Good Distinctions

Introduction

If you ask the average American on the street what religious freedom is, you will get all sorts of different ideas. Some places, you will hear: “keep your religion to yourself. Haven’t you heard of the separation of Church and State?” Others might answer: “People are free to believe whatever they want. Who am I to judge if they’re right or not?” Still others might claim that religious freedom means the ability to pray privately however you want.

None of these are what religious freedom actually is specifically. But it should also be noted that the American constitutional notion of religious freedom is not precisely what the Catholic Church holds religious freedom to be. And, so, the object of today’s exploration is to look at what religious freedom is in the United States of America. Then, more importantly, to view what religious freedom is, in principle, as defined by the Catholic Church at the Second Vatican Council. 

Separation of Church and State

The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, the first of the ten amendments which comprise the Bill of Rights, adopted on December 15, 1791, reads thusly:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

For our purposes we will focus on the first phrase: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” This is known as the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

I do not have the time or space here to provide an exhaustive account of American jurisprudence on the matter of religious liberty. But, I do want to draw out a few key moments in American History where this question came up and which will give us a clearer view of what religious freedom is.

Thomas Jefferson’s Danbury Letter

In a letter to the Danbury Baptists, Thomas Jefferson wrote:

“Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem (Danbury Letter).”

He wrote this letter in response to a letter from the Danbury Baptists in order to explain his views on federalism and the meaning of the Establishment Clause. The main meaning of his “wall of separation between Church & State” is an assurance that the government would not interfere with the church of the Danbury Baptists or give special treatment to any particular religion or sect. Justice Hugo Black, an appointee of Franklin Roosevelt to the Supreme Court, would even refer later to the Danbury explanation as an “almost authoritative declaration” of the Founders’ intent for the Establishment Clause (cf. Bill of Rights Institute).

Two days after sending this letter, though, Jefferson attended a religious service in the House of Representatives location in the Capitol. As Daniel Roeber notes: “Jefferson and others recognized the benefits of developing a national identity that transcended interdenominational division (Roeber).” Yet, since 1795, public worship was administered at the partially completed Capitol Building each Sunday at noon (cf. ibid).

Religious liberty was the motivation of the Plymouth Pilgrims and many Catholics who settled in Maryland. However, the colonial period was far from united on religious matters. Protestant sects disagreed amongst themselves. Catholics were seen as untrustworthy papists of low social stature. Jewish people were tolerated, at best. The nascent country needed an identity which transcended these divisions. The importance of developing a national identity was something that would take over a hundred years more as most identified most readily with their own state. 

Lemon V. Kurtzman and the Three Pronged Test (1971)

Let us now skip forward quite a bit to 1971. In that year, a case was brought to the Supreme Court in which the Court considered whether a law in Pennsylvania violated the Establishment Clause. The law reimbursed religious schools with state funds for textbooks and salaries for teachers for non-public, non-secular schools. The Court responded 8-0 with a three-pronged test for determining whether a given statute is constitutional. 

The government may assist religion only if:

* The primary purpose of the assistance is secular

* The assistance must neither promote nor inhibit religion, and 

* There is no excessive entanglement between church and state

In this specific case, the Pennsylvania law was struck down because of excessive entanglement between church and state. It is worth noticing here what is implicit: there is nothing wrong, in the American understanding, with some implicit entanglement between Church and State. The issue, ultimately, is when the line is crossed towards “excessive.”

Marsh v. Chambers (1983)

The Nebraska legislature opened each of its sessions with a publicly funded chaplain offering a prayer. The Supreme Court, in Marsh v. Chambers (1983) determined that this was NOT a violation of the Establishment Clause. Though this instance does not pass the “Lemon” three-pronged test, the Justices argued that there is a long historical custom going back to the Continental Congress and the very Congress that resulted in the Bill of Rights. 

In the majority opinion, Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote: 

“In light of the unambiguous and unbroken history of more than 200 years, there can be no doubt that the practice of opening legislative sessions with prayer has become part of the fabric of our society. To invoke Divine guidance on a public body entrusted with making the laws is not, in these circumstances, an ‘establishment’ of religion or a step toward establishment; it is simply a tolerable acknowledgment of beliefs widely held among the people of this country (Citation: 463 US 783).”

As we saw with the Capitol Building services, there is not a strict and non-transversable wall of separation of Church and State. 

Other Supreme Court Cases

I now want to walk through several other Supreme Court cases that touched on religious liberty. Again, this list is not exhaustive, but it can help us round out our picture.

Reynolds v. United States (1879)

In 1879, in Reynolds v. United States, the Court upheld a federal law banning polygamy. They claimed that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment forbids government from regulating belief but that government can nonetheless punish acts which it judges to be criminal, regardless of religious belief.

Torcaso v. Watkins (1961)

As of 1961, the State of Maryland had a requirement that a candidate for public office needed to declare that they believed in God in order to be eligible for the position. Unanimously, in Torcaso v. Watkins, the Court agreed that this gives preference to believers who were willing to publicly profess; therefore, Maryland was aiding theistic religions and beliefs overr atheistic ones.

Engel v. Vitale (1962)

In the 1962 case Engel v. Vitale, the Court ruled 6-1 that a New York prayer to begin the school day was unconstitutional and in violation of the Establishment Clause despite being a nondenominational prayer. 

Abington v. Schempp & Murray v. Curlett (1963)

The following year in 1963, the Court heard the case of Abington v. Schempp and the related case of Murray v. Curlett. In both cases, public schools were involving students in daily Bible readings and in the latter case of the daily recitation of the Lord’s Prayer. Both of these cases were seen as violating both the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause.

Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)

In 1972, Amish parents sued the State of Wisconsin for requiring that their children attend school until the age of 16. The unanimous decision held that the Amish teens were exempt from the state law of requiring 14 to 16 year olds to attend school because the Amish religion required a living apart from worldly influences. In other words, though it was in the state’s interest that the children receive two years more schooling, this did not outweigh the free exercise of the religion of the Amish.

McDaniel v. Paty (1978)

A Tennessee law barring clergymen from serving in public office was challenged in 1978 in McDaniel v. Paty. The Court unanimously ruled that this law was a violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment (as well as the Fourteenth Amendment) because it made holding public office contingent on surrendering religious beliefs. 

Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah (1993)

In 1993, the Court heard Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah. There were ordinances passed by the city of Hialeah, Florida that banned animal sacrifice. These laws were not written in a neutral and generally applicable way. They specifically targeted Santeria, a Afro-Caribbean religion based on Yoruba and some Catholic elements. Because animal sacrifice is an important part of Santeria, the Court ruled that the ordinances were designed as a form of religious persecution in violation of the Free Exercise Clause.  

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe (2000)

The Sante Fe Independent School District of Texas in 2000 had a policy permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer at football games. In a 6-3 decision, the Court upheld an appellate court’s ruling that this was a violation of the Establishment Clause. The school district tried to argue that because it was student led and initiated, it was private speech, and, thus, protected under the First Amendment. However, Justice John Paul Stevens argued that it was not private speech because it was done over the P.A. system, by a student body representative, under school faculty supervision, and under school policy. Also, it did not pass the “Lemon” test because it did not have a secular purpose and was implemented with the purpose of endorsing school prayer.

Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow (2004)

California’s Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow in 2004 investigated the policy requiring each elementary school class to say the Pledge of Allegiance daily. Michael Newdow, a father of one of the students, challenged this because of the words therein contained of “under God.” Because Newdow did not have custody of the child, he did not have standing to bring the case to court. However, in concurring opinions, Justices William Rehnquist, Sandra Day O’Connor, and Clarence Thomas, said that the words “under God” do NOT violate the Establishment Clause.

As the Bill of Rights Institute reports:

“Further, they noted, ‘the phrase ‘under God’ in the Pledge seems, as a historical matter, to sum up the attitude of the Nation’s leaders, and to manifest itself in many of our public observances. Examples of patriotic invocations of God and official acknowledgments of religion’s role in our Nation’s history abound.’ They concluded that ‘the recital, in a patriotic ceremony pledging allegiance to the flag and to the Nation, of the descriptive phrase ‘under God’ cannot possibly lead to the establishment of a religion, or anything like it’ (Bill of Rights Institute).”

Van Orden v. Perry (2005)

In a similar case in Van Orden V. Perry in 2005, in a 5-4 decision, the Court determined that a monument inscribed with the Ten Commandments on Texas State Capitol grounds did not violate the Establishment Clause. There were 38 other monuments on the grounds and highlighted different parts of Texan history. 

Justice William Rehnquist argued that the monument had a religious message, however, it was presented in a context showing that:

“[a] secular moral message about proper standards of social conduct and a message about the historic relation between those standards and the law.” 

Therefore, the religious message is part of a broader context of cultural heritage and patrimony of the people of Texas. 

Teaching Evolution in Schools

There are two Supreme Court cases worth looking at briefly which discuss the teaching of evolution in schools. Generally, there is a perceived discrepancy of considerable magnitude between the theory of evolution and the evidence for creation from the Book of Genesis. I am not getting into that minefield right now, but these cases show how religious liberty and the government of the United States interact.

Epperson v. Arkansas (1968)

In Epperson v. Arkansas in 1968, Arkansas passed a law saying that public school teachers were banned from teaching evolution because it was in contradiction with the Bible account of creation.

Justice Abe Fortas wrote in the majority opinion:

“In the present case, there can be no doubt that Arkansas has sought to prevent its teachers from discussing the theory of evolution because it is contrary to the belief of some that the Book of Genesis must be the exclusive source of doctrine as to the origin of man. No suggestion has been made that Arkansas' law may be justified by considerations of state policy other than the religious views of some of its citizens (Epperson v. Arkansas).”

He continued to argue that the law of Arkansas is clearly not a religiously neutral act. Instead it was the targeting of a particular theory on Biblical grounds, literally read. Therefore, it is a violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

Edwards v. Aguillard (1987)

Nineteen years later in Edwards v. Aguillard in 1987, the Court examined a Louisiana law forbidding the teaching of the theory of evolution in public schools unless it was accompanied by an equal treatment of creationism. In a 7-2 decision, the Court declared that this law violated the Establishment Clause because it failed all three parts of the “Lemon” test. It lacked secular purpose, endorsed the view that a supernatural being created mankind, and it entangled the interests of Church and State by seeking “to employ the symbolic and financial support of government to achieve a religious purpose (Citation: 482 US 578).”

The American View of Religious Liberty

In sum, the evolution of religious liberty in the United States has its basis on the cultural milieu of the time. In the colonial period and in the early days of the country, there were few true atheists. Deism was exceptionally popular, but even Deists acknowledge a belief in the Creator. So, a nondenominational prayer to the Creator at the state of a session of Congress was a forgone conclusion. Since that time, the United States of America has become far more cultural, religiously, and politically diverse. As a result of this undeniable diversity, it cannot be said that the United States is currently a Judeo-Christian nation, even if the case can strongly be made that it began that way. 

Private speech and religious practice is unambiguously protected. However, as we have seen, the nature of the public exercise of religion is questioned when public funds are in the mix. Each of the examples mentioned above, and where problems usually arise, is in publicly-funded schools, government property or buildings, and in relation to public office. However, the Supreme Court has upheld that religious beliefs which are not criminal are protected in the public sphere. A religious person need not check their religion at the door when engaging in public matters (and how could they, really). 

The First Amendment of the Constitution protects all Americans against the establishment of any one religion to the competition or detriment of any others. Any law which would exclude a person from public life on the basis of religion is unconstitutional. And the free exercise of religion is safeguarded and held in a careful balance with the interests of all other religions, beliefs, and ideas. 

This reality is a blessing and a curse for Catholics. On the one hand, we have freedom to boldly speak the truth without fear of legal reprisal, within due limits. Yet, on the other hand, there is a bland tolerance of false religions and ideas antithetical to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and His Church.

The Church’s View of Religious Freedom

All of that being said, what is the Catholic view of religious freedom? Is it precisely the American view or are there significant differences? When I speak to American Catholics about this question, there is no real sense of a firm understanding of the Church on the matter. And, frankly, when people read the official Church teaching, they do not understand the nuances offered there. I am going to do my best to help shed some light on the subject! 

Dignitatis Humanae

On December 7, 1965, Pope St. Paul VI promulgated a Declaration on Religious Freedom which is one of the sixteen documents of the Second Vatican Council. Dignitatis Humanae (DH) is only fifteen paragraph sections long and is highly worth reading in its entirety. What I will offer here is a brief summary and the main conclusions. In the interest of keeping this to the point, I am going to be looking at three questions:

* What is religious freedom in the eyes of the Catholic Church?

* Why is religious freedom based on human dignity?

* How has God revealed religious liberty?

What is religious freedom in the eyes of the Catholic Church?

God has made Himself known to man, shown us how we are to serve Him, and how we are saved in Christ and come to eternal blessedness. The Church unequivocally affirms in Dignitatis Humanae that:

“We believe that this one true religion subsists in the Catholic and Apostolic Church, to which the Lord Jesus committed the duty of spreading it abroad among all men. Thus He spoke to the Apostles: ‘Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have enjoined upon you’ (Matt. 28: 19-20) (DH, 1).”

Many of those who are suspicious of the Second Vatican Council read this not as the full throated profession of Christ and His Church that it is. Instead, they read the word “subsist” in an uncharitable and ignorant way. We could say that the one true religion IS the Catholic and Apostolic Church, but subsists is actually a richer word. Subsists means to begin in a certain way and remain in that way. In other words, there is no true religion apart from the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church of Jesus Christ, as our Lord began it and has constantly sustained it to this day. The Church which, of course, is His own Mystical Body.

The Council Fathers continue:

“On their part, all men are bound to seek the truth, especially in what concerns God and His Church, and to embrace the truth they come to know, and to hold fast to it (DH, 1).”

Elsewhere in Vatican II in the documents Lumen Gentium and Ad Gentes we hear: 

“Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved… The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a ‘bodily’ manner and not ‘in his heart’ (LG, 14).”

For those who claim that Vatican II is weak on doctrine and the truth and is overly ambiguous or some other such nonsense, it is abundantly clear that they never read the documents or they have read them in an uncharitable and ignorant way.

At any rate, all of this being said, what is religious freedom? The Council Fathers write:

“Religious freedom, in turn, which men demand as necessary to fulfill their duty to worship God, has to do with immunity from coercion in civil society. Therefore it leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion and toward the one Church of Christ (DH, 1).”

So, the moral duty of man towards the Catholic Church remains untouched by religious freedom. What is vital to understand the Church’s view is that phrase: “immunity from coercion in civil society.” That is the key. 

A more substantial definition is then given, with very official verbiage:

“This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits (DH, 2).”

The Church has always held to this doctrine. We know, for example, that the Church has always condemned forced conversions as illegitimate and compelled baptisms as invalid. As St. John Paul II often said: the Faith is always proposed, not imposed.’

Why is religious freedom based on human dignity?

This right to religious freedom is rooted in human dignity. The Church even calls for this right to be enshrined in constitutional law throughout the world. 

Our human dignity points to the fact that God endowed man with reason and free will and therefore personal responsibility. We are impelled by human nature and bound by moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. Once we know the truth, we are bound to adhere to it and order our lives towards it. The Church declares that religious freedom is thus necessary because:

“... men cannot discharge these obligations in a manner in keeping with their own nature unless they enjoy immunity from external coercion as well as psychological freedom (DH, 2).”

There is no love without freedom, there is no seeking of the truth without freedom. So, religious freedom does not belong to feelings and subjective disposition. No. It belongs to the very nature of the human person. 

Faith comes from what is heard. And as truth is discovered, “it is by a personal assent that men are to adhere to it,” to use another phrase from Dignitatis Humanae (DH, 2). Personal though this assent is, religious freedom also extends to religious communities. They should not be hindered:

“either by legal measures or by administrative action on the part of government, in the selection, training, appointment, and transferral of their own ministers, in communicating with religious authorities and communities abroad, in erecting buildings for religious purposes, and in the acquisition and use of suitable funds or properties (DH, 4).”

Nor should they be hindered from public teaching and witness of faith, whether spoken or written. As the preeminent religious community, all of these freedoms belong to the family as well.

How has God revealed religious liberty?

In Divine Revelation, the doctrine of religious freedom finds its roots. The Council Fathers write:

“Revelation does not indeed affirm in so many words the right of man to immunity from external coercion in matters religious. It does, however, disclose the dignity of the human person in its full dimensions (DH, 9).”

First and foremost, man’s response to God in faith must be free for it to be legitimate. No one can be forced to become Catholic. The act of faith is a free act. Forcing someone to love is not love at all. As Dignitatis Humanae states:

“It is therefore completely in accord with the nature of faith that in matters religious every manner of coercion on the part of men should be excluded. In consequence, the principle of religious freedom makes no small contribution to the creation of an environment in which men can without hindrance be invited to the Christian faith, embrace it of their own free will, and profess it effectively in their whole manner of life (DH, 10).”

God is very clear, however, in what He has revealed that we are to boldly proclaim the truth. Therefore, are we to be “tolerant” and “accepting” of other religions and simply have a bland indifference? Absolutely not! The Council Fathers write:

“The disciple is bound by a grave obligation toward Christ, his Master, ever more fully to understand the truth received from Him, faithfully to proclaim it, and vigorously to defend it, never-be it understood-having recourse to means that are incompatible with the spirit of the Gospel. At the same time, the charity of Christ urges him to love and have prudence and patience in his dealings with those who are in error or in ignorance with regard to the faith (DH, 14).”

Freedom from Coercion

Freedom from coercion in religious matters is the crux of the Church’s view of religious liberty. Really, it pertains directly to the establishing of an environment in which a person may freely seek and adhere to the one, true religion. Though there are elements of truth outside the Catholic Church, there is no salvation. If someone outside the visible bounds of the Church is saved, it is only by the superabundant merits of Jesus Christ and the instrumentality of the Catholic Church, the sacrament of salvation.

We must not be indifferent. We must boldly preach the truth at all times. And we must not be afraid to stand up for these beliefs, even when it is inconvenient. In some contexts doing so can lead to our bodily martyrdom. In the United States of America, the constitutional order is more or less compatible with the free practice of the Catholic religion. However, we must be cognizant that there is a distinct difference between religious freedom in the American idea and the Catholic teaching.

The American notion protects us, to an extent, but it is more geared to creating a national identity that transcends religion. This should make any faithful Catholic nervous because it is working. How many American Catholics do you know who are more concerned about being American Catholics than being Catholics who happen to be American? 

Religious freedom is freedom from coercion. Ultimately, it is freedom FOR the truth, FOR the Catholic Faith. We cannot forget this, lest we descend into a banal coexistence or tolerance without the drive to share the fullness of the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ. We cannot be indifferent and we cannot be content to allow anyone to stay in error. We must respect their right to religious freedom by not coercing them and respecting their journey, in good conscience. But the task and privilege of evangelization remains in full force.

NOTE: THIS EPISODE WAS PUBLISHED BEFORE OUR REBOOT. willwrightcatholic.com is now gooddistinctions.com

Why Do Bad Things Happen to Good People?

St. Thomas Aquinas when answering the question of whether God exists brings forward two objections. The second objection says that everything we see in the natural world can be explained by nature or by human reason; therefore, we do not need to suppose God’s existence. To this objection, St. Thomas says that we can trace back what is done in nature back to the first cause, which must be an immovable and self-necessary first principle, which we call God. He then references his Five Ways which are converging and convincing arguments to demonstrate God’s existence. 

For the remainder of today, I would like to focus on the first objection that St. Thomas raises to God’s existence. If you are unfamiliar with the disputed question format used by St. Thomas in the Summa and in many other scholastic works, it goes like this. There are objections posed, then a section where a brief response is given beginning with “on the contrary.” Then the main teaching is delivered in the “I answer that” section and is followed by the specific responses given for the objection posed at the beginning of the article.  

For the first objection to God’s existence, St. Thomas puts it this way:

“It seems that God does not exist; because if one of two contraries be infinite, the other would be altogether destroyed. But the word ‘God’ means that He is infinite goodness. If, therefore, God existed, there would be no evil discoverable; but there is evil in the world. Therefore God does not exist (ST I, q.2, a.3).”

Of course, this is an argument, not a slam dunk. God does exist and He is goodness itself. But can you feel the weight of the argument? If God is infinitely good, then why is there evil? In other words, why do bad things happen to good people?

Here on Earth, there is no sufficient answer to this argument. How can there be, really? We see evil happen and sometimes the human suffering which results is so extreme that no justice seems to ever come to fruition. Or perhaps it is not moral evil but physical evil. Why do children develop horrifically painful diseases? Why do mothers and fathers lose their children to miscarriage and stillbirth? In the goodness of creation, why are there devastating natural disasters that cause widespread death, destruction, and catastrophe? 

The Problem of Evil

This so-called “Problem of Evil” has plagued philosophers, theologians, and ethicists for millennia. The presence of evil and suffering in the world is the strongest argument against an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient God. The logical formulation of the problem of evil is laid out in Aquinas’ objection, and we will get to the response to this objection a bit later on. The evidential formulation, on the other hand, is the one that packs the biggest punch because we can see gratuitous evil, pain, suffering, and misery. No one needs proof that evil exists; we need look no further than our own sins or the sins of those around us to show its existence. The reason that the evidence of evil is so powerful is not based on its logical intricacies but because of emotion. 

The natural human response to suffering, pain, blatant evil, and injustice is repulsion. We have a visceral, subconscious reaction to the evil that we encounter. And we wonder: how could God allow this? I imagine that if you have never asked this question, “how could God allow this?” then you are fortunate enough to have not suffered a real trauma. 

I want to share a time of suffering in my own life to begin to show how we can handle inevitable sufferings when they come. My wife and I suffered a miscarriage a few years ago, and I did not know how to process it. I did not allow myself to recognize and feel my feelings. And after a few months, I realized that I was very angry with God and was depressed and despairing. How could He do this to me and to my wife? What did I do wrong? It was horrendous. I still have a profoundly vivid memory of lowering my son Gabriel’s little casket into a hole in the ground. It was truly awful and unnatural. I know that my wife and I desired Baptism for him and I believe firmly that he is in Heaven interceding for us. But I wanted to hold him. I wanted to get to know him here on Earth and watch him grow like my other boys. Yet, it was not to be. 

Since then, we suffered another miscarriage but this time I felt my feelings a bit more intentionally. I talked about the experience with friends and my priest. I grieved. I wept. I prayed. But I did not despair this time. What was different? Most recently, I experienced the same emotions but I recognized and gave them over to Jesus, as best as I could muster. I aimed to unite my suffering with His Cross in a more profound way than a few years ago. The suffering was imminently present, but by grace I was able to abandon myself more to Providence, I suppose. My response of faith and abandonment to Divine Providence was not perfect but I am positive that I grew over these last years. 

So, when suffering, pain, and evil come, and they will, and we ask “how could God allow this?”, what is our response? Before we get more into the response to the problem of evil, I want to look at what evil actually is. That way, we can better recognize it and even avoid it, to some extent. 

What is Evil? 

The Catholic Encyclopedia teaches that there are three kinds of evil: physical, moral, and metaphysical. 

Physical evil arises from nature and includes sickness, accident, death, anxiety, disappointment, disabilities, and imperfections in regards to the full development of human powers. 

Moral evil is the “deviation of human volition from the prescriptions of the moral order and the action which results from that deviation (Catholic Encyclopedia).” These are intentional acts which transgress against the precepts of the Catholic religion or of the nature of the human person, generally. 

Metaphysical evil is the mutual limitation of various parts of the natural world. The climate and natural causes adversely affect plants and animals. Predators rely on the destruction of life to remain alive themselves. The constituent parts of nature also have a system of perpetual decay and renewal. This type of “evil” is really more a relative perfection rather than an imperfection because creation was designed, as it is, by God.

In all cases, evil is negative, not positive. Evil consists in the loss or deprivation of something necessary for perfection. Pain has a disturbing effect on the sufferer and is, thus, a physical evil. Moral evil is evil because we are using reason improperly to choose a lesser good or neglect a higher good.

Some argue that evil does not actually exist. Instead it is merely a “lesser good” in place of a higher good that ought to be. It is an imperfection where perfection ought to be. It is a hole where there ought to be a whole. But our human experience points to a more complicated reality. 

What we can be sure of, though, is that God did not create evil nor does he cause evil. Nothing is evil in itself, but is evil in relation to other things or persons. The same fire which burns and destroys gives life-giving light and heat. The same water which drowns gives life and nourishment. The same free will which chooses evil has the capacity to choose good. 

Perfect vs. Permissive Will of God

God is perfect. He does not suffer any defect of weakness or change. He does not change His mind. If He could change, then He would simply not be God. In His wisdom, He created all things visible and invisible with the Divine foreknowledge that His creatures, namely humanity and some of the angels, would spurn Him. This is a mystery. He had no need to create anything, but He did so to manifest His goodness, wisdom, power, and love.

One of the important distinctions to draw at this juncture is the difference between God’s permissive will and His perfect will. Simply put: God has a perfect will. Another, admittedly imperfect, way to phrase this would be His “original plan.” The perfect will of God for humanity consisted of a desire for Adam and Eve to follow his indicative will. The indicative will of God is what He wants and how He wants it, perfectly. We see this indicative will for Adam and Eve in Genesis. He told them not to “eat the fruit of ‘the tree of the knowledge of good and evil’ (Gen. 2:17).” When Adam and Eve disobeyed sin, entered the world, along with the consequences of sin: suffering, pain, and death. 

Human suffering was not part of God’s original plan. In giving humanity free will, God permitted, or allowed, evil to enter the world. His free creatures, made in His image and likeness, rebel against His indicative and perfect will and commit evils. These are not within the perfect will of God; they belong tacitly to the permissive will of God. And He alone has the long-view. Only He knows the end of the story. And He assures us that His justice will come to full fruition in the end.

What is the Response to the Problem?

We should recall the great diversity of metaphysical evil which comes together to embody the universe as a whole. Stars explode and go supernova. Matter is sometimes transformed in violent and destructive ways. Predators eat other animals. Herbivores eat, and therefore destroy, plants. These relative perfections are not imperfections. Then, we stop to think about physical evils which befall mankind: sickness, plague, death, anxiety, and the like. And we know that human suffering often comes from true moral evil. The world and its inhabitants seem far from what might approximate perfection.

Frankly, this is where human reason hits an insurmountable roadblock. No ideology, school of thought, or religion can sufficiently speculate about the order of nature. Though we cannot know with human intelligence the full understanding of this mystery, we can be assured that God is completely justified. We can experience suffering and pain and wonder why it is happening while simultaneously acknowledging that God, in His perfect goodness, knowledge, and power, does know. Not only does He know, but He also fully cares. 

The response to the Problem of Evil is not logically satisfying because it is a mystery with no earthly solution. But as St. Thomas More said, “Earth has no sorrow that Heaven cannot heal.” The Catholic Faith as a whole gives the only satisfactory response to the Problem of Evil, even if it is not emotionally satisfying when we are in the thick of it. And this response is not an “easy answer.” It is not a quick response which puts the problem to rest. Instead, the response to the problem of evil bears fruit in prolonged contemplation, the practice of trust, faith, hope, love, prayer, study, and only with God’s grace. 

Let us return to St. Thomas Aquinas’ exploration of the objection to the existence of God based on the problem of evil. He responds this way, quoting St. Augustine:

“As Augustine says (Enchiridion xi): ‘Since God is the highest good, He would not allow any evil to exist in His works, unless His omnipotence and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil.’ This is part of the infinite goodness of God, that He should allow evil to exist, and out of it produce good (ST I, q.2, a.3).”

Like I said, it is not an emotionally satisfying answer. We long for justice and peace. And we want it now. In our fallen world, it can be easy to give in to despair. But we are called to trust in the infinite goodness of God. If He allows evil to exist, then He will produce a good out of it, though we may not see it in this lifetime. If He allows evil to exist, then His justice will be made perfect in the end. 

As St. Paul teaches us:

“We know that in everything God works for good with those who love him, who are called according to his purpose (Rom 8:28).”

Redemptive Suffering

And as I have already mentioned: God not only knows of our suffering but He also fully cares. We can see this on full display in the apparent triumph of evil, pain, and suffering on Good Friday. On the Cross, the Son of God died for love of you and me. If we were there on Calvary’s hill, we would be justified to some extent to question God’s wisdom or His omnipotence. For the Apostles, this dark day seemed like the end. How could a good possibly come from all this suffering, misery, and death? Even the demons thought that they had won a great victory. But the story did not end on Friday. On Easter Sunday, Jesus Christ burst forth from the tomb, the one who died who dies no more. Our God knows the way through suffering and death to eternal life.

As the Catechism puts it: 

“By his passion and death on the cross Christ has given a new meaning to suffering: it can henceforth configure us to him and unite us with his redemptive passion (CCC 1505).” 

In moments of affliction, suffering, and pain, we can offer these experiences as prayers when we unite them to the perfect Cross of Christ. Our sufferings then are transformed into grace for ourselves and others. We can “offer up” our sufferings for others, and it can even bring us spiritual healing and peace. 

Taking the Long Perspective

Human suffering is real and persistent. We all suffer. In this valley of the shadow of death, we do not see the full picture. In our limited human perspective, we do not even always see the good that God works in spite of evil. Nonetheless, the merits of Christ on the Cross continue to flow as grace to us through the Sacraments. And so, we hold fast to the truth of the Catholic Faith. We trust in God, especially in the darkest times. Through consistent prayer and cooperation with grace, we intentionally unite our sufferings to the Cross and conform ourselves to the Savior. We rely on the intercession of the sorrowful and immaculate Heart of Mary who was pierced by accompanying her holy Son on the way of His Passion.

May we contemplate and, by God’s grace, eventually adopt the perspective of the great St. Teresa of Avila who said that:

“In light of heaven, the worst suffering on earth will be seen to be no more serious than one night in an inconvenient hotel.” 

This does not downplay the real pain of human suffering. But it helps us enter into the eternal viewpoint of Almighty Good, who knows and cares. 

Will Wright Catholic Podcast is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

NOTE: THIS EPISODE WAS PUBLISHED BEFORE OUR REBOOT. willwrightcatholic.com is now gooddistinctions.com

Common Good and Society

Solidarity and subsidiarity are two principles of the moral teachings of the Church that are absolutely required for a well-ordered and functioning society. In fact, the common good cannot be served without them. It is from this starting point of the common good that we must begin. Pope St. John XXIII said in 1963 that “... civil authority must strive to promote the common good in the interest of all, without favoring any individual citizen or category of citizen (Pacem in Terris, 56).” Pope Leo XIII even said in 1891 that “civil society exists for the common good, and hence is concerned with the interests of all in general… (Rerum Novarum, 51).”

Civil society, serving the common good, is ordered towards men establishing of right-relationship with one another and setting up a commonwealth. No man is an island unto himself and the good of each individual is inextricably linked to the good of the society as a whole. The depths of this reality are rooted in the charity of Almighty God. As Pope Benedict XVI wrote in Caritas in Veritate: “To love someone is to desire that person’s good and to take effective steps to secure it (Caritas in Veritate, 7).” How else can this be accomplished than in a community, a society, and gathering of individuals united to common purpose, at least to some large degree. 

Solidarity

The common good is the aim of civil society, but how is it served? The first principle to examine is solidarity. Solidarity basically is the reality that there is an interdependence among individuals and nations. 

In his work Centesimus Annus, Pope St. John Paul II provides the historical context of the word solidarity. He reports that in the writings of Pope Leo XIII, the Greek philosophical term of “friendship” is employed with the same meaning as what is now called solidarity. Pope Piux XI refers to solidarity with the term “social charity.” And Pope St. Paul VI expanded “the concept to cover the many modern aspects of the social question, speaks of a ‘civilization of love’ (Centesimus Annus, 10).” Pope Benedict XVI put it eloquently to the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences in 2008 when he said: 

“Solidarity refers to the virtue enabling the human family to share fully the treasure of material and spiritual goods, and subsidiarity is the coordination of society’s activities in a way that supports the internal life of the local communities (Pope Benedict XVI, 2008).”

In our modern, interconnected world, with global media, we experience keenly the reality that we are connected. We watch the news and feel personally affected by injustice and human rights violations committed in countries in which we have never stepped foot. There is a moral connotation to this, as well, because we wonder: how can I help? What can I do? The human heart naturally reaches out to the suffering and pain of others and desires justice. Yet, what can we do? Well, in solidarity, we understand that we are interconnected.

As St. John Paul II put it 1987:

“It is above all a question of interdependence, sensed as a system determining relationships in the contemporary world, in its economic, cultural, political and religious elements, and accepted as a moral category. When interdependence becomes recognized in this way, the correlative response as a moral and social attitude, as a "virtue," is solidarity. This then is not a feeling of vague compassion or shallow distress at the misfortunes of so many people, both near and far. On the contrary, it is a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good; that is to say to the good of all and of each individual, because we are all really responsible for all (Sollicitudo rei socialis, 38).”

Committed to the common good, and aware of the interconnectedness of man, we set out in charity to sanctify the temporal order. This is the heart of solidarity. We see the world as God sees it. We recognize the members of society as persons. Seeing the image of God and recognizing opportunities to practice solidarity do not belong exclusively to one class either. As St. John Paul II puts it:

“Those who are more influential, because they have a greater share of goods and common services, should feel responsible for the weaker and be ready to share with them all they possess. Those who are weaker, for their part, in the same spirit of solidarity, should not adopt a purely passive attitude or one that is destructive of the social fabric, but, while claiming their legitimate rights, should do what they can for the good of all. The intermediate groups, in their turn, should not selfishly insist on their particular interests, but respect the interests of others (Sollicitudo rei socialis, 39).”

In other words, no one is excused from the practice of Christian charity. Likewise, because civil society exists to serve the common good, an essential condition for global solidarity is autonomy and free self-determination. Men organize themselves to constitute a commonwealth. Government should support this swelling of justice and charity, without undermining it by a tyrannical top-down approach.

Government and Solidarity

Those in government work can support the practice of solidarity by understanding that man’s fulfillment comes by using his intelligence and freedom in freely giving of himself to others. Private initiative and ownership are, therefore, to be respected and kept in preeminent position. To quote St. John Paul II from Centesimus Annus:

“Man works in order to provide for the needs of his family, his community, his nation, and ultimately all humanity. Moreover, he collaborates in the work of his fellow employees, as well as in the work of suppliers and in the customers' use of goods, in a progressively expanding chain of solidarity (Centesimus Annus, 43).”

It is Catholic and just to ensure bonds of solidarity among working people and allow them to practice useful work, without exploitation and being used as a means of making profit only. Man works to provide for the needs of others and his work ought to firstly expand the work and wealth of society, which then can lead to profits but only secondarily. Even at the level of the family, a mutual support of husband and wife ought to be fostered and care given by one generation to the other. The family is rightly ordered as a community of work and solidarity. 

Solidarity requires seeing the human person. Often today, we might find two prevailing forces which seek to devalue us. On the one hand, the market sees only producers and consumers of goods. On the other hand, the government only sees statistics and objects of State administration. But society serves the life of human persons and the common good; the market and the State are not the final purpose of society. 

Associations of persons and state agencies should work to promote a deeper vision of human solidarity. By doing so, solidarity can be shown by civil society in a way surpassing that of any one individual. Pope Francis said in 2013 that 

“As Church we all have a strong responsibility to spread hope through works of solidarity, always seeking to collaborate in the best possible way with public institutions with respect for their respective responsibilities (Pope Francis, 2013).”

As St. John Paul II put it in 1995, 

“Many Christians from all Communities, by reason of their faith, are jointly involved in bold projects aimed at changing the world by inculcating respect for the rights and needs of everyone, especially the poor, the lowly and the defenceless (Ut Unum Sint, 43).”

It is this vision of seeing the human person rather than a vague abstraction and respecting the needs of these persons that we enter into solidarity. As Pope Benedict XVI put it:

“Only my readiness to encounter my neighbour and to show him love makes me sensitive to God as well. Only if I serve my neighbour can my eyes be opened to what God does for me and how much he loves me (Deus Caritas Est, 18).”

Really, solidarity is instantiated in our place of work when we serve the other. If you are in real estate, are you viewing the human purpose of the structure you are helping to buy and sell? In healthcare, are you treating symptoms and diseases or paying care to the whole human person? In government, are you giving due deference to human communities or simply building a more efficient bureaucracy?

Pope Francis warned us in 2013 that “This word solidarity runs the risk of being deleted from the dictionary because it is a word that bothers us, it bothers us. Why? Because it requires you to look at another and give yourself to another with love (Pope Francis, 2013).” By practicing solidarity, from the heart of the Church, we are able to work in the public sector and transcend the cultural, political, social, and geographic differences that separate people in an effort to see persons as God sees them. As we encounter persons in the private or public sector in a clinical or service capacity, we grow in solidarity if we see them as persons to be loved. Likewise, from an administrative or policy standpoint, we are provided opportunities to practice the virtue of solidarity and create systems and structures which facilitate the growth in holiness, virtue, and a more holistic view of the dignity of each human person.

Subsidiarity

The companion principle to solidarity is the principle of subsidiarity. Subsidiarity can be defined a couple of different ways. The best definition, in my estimation, is this: the best decision is made at the lowest possible level and the highest level necessary. Put another way: any activity that can be performed by a more decentralized entity should be.

The principle of subsidiarity comes into play on every level of analysis. We can look at the interplay of the family in a community. Or we can investigate the proper balance between a regional government and a national government. On the level of the State, subsidiarity dictates that the State should not do things which belong properly to the capacity of individuals or private associations operating independently of the State. Again, subsidiarity means that the best decision is made at the lowest level possible and the highest level necessary.

We should be careful not to simply see subsidiarity as a conservative/traditional principle that seeks to limit the power of the State. Instead, subsidiarity sets limits on the State but it also justifies the existence of the State. The highest level necessary sometimes means that a national or federal level of oversight is necessary. Think, for example, of the existence of border security, military administration, or policies regarding national patriotism. So, the State is necessary, but it needs to be rightly limited to only those actions necessary to be administered at that level.

The heart of the principle of subsidiarity is human dignity. As Pope Benedict XVI beautifully teaches:

“Subsidiarity respects personal dignity by recognizing in the person a subject who is always capable of giving something to others. By considering reciprocity as the heart of what it is to be a human being, subsidiarity is the most effective antidote against any form of all-encompassing welfare state (Caritas in veritate, 57).”

If we do not allow decisions to be made at the proper level, then power will be exercised in a foolish way on the one hand or in a tyrannical fashion on the other hand. Though the effects of globalization have yielded some fruits on the international stage, there is still a threat of a “dangerous universal power of a tyrannical nature,” to borrow a phrase of Pope Benedict XVI. He acknowledges there should be sufficient global authority to pursue the global common good, but, most importantly, “[t]his authority, however, must be organized in a subsidiary and stratified way, if it is not to infringe upon freedom and if it is to yield effective results in practice (Caritas in veritate, 57).”

Pope Pius XI, in 1931, wrote of this reciprocal nature when he said: 

“The supreme authority of the State ought, therefore, to let subordinate groups handle matters and concerns of lesser importance, which would otherwise dissipate its efforts greatly. Thereby the State will more freely, powerfully, and effectively to do all those things that belong to it alone because it alone can do them: directing, watching, urging, restraining, as occasion requires and necessity demands (Quadragesimo Anno, 80).” 

The State cannot, however, be all-encompassing and tyrannical, unjustly limiting individual autonomy. In the Second World Meeting of Popular Movements in 2015, Pope Francis said this: “No actual or established power has the right to deprive peoples of the full exercise of their sovereignty (Pope Francis, 2015).”

If we do not heed the Church’s sage understanding of subsidiarity, then the State will begin to provide everything, even those things best left to a lower level or strata of society. This would inevitably become a mere bureaucracy which can never guarantee the thing needed most by those who are suffering: loving personal concern. As Pope Benedict XVI writes in his encyclical on love:

“We do not need a State which regulates and controls everything, but a State which, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, generously acknowledges and supports initiatives arising from the different social forces and combines spontaneity with closeness to those in need (Deus Caritas Est, 28).”

Solidarity and Subsidiarity

Solidarity and subsidiarity come together as a pair or neither are assured. If we have subsidiarity without solidarity, then we have what Pope Benedict XVI calls “social privatism.” In this situation, the individual is free to operate as they will but with no regard for his fellow man. This does not serve the common good. On the other hand, if we have solidarity but not subsidiarity, then we have what Pope Benedict calls “paternalist social assistance that is demeaning to those in need (Caritas in veritate, 58).”

In 1961, Pope St. John XXIII wrote clearly that 

“Experience has shown that where personal initiative is lacking, political tyranny ensues and, in addition, economic stagnation in the production of a wide range of consumer goods and of services of the material and spiritual order (Mater et Magistra, 57).”

This paternalist social assistance could also be called a Social Assistance State or Welfare State. Such a society deprives individuals of personal responsibility. The Social Assistance State, says Pope St. John Paul II, 

“... leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients, and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending. In fact, it would appear that needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them and who act as neighbours to those in need (Centesimus Annus, 48).”

The lesson here is an incredibly practical one. For those involved in the public or private sectors alike, we must view people as persons with true value. We need to work towards the common good and ensure that we are keeping subsidiarity and solidarity operative. If we are to avoid tyranny then we must put subsidiarity into practice. If we are to avoid a privatism devoid of charity, then we must put solidarity into practice!

For further reading, check the Compendium of Social Doctrine of the Church from the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace.

or Peter Kwasniewski’s book A Reader in Catholic Social Teaching.

Will Wright Catholic Podcast is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

NOTE: THIS EPISODE WAS PUBLISHED BEFORE OUR REBOOT. willwrightcatholic.com is now gooddistinctions.com

Acknowledgement

Thank you to my colleague, Mr. Sean Maddigan, M.Ed., for his assistance in the research and formulation of many of the finer points of the atonement of Christ in this episode. Thanks, Sean!

Perception of Serious Problems - Selling Indulgences?

If you say the word “indulgences” to most people today, they would bring up Martin Luther. However, indulgences have been explicitly preached in Catholic theology since the 11th Century, and there have been reductions of penalties since at least the 9th Century. So, where and when does Martin Luther enter the scene?

On October 31, 1517, Fr. Martin Luther an Augustinian monk and lecturer at the University in Wittenberg, Germany, issued his propositions for debate concerning the question of indulgences. The proposed debate was intended to be with Fr. Johann Tetzel, a German Dominican friar and preacher. Fr. Tetzel was an appointed papel commissioner for indulgences and was sent to his native Germany to make money to help build St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.

From 1503 to 1510, Tetzel preached on indulgences and was effective in doing so. There are countless modern sources which say that Pope Julius II authorized the sale of indulgences, and that, likewise, Pope Leo X sold indulgences too and used the money to build the magnificent St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. However, the claim that indulgences, as such, were sold seems to be a myth. At one time, one of the spiritual acts that you could receive an indulgence for is contributing to a charitable cause, such as the building of a church. Charitable organizations offer incentives today to increase donations. In the 16th Century, the building fund of St. Peter’s Basilica did increase as the result of Tetzel preaching indulgences. 

There were absolutely abuses in the practice of indulgences, to be sure! But it is important to understand what they actually are. One of the main contributing factors to knowledge of the controversy was Martin Luther’s “95 Theses.” In Luther’s time, and especially now, there is no end to the horribly wrong interpretations of the Catholic teaching on indulgences. I have also had a few friends ask if I’d be willing to do an episode on indulgences. So, here you go, gents!

Catholic Understanding of Atonement

After the Fall of Adam and Eve, it was fitting that the atonement or reconciliation of mankind be made by a man. However, what mere man could stand in place of all of humanity? When Jesus Christ died on the Cross, He did so as fully God and fully man. Thus, His death and resurrection were offered in our place, in His humanity, and offered perfectly, in His divinity. 

In the sixth Session of the Council of Trent, chapter ii, we hear:

“Whence it came to pass, that the Heavenly Father, the Father of mercies and the God of all comfort (2 Corinthians 1, 3), when that blessed fullness of the time was come (Galatians 4:4) sent unto men Jesus Christ, His own Son who had been, both before the Law and during the time of the Law, to many of the holy fathers announced and promised, that He might both redeem the Jews, who were under the Law and that the Gentiles who followed not after justice might attain to justice and that all men might receive the adoption of sons. Him God had proposed as a propitiator, through faith in His blood (Romans 3:25), for our sins, and not for our sins only, but also for those of the whole world (I John ii, 2).”

There are a lot of things to unpack here. God the Father sent His Son, who was foretold, to redeem the Jews and the Gentiles. This redemption brought with it adoption of each of us by God the Father, in Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit. The reconciliation or atonement (literally meaning to become “at one” with), comes through the propitiation of sins merited by Jesus’ death on the Cross. The just wrath of God earned by our sin was turned away by the self-offering (the sacrifice and oblation) of our Lord Jesus on the Cross. By His wounds, we are healed, quoting the Prophet Isaiah. The Nicene Creed we profess each Sunday at Mass reminds us of this reality:

“who for us men and for our salvation, came down, took flesh, was made man; and suffered…”

Jesus did not come for Himself, He came to give His life as a ransom for many. We say “many” because not everyone will accept this gift, sad to say. However, this does not diminish that the gift of Christ’s atonement was won for all mankind, without exception. But what is this ransom? Who was holding the souls of the fallen men? It is the Enemy, Satan.

In his commentary on Psalm 95, St. Augustine puts it this way:

“Men were held captive under the devil and served the demons, but they were redeemed from captivity. For they could sell themselves. The Redeemer came, and gave the price; He poured forth his blood and bought the whole world. Do you ask what He bought? See what He gave, and find what He bought. The blood of Christ is the price. How much is it worth? What but the whole world? What but all nations? (Enarration on Psalm 95, no. 5).”

He goes on to explain, in a figure of speech that the Cross was like a trap for the Enemy:

"The Redeemer came and the deceiver was overcome. What did our Redeemer do to our Captor? In payment for us He set the trap, His Cross, with His blood for bait. He [Satan] could indeed shed that blood; but he deserved not to drink it. By shedding the blood of One who was not his debtor, he was forced to release his debtors (Serm. cxxx, part 2).”

The debt owed to Divine Justice was paid in full by Jesus Christ. Divine Justice was satisfied. But not everyone agreed with St. Augustine’s reasoning. St. Anselm and Peter Abelard, for example, rejected the notion that Satan had some sort of right over man. St. Anselm held that an equal satisfaction for sin was necessary to pay the debt to Divine Justice. Abelard, though, did not hold to this strict notion of satisfaction and he argued that God could have pardoned us without requiring satisfaction. So, the Incarnation and the death of Chirst was the pure love of God. And Abelard was condemned by St. Bernard for this view because he argued the effect of the atonement was only moral influence and not any objective payment of a debt.

St. Thomas Aquinas, later, agreed with Abelard in rejecting the notion that full satisfaction was necessary. He agrees with Abelard in so far as the atonement was the greatest demonstration of love, but still holds that under God’s economy of salvation, the sacrifice of Christ objectively paid the debt of justice (which Abelard denied). Restoring mankind to grace was a work of God’s mercy and goodness. It was fitting that Christ should die on the Cross to show the depths of God’s love for us, but not absolutely necessary. Along the ages, Blessed Duns Scotus and St. Bernard of Clairvaux had differing opinions than Abelard and Aquinas.

Though there is disagreement among theologians throughout the ages, what is shared among them is this. The Atonement is essentially a sacrifice and an act of love. The outward Sacrifice is the sacrament of the invisible sacrifice which comes from the heart of God. As the Catholic Encyclopedia puts it so well:

“It was by this inward sacrifice of obedience unto death, by this perfect love with which He laid down his life for His friends, that Christ paid the debt to justice, and taught us by His example, and drew all things to Himself; it was by this that He wrought our Atonement and Reconciliation with God, ‘making peace through the blood of His Cross.’”

Imperfect in the Old, Perfect in the New

In the Old Covenants, the Jewish people would offer “sin-offerings” in which a cereal offering or animal was immolated, offered to God in worship, and then consumed by the priest. Likewise, we get the word scapegoat from the ancient practice of placing, so to speak, all of the sins of the town onto a goat and then releasing the goat to wander into the wilderness, presumably to die. 

This ancient notion of atonement was no clearer than on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. The Day of Atonement is centered upon repentance, fasting, asceticism, and the confession of sins. However, the annual nature of this event shows that it is an incomplete and imperfect atonement. 

Atonement is made perfect in Jesus Christ, who died once for the sins of man and then rose from the dead, to die no more. In the Holy Mass, Christ does not die again. Instead, the Cross of Christ, a propitiatory Sacrifice is renewed daily in a bloodless manner on the altar. 

What Is An Indulgence?

What does any of this have to do with indulgences? Well, everything, really. An indulgence is classically the remission of a debt. In Roman law, it meant to be release from imprisonment or punishment. The Catholic Encyclopedia defines an indulgence as “a remission of the temporal punishment due to sin, the guilt of which has been forgiven.”

So, an indulgence is not permission to sin, it is not stockpiling forgiveness for a future action, nor does it forgive sin or the guilt of sin. An indulgence presumes that God has already forgiven the person receiving it! What is being remitted is the temporal punishment due to sin.

Our sins affect us, our relationship with God, and our relationship with others. Particularly egregious sins, like rape and murder, have lasting effects which cannot be put right this side of Heaven. And putting things right is in the nature of justice. God will always set things right, one way or another, though we might not see it until the end of things. Nonetheless, once someone experiences contrition, there is a deep desire, rooted in justice, to make restitution. 

Imagine that you are a kid playing baseball in the street. Of course, this is a bad idea. Mistakes will happen. You know this, and, yet, you wrongly believe that you are special. So, nothing bad will happen. You will hit the ball perfectly and everything will be just fine. Then… you hit the ball and it goes sailing through Mrs. Johnson’s bay window. Immediately, you feel terrible about it. You did not mean for anything to be broken. You experience contrition for the wrong you have done. You knew, of course, that you should not be playing baseball in the street. What did you expect to happen?! Now, you have a choice: run away and hide or go and fess up to what you have done. You decide to go and ask for forgiveness. You ring the doorbell and Mrs. Johnson answers. You immediately apologize for breaking the window and tell her that you are truly sorry. And she forgives you! … That’s it, right? That’s the end of the story?... No way! You still have to make restitution. You have to pay for the window. 

In this example, we can see analogously, how we can be forgiven for something, but justice still demands restitution, satisfaction, and even punishment. This distinction between forgiveness and the temporal punishment due to sin seems to have gone by the wayside in Protestant theology over the last five hundred years. Really, if we look at it with fresh eyes, hopefully we can see that it is basic common sense that a wrong done demands restitution. So, why can Protestants not go there? The answer really has to do with Martin Luther. In Luther’s view, we can do nothing to merit our salvation and Catholics agree we cannot merit the gift of initial justification; it is completely a gratuitous gift from God whereby we are covered by Jesus Christ. Nothing in the Lutheran view demands cooperation with grace or even the internal change brought about by Baptism, which Catholicism has always held. 

How, Theologically, Does an Indulgence Work?

But with Baptism there is a true change, right down to the core of our being. And grace is given, but our free cooperation is necessary. God’s love does not force itself upon us. This means that our good actions, united with Christ, are meritorious. Our sinful actions require restitution. The Atonement won by Jesus Christ on the Cross is superabundantly meritorious, to use the language of the Church. When we unite our actions with the Cross, they do not add to the merits of Jesus Christ, but they come into communion with them. Likewise, the forgiveness of sins is a communion with the Cross of Jesus Christ! But, in justice, our bad actions still require temporal punishment and restitution. As the 14th Session of the Council of Trent puts it:

“Add to these things, that, whilst we thus, by making satisfaction, suffer for our sins, we are made conformable to Jesus Christ, who satisfied for our sins, from whom all our sufficiency is; having also thereby a most sure pledge, that if we suffer with him, we shall also be glorified with him. But neither is this satisfaction, which we discharge for our sins, so our own, as not to be through Jesus Christ. For we who can do nothing of ourselves, as of ourselves, can do all things, He cooperating, who strengthens us. Thus, man has not wherein to glory, but all our glorying is in Christ: in whom we live; in whom we merit; in whom we satisfy; bringing forth fruits worthy of penance, which from him have their efficacy; by him are offered to the Father; and through him are accepted by the Father (The Council of Trent: On the necessity and on the fruit of Satisfaction).”

Some Protestants hold to the erroneous view of “penal substitution” which is a theory of the atonement that holds that God punished Jesus on the Cross. But there is one glaringly huge problem: an innocent person cannot be justly punished. Jesus took upon Himself the sufferings and death that were due to our sins, but He did not take on the just punishment for our sins.

Understanding How Christ Took on Our Punishment (And What That Means)

Jesus Christ took our punishment upon Himself. As St. Thomas teaches:

“Now by Christ's Passion we have been delivered not only from the common sin of the whole human race, both as to its guilt and as to the debt of punishment, for which He paid the penalty on our behalf (ST III, q. 49, a. 5, co.).”

When discussing the fittingness of the death of Christ, St. Thomas also mentions:

“... in this way Christ by His death brought us back to life, when by His death He destroyed our death; just as he who bears another's punishment takes such punishment away (ST III, q. 50, a. 1, ad. 3).”

Satisfaction means taking up a penalty voluntarily in order to restore justice. St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of taking up this voluntary penalty as someone experiencing something against the will out of charity. In the case of sin and justice, in charity this action makes up for sin because sin is voluntarily doing one’s own will at the expense of charity. In other words, satisfaction derives its power from the strength of the charity of the one offering it. There is no need for Jesus to suffer the pains of Hell to save us because even one drop of His Precious Blood could have satisfied the wrath of God. The payment of Jesus, who is sinless and perfect in charity, merits not only release from punishment. By the Cross, He merits for us eternal life!

When a debt is to be paid, the punishment is measured. In merit, the root of charity is measured. When one merits for another, he merits more for himself. Yet, when one satisfies for another, he does not also satisfy for himself, because the measure of punishment still covers both him and the one on whose behalf he is satisfying. In the case of Jesus, who is without sin, He has no debt to pay. He is satisfying for sinful men out of perfect charity. The punishment He bore made satisfaction for the sins of all mankind and merited more than any man is capable of: eternal life!

Back to Indulgences

Temporal punishment acknowledges that the eternal punishment for sin has been taken away on the Cross, but the temporal consequences of sin still remain. These temporal effects of sin require restitution, to the ability that we are able. We ought to make amends for wrongs done. Expiation, satisfaction, amends, and reparation all mean the same thing when referring to the temporal consequences and punishment due to sin.

Going back to this notion of the superabundant merits of Christ on the Cross, we can also add all of the meritorious actions of the Baptized faithful through the ages, most notably the saints. The Treasury of Merit, as it is called, is the collection of the perfect, infinite, and superabundant merits of our Lord Jesus Christ, the expansive merits of our Blessed Mother and St. Joseph, and the merits of all the just. Our Lord gave to St. Peter, and to the Apostles and their successors, the authority to apply the fruits of these merits at their discretion when He said: 

“And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven (Mt. 16:18-19).”

Likewise, in St. John’s Gospel, Jesus says to the Apostles, and their successors by extension:

“And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld (Jn. 20:22-24).”

When a confessor gives absolution to a penitent in the Sacrament of Penance, he is applying this forgiveness of sins which comes from God alone, through the instrument of the priest and the Church. Our guilt for sin and eternal punishment for sin are absolved, but the temporal punishment for sin remains. An indulgence is outside of the sacraments and it does not forgive sins. Instead, it applies the satisfaction of the Treasury of Merit to an individual thereby remitting their temporal punishment due to sin. In other words, by the merits of Christ and the saints, the debt of temporal restitution has been paid in full. The superabundant merits belong to God’s mercy and justice, not to the Church absolutely. So, these concessions or diminishments of punishment are administered by the Church but they come from God as a free gift. 

There is value in what Christ has done for us. But there is also value in what Christ does through us. Either way, the primary action is God. But with our cooperation, we unite ourselves with the Sacred Action of Jesus. As St. Paul said:

"Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church (Col. 1:24).”

What could possibly be lacking in the sufferings of Christ, except for our cooperation with His grace and our own meritorious actions? Not only do our good actions possess the value or merit, they also certainly possess the value of satisfaction.

Luther Had a Couple Good Points, But a Lot of Errors

It must be said that Martin Luther had some great points in his 95 Theses. In fact, only 41 propositions of Luther’s from the 95 Theses and his other writings up to that point, were rejected as heretical, scandalous, erroneous, seductive of simple minds, in opposition to Catholic truth, or offensive to pious ears by Pope Leo X in 1520. 

Let us look at the first three of the 95 Theses:

* “When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, ‘Repent’' (Mt 4:17), he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.

* This word cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.

* Yet it does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.”

All three of these are true. Interior repentance is a reorienting of one’s entire life, not just a momentary “I’ll try a bit harder.” This call of our Lord to repentance does not refer to the Sacrament of Penance because it is a call which is first addressed to those who do not yet know Christ and the Gospel. And finally, interior conversion should find expression in visible signs, gestures, and penitential actions. 

It does seem, though, that Luther is presupposing that indulgences were being sold, with official authorization. This myth is prevalent today and it appears it was in Luther’s day as well. Indulgences are drawn from the Treasury of Merit and applied freely when those seeking them fulfill the requirements with proper disposition. Luther’s 95 Theses presents many theological errors in this regard. These errors are still being repeated today. For example, this 2009 article from “The New York Times” which gets it wrong from the title (the content of the article only goes from wrong to worse, by the way): “For Catholics, a Door to Absolution is Reopened.”

By the way, to show just how seriously the Church took these abuses, Pope St. Pius V, in 1567, issued a decree which canceled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions.

Seeking an Indulgence

Many Catholics think that indulgences, per se, were an abuse. They are not. And though it was a focal point in the Protestant Reformation, indulgences did not go anywhere. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church stated in the 1990s:

"An indulgence is obtained through the Church who, by virtue of the power of binding and loosing granted her by Christ Jesus, intervenes in favor of individual Christians and opens for them the treasury of the merits of Christ and the saints to obtain from the Father of mercies the remission of the temporal punishment due for their sins… to spur them to works of devotion, penance, and charity" (CCC 1478).

Everything that I have presented about indulgences belongs to the infallible teachings of the Church. We are not at liberty to dismiss them, diminish them, or disbelieve in them. The Council of Trent’s anathema makes this clear:

The Council of Trent "condemns with anathema those who say that indulgences are useless or that the Church does not have the power to grant them."

The Church does not remit temporal punishment due to sin with magic or the wave of a pen. The person who suffers those temporal punishments must be disposed to repentance and faith. As Pope St. Paul VI said:

"Indulgences cannot be gained without a sincere conversion of outlook and unity with God (Indulgentarium Doctrina, 11).”

Before the Second Vatican Council, indulgences were said to remove a certain number of “days” from punishment. Instead, this was to show that indulgences have two types: plenary and partial. Plenary, meaning full, means that all temporal punishment due to sin that a person owed is being remitted. Whereas, a partial indulgence remits part of the temporal punishment due to sin. In order to make this clearer, Pope St. Paul VI revised the handbook of indulgences (called the Enchiridion).

As we have covered, satisfaction and temporal punishment for sin are ordered towards justice on the one hand and purification on the other hand. So, the actions for which one might receive an indulgence should likewise be ordered to justice, charity, and purification. Because the justice of God has been satisfied through the merits of Christ and the saints, applied to our lives, then the “time,” so to speak, needed for purification in charity after death has been lessened. 

Just as a checkpoint or reminder: indulgences remit the temporal punishment due to sin, not eternal punishment. Eternal punishment is remitted fully by the Cross of Jesus Christ, the merits of which we receive in the Sacrament of Baptism. 

Knowing rightly what an indulgence is, how can we receive this great gift? Please forgive the following lengthy quotation, but Jimmy Akin put it concisely and excellently in his Primer on Indulgences for EWTN:

“To gain any indulgence you must be a Catholic in a state of grace. You must be a Catholic in order to be under the Church's jurisdiction, and you must be in a state of grace because apart from God's grace none of your actions are fundamentally pleasing to God (meritorious). You also must have at least the habitual intention of gaining an indulgence by the act performed.

To gain a partial indulgence, you must perform with a contrite heart the act to which the indulgence is attached.

To gain a plenary indulgence you must perform the act with a contrite heart plus you must go to confession (one confession may suffice for several plenary indulgences), receive Holy Communion, and pray for the pope's intentions. (An Our Father and a Hail Mary said for the pope's intentions are sufficient, although you are free to substitute other prayers of your own choosing.) The final condition is that you must be free from all attachment to sin, including venial sin.

Because of the extreme difficulty in meeting the final condition, plenary indulgences are rarely obtained. If you attempt to receive a plenary indulgence, but are unable to meet the last condition, a partial indulgence is received instead.”

The Church offers us special indulgences, both plenary and partial, for all sorts of things. But there are a couple of partial indulgences worth mentioning here. Partial indulgences are given by the Church for: 

* Devoutly spending time in mental prayer, 

* Reading Sacred Scripture with veneration as a form of spiritual reading (this one is plenary if done for at least 30 minutes), 

* Devoutly signing oneself with the Sign of the Cross and saying the customary formula: “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.”

Conclusion

Indulgences are not magic. They are a part of the infallible teaching of the Church. And they are for our spiritual well-being. 

We should not be wary of officially promulgated indulgences. We should be grateful to God for His superabundant mercy and His justice. Recognizing that we are sinners in need of His grace, we approach the Sacrament of Penance. Then, we do penance to seek temporal satisfaction and restitution for the consequences of our sins. All the while, we ought to seek out indulgences, because they are nothing more than being union and communion with Almighty God and striving to be more in love with Him who loved us first.

Suggestions for Further Reading:

* Atonement: Soundings in Biblical, Trinitarian, and Spiritual Theology by Margaret Turek, S.T.D. (Ignatius Press)

* The Spirit of the Liturgy by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (Ignatius Press)

* 20 Answers - Protestantism (20 Answers Series from Catholic Answers) - Kindle Edition

Will Wright Catholic Podcast is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

NOTE: THIS EPISODE WAS PUBLISHED BEFORE OUR REBOOT. willwrightcatholic.com is now gooddistinctions.com

What is the Sacred Triduum?

The most important Liturgical Season of the Church year is the Sacred Triduum: three days to change the world! Lent is over and, from the evening of Holy Thursday to the evening of Holy Saturday, we celebrate one long day, the unity of the Paschal Mystery of Jesus. On these three days, we celebrate the Last Supper, Passion, Death, and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. 

Holy Thursday and the Mass of the Lord’s Supper

Thursday night begins the sacred Easter Triduum in which the whole Church devotes herself to the remembrance of the night of the Last Supper. The Ceremonial of Bishops, no. 297, says this:

“At the supper on the night he was betrayed, the Lord Jesus, loving those who were his own in the world even to the end, offered his Body and Blood to the Father under the appearance of bread and wine, gave them to the apostles to eat and drink, then enjoined the apostles and their successors in the priesthood to offer them in turn. This Mass is, first of all, the memorial of the institution of the eucharist, that is, of the Memorial of the Lord's Passover, by which under sacramental signs he perpetuated among us the sacrifice of the New Law. The Mass of the Lord's Supper is also the memorial of the institution of the priesthood, by which Christ's mission and sacrifice are perpetuated in the world. In addition, this Mass is the memorial of that love by which the Lord loved us even to death.”

On this day, priests do not celebrate Mass alone, nor are Masses offered for special small groups. The altar is decorated with moderate flowers and there are a few oddities. For example, after the Gloria is sung (now back because Lent is over), the Church bells remain silent until the Easter Vigil. 

Also during this special Mass, there is the Washing of the Feet, which mirrors the washing of the Apostles’ feet by Jesus. The priest removes his chasuble and washes the feet of a few people to call to mind this sacred action on the night of the Last Supper. Remember, the Last Supper, and this action, is part of how Jesus instituted the Sacrament of Holy Orders! 

At the end of the Mass of the Lord’s Supper, to show that the Triduum is a unified whole, the Mass does not end. Instead, the Blessed Sacrament is processed to a suitable place for exposition and adoration. Normally, this time of adoration continues until midnight in the Parish. Unlike a normal time of adoration, a monstrance is not used. Instead, a large ciborium containing all of the consecrated Eucharist to be used the next day is adored. 

It is customary during this time to sing the beautiful Pange Lingua Eucharistic chant written by St. Thomas Aquinas.

Good Friday of the Lord’s Passion

Next up is Good Friday. Good Friday is the second day of the Sacred Triduum, in between Holy Thursday and Easter Vigil. Good Friday is the commemoration of the passion and death of Jesus Christ on the cross at Calvary. It is always three days before Easter, which marks the Resurrection of Jesus from the dead!

It might be confusing why we call this horrible day “good.” This term comes from an obsolete use of the term in English which means “pious” or “holy.” For hundreds of years in the Latin Church it was called Feria sexta in Parasceve which means “Friday of Preparation” and then after the 1955 Holy Week reform it was renamed Feria sexta in Passione et Morte Domini which means “Friday of the Passion and Death of the Lord.” In the current Latin edition of the Missal, it is Feria sexta in Passione Domini or “Friday of the Passion of the Lord.”

One of the strangest things about Good Friday is that Mass is not offered anywhere in the world. Tabernacles are empty, with the doors wide open. The altar is stripped of cloths and candles. And the holy water receptacles are empty. It is surreal, empty, and solemn. Jesus Christ, God made man, has died on the Cross, and He has been laid in the tomb. (Of course, we know the rest of the story: death could not hold Him down and He rose from the dead three days later!!)

Penance

There is a distinction in the teachings of the Church between forgiveness and consequences for sins. God forgives us when we ask for forgiveness with true sorrow for our sins, but there are still eternal consequences to our actions. Our relationship with God can still need healing in terms of conformity to Him and communion with Him. Even after we confess our sins, we can still have attachments to certain sins, for example. 

The Lord helps us to grow in cooperation with His grace through the gift and opportunity of doing penance. Followers of Christ are called to do formal penance, such as fasting, and informal penance such as intentionally going out of the way to be kind to someone. In doing penance, whether formal or informal, we are uniting ourselves to the superabundant merits won by Christ on the Cross. 

For penance to have its full effect in ourselves and to help us grow in holiness, this intentionality is necessary. When we act with Christ, we are drawing nearer to Him just as He is already near to us. Doing penance is our answer to the justice of God. We know that we are sinners in need of grace, and we unite our thoughts, prayers, and actions to communion with Him.

Penance can be done formally or informally, but there are certain times when the whole Church is called to collective penance. Canon Law teaches that “the penitential days and times in the universal Church are every Friday of the whole year and the season of Lent (Canon 1250).” This is why we say that every Friday is a mini Good Friday!

Fasting and Abstinence

In the early life of the Church, there was a fast before every major feast or important event. Historically, fasting comes from the Latin statio which means to stand watch or on guard. Another type of fast is called abstinence which pertains to abstaining from meat or fats. In the second case, this is an act of self-control. For the first meaning of fasting, the idea is in waiting, watching, and anticipating something. 

There is a fast in place for the Holy Eucharist. The faithful fast from everything except water and medicine at least one hour prior to receiving Holy Communion. In the past, this fast extended to midnight on the previous day. This is where we get the term breakfast because, after receiving Holy Communion, we are breaking the fast. 

Today, there are two days of required fasting: Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. On these two days, in the Latin Rite, we may eat one small meal and two other small meals that when combined are not equal to a normal size meal. This is obligatory for those who are 18 years old up to 59 ½ years old. For those younger than 18 and older than 60, the fast is optional and based on medical fitness to do so.

Abstinence from meat is required on Ash Wednesday and all Fridays for those above the age of 14 years old. Yes, you read that correctly. Canon Law says, “Abstinence from meat, or from some other food as determined by the Episcopal Conference, is to be observed on all Fridays, unless a solemnity should fall on a Friday (Can. 1251).” 

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) teach the following: 

“Christ died for our salvation on Friday. Gratefully remembering this, Catholic peoples from time immemorial have set apart Friday for special penitential observance by which they gladly suffer with Christ that they may one day be glorified with Him. This is the heart of the tradition of abstinence from meat on Friday where that tradition has been observed in the holy Catholic Church.”

Put simply: Christ gave up His Flesh for the life of the world on Friday and so we give up flesh for Him on Friday.

The USCCB recommends that the faithful continue meatless Fridays throughout the year, but it is no longer “binding under pain of sin.” Outside of Lent, the faithful may eat meat, but they must do some other penance in its stead.

Holy Saturday and the Mother of All Vigils

Finally, we have Holy Saturday and the Easter Vigil. The Easter Vigil is the greatest liturgy of the entire year in the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church. The Roman Missal guides the celebration of this great night and even refers to the Easter Vigil as the “mother of all vigils” which is quoting St. Augustine from the 5th Century. So, the Easter Vigil has real history.

Throughout the years, this celebration did get lost for a time, lacking the full vigor it once had. However, Pope Pius XII in the 1950s restored the prominent celebration of the mother of all vigils on the Saturday evening before Easter Sunday.

The Easter Vigil is packed with breathtaking symbolism and meaning. And it is packed with a celebration of everything that we hold dear as Catholics. Christ is seen throughout in amazing grandeur. 

Fire

First, it must be mentioned, the Easter Vigil begins with a bonfire outside. This holy fire is called the Lucernarium and the liturgy begins with the celebrant blessing the Easter fire. This fire is symbolic of Christ who is not dead, but very much alive, burning brightly. From this fire, coals are taken out to light the incense and the fire is also used to light the new Paschal candle.

Throughout the entire liturgical year, the Paschal candle stands in or near the sanctuary of the church or near the baptistry as a sign of Christ. This candle is triumphantly marched into the church which is completely dark at this point. The single burning flame enters the back of the church carried by a priest or deacon who then raises it above his head and sings, “Lumen Christi,” (the Light of Christ) to which the people respond, “Deo Gratias” (Thanks be to God). This is repeated for a total of three times as the priest nears the sanctuary of the church.

While the Paschal candle makes its way to the altar area, little candles held by the congregation are lit from the Paschal candle and the light of Christ truly begins to spread throughout the church which is now lit by candlelight. 

Beautiful Music

Once the candle makes it to the front, the Easter Proclamation or Exsultet is proclaimed by the priest, deacon, or cantor. This triumphant and beautiful chant is the prelude to the celebration of Easter. It speaks of night and light, of the place and time of the moment, of the priest and congregation, and it anticipates the glorious Resurrection of Jesus Christ. 

After the long subdued nature of the Lenten Season, the Easter Vigil breaks in with glory and anticipation. During the Gloria in Excelsis for example every bell available is rung all throughout the chanting or singing of the hymn. Each of the readings during the Liturgy of the Word have an accompanying responsorial psalm. There are many other musical additions to the liturgy called for in the Roman Missal, including the Litany of the Saints before the Blessing of the Baptismal Water. The music at the mother of all vigils is something truly magnificent. 

Abundant Proclamation of the Word of God

The Liturgy of the Word is kicked into high gear. There are seven possible readings (minimum of three), each with a selected responsorial psalm sung in between the readings and prayers by the priest following each psalm. 

Then the Gloria in Excelsis is sung. The Collect is said. A reading from St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans is proclaimed. The Alleluia is proclaimed for the first time since before Lent.  Yet another Psalm is sung. Then the Gospel is read and the Homily is given.

Blessing of Baptismal Water and Celebration of the Sacraments of Initiation

The remainder of the liturgy is a remarkable tour de force of the Sacraments of Initiation of the Church. The Baptismal water is blessed, those entering the Church make a profession of faith, renounce sin, and are baptized. Many of these adults have been preparing for this moment for a year or more. 

Next, those who are not Catholic but who are previously baptized make a profession of faith in the Catholic Church are received into full communion with the Church. Then, the new Catholics, now all baptized and officially members of the Catholic Church, are invited to the celebration of the Sacrament of Confirmation. 

The entire congregation is then invited to renew their own baptismal promises and receive a blessing from the priest with the newly blessed baptismal water. The Liturgy of the Eucharist then takes place in the normal way.

However, now baptized and confirmed, the new Catholics (neophytes) receive the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist for the very first time. What a splendid moment to behold. This is the pinnacle of our Faith. With so many people leaving the practice of the Faith, this holy night is one in which to take part. By being present and praying for these new Catholics, we show our support to these new members of the Body of Christ. 

Conclusion

The Sacred Triduum is the capstone of Holy Week and the summit of the Church’s liturgical life. What a beautiful time to enter into each day and remember in gratitude what Jesus Christ did in His Passion, Death, and Resurrection. And more than a mere remembering, through the Liturgy, we are taking part in these moments. Because the memory of God is perfect and brings the present and past collapsing into one another in a beautiful mystery. Have a very blessed Triduum and Easter, everyone.

Introduction

Welcome back to the fifth and final session of Praying the Mass! If you have not yet read parts 1 - 4 of this series, I highly recommend starting there!

The Fourth Cup

I want to pick up from last week’s conversation on the Liturgy of the Eucharist with a discussion of the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist, particularly the Passover. 

On the night before He was to suffer, our Lord Jesus celebrated the Passover meal with His Apostles. He chose this time and meal to establish the New and everlasting Covenant in His Blood. At the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we are not re-enacting the Last Supper. One of the major differences between the Mass and the Last Supper is that the Last Supper anticipated the Sacrifice of Jesus and the Mass makes this saving reality present once again.

In fact, we cannot understand the Mass as the Last Supper only. The Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ spans His entire saving Action, from the entrance into Jerusalem until His glorious Ascension into Heaven forty days after His Resurrection. It is impossible to separate the suffering of Christ from the Last Supper. The Sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the Cross was once and for all. God is outside of time. Therefore, the Holy Eucharist was established, along with Holy Orders, in the Upper Room before Jesus suffered and died. However, this is precisely because Jesus was making the Cross present in His Body and Blood offered in the first Eucharist.

The key to understanding the unity of the Last Supper and the Cross is understanding the Jewish Passover meal. In the Passover, the father of the family would use the first-person perspective when recounting the narrative of the Exodus. The blessings are read by the father of the house and the first cup of wine is consumed: the cup of blessing.

At the Passover meal, each adult at the dinner drinks four cups of wine. The four cups mark the journey of the Hebrew people. The four cups mark that 1) God will save His People from harsh labor, which He accomplished by the plagues 2) God will save His People from servitude to the Egyptians, 3) God will redeem His People, which the Jews saw in the crossing of the Red Sea, and finally 4) that God will take His People as a Nation, which happened at Sinai.

In Jesus Christ, these four cups reveal their fulfillment. 

The first cup is fulfilled in various ways by Christ, and in the Book of Revelation, as the full manifestation of God to man. The ten plagues inflicted on Egypt were directed against the various false Egyptian gods. Jesus reveals to us everything that God wished to reveal about Himself and frees us from harsh labor or toiling without purpose in matters of Faith. 

The second cup is fulfilled by the Incarnation. By the God-man entering into our humanity, we are freed from the slavery of sin, in order to share in His divinity. 

The third cup is clearly fulfilled in Baptism, which is the definitive escape from the power of evil through the Red Sea.

The fourth cup of the Passover meal marks the establishment of the People of God as a nation at Mount Sinai. As a nation, the Exodus from Egypt out of slavery was brought to completion. The New Exodus is the deliverance of men and women from the slavery of sin. The New Moses is our Lord Jesus Christ. In Him is the fullness of redemption. His Perfect Sacrifice on the Cross is begun at the Last Supper. 

Dr. Scott Hahn goes into exquisite detail about the relationship of the fourth cup, the Last Supper, and the Cross in his 2018 book “The Fourth Cup: Unveiling the Mystery of the Last Supper and the Cross.” I would highly recommend purchasing this book for a deeper dive. The main theological point that is drawn is incredibly important: the fourth cup is absent from the Last Supper!

The absence of the fourth cup from the Passover Meal would have been noticed by the Apostles. Certainly, they would have been wondering why Jesus left the Passover meal incomplete when He went out to the Garden of Olives to pray. Where then is the fourth cup consumed? It is on the Cross! The fourth cup in Passover marks the establishment of the People of God as a nation at Mount Sinai. In the New Passover, the fourth cup is consumed on the Cross when Jesus drinks wine mixed with gall and gives up His spirit saying, “It is finished (cf. Jn 19:30, Mk 15:37).” In Latin, the phrase is “consummatum est.” The fourth cup is called the cup of consummation.

On the Cross, Jesus establishes the new and everlasting Covenant in His Blood. The Church is borne from the Cross. The People of God become such by entering into the death of Christ and thereby sharing in His Resurrection. All of this is possible because of the outpouring of Jesus to the Father. What we need to remember is that Mass is not a reenactment of the Last Supper. It is a coming present once again of the saving Mysteries of Jesus’ Last Supper, Passion, Death, Resurrection, and Ascension.

After Supper Was Ended

Let us resume our walk through the Mass. The bread has been consecrated. Now, in a similar way, our Lord took the chalice in His holy and venerable hands. He gave thanks to the Father, blessed it, and shared the cup with His disciples. Why did our Lord do this? He could have consecrated the bread and wine together and given that model to the Apostles.

As we have explored earlier, the Last Supper is not merely a symbolic meal, it is a real participation in the events to come of the Passion, Death, and Resurrection of the Lord. God is the master of space and time, so this is not outside of the possibilities for Him. When Jesus says, “This is my body which will be given up for you,” we can hear that it is anticipating a future action. The mystery comes when we realize that even though He is talking about an action in the future, He is saying that the bread in His hands is His actual body. The Church has never believed these words to be metaphorical. That heresy did not appear until the second millennium.

We know that the Holy Mass is a sacrificial meal. So too was the Last Supper a sacrificial meal, inseparable from the Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. What is the logic to the double consecration: the consecration of bread and wine separately. Jesus was making the Cross present at the Last Supper in a real, sacramental way, and, in so doing, made the Mass a memorial of the whole of the Paschal Mystery. When He took the chalice and said the words of consecration: “For this is the chalice of my blood...” He was essentially separating His Body and His Blood. The result of the catastrophic separation of Body from Blood is death.

At every single Mass, the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ are separately made present under what looks like bread and what looks like wine. The Cross becomes present. The Death of our Lord Jesus Christ comes present. At the Last Supper, this was in an anticipatory sense because the events of the Passion and Death of Jesus had not yet happened. And at the Holy Mass, these events become present once more.

Of course, we know that the Death of Jesus Christ is not the end. Our God knows the way out of death’s decay. On the third day, He rose from the dead. His glorious Resurrection becomes present at each and every single Mass in a sacramental way during the Fraction Rite. Later on in the Mass, we sing the Agnus Dei (Lamb of God). However, just before this, the Priest breaks a piece of the Host over the paten and places it in the Chalice saying, “May this mingling of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ bring eternal life to us who receive it.”

Mysterium Fidei

After the bread and wine have been consecrated, the priest says the “mystery of faith” or mysterium fidei (in Latin), which is new to the 1970 Missal. Previously, the phrase mysterium fidei did not exist as an acclamation; rather, it was part of the formula of consecration spoken inaudibly by the priest. It was included just after “the new and everlasting covenant (novi et aeterni testamenti)” and just before “which will be poured out for you and for many... (qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur...).” However, it was only those two Latin words: mysterium fidei.

Originally, the use of the term mysterium fidei referred to the mysterious goodness of the material of Christ’s Blood being poured out. An early heretical sect, the Manicheans, held that the material order was bad and only the spiritual was good. So, adding the “mystery of faith” into the Canon further showed how important the Flesh and Blood of Christ was and is, His material humanity joined to His divinity.

The 1970 addition to the Missal of “we proclaim your Death, O Lord, and profess your Resurrection until you come again” seems to be more akin to the traditions of the Eastern liturgies. The Liturgy of St. James, a Byzantine form of liturgy, says, 

“This do in remembrance of me; for as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show forth the Lord’s death, and confess His resurrection, till He comes.” 

This shows that the memorial acclamation may be new to the Roman Rite of the Church but it has been used for ages in the Eastern Catholic Churches.

We are recognizing that the Mass is an anamnetic reality. By way of a quick review from last week, anamnesis in Greek literally means “bring to mind.” We could also translate it as a deliberate recollection. Anamnesis in the context of liturgy is more than just a memory or a calling to the mind in some abstract way. Through the power of the Holy Spirit and the mediation of Jesus Christ, our High Priest, the One Sacrifice becomes present once again in an unbloody manner. The word anamnesis is what Jesus says in the words of consecration when He says, “Do this in remembrance of me.”

So, the Mass is not a representation, it is a RE-presentation. It is the presenting once more the one and only Sacrifice of Jesus Christ, His suffering, death, and resurrection. Anamnetically, we become present in these sacred events, outside of space and time. Through our prayers and intention, we take part in the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit. We enter into the saving Action of Jesus Christ in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Borne By the Hands of Your Holy Angel

The priest is not only offering the Sacrifice of the Holy Victim, he is presenting an oblation or an offering. In the First Eucharistic Prayer, the ancient Roman Canon, the part which makes this explicit goes this way:

“In humble prayer we ask you, almighty God: command that these gifts be borne by the hands of your holy Angel to your altar on high in the sight of your divine majesty, so that all of us who through this participation at the altar receive the most holy Body and Blood of your Son may be filled with every grace and heavenly blessing.”

As we mentioned last week, we recognize the Sacrifice of the Mass as the re-presentation of Jesus’ suffering, death, resurrection, and ascension. We acknowledge that He Himself is the Sacred Victim offered on our behalf. And now, we recognize the link between Heaven and Earth in the Holy Mass.

What is offered here is not a request that the Body of Christ be locally transferred from the altar to Heaven. Jesus Christ is in Heaven already. Therefore, the meaning of this oblation is mystical. It is not a prayer invoking the power of God, like the epiclesis which calls down the power of the Holy Spirit on the gifts. Interestingly, the word used in the official Latin text for “these gifts” is more literally translated as “these Things.” God sees the gifts, He has commanded the Mass be offered in this way, and they are priceless and pleasing to Him.

The word Angel that is used comes from the Greek word “angelos” which means “messenger.” Certainly all of the angels and saints are worshiping at the throne of God and are taking part in the Sacred and Divine Liturgy of the Mass. So, who is this Angel?

St. Ambrose taught that an angel assists at Mass when Christ is sacrificed on the altar. From the text of the Roman Canon, there is little information as to the identity of this Angel. Is it the guardian angel of the Church? Is it St. Michael the Archangel, the guardian angel of the Eucharist? Is it Jesus Christ Himself, used in a metaphorical sense? Does the word Angel stand in for each and every angel and saint who takes part in the Mystical Supper of the Lamb?

It seems clear to me that what is asked here is not possible to any angel or creature. Truly, what created being can accomplish what God has asked and what the Church presents once again here? Besides being a messenger, the Angel is the “One Sent” by the Father. So, it seems that the Angel is the Son of God, Jesus Christ: the One Sent by the Father. In fact, Jesus is the “Angel of Great Counsel” referenced in Isaiah 9:6. We also see the Word of God (albeit before the incarnation) active in creation in Genesis 1-2. We see the Word of the Lord coming to Noah (Genesis 5-6). There is also the mysterious passage in the Gospel of John where Jesus says that Abraham had seen Him (cf. Jn. 8:56).

The point of this mystical prayer is to show that the Sacrifice of Heaven is the Sacrifice of Earth. The altar on high in the sight of the His divine majesty is the altar on which the Sacrifice of the Mass is being offered once more. Heaven and Earth meet by the power of the Holy Spirit and the mediation of the Angel of Great Counsel, our Lord Jesus Christ. “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus... (1 Tim. 2:5).” So, the Holy Angel of the Mass’s words is Jesus.

The End of the Eucharistic Prayer

The priest ends the Eucharistic Prayer with a Final Doxology, a liturgical formula of praise to God, saying:

“Through him, and with him, and in him, O God, almighty Father, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, all glory and honor is yours, for ever and ever.”

This entire Action, and truly the whole of the Holy Mass, is the action of God. The chief mover in the Liturgy is our High Priest, Jesus Christ. This final phrase given to us by the Church to close the Eucharistic Prayer might seem like a simple declaration of praise, but it is the key to understanding Catholic worship. “Through him, and with him, and in him, O God, almighty Father, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, all glory and honor is yours, for ever and ever.” 

Do we go to Mass to receive the gifts that God wants to bestow upon us? This is the view that many within the Church hold. We go to Mass to receive Jesus in the Eucharist. Of course, if we are in a state of grace, we have the honor and profound privilege of receiving our Lord in the Eucharist. But why do we go to Mass? Is it to receive or to give?

The key is this: “all glory and honor is yours.” We recognize that we have come to offer the Sacrifice of the Mass with our full, conscious, and actual participation for one primary purpose: to give glory and honor to the Father. And through this cooperation with grace, God makes us holy. Almighty God does not need our worship, but He delights in it. We have freedom and the free self-gift of His son or daughter is His delight. If we come to Mass primarily to receive, we are not coming for the right reasons. If we say, “I did not get anything out of Mass today,” then we have a wrong understanding of the Sacred Liturgy. We should not say, “I did not get...” We should instead say, “Did I give my all to my Heavenly Father?”

The Communion Rite

Following the Eucharistic Prayer, we stand and pray the prayer that our Lord Jesus taught us: the “Our Father.” This perfect prayer, according to St. Thomas Aquinas, contains all five excellent qualities required for prayer. It is confident, ordered, suitable, devout, and humble. It is also clear here the priest is leading this prayer in the Person of Christ, Head of His Body, because his hands are in the orans posture of offering.

Next, the priest offers the peace of Christ to us, just as Christ offered His peace to the Apostles on the day of the Resurrection. 

“On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld (Jn. 20:19-20).”

Then, it is optional for the deacon or priest to invite the gathered faithful to turn to those in their immediate vicinity and offer the peace of Christ. This is the action of one Member of the Body of Christ to another Member of the Body of Christ. So, we do not say the other person’s name, give them a secret handshake, or anything like that. We remember that Christ is now present on the altar and we offer the peace of Christ, which the world cannot give, to those around us. 

We are also reminded here of the words of our Lord: 

“So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift (Mt. 5:23-24).”

The Fraction Rite

As I mentioned last week, the priest then takes a piece of the Sacred Host and breaks it. Then, he puts that piece into the Chalice, which makes the Resurrection of Jesus present in a powerful way. Body and Blood are reunited, never to be parted again! We, and the priest, do not receive dead flesh; we receive the whole Christ, Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity into our own bodies. Interesting to note here, as well, that our posture changed after the Final Doxology. Instead of kneeling in penitence and adoration at the foot of the Cross, we are standing in the joy and power of the Resurrection! Meanwhile, the priest is saying quietly: 

“May this mingling of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ bring eternal life to us who receive it.”

Then, quietly, he prays directly to Jesus in one of two ways:

“Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the living God, who, by the will of the Father and the work of the Holy Spirit, through your Death gave life to the world, free me by this, your most holy Body and Blood, from all my sins and from every evil; keep me always faithful to your commandments, and never let me be parted from you.”

Or: “May the receiving of your Body and Blood, Lord Jesus Christ, not bring me to judgment and condemnation, but through your loving mercy be for me protection in mind and body and a healing remedy.”

Next, while facing the people, the priest raises the host and chalice echoing the words of St. John the Baptist,

“Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sins of the world. Blessed are those called to the supper of the Lamb.”

The people and the priest then respond with the words of the centurion to Jesus who believed that He could save the centurion’s daughter, despite being a Gentile pagan:

“Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.”

At this point, the priest then receives Holy Communion and then distributes our Blessed Lord, under the veil of a Sacrament, to the faithful gathered who are in a state of grace. 

Who Do We Say Amen?

I think it is worth investigating: Why do we say Amen after receiving Holy Communion?

In the Second Century, St. Justin Martyr writes in his Apologia that after the prayers of thanksgiving and consecration were finished by the priest, all responded by saying “Amen.” This is not simply a word found at the end of a conversation. It is not like saying, “Ok. Goodbye, God,” after a prayer is finished. St. Paul writes, “Otherwise, if you give thanks with your spirit, how can anyone in the position of an outsider say “Amen” to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying?” So, it would seem that the word Amen packs a punch. But what does it mean?

Amen is a Hebrew word which means “so be it.” St. Augustine translated it as “it is true (Latin: verum est).” In a tract explaining the Mass from the Middle Ages, we read, “Amen is a ratification by the people of what has been spoken, and it may be interpreted in our language as if they all said: May it so be done as the priest has prayed (Catholic Encyclopedia, 1907).”

It is custom in most of the Rites of the Catholic Church, both East and West, to say “Amen” after receiving Holy Communion. In the 1962 Missale Romanum, the priest says, “Corpus Domini Nostri Iesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam aeternam, Amen (May the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ preserve your soul unto life everlasting. Amen).” So, even though the communicant does not say “Amen” like in the Ordinary Form of the Mass, the priest has said “Amen” for them.

The language of “Amen” seems to be like a contract. When two people enter into an agreement with one another, they may mark it with a handshake and say, “so be it” or “I agree.” Is that what is happening at Mass? Certainly, what we are entering into at Mass is far more important, meaningful, lasting, and beautiful. Perhaps more than a contract, the “Amen” shows us that the language of the Mass is that of a covenant. A contract can be broken. A covenant cannot be broken.

When we approach our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist, we are approaching the Bridegroom as the Bride. We are uttering our wedding vows to the King of Heaven each time we receive Holy Communion. We are saying, “I do” when we say “Amen.” The meaning of the word is very close to this understanding. We are using the language of marriage to show that we are accepting the Bridegroom into our body and soul to remain with us always. As husband and wife become one flesh in marriage, the communicant and our Lord become one in the Eucharist. “Communion” means “one with.” We are becoming more closely joined to the Lord in reception of Holy Communion.

Every time we say “Amen” we should call to mind clearly what we are doing. We are giving our assent of Faith. We are not saying “Okay” or “Sure”, we are saying “so be it.” Do we know what we are saying “yes” to? Do we know what we entering into? Our “yes” to God cannot be half-hearted or wishy-washy. It must be sure and resolute, by His grace. Our Lord Jesus is a strong proponent of authenticity and resolution. We hear in the Book of Revelation: “So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth (Rev. 3:16).” And in the Gospel of St. Matthew: “Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything more than this comes from evil (Mt. 5:37).” Let our Amen mean Amen. 

Then, after Holy Communion, the priest or deacon purifies the Sacred Vessels, which is something only they can do. They quietly say:

“What has passed our lips as food, O Lord, may we possess in purity of heart, that what has been given to us in time may be our healing for eternity.”

Next, the priest invites the people to pray and says the Prayer after Communion. This is a special prayer given for each liturgical day, like the Collect, which ends the Communion Rite and the Liturgy of the Eucharist, more broadly. 

Will Wright Catholic Podcast is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Concluding Rites

Greeting, Blessing, and Dismissal

We have just taken part in the Liturgy of the Eucharist in which Jesus Christ became substantially, truly, and really present.  Having just received Him in His Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity in the Eucharist, the faithful are living tabernacles.  The word Eucharist actually means thanksgiving in Greek, and this is what we are doing during the Concluding Rites.

Out of deep gratitude for what our good God has done, we spend some time in silence following the Communion Rite, reflecting on the gift of the Most Holy Eucharist.  Then, the priest blesses the people assembled.  There is great power in this blessing. The priest, acting in the Person of Christ the Head, is blessing the people.  In other words, it is Christ Himself who blesses us at the end of Mass.  During Mass, where the priest is, there is Christ.

The priest, acting in the Person of Christ, blesses those gathered with the power and might of the Most Holy Trinity: “May almighty God bless you, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.”  By making the sign of the Cross and invoking the Trinity, the priest is sealing us with God’s presence.  We have been shown mercy in the Introductory Rites and we glorified God.  We were fed with His adorable Word in the Liturgy of the Word.  And we received Jesus Christ Himself in the Holy Eucharist in the Liturgy of the Eucharist.  This one, single act of worship began with the sign of the Cross and it ends with the sign of the Cross.

Following the final blessing, the dismissal is given by the priest or deacon.  This is, in fact, where the word Mass comes from.  The words in Latin “Ite, missa est” literally means “Go, she (meaning, the Church) – has been sent”.  This word is related to our English word “mission.”  Fed by the Word and the Eucharist, Jesus fills us with Himself and we are strengthened to go out and share Him with the world. The Church exists to evangelize, and we are the hands and feet of Christ. 

At the end of the Gospel of Matthew, in the Great Commission, Jesus says to the Apostles:

“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age (Mt. 28:18-20).”

Likewise, the deacon or priest is acting in the Person of Christ, telling us to “Go” as well! The dismissal makes the Ascension anamnetically present to us, because that is exactly what happened after the Great Commission.

Then, the priest, still acting in the Person of Christ the Head, then processes down the center aisle towards the narthex as a recessional hymn is sung.  Technically speaking, the one, single act of worship – the Mass – ends with the dismissal.  Practically speaking, our celebration of the Sacred Mysteries ends when the priest reaches the narthex of the Church. This practice of waiting until the priest reaches the narthex highlights the reality that Christ is the presider at Mass, acting through the priest.

Conclusion

I hope that this series has been a blessing to you. I hope that we all will continue in our pursuit of the glory of God and the sanctification of man. I hope that the Mass comes alive to your senses in a powerful way. Thanks be to God for such a great gift!

Thank you for reading Will Wright Catholic Podcast. This post is public so feel free to share it.

Introduction

Welcome back to session 4 of “Praying the Mass.” I am thrilled to share with you today the Liturgy of the Eucharist. With the Prayers of the Faithful completed, the Offertory begins. 

Presentation of the Gifts

Gifts

Bread and wine are brought to the altar and prayers of offering and blessing are made. This presentation of the gifts, the bread and wine, and the preparation of the altar is getting us ready to enter into the most sacred part of the Holy Mass. 

The bread and wine, now present on the altar, are gifts because all created things come from God. Without the act of creation and the sustaining of being itself, we would not have bread and wine to offer in the first place. 

Even from the earliest days, humanity has offered the first fruits of their harvest or flock back to God in thanksgiving. Recognizing an abundant harvest or a healthy flock or even a child being born as a gift from the divine is not isolated to Christianity and Judaism. In the oldest pagan religions, armed only with God-given human reason, there is an understanding that there is a higher power which created and sustains all things. And, so, the bread and wine are gifts. 

But that is not all. Our own lives are gifts. The churches in which we worship are gifts. The vestments, sacred vessels, and artwork are gifts. Without God, there is nothing. Everything we have is a gift in a very real sense. As St. Therese of Lisieux said, “Everything is grace.” 

Offerings

The bread and wine are offerings because they are being set aside for sacred use. Ordinary bread and wine are placed upon the altar with the full expectation of the miracle that is to come. These gifts are being offered for a specific purpose. Namely, to make Christ present Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity, under the veil of a sacrament. The bread and wine are not the only things being offered. We offer God, each day, our works, joys, sufferings, in union with the action of Jesus at the altar at Holy Mass. 

As St. Paul says in Romans 12: 

“I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship (Rom. 12:1).”

Everything we do throughout our day, which is intentionally united to Christ, is our spiritual offering. In offering ourselves, we are transformed to be more like Christ, just as the bread and wine become Christ. We can also offer all of the many requests and intentions that we have. We offer all we are next to the bread on the paten and in the chalice with the wine.

Finally, the bread and wine are holy and unblemished sacrifices. When the bread and wine are set aside for sacred use, they can no longer be used as ordinary food. In a simple sense, this is a sacrifice. 

When we understand that we are uniting ourselves to this offering at Mass, we come to realize that the content of our day to day lives is the sacrifice that we are offering. These sacrifices are acts of love: cleaning the dishes so your spouse does not have to do it, practicing virtue rather than vice, setting aside time for prayer, or striving to live the commands of Jesus Christ each moment of the day. 

Then, at Holy Mass, we offer these actions, as well as our failings, alongside the bread and wine. We become a sacrifice offered to God in humility. Holy because we are set apart by God in our Baptism. Unblemished because we are set right with God by our Baptism, frequent reception of the Sacrament of Penance, and by being transformed by our receiving of Holy Communion in a state of grace. 

Prayer Over the Offerings

During Sunday Mass, the collection is taken during the Prayers Over the Offerings. This is a chance for the assembly to make their tithing a liturgical action. Just as the gifts of bread and wine are offered, so too are our “first fruits.” 

During this preparation, you might see the Deacon or Priest pour wine into the chalice at the altar and then a bit of water as well. They are also quietly saying, 

“By the mystery of this water and wine, may we come to share in the divinity of Christ, who humbled himself to share in our humanity.”

Water, in most places of the world, is a fairly common thing. This is symbolic of humanity. Yet, wine is expensive and takes a long time to make; this is symbolic of divinity. And when the wine and water are mixed, can they be separated again? No! So, it is with the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. The Byzantine tradition takes the symbolism a step further. During Divine Liturgy, warm water is added to the wine during the preparatory prayers because the blood of a living Man is warm!

Turning to the people after the Offertory Prayers, the priest says, 

“Pray, brethren, that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God, the almighty Father.” 

This is not a prayer. This is an invitation. This is a command. The people then respond, speaking to the priest saying, 

“May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of his name, for our good and the good of all his holy Church.” 

This beautiful exchange is a call to action. The priest is about to enter into the Holy of Holies to offer the one Sacrifice of Jesus Christ in the Person of Christ, Head of His Body. The people offer sacrifice as well, but in a different way as members of the Body of Christ.

Also, the people are acknowledging that the Sacrifice being offered is 1) primarily at the hands of the priest, 2) is for the praise and glory of God, and 3) is for the “making holy” (sanctification) of the people.

It should be noted that after the priest says the Orate, Fratres and he is offering the Mass in the ad orientem posture, the Roman Missal does not direct him to turn back towards the people until the Ecce Agnus Dei (“Behold the Lamb of God…”). He is in the fight. His attention, and ours, should then be entirely fixed upon entering into the Sacred Action of the one Sacrifice of Jesus Christ, presented once more, outside of space and time. 

Attention entirely fixed upon the task at hand, the priest begins the Eucharistic Prayer by saying, “The Lord be with you.” (Latin: Dominus vobiscum) The people respond, “And with your spirit.” (Latin: Et cum spiritu tuo) This small exchange is not a greeting. The priest is acknowledging that, in our Baptism, we are members of the Body of Christ. And as members of the Body of Christ, we offer ourselves in union with the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ.  

We say, “And with your spirit” because we are acknowledging that by the power of the Holy Spirit, in his ordination, the priest is acting in the Person of Christ the Head of His Body. We are not speaking of “your spirit” as the priest’s human spirit. We are acknowledging his priestly spirit, in Christ, in the power of the Holy Spirit.  

Next the priest says, “Lift up your hearts.” (Latin: Sursum corda) The people respond, “We lift them up to the Lord.” (Latin: Habemus ad Dominum) Literally in Latin, this response means something like, “We hold towards the Lord.” This means we are lifting our hearts now or we have already been lifting them up and will continue to do so. God, ever-patient, is giving us another chance to clue in to the miracle in front of us before we charge into the breach in the battle of prayer. 

Then the priest says, “Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.” (Latin: Gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro) And the people acclaim, “It is right and just.” (Latin: Dignum et iustum est) It is “right” for us to give thanks to God because that is why human beings were ultimately created. We are made to worship God. It is “just” because God alone deserves glory and praise.  

This ancient dialogue of the Preface Dialogue begins the Eucharistic Prayer. It reminds us of who we are as priest and people, Head and Members of the Body of Christ. It reminds us of our active internal role in entering into the Sacrifice of the Mass. It reminds us of the glory due to God and our role in offering Him praise.  

The Preface

The first essential part of the Eucharistic Prayer is the Preface for the day which is then offered by the priest. These prefaces change depending on the season of the Church liturgical year and the feast, solemnity, or memorial that is being celebrated. 

Directly following the Preface and just before the beginning of the Eucharistic Prayer comes the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy). This ancient prayer was added to the Sacred Liturgy in the first half of the fifth century and is drawn from Isaiah 6:3 and Matthew 21:9. The Preface and the Sanctus specifically call to mind the angels and remind us that we are praising God, with all of the angels and saints in Heaven present with us. Heaven is touching Earth and we are present for this spectacular event.

In the 1962 Roman Missal, there is a beautiful insight in the rubrics. At the word Sanctus, the priest joins his hands and bows in humble adoration of God. Then, at the words Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini (Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord), he stands fully and makes the Sign of the Cross. In the midst of the angels and the saints, the grace of God is pouring out upon us and blessing us as we enter into the great Action of Jesus Christ in the remainder of the Eucharistic Prayer.

This is no longer called for in the rubrics of the 1970 Missal, but the spirit of the theological significance is no less for us!

The Sanctus is one of the oldest congregational hymns in existence. In Greek it is the ton epinikion hymnon or “Hymn of Victory.” This the final part of the Eucharistic Preface and is said or sung at every single Mass in the Latin Rite. The hymn also exists in some form in all but one of the Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church. 

Historically, in the Latin Church, the bells were rung at the start of the Sanctus to signal that the Roman Canon was coming imminently. Let us now walk through the Sanctus piece by piece. 

“Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of hosts.” (Latin: Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Deus Sabaoth.) There are two main points of interest I would like to draw out here: the repetition of Holy and the word “hosts.”  

In English, and many other languages, there are words called comparatives and superlatives. For example, we have the word “good,” the comparative “better,” and the superlative “best.” In Hebrew, this construction does not exist. To say “better,” you would say “good, good.” And to say “best,” you would say, “good, good, good.” Therefore, to say Holy, Holy, Holy is saying that God is the Most Holy. 

It is also a call to worship, often done in threes. Think, for example, of the popular Christmas chant where “O come, let us adore Him (Venite adoremus)” is repeated three times. And, of course, the repetition of three refers also to the Trinity. Like most things in the Church, there are multiple levels of meaning.

The word “hosts” refers to the heavenly hosts of angels, which St. Luke refers to in his account of the birth of Jesus. These legions of angels do the will of God and bring Him glory. They are with us in the fight and they join us in worship of Him.  

As Dr. Scott Hahn wrote so eloquently, 

“When we go to Mass, the congregation is never small, even if it is nonexistent in terms of human attendance. The angels are there, as is evident even in the words of the Mass: ‘And so with all the choirs of angels we sing: Holy, holy, holy…’ The Mass itself cries out for us to be aware of our angels (Hahn, Signs of Life).” 

“Heaven and earth are full of your glory.” (Latin: Pleni sunt cæli et terra gloria tua) Of course, here we are giving God praise, acclaiming the truth that for those with the eyes of Faith, He is recognizable all around. All things are directed ultimately to Him. 

“Hosanna in the highest. Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest.” (Latin: Hosanna in excelsis. Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini. Hosanna in excelsis.) This refers to the cry of the people as Christ entered Jerusalem to the sight of palm branches being waved, reminiscent of Solomon’s entrance into Jerusalem. The people exclaimed of Christ, 

“And the crowds that went before him and that followed him were shouting, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!’ (Mt. 21:9)”  

Hosanna means “Praise to the Lord!” And so, we are offering praise to the Father for the gift of the Son. In this hymn, the coming of Christ in the Nativity is called to mind. We know that Christ will come again. The Sanctus reminds us that Christ comes to us now. At the Mass, the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus become present under the veil of a sacrament on the altar. 

The Sanctus, with its mention of the angels and the triumph of Christ, is like a bridge between Heaven and earth. The Lord of Heaven and earth is drawing us deep into His heart. The eternal self-offering of the Son to the Father in the Spirit is veiled before us by signs and symbols. But there is no doubt that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, especially in the Eucharistic Prayer is a foretaste of Heaven.  

Epiclesis and Institution Narrative

There are currently a few different options for the Eucharistic Prayer, proper. However, they all contain two more essential parts: the Epiclesis (Greek: Epiklesis, Latin: Invocatio) and the Institution Narrative. 

The Epiclesis is the calling down of the Holy Spirit upon the gifts of bread and wine that they may become the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ. Every Western and Eastern liturgy contains this essential prayer. The Institution Narrative is the full narrative of the Last Supper in which Christ instituted the Eucharist as the New Covenant, including the words of consecration (This is My Body… This is My Blood…).

In the Catholic Church, there has always been an understanding that this invocation of the Holy Spirit was essential, along with the words of consecration.

We may be tempted to ask exactly when does the bread and wine actually become Jesus’ Body and Blood? Is it at the Epiclesis or is it at the Institution Narrative? This has been a source of tension through the history of discussions between the East and the West in the Church. The important thing is to recognize the essential nature of both. 

Without the words of consecration, there is no Eucharist. But without the power of the Holy Spirit, there is no Eucharist. This is absolutely not to say that the Holy Spirit waits for the priest to call on Him. The entire Holy Mass is the prayer and working of Almighty God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. But God has designed that His creatures should cooperate with His sacred Action. Therefore, the invocation of the Holy Spirit and the words of consecration of the Son are both to the glory of the Father and the making holy of the people, which hopefully we will remember are the two main ends of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

We take our cue of the importance of both elements, the Institution Narrative and the Epiclesis, from the posture of the people at the Holy Mass. Following the Preface and the Sanctus, the people kneel. In the Roman Rite, the posture of kneeling is twofold: humility and adoration. We kneel in humble adoration because God is sending His Holy Spirit in power to consecrate the bread and wine to become the Most Holy Eucharist, at the hands of the priest. We are humble because we understand who God is and who we are in relationship to Him. We adore Him because it is right and just, especially given the miracle that is taking place in front of us.

During the Epiclesis, the priest’s posture changes as well. He extends his hands, palms facing down, over the gifts to show the calling down of the Holy Spirit. The bells are also rung at this time to draw our sense’s attention to what is happening. 

During the Institution Narrative, the priest is engaged in the Sacred Action of Jesus Christ. When speaking the words of consecration, he bows and speaks in a straight tone. This is to show that the words are not his own, rather Jesus Christ is speaking through him at that moment. Back in ancient times, a messenger would visit a foreign king and speak the words of his own master. The foreign king would know that the words did not belong to the messenger because the messenger would speak them while bent at the waist. 

Then, the priest genuflects before the King of kings now present on the altar. Here, in the climax of the Mass, the bells are rung three times as if to say Holy, Holy, Holy. As I mentioned earlier, in Hebrew, there are no grammatical comparatives and superlatives. To say holier, you would say “holy, holy,” and to say holiest, you say “holy, holy, holy.”

Anamnesis

The fourth essential part of the Eucharistic Prayer is Anamnesis.

During the Institution Narrative, the bread and wine are consecrated separately, first the bread then the wine, and they become the Body and Blood of Jesus. The result of separating blood from a body is death. In this way, the Institution Narrative makes present the Passion and Death of Jesus. Is this just a metaphor? Is it symbolic? Far from being merely a symbol, this means the Holy Cross is made present to us in the here and now, outside of time, by the power of God. Rather, we could say that we are transported to the foot of the Holy Cross where the Son of God shed His blood and life for our sake. When we begin to see with the eyes of faith that this is a reality and not simply symbolic, we begin to understand anamnesis.

Anamnesis in Greek literally means bring to mind. We could also translate it as a deliberate recollection. Anamnesis in the context of liturgy is more than just a memory or a calling to the mind in some abstract way. Through the power of the Holy Spirit and the mediation of Jesus Christ, our High Priest, the One Sacrifice becomes present once again in an unbloody manner. The word anamnesis is what Jesus says in the words of consecration when He says, “Do this in remembrance of me.” 

The Anamnesis makes present the Sacred Action of Jesus Christ to our senses through external signs and symbols. It is a reminder on the surface level. But if we push past the veil, God allows us to see and to receive the full power of His saving Mysteries which were so powerful that they cannot be contained in a single moment of history. The Cross was two thousand years ago, but it comes present once again at every single Mass. What we see as signs and symbols are made truly present to us, in reality.

Of course, after the Eucharistic Prayer, the priest puts a piece of the Sacred Host into the Sacred Chalice in the Fraction Rite. In this action, anamnesis makes the reunion of the Body and Blood of Christ, the Resurrection, present to us once more. He who died will not die again. The whole Christ is risen. This is why the faithful receive the full risen Christ in His Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity in every particle of the Host or every drop from the Chalice.

Intercessions

The fifth main part of the Eucharistic Prayer is the Intercessions. Intercession means to intervene on behalf of another. From the outset, it should be clear that the Eucharistic Prayer must essentially be intercessory because it makes present the Saving Mysteries of Jesus Christ who suffered, died, and rose to redeem all mankind. 

St. Paul says to St. Timothy: “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus… (1 Timothy 2:5).” Jesus Christ is our mediator. He is the Pontifex Maximus (the “Greatest Bridge-Maker“). He stands in the gap between mankind and the Father, a gap which was caused by Adam’s first sin and perpetuated by each personal sin of every sinner. He is the only Way to the Father. He is the Bridge. And so, in the Eucharistic Prayer, we see this reality take form especially with the Intercessions. 

The Sacred Liturgy is a priestly action. It is the prayer of our High Priest, Jesus Christ, active in a special way through the instruments of the ordained minister and the baptized faithful as Head and Members. The Sacred Liturgy is the work of God for His glory and for the sanctification (making holy) of His people and the whole world. 

As the Eucharistic Prayer begins, the priest asks in the confidence of Jesus Christ for what we need, in and through Jesus Christ. The priest asks for the gifts of bread and wine, and the personal intentions and sacrifices of those gathered, to be accepted and blessed by God.  

In this way, our own personal sacrifices and intentions are being offered to the Father, in the Son, and through the Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is interceding for us to the Father. He intercedes for the whole world, beginning with the Church. We ask that God may give the Church peace, guidance, union, and governance throughout the world. Then we offer intercessory prayer for the Pope and for our local bishop. 

In the first Eucharisitic Prayer, there are prayers of intercession for “all those who, holding to the truth, hand on the catholic and apostolic faith.” This means, firstly, the whole college of bishops who are the successors of the Apostles. But, it also means all those throughout the entire Church. The Church exists in order to evangelize. She exists in order to bring glory to God and full, abundant life to all men and women. This happens by fidelity to the catholic and apostolic faith which must be handed on without change or lessening.

We should not forget the saints, as well!

Since it has been established by the Church that we have recourse to the saints, to the glory of God, then we ought to exercise it. We have previously discussed the one perfect Sacrifice of Jesus Christ. On the Cross, Jesus Christ earned superabundant merit. His perfect, eternal Sacrifice was sufficient to redeem all of mankind. But God has given us the ability to unite our own actions with His perfect Action. 

The merits of those who have come before us, the saints, are united to the Cross of Jesus Christ. Their cooperation with God’s grace is what allowed them to accept the invitation to eternal life. No human action is done in isolation. Our actions have consequences, and they affect other people. Therefore, our good actions, our good works, create a ripple effect that positively affects the souls of others. When applied to the Cross of Jesus Christ, these good works share in the superabundant merit of Jesus Christ. This is the essence of what Catholics mean when they say, “offer it up.”

It is not only the past merits and prayers of saints that have efficacious power in God’s grace. The saints, alive in Heaven, pray for the good of those still below on Earth. The Church investigates alleged miracles, wrought by God’s grace through the intercession of a specific person. If the miracle is found to be legitimate, then it confirms that the person is in Heaven. This is part of the official canonization process of the Church. 

By the merits and prayers of the saints, we are defended from temptation and evil. The genius of the saints is found in their fidelity to and love of God. The example of their lives and the fervor of their preaching is a testament to God’s goodness and an acclamation of His glory. Even in the midst of suffering, we can claim the joy of Jesus Christ. 

Even if we feel utterly alone, we know that we are never alone. As the author of Hebrews writes: 

“Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God (Heb. 12:1).”

The Words of Consecration

Let us finish today by looking at the gems of the Holy Mass: the words of consecration. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is one prayer of our High Priest Jesus Christ from beginning to end. But even in that one prayer, the Words of Consecration are precious jewels. These holy words, spoken after Jesus has taken ordinary bread in His holy and venerable hands, make His own Body present in a mystical way. 

Mystical, however, does not mean “less real.” The physical is brought up into the spiritual and transcendent in a way that is hidden to our senses but very much real. We have to remember the power of the speech of God. When God speaks, things come into being. Think back to Genesis: God said “Let there be light” and there was light. 

So, when the God-man Jesus Christ says, “This is my Body,” He means it. The bread is no more. The characteristics remain, but the substance underneath the appearances has transformed or shifted. This is the miracle of transubstantiation. Ordinary bread and wine become the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ.

The miracle of the Eucharist is a mystery. Though, we should be careful to take Jesus at His Word and to understand that God who made all things visible and invisible can make this reality present to us. When the priest elevates the Host, after the Words of Consecration, we are adoring our Eucharistic Lord, fully present under the veil of the Sacrament. 

The Eucharist is the Sacrament of Sacraments. Baptism orients us towards Holy Communion, as does Confirmation. Penance restores us to union with God, to partake worthily of the Blessed Sacrament. Holy Orders and Matrimony are at the service of Communion. Finally, the Anointing of the Sick is healing for soul and body and can be followed by reception of Holy Communion. Each of these outward showings of God’s inner-life, His grace, draw from the source of the Eucharist and are oriented to the summit which is the Eucharist. 

The Holy Body of Jesus Christ was “pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed (Is 53:5).” His Body was given up for you and for me. He went to the Cross for you and for me. But that was not enough for the gratuitous and superabundant love of God. He also established for us the everlasting memorial of His suffering and death by which the Holy Eucharist is made present for us to receive. 

The Byzantine traditions contain a remarkably beautiful prayer before Holy Communion which is said every single day at Divine Liturgy. This is a prayer of the heart, packed with meaning, gratitude, and seeking healing for soul and body. We will end today with this prayer and then pick up with the words of consecration over the chalice next week!

“O Lord, I believe and profess that You are truly Christ, the Son of the living God, Who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the first. Accept me as a partaker of Your mystical supper, O Son of God, for I will not reveal Your mystery to Your enemies, nor will I give you a kiss as did Judas, but like the thief I confess to You: Remember me, O Lord, when You shall come into Your kingdom. Remember me, O Master, when You shall come into Your kingdom. Remember me, O Holy One, when You shall come into Your kingdom. May the partaking of Your Holy mysteries, O Lord, be not for my judgment or condemnation, but for the healing of my soul and body.

O Lord, I also believe and profess that this, which I am about to receive, is truly Your most precious body and Your life-giving blood, which, I pray, make me worthy to receive for the remission of all my sins and for life everlasting. Amen. O God, be merciful to me a sinner. O God, cleanse me of my sins and have mercy on me. O Lord, forgive me for I have sinned without number.”

Introduction

Welcome back to Praying the Mass! Over the last couple of weeks, we have learned what the Sacred Liturgy is, what it’s for, and we looked a bit more intently at Sacred Music and the Introductory Rites of the Mass. Today, we are looking at the Liturgy of the Word, but I want to begin with “part two” of our exploration of Sacred Music. As we looked at last week, music is integral to the Sacred Liturgy. So, it’s important for us to know the mind and heart of the Church on the subject. And then we are going to take a close look at one of the most important theological ideas of this entire series: the Mystical Body of Christ.

Sacraments vs. Sacramentals

Let us begin first with a quick look at the difference between a Sacrament and a sacramental. This will be exceptionally brief, but I do not want to take for granted that the difference is evident to everyone listening.

A Sacrament is one of the seven sacraments instituted by Jesus Christ as an outward sign of God’s inward grace. The Sacraments actually make present in a very real way what is being symbolized. Baptism is not a bath; it causes a real change in us. The Eucharist is not a mere symbol; it is actually Jesus’ Body and Blood. 

Sacramentals, on the other hand, like holy water, the rosary, blessed salt, the Sign of the Cross, and crucifixes have no intrinsic power. They are not talismans or magic. They simply dispose of our hearts, minds, and souls to God’s grace. They open us up to God’s supernatural aid and love!

Full, Conscious, and Actual Participation and Sacred Music

Full, Conscious, Actual Participation

Intimately related to music, let us begin by looking at the phrase from the Second Vatican Council: full, conscious, and active participation.

In Vatican II’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Council Fathers write: 

“Mother Church earnestly desires that all the faithful should be led to that fully conscious, and active participation in liturgical celebrations which is demanded by the very nature of the liturgy. Such participation by the Christian people as ‘a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a redeemed people (1 Pet. 2:9; cf. 2:4-5),’ is their right and duty by reason of their baptism. In the restoration and promotion of the sacred liturgy, this full and active participation by all the people is the aim to be considered before all else…”

This notion of full, conscious, and active participation has been understood and misunderstood since the 1960s. There is a helpful distinction in the official text of the document. Of course, this constitution was promulgated in Latin not in English. The Latin word used for “active” is “actuosa.” While actuosa does mean active, busy, or energetic, this is not the meaning of the Church’s document. If we dig a bit deeper into the notion of active we arrive at the notion of active, active rather than passive. We will arrive at actually proceeding rather than dormant. Based on liturgical documents before and after the Council, the true meaning of actuosa is better rendered as “actual” rather than “active.” 

Why do I think this matters? Well, if we stick to the idea of being busy or externally energetic, then we are missing the boat. Full, conscious, and actual participation in the Sacred Liturgy comes from the disposition of the heart which bears fruit in external ways through singing and saying the responses, sitting, standing, kneeling, beating one's breast, making the sign of the cross, and so forth. Full, conscious, and active participation does not mean that every member of the laity needs to busy themselves with some role to fulfill. 

As we will see in a few minutes, speaking about the Mystical Body of Christ, our role as laity differs in degree from that of the priest. The priest is offering the Mass in persona Christi capitis (in the Person of Christ, Head of His Body). The priest offers the holy sacrifice. We, the people, offer the Mass as Members of the Body of Christ. We do this by praying, singing, and focusing our mind, heart, soul, and strength on the liturgical action.

As Pope Francis said in a homily in 2013, 

“Active and conscious participation in the liturgy constitutes being able to ‘enter deeply’ into the mystery of God made present in the Eucharist: thanks in particular to the religious silence and musicality of language with which the Lord speaks to us (Sample, 11).” 

Liturgical activity is not a jamboree. It is not a festival. It is a sacred foretaste of the heavenly banquet. Above all, it is the presentation once more of the one sacrifice of the Cross in an unbloody manner. This is a great mystery. Our actual participation, as a member of the Body of Christ allows us to enter this sacred reality. 

Singing the Mass

As Catholics, we are not called to sing at Mass. We are called to sing the Mass. We are not spectators at Mass, we are called to offer our own personhood, body and soul, in the celebration of the sacred mysteries. 

The parts of the Mass which are sung consist of the Ordinary, the Propers, the Orations and the Dialogues.

The Ordinary

The Ordinary are the parts of the Mass that are the same every Sunday (with the exception of Advent and Lent): Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus, Mysterium Fidei, and Agnus Dei. The Creed (Credo) can also be sung. These parts are ordinarily for the congregation or a choir. These are beautifully done with the music which receives pride of place in the Roman liturgy: Gregorian chant. 

The Propers

The Propers consist of five parts in two sets. The first set: Entrance Antiphon, Offertory Antiphon, and Communion Antiphon. The second set: Responsorial Psalm and Gospel Proclamation with its Verse. Each of the Propers have accompanying refrains and verses. These are often done antiphonally with the cantor or choir singing the refrain, the congregation repeating the refrain, and then the cantor or choir singing the verses. 

Just as the 1st and 2nd Reading and the Gospel, there are Propers selected by the Church for each Sunday Mass of the year and for every major feast or solemnity.

These are to be sung, when possible, as they are part of the Mass. Unfortunately, this integral practice has been neglected in the Church for many years. I will go into detail a bit later about why liturgical chant is more appropriate and efficacious for the Mass than a hymn or song.

Orations and Dialogues

The Orations and Dialogues are “the texts of the Collects and other presidential prayers, and those in which the celebrant and people address each other, for example the greeting and its response: “The Lord be with you” - “And with your spirit”. Musical notations for these dialogues are provided in the Missal and should be used (Arch. Sample, Pastoral Letter 2019, 13).”

Hymns at Mass?

Hymns, in the mind of the Church, belong primarily in the Liturgy of the Hours, also called the Divine Office or the Breviary. This custom of singing hymns at Mass arose during the Low Mass of the Extraordinary Form of the Latin Mass when the priest was speaking in an inaudible voice praying in Latin. The congregation would sing vernacular devotional hymns during these silent prayers. More on why hymns are devotional rather than liturgical in a moment.

Though hymn singing at low Mass was the case historically, the mind of the Church is to sing the Ordinary, the Propers, and the Orations and Dialogues. Hymn-singing at Mass is not envisioned in the documents of the Second Vatican Council or any subsequent magisterial documents. The only exception is the allowance of a hymn of praise after the distribution of Holy Communion prior to the Prayer After Communion.

The normative practice of music at Mass was not envisioned by the Church. It was set in many ways over the last decades by large music publishers which gave us the processional, offertory (preparation), and communion hymns, and then usually a recessional hymn or song. The recessional, by the way, is not in the Missal or any of the Church’s music documents. It was simply tacked on to give a sense of closure. However, for many centuries, after Sunday Mass, it was customary to sing antiphons in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary. These four antiphons were done seasonally. More on those here.

Liturgical vs. Devotional

Hymns are devotional by nature. They are written by men and women and arise from the human heart up to God. Liturgical music, on the other hand, is handed down by tradition directly from Scripture (not paraphrased). In this way, liturgical chants are the written Word of God, which speaks to our hearts and comes to us from above, from God. We make these words our own as we sing them. By chanting, we are conforming ourselves to the word of God rather than giving God our word, as beautiful a gift as that can be. 

There is a time and a place. In a rosary prayer group, praying Marian devotional songs is always appropriate. In the Liturgy of the Hours, devotional hymns are always appropriate and called for. During praise and worship, devotional songs are our expression of our faith in God, our hope in Him, and our love of Him. 

However, there is something distinct and set apart, something utterly universal, something transcendent about the words of Christ coming down into our human existence in the context of the Mass. We take in these words, they form us more into Christ, and we glorify God. This is the action of the liturgy made flesh! The Son eternally offers Himself to the Father in the Spirit! As members of the Body of Christ, this is what we are participating in when we do liturgical singing and sing the Mass. 

Instruments

The Church gives us a clear vision of what has preference in terms of instrumentation as well. I do not want to spend a long time on this but I think it is worth mentioning. 

The Second Vatican Council says, 

“In the Latin Church the pipe organ is to be held in high esteem, for it is the traditional musical instrument which adds a wonderful splendor to the Church’s ceremonies and powerfully lifts up man’s mind to God and to higher things… (Other instruments may be admitted) only on condition that the instruments are suitable, or can be made suitable, for sacred use, accord with the dignity of the temple, and truly contribute to the edification of the faithful (SC, 120).”

When it comes to instruments at Mass, the question we always want to keep in mind is: does this serve to facilitate praying and singing the Mass? Is it liturgical? Does it elevate or distract from what Christ Himself is doing?

As an aside, pre-recorded music is forbidden to be used in liturgy by liturgical law. Ideally, musicians should not be particularly visually prominent. Choir lofts are the ideal, but may not be possible given your Church’s architecture. It is simply always the standard that musicians at Mass should add to the solemnity of the occasion and never distract or detract. Solemnity is usually joyful; solemn does not need to mean somber unless the liturgical occasion calls for it.

Silence

It is also important to retain silence. God is manifest not only in the beauty of liturgical singing, but also in the powerful silence in which we hear His still, small voice. There is a rhythm to the Sacred Liturgy which must not be rushed or unduly prolonged by the music. Silence fosters communication with God. It allows for reflection and meditation. 

As St. John Paul II put it in 1998:

“Active participation certainly means that, in gesture, word, song and service, all the members of the community take part in an act of worship, which is anything but inert or passive. Yet active participation does not preclude the active passivity of silence, stillness, and listening; indeed it demands it. Worshipers are not passive, for instance, when listening to the readings or the homily, or following the prayers of the celebrant, and the chants and music of the liturgy. These are experiences of silence and stillness, but they are in their own way profoundly active. In a culture which neither favors nor fosters meditative quiet, the art of interior listening is learned only with difficulty. Here we see how the liturgy, though it must always be properly inculturated, must also be counter-cultural.”

Conclusion on Music

In all things, pastors and musicians should familiarize themselves with the documents of the Church’s Magisterium on Sacred Music and Liturgy. Special care should be given to Sacrosanctum Concilium, the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, Tra Le Solicitudini, the USCCB document Sing to the Lord, Musicae Sacrae, Mediator Dei. There is a lot to take in and these beautiful instructive and ecclesiastical law documents are not emphasized enough.

Mystici Corporis

A Reminder in Time of War

A full year before the invasion of Normandy by Allied forces during World War Two, in June 1943, Pope Pius XII issued an encyclical letter entitled “Mystici Corporis Christi.” This encyclical is nothing new in Catholic teaching but was an affirmation of the identity of the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ. 

This might seem like an odd topic to write about during such cataclysm in Europe, but the Pope thought it was important for people to understand the Church. Most especially, during this time and any time, the Church is called to share Christ with the world and make the invisible visible. The Church is called to be a source of love, faith, and hope in a beleaguered world.

During the war, there was also widespread forced conversions of Jews to Christianity by anti-Semites. The Pope wanted to give a forceful condemnation of this practice. In Christianity, unlike some other major world religions, forced conversions are out of the question. Conversion to Christianity and incorporation into the Mystical Body of Christ must be voluntarily based on faith, hope, and love, not involuntary compulsion.

As St. John Paul II said so well: “The Faith is always proposed, not imposed.”

The Church is the Mystical Body of Christ

Pope Pius XII states clearly that the Church is a body and it must “be an unbroken unity, according to those words of Paul: ‘Though many we are one body in Christ.’ (MCC, 14).” However, this mystical body is also visible. 

With a multiplicity of members of all different walks of life, the Church is united in Christ who is the Head. This reality is both invisible and visible, both divine and human. 

This encyclical picked up the teachings of St. Paul on the Body of Christ, the Church, and laid the groundwork for a much lengthier discussion during the Second Vatican Council. The constitution concerning the Church from Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, further develops much of what the Pontiff wrote in 1943. 

We must realize that if the Church is a body, then it is an organism. As St. John Henry Newman said, “The Church is not an organization, it is an organism.” Of course, Jesus is the Head of His Body. Without the Head, we can do nothing. But the Head does not choose to operate in the world without the use of the Body. 

The Church is composed of Head and Members. It has a means for people to enter the Body by the power of the Holy Spirit. It has an internal means of subsistence which is the Holy Eucharist. And it has a means to grow, mature, and prosper in the life of grace, especially the sacramental life.

The Church as Mystery

The reason that the Mystical Body of Christ is called “mystical” is because this reality is a mystery. A mystery is not something unknowable. A mystery in the Church is something which is revealed by God but is not readily understandable by human reason alone. 

The vital principle of the Church is Jesus Christ Himself. He is fully God and fully man. This is a great mystery, but it is true. The Son of God took on flesh, sharing in our humanity, though He remains fully the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. This is a great mystery. The Holy Trinity, truly, is a great mystery.

By speaking of the Mystical Body of Christ, we distinguish it from the physical Body of Jesus. We also distinguish the Mystical Body of Christ from a natural body. Though we have spoken about how the Mystical Body of Christ is organized like a natural body, it is a supernatural reality. This must be the case because the Church is caught up in the mystery of God Himself. 

The Church is Invisible and Divine

The Church is not a human invention. The Church is the action of Almighty God, built on the firm foundation of Jesus Christ, directed to the Father, in the power and working of the Holy Spirit. The bonds of divine Charity are what bind us together. And so, the Church is invisible and divine. 

The Church is Visible and Human

God moves first and then we respond. Knowing and loving us before time began, God sent His Son to gather us together. As Pope Pius XII writes, 

“Now the only-begotten Son of God embraced us in His infinite knowledge and undying love even before the world began. And that He might give a visible and exceedingly beautiful expression to this love, He assumed our nature in hypostatic union… (MCC, 75).”

What the Pope is pointing out here is the enfleshment of the God-man is the point of reference for the Church. Though the Church appears visibly and seems to be a human institution, it was first the action of God. Just as Jesus Christ is both fully God and fully man, so too the Church is fully divine and fully human. 

What Is A Priest?

The popular definition of a priest is given as an ordained person with the authority to perform certain rites and administer certain sacraments. Properly speaking, however, a priest is one who offers sacrifice. This is what a priest is. This is what a priest does. This is who a priest is. A priest has handed over his life to be at the service of Jesus Christ and to pour himself out in His service.

Truly, there is only one Priest, the one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus. Jesus is our great High Priest and every ordained man simply takes part in that one priesthood to varying degrees. For example, every baptized person shares in the priesthood of Christ in a general way. Whereas, deacons, priests, and bishops participate in the priesthood of Christ in particular and ever-greater degrees.

Priesthood of All Believers

In the general sense, we are all priests through our Baptism, because we all offer the sacrifice of our contrite hearts and our lives which take on new meaning when united with the one Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross. For our Baptism is a kind of death, a sharing in the Cross. Therefore, in the priesthood of believers, we come to share in His Resurrection.

The Ministerial and Ordained Priesthood

The priest, however, in a very particular way, acting in the person of Christ, Head of His Body, offers the one Sacrifice of Christ on Calvary. This is the essence of the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The entire Paschal Mystery of Christ becomes truly present by the power of God at every single Holy Mass. It is what He is doing! Our High Priest offers Himself in the Spirit to the Father and invites us to take part. But the way in which we take part, as Head or as Member of His Mystical Body, matters.

The entrance of Christ into Jerusalem, His suffering, death, and resurrection, and His glorious ascension all become present once more. This one sacrifice is perpetuated as an everlasting memorial. Christ does not die again, yet His saving action becomes present once more through the Divine and Sacred Liturgy at the hands of the priest in the High Priesthood of Jesus Christ.

Private vs. Public Mass

Every single Holy Mass is celebrated primarily by Jesus Christ. In this heavenly banquet and sacrificial meal, there are many who are already living in the perfection of the Trinity. The saints in Heaven, whether they are officially canonized or not, are taking part fully, consciously, and actively in the Holy Mass. Likewise, the angels are constantly worshiping God in accord with His desires.

When Mass is celebrated publicly, there is more than just the priest present on earth. There may be other ministers, a cantor, an altar server, a reader, or some other member(s) of the lay faithful. These Masses are beautiful because they show a greater sign of the Mystical Body of Christ gathered to worship God, head and members.

However, what if a priest has to offer Mass privately? This has happened throughout the history of the Church. Priests are encouraged to offer Mass daily and they are therefore unable to have the faithful present every time they offer Mass. This is colloquially known as a private Mass, but the name is misleading.

No Mass is private. At every single Mass, Jesus Christ is offering Himself eternally to the Father in the power and working of the Holy Spirit, and the angels and saints are actively taking part in this perfect worship. Heaven and Earth meet. The imminent and transcendent kiss. So, whether the faithful are present or not, the Holy Mass is the Holy Mass.

Efficacy and Aims of the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass

At the risk of treading on the same ground as Session 1, I think it is worth looking at the efficacy and aims of the Holy Mass. Since the very first Eucharist at the Last Supper, Jesus instituted the Most Holy Eucharist as the memorial of His suffering and death, by which the graces of the Cross would flow to the entire world, even two thousand years later. For, in the Mass, the Cross becomes truly present once more and the Blood of Christ flows to purify the world.

The Mass is a true sacrifice that is offered to God alone. It is a sacrifice offered for the praise and adoration of our triune God in thanksgiving. The Mass is also offered for impetration, that is, to lay our requests for the world before God. The Mass is also a propitiatory sacrifice because it is the re-presentation of the Cross. In other words, the Blood of Christ flowing from the Cross is offered in expiation for the sins of mankind.

Our High Priest, standing once again in the breach as our mediator, by the hands of the ordained priest, is offering His prayer on our behalf to God of praise, adoration, thanksgiving, propitiation, and imputation. Every single Mass is therefore infinitely efficacious and good, whether the faithful are present or not. Therefore, Mass is never really private. It is always crowded. We just do not yet have eyes to see this glorious reality.

The Readings:

First Reading

The Liturgy of the Word begins after the Collect with the First Reading. Readings from Sacred Scripture of part of every Holy Mass. Each Mass, there is a First Reading, a Responsorial Psalm, and a reading from the Gospels. On Sundays, Solemnities, and some Feast Days, there is also a Second Reading. Generally, the First Reading is taken from the Old Testament. During the Easter Season (from Easter through Pentecost), the First Reading is taken from the New Testament.

Responsorial Psalm

The Responsorial Psalm comes from the 150 Psalms, except for five times in the three year cycle of readings. These are a canticle from Exodus and Isaiah on Easter Vigil, the Magnificat on Gaudete year B, and Daniel 3 on Trinity Sunday year A.

By the way, in the Lectionary, the part of the Roman Missal that contains the Readings for Mass, there is a two year cycle for daily readings and a three year cycle for Sunday Readings. When I was growing up I heard that we get through the entire Bible in three years. That’s not quite true. The Sunday and weekday lectionaries contain 13.5 percent of the Old Testament (not counting the Psalms), 54.9 percent of the non-Gospel New Testament, 89.8 percent of the Gospels, and 71.5 percent of the entire New Testament. 

The Second Vatican Council called for a greatly increased amount of readings. In paragraph 35 of Sacrosanctum Concilium, they stated: “In the sacred rites, a more abundant, more varied, and more appropriate selection of readings from Sacred Scripture is to be restored (SC, 35).” For Sundays, vigils, and major feasts, the amount of Scripture read directly in the Tridentine Liturgy was 22 percent of the Gospels, 11 percent of the New Testament Epistles, and 0.8 percent of the Old Testament. 

The Responsorial Psalm is meant to be responsorial, of course. So, a large part of actual participation in the Mass means actually singing the response! If you can sing, sing loudly. If you don’t think you can sing… sing even louder!

Second Reading (on Sundays and solemnities)

By adding a second reading on Sundays and solemnities, we are able to get through more of the story of salvation history over the three year cycle. But the Holy Mother Church also desires to show us more explicitly the intricate link between the Old and the New Testaments.

Gospel Acclamation

Before the Gospel, outside of Lent, the Alleluia and accompanying verse, related to the Gospel of the day, are chanted. And during Lent, a traditional alternative acclamation is made: “Praise to you, Lord Jesus Christ.” 

Before this Gospel Acclamation, there are occasionally Sequences. These are the 11th Century Victimae paschali laudes for Easter, the 12th Century Veni Sancte Spiritus for Pentecost, and the 13th Century Lauda Sion Salvatorem written by St. Thomas Aquinas for Corpus Christi. The ones on Easter and Pentecost are not optional in the current Missal. Another optional sequence is the Stabat mater for Our Lady of Sorrows, added in 1727. The Dies irae for All Souls’ Day and Requiem Masses was moved to the Liturgy of the Hours in 1970. 

Gospel

We are seated for the readings, but we stand up for the Gospel Acclamation and the Gospel. Why? Because it is the life of our Lord Jesus Christ! When we hear the Gospel proclaimed by the Deacon or priest, then we are hearing the words of our Blessed Lord! And so we stand out of respect, reverence, and joy.

Ordinary Ministers of Reading

The readings used to be proclaimed only by the priest, at the altar, in Latin. Now, they are proclaimed at an ambo or lectern. The Old and New Testament readings and the Psalm interestingly were given to the laity as an Ordinary Ministry. This is a change from the pre-1970 liturgies and is a reform or development. The “lessons” as they used to be called were only offered by the priest. Now, they are proclaimed to the people in the vernacular. 

The Gospel, however, is never read by the laity, even an instituted lector. The Gospel “belongs”, so to speak, to the Deacon. Even at a papal Mass, a deacon will proclaim the Gospel. This is symbolized at the diaconal ordination when the man being ordained is given a Book of the Gospels. This is also why the deacon processes up to the altar, at the beginning of the Mass, with a Book of the Gospels held high!

Liturgical Actualization

Why does it matter that the readings are proclaimed or offered quietly in Latin? Following the authentic developments of the liturgical movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, there was an understanding brought to the foreground called liturgical actualization.

When the readings are proclaimed at Mass, those sacred realities become present to us in a mystical way. When we hear of the Hebrews crossing dry shod across the Red Sea in the Exodus, we are there with them. By the power of Almighty God, the liturgy comes alive in a mysterious way and the fabric of space and time are folded in upon themselves. Thus, the readings are not mere recollections, nor mere instruction. The antiphons, the prayers of the Mass, and especially the proclaimed readings make the holy mysteries present to us and us present to them, in a way that escapes our understanding. 

As the Second Vatican Council teaches, quoting the Council of Trent: 

“... the Church has never failed to come together to celebrate the paschal mystery: reading those things ‘which were in all the scriptures concerning him (Luke 24:27),’ celebrating the eucharist in which ‘the victory and triumph of his death are again made present (Trent),’ and at the same time giving thanks ‘to God for his unspeakable gift (2 Cor. 9:15)’ in Christ Jesus, ‘in praise of his glory (Eph. 1:12),’ through the power of the Holy Spirit.”

This sacred mystery of liturgical actualization is rendered more intelligible to our senses by having the readings proclaimed in the vernacular in a way that all can hear. Thus, reading at Mass is a true ministry and an action of our High Priest, Jesus Christ, working through the reader. “When the Sacred Scriptures are read in the Church, God himself speaks to his people, and Christ, present in his own word, proclaims the Gospel (GIRM, 29).”

Homily

Since the time of the Council of Trent, the sermon or homily was envisioned as taking place after the Gospel at least on Sundays and holy days. This was not happening everywhere, and so the Second Vatican Council ordered that these prescriptions of Trent actually come to fruition. 

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal says this of the homily:

“Although in the readings from Sacred Scripture God’s word is addressed to all people of every era and is understandable to them, nevertheless, a fuller understanding and a greater effectiveness of the word is fostered by a living commentary on the word, that is, the homily, as part of the liturgical action.”

I have found that the best homilies are, at the same time, sufficient in depth, personally challenging, accessible, and focused on leading us towards the next part of the Mass: the Sacrifice on the altar!

Profession of Faith 

After the homily, on Sundays, solemnities, and special occasions we profess our faith with either the Nicene or Apostles’ Creed. These creedal statements are so very important in the life of the Church. The Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, to use the full name, is the fruit of the first two ecumenical councils in the 4th Century which safeguarded the Church against various heresies.

The Creed is also something we profess together, as Head and Members of the Body of Christ, in response to the word of God that was proclaimed in the readings and expounded in the homily. Dr. Scott Hahn in his excellent book on the Creed refers to the profession in this way: 

“I want to show that creeds don't just make you who you are and I who I am; they also make us who we are. They are one of the ordinary means God uses to unite his people. God takes wayward tribes and makes them a nation--and, more than that, a family! He takes all the lawless, rebellious nations of the earth and makes them a Church--and, more than that, his own body! It begins with that cry from the heart: I believe!”

Dr. Hahn also teaches us that the profession of the Creed is to the Liturgy of the Word what the reception of Holy Communion is to the Liturgy of the Eucharist! I find this so fruitful to contemplate before reciting the Creed!

How can we pray the Creed better? First, if you do not know what is being professed, then ask questions and find the answers! The Catechism of the Catholic Church has an entire section devoted to walking through the Creed line by line. Second, do not just say it; really pray it! Savor every word and feel the weight of the History of the Church, the passionate preaching of the saints who defended each word, and the power of the focal points of Jesus Christ and the Blessed Trinity.

Universal Prayer

Finally, in the Liturgy of the Word is the Prayers of the Faithful or the Universal Prayer in which, standing,

“the people respond in a certain way to the word of God which they have welcomed in faith and, exercising the office of their baptismal priesthood, offer prayers to God for the salvation of all (GIRM 69).”

In these prayers, the Church asks us to pray:

“a. For the needs of the Church;

b. For public authorities and the salvation of the whole world;

c. For those burdened by any kind of difficulty;

d. For the local community (GIRM 70).”

These prayers are directed by the priest and the intentions are announced by the deacon. If a deacon is not present, the priest can do so, or a cantor, lector, or one of the lay faithful are allowed to do so by the General Instruction of the Roman Missal. 

Conclusion

Okay. That’s it for the Liturgy of the Word. There is far more to say. I could have spent an entire hour just commenting on the formatting of the lectionary. But this series is an introduction to whet our appetite. If any questions came up in your mind today during the presentation, please send them to [email protected] and I will happily answer them!

See you next week for the session on the Liturgy of the Eucharist. I am so excited to share with you the astounding implications of liturgical actualization as it relates to the Liturgy of the Eucharist. The mystery and beauty of it is breathtaking! Until next week, may God bless us and keep us, seeking ever more after His heart!

Thank you for reading Will Wright Catholic Podcast. This post is public so feel free to share it.

Introduction

Last week, we looked at the etymology of the word liturgy, a public service. We talked about the liturgical diversity in the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church of Jesus Christ. We learned that the Holy Mass is for the glorification of God and the sanctification of man. We looked at the one sacrifice of Jesus Christ, made present once again by the Holy Mass. And we discussed how to put the cult back in culture. 

Most importantly, we defined the Mass. Hopefully we have it memorized by now! But if not here it is again:

The Mass is the perfect self-offering of the Son to the Father in the Spirit in which we are invited to take part. 

Architecture, Gestures, and Symbols

When the Word of God became man in the Person of Jesus Christ, the spiritual met the material. The supernatural shared in the nature of the natural. God took on flesh to share in our humanity. Heaven and Earth met. This has always been the way of the Church. The outward shows something deeper inward. In the Sacraments of the Church, most especially, signs and symbols become the outward showing of God’s inward grace. Hidden realities are made clear through the sacramental.

This is what signs and symbols in the Church can do for us: they use the visible to lead us to and show us the invisible. Especially in the Holy Mass, Heaven and Earth meet. This is why Church art and architecture matters so much. Good art and architecture show us the truth and goodness of God!

Basic Church Layout

Generally, there are three different parts to a Catholic Church: the narthex, nave, and sanctuary. The Narthex is the gathering place and the appropriate place to chat and share in fellowship. In the Nave, representative of Earth, the people are seated standing or in pews for worship. In the Sanctuary, we have the place where the Eucharistic miracle takes place and Heaven meets Earth. This is why the altar is prominently in the center of the Sanctuary, Christ standing in the midst of His people. 

The Altar is Christ

Dr. Denis McNamara of Benedictine College points out that Preface V of Easter in the Roman Missal says of Christ: 

“As He gave Himself into Your hands for our salvation, He showed Himself to be the Priest, the Altar, and the Lamb of sacrifice.” 

The altar, which is the center of the Eucharistic celebration, is both the place of sacrifice and the table of the Lord. On this altar, the sacrifice of Calvary is made present once more.

On the Cross, Jesus is the Priest because, as a Priest, He is offering Himself to the Father. He is the Altar because His Body is the place of sacrifice. He is the Lamb because, like the Passover, He is offered in our place.

In the words of Mother Church, the Altar is Christ standing in the midst of His People. Even when an altar is consecrated and dedicated, it is anointed with oil as the Body of Christ was anointed before His burial.

The Altar is not merely a table, even a sacred table. The Altar is first and foremost the place of sacrifice. The Holy Victim, who is also the High Priest, is offered on the Altar, which is His Body. The Holy Mass makes this reality present to us again.

As the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy from the Second Vatican Council says, “in the earthly liturgy we take part in a foretaste of that heavenly liturgy which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem (SC, 8).” So, the Altar is a living altar in Heaven and the meal we share is a heavenly meal. This is why the Altar is holy and receives special treatment: anointing, incensing, covering, and lighting.

Gestures in the Liturgy

Genuflection and Bowing

This brings us to a good point to discuss the gestures of genuflection and bowing. It would be very unusual to bow to a table. If that is all the Altar is, then we would be out of our minds to do so. Of course, we know that this Sacred Table is the place of sacrifice. The Altar is Christ.

Jesus Christ is God Himself, the second Person of the Most Holy Trinity. He is our great High Priest. He is the Lamb of Sacrifice. He is also the King of the Universe. Even the worst kings and queens in history were honored by bowing and genuflection. How much more deserving is our perfect and infinite Lord!

The proper gesture towards the altar which is the sign of Christ standing in our midst is a profound bow, or a bow from the waist. The bow is a bending of the head or body in reverence and submission. One definition of “to bow” is to “cease from competition or resistance.” How often do we resist the Lord? But, of course, God Almighty is so far above us that resistance or competition is unthinkable.

By bowing, we remind ourselves of who God is and who we are. We are also reminded of what takes place and Who becomes present on the Altar during Holy Mass.

When Do We Genuflect?

The genuflection, or bending at the knee, is a sign of profound respect and adoration. Speaking of Christ Jesus, St. Paul writes:

“Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (Philippians 2:9-11).”

We genuflect in the presence of our Eucharistic Lord, present in the Tabernacle. We bend our knee to the one and only God and Lord of all. The Altar makes Christ present in a particular and special way, but the Holy Eucharist IS Jesus.

So, with all of the explanation behind us: We bow to the Altar. We genuflect to our Lord in the Tabernacle.

Other Gestures and Postures

As we continue through this series, we will look at the meanings of several gestures and postures. One of the most prominent signs or gestures is the Sign of the Cross. There is the gesture before the Gospel. There are a few other instances throughout the Mass of bowing and genuflection. We will talk about kneeling, sitting, standing, and why each of these are important parts of the Sacred Liturgy. Today and next week, we will be talking about the importance of singing and speaking the responses. And later today, I will be mentioning the orans posture which seems to be misunderstood in the Liturgy.

If you really pay attention, there are so many different gestures, postures, and signs in the Sacred Liturgy, and they all have a purpose and meaning.

The Entrance and Greeting

What is Everyone Wearing?

If your church has a bell that is rung at the beginning, then what happens? We stand up. And then we see a procession of the priest, deacon, and altar servers. We will get to what this procession actually is in just a moment. But everyone is dressing up and putting on a costume. The priest will wear a chasuble which covers himself up so that we can better see Jesus Christ our High Priest. The chasuble is similar to the outer garment worn by the priest in the Temple in the Old Covenant. Likewise, the deacon is wearing a garb similar to those who assisted at the Temple; his garment is called a dalmatic and, unlike the chasuble, it has long sleeves. Underneath, the priest and deacon also wear an alb (a long white garment - albus means white in Latin) and a stole. The priest wears a stole around the back of his neck and which hangs on the front on both sides. The deacon wears a stole across his body from one shoulder to the opposite side by his hip. There are a couple other garments, but we will stick to what is seen for now. 

Altar servers are traditionally an apprenticeship for the priesthood. It is a close-up look at the service at the altar and an opportunity for conversations between priests and boys about the priesthood. So, the altar boys wear cassock and surplice which is a priestly garment. St. John Paul II allowed girls to altar serve in the late 1990s, if there were no boys available. The clearest case of this would be in the situation of an all-girls Catholic school. This has been expanded far beyond St. John Paul II’s intentions in most Parishes throughout the world over the last few decades. In some parishes, to make a visual distinction, girls will wear altar server robes rather than the male garment of cassock and surplice. I plan on making a few more comments on altar serving in Session 5. So, stay tuned on that front! Anyway… back to the procession!

What is a procession, liturgically and theologically?

What is part of the procession? And is there a method to the ordering? If there is incense at the Mass, the server with the incense (the thurifer) will go first along with the server with the little boat of incense granules. Next comes the processional cross which is on a long pole for all to see. After that comes two candle-bearers. Then the deacon. Then the priest. We will discuss this more in the coming weeks, but the procession is a movement through Earth (the nave) towards Heaven (the sanctuary). It is a presenting once again of the entrance of Jesus into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday.

Once the priest reaches the altar, he bows and kisses the altar. This gesture is called “reverencing the altar.” In the 1962 Missale Romanum, the prayers show us the deep meaning of the priest’s gesture:

“Take away from us our iniquities, we beseech Thee, O Lord, that we may be worthy to enter with pure minds into the Holy of Holies: through Christ our Lord. Amen. We beseech Thee, O Lord, by the merits of Thy Saints, whose relics are here, and of all the Saints, that Thou wouldst vouchsafe to forgive me all my sins. Amen (Missale Romanum 1962; Baronius Press translation).”

The Sign of the Cross

The very first thing the priest says in the Roman Missal is: “In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.” The Sign of the Cross! Why do we trace the cross when we begin prayer? In the fourth century, St. Cyril of Jerusalem said this:

“Let us not then be ashamed to confess the Crucified. Be the Cross our seal made with boldness by our fingers on our brow, and on everything; over the bread we eat, and the cups we drink; in our comings in, and goings out; before our sleep, when we lie down and when we rise up; when we are in the way, and when we are still. Great is that preservative; it is without price, for the sake of the poor; without toil, for the sick; since also its grace is from God. It is the Sign of the faithful, and the dread of devils: for He triumphed over them in it, having made a shew of them openly; for when they see the Cross they are reminded of the Crucified; they are afraid of Him, who bruised the heads of the dragon. Despise not the Seal, because of the freeness of the gift; out for this the rather honor thy Benefactor.”

There is power in the Sign of the Cross! In the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, the Sign of the Cross is made dozens of times! In the West, we generally make the sign with an open palm which is a sign of blessing. In the East, the thumb, index, and middle fingers are joined to represent the Trinity and the ring and pinky are put towards the palm to show the divine and human natures of Christ. Either way, it is a great way to begin worship.

Where do the greetings come from in Scripture?

Next, the priest says one of a few different greetings which are all taken from the letters of St. Paul. The choices are a variation of: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with all of you (2 Corinthians 13:13).”

What does “The Lord be with you” and the “and with your spirit” actually mean?

We are praying for the spirit of the ordained priest who we believe has been configured, through Holy Orders and the power of the Holy Spirit, to Christ in a special way.  When we say, “and with your spirit,” we are not simply wishing him well. We acknowledge his priestly soul and the fact that he is acting in the Person of Christ, Head of His Body. Next week, we are going to talk more about the concept of the Mystical Body of Christ.

The Penitential Act

Confiteor

Next comes the Penitential Act. There are a few choices for the priest here, but the first and most traditional option is the Confiteor followed by the Kyrie. In the Confiteor we call to mind our sins, ask for the prayers of the saints and our brothers and sisters in Christ, and ask for God’s forgiveness. 

Before the 10th or 11th centuries, the asking for forgiveness was done by the priest in his preparation prayers in the sacristy. After that point, these prayers of preparation became part of the prayers at the foot of the altar. In the 1962 Missale Romanum, the first words of the priest after the Sign of the Cross are “Introibo ad altare Dei” which begins Psalm 42. Directly after this psalm comes the Confiteor, so named after the first word in Latin of this prayer. The prayers at the foot of the altar are then concluded; the prayers of reverencing the altar are then made, which I mentioned earlier. 

In the 1970 Missal which is currently in use the Confiteor is said not only by the priest but by all present. The prominent gesture associated with the Confiteor is striking the breast during the words mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa (through my fault, through my fault, my most grievous fault). This is the gesture of the humble sinner who is expressing his heartfelt contrition. 

Right after the Confiteor, the priest asks for God’s forgiveness of our sins and we receive an absolution of our venial sins.

Kyrie Eleison

Before the priest gives us absolution, the Kyrie is sung. The words in English are “Lord, have mercy. Christ, have mercy. Lord, have mercy,” but these do not do justice to what is actually said in the Greek. As a side note, along with one chant on Good Friday, these are the only Greek words used in the Roman Liturgy. Pope St. Gregory the Great implemented numerous liturgical reforms in the late 6th Century and early 7th Century; he retained this part in Greek to show communion with the East. 

The word Kyrie does mean Lord and Christe does mean Christ. But Eleison does not originally mean have mercy. Eleison in Greek is derived from the word from oil. Literally, it had the meaning of “Lord, pour your oil out upon us.” What is this about? How did that come to mean mercy? Well, oil was used in the Ancient Greek world as a salve for burns and bruises. It was also used to prepare wrestlers before the Greek Olympic games. And, so, when we say Kyrie Eleison, we are asking God to ready us for battle and simultaneously to heal our wounds and bind up what is broken in us!

Gloria In Excelsis Deo

Scriptural basis for the Gloria

Next comes the Gloria, which in English begins: “Glory to God in the highest…” Where does this come from? Well, like most parts of the Mass, it is taken directly from Sacred Scripture. We have just asked for God’s forgiveness and received it, and now it is time to praise and glorify Him! We hear in Luke 2:8-20:

“8 And in the same region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. 9 And an angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were filled with great fear. 10 And the angel said to them, “Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. 11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. 12 And this will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger.” 13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying,

14 ‘Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!’

15 When the angels went away from them into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, ‘Let us go over to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has made known to us.’ 16 And they went with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby lying in a manger. 17 And when they saw it, they made known the saying that had been told them concerning this child. 18 And all who heard it wondered at what the shepherds told them. 19 But Mary treasured up all these things, pondering them in her heart. 20 And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, as it had been told them (Lk 2:8-20).”

Sacred Music at Mass

The Gloria is one of the hymns in the Mass which is properly sung. But why? Like the angels in the heavens singing and praising God, so too do we unite our hearts and minds with this action of worship. Here, though, I want to take a detour from our regularly scheduled programming to discuss music generally.

What is the purpose of Sacred Music in the Latin Rite? Maybe you know! Maybe you think you know. Maybe you have no idea. I hope to give the basics of what the Church offers. I am not interested in giving you my opinion or the opinions of others. What does the Church say is “Sacred Music?” I think it is worth giving a decent chunk of time here to get into it a bit!

In January of 2019, Archbishop Alexander Sample of the Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon wrote a pastoral letter on Sacred Music in Divine Worship entitled: “Sing to the LORD a New Song.” It is a brilliantly written synthesis of the Church’s perennial teachings on music in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church. The original letter can be found here. I highly recommend that any person involved in the ministry of music in a Latin Rite Catholic Church give it a read.

Introduction to Church Music

Quoting St. Augustine, Archbishop Sample reminds us that singing is an expression of joy and of love. When the People of God gather, we sing praises to God. To lose the great 2,000 year tradition of Sacred Music in the Church would be a tragedy. In fact, the “beauty, dignity and prayerfulness of the Mass depend to a large extent on the music that accompanies the liturgical action (Sample, 1).”

Speaking of language, form, and genre, Pope Francis said a few years ago that, “At times a certain mediocrity, superficiality and banality have prevailed, to the detriment of the beauty and intensity of liturgical celebrations (Sample, 2).”

The archbishop alludes to the fact that there has been a certain confusion about Sacred Music in the past decades and that a rediscovery of the tradition of the Church will constitute for some a “change.” He says, “Change can be difficult, but this can also be an exciting time of rediscovering the spirit of the liturgy and exploring new horizons of sacred music (Sample, 3).”

History and the Nature and Purpose of Sacred Music 

Since the time of the Apostles, singing has not been an addendum to the worship of God. It is integral. Singing is an art form that “takes its life and purpose from the Sacred Liturgy and is part of its very structure (Sample, 3).”

The Second Vatican Council reiterates this in the document on the Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium: 

“The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art. The main reason for this pre-eminence is that, as sacred song united to the words, it forms a necessary or integral part of the solemn liturgy (Sample, 3).”

If this is the case, and it is, then it seems unfitting that the norm in the United States (at least) is to, as the archbishop puts it, 

“‘tack on’ four songs (the opening hymn, the offertory hymn, communion hymn and recessional hymn), along with the sung ordinary of the Mass (Gloria, Sanctus, etc.). We must come to see that, since sacred music is integral to the Mass, the role of sacred music is to help us sing and pray the texts of the Mass itself, not just ornament it… The Church solemnly teaches us, then, that the very purpose of sacred music is twofold: the glory of God and the sanctification of the faithful. This understanding of the essential nature and purpose of sacred music must direct and inform everything else that is said about it (Sample, 3 & 4).”

The Qualities of Sacred Music

There are three essential qualities of sacred music that flow from its nature and purpose: sanctity, beauty, and universality.

SANCTITY - Sacred Music has sanctity because it is holy. It must be free of profanity in its words, themes, and the manner in which it is delivered. To be holy is to be set apart. Common, secular music has no place in the worship of God in the liturgy.

BEAUTY – Liturgical and Sacred Music can give people a glimpse of the beauty of heaven, according to Pope Francis. Our liturgies must seek to be transcendent. They can be nothing compared to the glory of Heaven, but the beauty of Sacred Music can offer a foretaste of the Heavenly reality. 

UNIVERSALITY – The composition of Sacred Music, of any culture, must be recognized as having a sacred character. As a universal principle, holiness transcends every individual culture. In other words, “Not every form or style of music is capable of being rendered suitable for the Mass (Sample, 5).”

The Treasury of Sacred Music

The treasury of the Church’s Sacred Music spans centuries. Whether ancient or modern, Sacred Music must have the same character of sanctity, beauty, and universality.  

For example, there is Gregorian Chant which the Second Vatican Council gave pride of place in Sacred Music in the Roman liturgy. This has been reinforced by every Pontiff since. In terms of full, conscious, active participation of the laity in the liturgy, Pope Pius XI says this, 

“In order that the faithful may more actively participate in divine worship, let them be led once more to sing the Gregorian chant, so far as it belongs to them to take part in it (Sample, 6).”

The Second Vatican Council also suggests that 

“(S)teps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertains to them (SC, 54).” 

This is referring to the Kyrie (actually in Greek), the Gloria, the Credo, the Sanctus, the Mysterium Fidei, the Pater Noster, and the Agnus Dei. 

Echoing the Second Vatican Council, Pope Benedict XVI said, 

“(W)hile respecting various styles and different and highly praiseworthy traditions, I desire, in accordance with the request advanced by the Synod Fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy (Sample, 7).”

There are other kinds of Sacred Music in the Church. For example, polyphony has a venerable tradition in the Church, such as the compositions of Palestrina, Tallis, and Allegri. There is also a vast body of Sacred Music composed for the people, such as hymnody, psalmody, and different Mass settings in Latin or the vernacular. 

In contrast to Sacred Music is secular music. Secular music is not sanctified, necessarily beautiful, or universal. This does not just pertain to lyrics. There are a great many songs being written and utilized at Mass which are secular in their manner of being played (folk, rock, country, etc.) or their ambiguous lyrical content. 

Archbishop Sample quotes Pope Benedict XVI in saying: 

“As far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided. As an element of the liturgy, song should be well integrated into the overall celebration. Consequently everything - texts, music, execution - ought to correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons (Sample, 9-10).”

There is much more to say on music and full, conscious, actual participation in the Mass, but I am going to hold off on that until next week. Otherwise, this week will go far over an hour. So, make sure to come back next week for the exciting conclusion!

The Collect

The celebrant invites those gathered to pray and then proclaims the prescribed prayer for the day from the Roman Missal called the Collect.  The Collect literally collects the prayers of the people and the priest offers these prayers to God. The Collect also disposes the hearts of those present to be made ready to hear the Word of God proclaimed in the following part of the Mass: the Liturgy of the Word. As we will see next week, when we talk about the Mystical Body of Christ, we need a priest to do this properly. In his priesthood, the priest is acting in the Person of Christ, the Head of His Body, at Holy Mass. Only he can collect up the prayers of the Members of the Body of Christ and offer them, by his consecration, to God the Father, in the Spirit. 

Conclusion

With the Collect, the Introductory Rites are concluded. Whether we are celebrating the Holy Mass by the 1962 Missal or the 1970 Missal, the Collect ends the beginning prayers of the Mass which prepare us for the Readings. Next week, we will be diving into this next part of the Mass, known in our current Missal as the Liturgy of the Word. 

We will also be looking closer at the theology of the Mystical Body of Christ. We will look a bit closer at Sacred Music in Mass. We will walk through the progression of Readings and the Homily. And we will be learning more about the Profession of Faith and the Universal Prayer. We will also look at the difference between Sacraments and sacramentals. I am certain there will be a few other side roads to investigate along the way.

Thank you for joining us this week. I look forward to being with you again next week as we continue to learn more about Praying the Mass!

Thank you for reading Will Wright Catholic Podcast. This post is public so feel free to share it.

First of five sessions on the Holy Mass:

Introduction

What is the Mass? Most practicing Catholics understand that Mass is important. It is something they should go to. But the opinions about Mass are all over the ideological spectrum. For this series, my hope is to share what the Mass is from the Mind and Heart of the Church. I have my opinions about liturgical aesthetics, architecture, art, and the like, but I am going to try here to stick to principles. I make my promise here to you that if I offer an opinion, I will explicitly make sure that you know it is an opinion. 

So, today, in part 1 we will be answering the broad question: What is the Sacred Liturgy? We are going to be going lightspeed over a vast amount of ground, but I hope that it is, nonetheless, sufficiently explained. In part 2 - 5, we will be looking at the Introductory Rites, the Liturgy of the Word, the Liturgy of the Eucharist, and the Concluding Rites. These four main divisions are packed with theological meaning, symbolism, and beauty. I am thrilled to be sharing it with you.

The Sacred and Divine Liturgy

Etymology of the Word “Liturgy”

We should begin our exploration of the Sacred Liturgy by understanding what that word liturgy means. What is the liturgy? It is certainly a strange word to an English-speaker. Liturgy comes from two Greek words: leitos meaning public and ergo meaning to do. The Greek word for liturgy is leitourgos which is the same as the Latin word lictor, which both mean a public servant. 

In ancient Athens, public service was done by wealthier citizens by using their own wealth. This public service could be the manager of a gymnasium, the chorus singers in a theater, one who provides a banquet, or someone who funds and offers ships used for war to the state. In the Greek Old Testament, the term liturgy meant any kind of general service in the temple.

The author of Hebrews states, “But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry (Greek: leitourgos) that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises (Heb. 8:6).” So, the meaning of liturgy in the New Testament is established as the actions of the priest after the order of the High Priest Jesus Christ. 

Since we are speaking of terms, it is worth mentioning that in the Eastern Catholic Churches, the term liturgy is only used to describe the Divine Liturgy, that is, the celebration of the Sacrifice of the Holy Eucharist. In the West, including the Latin Rite, the term liturgy is used for the Sacred Liturgy, which is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. But, liturgy is also used for all official services, all the various rites, ceremonies, prayers, and sacraments of the Church. —--------------

We could also ask what liturgy is not. Liturgy is not private devotions. Devotional practices are indispensable and beautiful expressions of the heart of man being offered in love to God. Liturgy, on the other hand, is primarily what God is doing for us, through the ministry of the Church, in which we enter in and take part. In the Liturgy, God is reaching into our humanity, as He did when the Son became Flesh, and lifting us up to be more like Him.

St. Justin Martyr records around the year 164 A.D. what the Liturgy looked like in his day, early in the history of the Church. The full quotation can be found in paragraph 1345 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, but I will summarize it.

First, the Lessons are read. The Lessons are the Old and New Testament Scripture readings. Then a sermon is given by the bishop. There are prayers over the people, both those present and those throughout the whole world. The Sign of Peace is exchanged. The offering of bread and wine and water are brought up by the deacons. There is a lengthy prayer of thanksgiving done by the bishop. The bread and wine are consecrated by the words of Christ spoken at the Last Supper and they become the Eucharist. The people then acclaim Amen. Then, Holy Communion is distributed to those present and then taken to those who cannot be in attendance.

Here we see that there is a structure to the Sacred Liturgy and there is human involvement and participation. But, as we will come to see, the Sacred Liturgy is about the work that God has done and is doing, in which we enter in and take part.

Liturgical Diversity in the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church

Over the next few sessions, we will be exploring the Holy Mass of the Latin Rite using our current Missal. But I will also be touching on some historical points of references in the Roman Missal of 1962 and before. And I will also be bringing in elements of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom used in the Byzantine Rites. What the Liturgy is, which is our subject for the remainder of today’s session, does not change from one form or expression of the Liturgy to another. However, there is a beautiful, legitimate liturgical diversity within the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church of Jesus Christ. 

Over the last centuries, the Church has been welcoming back many groups of Byzantine Catholics into full communion with the Pope in Rome. These Byzantine Greek Churches are called sui iuris because they govern themselves, under the authority of the Pope, but they retain their language, customs, rituals, and the like. Likewise, there are other non-Byzantine Eastern Catholic Churches in full communion with Rome. Thus, the Catholic Church is far broader than just the Latin Rite, though the Latin Rite is the largest.

What is the Definition of the Mass?

Now we have a working understanding of the Sacred Liturgy as transcending each specific Rite of the Catholic Church. But what is it? What is the Mass? 

Dr. Scott Hahn of Franciscan University is fond of referring to the Mass as the continuation through space and time of the incarnation. Dr. David Fagerberg of Notre Dame speaks of it in highly technical terms: The perichoresis of the Trinity kenotically extended to invite our synergistic ascent into deification.

There is a time for academic and technical explanations of the Mass! I, for one, love them! But what about the average Catholic in the pew or the lapsed Catholic? Surely there is a way to define the Mass that is in simpler terms without watering down the meaning.

I will be repeating the following about three thousand times over the coming weeks because it is vital to our understanding of the Mass. At any rate, here it is:

The Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the perfect self-offering of God to the Son to God the Father in the power of God the Holy Spirit in which we are invited to participate and grow in our communion with God. Put even more simply: the Mass is the self-offering of the Son to the Father in the Spirit, in which we are invited to take part. 

What is the Sacred Liturgy “For”?

Now that we have defined what the Mass is, then we can ask: What is it for? Why do we go to Mass? For many, it is a checking of the boxes. Yes, I went to Mass on Sunday and received my “spiritual vitamin pill.” But is that it? Is it about “getting something” out of Mass? Is it primarily something we are doing?

From our definition, we know that Mass is the self-offering of the Son to the Father in the Spirit, in which we are invited to take part. It is something that God is doing and we are privileged to be beckoned to the Wedding Supper of the Lamb! So, what is Mass for? Why do we go? We go to encounter and worship God in the authentic way that He desires and be transformed by that encounter.

There are two main ends of the Holy Mass: the glorification of God and the sanctification of man. Through the Sacraments (beginning with Baptism), God who became one of us dwells within us as in a Temple and makes us like Himself. Through this communion and union, we are made holy by God; this is the sanctification of man. 

As St. Irenaeus says in the 2nd Century: “The glory of God is man fully alive, but the life of man is the vision of God.” Apart from true worship, how can we be formed in the vision of God? How can we be fully alive and thus glorify God by our lives apart from the Mass? We cannot! As St. Padre Pio said, “It would be easier for the world to survive without the sun than to do so without the Holy Mass.”

So, what is the Mass for? To glorify God and to allow His Sacred Action to make us holy. 

Re-presentation of the Paschal Mystery

What is the one sacrifice of Christ?

To understand the Sacred Action of the Holy Eucharist, we have to travel back in time two thousand years to Jerusalem. The Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the presenting once more, the “re-presentation,” of the One and only Sacrifice of Jesus Christ. It is the coming present once again to our senses, through the mystery of God, of the entrance into Jerusalem of Christ, the Last Supper, His suffering, His death on the Cross, His Resurrection, and His Ascension into Heaven. The Holy Mass marks all of these things, and makes them present to us, here and now, outside of time.

The Holy Mass is a memorial of Jesus’ suffering and death. It is not a reenactment nor is it mere remembering. In the Mass, by the power of God, these saving actions become truly present under the signs and symbols that God uses to communicate with us. He knows that we are flesh and blood. He knows that we are body and soul. So, He communicates with us through tangible signs, audible words, ritual actions, postures, and gestures. 

The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches, 

“The Eucharist, the sacrament of our salvation accomplished by Christ on the cross, is also a sacrifice of praise in thanksgiving for the work of creation… The Eucharist is the memorial of Christ's Passover, the making present and the sacramental offering of his unique sacrifice, in the liturgy of the Church which is his Body (CCC 1359, 1362).” 

In Christ, all things are restored and made new. Primarily, we enter into this saving reality through our Baptism into Christ and His Body, the Church. In Baptism, we are a new creation. Baptism then orders us to communion with Him in receiving truly and substantially His Most Holy Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity. 

The Catechism goes on to teach that, 

“In the Eucharist Christ gives us the very body which he gave up for us on the cross, the very blood which he ‘poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins’… The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit (CCC 1365-6).”

How are the graces that Christ super-abundantly merited on the Holy Cross applied to us, almost two thousand years later? It is, first, through Baptism, but it is perpetuated in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This One Sacrifice of Jesus Christ is presented once more in an unbloodied manner so that we may receive the fruits of this great gift. Thus, the Holy Eucharist has the power to forgive sins, by the blood of Jesus Christ. 

United as one Body, the Church offers this One Sacrifice until the end of time for the good of the Church and the good of the whole world. Each time our Holy Mother the Church celebrates the sacred mysteries, it is Christ who is the High Priest, the Saving Victim, the Place of Sacrifice, and our Mediator between God and man. Apart from Him, we can do nothing. So, the Mass is not what we do for God. It is the perfect prayer and sacrifice offered by Jesus Christ to the Father in the Spirit because it is the whole of the saving action of Christ transcending time and space. 

As lacking as we are and as sinful as we are, we enter into this reality of the One Sacrifice. Our imperfect offerings and sacrifices are united with the One Sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the Cross and are made perfect. We cooperate with the One Sacrifice and we receive the saving fruits of the One Sacrifice. By the mediation of Jesus and the power of the Holy Spirit to the glorification of the Father, we are made holy and we are transformed to be like Jesus. 

Every Sunday is a Mini Easter

As Catholics, we understand that at the Mass, in true worship, this Sacred Action is not a mere remembrance or a reenactment. These realities are coming present once again. So, it is fitting that every Sunday is a Holy Day of Obligation because every Sunday is a mini Easter. How does this fit in the ancient understanding of Sabbath?

The seventh day of the week is the sabbath, a day of solemn rest, that is set aside for the Lord. This goes all the way back to the dawn of creation when God made everything in six days and then rested on the seventh. The Sabbath day also marks the work of the Lord of acting on Israel’s behalf and freeing them from slavery in Egypt. 

The Sabbath is a day of rest and refreshment. Jesus shows us in the Gospels that this does not necessarily mean refraining from all work, without exception. Instead, we must realize that the poor are to be refreshed as well. And so, the Sabbath is a day of doing good for others as well. 

As with many things, the New Covenant fulfills and elevates the Old Covenants. The Sabbath remains on Saturday, but Sunday is the fulfillment of the Sabbath. Sunday is the “eighth day” of the week and is symbolic of the new creation which was brought about by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Jesus rose from the dead on the “first day of the week” and, therefore, consecrated a new moral commandment. 

We are to keep holy the day of the Lord by celebrating Sunday in an “outward, visible, public, and regular worship ‘as a sign of universal beneficence to all (CCC 2176).’” Our Sunday worship is the fulfillment of the moral command of the Old Covenant to keep holy the Sabbath day. 

The Sunday celebration of the Eucharist, on the day set aside for the Lord, is the heart of the Church’s life. When we celebrate the Sunday Eucharist, we are marking the passion, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In this way, every Sunday of the year is a mini-Easter.

The faithful gather together each Sunday and celebrate in the liturgical life what Christ has done, Who He is, what He has taught, and what He is doing through us today. Therefore, we go to church each Sunday, as well as holy days of obligation.

As St. John Chrysostom said, 

“You cannot pray at home as at church, where there is a great multitude, where exclamations are cried out to God as from one great heart, and where there is something more: the union of minds, the accord of souls, the bond of charity, the prayers of the priests.” 

Catholics are obligated and privileged to participate in the Holy Mass on Sundays and other holy days of obligation. The Eucharist is the beginning of our life of grace, and it is the apex of the mountain for which we yearn. Unless we are excused for a serious reason such as illness or the care of an infant or dispensed by our pastor, we fall into grave sin if we skip on going to Mass on Sundays or holy days of obligation.

We are not saved by ourselves. We need our brothers and sisters in Christ, and they need you and me. We must be present in the Parish to pray as a Eucharistic assembly. Of course, there are many places in the world where there is a severe shortage of priests. In these cases, even, the people gather to break open the Word and pray together. 

God rested on the seventh day from the work of creation. Therefore, the Lord’s Day, the fulfillment of the Sabbath, must be marked by an enjoyment of “adequate rest and leisure to cultivate… familial, cultural, social, and religious lives (CCC 2184).”

As much as possible, we are to refrain from 

“engaging in work or activities that hinder the worship owed to God, the joy proper to the Lord’s Day, the performance of the works of mercy, and the appropriate relaxation of mind and body (CCC 2185).” 

We should not, however, neglect our duties to our family. As St. Augustine teaches, “The charity of truth seeks holy leisure – the necessity of charity accepts just work.”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church also teaches that, 

“In respecting religious liberty and the common good of all, Christians should seek recognition of Sundays and the Church's holy days as legal holidays. They have to give everyone a public example of prayer, respect, and joy and defend their traditions as a precious contribution to the spiritual life of society (CCC 2188).”

Even if our society does not recognize the Risen Lord, nonetheless, it is our joy and duty to witness to the joy of His Resurrection each Sunday. Every Sunday is a mini-Easter and should be celebrated as such!

The Mass - True Worship and True Culture

We need the Holy Mass, but so does our modern culture. We have lost a sense of wonder and awe. Wonder and awe at the glory of the natural order is lost. Philosophers, theologians, political thinkers, and historians have debated the concept of the perfect world forever. In our fractured state, true consensus does not seem likely or possible in the court of public opinion. Without a concerted popular effort towards aiming at the same goal, the likelihood of achieving it is low. As to pride, it is not controversial to make the claim that most people today are either unabashedly or unwittingly self-focused. Mass helps us to get outside of ourselves because, as I hope I have shown by now, Mass is primarily what God is doing!

If we reach back in History, we see that the greatest minds of science were motivated by wonder and awe at the majesty of God’s creation. The foundational underpinnings of true progress and human flourishing comes from without, not within. What does a wonderless, blasé attitude do to a society? What becomes of culture? 

Putting the “Cult” Back in Culture

What we need is to put the “cult” back in culture. Culture is connected intimately to worship. The root word is “cultus,” from which arises the English word “cult.” Cultus comes from the Latin verb colare which means “to till.” This is why we have the word agriculture (agri - field, cultus - till). In the Middle Ages, cultus came to mean adoration or veneration specifically. The prime act of worship is sacrifice. It is getting outside of oneself in order to show that worth is found outside of the self. Worship could thus be seen as “giving worth.” 

So, what happens when we lose a sense of wonder and awe? It’s simple: we start to worship inwardly; we start to worship ourselves. Instead of the worship of one God, the replacement has been the worship of over seven billion “gods.” When every person is master of their own domain, then communal ties, even familial ties, begin to crumble. 

What would happen if we cultivate a sense of wonder and awe in our own life? I would imagine that we would start to be more appreciative and less cynical. We would be less pessimistic and more pragmatic, if not actually optimistic. We would have a longer viewpoint and shorter fuse. We would see beauty all around us instead of fixating on the ugly. We will understand that we are not the center of the universe but will not be lost to existentialist dread.

Avoiding Existential Dread

This last thought is one of the most pressing. Given the loss of wonder and awe, our world has descended into meaningless existentialism. Shouting into the void in a primal scream is the only prescription for our nihilistic culture. Of course, if we recapture the sense of wonder and awe, then we realize that nihilism is itself nothing. We realize that there is something greater and that we are an important part of the whole. 

Fear of the Lord is the Beginning of True Wisdom

Wonder and awe are not fixtures of a bygone era. They are the beginning of true wisdom. In fact, we could call them by their traditional name: “fear of the Lord.” This fear is a filial one, as a son to a father. When we begin to let God be God and understand that we are not, then we begin to see things differently. We take ourselves less seriously and take the Creator more seriously. We find ourselves, not “out there” or within, but rather where we place worth itself. This fear of the Lord and putting things right is the foundation of getting culture right. As then-Cardinal Ratzinger said in his book A New Song for the Lord: “Trivializing faith is not a new inculturation, but the denial of its culture and prostitution with the non culture.”

Let us put the cultus back in culture, tilling and cultivating a sense of wonder, awe, and amazement. There is much to be grateful for in this world. It will not take long to recognize the Giver of the good gifts who gratuitously and generously generated all things and respond in gratitude. As we will explore in the coming weeks, the very word Eucharist means thanksgiving! So, how can we pray the Mass better? Begin with humility and gratitude! 

Conclusion: Worshiping God the Way that He Wants

I want to end today by emphasizing that the Mass is primarily what God is doing. Jesus Christ is our High Priest in every age of the Church’s History: in the catacombs, in the Byzantine period, in the Middle Ages, in the Renaissance, in the Counter Reformation, and up until today. 

We are invited to take part in what He is doing. Truly, the worship of God becomes unintelligible if it becomes separated from the Saving Action of Jesus Christ, offered to the Father, in the Spirit. In fact, this Sacrifice of the Mass is the heart of Christian worship. If we are not celebrating the memorial of the Paschal Mystery from the heart and ministry of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church of Jesus Christ, then we are not worshiping God as He desires and as He has instituted. 

This is why the Catholic Church calls the Holy Eucharist the font and apex or the source and summit of the Christian life. There is no Church, properly speaking, apart from the Eucharist and the Holy Mass. To reiterate the words of Padre Pio: “It would be easier for the world to survive without the sun than to do so without the Holy Mass.”

There is so much more to say, even about the basic theological foundations of the Holy Mass, but this is just the beginning. I hope you will join me over the next four weeks as we continue to understand the Mass more fully and journey through Lent together towards Easter!

Thanks for reading Will Wright Catholic! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.