Adoremus Bulletin - May 2024

News & Views

Catholic Baptisms,

Mass Attendance Surge Worldwide for Easter 2024

A pair of reports published this Easter indicate that there’s plenty of good news for the Good News of Christ. The gospel is making inroads throughout the world, according to an April 3 report by the UK weekly, The Catholic Herald, and a March 27 report by the online US publication, The Pillar.

Writing for The Catholic Herald, Philip Campbell reports that there are signs of a renewed faith around the world.

“It was reported that one US parish in Auburn, Alabama, saw an astonishing 82 people being received into the Church,” Campbell writes. “Another person in Florida claimed they had 50 baptisms and 30 confirmations at their Easter Vigil this year.”

According to Campbell, these anecdotal accounts of spiritual renewal correspond to a report in France “that 7,135 adults were baptized in French Catholic Churches this Easter—double the number from 20 years ago—with just over a third of them being aged 18-25 years old. For a country that has just enshrined abortion into its constitution, this is definitely a move in the right direction.”

It was this same report that Luke Coppen and Brendan Hodge focused on in their March 27 article for The Pillar. Coppen and Hodge note that based on a March 27 report issued by the French bishops’ conference, “The number of adult

Adoremus Bulletin

For the Renewal of the Sacred Liturgy

Saint Athanasius on Divinization

By Matthew Tsakanikas

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God…. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:1,14). “To those who did accept him he gave power to become children of God” (John 1:12). By God’s own glory and power, “you may come to share in the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4).

If the above quotes of Scripture could be given in a simple summary, what would it say? It would say exactly what St. Athanasius said just before the Ecumenical Council of Nicaea in 325. He said, “The Son of God became man so that man might become God [by grace]” (Catechism of the Catholic Church [CCC], 460).

Why the Surprise?

Writing jointly with Russell Shaw, the moral theologian Germain Grisez once wrote, “The idea of our divinization is so astonishing, and so different from anything we ordinarily think that we tend to cast about for ways to weaken its force by giving it an attenuated meaning. That empties Christianity itself of meaning” (Fulfillment in Christ, 283). Have we emptied St. Athanasius’s saying of its meaning? Are we too busy trying to tone it down because of the effort involved in taking time to explain it properly? Will we let it mean what he understood it to mean? After all, Athanasius is the one who almost single-handedly saved Christianity from abandoning the Apostolic understanding of the Trinity when Arius tried to sway bishops away from following the Council of Nicaea. The Athanasian kerygma (key proclamation of the Gospel) is a powerful statement that restores the real mystery of Christianity, a mystery that must be lived to be understood.

“ The Son of God became man so that man might become God [by grace].”

—St. Athanasius

Most Christians never re-appropriate the Christian Faith at a mature level. St. Paul speaks of this phenomenon when he says, “I fed you milk, not solid food, because you were unable to take [the fuller meaning]” (1 Corinthians 3:2). Usually, answering their adult questions with childish answers and understandings, Christian adults and teens lose the faith and become only Christian in name or neo-pagans. They believe they have overcome childish beliefs when in fact they are only rejecting childish presentations of the faith from childhood. This is all the more true of Catholic Christians who were most often only “fed milk” in Catholic schools and often never got the “meat and potatoes.” The objective of this brief essay is to help them and Christians caught in solely legalistic understandings of justification (how God redeems our souls and makes us holy) to recover an authentic understanding of the faith and maintain its mystery and beauty.

Divinize Your Potential

By not getting too technical, it is hoped we will avoid attenuating Athanasius's meaning. Nevertheless, his statement is so foreign to so many who view Christianity as only a matter of avoiding sin that we need address their concerns about what “becoming God” means and what it does not mean. We need to use real authorities in the Christian West who will help alleviate their concerns. After all, are we implying that we become identical in every way with God? Was it not the sin of the devil to want to become God?

In an effort to help Christians love God with St. Athanasius, we will use the major theologians in the West who the Catholic Church declared to be Doctors; the main theologians who should be trusted for their explanations in a given subject area. St. Thomas Aquinas (the Angelic Doctor), who relied heavily on the theology of St. Augustine, will address concerns that such desires to “become God” led to the sin of the devil and will lead Christians astray. St. John of the Cross (the Mystical Doctor) will address objections that “becoming God” sounds New Age-ish and as if we will lose our humanity and personal identity in some kind of Nirvana.

Answering Concerns

In his Summa Theologica, St. Thomas Aquinas (the Angelic Doctor) does teach that the sin of the devil was that the devil desired to become God (STh I, 63, 3). However, Aquinas

We are all God—or at least can be—for God became us so we could become him through the liturgy, both here and now—and hereafter. Matthew Tsakanikas parses it all out for us ……1

Hours in a Moment

Benedictine Brother Stanley Rother Wagner relates how the Divine Office not only sanctifies his hours as a monk but also provides a place of refreshment for every moment of his life 6 Can I Hear an Alleluia?

According to sacred music man Adam Bartlett, the Alleluia is not a one- or two-hit wonder but, thanks to the rich trove of Church chant, a playlist of infinite proportion, melody, and joy 8

The Liturgy’s Spirit Anima In this third and final installment on the work of the Trinity in the liturgy, Michael Brummond explains how the Holy Spirit serves as the everanimating principle of mystery in the liturgy…9 Critical Mass

Athanasius is the one who almost single-handedly saved Christianity from abandoning the Apostolic understanding of the Trinity when Arius tried to sway bishops away from following the Council of Nicaea. The Athanasian kerygma (key proclamation of the Gospel) is a powerful statement that restores the real mystery of Christianity, a mystery that must be lived to be understood. But can he be trusted on this topic of divinization?!

baptisms in France has increased by 30%, from 5,463 in 2023 to 7,135 in 2024” while the “number of baptisms of adolescents—young people aged 11 to 17 who are in middle or high school—has also risen sharply, from 2,861 in 2023 to 5,025 in 2024.”

“The figures are the highest since the French bishops’ conference began tabulating the data more than 20 years ago,” Coppen and Hodge write, adding that the Belgian bishops’ conference reported a similar trend.

“The number of adult baptisms has also continued to rise over the border in Belgium,” The Pillar reported, “almost doubling in a decade, from 186 in 2014 to 362 in 2024, the Belgian bishops’ conference announced March 26.”

According to Coppen and Hodge, “France and Belgium are both traditionally Catholic nations that have seen a deep erosion in Catholic practice in recent decades.”

“Around 29% of France’s population of 68 million identify as Catholic, but only 8% of Catholics are regular Massgoers.”

“Roughly half of Belgium’s 12 million population identifies as Catholic, with 8.9% of Catholics attending Mass at least once a month.”

Coppen and Hodge quote Bishop Olivier Leborgne, head of the French bishops’ department for catechesis, in the foreword to the French bishops’ report, to provide an explanation for the surge in numbers among French Catholics.

“In almost every diocese in France,” Bishop Leborgne writes, “people are coming to the Church to ask for baptism, confirmation, and the Eucharist, sometimes in a movement of bewildering proportions.”

“They have come about through identified paths, having intersected with our pastoral projects and missionary endeavors, but they also arrive as part of a personal process that has taken a completely unexpected path.”

“In a world in search of meaning, Christ and his Gospel are speaking to people who had never heard of him before. Many are witnessing authentic experiences of salvation, the kind that lift you up, straighten you out, restore your confidence, and reopen your future. How can we fail to give thanks?”

In addition to baptisms, attendance at the Triduum and Easter Mass also showed signs of increase. In his report for The Catholic Herald, Campbell writes that “stories of packed parishes filled to the rafters for the entirety of the Triduum were commonplace. Online accounts of ‘standing room only’ and overflowing overflow-areas seemed to be the norm.”

“Some said it was the highest Easter Mass attendance they had seen in 25 years. Westminster Cathedral was so full on Good Friday that it was reported security personnel had to turn people away. These stories spanned everywhere from Ireland to Indonesia.”

Campbell concludes his report with a possible explanation for the uptick in interest in the Christian faith: “What we may be seeing—and which appeared highlighted this Easter—is that people are waking up to the dramatic (if not draconian) changes in the social, cultural, and spiritual landscapes; while seeking to go deeper, being drawn to the good, the true and the beautiful. And we should be ready to embrace them with open arms.”

Orthodox Patriarch Hopes for ‘Unified’ Easter Date in East and West

By Tyler Arnold

CNA—The Eastern Orthodox patriarch of Constantinople has expressed a desire that Christians in the East and the West begin celebrating Easter on a “unified date” rather than adhere to separate Lenten calendars.

“It is a scandal to celebrate separately the unique event of the one resurrection of the one Lord,” Patriarch Bartholomew I, who holds the title “first among equals” in Eastern Orthodoxy, said in a recent homily, according to Orthodox Times

The ecumenical patriarch made the comments during a homily on March 31, which marked Easter on the Western calendar and the second Sunday of Lent on the Eastern calendar.

“We extend a heartfelt greeting of love to all Christians around the world who celebrate holy Easter today,” Bartholomew said during the homily. “We beseech the Lord of Glory that the forthcoming Easter

NEWS & VIEWS

celebration next year will not merely be a fortuitous occurrence but rather the beginning of a unified date for its observance by both Eastern and Western Christianity.”

The ecumenical patriarch noted that the Eastern Orthodox Church in Constantinople sent representatives to Christian communities who celebrated Easter on March 31 “to extend our heartfelt wishes.” He also said this effort is “particularly significant” because the 1,700th anniversary of the First Council of Nicea of 325 is approaching. That meeting took place at a time when the Eastern and Western Churches were in full communion with each other.

“Among [the Council of Nicea’s] pivotal discussions was the matter of establishing a common time frame for the Easter festivities,” Patriarch Bartholomew said. “We are optimistic, as there is goodwill and willingness on both sides.”

Pope Francis has also expressed his intent to reach an agreement to establish a common date for Easter. In 2015, the pontiff said the two churches “have to come to an agreement.”

The pontiff similarly said that disunity is a scandal and joked that Christians could say to one another: “When did Christ rise from the dead? My Christ rose today, and yours next week.”

The Roman Catholic Church adopted the Gregorian calendar, introduced by Pope Gregory XIII, in the late 16th century. This replaced the Julian calendar, which was enacted in the Roman Empire by Julius Caesar in 45 B.C.

The Gregorian calendar was eventually adopted by most of the world as the standard calendar because its revision of leap years more adequately accounted for the revolution of the Earth around the sun than the Julian calendar did, ensuring the dates more accurately reflected the seasons.

In the Eastern Church, however, the liturgical calendar remained based on the Julian calendar for several more centuries. In the 20th century, most Orthodox churches adopted a revised version of the Julian calendar.

Some Orthodox churches still adhere to the old Julian calendar, including the largest patriarchate, Moscow. Adherence to either the old Julian calendar or the revised version lead to major feasts like Christmas and Easter falling on different days than adherents to the Gregorian calendar.

Any revision of the calendar by Patriarch Bartholomew would likely be rejected by the Moscow Patriarchate, which excommunicated Bartholomew in 2018 amid disputes about the Orthodox Church in Ukraine.

The Catholic Church by the Numbers: More Catholics but Fewer Vocations

By Kate Quiñones

CNA—The number of Catholics worldwide increased by 14 million in 2022, according to the Vatican’s 2022 Statistical Yearbook of the Church released earlier this month and highlighted in a report by the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano

The figures from 2021 to 2022—the most recent years where numbers are available—marked a decrease in the number of priests and seminarians.

While vocations to the priesthood and religious life have decreased overall, the Church shows signs of growth in some parts of the world—most notably Africa and Asia.

The number of baptized Catholics has increased by about 1%—14 million—rising from 1.376 billion in 2021 to 1.390 billion in 2022.

As in previous years, the Catholic Church in Africa continues to grow. Africa had the highest increase in Catholics at 3%, while the Americas recorded a 0.9% increase and Asia a 0.6% increase.

The number of Catholics in Europe remained steady at about 286 million from 2021 to 2022.

The number of priests continued the downward trend that began in 2012.

Globally, the number of priests decreased by 142 from 2021 to 2022, going from 407,872 to 407,730

But the number of priests continues to grow in Africa and Asia, while vocations in other continents plateau or decline.

The number of priests in Africa and Asia increased by 3.2% and 1.6%, respectively, while the number remained steady in the Americas. Oceania saw a 1.5% decrease in priests, while Europe had a 1.7% decrease. There are also fewer seminarians worldwide. According to the Vatican numbers, there were 1.3% fewer men preparing for priesthood in 2022 than in 2021.

But not all is lost for parochial Church leadership. The numbers show a marked increase in permanent deacons, increasing by 2% from 2021 to 2022.

While the global Catholic Church saw 142 fewer priests from 2021-2022, there are 974 more permanent deacons worldwide.

The number of bishops from 2021 to 2022 increased by a quarter, from 5,340 to 5,353 bishops, with most of the growth centered in Africa and Asia.

In the Americas, the number of bishops remained steady at about 2,000, while in Europe the number of bishops declined slightly at less than 1%.

The number of professed religious men—not including priests—decreased by 360, from 49,774 in 2021 to 49,414 in 2022.

Asia and the Americas were the only regions where religious vocations for men increased, with the most substantial increase in Asia.

While there are more religious women than priests by almost 50%, the number of religious women is also declining. According to the most recent data from 2021 to 2022, their numbers have declined by 1.6%—meaning almost 10,000 fewer religious sisters worldwide.

This decline is most prevalent in Oceania, Europe, and North America, where the number of women religious decreased by 3.6%, 3.5%, and 3% respectively. South and Central America also saw a slight decrease of more than 2,000 religious women.

But Africa had the largest increase in religious women at 1.7%, increasing by more than 1,000 vocations. Southeast Asia’s numbers also reflected a small increase of 0.1%—almost 200 more religious women.

Adoremus Bulletin

PHONE:

EDITOR - PUBLISHER: Christopher Carstens

MANAGING EDITOR: Joseph O’Brien

CONTENT MANAGER: Jeremy Priest

GRAPHIC DESIGNER: Danelle Bjornson

OFFICE MANAGER: Elizabeth Gallagher

MARKETING AND FUNDRAISING: Eugene Diamond

TECHNOLOGY: Zach Tudahl

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

Pushing the Liturgical Limits: Becoming God

By Christopher Carstens, Editor

It is common nowadays to compare liturgy to art.

Both express an idea in the mind’s eye of the artist through sensible media—words, song, paint— that is meant to be perceived by another. If the art is excellent, and if the receiver knows how to appreciate it, the revealed idea may even move or transform the beholder. In fact, rather than juxtaposing liturgy and art as analogous, it is truer to say that liturgy is art: as the supreme artist, God—who is beauty itself—transforms liturgical percipients through sensible, sacramental signs and symbols.

But if this liturgy-as-art paradigm is accurate—God manifested through sacred signs to active participants— then the priest and ministers who perform the rite must celebrate under relatively strict limits. For not just any word says “Word,” and not just any piece of music echoes the song of the angels, and not just any arrangement of colors, windows, or mosaic tiles transports us to heaven. There are limits, in liturgical art especially, to what a priest or assembly can do with the ritual. “Art is limitation,” Chesterton observes: “the essence of every picture is the frame.”

This is not to say, however, that the liturgy seeks to box us in, check our freedom, or confine us to our current condition. Quite the contrary. The liturgy, which manifests the Mystery of our faith in a most beautiful way, liberates and expands our souls. Gregory of Nyssa writes that “Christian perfection has but one limit, that of having none” (see Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), 2028). And the liturgy is the powerhouse of this limitless perfection.

It’s with this remarkable truth in mind that I’m pleased to announce the new Becoming God podcast. Catholic evangelist Michael Gormley and I are hosting this venture, which is being sponsored by Adoremus. Launched during the Octave of Easter, Becoming God considers sacramental celebrations and liturgical living with an eye on the prize: divinization, sanctification—in short, Christian perfection.

The “becoming God” angle on the liturgy may be a new one for some—or even many. Too often, liturgical headlines, commentaries, and debates center on what’s wrong with the liturgy (too much Latin, or not enough Latin); or liturgical abuses (e.g., invalid sacraments); or just plain liturgical confusion (what is a non-liturgical blessing, and when, where, and how may it be used?). And while questions like these are important, the telos of the liturgy—divinization—becomes an unintended casualty.

Indeed, the whole notion of “becoming God” may strike some readers as heretical, or New Age, or pantheistic—so foreign has it become to the modern (and especially Western) mind. But the Church has consistently held that such is the purpose of God’s plan. From the start, Adam and Eve were made in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:26). And from there, things were only meant to get better: “Created in a state of holiness,” teaches the Catechism, “man was destined to be fully ‘divinized’ by God in glory” (398). So, what happened? If they were already made “like God” and were meant to become even more “divinized”—then how could our first parents have

The Apostles' eyes “were opened in the breaking of bread, opened far more happily to the sight of their own glorified humanity than were the eyes of our first parents to the shame of their sin…. Indeed, that blessed company had a great and inexpressible cause for joy when it saw man’s nature rising above the dignity of the whole heavenly creation, above the ranks of angels, above the exalted status of archangels. Nor would there be any limit to its upward course until humanity was admitted to a seat at the right hand of the eternal Father, to be enthroned at last in the glory of him to whose nature it was wedded in the person of the Son.” (St. Leo the Great, Office of Readings from Wednesday,

sinned by wanting…to “become God”? The answer is that they did not sin by wanting to become God, but by doing so “without God, before God, and not in accordance with God” (CCC, 398, citing St. Maximus the Confessor).

So a second Adam—Jesus—comes and gives us another chance to fulfill our divine destiny. As St. Athanasius puts it, “the Son of God became man so that we might become God” (see CCC, 460). What Jesus is by nature—the Son of God—we can now become by grace—sons and daughters of God. Scripture, for example, recounts Jesus’ own words: “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, You are gods’”? (John 10:34). And at the Last Supper he prays to his Father that we “may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us” (John 17:21).

Nor is it accidental that this mutual indwelling of man in the Trinity is prayed for by Jesus at the Last Supper, since it is by the liturgy and the sacraments— especially the Eucharist—that divinization is realized. As the 12th-century Cistercian Blessed Isaac of Stella

Pop Quiz: Are You Smarter Than a Liturgist?

How would you answer these liturgy-related questions? (All of them are typically posed to liturgists.)

1. How should a minister hold or fold his hands during Mass?

2. Can a blessed be chosen as a confirmation name? Can a female candidate have a male saint?

3. What are the norms for confirmation sponsors?

4. Are paraphrases of psalms an acceptable option for reading at Mass?

5. What is the difference between Anointing of the Sick and Last Rites?

states, “This is the explanation of the Lord’s words: Father, I desire that as you and I are one, so they may be one with us…. When all are united with God they become one God. The Son of God is one with God by nature; the Son of Man is one with him in his person; we, his body, are one with him sacramentally. Consequently, those who by faith are spiritual members of Christ can truly say that they are what he is: the Son of God and God himself” (Office of Readings from Friday, Easter Week V). Becoming God loves the liturgy and the sacraments for many reasons, but chief among them is the power they have to transform us into what we were made to be.

So, if you are up for it, join Michael Gormley and me on the weekly Becoming God podcast (via Apple or Spotify). “Man is not satisfied with solutions beneath the level of divinization,” Joseph Ratzinger says (Address to Catechists and Religion Teachers [December 12, 2000]). Liturgy lovers should also not be satisfied with quarrels and quandaries, but with nothing less than our eternal calling—becoming God.

Easter Week VI)

Continued from DIVINIZATION, page 1 makes clear in this same section (Question 63, Article 3) that this is a sin according to one fashion, but not according to another. An expert on the Sacred Scriptures and the Church Fathers, Aquinas makes very clear there is no sin in desiring to be God “provided that [one] desires such likeness in proper order, that is to say, that [one] may obtain it of God.

begins when the Holy Spirit is given to us in baptism and helps us love according to God’s impulsion to love; according to God’s way of loving. As we grow into this likeness through the Holy Spirit’s inspirations and indwelling, we take on God’s divinity and we begin to possess the divine light that came from Christ at his Transfiguration (Matthew 17). We must be born of God (John 1:13) if we are to live on God’s

But [one] would sin were [one] to desire to be like God even in the right way, but of [one’s] own power, and not of God’s.”

The sin of the devil was according to this second fashion: “He desired as the last end of his beatitude something which he could attain by the virtue of his own nature, turning his appetite away from the supernatural beatitude which is attained by God’s grace. Or, if he desired as his last end that likeness to God which is bestowed by grace, he sought to have it by the power of his own nature, and not from divine assistance according to God’s ordering.” Aquinas ends by summarizing St. Anselm who says “that [the devil] sought that to which he would have come had he stood fast.”

“Growing into the true likeness of God and beginning to share in God’s own power comes from God as a gift.”

power to live (eternal life) and rise above this world’s limited power. Born of God and surrendering to God’s goodness makes us “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4). The scriptures speak of “becoming God” because we participate in God’s own life and nature. Born of a cat, you are a cat. Born of a dog, you are a dog. Born of a human, you are human. Born of God (cf. John 1:13), you are a participant in the divine nature and no longer merely human. This is why Jesus said, “I came that they may have life and have it more abundantly” (John 10:10).

death. It helped Adam and Eve understand that those in the image of God are persons and not objects for use; persons cannot be treated as a means to an end, they are to be affirmed and loved, not used.

God started Adam and Eve’s lives in love, sharing in his divinity, but the process of becoming God by grace (deification or growing in sanctification) was not yet complete. Adam and Eve did not yet know God according to God’s very own power to know (beatific vision), but rather according to the power of supernatural faith. Supernatural faith is real knowledge, eternal life-giving knowledge in us (cf. John 17:3), but not the perfection of beatific vision. By the power of the Holy Spirit, supernatural faith helps us to understand God and develop a true personal relationship with him. It begins our growth into God as we love God more and begin to participate in eternal life even now on earth. Faith is replaced by perfection and permanency when God gives us his power to see him “face to face” and we become fully children of God, fully persons of love in heaven. This is when our freedom reaches its goal of true and complete freedom in God.

When the devil convinced Adam and Eve they could attain this freedom and permanency through knowing “good and evil” for themselves, they were taken outside of real participation in God by their freedom to choose. They were not yet ready and prepared for such knowledge which injured them and their relationship in creation with everything lower than them. In their immaturity, Adam and Eve performed actions which were a rejection of God, a rejection of love, and they damaged themselves. They tried to take power for themselves and for their own glorification instead of for service to others and completion of the world according to God’s plan and care. They tried to take power for themselves and to live as a community separate from God when being like God means living according to true love and the one true Communion of the most holy Trinity. There is only one love, and real human love is a participation in it whereby humans become love through service to others. Love is the only reality that endures forever, and love is only achieved by growing in likeness to God and becoming a person who is realized in the true persons of the most holy Trinity. Adam and Eve’s sin began their corruption and disrupted their natural powers. Death as humans experience it today ensued.

Will “Becoming God” Mean We Cease to Be Human and Lose Our Identity?

Our desire to “become God” should have meant our desire that we should become what God wants us to become and in the way God showed us to become:

In other words, according to Anslem and Aquinas, Lucifer could have “become God” by participation in the divine nature if the devil had done it God’s way instead of trying to take the gift by his own power! God is love, not raw power and force. Love is received, not taken. Love is given freely, not taken by force. One cannot use force to become God who is love. We have no power over God. One must open up to God’s gift and receive God his way to become more like God. One only becomes a thief by trying to take by one’s own power that which belongs to God alone. “Taking” makes one a user of others instead of “the gift of self” which God is.

In short, on this issue of the sin of the devil, Aquinas is laying the groundwork to explain how it is that man “becomes God” in Christ according to grace. In fact, he quotes St. Augustine quoting St. Athanasius that man is to “become God” in Book III of the Summa Theologica (Part III, Q.1, a. 2). On this issue of the devil’s sin, Aquinas is making a distinction between grace (God’s working in us through the power that belongs only to God) and nature (our power to work and to will which comes to us by being born of human parents). It is not in our power to make God’s power enter us so that we can live according to God’s power instead of our own. No man can save himself without God’s help and God’s coming to us. Growing into the true likeness of God and beginning to share in God’s own power (eternal life) comes from God as a gift. It is not something that we can take or earn and it is a real change in us when God gives us this share in him, it changes our way of being.

Partaking in the divine nature (cf. 2 Peter 1:4)

The gift of freedom is what gives us the opportunity to “become God” by grace, but it does not mean we will accomplish staying inside this gift. The devil wanted us to use our freedom in a way unlike God. The devil wanted us to use our freedom to serve ourselves instead of living as a gift to others like God. The Trinity, God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, always lives totally for the other Persons in an eternal mystery of oneness and self-gift that goes beyond human understanding. The mystery was without beginning. It is a mystery of selflessness among persons (each the one infinite Good) which we know as love. God is personal and infinite goodness given and received without beginning and without end. Adam and Eve’s introduction to this mystery of love is what gave Adam and Eve the integrity of their human powers and their temporary immunity from

In their immaturity, Adam and Eve performed actions which rejected God, a rejection of love, and they damaged themselves. They tried to take power for themselves and for their own glorification instead of for service to others and completion of the world according to God’s plan and care. They tried to take power for themselves and to live as a community separate from God when being like God means living according to true love and the one true communion of the most holy Trinity.

by becoming a living sacrifice for others. God is the mystery and meaning of love and fulfilment. We must become true love or we will fail to find fulfilment and realize our humanity and image of God. Jesus did not become God, he always was God. He is God become a man; enabling man to go beyond (transcend) his human powers without loss to those powers. Jesus

Our deification begins in baptism and confirmation and is continued and advanced through proper participation in Holy Communion and daily prayer and acts of charity…and learning to surrender and make a gift of ourselves to God more fully.

AB/VATICAN MEDIA. © L’OSSERVATORE ROMANO.

showed man what it means for humans to love and live in God’s love so that they can possess eternal life and be saved from endless death (the endless process of self-centeredness instead of God-centeredness).

By his human obedience and giving of his human will to the Divine Will completely, Jesus became the source for all humans to become God by grace. The process of becoming love is enabled by faith in Christ who gives us the Holy Spirit to restore our integration (healing us) and elevate us into a participation in God’s transcendent and eternal power; an eternal and transcendent power which can increase within us without end (see CCC, 2028). Again, we call this process deification (fication—process of being made; deus—God). God is love (1 John 4:16). He loved us first and through his Spirit in us God urges our freedom to choose to live the truth in love so we may be taken up into his eternal love and made his true family members.

This process does not destroy our human nature. It heals it, preserves it, and elevates it beyond what it could do according to the powers that belong to it from natural birth. Without our human wills we could not freely choose or determine our way of being,

blacksmith making a sword and putting the blade in the fire. The fire makes the metal glow red-hot. The metal takes on the power of the fire and shines with the fire’s power, but the metal does not cease to be metal. Metal is taken beyond its ordinary power to share in another power. It becomes fire without ceasing to be metal and can do what fire does (cf. John 14:12).

St. John of the Cross (the Mystical Doctor) uses a similar language when he writes in The Ascent of Mt. Carmel: “When God grants this supernatural favor to the soul, so great a union is caused that all the things of both God and the soul become one in participant transformation, and the soul appears to be God more than a soul. Indeed, it is God by participation. Yet truly, its being (even though transformed) is naturally as distinct from God’s as it was before, just as the window, although illumined by the ray, has being

“ Through the grace of Jesus we can become God in so far as God became a man. We cannot attain deification through our own powers but only through renunciation of personal sins as inspired by the Spirit and acceptance of Jesus.”

Oftentimes, the process of divinization is explained using the analogy and image of metal in a fire. Think of a blacksmith making a sword and putting the blade in the fire. The fire makes the metal glow red-hot. The metal takes on the power of the fire and shines with the fire’s power, but the metal does not cease to be metal. Metal is taken beyond its ordinary power to share in another power. It becomes fire without ceasing to be metal and can do what fire does.

being for God or only being for ourselves…selfish. Without free will, we could not love or be capable of becoming love. For the Christian, being deified or divinized means being born from above (John 3:6-7) by God (John 1:12). We never cease to be human in the process of God helping us live the surrender of our wills (ourselves) to him more deeply. Jesus never ceased to be God in the process of becoming human. There was no change to the divine nature when God became man. Rather, humanity was now made capable of receiving divinity. Our deification begins in Baptism and Confirmation (Chrismation) and is continued and advanced through proper participation in Holy Communion and daily prayer and acts of charity… learning to more fully surrender and make a gift of our selves to God. It is a matter of virtue formation. Deification, which is the patristic (early apostolic) way of explaining our sanctification, enables us to love God more and live more fully for him. We are made holy by God’s power living more fully within us, within our wills and desires (cf. Philippians 2:1213). Sanctification means becoming holy (fication being made; sanctus—holy). The holiness is God in us. It is God’s work in us to help us cooperate with the truth and become free (Philippians 2:12-13; Galatians 5:1) so that we can become like God and our human wills abide in Love.

distinct from the ray’s.”

“Born of a cat, you are a cat. Born of a dog, you are a dog. Born of a human, you are human. Born of God (cf. John 1:13), you are a participant in the divine nature and no longer merely human.”

The Christian understanding of deification is totally opposed to New Age ideas of monistic or pantheistic conceptions of God (as being part of God or absorbed by God). We always remain totally other than God by our defined and created nature. The definition of human nature forever includes “having a beginning” while God’s definition forever remains “without beginning.” Human nature remains distinct from God forever because of the definition of “having a beginning.” We remain as distinct as the window and the light forever. However, through the mystery of the Incarnation we can attain a participation in God which is impossible without Jesus. Through the grace of Jesus we can become God in so far as God became a man. We cannot attain deification through our own powers but only through renunciation of personal sins as inspired by the Spirit and acceptance of Jesus. It is participation in the Holy Spirit who heals the damage sin causes, restores God’s image within us, and elevates and perfects that image to become the very likeness of God by bringing our human wills into God’s life-giving will. God preserves the authentic diversity of our createdness. It glorifies God as we become “sons in the Son” (cf. CCC, 51-53) and the beautiful mosaic of the mystical body of Christ.

In a later work, Against the Arians, St. Athanasius helps us understand his original statement that “God became man so that man might become God”: “God’s love of man is such that to those for whom first He is the Creator, He afterwards, according to grace,

“ When God grants this supernatural favor to the soul, so great a union is caused that all the things of both God and the soul become one in participant transformation, and the soul appears to be God more than a soul. Indeed, it is God by participation.” — St. John of the Cross

Oftentimes, this process is explained using the analogy and image of metal in a fire. Think of a

When sunlight passes through a window one cannot separate the window from the light that passes through it even though the window and light are truly distinct. The window is turned into the light as the light passes through it. Only smudges and dirt that prevent penetration of the light remind us that the window is still present. Clean the smudges and dirt and the window is no longer seen in the light. Smudges and dirt are not part of the definition of the window and sin is not part of the definition of man. Sin is only the current condition of man. Man can act more fully human by being healed of sin as a window becomes more fully a window without smudges and filth. The light (a sign of God sharing his life) simultaneously gives the window a participation in something higher.

Taking this analogy even further, all of humanity together is more like pieces of a stained-glass window forming a grand mosaic in a cathedral. Humanity’s beauty and pattern is not understood but remains dark until the “Sonlight” (cf. Ephesians 1:4-6) for which it was designed shines through us and reveals the many beautiful colors and patterns. God’s light shines through us and reveals our intended beauty so that together with our true brothers and sisters in the Lord we form a magnificent reflection of the glory of God. Humanity gets to rejoice with God and one another in God’s infinity…endless goodness in personal love.

becomes a Father also. The latter he does when men, who are His creatures, receive into their hearts, as the Apostle says, the Spirit of His Son, crying, ‘Abba, Father.’ It is these who, by their having received the Word, have gained from Him the power to become the children of God; for, being creatures by nature, they could not otherwise become sons than by receiving the Spirit of the natural and true Son. To bring this about, therefore, the Word became Flesh—so that He might make man [male and female] capable of divinity” (Discourses Against the Arians, Book II, paragraph 59 in Jurgens’ The Faith of the Early Fathers).

We are not family with God just because we are humans. We are not divine just because we are humans. But if we will accept Jesus by the Spirit’s inspirations, we can receive the Holy Spirit who makes us true sons and daughters of God. Grace builds on nature. We become God by grace without limit to the possibilities of perfection and likeness. The only limit is that we will have had a beginning which the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit never had. We become God by grace (participation in God) and not by nature. It is Mormons who teach that dreadful heresy that we become God apart from God and without real participation in the one and only true God. They actually think we become God by nature. Such is contrary to reason and especially to the teachings of Jesus and his one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church, founded upon the Apostles.

Editor’s note: The above excerpt is a chapter from Dr. Tsakanikas’s developing manuscript on the Transfiguration and Luminous Mysteries of the Rosary.

Matthew A. Tsakanikas is an associate professor of theology at Christendom College, Front Royal, VA. He also publishes on catholic460.substack.com in reference to CCC #460.

AB/RAWPIXEL

Divine Office and Divine Contentment: A Reflection on the Liturgy of the Hours and the Present Moment

Br. Stanley Rother Wagner, OSB

The Divine Office—also known as the Liturgy of the Hours—sanctifies time and allows God to find us in the maelstrom of our daily tasks and chores. In a day when to-do lists and the “Buy Now” button on websites seem to dictate how we live our lives, we expect things to be accomplished as soon as possible. Even as Christians, we enter Advent’s simplicity and look longingly toward the glories of Christmas; we run into Lent with every ounce of good zeal we possess because we have fixed our sights on Easter; or we drift into Ordinary Time and misconstrue its “ordinal” nature for mere “ordinariness.” It is human nature not to be content with what we have or with who we are—we want the newest gadget or book, and we fantasize about the future that lies in store for each of us. We want fulfillment and we want it now, despite forgetting that we live in the period of “already but not yet.”

This is not the case only for liturgical seasons, but also for the Second Edition of the Liturgy of the Hours, a task of renewal that has been delayed time and time again over the past decade or so. We desperately want this refined edition of the Liturgy of the Hours to be in our hands because of its perceived “new” spiritual benefits, not to mention the novelty of becoming acquainted with a new edition of a liturgical book. Yet, the Liturgy of the Hours as a liturgical act is intended to sanctify time: past, future, and most definitely the present moment. Now is the right time to remind ourselves about the spiritual benefits of our current edition of the Liturgy of the Hours—how it has nurtured our spiritual lives and anchored us to the timelessness of Christ while keeping us stable within the vicissitudes of our times. In this manner, we can help ourselves to stay in 2024 and be content with the gift that the Church gave us in 1975.

Text and Context

I approach the topics of the Liturgy of the Hours and contentment from numerous contexts. I am a Benedictine monk, obliged to pray the Divine Office in its entirety every day for my salvation and for the salvation of the world. I understand my vocation as one lived for Christ and his flock, an enterprise that edifies me and enables me to cocreate with God. I was not always a monk, though. I began praying the Liturgy of the Hours toward the end of my undergraduate career, something I continued once I became a graduate student at the Liturgical Institute in Mundelein, IL, in 2010. As a member of a community of priests, religious, and lay people who lived, worked, and prayed together, I saw how our common

celebrations of Lauds and Vespers throughout the week provided a needed respite amid classroom and house assignments. The conscious, fruitful, actual, and deliberate chanting gave me permission not to think about the earthly and transient concerns that often plague the minds of graduate students. Indeed, the Liturgy of the Hours provided a way for me to frame the day; to become content with the way things are, not the way I want them.

After stints as a diocesan seminarian, an archivist, and a high school teacher, in 2016, I found the road that led me to Saint Meinrad Archabbey. My commitment to the Office waxed and waned throughout the time between being a seminarian and becoming a monk. Despite the fluctuating intensity of my devotion to the Office, I kept desiring to immerse myself in the emotionally charged poetry of the psalms and the wisdom of our ancestors in the faith. Within the simple beauty of the 1963 Grail Psalms and

“As

a member of a community of priests,

religious, and lay people who lived, worked, and prayed together, I saw how our common celebrations of Lauds and Vespers throughout the week provided a needed respite amid classroom and house assignments.”

annual cycle of readings, I came to understand that the discipline required by the Liturgy of the Hours gives an overwhelming sense of peace and contentment to my day, as well as structure and accountability. I would never claim to be a “good monk,” but the way the Liturgy of the Hours punctuates my days has made me more aware that ultimate contentment can be found nowhere except in our Loving and Triune God.

Guide for the Perplexed

Father Ron Kunkel, one of my professors at the Liturgical Institute, once encouraged my classmates to read The General Instruction of the Liturgy of the Hours (GILH) at the beginning of Advent each year. Kunkel explained that such an act would deepen our appreciation of the Office. The GILH gives us the practical necessities of celebrating the Divine Office with care and diligence, but it also hands onto us the vision of how the Liturgy of the Hours sanctifies time and unites us to Christ and his Mystical Body

throughout all of time.

For example, we are reminded, “The testimony of the early Church shows that individual faithful also devoted themselves to prayer at certain hours…. In the course of time other hours were also sanctified by communal prayer, hours which the Fathers judged were found in the Acts of the Apostles” (GILH, 1). The GILH calls to mind how the Liturgy, though the Work of God, is also a work of the people—through our incorporation into the Mystical Body at our baptism, God has given us the charge to cocreate with him. The Liturgy of the Hours has its roots in Jewish Temple worship, and Christians practically began adapting the rituals of the Temple in their emerging Christian worship.

As the liturgical sanctification of time progressed and evolved in the early Church, the theology of the Trinity also became clearer to Christians. The liturgical hours gave to the Church a decidedly structured approach to the day, and it also offered to Christians a pattern for how to live a life centered in the triune-love of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. “Thus in the heart of Christ the praise of God finds expression in human words of adoration, propitiation and intercession; the head of renewed humanity and mediator of God prays to the Father in the name of and for the good of all mankind” (GILH, 3). When the members of Christ’s Church gather for worship, they are assembled into one Body, the Body of Christ on earth. As the GILH notes, the liturgy is the location where Christians pray as Christ prays to the Father in the Spirit: “A close and special bond exists between Christ and those whom, through the sacrament of regeneration, he makes members of his body, the Church. All the riches belonging to the Son flow from him as from the head into the whole body: the pouring out of the Spirit, truth, life and a share in his divine sonship, which he revealed to us in all his prayer on earth” (GILH, 7).

God takes the initiative to sanctify time, an ongoing and generative endeavor to which all who confess the name of Christ should (and must) attend in the world. To phrase that in another manner, “There can be no Christian prayer without the action of the Holy Spirit. He unites the whole Church and leads us through the Son to the Father” (GILH, 8).

With this schema for how Christians ought to live in the world, the GILH once more affirms that God’s grace diffuses throughout all times and places. “Compared with other liturgical actions, the particular characteristic which ancient tradition has attached to the Liturgy of the Hours is that it should consecrate the course of day and night” (GILH, 10).

The sanctification of time and of humankind is a

“I am a Benedictine monk, obliged to pray the Divine Office in its entirety every day for my salvation and for the salvation of the world. I understand my vocation as one lived for Christ and his flock, an enterprise that edifies me and enables me to cocreate with God. I was not always a monk, though….”

dialogue that ceaselessly echoes in our whole being, precisely because it is the dialogue of the Son offering eternal worship to the Father in the Spirit. “For in the liturgy God speaks to His people and Christ is still proclaiming His gospel. And the people reply to God both by song and prayer” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 33). Just as Christ offers to the Father this oblation in the Spirit in heaven, we are called to participate in that eternal and timeless worship even now in our earthly lives, offering ourselves as an oblation pleasing to the Father. It is through the members of his Mystical Body on earth that Christ’s work is manifested and the work of ushering in the Kingdom of God continues.

God, Presently

The timelessness of God was something I never doubted, though I gained a much deeper understanding of this fact when one of my theology professors stunned me with a divine revelation—of sorts. Dr. Keith Lemna, a professor of theology at the Saint Meinrad Seminary & School of Theology, once said in a lecture that “God sees all time—past, present, and future—occurring as the present moment.” Before that lecture in 2018, I knew that to be true in an objective sense, though after that comment, I was given a tailormade example of how I relate to Father, Son, and Spirit. I never forgot such simple wisdom, and it has guided my inner life and outward prayer ever since.

The Divine Office is something that is very much

“ The liturgical hours gave to the Church a decidedly structured approach to the day, and it also offered to Christians a pattern for how to live a life centered in the triune-love of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”

an earthly undertaking that God’s grace imbues with “hidden lessons of the past” (Psalm 77:2) for us to see how we work with God’s assistance throughout the course of each day, second to second and moment to moment. In my study of theology and in my liturgical prayer, I came to grow in love of God and in love of neighbor—I saw in the eternal dialogue of Father, Son, and Spirit the model on which I must base my life: love, mercy, humility, justice, hospitality, and mutual obedience. I encountered these monastic virtues in praying the Liturgy of the Hours, even before I was a monk.

The numerous components of the Liturgy of the Hours—the hymns, the beautifully composed chant modes of The Mundelein Psalter, and the 1963 Grail translation of the Psalms—fostered in me the desire to know God and who he is: a loving Creator who cares for his creatures, who loves them to such an extent that he willingly took on the sins of the world to deliver from eternal perdition those same creatures who once were deprived of his glory. The cyclical

“ The Liturgy of the Hours as a liturgical act is intended to sanctify time: past, future, and most definitely the present moment.”

turn, am meant to hand on in living out my baptismal promises and my monastic vows.

Even now, with the publication date of the second edition of the Liturgy of the Hours being delayed yet again, I can utilize God’s gift of memory to aid in keeping me stable and grounded in the present moment. I do not have to look back to some fantasized past version of myself, nor am I straining my gaze over the horizon for a new version of the Office that never seems to materialize. I am a Benedictine monk whose vocation is to pray the Office for my salvation and for the salvation of the whole world in the hereand-now of southern Indiana. For this, and for all the aforementioned liturgical insights and micro-revelations

I have received in my quest for daily sanctification, I am content.

Br. Stanley Rother Wagner, OSB, is a Benedictine monk of Saint Meinrad Archabbey in southern Indiana, where he currently serves as the archivist. He holds a BA in history from Quincy University, Quincy, IL; an MA in liturgical studies from the Liturgical Institute at St. Mary of the Lake University, Mundelein, IL; an MA in theology from the Saint Meinrad Seminary & School of Theology; and an MA in American history from University of Louisville, KY. His previous articles and essays have appeared in American Benedictine Review, Church Life, and PrayTellBlog.

The Second Edition of the Liturgy of the Hours has been delayed time and time again over the past decade or so. We desperately want this refined edition of the Liturgy of the Hours to be in our hands because of its perceived “new” spiritual benefits, not to mention the novelty of becoming acquainted with a new edition of a liturgical book. Until it appears, now is the right time to remind ourselves about the spiritual benefits of our current edition of the Liturgy of the Hours—how it has nurtured our spiritual lives and anchored us to the timelessness of Christ while keeping us stable within the vicissitudes of our times.

nature of the Office and the liturgical year reiterate for me how we as Christians are called to pray ceaselessly and offer thanks to God throughout all our days and so enter that glory of which our primordial parents deprived us.

The liturgical prayer of which I write did not have an idealized “formal translation” of the Psalter, and a number of those hymns were not composed from and within the Church’s rich tradition of liturgical music. The liturgical prayer that sustained me and helped me to understand my vocation as a child of God and as a Benedictine monk is found in the Liturgy of the Hours that went into effect in 1975. It is what was placed in my hands, to pray and to cherish, a gift that I, in

monk is found in the Liturgy of the Hours that went into effect in 1975,” reflects

Wagner. “It is what was placed in my hands, to pray and to cherish, a gift that I, in

am

hand on in living out my baptismal promises and my monastic vows.”

“The liturgical prayer that sustained me and helped me to understand my vocation as a child of God and as a Benedictine

Benedictine monk Br. Stanley Rother

turn,

meant to

By Adam Bartlett

IHow to Elevate the Gospel Acclamation in Your Parish

recently attended a family wedding at the parish that I grew up in—a parish under the patronage of St. Patrick in a small, historically Irish and German Midwestern town. It was an endearing reminder for me of how slowly things can change when it comes to liturgical practice—a double-edged sword that both serves to help preserve tradition but also makes efforts of renewal at times a serious practical challenge.

In my youth, I remember hearing and singing one of two possible Alleluias before the Gospel reading on just about any Sunday: either the Mode 6 chant alleluia (you know the one) at a drearily slow tempo, or the “Celtic Alleluia,” which is a bit more lively with a lilting 6/8 rhythm. I am not sure that I could have been convinced at the time that any other Alleluia had ever been sung, or that any others even existed. And so it wasn’t surprising to me when I heard the same Celtic inspired Alleluia tune sung at my family wedding, even though I probably had not heard it in nearly a quarter century.

I suspect that my early experience of the Alleluia is like that of many US Catholics today. For various reasons, a few melodies have gained currency in parishes and seem to have stuck—to the point that the Alleluia, and its counterpart during Lent, have largely lost their true character as a part of the Proper of the Mass, and are more commonly seen as a relatively static “Mass Part” like the Gloria or Holy, Holy. But the melodies for the Alleluia and their proper scriptural verses are meant to be varied, with the capacity to introduce a level of musical commentary into the Mass as it unfolds throughout the liturgical year. This added meaning is entirely lost when the same melodies are used over and over without variation.

This article is intended as a guide to help the Gospel Acclamation regain its rightful and noble place in our parish liturgies today as an integral and varied part of the Proper of the Mass, along with an implementation plan to help you progress toward this aim at whichever pace your parish requires.

A Rite or Act in Itself

First, we should understand what the Gospel Acclamation is and what it is not. Unlike the Entrance, Offertory, and Communion Chants that serve the purpose of accompanying a liturgical procession, the Alleluia is a liturgical action in and of itself (see General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) 62). The Alleluia itself, like the Responsorial Psalm, the Gloria, the Sanctus, and other similar parts of the Mass, should be our primary point of focus when it is sung.

With all due respect and filial affection to any of our beloved deacons reading this article, I am afraid to say that the procession to the ambo with the Book of the Gospels held high is not the point of focus as the Alleluia is sung. Instead, the entire liturgical assembly

“The melodies for the Alleluia and their proper scriptural verses are meant to be varied, with the capacity to introduce a level of musical commentary into the Mass as it unfolds throughout the liturgical year. This added meaning is entirely lost when the same melodies are used over and over without variation.”

of the Mass, where the texts are unchanging. It very often quotes the heart of the Gospel reading that immediately follows it and focuses our attention on a key spiritual insight, almost like lectio divina, before we listen prayerfully and attentively to the Gospel being proclaimed.

“The model for the way that the Gospel Acclamation should be sung is given to us in the first place in the Graduale Romanum, which is the Church’s own music book for the Mass.”

The Gregorian Model

The model for the way that the Gospel Acclamation should be sung is given to us in the first place in the Graduale Romanum, which is the Church’s own music book for the Mass. The Gregorian chant melodies in the Graduale, all things being equal, are meant to be sung by default in the Mass of the Roman Rite. As both Pope Saints Pius X and John Paul II asserted, this music—which has formed an integral part of the liturgy for well over a millennium—serves as the “supreme model” of sacred music, or, as William Mahrt puts it, as the “paradigm” that all other musical possibilities are oriented toward.

The arrangement of the Alleluia chants (and Tracts, during Lent) in the Graduale are intentionally and significantly varied. In fact, there are over 150 unique Alleluia melodies for use in a single year. When paired with their unique verse melodies, the number exceeds 300 unique chants. Rather than giving parishes a variety of options to select from, though, the Graduale prescribes specific Alleluia melodies with specific verse texts and melodies for each and every specific Mass throughout the entire year. And the arrangement is far from arbitrary or incidental. Certain modalities are paired with the character of particular texts and liturgical celebrations, and the melodies used form a musical tapestry that offers a level of spiritual insight that cannot be discerned from the texts alone.

Simpler Chant Melodies

Since the Alleluia melodies in the Graduale Romanum are among the most musically ornate in the Gregorian chant corpus, they are usually only sung well by a trained cantor or schola cantorum and are not always

within the reach of smaller parishes with fewer resources. It is for this reason that the Second Vatican Council called for a collection of simpler chants to be assembled for use in smaller churches that lack the resources to achieve the fullness of the sung liturgy week after week.

The result was the Graduale Simplex, first published in 1967, which is a collection of simpler Gregorian chants largely drawn from the Divine Office but arranged for use in the Mass. It also contains an excellent collection of chant-based alleluias for use throughout the liturgical year in a simplified arrangement, but in varied ways similar to that of the Graduale Romanum

The majority of the alleluia melodies in the Simplex are triple alleluias, meaning that the word alleluia is repeated three times within a single melody, while the melodies themselves are rather simple and well within reach of congregational singing.

Graduale Simplex Alleluias with English Verses

While the text of the Alleluia refrain is in Hebrew and carried over directly into English, Spanish, and other vernacular languages, the verses of the Gospel Acclamation in the Graduale Romanum and Graduale Simplex are in Latin. The source for Gospel Verses in English is the Lectionary for Mass, where no melodies are provided. Conveniently, the alleluia refrains of both of the Church’s chant books for the Mass can be paired with Psalm tones that can be used with any Gospel Verse text in English.

The Source & Summit Missal contains ten simple chant alleluias that are mostly drawn from the Graduale Simplex, all setting the same Gospel Verse text for the sake of demonstration. (See two of the ten samples below.)

What is Sung During Lent?

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal instructs that in place of the Alleluia during Lent, the Verse before the Gospel is to be sung, as found in the Lectionary or the Graduale. Strictly speaking, this verse has no refrain or acclamation. It is merely a Gospel Verse without an alleluia or anything else prior to or following it. In the Graduale Romanum, there is no Gospel Acclamation or refrain provided for singing, but only a (sometimes very lengthy) verse called the Tract. The Lectionary follows this model and allows the Gospel Verse alone to be sung during Lent, but it also provides several Lenten Gospel Acclamations that can be sung at will in place of the

is invited into a moment of praise and of preparation to hear the voice of Christ who is about to speak to them in the proclamation of the Gospel.

The text of the Gospel Verse is a proper element of the liturgy, meaning that it changes from day to day like the readings, Responsorial Psalm, orations, and antiphons, and is not a part of the Order or Ordinary

Please see GOSPEL on page 9

The Spirit in the Liturgy: The Work of the Third Person of the Trinity in the Sacraments

By Michael Brummond

This concluding essay examining the role of the Trinity in the sacred liturgy follows two previous articles which discussed the work of the Father and the Son in the liturgy.

As one delves into the accounts of the early Church in the Acts of the Apostles and the letters of St. Paul, one is struck by the mighty works of the Holy Spirit: tongues of fire descend, people speak in foreign languages, paralytics walk, and the dead are raised. The New Testament depiction of the Spirit’s work diverges from the typical experience of most Catholics. One could understandably ask: What happened between then and now? Nevertheless, today we can identify numerous ways the Spirit remains active within the Church,1 notably in the liturgy. Pope St. Leo the Great famously said, “What was visible in our Savior has passed over into his mysteries.” Perhaps we could paraphrase Leo and say of much of the Spirit’s work that what was manifest in signs of power has passed over into the powerful signs of the mysteries

In the Creed professed at Mass, we affirm our belief in the Holy Spirit, “the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son….” At once the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, eternally proceeding from both, the Holy Spirit is—as articulated by St. Augustine—the mutual love of the Father and Son.2 “The Holy Spirit is a certain unutterable communion of the Father and the Son.”3 The Spirit is the inner-trinitarian bond of love. Reflecting who the Spirit is eternally in the life of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit works in the Church as the source of her life and unity. In harmony with this dynamic, the Catechism of the Catholic Church outlines the Holy Spirit’s work in the liturgy

Continued from GOSPEL, page 8

Alleluia refrain, following a similar form.

The Source & Summit Missal contains various chant melodies set in the style of the Graduale Simplex.

Models for Elevating the Gospel Acclamation

For most parishes, an achievable goal for elevating the Gospel Acclamation is to introduce a reasonably varied cycle of alleluia melodies in the Simplex style, paired with the proper English (or Spanish) verses from the Lectionary.

The Source & Summit Missal provides a relatively simple and stable arrangement of alleluias for use throughout the entire liturgical year in this way. Ten alleluia refrains are used in total in the entire missal, with a single setting used for Advent, another for Christmas, a single acclamation for Lent, two melodies for Easter, and four that cycle through Ordinary Time. The other major categories of Feasts and Solemnities also receive their own melody so that, when they occur throughout the course of the year, they have a somewhat different character than Sundays.

This plan provides a parish repertoire of Alleluias that can endure over time while offering variety that is typical of the Proper of the Mass. Its internal logic also highlights the different dimensions of the liturgical year, all while blending seamlessly into the other parts of the sung liturgy.

The Source & Summit Gradual collection, which can be found on the Source & Summit Digital Platform, offers a slightly more varied plan, where the modality of each Simplex alleluia corresponds to the Alleluia mode used in the Graduale Romanum. In this way, interchange between the actual melodies of the Graduale becomes easier for parishes that can make use of it more regularly.

Where to Begin

If your parish context is anything like the one described at the outset of this article—and for many US parishes, it is—then you are most likely in need of a gradual implementation plan to help your parish elevate the Gospel Acclamation.

through four central actions.4

Firstly, the Holy Spirit prepares the Church to encounter Christ in her sacramental celebrations, forming in her members the proper dispositions.5 The liturgy is no Pelagian enterprise or merely human exercise of self-help. Initiative always belongs to the Spirit’s prevenient grace, prompting the Church’s responsive cooperation. In the economy of salvation, the Father sends the Son, and the Father and Son jointly send the Spirit. In the liturgical return to the Father, the path is reversed: the Spirit readies the Church to encounter the Lord Jesus through whom we have access to the Father.

Secondly, the Holy Spirit serves as the living memory, the anamnesis of the Church who manifests Christ in the liturgy.6 The Spirit imparts a spiritual understanding of the Word of God to the faithful and uses the liturgical actions and symbols to establish them in relationship with Christ.7 “The Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you” (John 14:26). Thomas Aquinas taught that “everything which is from another manifests that from which it is. Thus the Son manifests the Father because he is from the Father.”8 The Holy Spirit reveals the Son from whom he eternally proceeds while recalling Christ’s words to the Church. Nowhere is this more evident than in the liturgy.

Thirdly, the Holy Spirit brings about the presence of the mystery of Christ in each liturgical celebration.

Here are a few strategies that can be of help: First, you can select an annual arrangement of alleluias—such as the Source & Summit Missal or Graduale plans above, or perhaps even one of your own—that you want to implement fully in time.

“The

Second Vatican Council called for a collection of simpler chants to be assembled for use in smaller churches that lack the

resources to achieve the fullness of the sung liturgy week after week.”

Committing yourself to a set arrangement helps protect against arbitrary use of alleluia melodies based on preference or familiarity, as well as overusing a single setting to the point where you might want to retire it entirely (if you can) and move onto the next, creating an “out with the old, in with the new” approach to the Alleluia.

It may not be prudent for you to roll the new plan, with all of its variety, out of the gate all at once. Instead, you might choose to introduce new melodies from the plan one by one, giving your parishioners enough time to acclimate to them and to internalize them before being introduced to another. If your parish has adopted the Source & Summit Missal, you might consider introducing only one Alleluia melody per season for the first year or two, or even a new melody for several seasons at a time. Once all of the melodies as they are presented in the missal are eventually learned, then the more varied and stable plan can begin to settle into place, with your parishioners fully onboard.

In my own experience, the greatest challenge in parish musical renewal is not the introduction of new music so much as the discontinuance of the old. More often than not, when some parishioners express discontent about musical changes, it is actually less about not liking the new music and more about the

Unlike a mere commemoration of a past event lost to history, the Paschal Mystery becomes, in some way, contemporaneous with each liturgical celebration. This profound reality is achievable only through the power of the Holy Spirit. As Dom Anscar Vonier eloquently expressed, “The far-reaching conclusions of Catholic theology concerning the efficacy and the causation of sacraments could surprise those only who do not habitually associate the sacraments with the Holy Ghost nor recognize that through the presence of the Spirit each sacrament is linked up, through all space and all times, with the cause of all sacramental grace—the death of Christ on the Cross.”9 What was circumscribed in time and space in the humanity of Christ is made universal and accessible through the outpouring of the Spirit.10

Finally, in the liturgy the Holy Spirit unites the Church in communion with Christ. Through the transformative work of the Spirit, the liturgy molds the faithful into the mystical Body of Christ. Just as the Spirit is the bond of love common to the Father and Son, in the liturgy, the Spirit acts as the bond of communion uniting the Church with the Trinity and fostering fraternal communion among its members.11

A notable feature in the Catechism’s depiction of the Holy Spirit’s role in the liturgy is the cooperation of the Church in this divine work. Through this cooperation, “the liturgy becomes the common work of the Holy Spirit and the Church.”12 While the liturgy cannot be reduced simply to “the work of the people,” neither can it exclude a true divine-human synergy that invites our active participation.

In addition to these four general ways the Holy Spirit acts in each liturgy, the Spirit is uniquely active in each sacrament. A distinct movement of the Spirit is discernible as he is invoked in each sacrament’s epiclesis at the heart of each sacramental celebration.13 Jean Corbon proposes a method of mystagogy, suggesting we explore “the meaning of a celebration on the basis of the meaning of its uniquely special epiclesis…. The meaning sought is the meaning of the energy of the Spirit as it transforms the human beings offered to it.”14 Let us briefly follow this path to give some preliminary insights into the Spirit’s work in the sacraments of the Church.

Please see HOLY SPIRIT on page 10

sense of loss that they feel when they no longer hear the music they have become familiar with. For the first year or two of your implementation process, music directors would probably do well to keep some of the more familiar settings in the mix, in between the introduction of new melodies. In time, once the plan begins to settle in, some of the other melodies can begin to fall away naturally, and most parishioners will not even notice that they are gone.

Practically speaking, tools like the Source & Summit Digital Platform can help make this transitional process simple and easy since it allows you to apply any Alleluia melody and corresponding psalm tone to any Gospel Verse text in the Lectionary. Among many other benefits, this tool can help your transition from where you are to where you desire to be in time, employing a simple and almost automated process. If you would like to try the Source & Summit Digital Platform for yourself, you can sign up for a free 30-day trial at www.sourceandsummit.com.

Liturgical Renewal is a Process

True and lasting liturgical renewal in pastoral contexts is best achieved through a gradual process rather than a sudden leap. Over-communicating clarity with your parishioners and offering ample catechesis will always be essential, but, since beauty is its own argument, we can also trust that the Light of Christ will radiate from liturgical rites that are beautifully carried out and artfully prepared.

Adam Bartlett is the founder and CEO of Source & Summit. He is the composer and editor of Simple English Propers (CMAA, 2011), editor of the Lumen Christi series (Illuminare Publications, 2012-2016), and is the editor and publisher of the Source & Summit Missal and Digital Platform. He formerly served as a parish and cathedral music director, as a faculty member for the Liturgical Institute and Mundelein Seminary of the University of St. Mary of the Lake, as an adjunct faculty member for the Augustine Institute, and as a sacred music consultant for FOCUS. He lives in Grand Rapids, MI, with his wife and three children.

Baptism

The significance of invoking the Spirit over the baptismal waters is highlighted in the first known monograph on the sacrament, written by Tertullian in the early third century: “After God is invoked all waters attain the sacramental power to sanctify; for the Spirit immediately comes from heaven and rests on the water in order to make it holy. Once made holy, it acquires the power to sanctify.”15 In the Roman Rite today, the epiclesis occurs as the celebrant touches the water with his right hand during the blessing of baptismal waters. The hand serves as a symbol of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.16 Along with this gesture, the celebrant prays: “May this water receive by the Holy Spirit the grace of your Only Begotten Son, so that human nature, created in your image and washed clean through the Sacrament of Baptism from all the squalor of the life of old, may be found worthy to rise to the life of newborn children through water and the Holy Spirit.”17

The epiclesis reveals that it is through the power of the Holy Spirit that the baptized are born anew.18 As St. Ambrose said, the same Spirit who conceived Christ in the womb of Mary now conceives new life in Christians through the womb of the Church’s baptismal font: “In coming upon Mary, the Holy Spirit brought about the conception and accomplished the redemption; in the same way, by resting on the baptismal font and on those who receive baptism, the same Spirit effects the reality of rebirth.”19 The baptismal epiclesis also indicates that it is through the Holy Spirit that the baptized are conformed to Christ’s Paschal Mystery: “May the power of the Holy Spirit, O Lord, we pray, come down through your Son into the fullness of this font, so that all who have been buried with Christ by Baptism into death may rise again to life with him.”20 The prayer echoes the words of St. Paul to the Romans: “If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit who dwells in you” (Romans 8:11; cf. Romans 6:3-5). The central images of God’s work in baptism, our rebirth and our dying and rising with Christ, are both attributed to the Holy Spirit in the blessing of baptismal waters.

Confirmation

The presence and work of the Spirit are equally palpable in the sacrament of Confirmation. St. Cyril of Jerusalem explained the Spirit’s operations in the oil of this sacrament in the most realistic of terms: “Beware of thinking that this holy oil is simply ordinary oil and nothing else. After the invocation of the Spirit it is no longer ordinary oil but the gift of Christ, and by the presence of his divinity it becomes the instrument through which we receive the Holy Spirit.”21 In the modern consecration of sacred chrism, the Bishop, if appropriate, breaths over the opening of the vessel of Chrism. In the prayer of consecration, with hands extended, he asks God “to pour into it the strength of the Holy Spirit, with the powerful working of your Christ.”22 The act of breathing, the gesture of the extended hands, and the words of the consecratory prayer are all epicletic in nature.23

The Holy Spirit is invoked upon the chrism which, in a sense, contains and conveys the Spirit, who works in various ways when the chrism is administered in the Church’s liturgy. In Confirmation, there is a moment when the bishop extends his hands over the group of those to be confirmed. “Since the time of the apostles this gesture has signified the gift of the Spirit. The bishop invokes the outpouring of the Spirit….”24 Prior to the gesture, the bishop asks those present to pray that the Father will pour out the Holy Spirit upon those to be confirmed and, strengthened (confirmet) by the Spirit’s gifts, that they would be more fully conformed to Christ. The ensuing prayer asks for the personal gift of the Holy Spirit himself as well as the Spirit’s sevenfold gifts.

The Eucharist

In the Eucharist, a dual epiclesis is evident in the Eucharistic Prayers, particularly in the texts composed following the Second Vatican Council. The Holy Spirit is first invoked over the gifts of bread and wine that they may become the body and blood of Christ. Following the consecration, the Holy Spirit is again invoked, this time upon those who will receive the Eucharist, “that the faithful, by receiving them, may themselves become a living offering to God,”25 and “that those who take part in the Eucharist may be one body and one spirit.”26 Thus, the Holy Spirit is intimately involved in the sacramental action, so that by the Spirit’s work, the bread and wine (the sacramentum tantum) may become the Real

Presence of Christ (the res et sacramentum) so that those who partake thereof may be drawn into the unity of the Mystical Body of Christ (the res tantum).

Confession

The epiclesis in the sacrament of reconciliation is perhaps the least explicit in the sacramental celebrations of the Latin Church. The Holy Spirit’s role in the forgiveness of sins is apparent, however, already in the words of the risen Christ: “He breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained’” (John 20:22-23). In the Rite of Penance, the Holy Spirit’s work in forgiving sins is encapsulated in the words of absolution.27 With hands outstretched, the priest says: “God, the Father of mercies, through the death and resurrection of his Son has reconciled the world to himself and poured out the Holy Spirit for the forgiveness of sins….” As the bond of love between Father and Son, the Holy Spirit is also the Divine Person to whom it is attributed to restore repentant sinners to trinitarian communion.

Sacrament of the Sick

The blessing of the oil of the sick contains its own prayer invoking the Holy Spirit: “send forth from the heavens, we pray, your Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, upon this oil in all its richness, which you have graciously brought forth from the verdant tree to restore the body, so that by your holy blessing everyone anointed with this oil as a safeguard for body, soul, and spirit may be freed from all pain, all infirmity, and all sickness….”28 The sacramental formula itself calls upon the action of the Spirit as the person is anointed: “Through this holy anointing may the Lord in his love and mercy help you with the grace of the Holy Spirit.” The Catechism, however, points to another moment in the ritual as the epiclesis. “The ‘priests of the Church’—in silence— lay hands on the sick; they pray over them in the faith of the Church— this is the epiclesis proper to this sacrament….”29

The silent epiclesis of this sacrament is unusual. Perhaps confronted by the mystery of human sickness and suffering, the Church’s liturgy recognizes silence as a perfectly fitting response (see Job 2:13). We also know that “the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words” (Romans 8:26).

Marriage

The epiclesis in the sacrament of Matrimony is found in the nuptial blessing. This only became the case in the 1991 editio typica altera, marking the first time all the nuptial blessings included an epiclesis in the history of the Roman Rite. The English version was introduced only in 2016.30 It prays: “Send down on them the grace of the Holy Spirit and pour your love into their hearts, that they may remain faithful in the Marriage covenant.”31 The Catechism explains: “In the epiclesis of this sacrament the spouses receive the Holy Spirit as the communion of love of Christ and the Church. The Holy Spirit is the seal of their covenant, the ever available source of their love and the strength to renew their fidelity.”32 In a marriage elevated to the dignity of a sacrament, the Holy Spirit, the Trinitarian Bond of love, is invoked as the source of the couple’s love and fidelity which they promise.

Holy Orders

Finally, the sacrament of Holy Orders “confers a gift of the Holy Spirit which permits the exercise of a ‘sacred power’ (sacra potestas) which can come only from Christ himself through his Church.”33 The essential rite for all three degrees (deacon, priest, and bishop) consists of the bishop’s imposition of hands along with the “consecratory prayer asking God for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and his gifts proper to the ministry to which the candidate is being ordained.”34 The prayer for ordaining another bishop asks for an outpouring of “the power that is from you, the governing Spirit….”35 For the ordination of priests, the bishop asks that God the Father would “renew deep within them the Spirit of holiness.”36 Lastly, in ordaining deacons, the bishop prays: “Send forth the Holy Spirit upon them, O Lord, we pray, that they may be strengthened by the gift of your sevenfold grace to carry out faithfully the work of the ministry.”37 It is the Holy Spirit, poured out anew at ordination, that we refer to when, in the liturgy, we respond to the ordained minister, “And with your spirit.”38

Holiness in Training

The work of the Holy Spirit in the Church’s liturgy is rich and varied. David Fagerberg summarizes it well: “The movement of branches is a sign of the wind blowing, and I propose that the movement of liturgy is a sign of the Holy Spirit spirating. Do you want evidence of the Holy Spirit? Come to the liturgy and see sinners transfigured, elements transubstantiated, time transcended, sacrifices transacted, saints translated, and life transversed.”39 Indeed, the liturgy is a work of the Holy Trinity which demands of us a theocentric vision to be truly understood. As Cardinal Robert Sarah said in his opening homily at the December 2023 Congress of African Liturgists, “Let us pray, dear brothers and sisters, that we may rediscover the Trinitarian origin of the liturgy.”40

The liturgy is the glorification of the trinitarian God, and the Trinity’s means of sanctifying God’s people. It serves as a training ground, forming us to see all of life aright through doxological lenses, so that at all times, and in all things, we can sing: “Through him, and with him, and in him, O God, almighty Father, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, all glory and honor is yours, for ever and ever.”

Mike Brummond holds a Doctorate in Sacred Liturgy from the University of St. Mary of the Lake, Mundelein Seminary, IL. He is associate professor of systematic studies at Sacred Heart Seminary and School of Theology in Hales Corners, WI.

1. See Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), 688.

2 See Augustine, De Trinitate, XV.17.27: “The Holy Spirit, according to the Holy Scriptures, is neither of the Father alone, nor of the Son alone, but of both; and so intimates to us a mutual love, wherewith the Father and the Son reciprocally love one another.”

3 Augustine, De Trinitate, V.11.12.

4 See CCC, 1092: “In this sacramental dispensation of Christ's mystery the Holy Spirit acts in the same way as at other times in the economy of salvation….” The Catechism uses identical terms to describe the Holy Spirit’s actions in the life of the Blessed Virgin Mary (CCC 722-725) and in the Church (CCC 737). For a further treatment of these themes from the Catechism, see Christopher Carstens, Principles of Sacred Liturgy: Forming a Sacramental Vision (Hillenbrand Books, 2020), 40-45.

5 See CCC 1092, 1098.

6 See CCC 1092, 1099.

7 CCC 1101.

8 Super Ioan. 16, lec. 4 (no. 2107).

9 Dom Anscar Vonier, The Spirit and the Bride (Assumption Press, 2012; originally published London: Burns, Oates, and Washbourne, 1935), 156.

10 See CCC 1004.

11 See CCC 1108.

12 CCC 1091. Several other examples can be adduced: “The preparation of hearts is the joint work of the Holy Spirit and the assembly, especially of its ministers” (CCC 1098).” “The Spirit and the Church cooperate to manifest Christ and his work of salvation in the liturgy…” (CCC 1099). “The most intimate cooperation of the Holy Spirit and the Church is achieved in the liturgy” (CCC 1108). Emphases mine.

13 See CCC 1106.

14 Jean Corbon, The Wellspring of Worship (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005), 146.

15 Tertullian, De baptismo 4, quoted in Anscar Chupungco, What, Then, is Liturgy?: Musings and Memoir (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2010), 79.

16 See CCC 699.

17 Order of Baptism of Children (Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 2020), no. 54.

18 See CCC 1238.

19 Ambrose, De mysteriis 53, 59. See also Lumen Gentium, 564: “The Church indeed…by receiving the word of God in faith becomes herself a mother. By her preaching she brings forth to a new and immortal life the sons who are born to her in baptism, conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of God.”

20 Order of Baptism of Children, no. 54.

21 Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 21.

22 The Order of Blessing the Oil of Catechumens and of the Sick and of Consecrating the Chrism [OBO] (Washington D.C.: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2019), no. 25.

23 See Paul Turner, Sacred Oils (Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 2021), 73, 79-80.

24 CCC 1299.

25 CCC 1105.

26 CCC 1353. This latter work of the Spirit is articulated variously, asking that “we may be gathered into one by the Holy Spirit” (EP II); that “we, who are nourished by the Body and Blood of your Son and filled with his Holy Spirit, may become one body, one spirit in Christ” (EP III); and that “gathered into one body by the Holy Spirit, they may truly become a living sacrifice in Christ to the praise of your glory” (EP IV).

27 See CCC 1449.

28 OBO no. 20.

29 CCC 1519.

30 See Paul Turner, Inseparable Love: A Commentary on the Order of Celebrating Matrimony in the Catholic Church (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2017), 135.

31 Order of Celebrating Matrimony (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2016.), no. 74.

32 CCC 1624.

33 CCC 1538.

34 CCC 1573.

35 Ordination of a Bishop, or Priests, and of Deacons (Washington D.C.: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2021), no. 47.

36 Ordination of a Bishop, or Priests, and of Deacons, no. 131.

37 Ordination of a Bishop, or Priests, and of Deacons, no. 207.

38 See Christopher Carstens and Douglas Martis, Mystical Body, Mystical Voice: Encountering Christ in the Words of the Mass (Chicago, IL: Liturgy Training Publications, 2011), 135-136.

39 David Fagerberg, Liturgical Dogmatics: How Catholic Beliefs Flow from Liturgical Prayer (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2021), 175.

40 https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/256231/cardinal-sarahaddresses-first-african-congress-on-liturgy

41 The Order of Blessing the Oil of Catechumens and of the Sick and of Consecrating the Chrism [OBO] (Washington D.C.: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2019), no. 25.

Answers

Q: How should a minister hold or fold his hands during Mass?

A: Catholic liturgy “is woven by signs and symbols” (CCC, 1145) of many kinds: words, actions, objects, vestments, music—and bodily postures. Each of these sacred signs convey hidden realities. Some signs and symbols were authorized by the Lord (e.g., water at baptism, breaking bread at the Mass), while others have been cultivated by the Church over the centuries so that they may manifest as powerfully as possible Christ in our midst.

Even—or perhaps especially—hands communicate unseen truths. Romano Guardini explains the expressive power of hands in his small book Sacred Signs: “Every part of the body is an expressive instrument of the soul. The soul does not inhabit the body as a man inhabits a house. It lives and works in each member, each fiber, and reveals itself in the body’s every line, contour and movement. But the soul’s chief instruments and clearest mirrors are the face and hands.”

Given the sacramental power of hands, the Church gives ritual norms for how a minister uses his hands during the Mass. While in the sanctuary, for example, “Ministers keep their hands joined when walking from place to place or when standing, unless they are holding something” (Ceremonial of Bishops (CB), 107). When seated “and wearing vestments, he places his palms on his knees” (CB, 109). When the cleric blesses another person or object, “he points the little finger at the person or thing to be blessed and in blessing extends the whole right hand with all the fingers joined and fully extended” (CB, 108). And when in the orans position at prayer, “a bishop or presbyter addresses prayers to God while standing and with hands slightly raised and outstretched” (CB, 104).

Q: Can a blessed be chosen as a confirmation name? Can a female candidate have a male saint?

A: The 1885 Baltimore Catechism says that the one being confirmed “may and should add a new name to his own at Confirmation, especially when the name of a saint has not been given in Baptism” (Q. 674). Strictly speaking, this traditional practice of choosing a confirmation name is not part of the Order of Confirmation: after the Homily, “if possible, each of those to be confirmed is called by name and individually approaches the sanctuary” (21). When conferring the anointing with Sacred Chrism, the bishop says: “N., be sealed with the Gift of the Holy Spirit.” Given that the Sacrament of Confirmation is understood to complete the gift of baptismal grace (see CCC, 1285), it stands to reason that the “name” being used to call the candidate forward is his baptismal name. The Catechism of the Catholic Church describes the baptismal name: “In Baptism…the Christian receives his name in the Church. This can be the name of a saint, that is, of a disciple who has lived a life of exemplary fidelity to the Lord. The patron saint provides a model of charity; we are assured of his intercession” (2156). So, just as it is most fitting to choose one’s baptismal godparents to be his confirmation sponsors, so it is appropriate— and some would say, preferred—to be called by one’s baptismal name at Confirmation.

Nevertheless, Catholics have long understood that “any notable change of condition, especially in the spiritual order, [is] often accompanied by the reception of a new name” (The Catholic Encyclopedia, “Christian Names”). It is especially laudable that many who do not receive a Christian name at birth or even at baptism— and this is increasingly the case—desire a chance to adopt a Christian name. While not prescribed in the ritual, the practice of taking a confirmation name is customary in many parts of the Church.

The Archdiocese of Portland advises that “candidates may choose the name of a Christian Saint by which to be called. Candidates should be mindful that this custom places them under the special patronage of the Saint on whose intercession the confirmed Christian will call and who provides a role model for living the Christian life” (Archdiocesan Liturgical Handbook, 9.13.5). Since there are no ecclesiastical documents governing this pious custom of taking a confirmation

name, taking the name of a “blessed” is an option for confirmation names, as such men and women are individuals who have been beatified by the Church, are recognized as having lived lives of heroic virtue, and can be invoked publicly in the liturgy (e.g., in a Litany of the Saints). As such, they can serve as models of Christian virtue and (hopefully) as intercessors.

It has long been a practice for Christian men and women in religious life to take names traditionally held by members of the opposite sex. For example, “Sister Joseph Andrew,” or “Father Mary Eugene.” In the context of taking a confirmation name, the intention of taking the name should be the primary factor in deciding whether a particular name is appropriate. If the name is being chosen for an intention contrary to the Church’s teaching on gender ideology, this should be an indication that another name should be chosen.

Q: What are the norms for confirmation sponsors?

A: A summary of requirements for the role of confirmation sponsors is found in the Code of Canon Law. The first thing to note is how closely confirmation sponsors and baptismal godparents resemble one another. In fact, in Latin, there is no linguistic distinction between the two: patrinus (male) and matrina (female) identifies both “sponsor” (Canon 892) and “godparent” (Canon 873). Further, when turning to the section concerning confirmation sponsors, we read, “It is desirable to choose as sponsor the one who undertook the same function in baptism” (Canon 893 §2). Finally, the part of the Code dealing with confirmation doesn’t even list norms but says that in order to “perform the function of sponsor, a person must fulfill the conditions mentioned in can. 874”—that is, the baptism section (Can. 893 §1). When consulting the requirements laid out for baptismal godparents, we find:

“Can. 874 §1. To be permitted to take on the function of sponsor a person must:

1/ be designated by the one to be baptized, by the parents or the person who takes their place, or in their absence by the pastor or minister and have the aptitude and intention of fulfilling this function;

2/ have completed the sixteenth year of age, unless the diocesan bishop has established another age, or the pastor or minister has granted an exception for a just cause;

3/ be a Catholic who has been confirmed and has already received the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist and who leads a life of faith in keeping with the function to be taken on;

4/ not be bound by any canonical penalty legitimately imposed or declared [e.g., excommunicated];

5/ not be the father or mother of the one to be baptized.”

Additionally, “A baptized person who belongs to a non-Catholic ecclesial community is not to participate except together with a Catholic sponsor and then only as a witness of the baptism” (Can. 874 §2). Also, “There is to be only one male sponsor or one female sponsor or one of each” (Can. 873).

Q: Are paraphrases of psalms an acceptable option for singing at Mass?

A: Yes and no. Paraphrases of the Psalms are allowed in the Mass when the paraphrase of the Psalm comes from the Roman Missal itself. For example, the Entrance Antiphon for the Fourth Sunday of Easter is a paraphrase of Psalm 33:5–6. These antiphonal texts, like almost all of the prayers of the Missal, are not meant to be proclamations of the Sacred Scriptures. When the Sacred Scriptures are being proclaimed in the liturgy it is their task to announce God’s Word, that is, the words that God consigned to be written and read in the Sacred Liturgy—“everything and only those things which He wanted” written (Dei Verbum, 11). These words of the Old and New Testament are a description, inspired by God, of what it means to live in covenant union with him. As the General Introduction to the Lectionary says, “In the word of God the divine covenant is announced; in the Eucharist the new and everlasting covenant is renewed (10). Indeed, in this liturgical proclamation “it is He Himself who speaks when the holy scriptures are read in the Church” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 7). Because the faithful are assenting to what God is proposing in the sacred text, the Church has

always prohibited non-biblical texts to be read in the Liturgy of the Mass. By definition, a paraphrase is an attempt to render “the meaning” of words “in another form.”

The current General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) says that it is unlawful “to replace the readings and Responsorial Psalm, which contain the Word of God, with other, non-biblical texts” (57). More precisely to the present question, paragraph 61 of the GIRM makes clear, “Songs or hymns may not be used in place of the Responsorial Psalm.” This insistence on not including songs or hymns that might even be based on the Psalms is rooted in a move away from the translation principles proposed by the Consilium in the 1969 Instruction on vernacular translation, Comme le prévoit, which advocated a translation philosophy known as “dynamic equivalence,” in which an idea-foridea approach is taken. The 2001 Instruction Liturgiam Authenticam opposed such an approach, insisting that “the original text, insofar as possible, must be translated integrally and in the most exact manner, without omissions or additions in terms of their content, and without paraphrases or glosses” (LA, 20).

Q: What is the difference between Anointing of the Sick and Last Rites?

A: Briefly, the sacrament of the anointing of the sick is administered to those who are seriously ill or in danger of death from age or sickness, while last rites centers around the dying's final reception of the Eucharist as Viaticum.

The ritual book Pastoral Care of the Sick: Rites of Anointing and Viaticum states, “The sacrament of the anointing of the sick should be celebrated at the beginning of a serious illness. Viaticum, celebrated when death is close, will then be better understood as the last sacrament of Christian life” (175).

Elaborating further, the Catechism emphasizes: “The Anointing of the Sick ‘is not a sacrament for those only who are at the point of death. Hence, as soon as anyone of the faithful begins to be in danger of death from sickness or old age, the fitting time for him to receive this sacrament has certainly already arrived’” (1541).

Part of the confusion between anointing of the sick and last rites stems from (incorrectly) reserving anointing—also called “Extreme Unction”—only at the point of death. Also, the ritual book contains a “continuous” rite that involves confession of sins (sacrament of penance), anointing of the sick, followed by viaticum—an association that continues to see anointing with death.

MEMORIAL FOR

Donald di Paolo from Mary Ann di Paolo

Christine Fernandez from Ray Fernandez

Mike J. Gann from Kathy Gann-McKoy and family

Rachel (Brudos) Vance from Ken and Emily Brudos

Helen Wilkens from Russell Lundsgaard

Helen Hull Hitchcock from The Most Reverend Robert W. Finn

TO HONOR

Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke from Joseph Norton

Rev. Richard P. Crowley60th Anniversary of Ordination from Daniel Crowley

St. John Henry Cardinal Newman from Gerald Schnabel

Eric Fick from David Bruce

New Book Offers Concise yet Detailed History of the Mass

The Roman Mass: From Early Christian Origins to Tridentine Reforms by Father Uwe Michael Lang. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022. 456 pp. ISBN: 978-1108832458. $95.82 Hardcover.

By Aaron Sanders

Music lovers may remember how the Council of Trent almost banned polyphony until one of its greatest composers, Palestrina, demonstrated just how clear and intelligible it could be. With musical history brought to such a dramatic inflection point, the only part of the episode requiring improvement is its likelihood: historians now hold Palestrina had no discernible influence on the conciliar decrees.

Though this anecdote is merely an aside in Father Uwe Michael Lang’s latest book, The Roman Mass: From Early Christian Origins to Tridentine Reforms, the need to revisit common knowledge about polyphony may serve as a condensed marker of the timeliness of a work like Lang’s. What was once “known” about liturgical history has changed in many ways over the decades as old positions are questioned and new evidence disseminated. Yet the pace at which individual advances are noticed and integrated into further scholarship is often slower than one would hope. Accordingly, while landmark studies of the past remain valuable—even indispensable—the time was ripe for a new synthesis of both current consensus and ongoing debate in the study of the Roman Mass.

In providing this welcome reassessment, Lang carefully avoids replacing one overconfidence with another. His survey of the field, to his credit, is not a boldly revisionist work but a cautious examination well aware of the limitations that often prevent us from drawing strong conclusions. Lang warns that the mosaic of early sources yields fragmentary knowledge at best (5), and even then primarily through texts which are hard to interpret without the orally transmitted tradition meant to implement them. Understanding these sources requires consideration of broader historical context across “centuries of intense religious, social and cultural transformation” (1) and attention to participation of the lay faithful whose liturgical role is largely undocumented (6). Thus, with no desire to attempt his own detailed history, Lang aims to draw together specialized liturgical studies (2) and broader artistic and social perspectives (307) to advance research and debate, following Ratzinger’s lead to question “the prevailing narrative that the Roman liturgy moved from early dynamic development through medieval decline to early modern stagnation” (3).

Lang does not oppose that prevailing narrative with a mirrored account of constant vitality—while highlighting sometimes undervalued richness in High Medieval liturgy he readily admits the coexistence of decline—but instead lays out an arc of continuity in which oft-criticized liturgical features are shown to be present, if not from the beginning, then at least from a sufficiently early period as to suggest they are not deviations from the purer form but true to type enriched over time.

Early History

A reader may initially wonder why so many early pages are devoted to sources predating or outside clearly Roman material. Even if these sources are necessary to grasp the full sweep of liturgical history, some have little to no direct impact on Roman worship. Yet as the sources accumulate, the discrete details also coalesce into an important foundation for later claims about organic development. For example, having warned that attempts to derive Eucharistic Prayers from meal blessings “should be met with great caution” (19), Lang’s observations about the propitiatory valence of the Matthean Institution Narrative (26), the movement to replicate the (Second) Temple’s holiness and purity outside its literal precincts (42), early worship in commercial, leisure, and outdoor spaces that weaken the “house church” paradigm (68), and the sacred direction of prayer (74) collectively illustrate “the priestly and sacrificial understanding of the Eucharist”

(77) present at the outset of all ritual families. We should not be surprised to find that these core traits would naturally blossom over the centuries to come. As Lang moves into specifically Roman material, he provides short studies of the origins and character of individual parts of the Mass during the period in which they first entered use or stabilized. Thus the “formative period” of the fourth and fifth centuries examines the Sanctus (113), Roman Canon (114), Collect (132), and Preface (138). The Preface’s longer developmental arc (its decreasing variability through the Hadrianum and the 1570 Missal until reexpanding in 1970) is quickly rehearsed at this point, such that it needn’t be revisited in each subsequent period examined by the book. This method of fairly comprehensive treatment at earliest appearance conveys a strong continuity in which each era builds upon, without replacing or discarding, its inheritance. And this brick-by-brick construction continues to rise as the chapter on “Roman Stational Liturgy” explores the ceremonies of the Ordines Romani and the formation of the sacramentaries (156), lectionaries (159), and antiphoners (179) needed to celebrate them.

Several times in these middle chapters Lang counters a once-popular theory. For example, he briefly notes that the Offertory chant shows no signs of an original antiphonal structure between choir and congregation to accompany processions (185; even earliest sources are melismatic). At more length his description of Latinization in Roman worship convinces that it had more to do with creating Christian culture (with, to this point, an elevated and complex linguistic register) than “vernacularization” for immediate comprehension. (Consequently, liturgical Latin’s outliving any native use cannot be faulted too severely for distancing lay worshipers, many of whom—like the Goths—never spoke the language even when their regions first adopted the rite.)

The two chapters from Carolingian Age to the High Middle Ages chronicle the spread of Roman liturgical usage and trace the Ordo Missae from nascent strata through increasing precision of rubrical instruction. While it remains true that Charlemagne requested a Roman liturgical book in order to conform to the custom of the City, Lang twice notes (228, 255) that scholarship has abandoned a theory of sweeping Romanization and unification by imperial fiat. Instead, as educational reform allowed wider circulation of more books in better Latin, and Roman sources were more freely adopted and combined with native custom on local initiative, yielding a welcome enrichment in the process.

Later Romanization

Lang portrays later waves of Romanization, too, as more gradual and pluriform than previous histories may have let on. For all of Gregory VII’s desire to restore Roman usage and expand its adoption among local churches, Lang effectively demonstrates how the expected reform was not enforcement of Roman “purity” so much as a matter of following the order currently employed by the pope (277) while this basic papal pattern continued to allow for diversity in detail even among the churches of Rome (279; the proper traditions of the Vatican and Lateran basilicas were cultivated with sufficient vigor as to merit continuation past Pius V’s reform). And just as this nuancing of the Gregorian reform leaves the larger outline of Romanization in place, Lang does not reject the general view that the Franciscans’ adoption of the papal curia’s liturgy as their own was responsible for spreading that curial variant throughout Europe, even if he does believe that their praxis was more varied than the initial theory of uniform prototypes, for which no manuscript evidence exists (283). These adjustments are typical of the reevaluation Lang provides: the main lines and periodization of liturgical history (usually) remain intact while details within that larger picture are

brought into better focus.

To turn back from Lang’s sketch of this history to his valuation of the developments, he believes that it is important to acknowledge just which variants were the basis for elaboration north of the Alps. While the chants brought north by Roman singers were performed somewhat more simply in more Frankish idiom, they were still prayed in Masses on the model of Ordo Romanus I. Thus the Eucharistic liturgy was understood from a fully solemn paradigm. Less elaborate forms, whether the far simpler rites of the Roman tituli or the barest basics of the emergent “private Mass,” were deviations from—and still conceptualized according to—the solemn standard. Consequently, Lang renders a different judgment than many previous scholars regarding the development of the Ordo Missae through more copious rubrics and incorporation of apologiae, priestly prayers and gestures noticeable to few worshipers other than the celebrant. Against accusations of elaborate imposition on primitive sober simplicity, Lang notes that these apologiae were inserted in an already lavish paradigm of worship set, as noted, by Ordo Romanus I (266). In fact, rather than unduly embellish already solemn rites, the apologiae and the Ordo Missae in which they were set gave more coherent form to private Mass and thereby enabled the development of its reduced ceremonial. Enriching the celebration of Mass according to its original solemn intent, the Ordo Missae unintentionally contributed to currents of decline in Roman practice.

But even then, decline does not mean wholesale corruption. While conceding some decline from the Late Middle Ages onward, Lang positions it alongside continued vitality, with divergent religious tendencies uneasily coexisting. On the one hand, “the sheer materiality of religious devotion” fed true lay investment in “untexted” but multisensory forms of participation (318) that vivified community (322). But certain elaborations physically removed laymen from the altar ceremonial of high Mass beyond screens, servers, and singers (319, 339). As private Mass at side altars was sought out for proximity, this converged with the second tendency of the age, toward interior and private devotion, to gradually erode the normativity of solemn Mass. Pius V’s Missal in 1570 codified that shift by prioritizing instruction for celebration of low Mass (355). Ironically, then, although gratifying the humanists’ priority of the spoken word, this soughtafter physical proximity to low Mass only widened the gap between priestly liturgy and lay devotion by elevating the form of celebration lacking many other sensory stimuli by which late medieval worshipers could participate. Thus, while Lang convincingly calls for greater appreciation of the Carolingian and subsequent developments that yielded vibrant late medieval liturgy, he makes no attempt to paper over weaknesses of the Tridentine settlement at which his book ends.

New Starting Point

Much more could be said about this carefully sourced study of the Roman Mass, which should become a new starting point for refining our understanding of this history. Lang is to be commended for compacting so much scholarship into a single volume. The flip side, of course, of touching upon so many liturgical issues over so many centuries is that one often wishes to learn more detail than the format can spare. This is offset somewhat by the footnotes and ample bibliography, but as one breezes through the single paragraph devoted to the Communion chant or two paragraphs for the Offertory, it becomes clear that those who will benefit most from Lang’s latest book are those already well grounded in the history of the Roman Rite.

This review has, admittedly, labored under (far smaller yet) similar constraint with no room to remind readers of basics before addressing the finer details of his arguments. Language is, however, no barrier (all liturgical texts are rendered into English), and readers not already familiar with the character of introits and graduals or able to distinguish the Canon’s Te igitur section from its Supra quae might still use Lang’s book as a jumping off point into cited sources. Thus, while best for scholars with a strong foundation upon which to build, Lang has furnished an invaluable guide to anyone hoping to refresh or augment study of the Roman Mass.

Aaron Sanders is Director of the Office for Worship in the Diocese of Grand Rapids, MI. He holds a Ph.D. in Theology from the University of Notre Dame and lives in Grand Rapids with his wife and nine children.