Adoremus Bulletin For the Renewal of the Sacred Liturgy
MARCH 2022
FSSP: Pope Francis Issued Decree Confirming Its Use of 1962 Liturgical Books By Courtney Mares
Adoremus PO Box 385 La Crosse, WI 54602-0385
Non- Profit Organization U.S. Postage PAID Madelia, MN Permit No. 4
CNA—Pope Francis has issued a decree confirming that the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP) can continue to use the liturgical books in force in 1962, according to the traditionalist group. In a communique published February 21, the FSSP said that Pope Francis met with two members of the priestly fraternity for nearly an hour, a week before he promulgated the decree. “In the course of the audience, the pope made it clear that institutes such as the Fraternity of St. Peter are not affected by the general provisions of the motu proprio Traditionis custodes, since the use of the ancient liturgical books was at the origin of their existence and is provided for in their constitutions,” it said. The FSSP is a canonically approved community of priests dedicated to the “formation and sanctification of priests in the cadre of the traditional liturgy” and the care of souls and pastoral activities in the service of the Church. The group has more than 50 personal parishes in North America and is active in 39 dioceses across the United States. It also has 85 apostolates in France and Belgium and 79 apostolates in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Writing on his Twitter account on February 21, Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence, Rhode Island, described the development as “very good and welcome news for the FSSP everywhere.” Please see FSSP on next page
Benedict XVI and the Reforms of the Second Vatican Council: Re-Catholicizing the Liturgy—Part I By Kevin D. Magas, PhD
P
erhaps more than any pope in recent history, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI revealed himself as profoundly interested in questions relating to the liturgy and its singular importance in the life of the Church. Before, during, and after his eightyear papacy, Pope Benedict has made a number of provocative statements about its pivotal role in the renewal of the Church of today: “The Church’s existence lives from proper celebration of the liturgy and the Church is in danger when the primacy of God no longer appears in the liturgy nor consequently in life.”1 Likewise, he notes: “The Church stands or falls with the Liturgy. The celebration of the sacred liturgy is at the center of any renewal of the Church.”2 Prior to his assumption of the papal office in 2005, Joseph Ratzinger, as a cardinal and theologian, devoted numerous articles and books to liturgical theology and practical issues relating to the proper celebration of the liturgy in the contemporary Church, including questions of liturgical art, architecture, and music. Benedict’s thinking on liturgical matters displays a remarkable consistency throughout the years and remains fundamentally shaped by one of the chief goals of his theological vision: the proper reception and implementation of the true meaning of the Second Vatican Council as a source of renewal in the Church’s life. In this entry, we will 1) explore Benedict’s analysis of the state of the liturgy leading up to the Second Vatican Council, 2) his views of the Second Vatican Council’s liturgical reform, and 3) his critique of certain trends and developments in the postconciliar era. In the second part of the paper, to be published in a future issue, we will also study 1) Pope Benedict’s solutions to these challenges, known as the “reform of the reform,” and 2) conclude by surveying the liturgical renewal he ushered in during his papacy. 1. Ratzinger’s View of the Preconciliar Liturgy While Ratzinger is widely known for his rather sharp critiques of liturgical developments after the Council, he knew that the liturgy as celebrated before the Second Vatican Council was no “golden era” but in need of reform. While Ratzinger credits his love of
AB
Adoremus Bulletin MARCH 2022
AB/CATHOLIC CHURCH OF ENGLAND AND WALES ON FLICKR
News & Views
XXVII, No.5
“The Church’s existence lives from proper celebration of the liturgy,” Pope Benedict XVI writes, “and the Church is in danger when the primacy of God no longer appears in the liturgy nor consequently in life.”
“ The Church stands or falls with the Liturgy.” liturgy with his childhood memories participating in Corpus Christi processions and living the liturgical year in his close-knit parish in Bavaria, he does not romanticize the state of the liturgy before the Council. Ratzinger’s main issues with the preconciliar liturgy are best articulated in an image he uses in his preface to his central liturgical work, The Spirit of the Liturgy, where he describes the liturgy as a “painted over fresco” whose original content, clarity, and form have been covered and obscured by certain forms, ceremonies, and rubrics. This image is important and worth quoting at length because it succinctly captures Ratzinger’s analysis of the liturgy before, during, and after the Second Vatican Council: “We might say that…the liturgy was rather like a fresco [in the early 20th century]. It had been preserved from damage, but it had been almost completely overlaid with whitewash by later generations. In the Missal from which the priest celebrated, the form of the liturgy that had grown from its earliest beginnings was still present, but, as far as the faithful were concerned, it was largely concealed beneath instructions for and forms of private prayer. The Ratzinger Redux Whether as priest, bishop, cardinal, or pope, Joseph Ratzinger is inarguably one of the central figures of 20th- and 21st-century liturgical studies—and Kevin Magas demonstrates why.............................................1 This Easter, Light It Up! COVID isn’t the only bug putting a damper on the candlepower of Easter liturgies: Christopher Carstens offers tips on how to spark beauty and reverence in this year’s Paschal celebration..........................................................3
Early Screening Father Anthony Stoeppel brings readers behind the scenes—and screens—of the confes-
fresco was laid bare by the Liturgical Movement and, in a definitive way, by the Second Vatican Council. For a moment its colors and figures fascinated us. But since then the fresco has been endangered by climatic conditions as well as by various restorations and reconstructions. In fact, it is threatened with destruction, if the necessary steps are not taken to stop these damaging influences. Of course, there must be no question of its being covered with whitewash again, but what is imperative is a new reverence in the way we treat it, a new understanding of its message and its reality, so that rediscovery does not become the first stage of irreparable loss.”3
“ Ratzinger does not romanticize the state of the liturgy before the Council.” We’ll bracket for now the second half of this analysis, where Ratzinger worries about the climactic conditions after the Council that endangered this restoration and focus here on the fact that he did indeed believe the liturgy as celebrated before the council had been overlaid with “whitewash.” Among the elements of this whitewashing of the liturgy in the preconciliar period, Ratzinger notes an excessive focus on the liturgy as rubrics or external ceremonial; a textbook, scholastic approach to liturgy that was concerned with questions of validity and juridical concerns over its theological meaning and true spiritual content; what he refers to as the “wall of Latinity” which prevented a substantial number of the faithful from participation in the liturgy and caused the laity to focus on their own private prayers and devotions and muted the communal nature of the liturgical celebration.4 Ratzinger saw the preconciliar liturgy as in a state of fossilization or mummification when it needed to be open to development and change, but always in continuity with its own inner nature and principles. Above all, Ratzinger perceived the liturgical problem as modern man’s loss of contact with the liturgy, diminishing an awareness of it as a rich expression of the content of faith (dogma) and spirituality, and failing to connect how it relates to our daily lives in the world. Please see BENEDICT on page 4 sional to see how seminarians prepare for the daunting task of shriving souls in Christ’s name..................................................6 A Jesuit Walks into a Benedictine Monastery… And that’s no joke. Rather, it’s part of the inspiration for one of the greatest works on the liturgy, according to Michon Mathiessen: Mystierium Fidei by Jesuit Father Maurice de la Taille........................................................7 Official User’s Guide for Lent Adoremus reprints here Pope Paul VI’s 1966 apostolic constitution on the whys and wherefores of Lent, Paenitemini, to help readers map their route through the deserts and oases of Lent ........................................ 11
2
Adoremus Bulletin, March 2022
AB/CATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY
NEWS & VIEWS
Continued from FSSP, page 1
AB/CATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY
The decree gives the FSSP full permission to offer the Traditional Latin Mass, carry out the sacraments, and fulfill the Divine Office, according to the Missal, the Ritual, the Pontifical and the Roman Breviary that were used in 1962. This faculty is limited to the FSSP’s own churches and oratories, unless there is consent from the local Ordinary, with the exception of private Masses. The decree added: “Without prejudice to what has been said above, the Holy Father suggests that, as far as possible, the provisions of the motu proprio Traditionis custodes be taken into account as well.” The FSSP said that Pope Francis signed the decree, issued in Spanish and Latin, on February 11, the feast of Our Lady of Lourdes and the date that the group was solemnly consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. The Holy See press office had not responded at the time of publication to a request from CNA to confirm the text of the decree. According to the group, the pope received Father Benoît Paul-Joseph, the superior of the FSSP district of France, and Father Vincent Ribeton, the rector of St. Peter’s Seminary in Wigratzbad, Germany, in private audience on February 4. “During the very cordial meeting, they recalled the origins of the fraternity in 1988, the pope expressed that he was very impressed by the approach taken by its
Pope Francis Confers Ministries of Lector, Catechist on Lay Women and Men By Cindy Wooden
CNS—Highlighting the importance of the Bible in the life of faith and the role of lay women and men in sharing the Gospel, Pope Francis formally installed eight men and women in the ministry of lector and eight others in the ministry of catechist. During Mass on January 23, the Church’s celebration of Sunday of the Word of God, the pope used a revised rite for formally installing lectors, a ministry he opened to women a year earlier, and the new rite for the ministry of catechist, which he established in May. In most countries, women and men have long served as non-instituted lectors and catechists and even have been commissioned for those roles. But those formally installed in the ministries are recognized as having a specific vocation to leadership in their communities and will serve in what the Church defines as a “stable” manner. Pope Francis installed six women—from South Korea, Pakistan, Ghana and Italy—and two Italian men in the ministry of lector, telling them they were placing themselves “in the service of the faith, which is rooted in the word of God.” As they knelt on the marble floor before the main altar, Pope Francis prayed over them and told them,
founders, their desire to remain faithful to the Roman Pontiff and their trust in the Church. He said that this gesture should be ‘preserved, protected and encouraged,’” the FSSP said. The meeting took place more than six months after Pope Francis issued Traditionis custodes (“Guardians of the tradition”), a motu proprio that restricted the use of the Traditional Latin Mass and prohibited it from being celebrated in parish churches without the permission of the local
bishop. The priestly fraternity said in July 2021 that it was surprised and deeply saddened by the reasons given for limiting the use of the Missal of Pope St. John XXIII. The group noted that the Traditional Latin Mass had prompted “many people” to discover the Catholic faith or return to the Catholic faith. “How can we fail to notice, moreover, that the communities of the faithful attached to it are often young and flourishing, and that many Christian households, priests or religious vocations have come from it?” it asked. The FSSP was founded by 12 priests who were formerly members of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), a group that has a canonically irregular status. The FSSP’s constitutions reference the teachings of the Second Vatican Council, and the fraternity says that it “has always sought to be in accord with what Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI called in 2005: ‘the hermeneutic of reform in the continuity of the Church.’” “Grateful to the Holy Father, the members of the Fraternity of St. Peter are in thanksgiving for this confirmation of their mission,” the FSSP said on February 21. “They invite all the faithful who feel close to them as a spiritual family to attend or join them in prayer at the Mass tomorrow, on the feast of the Chair of St. Peter, and to pray for the Supreme Pontiff.” “You will proclaim that word in the liturgical assembly, instruct children and adults in the faith and prepare them to receive the sacraments worthily. You will bring the message of salvation to those who have not yet received it.” Three women from Spain, Brazil, and Ghana and five men from Italy, Peru, Brazil, and Poland were installed as catechists, and Pope Francis told them they were called “to live more intensely the apostolic spirit, following the example of those men and women who helped Paul and the other apostles to spread the Gospel.” They, too, knelt before the altar as the pope said, “May your ministry always be rooted in a profound life of prayer, built on sound doctrine and animated by true apostolic enthusiasm.” Pope Francis gave each of the lectors a Bible and the catechists a crucifix modeled after the crucifix on the crosier regularly used by St. Paul VI and St. John Paul II. In December, the Vatican released the Latin text of the Rite of Institution of Catechists and said the revised Latin text for the Rite for the Institution of Lectors and Acolytes would be published soon. Bishops’ conferences will translate the texts into local languages. In his homily, the pope said the 16 lectors and catechists “are called to the important work of serving the Gospel of Jesus, of proclaiming him, so that his consolation, his joy, and his liberation can reach everyone.”
Adoremus Bulletin
Society for the Renewal of the Sacred Liturgy PHONE: 608.521.0385 WEBSITE: www.adoremus.org MEMBERSHIP REQUESTS & CHANGE OF ADDRESS: info@adoremus.org
St. Irenaeus to Be Named Doctor of the Church By Courtney Mares
CNA—St. Irenaeus of Lyon is one step closer to being the first martyr to be declared a Doctor of the Church. Pope Francis met with the head of the Vatican Congregation for the Causes of Saints on January 20 to discuss the conferral of the title on the saint. During the meeting, Cardinal Marcello Semeraro informed the pope that the plenary session of the cardinals and bishops from the saints’ congregation had found the 2nd-century bishop worthy of the title, according to a Vatican statement issued January 20. Pope Francis has already made public his intention to declare Irenaeus a Doctor of the Church with the title “Doctor unitatis,” meaning “Doctor of Unity.” In a speech to a group of Catholic and Orthodox theologians last October, the pope called St. Irenaeus “a great spiritual and theological bridge between Eastern and Western Christians.” St. Irenaeus is a bishop and writer revered by both Catholics and Orthodox Christians and known for refuting the heresies of Gnosticism with a defense of both Christ’s humanity and divinity. While some of St. Irenaeus’ most important writings have survived, the details of his life are not as well preserved. He was born in the Eastern half of the Roman Empire, likely in the coastal city of Smyrna, in what is now Turkey, around the year 140 A.D. As a young man, he heard the preaching of the early Christian bishop St. Polycarp, who had been personally instructed by the Apostle John. Irenaeus became a priest, serving the Church in the region of Gaul, in what is now France, during a difficult period in the late 170s. During this time of state persecution and doctrinal controversy, Irenaeus was sent to Rome to provide Pope St. Eleutherius with a letter about the heretical movement known as Montanism. After returning to Lyon, Irenaeus became the city’s second bishop, following the martyrdom of his predecessor St. Pothinus. In the course of his work as a pastor and evangelist, the second bishop of Lyon came up against heretical doctrines and movements that insisted that the material world was evil and not part of God’s original plan. Irenaeus recognized this movement, in all its forms, as a direct attack on the Catholic faith. He rebutted the Gnostic errors in his lengthy book Against Heresies, which is still studied today for its historical value and theological insights. A shorter work, the Proof of the Apostolic Teaching, contains Irenaeus’ presentation of the Gospel with a focus on Jesus Christ’s fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies. Several of his other works are now lost, though a collection of fragments from them has been compiled and translated. Irenaeus died in Lyon around 202, when Emperor Septimus Severus ordered the martyrdom of Christians. The U.S. bishops voted in 2019 in favor of having St. Irenaeus named a Doctor of the Church at the request of Cardinal Philippe Barbarin, the then archbishop of Lyon, and sent their approval to the Vatican for the pope’s consideration. Pope Francis previously declared St. Gregory of Narek, a 10th-century Armenian monk, a Doctor of the Church in 2015. Benedict XVI named Sts. John of Avila and Hildegard of Bingen Doctors of the Church in 2012. Seventeen of the 36 figures declared Doctors of the Church by the Catholic Church lived before the Great Schism of 1054 and are also revered by Orthodox Christians. “His name, Irenaeus, contains the word ‘peace,’” Pope Francis said on October 7. “We know that the Lord’s peace is not a ‘negotiated’ peace, the fruit of agreements meant to safeguard interests, but a peace that reconciles, that brings together in unity. That is the peace of Jesus.” EDITOR - PUBLISHER: Christopher Carstens MANAGING EDITOR: Joseph O’Brien CONTENT MANAGER: Jeremy Priest GRAPHIC DESIGNER: Danelle Bjornson OFFICE MANAGER: Elizabeth Gallagher WEBSITE AND TECHNOLOGY: Matt Korger MARKETING AND FUNDRAISING: Eugene Diamond SOCIAL MEDIA: Jesse Weiler INQUIRIES TO THE EDITOR P.O. Box 385 La Crosse, WI 54602-0385 editor@adoremus.org
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE The Rev. Jerry Pokorsky = Helen Hull Hitchcock The Rev. Joseph Fessio, SJ
Contents copyright © 2022 by ADOREMUS. All rights reserved.
3
AB/ARCHDIOCESE OF BOSTON ON FLICKR
Adoremus Bulletin, March 2022
Resurrecting Easter The Holy Week liturgies express the Paschal Mystery of Jesus in remarkable signs, symbols, and rites. When celebrated fully and beautifully—and not minimized—they offer great graces to receptive faithful.
By Christopher Carstens, Editor “Don’t process with palms on Palm Sunday.” “Don’t wash feet on Holy Thursday.” “Don’t kiss the cross on Good Friday.” “Don’t sprinkle holy water at the Easter Vigil.” Will these be the guidelines for Easter 2022? For sure, as the above litany of “Don’t’s” has made abundantly clear, the Church’s Holy Week celebrations have lacked a lot of luster for the past two years due to COVID-19 precautions. Like every other aspect of life—trips to the store, the gym, the movie theater— the Church’s public, communal worship has become a COVID casualty. But as of this writing, there appear no special Holy Week guidelines from the Holy See for 2022, nor do most dioceses appear eager to offer any directives. But this doesn’t necessarily mean we ought to rejoice in being able to go back to the Holy Week celebrations of 2019. In many places, and for many years—long before COVID and pandemic became part of our common cultural lexicon—the grand liturgies of Holy Week had not been as radiant as they should have been—and we didn’t have a virus to blame it on back then, either. In some ways, COVID is less a hindrance to our liturgies than we ourselves are. Whatever the causes of past Holy Week liturgies poorly celebrated, we have a great opportunity in 2022 to do our part to bring back to life these most important rites of the year. Christ, of course, and with him, Father and Holy Spirit, will continue to work flawlessly to manifest in our midst the saving Paschal Mystery. But liturgy isn’t magic, and grace doesn’t penetrate our souls like osmosis—however much we wish this were the case at times. Rather, liturgy is a co-operation, a co-working, and a co-laboring (or collaboration). Consequently, priests and those ministers who assist him must hone their respective skill sets and bring to the Holy Week liturgies an ars celebrandi, or “art of celebrating,” that reveals the radiant beauty of salvation through Christ in our midst. In addition to the ministers’ ars celebrandi, the lay faithful must prepare themselves to participate actively and intelligently and not, as Pope Pius XII once wrote, as “dumb and idle spectators” (Musicae Sacrae Disciplina, 64). I’d like to suggest, then, a few ways that both priests and people can prepare themselves to “resurrect” our 2022 Holy Week liturgies. As a layman, I have less influence on what my bishop or pastor might do. (The “power” wielded by a diocesan liturgy director or parish music director—both of which I am—is not as great as some may think!) But as a baptized member of the Church and the father of a family, there is much in my control that I can contribute. Palm Sunday. I am not a priest, nor have I ever been one. But were I to suggest anything to a priest and his assisting ministers it would be to prepare well, and well in advance, not only by studying and mastering the various ritual celebrations but also by praying. Just as nature abhors a vacuum, liturgy abhors chaos. Indeed, liturgy is this fallen world’s cosmetic: it has the power to re-order the dis-order by beautifying and sanctifying it. And while it is undeniably true that the Holy Week liturgies have their fair share of complexity and unique features that make demands on priests, it is also true
that (as one pastor told me) the Holy Week schedule is also usually simpler than the Christmas schedule. For most pastors, there is only one Holy Thursday celebration, one Good Friday liturgy, and one Easter Vigil Mass. (Compare this schedule to the multiple Masses celebrated during the Christmas-Holy Family weekend in 2021). As far as the people are concerned, the Church recommends that we remember our guardian angels and patron saints. A closer look at the Lenten liturgies finds these supernatural companions everywhere. Jesus is comforted by angels after his temptations in the desert, which we heard about back on the First Sunday of Lent; he is likewise comforted by an angel at his agony in the garden, which we hear proclaimed on Palm Sunday and Good Friday. Did you know that the Church recommends singing the Litany of the Saints during the entrance procession on the First Sunday of Lent (see Paschalis Sollemnitatis, 23)? And presuming there are baptisms being celebrated at particular parishes during the Easter Vigil, the Litany of the Saints will resound again to help welcome the new members into the Body of Christ. So as Holy Week begins on Palm Sunday, be sure you are travelling in good company. Holy Thursday. There’s a rubric at the Mass of the Lord’s Supper that is a remarkable sign to the parish. “At an appropriate moment during Communion, the Priest entrusts the Eucharist from the table of the altar to Deacons or acolytes or other extraordinary ministers, so that afterwards it may be brought to the sick who are to receive Holy Communion at home” (33). For sure, exercising this option will require of priests and ministers even more planning than usual (e.g., organizing enough Eucharistic Ministers, and alerting the homebound to expect a visit late Holy Thursday evening!). But if the pandemic has taught us anything, it is that sizable portions of our parish will choose to participate remotely— even as they (and we) require human contact. Another of Holy Thursday’s rubrics makes demands on the people. “At the beginning of the Liturgy of the Eucharist, there may be a procession of the faithful in which gifts for the poor may be presented with the bread and wine” (14). Whether or not your parish actually has such a procession at the Mass of the Lord’s Supper, there is no reason we faithful cannot make extra efforts on this day to support the poor in our midst. And speaking of support, Holy Thursday’s Chrism Mass (which may take place on another day leading up to Easter) hears priests renew their priestly promises and calls upon the faithful to hold our priests and their priesthood in prayer. Consider attending your diocesan Chrism Mass—you will be glad you did. Good Friday. Priests and ministers are obliged to give their people something to behold on this day. Indeed, the word Ecce—“Behold!”—occurs a number of times on Good Friday: “Behold, the man!” during the Gospel; “Behold, the wood of the Cross,” during the showing of the Cross; and, as at Mass, “Behold, the Lamb of God” prior to the reception of Holy Communion. So that each of these visions are of Jesus himself (and not his ministers), ministers must strive to proclaim the Passion reading as it deserves, without idiosyncratic innovations (as is sometimes the case). They should also use a cross of “appropriate size and beauty” (Paschalis Sol-
lemnitatis, 68) and not one of “real-life” slabs of wood. Most importantly, priests and ministers ought to treat the Eucharist on this day of its birth from Christ’s side in an especially reverent way. The ordained priesthood is not the only group called upon to celebrate well on this day of Christ’s priestly offering; the baptismal priesthood is likewise expected to exercise its priestly power in a special way during the Universal Prayer. You will remember the rather extended process of the petitions on this day: 1) “Let us pray for the Pope…” (for example), 2) “Let us kneel,” 3) prayer in silence, 4) “Let us stand,” 5) collect recited, and 6) “Amen”—ten or more times! Priests intercede and meditate between God and man, heaven and earth. To make this priestly action as efficacious as possible, why not borrow a missalette or hymnal from the parish beforehand and consider thoughtfully, intentionally those persons for whom we are called to pray? Easter Vigil. Grace is mediated through sacramental signs and symbols. The rites that compose the Easter Vigil’s Lucernarium—the blessing of the fire and the candle, the procession into the church building, and the singing of the Exsultet—are among the most powerful sacred symbols used throughout the year. But only if they are used! Night can do its symbolic best, and the fire’s light radiate its sacramental power, only if the Vigil actually begins in darkness, as the rubrics direct (Paschalis Sollemnitatis, 78). The marking of the candle with the sign of the cross, the Alpha and Omega, and the numerals 2022 are to be cut with a stylus, not traced upon plastic stickers—in much the same way that the faithful are supernaturally, yet really, marked by baptism. Coals are to be taken from the Easter fire and shoveled into the thurible on this night, rather than using pre-packaged charcoals, since the fire is the new Fiat lux of all that lies ahead. There are many occasions for shortcuts at the start of the Easter Vigil: and there are many occasions for sacramental grace. A priest’s ars celebrandi is especially important at this time. One of the numerous high points of the Vigil is the celebration of the Sacrament of Baptism, or at least the renewal of baptismal promises. We have heard, unfortunately, too many recent stories of invalid baptisms resulting from a minister using an invalid formula. May each of us come to appreciate the great gift of baptism ever more at the upcoming Vigil. Listen and respond with conviction to the priest’s questions at the renewal of our promises. Meditate beforehand about their meaning. Reflect afterward (especially with children and grandchildren) on the obligations and privileges that baptism entails. A great deal of work lies ahead for us Catholics during Holy Week. There is, of course, much more that can be suggested; indeed, consider coming up with your own to-do list. But if these few ideas appear to be a lot to ask of priests and parishioners coming out of two years of relative paschal inaction, recall that the Olympics didn’t wait, nor did Super Bowls, elections, or the school year (however delayed or modified these important secular events may have been). Christ will do his part this Easter, but his clergy and laity must do theirs. If we do, then Holy Week may be for the first time in a long time a fuller expression of the true font of divine life.
Adoremus Bulletin, March 2022
AB/WIKIMEDIA
4
Among the weaknesses of the preconciliar liturgy, Ratzinger notes an excessive focus on the liturgy as rubrics or external ceremonial. In addition to the ritual concerns of the liturgy’s celebration, Ratzinger perceived the liturgical problem as modern man’s loss of contact with the liturgy, diminishing an awareness of it as a rich expression of the content of faith (dogma) and spirituality, and failing to connect how it relates to our daily lives in the world.
Continued from BENEDICT, page 1 For these reasons, Ratzinger was a supporter of the 20th-century liturgical movement, which had as its goal the rediscovery of the central role of the liturgy in the life of the Church as a living whole, a call for deeper, more active participation in the liturgical rites to bridge the gap between liturgy and life, and a deepened liturgical catechesis to better understand and appreciate what the liturgy truly is and does through its rites, prayers, gestures, and postures. Above all, as a proponent of the liturgical movement, Ratzinger stressed the need to get in greater contact with the spirit of the liturgy. He believed any sort of liturgical reform inspired by the liturgical movement should prioritize the values of listening, learning, rediscovering, receiving, and, above all, interiorizing this liturgical spirituality as its starting point.5 2. Ratzinger on the Second Vatican Council’s Reform of the Liturgy Given his support for the main goals and principles of the 20th-century liturgical movement, it should come as no surprise that Ratzinger viewed the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, as the culminating fruit and crowning of that movement’s efforts. His response to the Liturgy Constitution itself is overwhelmingly positive and optimistic about the future liturgical life of the Church. He viewed the Constitution’s recommended reforms as a fulfillment of his desire to remove the “whitewash” of the liturgical fresco by removing certain aspects that had obscured its true meaning and restoring them to their original intent. Among the Council’s recommendations Ratzinger praises in his writings at the time of the Council include: the priority of Sunday over saint’s days in the liturgical year, a focus on simple liturgical structures rather than “overgrown forms” in parts of the liturgy, a greater emphasis on communal celebration, restoration of the liturgy of the word, the call for more active participation of the laity, overcoming the exclusive dominance of Latin through allowance of the vernacular, and a “defrosting of ritual rigidity,” opening the liturgy up to future developments.6 Despite certain revisionist traditionalist narratives to the contrary, Ratzinger’s praise of these reforms testifies to the fact that they were not merely the concerns of a fringe group of “progressive” liturgists foisted upon the Church—the Liturgy Constitution was approved by the overwhelming majority of the Council Fathers (only 4 votes against vs. 2147 in favor). After the Council, the liturgical reform mandated by the Council Fathers was entrusted by Pope Paul VI to the Consilium for the Implementation of the Constitution on the Liturgy. The Consilium was composed of study groups of bishops and top liturgical scholars and worked over the next five years to reform the Church’s liturgical rites, including the Roman Missal
and its revised order of Mass (ordo missae) that was promulgated by Paul VI in 1969, coming into effect the first Sunday of Advent that year. On the whole, I would judge that Ratzinger’s attitude to the revised liturgical books is generally positive and appreciative, if more muted in enthusiasm than his earlier writings on the Council’s Constitution. In an interview with the editor of the scholarly journal Communio he stated: “Lest there be any misunderstanding, let me add that as far as its content is concerned (apart from a few criticisms), I am very grateful for the new Missal, for the way it has enriched the treasury of prayers and prefaces, for the new Eucharistic prayers and the increased number of texts for use on weekdays, etc.,
“ The revised Missal is nothing other than a renewed form of that same Missal to which Pius X, Urban VIII, Pius V and their predecessors have contributed, right from the Church’s earliest history.” quite apart from the availability of the vernacular.”7 On the other hand, he has made certain strong criticisms which could be regarded as applying to the revised liturgical books themselves. In particular, he takes issue with the impression that the revised liturgical books appear more as creations of academics in a study group to meet the needs of modern men and women rather than the fruit of living, organic liturgical development: “After the Council...in the place of the liturgy as a fruit of organic development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries and replaced it—as in a manufacturing process—with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product.”8 However, Ratzinger seems here to be primarily criticizing the mentality or deficient attitudes accompanying the introduction of the reformed liturgies and errors in its implementation, rather than the reformed liturgy itself. He made clear that the Missal of Paul VI was not a rupture in the tradition, not a “new Mass,” but “nothing other than a renewed form of that same Missal to which Pius X, Urban VIII, Pius V and their predecessors have contributed, right from the Church’s earliest history.”9
3. Ratzinger’s Critiques of Postconciliar Developments Moreover, Ratzinger has written that the post-Vatican II liturgical crisis in the Church has “very little to do with the change from the old to the new liturgical books” and more to do with “a profound disagreement about the very nature of the liturgical celebration.”10 In an analysis of the postconciliar era, he asserted that, through the reform, “the liturgy has been brought from behind the veils of history to stand before us, fresh in its simplicity and greatness of status,”11 and
that it became more accessible to contemporary believers.12 Now, in light of this, we will focus rather on Ratzinger’s critiques of the certain postconciliar attitudes and deficiencies in its implementation which negatively impacted the reception of the liturgical reform. He largely saw these aberrations as coming from an excessive emphasis on particular features of the liturgy which caused imbalances, aspects which, while good and noble in themselves, are thrown out of whack when given undue exaggeration. As Ratzinger himself puts it, “in the implementation of the conciliar mandate it was easy for the balance of the conciliar document to be disrupted one-sidedly in a specific direction.”13 So, for example, while Catholic theology recognizes the Eucharist is both a sacrifice and a meal, after the Council, certain theologians placed undue emphasis on the Eucharist as a communal meal such that its sacrificial dimension was obscured. Outside of its proper context, this exaggerated emphasis on the meal aspect of the Eucharist led to celebrations that reflected an everyday meal among friends rather than the awe-inspiring rite whereby we participate in the one sacrifice of Christ on Calvary. Rather, for Ratzinger, the Eucharist is a meal only because it is first and foremost a sacrifice; it presupposes communion in a sacrifice which has been offered. Another one of Ratzinger’s closely related concerns centers on the subject of the liturgical celebration. If the Eucharist is reduced to a communal meal on the strictly horizontal plane to foster human values of unity, a feeling of togetherness, and reaffirmation of its own identity, then Ratzinger worries that we are tempted to shift the focus from God-centered celebrations (theocentric) to people-centered celebrations (anthropocentric) in the name of a “pastoral pragmatism,” resulting in a liturgy “constructed entirely for men..., concerned with winning people over or keeping them happy and satisfying their demands.”14 For Ratzinger, the liturgy is not something that we do, but what God does in us and for us, reconciling us to the Father in the power of the Spirit. Ratzinger sees this local, assembly-centered, anthropocentric shift as the root of a number of related issues in the postconciliar mentality. For if the liturgy is principally about meeting the needs of a local congregation, if it is celebrated primarily by and for the people, then liturgical creativity becomes a central goal of the celebration. Rather than receiving the liturgy as a gift we receive from tradition, it becomes a general outline that each local community adapts according to its needs—either by omitting certain prayers or gestures, changing the texts of the prayers, or adding foreign elements into the liturgy that obscure its fundamental meaning. This leads to the impression that the liturgy is “fabricated,” a product of our own making that ultimately only serves as a mirror to our own thoughts, feelings, and concerns instead of opening us to the transcendent Lord who comes to meet us and change us beyond our expectations. In short, the community risks “celebrating itself ” (auto-celebration), muting the fact that the liturgy has a cosmic dimension, leading all of creation into right praise of God, and losing sight of its primary goal: to draw us into Christ’s death and resurrection and thereby share in the richness of God’s triune life. Ratzinger believes this misunderstanding is reinforced ritually by the nearly exclusive practice of celebrating the liturgy ad populum, where the priest faces the congregation. In this practice, in no way called for by the Council itself, Ratzinger wonders: “Must every Mass... be celebrated facing the people? Is it so absolutely important to be able to look the priest in the face, nor might it not be often very salutary to reflect that he is also a Christian and that he has every reason to turn to God with all his fellow-Christians of the congregation and to say together with them ‘Our Father’?”15 This practice doesn’t mean that the priest had his back “to the people” but highlights that the whole congregation, including the priest, faces the same direction, the East, which has symbolic associations with the Lord who comes to meet and transform us. Instead, celebrating ad populum can lead to the impression that the congregation and priest are celebrating Mass as a “circle closed within” when both should be turned in an attitude of profound adoration towards the Lord. He also believes this led to an unintended side effect whereby the priest is tempted to become the center of attention in the liturgy, fulfilling the role of show-master or entertainer, rather than being transparent to the person of Christ. Another area of Ratzinger’s critiques concerns the understanding of participation in the liturgy. Ratzinger is concerned that the concept of “active participation” called for by the Second Vatican Council has been interpreted one-sidedely as “doing things”
Adoremus Bulletin, March 2022 in the liturgy (singing, gestures, fulfilling a liturgical ministry) when it is primarily internal and spiritual, being interiorly transformed and taken up into Christ’s paschal journey to the Father. As a result, forgotten qualities like listening, adoration, and silence are crucial to this fuller understanding of active participation and regrettably absent in many noisy, contemporary celebrations of the liturgy. For Ratzinger, as for Romano Guardini, “being” is prior to and foundational for “doing.” Ratzinger also criticizes certain “rationalistic” and didactic tendencies which construe the call for active participation as a call for everything to be easily accessible or immediately understood, often sacrificing the solemnity and mysterious “otherness” of the liturgy. Simplicity and intelligibility are good in and of themselves, but the liturgy should also cultivate a sense that a reality greater than ourselves is here present among us—the beauty of heaven and the eschatological glory of the Lord are anticipated and rendered present for
5
us, and our liturgies must reflect this. Similarly, even though not immediately, easily comprehensible to many modern believers, he believes Latin still has a role to play in the Church alongside the vernacular as a concrete tie to Catholic tradition and the universal church. The vernacular translations that are used also need not be always immediately accessible or suited to contemporary mentalities but faithful to the original Latin and its theological richness. Closely tied to this development was the desacralization of the liturgy and the loss of the treasury of sacred art and architecture. If the liturgy is simply a human meal designed to foster friendly feelings and human brotherhood, then the ordinary and everyday becomes primary. Rather, for Ratzinger, Christian spaces and music should be truly sacred, that is, consecrated and in some way set apart from our everyday experience and dedicated solely to worship. This would cultivate the sense that the liturgy truly does take us outside of ourselves and transports us into the liturgy of heaven. In a future issue, Kevin Magas will examine Pope Benedict’s project of the “Reform of the Reform,” his promotion of ars celebrandi and beauty in the liturgy, and his overall desire to “re-Catholilcize” the liturgy today and in the future. Kevin D. Magas holds an MTS and PhD in theology from the University of Notre Dame. He currently serves as an assistant professor of dogmatic theology and director of intellectual formation for the Liturgical Institute at the University of St. Mary of the Lake/Mundelein Seminary, Mundelein, IL. He lives in Mundelein with his wife and children.
AB/WIKIMEDIA
“ Forgotten qualities like listening, adoration, and silence are crucial to this fuller understanding of active participation and regrettably absent in many noisy, contemporary celebrations of the liturgy.”
Among the Council’s recommendations Ratzinger praises in his writings at the time of the Council include: the priority of Sunday over saint’s days in the liturgical year, a focus on simple liturgical structures rather than “overgrown forms” in parts of the liturgy, a greater emphasis on communal celebration, restoration of the liturgy of the word, the call for more active participation of the laity, overcoming the exclusive dominance of Latin through allowance of the vernacular, and a “defrosting of ritual rigidity,” opening the liturgy up to future developments.
* This is a version of a talk delivered at the Lumen Christi Institute West Suburban Catholic Culture series on Liturgy, October 2020. 1. https://www.praytellblog.com/index.php/2017/10/04/pope-benedictxvi-on-the-crisis-of-the-church-god-and-the-liturgy/ 2. Joseph Ratzinger, Preface to Die Heilige Liturgie, quoted by Roberto de Mattei, “Reflections on the Liturgical Reform” in Looking Again at the Question of the Liturgy with Cardinal Ratzinger, ed. Alcuin Reid (Farnborough: Saint Michael’s Abbey Press, 2003), 141. 3. Joseph Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2000), 7-8. 4. See Joseph Ratzinger, Theological Highlights of Vatican II (New York: Paulist Press. Deus Books, 1966; republished in 2009), 130-133. 5. Mariusz Biliniewicz, The Liturgical Vision of Pope Benedict XVI: A Theological Inquiry (New York: Peter Lang, 2013), 73. 6. See Ratzinger, Highlights, 32-37.
7. Ratzinger, Feast of Faith. Approaches to a Theology of the Liturgy (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986), 87. 8. Joseph Ratzinger, Foreword to Klaus Gamber, La Reforme liturgique en question (Le Barroux: Editions sainte-Madeleine, 1992), 7. 9. Ratzinger, Feast of Faith, 87. 10. Ibid., 61. 11. Ibid., 147. 12. Joseph Ratzinger, “Review of the Postconciliar Era—Failures, Tasks, Hopes” in Principles of Catholic Theology. Building Stones for a Fundamental Theology (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1987), 367-78, at 370. 13. Joseph Ratzinger, “Fortieth Anniversary of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy,” in Collected Works, XI. Translated by Kenneth Baker, S.J., and Michael J. Miller. (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 2014), 575. 14. Joseph Ratzinger, “Eucharist and Mission,” in Collected Works, XI:332. 15. J oseph Ratzinger, “Catholicism after the Council,” trans. P. Russell, The Furrow 18 (1967): 11-12.
Adoremus Bulletin Announces a New Land-Down-Under Edition
A
doremus Bulletin is coming to Australia and New Zealand, and prospective subscribers can receive it FREE OF CHARGE until March 2023. Adoremus has been blessed since its inception in 1995 to have readers across the English-speaking world, including Australia and New Zealand. Beginning in May 2022, the Bulletin will be printed and distributed directly from the continent thanks to local donors, current readers, and the Sydney-based Catholic media enterprise, Parousia. For almost 30 years, Adoremus has fostered the sound formation of Catholic laity in matters relating to the Church’s worship, consistent with the Second Vatican Council and the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, and has aided Catholics (including priests and seminarians) with reliable information and encouragement about the Church’s mind and heart on all things liturgical. In Adoremus’s mission, its editorial team and host of talented, thoughtful writers strive to bring the Catholic liturgy to its readers. We share Pope Benedict XVI’s excitement in raising up our readers to share ever more fully in the beauty and truth of Christ found at the heart of the liturgy. “What is exciting about
Christian Liturgy is that it lifts us up out of our narrow sphere and lets us share in the Truth,” says Pope Benedict. “The aim of all liturgical renewal must be to bring to light this liberating greatness” (Feast of Faith, 75). The mission of Adoremus is to rediscover and restore the beauty, the holiness, and the power of the Church’s rich liturgical tradition while remaining faithful to an organic, living process of renewal. Faithful to the magisterium, concerned with tradition, eager to open the liturgy’s mystery to the modern world, Adoremus is joyful, orthodox, and intelligent. Our hope is to respond to the interventions of Australia’s Plenary Council, through a lay endeavor, by being faithful to our mission and providing this resource to the people of Oceania. When you sign up to receive Adoremus, you not only receive its full-color, 12-page print bulletin, published six times each year, but you also receive a monthly electronic newsletter, AB Insight. In addition, Adoremus offers podcasts and videos on its website, www.adoremus.org. If you would like to receive the Adoremus Bulletin for
free from May 2022 until March 2023, register at www.parousiamedia.com/adoremus-bulletin. Please join us in the work of ongoing liturgical renewal!
6
Adoremus Bulletin, March 2022
AB/CATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY
pressure the seminarian feels. Seminarians also react to this practicum by appreciating how quickly a good confessor listens to the penitent, synthesizes his own thoughts, and then speaks Christ-like words of mercy that truly address the penitent’s spiritual maladies.
By knowing Jesus through a deep study of Sacred Scripture, countless hours spent in silent prayer, and meditation on the content of their seminary courses, these future confessors put on the mind of Christ so as to think, speak, and act like him.
Confession 101: A Glimpse into How Seminarians Are Trained for the Sacrament of Penance
L
ay Catholics who frequent the Sacrament of Confession know what its reception requires of them: From the moment they examine their conscience to the moment they leave the confessional to complete their assigned penance, their role is clear. But what about the priest who administers the sacrament? Both his training as a confessor and his experience in the confessional may remain somewhat mysterious, at least to the average layman, since a confessor is understandably reluctant to speak about these sacred matters lest he violate the sacramental seal and incur the grave penalties such a violation entails. The fact remains, however, that the priest arrives at the confessional only after a long journey. The Church, through her seminaries, places a premium on educating excellent confessors. The present article offers a glimpse of this preparation: What is it like for a seminarian to learn the ministry of the confessor during his seminary training? As we will see below, seminarians often express apprehension about their ability to live up to the demands of the sacrament, yet they remain undeterred in their joyful aspiration to imitate great priest-confessors like St. John Vianney. Both their apprehension and their aspiration, which reflect a genuine appreciation for this sacrament and a love of Jesus Christ, are reasons for the Church to be optimistic about the future priests who will guide the faithful in the years to come. Formed to Forgive All seminarians take a variety of moral theology courses during their seminary formation. Topics include, but are not limited to, action theory (the study of human acts and when they are sinful), theological anthropology (for example, St. John Paul II’s theology of the body), sin, virtues and vices, marriage and family life, states of life (lay, consecrated, ordained), human sexuality, and Catholic social doctrine. Such courses typically focus on fundamentals and theory, but good professors will pepper their lectures with concrete, topical examples to help solidify their students’ grasp of the Catholic moral tradition. All seminarians must also take at least a year’s worth of canon law. It is here that seminarians learn the Church’s legislative discipline concerning the minister and recipient of the Sacrament of Confession, the norms for administering the sacrament, faculties to hear confessions, reserved cases (sins that the Holy Father or local bishop has reserved to himself to forgive, such as apostasy, heresy, schism, violating the sacred species of the Eucharist, or attacking the pope), and indulgences. Some seminaries offer courses on pastoral counseling and psychology to present a more complete picture of the human person. Such courses also give seminarians an understanding of mental illness and teach them how to work with psychiatric and psychological professionals to help the penitent fully heal. Toward the end of their formation, seminarians in the United States take a semester-long course that synthesizes the above-mentioned courses in view of
the Sacrament of Penance. This course addresses topics proper to the sacrament itself, such as its scriptural and anthropological foundations, its historical development, its nature and components (contrition, confession, satisfaction, absolution), while also dealing with other matters such as the sacramental seal and the celebration of the rite itself. Seminarians also
“ What is it like for a seminarian to learn the ministry of the confessor during his seminary training? ”
AB/© L’OSSERVATORE ROMANO
By Father Anthony J. Stoeppel
Seminarians often compare the content of their courses, as well as the practical suggestions of their seminary professors, to their own experience. Seminary professors will encourage seminarians to imitate those priest-confessors who have visibly acted in persona Christi for them.
learn how to handle pastorally reserved sins (sins that a priest cannot absolve because they are reserved to the pope or local bishop), censures (a punishment meant to have a medicinal effect in helping the person repent, like an excommunication), and special cases involving lack of a shared language between penitent and priest, penitents with disabilities, and so forth. This penance course has a decidedly practical dimension. For example, a typical assignment is to recite from memory the priest’s formula of absolution. If they do not do so in a separate practicum, seminarians will also practice hearing mock confessions in a classroom environment with one or more priests monitoring them and offering feedback. Other seminarians are often called in to play the part of a certain type of penitent, thus giving the “seminarian-confessor” an opportunity to envision himself dispensing mercy to all God’s people and to develop strategies suited to different kinds of penitents and to his own personality. Seminarians often find the first few practice confessions a bit jarring given that it is not an ordinary experience to have other people admit their sins. Having classmates “listening in” to the mock confession and his response only adds to the
Jesus in the Box Given that seminarians usually take this course just before priestly ordination, it tends to increase their appreciation of the weighty responsibility incumbent on God’s minister of reconciliation. It’s not surprising, then, that a plethora of questions arise in this context. These questions both reflect the men’s apprehension about their future role as confessors and reveal the positive reasons motivating their aspiration to embrace it. Even with all the preparation that seminarians receive at seminary, nothing compares to actual experience in the confessional. Seminarians sense this. This is why they often ask for advice about hearing their first confession. They know that of him to whom much is given, much will be required. While the first-time penitent may be nervous, the anxiety level of the priest hearing his first confession is certainly much higher! Seminarians recognize the seriousness of the sacrament in which a penitent reveals the secrets of his soul. At the same time, they manifest a genuine desire to be Jesus for each and every penitent who approaches them. They are eager to “have the right word,” to know exactly what to say to help the penitent convert from sin to virtue; they wish to make the sacramental experience and the moment of grace memorable for the penitent. Given that no one does it better than Jesus, and that his standard is very high, seminarians initially fear falling short of the Master and disappointing him. This apprehension forces them to humble themselves and to face the reality that, if they wish to be Jesus Christ to the flock entrusted to their care, especially in the Sacrament of Confession, they must know him intimately. By knowing Jesus through a deep study of Sacred Scripture, countless hours spent in silent prayer, and meditation on the content of their seminary courses, these future confessors put on the mind of Christ so as to think, speak, and act like him. St. Paul’s words: “It is not I who live, but Christ who lives in me” take on a new and deeper meaning for those seminarians preparing to hear confessions. God and Man in Confession The prayer of the seminarian thus comes to include an ever more fervent petition: “Abide in me, Lord.” Yet his fear begins to subside once he recognizes that he will not hear confessions on his own authority or speak in his own name. Rather, Christ is with him, and he uses the powerful words of Jesus to convert hearts, heal wounds, and forgive sins in his name. Seminarians often compare the content of their courses, as well as the practical suggestions of their seminary professors, to their own experience. They know from their own confessions that not every priest enables the penitent to feel that he has encountered
“ Hear someone’s confession the way you would want your confession heard.” — Francis Cardinal Arinze Christ in the sacrament, and they do not wish to subject their own future penitents to the same experience. To direct this holy desire to a fruitful end, seminary professors will encourage seminarians to take a step back from any unfortunate personal experiences in the confessional and to imitate instead those priest-confessors who have visibly acted in persona Christi for them. In this context, seminarians often cite characteristics important to them in a confessor: One hears adjectives such as attentive, calm, listening, supportive, encouraging, positive, uplifting, hopeful, and helpful. It may sound simple, but the Golden Rule applies to the priest in the confessional as much as it does to anyone else. As Francis Cardinal Arinze once exhorted seminarians: “Hear someone’s confession the way you would want your confession heard.” Time to Heal Seminarians, like all penitents, know what it’s like to wait in long confessional lines. They are therefore understandably concerned about the question of time: They’re worried lest they spend too much of it on each penitent, which only lengthens the wait for those still in line, but they also realize that excessive briskness can leave the penitent with the impression of having been short-changed. The truth is that finding the balance comes with experience. (Yet even before hearing their first confession, seminarians do understand that some penitents may require more time to receive the Please see CONFESSOR on page 7
7
Adoremus Bulletin, March 2022
Maurice de la Taille’s Mysterium Fidei: A Precursor of Liturgical Renewal By Michon M. Matthiesen
I
A Jesuit Among Benedictines De la Taille (1872-1933), who came from a French noble family of 11 boys, knew at a young age that he wished to become a Jesuit. Due to secularist laws which exiled religious orders from France, much of his early Jesuit formation took place on British soil, primarily at St. Mary’s in Canterbury. Weak health precluded his aspirations for missionary work, but several seasons of forced convalescence at the English Benedictine monastery of Ramsgate propagated de la Taille’s deep appreciation of the liturgy and his joy in celebrating the solemn high Mass. In fact, de la Taille developed there a life-long affection for the Benedictine order. When the anti-clerical laws were eased in France in the mid-1890s, he returned to study theology at the L’Institut catholique and earned a Licentiate in philosophy at the Sorbonne. Not long after his ordination in 1901, de la Taille followed the counsel of a spiritual director to study Please see DE LA TAILLE on page 8
AB/WIKIPEDIA
n 1915, just before being called to a military chaplaincy in the First World War, Jesuit theologian Maurice de la Taille placed in the hands of the publisher a three-volume work which constituted the fruit of 10 years of research and writing on the Eucharist: Mysterium Fidei: de augustissimo corporis et sanguinis Christi sacrificio atque sacramento, Elucidationes L in tres libros distinctae (The Mystery of Faith: Regarding the Most August Sacrifice and Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, Fifty Elucidations in Three Distinct Books). Beauchesne released the book six years later, in 1921. De la Taille purportedly told the publisher that he did not expect the book to sell more than 30 copies worldwide; by 1931, sales had reached over 3,000 and a third edition was at the press. The author himself was likely among those most surprised. Yet the book—and its author—remain to this day important components of the liturgical movement. To understand why, let us first look at De la Taille’s life.
Born in France in 1872, secularist laws which exiled religious orders from France forced de la Taille to British soil, including a period at the English Benedictine monastery of Ramsgate, where he came to appreciate the liturgy and celebrating the solemn high Mass. When the anti-clerical laws were eased in France in the mid-1890s, he returned to study theology at the L’Institut catholique and earned a Licentiate in philosophy at the Sorbonne (its chapel pictured here).
we make reparation for sins. This devotion, together with Our Lady of Fatima’s call to do penance for sinners, places the importance of sacramental confession before the seminarian’s mind. Closer to our own time, St. John Paul II’s pontificate of mercy highlighted the importance of the Sacrament of Confession, and we are still reaping abundant fruit from the seeds he planted. Thus, seminarians will often cite a celebration of Divine Mercy Sunday as a pivotal moment in their vocational discernment. Many seminarians have a profound devotion to Jesus’ Divine Mercy and pray the Chaplet of Divine Mercy on a daily basis. As their devotion to Jesus’ Divine Mercy continues to grow during their seminary years, the experience wells up in their hearts an evergreater desire to be the instrument through which Our Lord dispenses that mercy. They know what it means to pray “Jesus, I trust in You,” and they want others to pray it with them.
Continued from CONFESSOR on page 6 healing graces of the sacrament to the full; they know that a few extra minutes may be crucial for healing a soul of some spiritual malady.) In the end, only the penitent, priest, and God know why one penitent’s confession runs longer or shorter than another’s. Seminarians also commonly ask for advice about what to do if there is still a line for confession when Mass is about to begin or the priest needs to use the restroom. The opposite question also tends to arise in seminarians’ minds: What should a priest do if no one comes to confession? Does he just sit there? How does a priest hear the confession of someone who has asked for the sacrament while in a store or at the airport? Seminarians also typically ask for guidance in guarding against violation of the sacrament seal. Given that a priest who reveals a penitent’s sin incurs an automatic excommunication, this concern is quite understandable. While it may appear easy to refrain from disclosing the content of a confession, seminarians realize that more subtle issues arise. For example, they ask for tips about answering someone who says: “Don’t you remember, Father? I told you yesterday in confession.” Another common question concerns how to maintain a neutral expression or, better, how to “act normal” in the presence of a person whose confession one has just heard. Further, while priests pray for the grace to forget confessions, what if there is one they cannot forget? And what should a priest do if a person known to him, say a church employee, mentions in confession that he has stolen from the parish (or worse)?
AB/WIKIMEDIA
Personal Work Seminarians share many other experiences and concerns in the course of their preparation for the confessor’s role. For example, many of them are introverts who nonetheless wish to help other people. Confession offers a safe place for such introverts to shine and to mediate spiritual healing to others. Furthermore, seminarians bring to the classroom their own knowledge of what it means to say that Jesus saves in the sacrament: They themselves may have had a positive personal experience of radical conversion in the context of confession, or else they will know others whose lives have totally changed through reconciliation with God. Seminarians also often express their confident hope that loved ones who confessed shortly before death will go to heaven. The peace that they have about the eternal destiny of
“ Seminarians are inspired to be great confessors by the stories of confessor-saints like John Vianney and Padre Pio.”
St. John Paul II’s pontificate of mercy highlighted the importance of the Sacrament of Confession, and we are still reaping abundant fruit from the seeds he planted. Thus, seminarians will often cite a celebration of Divine Mercy Sunday as a pivotal moment in their vocational discernment. They know what it means to pray “Jesus, I trust in You,” and they want others to pray it with them.
these loved ones is a gift they desire to share with everyone. Seminarians are inspired to be great confessors by the stories of confessor-saints like John Vianney and Padre Pio. Since the priesthood channels the love of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, seminarians take seriously Our Lord’s request to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque that
Men of Mercy The Church and her lay members ought to be optimistic about the future. First and foremost, despite all the scandals and controversies in recent decades, men keep showing up at seminaries. Further, these men are frequent recipients of the Sacrament of Confession who are intimately acquainted with its power. As such, they will become a generation of priests who receive, preach, and offer the sacrament. Because of the devotion to the Sacrament of Confession these future priests manifest even now, we can be confident that they will be zealous and generous ministers of reconciliation who will do much more than the bare minimum of half an hour on Saturday afternoons. Knowing personally that the world needs the mercy of Jesus Christ, they are ready to make themselves unstintingly available to bring it to their fellow men. Father Anthony J. Stoeppel, a priest of the Diocese of Tyler, TX, serves as Vice-Rector of St. Patrick’s Seminary & University in the Archdiocese of San Francisco.
8
Adoremus Bulletin, March 2022 length of his work, as well as his prolix quoting from the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, as inevitable to a coordinating and elucidating doctrine of the Eucharist. He also begs the reader not to simply read a part of his work—for no part in a living organism can be completely understood apart from the whole. (Given the length of the book, and the fact that only the first two volumes have been translated into English, I suspect the author’s wish is frequently unfulfilled, which may account for much misapprehension of his thought.)
Dom Lambert Beauduin, a founding figure of the liturgical movement, was a great supporter of de la Taille’s work.
Continued from DE LA TAILLE, page 7 the Letter to the Hebrews—an endeavor that cast a long and bright light upon his theological career. Before he began to teach at the School of Theology at Angers in 1905, he had written a Lenten series of sermons on “The Sacrifice of the Mass” and had composed retreat talks on the topic. During the decade of teaching at Angers, de la Taille immersed himself entirely in researching Eucharistic sacrifice; the depth of his study yields the unmistakable impression that he read through the entire collection of Migne’s Patrologiae cursus completes—more than 200 volumes of patristic writings. At the end of World War I, de la Taille was invited to become a professor at the Gregorian University in Rome, where he taught until his health declined in 1930. He was a dynamic teacher, whose lectures on Thomas Aquinas drew large crowds. Though de la Taille wrote significant essays on other topics such as grace and contemplative prayer, it is his masterpiece on sacrifice that constitutes his legacy to Catholic theology. Mysterium Fidei immediately captured the attention of theologians in Europe: it was highly acclaimed for the breadth of its scholarship and its insight; yet it likewise was fiercely criticized for its “new theory” of sacrifice. While de la Taille was quick to defend his work against the claim of novelty, it is fair to say that his study marks a distinct shift in the way that Eucharistic sacrifice had been theologically treated since the Council of Trent. He both broadens and brings into focus a richer and more traditional understanding of the Mass as a sacrifice. The methodology itself of Mysterium Fidei caused excitement within the nascent liturgical movement, as well as among those who would become important figures of ressourcement theology, which preferred scriptural and patristic texts rather than neo-Scholastic ones. What is de la Taille’s central thesis about the Mass sacrifice and how does he demonstrate it? The answer to both of these questions will underscore the significance of de la Taille’s thought for the liturgical movement, particularly in light of its fervent desire for a fuller participation of the laity in the Eucharist of the Lord’s Day.
Theology, Piety, and the Liturgy In the preface to his great work, Mysterium Fidei, de la Taille stipulates the purpose of theology and makes an apology for the method he follows in treating the Eucharist. A theologian, he writes, aims not to dispute, but to illuminate; not to display his own erudition or to “promote his own special findings,” but rather to augment the knowledge of faith, deepening the engagement of believers with the mysteries of Christ and the Church. Even more bluntly, he argues that theology “has no place for anything that does not foster piety.” In a word, theology is to serve the life of the Church, exciting desire for God and massaging into greater vitality the faith of the baptized. Behind these comments lies a distaste for the systematic distillations of textbook theology in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. To his way of thinking— which would be echoed by several nouvelle théologie figures—theology ought to eschew systems, even while it methodically unfolds in a necessarily organic and complexly related way. De la Taille can thus justify the
If scripture, patristic authors, and Thomas Aquinas figure prominently in Mysterium Fidei, de la Taille throws wide the net of tradition and sets down for his readers an astonishing array of other theological resources: the testimony of the Church’s liturgies—attending to anaphora, collects, prayers over the oblations, and postcommunion prayers; Eucharistic hymns; ancient and contemporary preaching; medieval and modern mystical writers; catechisms and conciliar documents; and even some findings of the newly burgeoning field of history of religions. That de la Taille would consult and present the witness of the Church’s liturgies (both West and East) brought particular delight to Dom Lambert Beauduin, O.S.B. (1873-1960), who is often called the “father of the Liturgical Movement in Europe.” Beauduin praises de la Taille for recognizing that the liturgy itself constitutes an eminent place at the theological table.1 He likewise hails Mysterium Fidei as a “new point of departure” for the explication of doctrine, noting that the title alone announces a fresh spirit and “program” for theology, one that values its mystagogical character.
Sacrifice As Gift Beyond the method and concerns of Mysterium Fidei, de la Taille’s study marks a major turning point in a theology of Eucharistic sacrifice. Beauduin, for example, claims that Mysterium Fidei provides a “release” (soulagement) and “deliverance” (déliverance)2 from the web of immolationist theories propounded since the Council of Trent, theories that located the “true and proper” sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist in the destruction of the victim. This deliverance emerges in de la Taille’s studied depiction of sacrifice in the Old Testament, highlighting that sacrifice involves two central acts: immolation and oblation, with oblation positioned as the determining component of sacrifice. Without the giving/offering of a gift to God, there is no sacrifice. Immolation, strictly speaking, is the destruction of the victim, either one already offered to God by the presiding liturgus (the priest), or one to be offered. The priest alone can transfer the gift into the possession of the deity; whereas, the slaying of the victim can be carried out by another. Oblation, then, is the soul, the form of the sacrifice; immolation constitutes its essential material element. When considering the sacrifice of Christ, de la Taille argues from early sources that the Last Supper and the Cross are conceived as a single sacrifice, with the oblation occurring at the Last Supper, and the immolation on the Cross. This vision places the spotlight on the Supper, where Christ, acting as priest and victim, willingly offers
AB/CATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY
AB/WIKIPEDIA
“ At the Last Supper, Christ makes manifest his interior desire to offer his death to the Father. ”
certainly witnesses to—indeed, advocates for—concerns linked with the early project of liturgical renewal: the promotion of scriptural fluency, along with the retrieval of patristic sources; a careful listening to liturgical prayer texts; the desire for fuller lay participation in the offering of the sacrifice (more about this below); and a more frequent reception of communion. Apropos of the latter, perhaps it is not surprising that de la Taille dedicates his masterwork to Pope Pius X, the outstanding papal promoter of the liturgy.
Baptism inaugurates Christic life, impressing the priestly character that allows the believer, in grace, to offer his own interior immolation with the ecclesial offering of Christ’s death.
Like Beauduin, de la Taille reveals no interest in reforming the liturgy, but rather only an earnest desire to renew the liturgy by displaying her treasures and encouraging a fuller participation in, and understanding of, ecclesial sacrifice. Beauduin’s efforts to restore Christian spirituality through the restoration of the high Mass on Sunday—which included the first printing of Latin-vernacular missals for the people—would have had de la Taille’s support. Others have acknowledged Mysterium Fidei as a catalyst and guiding factor in the blossoming of liturgical studies. De la Taille’s work
“ De la Taille reveals no interest in reforming the liturgy, but rather only an earnest desire to renew the liturgy by displaying her treasures and encouraging a fuller participation in, and understanding of, ecclesial sacrifice.”
himself to the Father, thereby deputing himself to the immolation that would follow. Christ offers himself by way of bread and wine, which he declares to be his body and his blood poured out for many. Here is the new covenant in blood. Here the victim-to-be-immolated is present and is offered. The sacrifice has begun, which will be consummated by the immolation on the cross. What this means for the Mass-sacrifice is clear and astonishing. At the Mass, as at the Last Supper, there is a real offering of Christ’s passion and death because the Body and Blood are present (via the consecration). The oblation at the Mass, as at the Supper, is real and present (realis et praesens); the immolation is mystical, or in sacramento. The Mass is a true and proper sacrifice because of the identity of the victim offered—a victim now already-immolated some 2,000 years ago on Golgotha. The Church can offer this same sacrifice because of a derivative power granted by Christ to his Spouse, the Church. Christ associates as his own the ecclesial offering of his Body and Blood, thereby securing the unity between the Supper-Cross sacrifice and that of the holy Mass. In other words, de la Taille directs our attention not to looking in the Mass for an immolation or crucifixion
9
AB/WIKIMEDIA. LAST SUPPER. 2009. CANVAS, OIL. 95 X 200. ARTIST A.N. MIRONOV
Adoremus Bulletin, March 2022
When considering the sacrifice of Christ, de la Taille argues from early sources that the Last Supper and the Cross are conceived as a single sacrifice, with the oblation occurring at the Last Supper, and the immolation on the Cross. This vision places the spotlight on the Supper, where Christ, acting as priest and victim, willingly offers himself to the Father, thereby deputing himself to the immolation that would follow. Christ offers himself by way of bread and wine, which he declares to be his body and his blood poured out for many. Here is the new covenant in blood. Here the victim-to-be-immolated is present and is offered. The sacrifice has begun, which will be consummated by the immolation on the cross.
in order to shore-up its sacrificial reality, but rather to looking for the Crucified One—and the offering of that Victim. Underscoring the oblatory element of sacrifice is concomitant with de la Taille’s treatment of the role of the baptized at the ecclesial sacrifice. Fruits of the Mass At the Last Supper, Christ makes manifest his interior desire to offer his death to the Father. In the Eucharistic liturgy, the Church gives expression to her own desire to offer sacrifice to God by offering the eternally and infinitely acceptable Gift: the Body and Blood of the Son. In fact, offering sacrifice (latria) requires the accompaniment of an interior devotion and a willing surrender of oneself to God. The external offering of a gift to God is the sign of the worshiper’s devotion. Because both soul and body share in the fallen condition, an external indication of latria is necessary. The love and submission of the interior will are both signified and actualized in the gift being handed over to God. De la Taille alludes to sacramental language here: the giving over of the gift is the res et sacramentum of sacrifice; the res tantum, the reality itself, is found in the interior offering. This robust connection between the interior will and the external gift-giving aspect of sacrifice draws attention to the subjective element in sacrificial action, accentuating a vision of the offering Church. Rather boldly, de la Taille suggests that the fruits of the sacrifice can be limited when the interior, subjective aspect of sacrifice is missing. This point needs careful delineation.
“ Every offering of ecclesial sacrifice provides a practical opportunity for the believers to claim and perpetuate their profession of baptism.” On the basis of what is offered, every Mass-sacrifice is equally, infinitely, and abundantly efficacious—for the Victim offered is eternally accepted and acceptable to the Father. However, the fruits of a particular Mass-sacrifice are “restricted” by the offerers, that is, by the measure of their affect in offering the Gift. The participation of the faithful in the offering of the sacrifice clearly matters. While the promised presence of the Holy Spirit—the very Amor of the triune God—assures that every Mass bears sacrificial fruit, de la Taille awakens the faithful to the significance of doing what Jesus did at the Last Supper, namely, putting on display his interior will to surrender himself to the Father in sacrifice. Baptism disposes the believer to do the same in the
offering of ecclesial sacrifice. How intimately involved are the faithful in the offering of the Victim? How much is that Gift an authentic sign of our desire to offer ourselves latreutically (in worship and praise) to God? Is there a promise of surrender at the altar? Does the heart, with all its capricious desires and fervent petitions, find a place on the altar of sacrifice? If not, such an unconsidered and incomplete oblation can limit the abundant fruits that flow from the generous font opened up by the Gift of Christ’s Body and Blood.
“ The fruits of the sacrifice can be limited when the interior, subjective aspect of sacrifice is missing.” Baptism and Ecclesial Sacrifice In Book III of Mysterium Fidei, de la Taille reveals the crucial role of baptism for ecclesial sacrifice and for a liturgically oriented spirituality. Baptism is a mystical death through which the new Christian is immolated with Christ and commits himself to a lifelong process of spiritual mortification. This spiritual commitment is intimately related to the liturgical offering of sacrifice at the Mass. Let me spell this out. At baptism, the believer receives Christ’s priestly character. With St. Thomas Aquinas, de la Taille affirms that the water and the verbal formula together bestow Christ’s priestly character, which immediately introduces and “indicates in us an interior immolation to God (in terms of an immolation of the life of sin, of the flesh, and of the death-dealing world, in order that we might live unto Christ through grace)” (IV Sent. D. 26, q.2, a.3, ad.2). Baptism thus inaugurates Christic life, impressing the priestly character that allows the believer, in grace, to offer his own interior immolation with the ecclesial offering of Christ’s death. Baptismal character allows the ecclesial sacrifice of Christ’s body to be a true sign of the believer’s interior immolation, borne out in the whole of spiritual life: in prayer and ascetical practice, in repentance and selfdenial, and in the handing over of those parts of life which we yet wish to have under our own control. All of this is a prolongation of baptismal death oriented to the Eucharistic sacrifice; all is the ongoing unfolding of the grace of Christ’s priestly character. To participate in the Church’s ritual oblation indicates an “Amen” to disposing oneself for death, for the “crucifying” of those desires which yet resist the divine will. Emphatically, de la Taille calls for an ecclesial oblation aware of its baptismal promise to imitate the sacrificial death of Christ. The disciplining of desire presses upon daily spiritual life only with unequal
force (e.g., with much more intentionality during Lent). Still, de la Taille wants us to see this obligation as fundamentally one with the offering of ecclesial sacrifice. Each time the believer participates in the sacrifice of the Mass, however generously or sparingly he offers, that oblation is being mingled with the one death which redeems all (minimal) efforts and failures of love. And this is certainly good news, as none of us is always as keenly aware as we might be of our participation in the offering of the Mass-sacrifice. The Church raises up that Gift which converts impure desire into the holy image of the Son’s single-hearted and divine desire for the Father. Baptismal Breakthrough This is a rather remarkable baptismal theology for the early decades of the 20th century, and one which gave momentum to those prophets of the liturgical movement. To be sure, new life was breathed into the sacrament of baptism at Vatican II, particularly in Lumen Gentium (see nn. 34, 40). Yet even here, the Council Fathers do not provide a robust theological account of the manifest connection between baptism and the ecclesial sacrifice. De la Taille’s work helps to fill this lacuna. One hears frequently enough that Confirmation is that sacrament by which a young man or woman can finally make “their own” a sacrament which happened to them as in infant. De la Taille would find this a misleading sentiment. In fact, every offering of ecclesial sacrifice provides a practical opportunity for believers to claim and perpetuate their profession of baptism. For the liturgical renewal still underway in the Church, de la Taille recalls how baptism empowers and obligates the Christian to offer sacrifice—and with a movement of heart and will that lends authenticity, sincerity, and vitality to the Mass oblation. From an opposite angle, it is also true that Eucharistic sacrifice bestows value and dignity on all the spiritual-ascetic efforts of the Christian disciple. When prayer, fasting, charitable acts, the denying of desires, etc. are placed on the altar and mingled with the chalice of Christ’s blood, de la Taille envisions that they are thereby changed like the water of Cana into the wine of salvation. Michon M. Matthiesen, S.T.L, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Theology at The University of Mary (Bismarck, ND). Her book on Maurice de la Taille (Sacrifice as Gift) was published by CUA Press in 2013. She is currently working on topics in Monastic Studies and Literature and Theology. 1. “Le Saint Sacrifice de la Messe: A propos d’un livre recent,” Les questions liturgiques et paroissiales VI (1921), 197-198. For a fine biography of Beauduin, see Sonya Quitslund, Beauduin: A Prophet Vindicated (New York: Newman Press, 1973). 2. Ibid., 202.
10
Q A
Adoremus Bulletin, March 2022
THE RITE QUESTIONS : What is a “healing
Mass,” and what norms direct its celebration?
“signs perceptible to the senses”: His assembly (praying & singing), his minister, his Scriptures, and his Sacraments—“especially under the Eucharistic species” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 7). The essential liturgical aspects (priest, silence, laying on of hands, anointing—cf. CCC, 1519, Order for the Anointing of the Sick, 5), celebrated either within or outside of Mass, form “a sacramental action: anointing of the sick with oil and prayer ‘over him’ and not simply ‘for him,’ as if it were only a prayer of intercession or petition; it is rather an efficacious action on the sick person” (IPH, I.3). As with most liturgical issues, problems arise when non-liturgical signs are imposed on the liturgical rites to mix the liturgical with non-liturgical signs. Healing prayer, whether liturgical or non-liturgical, should be characterized by “a climate of peaceful devotion in the assembly” and not “hysteria, artificiality, theatricality or sensationalism” (IPH, II. Art. 9 and 5.3). While prayer meetings and the sacramental liturgy are not opposed to one another, “confusion between such free non-liturgical prayer meetings and liturgical celebrations properly so-called is to be carefully avoided” (IPH, II. Art 5.2). Indeed, “prayers for healing” and prayers for exorcism, “whether liturgical or non-liturgical—must not be introduced into the celebration of the Holy Mass, the sacraments, or the Liturgy of the Hours” (IPH, II. Art. 7.1 and 8.3). —The Editors
: The ministry of healing is among the central works of the Church, as it was for Jesus himself. As Pope Benedict XVI remarked, “Healing is an essential dimension of the apostolic mission and of Christian faith in general…. [It is] a religion of healing. When understood at a sufficiently deep level, this expresses the entire content of ‘redemption’” (Jesus of Nazareth, 176). Consequently, the Church offers direction in how Christ’s saving work continues in her rites today. In its Instruction on Prayers for Healing ([IPH] 2000), the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith noted the recent “proliferation of prayer meetings, at times combined with liturgical celebrations, for the purpose of obtaining healing from God. In many cases, the occurrence of healings has been proclaimed…[and] appeal is sometimes made to a claimed charism of healing. These prayer meetings for obtaining healing present the question of their proper discernment from a liturgical perspective” (Introduction; cf. Code of Canon Law, 34). This phenomenon continues today, and so it seems helpful to recall the Church’s teaching on the proper relationship between the sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick and the charism of healing, and in particular the question of a “healing Mass.” “Suffering and illness have always been among the greatest problems that trouble the human spirit” (Pastoral Care of the Sick [PCS]. 1). The redemption wrought in Christ heals the wounds of sin and death that “entered the world” through the enemy (Wisdom 2:24; see also Catechism of the Catholic Church [CCC], 400). Healing in the life and ministry of Jesus as well as in the time after Pentecost “manifest the victory of the kingdom of God over every kind of evil, and become the symbol of the restoration to health of the whole human person, body and soul” (IPH, I.1). “In this age of the Church, Christ now lives and acts in and with his Church, in a new way appropriate to this age,” known as the “sacramental economy” (CCC, 1076). Although the sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick is the ordinary means by which God makes present his healing work of salvation, it is not the only way he has chosen to dispense his healing. In the economy of salvation, the “Holy Spirit gives to some a special charism of healing so as to make manifest the power of the grace of the risen Lord” (CCC, 1509, emphasis added) and to “obtain graces of healing for others” (IPH, I.3; see also I.5). From the apostolic period the charism of healing was exercised by both laity and clergy. Craig Keener, in his exhaustive study on miracles, notes that the Christian apologists of the second and third centuries “depict not only apostolic leaders but also ordinary Christians as miracle workers.”1 At the same time, in her liturgy the Church “has never failed to beg the Lord that the sick person may recover his health if it would be conducive to his salvation” (CCC, 1512). Properly speaking, the only legitimate “Healing Mass” is the celebration of the Sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick within the Mass using the formularies as found in two liturgical books. The first formulary is the “Mass for the Sick” in the Roman Missal-Third Edition (Masses and Prayers for Various Needs and Occasions, 45) with two options for the final blessing given in the ritual Mass “For the Conferral of the Anointing of the Sick.” The second formulary is found in the Pastoral Care of the Sick, 131–148. This “formulary… continues in force…because those texts are located in an approved ritual book (Pastoral Care of the Sick) and so are still permitted for liturgical use in the dioceses of the United States” (BCDW Newsletter, May 2013). This Mass begins with the usual greeting followed by the “Reception of the Sick,” where the purpose of the liturgy is announced: “that the sick may be restored to health by the gift of this mercy and made whole in his fullness” (Order for the Anointing of the Sick, 135A). The Liturgy of Anointing of the Sick follows the liturgy of the word and culminates in the liturgy of the Eucharist and in the reception of the Holy Eucharist. A litany begins the anointing liturgy, followed by the silent laying on of hands by the priest. This prayer culminates in a prayer of thanksgiving over the oil, followed by the anointing of the sick person and a post-anointing prayer. The liturgical books include a proper preface along with special intercessions for Eucharistic Prayers I–III.2 The liturgical actions manifest the “presence of Christ” the healer (CCC, 1509) and are distinguished by
: With the immense number of new liturgical texts that were prepared in the years following the Second Vatican Council, it should come as no surprise that certain lacunae appear from time to time. For example, the Ceremonial of Bishops refers to a ritual for public prayer after the desecration of a church (chapter 20), but no such rite has ever been promulgated. Likewise, the Ceremonial encourages the blessing of episcopal liturgical items (no. 569), although the current rites of the Roman Pontifical do not contain this blessing.3 But perhaps the most notable of these “missing texts” are those mentioned in the General Instruction of the Liturgy of the Hours (GILH). The most significant missing text of the Liturgy of the Hours is the supplementary or optional Lectionary mentioned in GILH nos. 145 to 152 and again at no. 161. When the experts were reforming the Divine Office, there was significant debate over what to do with the office of Matins, which had its origins in monastic prayer during the night. The reformers encountered tensions between competing goods: 1) a desire to keep the book to a practical length but also a desire to make a broader selection of Scripture available, and 2) a desire to emphasize the Church’s treasury of Patristic writings while also providing the clergy and faithful with a generous collection of spiritual and hagiographical texts. In the end, practicality won out and the new hour entitled “the Office of Readings” was designed to be roughly the same length as Morning and Evening Prayer, and it was limited to a single cycle of Scriptural and mostly-Patristic ecclesiastical writings. However, as a compromise, there emerged a plan to offer an optional Lectionary for the Office of Readings that would provide a two-year cycle of Scripture readings and a wider selection of ecclesiastical texts that could be chosen when praying this hour. This intention is reflected in the above-mentioned paragraphs of the GILH—except that the Holy See never promulgated the book. A draft list of the Scripture passages was published in the Congregation for Divine Worship’s journal Notitiae in 1976, but the project was never completed. Various Bishops’ Conferences, religious communities, and publishers have produced versions of an optional Lectionary for the Office of Readings, so in some sense the vision of the reformers came to fruition, at least in a limited way. However, the Holy See appears to be in the midst of preparing an official Lectionary for the Liturgy of the Hours and the day may arrive when those “missing” references in GILH nos. 145 to 152 and no. 161 finally have a concrete point of reference for the universal Church. A second notable missing text is a “supplement to the
1C raig Keener, Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011), 361–362). 2 BCDW Newsletter suggests a slight adaptation of the preface for EP I to fit the revised translation.
3. Actually, the first post-Conciliar edition of the rites of Ordination (1968) did contain a blessing for episcopal insignia, but it was removed from the second edition (1990); the Ceremonial of Bishops (1983) has not been updated in this regard.
Q
: The General Instruction
of the Liturgy of the Hours speaks of a “Supplement,” “Optional Lectionary,” and “special appendix.” Where are these to be found?
A
Liturgy of the Hours” said to contain Psalm-prayers that can accompany each Psalm, mentioned in GILH no. 112. When the arrangement of the Psalmody in the new Liturgy of the Hours was being debated, some of the experts argued that praying Psalms one after another can be difficult. To mitigate this challenge and deepen the experience of prayer, they proposed a short meditative prayer between the Psalms. Other experts disagreed, so by way of compromise it was decided that a collection of Psalm-prayers would be published separately for optional use. Hence, the Latin edition of the Liturgy of the Hours does not include Psalm-prayers amidst the Psalmody—but the Holy See hasn’t yet published the intended supplement that would make them available. However, those who pray the U.S. edition of the Liturgy of the Hours know that there are indeed Psalm-prayers interspersed throughout the four-week psalter approved for use in this country. This is because the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) obtained a draft of the prayers from the Holy See and prepared translations, which were then approved for use by several of the bishops’ conferences that use ICEL translations, including the United States. The U.S. bishops have indicated that the next edition of the Liturgy of the Hours will probably not include these Psalm-prayers. Finally, another reference in the GILH that might seem mysterious is the mention of a “special appendix” in no. 73, for use when observing the Office of Readings as an extended vigil on Sundays, solemnities, and feasts. Perhaps ignored by most users of the book, there is indeed an appendix containing this material—namely, the first appendix in each volume of the U.S. edition. Between the second reading of the Office of Readings and the Te Deum, the hour can be lengthened by the insertion of canticles and a Gospel reading found in the appendix. This option is the result of another compromise. The experts reforming the Divine Office did not want the Office of Readings to be overly long, so that it would not be a burden to priests charged with pastoral ministry. Some of the experts, however, felt that some, such as contemplative religious and retired priests, might appreciate the ability to observe these more important days in an expanded way. The solution agreed upon was to relegate the material to an appendix of the book and leave it as an option. Perhaps future updates will account, one way or another, for the lacunae in the liturgical books. Until then, they remain interesting witnesses to the fact that things in this world do not always work out as we intend. —Answered by Father Andrew Menke, Executive Director of the USCCB’s Secretariat of Divine Worship
Collect for Mass in Time of War or Civil Disturbance O God, merciful and strong, who crush wars and cast down the proud, be pleased to banish violence swiftly from our midst and to wipe away all tears, so that we may all truly deserve to be called your children. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God, for ever and ever. Amen.
Adoremus Bulletin, March 2022
Paenitemini: Apostolic Constitution on Fast and Abstinence
11
By Pope Paul VI
“Be converted and believe in the Gospel.”1 It seems to us that we must repeat these words of the Lord today at a moment when—with the closing of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council—the Church continues along its path with more vigorous steps. Among the grave and urgent problems which in fact summon our pastoral concern, it seems to us that not the least is to remind our sons—and all religious men of our times—of the significance and importance of the divine precept of penitence. We are prompted to this by the fuller and more profound vision of the Church and its relationship with the world given us recently by the supreme ecumenical assembly. During the council, in fact, the Church, in an effort to arrive at a more profound meditation on the mystery of itself, examined its own nature in all its dimensions and scrutinized its human and divine, visible and invisible, temporal and eternal elements. By first of all examining more thoroughly the link which binds it to Christ and His salvific action, it has underlined more clearly how all its members are called upon to participate in the work of Christ and therefore to participate also in His expiation.2 In addition, it has gained a clearer awareness that, while it is by divine vocation holy and without blemish,3 it is defective in its members and in continuous need of conversion and renewal,4 a renewal which must be implemented not only interiorly and individually but also externally and socially.5 Lastly, the Church has considered more attentively its role in the earthly city,6 that is to say, its mission of showing man the right way to use earthly goods and to collaborate in the “consecration of the world.” But at the same time it has considered more attentively its task of prompting its sons to that salutary abstinence which will forearm them against the danger of allowing themselves to be delayed by the things of this world in their pilgrimage toward their home in heaven.7 For these reasons we should like today to repeat to our sons the words spoken by Peter in his first speech after Pentecost: “Repent...then for the forgiveness of your sins.”8 And at the same time we want to repeat once more to all the nations of the earth the invitation of Paul to the Gentiles of Lystra: “Turn...to the living God.”9 CHAPTER I The Church—which during the council examined with greater attention its relations not only with the separated brethren but also with non-Christian religions—has noted with joy that almost everywhere and at all times penitence has held a place of great importance, since it is closely linked with the intimate sense of religion which pervades the life of most ancient peoples as well as with the more advanced expressions of the great religions connected with the progress of culture.10 In the Old Testament the religious sense of penitence is revealed with even greater richness. Even though man generally has recourse to it in the aftermath of sin to placate the wrath of God,11 or on the occasion of grave calamities,12 or when special dangers are imminent,13 or in any case to obtain benefits from the Lord,14 we can nevertheless establish that external penitential practices are accompanied by an inner attitude of “conversion,” that is to say of condemnation of and detachment from sin and of striving toward God.15 One goes without food or gives away his property (fasting is generally accompanied not only by prayer but also by alms16) even after sins have been forgiven and independently of a request for graces. One fasts or applies physical discipline to “chastise one’s own soul,”17 to “humble oneself in the sight of his own God,”18 to “turn one’s face toward Jehovah,”19 to “dis-
AB/PATRICK GRAY NO FLICKR
Editor’s note: Pope Paul VI wrote the apostolic constitution Paenitemini, (“Repent”) in 1966. In it, the Holy Father emphasizes the necessity of penance for the Church and her members, even broadening the approved ways the Church calls her members to penance. Quoting Jesus at the beginning St. Mark’s Gospel, Paul VI begins, “Be converted and believe in the Gospel!” In a statement that still resonates with us more than 50 years later, the Holy Father challenges us to confess our sins and embrace the grace that flows from this sacrament. Many do not know of this papal document’s existence and import; some who have read the letter may have forgotten much of its content and relevance today. As the penitential season of Lent is upon us, Pope Paul VI’s Paenitemini makes more than suitable reading. _________________ Apostolic Constitution Paenitemini Of The Supreme Pontiff Paul VI On Fast and Abstinence February 17, 1966 Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV does penance at Canossa Castle in 1077 after having been excommunicated by Pope Gregory VII over a matter of investing bishops.
pose oneself to prayer,”20 to “understand” more intimately the things which are divine,21 or to prepare oneself for the encounter with God.22 Penance therefore—already in the Old Testament— is a religious, personal act which has as its aim love and surrender to God: fasting for the sake of God, not for one’s own self.23 Such it must remain also in the various penitential rites sanctioned by law. When this is not verified, the Lord is displeased with His people: “Today you have not fasted in a way which will make your voice heard on high.... Rend your heart and not your garments, and return to the Lord your God.”24 The social aspect of penitence is not lacking in the Old Testament. In fact, the penitential liturgies of the Old Covenant are not only a collective awareness of sin but constitute in reality a condition for belonging to the people of God.25 We can further establish that penitence was represented even before Christ as a means and a sign of perfection and sanctity. Judith,26 Daniel27, the prophetess Anna and many other elect souls served God day and night with fasting and prayers,28 and with joy and cheerfulness.29 Finally, we find among the just ones of the Old Testament those who offered themselves to satisfy with their own personal penitence for the sins of the community. This is what Moses did in the 40 days when he fasted to placate the Lord for the guilt of his unfaithful people.30 This above all is how the character of the Servant of Jehovah is presented, “who took on our infirmities” and in whom “the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all.”31 All this, however, was but a foreshadowing of things to come.32 Penitence—required by the inner life, confirmed by the religious experience of mankind and the object of particular precept of divine revelation—assumes “in Christ and the Church” new dimensions infinitely broader and more profound. Christ, who always practiced in His life what He preached, before beginning His ministry spent 40 days and 40 nights in prayer and fasting, and began His public mission with the joyful message: “The kingdom of God is at hand.” To this He added the command: “Repent and believe in the Gospel.”33 These words constitute, in a way, a compendium of the whole Christian life. The kingdom of God announced by Christ can be entered only by a “change of heart” (“metanoia”) that is to say through that intimate and total change and renewal of the entire man—of all his opinions, judgments and decisions—which takes place in him in the light of the sanctity and charity of God, the sanctity and charity which were manifested to us in the Son and communicated fully.34 The invitation of the Son to “metanoia” becomes all the more inescapable inasmuch as He not only preaches it but Himself offers an example. Christ, in fact, is the supreme model for those doing penance. He willed to suffer punishment for sins which were not His but those of others.35 In the presence of Christ, man is illumined with a new light and consequently recognizes the holiness of God and the gravity of sin.36 Through the word of Christ a message is transmitted to him which invites him to conversion and grants forgiveness of sins. These gifts he fully attains in baptism. This sacrament, in fact, configures him to the passion, death and resurrection of the Lord,37 and places the whole future of the life of the bap-
tized under the seal of this mystery. Therefore, following the Master, every Christian must renounce himself, take up his own cross and participate in the sufferings of Christ. Thus transformed into the image of Christ’s death, he is made capable of meditating on the glory of the resurrection.38 Furthermore, following the Master, he can no longer live for himself,39 but must live for Him who loves him and gave Himself for him.40 He will also have to live for his brethren, completing “in his flesh that which is lacking in the sufferings of Christ...for in the benefit of his body, which is the church.”41 In addition, since the Church is closely linked to Christ, the penitence of the individual Christian also has an intimate relationship of its own with the whole ecclesial community. In fact, not only does he receive in the bosom of the Church through baptism the fundamental gift of “metanoia,” but this gift is restored and reinvigorated in those members of the Body of Christ who have fallen into sin through the sacrament of penance. “Those who approach the sacrament of penance receive from the mercy of God forgiveness for offenses committed against Him and at the same time become reconciled with the Church on which they have inflicted a wound by sinning, and the Church cooperates in their conversion with charity, example and prayer.”42 And in the Church, finally, the little acts of penitence imposed each time in the sacrament become a form of participation in a special way in the infinite expiation of Christ to join to the sacramental satisfaction itself every other action he performs, his every suffering and sorrow.43 Thus the task of bearing in his body and soul the death of the Lord44 affects the whole life of the baptized person at every instant and in every aspect. CHAPTER II The preeminently interior and religious character of penitence and the new wondrous aspects which it assumes “in Christ and in the Church” neither excludes nor lessens in any way the external practice of this virtue, but on the contrary reaffirms its necessity with particular urgency45 and prompts the Church—always attentive to the signs of the times—to seek, beyond fast and abstinence,
MEMORIAL FOR Peter J. Hartwick, Jr. from Mr. and Mrs. Peter Hartwick Mrs. Dusca Nagy from her daughter
TO HONOR
Reverend George Rutler from Susan Pritchett
12
new expressions more suitable for the realization, according to the character of various epochs, of the precise goal of penitence. True penitence, however, cannot ever prescind from physical asceticism as well. Our whole being in fact, body and soul (indeed the whole of nature, even animals without reason, as Holy Scripture often points out),46 must participate actively in this religious act whereby the creature recognizes divine holiness and majesty. The necessity of the mortification of the flesh also stands clearly revealed if we consider the fragility of our nature, in which, since Adam’s sin, flesh and spirit have contrasting desires.47 This exercise of bodily mortification—far removed from any form of stoicism—does not imply a condemnation of the flesh which sons of God deign to assume.48 On the contrary, mortification aims at the “liberation”49 of man, who often finds himself, because of concupiscence, almost chained50 by his own senses. Through “corporal fasting”51 man regains strength and the “wound inflicted on the dignity of our nature by intemperance is cured by the medicine of a salutary abstinence.”52 Nevertheless, in the New Testament and in the history of the Church—although the duty of doing penance is motivated above all by participation in the sufferings of Christ—the necessity of an asceticism which chastises the body and brings it into subjection is affirmed with special insistence by the example of Christ Himself.53 Against the real and ever recurring danger of formalism and pharisaism, the Divine Master in the New Covenant openly condemned—and so have the Apostles, Fathers and supreme pontiffs—any form of penitence which is purely external. The intimate relationship which exists in penitence between the external act, inner conversion, prayer and works of charity is affirmed and widely developed in the liturgical texts and authors of every era.54 CHAPTER III Therefore the Church—while it reaffirms the primacy of the religious and supernatural values of penitence (values extremely suitable for restoring to the world today a sense of the presence of God and of His sovereignty over man and a sense of Christ and His salvation)55— invites everyone to accompany the inner conversion of the spirit with the voluntary exercise of external acts of penitence: A) It insists first of all that the virtue of penitence be exercised in persevering faithfulness to the duties of one’s state in life, in the acceptance of the difficulties arising from one’s work and from human coexistence, in a patient bearing of the trials of earthly life and of the utter insecurity which pervades it.56 B) Those members of the Church who are stricken by infirmities, illnesses, poverty or misfortunes, or who are persecuted for the love of justice, are invited to unite their sorrows to the suffering of Christ in such a way that they not only satisfy more thoroughly the precept of penitence but also obtain for the brethren a life of grace and for themselves that beatitude which is promised in the Gospel to those who suffer.57 C) The precept of penitence must be satisfied in a more perfect way by priests, who are more closely linked to Christ through sacred character, as well as by those who in order to follow more closely the abnegation of the Lord and to find an easier and more efficacious path to the perfection of charity practice the evangelical counsels.58 The Church, however, invites all Christians without distinction to respond to the divine precept of penitence by some voluntary act, apart from the renunciation imposed by the burdens of everyday life.59 To recall and urge all the faithful to the observance of the divine precept of penitence, the Apostolic See intends to reorganize penitential discipline with practices more suited to our times. It is up to the bishops—gathered in their episcopal conferences—to establish the norms which, in their pastoral solicitude and prudence, and with the direct knowledge they have of local conditions, they consider the most opportune and efficacious. The following, however is established: In the first place, Holy Mother Church, although it has always observed in a special way abstinence from meat and fasting, nevertheless wants to indicate in the traditional triad of “prayer—fasting—charity” the fundamental means of complying with the divine precepts of penitence. These means were the same throughout the centuries, but in our time there are special reasons whereby, according to the demands of various localities, it is necessary to inculcate some special form of penitence in preference to others.60 Therefore, where economic well-being is greater, so much more will the witness of asceticism have to be given in order that the sons of the Church may not be involved in the spirit of the “world,”61 and at the same time the witness of charity will have to be given to the brethren who suffer poverty
Adoremus Bulletin, March 2022 and hunger beyond any barrier of nation or continent.62 On the other hand, in countries where the standard of living is lower, it will be more pleasing to God the Father and more useful to the members of the Body of Christ if Christians—while they seek in every way to promote better social justice—offer their suffering in prayer to the Lord in close union with the Cross of Christ. Therefore, the Church, while preserving—where it can be more readily observed—the custom (observed for many centuries with canonical norms) of practicing penitence also through abstinence from meat and fasting, intends to ratify with its prescriptions other forms of penitence as well, provided that it seems opportune to episcopal conferences to replace the observance of fast and abstinence with exercises of prayer and works of charity. In order that all the faithful, however, may be united in a common celebration of penitence, the Apostolic See intends to establish certain penitential days and seasons63 chosen among those which in the course of the liturgical year are closer to the paschal mystery of Christ64 or might be required by the special needs of the ecclesial community.65
Therefore, the following is declared and established: I. 1. By divine law all the faithful are required to do penance. 2. The prescriptions of ecclesiastical law regarding penitence are totally reorganized according to the following norms: II. 1. The time of Lent preserves its penitential character. The days of penitence to be observed under obligation throughout the Church are all Fridays and Ash Wednesday, that is to say the first days of “Grande Quaresima” (Great Lent), according to the diversity of the rites. Their substantial observance binds gravely. 2. Apart from the faculties referred to in VI and VIII regarding the manner of fulfilling the precept of penitence on such days, abstinence is to be observed on every Friday which does not fall on a day of obligation, while abstinence and fast is to be observed on Ash Wednesday or, according to the various practices of the rites, on the first day of “Grande Quaresima” (Great Lent) and on Good Friday. III. 1. The law of abstinence forbids the use of meat, but not of eggs, the products of milk or condiments made of animal fat. 2. The law of fasting allows only one full meal a day, but does not prohibit taking some food in the morning and evening, observing—as far as quantity and quality are concerned—approved local custom. IV. To the law of abstinence those are bound who have completed their 14th year of age. To the law of fast those of the faithful are bound who have completed their 21st year and up until the beginning of their 60th year. [Editor’s note: Following the promulgation of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, the United States bishops lowered the fasting age from 21 to 18 (Canons 1252-3).] As regards those of a lesser age, pastors of souls and parents should see to it with particular care that they are educated to a true sense of penitence. [Numbers V-VIII, omitted here, discuss the rights and responsibilities of Eastern Churches and Bishops.] IX. 1. It is strongly desired that bishops and all pastors of souls, in addition to the more frequent use of the sacrament of penance, promote with zeal, particularly during the Lenten season, extraordinary practices of penitence aimed at expiation and impetration. 2. It is strongly recommended to all the faithful that they keep deeply rooted in their hearts a genuine Christian spirit of penitence to spur them to accomplish works of charity and penitence. X. 1. These prescriptions which, by way of exception, are promulgated by means of L’Osservatore Romano, become effective on Ash Wednesday of this year, that is to say on the 23rd of the present month. 2. Where particular privileges and indults have been in force until now—whether general or particular of any kind—“vacatio legis” [suspension of the law] for six months from the day of promulgation is to be regarded as granted. We desire that these norms and prescriptions for the present and future be established and effective notwithstanding—inasmuch as is necessary—apostolic constitutions and regulations issued by our predecessors and all other prescriptions, even if worthy of particular mention and revocation. Given at Rome, at St. Peter’s, February 17, 1966, the third year of our pontificate. PAUL VI
Giovanni Battista Montini reigned as Pope Paul VI from 1963 to his death in 1978. Succeeding Pope John XXIII, he continued the Second Vatican Council which he closed in 1965 and spent the remainder of his papacy implementing its numerous reforms within the Catholic Church. 1. Mark 1:15. 2. Cf. Dogmatic Constitution on the Nature of the Church (Second Vatican Council), no. 2, and no. 8; and Decree on the Lay Apostolate, no. 1. 3. Cf. Eph. 5:27. 4. Cf. Constitution on the Nature of the Church, no. 8; and Decree on Ecumenism, nos. 4, 7 and 8. 5. Cf. Constitution on the Liturgy, no. 110. 6. Cf. Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, throughout, but especially no. 40. 7. Cf. 1 Cor. 7:31; Rom. 12:2; Decree on Ecumenism, no. 6; Constitution on the Nature of the Church, nos. 8 and 9; Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, nos. 37, 39 and 93. 8. Acts 2:38. 9. Acts 14:14; Cf. Pope Paul VI’s speech to United Nations of Oct. 4, 1965: A.A.S. 57 (1965), p. 885. 10. Cf. Declaration on Church’s Relations with Non-Christian Religions, nos. 2 and 3. 11. Cf. 1 Sam. 7:6; 1 Kings 21:20-21, 27; Jer. 3:3, 7, 9; John 1:2; 3:4-5. 12. Cf. 1 Sam. 31:13; 2 Sam. 1:12; 3:35; Baruch 1:2, 5; Judith 20:25-26. 13. Cf. Judith 4:8, 12; 8:10-16; Esther 3:15; 4:1, 16; Psalms 34:13; 2 Chron. 20:3. 14. Cf. 1 Sam. 14:24; 2 Sam. 12:16, 22; Esd. 8:21. 15. In reference cited above, need for interior penitence is clearly illustrated: Cf. 1 Sam. 7:3; Jer. 36:6-7; Baruch 1:17-18; Judith 8:16- 17; John 3:8; Zach. 8:9, 21. 16. Cf. Is. 58:6-7; Tob. 12:8-9. 17. Cf. Levit. 16:31. 18. Cf. Dan. 10:12; Esd. 8:21. 19. Cf. Dan. 9:3. 20. Cf. ibid. 21. Cf. Dan. 10:12. 22. Cf. Exodus 34:28. 23. Cf. Zach. 7:5. 24. Is. 58:4; Joel 2:13. cf. Is. 58:3-7 throughout; cf. Amos 5 throughout; Is. 1:1320; Jer. 14:12; Joel 2:12-18; Zach. 1:4-14; Tobias 12:8; Psalms 50:18-19; etc. 25. Cf. Lev. 23:29. 26. Cf. Judith 8:6. 27. Cf. Dan. 10:3. 28. Cf. Luke 2:37; Eccles. 31:12, 17-19; 37:32-34. 29. Cf. Dan. 1:12, 15; Judith 8:6, 7; Matt. 6:17. 30. Cf. Deut. 9:9, 18; Exod. 24:18. 31. Cf. Is. 53:4-11. 32. Cf. Heb. 10:1. 33. Mark 1:15. 34. Cf. Heb. 1:2; Col. 1:19 and throughout; Eph. 1:23 and throughout. 35. Cf. St. Thomas, Summa Theol., III, q. XV, a. 1, ad. 5. 36. Cf. Luke 5:8 and 7:36-50. 37. Cf. Rom. 6:3-11; Col. 2:11-15; 5:1-4. 38. Cf. Phil. 3:10-11; Rom. 8:17. 39. Cf. Rom. 6:10; 14:8; 2 Cor. 5:15; Phil 1:21. 40. Gal. 2:20; cf. Constitution on the Nature of the Church, no. 7; also Gal. 4:19; Phil. 3:21; 2 Tim. 2:11; Eph. 2:6; Col. 2:12 etc.; Rom. 8:17. 41. Cf. Col. 1:24; Decree on Church’s Missionary Activity, no. 36, Decree on Seminaries, no. 2. 42. Cf. Constitution on the Nature of the Church, no. 11; James 5:14-16; Rom. 8:17; Col. 1:24; 2 Tim. 2:11-12; 1 Peter 4:13; Decree on Priestly Life and Ministry, nos. 5 and 6. 43. Cf. St. Thomas, Quaestiones Quodlib., III, q. XIII, a. 28. 44. Cf. 2 Cor. 4:10. 45. For example: a) with regard to priests, cf. Decree Priestly Ministry and Life, no. 16; b) regarding spouses, cf. Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, no. 49; also cf. same constitution, no. 52; cf. Pius XII, speech to cardinals archbishops, bishops, etc., of Nov. 2, 1950: A.A.S. 17 (1950), pp. 786-788; cf. Justin, Dialogue with Triphon, 141: 2-3 (MG 6: 797-799). 46. Cf. John 3:7-8. 47. Cf. Gal. 5:16-17; Rom. 7:23. 48. Cf. Roman Martyrology for the Vigil of Christmas; 1 Tim. 4:1-5; Phil. 4:8; Origen, Against Celsus 7:36 (MG 11:1472). 49. Cf. Lenten Liturgy, throughout; and footnote no. 53 of this document, part B. 50. Cf. Rom. 7:23. 51. Cf. Roman Missal, Preface for Lent: “corporali jejunio vitia comprimis, mentem elevas, virtutem largiris….” 52. Cf. ibid., Collect for Thursday after First Sunday of the Passion (Passion Sunday). 53. A) In the New Testament: 1) words and example of Christ: Matt. 17:20 (cf. Mark 9:28); Matt. 5:29-30; 11:21-24; 3:4; 11:7-11; and 4:2; Mark 1:13; Luke 4:12; cf. Matt. 8:18-22; 2) witness and doctrine of St. Paul: 1 Cor. 9:24-27; Gal. 5:16; 2 Cor. 6:5; ibid. 11:27; 3) In the Early Church: Acts 13:3; ibid. 14:22; etc. B) Among the Fathers: several references arranged according to order of time: Didache 1:4 (F. X. Funk, Patres Apostolici, ed. 2, Tubingen, 1901, 1: 2); Clement of Rome; 1 Cor. 7:4 and 8:5 (Funk 1:108-110); 2 Clement 16:4 (Funk 2:204); ibid. 8:1-3 (Funk 1:192- 194); Aristides, Apologia 15:9 (Goodspeed, Goettingen, 1914, 21); Hermas, Pastor, Sim. 5:1, 3-5 (Funk 1:530); cf. ibid. Sim. 7:2-5 (Funk 1:554); Tertullian, De Paenitentia 9 (ML 1:1243-1244); Tertullian, De Jejunio 17 (ML 2:978), Origen, Homeliae in Lev, Hom. 10:2 (MG 12:528); St. Athanasius, De Virginitate, 6 (MG 28:257); ibid., 7, 8 (MG 28:260, 261); Basil, Homeliae, Hom. 2:5 (MG 31:192); Ambrose, De Virginitate, 3:2, 5 (ML 16:221); idem, De Elia et Jejunio 2:2, 3:4, 8:22 and 10:33 (ML 14:698, 708); Jerome, Epistola 22:17 (ML 22:404); idem, Epistola 130:10 (ML 22: 1115); Augustine, Sermo 208:2 (ML 38:1045; idem, Epistola 211:8 (ML 33:960); Cassian, Collationes 21:13, 14, 17 (ML 49:1187); Nilus, De Octo Spiritibus Malitiae 1 (MG 79:1145); Diadochus Photicensis, Capita Centum de Perfectione Spirituali 47 (MG 65:1182); Leo the Great, Sermo 12:4 (ML 54:171); idem, Sermo 86:1 (ML 54:437-438); Leonine Sacramentary, Preface for Autumn (ML 55:112). 54. A) In the New Testament: Luke 18:12; cf. Matt. 6:16-18 and 15:11; Hebrews 13:9; Romans 14:15-23. B) Among the Fathers: cf. footnote no. 53, B. 55. Cf. Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, nos. 10 and 41. 56. Constitution on the Nature of the Church, nos. 34, 36 and 41; cf. Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, no. 4. 57. Ibid., no. 41. 58. Cf. Decree on Priestly Ministry and Life, nos. 12, 13, 16 and 17; Constitution on the Nature of the Church, no. 41; Decree on Missionary Activity of the Church, no. 24; Constitution on the Nature of the Church, no. 42; Decree on Renovation of the Religious Life, nos. 7, 12, 13, 14 and 25; Decree on Seminaries, nos. 2, 8 and 9. 59. Cf. Constitution on the Nature of the Church, no. 42; Constitution on the Liturgy, nos. 9, 12 and 104. 60. Cf. Ibid., no. 110. 61. Cf. Romans 12:2; Mark 2:19; Matt. 9:15; Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, no. 37. 62. Cf. 1 Cor. 16:1; Romans 15:26-28; Gal. 2:10; 2 Cor. 8:9; Acts 24:17; Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, no. 88. 63. Cf. Constitution on the Liturgy, no. 105. 64. Cf. Ibid., no. 107. Regarding the Lenten season as a preparation for celebrating the Paschal Mystery, cf. ibid., no. 109. Concerning the celebration of the Paschal Mystery each week, cf. ibid., no. 102 and 106; Eusebius, De Solemnitate Paschali, 12 (MG 24:705); idem, ibid., no. 7 (MG 24:701); John Chrysostom, In Epistola I ad Tim. 5:3 (MG 62:529-530). 65. Cf. vg. in Acts 13:1-4 (on fasting of the Antioch Church, when Paul and Barnabas were sent to announce the Gospel to the Gentiles).