The Octave of Ss Peter and Paul

At that time: Jesus obliged his disciples to go up into the boat, and to go before him over the water, till he dismissed the people. And having dismissed the multitude, he went into a mountain alone to pray. And when it was evening, he was there alone. But the boat in the midst of the sea was tossed with the waves: for the wind was contrary. And in the fourth watch of the night, he came to them walking upon the sea. And they seeing him walk upon the sea, were troubled, saying: It is an apparition. And they cried out for fear. And immediately Jesus spoke to them, saying: Be of good heart: it is I, fear ye not. And Peter making answer, said: Lord, if it be thou, bid me come to thee upon the waters. And he said: Come. And Peter going down out of the boat, walked upon the water to come to Jesus. But seeing the wind strong, he was afraid: and when he began to sink, he cried out, saying: Lord, save me. And immediately Jesus stretching forth his hand took hold of him, and said to him: O thou of little faith, why didst thou doubt? And when they were come up into the boat, the wind ceased. And they that were in the boat came and adored him, saying: Indeed thou art the Son of God. (Matthew 14, 22-33, the Gospel of the octave day of Ss Peter and Paul)

(Public domain image from Wikimedia.)

This image of St Peter walking on the upon the water was originally made by Giotto in 1298 as a mosaic on a wall of the courtyard of the old St Peter’s Basilica, opposite the church’s façade. Only a few fragments were saved from the destruction of the old basilica; this copy is an oil painting made in 1628 from drawings of the original. In 1675, a new mosaic on the same design was mounted in the portico of the new basilica, facing the main door, as a reminder to pilgrims as they leave the church to pray for the Holy Father.

Image from Pax inter Spinas, the printing house of the Monastère Saint-Benoît in Brignole, France.

Our Lord’s Request for the Institution of the Feast of His Sacred Heart

The devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus has deep roots; texts can be found in the ancient and medieval periods that speak of the love of His wounded and glorious Heart, and of the appropriate response of adoring love we should make to Him.

However, the devotion in the form more familiar to Catholics today is traceable to the private revelations made by Our Lord Jesus Christ to St Margaret Mary Alacoque in the later 17th century. The content of these revelations was written down for her spiritual director, St Claude de la Colombiere, and are widely available (see, e.g., here).

A priest mentioned to me a detail that had previously escaped my notice. When Our Lord appeared to St Margaret Mary on June 16, 1675, to request the institution of a feast in honor of His Sacred Heart, He spoke as follows:

I ask of you that the Friday after the Octave of Corpus Christi be set apart for a special Feast to honor My Heart, by communicating on that day, and making reparation to It by a solemn act, in order to make amends for the indignities which It has received during the time It has been exposed on the altars. I promise you that My Heart shall expand Itself to shed in abundance the influence of Its divine love upon those who shall thus honor It, and cause It to be honored.

The very Son of God — God from God, Light from Light, Word Incarnate, Eternal High Priest, Head of the Mystical Body, Creator, Savior, and Judge of the universe — refers as a matter of course to the “Octave of Corpus Christi” and places His request for a special feast precisely in this context. Moreover, He specifically asks that the feast be one of reparation, and that this reparation be connected with the extended Eucharistic adoration during the Octave of Corpus Christi. Finally, He promises to shed His divine love on those who shall thus honor His Heart, that is, honor It in the manner He has explained.

Is it not disturbing, then, to think of liturgical reformers under Pius XII simply chucking out this Octave of Corpus Christi, which had endured from the time of its widespread observance in the 14th century until 1955, at which time all octaves were abolished except those of Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost? [1] The invisible supreme Head of the Church endorsed this octave and made His requests based on it, but no matter; committees know better, and popes always know better, as we can see today.

Although the feast of the Sacred Heart always possessed a reparatory character, this was underlined by the new Mass and Office for the feast promulgated by Pius XI in 1928, to replace the Mass and Office first approved by Clement XIII in 1765, and extended to the universal Church in 1856. For 41 years, this Collect, which so aptly mirrors Our Lord’s request, was recited at Mass:

O God, Who in the Heart of Thy Son, wounded by our sins, dost mercifully vouchsafe to bestow upon us the infinite wealth of Thy love; grant, we beseech Thee, that revering It with meet devotion, we may fulfil our duty of worthy reparation. Through the same our Lord Jesus Christ…

Moreover, the Postcommunion prays for detachment from worldly goods and attachment to heavenly ones, a petition characteristic of the usus antiquior in general, and fitting for this feast in particular, which is very much about the truth “where your heart is, there your treasure is also”:

May Thy holy mysteries, O Lord Jesus, produce in us a divine fervour, whereby, having tasted the sweetness of Thy most dear Heart, we may learn to despise earthly things and love those of heaven: Who livest and reigneth.

In contrast, the Novus Ordo Collect borrows some of its phrasing from Clement XIII, while recasting it in a more generic Christological way that does not emphasize the rationale behind the institution of the feast:

Grant, we pray, almighty God, that we, who glory in the Heart of your beloved Son and recall the wonders of his love for us, may be made worthy to receive an overflowing measure of grace from that fount of heavenly gifts. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son…

Happily, the Collect of Pius XI was added back as an option in the most recent edition of the Pauline missal, which will bring it back into circulation to some extent. The Postcommunion, regrettably, excises the unfashionable sentiment discamus terrena despicere, et amare caelestia, and, recasts the prayer to the Father, due to the subordinationist principle that we must nearly always address the Father rather than the Son in our public prayer:

May this sacrament of charity, O Lord, make us fervent with the fire of holy love, so that, drawn always to your Son, we may learn to see him in our neighbor. Through Christ our Lord.

As a friend commented on this prayer, “All man, all the time.” As Gaudium et Spes 12 begins, “According to the almost unanimous opinion of believers and unbelievers alike, all things on earth should be related to man as their center and crown.”

In 1904, Pope St Pius X added the threefold invocation Cor Iesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis to the already-existing Leonine prayers after Low Mass. In 1964, the Instruction Inter Oecumenici abolished all of the prayers after Mass. For sixty years, Catholics on every continent, of every culture, in every conceivable situation, prayed, “Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.” But this was, one supposes, just another of those useless repetitions that had to be purged for the benefit of . . .

Come to think of it, cui bono? Why was the character of the feast tilted away from the theme of reparation to the Sacred Heart of Jesus for sins, blasphemies, outrages, sacrileges, indifference, and worldliness? Why was the octave of Corpus Christi abolished, depriving the Church and the world of more solemn, calendrically set-apart opportunities to adore the Lord with Eucharistic adoration, exposition, and procession? Why did we abandon the humble collective invocations that united us to one another and to the merciful God at the end of Low Mass?

Indeed, the very Offertory of the Mass in which the priest says that he is offering sacrifice for his sins, offenses, and negligences, as also for the welfare of the living and the dead, was abolished, as was the Placeat tibi at the end of Mass:

May the homage of my bounden duty be pleasing to Thee, O Holy Trinity; and grant that the sacrifice which I, though unworthy, have offered in the sight of Thy Majesty may be acceptable to Thee, and through Thy mercy be a propitiation for me and for all those for whom I have offered it. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.

What benefit did the reformers under Pius XII and Paul VI think they were bringing to the Church by removing so many references to the “sins, offenses, and negligences” for which we are called upon to make reparation?

On a good day in October 1946, a day when chopping off digits and limbs from the liturgical calendar wasn’t on the agenda, Pius XII said, “Perhaps the greatest sin in the world today is that men have begun to lose the sense of sin.” Whatever else may be said, this much is clear: the changes to the liturgy have not helped us regain it.

Cor Iesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.
Cor Iesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.
Cor Iesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.

NOTE

[1] As the incomparable St. Andrew Daily Missal of 1945 tells us on p. 782: “To resist the attacks of renewed heresies against the Holy Eucharist and to revive in the Church a zeal which had somewhat grown cold, the Holy Ghost inspired, at the beginning of the thirteenth century, the solemnity of Corpus Christi. In 1208, the blessed Juliana of Mount Cornillon, near Liège, saw in a vision the full moon with an indentation indicating that a feast was missing in the liturgical cycle. . . . It was thought that immediately after Paschaltide a feast with an octave should be established. As the Last Supper took place on Thursday, the Bishop of Liège instituted in 1246 this solemnity in his diocese on the Thursday which follows the octave of Pentecost. In 1264, Pope Urban IV extended this feast to the whole world.”

This commentary brings several truths to mind: first, that the Holy Spirit is the principal agent of organic liturgical development, who also inspires the conservation of that which has been established; second, that the double fittingness of a Thursday feast followed by an octave was intuitively grasped, precisely because of the need to resist heresy and rekindle fervor; third, that if this feast was needed by medieval Catholics, a fortiori it is needed by Catholics today, who are facing heresy, apostasy, and indifference several magnitudes greater; fourth, that the Church observed this Corpus Christi octave for between 500 and 700 years (depending on the region, as the feast was of variable diffusion), before Pius XII unceremoniously scrapped the octave and later bishops bumped it to a Sunday (I refer not to the concept of a so-called “external solemnity,” but of a simple switch from the proper day to the nearest Sunday, thereby effectively surrendering to the Protestant conception of the secular work week). The changes offer another a textbook example of how badly mistaken recent popes and liturgists have been in “interpreting the signs of the times.”

Visit Dr. Kwasniewski’s Substack “Tradition & Sanity”; personal site; composer site; publishing house Os Justi Press and YouTube, SoundCloud, and Spotify pages.

The Character of Pentecost in Other Rites

Last week, I published a two-part article on the historical character of Pentecost in the Roman Rite, divided into three topics: the feast’s baptismal character, its octave (part 1), and its relationship to the summer Ember Days (part 2). As is so often the case, other rites have developed customs analogous to those of Rome, of which I will here give a brief and certainly not comprehensive account. The parts about the Ambrosian Rite are taken in part from notes by Nicola de’ Grandi.

On the vigil of Pentecost, the Ambrosian Rite has a special ritual, by which a highly simplified form of Mass is celebrated in the middle of a highly simplified form of Vespers. This is done on only two other days, the vigils of Christmas and Epiphany. (The Mass of Holy Thursday is also celebrated within Vespers, but not simplified in the same way.)

Vespers begins with a responsorial chant called a lucernarium (video above), the hymn Jam Christus astra ascenderat, which the Roman Rite sings at Lauds of Pentecost, and another brief responsory. The psalmody, which would normally be sung at this point, is omitted, and four readings from the Old Testament are said. Unlike the prophecies of the Roman vigil of Pentecost, these are not repeated from the Easter vigil, but one of them, the third, is also said on the eve of Epiphany.

- Isaiah 11, 1-9b: the prophet describes the sevenfold nature of the Holy Spirit.

- Genesis 28, 10-22: Jacob’s vision of the Ladder.

- IV Kings 2, 1-12: Elijah and Elisha at the Jordan; the former is taken away in the fiery chariot.

- III Kings 3, 5-14: God gives the gift of wisdom to Solomon.

A medieval fresco of Elijah in the Fiery Chariot, in the cathedral of Anagni, Italy. (Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons.)

The first three of these are followed by a psalmellus, the Ambrosian equivalent of the gradual, and a prayer, the fourth by a cantus, the Ambrosian equivalent of the tract, which is also said after the last of the six prophecies of the Easter vigil. This cantus is only the first verse of Psalm 41, where the Roman tract has three.

As in the Roman Rite, the blessing of the baptismal font is then repeated exactly as on Easter night, followed by the administration of baptism, and the Litany of the Saints. On Easter night, the blessing concludes with the following prayer.

“Celebratis atque perfectis divini Baptismatis sacramentis, Domino caeli et terræ, Deo Patri omnipotenti, indefessas gratias referamus: ipsumque supplices postulemus, uti nos atque omnem familiam suam [gloriosae Resurrectionis Domini nostri Jesu Christi] annuat esse participes. Præstante eodem Domino nostro Jesu Christo Filio suo, secum vivente atque regnante Deo in unitate Spiritus Sancti per omnia secula seculorum.

Having celebrated and completed the sacraments of divine baptism, let us give untiring thanks to the Lord of heaven and earth, God the Father almighty, and humbly ask of Him, that He may allow us and all his family to participate in the glorious Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ; the same granting this, who liveth and reigneth with him in the unity of the Holy Spirit, for all the ages of ages.”

On the vigil of Pentecost, this prayer is said with the words “gratiæ Spiritus Sancti – the grace of the Holy Spirit” in place of “the glorious Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

The priest then replaces his cope with a chasuble, and the Mass begins. All the variable chants are omitted, except for a brief Alleluia between the Epistle and Gospel, a custom analogous to the incomplete Roman Mass of the Easter vigil, which has no Introit, Offertory, or Communio. The Gloria and Creed are also omitted, and the Ambrosian Mass has no Kyrie or Agnus Dei, so the ordinary is stripped down to just the Sanctus (video below). The Ambrosian Rite prescribes the same Hanc igitur at the vigils of both Easter and Pentecost as the Roman Rite, which refers to those whom God has “vouchsafed to bring to a new birth from water and the Holy Spirit, granting them remission of all their sins.” (In both rites, it is also said for the whole week of the feast.)

The vigil concludes with the celebrant donning the cope again, the singing of the Magnificat with its antiphon, and a concluding prayer.

On the vigil and feast of Easter, and throughout the rest of Easter week, the Ambrosian Rite has two Masses for each day, one “of the solemnity”, and another “for the (newly) baptized.” Pentecost also has this feature, although not on the vigil. On the Easter Sunday, the Gospel of the Mass for the newly baptized is John 7, 37-39a, in obvious reference to baptism.

“On the last, and great day of the festivity, Jesus stood and cried, saying, ‘If any man thirst, let him come to me, and drink. He that believeth in me, as the Scripture saith, Out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.’ Now this he said of the Spirit which they should receive, who believed in him.”

At the parallel Mass of Pentecost, this Gospel is completed by adding the second part of verse 39, “for as yet the Spirit was not given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.”

Finally, we should note the Transitorium which is said at both Masses, the equivalent of the Roman Communio.

“Hymnum canite, Agni mundi, lavacro Fontis renati, satiati Corpore Christi. Hallelujah, hallelujah. – Sung the hymn, ye pure lambs, reborn in the washing of the font, fed with the Body of Christ, alleluia.”

In the Mozarabic Rite, references to baptism on the vigil of Pentecost are essentially limited to two of the four Scriptural readings. The New Testament reading is Acts 19, 1-6, two verses shorter than the Roman Epistle, ending with the words, “they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had imposed his hands on them, the Holy Ghost came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.” The Gospel is John 3, 1-16, Jesus’ colloquy with Nicodemus, a fundamental passage for the Church’s understanding of baptism.

“Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”

On Pentecost itself, however, the opening chant of the Mass, the Officium, is as follows (Gal. 3, 27): “Vos qui in Christo baptizati estis, * Christum induistis, alleluia. V. Benedicti vos a Domino, qui fecit caelum et terram. Christum induistis, alleluia. Gloria et honor Patri… Christum induistis, alleluia. – Ye that have been baptized in Christ, * have put on Christ, alleluia. V. Blessed are ye by the Lord, who made heaven and earth. Ye have put on Christ, alleluia. Glory and honor to the Father… Ye have put on Christ, alleluia.”

In the Byzantine Rite, almost these same words are sung in place of the Trisagion at the Divine Liturgy of Pentecost, as well as Easter; the custom was later extended to other major feasts of the Lord such as Christmas and Epiphany. (In this recording of the Divine Liturgy celebrated at the Pontifical Russian College in Rome on Pentecost of 2009, it begins at 14:30.)

The Gospel of the Divine Liturgy begins with the same verse as the Ambrosian Gospel cited above, John 7, 37, but continues to the end of the chapter, and includes verse 8, 12, as I have explained previously.

Pentecost does not have a Forefeast, the Byzantine equivalent of a Roman vigil; the day before it is one of several Saturdays especially dedicated to prayer for the dead. But like most of the greater feasts, Vespers is said in a more solemn form, which includes three readings from the Old Testament; the third of these, Ezekiel 36, 24-38, seems also to have been chosen in view of the feast’s ancient baptismal character.

“For I will take you from among the gentiles, and will gather you together out of all the countries, and will bring you into your own land. And I will pour upon you clean water, and you shall be cleansed from all your filthiness, and I will cleanse you from all your idols. And I will give you a new heart, and put a new spirit within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and will give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit in the midst of you: and I will cause you to walk in my commandments, and to keep my judgments, and do them. And you shall dwell in the land which I gave to your fathers, and you shall be my people, and I will be your God.”

This same passage supplies the Introit and first reading of the Roman Mass of Wednesday of the fourth week of Lent, a day which was originally dedicated to the scrutiny of the catechumens preparing for baptism at Easter. That Introit was later assigned to private Masses of the vigil of Pentecost.

Like the Roman Rite, the Byzantine and Ambrosian Rites both celebrate Pentecost with an “octave” which terminates on Saturday. The Ambrosians share the Roman custom of keeping the feast of the Holy Trinity on the Sunday after Pentecost, but in the Byzantine Rite, Pentecost itself is the feast of the Holy Trinity, and Monday is a special Synaxis of the Holy Spirit. The Sunday after Pentecost is therefore the Byzantine feast of All Saints, celebrating the lives of the Saints as the fulfillment of the mission of the Holy Spirit.

Ember days are a uniquely Roman custom, and so, even though they are noted as fast days in the Ambrosian liturgical books, they have no special texts of their own.

In the Byzantine Rite, Vespers belongs to the day following it; there is no such thing as Second Vespers, even for a Sunday or a major feast like Pentecost. Therefore, the very first service of the period after the 50-days of Easter, Vespers on the evening of Pentecost Sunday, is liturgically part of Monday. Since it is a long-standing custom of the Rite never to kneel in Eastertide, a custom which goes back to a decree of the First Council of Nicea, this Vespers also includes the ritual known as the “gonyklisia – the bending of the knee.”

This consists of the recitation of several prayers interpolated between the regular Litanies (some of them extraordinarily long, even by Byzantine standards), which the priest ordinarily says while kneeling down before the iconostasis, facing the people. Here is an excerpt of the first prayer: the full texts can be read in Greek here, in Church Slavonic here, and in English here.

His Beatitude Sviatoslav Shevchuk, Major Archbishop of Kyiv-Halych and leader of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, reciting the kneeling prayers in the cathedral of the Resurrection in Kyiv. (Image from the website of the UGCC Seminary of the Three Holy Hierarchs in Kniazhychi.)

“…do Thou now hearken unto us who beseech Thee, and remember us, the lowly and condemned, and restore us from the captivity of our souls, having Thine own compassion as an intercessor for us. Accept us who fall down before Thee and cry: We have sinned. Upon Thee were we cast from the womb; even from our mother’s womb, Thou art our God. But since our days have wasted away in vanity, we have been stripped of Thine aid, and have been deprived of all defense. Yet taking courage in Thy compassions, we cry: Remember not the sins and ignorances of our youth, and cleanse us of our secret sins. Cast us not away in the time of our old age; when our strength hath waned, forsake us not; before we return to the earth, grant that we return unto Thee, and attend Thou unto us in Thy kindness and grace. Measure our iniquities by Thy compassions. Set the abyss of Thy compassions against the multitude of our transgressions. Look down from Thy holy height, O Lord, upon Thy people who stand here present and await from Thee Thine abundant mercy. Visit us in Thy goodness. Deliver us from the oppression of the devil. Preserve our life with Thy holy and sacred laws. Entrust Thy people unto a faithful Guardian Angel; gather us all into Thy Kingdom, grant forgiveness to them that hope in Thee; forgive them and us our sins. Purify us through the operation of Thy Holy Spirit, and destroy the enemy’s devices which are against us.”

As I noted previously, the purpose of the summer Ember days, as stated by the first witness to their existence, Pope St Leo the Great, is to prepare the Church for the longest stretch of the ecclesiastical year, the time after Pentecost. Although the Byzantine kneeling Vespers has much more of a penitential tone, it serves essentially the same purpose.

The Ancient Character of Pentecost in the Roman Rite (Part 1)

In this article, I propose to examine the ancient character of the feast of Pentecost in the Roman Rite: first, its role as a baptismal feast; second, the development of its octave; and third, its relationship to the Ember days. (This last section will be published separately as a second part.) In addition to the ancient liturgical sources, my guide in this consideration will be St Leo the Great, who was Pope from 440-61, and whose writings are one of the first and most important witnesses to the Roman liturgical tradition. Foremost among these are his three surviving sermons on Pentecost, and four on the following Ember days, but we begin with one of his letters.

A statue of St Leo on the façade of the cathedral of Florence. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by Sailko, CC BY 3.0)

Pentecost as a Baptismal Feast

At the end of the fourth century, Pope St Siricius (384-399) wrote in a letter to Himerius, bishop of Tarragon, that the sacrament of baptism was to be celebrated on Pentecost as on Easter. (Epist. ad Himerium, cap. 2: PL XIII, 1131B-1148A) Pope Leo reasserted that this was the Church’s practice in a letter to the bishops of Sicily, exhorting them to follow the example of the Apostle Peter, who baptized three-thousand persons on Pentecost day. (Epist. XVI ad universos episcopos per Siciliam constitutos: PL LIV, 695B-704A)

As we would expect, therefore, all pertinent liturgical books of the Roman Rite, as far back as we have them, reflect this tradition. The very oldest collection of Roman liturgical texts, the so-called Leonine Sacramentary, ca. 550 A.D., contains a Mass “on Pentecost, for those coming up from the font.” The first part of its preface is almost identical to that of the Holy Spirit in the Missal of St Pius V, which is used from the vigil to the following Ember Saturday. (The variants of the Roman Missal are in parentheses.)

VD: Qui ascendit (-ens) super omnes cælos sedensque ad déxteram tuam, promissum Spíritum Sanctum (hodierna die) in filios adoptiónis effúdit.

It is truly meet and just… Who ascended (-ing) above all in the heavens, and sitting at Thy right hand, (this day) poured out the promised Holy Spirit upon the children of adoption.

Likewise, the variable Hanc igitur, which is also traditionally said on Easter, is very similar to the Pius V version. (In keeping with the erratic character of the Leonine Sacramentary, this is placed before a variable Communicantes, which differs from the traditional one.)

Hanc ígitur oblatiónem, quam tibi offérimus pro his quos ex aqua et Spíritu Sancto regeneráre dignátus es, tríbuens eis remissiónem omnium peccatórum, quæsumus, placátus accipias, eorumque nómina ascríbi júbeas in libro viventium. Per.

We therefore ask, o Lord, may Thou graciously accept this oblation, which we make unto Thee for these whom Thou hast vouchsafed to bring to a new birth from water and the Holy Spirit, granting them remission of all their sins: and may Thou command that their names be entered into the book of life.

The oldest actual sacramentaries contain prayers for the vigil of Pentecost to go with the readings of prophecies repeated from the Easter vigil, and even more explicitly baptismal prayers and prefaces for the Masses. This tradition continues uninterrupted into the Missal of St Pius V; it was, inexplicably, mostly abolished by the Holy Week reform of 1955. (This is one of the many aspects of this reform which thoroughly belies its claim to be any kind of “restoration.”) I say “mostly” because although the parts of the ritual borrowed from the Easter vigil are suppressed, the Hanc igitur continues to be said, nonsensically; the post-Conciliar rite removed even this.

The interior of the Lateran Baptistery

The Octave

In his first sermon “on the fast of Pentecost”, Pope Leo says that it was observed “after the days of holy rejoicing, which we have passed unto the honor of the Lord who rose from the dead, and then ascended into heaven, and after receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (chapter 3) And likewise, in the third sermon, “the current season invites us to recur to the remedies of fasting, after passing fifty days from the Lord’s resurrection to the coming of the Holy Spirit…” (chapter 3) Nothing in any of the sermons indicates that this fast was regarded as part of the feast. Scholars therefore agree that there was no octave of Pentecost in his time, an example of a fairly solid argument from silence, even though it was clearly not Leo’s purpose to give any kind of systematic explanation of the liturgical year.

It is also true that roughly a century later, there is no mention of the octave in the “sacramentary” named after him, but here, the argument from silence is perhaps rather less solid. This manuscript, of which there survives only one copy (very possibly the only one ever made), was not actually a sacramentary at all, which is to say, a book which contains the priest’s parts of the Mass, the Canon, and the variable prayers and prefaces of individual Masses.

Before the creation of such books, the variable prayers and prefaces of the Mass were written down in booklets called “libelli Missarum”, which might well vary from one church to another even within the same city. The manuscript in question is a privately made and highly irregular collection of these libelli, generally dated on internal evidence to the mid-6th century. The collection was certainly made in Rome itself, since it contains numerous specific references to the city. Its traditional name “Leonine”, in reference to Pope St Leo I, is no more than a fancy of its discoverer, Fr Giuseppe Bianchini (1704-64), a canon of Verona who found it in the library of the cathedral chapter.

The capitular library of Verona Cathedral. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by Marco Almbauer, CC BY-SA 4.0) 

This is what accounts for its rather haphazard arrangement, the irregularity of its contents (five Masses of St John the Baptist, but twenty-eight for Ss Peter and Paul), its many mistakes, several incomplete Masses, and the inclusion of the worst preface ever written. (One of its strangest mistakes is the placement of nine Masses of St Stephen the First Martyr on August 2nd, the feast of Pope St Stephen I, even though the former was certainly celebrated on December 26th long before the collection was made.)

It is therefore too much to say that because the octave is not mentioned in it, it cannot have existed in any form when the collection was made. Pope Leo says very clearly that the Ember fasts were kept on the Wednesday, Friday and Saturday after Pentecost, but the “Leonine” manuscript has only two Masses for them, one placed before Pentecost, and the other after, so it is certainly not a definitive or wholly reliable witness.

The Mass of the octave of Pentecost in the Gellone Sacramentary, ca. 780 AD. It begins with the second rubric on the left hand side; the preface of the Holy Trinity is introduced by the large VD glyph towards the bottom. 

The oldest actual sacramentary, the Old Gelasian, dated ca. 700, does not have special Masses for the days within the octave of Pentecost. However, it does have, right after the Mass of Pentecost Sunday, six prayers for Vespers “within the octave of Pentecost”, followed by the Ember Day Masses, and then the Mass “on Sunday of the octave of Pentecost.” The preface of this last is that which we say on the feast of the Holy Trinity, the following Sundays until Christmas, and between Epiphany and Lent. This also reflects the work of St Leo, who expounds the doctrine of the Trinity at length in his Pentecost sermons; all of the preface’s keywords (Trinitas, substantia, essentia etc.) appear in these sermons quite frequently.

Likewise, readings for the days within the octave appear in the earliest lectionaries, and the chants in the oldest antiphonaries. The Thursday within the octave of Pentecost was originally an “aliturgical” day like the Thursdays in Lent, on which no Mass was said. By the time this custom was changed in the early 8th century, the corpus of Mass chants was regarded as a closed canon, which is why the Thursdays of Lent borrow almost all their chants from other Masses, and that of Pentecost simply repeats the Mass of Sunday.

The post-Conciliar rite purported to restore the earliest custom of the Church by abolishing the octave, and making one undifferentiated fifty-day long feast of the whole period between Easter and Pentecost. (This in itself is, unsurprisingly, a misrepresentation of the custom of the early Church.) This claim is belied by the fact that it also abolished the Ember days, which are consistently attested in the same ancient sources that attest to the “fifty days of Easter.”

“For a General Liturgical Reform” by Annibale Bugnini (Part 5: Conclusion)

With this final installment we complete our publication of the first-ever English translation of Bugnini’s programmatic 1949 article in Ephemerides Liturgicae outlining the plan for a total overhaul of the Church’s liturgical worship. (See Part 1; Part 2; Part 3; Part 4. The entire document may be downloaded as a single PDF.)

12. OBSERVATIONS ON CERTAIN PARTS OF THE OFFICE

We have made a few remarks on the different parts of the Divine Office, discussing the matter systematically. Let us now complete this with a few specific annotations.

Some would like to give each Hour an explanatory title: a “theme,” an “idea” as a guide, and also assign for each day and for the individual Hours an official “prayer intention” of the Church. Furthermore, according to the same proponents, each feria could have its own, more explicit particular meaning. For example: Sunday: the Trinity; Monday: thanksgiving; Tuesday: high praise to God; Wednesday: universal prayer; Thursday: glorification of the God-Man; Friday: general Satisfaction to Christ who is sacrificed for us; Saturday: Mary and the saints.

Some would ask for the faculty to say ad libitum, in Lent, the Office de tempore, instead of that of the day’s saint, as is already done for the Mass.

Let us just mention the proposal that “parish priests be authorised to anticipate at noon, at least on Sundays and Feasts, the Matins of the following day.” The proposal denotes the good spirit and the piety of those who advanced it, but betrays an erroneous conception of the Divine Office, which by its very nature is an “hourly” prayer, to be distributed in the various proper times to sanctify all the hours of the day.

To compensate for the loss of the hagiographic lessons, it is asked for the introduction at Prime of the reading of the Martyrology (either in full, or reduced to some eulogies more important to the universal and local Church). This would also resolve, according to the contributors, the issue of commemorations, which would be abolished per se, as the memory done at Prime with the Martyrology should suffice.

As for the Minor Hours, a pastoral suggestion is that at least on Sundays and feast days, parish priests and others with care of souls should be dispensed from them.

Some would like greater protection of the standing of First and Second Vespers on Sunday, particularly during Lent and Advent, even when First and Second Class feasts clash against it.

For Compline there are those who would want every day, except Sunday, Psalm 50 (“Miserere”). Others would prefer to return to the old invariable arrangement, that is, the current Sunday scheme, as it was before Pius X. Some think that for Compline too, parish priests and clergy who sing Vespers with the people could be exempted.

For a fair solution it is necessary to bear in mind the proper character of each Hour and particularly of Compline, to which Psalms 90 and 133 are really well suited, and therefore a return to the status quo ante would please anyone. All the more so since the ever more frequent use, among certain groups of faithful, of Prime and Compline as morning and evening prayers, compels the clergy to say these Hours with them, and a simplification of the arrangements for practical use would be desirable.

13. THE OCTAVES

These have taken on enormous development, “exaggerated,” says one of the contributors. And for the octaves too, the “unanimous consensus” is that they should be simplified. Some would like them all to be abolished, with the exception of Christmas, Epiphany, Easter, Pentecost, Ascension and Corpus Christi, raising the office infra octavam to the rank of duplex. Others argue as follows: “The octaves of Easter and Pentecost should undoubtedly be retained because of their antiquity, and also that of Christmas because of its entirely special character: it is in fact an integral part of Christmastide, and endows the week from 25th to 31st December with singularly attractive features.

The octave of the Ascension, of recent institution, could certainly disappear, and the same goes for that of the Sacred Heart and all the non-privileged octaves. Besides, they could all be reduced to the rank of simple octaves, with a proper office only on the eighth day and with a special privilege enabling this to be preferred to feasts of double or inferior rite. One could also give the Sundays “infra octavam” an office inspired by the feast: this would seem almost indispensable for the majority of countries where these feasts are no longer celebrated by the people on the assigned day, but postponed to the following Sunday.

For Epiphany and Corpus Christi, the octave might be retained, but reducing all the days infra octavam to the simple rite, with ferial psalter. Wouldn’t it be a good idea to go a step further and rearrange all the festive offices, if not by reducing them to the simple rite, at least by referring them to the principle of a three-lesson office? In that case, the responsories that were suppressed could be used at Vespers, Lauds, and the Minor Hours after the chapter, so as not to deplete the liturgical prayer of these items, which are often magnificent.”

To recap, the octave system, in the opinion of a contributor, could be modified as follows:

1. Easter, Pentecost, Christmas: no change.

2. Octaves of the Temporal:

• Epiphany: on the days infra octavam, 3-lessons office with ferial psalter, commemoration only on the feasts of St Joseph and the Holy Family; on the eighth day, double office as on the feast day, but with proper texts, referring to the Baptism of Jesus.
• Ascension: octave suppressed, but maintaining the “Ascensiontide.”
• Corpus Christi: on the days infra octavam, 3-lessons office, yielding only before a double with simple commemoration; on the eighth day, feast of Christ the High Priest.
• Sacred Heart: simple octave, to be merged with the feast of the Precious Blood of Our Lord.

3. Octaves of the Sanctoral:

• Immaculate Conception, simple octave.
• Joseph (to be celebrated at Christmastide), simple octave.
• John the Baptist, simple octave.
• Ss. Peter and Paul, simple octave (on 4th July, feast of all the Holy Popes).
• Lawrence, simple octave.
• Assumption, simple octave, to be merged with the feast of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
• Nativity of the Blessed Virgin, simple octave, to be merged with the feast of the Name of Mary, which would take the office of the Nativity with proper parts from the current office.
• All Saints’ Day, simple octave, to be merged with the feast of the Holy Relics.
• Patron and Titular Saint, Dedication of a church, simple octave.

4. Office of the Sundays infra octavam:

Preserve intact the current offices for the Sundays within the octaves of Christmas, Ascension, Corpus Christi and Sacred Heart. Restore the Sunday within the Octave of the Epiphany and set the Feast of the Holy Family on another day infra octavam.

For Sundays infra octavam of the feasts of the Assumption and the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin, Saints Peter and Paul, All Saints, the Dedication, the Feast of the Patron and of the Titular, the office could be composed as follows: Psalms and antiphons, chapter and hymn, short responsories and verses, from the Feast; Matins lessons and oration, from the occurring Sunday. At Mass, commemoration (the first one) and preface of the octave.

14. COMMEMORATIONS

It is said that by inserting the Martyrology at Prime, all the commemorations may as well be suppressed. This is, frankly, a somewhat simplistic way of solving the problem. Others call for its suppression at Matins, Lauds and Vespers, but not at Mass. All the commemorations should be reduced to two and all the rest be omitted, some propose. And again: the saints of the simple or double rite, when occurring on a Sunday, should only be commemorated at Lauds. We will not linger over other proposals as the simplified system for the octaves would also bring about this simplification, which ultimately is a logical consequence of the foregoing.

15. THE RUBRICS

Among the various proposals, here are the main ones:

1. Brief notes, both historical and exegetical, should be provided before the various rites and their parts, or else be merged with the general rubrics of both the Breviary and the Missal. Naturally the current “Rubricae generales” should be combined with the “Additiones et Variationes.” These should be numbered progressively, emulating in brevity and clarity the canons of the C.I.C. The new prolegomena of the liturgical books should also serve as the school text (or as a substantial part of the text) of practical liturgy in seminaries.

2. The rubric or rubrics referring to the canonical Hours in relation to the Conventual Mass should be revised or deleted. Thus the rule prescribing the recitation of Vespers before midday (i.e. before lunch) in Lent is a patent error of interpretation, which should be corrected.

3. A few specific notes: in order to dispel any doubt as to whether one should genuflect with one or both knees, the rubric at the Invitatory: “In sequenti Psalmi versu, ad verba: venite, adoremus, et procidamus, genuflectitur,” should be changed to: “In sequenti Psalmi versu verba: venite, adoremus, et procidamus dicuntur flexis genibus.”

On the feast of the Holy Angels, at each Hour and at the end of First Vespers on 24 March, 8 May, 29 September, 2 October, 24 October, the following rubric should be added: “Conclusio hymnorum ad omnes Horas”:

         Deo Patri sit gloria, - Qui, quos redemit Filius
         Et Sanctus unxit Spiritus, - Per Angelos custodiat. Amen.

The first stanza of the Iste Confessor should always say: “Hac die laetus meruit supremos - Laudis honores.” Thus many particular rubrics on the feasts of the saints would drop by themselves.

4. “There is urgent need,” says a collaborator, “for a methodical compilation, for the use of the whole Church, not of a detailed guide to the slightest gestures of choir or officiants, but of a collection of the general principles, a true Codex iuris liturgici, enunciating in clear and systematic terms what individuals and the different categories are to do, according to the times, places and circumstances of the celebration of liturgical feasts and ceremonies.

The order should be parallel to that of the Code of Canon Law, and the subject matter should be provided by the methodical sifting of the rubrics -- those that have not fallen into disuse or become obsolete -- of the Missal, the Breviary, the Pontificale and the Ceremoniale, together with the appendix for minor churches, and the Rituale. The selection should be made not on the basis of the uses that are legally in force, but on that of the abundant and serious studies that have shed light on the origin, meaning and historical evolution of each rite or ceremony.

Such work should later serve as a starting point for synodal and diocesan commissions for liturgy to adjust, according to the spiritual needs of the different places, the celebrations required of each priest in his parish and to put an end to the arbitrary practices that are occurring more and more every day.”

CONCLUSION

We have sifted here and there through an abundant harvest. Proposals and projects, in their manifold variety, reflect one identical light: the intimate desire for renewal and adaptation of the “laus perennis” to the current spiritual needs of the clergy and the “plebs Dei.” We have wanted to report with absolute fidelity, often in their own words, the thoughts of our collaborators, so that their voice may reach our readers without distortion or misrepresentation, but in its genuine integrity. While we warmly thank all those who have joined us in this common endeavour, which we hope will bear fruit “tempore opportuno,” we also confirm that the pages of the Review will remain open to any other collaboration that, both in intention and in formulation, adheres to a wise balance between “nova et vetera.”

Rome, March 1949.

A. BUGNINI, C. M.

Msgr. Bugnini 18 years later, celebrating the Missa Normativa at the 1967 Synod of Bishops

“For a General Liturgical Reform” by Annibale Bugnini (Part 2)

We continue our publication of the first-ever English translation of Bugnini’s programmatic 1949 article in Ephemerides Liturgicae outlining the plan for a total overhaul of the Church’s liturgical worship. Part 1 was published yesterday.

An Ordo from 1842

II. RANKING OF FEASTS

The general complaint is that the ranking of feasts, as it currently stands, is too complicated and painstaking. But when it comes to providing a solution, either no solution at all is offered, or one which is clearly inadequate to the purpose. Most are content to say that the “doubles” are too many and must be reduced; that the “semi-doubles,” in practice, have no other effect than to burden the office with the addition of the “preces” at Prime and of the common commemorations to the normal nine-lesson office, and that it must therefore be abolished, reducing these feasts to the simple rite, while raising the Sundays to the double rite, or to the major double, or to second-class feasts.

Furthermore, we have the semi-festive office (St. Agatha, St. Cecilia, etc.), which would also need a transformation as it forces an illogical division and, in some cases, a capricious interweaving of parts that are inseparable by nature. Overall, the proposed remedies only solve the problem to a minimal extent. How to reach a real and definitive simplification?

Not far from the truth, perhaps, are those who describe as “excessive and arbitrary the current nomenclature of the rites of the Office,” and even suggest the development of a new ideal scale for the ranking of feasts, one that is not merely intentional and fictitious, but has a real and concrete basis in the intrinsic value of the feasts themselves, and that can meet the reasonable demands of the liturgy. Such a scale should take into account first of all the fundamental feasts of the mysteries of the Lord (Christmas, Epiphany, Easter, Ascension, Pentecost), which regulate the entire annual cycle of the Redemption and should therefore be given special treatment, then the other more recent but particularly important feasts of the Lord, namely Corpus Christi, Sacred Heart and Christ the King, and then, proportionally, the other feasts of the year, distributed, of course, in very limited gradations.

III. CALENDAR

A. Temporal [Cycle]

We have already mentioned that with the two cycles of Christmas and Easter the proprium de tempore should regain, in the reformed liturgy, an absolute pre-eminence over the proprium sanctorum. This desire is universal. Here too, however, no one has addressed the problem on the whole, but rather limited themselves to particular remarks, which can be summarised as follows:

a) A proper Preface for Advent;

b) Suppression of commemorations in Advent;

c) In the Christmas cycle, concordance between the historical succession of events and the liturgical calendar. Currently, it is noted, there is a very capricious intertwining of the two things, as can be seen from the following chart:

Historical succession 1. Nativitas 2. Circumcisio 3. Praesentatio 4. Magorum adventus 5. Fuga in Ægyptum 6. Innocentium Passio 7. Reditus de Ægypto 8. Vita in Nazareth 9. Jesus in Tempo 10. Baptismus in Jordane 11. Nuptiae in Cana

[Feast Date] 25 Dec. 28 Dec. Dom. Infra Oct. [Idem] 1 Jan. 5 Jan. 6 Jan. Dom. i. Oct. 13 Jan. Dom. II 2 Febr.

Liturgical Calendar 1. Nativitas 2. Innocentium Passio 3. Praesentatio (1ª pars) 4. Reditus in Nazareth 5. Circumcisio (die 8) 6. De Ægypto in Nazareth 7. Magorum adventus 8. Jesus in Tempo 9. Baptismus in Jordane 10. Nuptiae in Cana 11. Praesentatio (2ª pars)

If one were to trace the lines connecting historical facts with the corresponding liturgical feast, the result would be a veritable labyrinth.

The proposal would aim to bring the two ideal successions together.

d) The octave of Christmas should deal entirely with the Christmas mystery and therefore the feasts of the saints should be eliminated or reduced to a simple commemoration. St John the Evangelist and St Stephen are already celebrated at other times and can disappear here; the Holy Innocents, on the other hand, can remain, as they are related to Christmas. Lessons for other days can be taken from the feast of the Holy Family, the Maternity, etc. (Editor’s note: when he says that Ss John and Stephen “are already celebrated at other times”, he is referring to the feasts of St John at the Latin Gate on May 6th, and of the Finding of St Stephen on August 3rd, both of which were suppressed in 1960. That such a mutilation of the ancient arrangement of the Christmas octave was even deemed worthy of mention, and not just in any scholarly journal, but the Vatican’s official publication on the liturgy, shows how appallingly the field of liturgical study had already deteriorated well before any serious changes were made.)

e) On the Feast of the Epiphany, a second Mass should be celebrated to commemorate the Baptism of Jesus (the Mass of the Magi in the morning, and of the Baptism after Terce).

Greater prominence should be given to the Feast of the Epiphany with its octave. Somewhat curious in this regard is a project that would pile up around this solemnity several others, currently celebrated throughout the year. Namely, with this arrangement:

Sabbato post kalendas Januarii Dominica prima post Circumc. Feria secunda post Epiphaniam Feria tertia post Epiphaniam Feria quarta post Epiphaniam Feria quinta post Epiphaniam Feria sexta post Epiphaniam Sabbato post Epiphaniam Dominica prima post Epiphaniam Dominica secunda post Epiphaniam Dominica tertia, quarta, quinta p. E. Dominica ultima post Epiphaniam

Vigilia Epiphaniae Epiphania (Bapt. J. C. in Jordane) Magorum adventus Jesus in Templo Nuptiae in Cana Transfiguratio Christi Cor Jesu (sine octava) Assumptio B. M. V. Festum Christi Regis Festum Sanctae Familiae ut nunc Festum Praesentationis (Purificatio)

The proponent adds to the scheme ample explanations justifying the individual allocations and transpositions, but the proposal seems on the whole rather peculiar and not easy to implement, assuming, of course, that it really deserves, as it stands, to be taken into consideration. (Editor’s note: here also, we have a proposal for mutilating the liturgical calendar in which even something so ancient and universal as the date of the Assumption is not safe. The mere fact that Bugnini himself describes this horrendous and absurd idea so mildly (‘somewhat curious’, ‘rather peculiar’), demonstrates how perfectly unfit he was to have any hand in any project of liturgical reform.) 

f) Easter. Some want it fixed, others mobile (either leaving it as it is, or setting it on the first Sunday in April or in the first half of the same month). The supporters of a fixed Easter claim that it “would bring in all fields of activity and of prayer a considerable advantage, which would far outweigh the various standpoints of the traditionalists.” These, in turn, note that “the mobility of Easter is one of the most precious elements in the poetry of an already too monotonous life.” On the other hand, they add that in order to achieve it artificially, the desired fixedness could not be ensured without sacrificing,  the traditional lunar computation and the regular succession of the seven weekdays.”

The issue, as is well known, has been dealt with in all sorts of ways even outside, indeed especially outside, the purely ecclesiastical field. Yet for the purposes of a possible liturgical reform, this is of secondary importance. The attitude of the Holy See in this regard is also well known, an attitude which remains to this day the guiding principle.

g) Pentecost. Return to the most ancient practice of closing the Easter season with the fiftieth day, i.e. with Pentecost Sunday, without an octave. [1]

B. Sanctoral [Cycle]

A lightening of the Sanctoral was a desideratum of many respondents, wishing for a greater development of latreutic worship and ferial offices. It is a matter of elimination and limitation. Thus, what is called for is not just a reduction of the current calendar, but also some fixed and peremptory norms to prevent the indiscriminate clustering of new feasts of saints, later on. Here is how one contributor puts it:

The devotional prevalence must be brought to an end by reducing to the one type of simple feast and ferial psalter all the feasts of saints for which there exists no local reason for greater solemnity. Purely devotional reasons are inadmissible. All that should be taken into account are: the birth of the saint, his dwelling place, his tomb or the actual presence of prominent relics in a specific place, not for the whole diocese.
        The simplified feasts should include, out of their proper or from the common, nothing but the Collect, the antiphon to the Magnificat and the verse at Vespers, the antiphon of the Benedictus with the verse at Lauds. Everything else should be taken from the psalter and the ordinary. Only the most solemn feasts should have the nine-lesson office and double rite, as in current use. The actual patrons, local apostles and major saints of the universal Church should have their proper office or the common one with double major or 2nd class rite. The 1st class, especially with an octave, should be very rare.
        An excellent way to cut down on the irritating multiplication of commemorations would be to incorporate into the Breviary the reading of the Martyrology at Prime...
        The public celebration must be freed of all the elements that have crept in by fortuitous circumstances (findings of relics, translations of relics, etc.). History tells us that the cult of saints was only celebrated around their burial site, the tomb or ‘cathedra’. The unsafe position of “extra muros” cemeteries at the time of the invasions led to the bringing of the saints’ bodies into the city, giving rise to the development of their cult to the detriment of the celebration of the mysteries of Redemption. A return to the ancient state of affairs could have the beneficial effect of revitalising pilgrimages, something that no one thinks about any more since the saints’ feasts are celebrated everywhere.

To these general observations another scholar gives a more traditionalist and detailed emphasis, while still upholding the principle of simplification:

1. It is by now common consensus (he says), and admitted by all that the office ‘de tempore’ must resume a preponderant place without sacrificing the cult of saints. This can be achieved by keeping only these feasts in the calendar of the universal Church:

a) the two feasts of St John the Baptist, and that of St Michael the Archangel on 29 September;

b) a single feast of St Joseph to be celebrated at Christmastide (others suggest the 3rd Sunday after Easter or in the month of May);

c) the feasts of the Apostles;

d) the main feasts of the martyrs, retaining just the ancient Roman martyrs, but also a few martyrs of the universal Church, e.g. St. Pothinus and St. Dionysius, St. Boniface, St. Josaphat, St. Wenceslas, the Dominican and Franciscan Martyrs of Morocco, the Japanese Martyrs, a few missionary martyrs of the last centuries;

e) the feasts of the Doctors of the Church (if necessary, by grouping them together);

f) the feasts of some major Popes: St. Gregory VII, St. Pius V, etc.;

g) the feasts of the founders of great Orders or Congregations of truly universal importance and scattered throughout the world, such as St. Benedict, St. Bernard, St. Brunel, St. Francis of Assisi, St. Dominic, St. Vincent de Paul, St. Jeanne de Chantal, St. Theresa of Avila, etc.;

h) a few other feasts of saints that are truly universal and chosen somewhat from all countries. Obviously, this choice would require a great deal of tact!

2. Within the same vein, several saints who have had the same or related activities should be grouped together (something that is already the case in the Benedictine Order). Why not bring together Saints Barnabas, Titus, Timothy and Silas, with the office of the Apostles? Likewise St. Joachim and St. Anne (with their own office, taking into account that they are Old Testament saints); groups of holy Popes, etc.; of holy Patriarchs and Prophets, instituting a collective feast.

3. As a mere suggestion, the following feasts could be eliminated from the universal calendar: St Martina, St Andrew Corsini, St Romuald, the Seven Holy Founders of the Servants of Mary, St Symeon of Jerusalem, St Casimir, St Frances of Rome, the Forty Martyrs [of Sebaste], St Francis of Paola, Sts Soter and Caius, St George, St Paul of the Cross, St Peter of Verona. On the contrary, one could combine St. Thomas Becket and St. Stanislaus, St. Athanasius of Alexandria and St. Hilary of Poitiers, St. Cyril of Jerusalem and St. John Damascene, St. Albert the Great and St. Bonaventure, St. Peter Canisius and St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Felix of Valois and St. John of Matha, St. John of God and St. Camillus de Lellis. In this case the common “pro aliquibus locis” of multiple confessors and holy women could brought into general use. On the other hand, suppressed saints’ feasts could be integrated into the diocesan, national or congregational propers.

4. As for the feasts of Our Lord and Our Lady, some are certainly duplicates and should be simplified. For instance: the Circumcision and the Holy Name of Jesus, the Precious Blood to be merged with the Octave of the Sacred Heart, the Transfiguration and the 2nd Sunday of Lent, the two feasts of the Holy Cross, the two feasts of Our Lady of Sorrows, the Holy Name of Mary, to be merged with the Octave of the Birth of the Virgin, the two feasts of the Cathedra Petri.

Other proposals of lesser importance concerning the Sanctoral are: that the feast of Christ the King be transferred to the Sunday within the octave of the Ascension, and the Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary to 3rd January; or that the name of St. Joseph enter into the Canon [2] and the Confiteor; that a “festum Annuntiationis S. Ioannis Baptistae” be set on September 23rd, as this day would constitute “primordia Evangelii” [the primordial events of the gospel]; that the “Commune Sanctorum” be completely reordered; (the so-called “Confessorum” is practically a refuge for all the most disparate saints: priests, monks, laymen, young, old, of all classes and ranks, so that even the formulary has become schematic, without life and proper charateristic). At least the “Commune Confessoris non Pontificis” should be split in two: a “Comm. Confessoris Presbyteri” and a “Comm. Conf. non Presbyteri,” assigning to the former some texts drawn even from the Roman Pontifical, so that they may “rememorent pristinos dies” and “resuscitent gratiam quae data est per impositionem manuum” [“remember the ancient days” and “reawaken the grace once given through the imposition of the hands”].

What to say about all these proposals? There is undoubtedly much good in them, and they appear to be driven by a fairly concrete vision of the problem. However, it seems to us that they must be set within an even broader framework, and flow from distinct and clear principles, providing the backbone for the reformed calendar and serving as a norm for the future. For the days in a year are limited (365), while the saints are many and ever increasing. On what principles could an agreement be reached? We think these should be the same as those that inspired the Commission of St. Pius V when it carried out the reform named after him, as it was exactly then that the Roman calendar took on a truly “catholic” character with its extension to the universal Church. If one looks closely, the Pian calendar has an embryonic twofold orientation: a sense of Roman-ness and a beginning of Catholic universality. These two concepts could provide the founding principles of the new calendar.

Romanitas, thus giving a place of privilege to authentic Roman martyrs, ancient saints that are not Roman but with ancient cult in Rome, saints associated with the titular churches of Rome, popes, the dedication of Roman churches.

Catholic universality: the Doctors, the holy Fathers and later ecclesiastical authors, the saints representative of monasticism and ancient asceticism, of the Eastern Churches, the national saints (the evangelizers of the different nations, saints and princes, other “national” saints), the founders (depending on the importance of the saint and of his Order in the universal Church), patron saints, the feasts of the most famous world shrines. There is then a heap of questions about the minor feasts of Our Lord and Our Lady, the feasts of ideas, the Offices of the Passion, etc., which must be carefully examined, so that the liturgy can truly meet all the demands (as far as humanly possible) of today’s liturgical piety. But how can the introduction or retention of all these feasts be reconciled with the desired lightening of the calendar from the feasts of the saints? Everything depends on the rank they will possess, and thereby the manner of celebrating them.

This series will continue with Part 3, on the Breviary, the Psalmody, and Antiphons.

[NOTES]

[1] [It is with some astonishment that one reads “return to” Pentecost without an octave, since the octave in this case is extremely ancient, going back at least to the sixth century (and probably more ancient given its universal practice in East and West), putting it squarely within the age of antiquity recognized by the Liturgical Movement as “uncorrupted” by medieval influence. Even the Jews celebrate Pentecost (Shavuot) for two days instead of just one.—PAK]

[2] [Which occurred in John XXIII’s revision of the Missal.—CS]

The Octave of All Saints 2019: The Confessors

From the Breviary according to the use of the Roman Curia, 1529, the conclusion of the sermon for the third day in the Octave of All Saints.

After the most unconquered witnesses of Christ follows the venerable chosen company of pontiffs and priests, and the blessed perfection of the most holy confessors, illuminated by the light of truth, and resolute in the confession of the apostolic faith. They pleased the one God, because they showed forth the faith of the holy Trinity in the perfection of their works. Although they did not pass from the light of this world by the sword or any other sort of torment, they were taught in the school of the virtues under the discipline of the Gospel, and by the wonderful patience of the Cross; they fought against the beasts of heretical depravity with the sword of the spirit (which is the word of God) and so nevertheless merited the glory of martyrdom. And although some of the holy confessors never attained the dignity of the priesthood, they were yet in no wise inferior in holiness and justice, in the virtues and the examples of their lives. These then are the men who while they were clothed in the garment of mortal flesh, could say in the spirit of truth with Paul, “our conversation is in heaven.”

The Charity of St Martin, by Jacob van Oost the Elder (1603-71); now in the Groeinge Museum in the painter’s native city of Bruges in Belgium. Martin was one of the very first Confessors to be venerated as a Saint.

A reading from the Epistle of Blessed Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews. (Chapter 11, 33-39, the epistle of the feast of the Four Crowned Martyrs, who share their feast day with the Octave of All Saints.)

The Saints by faith conquered kingdoms, wrought justice, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, recovered strength from weakness, became valiant in battle, put to flight the armies of foreigners: women received their dead raised to life again. But others were racked, not accepting deliverance, that they might find a better resurrection. And others had trial of mockeries and stripes, moreover also of bands and prisons. They were stoned, they were cut asunder, they were tempted, they were put to death by the sword, they wandered about in sheepskins, in goatskins, being in want, distressed, afflicted: Of whom the world was not worthy; wandering in deserts, in mountains, and in dens, and in caves of the earth. And all these being approved by the testimony of faith, in Christ Jesus, our Lord.

The tabernacle of the Four Crowned Martyrs, on the outside of the Orsanmichele in Florence; commissioned from the sculptor Nanni di Banco by the guild of wood- and stone cutters, 1408. Notice on right side of the lower panel the clever image of two sculptors making a statue.

Our Lord’s Request for the Institution of the Feast of His Sacred Heart

The devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus has deep roots; texts can be found in the ancient and medieval periods that speak of the love of His wounded and glorious Heart, and of the appropriate response of adoring love we should make to Him.

However, the devotion in the form more familiar to Catholics today is traceable to the private revelations made by Our Lord Jesus Christ to St Margaret Mary Alacoque in the later 17th century. The content of these revelations was written down for her spiritual director, St Claude de la Colombiere, and are widely available (see, e.g., here).

A priest mentioned to me a detail that had previously escaped my notice. When Our Lord appeared to St Margaret Mary on June 16, 1675, to request the institution of a feast in honor of His Sacred Heart, He spoke as follows:

I ask of you that the Friday after the Octave of Corpus Christi be set apart for a special Feast to honor My Heart, by communicating on that day, and making reparation to It by a solemn act, in order to make amends for the indignities which It has received during the time It has been exposed on the altars. I promise you that My Heart shall expand Itself to shed in abundance the influence of Its divine love upon those who shall thus honor It, and cause It to be honored.

The very Son of God — God from God, Light from Light, Word Incarnate, Eternal High Priest, Head of the Mystical Body, Creator, Savior, and Judge of the universe — refers as a matter of course to the “Octave of Corpus Christi” and places His request for a special feast precisely in this context. Moreover, He specifically asks that the feast be one of reparation, and that this reparation be connected with the extended Eucharistic adoration during the Octave of Corpus Christi. Finally, He promises to shed His divine love on those who shall thus honor His Heart, that is, honor It in the manner He has explained.

Is it not disturbing, then, to think of liturgical reformers under Pius XII simply chucking out this Octave of Corpus Christi, which had endured from the time of its widespread observance in the 14th century until 1955, at which time all octaves were abolished except those of Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost? [1] The invisible supreme Head of the Church endorsed this octave and made His requests based on it, but no matter; committees know better, and popes always know better, as we can see today.

Although the feast of the Sacred Heart always possessed a reparatory character, this was underlined by the new Mass and Office for the feast promulgated by Pius XI in 1928, to replace the Mass and Office first approved by Clement XIII in 1765, and extended to the universal Church in 1856. For 41 years, this Collect, which so aptly mirrors Our Lord’s request, was recited at Mass:

O God, Who in the Heart of Thy Son, wounded by our sins, dost mercifully vouchsafe to bestow upon us the infinite wealth of Thy love; grant, we beseech Thee, that revering It with meet devotion, we may fulfil our duty of worthy reparation. Through the same our Lord Jesus Christ…

Moreover, the Postcommunion prays for detachment from worldly goods and attachment to heavenly ones, a petition characteristic of the usus antiquior in general, and fitting for this feast in particular, which is very much about the truth “where your heart is, there your treasure is also”:

May Thy holy mysteries, O Lord Jesus, produce in us a divine fervour, whereby, having tasted the sweetness of Thy most dear Heart, we may learn to despise earthly things and love those of heaven: Who livest and reigneth.

In contrast, the Novus Ordo Collect borrows some of its phrasing from Clement XIII, while recasting it in a more generic Christological way that does not emphasize the rationale behind the institution of the feast:

Grant, we pray, almighty God, that we, who glory in the Heart of your beloved Son and recall the wonders of his love for us, may be made worthy to receive an overflowing measure of grace from that fount of heavenly gifts. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son…

Happily, the Collect of Pius XI was added back as an option in the most recent edition of the Pauline missal, which will bring it back into circulation to some extent. The Postcommunion, regrettably, excises the unfashionable sentiment discamus terrena despicere, et amare caelestia, and, recasts the prayer to the Father, due to the subordinationist principle that we must nearly always address the Father rather than the Son in our public prayer:

May this sacrament of charity, O Lord, make us fervent with the fire of holy love, so that, drawn always to your Son, we may learn to see him in our neighbor. Through Christ our Lord.

As a friend commented on this prayer, “All man, all the time.” As Gaudium et Spes 12 begins, “According to the almost unanimous opinion of believers and unbelievers alike, all things on earth should be related to man as their center and crown.”

In 1904, Pope St Pius X added the threefold invocation Cor Iesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis to the already-existing Leonine prayers after Low Mass. In 1964, the Instruction Inter Oecumenici abolished all of the prayers after Mass. For sixty years, Catholics on every continent, of every culture, in every conceivable situation, prayed, “Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.” But this was, one supposes, just another of those useless repetitions that had to be purged for the benefit of . . .

Come to think of it, cui bono? Why was the character of the feast tilted away from the theme of reparation to the Sacred Heart of Jesus for sins, blasphemies, outrages, sacrileges, indifference, and worldliness? Why was the octave of Corpus Christi abolished, depriving the Church and the world of more solemn, calendrically set-apart opportunities to adore the Lord with Eucharistic adoration, exposition, and procession? Why did we abandon the humble collective invocations that united us to one another and to the merciful God at the end of Low Mass?

A mere observer might come away thinking that the liturgical reformers under Pius XII and Paul VI were actually seeking ways to add to the “sins, offenses, and negligences” for which we are called upon to make reparation. Indeed, the very Offertory of the Mass in which the priest says that he is offering sacrifice for his sins, offenses, and negligences, as also for the welfare of the living and the dead, was abolished, as was the Placeat tibi at the end of Mass:

May the homage of my bounden duty be pleasing to Thee, O Holy Trinity; and grant that the sacrifice which I, though unworthy, have offered in the sight of Thy Majesty may be acceptable to Thee, and through Thy mercy be a propitiation for me and for all those for whom I have offered it. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.

On a good day in October 1946, a day when chopping off digits and limbs from the liturgical calendar wasn’t on the agenda, Pius XII said, “Perhaps the greatest sin in the world today is that men have begun to lose the sense of sin.” Whatever else may be said, this much is clear: the changes to the liturgy have not helped us regain it.

Cor Iesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.
Cor Iesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.
Cor Iesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.

NOTE

[1] As the incomparable St. Andrew Daily Missal of 1945 tells us on p. 782: “To resist the attacks of renewed heresies against the Holy Eucharist and to revive in the Church a zeal which had somewhat grown cold, the Holy Ghost inspired, at the beginning of the thirteenth century, the solemnity of Corpus Christi. In 1208, the blessed Juliana of Mount Cornillon, near Liège, saw in a vision the full moon with an indentation indicating that a feast was missing in the liturgical cycle. . . . It was thought that immediately after Paschaltide a feast with an octave should be established. As the Last Supper took place on Thursday, the Bishop of Liège instituted in 1246 this solemnity in his diocese on the Thursday which follows the octave of Pentecost. In 1264, Pope Urban IV extended this feast to the whole world.”

This commentary brings several truths to mind: first, that the Holy Spirit is the principal agent of organic liturgical development, who also inspires the conservation of that which has been established; second, that the double fittingness of a Thursday feast followed by an octave was intuitively grasped, precisely because of the need to resist heresy and rekindle fervor; third, that if this feast was needed by medieval Catholics, a fortiori it is needed by Catholics today, who are facing heresy, apostasy, and indifference several magnitudes greater; fourth, that the Church observed this Corpus Christi octave for between 500 and 700 years (depending on the region, as the feast was of variable diffusion), before Pius XII unceremoniously scrapped the octave and later bishops bumped it to a Sunday (I refer not to the concept of a so-called “external solemnity,” but of a simple switch from the proper day to the nearest Sunday, thereby effectively surrendering to the Protestant conception of the secular work week). The changes offer another a textbook example of how badly mistaken recent popes and liturgists have been in “interpreting the signs of the times.”

Visit www.peterkwasniewski.com for events, articles, sacred music, and classics reprinted by Os Justi Press (e.g., Benson, Scheeben, Parsch, Guardini, Chaignon, Leen).