as our correspondent suggests it will
be, to consecrate a large number of portable altars, the short
formula mentioned in canon 1200 cannot be used, because
there is here question of consecrating altars which have never
been properly consecrated, not of repairing those which have
been desecrated. The short formula could not be used without
making a special recourse to the Holy See. The burden may,
however, be lightened in many ways. If the bishop personally
carries out the consecration, the assistant priests may mark the
crosses and affix the candles on the other stones while the
bishop does so on the first one.3 Similarly it is sufficient that the
bishop cement the lid on the first stone while those on the other
stones are secured by assistant priests.1 Moreover, the Quin
quennial5 Faculties at present held by bishops in Ireland
empower them to delegate the vicar-general or any priest who
w
K1
•I
1 A special dispensation from repeating the whole ceremony was granted.
Cf. S.R.C. 2918.
»/. E. Record, 1890, p. 259.
» S.R.C. 4244.
♦ S.R.C. 3726.
* 1948, sect, v, Faculties from S.R.C., n. 1.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
327
holds an ecclesiastical dignity, e.g. the vicar forane or a canon
of the diocesan chapter, to carry out the ceremony according
to the rite given in the Pontifical. The ceremony can be per
formed in any suitable place, but should take place in the
morning. The rubrics state jejuno tamen stomacho, but com
mentators1 arc agreed that this indicates merely that the cere
mony should take place in the morning; there is no strict
obligation to celebrate Mass on one of the new altars after the
consecration. If Mass is celebrated at the conclusion of the
ceremony, as may be done laudabiliter, no liturgical privileges
are attached to it ; on a day on which a private Votive Mass
is permitted, the Mass Terribilis may be said without Gloria or
Credo and with three prayers ; on a day on which a Votive
Mass is not allowed, the Mass of the day is said without any
special commemoration. It should be noted that, if possible,
relies of more than one saint, including two martyrs, should be
enclosed in the sepulchre, but the relic of one martyr suffices
for validity. It is not necessary that the name of the saint be
known, provided that the relic is authentic and it must be a
portion of the saint’s body ; parts of garments arc not con
sidered sufficient.2 The sepulchre of the relics must be of
natural stone with a lid likewise of natural stone ; it should be
cut out of the surface of the stone. It is not sufficient to cover
the sepulchre only with cement ; cement is used merely to
fasten the lid. Λ permanent record of the consecration should
be placed in the parochial or diocesan archives lest any similar
doubts recur in the future.
USE OF SHORT FORMULA FOR RE-CONSECRATING
ALTAR-STONES
It was lately discovered that some of our altar-stones have the
sepulchre closed with cement only. This demands a repetition of
the consecration ; what formula is to be used?
Missio.narius.
The altar-stones must be re-consccratcd ; this may be
done by means of the ordinary formula for the consecration of
portable altars or application may be made to the Holy See
for permission to use a shorter formula. The shorter formula
1 Vide Nabuco, Pontificalis Rom. Esfiositio, ii, n. 120.
moniale, iv, p. 315.
11. E. Record. 1935, p. 542.
Martinucci, Caere-
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
issued by the Sacred Congregation of Rites for use in such
eases may be availed of only by virtue of an apostolic induit
and the formula is not contained in the ordinary liturgical
books. In 1883 when the bishop of Antigonish asked for a
direction concerning a number of altar-stones which had been
closed only with cement the Sacred Congregation directed that
they be re-consecrated and permitted the use of a very short
formula. This formula was granted only for this special case,
not for general use :
... in casu Sacra Rituum Congregatio, utendo facultatibus sibi specialiter
a SSmo. D. N. Leone Papa XIII tributis indulget usum brevioris ritus. Hic
autem ritus erit sequens : Episcopus orator vel per se vel per simplices
Sacerdotes hoc tantum in casu Apostolicae Sedis nomine delegandos, certas
Sanctorum Reliquias in iisdem altaribus reponat, iis solummodo caeremoniis
servatis, quae in Pontificali Romano praescribuntur, dum in sepulchro
reconduntur Reliquiae, et superponitur lapis ; scilicet ut signetur sacro
Christmate Confessio sive Sepulcrum, et interim dicatur Oratio : Conseretur
et sanctificetur, etc. : postea reconditis Reliquiis cum tribus granis thuris ct
superposito operculo ac firmato, dicatur altera Oratio : Deus qui ex omnium
cohabitation Sanctorum, etc. et nihil aliud.1
This is the formula published by Wuest-Mullaney2 in Afalters
Liturgical, but unfortunately it is not sanctioned for general
use. In 1901 when the bishop of Vich (Spain) submitted a
similar problem the Sacred Congregation replied :3
Interim, ex speciali gratia, permitti celebrationem Missae in cnunciatis
Altaribus, simulque indulgcre ritum formulamque breviorem, pro nova
consecratione ab Episcopo, per se vel per simplices Sacerdotes delegandos
peragenda, cum substitutione operculi lapidei, ubi opus est, alteri ex caemento.
Reliquias autem, quae in praedictis /Mtaribus inveniuntur, licite apponi
posse in nova eorum consecratione, si nullum dubium de eorum authenticitate
exoriatur.
Usually for such eases the Holy See permits the use of a
special short formula which is not the same as the short formula
given in the Roman Ritual Titulus ix, caput ix, n. 20. The
formula of the Ritual is simply an extract from the full ceremony
for the consecration of an altar and is to be used only in the
circumstances where an altar has lost its consecration by reason
of a serious breakage or by violation of the sepulchre (canon
1200, §2). When the re-consecration is rendered necessary
because the sepulchre has been covered with cement only or
because the sepulchre has been made in the side of the stone and
must now be transferred to the surface, then an induit for the
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
329
consists of the blessing of the Gregorian water, the stone is
sprinkled with the water while the Asperges antiphon and
Miserere psalm arc recited ; the five anointings with chrism are
made with the usual formula, the cover of the sepulchre is put
in position and anointed and finally the prayers Deus qui ex
omnium cohabitationc Sanctorum, and Descendat, quaesumus Domine.1
Portable Altars : The following questions and replies have
been issued by the Sacred Congregation of Rites :2 The Arch
bishop of Trent asked whether it is lawful to follow the custom
whereby ‘ fixed altars ’ which are consecrated apart from the
consecration of the church are treated as ‘ portable altars ’ and
consecrated by the short formula permitted by induit for the
consecration of altar-stones. It is urged that while the rubrics
determine the minimum necessary dimensions for an altar
stone, there is no prohibition against regarding the whole table
of the altar as an altar-stone. Secondly, the Archbishop asked
whether, in the consecration of a church, it is permissible for
the convenience of the people to anticipate on the previous
evening the part of the ceremony which takes place outside
the church and so, on the morning of the consecration, to begin
with the entry to the church and the antiphon, Pax aetema, etc.
The Sacred Congregation has replied :
Nihil impedit altare portatile posse componi quasi esset fixum. Altare
consecratum in casu, licet materialiter fixum, est liturgicc portatile seu
mobile, idcoque potest, quin amittat consecrationem, transferri, ct separari
a stipitibus.
Ad. II. Negative sine speciali induito.
USE OF THE ANTIMENSION
Is it true to say that the use of the Antimension instead of an
altar-stone is now permitted to all missionaries ? If so, what are the
prescriptions to be observed regarding its size, material, blessing,
etc?
Missionary's.
On 12th March, 1947, the Sacred Congregation of Rites,
at the request of the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda,
published a decree containing the following concession :
Sacra Rituum Congregatio prae oculis habens difficultatem quam sccurn
fert portatilium altarium translatio, quae ex lapide confici debent, de speciali
gratia facto verbo cum Sanctissimo, in iis regionibus ubi viarum ct curruum
1 Nabuco, Commentarium in Pontificale Romano, ii. p. 185. The formula is
the same as that given in the Pontifical as * Formula Breoior ’ with the exceptions
that the blessings of the ashes and of the wine arc omitted.
’ Ephem. Lit., 1952, p. 112.
330
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
desit copia, benigne indulgct ut loco illarum lapidum substituatur aliquod
linteum ex lino vel cannabe confectum, ct ab Episcopo benedictum, in quo
reconditae sint Sanctorum Reliquiae ab eodem Episcopo recognitae ; super
quo sacerdotes missionalcs sacrosanctum Missae sacrificium celebrare valeant,
iis tantum in casibus, et onerata conscientia, in quibus aut nulla ecclesia vel
oratorium sive publicum sive privatum exstet, et valde incommodum sit
lapideum altare sccum in itinere transferre, aut in promptu habere.1
This concession docs not derogate from canon 823, § 2 :
Deficiente altari proprii ritus, sacerdoti fas est ritu proprio celebrare in
altare consecrato alius ritus catholici, non autem super Graecorum antimensiis.
The prohibition against celebrating on the Greek antimension
still retains its force. The antimetision as used in the Greek
churches is made of linen or silk ; usually about ten inches
wide by fourteen inches long, it contains relics of the saints and
is ornamented with representations of the instruments of the
Passion or with a representation of Our Lord in the sepulchre.
The Greek anlimension is consecrated by a very solemn ceremony.
The consecration is similar to the consecration of an altar. For
the ceremony the antimension is placed on an altar and wine is
poured upon it ; it is then anointed three times with myrrh,
and after the prayers and psalms of the consecration the sacred
Liturgy is celebrated.
In all these particulars the Greek antimension differs from the
antimensium now permitted to priests of the Latin rite. This
latter may be made of linen or hemp and have somewhat the
same dimensions as a corporal. When it is used it replaces the
altar-stone, and hence the altar should be prepared as usual for
the celebration of Mass, with altar-cloths, etc., and with the
antimensium underneath the altar-cloths in the place of the altar
stone. The relics of the saints arc sewn into a little bag in the
right-hand corner. It may be blessed by any bishop but, before
blessing it, the bishop must assure himself of the authenticity of
the relics. The blessing consists simply in the recitation of one
prayer2 and the sprinkling of the antimensium with holy water;
it bears no resemblance to the ceremony of the consecration of
an altar-stone. In interpreting the reasons for the concession
and the causes which justify its use the conjunction et may be
1 Ephem. Lit., 1948, p. 382.
1 The prayer is : Afaiestatem tuam, Domine, humiliter imploramus ut linteum
hoc ad suscipienda populi tui munera praeparatum, per nostrae humilitatis servitium
benedicere, sanctificare et conseaare digneris ut super eo sanctum sacrificium Tibi offerre
valeamus, ad honorem beatissimae Virginis Mariae, Sanctorum N.N. quorum reliquias
in eo reposuimus, et omnium Sanctorum ; et praesta, ut per haec sacrosancta mysteria
vincula peccatorum nostrorum absolvantur, maculae deleantur, veniae impetrentur,
gratiae acquirantur quatenus una cum Sanctis et Electis tuis vitam percipere mereamur
aeternam. Per eumdem Christum Dominum nostrum.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
331
understood as disjunctive, i.e. there would be sufficient reason
for its use if the means of transporting an altar are lacking,
although the roads arc good or one may have sufficient cause
for using it in a church or oratory if it would be very incon
venient to bring or to set up promptly an altar-stone.1 The
Sacred Congregation of Propaganda has sometimes previously
permitted that in cases of necessity Mass could be celebrated on
a simple unconsccratcd stone, and during the recent war the
Holy Father sometimes granted to military chaplains the faculty
to celebrate on a small linen cloth.
THE ALTAR CRUCIFIX
What are the detailed prescriptions of the rubrics concerning the
altar crucifix? In particular what is to be said for or against: (a) a
hanging crucifix; (6) a crucifix on which the figure is clothed in vest
ments; (c) a crucifix on which the arms are almost perpendicularly
above the head, i.e. what is commonly called the ‘Jansenist ’
Crucifix ?
C. D.
The rubrics actually do not give very detailed prescriptions
concerning the altar crucifix. The General Rubrics of the
Missal in the section2 dealing with the furnishings of the altar
simply state : ‘A cross should be placed at the middle of the
altar and at least two candlesticks with lighted candles, one on
either side of the cross.’ The Caeremoniale Episcoporum in the
chapter3 describing the decoration of the church for festive
occasions directs that ‘ on the table of the altar there should be
six silver candlesticks, if they can be had, if not, at least ones
of bronze or copper-gilt, of finer workmanship, taller and more
handsome than those which arc used on ordinary days. . . .
In their midst is to be placed a cross of the same metal and more
finely wrought, so that the foot of the cross is on the same level
as the top of the candlesticks next to it and the whole of the
cross itself overtops the candlesticks, with the figure of the Most
Holy Crucified facing the interior of the altar.’ For further
details we must turn to the Decrees of the Sacred Congregation
of Rites and other authoritative directions. Pope Benedict XIV
in the Apostolic Constitution Accepimus ( 1746) urged the bishops :
‘ We command you that under no circumstances should you
1 Cf. Ephem. Lit., loc. cit.
1 Rub. Gen., xx.
a I, xii, 11.
332
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
permit (not even in the churches of regulars) that the sacred
mysteries be carried out . . . unless a crucifix stands prominently
between the candlesticks so that the celebrating priest and the
people assisting at the sacrifice can easily and conveniently
look upon it ; they cannot do this if only a small cross fixed to
a lower ledge is placed before the people.’ Amongst the
Decrees of the Sacred Congregation, N. 1270 (16th June, 1663)
decided that a small crucifix with the image of the Crucified
fixed above the wooden tabernacle is not sufficient, but another
cross must be placed between the candlesticks and N. 2621
(17th September, 1822) stated that the practice of placing a
small cross, scarcely visible either over the tabernacle or on a
lower ledge at the middle of the altar, is an abuse against which
the local Ordinary should apply remedies juris el facli. The
Decree added : ‘ If for some particular reason it happens that
the cross between the candlesticks must be removed, another
one should, during the time of the Sacrifice, be suitably placed,
in a lower position, but visible to both the celebrant and the
people.’ More recently Decree N. 4136 (11th June, 1904)
summarized the law : ‘ the cross is to be placed between the
candlesticks, never before the door of the tabernacle ; it may be
placed above the tabernacle, but never in the throne in which
the Blessed Sacrament is exposed.’
Hence the cross must stand between the candlesticks, be
clearly visible to all with the figure of the Crucified overtopping
the candlesticks. If it is to have its due prominence, the cross
must stand higher than the tops of the candles ; the best
arrangement is that the candlesticks do not come above the
level of the foot of the cross and the candles should not reach
above the arms of the cross. The cross may not be placed in the
throne, because the same honour may not be given to the
image as is given to the reality dining exposition. Although
the rubrics mention only a metal cross for use on the special
feast-days, it is also quite correct to have a wooden cross with
a figure of wood or other suitable material.
(a) The hanging crucifix : The practice of hanging a crucifix
immediately over the altar is not explicitly recognized in any
of the rubrical decrees, but Decree N. 1270, § 2, is generally
interpreted as referring to it implicitly—‘ sufficit magna statua
Crucifixi in Altari locata.’ Commentators, however, arc
practically unanimous in admitting the use of the hanging
crucifix chiefly because even before the cross found its place on
the altar, that is before the eleventh century, frequently a cross
was suspended from the chancel arch or from the ciborium
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
333
over the altar. It may be argued that the hanging crucifix
does not fully conform to the prescription that the crucifix
stand between the candlesticks and also it is difficult to veil it
during Passiontide. Nevertheless it is a correct arrangement
and in modern times is increasingly finding favour ; yet at the
same time we must regard it as a second best. It may be
replaced by a painting of the crucifixion in which the figure of
Christ on the cross is predominant, but a stained-glass window
depicting the crucifixion would not suffice—‘ Imagines in vitris
fenestrarum depictae nihil cum Altari commune habent.’1
(A) The clothed crucifix: In this context we must distinguish
between artistic representations of the crucifixion in paintings,
mosaics, etc., and the liturgical altar crucifix. It does not seem
at any period to have been customary to have a fully clothed
figure on the altar cross. In the earliest examples of Christian
art, on monuments, etc., the cross did not carry any human
figure ; as the symbol of Christ’s triumph it was often adorned
with palm branches and wreaths or carried a figure of the
Lamb ol the Apocalpysc. It was not until the sixth century
that Christ was represented on the cross. He was usually
represented as in an attitude of confident prayer; clothed in
a long tunic (the colobium), Christ, without any signs of
physical suffering, affixed to the cross with four nails, yet with
His eyes open and living, reigned, His head being surmounted
by a crown. This type of representation was slowly adopted
during the sixth and seventh centuries.2 In a.d. 692 the Council
of Trullo3 directed that merely symbolical representations
should be replaced by it. Yet this type of crucifix was not
used in the liturgy ; it had only an artistic value. The sixth
century hymn of Venantius Fortunatus, ‘ Vexilla regis . . .
regnavit a ligno Deus ’ cannot be taken as a reference to the
actual processional cross, which was not used in his time.
. . . si ccttc hymne du VIe siècle est une belle inspiration, elle n’est pas du
tout un témoignage archéologique.4
It was not until the tenth century that realism began to come
in and the robed Christ was replaced by a scantily-clad figure.
In the Gothic period from the eleventh to the thirteenth century
this trend developed and now it became customary to represent
’S.R.C. -1191 ad 4.
3 Vide, O’Connell, Chinch Building and Furnishing, pp. 102 and 2Ü1 ; D..I.C.L.
art., ‘ Croix ct Crucifix ’ ; Callewacrt, De Missalls Romani Liturgia, i, p. H
Webb, The Liturgical Altar.
’The Pope refused to confirm the decrees of this council.
4 H. Leclercq in D.A.C.L., art. cit.
334
"
(
r
'
'
.
?
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Christ hanging dead on the cross, fastened thereto by three
nails and, at least in Italian art, with the crown of thorns
replacing the royal crown. It was not until this era that the
crucifix came to be considered as part of the rubrical furnishing
of the altar. ‘ It has often been said that we arc to sec the
origin of the altar-cross and candlesticks in those that were
carried in the procession before Mass, as described, e.g. in the
First Roman Ordinal. This view must, however, be treated
with reserve.’1 Bishop, for example, secs the origin of the
altar-cross in the practice of adorning the ciborium over the
altar with pendent crosses and lights. The disuse of the
ciborium led to the placing of the cross and lights on the table
of the altar. ‘ Thus at the abbey of Zwiefalten in Swabia the
cross was kept iugiter and semper on the altar itself at a date
earlier than 1135. At first or in some places, only one candle
stick was placed on one side of the altar as a set-off it would
seem to a cross placed on the other ; by the thirteenth century
the symmetrical arrangement of two candles was common,
though there was still a certain chariness in regard to the
novelty. . . .’1
2 Pope Innocent III refers to the cross between
the candlesticks as the Roman custom, but it was not universally
established until the sixteenth century.
At all events, it was the crucifix representing the suffering
Christ which was adopted in the liturgy and placed on the altar.
Hence a crucifix showing Christ robed in priestly vestments
with a royal crown on His head, although it may recall earlier
artistic representations, is not in the liturgical tradition and
would not be suitable as an altar crucifix. In the encyclical
Mediator Dei, Pope Pius XII states : ‘ But the desire to restore
everything indiscriminately to its ancient condition is neither
wise nor praiseworthy. It would be wrong, for example, . . .
to require crucifixes that do not represent the bitter sufferings
of the divine Redeemer.’3
(c) ‘ Jansenislic ’ crucifixes : This term is often applied to
crucifixes4 which do not represent the arms of Our Lord as
fully extended, because they may suggest the Jansenist error
that Christ died only for the elect. The Jansenists never
formally adopted such a symbol and the crucifix with almost
perpendicular arms was simply a commonplace of French art
1 Long in I. E. Record, December, 1936, p. 652.
1 Liturgica Historica, p. 82.
3 It would be an over-statement to interpret these words as condemning
all representations of the robed Christ in paintings, etc., but obviously they
imply disapproval of such crucifixes for liturgical purposes.
4 E.g. vide O’Brien, History of the Mass, p. 128.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
33o
during the Baroque period. There may be artistic objections
to such figures, but they cannot be described as opposed to the
rubrics, and it is unlikely that they would be now used to
suggest false doctrine.
A HANGING CRUCIFIX
It has been suggested to me that there are some serious infringe
ments of the rubrics in the decoration of our church here. Firstly,
instead of a crucifix on the altar, we have one affixed to the wall
behind the high altar. Is that correct?
Normally the cross should stand on the altar, either on the
table of the altar or on a gradine between the candlesticks on
the same plane and in the same line. Rubricists generally do
not favour1 the use of a crucifix on the wall, but it cannot be
described as incorrect and, from the view-point of the archi
tecture of the altar, it is sometimes the best arrangement. Some
arguments in favour of such a hanging crucifix may be found
in certain relevant decrees of the Sacred Congregation of
Rites. A decree was issued in 1663 in reply, when the question
was asked :
Si in altari, in quo adest magna statua Crucifixi, sit ponenda alia crux,
dum celebratur Missa ?
The reply was :
Est sufficiens, et non indiget alia cruce.
Decree 4136 (issued on 11th June, 1904) states:
Crux collocetur inter candelabra, nunquam ante ostiolum tabernaculi.
Potest etiam collocari super ipsum tabernaculum, non tamen in throno ubi
exponitur Sanctissimum Eucharistiae Sacramentum.
It is also required that the cross be clearly visible to both die
celebrant and the people. Hence, if there is not sufficient
room to place the cross on the gradine or table immediately
behind the tabernacle, architects recommend the alternatives
of a hanging crucifix or a cross erected on a staff'which is clamped
to the rear of the altar.2 If a crucifix is hung over the altar then
its place is between the candle-sticks. If the altar is close to the
wall behind, the cross may be affixed to the wall or placed stand
ing on a ledge above and behind the tabernacle. This latter
1 Vide Directions for Altar Societies (1936), p. 24 ; Collins, Church Edifice and
Its Appointments, p. 114.
1 Webb, Liturgical Altar, p. 53.
336
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
arrangement would not be advisable if the altar is somewhat
distant from the wall, because the crucifix must be seen as part of
the furnishing of the altar. It is true that the custom of placing
the cross on the altar was not firmly established until about the
eleventh century1 and that before that time the cross was more
commonly hung over the altar ; nevertheless, the cross standing
between the candlesticks most closely conforms to the present
rubrics. It is certainly not desirable that in addition to the cross
on the altar, a second, ornamental crucifix be hung on the wall
behind the altar. A place for such an image may be found
above the chancel arch (cf. Rood Screen) or in a side chapel,
a profusion of crosses is not a suitable motif of decoration2—
‘ alors que la croix n’est pas en elle-même un aboutissement,
mais une étape qui achemine vers la Resurrection et la Gloire.’
RELIC OF THE TRUE CROSS AT AN ALTAR;
CRUCIFIX AFFIXED TO THE TABERNACLE
(1) Is it ever permitted to offer a Requiem Mass at an altar where
a relic of the True Cross is exposed for veneration?
(2) May the crucifix be nailed to or screwed on the tabernacle?
Interested
WE .
(1) There is no prohibition against the celebration of a
Requiem Mass at an altar at which a relic of the True Cross is
exposed. The general principle in the rubrics is that to a relic
of the True Cross exposed on the altar there is due the same
reverence as to the Blessed Sacrament in the tabernacle. Several
decrees of the Sacred Congregation have emphasized the fact
that the rubrics to be observed when a relic of the True Cross
is exposed may by no means be equipcratcd with those govern
ing exposition of the Blessed Sacrament. For example on
23rd May, 1835, the following questions and answers were
published by the Sacred Congregation :
Î
kJ
xs
1. An caeremoniae in Missa coram Sacrae Crucis Ligno palam exposito,
differant ab iis quae in Missa corain Sanctissimo Sacramento adhibentur ?
Affirmative ; et solum est gcnuilectcndum in accessu et recessu, ct quoties
opus sit transire ante medium Altaris, seu a latere ad latus, ut in inccnsatione.
2. Quum coram Sanctissimo Sacramento palam exposito omnes in Choro
stant nudo capite, nec transeunt ante medium Altaris quin genua flectant;
quaeritur : Anne idem observari debeat corain Ligno Sanctae Crucis palam
exposito ? Negative ad utrumque ; sed tantum unico genu in transitu.3
1 Callewacrt, De Liturgia Missalis Romani, i, p. 4L
’Vide L'Art Sacré, 1957, 9-10, p. 11.
* S.R.C. 2722.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
337
These decisions were confirmed in 1843 and 1909.1 There
seems to be no valid reason for holding that the rubric which
forbids the celebration of a Requiem Mass coram Sanctissimo
should be applied also to the ease where a relic of the True
Cross is exposed at the altar.
(2) Crux collocetur inter candelabra, nunquam ante ostiolum taber
naculi. Potest etiam collocari super ipsum tabernaculum, non tamen in
throno ubi exponitur Sanctissimum Eucharistiae Sacramentum.2
U, faute de mieux, the cross is placed on the tabernacle it should
not exclude the possibility of having the tabernacle covered
with the conopaeum as the rubrics prescribe. Hence there
should be no question of nailing a cross to the flat top of a
tabernacle. A crucifix sufficiently large to be seen by all could
be fixed to the apex of a domed tabernacle in such a way as
not to exclude the conopaeum. Commentators on the rubrics
are unanimous that the practice of placing the cross on the
top of the tabernacle is merely to be tolerated ;3 hence it should
not be made a permanent fixture.
ALTAR-CLOTHS AND FLOWERS ON THE ALTAR
DURING MASS
When Benediction is to be given immediately after Mass, it is
customary in some churches to spread over the altar the linen dust
cloth on which the Benediction candelabra are placed and to put
candles and flowers in position before the Mass. Is this practice in
accordance with the rubrics?
Vicarius.
In the General Rubrics of the Missal it is prescribed that the
altar be covered with three cloths specially blessed by one who
has the requisite faculty.1 The uppermost cloth should extend
down to the ground on cither side and due care must be taken
to ensure the cleanliness of all the cloths. When the altar is
not in use for a liturgical function a protecting cover may be
spread over the altar cloths. This cover may be retained on the
altar during the solemn celebration of the Divine Office, pro
vided that, it be rolled back by the acolytes at the time of the
incensation of the altar. But the Sacred Congregation of Rites
’S.R.C. 2854, 4341; Cf. 3966, 3201, clc. ; Oppenheim, Institutiones, vi,
p. 334.
’S.R.C. 4136.
’Vide Directions for Altar Societies, p. 24; Webb, Liturgical Altar, p. 55;
Collins, Church Edifice, p. 89.
4 Rub. Gen. .Missalis, XX.
338
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
has expressly directed that it may not be kept on the altar during
Mass.1 It is not, then, sufficient that the cover be rolled back;
it must be completely removed. Hence the custom of placing
a protecting cloth over the altar-cloths before Mass is not in
conformity with the rubrics.
The placing of flowers on the altar, however, even for Mass,
is not directly contrary to the rubrics. In the General Rubrics
of the Missal1
2 it is prescribed :
Super Altare nihil omnino ponatur, quod ad Missae sacrificium vel ipsius
Altaris ornatum non pertineat.
Nevertheless the Caercmoniale Episcoporum and the Memoriale
Rituum mention the use of flowers for the decoration of the
altar. The Caeremoniale Episcoporum34 allows the use of vases
of flowers, whether natural or artificial, to decorate the altar
on the more solemn feasts and directs that they should be placed
between the candlesticks. The Memoriale Rituum also prescribes1
that if, in accordance with local custom, flowers are used on the
Feast of the Purification, they should be placed between the
candlesticks. A decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites
sanctions the use of flowers even during Lent when Mass is
celebrated on the occasion of the First Communion of children
or on the Feast of St. Joseph. They arc definitely excluded on
Ash Wednesday and Good Friday5 and as a rule should not be
placed on the altar during the penitential seasons when Masses
de tempore are to be celebrated.67
There is no special prohibition against placing the flowers
on the table of the altar. In a decree issued on 22nd January,
1701, the Sacred Congregation of Rites condemned the practice
of placing flowers before the door of the tabernacle and directed
that they be placed in humiliori et decenliori loco.1 The liturgical
books indicate that the flowers arc to be put between the candle
sticks and it has been decided that the candlesticks may stand
on a gradine at the back of the altar.8 It will usually be found
that the most convenient and becoming arrangement is to place
both candlesticks and flowers not on the table of the altar but
on the gradinc. The choice of the quality and colour of the
1 S.R.C. 3576 (2nd June, 1883).
3 Rub. Gen., loc. cit.
3 Carr. Epis., i, xii, 12.
4 Mem. Rit., tit. i, iv, 3.
4 S.R.C. 3448 (Hth May, 1878).
. J
• Mem. Rit., tit. ii, cap. i, 1, and tit. v, cap. i, 1 ; Ephem. Lit.. 1923, p. 385;
I. E. Record, 1924, p. 535.
Ί
7 S.R.C. 2067.
• S.R.C. 3759.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
339
flowers is left to the discretion of those who have care of these
matters, but for reasons of propriety and convenience flowers
must not be used lavishly. The Caeremoniale Episcoporum permits
die use of artificial flowers made of silk, yet it is worthy of note
that more recently the Cardinal Vicar of Rome has forbidden
the use of any artificial flowers in the churches under his
jurisdiction.1
PROTECTIVE COVERING FOR THE ALTAR
Nowadays it is possible to obtain a very good white plastic
cloth which looks like linen damask. May covers made from such
material be used to protect the altar-cloths during the day, in particu
lar may such covers be spread over the altar-cloths during Exposition
when a number of candles must be lighted?
Sacerdos.
Provided that the altar is properly clothed with three
linen cloths there does not seem to be any objection to putting
on an additional protective cloth during Exposition when many
candles arc lighting on or around the altar. Such a dust-cover
is not part of the rubrical ornamentation of the altar and,
therefore, there arc no regulations concerning the material to
be used. The Sacred Congregation of Rites has expressly
directed that such a protecting cover may not be kept on the
altar during Mass;2 it is not sufficient that it be rolled back,
rather it must be completely removed. There is no prohibition
against its use during other services. Apart from the time of
the services it is customary to use for the protection of the altarcloths dining the day a cover of coloured linen or of richer
material. Ordinarily it should be a green cloth, but violet is
more appropriate for the penitential seasons. Needless to say
something better in texture and appearance than a white
plastic cloth should be used for this purpose.
PLANTS ON THE ALTAR
May plants in pots be used on the altar, especially when cut
flowers are scarce?
Sacristan.
(1) The liturgical books mention the use of flowers for the
decoration of the altar as being desirable only on great feasts.
1 June, 1932.
«S.R.C. 3576.
η
A'
340
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
For all such occasions they contemplate only the use of cut
flowers in vases, which are to be placed between the candle
sticks.1 There is no prohibition against the placing of plants
in pots upon the altar, but liturgical writers generally are of
one mind in disapproving of the practice.2 It is unbecoming
that the proper liturgical furnishings of the altar (crucifix and
candlesticks) should be overshadowed by flower-poLs, which arc
usually inconvenient obstructions to the ministers during
liturgical functions. Flowers on the altar are never strictly
necessary and if suitable cut flowers cannot be procured, it is
more becoming and more closely conforms to the simple dignity
of the liturgical services if the altar remains unadorned.
ANTEPENDIUM OBLIGATORY
When the altar is carved, is it necessary to have an antependium
on certain occasions?
Sacristan.
The General Rubrics of the Missal3 require that an
altar on which Mass is to be celebrated should be decorated
with an antependium. The Caeremoniale Episcoporum and the
Memoriale Rituum also give directions regarding the use of the
frontal.4 It is generally held, however, that since the ante
pendium is an ornament, it may be dispensed with if the front
of the altar is of precious material and ornamented.5 This
opinion may be followed, although it docs not seem to be in
strict agreement with the liturgical books. In the liturgy and
tradition it is clear that the primary purpose of the antependium
is not merely decorative, but it is the symbolic clothing of the
altar which represents Christ, and, therefore, it is desirable
that it be used even when the altar is otherwise ornamented.
If the antependium may be dispensed with throughout the
year, one can scarcely hold that it is of obligation even on the
more solemn feasts ; at most its use is to be recommended on
such occasions. The Memoriale Rituum pre-supposes that the
1 Caer. Epis., i, xii, 12. Mein. Rit., (it. i, iv, 3.
* O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, i. p. 244 ; Directions for the Use of Altar
Societies, p. 22. Van der Stappcn, De Sacra Lilurgia, iii, Q. 65 n. Webb,
Liturgical Altar, p. 97.
’ Rub. Gen., xx.
4 Caer. Epis., i, xii, 11 ; Mein. Rit., lit. i, ii, iii, iv.
• I. E. Record, April, 1936. O’Connell, op. cit., i, p. 242. Webb, op. cit.,
p. 70. Directions for the Use of Altar Societies, p. 21. Van der Stappcn, op.
cit, iii, Q. 44.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
341
antependium will be used on the feast of the Purification and
on Ash Wednesday, Palm Sunday and Holy Thursday. The
Caeremoniale Episcoporum directs that it be used on the high altar
on the more solemn feasts or if the bishop is celebrant.
THE ALTAR FRONTLET
Is it correct to have ‘ gold lace ’ or decorated cloth, about
fourteen or sixteen inches in depth, hanging along the front of the
altar above the antependium?
Exile of Erin,
It is tolerated, but certainly not to be recommended, to
have the altar-cloth ornamented with lace edging on which
figures of the cross, monstrance, chalice, angels and other
sacred objects arc represented. The Sacred Congregation of
Rites when asked about the liceity of the practice replied
simply ‘ Permitti potest.’1 Rubricists do not recommend the
ornamentation of altar-cloths with such lace fringes or with
embroidered scrolls hanging down in front of the altar, because
very frequently such work is a more or less vulgar display in
bad taste or is used as an excuse for dispensing with the rubrical
antependium. If lace is used at all, it should not be more than
six or seven inches deep, not ornate, but of simple unobtrusive
design. The most correct altar-cloth is a plain linen cloth cut
according to the measurements of the altar which would cover
the altar-table exactly and not come over the front at all. ‘A
lace curtain used as a frontal, especially if it be made of tawdry,
tinselled lace, may please the unskilful, but it is sure to grieve
the judicious.’12*4
Distinct from any ornamentation on the altar-cloth is the
frontlet which is sometimes hung along the top of the ante
pendium. This is usually a fringed apparel tacked onto one
of the lower altar-cloths and serves the useful purpose of con
cealing the hooks or rod supporting the antependium. The
frontlet should be of the same material as the antependium
and of a neutral colour which will not catch the eye, such as
dark red or old gold. Frontlets were commonly used on the
medieval altars and their use is to be recommended because,
unlike an ornamented altar-cloth, the frontlet really sets off the
antependium as the proper liturgical vestment of the altar.
’S.R.C. 3191, ad. 5.
’ Dr. R. Murray, Liturgical Arts Quarterly, February, 1947, p. 36. Cf.
Webb, Liturgical Altar, p. 63. Collins Church Edifice and Its Appointments, p. 211.
342
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
ELECTRIC LIGHT AS SANCTUARY LAMP
Is it permitted to use an electric bulb as a sanctuary lamp in a
church or public oratory?
C. J. P.
The parish priest or rector of a church cannot of his own
authority substitute an electric light for the sanctuary lamp ;
but the Ordinary may, for a proportionate cause, permit him
to do so. In 1916, and again in 1942, that is during both world
wars, the Holy See granted to Ordinaries special faculties con
cerning the sanctuary lamp and the candles for the liturgical
functions. In the decree issued on 13th March, 1942,*1 the
Sacred Congregation of Rites stressed the fact that these faculties
were being granted only with the greatest reluctance. It is
pointed out that the Sacred Congregation has never granted
a general induit for the use of electric light in the sanctuary
lamp and the concessions made in 19162 were only temporary
and given in the difficult circumstances of the war. The reason
is that the cultual purpose of the lamp requires the destruction
of visible substance, the burning of the oil, otherwise the
sanctuary lamp docs not serve as a symbol of faith and charity.
Hence the Sacred Congregation has always required that the
sanctuary lamp be fed by oil (vegetable oil in preference to
mineral oil), or that it be a wax candle ; only in the last resort
may the Ordinary permit this burning light to be replaced by
an electric bulb. This 1942 induit was a temporary' one,
peculiaribus huius belli circumstantiis sive ordinariis sive extraordinariis
perdurantibus.
and should have expired when normal supplies became avail
able after the war. In 1949, however, the Sacred Congregation
granted a further extension3 of it because of the very high cost
of oil suitable for the sanctuary lamp. The present induit
empowers the Ordinary to allow the use of inferior oil (yet
vegetable oil if possible) and even in the last resort an electric
light in the sanctuary lamp. The reason is
ctsi modo ncc ccra ncc oleum deficiant perpenso tamen gravi horum pretio;
moreover the concluding words of the decree urge the Ordinary
ut quam citius fieri potest, veneranda saecularis traditio instauretur.
Hence the Ordinary should permit the use of electric light
only where and when the genuine poverty of the church makes
the provision of an oil lamp very difficult.
1 A.A.S. (April), 1942.
1 Decree N. 4334.
’ /I.J.S., 1949, p. 476 ; Vide I. E. Record, 1949, p. 537.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
343
CANDLES FOR EXPOSITION
On days of Exposition of the Most Holy Sacrament when there
arc sufficient wax candles (12) on the altar, is it permitted to put
other candles (offering or composite) on the table of the altar with
the wax candles, or should they be put on side stands?
In 1910 there was submitted to the Sacred Congregation
of Rites the following question : ‘ Whether at Mass or at
Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament in addition to the pre
scribed wax-candles other candles made from stearine may be
used within the limits of the altar {intra ambitum altaris) ? ’ The
reply was in the negative ; the custom could not be tolerated
even in those places where, because of the structure of the altar,
the additional candles could not be arranged around it—extra
ambitum—or where by reason of the expense involved, the
supplementary candles could not all be of wax.1
Hence all the candles which were placed on the table of the
altar during any liturgical function had to be partly, at least,
of beeswax. Various decrees have forbidden the use of candles
made of stearine, paraflin or tallow.2 In 1904 the Sacred
Congregation of Rites explained that the paschal candle, the
candle used in the blessing of the baptismal water, and the two
candles for Mass must be of the greater part of beeswax ; other
candles which were placed on the altar must consist of beeswax
to a notable extent which is to be determined precisely by the
Ordinary.3 In Ireland it has been directed by the bishops
that the paschal candle and the two principal candles lighted at
Mass should contain at least 65 per cent, beeswax and that
other candles which may stand on the altar should contain at
least 25 per cent. Composite candles which do not fulfil these
minimum requirements could not be placed on the altar during
exposition of the Blessed Sacrament. However, in 1949 (18th
August), the Sacred Congregation of Rites directed that the
Ordinary could permit for private Mass, two wax candles, for
a solemn or sung Mass four, and for exposition of the Blessed
Sacrament, four wax candles ‘ suppleto maiori numero aliis lumi
nibus.' Other lights, even electric candles, could be used to
make up the total normally required. This Decree was intended
to meet the emergency which arose after the Second War when
the cost of wax candles became a burden on poor churches.
» S.R.C. 4257, ad 5. Vide Vermeersch, Periodica, v., p. 242.
’S.R.C. 2865, 3063, etc.
’S.R.C. Plurium dioecesium, 14 Dec., 1904.
344
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
The Decree did not permit directly these expedients, but
empowered the Ordinary to permit them and it concluded :
Ceterum Revmos Ordinarios hortatur ut, quam citius fieri potest veneranda
saccularis traditio instauretur.
The concession is meant only as a temporary measure.
REQUIREMENTS IN ALTAR MISSAL
Is it lawful for a priest offering Mass to make use of a Missal
for the laity, published in Latin and English?
Veterascens.
It is required that a priest celebrating Mass should follow
the text and rubrics of the authentic Missal.*
1 The typical
Roman Missal is published by the Vatican Press, and when a
Missal is brought out by any other authorized press it is the duty
of the Ordinary to certify that this edition is a faithful repro
duction, iuxla typicam, of the authentic Roman Missal. This
procedure is not normally adhered to in the publication of a
Missal for the laity which receives simply an imprimatur. Such
missals do not usually contain a full statement of the rubrics,
etc., of the full Roman Missal and have in addition a number
of prayers, etc., which are not contained in the Roman Missal.
Hence, it would not be lawful to use habitually such a Missal
for the celebration of Mass. A reasonable cause, for example
if the text of a new Mass were not otherwise available, may
justify its use for one or two occasions. The priest using it
would, needless to say, be bound to have certitude that the text
of the Mass conforms with the typical edition ; normally the
imprimatur given by the local Ordinary to a Missal for the laity
can be accepted as a certificate of concordance where particular
Mass formulas are in question.
COVER FOR MISSAL STAND
Is the Missal stand to be covered with a black cover at a
Requiem Mass (Low or Solemn)?
Sacristan.
The rubrics direct that the Missal rest during Mass on
a cushion,2 nevertheless, a universal custom now sanctions the
1 Bull of Pius V, Quam primum, prefixed to the Missal. The present typical
edition of the Missal was brought out in 1920 and in 1953 an edition sexta post
typicum, including minor changes, was published by the Vatican Press.
1 Rub. Gen., xx.
345
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
use of a Missal-stand made of wood or metal.1 There is no
obligation to have this stand covered, but it is a laudable custom
to do so on feast days. It should, however, remain uncovered
during a Requiem Mass in accordance with the general instruc
tion that on these occasions ‘ altare nullo ornatu festivo, sed
simpliciter paretur.’2
CORPORAL ON EXPOSITION THRONE
Should the cover of the throne under the monstrance be treated
as a corporal and washed first by the priest?
Sacristan.
Canon 1306, § 2, states : ‘ Purificators, palls, and corporals
which have been used in the Sacrifice of the Mass should not
be given to lay people, even religious, to be washed, unless they
have first been washed by a cleric who is in major orders. . . .’
The purpose of the law is fully satisfied if this rule is observed
for those linens which have been used at Mass ; therefore it
need not be extended to apply to a corporal which has been
used only to cover the throne for the monstrance.
CANOPY FOR BLESSED SACRAMENT THRONE
If the altar is surmounted by a canopy, is it necessary to have
a separate canopy over the throne for the Blessed Sacrament?
P.P.
Rubricists arc agreed that where the altar is properly
surmounted by a canopy, a special throne for exposition of the
Blessed Sacrament is not required for short periods, e.g. Benedic
tion.3 In this case it suffices that the monstrance is placed on
a pedestal, preferably behind the tabernacle. In England, this
rule is confirmed by the directions of the Ritus servandus based
on the reply given by the Sacred Congregation of Rites in
1911. For protracted periods of exposition, there should be
put up a temporary throne for the Blessed Sacrament, even
when the altar is covered by a canopy, but it certainly is not
necessary or desirable to have a permanent throne at such an altar.
1 Hacgy, Manuel de Liturgie, i, p. 96. Callcwaert, De Missalis Romani
Liturgia, i, par. 448.
’ Caer. Epis., ii, cap. 11 ; O’Connell, op. cit., i, p. 248. I. E. Record, May,
1937.
. T-Λ·' * *
’Webb, Liturgical Altar, p. 87; Collins, Church Edifice, p. 107; Directions
for Altar Societies, p. 19.
346
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
TABERNACLE TO SERVE AS THRONE FOR THE
BLESSED SACRAMENT
(1) Is it liturgically correct to remove the dome of a tabernacle
(which has a movable dome) and place the Monstrance with the
Blessed Sacrament on top of the tabernacle for the Forty Hours'
Prayer or for a day of exposition? It is impossible to place or fix a
throne behind the tabernacle, because the altar is too close to the
wall.
(2) Is it liturgically correct to have a sliding plate above the door
of the tabernacle that can be drawn out from there over the altar
for Benediction or for the Forty Hours’ and used as a throne?
Sinn Fein.
(1) There is no prohibition against constructing a tabernacle
in the manner suggested, and such an arrangement could be
made without conflict with the rubrics. Several decrees of the
Sacred Congregation of Rites make it clear that the veiling of
the tabernacle is of strict obligation.1 If the tabernacle is
constructed with a removable dome, then separate veils must
be provided for the dome and for the body of the tabernacle.2
If the dome is raised directly over the tabernacle, by means of
rods and counterweights, it would thus provide a canopy for
the monstrance when it is placed on the tabernacle.3
(2) The second suggestion does not seem to be in strict con
formity with the rubrics. A tabernacle with such a sliding
plate could not be conveniently kept veiled.
According to the rubrics and to the decrees of the Sacred
Congregation, for a prolonged period of exposition the Blessed
Sacrament should be placed on a throne.1 For Benediction or
for short periods of exposition, if the altar is provided with a
canopy, no throne is necessary ; the monstrance may be placed
on the table of the altar. Even for the ordinary Benediction
service a throne should be used if the altar itself is not covered
by a canopy.5 The throne contemplated in the rubrics is a
temporary one and movable.0 A decree of the Sacred Con
gregation of Rites expressly forbids a permanent throne if the
crucifix is to be placed on it.7 The throne may be supported
by the tabernacle or, if the construction of the tabernacle docs
*3035, 3150, 3520, 4137.
* I. E. Record, January, 1938.
’ Lit. Arts (Spring, 1932).
4 Clem Instr, v. ; S.R.C. 3349, 3375 ad 11.
•Vide Ephem, Lit., 1921.
• 3349, 4268.
’4268.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
347
not allow that, then the throne may stand over the tabernacle
with its own supports resting on the mensa or gradine.1 Such
a temporary stand suffices. It should consist of a base and, if the
altar is not furnished with a canopy, a back with a small canopy
and side curtains. The throne must not stand too high, because
it is unbecoming that in order to place the monstrance in it the
priest should mount upon the table of the altar.2
Alternatively, it w’ould be permissible to construct a throne
of exposition in the wall, provided that ‘ the throne is not much
distant from the altar with which it ought to make one unit.3
Again, care must be taken that such a throne is easily accessible
to the priest.
LICEITY OF
HINGED PYX
Is it contrary to the rubrics to use a sick-call pyx which has a
hinged lid ?
Missionarius.
Concerning the ciborium in which the Blessed Sacrament
is to be kept the rubrics of the Roman Ritual give the following
general directions :
[Parochus] curare porro debet, ut particulae consecratae, eo numero qui
infirmorum et alioruin fidelium communioni satis esse possit, perpetuo
conserventur in pyxide cx solida dccentiquc materia, caquc munda, et
suo operculo bene clausa. . . .*
The rubrics do not give any special directions about the
material, shape, etc., of the smaller pyx or custodia in which the
Blessed Sacrament is brought privately to the sick. Com
mentators on the rubrics arc unanimous in recommending that
the lid of the ciborium should not be attached by a hinge.5
This recommendation may be extended to cover also the sickcall pyx. While the disadvantages of having a hinged lid on
the pyx arc not so obvious as in the case of the ciborium, never
theless such inconveniences do exist. During the administration
of Holy Communion to the sick the lid of the pyx would be an
obstruction and when the open pyx is placed on a table there
is a certain danger of its toppling over. St. Charles Borromeo
’Vide I. E. Record, January, 1932; Van dcr Stappcn, Sacra Liturgia, iv,
q. 178; also Webb. Liturgical Altar, p. 85 ct scq.
1 Martinucci, Lib. ii, cap. iv.
•S.R.C. 4268 (27th May, 1911).
4 Rit. Rom., tit. iv., cap. i, n. 5. Cf. canon 1270.
1 O’Kanc-Fallon, Rubrics of the Roman Ritual, p. 290 ; Directions for Altar
Societies, p. 45 ; Collins, The Church Edifice, p. 198, etc.
348
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
recommended that the lid of a ciborium should be fastened on
with little hooks at either side, but these hooks arc now usually
dispensed with as the cover can be made sufficiently secure
without them. The same is true of the smaller pyx. It is best
made with a close-fitting lid which is neither screwed on nor
has any external fastening.
THE CHALICE PATEN
What are the rubrics concerning the metal to be used in the
chalice paten? Is a paten made of copper gilt unrubrical?
Sacerdos.
‘ [A priest who is about to celebrate Mass] prepares the
chalice, which should be either of gold or silver, or have at
least a silver cup gilded inside and should have been conse
crated by a bishop, together with the paten similarly gilded.’1
Nowhere in the rubrics is the material of the paten expressly
prescribed . ‘ Strictly, then, all that can be demanded in the case
of the paten is that it be of solid and becoming material, as
is the law for the ciborium or pyx.’2 The reason is, of course,
that the paten does not need to have the same resistance to
oxidization as does the chalice. Usually the paten is made of
the same precious metal as the chalice to which it belongs yet
although a chalice cannot be made with a copper or brass c;: '
because it would in time be covered with verdigris which wo i!d
cause nausea, there is no rubrical objection to the use of a pa n
made of copper and gilt at least on the upper surface.
SIZE OF A CHALICE
What are the most suitable dimensions for a chalice?
Sacristan.
The size and shape of the chalice are not fixed by the rubrics.
Commentators suggest that it should be at least seven inches
high, as a smaller one is not dignified. A good average height
is eight or nine inches ; one higher than eleven inches is very
inconvenient. The base and stem may be of any suitable metal,
preferably gold or silver ; the base should be heavy to ensure
stability, but not spread out so that it would take up too much
1 Rit. Servandus, i, n. 1.
2 Long, in I. E. Record, December, 1938, p. 661.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
349
room on the corporal ; the knob should be easy to grasp and
without sharp projections. The cup of the chalice must be gilt
and should not be too narrow nor too deep because it cannot
then be properly anointed at its consecration. On the other
hand the contents may easily be spilled when the celebrant is
drinking from a cup that is too wide and shallow. Modern
chalices usually carry little or no encrusted ornamentation.
NECESSITY FOR RE-CONSECRATION OF CHALICE
I understand that a chalice which has been simply re-gilt need not
now be re-consecrated. Could you please inform me whether a chalice
must be re-consecrated in the following circumstances : (a) If the
chalice has been ‘ fired,
*
i.e. passed again through the furnace in
order to have the cup re-moulded or to have dents removed? (6) If
a new stem has been fitted to a chalice which is made so that the cup
can be screwed from the stem?
If re-consecration is necessary in these circumstances, must it
always be performed by a bishop?
Sacristan.
Any article that has been blessed or consecrated loses its
blessing or consecration if it is so badly damaged or changed
that its form is lost and it becomes unfit for its proper purpose.1
The consecration of a chalice ‘ haeret metallo ct non auraturae,’
hence the consecration need not be repeated after the chalice
has been merely re-gilt. Earlier decisions12 of the Sacred Con
gregation of Rites insisted on a repetition of the consecration
after a renewal of the gilding, but the Code now makes it clear
such a re-consecration is not necessary. The chalice retains its
consecration as long as its cup is unimpaired. Re-gilding does
not, of course, involve passing the chalice again through the
furnace ; if, however, the chalice is placed in the furnace and
its cup is melted down and re-moulded the consecration is
certainly lost.
Authors arc not in agreement regarding the case in which the
stem is separated from the cup of the chalice. Many argue3
that the stem and node are integral parts of the chalice and the
whole is consecrated as one unit, at least in those chalices in
which the cup is firmly and permanently attached to its stem.
If, then, the cup is detached from the stem, even for an instant,
1 Canon 1305.
*S.C.R. 2620; 3042; Vide Suffragium in vol. iv, p. 225.
3 E.g. Collins, The Church Edifice and Ils Appointments, p. 192; Directions
or Altar Societies, p. 44.
350
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
this unity is broken and the consecration is lost. Clearly this
argument does not apply to chalices which are made in separ
able parts so that the cup can be easily screwed off from the
stem ; in such chalices the cup alone is consecrated. In the
light of canon 1305, § 1, η. 1, this view seems to be now overstrict. It would seem that in all chalices the cup alone is conse
crated.1 Hence, if the stem or base is removed and replaced
by a new one, provided that the cup remains intact, the conse
cration is not certainly lost. At most the consecration may be
repeated conditionally, but there does not seem to be a clear
obligation to do so.
Canon 1147 :
Consecrationes nemo qui charactere episcopali careat, valide peragere
potest, nisi vel iure vel apostolico induito id ei permittatur.
The ordinary minister of the consecration of a chalice and paten
is a bishop ; normally he can carry out this ceremony even in
places where he has not jurisdiction. Usually the consecration
is carried out privately and the only vestment necessarily worn
is a white stole—
Pontifex ad consecrationem Calicis procedere volens, debet semper stolam
circa collum habere, ct mitram tenere poterit ubi convenit.2
If the consecration takes place immediately after the bishop
has celebrated Mass, he may retain the Mass vestments except
the maniple and may wear the mitre if it is convenient to do so.
Ordinaries who are not in Episcopal Orders, e.g. Prefects
Apostolic, etc., may consecrate chalices only within their own
territory, but this restriction does not apply to consecrated
bishops. In some countries, but not in Ireland, it is customary
for the owner of the chalice to donate a stipend to the conse
crator and hence the function is by custom reserved to the
local Ordinary.3
1
»
SHAPE OF MONSTRANCE
ζ)
Is it permissible to have a monstrance in which the stem is
fashioned as a figure of the Blessed Virgin or one in which the usual
rays are replaced by a cross with the aperture for the lunette at the
centre of the cross?
Exile.
1 Nabuco, Expositio Pontificalis Romani, ii, note 169;
Juris Canonici, vol. ».
1 Pontificale Romanum : De Consecratione Calicis.
’Vide Nabuco, op. cit., note 170.
Coronata, Institutiones
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
35]
A decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites issued in 1875
(N. 3349, Lisbonem) in answer to a query on the liceity of the
custom of exposing the Blessed Sacrament by means of a
mechanical device so that the Host was held in the hand of a
statue of the Blessed Virgin or placed in the wound on the side
of the figure on a crucifix, declared :
Proposita consuetudo sit omnino abolenda. Statuae enim non sunt
apponendae in Altari, in quo SSmum Sacramentum est expositum ; . . .
In 1884 the Poor Clare nuns in the diocese of Urgel (Spain)
asked permission to continue the immemorial custom by which
the Blessed Sacrament was exposed in a monstrance held in the
hand of a statue of St. Clare. Their request was refused—
Non expedire (Decree N. 3615). Again, the rubrics of the
Clementine Instruction for the Forty Hours Prayer require that
all images, pictures or statues, on or above the altar must be
veiled during the prayer.1 For shorter periods of exposition it
is tolerated that statues permanently set on the altar may
remain uncovered ; other images or relics should be removed.2
When the Blessed Sacrament is placed in the monstrance
nothing on or around the altar must be allowed to distract the
attention of the worshippers. Hence the monstrance should not
be embellished with the figures of saints or even with a figure
of the Blessed Virgin ; figures of angels may bç used, but not
those of saints.3 There is also the practical argument adduced
by De Amicis against having the stem too highly ornamented ;
he says
Pcs (ostensorii) satis patcat ut firmissime, ubi collocatur, haerens, cadere
nequeat ; porro nodus aliquantum extet a pede, nullumque nimis eminens
ornatum praebeat, ne velum humerale consumetur, neve incommodo cele
brans illud adhibeat.4
It is true that many of the most famous monstrances made in
past ages did carry statues. The sixteenth-century' monstrance
of Toledo, standing twelve feet high, was ornamented with
hundreds of statuettes ; Corblct in his Eucharistie Histoire^
describes in detail the monstrance executed by M. PoussiclgueRusand for the Church of St. Vincent de Paul at Marseilles,
in which figures of the Madonna and Child were worked on the
stem, with many other figures of the prophets, evangelists, etc.
In more recent times monstrances incorporating a statuette of
1 Clementine Instr., § § IV and V.
’S.R.C. 3599.
’ Vide Anson, Churches, Their Plan and Furnishing, p. 182 ; Collins, Church
Edifice and Its Appointments, p. 203.
4 Caeremoniale Parochorum, p. 61 (Edition 19-18).
4 II, p. 315; Cf. Bridgett, History of the Eucharist.
352
the Blessed Virgin have been commonly used at some Marian
shrines ; although they may be regarded as contrary to certain
general rubrical principles there is no explicit prohibition
against them and local ecclesiastical authority may permit their
use. Care must obviously be taken that the faithful are not
distracted by any of the altar’s appointments from devotion to
the Blessed Sacrament. It was in France and Spain in the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries that most elaborate and
unpractical monstrances were made. There was one for the
cathedral at Narbonne which weighed nearly ten hundredweight
and could be carried only by eight priests ; at Notre-Dame in
Paris the monstrance was over six feet in height, and at Valladolid
there was one measuring nine feet. In Italy the monstrance
remained comparatively simple in design ; the one used by the
Holy Father in Blessed Sacrament processions measures only
twelve or fifteen inches. The introduction of the ‘ sun ’ mon
strance marked the beginning of a new approach to worship of
the Eucharist and the end of the era of the more elaborate,
processional monstrances as outmoded and unsuitable for
modern devotion.
A monstrance fashioned in the form of a cross instead of the
more customary sunray shape seems to be quite lawful and
such monstrances arc becoming increasingly common. The
rubrics requir^that the monstrance be surmounted by a cross.
A reply given in 1847 by the Sacred Congregation of Rites
(N. 2957) to the bishop of Rimini stated :
. . . ac pariter exigat (Sacra Congregatio) ut in summitate Ostensorii
Crux visibilis apponatur, quod requirunt ecclesiasticae leges, non obstante
consuetudine Ordinis Praedicatorum, cui peculiaris est ritus in explendi»
Sacris Caeremoniis.
·.
It
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
This condition and its purpose arc amply fulfilled if the mon
strance is shaped in the form of a cross. The ‘ sun ’ monstrance
in which the rays are meant as symbolic of glory with perhaps
a hint of reference to the title of Our Lord, ‘ Sun of Justice,’
has become common since the fifteenth century and since it was
the type formally approved by Pope Clement XI it has tended
to exclude all others. The cross-shaped monstrance, however,
has never completely gone out of use and in recent times has
once more become quite common. Dom Roulin in his Nos
Églises includes illustrations of two modern monstrances made
in this shape by M. F. Jacques of Brussels and the workshops of
Marcdsous respectively. He praises them highly and adds :
... [La grande croix] est souvent devenue depuis quelques années,
1 élément principal de l'ostensoir, et franchement, elle est bien préférable à
la croix minuscule située au soumet de nombreuses monstrances.
353
MATERIAL FOR VESTMENTS
Is it permissible in warmer climates to have surplices and albs
made of a material which is for the greater part nylon? What are
the prescriptions concerning the material of the tabernacle veil?
Missionaries.
It may be argued that nylon may be lawfully used in the
making of a surplice, but its use in the making of an alb or of
a tabernacle veil would seem to be contrary to the decrees.
Concerning the tabernacle veil the Sacred Congregation of
Rites on 11th July, 1940, dealt with the following question :
.An tolerari debeant conopaea ex linteaminibus denticulatis vulgo ‘ trina,
merlctto ’ (i.e. oflacc or open net work) confecta?1
The reply was :
Stetur decretis S.R. Congregationis, N. 3035, ad 10, et conopaeum fiat
ex panno contexto ex gossypio vel lana vel cannabe, praeterquam ex holo
serico ; et sit coloris albi vel coloris convenientis officio diei.
Hence the tabernacle veil should be cloth woven of cotton,
wool, hemp or silk ; open lace or net work is not to be tolerated.
It is true that etymologically the word ‘ conopaeum ’ is derived
from the name for a mosquito-net, nevertheless, in the rubrics
the term designates an opaque veil which really covers the
tabernacle. Nylon would not give a suitable material for this
veil. The practice, becoming in recent times increasingly
common, of using a transparent veil of lace or meshed fabric
is not correct. Even if the tabernacle doors are specially orna
mented they should not be exposed to view, but their beauty
should be ad majorem Dei gloriam. The Decree (N. 3035),
referred to in the reply of the Congregation, stated that the
conopaeum may be woven of cotton, wool or hemp, and its
colour may be always white (as Barufaldus held),or, preferably
(in accordance with the opinion of Gavantus), the colour of
the veil may be the same as that of the vestments except at a
requiem function, when a violet, not a black veil, should be
used.
Similarly, the decrees of the Sacred Congregation prescribe
that the alb must be made of linen or hemp ; other materials,
such as cotton, wool, or muslin, arc forbidden. Many authors2
argue that since a surplice is really an abbreviated alb the same
rules should be applied to its material ; this contention cannot
1 Ephem. Lit., 1940, p. 81.
1 Vide De Amicis, Caeremoniale Parochorum, p. 64 ; Callewaert, De Musalis
Liturgia, p. 64.
13—1993
354
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
be easily sustained. The relevant prescriptions for the alb
are laid down chiefly in a general Decree N. 2600, and the
official commentary on this Decree states :
De Superpclliceis ct Rochettis nihil pro nunc decernendum duxit, quia
huiusmodi vestes neque pertinent ad immediatum Sacrificii et Altaris usum,
neque Supclicctilibus Sacerdotalibus ad sacrificandum stricte necessariis
adnumerantur, sed haberi possunt potius ut Choralia Indumenta.1
Strictly speaking then, there arc no positive directions con
cerning the material to be used for a surplice. Preferably it
should be linen, but in warmer climates where a lighter material
is desired perhaps a well-cut surplice of nylon fabric would be
less objectionable than very short surplices or cottas made
entirely of very fine tulle or lace. Don Roulin in his Vestments
and Vesture2 insists that linen is the true liturgical material for
the surplice and rejects all transparent materials ; he is justi
fiably severe in his judgments on certain modern surplices
which by reason of the material used or unsuitable embellish
ments are not really vestments, but are rather undignified
ornaments with their pretty embroidery, trivial lace decorations,
etc. Yet he adds : ‘ We arc not here insisting upon anything
like a strict uniformity, and in fact surplices and cottas vary’
very much according to the country, and according to those
differences of temperament and mental outlook which dif
ferentiate the nations so profoundly and which have so strong
an influence on the style and form of liturgical vestments.
Rome is very wise, and appreciating this diversity does not
impose any one cut or one size for surplice and cotta, any more
than she imposes one style of architecture or church furniture.’
A writer in the L’Ami du Clerge (21st January, 1954)3 re
pudiates in the strongest terms the suggestion that nylon be
used for the cope or chasuble and points out the practical dis
advantages of the fabric :
jtf
D’abord [1c nylon] est cher ... il s’éraille beaucoup ; il est très inflam
mable ... il fond complètement a la chaleur ... un petit accroc s’élargit
rapidement et toute reparation devient impossible.
Hence even if its use in surplices is not forbidden by the rubrics,
this fabric for practical, economic considerations and reasons of
good taste is not to be recommended.
Vol. iv, S.R.C., p. 193. Ritus Servandus i, η. 2, does prescribe that the
celebrant of Mass vest in the surplice before he puts on the amice, but custom
has derogated from this rubric.
* Page 34.
* Page 47.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
355
A MODERN MATERIAL SUITABLE FOR
VESTMENTS
Church vestments are to be made from silk, but silk is very dear
in U.S.A. We can obtain a fabric consisting of 37 per cent, silk
which has all the appearances of true silk and is acceptable in every
other way. Is it lawful for us to use this fabric, and can you tell us
what is the percentage of silk that is obligatory for vestments?
Vestments.
It would seem that there arc good and sufficient arguments to
justify the use for the making of vestments of a material such as
that described in this query. The rubrics of the liturgical books
do not explicitly prescribe silk for the sacred vestments, but
prescribe it only for veils—the chalice veil, the humeral veil,
the vimpa or veil of the mitre-bearer—and for the coverings of
the faldstool. For example, the Ritus servandus in the Missal
speaks of the chalice veil as a ‘ velum sericum11 yet in the next
paragraphs dealing with the vestments, refrains from any
reference to silk. Similarly, although the Sacred Congregation
of Rites has on many occasions been called upon to forbid the
use of unsuitable, inferior materias none of its decrees has
simply, explicitly prescribed that silk must be used. The instruc
tions issued in Rome for the Apostolic Visitation of 1904 do state :
Planctae ct quaecumque alia paramenta ex serico esse debent.
*
Since the Sacred Congregation hits refrained from making any
general decree in such terms liturgical commentators have
usually held that other fabrics which arc in greater part silk
arc certainly admissible, e.g. silk poplin, silk velvet, satin, silk
damask, etc. Vestments made entirely from woollen cloth,
linen, cotton arc not allowed nor may the silk be interwoven
with glass fibre, because of the danger of small particles of
glass finding their way into the chalice.
Two decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites tolerate the
use of materials in which silk is interwoven with other materials.
Decree No. 3543—
In Paramcntis, attenta Ecclesiarum paupertate, tolerari potest panni genus,
quod ex parte externa et oculis intuendum apparante ex filo serico integre
contegitur, sed habet operis textilis fulcimentum in gossypio, lana vel lino—
and Decree N. 3796 which makes no mention of the condition
of poverty—
In Paramends conficiendis quoddam textum ex serico et mori fibris a D.
los. Pasquali inventum licite adhiberi potest ; dummodo textum, de quo
agitur, nunquam nova adiecta materia immutetur.’
1 Ritus Servandus, i.
» Vide Long, I. E. Record, December, 1939, p. 658.
’S.R.C. 1882 and 1893.
356
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Commenting on these and other decisions, De Amicis writes:1
Ex his igitur ct aliis decretis, sericum seu holosericum est adhibendum;
at satisne esset istud in planetis haberi saltem principaliter? Nil rcipsa vetat,
quominus alia congrua materia, puta gossypium, coniungi cum serico possit,
dummodo tamen principalior, quae apparet materia exterius sit serica?
Ita quidem Accdcmia Lilurgica Romana docuit in publico conventu diei
25 novembris anni 1885, item et ipsa s. Rituum Congregatio declaravit:
sed hoc cum mica salis accipiendum est, agitur ibi de casu particulari, attenta
ecclesiarum paupertate ; ita ut secus huiusmodi materia mixta pro sacris orna
mentis tolerari non possit (Decr. 3543).
This seems to be an unnecessarily strict interpretation and no
mention is made of Decree N. 3796. The decrees do not state
that the greater part of the material must be silk, but only that
the material contain silk, have a silk finish and all the appear
ances of silk. It is not on these decrees, however, that one
relies for arguments for the use of materials which are principali)'
silk. ‘ The justification for the use of such materials as silk
poplin for vestments must be sought in the absence of any pro
hibition by the Sacred Congregation of Rites, in their common
use at the present day, in the fairly common teaching of rubricists,
and in the inherent suitability of such materials for sacred
vestments,’2 In view of the common teaching and practice if
the materials under discussion in 1882 and 1893 had certainly
been in greater part silk, the questions would scarcely have been
submitted to the Congregation. Hence it may be held that in
these decisions the Congregation tolerated the use of materials
containing a smaller percentage of silk. Suitable materials
which have a substantial percentage of silk, e.g. one-third, and
have a silk finish with all the appearances of silk may, therefore,
be tolerated because of poverty. Obviously such materials
which arc only a second best should not be employed beyond
the limits of genuine necessity. It must be borne in mind that
the material of vestments must always be woven. Knitted
work, lacework or modern synthetic materials are not allowed.
Some writers have expressed disapproval of artificial silk ; for
example, Braun, writing in 1912, pointed out that artificial
silk was only celluloid and gelatine and is too easily affected
by damp. These arguments may not, however, hold against
all modern artificial silks, but it is commonly agreed that in
fact pure silk is really more economical than the artificial
product.
1 De Amicis, Caer. Par. (1948), p. 70.
1 Long, loc. cit.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
USE OF FACULTIES TO BLESS VESTMENTS
Is a parish priest empowered to bless only those vestments
which will be used in the churches in his parish or may he bless any
vestments which are brought to him? For example, may he bless
vestments belonging to a young priest who intends to go abroad and
who will use these vestments on board ship and elsewhere abroad?
P.P.
Canon 1304, §3, empowers a parish priest to bless vest
ments ‘ for the churches and oratories situated in the territory
of his parish.’ It would seem clear from the words of the canon
that this territorial restriction must be strictly interpreted.
Only to cardinals and bishops arc the faculties given without
any such restriction. Local Ordinaries who arc not bishops
may bless sacred furniture only for the churches and oratories
of their territory and may delegate other priests to do so only
within the limits of their jurisdiction. Before the Code, bishops
could not, without a special induit, delegate this power and the
Apostolic Faculties granted to bishops commonly contained
the faculty
delegandi simplicibus sacerdotibus potestatem benedicendi paramenta et alia
utensilia ad sacrificium Missae necessaria, ubi non intervenit sacra unctio.1
This induit is now no longer granted in the Quinquennial
Faculties and a bishop can delegate the power only by virtue
of his position as local Ordinary and only for use within the
limits of his territory. Similarly before the Code religious
Superiors had not by common law the power to delegate and
their right to bless vestments was expressly limited to their own
churches. The Sacred Congregation decided that religious
could not, even where there was an established custom in their
favour, bless vestments for use in churches not under their
jurisdiction.2 Hence for those who arc not in episcopal Orders
the blessing of vestments is a function of powers of jurisdiction,
and a parish priest cannot lawfully bless vestments that are
not intended for use in his own parish. According to the
common law, only a person in episcopal Orders can bless
vestments to be used anywhere without restriction. Needless
to say, once vestments have been properly blessed they may be
transferred from one church to another without loss of their
blessing.
1 Putzer, Commentarium in Facultates Apostolicas, p. 213.
* Vide S.R.C., 513; 1131 ; 3343 ; 2377. Vide Bcruti, Comment, in Cod
iv, p. 306.
358
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
HOW SHOULD THE STOLE BE ADJUSTED?
There is one rubric which in practice would seem often to be
literally impossible to keep. The stole must neither appear above
the chasuble nor be thrown back between the shoulders. The way
the vast majority of stoles are made the server may do his best to
pat the stole into position, but it will infallibly ride above the chasuble.
Some stoles are made in the V-shape which is certainly an attempt to
solve the problem. Would you kindly offer a solution.
Ignorans.
This problem need not arise if the stole is properly made. It
should be not more than about three inches wide at the neck
and should be V-shaped rather than straight. The rubrics do
not explicitly prescribe but undoubtedly imply that the stole
should be covered by the chasuble. The Ritus Servandus11directs
for the celebrant : ‘ Stolam . . . imponit medium eius collo ..
and the rubrics of the Caeremoniale Episcoporum say that the
stole is to be put on the bishop ‘ super eius humeros ... ita
ut, nec cius collum tegat . . .’2 Rubricists unanimously agree
that the stole should neither be thrown back between the
shoulders nor appear above the chasuble.3 Certainly the
symbolism of the chasuble requires that it completely cover
the stole at the back. If the vestments arc properly made, the
problem is not insoluble ; the chasuble should have a round or
wedge-shaped opening for the head, not cut away at the back.
As our correspondent suggests, if the stole is made of two pieces
joined at an angle (but not a very acute angle) at the centre,
it will fit smoothly at the bottom of the neck between the
celebrant’s shoulders.4 Since the stole should not be worn
around the neck, it is unnecessary and incorrect to have a
‘ “ saver ” of linen sown along its edge. ... A word should
be said about a reprehensible practice which has begun in many
churches and especially in convent chapels. It consists in
sewing a long strip of linen or muslin, edged with the ubiquitous
lace, on the stole around the edge of the chasuble and even on
the maniple. The practical reason offered for these unauthorized
additions to the vestments is that the linen guards prevent the
vestment from becoming soiled. With such additions it becomes
difficult if not impossible to keep the rubrics, which prescribe
1 Ritus Servandus, i, 3.
■BCd/r, Epis, lib. II, viii, 14.
’ Cf. O’Connell, Celebration of Mass, ii, p. 50 ; Menghini, Le Sacre Ceremonie,
p. 40 ; Ephem. Lit., 1941, p. 26, etc.
* Vide Directions for Use of Altar Societies, p. 61. (Fifth Edition.)
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
359
that the priest kiss the cross on the stole and maniple before
putting them on. For in many instances the cross is entirely
covered by the linen guard. No none will deny that many
stoics are improperly made. To fit into some stoles, the back
of the priest’s neck would have to come to a sharp point. Stoles
of this type arc made and purchased, and because they have a
tendency to rise above the priest’s collar or amice, the makeshift
of a stole guard is used. How much more reasonable it would
be to make stoics which conform to the contour of the priest’s
neck, thus eliminating the abuse at its source.’1
THE AUMBRY FOR THE HOLY OILS
Is it necessary when building a new church to make provision for
an aumbry for the Holy Oils in the wall of the sanctuary? Would
it suffice to place a special safe in the sacristy or to reserve for the
Holy Oils a special compartment in the sacristy safe in which the
sacred vessels are kept?
G. P.
Both the rubrics of the Roman Ritual and the Code of Canon
Law prescribe : ‘ The vessels containing the holy oils should be
reserved reverently in the church in a special place which is
suitable and clean and they should be kept under lock and key ;
in this way they will be safely guarded so that only the priest
may handle them and no one else may improperly touch or
misuse them sacrilegiously. The parish priest ought not to
keep them in his own house unless necessity or a reasonable
cause justifies his doing so with the permission of the Ordinary.’2
An early decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites states that
the aumbry may be placed cither on the Gospel or the Epistle
side of the high altar ; however, the place in the church is not
exactly determined and rubricists suggest that the aumbry
may be situated on cither side of the sanctuary, or behind die
altar or even in the body of the church. If the sacristy is imme
diately beside the church and may be considered as part of it
the aumbry may be placed conveniently in a w’all of the sacristy.
Commentators recommend,3 although the rubrics do not pre
scribe it, that the door of the aumbry be inscribed Olea Sacra
and it is also recommended, again not prescribed, that a veil
1 Dr. Murray in Liturgical Arts, February, 1947, p. 42.
2 Rit. Rom., tit. ii, cap. i, n. 53.
2 Directions for Altar Societies and Architects, p. 38 ; Collins, Church Edifice
and its Appointments, p. 188. The recommendation that a lamp be kept lighting
before the door of the aumbry is not usually followed now.
360
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
be hung before the door. This veil should be violet if only the
oleum infirmorum is kept there and violet and white if all three oils
arc reserved. In some countries, custom and the common circum
stance that the priest lives some distance from the church justify
the practice by which a priest may keep in his own house1 and
in a locked receptacle the small oil stock in which he takes the
oleum infirmorum on a sick-call. Similarly, for convenience, small
containers for the oleum catechumenorum and chrism may be kept
in a locked drawer in the baptistery but the stocks holding the
year’s supply should be kept in the aumbry or special safe. The
rubric would not be fulfilled by keeping the oils in the ordinary
safe because inevitably others besides the priest have access
to the safe in which the sacred vessels arc kept. Needless to
say the rubrics do not contemplate the practice of a priest
carrying the oils habitually on his person. Only a grave emer
gency such as may easily arise for a military chaplain on active
service would justify it ; the possibility of a priest being called
upon to administer Extreme Unction suddenly in the ordinary
course of travelling, etc., is too remote to give sufficient cause
for a daily contravention of the rubrics.
ELECTRIC BELLS
Is it permissible to use electric church bells?
P.P.
Λ decision of the Sacred Congregation of Rites in 1952
leaves to the judgment of the local Ordinary the question
whether church bells may be electrified.
Sacrorum Rituum Congregationem nonnulli audiverunt expostulantes utrum
licitus sit usus campanarum electrophonicarum. Et Sacra eadem Congre
gatio audito specialis Commissionis suffragio, rcbusque omnibus diligenter
perpensis respondit : Res demandatur iudicio Reverendissimorum Ordinario
rum.’
n
Λ single swinging bell, the tolling hammer of which may be
easily operated by a bell-rope, is not usually electrified, but
electro-pneumatic mechanism is often installed to assist in the
ringing of a carillon or of chimes. With permission of the
Ordinary, these arrangements are lawful, or an electrical device
may even be installed with an automatic music-roll player.3
1 O'Kane-Fallon, Notes on Rubrics of Roman Ritual.
1 Ephem. Lit., 1952, p. 378.
3 Cf. Anson, Churches—Their Plan and Furnishing : A carillon is a group of
bells comprising at least two chromatic octaves (25 bells) ; a chime consists of
a limited number of bells for playing single-note melodies. A chime is played
by one person from a ‘ hand clavier.’
7
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
361
BLESSING OF BELLS
Who may bless the bells for a church?
P.P.
‘ The bells of a church should be consecrated or blessed
according to the rites in the approved liturgical books ’ (canon
1169, §2). In churches which are consecrated, or which will
probably be consecrated, the bells must also be consecrated
according to the rite given in the Roman Pontifical ; in those
churches which are only blessed the bells may be blessed with
the rite of the Roman Ritual. Since the bells must be con
secrated or blessed before they are erected and since it would
be extremely inconvenient to take them down again, it is
permissible to consecrate bells and erect them in a church which
at present is only blessed and may not be consecrated for a
considerable time. On the other hand, bells which have been
merely blessed with the formula of the Ritual may not be
erected in a consecrated church. The consecration of bells
must be carried out by the Ordinary who is in episcopal orders,
or by a priest who is designated by apostolic induit ; in the
long ceremony of consecration the bells arc anointed with the
oleum infirmorum and with chrism. In the Rituale Romanum,
there arc three blessings concerning bells. The first is a non
reserved blessing for the metal which will be used in casting a
bell and is scarcely ever used now (Rit. Rom. Tit. ix, n. 4).
The second is a reserved blessing for a church bell and may be
used by a priest with due permission from the local Ordinary
(Rit. Rom. Tit. ix, n. 11) ; the third (Rit. Rom. Tit. ix, n. 12)
is a reserved blessing for a bell which will be used for a school
or other ecclesiastical building.
NOTES ON RECENT REPLIES FROM THE SACRED
CONGREGATION CONCERNING DEVOTIONS, ETC.
The Ephemerides Liturgical has published a number of private
replies which were given by the Sacred Congregation of Rites
in the years from 1942 4o 1947 and which arc here revelant.
(1) S'. Agathae Gothorum (11th July, 1942). Two Images of the
Same Mystery are prohibited : It is not permitted to have in the
same church two images representing the same mystery and
therefore an image of Our Lady of the Rosary, commonly
1 1954, Fasc., iv, pp. 370 et seq.
362
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
known as ‘ of Pompey ’ may not be placed in a church in which
there is already an image of Our Lady of the Rosary.
Comment : The shrine of Our Lady at Pompeii was cstablished in 1875 in honour of Our Lady of the Rosary. In it is
venerated a picture of little artistic merit representing Our
Lady with St. Dominic and St. Catherine of Siena (originally
the third figure was St. Rose, but it was changed at the wish
of the donor of the picture, Bartolo Long). The picture was
set up in its shrine in 1875, and in the following year the Con
fraternity of Our Lady of Pompeii was established ; there soon
occurred a number of miraculous cures and the shrine became
an important place of pilgrimage. Reproductions of its picture,
as touched up by Maldarelli, are popularly venerated under the
title of Our Lady of the Rosary of Pompeii.1 rMthough the
picture is different from the image of Our Lady' of the Rosary
with which we arc familiar in this country the two pictures
refer to the same devotion.
(2) Saharien (\%th July, 1942). Genuflections Prescribed for
Communicants : In reply to a query from the diocese of Sabaria
(Austria) the Sacred Congregation decided that the faithful
when they receive Holy Communion should genuflect on one
knee before they approach to receive and immediately after
wards.
Comment : The purpose of this enquiry was to obtain uni
formity of practice in a particular region where varying customs
were being observed ; the petitioner stated that some people
genuflected on both knees, some on one knee and some omitted
the genuflection entirely. Before this decree, while the more
common opinion amongst rubricists favoured the practice of
genuflecting, the local conditions, i.e. the space available and
the order observed by communicants, must be taken into
account and it may not always be advisable to insist on their
genuflecting. This opinion remains true, although the present
private reply of the Sacred Congregation indicates that a
genuflection on one knee immediately before and after com
municating is to be recommended where possible.
(3) Sherbrooken (27 th November, 1947). Rubrics for Chant of
Te Deum, etc. : The Bishop of Sherbrooke (Canada) asked :
Whether during exposition of the Blessed Sacrament the cele
brant should remain kneeling or should stand while prayers or
hymns take place in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament
exposed and before Benediction ?
1 Vide Gillett, Shrines of Our Lady, i, p. 176.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
363
The reply was : ‘In the presence of the Blessed Sacrament
exposed he should stand while the Te Deum, Canticles and Hymns
arc sung.’
Comment : This decision is in accordance with Decree N. 4224
(6th November, 1908). It means that the celebrant and his
ministers should stand when in the presence of the Blessed
Sacrament exposed there is chanted the Te Deum, or the
Magnificat or Benedictus canticle, or any hymn or major antiphon
which according to the rubrics of the Divine Office must be
sung standing, e.g. the Regina Coeli in Paschal time, or the
Salve Regina or other major antiphon on Sundays. The celebrant
is not required to stand during the singing of non-liturgical
hymns or hymns in the vernacular.
(4) Ultrajecten (4th July, 1947). ‘ October ’ Devotions on Ij7
and 2nd November : In reply to the Bishop of Utrecht the Sacred
Congregation of Rites decided that the ‘ October ’ devotions
should be held also on the 1st and 2nd of November.
Comment : The reason for the extension of these special
devotions in honour of Our Lady of the Rosary and of St.
Joseph to the first days of November seems to be simply the
positive direction of Pope Leo XIII which has never been
abrogated. The first of the Rosary documents1 was a letter
published by the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide on
16th July, 1883, prescribing that the Rosary and the Litany of
Loreto be recited in parochial churches and in churches dedi
cated to the Blessed Virgin from the 1st October until the 2nd
November, inclusive. In September of the same year Pope Leo
XIII, in his encyclical Supremi Apostolatus, extended the devotion
to all churches for the same period. In 1884, when there was
an epidemic of cholera in Italy, the Pope directed that the
practice be continued from 29th September until 2nd November.
Subsequent decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites in
1885, 1886 and 1887, confirming the devotions as a permanent
practice, prescribed that they be held from 1st October until
2nd November. The prayer to St. Joseph was added in 1889.
It is clear from all the positive directions concerning the devo
tions that they arc to be held for thirty-three days, although the
reason for this regulation is not apparent.
(5) Brixinen (9 th December, 1947). Colour of conopeum during
Advent and Lent. The following question was asked : Whether
it is permissible during Advent and Lent to use the violet
conopeum even on feasts of saints of double or semi-double rite
1 Vide I. E. Record, 1950, p. 366; Ephem. Lit., 1949, p. 235.
364
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
in order that the faithful may be reminded of the spirit of
penance, and hence the white or the red conopeum would be
used only on feasts of the first or of the second class ?
The Sacred Congregation replied : The conopeum should be
white or of the colour corresponding to the Office of the day.
Comment : This decision is simply a re-statement of the rubric
governing the colour of the conopeum and it will serve to correct
the growing tendency to use a conopeum corresponding to the
colour of the season rather than one which is of the colour of
the day. Many authors hold that one could retain a conopeum
of the seasonal colour during a private votive Mass for which
the colour of the vestments is different from that for the Office
of the day ; for example, during the penitential seasons one could
use the violet conopeum when a private Requiem Mass or a
private Mass of the feria or vigil is celebrated at the altar instead
of the Mass corresponding to the festal Office of the day.
(6) Obligation to wear surplice when preaching coram Sanctissimo :
In the Ephemerides Liturgicae for 1951 (p. 262) the following
question and reply are published : The Missionaries of the
Precious Blood asked :
ft
Utrum missionarii, dum orationem de rebus divinis habent ad populum
corarn SSino Sacramento solemniter exposito publicae venerationi, gestare
possint sanctissimum crucifixum absque supcrpellicco an non ?
The Sacred Congregation on 28th January, 1948, replied :
Adhibendum esse superpelliccum atque extra Urbem etiam stolam.
Idcoque in casu sanctissimum crucifixum deferendum esse subter superpelliceum.
r
•t
0
The Clementine Instruction for the Forty Hours’ Prayer
directs that if, with the necessary special permission, a short
sermon is preached during the Prayer, the preacher must wear
a surplice even though he be a regular, but no stole.1 This
prohibition against the use of the stole when preaching is peculiar
to Rome. Elsewhere a stole may1· always be worn when preach
ing and now, in accordance with this decision, it should be
worn when one preaches in the presence of the Blessed Sacra
ment exposed. The colour of the stole is white. Apart from
the prescriptions of the Clementine Instruction, which apply
only in Rome, there is no general prohibition against preaching
before the Blessed Sacrament exposed.2 The custom of preach
ing short sermons during exposition is quite lawful and has
become the most commonly observed method of conducting
the Holy Hour in public. The purpose of such ferverinos must
1 Clementine Instruction xxxii.
’Vide I. E. Record, 1937, pp. 432, 504; 1944, p. 60.
CHURCH BUILDINGS AND FURNISHINGS
365
always be to direct the devotion of the faithful to the Blessed
Sacrament, and care must be taken that their attention is not
distracted from the Real Presence. If the monstrance is to
remain unveiled during the sermon the central theme must be
the Blessed Sacrament and the sermon must not be a prolonged
one.
(7) Liceity of electrophonic Organs. The following communi
cation has been published by the Sacred Congregation of Rites :1
‘ The war, which has been grievously marked by many disasters
and ruins has not spared sacred edifices. Many of these have
been destroyed and many more seriously damaged so that in
addition to other excellent works of art not a few musical organs
have been destroyed or rendered useless. It is unnecessary to
observe that in the sacred liturgy exceptional demands are
made upon organ music and in the building of even a small
organ much expense is incurred. Hence in recent times com
panies engaged in the manufacture of musical instruments have
devised electrophonic organs which, while they are not as good
as the pneumatic organs, offer notable advantages in their con
struction and use. 1 aking all these things into consideration
the Sacred Congregation of Rites, while confirming the fact
that the older reed-organ is preferable because in every respect
it conforms more closely with the requirements of the liturgy,
docs not prohibit the use of electrophonic organs. Hence, the
Sacred Congregation leaves it to the judgment of bishops and
other Ordinaries that in individual cases when a pipe-organ
cannot easily be purchased, they may allow the use of electro
phonic organs in their churches. They should hear the opinion
of the Diocesan Councils for the promotion of sacred music and
make the alterations suggested by such Councils. The Sacred
Congregation holds that before an organ of this kind can be
worthily substituted for a reed-organ, it must be improved and
perfected and manufacturers are strongly urged to carry out
this work.’
The elcctrone or electrophonic organ is thus admitted, but
only in a case of necessity and as a second-best to the traditional
pipe-organ. The. most common type of electrophonic organs
available are the Hammond, Compton and Midgley-Walker.
These produce organ-tones by modifying and amplifying
through valves minute electric currents.2 In the Hook-photo
electric system light is supplied at various speeds and forces to
a photo-electric cell and the different sounds are so produced.
1 /M.S., 22nd December, 1949, p. 617.
» Vide Shcrin, I. E. Record, 1940, p. 454.
366
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Such organs have been developed largely for use in cinemas and
theatres and since they arc usually adapted for the production
of profane music the Holy See has been reluctant to allow their
use in church. The Liturgical Arts Quarterly for November, 1949,
reprints from the Catholic Choirmaster (September, 1949),1 a
private reply given by the Sacred Congregation of Rites in
1938. The firm of ‘ Orme, Limited,’ had asked whether the
‘ Hammond ’ organ could be used in the liturgy, and in
December, 1938, the Sacred Congregation replied: ‘having
heard the opinion of the competent Commission, and not having
found in the new form of organ that which is required by
liturgical law in the matter, it has considered it opportune to
deny the requested approbation, at least for the present.’ The
present communication makes clear that only economic neces
sities have brought about a reluctant modification of that
position.
It may be opportune here to draw attention to the principles
stated by Pope Pius XI in his /Vpostolic Constitution on the
Liturgy:2 ‘The traditionally appropriate musical instrument
of the Church is the organ, which, by reason of its extraordinary
grandeur and majesty, has been considered a worthy adjunct to
the liturgy, whether for accompanying the chant or, when the
choir is silent, for playing harmonious music at the prescribed
times. But here, too, must be avoided that mixture of the
profane with the sacred which, through the fault partly of
organ-builders and partly of certain performers who are partial
to the singularities of modern music, may result eventually in
diverting this magnificent instrument from the purpose for which
it is intended. We wish, within the limits prescribed by the
liturgy, to encourage the development of all that concerns the
organ ; but we cannot but lament the fact that, as in the case
of certain types of music which the Church has rightly forbidden
in the past, so now attempts arc being made to introduce a
profane spirit into the Church by modern forms of music;
which forms, if they begin to enter in, the Church would likewise
be bound to condemn. Let our churches resound with organ
music that gives expression to the majesty of the edifice and
breathes the sacrcdncss of the religious rites ; in this way will
the art both of those who build organs and of those who play
them, flourish afresh, and render effective service to the sacred
liturgy.’
» The reply was published in an article in the Bollettino Caeciliano, JanuaryFebruary, 1949.
J
'
’ 20th December, 1928 ; Translation in Catholic Church Music, p. 42.
SECTION VI
INDULGENCES
CONDITIONS FOR THE GAINING OF INDULGENCES
(1) When more than one plenary indulgence may be gained on a
certain feast, but under different titles, one visit to a church would
seem to be sufficient, e.g. on any of the principal feasts of the
Blessed Virgin those enrolled in the brown and blue scapulars may
gain two plenary indulgences under the usual conditions. These
two indulgences are independent of each other. Would one visit
to a church suffice provided that the prayers for the Pope’s intentions
are said twice with the intention of gaining both indulgences?
(2) Except in the case of a Jubilee indulgence, is not the visit to
a church to hear a Mass of obligation sufficient for a visit prescribed
for gaining a plenary indulgence; the prayers for the Pope’s inten
tions could be said before or after Mass without making a distinct
visit?
(3) A plenary indulgence, on condition of reception of the sacra
ments of Confession and Communion, may be gained by reciting
five decades of the Rosary in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament.
Do persons who are not daily communicants but who attend a week’s
retreat, saying the Rosary each evening and receiving Communion
on the closing Saturday or Sunday, gain this indulgence seven times
or only once, i.c. on the day on which they communicate?
Missioner.
(1) Canon 933 :
Uni eidemque rei vel loco plurcs ex variis titulis adnecti possunt indulgentiae;
sed uno codcmquc opere, cui ex variis titulis indulgentiae adnexae sint, non
possunt plurcs acquiri indulgentiae, nisi opus requisitum sit confessio vel
communio, aut nisi aliud expresse cautum fuerit.
Amongst the sources of this canon cited in the Code is a decision
of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences published on 29th
February, 1864.1 Concerning the gaining of several plenary’
indulgences on the same day this decree contains the following
answers :
u . r
Ί
4.,’> L
Qui decreto ipso uti valuerit, an teneatur ecclesiam vel publicum oratorium
(quando nempe requiritur talis visitatio) totidem vicibus, quot sunt indul
gentia lucrifaciendae ? Resp. : Affirmative. An sufficiat, ut in eademque
ecclesia tot preces, seu visitationes repetantur quot sunt indulgentiae lucran
dae, quin de ecclesia post quamlibet visitationem quis egrediatur, et denuo
in eam ingrediatur ? Resp. : Negative.
1 Deaeta Authentica, n. 399.
367
368
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Hcncc it is clear that, if a visit to a church is prescribed for the
gaining of each of several indulgences, one visit will not suffice
for all. This is an application of the general principle that one
good work docs not satisfy the conditions for several indulgences
attached to it under different titles unless the work is the recep
tion of the sacraments of Penance or of the Eucharist or unless
a special privilege is attached to its performance. Pope Pius X,
for example, granted a special privilege by which one recitation
of the Rosary on properly blessed beads would satisfy for both
the Dominican and Crosier indulgences. No such privilege
is attached to the scapulars and, therefore, separate visits are
necessary to gain the indulgences both of the Brown and Blue
Scapulars.
(2) In the first place there is no need to distinguish here
between the Jubilee indulgence and other indulgences for which
a visit to a church is prescribed. Authors arc not in agreement
on the question whether such a visit may be made when one
goes to church to assist at a Mass of obligation. Λ writer in the
Nouvelle Revue Theologique1 states :
Si les prières étaient elites pendant le messe on ne satisferait certainement
pas à la visite requise. Mais nous ne voyons rien qui s’oppose à ce qu’un
fidèle remplisse suffisamment cette condition en partant un peu plus tôt pour
faire la prière imposée par le Pape avant d’assister à la messe. Il a fait sa
visite avant la messe ; il n’est nullement necessaire qu’il sorte de l’église et y
rentre pour assister à la messe : la sortie de l’église n’a aucune influence sur
la visite. En sera-t-il de même s’il dit les prières après la messe ? Il ne nous
le semble pas. Le fidèle était a l’église pour satisfaire à une œuvre obligatoire,
qui ne pouvait par consequent servir pour le gain du Jubilé . . . il y aurait
recitation de prière, mais non visite.
Most authors, however, do not accept this strict view. Melata2
points out that the two acts—visit to a church and assistance
at Mass—are always separable since one may sometimes hear
a Mass of obligation without entering a church. Mindercr3
even maintains that the prayers for the indulgence may be
recited during Mass, because the precept of assisting at Mass
does not require the recitation of any prayers ; a person bound
to the recitation of the Office could satisfy his obligation while
assisting at a Mass of precept. Beringer
*
and De Angelis5 also
hold that the prayers may be recited before or after Mass. It
would seem to be die safer view that die prayers should not be
said during Mass, but if a person who comes to a church to
hear a Mass of obligation also has the intention of making an
1 Tom. vii, p. 499.
2 Apud Beringer, Les Indulgences, i, § 124.
3 Apud De Angelis, De Indulgences, p, 53.
4 Op. cit.
6 Op. cit.
INDULGENCES
369
indulgcnced visit, he may avail of the opportunity to recite
the prescribed prayers before or after the Mass.
(3) The indulgence for the recitation of the Rosary in the
presence of the Blessed Sacrament was granted by Pope Pius XI
in the Brief Ad Sancti Dominici, issued on 4th September, 1927—
omnibus ct singulis christifidclibus qui pocnitentcs et confessi ac sacra Com
munione iuxia inorem sint refecti, ante Sanctissimi Corporis Christi sacra
mentum ad publicam fidelium venerationem expositum, vel etiam in taber
naculo adservatum. tertiam B.M.V. Rosarii partem devote recitantibus,
quotiescumque id egerit, Plenariam Indulgentiam . . . concedimus.
In the following year the Sacred Penitentiary was asked to
interpret the phrase ‘ iuxta morem,' and in a reply published on
13th March, 1928, referred the question to the Code Com
mission. Vermeersch1 maintains that iuxta morem means in
accordance with the prescriptions of canon 931, and adds :
Itaque practice, qui bis in mense confiteri solet ct singulis hebdomadis ad s
synaxim accedit, poterit cotidie lucrari indulgentiam plenariam quotiescum
que tertiam partem rosarii coram Sanctissimo recitaverit.
His arguments are based on canon 931, § 1 and canon 933.
Canon 931 states that Communion received on die previous
day or within the octave avails ‘ ad quaslibet indulgentias lucrandas'
The Brief does not say ‘ diebus quibus s. synaxim receperint ’ but
‘ qui s. communione iuxta morem sint refecti.' Finally, a narrow
interpretation would reduce notably the value of die concession,
and the reply of the Sacred Penitentiary indicates that the
question is to be decided by an interpretation of the canons.
De Angelis,1
2 on the contrary, rejects this opinion and argues :
Indulgentiae tantum valent quantum sonant. ... Si vera esset praefata inter
pretatio, nullius roboris ac prorsus inutile esset dispositum canon 931, §3,
vi cuius ad omnes indulgentias lucrandas, pro quibus Communio praescripta
sit, requiritur Communio quotidiana vel fere quotidiana ; sufficiens esset
Communio hebdomadalis, quinimmo Communio quolibet nono dic peracta.
Putamus itaque quod Communio utique fieri potest in pervigilio dici cui
indulgentia fuit affixa et per totam subsequentem octavam, sed tot requiruntur
Communiones quot sunt dies quibus una vel plures indulgentiae acquiri
possunt.
Until an authoritative decision is given it would seem that
the safer opinion should be followed and the faithful should
be instructed that only those who arc daily communicants or
who receive five or six times a week may gain every day the
indulgence for reciting the Rosary before the Blessed Sacrament.
Persons who receive Communion only once a week cannot be
certain of gaining the indulgence more than once in die week.
1 Periodica, 1927, p. 128 ad 1928, p. 75.
2 Op. cit., p. 49.
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
INDULGENCES
PLENARY INDULGENCES: MORE THAN
ONCE A DAY
INDULGENCE ATTACHED TO THE APOSTOLIC
BLESSING
It is stated that outside Portiuncula and All Souls’ Days, a
plenary indulgence can be gained only once in the same day irre
spective of the prayers, or works performed. May one gain on the
same day the plenary indulgences attached to the recitation of the
En Ego after Holy Communion, the five decades of the rosary before
the Blessed Sacrament, the prayers of the Blue Scapular, and to the
Stations of the Cross as often as they are performed during the day?
Over 80.
Is the indulgence attached to the Apostolic Blessing, which is
usually given at the close of a mission or retreat, suspended during
a Holy Year? If so, may this indulgence be applied to the souls
in Purgatory?
Canon 928 states : ‘A plenary indulgence, unless it be
otherwise stated, can be gained only once a day even though
the prescribed work be performed several times. A partial
indulgence, unless the contrary be expressly stated, can be
gained frequently throughout the day, whenever the prescribed
work is repeated.’ It is possible, however, to gain several
plenary indulgences in one day by different acts.1 The prayers
for the Pope’s intentions must be repeated for the gaining of
each indulgence as often as they arc prescribed. It would not
suffice to recite such prayers once only for the gaining of several
indulgences.1
2
Hence the indulgences attached to the prayer En Ego as well
as those granted for the recitation of the scapular prayers and
of the rosary in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament may all
be gained on the same day. The primary indulgence attached
to the Way of the Cross is now a toties quoties indulgence and so
may be gained several times in the same day. 3 In the present
(1952) edition of the Raccolta it is laid down : ‘ The faithful who
with at least a contrite heart, whether singly or in company,
perform the pious exercise of the Way of the Cross . . . may
gain : a plenary indulgence as often as they perform the same :
another plenary indulgence if they receive Holy Communion on
the same day or even within a month after having made the
Stations ten times ; an indulgence of 10 years for each station,
if for some reasonable cause they are unable to complete the
entire Way of the Cross.’4
1 De Angelis (1946), p. 79; Deer. Auth., n. 291 ad lum ; Cf. canon 926:
‘A plenary indulgence is understood as granted in such terms that if one is
unable to gain it fully, he may, nevertheless, gain it partially in proportion
to his dispositions.
*
1 Bcringcr, Les Indulgences (edit. 1925), p. 85; Deer. Auth., S. Cong. Ind.
399 (29di February, 1864).
•ÆXS.» 1931, pp. 167, 522.
4 Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, n. 194.
M. F.
During a Jubilee Year the plenary indulgence attached
to the Papal Blessing is suspended for the living, but not for
the dead ; the blessing can and should be given during the
Holy Year. The Apostolic Constitution of 10th July, 1949,
which suspended indulgences for the living during the Holy
Year of 1950 mentions as an exception to this suspension
Indulgentias, quas S.R.E. Cardinales, Apostolicac Sedis Nuntii, vel Inter
nuntii, ac Delegati Apostolici itemque Archiepiscopi, Episcopi, Abbates vcl
Praelati nullius, Vicarii et Praefecti Apostolici in usu Pontificalium aut
impertienda benedictione aliave fonna usitata largiri solent.1
This exception refers to the partial indulgences which may be
granted by prelates in virtue of canons 239, § 1, 274, 294, 323
and 349, § 2 respectively. It does not refer to the power conderred by canon 914 to impart the Papal Blessing and Plenary
Indulgence three times during the year on the more solemn
feasts.2 On 22nd December, 1824, in connection with the
Jubilee proclaimed by Pope Leo XII, the Sacred Congregation
of Indulgences decided that the plenary indulgence attached
to the blessing which can be given by bishops on the more
solemn feasts was suspended, during the Jubilee Year.3 A
similar decision was given by the Sacred Penitentiary in 1900.4
The Apostolic Constitution for the Holy Year (1950) does not
make any exception in favour of the Papal Blessing and Plenary
Indulgence given at the close of a mission or retreat ; hence wc
must conclude that this indulgence is suspended for the living
during the Jubilee.
The Papal Blessing, however, may still be given and it should
be remembered that the indulgence is applicable to the souls
in purgatory. The usual formula used by the Holy See in
granting the faculty to impart the indulgence at the close of a
mission is :
1 A.A.S., 16th August, 1949, p. 338.
.
.
>Cf. .4.J.S., xxxiv, Num. 9, p. 240—Increase in faculties for granting
Indulgences.
3 Decreta Authentica^ n. 2j5.
4 12th February, 1900.
372
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Impertiendi, cum Crucifixo et unico Crucis signo, in postrema concione,
papalcm benedictionem cum adnexa plenaria indulgentia etiam animae
alicuius fidelis in Dei gratia vita functi applicabiti, ab iis christifidclibus
confessis ac sacra synaxi refectis lucranda, qui postremae eidem concioni
adfuerint, et quattuor saltem alias ex praecedentibus audierint, ac insuper
ad mentem Summi Pontificis pie oraverint. ...*
1*
Ordinarily the conditions of reception of the sacraments and
prayers for the Pope’s intentions must always be fulfilled for
the gaining of the indulgence.2 In order that the indulgence
be applied validly for the souls in Purgatory the persons who
receive the blessing must have at least a virtual intention of
so applying it either in general or in particular to specified
deceased persons. This solemn Papal Benediction to which an
indulgence is attached must, needless to say, be distinguished
from the blessing which the Holy Father imparts on the occasion
of audiences or which is sometimes sent on the occasion of
weddings, etc. To these ordinary blessings no indulgence is
attached, but the blessing is a sacramental through which grace
may be obtained in accordance with the dispositions of the
recipient.
IMPARTING THE PAPAL BLESSING
Many priests who have visited Rome have received from the Holy
Father the privilege of imparting the Papal Blessing once to their
people. What formula should be used when the priest avails of this
privilege ? In order that all his parishioners may receive it, may a
priest give the blessing, not only in the parish church, but also in the
second church of his parish ? Is there an indulgence attached to this
blessing ?
Peregrinus.
K «
ui $
r*
The Papal Blessing with plenary indulgence attached is a
solemn blessing imparted by the Roman Pontiff on special
occasions or by others who have been duly authorized to do so
in his name. Bishops arc empowered to give it in their dioceses
on Easter Sunday and on two other occasions during the year.
In doing so they use the formula found in the Pontifical as
prescribed by Pope Clement XIII. Superiors of most religious
orders also have the faculty per modum habitus to impart the
blessing twice during the year in their own churches ; they make
use of the formula prescribed by Pope Benedict XIV, and now
1 Cf. Lacau, Précieux Trésor des Indulgences, p. 204.
1 Cognizance must be taken of the terms of a particular grant of the
faculty.
373
INDULGENCES
given in the Roman Ritual (tit. viii, cap. xxxii). Thirdly,
the privilege is commonly granted to preachers empowering
them to impart the blessing at the conclusion of sermons during
the penitential seasons or at the end of missions or retreats. A
decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites published in 1911
decided that for these occasions the blessing should be given :
Unicum signum crucis cum Crucifixo adhibita formula : Benedictio Dei
Omnipotentis, Patris et Filii ct Spiritus Sancti descendat super vos ct maneat
semper. R. Arnen.1
This rite and formula is now given in the appendix to the
Roman Ritual. In addition to these ordinary grants of the
faculty the Holy Father frequently, either viva voce or through
the Sacred Penitentiary, authorizes individual priests to bless
their people in his name per modurn actus. This is the privilege
granted frequently to priests present at papal audiences during
a Holy Year and usually it is given only for one occasion. All
such special concessions are now governed by the decree issued
on 12th March, 1940 :2 ‘The Sacred Congregation taking
notice of the formula contained in the Roman Ritual itself
(tit. viii, cap. xxxii), which is permitted to Regulars for imparting
the Apostolic Benediction on certain days to the people, after
having heard the opinion of the Special Liturgical Commission,
decided that this same formula is hereafter to be used and
retained by all priests, whether secular or regular, who have a
special induit from the Holy Sec for imparting the Papal Bene
diction with the plenary indulgence.’
Hence, a priest who wishes to avail of the special faculty
which he has received in Rome should make use of the formula
found in the Ritual (tit. viii, cap. xxxii). It is not clear that
there is an obligation to do so under pain of nullity of the
blessing ; there is extrinsic probability for the opinion expressed
by Fanfani—
ad essentiam tamen quod spectat, sola benedictio cum crucifixo semper
sufficere videtur3
—but since there is a plenary’ indulgence attached to the
blessing, the safer course should be followed. For the gaining
of this indulgence the usual conditions of Confession, Com
munion, visit to a church or public oratory (or to a semi-public
oratory for those legitimately using it) and prayers for the
Pope’s intentions must be fulfilled. Formerly when the blessing
was given by the Holy Father, the indulgence was granted to
'.-l./l.S., vol. iii, p. 241.
’
vol. xxxii; vide /· E. Record, November, 1946.
3 De Indulgentiis, p. 100.
kt,
ή
374
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
all present and no further conditions were prescribed. In 1939,
however, it was decreed1 that physical presence is not necessary
to gain the indulgence when the Pope gives his special blessing
but moral presence by listening to the radio broadcast would
suffice and all, whether physically or morally present, must
now fulfil the usual conditions for gaining the indulgence. For
the reception of the blessing one must have ‘ pietas ac devotio ’ ;
for the gaining of the indulgence one must fulfil ‘ suctas con
ditiones.’ It should be noted that this privilege of receiving
the blessing and indulgence over the radio is attached by positive
decree only to the blessing given by the Pope ‘ Urbi el Orbi' ;
when the Apostolic Benediction is given by a bishop or priest,
its benefits accrue only to those who are physically present to
receive it.12
Whether or not a priest may give the blessing more than
once depends on the terms by which the privilege was granted
to him. If he has received power to give it only once, he may
not repeat it at a second Mass or in a succursal church. Even
if, however, he has been empowered to grant the blessing and
indulgence ‘ to all his parishioners,’ he would most probably
not be justified in repeating it in a second church so that all
the faithful in his parish may have the opportunity of benefiting
by it.3 The rubrics of the Ritual anticipate this difficulty.
They direct : ‘ The people arc to be informed about the day,
the time and the church where the blessing will be given.’
The plenary indulgence is, needless to say, not attached to
every blessing of the Holy Father but only to the special occasions
when the Pope gives his blessing ‘ Urbi el Orbi ’ or when mention
is made of the indulgence. The current edition of the Enchiridion
Indulgentiarum states :4
Fidelibus qui Benedictionem a Summo Pontifice Urbi et Orbi impertitam,
etsi ope tantum radiophonica, pie devoteque acceperint, conceditur Indulgentia
plenaria suctis conditionibus.
When the Pope blesses those present at an audience or sends
his blessing on the occasion of a marriage, etc., no indulgence
is included unless it is expressed. When, however, the Holy
Father blesses and authorizes the issue of formulas promising
an indulgence in articulo mortis the recipients of these (usually
illuminated scrolls) have ipso iure or lato facto a claim to an
1 A.A.S., 1939, p. 277.
* Vide Ephern. Lit., 1939, p. 122 ; De Angelis, De Indulgentiis, p. 94 : Hcylen,
Tractatus de Indulgentiis, p. 274.
3 Cf. Bishop who rules two or more dioceses united aeque principales. De
Angelis, loc. cit.
♦N. 695.
INDULGENCES
375
indulgence at the hour of death.1 It is required of them that
they receive the sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist, or
at least be contrite, and pronounce the Holy Name interiorly.
By fulfilling these conditions they gain in articulo mortis a plenary
indulgence even without the intervention of a priest to give
the Apostolic Benediction.
PAPAL BLESSING AT THE END OF A RETREAT
When the Papal Blessing is imparted at the end of a retreat should
all priests now use the formula which the Ritual gives for Regulars?
X
Canon 915 states that Regulars who have the privilege of
imparting the Papal Blessing are bound to observe the pre
scribed formula, i.c. the formula given in the Roman Ritual
(tit. viii, cap, xxxii). There is no mention in this canon of
such an obligation for other priests who may' have the necessary
faculty to impart the blessing. This omission is in accordance
with a decision given by the Sacred Congregation of Rites on
11th May, 1911.2 The Sacred Congregation then decided that
when the faculty was granted to priests to impart the bene
diction at the end of sermons, the rite to be followed was that
the preacher make the sign of the cross with a crucifix saying,
Benedictio Dei Omnipotentis, Patris et Filii ct Spiritus Sancti, descendat
super vos ct maneat semper. Amen.
On 12th March, 1940, the following decree was issued by' the
same Congregation : ‘As the Sacred Penitentiary, by' gracious
permission of the Sovereign Pontiff, in certain peculiar and
extraordinary circumstances, regularly grants to priests the
faculty of imparting the. Papal Benediction with the correspond
ing plenary' indulgence, His Eminence Cardinal Lauri, Chamber
lain of the Holy Roman Church and Major Penitentiary', asked
this Sacred Congregation of Rites to declare the formula by
which the aforesaid Papal Benediction may' be imparted to the
faithful.
‘ The Sacred Congregation taking notice of the formula con
tained in the Roman Ritual itself (tit. viii, cap. xxxii), which
is permitted to regulars for imparting the Apostolic Benediction
on certain days to the people, after having heard the opinion
‘Dr Angelis, op. cit., pp. 102, 109.
3 S.R.C. 4265.
4 Λ*
■-· ■ ir ·'·
376
r
H
M
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
of the Special Liturgical Commission, decided that this same
formula is hereafter to be used and retained by all priests,
whether secular or regular, who have a special induit from the
Holy Sec for imparting the Papal Benediction with the plenary
indulgence. ’1
This recent decree must, of course, be interpreted in the light
of die previously existing canons and directives. The formula
now given in the Ritual for the use of Regulars was published
by the authority of Pope Benedict XIV in 1748 and was intended
to be used only on a few occasions during die year.2 The grant
of the formula was confirmed by Popes Clement VIII34and
Leo XIII,1 and finally its use has been prescribed by canon 915
of the Code. In addition to this grant, the Sovereign Pontiff,
or in his name the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences (and
later, the Holy Office) often empowered secular priests or reli
gious to impart the blessing at the close of missions or retreats
or on their return from a pilgrimage to Rome. In these cases
no Ritual formula was prescribed ; the blessing was to be given
with a crucifix and with a simple sign of the cross. The decree
published in 1911 settled definitely the manner in which it was
to be imparted;5* hence the query submitted by the Sacred
Penitentiary in 1940 to the Sacred Congregation of Rites did
not refer to these cases already covered by the 1911 decision.
That decision still retains its force and has not been abrogated
by the recent decree. In 1940 doubt remained only in regard
to the rite to be observed by those priests who ‘ in certain
peculiar and extraordinary circumstances ’ received the faculty
by special induit through the Sacred Penitentiary. Such a
special induit would empower the recipient to give the blessing
only per modum actus, i.e. on one or at most a few particular
occasions and the faculty is conferred because of some unusual
circumstance. In these circumstances the Ritual formula pre
scribed for the use of Regulars must now be used. On the other
hand, when the faculty to impart the blessing at the conclusion
of missions, etc., is held per modum habitus either by reason of
membership of a religious congregation or of a confraternity or
by virtue of an ordinary privilege from the Holy See, if in the
Apostolic Brief which so empowers him no mention is made
1 J./Î.S1., vol. xxxii; Trans. Bouscarcn, Canon Law Digest.
1 Encyclical, Exemplis Praedecessorum, 19th March, 1748.
3 Bull, Inexhaustum, 5th September, 1762 ; and Decet Romanos Pontifices.
30th August, 1763.
J
4 Brief, 7 th July, 1882.
|·
4 Vide Bcringcr, Les Indulgences (1925), i, par. 799, ii, par. 506, 507: Stercky,
Ceremonial, u, p. 170.
7
INDULGENCES
377
of a special formula, a priest should still give the blessing by
making the sign of the cross with the crucifix, and using the
ordinary formula for blessing : Benedictio Dei, etc.1
THE ANGELUS
What is the significance of the three threes followed by nine
strokes in the ringing of the Angelus?
Curiosus.
The manner of ringing the Angelus is not prescribed but
is determined entirely by local custom. The method usually
observed in this country of ringing three threes followed by a
longer peal is the French method. Southern France is generally
regarded as the home of the Angelus ;2 certainly it was in Avignon
and Toulouse that the morning as distinct from the evening
Angelus was first adopted, and in these places the custom was
to have the bell rung with three equal peals. In Rome and in
Italy generally the custom is to ring three, four and five strokes
with a pause after each group and then a final louder stroke
to mark the ending. Obviously, the pauses were meant to
emphasize the distinction between the three Ave and to give
sufficient time for their devout recital ; this observance has been
always stressed in the Carmelite tradition. Our custom of
having three distinct, equal peals is probably the oldest practice.
It was certainly known in France and England in the Middle
Ages and may be derived from a monastic practice established
many centuries before the Angelus was used. Martène records3
the fact that in many monasteries at the end of the tenth century'
it was directed that after Compline the bell was rung three
times and prayer recited—
Finita Completa primum pueri faciunt tres orationes et postea Abbas
pulsat tinntinabulum tresque orationes fundit cum fratribus.
There seems to be no really fixed custom concerning the number
of strokes in the final peal ; in Italy sometimes as many as one
hundred strokes were rung or more often seventy as a reference
to the tradition that after seventy years the earthly life of the
Blessed Virgin came to a close. In this country' the most common
i Vide Rituale Parvum (Dublin : Μ. H. Gill, 1915), p. 410. S.R.C., 13th
J "3 Vide
E Record, April, 1939, p. 428; Dumford, art. in Church and
People d), p. H; Thurston, art. ‘ Bells ’ in Cath. Encyl.
3 De Antiquis Eccles. Ritibus, iv, p. 39.
378
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
practices are to add only nine or twelve strokes to mark the
conclusion of the prayer. The purpose of these extra strokes
simply was to give time for the recital of the prayer when it
was necessary in order to gain the indulgences that the prayer
be said at the sound of the bell. This condition is no longer
binding. Originally the indulgenccd prayer of the Angelus did
not include the versiclc and response and final prayer but
consisted only of the three Ave with the verses Angelus Domini,
etc., inserted. This prayer had to be said kneeling and at die
sound of the bell. Pope Leo XIII in 1884*
1 granted the indul
gence to those who did not kneel or where no bell was rung,
on condition that the versicle and response Ora pro nobis, etc.,
with the prayer Gratiam tuam were added. The present grant
of indulgence for the Angelus (made by Pope Pius XI in 1933)2
is given only for reciting the full prayer with versicle, response,
etc., and makes no mention of the ringing of the bell.
RECITATION OF KYRIE ELEISON IN LITANIES
Should the Kyrie eleison, Christe eleison, etc., at the beginning
of a litany always be repeated by the congregation, or should these
invocations be said only once, i.e. by the person leading the prayer?
In the Litany of Loreto, is it correct to repeat the Kyrie eleison
immediately after Agnus Deil
Rubricist.
To summarize briefly in chronological order the various
decisions which have been given in recent times on these
matters :3 In 1891, the Sacred Congregation of Rites directed
that the vcrsicles Domine exaudi, etc., and Dominus Vobiscum were
not to be added after the versiclc Ora pro nobis, Sancta Dei Genetrix
at the end of the Litany.4
In 1900, it was decided that the Litany of Loreto should be
concluded with a versiclc, response and prayer after the Agnus
Dei, without the insertion of Christe, audi nos, etc., as in the litanies
of the Saints.5 It was also decided that the versicle, response
and prayer could be varied according to the season. In the
following year, the Sacred Congregation recognized the custom
by which the chanters sang together three invocations of the
1 Vide Beringer, Les Indulgences, i, § 428.
* Preces et Pia Opera, η. 331.
» Vide I. E. Record, March, 1934, and December, 1939.
*3751.
• A.S.S., xxxiii, p. 631.
INDULGENCES
379
Litany and the people responded with the fourth invocation in
each case.1 This custom was subsequently confirmed by a
post-Codc decision of the Congregation of Rites ; that is, ‘ the
Litanies of Loreto may be sung by three invocations, each
invocation having its respective Ora pro nobis ; the faithful
making the fourth invocation with its respective Ora pro nobis
by way of response? 2
Canon 934 states that the indulgences attached to any par
ticular prayer cease entirely if there has been any addition,
omission or interpolation. In accordance with this canon, the
Sacred Penitentiary decided in 1919 that the indulgences are
lost if3 (a) only one Kyrie eleison is recited (i.e. Kyrie eleison, Christe
eleison, Christe, audi nos} ; (6) three invocations are joined to a
single Ora pro nobis ; (c) the Agnus Dei is pronounced only once.
This decision regarding the Kyrie and Agnus Dei was repeated
in 1921, when the Sacred Congregation insisted once more on
the repetition of the Kyrie—‘ let the entire order of the Litanies
with annexed indulgences, which has been approved, be
observed ; namely, Kyrie eleison, Christe eleison, Kyrie eleison, etc.,
to the end? It is noteworthy that at this time and until 1933
the indulgenced Litany, as given in the Raccolta, concluded
with the Agnus Dei. The versicle, response and prayers accord
ing to the different liturgical seasons were to be found in the
Ritual, but did not form part of the indulgenccd prayers. The
current edition of the Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, however, states
that the indulgence is granted for the recitation of the Litany,
with the versicle Ora pro nobis and the prayer Concede nos.
In 1925,4 the Sacred Congregation of Rites replied in the
affirmative to the question : Whether, in the recitation of the
Litanies without singing, it is permitted to repeat the first
invocations as follows : y. Kyrie eleison, R/. Kyrie eleison.—y.
Christe eleison, R'. Christe eleison.—y. Kyrie eleison, R7. Kyrie eleison.
Hence it is clear that at the beginning of the Litany there must
be three distinct invocations—one for each person of the Holy
Trinity. These may or may not be repeated according to
custom. It is not correct to insert the Kyrie eleison or Christe,
audi nos, etc., after the Agnus Dei and before the concluding
collect which now forms part of the indulgenced prayer.
1.4.5.5., xxxiv, p. 377.
»4367.
.
r T JI
non
1 S.R.C. 4362 ; Beringer, Les Indulgences, i, p. 230.
« S.R.C. 4397 ; Race., n. 290.
380
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
USE OF EJACULATION AT THE ELEVATION AT
MASS
Would you kindly state if the saying aloud of the indulgenced
prayer ‘ My Lord and My God ’ is forbidden by the rubrics at the
children’s Mass when one of their teachers or a priest is conducting
the prayers?
Jacobus.
The following reply was published by the Sacred Congre
gation of Rites on 6tH November, 1925 :
Summus Pontifix Pius X die 18 Maii 1907 indulgentias christifidclibus
concessit qui devote sacram Hostiam adspcxcrint cum in Missae sacrificio
elevatur, additis in ipsa oculorum elevatione verbis ‘ Dominus meus et Deus
meus ! ’ Hinc quaeritur ;
1. An fideles Missae adstantes, in sacrae Hostiae elevatione, clara et
elata voce verba * Dominus meus et Deus meus ! ’ proferre possint ? An etiam
ad Calicis elevationem ?
2. An ipse celebrans idem agere valeat, submissa tamen voce ?
Resp. : Ad I. Quoad primam partem, negative in omnibus, ad mentem
Caeremoniale Episcoporum, lib. ii, cap. viii, n. 70 ct Decreti generalis
n. 3827, ad III, diei 22 Maii 1894.
Quoad secundum partem, negative, iuxta canoncm 818 Codicis luris
Canonici ct Rubricas Missalis Romani.
The paragraph of the Caeremoniale Episcoporum referred to
in the reply contains the following instruction for those who
assist at Solemn Pontifical Mass : ‘ The choir continues the
chant up to Benedictus qui venit exclusively ; when that is
finished and not before its conclusion the Blessed Sacrament
is elevated. The choir then remains silent and adores with
the others.’ Similarly the general decree, N. 3827, directs :
‘ While the Blessed Sacrament under cither species is elevated,
the chanters arc to remain completely silent, in accordance
with the rubrics and are to adore the Blessed Sacrament with
the others.’ It is clear from these decisions that at the elevations
in the Mass the Blessed Sacrament should be adored silently,
at that moment no chants should take place and no prayers
should be recited aloud.
The conditions under which the indulgences are attached
to the use of the ejaculation ‘ My Lord and My God ’ arc
stated as follows :
./
‘ The faithful who, at the elevation of the Sacred Host during
Mass or when It is solemnly exposed, recite this ejaculation
with faith, piety and love arc granted an indulgence of seven
years and a plenary indulgence once a week on the usual
conditions if this pious practice is followed daily.’1 These
1 Preets et Pia Opera, n. 107.
INDULGENCES
381
conditions can be fulfilled and the indulgence gained by those
who pronounce the ejaculation silently. It would certainly
not be correct to have the ejaculation recited aloud by the
congregation at a children’s Mass. Canon 818 and the rubrics
of the Missal which forbid the addition of private prayers to
the Mass completely debar the celebrant from its use.
INDULGENCED EJACULATION
A large indulgence is attached to the invocation ‘Jesus, Mary
and Joseph,’ and a small one to ‘Jesus, Mary, Joseph, I give you my
heart, etc.’ To gain the large indulgence must one stop short at
‘Jesus, Mary, Joseph ’?
Parochus.
According to the most recent edition of the Raccolta,'
the same indulgence is granted for each of the pious ejaculations
mentioned in the query. In Section 274 it is stated : ‘ The
faithful who devoutly invoke the sacred names of Jesus, Mary
and Joseph conjointly may gain an indulgence of seven years,
and for the daily repetition of the invocation a plenary indulgence
once a month on the usual conditions.’ These indulgences are
based on rescripts published by Pope Pius X in 1906 and by
the Sacred Penitentiary in 1932. Section 636 states that, in
accordance with decress published by the Sacred Congregation
of Indulgences in 1807 and by the Sacred Penitentiary in 1936,
these same indulgences may be gained by reciting the invoca
tions : ‘Jesus, Mary and Joseph, I give you my heart, etc. . . .’
The indulgence for the invocation of the names of the Holy
Family would not be gained by reciting the longer prayer. A
prayer to which an indulgence is attached is to be considered
as an indivisible unit and is to be recited without any additions,
interpolations, or omissions.2
CONDITIONS FOR GAINING THE INDULGENCE OF
THE HOLY HOUR
Is it lawful to compute the night prayers said in common by
members of religious communities as part of the prayers necessary
to gain the indulgences of the Holy Hour? These prayers are of
1 Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, nn. 274, 636.
3 Canon 933.
382
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
obligation by the constitutions of the religious society and they do
not refer to the agony and passion of Our Lord.
May the Holy Hour be made in private as a condition for gaining
the plenary indulgence ?
Scriba.
Fidelibus qui in qualibet ecclesia aut publico vel (pro legitime utentibus)
semipublico oratorio, ad recolendam lesu Christi Passionem et Mortem et
ad flagrantissimum cius amorem, quo ductus divinam Eucharistiam instituit,
meditandum colendumque, pium exercitium, quod vulgo ‘ Horam Sanctam ’
vocant, publice peractum, per integrum horam participaverint, conceditur :
Indulgentia plenaria. . . . Iis vero, qui saltem corde contrito, pium hoc
exercitium publice vel privatim peregerint, conceditur : Indulgentia decem
annorum ...1
In general the prayers, etc., by which we gain indulgences
must be acts of supererogation and not works which are already
of obligation, except in those cases where a special concession
allows obligatory works to count towards an indulgence, e.g.
the Paschal Communion can fulfil the condition of reception
of the Eucharist for the gaining of any indulgences. Pre-code
commentators interpreted this rule so strictly that they com
monly held that no indulgences could be gained by the reciting
of prayer imposed as sacramental penance. Canon 932, how
ever, now states the regulation more clearly :
Opere cui praestando quis lege aut proscripto obligatur, nequit indulgentia
lucrifieri, nisi in eiusdem concessione aliud expresse dicatur ; qui tamen
praestat opus sibi in sacramcntalem poenitentiam iniunctum et indulgentiis
forte ditatum, potest simul et poenitentiae satisfacere ct indulgentias lucrari.
Present-day commentators12 are agreed that prayers or good
works prescribed by the statutes or rules of a religious society,
if they do not bind under pain of sin, may avail for the gaining
of indulgences. This opinion is confirmed by a reply given by
the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences to the superior of the
Camaldolese Hermits in 1888 to the effect that the hermits
could gain the indulgence attached to the Little Office of the
Blessed Virgin which in obedience to their rule they recited
daily in addition to the Breviary.3 Hence when statutory
prayers do not bind under pain of sin religious need only form
the intention of gaining the indulgences attached to them.
Is it necessary that prayers recited for the Holy Hour in
dulgences refer explicitly to the agony or passion of Our Lord ?
By rescripts issued on 14th February, 1815, and 6th April, 1816,
Pope Pius VII granted a plenary indulgence to all who on
1 Enchiridion Indulgentiarum (1952), n. 168.
2 Vide Cappello, De Poenitentia, p. 686 ; Fanfani, De Indulgentiis, p. 52 :
Bcringer, Les Indulgences (1925), i, p. 71.
3 Bcringer, loc. ch.
INDULGENCES
383
Holy Thursday or on the feast of Corpus Christi practised for
one hour some devotion in remembrance of the institution of
the Blessed Eucharist.1 Λ partial indulgence of 300 days could
be gained by carrying out the same practice on any Thursday
of the year. These concessions were renewed by the Sacred
Congregation of Indulgences in 1876. The present indulgence
was first granted by Pope Pius XI in 1933 ; the decree of 21st
March, 1933, explains the circumstances under which this
indulgence was promulgated :
. . . SS. mus D. N. Pius . . . cum indictum haud pridem Annum Sanctum,
undevicesimo exeunte sacculo a peracta humani generis Redemptione, non
alio modo auspicari exoptat, quam sollemnem eiusmodi celebrationem
supplicationcmquc in Vaticana Basilica participando, tum hanc opportuni
tatem nactus, ... id ipsum piaculare exercitium indulgentiis . . . ditare
dignatus est.2
A commentator in Periodica for 1933 states :
Ex decreto colligimus essentiam horae sanctae eam esse ut, revocata memoria
amoris quo Christus pro nobis passus et mortuus est, ac sanctissimam Eucharis
tiam instituit, fideles meditatione et cultu excitentur ad expianda propria
ceterorumque hominum peccata. Definiri potest : hora amoris reminiscentis
et reparantis.8
Hence the ‘ Holy Hour ’ is a devotion essentially aimed at
making reparation for sin and thanksgiving for the Blessed
Sacrament. Meditations on the passion would very' naturally
suggest themselves but it does not seem necessary' that all the
prayers recited during the hour should make explicit references
to the sufferings and death of Our Lord. The essential relation
ship of the Eucharist to the passion of Our Lord is succinctly
expressed in the prayer of the Blessed Sacrament :
Deus qui nobis sub Sacramento mirabili memoriam Passionis reliquisti . . .4
It seems, therefore, that on both counts the obligatory' prayers
of religious may be computed as part of the Holy Hour
devotions. Also it seems that the plenary indulgence is gained
only if the Holy Hour is made publicly with others. Only to
members of certain associations e.g. the Archconfraternity of
the Blessed Sacrament, is the privilege granted of gaining a
plenary' indulgence even when the exercise is performed
privately. ‘ Religious exercises are said to be performed publicly
only when they arc held in common in churches or public or
semi-public oratories. In other cases they are understood to
be performed privately.’5
1 Mocchcgiani, Collectio Indulgentiarum, p. 134; Raccolta, η. 137.
2 Acta Ap. Sedis, 1933.
8P. 111.
4 Vide I. E. Record, January’, 1944, p. 60.
4 Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, n. 8 in Praenotanda.
I
384
indulgences
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
TRANSLATION OF LATIN PRAYERS
Many English versions of Latin prayers commonly used are
very unfortunate translations, in which archaic or incorrect expres
sions are used. Without any loss of indulgences, etc., may a priest,
on his own authority, change such expressions when he recites the
prayers from a properly approved prayer-book.
Fautor Franciscanus.
Canon 1259 :
Orationes ct pietatis exercitia ne permittantur in ecclesiis vel oratoriis sine
revisione ct expressa Ordinarii loci licentia, qui in casibus difficilioribus rem
totam Sedi Apostolicac subiiciat.
This canon is, needless to say, strictly applicable only when
there is question of die introduction of new prayers or of pious
exercises not yet established by common usage.1 It is sufficient
for their use in public that the prayers be taken from a prayer
book or compilation approved by any competent ecclesiastical
authority. A priest would not be justified in changing such
prayers on his own authority. In particular, when a prayer
has been indulgenced the indulgences are attached only to
duly audiorizcd versions of the prayer. The indulgences can
be gained in whatever language the prayer is recited provided
diat the translation be officially correct either by virtue of a
declaration of the Sacred Penitentiary, or of one of the local
Ordinaries of any place where the language into which the
prayer has been translated is the vernacular ; but the indul
gences cease entirely if there has been any addition, omission
or interpolation.2 It may be pointed out, as, indeed, has been
exemplified by the very unfavourable reception given by liturgists
to the new translation of the Psalter, that the elimination of
archaic words and other attempts to render prayers more
intelligible do not always result in making them more suitable
for use in public worship.
CONDITIONS TO BE FULFILLED IN GAINING THE
INDULGENCES OF NOVEMBER 2nd
From mid-day on 2nd November until midnight on 3rd
November all who have confessed and communicated may gain a
Plenary Indulgence (applicable to the souls in Purgatory) as often
‘Vide I. E. Record, December, 1945, p. 451.
* Canon 934.
385
as they visit a church or public or semi-public oratory and pray there
for the intentions of the Pope. May the above indulgences be gained
in a chapel of ease where and when the Blessed Sacrament is not
reserved?
Parochus.
‘The faithful, as often as they visit a church or public
oratory, or even a semi-public oratory (if they may lawfully
use the same), in order to pray for the dead on the second day
of November, may gain a plenary indulgence applicable only
to the souls detained in purgatory . . ,’1
The phrase ‘ visiting a church, etc.,’ has been explained in a
declaration issued by the Sacred Penitentiary in September,
1933, and now included in the official Preces et Pia Opera : ‘ The
condition of “ visiting a church or public or semi-public orator)'
(in the case of those who may legitimately use die latter) ” is
fulfilled by entering the church or oratory with at least a general
or implicit intention of honouring God Himself or His saints
and making use of some form of prayer, or indeed die pre
scribed form if any has been imposed by the grantor of the
indulgence, or any other form vocal or even mental in accord
ance with the piety and devotion of the individual.’2 For the
indulgence of 2nd November a visit to the Blessed Sacrament
is not prescribed and, therefore, the indulgence can certainly
be gained in a church or oratory in which the Blessed Sacrament
is not reserved.
OFFICE AND INDULGENCES ON 2nd NOVEMBER
Is it permitted on 1st November to anticipate Matins and
Lauds of the Office of 2nd November?
Veterascens.
Yes. Matins and Lauds of All Souls’ Day may be
anticipated on 1st November. Λ decree of the Sacred Con
gregation of Rites stales : ‘ Matins of the Dead, which accord
ing to the rubrics are to be recited on 2nd November, may be
anticipated on the first day of the month not only in private
recitation but also in public recitation in choir, after Compline.
. . ,’3 The Caeremoniale Episcoporum recommends this procedure :
1 Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, n. 590.
* Ibid, p. xiii, note.
»3864; cf. 2002.
14—1993
386
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
(recitari solent) . . . statim post Vesperas omnium Sanctorum, Vesperae,
et Matutinae Defunctorum, ad hoc ut populi commodius et frequentius illis
intéresse possint.*1
In accordance with the 1955 Decree for the simplifying of the
Rubrics the Office of 1st November concludes with Sunday
Compline ; Vespers and Compline of the Dead are recited only
on All Souls’ Day.
INDULGENCED VISITS ON 2nd NOVEMBER
(1) Are the indulgences still available on the Sunday following
2nd November?
(2) For the purposes of the visits may the sacristy be considered
part of the church? If so, may old people or the infirm make their
visits by entering the sacristy or on the contrary, if it is not, may
one make separate visits by passing from the sacristy to the church
and back again?
VeteRz\xens.
(1) The extension of the indulgences of All Souls’ Day to
the following Sunday was granted on 2nd January, 1939, and
is still available. The current (1952) edition of the official
Enchiridion Indulgentiarum states :2
RHBW99
Fidelibus dic quo Commemoratio Omnium Fidelium Defunctorum cele
bratur vel die dominica proxime insequenti, quoties aliquam ecclesiam aut
publicum vel (pro legitime utentibus) scmipublicum oratorium defunctis
suffragaturi visitaverint, conceditur : Indulgentia Plenaria . . .
The indulgence may, therefore, be gained either on 2nd
November or on the following Sunday ; it cannot be gained
by the same person on both occasions. This is clear from the
terms of the decree granting the extension :3 ‘ . . . in the
course of time petitions have been repeatedly sent to this Sacred
Tribunal asking that the same indulgence might be gained
also on the following Sunday, so that those also might enjoy
this most precious concession who failed to do so on All Souls’
Day. Wherefore His Holiness Pius XI, in the audience granted
to the Cardinal Major Penitentiary on 10th December, 1938,
deigned to decide and declare that this plenary indulgence can
be gained either on the 2nd of November or on the following
Sunday, without any change in die other conditions . . .’
(2) The condition of ‘ visiting a church is fulfilled by entering
the church with at least a general implicit intention of honouring
1 Caer. Epis. Lib. ii, cap. x, 1 ; Cf. Decree * Cum Nostra ’ (1955).
1N. 590.
7
’ A.A.S., 1939; Trans. Bouscarcn, Canon Law Digest.
INDULGENCES
387
God or His saints and making use of some form of prayer, or
the prescribed form, if any has been imposed . . .u Authors
are in agreement that the condition of visiting a church can be
satisfied by moral presence as near as possible to the church.2
If, because of the great crowds or because the doors of the
church arc closed, one cannot enter the church, it would suffice
to recite the prescribed prayers at the door.3 Some hold that
if a person is sufficiently near to the church so that it is possible
to see and hear all that is going on in it the condition of visiting
is satisfied.1 Hence, if for a valid reason, such as physical
infirmity, a person cannot proceed beyond the sacristy which
opens directly on the sanctuary of the church, it would seem
that the visits could safely be made there.
Canon 935 states :
Pia opera ad lucrandas indulgentias iniuncta confessarii possunt in alia
commutare pro iis qui legitime detenti impedimento, eadem praestare
nequeant.
A physical impediment such as old age may easily suffice for
commutation of the conditions of the indulgence. The impedi
ment must be a genuine obstacle to fulfilling these conditions
and it must endure for the whole period during which the
indulgence is available. The confessor can commute the con
ditions for such invalids or old persons and enjoin some other
suitable work. It is not necessary that this power be exercised
by the confessor actually in the sacramental forum but it suffices
that he have faculties here and now to hear the person’s con
fession.5 This canon may be availed of only when there is
question of indulgences which can be gained in the place where
the sick person lives ; it can, therefore, be applied to the indul
gence of 2nd November, which is available in all churches.
INDULGENCE FOR VISIT TO A CEMETERY
DURING OCTAVE OF ALL SOULS
When All Souls’ Day is put back to 3rd November is it possible
to gain the indulgence for visiting a cemetery up to, and including
10th November, or is the tempus utile shortened ? Also, may this indul
gence be gained only by a visit to a consecrated cemetery or one in
use ; would it be gained by visiting an old, disused cemetery which
may never have been consecrated ?
Religious.
1 Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, p. »ü·
1 Vide Bcringer, De Angelis, Fanfam, etc.
sE.g. St. Alphonsus.
* Vide Bcringer, Les Indulgences, i, p. 124.
4 Vide De Angelis, p. 61.
"'iff, ·~ΤΠ
388
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
The indulgence for visiting a cemetery during the octave
of AH Souls’ Day was first granted by Pope Pius XI on
31st October, 1934; in the current edition of the Enchiridion
Indulgentiarum (March, 1952) the indulgence is given as follows:
Fidelibus, qui, durante Commemorationis Omnium Fidelium Defunctorum
octavario, coemeterium pie ac devote visitaverint et, vel mente tantum pro
defunctis exoraverint, conceditur :
Indulgentia plenaria suctis conditionibus, singulis diebus, defunctis tantum
applicabitis.
Iis vero, qui camdcin visitationem ct orationem, quovis anni dic, pere
gerint, conceditur ; Indulgentia septem annorum defunctis tantummodo applicabilis.1
» «
I
K tl
’St
KI JU
When the Commemoration of All Souls is held on 3rd Novem
ber, the indulgence may be gained until midnight on 10th Novem
ber ; the rule is stated in canon 922 that if a feast is transferred
permanently with Office and Mass or is transferred temporarily
with its solemnity and external celebration, the indulgences
attached to it arc also transferred. A strict interpretation of
this canon would mean that, although the Office and Mass of
All Souls’ Day are transferred to 3rd November in a particular
year, the indulgences may not be transferred, if the external
celebration, e.g. procession of the faithful to the cemetery,
special alms for the dead, etc., took place on 2nd November.
A reply given by the Holy Office on 14th December, 1916,
stated that the plenary indulgence for visits was not necessarily
fixed on the 2nd November, but may be transferred to another
date. This decision taken in conjunction with the subsequent
canon 922 still left the question open to discussion ;12 the indul
gence was transferred only if the external celebration was
transferred, and what constituted ‘ external celebration ’ ? It
was not until the 1950 edition of the Enchiridion Indulgentiarum
that the matter was settled beyond doubt. The present grant
of the indulgence makes no mention of the date 2nd November,
but states that the indulgence for visits may be gained
die quo Commemoratio Omnium Fidelium Defunctorum celebratur vel,
dic dominico proxime insequenti. . . .
If, then the Commemoration of All Souls is put back to 3rd
November, the indulgence is also transferred (i.e. the period
for it is from midday on 2nd November until midnight on 3rd
November). The tempus utile for the indulgence for visiting a
cemetery' runs for eight days and so until 10th November,
inclusive. The ‘ octavarium ' mentioned in the grant of the
> Edit., 1952, n. 592.
2 Vide De Angelis, De Indulgentiis, § 374.
INDULGENCES
389
indulgence is not a liturgical octave, since All Souls’ Day has
not a liturgical octave and, therefore, the period of eight day's
is not shortened as would happen when a feast is put back in
its liturgical octave.1
Undoubtedly the indulgence for visiting a cemetery is granted
for a visit to a cemetery where the faithful departed are buried,
and according to canon law they ought to be buried in conse
crated ground, that is, ordinarily in cemeteries set aside for
this purpose and sanctified with solemn or simple blessing. In
those places where the right of the Church to possess cemeteries
is not respected, civil cemeteries may be blessed if the majority
of those who are to be buried there are Catholics, and this
blessing is not lost even though the Church must tolerate the
burial in such cemeteries of infidels or excommunicated persons.2
It would seem that the privilege of the indulgence does not
attach to merely civil cemeteries which arc not blessed in any
way and arc not used, except in cases of necessity, for the burial
of the faithful. On the other hand, an unused cemetery', which
in the past was properly used for the burial of the faithful, remains
a place where the indulgcnced visits may be validly made unless
the bodies have been removed and the ccmetervJ formallyd
handed over to profane uses. Execration or violation of the
cemetery' which would render unlawful its further use for burials
probably would not constitute an obstacle to the gaining of the
indulgence by those who visit the graves of the faithful who arc
still buried there.
CONDITIONS TO BE FULFILLED IN GAINING THE
INDULGENCES OF THE PORTIUNCULA
May the indulgences of the Portiuncula be gained now by
religious in their own oratories?
Parochus.
The privilege of the Portiuncula Indulgence may now be
obtained only from the Sacred Penitentiary by a direct grant,
which will be given in reply to a petition approved by the local
Ordinary. It may now be obtained in favour of any church or
oratory. The Indulgence of the Portiuncula, ‘ the Pardon
of Assisi ’ which in the thirteenth century was attached to the
Church of St. Maty of the Angels, was in the course of time
1 Vide Hcylcn, Tractatus de Indulgentiis, p. 62.
2 Canon 1206.
390
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
extended by special privilege to many other churches and came
to be recognized as a loties quoties indulgence.1 In 1910, on the
occasion of the celebration of the seventh centenary of the
foundation of the Franciscan Order, Pope Pius X2 authorized
bishops to designate in their dioceses, and in accordance with
the needs of the faithful, churches or oratories where the indul
gence may be gained. For the faithful living in community,
the indulgence could be gained by visiting the oratory of their
religious house, even a domestic oratory, if the Blessed Sacrament
was there reserved. Bishops were also empowered to appoint
either 2nd August or the following Sunday as the day on which
the indulgence could be obtained in any particular place. This
general extension of the privilege of the Portiuncula was at
first granted only for the year 1910, but in the following year
the grant was prolonged indefinitely—‘ usque ad novam dis
positionem valiturum ’—and in practice bishops could attach
the privilege to every suitable church or oratory in their dioceses.
'The new regulation of the indulgence was finally contained in
a decree published on 10th July, 1924.3 This decree revokes
the privileges of Pope Pius X except in those cases where a
particular perpetual grant had been given. Bishops can no
longer grant the privilege to churches in their dioceses ; it
may be obtained only from the Sacred Penitentiary directly.
According to the 1924 decree, churches or public oratories to
receive this privilege must be distant at least three kilometres
from other churches or oratories which belong to any Franciscan
Order or which have the privilege. If for some special reason
this indulgence be granted to a semi-public oratory, it shall be
only in favour of the community or group of the faithful for
whose convenience the oratory has been erected. A further
decree published on 1st May, 1939, expressly abrogated the
condition regarding distance, and directed ‘ that all cathedral
and parochial churches and, moreover, other churches and
oratories—for which, especially in the larger parishes, the
convenience of the faithful in the prudent judgment of the local
Ordinary seems to demand it—be entitled to obtain the privilege
of the Portiuncula from the Sacred Penitentiary upon a petition
therefor with a recommendation from the Ordinary.’ Hence,
any church or oratory may now, with the due approval of the
local Ordinary, apply for a grant of the privilege. Normally
1 Bcringer, i, par. 970. Campclo, De Indulgentiis Ordinis Seraphici, p. 214.
5 Vide Lacau, Trésor des Indulgences, p. 226; N.R.Theol., 1939, p. 812:
A.E.R., 1929, p. 5.
1
’ Vide Preces et Pia Opera, η. 698 ; Bouscarcn, Digest, i, p. 454 (A.A.S., xvi,
p. 345); Bouscarcn, Supplement, p. 110 (A.A.S., xxxi, p. 226).
391
INDULGENCES
such a grant is given by the Sacred Penitentiary for a period
of seven years.1 It is also required that in these churches or
oratories, as long as they remain open for the visits of the faithful
who come to gain the indulgence, the relics of St. Francis of
Assisi or of the Blessed Virgin, or at least a picture or statue of
the saint or of Our Lady of the Angels, shall remain exposed
to the veneration of the faithful. Besides, public prayers shall
be made there at such time as seems most fitting for the Supreme
Pontiff and the whole militant Church, for the extirpation of
heresy and the conversion of sinners, and for peace and concord
among nations ; and this rite shall include the invocation of
Our Lady of the Angels and the Seraphic Patriarch and the
Litany of the Saints, and shall close with Benediction of the
Blessed Sacrament.
INDULGENCE FOR THE FIRST SATURDAY
I notice the plenary indulgence for the first Saturday is not included
in the list in the Ordo. What is the position in regard to it?
M. C.
The current edition of the Raccolta mentions indulgences
for the first Saturday under two separate headings. (1) ‘ The
faithful who spend some time in devout prayers or meditations
in honour of the Blessed Virgin Mary Immaculate, on the first
Saturday or Sunday of each month with the intention of perse
vering in the same practice for the space of twelve months, may
gain a plenary indulgence under the usual conditions on each
first Saturday or Sunday.’2 (2) ‘ The faithful who on the first
Saturday of each month perform some special exercises of
devotion in honour of the Blessed Virgin Mary Immaculate,
in order to make atonement for the blasphemies whereby the
name and prerogatives of the same Blessed Virgin are reviled,
may gain a plenary indulgence on the usual conditions. Those
‘In a petition Tor the grant of the indulgence, the following formula could
be used :
Beatissime Pater
Parochus Paroeciae sub titulo ... in loco . . . dioecesis ... ad pedes
Sanctitatis Vestrae provolutus, humiliter petit ut. existentihus in ecclesia
parochiali omnibus per Decreta S. Poenitentiariae Apostolicac d.d. 10 Julii
1924 et 1 Maii 1939 praescriptis, omnes christifidelcs. servatis normis eorumdem
Decretorum Indulgentiam plenariam * toties quoties ’ dic 2 Augusti ibidem
lucrari valeant.
Et Deus etc. . . .
Die . . · Signatures of the Parish Priest and of the local Ordinary.
1 Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, n. 365.
392
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
who once in their lifetime perform such a devout exercise on
the first Saturdays of eight successive months may gain, without
prejudice to the above plenary indulgence, a plenary indulgence
at the hour of death, if after Confession and Communion, or at
least being duly contrite, they invoke with their lips, if possible,
otherwise in their hearts, the most Holy Name of Jesus, and
accept death with resignation from the hand of God as the due
punishment of their sins.’1
This practice of performing special devotions on the first
Saturday of the month has long been recognized under different
forms. The indulgence first mentioned above is based upon
a grant made by Pope Pius X in 1905. That grant was made by
the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences on 1st July, 1905, in
response to a petition from the Minister-General of the Friars
Minor. In his petition the Minister-General asked that the
jubilee of the definition of the Immaculate Conception should
be celebrated by reviving the almost-forgotten devotion of
honouring the Immaculate Virgin specially in the first Saturday
of each month, and recalled the fact that Pope Clement XIV
had in 1714 granted an indulgence of two hundred days for
such a devotion. The indulgence granted in 1905 was confirmed
by a decree issued in 1927. The second indulgence mentioned
above, in which particular reference is made to the intention
of making reparation for irreverence to the Blessed Virgin Mary,
was granted in 1912. This aspect of the devotion in reparation
to the Blessed Virgin developed in France after the revolution
and was fostered by such men as Père Pierre Joseph Picot de
Cloriviere in imitation of the first Friday devotion in reparation
to the Sacred Heart.2
In addition, special indulgences are granted to those who
assist at public devotions in honour of Our Lady of Good
Counsel. ‘ The faithful who piously assist at public devotions
in honour of Our Lady of Good Counsel, held in a church or
public oratory, on the first Sunday of any month, or, if that be
impossible on the Saturday immediately preceding, may gain
an indulgence of seven years and a plenary indulgence under
the usual conditions.’3
The list of indulgcnccd days given in the Latin Ordo for
Ireland is not meant to be exhaustive. It contains only those
days which have been indulgenccd by a special privilege granted
to the faithful of Ireland. The universal indulgence for the
1 Ibid, n. 367.
’
Cutl° Cattolico, i, p. 463 ; A.S.S., 19, 6 ; Ephem. Lit., 1912.
’ Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, n. 428.
393
INDULGENCES
first Friday is mentioned at the end of this list because it replaces
an earlier privilege which was confined to members of the
Sacred Heart Sodality.1 These indulgences were contained in
privileges granted in 1772, 1773 and 1783. Special grants were
made to the diocese of Dublin in 1771, 1780 and 1783 and these
were extended to the other provinces of Ireland in 1832. Λ
similar privilege was granted to Maynooth College in 1834.2
The devotions of the first Saturday were never referred to in
these national privileges. At the present time the devotion of
the first Saturday in honour of the Immaculate Heart of Mary
is being more widely practised and the Holy See has in individual
grants to many dioceses authorised a privileged Votive Mass
with a status similar to that of the first Friday Mass in honour
of the Sacred Heart. It may, therefore, be worthy of note that
the devotion of the first Saturday in honour of the Immaculate
Heart of Mary which, originated independently of any events
which may have taken place in the present century, has a long
history.
THE IRISH INDULGENCED FEASTS
In the Irish Ordo (Latin edition, page viii) there is a list of feasts
on which indulgences may be gained by the faithful in this country,
(a) Is the indulgence for the feast of the Assumption obtainable
either on the feast or on the following Sunday? (6) For the feasts of
the Trinity, SS. Peter and Paul and of St. Patrick it is stated that the
indulgence may be gained on the feast ‘ ve/ in aliqua sequentium sept,
dierum.' Does this mean that it may be gained only on one of these
days?
Studens.
In the I. E. Record for March, 1882,3 extracts were published
from the original documents by which these indulgences were
granted to the faithful of Ireland. It may be of general interest
to set forth here some of these details concerning the general
grants of indulgence to Ireland.
(1) Pope Clement XIV, on 19th April, 1772, granted to the
faithfid of Ireland a plenary indulgence on the feast of SS. Peter
and Paul, 29th June, or on any day within the octave, provided
that they receive the sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist
and pray for the conversion of infidels and heretics and for the
propagation of the Faith.
* Vide I. E. Record, 1912, p. 377.
3 /. E. Record, 1882, p. 183.
’ P. 182 ; Cf. I. E. Record, 1942 (November).
MWMWEW7* «ΛΗβ1
A.
394
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
(2) On 14th February, 1773, the same Pope granted an
indulgence in similar terms for the feast of St. Patrick ; con
cerning the prayers it was specified
per aliquod temporis spatium in Ecclesiis sive Oratoriis, vel etiam in privatis
domibus, pias ad Deum dirigant preces pro Infidelium conversione, etc.
Tf
1
»
p
b
(3) Pope Pius VI, on 12th January, 1783, granted an indul
gence on the feasts of patrons or titular saints of churches or
oratories throughout the country to all who receive the sacra
ments and visit these churches or if they arc legitimately pre
vented from making the visit pray at home for the propagation
of the Faith.
In addition the following indulgences were originally granted
to the Dublin province : (1) By Pope Clement XIV, on 4th
August, 1771, persons who having received the sacraments
visited any parochial church in the city of Dublin were privileged
to gain an indulgence on the following feasts : Christmas, Cir
cumcision, Epiphany, Resurrection, Ascension, Pentecost and
Corpus Christi, five of the more important feasts of the Blessed
Virgin and All Saints. A decree of Pope Pius VI, on 11th
June, 1780, specified nominalim the feasts of the Blessed Virgin
as the Annunciation, Assumption, Immaculate Conception,
Nativity and Purification, and added that the indulgence in
each of these cases was available either on the feast or on the
Sunday immediately after it ; (2) Pope Pius VI granted an
indulgence for the first Sunday of each month (12th January,
1783) ; and (3) Pope Leo XII, on 18th February, 1827, granted
a plenary indulgence to those who would make their Easter
Communion between Ash Wednesday and Low Sunday. On
18th March, 1832, the archbishops and bishops of the provinces
of Armagh, Cashel and Tuam successfully petitioned Pope
Gregory XVI that the privileges already granted to the Dublin
province should be extended to all the dioceses of Ireland. The
feast of the Sacred Heart was at first (1801 and 1802) indulgcnced
only for members of the Sacred Heart Sodality, but in recent
times the indulgence has been made available to all the faidiful,
and not only in this country.1 We cannot find any record of a
grant of indulgence for the feast of the Holy Trinity and accord
ing to the present edition of the Enchiridion Indulgentiarum it is
not indulgcnced for the Universal Church. It has, however,
been listed in the Irish Ordo at least since 1875.
From the decrees which have been cited it is clear that (a) the
indulgence for the feast of the Assumption may be gained either
1 Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, η. 249.
INDULGENCES
395
on the feast or on the following Sunday.1 (b) In accordance
with canon 921 the indulgence for St. Patrick’s feast or for the
feast of SS. Peter and Paul may be gained only once, i.e. either
on the feast or on any of the following seven days as one chooses.
MAY INVALIDS GAIN ON OTHER DAYS THE
INDULGENCES ATTACHED TO THE RECEIVING
OF HOLY COMMUNION ON THE FIRST FRIDAY
OF THE MONTH?
When attending the sick in their own homes I find it impossible
to bring Holy Communion to all on the first Friday of the month.
What indulgences are attached to the receiving of Holy Communion
on the first Friday, and may these indulgences be gained also by
those sick persons who cannot receive until the Saturday ?
Aquila.
It is necessary to distinguish clearly between (a) the devotional
practice of receiving Holy Communion on the first Friday
of each month and (b ) the special devotion of the ‘ Nine
Fridays.’ The former devotion was made known to St. Margaret
Mary Alacoquc during the ‘ third great apparition ’ which took
place in 1674. Our Lord directed the saint to receive Holy
Communion on the First Friday of each month in reparation
to the Sacred Heart.2 This devotion has been recognized by
the Church by the granting both of a special indulgence and
of the privilege, whereby in churches and oratories where
special first Friday devotions arc held in the morning, the Mass
of the Sacred Heart may be celebrated as a Solemn Votive
Mass. The indulgences which may now be gained in con
nection with this devotion are as follows :3
(λ) The faithful who take part in public devotions in honour
of the Sacred Heart gain a plenary indulgence if they receive
the sacraments of confession and Holy Communion and in
addition pray for the intentions of the Pope (i.e., recite, Pater,
Ave, and Gloria at least once or say some equivalent prayers) ;4
(ό) Persons who are legitimately detained from attending
1 It may not be gained on both days by the same person.
1 Vide, The Nine First Fridays, by a Secular Priest. Burns Oates and
Washbournc, p. 73.
3 Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, n. 252.
4 Op. cit., p. xv. ‘ Clausula “ precandi ad mentem Summi Pontificis ”
plane adimpletur, adiicicndo ceteris operibus praescriptis recitationem ad
eam mentem unius Pater, Aoe et Gloria, relicta tamen libertate singulis fidelibus,
ad nonnam canon 934 1, quamlibet aliam orationem recitandi iusta unius
cuiusque pietatem et devotionem erga Romanum Pontificem (S. Paen. Ap.
20, Sept., 1933 ; A.A.S., vol. xxv, p. 44€).’
-
ilMÉII·!,.
396
INDULGENCES
PROBLEMS LX THE LITURGY
the public devotions or who arc in places where such devotions
are not carried out, may gain a plenary indulgence if they
receive the sacraments, recite some prayers in reparation to
the Sacred Heart, visit a church or public oratory and pray
for the Pope’s intentions ;
(r) On all other Fridays throughout the year an indulgence
of seven years may be gained under the same conditions.
In accordance with canon 931 of the Codex the sacramental
confession prescribed for this indulgence may be made at any
time during eight days preceding or following the first Friday
and the Holy Communion may be received either on the pre
ceding Thursday or within the succeeding week. Hence Holy
Communion received on the Saturday satisfies the required
condition. Presumably invalids will not be able to fulfil the
prescription of visiting a church or oratory even privately. In
such cases the confessor could by virtue of canon 936 commute
that condition to the recital of prayers or to the performance of
some other suitable pious work in reparation to the Sacred
Heart.*
1 In such commutation the object of the devotion must
be observed substantially.
The special devotion of the ‘ Nine Fridays ’ has, however, a
completely different status. This remains a popular devotion
which has not been recognized by any grant of indulgence.
It originates from the ‘ Great Promise made by our Lord to
St. Margaret Mary when He said : “ I promise thee in the
exceeding great mercy of my Heart that its all-powerful love
will grant to all those who will receive Holy Communion on
nine consecutive first Fridays of the month, the grace of final
repentance, not dying in my disfavour and without receiving
their sacraments. . . . ” ’2 Holy Communion must be received
on the first Friday of nine consecutive months, and if the series
is interrupted even inculpably, the conditions required in the
Promise are simply not verified. None of the Sacred Con
gregations has been concerned to give an official interpretation
of the Promise ; hence, we can have no authority for going
beyond the exact conditions determined by Our Lord’s words.
If the condition of receiving Holy Communion on each of nine
consecutive first Fridays is not fulfilled, then the devotion of
the * Nine Fridays ’ has not certainly been performed.
1 \ ermeersch, Epitome, luris Canonici, ii, p. 150, * Quae commutatio etiam
extra tribunal paenitentiae a confessario, i.e., a sacerdote pro confessionibus
approbato, fieri potest. Oportet tamen ut objectum seu causa indulgentiae
substantialiter servetur, solis mutatis condicionibus.’ Canon 935. Cf
canon 936.
1 The Nine Fridays, loc. cit.
397
THE STATIONS OF THE CROSS
It may be useful to state here briefly all the requirements of
the laws governing this devotion. The devotion of the Way of
the Cross has been fixed in its present form since the eighteenth
century. In 1731, Pope Clement XII definitely fixed the
number of Stations at fourteen and permitted these indulgenced
Stations to be erected in every church, provided that they were
erected by a Franciscan father with the permission of the
Ordinary. In 1742, Pope Benedict XIV exhorted all priests
to have the Stations installed in their churches. The basis of
all the legislation for the Stations has been the Avvertismcnti
Necessarii per Ben Regotare II Devolo Esercizio Della Via Crucis,
published in 1731, but many of these provisions have been
abrogated either by custom, or by subsequent decisions.
Erection and Transference of the Stations : For validity it is
required that a priest, having the proper faculties, bless and
erect, according to the formula given in the Roman Ritual,
fourteen wooden crosses. A secular priest must now obtain
the requisite faculty by application through his Ordinary to
the Holy Sec.1 The Ordinary has not, by the general law, the
power to delegate this faculty even per modum actus, but he may
be so empowered by virtue of a special privilege. All bishops,
even titular bishops, have the power to erect the Stations, but
they may not, by the general law, delegate that power.2
Superiors, even local superiors of the Friars Minor, have the
faculty and may delegate it to their own subjects. It is no
longer required for validity that the faculty be in writing or
that the Ordinary give his written permission for its use. For
liccity, a priest who has the faculty to erect the Stations should
not avail himself of it, unless he can at least presume consent
of the Ordinary, and the fact of valid and lawful erection should
be recorded in writing ad perpetuam rei memoriam. In the decree
prescribing these conditions, Pope Pius XI granted a validation
of all erections of Stations which may have been performed
before that date, 30th March, 1938.
The crosses must be plain wooden crosses, not crucifixes.3
They may be gilt or ornamented, but not in such a manner that
the nature of their material is concealed, i.e. they must be
1 Vide Decree of S. Pen.. 12th March. 1938, J..Î.Ô'., vol. xxx. No. 4. p. 111.
s Canons 239 and 349. This is a privilege, not ordinary power and therefore
cannot be delegated.
3 Vide Rescripta Authentica, S.C.Ind., n. 100, 258, 270, 275, 332, 311,
328, etc; Mocchegiani, Collectio Indulgentiarum, η. 1122, et seq ; Bcringer,
Les Indulgences (1925), i, par. 618, etc; /. E. Record, 1932, p. 85.
398
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
clearly seen as wooden crosses. To (.he crosses may be attached
sculptures or paintings of the various scenes commemorated in
the Stations, but no such representations are necessary. It is
not correct to have such pictures inset in the arms of the crosses ;
the crosses must stand out clearly as the important part of the
Station. If the crosses are concealed by paintings, etc., the
erection is probably invalid. Any images or pictures attached
to the crosses should be blessed, but this blessing is prescribed
only for liceity and is not necessary for validity. It is necessary
that the crosses be blessed according to the formula of the
Ritual (Titulus ix, cap. xi). All the crosses may be blessed
together and then erected, or they may be first affixed to the
wall and then blessed. It is not necessary that the priest who
blesses the crosses assist in, or even superintend, their erection.
Aflixio autem Crucium ct tabularum Stationum fieri potest a quocumque
privatim sine caeremoniis, etiam alio tempore sivc post sivc ante ipsarum
benedictionem faciendam a Sacerdote in loco, in quo Stationes sunt erigendae.1
The blessing, however, must take place in the church or oratory
in which the Stations will be erected. Although the Ritual
directs that the ceremony of blessing should conclude with the
performance of the Way of the Cross, this docs not pertain to
the validity of the blessing and it is by no means necessary that
the celebrant place in position the paintings or images of die
Stations. The crosses must be in fixed positions with some
distance between then ; the distance separating them one from
anodier is not determined, but the crosses must not be so
crowded together that one could make the round of the Stations
in a few paces. The Stations may begin from either the Epistle
or the Gospel side of the church. The Sacred Congregation of
Indulgences has inclined2 to favour the custom of beginning
the Stations on the Gospel side, as is done in the church of the
Holy Saviour in Jerusalem. There is, however, no regulation
on this point, but if pictures are attached to the Stations, it is
desirable that persons making the Way of the Cross should
accompany Our Saviour on the way to Calvary and not find
that He is represented as meeting them from the opposite
direction.
Once the Stations have been canonically erected, they may
without any loss of indulgences be completely re-arranged in
the same church or oratory, c.g. their order may be reversed
from the Epistle to the Gospel side. They may be removed
temporarily, for example, if the walls of the church are being
1 Rit. Rom. Rubric, at the end of the formula for blessing Stations.
1 1831.
INDULGENCES
399
painted, and replaced (not necessarily in exactly the same
places), without any repetition of the blessing and canonical
erection. Up to six new crosses may be put up without any
special blessing, provided that at least eight of the original
crosses remain. Without any ceremony, new pictures could be
attached to the old crosses ; these pictures should themselves
be blessed, but the blessing is not essential to the validity of the
Stations. The blessing is lost and a new canonical erection is
necessary only if the Stations are transferred to a different place,
i.e. to a différent church or oratory, or if the majority of the
crosses arc replaced by new ones. During the time of alterations
and repairs the indulgences arc temporarily suspended. The
faithful cannot gain the indulgences, unless there are actually
fourteen crosses affixed to the walls. If one of the crosses is
broken or removed, the indulgences cannot be gained until it
is replaced. If the Stations are transferred to another church
or oratory, the crosses must be blessed again and canonically
erected.
Conditions for Gaining the Indulgences : ‘ The faithful who with
at least a contrite heart, whether singly or in company, perform
the pious exercise of the Way of the Cross, when the latter has
been canonically erected according to the prescriptions of the
Holy See, may gain a plenary indulgence as often as they perform
the same.’ Since the decree of the Sacred Penitentiary issued
on 25th March, 1931, it is clear that the indulgence of the
Stations is a toties quoties indulgence—it may be gained as often
as the exercise is performed. For the private carrying out of
the devotion no vocal prayers arc necessary ; it is required that
one meditate briefly {quantumvis breviter') on the Passion of Our
Lord. It is not necessary' to meditate on each of the mysteries
represented by the fourteen Stations;1 it suffices to meditate
in general on the Passion, but some meditation is necessary.
Vocal prayers alone do not fulfil the required conditions. For
people who are not accustomed to mental prayer it would
suffice, as St. Leonard of Port-Maurice taught, that they know
that the crosses represent the holy places where the Word
Incarnate suffered for us and that they strive through this
thought to arouse in themselves sympathy with our suffering
Redeemer. For the public performance of the devotion some
vocal prayer is necessary ; the decrees suggest, but do not
actually prescribe, the form of prayer which would be suitable,
namely the reading of a short meditation, followed by an act
1 Λ decree requiring meditation on each station (16th March, 1839) has
since been suppressed.
400
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
of contrition and Paler and Ave at each Station.
approved forms now in use follow this scheme.
Λ number of
Ubi nullum adsit impedimentum, singulae stationes singillatim sunt
visitandae.1
In the private performance of the devotion, it is absolutely
necessary to visit each station in so far as space and the number
of persons making the exercise permit. There must be at least
some movement de loco in locum even when the church is crowded.
One may fulfil this condition even when it is not possible to
move actually from station to station, but one must move from
one place to another between the stations. For example,
a person may validly fulfil this condition by passing down the
Gospel side and returning again on the same side of the church,
thus visiting the Stations on the Epistle side a longe. In a very
large church, however, the faithful should be counselled against
this practice because it must inevitably engender distractions
in prayer, and for the less well instructed the validity of their
performance of the exercise may be endangered by the fact that
they can scarcely see and, therefore, only in a very wide sense
do they visit the Stations on the farther side of the church.
Some commentators hold that, when the church is crowded,
any motion would suffice for the gaining of the indulgences.1
2
A decree of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences, on the
other hand, declares,
'L
Transeundum esse ab una statione ad aliam in quantum sinit aut multitudo
personarum, quae eas visitant, aut angustia loci ubi erectae sunt.34
«
1.
V
&
£
»
Hi
Other decrees direct that the faithful should not attempt to
perform the exercise during Mass or other divine sendees lest
they should disturb other members of the congregation. When
the Way of the Cross is performed in public, it suffices that the
priest conducting the devotion, or in a religious or pious house
that one member of the community, move from station to
station while the others remain in their places, standing and
kneeling and turning towards the various Stations while the
prayers are said. ‘ The Stations must be made uninterruptedly,
i.e. without interruption by any secular action. An interruption
to hear Mass or recite other prayers would not break the
continuity. Oratio non interrumpitur per orationem.
1 Reser. Aut., 100.
1 Cappello, De Sacramentis, ii (1944), p. 707 : * Si ecclesia sit repleta et
compressa devotis, ut motus corporis de loco in locum omnino impossibilis
existât, censemus indulgentias nihilominus acquiri positis ponendis, ubi motus
quidam ponatur, quamvis non dc loco in locum.
3 Rescr. Aut., 287.
4 Vide I. E. Record (November, 1947), p. 1017.
INDULGENCES
401
RENOVATING THE STATIONS OF THE CROSS
The Stations of the Cross in my church have been canonically
erected, but now are dirty and worn after fifty years of service. Can
I replace them with new stations or have them removed for cleaning
and repairing without formality? In the latter case could I get the
loan of a set and put them up for the sake of the people temporarily?
The crosses are a fixed and immovable part of the stations and would
have to come down with them.
Parochus.
It must be borne in mind that canonical erection of the
stations means that a certain set of fourteen wooden crosses
has been blessed and erected in a particular place. All the
crosses may be blessed together and then erected or they may
be first affixed to the wall and then blessed ; the blessing,
however, must be imparted in the church or oratory in which
the stations will be erected and the stations arc validly blessed
only for that place. Once the stations have been canonically
erected, they may, without any loss of indulgences, be com
pletely re-arranged in the same church or oratory or they may
be removed temporarily during the painting or alteration of
the church and replaced (not necessarily in exactly the same
places), without any repetition of the blessing and canonical
erection. As many as six new crosses may be put up without
any special blessing, provided that at least eight of the original
crosses remain. Without any special ceremony, new pictures
may be attached to the old crosses ; these pictures should
themselves be blessed, but the blessing is not essential to the
validity of the stations. The blessing is lost and a new canonical
erection is necessary only if the stations arc transferred to
a different place, i.e. to a different church or oratory', or if
the majority of the crosses arc replaced by new ones. During
the time of such alterations and repairs, the indulgences
are temporarily suspended. The faithful cannot gain the
indulgences unless there are actually fourteen crosses affixed
to the walls. If the stations arc transferred to another church
or oratory, the crosses must be blessed again and canonically
erected.1
In accordance with these principles the difficulties of our
enquirer must be answered as follows : New stations put up
even for a short time would require canonical erection. The
present stations may be removed for cleaning and repairs
1 Vide Rescripta Authentica S. Congr. Ind.< n. 100, 258, 275, 322, 311, etc. ;
Beringer, Les Indulgences (1925), i, par. 618, et scq.
402
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
INDULGENCES
and put back without any formality. In the course of such
repairs not more than six of the crosses may be replaced by new
ones but, provided that at least eight of the original crosses
arc retained, as many new pictures as are desired may be set up.
For liccity these pictures should be blessed if the majority arc
new ; this blessing, however (the formula for which is found
in the Roman Ritual), is not necessary for the valid erection of
the stations. During the time of the cleaning, etc., the indul
gences are suspended ; the stations could not be temporarily
replaced by a borrowed set unless the latter are canonically
erected in that particular church.
CONDITIONS TO BE FULFILLED IN GAINING THE
INDULGENCES OF THE WAY OF THE CROSS
In order to fulfil the necessary conditions when making the
Way of the Cross, must one actually move from station to station?
I understand that when members of a religious community are making
the Way of the Cross in common, it suffices if the person conducting
the devotion moves around from one station to another. May this
privilege be availed of in a public church or only in the oratories of
religious ?
Parochus.
When one makes the Way of the Cross privately, it is
necessary in order to gain the indulgences that each station be
visited separately, i.e. that one really move from station to
station. Several decisions*11 of the Sacred Congregation of
Indulgences make it clear that this is an essential condition
which must be fulfilled in so far as the available space permits,
and hence it is recommended2 that, in order to avoid disturbing
others, the faithful should not attempt to perform this devotion
privately while Mass or any other public service is being cele
brated. Ina few particular cases because of special circumstances
the condition has been dispensed with, but always such a dis
pensation is a special privilege confined to certain churches—
‘ de speciali gratia in exemplum non afferenda.’3
The privilege granted in favour of persons living in com
munity may be availed of only in their own chapels or oratories.
1 E.g. Decreta Authentica, η. 100, 287, etc.
Ί
1 Avvertimente, vii, 1731.
« E.g. Decreta Authentica, 407 10th March, 1808) ; Privilégia Congr. Presbyt.
S0. Sacramento—S. Congr. Inaul., 15th May, 1908.
S
7
403
By virtue of this privilege, it suffices when the community make
the Way of the Cross in common that the person conducting
the devotion alone move from station to station while the
others kneel and stand in their places. In 1757 it was decided
that the method of St. Leonard de Port-Maurice, i.e. that the
priest alone, with two servers, should visit each station, may be
used when the devotion is held in public.1 Later a Rescript
from the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda stated that, if
the faithful could not otherwise hear the prayers, the priest
conducting the devotion may remain in the pulpit provided
that another priest accompanied by servers move from station
to station.2 The Sacred Penitentiary in December, 1917,
formally declared that when the Way of the Cross is so con
ducted in public the faithful should stand, kneel and genuflect
in their places.3 Replies published by the Sacred Congregation
of Indulgences in 19014 and 19025* admitted the use of the
same method in the oratories of religious of both sexes. When
the exercise is performed by the community, it suffices if one
religious makes the round of the stations. Such a community
exercise is not a public service but rather a private function
which is carried out at the same time by the members of the
community. The most recent decision in this matter is that
published by the Sacred Penitentiary on 20th March, 1946.®
In that reply the following points are made clear : (a) The
decree issued in 1757 applied only to the public exercise of the
Way of the Cross ; (ά) In accordance with the decisions given
in 1901 and 1902, a similar method may be used in the oratories
of religious men and women, a member of the community
conducting the exercise ; (c) the same method may now be
used by members of the faitliful who, as described in canon
929, live in community. Those, therefore, who are living in
educational institutions, hospitals, etc., may in the oratory of the
institute perform the exercise in common, one man or one
woman alone visiting each station while the others standing
and kneeling in their places join in the prayei
*s.
1 Decreta Authentica, loc. cit.
2 Rescript, 1st March, 1884 vide Bcringcr, les Indulgences, i, p. 379.
3.4..4.5.. vol. x, p· 30 (4th December, 1917).
<2 7 th February, 1901.
» Mechlinien, 7 th May, 1902.
βΛ.Λ.<ΐ., xxxviii, p. 160·
404
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
CONDITIONS TO BE FULFILLED IN THE USE OF
A CRUCIFIX TO GAIN THE INDULGENCES OF
THE STATIONS OF THE CROSS
A decree was issued in 1942 regarding the plenary indulgence
attached to crucifixes. Does this decree affect crucifixes blessed for
the gaining of the indulgences of the Stations of the Cross? What
are now the conditions to be fulfilled in the use of such a crucifix?
Capellanus Noscomii Publici.
This decree docs not alter the conditions to be fulfilled when
using a crucifix for the gaining of the indulgences of the Stations
of the Cross. The declaration issued by the Sacred Penitentiary
on 22nd September, 1942, simply makes clear the fact that the
plenary indulgences attached to the devout kissing of a specially
blessed crucifix is never a toties quoties indulgence but may be
gained only once—namely, in articulo mortis.1 According to
the present law the conditions to be fulfilled when using a
crucifix blessed for the obtaining of the indulgences of the Way
of the Cross arc those given in the official Enchiridion Indulgenti
arum.'1 Persons who arc sick, in prison or at sea, or in partibus
infidelium or in any way legitimately prevented from making
the Way of the Cross may gain the indulgences attached to
that devotion if, while holding a crucifix specially blessed by
a priest who has the required faculty, they recite with devout
and contrite heart Pater, Ave, and Gloria twenty times. The
number twenty is prescribed because the prayers {Pater, Ave,
and Gloria) must be recited once in commemoration of each
of the fourteen Stations of the Cross, five times in honour of the
Wounds of our Divine Lord and once for the intentions of the
Pope. Persons who for any reasonable cause arc unable to
complete the recitation gain a partial indulgence of ten years
for each Paler, Ave and Gloria which they have recited. Finally,
sick persons who, because of the gravity of their illness cannot
recite these prayers may, nevertheless, gain the indulgences
if they kiss or merely look at a specially blessed crucifix and
repeat any brief prayer or ejaculation in memory of the Passion
and Death of our Divine Lord. The indulgence gained in
these latter circumstances is, however, distinct from the plenary
1 Vide I E. Record, June, 1943, and July, 1913. This indulgence has
frequently been referred to as a toties quoties indulgence because it could be
gained by many persons successively using the same crucifix ; Benneer
Les Indulgences, i, p. 443.
B ’
* N. 164; Cf. Raccolla (1935), n. 175.
"
INDULGENCES
405
indulgence for kissing or looking upon a crucifix which can be
obtained only in articulo mortis—and which is referred to in the
recent decree. The indulgence granted in favour of invalids
like that attached to the devotion of the Stations of the Cross
is now a toties quoties indulgence,*1 and, therefore, may be gained
several times every day.
The faculty to bless and indulgence crucifixes in this way
was first granted in 1773 by Pope Clement XIV to the superiors
of the Franciscan Order, and was confirmed and extended by
Pope Pius IX in 1863.2 Subsequently it was communicated
to the priest members of the Pia Unio Cleri pro Missionibus and
of similar pious societies. In 1933 all such favours granted to
pious societies were revoked and priests who for the future wished
to obtain faculties to indulgence crucifixes, etc., must needs
apply directly to the Sacred Penitentiary.3 In 1943, at the
request of the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda Fide, many
such privileges and faculties were restored to the members
of the Missionary Union of the Clergy. In an official letter
dated 1st May, 1943, the Sacred Penitentiary decided to grant
to members of the Pia Unio Clcri pro Missionibus faculties
to apply to crucifixes, etc., the ‘Apostolic Indulgences,’ to
Rosaries of the Blessed Virgin Mary the Crosier Indulgences
and to bless crucifixes with the sign of the cross alone, thereby
applying to them indulgences of the Way of the Cross and
the plenary indulgence to be gained in articulo mortis. Priests
who have joined this society since 1st April, 1933, have not
these faculties immediately but each must apply for them
through his diocesan director and the international secretariate
of the society.
Indulgences can be attached only to crucifixes which are
made of solid, durable material which will not be easily broken
nor deteriorate in use. It is expressly forbidden that the cruci
fixes be made of lead, pewter, plaster, blown glass or similar
materials.4 The Indulgences of the Way of the Cross can be
applied only to a real crucifix not to a simple cross. It is not
prescribed that the figure be detachable or that any portion
of the cross or of the figure be of wood, it is necessary', however,
that there be a figure of our Saviour Crucified attached to the
cross or reproduced in relief.5 The indulgence is always
1 J..-L.S·., 1931, pp. 167, 522.
* Bcringer, Les Indulgences (1925), p. 450; Dtcr. Auth. S. C. Ind., 387.
1Æ.4.S., 1933, p. 170.
* Décréta Authentica Conçr. Indulg., η. 333, 387, 249.
* S.C.Ind., 24 th May, 1893.
406
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
attached to the figure of Christ, not to the cross1 and hence the
figure may be transferred to another cross without loss of the
indulgence.
CORRECT FORMULA FOR BLESSING OF ROSARIES
AND CRUCIFIXES
A priest who has not any special faculties for the blessing of
rosaries, etc., is frequently asked to impart such blessings in the
confessional and elsewhere. What would be the correct formula
and procedure for him to follow? Again, when a priest has the
special faculties to bless such pious objects unico signo crucis, is it
necessary that he always pronounce the words In nomine Patris, etc.,
when he makes the sign of the cross?
Neo-Ordinatus.
In the Roman Ritual the general rules for blessings include
the following directions :
Benedictiones impertire potest quilibet Presbyter, exceptis iis quae Romano
Pontifici aut Episcopis aliisve reserventur. Benedictio reservata quae a
Presbytero detur sine necessaria licentia, illicita est, sed valida nisi in reservationc Sedes Apostolica aliud expresserit.
Benedictiones sive constitutivae sive invocativae invalidae sunt, si adhibita
non fuerit formula ab Ecclesia praescripta.1
2
A simple benediction can be imparted by a priest to many
objects which he could not indulgence. The application of
indulgences requires that the priest be specially empowered to
attach indulgences to such determined objects of piety and the
exercise of his powers is governed by the conditions laid down in
the decree by which they are granted. Most rosary chaplets,
medals, etc., owe their origin and propagation to a particular
religious Order or Congregation. The members of the Order
have habitually the privilege of blessing and indulgencing such
particular objects and now through the Sacred Penitentiary
these special faculties arc sometimes communicated to other
priests.34 The Apostolic Indulgences can be imparted to objects
of piety by the Pope or by a priest authorized by the Holy See.
Without such due authorization an object may be validly
blessed but no indulgences will be gained by its use. If a special
formula for the blessing is prescribed, then it is necessary for
validity that it be used ; ‘ such a formula is usually prescribed
1 Deer. Atith., 281 ad 6.
2 Rit. Rom., tit. ix, cap. i, n. 2.
3 Decrees of the S. Pcnit., /Î.J.S., 1931, 1943.
4 Rit. Rom., loc. cit., canon 1148.
INDULGENCES
407
in such words as that the blessing is to be carried out ad. formam
Ritualis. If, however, the more general phrase is used that the
blessing be given in forma Ecclesiae consueta, it would suffice to
bless with a simple sign of the cross or when no special formula
is prescribed the common formula, the Benedictio ad Omnia,
approved by Pope Pius IX in 1847, may always be used but
there is no obligation to use it.1
Rosaries of the Blessed Virgin Mary may receive the ordinary
blessing of the Church which is imparted cither by a simple
sign of the cross or by the recital of the Benedictio ad Omnia and
they arc thereby constituted sacramcntals. Rosaries, however,
which have not received the distinctive Rosary blessing nor been
blessed by a properly authorized person do not carry any
indulgences. For the attaching of the Apostolic, the Crosier
and the Brigittine indulgences no special formulas are pre
scribed, but the Dominican indulgences arc to be imparted by
a special blessing according to one of the formulas found in the
Roman Ritual.2
It is by no means certain that when faculties are granted
to bless objects of piety unico signo crucis, the words In nomine
Patris, etc., must be pronounced. A writer in the Ephemerides
Liturgicae for 19333 holds that the pronouncing of the words
is probably necessary for validity and this opinion should pro
tutiore be followed. Many priests, who have been accustomed
to avail of their special faculties by blessing with a sign of the
cross nihil dicens, may now doubt the validity of these blessings ;
hence it may be useful to summarize here the arguments for
and against the obligation of adding the words In nomine Patris,
etc.
The principal arguments by which it is sought to establish
the obligation are : (1) A decree of the Sacred Congregation
of Rites published in 1854 directs for blessings for which the
Ritual does not give a special formula Producendum signum crucis
super re benedicenda cum formula In nomine Patris, etc. ... A
further decree in 1883 decided that a bishop assisting at solemn
Mass should bless the water with the words In nomine Patris,
etc. (2) According to the Ritus Servandus in Celebratione Missae
the words In nomine Patris, etc., pertain to the proper forming
of the sign of the cross.4 (3) The following reply was published
by the Code Commission in 1929 : ‘ Whether the words of
‘‘Haec benedictionis formula adhiberi potest a quovis Sacerdote. . . .’
Rit. Rom.
* Nos. 35 and 36 in titulus ix, cap. xi.
3 Page 71.
‘ Tit. iii, n. 4.
408
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
canon 349 ritibus ab Ecclesia praescriptis arc to be understood in
the sense that bishops when they impart sacred blessings are
forbidden to use a mere sign of the cross when no special formula
is prescribed in the liturgical books ? In the negative.’1 (4) In
Formula III of the quinquennial faculties commonly granted
to bishops there is contained the privilege for the occasion of
visitation of blessing, many various objects without using
particular formulas, but with a sign of the cross and the words
Benedicat haec omnia Deus, Pater, et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus. Amen.2
Against these contentions it may be urged : (1) The Sacred
Congregation of Indulgences in 1840 replied in the negative to
the query
Utrum ad indulgentias applicandas crucibus, rosariis, etc., alius ritus sit
necessarius praeterquam signum crucis a sacerdote qui hanc facultatem
accepit factum?
And in 1843 the same Congregation decided that when the con
dition In forma Ecclesiae consueta was inserted, it was fulfilled by
making the sign of the cross without pronouncing any formula.
(2) The more common interpretation of the above decrees as
well as of the regulations governing the Apostolic indulgences
and of canons 239 and 349 of the Code has been that no words
are necessary. For example, Bcringer3 directs
Lorsque, dans le Rituel romain il n’y a point de benediction speciale pour
tel ou tel objet, il suffit que, sans allumer de cierge le pêtre fasse simplement
le signe de la croix avec la main sur l’objet ά bénir eu disant : In nomine Patris,
etc. . . . S’il s’agit d’appliquer â des objets les Indulgences apostoliques
ou les indulgences dites de sainte Brigitte, il n’est pas meme necessaire de
pronouncer ces paroles ... il suffit qu’on fasse de la main un signe de croix
sur les objets â indulgcncicr ct qu’on ait l’intention de les bénir et de leur
appliquer les Indulgences.
And in Vcrmccrsch-Creuscn 1 we find the following comment
on canon 349 :
»
• '4
■■ β
Ubi peculiaris formula benedictionis Rituali romano praecipitur, etiam
episcopi ea uti tenentur, contra ac Cardinales (cf. canon 349 cum canon 239) ;
ubi nulla vero vel communis tantum formula proponitur unico signo crucis,
i.c. ne verbis quidem In nomine Patris, etc., adhibitis, in sacris benedictionibus
contenti esse possunt.
We may conclude, however, with the learned contributor
to the Ephemerides Liturgicae that, although until an authentic
declaration is promulgated by the Holy See the obligation to
1 Trans. Bouscarcn, Canon Law Digest, i, p. 209.
3 Cf. Appendix to Maynooth Statutes, p. 13.
. ...
3 Fourth French Edition, p. 427. Cf. I.acau, Trésor des Indulgences (1932),
p. 67. ‘ Suppose que ces pouvoirs portent la clause in forma Ecclesiae consueta
il suffit encore d’un signe de croix sans aucune parole. . . .’ Cf. De Angelis
(1916), §221, ‘sufficit signum crucis quod formulae locum tenet.’
* Epitome (1937), p. 348.
jfll
INDULGENCES
409
pronounce any words remains doubtful, since the validity of
the indulgences is at stake the safer course should be followed.
To recapitulate, therefore, the general rules regarding the
imparting of blessings and indulgences : (1) Every priest may
give all the blessings which arc to be found in the Missal and
in the Ritual and which arc not reserved. A reserved blessing
given without due authorization is valid though unlawful.1
(2) Every blessing whether invocative or constitutive is invalid
if the appropriate, appointed form is not used.2 A blessing may
not be imparted in the vernacular. To bless objects for which
no special blessing is given in the Ritual, one may make use of
the Benedictio ad omnia or one may be satisfied with making a
sign of the cross with the words In nomine Patris, etc. By such
an informal blessing rosaries, scapulars, medals, etc., would be
constituted sacramentals, but unless the person blessing them
has the requisite faculties they would not have their distinctive
value for the gaining of indulgences or membership of a con
fraternity, etc. (3) Only a priest who is duly authorized to do
so may attach indulgences to any objects of piety. Again, it
is necessary for validity that a formula which is expressly pre
scribed and from which a dispensation has not been given be
pronounced. The Apostolic Indulgences to be attached to
various objects of piety and the Crosier and Brigittine Indulgences
applicable to rosary beads are to be imparted by a sign of the
cross alone ; although the obligation is not certain, it is advisable
that this sign of the cross be accompanied by the words In
nomine Patris, etc. (4) For the imparting of the Dominican
indulgences to rosaries, it is always necessary to recite the
prescribed form as found in the Roman Ritual.
CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO FACULTIES TO BLESS
AND INDULGENCE ROSARIES, ETC.
Through membership of the Pia Unio I have obtained faculties to
bless and indulgence rosaries, crucifixes, etc. The faculties are granted
under certain conditions, namely: 'dummodo orator ad audiendas
sacramentales confessiones sit approbatus ’ and * de consensu Ordinarii
loci, in quo facultas exercetur.
*
What is the force of these conditions?
Do they mean that I may validly bless and indulgence objects only
in the diocese in which I have faculties to hear confessions?
Neo-Sacerdos.
Priests who have become members of the Pia Unto or of any
’C.I.C. 1147, §§ 2, 3.
’Canon 1148, §2.
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
INDULGENCES
similar society since 1933 do not gain the special faculties to
bless rosaries, etc. through their membership but only through
personal application to the Holy See. The function of the Pia
Unio in this matter is simply to facilitate their applications. The
formula of the rescript by which the Holy See is accustomed to
grant such faculties contains the conditions :
*fW 0 W
*
*
dummodo ad excipiendas sacramentalcs Confessiones sit approbatus, privalim
quandocumque, publice vero tempore tantummodo Adventus, Quadragesi
mae, Spiritualium Exercitionum ac sanctarum Missionum . . . extra Urbem,
gratis quocumque titulo ac de consensu Ordinarii loci in quo haec facultas
exercetur.
Commentators are not agreed on the precise force of these
conditions. De Angelis1 holds : (a) that one must actually
have at least limited faculties to hear confessions in order to
exercise validly the power of blessing and indulgencing pious
objects ; it would not suffice that a priest be qualified to receive
faculties in the sense of canon 877, § 1 ; (Z>) the consent of the
local Ordinary is required for liccity only and it is sufficient if
the consent is tacit, implicit or prudently presumed ; (c) faculties
which arc granted to be used privalim may be used in public
validly though unlawfully. On the other hand, Father Schaaf2
holds that the clause de consensu Ordinarii loci made the per
mission of the local Ordinary necessary for the valid use of the
faculties. Again according to a commentary on the Pia Unio
faculties,3 published in the 1940 issue of the Liber Annualis of the
Pia Unio, when sacramental jurisdiction is required, any juris
diction, no matter how limited, will suffice and will enable
the possessor to use his faculties both inside and outside the
area in which he exercises jurisdiction ; this interpretation of the
condition as attached to faculties obtained (before 1933) ipso
facto by membership of the Pia Unio can be applied also to the
condition now attached to faculties obtained by rescript.
In holding that the consent of the Ordinary is necessary for
the valid use of the faculties Father Schaaf relics on a decision
given by the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences in 1887 con
cerning a rescript by which Pope Pius IX granted faculties to
certain priests ‘ de consensu Ordinariorum.'1 The Congregation of
Indulgences replied Affirmative to the following questions :
(1) Utrum sine hoc consensu invalide quis illis facultatibus ac privilegiis
uteretur? (2) Utrum singuli sacerdotes qui illis facultatibus ac privilegiis
uti volunt singillatim recurrere debeant ad Ordinarium, ut ipsius consensum
obtineant? (3) An vero Ordinarius omnibus ct singulis sacerdotibus suae
1 De Indulgentiis, p. 137.
’ A. E. Revietv (1934), vol. 91, p. 516.
* \zide Pagan Missions, December, 1944.
I
4 JI
Dioccsis, qui nempe conditiones adimpleverint, suum consensum in globo
dare valeat ? 1
The Congregation also decided that merely from the fact that
the pious association existed in the diocese with the approval of
the Ordinary, one could not conclude that its members had the
Ordinary’s consent to the use of their faculties. However, these
decisions were considerably amended by an instruction pub
lished by the Sacred Congregation on 14th June, 1901.2 This
instruction states that : (1) a priest who applies for the faculties
must send with his application a recommendation from his
Ordinary ; (2) for the valid exercise of these powers the priest
must be approved for the hearing of confessions, at least of
men;3 (3) in order that the exercise of the faculties be lawful
it is necessary that he have the consent of the Ordinary of the
place where he uses them. It is desirable that this consent be
given expressly, yet it suffices if the consent is tacit or implicit
and sometimes when it is in practice impossible to do otherwise
the consent may be prudently presumed. If the rescript carries
the condition ‘ privalim ’ a priest cannot exercise the faculties
publicly in a church or oratory before a congregation holding
in their hands the objects to be indulgcnccd or have the objects
placed on an altar where he would bless them at the end of a
function and in the presence of the congregation.
Hence we may conclude that the better opinion is that :
(1) For the valid exercise of his powers to bless and indulgence
articles a priest must have some faculties to hear confessions
although he need not have actual sacramental jurisdiction in
the place where he blesses objects ; (2) for the lauful use of his
powers he requires the consent of the Ordinary of the place,
which consent may be tacit or reasonably presumed.
OBLIGATION TO USE THE CORRECT FORMULA
FOR A BLESSING
A priest in the confessional is asked to bless a ‘ Miraculous Medal.’
He does so by simply making the sign of the cross nihil dicens. Does
he thereby give a constitutive blessing? Is the medal now a blessed
object, carrying all the privileges attached to the devotion of the
‘Miraculous Medal’?
1 16th July, 1887, A.S.S., xx, p. 60.
2 Vide Nouvelle Revue Theologique, xxxiii. p. 528 ; Bcringer, Zzj Indulgences,
i, p. 426. The questions asked were : ‘ I.—Utrurn huiusmodi consensus ita
necessarius retineri debeat ut, si desit, indulgentiae sint omnino invalidae ?
II.—a quonam Ordinario huiusmodi consensus dari debeat?’ The Con
gregation replied by giving an Instruction.
* Vide Bouscaren, Canon Law Digest, 1948, p. 138.
■ ■ H · · ■■■■■
410
412
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Benedictiones impertire potest quilibet Presbyter, exceptis iis quae Roinano
Pontifici aut Episcopo aliisvc reserventur.
Benedictiones sive constitutivae sive invocativae invalidae sunt, si adhibita
non fuerit formula ab Ecclesia praescripta.1
The right to bless and indulgence the ‘ Miraculous Medal ’
is reserved to priests who have obtained the requisite faculty
either directly from the Sacred Penitentiary or through the
Superior-General of the Congregation of the Missions (Vincent
ians). A special formula of blessing was prescribed by the
Sacred Congregation of Rites in 1895 and this formula must be
used for validity. The terms of the concession ordinarily used
in the grant of the faculty to bless the ‘ Miraculous Medal ’
insist on the use of this prescribed formula :
Sacra Pacnitcntiaria Apostolica, vi facultatum a Ssmo D. N. . . . Pp.
sibi tributarum, benigne annuit pro gratia iuxta preces, ita tamen ut Orator
praefata potestate utatur adhibita praescripta formula. . . .
Hence if the correct formula is not used, the blessing is null ;
and a medal blessed with a simple sign of the cross would not
carry the distinctive indulgences of the Miraculous Medal. In
order that these indulgences be gained, it is necessary not only
that the medal be blessed but that it be also formally imposed.
The blessing and imposition cannot be separated. If, however,
the medal is being conferred on a large number, it would suffice
if each member of the congregation put on the medal while the
priest recites in the plural number the formula for the imposition.
It is worthy of note that the medal must be worn around the
neck ; it is not sufficient to carry it on one’s person, e.g. in a
pocket. This is clear from the words of the Apostolic Brief on
the Association of the Miraculous Medal :
Omnes ex utroque sexu fideles, hanc associationem adire et privilegiorum
participes effici possunt, dummodo c collo pendens supra pectus gestent
sacrum numisma benedictum ct sibi impositum a sacerdote ad hoc. deputato.
*
There arc many objects of piety which a priest who has the
appropriate faculties can bless and indulgence with a simple
sign of the cross. Formerly in induits granting these faculties
it was directed that the blessing should be given In forma
Ecclesiae consueta and a Decree of the Sacred Congregation of
Indulgences decided :8
Quando in induito cxistit clausula : * In Forma Ecclesiae Consueta ’ sufficit
signum crucis manu cfTormarc super res benedicendas absque pronuntiatione
formulae benedictionis, et sine aspersione aquae benedictae.
Nowadays in such cases usually it is explicitly prescribed that
1 Rit. Rom., tit. ix, cap. i, nos. 1 and 2.
’ÆÆS.» 1909.
3 Rescripta Authentica, p. 313.
INDULGENCES
413
the blessing be given unico signo crucis ; in these eases the sign
of the cross is a sufficient form and gives a valid blessing. /X
medal may always be blessed in this way and so constituted a
blessed object1 but in the case of the Miraculous Medal unless
the prescribed form for its blessing and imposition is used the
person does not become a member of the Association of the
Miraculous Medal and cannot claim the special indulgences
attached exclusively to that membership.
DOUBT REGARDING FORMULA OF BLESSINGS
Is the sign of the cross a sufficient form giving a valid blessing ?
Would not the omission of the words In nomine Patris, etc., leave
the validity of the blessing gravely in doubt?
J. K.
This question has already been discussed in detail. To
repeat briefly the main points of that discussion. A writer in
the Ephemerides Ltlurgicae for 1933 holds that when faculties are
granted to bless objects of piety unico signo cruets, it is probably
necessary for validity that the words In nomine Patris, etc., be
pronounced. When the validity of indulgences is at stake, this
opinion pro tutiore should be followed although, until an authentic
declaration is promulgated by the Holy See, the obligation to
pronounce any words remains doubtful. When there is a
question of a simple blessing and indulgences are not at stake,
there is no obligation to follow the stricter view. The principal
arguments by which it is sought to establish the obligation to
say the words are : (λ) A Decree of the Sacred Congregation
of Rites published in 1854; (Z>) the rubrics of the Pilus servandus
in celebratione Missae ; (c) A reply of the Code Commission in
1929 ; and (J) the formula used in certain quinquennial faculties
granted to bishops. Against these contentions it is urged that
the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences in more than one
decree decided that the words are not necessary, and there is
excellent extrinsic authority for this view. To cite a few of these
authorities : Vcrmcersch-Crcusen makes the following comment
in canon 349 :2
. . . ubi nulla vero, vcl communis tantum fonnula proponitur unico
signo crucis, i.c. nc verbis quidem In nomine Patris, etc., adhibitis, in sacris
benedictionibus contenti esse possunt.
And in the same context Cappello3 notes :
11. E. Record, May, 19+6.
s Epitome luris Canonici, i, p. 348.
3 Summa luris Canonici (1945), i, p. 345.
414
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Verba ritibus ab Ecclesia praescriptis non ita sunt intclligcnda ut Episcopi
prohibeantur in sacris benedictionibus uti solo crucis signo, quoties peculiaris
forma in libris liturgicis non sit praescripta.
Heylcn1 states :
Ad praefatas indulgentias (i.c. indulgentias apostolicas) objectis piis
applicandas sufficit signum crucis, etiamsi induito addatur clausula : in
orma Ecclesiae consueta idque gcneratiin ut sufficiens est habendum quoties
forma specialis non est praescripta.
In 1914 the Holy Office in dealing with the question whether
it is necessary to repeat several times the sign of the cross when
one blesses several different objects, replied :
In benedicendis pluribus similibus aut diversis religionis obicctis, quae
sacerdoti pluribus facultatibus munito coniuncta vel commixta offeruntur,
atque in ipsis, vigore diversarum facultatum, indulgentiis ditandis, sufficere
unicuin signum pro pluribus benedictionibus atque indulgentiarum adnexioni*
bus.
Commenting on this decree, De Angelis writes :1
*34
Necessc tamen est ut sacerdos, hoc crucis signum super res benedicendas
efformans, intentionem habeat circa indulgentias quas ipse vult adnectere.
Hence we may conclude that, in the light of existing decrees
and opinions, it is by no means certain that, when faculties are
granted to bless objects unico signo crucis, the words In nomine
Patris, etc., must be pronounced.
ROSARY INDULGENCES
If the person leading the Rosary holds rosary beads blessed with
the Dominican indulgences, the people answering the prayers gain
these indulgences, even though they have no beads. Does the same
rule apply to the Crosier, Apostolic and Brigettine indulgences?
P.P.
This question is dealt with briefly on page 418, where it is
pointed out that the privilege is not confined merely to the
Dominican indulgence. The privilege is based on a reply
issued to the Procurator-General of the Dominican Order on
22nd January, 1858. To avoid further repetitions, the text of
the question and reply as found amongst the Decreta Authentica
of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences1 is :
An consulendum sit SSmo, ut concedcrc dignetur ut omnes utriusque
sexus Christifidclium rosarium, vel tertiam saltem eiusdem partem in communi recitantes lucrentur indulgentias a fel. rec. Benedicto Papa XIII
1 Tractatus de Indulgentiis (1948), p. 152.
1914, p. 346.
’ De Indulgentiis (1946), p. 139.
4 N. 384.
INDULGENCES
415
concessas, licet manu non teneant rosarium benedictum, ac sufficere, ut una
tantum persona, quaecumque ea sit ex communitate, illud manu teneat,
coque in recitatione de more utatur?
The Sacred Congregation replied in the affirmative and Pope
Pius IX explicitly approved that reply
addita ternen expressa conditione, quod fideles omnes, ceteris curis semotis,
se componant pro oratione facienda una cum persona, quae tenet coronam,
ut rosarii indulgentias lucrari queant.
This condition that the persons who join in the recitation of
the Rosary should ‘ put aside all other cares ’ was clarified and
mitigated somewhat in a further rescript from the Sacred
Congregation of Indulgences in 1893.1 It was then explained
that die faithful must abstain only from those exterior occupa
tions which would prevent interior recollection ; diis does not
exclude during the recitation of the Rosary the small manual
tasks which at such a time are commonly carried out in religious
houses. For example, a person engaged in arranging the altar
or in folding vestments could validly take part in the recitation
of the Rosary. Canon 934, § 3, of the Code is in accord with
this decision :
Ad indulgentiarum acquisitionem satis est orationem alternis cum socio
recitare, aut mente eam prosequi, dum ab alio recitatur.
It is important to remember that meditation on the mysteries
is nol required to gain the indulgences attached to rosaries by
the special Crosier or Apostolic blessings. When a Dominican
rosary is used meditation is required of those who are able to
meditate. Finally the question may be asked whether it is
necessary to pass the beads successively through one’s fingers.
When the Rosary is recited in common with only one person
holding blessed beads it would seem to be necessary that the
beads be used properly.2 This would not be necessary in private
recitation. Pope Pius XI ‘ deigned to grant that whenever
either manual labour or some other reasonable cause prevents
the faithful from carrying in their hands, according to the
prescription, either the rosary or the crucifix, which has been
blessed for gaining the indulgences either of the Rosary or of
the Way of the Cross, the faithful may gain these indulgences,
provided that, during the recitation of the prayers in question,
they carry with them in any way the rosary or the crucifix.’
1 Vide Beringcr, Les Indulgences (4th edition), i, p. 471.
* Vide Fanfani, De Rosario, p. 141 ; also Fuerst, This Rosary', Ephem. Lit.,
1947, p. 143.
416
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
COMMUNICATION OF THE ROSARY INDULGENCES
While agreeing with you that the indulgences are communicated
to all who recite the Rosary in common provided that one person
in the group holds beads enriched with the Dominican indulgences,
I must respectfully disagree with your extension of this privilege to
cover the Crosier, Apostolic or Brigettine indulgences. I think that
this privilege applies solely to the Dominican indulgenced rosary.
My reasons are based on the following arguments: (1) Pope Pius IX
was asked: * . . . ut concedere dignetur ut omnes ... in communi
recitantes lucrentur indulgentias a fel. rec. Benedicto Papa XIII,
concessas, licet manu non teneant rosarium benedictum, ac sufficere,
ut una tantum persona . . . illud manu teneat, eoque in recitatione
de more utatur.
*
On 22nd January, 1858, Pius IX granted the favour.
In the document cited in the above request Pope Benedict XIII
referred only to the Dominican indulgences; to extend the grant of
1858 in similibus is indefensible. (2) An earlier decision found in the
Decreta Authentica (12th May, 1841), makes it clear that without a
special faculty the indulgences of the Way of the Cross could not be
communicated to others by the possessor of an indulgenced chaplet
or crucifix. (3) Decreta Authentica, η. 249 (29th February, 1820),
decides: ‘Recitans alternatim cum socio orationem cui applicatae
sunt indulgentiae possit lucrari indulgentias.’ The repondent will
gain the indulgences attached to the prayer but it does not follow
that he will also gain the real indulgences attached to the beads held
by his companion.
My conclusions are : (a) Dominican rosary—it is possible for the
leader who holds and uses properly indulgenced Dominican beads
to communicate these indulgences to all others who recite the Rosary
with him. (ό) Crosier rosary indulgence—the holder of the Crosier
rosary does not communicate the grant to his companions; similarly
with the Brigettine rosary the indulgences are not communicated.
The Apostolic indulgences are gained by ownership of an article to
which they have been attached. Nowhere is a reference to be found
that the Apostolic indulgences are shared with companions who assist
in the recitation of the Rosary.
The numerous authors1 who support your view give your opinion
sufficiently strong extrinsic authority to make it safe, but I can assert
that the internal reasons which I propose need first to be disproved.
C.PP.S.
I wish to thank my correspondent for his very informative
letters which are summarized in die above query. Father
Linenberger agrees that there is an extrinsic authority amongst
commentators which is sufficiently strong to justify as quite
safe the view that we have already expressed, but he wishes us
1 E.g. De Angelis, Fuerst, etc.
s. 4
INDULGENCES
417
to examine more carefully the actual evidence on which that
opinion is based. Modern writers base it first on canon 934, § 3—
Ad indulgentiarum acquisitionem satis est orationem alternis cum socio
recitare, aut mente eam prosequi, dum ab alio recitatur.
For example Beringer writing of the Brigettine rosary says :
‘ One may recite this chaplet alternately with others and it
suffices that one of these persons recite it on an indulgenced
chaplet and that the others join in the recitation.—Canon 934,
§ 3.’1 ‘ This canon is based upon decree n. 249 in the Rescripta
Authentica of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences—Reci tans
alternatim cum socio orationem cui applicatae sunt indulgentiae
possit lucrari indulgentias (29th February, 1820).’ It must be
borne in mind that we are not concerned here with the purely'
real indulgences attached to beads, i.c. indulgences which can
be gained merely' by possessing or carry ing specially blessed
beads, but rather with the indulgences to be gained by the use
of blessed beads when reciting certain prayers. The Apostolic
indulgences are purely real and it would seem that they can be
gained only' by’ the person who possesses the blessed object.
The owner of beads enriched with the Apostolic indulgences
may gain these indulgences when he recites the Rosary' provided
that he actually' possesses the beads either on his person or has
them safely at home ; he need not actually hold them in his
hand. I would agree that it seems more probable that he does
not communicate these indulgences to others who join with
him in the prayers. (It must be remembered, however, that the
same Apostolic indulgences can be gained by' possession of a
crucifix, medal, statue, or any' other pious object properlyblessed.)
The question which now arises is whether the Crosier and
Brigettine indulgences arc communicated in the same way as
the Dominican indulgences. The earliest indulgences granted in
favour of the Brigettine rosary' made no mention of the use of
material chaplets. Pope Leo X,2 however, in 1515, granted
special indulgences to those
qui, per ct super Rosaria seu Coronas S. Birgittac devote oraverint,
1 Par. 884 (1925), French edition : * On peut reciter ce chapelet alternative
ment avec d’autres personnes ; et il suffit que l’une de ces personnes le recite
sur un chapelet indulgcncié et que les autres s’unissent pour la récitation.’
This apparently differs from the opinion expressed in the 1921 German edition.
’Bull, Ex Clementi (10th July, 1515); Vide Ferraris. Prompt, Biblioth, iv,
p. 479. Leo X grants indulgences : ‘ omnibus et singulis utriusque sexus
Christifidelibus qui per ct super rosaria seu coronas S. Birgittac devote
oraverint pro qualibet oratione Dominica ... si dixerint vcl recitaverint . . .
per scipsos, aut cum socio, vcl familiari ; qui eamdem indulgentiam con
sequatur.’
15—1993
418
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
INDULGENCES
and permitted the recitation of these prayers with another
person who had not beads ; and in the following year made
the special grant in favour of rosaries blessed by the Canons
Regular of St. Augustine of the Order of die Holy Cross. Pope
Benedict XIII when promulgating similar indulgences for the
recitation of the Dominican rosary added
ad effectum lucrandi praedictas indulgentias requiratur, ut Rosarium fuerit
de more benedictum a Fratribus Ordinis Praedicatorum.
I he condition that the rosary should be held in one’s hand
was not mentioned in any of the papal decrees but was made
explicit in the Raccolta.1 Again in 1808 Pope Pius λΠΙ and in
1851 Pope Pius IX granted indulgences for the recitation of the
Rosary without making mention ofblessed beads, but the Raccolta
added the condition that to gain the indulgence one must hold
a blessed chaplet. It would seem that this condition was added
by the Raccolta as an interpretation of the phrase de more simply
because the use of blessed beads in reciting the Rosary was an
established custom. In 1889 the Sacred Congregation of Indul
gences was asked :
An ad lucrandas indulgentias Rosarii Beatae Mariae Virginis sive Coronas
Franciscanas, vel parvae Coronas Immaculatae Conceptionis Beatae Mariae
Virginis vel S. Birgittae, etc., necessarium sit habere Rosarium materiale
ad hoc benedictum vel simplex recitatio sufficiat ?
The reply was
Standum terminis concessionum Indulgentiarum
prccatoriis coronis de quibus in proposito dubio.
adnexarum singulis
Only in the decree of Pope Benedict XIII had explicit mention
been made of the obligation of holding the blessed beads during
the recitation, hence it was only in respect of this decree that a
relaxation was necessary. The decree of Pope Pius IX con
ceding this relaxation (22nd January, 1858) added the con
dition that the faithful joining in the recitation of the Rosary
should leave aside all other cares. A subsequent decision (13th
November, 1893) clarified this condition—the faithful are to
abstain only from those external occupations which would
impede internal attention. (Pope Leo XIII in 1884 granted
the same special faculty in respect of a crucifix indulgenced for
the Way of the Cross.) Pope Pius X conceded that the Crosier
and Dominican indulgences could be gained simultaneously by
the use of one and the same chaplet. Hence it is reasonable to
conclude that the chaplet is required to be used in the same
manner for both cases.
a
I'bi lex non distinguit nec nos distinguere debemus.
1 Vide Nouvelle Revue Thtologiquey 1388 and 1894.
419
Hence I believe that the Brigettinc and Crosier indul
gences are communicated in the same way as the Dominican
indulgences because it is not clear that the papal grants of
these indulgences ever insisted that each person hold a blessed
chaplet. Persons reciting the Rosary in common arc envisaged
as a community or confraternity and it therefore suffices that
the leader of the prayers hold the blessed beads. In conclusion :
(era, n. 360.
8 Even earlier ‘ Bede ’ rings, i.e. rings with ten small knobs or bosses and
a larger one for die Pater Nosier were made of gold, silver, ivory, and cheaper
materials, and commonly used in Ireland and England in the fourteenth
century (vide Nesbitt, Our Lady in the Church).
424
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
they recite Rosaries while turning this ring five or fifteen times
on the finger. Moreover these faithful ask that rings of this
kind should be blessed and that the indulgences usually applied
to rosary beads should be attached to them. . . . The Bishop
of Le Mans (Province of Tours) requests for his priests the
faculty to bless these rings and to apply to them the indulgences
attached to rosary chaplets.’1 The Sacred Congregation refused
to grant any approval or to allow the rings to be blessed or
indulgenced. A person who makes use of such a ring can, of
course, gain the ordinary indulgences granted for the recitation
of the Rosary which can be gained without the use of a chaplet
of any kind.2 Also it must be remembered that when the
Rosary is recited in common all the participants may gain the
special indulgences attached to the use of rosary beads if the
person leading the prayer holds such an indulgenced chaplet.
More recently, in 1918, the Sacred Penitentiary was asked
whether the Rosary indulgences could be applied to metal
bracelets in which five decades of metal beads were rigidly
fitted together with a metal crucifix. The Congregation decided
that such bracelets could be blessed as pious objects and that
the Apostolic indulgences could be attached to them, but
excluded the distinctive Rosary indulgences ; such a bracelet
cannot be indulgenccd as a rosary chaplet. De Angelis com
ments on this decision :
Objectum hoc, quamvis stride loquendo dici nequeat corona, nihilominus
inter pietatis objecta merito adnumerari potest ; habet enim applicatam
parvam coronulam cum crucifixo.
Ceterum ipsum non habet, saltem
praecipue, ut sit personae ornamento sed ut facilior evadat SS. Rosarii
*
recitatio.
INDULGENCES OF THE ROSARY, Etc.
Rosary beads are frequently sold with crosses without the figure.
A notice attached to these beads states that in spite of the absence of
the figure, all indulgences may be gained through these rosaries. Does
this apply also to the plenary indulgence to be gained by recitation of
the En Ego after Holy Communion?
Over 80.
1 De Angelis, De Indulgentiis, § 225 ; cf. Fuerst, This Rosary, p. 61 ; American
Ecclesiastical Review, 1933 (vol. 88), p. 193.
5 Recently (on 11 th October, 1954), the Holy Father has increased the
indulgences for the Family Rosary. Now those who recite the Rosary daily
in their families (qui tertiam B.M.V. Rosarii partem in familia per hebdomadam
quotidie recitaverint) may, on condition that they receive the sacraments of
Penance and Eucharist gain a plenary indulgence each Saturday, also on
two other days during the week and on all feasts of the Blessed Virgin which
are celebrated in the universal Church.
* Loc. cit.
INDULGENCES
425
Λ rosary is essentially a chaplet in which the beads are
arranged in five or fifteen decades and the blessing and indul
gences are attached to the beads so joined together, not to any
medals, crucifix or other pendant which may be added.1 Hence
beads to which a simple cross without a figure is appended
may nevertheless be enriched with all the rosary indulgences.
The cross, however, could not be used for the gaining of in
dulgences for which a crucifix is required. The indulgence of
the En Ego can be gained only if the prayer is recited before a
crucifix or an image of Christ crucified. Similarly the simple
cross could not be validly blessed for the indulgences of the Way
of the Cross or for gaining the Apostolic indulgences. Such
indulgences arc attached always not to the cross but to the
figure of Christ crucified ;12 hence only a crucifix can be validly
used.
INDULGENCES ATTACHED TO ROSARIES
Some of the laity take out their rosaries for incidental Our
Fathers and Hail Marys said, for example at a Holy Hour, with the
intention of gaining indulgences. Is it true that rosaries are indulgenced
in the sense implied?
Fautor Franciscanus.
Indulgences can be gained by the use of rosary' beads
while reciting occasional Paters and Aves if the beads carry' the
special indulgences known as the Crosier indulgences.3 By' the
Brief Regularem Vitam (20th August, 1516) Pope Leo X granted
a special indulgence for the recitation of the Rosary of the
Blessed Virgin Mary' while using a chaplet blessed by the MasterGeneral of the Canons Regular of St. Augustine of the Order
of the Holy Cross. This indulgence could be imparted by any
member of the Crosier Order, and, in 1913, Pope Pius X em
powered their General to communicate that privilege to other
priests. Since 1933, however, priests outside the Order can
obtain the privilege only' through the Sacred Penitentiary.
By' virtue of the special Crosier privilege an indulgence of
500 days is gained for each Paler and Ave recited on the beads.
This indulgence may' be gained even by’ persons who do not
say or intend to say the entire chaplet. The Crosier indulgences
may be attached to the same beads in addition to the Apostolic,
1 Fanfani, De Rosario (1930), p. 138.
* Deer. Auth., n. 281 ad 6.
3 Vide Beringer, Les fnitulgenees (1925), i, p. 461 ; Fuerst, This Rosary, p. 117.
426
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Dominican or so-called Brigcttinc indulgences, provided that
they have been blessed by a priest properly empowered to attach
such indulgences. It should be noted that beads blessed for
the gaining of the Dominican indulgences only, do not carry
the privilege of being indulgcnced for isolated Paters and Aves.
By virtue of the Dominican indulgences one may gain an indul
gence of 100 day's for each Pater and Ave recited in the course
of the Rosary, but one must have the intention of saying at
least five decades.1 The faithful should be instructed that,
while the desire to gain indulgences is commendable and the
practice is to be encouraged, nevertheless, if too much emphasis
is placed on the indulgences and on the importance of using
specially blessed beads, etc., the true value of the Rosary itself
as an efficacious prayer may be forgotten.
THE ROSARY OF THE DEAD
We enclose a copy of a prayer which describes the ‘ Rosary of the
Dead ’ and indulgences which can be gained in conjunction with the
recitation of the prescribed prayers. It is our opinion that this
devotion originated in either England or Ireland. Could you kindly
let us know by whom it was authorized and from what source this
four decade rosary could be obtained?
*
The particulars given on the enclosed leaflet arc as follows :
‘ The Rosary of the Dead contains four decades, or forty beads
in honour and memory of the forty hours during which Our
Blessed Lord remained in Limbo to deliver and conduct to
Heaven the souls of the just who died before Him. The manner
of reciting this Rosary follows : On the cross say the De Profundis,
or Our Father and Hail Mary. On the large beads is said :
“ Eternal rest give to them, 0 Lord, May perpetual light shine upon
them. May they rest in peace. Amen. 0 my God I believe in Thee,
because Thou art truth itself ; I hope in Thee because Thou art infinitely
merciful ; I love Thee with my whole heart and above all things, because
Thou art infinitely perfect, and I love my neighbour as myself for the
love of Thee. I am heartily sorry for having offended Thee, on account
of Thy infinite goodness, and firmly purpose, with Thy holy grace never
more to offend Thee. Amen.” On each of the small beads is said
“ Sweet Heart of Mary, be my salvation." The Rosary is concluded
by saying the De Profundis or one Our Father and one Hail
Mary.’ Finally, it is stated that an indulgence of more than
1 Bcringcr, op. cit., p. 469.
INDULGENCES
427
sixty years is attached to these beads every time they are said
and that it is applicable to the souls in Purgatory.
The Rosary, or rather the Chaplet of the Dead, was composed
by Monsignor Plantier, Bishop of Nîmes. It was indulgenced
by Briefs issued by Pope Pius IX in 1873 and 1877 and approved
for the use of members of the Archconfraternity of Our Lady of
Suffrage. The Archconfraternity of Our Lady of Suffrage was
founded by Canon Serre of the diocese of Nîmes in 1857. It
was similar to the Archconfraternity for the Relief of the Poor
Souls in Purgatory under the title of the Assumption of Mary
in the Redemptorist church of S. Maria in Monterone in Rome.
Pope Pius IX in 1858 granted to the confraternity at Nîmes the
same spiritual privileges and favours already enjoyed by the
Roman confraternity, and in 1873 approved for the use only of
associates of the confraternity at Nîmes a special chaplet known
as the ‘ Chaplet of the Dead.’
This Chaplet of the Dead was composed by Monsignor
Planticr at the request of Canon Serre. The chaplet consists
of four decades, each of ten small beads with a pendant cross and
a medal carrying a representation of Purgatory. Between the
decades are placed four large beads. Authorized commentators1
describe a manner of reciting the chaplet which differs in many
details from that given in the leaflet quoted above. Bcringer
directs that the chaplet should be recited as follows : On the
large beads one recites the psalm De Profundis with the versicle
Requiem aeternam (or a person who does not know the De Profundis
may recite Pater and Ave). On each of the small beads one says
the ejaculation Sweet heart of Mary, consolation of those who suffer,
pray for us and for the abandoned souls in Purgatory. The chaplet
is concluded by the recitation of the De Profundis, Requiem
aeternam, Lux perpetua, Requiescant in pace, etc., without the Oremus
or the prayer Fidelium (or by recitation of a Pater and Ave).
The number forty was chosen in honour of the hours spent by
Our Lord in Limbo.
The indulgences attached by the Papal Briefs to the recitation
of the Chaplet of the Dead were : One hundred days for each
of the beads, large and small, and seven years and seven quaran
tines for the recitation of the entire chaplet. Those who recited
the chaplet daily could gain a plenary' indulgence on one day
in each month, on All Souls’ Day, on the feast of Our Lady of
Mercy, and on the 30th of November. These indulgences
1 Vide Catholic Encyclopedia, art. ‘Purgatorial Societies’; Bcringer, Les
Indulgences (4th French edition), ii, p. 322 ; Lacau, Précieux Trésor des Indulgences,
d. 399.
428
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
could be gained only by members of the Archconfraternity of
Our Lady of Suffrage and only by using the special chaplet of
the confraternity. The privilege of blessing such chaplets and
of imparting indulgences to them was reserved exclusively to
the Bishop of Nîmes, from whom priest members could obtain
delegated faculties. Further particulars could be obtained from
the episcopal curia or the director of the archconfraternity,
Nîmes (Gard), France.
RECITATION OF ROSARY BEFORE THE BLESSED
SACRAMENT EXPOSED
Is the practice of saying the Rosary before the Blessed Sacrament
exposed restricted to the months of May and October? Would it be
(a) allowed, (6) prohibited, or (c) tolerated for any reason to adopt
this as the ordinary practice on Sundays and holidays throughout
the year?
B. K.
ni
In general the ordinary evening service which consists of the
recitation of the Rosary and concludes with Benediction of the
Blessed Sacrament is not a liturgical function, but a private
devotion which should be carried out in conformity both with
local customs and with any positive directions of the local
Ordinary. The Sacred Congregation of Rites has decided that
in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament exposed : (i) approved
prayers may be recited even in the vernacular ;1 (ii) such prayers
may not be recited immediately before the actual Benediction,12
but must be followed by the Tanlurn ergo with the vcrsicle,
response and prayer of the Blessed Sacrament. To recite the
Rosary before the Blessed Sacrament exposed would not in any
way be contrary to these general rules.3 Local legislation may
give more explicit instructions, but in the absence of such
directions the priest who conducts the service may arrange it
as he choses. He should not, of course, without good reason
depart from an established custom.4
1 S.R.C. 3157—vide 7. E. Record, October, 1943, p. 278.
1 S.R.C. 3530. In certain circumstances other collects may be chanted
under one conclusion with the prayer of the Blessed Sacrament. Vide
Clementine Instruction, also S.R.C., 23rd November, 1906, and D. 3134.
3 Vide 7. E. Record, loc. cit. ; also O’Connell, Ceremonies of the Roman Rite,
edit. 1943, p. 230.
4 1 Si in honorem sanctorum, sanctissirnacque Virginis recitentur preces,
post cas et non ante exponatur Sanctissimum ; secus, si preces in honorem
SS. Sacramenti effundantur, expositio ostensorii antea fiat. Hoc nobis est
in more, pluricsque commendavimus, exponendi scilicet SS. Sacramentum
non antea sed f>ost recitationem precum in honorem sanctorum vel SS. Virginis.1
—De Amicis in Cacremoniale Parochorum, ii, p. 87 (Roma, 1910).
INDULGENCES
429
For the October Devotions, however, more precise instruc
tions have been given. These devotions are governed by the
Decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, which were issued
in conformity with the Encyclical Letter Supremi Apostolatus
of Pope Leo XIII, in 1883. In the general decree, published
on 20th August, 1885,1 the Sacred Congregation rules as
follows :
Decernit itaque et mandat ut quolibet anno a prima die Octobris ad
secundum sequentis Novembris, in omnibus Catholici orbis parochialibus
templis, et in cunctis publicis oratoriis Deiparae dicatis, aut in aliis etiam
arbitrio Ordinarii eligendis, quinque saltem Mariani Rosarii decades cum
Litaniis Laurentanis quotidie recitentur ; quod si mane fiat, Missa inter
preces celebretur ; si a meridie, sacrosanctum Eucharistiae Sacramentum
adorationi proponatur, deinde fideles rite lustrentur.
In the October Devotions, therefore, the Rosary must be recited
either during Mass or during exposition of the Blessed Sacra
ment.
Any services held in honour of the Blessed Virgin Mary
during the month of May are private devotions, not liturgical
functions. Such services have been commonly held in one
form or another since the twelfth century,2 but they have never
been given any official recognition in the Liturgy'. Hence the
precise character of such devotions and, indeed, the question
whether or not they should be held at all must be determined
by the local Ordinary or in accordance with the established
custom.
THE EARLY IRISH MONKS AND THE ROSARY
Is there any historical foundation for the statement that the early
Irish monks made a notable contribution to the development of the
Rosary?
Curious.
During the early Middle Ages, the period when the
influence of the Irish monks was strong throughout Europe,
the Rosary' was unknown, hence at most it may' be claimed that
the Celtic monks prepared the way for its coming and develop
ment. That they' certainly did so is maintained by' Canon
François-Michel Wiliam in his history' of the Rosary.1 In the
1/I.S.5., 1885, p. 95; vide I. E. Record, November, 1942, p. 376. This
decree is not contained in the official collection, but was confirmed by a
subsequent decree in 1866 (N. 3666).
1 Vide I. E. Record, loc. cit., also Bcringer, Les Indulgences, cd. 1924, p. 389.
• Histoire du Rosaire, French translation published 1949.
430
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
preface to the French translation of his work Dr. Wiliam says :
Les premières et vigoureuses frondaisons (du Rosaire) apparaissent sur la
terre d’Irlande ; dans les pays de l’Europe Centrale, il commence à fleurir
en mystères ; puis c’est dans le sud de l’Europe que ces roses des mystères
prennent leur nombre ct leur aspect définitifs.
He finds the influence of the Irish monks expressed especially
in two customs—the division of the Psalter into the ‘ three
fifties ’ and the use of ‘ corporal prayers,’ i.e. genuflections,
bows, striking the breast, praying with the arms extended, etc.
The Irish monks had undoubtedly the custom of dividing the
psalms into three groups of fifty each and one or two of these
groups (‘ quinquena ’) were often recited as a suffrage for the
dead or as a penance after Confession, for they had introduced
the custom of frequent confession. This division of the psalter
was brought to the Continent by St. Columbanus and his
followers and was soon popularized. In the monastery of Cluny,
for example, when it was customary for a monk to recite fifty
psalms for a deceased brother, those who could not read were
required to say fifty times the Pater noster.1 Hence arose the
practice of saying the Pater nosier in scries of fifty at a time and
in accordance with the Irish custom these prayers were accom
panied by bows, genuflections, etc.
When about the eleventh century the Ave Maria came into
use as a popular devotion, these gestures were attached very
naturally to the prayer which was simply a salutation of the
Blessed Virgin. Wiliam states :
Si aujourd’hui le psautier sc devise en Rosaire joyeux, en Rosaire douloureux
et en Rosaire glorieux comprenant chacun 50 Ave, celte division dérive de
la division du Psautier de la Sainte Écriture faite en Irlande ct n’a pas été
introduite pour la première fois dans la dévotion populaire à l’occasion du
Psautier-Rosaire.1
2
Without entering on the vexed question of the origins of the
Rosary we may take it, in agreement with Canon Wiliam, that
largely through the influence of the Irish monks the practice
had been popularized in the ninth and tenth centuries of reciting
prayers in three groups of fifty ; at first it was observed in reciting
the Pater noster for a special purpose and was prescribed by the
rule in Cluny (clcventy century) and in the Order of Knights
Templar (twelfth century), etc. During the course of the twelfth
1 Cf. Thurston, Familiar Prayers ; Ryan, Irish .Monasticism. Aniif>honaty of
Bangor—Henry Bradshaw Series, etc.
2 Wiliam, op cit., p. 24. Canon Wiliam states : * Pendant les siècles qui
s’écoulèrent entre l’époque de la migration des peuples et Père de Charlemagne
l’irlandais fut vraiment et littéralement, à coté du latin, la seconde langue
de l’Eglise.’
INDULGENCES
431
century a similar custom was established in relation to the Aoe
Maria. The custom popularized by the Irish monks may not,
however, have been of Irish origin. St. Columbanus, perhaps
the most influential of Irish missionaries, adhered faithfully to
the liturgical practices which had become traditional in Bangor
and certainly the division of the psalms used in the Divine Office
in Bangor was based on tlie Egyptian scheme for the Office,
modified to suit the varying length of the nights in winter and
summer in the northern climate. The liturgical usages of
Egyptian monasteries had been introduced into Gaul by John
Cassian and had been brought to Ireland perhaps by St. Patrick
himself.
Ainsi la liturgie chorale de Luxeuil vient très probablement des deserts
d’Egypte via Lerins, Auxerre, Armagh, Bangor.1
Amongst the monks of Egypt and Thebes we find traces of the
custom of dividing the psalter into three fifties. It was this
practice which the Irish monks brought back to the European
continent and its spread, with the application to the Pater nosier
and Ave Maria, prepared tlie way for the development of the
‘ Psalter ol Mary ’ and later of the Rosary as we know it.
INDULGENCE FOR ROSARY OF THE SEVEN
DOLOURS
A decree of the Sacred Penitentiary dated 15th January',
1954, grants a plenary indulgence once a day to the faitlrful
who, having received the sacraments of Confession and Com
munion, recite the Rosary of the Seven Dolours in the presence
of the Blessed Sacrament exposed or reserved in the tabernacle.
The Rosary of the Seven Dol0Urs is a devotion promoted by
the members of the Order of Servîtes. It is made up of seven
parts each consisting of one Pater and seven Aves and at the
conclusion arc said three Aves. The other prayers—an act of
contrition and an invocation of the Holy Spirit usually recited
at the beginning of the devotion and the closing invocation
Virgo dolorissirna—arc not necessary for the gaining of the indul
gences. 1 To gain the indulgences it was normally necessary to
meditate on the Dolours of the Blessed Virgin, but a rescript
of Pope Leo XIII granted in 1886 dispenses from the condition
as necessary for the indulgences. The chaplet must be blessed
by a priest of the Servite Order or by another priest who has
1 Dom Cousins in Melanges Columbiens, p. 183.
* Vide De .Angelis, De Indulgentiis, § 272 ; Bcringer, De Indulgentiis, i.
432
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
the necessary faculty and for the blessing the prescribed formula
must be used. The beads must be passed through the fingers
while the prayers are recited unless for a reasonable cause one
is excused from this condition and then it suffices that one is
carrying the blessed chaplet or that one joins in recitation a
group in which at least one person uses the beads properly.
In the chaplets commonly distributed by the Servîtes medals
depicting the Dolours are often placed beside the large beads
for the Paler or instead of these large beads ; such medals are
not a necessary part of the chaplet. The present grant of indul
gences simply makes available every day an indulgence which
could formerly be gained only on Thursdays ; the other plenary
and partial favours previously attached to the devotion still
remain valid.
Rosary Indulgences : In this context it may be useful to call
attention to the change in the indulgences attached to the
ordinary Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary. According to the
1950 edition of the Raccolta the faithful could gain an indulgence
of five years by reciting a third part of the Rosary. Now the
1952 edition makes the following grant of indulgences :
Fidelibus, si tertiam Rosarii partem devote recitaverint, conceditur :
Indulgentia quinque annorum ; Indulgentia plenaria, suetis conditionibus, si
quotidie per integrum mensem idem praestiterint. (22 ian. 1952.)
INDULGENCES ATTACHED TO SCAPULARS
Many popular prayer manuals give long lists of indulgences
attached to scapulars. For example, it is said that the wearer of the
Blue Scapular of the Immaculate Conception may by the recitation
of six Paters, Aves and Glorias gain all the indulgences granted to
those who visit the Basilicas at Rome and Jerusalem, the Church of
the Portiuncula at Assisi and the Church of St. James at Compostella.
Are all these indulgences still extant?
Religious.
The grant of indulgences as mentioned in the query and all
similar concessions were abrogated by a decree of the Sacred
Penitentiary published on 22nd April, 1933.1 This decree
points out that many summaries of indulgences state that to
the recitation six times of Pater, Ave and Gloria there are attached
the indulgences of the Roman basilicas, of the Portiuncula, etc.,
without any restrictions concerning the time and place of saying
■IS A.A.S., vol. xxv, p. 254.
INDULGENCES
433
the prayers, and with no mention of the distinction between
plenary and partial indulgences or of the usual conditions. This
apparent prodigality with the treasury of the Church has caused
much comment and there have been many controversies regard
ing the correct interpretation of the documents containing the
grants of such indulgences. Hence the Sacred Penitentiary
referred the matter to the Holy Father and on 20th January,
1933, Pope Pius XI decided that the indulgences attached to the
privileged recitation of Pater, Ave and Gloria six times should be
moderated so that henceforth the faithful who are entitled to
such privileges may gain a partial indulgence of ten years each time
they recite these prayers with a contrite heart and for the inten
tions of the Pope. Those who recite the prayers daily for a month
may gain a plenary indulgence under the usual conditions,
i.e. reception of the sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist,
visit to a church or oratory, and prayer for the Pope’s intentions.
By this decree all previous concessions are abolished.
The indulgence of ten years, etc., is not granted to all the
faithful, but only to those who already have a tide to it by
reason of their enrolment in the Blue Scapular of the Immaculate
Conception or by reason of membership in a confraternity or
religious Order to which this privilege has already been granted.
The Blue Scapular has since its origin been very richly indulgenccd. St. Alphonsus counted no less than 535 plenary'
indulgences attached to it and declared that its partial indul
gences were ‘ innumerable.’ The object of this devotion is to
honour the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin and
to pray for a reform of morals. The scapular was originally
merely a devotion not connected with any confraternity and it
does not seem that membership of the Confraternity of the
Immaculate Conception is even now necessary for the gaining
of the indulgences.1 The scapular and the confraternity are
separable. It must be borne in mind that approbation of a
scapular docs not imply any direct or indirect approval of any
supernatural revelations or visions said to have been received
in its connection. ‘ The indulgence and the privileges are
testimonies to the spiritual worth of the devotion in the Church
but prescind entirely from any of the mooted questions of origin
and history.
*
The principal privileges carried now by most scapulars are
that the wearers may gain a plenary indulgence on the day of
reception of the scapular, in articulo mortis, on various feasts
1 Vide Beringer, Les Indulgences I ; De Angelis, De Indulgentiis ; Locau,
Trésor des Indulgences ; Magennis, The Scapular Devotion.
434
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
throughout the year, and on one day at choice each year.
This Jast-named privilege is usually described as ‘ plenaria
quotidiana,’ but that does not mean that it may be gained
ever}’ day ; it may be gained only once a year. The indulgences
attached to the special feasts mentioned nominatim in the sum
marium of indulgences of a scapular ordinarily may be gained
only on the usual conditions of confession, Communion, visit
to a church or oratory (frequently it is required that the visit
be made to the church of a particular religious Order or Con
gregation) and prayers for the Pope’s intentions. Plenary
indulgences granted for feasts of Our Lord or of the Blessed
Virgin are to be understood only for feasts celebrated in the
calendar of the universal Church, and indulgences attached to
feasts of the Apostles hold only for feasts of the dies natalitiae
(canon 921). /X plenary indulgence, unless the contrary is ex
pressly stated, cannot be gained more than once a day (canon 928).
Dans ces derniers temps diverses Indulgences, surtout si clics sont anciennes,
pour lesquelles cette declaration n’est pas très expressément faite, on ne peut
sûrement affirmer qu’elles soient toties quoties dans le sens qu’on y attache
aujourd’hui. Meme pour Indulgence de la Portioncule ce n’est que récem
ment qu’une declaration precise est intervenue ; mais pour les Indulgences
anciennes, ces expressions toties ou quoties, ou toties quoties, n’a aucun fondement
certain.1
One good work does not satisfy the conditions for several
indulgences attached to it under different titles unless the work
is the reception of the sacraments of Penance or of the Eucharist
or unless a special privilege is attached to its performance. No
such privilege is attached to the scapulars and, therefore, a
person who has been enrolled in several scapulars cannot gain
all their indulgences by making one visit to a church and reciting
once the prescribed prayers ; the visit and prayers must be
repeated for each indulgence (canon 933). Also when indul
gences can be gained every day under the usual conditions only
those persons who arc daily communicants or who receive five
or six times a week certainly fulfil the conditions for gaining the
indulgences every day. Persons who receive Communion only
once a week cannot be certain of gaining the indulgence more
than once in the week (canon 931).
CORRECT MATERIAL FOR SCAPULARS
What materials must be used in the making of scapulars? Is
it correct to have suitable symbols painted on the scapular?
M. F.
1 Bcringer, op. cit., p. 101.
435
INDULGENCES
Each of die approved scapulars is composed of two small
rectangular pieces of wool woven into cloth. Wool knitted or
worked with a needle after the fashion of lace would not be
valid material ; similarly cotton, linen, silk or any other fabric
would not constitute valid material.1 The scapulars must be
of oblong or square formation ; other shapes, such as oval,
hexagonal, etc., are not approved.2 With one exception no
material or colour is prescribed as necessary in the cords joining
the two portions of the scapulars. For the Red Scapular of the
Passion the cords must be of red wool. Again the Red Scapular
of the Passion is die only one on which images are necessary.
This scapular must carry on one square the image of Christ
crucified with the instruments of the Passion represented at the
foot of die cross and on the other square a representadon of the
Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary surmounted by a cross. For
all the other scapulars no ornamentation is necessary, but they
may be ornamented provided that the essentials of the scapular,
the material, form and colour, remain visible.3 In the orna
mentation of the scapulars any suitable material may be used,
but one may not have a scapular so completely covered with
decorations worked in cotton or silk or with images in any other
material, that the essential character of the scapular is hidden.
A medal may· be attached to die scapular, but a medal may not
be used to replace one of the prescribed woollen squares. It is
permissible to have the scapular covered with a little bag of
suitable material to preserve it, but the scapular itself must
remain visibly distinct from the cover. In any ornamentation
applied to a scapular the disdnetive colour of the scapular must
be predominant.
FACULTIES FOR ENROLLING IN SCAPULARS
The Pio Unio Cleri gives the following faculties to priests who
are members and have been prior to 1st April, 1933:—
* Blessing under one formula Scapulars of the Passion of our Lord,
of the Immaculate Conception, of the Most Holy Trinity, of Our
Lady of Dolours, of Our Lady of Mount Carmel (without the obliga
tion of having the names inscribed).’
May a priest having these faculties, by virtue of them, enrol in each
of these Scapulars without enrolling in the others, using the appro
priate formula?
P.P.
1 Vide Beringer, Les Indulgences, i. § 920; Magcnnis, The Scapular Devotion, p. 37.
3 Deer. Aulh., n. 423.
* Ibid., n. 3 and 4.
436
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Members of the Pio Unio Cleri enjoy, in regard to scapulars,
the following faculties :—
(i) Facultas (dummodo adscriptus ad sacramentalcs confessiones audiendas
sit approbatus) benedicendi ac imponendi, servatis ritibus ab Ecclesia prae
scriptis, scapularia Passionis D. N. Jesu Christi, Immaculatae Conceptionis
B.M.V., SS. Trinitatis, B.V.M. perdolentis, B.V.M. a Monte Carmelo, ab
Apostolica Sede approbata.
(ii) Facultas, ut supra benedicendi et imponendi sub unica formula,
scapularia quae ut Sodales Piae Unionis imponendi facultate gaudent.
(iii) Facultas imponendi scapularia de quibus supra absque inscriptionis
onere in album Confratcrnitatis.
It should be noted that these faculties were not withdrawn
by the decree Consilium suum persequens (1933) and so arc still
enjoyed by all priest members of the Pio Unio.
For the blessing and imposition of scapulars the prescribed
form must always be used.1 A special formula is to be found in
die Ritual for each of the most common scapulars. In these
forms those parts only are necessary for validity which express
(a) the blessing of the scapular, (/>) the imposing of it on the
wearer, and (c) when there is question of membership of a Third
Order or confraternity, the reception of the subject.1
2 All these
essentials are contained in the short formula for the simultaneous
blessing of the five scapulars, and, therefore, that form may
be validly and lawfully used by a priest who has received the
requisite faculties. He may make use of it even when enrolling
the faithful only in four of these scapulars.3*
In 1883 the Congregation of Indulgences was asked whether
the short form could be used when blessing and imposing only
one or two of the five scapulars. No definite reply was given
beyond the direction that the query should be addressed to the
Sacred Congregation of Rites.1 Each of the particular blessings
assigned in the Ritual has some special characteristics, c.g., the
formula for the black scapular of the Seven Dolours of the
Blessed Virgin Mary includes the form for blessing and delivering
the chaplet of the Seven Dolours. Hence to make use of the
composite short formula when enrolling in only one of the five
scapulars would be contrary to the rubrics and so unlawful,
although the blessing would most probably be valid.6
<1
1 S.C.Ind., 27th April, 1887, and 18th August, 1868.
* Loc. cit., 18th August, 1866, and 24th August, 1844; vide Beringcr,
Les Indulgences (1924), i, par. 933.
3 Periodica, xxvii (1937), p. 147.
* Rescripta Authentica, 444.
* Cf. Rescripta Authentica, 329 ad 3 : ‘An rata sit fidelium adseriptio Confraternitati B.M.V. de Monte Carmelo, quae fit a sacerdotibus quidem
facultatem habentibus non servata tamen forma in Rituali et Breviario
Ordinis Carmclitarum descripta ? Affirmative dummodo sacerdotes facul
tatem habentes non deficiant in substantialibus, nempe in benedictione et
impositione habitus ac in receptione ad confraternitatem.’
INDULGENCES
437
THE SCAPULAR MEDAL
(1) Is it correct that we should not wear the Scapular Medal in
place of the Scapular without a sufficient reason? On page 18 of the
book Mary in Her Scapular Promise by John M. Haffert it is stated:
‘ One who does wear the Medal without a sufficient reason runs the
danger of not receiving the promise.’
(2) On page 19 of the same book we read: ‘The first successor of
Pius X, His Holiness Pope Benedict XV, declared on 8th July, 1916:
“ In order that one may see that it is our desire that the Brown
Scapular be worn, We concede to it a grace that the Scapular Medal
shall not enjoy.” And the Pontiff proceeded to grant an indulgence
of 5
days for each time the scapular is kissed.’ Is this indulgence
authentic?
N. S.
(1) The Scapular Medal was formally recognized by Pope
Pius X in 1910 in a decree couched as follows : ‘ For the future
all the faithful already inscribed or who shall be inscribed in
one or other of the real Scapulars approved by the Holy See
(excepting those which are proper to the Third Orders) by
what is known as regular enrolment, may, instead of the cloth
scapulars, one or several, wear on their persons, cither round
the neck or otherwise, provided it be in a becoming manner,
a single medal of metal, through which, by the observance of
the laws laid down for each scapular, they shall be enabled to
share in and gain all the spiritual favours (not excepting what
is known as the Sabbatine Privilege of the Scapular of Our
Lady of Mount Carmel), and all the privileges attached to
each.’1 Commenting on this decree, Vermecrsch123*says:
Mens S. Pontificis ca esse dicitur, ut servatum hactenus morem praeferat,
simul tamen novam facilitatem libenter concedat. Dicitur enim vehementer
exoptare ut scapularia diu iam recepto more gerantur, et rursus ex animo
aliis votis obsecundare. Erraverit ergo qui putaverit metallicum numisma
tolerari potius quam approbari ; recte autem senserit qui levem causam satis
esse dixerit ut, numisma in scapularis locum sufficiendo, intentioni ponti·
ficiae plene respondeas. Sic enim potius probatum iri existimarim qui, ad
honorandum principale scapulare, id est B.M.V. de Monte Carmelo, hoc
gesserit more consueto, in locum vero aliorum numisma suppleat ne plures
parvos pannos scapulis gestare cogatur.
What is known as the ‘ Scapular Promise ’ is the promise
that the wearer will be saved from the fires of Hell.—
Hoc erit ct tibi ct cunctis Carmelitis privilegium, quod in hoc pie moriens
non patietur actemum incendium.8
1
16th January, 1911 ; Trans, apud Magennis, The Scapular Depotion.
8 Periodica, v, par. -168.
3 Carmelite Breviary, Office of St. Simon Stock. There arc various texts of the
promise.
438
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
To claim the protection of this promise a person must (a) be
properly enrolled in the Confraternity of die Scapular ; and
(b) wear the scapular in the prescribed way. (It goes without
saying dial the faithful discharge of the obligations of the
Christian life is also implied—1 pie morions).’ The Sabbatinc
Privilege depends upon a promise that the wearer of the scapular
will be delivered from the (lames of Purgatory, especially on the
first Saturday after his death. To gain this privilege, one must,
in addition to being enrolled and wearing the scapular, observe
chastity in accordance with one’s state in life and recite daily
the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin or the Canonical Office
(or persons who cannot read must observe abstinence on every
Wednesday and Friday). In the decree approving of the
Scapular Medal the Pope certainly imparted to the wearing of
the medal all the indulgences and spiritual favours (not except
ing the Sabbatinc Privilege) attached by the Holy See to the
various scapulars. Some authors1 have pointed out that the
special promise of the Brown Scapular depends upon a private
revelation and if the conditions laid down in that revelation
arc not fulfilled, the promise is not certainly received. Since
the Pope could not change the conditions of the promise the
Papal decree makes no mention of it and persons who without
a sufficient reason wear the Scapular Medal do not with certainty
fulfil the conditions of the Promise. This view, however, is not
well established.2 Pope Pius X directed that in every case
regular enrolment was to take place by use of the cloth scapular.
Persons so enrolled became members of the confraternity and
the papal decree merely stated that they could continue to
fulfil the conditions of membership by wearing the medal
instead of the cloth scapular. Persons properly enrolled and
wearing the medal can lay claim to the application of the
promise as of all the other spiritual privileges ; perhaps it would
be more profitable for writers on this subject to suggest that
for most people the ‘ danger of not receiving the promise ’ will
more easily arise from the difficulty of living a sincere Christian
life than from the difference between a medal and a cloth
scapular. ‘ .· . .at most the Scapular can never be more
than a conditional means to salvation since the life of the wearer
must be consonant with what the habit signifies and demands.’3
(2) I have not seen the text of this indulgence. This and
other privileges are reliably reported as having been granted
1 E.g. Ninus Manclla, apud Magennis, op. cit.
1 Magennis, op. cit.
• Ibid.
INDULGENCES
439
by Pope Benedict XV to the General of the Discalced Carmelites.
They were published in II Carmelo on 29th July, 1916, but have
not been included in any official commentary.
WEARING THE SCAPULAR MEDAL
Is the obligation to carry the scapular medal decenter fulfilled
by carrying it in the purse or waistcoat pocket?
Parochus.
For the gaining of the indulgences it is sufficient that the
scapular medal be carried in the purse or pocket, but it is
desirable that it should always be carried in a becoming manner
and that there should be no appearance of irreverence. The
decrees of the Holy Office by which the use of the scapular
medal has been promulgated do not give detailed instructions
on the manner in which it is to be worn, and hence this must be
determined in the light of the history of the medal.
The use of one medal to replace the ordinary scapulars
approved by the Holy See became common during the pontifi
cate of Pope Pius X. Frequently in private audiences Pope
Pius X granted the privilege of imparting to a medal the indul
gences and privileges of the scapulars, few conditions were
imposed, and at first no special medal was prescribed. In 1909,
Father Albert Missone of the Missionaries of the Immaculate
Heart of Mary (Scheut Fathers) in a petition for the use of the
medal on the missions asked : whether it would suffice if the
medal were carried habitually in any way without being worn
around the neck or immediately touching the skin ? The reply
was in the affirmative.1 Later, however, in the same year in
a number of grants of the privilege the Holy Office inserted the
condition that it was necessary that the medal be worn around
the neck. 2 Finally a detailed decree and declaration issued in
December, 1910, gave fuller instructions concerning the type
of medal to be used and the conditions to be fulfilled. It stated :
‘ For the future all the faithful already enrolled, or who shall
be enrolled, in one or other of the real scapulars approved by
the Holy Sec (excepting those which arc proper to the Third
1 19th July, 1909» A.A.S., vol. ii.
- Vide Vcrmccrsch, Monumenta^ v, p. 148. ‘ Praefecto cuidam aposlolico
concessit S. Pontifex,. ut quaelibet pia numismata benedicere posset ita ut
christifidclibus, iis etiam qui scapularia non recepissent, omnia scapularia
supplerent. Una tanta addebatur condicio, ut haec numismata c collo
penderent.’
440
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Orders) by what is known as regular enrolment, may, instead
of one or several of the cloth scapulars, wear on their persons,
either round the neck or otherwise, provided it be in a becoming
manner, a single medal of metal, through which by observance
of the laws laid down for each scapular they shall be enabled
to share in and gain all the spiritual favours (not excepting the
so-called Sabbatine Privilege of the Scapular of Our Lady of
Mount Carmel), and all the privileges attached to each.’1
Subsequent decisions granted to all soldiers the additional
privilege of becoming members of the scapular confraternities
and sharing in their spiritual benefits by simply procuring and
wearing a properly blessed scapular medal.1
2
It is clear, therefore, that to carry the medal in a purse or
pocket is sufficient, but it must be done in a respectful manner.
Continuity would not necessarily be broken by leaving aside
temporarily the clothes in which the medal is carried but it is
to be recommended that at night at least the medal should be
worn around the neck, or retained by some other means in
one’s possession, or is at least placed within reach. ‘ Nec requiri
videtur ut ab habente habitualiter geratur, sed sufficit ut sit
habitualiter apud habentem.3 “There is always a danger that
the liberty allowed to the medal may lead to the conclusion
that a similar liberty may be presumed for the scapular itself.
Hence it is well to remark that in so far as the scapular is a habit,
or rather a miniature habit, it must be worn after the manner
of such garments, that is, one part of the scapular must rest
on the breast and the other part on the back and the parts must
be connected by two cords or strings. The obligation would not
be fulfilled if the scapulars were carried about in the pockets,
or if they were attached to the garments of the person enrolled.
The common opinion is that, if the scapulars are put aside even
for one day, the indulgences for that day are lost.” ’4
1 16th December, 1910, A.A.S., vol. iii, pp. 22, 24.
1 12th January and 22th March, 1912, vide Beringer, Ler Indulgences, i,
sect. 939.
* Vermeersch, Alonumenta, iv, p. 350 ; v, p. 269 : ‘ Decens delatio, et
quidem super propriam personam, non tamen ad collum, postulatur. Quare
etiam per noctem corpori vel vesti qua indutus sis numisma adherere debet.’
‘. . .si quis numisma huiusmodi in vestibus prope sc depositis noctu
servet, praescriptam legem impleverit. Quamquam suademus ut vel collo
tunc imponat, vel multo magis aperto v.g. in mensa depositum, apud se
teneat.’ Beringer, op. cit., i, sect. 938, note : ‘ Si l’on porte cette médaille
attachée â un chapelet, que l’on garde sur soi, il semble necessaire que l’on
garde avec soi durant la nuit, a moins que, durant ce temps on ne conserve
avec soi une seconde médaille bénite a cet effet. Toutefois le Saint-Office
n’a rien décidé sur ce point.’
4 Magennis, The Scapular Devotion, p. 58.
INDULGENCES
441
REPLACING THE MIRACULOUS MEDAL
If a person who has been properly invested with the Miraculous
Medal loses it, may he put on a new one just as he would a new
scapular or does he require to have a new medal blessed by a priest
who has the special faculties?
P.P.
The indulgences attached to membership of the Association
of the Miraculous Medal may be gained only by persons who
wear around the neck a medal which has been properly blessed
and imposed. This is clear from the words of the Apostolic
Brief :
Omnes ex utroque sexu fideles hanc associationem adire et privilegiorum
participes effici possunt, dummodo c collo pendens supra pectus gestent
sacrum numisma benedictum ct sibi impositum a sacerdote ad hoc deputato.1
Normally the blessing and imposition cannot be separated ; if
a person loses his medal, the new one must also be blessed with
the prescribed formula by a priest who has the necessary faculties.
The formula for the blessing includes the formula for the
imposition, but in the case of a person who has already been
properly invested with the medal it probably would not be
necessary for him to be present on the second occasion. The
blessed medal may be sent to him and he may himself put it
on since he has previously been made a member of the associa
tion.
There is a special privilege in favour of those who wear
cloth scapulars permitting the replacement of scapulars without
any blessing or ceremony when they have become worn. For
example, the Ritus servandus quoad scapulare B.M.V. a Monte
Carmelo directs :
Si attritum fuit aliud sivc benedictum sivc non benedictum absque alia
nova caeremonia assumendum.
This rule now applies to all cloth scapulars2 even that of the
Holy Trinity which was formerly excepted, but it docs not
apply to the scapular medal. A decree of the Holy Office
issued in 1916 makes it clear that as often as a new scapular
medal is required it must be specially blessed. It is not neces
sary, however, that the persons for whom the scapular medals
are intended be actually present at the blessing. The medals
may be blessed and later distributed.3 Probably the same
' A.A.S., 1909.
’S.C.Ind., 24th .August, 1895; A.S.S., xxv, p. 256.
’ Vide I levlcn, Tractatus de Indulgentiis, p. 195 ; De Angelis, De Indulgentiis,
p. 186; S.C.R., 16 Julii, 1909.
442
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
procedure may be followed for persons who have been already
properly invested with the Miraculous Medal, but if possible
the safer course should be followed even when a second medal
is being conferred, namely, that the medal should be not only
blessed but also imposed by, or at least in the presence of, a
priest who recites the formula for the imposition.
INDEX
PAGE
Abbott :
private Mass of
Absolution ceremony :
rubrics at funerals
significance of .
Altar :
Antipcndium .
cloths
cover for
crucifix at
frontlet .
hanging crucifix
flowers on
plants on
relic of True Cross at
unapproved form of
Altar-stone :
short re-consecration
without relics .
Angelus
/Announcements :
during Mass .
Antimension
Antcpendium
/Ashes :
may they be brought from
church
objections to practice
Asperges :
blessing of water for
when obligatory
Aumbry :
for holy oils .
Beatus :
Mass of .
statue of
...
Bells :
blessing of
.
.
.
electric ....
during Benediction .
at Mass coram Sanctissimo .
Benediction with Blessed
Sacrament :
Christmas carols during
in classroom .
during Exposition
small Host in monstrance .
rubrics for
Benedictus qui venit :
when chanted .
Bishop :
assistance
at
various
functions
111
184
189
340
337
339
331
341
335
337
339
336
316
327
324
377
page
Blessings :
Apostolic,
external danger .
180
dispositions .
180
indulgence for
371
for expectant mother
168
of bells ....
361
of death bed habit .
198
obligation to use formula 411 , 413
Papal
....
372
after retreat
375
Blessed Sacrament :
canopy in processions
136
genuflections before .
140
office in presence of
282
prayer in Mass
102
Rosary during exposition .
428
reservation at side altar .
133
throne ....
345
vernacular prayers during
rvrvXI1 llUi
1ΛΠI
»
·
»
1145
*J
Breviary :
decree
simplifying
the
rubrics of .
.
266, 272
1
13
329
340
212
214
Candles :
for exposition .
343
on altar
343
2•
symbolism at Tenebrae
228
1
Paschal,
inccnsation of
235
359
renewal of .
231
Canopy :
in Blessed Sacrament pro
cession
92
136
Carols :
314
during Mass or Benediction
13
Cathedral :
361
360
280
celebration of Titular
149 Cemetery :
16
erection of cross
197
387
indulgence for visiting
Chair :
13
of Unity Octave
210
Chalice :
139
size of .
138
348
152
paten for
...
348
140
349
re-consecration
Chant :
234
at solemn Mass
.
43 , 47
Choir :
obligation of Office
284
104
74
seminarists at high Mass .
443
444
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
PAGE
I
Christ :
page
Crucifix :
of Limpias
248
altar
Christmas carols :
331
afiixed
to tabernacle
during Mass or Benediction
336
13
blessing for
midnight Mass, at .
406
80
indulgcnced
Church :
404
blessing of extension
303
Dedication :
crosses in consecrated
304
of renovated church
dedication of renovated
.
302
302
Decrees :
feast of Titular
307
Cum nostra
266, 272
Holy Souls as Titular
305
Maxima Redemptionis .
without Titular
•
219
306
Spiritus
Sancti
Munera
Ciborium :
.
159
Sacramentum
Ordinis
.
purification
.
208
120
Constitutio Apostolica de Contransferring Hosts
132
secratione Episcopali
207
Communion :
De Profundis :
cloth obligatory
319
why recited after Mass
28
confraternity, records of
Dies
Irae
:
122
in hospitals
chanted in full
130
72
Hosts consecrated at same
Devotions :
Mass ....
Christ of Limpias
18
248
of sick in religious houses .
Eucharistic
Heart
127
246
of sick, canopy
Holy Face
124
249
>
order of communicants
123
Mary, Virgin, Priest
256
patina for
October
.
322
238
server at
.
.
.
Our Lady of Fatima
323
258
purifying cloth
Sacred
Heart,
First
Friday
121
85
safeguarding cloth
Divine
Praises
:
321
prayers before and after
history
150
distributing .
pronunciation of “ blessed
.
117
152
rubrics at reception
Double-ring
:
118, 362
place of reception .
ceremony
124
170
blessing acolytes at Com
munion of sick
Ejaculations :
127
Confraternity :
at Mass .
380
records of Communion
indulgcnced
122
381
Confirmation :
Episcopal consecration :
extraordinary minister
rubrics
159
207
new name in .
Encyclical
:
158
Consecration :
on Sacred Music
295
of a church extension
Et cum spiritu tuo :
303
of family to Sacred Heart .
translation
205
245
Conopacum :
Eucharistic Heart
246
colour ....
Exsultet
....
233
363
Convert :
Exposition :
reception of .
after Mass
137
156
conditional baptism of adult
Benediction during .
138
154
Corporals :
candles for
.
343
conditions for
for exposition throne
136
345
corporal for throne .
washing of
.
.
.
345
345
Cross :
Extreme Unction :
rubric
.
in cemetery
180
197
in consecrated church
304 Faculties :
relic of True Cross .
336
to bless and indulgence
sign of at end of Mass
40
objects
Credo :
409
to
bless
vestments
omitted on Holy Saturday
357
Feasts
:
and on Vigil of Pentecost
115
exequial Mass on transferred
59
INDEX
I
Irish, indulgcnced .
Missa pro populo,
on Patron’s
on transferred
of Most Holy Trinity
First Friday :
devotions for .
interruption of nine
indulgences for invalids
First Saturday :
indulgence
Flags :
in church
Flectamus genua :
rubric
Flowers :
on altar
Font :
blessing of
not blessed on vigil
Pentecost
Foundation stone :
blessing
inscription on
Frontlet :
on altar
Funeral :
ceremonies
offerings
, rubrics of service
when Mass is omitted
445
PAGE
PAGE
•
393
•
55
58
240
•
•
85
396
395
Holy Week :
ceremonies in parochial
churches
. .
. 225
reform of ceremonies of
. 219
“ Sepulchre ” during
. 218
Hymns ;
at Holy Hour .
.
.148
at low Mass .
.
.
11
•
391
•
315
•
236
•
337
•
of
•
237
237
•
•
301
300
•
341
•
•
•
•
187
194
184
198
Genuflections :
at Benediction
.
Genealogy :
Gospel of, on Nativity of
B.V.M.
140
Habit :
blessing of death-bed
Holy Face :
devotion in honour of
Holy Hour :
approval for prayers at
conditions for indulgences of
preaching during
on Holy Thursday
'
Holy Thursday :
history of Mass of .
Holy Trinity :
feast of .
Holy Oils :
aumbry for
.
Holy Saturday :
new ceremonies
.
219
Holy Souls :
*
as Titular of church .
.
Holy Water :
stoups
Images :
of saints in sanctuary
. 312
two prohibited
.
. 361
Immaculate Heart of Mary :
prayers on feast
.
. 260
new feast
.
. 254
Incense :
not blessed at Benediction .
150
at sung Requiem .
.
71
Indulgences :
Apostolic Blessing .
, 371
conditions for ..
.
. 367
of Irish feasts .
.
. 393
on 2nd November 384, 385, 387
Portiuncula
.
.
.
389
Rosary .
.
414,419, 425
Rosary, communication of.
416
first Saturday .
.
.391
first Friday
.
.
.
396
Holy Hour
.
.
.
381
Seven Dolours, Rosary
.
431
plenary, more than once a
day
.
.
.
.370
scapulars
.
.
.
432
translations of indulgcnced
prayers
...
384
Way of the Cross .
.
397
251
Kyrie Eleison :
recitation in litanies
.
378
.
176
.
283
198
249
148
381
142
143
229
240
359
231
305
308
Last Sacraments :
administration of .
Lauds :
before Mass .
.
Leonine prayers :
omission .
.
.
sign of cross after .
33, 35, 39
.
40
Mass :
Abbot’s private
.
.
application of fruits of .
/Asperges, when obligatory.
of Beatus
...
bination .
.
.
.
bination, new fasting rules.
calendar,
on board ship
.
.
in Sisters’ oratory
.
of Christ the King .
.
m
52
1
92
21
23
113
95
114
446
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
PACE
’i
V!
»
» <·
\i
r
PACE
Coram Sanctissimo
114
Sequence in .
114
Credo
....
115
transferred solemnity
114
dialogue ....
25
sung,
duration of
40
carols during
13
low,
chant,
announcements during
13
of Ordinary
43
bell at, Coram Sanctissimo.
16
of Proper .
47
Communion,
chaplains to Bishop
104
with Hosts consecrated at
choir of seminarists
47
same
conventual,
chaplain’s
18
after midnight
duty
20
98
rubrics at Creed .
of sick after midnight .
46
82
Dominican rite
De Profundis after
112
28
organ during penitential
hymns at
.
.
.
seasons
Leonine prayers, when
43
oscula obligatory
omitted
42
33, 39
rubrics,
Prelates assisting at
107
tone of voice at .
at beginning of .
45
3
votive,
at Communion and when
binating .
of Assumption, formulary
86
21
Gloria in votive of B.V.M.
at Qui Pridie and Conse
88
cration
for golden jubilee
95
15
of Irish saints
server obligatory .
90
4
sign of the cross at end of
nuptial, oratio imperata .
100
40
tones of voice
for propagation of the
10
midnight, at Christmas
faith
93
80
Offertory procession
new rubrics .
84
48
Oratio imperata, substitution,
of Sacred Heart,
101
of St. Patrick .
devotions
on
first
89
place of,
.
85
** Friday
in hospital ward .
86
77
in sick room
oratio imperata
100
79
Marriage :
prayer of Blessed Sacrament
in
... .
ceremonies
102
163
Pro populo,
jubilee of
169
on feast of Patron
Mary, Blessed Virgin :
55
on transferred feast
devotion to Immaculate
58
for propagation of faith .
Heart ....
93
254
Requiem,
Fatima devotion
258
anniversary, contrary
new Mass of Assumption .
86
custom
feast of Nativity of .
62
251
colour of vestments for
Virgin priest .
75
256
daily, choice of prayers 70, 116
Queen of Ireland
257
Dies irae
Matins :
76
exequial,
recitation before Mass
283
application of .
Miraculous Medal :
61, 115
on transferred feast
replacing
59
441
on privileged feria
Mediator Dei :
76
omission of
198
correct interpretation
286
on Sunday
Memorial :
74
incense at sung
71
war, erected in church
310
intention of
59
Missal :
month’s mind,
decree simplifying rubrics
formulary .
64
of
266, 272
on suppressed holyday
59
some
rubrics
of
.
271
privileged
66
requirements
in
altarin minor oratories
69
MLssal
.
344
Trium puerorum after
76
stand for
.
344
INDEX
PAGE
Month’s mind,
celebration on suppressed
holyday
formulary for priest’s
Monstrance :
shape of
. .
.
Music :
Encyclical on Sacred
Nocturn :
imposed at ordination
Nuptial Blessing :
who may give
who may receive
Octobcr :
238,
devotions
Offerings :
history of funeral
Office :
choral recitation
Little Office of B.V.M. 282
privilege of anticipating
for 2nd November .
rubrics for Requiem
solemn Requiem
Oratory :
Titular of semi-public
Oratio imperata :
substitution for
in votive Masses
Orders :
minor
Ordination :
correct form of mandatum
at
... .
Nocturn imposed at
prayer pro ordinandis
Constitution,
Sacramentum
Ordinis ....
Ordo :
in secondary oratory
in Sisters’ oratory
on board -ship
Organ :
in penitential seasons
electronic
Oscula :
in high Mass .
Paten :
for chalice
Patina :
for Communion
for Communion of server
Patron :
Mass pro populo on feast of .
Photography :
of ceremonies .
291,
59
64
350
295
175
166
167
363
194
284
289
275
116
191
116
279
101
100
171
173
175
173
208
95
95
113
43
365
42
348
322
323
55
292
page
Pia Unio :
faculties of members
Pontifical :
changes in
Preaching :
during Holy Hour .
Prelate :
domestic, liturgical privi
leges of
minor, choir dress of
right to have chaplains
Procession :
Offertory
of
Blessed
Sacrament,
canopy used
Purifications :
danger of infection in
hinged
409
208
142
107
109
104
136
120
347
Relics :
altar stone without .
324
of True Cross at altar
336
Religious :
ring worn by professed
169
Retreat :
papal blessing at end of .
373
Ritual :
translations of .
201
Rorate :
Masses .
.
.
.
216
Rosary :
history of
.
.
.
429
conditions for indulgences in
chaplet
422
communication of indulgenccs ....
416
common
practices
in
recitation of
419
conditions
attached
to
409
faculties to bless .
406
correct form of blessing .
recitation of, indulgences . 423,
424, 425
420
mysteries of .
.
420
additional prayers
of the dead
426
428
recited Coram Sanctissimo .
423
rings
.
.
.
.
single decade and string 422
Seven Dolours
431
Rubrics :
decree simplifying
266, 272
Sacrosaiutae
.
Sacred Heart :
acts of consecration to
275
242
■148
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
PAGE
PAGE
oratio imperata on first Friday
100
crucifix affixed to
336
consecration of family to .
245
Te Deum :
votive Mass of
.
.
86
rubrics for chant of
.
362
Saints :
Tenebrae :
statues and images in
symbolism of candles
.
228
sanctuary . .
,
312
Throne :
two images forbidden
.
361
for
Blessed
Sacrament,
Sanctuary lamp ;
canopy of . .
.
345
electric .
.
.
.342
Titular :
Scapular :
church without
faculties for enrolling in .
435
306
feast of, in particular church
indulgences of.
.
.
432
307
Holy Souls as .
material for .
.
.
434
305
of cathedral
Medal .
.
’
437, 439
280
of semi-public oratory
Sequence :
279
Tonsure :
in external solemnity trans
ferred . .
.
.115
matter and form of .
171
Sick-call :
Translations :
bringing of Communion,
of et cum spiritu tuo .
205
rubrics of . .
.176
of Latin prayers
.
25. 201
Mass in sick room
.
79
of Ritual
201
Surplice :
Trinity :
when preaching
.
.
364
special feast of First Person
Stations of the Cross :
of Holy
240
conditions for indulgences .
402
legal requirements .
.
397
Vernacular :
renovation of .
.
.
401
prayers during exposition .
145
two sets in same church .
312
Stole :
prayers at Mass
.
.
25
in Ritual
.
.
.201
adjustment of .
.
.
358
Vestments :
colour for blessings .
.
183
St. Patrick :
blessing of
.
.
.
357
history of feast of .
. 260
colour of, in Requiem
.
75
materials for .
.
353, 355
proper Mass of
.
.
89
Voice :
tone at Mass .
.
7, 10, 45
Tabernacle :
as throne for Blessed
Sacrament .
. 346
Wreaths
191
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aertnys, Jos, and Dankelmann, A., C.SS.R. : Compendium
Liturgiae Sacrae (1936).
Amicis, de P. : Cacremoniale Parochorum (1948).
Angelis, de S. : De Indulgentiis (1950).
Anson, Peter F. : Churches, their Plan and Furnishing (1948).
Addis and Arnold : Catholic Dictionary.
Ayrinhac, H. : Administrative Legislation in Code.
Augustine, C. A. : Commentary on the Code of Canon Law.
Baldeschi, G. : Esposizione delle Sacre Ceremonie (1937).
Bcringer, Father : Les Indulgences (1925).
Bishop, E. : Lilurgica Historica.
Bouscarcn, T. L. : Canon Law Digest ; Commentary on Canon Law.
Bcauduin, Dorn Lambert : Melanges Liturgiques.
Bonniwell, W. R. : History of Dominican Liturgy.
Botte, B. and C. Mohnnann : L'Ordinaire de la Messe.
Bridgett, T. : History of the Eucharist in Britain.
Callewaert, G. : De Breviarii Liturgia ; De Missalis Romani
Liturgia.
Campelo, J. : De Indulgentiis Seraphici Ordinis.
Carpo, de, and A. Moretti : Caeremoniale.
Capello, S. : De Sacramentis : Commentarium in Codicem.
Catalani, G. : Rituale Romanum.
Capelie, Dom B. : Travaux Liturgiques.
Collins, H. : The Church Edifice and Its Appointments.
Concannon, Mrs. T. : Blessed Eucharist in Irish History.
Corblct, J. : Histoire du Sacrament de ΓEucharistie.
Coronata, C. : De Locis et Temporibus Sacris.
Crocgart, A. : Les Rites et Prières du S. Sacrifice de la Messe.
Dix, G. : Detection of Aumbries ; Shape of the Liturgy.
De la Taille, M. : The Mystery of Faith ; The Mystery of Faith
and Human Opinion.
Dunne, W. : The Ritual Explained.
449
450
PROBLEMS IN THE LITURGY
Ellard, G. : Dialog Mass ; The Mass in Transition.
Gavanti, B. : Thesaurus Sacrorum Rituum.
Gougaud, Dom L. :
Middle Ages.
Devotional and Ascelical Practices in the
Ford, J. : The New Eucharistic Legislation.
Fuerst, A. N. : This Rosary.
Favrin, B. : Praxis Sollemnium Functionum Episcoporum.
Hcrdt, de J. B. : Sacrae Liturgiae Praxis.
Heylen, P. : Tractatus de Indulgentiis.
King, A. : Liturgies of the Primatial Sees : Liturgies of the. Religious
Orders.
Lydon, P. J. : Ready Answers in Canon Law.
Jungmann, J. A. : The Mass of the Roman Rite ; Liturgical Worship.
Martène, J. : De Antiquis Ecclesiae Ritibus.
Martinucci, P., and Mcnghini : Manuale Sacrarum Caeremoniarum ;
Miscellanea Liturgica Mohlberg.
Molien, P. : Liturgie des Sacraments.
Moretti, A. : De Sacris Functionibus.
Murphy, D. : The Sacristan's Manual.
Murphy, D. : The Mass and Liturgical Reform.
McCloud, H. : Clerical Dress and Insignia.
McGennis, P. : The Scapular Devotion.
McManus, F. : The Rites of Holy Week.
Nabuco, J. : Pontificalis Romani Expositio ; Ius Pontificalium.
O’Callaghan, Μ. : Sacred Ceremonies of Low Mass.
O’Connell, J. B. : Directions for the Use of Altar Societies ;
Clementine Instruction ; Devotion of the Nine Fridays ; Celebration
of Mass ; Church Building and Furnishing ; Ceremonies of Holy
Week ; Simplifying the Rubrics.
O’Connell-Fortescue : Ceremonies of the Roman Rite.
O’Connell, L. : The Book of Ceremonies ; Holy I Peek in Large and
Small Churches.
O’Kane-Fallon : Notes on the Rubrics of the Roman Ritual.
O’Leary, P. : Pontificalia.
Oppenheim, P. : Institutiones Systematico-Historicae in Sacram
Liturgiam.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Puniet, de P. : Roman Pontifical.
Reinhold, H. A. : Speaking of Liturgical Architcd.,,,,
Righetti, Μ. : Storia Lilurgica.
Romita, F. : Ius P'lusicae Liturgicae.
Roschini, I. : Compendium Mariologiae.
Roulin, E. : Nos Églises ; Vestments and Vesture.
Salmon, P. : Etude sur les Insignes du Pontife.
Sangiorgi, D. : Liturgia dell' Organista.
Schuster, I. : The Sacramentary.
Stcuart, B. : Development of Christian Worship.
Stappen, J. Van der, and Crogaert : Caeremonialc.
Stchle, A. : Manual of Episcopal Ceremonies.
Shaw, J. : The Story of the Rosary.
Schneider : Rescripta Authentica S. Congr. Indulgentiarum.
Van Treck-Croft : Symbols in the Church.
Vermeersch-Creusen : Compendium luris Canonici.
Vavasseur-Stercky-Haegy : Manual de Liturgie ; Les Function»
Pontificales.
Wapelhorst, I. : Compendium Sacrae Lilurgiae.
Webb, G. : Liturgical Altar.
William, R. : Histoire de la Rosarie.
Periodicals : Ami du Clergé ; Clergy Monthly ; Clergy Review ;
Documentation Catholique; Ephemerides Liturgicae ; Liturgy ;
Liturgical Arts ; La Maison Dieu ; Paroisse et Liturgie :
Questions Liturgiques et Paroissiales: Worship.