A Simpler, More Pastoral Vision

Archbishop Diego Ravelli, Master of Pontifical Liturgical Celebrations, explained that the revisions aim to simplify and modernize the liturgy to better express the Church’s faith in Christ’s resurrection. “The funeral of the Roman Pontiff should highlight his role as a shepherd and disciple of Christ, not as a figure of worldly power,” he stated.

Notable changes include the removal of the traditional three-coffin system—previously composed of cypress, lead, and oak—and the immediate placement of the Pope’s body into a single coffin. The deceased Pope will now lie in repose for veneration within this coffin, rather than atop a bier.

Further, the confirmation of death, a ritual once performed in the Pope’s private chamber, will now take place in his chapel. The updated rites emphasize the spiritual nature of the occasion, moving away from overly ceremonial elements toward a focus on the Pope’s pastoral and apostolic mission.

Streamlining the “Three Stations”

The funeral rites retain their traditional structure of three stations: the Pope’s residence, St. Peter’s Basilica, and the burial site. However, each has been refined:

1. First Station (Residence): The body is placed directly into a coffin at the chapel following the confirmation of death, eliminating a previous intermediary step at the Apostolic Palace.
2. Second Station (Basilica): The coffin is closed the evening before the funeral Mass, which takes place in St. Peter’s Basilica. During public veneration, the body will be displayed within the open coffin, aligning with practices for diocesan bishops as outlined in the Caeremoniale Episcoporum.
3. Third Station (Burial): A single-coffin burial simplifies this stage, eschewing the traditional layering of coffins. Additionally, the rites now accommodate burial sites outside the Vatican Basilica.

A Refined Liturgical Text

The updated Ordo underwent a comprehensive revision of its biblical, liturgical, and rubrical texts. Latin prayers were harmonized with the Missale Romanum (2008) and the Nova Vulgata translation, while the Italian version aligns with the Missale Romanum (2020).

Musical annotations were removed to allow greater flexibility, though references to the Graduale Romanum guide the selection of Gregorian chants. Adjustments were also made to the Litany of Saints, sung during two key moments: the body’s transfer to the basilica and the conclusion of the funeral Mass. The revised Litany includes all saints celebrated in the Church’s General Calendar, with a particular focus on saintly Popes.

The Novendiales: Nine Days of Mourning

A dedicated chapter addresses the Novendiales, the nine days of Masses for the deceased Pope that follow the funeral. This edition expands the number of liturgical formularies from three to four, drawing on prayers for deceased Popes and bishops found in the Missale Romanum.

Unlike its predecessor, the new edition excludes lectionary texts, providing only scriptural references. The omission of supplementary materials, such as Gregorian chant notations, reflects the Vatican’s intent to create a more focused, user-friendly volume.

A Bridge Between Tradition and Renewal

The new edition reflects the Vatican’s commitment to adapting the papal funeral liturgy to contemporary needs while preserving its rich historical roots. By emphasizing the Pope’s role as a servant of Christ and simplifying complex rituals, the Church seeks to present a more accessible and spiritually resonant celebration.

As Archbishop Ravelli noted, “This is not merely a liturgical book but an essential tool to prepare and celebrate the funeral of the disciple of Christ chosen as Peter’s successor.”

Thank you for reading our content. If you would like to receive ZENIT’s daily e-mail news, you can subscribe for free through this link.

The post Pope Francis’ funerals will be like this: reformed funeral ritual for Pope Francis appeared first on ZENIT - English.

(ZENIT News / Rome, 11.19.2024).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy and sacramental theology and director of the Sacerdos Institute at the Pontifical Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: Is a deacon at Mass allowed to participate in reading part of the Eucharistic Prayer? — C.M., Mexico City 

A: The short answer is quite simple: no.

This theme is addressed very well in the 2004 instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum, on abuses in the liturgy. To wit:

“52. The proclamation of the Eucharistic Prayer, which by its very nature is the climax of the whole celebration, is proper to the Priest by virtue of his Ordination. It is therefore an abuse to proffer it in such a way that some parts of the Eucharistic Prayer are recited by a Deacon, a lay minister, or by an individual member of the faithful, or by all members of the faithful together. The Eucharistic Prayer, then, is to be recited by the Priest alone in full.

“53. While the Priest proclaims the Eucharistic Prayer ‘there should be no other prayers or singing, and the organ or other musical instruments should be silent,’ except for the people’s acclamations that have been duly approved, as described below.

“54. The people, however, are always involved actively and never merely passively: for they ‘silently join themselves with the Priest in faith, as well as in their interventions during the course of the Eucharistic Prayer as prescribed, namely in the responses in the Preface dialogue, the Sanctus, the acclamation after the consecration and the ‘Amen’ after the final doxology, and in other acclamations approved by the Conference of Bishops with the recognitio of the Holy See.’”

Therefore, from what has been seen above, only a priest may proclaim any part of the Eucharistic Prayer.

The acclamation after the consecration, proclaimed by the people, does not violate this rule. This is because this acclamation is not, strictly speaking, a part of the Eucharistic Prayer.

Indeed, if a priest celebrates alone, or concelebrate only with other priests, both the “mystery of faith” and the acclamation are omitted, and the priest passes immediately from “Do this in memory of me” to “Therefore O Lord …” or “Therefore as we celebrate …” depending on which Eucharistic Prayer is used.

This same rule would apply for when other acclamations of the people have been inserted into the Eucharistic Prayer with the approval of the bishops’ conference and the Holy See. This is the case, for example, in the Portuguese version of the missal used in Brazil.

Another particularity is Germany in which the missal foresees that the deacon may intone the “Mystery of faith.” This possibility is not foreseen in the Latin missal or in any other missal that I know, but it seems to have been approved for Germany.

As we saw above, it would not contradict the overall principles as this invitation is not part of the Eucharistic Prayer as such.

* * *

Readers may send questions to zenit.liturgy@gmail.com. Please put the word «Liturgy» in the subject field. The text should include your initials, your city and your state, province or country. Father McNamara can only answer a small selection of the great number of questions that arrive.

Thank you for reading our content. If you would like to receive ZENIT’s daily e-mail news, you can subscribe for free through this link.

The post Questions about liturgy: Deacons and the Eucharistic Prayer appeared first on ZENIT - English.

Rather than dismissing these traditions as mere folklore or customs, the Vatican’s recognitio elevates them to the status of “liturgical expressions,” fostering a deeper sense of inclusion and respect for the faith traditions of the Tseltal, Tsotsil, Ch’ol, Tojolabal, and Zoque peoples.  

Liturgical Innovations: Faith Through Indigenous Lenses

Key among the approved adaptations are ritual dances integrated into various parts of the Mass, such as the offertory and thanksgiving after communion. Cardinal Arizmendi emphasized that these are not decorative acts but meditative movements reflective of indigenous spirituality. Accompanied by traditional music, these dances serve as contemplative expressions aligned with the essence of the Roman rite but through a distinctly local cultural lens.

Additionally, women from these communities will now take on the ministry of incensing during Mass. Using culturally significant sahumerios instead of traditional censers, they will incense the altar, sacred images, and the congregation. Cardinal Arizmendi clarified that this inclusion is not a statement of gender equality but a faithful reflection of indigenous customs, where women traditionally hold this role in community prayers.  

Expanded Lay Participation

Another notable change is the introduction of a greater role for lay leaders of moral standing. These individuals may now guide certain communal prayers, such as the opening prayer, intentions, and moments of thanksgiving, under the supervision and authorization of the priest. Cardinal Arizmendi stressed that these adaptations aim to deepen communal participation without diminishing the priest’s role as the celebrant.

Cultural Context Meets Catholic Doctrine

Cardinal Arizmendi described the changes as a step toward the “incarnation of faith” within indigenous cultures. He underscored that the core content of the Roman rite remains untouched, with only its cultural expression adapted. This approach seeks to bridge the gap between universal Catholic traditions and local indigenous practices, offering a way for these communities to worship authentically within their cultural frameworks.

“These adaptations are not a dilution of the faith but an enrichment,” he explained, highlighting how the Church can guide indigenous customs toward fulfillment in Christ without dismissing their value.

A Model for Broader Inclusion

The decision could set a precedent for other indigenous groups around the world, encouraging bishops and pastoral leaders to explore similar adaptations. Cardinal Arizmendi called on Church leaders to embrace the liturgical potential of indigenous expressions, urging them not to reduce these practices to mere folklore.

Thank you for reading our content. If you would like to receive ZENIT’s daily e-mail news, you can subscribe for free through this link.

The post Vatican approves “Mayan Mass”: it does not change the content of the Mass, but the way of expressing it appeared first on ZENIT - English.

(ZENIT News / Roma, 11.12.2024).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy and sacramental theology and director of the Sacerdos Institute at the Pontifical Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: No. 48 of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal used in England and Wales says that for the entrance chant at Mass another song “cuius textus a Conferentia Episcoporum sit approbatus” can be chosen. The same goes for the offertory and communion chants (GIRM 74, 84). For adaptations in England and Wales GIRM 48 states that these “other songs” have to be accepted by the bishops’ conference. But what about other countries? Do the GIRM norms cited above mean that any song approved by any bishops’ conference can be said to qualify for the entrance chant in a particular diocese? – T.N., Helsinki, Finland

A: The complete text of the GIRM 48 in the missal used by the dioceses of England and Wales is the following:

“48. The singing at this time is done either alternately by the choir and the people or in a similar way by the cantor and the people, or entirely by the people, or by the choir alone. In the dioceses of England and Wales the options for the Entrance Chant are: (1) the antiphon and psalm from the Graduale Romanum or the Graduale Simplex; or (2) a song from another collection of psalms and antiphons, the text of which has been approved by the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales. If there is no singing at the Entrance, the antiphon in the Missal is recited either by the faithful, or by some of them, or by a lector; otherwise, it is recited by the priest himself, who may even adapt it as an introductory explanation (cf. no. 31).”

In the missal for Ireland this text follows more closely the Latin original saying: “[…] Graduale Simplex; or another chant that is suited to the sacred action, the day, or the time of year, and whose text has been approved by the Conference of Bishops.” The corresponding Latin is “[…] Graduale simplici extans, sive alius cantus, actioni sacrae, diei vel temporis indoli congruous, cuius textus a Conferentia Episcoporum sit approbatus.”

The U.S. version of this number has some variations which amplify the possibilities:

“48. This chant is sung alternately by the choir and the people or similarly by a cantor and the people, or entirely by the people, or by the choir alone. In the Dioceses of the United States of America, there are four options for the Entrance Chant: (1) the antiphon from the Missal or the antiphon with its Psalm from the Graduale Romanum, as set to music there or in another setting; (2) the antiphon and Psalm of the Graduale Simplex for the liturgical time; (3) a chant from another collection of Psalms and antiphons, approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop, including Psalms arranged in responsorial or metrical forms; (4) another liturgical chant that is suited to the sacred action, the day, or the time of year, similarly approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop.

“If there is no singing at the Entrance, the antiphon given in the Missal is recited either by the faithful, or by some of them, or by a reader; otherwise, it is recited by the Priest himself, who may even adapt it as an introductory explanation (cf. no. 31).”

These norms are more fully explained in the guidelines issued by the U.S. bishops’ conference, “Sing to the Lord.” While these are guidelines and not strict laws, they incorporate the laws found in the GIRM.

Regarding the entrance chant or song, the guidelines say:

“142. After the entire liturgical assembly has been gathered, an Entrance chant or song is sung as the procession with the priest, deacon, and ministers enters the church. ‘The purpose of this chant is to open the celebration, foster the unity of those who have been gathered, introduce their thoughts to the mystery of the liturgical season or festivity, and accompany the procession of the priest and ministers.’

“143. Care must be taken in the treatment of the texts of psalms, hymns, and songs in the Liturgy. Verses and stanzas should not be omitted arbitrarily in ways that risk distorting their content. While not all musical pieces require that all verses or stanzas be sung, verses should be omitted only if the text to be sung forms a coherent whole.

“144. The text and music for the Entrance song may be drawn from a number of sources.

“a. The singing of an antiphon and psalm during the entrance procession has been a long-standing tradition in the Roman Liturgy. Antiphons and psalms may be drawn from the official liturgical books—the Graduale Romanum or the Graduale Simplex—or from other collections of antiphons and psalms.

“b. Other hymns and songs may also be sung at the Entrance, providing that they are in keeping with the purpose of the Entrance chant or song. The texts of antiphons, psalms, hymns, and songs for the Liturgy must have been approved either by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops or by the local diocesan bishop.”

As seen above, the possibility of using other chants requires the approval of the bishops’ conference. Since these laws are territorial, priest and choir directors must follow the norms approved within each country and may only use those songs that are officially approved.

Outside the English-speaking world, whenever Mass is celebrated in English, such as in Finland, then any suitable musical setting or any hymn approved by an English-speaking bishops’ conference may be used. The same principle applies for other languages spoken in several countries.

Said approval may be quite specific, such as the approval of an alternative book of chants and antiphons with musical settings.

This may be necessary since many of the entrance antiphons for daily Mass do not correspond to the Roman Gradual and were always intended to be recited rather than sung. However, nothing opposes their being sung, and some authors have composed melodies for them.

The approval may also be general, such as when a bishops’ conference publishes a list of suitable hymns and songs approved for liturgical worship; for example, those in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and England and Wales.

The U.S. bishops have also issued an interesting doctrinal document to help discern suitable hymns for the liturgy, “Catholic Hymnody at the Service of the Church: An Aid for Evaluating Hymn Lyrics.”

Therefore, while preference should always be given to singing the official texts whenever possible, there are wide-ranging alternatives.

* * *

Readers may send questions to zenit.liturgy@gmail.com. Please put the word «Liturgy» in the subject field. The text should include your initials, your city and your state, province or country. Father McNamara can only answer a small selection of the questions that arrive.

The post Questions about liturgy: Deciding on Which Songs Are OK for Mass appeared first on ZENIT - English.

Under the new guidelines, starting November 30, priests within the Diocese of Tyler will no longer be permitted to use the 1962 Missal for Mass or sacraments, except for a single parish granted special authorization: St. Joseph Parish in Tyler. This parish, affiliated with the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, will be allowed to continue offering the Traditional Latin Mass, with permission extending to all canonically assigned priests and deacons of the parish.

The new regulations come one year after Pope Francis dismissed Bishop Joseph Strickland from his leadership role in the Diocese of Tyler, appointing Bishop Vásquez of Austin as Apostolic Administrator. Strickland, who led the diocese from 2012, had voiced support for the Traditional Latin Mass and was critical of some Vatican policies, a stance which placed him at odds with Pope Francis’ vision for liturgical unity and reform.

In his letter, Bishop Vásquez acknowledged the emotional impact of these changes and encouraged the faithful to accept the adjustments with “faith and trust.” He offered words of support to those who might find the transition difficult, affirming that his prayers are with the diocesan community during this period of adjustment.

This directive follows a series of Vatican actions aimed at realigning the celebration of the liturgy with the post-Vatican II reforms, underscoring Pope Francis’ desire to strengthen liturgical unity within the Church. The decision reflects ongoing efforts by Church leadership to balance tradition with contemporary expressions of faith, a dialogue that has intensified since the release of “Traditionis custodes”. For the Diocese of Tyler, these changes signal a new era of worship practices, with the hope that this approach will foster greater unity and reflection among the faithful.

Thank you for reading our content. If you would like to receive ZENIT’s daily e-mail news, you can subscribe for free through this link.

The post Vatican Limits Traditional Latin Mass in Texas Diocese Following Bishop’s Removal appeared first on ZENIT - English.

(ZENIT News / Rome, 11.03.2024).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy and sacramental theology and director of the Sacerdos Institute at the Pontifical Regina Apostolorum university.

***

Q: In churches where the tabernacle with the Body of Christ is just behind the altar, the first and last reverence is to be made with a genuflection toward the tabernacle, but all other acts of reverence are to be made by bowing toward the altar and not toward the tabernacle. Is that correct? The readers, before going up to the sanctuary, should make a small bow. Should they also bow toward the altar before starting the reading? — M.C.G., Munich, Germany

A: The first question basically refers to the overall norms found in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) when speaking about genuflections:

“274. A genuflection, made by bending the right knee to the ground, signifies adoration, and therefore it is reserved for the Most Blessed Sacrament, as well as for the Holy Cross from the solemn adoration during the liturgical celebration on Good Friday until the beginning of the Easter Vigil. During Mass, three genuflections are made by the priest celebrant: namely, after the showing of the host, after the showing of the chalice, and before Communion. Certain specific features to be observed in a concelebrated Mass are noted in their proper place (cf. nos. 210-251).

“If, however, the tabernacle with the Most Blessed Sacrament is present in the sanctuary, the priest, the deacon, and the other ministers genuflect when they approach the altar and when they depart from it, but not during the celebration of Mass itself. Otherwise, all who pass before the Most Blessed Sacrament genuflect, unless they are moving in procession. Ministers carrying the processional cross or candles bow their heads instead of genuflecting.”

Thus, the answer to the first question is affirmative. In most cases where there is liturgical movement, and the tabernacle is directly behind the altar, the bow will be toward both.

However, should it happen that the logistics of the church mean that those who are moving pass between the altar and the tabernacle, or the tabernacle is within the sanctuary but is not centered, they will only bow toward the altar during Mass.

With respect to the readings, GIRM No. 59 states:

«By tradition, the function of proclaiming the readings is ministerial, not presidential. The readings, therefore, should be proclaimed by a lector, and the Gospel by a deacon or, in his absence, a priest other than the celebrant. If, however, a deacon or another priest is not present, the priest celebrant himself should read the Gospel. Further, if another suitable lector is also not present, then the priest celebrant should also proclaim the other readings.»

With respect to the bow or bows made by the reader this will depend on where the reader is placed. Sometimes readers are already within the sanctuary from the entrance procession; sometimes they enter the sanctuary from the pews.

Liturgical experts describe the practice in several ways.

Bishop Peter J. Elliott describes the reader’s bow in his «Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite»: «The lector (comes to the sanctuary and) makes the customary reverences; first bowing deeply to the altar …, then bowing to the celebrant, before going to the ambo …»

In his more recent “Ceremonial for Priests,” Monsignor Marc Caron goes into more detail:

“If the reader is not seated in the sanctuary, he or she goes to the center of the main aisle and makes a profound bow to the altar at the steps of the sanctuary before approaching the ambo. If the reader, however, is already seated in the sanctuary itself and must pass before the altar while crossing the sanctuary in order to approach the ambo, he or she makes a profound bow to the altar when doing so. In addition, either immediately after making the reverence to the altar or upon arriving at the ambo, the reader makes a bow of the head towards the celebrant and turns to the ambo to begin the reading.”

Why this bow toward the celebrant? “The bow indicates the reader’s recognition that all ministries during Mass take place under the presidency of the priest celebrant. It is a gracious gesture to acknowledge the one who is moderating the exercise of various ministries into one harmonious act of worship.”

As we have seen, two bows are described. The first bow toward the altar is based on the Ceremonial of Bishops, No. 72: «A deep bow is made to the altar by all who enter the sanctuary (chancel), leave it, or pass before the altar.»

This would seem to resolve the question regarding the case of when the reader has entered the sanctuary from the beginning of Mass and is located near the ambo with no need to cross in front of the altar. The bow made toward the altar on first entering the sanctuary would be deemed sufficient, and only the second bow toward the celebrant from the ambo would be made.

We must admit, however, that this second bow, toward the priest celebrant, is not explicitly prescribed in the liturgical books.

Indeed, in describing the Liturgy of the Word the Ceremonial of Bishops, No. 137, makes no mention of any bows: «After the opening prayer, the reader goes to the ambo and proclaims the first reading …»

Nor does the GIRM make any mention of this bow toward the celebrant:

“128. After the Collect, all sit. The priest may, very briefly, introduce the faithful to the Liturgy of the Word. Then the lector goes to the ambo and, from the Lectionary already placed there before Mass, proclaims the First Reading, to which all listen. At the end, the lector sings or says the acclamation: Verbum Domini (The word of the Lord ) , and all respond: Deo gratias (Thanks be to God).

“Then, as appropriate, a few moments of silence may be observed so that all may meditate on what they have heard.”

Apart from the arguments regarding the presidency, the authors we have quoted would apparently consider these bows as a logical liturgical extension of the indications for reverence toward bishops in the Ceremonial, Nos. 76-77:

«The bishop is greeted with a deep bow by the ministers or others when they approach to assist him, when they leave after assisting him, or when they pass in front of him.

«When the bishop’s chair is behind the altar, the ministers should reverence either the altar or the bishop, depending on whether they are approaching the altar or approaching the bishop; out of reverence for both, ministers should, as far as possible, avoid passing between the bishop and the altar.»

It may also be said that the liturgical deductions made by the authors are quite reasonable and that the custom of the bow toward the celebrant is sufficiently widespread as to be deemed a legitimate custom.

However, since the liturgical books themselves do not explicitly mention readers when referring to bows, and the norms are only applicable insofar as they enter or leave the sanctuary, or, in a very broad sense, assist the presiding celebrant, it does not appear that these bows form a stable and obligatory part of the rites for those who exercise the ministry of reader.

Therefore if, for example, the seating arrangements are such that the readers are in the sanctuary from the beginning of Mass and have no need to cross in front of the altar, they could legitimately exercise their ministry without making any of these bows.

* * *

Readers may send questions to zenit.liturgy@gmail.com. Please put the word «Liturgy» in the subject field. The text should include your initials, your city and your state, province or country. Father McNamara can only answer a small selection of the great number of questions that arrive.

Thank you for reading our content. If you would like to receive ZENIT’s daily e-mail news, you can subscribe for free through this link.

The post Questions about liturgy: Bows Toward the Altar and the Celebrant appeared first on ZENIT - English.

(ZENIT News / Rome, 10.28.2024).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy and sacramental theology and director of the Sacerdos Institute at the Pontifical Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: Could you send me the revised “Rite of Eucharistic Exposition & Benediction”? We have older priests (40-plus years in the priesthood) and younger ones (between five and 10 years in the priesthood), and we conduct the service of Benediction differently. This leaves the congregation in doubt as to whether we know what we are doing and therefore what they are to believe. The younger priests leave out the Divine Praises altogether with the explanation that they are following the revised rite. Unfortunately, they are not willing to show us that revised rite, saying that their example is enough evidence. — S.K., Wa, Ghana

A: The “ordo” or “Rite of Exposition and Benediction” forms part of the larger liturgical book “Holy Communion and Worship of the Eucharist outside Mass.” In the Latin version of this book the rite of exposition and Benediction are found in numbers 93-100. The various translations usually adjust the number system.

It must be observed that while the recitation of the Divine Praises is no longer obligatory in the revised rite, this does not mean that they have been abolished.

The prayers called the Divine Praises, or the prayers of reparation for profanity and blasphemy, are a sequence of acclamations, chiefly composed by Jesuit Luigi Felici in 1797, blessing God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, the Blessed Virgin Mary, St. Joseph, and all the angels and saints.

It is worth pointing out that although the original Latin text of the revised rite does not include the Divine Praises, the Compendium Eucharisticum published by the Congregation for Divine Worship in 2009 has recovered the Divine Praises within the rite of exposition and Benediction.

According to the rubrics, these may be used as an acclamation of the people while the Blessed Sacrament is being reposed following Benediction. It is implied that alternative acclamations may also be used but these are not provided in the ritual.

However, the Holy See gave wide leeway to the bishops’ conferences to adapt the rites to circumstances and add recommended hymns and prayers according to local custom.

For example, my Italian copy of the Rite of Holy Communion and Worship of the Eucharist places the Divine Praises after the Benediction as a possible acclamation. The rubric which accompanies the text in No. 237 says: «If considered opportune, following Eucharistic Benediction or before the reposition, the following acclamations may be recited according to custom.»

Papal functions in Rome tend to follow the Italian customs and publicly recite or sing the Divine Praises immediately after the Benediction with the Blessed Sacrament and before the reposition.

The English translation of the rite adopts a different policy, preferring not to have any official prayers after Benediction. The rite does, however, foresee that hymns or acclamations may be recited during the reposition.

Because of this, countries and dioceses have variant indications with respect to songs and the use of the Divine Praises. One summary of the Rite is offered by the Liturgy Office of the Bishop’s Conference of England and Wales. Another, quite practical, version of the rite is offered by the Archdiocese of Sydney.

Since the Holy See deliberately opted for allowing wide scope for freedom of choice, including a prayer such as the Divine Praises in one or other part of the ritual is a case of recommending a custom without establishing an obligation.

Thus, both in Italy, England and anywhere else, the Divine Praises may be recited after Benediction whenever customary. Or the reposition may be done in silence or accompanied by an appropriate hymn or other acclamations.

At the same time, it is certainly better to follow the indications of the official books for each nation.

Monsignor Peter Elliott ably describes the rites concluding Benediction in his renowned ceremonies book:

«If the Blessed Sacrament is to be reposed in the tabernacle, then (after the Divine Praises and) during a psalm, hymn, acclamation or appropriate music, the celebrant or the assisting deacon or priest goes to the altar. He genuflects, turns the back of the monstrance toward himself, removes the lunette and places it in the pyx, which he closes. He moves the monstrance to the left of the corporal and may veil it. He then takes the pyx and places it in the tabernacle, genuflecting before he locks the door.

«(If the tabernacle is in a chapel, a server should place a humeral veil over the shoulders of the celebrant or the assistant deacon or priest before he removes the lunette from the monstrance. Torch bearers should precede him to the chapel and then return with him to the sanctuary, unless it is thought more convenient to go directly to the sacristy.) All bow to the altar (or genuflect if the tabernacle is behind or on it) and return to the sacristy led by the thurifer. Sacristans and/or servers carry out their respective duties in the sanctuary and in the sacristy.»

There are abundant publications available as aids for adoration. They usually contain appropriate selections of Scripture, writings of saints, hymns, prayers and litanies that may be profitably used during adoration either privately or for communal recitation.

Therefore, it is not a case of the younger or older priests being right or wrong. Both possibilities are open and legitimate.

That said, all priests should be attentive to the pastoral needs of the People of God and be willing to serve their legitimate traditions and expectations unless some greater principle is at stake and a practice needs to be amended or made to conform to liturgical law.

* * *

Readers may send questions to zenit.liturgy@gmail.com. Please put the word «Liturgy» in the subject field. The text should include your initials, your city and your state, province or country. Father McNamara can only answer a small selection of the questions that arrive.

Thank you for reading our content. If you would like to receive ZENIT’s daily e-mail news, you can subscribe for free through this link.

The post Questions about liturgy: The Divine Praises at Benediction appeared first on ZENIT - English.

(ZENIT News / Rome, 10.21.2024).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy and sacramental theology and director of the Sacerdos Institute at the Pontifical Regina Apostolorum university.

***

Q: Some people believe that during the Eucharistic Prayer those concelebrants who have been assigned to the various intercessions are assigned based on their ecclesiastical rank, for example, vicar general, vicar forane, monsignor etc. So that C1 is always assigned to the person holding the highest office, then C2 to the second highest, and so forth. Are there any specific criteria for choosing the concelebrants for the Eucharistic Prayer intercessions? For example, must they be chosen from among the most senior priests, that is, priests with a title (vicar, monsignor etc.) or can priests without title be chosen for the parts? Also, is it automatic that when a bishop is the principal celebrant and there are other bishops concelebrating that they automatically must be assigned to the intercessions? In my liturgical readings and study, I have never come across this understanding implicitly or explicitly. I would think that during the Eucharistic Prayer especially, that all present, chief celebrant and concelebrants regardless of rank or office are all acting in persona Christi, in the “one” person of Christ and together are exercising their “one” “common” ministerial priesthood and not exercising a particular rank or office, and that therefore no distinction should be made based on rank or office. The only instances where the order of precedence is applied, as far as I am aware, is in the liturgical procession, incensation, communion and in the seating arrangements for a concelebrated Mass. I am not aware that it is applied to the Eucharistic intercessions. — F.M., Trinidad and Tobago

A: First, I think we must distinguish between a distinction of rank or office, and a distinction of order.

The distinction of order would be between bishops and priests. The bishop has the fullness of the sacrament of holy orders, and this means that he is the higher order with respect to the priest. Therefore, a bishop should always preside if he is a celebrant in a concelebration.

When there is a good reason for him to be present but not concelebrate, such as a priest’s jubilee celebration, the liturgy foresees the possibility of the bishop being present in choir dress, preaching the homily and imparting the final blessing.

Because of this difference in order, I would say that, yes, it would be good liturgical logic to defer to other bishop concelebrants for the intercessions of the Eucharistic Prayer. At the same time there might be good motives for exceptions, such as a guest bishop having difficulty with the language of the Mass.

It is true, however, that the official documents do not mention the case of multiple bishops, and therefore what I have said above is just an opinion.

The other distinction would be the difference in ecclesiastical rank, and these are human distinctions which would not affect who proclaim the intercessions.

It is true that rules of protocol, in determining who goes where in the procession, and who sits where, often means that the same people end up next to the bishop and close to the microphone on the altar during the Eucharistic Prayer. The repetition of these situations can lead to the presumption that the participation in the intercessions is a question of rank.

Human foibles being what they are, it can happen that presumed rights are defended more tenaciously than those enshrined in written laws and decrees.

However, as our reader has pointed out, there is almost nothing in the liturgical books that would support this supposition.

Neither the Ceremonial of Bishops nor the General Instruction of the Roman Missal appear to make any distinction with respect to ecclesial rank in this area. The GIRM, in describing the recitation of a part of the Eucharistic Prayer, says the following:

“220. It is appropriate that the commemoration of the living (the Memento) and the Communicantes (In union with the whole Church) be assigned to one or other of the concelebrating priests, who then speaks these prayers aloud, with hands extended.”

This expression of the text regarding the parts being “assigned to one or other of the concelebrating priests” is used for all the Eucharistic Prayers.

This would indicate that there is no precise rule or ranking in choosing the priests who will recite these parts of the prayer.

It must also be considered that the text says that “it is appropriate.” This means that the principal celebrant may opt to say the entire Eucharistic Prayer himself, and thus there is no question of any other celebrant having a “right” to proclaim a particular section. Therefore, the assignment of which priest proclaims what part can be determined on each occasion taking several elements into account.

Among these elements, the 2014 document of the Holy See offering guidelines for large concelebrations, which is also silent as to who recites these parts of the Eucharistic Prayers, reminds those preparing the celebration of the importance that the faithful may see and hear the liturgical action. We offer an unofficial translation:

“16. In such a space ‘places are to be arranged for the faithful with appropriate care, so that they may duly participate in the sacred celebrations, following with their gaze and heart. The places should be structured in such a way that it is easy to approach to receive Holy Communion. Take care that the faithful can not only see, but also easily hear. Therefore, to encourage participation, an appropriate public address system should be prepared, with the collaboration of experts.’”

This would at least imply that the priests assigned to recite a part of the Eucharistic Prayer should be visible to the faithful and not be a disembodied voice. This would suggest that he be close to the altar albeit not necessarily next to the principal celebrant.

In solemn papal Masses at the Vatican, the order of procession is usually determined by certain rules of protocol so that bishops are followed by archbishops and then cardinal deacons, presbyters and cardinal bishops. Therefore, other things being equal, the dean of the College of Cardinals and other cardinal bishops are beside the Pope at the altar.

In practice, however, this protocol is not strictly applied, and the choice of those who are beside the Pope and who intervene in the Eucharistic Prayers are guided by the concrete circumstances of each celebration. Thus, it can be the prefect of a certain dicastery, the bishop of a diocese, the superior general of a congregation and even the parish priest when the Pope visits a parish.

Also, when the Holy Father celebrated daily Mass in the Chapel of Santa Martha, the assignation of who prayed the different parts of the prayer was occasionally made just before the celebration began.

In conclusion, we can say that there is no official rule whatsoever that would assign a right of intervention to a particular ecclesiastical dignitary.

Unless the presiding celebrant has reserved to himself the recitation of the entire Eucharistic Prayer, this designation can be made in several ways, from leaving it to chance to whomsoever happens to end up closest to the microphone and the presiding celebrant, to previous designation before the celebration begins for any worthy reason whatsoever.

* * *

Readers may send questions to zenit.liturgy@gmail.com. Please put the word «Liturgy» in the subject field. The text should include your initials, your city and your state, province or country. Father McNamara can only answer a small selection of the great number of questions that arrive.

Thank you for reading our content. If you would like to receive ZENIT’s daily e-mail news, you can subscribe for free through this link.

The post Questions about liturgy: Who Gets to Intercede in a Eucharistic Prayer appeared first on ZENIT - English.

The Vatican’s letter, dated September 4, was made public in late September and addresses the obligation of Catholics to attend Mass when a solemnity is transferred from its original Sunday date to the preceding Saturday or following Monday. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has had a long-standing policy, in effect since 1992, stating that when some holy days are transferred, the requirement to attend Mass is lifted.

A Conflict of Interpretations

The heart of the issue revolves around whether the obligation to attend Mass remains when a holy day, such as the Immaculate Conception or other solemnities, is moved. Bishop Paprocki, in his role as chair of the USCCB’s Committee on Canonical Affairs, sought clarification from the Vatican: «If a holy day of obligation in Advent, Lent, or Easter is transferred to a Monday, is the obligation still binding?» The response from the Vatican’s Prefect for Legislative Texts, Archbishop Filippo Iannone, made it clear: the obligation remains.

Archbishop Iannone stated that Canon Law explicitly lists the solemnities that must be observed as holy days of obligation. These include the Nativity of the Lord, Epiphany, Ascension, Corpus Christi, and other major feasts. “The canon does not allow for exceptions,” he wrote. Thus, even if the celebration is moved, the obligation stands.

However, the Vatican letter also recognized the principle of «moral impossibility,» which means that if attending Mass is genuinely impossible for a person, no dispensation is necessary. This would typically apply to serious situations, but minor inconveniences such as back-to-back Masses or workday obligations do not qualify as sufficient cause for missing Mass.

USCCB’s 1992 Policy Under Scrutiny

While the Vatican’s stance is clear, questions remain about how it aligns with U.S. policy. The USCCB has the authority to adapt the universal laws of the Church for particular circumstances in the United States. Since 1992, their norms state that when certain holy days fall on a Saturday or Monday, the obligation to attend Mass is removed. However, the recent clarification from the Vatican seems to call this approach into question.

A notable example this year involves the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, the national patronal feast of the United States, which typically falls on December 8. In 2024, this feast is transferred to Monday, December 9, as December 8 falls on the second Sunday of Advent. According to the Vatican’s recent interpretation, the obligation to attend Mass on December 9 should still stand, but the USCCB’s liturgical calendar for 2024 marks the day as “not a holy day of obligation.”

Potential Oversights and Internal Disagreement

The discrepancy has raised questions about whether an error was made in the USCCB’s 2024 liturgical calendar. Some speculate that the omission of the Immaculate Conception from the holy days of obligation this year may have been unintentional, as the 1992 norms do not explicitly cover this particular situation.

According to sources close to the USCCB, there may have been internal disagreement between the Committee on Canonical Affairs, led by Bishop Paprocki, and the Committee on Divine Worship, chaired by Bishop Steven Lopes. It’s suggested that Bishop Lopes’ committee believed the holy day obligation for the Immaculate Conception would be automatically dispensed by universal law since the feast was moved to Monday. This interpretation was challenged by Bishop Paprocki, leading to his request for a formal ruling from the Vatican.

Looking Ahead: A Potential Policy Revisit

The Vatican’s clarification seems to suggest that, despite the USCCB’s past policies, U.S. Catholics are still bound to observe the Immaculate Conception as a holy day of obligation this year, even though it has been moved to December 9. This situation may prompt the U.S. bishops to revisit their 1992 guidelines to ensure alignment with the universal law of the Church.

For now, many U.S. Catholics might find themselves navigating conflicting messages—whether to follow the guidance of the national bishops’ calendar or adhere to the Vatican’s stricter interpretation of Canon Law. Either way, the recent ruling highlights the complexity of Church law and the careful balance between national adaptations and the universal Church’s expectations. As the U.S. bishops convene in upcoming meetings, this issue is likely to be a topic of significant discussion, potentially leading to revised policies that align more closely with Rome’s directives.

Thank you for reading our content. If you would like to receive ZENIT’s daily e-mail news, you can subscribe for free through this link.

The post Vatican Clarifies US Holy Day Obligations, Raising Questions About USCCB’s Policy appeared first on ZENIT - English.

Below is the English translation of this Declaration, with the original version available here: https://www.felleskristen.no/.

***

A Joint Christian Declaration on ‘Diversity of Gender and Sexuality’

From www.Felleskristen.no/english
A Norwegian Christian ecumenical project

Based on our faith in the Bible as the Word of God, on the recognition of biological realities and
out of respect for the human rights of children we affirm the following principles:

On the basis of the BIBLE 

• God is the Creator and Sustainer of the universe. Ha has created human beings male and female.
• All people are created in the image of God. All are deeply loved by Him, have the same inherent human dignity, and are equally precious.
• Marriage is a divine institution inscribed in natural law. Marriage unites one man and one woman. Founded by God, confirmed by Christ and the Apostles, this institution of marriage has been recognised by the Christian church throughout the centuries (cf. Genesis 1:26-28 and Matthew 19:4-6).
• Marriage between one man and one woman constitutes the Biblical framework for sexual relationships. Other forms of sexual relationships represent a ‘diversity’ at odds with the Bible’s theology of creation and with Jesus’s ethical teaching, even when these relationships are marked by long-lasting fidelity.
• The doctrine and example of Jesus teach us that every human being is our neighbour. However deeply we may disagree about matters of faith and our very worldview, about ethics and moral codes, we urge all to encounter one another with respect and friendliness.

On the basis of BIOLOGY

• There are only two biological sexes: female and male. The sex of each individual is determined at conception.
• Our sex is principally determined by the size and function of the reproductive cells. Women produce large reproductive cells (egg cells); men produce small reproductive cells (sperm cells).
• Further to to the crucial importance of reproductive cells, female or male chromosomes (XX or XY) are woven into almost all the body’s thousands of billions of cells. The affirmation that there are two biological sexes, and no more, is not invalidated by the fact that some children are born with chromosomal anomalies or by the fact that an extremely small number of children (n Norway, 10-15 per year) are born with unclearly defined genitalia.
• The notion that gender is a subjective category and that sexual and gender identity can be freely chosen on the basis of feelings or preference, irrespective of biological sex, is based on ideology. It has no biological or scientific foundation.
• It is immensely problematic to teach children and young people that there are ‘boys, girls, and other genders’; that there exists an ‘interior gender’; that they may happen to have been ‘born in the wrong body’; and that gender is ‘fluid’. This manner of influence may lead to confusion, insecurity, and destructive life choices for many children and young people.
• The relationship between mother, father, and child is biologically singular. Divinely ordained, it is the foundation of the family and of society.

Out of respect for the CHILD 

• Children are a gift from God. It is no adult’s right to have a child.
• Human beings originate from the egg of one woman and the sperm of one man. Neither mother nor father, nor the wider family of either, is superfluous or irrelevant in a child’s life.
• It is a human right for every child, as far as possible, ‘to know and be cared for by his or her parents’ (United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, art. 7.1).
• To deprive children deliberately and intentionally of the right to know their biological mother or father, and their wider families – for example through assisted fertilisation or surrogacy – violates God’s will for creation and children’s rights.
• Regardless of the manner in which they are conceived, all children are equally precious, equally loved by God.
• Children’s rights and the best interests of the child must take precedence over the demands and wishes of adults – in secular society and in the church.

Core values

• We regard the Bible as our highest authority in matters of faith, doctrine, and life. As Christian churches, congregations, and organisations, and as individuals, we commit ourselves to the truths, values, and convictions expressed in this declaration.
• We wish to encounter all people with respect, reasonably and kindly – ‘speaking the truth in love’ (Ephesians 4:15). But we will not compromise on Biblical truths, even if these truths should conflict with political pressure or societal trends.
• We reject, in every setting, all forms of bullying and ostracism, manipulation and coercion, harassment and hatred, sabotage and violence.
• We hold that much of the content of modern gender ideology, indeed the very concept of ‘gender and sexual diversity’, is not based on medical and natural science. We find it to be incompatible with our faith, thought, and worldview as Christians.
• We stand up for a democratic, pluralistic, and open-minded society where there is space for diversity of beliefs characterised by mutual respect. Freedom of expression and conscience, as well as religious freedom, are for us central and essential values.
• We hold that public authorities and governmental bodies exceed their mandate and power by attempting to pressure citizens and organisations to adapt to ‘queer theory’ on gender, sexuality, and marriage. Such activism on the part of government violates religious freedom and freedom of conscience, as well as the rights of parents.
• We, the signatories of this declaration, adhere to the Declaration on Marriage [a link to an English version] published in 2016 by 36 Norwegian Christian organisations and denominations. We stand united with hundreds of millions of Christians of almost all denominations worldwide.

Thank you for reading our content. If you would like to receive ZENIT’s daily e-mail news, you can subscribe for free through this link.

The post Norwegian Episcopate signs “Ecumenical Statement on Gender and Sexual Diversity” reaffirming biology and the Bible appeared first on ZENIT - English.