THE HISTORY OF THE TRADITIONAL OR TRIDENTINE MASS

Rama P. Coomaraswamy, M.D.

"The work of our redemption is accomplished on the altar"
Secret, 9th Sunday after Pentecost
O God, Who hast sanctioned the diversity of offerings by the perfection of one sacrifice, receive the
sacrifice offered Thee by Thy devoted servants, and sanctify it as Thou didst sanctify the gifts of Abel, that
what each one hath offered to the glory of Thy majesty may profit for the salvation of all Through our
Lord...
Secret, Seventh Sunday after Pentecost
"Cursed be the man who performs to the work of God improperly" Jeremiah. XLVIII.10

In tracing the history of the Tridentine Mass one can follow two possible courses. One can either
follow events from the time of the Last Supper - not a development as many claim, but rather a "fleshing out" of the
divine outline, or one can look to the "pre-Christian" period and see how the Traditional Mass - the central rite of
our faith, incorporates within it, and brings to fruition, all the sacrificial rites of the old dispensation, and indeed, of
the entire world. While attempting to do both within the confines of a short essay, it is the latter aspect that will be
emphasized. Finally I shall attempt to show how our participation in the traditional Mass is in fact our participation
in the whole life of Christ - how through participation in the Mass we are baptized with Christ, die with Christ and
are resurrected with Christ.
Let it be clear from the outset that I am saying nothing original in what follows, unless of course
there be errors in the exposition. The topic is, as Father Marmion says, "an ineffable subject... Even the priest, who
makes the Eucharistic Sacrifice the center and sun of his life, is powerless to put into words the marvels that the love
of Christ Jesus has there gathered up. All that man, a mere creature, can say of this mystery come forth from the
Heart of God, remains so far beneath the reality that, when we have said all that we know of it, it is as if we had said
nothing. there is no subject the priest loves more and at the same time dreads more to speak of, so high and holy is
this mystery."1
Let us begin with the traditional Mass as we know it. I say, as we know it, because it is essentially
unchanged from the time of its establishment to the present day. As Father Barry said, should a Christian from the
first century return to life, and walk into a Church where the Tridentine Mass was being said, he would recognize it
as the Mass he was familiar with. This is why we call it the "traditional Mass" - the Mass which was literally
"handed down" and again "The Mass of all times." I avoid the use of the phrase "Latin Mass," because this can refer
to a variety of different rites including the Novus Ordo Missae.
I would like you to imagine the situation in Palestine following the Pentecost. Shortly after St.
Peter said the first Mass in the same room where Christ established the rite, the twelve Apostles dispersed
throughout the world, carrying with them, not the Bible, but rather that most precious of all precious things, our
traditional Mass. They went to different parts of the world - St. James to Spain, Joseph of Arimathea - even though
not an Apostle - to England, St. Thomas to India, Peter and Paul to Rome and the others throughout the Middle East.
And each of them brought with them the central and essential rite which we know as the Mass. Each of the Apostles
adapted the Mass to the nations in which they found themselves. Of course, it was within the perogatives of the

1 Some claim that the word priest is not used in the New Testament. This is true. So long, namely as the
bloody sacrifices of the Mosaic rites, together with the Aaronic priesthood, the temple of Jerusalem and
the various Jewish ceremonies were in evidence, the Apostles discreetly refrained from the use of such
words as priest, sacrifice, altar, or church, so that by this contrast they might impress the faithful with the
difference between the Jewish religion and the Church of Christ. It was done that no one might think the
Apostles were imitating the Mosaic priesthood, abolished by Christ, when the new priesthood had been
instituted in its place. But as soon as the temple of Jerusalem was destroyed, and the priesthood which
could not sacrifice elsewhere but in Jerusalem ceased, the disciples began immediately to use such words
as priest, altar, sacrifice. St. Ignatius, the disciple of St. John, was one of the first to use these words. After
him, the erly Fathers of the Church such as Tertullian, Cyprian, Ambrose, Eusebius and Jerome, use the
words in all their epistles.
1
Apostles to do this, for, as the Church teaches, Revelation ceased, not with the death of Christ, but with the death of
the last apostle. What is remarkable is, that despite the diversity of rites recognized by the Church as valid, all of
them retain the same essential core.
We hear a lot about the need to adapt the faith to our times. But let us remember that the Apostles
were not a brood of modernists intent on compromising with the world. On the contrary, they were men dedicated to
bringing the world into conformity with the Church which is to say, bringing souls into conformity with Christ. The
Church, the Body of Christ, is Christ's presence in the world. They knew that they could not serve both God and
Mammon - that it was not for the Father of the Prodigal Son to join his offspring in a life of dissipation that ended
up in feeding pigs, but for the Son to return to the bosom of the Father. The world of course also knows its own. The
refusal to conform to the syncretism of ancient Rome and the entrenched ideologies and power structures of the
world led to the inevitable. So much was this the case that all but one of the Apostles were martyred - and the only
reason St. John wasn't martyred is because, despite all their efforts such as boiling him in oil, they couldn't kill him.
And so it is that the Apostles, while preserving the essentials, adapted the rites of the Church to the various lands in
which they found themselves. In this they provided the Church with a pattern to follow.
Adaptation is of course appropriate under certain circumstances. More precisely, one must not so
much consider adaptation as such, but just what one is adapting to. As an example of legitimate adaptation, consider
Baptism. In the early Church. In the time of the Apostles Baptism was by immersion patterned on Christ's Baptism
in the river Jordan. We have descriptions of how these rites were carried out and one can see the baptismal fonts
such as still exist in some of the churches of the Middle East into which a person had to walk. But when the Church
found itself in northern Europe, baptism by immersion was no longer advisable - one didn't have to be a member of
the polar bear club to enter the Church. The essentials were recognized and as long as flowing water was used, the
baptizing individual had the proper intention, and the proper words said, the rite was effective. And so it is with the
Apostolic adaptations of the Mass. There are some 83 forms of the Mass used throughout the world - the Traditional
Mass which we are familiar with is but one of them. There are Eastern rite Masses, Coptic Masses, Arabic Masses,
Ambrosian Masses. There used to be a special rite used in England called the Saram rite. These are all true Masses.
Those who have attended Eastern Rite Masses know they are quite different than those we are used to. The rite is
carried out behind a curtain and the iconostasis - thus signifying its mysterious nature. In the west the altar rail
serves the same function of enclosing the sacred space and distinguishing it from the remainder of the church. The
Eucharist is given in a spoon and dipped in the consecrated wine. Similarly, in the Eastern Church, a confessional is
not used. Instead the priest and the penitent go up to Christ painted on the Iconastasis. The priest puts his stole over
the shoulder of the penitent and the penitent confesses along with the priest to Christ. But the essence of the rite is
the same. True Contrition must be expressed and Penance is given by the priest followed by absolution.
What however is remarkable is not how different the various rites of the Church are, but how
similar. Latin rite Catholics use unleavened bread as did Christ at the Last Supper. Eastern rite Catholics use
leavened bread, said by some to symbolize the risen Christ. But in point of fact, the canons or rules of both rites
allow for the use of both forms of bread. The form of the bread used is a matter of Church discipline. The Eastern
rite Catholics hold that the consecration is the result of the Epiclesis or prayer said just after the words of
Consecration. When the Eastern rite priest, acting in the place of Christ, says this prayer, he covers the Chalice with
the Veil and waves it to symbolize the descent of the Holy Spirit. The Roman Church holds that transubstantiation
occurs when the priest - acting in the place of Christ - says the words of Consecration. Now theologians can argue as
to just when transubstantiation occurs - but what is clear is that Rome has never denied the validity of the eastern
rites. What is also clear is that both rites - and indeed, all the valid rites - use the same words of consecration. There
are in fact some 17 different Eastern rites ranging from the Rheuthanian to the Malabar rite used in India. But the
words of consecration used vary only with respect to one phrase: Mysterium Fidei. Christ did not use these words -
but some of the Apostles - tradition says Peter was the first to do this - inserted them in the rite, while others did not.
The Church has never held that they were essential. Incidentally, the novus ordo missae not only changed the Words
of Consecration, they also dropped the prayer in the traditional Mass which is the equivalent of the Epiclesis.
It is interesting to note that the word Mass, usually said to derive from the dismissal prayer Ita
Missa est (Go, the Mass is over), more likely is derived from the Hebrew word misssach, meaning a voluntary
oblation (Deuteronomy 16:10), for such is our Sacrifice of the Altar
And so the Mass came to be said in various languages - arabic - Coptic - Greek - Aramaic -
Kanarese, etc. But despite this its core or essential parts remained the same. Now, the Church has always held that
the ceremonies surrounding a sacrament can be changed if there is adequate reason - but that the core or principle
parts must remain unchanged. The core of our Mass is what is called the Canon and above all the Words of
Consecration which are part of the Canon. As far as we can tell, the Canon of our Mass goes back to the time of
Christ and the Apostles. We believe this on two grounds:
1) the Church teaches that the Canon "was established many centuries ago and is so entirely free
of error that it contains nothing that does not eminently inspire reverence and devotion, and raise to God the hearts
2
of those who offer the Sacrifice. For it is composed of the very words of the Lord, the traditions of the Apostles, and
the pious institutions of the holy pontiffs." Such is the declaration of the XII session of the Council of Trent, and as
such it is something we must believe - for the Church in its magisterial teaching cannot lie to us. We know what the
last phrase - the pious institutions of the holy pontiffs refers to. Pope St. Gregory added 19 words to the prayer Hanc
Igitur - diesque nostros in tua pace disponas - at a time when Rome was being besieged by the Lombards and the
city was in utmost peril, and the Church has judged it expedient to retain these words ever since. And Pope St. Leo
added another four.
2) The second reason we believe this is based on historical evidence. To quote but one source: the
Anglican Liturgical Historian Sir William Palmer said, the Canon of the Mass "may have existed from a period of
the most remote antiquity, and perhaps there are nearly as good reasons for referring its original composition to the
Apostolic Age."
Obviously additions to the central rite were made over time. We have already mentioned those of
Sts. Leo and Gregory. Outside of the Canon innumerable changes have been made throughout the ages - mostly in
the way of additions. Now additions are a very different thing than deletions and when we come to the Novus Ordo
Missae, somewhere between 60 and 80% of the traditional rite has been deleted. Additions are also different from
changes in the wording of the rite. What were some of the additions? Well some of the prayers said before and after
the Canon were added. For example, the Last Gospel was instituted in the 13th Century. In the 12 century when
heretics denied the Real Presence, the Church instituted kneeling when it was said in the creed that "the Word was
made flesh." We know that the Gloria was originally said only at the Christmas Mass, but was later extended to all
those Masses apart from penitential seasons and funerals. Incidentally, the current official English translation of the
Gloria used in the Novus Ordo is false for it grants peace to all men - but peace on earth is only accessible to men of
good will. We know that at the Last Supper there were readings taken from Scripture. We know that Sacred writings
were read in the earliest liturgies. However, the New Testament Canon of Scriptures was only established in the
fourth century, and hence the present cycle of Scripture readings had to be established after that time.
This is an important point to keep in mind. While the Scriptures were written between 6 to 100
years after the death of Christ - scholars argue about the precise dates - the New Testament as such was only
established around the year 370. The reason for this was that there were so many spurious Scriptures being
promulgated that the Church found it necessary to convene a Council in order to sort out what was really Catholic
and what was not. It was at this Council that the Scriptures or New Testament as we know it, were established. Thus
it is that those who believe that the Scriptures and only the Scriptures are the basis of Christianity, have to recognize
that it is the Church that gave them the Scriptures, and not the other way around. St. Augustine bluntly said that if it
wasn't for the Church establishing the Scriptures as such, he would not give them his unconditioned assent. The
Protestants should remember this. So should those seemingly Catholic priests who we see on television holding a
Bible in their hands and imitating "for all the world" their Protestant brethren. It follows that it was impossible for
the Apostles to have brought the Bible with them when they first started to Evangelize the world. It was shortly after
the fourth century, during the reign of Pope St. Damasus, that the Church selected the most important Scripture
passages which were to be read throughout the year so as to become fixed in the minds of the faithful. In the new
mass these Scripture selections were changed and, following the Lutheran pattern, read on a triennial basis. And this
is to say nothing of the newer translations which frequently distort the meaning of the text. Consider the word Hell.
In the Douay version it is mentioned some 350 times; in the King James Version, over 150 times, but in the New
American Bible used in the Novus Ordo it is mentioned but once, and that not in a prescribed reading. How about
the translation of a "mess of pottage" as "gimmie some of that red stuff"? Or the Hail Mary as "Greetings most
favored daughter..."
Returning to the Mass, the point has already been made that additions are quite a different thing
than deletions or changes in the words. Over the course of the centuries, many additional prayers were added to the
Mass until, by the time of Pope Saint Pius V, the Mass had become overburdened with accretions to the point of
almost obscuring its essential core. Thus it was that Pius V gathered together the best scholars of the time and
removed all those accretions that had been added from the fifth century onwards. He allowed all the rites that had
been in use for over 200 years to be kept - such changes for example as we see in the Dominican rite - but otherwise
ordered that the Church return to the Mass as it had always been since the earliest of recorded history. Since then
there have been four very minor changes made in the official Mass he promulgated based either on better
scholarship or the revision of typographical errors. Paul VI would have us believe that his reforms were in no way
different from those of Pope Saint Pius the Fifth's. That such is a gross distortion of the facts is obvious. And so it is
that the core of the Mass as we know it today goes back to the earliest recorded time. As Father Louis Bouyer, a
Lutheran convert who was part of the Concilium that created the Novus Ordo Missae and who later regretted his
involvement said "The Roman Canon, as it is today, goes back to Gregory the Great. There is not, in the East or in
the West, a Eucharistic prayer remaining in use to this day, that can boast of such antiquity. To jettison it would be a
rejection of any claim on the part of the Roman Church to represent the True Catholic Church." He felt that the new
3
mass was very much responsible for what he called "The Decompensation of Catholicism."
The Church has been likened to the Ark of Noah which functions to enable us to travel safely over
the stormy seas of this world. It is also a title given to Our Lady who bore within her bosom Jesus Christ. Now the
Ark was not built according to the whims of Noah's contemporaries - even less according to the whims of Noah
himself. It was built according to the instructions of God who Himself sealed its door. And we can say the same for
our traditional Mass. Its essential core and nature was established by Christ Himself and embellished by the
Apostles. Our Mass is part of Revelation for God Himself instructed the Apostles, ordained them, and instructed
them to "to do these things in memory of me." Those of you who are familiar with my book on the Mass know that
this phrase means a great deal more than a "memorial" in the sense of remembering something that happened 2000
years ago.2

As opposed to this, the Novus Ordo Missae was created by men - or more exactly, by a Concilium
of some 200 individuals with the help of Protestants.3 Lutherans and the creators of the Novus Ordo Missae would
have us believe that the Mass was developed by men over a period of time - and that, for some strange reason, it was
necessary to bring the Mass into agreement with the Scriptures. Almost certainly, this "strange reason" was to
expedite the ecumenical process by accommodating the Protestants who reject Tradition and only accept the
[truncated] Scriptures. Now there is no more reason for a Catholic to bring the Mass into line with Scripture, then
there is reason to change the Scriptures to bring it into line with our Mass. Let us be clear about
this. As I have already pointed out, The first Scriptures were written some 6 years after Christ's Crucifixion and
those of St. John some 90 years later. The first Apostles did not go around like the Protestants, bringing the Good
News in the form of any written word.4 The Mass was not something drawn from the Scriptures but existed years
before the Scriptures were written. In fact, the Mass was so sacred that no one who was unbaptized was allowed to
be present - there is good historical reason to believe that the Canon had to be memorized by heart and was not
written down before the third century. It was referred to as the arcana - the secret which could not be disclosed to
the profane. The words of Consecration were so sacred that they were likened to the Holy of Holies of the Jewish
temple - when they were first written down in the fourth century, they were written in letters of gold. So sacred and
holy were the rites of the Mass considered that it is almost certain that the words of Scripture were somewhat altered
so as to give the sense but not the exact form used in the Consecration. And so we see that one of the principal
excuses used by the new Church to explain changing the words of Consecration is based on a false premise. What is
even more extraordinary is that the General Instruction which provides the rubrics for the new mass no longer uses
the phrase "Words of Consecration" - in line with the new and false historical perspective, they are now referred to
as the "Words of our Lord." And what is even more shocking is that Paul VI in changing the Words of Consecration,
in bringing them into line with those used by Lutherans and Protestants, used the phrase "We wish the Words of our
Lord to be..." It is a measure of our incredulity that we can even conceive of, much less accept, the Mass established
by Christ and the Apostles being altered by men. The true Mass - all of the true Masses throughout the world,
regardless of which rite - are based, not on Scripture, but on the words specified - in specie - in precise detail as the
traditional texts state - by Christ Himself. When it came to the other Sacraments, he told the Apostles in general
what the form or words used had to be, but with the Mass no variation was allowed, and throughout the long course
of history, no changes in these precious words were made. Of course there is another reason why the words we
consider to be related to the Words of Consecration are now referred to as "the words of our Lord." The reason is
that not only these words, but the entire Eucharistic Prayer(s) of the new mass are part of what is called the
"narration of the institution" or the retelling of the story of what occurred at the Last Supper. In other words, in the
Novus Ordo Missae, the "president" (for that is what the "priest" is called) is telling us the story of what happened
2000 years ago at the Last Supper. In reading the Scripture story, they are indeed the "words of Our Lord," and not
the "Words of Consecration." Under these circumstances, to speak of consecration would be inappropriate. The
Church has always taught that when a priest says or relates the traditional Mass as a historical event, no consecration
occurs.
The second fact to be recognized is that in all 83 rites of the Mass which the Church recognizes
and has always recognized as valid, the Words of Consecration are essentially the same. I have already explained to

2 Rama Coomaraswamy, The Problems with the New Mass, TAN, Rockford, Ill., 1992
3 "The idols of the Gentiles are silver and gold, the works of the hands of men. They
have mouths and speak not: they have eyes and see not" Psalm 113.
4 Cardinal Manning: "We neither derive our religion from the Scriptures, nor does it depend
on them. Our faith was in the world before the New Testament was written." The Temporal Mission of the
Church.
4
you that it was the Apostles who legitimately added the phrase Mysterium Fidei. Now all 83 rites use the word
many. None of them use the word all. This is, as St. Thomas Aquinas and innumerable saints have explained,
because, while Christ died for all men, not all are saved, but only those that accept Him. This explanation is
incorporated into the Catechism of the Council of Trent which clearly places it within the realm of what is called the
Ordinary Magisterium of the Church. The reason why many was changed to all is because the new Church believes
all men will go to heaven. This is why the funeral Mass in the new Church is the Mass of the Angels. What is the
Mass of the Angels? It is the Mass said for infants that die after baptism before they have a chance to sin. This is
why in the new funeral Mass there are no prayers for the repose of the soul - why pray for a soul that is going to
heaven. In the Latin version, the word anima or soul occurs twice in two prayers which are offered as "alternatives."
But how often are "alternative" prayers" used? Of course, a priest may add whatever he wants to the service and
occasionally one does hear a request for prayers for the repose of the soul - but not often. But returning to the issue
of mistranslating multis by all. The new Church would have us believe that there is no word for all in Aramaic. This
is a lie. It is a lie first propounded by the Protestant theologian Jeremias in the present century. I call it a lie because
the falsity of this claim has been repeatedly demonstrated by scholars of every persuasion. To see the absurdity of
such a claim, one only has to change many into all throughout the Scriptures.5
.
A third falsehood is the repeated claim by Paul VI that "nothing has changed in the new mass."
How can you delete between 60 and 80% of a rite, change the very Words of Consecration given to us by Christ, and
then claim that nothing has changed. One can list a host of other misrepresentations - the new mass - if one can call
it a mass at all, is unfortunately based on a host of similar distortions. I have only superficially dealt with the Novus
Ordo Missae, because, strictly speaking, it is not the Mass but something entirely different - something created by a
Concilium of some 200 people under the supervision of the red bishop Loclario and Annibal Bugnini, a man who
Michael Davies has virtually proven to be a Freemason, and who has referred to this service as a "new song."
Throughout this paper an attempt will be made to compare various aspects of Our Traditional Mass - created by
Christ and embellished by the Apostles - and the new "mass," a quasi-Protestant service created by a Concilium of
two hundred modernists assisted by six Protestant theologians.6

It will be argued by some that a pope can change what a previous pope established. Now this is
true when one is considering such practices as the pope eating dinner alone, or when one is dealing with disciplinary
matters such as eating meat on Friday or the length of the Fast before Mass. It is not however true that what is
magisterially established in the realm of "faith and morals" by one pope can be changed by another. The reason for
this is that whatever is magisterially established, is established by the Holy Ghost, and the Holy Ghost, incapable of
"speaking" other than the truth, cannot contradict Himself. Now the form and matter of the Sacraments has been
magisterially established since the time of Christ and the Apostles.7 The Bull Quo Primum is part of the Church's
Magisterium as are the various documents - "briefs, encyclical letters, consistorial allocutions, and other Apostolic
letters" - whose function is to protect the traditional liturgy of the Church. The traditional Mass, part of the Universal
and Ordinary Magisterium of the Church is and has always been protected from substantial change. It goes without
saying that the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium of the Church is protected from all error by its very nature. Let
us flee in horror from those who so loudly proclaim that this Magisterium is capable of any error. We can argue
about what is covered by the Ordinary Magisterium, but not about its infallible character which was always believed
and clearly defined at Vatican I

One further point. Many traditional Catholics will point to the Quo Primum as guaranteeing their
5 The importance of retaining the precise words of Christ relates to their meaning. For example, Christ
said “This is my body which is given for you” Christ said that His body is given. He did not say: “It is
given to you, “ but “given for you and many others” - not to you, but for you, an offering to God.
6 Among those responsible is the Jesuit Joseph Jungman. I mention this because many
traditional Catholics mistakenly consider him to be orthodox. It is also pertinent that, according to Father
Summers, in the black or satanic masses, the priest faces the audience (The History of Witchcraft).
7 in speciae for the Mass, in genera for the other sacraments.
5
right to the traditional Mass. They are of course correct. But we must be clear about what this document says. It does
not say that the Church cannot offer other forms of the Mass, such as the Eastern Rite, but only that no one can
forbid the traditional Latin rite. The new Church does not violate this Bull by allowing for the usage of other. It
violates this Bull and incurs the "wrath of Almighty God" by forbidding the traditional rite, by altering it, or by
making some other rite "normative." There has been some debate about whether or not the new Church has in fact
abrogated this Bull - Michael Davies says it hasn't and further denies that the new Church has forbidden the
traditional rite. He is wrong - and I might add, he often is. I have a letter - or a copy of a letter - from the Papal
Commission Ecclesia Dei to the All India Catholic Laity Congress which clearly states that Quo Primum has been
abrogated. To quote it directly, "the law of the Bull Quo Primum was removed in 1970, at the time established by
Pope Paul VI for the obligatory use of his Missal." It is perhaps difficult for some to comprehend what this statement
means. Let me reiterate: the traditional rite which sufficed within the Church for almost 2000 years has been
forbidden by the new Church. This is an extraordinary act. Imagine Hindus forbidding the reading of the Vedas; or
Muslims forbidding the reading of the Koran! Everything is acceptable but the traditional Mass.
***
Before considering the second aspect of the history of the Mass, its historical roots dating back to
the earliest of times, let us pause to consider the intrinsic nature and essential character of sacrifice. The word comes
from sacer and facere - to make sacred.8 One can define sacrifice as a two-fold act, the purpose of which is to bring
a gift to God, and also to sanctify the person who gives it. Now it may seem cruel to us to sacrifice an animal, but in
effect, life is a gift of the Creator, as is everything such as food which goes to maintain life. And so it is that we offer
to the creator some part of that which He has given us. Usually this is the best part - the first fruits or the
unblemished lamb. Now, as a result of the Fall of Adam, man had to die. In performing a living sacrifice, an animal
is offered up in the place of man so that man can, as it were, be returned to the Edenic state in which there is no
death. In some of the ancient pagan sacrifices, before the animal was killed, those responsible prayed God to enter
the animal; and after the animal was killed, the priest would wear the animal's skin. The animal dies in our place - or
we offer up the animal as we should offer ourselves up. As St. Thomas said: "Exterius sacrificium signum est
interioris sacrificii - exterior sacrifice is the sign of interior Sacrifice." In the Mass the animal is replaced by Christ
Himself. It is in this sense that Christ died for us or died for our sins that we might live. As a result of his Sacrifice,
we are said "to put on Christ." By offering ourselves up with Christ - by participating and partaking of this sacrifice
we offer up the "old man." This is why we must be baptized with Christ, die with Christ, and be resurrected with
Christ into life everlasting.

The admonition to "put on Christ" carries with it yet another implication. Adam was created in
"the image and likeness of God." After the fall Adam lost the likeness, but still retained the "image" of Christ. In his
fallen state, he recognized that he was naked and was ashamed. As St. Symeon teaches, "he was stripped of that
uncorrupt garment and glory, and was clothed in the nakedness of corruption." And before expelling him from
Paradise, God clothed him in animal skins which as St. Augustine tells us, was a sign of man's new found
corruptibility. Tradition has it that Christ was naked like the first Adam when he was crucified, a condition which we
because of our fallen nature see as yet another humiliation. It is the Sacrifice of Christ that reversed the fall of Adam,
and we by participation in the Sacrifice of the Mass, cast off our corruptible animal nature and once again "put on
Christ."

Again, when a live animal is offered, it is a bloody sacrifice: thus we see how the ancient Jewish
sacrifices prefigured the bloody Sacrifice of Christ. Christ is, as St. Paul says, "the first-born of all Creation." (Col. I:
15-16) Now, according to St. Iranaeus, "we offer up the first fruits of creation in the Eucharistic Sacrifice: all
creation is recapitulated in Christ and offered to God."

***

We should not be surprised to find the roots of our traditional Mass in the practices of the Old
Dispensation, for Christ told us that he did not come to destroy, but to fulfil the law of the Prophets. We know from
8 Novus Ordo theologians actually described the process of creating the new mass as a
"desacrelization" and a "dymystification."
6
the Canon that the Mass is closely linked to the Sacrifice of Abel the just, the Sacrifice of Abraham, the Father of
our race, the sacrifice of Noah, and that of the high priest Melchisedch who also offered "a victim without
blemish." (The reason for the use of bold letters will become clear later.) Now these Sacrifices were precursors of
the Mass. As St. Augustine teaches, "in the Old Law the New was hidden, and in the New Law the Old was
unfolded," and as St. Paul tells us, the Old Law "contained the shadow of the good things to come." The rites
established by the Old Law were incorporated into the Mass and as it were perfected by the Mass. And just as the
rites of the Old Law were established on the Mount "in exact detail," as Moses tells us, so also, as we shall see, were
the essential rites of the New Covenant. The reason these four sacrifices are specifically mentioned in the traditional
Mass is that they in a special manner prefigure the Crucifixion.

The first type of holy sacrifice of the Mass was the sacrifice of Abel who offered a burnt offering of the firstlings of
his flock. We learn that this offering - it was a lamb - was pleasing to Almighty God, for Scripture tells us "The Lord
kindled Abel's sacrifice," which means that it was a holocaust or a burnt offering where the consuming flames came
from above. So it is in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass; when the priest has offered the oblation of bread and wine
upon the altar, and pronounced the words of consecration over them, the Holy Ghost, the divine fire, descends from
heaven and consumes the oblation, changing it into the true body and blood of Christ.9
The second type of holy sacrifice was that offered by the patriarch Noah. As we read in Scripture,
"Noah built an altar unto the Lord, and taking of all cattle and fowls that were clean, offered holocausts upon the
altar. And the Lord smelled a sweet savor, and said: I will no more curse the earth for the sake of man." We find a
third type of sacrifice in Abraham who offered up his son Isaac who carried the wood for his holocaust. It is said in
Scripture of Abraham that he "built an altar to the Lord, and called upon His name." The same is likewise said of
Isaac and Jacob. The fourth type of sacrifice is that of Melchisedech who, as we know, is a type of Christ.10
The sacrifice offered by Aaron and all other priests of the Mosaic law formed a fifth type. One of
these was the Rite of the Red Heifer which was referred to by St. Paul in Hebrews, Chapter 13. In Numbers, Chapter
19, we find that this was a rite of purification. The red Heifer had to be ritually clean, without spot or blemish.
(Again, bold letters.) And this Heifer had to be brought outside the camp as Galgotha is outside of Jerusalem, and
be immolated in the sight of all - immolated by being burnt with cedar wood which is the wood of the Cross.
It is very difficult to specify all the various rituals and sacrifices which the Jews practiced. It
would appear that in the law of Moses God appointed three principle kinds of sacrifices to be offered to Him by the
whole Jewish nation - primarily in the Temple at Jerusalem - the burnt offering, the peace offering and the sin
offerings. The burnt offering was a sacrifice of adoration in recognition of the supreme majesty of God; in this the
victim was entirely consumed. The peace offering was in thanksgiving and/or to propitiate the divine favor and
appease God's anger; in this part of the victim was burned, another part reserved for the prists, and a third part
attributed to those for whom the sacrifice was offered. The sin offering was expiatory, which is to say, to obtain
forgiveness of sin and remission of the penalty of sin. These correspond to the four ends of the traditional Mass: a
sacrifice of praise, thanksgiving, propitiation, and impetration or petition.
Father Lucas points out that for the attainment of the end ultimately desired, viz., full fellowship

9 Cochem's Explanation of the Holy Mass.

10 That the sacrifice of Melchisedech was a figure of the Sacrifice of the Mass. St. Paul explains this in
his letter to the Hebrews, Chapters VII, VIII, and IX. He expatiates at length on the priesthood of Christ
showing that Christ was a priest but not of the order of Aaron, because He was not of the tribe of Levi
whose sons alone were ordained to the priesthood. Being of the generation of Juda, from which kings
were chosen, Christ was a King and, therefore a priest according to the order of the King-priest
Melchisedech. The two priesthoods differed in two things. In the first place, Aaron sacrificed the blood of
animals, while Melchisedech offered bread and wine. Secondly, the priesthood of Aaron was temporal
and was to terminate, but the priesthood of Melchisedech, or Christ, was eternal, and its institution was
sealed with an oath of God concerning which the Psalmist writes: “And the Lord hath sworn and he will
not repent. Thou are a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedech” (Ps. 109:14). St Cyprian
tells us “Christ offered that which Melchisedech offere, bread and wine, that is His body and blood”
(Lib.2, ca.3). It is of great significance that all references to Melchisedech have been eliminated from the
new mass as well as from the new ordination rites.
7
with God, it was needful that obstacles should first be removed; and accordingly, in the actual carrying out of the
ritual, the sin offering took precedence over the other kins of sacrifice (Lev. Xvi.3). After the sin offering, the
holocaust; and then, to put the seal – as it were – upon the reconciliation already effected, came the thank offering or
peace offering (Lev. Ix. 8,12,18).
Among the bloody sacrifices, the most important was the holocaust called in Hebrew 'OLA. In this
sacrifice the bullock, after having been bled - the blood being sprinkled on the altar, in the sanctuary, and over the
people - was entirely incinerated by the fire on the altar - i.e., it was entirely offered up to God. This was the type
of sacrifice that Gideon offered up in Judges 6.26; and Samson in Judges 13, verses 15 to 20. This is well described
in Exodus: "and they offered holocausts, and sacrificed pacific victims of calves to the Lord. Then Moses took half
of the blood and put it into bowls; and the est he poured upon tha altar. And taking the book of the covenant, he read
it in the hearing of the people... and he took the blood and sprinkled it upon the people and he said: This is the blood
of the covenant which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words." St. Paul refers to this when he says
in Heb. ix, 20 that "Moses sprinkled the blood of calves and goats upon all the people, saying: This is the blood of
the testament which God has enjoined unto you." When Christ consecrated the chalice at the Last Supper his words
are almost identical: "This is the new testament in My blood." (St. Luke XXII.20). St. Paul adds, in the passage
already quoted: "It is necessary, therefore, that the patterns of heavenly things should be cleansed with these: but the
heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these." By this he meant to say: the Jewish synagogue, which
was a type of the Catholic Church is cleansed by the blood of the Lamb of God. Now in order that anything be
cleansed either with blood or with water, it must be sprinkled or moistened with blood or water. Thus, if our souls
are cleansed by the blood of Christ in the Mass, they must be sprinkled therewith. Does this happen in our Mass? St.
John Chrysostom tells us: "Thou seest that Christ is immolated in the Mass, thou seest that the people present are
sprinkled and marked with the crimson blood from His veins." Marchantius, another church father says the same.
"The precious blood is shed in the Mass as a holy oblation, and the souls of the faithful who stand around are
sprinkled with it." The Beloved Apostle John also tells us that "Jesus Christ hath loved us, and washed - not just
sprinkled - us with His own blood." (Apoc. 1.5). Of course, we do not see this blood any more than we see Christ's
body - though individuals have been graced with visions in which for example, while holding the host over the
chalice, the priest sees drops of blood falling into the chalice.
A second kind of sacrifice was the ZEVAH SHELAMIM, or the Sacrifice of Peace which was
performed at the time of great solemnities. In this sacrifice one part of the immolated victim, the blood and the fat,
was burnt; the remainder was eaten by the priests and the faithful. It was a sacrifice which prefigured Communion.
A third was called HATTAT and was a rite of purification for the expiation for sin. This is the rite performed at
YOM KIPPUR, or the day of atonement. This rite involved two goats, one of which was sacrificed, and the other
released into the wilds. The high priest extended his hands over a goat - just as the priest does over the chalice when
saying the Hanc Igitur. The purpose of this was to convey the sins of the people and the priest to the goat. This goat
was then burnt, the sacrifice ascending to the throne of God in odorem suavitatis. After this the second goat had a
scarlet ribbon attached to his neck - scarlet being symbolic of sin - as in the phrase we still use of a "scarlet woman."
And then the goat is led out to a deserted place and thrown down from a high precipice. In similar manner, after the
scourging, Christ had a scarlet robe placed over his shoulders and tied around his neck by the Roman soldiers. This
incidentally is the origin of the word "scapegoat." Christ embodied both aspects of this rite, and was, as St. Paul tells
us, "an oblation and a sacrifice to God for an odor of sweetness" (Rom. III, 25). This rite is not unconnected with the
challenge of Satan in asking Christ to cast himself down from the precipice.11
Now the Jewish Pasch belongs to the type of sacrifice in which the animal offered is entirely
consumed by men. The offerer was the head of the family and/or the priest, for the sacrifice of the Pasch was offered
both in the home and in the temple. This rite was of the greatest importance to the Jews, for it commemorated their
liberation from the slavery of Egypt and their entry into the promised land. PESAH signifies "passage" and was the
symbol that Christ had only in some way to "vitalize" in order to make it an efficacious sign of the passage from
death to life and from darkness into the light. It is by the immolation of the Divine Lamb that we are brought into the
kingdom of the Father.

11 This sacrifice is described in Levitics, Chapter 16. Actually, two male goats were
brought to the high priest. One was sacrificed to the Lord as an offering and the other sent away "living."
Origin states that this prefigured Pilate demanding of the Jews that they choose between Christ and
Barabbas. It was Barrabas who was sent out into the wilderness bearing with him the sins of the people
who cried out and said "crucify, crucify." It was Christ who was offered to God as an offering to atone for
sins.
8
 The Sacrifice of Christ incorporated all these previous sacrifices to a greater or lesser degree. As
Pope St. Leo tells us, in His one sacrifice Our Lord has united and consummated the ancient rites with all their
diversities (Seventh Sunday after Pentecost). St. Augustine tells us that “the Sacrifice which the high priest of the
New Testament, Jesus Christ, offers is the sacrifice of His body and blood, and that oblation takes the place of all the
old ones which were only a shadow of that which was to be. And we find Christ Himself repeating the words of the
thirty-ninth Psalm: ‘Sacrifice and oblation thou wouldst not, but a body thou has fitted for me’ (Heb. 10:5). An
astronomer who read this paper pointed out something very startling to me. He noted that the Jewish calender had
been changed several times over the course of history, and that when one combined all these calenders, the dates
usually given for the three principle kinds of sacrifice actually could be made to come together at the time of the
Crucifixion. Thus for example, it is known that the Essenes celebrated Yom Kippur at the same time as the Jews in
Jerusalem were celebrating the Pasch.
In 1 Cor. 5, verses 7-8 St. Paul tells us that "Christ our Passover Lamb has been sacrificed." As St.
Ambrose said, “When we offer, Christ is present Christ is offering Himself, for Christ the Easter Lamb, our pasch is
sacrificed” (in cap. 26. Mat.).12 It follows that if we are to understand the Mass one must consider the Paschal meal
or Seder in greater detail, for it was this rite which Christ Himself chose for the institution of the Mass. In this rite,
before the main meal a form of bread called meze is served. At the same time cups of wine are passed around. Both
were blessed. In the Melkite Church this rite is still carried out before dinner on Friday evenings. This "first chalice"
at the Lord's Supper is described by St. Luke in XXII: 17. After this the guests washed their hands with perfumed
water and the meal itself began. Christ replaced this with the washing of the Apostles feet. The main meal then
commenced with the head of the family solemnly breaking bread and saying "Blessed be Thou O Lord, who hath
cause the earth to produce this bread." It is undoubtedly at this moment that Christ consecrated the bread. Next
different courses were brought to the table and blessed. The main course was the Pascal lamb - and interestingly
enough, it was forbidden that any bone should be broken during the cooking or eating of this victim. Cups of wine
were served and each guest blessed his own cup. This is sometimes called the "second chalice." At the end of the
meal the lamps were carried to the table. The lamp was the Menorah or seven candle stand such as Titus brought to
Rome after the destruction of the temple, and which is carved on his triumphal arch. One mustn't confuse this with
the currently used Jewish Menorah such as is used in the season of Hanakah, and which significantly has 8 candles.
The temple Menorah which is figured on the triumphal arch in Rome was a seven candle stand always lit in the
temple. The central candle was not lit because the Messiah had not yet come.13 Their place in the traditional Mass is
represented by the six candles on the altar which are lit for high masses. The seventh or central candle is of course
Christ our Lord.
Next there was a second washing of the hands. The table was then incensed following which the
third chalice in which water was added to the wine was solemnly blessed by the head of the household or
community who said: "Blessed by Thou O Lord... who has created the fruit of the vine." This was accompanied by a
great thanksgiving for the material and spiritual blessings that had been received since the time of the exodus from
Egypt - hence the name Eucharistica or thanksgiving. It was at this point that Our Lord introduced the Consecration
of the Chalice.
The Seder has a fourth chalice which is consumed after the singing of the Hillel Psalms -
especially Psalm 21 which foretells and describes the Crucifixion. But Scripture says nothing about this fourth cup
or chalice being consumed at the Last Supper. Instead it tells us that after the Consecration of the Third Cup Jesus
said "I will not taste again of the fruit of the vine until I am entering into the Kingdom of God." They then prayed
the Psalms and he went out into the night.
No one can deny that the New Testament began at the Last Supper and not on the Cross. On
Calvary Christ was dying, and by His death sealed the testament made at the Last Supper. It was on the eve of His
final going to Golgotha that He promised the remission of our sins, saying “This is my blood of the new and
everlasting testament which shall be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins.” Nothing like that

12 Christ was a priest on the Cross. He is the eternal priest, for He daily makes His offering through the
hands of His priests.
13 The Menorah is "a nine branched candelabra used a Hanukkah commonly referred to
as a mannorah, although a more accurate description for it would be "Chanukah". Menorah is actually the
word for the candelabra consisting of 6 or 8 branches, which is used in the synagogue. The original
temple menorah had seven branches, but the use of seven branches is avoided today so that we might
draw a distinction between worship today and worship when the temple was still in existence." Ruth
Rosen, Jews for Jesus, A Messianic Jewish Perspective, San Francisco, Calif., 1987.
9
happened on the Cross.
What happened next?
According to the Scriptures, Jesus then went to the Garden of Gethsemani. Here he fell three times
to the ground and cried out "Abba, Father, All things are possible to Thee. Remove this chalice from me. Yet not
what I will, but what Thou wilt." What is this cup referring to? It can of course refer to the "cup of wrath" which
Isaiah and Jeremiah speak of, the chalice of wrath which the Messiah would have to drink. But it is even more
closely related to the fourth cup of the Seder which Christ drank at the Crucifixion. You will remember that Christ
was offered wine and myrrh while on the way to Calvary - myrrh is a kind of opiate which was meant to lessen the
pain of crucifixion. But Christ refused.
There is a tradition that our Lord, hanging on the Cross, began to repeat- as we know from the
Gospels, Psalm 21 - and repeating it and those that follow, gave up His most blessed Spirit when he came to the fifth
verse of Psalm 30. Let us consider the 21st Psalm14:

My God my God, Why hast thou forsaken me? I am a worm of the earth and not a man
the derision of men and the outcast of the people; All that see me laugh me to scorn; They
whisper and shake their heads: He hoped in the Lord; let him deliver him; let him save him, since he has
complacence in him...
They have dug my hands and my feet I can count all my bones They have divided my
garments among them' for my tunic they cast lots.
Here we have then the story of the Crucifixion which is said in the Seder prior to the drinking of the last chalice.
And how obliging were those who thought He was calling upon Elias because He cried out Eli, Eli, meaning "My
God, my God...". They also fulfilled the Scriptures who derided him by saying "if He is God, let him save Himself,"
for as Christ said through David's mouth, "All they that saw me scoffed at me: they spoke with their lips and tossed
their heads, 'He relied on the Lord, let him deliver him, let him rescue him, since he loves him. This explains the
seeming words of discouragement which Christ said on the Cross. But even more important, as Cornelius Lapide
points out, in crying "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me, He made it clear that He was indeed the Person
of whom the Holy Spirit spoke through the mouth of David. But let us continue with the Psalm:15

My throat is dried up like a potsherd of clay; My tongue cleaves to my palate.

At this point Christ on the Cross cries out "I thirst." He did this that "Scripture might be fulfilled."
There was a bowl of wine near by - sour wine being vinegar, though many hold it to have been posca, a kind of thin
wine which the Roman troops were supplied with when in the field. They put a sponge on a branch of hyssop - the
very same plant used by the Jews to sprinkle blood on the door posts so that the angel of death would by pass their
homes and their first born would not be taken, the same branch with which we are symbolically sprinkled in the
Asperges. And dipping the sponge in the vinegar - actually, sour wine, they gave Christ to drink.16 After drinking it
Jesus said, "it is consummated," a phrase so reminiscent of the phrase Ita Missa Est. St. John ends the story at this

14 Rabbi Solomon, a ancient Jewish commentator on the psalms, predicted that the
Messiah in the midst of His sufferings would sing this Psalm aloud. (Commentary on the Psalms, Rev. J.
Neale and R Littledale, Moseph masters, London, 1884.
15 St Leo speaks to this in his De Pass. s. 16: by noting that in the Savior’s statement
Deus mesu, Deus mesus, ut quid dereliquiste me? (My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?) our
Savior was not complaining but teaching - Vox ista doctrina est, non querela. “Jesus Christ did not thus
speak to the eternal Father to be delivered from death, nor was he speaking of his own abandonment, but
of the abandonment of grace, of which all men would have remained deprived if he had not died for our
salvation. He was praying then in our name, that we might be delivered from eternal death; in our name
also he prayed for his resurrection, to make us also have a share therein. so that he then put himself in our
place, and thus prayed not to be abandoned, whilst at the same time he offered up his own death in order
to save us from the abandonment that we deserved, and he did not die himself until he had at first made
our salvation secure. This is the reason why, towards the end of the psalm, he gives thanks to his Father,
and sings the fruits of his victory.”
10
point, but Luke and Mark add a further phrase. After this He bowed his head and said "Father, into thy hands I
commend my spirit." This phrase is found in verse 5 of Psalm 30, is also one the priest repeats several times in his
evening office.
Scripture tells us that Christ tasted the posca, but did not drink it. The sainted Church Fathers
explain the drinking of the forth cup as occurring when the priest (who is an altar Christus) at Mass drinks the
consecrated wine, for the priest at this point partakes of the most sacred banquet and is mystically present in the
Kingdom of God.
One wonders whether Christ went on praying the Psalms to verse 5 of Psalm 30. One must of
course remember that the numbering of Psalms has changed over the centuries. One should also note that Psalm 30
is a Psalm redolent with hope which starts out:
"In thee, O Lord, have I hoped, let me never be confounded: deliver me in thy justice. Bow down
thy ear to me: make haste to deliver me. Be thou unto me a God, a protector and a house of refuge, to save me. For
thou art my strength and my refuge; and for thy name's sake thou wilt lead me, and nourish me. Thou wilt bring me
out of this snare which they have hidden for me: for thou art my protector. Into thy hands I commend my spirit: thou
has redeemed me, O Lord the God of Truth."
There is another explanation which the fathers give us for Christ's seeming despair. Many, facing
death feel abandoned, and Christ concentrated in this moment, the duration of which is unknown to us, that complete
despair and unspeakable grief of supreme abandonment. In assuming all our human weakness, he wished to
sympathize with the sufferings of the poor human creature who no longer sees anything or knows anything, who
counts upon no one, and expects neither remedy, nor solace, nor consolation. This is why I like to think that, after
sharing our despairs, He turned to the psalm 30, a psalm of hope. For this is indeed the path which we must follow
in our sorrows.
The seamless garment was prescribed for the High Priest in Jerusalem during the Pasch service in
the Temple. Once again, this prefigured the true High Priest which is of course Our Lord Jesus Christ. And again, it
was said of our Lord that "not a bone shall be broken." It was of course the custom to break the legs of the crucified
if they took too long to die - once their legs were broken they hung limply on the cross and could no longer take in
an adequate breath. But there is yet another connection. When the sacrificial lamb for the Pasch was examined, if it
was found to have a broken bone, it would be discarded and replaced. Once again we see fulfilled St. Paul's words,
"Christ our Passover Lamb has been sacrificed."
Now all these events occurred within a 24 hour period; there is a continuity between Holy
Thursday and Good Friday, for the Jewish day was from sundown to sundown. And Christ was, in accord with
Jewish custom, buried before sundown.
***
Christ didn't die once and for all. His sacrifice is a perpetual sacrifice. The immolation of the lamb
is continuous in heaven. It is the priest - or Christ acting in the priest, who once again brings this sacrifice down on
earth - on the altar in an unbloody manner - for us and for our salvation. As M. Olier of St. Suplice wrote: "to
understand the mystery of the most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.... it is necessary to know that this Sacrifice is the
Sacrifice of Heaven... It is the Sacrifice effected in Paradise and which at the same time is offered up here on earth;
the only difference is that here below, it is seen under a veiled form." This is the "Lamb, slain but alive" of which St.
John speaks in the Apocalypse. Thus the Mass is not a "memorial" in the sense of commemorating something that
occurred in the past, but rather a making present in time of something occurring eternally. How pregnant with
meaning is the priest's prayer "Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world, have mercy on us."
The Jewish sacrifice of the holocaust was only performed in the Temple. Now the temple is as it
were the center of the world, and in fact, when the Jews held the Pasch they always faced in the direction of the
Temple, much like Moslems today face the Kaaba in Mecca when they pray. At the Last Supper the Apostles all sat
on the same side of the table facing the temple which could be seen through the portico.. After the destruction of the
16 The English translation of the Third Nocturn for the Feast of the Precious Blood does translate the
word acetum (vinegar) as “wine,” and Gerry Metatics in his discussion of the Crucifixion suggests that
this is the “fourth cup.” However, others have stressed the fact that this fourth cup was only taken after
the Kingdom of God had been established. -donec regnum Dei veniat.. Dionysius the Carthusian
commentator points out that Jesus did in fact share food with the Apostles at Emmeus because it was after
His resurrection that the Kingdom of God was re-established. The Blessed Olier discusses this at some
length and points out that when the priest in Mass consumes the precious Blood, it is Christ who also
consumes His own blood, and as the entire Pasque is once again made present, so also is the Resurrection,
the establishment of the Kingdom in us ass well as in society. And hence it is here that He partakes of the
Fourth Cup.
11
temple, the first stage of which was the rending of the curtain over the holy of holies, Christians faced the east, for
the rising sun is a symbol of the Risen Christ we await at the end of time. There is absolutely no history of the priest
facing the people in the early Mass.
But there is a difference in the Church, as was indeed foretold by Malachias, the last of the
Prophets: "I have no pleasure in you [referring to the lax sacrifices of the Levites] and I will not receive a gift from
your hand. For from the rising of the sun even to the going down, My name is great among the Gentiles and in every
place there is offered to My name a clean oblation" (Malachias, 1, 10-11).17 No longer is the Sacrifice centered in a
single place - the temple. Rather wherever the Mass is said becomes the center of the world. As Nicholas of Cusa
said, "the center of the world is that point from which all creation is equi-distant." The architectural symbolism of
the Church which incidentally parallels that of the temple, placed the altar directly under the dome which was in turn
over the center of the cross. That is to say that the Church was built in the form of a cross with a dome over the
center - a pattern still followed in the east. In the western church the altar was moved forward into the nave which is
as it were half a dome. But to make the symbolism clear, altars were placed under a baldachino. This term is perhaps
strange. However, picture the altar in St. Peter's of which we have all seen at least in pictures. There are four pillars
surmounted by a dome; the entire structure being under the central dome. The dome symbolizes the heavens while
the square structure on which it rests is the created world in which we live. Many of our traditional chapels have a
similar structure over the tabernacle. Now every traditional altar must have over it a crucifix. Within the
requirements of space, this crucifix is also at the center of creation - as indeed it was in Jerusalem historically. We
must all return to this "center" and be centered in Christ. The priest prays daily for conversion - converte nos
salutaris noster as he says in Compline. Conversio means to turn towards the center. And every time we make the
sign of the cross we are ourselves enacting the same thing symbolically.
We know that the Jews had a high priesthood and rites which were performed only in the temple.
But every Jew could not go to the temple for the High Holidays, and so it was that the same rites were also carried
out in each family. Remember that the family is as it were, a "mini-Church." The Father in the family is Christ's
representative within this structure. Thus it is not without accident that we refer to God as the "Father"; we call the
Pope the "holy father" because he is Christ's representative over the whole Church; we call the priest a father, for he
is Christ's representative in the community; and we call the head of the family a father because he is Christ's
representative in the family. Now Christ and the Apostles at the Last Supper were actually carrying out the Jewish
Pasch - and Christ who allowed himself to be circumcised, who declared that He came to fulfill the law, carried out
the traditional Jewish rites in the normal manner. As Sister Agreda says, "He observed all the ceremonies of the Law
(Exodus 12,3), as prescribed by Himself through Moses." Catherine Emerick goes even farther and points out that
one of the accusations brought against Him before Caiaphus was that he had introduced innovations into this rite - a
charge Nicodemus successfully defended Him against. During the Last Supper Christ gave the Apostles an
understanding of all the ceremonies of the figurative law as observed by the Patriarchs and the Prophets. He showed
them how beneath these rites was hidden the real truth, namely, all that He himself was to accomplish as Redeemer
of the World." It is not surprising then that the Mass as we know it should encompass all the sacrifices of the Old
Law. Catherine Emerick also tells us that the Apostles took notes so as not to forget His instructions as to how the
Mass should be said.
It is not surprising then that many of the phrases used in the Mass such as "The Lord be with you"
and "Peace be with you" also come from the Jewish ritual. This is also true of the phrase "...and for ever and ever"
which is the exact translation of the Hebraic liturgical formula min ha-olem ad ha-olem. The Alleluia and Amens are
alse derived from this source. The Alleluia incidentally means "praise God" and is taken from the Hallel psalms sung
at the Paschal meal. After each verse of these psalms the people present exclaimed Hallelou-yeh. In the Mass the
three Alleluias follow verses taken from the psalms which are sung before the Gospel.
Yet another formula retained from synagogal usage is the solemn prayer used at the start of the
Canon in all the liturgies of both East and West - called the Anaphora in the East and the Preface in the west. The
phrases sursum corda, oremus and gratias agamus are direct translations of phrases used in the Jewish rite are the
various phrases preceding and including the triple Sanctus. Finally, another practice adapted from the Jewish ritual is
the repetetive liturgical cycle which annually as well as in each and every Mass renews the cycle of events in our
Lord's life, as it does the feasts such as Easter and Pentecoste.18

17 Unlike the Jewish sacrifices which God often rejected because they were rendered loathsome by the
impurity of the offerer, the Sacrifice of Christ is called a “clean” Sacrifice because it cannot be defiled by
the sins of the priest.
18 Gueranger's Liturgical Year, highly recommended by St. Theresa of Liseaux, provides
us with the best guide to the recurring liturgical cycles.
12
 And so we see that our traditional Mass is the culmination and the fulfillment of all the Sacrifices
of the Old law. Now it is of interest that the Jews no longer have a priesthood. Rabbis are not priests but scholars
who graduate from special schools, often called seminaries. They are not ordained by any rite whatsoever and such
is not surprising, for as Daniel prophecized, "when the Holy of Holies has come, anointing will cease." Once the
temple veil was torn, the supreme sacrifice, the Mass, was no longer limited to a central temple, but rather every
altar became the center. And when we contemplate the close relationship of our Mass - the true Mass, with all that
was prefigured in the Old Testament, let us not forget that Daniel also prophecized that "they shall defile the
sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the continual sacrifice, and they shall place there the abomination unto
desolation. And such as deal wickedly against the covenant shall deceitfully dissemble: but the people that know
their God shall prevail and succeed. What is this abomination but a defective sacrifice? "Thou shalt not sacrifice to
the Lord thy God a sheep or an ox wherein there is blemish or any fault; for that is an abomination to the Lord thy
God" (Deut. 17.1). This defilement is again referred to in Maccabees where Antiocus set up false altars in Jerusalem
and where "there went out of Israel wicked men, and they persuaded many, saying: Let us go, and make a covenant
with the heathen that are round about us... The Jerome Biblical Commentary speaks of this in the following terms:
"Antiochus thought it necessary to foster the process of cultural and religious syncretism that had received such
impetus under Alexander." St Matthew, Mark and Luke all refer to this event and add that frightening phrase, "he
that readeth, let him understand." For those of us who tend to see the preservation of the traditional Mass as a
function of the "Remnant," and who are constantly accused of being in "rebellion," it is pertinent to note that the
original Maccabian force rallied precisely around this issue and consisted of some 300 individuals! If this sounds
strange, allow me to quote a passage from the introduction to the 22nd Sunday after Pentecost taken from the St.
Andrew Missal of a previous era: "One of the most outstanding lessons which may be drawn from the books of the
Maccabees, which almost every year are still being read at Matins at this time, is the reverence due to the things of
God. What is generally called the rebellion of the Maccabees was in reality a magnificent example of fidelity to
God, to His law, and to the covenants and promises that he made to His people. These were threatened with oblivion
and it was to uphold them that the Maccabees rebelled."
It logically follows from this that everything that the priest does in the Mass is full of meaning - is
symbolic or representative of something divine. - is patterned after a divine archetype - as in heaven, so also on
earth.19 As St. Bonaventura said, "the Holy Mass is as full of mysteries as the ocean is full of drops, or as the sky is
full of stars, and as the courts of heaven are full of angels. For in it so many mysteries are daily performed that I
should be at a loss to say whether greater or more lofty wonders have ever been accomplished by divine
omnipotence." The Mass is in a certain sense a "mini-drama" which recapitulates, not only the entire life of Christ,
but the entire history of man's relationship to God. The pious Marchantius writes: "What is the Mass if not a forcible
and complete representation, nay renewal, of the incarnation, the birth, the life, the sufferings and the death of
Christ, and the redemption that He wrought?" Dennis the Carthusian teaches us that "The whole life of Christ which
He led upon earth was one long celebration of Mass, He being Himself the altar, the priest, the victim."

Let us consider the altar. In the consecration of the Catholic altar, reference is made to all the altars
set up by the patriarchs of the old testament. The Shekina or divine presence in the temple in Jerusalem was
dependent upon the presence of the Ark. The Ark was set upon a stone which was the center of the earth - not in a
geographical sense, but in a symbolic sense. You have heard it said that the altar is a symbol of the body of Christ.
This is because he is the "rock" under the Ark. He is the rock that Moses "split" and from which poured forth living
waters. We are all familiar with Peter being described as the "rock." But Peter is the rock by participation. It is Christ
who is the rock as St. Paul makes clear when he tells us in Hebrews XIII: 10 that "they drank of the spiritual rock...
and the rock was Christ. It is Christ who is the corner-stone or more precisely, the "angle stone."20 All our altars are
of course of stone - strictly speaking, a wooden altar always encloses a altar stone, and that is the altar. The reason
for this has already been explained. It is not without significance that the novus ordo no longer requires an altar
stone and insists that the what occurs, occurs upon a "table." As Cranmer said, "the use of an altar is to make
sacrifice upon it; the use of a table is to serve men to eat upon." Our Mass and our Faith is built, not upon shifting
sands or corruptible wood, but on solid rock.21 As mentioned above, the Catholic altar must have a Crucifix over it -

19 It follows that the deletions and changes made to create the novus ordo missae are
equally significant.
20 The "angle-stone" is diamond shaped and placed at the apex of the arch. It is what
holds all the other stones of the arch in place.
21 During the times of persecution the Church did in fact use wooden altars, but whenever
possible would say Mass over the tombs of the martyrs as in the catacombs. Altar stones became
13
the Crucifix is as the 1908 Catholic Encyclopedia says, "the principal ornament of the altar... placed [there] to
remind the celebrant and the people that the Victim offered on the altar is the same as was offered on the Cross." The
novus ordo has dropped this requirement.

Speaking of the Holy of Holies, the place in the temple which held the Arc which in turn contained
the Shekina or "presence" of God, has been replaced by the tabernacle fixed on the main altar - or suspended over
the main altar in the Eastern churches. The removal of the tabernacles from the altar and their replacement with the
Bible - usually one of the badly translated versions aimed at being acceptable to every shade of Christian belief or
disbelief, can only be likened to the removal of the Arc of the Covenant and replacing it with poorly translated
versions of the Torah.22
**
The traditional Mass is divided into the "Mass of the Catachumens" and the "Mass of the
Faithful." The Novus Ordo Missae is divided into the "Liturgy of the Word" and the "Liturgy of the Eucharist"
(which word means "thanksgiving"). Now the Mass of the Faithful refers to those that believe in the Real Presence,
which is the Mystery of our Faith, "the Word made flesh." The Novus Ordo Missae has shifted the sense of the
"Word" to the reading of Scripture, while teaching that the Mystery of the Faith refers to the historical Life, Death
and Resurrection of Our Lord. The new mass retains a certain teaching and instructive role (readings from Scripture
and the Sermon) but, having deleted every reference to immolation and propitiation, has altered the nature of the
sacrifice that follows.23 The distinction is important if one is to understand how all that we have said manifests itself
in the traditional Mass.

Let us take the Catholic ritual in sequence starting with the Asperges, sung prior to the principle
Mass on Sunday: "Thou shalt sprinkle me with hyssop, O Lord, and I shall be cleansed; Thou shalt wash me and I
shall be whiter than snow." Hyssop was used to place the blood of the Lamb on the portals of the homes of the Jews
in Egypt, thus signaling to the angel of death that the inhabitants were protected. Similarly, the High Priest, before
entering the Holy of Holies, slew a lamb, dipped his hands in the blood, and used hyssop to sprinkle the blood of
the Sacrifice on the congregants. This is a reminder of both the need for purification and of baptism. By the
sprinkling of Holy water - once again with a branch of the Hyssop, we are purified and sanctified, which is to say,
separated from the impure or "old man." It is an indispensable condition for the offering of and participation in the
sacrifice.24

The priest, having vested, now approaches the altar.25 "Out of the Mount of Sion, out of her
fullness of beauty, God has shone forth" (Psalm 49). After bowing, making the sign of the Cross, he ascends the
triple steps of the altar as Our Lord climbed the slopes at Golgotha, saying "introibo ad altare Dei". Every true
sacrificial altar, being "central," is both elevated and set apart. Moses, Lot, Aaron, Abraham and Elijah were all
commanded by God to go up to "the mountain of the Lord... His holy place. It was, as Cornelius Lapide points out,
on Mt. Tabor that Christ selected the twelve disciples whom he ordained and called apostles. It was on the Mount

mandatory from about the middle of the third century. The altar stone may be replaced by a special cloth
in which relics are sown. Such is used in the Eastern Churches, in missionary lands, and where priests
have to travel distances to say masses.
22  The Jews rightly have a horror of anything that might distort the meaning of the Torah. thus
it is that it is written in Hebrew letters and to even change a letter would be considered a sin. somehow
the Jews never felt the need to vernacularize their Torah, much less to mistranslate it in order to bring it
into line with "our times." Again, one can look at this in the light of the evening service of Maundy
Thursday. Once a year, commemorating the Passion of our Lord, our altars are stripped naked, our
tabernacles emptied, and the altar light extinguished. The new Church has made every day a Maundy
Thursday It will be argued that the tabernacles have been placed elsewhere in the Church - usually some
obscure corner. Even when placed on a side altar, it is n o longer covered with a veil. As on Good Friday,
the veil that covered the Holy of Holies has been rent.
23 It is precisely for this reason that Protestants of every shade of belief can and du use the
Novus Ordo Missae in their services and as representative of their beliefs.
24 The Novus Ordo Missae retains this rite.
25 Every reference to altar has been removed from the Novus Ordo Missae
14
that he taught that compendium of the new law which is called the Sermon on the Mount. Moreover, the “rock” and
the “mountain” are symbolic equivalents which explains why the altar is also considered as the body of Christ. And
so it is that the Catholic altar is placed "on high" and draped with the richest of cloths.26 The priest mounts up above
the three choirs of angels, for the Sacrifice is one that occurs perpetually in heaven. The triple steps also remind us
of the three stages of the spiritual life which we all must follow - purgative, illuminative and unitive. How unlike the
plain and often ugly Novus Ordo table, no longer set apart, but rather placed outside the sanctuary among the people.
(Imagine the Jews placing the Arc of the Covenant in the market place!)

During the first part of the Mass - the Mass of the Catachumens, the faithful are confessed and
instructed.27 The prayers at the foot of the altar are extraordinary; they set the tone or proper attitude for both priest
and congregation. How appropriate is the recitation of Psalm 42 (dropped in the Novus Ordo) which reminds us of
both the last judgment and of the fact that we are in this world, but not of this world. "Judge me O God, and
distinguish my cause from the nation that is not holy; deliver me from the unjust and deceitful man." This text
evokes the harsh combat engaged in by the catechumens against the powers of evil in preparation for their baptism.
The unjust man is of course "fallen man" as opposed to the "new man." Once again we are reminded of the need to
renew our baptismal commitments. Just as we must all constantly return to the senter, so also must we constantly
discared the "old man" and "put on Christ."

After all have confessed and received absolution, the priest approaches the altar between two
servers symbolizing Christ between the Ancient and New Testaments, or between the prophets of the Old and the
Bishops, descendents of the Apostles of the New dispensation. The first thing he does is to kiss the altar stone
showing his respect for Jesus Christ, who will soon descend there, and his veneration for the holy martyrs whose
relics are deposited there. He accompanies his action with the following prayer: "We beseech Thee, O Lord, through
the merits of Thy Saints whose relics are here, and of all Thy Saints, that it may please thee to forgive me all my
sins." In placing the relics of martyrs under the table of the altar, the Church on Earth wished to imitate what St.
John had remarked in Heaven: "I saw under the altar of the Lamb the souls of them that had been slain for the name
of Jesus" (Apoc., VI, 9). Next, In solemn masses the altar is incensed. This also is derived from Jewish custom, for it
was used in the temple and God Himself instructed Moses in the preparation of incense (Exod XXX, 34). Incense is
not only a symbol of prayer, it also reminds us that we see and understand the mystery of the Mass as through a dark
cloud - for God and His ways are obscure. So important is incense that God inspired the Magi to bring it as an
offering before the crib - Gold for His royalty; Frankincenses for His Sacred Nature, and Myrrh for his passion and
burial. The priest then moves to the Epistle side of the altar, opens the Missal, and says the Introit or entrance prayer.
Taken from the Psalms, the Introit represents the cry by which the ancient world called for Our Lord, the Desired of
Nations. Next follows the nine-fold Kyrie - said nine times in imitation of the nine choirs of angels, or three times
each in praise of each Person of the Blessed Trinity.
Next comes the Gloria, first sung by the Angels at the time of Christ's birth and reminding us how
the Mass is a mini-drama of the life of Christ. This is made strikingly clear in the Eastern rite. As Cabasilas explains,
in the first stage of the Mass, the oblations represent the Body of our Lord in His youth, because they are not yet
consecrated. The hosts are prepared in the following manner. The specially prepared loaf is placed under an open
pedestal with a cross over it and within which, from the vertical axis of the cross, there hangs a small star. This is
called an astiriskon which the Greek word for a star. When the priest places the asteriskon over the offering he
pronounces the words of St. Matthew: "behold the star... come and stood over where the child was." Furthermore,
the paten is assimilated to the cradle and the side altar where this ceremony is carried out is called the prosthesis and
is assimilated with the grotto of the nativity. Finally the priest covers all this with a veil because, prior to Jesus'
public life, His power was hidden.

26 As Origin points out, "One should observe in reading the Holy Scriptures how 'to go
up' and 'to go down' are employed in each individual passage. For if we were to give diligent
consideration, we would discover that almost never is anyone said to have gone down to an holy place
nor is anyone related to have gone up to a blameworthy place. These observations show that the divine
Scripture was not composed, as it seems to most, in illiterate and uncultivated language, but was adapted
in accordance with the discipline of divine instruction..." Homily XV on Genesis
27 In ancient times the Catechumens were dismissed. Only the baptized could participate
in the sacrificial aspects of the rite.
15
 Recalling for us the need to pray, the priest next returns to the Epistle side of the altar and reads
the collects with his hands outstretched in imitation of Our Lord on the Cross. The collects are usually addressed to
God the Father, for it is to Him that the Sacrifice is offered. After the Collects the Epistle is read - the Apostles
preparing us for the Master's voice which will be conveyed to us through the Gospel. Now, as will be explained
below, the transference of the Missal from the Epistle to the Gospel side of the altar represents the transition of
Christ's life, which is to say, His "going public." It is a matter of great joy and during the process Responses
reflecting the Epistle reading are sung followed in non penitential seasons by Alleluias. In the Eastern rites there is a
formal procession of the Gospel called the "Little Entrance." After the antiphons have been sung, the officiant
displays the Holy Book to signify the commencement of christ's public life.
Prior to the reading of the Gospel we bless ourselves with the triple blessing - making the sign of
the Cross on our foreheads, lips and heart. During the reading of the Gospel we stand, showing respect for Our Lord,
for it is His very words we hear. This is followed by the sermon in which the Epistle and or Gospel is explained.
This section of the Mass is concludes with the Credo. At this point the catechumens were dismissed, for the
Sacrifice which followed was only for those who were baptized.
During the Offertory the priest offers up, not "the work of human hands," as in the Novus Ordo, but
rather a spotless host, later referred to in the Canon as an unblemished sacrifice. And this is because it is not the
work of human hands, but Christ Himself, prefigured in the unblemished sacrifices of the old testament that the
priest offers up.28 As Father Schouppe, S.J. states, the Offertory represents the history of the world from creation to
the Passion of Christ. In the Eastern rite the offering is brought from the side altar or prosthesis, to the main altar.
This is done with singing and incensing and symbolizes the triumphant entrance of Our Lord into Jerusalem.
In the Offertory, the priest, after placing the host upon the corporal, goes to the epistle side of the altar and pours
wine and water into the chalice. He blesses the water before it is mixed with the wine, praying that by the mystery of
this water and wine we may be made partakers of His divinity, Jesus Christ, Who became partaker of our humanity.
The wine is not blessed, because it represents Christ, the Eternal Son of the Father, the source of benediction. The
water represents our human nature, which stands in great need of blessing.29 The mixture of wine and water is said
by theologians to represent the union of the divine and human natures in Our Lord. But this added water also
represents our human natures which we offer up along with Christ. All this is made clear by the prayers
accompanying the action: "O God, Who in creating human nature didst wonderfully dignify it, and (by the
28 This important point is clarified by Dr. Nicholas Gihr (The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass):
"yet the Offertory has not exclusively for its object the mere elements of bread and wine, but also the real
object of the Sacrifice, the true and only Sacrifice of the New Law, that is, the Body and Blood of Christ,
which by Consecration takes the place of the former substance of bread and wine, and thus becomes
present on the altar. The Church, therefore, does not wait until the change of substance has taken place to
offer to the Divine Majesty the Divine Victim; - no, she already now offers the real Victim to the Divine
Majesty, regarding, as it were, the approaching Consecration of the sacrificial elements as if already
passed... From this point of view it can be explained why the Church already designates her Oblation by
such names (immaculata hostia, calix salutaris, sancta sacrificia illibata, sacrificium laudis, etc), as in
their full sense are applicable only to Christ's sacrificial Body and Blood, - and why by reason of this
Oblation she expects as great effects and fruits as can by no means be ascribed to the offering of some
bread and wine, but only to the offering of the Divine Victim....From the liturgical prayers of the
Offertory, therefore, we may by no means conclude that the offering of the elements of bread and wine is
a real sacrifice or constitutes a part of the Eucharistic Sacrifice." In similar manner, the Sacrifice of Christ
started from the moment of His conception and culminated on the Cross. Similarly, St. Alphonsus says
regarding the Offertory: "the second condition, [for the Sacrifice of the Mass is the] or the oblation, was
also fulfilled at the moment of the Incarnation, when Jesus Christ voluntarily offered himself to atone for
the sins of men" (The Mass).
29 It is not blessed during funeral masses because they are said primarily for those in
pergatory.
16
Incarnation) hast still more wonderfully renewed it, grant that by the mystery of this Water and Wine, we may be
made partakers of His Divinity, Who vouchsafes to become partaker of our humanity, Jesus Christ, Thy Son, Our
Lord, Who liveth and reigneth with Thee in the unity of the same Spirit world without end." Then the priest offers
the chalice and prays that it may be accepted by God in odorem suavitatis. That the wine represents Christ, the water
represents the people, as was said by St. John in the Apocalypse and was confirmed by the Council of Trent: "Aquae
populi sunt" (Apoc. XVII, 15).

In the Eastern rite, this union of the faithful with Christ in His offertory sacrifice is expressd in a
most viid manner. At the beginning of Mass, the priest, with a small golden lance, divides the bread into several
fragments and assigns to each of them, in a special prayer, the part of representing the personages for whom the
sacrifice is to be offered up, or for the various members of the Christian community. The first fragment represents
Christ; another the Virgin, others the apostles, martyrs, virgins, the saint of the day, and the entire Church
triumphant. Next come the fragments reserved for the Church suffering and the Church militant; the supreme
Pontiff, the bishops and the faithful who are present. These are then united once again and placed upon the altar to
be consecrated.
Intimately tied to the Offertory is Our Blessed Lady. She has been referred to by the Church
Fathers as a "spotless host" and an "unblemished sacrifice." In the words of St. Tharasius she is "the clean offering
of Abel, chosen out of the firstlings of the flock, a pure sacrifice"(Breviary, Dec. 12). St. Symeon, the New
Theologian describes her as "a kind of leaven and a certain beginning from the dough of our nature" (On the
Economy of the Incarnation). Michel Scheeban tells us that "the changing of the bread into the body of Christ by the
power of the Holy Spirit is a renewal of the wonderful act by which, in the power of the same Holy Spirit, He
originally formed His body in the womb of the Virgin and took it to His person." As Augustine said, "O truly
reverend dignity of the priests, in whose hands the Son of God becomes flesh as once in the womb of the Virgin."30
It follows from this, as well as from the very nature of Our Lord's Body, that in partaking of the Body of Christ, we
also in a manner partake of her body.31 Further, as the prayer Memento Domine makes clear, we are also meant to
offer ourselves along with the "gifts," "for the redeeming of our souls, for our hope of safety and salvation." As St.
Ambrose says, "Christ will not be a true victim in our behalf if we do not sacrifice ourselves with Him." If however
we are to be worthy of such an offering, it is precisely because, and in so far as we try to adopt the qualities of Our
Lady, qualities made clear in her Magnificat, every sentence of which is drawn from the Old Testament. Should we
fail to approach the wedding feast - for every soul should be a bride of Christ32 - united in one flesh - than we risk
being cast out into the "outer darkness." As many saints have said, if we would bear Christ, we must become the
Blessed Virgin, and As the Pusillum instructs priests: "You resemble the Mother of God when the Son of God
becomes present in your hands at the altar. Seek to resemble Mary also in purity. Offer yourself to God as a clean
oblation together with the mystic gifts upon the altar."33

30 Pope St. Pius X spoke of Mary as "Our Lady of the Blessed Sacrament" Mary can truly
say: "Come eat my bread, and drink the wine which I have mingled for you" (Prov. 5, 9), for were it not
for Mary, we should not have Him who is present in the Blessed Sacrament..." At the Banquet of Love,
"there we are refreshed with the body and blood which He assumed from Mary." Quotes taken from the
Pusillum, Saterday, First Week after Pentecost. Finally, St. Alphonse Liguori quotes the Abbot Arnold of
Chartres with approval: "Since the flesh of Mary was not different from that of Jesus, how can the royal
dignity of the Son be denied to the Mother?" (Explanation of the Salve Regina, TAN publ.)
31 The "red heifer" has been previously referred to. While it is usually said to prefigure Christ,
there are problems with such an interpretation. A heifer is a virginal female cow which is sacrificed -
totally immolated - before the high priest. According to Catherine Emerick, when the Blessed Virgin was
presented to the Temple, she had a red cap with horns placed upon her head and received the blessing of
her father. Josephus tells us that on the night before the temple was destroyed, a red heifer gave birth to a
lamb in the temple precincts. Now, it is through the sacrifice of the red heifer that the Aronic (Jewish)
priesthood is purified, and indeed, there is talk of the Jews who wish to rebuild the temple reinstituting
this sacrifice as it is only by doing so that this "priesthood" could ever by purified. Now, of course, Our
Lady's presence at the Cross was a total immolation, and she is the mediatrix of all graces.
32 Theodoret, In Cant., cap 3 satates: "by eating of the members of the Spouse and drinking of
His blood they will attain to nuptual communion with Him."
17
Father Muller instructs us still further on this point. "many offer to God their prayers, alms, fasts, and mortifications;
but few offer themselves, and make an oblation of their hearts. They always secretly reserve to themselves the
disposal of their own will. This division is displeasing to God; it is not the sacrifice of Abel, but of Cain, who
offered to God the fruits of the earth, but reserved to himself his heart and will, as St. Augustine says. We should
remember, therefore, that as we are associated with the priest of Christ in offering the adorable Victim to God, so
should we be associated with the divine Victim in the spirit of self-sacrifice; we should offer ourselves to Him; we
should lay on the altar the oblation of our soul and body, our memory, will, and understanding; our thought, words,
actions and intentions of the day; our life, death and whole being, that all may be sanctified by union with Him who
is immolated for the love of us."34 The replacement of the "spotless host," and "unblemished sacrifice" by "the work
of human hands" in the Novus Ordo Missae is highly significant precisely because the absence of a true "victim"
precludes the possibility of our self-immolation. The Novus Ordo is but a "Mass of praise and thanksgiving," and
such it must be if it is but the retelling of an event that occurred 2000 years ago. If there is no victim and no
immolation, than we cannot offer or unite ourselves to Him as a holocaust. We are limited to joining the president in
an praise and thanksgiving, worthy acts in themselves, but a far cry from Sacrifice of Christ. Father Olier (of the
Oratory) comments on this issue and tells us Abel offered up a living sacrifice to which he joined himself, but Cain
only offered up fruits and inanimate objects, without offering himself, and such a sacrifice was unacceptable to God.
If the Novus Ordo can be likened to the sacrifice of Cain, will Our Lord find it acceptable? One may be permitted to
doubt it.35
Scripture and the liturgy further confirm this interpretation. If the faithful share through baptism, in the priesthood of
Christ, it is, says St. Peter, that they may "offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ" (I Pet. II,5).
In the Secret of Whit monday and Trinity Sunday we find the prayer "Vouchsafe, O Lord, to sanctify these gifts, and
receiving the oblation of this spiritual victim, make us (in Latin, the emphatic Nosmetipsos) an eternal sacrifice to

33 A Franciscan manual of daily meditations for priests.

34 The concept of mortification is highly significant, for in mortifying ourselves we
becme dead to the world and alive to Christ. The primary means of mortification are fasting and prayer.
The old fast from midnight - now reduced in the novus ordo to one hour, was a highly efficacious
discipline which prevented many acts that are offensive to God.

35 In The General Instruction of the Roman Missal (the fourth version of Paul VI's Missale
Romanum) promulgated March 27, 1975, the following Query and response is to be found as a footnote
to paragraph 1439 (Documents on the Liturgy, 1963-1979, Litugrical Press): Query: What is the genuine
meaning of the offertory rite? The description of the offertory of the Mass, it is point out, speaks only of
the preparation of the gifts and of placing them on the altar, of the people's offerings for the church, and
for the poor, but nothing about the offering of the sacrifice. Reply: History teaches that the offertory rite is
an action of preparation for the sacrifice in which the priest and ministers accept the gifts offered by the
people. These are the elements for the celebration (the bread and wine) and other gifts intended for the
church and the poor. The preparatory meaning has always been regarded as the identifying note of the
offertory, even though the formularies did not adequately bring it out and were couched in sacrificial
language. The new rite puts this speciffying note in a clearer light by means of both the active part taken
by the faithful in the presentation of the gifts and the formularies the celebrant says in placing the
elements for the eucharistic celebration on the altar: Not 6(1970) 37, No. 25. "Query: Does it not
seem that the suppression of the prayers that accompanied theoffering of the bread and wine has
impoverished the offertory rite? Reply. In no way. The former prayers: Suscipe Sancte Pater... and
Offerimus tibi Domine... were not accurate expressions of the genuine meaning of the "offertory" rites but
merely anticipated th meaning of the true and literal sacrificial offering that is present in the eucharistic
prayer after the consecration, hen Christ becomes present on the altar as victim. The new formularies for
the gifts bring out the giving of glory to God, who is the source of all things and of all the gifts given to
humanity. they state explicitly the meanig of the rite being carried out; they associate the value of human
work, which embraces all human concerns, with the mystery of Christ. The offertory rite, then, has been
restored through that explicit teaching and shines forth with new light: ibid. It is indeed sad that for
almost 2000 years we used inadequate formularies!
18
Thyself."36

At this point the priest washes his hands, or rather, his fingers. As he has already washed his hands
prior to vesting, his action now, as the words of the Psalm he recites make clear, is concerned with inner purity. As
St. Cyril of Jerusalem tells us "Do not imagine that this is for the sake of corporal cleanliness. Not so at all. We are
not accustomed when entering the church to be in such a state as to need the washing in order to be clean. This
washing of hands reminds us that we ought to be free from all our sins because our hands mean our deeds. To wash
our hands is nothing else than to purify our works." Moreover, as Gueranger notes, this is a Messianic psalm. “Ego
autem in innocentia mea ingressus sum: I have walked in mine innocence, proves this. The Priest, therefore, says it
in the Name of Christ, with whom he is but one and the same, during the action of the Great Sacrifice. Up to now the
priest has been inviting the faithful to join themselves to him in offering the sacrifice. He makes this clear by the
words of the prayers and his frequent turning to the congregation in order to impart blessings. The last time he will
do this is when he says the Orate Fratres - Pray brethren that your sacrifice and mine may be acceptable. Now
clearly, it is not the acceptability of the Sacrifice of Christ that is in question. What Sacrifice is the priest referring
to? It is the sacrifice of himself and of ourselves which is joined to that of Christ's.
From here on, the Mass re-presents the passion of our Lord and His resurrection. The priest will
not turn to the faithful till after he communicates. He now enters into the secret of the sanctuary, there to treat alone
with God. He can be likened to a Moses climbing the mountain. He now says the Secret, so-called because he says it
in a low voice like Jesus Christ Who, in the Garden of Olives, who moved a stone's throw away from His disciples,
in order to enter into the silence of recollection and prayer. The Preface follows. The Preface is as it were the
introduction to the Canon and invites us to assume the proper attitude for attending the Sacrifice itself. Lift up your
hearts. It is truly meet and just. It terminates with the Sanctus, the song of angels, and indeed the bell is rung to
remind us that at this point the angels are present.
We have already pointed out that the Canon (which means "rule") is the core and essence of the
Mass can be traced back to Christ and the Apostles. It is in the early part of the Canon that the priest prays for the
Church and hierarchy as well as "all the orthodox believers and professors of the Catholic and Apostolic faith." Next
he mentions the names of the persons and the intentions for which the Mass is offered. It is in the Canon that we find
the Diptych or list of saints whose intercession we beseech. In the early Church the names of those whose lives had
been especially saintly were incorporated into this prayer, whence it is that we have the term canonize. This prayer,
the Communicantes, reminds us of the consoling doctrine of the Communion of Saints.
We now come to the prayer Hanc igitur where the priest extends his hands over the chalice as
Aaron did during the HATTAT thousands of years ago. In this action our sins are transferred onto the sacrificial
victim who is to die in our place - die that we might live. It is here that the priest asks that we be preserved from the
eternal damnation that our sins deserve.
At the Consecration the priest takes the Host into his hands, just as Jesus Christ, at the Last
Supper, took the bread and wine into His holy and venerable hands. Then the priest's words cease, his personality
disappears (Father Arminjon) and the voice of Jesus Christ replaces that of His minister. It is no longer the priest
who speaks or lives: the body of the priest has become the very body of God.37 Leaning over the Host, the priest

36 According to the Catechism of the Council of Trent, "Sacred Scripture describes a

twofold priesthood, one internal and the other external... Regarding the internal priesthood, all the faithful
are said to be priests, once they have been washed in the saving waters of Baptism... Hence we read in the
Apocalypse: Christ hath washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us a kingdom, and
priests to God and his Father(Apoc. I, 5,6)." This is very different from the "external priesthood" which
"does not pertain to the faithful at large, but only to certain men who have been ordained and consecrated
to God by the lawful imposition of hands and by the solemn ceremonies of holy Church." This distinction
is important because, according to the General Instruction (rubrics) of the Novus Ordo Missae, it is all the
faithful who "consecrate" while in the traditional Mass, it is only the (external) priest, acting in persona
Christi, who can effect the consecration.
37 St. Vincent de Paul taught that "the dignity of a priest is so great because a priest, as a
priest, has no personality of his own; he leaves it aside to put on that of Christ." (St. Vincent de Paul,
Guide for Priests, Rev. Joseph Leonard, C.M.) Similarly, Cardinal O'Connell of Boston has said "there is
19
does not say "This is the body of Jesus Christ, this is the blood of Jesus Christ," but "This is my body, this is my
blood." Some will point to the fact that these words are retained in the Novus Ordo Missae, as in fact they are in the
Lutheran and Anglican services. But in the Novus Ordo Missae, as I have already explained they are part of the
"narration of the institution" or in plainer English, part of the story of the Last Supper. If a priest were to read you
the story of the Last Supper as is found in the Gospels, he would say these same words, but would in no way
consecrate. Nowhere in the General Instruction which accompanies the new mass and provides its rubrics, is it made
clear that these words are said in persona Christi. If you look at the Eucharistic Prayers in the "Peoples Mass Book"
used in the Novus Ordo churches, you will note that the supposed words of consecration are in no way distinguished
from the rest of the narration.

The Sacrifice of the Mass is a holocaust. "According to the conception of the ancient liturgies, the
Eucharistic act of sacrifice is effected by the fire of the Holy Spirit which called down by the Church, falls upon the
bread that represents mankind. From this bread it forms the body and blood of the true sacrificial Lamb as once it
formed Him in the womb of the virgin, thereafter to offer Him on the cross and in the resurrection as the perfect
holocaust." The Pontificale Romanum specifically refers to the altaris holocaustum, and St. John Chrysostom
compares the priest with Elias, who called fire down from heaven to consume the victim.38

The two-fold elevation of the Consecrated Host and Chalice was not always the practice of the
Roman Church. Before the twelfth century, they were elevated together as in the Greek rite. This is still done in what
is called the minor elevation. However, after the attacks on the Real Presence by the heretic Berengarius, the Church
decreed that both Consecrated Host and Chalice should be exposed for the veneration of the faithful.
After the elevation the priest directs his prayer to the Real Presence on the altar, the Unde et
memores Domine referring to the injunction of Our Lord to "Do this in commemoration of me." In compliance with
this charge, Christ's oblation of himself is offered to God by the priest. (nos servi tui) and by the congregation (et
plebs tua sancta). The second part, the Supra quae, entreats that the oblation be graciously accepted though offered
by sinful hands. If the gifts are to be acceptable, they must be presented with the sentiments of Abel the innocent and
just, of Abraham the humble and obedient, and of Melchisedech, dead to the world. Again, these references point to
the perpetual nature of the Sacrifice which has been offered in different ways throughout the ages. After this prayers
for the Church suffering are offered.
The Nobis quoque peccatoribus is a prayer for the Church militant, that they might have a part
with the Church triumphant. The saints here mentioned belong to all the walks of life - an encouragement to all, no
matter what their station in life: John the prophet, Stephen the deacon, Matthias the apostle, Barnabas the disciple,
Ignatius the bishop, Alexander the pope, Marcellinus the priest, Peter the minorist, Felicitas and Perpetua of the
married state Agatha, Lucy, Agnes and Cecilia the virgins, and Anastasis the widow.
After this the priest makes multiple signs of the Cross over the Host and Chalice - the per ipsum -
Christ, the God-man is the Mediator between God and man; cum ipso - Christi is one with God; in ipso - Christ is of
one essence with God. The signs of the cross indicate that all these effects were accomplished through the original
sacrifice of the Cross. All this is said quietly. The priest now raises his voice and says Per omnia saecula
saeculorum. the congregation answers with its Amen, as if to say, all that you our sacrificing priest have said and
done, we endorse and approve. Up to this point of the Canon, the celebrant has been praying alone. Now the priest
and the people are again acting together.
The priest, an alter Christus (another Christ) now extends his hands as did Moses praying for
victory; as did Our Lord on the Cross, and likens the sacrifice accomplished to that prefigured by Abel, Abraham
and the high priest Melchisedech. This is followed by prayers for the faithful departed, the priest begging admission
into Heaven for the dead as well as for those still journeying on the road of life: the Priest asks earnestly for himself

no such thing as the personality... of a parish priest. Personal qualities are subject to change. These are
transient things...(In Mysterious Ways, Random House, 1911). This shows the absurdity of attending a
Mass that one likes because of the manner in which a priest says it. As st. Ambrose said, "a priest shall be
to thee as one not to be valued for his outward appearance, but for his office" (On the Sacraments).
Similarly, when we approach the altar rail, we leave, or should leave behind, not only our passions (anger,
envy, etc.), but also our own personalities charming or otherwise. "My God, I am not worthy to receive
You. Only say the word and my soul shall be healed."
38 Matthias Scheeban, The Mysteries of Christianity, B. Herder, 1946
20
and the Faithful the happiness of Heaven.
As the Pusillum39 points out, the Pater Noster (Our Father) is a splendid summary of ascetics and
at the same time a practical guide for wafarers to heaven. Our excessive familiarity with this prayer - despite its
being directly provided by the Logos - often leads us to ignore is mataphysical content. The first invocation is
addressed to our Father in Heaven and induces a childlike love of God in Heaven, and a brotherly love of our
neighbor on earth. The two petitions which follow deal with the objective of our wayfaring: the honor of God and
our soul's salvation. For as the same source states, Nomen stands for God himself, in his essence and majesty and the
Adveniat regnum tuum for the kingdom of grace here (and as Eckhardt says, primarily in our hearts) and the
kingdom of glory hereafter. Next we are introduced to the very best guide for our way through life, doing the will of
God. Having provided the principles for the spiritual life, the necessary supplies for the journey are considered
Panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie (Give us this day our daily bread). We ask for necessary food, for both
body and soul. How appropriate that this prayer should just proceed Communion. Next follow the obstacles that
beset our journey, Forgive us our sins as we forgive the sins of others. Christ taught us the importance of this
repeatedly in the various Gospel parables and finally on the Cross itself. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver
us from evil, or as the French translate it, from the evil one. What better preparation for our souls than to say and
believe the contents of this prayer prior to Communion.

One of the seeming inconsistencies of the traditional Mass is that the priest mentions Christ's
breaking of the bread prior to consecration, but does not fracture the host until well after the Consecration. The
reason for the fracturing of the host after the Pater Noster is that it signifies Our Lord's death. The Sacrifice has
occurred. It is followed by placing a particle of the host in the chalice which is significant of the reunion of Our
Lord's Body and Blood in the Resurrection.
The Bread of Life is the "Word made flesh." Through the power of the Holy Spirit this earthly
bread is remade into the mystical body of Christ - the bread is transubstantiated, re-created as the newly incarnate
flesh of the primal victim. But this bread must also be identified with the human being, the sacrificer himself. Man
himself is the oblation. In order to truly consume the flesh of Christ, man must first be remade and reformed in the
image of Christ. For we are all one body, the body of the Church, of whom Christ is the head. As St. Augustine said,
"You have received that which your are; become that which you have received." Man, too, must be transformed
-transubstantiated - into the body of Christ, made one with the flesh of the Son. The wheat must be separated from
the chaff. As St. Augustine says: "First there is the threshing. Then it is ground, kneaded, baked; in the kneading it is
refined, in the baking it becomes solid. Where is your practice of sifting [the flour]? In fastings, in vigils, in
exorcisms. Kneading is not done without water: you were baptized. Baking is troublesome but essential. How are
you baked? In the fire of temptations which are an intimate part of life" (Sermon on the Day of Easter). Man must be
purified and newly formed as a sacrificial offering. In Romans 12:1 St. Paul tells us to "present our bodies as a
living sacrifice," and in Corinthians V, 6-7 he writes, "Purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new dough." St.
Gregory makes this clear: "When a man vows to Almighty God all that he has, all his life, all his knowledge, it is a
holocaust"(XX Homily on Ezekiel). Communion follows. St. Leo the Great speaks of Communion in the following
terms: "Nothing else is aimed at in our partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ than that we change into what we
consume, and ever bear in spirit and in flesh Him in whom we have died, been buried, and have risen" (Sermo 63).
St. Cyril of Jerusalem says "in the Eucharist we are made con-corporate, and of the same blood with Christ"
(Cateches., 4, Myst). In even stronger terms, St. Symeon the New Theologian says: "when we receive the grace of
Jesus Christ our God, we become participants in His Divinity (II Peter 1:4), and when we eat his most pure Body,
that is, when we receive communion of the Holy Mysteries, we are of one body with Him, and in truth akin to Him,
as also the divine Paul says, For we are members of his body, of His flesh and of His bones (Eph. 5:30), and as St.
John the evangelist says, "of His fullness we have all received. Thus by grace we become like unto Him, our man-
loving God and Lord, and in soul are renewed from being old, and brought to life from being dead as we were."
Mathias Sheeban tells us "Christ is reproduced at the Consecration, that He may unite Himself with individual men
in Communion and become one body with them, so that the Logos may, as it were, become man anew in each man
by taking the human nature of each into union with His own...we must be overwhelmed with the fullness of the
Godhead; we must be deified." Lest the reader think the term deified to strong, consider the declaration of the
Council of Trullo: "God, who is offered and distributed for the salvation of souls and bodies, deifies those who
receive Him."40

39 The Pusillum is a well known manual of daily meditations for priests.

40 Matthias Scheeban, The Mysteries of Christianity, B. Herder, 1946

21
 Similarly with the wine. Just as Christ Himself so humbled Himself as to be "trodden upon and
pressed" in the winepress, allowing the blood to flow from His own side into our chalice, so also man must follow
his Lord through the press, threshing out his sins and freeing the Divine within him. After the pressing the skins are
discarded. It is Christ who will "lead them, at last to the wine presses where the blood of grapes is poured out
(Genesis 49:11). It is this Divine Presence within us that we must press out from our own sinful skins, from out of
the raw stalks of our worldliness and pride. In order to truly share the feast of the Eucharist upon the innermost altar
of the heart, man must slay the old Adam of self and mingle his blood with the Divine Blood of the true Self, Jesus
Christ, for, as St. Augustine points out, "the wine is formed by being pressed, and many individual drops unite in a
single flow." Christ dies to the world and gives His blood to man, while man dies to sin and releases the Divine
Nature, the spiritual blood, within his own heart. This is a communion wherein the consumer becomes the
consumed, the sacrificer becomes the sacrifice, and man and God mingle together as the very water and wine of the
chalice.
What follows is the Angus Dei, the Lamb of God. Here the Lamb of God is actually on the altar
and the faithful join the priest in yet once again in recognizing the Divine Presence and paying it homage.
Subsequent to this the priest thrice declares his unworthyness and communicates.
Communion of the faithful follows, but not before another Confession which implicitly implies a
certain atonement. The saying of the Confiteor removes from us the stains of venial sins, and who of us has not let
his mind wander during the service. Thus it is that we are allowed to communicate in the purist possible state.
Communion literally means "in union with." We are made one with Christ in this act. This brings us back to the
essential nature of "at-onement" which is really being made "at-one-with." (Again, atonement also implies being in
tune or harmony with.) We actually "partake of God" in order to be born again with Him by means of His life. He
has died for us that we might live in Him. "Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood, you
shall not have life in you." The soul's relationship to God is often described by mystics in terms of the Bride and the
Bridegroom. This nuptial symbolism is most apt as an expression of communion between the soul and Christ
because as it were, we are made one flesh.
As Father Marmion says, "when we assimilate the food of the body, we change it into our own
substance, while Christ gives Himself to us as food in order to transform us into Himself. St. Leo teaches us that
"participation in the Body and Blood of Christ produces in us none other effect than to make us pass into that which
we take. St. Augustine is still more explicit; He makes Christ say: "I am the Food of the strong; have faith and eat
Me. But thou wilt not change Me into thyself, it is thou who wilt be transformed into Me." St. Thomas Aquinas also
makes this clear: "the principle of arriving at a clear understanding of the effect of the Sacrament, is to judge of it by
analogy with the matter of the Sacrament... The matter of the Eucharist is a food; its proper effect must then be
analogous to that of food. He who assimilates corporal food transforms it into himself; this change repairs the losses
of the organism and gives it the necessary increase. But the Eucharistic food, instead of being transformed into the
one who takes it, transforms him into Itself. It follows that the proper effect of the Sacrament is to transform us so
much into Christ, that we can truly say: 'I live, not I, but Christ liveth in me'....The efficacy of this Sacrament is to
work a certain transformation of ourselves into Christ by means of charity. And this is the fruit proper to It... the
property of charity is to transform the one who loves into the object of his love." As St. John said, "He that abideth
in charity, abideth in God, and God in him" (IV,16).
Father Marmion continues: "Without this there is no real "communion". Without this we receive
Christ with the lips, it is true, but He means us to be united to Him with mind and heart and will and all our soul, in
order that we may share His Divine life in as far as is possible here below, and that, by the faith we have in Him, by
the love we bear towards Him, it may be really His life, and no longer our ego that is the principle of our life.... Do
not let us lose sight of the fact that Communion is not a human invention but a Divine Sacrament instituted by
Eternal Wisdom. Now it belongs to wisdom to proportion the means to the end. If, then, our Divine Savior instituted
the Eucharist in order to unite Himself to us and make us live by His life, we may be assured that the Sacrament
contains all that is needful to bring about this union" providing we ourselves place no obstacle to its achieving its
purpose. This was made clear by Pope Saint Pius X writing on Daily Communion: "Whereas the Sacraments of the
New Law, thought they take effect ex opere operato, nevertheless produce a greater effect in proportion as the
dispositions of the recipient are better; therefore, care is to be taken that Holy Communion be preceded by serious
preparation, and followed by suitable thanksgiving."
Christ gave His body and blood separately at the Last Supper. He did this to signify His death on
the Cross, for when the blood is separated from the body, death is certain. That does not mean that actually in
themselves the two were separated at the Last Supper, because He was not yet actually dead, only symbolically. For
this reason the Mass can be celebrated only under the two species, that both His death and His sacrifice be thereby
signified. But the Sacrament can be received under one species. Christ Himself gave His body and blood under one
species to the two disciples at Emmaus. While communion was ordinarily distributed under both forms in the early
22
Church, it was administered outside of Mass to the sick and others under the form of bread alone. Infants were given
communion only under the form of wine, which is still the practice in some of the eastern Churches. This is of
course a disciplinary decision of the Church depending on the needs and various circumstances of the faithful. What
is important is that under each species alike is contained the entire Christ, body and blood, soul and divinity.41
A brief caveat: the post-Conciliar church frequently proclaims that the Eucharist is a "Sacrament
of Unity," meaning by this, the unity of the People of God. It is indeed a Sacrament of Unity, as St. Paul makes
clear: For we being many are one bread, one body, all that partakes of one bread" (I Cor. X,17). But this is not a
unity of some vague community consisting of Protestants, nominal Catholics and "atheistic Christians." Rather it is,
as the Council of Trent makes clear, a unity of the faithful with Christ. As the Council of Trent says: "Our Lord has
willed to leave us this Sacrament as a symbol of the intimate union of this mystical body of which He is the Head."
One of the most significant prayers the priest says after communicating is the following: "I will
take the Bread of heaven and will call upon the Name of the Lord... What return shall I make to the Lord for all He
has given me? I will take the chalice of salvation and call upon the name of the Lord."42 We have already seen that
His Name is an "unblemished sacrifice." Now there is an intimate relationship between the Eucharist and the divine
Name - that Name given our Lord when He first shed blood at his Circumcision. (By adding S to the middle of the
Tetragammon or Hebrew Jehovah, one gets the name Jesus. This name was so holy that it was forbidden to be
pronounced in the Old Dispensation.) The invocation of the Name of Jesus, so often referred to in the Psalms and
New Testament, and so frequently on the lips of the saints, is but another way in which the Holy Sacrifice of the
Mass is carried forward through our daily lives. The repetition of this Name is itself an oblation, replacing all our
wayward thoughts with the divine presence in our hearts.
***
Let us examine some further elements of the Traditional Mass. The chalice symbolizes the heart in
which Our Lord's Blood flowed; or according to others, the bitter chalice of his passion; or again, the grave in which
he was laid. The pall covering the chalice represents the stone which was rolled across his tomb. The paten
represents the vases containing the unguents used to anoint his body. The corporal is the square of fine linen carried
in the bursa and placed under the chalice during Mass. It must always be white for it symbolizes the purity of the
Virgin from whence Christ drew his terrestrial body. It also symbolizes Christ's passion, for linen acquires its
whiteness only after many washings and much travail, as also Christ underwent. It further symbolizes the Church
which is the body of Christ present in the world, and finally, the host is placed upon the corporal, and both on the
altar, just as the body of Christ united to His divinity was attached to the Cross. It is folded in three, representing the
three theological virtues, faith hope and charity, by means of which we are united to God.
The purificator represents the other cloths that were used at His interment; the veil of silk covering
the chalice represents the veil of the temple that was torn from top to bottom at the moment of His death; the two
cruets represent the vessels which contained the wine and the gall given Him to drink upon the cross. The three altar
cloths under the chalice at Mass also represent the shroud in which he was laid - and according to Catherine Emerick
there were three cloths used at the time of the Last Supper. Everything on the altar and everything the priest does or
says is replete with meaning. Such of course is also true of the novus ordo missae, but in a negative fashion. I say, in
a negative fashion, because one must look at precisely those prayers and words which were deleted or changed to
understand the nature of this new desacralized rite.
Other symbols used in the Mass that date back to Apostolic times are worthy of mention. Of the
sacerdotal vestments: The Amice is symbolic of the linen cloth wherewith in the house of Caiaphas the Jews covered
Christ's face, bidding Him in mockery: "Prophesy to us, who is it that struck Thee?"; the alb represents the white
garment in which the son of God was mocked in the house of Herod; The linen girdle with which the priest girds
himself represents the cord wherewith Christ was bound in the Garden of Olives. The maniple on the priests left arm
represents the bonds wherewith Christ was tied to the pillar when he was scourged. The priest takes this off when he

41 The Eucharist is both a Sacrament and a Sacrifice. There are some points of difference between the
Eucharist as a Sacrament and Sacrifice. The efficacy of the Sacrifice lies in it being offered, and of a
Sacrament in its being received. The Eucharist as a Sacrament increases our merit, and gives to the soul
all the advantages that food gives to the body. As a Sacrifice the Eucharist is not only a source of merit,
but also of satisfaction. While the Eucharist as a Sacrament benefits by reason of being received only by
the person who communicates and obtains graces and blessings for others only through the goodness of
God. As a Sacrifice, the Eucharist is offered for the benefits the whole Catholic Church, and its
satisfactory power is extended to all faithful Christians living and dead. Lastly, the chief end of the Holy
Eucharist as a Sacrament is our own sanctification, while its chief end as a Sacrifice in the Mass is the
supreme worship of God.
42 dropped from the Novus Ordo.
23
leaves the altar to give his sermon because he gives the sermon as Christ's representative - but he services the altar
as an alter Christus or another Christ. Or again, it is that maniple of tears intended to wipe away the filth resulting
from our attachment to the things of this world. It is not without significance that the novus ordo missae has dropped
the use of the Maniple. The stole represents the chains laid upon Our Lord after He was sentenced to death. The
chasuble represents, either the purple robe that the soldiers laid upon his shoulder, or the need above all for Charity.
It bears upon it the image of the Cross which Our Lord Jesus Christ bore upon His own shoulders.43

The colors of the vestments are also significant. White, a symbol of purity and sanctity, is used on
festivals of Our Lord and the Blessed Virgin, the Angels, Pontiffs, Confessors, and Virgins. White is of course a
symbol of purity. Red which suggests both blood and fire is used to celebrate festivals of the Martyrs. Purple is a
penitential color and thus is used in Advent and Lent, and interestingly enough for the death of Kings. Pink is for joy
as in the Third Sunday of Advent where the penitential tone is mitigated in anticipation of the birth of Our Lord.
Green, which is used for ordinary Sundays and ferias (weekdays) and symbolizes hope, that hope which we have for
things unseen. Blue is used for Masses of Our Lady, especially in Latin countries. And Black of course is used at
funeral Masses. In the novus ordo black is no longer used.
A word about the magnificence of the priestly vestments. The can be and frequently are worn over
the poorest of garments. The Cure of Ars used to spare no expense in decorating the altar or on vestments used in the
Mass. One must remember that in wearing them, the priest is an alter Christus. The priest on the altar as an
individual is a "nobody." It is Christ who consecrates. In the novus ordo missae, it is the people who consecrate
under the presidency of the so-called priest.
***
We have shown then how the Church gathers together all the sacrifices of the Old Testament and
incorporates them into the New Covenant. As Father Cochem says: "If our eyes were enlightened by faith, this
sacred spectacle of the Mass would fill us with intense joy. For holy Mass is a brief compendium of the whole life of
Christ, and a renewal of all the mysteries comprised in it; not, indeed, a fictitious portrayal of past events, but a real
and actual repetition of all that Christ did and suffered on earth." Just as Christ is continually sacrificing Himself in
heaven for us - perpetually offering to the Father a "clean oblation" of Himself; so also is He continually being born
on earth and in us. As one sainted Dominican put it, "it is no use Christ being born on earth, if He is not born in me."
At this point it is perhaps useful to consider and provide an example of how one can indeed apply Christ's life to
ourselves. According to the Blessed Johannes Tauler, the story of the Flight into Egypt is full of meaning for us. In
the Gospel story, the angel warned Joseph that although Herod had died, his son Archelaus had taken the throne and
still sought to kill the Christ-child. Tauler viewed this entire drama as taking place within the soul - even though the
Herod in our souls is dead as a result of Baptism which engendered the Christ-child within us, Archelaus still
continues to live within our souls and still seeks to kill the Christ-child. Thus it is that, that like the Magi, after the
encounter with Christ, they had to travel a different path.
Now as we trace the life of Christ in the Mass, let us remember that we must unite ourselves to
Him - as Scripture puts it, we must be baptized with Him, must die with Him and must Rise again with Him. As it
says in the Epistle for the Fourteenth Sunday after Pentecost: "Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the
flesh with its passions and desires." Let us follow the life of Christ in the Mass and see at the same time how the
actions of our Exemplar apply to us. Let us remember that our entire spiritual life must be patterned after Him, for
he in not only the Truth and the Light, but also the Way. As several saints have put it, "if we would bear Christ, we
must become like the Virgin Mary." 44

As Father Myers puts it, "Christ, head and members, offers the sacrifice, but Christ, head and
members, offers himself, and we, in union with our Head are victims too." In this communal meal man and God
sacrifice themselves for one another and dwell within one another in a mysterious wedding and divine conjugation.
"Abide in me and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abide in the vine, so neither can you
43 According to Father Summers, the removal or inversion of the cross on the chasuble is
characteristic of a black or satanic mass (The History of Witchcraft).
44 “If anyone wishes to know how the bread is changed into the Body oif Jesus Christ I
will tel him The Holy Ghost overshadows the priest and acts on him as He acted on the Blessed Virgin
Mary” (St John Damascene). Again, God, when He descends on the altar, does no less than Hed did
when He bacame man for the first time in the womb of the Virgin Mary.” (Both Quoted by Fr. Paul
O’Sullivan, O.P, The Wonders of the Mass.
24
unless you abide in me." (John XV. 4-5) No wonder then that Christ told us, "Except you eat the flesh of the Son of
Man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you; he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath
everlasting life... He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me and I in him." (John VI. 54. ff).
At this point I think it is obvious that the traditional Mass incorporates all the sacrifices of the Old
Testament. It has also been shown - granted in an abbreviated manner - for time and space is limited - how the Mass
recapitulates the entire life of Christ, and how by our participation in this rite we are baptized in Christ, die in Christ
and are resurrected in Christ. We have also seen how the essence of the Mass was established by Christ and the
Apostles, and how every act by the priest, even the smallest detail, is full of meaning, for the rite follows a heavenly
model - to use the Scholastic phrase, "as in heaven, so on earth." When we know all this it is obvious that to change
the Mass is an inversion - it is to say, that heaven should follow an earthly pattern - it is to say, "as on earth, so we
wish it to be in heaven" which is but another aspect of Satan's non serviam. Just as every thing in the traditional
Mass is replete with meaning, so also are all the changes. Nothing in the novus ordo is accidental; the elimination of
the altar rails, the removal of the tabernacles, the changes in the "form" of the Sacrament, the failure to insist on an
altar stone, the changing of the altar into a table with a single covering, the elimination of the Maniple, a president
facing the people, communion in the hand with recipient standing - all these things are just as full of meaning as are
their contrary in the true Mass. Knowing this, we see how important it is for us to insist on the rite that Christ and
the Apostles established, and not some ersatz imitation. Finally, how grateful to God we must be, not only for the
priests which continue to provide us with this great sacrament, but also because we have been privileged to persist in
being Catholic. With this comes of course the other side of the coin. Much has been given to us; much will be asked
of us. It is with fear and trembling that we must approach this most holy of sacraments lest we be condemned along
with the man who came to the marriage feast without a wedding garment. We must truly put off the old man and put
on Christ.
"Our heart is an altar. On this altar lies the victim: our evil inclinations. The sword
destined to slay this victim is the spirit of sacrifice and immolation; the sacred fire which must
burn night and day on the altar of our heart is the love of Jesus Christ; the fruitful invigorating
breath which inspires and nourishes this sacred fire of love is the Eucharist." Father Arminjon

***

A brief comment on the Catholic practice of making the sign of the Cross. There is of course,
nothing in Scripture that speaks to this practice; and it was of course dropped by the Protestants. I have told you how
the Mass and Altar are at the center of the world and I have mentioned to you how the priest, and all of us, need to
be converted on a daily - even hourly basis. Well, when we make the sign of the Cross, we are as it were lining
ourselves up with the Cross and placing ourselves at the center of creation. One should never forget the importance
of this act. Let me illustrate its importance by retelling the story of St. Simeon of the Pillar.

St. Simeon was recognized as a great saint by the Christian world of his time. When he died, his
body had to be transported twelve miles from his pillar to the Cathedral in Antioch. The crowds of people attending
the funeral extended then entire twelve miles from his pillar to Antioch in a column one mile wide - three different
histories of his life tell us this. Now St. Simion lived on top of a pillar and was known for the great austerity of his
life. He was a wonder worker and the advisor of kings throughout the Eastern world. One day Christ appeared to
him on a fiery chariot praising him for his life of prayer and sacrifice and informing him that like some of the saints
of the Old Testament, he was to be taken to heaven in this chariot, and that Christ Himself had come to bring this
about. St. Simion accepted this without question, opened the gate of his pillar, and was about to step into the chariot.
Before doing so however, out of habit, he made the sign of the cross. And much to his surprise, Christ turned into
Satan. St. Simion realized that he still lacked sufficient humility and spent the next year standing on one leg as an
added penance. Here the habitual making of the sign of the cross saved his soul. How important then it is for us to
make the sign of the cross on awaking, or before going to sleep - or for that matter, before initiating any action.

25
26