On Friday I was permitted to go up into the Clerestory level of the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception here in Washington. I brought my camera and took some unique photos of the Basilica. I am posting a few of them here but you can see the rest of what I took here: Clerestory Views. I think they turned out pretty well considering that very few lights were on in the Basilica. I had to open the lens wide and give lengthy exposure to each shot but in the end I think they turned out well. Thanks to TJ Dhanagom and Msgr. Rossi for the privilege of ascending to the clerestory.
We are in the heart of Lent but for one day we step back into the Christmas cycle. It is nine months before Christmas and today we celebrate the true feast of the Incarnation. December 25 is the Lord’s birth but today is His incarnation as he is conceived in his Mother’s womb. TODAY the Word becomes flesh.
This needs to be emphasized in an age of abortion where some in our culture deny explicitly or implicitly that human life begins at conception. You are aware that a new translation of the Mass will soon come to us in the English speaking world. It is long needed and treasures of the faith kept hidden for long decades (except for those know Latin) will become visible again.
Among the most egregious errors of the current English version is in the Creed which erroneously indicates that Jesus became man at his birth, rather than his conception. Here is what the current version says:
For us men and our salvation He came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit, He was born of the Virgin Mary , and became man.
Notice that the text says he became man when he was born. As a poor translation of the Latin text it is irritating enough but to have this mistranslation exist when abortion is thought a legal right is a complete disaster. The Latin text does not say that Jesus became man at his birth (celebrated December 25), but rather at His incarnation (celebrated March 25). Here is what the the Latin text says:
Qui propter nos homines et propter nostram salutem descendit de caelis. Et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria Virgine, et homo factus est.
The New Translation which will be implemented in a little over a year renders it correctly in the following way:
For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man.
I for one am grateful for the accuracy. The whole translation is going to take some getting used to but it will be of great benefit to see our Holy Faith, so beautifully articulated in the Latin text, properly translated and conveyed at last. Since 1970 the text has been really little better than a paraphrase and so much is lost. This mistranslation of the Creed is but one of ten thousand examples where the current translation is woefully inaccurate and/or incomplete. But surely the mistranslated Creed is most egregious for the reasons stated.
A final thought on this section of the Creed – The Bow. The Congregation is instructed to bow at the words: and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. This is in recognition of the great mystery that the incarnation is. How can God, whom the very heavens cannot contain dwell in the womb of the Virgin Mary? How can the infinite become an infant? It is a mystery too great and so we bow in reverence. In the Traditional Latin Mass the practice is to kneel at these words. Such was the practice until about 1970 when it was replaced by a bow. Personally I think we Americans are terrible at bows and would be happy if the genuflection returned. In other cultures bowing is graceful and natural. For most of us here it is awkward and usually lacks proportional and graceful movement. But bow we are told and bow we should. One ought to fold the hands and bow at the waist. Think of your waist as the hinge, not the neck and shoulders which should not move in proportion to the shoulders. The bow is a reverent acknowledgment of the mystery of the Incarnation we celebrate today. Interestingly enough there are still two days in the year when we still kneel at the words of the incarnation. We kneel and pause at these words on Christmas and today, March 25, The Feast of the Annunciation. Otherwise we bow, as gracefully as possible 🙂
I am curious if you bow at these words in the Creed and if it is common in your parish. Does your clergy bow, do they teach others to do so? Just asking!
When I talk with Catholics who have left the Church, the number one reason I get that they left was poor preaching.This is especially true of those who left for the Evangelical Churches. Catholic priests as a group have the reputation of being poor preachers. I think there are several reasons for this.
The expected length of a Catholic sermon is 7-10 minutes. This is far too brief a time to really develop well a biblical or doctrinal theme. It results in a slogan based and brief exhortation. In this matter the people of God have to work with us. Most Catholics are upset if the liturgy goes more than 50 minutes. We all need to agree to take more time to be with the Lord. Longer sermons are necessary to really develop and break open most passages. Most Protestant sermons are about a half and hour. True, I don’t want a preacher to go longer unless he really has something to say but it is also true that most priests have to wrap up when they’ve barely gotten started. It’s not a good context for preaching. The old “say it in seven” rule needs to be re-evaluated
I think many confuse exhortation for preaching. Most of the sermons I grew up with could be summarized in two sentences: “1. Jesus is challenging us to do better today.” And 2. “Let us try to do better” (Now please stand for the creed).” This is exhortation but true preaching takes the Word of God and does four things: Analyzes, organizes, illustrates, and applies it. It doesn’t just exhort us to do better it shows how, and sets for the why and wisdom of God’s Word. This as you might guess takes a little more than 7 minutes.
Teaching is often lacking– When I ask Catholics who have gone on to the “Word churches” why they like the preaching there more they usually say it is because the minister teaches the Word of God. Perhaps he shows the stages of the faith journey of a biblical character, or Five aspects of a healthy marriage from Ephesians 5. Maybe he expounds on the Four Disciplines of Devoted Discipleship in Matthew and so forth. But the Word of God is both taught, and applied to life in memorable ways.
The Three Essential questions often go unaddressed – It would seem that every sermon should ask and answer three questions: What? So What? and Now What? I think we Catholic Priests do alright with the “what” but not so well with the other two questions. Homilies are not just about information (the What) they also aim at transformation. Addressing the “What” can help to inform but the “So what” and “Now What” aim more for transformation.
Good preaching is edgy. It comforts the afflicted and afflicts the comfortable. But too many priests are afraid of offending or upsetting. Despite the fact that we serve a Lord who got killed for what he said, too many of us are not willing to suffer even the raised eyebrows of our congregation. We have to be willing to talk forthrightly about serious issues today, about sin, about injustice, about promiscuity and so forth. We have to speak the truth in love but the “Jesus loves you sermons” are not enough. Jesus loved us enough to speak the truth to us even when we killed him for it. We priests have to get a spine, and a heart and be willing to preach even the difficult stuff. It has been my experience that Catholics respond well to tough sermons. They don’t want angry priests but they do want priests who are zealous for the truth.
How about a little enthusiasm? If you really care about what you are saying shouldn’t it be reflected in your mannerisms and tone of voice? Too many priests have a kind of lecture like discursive approach instead of a fiery Charismatic approach. True enough there are different personalities but a fiery enthusiasm is hard to hide. But being on fire can’t be faked. It comes only from prayer and a deep love for God and His people.
I know you can add to the list above. Perhaps your feed back will help some of us priests improve. So have at it. Be kind and constructive but speak the truth. We priests can use it. And pray, pray, pray. You get the priests and the sermons you pray for. Also encourage us when we do well and gently admonish when we need improvement.
Perhaps we do well to end with the Words of St. Gregory the Great who exhorts the faithful to pray for the Priests in their preaching role:
Pray for us so that we may have the strength to work on your behalf, that our tongue may not grow weary of exhortation, and that after we have accepted the office of preaching, our silence may not condemn us before the just judge. For frequently the preacher’s tongue is bound fast on account of his own wickedness; while on the other hand it sometimes happens that because of the people’s sins, the word of preaching is withdrawn from those who preside over the assembly. With reference to the former situation, the psalmist says: But God asks the sinner: Why do you recite my commandments? (PS 50:16) And with reference to the latter, the Lord tells Ezekiel: I will make your tongue cleave to the roof of your mouth, so that you shall be dumb and unable to reprove the, for they are a rebellious house. (Ez 3:26) He clearly means this: the word of preaching will be taken away from you because as long as this people irritates me by their deeds, they are unworthy to hear the exhortation of truth. It is not easy to know for whose sinfulness the preacher’s word is withheld, but it is indisputable that the shepherd’s silence while often injurious to himself will always harm his flock. (As quoted in the Liturgy of the Hours, Vol 3)
This video is an excerpt of a sermon by Fr. Bill Casey, it’s powerful.
Over 21 years ago I made my canonical retreat that was required before being ordained a transitional deacon. We were studying the Letter to the Romans in the retreat conferences and came upon a particularly difficult passage early in the retreat. The retreat master, an older priest and well known scripture scholar stopped his train of thought, perhaps perceiving we were having difficulty and said, “Do you know what is the biggest obstacle for us in understanding the Word of God?” I was expecting a geeky answer like, “We don’t know enough Greek,” or “We haven’t studied the Historical Critical Method carefully enough.” But the priest pleasantly surprised me we he paused, looked around the room and then said, “The biggest obstacle we have to understanding the Word of God is our sin.” He was (and still is) Fr. Francis Martin. He went on to encourage us in the discipline of study but warned us that all the study in the world could not be of great help, indeed it could be of harm, if we did not have a clean heart. I have respected him ever since and listened on tape to probably two dozen other priest conferences and courses he preached and taught. He became one of my principal teachers through his tape ministry though I was never formally enrolled in a class he taught.
Scholars, academicians, even unbelievers to some extent can tell you what a biblical text is talking about, but only the holy, the Saints, can tell you what it means. Fulton Sheen was famous for saying toward the end of his life something to the effect, that we have tried in modern times every possible way to build up the Church: committees, study groups, task forces, seminars, advanced degrees in every sort of theology and religious study. But there is only one thing that we have not tried and that is holiness. He went on to recommend that every priest commit to make a daily Holy Hour.
This past week in the Office of Readings from the Breviary the following reading reminded me of all these things:
If you say, “Show me your God,” I will say to you, “Show me what kind of person you are, and I will show you my God.” …..God is seen by those who have the capacity to see him, provided that they keep the eyes of their mind open. All have eyes, but some have eyes that are shrouded in darkness, unable to see the light of the sun. Because the blind cannot see it, it does not follow that the sun does not shine. The blind must trace the cause back to themselves and their eyes. In the same way, you have eyes in your mind that are shrouded in darkness because of your sins and evil deeds. A person’s soul should be clean, like a mirror reflecting light. If there is rust on the mirror his face cannot be seen in it. In the same way, no one who has sin within him can see God. But if you will you can be healed. Hand yourself over to the doctor, and he will open the eyes of your mind and heart. Who is to be the doctor? It is God, who heals and gives life through his Word and wisdom…. If you understand this, and live in purity and holiness and justice, you may see God. But, before all, faith and the fear of God must take the first place in your heart, and then you will understand all this. When you have laid aside mortality and been clothed in immortality, then you will see God according to your merits.— From the book addressed to Autolycus by Saint Theophilus of Antioch, bishop
So there it is, holiness, a the fear of the Lord are the only way to really see at all.
There was an option this past Sunday in Parishes where the Second Scrutiny was celebrated to the Gospel of the Man Born Blind. In a pivotal moment Jesus smeared his eyelids with clay and sends him to the Pool of Siloam to wash. He comes back able to see. When asked how he came to see he says, in effect, “I went, I washed and now I see.” This is Baptismal theology even if in seminal form. We cannot see until we are washed. In the end it is Baptism, Confession and a holy life by God’s grace that give the greatest light. One of the great theologians and Fathers of the Church St. Cyprian experienced the vision that Baptism and holiness brings:
And I myself was bound fast, held by so many errors of my past life, from which I did not believe I could extricate myself. I was disposed therefore to yield to my clinging vices; and, despairing of better ways, I indulged my sins…But afterwards, when the stain of my past life had been washed away by means of the waters of rebirth, a light from above poured itself upon my chastened and now pure heart; afterwards, through the Spirit which is breathed from heaven, a second birth made of me a new man. And then in marvelous manner, doubts immediately clarified themselves, the closed opened…and what had been thought impossible was able to be done(“Letter to Donatus,” 4).
Only after baptism did some things make sense and seem possible for Cyprian. For me too, I have come to understand some things only after many years of prayer and growth. Daily Holy Hours, daily mass and the liturgy of the hours, weekly confession, only then do some things clarify and does that which had been in darkness come to light. Studies have had their place in my life to be sure, But only the path to holiness (combined with study) can ever really bring light.
We’ve tried everything! How about holiness? …..Prayer anyone?
Here’s a video I put together on the beauty of prayer especially before the Blessed Sacrament. It is set to the words of a beautiful Eucharistic Hymn “Jesus My Lord, My God, My All” directed by the late Richard Proulx.
The Diagnosis is in. The situation looks grave. From the test results, we’ve got some serious stuff wrong with us! You might say we’ve got a few issues! Yes, I’ve got your spiritual “medical chart” and mine open and I’m looking at the test results and the numbers don’t look good. We’ve tested positive for a number of things: It says we can be dishonest, egotistical, undisciplined, weak, immature, arrogant, self-centered, pompous, insincere, unchaste, grasping, judgmental, inpatient, and shallow. It looks like we’ve tested positive for being inconsistent, unfaithful, immoral, ungrateful, disobedient, selfish, lukewarm, slothful, unloving, uncommitted, and just plain sinful. Further tests indicate the presence of fear, indifference, contempt, impurity, hatred, laziness, cowardice, and anger. Likewise, greed, jealousy, revenge fullness, disobedience, hardheartedness, pride, envy, stinginess, selfishness, pettiness, spite, self-indulgence, lust, careless neglect, and prejudice. Our “spiritual” medical history indicates that we have sinned against justice, modesty, purity, and the truth. We have committed sins against the human person, the children and the young, innocent and the trusting, the frail and elderly, the unborn in infants, weak and powerless, immigrants and strangers, and those who are disadvantaged. A set of further test results indicates that we have failed to give witness to Christ, we have failed to join our will to God or give good example to others. We have failed to seek God above all things, to act justly you show mercy, and to repent of our sins. We’ve failed to obey the commandments and curb our earthly desires. We have failed to lead a holy life and to speak the truth. We have failed to pray for others and assist those in need; neither have we consoled the grieving.
Well, you can see that we’re kind of in bad shape. You might say that I’m exaggerating but I suspect, if you’re honest, that you like me have committed many of these sins if not most of them. Without a lot of grace and mercy we are in very bad shape! The diagnosis is dire.
But here’s the good news: the doctor is in! Jesus! Likewise, the doctor has a cure! Jesus refers us to the Physician’s Desk Reference (PDR)- Spiritual Edition (also called the Holy Book) for a cure to this condition. It is to be found in section Acts 2.42:
They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. (Acts 2:42)
The cure is thus ancient and well attested and consists of a consistent regime of four basic medicines which must be taken as the text says “Devotedly”:
The Apostles’ Teaching– This medicine supplies daily doses of Scripture which helps to cleanse the mind of worldly thinking and to deliver remedial amounts of God-like thinking. It removes the tendency to be conformed to this world and begins a process of transformation by the renewing of the mind (Rom 12:4). While the term “apostles teaching” is here used, this is medicine is inclusive of all Sacred Scripture of which the Apostles’ teaching is the pinnacle. Studying carefully another manual known as the Catechism also delivers healthy doses of Scripture (aka the Apostles Teaching).
The Fellowship– This gathering or fellowship is also referred to as “The Church” and refers to the prescribed medicine of gathering frequently with the Church for instruction, edification, encouragement, necessary rebuke, exposure to truth, helpful friendships and proper worship of God known as the “Liturgy”. The regular and necessary dosage is once per week. Taking more is advantageous but missing the necessary weekly dose leads to a deadly condition known as “mortal sin.”
The Breaking of the Bread– Also known as Holy Communion. This medicine supplies necessary nourishment to sustain the Christian on the journey across the desert of this life to the Promised Land of Heaven. Regular reception helps ensure being raised up on the last day to eternal life (Jn 6:54). Neglect of this medicine leads to spiritual death which the PDR – Spiritual Edition refers to as “having no life in you” (Jn 6:53). While this medicine is called the “breaking of the bread” it actually refers to a series of seven medicines known as the “sacraments” of which Holy Communion is the greatest. Some medicines in this series are taken but once, others may require on-going doses. Most notable is the medicine called “confession” wherein, through salutary conversation with a properly licensed doctor in Jesus’ practice, one is healed from the wounds of sin through the laying on of hands and the words of absolution. The usual recommended dosage of this medicine of confession is four to six times per year but more for those who wound easily.
Prayer– Regular and substantial conversation with the Doctor (aka Jesus) is essential for healing. Herein symptoms are discussed and solutions are proposed. Given the grave condition, these visits must be daily. Failure to take this medicine daily leads to a serious complex known as “temptation” (cf Mk 14:38) which leads the patient to further wounding and death-directed actions. The medicine of prayer comes in a variety of forms: meditation, devotional reading of Scripture, contemplation, reading the lives of the saints and devotions such as the rosary, and novenas.
Well there it is. We need help; we’ve got stuff going on that will kill us eternally. But Jesus has a hospital: the Church, and Medicine: the Sacraments. Likewise there is spiritual “medical” advice available, the Word of God, sermons, the teachings of the Church and the presence of encouraging doctors and nurses such as the priests, religious, and fellow Catholics. Whether you and like to admit it or not we need regular check-ups and serious medicine. And Jesus is guiding his Church to give skillful advice and distribute powerful medicine. Do you think of the sacraments that way? Many simply think of them as rituals but the truth is they are powerful medicine. I’m a witness. After twenty-five years of seeing the doctor, Jesus and letting him minister to me through Sacraments, the Word and his Church a wonderful change has come over me. I’m not what I want to be but I’m not what I used to be.
The doctor is in and you know you need him! Reach out for him what ever your struggles. He’s waiting to minister to you especially in the liturgy and the sacraments. You can’t do it alone. Join us every Sunday at the “holy hospital”, the Church. The Doctor is in!
In the secular world a mystery is something which baffles or eludes understanding, something which lies hidden or undisclosed. Now the usual attitude of the world toward mystery is to resolve it, get to the bottom of or uncover it. Mysteries must be overcome! The riddle or “who-done-it” must be solved.
In the religious world mystery is something a bit different. Here mystery refers to something revealed by God which largely or completely escapes what we can know by our intellect alone and unaided by God through grace and revelation. These are not worldly mysteries but mysteries of the faith. From the perspective of faith it is also usually that case that a mystery is something partially revealed by God but much more of which lies hidden. So something is seen, but much more is unseen.
For the Christian then, mysteries are not something to solved or overcome so much as to appreciate and reverence. In worldly mystery it is something to approach and with daring, perseverance and smarts to conquer. But the mysteries of faith are something to be considered with humility and reverence realizing we can never exhaust their meaning or capture and conquer their full essence. A few thought on the mysteries of faith:
Consider the picture at the upper right of the iceberg and allow it to be an image for the mysteries of faith. Above the water line we see something of the iceberg, but beneath the waterline, remains much more, hid from our eyes (except in a picture like this).
Consider the mystery of creation. In the book of Sirach, after a long list of the marvels of creation there comes this magnificent line: Beyond these, many things lie hid; only a few of God’s works have we seen. (Sirach 43:34) This is mystery, what we see is far surpassed by what we do not see!
Consider the mystery of the human person. Think of someone you know rather well, perhaps a spouse, family member or close friend. There is much about them that you see and know, but even more of which lies hid. You can see their body, but only the external parts of it. Much more lies active and intricate beneath the skin. You “see” aspects of who they are in terms of their personality and mannerisms and so forth but much more lies hid from your knowledge such as their inner thoughts, aspects of their history, and deeper drives and motivations that may lie hidden even to them in many ways. As time goes on and relationships deepen the “mystery” of the human person unfolds and more is revealed. Yet the mystery of the human person is never “solved” and it would be irreverent to assume we ever could or should do so. No, this mystery must be reverenced and approached with humility and if we ever really think we have some one (even our selves) “figured out” we are badly mistaken and transgress the dignity of the person. Scripture says, More tortuous than all else is the human heart, beyond remedy; who can understand it? I, the LORD, alone probe the mind and test the heart (Jer 17:9-10). Surely we are on a journey to understand and the discover as the mystery of our selves and the others as our life unfolds but the mystery must always be respected and reverenced, not solved in order to be controlled and manipulated.
Herein lies a problem with modern American culture that should be critiqued and that is the tendency to lack modesty. One definition of modesty is “reverence for mystery.” Part of the dignity of the human person is not simply to be on open display in an indiscreet way. In deeper relationships more is revealed in increasingly appropriate ways. Close friends share more and understand more. Spouses, ideally, share even more to include the deep intimacy of the body. The disclosing of the mystery of the human person in appropriate ways based on the depth of relationship is at the heart of modesty. But today too many things of a private nature are too easily sought and disclosed. A nosey media is partially to blame along with an increasingly odd tendency for many today to want to disclose matters that should remain private. Talk shows come to mind wherein a person or celebrity “tells all.” In today’s physcotherapeutic culture there is also the tendency to request and also to provide too much information about personal things. Surely close friends and family may be an appropriate audience for such disclosures but immodesty causes many to reveal indiscreetly what should remain private. Clearly too, physical immodesty is epidemic and we have discussed it here before. And this also fails to reverence the mystery due the human person by putting on display that would should only be revealed in the most intimate and appropriate settings. Mystery is at the heart of the dignity of the human person. Modesty is reverence for that mystery, immodesty is a lack of reverence (cf 1 Cor 12:22ff).
Consider the mystery of the Liturgy and the Sacraments– We see much in the Liturgy and the celebration of the Sacraments but far more remains hidden from our eyes as these mysteries are celebrated. (You may well know that the Eastern Churches and especially the Orthodox Churches refer to the sacraments as the “Mysteries”). Consider a baby being baptized. We see the water poured and hear the words. Perhaps there is a cry. But what remains unseen is even greater: The child dies, is buried with Christ and rises to new life with him in an instant (Rom 6:1-4). Sin is washed away, an inheritance is received, true membership into the Body of Christ is conferred, the office of Priest Prophet and King are received, divine sonship is conferred and on and on. Far more is actually happening that we see or even know. This is mystery, something seen, yet far, far more unseen. Consider the Liturgy, the altar is there, a priest, the faithful gathered, words and gestures perceived. But far more is unseen: Christ the high priest is the true minister, the physical church building gives way to the truth that we are mysteriously caught up into heaven and the heavenly liturgy surrounded by countless saints and angels worshipping the Father and we as members of the Body of Christ render the Father perfect praise and thanks through, with and in Jesus our head.
Herein lies a problem with the Liturgy in modern times– In recent decades there has been a laudable attempt to make the Liturgy more intelligible to people. However there is a trade off to be careful of. The mystery of the Liturgy and the sacraments must be reverenced. In our attempt to make everything intelligible and accessible we risk offending the dignity of the liturgy and sacraments which are ultimately NOT fully intelligible or explainable. They are mysterious (in the way we are using the word) and ineffable (not reducible fully to words). In the ancient Church the Liturgy was surrounded by the disciplina arcanis (discipline of the secret) wherein only fully initiated Catholic Christians were permitted to witness it. Sacramental catechesis was carried on largely AFTER the celebration of the Sacraments (Mysteries) in a process called mystagogia (a Greek word meaning “Education in the mysteries”). I do not argue here for a complete return to those days but one of the characteristics of the modern age and the manner in which liturgy is often celebrated is the lack in a sense of mystery. It often seems that everything has to be “seen” and “understood” to be authentic or relevant, or so the thinking goes with some. But this is wrong on two levels. First, everything CANNOT be seen. Most of the liturgy in fact lies hid from our earthly eyes. Secondly most of the liturgy cannot be understood. It is mystery to be reverenced and appreciated as such. It is “other” and beyond what this world can ever fully appreciate. We can grow in our appreciation of it as the years go by but never solve or understand it fully here on this side of the veil. Somehow this appreciation of the mystery of the Liturgy and Sacraments must be balanced with the attempt to render our worship “intelligible.” I put intelligible in quotes for we can only use that term in a relative manner.
Finally it remains true that our longing to enter fully the mystery of God and our very selves will one day be fulfilled. St. Paul speaks of this when he writes: Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known ( 1 Cor 13:12). You may be aware that the Greek word (title) for the last book of the Bible is Ἀποκάλυψις (Apocalupsis) which means “unveiling.” One day, the great mystery of this world, of ourselves, and God’s plan will be fully unveiled. For now, we reverence these mysteries of our self, others, the liturgy, the sacraments, creation itself and God’s plan. One day they shall be revealed. A caution here. I do not think we will ever exhaust the mystery of God (and perhaps not even ourselves). I do not think all eternity will ever be enough to exhaust the full mystery of God who is infinite and can never be fully comprehended in essence by his finite creatures.
Reverence mystery, relish mystery, respect mystery. Magnum mysterium, admirabile sacramentum!
The Sign of Peace is ironically a matter over which there is significant dispute in the Church. Some love it just the way it is. Others hate and want it dropped. Still others like it but want it moved to a different part of the liturgy where it is fits better, perhaps at the beginning, perhaps before the offertory. Some see it as a very gregarious moment and leave their pew and move through the Church. Others stay put and just nod at others. What of this disputed moment, the sign of “peace?”
We do well first to examine the what the General Instruction of the Roman Missal says:
The Rite of Peace follows [the Our Father and the Prayer “Lord Jesus Christ you said to your Apostles, ‘I leave you peace…’], by which the Church asks for peace and unity for herself and for the whole human family, and the faithful express to each other their ecclesial communion and mutual charity before communicating in the Sacrament. As for the sign of peace to be given, the manner is to be established by Conferences of Bishops in accordance with the culture and customs of the peoples. It is, however, appropriate that each person offer the sign of peace only to those who are nearest and in a sober manner. (G.I.R.M. # 82)
Other instructions in the Missal in the rubrics ( #’s 128 & 129) indicate that exchange of peace is shared “if appropriate” and that the celebrant “gives the sign of peace to a deacon or minister.” GIRM # 154 adds, The priest may give the sign of peace to the ministers but always remains within the sanctuary, so as not to disturb the celebration. (There are rare exceptions to this also listed there).
Hence we learn some of the following things about the sign of peace:
The purpose of the prayer and rite is that the Church asks peace and unit for herself and the whole world.
The faithful express to each other ecclesial communion and mutual charity before receiving Holy Communion.
It is for local Bishops conferences to issue norms regarding how this sign of peace is exchanged.
One should share the sign of peace only with those nearest to them. Hence the leaving of one’s pew is generally not appropriate.
The Sign of peace is to be shared in a sober manner. Hence loud greetings, lengthy conversations, back slapping, long embraces and the like are not appropriate here. Sober need not mean a mere handshake (which might be silly for a married couple for example). But the greeting should be cordial and generally to the point.
There is no required expression that the faithful should say. But if something is said GIRM # 154 recommends: “The peace of the Lord be with you always.”
The priest is not to leave the sanctuary but is only to exchange the sign of peace with the deacon or other ministers nearest him.
The exchange of Peace is optional and is shared “if appropriate.” What would make it inappropriate is not clear but that is left to the discretion of the celebrant. There are times, such as in flu season, at special liturgies such as funerals, or when pressed for time that the celebrant may chose to omit the exchange of peace.
Way back in 1977 the Bishop’s Committee on Liturgy also issued some direction on the sign of peace which fills out some of this:
Neither the people nor the ministers need try exhaust the sign by attempting to give the greeting personally to everyone in the congregation or even to a great number of those present…Unless the sign of peace is clearly tailored to a specific occasion, such as a marriage, ordination, or some small intimate group, the more elaborate and individual exchange of peace by the celebrant has a tendency to appear clumsy. It can also accentuate too much the role of the celebrant or ministers, which runs counter to a true understanding of the presence of Christ in the entire assembly.” (Bishops Committee on the Liturgy: The Sign of Peace, 1977)
Hence both celebrant and congregation are cautioned against elaborating the sign of peace and are encouraged to sobriety. The sign of peace is not a “meet and greet” but rather it symbolizes the communion and peace of the whole Church in Christ. Because we are one in Christ and all members of the Body of Christ, to exchange the sign of peace with a few is to exchange it with all. Hence it is not necessary or even desirable (due to disruption) to greet large numbers or to leave the pew or begin conversations.
What is the History of the Sign of Peace –Among the early Christians the “kiss of peace” was an important gesture to manifest love and unity, both within the liturgy and outside of it. In numerous places Paul and others encourage the Christians to “greet one another with a holy kiss.” (Rom 16:16, I Cor 16:20, II Cor 13:12, and also I Peter 5:14) The location in the liturgy of this gesture has been various. Early on it seems to have been exchanged at the end of the service of readings just before the preparation of the gifts. This was in response to the directive of the Lord in Matt 5:23ff wherein we should be reconciled with our brethren before bringing a gift to the altar. In many Eastern Churches the sign was moved to the beginning of the liturgy where it still remains today in many of them. However in the Roman Rite, as early as the 6th Century it was moved to the place it is today. Pope Innocent I defended a practice of moving it after the Canon as a way that people could assent to what had happened. Then again, when Gregory the Great placed the Our Father after the Canon he also moved the sign of peace after the Our Father and it fit nicely according to commentators of the day since it echoed well the words “as we forgive those who trespass against us…” It has remained in this location ever since that time. In addition the sign of peace came to be regarded as a preparation for communion and was exchanged even when communion was received outside of Mass. It was exchanged by all who were to receive communion. Those who not going to receive communion were instructed not to exchange the kiss of peace. Later however, the kiss was exchanged by all. An interesting practice that developed was the use of the osculatorium. This was an elaborately carved board that was passed around the congregation and kissed by all. It was thus a way of sharing the kiss through the whole congregation. However, over time the exchange of peace declined and in the Latin Mass codified by the Council of Trent it was exchanged only at the Solemn Mass among the clergy. This is at least partly related to the declining frequency of reception of communion and various other factors such as the stylizing of the embrace. Today the whole matter has been restored more to its original scope. Pope Benedict has taken under study the possibility of moving the sign of peace to just before offertory. It seems doubtful however that it will in fact be move there since it has been at its current spot since the 6th Century. That’s a pretty long tradition to unseat.
A Pastoral Note– The profound communion we have in Christ and the peace for which we pray should not be understood in a shallow way. Peace here is not the shallow meaning of the world but the richer Hebraic understanding of shalom which is a wish for all possible prosperity, the state of a person who lives in complete harmony with nature, self, God and others. Christ is the source of all peace since it is He who enables every person to become fully human which is an absolute prerequisite for true peace founded on the truth of God and man. Our greeting of one another at this moment of the mass should not be construed as a mere “haver nice day” or “How ya doin?'” Given our membership in the Body of Christ, what He has just been accomplished on the altar, and the communion we are about to receive, we both wish and experience shalom. The greeting we extend is no mere human greeting, it is the greeting of Christ: “May the peace of the Lord be always with you.”
This video illustrates the Kiss of Peace in the Divine Liturgy of the Russian Orthodox Church. It uses the more ancient gestures of the “Holy Kiss” mentioned in scripture. Many Catholic clergy also use a more formal embrace than a hand shake when exchanging the sign of peace.
Sometimes things get so familiar to us that we stop understanding or reflecting on their deeper meaning. Each year in RCIA (adult conversion) classes I get some puzzled looks as we discuss the ritual. “What’s that all about?” some will say. There is even some revulsion expressed at having dirty ashes smeared on your forehead. I remember as a kid wondering why so many people liked to rush to Church to get ashes smudged on their forehead. I didn’t like it at all and would secretly rub them off when no one was looking. Today I’ll admit I still don’t like it much, though I behave myself and do not rub them off!
Please forgive me, I don’t want to seem impious yet I still marvel, as a priest at how many people pack into Church to get ashes on their forehead. Even sadder, many of them don’t seem to want communion as much. In fact significant numbers walk out the door after ashes are given and do not stay for communion. I remember a certain pastor of mine responding to that by not giving Ashes until after Communion.
Most people of course who come to Mass are faithful and have their priorities straight but it still interests me how large the numbers are for something that seems to me to unappealing and also challenging, if we really come to terms with what we are saying in receiving them. I wonder if large numbers would flock for ashes if they really knew that they were saying some pretty powerful stuff and making some extensive promises of a sort.
What, really do ashes signify? Perhaps a brief tour of Scripture is in order:
Humility – Job said, You [Oh Lord] asked, ‘Who is this that obscures my counsel without knowledge?’ Surely I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know. “You said, ‘Listen now, and I will speak; I will question you, and you shall answer me.’ My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you. Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes.” Job 42:3-6 Notice that Job does not merely repent in a general sense here. But, having encountered God he realizes that God is God and he is a creature, mere dust and ashes in the presence of God who is Being itself, who is All in All. Yes he is a son in the presence of a Father but he is not God’s equal that he might question God or put him on trial. Hence in this case the ashes represent not only repentance, but humility. The Church’s liturgy echoes this theme of humility when she quotes Gen 3:19 “Remember, you are dust and unto dust you shall return” as she places ashes on the individual.
A Sacramental that points to the Sacrament – A man who is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer and put them in a ceremonially clean place outside the camp. They shall be kept by the Israelite community for use in the water of cleansing; it is for purification from sin….For the unclean person, put some ashes from the burned purification offering into a jar and pour fresh water over them. Then a man who is ceremonially clean is to take some hyssop, dip it in the water and sprinkle the tent and all the furnishings and the people who were there. Number 19:9,17) This text sees ashes obtained from a burned sin offering and mixed with sprinkled water as a cleansing ritual. In the Old Testament this ritual could not actually take away sin (cf Heb 9:9-13) but it did provide for ritual purity. It also symbolized repentance and a desire to be free from sin. In the same way ashes on Ash Wednesday, mixed with holy water cannot take away sin. They are a sacramental, not a sacrament. To get ashes on Ash Wednesday and not go to confession during Lent is really to miss the point. If one’s desire to repent and to be clean, free of sin, is real then from the sacramental to the sacrament they go. Otherwise the ritual of Ash Wednesday is pretty pointless.
A sign of a true change – When the news[of Ninevah’s possible destruction in forty days] reached the king of Nineveh, he rose from his throne, took off his royal robes, covered himself with sackcloth and sat down in the dust. (Jonah 3:6) Here too repentance is symbolized. But the symbol is not enough. Actual repentance is required. Hence the King does not just “do ashes,” he issues a decree calling for fasting, prayer and true reform: Do not let any man or beast, herd or flock, taste anything; do not let them eat or drink. But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth. Let everyone call urgently on God. Let them give up their evil ways and their violence. Who knows? God may yet relent and with compassion turn from his fierce anger so that we will not perish.” (Jonah 3:7-9) Hence another option for the priest to say as he places ashes is “Turn away from sin and be faithful to the Gospel.” It is not enough to get a sooty forehead. True repentance is what is called for, an actual intent to change. Otherwise the ashes are a false sign.
A summons to faith and a new mind – Jesus said, Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes(Matt 11:21). Here Jesus rebukes ancient towns for their lack of faith in what he said. It is good to recall that the Greek word translated here as “repented” is μετενόησαν (metenoesan) which more literally means to come to a new mind or way of thinking. The fact is that there are many ways that we think about things that are more of the world than of God. Our on-going challenge is to come to a new mind and to think more as God thinks. This is only possible by his grace working through Scripture and Church teaching. It is significant that the ashes are smeared on the forehead or sprinkled on the head. We are called to a faith that transforms our mind. We are called to be “transformed by the renewal of our minds.” (Romans 12:2) Hence another option for the priest is to say, “Repent and believe the Good News” as he places the ashes.
So, how real are your ashes? Do you and I intend these things as we go forth or is it just a ritual, something to do because it’s “sorta neat.” Pray and reflect on the deeper meaning of ashes.
We are in the heart of Lent but for one day we step back into the Christmas cycle. It is nine months before Christmas and today we celebrate the true feast of the Incarnation. December 25 is the Lord’s birth but today is His incarnation as he is conceived in his Mother’s womb. TODAY the Word becomes flesh.