The Prayer for Peace and the Peace

Lost in Translation #168

After the commingling and the Agnus Dei the priest silently prays the following:

Domine Jesu Christe, qui dixisti Apostolis tuis: Pacem relinquo vobis, pacem meam do vobis: ne respicias peccata mea, sed fidem Ecclesiæ tuæ; eamque secundum voluntatem tuam pacificare et coadunare digneris: Qui vivis et regnas Deus per omnia saecula saeculorum. Amen.

Which I translate:

O Lord Jesus Christ, Who said to Thine Apostles, ‘Peace I leave with you, My peace I give unto you’, look not on my sins but on the faith of Thy Church; and, in accordance with Thy will, deign to pacify her and to collect her into one, Who livest and reignest, God, forever and ever. Amen.

My translation is not as eloquent as that of the 2011 ICEL:

Lord Jesus Christ,

who said to your Apostles:

Peace I leave you, my peace I give you,

look not on our sins,

but on the faith of your Church,

and graciously grant her peace and unity

in accordance with your will (no. 126).

“Grant her peace and unity” is better on the ears than “pacify her and collect her into one.” The imperative “pacify her” makes the Church sound like a dyspeptic baby in need of her binky. But by using the verb pacificare, the prayer does not simply ask that the Church be given a gift called peace that she can use or not use to various degrees, but that she be transformed by peace, that she herself be made peaceful.

Coadunare, which I have translated as “collect into one,” is also an apt verb for uniting. Aduno already means to “make one,” that is, to move the many to (ad) the one (uno). Co-ad-uno makes the action both more corporate and more intense. To my mind the verb calls to mind the meaning of the word “Church” – in both the Greek Ekklēsia and the Latin Ecclesia, it means the assembly. The prayer essentially asks that Christ may really and truly make the Church what she is, that He may make her an assembly collected from everywhere and now united in His peace.

My translation renders digneris as “deign to.” ICEL changes this verb in the subjunctive mood to the adverb “graciously,” while some preconciliar hand Missals use “vouchsafe.” The latter is a lovely if obsolete word: to vouch or warrant something safely is to be generous, trustworthy, and gracious in bestowing. But in English, “deign” still maintains a tenuous connection to “dignify,” a connection that is stronger in the Latin and, I contend, significant. The inclusion of digneris adds a layer of hierarchic formality (which it is good to do in sacred liturgy), but more than that, it has the Domine Jesu Christe ask that God dignify His Church or increase her dignity by granting her certain properties. And human dignity is one of the surprising themes of the Latin Mass. The Offertory Rite marvels at the dignity that man has been given through His creation and redemption, and the priest and faithful in a moment will be reciting the Domine, non sum dignus, still trembling at the thought of their own unworthiness or lack of dignity in receiving so august a Sacrament.

The prayer reminds Jesus Christ what He said during the Last Supper: “Peace I leave, My peace I give.” The full quote is:

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. (John 14, 26-27)

The hint of a relationship between the Holy Spirit and Christ’s peace is confirmed later in John’s Gospel, when our Risen Lord appears to the Apostles and says:

‘Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent Me, I also send you.’ When He had said this, He breathed on them; and He said to them: ‘Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them.’ (John 20, 21-23)

The Church Fathers interpreted Christ’s insufflation here as a kiss. Hence, His breathing of the Holy Spirit onto the Apostles after bidding them peace is a Kiss of Peace. Indeed, as I argue elsewhere, Eastern liturgies place their Kiss of Peace before their Offertory/Anaphora because they are following Matthew 5:23-24:

If therefore thou offer thy gift at the altar, and there thou remember that thy brother hath any thing against thee; Leave there thy offering before the altar, and go first to be reconciled to thy brother: and then coming thou shalt offer thy gift.

The Roman Rite, on the other hand, follows John 20 and hence has not a [primarily] conciliatory Kiss but a Paschal Kiss, a Kiss that communicates the peace of the Risen Christ. The Paschal character of this kiss is reinforced by its placement after the commingling, which represents the Resurrection. In the words of Honorius Augustodunensis (1080-1140): “By sharing the pax, [the priest] denotes the peace given after Christ’s resurrection and our participation in its joy.” [1]

The Church takes seriously the words of the Domine Jesu Christe and of these Johannine passages. Christ has bequeathed to the Church a unique peace that is real and palpable and not vague or metaphorical. As David Yeago notes, Christ describes the peace “with utter substantial realism,” as “a concrete reality” which “confers the gift of which it speaks” and has the power to return to the giver if the recipient is unworthy. [2] As James Perella notes in his magisterial study The Kiss Sacred and Profane, for Church Fathers such as Sts. Cyril of Jerusalem and John Chrysostom, “the kiss exchanged by the brethren is more than just a symbol”: it is the actual mixing of souls, [3] the movement of souls towards “a mutual intercourse.” [4]

In the traditional Mass this respect for the Peace’s substantial realism may be seen in two areas: its ceremonies and its language.

In the traditional Mass, the priest kisses the altar near where the Sacred Host lies (earlier rubrics have him kissing the Host itself or the lip of the Chalice) and then “kisses” the deacon who in turn “kisses” the subdeacon and so on. To administer the Kiss (which is no longer labial), the giver of the peace places his hands on the other’s shoulders. He leans forward towards the recipient’s left cheek and says, Pax tecum, to which the recipient replies, Et cum spiritu tuo. I call this form of the Kiss of Peace the Roman accolade, for “accolade” comes from or “to the neck,” and the act of “falling on” someone’s neck betokens a kiss, as we see with the father of the prodigal son who ran out of his house and “fell upon his [son’s] neck and kissed him” (Luke 15, 20).

No one can give the peace who has not received it from someone else, including the priest, who receives it from Christ Himself on the altar. The symbolism is both beautiful and clear. All true peace comes from Christ through the ministration of His Church. Grace cascades from the Eucharistic sacrifice through Christ’s ministers to His people, forming what several Western rites aptly called a “chain of peace and charity” that both binds together and elevates. [5]

The power of this peace is reinforced in the etiquette governing the ritual. While it is common in the Tridentine rite to bow to one’s ecclesiastical superior at incensations and the like, one does not acknowledge the rank of the giver of the peace before it is administered, for, as the Caeremoniale Episcoporum puts it, “there is consideration not for the minister bringing it but for the Peace [itself], which is conveyed to him from the Sacrifice of the altar.” [6] The giver of the peace, in other words, represents not himself but Christ, for the peace that he gives is Christ (cf. Eph. 2, 19).

The second way in which the traditional Roman Rite acknowledges the substantial realism of the Peace is the manner in which it speaks about it. The 1570/1962 Missal simply states:

Si danda est pax, osculatur altare et, dans pacem, dicit: Pax tecum. ℟. Et cum spiritu tuo.

In Missis defunctorum non datur pax, neque dicitur praecedens oratio.

Which I translate as:

If the Peace is to be given, [the priest] kisses the altar and, when giving the Peace, says, Peace be with thee. ℟. And with thy spirit.

In Masses for the dead the Peace is not given, nor is the previous prayer said.

Unlike today, there is no talk of a “sign of peace” being exchanged. In the classical Roman liturgy, the Peace itself is given and received, not a mere sign of it. And that Peace is a real spiritual blessing that even has the power to forgive venial sins, for it may be considered a sacramental. [7] And insofar as the Peace bjustítia, et pax osculátæ sunt—justice and peace have kissed. Psalm 84[3]:11

The 1970 Missal

The Novus Ordo changed the Kiss of Peace in four ways. The rubrics of the 2002 Missale Romanum state:

128. Deinde, pro opportunitate, diaconus, vel sacerdos, subiungit:

Offerte vobis pacem.

Et omnes, iuxta locorum consuetudines, pacem, communionem et caritatem sibi invicem significant; sacerdos pacem dat diacono vel ministro.

The 1985 ICEL for which is:

Then, if appropriate, the deacon or priest adds:

Let us offer each other the sign of peace.

All make an appropriate sign of peace, according to local custom.

The priest gives the sign of peace to the deacon or minister.

And the 2011 ICEL translation for which is:

Then, if appropriate, the Deacon, or the Priest, adds:

Let us offer each other the sign of peace.

And all offer one another a sign, in keeping with local customs, that expresses peace, communion, and charity.

The Priest gives the sign of peace to a Deacon or minister.

The rubric now appears after the fraction rite and before the commingling, the first change to the Kiss and one that undermines the Paschal meaning of the Kiss as coming from the Risen Lord, since the mystical symbol of the Resurrection, the commingling, has yet to occur. According to the testimony of Annibale Bugnini, on the basis of the principle that the Consilium was authorized to simplify but not alter the structure of the Roman Rite, Pope Paul VI “asked for the elimination of no. 13 of the draft [of the Novus Ordo], which placed the rite of the fraction after the greeting of peace and during the singing of the Agnus Dei.” [8] His request, however, was denied!. And thus today, while the faithful smile, shake hands, and offer each other the hippie peace sign, Our crucified Lord mystically lies lifeless on the altar.

Second, the new rubrics simply state Offerte vobis pacem or “Let us offer each other the sign of peace.” Gone is the chain of love: The vertical mediation of Christ’s peace from Host to priest to ministers and so on has been replaced by a horizontal immediacy, with peace springing up spontaneously from among the people. The metaphysics of pseudo-Dionysius has been replaced by that of Hegel.

Third, the peace is to be administered according to local custom. Instead of a kiss or a kiss-adjacent gesture like that of the Roman accolade, any “appropriate sign” is valid. In the United States, the most common sign (at least before the COVID pandemic) has been the handshake. I many respects, this is not an unreasonable choice. As an indication that one is unarmed, the handshake is certainly a recognizable sign of peace. Unfortunately, though, it is a better sign of the peace that comes from the city of man rather than from the city of God. Handshaking signifies a truce, a deal, the kind of agreement one makes in the world of politics and business. It is not first and foremost a sign of love or intimacy, let alone the charity that the Holy Spirit alone pours forth into our hearts. Indeed, unlike the kiss and virtually every other sacred gesture in the liturgy, it has undergone no transformation or modification that would mark it as distinctive from the “profane” handshakes outside the temple and thus it more or less retains its worldly resonance. In any event, the kiss of peace is no longer the kiss of peace.

Msgr. Peter Elliott has an interesting interpretation, or rather suggestion, regarding these rubrics. While acknowledging that the “sign of peace” is to take place according to local custom, he recommends that within the sanctuary, the traditional Roman accolade be given. One wonders how often his advice has been heeded. [9]

Fourth, while the Latin of the 1970/2000 Missale Romanum preserves a belief in the substantial realism of the Peace by simply calling it the Pax, some approved translations undermine this realism. We have already seen above how ICEL calls the Pax the “sign of peace.” As for other languages, the Italian is just as weak, the French is the strongest of the translations that I consulted, and the Mexican Missal is somewhere in between.

The third edition of the Italian Missal has:

Scambiatevi il dono della pace.

Oppure:

Come figli del Dio della pace, scambiatevi un gesto di comunione fraterna.

Oppure:

In Cristo, che ci ha resi tutti fratelli con la sua croce, scambiatevi il dono della pace.

Oppure:

Nello Spirito del Cristo risorto, scambiatevi il dono della pace. [10]

Which I translate as:

Exchange the gift of peace.

Or:

As children of the God of peace, exchange a gesture of fraternal communion.

Or:

In Christ, who made us all brothers and sisters by his cross, exchange the gift of peace.

Or:

In the Spirit of the risen Christ, exchange the gift of peace.

The French has:

Dans la charité du Christ, donnez-vous la paix.

Et tous se manifestent la paix et la charité mutuelles selon les coutumes locales.

Le prêtre donne la paix au diacre ou au ministre. [11]

Which I translate as:

In the charity of Christ, give one another the peace.

Mutual peace and charity are manifested according to local customs.

The priest gives the peace to the deacon or the minister.

Because of its numerous options, the Mexican Misal Romano is all over the map:

Luego, si se juzga oportuno, el diácono, o el sacerdote, añade:

Dense fraternalmente la paz.

O bien:

Como hijos de Dios, intercambien ahora un signo de comunión fraterna.

O bien:

En Cristo, que nos ha hecho hermanos con su cruz, dense la paz como signo de reconciliación.

O bien:

En el Espíritu de Cristo resucitado, dense fraternalmente la paz.

Y todos, según la costumbre del lugar, se dan la paz.

El sacerdote da la paz al diácono o ministro. [12]

Which I translate as:

Then, if deemed appropriate, the deacon or priest adds:

Fraternally give the peace.

Or:

As children of God, exchange now a sign of fraternal communion.

Or:

In Christ, who has made us brothers and sisters through his cross, give the peace as a sign of reconciliation.

Or:

In the Spirit of the risen Christ, fraternally give the peace.

And all, according to local custom, exchange a sign of peace.

The priest gives the peace to the deacon or minister.

Note that while some options refer to the Peace, others refer to a sign or gesture. And while one option rightly characterizes the Peace as Paschal (Johannine) in character, another wrongly characterizes it as conciliatory (Matthean) in character.

Notes

[1] Gemma Animae I (Migne, PL 172.570), ch. 83.

[2] Yeago, “Unfashionable Thoughts on Sharing the Peace,” Dialog 23 (August 1984), 292.

[3] Perella, The Kiss Sacred and Profane: An Interpretive History of Kiss Symbolism and Related Religio-Erotic Themes (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969), 24. Perella cites Cyril, Catechesis Mystagogice XXIII.3 (PG 33:1112).

[4] John Chrysostom, Homily 30 (PG 61:606); cf. In epistulam II ad Corinthios 30:2 (PG 61:607). And if the kiss produces united souls, it also produces one body, thereby fulfilling the petition of the Domine Jesu Christe (cf. John Chrysostom, In epistulam I ad Corinthios 44.4 (PG 61:376).

[5] Along with the “Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum,” several medieval Missals include the blessing: Habete vinculum pacis et caritatis, ut apti sitis sacrosanctis mysteriis (cf. Jungmann, 332, n. 61).

[6] Quia ante non habetur consideratio ipsius ministri deferentis, sed Pacis, quae a Sacrificio altaris ad illum defertur (I.xxix.8).

[7] Such, at least, is the opinion of Fr. Pius Parsch, who designates the Peace a sacramental. See Liturgy of the Mass, 298.

[8] The Reform of the Liturgy: 1948-1975, trans. Matthew J. O'Connell (Liturgical Press, 1990), 837, n. 19.

[9] Peter J. Elliott, Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite, 2nd ed. (Ignatius Press, 2005), no. 323.

[10] P. 447.

[11] Missel Romain, 3rd ed., no. 128.

[12] No. 128.

Our Lady and the Cathedral of Chartres

We are now in the midst of an octave that contains three feasts of the Virgin Mary, her Nativity on September 8th, her Holy Name on the 12th, and the Seven Sorrows on the 15th. The historical starting point of this arrangement is of course the first of these, which was imported into the Roman Rite from the Byzantine tradition at the end of the 7th century, along with three other Marian feasts, the Annunciation, the Purification, and the Assumption. Unlike those other three, however, it was slow to catch on, and still not celebrated in many parts of western Europe even by the beginning of the 11th century.

A stained glass window in the south ambulatory of Chartres Cathedral, known as Notre-Dame de la Belle Verrière (Our Lady of the Beautiful Window), or the Blue Virgin. The three large panels in the center were made in the 12th century, and are among the very few pieces of stained glass that were found to be salvageable from the fire of 1194 that destroyed the older church.

To a large degree, the impetus for its general acceptance came from the preaching of a Saint named Fulbert, who became bishop of Chartres in France in 1006, and held the see for 22 years. His city was already an important pilgrimage center because it possessed an object believed to be a garment of the Virgin Mary herself. Fulbert began rebuilding Chartres Cathedral after it was destroyed by a fire in 1020 in a much larger form, to accommodate the great crowds of pilgrims who came to venerate the relic. As is so often the case with such projects, it was not completed until after his death. This new church in turn burned down in 1194, leading to the magnificent Gothic building which stands today, rightly recognized as one of the greatest architectural achievements of the Middle Ages.

Here is a fairly recent documentary about Chartres cathedral which I found quite enjoyable, and which explains a lot of interesting things not just about the building project, but also its relation to the previous structure, the church that St Fulbert would have known.   

The Audible Recitation of the Secret Priestly Prayers of the Divine Liturgy from an Empirical Perspective

St. Basil the Great praying during the Holy Anaphora (source)

A guest article by Pan. Papadimitriou, PhD

“Having shut thy door, pray to thy Father who is in secret”, Mat. 6:5–6
“While the Secret prayer is being performed” (St. Gregory of Nyssa, 4th c.)
“The first [prayer] silently/secretly”, 19^th Canon, The Council of Laodicea (364 A.D.)

A characteristic feature of the Orthodox is their adherence to Tradition. The observance of Holy Tradition is an apostolic command: “Stand fast, and hold the traditions” (2 Thess. 2, 15). “Let all things be done decently and in order” (1 Cor. 14, 40). In ministry within the Orthodox Church, each person does not simply act according to his own will; otherwise, in practice, he would be adopting a Protestant mentality. The Church is “following the Holy Fathers,” not following the personal opinions of each individual.

Why must the Tradition of the Church be observed? Holy Tradition is the secure path of the Church, the path of the Holy Fathers, the secure path of divine worship, prayer, repentance, purification, illumination, and deification.

The Tradition of the Divine Liturgy is as follows: the deacon proclaims aloud (eis epēkoon) the common prayers by way of exhortation, addressing the priest and the faithful; they, in response, pray secretly (inwardly, mentally) and individually—the priest with his own prayers, and the faithful with the silent Kyrie eleison (“Lord, have mercy”) or with their own prayers. The chanter responds aloud as the “guide” of the faithful in their prayerful responses to the deacon’s common prayer.

By the grace of God, all these prayers together ascend to God, not as separate prayers, but as one common and powerful prayer, as one common force. This means that even the smallest prayer of a spiritually negligent member of the faithful in church acquires greater boldness before God than when he prays alone at home—though home prayer must by no means be neglected—because he participates in the common prayer of the Church.

Let us not neglect prayer at home. Prayer at home strengthens our prayer in church, and prayer in church, in turn, strengthens our prayer at home. When repentance, forgiveness, guilelessness, love, and humility are also present, then our prayer acquires even greater power—always by the grace of God.

According to Ioannis Fountoulis, during his lifetime, the overwhelmingly predominant Tradition was the ancient Tradition of the prayers being recited secretly, silently, inwardly (not the modern innovation of their audible recitation): [1]

a) “A tradition extending over many centuries has, however, been formed concerning the secret reading of the prayers, and this today is the generally prevailing order throughout the entire Orthodox Church.”

b) “Quite early there prevailed the practice that the prayers of the Divine Liturgy be said secretly (μυστικῶς). Usually the priest said them at the time when the deacon was saying the synapte, in any case before the ekphonesis.”

c) “Secretly, as is well known, all the prayers of the Divine Liturgy are said today, except for the prayer Behind the Ambo [at the end].”

d) “Secretly are said the prayers which are addressed to God.” [Yet all prayers are addressed to God (!), not to men, but for men, for the world, etc.].

The audible recitation of the prayers in the Divine Liturgy was promoted in Greece mainly during approximately the last eighty years, and with particular intensity, publicity, and widespread diffusion after the repose of the late Archbishop Seraphim of Athens (+1998), by theologians, liturgists, and clergy (including Bishops) who were influenced by the preparatory developments leading up to the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965), [2] and who in turn influenced numerous clergy and laypeople, who then influenced many others, down to the present day.

Unfortunately, in our time, many people, at every opportunity, whether appropriate or inappropriate, advocate the innovative practice of priests reciting their prayers aloud during the Divine Liturgy.

They say: “The priest should pray aloud, so that the faithful may hear him.”

Here we shall attempt to respond briefly to this argument, from an empirical point of view.

Response from the Perspective of Holy Tradition

There is no evidence in the Holy Tradition of the Church, with regard to the Divine Liturgy, that the priest recited the prayers audibly for the congregation to hear. On the contrary, their secret recitation is attested, either explicitly or implicitly. [3] Indeed, even the Hieratikon published by the Apostoliki Diakonia prior to 2002/2004 explicitly prescribed that the priestly prayers of the Divine Liturgy be recited secretly.

The Holy Synod of the Church of Greece, moreover, issued not one but three (3) Synodal Encyclicals addressed to those innovators who persisted in disobedience: Prot. No. 499 / 16 February 1951, Prot. No. 1353 / 9 June 1956, and Prot. No. 1137 / 13 March 1974—to ears unwilling either to hear or to understand. [4]

The faithful heard the common prayers proclaimed by the deacon, just as the priests heard them; and, in response, both the priests and the people [5] prayed secretly, inwardly. Only the chanter responded aloud, serving, as it were, as a “guide” for the faithful in their prayerful responses to the deacon’s prayer.

Of the priestly prayers, the faithful heard only the “later” prayer behind the Ambo at the conclusion of the Liturgy. [6] This is also why it was recited aloud in the middle of the church—so that the faithful could hear it, in an age before microphones and loudspeakers—with the priest always facing east, standing before the ambo, which at that time was located in the centre of the church (or “behind the ambo,” opisthambonos, if the ambo is viewed from the direction of the sanctuary).

Likewise, the priests do not hear the secret prayers of the faithful, nor those of the monks in monasteries; nor does any Orthodox Christian pray in church audibly for the person standing beside him to hear. For this reason, when the deacon addresses the assembly, he does not say: “In peace, pray to the Lord, Father! And you, faithful people, listen to the Father as he prays aloud!” Neither does he say: “In peace, you faithful, pray to the Lord!”

What, then, does he proclaim? He proclaims: “In peace, let us pray to the Lord!”

To whom does the deacon address the words “let us pray”? Naturally, to the priest and to the faithful people. [7] [8] [9]

Response from the Perspective of the Faithful (and of Monastics in Monasteries)

The innovators argue that the faithful—and, by extension, the monks in monasteries—should hear the secret prayers of the priest.

Even if we set aside the innovative character of this position, they do not explain what, precisely, the faithful (and the monks) are expected to do while the priest is reading the secret priestly prayer aloud. Are they to listen actively (that is, to reflect upon it intellectually—or how exactly is “actively” to be defined?), passively, or to follow the priestly prayers by reading them from the latest modernist editions of the “Hieratikon for the Faithful”? If their attention wanders for a moment, and they fail to hear or read one, two, or ten sentences of the priest’s prayer—or even the entire prayer—what then becomes of their “participation”?

Can the faithful truly pray while listening to the secret prayers of the priest, or are the faithful transformed into reflective listeners, then perhaps merely hearers, and eventually into indifferent spectators? [10] Prayer is not the hearing, comprehension, or interpretation of prayers, nor is it a form of theatrical observation. The liturgical Holy Tradition of the Church does not require the faithful to be present as hearers or interpreters of the priestly prayers, nor as spectators of the priests, but rather to participate prayerfully in the common prayer of the Church. What is required is that the whole Church pray together, heeding and responding to the common prayers proclaimed by the deacon, while each person prays secretly and inwardly (“the prayers of the multitude” and “the prayers of the priests,” as St John Chrysostom says; see also St Porphyrios). [11]

What power this common prayer possesses! The secret prayers of the priest and of the faithful, are neither competing nor disconnected prayers, but one common ecclesial prayer which, by the grace of God, ascends to God.

When, however, the listening—the recitation—becomes continuous, theologically and conceptually dense, and demanding of sustained attention, it hinders the inward prayer of the faithful and turns the believer into a listening observer. Yet the deacon said, “Let us pray to the Lord,” not “Pray, Father!” The faithful, too, must pray secretly and inwardly; and when the priest prays aloud, he makes that inward prayer more difficult, whether knowingly or unknowingly—especially when microphones are used.

It is for this reason that the great practitioner of prayer, the dispassionate and watchful Saint of our own times, St Joseph the Hesychast, called out to the hieromonk: “Do not shout, Father; say them quietly, just as it is written in the Hieratikon, that they are to be said secretly.” [12] [13]

The same difficulty caused by a priest praying aloud affects not only the faithful, but also concelebrating Presbyters who wish to pray together. In earlier practice, the Tradition of priestly Concelebration was that each priest (and each Bishop) would recite the secret priestly prayers privately, [14] just as each member of the faithful (and each monastic) prays privately, in accordance with the commandment of the Lord: “shut thy door and pray to thy Father.”

Yet, although all pray individually within the Church—priests and faithful alike—responding to the common prayers proclaimed by the deacon, nevertheless one prayer, one spiritual force, ascends to God!

“Let the whole body of the Church, with one accord, offer up the supplication with one voice, the priests being present and presenting the prayers of the common multitude,” Chrysostom [PG 56, 182]; cf. [PG 48, 725]. That is: “the supplication is offered by the multitude of the faithful, by the body of the Church, with one soul, in the presence of the priests, who offer to God the prayers of the congregation.” [15] This also explains the plural forms found in the priestly prayers, which the innovators misinterpret. The plural signifies that the priest also presents the prayers of the faithful; it does not signify that the secret priestly prayers must be made audible to the faithful. [16]

Even if the faithful person wishes, or attempts, to pray while listening to the priest’s secret prayer (where it is recited aloud), his mind is drawn away from his own prayer in order to follow and understand what he is hearing, insofar as he is able to do so and insofar as his theological and spiritual formation permits. Even if the faithful person holds before him the text of the secret priestly prayer, or reads it in a Modern Greek translation, [17] he may still fall into the same—and even greater—distractions: he tries to read, to listen, not to lose his place, to study, to reflect, to comprehend intellectually the theological meanings, to notice any possible errors on the part of the priest or in the text itself, or to assess whether the priest is reading correctly and conveying the meaning properly, while at the same time attempting to … pray. If he is also reading from a mobile phone, the situation is even worse. This, however, is not prayer, but at best auditory or intellectual following. In short, the innovators bind heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders.

What is prayer? “prayer is the ascent of the mind to God, or the asking of fitting things from God,” St John of Damascus [PG 94, 1089C–D, ch. 64]. [18] In the Divine Liturgy, such asking consists in the personal prayerful response directed to God in response to the common prayer proclaimed by the deacon (or in each person’s own private petitions); it does not consist in listening to the priest’s prayer. Likewise, the “ascent of the mind to God” [19] is the mind’s speaking to God, for “prayer is the mind’s speaking to God” (Evagrius/Nilus) [PG 79, 1168C, ch. 3]. There is, of course, also an ascent of the mind to God without verbal speaking. [20]

If, when speaking to a prime minister, a ruler, or someone whom we hold in high esteem, we naturally adopt an appropriate disposition, how much more should this be so in our speaking—our prayer—to God.

Metropolitan Athanasios of Limassol says: “In essence, the Saints do not think; they pray. [21] That is, discursive thought is set aside, and prayer remains—prayer which is a question addressed to God and an answer received from God. Such are perfect humans beings, those who are in Christ.” [22]

The faithful person—and especially, as is often the case, the young person—does himself a disservice when he uses a modernist “Hieratikon for the faithful” during the Divine Liturgy. He remains present throughout the service, yet in practice, because of the distractions involved, it becomes difficult for him to pray truly.

By the grace of God, you will understand the Divine Liturgy more deeply and more correctly by participating in it through your secret prayer than by reading about it—although reading is, of course, also very beneficial, provided that the book contains no errors, but this should be done outside the service and outside the church. “prayer enlightens the human person. If a person prays, then he will receive assurance from God.” [23] It is also necessary, however, to cultivate virtue, so that prayer may have power [PG 61, 398].

Of course, the priestly exclamations, blessings, the exhortations that properly belong to the Tradition of the Church—not the modernist “all together”—the readings, the troparia, and so forth, which the Church’s Tradition has wisely incorporated into the order of the Divine Liturgy, and which serve as doxology and catechesis while at the same time, by the grace of God, spiritually strengthening the faithful for more attentive prayer, these are traditionally proclaimed aloud, not secretly.

Response from the Perspective of the Priests

The priest’s audible prayer during the Divine Liturgy is not only contrary to Tradition, [24]  and contrary to the canonical order, [25] nor does it merely distract the praying faithful from their secret (inward) prayer; it also distracts the priest himself. The “[audible] recitation of the prayers for the congregation to hear requires rhetorical projection, modulation of the voice, and often a pompous style and other ‘dramatic’ abilities—elements that stand in sharp contrast to the solemn and compunctious atmosphere required for the celebration of the Mysteries of the Church.” [26]

In this respect, the audible recitation of the secret priestly prayers may transform prayer into a concern with being heard, a rhetorical performance, or a liturgical presentation. The priest runs the risk of ceasing to be a praying celebrant and becoming instead a reader.

As a praying celebrant, however, he approaches “the throne of the grace of God with boldness, with a true heart, in full assurance of faith, speaking to God and conversing alone with Him” [PG 98, 429A].[27] We have already discussed priestly Concelebration in §B.

A characteristic rubric (instruction) found in the Euchologia states that the priest prays while bowed,[28] or, more specifically, that “the priest, inclining himself, prays,” naturally in secret. [29] This posture is, moreover, also depicted in iconography. This bowed posture of the praying priest, as a bodily expression of restraint and reverence, is not suited to the public delivery of speech before an audience, but rather to secret prayer addressed to God.

This also accords with the patristic interpretation of the Divine Liturgy, and especially of the Holy Anaphora, according to which the priest “alone to the Alone, he speaks mysteries to God, uttering them in mystery [secretly]” [30] and is “conversing alone with Him.” [31]

Thus, the priest who recites the secret priestly prayers of the Divine Liturgy aloud for the express purpose of making them heard by the people does an injustice first of all to himself; he also does an injustice to the faithful, depriving them of true prayer and making them, willingly or unwillingly, hearers of his secret prayers—something that would rightly be regarded as disorderly if the faithful or monastics themselves were to do the same by loudly voicing their own secret prayers. Most importantly, however, he does an injustice to the whole Church by diminishing the power of her prayer. The weakening of the Church’s prayer may be observed on the personal, ecclesiastical, social, national, and global levels.

At the same time, the audible recitation of the priestly prayers of the Divine Liturgy may conceal a form of clericalism. Clericalism does not consist in the secret prayer of the priests—the people also pray secretly—but, on the contrary, in their deliberate, often affected, and contrary-to-Tradition audible prayer, when it is performed for the purpose of drawing the congregation’s attention to the celebrant, with the result that the faithful are hindered from praying truly.

To God be the glory for all things.

For futher reading:

Pan. Papadimitriou, “Let Us Pray to the Lord”: Neither “Pray Thou, Father” nor “Pray Ye, Faithful” (Secret prayers), [PDF], translated from the 3rd Greek edition, 15/5/2026.

Our liturgical articles [in Greek] (available in Ἀναλόγιον [32], and in Academia [33]).

NOTES

[1] Ioannis M. Fountoulis, Answers to Liturgical Questions, vol. V (2003), nos. 551–553, p. 201; vol. II (1994), no. 235, p. 229; vol. V (2003), nos. 551–553, p. 192; vol. V (2003), no. 558, p. 222.

[2] The Second Vatican Council took place between 1962 and 1965. It was, however, based upon the corresponding publications and movements of liturgists that had developed over many years beforehand within the Western-inspired so-called liturgical renewal. It was upon these publications of Western liturgists that Trembelas relied—and by which he was influenced—when he wrote, on p. 61 of his book The Roman Liturgical Movement and the Practice of the East (Athens, 1949):

“For the immediate and active participation of the people in the celebration of the Mysteries, and especially of the Divine Eucharist, and for the restoration of the unity (sic) between the altar and the people, the Roman Catholic liturgical movement advocated, as we have said, that the celebrant should turn toward the congregation during the Anaphora and should read the prayers of the Divine Liturgy in a voice audible to the people.”

The Second Vatican Council was cautious and highly diplomatic on the question of the Prayers—in order to avoid reactions from its own “traditionalists”—and simply condensed all the innovations that had appeared in the West up to that time into the diplomatic expression “active participation” of the people, leaving its “interpretation” to a later stage. Those who came afterwards “interpreted” “active participation” in the same manner as those who had interpreted it before the Second Vatican Council (cf. Trembelas), namely, as requiring the Prayers to be recited aloud. The same term and the same interpretation are also given by our own contemporary so-called liturgical reformers.

More precisely, the Second Vatican Council states verbatim in Sacrosanctum Concilium (4 December 1963), under the heading “II. The Promotion of Liturgical Instruction and Active Participation”: “all the faithful should be led to that fully conscious, and active participation in liturgical celebrations.”

The Western-inspired liturgical mentality, and our own so-called liturgical reformers who follow it, understand the “active participation” of the people in the Liturgy as an auditory, intellectual, and theatrical participation. Hence the audible prayers; hence also the occasional anti-traditional celebration, even within Orthodoxy, of the Divine Liturgy, Memorial services, Holy Unction, the Blessing of Waters, and other services facing westward—that is, with the priest turned not eastward in prayer, but toward the people; hence also the practice of “everyone together,” and so forth.

Orthodox “active participation,” however, is pre-eminently “participation in prayer.” And prayer is secret, according to the word of the Lord (Matt. 6:5–6).

[3] Pan. Papadimitriou, While the Deacon Recites the Prayer, the priest Prays the Prayer, 30 October 2022.

[4] The fact that repeated and stringent Synodal interventions were deemed necessary indicates that the innovative practice was not an isolated or accidental phenomenon, but rather a persistent and organized liturgical deviation.

[5] “And let all the faithful pray for them secretly (in their minds, inwardly), saying: Lord, have mercy” [PG 1, 1076–1077]. The Holy Apostles: “while all the people stand and pray quietly” [PG 1, 737]. St Clement: “Let us therefore, having gathered together in concord in one place, cry out earnestly to Him in our conscience, as though from one mouth, that we may become partakers of His great and glorious promises” [PG 1, 277]. For further discussion, see our article on Canon XIX of the Council of Laodicea, especially notes 11 and 15, concerning prayer kata dianoian (“in the mind”, secretly).

[6] This Prayer was added to the Liturgy on account of certain inquisitive persons who active contended against not knowing what was taking place [St Germanos, Archbishop of Constantinople (640–740), PG 98, 452C], a type of persons that has never entirely disappeared from the life of the Church throughout the centuries. See also Presbyter G. Diamantopoulos, The Theological Basis for the Concealment of What Is Performed in the Sanctuary according to St Niketas Stethatos, paper presented at the conference of the Estia of Patristic Studies, In the Aftermath of Liturgical Renewal: Disturbances in Divine Worship, 11 June 2023.

[7] Pan. Papadimitriou, “Let Us Pray to the Lord”: Neither “Pray Thou, Father” nor “Pray Ye, Faithful” (Secret Prayers), [PDF], translated from the 3rd Greek edition, 15/5/2026.

[8] St John Chrysostom: “For the expression ‘Let us pray’ is addressed not only to the priests, but also to those who constitute the [faithful] people” [PG 61, 399].

[9] “The expression ‘let us pray,’ just like ‘let us stand aright,’ which we hear in the Church, is addressed not only to the priests, but also to the congregation, the people,” Panagiotis G. Stamou, John Chrysostom: Prayer — The All-Powerful Weapon of the Faithful, Athens 1988, p. 34.

[10] An anonymous priest wrote in a comment on a post on the Anastasios blog: “Whether the [aloud secret priestly] Prayers help toward an understanding of worship and the participation of the people is clearly shown by the manner in which Christians participate in the Mysteries of Baptism and Marriage, and in funerals, where they hear everything proclaimed aloud. No compunction, no sense of the sacred space.” (accessed 27 May 2026).

[11] See Sections §B and §C of the article: Let Us Pray to the Lord: Neither “Pray, Father” nor “You, the Faithful, Pray”, 3rd ed., 15 May 2026.

[12] Elder Ephraim of Philotheou, My Elder Joseph the Hesychast and Cave-Dweller (1897–1959), Monastery of St Anthony, Arizona, USA, 9th ed., 2019, p. 160.

[13] Pan. Papadimitriou, Contemporary (Saintly) Elders and the Secret Prayers, 8 February 2022; Orthodoxos Typos, 13–27 January 2023, nos. 2431–2433.

[14] Pan. Papadimitriou, priestly Concelebration — A Comparison of Rubrics, Hieratika, and Commentary, 21 December 2022.

[15] Panagiotis G. Stamou, John Chrysostom: Prayer — The All-Powerful Weapon of the Faithful, Athens, 1988, p. 31.

[16] In other words, according to the innovators’ interpretation, if the faithful pray, “Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on the priest,” or “Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us,” must these prayers also be made audible to the priest and to the faithful standing nearby simply because they are expressed in the plural? Or, in the absence of a microphone for the faithful, should they approach the priest and whisper into his ear that they are now praying for him?

[17] The question of rendering the texts into Modern Greek is a separate matter. Even the [Greek] New Testament [in Greece] has not been translated in a single universally accepted form, and there are numerous Modern Greek versions of it—one by Zoe, another by Soter, another by Stavros, another by the Apostoliki Diakonia, and so forth. If one turns to published global English translations and paraphrases—now approaching some 900 in number—there is, even in English, still no single official Orthodox translation.

[18] See also: “Prayer is the ascent of the mind to God” (Evagrius/Nilus), [PG 79, 1173, ch. 35].

[19] “For the mind is the eye and the purest part of the soul” [PG 95, 144B]. “for just as the eye is to the body, so the mind is to the soul”, [PG 94, 924B].

[20] Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos and Agios Vlasios, Empirical Dogmatics of the Orthodox Catholic Church, according to the Oral Teachings of Fr John Romanides, vol. I, 2nd ed., 2011, Holy Monastery of the Nativity of the Theotokos, p. 109.

[21] “Pray without ceasing. In everything give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you” (1 Thess. 5:17–18). Pray without ceasing, especially during the Church services.

[22] Homily on Prayer, 52:38 (First Series—lectures at the University of Cyprus, Nicosia).

[23] Homily on Prayer, 52:29 (First Series—lectures at the University of Cyprus, Nicosia).

[24] Ioannis Fountoulis: “A tradition regarding the secret recitation of the Prayers has, however, been established for centuries, and today this is the generally prevailing order throughout the entire Orthodox Church.”

[25] Pan. Papadimitriou, Canon XIX of the Council of Laodicea (364) and the Recitation of the Liturgical Prayers, 3 April 2022.

[26] Protopresbyter Alexandros K. Karapanagopoulos, The Divine Liturgy (Introduction – Text – Interpretation), Athens, 1975, p. 12.

[27] Pan. Papadimitriou, The invisible of the Altar (hidden Sanctuary) …, chs. 53, 65, p. 242.

[28] In earlier times, the people too bowed deeply at the reading of the Gospel and at the “Your own of Your own” (Ta Sa ek ton Son).

[29] Pan. Papadimitriou, While the Deacon Recites the Prayer, the priest Prays the Prayer, 30 October 2022.

[30] [PG 98, 429A]. The invisible of the Altar (hidden Sanctuary) …, chs 53, 65, p. 242.

[31] In earlier times, the curtains of the sacred Ciborium over the Holy Altar were closed, with the priest praying within during the Holy Anaphora. See The invisible of the Altar (hidden Sanctuary) …, chs. 11.2, p. 117.

[32] analogion.gr/typikon/liturgy-articles.

[33] independent.academia.edu/ΠΔΠ/Liturgical.

Liturgical Notes on the Nativity of the Virgin Mary

Advent is considered the start of the Roman Rite’s liturgical year as a matter of logic and convention, but is not formally designated as such in the liturgy itself. In the Byzantine Rite, on the other hand, the liturgical year has a formally designated beginning on September 1st, a custom which has its origin in an ancient Roman cycle of taxation known as the Indiction. This was celebrated as the civil New Year in the Byzantine Empire until the fall of Constantinople in 1453, and in the Russian Empire until 1699, when it was changed by Tsar Peter I as part of his Westernizing reforms. The Indiction is still mentioned repeatedly in the liturgical texts of September 1, as in this Idiomel for Matins.

Thy kingdom, Christ God, is the kingdom of all the ages, and Thy dominion is from generation to generation; Thou hast made all things in wisdom, fixing for us times and seasons; therefore we thank Thee for all things and through all things we cry out: Bless the crown of the year with Thy goodness and grant that we may all cry out to Thee without condemnation: Lord, glory to Thee! (Psalm 144, 13; 103, 24; 64, 12)

The Byzantine tradition distinguishes twelve feasts, eight of Our Lord and four of Our Lady, as “Great Feasts”, with Easter in a category of its own as the Feast of Feasts. Whether by design or coincidence, the first of these in the liturgical year is also the first chronologically, the Nativity of the Virgin on September 8th. This event does not of course occur in the Bible, but is first mentioned in the popular apocryphal work known as the Protoevangelium of James. The precise origin of the feast is a matter of speculation, and the reason for the choice of date is unknown. It was celebrated at Constantinople by the 530s, when St Romanus the Melodist composed a hymn for it; by the seventh century, it had passed to the West, and Pope St Sergius I (687-701) decreed that it be should celebrated with a procession from the church of St Adrian (who shares his feast day with the Birth of the Virgin) to St Mary Major. It would seem, however, that it was rather slower to be accepted than the other early Marian feasts, the Purification, Annunciation and Assumption, since it is not mentioned in some important early liturgical books. Thus we find it included in the oldest manuscript of the Gelasian Sacramentary in roughly 750 A.D., but missing from the calendar in some later books.

A 16th-century icon of the Birth of the Virgin.

From the Byzantine Rite, the Roman borrowed the following troparion as the antiphon at the Magnificat for Second Vespers, surely one of the most beautiful of the entire Gregorian reportoire.

Ἡ γέννησίς σου Θεοτόκε, χαρὰν ἐμήνυσε πάσῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ· ἐκ σοῦ γὰρ ἀνέτειλεν ὁ Ἥλιος τῆς δικαιοσύνης, Χριστὸς ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν· καὶ λύσας τὴν κατάραν, ἔδωκε τὴν εὐλογίαν· καὶ καταργήσας τὸν θάνατον, ἐδωρήσατο ἡμῖν ζωὴν τὴν αἰώνιον.
Nativitas tua, Dei Genitrix Virgo, gaudium annuntiavit universo mundo: ex te enim ortus est sol justitiae, Christus Deus noster: qui solvens maledictionem, dedit benedictionem, et confundens mortem, donavit nobis vitam sempiternam.
Thy birth, O Virgin Mother of God, proclaimed joy to the whole world; for from Thee arose the sun of righteousness, Christ our God; who released us from the curse, and gave us blessing; and confounding death, He granted us eternal life.

A tradition of the church of Angers in France claims that the feast was instituted by a bishop of that see in the early fifth century, St Maurilius, in consequence of an apparition of the Virgin vouchsafed to him. Another version of the story, also associated by some authors with St Maurilius, claims that a hermit who lived near Angers heard angels singing on September 8th to celebrate the birth upon earth of the Queen of Heaven. However, St Fulbert of Chartres, (ca. 960-1028) speaks of it as a feast of recent institution, and his three sermons on the subject are the oldest genuine Latin homilies on the feast. In the first of these, he says, “After some of Her other, more ancient feasts, the devotion of the faithful was not content, unless it could add to them today’s feast of Her Birth.”

Ironically, it was another sermon of St Fulbert, preached not on the Nativity, but on the Annunciation, which became the standard medieval Office sermon for the feast, since it was included among the sermons of St Augustine. This inclusion was perhaps not an accident, but a way of adding greater authority to the work of a “new” author on a new custom. (It is still to this day noted as “A Sermon of St Augustine” in the Breviary of the Extraordinary Form.) This text would have a huge fortune in the history of Marian devotion, since a part of the peroration became one of the most commonly used texts for antiphons and responsories of the Virgin Mary.

Sancta Maria, succurre miseris, juva pusillanimes, refove flebiles, ora pro populo, interveni pro clero, intercede pro devoto femineo sexu. Sentiant omnes tuum juvamen, quicumque celebrant tuam commemorationem.
Holy Mary, come to the aid of the wretched, help the weak in spirit, refresh the mournful, pray for the people, intervene for the clergy, intercede for all devout women. May all those who celebrate the commemoration of Thee perceive Thy aid.

The words occurring before and after these were often used in France as lessons for Matins in the Little Office of the Virgin Mary, as for example in the Cistercian Use, which, with characteristic austerity, proposes the same single lesson every day.

Admitte, piissima Dei Genitrix, preces nostras intra sacrarium tuæ exauditionis, et reporta nobis antidotum reconciliationis. Sit per te excusabile quod per te ingerimus: fiat impetrabile quod fida mente poscimus. Accipe quod offerimus, redona quæ rogamus, excusa quod timemus.
Most holy Mother of God, admit our prayers into the holy place where Thou may hear them, and bring us the remedy of reconciliation. Through Thee, may all be forgiven, that we place therein also through Thee; and what we ask with confidence become obtainable. Receive what we offer, grant in return what we ask, obtain pardon for what we fear.

The upper part of the Tree of Jesse window, one of the most famous and best preserved of the stained glass windows in the cathedral of Chartres, from the end of the 12th century.

At the Papal conclave of 1241, one of the most difficult in the Church’s history, the cardinals were forcibly enclosed in a ruined Roman building known as the Septizodium, then a thousand years old, under such rough conditions that one of their number died. This was done by another cardinal, Matteo Orsini, in an attempt to force the election of a Pope favorable to certain interests which he backed. The cardinals vowed to honor the feast of the Virgin Mary’s Nativity by granting it an octave, if She would lead them to agreement on a candidate and obtain their deliverance; the liturgical commentator William Durandus, writing at the end of the century, notes that the Pope thus elected, Celestine IV, died after a reign of two-and-a-half weeks, and it was left to his successor, Innocent IV, to fulfill the vow.

As a “new” feast, the Nativity of the Virgin was never kept with a vigil in the Roman Rite, i.e., a fast on the day before, accompanied by a Mass in violet after None, and without the Gloria in excelsis, Alleluia or Creed. (The same holds true even for the medieval feast par excellence, Corpus Christi.) In the Ambrosian Rite, however, it is kept with such a vigil, as a feast of particular importance, the titular feast of the cathedral. On the façade over the central door is a large plaque with the two words “Mariae Nascenti - To Mary as She is born.”

On both the vigil and feast, a lesson is read which very cleverly links two Biblical passages traditionally associated with the Virgin Mary, the sixth chapter of the Song of Songs, and the twenty-fourth of Ecclesiasticus.

Thus sayeth Wisdom: Song 6, 8-9 She is the only one of her mother, the chosen of her that bore her. The daughters saw her, and declared her most blessed: the queens and concubines, and they praised her. Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terrible as an army set in array? Eccli. 24, 24-28 I am the mother of fair love, and of fear, and of knowledge, and of holy hope. In me is all grace of the way and of the truth, in me is all hope of life and of virtue. Come over to me, all ye that desire me, and be filled with my fruits. For my spirit is sweet above honey, and my inheritance above honey and the honeycomb. My memory is unto everlasting generations.

The Protoevanglium of James mentioned above is also the source for the names of the Virgin’s parents, Ss. Joachim and Anna. Because it is an apocryphal Gospel, their feasts were suppressed from the Roman Rite in the reform of St Pius V, along with the Virgin’s Presentation in the Temple, which is also first mentioned therein. This went far too strongly against the grain of traditional piety, and all three feasts were swiftly restored, St Anne’s by Pius’ own successor, Gregory XIII, in 1584, the Presentation by Sixtus V the following year, and St Joachim by Gregory XV in 1622. In the Roman Rite, his feast was assigned to the Sunday within the Octave of the Assumption, and later fixed by St Pius X to August 16th. The Ambrosians, however, placed it on September 9th, the day after the Virgin’s Nativity; arguably a more reasonable choice, since the ancient tradition was that Joachim and Anne were both quite elderly at the time of the Virgin’s birth, making it certain that neither was still alive at the time of the Assumption.

The Descent of the Virgin from St Anne, by Gerard David, ca. 1490

On both feasts, in both the Roman and Ambrosian liturgies, the Gospel is the genealogy of Christ from the beginning of St Matthew, chapter 1, 1-16. From ancient times, it was understood that this Gospel, in tracing the royal descent of St. Joseph, shows that the Virgin Mary is also descended from King David, to whom the promise of the Messiah was made. Since Joseph is commended as a just man, he would not transgress the law that a Jew must marry within his own tribe, and therefore Mary must also be of the tribe of David. A passage to this effect from St John Damascene’s book “On the Orthodox Faith” (book 4, 15) is read in the Roman Breviary on the feast of St Joachim.

On September 12th, 1683, the combined armies of the Holy Roman Empire and the Kingdom of Poland defeated the invading armies of the Ottoman Empire at the gates of Vienna, a battle which would prove to be the high-water mark of the Turkish invasion of Europe. The King of Poland and commander of the Christian armies, Jan III Sobieski, had placed his troops under the special protection of the Virgin Mary, as they rode to the defence of Christendom. In thanksgiving for the victory, therefore, Blessed Innocent XI (1676-89) extended to the universal calendar the feast of the Holy Name of Mary, thitherto kept only in Spain and Naples. It was originally assigned to the Sunday within the Octave of the Nativity of the Virgin, but later fixed by St Pius X to September 12th. (The reform of 1911 abolished the once-common custom of fixing feasts to particular Sundays, with a few exceptions.) In the Calendar of 1969, the feasts of the Holy Name of Jesus and of Mary were both abolished, one of the reformers’ worst decisions, happily undone by St John Paul II in 2002. In the interim, it continued to be observed as the titular feast of many churches of the Virgin Mary, especially in Italy.

King Jan Sobieski Victorious at the Gates of Vienna, by Jan Matejko, 1883. In the middle, King Jan hands to a Dominican friar a message to deliver to the Pope, announcing the victory; on the right, Leopold I, Archduke of Austria and Holy Roman Emperor, doffs his hat to him. The artist, himself a Pole, painted this in commemoration of the 200th anniversary of the battle, by which time the Kingdom of Poland had been partitioned between Austria, Russia and Prussia, and no longer existed as an independent state; he is here reminding the Austrians that their position as a dominant power in Central Europe was due in no small measure to the military might of the Poles, now in part their subjects. This painting was donated to the Vatican Museums by the artist, on condition that it always be prominently displayed; on the frame (not seen here) are medallion portraits of Bl. Innocent XI and the then-reigning Pope, Leo XIII. A copy of this image in silver relief was placed over the grave of King Jan in the cathedral of Krakow.

New England Sacred Music Workshop, October 15-17

At St Benedict Abbey, Still River, MA

I am happy to promote the New England Sacred Music Workshop 2026, offered in conjunction with St Benedict Abbey. The workshop focuses on both chant and polyphony, offering expert tuition for singers, and talks on the connections between sacred music and the liturgy. The setting is beautiful Still River, near Harvard (not to be confused with the less important university of the same name), the site of the abbey, in rural Massachusetts, about 50 miles west of Boston. I have a fondness for this community: when I was on the faculty of Thomas More College of Liberal Arts, I regularly attended Mass and Divine Office there, and took groups of students to experience the beautiful, chanted, Latin liturgy. To learn more and register, follow this link.

Here is the information that I received from the organizers:

New England Sacred Music and St. Benedict Abbey are pleased to invite you to a two-and-a-half-day sacred music workshop in beautiful Still River, Massachusetts. This workshop is designed for advanced singers and directors who wish to delve further into neumatic interpretation, and for intermediate singers who are looking to broaden their understanding of the repertoire.

Rehearsals and classes will be taught by faculty with a breadth of experience teaching and directing sacred music in monasteries, cathedrals, and parishes of all sizes. Lauds and Vespers will be chanted each day with the monks. In addition to all of the chant propers, participants will sing several motets at the two Masses: one Friday evening and one on Saturday at noon. Both masses will be at the magnificent St. Cecilia Church in Leominster.

Faculty:

• David Hughes (Denver, Colorado): Advanced Chant
• Samuel Schmitt (Bridgeport, Connecticut): Refresher Chant
• Christopher Berry (St. Patrick’s Seminary, Menlo Park, California): Polyphony

Speakers:

• Fr. Leo Camurati, OP (New York, New York)
• Fr. Peter Connelly, OSB (St. Benedict Abbey)

Cost:

EARLY BIRD PRICE ( Sep 3 - Sep 21 )

- $200 per participant (Includes all workshop materials and six meals. Does not include lodging.)

REGULAR PRICE ( Sep 21 - Oct 8 )

- $250 per participant (Includes all workshop materials and six meals. Does not include lodging.)

- We are eager to encourage students and parish choirs to attend. To that end, we will offer a generous 50% discount per person for any parish that sends more than five choristers, or any school (secondary or college) that sends more than ten students.

- We are also eager to invite religious and clergy to attend, and are providing a 50% discount for religious and a 25% discount for clergy.

Lodging:

Saint Benedict Abbey is unable to provide lodging for participants. If you are local, we suggest you commute to and from the abbey. Otherwise, the following hotels are in close proximity:

- Nashoba Valley Inn & Suites (nashobavalleyinn.com)

- Boxboro Regency (boxbororegency.com)

- Hilton Garden Inn Devens (hilton.com/en/book/reservation/rooms/?ctyhocn=ORHDCGI)

If you have any questions, please write to us at info@newenglandsacredmusic.org.

Contact:

- For further information, please write info@newenglandsacredmusic.org.

Registration:

- Please register at the following link: newenglandsacredmusic.org/register

Early Bird registration is now open until September 21 (the feast of St. Matthew)! On September 21, the standard registration price will increase to $250 and will remain open until 5:00PM EST on October 8, one week prior to the workshop. We will accept registration at the door on Thursday, October 15 for $250.

For more details, please visit our Facebook page! We’ll be posting details about the daily schedule and repertoire in the coming days. Be sure to follow us, like the event, and share it with your friends!

The Vigil of the Nativity of the Virgin

The origin of the feast of the Virgin Mary’s Nativity is a matter of speculation, and the reason for the choice of date is unknown. It was celebrated at Constantinople by the 530s, when St Romanus the Melodist composed a hymn for it; by the seventh century, it had passed to the West, and Pope St Sergius I (687-701) decreed that it be should celebrated with a procession from the church of St Adrian (who shares his feast day with the Birth of the Virgin) to St Mary Major. It would seem, however, that it was rather slower to be accepted than the other early Marian feasts, the Purification, Annunciation and Assumption, since it is not mentioned in some important early liturgical books. Thus we find it included in the oldest manuscript of the Gelasian Sacramentary in roughly 750 A.D., but missing from the calendar in some later books. The liturgical commentators of the High Middle Ages such as Sicard of Cremona and William Durandus were aware that it was of later institution.

The Nativity of the Virgin, by Pietro Lorenzetti, 1335-42; originally painted for one of the side-altars of the Cathedral of Siena, now in the Cathedral Museum.

By the time the feast was universally accepted, the Roman Rite had mostly ceased to institute vigils for “new” celebrations; this holds true even for the medieval feast par excellence, Corpus Christi. Thus, the Nativity of the Virgin was only kept with a vigil in a limited number of places, and never at Rome itself. This vigil would have consisted of a fast on the day before the feast, accompanied by a Mass in violet after None, and without the Gloria in excelsis, Alleluia or Creed. As it generally the case with later additions, there is not a complete uniformity in the liturgical texts of these Masses from one church to another, but in most places, they were taken from the daily votive Mass of the Virgin or the vigil of the Assumption.

In the Ambrosian Rite, however, the feast is kept with such a vigil, as a feast of particular importance, the titular feast of the cathedral of Milan. On the façade over the central door is a large plaque with the two words “Mariae Nascenti - To Mary as She is born.”

On both the vigil and feast, the Ambrosian Mass reads a lesson which very cleverly links two Biblical passages traditionally associated with the Virgin Mary, the sixth chapter of the Song of Songs, and the twenty-fourth of Ecclesiasticus.

“Thus sayeth Wisdom: Song 6, 8-9 She is the only one of her mother, the chosen of her that bore her. The daughters saw her, and declared her most blessed: the queens and concubines, and they praised her. Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terrible as an army set in array? Sir. 24, 24-28 I am the mother of fair love, and of fear, and of knowledge, and of holy hope. In me is all grace of the way and of the truth, in me is all hope of life and of virtue. Come over to me, all ye that desire me, and be filled with my fruits. For my spirit is sweet above honey, and my inheritance above honey and the honeycomb. My memory is unto everlasting generations.”

At the Mass of the vigil, the following Confractorium is sung; this is the antiphon that accompanies the Fraction rite, which is done immediately after the Canon, before the Lord’s Prayer.

Beatus ille venter qui te portavit, Christe, et beata ubera quæ te lactaverunt Dominum, et Salvatorem mundi, qui pro salute generis humani carnem assumere dignatus es. ~ Blessed is the womb that bore Thee, o Christ, and blessed are the breasts that nursed Thee, the Lord and Savior of the world, Who for the salvation of the human race deigned to take on the flesh. (In the video below, this is the third piece, beginning at 1:10.)

In the same Mass, the Transitorium (the equivalent of the Roman Communio) was borrowed from the repertoire of processional chants used on the feast of the Purification, the first Marian feast to be accepted by the Ambrosian Rite in the post-Carolingian period. In this video, we hear it sung as part of that procession in the cathedral itself, starting at 1:22.

Magnificamus te, Dei Genitrix; quia ex te natus est Christus salvans omnes, qui te glorificant. Sancta Domina, Dei Genitrix, sanctificationes tuas transmitte nobis. ~ We magnify Thee, Mother of God, because from Thee was born Christ, who saveth all that glory Thee. Holy Lady, Mother of God, impart Thy sanctity to us.

The Byzantine tradition distinguishes twelve feasts, eight of Our Lord and four of Our Lady, as “Great Feasts”, with Easter in a category of its own as the Feast of Feasts. Whether by design or coincidence, the first of these in the liturgical year, which begins on September 1st, is the Birth of the Virgin, which is also the first historically. The Twelve Feasts also each have a Fore-feast, the Roman equivalent of a vigil, and an Afterfeast; the latter are like the octaves of the Roman Rite, but vary in length, and that of the Virgin’s Nativity is only 4 days long, ending on September 12th. A Fore-feast is a full liturgical day, and so unlike Roman vigils, which run from Matins to None, it begins at Vespers of the day which precedes it, in this case, on the evening of September 6th. Here is a selection of some of the hymns sung at that Vespers, followed by the proper hymns of the Divine Liturgy of the Forefeast on September 7th.

An icon of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary, painted by Adrianoupolitis Konstantinos in the middle of the 18th century, now in the Benaki Museum in Athens. (Public domain image from Wikipedia.)

In Thy nativity, o Immaculate one, rays of joy dawned upon the minds of the whole world, foretelling to all the sun of Glory, Christ our God; for Thou were shown to be the mediatrix of true gladness and grace.

The glory of this Thy forefeast, o Immaculate one, foretells to all peoples the good deeds wrought by Thy favor; for Thou art the source of their present gladness, and the cause of the joy that shall come to us, the delight of divine happiness.

The maiden in whom God dwelt and pure Mother of God, the glory of prophets, the daughter of David, today is born of Joachim and the prudent Anne, and in Her birth, overthrows the curse of Adam that was against us.

Theotokion The multitudes of the Angels in heaven and the race of men upon the earth bless Thy all-venerable Nativity, a all-holy and pure Virgin, since Thou became the Mother of the Creator of all things, Christ our God. Ceasa Thou not, we pray, to supplicate Him for us, who after God, place our hopes in Thee, all-praised and undefiled Mother of God.

At the Divine Liturgy, the Troparion From the root of Jesse and from the loins of David, the godly child Mary is born to us today. Therefore, all creation rejoices and is renewed, together with heaven and earth rejoice. Praise Her, ye families of the nations; Joachim is gladdened, and Anna cries out in celebration: The barren woman gives birth to the Mother of God and the Sustainer of our Life.

The Kontakion Today, the Virgin and Mother of God Mary, the inviolate bridal chamber of the heavenly bridegroom, is born from a barren woman according to the divine plan to be made ready as the chariot of God’s Word; even for this was she predestined, the gateway of God, and truly the Mother of Life.

The Fifteenth Sunday after Pentecost

Incline Thy ear, o Lord, and hear me; save Thy servant, O my God, who hopeth in Thee; have mercy on me, o Lord, for to Thee have I cried to Thee all the day. Ps. 85 Give joy to the soul of thy servant, for to Thee, o Lord, I have lifted up my soul. Glory be... Incline Thy ear... (The Introit of the Fifteenth Sunday after Pentecost. This very nice recording omits the doxology, following the custom of the post-Conciliar rite, which is more Trinitarian, and therefore refers to the Trinity much less often.)

Introitus Inclína, Dómine, aurem tuam ad me, et exaudi me: salvum fac servum tuum, Deus meus, sperantem in te: miserére mihi, Dómine, quoniam ad te clamávi tota die. Ps 85 Laetífica ánimam servi tui: quia ad te, Dómine, ánimam meam levávi. Glória Patri ... Inclína, Dómine...

From the Breviarium in Psalmos, a commentary on the psalms often attributed (erroneously) to either St Jerome or St Augustine, which was very influential on the composers of the Roman chants: “ ‘Incline Thy ear, o Lord, and hear me, for I am holy.’ According to the frailty of the body which He had taken on, pours forth a prayer to the Father. But according to the godhead, He calls Himself holy, as once He had said to Moses, ‘Be ye holy, for I am holy.’ (Lev. 19 passim)

‘Save Thy servant, that hopeth in Thee. Have mercy on me, o Lord, for I have cried to Thee all the day.’ He took on the form of a servant, which he prays may be saved in every time of the present life; for He knows that even if the spirit is willing, the flesh is weak. ‘Give joy to the soul of Thy servant,’ which is saddedn by the present tribulations, ‘for to Thee, o Lord, have I lifted up my soul’, to Thee, believing that it will be raised.”

The Gospel, Luke 7, 11-16: At that time, Jesus went into a city that is called Naim, and there went with him his disciples, and a great multitude. And when he came nigh to the gate of the city, behold a dead man was being carried out, the only son of his mother, and she was a widow, and a great multitude of the city was with her. And when the Lord had seen her, being moved with mercy towards her, he said to her, “Weep not.” And he came near and touched the bier, and they that carried it, stood still. And he said, “Young man, I say to thee, arise.” And he that was dead sat up and began to speak, and he gave him to his mother. And there came a fear on them all, and they glorified God, saying, “A great prophet is risen up among us, and God hath visited his people.”

An ivory plaque carved between 1025 and 1060 in the area of the Meuse valley, known as the Ivory of the Three Resurrections, which depicts in the upper register the raising of the daughter of Jairus, in the middle, of the widow of Naim’s son, and at the lower register, of Lazarus. The plaque is kept at the Treasury Museum of the cathedral of St Paul in Liège. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by Okapi071, CC BY-SA 4.0.)