The “Barbarous” Sequence of the Presentation

In the revised edition of Butler’s Lives of the Saints by Fr Herbert Thurston SJ and Donald Attwater (1956), each main entry is followed by a series of notes of a more scholarly and technical nature. The notes on the feast of the Presentation of the Virgin Mary include the following statement: “In the Henry Bradshaw Society’s reprint of the Missale Romanum of 1474 (vol. ii, pp. 251-253) is an interesting note which, while pointing out that the Presentation feast does not occur in the calendar or text of the 1474 edition, prints a Mass for the feast from a Roman missal of 1505. This includes a long sequence so barbarously worded that one can readily believe that St Pius V thought it better to suppress the feast altogether – as he did – rather than tolerate the continued recitation of such doggerel.”

The fact that this could find its way into print in a serious publication demonstrates what an atrocious state liturgical scholarship was when Thurston wrote these notes in the 1930s, and still was when Attwater put his hand to revising them in the 1950s. And indeed, the entire entry on the feast is grossly lacking. It states that it is “not very ancient”, while simultaneously asserting that it probably originated with the dedication of a church to the Virgin Mary in Jerusalem in 543, making it older than a great many other feasts on the calendar in both East and West. [1] But it fails to mention that it is counted among the Twelve Great Feasts of the Byzantine Rite, which celebrates it with a fore-feast and an after-feast, the equivalent of the Roman Rite’s vigil and octave.

An icon of the Entrance of the Mother of God into the Temple, as the feast is called in the Byzantine Rite. Note that the Virgin is represented as a small adult, rather than as a child; the reason for this is give below. (Cretan, 15th century; public domain image from Wikimedia Commons.)

It is certainly true that the feast did not become common in the West until the later part of the 15th century, and that Pope St Pius V removed it from the first editions of the Breviary and Missal issued after the Council of Trent. But the idea that he did so because of its sequence is absurd on two grounds. The first is that the sequence, and the proper Mass of the Presentation to which it belongs, only appear in two of the early printed editions of the Roman Missal. [2] Most editions simply have a rubric which says that on November 21st, the Mass of September 8th is repeated, changing the word “Nativity” to “Presentation.” (The Ambrosian Rite still follows this custom to this day, excepting only the first reading and the Alleluja.) There was therefore already an established custom of celebrating the feast in a manner fully in keeping with the Roman liturgical tradition, and which would not give offense to anybody’s literary sensibilities.

A page of a Roman Missal printed at Venice in 1521, in which the Mass of the Presentation consists solely of the aforementioned rubric in the upper part of the right column.

The second is simply that the sequence in question, while hardly a great masterpiece of its genre, is not bad, and it is difficult to see why Thurston and Attwater refer to it as “barbarously worded” and “doggerel.” It is in fact very typical of its genre and period. The true reason for the suppression of the feast in 1568, and along with it, those of the Virgin Mary’s parents, obviously lies in the fact that the episode comes from an apocryphal Gospel known as the Protoevangelium of James. We may take this as an object lesson, that even the Church’s formal recognition of a Pope’s sanctity is no guarantee that his interventions in the liturgy are all done for the best. And likewise, we may thank St Pius’ successor, Gregory XIII, for restoring the feast of St Anne in 1584, Sixtus V for restoring the Presentation the following year, and Gregory XV for restoring St Joachim in 1622: worthy men all, but none of them a Saint.

Here then is the text of the sequence; the first letters of each stanza form an acrostic: “Ave Maria; benedico te. Amen.” As told in the Protoevangelium, when she entered the temple at the age of three, the Virgin already walked as if she were fully mature; this is the reason why in icons of the Presentation, she is represented not as a toddler, but as a small adult. The sequence also refers to the tradition that when it came time for the maidens who served in the temple to marry, St Joseph was chosen as her spouse because a flower bloomed on his walking staff, as did the rod of Aaron in Numbers 17. The translation is taken from the English edition of the apposite volume of Dom Gueranger’s Liturgical Year, with several modifications. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, there is no recording available on YouTube.

The Marriage of the Virgin, ca. 1475-95, by an anonymous Netherlandish painter known as the Master of the Tiburtine Sybil. In the background are various other episodes from the Protoevangelium of James: in the upper middle, Joachim walks away from the temple, as his offering is rejected, since he is believed to be disfavored by God because of his failure to beget a child; he then goes out into the desert, and in the far background, an angel comes and tells him to return to his wife, and that they will conceive a child; Joachim and Anne are reunited at the gate of Jerusalem. At the left, the birth of the Virgin, and opposite, Her entry into the temple, with Joachim and Anne looking on behind her. (Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons.)  

Altissima providente, Cuncta recte disponente, Dei sapientia:	As the Wisdom of God, foreseeing the greatest mysteries, disposeth all things rightly:
Uno nexu coniugatis Ioachim et Anna gratis Iuga sunt sterilia.	Joachim and Anne are united in wedlock, but their union is sterile.
Ex cordis affectu toto Domino fideli voto Se strinxerunt pariter:	With all the heart’s affection they together bind themselves by faithful vow to the Lord:
Mox si prolem illis dare Dignetur, hanc dedicare In templo perenniter.	that if He deign to give them a child, they soon will consecrate it for ever in the temple.
Angelus apparuit Lucidus, qui docuit Exaudita vota,	A bright Angel appears, and tells them their prayers are heard
Regis summi gratia Ut detur his filia Gratiosa tota.	By the most high King’s grace, a daughter shall be given them, full of grace.
In utero consecrata, Miro modo generata, Gignet mirabilius	Consecrated in the womb born in a wondrous manner, more wondrously will she give birth
Altissimi Patris natum, Virgo manens, qui reatum Mundi tollet gratius.	to the Son of the Father most high, remaining a virgin; and He shall freely take away the world’s guilt.
Benedicta virgo nata, Templo trina præsentata, Ter quinis gradibus	Blessed is the Virgin born, at three years presented in the temple; by the fifteen steps
Erecta velox ascendit, Et uterque parens tendit, Ornando se vestibus.	Swift and erect, she ascends adorned with her beautiful robe, as her parents’ watch.
Nova fulsit gloria Templo, dum eximia Virgo præsentatur.	The temple shines with a new glory, when the august Virgin is presented;
Edocta divinitus, Visitata cælitus Angelis lætatur.	Taught by God, Visited from heaven, she rejoices with the Angels.
Dum ut nubant iubet multis Princeps puellis adultis, Primo virgo renuit.	When the chief (priest) bids the maidens of adult age to marry, the Virgin at first refuses;
Ipsam namque devovere Parentes, ipsaque manere Virgo voto statuit.	for her parents have devoted her to God, and she herself has vowed to remain a virgin.
Consultus Deus responsum Dat ut virgo sumat sponsum, Quem pandet flos editus.	God, being consulted, answers that the Virgin shall take that spouse whom the blooming flower shows;
Ostensus Ioseph puellam Ad parentum duxit cellam, Nuptiis sollicitus.	Joseph thus chosen weds the maiden, and leads her to his parents’ home, careful of the marriage.
Tunc Gabriel ad virginem Ferens conceptus ordinem, Delegatur.	Then Gabriel is sent to the Virgin, bearing (God’s) command of her conception;
Erudita stat tacita, Verba quam sint insolita Meditatur.	the prudent Virgin stands silent, pondering over the strangeness of the message.
At cum ille tradidit Modum, virgo credidit, Sicque sacro Flamine	But when he explains how this shall be, she believes him; and thus by the Holy Spirit
Mox Verbum concipitur, Et quod nusquam clauditur, Conditur in virgine.	Soon the Word is conceived, and He whom no space can contain is concealed within the Virgin.
Ecce virgo singularis, Quanta laude sublimaris, Quanta fulges gloria.	Behold, peerless maiden, with what great praise thou are exalted, with what great glory thou shinest.
Nos ergo sic tuearis, Ut fructu quo gloriaris Fruamur in patria. Amen.	Therefore, do so protect us, that in our fatherland we may enjoy the fruit, whereby thou art so honored. Amen.

[1] This church, known as the “nea ekklesia – the new church”, or simply the Nea, was a project of the emperor Justinian, and was located very close to the site of the temple of Solomon into which the Virgin entered, the event celebrated by today’s feast. Its dedication was celebrated on November 20, 543; it seems likely, therefore, that the Presentation came into existence as a concomitant feast for the anniversary of this dedication, as the Exaltation of the Cross did for the dedication of the Holy Sepulcher. Thurston and Attwater inexplicably given no indication of any of this. (The Nea no longer exists; another church of the same name was built in Constantinople in the later 9th century, and has also disappeared.)

Jerusalem in a mosaic map in the floor of the church of St George in Madaba, Jordan, ca. 570 A.D., discovered in 1884. The main street is clearly visible running through the middle of it; the Nea Ekklesia is the building which fronts on it at the end of the street on the right. (Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons.)

[2] The Bradshaw Society’s critical edition cited above notes that they were both printed in Venice. This means that the printers, not as yet constrained by any law of the Church as to what they might or might not add to the Missal, added the proper Mass of the Presentation to their edition from other sources. Thurston and Attwater should not have even surmised that Pius V suppressed the Mass because of its sequence without demonstrating first that the sequence was known and used at Rome itself.

The Sacrifice of the Mass (Papers of the Fota XIV Liturgical Conference): A Book Review

The Sacrifice of Abraham, 1631/35, by the Flemish painter Cornelis de Vos (1585-1651)

The current effort to return to liturgical tradition takes, and must take, several forms. There are fraternities of priests who actively run parishes and shepherd souls, and there are contemplative nuns who pray without ceasing from behind cloister walls. There are polemicists on the front lines engaged in apologetics, like the late Michael Davies, and there are artists in music, painting, stained glass, and architecture trying to make churches once again centers of beauty.

And then there are the scholars, researchers who approach their subject in a more detached manner, but with the hope of changing the learned consensus about something. One may be tempted to dismiss this erudite division of the so-called traditionalist movement as so much ivory-tower theorizing, but it must be remembered that we never would have known how much bad scholarship led to the worst of the liturgical reforms had good scholarship not exposed it. And just as bad scholarship helped get us into this mess, good scholarship will help get us out.

One of the most eminent conferences promoting sound scholarship on the traditional liturgy is sponsored by the St. Colman’s Society for Catholic Liturgy in County Cork, Ireland. Named “Fota” after the inland island where the conferences were originally held, the conferences are centered around a different theme each time. The proceedings of the most recent, the Fourteenth Fota International Liturgical Conference in 2023, were edited and published last year under the title The Sacrifice of the Mass (Smenos Publications, 2024).

The volume, which is dedicated to the memory of Cardinal Pell (1941-2023), contains the kind of diversity one would hope to find in such a collection. There are two articles on sacrifice in the Bible, two on Eucharistic sacrifice in the theology of Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, one on the Canon of the Mass, one on the Offertory Rite (which proved invaluable for my own article on the subject in this issue of TLM magazine), one on atonement, one on why the physical presence of the faithful at Mass is required, one on the radical changes the Novus Ordo made to the orationes super oblata or former Secrets, and one on liturgy and ritual process.

Collections of proceedings usually suffer from an uneven quality since it is rare that all contributors are of the same caliber. This volume is a happy exception to this rule. In fact, I found each one to be a page-turner, unfolding a riveting history or theology that was new to me. Two examples will suffice.

In the chapter “Sacrificium Patriarchae nostri Abrahae: The Aqedah in the Bible and the Canon of the Mass,” Fr. Dieter Böhler, S.J. examines the Supra quae propitio:

Upon these [the consecrated Host and Chalice] deign to look with a favorable and serene countenance, and to accept them, as Thou wert graciously pleased to accept the gifts of Thy just servant Abel, and the sacrifice of our patriarch Abraham, and that which Thy high priest Melchizedek offered to Thee, a holy Sacrifice, an unspotted Victim.

Böhler first notices that even though Abel made a genuine sacrifice by immolating a lamb, his offering is called munera (gifts) and not sacrificium. “Abel,” Böhler observes, “is not an Israelite, but a representative of all humanity…. Thus, his sacrifice is an act of natural religion” (25). The Lord accepts Abel’s offerings, even though Abel has acted only in response to a natural impulse rather than any divine revelation.

Melchizedek is not an Israelite either, but even as a pagan he somehow worships the true “God Most High, the Creator of heaven and earth” (Gen. 14, 19). Moreover, he is designated as both a king and a priest, and his offering of bread and wine clearly foreshadows the Eucharist. Hence, even though unbloody offerings in the Old Testament (such as grains and vegetables) are not called sacrifices or victims, the Supra quae propitio elaborately refers to Melchizedek’s offering as “that which he offered to You… a holy sacrifice, an unspotted victim.”

Together, the sacrifices of Abel and Melchizedek point to the Eucharist:

Abraham and Melchizedek, anonymous Italo-flemish, late 16th century

Israel’s liturgy and the aspirations of all human reverence towards the divine are thus taken up and fulfilled in the Eucharistic sacrifice. The sacrificial matter of Abel (the lamb) and of Melchizedek (bread and wine) lend themselves to this interpretation, since the Eucharistic sacrifice of bread and wine makes present the sacrificed Lamb (see Rev. 5, 6) (26).

But the real mystery is the sacrifice of Abraham. Böhler first establishes that the sacrifice of Isaac was designed by God to be a test not of Abraham’s obedience, but of his faith. Specifically, Abraham had to have faith that God would fulfill His promise to make Abraham’s descendants a great nation through Isaac even though Isaac was to be killed before he could sire any offspring. This meant only one thing: Abraham had to believe in the resurrection of the dead, in this case, the resurrection of his ostensibly-soon-to-be dead son Isaac. That is why Abraham remains our Patriarch, even if we do not share his bloodline; he is a towering figure of great faith in the key doctrine of Christianity.

And his sacrifice? It was not Isaac, who was spared. And for Böhler, it was not really the ram that Abraham substituted for Isaac. Böhler notes that rams had only one meaning in the Levitical sacrifices: “they were the classic sacrificial animal of cult inauguration” (34), such as initiating priestly ordination. The cult inauguration here on Mount Moriah is an anticipation of the cult that David and Solomon would inaugurate centuries later in the same location (later renamed Mount Zion) and the new cultus that Our Lord would inaugurate again in the same location in the Upper Room on Holy Thursday. Rather, for Böhler, “The sacrifice of Abraham was a sacrifice of himself by himself. He surrendered himself will all his hopes, his love, his faith, into the dark night of God’s will. It was a self-offering” (32). It is indeed fitting that this knight of Faith be remembered in the Canon.

In the chapter “Why does the Participation of the Faithful in the Eucharist Require Their Physical Presence (during Mass)?” Michael Stickelbroeck responds to the public lockdowns during Covidtide and the eager collaboration of some bishops to suppress Mass attendance and encourage livestreaming of the Mass instead. To analyze this decision, Stickelbroeck draws from other scholars to contrast two encounters with the world. The first is one built upon social media and digital communication. This “virtual world” abstracts from place and time; indeed, it “rejoices in a bodyless corporality” (108) that enables anyone to enjoy anything anywhere, and to rewind or fast forward at will. Instead of being grounded in the real, the virtual world is grounded in a simulation of the real. “What is real,” Stickelbroeck concludes, “has been converted to a satellite that moves around its own image, the simulacrum” (106).

The danger of this worldview is that it weakens our ties to the world that is. “The more people immerse themselves in the virtual worlds of technology, the more the empirical and substantial reality of things dissolves” (107). Unlike the limitlessness of virtual worlds, “the substantial real is always at a determinate place and temporal nunc, which marks—in the flow of time—a limit between prior and posterior.” One of Stickelbroeck’s more interesting sources is the German essayist and playwright Botho Strauss, who argues that thanks to our cyberlives, we are no longer attuned to real, physical presences, and this loss affects everything from our social interactions to our understanding of the sacramental order. Strauss’s solution is the liberation of art and symbol from what he calls the “dictatorship of secondary discourses” and a rediscovery of art’s “theophanic glory, its transcendental proximity” (108). Although Strauss does not say so explicitly, there is obviously no better way for this liberation to occur than through sacred art, and no better place for it to happen than in a church. And given that young people are especially beholden to this “dictatorship,” they more than any other generation are in a need of churches that reintroduce them to the wonder of low-tech, real presences that prepares them for the Real Presence in the Eucharist.

It is not difficult to see upon which worldview the Catholic Church depends. As an incarnational religion that worships a God who became flesh and dwelt among us and who is really present in the Eucharist, Christianity does not and cannot abstract from space and time, at least not in the administration of its sacraments, which are material conduits of spiritual grace. Hence, just as one cannot abstract from space and go to confession via telephone, one cannot abstract from space and be physically absent from Mass. Stickelbroeck modestly concludes that any arrangements that suggest the contrary “must be vigorously challenged” (115).

The other eight chapters in Sacrifice of the Mass are just as thought-provoking as the two I have surveyed. Editor Matthew Hazell is to be commended for producing an outstanding contribution to our study of the sacred liturgy.

Many thanks to the editors of The Latin Mass magazine 34:3 for allowing this publication to appear here (Fall 2025, 76-77).

A New Edition of the Monastic Breviary from Farnborough Abbey

We are glad to share this notice from the abbey of St Michael in Farnborough, England, about their new republication of the Monastic Breviary. It may be purchased at a special pre-order price at this link: https://www.theabbeyshop.com/product/breviarium-monasticum. Orders will ship in February of next year.

Many readers of the NLM will be familiar with the extremely popular Monastic Diurnal in Latin & English. The St Michael’s Abbey Press has been publishing that title for about 20 years now, and it is now in its 8th edition. We are therefore delighted to announce that, after some years of preparation, we are publishing a full Breviarium Monasticum - the 1962 Monastic Breviary in two volumes in Latin only. These volumes contain everything necessary to follow the entire Monastic Office including the Office of Matins, which is not given in the diurnal.

The St Michael’s Monastic Breviary is a reprint of the Marietti edition of 1962. Marietti were a very high quality Italian liturgical publishers founded in 1820. They were known both for the quality of their bindings, and also the beauty of the text itself. The 1962 Breviarium Monasticum is an excellent example of the quality of their work: the text is clear and readable, including “Liturgical Movement” style titles, arguably the breviary’s most distinctive feature.

As well as its beauty, another feature of this edition is its practicality: it reduces flipping backwards and forwards to a minimum- each office in the psalter gives all the texts necessary. For example, the daily psalms 66, 50, and 148-150, together with the Benedictus are printed in full for Lauds each day. Other editions would constantly (and sometimes frustratingly) refer you to different pages. It also includes several appendices, such as preparation & thanksgiving for Mass, various useful blessings, litanies, brief formulas for the sacraments, the last rites, &c.

Printed on bible paper, in black and red throughout and with gilt edges and six marker ribbons, our edition builds on the original Marietti beauty with several touches: custom endpapers unique to our publications, raised bands on the spine, the arms of the Abbey together with the title and volume number stamped in gold, and covers embossed with the medal of St Benedict. It is of a size that sits comfortably in the hand, sits open easily, not too heavy, and a generally pleasant book to handle and use.

The Breviary is available in two versions: with a zip case closing, or a traditional binding with a hard slipcase included. Both editions are leather bound, and extremely robust. A monk would traditionally spend several hours of his day praying the breviary, and so these volumes are intended to stand up to that level of daily wear and tear.

In buying the Breviarium Monasticum (and other titles) from the St. Michael’s Abbey Press you are also supporting a flourishing 140-year-old contemplative Benedictine Community of ten monks, in full Communion with the Church, celebrating the monastic liturgy in Latin, with a proud tradition of Gregorian chant. Buying our produce enables us to continue our life of prayer and work within the monastic enclosure. Thank you.

Reliquaries of St Elizabeth of Hungary

St Elizabeth of Hungary was canonized on Pentecost of the year 1235, May 25th, just over three-and-a-half years after her death, the third Franciscan Saint, and first woman among them, since at the time St Clare of Assisi was still alive in this world. She was one of the very earliest prominent members of the Third Order, and has long been honored as its chief patron alongside St Louis IX, king of France. (St Francis himself and St Anthony of Padua were canonized before her, and even more rapidly, by the same pope, Gregory IX.)

The Polyptych of St Anthony, 1460-70, made by Piero della Francesca (1412-92) for the Franciscan church of St Anthony in Perugia. At top, the Annunciation; in the middle (left to right), Ss Anthony and John the Baptist, the Madonna and Child, and Ss Francis and Elizabeth of Hungary; in the band below them, St Clare on the left, and St Agatha on the right. In the predella are shown three miracles: St Anthony raising a dead girl to life, St Francis receiving the stigmata, and St Elizabeth saving a child that had fallen into a well. (Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons.)

There seems to have been some confusion over the precise date of St Elizabeth’s death right from the beginning. Before and after the Tridentine reform, her feast was kept by almost all the places that observed it on November 19th, and this is the day she was given when she was added to the Roman general calendar in 1670. However, it is now understood that she died on the 17th, and the 19th was the day of her burial. On the post-Conciliar general calendar, the 17th was opened up by the suppression of St Gregory the Wonderworker (one of the reformers’ least intelligent decisions), and she has been moved to that day. But ironically, in Germany, where her cultus was most fervent and important, the 17th belongs to St Gertrude the Great, and Elizabeth is therefore still on the 19th.

She is called “of Hungary” because she was the daughter of Andrew II, king of that nation, but she was married at quite a young age to a German nobleman, Louis, the landgrave of Thuringia. Her maternal aunt, Hedwig, duchess of Silesia, is also a canonized Saint, celebrated on October 16th. After her death and canonization, her shrine in the city of Marburg, where she died (about 54 miles north of Frankfurt), became a very important pilgrimage center.

Unsurprisingly, given her various royal connections, several very impressive reliquaries were made for her. The most notable of these is a reliquary in the form of a large chalice which formerly contained her skull. The cup inside is an agate bowl made sometime between the fourth and seventh centuries. It is decorated with a large number of jewels, including some carved in very ancient times, and the lid is decorated with parts of two royal crowns of the 13th century. During the Thirty Years’ War, it was looted by Swedish troops from a fortress in Würzburg, and now resides in the Swedish History Museum in Stockholm. There are a huge number of photographs showing its details at the relevant page of Wikimedia Commons. (First four images by Ola Myrin, SHM, CC BY 4.0)

A clearer view of the agate bowl.

Continue Reading this Article. . .

The Dedication of the Basilicas of Ss Peter and Paul

The basilicas which house the tombs of Saints Peter and Paul are among the six which the Emperor Constantine built in Rome in the first years of the peace of the Church. Already by the later 4th century, a hymn of St Ambrose speaks of a procession to visit them both on the Apostles’ feast day, June 29th. However, the most ancient liturgical books of the Roman Rite do not attest to a celebration of the anniversary of their dedication, nor indeed of any such anniversary; the annual commemoration of the dedication of a church is one of the many happy inventions by which the Carolingians enriched the Roman Rite. It is reasonable to assume that once this custom had taken root, the joint celebration of the dedication of the two basilicas was inspired by the joint celebration of the two Apostles to whom they are dedicated, which is one of the universal and most ancient customs of all Christian liturgy. As far as I have been able to ascertain, this is the only pre-Tridentine example of the dedication of two separate churches being kept as a single feast.

Pope Urban VIII draws the letters of the Latin alphabet in ashes spread over the floor, during the consecration of St. Peter’s Basilica on November 18, 1626, the 1300th anniversary of the original church’s consecration by Pope St Sylvester I. (Roman tapestry, ca. 1660)

Prior to the Tridentine reform, however, this feast and the dedication of the Lateran basilica on November 9th were kept almost nowhere outside of Rome itself. Even the Franciscans, who adopted the liturgy of the Roman Curia from their very beginning, did not keep either one. Most of Europe celebrated November 9th as the feast of the martyr Theodore, who is still commemorated on that day, and the 18th as the octave of St Martin.

The breviary of St Pius V, issued in 1568, and the missal which followed it in 1570, were the first liturgical books of their kind deliberately designed to be used outside their place of origin, since they came with the Pope’s permission (not requirement) to adopt them anywhere the Roman Rite was used, in place of the local liturgical use which had hitherto prevailed. However, the liturgy of November 18th contains an interesting anomaly which is found on no other occasion; although the feast commemorates the dedication of two different churches, the Collect of the Mass, which is also said six times in the Office, remains in the singular.

“Deus, qui nobis per síngulos annos hujus sancti templi tui consecratiónis réparas diem … præsta, ut quisquis hoc templum beneficia petitúrus ingréditur, cuncta se impetrasse laetétur.

O God, who each year renewest for us the day of the consecration of this Thy holy temple … grant that whoever entereth this temple to ask for (Thy) favors, may rejoice in having obtained all (that he sought).”

The prayers for the Mass of the anniversary of the dedication of a church in the Echternach Sacramentary, 895 A.D. (Bibliothèque nationale de France, Département des manuscrits, Latin 9433)

Likewise, none of the other references to “church” in the singular are changed in either the Office or the Mass. Since most places in Europe only began to keep these feasts when (and if) they adopted the Roman liturgical books, they would have encountered this anomaly for the first time in the celebration of this feast.

Some might find it tempting to dismiss this as no more than an example of the habitual, and some might say lazy, liturgical conservatism of the Roman church. I do not believe this to be the case, since the Tridentine books are in so many ways a carefully thought-out response to the novelties of the Protestant reformation.

It is well known that the Reformation, starting with Luther himself, pretended to find justification for its novelties in some of St Paul’s letters, which became for them “the canon within the canon”, the yardstick against which everything else in Scripture, tradition and history was to be measured. This includes not just everything taught by the papacy and the Church in communion with it, but the papacy itself, and thus would the so-called reformers pit Peter and Paul against each other. The Roman liturgy (more precisely, the specifically Roman iteration of it then spreading out to other parts of the world), therefore treats the two churches and the two tombs of the two Apostles as if they were one, to lay emphasis on their real and ancient unity, always faithfully maintained and fostered by the Roman church.

The chancel arch, apse and high altar of the basilica of St Paul Outside-the-Walls, seen from the nave. Each image of St Paul is accompanied by one of St Peter, on the chancel arch, in the apsidal mosaic, and with the two statues seen here at the lower corners. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by Fallaner, CC BY-SA 4.0)

As noted above, the joint feast of Ss Peter and Paul is extremely ancient, while that of the dedication of their basilicas is a product of the early Middle Ages. The Protestant reformers believed that they could restore the original ancient Christian faith by liberating it from the supposed accretions of the medieval period, although they often disagreed amongst themselves, and often quite violently, as to what exactly those accretions were. The Tridentine reform was essentially the Catholic Church’s answer to the question of what to do with all that it had inherited from the Middle Ages, in response to the Protestant repudiation of that inheritance. The Tridentine liturgy therefore reasserts the unity between Peter and Paul with two feasts, one ancient and one medieval, in which they are jointly commemorated, as an assertion of continuity between Christian antiquity and the Middle Ages. [1]

Furthermore, the Protestants often accused the Catholic Church of emphasizing the Saints so much as to eclipse Christ Himself. Many of them believed, and still believe, that devotion to the Saints was no more than a shallow Christianization of ancient polytheism. But this idea is refuted specifically by St Augustine, the same author to whom they turned for proof of their doctrine of grace. In The City of God, 8, 27, he writes, “But who ever heard a priest of the faithful, standing at an altar built for the honor and worship of God over the holy body of some martyr, say in the prayers, ‘I offer to you a sacrifice, Peter, or Paul, or Cyprian?’ For it is to God that sacrifices are offered at their tombs – the God who made them both men and martyrs, and associated them with holy angels in celestial honor; and the reason why we pay such honors to their memory is that by so doing, we may both give thanks to the true God for their victories, and, by recalling them afresh to remembrance, may stir ourselves up to imitate them by seeking to obtain like crowns and palms, calling to our help that same God on whom they called. Therefore, whatever honors the religious may pay in the places of the martyrs, they are but honors rendered to their memory, not sacred rites or sacrifices offered to dead men as to gods.” [2]

(The Communio of the Mass of a church dedication: “My house shall be called a house of prayer, sayeth the Lord; in it, everyone who asketh, receiveth; and he that seeketh, findeth; and it is open to him that knocketh.” Matthew 21, 13)

The choice of Matins readings for a dedication and its octave reinforces this. On the feast itself and the following five days, those of the second nocturn are taken from Augustine. On the seventh day, St John Chrysostom is brought in as a witness that the Eastern churches have always held the same ancient Faith as the West; on the octave itself, the reading is from an early medieval Pope, St Felix IV, as quoted in a medieval collection of canon law. (Canon law was especially hated by the early Protestants as one of the worst medieval “corruptions.”) Likewise, in the third nocturn, the readings begin with St Ambrose, then pass to St Gregory the Great, and finally to the Venerable Bede, a symbol of the faithful transmission of the Church’s teaching from one generation to another. [3]

The very first such reading (on the second day of the feast) shows how carefully this was all thought out, a passage from St Augustine’s Treatise on Psalm 121, which quotes both Peter and Paul.

“ ‘Jerusalem that is being built as a city.’ Brethren, when David was saying these things, that city had been finished; it was not still being built. He speaks therefore of some city, I know not which, that is now being built, unto which living stones run in faith, of whom Peter says, ‘And you are built up together as living stones into a spiritual house’ (1 Pet. 2, 5) that is, as the holy temple of God. What does it mean, ‘You are built up together as living stones?’ You live, if you believe, but if you believe, you will be made a temple of God; for the Apostle Paul says, ‘For the temple of God is holy, which temple are you.’ ” (1 Cor. 3, 17)

Ss Ambrose and Augustine, ca. 1495, by the Spanish painter Pedro Berruguete (1450-1504.) Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons.

NOTES: [1] The creators of St Pius V’s reformed books may not have understood when exactly the feast of a church dedication came into existence, but they would certainly have noted its absence from the ancient sacramentaries kept in the Vatican library.

[2] Likewise, in his treatise against Faustus the Manichaean (20, 21): “For which of the bishops, while officiating at the altar in the places where the saints’ bodies lie, has ever said ‘We bring thee an offering, Peter, or Paul, or Cyprian’? But what is offered is offered to God, who crowned the martyrs, in the places of memorial of those whom He crowned, so that great affection might arise from the association with those very places, and charity kindled towards those whom we can imitate, and to Him by whose help we can imitate them.”

[3] The reading attributed to Pope Felix is not authentically his, but this fact was unknown in the 16th century. The breviary of St Pius V reads the homily of St Gregory that begins with the words “Si veraciter sapientes” on the 4th day within the octave; in the reform of St Pius X, it was moved to the octave day.

Elijah And The Priests of Baal - An Anticipation of the Trinity

Recently, I was reading some of the hymns from the Midnight Office of the Byzantine Rite, and the following one from the third tone of the Sunday octoechos particularly caught my attention:

In days of old, Elijah ordered that water be poured three times over the wood and the sacrifice; thus, he manifested a symbol of the Three Hypostases of the one and divine Lordship.

This is a commentary on a passage from 1 Kings 18, in which the prophet Elijah challenges 450 prophets of the pagan God Baal to a contest on Mount Carmel. Each side prepares a bull on an altar without lighting a fire:

Then Elias bade the people come near; and when they were standing close to him, he began repairing the altar of the Lord, which was broken down. Twelve stones he took, one for each tribe that sprang from the sons of Jacob, to whom the divine voice gave the surname of Israel; and with these stones he built up the altar again, calling on the Lord's name as he did it. Then he made a trench around the altar of some two furrows breadth; piled the wood high, cut the bull into joints, and laid these on the wood. Now, he said, fill four buckets with water, and pour it over victim and wood alike. And again he bade them do it, and when they had finished a third time. The water was running all around the altar, and the trench he had dug for it was full. (1 Kings 18, 30-35)

He then calls on their god to send flames from heaven to consume the sacrifice. Elijah, needless to say, prevails, calling upon God who consumes altar, bull and water with fire.

Here are examples of artistic depictions of this scene that I found. There weren’t many to choose from, so this is pretty much all of them!

3rd Century Fresco, Dura Europos, in modern Syria.

The Sacrifice of Elijah, by Aert Jansz. Marienhof (1626-54) Credit: The Bowes Museum

Albert Joseph Moore: Elijah’ Sacrifice, 1863. (Bury Art Museum)

Rembrandt, pen and ink, 17th century Dutch

Domenico Fetti (Rome c. 1588-Venice 1623) - The Sacrifice of Elijah Before the Priests of Baal

Looking at these, I realised that, as far as I could see, none of the artists attempted to draw out the simple Trinitarian symbolism referred to in the Byzantine liturgy. This, therefore, provides an opportunity for contemporary artists to enrich the tradition. It is important to draw out these parallels, just as Rublev reflected the Trinitarian imagery in his depiction of the Hospitality of Abraham. By connecting the texts of the Old and New Testaments through prototypes, artists and hymnographers help to reinforce the unity of Scripture and establish the sense of a single arc of time in Salvation History.

I was reflecting on this and thinking about how I would do it if I were to paint it. What follows is purely speculative.

I suggest incorporating a clear triangular geometry and a representation of the triple action of pouring water, showing each of the three instances as a triple image.

We might also draw out other prototypes too, it occurs to me. First is Eucharistic (just as Rublev’s Trinity is both Eucharistic and Trinitarian...and even Marian); second is Baptismal; and third is Pentecostal.

The Eucharistic parallels are in the sacrifice, while the baptismal arises from the purifying action of the water.

It is the pentecostal that is most interesting to me. First, the action of fire that consumes evil but leaves the pure untouched echoes that of the three children in the fiery furnace in the book of Daniel. The hymns of the liturgy describe this scene from Daniel very often, and refer to the action of God in the fire of the furnace, and of the young men who were protected by the presence of a cooling dew. Both dew and fire are connected symbolically to the Holy Spirit. The other place where this parallel with dew and the Spirit is made in the commentaries of Church Fathers is in the description of the fleece of Gideon. So how might I bring all of this together?

I suggest creating a painting of Pentecost in which the New Testament scene is the primary image, with subsidiary images in the same painting of Gideon, Elijah, and the prophets of Baal, and the three young men in the fiery furnace. Just a thought!

13th century Armenian illumination: The Fiery furnace by Toros Roslin.

The Feast of St Hugh of Lincoln

In England and in the Carthusian Order, today is the feast of a Saint called Hugh (1140 ca. – 1200), a French Carthusian who in 1186 became bishop of Lincoln, which was at the time the largest diocese in that country. (Image below: part of an altarpiece from the Carthusian monastery of Saint-Honoré in Thuison-les-Abbeville, France, ca. 1490/1500. Like his contemporary St Francis, Hugh was known for his love of animals; he is often depicted with a wild swan which would follow him around like a pet and eat from his hand, not at all typical behavior for those ill-tempered creatures.)

St Hugh was born to a noble family in a village called Avalon in the kingdom of Burgundy, roughly 80 miles to the south-southeast of Lyon. When he was eight, at the death of his mother, his father sent him to be educated by a local community of Augustinian Canons Regular, which he decided to enter in his mid-teens. He was ordained a deacon, and sent to assist an aged parish priest whose church was a dependency of the canonry; he soon had a reputation for being a very good preacher. But he had already begun to long for a more contemplative life when he paid a visit to the Grande Chartreuse, which is roughly a long day’s walk (around a mountain) from Avalon. The monastery was then relatively new, founded by St Bruno in 1084 on property donated by another St Hugh, bishop of nearby Grenoble (1053 – 1132). He entered the community in 1163, and was ordained a priest; after about ten years, he was chosen for the office of procurator, the administrator of all the monastery’s temporal possessions. He would hold this position until he left the monastery seven years later.

Normally, the life of a Carthusian would pass unnoticed by the wider world, but Hugh was a man of noble birth who held an office of high importance in a much-admired monastery, a leading institution of reform in an age of reformers, and was destined not to remain in the obscurity of his cell.

As part of his penance for his role in the murder of St Thomas Becket, King Henry II of England had agreed to establish the first Carthusian house in his country, at a place called Witham in Somerset in the west country, but the project was going forward at a snail’s pace. Henry had heard about Hugh from a French nobleman who had lands near the Grande Chartreuse, and therefore sent a deputation to formally request that he be sent to take over as prior. Against his great reluctance, Hugh was constrained to accept the position by the Carthusian chapter, and thus departed for England, where he would spend nearly all the rest of his life.

The Grande Chartreuse. St Hugh’s native place is on the other side of the mountains seen here behind it.

On arriving at Witham, he found the monastery barely begun, and the local peasants, many of whom had been displaced from the king’s land to make room for it, understandably quite hostile. Hugh was able with great tact to persuade the king not only to fulfill his promise to provide all that was necessary to complete the building project, but also to properly and fully compensate the peasants. The monastery began to flourish, and was often visited by the king, whose favorite hunting grounds were nearby.

King Henry held Hugh in very high regard, as illustrated by the story that once when he and his army were caught in a terrible storm at sea, he called upon God to save them “though the merits and intercession” not of St Nicholas or St Elmo, but by those “of the prior of Witham”, and the storm died down immediately. However, although he had been chastened in the aftermath of St Thomas’ murder, Henry had not really renounced any of the importunities which had for too long characterized relations between the monarchy and the Church. Among other things, it had become a common custom to leave episcopal sees vacant, so that the revenues attached to the bishop’s office would default to the royal coffers. The see of Lincoln had thus been left vacant for all but 18 months of the previous 18 years. St Hugh prevailed upon the king to redress the matter, at which Henry pressured the chapter of Lincoln to elect Hugh himself as their bishop. Once again, this was done very much against his will, and once again, he was obliged to accept the office by the authority of his order.

The Martyrdom of St Thomas Beckett, depicted ca. 1220, the year of St Hugh’s canonization, in an illuminated psalter.

Not at all surprisingly, his tenure as bishop demonstrated the truth of the axiom that power is best given to those who do not want it. After so long without a shepherd, the diocese of Lincoln was very much in need of reform, and Hugh proved to be an exemplary reformer, assiduous in his administration of the sacraments, in his preaching, and in his visitation of his very large diocese, diligent in his leadership of his clergy, and in his care of the poor and the sick. Each year he would make a retreat to Witham Priory, and live for a time as an ordinary monk within the community.

He was known for his good cheer and sense of humor, which is illustrated by an anecdote regarding yet another of King Henry’s intrusions into the life of the Church. It was a common abuse in that era for the nobility to reward their courtiers with lucrative ecclesiastical jobs under their patronage. (Very often, the salary would go to a man with no interest in actually doing the job, who would then use part of it to pay a man of much lower social class to act as his vicar, and do all the work in his stead.) St Hugh refused to seat a proposed nominee to one of the prebends of his cathedral, saying that “the king does not lack (other) means to reward his servants.” Henry summoned him to court, but ordered everyone in the castle to simply ignore him when he arrived. Hugh came upon the king sewing a bandage on his cut finger, and after a few minutes of icy silence from his majesty, remarked, “Now you look like your kinsman at Falaise,” a reference to Henry’s great-grandmother, Herleva of Falaise, who had been the daughter of a glove-maker. The king is said to have laughed out loud at this, and once again, been reconciled with the holy bishop.

In 1189, Henry died, and was succeeded by his son Richard I, known as the Lionhearted; that same year saw the beginning of the Third Crusade, and several outbreaks of mob violence against the Jews in England. On three different occasions, one of them at his own cathedral, St Hugh single-handedly faced down the mobs, and solely by the force of his own authority and personality, cowed them into leaving their would-be victims alone. In 1197, Richard attempted to force the bishops of England to help finance a war with the king of France; Hugh successfully resisted this importunity as well.

A year before his election to Lincoln, the city’s original cathedral had been badly damaged by an earthquake, an extremely rare event in England. St Hugh began an ambitious rebuilding project, and lived to see the completion of the choir, which is traditionally named after him. (From the time of its completion in 1311 until 1549, Lincoln Cathedral was the tallest man-made structure in the world. It lost its rank as such not because it was outbuilt, but because its central spire collapsed.)

Lincoln Cathedral. Image from Wikimedia Commons by Julian P Guffogg, CC BY-SA 2.0. 

St Hugh’s Choir within the cathedral, as it appears today.

When King Richard died in 1199, his brother and successor, John, sent Hugh as an ambassador to France. On this trip, he visited the three great mother-houses of the major monastic congregations, his old home, the Grand Chartreuse, Cluny and Citeaux, and was received with great honor. But his health was now failing; he was taken badly ill while attending a council in London, and died after lingering for two months. His body was taken back to Lincoln and buried in the cathedral, and he was canonized by Pope Honorius III only 20 years after his death. His shrine became an important pilgrimage site, and his feast was kept on this day throughout England until the reformation, when the shrine was destroyed.

In the 16th century, the importunity of the English monarchs against the Church finally reached its zenith, the greed and impiety of another eighth Henry was brought down on all the monasteries of England, and the charterhouse at Witham was suppressed, along with the nine other Carthusian houses that had subsequently been founded. When the order was reestablished in England in 1873, in the southern town of Parkminster, the new house was named for St Hugh.

The Charterhouse of St Hugh at Parkminster. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by Antiquary, CC BY-SA 4.0.)

The Inter-Hours of the Byzantine Office

In addition to Great Lent, the Byzantine tradition has three other fasts connected with major feasts. The liturgical year begins on September 1st, so the first of these is the fast of the Lord’s Nativity, which is often called “St Philip’s fast”, since it begins on November 15th, the day after the feast of the Apostle St Philip. This is very similar to the custom of the Ambrosian and Mozarabic Rites, which begin Advent on the Sunday after the feast of St Martin. Another fast is kept from the Monday after the feast of All Saints (which is celebrated on the Sunday after Pentecost, the Western day for the feast of the Holy Trinity) to the feast of Ss Peter and Paul; because of the variable date of Pentecost, this can run as long as 42 days, or as short as 8. The fast of the Dormition is kept from August 1-14, and is the strictest of the three.

One of the liturgical customs associated with these fasts is the celebration of the “Inter-Hours”, as they are called (in Greek Μεσώριον sing., -ια plur., in Church Slavonic Междочасїе sing., -їѧ plur.), a second Prime, Terce, Sext and None, which are said after the main Prime etc. Most Greek liturgical books appoint them to be said during the Nativity and Apostle fasts; some sources say that they are also done during that of the Dormition. They are not said during Great Lent, since the Hours from Prime to None are lengthened by various other additions in that season. In point of fact, the Inter-Hours are now something of an archaism, in that they are associated with the practice of keeping some weekdays within the fasting periods as “aliturgical” days, i.e., days on which the Eucharist is not celebrated. This practice is still strictly observed for all the weekdays of Lent, but has apparently mostly fallen out of use for the other three fasts. Some sources indicate that the Inter-Hours are in practice celebrated in monasteries only on the first weekday of each minor fast (this year, that would be today), so effectively, twice or three times a year. (See this article on Academia for more details.)

The beginning of Psalm 45, the first Psalm of the Inter-Hour of Prime, in a Byzantine Psalter of the mid-10th century known as the Paris Psalter. (Bibliothèque nationale de France, Département des manuscrits, Grec 139; folio 119v, image cropped.)

Their structure is similar to that of the main Hours to which they correspond, but not identical. They begin with the same series of prayers said at the beginning of the other Hours, conveniently known as “The Usual Beginning.” However, when an Hour is said immediately after another, it starts with the very last part of the Usual Beginning, “Come let us worship…” Three invariable Psalms are then said: at Prime, 45, 91 and 92 (according to the numbering of the Septuagint); at Terce, 29, 31 and 60; at Sext, 55, 56 and 69; at None, 112, 137 and 139. A group of prayers called the Trisagion prayers are then said, which are repeated from the Usual Beginning (omitting the first two parts and the last part), and then a series of three chants called tropars, with the two parts of the doxology between them. These do not vary according to the day or season, as they do at the corresponding main Hour; the final tropar in any such group is almost always dedicated to the Virgin Mary.

At Prime:

Have mercy upon us, o Lord, have mercy upon us; for lacking all apology, we sinners bring to Thee this supplication, as to our Master: have mercy on us. Glory be…

Lord, have mercy us, for in Thee we have placed our trust, be not exceedingly wroth with us, and remember not our iniquities, but look (upon us) even now, as one merciful, and ransom us from our enemies; for Thou art our God, and we are Thy people, all of us the works of Thy hands, and we have all called upon Thy name. Both now and forever…

Open to us the gate of mercy, blessed Mother of God; as we hope in Thee, let us not err; may we be delivered through Thy urgent prayers, for Thou art the salvation of the nation of Christians.

At Terce:

God of our fathers, who dealest with us ever according to Thy goodness, put not Thy mercy away from us, but by their prayers, govern our life in peace. Glory be…

Thy Martyrs, o Lord, in their contests bore away the crowns of incorruption from Thee, our God; for having gained Thy strength, they threw down tyrants, and shattered the weak insolence of demons; by their prayers, o Christ our God, save our souls! Both now and forever…

Virgin Mother of God, Thou art the unconquerable fortress of Christians; for as we flee to Thee, we remain unwounded, and when we sin again, we cry out to Thee, “Hail, that art full of grace; the Lord is with Thee!”

At Sext:

Save, o Lord, Thy people, and bless Thine inheritance, granting victory to (our) kings over the barbarians, and preserving Thy citizenry (i.e., the members of the Church) through Thy Cross. Glory be… (This is also the tropar of the Exaltation of the Cross, and of the commemoration of the Cross celebrated on the Third Sunday of Lent; the traditional music of the Church Slavonic version is particularly nice.)

Be Thou prevailed upon, o Lord, by the pains of the Saints which they suffered for Thee, and heal all our ailments, we beseech Thee, that lovest mankind. Both now and forever…

By the prayer of all the Saints, o Lord, and of the Mother of God, give us Thy peace, and have mercy on us, as the only merciful one.

At None:

Thou who didst enlighten the things of the world through Thy Cross, and call sinners unto repentance, separate me not from Thy flock, o Good Shepherd, but seek me, Master of those who wander, and number me together with Thy holy flock, who alone art good and love mankind. Glory be…

Like the thief, I confess and cry out to Thee, o Good one: remember me o Lord, in Thy kingdom, and number me within it, who didst willingly accept sufferings for our sake. Both now and forever…

Come, let us all sing hymns to Him who was crucified for us, for Mary beheld Him upon the Cross and said, “Although Thou abidest the Cross, Thou are My Son and God.

There follows a series of elements also said at the other Hours except for Vespers and Orthros: Kyrie, eleison 40 times, the Prayer of the Hours, Kyrie, eleison 3 times, Glory be, a brief prayer to the Virgin (“Higher than the Cherubim…”) a conclusion said by the priestly celebrant, and then a very well-known prayer of St Ephraim the Syrian, accompanied by three prostrations. (In Lent this is added to all of the Hours.)

At the end of Prime, two longer prayers are said by the reader, at the others, just one. The prayers of the Inter-Hours of Prime and Terce are proper to them, but those of Sext and None are taken from the main Hour that precedes them. (When the Inter-Hours are said, the prayer of the main Terce, which is quite short, is repeated at the main Sext and None.) Like almost all prayers of the Byzantine Rite, these are not changed from one day or season to another. They are traditionally attributed to St Basil the Great. These office conclude with the same brief dismissal as at the other day Hours.

An 18th-century icon of St Basil. (Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons.)

At Prime:

Eternal God, light without beginning and everlasting, maker of all creation, fount of mercy, sea of goodness, unsearchable abyss of love for mankind, shine the light of Thy countenance upon us, o Lord. Shine in our hearts, o spiritual Sun of justice, and fill our souls with Thy rejoicing, and teach us ever to take thought of Thy matters, and speak forth judgments, and confess Thee without ceasing, our Master and benefactor. Guide the works of our hands towards Thy will, and help us on the way to do what is pleasing and welcome to Thee, that even through us, Thy unworthy servants, Thy all-holy name may be glorified, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, of one divinity and kingdom to which beseem all glory, honor and worship, unto the ages. Amen.

Thou who sendest forth the light, and it goeth, who makest the sun to rise upon the just and the unjust, the wicked and the good, who makest the morn, and enlighten all the world; enlighten also our hearts, Master of all. Grant us to please Thee in the present day, preserving us from every sin and from every wicked deed, delivering us from every arrow that flieth in the day, and every opposing power, by the prayers of our all-immaculate Lady, the Mother of God, of Thy immaterial ministering heavenly powers, and all the Saints that have been pleasing to Thee from the beginning of the world. For it is Thine to have mercy on us and save us, our God, and to Thee do we give glory, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and every, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

At Terce:

O Lord our God, who hath given Thy peace to men, and sent the gift of Thy All-holy Spirit to Thy Disciples and Apostles, and by Thy power opened their lips with tongues of fire, open Thou also the lips of us sinners, and teach us how we must pray and for what things. Govern our life, calm haven of those tossed by storms, and make known to us the way in which we shall go. Renew a righteous spirit within us, and by (Thy) governing Spirit, give support to what is liable to err in our thoughts, so that each day, being led on the way by Thy good spirit to that which is beneficial, we may be deemed worthy to obey Thy commandments and ever to remember Thy return in glory, that shall search through the deeds of men, and not be deceived by the corruptible delights of this world, but strengthen us to reach out for the enjoyment of the treasures that are to come, for Thou art blessed and praiseworthy in all Thy Saints, unto the ages of ages. Amen.