The Orate fratres and Suscipiat

Lost in Translation #126

After praying the Suscipe Sancta Trinitas, the priest kisses the altar and turns clockwise towards the people, saying Orate fratres while opening and closing his hands. He completes the prayer as he continues his clockwise movement, finishing both at the same time. When he is done, the prayer Suscipiat is said. 

The Orate fratres is:

Oráte, fratres, ut meum ac vestrum sacrificium acceptábile fiat apud Deum Patrem omnipotentem.

Which is commonly translated as:

Brethren, pray that my Sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God the Father almighty.

The Suscipiat is:

Suscipiat Dóminus sacrificium de mánibus tuis, ad laudem et gloriam nóminis sui, ad utilitátem quoque nostram, totiusque Ecclesiae suae sanctae.

Which is commonly translated as:

May the Lord receive the Sacrifice from thy hands, for the praise and glory of His name, for our benefit and that of all His holy Church.

Adrian Fortescue and other rubricists identify three tones of voice at a Low Mass: aloud, audible but low, and “silent” (at a whisper). At a Low Mass, the priest says the two words Orate fratres aloud while the rest is said audibly but lowly. Although not in the rubrics, it is customary for the priest to say the last word of the prayer, omnipotentem, somewhat more loudly so that his respondent(s) knows when to begin the Suscipiat. [1]

Who says the Suscipiat in reply depends on the kind of Mass being offered. At a Solemn High, the deacon does it; if he has not returned to his position in time, the subdeacon says the prayer for him. At a Missa cantata or sung Mass, if there is an MC, he says it; if there is not and there are only two servers, they say it. At a low Mass, the Suscipiat is said by the server(s) and/or congregation. If there is one server and for some reason he cannot answer, or if there is no server and the priest is alone, the priest says the Suscipiat himself, changing “thy hands” (de manibus tuis) to “my hands” (de manibus meis).

The Orate frates is said or used differently on Good Friday and during a Missa coram Sanctissimo, a Mass during which the Blessed Sacrament is exposed on the altar. On Good Friday, after finishing the In spiritu humilitatis (not the Suscipe Sancta Trinitas), the priest kisses the altar, genuflects, turns counterclockwise towards the Gospel side, says Orate fratres, and turns back the same way with no answer made. At a Missa coram Sanctissimo, since it would be rude to turn one’s back on one’s Lord and King, the priest turns clockwise as usual but does not complete the circle; rather, he returns counterclockwise to the altar, as he does at the Dominus vobiscum. [3]

The circular—or rather, semicircular—motion of the priest is distinctive. Usually, when the priest faces the people to make a declaration such as Dominus vobiscum, he returns whence he came, as if powered by a spring that stretches him out and brings him back again. But with the Orate fratres, the priest crosses the meridian and never returns. The only other time that this action happens is after the dismissal (Ite, missa est) and before the Last Gospel. If you consider anything that happens after the dismissal an epilogue of the Mass rather than part of the Mass per se, then the semicircular motion of the Orate fratres is unique within the Mass.

In terms of diction, we call attention to three aspects of these prayers:

First, meum ac vestrum. Had the Holy Spirit been lazy or in a hurry, He could have said, nostrum sacrificium or “our sacrifice” instead of “your sacrifice and mine.” The original ICEL translators chose this route (despite the obvious meaning of the Latin), but their decision was rejected in the new official English translation in 2011. What is the difference, and why does it matter?

The original wording calls attention to the common yet differentiated priesthood of all believers which, it is alleged, the 1970s ICEL translation blurs and buries intentionally. As a validly ordained minister, the priest has the faculty to offer the Sacrifice of the Mass, to turn bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. In that respect the sacrifice is his and his alone, one for which he himself has sacrificed much (with vows of celibacy, obedience, etc.).

But Catholics also comprise a “royal priesthood” by virtue of their baptism (see Exodus 19, 6; 1 Peter 2, 9) They too, when assisting at Mass, offer the Mass in their own way. Other Western rites (e.g., the Mozarabic) and various usages of the Roman Rite (e.g., that of Cologne) make this facet clear when they add pariterque to the Orate fratres, as in ut meum sacrificum pariterque vestrum. Pariterque means “and equally,” but we can also translate it as: “May my sacrifice, and every bit as much as well yours, be…” Keeping to its signature economy with words, the Roman Rite lacks this added formulation, but the sentiment is still there. Even though they are not essential to the confection of the Eucharist, the laity help offer the sacrifice all the same.

My sacrifice, and yours

Second, sacrificium. What or which sacrifice is being referenced? As we have seen in previous articles, the Offertory Rite in Apostolic liturgical tradition, both East and West, is rightly understood as no mere preparation of the gifts, but as the first stage of the Holy Eucharistic Sacrifice and as a proleptic of that Sacrifice. (see here and here and here) And so we may wonder if the sacrifice in question is the sacrifice that has been offered so far, or the sacrifice that will be offered soon during the Canon. Sages from our tradition, such as Fr. Martin von Cochem (1630–1712) and St. Leonard of Port Maurice (1676–1751), interpret the sacrifice to be that which is to come through transubstantiation. Of course they are right, for there is only sacrifice of the Mass, which consists of the transformation of glutinous and vinicultural earthly matter into the divine Flesh of Our Lord. But given the importance imposed upon the laity to be present during the Offertory Rite (if they miss it, they have not “attended Mass” or fulfilled their Sunday obligation), it would be reductionistic to think of the “sacrifice” at this point of the Mass as something in the future and nothing more. The priest’s sacrifice and ours, when the Orate fratres is uttered, has already begun and is on the way to its numinous crescendo.

Third, utilitatem. English translations overwhelmingly favor “benefit” as the correct equivalent, and they are prudent in their judgment. At first blush “utility” is the more obvious choice, but the problem is that the Anglophonic well has been poisoned by the utilitarian philosophy of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, which privileges anything useful in the hedonistic attainment of happiness, even, perhaps, flagrant acts of injustice. The use of utilitas in this prayer, on the other hand, calls to mind the classic Augustinian distinction between use (utor) and enjoyment (fruor). For Augustine, God alone is that which is to be enjoyed, and the useful is that which (in accordance with His law, of course) is that which is made use of in light of that enjoyment. Whereas nineteenth-century utilitarianism tries to claw its way up to happiness from the bottom up (looking to everything and anything utilitarian that will help it along the way), Augustinian theology looks at life from the top down, seized by the love and enjoyment of God that puts all of His temporal goods in their true (and useful) perspective.

Bentham and Mill: do they look happy to you?

One sees this celestial, as opposed to grungy, perspective in the Suscipiat. The Sacrifice is first and foremost for the praise and glory of God’s name, come what may, and only secondarily is it for our benefit. That “secondarily” is reinforced by the addition of quoque (also) in the prayer, which is rarely if ever translated although it should be. It is as if the Suscipiat is saying: “May God be glorified for His own sake (enjoyment). Oh, and yeah, also for our benefit (use), which in the rapture of love only comes to mind as an afterthought.”

Notes

[1] Ceremonies of the Roman Rite, 41.

[2] 299.

[3] 61-62.

Theological Censorship in the 1969 Lectionary (Part 2): Guest Article by Dr. Agnieszka Fromme

This is the second part of an article by Dr Agnieszka Fromme about the theological censorship of certain ideas in the lectionary of the post-Conciliar rite; the first part was published yesterday. Our thanks once again to Dr Fromme for sharing her interesting work with NLM.

4. Comparing the Lectionaries

The following analysis is part of a broader project in which I examine the differences between the traditional Latin Mass and the new form of the Eucharistic celebration. Here, the focus is on the theological implications of the new lectionary, which often subtly alters or shifts Catholic doctrine.

My lectionary analysis begins with the Missal of 1962 (which also serves as the basis for the following table) and compares it with the new lectionary to determine what happened to the originally included pericopes. The differences often concern the Epistle, which is especially theologically rich. Narrative texts from the Old Testament or Gospels, as well as parables of Jesus that do not pose potential theological tension, are usually omitted – unless particular verses were conspicuously redacted. My aim is not to produce a comprehensive comparison of the two lectionary systems, but to highlight theologically significant differences.

The readings in the Advent and Christmas seasons are largely similar or parallel, with some shifts. One example is the Epistle Titus 2:11–15, which is read in the old Missal on January 1, but appears in the new lectionary only in Year A on the Second Sunday of Advent. Therefore, the following table begins with the period that contains the most striking differences:

TABLE 1

Occasion	Missal 1962	New (1969) Lectionary	Comment
Septuagesima	Mt 20:1-16	Mt 20:1-16a (25th Sunday in Ordinary Time)	1. Verse 16 is shortened here by omitting the second half: “For many are called, but few are chosen” is missing.
Ash Wednesday	Mt 6:16-21	Mt 6:16-18	The Gospel was shortened. The emphasis on prayer and fasting in secret – which is often used as an argument against public worship – remains. However, the call to actively store up treasures in heaven has been omitted.
Second Sunday of Lent	1 Thess 4:1-7	omitted (included in the new lectionary, but only on a weekday)	A particularly striking omission from the Sunday readings—Paul clearly emphasizes in this pericope the Catholic teaching that sanctification is a lifelong process and requires striving for ever greater perfection, and that even Christians are at risk of succumbing to sinful desires. Overall, this presents a very strong counterpoint to the Protestant doctrines of “sola fide” and “once saved, always saved.”
S. Joseph Sponsi B.M.V.	Sir 45:1-6 Mt 1:18-21	2 Sam 7:4-5a.12-14a.16 Rom 4:13.16-18.22 Mt 1:16.18 – 21.24a	The new readings emphasize different aspects of the life of St. Joseph, yet the pericopes are noticeably censored: In 2 Samuel, God’s chastisement as a Father has been removed; in Romans, Abraham’s old age is omitted, reflecting modernist skepticism toward miracles.[Note 8]
Third Sunday of Lent	Eph 5:1-9; Lk 11:14-28	omitted, instead (depending on year): 1 Cor 10:1-6.10-12 or: Rom 5:1-2.5-8 (19. Sunday of Ordinary Time); Lk 11:14-23	The omitted verses from 1 Corinthians speak of fornication and its punishment, once again highlighting the danger that even those who have become Christians can fall back into sin. The older pericope from Ephesians 5 emphasizes this danger and the necessity of a holy way of life. The missing verses from Romans 5 underline that hope is not the finished product of a once-accomplished work of salvation, but is attained through tribulation, perseverance, and proven character. In Luke 11, verses 24-28 – which contain a warning about the renewed danger of unclean spirits – have been removed.
Fifth Sunday of Lent	Hebr 9:11-15	Appears as the second reading on Corpus Christi; replaced here by: Rom 8:8–11; Heb 5:7–9 or Phil 3:8–14	In the pericope from Hebrews 5, verse 10 is omitted – this verse speaks of Jesus as a priest according to the order of Melchizedek, which points to the sacrificial character of the Holy Mass. In Philippians 3, the statement against the law requires a distinction between ritual regulations and the Decalogue. It is worth noting positively that verse 12 is retained, in which Paul speaks of the perfection he still strives to attain.
Palm Sunday	Phil 2:5-11	Phil 2:6-11 (on 26. Sunday in Ordinary Time, vv1-11 are read)	On Palm Sunday verse 5 has been omitted: “Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus.” What remains is only the description of Christ’s kenosis, without the exhortation to imitate it.
Chrism Mass	Ja 5:13-16; Mk 6:7-13	Moved to 24. Sunday year B; here instead: Isa 61:1-3a.6a.8b-9 Rev 1:5-8 Lk 4:16-21	James here speaks of the Anointing of the Sick, while Isaiah focuses solely on Christ’s messianic mission. The pericope from Revelation emphasizes the universal priesthood. In Mark 6, we find the sending of the Twelve with the authority of Jesus (apostolic authority, ministerial priesthood), whereas Luke 4 essentially repeats the content from Isaiah. This very noticeable shift from the sacraments to the universal priesthood in the Chrism Mass is also reflected in the oration of that Mass. [Note 9]
Mass of the Lord’s Supper	1 Cor 11:20-32	Ex 12:1-8.11-14; 1 Cor 11:23-26	Another very striking and deeply troubling omission: In the pericope from 1 Corinthians, verses 27-32 – with its explicit warning against receiving the Eucharist unworthily – have been removed. This warning is not found anywhere in the entire new lectionary, not even on Corpus Christi.
Easter Sunday	1 Cor 5:7-8	Acts 10:34a-37-43; Col 3:1-4	The new readings contain only the joyful message of the Resurrection, whereas 1 Corinthians additionally emphasizes the necessity of a way of life that corresponds to this message.
Low Sunday	1 Jn 5:4-10	1 Jn 5:1-6; Rev 1:9-11a.12-13.17.19	In the pericope from Revelation, the two-edged sword was censored.
3rd Sunday after Easter [Note 10]	1 Pet 2:11-19	1 Pet 2:20b-25; Rev 7:9.14b-17	The omitted part of 1 Peter 2:20a refers to suffering that is self-inflicted and therefore not meritorious. In the pericope from Revelation, the description of the heavenly liturgy is missing.
4th Sunday after Easter	Ja 1:17-21; John 16:5-14	Rev 21:1-5a Ja 1:19-20.23-26 on 22. Sunday B Partially on Pentecost Monday	A repeated emphasis on the universal priesthood. James 1:21–22 has been omitted: “But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves…” Verses 8–11 are absent from the new lectionary; they speak of the Holy Spirit convicting the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment.
Sunday after the Ascension		Rev 22:12-14.16-17.20	The missing verses warn that sorcerers, fornicators, and others will not enter the heavenly Jerusalem, and that those who distort the word of God will be punished accordingly.
Corpus Christi		1 Cor 11:23-29	The institution narrative from 1 Corinthians 11 is completely missing from the new lectionary on Corpus Christi, and it is censored on Holy Thursday – the warning against unworthy reception (see above) is omitted.
2nd Sunday after Pentecost	1 Jn 3:13-18	omitted	The omission of verse 18 – “Let us not love in word or speech but in deed and in truth”- from the new lectionary is particularly troubling. Especially in the Protestant context, where speaking in tongues is often seen as a sign of spiritual perfection, 1 John 3:18 almost serves as a counter-program.
3rd Sunday after Pentecost	1 Pet 5:6-11	omitted	The warning about the devil as a roaring and prowling lion is missing from the new lectionary.
5th Sunday after Pentecost	1 Pet 3:8-15	omitted	The exhortation that Christians should avoid evil and be zealous for what is good is missing.
11th Sunday after Pentecost	1 Cor 15:1-10	partially on Easter Monday	On Easter Monday, this pericope does appear, but without verses 9–10. These verses emphasize that God's grace can remain ineffective without our effort.
21st Sunday after Pentecost	Eph 6:10-17	omitted	The spiritual battle and the “armor of God” are absent.

The following section highlights some pericopes that were added to the new lectionary in comparison to the old Missal, yet appear in a censored version:

TABLE 2

Occasion	Pericope	Comment
2nd Sunday in Ordinary Time (B)	1 Cor 6:13c-15a.17-20	The warning against sexual sin as a metaphor for spiritual adultery has been omitted.
22nd Sunday in Ordinary Time (B)	Mc 7:1-8.14-15.21-23	Some clarifying verses are missing, which make it clear that Jesus is drawing a distinct line between the commandments of God and human laws or ritual regulations – a very important distinction for properly understanding Pauline theology of law and grace in a Catholic sense.
22nd Sunday in Ordinary Time (C)	Sir 3:17-18.20.28-29	The omitted verses warn against false curiosity and the pursuit of hidden secrets – a valuable reminder in times of obsession with private revelations.
25th Sunday in Ordinary Time (A)	Phil 1:20c-24.27a	The first part of verse 20 is omitted. It contains the reminder that even a believer – Paul himself included – can be put to shame, and that there is a risk of failing to glorify Christ in every aspect of his life.

It is worth noting positively that some passages containing important Catholic teachings have been retained in the new lectionary – such as Galatians 5:16-6:10 (warning against temptations) – or even added, such as 2 Maccabees 12:43-45 (sacrifice for the dead), 1 John 5:2 and 1 John 2:3 (love expressed through keeping the commandments). Others have been moved e.g. from Ember Friday in Lent to a Sunday, Ezekiel 18:20–28 (rejection of “once saved, always saved”).

Summary

Numerous biblical texts have been altered in the new lectionary, revealing a clear trend toward a theology more aligned with Protestant and modernist interpretations. Particularly striking is the omission or shortening of many passages that emphasize key Catholic doctrines. A prime example is the removal of verses highlighting the necessity of active participation in sanctification and moral responsibility.

Important passages such as the warning against unworthy reception of the Eucharist or the teaching that sanctification is a lifelong process have either been entirely omitted or significantly weakened. Instead of emphasizing the sacrificial character of the Eucharist and the role of the sacraments, the focus is increasingly placed on a general priesthood—reflecting Protestant perspectives.

These changes in the new lectionary represent a shift toward a theology that emphasizes personal, subjective experience and a “simplified” understanding of grace, while the traditional Catholic teaching on the interplay of faith, works, and the sacramental order is increasingly diluted.

NOTES (numeration continued from part 1) 

[8] St. Pius X, Pascendi Dominici gregis: The Philosophy of the Modernists; Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1907, 59.

[9] 1962 Collect: “Lord God, who in the regenerating of Thy peoples makest use of the ministry of priests, grant us to serve with perseverance in Thy will, that by the gift of Thy grace, the people made holy unto Thee may be increased in our days both in merit and in number. Through (our) Lord (etc.)”; 1969 Collect: “O God, who anointed your Only Begotten Son with the Holy Spirit and appointed him Christ the Lord, graciously grant that, made partakers in his anointing, we may be found witnesses of redemption in the world. Through our Lord…”

[10] The alignment of the old Sundays after Easter or after Pentecost with the new Sundays in Ordinary Time varies from year to year depending on the date of Easter. The assignments in this table correspond to the calendar of 2025.

A History of the Popes Named Leo, Part 3: The 10th Century (Leo V-VIII)

This is the third installment of a series on the thirteen papal namesakes of our new Holy Father Leo XIV; click these links to read part 1 and part 2.

Four Popes named Leo reigned within a span of about 62 years in the 10th century; their reigns are all quite brief, and their careers for the most part so obscure that the precise dates of some of them are not even known, so this will be a short article. First, however, an historical and historiographical note.

The term “dark ages” is used and over-used by bad historians to mean broadly “any period after the fall of the Roman Empire when stuff happened that I dislike.” But if there is an age to which it can justly be applied, and especially in regard to the papacy, it is the 10th century. The Carolingian Empire had fractured, and was no longer the stabilizing political force it had been under Charlemagne. Western Europe was besieged on all sides: by the Vikings from the north, the Magyars from the east, and the Saracens everywhere that touched the Mediterranean. Even if the Popes of that era had been Saints on the model of men like the first Leo, it is hard to imagine that they would have been able to achieve much that we would look back on as exemplary. But many of them were very far indeed from being Saints, and the tenth century is the first in which there is no canonized or beatified pope.

A drawing of the third version of the church of Cluny Abbey.

Given the tremendous political and social instability of the era, it is not surprising that the papacy became essentially a tool of the local secular powers, which were themselves very corrupt, and tainted the papacy as an institution with their corruption. Rather, it is surprising, and should be encouraging, that even in the midst of such chaos, indeed, at its beginning (in the year 910), there was founded the very institution that would lead the Church out of the darkness, the abbey of Cluny.

We are not sure of the date of Leo V’s election, which took place in the second half of 903, or the length of his reign. He was from the region of Ardea, a town about 23 miles south of Rome, and at the time of his election, was a priest of a minor church outside the Roman city walls. A contemporary writer named Auxilius is cited by the Catholic Encyclopedia to the effect that he ruled for only a month, and was “a man of praiseworthy life and holiness.” Record of only one act of his papacy survives, a minor administrative matter.

For reasons unknown, he was deposed and imprisoned by one of the cardinal-priests of Rome, a man named Christopher. The report in one source that he was murdered in prison is considered suspect and unreliable, but the date and circumstances of his death are unknown. Although the deposition was both immoral and uncanonical, Christopher was accepted as the legitimate pope at the time, and is referred to as such by many subsequent documents, including some issued by sainted popes such as Leo IX.

A portrait of Pope Christopher (not based on any contemporary image of him), copied from the medallion portrait of him in the Roman basilica of St Paul Outside-the-Walls, where he is included as a legitimate pope, despite the irregularity of the manner of his accession. (From the book Ritratti e biografie dei romani pontefici: da S. Pietro a Leone 13, by Davide Vaglimigli, 1879.)

The length of Leo VI’s reign is known, seven months and five days, but the exact date of his election within the year 928 is not. He was a Roman, the son of a city government official, and cardinal-priest of the church St Susanna at the time of his election. (The same title was previously held by Ss Sergius I (687-701) and Leo III (795-816), and much later, by Nicholas V (1447-55).) Our knowledge of his papacy is limited to some minor administrative acts.

Leo VII was a Roman, the cardinal-priest of the church of St Sixtus, elected in January of 936, and reigning for a bit longer than three and a half years, until his death in mid-July of 939. His election was brought about by Alberic II, Duke of Spoleto, who was then in conflict with another secular prince, Hugo, the king of Italy. As the latter was besieging Rome, Leo summoned St Odo, the second abbot of Cluny, to broker a peace between them, which was successfully achieved. Apart from this, most of what is known of Leo’s reign consists of administrative acts, including the granting of privileges to various monasteries, and especially Cluny. This is more important than it might seem. The word “privilegium” means literally “an exemption from the law”, and it was precisely these kinds of exemption that enabled Cluny, and the reform movement which it represented, to flourish amid so much corruption in both the Church and secular society.

Leo VIII has the rare (but not wholly unique) distinction of being regarded as both an antipope and a legitimate pope, in two different periods, a circumstance very much the product of the chaos of his era. He was a native Roman of a prominent family, and a lay protonotary at the time of his election.

His predecessor, John XII, was intruded into the papacy by the manipulations of his father, the same Alberic mentioned above. He was easily one of the most disgraceful Popes in the Church’s history, not only for his coarse behavior and personal immorality, but also for his political treachery. The famous term of rhetorical exaggeration “pornocracy”, and the equally exaggerated statement, too often taken literally, that the Lateran palace was turned into a brothel, are said especially in reference to his scandalous reign.

A reconstruction of the Lateran complex as it stood in the Middle Ages. (Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons.)

In November of 963, the Emperor Otto I deposed this thoroughly unworthy man, an action which was as unlawful as the manner of John’s election had been, but, for all its illegality, difficult to regret. Leo was then put forward as his replacement, and hastily consecrated, receiving all the orders preceding that of bishop in one day, another flagrant violation of canon law. When the emperor departed from Rome the following February, Leo was deposed by a popular uprising, and John XII returned to power, but the latter died only three months later, at which another candidate, a man named Benedict, was elected to replace him.

However, Otto hastened back to Rome, and having once again seized complete control of the city, had Benedict deposed, and Leo put back into his place. A contemporary source states that Benedict acquiesced to his own deposition, allowing Leo to personally remove his pallium. For this second period, therefore, from July of 964 to about the beginning of the following March, Leo VIII is regarded as the legitimate pope, but nothing is known of the deeds of his papacy.

Theological Censorship in the 1969 Lectionary (Part 1): Guest Article by Dr. Agnieszka Fromme

Our thanks to Dr Agnieszka Fromme for sharing with us this interesting article about theological censorship in the post-Conciliar lectionary. It will be presented in two parts. 

Jefferson Bible (photo from Smithsonian)

Was a “Richer Table of the Word” Truly Set for Us in 1969?

A Comparison of the Tridentine Lectionary and the Ordo Lectionum Missae

Dr. Agnieszka Fromme

One of the aims of the liturgical reform following the Second Vatican Council was to “open up the treasures of the Bible more lavishly, so that a richer share in God’s word may be provided for the faithful” (Sacrosanctum Concilium 51). The introduction of the new Ordo Lectionum Missae in 1969 promised precisely that: a “richer table of the Word” – as the programmatic phrase in the official preface to the new Lectionary put it.

A three-year Sunday cycle and an expanded set of readings were meant to offer greater biblical variety, whereas the traditional Tridentine lectionary emphasized theologically dense repetition. But was this goal truly achieved?

Anyone who has ever held the modern Lectionary in hand will have stumbled upon its cryptic Scripture references – such as 1 Cor 6:13c-15a; 17-20 or Rev 1:9-11a, 12-13, 17, 19. Those who do not settle for vague piety but have the courage to look closely at these liturgical fragmentations are soon confronted with an uncomfortable question: Which parts of Holy Scripture have been deliberately omitted – and why? When verses appear to be systematically fragmented or trimmed in multiple places, it raises the suspicion that this may not simply be a matter of length or practicality – but at times a form of ideological filtering. Which leads to the underlying question: Was a truly “richer table of the Word” prepared for us in 1969 – or merely a pre-sorted, pre-portioned plate? This study thus approaches the question not only quantitatively, but above all qualitatively.

1. The History of the Lectionary

In the liturgy of the Catholic Church, the proclamation of Holy Scripture plays a central role. From the earliest centuries, biblical texts were read aloud during Christian assemblies – initially from the Apostolic letters, later including the Gospels. These readings were first selected relatively freely; over time, fixed orders developed, known as lectionaries.

By the 4th century, various regions – such as Rome, Jerusalem, and North Africa – had established lectionaries: collections of reading texts assigned to specific days and feasts. These orders varied regionally but generally followed the liturgical year with its major feasts like Easter, Pentecost, and Christmas. In Rome, a fixed set gradually emerged, providing for each day of the year a reading from the Epistles or Old Testament and a Gospel – often supplemented by a Gradual (intermediate chant).

Although the entire Catholic Church can be styled “Roman” in the sense that it is under the Pope in Rome, there obviously exists significant liturgical diversity within this one Church. This was evident, for example, during the recent papal election through the varied liturgical attire of cardinals from different traditions. The term “Roman” typically refers to the Roman Rite, the predominant liturgical form in the Western Church. However, it is only one of 24 rites within the Catholic Church. The following discussion pertains exclusively to the Roman Rite.

The Roman Mass, often referred to as “Tridentine,” does not, in its substance, originate from the Council of Trent itself. Instead, it has deep roots in the early Church. From this tradition, the Roman liturgy developed in the West, receiving its first comprehensive organization and stabilization under Pope Gregory the Great († 604). In subsequent centuries, the “Mass of the Roman Curia” became the predominant form in the papal environment. This local role might have continued till today – had the Reformation not intervened.

In response to the significant attacks on the Catholic understanding of the Eucharist, priesthood, and sacraments, the Council of Trent (1545-63) sought to clearly define Catholic doctrine and establish liturgical unity to protect the faithful. Pope St Pius V, therefore, published the Missale Romanum in 1570, standardizing the form of the Roman Curia Mass for the entire Church – except where another liturgical rite existed that was demonstrably older than 200 years, a regulation aimed to exclude all Protestant-influenced innovations. The Roman liturgy then remained largely unchanged for 400 years, shaping Catholic worship well into the 20th century.

With the promulgation of the Missale Romanum in 1570, the lectionary for the entire Roman Rite was also established. It followed a one-year cycle, as do all traditional rites. The so-called Tridentine lectionary is based on a much older liturgical tradition and contains, for each Sunday and feast day, an Epistle (usually from the Pauline letters) and a Gospel, carefully paired over centuries. Weekdays generally did not have their own pericopes but repeated readings from Sundays or saints’ feasts.

Although the volume of biblical text was quantitatively limited, the recurring readings fostered a mystagogical anchoring in the believers’ faith life. Regular Mass attendees encountered the same central Gospel passages repeatedly – leading to a deep familiarity with the mystery of salvation. The liturgy “imprints” rather than merely “informs” – serving as a spiritual practice. The combination of Epistle and Gospel was not merely thematic or chronological but theologically deliberate. Often, the Epistle elucidates the spiritual significance of the Gospel event. Many of these pericopes are strongly sacramental, ecclesial, and dogmatic – addressing grace, sin, redemption, and the holiness of the Church. The selection focused on particularly poignant and dense Scripture passages, resulting in a clear catechetical and apologetic effect. In confronting heresies or ideological challenges, the Tridentine lectionary was often perceived as theologically refined and incisive.

2. The Reform of 1969: Ordo Lectionum Missae

The Second Vatican Council (1962-65) called for a more intensive inclusion of Sacred Scripture in the liturgy. The result was the new Ordo Lectionum Missae (OLM) – the Order of Readings for the Mass – introduced in 1969 and slightly revised in 1981. This new lectionary brought about profound structural changes, both in its layout and in the amount of Scripture read:

Key features of the new order:

• Introduction of a three-year cycle for Sundays and feast days:
• Year A: Focus on the Gospel of Matthew
• Year B: Mark
• Year C: Luke
• The Gospel of John is included during Lent, Eastertide, and on solemnities
• Introduction of a two-year weekday cycle (Year I and Year II)
• Introduction of three readings on Sundays:
1. First Reading: usually from the Old Testament
2. Second Reading: usually from the Apostolic Letters
3. Gospel

The goal of this reform was to allow a much larger portion of the Bible to be heard over three years – approximately 70% of the New Testament and 13% of the Old Testament.

The order was promulgated by the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship. The respective bishops’ conferences are responsible for translations and pastoral adaptations (e.g., to national feasts). The lectionary must be used for all public celebrations of Mass in the Pauline rite; exceptions are only permitted in certain pastoral contexts (e.g., children’s Masses, weddings, or funerals). [1]

In Roman Catholic liturgy, the Gospel is the preferred foundation for the homily, though all three readings may be incorporated. In contrast to the Protestant pericope system, the Catholic homily is not tied to a single fixed “preaching text”, allowing greater thematic freedom. This enables stronger connections between the Old and New Testaments – for example, typological interpretation (e.g., sacrifice – Eucharist – Paschal mystery).

Liturgically, this is properly referred to as the homily – an exposition of the day’s readings, especially the Gospel. It is an integral part of the Mass and obligatory on Sundays and holy days of obligation. The homily may only be given by a priest or deacon and aims to deepen faith through scriptural and mystagogical reflection.

The broader term sermon is also used outside the liturgy, often for Lenten preaching, catechesis, or missionary talks, which are not necessarily tied to the day’s readings and may be delivered by laypeople or religious.

3. Cornerstones of Catholic Dogmatics

In the following analysis, I highlight theological differences, omissions, and shifts in emphasis in the new lectionary (to be illustrated by tables in Part 2). These pertain to uncomfortable or “non-contemporary” topics – such as sin, judgment, and conversion – but also to a tendency toward Protestant theological perspectives, especially regarding grace, Scripture, and the Church.

To frame these observations theologically, this section outlines key cornerstones of Catholic dogma that define the Church’s understanding of grace, liturgy, Scripture, and ecclesiology. These serve as reference points for the comparative analysis that follows.

Faith and Works, Grace and Human Cooperation

The Catholic Church does not view grace as merely external divine favor but as an interior transformation and empowerment of the person to participate in the divine life. The human being is not passive but actively cooperates with grace once moved by it. This cooperation is itself a gift but an inseparable part of salvation. Correct interpretation of Paul’s rejection of “works of the law” (e.g., Rom. 3, 28; Gal. 2, 16) is essential. Paul refers here to ritual prescriptions such as circumcision or dietary laws – not works of love, moral commandments, or cooperation with grace. [2]

Sanctification as a Lifelong Process

God’s grace aims not just at legal acquittal but at the true transformation of the person. The Catholic Church stresses the need for continuous growth in holiness – through sacraments, works of love, prayer, and daily struggle against sin. The path to full communion with God is a lifelong process requiring fidelity, repentance, and perseverance to the end. This directly contradicts the notion of “once saved, always saved”. Catholic teaching opposes this idea, which appears in some Protestant traditions (especially Calvinist predestination), as it conflicts with the biblical exhortation to “work out your salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil 2, 12), and warnings against apostasy, lukewarmness, or moral laxity (cf. Heb 6, 4-6; Rev 3, 16). [3]

Unity of Scripture and Tradition

The Church teaches that divine revelation is transmitted not by Scripture alone, but by Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition together, both flowing from the same divine source. The interpretation of this revelation is entrusted to the Church’s Magisterium, guided by the Holy Spirit. [4]

The Church as Visible Sign of Salvation

The Church is not just a spiritual community but a visible and efficacious sacrament of salvation. Founded by Christ, she is both divine and human. Salvation is sacramentally mediated within her – especially through the Eucharist, which is the source and summit of ecclesial life. Liturgy is not merely religious expression but Christ’s action through his Church. In celebrating the seven sacraments, especially the Eucharist, the faithful truly participate in the mystery of redemption. [5]

The Sacramental Priesthood and the Sacrificial Nature of the Mass 

The Catholic Church affirms that the Eucharist is not merely a memorial meal but a true and proper sacrifice. In the Mass, Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross is made present in an unbloody, sacramental manner through the ministry of the ordained priest, who acts in persona Christi capitis – in the person of Christ the Head. The ministerial priesthood is essentially distinct from the common priesthood of all the faithful and is conferred by the sacrament of Holy Orders. The priest is not merely a presider but a sacramental instrument, through whom Christ himself offers the sacrifice. [6]

Real Presence and Transubstantiation

The Catholic Church teaches that Jesus Christ is truly, really, and substantially present in the Eucharist – body, blood, soul, and divinity. This presence comes about through the transformation of the substance of bread and wine into the substance of Christ’s body and blood: transubstantiation. The appearances (accidents) remain, but the inner reality is fully changed. A profound hint of this Eucharistic reality is found in the Lord’s Prayer: “τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον (= supersubstantialem) δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον” (Mt 6, 11) – “Give us this day our supersubstantial bread.” [7]

In Part 2, we will present a table in which many examples are given of how readings in the new lectionary deliberately sidestep, by means of excluded verses, the dogmatic principles listed above.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Dr. Agnieszka Fromme holds degrees in German Studies, Theology, and Information Technology. She earned her doctorate in theology in 2012 in Poland, with a dissertation in catechetics focused on the RCIA and a large-scale study of young people's faith life. After her marriage, she moved to Germany, where she currently works as a programmer. Theology remains her deep passion, now pursued mainly alongside her profession. Under the pen name Pia Lamm, she has published several books, some of which are available also in English (see here).

NOTES

[1] In the nuptial Mass of the traditional Roman Rite, the Gospel is always Matthew 19 – on the indissolubility of marriage. Today, this passage is just one of ten optional readings – just as the indissolubility of marriage itself seems to have become one option. In funeral liturgies, on the other side, the famous Dies irae sequence has disappeared. German Wikipedia puts it with remarkable candor: “The Dies irae is no longer used in the liturgy of the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite according to the new Missal, due to the image of an angry God (‘Day of wrath…’) that the sequence conveys. It is, however, permitted at the grand Requiem on All Souls’ Day so that the treasure of Church music may be preserved.” In plain terms: it was removed because it no longer fits the times – but in order not to lose it musically, it may be performed once a year, on All Souls’ Day. That is, on a weekday when few people attend Mass, since most visits to the cemetery already take place on All Saints’ Day. But certainly not at ordinary funeral Masses – where there would be the risk of confronting lapsed or secular mourners with the idea of an “angry God.”

[2] References: Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) 1996–2001; Müller, G.L., Katholische Dogmatik: für Studium und Praxis der Theologie Herder 1995, pp. 800–805; Diekamp-Jüssen, Katholische Dogmatik, Alverna 2013, pp. 678–778; Denzinger, Kompendium der Glaubensbekenntnisse und kirchlichen Lehrentscheidungen, Herder 2017, nos. 1520–1534.

[3] References: CCC 2012–2016; Diekamp-Jüssen, pp. 784–799; DH 1535–1563.

[4] References: CCC 80–83, 95; Müller, pp. 53–94; Diekamp-Jüssen, pp. 42–85; DH 1501–1507, 4207–4214.

[5] References: CCC 748–780, 1113–1131; Müller, pp. 573–578; Diekamp-Jüssen, pp. 804–856, 1081–1084; DH 1601, 3011–3014, 4118.

[6] References: CCC 1362–1372, 1547; Müller, pp. 640, 705–706, 751–753; Diekamp-Jüssen, pp. 960–972, 1095; DH 1743–1750.

[7] References: CCC 1373–1381; Müller, pp. 710–711; Diekamp-Jüssen, pp. 912–948; DH 1636–1642.

The Miracles of St Bernardine of Siena

During the Jubilee year of 1450, Pope Nicholas V canonized the Franciscan St Bernardine (Bernardino) of Siena (1380-1444), who had died six years earlier, and whose feast is kept today. This was an unusually quick process for the era, especially considering how varied the Saint’s career had been; he had preached all over Italy, performed countless miracles, produced a large body of writings, and served as the general of the reformed branch of his order, known as the Strict Observance, or “Osservanza” in Italian. The revised Butler’s Lives of the Saints tells a funny story regarding his process, in reference to one of his contemporaries, Thomas of Florence, a collaborator in the reform. Thomas died in 1447, and many within the order wished that his cause for canonization might be joined to Bernardine’s. But since this would certainly have delayed the latter, St John of Capistrano went to Thomas’ tomb (which was in the order’s church in Rieti) and ordered him in the name of holy obedience to stop performing miracles until Bernardine had been canonized. This did in fact happen, and Thomas remains a blessed.

St Bernardine of Siena, 1450-60, by the Sienese painter Sano di Pietro.

St Bernardine is especially well known for promoting devotion to the Holy Name of Jesus. In his time, the upper two-thirds of Italy (basically everything north of the kingdom of Naples) was divided into many small states, which were very often at war with each other, and just as often rent by civil wars. Bernardine was extraordinarily successful in bringing peace to and between these states by preaching on the Holy Name, and would usually end his sermons by holding up a painted tablet with an IHS monogram on it, surrounded by the sun. (Monograms of this sort can still be seen to this day on the outside of public buildings all over Italy.) In many places, there was no church large enough to accommodate the crowds that gathered to hear him, and so he had to preach in the public squares, which is all the more remarkable when one considers that (as is often seen in paintings of him, including the one above) he had lost all his teeth.

The IHS monogram on the façade of the city hall of St Bernardine’s native city. Image from Wikimedia Commons, © José Luiz Bernardes Ribeiro, CC BY-SA 4.0.

One of the places that had benefitted very greatly from Bernardine’s services as a peacemaker, and which nourished a great devotion to him, was the little Umbrian city of Perugia, the long-time rival of St Francis’ native place, Assisi. (It was during one of the frequent little wars with Perugia that Francis was captured and imprisoned, leading to his conversion and embrace of holy poverty.) As the Jubilee of 1475 approached, the Franciscan friars of Perugia commissioned a set of paintings of his miracles, which were made to be mounted on two large doors that covered a statue of the Saint in a small but very beautiful oratory dedicated to him. These panels are now displayed in the National Gallery of Umbria in Perugia, one of the best museums in all of Italy.

The oratory of St Bernardine in Perugia, built in 1452, only two years after his canonization. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by AliasXX00, CC BY-SA 4.0)

The group of painters who produced the panels is collectively referred to as “the workshop of 1473”, and includes two particularly famous names. One is Pietro Vannucci, by far the best known and most successful artist in the city, and therefore usually just called “Perugino – the man from Perugia.” (1448 ca. – 1523) The other is his assistant Bernardino di Betto Betti, who was generally known by the nickname “Pinturicchio – tiny little painter”, from his unusually small stature. (Born in Perugia ca. 1452; died in Siena, 1513.)

One of Piero della Francesca’s most famous paintings, The Flagellation of Christ, 1459-60. Notice how the composition is dominated by the architectural elements, as is also the case in the paintings shown below.

An interesting aspect of the project is how much it evidently owes to the style of Piero della Francesca (1415 ca. – 1492), their almost-fellow Umbrian. (Almost, because his native place is in the modern region of Tuscany, but borders on Umbria.) In six of the eight panels, the scene is either indoors or taking place in front of a building, and the architecture dominates the image; in the remaining two, roughly two-thirds of the scene is sky and countryside. The colors are bright, and the human figures cast shadows, but just barely. Pinturicchio had originally been trained as a miniaturist, doing very small images for the illustration of devotional books, and brought his training for finely drawn detail into the style of Perugino’s workshop; this is evident in the trees and the elaborate decorations on the buildings. (All images from Wikimedia Commons by Sailko, CC BY-SA 3.0, or public domain)

St Bernardine heals a young girl who suffers from an ulcer. (Perugino) The large structure that provides the backdrop is an idealized restoration of the arch of Titus in the Roman Forum, and partly reproduces the inscription on it.

St Bernardine raises up a young man whom he finds dead under a tree as he is traveling to Verona. (Perugino) The countryside shown in the background is very much like that of Umbria, but notice how the artist introduces the rather exotic looking and impossibly balanced cliff structure for contrast.

Continue Reading this Article. . .

Palestrina’s Motet for Papal Coronations, “Hic Nunc Est”

This was spotted on Twitter yesterday, a set of photos from the Mass which formally inaugurated the ministry of the newly-elected Pope Leo XIV, feliciter nunc regnantis.

The learned Dominican and the learned Jesuit are speaking about one of the old rituals that was removed from the papal coronation Mass by the post-Conciliar reform. When the faithful had gathered in St Peter’s basilica, before the Mass began, the Cardinal Bishop of Albano would gesture first towards the clergy in choir, and then towards the crowd in the nave, and solemnly intone the motet “Hic nunc est”, which the choir would then continue, “circus tuus, hae nunc sunt simiae tuae!” Palestrina’s polyphonic setting of it, composed for the coronation of Pope Marcellus II in 1555, is pretty amazing, and came to be used as a matter of routine, so that the Gregorian original was lost. Unfortunately, there is no recording of it on YouTube, but an old friend managed to find a version of it on this platform. (The recording is not embeddable, but the external link is safe, I promise.)

https://suno.com/s/Qd39EXEd6Vgd9Khp

The Latin scholars among our readers will recognize these words as a reference to a Polish expression which has become somewhat popular in English in recent years, “Not my circus, not my monkeys”, a way of saying, “This is not my problem.” And in point of fact, it was originally a privilege of the ranking Polish cardinal or archbishop to intone the motet, IF any of them happened to be in Rome for the coronation. But Gniezno, the primatial see of Poland, is 975 miles from Rome, and most of the other important episcopal sees of that nation are even further away. Before trains and telegraphs, it usually worked out that by the time they got the news of the death of the old pope, the new one had already been elected and crowned, so over time, the custom devolved onto Albano.

The full text of the antiphon as given in the recording is as follows:

“Hic nunc est circus tuus, hae nunc sunt simiae tuae,
quas Dominus in sapientia sua Petro tradidit,
et per manus eius nunc tibi commendat.
Gaude in stultitia sanctorum,
laetare in tumultu gratiae,
nam per hos clamosos
regnum caelorum patefit.

This is now your circus, these are now your monkeys,
Whom the Lord in His wisdom handed over to Peter,
and though his hands, now commends to you.
Rejoice in the foolishness of the Saints (cf. 1 Cor. 3, 18-19),
be glad in the tumult of grace,
for through these noisy ones
the kingdom of heaven is laid open.”

And I therefore also make bold to remind our readers of these prayers for the Pope which are traditionally said at services like Benediction, and can of course be said privately any time.

The Roman Basilica of St Pudentiana

Before the feast of St Peter Celestine was added to the general calendar in the reign of Pope Clement IX (1667-69), May 19th was the feast of St Pudentiana, already attested on this date in the so-called Martyrology of St Jerome in the 5th century. Prior to Pope Clement VIII’s editorial revision of the Tridentine breviary, her name was usually given as “Potentiana”; her traditional legend is not considered historically reliable, and she was removed from the calendar altogether in the post-Conciliar reform. However, a church titled to her is one of the oldest in Rome, built at the end of the 4th century, and preserves one of the oldest Christian mosaics in the city.

Image from Wikimedia Commons by Welleschik, CC BY-SA 3.0

Unfortunately, the church has undergone a number of restorations, most notably, a radical transformation in the later 16th century, at a point when it was practically in ruins. This “restoration” clipped off much of the lower part of the mosaic, and a good portion of the sides as well; as a result, Christ now appears in the company of ten of the Apostles, rather than the customary twelve.

In the upper part are seen the four animals from the visions in the first chapter of Ezekiel and the fourth of the Apocalypse, which, according to a tradition that goes back to St Irenaeus at the end of the 2nd century, represent the four Evangelists. This is one of the oldest images of them; at the time it was made, this tradition was generally accepted, but had not yet been confirmed precisely as we now know it. Ss Jerome and Augustine, who were both alive when the church was built, give slightly different explanations of which animal represents which writer, and both differ from Irenaeus. Going from left to right, they appear in the order which Jerome gives (man – Matthew; lion – Mark; bull – Luke; eagle – John) in the prologue of his commentary on the Gospel of St Matthew. Since Jerome had lived in Rome, and been the secretary to Pope St Damasus I, who died in 384, it is quite possible that the artist or his patron took this arrangement directly from a personal conversation with the saint.

Other details are open to interpretation. The city behind Christ and the Apostles may be Jerusalem, in which case, the buildings may be the churches built there by Constantine in the early days of the peace of the Church. (All of these were destroyed by the Muslim Caliph at the beginning of the 11th century, and later rebuilt, so we cannot compare their appearance today with anything seen in the mosaic.) This is also suggested by the brightly jeweled Cross on the hill directly behind Christ, which may be intended to the remind the viewer of the famous apparition of the Cross on Mt Calvary, which took place roughly 40 years earlier.

The city may also be understood to be Rome, sanctified by the tombs of the Apostles Peter and Paul, who are here shown closest to Christ. About twenty years before this church was built, the prefect of Rome, Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, an ardent defender of the traditional worship of the pagan gods, had restored a portico in the Roman Forum dedicated to the “Dii Consentes – the Harmonious Gods”, also known as the Twelve Olympians. This was the last time a structure with a pagan religious significance was restored as an official act in the city.

The portico of the Dii Consentes in the Roman Forum, very partially reconstructed out of fragments of the original found on the site, as part of a major excavation campaign in the 1930s. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by Ursus; CC BY-SA 3.0).

The Dii Consentes were as a group the patrons of the Roman senatorial class, many of whom had residences on the Esquiline hill where the basilica of St Pudentiana is located. The majestic portrayal of Christ in gold and on an imperial throne may therefore be intended to mean that Rome is now a Christian city under the King of kings and Lord of lords. The portico which embraces the twelve Apostles would then displace that of the Dii Consentes, and show the senators that they are now under the protection, not of a group of fictitious and immoral characters, but that of Jesus’ close friends.

There is also some uncertainty concerning the two women who seem to be crowning Ss Peter and Paul. They are traditionally said to be St Pudentiana and her sister Praxedes, daughters of a senator named Pudens, who according to one of the more unlikely stories, was the host of St Peter when he first came to Rome. The feast of St Praxedes on July 21st is also very ancient, and a church dedicated to her, originally of the 5th century, but completely rebuilt in the early 9th, is only a quarter of a mile away.

A mosaic from the reign of Pope St Paschal I (817-24) in the chapel of St Zeno within the basilica of St Praxedes. The lower register depicts the Pope’s mother Theodora (with a square blue nimbus, indicating that she was alive at the time the image was made), and the sisters Praxedes and Pudentiana to either side of the Virgin Mary. In the upper part, the Lamb of God stands on a hill from which the four rivers of Paradise flow, with deer to either side as a reference to the words of the Psalm, “As the deer longeth for the streams of running water...”; to the right, a fragmentary Harrowing of Hell.

However, the legend that links them as sisters is decidedly much later than the building of either church, and not reliable as history; it is also very unlikely that a Roman senator would give one of his daughters a Latin name, and the other a Greek name like Praxedes. It seems more probable that the two figures represent the Church of the Synagogue, i.e., those who converted to Christianity from Judaism, and the Church of the Gentiles, those who converted from paganism. This is a common motif of early Christian art, as seen, for example, in the mosaic on the counter-façade of Santa Sabina about 50 years later. In this case, the women would perhaps not be crowning the Apostles, but offering them as tributes to Christ, indicated by the gestures made in His direction by Peter, “the Apostle of the circumcision”, and Paul, “the Apostle of the gentiles.” (Galatians 2, 8).

The dedicatory inscription on the counter-façade of Santa Sabina, the only part of the church’s original mosaic decoration which survives, ca. 425 A.D. The symbolic figure of “the church from the circumcision” is on the left, and that of “the church from the gentiles” on the right. Photo by Fr. Lawrence Lew, O.P.

Finally, the inscription on the book in Christ’s hands, “Dominus conservator ecclesiae Pudentianae” may be read in two ways. “Pudentianae” may be taken as the genitive case of the woman’s name, in which case it would mean “the Lord is the preserver of the church of Pudentiana.” It may be also be taken as an adjective meaning “belonging to Pudens”, and modifying the word “ecclesiae”, and thus “the Lord is the preserver of the church of Pudens.” For this reason, some scholars believe that the association of the saint called Pudentiana with this church is purely accidental, deriving from a misunderstanding of the inscription.

An interesting piece of history connected to this church is that it was the first cardinalitial title of one Scipione Rebiba, which he received in 1556 from Pope Paul IV, whom he had previous served as the auxiliary bishop of Chieti. The vast majority of Latin Rite Catholic bishops (and therefore the priests ordained by them) today derive their Apostolic succession from Cardinal Rebiba through Pope Benedict XIII (1724-30), and the nearly 160 bishops consecrated by the latter. (Of these, by the way, only 18 were consecrated before Benedict’s election as Pope. His Holiness was evidently really fond of lengthy ceremonies; in the second month of his Papacy, July of 1724, at the age of 75, he performed episcopal consecrations on four Sundays in a row, and one on the last Wednesday of the month for good measure!)

Cardinal Scipione Rebiba (1504-77)

The Offertory Jubilate Deo, Universa Terra

Shout with joy to God, all the earth, sing ye a psalm to his name; come and hear, and I will tell you, all ye that fear God, what great things the Lord hath done for my soul. allelúja. V. My mouth hath spoken, when I was in trouble; I will offer up to thee holocausts full of marrow.

This recording of the Offertory of the Fourth Sunday after Easter, the text of which is taken from Psalm 65, includes one of the extra verses with which the Offertories were generally sung in the Middle Ages (in this case, the second of two), with a long melisma on the word “offeram - I will offer.” It is also used on the Second Sunday after Epiphany, on which the Gospel of the Wedding of Cana is read; in his commentary on that day, Durandus explains the repetition of certain words within it. “We sing out for joy, doubling the words both in the Offertory and its verses, an effect of spiritual inebriation.” The text and music can be seen in this pdf, starting on page 69:

https://media.musicasacra.com/books/offertoriale1935.pdf

Jubiláte Deo, universa terra, psalmum dícite nómini ejus: veníte et audíte, et narrábo vobis, omnes qui timétis Deum, quanta fecit Dóminus ánimae meae, allelúja. V. Locútum est os meum in tribulatióne mea, holocausta medulláta ófferam tibi.

A History of the Popes Named Leo, Part 2: Saints Leo II, III and IV

This is the second installment of a series on the thirteen papal namesakes of our new Holy Father Leo XIV; click here to read part 1.

St Leo II reigned for less than 11 months, from August of 682 to June of 683. The most important deed of his pontificate was the confirmation of the acts of the Sixth Ecumenical Council, the third to be held in Constantinople, which condemned the Monothelite heresy; being fluent in Greek as well as Latin, Leo personally made the official Latin translation of the council’s acts. At the Council of Chalcedon in 451, St Leo I’s letter was acclaimed with the words, “Peter has spoken through Leo,” and likewise at Third Constantinople, the intervention of Leo II’s predecessor St Agatho (through his legates) was acclaimed with the words “Peter has spoken through Agatho!” It is one of the oddities of hagiography that the latter has never been honored with a general feast day in the West, but is kept on the calendar of the Byzantine Rite. Leo II, on the other hand, was a Sicilian, and therefore born as a subject of the Byzantine Empire, but is not liturgically honored in the East.

The collection of papal biographies known as the Liber Pontificalis is practically the only source of information about him, and gives few other details of real interest. He was highly skilled in rhetoric and music, and noted for his love and care for the poor. He built a church in the area of Rome now known as the Velabro, dedicated to St Sebastian, and later also to St George, whence its common title “San Giorgio in Velabro.” (Because George is the patron of England, Leo XIII gave it to St John Henry Newman as his cardinalitial title.)

San Giorgio in Velabro (seen though the nearby Arch of Janus), 1820, by the Dutch painter Antonie Sminck Pitloo (1790-1837).

On the Saturday before the feast of Ss Peter and Paul, June 27, 683, he celebrated the ordination of nine priests, three deacons, and twenty-three bishops, and then died the next day. The Liber Pontificalis does not say that it was the ordination ceremony that killed him, but the heat of Rome in June and the inevitable length of such a ceremony make this seem likely more than coincidence. June 28th is his traditional feast day, but he was moved in 1921 to July 3rd to make room for St Irenaeus of Lyon, and then suppressed altogether in 1960.

St Leo III (795-816), a native of Rome, possibly of either Greek or Arab descent, was appointed as the cardinal priest of the church of St Susanna by St Adrian I, who reigned for 23 years and almost 11 months, and held the title of longest-reigning Pope (after St Peter) for over a millennium. Adrian died on Christmas of 795; the very next day, after his funeral and burial, Leo was elected by a unanimous vote to succeed him, and would reign for nearly 20 years and a half, the 12th-longest papal reign.

In 799, there occurred a very shocking incident which, although it was resolved for the good, was nevertheless a harbinger of the terrible state to which Rome and the papacy would devolve in the 10th century, the first in which there is no canonized or blessed Pope. A group of nobles disaffected with Leo’s reign, led by some of Adrian’s family, attacked the Pope during the Great Rogation procession, and attempted to render him incapable of performing the duties of his office by blinding him and cutting out his tongue. The attempt failed, and although Leo was injured, he recovered very quickly, but very naturally decided to flee to the court of Charlemagne, who as king of the Franks, had long been the protector of the papacy.

The Oath of Pope St Leo III, 1516-17; fresco by the workshop of Raphael within the apartments of Pope Julius II, known as the Stanze of Raphael, now part of the Vatican Museums.  

The following year, Leo returned to Rome, escorted by Charlemagne’s troops, and a commission was appointed to investigate the attack. The Pope’s enemies retaliated by bringing charges of such gravity against him, involving perjury and adultery, that the matter was referred back to Charlemagne, who soon came to Rome in person. A synod was called together in St Peter’s basilica, with the king himself being present. The Pope’s accusers did not dare to appear, and the assembled bishops declared that they had no right to sit in judgment of him; nevertheless, Leo solemnly swore to his innocence before the synod on December 23rd.

Two days later, on Christmas Day, Leo crowned Charlemagne as emperor of the Romans in St Peter’s, the event traditionally recognized as the beginning of the Holy Roman Empire. This alliance of Church and State brought many benefits to both, and it would be foolishly cynical to represent it, as has often been done, as no more than Leo’s attempt to strengthen his own position by strengthening that of his protector. But it also revealed a growing problem, that the position of the papacy was dependent on that of the empire, and as the latter grew progressively weaker after Charlemagne’s death, so did the former; whence also the unedifying spectacle of Rome in the 10th century, which includes the reigns of Leos V-VIII.

The Coronation of Charlemagne, 1514-15, also by the workshop of Raphael; this fresco is on the wall next to the one shown above.

As a final matter of note, pertaining to the Filioque controversy, Leo accepted what had by his time become the common understanding in the West, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. But he advised against adding the word “Filioque” to the Nicene Creed, which had become the custom in various places, including Charlemagne’s court, and did not allow it to be said in Rome itself.

St Leo IV, also a native of Rome, was raised in one of the monasteries attached to St Peter’s basilica, and made cardinal-priest of the title of the Four Crowned Martyrs on the Caelian Hill by Pope Sergius II, whom he succeeded in April of 847.

In his time, Saracen pirates were wreaking havoc throughout the western Mediterranean; the year before his election, they had sailed up the Tiber and sacked the basilica of St Paul Outside-the-Walls, destroying at least a large portion of the Apostle’s relics. His papacy began with the construction of major works to defend Rome, including a new set of walls around the Vatican, which are still called the Leonine walls to this day, and the complex as a whole was known as the Leonine city. (This used to be the name of the bus stop in front of Cardinal Ratzinger’s old apartment building, ‘Città Leonina’ in Italian.)

In the year of his election, he put out a fire which had broken out in the Borgo, the neighborhood in front of the Vatican, by giving his blessing from the balcony of St Peter’s. Two years later, he formed a league with the maritime states of Naples, Gaeta and Amalfi; at the battle of Ostia, their combined naval forces destroyed a massive Saracen invasion force which had set out from Sardinia. Both of these events are depicted in one of the rooms now within the Vatican Museums known as the Stanze of Raphael, but these specific paintings are really the works of his students.

The Fire in the Borgo, by the workshop of Raphael, 1514-17. The three male figures on the left are a nod to the story of Aeneas escaping from the burning of Troy; their exaggerated musculature, and that of the man next to them hanging from the wall, reflects the exaggerated influence of the recently discovered statue of Laocoön, which also greatly influenced the work of Michelangelo. This painting was much admired for the cleverly designed figure on the far right, the woman with a water-jar on her head, who has just turned the corner, and opens her mouth in astonishment at the scene. ~ A few years prior to the commissioning of this painting, Pope Julius II and his architect Donatello Bramante had begun the process of replacing the ancient basilica of St Peter, then almost on the point of collapse. This image is an important historical record of what its façade looked like at the time.

The Battle of Ostia, also by the workshop of Raphael, 1514-15. Pope St Leo IV presides over the battle from the far left in cope and papal tiara, as one does; his face is that of the contemporary Pope, Leo X Medici.

The Liber Pontificalis contains an enormous list of his works in and benefactions to Roman churches, and he translated the relics of many Saints from the catacombs outside the city to churches within it. He is also traditionally, but erroneously, credited with the invention of the Asperges rite, and the sermon on the duties of priests which the Pontificale appoints to be read by the bishop at their ordination. He died on July 17, 855.

In the southwest corner of St Peter’s basilica, immediately to the left of the altar of Pope St Leo I, stands the altar of the Madonna of the Column, a votive image painted on one of the columns of the Constantinian Basilica of St Peter. In the process of tearing down the ancient church and rebuilding, the section of the column with the fresco of the Virgin and Child was saved, and later mounted within this reredos; the relics of Popes Leo II, III and IV are in the altar, which is also dedicated to them.