Category: Liturgy

Posted on

Reverencing Mystery

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:

  1. 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).
  2. 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!
  3. 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.
  4. 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).
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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!

Posted on

The Mass in Slow Motion: Sobriety at the Sign of Peace

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:

  1. The purpose of the prayer and rite is that the Church asks peace and unit for herself and the whole world.
  2. The faithful express to each other ecclesial communion and mutual charity before receiving Holy Communion.
  3. It is for local Bishops conferences to issue norms regarding how this sign of peace is exchanged.
  4. One should share the sign of peace only with those nearest to them. Hence the leaving of one’s pew is generally not appropriate.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.”
  7. 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.
  8. 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.

Posted on

How Real are Your Ashes?

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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.

Posted on

The Music of the Spheres and a Bach Fugue in the Sky! The Fascinating Connection between Cosmology and Church Music

There are some pretty fascinating connections between cosmology and the music that has predominated in different ages of the Church. Now I said cosmology, not cosmetology. Cosmetology is the art of beautifying women, the beauty shop owner is a cosmetologist. But cosmology is the understanding of the universe (cosmos) in which we live. How do we see andunderstand the universe in which we live and our relation to it? And what does all this have to do with Church music?  Hmm… let’s see.

Chant and the Unity of All Things- In the earliest days of Church music plainsong and chant predominated.  A melody was sung unaccompanied and with no harmony. In fact there is early Church legislation  that frowned on use of harmony seeing it too strongly connected with paganism. There was also a cosmology among early Christians that stressed the unity of all things. That everything, no matter how  varied was ultimately from God and was united in God. The Patristic Fathers (eg Ignatius of Antioch et al.) imagined in heaven the angels and saints and yet despite myriads of them singing they all sang as if with one voice.  This patristic  teaching found its way into the prefaces of the mass sung or recited just before the Holy, Holy. There it is said that we join our voices with that of the angels who with one voice (una voce dicentes) say: Holy Holy, Holy Lord…. Thus unaccompanied, unharmonized chant reflected a cosmology of the day that all things and all people were ultimately one, united in God and sustained by Him.  St Augustine imagined that, in the end, when Jesus finally handed over the kingdom to his father that there would be unus Christus amans seipsum (One Christ loving himself).  Gregorian Chant exemplified through unison singing the cosmology of the oneness, the unity of all things (cf Quasten: Music in Pagan and Christian Antiquity).

Polyphony and the Music of the Spheres – But moving forward into the middle ages and toward the Renaissance we begin to discover rich and extended harmonies introduced into Church Music. Here too a cosmology is lurking just beneath the surface. As the ancient Greek Philosophers began to be “rediscovered” the ancient cosmology of the “music of the spheres” began to re-emerge. The ancients pondered the planets and stars as they swept through space. Each planet was thought made a perfect circle around earth. As they made this perfect circle they each rang out a different tone or note. These different notes rang out as a beautiful celestial harmony. Now harmony in church music began to be seen as reflective of the celestial harmony. Such cosmology and celestial harmony reached its apex and perfection in Renaissance polyphony (see video below).

Mathematical Baroque and the Ellipse of the Planetary Paths – Another change in cosmology is reflected another form of music.  In the 16th Century Copernicus discovered that the planets orbited the sun, not the earth.  Studies of the planets by Kepler and others at the same time revealed that planets do not orbit in perfect circles but in elliptical orbits, in a kind of a mathematical progression. This is really the insight of a musical form perfected at the time called the “fugue” A fugue introduces a musical theme and then develops the theme in a kind of mathematical progression. Much music of the Baroque period exhibits a kind of mathematical. If you’ve ever heard the famous Canon in D by Pachelbel you will note that it begins with a simple theme that builds mathematically as the as the half notes become quarter notes, then eighth notes, then sixteenth and even 32nd notes at the high point. Math as music reflecting the mathematical progression of the planets sweeping out their ellipses! So again, music and cosmology inter-relate.

Modern dissonance and relativity –  In modern times, the theory of relativity has come to predominate. Most people interpret relativity to mean that truth varies (it does not) and that beauty and perfection are ultimately indefinable (everything is relative). Of course this is not what the scientific theory of relativity really holds but most people have allowed this interpretation of the theory to affect their cosmology, their interpretation of the universe. Thus in modern music dissonance and chaotic rhythm often predominate. The music reflects a kind of uncertainty with the truth and order of things and in an almost iconoclastic way many modern composers radically reinterpret harmony, melody, and rhythm. Much modern art also bespeaks this “relativistic” cosmology.

So there is a quick tour of how cosmology and music are linked. Our Church is very old and we have lived through many shifts in cosmology. Our music reflects this journey. Below are two videos that illustrate the music of the spheres and the art of the fugue.

This first Video represents the “music of the spheres wherein the ancients saw the planets and stars sweeping though the heavens and each sounding a musical tone that added up to a beautiful celestial harmony. This cosmology is beautifully reflected in the Renaissance polyphony of the Church. This piece is Victoria’s O Magnum Mysterium and is translated: “O great mystery and wondrous sacrament that animals would see the birth of Christ. O blessed Virgin whose womb merited to carry Jesus Christ. Alleluia!” Listen and imagine the planets sweeping through the heavens in celestial harmony!

This video is of a Fugue in D Major by JS Bach (BWV 532.2). Notice how the organist announces the main theme in her right hand. The left hand answers, then the feet. The basic theme is then taken through a series of “mathematical” progressions. The fugue reflected the cosmology of the day which saw the planets as sweeping out an ellipse (not a perfect circle) around the sun in a kind of  mathematical perfection and progression: a Bach fugue in the sky! If you’ve never seen a fine organist play get ready for an experience. It is said that the organist is the greatest virtuoso and you’ll see why as our lovely and gracious organist shows forth the incredible skill needed to play the great Bach organ works. Her hands and feet will amaze you as they fly through the notes, never missing one!

Posted on

Lost Liturgies File: The Churching of Women

Today as I write this it is the Feast of the Presentation (February 2). Some determine this feast to be the definitive end to the Christmas cycle and it is perhaps appropriate that yet another snowfall is descending on Washington. Biblically this feast commemorates the Jewish practice of a woman presenting herself at the temple forty days after the birth of a male child in order to be “purified” and blessed by the priest. Mary as an observant Jew fulfilled this obligation and it is recorded in Luke 2:22-24:

When the time of their purification according to the Law of Moses had been completed, Joseph and Mary took him to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord (as it is written in the Law of the Lord, “Every firstborn male is to be consecrated to the Lord”and to offer a sacrifice in keeping with what is said in the Law of the Lord: “a pair of doves or two young pigeons.”

The Jewish practice of “purifying” a woman after childbirth was set forth in the Book of Leviticus 12:1-8:

The LORD said to Moses, “Say to the Israelites: ‘A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period. On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over.  If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding. ” ‘When the days of her purification for a son or daughter are over, she is to bring to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting a year-old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a dove for a sin offering. He shall offer them before the LORD to make atonement for her, and then she will be ceremonially clean from her flow of blood.” ‘These are the regulations for the woman who gives birth to a boy or a girl. If she cannot afford a lamb, she is to bring two doves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.’ “

As you can see, there is a fairly negative concept at work here. A woman becomes ritually unclean by giving birth. This was due to the flow of blood and/or other fluids at birth. Even more distressing to modern notions is that a woman who gave birth to a daughter was considered ritually unclean for even longer! Alas, it is well that the power of the Church to bind and loose has freed us from this thinking. Keep in mind that this was ceremonial law, not moral law and, hence, the Church is not setting aside immutable moral law in abrogating such notions of ritual impurity.

Nevertheless the custom and instinct of blessing women after childbirth was retained in the Church with an altered understanding from Jewish teaching. That rite came down through the centuries and was intact until very recent times and was referred to in many places as the “Churching of Women.” (The official Latin title of the Rite was actually benedictio mulieris post partum – (the blessing of women after giving birth)).  The rite was largely discontinued in the 1960s in the wake of the Second Vatican Council. The Book of Blessings published in 1984 does contain a “Blessing of a Woman after Childbirth” but it is seldom used and is significantly altered from the old rite in use until about 1965.

The reasons for the discontinuance are many. I remember my mother and other  women of my mother’s generation saying they had been taught the Jewish history of this rite and thus rejected it for that reason. But the Catholic Church was clear to distinguish its practice from the Jewish roots. Pope Gregory as early as the 6th Century protested any notion that defilment was incurred by childbirth. Further, the prayers of the old “Churching of Women” Rite never mentioned a need for purification and spoke only of blessing and thanksgiving. So those who taught women of my Mother’s generation against this practice were probably engaged more in polemics than true Church history. Another reason for the discontinuance was probably and simply that so many things were dropped during the changes in the wake of the Council.

On this Feast of the Presentation I would like to recommend this beautiful ritual to your attention. In an extended sense it fulfills What Mary did today, forty days after the birth of Christ. Surely we do not understand it in an Old Testament way, but we rescue and fulfill the tradition with the beauty of Christian faith and the dignity of women who are mothers.

I have attached a PDF version of it here:  The Churching of Women.  Though it has never been required by the Church it is a beautiful way to welcome back and bless a woman who has perhaps been away for a few weeks  giving birth. She has labored well for her family, her child and the Church and this ritual can serve simultaneously as a blessing and thanksgiving extended by the Church to the noble women who are our mothers. The blessing can be given after a baptism, after mass, collectively to recent mothers, or individually. It is true that the current baptismal rite contains a blessing for the mother but this older rite is a more single and special blessing. The Pope’s recent Motu Proprio permitting the older forms of the sacraments to be used has made these older rituals also more available. Here is the concluding prayer of the rite:

Almighty, everlasting God, through the delivery of the blessed Virgin Mary, Thou hast turned into joy the pains of the faithful in childbirth; look mercifully upon this Thy handmaid, coming in gladness to Thy temple to offer up her thanks: and grant that after this life, by the merits and intercession of the same blessed Mary, she may merit to arrive, together with her offspring, at the joys of everlasting happiness. Through Christ our Lord.

I looked for a video depicting the Churching of Women but found none. Instead enjoy this video by Shirley Ceasar which celebrates the love of a mother as an image of God’s love:  The full cost of my love is “no-charge”

Posted on

The Seating Plan at the Last Supper

Most of us who live now think of the Last Supper in terms that are familiar to us. In our imagination Jesus and his apostles sit around a square table on chairs. Jesus is a the center and his apostles arrayed around him. The famous painting of Leonardo Da Vinci (See right)  is uppermost in most modern minds when thinking of the Last Supper.

But the real Last Supper was different in many significant ways. Some of the following I am about it present is still a matter of debate other aspects of it are undisputed.

  1. Jesus and the Apostles did not sit on chairs at a table. Rather they reclined on ground or on mats and pillows, leaning on their left elbow (either forward of back) and eating with their right hand. Their legs were stretched out behind them. (See picture at left, click to get a bigger size) This was the typical fashion for eating in the ancient world. That they reclined to eat is made plain in the Gospel of Mark: While they were reclining at the table eating, he said, “I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me–one who is eating with me(Mk 14:18).  It also explains some things that seem strange to us moderns. First of all why did John lean back on Jesus’ chest to ask him a question? (Jn 13:25;  21:20) This would be strange and physically awkward in a modern upright table setting. But reclining on one’s side on a mat meant you had to lean back to talk to the person next to you. There is also another strange scene where Jesus is reclining to eat in the home of a Pharisee and and a woman begins to anoint his feet (Luke 7:38).  In a modern upright table setting this would mean she’s have to be under the table. Strange indeed! But in the ancient setting the posture was such that one’s feet were behind and thus the woman could approach Jesus from behind and begin to anoint his feet without his prior knowledge.
  2. The Place of honor in modern western settings  at a typical long rectangular table is either at the center or at one end. Everyone is seated upright and facing in to the center and can generally see all the others well. However, in the ancient meal setting the table was  “U” shaped either as a half circle or with 90 degree arms. Instead of sitting at the center of the table (as in DaVinci’s painting above) the host or honored guest sat at the far left corner. Further, everyone sat on one side on the outside of the table allowing the inside of the table to open for servers.  The picture to the right is from a very early mosaic in Ravenna, probably made well before the 5th Century. At this early time the artists still had access to the memory of the actual practices at the time of Jesus and thus depicts the Last Supper as it was more likely arranged. Notice that Jesus is at the head of the left corner and his disciples are arrayed in a sloping ark behind and sloping to his left. This was the usual setting for the ancient meal and especially something as formal as a passover meal.
  3. It would seem that the place of second honor was at the other end of the U shaped table on the right corner. This would help explain why Peter is not at Jesus’ immediate right or left and has to motion to John across the room to lean back and ask Jesus a question (Jn:13:24-25). Since Peter would like have had the other place of honor it makes sense that he would be across the room and unable to ask Jesus himself.

Thus the whole setting of the Last Supper was rather a different setting that most modern people imagine. Leaning on elbows and eating with one hand would all be very awkward to us. But I suppose they’d think what we do strange as well. The question of the arrangement also factors into modern discussions of liturgical orientation and Mass facing the the people vs. Mass facing away from the congregation toward God. I’m sure that this will emerge in the discussion but it is clear from the Ravenna Mosaic that Mass facing east toward God and not toward the people did not offend ancient notions of the Mass as the “Lord’s Supper.” To the ancients formal meals featured the honored guest at one end angled away a bit  from most of the other guests.

I am sure that this final observation may generate some discussion in the comments but it is also meant to explain some of the theology and history that Pope Benedict has asked us to consider in the discussion of orientation in the Liturgy.

The following clip is a humorous scene from the Passion of the Christ. Mary is puzzled over Jesus making a tall table to eat at. She cannot imagine that anyone would want to eat sitting up. She says, “This will never catch on!”

Posted on

The Didascalia: A Sometimes Humorous Look at the Liturgy of the Early Church

duraAs you may know the Catholic Faith was illegal in the Roman Empire prior to 313 AD when the Emperor Constantine issued the Edict of Milan permitting the Christian Faith to publicly flourish. Prior to that time Church buildings as we know them today were rare. Mass was usually celebrated in houses.

Now careful here. These “houses” were usually rather large, with a central courtyard or large room that permitted something a little more formal than Mass “around the dining room table.”  I remember being taught (incorrectly) that these early Masses were informal and emphasized an informal communal quality and were celebrated facing the people. Well that isn’t really true. People didn’t just sit around a table or sit in circle, not at all. They sat or stood formally and everyone faced one direction: East.

In the drawing  above right you can see the layout of an ancient House Church from the excavated 3rd Century House Church at Dura Europos (Syria). Click on the picture for a clearer view. The assembly room is to the left and a priest or bishop is conducting a liturgy facing east at and altar against the east wall. A baptistery is on the right and a deacon is guarding the entrance door. The lonely looking deacon in the back of the assembly hall is there to “preserve good order” as you will read below. The Picture below left shows the baptistery of the Dura Europa House Church.

What is remarkable about these early liturgies is how formal they were even though conducted under less than ideal circumstances. The following text is from the Didiscalia, a document written in about 250 AD. Among other things it gives rather elaborate details about the celebration of the early Catholic Mass in these “House Liturgies.” I would like to print an excerpt here and make my own comments in RED. You will find that there are some rather humorous remarks in this ancient text towards the end.

Now, in your gatherings, in the holy Church, convene yourselves modestly in places of the brethren, as you will, in a manner pleasing and ordered with care. [So these “house liturgies were NOT informal Masses. Good order and careful attention to detail was essential].  Let the place of the priests be separated in a part of the house that faces east. [So, even in these early house Masses the sanctuary, the place where the clergy ministered was an area distinct from where the laity gathered. People were not all just gathered around a dining room table.]  In the midst of them is placed the bishop’s chair, and with him let the priests be seated. Likewise, and in another section let the lay men be seated facing east. [Prayer was conducted facing to the east, not facing the people].  For thus it is proper: that the priests sit with the bishop in a part of the house to the east and after them the lay men and the lay women, [notice that men and women sat in separate sections. This was traditional in many churches until rather recently, say the last 150 years.] and  when you stand to pray, the ecclessial leaders rise first, and after them the lay men, and again, then the women. Now, you ought to face to east to pray for, as you know, scripture has it, Give praise to God who ascends above the highest heavens to the east. [Again note, Mass was NOT celebrated facing the people as some suppose of the early Church. Everyone was to face to the east, clergy and people. Everyone faced one direction. The text cites Scripture as the reason for this. God is to the East, the origin of the light.]

Now, of the deacons, one always stands by the eucharistic oblations and the others stand outside the door watching those who enter [Remember, this was a time of persecution and the early Christians were careful only to allow baptized and bona fide members to enter the sacred mysteries. No one was permitted to enter Sacred liturgy until after having been baptized. This was called the disciplina arcanis or “discipline of the secret.” Deacons guarded the door to maintain this discipline], and afterwards, when you offer let them together minister in the church. [Once the door was locked and the Mass begin it would seem that the deacons took their place in the sanctuary. However it also seems that one deacon remained outside the sanctuary and maintained “good order” among th laity.] And if there is one to be found who is not sitting in his place let the deacon who is within, rebuke him, and make him to rise and sit in his fitting place…also, in the church the young ones ought to sit separately, if there is a place, if not let them stand. Those of more advanced age should sit separately; the boys should sit separately or their fathers and mothers should take them and stand; and let the the young girls sit separately, if there is really not a place, let them stand behind the women; let the young who are married and have little children stand separately, the older women and widows should sit separately. [This may all seem a bit complicated but the bottom line is that seating was according to Gender and Age: the men on one side, the women on the other, older folks to the front and the younger ones to the back. Also those caring for young children should be in a separate area. See – Even in the old days there was a “cry room!”] And a deacon should see that each one who enters gets to his place, and that none of these sits in an inappropriate place. Likewise, the deacon ought to see that there are none who whisper or sleep or laugh or nod off. [Wait a minute! Do you mean to tell me that some of these early Christians did such things! Say it isn’t so! Today ushers do this preserving of good order but the need remains!] For in the Church it is necessary to have discipline, sober vigilance, and attentive ear to the Word of the Lord. [Well that is said pretty plain and the advice is still needed].

One of the oldest House Churches was the House of Peter in Capernaum. There is evidence of a House Church where early masses were celebrated going back to as early as the 1st Century. Wall writings from that period were found. Over time the House Church was enlarged. After the Edict of Constantine a Byzantine Church was built on the site. But it was destroyed after the Byzantine period in the wake of Christian/Muslim conflicts. The whole area  of Capernaum lay buried until the 1940s when it was rediscovered. Unfortunately in the 1960s a terribly ugly Church was built atop the ruins and it looks like a space ship that has landed on these ancient ruins. Here are a couple of videos that discuss the House and later House Church of St. Peter in Capernaum.

Posted on

From Heaven to Earth and Back Again – Celebrating a Great Hymn of the Church

One of the greatest English hymns ever written, is “For All the Saints.” It is a wide and sweeping vision of the Church Militant and the Church Triumphant. It’s imagery is regal and joyful, it’s poetry majestic and masterful. A vivid picture is painted in the mind as the wondrous words move by. If you ask me it is a masterpiece. Many people know the opening line, but most have never sung it all the way through and thus miss its wondrous portrait.  A number of  years ago I committed words of this hymn to memory, very much like my father who loved to memorize things that moved him.

Spend a few moments now reflecting on this masterwork. It was written in 1864 by William Walsham How, an Anglican Bishop. Ralph Vaughan Williams set it to a stirring melody in 1906. I love to play this hymn at the organ since it has a challenging but exciting “walking base” played  by the feet and big rich chords in the hands. In his recent outreach to the Anglicans the Pope speaks of the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion as a “precious gift” and treasure to shared” (AC, III). This hymn from the Anglican tradition is surely one of those treasures. Permit me to set forth each verse and then comment.

First we cast our eyes heavenward to the Church Triumphant:

For all the saints, who from their labours rest, Who Thee by faith before the world confessed, Thy Name, O Jesus, be forever blessed. Alleluia!

Here then in the first verses is stated the purpose of the hymn. Namely, that we sing to and praise God for all those saints who have finished their course here and entered into the rest of the Lord. Like the the Lord they can say, “It is finished.” Like St. Paul they can say, I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day (2 Tim 4:7-8). These saints declared to world the holy and blessed name of Jesus by their words and deeds. They confessed and did not deny him. To them and us Jesus made a promise: Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven (Matt 10:32). And we too are summoned to take up the cry: “Blessed be the Name of the Lord!”

Thou wast their Rock, their Fortress and their Might;
Thou, Lord, their Captain in the well fought fight;
Thou, in the darkness drear, their one true Light.
Alleluia!

Salvation and the living of a holy and courageous life is only possible by the grace of God. Only if God be our rock,  our defender and our strength can we stand a chance in the battle of this earthly life. Jesus said, “Without me you can do nothing.” (Jn 15:5) St. Paul taught that the ancient Israelites made it through the desert only by Christ for he wrote: they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them in the desert, and that rock was Christ. (1 Cor 10:4). So Jesus is a rock in a weary land, a shelter in a time of storm! Only in Christ and by his light could they have the strength for the battle and win through to the victory.

O blest communion, fellowship divine!
We feebly struggle, they in glory shine;
Yet all are one in Thee, for all are Thine.
Alleluia!

Ah here then is our connecting verse. We, here on earth (the Church Militant) share blessed communion with the saints in heaven because we are one in Christ. The body of Christ is one and so we hav communion with the saints. We are not in separate compartments unconnected to the saints in heaven. No, we are one in Christ and have communion with them. And though we feebly struggle here on earth, the vision of the glory they already share and  our communion with them strengthens us. The Book of Hebrews referring to the saints in heaven says: Therefore since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders us and the sin that so easily entangles, and let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us! (Heb 12:1-2)

Having gazed heavenward and derived strength from our mystical communion with the Saints in Christ, the hymn now sets forth the trials of the Church militant and counsels: Courage!

O may Thy soldiers, faithful, true and bold,
Fight as the saints who nobly fought of old,
And win with them the victor’s crown of gold.
Alleluia!

We now who live here are told to be like courageous soldiers holding firm and loyal to the end to the true faith. We like they must often fight bravely in a world that is hostile to Christ and his truth. So fight we must, in a noble way for the crown comes only after the cross. But the victory will one day be ours. It doesn’t always look that way now, But Christ has already won the victory. And even if this world deprives us, ridicules us or even kills us, the victor’s Crown awaits to all who remain faithful. Jesus said, You will be hated by all because of me, be he who perseveres to the end will be saved. (Matt 10:22)

Now comes a call to courage rooted in song that faith puts in our hearts. Psalm 40 says: I waited patiently for the LORD; he turned to me and heard my cry. He put a new song in my mouth,  a hymn of praise to our God. Many will see and fear and put their trust in the LORD. It is a  song that echoes from heaven, through the words of scripture and the teachings of the Church: Victory is our today!  Here the call and source of courage in this verse:

And when the strife is fierce, the warfare long,
Steals on the ear the distant triumph song,
And hearts are brave, again, and arms are strong.
Alleluia!

For now,  it is God’s will that we hear the call “still to fight on.” For now we are in the Church militant. But here the verses of the hymn direct us back toward heavenly things and the last things. For, one day the battle will end for us. The hymn speaks elegantly of the “golden evening” of life and the “rest” that death will one day bring. And, likely through the purifying effects of purgatory, we shall one day pass where we will cast off our burdens, our sorrows and final sins. There the Lord will wipe every tear from our eyes (cf Rev. 21:4).

The golden evening brightens in the west;
Soon, soon to faithful warriors comes their rest;
Sweet is the calm of paradise the blessed.
Alleluia!

And then an even more glorious day breaks forth. The hymn closes the circle and we are back in heaven again! There the saints are clothed in bright array and the heavenly liturgy is beautifully captured in two lines as it describes the saints in worshipful praise as the King of Glory, Jesus passes by in triumuphal procession. What a glorious vision this verse provides:

But lo! there breaks a yet more glorious day;
The saints triumphant rise in bright array;
The King of glory passes on His way.
Alleluia!

And the hymn takes one final look. We have come full circle from heaven to earth and back to heaven again. We have made our journey but now the hymn bids us to cast our glance outward and see the magnificent procession that continues for all who will come after us. Jesus had said, “And I when I be lifted from the earth with draw all men unto me.” (Jn 12:32) So now look fellow Christian! Look outward from a heavenly perspective and see the harvest as Christ draws countless numbers to himself:

From earth’s wide bounds, from ocean’s farthest coast,
Through gates of pearl streams in the countless host,
And singing to Father, Son and Holy Ghost:
Alleluia!

Ah, what a hymn. What a sweeping vision and woundrous celebration of  the Christian life. Though the battle be now engaged, victory is sure if we but stand firm and hold to God’s unchanging hand.