Mystery and the Sacred in the Early Church
by
Fr. Dennis Koliński, SJC
After completing undergraduate studies at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point in 1974, Fr. Koliński did postgraduate study at the Jagiellonian University in Kraków, Poland where he received an M.A. in Slavic ethnography. Many years later, perceiving a call to the religious life and the priesthood, Fr. Koliński became one of the founding members of the Canons Regular of St. John Cantius, a new religious community of men that was founded at St. John Cantius Parish in Chicago in 1998. He received his M.Div. degree following the completion of his seminary studies at Holy Apostles Seminary in Cromwell, Connecticut and was ordained to the priesthood in 2004. After serving as an associate pastor at St. John Cantius Parish in Chicago, Fr. Koliński was appointed in 2007 as pastor of his community’s second parish, St. Peter’s in Volo, Illinois. Since 2010, he has been assigned to Holy Apostles Seminary and College as formator and academic advisor for the seminarians of the Canons Regular of St John Cantius. He is also a member of the seminary faculty and helps in seminary formation.
Note from Dr. Chervin: Fr. Kolinski, S.C.J., teaches liturgy at Holy Apostles College and seminary. I asked him if he would write a chapter on this subject in addition to the chapter on the Spirituality of John Paul II which you will read later in this book. He didn’t have time to write another chapter but said that I could place here two papers he wrote years ago. I think you will agree that these papers of Fr. Koliński shed light on the reason behind some of the liturgical issues so current in our Church today.
by
Fr. Dennis Koliński, SJC
After completing undergraduate studies at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point in 1974, Fr. Koliński did postgraduate study at the Jagiellonian University in Kraków, Poland where he received an M.A. in Slavic ethnography. Many years later, perceiving a call to the religious life and the priesthood, Fr. Koliński became one of the founding members of the Canons Regular of St. John Cantius, a new religious community of men that was founded at St. John Cantius Parish in Chicago in 1998. He received his M.Div. degree following the completion of his seminary studies at Holy Apostles Seminary in Cromwell, Connecticut and was ordained to the priesthood in 2004. After serving as an associate pastor at St. John Cantius Parish in Chicago, Fr. Koliński was appointed in 2007 as pastor of his community’s second parish, St. Peter’s in Volo, Illinois. Since 2010, he has been assigned to Holy Apostles Seminary and College as formator and academic advisor for the seminarians of the Canons Regular of St John Cantius. He is also a member of the seminary faculty and helps in seminary formation.
Note from Dr. Chervin: Fr. Kolinski, S.C.J., teaches liturgy at Holy Apostles College and seminary. I asked him if he would write a chapter on this subject in addition to the chapter on the Spirituality of John Paul II which you will read later in this book. He didn’t have time to write another chapter but said that I could place here two papers he wrote years ago. I think you will agree that these papers of Fr. Koliński shed light on the reason behind some of the liturgical issues so current in our Church today.
Introduction
In the early twentieth century, Pope Pius X’s call for a restoration of the “true Christian spirit” by means of “active participation in the holy mysteries and in the public and solemn prayer of the Church,” led to what became known as the Liturgical Movement and laid the groundwork for the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium). It was the desire of the Council “to undertake with great care a general restoration of the liturgy itself.” (SC, 21) And in doing so, the Council specifically asked “that sound tradition may be retained” (SC, 23) because “in the earthly liturgy we take part in a foretaste of that heavenly liturgy which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem,” (SC, 8) a sacred action surpassing all others, “of Christ the priest and of His Body, the Church.” (SC, 7) Renewal is always necessary, especially in the modern world, but in recent years, many have questioned whether it has taken the correct course. In 2007, the secretary of the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship, Archbishop Albert Malcom Ranjith, admitted that liturgical reform after Vatican II “has not been able to achieve the expected goals.” (CWN, 23 February 2007) It is for this reason that a “new liturgical movement” has arisen, which strives to be true to both the Council’s directives, as well as to “sound tradition.” The following two articles can, therefore, help shed some light on the nature of the liturgy itself by taking a look at two important aspects of the Church’s centuries-old liturgical tradition.
In the early twentieth century, Pope Pius X’s call for a restoration of the “true Christian spirit” by means of “active participation in the holy mysteries and in the public and solemn prayer of the Church,” led to what became known as the Liturgical Movement and laid the groundwork for the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium). It was the desire of the Council “to undertake with great care a general restoration of the liturgy itself.” (SC, 21) And in doing so, the Council specifically asked “that sound tradition may be retained” (SC, 23) because “in the earthly liturgy we take part in a foretaste of that heavenly liturgy which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem,” (SC, 8) a sacred action surpassing all others, “of Christ the priest and of His Body, the Church.” (SC, 7) Renewal is always necessary, especially in the modern world, but in recent years, many have questioned whether it has taken the correct course. In 2007, the secretary of the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship, Archbishop Albert Malcom Ranjith, admitted that liturgical reform after Vatican II “has not been able to achieve the expected goals.” (CWN, 23 February 2007) It is for this reason that a “new liturgical movement” has arisen, which strives to be true to both the Council’s directives, as well as to “sound tradition.” The following two articles can, therefore, help shed some light on the nature of the liturgy itself by taking a look at two important aspects of the Church’s centuries-old liturgical tradition.
he Age of the Church Fathers has been called the era of great liturgies and the proliferation of different liturgical families.1 The liturgy of the great center of Alexandria in Egypt traces its roots to St. Mark the Evangelist, which in time gave birth to other eastern liturgical forms. The liturgy of Antioch, the second great center of Christian learning in the ancient world, had its origin in the Greek liturgy of St. James. Within this tradition, two of the great Church Fathers, St. Basil the Great and St. John Chrysostom, composed liturgical prayers that eventually developed into the most notable branch of the eastern liturgies—the Byzantine Rite.
Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom The ancient Roman Rite of the liturgy, which we know best, was initially a liturgical form that was limited to a relatively small part of the early Christian world. It was characterized by “simplicity, practicality, a great sobriety and self-control, gravity and dignity,” which was a reflection of the ancient Roman disposition.2 And this rite, in turn, had its own variations. The most famous of them was the Ambrosian Rite celebrated in the city of Milan, most likely since the fourth century.
Contrary to what some have thought, the liturgies of the Early Church were not based upon improvisation by the celebrating bishop. Rather, research has shown a striking uniformity in certain key elements of the liturgy already at a very early date, and in the major centers of Christianity the liturgy was uniform to a great extent already by the first or early second century—especially in the Eucharistic Sacrifice itself.3 A number of liturgical texts have come down to us from that period and the prayers, which they contain, display an unusual beauty.
In addition to this, descriptions of some of the rituals that were used in the Early Church have also survived. The Eucharist was called the “Sacred Mystery” and was celebrated with great solemnity. The sanctuary was adorned with mosaics and precious metals. It was a period of grand processions through magnificent basilicas.
All of these liturgies, in one way or another, incarnated a sense of the transcendent and evoked an inexpressible awe for the ancient Christians. The rituals of the Sacred Mysteries expressed otherworldly realities and showed that the Patristic era clearly possessed a concept of the “sacred.” Certain spaces, words and rituals were sacred not only because of what they represented but also because they actually embodied the inexpressible mystery of the Eucharist. Mystery was at the root of the liturgy and mystery defined what was sacred.
All of these liturgies, in one way or another, incarnated a sense of the transcendent and evoked an inexpressible awe for the ancient Christians. The rituals of the Sacred Mysteries expressed otherworldly realities and showed that the Patristic era clearly possessed a concept of the “sacred.” Certain spaces, words and rituals were sacred not only because of what they represented but also because they actually embodied the inexpressible mystery of the Eucharist. Mystery was at the root of the liturgy and mystery defined what was sacred.
In its essence, Christianity is a mystery religion and one could say that “the ancient Church lived in a mystery.”4 Ancient man was very conscious of a higher spiritual kingdom that was beyond the visible world and knew that the things, which they saw in this world, were symbols of that kingdom, which was hidden from their eyes.5 The Fathers of the Early Church, who meditated on the truths of the Faith and the history of salvation, had a living sense of this mystery. It was, “something sacred that comes from God,” which man “accepts without fully understanding, but adoring, praising, giving thanks.”6 For them, this profound sense of mystery was important because it was a safeguard of orthodoxy and of the spirit of faith and prayer that inspired an attitude of humble and profound adoration during the liturgy.7 The sacred ritual was the “language,” which described for them the soul’s spiritual ascent to the vision of the transcendent God.8
The concept of the sacred was something inherent to the ancient Christian way of thinking and their understanding of it in the context of liturgy and ritual was shaped by a specific understanding of time and history. Because everything in history pointed to or flowed from Christ, the Fathers of the Church saw salvation history as a progression from the shadow of the Old Testament, to the image of the New Testament and finally to the reality of heaven.9 The “shadows” of the Old Testament were not essentially different from the “images” of the New Testament and the ultimate “reality” of heaven. It was a reality that was obscured in the past, as if viewed through a veil that became clearer as time progressed. The Letter to the Hebrews speaks of the earthly sanctuaries as “copies of the heavenly things.”10 The sanctuary “made with hands” is a “copy of the true one”—the reality of heaven.11
The priests of the Old Covenant served “a copy and shadow of the heavenly sanctuary.”12 They were aware that the rituals, which they performed in the Holy of Holies, took place “outside of time and matter, in the realm of the angels and the heavenly throne.”13 The high priest entered the Holy of Holies in great fear and awe. Because the sanctuary of the New Covenant was not a different sanctuary, but merely a clearer manifestation of the same heavenly reality—the image in contrast to the shadow—priests in early Christian times were likewise filled with fear and awe as they entered the sanctuary for the celebration of the Sacred Mysteries. Writings of the Patristic Age speak of “the most awful sacrifice” and “the great fearful holy life-giving awful sacrifice.”14,15
The priests of the Old Covenant served “a copy and shadow of the heavenly sanctuary.”12 They were aware that the rituals, which they performed in the Holy of Holies, took place “outside of time and matter, in the realm of the angels and the heavenly throne.”13 The high priest entered the Holy of Holies in great fear and awe. Because the sanctuary of the New Covenant was not a different sanctuary, but merely a clearer manifestation of the same heavenly reality—the image in contrast to the shadow—priests in early Christian times were likewise filled with fear and awe as they entered the sanctuary for the celebration of the Sacred Mysteries. Writings of the Patristic Age speak of “the most awful sacrifice” and “the great fearful holy life-giving awful sacrifice.”14,15
The liturgies of the Early Church were permeated with images of the Holy of Holies surrounded by hosts of angels. The altar was located in a space set apart from the main body of the church. Just as the ancient Hebrews always prayed toward the Temple, the Christian ecclesia, with the bishop and the priests at its head, offered the Holy Sacrifice toward the East, from whence, they believed, Christ was to come again. At the moment of the consecration, awe and stillness filled the whole church.
The arrangement of sacred buildings, the manner of executing the sacred rituals and the words that the ancient Christians used in the sacred liturgies show us that they worshipped with an acute awareness of the sacred.
The arrangement of sacred buildings, the manner of executing the sacred rituals and the words that the ancient Christians used in the sacred liturgies show us that they worshipped with an acute awareness of the sacred.
The form of their churches and the delineation of sacred space within them established a context of worship, which maintained a certain continuity with the Temple of the Old Covenant. The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles say that “the building should be long, with its head to the east … so it will be like a ship.”16 There was a barrier, which separated the sanctuary from the nave, pierced by two doors in which curtains were hung.17 Because the non-baptized could not remain in the nave during the most sacred part of the Mysteries, this brings to mind the Inner Court of the Temple, which excluded non-Jews. The sanctuary, in turn, corresponded to the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies of the Temple, to which only the ministerial priesthood had access. We see this clearly in the Divine Liturgy of St. James. Standing at the gate leading into the sanctuary the priest stated: “God Almighty, Lord great in glory, who hast given to us an entrance into the Holy of Holies.”18
Within the sanctuary stood a ciborium—a canopy supported by four columns, which enclosed the altar itself. Just as the Temple had a curtain to separate the Holy Place from the Holy of Holies, curtains were hung between the columns of the ciborium to shield the altar from the view of the people because in the early centuries, Christians felt that the consecration was so sacred that they should not see it.19 In northern Syria of the late fourth century, this veil hid the entire sanctuary—a practice that spread and eventually developed into the iconostasis of the Eastern Church.
In the Temple of the Old Covenant the altar of incense and the Ark of the Covenant were overlaid with gold.20 The altar and sanctuary of the New Covenant, which were more perfect images of these heavenly realities, were treated with no less dignity. In one account from the year 537 we read that the altar in Constantinople’s magnificent church of Hagia Sophia was made of gold and the sanctuary was adorned with 40,000 pounds of silver.21
Behind the altar in the middle of the sanctuary apse stood the bishop’s throne, with seats for his presbyters on both sides in a semi-circle. He sat at the head of the assembly because he was the helmsman of the ship.22 Directly above him mosaics adorned the dome of the apse with representations of Christ—either as the Pantocrator (in the East) or the Lamb of God (in the West). The location of these images on the eastern wall of the church also had great significance, for Christians of the first century believed that during the Sacred Mysteries they were turning toward Christ, “who ascended up to the heaven of heavens to the east.” 23,24
Behind the altar in the middle of the sanctuary apse stood the bishop’s throne, with seats for his presbyters on both sides in a semi-circle. He sat at the head of the assembly because he was the helmsman of the ship.22 Directly above him mosaics adorned the dome of the apse with representations of Christ—either as the Pantocrator (in the East) or the Lamb of God (in the West). The location of these images on the eastern wall of the church also had great significance, for Christians of the first century believed that during the Sacred Mysteries they were turning toward Christ, “who ascended up to the heaven of heavens to the east.” 23,24
| 
|
Because churches were images of the reality in heaven, their arrangement in the early Christian era naturally corresponded with the account of the heavenly liturgy in the Book of Revelation. The congregation assembled in the nave was like “the multitude standing before the golden altar.” The twenty-four elders seated in a semi-circle around the “great white throne of God and the Lamb, with angels ministering everywhere” had its counterpart in the bishop’s throne surrounded by his presbyters and deacons.25 The heavenly liturgy was mediated through earthly signs, which allowed one to participate in the reality of heaven.26
So mysterious, so holy was this sacred ritual, which united earth with heaven, that in the Early Church the holy “Mystery” was concealed from catechumens and pagans as much as possible.27 It was a highly private activity, which necessarily excluded all strangers.28 Only the baptized, those who were in full communion with the Church, both earthly and heavenly, were present.29 Only those, who fully understood what was happening could attend.
After the homily, the deacon exclaimed, “Let none of the catechumens, let none of the hearers, let none of the unbelievers, let none of the heterodox, stay here.”30 Then, after all of the unbaptized had left, the deacons and subdeacons stood at the doors to the church “lest any unbeliever, or one not yet initiated, come in.”31 They warned lest “no one stay in hypocrisy,” and that all “stand in fear and trembling.”32 Only after the catechumens, public penitents and pagans had left the church did the deacons draw back the curtains, which had concealed the altar, “uncovering the veils that darkly invest in symbol this sacred ceremonial.”33
So mysterious, so holy was this sacred ritual, which united earth with heaven, that in the Early Church the holy “Mystery” was concealed from catechumens and pagans as much as possible.27 It was a highly private activity, which necessarily excluded all strangers.28 Only the baptized, those who were in full communion with the Church, both earthly and heavenly, were present.29 Only those, who fully understood what was happening could attend.
After the homily, the deacon exclaimed, “Let none of the catechumens, let none of the hearers, let none of the unbelievers, let none of the heterodox, stay here.”30 Then, after all of the unbaptized had left, the deacons and subdeacons stood at the doors to the church “lest any unbeliever, or one not yet initiated, come in.”31 They warned lest “no one stay in hypocrisy,” and that all “stand in fear and trembling.”32 Only after the catechumens, public penitents and pagans had left the church did the deacons draw back the curtains, which had concealed the altar, “uncovering the veils that darkly invest in symbol this sacred ceremonial.”33
Because the people were to shortly behold the heavenly sanctuary, purity of body and spirit was required for all who participated.34 In his Instructions to Catechumens, St. John Chrysostom admonished: “For he who is about to approach these holy and dread mysteries must be awake and alert, must be clean from all cares of this life, full of much self-restraint, much readiness, he must banish from his mind every thought foreign to the mysteries, and on all sides cleanse and prepare his home, as if about to receive the king himself.”35
The need for purity was especially important for the priests who ministered at the altar. St. Cyprian was uncompromising on this point. He said that if the Levitical priests of the Old Covenant were forbidden to approach the altar if they were guilty of serious sin, how much more must the priests of the New Covenant be unblemished as they approach the Holy Mysteries. So holy was the altar of sacrifice that those guilty of serious sin “may not return again to the profanation of the altar.”36 The sacredness of the ritual demanded a reflection of the sacred within the priest himself, for he “call[ed] down the Holy Spirit over the Holy Sacrifice, while angels surround[ed] the altar!”37 It was as if he were already entering heaven—and in a sense, he truly was.
The unseen spiritual realities of the Mysteries expressed themselves through the physicality of the ritual. The manner in which the body expressed itself liturgically “[made] the essence of the liturgy, as it were, bodily visible.”38 Bodily gestures and ritualistic motions bore spiritual meaning. Postures, gestures, ritual garb, the layout of physical space, and the position taken for various liturgical actions were not arbitrary or superfluous because they were sacred. For the ancients, they all took on a symbolic ritual significance for they were physical expressions of spiritual realities—an image of the heavenly reality. The “physicality” of ritual practices that took place within the sacred spaces affected the body in perceptible ways, so that Christians could see and feel their spiritual endeavors.39
The need for purity was especially important for the priests who ministered at the altar. St. Cyprian was uncompromising on this point. He said that if the Levitical priests of the Old Covenant were forbidden to approach the altar if they were guilty of serious sin, how much more must the priests of the New Covenant be unblemished as they approach the Holy Mysteries. So holy was the altar of sacrifice that those guilty of serious sin “may not return again to the profanation of the altar.”36 The sacredness of the ritual demanded a reflection of the sacred within the priest himself, for he “call[ed] down the Holy Spirit over the Holy Sacrifice, while angels surround[ed] the altar!”37 It was as if he were already entering heaven—and in a sense, he truly was.
The unseen spiritual realities of the Mysteries expressed themselves through the physicality of the ritual. The manner in which the body expressed itself liturgically “[made] the essence of the liturgy, as it were, bodily visible.”38 Bodily gestures and ritualistic motions bore spiritual meaning. Postures, gestures, ritual garb, the layout of physical space, and the position taken for various liturgical actions were not arbitrary or superfluous because they were sacred. For the ancients, they all took on a symbolic ritual significance for they were physical expressions of spiritual realities—an image of the heavenly reality. The “physicality” of ritual practices that took place within the sacred spaces affected the body in perceptible ways, so that Christians could see and feel their spiritual endeavors.39
| 
|
In the liturgy of the Early Church, the bishop-priest took the place of Christ, who is the High Priest of the Eternal Liturgy.40 As Christ appeared to Peter, James and John in brilliant white clothing at His Transfiguration, so the bishop, who represented him, wore “a vestment of fine, bright linen.”41 By imitating his gestures, the bishop represented Christ himself.42 At the altar the sacred minister stood “fearful and trembling,”43 always “unworthy to come into the presence of this Thy holy and spiritual table, upon which Thy only-begotten Son, and our Lord Jesus Christ, is mystically set forth as a sacrifice.”44 He acclaimed, “Let all mortal flesh be silent, and stand with fear and trembling. … the King of kings … comes forward to be sacrificed, … and the bands of angels go before Him with every power and dominion, the many-eyed cherubim, and the six-winged seraphim, covering their faces.”45 He implored “Accept, O God, by Thy ministering archangels at Thy holy, heavenly, and reasonable altar in the spacious heavens, the thank-offerings of those who offer sacrifice and oblation.”46
Traditionally, the task of deacons was to tell the congregation what postures the people were to assume. Appropriate physical expressions encouraged appropriate interior attitudes.47 The deacons were to “oversee the people, that nobody may whisper, nor slumber, nor laugh, nor nod; for all ought in the church to stand wisely, and soberly, and attentively.”48 When they drew back the curtains, which had previously hid the sanctuary and altar, all of the faithful fell to their knees.49
When the time came to distribute Communion, the bishop showed the Sacred Host to the people and the deacon exclaimed, “The Holy of Holies!” St. John Chrysostom wrote that the faithful must approach the Eucharist with awe and devotion.50 He wrote: “Reflect, o man, what sacrificial flesh you take in your hand! To what table you approach.”51 Everyone was to approach the altar “with reverence and holy fear, as to the body of their king.”52 To each person the deacon said, “Approach in the fear of the Lord” because he was to partake not of earthly bread, but of “heavenly and immortal food.”53,54
St. John Chrysostom excelled in expressing the sacred mystery of the Eucharist. He wrote that it was an “awe-inspiring and divine table,” “a table of holy fear,” upon which took place the “ineffable mysteries,” the “frightful mysteries,” the “mysteries that demand reverence and trembling.”55,56 For him, the meaning of the word “mystery” even took on the nuance of “tremendous,” “He whom the angels do not see without trembling and do not dare to gaze on without fear because of the brightness that radiates from him, him we take as food, we receive him, we become one body and one flesh with Christ.”57,58
Traditionally, the task of deacons was to tell the congregation what postures the people were to assume. Appropriate physical expressions encouraged appropriate interior attitudes.47 The deacons were to “oversee the people, that nobody may whisper, nor slumber, nor laugh, nor nod; for all ought in the church to stand wisely, and soberly, and attentively.”48 When they drew back the curtains, which had previously hid the sanctuary and altar, all of the faithful fell to their knees.49
When the time came to distribute Communion, the bishop showed the Sacred Host to the people and the deacon exclaimed, “The Holy of Holies!” St. John Chrysostom wrote that the faithful must approach the Eucharist with awe and devotion.50 He wrote: “Reflect, o man, what sacrificial flesh you take in your hand! To what table you approach.”51 Everyone was to approach the altar “with reverence and holy fear, as to the body of their king.”52 To each person the deacon said, “Approach in the fear of the Lord” because he was to partake not of earthly bread, but of “heavenly and immortal food.”53,54
St. John Chrysostom excelled in expressing the sacred mystery of the Eucharist. He wrote that it was an “awe-inspiring and divine table,” “a table of holy fear,” upon which took place the “ineffable mysteries,” the “frightful mysteries,” the “mysteries that demand reverence and trembling.”55,56 For him, the meaning of the word “mystery” even took on the nuance of “tremendous,” “He whom the angels do not see without trembling and do not dare to gaze on without fear because of the brightness that radiates from him, him we take as food, we receive him, we become one body and one flesh with Christ.”57,58
The Eucharist is an “awe-inspiring and terrible sacrifice,” “a fearful and holy sacrifice,” that perpetuates God’s presence among men.59,60 St. John Chrysostom had no doubt that on the Eucharistic altar “[Christ’s] body lay before us.”61 The wine, once consecrated, was “the cup of holy awe,” “the awe-inspiring blood,” “the precious blood.”62
The Fathers saw “shadows” of the Eucharist in the sacrifices of Abel, Abraham, and Melchizedek, all of whom were mentioned in their ancient anaphoras.63 In addition, the Eucharist anticipated the mystery of the heavenly banquet. It was an earthly image of the heavenly liturgy, which truly became present upon the altar. Because early Christians were fully aware of this reality, the entire patristic concept of the Church was dominated by the presence of angels. Its communion with the Church in heaven received its greatest expression precisely in the liturgy because its symbols connected Christians to “what is present but hidden.”64
In their writings, the Fathers of the Church were unambiguous in their understanding that what happened on the altar during the Eucharistic sacrifice was something far from ordinary. It was an entry into the liturgy of heaven. On the altar Christ entered into the assembly through the torn curtain. It was the place where heaven opened up, leading them into the eternal liturgy.65 One of the most striking aspects of the ancient liturgical prayers which exemplify this, is their vivid and effusive descriptions of the heavenly realities unfolding in the sanctuary: “Round Thee stand ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands of holy angels and hosts of archangels; and Thy two most honored creatures, the many-eyed cherubim and the six-winged seraphim.”66 “The numberless army of Angels … the Cherubim and six-winged Seraphim … together with thousands of thousand Archangels and myriad myriads of Angels.”67
Throughout the liturgy, ancient Christians heard references to hidden mysteries and secret words.68 They knew that when they were present at the Sacred Mysteries of the Eucharist, they were in the presence of “the unutterable One, the incomprehensible One … before whom all that is high falls down and remains silent … and beholding whom all creation surrenders in silent adoration.”69 Contemplation of this mystery directed and stimulated their lives and the liturgy was lived and practiced by the Early Church in an attitude of objective piety.70
The prayers, the gestures and postures, the acts of reverence used in the early Christian Church all cultivated an awareness of holy mystery. Its churches created a sacred space, which took them out of the everyday world and placed them before the heavenly altar surrounded by myriads of angels. The words, which the Fathers of the Church used to express the reality in which they were taking part put them in the realm of the sacred. For them, the liturgy expressed something beyond this world by embodying a sense of transcendence and inexpressible awe. They knew that they were in the presence of the One God and Sovereign of all, “who sittest upon the cherubim, and art glorified by the seraphim, before whom stand thousand thousands and ten thousand times ten thousand hosts of angels and archangels.”71
In their writings, the Fathers of the Church were unambiguous in their understanding that what happened on the altar during the Eucharistic sacrifice was something far from ordinary. It was an entry into the liturgy of heaven. On the altar Christ entered into the assembly through the torn curtain. It was the place where heaven opened up, leading them into the eternal liturgy.65 One of the most striking aspects of the ancient liturgical prayers which exemplify this, is their vivid and effusive descriptions of the heavenly realities unfolding in the sanctuary: “Round Thee stand ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands of holy angels and hosts of archangels; and Thy two most honored creatures, the many-eyed cherubim and the six-winged seraphim.”66 “The numberless army of Angels … the Cherubim and six-winged Seraphim … together with thousands of thousand Archangels and myriad myriads of Angels.”67
Throughout the liturgy, ancient Christians heard references to hidden mysteries and secret words.68 They knew that when they were present at the Sacred Mysteries of the Eucharist, they were in the presence of “the unutterable One, the incomprehensible One … before whom all that is high falls down and remains silent … and beholding whom all creation surrenders in silent adoration.”69 Contemplation of this mystery directed and stimulated their lives and the liturgy was lived and practiced by the Early Church in an attitude of objective piety.70
The prayers, the gestures and postures, the acts of reverence used in the early Christian Church all cultivated an awareness of holy mystery. Its churches created a sacred space, which took them out of the everyday world and placed them before the heavenly altar surrounded by myriads of angels. The words, which the Fathers of the Church used to express the reality in which they were taking part put them in the realm of the sacred. For them, the liturgy expressed something beyond this world by embodying a sense of transcendence and inexpressible awe. They knew that they were in the presence of the One God and Sovereign of all, “who sittest upon the cherubim, and art glorified by the seraphim, before whom stand thousand thousands and ten thousand times ten thousand hosts of angels and archangels.”71
BIBLIOGRAPHY
St. Ambrose, Theological and Dogmatic Works: The Sacraments, The Mysteries (The Catholic University of America Press: Washington, D.C., 1963).
Baker, Margaret. “The Temple Roots of the Liturgy,” (Online resource, Jewish Roots of Eastern Christian Mysticism Project, Marquette University, 2003).
Baur, Chrysostomus, OSB, John Chrysostom and His Times, vol. I (The Newman Press: Westminster, Maryland, 1959).
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II, Section VII, Paragraph LVII (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book VIII, Section II, paragraph XII (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
St. Cyprian, Epistle LXIII (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
Divine Liturgy of St. James (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
The Divine Liturgy of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist Mark, The Disciple of the Holy Peter (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
Dix, Dom Gregory, The Shape of the Liturgy (Dacre Press: London, 1945).
The Early Christians after the Death of the Apostles, ed. Eberhard Arnold (Plough Publishing House: Rifton, N.Y., 1970).
Encyclopedia of the Early Church, ed. Angelo Di Berardino (Oxford University Press: N.Y., 1992).
Fortescue, Adrian, “Antiochene Liturgy,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. I (Robert Appleton Company, 1907, Online Edition, 2003).
Fortescue, Adrian, “Liturgy,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. IX (Robert Appleton Company, 1908, Online Edition, 2003).
Fortescue, Adrian, “Liturgy of Jerusalem,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. VIII (Robert Appleton Company, 1910, Online Edition, 2003).
Introduction to the Liturgy, ed. Anscar J. Chupungco, O.S.B. (The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minn., 1997).
Jenner Henry, “Ambrosian Liturgy and Rite,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. I (Robert Appleton Company, 1907, Online Edition, 2003). 12
St. John Chrysostom, Instructions to Catechumens (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church,” Copyright © 1999).
Kinross, Lord, Hagia Sopia (Newsweek: N.Y., 1972).
Martimort, A.G., “Structure and Laws of the Liturgical Celebration,” The Church at Prayer: An Introduction to the Liturgy, vol. I—Principles of the Liturgy (The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minn., 1987).
The Mystery of Christian Worship: and other writings, ed. Burkhard Neunheuser, O.S.B. (The Newman Press: Westminster, Maryland, 1932).
Neunheuser, Burkhard, O.S.B., “Roman Genius Revisited,” Liturgy for the New Millenium (The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minn., 2000).
Quasten, Johannes, Patrology, vol. III (The Newman Press: Westminster, Maryland, 1960).
Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal, The Spirit of the Liturgy (Ignatius Press: San Francisco, 2000).
Thurston, Herbert, “Symbolism,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. IV (Robert Appleton Company, 1912, Online Edition, 2003).
Torevell, David, Losing the Sacred: Ritual, Modernity and Liturgical Reform (T & T Clark Ltd.: Edinburgh, 2000).
Endnotes
1. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, ed. Angelo Di Berardino (Oxford University Press: N.Y., 1992), 293.
2. Neunheuser, Burkhard, O.S.B., “Roman Genius Revisited,” Liturgy for the New Millenium (The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minn., 2000), 43.
3. Fortescue, Adrian, “Liturgy,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. IX (Robert Appleton Company, 1908, Online Edition, 2003).
4. The Mystery of Christian Worship: and other writings, ed. Burkhard Neunheuser, OSB (The Newman Press: Westminster, Maryland, 1932), 34.
5. Ibid, 35.
6. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 495.
7. Ibid, 495.
8. Ibid, 577.
9. Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal, The Spirit of the Liturgy (Ignatius Press: San Francisco, 2000), 60.
10. Hebrews 9:23.
11. Hebrews 9:24.
12. Hebrews 8:5.
13. Baker, Margaret. “The Temple Roots of the Liturgy,” (Online resource, Jewish Roots of Eastern Christian Mysticism Project, Marquette University, 2003).
14. From St. Cyril of Jerusalem, in Baker, “The Temple Roots”
15. From the Nestorian liturgy, in Baker, “The Temple Roots”
16. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II, Section VII, Paragraph LVII (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”). Our word “nave” comes from the Latin word for ship, navis.
17. Baur, Chrysostomus, O.S.B., John Chrysostom and His Times, vol. I (The Newman Press: Westminster, Maryland, 1959), 196.
18. Divine Liturgy of St. James (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
19. Exodus 26:31-34.
20. Hebrews 9:4.
21. Kinross, Lord, Hagia Sopia (Newsweek: N.Y., 1972), 15.
22. Thurston, Herbert, “Symbolism,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. IV (Robert Appleton Company, 1912, Online Edition, 2003).
23. St. Ambrose, Theological and Dogmatic Works: The Sacraments, The Mysteries (The Catholic University of America Press: Washington, D.C., 1963), 7.
24. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II.
25. Dix, Dom Gregory, The Shape of the Liturgy (Dacre Press: London, 1945), 28. Taken from St. Ignatius’ Epistle to the Magnesians: VI.I.
26. Ratzinger, The Spirit, 61.
27. Baur, John Chrysostom, 194.
28. Dix, The Shape, 16.
29. Fortescue, “Liturgy”.
30. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book VIII, Section II, paragraph XII (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
31. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II.
32. Fortescue, Adrian, “Antiochene Liturgy,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. I (Robert Appleton Company, 1907, Online Edition, 2003).
33. Divine Liturgy of St. James.
34. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 494.
35. St. John Chrysostom, Instructions to Catechumens: 2 (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church,” Copyright © 1999).
36. St. Cyprian, Epistle LXIII.3 (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
37. Baur, John Chrysostom, 183.
38. Ratzinger, The Spirit, 176-177.
39. Torevell, David, Losing the Sacred: Ritual, Modernity and Liturgical Reform (T & T Clark Ltd.: Edinburgh, 2000), 48-49.
40. Introduction to the Liturgy, ed. Anscar J. Chupungco, O.S.B. (The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minn., 1997), 76. 14
41. Martimort, A.G., “Structure and Laws of the Liturgical Celebration,” The Church at Prayer: An Introduction to the Liturgy, vol. I—Principles of the Liturgy (The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minn., 1987), 180.
42. Introduction to the Liturgy, 76.
43. Divine Liturgy of St. James.
44. Ibid.
45. Ibid.
46. The Divine Liturgy of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist Mark, The Disciple of the Holy Peter (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
47. Martimort, “Structure and Laws”, 180.
48. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II.
49. Baur, John Chrysostom, 192.
50. From Homilia de baptismatis Christi, MG 49,379, in Quasten, Johannes, Patrology, vol. III (The Newman Press: Westminster, Maryland, 1960), 480.
51. Quasten, Patrology, 480.
52. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II.
53. Fortescue, “Antiochene Liturgy”.
54. The Divine Liturgy of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist Mark.
55. Quasten, Patrology, 480.
56. From St. John Chrystosom, in Quasten, Patrology, 480.
57. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 577.
58. From St. John Chrysostom’s Homily 82 on Matthew 5, in Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 441.
59. Quasten, Patrology, 480.
60. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 441.
61. Quasten, Patrology, 480.
62. Ibid.
63. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 504.
64. Ratzinger, The Spirit, 60.
65. Ibid, 71.
66. The Divine Liturgy of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist Mark.
67. Fortescue, “Antiochene Liturgy”.
68. From the Acts of Thomas I.10, in The Early Christians after the Death of the Apostles, ed. Eberhard Arnold (Plough Publishing House: Rifton, N.Y., 1970).
69. From Acts of John 84, 84, 79, in The Early Christians, 235.
70. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 495.
71. Divine Liturgy of St. James.
Questions for Personal Reflection and Group Sharing:
1. How did the Early Church understand the nature of the sacred liturgy?
2. How was the liturgy of the New Covenant foreshadowed in the worship of the Old Covenant Temple?
3. How do the sensate elements of the liturgy help Catholics properly and more fully experience the Mass?
RESPONSES TO THIS CHAPTER:
Response of Sean Hurt:
The unseen spiritual realities of the Mysteries expressed themselves through the physicality of the ritual. The manner in which the body expressed itself liturgically “[made] the essence of the liturgy, as it were, bodily visible.”
When I first started attending masses, before I even started RCIA, I mostly ignored the liturgical movements. Things like genuflection, an offering or opening gesture, even the sign of the cross I didn’t really participate. I thought, “This is not how I show respect, holiness etc. Should I do it just because everyone else does? That wouldn’t be genuine.”
It wasn’t until I met Ronda’s sister who teaches sacred dance that I really understood the importance of these gestures. She taught me that we can pray through movement. In fact that is an important aspect of prayer. Jesus taught us to love God with our whole being. So, doesn’t it make sense to pray with our bodies as well?
Now, we normally assume our minds control our bodies. But I think it’s a two-way street. Outward actions (such as dance and gestures) can shape our interior self. For example, there is something inherent to genuflection that builds an inward respect for our Lord. It seems to me that action and belief reinforce each other, rather than one simply causing the other. So, it’s fascinating to me how the early Church recognized this, and placed such emphasis on movement.
Response from Kathleen Brouillette:
I am tempted to write, “this is a recording” because my reaction to these chapters on liturgy is the same as it has been to all the preceding chapters: our beloved Holy Mother Church needs to do a better job of forming her people in the truth. A significant part of that truth, the image of Christ as Bridegroom of the Church and Head of His Body, the Church, is noted in the introduction to Fr. Kolinski’s paper: “…‘in the earthly liturgy we take part in a foretaste of that heavenly liturgy which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem,’ a sacred action surpassing all others, ‘of Christ the priest and of His Body, the Church.’ ”
A clear and deep understanding of that truth would do much to change the celebration of liturgy today, when mankind takes so much for granted and is especially impressed with his own ability to understand and master the world in which he lives. There is precious little sense of mystery and awe, and very little fear of the Lord, who is being systematically removed from every aspect of life in the twenty-first century, as I have written before.
In Fr. Kolinski’s course (taught at Holy Apostles on campus and also on-line in the Distance Learning program) on organic development of the liturgy, he taught that the Church and Her liturgy are a living and growing entity, evolving over time. However, removal of so much of the beauty and awe in language, architecture, art, music, and such has also removed much of the mystery and reverence on the part of the people. Fewer are attending Mass with any regularity, or exhibiting any outward expression of holy fear. We are not taught the privilege of being in the Presence of such a great mystery, as they were in the early Church. How many people strike their breasts as they say, “through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault”? How many follow a Eucharistic fast? How many even rid their mouths of gum or candy before going to receive the Most Precious Body and Blood of Christ? It’s heartbreaking… We have no sense of sin and little sense of unworthiness because man has made himself a god. We see more a sense of entitlement – even when it comes to the Eucharist. How many march up to receive Communion without having gone to Mass or confession in many years?
Response from David Tate:
We fall so easily into the trap of comparing the past with the ‘superior’ standards of today. The quotation that really helps me to refrain from unfairly judging the past is, “That was then, and this is now.” We must also include this mentality when understanding how the early Church celebrated Liturgy. It is very easy to ‘suppose’ many things. We can err on both sides of supposition. The first side is that because they were closer in time to the Apostles, they must have been more correct. The other side is to assume that they did a lot of “improvisation” due to their ignorance of a truly proper liturgy. Through research of ancient liturgies, Fr. Kolinski shows that the Early Church gained quite quickly a “striking uniformity… at a very early date.”
Fr. Kolinski often says that Heaven touches the earth during the Holy Mass. We are so accustomed to seeing with our eyes of flesh that it is difficult to perceive sometimes the difference between the Liturgy and any other human performance. If we had eyes to see the transcendent, our lives would be completed changed with a single Mass. How true it is when we see how the Old Covenant priests did celebrate a shadow of Holy Mass when they served at the Altar of the Holy of Holies.
St. Ambrose, Theological and Dogmatic Works: The Sacraments, The Mysteries (The Catholic University of America Press: Washington, D.C., 1963).
Baker, Margaret. “The Temple Roots of the Liturgy,” (Online resource, Jewish Roots of Eastern Christian Mysticism Project, Marquette University, 2003).
Baur, Chrysostomus, OSB, John Chrysostom and His Times, vol. I (The Newman Press: Westminster, Maryland, 1959).
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II, Section VII, Paragraph LVII (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book VIII, Section II, paragraph XII (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
St. Cyprian, Epistle LXIII (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
Divine Liturgy of St. James (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
The Divine Liturgy of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist Mark, The Disciple of the Holy Peter (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
Dix, Dom Gregory, The Shape of the Liturgy (Dacre Press: London, 1945).
The Early Christians after the Death of the Apostles, ed. Eberhard Arnold (Plough Publishing House: Rifton, N.Y., 1970).
Encyclopedia of the Early Church, ed. Angelo Di Berardino (Oxford University Press: N.Y., 1992).
Fortescue, Adrian, “Antiochene Liturgy,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. I (Robert Appleton Company, 1907, Online Edition, 2003).
Fortescue, Adrian, “Liturgy,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. IX (Robert Appleton Company, 1908, Online Edition, 2003).
Fortescue, Adrian, “Liturgy of Jerusalem,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. VIII (Robert Appleton Company, 1910, Online Edition, 2003).
Introduction to the Liturgy, ed. Anscar J. Chupungco, O.S.B. (The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minn., 1997).
Jenner Henry, “Ambrosian Liturgy and Rite,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. I (Robert Appleton Company, 1907, Online Edition, 2003). 12
St. John Chrysostom, Instructions to Catechumens (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church,” Copyright © 1999).
Kinross, Lord, Hagia Sopia (Newsweek: N.Y., 1972).
Martimort, A.G., “Structure and Laws of the Liturgical Celebration,” The Church at Prayer: An Introduction to the Liturgy, vol. I—Principles of the Liturgy (The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minn., 1987).
The Mystery of Christian Worship: and other writings, ed. Burkhard Neunheuser, O.S.B. (The Newman Press: Westminster, Maryland, 1932).
Neunheuser, Burkhard, O.S.B., “Roman Genius Revisited,” Liturgy for the New Millenium (The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minn., 2000).
Quasten, Johannes, Patrology, vol. III (The Newman Press: Westminster, Maryland, 1960).
Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal, The Spirit of the Liturgy (Ignatius Press: San Francisco, 2000).
Thurston, Herbert, “Symbolism,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. IV (Robert Appleton Company, 1912, Online Edition, 2003).
Torevell, David, Losing the Sacred: Ritual, Modernity and Liturgical Reform (T & T Clark Ltd.: Edinburgh, 2000).
Endnotes
1. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, ed. Angelo Di Berardino (Oxford University Press: N.Y., 1992), 293.
2. Neunheuser, Burkhard, O.S.B., “Roman Genius Revisited,” Liturgy for the New Millenium (The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minn., 2000), 43.
3. Fortescue, Adrian, “Liturgy,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. IX (Robert Appleton Company, 1908, Online Edition, 2003).
4. The Mystery of Christian Worship: and other writings, ed. Burkhard Neunheuser, OSB (The Newman Press: Westminster, Maryland, 1932), 34.
5. Ibid, 35.
6. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 495.
7. Ibid, 495.
8. Ibid, 577.
9. Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal, The Spirit of the Liturgy (Ignatius Press: San Francisco, 2000), 60.
10. Hebrews 9:23.
11. Hebrews 9:24.
12. Hebrews 8:5.
13. Baker, Margaret. “The Temple Roots of the Liturgy,” (Online resource, Jewish Roots of Eastern Christian Mysticism Project, Marquette University, 2003).
14. From St. Cyril of Jerusalem, in Baker, “The Temple Roots”
15. From the Nestorian liturgy, in Baker, “The Temple Roots”
16. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II, Section VII, Paragraph LVII (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”). Our word “nave” comes from the Latin word for ship, navis.
17. Baur, Chrysostomus, O.S.B., John Chrysostom and His Times, vol. I (The Newman Press: Westminster, Maryland, 1959), 196.
18. Divine Liturgy of St. James (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
19. Exodus 26:31-34.
20. Hebrews 9:4.
21. Kinross, Lord, Hagia Sopia (Newsweek: N.Y., 1972), 15.
22. Thurston, Herbert, “Symbolism,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. IV (Robert Appleton Company, 1912, Online Edition, 2003).
23. St. Ambrose, Theological and Dogmatic Works: The Sacraments, The Mysteries (The Catholic University of America Press: Washington, D.C., 1963), 7.
24. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II.
25. Dix, Dom Gregory, The Shape of the Liturgy (Dacre Press: London, 1945), 28. Taken from St. Ignatius’ Epistle to the Magnesians: VI.I.
26. Ratzinger, The Spirit, 61.
27. Baur, John Chrysostom, 194.
28. Dix, The Shape, 16.
29. Fortescue, “Liturgy”.
30. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book VIII, Section II, paragraph XII (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
31. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II.
32. Fortescue, Adrian, “Antiochene Liturgy,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. I (Robert Appleton Company, 1907, Online Edition, 2003).
33. Divine Liturgy of St. James.
34. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 494.
35. St. John Chrysostom, Instructions to Catechumens: 2 (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church,” Copyright © 1999).
36. St. Cyprian, Epistle LXIII.3 (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
37. Baur, John Chrysostom, 183.
38. Ratzinger, The Spirit, 176-177.
39. Torevell, David, Losing the Sacred: Ritual, Modernity and Liturgical Reform (T & T Clark Ltd.: Edinburgh, 2000), 48-49.
40. Introduction to the Liturgy, ed. Anscar J. Chupungco, O.S.B. (The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minn., 1997), 76. 14
41. Martimort, A.G., “Structure and Laws of the Liturgical Celebration,” The Church at Prayer: An Introduction to the Liturgy, vol. I—Principles of the Liturgy (The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minn., 1987), 180.
42. Introduction to the Liturgy, 76.
43. Divine Liturgy of St. James.
44. Ibid.
45. Ibid.
46. The Divine Liturgy of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist Mark, The Disciple of the Holy Peter (Online Edition, New Advent, “The Fathers of the Church”).
47. Martimort, “Structure and Laws”, 180.
48. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II.
49. Baur, John Chrysostom, 192.
50. From Homilia de baptismatis Christi, MG 49,379, in Quasten, Johannes, Patrology, vol. III (The Newman Press: Westminster, Maryland, 1960), 480.
51. Quasten, Patrology, 480.
52. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II.
53. Fortescue, “Antiochene Liturgy”.
54. The Divine Liturgy of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist Mark.
55. Quasten, Patrology, 480.
56. From St. John Chrystosom, in Quasten, Patrology, 480.
57. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 577.
58. From St. John Chrysostom’s Homily 82 on Matthew 5, in Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 441.
59. Quasten, Patrology, 480.
60. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 441.
61. Quasten, Patrology, 480.
62. Ibid.
63. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 504.
64. Ratzinger, The Spirit, 60.
65. Ibid, 71.
66. The Divine Liturgy of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist Mark.
67. Fortescue, “Antiochene Liturgy”.
68. From the Acts of Thomas I.10, in The Early Christians after the Death of the Apostles, ed. Eberhard Arnold (Plough Publishing House: Rifton, N.Y., 1970).
69. From Acts of John 84, 84, 79, in The Early Christians, 235.
70. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, 495.
71. Divine Liturgy of St. James.
Questions for Personal Reflection and Group Sharing:
1. How did the Early Church understand the nature of the sacred liturgy?
2. How was the liturgy of the New Covenant foreshadowed in the worship of the Old Covenant Temple?
3. How do the sensate elements of the liturgy help Catholics properly and more fully experience the Mass?
RESPONSES TO THIS CHAPTER:
Response of Sean Hurt:
The unseen spiritual realities of the Mysteries expressed themselves through the physicality of the ritual. The manner in which the body expressed itself liturgically “[made] the essence of the liturgy, as it were, bodily visible.”
When I first started attending masses, before I even started RCIA, I mostly ignored the liturgical movements. Things like genuflection, an offering or opening gesture, even the sign of the cross I didn’t really participate. I thought, “This is not how I show respect, holiness etc. Should I do it just because everyone else does? That wouldn’t be genuine.”
It wasn’t until I met Ronda’s sister who teaches sacred dance that I really understood the importance of these gestures. She taught me that we can pray through movement. In fact that is an important aspect of prayer. Jesus taught us to love God with our whole being. So, doesn’t it make sense to pray with our bodies as well?
Now, we normally assume our minds control our bodies. But I think it’s a two-way street. Outward actions (such as dance and gestures) can shape our interior self. For example, there is something inherent to genuflection that builds an inward respect for our Lord. It seems to me that action and belief reinforce each other, rather than one simply causing the other. So, it’s fascinating to me how the early Church recognized this, and placed such emphasis on movement.
Response from Kathleen Brouillette:
I am tempted to write, “this is a recording” because my reaction to these chapters on liturgy is the same as it has been to all the preceding chapters: our beloved Holy Mother Church needs to do a better job of forming her people in the truth. A significant part of that truth, the image of Christ as Bridegroom of the Church and Head of His Body, the Church, is noted in the introduction to Fr. Kolinski’s paper: “…‘in the earthly liturgy we take part in a foretaste of that heavenly liturgy which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem,’ a sacred action surpassing all others, ‘of Christ the priest and of His Body, the Church.’ ”
A clear and deep understanding of that truth would do much to change the celebration of liturgy today, when mankind takes so much for granted and is especially impressed with his own ability to understand and master the world in which he lives. There is precious little sense of mystery and awe, and very little fear of the Lord, who is being systematically removed from every aspect of life in the twenty-first century, as I have written before.
In Fr. Kolinski’s course (taught at Holy Apostles on campus and also on-line in the Distance Learning program) on organic development of the liturgy, he taught that the Church and Her liturgy are a living and growing entity, evolving over time. However, removal of so much of the beauty and awe in language, architecture, art, music, and such has also removed much of the mystery and reverence on the part of the people. Fewer are attending Mass with any regularity, or exhibiting any outward expression of holy fear. We are not taught the privilege of being in the Presence of such a great mystery, as they were in the early Church. How many people strike their breasts as they say, “through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault”? How many follow a Eucharistic fast? How many even rid their mouths of gum or candy before going to receive the Most Precious Body and Blood of Christ? It’s heartbreaking… We have no sense of sin and little sense of unworthiness because man has made himself a god. We see more a sense of entitlement – even when it comes to the Eucharist. How many march up to receive Communion without having gone to Mass or confession in many years?
Response from David Tate:
We fall so easily into the trap of comparing the past with the ‘superior’ standards of today. The quotation that really helps me to refrain from unfairly judging the past is, “That was then, and this is now.” We must also include this mentality when understanding how the early Church celebrated Liturgy. It is very easy to ‘suppose’ many things. We can err on both sides of supposition. The first side is that because they were closer in time to the Apostles, they must have been more correct. The other side is to assume that they did a lot of “improvisation” due to their ignorance of a truly proper liturgy. Through research of ancient liturgies, Fr. Kolinski shows that the Early Church gained quite quickly a “striking uniformity… at a very early date.”
Fr. Kolinski often says that Heaven touches the earth during the Holy Mass. We are so accustomed to seeing with our eyes of flesh that it is difficult to perceive sometimes the difference between the Liturgy and any other human performance. If we had eyes to see the transcendent, our lives would be completed changed with a single Mass. How true it is when we see how the Old Covenant priests did celebrate a shadow of Holy Mass when they served at the Altar of the Holy of Holies.
RSS Feed