- RSS Channel Showcase 9695456
- RSS Channel Showcase 9412081
- RSS Channel Showcase 6845043
- RSS Channel Showcase 5346768
Articles on this Page
- 11/21/18--05:58: _Liturgical Notes on...
- 11/22/18--03:06: _New Mass by Frank L...
- 11/22/18--08:33: _The Feast of St Cec...
- 11/22/18--09:00: _Solemn TLM in Trent...
- 11/23/18--02:09: _The Life and Work o...
- 11/23/18--05:50: _Vespers of the Dead...
- 11/23/18--11:52: _New Regular TLMs in...
- 11/23/18--18:58: _The Life and Work o...
- 11/24/18--10:44: _New TLM in Vero Bea...
- 11/25/18--06:55: _Bishop Robert Morli...
- 11/26/18--07:06: _The Continual Spect...
- 11/27/18--07:16: _Steve Talley - Tona...
- 11/27/18--23:26: _The Post-Vatican II...
- 11/28/18--09:37: _Cardinal Burke Cele...
- 11/28/18--15:11: _Charles Tournemire’...
- 11/29/18--09:57: _The Feast of St Ce...
- 11/29/18--14:02: _Dominican Rite Miss...
- 11/29/18--14:55: _Liturgical Notes on...
- 11/30/18--12:51: _PCED Ordo for 2019 ...
- 11/30/18--20:40: _The Feast of St And...
- 11/21/18--05:58: Liturgical Notes on the Presentation of the Virgin Mary
- 11/22/18--03:06: New Mass by Frank LaRocca to Premiere in San Francisco on Dec. 8th
- 11/22/18--08:33: The Feast of St Cecilia 2018
- 11/22/18--09:00: Solemn TLM in Trenton Cathedral on November 27
- 11/23/18--02:09: The Life and Work of Mgr. Li Jingfeng, Bishop of Fengxiang (Part 1)
- 11/23/18--05:50: Vespers of the Dead at the Birmingham Oratory
- 11/23/18--11:52: New Regular TLMs in Rome
- 11/23/18--18:58: The Life and Work of Mgr. Li Jingfeng, Bishop of Fengxiang (Part 2)
- 11/24/18--10:44: New TLM in Vero Beach, Florida
- 11/25/18--06:55: Bishop Robert Morlino, RIP
- 11/26/18--07:06: The Continual Spectre of False Antiquarianism
- 1962 Missal: CO 20, 875, 899, 990, 1188, 1245, 1532, 1772, 1898, 1952, 2175, 2210, 2234, 2418, 2555, 2637, 2638, 3233, 3237, 3739, 3773, 3849, 3887, 3909, 4145, 4557, 4745, 5346, 5956;
- Schema 186: CO 762, 875, 899, 934, 1188, 1245, 1532, 1772, 1898, 1952, 2055, 2175, 2210, 2234, 2418, 2555, 2637, 2638, 3233, 3237, 3246, 3739, 3773, 3849, 3887, 3909, 4145, 4244, 4557, 4663, 4745, 5346, 5956;
- 1970/2002 Missal: CO 95, 669, 899, 901, 934, 1085, 1188, 1245, 1310, 1532, 1582, 1633, 1737, 1952, 2055, 2128, 2210, 2555, 2638, 3739, 3773, 3819, 3830, 3847, 3886, 3887, 3909, 4244, 4557, 5110, 5346, 5956, 6109, 6821, 6824; CP 1073.
- 1962 Missal & Schema 186: those common to all three (see note ), plus CO 875, 1772, 1898, 2175, 2234, 2418, 2637, 3233, 3237, 3849, 4145;
- 1962 & 1970/2002 Missal: none, other than those common to all three (see note );
- Schema 186 & 1970/2002 Missal: those common to all three (see note ), plus CO 934, 2055, 4244.
- 1962 Missal: CO 20, 990;
- Schema 186: CO 762, 3246, 4663;
- 1970/2002 Missal: CO 95, 669, 901, 1085, 1310, 1582, 1633, 1737, 2128, 3819, 3830, 3837, 3886, 5110, 6109, 6821, 6824; CP 1073.
- 11/28/18--09:37: Cardinal Burke Celebrates Pontifical Mass in Mexico City Cathedral
- 11/29/18--09:57: The Feast of St Cecilia in Paris with the Schola Sainte-Cécile
- 11/29/18--14:55: Liturgical Notes on the Vigil of St Andrew
- 11/30/18--12:51: PCED Ordo for 2019 Now Available
- 11/30/18--20:40: The Feast of St Andrew the Apostle 2018
|The Presentation of the Virgin, by Tintoretto, 1553-56, from the church of the Madonna dell’Orto in Venice.|
And the child was three years old, and Joachim said: Invite the daughters of the Hebrews that are undefiled, and let them take each a lamp, and let them stand with the lamps burning, that the child may not turn back, and her heart be captivated from the temple of the Lord. And they did so until they went up into the temple of the Lord. And the priest received her, and kissed her, and blessed her, saying: The Lord has magnified your name in all generations. In you, on the last of the days, the Lord will manifest His redemption to the sons of Israel. And he set her down upon the third step of the altar, and the Lord God sent grace upon her; and she danced with her feet, and all the house of Israel loved her. And her parents went down marveling, and praising the Lord God, because the child had not turned back. And Mary was in the temple of the Lord as if she were a dove that dwelt there, and she received food from the hand of an angel.” (chapter 7 and beginning of chapter 8)This story is told in similar terms in the “History of Joseph the Carpenter”, written about the year 400, which goes on to tell how the temple priests chose Joseph to be Mary’s husband. The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, of the same period, adds that “Joachim, and Anna his wife, went together to the temple of the Lord to offer sacrifices to God, and placed the infant, Mary by name, in the community of virgins, in which the virgins remained day and night praising God. And when she was put down before the doors of the temple, she went up the fifteen steps so swiftly, that she did not look back at all; nor did she, as children are wont to do, seek for her parents.” (chapter 4) It then describes the Virgin’s life of prayer and work in the temple, showing Her to be a perfect model of religious life.
A feast in honor of this event appears in an English manuscript known as the Canterbury Benedictional, written about 1030, and in a number of English calendars after that. It seems, however, to have died off; in the last editions of the Sarum Missal, from the mid-16th century, it is missing from the Calendar, and the Mass is included only in the appendix. Elsewhere, it appears sporadically in liturgical books printed in the century before the Council of Trent; the Mass and Office were often simply those of the Virgin’s Nativity, with the word “Nativity” changed to “Presentation” wherever it occurred. Pope Sixtus IV (1471-84), who was the Minister General of the Franciscans until two year before his election, brought his order’s traditional zeal for new Marian feasts to the Use of Rome by adding the Presentation to the Roman Missal and Breviary, as he also did for the Immaculate Conception. The unusually elaborate rhyming Office seems to refer to the novelty of the feast in the Magnificat antiphon of First Vespers.
Novae laudis adest festivitas,
grata mundo ac caeli civibus,
qua Beatae Mariae sanctitas
templo data est a parentibus,
ut olivae pinguis suavitas
uberibus redundet fructibus.
(A feast of new praise is nigh, pleasing to the world and the citizens of heaven, in which the holiness of Blessed Mary is given to the temple by Her parents, that the sweetness of this rich olive tree may redound with rich fruits.)
A page of a Roman Missal of 1515, with the rubric in the upper part of the right-hand column, “On the feast of the Presentation of the Virgin Mary, the Mass is said of (Her) Nativity, with the name ‘Nativity’ changed to ‘Presentation.’ ”
The Byzantine Rite knows no such reserve or restraint in regard to the feast, which is properly called “The Entrance of the Our All-Holy Lady, the Mother of God, into the Temple.” It is ranked as one of the Twelve Great Feasts, most of which are kept with both a Forefeast and Afterfeast, broadly the equivalent of a Vigil and Octave in the traditional Roman Rite. Afterfeasts vary in length, however, and those of the Virgin’s Presentation and Nativity are the shortest, only four days, the final day being known as the Leave-taking.
As such, it has a great many proper texts to be sung in the Office, of which here I can only give a very small selection.
At Vespers: Today, let us dance, O faithful, singing to the Lord in psalms and hymns and honoring His sanctified Tabernacle, the living Ark, that contained the Word Who cannot be contained; for in wondrous fashion she is offered to the Lord as a young child in the flesh, and Zachariah, the great High Priest, joyfully receives her as the dwelling place of God.
Here and elsewhere, the liturgy assumes that the High Priest who received Mary into the Temple was Zachariah, the father of John Baptist.
Anna the all-praised cried out rejoicing, “Receive, O Zachariah, her whom God’s prophets proclaimed in the Spirit, and bring her into the holy Temple, there to be brought up in reverence, that she may become the divine throne of the Master of all, His palace and resting place and dwelling filled with light!”
At the Divine Liturgy, the usual hymn to the Mother of God “It is truly meet’ is replaced by the following:
The angels beheld the entrance of the Pure One and were amazed. How has the Virgin entered into the Holy of Holies? Since she is a living Ark of God, let no profane hand touch the Theotokos. But let the lips of believers unceasingly sing to her, praising her in joy with the angel’s song: Truly, thou art more exalted than all, O pure Virgin!
The Apocryphal Gospels have also helped to establish the traditional manner of representing the Entrance of the Mother of God in icons. The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew states in chapter six that “when (Mary) was three years old, she walked with a step so mature, she spoke so perfectly, and spent her time so assiduously in the praises of God, that all were astonished at her, and wondered; and she was not reckoned a young infant, but as it were a grown-up person of thirty years old.” For this reason, She is represented in this icon, not as a child, but as a miniature adult, to indicate that the fullness of grace and virtue already resides within Her. The lamp-bearing virgins who accompany Her to the temple at Joachim’s request, as stated above in the Protoevanglium of James, are also shown. Note how The Virgin Mary approaches the high priest with Her hands open, to symbolize that She is offering Herself to God.
The Mass was partly inspired by the fact that this year the feast of the Immaculate Conception falls on the Saturday before the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, which is the day the Archdiocesan Guadalupan celebrations take place, offering a unifying moment for the Anglo and Latino Church. “The Mass of the Americas thus embodies the way Mary, our Mother, unites all of us as God's children,” says Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone.
A local television channel program on recently interviewed composer Frank La Rocca about his work.
R. As the organs played, the virgin Cecilia in her heart sang only to the Lord, saying: * Let my heart, o Lord, and my body be immaculate, that I may not be confounded. V. Praying in fasts of two and three days together, she entrusted the cause of her fear to the Lord. Let my heart...
Saturday, November 17, marked the first anniversary of the death of Mgr. Li Jingfeng, Bishop of Fengxiang, a heroic confessor of the Church in China, who throughout the tribulations of his long episcopate gave a glorious witness to the Catholic faith. In tribute to his memory, we offer a brief biography and, thanks to the diligence of a Chinese reader, publish an exemplary selection of his writings for the first time in English. Requiescat in pace. (Our thanks to Zachary Thomas and Theresa Shen for sharing this with our readers.)
After his release, he dedicated himself to rebuilding the Catholic communities of his province of Shaanxi. In 1980, when he was secretly consecrated the bishop of Fengxiang, he became the head of a Catholic community that obstinately refused to join the “official” structures of the Church, despite the efforts of the local authorities to impose the Patriotic Association on Chinese Catholics. For this reason, the cathedral, churches, seminary, and the various organizations of his diocese remained “clandestine” for a long time, though physically visible to everyone. In 2004, at the advice of Mgr. Li Du’an, “official” bishop of Xi’an, Mgr. Li decided that, for the sake of the unity of the Church in Shaanxi, it was necessary to “surface,” i.e. to obtain from the government recognition of his episcopal rank. He obtained it, but nevertheless, always refused any membership in the Patriotic Association and any affiliation to the “official” episcopal conference. In May 2011, aged but still in good physical and intellectual health, he organized the election of his successor, thus assuring the continuity of apostolic succession in his diocese.
On 16 October 2012, the 13th Ordinal General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops began its first session in Rome to address themes relating to the “New Evangelization.” Beijing refused to grant the bishops of continental China permission to attend the synod. Instead, Bishop Li addressed a letter to the assembled fathers, boldly urging them to take inspiration from Chinese Catholics, whose fervor he contrasts with the “lukewarmness” and “infidelity” of Christians in the West. Here is a translation of the letter:
Most Reverend and Esteemed Fathers of the Synod, I am grateful that you are able to attend the synod and visit the tomb of St. Peter, but I am grieved that you are not able to hear any voice from the Church in China. In my desire that our voice should be heard among you and especially by our Pope Benedict XVI, I send You today this short letter.
I want to tell you that our Church in China, and especially the Christian laity, still keep the piety, faithfulness, sincerity, and devotion of the ancient Christians, even while suffering under fifty years of persecution. I also want to tell you that I am always offering prayers to the All Powerful God, that our piety, fidelity, sincerity, and our devotion can heal the lukewarmness, infidelity, and worldliness of Christians outside China, which have arisen out of an unrestrained liberty and openness. In the Year of Faith, in our discussions in the Synod you may address the reasons why our faith has remained strong in China. The reason is, as a maxim of the great Chinese philosopher Laozi says: “Prosperity is born in calamity, and calamity lies concealed in satisfaction.” In the foreign churches, the lukewarmness, infidelity, and worldliness of Christians has affected many of the clergy. But in the Chinese Church the Christian laity are more devout than the clergy. Can the piety, fidelity, sincerity, and devotion of the lay Christians of China have an effect on clergy outside China? I have found the lament of Pope Benedict XVI very moving: “As we know, in vast areas of the earth faith risks being extinguished, like a flame that is no longer fed. We are facing a profound crisis of faith, a loss of the religious sense that constitutes the greatest challenge to the church today. The renewal of faith must therefore take priority in the commitment of the entire Church in our time” (See the review “Christ to the world” vol. 59, p.167). Nevertheless, I believe that the Pope may find consolation in the faith of us, the Christians of China. I say nothing of the political situation, which is a transitory thing. (A version of the original text, which I have amended, can be found here. The Vatican’s reply can be found here.)
It is common knowledge that Latin is the official language of the Church. Consider for example this statement of Pope John XXIII: ‘The Catholic Church has a dignity far surpassing that of every merely human society, for it was founded by Christ the Lord...The language it uses should be noble, majestic, and non-vernacular. The Church’s language must be not only universal but also immutable...If the truths of the Catholic Church were entrusted to an unspecified number of them, the meaning of these truths, varied as they are, would not be manifested to everyone with sufficient clarity and precision’ (Veterum Sapientia). And Pope John Paul II says: ‘Countless works of the Church are written in Latin. Without a sound knowledge of Latin, it is impossible to read them directly and unearth their treasure. One has to access them through another’s translation. But the correctness of the translation is not certain.’
The Latin language itself has many features that deserve attention. ‘There can be no doubt as to the formative and educational value either of the language of the Romans or of great literature generally. It is a most effective training for the pliant minds of youth. It exercises, matures, and perfects the principal faculties of mind and spirit. It sharpens the wits and gives keenness of judgment. It helps the young mind to grasp things accurately and develop a true sense of values. It is also a means for teaching highly intelligent thought and speech’ (Veterum Sapientia). There is good reason for this. The declensions, conjugations, and grammatical structure of the Latin language are highly logical, demanding a clear mind, memory, and precise judgment, all of which are helpful to the exercise and testing of intelligence.
There is still another feature of Latin, as the Pope says: ‘Its concise, varied and harmonious style, full of majesty and dignity makes for singular clarity and impressiveness of expression.’ Thus the value and importance for Catholics to learn Latin is clear.
These facts suggest the importance of learning Latin for the clergy of China. In addition, many precious Church documents have been translated into Chinese by people outside of the Church, such as Fides quaerens intellectum by St. Anselm, Civitas Dei and the Confessiones of St. Augustine, etc. These works have all been translated into Chinese by non-Catholics, which is a great irony for our Catholic clergy! This reality should be a warning: not to learn Latin is to lag behind and remain passive. Is our Chinese Church willing to languish forever at the margins of the universal Church?
Moreover, in 2007 Pope Benedict XVI issued the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum to grant the wish of many of the faithful who ‘continued to be attached with such love and affection to the earlier liturgical forms.’ Its intention is that all priests be able to celebrate Tridentine Mass in the forma extraordinaria. This is a great challenge to every priest. Are we capable of doing it? As priests of the Church, if we are not able to celebrate the sacrifice and to venerate God in the official language of the Church, what does that say about our identity as priests! The Holy See further suggests that ‘Gregorian chant be preserved and be sung in monasteries, other religious houses and seminaries, as a special form of chanted prayer and as something of high cultural and pedagogic value’ (Voluntati Obsequens, April 1974).
Latin is not only the special language of the Church. It has also been used as an international language of science and culture by scholars up until the present day. For hundreds of years, many great works of science were published in Latin. Countless famous people such as Bacon, Newton, Descartes, Spencer, Copernicus, etc. have written in Latin. Even the doctoral dissertation of Karl Marx was written in Latin; in 1955, the Convention of Mayors of the World’s Capital Cities, held in Florence, Italy, issued its peace pact in Latin.
(Part 2 will discuss Bishop Li Jingfeng’s support of the traditional Latin liturgy.)
The first part of this article offered a brief biography of the late Mgr. Li Jingfeng, Bishop of Fengxiang, China, together with his letter to the general synod of 2012 and his preface to a Chinese-Latin textbook. Today we will look at what this good bishop did to promote the usus antiquior in China, and his rather sharp criticisms of the deleterious effects of the introduction of the Novus Ordo in his country.
In particular, he worked energetically to oppose the liberal liturgical reforms that were brought into China by these religious. As a clandestine Church, China had had restricted communication with the Vatican, and thus the great changes of the ‘70s and ‘80s had mostly passed them by, and many dioceses did not yet celebrate the Novus Ordo Missae.
His Pastoral Letter for the Year of Faith (15 August, 2012) blames a flawed interpretation of the “spirit of Vatican II” for creating a “Protestant” attitude toward liturgical law. Most of all, it blames the influence of liberal western missionaries for disrupting the sound traditional piety of Chinese Catholics in the name of “progress” and “inculturation.”
“In the 1980s, after the opening-up policy, foreigners started coming to mainland China and brought with them the pollution of the West. When the government discovered this, it took action to correct it. But who was keeping watch over the corruption brought by people into the Church? At that time, some Western religious came to China. When they saw Chinese Catholics piously kneeling on the ground and praying the Rosary and Stations of the Cross before the liturgy, they said: ‘You are all so behind the times, acting like that, kneeling and saying so many prayers. We stopped doing that a long time ago!’ Not wanting to witness this, they would leave the church and go back home until the Mass began and our Catholics had stopped saying their prayers. Moreover, during Mass they always either stood or sat, which our priests and lay Catholics despised.
I once wrote a letter to the Apostolic Delegate in Hong Kong: ‘The rubbish brought into civil society has been cleaned up by the state. But whose duty it is to clean out the trash brought into the Church? Your religious who came here, they walked out because they disapproved of our way of praying. Their influence is extremely dangerous. I urge you not to let this kind of religious come to mainland China.’ But the Apostolic Delegate did nothing. So this kind of religious kept coming as before, and always protested against our way of praying. Now that several decades have passed, finally we have come to understand that the faith of certain people overseas was corrupted long ago.”
The same pastoral letter addresses the question of inculturation. He points out that recent efforts at “inculturation” often turned out to be merely an imposition of Western liberal values:
“Some people make use of the fashionable word ‘inculturation’ to argue that everything should be localized. But how should we understand inculturation? We may well ask whether we still see a genuine Chinese culture in China. But putting aside the question of Chinese culture for the moment, the meaning of the word ‘inculturation’ is ambiguous. It is a new word that became common after the Vatican II, derived from the Latin word ‘inculturatio.’ ‘Cultura’ means culture, but the meaning of the prefix in- added before it is hard to tell clearly. ‘In’ has two meanings: ‘in something’ and ‘into something.’ Therefore the choice to render it in Chinese as ‘localization’ is not necessarily appropriate.
Some people think that inculturation entails assimilation to local things. But a small error can lead to a great misconception. ‘To enter into a culture’ and ‘to become like that culture’ are two absolutely different things. As for Chinese culture, can it still be seen in our modern society? Customs, ways of thinking, food, clothing, living arrangements, travel, and morality, is there any of these domains in which we do not imitate the West? Are the cornerstones of Chinese culture, such as the Three Obediences and the Four Virtues, the Three Principles and the Five Moralities,  still seen and practiced in today’s China? To the contrary, in the eyes of modern Chinese people, this whole culture can be summarized in one phrase: undesirable feudalistic doctrines. What is desirable is Western culture. The Western people wear camisole dresses at weddings, and so we are imitating it. Western people practice homosexuality, and we are starting to imitate it. Is this Chinese culture?
|A classic example of inculturation in a Chinese context: altar boys wearing the jijin, the hat worn by the clergy when saying Mass in China, where it was traditionally considered a matter of shame for a man to appear in public without a hat. (From an article we originally published last August.)|
We can see how Buddhism has entered into local culture. For example, there are many Buddhist ideas and phrases in our language; in this case there was a real entering into Chinese culture. Can we do as Matteo Ricci and Xu Guangqi did, who made the Gospel of Jesus Christ enter into Chinese culture, so that everyone will know the salvation of Jesus? Can we make the Gospel of Christ become part of Chinese culture? This is the real meaning of inculturatio.”
On 10 Oct 2011, Bishop Li published called “The Inviolability of the Sanctity and Dignity of the Church’s Liturgy,” (Chinese text here), in which he instructed Catholics on the nature of the sacred liturgy. Citing decades of conciliar and papal teaching, he forcefully urges the necessity of obeying liturgical law, and warns against the dangers of the liberal “reform” movement imported by Western clergy. Here are a few excerpts:
“9. What can we do to help correct liberalism?
Here I want to quote some words from the introduction of Pope Benedict XVI’s encyclical Caritas in Veritate, as the basis of an answer to this question. ‘Love — caritas — is an extraordinary force which leads people to opt for courageous and generous engagement in the field of justice and peace… ‘Caritas in veritate’ is the principle around which the Church’s social doctrine turns, a principle that takes on practical form in the criteria that govern moral action...: justice and the common good.
Justice: Ubi societas, ibi ius… Love is to give, to offer what is ‘mine’ to the other; ... justice [is] to give the other what is ‘his’... I cannot ‘give’ what is mine to the other, without first giving him what pertains to him in justice.
The common good: To love someone is to desire that person’s good and to take effective steps to secure it… It is a good that is sought not for its own sake, but for the people who belong to the social community and who can only really and effectively pursue their good within it.’
‘The social community’ the Pope mentions certainly includes the Church, and the appearance of liberalism in the Church is precisely what the Pope meant by a ‘lack of love’.
As pastors of souls, if priests do not celebrate according to liturgical rubrics, then as the Holy See pointed out, they ‘insult the dignity of the believer’ (Liturgicae Instaurationes). The Pope said: ‘To love someone is to desire that person’s good and to take effective steps to secure it.’ Now let us look at these priests, who lack love. Can they say they desire the good of lay Catholics and that they take effective steps to secure it? … The reason why the clergy who disobey the liturgical regulations do not care about justice and the common good, and choose to insult the dignity of believers, is that they do not have the love mentioned above. [....]
Now let’s see how to correct liberalism in the liturgy. It is simple: the priest must love the Lord with his whole heart, and the Church, lay Catholics, the Sacrament and the liturgy, justice, the common good, his own vocation, and his priestly identity, imitating the Apostle Matthew who left the tax-collector’s desk at the call of Christ, imitating Zacchaeus who gave up worldly thoughts and climbed into the sycamore tree of love to see our sorrowing Lord Jesus. In this way we can overcome liberalism without difficulty, conform our actions to the Church’s teaching, restore respect for the sacred and sublime character of the priest, and console our sorrowing Mother Church and her vulnerable flock of believers.”
The same letter puts forward the traditional Roman liturgy, with its strictly regulated ceremonies, as a powerful antidote against liturgical liberalism:
“I feel it is necessary to talk about a very realistic fact. Pope Benedict has granted the whole Church freedom to celebrate the Tridentine Mass. The rituals of this form are complicated and difficult. But priests around the world, in ancient and modern times, in China and overseas, have been able to celebrate this Mass in exactly the same way according to the liturgical rubrics, without exception. How can we explain this? Recently, our priests and seminarians watched videos of the Tridentine Mass being celebrated in different places around the world (the United States, Ireland, Britain, Rome, the SSPX). They exclaimed afterwards: ‘This is amazing! These priests from different places and differents times celebrate the same ritual with exactly the same gestures, and their rite is also identical to the Tridentine Mass we celebrate here! How can this be?’ I said: ‘It is simple: that they all love the Lord and the Church with their whole hearts, and love to obey Church teaching. There is nothing else.”
While forming his priests for a correct celebration of the new rites in conformity with the mind of the Church, Bishop Li also fostered in his priests devotion to the traditional Latin liturgical tradition, which was used generally by the Church in China until the 1980s and 90s.
Bishop Li’s devotion to the old rite led him, in 2012, to publish a Chinese-Latin edition of the Missale Romanum 1962, (Parvum Missale Tridentinum 1962 Sinice Explicatum - A Small Tridentine Missal, 1962, Explained in Chinese) whose use he encouraged in his diocese. This Missal is used in several dioceses of mainland China where the traditional Mass is offered. It may be the only edition on the mainland, though there is another printed in Hong Kong.
Bishop Jingfeng made it clear in his writings that he saw Summorum Pontificum not merely as a permission, but as a challenge to all priests of the Roman rite: “As priests of the Church, if we are not able to celebrate the sacrifice and to venerate God in the official language of the Church, what does that say about our identity as priests!” The Missal was accompanied soon after by a volume of liturgical instruction for priests, published on Dec. 1, 2012. These and all his books can be found here.
Bishop Li died on 17 November, 2017, at the age of 95. A young Catholic who witnessed his holy death had this to say. (http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Msgr.-Lucas-Li-Jingfeng-has-died.-The-memory-of-a-young-Catholic-42344.html)
“Our beloved bishop loved God in his whole life. For his steadfastness in faith, he had been jailed for years. Even though he was under all kinds of pressures and suffered injustices, his love for God was not shaken. He was firm in his faith, never changed, even until the last moment of his life on earth.
His firmness in the principle of faith, his love and seriousness in Church liturgy and Church traditions have deeply influenced my faith and vocation.
We were happy our beloved bishop had received the Precious Blood at 6:50 am this morning, before he departed at 7:20 am. In the prayers of priests and the faithful, our Lao Zhujiao rested in peace!”
The Three Obediences (obedience to the father before marriage, to the husband in marriage, and to sons in widowhood) and the Four Virtues (morality, proper speech, modest manner, and diligent work) apply to women. The Three Principles express the hierarchical order of society: the monarch is the principle of the subject; the father is the principle of the son; the husband is the principle of the wife. The Five Moral Rules are: charity, gratitude, humility, prudence, and honesty.
Da nobis, Dómine, ut ánimam fámuli tui Roberti Epíscopi, quam de hujus sáeculi eduxisti laborióso certámine, Sanctórum tuórum tríbuas esse consortem. Per Christum, Dóminum nostrum. R. Amen.
|Bishop Morlino imparts the Pontifical Blessing while assisting from the throne at the first Mass of a newly ordained priest. (From an article posted this past June.)|
|Excavating Roman ruins in London|
Here were three points made by this teacher:
1. The Emmaus story prefigures the Novus Ordo Mass because Jesus broke open the Scriptures (“Liturgy of the Word”) and then broke bread (“Liturgy of the Eucharist”).
2. Origen’s commentary on Exodus 35, 4–5 shows that people received Communion in the hand at the inception of the Church: “How carefully and respectfully you receive the Lord’s body when it is distributed to you, for fear even a crumb might fall and a little part of this consecrated treasure might be lost. You would even blame yourself — and rightfully so — if a fragment were lost through your negligence.”
3. St Justin Martyr’s First Apology describes a Mass far closer to the Novus Ordo than to the traditional Latin Mass. Even the term “president” is found there, as the term “presider” is found in the context of the Novus Ordo. Thus, the Novus Ordo is a return to the “true” Mass of early Catholics.
Note that there is a common thread running through all of these points: “false antiquarianism,” as Pius XII called it. This appeal to antiquity is always selective: the reformers pick the early elements that fit with their modernist agenda, and effortlessly discard the rest — even things that are equally ancient or more ancient, such as the ad orientem stance.
In other words, there is a modern filter that determines what antiquity means and what makes an ancient element acceptable to moderns. In this way, all such “recoveries” are inherently and unavoidably modern rather than ancient. Thus, antiquarianism is doomed to collapse into the self-referential modernism that picks and chooses items still deemed “relevant” out of the indifferent mass of ateleological matter into which the Church’s past has been converted by modern philosophy. Nothing is valued simply on account of its being handed down; it is valued because it is wanted by a reformer according to his own lights and for his own purposes, be they good or ill. It could almost be turned into a motto for an organization called Planned Prayerhood: “No rite an unwanted rite.”
For example, the reformers liked Communion in the hand because it suited their anti-medieval, anti-scholastic, anti-metaphysical, anti-Tridentine mentality, dressed in the fancy clothing of ressourcement. But when it came to Septuagesimatide, which is from the 6th century and even older than Ash Wednesday, they just chucked it out the window. One can cite dozens of such examples. There are, however, patently good reasons why the liturgy of the Church developed as it did over the centuries — when, for example, a period of preparation for Lent was introduced, or when it was experienced as safer and more reverent to give Communion on the tongue to kneeling faithful.
The modernist agenda is thus very clever in how it appeals to the ancient practice while conveniently forgetting (or denying?) that the Church’s worship is perfected over time, under the guidance of Divine Providence. In spite of his own unfortunate dabbling with liturgical reform, it seems that Pius XII saw this truth and underlined it in the 1947 encyclical letter Mediator Dei, in three paragraphs that should have been engraved on the wall of the Consilium’s headquarters:
62. Assuredly it is a wise and most laudable thing to return in spirit and affection to the sources of the sacred liturgy. For research in this field of study, by tracing it back to its origins, contributes valuable assistance towards a more thorough and careful investigation of the significance of feastdays, and of the meaning of the texts and sacred ceremonies employed on their occasion. But it is neither wise nor laudable to reduce everything to antiquity by every possible device. Thus, to cite some instances, one would be straying from the straight path were he to wish the altar restored to its primitive table form; were he to want black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments; were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues in churches; were he to order the crucifix so designed that the divine Redeemer’s body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings; and lastly were he to disdain and reject polyphonic music or singing in parts, even where it conforms to regulations issued by the Holy See.Notice how many of the things that Pius XII singled out for condemnation ended up being done, to the letter, by Captain Bugnini and his novelty-mongering crew. (In my book Noble Beauty, Transcendent Holiness,I go into all these things in more detail, especially in the chapter contrasting the original liturgical movement with what it devolved into.)
63. Clearly no sincere Catholic can refuse to accept the formulation of Christian doctrine more recently elaborated and proclaimed as dogmas by the Church [a reference to the Council of Trent], under the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit with abundant fruit for souls, because it pleases him to hark back to the old formulas [of antiquity]. No more can any Catholic in his right senses repudiate existing legislation of the Church to revert to prescriptions based on the earliest sources of canon law. Just as obviously unwise and mistaken is the zeal of one who in matters liturgical would go back to the rites and usage of antiquity, discarding the new patterns introduced by the disposition of divine Providence to meet the changes of circumstances and situation.
64. This way of acting bids fair to revive the exaggerated and senseless antiquarianism to which the illegal Council of Pistoia gave rise. It likewise attempts to reinstate a series of errors which were responsible for the calling of that meeting as well as for those resulting from it, with grievous harm to souls, and which the Church, the ever watchful guardian of the “deposit of faith” committed to her charge by her divine Founder, had every right and reason to condemn. For perverse designs and ventures of this sort tend to paralyze and weaken that process of sanctification by which the sacred liturgy directs the sons of adoption to their Heavenly Father for their souls’ salvation.
Let us consider briefly, then, the three points made by the teacher that were mentioned at the top of this article.
Ad 1. The division of the Mass into the Mass of the Catechumens and the Mass of the Faithful is far more ancient than the division between Liturgy of the Word and Liturgy of the Eucharist. This latter division hails from the Protestants. Sure, you can get it out of Emmaus, just as you can get Luther out of Romans or Calvin out of Augustine. But it’s not traditional and it’s not Catholic.
Ad 2. Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s book Dominus Estis the definitive refutation of the idea that the early Church did “just what we’re doing now” with Communion in the hand. Nothing could be further from the truth. First, the ancient way was more careful, more devout, and more solemn. Second, the numbers of faithful were far smaller. Third, the reason the Church moved to Communion on the tongue for kneeling recipients is the very piety one finds in the Fathers of the Church. Take the attitude you find in St. Cyril of Jerusalem and compound it by several centuries of meditation, adoration, and experience, and you will end up with the medieval custom. (It should hardly need to be said that the Byzantine manner of distributing communion, in spite of superficial differences, has far more in common with the traditional Roman way than it has with the contemporary Romish way.)
Ad 3. Yes, the primitive liturgy described by St. Justin sounds a bit like the Novus Ordo. That’s because there had not yet occurred 1,800 years of natural and supernatural development to enrich the solemn official worship of the Church, especially after this worship had become legal and public. St. Justin must be rolling over in his grave to see people depriving themselves and Our Lord of due reverence and beauty in order to simulate the fiction of a primitive liturgy.
To return to our point of departure, the well-intentioned but ill-informed teacher who presented this half-information to his Catholic audience was doing them a disservice by implying that the Novus Ordo is somehow more in continuity with the ancient Church than the developed Latin liturgical tradition. In so doing he inadvertently made himself a “useful idiot” running interference for the modernists who carried out the liturgical reform with a hatred of the traditional Catholic faith, and who removed every so-called “medieval or Baroque accretion” they could get away with removing. The result is the stripped-down Bauhaus liturgy that will haunt the reputation of Paul VI until the end of the ages.
In order to cover the new rite’s nakedness, people inclined to “Reform of the Reform” add as many “smells and bells” as they can think of or get away with. But there is no amount of Latin that will change what the prayers say (and do not say); there is no amount of chant that will change the damaged structure of the propers, the lectionary, and the calendar; there is no mountain of incense that will mask the sharp smell of the electric dynamo, the spirit behind the reform. ROTR is a huge band-aid placed over a gaping wound that refuses to heal. It refuses to heal because rupture with tradition cannot be blessed by God. Many people will be saved in spite of it, but it can never be a good thing in itself.
Why, then, do Catholics still adhere to the ROTR when they could (in many cases) so easily move over to the TLM? When, let us say, a parish run by the Fraternity or the Institute is just across town, or even down the road, or where a parish priest has added the usus antiquior to the Sunday schedule? Why settle for the Citroën or Renault when you could have the Jaguar or Rolls Royce? Why is it that those without special training or academic credentials can often see the rightness of the old ways and the emptiness of the new, while those who should be leading their brethren by precept and example turn out to be hoodwinked and benighted?
I believe there is a moral reason and a cognitive reason.
They do not see it because they do not want to see it. This is the moral dimension. It stems from a false ultramontanism, whereby Paul VI or any pope can do no wrong, and from a fear that if the liturgy he promulgated turns out to be flawed, it will somehow call into question the indefectibility of the Church — which it certainly does not. It also stems from a fear of personal instability: if the new liturgy is seriously defective, that may mean the new theology and pastoral approach introduced by Vatican II is worthy of critique (as indeed it is). And that would require an interior spiritual and intellectual reorientation that many are unwilling to entertain, let alone execute — although Pope Francis has been making this reorientation tempting and even irresistible, for which we can be grateful to him.
They do not see it because they have not tried to see it. This is the cognitive or perceptual dimension. One has to let the traditional liturgy wash over one’s body and soul like waves at the ocean, patiently getting to know it, adjusting to its gentle rhythm, before its secrets fully reveal themselves. Those who discover these secrets are proving once again the efficacy of the prayer of Our Lord: “I thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to the little ones” (Mt 11:25).
Visit www.peterkwasniewski.com for news, information, article links, sacred music, and the home of Os Justi Press.
Naturally, I recommended that he enroll in the Master of Sacred Arts program and suggested that while he considers this he read two books, The Vision for You, which would help him to discern his personal vocation, and The Way of Beauty.
I asked Steve about his work. His approach as he described it to me is to look at artists whom he admired and whose style he thinks might have an appeal to people today. Believing that the paintings of the American landscape would have an appeal, he divides his time between Texas and New Mexico, and so these have become the subjects of his work. The works of specific artists that he mentioned to me were the nocturnes of Will Sparks, and the tonalist works of John Francis Murphy and Chauncey Foster Ryder. All three are American artists who worked in the last part of the 19th century and the first decades of the 20th. He used these as a starting point for the development of his own style.
|Lifting Fog by Steve Talley|
We can think of the Nocturne as an American invention in many ways. The term “nocturne” was coined by the American artist James McNeill Whistler in the 19th century. Although Whistler himself did much of his work in London (sometimes from a boat anchored in the middle of the Thames) it is a form that seems to have taken up by American painters in their portrayal of their own country. Perhaps it’s the wide open night skies of the prairie that inspire them, I don’t know, but it is unmistakably a theme in the American landscaping tradition. Associated with it is a school of painters called Tonalists. As well as the harmony and beauty of the natural world, both the Tonalists style and the Nocturne painters draw inspiration from ideas of musical harmony - parallels with the musical Tone Poems and Nocturnes of the 19th century were deliberate. While the inspiration for these is the beauty of the created world and the natural order, it seems to me that this is a form that an artist will excel in if he understands that they give glory to God .
The paintings by Talley that I like most seem to sit in the place where the Nocturne painter and the Tonalist touch. They are set at times when the light is still present, but dimmed, waxing, or waning - late in the day, or early in the morning, or perhaps in heavy mist.
Below are paintings, in order, by Talley (the first two) then works by Whistler, John Francis Murphy, and Chauncey Foster Ryder.
|An example page from the indices of The Proper|
of Time in the Post-Vatican II Liturgical Reforms
(click to enlarge)
Between the 1962 Missal, Schema 186 and the 1970/2002 Missal, there are 53 sources used for the collects that occur in Epiphanytide and post-Pentecost.  Some of these sources are common to all three corpora, some are common to two of them, and some are unique to one corpus. Of these 53 sources, 29 are used in the 1962 Missal, 33 are used in Schema 186, and 37 are used in the 1970/2002 Missal.  The percentage of collects common to all three sets of orations is 30.2% (16/53). 
It should be noted that this figure is already quite a low level of correspondence, but it also masks the stark differences between the 1970/2002 Missal and the other two corpora:
|Table 1: Percentage similarity of sources used between the different corpora (click to enlarge)|
We can observe another major difference between the three sets of sources when we look at those unique to each set of collects:
|Table 2: Percentage of unique sources in each corpora (click to enlarge)|
So, what do these basic statistics point towards?
Firstly, that the corpus of collects in the 1970/2002 Missal really is very different to that of both the preceding liturgical tradition and the proposed draft for the reform of these prayers - perhaps even more so than liturgists and scholars have thus far realised. It should be pointed out here that these statistics do not indicate which orations were edited prior to their inclusion in either Schema 186 or the 1970/2002 Missal, as this would require much more detailed consultation of the Corpus Orationum. However, the number of changes would seem to indicate that, potentially, the character of what is known in the 1970/2002 Missal as tempus per annum has been significantly altered from what came before.
Secondly, that the set of collects being proposed by Coetus 18 bis in 1966 for Epiphanytide and post-Pentecost were only marginally different from those already in the 1962 Missal. It should be noted that a significant proportion of these differences can be accounted for by the elimination of Pre-Lent in Schema 186, and the subsequent designation of these Sundays as the 7th, 8th and 9th after Epiphany. It would also be interesting to look at the collects that have been changed from the 1962 Missal in Schema 186, to see if there are any patterns in the changes and whether these changes satisfy the criteria laid out by Coetus 18 bis in the schema. 
Both of these observations raise the question of why the eventual outcome of the Consilium’s work was quite so different from their 1966 draft. Further research and comparative analysis of the post-Vatican II reform of the Missal orations is vital for this question (and others) to be resolved.
 For the numbering of sources which follows in this article, CO = E. Moeller, J.M. Clément & B. Coppieters ’t Wallant (eds.), Corpus Orationum (CCSL 160-160M; Turnholt: Brepols, 1992-2004, 14 vols.); CP = E. Moeller (ed.), Corpus Praefationum (CCSL 161-161D; Turnholt: Brepols, 1980-81, 5 vols.)
 Lauren Pristas, The Collects of the Roman Missals: A Comparative Study of the Sundays in Proper Seasons before and after the Second Vatican Council (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2013).
 It should be noted here that, though some of these sources are used elsewhere in the respective corpora, we are only looking at the use of sources in Epiphanytide and post-Pentecost (tempus per annum).
 The 53 sources are: CO 20, 95, 669, 762, 875, 899, 901, 934, 990, 1085, 1188, 1245, 1310, 1532, 1582, 1633, 1737, 1772, 1898, 1952, 2055, 2128, 2175, 2210, 2234, 2418, 2555, 2637, 2638, 3233, 3237, 3246, 3739, 3773, 3819, 3830, 3837, 3849, 3886, 3887, 3909, 4145, 4244, 4557, 4663, 4745, 5110, 5346, 5956, 6109, 6821, 6824; CP 1073.
 The breakdown is as follows:
 The breakdown is as follows:
This article by Douglas O’Neill was originally published on the website Vox Humana, and is here reproduced by permission of the editors, with our thanks.
|Charles Tournemire, 1910|
One might be tempted to think that this radical overhaul of the Mass propers might condemn Tournemire’s massive project to the dustbins of history. Pope Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum of 2007 liberalized the permission to use the old Tridentine Mass, now known as the Extraordinary Form of the Mass; thus, musicians who serve communities that offer this Mass may use this music in its original context. Nonetheless, the Ordinary Form remains the norm, and so this article will focus on how to incorporate this music into the commonly celebrated form of the Mass. For each piece of the suite, I will cite current liturgical law and suggest how the music might be used in the “new” Mass. I will rely on two magisterial documents (that is, documents approved by the Holy See): Musicam sacram of 1967, the only post-Vatican II magisterial document that specifically concerns liturgical music; and the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (hereafter GIRM) in its 2011 edition.
The reader may wonder why I choose not to include two other documents: Sacrosanctum Concilium from the Second Vatican Council, and Sing to the Lord: Music in Divine Worship. Sacrosanctum Concilium, known in English as the “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy”, is a seminal and highly important work, but is largely philosophical, with broad general concepts. Musicam sacram more specifically applies that philosophy to regulations concerning music for the Mass. Sing to the Lord was issued by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in 2007, and as such contains guidelines for liturgical music in congregations of the United States. This document to this date has not received official approval from the Holy See, and so remain guidelines (except where rooted in magisterial documents) rather than liturgical law. As well, this article seeks to suggest worldwide use of L’Orgue Mystique.
|The 1863 Cavaillé-Coll organ at Ste-Clotilde in Paris, France, where Tournemire played.|
The first piece of each suite is a brief piece based on the Entrance Chant for the Mass. The old High Mass would customarily begin with the Rite of Sprinkling, accompanied by the singing of the Asperges. After this, the procession would return from the main nave of the church to the sanctuary, upon which the celebrant would remove the cope and vest in the chasuble. Then he would go to the altar for the singing of the Introit. The organist was permitted to play an interlude during the time between the end of the Asperges and the beginning of the Introit, which is the original purpose of Tournemire’s Prélude à l’Introït.
Musicam sacram specifically mentions that organ music may be played during the Entrance Procession. The GIRM instructions regarding the Entrance Chant are these:
47. When the people are gathered, and as the Priest enters with the Deacon and ministers, the Entrance Chant begins. Its purpose is to open the celebration, foster the unity of those who have been gathered, introduce their thoughts to the mystery of the liturgical time or festivity, and accompany the procession of the Priest and ministers.GIRM 47 mentions a fourfold purpose of the Entrance Chant, none of which would preclude the playing of organ music before the Introit. It also says that the Entrance Chant begins as the procession commences. However, it seems not to rule out an extended organ introduction to the singing of the Introit. GIRM 48 concerns more specifically the method of the Entrance Chant, and permits a choral-only rendition of the Gregorian Introit upon which the Tournemire piece is based. For those congregations that wish to incorporate congregational participation in the Entrance Procession, a short congregational antiphon could be added. Concerning chants in English, the work of Fr. Columba Kelly, OSB; Adam Bartlett; Fr. Samuel Weber; and Richard Rice are especially to be commended in this regard. Their settings tend to use the same modes as the Gregorian Introits. This allows various possibilities for seamless musical transitions between Tournemire and the singing, when the starting pitches of the chants are matched to the organ piece.
48. This chant is sung alternately by the choir and the people or similarly by a cantor and the people, or entirely by the people, or by the choir alone…. If there is no singing at the Entrance, the antiphon given in the Missal is recited either by the faithful, or by some of them, or by a reader; otherwise, it is recited by the Priest himself, who may even adapt it as an introductory explanation.
There would be a few options for its use in the current Mass: as a Prelude before the Mass, after which the Introit would be sung during the Entrance Procession; during the Entrance Procession, followed by the singing of the Introit; and music covering the entire Entrance Procession, with a spoken Entrance Antiphon.
Of the four movements from the suites, the Offertory is perhaps the easiest to incorporate into the Ordinary Form Mass, as the chants are often retained from the earlier Tridentine Mass. Musicam sacram makes clear that solo organ music is permitted at this time, and the GIRM regards the guidelines for the music to be identical to those of the Entrance Chant. Tournemire intended that the music be played following the singing of the Offertory Chant, and this practice may be followed. In addition, it could follow the singing of a vernacular chant of the same mode or be played without the chant being sung.
This is the one movement that has no equivalent in the Ordinary Form Mass. It was customary for some churches in France to have organ music at the consecration and elevation of the host, though some clergy preferred silence. After the elevation, the celebrant would conclude this portion in a subdued voice, and organ music was permitted during this short time. Even before the Mass of Paul VI was promulgated, a 1958 instruction during the pontificate of Pius XII effectively ended the practice of having music during this time, and this guideline has continued to the present day. Organists who wish to play the Elevation pieces could incorporate them as part of a prelude before Mass, but not in the context of its function as Tournemire intended. For this reason, they are not included in the chart at the end of this article.
|Charles Tounemire playing at St. Clothilde, June 1939|
Tournemire’s Communion pieces are based on the appointed Communion chant for the day. Many of the Communion chants in the 1974 Graduale Romanum vary according to the three-year lectionary cycle. For instance, the communion piece in Office 9 paraphrases Dicit Dominus: Implete, which now is appointed for only Year C on the Second Sunday of Ordinary Time. The chant for Year A, Laetabimur in salutari, appears in the 1961 Graduale Romanum for Tuesday of the Fourth Week of Lent, and Year B’s Dicit Andreas Simoni for the Vigil of the Feast of St. Andrew.
Tournemire intended that the Communion piece be played following the Agnus Dei, thus beginning the music for the distribution of communion. The singing of the communion chant would follow.
Musicam sacram specifies that solo organ music is appropriate for music during Communion. Regarding music at Communion, the GIRM instructs:
While the Priest is receiving the Sacrament, the Communion Chant is begun, its purpose being to express the spiritual union of the communicants by means of the unity of their voices, to show gladness of heart, and to bring out more clearly the “communitarian” character of the procession to receive the Eucharist. The singing is prolonged for as long as the Sacrament is being administered to the faithful…. Care should be taken that singers, too, can receive Communion with ease.Here, the GIRM specifies that the chant should begin as the Priest receives, rather than after, as was the former practice. Although some would claim that the mention of “unity of their voices” would preclude any instrumental music, or indeed a choral-only rendition at all, it should be noted that these are not specific guidelines, but rather broad expressions of purpose. It is left to those planning the liturgical music to decide if organ music fulfills the “spiritual union of the communicants.” The GIRM also mentions that the “singing is prolonged” for the duration of the communion procession, but that does not rule out the possibility that organ music could prolong the singing; the singing need not be continuous. Organ music could, in fact, enable the singers to “receive Communion with ease.” The following paragraph implies that singing is not necessary at all, as is the common practice at daily Masses. Feasibly, organ music could be played during the Communion procession, with no singing at all.
…. if there is no singing, the antiphon given in the Missal may be recited either by the faithful, or by some of them, or by a reader; otherwise, it is recited by the Priest himself after he has received Communion and before he distributes Communion to the faithful.
In my experience, the following scheme works well: (1) The choir/schola sings the Communion antiphon. (2) The organist plays Tournemire’s setting of the communion chant while the choir receives Communion. (3) The choir/schola again sings the communion antiphon, alternating with psalm verses. A short vernacular antiphon involving the congregation, in the same mode as the Gregorian chant, could also be incorporated if so desired.
Tournemire avoids the use of the common French term “Sortie,” as it connotes a purely functional role as “exit music.” Rather, he refers to the movement as the “final piece,” which implies a work of more substance. Robert Sutherland Lord writes that “Tournemire seemed to have envisioned a period of meditation for the devout at the conclusion of the Mass rather than the usual noisy and hurried movements of the congregation toward the door.” Unrestricted by time constraints within the Mass, these pieces are lengthy and complex, frequently quoting chants from the Gregorian Gradual and Alleluia of the Mass (normally replaced in most celebrations of the Ordinary Form Mass by the Responsorial Psalm and a simpler congregational alleluia, although they are technically still permitted), as well as hymns and antiphons sung at Lauds and Vespers.
Musicam sacram mentions the possibility of solo organ music “at the end of Mass.” The GIRM makes no mention of what happens at this point, as the Dismissal formally concludes the Mass itself. While it has become customary in many parishes to sing a hymn after the Dismissal, this practice is hardly required. Because Tournemire’s pieces often do not begin in a boisterous manner, they tend to sound anticlimactic after a final congregational hymn. They more appropriately commence immediately following the Dismissal, accompanying the retiring procession and continuing as the congregants leave the church, or choose to stay and listen while meditating.
The following chart shows how the suites of L’Orgue Mystique may be adapted to the current liturgical calendar, tied to the appointed chants:
L’Orgue Mystique for Novus Ordo.pdf
With this chart, I hope organists in Catholic churches around the world will incorporate L'Orgue Mystique into the Ordinary Form Mass.
First Prize Winner of the 1999 Dublin International Organ Competition, Douglas O'Neill is an active performer on organ, piano, and harpsichord, as well as a church musician and choral conductor. He holds degrees from the University of Evansville, the University of Iowa, and the University of Kansas, where he completed the DMA in Church Music. His principal teachers have been Douglas Reed, Delbert Disselhorst, and James Higdon. Douglas has performed solo and collaborative concerts in the United States and Europe, including the Dublin International Organ and Choral Festival. He has also performed at regional and national conventions of the American Guild of Organists, the American Choral Directors Association, and the International Trumpet Guild, as well as with the Utah Symphony Orchestra. He has previously served as Assistant University Organist at the University of the South in Sewanee, Tennessee, on the faculty of the University of Evansville, as Associate Organist and Director of the Organ Academy at Saint Cecilia Cathedral in Omaha, and as Organist and Assistant Director of Music at the Cathedral of the Madeleine in Salt Lake City. His responsibilities at the Madeleine included playing for daily liturgies at the Cathedral, managing the acclaimed Eccles Organ Festival, and teaching at the Madeleine Choir School, the only full-time co-educational Catholic choir school in North America. He also prepared numerous editions of chant and polyphony, as well as compositions and orchestrations for performance by the choirs of the school and Cathedral. In addition to his prizewinning effort in Dublin, he has participated in the Grand Prix de Chartres, the Concours internationaux de la Ville de Paris, and the RCO Performer of the Year Competitions, and was a finalist in the Grand Prix Bach de Lausanne competition.
Western Dominican Province.
The next Dominican Rite Mass will occur after the January academic recess, on February 2. It will be the Mass of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin. Blessing of Candles and a procession through the cloister is being planned for this Mass.
Folio 122r of the Gellone Sacramentary, a sacramentary of the Gelasian type written in 780-800 AD. The Mass of the vigil of St Andrew begins with the large O, decorated with two fish in honor of his calling as a “fisher of men”; the same device is used with the Collect of the feast day towards the bottom of the page. The preface “Reverentiae tuae” cited below begins with the decorated VD about the middle of the page. (Bibliothèque nationale de France, Département des Manuscrits, Latin 12048)
Writing in the mid-12th century, the liturgical commentator John Beleth states that the feast of St Andrew the Apostle “has no vigil, because it occurs in a time of fasting, (i.e. Advent), wherefore it was not necessary that a vigil be instituted for it.” (Summa de Ecclesiasticis Officiis 164). At the end of the 13th century, William Durandus repeats this statement word for word (Rationale 7,38). It may safely be assumed that this is not said merely in error, and does reflect a custom which they both knew to be in use at the time.  Nevertheless, the vigil of St Andrew is a very ancient observance of the Roman Rite, attested in the oldest sacramentaries and lectionaries with its own proper Mass, alongside those of the Assumption, the Birth of St John the Baptist, Ss Peter and Paul, and St Lawrence.
The church of Rome is particularly concerned to honor St Andrew as the brother of its first bishop, whom he brought to Christ, as recounted in the Gospel of the vigil. The Introit of the vigil Mass is therefore taken from the Gospel of the feast, Matthew 4, 18-22. “Dóminus secus mare Galiláeae vidit duos fratres, Petrum et Andréam, et vocávit eos: Veníte post me: faciam vos fíeri piscatóres hóminum. – By the sea of Galilee, the Lord saw two brothers, Peter and Andrew, and called them: “Come ye after me, and I will make you to be fishers of men.”
The epistle is a selection of verses from chapters 44 and 45 of the book of Sirach, with the first verse taken from the book of Proverbs. Several words differ from the version of Sirach found in the Vulgate, an indication of the reading’s extreme antiquity. In the lectionary of Wurzburg, the oldest of the Roman Rite (ca. 650 AD), it is assigned to the feast, but about a century later, in the lectionary of Murbach, it is assigned to the vigil. From this position, it became the common Epistle for vigils of the Apostles, as we find in the Missal of St Pius V. The words “divided him his portion among the twelve tribes” refer to the words spoken by the Lord words spoken to St Andrew’s brother, “You, who have followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit on the seat of his majesty, shall also sit on twelve seats, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” (Matthew 19, 28)
Prov. 10, 6a The blessing of the Lord is upon the head of the just, Sir. 44, 26 therefore he gave him an inheritance, and divided him his portion among the twelve tribes, 27 and he found grace in the sight of all flesh, 45, 2 and magnified him in the fear of his enemies, and with his words he made prodigies to cease. 3 He glorified him in the sight of kings, and gave him commandments before his people, and shewed him his glory. 4 He sanctified him in his faith, and meekness, and chose him out of all flesh. 6 And he gave him commandments before his face, and a law of life and instruction, and 7 exalted him. 8 He made an everlasting covenant with him, and he girded him about with a robe of justice, and the Lord put on him a crown of glory.
In the Gospel, John 1, 35-51, St Andrew is named one of two disciples of St John the Baptist who follow the Lord after John points to Him and says “Behold, the Lamb of God.” Andrew finds and brings to the Lord his brother Simon, who is then first given the name “Cephas”, the Hellenized form of the Aramaic “kepha – the rock.” The passage continues to include the Lord’s meeting with Philip, who was of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter; Philip then brings to Him Nathanael, whom the other Evangelists call Bartholomew. This passage also provides the Communion antiphon of the Mass, which is unique to it. “Dicit Andréas Simóni fratri suo: Invénimus Messíam, qui dícitur Christus: et addúxit eum ad Jesum. – Andrew sayeth to his brother Simon, ‘We have found the Messiah, who is called Christ’, and brought him to Jesus.”
The Gelasian and Gregorian Sacramentaries each have a proper preface for the vigil of St Andrew. The former speaks of the importance of the ancient discipline of fasting in preparation for a major feast. “VD. Reverentiae tuae dicato jejunio gratulantes, quo apostolica beati Andreae merita desideratis praevenimus officiis, ut ad eadem celebranda solemniter preparemur. – Truly it is worthy and just, meet and profitable to salvation, that we give Thee thanks always and everywhere, o Lord, Holy Father, almighty and everlasting God, rejoicing in the fast dedicated to Thy veneration, by which we anticipate the merits of the blessed Apostle Andrew, our glad duty, that we may be prepared to solemnly celebrate the same. And therefore…”
In the Gregorian Sacramentary, this preface is displaced by that of the feast day, which lays greater emphasize on St Andrew’s role as a member of the Apostolic college. “VD. Qui Ecclesiam tuam in apostolicis tribuisti consistere fundamentis, de quorum collegio beati Andreæ solemnia celebrantes, tua, Domine, preconia non tacemus. Et ideo. – Truly it is worthy… who granted to Thy Church to stand firmly upon the foundation of the Apostles; and among their company, as we celebrate the solemnity of the blessed Andrew, we proclaim also Thy praises, o Lord. And therefore…”
Surprisingly, it is the Ambrosian Preface, not the ancient Roman one, that speaks particularly of St Andrew’s relationship to his brother Peter, and the fact that they both shared the Lord’s death by crucifixion. “VD. Per Christum, Dominum nostrum. Per quem beatus Apostolus Andreas tantum caelesti gratia eminet praecipuus, quantum etiam beati Petri Apostoli germanitate demonstratur esse præclarus: ut, quos una genitrix edidit mundo, una regeneratione per Crucis patibulum collocarentur in caelo. Et ideo… – Truly it is worthy… through Christ, our Lord. Through Whom the blessed Apostle Andrew stands forth as preeminent in heavenly grace, as he is also shown glorious as the brother of the blessed Apostle Peter; so that those whom one mother brought forth unto the world, might be reborn through the gibbet of the Cross, and placed in heaven. And therefore…” The final words “be placed in heaven” refer to a verse of Psalm 112 which is often referred to the Apostles, “That he may place (collocet) him with princes, with the princes of his people.”
|The Crucifixion of St Andrew, by Mattia Preti, from the choir of the basilica of Sant’Andrea della Valle in Rome.|
 According to the rubrics of the Breviary and Missal of St Pius V, if the vigil occurs in Advent, the Office is that of the ferial day of Advent, with no mention of the vigil. However, the Mass of the vigil remains the principle Mass of the day, with commemorations of the feria and the martyr St Saturninus.
The hymns sung at the litia, the blessing of bread, wine and oil which is celebrated at Vespers on major feasts in the Byzantine Rite, for the feast of St Andrew the Apostle.
The Calling of Ss Peter and Andrew, one of the panels from the reverse of the large altarpiece of the Cathedral of Siena known as the Maestà, by Duccio di Buoninsegna, 1308-11.
Having received within his heart the mystic flame that enlighteneth the mind and burneth away sins, the Apostle and disciple of Christ shineth forth with the mystical rays of his teachings in the unenlightened hearts of the nations, and likewise, burns the fables of the impious like twigs; for the fire of the Spirit hath such. O strange and fearful wonder! The tounge of clay, the body of mud, the nature of mud, the body of dust receiveth knowledge mystical and immaterial. But do thou, o teacher of matters ineffable, witness of things in heaven, intercede that our souls may be enlightened!
Statue of St Andrew with his Cross in the Lateran Basilica in Rome, by Camillo Rusconi, 1715 (Photo by Marie-Lan Nguyen from Wikimedia Commons)
Let us acclaim Andrew, the herald of the Faith and servant of the Word; for he fishes men from the depths (of error), holding in his hands the Cross in place of a rod, and letting down its power like a fishing-line, draweth up souls from the errors of the enemy, and bringeth as a gift most welcome to God. O ye faithful, let us ever acclaim him ceaselessly sing to him with the choir of Christ’s disciples, that he may pray Him to be merciful to us on the day of judgment.
|St Nicholas and Andrew with the icon of Virgin Hodegetria (She Who Leads the Way)|