Chapter II
The Rite of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass
33. Preliminary Remarks
1. Countless goods, incomprehensible wonders and mysteries are contained in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This holy Sacrifice is too great, too precious and too glorious to be adequately expressed in words or to receive an appropriate name: it surpasses all created knowledge, it is unspeakably grand and sublime. Since the mind of man is too limited and his language too feeble to express perfectly the Mystery of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, there have been even from the most ancient times a number of titles bestowed upon it, each of which, however, brings into prominence but some one side of the mystery, yet not one of them exhausts its unfathomably deep and rich contents.1 Among these names that of Missa (Mass) deserves a more particular explanation, as it is almost the only one employed since the early part of the Middle Age to designate the Eucharistic Sacrifice.
The word Missa (= missio, i. e. dimissio, ἀπόλυσις)2 denotes the solemn dismissal or the departure of those present after the conclusion of divine service; this signification it even now retains in the well known concluding formula given: Ite, missa est—“Go, it is the dismissal.” As long as the old baptismal and penitential discipline was in force, a twofold dismissal took place at the Eucharistic Sacrifice: the catechumens and the penitents were permitted to assist along with the faithful assembled at divine worship and to be present at the readings or discourses, but were formally dismissed after the Gospel, or the sermon;3 the faithful only were allowed to assist at the celebration proper of the Sacrifice, and to them also the dismissal was formally announced at the conclusion of the service. The rite of the dismissal with blessing and prayer was called missa, and the term, in the first place, found its way into the language of the people, and later on was written and introduced into the liturgical public Church service in the celebration of the divine Sacrifice, which was introduced and concluded with the dismissal.
The name Missa, which in the beginning, therefore, signified the dismissal from divine service of persons assisting thereat, was thus transferred to the celebration of divine worship itself. This without doubt occurred already at an early period; but when this first happened cannot be historically ascertained. A certain proof for the use of the expression Missa in the meaning of the liturgical celebration of the divine Sacrifice is first met with in the writings of St. Ambrose († 397)4; from his manner of speaking, it is evident that the word Missa was at that epoch not a newly coined expression, but a traditional designation of the celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice.
The transfer of the expression Missa to designate the most holy and sublime Sacrifice is at first sight strange indeed, but is, however, susceptible of explanation. At the period when the name Missa was first applied to the celebration of the Eucharistic Mystery, the strictest discipline of secrecy was in force. This mode of calling the Holy Sacrifice was well fitted to conceal the holy mysteries from the uninitiated. Therefore, the dismissals in use at that period are not to be regarded as implying “unessential ruling of Church discipline,” but as important acts, which were conducted with a certain degree of solemnity. After an appropriate prayer of thanksgiving and blessing the dismissal was liturgically announced by the deacon’s exclaiming: Ite, missa est. The first dismissal which was intended for the uninitiated, characterized the subsequent celebration as mysterious, and gave to those who remained to understand what purity was required to assist at the Sacrifice and to receive the sacrificial food. Not less venerable was the liturgical dismissal of the faithful; they were thereby admonished not to depart from the house of God without permission and not to return to the daily duties of their calling, until they had rendered unto God the honor and adoration due Him, and had been enriched with the fulness of heavenly gifts and blessings.5
In addition to this explanation, the best founded and the most widely spread, there is still another that deserves mention, one which was held in esteem especially by the liturgists of the Middle Age. It runs thus—the Eucharistic Sacrifice is called Missa, because in it there is a sending forth (missa = transmissio) from earth to heaven and from heaven to earth. — The Church sends up to the throne of God by the ministry of the priest the Eucharistic Sacrifice and prayers, and the necessities and desires of the faithful; God in return sends down upon men the riches of heavenly grace and blessing. — Or we may put it in a different way: Christ is sent into the world by the Father as a sacrifice, and in turn He is sent back again to heaven by the faithful as a sacrifice, in order to reconcile us to the Father and to procure for us all blessings.6 This signification of the Missa is implied by the very nature of the thing, and thus far undoubtedly contains truth; but this point of view probably did not determine the selection of the expression Missa to designate the Holy Sacrifice: in other words, the faithful of the first ages did not choose the word Missa to express that in the Sacrifice the above mentioned mission or sending forth from God to man and from man to God takes place; it was only later that this was so understood and explained.7
2. Jesus Christ Himself offered the first Eucharistic Sacrifice in the Supper Room of Jerusalem, and this in close connection with the eating of the Paschal Lamb of the Old Testament.8 At the same time He ordered the celebration of this Sacrifice in His Church for all times, when He gave to the Apostles and their successors in the priestly office the command and the power to do the same as He had done. After the example and by the order of Christ, the Apostles celebrated everywhere on their missionary journeys the Eucharistic Sacrifice. In all probability they did not celebrate it for the first time previous to Whitsunday, but they most likely did so on that grand day, when the Holy Ghost descended on the infant Church;9 this view is made evident by the fact that the Holy Ghost performs forever the mystery of the Consecration as He once did the mystery of the Incarnation. Christ’s example was the norm for the Apostles; at the celebration of the Sacrifice they did, first, only that which Christ had done before. According to His directions and under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost they observed other things besides, namely, according to circumstances of time and place, to the simple, essential act of sacrifice they added various prayers and observances, in order to celebrate the Holy Mysteries as worthily and as edifyingly as possible. Those constituent portions of the sacrificial rite, which are found in all the ancient liturgies, have incontestably their origin from Apostolic times and tradition; such, for example, as the preparatory prayers, the readings from Holy Scripture, the Psalms, the offering of bread and wine mixed with water, the supplications for the living and the dead, the Offertory prayers and the words added to those of the Consecration, the reference to the death and resurrection of Christ, the Lord’s Prayer, the sign of the Cross, the kiss of peace, the fraction and distribution of the Host, the thanksgiving after Communion. The Apostles, who had been instructed by the Lord Himself in the mysteries of the kingdom of God, and were filled with the Holy Ghost, assuredly observed a fixed order in the daily celebration of the Holy Sacrifice, although they did not establish and bequeath a written liturgy.10 — The first offering of the Holy Sacrifice by our Lord was the rule and the model for the Apostles; and the essential and fundamental features of the sacrificial rite, introduced and enlarged upon by the Apostles, were preserved with fidelity and reverence in the churches founded by them and their successors; but in the course of time, according as it was deemed necessary or expedient, it was always more and more developed, enriched and perfected, yet after a different manner, in the various churches of the East and West. “The Lord never ceases to be present to His beloved Spouse the Church, never fails to be at her side in her office of teaching and to accompany her in her operation with His blessing,”—consequently, He had the power, as He also had the will, to bequeath to the chiefs and shepherds of the Church the right to give to the Sacrifice instituted by Himself the most natural and the wisest development and the best adapted form, that is, to give it due liturgical form and solemnity.
Thus there originated in different places, at different times and among different nations also different liturgies, that is, ecclesiastical formulas for the celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice. In the main features, in the essential points of the Sacrifice, all these various rites of the Mass agree; but in the rest they all differ more or less, both in substance as well as in construction.11 With regard to their origin and their affinity, they may be divided into different classes; in general they are divided into two extensive groups—the liturgies of the East and the liturgies of the West. This division is warranted and well grounded, for the Eastern liturgies are characteristically distinguished from those of the West, not only by reason of their country and language, but also because of their spirit, contents and form. The liturgies of the East have a more stable, unchangeable character, since the same divine praises, the same petitions and thanksgivings are nearly always repeated; they present very little variety in the daily celebration of the ecclesiastical year. The liturgies of the West, on the contrary, exhibit a greater variety, fresh life and constant progress, for the celebration of the ecclesiastical feasts and seasons is most intimately connected and interwoven with the Holy Sacrifice. While the Oriental liturgies, for the most part, contain more lengthy prayers, a greater abundance of symbolical customs and acts, the Western, and especially the Roman-Latin rite, is marked by a significant brevity, as well as by a dignified simplicity and a marvellous sublimity in word and action.
3. While the liturgies of the East are very numerous, there are but few in the West. The principal are the Mozarabic, the ancient Gallic, the Ambrosian12 and Roman liturgies. The last named has at all times had the precedence, and is now found in all parts of the world. Already Pope Innocent I. (402–417), in writing to Decentius, Bishop of Gubbio, about ritual matters, traces the origin of the Roman liturgy to the Prince of the Apostles: “Who does not know,” he writes, “that what has been handed down by Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, to the Roman Church is still observed unto this day, and must be observed by all?” St. Peter, consequently, must be regarded (in a more general sense) as the founder of the Roman liturgy, for the method of celebration followed and introduced by him13 was, without doubt, the essential and permanent foundation for its later development and form. “This liturgy, as yet a tender plant, was brought by St. Peter, the Prince of the Church, into the garden of the Roman Church, where by his nursing care and that of his successors, assisted by the Holy Ghost, it has grown to a large tree, and although the trunk has long ago attained its full growth, it nevertheless shoots forth in every century new branches and new blossoms” (Kössing). — The most ancient written inventories of the Roman liturgy we possess in three Sacramentaries, which bear the names of Pope Leo I. (440–461), Gelasius I. (492–496) and Gregory I. (590–604) (Sacramentarium Leonianum, Gelasianum, Gregorianum).14 These Sacramentaries contain a precious treasure of liturgical traditions, which date from the most ancient period of the Roman Church. The above named Popes deserve well of the liturgy, inasmuch as they faithfully preserved the ancient formulas, and, at the same time, enriched and perfected them with additions suitable to the times. Our Missal is principally derived from the Sacramentary of St. Gregory the Great. Under him the Canon of the Mass received its last addition. The rest of the constituent parts of the Roman liturgy of the Mass (the Introit, the Kyrie, the Gloria, the Collect, the Epistle, the Gradual, the Gospel, the Secreta, the Preface, the Pater Noster, the Communion and the Post-Communion) date back at least to the fifth or even the fourth century. Toward the close of the Middle Age the Missals were much disfigured by particular changes and unsuitable additions, so that there was urgent need of a reform. This was accomplished under the Popes Pius V. (1560–1572), Clement VIII. (1592–1605) and Urban VIII. (1623–1644), who carefully revised and corrected the Missal.15 Thus the Gregorian Rite was, as far as possible, restored to its original purity, simplicity and dignity, while at the same time the desired unity of divine worship was brought about.
4. Thus has the Church in the course of time set the jewel of the Holy Sacrifice in the most magnificent manner with heavenly wisdom and skill for the praise of God and the edification of the faithful, by surrounding it with the precious decorations of holy prayers, of holy hymns, lessons and ceremonies.16 She has enveloped the celebration of the adorable Sacrifice in a mystic veil, in order to fill the hearts and minds of the faithful with religious awe and profound reverence, and to urge them to earnest, pious contemplation and meditation. The beauty, the worth and the perfection of the Roman liturgy of the Mass are universally acknowledged and admired. Father Faber styles the Church’s Rite of the Holy Sacrifice “the most beautiful thing this side of heaven,” and, as he remarks, “it came forth out of the grand mind of the Church, and lifted us out of earth and out of self, and wrapped us round in a cloud of mystical sweetness and the sublimities of a more than angelic liturgy, and purified us almost without ourselves, and charmed us with celestial charming, so that our very senses seem to find vision, hearing, fragrance, taste and touch, beyond what earth can give.” The Church prayers of the liturgy are superior to all other prayers; no “human genius can hope to attain their beauty and sublimity. In these two qualities, the Mass differs from all other offices in a remarkable manner. It has not merely flights of eloquence and poetry strikingly displayed in particular prayers, but it is sustained throughout in the higher sphere, to which its divine purpose naturally raises it. If we examine each prayer separately, it is perfect; perfect in construction, perfect in thought, and perfect in expression. If we consider the manner in which they are brought together, we are struck with the brevity of each, with the sudden but beautiful transitions, and the almost stanza-like effect, with which they succeed one another, forming a lyrical composition of surpassing beauty. If we take the entire service, as a whole, it is constructed with the most admirable symmetry, proportioned in its parts with perfect judgment and so exquisitely arranged, as to excite and preserve an unbroken interest in the sacred action. No doubt, to give full force and value to this sacred rite, its entire ceremonial is to be considered. The assistants, with their noble vestments, the chant, the incense, the more varied ceremonies which belong to a solemn Mass, are all calculated to increase veneration and admiration. But still, the essential beauties remain, whether the holy rite be performed under the golden vault of St. Peter’s, with all the pomp and circumstance befitting its celebration by the Sovereign Pontiff, or in a wretched wigwam, erected in haste by some poor savages for their missionary” (Wiseman). — “That overruling influence of the Spirit of God, that directs even in secondary matters the affairs of the visible Church, nowhere else appears so marked and evident as in the arrangement of the rite of the Holy Mass, which, although only monumental, yet in its present state forms such a beautiful, perfect whole, yea, a splendid work, that it excites the admiration of every reflecting mind. Even the bitterest adversaries of the Church do not deny it; unprejudiced, aesthetic judges of good taste admit that even from their own standpoint the Mass is to be classed as one of the greatest masterpieces ever composed. Thus the momentous sacrifice is encompassed with magnificent ceremonies: it is our duty to study to penetrate more and more into their meaning, and to expound what we have learned to the people according to their capacity” (Oswald). — The Roman liturgy has for some centuries been a complete masterpiece of art, wonderful in the harmony and union of its parts. The most sacred and venerable prayers and chants, breathing religious fervor and tenderness, follow most ingeniously upon one another, and together with the most appropriate and significant actions and ceremonies, form a beautiful whole, serving as a protecting garment and a worthy ornament to the divine mystery of the Holy Sacrifice. Their language, for its kind and object, cannot be surpassed;17 for it is biblical, ancient, simple, grave, dignified, solid, full of the spirit of faith, humility and devotion, and penetrated with the perfume of piety and holiness.
5. This glorious rite of the Sacrifice of the Mass is an unfailing mine of religious instruction and edification; it is like an immensely rich mine, where always new gold veins are disclosed to the searching look. Even if we were to devote our entire life to considering in our meditations and prayers the mystical liturgy of the Mass, there would still remain for our heart and mind new treasures, still new riches would reveal themselves and new beauties would be disclosed. And yet though it be so deep and impenetrable as to prove inexhaustible to even the greatest contemplative saint, it is, at the same time, so clear and easy of comprehension, that the most artless child as well as the most simple of the faithful finds therein light, incentive, strength and nourishment for his religious life. But is this precious liturgical treasure valued and turned to good account, as it deserves to be, by the ministers of the Church, in other words, do they study it for their own sanctification and make it available to the faithful in the school, in catechetical instructions and sermons?18 “The liturgy is a constant mysterious sermon, but it is by the mouth of the priest that the laity must learn to understand its language. Without liturgical instruction the participation of the faithful in the functions of divine worship will be in many instances only external and mechanical. The mighty stream of the ecclesiastical year flows by, the faithful stand on its bank, they look on, and of its waters they receive but a few drops which the waves of themselves cast upon the shore” (Amberger).
In order to discover the true and full meaning of the rite of the Mass, we must view it from the proper standpoint, and be guided by those correct maxims which give the sense of the liturgical words and actions.19 — It is self-evident that that unecclesiastical view is to be rejected which, while discarding all the higher and mystical sense, seeks to explain the mysterious liturgy after a mere natural or historic manner, by trying to ascribe all ceremonies exclusively to reasons of necessity, expedience and propriety.20 — Yet, on the other hand, in the mystical explanation of the liturgy the opposite mistake is to be avoided, which consists in giving arbitrary explanations without regard to the intentions of the Church, and in indulging in silly trifles and affected subtleties.21 — The Church herself applies symbolical meanings in her liturgy; therefore, in explaining the liturgy we must, above all things, attend to what the Church would express by her ceremonies.22 “Since by reason of his nature man is so constituted that without exterior aid he cannot easily rise to the contemplation of divine things, the Church, as a devoted Mother, has, therefore, introduced into her liturgy certain usages, as, for example, that some portions of the Mass should be recited in a low tone, others in a loud tone of voice. In like manner certain ceremonies, for instance, the mystical blessings, the use of lights, incense, vestments and many things of that nature, she employs by Apostolic prescription and tradition, in order both to manifest thereby the majesty of the great Sacrifice, as well as to animate the minds of the faithful by these visible signs of religion and piety to the consideration of the sublime mysteries hidden within this Sacrifice.”23 The ceremonies of the liturgy of the Mass, accordingly, have in general for their purpose a twofold object: in the first place they are intended to enhance and adorn the celebration of Mass, to serve for the honor and the worship of God; then, too, they are designed as a means to place before the eyes of the faithful in a lively manner the sublimity, the holiness and the efficacy of the Sacrifice, that the faithful, being thereby moved to sentiments of devotion, may be better disposed in heart to glorify God and to obtain grace. Now the honor of God and the sanctification of man invariably constitute the principal object of all liturgical acts,—and this, consequently, in their explanation must be always kept in the foreground; whatever is instructive therein is merely subordinate, and should be made to serve the main object.24 — The different ceremonies may, according to their object and signification, be more succinctly grouped into three classes.25
a) All the ceremonies of Mass conduce to the order, beauty and adornment of divine worship. Now while some ceremonies, nay, even many, have yet a higher mystical meaning, others are prescribed merely to invest the celebration of divine worship with decorum, dignity and reverence. The latter ceremonies are based merely on a just regard to propriety, decorum and suitableness. To this class belongs, for example, the prescription that the priest approach the altar with downcast eyes and measured step; that he place the left hand on his breast when making the sign of the Cross; that he turn toward the faithful, when greeting or blessing them.26
b) Most of the ceremonies are outward forms of worship, that is, they are the outcome of an interior emotion, expressions of religious thought and sentiments.27 Among these are the different positions and movements of the body, of the members of the body, for example, the bending of the knee, the striking of the breast, the bowing of the body and the head, the raising up and the joining of the hands. Such acts are outward signs which express, accompany and awaken devout sentiments of the heart; for instance, sentiments of adoration, humility, desire, sorrow and confidence. “They who pray, bend the knee, raise the hands or prostrate themselves to the ground, thereby expressing outwardly what they feel inwardly. Their invisible will and the intention of their heart is indeed known to God, and their interior sentiments need not be made known to Him by such signs; but by their means we are to pray and sigh more humbly and more ardently; and although these bodily motions are made through a previous impulse of the heart, nevertheless, the emotion of the heart is, I know not how, again increased by these exterior signs, which it had produced, and the interior devotion, which preceded them, grows more intense through the exterior devotion which it had brought forth.”28
c) A third group is prescribed especially because of their symbolical signification; these ceremonies are destined prominently to indicate the mysteries of Christian faith and life.29 To this class, for example, belong the mixing of wine and water, the washing of the hands at the Offertory, the placing of the hands over the oblation before the Consecration, the breaking of the Host and the dropping of a small particle of it into the chalice, the frequent making of the sign of the Cross, the use of lights and incense.
Accordingly the ceremonies of the liturgy in the intention of the Church serve not merely for the proper, the worthy and the edifying celebration of the Sacrifice, but also for the exterior honor of God, of the Eucharistic Saviour, of the saints, of relics and pictures, as well as for the symbolical expression of the different mysteries. These different objects do not exclude one another, but are often united together in one and the same liturgical act, for example, sometimes in the use of the sign of the Cross, the honor paid the Cross. Along with the natural reason and object of a ceremony the Church not unfrequently combines a higher, mystical sense.30
Finally, we must not overlook in the ceremonies their sacramental character, which consists in this that they in their own way produce spiritual effects and obtain divine grace.
6. Catholic ceremonies, therefore, are not the relics of heathen or Jewish customs, but Apostolic and ecclesiastical ordinances, forms of worship created and pervaded by a higher spirit. Consequently, the priest should highly esteem and love them, and therefore perform them with punctuality and dignity. St. Teresa was ready to sacrifice her life for even the least ceremony of the Church. In the service of the Almighty, in the most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass even the smallest thing has its meaning and importance; and, therefore, the Church has so exactly and minutely regulated by her rubrics the entire deportment of the priest at the altar. Whosoever conscientiously complies with these ecclesiastical regulations, has the special merit of practising the virtue of obedience in all his actions and movements when celebrating. To all applies the admonition of the Apostle: “Glorify and bear God in your body!” (1 Cor. 6, 20.) — A modest demeanor and a becoming exterior, regulated according to the requirements of reason and faith, honors God, edifies our neighbor and promotes our own spiritual life. Therefore, the priest at the altar should, above all, not neglect the exterior. In his whole deportment should be reflected his faith, his reverence, his recollection of mind, his heartfelt devotion.31 “What great care is to be taken to celebrate Holy Mass with all religious solemnity and devotion, every one will easily understand, when he reflects that in Holy Scripture a curse is pronounced upon those who do the work of God negligently.32 Since we must confess that the faithful can perform no action so holy and so divine as this adorable mystery, in which that life-giving Victim, which has reconciled us with God the Father, is daily offered by the priest on the altar. It is, then, self-evident that all pains and care should be taken to perform this Sacrifice with the greatest purity of heart and with all the marks of exterior devotion and piety.”33 The priest at the altar should render to God in the name of the Church a homage of the highest veneration: in the first place, interiorly by acts of faith, of hope, love, humility, contrition, praise, thanksgiving and petition; then also exteriorly by bows, by genuflections, by striking his breast, raising his hands and eyes, kissing the altar and many other ceremonies.34 All these acts should be performed with devotion, reverence and dignity in the presence of God and of His holy angels, otherwise they become occasions of distraction, of scandal and of all manner of irreverence.35
From historical and, at the same time, from objective reasons the liturgical celebration of the Mass may be divided into two parts—1) into the general, preparatory divine service (Missa catechumenorum) and 2) into the particular, real sacrificial worship (Missa fidelium), which admits of a three-fold subdivision (the Offertory, the Consecration and the Communion).36
Section I—The Preparatory Divine Service
What is most holy must be treated in a holy manner; therefore, a careful preparation for the mystery of the Divine Sacrifice is required. The whole career, the entire life and conduct of the priest should be a remote, uninterrupted preparation for Holy Mass;37 but when the hour for Mass is near, he has an immediate and special preparation to make, that is, by religious acts, by the exercise of mental and vocal prayer,38 to dispose his soul and to excite his heart to devotion.39 In a touching manner does the venerable John of Avila exhort one thereto. He thus writes: “It is indeed the most powerful means to arouse a man, to make this serious reflection: I am going to perform the holy Consecration, to hold God in my hands, to converse with Him and to receive Him into my heart. Who will not be inflamed with love by making the reflection to himself: I am on the point of receiving the Infinite Goodness? Who does not tremble and shudder out of a loving awe toward Him, before whom the heavenly Powers themselves shudder and tremble? Who does not tremble with the fear of offending Him, and does not tremble with the desire to praise and serve Him? Who does not experience sorrow, confusion and remorse for having offended the Divine Master, whom he beholds before him? Who is not filled with confidence by such a pledge? Who does not endeavor—having such a Viaticum with him in the desert of this world—to do penance? In short, such a meditation, dictated by the spirit of God, entirely transforms man, and carries him away and beside himself,—at one time by a sense of reverence, now by love, again by other powerful emotions. How cautious should we not be to keep ourselves wholly and unreservedly for Christ, who so greatly honors us, as to descend unto us and place Himself in our hands, when the words of Consecration are pronounced!”40
After this private preparation41 the priest proceeds to the altar, to offer the Holy Sacrifice. The first principal division of the Mass liturgy, which extends from the prayers said at the foot of the altar to the Offertory, bears also a preparatory character; it may be considered as the public and common preparation of the priest and the people for the actual celebration of the Holy Mysteries.
The prayers, hymns and readings which compose this introductory and preparatory divine service, aim principally at purifying the heart and enlightening the mind, at animating the faith and exciting devotion, in order that all present may be placed in the proper dispositions and thus be able to offer worthily the most Holy Sacrifice to the Most High.
Notes
Nomen dictum quasi notamen (characteristic, mark), quod nobis vocabulo suo res notas efficiat. Nisi enim nomen scieris, cognitio rerum perit (S. Isidor. Etymolog. l. 1, c. 7, n. 1). — Such names are, for example, collecta; dominicum; memoriale; communio; oblatio;—λειτουργία, εὐχαριστία, θυσία, λατρεία, σύναξις, μυσταγωγία, οἰκονομία. — Cfr. Bona, Rer. liturg. l. 1, c. 3.
↩Altogether untenable and, therefore, universally rejected is the etymological tracing of the word Missa from the Hebrew (Deuter. 16, 10 missah = tributum, oblatio), or from the Greek (μύησις = initiatio, mystica doctrina), or from the German (Mess = festum, congregatio). — Missa is also not to be taken as a participle of mitto, to which the substantive concio or congregatio (concio vel congregatio missa, i. e. dimissa est) or oblatio (oblatio missa, i. e. transmissa est ad Deum) would have to be supplied; Missa is rather a later Latin substantive for missio, as similar derivative words often occur, for example, remissa = remissio; collecta = collectio; ingressa = ingressio; oblata = oblatio; accessa = accessio; confessa = confessio. As a substantive Missa was used in a manifold sense. It designated in the first place the dismissal at the close of divine service and also of secular assemblies; for the holy Bishop Avitus of Vienne writes (about the year 500) to the Burgundian King Gundobald, that it was customary in churches and in judgment-halls to cry out missa est, when the people were dismissed (in ecclesiis palatiisque sive praetoriis missa fieri pronunciatur, cum populus ab observatione dimittitur). Furthermore, the word Missa was employed to designate the entire Officium divinum, as well as the separate readings and prayers during it; for example, missae matutinae, was the name given to Matins; Vespers were called missae vespertinae. In the Middle Age we meet the word Missa in the signification of feast and annual fair, as celebration of the sacrifice was the principal part of the festivity, and as the people flocked together at the festivals for buying and selling. The view already advanced and recently defended by Müller in his pamphlet “Missa, Ursprung und Bedeutung der Benennung,” that Missa is an ancient Latin sacrificial name and originally signified the same as oblatio, is unfounded. Cfr. Bellarmin. De Missa, l. 1, c. 1. — Benedict. XIV. De sacr. Miss. sacrif. l. 2, c. 1. — Cfr. especially P. Rottmanner, O. S. B., in the “Tübinger Quartalschrift” 1889.
↩Missa (dismissal), tempore sacrificii, est quando catechumeni foras mittuntur, clamante levita: “Si quis catechumenus remansit, exeat foras,” et inde missa, quia sacramentis altaris interesse non possunt, qui nondum regenerati noscuntur (S. Isidor. Etymol. l. 6, c. 19, n. 4.) — Missa (the dismissal) catechumenorum fiebat ante actionem Sacramentorum: missa (the dismissal) fidelium post confectionem et participationem eorundem Sacramentorum (mysteries). Flor. Diac. De expos. Miss. n. 131.
↩Sequenti die (erat autem Dominica), post lectiones (sc. sacrae Scripturae) atque tractatum (sc. expositionem lectionis vel concionem), dimissis catechumenis, symbolum aliquibus competentibus in baptisteriis tradebam basilicae. Illic nuntiatum est mihi comperto quod ad Portianam basilicam de palatio decanos (= lictores) misissent et vela suspenderent, populi partem eo pergere. Ego tamen mansi in munere, Missam facere coepi. Dum offero, raptum cognovi a populo Castulum quemdam (S. Ambr. Epistol. 20, n. 4–5).
↩The Latins have given this name (Missa) to the Sacrifice, because, when the time of the offering was reached, the catechumens, the penitents and the possessed, and at the end all the faithful, were dismissed by a solemn proclamation.... This solemn exclusion of these three kinds of persons inspired the people with an exalted idea of the holy mysteries, because it showed them how great a purity is requisite to assist thereat, and much more still to participate therein. The dismissal of the faithful at the end of the service was not less venerable: because it gave them to understand that they should not go out of the church without leave, and that the Church did not dismiss her children until she had filled them with veneration for the majesty of the holy mysteries and the graces accompanying their reception; so that they returned to their ordinary occupations, bearing in mind that the Church, which had dismissed them, admonished them thereby to perform them as religiously as their vocation called for, and with the spirit with which they were filled (Bossuet, Sur les prières de la Messe. Oeuvres complètes IV [Bar-le-Duc 1870], q. 447).
↩Sacrosanctum altaris mysterium idcirco missa dicitur, quia ad placationem et solutionem inimicitiarum (Ephes. 5), quae erant inter Deum et homines, sola valens et idonea missio est (Rupert. Tuitiens. De divin. off. l. 2, c. 10). — Dicitur autem Missa a mittendo, et repraesentat legationem inter homines et Deum; Deus enim mittit Filium suum Christum in altare, et iterum mittit Ecclesia fidelis eundem Christum ad Patrem, ut pro nobis intercedat (S. Bonavent. Expos. Miss. c. 2). — Missa dicitur, quia in hoc officio repraesentatur missio Christi a sinu Patris in mundum redimendum, i. e. incarnatio, et missio Christi a mundo ad Patrem placandum, scilicet passio (Sicardus, Mitral., l. 3, c. 1).
↩Prima etymologia verior videtur, altera ad pietatem propensior (Benedict. XIV. De Miss. sacrif. l. 2, c. 1, n. 5).
↩Bickell, Messe und Pascha. Mainz 1872.
↩The first Mass said by an apostle was not celebrated before the Resurrection, nor before the Ascension, nor before Pentecost. Mary d’Agreda assigns the day of the octave for this; but the most common and most probable opinion assigns the very day on which the Holy Ghost came down. Did He come down before or after the consecration? According to Théophile Raynaud (De prima Missa sect. 2, c. 6), it took place only after the communion of the faithful; but is it not preferable to suppose, as St. Proclus, patriarch of Constantinople, seems to do, that the sanctifying Spirit descended before the consecration, which took place and always takes place by His virtue? (Blot, Marie Réparatrice et l’Eucharistie p. 200–201. — Cf. Bona, Rer. liturg. l. 1, c. 5.)
↩Probst, Bickell, Funke and others state that the so-called Clementine Liturgy (the 8th Book of the Apostolic Constitution) with some slight peculiarities was used in the entire Church,—from the days of the Apostles until the fourth century: not until this epoch did the various liturgies of the eastern and western churches proceed by reform from this one primitive liturgy. Historic as well as intrinsic reasons rather oppose than approve of this view. Cf. Thalhofer, Liturgik, I, 334 etc. — Krazer, sect. 1, c. 1–4.
↩In celebrando sacrosancto Missae sacrificio omnes Orientis et Occidentis Ecclesiae modum quemdam in summa communem ab initio habuere; singulae tamen ritus aliquos singulares ac diversos. Haec omnibus semper communia: nempe lectiones sacrarum Scripturarum initio Liturgiae; psalmorum aliorumque canticorum recitatio; oblatio panis et vini aqua mixti; consecratio utriusque verbis Christi Domini cum benedictione ac signo crucis a sacerdote facta; oratio Dominica et sacra communio cum gratiarum actione. At designatio certarum ex Scriptura lectionum; psalmorum aliarumque precum numerus et definitio; ministrorum ritus praeter eos, qui sunt ex institutione divina,—haec omnia pro locis ac temporibus varia exstiterunt (Mabillon, De Liturg. Gallic. l. 1, cap. 2). — Non errare illos reputamus, qui rituum et ceremoniarum varietatem inter ipsa rerum christianarum primordia jam esse natam suspicantur. Fieri enim potuit, ut Apostoli gravissimis de causis in diversis partibus et provinciis pro captu et ingenio populorum diversas rogarent leges, diversas ordinarent ceremonias (Krazer sect. 1, c. 1, § 2).
↩The Mozarabic Liturgy is also called the Gothic-Spanish, Isidorian and Toledian. The expression Mozarabic probably denotes that this was the liturgy of the Arabianized, that is, of the Christians resident in Spain under Arab power and mingling with the Arabs. It bears much resemblance to the ancient Gallic Liturgy, and appears to have originated from it. Probably it was in use from the beginning among the Christians in Spain, and gradually gave place to the Roman Liturgy, so that at the close of the fifteenth century at Toledo alone, and that only in six churches of the city, was the Mozarabic rite celebrated on great feasts. Cardinal Ximenes († 1517) founded a college of thirteen priests at Toledo, who were obliged daily to celebrate according to the Mozarabic Rite. In the beautiful chapel ad Corpus Christi, which Ximenes built in the Cathedral of Toledo, the Office is until now daily recited and Holy Mass celebrated according to the Mozarabic Rite. Besides this in two parish churches in Toledo—namely, in that of St. Mark and that of Sts. Justa and Rufina—the Holy Sacrifice is celebrated according to the Mozarabic Liturgy,—but only on Sundays and feast-days. Also at Salamanca there is in the cathedral a chapel—St. Salvador’s, in which the priest on sixteen stated days of the year has to observe the Mozarabic Mass Rite. Cf. Theologisch-praktische Quartalschrift von Linz 1879, S. 35 etc. — The ancient Gallic Rite was observed in Gaul until the end of the eighth century, when it was replaced by the Roman. The ancient Gallic Liturgy, now nowhere in use, harmonizes to a great extent with the Mozarabic. Both have the same Introit, called in the Mozarabic Liturgy officium, in the ancient Gallic antiphona ad praelegendum. Then follows the Gloria, which in the Gallic Liturgy is often replaced by the Benedictus, for this reason the oration that follows it is called collectio post prophetiam, while, on the contrary, in the Mozarabic it is styled post Gloria. Both have the salutation: Dominus sit semper vobiscum. After the three Lessons and the Offertory there follow in both Liturgies seven prayers: a) The Oration Missa, so called because it is the first in the actual Mass, that is, in the Mass of the faithful (formerly called praefatio ad missam); b) the alia oratio (A. G. collectio); c) the Oratio post nomina, that is, after the reading of the Diptychs; d) the Oratio ad pacem, that is, before the kiss of peace; e) the Inlatio (A. G. contestatio vel immolatio = Preface); f) the prayer post pridie (A. G. post mysterium), that is, after the Elevation; g) the prayer post orationem dominicam. Both have the blessing before the Communion. The Mozarabic Rite has an elevatio hostiae at the Creed, the Pater noster with responsories after each petition, the fraction of the Host in nine specially named parts. — The Ambrosian Rite still partly in use in Milan (so called because St. Ambrose enriched and completed it) harmonizes with the Roman as to essentials, and is to be regarded as its daughter or sister. In both prevails the same connection between the changeable and unchangeable constituent parts, the same structure of prayers, the same brevity, vigor and precision, the same wealth of thought. The variations are insignificant; thus, for example, the succession of the parts is somewhat changed in the Ambrosian Rite, in that the Credo comes after the Offertory, the Pater noster is recited after the fractio hostiae, and the washing of the hands immediately precedes the Consecration; the regulation of the liturgical colors is also somewhat different. — Cf. Liturgia Mozarabica (Migne tom. 85). — Mabillon, De Liturgia Gallic. l. 3 (Migne tom. 72). — Mozarabische und ambrosianische Liturgie in der Bibliothek der Kirchenväter. Kempten 1877.
↩Istum ordinem ab apostolis et ab apostolicis viris traditum Romana tenet ecclesia et per totum paene Occidentem omnes ecclesiae eandem traditionem servant (Raban. Maur. De clericor. institut. l. 1, c. 33). — Inter Occidentis Liturgias potissimum sibi locum vindicat Romana, quam saltem quoad praecipuas partes a Petro Apostolorum principe processisse constans et perpetua Ecclesiae Romanae est traditio. Id Decentio Eugubino Innocentius I., id Profuturo Braccarensi episcopo Vigilius in suis contestantur epistolis (Krazer sect. 2, c. 2, § 25).
↩Sacramentarium (= liber sacramentorum vel mysteriorum, the book for the celebration of the mysteries) was in the West until far into the Middle Age the name of the liturgical book containing the prayers to be recited by the priest only in the celebration of Mass and in the administration of the sacraments and sacramentals, v. g., the Orationes and Prefaces with the Canon, the rite of administering baptism and holy orders, and the blessing of the holy oils. — The parts to be sung by the choir (at the Introit, after the Epistle, at the Offertory and at the Communion) were in another book, which was called in early times Antiphonarium, and later Graduale. — The complete list of the readings from the Bible was called Comes, Companion, that is, Guide for the liturgical Scripture lessons of the whole ecclesiastical year. If the sections for the readings from the Bible were taken according to the order of the Comes not merely by their first words, but according to the whole text, they were called Lectionaries or Plenaries; and these contained the whole course in full (plene, pleniter) and were used until the seventh century. These Lectionaries were often divided into two books—the Epistolarium and the Evangelarium. Since the tenth century the parts for reading and singing were partly externally connected with the Sacramentarium, and partly internally and organically blended with the contents of the Sacramentarium to form the complete Missal (Missale plenum vel plenarium), which did not come into exclusive and general use until the thirteenth century. — The rubrics were given in the so-called Ordines Romani, from which they afterward were taken up into the liturgical books. — (Cf. Zaccaria, Biblioth. ritual. I, 26 sqq. — Thalhofer, Liturgik I, 33 etc. — Ebner, Quellen und Forschungen S. 359 etc.)
↩The holy Pope Pius V., whom the Church honors as an instrument chosen by God ad conterendos Ecclesiae hostes et ad divinum cultum reparandum, forbade in the bull of July 14, 1570, any one to add or omit or change anything in the Missal that had recently been published by him. At the same time he suppressed all other Missals; those only might be retained, which had been in use for more than two hundred years. Thus, for example, the Carmelites, the Carthusians and the Dominicans retained their ancient rite, as also the Mozarabic and Milan liturgies have remained in use in some churches until this day.
↩Olim non tanto exterioris apparatu decoris Missarum solemnia celebrabantur, nec ab uno quolibet haec omnis religiosi obsequii gloria consummata et perpolita est. Pontifices quippe sacri, splendida Romanae sedis luminaria, sicut diversis temporibus affulserunt, ita paulatim studii sui claritate, venustatem hujus salutaris officii perfecerunt. Et sicut traditum a Domino per Moysen sacrificii veteris ordinem praecipue David et Salomon (III. Reg. 7) sacerdotum et levitarum ministerio (I.Paral. 23), cantorum multiplici numero, psalmorum divinorum tripudio, templi vel altaris illustri gloria, sacrorumque multitudine vasorum splendidius amplificaverunt, sic traditum a Domino mirabilem novi sacrificii ritum per primos Apostolos sancta Romana Ecclesia suscipiens, religiosa fide amplexata est, fideli cura conservavit, diligenti apparatu exornavit... Studiosa divinae legis Ecclesia Romana paulatim protulit de thesauro suo nova pietatis monumenta, et quoddam velut ex auro lapidibusque pretiosis religiosi officii sancto sacrificio fabrefecit diadema (Rupert. Tuitiens. De divin. offic. l. 2, c. 21).
↩What Bossuet says of the Christian language in general, applies in the highest degree to the liturgical language: “It is not addressed to the senses, but to the soul, whose food it is”—“verbum nutritorium animarum” (Origen. in Matth. n. 85). “Like the body of Jesus Christ, who made Himself the bread of our souls, it must not be dazzling, for His word must participate in the humility of His flesh, and as in His flesh lowliness is mingled with greatness, so in it every thing is grand and every thing is lowly, every thing is rich and every thing is poor” (Bossuet, Panégyrique de Saint Paul).
↩Sacrorum rituum leges, quae rubricarum nomine censentur, presbyteri accurate addiscant, apprimeque calleant ac attentissime servent; nec illos commentarios, qui de istis sacris ritibus a piis et eruditis viris conscripti sunt, legere omittant, dictasque ceremonias frequenter inter Missarum celebrationem exponere, ut earum sanctitas et significatio ab omnibus agnoscantur (Coll. Lac. III, p. 644). — There are few priests, even among those who exercise the sacred ministry, who have nothing to reproach themselves with in this matter. This is the cause of the ignorance among the people of one of the most interesting parts of the Catholic worship, and of the disgust or indifference of many for the mysteries or sacraments of our holy religion (Gousset, Théol. mor. II, 28).
↩Cfr. Languet, De vero Ecclesiae sensu circa sacrarum ceremoniarum usum. — Assemani, De ritibus sacris (Migne, Curs. theolog. compl. 26). — Lebrun, Explication de la Messe, Préface n. IV. — VI.
↩Thus writes Claudius de Vert († 1708) in his celebrated work: Explication simple, littérale et historique des Cérémonies de l’Eglise IV (Paris 1706–1713).
↩Blessed J. M. Thomasius (Tomasi) of the Order of the Theatines († 1. Jan. 1713), writes on this subject (Op. VII, 185): Concerning the mystical or moral senses of the Mass we should be somewhat sparing, because many things are intended to signify something,... whilst many others, rather the most part, are instituted not to signify anything in particular, but from decorum, for good order and religious propriety,... and to look for a mystical and spiritual sense in every little thing, would not be in accordance with the intentions of those who instituted it.
↩Sunt quidem quamplurimae caeremoniae et usu et origine mysticae. Concedo tamen, et alias esse, quae exordium et institutionem suam necessitati, commodo et decoro debent. Imo nec diffiteor, quamplures auctores nimio indoctae pietatis zelo adductos extra justi tramites vagatos fuisse, dum sibi mysteria, parabolas, symbola iis in caeremoniis fabricarunt, quibus certe talia adjungere Ecclesia numquam in mente habuit (Languet 1. c, §2).
↩Trid. sess. 22, cap. 5.
↩Finis omnium caeremoniarum et verborum, quae ab Ecclesia (Apostolis eorumque successoribus) instituta sunt in administratione sacramentorum et nominatim sacrificii eucharistici, potissimum duplex est; proxime ut res ipsa essentialis quae agitur, distinctius declarata velut ob oculos ponatur atque convenienti majestate et externo cultu condecoretur, consequenter deinde ut excitetur et foveatur congruentior dispositio ac devotio in animis fidelium ad cultum Deo exhibendum et majorem fructum percipiendum (Cardin. Franzelin, De Sacramento Eucharistiae thes. VII).
↩Cfr. Suarez disp. 84, sect. 1.
↩Primo quaedam ex caeremoniis Missae inductae sunt solum, ut hoc sacrum mysterium debita honestate, modestia et reverentia peragatur; unde constat, hujusmodi caeremonias non solum convenientes, sed moraliter etiam esse necessarias et ideo summa prudentia esse ab Ecclesia institutas (Suarez l. c., n. 2).
↩Secundo sunt aliae caeremoniae institutae per se primo propter exteriores actus latriae exercendos, quae etiam convenientissime institutae sunt (Suarez l. c., n. 3).
↩S. Aug. De cura pro mortuis gerenda c. 5, n. 7. — Exercentur ab hominibus quaedam sensibilia opera, non quibus Deum excitent, sed quibus seipsos provocent in divina, sicut prostrationes, genuflexiones, vocales clamores et cantus, quae non fiunt, quasi Deus his indigeat, quia omnia novit et cujus voluntas est immutabilis et qui affectum mentis et etiam motum corporis non propter se acceptat, sed propter nos facimus, ut per haec sensibilia opera intentio nostra dirigatur in Deum et affectio ascendatur; simul etiam per hoc Deum profitemur animae et corporis auctorem, cui et spiritualia et corporalia obsequia exhibemus (S. Thom., C. gent. l. 3, c. 119).
↩Tertio sunt aliae caeremoniae, quae specialiter sunt propter significationem (moralem vel mysticam) institutae, non quod non pertineat etiam ad ornatum, neque quod cultum etiam aliquem non contineant, sed quod principaliter propter significationem ordinatae sint (Suarez l. c., n. 4).
↩In the ceremonies, even in those which seem the least important, there is nothing that has not its reason, and often a very deep meaning. Christian symbolism is something admirable for those who are able to understand it. It is God with His infinite perfections and His grandeurs, it is the Church with her doctrines and her history made evident to the eyes of our infirmity (Mgr. Guibert, Lettre à son clergé sur les études ecclésiastiques, 2. Oct. 1851).
↩Tanta gravitate, tanto religionis cultu (sacerdotes) Missae sacrificium celebrent, ut per visibilem ministri pietatem invisibilia aeterni sacerdotis mysteria conspiciantur. Nihil igitur obiter in hac divina actione, nihil perfunctorie, nihil praecipitanter, nihil inconditis gestibus, omnia vero graviter, omnia secundum ordinem fiant, juxta receptos et approbatos Ecclesiae ritus, qui vel in minimis sine peccato negligi, omitti vel mutari haud possunt (Concil. prov. Quebec. II, a. 1854).
↩Ex consideratione infinitae bonitatis, majestatis et excellentiae Dei, ex intuitione quoque totius miseriae, vilitatis, culpae ac indigentiae nostrae exhibeamus nos Deo in omni suo obsequio, in oratione praesertim et psalmodia, maxime vero in celebratione cum omni ac profundissima humilitate, compunctione, reverentia, attentione, custodia ac fervore; et ante horarum, orationum et psalmodiae inceptionem recolligamus cor nostrum et simplificemus ac stabiliamus illud in Deo, ejus incircumscriptibilem dignitatem, praesentiam, misericordiam justitiamque pensando, proprias quoque miserias et offensas efficaciter ponderando et aggravando, et ita singula verba sacra quasi ex proprio affectu cum attentione et gustu interno distincte pronuntiemus (Dion. Carthus. De laude vitae solitariae art. 21).
↩Trident. sess. 22, decret. de observandis et evitandis in celebr. Miss.
↩Cogitemus nos sub conspectu Dei stare. Placendum est divinis oculis et habitu corporis et modo vocis (S. Cyprian. De Orat. domin. c. 3). — Quia ex duplici natura compositi sumus, intellectuali sc. et sensibili, duplicem adorationem Deo offerimus: sc. spiritualem, quae consistit in interiori mentis devotione, et corporalem, quae consistit in exteriori corporis humiliatione. — Et quia in omnibus actibus latriae id quod est exterius, refertur ad id quod est interius, sicut ad principalius, ideo ipsa exterior adoratio fit propter interiorem, ut videlicet per signa humilitatis, quae corporaliter exhibemus, excitetur noster affectus ad subjiciendum se Deo, quia connaturale est nobis, ut per sensibilia ad intelligibilia procedamus (S. Thom. 2, 2, q. 84, a. 2).
↩Presbyter = senior, non propter senectutem, sed propter dignitatem, honorem et sapientiam, quia quicunque presbyter est, sapiens esse debet, ut intelligat ea quae legit: intelligat orationes, quas dicit et diurnis temporibus et nocturnis; intelligat ea quae cantat in Missa (Pseudo-Alcuin. cap. 36).
↩In hoc sacramento totum mysterium nostrae salutis comprehenditur, ideo prae ceteris sacramentis cum majori solemnitate agitur. Ante celebrationem hujus mysterii primo quidem praemittitur praeparatio quaedam ad digne agenda ea, quae sequuntur... Consequenter acceditur ad celebrationem mysterii, quod quidem et offertur ut sacrificium et consecratur et sumitur ut sacramentum. Unde primo peragitur oblatio; secundo consecratio oblatae materiae; tertio ejusdem perceptio (S. Thom. 3, q. 83, a. 4).
↩Generalis dispositio ad celebrandum est ea diligentia, qua incumbere sacerdotes debemus, ut vita nostra et conversatio respondeat sanctitati atque amplitudini mysteriorum, quae celebramus. Et haec est principalis magisque necessaria praeparatio: adeo ut omnino requiratur, ut tota sacerdotis vita praeparatio sit ad digne celebrandum, et in omni re tam circumspecte agat, ut paratus esse ad offerendum semper dici possit, utque in omnibus, quae dixerit ac fecerit, recordetur sese hodie celebrasse, et cras celebraturum (Anton, de Molina, Instructio sacerdotum tr. 4, c. 6).
↩Optimum consilium est, ut sacerdos omnino rejectis curis et cogitationibus saeculi immediate ante Missam orationi vacet, i. e. mentali, quae maxime fervorem et devotionem excitat (Quarti, In rubr. Miss. p. 2, tit. 1, n. 1).
↩Tota vita sacerdotis timorati cupientis celebrare devote, debet esse continua praeparatio incessabilisque dispositio ad celebrandum condigne, ita ut diligentissime vitet, quidquid impedimentum est celebrationis devotae ac fervidae, et quidquid ad eam disponit ac confert viriliter apprehendat et exsequatur, ita tamen, ut hora celebrationis instante, per specialia et peculiaria quaedam exercitia devotionalia orationum, meditationum, psalmodiarum, contritionis, confessionis et satisfactionis ad instantem celebrationem se praeparet (Dionys. Carthus. De particul. judicio dialog. art. 34). — Ad celebrandum meritorie sufficit et item requiritur, quod celebrans existat in caritate et ex caritate ad celebrandum moveatur ac procedat, quae interior motio sit promptitudo aliqua voluntatis ad opus illud cultus divini. Celebratio namque est actus tam privilegiatus, divinus ac eminens, quod ad eam exigitur actualis devotio, quae caritatem ejusque actum et quandam Dei contemplationem aut saltem considerationem includit. Christus quippe sacramenti hujus frequentationem, h. e. celebrationem instituendo praecepit Apostolis et in eorum persona cunctis presbyteris: “Haec quotiescunque feceritis, in mei memoriam facietis,” h. e. in commemorationem amorosam ac devotam eximiae caritatis meae ad vos et acerbissimae meae passionis pro vobis... Tenetur ergo sacerdos in celebratione bonam et specialem timoratamque diligentiam adhibere, ut attente, devote ac reverenter se habeat et se a distractione compescat (Id. De sacram. altar. art. 17).
↩Cfr. Schermer, Geistliche Briefe des ehrw. Juan de Avila I, 47–55.
↩The preparatory prayers recommended by the fact that the Church has received them into the Missale Romanum, deserve the preference over others and should, therefore, never be omitted. The above mentioned five Psalms contain and awaken every affection (faith, hope, confidence, love, desire, devotion, humility, sorrow, compunction, gratitude, resignation, self-offering), that disposes the priest for the worthy and fruitful celebration of Mass. The Antiphon: “Remember not, O Lord, our (mine and the nation’s) offences nor those of our parents and take not revenge of our sins” (according to Tob. 3, 3), is a prayer of atonement that imparts corresponding expression to the sentiment of sinfulness and unworthiness, with which the soul of the priest should be animated at this moment. — Psalm 83 has a privileged position in the liturgy among the hymns which glorify the Eucharistic mysteries: fervently and with deep feelings of devotion it expresses the sentiments of the priestly heart, which longs for the altar, to place there in Jesus’s Heart and wounds all his labors, sufferings and joys, thence also to draw strength for the earthly pilgrimage which conducts through this valley of tears to our heavenly home and to glory. — Psalm 84 has by preference become an Advent and Christmas hymn in the Church. It contains gratitude for redemption about to begin, petitions for the completion of redemption and for perfect sanctification (for mercy, favor and peace, for freedom from the assaults of sensuality and self-love, and for the diminution of daily faults, &c.), and concludes with the joyful confidence of obtaining the fruits of salvation at the altar in all their fulness. — Psalm 85 is an humble and ardent prayer of petition. Feeling his indigence and dependence on God, in consideration of the goodness and power of his Master, the priest implores strength against his perverse inclinations and protection against external enemies, as well as assistance for the worthy performance of the most holy, sublime and divine action of his office at the altar. — Psalm 115 imparts earnest and enthusiastic expression to the celebrant’s intention of thanksgiving, that is, to his grateful sacrificial joy and joyful self-sacrifice in the service of God. — Psalm 129 is a heartrending penitential hymn, full of humility and contrition, of hope and confidence in the mercy of God and in the superabundant redemption, the source of which is daily disclosed anew on the altar for the atonement of sin. — The following Versicles and Responsories continue the supplication for favor and mercy, and the perfect application of the “copiosa redemptio” prepared at the altar, and the orations contain petitions for light, for purifying and inflaming the heart by the light and fire of the Holy Spirit, ut veniens Dominus noster Jesus Christus paratam sibi in nobis inveniat mansionem. — This praeparatio ad Missam was in use as to its essential parts already in the eleventh century. Presbyter, cum se parat ad Missam, juxta Romanam consuetudinem decantat (recites) hos Psalmos: Quam dilecta (83), Benedixisti (84), Inclina Domine (85), Credidi (115); deinde Κύριε ἐλέησον, Pater noster, cum precibus et oratione pro peccatis, videlicet ut intus et exterius summo sacerdoti placere valeat, quem cum sacratissima oblatione sibi omnibusque christianis placare desiderat (Microlog. c. 1). Decanta cum devotione illos quinque psalmos (83, 84, 85, 115, 129) cum suis versiculis et orationibus. Dicas etiam, si tempus suppetit, orationem illam “Summe Sacerdos”, quae valde efficax est et devota. Postea procedens ad altare recole Christum euntem ad crucem et fige cor ad ea, quae in passione gesta sunt; legas clare et distincte ea, quae legenda sunt, non multiplicando collectas nimias nec alia legendo ex devotione vel proprio arbitrio, quam quod a sanctis Patribus institutum est (S. Bonav. tr. de praepar. ad Miss. c. 2, n. 2).
↩
