Philadelphia Chapter

Peter Kwasniewski (from NLM)

Last year, I started an open-ended series, which I introduced with these words:

I have decided to start a new series here, introducing readers to older and newer authors who have a valid claim to be considered representatives of that authentic Liturgical Movement to which this blog has been contributing for years, and of which Pope Benedict XVI is the greatest recent exponent.

The mention of Pope Benedict reminds us, of course, of his great teacher, Romano Guardini, who is a sort of grandfather of NLM. So famous an author, with so many wise and penetrating books to his credit, hardly needs an introduction. It may be as well to admit that Guardini, like most modern Catholic authors, is not always reliable or sound on certain points, but when he’s on, he’s really on. The excerpts presented below, from chapter 1 of The Spirit of the Liturgy, are just a taste of the exquisite insights one can find in his work, particularly when he is writing on the liturgy, which he loved so ardently. Indeed, I prefer to think that certain problematic practical applications with which his name is connected were the result more of a misjudging zeal for sharing the riches of the Church’s liturgy than of a considered desire to modernize or transmogrify it, and it is obvious that he would have been sorely disappointed in the postconciliar collapse of the liturgy, the stripping of its symbols, the reduction of its majesty, the evisceration of its eloquent prayers and gestures, and the general loss of the awareness of the sacred, a category central in his thinking.

When we read the best of Guardini, we seem to hear, as from a distance, the future coming of Joseph Ratzinger and the unsurpassed writings on the theology of the liturgy that Pope Benedict the Great (for he, in truth, deserves such a title) would bequeath to the Church, as a heritage that can vie with the golden age of the Fathers. Without further ado, let us hear some excerpts.

* * *

The Catholic liturgy is the supreme example of an objectively established rule of spiritual life. It has been able to develop kata ton holon, that is to say, in every direction, and in accordance with all places, times, and types of human culture. Therefore it will be the best teacher of the via ordinaria—the regulation of religious life in common, with, at the same time, a view to actual needs and requirements. The significance of the liturgy must, however, be more exactly defined. Our first task will be to establish the quality of its relation to the non-liturgical forms of spiritual life.

The primary and exclusive aim of the liturgy is not the expression of the individual’s reverence and worship for God. It is not even concerned with the awakening, formation, and sanctification of the individual soul as such. Nor does the onus of liturgical action and prayer rest with the individual. It does not even rest with the collective groups, composed of numerous individuals, who periodically achieve a limited and intermittent unity in their capacity as the congregation of a church.

The liturgical entity consists rather of the united body of the faithful as such—the Church—a body which infinitely outnumbers the mere congregation. The liturgy is the Church’s public and lawful act of worship, and it is performed and conducted by the officials whom the Church herself has designated for the post—her priests. In the liturgy God is to be honored by the body of the faithful, and the latter is in its turn to derive sanctification from this act of worship. It is important that this objective nature of the liturgy should be fully understood. Here the Catholic conception of worship in common sharply differs from the Protestant, which is predominantly individualistic. The fact that the individual Catholic, by his absorption into the higher unity, finds liberty and discipline, originates in the twofold nature of man, who is both social and solitary.

Now, side by side with the strictly ritual and entirely objective forms of devotion, others exist, in which the personal element is more strongly marked. To this type belong those which are known as “popular devotions,” such as afternoon prayers accompanied by hymns, devotions suited to varying periods, localities, or requirements and so on. They bear the stamp of their time and surroundings, and are the direct expression of the characteristic quality or temper of an individual congregation.

Although in comparison with the prayer of the individual, which is expressive of purely personal needs and aspirations, popular devotions are both communal and objective, they are to a far greater degree characteristic of their origin than is the liturgy, the entirely objective and impersonal method of prayer practiced by the Church as a whole. This is the reason for the greater stress laid by popular devotion upon the individual need of edification. … But in spite of the fact that the liturgy and popular devotion have each their own special premises and aims, still it is to liturgical worship that pre-eminence of right belongs. The liturgy is and will be the lex orandi. Non-liturgical prayer must take the liturgy for its model, and must renew itself in the liturgy, if it is to retain its vitality. … All other forms of devotional practice can always measure their shortcomings by the standard of the liturgy, and with its help find the surest way back to the via ordinaria when they have strayed from it. The changing demands of time, place, and special circumstance can express themselves in popular devotion; facing the latter stands the liturgy, from which clearly issue the fundamental laws—eternally and universally unchanging—which govern all genuine and healthy piety. …

The first and most important lesson which the liturgy has to teach is that the prayer of a corporate body must be sustained by thought. The prayers of the liturgy are entirely governed by and interwoven with dogma. Those who are unfamiliar with liturgical prayer often regard them as theological formulae, artistic and didactic, until on closer acquaintance they suddenly perceive and admit that the clear-cut, lucidly constructed phrases are full of interior enlightenment. To give an outstanding example, the wonderful Collects of the Masses of Sunday may be quoted. Wherever the stream of prayer wells abundantly upwards, it is always guided into safe channels by means of plain and lucid thought. Interspersed among the pages of the Missal and the Breviary are readings from Holy Scripture and from the works of the Fathers, which continually stimulate thought. Often these readings are introduced and concluded by short prayers of a characteristically contemplative and reflective nature—the antiphons—during which that which has been heard or read has time to cease echoing and to sink into the mind. The liturgy, the lex orandi, is, according to the old proverb, the law of faith, the lex credendi, as well. It is the treasure-house of the thought of Revelation.

This is not, of course, an attempt to deny that the heart and the emotions play an important part in the life of prayer. Prayer is, without a doubt, “a raising of the heart to God.” But the heart must be guided, supported, and purified by the mind. … Only thought is universally current and consistent, and, as long as it is really thought, remains suited, to a certain degree, to every intelligence. If prayer in common, therefore, is to prove beneficial to the majority, it must be primarily directed by thought, and not by feeling. It is only when prayer is sustained by and steeped in clear and fruitful religious thought, that it can be of service to a corporate body, composed of distinct elements, all actuated by varying emotions.

We have seen that thought alone can keep spiritual life sound and healthy. In the same way, prayer is beneficial only when it rests on the bedrock of truth. This is not meant in the purely negative sense that it must be free from error; in addition to this, it must spring from the fullness of truth. It is only truth—or dogma, to give it its other name—which can make prayer efficacious, and impregnate it with that austere, protective strength without which it degenerates into weakness. If this is true of private prayer, it is doubly so of popular devotion, which in many directions verges on sentimentality. Dogmatic thought brings release from the thralldom of individual caprice, and from the uncertainty and sluggishness which follow in the wake of emotion. It makes prayer intelligible, and causes it to rank as a potent factor in life.

If a prayer therefore stresses any one mystery of faith in an exclusive or an excessive manner, in the end it will adequately satisfy none but those who are of a corresponding temperament, and even the latter will eventually become conscious of their need of truth in its entirety. For instance, if a prayer deals exclusively with God’s mercy, it will not ultimately satisfy even a delicate and tender piety, because this truth calls for its complement—the fact of God’s justice and majesty. In any form of prayer, therefore, which is intended for the ultimate use of a corporate body, the whole fullness of religious truth must be included.

Here, too, the liturgy is our teacher. It condenses into prayer the entire body of religious truth. Indeed, it is nothing else but truth expressed in terms of prayer. For it is the great fundamental truths which above all fill the liturgy—God in His mighty reality, perfection, and greatness, One, and Three in One; His creation, providence, and omnipresence; sin, justification, and the desire of salvation; the Redeemer and His kingdom; the four last things. It is only such an overwhelming abundance of truth which can never pall, but continue to be, day after day, all things to all men, ever fresh and inexhaustible. …

Individuals, or short waves of enthusiasm, can to a wide degree dispense with learning and culture. This is proved by the beginnings of the desert Orders in Egypt, and of the mendicant friars, and by holy people in all ages. But, generally speaking, a fairly high degree of genuine learning and culture is necessary in the long run, in order to keep spiritual life healthy. By means of these two things spiritual life retains its energy, clearness, and catholicity. Culture preserves spiritual life from the unhealthy, eccentric, and one-sided elements with which it tends to get involved only too easily. Culture enables religion to express itself, and helps it to distinguish what is essential from what is non-essential, the means from the end, and the path from the goal. The Church has always condemned every attempt at attacking science, art, property, and so on. The same Church which so resolutely stresses the “one thing necessary,” and which upholds with the greatest impressiveness the teaching of the Evangelical Counsels—that we must be ready to sacrifice everything for the sake of eternal salvation—nevertheless desires, as a rule, that spiritual life should be impregnated with the wholesome salt of genuine and lofty culture.[1]

* * *

The internal revival of the Catholic community will not make progress until the liturgy again occupies its rightful position in Catholic life. And the Eucharistic movement can only effectually distribute its blessings when it is in close touch with the liturgy.[2]

* * *

Certainly the grace of God is self-sufficient; neither nature nor the work of man is necessary in order that a soul may be sanctified. God “can awaken of these stones children to Abraham.” But as a rule He wishes that everything which belongs to man in the way of good, lofty, natural and cultural possessions shall be placed at the disposal of religion and so serve the Kingdom of God. He has interconnected the natural and the supernatural order, and has given natural things a place in the scheme of His supernatural designs.[3]

SOURCE
From chapter 1 of The Spirit of the Liturgy. Trans. Ada Lane (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1935). Amazon link.

Other installments in this ongoing series “Classics of the Liturgical Movement”:

Canon G. A. Simon’s Commentary on the Rule
Dom Jean-Baptiste Chautard’s Soul of the Apostolate
Dom Paul Delatte’s Commentary on the Rule of St. Benedict

Rev. Fr. Leonard Goffine’s
The Church’s Year

Why is this day called Corpus Christi?

Because on this Thursday the Catholic Church celebrates the institution of the most Blessed Sacrament of the Altar. The Latin term Corpus Christi signifies in English, Body of Christ.

Who instituted this festival?

Pope Urban IV, who, in the decree concerning it, gives the following explanation of the institution and grandeur of this festival: “Although we daily, in the holy Sacrifice of the Mass; renew the memory of this holy Sacrament, we believe that we must, besides, solemnly commemorate it every year, to put the unbelievers to shame; and because vie have been informed that God has revealed to some pious persons that this festival should be celebrated in the whole Church, we direct that on the first Thursday after the octave of Pentecost the faithful shall assemble in church, join with the priests in singing the word of God,” &c. Hence this festival was instituted on account of the greatness of the divine mystery; the unbelief of those who denied the truth of this mystery; and the revelation made to some pious persons. This revelation was made to a nun at Liege, named Juliana, and to her devout friends Eve and Isabella. Juliana, when praying, had frequently a vision in which she saw the bright moon, with one part of it somewhat dark; at her request she received instructions from God that one of the grandest festivals was yet to be instituted the festival of the most Blessed Sacrament of the Altar. In 1246, she related this vision to Robert, Bishop of Liege, who after having investigated the matter with the aid . of several men of learning and devotion, among whom was Jacob Pantaleon, Archdeacon of Liege, afterwards Pope Urban IV. made arrangements to introduce this festival m his diocese, but death prevented his intention being put into effect. After the bishop’s death the Cardinal Legate Hugh undertook to carry out his directions, and celebrated the festival for the first time in the year 1247, in the Church of St. Martin at Liege. Several bishops followed this example, and the festival was observed in many dioceses, before Pope Urban IV. in 1264 finally ordered its celebration by the whole Church. This order was confirmed by ClementV, at the Council of Vienna in 1311, and the Thursday after the octave of Pentecost appointed for its celebration. In 13 17, Pope John XXII. instituted the solemn procession.

Why are there such grand processions on this day?

For a public profession of our holy faith that Christ is really, truly and substantially present in this Blessed Sacrament; for a public reparation of all the injuries, irreverence, and offences, which have been and are committed by impious men against Christ in this Blessed Sacrament; for the solemn veneration and adoration due to the Son of God in this Sacrament; in thanksgiving for its institution; and for all the graces and advantages received therefrom; and finally, to draw down the divine blessing upon the people and the country.

Had this procession a prototype in the Old Law?

The procession in which was carried the Ark of the Covenant containing the manna, was a figure of this procession.

The Church sings at the Introit the words of David:

INTROIT He fed them with the fat of wheat, alleluia: and filled them with honey out of the rock. Allel. allel. allel. Rejoice to God our helper; sing aloud to the God of Jacob. (Ps. LXXX.) Glory etc.

COLLECT O God, who under a wonderful sacrament hast left us a memorial of Thy Passion; grant us, we beseech Thee, so to venerate the sacred mysteries of Thy body and blood, that we may ever feel within us the fruit of thy redemtion. Who livest etc.

EPISTLE (I Cor. XI. 23-29.) Brethren, I have received of the Lord, that which also I delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread, and giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat; this is my body which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This Chalice is the New Testament in my blood: this do’ ye; as often as you shall drink., for the commemoration of me. For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink this chalice, you shall show the death of the Lord until he come. Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink of the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.

GOSPEL (John VI. 56?59.) At that time, Jesus laid to the multitude of the Jews: My flesh is meat indeed arid my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna and are dead. He that eateth this bread shall live forever.

[The explanation of the epistle and gospel is contained in the following instruction.]

The Jews, liberated by the powerful hand of God from Egyptian captivity, went on dry ground through the midst of the Red Sea, whose waters became the grave of their pursuer, King Pharao, and, his whole army. Having arrived in the desert called Sin they began to murmur against Moses and Aaron, their leaders; on account of the want of bread, and demanded to be led back to Egypt where there was plenty. The Lord God took pity on His people. In the evening He sent into their, camp great flocks of quails, which the Jews caught and ate, and on the morning of the next day the ground was covered with white dew, and in the desert something fine, as if pounded in a mortar, looking like frost on the earth, which as soon as the Jews beheld, they exclaimed in surprise: “Man hu?” “What is that?” But Moses said to them: “This is bread which the Lord has given you.” And they at once began to collect the food which was white, small as Coriander seed, and tasted like wheat?bread and honey, and was henceforth called man or manna. God gave them this manna every morning, for forty years, Sabbaths excepted, and the Jews lived upon it in the desert, until they came to the Promised Land. This manna is a figure of the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar which contains all sweetness, and nourishes the soul of him who receives it with proper preparation, so that whoever eats it worthily, dies not, though his body sleeps in the grave, for Christ will raise him to eternal life.

INSTRUCTION ON THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF THE ALTAR

What is the Sacrament of the Altar?

It is that Sacrament in which under the appearance of bread and wine the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are really, truly and substantially present.

When and to what manner did Christ promise this Sacrament?

Instruction on the most Holy Sacrament

About one year before its institution He promised it in the synagogue at Capharnaum, according to St. John the Evangelist: (VI, 24-65.) When Jesus, near the Tiberian Sea, had fed five thousand men in a miraculous manner with a few small loaves, these men would not leave Him, because they marvelled at the miracle, were anxious for this bread, and desired to make Him their king. But Jesus fled to a high mountain, and in the night went with His disciples to Capharnaum which was a town on the opposite side of the sea; but a multitude of Jews followed Him, and He made use of the occasion to speak of the mysterious, bread which He would one day give them and all men. He first exhorted them not to go so eagerly after the perishable. bread of the body, but to seek the bread of the soul which lasts forever, and which the Heavenly Father would give them, through Him, in abundance. This imperishable bread is the divine word, His holy doctrine, especially the doctrine that He had come from heaven to guide us to eternal life. (Vers. 25-38.) The Jews murmured because He said that He had come from heaven, but the Saviour quieted them by showing that no one could believe without a special grace from His Heavenly Father (V. 43, 44.) that He was the Messiah, and had come from heaven. After this introduction setting forth that the duty of faith in Him and in His divine doctrine was a spiritual nourishment, Christ very clearly unfolded the mystery of another bread for the soul which was to be given only at some future time, and this the Saviour did not ascribe to the Heavenly Father, as He did the bread of the divine word, but to Himself by plainly telling what this bread was: I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever, and the bread that I will give, is my flesh for the life of the world. (V. 51, 52.)

But the Jews would not believe these words, so clearly expressed, for they thought their fulfillment impossible, and said: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? (V. 53.) But Jesus recalled not His words, answered not the Jews’ objections, but confirmed that which He had said, declaring with marked emphasis: Amen, amen, I say unto you, except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you., (V. 54.) He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life, and I will raise him up in the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed; he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. As the living Father bath sent me; and I live ,by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread; shall live forever: (V. 55-59.) Jesus, therefore, said distinctly and plainly, that at a future time He would give His own Body and Blood as the true nourishment of the soul; besides, the Jews and the disciples alike received these words in their true, literal sense, and knew that Jesus did not here mention His Body and Blood in
figurative sense, but meant to give them His own real Flesh and Blood for food; and it was because they believed it impossible for Jesus to do this, and because they supposed He would give them His dead flesh in a coarse, sensual manner, that the Jews murmured, and even several of His disciples said: This saying is hard, and who can hear it? But Jesus persisted in His words: My flesh is meat indeed, &c., and calls the attention of His disciples to another miracle: to His future ascension, which would be still more incredible, but would come to pass; and by the words: It is the spirit which quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing, the words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life, (V. 64) He showed them that this mystery could be believed only by the light and grace of the Holy Spirit, and the partaking of His Bodes and Blood would not be in a coarse, sensual manner, but in a mysterious way. Notwithstanding this, many of His disciples still found the saying hard, and left Him, and went no longer with Him. (V. 67.) They found the saying hard, because, as our Saviour expressly said, they were lacking in faith. He let them go, and said to His apostles: Will you also go away? thereby showing that those who left Him, understood Him clearly enough, and that His words did contain something hard for the mind to believe. The apostles did not leave Him, they were too well assured of His divinity, and that to Him all was possible, as St. Peter clearly expresses: Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed and have known that thou art Christ, the Son of God.

From the account given by St. John, it is plainly seen that Christ really promised to give us for our food His most precious Body and Blood, really and substantially, in a Wonderful, mysterious manner, and that He did not speak figuratively of faith in Him, as those assert who contemn this most holy Sacrament. If Jesus had so meant it, He would have explained it thus to the Jews and to His disciples who took His words literally, and therefore could not comprehend, how Jesus could give His Flesh and Blood to them for their food. But Jesus persisted in His words, that His Flesh was truly food, and His Blood really drink. He even made it the strictest duty for man to eat His Flesh and drink His Blood; (V. 54) He shows the benefits arising from this nourishment of the soul, (V. 55) and the reason why this food is so necessary and useful. (V. 56.) When His disciples left Him, because it was a hard saying, He allowed them to go, for they would not believe His words, and could not believe them on account of their carnal manner of thinking. This holy mystery must be believed, and cannot be comprehended. Jesus has then promised, as the Catholic Church has always maintained and taught, that His Body and Blood. would be present under the appearance of bread and wine in the Blessed Sacrament, a true nourishment for the soul, and that which He promised, He has really given.

When and in what manner did Christ institute the most holy Sacrament of the Altar?

At the Last Supper, on the day before His passion, after He had eaten with His apostles the paschal lamb, which was a prototype of this mystery. Three Evangelists, Matthew, (XXVI: 26?29.) Mark, (XIV. 22-25.) and Luke (XXII. 19-20.) relate in few, but plain words, that on this evening Jesus took into His hand bread and the chalice, blessed and gave both to His disciples, saying: This is my body, that will be given for you; this is my blood, which will be shed for you and for many. Here took place in a miraculous manner, by the all?powerful word of Christ, the mysterious transformation; here Jesus gave Himself to His apostles for food, and instituted that most holy meal of love which the Church says contains all sweetness. That which three Evangelists. plainly relate, St. Paul confirms in his first epistle to the Corinthians, (XI. 23-29. ,See this day’s epistle) in which to his account of the institution of the Blessed Sacrament he adds: Whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, (that is, in a state of sin) shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord . . . .eateth and drinketh judgment to himself. (V. 27-29.)

From these words and those of the three holy Evangelists already mentioned, it is clear that Jesus really fulfilled His promise, really instituted the most holy Sacrament, and gave His most sacred Body and Blood to the apostles for their food. None of the Evangelists, nor St. Paul, informs us that Christ said: this will become my body, or, this signifies my body. All agree that our Saviour said this is my body, this is my blood, and they therefore decidedly mean us to understand that Christ’s body and blood are really, truly, and substantially present under the appearance of bread and wine, as soon as the mysterious change has taken place. And this is confirmed by the words: that is given for you; which shall be shed for you and for many; because Christ gave neither bread nor wine, nor a figure of His Body and Blood, for our redemption, but His real Body, and His real Blood, and St. Paul could not assert that we could eat the Body and Blood of the Lord unworthily, if under the appearance of bread and wine were present not the real Body and Blood of Christ, but only a figure of them, or if they were only bread and wine. This is also proved by the universal faith of the Catholic Church, which in accordance with Scripture and the oldest, uninterrupted Apostolic traditions1 has always believed and taught, that under the appearance of bread and wine the real Body and Blood of Christ are present, as the Ecumenical Council of Trent expressly declares: (Sess. XIII. C. I. Can. I. de sacros. Euchdr.) “All our ancestors who were of the Church of Christ, and have spoken of this most Blessed Sacrament, have in the plainest manner professed that our Redeemer instituted this wonderful Sacrament at the Last Supper, when, having blessed the bread and wine, He assured the apostles in the plainest and most exact words, that He was giving them His Body and Blood itself; and if any one denies that the holy Eucharist truly, really, and substantially contains the Body and Blood, the Soul and Divinity of, our Lord Jesus Christ, therefore the whole Christ, and asserts that it is only a sign or figure without virtue, let him be anathema.”

Did Christ institute this Sacrament for all time?

Yes; for when He had promised that the bread which He would give, was His flesh for the life of the world, (john. vi. ga.) and had said expressly that whosoever did not eat His Flesh and drink His Blood would not have life in Him, He, at the Last Supper, by the words: Do this for a commemoration of me, (Luke XXII. 19.) gave to the apostles and their successors, the priests, the power in His name to change bread and wine into His Body and Blood, also to receive It and administer It as a food of the soul, which power the apostles and their successors, the priests, have always exercised, (I Coy. X. 16.) and will exercise to the end of the world.

How long after the change does Christ remain present under the appearance of bread and wine?

As long as the appearances remain; this was always the faith of the Church; therefore in the primitive ages when the persecutions were raging, after the sacrifice the sacred body of our Lord was taken home by the Christians to save the mystery from the pagans; at home they preserved It, and received It from their own hands, as affirmed by the holy Fathers of the Church Justin, Cyprian, Basil, and others. But when persecution had ceased, and the Church was permitted to profess the faith openly, and without hinderance, the Blessed Sacrament was preserved in the churches, enclosed in precious vessels, (ciborium, monstrance, or ostensorium) made for the purpose. In later times it was also exposed, on solemn occasions, for public adoration.

Do we Catholics adore bread when we pay adoration to the Blessed Sacrament?

No; we do not adore bread, for no bread is there, but the most sacred Body and Blood of Christ, and wherever Christ is adoration is due Him by man and angels. St. Augustine says: “No one partakes of this Body until he has first adored, and we not only do not sin when we adore It, but would sin if we did not adore It.” The Council of Trent excommunicates those who assert that it is not allowable to adore Christ, the only?begotten Son of God, in the Blessed Sacrament. How unjust are those unbelievers who sneer at this adoration, when it has never entered into the mind of any Catholic to adore the external appearances of this Sacrament, but the Saviour hidden under the appearances; and how grievously do those indifferent Catholics sin who show Christ so little veneration in this Sacrament, and seldom adore Him if at all!

Which are the external signs of this Sacrament?

The form and appearance, or that which appears to our senses, as the figure, the color, and the taste, but the substance of the bread and wine is by consecration changed into the real Body and Blood of Christ, and only the appearance of bread and wine remains, and is observable to the senses.

Where and by whom is this consecration effected?

This consecration is effected on the altar during the holy Sacrifice of the Mass (therefore the name Sacrament of the Altar), when the priest in the name and by the power of Christ pronounces over the bread and wine the words which Christ Himself pronounced when He instituted this holy Sacrament. St. Ambrose writes: “At the moment that the Sacrament is to be accomplished, the priest no longer uses his own words, but Christ’s words therefore. Christ’s words complete the Sacrament.”

Is Christ present under each form?

Christ is really and truly present under both forms, in Divinity and Humanity, Body and Soul, Flesh and Blood. That Jesus is thus present is clear from the words of St. Paul: Knowing that Christ rising again from the dead, dieth now no more. (Rom. VI. 9.) Because Christ dies no more, it naturally follows that He is wholly and entirely present under each’ form. Hence the council of Trent says: “Whoever denies that in the venerable Sacrament, of the Eucharist the whole Christ is present in each of the forms and in each part of each form, where a separation has taken place, let him be anathema.”

Then no matter how many receive this Sacrament, does each receive Christ?

Yes, for each of the apostles received Christ entirely, and if God by His omnipotence can cause each individual to rejoice at the same instant in the sun’s light, and enjoy its entireness, and if He can make one and the same voice resound in the ears of all the listeners, is He not able to give the body of Christ, whole and entire, to as many as wish to receive It?

Is it necessary that this Sacrament should be received in both forms?

No, for as it has already been said, Christ is wholly present, Flesh and Blood, Humanity and Divinity, Body and Soul, in each of the forms. Christ promises eternal life to the recipient also of one form when He says,: I f any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever, and the bread that I will give, is my flesh for the life of the world. (John. VI. 52.) The first Christians, in times of persecution, received this Sacrament only in the form of bread in their houses. Though in earlier times the faithful, like the priests, partook of the chalice, it was not strictly required, and the Church for important reasons has since ordered the reception of Communion under but one form, because there was danger that the blood of our Lord might be spilled, and thus dishonored; because as the Blessed Sacrament must always be ready for the sick, it was feared that the form of wine might be injured by long preservation; because many cannot endure the taste of wine; because in some countries there is scarcity of wine, and it can be obtained only at great cost and with much difficulty, and finally, in order to refute the error of those who denied that Christ is entirely present under each form.

Which area the effects of holy Communion?

The graces of this most holy Sacrament are, as the Roman Catechism says, innumerable; it is the fountain of all grace, for it ,contains the Author of all the Sacraments, Christ our Lord, all goodness and perfection. According to the doctrine of the?Church , there are six special effects of grace produced by, this Sacrament in those who worthily receive it. It unites the recipient with Christ, which Christ plainly shows when He says: He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, abideth in me and I in him; (John VI. 57.) hence the name Communion, of which St. Leo writes: “The participation of the Body and Blood of Christ transforms ‘ us into that which we receive,” and from this union with Christ, our Head, arises also a closer union with our brethren in Christ, into one body. (I Cor. X. 17.) It preserves and increases sanctifying grace, which is the spiritual life of the soul, for our Saviour says: He that eateth me, the, same also shall live by me. (John VI, 58.) It diminishes in us concupiscence and strengthens us against the temptations of the devil. St. Bernard says: “This holy Sacrament produces tow effects in us, it diminishes gratifiation in venial sins, it removes the full consent in grievous sins; if any of you do not feel so often now the harsh emotion of anger, of envy, or impurity, you owe it to the Body and Blood of the Lord:” and St. Chrystostom: “When we communicate worthily we return from the table like fiery lions, terrible to the devils.” It causes us to perform good works with strength and courage; for be who abides in Christ, and Christ in him, bears much fruit. (John XV.) It effaces venial sin, and preserves from mortal sin, as St. Ambrose says: “This daily bread is used as a help against daily weakness: and as by the enjoyment of this holy Sacrament, we are made in a special manner the property, the lams of Christ, which He Himself nourishes with His own heart’s blood, He does not permit us to be taken out of His hands, so long as we cooperate with His grace, by prayer, vigilance and contest. It brings us to a glorious resurrection and to eternal happiness; for he who communicates worthily, possesses Him who is the resurrection and the life, (John XI. 25.) who said: He that eatheth my flesh, and drinketh ? my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. (John VI, 55.) He has, therefore, in Christ a pledge, that he will rise in glory and live for ever. If the receiving of this Sacrament produces such great results, how frequently and with what sincere desire should we hasten ~ to enjoy this heavenly banquet, this fountain of all grace! The first Christians received it daily, and St. Augustine says: “Daily receive what daily benefits!” and St. Cyril: The baptized may know that they remove themselves far from eternal life, when they remain a long time from Communion.” Ah, whence comes in our days, the indifference, the weakness, the impiety of so many Christians but from the neglect and unworthy reception of Communion! Christian soul, close not your ears to the voice of Jesus who invites you so tenderly to His banquet: Come to me all you who are heavily laden and I will refresh you. Go often, very often to Him; but when you go to Him, do not neglect to prepare for His worthy reception, and you will soon feel its effects in your soul.

In what does the worthy preparation for this holy Sacrament consist?

The worthy preparation of the soul consists in purifying ourselves by a sincere confession from all grievous sins, and in approaching the holy table with profound humility, sincere love, and with fervent desire. He who receives holy Communion in the state of mortal sin draws down upon himself, as the, apostle says, judgment and condemnation. The worthy preparation of the body consists in fasting from midnight before receiving Communion, and in coming properly dressed to the Lord’s banquet.

The holy Sacrament of the Altar is preserved in the tabernacle, in front of which a light is burning day and night, to show that Christ, the light of the world, is here present, that we may bear in mind that every Christian congregation should contain in itself the light of faith, the flame of hope, the warmth of divine love, and the fire of true devotion, by a pious life manifesting and consuming itself, like a light, in. the service of God. As a Christian you must believe that under the appearance of bread Christ is really present in the tabernacle, and that He is your Redeemer, your Saviour, your Lord and King, the best Friend and Lover of your soul, whose pleasure it is to dwell among the children of men; then it is your duty often to visit Him in this most holy Sacrament, and offer Him your homage and adoration, “It is certain,” says: St. Alphonsus Ligouri, that next to the enjoyment of this holy Sacrament in Communion, the adoration of Jesus in this Sacrament is the best and most pleasing of all devotional exercises, and of the greatest advantage to us.” Hesitate not, therefore, to practise this devotion. From this day renounce at least a quarter of an hour’s intercourse with others, and go to church to entertain yourself there with Christ. Know that the time which you spend in this way will be of the greatest consolation to, you in the hour of death and through all eternity. Visit Jesus not only in the church, but also accompany and adore Him when carried in processions, or to sick persons. You will thus show your Lord the homage due to Him, gather great merits for yourself, and have the sure hope that Christ will one day repay you a hundredfold.

1. Thus St. Ignatius, the Martyr, who was instructed by the apostles themselves, rebukes in these words those who even at that time would not believe in the change of the bread and wine into the body and blood of the. Lord: “They do not believe that the real body of Jesus Christ our Redeemer who suffered for us and has risen from death is contained in the Sacrament of the Altar.” (Ep. ad Smyr.) Thus St. Irenaeus who was a disciple of St. Polycarp, a pupil of St. John the Evangelist, writes: “Of the bread is made the body of Christ” (Lib. IV adv. haer.) In the same manner St. Cyril: “Since Christ our Lord said of this bread, This is my body, who dares doubt it? Since He said, This is my blood, who dares to say, it is not His blood?” (Lib. IV. regul. Cat.) and in another place: “Bread and wine which before the invocation of the most Holy Trinity were only bread and wine, become after this invocation the body and blood of Christ.” (Cat. myrt. I.)

What can the unbelievers say to this testimony? Do they know the truth better than those apostles who themselves saw and heard Jesus at the Last Supper, and who taught their disciples that which they had seen and heard? All Christian antiquity proves the error of these heretics.

Taken from “Traditional Catholic Priest”

I want to encourage all of you wonderful priests who are willing to learn the Latin Mass. Once you have decided to begin the daunting task of saying the Latin mass, you usually begin to try to learn all the difficult rubrics; (blessings, bows, genuflection, postures and hand and finger movements). One of the greatest aspects of the Latin Mass is that all priests have to follow the rubrics EXACTLY AS THEY ARE WRITTEN IN THE ROMAN MISSAL. Thank God with the Latin Mass there is NO ‘father so in so’ doing whatever he wants and in his own style.

Once you begin to familiarize yourself with the rubrics comes learning to offering the Holy Mass in LATIN. Besides the prayers of the Mass being in Latin, the readings from the Bible are also in Latin. On top of that, some of the Latin prayers have to be memorized because you will be praying them as you move or when giving out Holy Communion. You can not have card to cheat from. These prayers are especially difficult to memorize. This is because the meaning and translation of the Latin words into English is difficult and they are arranged in the sentence structure in a way that is not used in the English language.

Just learning the correct pronunciation of the Latin words, is in itself very difficult. Every syllable has to be pronounced, (and in the Latin language, they sure do cram a lot of syllables into each word). I can speak Spanish and Italian. This has helped me a great deal in learning and pronouncing Latin.

Often, I think that the Latin Mass was so easy for the Italians to understand because it is so close to their language. Since Rome is in Italy, maybe that is why the people there did not complain about the Holy Mass being in Latin and it stayed so long in Latin, (1800 + years). I know that the Holy Mass in Latin united the whole Catholic Church all over the world where everyone speaks a different language or dialect. Also words in Latin do not change their meanings [as do words in modern languages], (edit.).

Germanic languages are very far from Latin roots of words even though many of the words have Latin roots. In the sciences, many of the correct titles of medicine, body parts and plants are still in Latin.

So, for all of you who have a hard time learning foreign languages and are trying to learn the Latin Mass, DO NOT GET DISCOURAGED. It does get easier over time. You do not have to say the Latin with perfect diction. Do the best you can.

At the beginning, I only understood 60% of the Latin. Now, after praying daily the Latin Breviary with English text next to it, I understand a great deal more. I am just doing my best to do the Latin Mass for God and others. For all of you too, try the best you can and let God do the best.

We are so blessed to be traditional Catholics and to be able to offer a dignified Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in gratitude for all we receive from God and to beg His help and forgiveness of our sins.

First Friday, June 5, A.D. 2015, Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) will be offered by Fr. Gerald Carey, Parochial Vicar of Our Lady of Perpetual Help Roman Catholic Church, at the Rectory Chapel of St. Albert The Great Parish, 212 Welsh Road, Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006, (T) 215-947-3500, at 7 p.m. preceded by Confessions at 6:30 p.m. This TLM will be the Mass of Saint Boniface – Bishop, Martyr, Apostle to Germany, offered in Reparation to The Sacred Heart of Jesus. RED vestments.

First Saturday, June 6, A.D. 2015 Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) will be offered by Fr. Anthony Manuppella, Pastor of St. Peter Roman Catholic Church, Merchantville, New Jersey, at the Rectory Chapel of St. Albert The Great Parish, at 9 a.m., preceded by Confessions at 8:30 a.m. This TLM will be the Mass of Saint Norbert – Bishop, Founder of Canons Regular of Premontre, offered in Reparation to The Immaculate Heart of Mary. White vestments.

The St. Albert The Great Rectory, also known as the Parish Center, is behind the Church, which fronts on Welsh Road.

Mark Matthews

Please click on the Link on the left side of the Site to read about the fascinating “History of the Agatha Christie Indult.”

Priest: Rev. Fr. Gerald Carey

Mass Intention: Intentions of Ryan Kullavanijaya (Living)req. by Peter W. Frey

*****************

May is Mary’s Month; let us not forget our Queen and our Mother.

Available Mass Intentions: Please write legibily & include e-mail or telephone number.

Sunday, July 26, 2015

Sunday, August 2, 2015, Sunday, August 9, 2015, Sunday, August 16, 2015

Sunday, August 23, 2015, Sunday, August 30, 2015,

Sunday, September 6, 2015, Sunday, September 13, 2015, Sunday, September 20, 2015,

Monday, September 21, 2015, Tuesday, September 22, 2015,

Wednesday, September 23, 2015, Thursday, September 24, 2015 (9am),

Thursday, September 24, 2015 (7pm), Friday, September 25, 2015,

Sunday, September 27, 2015

We move to St. Edmond Church, 21st & Snyder next week:

For your information:

The parking lot is behind the rectory, and the rectory is attached to the back of the Church.

At St. Edmond Church, there is a ramp for use by anyone who has difficulty with steps. It is on the east side (observer’s left).

The door to the bathrooms are on the St. Joseph side (observer’s right) in the front. As you pass through the door, it is on your right.

There is no rail, so we will be using the modesty panel in the front. Please look to the ushers for direction.

Movers & cleaners: Those who are assisting with the move & the clean-up of Holy Trinity should meet at Holy Trinity on Tuesday, June 2 at 10am. Parking relaxation has been granted for 200 feet on Spruce St from 6th to 7th.

Website: www.latinmassphila.org

International Institute for Culture: Check out upcoming events at http://www.iiculture.org/aboutus.asp

Events: If anyone has pertinent information that would be appropriate for our bulletin, please e-mail it to Fr. McKale @ frmckalenativitybvm@gmail.com.

Mass Intentions: If anyone still has unfulfilled Mass intentions, Fr. McKale can pass them on to a priest that will satisfy the intention by offering a TLM or Divine Liturgy (Byzantine). Please specify if you have a preference. The donation is $10. If you would like a Mass card, please include an extra $5 for the card. Mass cards should be in the back of Church.

********************************************

If you or people you know are attending the World Meeting of Families, please pass this information on to them.

WORLD MEETING OF FAMILIES TLM SCHEDULE

Sunday, September 20 Missa Cantata @ Noon at St. Edmond Church

Monday, September 21 through Friday, September 25 Low Mass @ 9am at Holy Redeemer Chinese Catholic Church (1/2 mile away from the Convention Center)

Thursday, September 24 Missa Cantata @ 7pm at Holy Redeemer in honor of Our Lady of Ransom

Saturday – No TLM scheduled

Sunday, September 27 Missa Cantata @ Noon @ St. Edmond Church

For other locations, please visit www.latinmassphila.org

***********

We are moving….. Please join us

Beginning June 7, 2015

at

St. Edmond Church

21st Street and Snyder Avenue

Philadelphia, PA

Join us for Mass & Procession in honor of the M.B.S.

　

Until May 31, 2015

at Holy Trinity Roman Catholic Church

6th and Spruce Streets, Philadelphia PA

Dom Gueranger provides some interesting history concerning the Roman Church’s development of the liturgical season, “Time after Pentecost”.

Excerpt from The Liturgical Year by Dom Prosper Gueranger.

The solemnity of Pentecost and its octave are over, and the progress of the Liturgical Year introduces us into a new period, which is altogether different from those we have hitherto spent.

From the very beginning of Advent, which is the prelude to the Christmas festival, right up to the anniversary of the descent of the Holy Ghost, we have witnessed the entire series of the mysteries of our Redemption; all have been unfolded to us.

The sequel of seasons and feasts made up a sublime drama, which absorbed our very existence; we have but just come from the final celebration, which was the consummation of the whole. And yet, we have got through but one half of the year.

This does not imply that the period we have still to live is devoid of its own special mysteries; but, instead of keeping our attention by the ceaseless interest of one plan hurrying on its completion, the sacred liturgy is about to put before us an almost unbroken succession of varied episodes, of which some are brilliant with glory, and others exquisite in loveliness, but each one of them bringing its special tribute towards either the development of the dogmas of faith, or the furtherance of the Christian life.

That year’s cycle will thus be filled up; it will disappear; a new one will take its place, bringing before us the same divine facts, and pouring forth the same graces on Christ’s Mystical Body.

This section of the liturgical year, which comprises a little more or a little less than six months, according as Easter is early or late, has always had the character it holds at present. But, although it only admits detached solemnities and feasts, the influence of the moveable portion of the cycle is still observable.

It may have as many as twenty-eight, or as few as 23 weeks. This variation depends not only upon the feast of Easter, which may occur on any of the days between the 2nd of March and 25th of April, inclusively; but, also, on the date of the First Sunday of Advent, the opening of a new ecclesiastical year, and which is always the Sunday nearest the Kalends [i.e., the month’s first day] of December.

In the Roman liturgy, the Sundays of this series go under the name of “Sundays after Pentecost”. As we shall show in the next chapter, that title is the most suitable that could have been given, and is found in the oldest Sacramentaries and Antiphonaries; but it was not universally adopted by even all those churches which followed the Roman Rite; in progress of time, however, that title was the general one.

To mention some of the previous early names:

in the Comes of Alcuin, which takes us back to the 8th century, we find the first section of these Sundays called “Sundays after Pentecost”;
the second is named “Weeks after the Feast of the Apostles” (post Natale Apostolorum);
the third goes under the title of “Weeks after St. Laurence” (post Sancti Laurentii);
the fourth has the appellation of “Weeks of the Seventh Month” (September);
and, lastly, the fifth is termed “Weeks after St. Michael” (post Sancti Angeli), and lasts till Advent.

As late as the 16th century, many missals of the Western Church gave us these several sections of the Time after Pentecost, but some of the titles varied according to the special saints honored in the respective dioceses, and which were taken as the date-marks of this period of the year.

The Roman Missal, published by order of St. Pius V, has gradually been adopted in all our Latin churches, and has restored the ancient denomination to the ecclesiastical season we have just entered upon; so that the only name under which it is now known amongst us is, the “Time after Pentecost” (post Pentecosten).

Gregory DiPippo

This August, Catholic Univ. of America and the International Institute for Culture will host a conference called Veterum Sapientia, a week-long Latin program for Catholic priests, seminarians, and those men and women belonging to religious orders. This program seeks to respond to the call of Saint John XXIII’s Apostolic Constitution Veterum Sapientia to revitalize the Latin language in the Catholic Church. This full-immersion (Latine tantum) program offers intensive instruction in the language to intermediate and advanced students of Latin.

Veterum Sapientia offers a unique, guided exploration of the most important categories of writing that make up the Church’s Latin patrimony, with exercises ordered toward helping participants grow in their understanding of the mechanics of the language and internalize new vocabulary through active use. Classes and related activities (e.g. meals, games, walks) will be conducted in Latin and in a combination of Latin and English, as appropriate to participants’ level of experience. Plenary class sessions and some small-group work will be devoted to reading and discussion of texts representing the major genera of Latin writing in the life of the Church: scriptural Latin, patristic Latin, liturgical Latin, scholastic Latin, ecclesiastical (curial) Latin, and Gregorian chant (hymns). In other small-group sessions, participants will be guided through active exercises in speaking and in simple writing, based on material from these representative texts. Participants will work with instructors every day, experiencing a series of plenary and small-group class sessions for a minimum total of six hours of instruction daily. Common lunches, dinners, and evening recreational activities will also be provided, offering opportunities for informal conversations in Latin. All class sessions, common meals and recreation activities will be conducted on the Catholic University of America and Theological College campuses.

Further information, including such details as tuition and lodging, can be found at the conference wesbite: https://veterumsapientia.com/.

Rev. Fr. Leonard Goffine’s
The Church’s Year

What festival is this?

It is the day on which the Holy Ghost descended in the form of fiery tongues, upon the apostles and disciples, who with Mary, the Mother of Jesus, were assembled in prayer in a house at Jerusalem. (Acts II.)

Why is this day called Pentecost?

The word “Pentecost” is taken from the Greek, and signifies fifty. As St. Jerome explains it, this was the last of the fifty days, commencing with Easter, which the early Christians celebrated as days of rejoicing at the resurrection of the Lord.

Why is this day observed so solemnly?

Because on this day the Holy Ghost, having descended upon the apostles, the law of grace, of purification from sin, and the sanctification of mankind, was for the first time announced to the world; because on this day the apostles, being filled with the Holy Ghost, commenced the work of purifying and sanctifying mankind, by baptizing three thousand persons who were converted by the sermon of St. Peter; and because on this day the Church of Jesus became visible as a community to the world, and publicly professed her faith in her crucified Saviour.

Why did the Holy Ghost descend on the Jewish Pentecost?

Because on their Pentecost the Jews celebrated the anniversary of the giving of the law on Mount Sinai, and God would show by sending the Holy Ghost on this days that the Old Law had ceased and the New Law commenced. God also chose this time, that the Jews who on this day came together from all countries to Jerusalem to celebrate the Pentecost, might be witnesses of the miracle, and hear the New Law announced by the apostles.

Why is the baptismal font blessed an the vigil of Pentecost, as on Holy Saturday?

Because the Holy Ghost is the Author of all sanctity and the Fountain of baptismal grace, and because in the Acts (i. 5.) the descent of the Holy Ghost itself is called a baptism.

In the Introit of the Mass the Church rejoices at the descent of the Holy Ghost and sings:

INTROIT The Spirit of the Lord hath filled the whole earth, allel.; and that which containeth all things hath knowledge of the voice, Allel., allel., allel. (Wisd. I.7.) Let God arise, and his enemies be scattered: and let them that hate him, fly before his face. (Ps. 67.) Glory etc.

COLLECT God, who on this day didst instruct the hearts of the faithful by the light of the Holy Spirit: grant us in the same spirit to relish what is right, and ever to rejoice in His consolation. Thro’. — in the unity of the same, etc.

LESSON (Acts II. I-II.) When the days of Pentecost were accomplished, they were all together in one place; and suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a mighty wind coming, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. And there appeared to them parted tongues as it were of fire, and it sat upon every one of them:. and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they began to speak with divers tongues, according as the Holy Ghost gave them to speak. Now there were. dwelling at Jerusalem, Jews, devout men, of every nation under heaven. And when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded in mind, because that every man heard them speak in his own tongue: and they were all amazed, and wondered, saying: Behold, are not all these that speak Galileans? And how have we heard every man our own tongue wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and inhabitants of Mesopotamia, Judea, and Cappadocia, Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphilia, Egypt, and the parts of Lybia about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews also and Proselytes, Cretes and Arabians: we have heard them speak in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.

Why did the Holy Ghost come upon the apostles in the form of fiery tongues?

The appearance of fiery tongues indicated the gift of language imparted to the apostles by the Holy Ghost, and inflamed their hearts and the hearts of the faithful with the love of God and their neighbor.

Why did a mighty wind accompany the descent?

To direct the attention of the people to the descent of the Holy Ghost, and to assemble them to hear the sermon of the Apostle Peter.

What special effects did the Holy Ghost produce in the apostles?

He freed them from all doubt and fear; gave them His light for the perfect knowledge of truth; inflamed their hearts with the most ardent love, and incited in them the fiery zeal for the propagation of the kingdom of God, strengthened them to bear all sufferings and persecutions, (Acts V. 41.) and gave them the gift of speaking in various languages, and of discerning spirits.

GOSPEL (John XIV. 23-31,) At that time, Jesus said to his disciples: If any one love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will make our abode with him. He that loveth me not, keepeth not my words: and the word which you have heard is not mine, but the Father’s, who sent me. These things have I spoken to you, abiding with you: but the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you. Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, do I give unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, nor let it be afraid. You have heard that I said to you, I go away, and I come unto you. If you loved me, you would indeed be glad, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I. And now I have ;told you before it came to pass, that when it shall come to pass you may believe. I will not now speak many things with you; for the prince of this world cometh, and in me he hath not anything. But that the world may know that I love the Father, and as the Father hath givers me commandment, so do I.

Why is the Holy Ghost expressly called “Holy,” since this attribute is due to each of the divine persons?

Because He is the Author of inward sanctity and of all supernatural gifts and graces, and therefore to Him is especially ascribed the work of man’s sanctification.

What does the Holy Ghost effect in man?

He enlightens him that he may know the truths of religion and salvation, and the beauty of virtue; He moves him to desire, to aim after and to love these things; He renews his heart by cleansing it from sin, and imparts to him the supernatural gifts and graces by which he can become sanctified, and He brings forth in him wonderful fruits of holiness.

What are the gifts of the Holy Ghost?

According to the Prophet Isaias they are seven: 1.The gift of wisdom, which enables us to know God, to esteem spiritual more than temporal advantages, and to delight only in divine things. 2. The gift of understanding, by which we know and understand that which our faith proposes to our belief; children and adults should pray fervently for this gift, especially before sermons and instructions in the catechism. 3.The gift of counsel, which gives us the knowledge necessary to direct ourselves and others when in doubt, a gift particularly necessary for superiors, for those about choosing their state of life, and for married people who live unhappily, and do not know how to help themselves. 4. The gift of fortitude, which strengthens us to endure and courageously overcome all adversities and persecutions for virtue’s sake. 5. The gift of knowledge, by which we know ourselves, our duties, and how to discharge them in a manner pleasing to God. 6. The gift of piety, which induces us to have God in view in all our actions, and infuses love in our hearts for His service. 7. The gift of the fear of the Lord, by which we not only fear the just punishment, but even His displeasure at every sin, more than all other things in the world.

Which are the fruits of the Holy Ghost?

As St. Paul (Gal. V.. 22-23.) enumerates them, they are twelve: 1. Charity. 2. Joy. 3. Peace. 4. Patience. 5. Benignity. 6. Goodness. 7. Longanimity. 8. Mildness. 9. Faith. 10. Modesty. 11. Continency. 12. Chastity. To obtain these fruits as well as the gifts of the Holy Ghost, we should daily say the prayer: “Come, O Holy Ghost, etc.”

Why does Christ say: The Father is greater than I?

Christ as God is in all things equal to His Father, but as Christ was at the same time Man, the Father was certainly greater than the Man-Christ.

Why does Christ say: I will not now speak many things with you?

Christ spoke these words a short time before His passion, and by them He wished to say that the time was near at hand when Satan, by his instruments, the wicked Jews, would put Him to death, not because Satan had this power over Him, but because He Himself wished to die in obedience to the will of His Father.

The 1971 ‘English’ Indult – a Recollection.

Alfred Marnau.

There were many Catholics in the middle to late 1960s who had become very uneasy with the developments and proposed changes in the liturgy following the Second Vatican Council. While being deeply unhappy with these changes, it proved to be very difficult to mount any kind of positive resistance because the changes had been introduced gradually and, in some ways, in a piece-meal fashion, over a period of time. The Latin Mass Society had been started in 1964, even before the Council had ended, but at that time it was still very much finding its feet and there had been certain promises that Latin would be retained and that the Canon of the Mass, for example, would remain unchanged, as would Latin, as in the traditional manner. It soon became obvious that this was not to be and as early as November 1965 the officers of The Latin Mass Society sent an appeal to Pope Paul VI that “the discontinuance of the use of the Latin tongue in parts of the Mass has proved a grave spiritual privation and a source of great anguish of soul”. The petition also requested “that, side by side with the continued employment of the mother-tongue, the Mass may frequently and regularly be celebrated wholly in Latin”.

A time of confusion and turmoil.

It was a time of great confusion and turmoil, the form of the Mass seemed to be changing by the month, and no sooner had one novelty been introduced then it was replaced very quickly by something else. A number of priests took the opportunity to introduce their own whims and fancies, which only exacerbated the problem, and many priests cast aside their vows and left their ministry. Such was the maelstrom of confusion that faced those who were trying desperately to cling on to the Mass of their heritage and prevent the great traditions of the Church being cast aside as unwanted goods which had outlived their purpose.

It was the introduction of the new rite of Mass in the early 1970s, and the instruction that the old had to be discontinued, that concentrated our minds wonderfully and gave us a focal point on which to mount a specific course of action. It was that proposal that made us wake up to the fact that the Mass, our beloved Mass, had been vandalised to such an extent as to pass belief, although it still took some time for us to realise what had been done. I was waiting for someone to tell me that the whole disaster was a joke, a try-on, and that at any day now the priests would return to the Mass for which they had been ordained. We were all naïve, and naïve for quite a long time, but when I realised it was not a joke I became active. I was very much a new hand at this sort of thing – gathering signatures – and some people thought I was mad to get involved. After all, I was until a few years earlier, a rather lapsed Catholic, and was one of those whom the destruction of our most precious spiritual and cultural heritage, manifested in the destruction of the liturgy, brought back to the Church; to be counted, to say No, to what we considered a return to barbarism and blasphemous vandalism. Yes, there were such, and some were not even Catholics, lapsed or otherwise, but alarm bells began to be heard by thoughtful men and women.

I had been a member of The Latin Mass Society only since December 1969 and I can recall discussing with Iris Roper, Bernard Wall, Professor Alexandra Zaina, and Geoffrey Houghton-Brown, my plan to write to prominent people and ask for their support in trying to save the old Mass. After this discussion and the approval of all concerned I went to work in early 1971 with my late wife Senta and was also supported and helped by my private secretary. I contacted a number of well-known personalities and spoke personally to Graham Greene, Harman Grisewood, Kathleen Raine, Cecil Day Lewis and others, but most of the signatories agreed to help after responding to letters to them. There were some who were contacted and declined to help, including a famous Catholic actor who was content with the new Mass, but most were more than happy to be associated with such an important initiative. Because the changes were imminent, and there was some urgency in getting the appeal to Rome, we had to move quickly. We had no particular deadline date in mind but we knew that we could not afford to wait too long After about three weeks, Senta and I had fifty-seven signatures and we thought that would suffice; especially considering the kind of people that had put their name to the appeal.

When the appeal had been prepared I informed Cardinal Heenan and gave him a copy, but the original was sent direct to the Pope with the help of my good friend Mgr. John MacDonald who was based at the Beda College in Rome at that time. Many members, especially those in London, will remember Mgr. MacDonald with affection and others will remember him from The Latin Mass Society’s video recording of Solemn High Mass on 31st August 1986 at St. Mary of the Angels, Bayswater. The Cardinal readily agreed to help and to do what he could and I think he acted independently. On 6th July 1971 The Times published the text of the appeal and included a list of all the signatories. It informed its readers, “The following appeal to preserve the Roman Catholic Mass in its traditional form has been sent from Britain to the Vatican. Similar appeals, ecumenical and non-political, have been made from other countries”. Interestingly, among the signatories were the Anglican Bishops of Exeter and Ripon.

The appeal to Pope Paul VI in 1971.

The text of the appeal letter is as follows:

“If some senseless decree were to order the total or partial destruction of basilicas or cathedrals, then obviously it would be the educated – whatever their personal beliefs – who would rise up in horror to oppose such a possibility. Now the fact is that basilicas and cathedrals were built so as to celebrate a rite which, until a few months ago, constituted a living tradition. We are referring to the Roman Catholic Mass. Yet, according to the latest information in Rome, there is a plan to obliterate that Mass by the end of the current year. One of the axioms of contemporary publicity, religious as well as secular, is that modern man in general, and intellectuals in particular, have become intolerant of all forms of tradition and are anxious to suppress them and put something else in their place. But, like many other affirmations of our publicity machines, this axiom is false. Today, as in times gone by, educated people are in the vanguard where recognition of the value of tradition in concerned, and are the first to raise the alarm when it is threatened. We are not at this moment considering the religious or spiritual experience of millions of individuals. The rite in question, in its magnificent Latin text, has also inspired a host of priceless achievements in the arts – not only mystical works, but works by poets, philosophers, musicians, architects, painters and sculptors in all countries and epochs. Thus, it belongs to universal culture as well as to churchmen and formal Christians. In the materialistic and technocratic civilisation that is increasingly threatening the life of mind and spirit in its original creative expression – the word – it seems particularly inhuman to deprive man of word-forms in one of their most grandiose manifestations. The signatories of this appeal, which is entirely ecumenical and non-political, have been drawn from every branch of modern culture in Europe and elsewhere. They wish to call to the attention of the Holy See, the appalling responsibility it would incur in the history of the human spirit were it to refuse to allow the Traditional Mass to survive, even though this survival took place side by side with other liturgical reforms.”

Signed: Harold Acton, Vladimir Ashkenazy, John Bayler, Lennox Berkeley, Maurice Bowra, Agatha Christie, Kenneth Clark, Nevill Coghill, Cyril Connolly, Colin Davis, Hugh Delargy, +Robert Exeter, Miles Fitzalan-Howard, Constantine Fitzgibbon, William Glock, Magdalen Goffin, Robert Graves, Graham Greene, Ian Greenless, Joseph Grimond, Harman Grisewood, Colin Hardie, Rupert Hart-Davis, Barbara Hepworth, Auberon Herbert, John Jolliffe, David Jones, Osbert Lancaster, F.R. Leavis, Cecil Day Lewis, Compton Mackenzie, George Malcolm, Max Mallowan, Alfred Marnau, Yehudi Menuhin, Nancy Mitford, Raymond Mortimer, Malcolm Muggeridge, Iris Murdoch, John Murray, Sean O’Faolain, E.J. Oliver, Oxford and Asquith, William Plomer, Kathleen Raine, William Rees-Mogg, Ralph Richardson, +John Ripon, Charles Russell, Rivers Scott, Joan Sutherland, Philip Toynbee, Martin Turnell, Bernard Wall, Patrick Wall, E.I Watkin, R.C. Zaehner.

The publication of the appeal on the 6th July was followed three days later by a rather lengthy article from Clifford Longley in The Times in which he said:

“A plea for the preservation of the traditional Latin Mass – threatened by extinction by the end of this year – is to be made to the Vatican by Cardinal Heenan, Archbishop of Westminster. There has been mounting pressure in Britain for such a step for some time, transcending the divisions between progressive and conservative factions in the Church, and supported by a considerable body of opinion outside the Roman Catholic communion. From the beginning of the new liturgical year in December it will no longer be permitted to celebrate in Roman Catholic churches the so-called Tridentine Mass, whether in the vernacular or in Latin. A new form, with a set of four basic variations and known as the Ordo Missae, will be obligatory in spite of widespread misgivings both at the passing of the old and at details of the new. Cardinal Heenan is to ask the Vatican authorities – and, in effect, the Pope himself – to leave it up to individual bishops whether the Tridentine rite can be used on special occasions or not. The new forms would continue as the standard, but the Tridentine tradition could be kept alive in certain churches and cathedrals, and the settings of the Mass by the great classical composers would not become, as is now feared, mere museum pieces without a contemporary religious significance.”

Mr. Longley went on to say, “Resistance to these changes has not come only out of nostalgia for the old and venerable. A theological argument has been raging for some time over the validity and orthodoxy of parts of the new rite, and in England the Latin Mass Society has resolved to boycott it completely on the grounds of conscience. One variation, the Second Eucharistic Prayer, was said to be so silent on the subject of sacrifice as to render it acceptable to non-conformist churches. Generally, however, the Latin version of the Ordo Missae has been accepted as an improvement on the Tridentine for everyday use.”

After a rather lengthy examination of the problems surrounding an acceptable English translation he continues:

“For this reason, therefore [the possibility of hearing the Credo and Gloria occasionally in the great cathedrals of Europe], Mgr. John Humphreys, Secretary of the English hierarchy’s Liturgical Commission, feels that to mourn the passing of the Tridentine Mass on the grounds that it will be a serious loss to western culture is misplaced. Permission to revert to it on such special occasions as Mass in an old people’s home or a meeting of the Latin Mass Society would, he considers, be a reasonable concession for a five or ten year period. Although the quarrel with the new order of Mass has provoked much criticism of the language chosen, both in the original Latin and in ICEL’s translations, and some bitter theological wrangles from some more conservative quarters, the fact remains that the Roman Catholic Church is coming to the end of a momentous period of change in its most sacred worship with astonishingly little damage. This fundamental renewal of its spiritual well-springs could lead to incalculable benefits, not least the revitalization of Roman Catholic parish life.”

A natural and inevitable consequence.

Well, it is a fact that this prophecy of revitalization that many predicted for the new order has failed miserably but many of us warned at the time that this would be the natural and inevitable consequence. You cannot sever the traditions of centuries, embark on a completely new venture, and expect life to continue with equilibrium. Life is simply not like that. The hierarchy in general may have been aware at that time at what was in the air but I cannot recall any of them making any public comment. At that time, in the midst of all the turmoil of the day, we did not consider producing the appeal on expensive parchment or on a scroll, we simply presented it on Latin Mass Society notepaper with the then new, but now very familiar logo, which had been designed and supplied by a friend of Iris Roper.

This had been an entirely new venture for us and in those days we had no experience in how to present a petition to a Pope. The appeal was entrusted to Mgr Macdonald and no-one who had had any involvement with preparing it had travelled to Rome, nor was there any particular presentation ceremony. Mgr. Macdonald’s contact in the Vatican had left it ‘on the table’ for personal petitions to the Pope.

Towards the end of 1971 two most important, and perhaps contradictory, events happened within very close proximity. The first on 26th November, when The Universe informed its readers on its front page:

“As from this Sunday, the first in Advent, it is forbidden to offer Mass in the Tridentine rite anywhere in the world. In very special circumstances old or retired priests may apply to their own bishop for permission to use the rite, but for private use only.” (Because this kind of information was the norm, the laity were conditioned into accepting the new Mass as a fait accompli. In fact, the old Mass had never been forbidden and this was revealed some 15 years later in December 1986 when a commission of cardinals, set up by Pope John Paul II, confirmed that this was so and proposed the granting to all who seek it the use of the Roman Missal according to the 1962 edition).

This front page story in The Universe was somewhat contradicted by The Times less than a week later when, on the 2nd December 1971, it informed its readers with the headline, “Pope sanctions traditional Latin Mass in Britain”. It explained that Pope Paul VI had given permission for the traditional form of the Latin Mass, known as the Tridentine rite, to be used on special occasions in England and Wales with the consent of the local Roman Catholic bishop. “This concession was obtained by Cardinal Heenan, Archbishop of Westminster, at a recent private audience with the Pope and news of it has been passed to such bodies as the Latin Mass Society who have been campaigning for the right to retain the Tridentine form……Cardinal Heenan’s approach to the Pope on this question came after the publication of an open letter, signed by many non-Roman Catholic artists, musicians, and intellectuals, in July. The letter pointed out that the Tridentine rite, which takes its name from the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century, was one of the basic art forms of European culture on which had been based many settings of the Mass by great classical composers. The disappearance of the rite, they complained, would impoverish cultural life.”

Cardinal Heenan had, indeed, secured a personal audience with the Pope, who, on the 30th October 1971 had granted the request. The story goes that Pope Paul VI was reading quietly through the list of signatories and then suddenly said, “Ah, Agatha Christie!” and signed his approval. It has since been known, informally, in traditional circles as the Agatha Christie Indult. Mgr. Annibale Bugnini, of the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship, conveyed the decision officially to Cardinal Heenan on 5th November 1971.

In his letter, Mgr. Bugnini informed Cardinal Heenan that Pope Paul VI, by letter of 30th October 1971, had given special faculties to the Secretary of the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship to convey to His Eminence, as Chairman of the Episcopal Conference of England and Wales, that it was permitted to the local Ordinaries of England and Wales to grant that certain groups of the faithful may on special occasions be allowed to participate in the Mass celebrated according to the rites and texts of the former Roman Missal. The Missal to be used on these occasions should be that published by the decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites (27 Jan.1965), and with the modifications in the Instructio altera (4 May 1967).

No publicity, please.

Mgr. Bugnini added a personal letter to the official text of the Indult which perhaps indicated his own mind on how restrictive he wished the indult to be applied. He said: “Under separate cover you will have received the letter expressing the mind of the Holy Father regarding Your Eminence’s request of 29th October 1971. His Holiness knows well that Your Eminence will ensure that this permission is granted with that prudence and reserve that the matter requires. It is also very desirable that the permission be given without too much publicity. As I write I am reminded about this time last year we celebrated the canonization of the Forty Martyrs. That canonization remains one of the best liturgical celebrations I have seen in St. Peter’s, a fine blend of the old and the new”.

On 22nd November Cardinal Heenan wrote to Mr. Geoffrey Houghton-Brown, the Chairman of The Latin Mass Society, and informed him that at the last bishops’ meeting he had reported on a private audience he had with Pope Paul. He had expressed sorrow that some Catholics opposed to reform of the liturgy had spoken offensively of the Holy Father. He said, however, that he had sympathy with the few Catholics who, while loyally accepting the reforms, felt a certain nostalgia for the old rite. The Pope had not regarded this attitude as unreasonable and would not absolutely forbid occasional use of the Roman Mass (according to the decree of 1965: amended 1967) provided all danger of division is avoided. In his diocese, he said, he was quite willing for the old rite to be used on special occasions.

A meeting of the committee of The Latin Mass Society took place in London on 27th November 1971 to discuss the letter from Cardinal Heenan to the Chairman. The feeling of the committee was one of dismay that the Cardinal had said that some Catholics had spoken offensively about the Holy Father thus, perhaps, linking the Society in some way to these offensive remarks. The Chairman had drafted a reply and the committee agreed unanimously that it be sent. The letter, which was sent on 28 November 1971was as follows.

“My Lord Cardinal: I have shown your letter to the Committee of the above Society who are most grateful to Your Eminence for the trouble you have taken in Rome on behalf of the Roman Missal. The Committee, however, was greatly astonished at the contents of the letter. We hope that Your Eminence expressed no sorrow on behalf of the Latin Mass Society for having “spoken offensively” of the Holy Father, because this Society has always spoken of His Holiness with the respect due from Roman Catholics to the Vicar of Christ.

My Lord Cardinal, it is the opinion of this Society that the use of the customary Missal cannot be forbidden. The Pope has never rescinded the Bull, Quo Primum, nor the right of immemorial custom, both of which give priests a perpetual right to use, both in public and in private, the Tridentine or the Roman Missal. The Society is most grateful to Your Eminence for letting us know that you are willing to allow the use of the Roman Missal in the churches of the Westminster Diocese on special occasions. Your Eminence may rest assured that the Society will urge the use of the Roman Missal as often as possible.”

The Committee discussed whether the letters be sent to the Press, both Catholic and national, in view of the first page story in The Universe about the Latin Mass being “unlawful” and “forbidden throughout the world” from the first Sunday in Advent but there were objections on the grounds of breach of confidence. Considerable discussion followed on both the ethics and the expediency of the whole matter of publicising the information and it was finally decided to make the substance of the letter known, initially to The Universe, refuting its story, and to The Times as a sequel to its earlier information that the Cardinal would be seeking permission of the Pope for the retention of the Tridentine Mass.

More hostile then than now.

There was no particular response from the English and Welsh bishops who, it seems from memory, were more hostile then than now except for Bishop Gordon Wheeler and Bishop Alexander, still with us, of Clifton, who I recall as being courteous and a gentleman.

Those of us who fought for the retention of the old Mass had a very rough ride in those early days. In comparison, things are now unbelievably improved. We never thought that we would have so many Masses celebrated in England and Wales, or France, or even in the U.S.A. In other ‘old Catholic countries’ the situation is still disastrous. In fairness and honour, it must be said for Cardinal Hume that not only did he accept Cardinal Heenan’s Bishop’s Conference decision to allow the old Requiem, but that no other Archbishop throughout Europe would have followed the policy of his predecessor and allowed a monthly Mass in his cathedral to continue (the monthly Mass in the crypt), let alone two Solemn High Masses a year at his High Altar! Let us always remember that with gratitude. Deo gratias.

____________________________

Addendum: At their Low Week Meeting in 1974 the English and Welsh Hierarchy, responding to an appeal to Cardinal Heenan from The Latin Mass Society, “recognised the right of Catholics to leave instructions regarding the rite to be used at their Requiem Mass”, and they informed the clergy of their decision. This was another concession gained by The Latin Mass Society in ensuring that the traditional rite of Mass would continue to be available after the introduction of the new liturgy. The fact that some bishops individually refused legitimate requests for a ‘Tridentine’ Requiem was to their shame but it does not invalidate the fact that the Society obtained another concession whereby the old Mass would continue to be celebrated in parish churches in England and Wales.

NOTE: The Committee of The Latin Mass Society urges members to ensure that your wishes regarding your Requiems are known and understood. You should include specific instructions in your wills and inform your executors. It may also be prudent to inform your parish priests. Anyone anticipating problems should contact their diocesan representative in the first place, or our London office if there is no representative available.

[Taken from the Latin Mass Society’s February 1999 Newsletter.]