January 1980 Print

by Michael Davies

This article, "A Sacred Stillness Reigns," is Chapter XVII of Mr. Davies' book, Pope Paul's New Mass. The Angelus Press is pleased to announce the publication of this volume which should be available in the early Summer of 1980. Pope Paul's New Mass concludes Mr. Davies' trilogy, the Liturgical Revolution. The first two volumes were Cranmer's Godly Order and Pope John's Council.

IN HIS EPIC WORK, The Mass of the Roman Rite, Father Joseph A. Jungmann describes the beginning of the Canon of the Mass in the following words:

The priest enters the sanctuary of the canon alone. Up till now the people have thronged round him, their songs at times accompanying him in the fore-Mass. But the songs have become less frequent, and after the steep ascent of the Great Prayer they have come to an end in the Triple Sanctus. A sacred stillness reigns; silence is a worthy preparation for God's approach. Like the High-priest of the Old Testament, who once a year was permitted to enter the Holy of Holies with the blood of a sacrificial animal (Hebr. 9:7), the priest now separates from the people and makes his way before the all-holy God in order to offer up the sacrifice to Him. . .1

The fact that a sacred stillness no longer reigns during the numerous Eucharistic Prayers of the New Mass indicates, as Father Bouyer has testified, that the reform we have is not simply contrary to what the Fathers of Vatican II desired but represents a turning of the back upon the liturgical movement of which Father Jungmann was one of the most outstanding figures.² According to Father Anthony Boylan, Secretary of the Liturgical Commission of England and Wales, the silent canon is not simply no longer obligatory, it is forbidden. Writing in The Universe on 27 July 1979, Father Boylan insisted: "At the present time, when Mass is celebrated according to the Roman Rite, whether in Latin or a vernacular language, to recite the Eucharistic Prayer inaudibly is forbidden."

The prohibition of the silent Canon is not simply a matter of aesthetics, it is of the very greatest ecumenical significance. Protestant approval could never have been secured for a liturgy which permitted a silent Canon—and Father Jungmann has given the reason why: "... the priest now separates from the people and makes his way before the all-holy God in order to offer up sacrifice to Him." In the Eastern liturgies, not only is the Eucharistic Prayer said inaudibly—so is the Preface.³ What is more, such is the reverence for the sacred prayer that the priestly prerogative of saying it is emphasized by the celebrant's retirement behind the ikonostasis from which he will emerge bringing the true Body and Blood of Christ as food for the faithful.

For a Protestant, there is no difference in essence between a priest and a layman. A priest is simply a president, a man appointed, inter alia, to preside at the Communion Service and distribute Holy Communion. The Eucharistic Prayer is no more his prerogative than that of any other member of the congregation, he simply says it as their appointed representative. As Cranmer expressed it:

As in a prince's house the officers and ministers prepare the table, and yet other, as well as they, eat the meat and drink the drink; so do the priests and ministers prepare the Lord's Supper, read the Gospel, and rehearse Christ's words; but all the people say thereto, Amen; all remember Christ's death, all give thanks to God, all repent and offer themselves an oblation to Christ, all take him for their Lord and Saviour, and spiritually feed upon him; and in token thereof, they eat the bread and drink the wine in his mystical supper.4

Thus, the practice of the silent Canon, as Dr. Gihr explains, "betokens the Consecration and Sacrificial Act to be an exclusively priestly function."⁵As there is no exclusively priestly function in a Protestant Communion Service, because for a Protestant there is no priesthood beyond the common priesthood of all the faithful, the sixteenth-century Reformers abolished any ceremony or custom which could indicate belief in any form of priesthood distinct from that of the faithful. Cranmer ordered his entire service to be said "playnly and distinctly".⁶ This is just one indication of the thoroughness with which he gave liturgical expression to his belief that:

As for the saying or singing of mass by the priest, as it was in time passed used, it is neither a sacrifice propitiatory, nor yet a sacrifice of laud and praise, nor in any wise allowed before God, but abominable and detestable; and thereof may well be verified the saying of Christ, "That thing which seemeth an high thing before men, is an abomination before God."⁷

Not only is the silent Canon unacceptable to Protestants as an indication of belief in a ministerial priesthood⁸ but as contrary to the nature of the Lord's Supper as a memorial in the commonly accepted sense of this word.

His holy Supper was ordained for this purpose, that every man eating and drinking thereof should remember that Christ died for him and so should exercise his faith, and comfort himself by the remembrance of Christ's benefits; and so give unto Christ most hearty thanks, and give himself also clearly unto him.9

If the Eucharistic Prayer is simply an announcement of God's saving deeds, during which the Narrative of the Institution at the Last Supper is read aloud, then clearly these saving deeds should be proclaimed audibly in a language "understanded of the people".¹⁰

The Council of Trent anathematized anyone who condemned the silent Canon or insisted upon the exclusive use of the vernacular during the Mass. The ninth Canon on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in its Twenty-Second Session (1562) reads:

If anyone says that the rite of the Roman Church prescribing that a part of the Canon and the words of consecration be recited in a low tone of voice, should be condemned; or that Mass should be celebrated only in the vernacular; or that water should not be mixed with the wine in the chalice since that would be contrary to Christ's decree: let him be anathema.11

It should be noted that the Canon refers to a "low tone of voice" and, in this respect, the term "silent Canon" is not strictly accurate. The prayers of the Divine Office can be offered mentally but during the prayers of the Mass the priest must at least be able to hear himself. The prayers must be recited not merely mentally but vocally (vocaliter).

It seems obvious that Father Boylan, and anyone else who claims that the Canon must not be recited inaudibly, are anathematized under the terms of Canon Nine. Obviously, this Canon precludes neither the introduction of the vernacular nor the audible recitation of the Eucharistic Prayer; it anathematizes those who condemn these practices as a matter of principle. Father Boylan most certainly does this when he quotes the General Instruction as follows:

The General Instruction on the Roman Missal, n. 12, says: "The nature of the 'presidential prayers' (i.e. the Eucharistic Prayer and the orations) demands that (exigit ut) they be spoken in a loud and clear voice (clara et elata voce proferantur) and that they be listened to by everyone with attention (ab omnibus cum attentione auscutentur).

The implications of this claim are as serious as they are obvious. It means for well over a thousand years the Church has demanded that the Eucharistic Prayer be recited in a manner that is contrary to its nature. Anathemas of a General Council are infallible but, according to Father Boylan—who is no more than quoting the General Instruction—the Council of Trent has infallibly anathematized those who rightly condemn a practice contrary to the nature of the Eucharistic Prayer. In other words, it is the anathema which is in error, not those condemned by it. Well, it's a point of view. The reader must choose between the Council of Trent and the General Instruction. Furthermore, if Father Boylan is right then the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Eastern rites proclaim the Eucharistic Prayer in a manner that is contrary to its nature. Well, that too is a point of view. Father Boylan and the authors of the General Instruction are welcome to it. I am sure that they do not consider themselves in the least arrogant; revolutionaries never feel the least compunction in overthrowing the traditions and received wisdom of centuries or even millennia. They are the chosen ones, the elect, the men with the message, prophets of a new and liberating revelation.

There are so many exalted things hidden in this Sacrifice that it could provide an endless source of meditation for the greatest saint. The Sacrifice is made present upon the altar by the power of the words of consecration spoken by the priest alone in the name of Christ and NOT as the representative of the faithful.

 

It would, however, be wrong to claim that an audible recitation of the Canon in a vernacular language is contrary to its nature. This was the practice in the early centuries. Father Amiot writes:

For long the Canon was said aloud, probably to a recitative, but simpler, tone like the preface. Recitation in a low voice appears towards the middle of the eighth century, and in the ninth century with Ordo Romanus II silent recitation became obligatory. In the east the practice was adopted much earlier. Everywhere the tendency was to surround the Canon with respect and a sense of mystery and to reserve it to the celebrant alone.12

Father Fortescue believes that a practical reason accounts for the adoption of the silent Canon: "The Sanctus sung by the choir took some time; meanwhile the celebrant went on with the prayer, which in that case had to be said silently. So it became a custom, a tradition, and later mystic reasons were found for it."¹³

What is certain is that the transition must have taken place under the guidance of the Holy Ghost and the reason is not hard to find—there could be no more appropriate manifestation both of the nature of the Canon and the awesome powers of the sacrificing priest. This is made clear in the quotation from Father Jungmann which began this chapter. Similar sentiments expressed by other Catholic authors are not hard to find—and the Catholic who would have questioned them before Vatican II would have been rare indeed.

"Here we must pause," wrote Cardinal Wiseman, "because the subject becomes too sacred for our pen; the ground upon which we are about to tread is holy, and the shoes must be loosed from the feet of him who will venture upon it." The Council of Trent teaches:

Holy things must be treated in a holy way and this sacrifice is the most holy of all things. And so, that this sacrifice might be worthily and reverently offered and received, the Catholic Church many centuries ago instituted the sacred Canon. It is free from all error and contains nothing that does not savour strongly of holiness and piety and nothing that does not raise to God the minds of those who offer the Sacrifice. For it is made up from the words of Our Lord, from apostolic traditions, and from devout instructions of the holy pontiffs. Having the nature that he does, man cannot easily meditate on divine things without external helps. For this reason, holy Mother Church has prescribed certain rites for the Mass, some parts to be said in a low tone of voice, some to be said more loudly. She also has made use of ceremonies such as sacred blessings, candles, incense, vestments, and other things of like nature which have come down from apostolic teaching and tradition. All these things are used to point up the majesty of this great sacrifice and to raise the minds of the faithful through these visible signs of religion and piety to the contemplation of the very exalted things hidden in this sacrifice.15

There are so many exalted things hidden in this sacrifice that it could provide an endless source of meditation for the greatest saint. The sacrifice is made present upon the altar by the power of the words of consecration spoken by the priest alone in the name of Christ and not as the representative of the faithful.¹⁶Hoc est enim Corpus Meum: Hic est enim Calix Sanguinis Mei. After these words bread and wine are present on the altar no longer. "By the transubstantiation of bread into the Body of Christ, and of wine into His Blood, both His Body and Blood are rendered really present; but the eucharistic species under which He is present symbolize the violent separation of His Body and Blood, and so a commemorative showing forth in the death which took place in reality on Calvary is repeated in each Mass, because by distinct representations Christ Jesus is signified and shown forth in the state of victim."¹⁷

Holy things must be treated in a holy way and this sacrifice is the most holy of all things. And so, that this sacrifice might be worthily and reverently offered and received, the Catholic Church many centuries ago instituted the sacred Canon. It is free from all error and contains nothing that does not savour of holiness and piety and nothing that does not raise to God the minds of those who offer the Sacrifice. For it is made up from the words of Our Lord, from apostolic traditions,, and from devout instructions of the holy pontiffs.

 

The miracle has happened. Past, present and future have united in Christ. They have been made present on the altar before us. Christ is with us now in the present, renewing His sacrifice which happened in the past so that in the future we may come to Dr. Gihr has expressed perfectly the reaction of a true Catholic to this supreme moment in the Mass:

In every Host there are miracles, as numerous as stars in the firmament,—yet not the slightest trace of the wonders appears externally. With all this the ecclesiastical rite harmonizes perfectly. The holy silence is quite suited to indicate and to recall the concealment and depth, the incomprehensibleness and ineffableness of the wonderful mysteries that are enacted on the altar. Silent prayer is related to religious silence, and, therefore, expresses the humility, reverence, admiration, and awe wherewith the Church administers and adores the Mystery of the Altar. "The Lord is in His holy temple; let all the earth keep silence before Him" (Hab. 2:20). The sight of the priest at the altar, communing amid profound stillness with God alone, is, therefore, also an excellent means afforded to arouse and promote in those who are present the proper dispositions, with which they should admire, adore, and offer along with the priest So grand and sublime a Sacrifice. Quam terribilis est haec hora!—thus does the deacon cry out to the people in the Syrian liturgy—"How terrible is this hour!" While the tremendous Sacrifice is being accomplished on the altar, all present should be immersed in silent contemplation and in devout meditation of the divine Mysteries.18

Father Maurice Zundel has written beautifully on the same theme:

The Canon of the Mass guides us silently to the heart of the Mystery. In silence we go to meet Silence. We wait "until He come"* Our eyes, we know, will not see Him, our hands will not touch Him. God is a Spirit; He remains such even in the sacred humanity which gives Him to us. God is a secret audible only when self is silent. The very formulae have a silent character. Their sublimity is their modesty. They possess the lowliness of the bread and wine, and their glory is self-effacement. Different conjectures have been made about their origin and arrangement. It is certain that they were not all composed at the same time and that they were refashioned several times before the pontificate of St. Gregory who left them as we read them today. Their unity is internal. None obtrudes itself, none forces itself on our attention, none disturbs the silence. Since the mystery of faith is present, they do not attempt to utter it. All their life is within ... Silence alone can confront the soul with the crucified love of her God. The formulae say nothing of this meeting. They bring us to it without mentioning it. Like God they respect the secret of the soul, they preserve the spirit of poverty.19

The Conciliar Church appears possessed by an unholy fear of silence—perhaps because it is in silence that we are most likely to meet God.

Dum medium silentium teneret omnia, et nox in suo cursu medium inter haberet, omnipotens sermo tuus, Domine, de caelis a regalibus sedibus venit.20  —Introit for the Sunday within the Octave of Christmas (Wisdom, 18:14-15).

 

---

NOTES

1. The Mass of the Roman Rite (London, 1959), pp. 384-5.

2. The Decomposition of Catholicism (London, 1970), p. 99.

3. But the words of institution are spoken audibly.

4. Cranmer on the Lord's Supper (London, 1907), p. 246.

5. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (St. Louis, Mo., 1908), p. 582.

6. Rubric in the 1549 Communion Service.

7. Op. cit. Note 3, p. 252.

8. This is a term used to distinguish the priesthood conferred by ordination from the common priesthood of all the faithful.

9. Ibid., p. 251.

10. Article XXIV of the Thirty-Nine Articles states: "It is a thing plainly repugnant to the word of God, and the custom of the primitive Church, to, have public prayer in the Church, or to minister the Sacraments in a tongue not understanded by the people." This was a rephrasing of Article XXV of the original Forty-Two Articles. It was altered as a direct defiance of the Ninth Canon of the Twenty-Second Session of the Council of Trent on the Mass.

11. Enchiridion Symbolorum Denzinger (31st Edition).

12. History of the Mass (London, 1959), p.77.

13. The Mass: A Study of the Roman Liturgy (London, 1917), p. 327.

14. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass  (St. Louis, Mo., 1908), p. 578.

15. Enchiridion Symbolorum Denzinger (31st Edition), pp. 942-3.

16. "The unbloody immolation by which after the words of consecration have been pronounced, Christ is rendered present on the altar in the state of a victim, is performed by the priest alone, and by the priest in so far as he acts in the name of Christ, not in so far as he represents the faithful." (Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei, para. 96).

17. Mediator Dei (CTS Edition), para .74.

18.The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (St. Louis, Mo., 1908), pp. 583-4.

19. The Splendour of the Liturgy (London, 1939), pp. 169-170.

20. It is interesting to note that the Latin text does not correspond with the Vulgate. This is because the propers of the older Masses in the Roman Missal actually pre-date the Vulgate.