Category: Liturgy

Posted on

To Re-Propose Rather than to Impose – A Reflection on The Latin Mass and Traditional Forms

I had the privilege of being on the Catholic Answers Live radio program on Monday. The topic was the Traditional Latin Mass. The Host, Patrick Coffin, presents an excellent show each night and is heard on most Catholic radio stations 6-8 pm Eastern Time.

You can hear the whole, hour long interview here: Catholic Answers Live – The Latin Mass.

I would like to mention a few of the topics that came up in the show either by Mr. Coffin, or by callers.

Mark your Calendar – And while we discuss some Liturgical topics please also mark your calendar for a splendid celebration of a Pontifical Solemn High Mass at the High Altar of the Great Upper Church of the Basilica of the Immaculate Conception here in Washington DC. It will Take place Saturday, April 9, 2011 at 1:00pm. The Celebrant will be Archbishop Joseph DiNoia, OP, Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Liturgy. Here’s a flyer you can print: Pontifical Mass Flyer. The picture from last year’s Mass is to upper right of this post.

Among the issues discussed in the radio interview are some of these:

1. To Re-propose tradition rather than to impose – Several of the questions surrounded the issue of how far to go with diversity in the liturgy and what can be done to root the Church more deeply in traditional forms of the liturgy. In this matter  I have found that Pope Benedict has taken an approach wherein he has chosen to re-propose traditional elements, and the extraordinary form of the Mass rather than to impose them.

There are some in more traditional circles that would like him to use a heavier hand and simply abolish what they consider less desirable things such as modern instruments, Mass facing the people, communion in the hand, and so forth. There are others who fear that some of the freedoms they now enjoy in the ordinary form of the Mass will be simply taken away by the Pope.

But in all this Pope Benedict has a pastor’s heart. He has written clearly of his concerns over certain trends in modern liturgical practice. However, it would seem that his approach has been to re-propose more traditional practices and allow them greater room in the Church. In so doing he signals bishops and priests that they should be freer make use of such options. With the faithful more widely exposed to traditional elements, their beauty and value can be appreciated anew by the wider Church, and they will also excerpt increasing influence. But this will be done in an organic way that does not shock some of the faithful or provoke hostile reaction.

I must say that I have come to appreciate the value of this approach. As a diocesan priest I minister to a wide variety of the faithful, many of whom would not easily understand or accept a sudden imposition of the things preferred by Catholics of a more traditional bent. Mass said, ad orientem  is appealing to me for a wide variety of reasons. But many are not ready for a shift back. The Pope has modeled the option in the Sistine Chapel for the new Mass. I have made occasional use of this option at my own parish by using side altars for smaller Masses. The wider use of the extraordinary form in my own parish and throughout the world will also reacquaint the faithful with this posture. Little by little (“brick by brick,” shall we say) there will be a greater comfort with this eastward orientation. The same can be said for the use of Latin, Gregorian Chant having pride of place, communion on the tongue, kneeling for communion and the like. If the Pope were merely to impose such things we might find that pastoral harm was caused and open dissent might also be a problem.

2.  The silence of the Traditional Latin Mass was praised but also raised some questions. It is obviously harder for the faith to follow the Mass when much of it is whispered. Indeed, it had often been the practice of the faithful to quietly pray rosaries while Mass was going on, or say private prayers. The bells would signal them as to important moments requiring their attention. By the late 1940s and into the 1950s there was strong encouragement made for the faithful to use missals and follow along with the Mass while reading vernacular translations. The widely viewed black and white video of a Solemn High Latin Mass narrated by Fulton Sheen, (HERE),  was an attempt to teach the faithful more about the Mass and get them to use their hand missals. There were also experiments with using microphones on the altar, and beginning “dialogue” Masses wherein the faithful were encouraged to make the responses along with the server. So, while the silence of the Traditional Latin Mass is prayerful for some, others find it challenging to follow along. It takes a while to learn the visual cues as to where the priest is in the Mass and be able to follow. Some who experience this quietness are even provoked to anger that they are so “left out” of the Mass. Hence there are many different reactions to it.

3. The use of a sacred language. Some are bewildered by the use of a language that “no one understands” for the the Mass. But to this there are three answers.

First, the prayers are directed to God who understands Latin perfectly well. There is a tendency in modern liturgy to think its “all about me.” But the use of Latin makes it very clear we are directing our prayer to God, rather than to the edification of the congregation per se.

Second, liturgical Latin is not that hard and most of the faith have a familiarity with many of the responses. Some of the collects and other changeable prayers were obviously less well understood. But the English translation is readily available with the use of a hand missal.

Third, the use of a “sacred” language is not uncommon in human history. Notably, at the time of Jesus, the people spoke Aramaic in the streets and houses, but Hebrew in the synagogue and temple. There is no evidence that Jesus ever railed against such a practice and he, himself, read the Hebrew Scriptures in the synagogue. He had many concerns he expressed over the elitist and scornful religious leaders of his day and over certain religious practices. But the use of a sacred language in the liturgy was not among his listed concerns.

Balance – The use of the vernacular has many benefits, to be sure. But the loss of a common liturgical language is sad. Greater familiarity with the “mother tongue” of the Roman Catholic Church should be encouraged. Those who call the use of Latin “wrong” go too far. Latin can and should have a more frequent use than it currently does while not neglecting to appreciate the value that the vernacular has also brought.

4. One caller had an interesting question about the pronunciation of  Latin. He had been trained in classical Latin, and found that Church Latin sounds more like Italian. I got the sense that this grated on his ears! To be fair, the classical method of pronunciation has scholarly roots, but to me it sounds like Castilian Spanish. Theories abound about how the ancient Romans pronounced Latin. What puzzles me is why anyone thinks there was one way it was pronounced. Latin was spoken over a wide area from one end of the Mediterranean to the other, and north into Europe, later. Just as here in America, English is spoken with a wide variety of accents and pronunciation, surely Latin must also have had a wide variety of “sounds.” Church Latin simply took up the accent common in and around Rome. No doubt it does sound like Italian,  for the Italians are descendants of the Romans who lived in that region.

5. Problems in the Past – When I learned the Traditional Latin Mass back in the mid 1980s I interviewed a number of older priests and wondered why their generation had discarded something I thought was so beautiful. Most of them told me that in fact the Mass was often poorly celebrated. The Mass was hurried, the Latin was mumbled, the genuflections were half-hearted. There was great pressure to get things done. Low Mass on a  Sunday morning could be as short as 18 minutes. The more beautiful sung forms were rarely done and choirs had little skill when it came to executing the Chants.

There were exceptional parishes where things were done with greater solemnity and care, but the older guys told me the big picture was pretty bleak. Thus most welcomed the changes and found that the English imposed on them a more careful celebration in terms of how they said the prayers. It would seem therefore, before we idealize the past, we ought to have some sobriety that certain lacks and abuses may have given rise to the felt need for reform.

That said, we have tragically suffered and whole new series of abuses and problems. And the hoped for reforms were dashed on the rocks by a cultural storm that was blowing through the West. Continuity was lost and most have experienced a great tearing away from tradition and the Mass that the saints knew. With God’s grace we will find our way back to a greater continuity as the Pope re-proposes the tradition and seeks to knit together what is currently good with what has been lost.

Listen to the show if you get a chance, the link is above.

Plan as well to come the Pontifical Solemn High Mass here in DC if you live here or nearby. You won’t regret that you did. There is just nothing more splendid than a Solemn High Pontifical Mass. Archbishop DiNoia is also a fine homilist. Last year’s Mass was a great blessing with Bishop Slattery who is also a fine homilist. Here is a video clip of the day and info on how you can order the DVD if you so wish.

Posted on

Compare and Contrast: Super Bowl and the Mass, Football and Faith

I write to you in the midst of a semi-“religious” event: the Super Bowl. People have donned their sacred attire and are shouting praises. The game really lit up toward the end of the second half and again in the last quarter. I enjoy football, but see it a lot less since I am a priest and tend to be busy on Sundays! Yet, I remain quite fascinated at how passionate and dedicated many Americans are to the game and their team. Would that more Catholics had the same dedication to the Mass and the Church that true football fans have for the game. (Fan is short for fanatic). Would too that all priests and religious had the same sacrificial dedication that foot ball players have.

Consider for a moment the players. They spend years coming up through a system of high school, college and professional levels. Priest and religious do as well. Football players give their all to the game. Their whole life is centered on it. Exhausting, year-long practices, weight lifting and punishing games. They risk injury, and suffer many pains, all for the game. Do priests and religious show the same dedication and are they willing to make the same kind of sacrifices for Jesus? Will they risk injury and attack? I pray we will and do, but I wonder. True, we are not paid multi-millions, but we don’t do it for the money. Are we as dedicated and sacrificial?

And what of the faithful? So many Catholics are dedicated to the game. They even come to Church wearing the jersey of their team and someone else’s name on their back! Let’s compare and contrast some of the aspects of football and see if the same kind of thrill and dedication are exhibited to the Lord, the Mass and the Church.

Disclaimer – I write a lot of this “tongue in cheek.” I am not brooding over this, just observing. I am also using a technique known as hyperbole. Hyperbole uses exaggeration to make a point. For example the phrase, “There must have been a million people there” is an exaggeration that is not literally true but does convey the truth that a lot of people were present. Please take these comparisons in the light-hearted manner they are intended.

That said, the point remains a serious one: that we often exhibit unusual priorities when it comes to worldly vs. spiritual matters. We do well to humorously look at ourselves in order to ask God for a greater passion for what matters most. Football is about a bag full of air going up and down a field. Faith is about our eternal destiny.

Consider the following Super Bowl behaviors and contrast them to Mass and the faith:

  • Super Bowl – Many fans prepare for weeks for the game. They follow playoffs, review stats, listen to commentaries and predictions. They are “up on the game.” At bare minimum they know who is playing, and usually a great deal more. They often plan parties and invite others to join them. They discuss with fellow fans their wishes and the likely outcome of the game. They often boast of their team and loudly proclaim their intent to watch the game and see their team win! They anticipate the game and joyfully look forward to it.
  • Mass – Little preparation is evident by most who go to Mass. Generally they do not review the readings or spiritually prepare by frequent confession. Fasting is gone from the Catholic landscape. In fact ¾ of Catholics don’t go to Mass at all. Many who do, don’t joyfully anticipate it. Many even dread going and try to fit it in at the most convenient time and hope for the shortest Mass. This is true even of the great feasts like Christmas and Easter, Holy Week etc. Most Catholics do not speak to others of going to Mass or invite them to join them.
  • Super Bowl – Many wear special clothes for the occasion, even at general football games. Many wear jerseys, hats with insignia and other “sacred” apparel. Some even paint their faces and bodies.
  • Mass – Sacred apparel for Mass is all but gone. Little special attire or care is given to display one’s faith through clothing or other marks of faith. Sunday clothes were once special. Women wore hats and veils, men wore suits and ties and would never dream of wearing a hat into Church. But that is gone. Come as you are seems the only rule.
  • Super Bowl – People who go to games often spend hundreds of dollars for game tickets. Those who are fortunate enough to go to the actual Super Bowl spend many thousands, gladly. Those who stay home often spend a lot of time and money on parties.
  • Mass – Most Catholics give on average 5-7 Dollars per week in the collection plate. Many are resentful when the priest speaks of money.
  • Super Bowl – Most fans arrive early for the game. They do so eagerly. Many, at regular games, have tailgate parties. At home, fans joyfully anticipate the kick off and spend time in preparatory rites such as parties, beer etc. Even ordinary games find the fans watching pre-game shows and gathering well before the kick-off.
  • Mass – Many Catholics time their arrival for just before the Mass. Many, as high as 50%, arrive late. The thought of arriving early to pray or greet fellow worshippers is generally not something that is planned for.
  • Super Bowl – People LOVE the game. They are enthusiastic, they shout, cheer, are focused and interested in each play. They are passionate, alive and celebratory. They also care a great deal, exhibiting joy at good plays, sorrow at bad ones. They are alive, exhilarated, expressive and passionately care about what is happening on the field.
  • Mass – Many look bored at Mass. In many ways the expressions remind more of a funeral than of a resurrected Lord. Rather than joyful faces, it looks like everyone just sucked a lemon: bored believers, distracted disciples, frozen chosen. One finds exceptions in Black Parishes, charismatic Masses, and some Latino parishes. But overall little joy or even interest is evident. It is true many would not think of loud cheers etc as proper for Church, but even a little joy and displayed interest would be a vast improvement.
  • Super Bowl – Many sing team songs. Here in Washington we sing: Hail to the Redskins, Hail victory! Braves on the warpath! Fight for ole DC!
  • Mass – Most Catholics don’t sing.
  • Super Bowl – Even a normal football game goes four hours including the pre and post-game show. Towards the end of a half the game is intentionally slowed down since incomplete passes stop the clock etc. Fans gladly accept this time frame and are even happy and excited when the game goes into overtime.
  • Mass – Frustration and even anger are evident in many of the faithful  if Mass begins to extend past 45 minutes. People even begin to walk out. Many leave after communion even if the Mass is on time.
  • Super Bowl – Fans understand and accept the place of rules and expect them to be followed. Often they angry when they are broken or when penalties are missed. They respect the role of the referee and line judges and, even if they are unhappy they accept the finality of their judgments. They seem to understand that a recognized and final authority is necessary for the existence of the game.
  • Mass – Some Catholics resent rules and routinely break them or support those who do. They also resent Church authorities who might “throw a penalty flag” or assess a penalty or any sort. Often do not respect Bishops or the authority of the Church. Many refuse to accept that recognized and final authority is necessary for the existence of the Church. Many Catholics resent pointed sermons at Mass where the priest speaks clearly on moral topics. Praise God, many Catholics are faithful and respect Church authority, sadly though others do not.
  • Super Bowl – Many who go to any football game endure rather uncomfortable conditions for the privilege. Hard seats, freezing cold, pouring rain. Often the game is hard to see and the sound system is full of echoes. Still the stadium is full and few fans complain.
  • Mass – Many complain readily at any inconvenience or discomfort. It’s too hot, too cold, the Mass times aren’t perfectly to my liking. Why aren’t the pews cushioned (hard to keep clean that’s why). Why wasn’t the walk to my usual door shoveled of snow? When will the sound system be better, why do they ask me to move to the front in an empty Church? Etc.

OK, enough. Remember I use hyperbole here and intend this in a light-hearted manner. We people are funny, and what we get excited about is often humorous. Truth is, people love their football. And this one point is serious: would that we who believe were as passionate as football fans. We need to work at this at two levels.

Clergy and Church leaders need to work very hard to ensure that the liturgy of the Church is all it should be. Quality, sacred music, good preaching, devout and pious celebration are essential. Perfunctory, hurried liturgy with little attention to detail does not inspire.

The faithful too must realize more essentially what the Mass really is and ask God to anoint them with a powerful and pious awareness of the presence and ministry of Jesus Christ. They must ask for a joy and a zeal that will be manifest on their faces, in their deeds, in their dedication.

Enjoy this video by Fr. Barron who also uses a sports analogy.

Posted on

Veils Again – Colombo Cathedral Mandates the Use of Veil For Women

From Sri Lanka comes the following article:

Priests at St Lucia’s Cathedral in Colombo are insisting that young women cover their heads while at Mass. The move is part of a drive to have churchgoers dress appropriately during religious ceremonies.

Many Catholics have complained that churchgoers in Colombo turn up for services in short skirts, halter tops, low cut blouses and shorts. In a recent Sunday homily, Father John Paul Vinoth, ….a priest at the cathedral, said that modest dressing would help create an atmosphere that is more “conducive to a spiritual experience.”…..

“Modest dress is beginning to disappear,” said Father Anthony Victor Sosai, who is also vicar general of Mannar diocese….. noting that Hindu, Buddhist and Muslim places of worship have enforced a strict dress code for centuries.

Laypeople have also expressed concern over declining dress standards.

These are excerpts, the full article can be found HERE

[N.B. I am suffering from a rather bad stomach virus and all the unpleasantries that go with it. I hope you won’t mind if I recycle an old, but popular post on the issue of women and veils.  Perhaps some newer readers to the blog have never seen it. I should be back in shape tomorrow if this is one of those 24 hour things. ]

This blog post is not meant to be a directive discussion about what should be done. Rather an informative discussion about the meaning of head coverings for women in the past and how such customs might be interpreted now. We are not in the realm of liturgical law here just preference and custom.

What I’d like to do is to try and understand the meaning and purpose of a custom that, up until rather recently was quite widespread in the Western Church. The picture at the right was taken by LIFE Magazine in the early 1960s.

With the more frequent celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass, the use of the veil is also becoming more common. But even at the Latin Masses I celebrate, women exhibit diversity in this matter. Some wear the longer veil (mantilla) others a short veil. Others wear hats. Still others wear no head covering at all.

History – the wearing of a veil or hat for women seems to have been a fairly consistent practice in the Church in the West until fairly recently. Practices in the Eastern and Orthodox Churches have varied. Protestant denominations also show a wide diversity in this matter. The 1917 Code of Canon Law in the Catholic Church mandated that women wear a veil or head covering. Prior to 1917 there was no universal Law but it was customary in most places for women to wear some sort of head covering. The 1983 Code of Canon Law made no mention of this requirement and by the 1980s most women, at least here in America, had ceased to wear veils or hats anyway. Currently there is no binding rule and the custom in most places is no head covering at all.

Scripture – In Biblical Times women generally wore veils in any public setting and this would include the Synagogue. The clearest New Testament reference to women veiling or covering their head is from St. Paul:

But I want you to know that Christ is the head of every man, and a husband the head of his wife, and God the head of Christ. Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covered brings shame upon his head. But any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled brings shame upon her head, for it is one and the same thing as if she had had her head shaved. For if a woman does not have her head veiled, she may as well have her hair cut off. But if it is shameful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should wear a veil. A man, on the other hand, should not cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; nor was man created for woman, but woman for man; for this reason a woman should have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels. Woman is not independent of man or man of woman in the Lord. For just as woman came from man, so man is born of woman; but all things are from God. Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head unveiled? Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears his hair long it is a disgrace to him, whereas if a woman has long hair it is her glory, because long hair has been given (her) for a covering? But if anyone is inclined to be argumentative, we do not have such a custom, nor do the churches of God. (1 Cor 11:1-11)

This is clearly a complicated passage and has some unusual references. Paul seems to set forth four arguments as to why a woman should wear a veil.

1. Argument 1 – Paul clearly sees the veil a woman wears as a sign of her submission to her husband. He also seems to link it to modesty since his references to a woman’s hair cut short were references to the way prostitutes wore their hair and his reference to a shaved head was the punishment due an adultress. No matter how you look at it such arguments aren’t going to encourage a lot of women to wear a veil today. It is a true fact that the Scriptures consistently teach that a wife is to be submitted to her husband. I cannot and will not deny what God’s word says even though it is unpopular. However I will say that the same texts that tell a woman to be submitted tell the husband to have a great and abiding love for his wife. I have blogged on this “difficult” teaching on marriage elsewhere and would encourage you to read that blog post if you’re troubled or bothered by the submission texts. It is here:

2. Argument 2 – Regarding the Angels– Paul also sees a reason for women to wear veils “because of the angels.” This is a difficult reference to understand. There are numerous explanations I have read over the years. One of the less convincing ones is that the angels are somehow distracted by a woman’s beauty. Now the clergy might be 🙂 but it just doesn’t seem likely to me that the angels would have this problem. I think the more convincing argument is that St. Paul has Isaiah in mind who wrote: I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne, with the train of his garment filling the temple. Seraphim were stationed above; each of them had six wings: with two they veiled their faces, with two they veiled their feet, and with two they hovered aloft.(Is 6:2-3). Hence the idea seems to be that since the angels veil their faces (heads) it is fitting for women to do the same. But then the question, why not a man too? And here also Paul supplies an aswer that is “difficult” for modern ears: A man, on the other hand, should not cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man. In other words a man shares God’s glory immediately whereas a woman does as well but derivatively for she was formed from Adam’s wounded side. Alas this argument too will not likely cause a run on veil sales.

3. Argument 3 – The argument from “nature” – In effect Paul argues that since nature itself veils a woman with long hair and this is her glory that this also argues for her covering her head in Church. What is not clear is that, if nature has already provided this covering, why then should she cover her covering? I want to take up this notion of glory in my conclusion.

4. Argument 4- The Argument from Custom– This argument is pretty straight-forward: Paul says it is customary for a woman to cover her head when praying and, other things being equal, this custom should be followed. Paul goes on to assert that those who insist on doing differently are being “argumentative.” In effect he argues that for the sake of good order and to avoid controversy the custom should be followed. However, in calling it a custom, the text also seems to allow for a time like ours where the custom is different. Customs have stability but are not usually forever fixed. Hence, though some argue that wearing veils is a scriptural norm that women “must” follow today, the use of the word custom seems to permit of the possibility that it is not an unvarying norm we are dealing with here. Rather, it is a custom from that time that does not necessarily bind us today. This of course seems to be how the Church understands this text for she does not require head coverings for her daughters.

Conclusions –

1. That women are not required to wear veils today is clear in terms of Church Law. The argument that the Church is remiss in not requiring this of her daughters is hard to sustain when scriptures attach the word “custom” to the practice. There may be some local ordinances by bishop’s conferences but there is no universal Church law on this matter.

2. I will say however that I like veils and miss women wearing them. When I was a boy in the 1960s my mother and sister always wore their veils and so did all women in those days and I remember how modestly beautiful I found them to be. When I see women wear them today I have the same impression.

3. That said, a woman does not go to Church to please or impress me.

4. It is worth noting that a man is still forbidden to wear a hat in Church. If I see it I go to him and ask him to remove it. There a partial exception to the clergy who are permitted to wear birettas and to bishops who are to wear the miter. However, there are strict rules in this regard that any head cover is to be removed when they go to the altar. Hence, for men, the rule, or shall we say the custom, has not changed.

5. This leads me then to a possible understanding of the wearing of the veil for women and the uncovered head for the men that may be more useful to our times. Let’s call it The Argument from Humility.

For both men and women, humility before God is the real point of these customs. In the ancient world as now, women gloried in their hair and often gave great attention to it. St. Paul above, speaks of a woman’s hair as her glory. As a man I am not unappreciative of this glory. Women do wonderful things with their hair. As such their hair is part of their glory and, as St. Paul says it seems to suggest above it is appropriate to cover our glory before the presence of God.

As for men, in the ancient world and to some lesser extent now, hats often signified rank and membership. As such men displayed their rank and membership in organizations with pride in the hats they wore. Hence Paul tells them to uncover their heads and leave their worldly glories aside when coming before God. Today men still do some of this (esp. in the military) but men wear less hats in general. But when they do they are often boasting of allegiances to sports teams and the like. Likewise, some men who belong to fraternal organizations such as the various Catholic Knights groups often display ranks on their hats. We clergy do this as well to some extent with different color poms on birettas etc. Paul encourages all this to be left aside in Church. As for the clergy, though we may enter the Church with these ranked hats and insignia, we are to cast them aside when we go to the altar. Knights organizations are also directed to set down their hats when the Eucharistic prayer begins.

I do not advance this argument from humility to say women ought to cover their heads, for I would not require what the Church does not. But I offer the line of reasoning as a way to understand veiling in a way that is respectful of the modern setting, IF a woman chooses to use the veil. Since this is just a matter of custom then we are not necessarily required to understand its meaning in exactly the way St. Paul describes. Submission is biblical but it need not be the reason for the veil. Humility before God seems a more workable understanding especially since it can be seen to apply to both men and women in the way I have tried to set it forth.

There are an amazing number of styles when it comes to veils and mantillas: Mantillas online

This video gives some other reasons why a woman might wear a veil. I think it does a pretty good job of showing some of the traditions down through the centuries. However I think the video strays from what I have presented here in that it seems to indicate that women ought to wear the veil and that it is a matter of obedience. I do not think that is what the Church teaches in this regard. There can be many good reasons to wear the veil but I don’t think we can argue that obedience to a requirement is one of them.

Posted on

Curvatus in Se: On the Inward Focus of Modern Liturgy and On Rediscovering the True Source of Our Unity

St. Augustine described the fundamental ailment of the human person when he described man as curvatus in se (turned in upon himself). St. Augustine had the individual in mind but I think communities can also turn in upon themselves.

Indeed, we have been through a difficult period of this sort in the Church, especially in regard to the way we celebrate the Liturgy, where the fundamental premise of unity seems to have become highly anthropocentric. That is to say we have understood the source of our unity to be primarily ourselves, rather than God. We may not have formally taught this,  but it is implicit in many of things we have done. I have remarked on this in another post over a year ago which you can read here:   Anthropocentric Attitudes  But allow just a few examples from Church life to illustrate.

1. The Tabernacle, once invariably at the center of our churches, was placed to the side or in some chapel. It was almost as if Jesus was in the way, somehow, of what we wanted to accomplish in the Mass. Increasingly what it seems our focus shifted to was our very selves. The principle of unity was thus to be found in us.

2. The Linear and cruciform orientation of the church building gave way to the fan shaped and even circular buildings of the past forty years. Again the message seems to be that we should look at each other, and the main goal  seems to be that we be able to see each other’s faces. It would be this that would enhance and create greater unity. Hence anything like tabernacles, candles, crosses, even altars that blocked  the view of others was to be eliminated. The unity was to be found within the assembly and by a physically inward arrangement free of any obstacles.

3. Thus architectural  minimalism became essential since the people and their ability to see each other and thus find unity were the main point. Large impressive altars, statues, high ceilings etc., anything that tended to draw attention away from others or bock the view of others, was to be removed. Somehow these outside and “distracting” objects, even if they were images of our Lord, offended against unity which was to be found within the “gathered” Church.  I remember rather humorously a now deceased liturgist from the 1970s, (Eugene Walsh), coming to our parish and telling us that the altar should be no bigger than a night stand or side table and that the priest should never stand behind anything. Even our rather radical pastor at that time thought that was going a bit too far! The altar stayed.

4. The priest must face the people at all times. The ancient and common orientation of priest and people in one direction, all looking outward toward Christ, was replaced with an inward focus, a circle. This was said to create and emphasize unity in the gathered assembly. The principle of unity was within, among the humans gathered.

5. Self-congratulatory salutations abound. We are endlessly impressed and fascinated by what we are doing and who is doing it. At large parish masses announcements and congratulatory accolades for musicians, visitors, youth et al. may last longer than the homily or Eucharistic prayer. This is seen as affirming and community-building and thus, once again, the impression is created that the we are the main point and that our unity and gifts flow from us, and exist for us. That the worship of God should be the main point  seems to many to be a downer or a distraction.

Now community is an essential partof who we are and why we are at Church. We do not come to Mass as a purely private moment with God and the Church is not a private oratory. Neither is this a question of the old versus the new Mass, for many of these trends set up wel before the missal of 1970. But in our attempt to emphasize the important and essential communal dimension of the liturgy,  it seems we may have over-corrected. It also seems that we have set up a false dichotomy wherein focusing on God, on the vertical and outward dimension of liturgy, is necessarily to offend against the human and communal dimension of the Mass.

Not only is this dichotomy false but it also destroys the very unity it clams to serve. For, if we do not communally focus on the Lord, we have no true unity. It may be argued that there is some vaguely human sort of unity, but it really no different that the unity that exists among the members of a bowling league. And even the members of a bowling league know that at some point it is important to focus on the act of bowling rather than merely on each other. Something outside themselves (i.e. bowling) ultimately unites them.

It is the Lord who unites us – Hence in the Church and in the Liturgy we must resist the false dichotomy of pitting the focus on the Lord against the focus on ourselves. There really is only one focus, the Lord. And our common focus on him unites us. He and his grace are the source of our unity. This will not exclude our unity with each other, but enhance and deepen it. This of course seems an untenable thought to those who see unity as essentially a human work, rather than a mystical or divine one.  But ultimately the only lasting unity for the Church is the unity God creates.

The Old Latin hymn, Ubi Caritas has this to say: congregavit nos in unum Christi amor  (The Love of Christ has gathered us in one). It will be noted that Amor Christi (the Love of Christ) is the subject of the verb congregavit (has gathered) and nos (us) is the direct object. That is to say, it is Christ who acts, and we who are acted upon. It is Christ who gathers and we who are gathered. The resulting unity is Christ’s work.

To focus on Christ, therefore, is to  focus on the very source of our unity.  Unity for  two really requires a third principle or person. Consider these images from Archbishop Fulton Sheen’s book Three to Get Married (TTGM):

Two glasses that are empty cannot fill up one another. There must be a fountain of water outside the glasses, in order that they may have communion with one another. It takes three to make love. (TTGM Kindle version Loc. 137-39)

Love of self without love of God is selfishness; love of neighbor without love of God embraces only those who are pleasing to us, not those who are hateful. One cannot tie two sticks together without something outside the sticks; one cannot bind the nations of the world together except by the recognition of a Law and a Person outside the nations themselves. Duality in love is extinction through the exhaustion of self-giving. Love is triune or it dies. (TTGM Kindle version Loc. 831-34)

Yes, there it is, the great paradox: the true source of our unity is outside ourselves. The inward focus of modern times in the Church has led to very divisive times in the Church. The more we seek to find our unity in a purely humanistic, inward focused manner, the more we have argued, divided and diminished. The great paradox is that the more we look up and out, the greater our unity can be. It is like a man pointing to a wonder in the sky and the crowd around him also looks up to marvel. And in the shared experience of something outside themselves, they find greater unity than before he pointed out and up.

 Consider too this image from Sheen:

 Imagine a large circle, and in the center of it, rays of light that spread out to the circumference. The light in the center is God; each of us is a ray. The closer the rays are to the center, the closer the rays are to one another. The closer we live to God, the closer we are bound to our neighbor; the farther we are from God, the farther we are from one another. (TTGM Kindle version Loc. 910-12)

Yes, it is a paradox, but like most paradoxes, it is true. The anthropocentric premise of unity in modern times has ultimately offended against unity. In the world we sought brotherhood,  and so, many, under a false notion of tolerance, kicked truth to the curb. We have not found brotherhood though, rather, extreme factions in our culture, strident demands and a battle of wills. For nothing outside us, such as truth, or God unites, we are left only to struggle for power. In the Church we sought community within. We turned inward to the merely human. And here too a battle of wills and tastes ensued. Liturgy more often divides than unites today, for in the current thinking, there is no one outside us to unite us: not God, not the Church, not tradition. What’s left is just us,  and unfortunately we are a disagreeable lot. The promise of community falls flat.

The true source of our unity must be discovered outward and upward. Outward and upward to God, outward to the wider community of the Church and the voice of the ancient community that tradition is. Congregavit nos in unum Christi amor!

I would like to finish with the words of Pope Benedict in his recent book The Light of the World. Here too he speaks with a clarity, that we have got to do a better job of getting outside ourselves if we are to find true liberation and unity in God:

Our preaching, our proclamation, really is one-sided, in that it is largely directed toward the creation of a better world, while hardly anyone talks any more about the other, truly better world. We need to examine our consciences on this point. Of course one has to meet one’s listeners halfway, one has to speak to them in terms of their own horizon. But at the same time our task is to open up this horizon, to broaden it, and to turn our gaze toward the ultimate. These things are hard to accept for people today and seem unreal to them. Instead, they want concrete answers for now, for the tribulations of everyday life. But these answers are incomplete so long as they don’t convey the sense and the interior realization that I am more than this material life, that there is a judgment, and that grace and eternity exist. By the same token, we also need to find new words and new means to enable people to break through the sound barrier of finitude. (Pope Benedict XVI Light of the World Kindle Edition Loc 2271-78)

Onward, outward, upward!

Posted on

On Time Warps and Missing Feasts: Puzzling Over the Confusion in the Liturgical Cycle of Christmas

I must admit that I have a few concerns about the Christmas Calendar and I am interested in your thoughts on the matter.

1. In the First place I think that having the Feast of the Holy Family inside the Octave is a mistake. This is due, not to the feast per se,  but especially to the Gospel readings that are selected for the Feast.

In cycle A we read of the flight to Egypt, an event that takes place after the Epiphany which we have yet  yet to be celebrate! In effect, we jump forward in time either weeks, or even two years, (depending on when we reckon Epiphany to have taken place historically, (for some scholars think the Epiphany may have take place up to two years after the birth, which I personally doubt)). After having  jumped forward in time and place (Egypt), we then go back in time and place, (Bethlehem), to celebrate Epiphany on January 6th or the nearest Sunday.

If this were not bad enough Cycle B takes us forty days forward in time for the Feast of the Presentation (also called the Purification).   This too is a jump forward in time for the Rite of Purification was to take place forty days after birth by Jewish law and custom. That is why we celebrate the Feast of the Presentation on February 2nd.

Even worse, Cycle C takes us 12 years into the future as we read of the finding of Jesus in the Temple.  Then suddenly we are back to the infant Jesus for the feast of Epiphany.

All this temporal displacement could be avoided if we returned the Feast of the Holy Family back to the Sunday after Epiphany where it was prior to 1970. Indeed the Traditional Latin Mass still has the feast located there and uses the Gospel of the Finding of Jesus in the Temple. As such it provides a nice bridge from the infant Jesus we had at Epiphany to the Adult Jesus we have and the Baptism of the Lord and the Sundays following. It also avoids the temporal whiplash which the calendar and Christmas cycle causes by celebrating the Feast of the Holy Family on the Sunday inside the Christmas Octave.

2. Asecond concern I have is the loss of the Feast of the Circumcision and the giving of the Lord’s Name. As you likely know, Jewish boys were circumcised on the 8th Day, and their name was announced. Until 1960 we celebrated the octave day of Christmas as the Feast of the Circumcision of the Lord. More than the Circumcision we also celebrated the giving of Jesus’ name. However in 1960 Pope John XXIII renamed January 1st as simply, “the Octave Day of Christmas,” though the Gospel of the Circumcision continued to be read. In 1970, the Feast came to be designated as the Solemnity of Mary, Mother of God.

However! –  Now in this matter, my preference for the Feast of the Circumcision is rooted in my preference for a proper chronology that follows the Biblical Data as close as possible. However, the designation of the Octave Day as “Mary Mother of God” has some very strong arguments for it, I must say.

Evidence for the celebration of this feast goes back in the Roman Church all the way to the 7th Century. Prior to that, there is evidence of this feast being celebrated in other parts of Europe, but usually on the Fourth Sunday of Advent. By the 13th and 14th Centuries, however, the Feast of the Circumcision of the Lord came to replace this feast, and the Feast of Mary Mother of God was eventually moved to October 11th and renamed the feast of the “Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary.” Just after Vatican II The more ancient feast of Mary Mother of God was restored to January 1st. So, in the first place we see that the Feast of  Mary Mother of God on January 1st is the more ancient practice and this is a strong argument in its favor.

The feast also commemorates a very central dogma, most appropriate for the Christmas season:  that since Christ is one person with two natures (human andDivine), then Mary is rightly called the Mother of God.  Mary is Mother of God because Jesus is God. Some had wanted to argue that she only gave birth to his human nature and,  hence,  is only mother of what is human in him. But Jesus is ONE PERSON with two natures. This is something called in theology the “hypostatic union” and it is an essential teaching on Christ. He unites, in one person, the human nature and the divine nature. There are not two “Jesuses.” Neither is it true that his Divine nature came upon him at a later time such as his baptism. No, his two natures were united in his one person from the moment of of his human conception. And since Jesus is one, Mary gives birth, and is mother to the whole Christ. Mary is Mother of God because Jesus is God and Jesus is one. This title was given to Mary at the Council of Ephesus in 431 in defense of Christ’s divinity. The Greek form of this title is Θεοτόκος (Theotokos) translated more literally as “God Bearer.”

Still! – I love the Blessed Mother and surely affirm her under this proper title. But I regret the loss of the Feast of the Circumcision. As stated, I generally prefer to stick as close to the Biblical narrative as possible. In this case Scripture is clear, on the eighth day (i.e. January 1st for us), Jesus was circumcised and his name given. Three important truths and events are celebrated here. First that Jesus was born under the law and submitted himself to it so that he might fulfill it. Secondly there is the first shedding of blood, and this refers to the passion. Thirdly his name is announced: Jesus, a name which means “God saves.” There is no other name given to men by which we are to be saved, there is no other blood that can atone for our sins than the blood of Jesus and there is no one who can fulfill the Law as Jesus does. It seems a bit of a loss not to explicitly celebrate these  truths about Jesus on the very day (the eighth day) they happened.

3. A final concern is the moving of Epiphany in many parts of the world to the nearest Sunday. This troubles me greatly. Epiphany is a very important feast of the Church and completes the the 12th day of the Christmas feast. January 6th is the proper day for this feast going back to the 4th Century. Now many argue that the Feast is important and that is why it should be moved to the nearest Sunday so that many more will experience it. However, it is a  fact that this inevitably shortens the Christmas Cycle. The liturgical calendar sets forth sacred time, and it seems a very bad idea to allow the demands of the secular world for convenience to intrude on sacred time. Christmas is OUR time and OUR feast. It seems as though the tail is wagging the dog here. Too many Catholics allow the world to influence how they celebrate Christmas. Christmas does not end December 26th or January 2nd. It ends January 6th. Better that we should catechize our faithful as to the importance of this feast and even set it as a holy day of obligation than to move it.  It is true that fewer will experience the feast, even if we oblige it, but at least the Church will speak more clearly to full mystery of the Christmas feast rather than rush its completion and cave to worldly schedules. IMHO.

You may wish to dispute these regrets of mine and I hope you will use the comments section to advance your points. Obviously, greater minds in the Church than I have decided on these matters and do not agree with yours truly.

I suppose though, if I had it my way, here is what I would do:

  1. Celebrate the Feast of Mary Mother of God on the Sunday Between Christmas and January 1st (where we celebrate Holy Family now).
  2. Move the Feast of the Holy Family to the Sunday after Epiphany (where it used to be before 1970). This Feast seems better celebrated after Epiphany as a kind of bridge: Jesus at 12 years of age links the infant Chirst and the adult Christ as we return to Ordinary time.
  3. Restore the Feast of the Circumcision to January 1st.
  4. Return Epiphany to January 6th where this is not currently the case.

But nobody is asking me from Rome what I think! 🙂 So enjoy my “rant” for what it is: , just a slight case of temporal whiplash, grief for a feast that is missing  in action and a wish to tweak the Christmas calendar so it flows a little better.

Enjoy The Ave Maria by Rachmaninoff.

And for those of you who prefer a more modern Christmas, here is a virtual and iPad Christmas:

North Point’s iBand from North Point Web on Vimeo.

Posted on

On Running to Meet God – An Advent Reflection

Advent is beginning to wind to a close and even liturgically the focus has now turned toward the Christmas Feast. However, still in Advent, we look for the Lord to come. We still wait on the Lord, wait for him to come in glory.

We have all been well schooled in the in the understanding that the word “Advent” means “coming.”  This is fine and accurate but there is one danger to avoid in our current notion of Advent,  and that is that we are not merely passive as we look for the Lord or wait for him to come.  It is not just that the Lord is coming to us but we are also journeying to him. In fact we are running to meet him.

There is an image of the Prodigal Son that comes to mind. His Father saw him and ran toward him, but he too was hastening to his Father with contrition and hope. Yes, in Advent we do look for the Lord’s coming. But the Lord also looks for us as we come to him by faith.  We, like the prodigal son, consider our need for salvation, and with contrition, (did you get to confession this advent?), hasten to meet our Lord, whom we know by faith is coming to us.

This notion of our running to meet God has not been well articulated in the Liturgies of the English speaking world since about 1970. Since 1970 we have been using a translation that is really more of a paraphrase. Much has been left out of the current translation, including this notion of us running to the Lord in the Advent prayers. Happily it looks like a much more accurate translation will begin to be used next Advent. So let’s look at the how the new translation will set forth these prayers and how the theme of our running to meet God, even as he is coming to us, is set forth:

  1. Grant your faithful, we pray, almighty God, the resolve to run forth to meet your Christ with righteous deeds at his coming, so that, gathered at his right hand, they may be worthy to possess the heavenly kingdom.  (First Sunday of Advent)
  2. Almighty and merciful God, may no earthly undertaking hinder those who set out in haste to meet your Son, but may our learning of heavenly wisdom gain us admittance to his company. (Second Sunday of Advent)
  3. Stir up your mighty power, O Lord. and come to our help with a mighty strength, so that what our sins impede, the grace of your mercy may hasten. (Thur of the First Week of Advent).
  4. Grant that your people, we pray , almighty God, may be ever watchful for the coming of your Only Begotten Son, that, as the author of our salvation himself has taught us, we may hasten, alert with lighted lamps, to meet him when he comes. (Friday of the Second Week of Advent)
  5. May the reception of your sacrament strengthen us O Lord, so that we may go out to meet our savior, with worthy deeds when he comes, and merit the rewards of the blessed. (post communion, Dec 22)

Thus, we are not counselled to “wait on the Lord” in a merely passive sense as though we were sitting still and waiting for a bus to arrive. Rather we are counselled to “wait on the Lord” in an active sense, much as when we speak of a waiter in a restaurant waiting on tables. Such a form of waiting is a very active form of waiting. Alert and aware, the waiter or waitress carefully observes the needs of others around them and serves their brothers and sisters. The good ones strive to avoid distraction and do their job of serving well and with swiftness.

Notice too how the prayers indicate what it means to “run.”  We do not run aimlessly or in frantic circles. Rather running to the Lord means:

  1. Being engaged in righteous deeds (holiness) by God’s grace.
  2. Not being hindered by worldly preoccupations and distractions.
  3. Learning heavenly wisdom.
  4. Receiving the Lord’s mercy unto the forgiveness of our sins.
  5. Being alert and ready for the Lord’s coming, the lamp of our soul trimmed (humble and purged of sin) and burning (alive with fiery love).
  6. Strengthened by the Eucharist which is our food for the journey.

St. Paul speaks of running too:

Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize. Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last; but we do it to get a crown that will last forever. Therefore I do not run like a man running aimlessly; I do not fight like a man beating the air. No, I discipline my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize (1 Cor 9:24-27).

Are you running to meet the Lord? Or are you just waiting? Advent involves looking and waiting, but it also means running, running to meet the Lord who is coming to us. Run!

Posted on

"It’s Getting Late Very Early These Days" – An Advent Meditation

Here in the Northern Hemisphere the days are getting very short just now. And they’re going to get shorter. In Washington DC, where I live,  it is dark by 5pm. On cloudy days it is almost dark by 4pm. My brothers both live further north, one in St. Paul the other in Seattle. It’s dark even earlier there. An old expression (probably by Yogi Berra) goes, “It’s getting late very early out there.”

Yes, indeed a great drama of light and darkness is unfolding before us. The light is giving way to darkness.

For us, who live in modern times of electricity, the drama is less obvious, little more than an annoyance as we switch on more lights. But think of those who lived not long before us, in a time before abundant electrical lights. Perhaps it was possible to huddle near a candle or fire, but in the end, the darkness put a real stop to most things. Neither work, nor reading, nor most forms of recreation could take place. Darkness was a significant factor.

Recently, in a widespread power outage, I was struck at just how really dark it was outside at night without the streetlights and lights from homes. Frankly it was hard to venture out. Bearings were quickly lost and I stumbled over simple things like a curb or fence post. We moderns just aren’t used to this.

Once I toured Luray Caverns in the nearby Shenandoah Mountains. At the bottom of the caverns hundreds of feet down they gathered us near the center of a large cave and shut off the lights. The darkness was overwhelming. It was almost a physical feeling. I felt a wave of slight panic sweep through me and was so relieved when the lights came back on. Is this what it is like to be blind? Light is very precious.

But here in a “deep and dark December,”  the light continues to recede. The spiritual impact of this drama of light is brought into the Church. Our hymns turn to images of light. The darker it gets, the more candles we light on the Advent wreath. In the darkest moments of December our Advent wreath is at its brightest.  And just when the days are shortest, the darkness is deepest, Christ is our light is born and the light begins to return.

The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome  it….The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. (John 1:5, 9)

December 21 and 22nd are the shortest, darkest days of the year. By December 23rd, the ancients noticed a slight return of the Light. Now the morning star heralds something new, something brighter.

People, look east. The time is near
Of the crowning of the year.
Make your house fair as you are able,
Trim the hearth and set the table.
People, look east and sing today:
Love, the guest, is on the way.

December 24th in the deep center of the longest  nights, Christ is born and on December 25th a new light shines. From then on, the days get longer.

Yes, a great drama of light is unfolding before us. It is Advent. It is time to recognize our need for the light and just how precious Jesus, the light of the world is. Ponder in these darkest days  the beauty of the light.

Consider too the theme of light in many of the Advent songs we sing. Here are few excerpts, mostly from Old Latin Hymns:

From Veni, Veni, Emmanuel:

O come, thou Dayspring  from on high,
And cheer us by thy drawing nigh:
Disperse the gloomy cloud of night
And death’s dark shadow put to flight
Rejoice, rejoice Emmanuel,
Shall come to thee O Israel.

From the German Hymn Wachet auf:

Wake, awake, for night is flying;
The watchmen on the heights are crying:
Awake, Jerusalem, at last!
Midnight hears the welcome voices
And at the thrilling cry rejoices;
Come forth, ye virgins, night is past;
The Bridegroom comes, awake;
Your lamps with gladness take;
Alleluia! And for His marriage feast prepare
For ye must go and meet Him there.

From Conditor Alme Siderum

Creator of the stars of night,
Thy people’s everlasting light
Oh Christ, thou savior of us all,
We pray thee hear us when we call

From Vox Clara ecce intonat:

Hark! a thrilling voice is sounding;
“Christ is nigh,” it seems to say,
“Cast away the works of darkness,
O ye children of the day.”
 
Wakened by the solemn warning
Let the earthbound soul arise;
Christ, her Sun, all ill dispelling,
Shines upon the morning skies.
 
 
From an Old German Hymn:
  
Rejoice, rejoice, believers, and let your lights appear.
The evening is advancing, and darker night is near.
The Bridegroom is arising, and soon He draweth nigh.
Up, pray, and watch, and wrestle: At midnight comes the cry.
 
See that your lamps are burning; replenish them with oil.
And wait for your salvation, the end of earthly toil.
The watchers on the mountain proclaim the Bridegroom near.
Go meet Him as He cometh, with alleluias clear.

From the Li­tur­gy of St. James, 4th Cen­tu­ry (Σιγησάτο παρα σὰρξ βροτεία):

Rank on rank the host of heaven
Spreads its vanguard on the way,
As the Light of light descendeth
From the realms of endless day,
That the powers of hell may vanish
As the darkness clears away.

From Veni Redemptor Gentium:

Thy cradle here shall glitter bright,
And darkness breathe a newer light,
Where endless faith shall shine serene,
And twilight never intervene
 

Enjoy this Advent and watch for the Light, it will surely come

Posted on

Hidden Jewel: An Advent Hymn Often Unheard

I have published on this Hymn before but want to post on it again at the beginning of Advent in hopes that a few of you who have the influence and ability may see that this hymn in used in your parishes for Advent at some point.

For my money the best Advent hymn ever written is Veni Redemptor Gentium (Come Redeemer of the Nations) written by St. Ambrose in the 4th Century.

One of the beautiful things about the ancient Latin Hymns is how richly theological they are. Not content to merely describe the event in question, they give sweeping theological vision and delve into the more hidden mysteries of each event.

So here we are beginning Advent and Jesus is coming, get ready! Well yes, but he is not just coming, he is redeeming, dying, rising, ascending and reigning at the Father’s Right Hand!  But how can we get all that into an Advent Hymn?  Well, just below you can read the text and see how.

But for now ponder the theological point that hymns like this make. And it is this:  that no act of God can merely be reduced to the thing in itself. Everything God does is part of a sweeping master plan to restore all things in Christ, to take back what the devil stole from us! Too often we see the events of our redemption in a disconnected sort of way, but it is all really one thing and the best theology connects the dots. It is not wrong for us to focus on one thing or another, but we must not forget it is all one thing in the end.

Without this we can develop a kind of myopia (a limited vision) that over-emphasizes some aspect of redemption and thus harms the rest by a lack of balance. In the 1970s and 80s we had all resurrection all the time, but no passion or death. Christmas too has its hazards as we get rather sentimental about the “baby Jesus” but miss other important aspects of his incarnation. The passion and death are present in his birth in homeless poverty, the swaddling clothes, the flight into Egypt and so forth. The Eucharist is evident in his birth at Bethlehem (House of Bread) and his being laid in a manger (feed box for animals). His glory as God and his ultimate triumph are manifest in the Star overhead and the Angels declaration of glory! You see it is all tied together and the best theology connects the dots.

So with that in mind I present you to this wonderful Advent hymn so seldom sung in our Catholic Parishes. It can be sung to any Long Meter tune but is usually sung to its own melody (Puer Natus – see video below). I give here only the English translation but the PDF you can get by clicking here: ( VENI REDEMPTOR GENTIUM) contains also the Latin text. I think the poetic translation reprinted here is a minor masterpiece of English literature and hope you’ll agree. Enjoy this sweeping theological vision of the mystery of advent caught up into the grand and fuller vision of redemption.

Among the theological truths treated in this brief hymn are these: His title as Redeemer, his virgin birth, his inclusion of the Gentiles, his sinlessness, his two natures but one person, his incarnation at conception, His passion, death, descent into hell, ascension,  his seat at the Father’s right hand, his divinity and equality with the Father, his healing and sanctification of our humanity so wounded by sin, his granting us freedom and eternal life, his renewing of our minds through the light of faith, his opening of heaven to us.

Not bad for seven verses!   St. Ambrose, Pray for us!   And now the hymn:

  • Come, thou Redeemer of the earth,
  • Come testify thy virgin birth:
  • All lands admire, all times applaud:
  • Such is the birth that fits our God.
  •  
  • Forth from his chamber goeth he,
  • That royal home of purity,
  • A giant in twofold substance one,
  • Rejoicing now his course to run.
  •  
  • The Virgin’s womb that glory gained,
  • Its virgin honor is still unstained.
  • The banners there of virtue glow;
  • God in his temple dwells below.
  •  
  • From God the Father he proceeds,
  • To God the Father back he speeds;
  • Runs out his course to death and hell,
  • Returns on God’s high throne to dwell.
  •  
  • O Equal to thy Father, thou!
  • Gird on thy fleshly mantle now;
  • The weakness of our mortal state
  • With deathless might invigorate.
  •  
  • Thy cradle here shall glitter bright,
  • And darkness breathe a newer light,
  • Where endless faith shall shine serene,
  • And twilight never intervene.
  •  
  • All laud, eternal Son, to thee
  • Whose advent sets thy people free,
  • Whom with the Father we adore,
  • And Holy Ghost, for evermore.

 This video gives you an idea of what the hymn tune for Veni Redemptor Gentium sounds like. The words in this version are slightly different but the hymn tune is perfect. Try not to dance as it is sung. You can find the melody for this hymn tune in the hymn tune index of most hymnals. This hymn tune is called “Puer Natus.” The words to this hymn however can be sung to any Long Meter (LM) hymn tune.