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 ; ( 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 ; ( 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) ; () 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 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 ; ( 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.