A Study of Origins and Development of the Mass of the Roman Rite- Indicate Consistent Element Throughout the Years

Introduction

This assignment is a very brief summary of the History of theMass, Summarizing 2000 years of liturgical history in few words.There are only the most significant developments that occurredduring the 20 centuries of Catholicism. It will be divided intoseven time periods: 1) Emerging Christianity (33-100AD); 2) TheDomestic Church (100-313AD); 3) Rise of the Roman Church (313-750AD); 4) Normalizing the Liturgy (750-1073AD); 5) Prelude toReform (1073-1517AD); 6) Reform and Counter-Reform (1517-1903);and 7) Renewal, Reaction and Unfolding Vision (1903----). Ineach of these time periods, the Mass is influenced by manycontributing factors that we will see while going through thecourse of history, at the end of the assignment I will mentionsome of the consistent elements which we are observing throughoutthe years.

1. Origins and Development of the Mass of the Roman Rite

The Mass is the combination of “prayers and ceremonies” that makeup the service of the Eucharist in the Roman Rites. As in thecase of all liturgical terms the name is less old than the thing.From the time of the first preaching of the Christian Faith, aseverywhere, the Holy Eucharist was celebrated as Christ hadinstituted it at the Last Supper, according to His command, inmemory of Him. But it was not till long afterwards that the laterLatin name “Missa”, used at first in a vague sense, later on itbecame the technical and almost exclusive name for this service.Its origins and development is described below in detail. It isdivided according to its time period as follows:

1.1. Emerging Christianity (33-100AD)

One of the major external influences of this time is the end ofJewish governance caused by the destruction of Jerusalem and thetemple. The early Jews, as Christians, are dispersed and cangather to worship only in the home. This takes place at theevening meal as they typically sat around the small table on matsand used the regular blessing or “berakah” Method. The mealincluded readings from Hebrew Scripture and a retelling of thestories of Jesus, especially the story of the last meal beforeHis Death. These early followers remembered the Manner in whichChrist blessed the food, using the common bread and wineprevalent at that time. As more and more Gentiles becameChristian, the “berakah” (blessing) Method of the Hebrew style ofmeal celebration migrated to a form emphasizing “Eucharistia”(thanksgiving), a style more common to the Gentile culture.

1.2. Domestic Church (100-313AD)

As Christianity spreads throughout the Roman Empire, Governmentalpersecution often drives those gathering underground (i.e.Catacombs) affecting how the meal/worship is celebrated. Duringless stressful periods, the Dining Rooms of wealthy citizensprovide sufficient reclining space for the growing assemblies tocelebrate the memorial meal. Since some Christians were unableto join the gathering, members crafted a small box (pyx) to bringhome a piece of the blessed bread-loaf shared at the Mass. Also,the shift in daily language from popular Greek to common Latinnow influences the Christian experience of worship. For example,“sacramentum” replacing “mysterion” describes the worship in away that changes its character. Similarly, philosophy begins toinfluence the way Christians understand the celebration (i.e. itsconcepts vs practices). The “Didache” and the “DidascaliaApostolorum” are the first formal documents setting forth theworship (Mass) ritual or rubrics. Along with these documents arebeginnings of the distinctive liturgical and ecclesial roles ofthe “episcopos” (bishop), “diaconos” (deacon) and “presbyteros”

(elder or priest), needed as local Christian communities becomemore numerous.

1.3. Rise of the Roman Church (313-750AD)

In this era, worship (Mass) can now be celebrated withoutretribution since the Emperor Constantine recognizes Christianityas a public religion. Also, the first large public structure isbuilt in the form of a basilica to address the Mass, called St.Peter’s. The elongated, structural shape shifts the location ofthe altar close to the rear wall, thereby discouraging theassembly from gathering around the table of the Lord. Use ofLatin and inclusion of the Gloria, Sanctus and Agnus Dei emergeas standards of the Mass, along with use of specific ritualbooks. Hosts instead of bread-loafs and the rise of large Pyxes(called Tabernacles) for reserved Hosts become more common.Theological issues now affect the age for receiving Communion,how and when the host and wine are changed to Christ’sBody/Blood, the person’s worthiness to receive Communion(Pelagianism) and what is being received in the host/wine (i.e.Jesus’ Body/Blood).

1.4. Normalizing the Liturgy (750-1073AD)

In this era, the Church is being severely impacted as Islamexpands and reaches the heart of Europe almost to Paris beforebeing stop the progress of it and thrown back by Charlemagne andthe rise of the Holy Roman Empire. To unify his empire,Charlemagne decrees that one style of Mass will be celebratedthroughout the empire. Architecture exerts significant influenceas the new Romanesque style of churches results in altars beingfixed to the wall, choir chapels and rood screens separating theassembly from the altar and multiple chapels being erected tofacilitate “private” Masses. The rise of choirs and the rise ofpersonal “unworthiness” further suppress the people’s directparticipation in the Mass and their reception of Communion. And

its reception is now limited to the Host, no longer received inthe hand but more on the Tongue. The increased use of liturgicalbooks emphasizes the roles of deacon, priest and bishop anddeemphasizes the people gathered. The most important theologicalinfluence on the Mass is the 9th and the 11th century debatesfeaturing the theological scholars Paschasius, Ratramnus andBerengar who debated about the real presence of Christ in theEucharist. This led to the synods in 1059 and 1079 affirming the“real” presence of Christ in the Eucharistic elements. This issueis a precursor to the later debates regarding“Transubstantiation” on how and when the bread and wine becomesChrist.

1.5. Prelude to Reform (1073-1517AD)

During this period, the several Crusades, the developingMonarchial and Papal power, the founding of the Franciscan andDominican orders and the beginnings of the university system(Paris, Bologna and Oxford) have their particular impact on theRitual of Mass. The rise of Gothic church architectureprecipitates the practice of elevating the host and the companionringing of bells so that people can see the consecrated bread.People are now essentially spectators rather than participantswhich causes the emergence of Eucharistic Adoration and the useof highly Ornate Monstrances for exposition as an alternative.The Silent Mass is another result of the people’s diminishedliturgical role. These changes are reinforced by the renewal ofthe 9th/11th century debate on the theology of “Presence” in whichThomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus furiously debate the issue of whatand how the “Transubstantiation” of bread/wine takes place. It isan issue that won’t be solved until the 16th century Council ofTrent. All this further reduces the people’s direct role in theMass in a way that Mass is more understood as a Noun rather aVerb.

1.6. Reform and Counter-Reform (1517-1903AD)

The 16th century begins with the second major rupture ofChristianity caused by the Protestant reformation. Thetheological challenges of Luther and others caused both Politicaland Religious division, leading powerful kings and princes tomandate which version of Christianity would be the officialreligion and worship of their realm. Finally, the Pope convenedthe Council of Trent resulting in theological and ritualdecisions that reformed the Mass, such as the formal doctrine ofTransubstantiation. The publication in 1570 of the new RomanMissal became the liturgical touchstone for the next 500 years.Still, Trent’s reforms were not uniformly applied, as evidencedby the rise of Gallicanism, Josephinism and the Synod of Pistoiaaffecting celebration of Mass. Also, the rise of the highlyornate Baroque and Rococo architecture intensified focus on theSanctuary, the Altar and Tabernacle further deemphasizing theassembly’s participation, other than to watch the priest, who isnow preeminent. The assembly’s primary role now is to listen tothe homily preached from magnificent Pulpits which led to theincreased use of Pews in many churches. The dependence on highlytrained Choirs to sing the more complicated religious musiccomposed during these centuries further deemphasized the people’srole; the people now used devotional practices, such as therosary and prayer-books, to be spiritually occupied during theMass. Even though the Roman Rite becomes the Universal Norm forthe Mass, some attempts were made to localize the celebration,such as those sought by Matteo Ricci (Chinese) and John Carroll(American), in the manner of the existing Ambrosian, Mozarabicand other approved Rites for the Mass. This reflected theChurch’s tremendous growth from its world-wide missionaryefforts.

1.7. Renewal, Reaction and Unfolding Vision (1903----)

Most Catholics Bishops, priest, deacon and those who are to bedeacons are familiar with the major renewal in the Mass as

currently celebrated and very few lay people know about it onlythose who have studied history. Therefore, the average person isunaware that the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy issued in1963by the Second Vatican Council was the result of almost 100 yearsof effort involving the renewal of the Mass. It began in theearly 1800s with research on the Roman Rite by the BenedictineAbbot Gueranger and then his confrere, Lambert Beaudin, who wroteon the people’s participation in the Mass, so greatly diminishedover the course of centuries. This renewal of the people’s activeparticipation was officially encouraged in quick order. BenedictXV permitted the Slavic people (1920) to celebrate Mass in theirlanguage, followed by Pius XI’s permission for the Mass in German(1929). Pius X also was an important influence with his decreeson the frequency and early reception of Communion. Pius XIIencouraged further expansion of these renewal efforts by issuing“Mediator Dei”. Other great liturgical theologians in Europe andthe United States were writing extensively about how the Masscould retrieve its ancient form and enable Catholics to bringalive the liturgy in their everyday lives. Not without reason,music in Mass was also changing significantly to reflect theincreased role of the people and their desire to sign as a signof the participation. Concurrently, modern architecture wasbeginning to have a direct effect on the design of churches in away that greatly fostered the participation and renewal of theMass decreed by Vatican II. This major Liturgical renewal furtherenhanced the tremendous growth in Catholicity across the world,including the indigenous style in which the Mass is celebrated inmany countries.

Eminent Liturgical and other scholars continue to study the 2000years of celebrating the Mass for its impact on the future of theChurch and the world. So we finish as we started in understandingthe history of the Mass: “semper eadem, semper reformanda

(always the same, always renewing)” to emphasize the full, activeand conscious participation of the people who become what theyshare and eat (Christ).

2. Consistent Element Throughout the Years1. Sign of cross in the binginng and at the end2. Kyrie Eleison3. Gloria 4. Reading form one of the 4 canonical Gospels 5. Collection and Offertory6. washing of hands just before the Offertory. 7. Kiss Of Peace or Sign of Peace8. Kneeling/ Standing/ Bowing9. Choir 10. Following Rubrics

Sources for the lecture content:

“From Age to Age” by Edward Foley, OFM

“The Didache” by Thomas O”Loughlin

“History of the Liturgy: Its Major Stages” by Marcel Metzger

“Celebration of the Eucharist: The Origin of the Rite and theDevelopment of its

Interpretation” by Enrico Mazza

“The Mass of the Roman Rite: Its Origins and Development” byJoseph

Jungmann, SJ

Audience Questions

These are some of the questions that attendees asked about thelecture.

1. Q. What dictates the color of vestments worn for the Mass?Ans: The particular

vestment colors (white, red, green and violet) correspond to theliturgical calendar of the

Church. For many centuries, white was the only color used butother colors began to be

used until the 16th

century when the current colors became the norm. Typicallywhite

(Easter/Christmas seasons and other solemn feasts; red(Pentecost, the apostles and

martyrs); green (ordinary time) and violet (Lent/Advent).

2. Q. Why does the frequency of people receiving Communion notcoincide with their

frequency of confession? Ans: This is not a history of Massissue; rather requires a

particular discussion of the sacraments.

3. Q. What are some good books on the history of the Mass?Ans: Edward Foley’s

book “From Age to Age.” See below also.

4. Q. In the early church (33-100AD), when there were not“officially, formally

ordained” priests, who consecrated the bread and wine? Ans: Theshort answer is the

early communities selected their leader who was ultimatelyrecognized by an apostle or

successor to bless (consecrate) the bread and wine. Keep in mindthat people at that time

did not use or understand the word “consecration.”

5. Q. Was changing church architecture really the reason peoplestopped receiving

Communion? Ans: As people became further removed from the tableover-time by its

location, they inevitably became and felt further removed fromthe bread (body) and wine

(blood). Other important theological issues involving theEucharist over-time also

reinforced people’s perceived unworthiness to receive Communion.

6. Q. After Vatican II, why did churches start moving thetabernacle all over the place

and away from the focus of the congregation? Ans: In the Mass,the table of the Lord

(altar) is always the center of attention, distinguished as suchby the principle ministers

bowing to, kissing and incensing it. The tabernacle is secondaryfor use only when a

consecrated host was needed as Communion for the sick and dyingand for Eucharistic

exposition. In Catholic communities especially in missionplaces, one can find only the

Table of the Lord and no evidence of a tabernacle, as was thesituation for Christianity

until the small pyxes became tabernacles about the 12th

century.

1. Name and definitionThe Mass is the combination of prayers and ceremonies that makeup the service of the Eucharist in the Roman Rites. As in thecase of all liturgical terms the name is less old than the thing.From the time of the first preaching of the Christian Faith, aseverywhere, the Holy Eucharist was celebrated as Christ hadinstituted it at the Last Supper, according to His command, inmemory of Him. But it was not till long afterwards that the laterLatin name Missa, used at first in a vaguer sense, later on itbecame the technical and almost exclusive name for this service.

2. Origins and Development of the Mass

2.1. In the First Period

The origin of the Mass takes us to the first century when Jesusinstitutes this Sacrament. When He took the bred and thank theLord, giving it to his disciples said “take this and eat from it,this is my body which will be given for you. Then He took thechallis, again He giving thank to the Lord, said take this anddrink from it, this my blood which will be shad for you and formany in my new covenant.

Later in the second century we see that the Church Fathers gavedifferent titles or name to it in Greek and in Latin languages.E.g. we find the usual Greek names used there. The termEucharistia, was used commonly for both; the consecrated bread andwine and for the whole service.

Clement of Rome (d. about 101) he uses the verbal form still inits general sense of "giving thanks", but also in connection withthe Liturgy. He calls the service Leitourgia and prosphora.

Justin Martyr (d. c. 167), he uses the term eucharist, after himthe word is always used, and passes into Latin (eucharistia) assoon as there is a Latin Christian Literature. It remains thenormal name for the sacrament throughout Catholic theology, butis gradually superseded by Missa for the whole rite.

Further in the third century with the use of the Latin language,first translations of the Greek Terms. While, eucharistia is verycommon, still, we find also its translation gratiarum action. thereis a favorite expression of St. Cyprian that is generally with anattribute to him “sacrificium.” and other expressions that are ratherdescriptions than technical names. All these were destined to besucceed in the West by the classical name Missa.

The first certain use of it is by St. Ambrose (d. 397). He writesto his sister Marcellina describing the troubles of the Arians inthe years 385 and 386, There I was told suddenly that they hadsent soldiers to the Portiana basilica. . . . But I remained atmy place and began to say Mass (missam facere coepi). We mayconsider St. Ambrose as the earliest certain authority for it.

In the Second Period

In the first period we have seen the struggle regarding the termfor the Eucharist and it celebration. Then we came to the pointthat St. Ambrose introduced the term Mass (in Latin Missa). Nowfrom the fourth century the term becomes more and more common,but still developing it understanding. E.g. For a time it occursnearly always in the sense of dismissal.

St. Augustine (d. 430) says: "After the sermon the dismissal ofthe catechumens takes place" (post sermonem fit missa catechumenorum)

The Synod of Lérida in Spain (524) declares that people guilty ofincest may be admitted to church "usque ad missamcatechumenorum", that is, till the catechumens are dismissed

The same expression occurs in the Synod of Valencia at about thesame time

Etheria (fourth century) calls the whole service, or the Liturgyof the Faithful, missa constantly. Although from the beginningthe word Missa usually means the Eucharistic Service or some partof it, we find it used occasionally for other ecclesiasticaloffices too.

The origin and first meaning of the word, once much discussed, isnot really doubtful. We may dismiss at once such fancifulexplanations as that missa is the Hebrew missah ("oblation" — soReuchlin and Luther), or the Greek myesis ("initiation"), or theGerman Mess ("assembly", "market"). Nor is it the participlefeminine of mittere, with a noun understood ("oblatio missa adDeum", "congregatio missa", i.e., dimissa — so Diez, "Etymol.Wörterbuch der roman. Sprachen", 212, and others). It is asubstantive of a late form for missio. There are many parallelsin medieval Latin, collecta, ingressa, confessa, accessa, ascensa — all forforms in -io. It does not mean an offering (mittere, in the sense ofhanding over to God), but the dismissal of the people, as in theversicle: "Ite missa est" (Go, the dismissal is made). It mayseem strange that this unessential detail should have given itsname to the whole service. But there are many similar cases inliturgical language. Communion, confession, breviary are none of themnames that express the essential character of what they denote.

In the case of the word missa we can trace the development ofits meaning step by step. We have seen it used by St. Augustine,synods of the sixth century, and Hincmar of Reims for"dismissal". Missa Catechumenorum means the dismissal of thecatechumens. It appears that missa fit or missa est was the regularformula for sending people away at the end of a trial or legalprocess. Avitus of Vienne (d. 523) says: "In churches and palacesor law-courts the dismissal is proclaimed to be made [missapronuntiatur], when the people are dismissed from theirattendance" (Ep. i). So also St. Isidore of Seville: "At the timeof the sacrifice the dismissal is [missa tempore sacrificii est] whenthe catechumens are sent out, as the deacon cries: If any one ofthe catechumens remain, let him go out: and thence it is thedismissal [et inde missa]" ("Etymol.", VI, xix, in P.L., LXXXII,252). As there was a dismissal of the catechumens at the end ofthe first part of the service, so was there a dismissal of thefaithful (the baptized) after the Communion. There were, then, amissa catechumenorum and a missa fidelium, both, at first, in thesense of dismissals only. So Florus Diaconus (d. 860): "Missa isunderstood as nothing but dimissio, that is, absolutio, which thedeacon pronounces when the people are dismissed from the solemnservice. The deacon cried out and the catechumens were sent[mittebantur], that is, were dismissed outside [id est, dimittebanturforas]. So the missa caechumenorum was made before the action ofthe Sacrament (i.e., before the Canon Actionis), the missa fideliumis made "-- note the difference of tense; in Florus's time thedismissal of the catechumens had ceased to be practised --" afterthe consecration and communion" [post confectionem et participationem](P.L., CXIX 72).

How the word gradually changed its meaning from dismissal to thewhole service, up to and including the dismissal, is notdifficult to understand. In the texts quoted we see already thefoundation of such a change. To stay till the missa catechumenorumis easily modified into: to stay for, or during, the missacatechumenorum. So we find these two missae used for the twohalves of the Liturgy. Ivo of Chartres (d. 1116) has forgottenthe original meaning, and writes: "Those who heard the missacatechumenorum evaded the missa sacramentorum" (Ep. ccxix, in P.L.,

CLXII, 224). The two parts are then called by these two names; asthe discipline of the catechumenate is gradually forgotten, andthere remains only one connected service, it is called by thelong familiar name missa, without further qualification. We find,however, through the Middle Ages the plural miss, missarum solemnia,as well as missae sacramentum and such modified expressions also.Occasionally the word is transferred to the feast-day. The feastof St. Martin, for instance, is called Missa S. Martini. It is fromthis use that the German Mess, Messtag, and so on are derived. Theday and place of a local feast was the occasion of a market (forall this see Rottmanner, op. cit., in bibliography below). Kirmess(Flemish Kermis, Fr. kermesse) is Kirch-mess, the anniversary of thededication of a church, the occasion of a fair. The Latin missais modified in all Western languages (It. messa, Sp. misa, Fr.messe, Germ. Messe, etc.). The English form before the Conquestwas maesse, then Middle Engl. messe, masse --" It nedith not tospeke of the masse ne the seruise that thei hadde that day"("Merlin" in the Early Engl. Text Soc., II, 375) --"And whan ourparish masse was done" ("Sir Cauline", Child's Ballads, III,175). It also existed as a verb: "to mass" was to say mass;"massing-priest" was a common term of abuse at the Reformation.

It should be noted that the name Mass (missa) applies to theEucharistic service in the Latin rites only. Neither in Latin norin Greek has it ever been applied to any Eastern rite. For themthe corresponding word is Liturgy (liturgia). It is a mistake thatleads to confusion, and a scientific inexactitude, to speak ofany Eastern Liturgy as a Mass.

The origin of the MassThe Western Mass, like all Liturgies, begins, of course, with theLast Supper. What Christ then did, repeated as he commanded inmemory of Him, is the core of the Mass. As soon as the Faith wasbrought to the West the Holy Eucharist was celebrated here, as inthe East. At first the language used was Greek. Out of thatearliest Liturgy, the language being changed to Latin, developedthe two great parent rites of the West, the Roman and theGallican (see LITURGY).

The origin of the Roman Mass, is a most difficult question, Wehave here two fixed and certain data: the Liturgy in Greekdescribed by St. Justin Martyr (d. c. 165), which is that of theChurch of Rome in the second century, and, at the other end ofthe development, the Liturgy of the first Roman Sacramentaries inLatin, in about the sixth century.

The two are very different. Justin's account represents a rite ofwhat we should now call an Eastern type, corresponding withremarkable exactness to that of the Apostolic Constitutions (seeLITURGY).

The Leonine and Gelasian Sacramentaries show us what ispractically our present Roman Mass. How did the service changefrom the one to the other? It is one of the chief difficulties inthe history of liturgy. During the last few years, especially,all manner of solutions and combinations have been proposed. Wewill first note some points that are certain, that may serve aslandmarks in an investigation.

Justin Martyr, Clement of Rome, Hippolytus (d. 235), and Novatian(c. 250) all agree in the Liturgies they describe, though theevidence of the last two is scanty (Probst, "Liturgie der dreiersten christl. Jahrhdte"; Drews, "Untersuchungen über die sogen.clement. Liturgie").

Justin gives us the fullest Liturgical description of any Fatherof the first three centuries. He describes how the Holy Eucharistwas celebrated at Rome in the middle of the second century; hisaccount is the necessary point of departure, one end of a chainwhose intermediate links are hidden.

We have hardly any knowledge at all of what developments theRoman Rite went through during the third and fourth centuries.

This is the mysterious time where conjecture may, and does, runriot. By the fifth century we come back to comparatively firmground, after a radical change. At this time we have the fragmentin Pseudo-Ambrose, "De sacramentis" (about 400. Cf. P.L., XVI,443), and the letter of Pope Innocent I (401-17) to Decentius of

Eugubium (P.L., XX, 553). In these documents we see that theRoman Liturgy is said in Latin and has already become in essencethe rite we still use.

A few indications of the end of the fourth century agree withthis. A little later we come to the earliest Sacramentaries(Leonine, fifth or sixth century; Gelasian, sixth or seventhcentury) and from then the history of the Roman Mass is fairlyclear.

The fifth and sixth centuries therefore show us the other end ofthe chain. For the interval between the second and fifthcenturies, during which the great change took place, although weknow so little about Rome itself, we have valuable data fromAfrica. There is every reason to believe that in liturgicalmatters the Church of Africa followed Rome closely. We can supplymuch of what we wish to know about Rome from the African Fathersof the third century, Tertullian (d. c. 220), St. Cyprian (d.258), the Acts of St. Perpetua and St. Felicitas (203), St.Augustine (d. 430) (see Cabrol, "Dictionnaire d' archéologie", I,591-657).

The question of the change of language from Greek to Latin isless important than if might seem. It came about naturally whenGreek ceased to be the usual language of the Roman Christians.Pope Victor I (190-202), an African, seems to have been the firstto use Latin at Rome, Novatian writes Latin.

By the second half of the third century the usual liturgicallanguage at Rome seems to have been Latin (Kattenbusch,"Symbolik", II, 331), though fragments of Greek remained for manycenturies. Other writers think that Latin was not finally adoptedtill the end of the fourth century (Probst, "Die abendländ.Messe", 5; Rietschel, "Lehrbuch der Liturgik", I, 337).

No doubt, for a time both languages were used. The question isdiscussed at length in C. P. Caspari, "Quellen zur Gesch. desTaufsymbols u. der Glaubensregel" (Christiania, 1879), III, 267sq. The Creed was sometimes said in Greek, some psalms were sungin that language, the lessons on Holy Saturday were read in Greek

and Latin as late as the eighth century (Ordo Rom., I, P.L.,LXXVIII, 966-68, 955). There are still such fragments of Greek("Kyrie eleison", "Agios O Theos") in the Roman Mass. But achange of language does not involve a change of rite. Novatian'sLatin allusions to the Eucharistic prayer agree very well withthose of Clement of Rome in Greek, and with the Greek forms inApost. Const., VIII (Drews, op. cit., 107-22).

The Africans, Tertullian, St. Cyprian, etc., who write Latin,describe a rite very closely related to that of Justin and theApostolic Constitutions (Probst, op. cit., 183-206; 215-30). TheGallican Rite, as in Germanus of Paris (Duchesne, "Origines duCulte", 180-217), shows how Eastern — how "Greek" — a LatinLiturgy can be.

We must then conceive the change of language in the third centuryas a detail that did not much affect the development of the rite.No doubt the use of Latin was a factor in the Roman tendency toshorten the prayers, leave out whatever seemed redundant informulas, and abridge the whole service. Latin is naturallyterse, compared with the rhetorical abundance of Greek. Thisdifference is one of the most obvious distinctions between theRoman and the Eastern Rites.

If we may suppose that during the first three centuries there wasa common Liturgy throughout Christendom, variable, no doubt, indetails, but uniform in all its main points, which common Liturgyis represented by that of the eighth book of the ApostolicConstitutions, we have in that the origin of the Roman Mass as ofall other liturgies (see LITURGY). There are, indeed, specialreasons for supposing that this type of liturgy was used at Rome.The chief authorities for it (Clement, Justin, Hippolytus,Novatian) are all Roman. Moreover, even the present Roman Rite,in spite of later modifications, retains certain elements thatresemble those of the Apost. Const. Liturgy remarkably. Forinstance, at Rome there neither is nor has been a publicOffertory prayer. The "Oremus" said just before the Offertory isthe fragment of quite another thing, the old prayers of thefaithful, of which we still have a specimen in the series ofcollects on Good Friday. The Offertory is made in silence while

the choir sings part of a psalm. Meanwhile the celebrant saysprivate Offertory prayers which in the old form of the Mass arethe Secrets only. The older Secrets are true Offertory prayers.In the Byzantine Rite, on the other hand, the gifts are preparedbeforehand, brought up with the singing of the Cherubikon, andoffered at the altar by a public Synapte of deacon and people,and a prayer once sung aloud by the celebrant (now only theEkphonesis is sung aloud). The Roman custom of a silent offertorywith private prayer is that of the Liturgy of the ApostolicConstitutions. Here too the rubric says only: "The deacons bringthe gifts to the bishop at the altar" (VIII, xii, 3) and "TheBishop, praying by himself [kath heauton, "silently"] with thepriests . . ." (VIII, xii, 4). No doubt in this case, too, apsalm was sung meanwhile, which would account for the uniqueinstance of silent prayer. The Apostolic Constitutions order thatat this point the deacons should wave fans over the oblation (apractical precaution to keep away insects, VIII, xii, 3); this,too, was done at Rome down to the fourteenth century (Martène,"De antiquis eccl. ritibus", Antwerp, 1763, I, 145). The RomanMass, like the Apostolic Constitutions (VIII, xi, 12), has awashing of hands just before the Offertory. It once had a kiss ofpeace before the Preface. Pope Innocent I, in his letter toDecentius of Eugubium (416), remarks on this older custom ofplacing it ante confecta mysteria (before the Eucharistic prayer —P.L., XX, 553). That is its place in the Apost. Const. (VIII, xi,9). After the Lord's Prayer, at Rome, during the fraction, thecelebrant sings: "Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum." It seems thatthis was the place to which the kiss of peace was first moved (asin Innocent I's letter). This greeting, unique in the Roman Rite,occurs again only in the Apostolic Constitutions (he eirene tou theoumeta panton hymon). Here it comes twice: after the Intercession(VIII, xiii, 1) and at the kiss of peace (VIII, xi, 8). The twoRoman prayers after the Communion, the Postcommunion and theOratio super populum (ad populum in the Gelasian Sacramentary)correspond to the two prayers, first a thanksgiving, then aprayer over the people, in Apost. Const., VIII, xv, 1-5 and 7-9.

There is an interesting deduction that may be made from thepresent Roman Preface. A number of Prefaces introduce the

reference to the angels (who sing the Sanctus) by the form et ideo.In many cases it is not clear to what this ideo refers. Like theigitur at the beginning of the Canon, it does not seem justifiedby what precedes. May we conjecture that something has been leftout? The beginning of the Eucharistic prayer in the Apost.Const., VIII, xii, 6-27 (the part before the Sanctus, ourPreface, it is to be found in Brightman, "Liturgies, Eastern andWestern", I, Oxford, 1896, 14-18), is much longer, and enumeratesat length the benefits of creation and various events of the OldLaw. The angels are mentioned twice, at the beginning as thefirst creatures and then again at the end abruptly, withoutconnection with what has preceded in order to introduce theSanctus. The shortness of the Roman Prefaces seems to make itcertain that they have been curtailed. All the other rites beginthe Eucharistic prayer (after the formula: "Let us give thanks")with a long thanksgiving for the various benefits of God, whichare enumerated. We know, too, how much of the development of theRoman Mass is due to a tendency to abridge the older prayers. Ifthen we suppose that the Roman Preface is such an abridgement ofthat in the Apost. Const., with the details of the Creation andOld Testament history left out, we can account for the ideo. Thetwo references to the angels in the older prayer have met andcoalesced. The ideo refers to the omitted list of benefits, ofwhich the angels, too, have their share. The parallel between theorders of angels in both liturgies is exact:

ROMAN MISSAL: . . . . cum Angelis et Archangelis, cum Thronis et Dominationibus, cumque omni militia cælestis exercitus . . . . sine fine dicentes.

APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS: . . . . stratiai aggelon, archallelon, . . . . thronon, kyrioteton, . . . . . . . . stration

aionion, . . . . legonta akatapaustos.

Another parallel is in the old forms of the "Hanc igitur" prayer.Baumstark ("Liturgia romana", 102-07) has found two early Romanforms of this prayer in Sacramentaries at Vauclair and Rouen,already published by Martène ("Voyage littéraire", Paris, 1724,40) and Delisle (in Ebner, "Iteritalicum", 417), in which it ismuch longer and has plainly the nature of an Intercession, suchas we find in the Eastern rites at the end of the Anaphora. Theform is: "Hanc igitur oblationem servitutis nostræ sed et cunctæfamiliæ tuæ, quæsumus Domine placatus accipias, quam tibi devotoofferimus corde pro pace et caritate et unitate sanctæ ecclesiæ,pro fide catholica . . . pro sacerdotibus et omni gradu ecclesiæ,pro regibus . . ." (Therefore, O Lord, we beseech Thee, bepleased to accept this offering of our service and of all Thyhousehold, which we offer Thee with devout heart for the peace,charity, and unity of Holy Church, for the Catholic Faith . . .for the priests and every order of the Church, for kings . . .)and so on, enumerating a complete list of people for whom prayeris said. Baumstark prints these clauses parallel with those ofthe Intercession in various Eastern rites; most of them may befound in that of the Apost. Const. (VIII, xii, 40-50, and xiii,3-9). This, then, supplies another missing element in the Mass.Eventually the clauses enumerating the petitions were suppressed,no doubt because they were thought to be a useless reduplicationof the prayers "Te igitur", "Communicantes", and the two Mementos(Baumstark, op. cit., 107), and the introduction of thisIntercession (Hanc igitur . . . placatus accipias) was joined towhat seems to have once been part of a prayer for the dead(diesque nostros in tua pace disponas, etc.).

We still have a faint echo of the old Intercession in the clauseabout the newly-baptized interpolated into the "Hanc igitur" atEaster and Whitsuntide. The beginning of the prayer has aparallel in Apost. Const., VIII, xiii, 3 (the beginning of thedeacon's Litany of Intercession). Drews thinks that the formquoted by Baumstark, with its clauses all beginning pro, wasspoken by the deacon as a litany, like the clauses in Apost.

Const. beginning hyper (Untersuchungen über die sog. clem. Lit.,139). The prayer containing the words of Institution in the RomanMass (Qui pridie . . in mei memoriam facietis) has just theconstructions and epithets of the corresponding text in Apost.Const., VIII, xii, 36-37. All this and many more parallelsbetween the Mass and the Apost. Const. Liturgy may be studied inDrews (op. cit.). It is true that we can find parallel passageswith other liturgies too, notably with that of Jerusalem (St.James). There are several forms that correspond to those of theEgyptian Rite, such as the Roman "de tuis donis ac datis" in the"Unde et memores" (St. Mark: ek ton son doron; Brightman, "EasternLiturgies", p. 133, 1. 30); "offerimus præclaræ maiestati tuæ detuis donis ac datis", is found exactly in the Coptic form("before thine holy glory we have set thine own gift of thineown", ibid., p. 178, 1. 15). But this does not mean merely thatthere are parallel passages between any two rites. Thesimilarities of the Apost. Const. are far more obvious than thoseof any other. The Roman Mass, even apart from the testimony ofJustin Martyr, Clement, Hippolytus, Novatian, still bearsevidence of its development from a type of liturgy of which thatof the Apostolic Constitutions is the only perfect survivingspecimen (see LITURGY). There is reason to believe, moreover,that it has since been influenced both from Jerusalem-Antioch andAlexandria, though many of the forms common to it and these twomay be survivals of that original, universal fluid rite whichhave not been preserved in the Apost. Const. It must always beremembered that no one maintains that the Apost. Const. Liturgyis word for word the primitive universal Liturgy. The thesisdefended by Probst, Drews, Kattenbusch, Baumstark, and others isthat there was a comparatively vague and fluid rite of which theApost. Const. have preserved for us a specimen.

But between this original Roman Rite (which we can study only inthe Apost. Const.) and the Mass as it emerges in the firstsacramentaries (sixth to seventh century) there is a greatchange. Much of this change is accounted for by the Romantendency to shorten. The Apost, Const. has five lessons; Rome hasgenerally only two or three. At Rome the prayers of the faithfulafter the expulsion of the catechumens and the Intercession at

the end of the Canon have gone. Both no doubt were consideredsuperfluous since there is a series of petitions of the samenature in the Canon. But both have left traces. We still sayOremus before the Offertory, where the prayers of the faithfulonce stood, and still have these prayers on Good Friday in thecollects. And the "Hanc Igitur" is a fragment of theIntercession. The first great change that separates Rome from allthe Eastern rites is the influence of the ecclesiastical year.The Eastern liturgies remain always the same except for thelessons, Prokeimenon (Gradual-verse), and one or two other slightmodifications. On the other hand the Roman Mass is profoundlyaffected throughout by the season or feast on which it is said.Probst's theory was that this change was made by Pope Damasus(366-84; "Liturgie des vierten Jahrh.", pp. 448-72). This idea isnow abandoned (Funk in "Tübinger Quartalschrift", 1894, pp. 683sq.). Indeed, we have the authority of Pope Vigilius (540-55) forthe fact that in the sixth century the order of the Mass wasstill hardly affected by the calendar ("Ep. ad Eutherium" inP.L., LXIX, 18). The influence of the ecclesiastical year musthave been gradual. The lessons were of course always varied, anda growing tendency to refer to the feast or season in theprayers, Preface, and even in the Canon, brought about thepresent state of things, already in full force in the LeonineSacramentary. That Damasus was one of the popes who modified theold rite seems, however, certain. St. Gregory I (590-604) says heintroduced the use of the Hebrew Alleluia from Jerusalem ("Ep. adIoh. Syracus." in P.L., LXXVII, 956). It was under Damasus thatthe Vulgate became the official Roman version of the Bible usedin the Liturgy; a constant tradition ascribes to Damasus's friendSt. Jerome (d. 420) the arrangement of the Roman Lectionary. MgrDuchesne thinks that the Canon was arranged by this pope(Origines du Culte, 168-9). A curious error of a Roman theologianof Damasus's time, who identified Melchisedech with the HolyGhost, incidentally shows us one prayer of our Mass as existingthen, namely the "Supra quæ" with its allusion to "summussacerdos tuus Melchisedech" ("Quæst. V. et N. Test." in P.L.,XXXV, 2329).

The Mass from the fifth to the seventhcenturyBy about the fifth century we begin to see more clearly. Twodocuments of this time give us fairly large fragments of theRoman Mass. Innocent I (401-17), in his letter to Decentius ofEugubium (about 416; P.L., XX, 553), alludes to many features ofthe Mass. We notice that these important changes have alreadybeen made: the kiss of peace has been moved from the beginning ofthe Mass of the Faithful to after the Consecration, theCommemoration of the Living and Dead is made in the Canon, andthere are no longer prayers of the faithful before the Offertory(see CANON OF THE MASS). Rietschel (Lehrbuch der Liturgik, I,340-1) thinks that the Invocation of the Holy Ghost has alreadydisappeared from the Mass. Innocent does not mention it, but wehave evidence of it at a later date under Gelasius I (492-6: seeCANON OF THE MASS, s.v. Supplices te rogamus, and EPIKLESIS).Rietschel (loc. cit.) also thinks that there was a dogmaticreason for these changes, to emphasize the sacrificial idea. Wenotice especially that in Innocent's time the prayer ofIntercession follows the Consecration (see CANON OF THE MASS).The author of the treatise "De Sacramentis" (wrongly attributedto St. Ambrose, in P.L., XVI, 418 sq.) says that he will explainthe Roman Use, and proceeds to quote a great part of the Canon(the text is given in CANON OF THE MASS, II). From this documentwe can reconstruct the following scheme: The Mass of theCatechumens is still distinct from that of the faithful, at leastin theory. The people sing "Introibo ad altare Dei" as thecelebrant and his ministers approach the alter (the Introit).Then follow lessons from Scripture, chants (Graduals), and asermon (the Catechumens Mass). The people still make theOffertory of bread and wine. The Preface and Sanctus follow (lausDeo defertur), then the prayer of Intercession (oratione petitur propopulo, pro regibus, pro ceteris) and the Consecration by the words ofInstitution (ut conficitur ven. sacramentum . . . utitur sermonibus Christi). Fromthis point (Fac nobis hanc oblationem ascriptam, ratam,rationabilem . . .) the text of the Canon is quoted. Then comethe Anamnesis (Ergo memores . . .), joined to it the prayer of

oblation (offerimus tibi hanc immaculatam hostiam . . .), i.e.practically our "Supra quæ" prayer, and the Communion with theform: "Corpus Christi, R. Amen", during which Psalm 22 is sung.At the end the Lord's Prayer is said.

In the "De Sacramentis" then, the Intercession comes before theConsecration, whereas in Innocent's letter it came after. Thistransposition should be noted as one of the most importantfeatures in the development of the Mass. The "Liber Pontificalis"(ed. Duchesne, Paris, 1886-92) contains a number of statementsabout changes in and additions to the Mass made by various popes,as for instance that Leo I (440-61) added the words "sanctumsacrificium, immaculatam hostiam" to the prayer "Supra quæ", thatSergius I (687-701) introduced the Agnus Dei, and so on. Thesemust be received with caution; the whole book still needscritical examination. In the case of the Agnus Dei the statementis made doubtful by the fact that it is found in the GregorianSacramentary (whose date, however, is again doubtful). A constanttradition ascribes some great influence on the Mass to GelasiusI(492-6). Gennadius (De vir. illustr. xciv) says he composed asacramentary; the Liber Pontificalis speaks of his liturgicalwork, and there must be some basis for the way in which his nameis attached to the famous Gelasian Sacramentary. What exactlyGelasius did is less easy to determine.

We come now to the end of a period at the reign of St. Gregory I(590-604). Gregory knew the Mass practically as we still have it.There have been additions and changes since his time, but none tocompare with the complete recasting of the Canon that took placebefore him. At least as far as the Canon is concerned, Gregorymay be considered as having put the last touches to it. Hisbiographer, John the Deacon, says that he "collected theSacramentary of Gelasius in one book, leaving out much, changinglittle, adding something for the exposition of the Gospels" (VitaS. Greg., II, xvii). He moved the Our Father from the end of theMass to before the Communion, as he says in his letter to John ofSyracuse: "We say the Lord's Prayer immediately after the Canon[max post precem] . . . It seems to me very unsuitable that weshould say the Canon [prex] which an unknown scholar composed

[quam scholasticus composuerat] over the oblation and that we shouldnot say the prayer handed down by our Redeemer himself over Hisbody and blood" (P.L., LXXVII, 956). He is also credited with theaddition: "diesque nostros etc." to the "Hanc igitur" (ibid.; seeCANON OF THE MASS). Benedict XIV says that "no pope has added to,or changed the Canon since St. Gregory" (De SS. Missæ sacrificio,p. 162). There has been an important change since, the partialamalgamation of the old Roman Rite with Gallican features; butthis hardly affects the Canon. We may say safely that a modernLatin Catholic who could be carried back to Rome in the earlyseventh century would — while missing some features to which heis accustomed — find himself on the whole quite at home with theservice he saw there.

This brings us back to the most difficult question: Why and whenwas the Roman Liturgy changed from what we see in Justin Martyrto that of Gregory I? The change is radical, especially asregards the most important element of the Mass, the Canon. Themodifications in the earlier part, the smaller number of lessons,the omission of the prayers for and expulsion of the catechumens,of the prayers of the faithful before the Offertory and so on,may be accounted for easily as a result of the characteristicRoman tendency to shorten the service and leave out what hadbecome superfluous. The influence of the calendar has alreadybeen noticed. But there remains the great question of thearrangement of the Canon. That the order of the prayers that makeup the Canon is a cardinal difficulty is admitted by every one.The old attempts to justify their present order by symbolic ormystic reasons have now been given up. The Roman Canon as itstands is recognized as a problem of great difficulty. It differsfundamentally from the Anaphora of any Eastern rite and from theGallican Canon. Whereas in the Antiochene family of liturgies(including that of Gaul) the great Intercession follows theConsecration, which comes at once after the Sanctus, and in theAlexandrine class the Intercession is said during what we shouldcall the Preface before the Sanctus, in the Roman Rite theIntercession is scattered throughout the Canon, partly before andpartly after the Consecration. We may add to this the otherdifficulty, the omission at Rome of any kind of clear Invocation

of the Holy Ghost (Epiklesis). Paul Drews has tried to solve thisquestion. His theory is that the Roman Mass, starting from theprimitive vaguer rite (practically that of the ApostolicConstitutions), at first followed the development of Jerusalem-Antioch, and was for a time very similar to the Liturgy of St.James. Then it was recast to bring if nearer to Alexandria. Thischange was made probably by Gelasius I under the influence of hisguest, John Talaia of Alexandria. The theory is explained atlength in the article CANON OF THE MASS. Here we need only addthat if has received in the main the support of F.X. Funk (who atfirst opposed it; see "Histor. Jahrbuch der Görresgesellschaft",1903, pp. 62, 283; but see also his "Kirchengesch. Abhandlungen",III, Paderborn, 1907, pp. 85-134, in which he will not admit thathe has altogether changed his mind), A. Baumstark ("Liturgiaromana e Liturgia dell' Esarcato", Rome, 1904), and G. Rauschen("Eucharistie und Bussakrament", Freiburg, 1908, p. 86). Butother theories have been suggested. Baumstark does not followDrews in the details. He conceives (op. cit.) the original Canonas consisting of a Preface in which God is thanked for thebenefits of creation; the Sanctus interrupts the prayers, whichthen continue (Vere Sanctus) with a prayer (now disappeared)thanking God for Redemption and so coming to the Institution(Pridie autem quam pateretur . . .). Then follow the Anamnesis(Unde et memores), the "Supra quæ", the "Te igitur", joined to anEpiklesis after the words "hæc sancta sacrificia illibata". Thenthe Intercession (In primis quæ tibi offerimus . . .), "Mementovivorum", "Communicantes", "Memento defunctorum" (Nos quoquepeccatores . . . intra sanctorum tuorum consortium non æstimatormeriti sed veniæ quæsumus largitor admitte, per Christum Dominumnostrum).

This order then (according to Baumstark) was dislocated by theinsertion of new elements, the "Hanc Igitur", "Quam oblationem","Supra quæ" and "Supplices", the list of saints in the "Nobisquoque", all of which prayers were in some sort reduplications ofwhat was already contained in the Canon. They represent a mixedinfluence of Antioch and Alexandria, which last reached Romethrough Aquilea and Ravenna, where there was once a rite of theAlexandrine type. St. Leo I began to make these changes; Gregory

I finished the process and finally recast the Canon in the formif still has. It will be seen that Baumstark's theory agrees withthat of Drews in the main issue — that at Rome originally thewhole Intercession followed the Canon. Dom Cagin (Paléographiemusicale, V, 80 sq.) and Dom Cabrol (Origines liturgiques, 354sq.) propose an entirely different theory. So far it has beenadmitted on all sides that the Roman and Gallican rites belong todifferent classes; the Gallican Rite approaches that of Antiochvery closely, the origin of the Roman one being the greatproblem. Cagin's idea is that all that must be reversed, theGallican Rite has no connection at all with Antioch or anyEastern Liturgy; it is in its origin the same rite as the Roman.Rome changed this earlier form about the sixth or seventhcentury. Before that the order at Rome was: Secrets, Preface,Sanctus, "Te igitur"; then "Hanc igitur", "Quam oblationem", "Quipridie" (these three prayers correspond to the Gallican Post-Sanctus). Then followed a group like the Gallican Post Pridie,namely "Unde et memores", "Offerimus praeclaræ", "Supra guæ","Supplices", "Per eundem Christum etc.", "Per quem hæc omnia",and the Fraction. Then came the Lord's Prayer with its embolism,of which the "Nobis quoque" was a part. The two Mementos wereoriginally before the Preface. Dom Cagin has certainly pointedout a number of points in which Rome and Gaul (that is all theWestern rites) stand together as opposed to the East. Such pointsare the changes caused by the calendar, the introduction of theInstitution by the words "Qui pridie", whereas all EasternLiturgies have the form "In the night in which he was betrayed".Moreover the place of the kiss of peace (in Gaul before thePreface) cannot be quoted as a difference between Rome and Gaul,since, as we have seen it stood originally in that place at Rometoo. The Gallican diptychs come before the Preface; but no oneknows for certain where they were said originally at Rome. Caginputs them in the same place in the earlier Roman Mass. His theorymay be studied further in Dom Cabrol's "Origines liturgiques",where if is very clearly set out (pp. 353-64). Mgr Duchesne hasattacked it vigorously and not without effect in the "Revued'histoire et de litérature ecclésiastiques" (1900), pp. 31 sq.Mr. Edmund Bishop criticizes the German theories (Drews,Baumstark etc.), and implies in general terms that the whole

question of the grouping of liturgies will have to bereconsidered on a new basis, that of the form of the words ofInstitution (Appendix to Dom R. Connolly's "Liturgical Homiliesof Narsai" in "Cambridge Texts and Studies", VIII, I, 1909). Ifis to be regretted that he has not told us plainly what positionhe means to defend, and that he is here again content with merelynegative criticism. The other great question, that of thedisappearance of the Roman Epiklesis, cannot be examined here(see CANON OF THE MASS and EPIKLESIS). We will only add to whathas been said in those articles that the view is growing thatthere was an Invocation of the Second Person of the Holy Trinity,an Epiklesis of the Logos, before there was one of the HolyGhost. The Anaphora of Serapion (fourth century in Egypt)contains such an Epiklesis of the Logos only (in Funk,"Didascalia", II, Paderborn, 1905, pp. 174-6). Mr. Bishop (in theabove-named Appendix) thinks that the Invocation of the HolyGhost did not arise till later (Cyril of Jerusalem, about 350,being the first witness for it), that Rome never had it, that heronly Epiklesis was the "Quam oblationem" before the words ofInstitution. Against this we must set what seems to be theconvincing evidence of Gelasius I's letter (quoted in CANON OFTHE MASS, s.v. Supplices te rogamus).

We have then as the conclusion of this paragraph that at Rome theEucharistic prayer was fundamentally changed and recast at someuncertain period between the fourth and the sixth and seventhcenturies. During the same time the prayers of the faithfulbefore the Offertory disappeared, the kiss of peace wastransferred to after the Consecration, and the Epiklesis wasomitted or mutilated into our "Supplices" prayer. Of the varioustheories suggested to account for this it seems reasonable to saywith Rauschen: "Although the question is by no means decided,nevertheless there is so much in favour of Drews's theory thatfor the present it must be considered the right one. We must thenadmit that between the years 400 and 500 a great transformationwas made in the Roman Canon" (Euch. u. Bussakr., 86).

From the seventh century to modern times

After Gregory the Great (590-604) it is comparatively easy tofollow the history of the Mass in the Roman Rite. We have now asdocuments first the three well-known sacramentaries. The oldest,called Leonine, exists in a seventh-century manuscript. Itscomposition is ascribed variously to the fifth, sixth, or seventhcentury (see LITURGICAL BOOKS). It is a fragment, wanting theCanon, but, as far as it goes, represents the Mass we know(without the later Gallican additions). Many of its collects,secrets, post-communions, and prefaces are still in use. TheGelasian book was written in the sixth, seventh, or eighth century(ibid.); it is partly Gallicanized and was composed in theFrankish Kingdom. Here we have our Canon word for word. The thirdsacramentary, called Gregorian, is apparently the book sent byPope Adrian I to Charlemagne probably between 781 and 791(ibid.). It contains additional Masses since Gregory's time and aset of supplements gradually incorporated into the original book,giving Frankish (i.e. older Roman and Gallican) additions. DomSuitbert Bäumer ("Ueber das sogen. Sacram. Gelasianum" in the"Histor. Jahrbuch", 1893, pp. 241-301) and Mr. Edmund Bishop("The Earliest Roman Massbook" in "Dublin Review", 1894, pp. 245-78) explain the development of the Roman Rite from the ninth tothe eleventh century in this way: The (pure) Roman Sacramentarysent by Adrian to Charlemagne was ordered by the king to be usedalone throughout the Frankish Kingdom. But the people wereattached to their old use, which was partly Roman (Gelasian) andpartly Gallican. So when the Gregorian book was copied they(notably Alcuin d. 804) added to it these Frankish supplements.Gradually the supplements became incorporated into the originalbook. So composed it came back to Rome (through the influence ofthe Carlovingian emperors) and became the "use of the RomanChurch". The "Missale Romanum Lateranense" of the eleventhcentury (ed. Azevedo, Rome, 1752) shows this fused rite completeas the only one in use at Rome. The Roman Mass has thus gonethrough this last change since Gregory the Great, a partialfusion with Gallican elements. According to Bäumer and Bishop theGallican influence is noticeable chiefly in the variations forthe course of the year. Their view is that Gregory had given theMass more uniformity (since the time of the Leonine book), hadbrought it rather to the model of the unchanging Eastern

liturgies. Its present variety for different days and seasonscame back again with the mixed books later. Gallican influence isalso seen in many dramatic and symbolic ceremonies foreign to thestern pure Roman Rite (see Bishop, "The Genius of the RomanRite"). Such ceremonies are the blessing of candles, ashes,palms, much of the Holy Week ritual, etc.

The Roman Ordines, of which twelve were published by Mabillon inhis "Museum Italicum" (others since by De Rossi and Duchesne),are valuable sources that supplement the sacramentaries. They aredescriptions of ceremonial without the prayers (like the"Cærimoniale Episcoporum"), and extend from the eighth to thefourteenth or fifteenth centuries. The first (eighth century) andsecond (based on the first, with Frankish additions) are the mostimportant (see LITURGICAL BOOKS). From these and thesacramentaries we can reconstruct the Mass at Rome in the eighthor ninth century. There were as yet no preparatory prayers saidbefore the altar. The pope, attended by a great retinue ofdeacons, subdeacons, acolytes, and singers, entered while theIntroit psalm was sung. After a prostration the Kyrie eleison wassung, as now with nine invocations (see KYRIE ELEISON); any otherlitany had disappeared. The Gloria followed on feasts (see GLORIAIN EXCELSIS). The pope sang the prayer of the day (see COLLECT),two or three lessons followed (see LESSONS IN THE LITURGY),Interspersed with psalms (see GRADUAL). The prayers of thefaithful had gone, leaving only the one word Oremus as afragment. The people brought up the bread and wine while theOffertory psalm was sung; the gifts were arranged on the altar bythe deacons. The Secret was said (at that time the only Offertoryprayer) after the pope had washed his hands. The Preface,Sanctus, and all the Canon followed as now. A reference to thefruits of the earth led to the words "per quem hæc omnia" etc.Then came the Lord's Prayer, the Fraction with a complicatedceremony, the kiss of peace, the Agnus Dei (since Pope Sergius,687-701), the Communion under both kinds, during which theCommunion psalm was sung (see COMMUNION-ANTIPHON), the Post-Communion prayer, the dismissal (see ITE MISSA EST), and theprocession back to the sacristy (for a more detailed account see

C. Atchley, "Ordo Romanus Primus", London, 1905; Duchesne,"Origines du Culte chrétien", vi).

It has been explained how this (mixed) Roman Rite gradually droveout the Gallican Use (see LITURGY). By about the tenth oreleventh century the Roman Mass was practically the only one inuse in the West. Then a few additions (none of them veryimportant) were made to the Mass at different times. The NiceneCreed is an importation from Constantinople. It is said that in1014 Emperor Henry II (1002-24) persuaded Pope Benedict VIII(1012-24) to add it after the Gospel (Berno of Reichenau, "Dequibusdam rebus ad Missæ offic. pertin.", ii), It had alreadybeen adopted in Spain, Gaul, and Germany. All the present ritualand the prayers said by the celebrant at the Offertory wereintroduced from France about the thirteenth century ("Ordo Rom.XIV", liii, is the first witness; P.L., LXXVIII, 1163-4); beforethat the secrets were the only Offertory prayers ("Micrologus",xi, in P.L., CLI, 984). There was considerable variety as tothese prayers throughout the Middle Ages until the revised Missalof Pius V (1570). The incensing of persons and things is againdue to Gallican influence; It was not adopted at Rome till theeleventh or twelfth century (Micrologus, ix). Before that timeincense was burned only during processions (the entrance andGospel procession; see C. Atchley, "Ordo Rom. Primus", 17-18).The three prayers said by the celebrant before his communion areprivate devotions introduced gradually into the official text.Durandus (thirteenth century, "Rationale," IV, liii) mentions thefirst (for peace); the Sarum Rite had instead another prayeraddressed to God the Father ("Deus Pater fons et origo totiusbonitatis," ed. Burntisland, 625). Micrologus mentions only thesecond (D. I. Chr. qui ex voluntate Patris), but says that manyother private prayers were said at this place (xviii). Here toothere was great diversity through the Middle Ages till Pius V'sMissal. The latest additions to the Mass are its presentbeginning and end. The psalm "Iudica me", the Confession, and theother prayers said at the foot of the altar, are all part of thecelebrant's preparation, once said (with many other psalms andprayers) in the sacristy, as the "Præparatio ad Missam" in theMissal now is. There was great diversity as to this preparation

till Pius V established our modern rule of saying so much onlybefore the altar. In the same way all that follows the "Ite missaest" is an afterthought, part of the thanksgiving, not formallyadmitted till Pius V.

We have thus accounted for all the elements of the Mass. The nextstage of its development is the growth of numerous localvarieties of the Roman Mass in the Middle Ages. These medievalrites (Paris, Rouen, Trier, Sarum, and so on all over WesternEurope) are simply exuberant local modifications of the old Romanrite. The same applies to the particular uses of variousreligious orders (Carthusians, Dominicans, Carmelites etc.). Noneof these deserves to be called even a derived rite; their changesare only ornate additions and amplifications; though certainspecial points, such as the Dominican preparation of the offeringbefore the Mass begins, represent more Gallican influence. TheMilanese and Mozarabic liturgies stand on quite a differentfooting; they are the descendants of a really different rite —the original Gallican — though they too have been considerablyRomanized (see LITURGY).

Meanwhile the Mass was developing in other ways also. During thefirst centuries it had been a common custom for a number ofpriests to concelebrate; standing around their bishop, they joinedin his prayers and consecrated the oblation with him. This isstill common in the Eastern rites. In the West it had become rareby the thirteenth century. St. Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274) discussesthe question, "Whether several priests can consecrate one and thesame host" (Summa Theol., III, Q. lxxxii, a. 2). He answers ofcourse that they can, but quotes as an example only the case ofordination. In this case only has the practice been preserved. Atthe ordination of priests and bishops all the ordainedconcelebrate with the ordainer. In other cases concelebration wasin the early Middle Ages replaced by separate privatecelebrations. No doubt the custom of offering each Mass for aspecial intention helped to bring about this change. The separatecelebrations then involved the building of many altars in onechurch and the reduction of the ritual to the simplest possibleform. The deacon and subdeacon were in this case dispensed with;

the celebrant took their part as well as his own. One server tookthe part of the choir and of all the other ministers, everythingwas said instead of being sung, the incense and kiss of peacewere omitted. So we have the well-known rite of low Mass (missaprivata). This then reacted on high Mass (missa solemnis), so that athigh Mass too the celebrant himself recites everything, eventhough it be also sung by the deacon, subdeacon, or choir.

The custom of the intention of the Mass further led to Mass beingsaid every day by each priest. But this has by no means beenuniformly carried out. On the one hand, we hear of an abuse ofthe same priest saying Mass several times in the day, whichmedieval councils constantly forbid. Again, many most piouspriests did not celebrate daily. Bossuet (d. 1704), for instance,said Mass only on Sundays, Feasts, every day in Lent, and atother times when a special ferial Mass is provided in the Missal.There is still no obligation for a priest to celebrate daily,though the custom is now very common. The Council of Trentdesired that priests should celebrate at least on Sundays andsolemn feasts (Sess. XXIII, cap. xiv). Celebration with noassistants at all (missa solitaria) has continually been forbidden,as by the Synod of Mainz in 813. Another abuse was the missabifaciata or trifaciata, in which the celebrant said the first part,from the Introit to the Preface, several times over and thenjoined to all one Canon, in order to satisfy several intentions.This too was forbidden by medieval councils (Durandus,"Rationale", IV, i, 22). The missa sicca (dry Mass) was a commonform of devotion used for funerals or marriages in the afternoon,when a real Mass could not be said. It consisted of all the Massexcept the Offertory, Consecration and Communion (Durandus,ibid., 23). The missa nautica and missa venatoria, said at sea inrough weather and for hunters in a hurry, were kinds of dryMasses. In some monasteries each priest was obliged to say a dryMass after the real (conventual) Mass. Cardinal Bona (Rerumliturg. libr. duo, I, xv) argues against the practice of sayingdry Masses. Since the reform of Pius V it has graduallydisappeared. The Mass of the Presanctified (missa præsanctificatorum,leitourgia ton proegiasmenon) is a very old custom described by theQuinisext Council (Second Trullan Synod, 692). It is a Service

(not really a Mass at all) of Communion from an oblationconsecrated at a previous Mass and reserved. It is used in theByzantine Church on the week-days of Lent (except Saturdays); inthe Roman Rite only on Good Friday.

Finally came uniformity in the old Roman Rite and the abolitionof nearly all the medieval variants. The Council of Trentconsidered the question and formed a commission to prepare auniform Missal. Eventually the Missal was published by Pius V bythe Bull "Quo primum" (still printed in it) of 14 July 1570. Thatis really the last stage of the history of the Roman Mass. It isPius V's Missal that is used throughout the Latin Church, exceptin a few cases where he allowed a modified use that had aprescription of at least two centuries. This exception saved thevariants used by some religious orders and a few local rites aswell as the Milanese and Mozarabic liturgies. Clement VIII(1604), Urban VIII (1634), and Leo XIII (1884) revised the bookslightly in the rubrics and the texts of Scripture (seeLITURGICAL BOOKS). Pius X has revised the chant (1908.) But theserevisions leave it still the Missal of Pius V. There has beensince the early Middle Ages unceasing change in the sense ofadditions of masses for new feasts, the Missal now has a numberof supplements that still grow (LITURGICAL BOOKS), butliturgically these additions represent no real change. The newMasses are all built up exactly on the lines of the older ones.

We turn now to the present Roman Mass, without comparison themost important and widespread, as it is in many ways the mostarchaic service of the Holy Eucharist in Christendom.

The present Roman MassIt is not the object of this paragraph to give instruction as tohow the Roman Mass is celebrated. The very complicated rules ofall kinds, the minute rubrics that must be obeyed by thecelebrant and his ministers, all the details of coincidence andcommemoration — these things, studied at length by studentsbefore they are ordained, must be sought in a book of ceremonial(Le Vavasseur, quoted in the bibliography, is perhaps now the

best). Moreover, articles on all the chief parts of the Mass,describing how they are carried out, and others on vestments,music, and the other ornaments of the service, will be found inTHE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA. It will be sufficient here to give ageneral outline of the arrangement. The ritual of the Mass isaffected by (1) the person who celebrates, (2) the day or thespecial occasion on which it is said, (3) the kind of Mass (highor low) celebrated. But in all cases the general scheme is thesame. The normal ideal may be taken as high Mass sung by a prieston an ordinary Sunday or feast that has no exceptional feature.

Normally, Mass must be celebrated in a consecrated or blessedChurch (private oratories or even rooms are allowed for specialreasons: see Le Vavasseur, I, 200-4) and at a consecrated altar(or at least on a consecrated altar-stone), and may be celebratedon any day in the year except Good Friday (restrictions are madeagainst private celebrations on Holy Saturday and in the case ofprivate oratories for certain great feasts) at any time betweendawn and midday. A priest may say only one Mass each day, exceptthat on Christmas Day he may say three, and the first may (orrather, should) then be said immediately after midnight. In somecountries (Spain and Portugal) a priest may also celebrate threetimes on All Souls' Day (2 November). Bishops may give leave to apriest to celebrate twice on Sundays and feasts of obligation, ifotherwise the people could not fulfil their duty of hearing Mass.In cathedral and collegiate churches, as well as in those ofreligious orders who are bound to say the Canonical Hours everyday publicly, there is a daily Mass corresponding to the Officeand forming with it the complete cycle of the public worship ofGod. This official public Mass is called the conventual Mass; ifpossible it should be a high Mass, but, even if it be not, italways has some of the features of high Mass. The time for thisconventual Mass on feasts and Sundays is after Terce has beensaid in choir. On Simples and feriæ the time is after Sext; onferiæ of Advent, Lent, on Vigils and Ember days after None.Votive Masses and the Requiem on All Souls' Day are said alsoafter None; but ordinary requiems are said after Prime. Thecelebrant of Mass must be in the state of grace, fasting frommidnight, free of irregularity and censure, and must observe all

the rubrics and laws concerning the matter (azyme bread and purewine), vestments, vessels, and ceremony.

The scheme of high Mass is this: the procession comes to thealtar, consisting of thurifer, acolytes, master of ceremonies,subdeacon, deacon, and celebrant, all vested as the rubricsdirect (see VESTMENTS). First, the preparatory prayers are saidat the foot of the altar; the altar is incensed, the celebrantreads at the south (Epistle) side the Introit and Kyrie.Meanwhile the choir sing the Introit and Kyrie. On days on whichthe "Te Deum" is said in the office, the celebrant intones the"Gloria in excelsis", which is continued by the choir. Meanwhilehe, the deacon, and subdeacon recite it, after which they may sitdown till the choir has finished. After the greeting "Dominusvobiscum", and its answer "Et cum spiritu tuo", the celebrantchants the collect of the day, and after it as many more collectsas are required either to commemorate other feasts or occasions,or are to be said by order of the bishop, or (on lesser days) arechosen by himself at his discretion from the collection in theMissal, according to the rubrics. The subdeacon chants theEpistle and the choir sings the Gradual. Both are read by thecelebrant at the altar, according to the present law that he isalso to recite whatever is sung by any one else. He blesses theincense, says the "Munda Cor meum" prayer, and reads the Gospelat the north (Gospel) side. Meanwhile the deacon prepares to singthe Gospel. He goes in procession with the subdeacon, thurifer,and acolytes to a place on the north of the choir, and therechants it, the subdeacon holding the book, unless an ambo beused. If there is a sermon, if should be preached immediatelyafter the Gospel. This is the traditional place for the homily,after the lessons (Justin Martyr, "I Apolog.", lxvii, 4). OnSundays and certain feasts the Creed is sung next, just as wasthe Gloria. At this point, before or after the Creed (which is alater introduction, as we have seen), ends in theory the Mass ofthe Catechumens. The celebrant at the middle of the altar chants"Dominus vobiscum" and "Oremus" — the last remnant of the oldprayers of the faithful. Then follows the Offertory. The bread isoffered to God with the prayer "Suscipe sancte Pater"; the deaconpours wine into the chalice and the subdeacon water. The chalice

is offered by the celebrant in the same way as the bread(Offerimus tibi Domine), after which the gifts, the altar, thecelebrant, ministers, and people are all incensed. Meanwhile thechoir sings the Offertory. The celebrant washes his hands sayingthe "Lavabo". After another offertory prayer (Suscipe sanctaTrinitas), and an address to the people (Orate fratres) with itsanswer, which is not sung (it is a late addition), the celebrantsays the secrets, corresponding to the collects. The last secretends with an Ekphonesis (Per omnia sæcula sæculorum). This is onlya warning of what is coming. When prayers began to be saidsilently, it still remained necessary to mark their ending, thatpeople might know what is going on. So the last clauses were saidor sung aloud. This so-called Ekphonesis is much developed in theEastern rites. In the Roman Mass there are three cases of it —always the words: "Per omnia sæcula sæculorum", to which thechoir answers "Amen". After the Ekphonesis of the Secret comesthe dialogue, "Sursum Cords", etc., used with slight variationsin all rites, and so the beginning of the Eucharistic prayerwhich we call the Preface, no longer counted as part of theCanon. The choir sings and the celebrant says the Sanctus. Thenfollows the Canon, beginning "Te Igitur" and ending with anekphonesis before the Lord's Prayer. All its parts are describedin the article CANON OF THE MASS. The Lord's Prayer follows,introduced by a little clause (Præceptis salutaribus moniti) andfollowed by an embolism (see LIBERA NOS), said silently andending with the third ekphonesis. The Fraction follows with theversicle "Pax domini sit semper vobiscum", meant to introduce thekiss of peace. The choir sings the Agnus Dei, which is said bythe celebrant together with the first Communion prayer, before hegives the kiss to the deacon. He then says the two otherCommunion prayers, and receives Communion under both kinds. TheCommunion of the people (now rare at high Mass) follows.Meanwhile the choir sings the Communion (see COMMUNION ANTIPHON).The chalice is purified and the post-Communions are sung,corresponding to the collects and secrets. Like the collects,they are introduced by the greeting "Dominus vobiscum" and itsanswer, and said at the south side. After another greeting by thecelebrant the deacon sings the dismissal (see ITE MISSA EST).There still follow, however, three later additions, a blessing by

the celebrant, a short prayer that God may be pleased with thesacrifice (Placeat tibi) and the Last Gospel, normally thebeginning of St. John (see GOSPEL IN THE LITURGY). The processiongoes back to the sacristy.

This high Mass is the norm; it is only in the complete rite withdeacon and subdeacon that the ceremonies can be understood. Thus,the rubrics of the Ordinary of the Mass always suppose that theMass is high. Low Mass, said by a priest alone with one server,is a shortened and simplified form of the same thing. Its ritualcan be explained only by a reference to high Mass. For instance,the celebrant goes over to the north side of the altar to readthe Gospel, because that is the side to which the deacon goes inprocession at high Mass; he turns round always by the right,because at high Mass he should not turn his back to the deaconand so on. A sung Mass (missa Cantata) is a modern compromise. Itis really a low Mass, since the essence of high Mass is not themusic but the deacon and subdeacon. Only in churches which haveno ordained person except one priest, and in which high Mass isthus impossible, is it allowed to celebrate the Mass (on Sundaysand feasts) with most of the adornment borrowed from high Mass,with singing and (generally) with incense. The SacredCongregation of Rites has on several occasions (9 June, 1884; 7December, 1888) forbidden the use of incense at a Missa Cantata;nevertheless, exceptions have been made for several dioceses, andthe custom of using it is generally tolerated (Le Vavasseur, op.cit., I, 514-5). In this case, too, the celebrant takes the partof deacon and subdeacon; there is no kiss of peace.

The ritual of the Mass is further affected by the dignity of thecelebrant, whether bishop or only priest. There is something tobe said for taking the pontifical Mass as the standard, andexplaining that of the simple priest as a modified form, just aslow Mass is a modified form of high Mass. On the other handhistorically the case is not parallel throughout; some of themore elaborate pontifical ceremony is an after-thought, anadornment added later. Here it need only be said that the maindifference of the pontifical Mass (apart from some specialvestments) is that the bishop remains at his throne (except for

the preparatory prayers at the altar steps and the incensing ofthe altar) till the Offertory; so in this case the change fromthe Mass of the Catechumens to that of the Faithful is stillclearly marked. He also does not put on the maniple till afterthe preparatory prayers, again an archaic touch that marks themas being outside the original service. At low Mass the bishop'srank is marked only by a few unimportant details and by the laterassumption of the maniple. Certain prelates, not bishops, usesome pontifical ceremonies at Mass. The pope again has certainspecial ceremonies in his Mass, of which some represent remnantsof older customs, Of these we note especially that he makes hisCommunion seated on the throne and drinks the consecrated winethrough a little tube called fistula.

Durandus (Rationale, IV, i) and all the symbolic authorsdistinguish various parts of the Mass according to mysticprinciples. Thus it has four parts corresponding to the fourkinds of prayer named in 1 Timothy 2:1. It is an Obsecratio fromthe Introit to the Offertory, an Oratio from the Offertory to thePater Noster, a Postulatio to the Communion, a Gratiarum actio fromthen to the end (Durandus, ibid.; see SACRIFICE OF THE MASS). TheCanon especially has been divided according to all manner ofsystems, some very ingenious. But the distinctions that arereally important to the student of liturgy are, first thehistoric division between the Mass of the Catechumens and Mass ofthe Faithful, already explained, and then the great practicaldistinction between the changeable and unchangeable parts. TheMass consists of an unchanged framework into which at certainfixed points the variable prayers, lessons, and chants arefitted. The two elements are the Common and the Proper of the day(which, however, may again be taken from a common Mass providedfor a number of similar occasions, as are the Commons of variousclasses of saints). The Common is the Ordinary of the Mass(Ordinarium Missae), now printed and inserted in the Missal betweenHoly Saturday and Easter Day. Every Mass is fitted into thatscheme; to follow Mass one must first find that. In it occurrubrics directing that something is to be said or sung, which isnot printed at this place. The first rubric of this kind occursafter the incensing at the beginning: "Then the Celebrant signing

himself with the sign of the Cross begins the Introit." But noIntroit follows. He must know what Mass he is to say and find theIntroit, and all the other proper parts, under their headingamong the large collection of masses that fill the book. Theseproper or variable parts are first the four chants of the choir,the Introit, Gradual (or tract, Alleluia, and perhaps after it aSequence), Offertory, and Communion; then the lessons (Epistle,Gospel, sometimes Old Testament lessons too), then the prayerssaid by the celebrant (Collect, Secret, post-communion; oftenseveral of each to commemorate other feasts or days). By fittingthese into their places in the Ordinary the whole Mass is puttogether. There are, however, two other elements that occupy anintermediate place between the Ordinary and the Proper. These arethe Preface and a part of the Canon. We have now only elevenprefaces, ten special ones and a common preface. They do not thenchange sufficiently to be printed over and over again among theproper Masses, so all are inserted in the Ordinary; from themnaturally the right one must be chosen according to the rubrics.In the same way, five great feasts have a special clause in theCommunicantes prayer in the Canon, two (Easter and Whitsunday)have a special "Hanc Igitur" prayer, one day (Maundy Thursday)affects the "Qui pridie" form. These exceptions are printed afterthe corresponding prefaces; but Maundy Thursday, as it occursonly once, is to be found in the Proper of the day (see CANON OFTHE MASS).

It is these parts of the Mass that vary, and, because of them, wespeak of the Mass of such a day or of such a feast. To be able tofind the Mass for any given day requires knowledge of acomplicated set of rules. These rules are given in the rubrics atthe beginning of the Missal. In outline the system is this. Firsta Mass is provided for every day in the year, according to theseasons of the Church. Ordinary week days (feriæ) have the Massof the preceding Sunday with certain regular changes; but feriæof Lent, rogation and ember days, and vigils have special Masses.All this makes up the first part of the Missal called Proprium detempore. The year is then overladen, as it were, by a greatquantity of feasts of saints or of special events determined bythe day of the month (these make up the Proprium Sanctorum). Nearly

every day in the year is now a feast of some kind; often thereare several on one day. There is then constantly coincidence(concurrentia) of several possible Masses on one day. There arecases in which two or more conventual Masses are said, one foreach of the coinciding offices. Thus, on feriæ that have aspecial office, if a feast occurs as well, the Mass of the feastis said after Terce, that of the feria after None. If a feastfalls on the Eve of Ascension Day there are three ConventualMasses — of the feast after Terce, of the Vigil after Sext, ofRogation day after None. But, in churches that have no officialconventual Mass and in the case of the priest who says Mass forhis own devotion, one only of the coinciding Masses is said, theothers being (usually) commemorated by saying their collects,secrets, and post-Communions after those of the Mass chosen. Toknow which Mass to choose one must know their various degrees ofdignity. All days or feasts are arranged in this scale: feria,simple, semidouble double, greater double, double of the secondclass, double of the first class. The greater feast then is theone kept: by transferring feasts to the next free day, it isarranged that two feasts of the same rank do not coincide.Certain important days are privileged, so that a higher feastcannot displace them. Thus nothing can displace the first Sundaysof Advent and Lent, Passion and Palm Sundays. These are the so-called first-class Sundays. In the same way nothing can displaceAsh Wednesday or any day of Holy Week. Other days (for instancethe so-called second-class Sundays, that is the others in Adventand Lent, and Septuagesima, Sexagesima, and Quinquagesima) canonly be replaced by doubles of the first class. Ordinary Sundayscount as semidoubles, but have precedence over other semidoubles.The days of an octave are semidoubles; the octave day is adouble. The octaves of Epiphany, Easter, and Pentecost (theoriginal three greatest feasts of all) are closed against anyother feast. The displaced feast is commemorated, except in thecase of a great inferiority: the rules for this are given amongthe "Rubricæ generales" of the Missal (VII: deCommemorationibus). On semidoubles and days below that in rankother collects are always added to that of the day to make up anuneven number. Certain ones are prescribed regularly in theMissal, the celebrant may add others at his discretion. The

bishop of the diocese may also order collects for special reasons(the so-called Orationes imperat ). As a general rule the Mass mustcorrespond to the Office of the day, including itscommemorations. But the Missal contains a collection of VotiveMasses, that may be said on days not above a semidouble in rank.The bishop or pope may order a Votive Mass for a public cause tobe said on any day but the very highest. All these rules areexplained in detail by Le Vavasseur (op. cit., I, 216-31) as wellas in the rubrics of the Missal (Rubr. gen., IV). There are twoother Masses which, inasmuch as they do not correspond to theoffice, may be considered a kind of Votive Mass: the Nuptial Mass(missa pro sponso et sponsa), said at weddings, and the Requiem Mass,said for the faithful departed, which have a number of specialcharacteristics (see NUPTIAL MASS and REQUIEM MASS). The calendar(Ordo) published yearly in each diocese or province gives theoffice and Mass for every day. (Concerning Mass stipends, seeSACRIFICE OF THE MASS.)

That the Mass, around which such complicated rules have grown, isthe central feature of the Catholic religion hardly needs to besaid, During the Reformation and always the Mass has been thetest. The word of the Reformers: "It is the Mass that matters",was true. The Cornish insurgents in 1549 rose against the newreligion, and expressed their whole cause in their demand to havethe Prayer-book Communion Service taken away and the old Massrestored. The long persecution of Catholics in England took thepractical form of laws chiefly against saying Mass; for centuriesthe occupant of the English throne was obliged to manifest hisProtestantism, not by a general denial of the whole system ofCatholic dogma but by a formal repudiation of the doctrine ofTransubstantiation and of the Mass. As union with Rome is thebond between Catholics, so is our common share in this, the mostvenerable rite in Christendom, the witness and safeguard of thatbond. It is by his share in the Mass in Communion that theCatholic proclaims his union with the great Church. Asexcommunication means the loss of that right in those who areexpelled so the Mass and Communion are the visible bond betweenpeople, priest, and bishop, who are all one body who share theone Bread.

SourcesI. HISTORY OF THE MASS: DUCHESNE, Origines du Culte chrétien (2nd ed.,Paris, 1898); GIHR, Das heilige Messopfer (6th ed., Freiburg, 1897);RIETSCHEL, Lehrbuch der Liturgik, I (Berlin, 1900); PROBST, Liturgie derdrei ersten christlichen Jahrhunderte (Tübingen, 1870); IDEM, Litergie desvierten Jahrhunderts u. deren Reform (Münster, 1893); IDEM, Die ältestenrömischen Sacramentarien u. Ordines (Münster, 1892); CABROL, Les Originesliturgiques (Paris, 1906); IDEM, Le Livre de la prière antique (Paris,1900); BISHOP, The Genius of the Roman Rite in STALEY, Essays on Ceremonial(London, 1904), 283-307; SEMERIA, La Messa (Rome, 1907); RAUSCHEN,Eucharistie u. Bussakrament (Freiburg, 1908); DREWS, Zur Entstehungsgesch.des Kanons (Tübingen, 1902); IDEM, Untersuchungen über die sogen.clementinische Liturgie (Tübingen, 1906); BAUMSTARK, Liturgia Romana eliturgia dell' Esarcato (Rome, 1904); ALSTON AND TOURTON, OriginesEucharistic (London, 1908); WARREN, Liturgy of the Ante-Nicene Church(London, 1907); ROTTMANNER, Ueber neuere und ältere Deutungen des WortesMissa in Tübinger Quartalschr. (1889), pp. 532 sqq.; DURANDUS (Bishopof Mende, d. 1296), Rationale divinorum officiorum Libri VIII, is theclassical example of the medieval commentary; see others in CANONOF THE MASS. BENEDICT XIV (1740-58), De SS. Sacrificio Miss , bestedition by SCHNEIDER (Mainz, 1879), is also a standard work ofits kind. II. TEXTS: CABROL AND LECLERCQ, Monumenta ecclesiae liturgica, I, 1(Paris, 1900-2); RAUSCHEN, Florilegium Patristicum: VII, Monumentaeucharistica et liturgica vetustissima (Bonn, 1909); FELTOE, SacramentariumLeonianum (Cambridge, 1896); WILS0N, The Gelasian Sacramentary(Oxford, 1894); Gregorian Sacramentary and the Roman Ordines in P.L.,LXXVIII; ATCHLEY, Ordo Romanus Primus (London, 1905); DANIEL, CodexLiturgicus Ecclesiae universae I (Leipzig, 1847); MASKELL, The Ancient Liturgyof the Church of England (London, 1846); DICKENSON, Missale Sarum(Burntisland, 1861-83). III. PRESENT USE: Besides the Rubrics in the Missal, consult DEHERDT, Sacr Liturgic Praxis (3 vols., 9th ed., Louvain, 1894); LEVAVASSEUR, Manuel de Liturgie (2 vols., 10th ed., Paris, 1910); MANY,Pr lectiones de Missa (Paris, 1903). See further bibliography inCABROL, Introduction aux études liturgiques (Paris, 1907), in CANON OFTHE MASS and other articles on the separate parts of the Mass.

About this pageAPA citation. Fortescue, A. (1910). Liturgy of the Mass. In TheCatholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.Retrieved April 29, 2015 from New Advent:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09790b.htm

MLA citation. Fortescue, Adrian. "Liturgy of the Mass." TheCatholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 9. New York: Robert Appleton Company,1910. 29 Apr. 2015 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09790b.htm>.

Transcription. This article was transcribed for New Advent byDouglas J. Potter. Dedicated to the Sacred Heart of Jesus Christ.

Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1910. RemyLafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of NewYork.

Contact information. The editor of New Advent is Kevin Knight. Myemail address is webmaster at newadvent.org. Regrettably, I can'treply to every letter, but I greatly appreciate your feedback —especially notifications about typographical errors andinappropriate ads.

Copyright © 2012 by Kevin Knight. Dedicated to the ImmaculateHeart of Mary.

CONTACT US

1. Mass in the Catholic Church 1.1 Introductory rites

The priest enters, with a deacon, if there is one, and altarservers (who may act as crucifer, torch-bearers and thurifer).After making the sign of the cross and greeting the peopleliturgically, he begins the Act of Penitence. This concludes with

the priest's prayer of absolution, "which, however, lacks theefficacy of the Sacrament of Penance".[14] The Kyrie, eleison(Lord, have mercy), is sung or said,[15] followed by the Gloriain excelsis Deo (Glory to God in the highest), an ancient praise,if appropriate for the liturgical season.[16] The IntroductoryRites are brought to a close by the Collect Prayer.

1.2 Liturgy of the Word

On Sundays and solemnities, three Scripture readings are given.On other days there are only two. If there are three readings,the first is from the Old Testament (a term wider than "HebrewScriptures", since it includes the Deuterocanonical Books), orthe Acts of the Apostles during Eastertide. The first reading isfollowed by a psalm, either sung responsorially or recited. Thesecond reading is from the New Testament, typically from one ofthe Pauline epistles. A Gospel Acclamation is then sung as theBook of the Gospels is processed, sometimes with incense andcandles, to the ambo. The final reading and high point of theLiturgy of the Word is the proclamation of the Gospel by thedeacon or priest. At least on Sundays and Holy Days ofObligation, a homily, a sermon that draws upon some aspect of thereadings or the liturgy of the day, is then given.[17] Finally,the Creed is professed on Sundays and solemnities,[18] and it isdesirable that in Masses celebrated with the people the UniversalPrayer or Prayer of the Faithful should usually follow.[19]

1.3 Liturgy of the Eucharist

The Liturgy of the Eucharist begins with the preparation of thealtar and gifts,[20] after which the congregation stands, as thepriest gives the exhortation to pray, "Pray, brethren, that mysacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God, the almightyFather." The congregation responds: "May the Lord accept thesacrifice at your hands, for the praise and glory of his name,

for our good, and the good of all his holy Church." The priestthen pronounces the variable prayer over the gifts.

The Eucharistic Prayer, "the centre and high point of the entirecelebration",[21] then begins with a dialogue between priest andpeople. The priest continues with one of many Eucharistic Prayerthanksgiving prefaces, which lead to the reciting of the Sanctusacclamation. The Eucharistic Prayer includes the epiclesis, aprayer that the gifts offered may by the power of the Holy Spiritbecome the body and blood of Christ.[22] The central part is theInstitution Narrative and Consecration, recalling the words andactions of Jesus at his Last Supper, which he told his disciplesto do in remembrance of him.[23] Immediately after theConsecration and the display to the people of the consecratedelements, the priest says: "The mystery of faith", and the peoplepronounce the acclamation, using one of the three prescribedformulae.[24] It concludes with a doxology, with the priestlifting up the paten with the host and the deacon (if there isone) the chalice, and the singing or recitation of the Amen bythe people.

1.4 Communion rite

All together recite or sing the "Lord's Prayer" ("Pater Noster"or "Our Father"). The priest introduces it with a short phraseand follows it up with a prayer called the embolism and thepeople respond with the doxology. The sign of peace is exchangedand then the "Lamb of God" ("Agnus Dei" in Latin) litany is sungor recited, while the priest breaks the host and places a piecein the main chalice; this is known as the rite of fraction andcommingling.

The priest then presents the transubstantiated elements to thecongregation, saying: "Behold the Lamb of God, behold him whotakes away the sins of the world. Blessed are those called to the

supper of the Lamb." Then all repeat: "Lord, I am not worthy thatyou should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soulshall be healed." The priest then receives Communion and, withthe help, if necessary, of extraordinary ministers, distributesCommunion to the people, who usually approach in procession.[25]Silence is called for following the Communion procession. APrayer After Communion is then proclaimed by the priest while allstand.

1.5. Concluding rite

The priest imparts a simple blessing or a solemn blessing tothose present. The deacon or, in his absence, the priest himselfthen dismisses the people, choosing one of four formulas, ofwhich the first is "Ite, missa est" in Latin or its equivalent inother languages. The congregation responds: "Thanks be to God."The priest and other ministers then leave, often to theaccompaniment of a recessional hymn.

Bibliography

Alexander, Jonathan J. G. “Facsimiles, Copies, and Variations:The Relationship to the

Model in Medieval and Renaissance European IlluminatedManuscripts.”

Retaining the Original. Multiples, Originals, Copies, andReproductions.

Hanover: National Gallery of Art, 1989.

———. The Painted Page: Italian Renaissance Book Illumination. NewYork: Prestel,

1994.

Armstrong, Lilian. “The Impact of Printing on Miniaturists inVenice after 1469.”

Printing the Written Word, ed. Sandra Hindman. Ithaca: CornellUniversity Press,

1991.

———. “Benedetto Bordon, Aldus Manutius and Lucantonio Giunta: OldLinks and

New.” Aldus Manutius and Renaissance Culture: Essays in Memory ofFranklin

D. Murphy, ed. Franklin D. Murphy, D. S. Zeidberg and FiorellaGioffredi

Superbi. Florence: L.S. Olschki, 1998.

———. “Woodcuts for Liturgical Books Published by LucantonioGiunta in Venice,

1499-1501.” Word and Image 1, Jan-June (2001).

———. “Venetian and Florentine Renaissance Woodcuts for Bibles,Liturgical Books,

and Devotional Books.” A Heavenly Craft: The Woodcut in EarlyPrinted Books.

New York: George Braziller, 2004.

Baldovin, John F. The Urban Character of Christian Worship: TheOrigins, Development

and Meaning of Stational Liturgy. Rome: Institutum StudoriumOrientalium,

1987.

Baxandall, Michael. Painting and Experience in Fifteenth-CenturyItaly. Oxford:

Clarendon, 1972.

Belting, Hans. The Image and Its Public in the Middle Ages: Formand Function of Early

Paintings of the Passion. New York: Aristide D. Caratzas, 1990.

Biggs, B. J. H. The Imitation of Christ: the first Englishtranslation of the Imitatio

Christi. Oxford, 1997.

54

Blaauw, Sible de. “Architecture and Liturgy in Late Antiquity andthe Middle Ages:

Tradition and Trends in Modern Scholarship.” Archiv furLiturgiewissenshaft 32

(1991): 1-34.

Blumenthal, Joseph, ed. Art of the Printed Book, 1455-1955.Masterpieces of Typography

through Five Centuries from the Collections of the PierpontMorgan Library.

New York: Pierpont Morgan Library, 1973.

Bolzoni, Lina. The Gallery of Memory: Literacy and IconographicModels in the Age of

the Printing Press. Toronto: University of Toronto, 2001.

Bradshaw, Paul F. The Search for the Origins of ChristianWorship: Sources and

Methods for the Study of Early Liturgy. New York: OxfordUniversity Press,

1992.

Brown, H. R. F. The Venetian Printing Press, 1469-1800.Amsterdam: Gerard Th. van

Heusden, 1969.

Buhler, Curt F. The Fifteenth-Century Book: The Scribes, thePrinters, the Decorators.

Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1960.

Butler, Pierce. The Origin of Printing in Europe. Chicago: TheUniversity of Chicago

Press, 1940.

Calkins, Robert. Illuminated Books of the Middle Ages. Ithaca:Cornell University Press,

1983.

———. Programs of Medieval Illumination. Lawrence, Kan.: HelenForesman Spencer

Museum of Art, University of Kansas, 1984.

Camerini, Paolo. Annali De Giunti. Florence: SansoniAntiquariato, 1962.

Canova, Mariani G. "Profilo di Benedetto Bordone miniaturepadovano." Atti

dell'Instituto Veneto di scienza, lettere ed arti, 127, 1968-69.

Carr, Dawson W. Andrea Mantegna: The Adoration of the Magi. LosAngeles: Getty

Museum of Art, 1997.

Carruthers, Mary. The Book of Memory: A Study of Memory inMedieval Culture.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

Connell, Susan. “Books and Their Owners in Venice, 1345-1480.”Journal of the

Warburg and Courtauld Institute 35 (1972): 163-86.

55

Copinger, W. A. Supplement to Hain's Repertorium Bibliographicum,2 volumes.

London: 1895 and 1902.

Davies, John G. A Dictionary of Liturgy and Worship. New York:Macmillian, 1972.

DeHamel, Christopher. A History of Illuminated Manuscripts, 2nd

ed. London: Phaidon,

1994.

———. The Book. A History of the Bible. London: Phaidon, 2002.

Delaisse, L. M. J. "Toward a History of the Medieval Book."Cocicologica, I. 1976.

Dondi, Cristina. “Books of Hours: The Development of the Texts inPrinted Form.”

Incunabula and Their Readers: Printing, Selling, and Using Booksin the

Fifteenth Century, ed. Kristian Jensen. London: The BritishLibrary, 2003.

Doren, Rombaut van. “Liturgical Year in Roman Rite.” New CatholicEncyclopedia.

New York: McGraw Hill, 1967: 915-19.

Douglas, David Charles. English Historical Documents, Volume II.New York: Oxford

University Press, 1950.

Duffy, Eamon. The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religionin England, c. 1140-

c.1580. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997.

Duggan, Mary Kay. “The Psalter on the Way to the Reformation: TheFifteenth-Century

Printed Psalter in the North.” In The Place of the Psalms in theIntellectual

Culture of the Middle Ages, ed. Nancy Van Deusen. Albany: StateUniversity of

New York Press, 1991.

———. Italian Music Incunabula: Printers and Type. Berkeley:University of California

Press, 1992

———."The Design of the Early Printed Missal." Journal of thePrinting Historical

Society, 22, (1993).

———."Music in the Early Printed Missal." The Dissemination ofMusic: Studies in the

History of Music Publishing, ed. Hans Lenneberg. New York: Gordonand

Breach, 1994.

———. “Politics and Text: Bringing the Liturgy to Print.”Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 76

(2001): 104-17.

56

———. “Reading Liturgical Books.” Incunabula and Their Readers:Printing, Selling,

and Using Books in the Fifteenth Century, ed. Kristian Jensen.London: The

British Library, 2003.

Dutschke, Consuelo W. “Liturgical Manuscripts.” Leaves of Gold:Manuscript

Illumination from Philadelphia Collections, ed. James R. Tanis.Philadelphia:

Philadelphia Museum of Art, 2001.

Eisenstein, Elizabeth. The Printing Press as Agent of Change:Communications and

Cultural Transformations in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge:Cambridge

University Press, 1979.

Essling, Prince d'. Les missels imprimées à Venise de 1481 à1600. Paris: Rothschild,

1894-96.

———. Les livres à figures vénitiens de la fin du XV siècle et ducommencement du XVI,

3 vols. Florence-Paris, 1907-14.

Febvre, Lucien, and Henri-Jean Martin. The Coming of the Book:The Impact of Printing

1450-1800. London: N.L.B, 1976.

Fleming, John. An Introduction to the Franciscan Literature ofthe Middle Ages.

Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1977.

Finkelstein, David, and Alistair McCleery. The Book HistoryReader. New York:

Routledge, 2002.

Gelder, Ferdinand. Inkunabelkunde: Eine Einführung in die Weltdes frühsten

Buchdrucks. Wiesbaden, 1978.

Gerulaitis, Leonardas V. Printing and Publishing in Fifteenth-Century Venice. Chicago:

American Library Association, 1976.

Goff, Frederick R. Incunabula in American Libraries: A ThirdCensus of Fifteenth-

Century Books recorded in North America Collections. New York:Millwood,

1973.

Goodman, Anthony, and Angus MacKay. The Impact of Humanism onWestern Europe.

London: Longman, 1990.

Hain, Ludwig. Repertorium bibliographicum, in quo libri omnes abarte typographica

inventa usque ad annum MD. typus expressi, ordine alphabetico velsimpliciter

enumerantur vel adcuratius recensentur, 2 volumes. Milan:Görlich, 1948.

57

Hardison, O. B. Christian Rite and Christian Drama in the MiddleAges; Essays in the

Origin and Early History of Modern Drama. Baltimore: JohnsHopkins Press,

1965.

Harper, John. The Forms and Orders of Western Liturgy from theTenth to the Eighteenth

Century: A Historical Introduction and Guide for Students andMusicians.

Oxford: Clarendon, 1991.

Harthan, Jonathan P. Books of Hours: Illuminated Pages from theWorld's Most Precious

Manuscripts. New York: Crowell, 1977.

Hasenohr, Genevieve. “Religious Reading Amongst the Laity inFrance in the Fifteenth

Century.” Heresy and Literacy, ed. Peter Biller and Anne Hudson.Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1994.

Heffernan, Thomas J., and E. Ann Matter. The Liturgy of theMedieval Church.

Kalamazoo: Western Michigan University, 2001.

Henisch, Ann. The Medieval Calendar Year. Philadelphia:Pennsylvania State University

Press, 1999.

Hind, Arthur M. An Introduction to a History of Woodcut, with aDetailed Survey of

Work Done in the Fifteenth Century. New York: Dover, 1963.

———. Early Italian Engraving, 7 vols. London: Bernard Quartich,1938-48.

Hindman, Sandra. Printing the Written Word: The Social History ofBooks, Circa 1450-

1520. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991.

Hindman, Sandra, and James D. Farquhar. Pen to Press: IllustratedManuscripts and

Printed Books in the First Century of Printing. College Park:University of

Maryland, 1977.

Hirsch, Rudolf. Printing, Selling, and Reading 1450 - 1550.Wiesbaden, 1967.

Hobson, Anthony. Humanists and Bookbinders. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,

1989.

Holub, Robert C. Reception Theory, A Critical Introduction. NewYork: Mathven, 1984.

Hourihane, Colum, ed. Objects, Images, and the Word: Art in theService of the Liturgy.

Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003.

Hughes, Andrew. Medieval Manuscripts for Mass and Office: A Guideto Their

Organization and Terminology. Toronto: University of TorontoPress, 1982. 58

———. “The Scribe and the Late Medieval Liturgical Manuscript:Page Layout and

Order of Work.” The Centre and Its Compass: Studies in MedievalLiterature in

Honor of Professor John Leyerle, ed. Robert A. Taylor. Kalamazoo:Western

Michigan University, 1993.

Iser, Wolfgang. “Interaction Between Text and Reader.” The BookHistory Reader, ed.

David Finkelstein and Alistair McCleery. New York: Routledge,2002.

Ivins, William M. How Prints Look. Boston: Beacon Press, 1987.

———. Prints and Visual Communication. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T.Press, 1996.

Jensen, Kristian. “Printing the Bible in the Fifteenth Century:Devotion, Philology, and

Commerce.” Incunabula and Their Readers, ed. Kristian Jensen.London: The

British Library, 2003.

Jungmann, Joseph. The Mass of the Roman Rite: Its Origins andDevelopment. Maryland:

Christian Classics, 1986.

Lebrun, Francois. “The Two Reformations: Communal Devotion andPersonal Piety.” A

History of Private Life, ed. Philippe Aries and Georges Duby.Cambridge, Mass.:

Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1987-91.

Leesti, Elizabeth. Les manuscrits liturgiques du Moyen Age.Montreal: Montreal Museum

of Fine Arts, 1987.

Leroquais, Victor. Les sacramentaires et les missels manuscritsdes bibliothèques

publiques de France. Paris: Rothschild, 1924.

———. Les manuscrits liturgiques latins du haut Moyen Age à larenaissance. Paris:

Macon, Protat frères, imprimeurs, 1931.

John Lowden, “Illuminated Books and the Liturgy: SomeObservations.” Objects,

Images, and the Word: Art in the Service of the Liturgy, ed.Colum Hourihane.

Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003, 17-53.

Lowry, Martin. The World of Aldus Manutius: Business andScholarship in Renaissance

Venice. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1979.

———. “Aldus Manutius and Benedetto Bordon: The Quest for a Link.”Bulletin of the

John Rylands University Library of Manchester 66 (1983): 173-97.

59

———. Nicholas Jensen and the Rise of Venetian Publishing inEurope. Oxford: B.

Blackwell, 1991.

Marrow, James. “Symbol and Meaning in Northern European Art ofthe Late Middle

Ages and the Early Renaissance.” Simiolus 16 (1986): 150-69.

———.“The Shape of Meaning: Word and Image in a 15th CenturyBook.” Art &

Design, 56 (1996): 40-45.

Matzger, Marcel. History of the Liturgy: The Major Stages.Minnesota: The Liturgical

Press, 1997.

McCann, Justin, ed., The Rule of Saint Benedict: In Latin andEnglish. London: Burns,

Oates, 1952.

Mortimer, Ruth. Harvard College Library Department of Printingand Graphic Arts,

Catalogue of Books and Manuscripts, Part II, Italian Sixteenth-Century Books,

volume 1. Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1964.

Needham, Paul. “Venetian Printers and Publishers in the FifteenthCentury.” Bibliofilia

100, no. 2-3 (1998): 157-200.

Neumeyer, Alfred. Der Blick aus dem Bilde. Berlin: Gebr. Mann,1964.

Noakes, Susan. “The Development of the Book Market in LateQuattroceto Italy:

Printers' Failures and the Role of the Middlemen.” Journal ofMedieval and

Renaissance Studies 2 (1981): 23-55.

Nuvoloni, Laura. “Commissioni Dogali: Venetian Bookbinding in theBritish Library.” In

For the Love of Binding: Studies in Bookbinding History Presentedto Mirjam

Foot, edited by D. Pearson, 81-109. London: The British Library,2000.

Ploeg, Kees van der. Art, Architecture, and Liturgy: SienaCathedral in the Middle Ages.

Groningen: Forsten, 1993.

Plummer, John. Liturgical Manuscripts for the Mass and DivineOffice. New York:

Pierpont Morgan Library, 1964.

Pollack, M. “Production Costs in Fifteenth-Century Publishing.”Library Quarterly 39

(1969): 318-33.

Pollard, A. The Woodcut Designs for Illumination in VenetianBooks, 1469-73. London,

1897.

60

Post, R. R. The Modern Devotion: Confrontation with Reformationand Humanism.

Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1968.

Reilly, Eileen F. “The University of Florida Pigouchet and VostreHorae: A Book Printed

in Paris for Export to London.” M.A. Thesis, University of SouthFlorida, 1996.

Reinburg, V. “The Liturgy and the Laity in Late Medieval andReformation France.” The

Sixteenth-Century Journal 23 (1992-3).

Reinhold, Hans A. Liturgy and Art. New York: Harper and Row,1966.

Richardson, Brian. Print Culture in Renaissance Italy: The Editorand the Vernacular

Text, 1470-1600. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

———. Printing, Writers and Readers in Renaissance Italy.Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1999.

Ringbom, Sixten. “Devotional Images and Imaginative Devotions.”Gazette des Beaux-

Arts 73 (1969): 159.

———. From Icon to Narrative: The Rise of the Dramatic Close-up inFifteenth-Century

Devotional Painting. Doornspijk: Davaco, 1984.

Rosand, David and Michelangelo Muraro. Titian and the VenetianWoodcut.

(Washington D.C.: National Gallery of Art, 1976.

Rouse, M. A., and R. H. Rouse. Cartolai, Illuminators, andPrinters in Fifteenth Century

Italy. Los Angels: University of California Press, 1988.

Saenger, Paul. “Silent Reading: Its Impact on Late MedievalScript and Society.” Viator

13 (1982): 367-414.

———. “Books of Hours and the Reading Habits of the Later MiddleAges.” The

Culture of Print: Power and the Uses of Print in Early ModernEurope, ed. Alain

Boureau and Roger Chartier. Princeton: Princeton UniversityPress, 1989.

Sand, Alexa. "Picturing Devotion Anew in the Psalter Hours 'ofYolande of Soissons'

(New York, Pierpont Morgan Library M 729)." Ph.D. Dissertation.Berkeley:

University of California, 1999.

———."Vision, Devotion, and Difficulty in the Psalter Hours 'ofYolande of Soissons'"

In Art Bulletin, vol. 87, no. 1. March, 2005.

Sander, Max. Prices of Incunabula. Mailand: U. Hoepli, 1930

61

———. Le livre à figures italien depuis 1467 jusqu à 1530, 6 vols.Milan: 1941.

Seidel, Linda. Pious Journeys: Christian Devotional Art andPractice in the Later Middle

Ages and Renaissance. Chicago: The University of Chicago, 2001.

Shearman, John K. G. Only Connect... Art and the Spectator in theItalian Renaissance.

Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992.

Sinding-Larsen, Staale. Iconography and Ritual: A Study ofAnalytical Perspectives. New

York: Columbia University Press, 1984.

Swanson, R. N. Religion and Devotion in Europe, C. 1215 - C.1515. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Szepe, Helena. “The Book as Companion, the Author as Friend:Aldine Octavos

Illuminated by Benedetto Bordon.” Word and Image 10, no. April -June (1994).

———, ed., Books of Hours: Illuminated Devotion. Tampa: Universityof South Florida

Tampa Library, 2004.

Talley, Thomas J. The Origins of the Liturgical Year. New York:Pueblo Pub, 1986.

Taney, Francis X. John of Caulibus: Meditations on the Life ofChrist. Asheville: Pegasus

Press, 2000.

Thompson, Martyn P. “Reception Theory and the Interpretation ofHistorical Meaning.”

History and Theory 32 (1993): 248-72.

Tyson, Gerald P., and Sylvia Wagonheim. Print and Culture in theRenaissance. Newark:

University of Delaware Press, 1986.

———. Medieval Liturgy: An Introduction to the Sources. WashingtonD.C.: Pastoral

Press, 1986.

Van Os, Henk. “Some Thoughts on Writing a History of SieneseAltarpieces.” The

Altarpiece in the Renaissance, ed. Peter Humfrey and Martin Kemp,21-33. New

York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

———. Sienese Altarpieces 1215-1460: Form, Content Function.Groningen: Egbert

Forsten, 1990.

———. The Art of Devotion in the Late Middle Ages in Europe 1300-1500. Princeton:

Princeton University Press, 1994.

62

———. The Way to Heaven: Relic Veneration in the Late Middle Ages.Baarn: De Prom,

2000.

Vasari, Giorgio. Lives of the Most Eminent Painters, Sculptorsand Architects: Newly

translated by Gaston Duc DeVere with five hundred illustrationsin ten volumes.

London, 1912-15.

Voragine, Jacobus de, Archbishop of Genoa. The Golden Legend:Readings on the

Saints. Translated by William Granger Ryan. Princeton: PrincetonUniversity

Press, 1993.

Weale, W. H. Iacobus, and H. Bohatta. Bibliographica Liturgica:Catalogus Missalium

Ritus Latini. London: Bernardum Quaritch, 1928.

Wieck, Roger. Painted Prayers: The Book of Hours in Medieval andRenaissance Art.

New York: George Braziller, 1997.

———. Time Sanctified: The Book of Hours in Medieval Art and Life.New York:

George Braziller, 2001.

Williamson, Beth. “Altarpieces, Liturgy, and Devotion.” Speculum79 (2004): 341-406.

———. "Liturgical Image or Devotional Image? The London Madonna ofthe

Firescreen?" Objects, Images and the Word: Art in the Service ofthe Liturgy, ed.

Colum Hourihane. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003:298-318.

Zemon-Davis, Natalie. Society and Culture in Early Modern France.Stanford: Stanford

University Press, 1975.