Thesaurus responsorum ex « Notitiae » - Notitiae Response Database
[Part of Ipsissima-Verba]

Hoc in situ interretiali ordinantur responsiones, explanationes, et decreta ex « Notitiae » aliisque interdum fontibus (ut AAS) desumpta, quae facilius aliis locis minime inveniuntur. Finis est praestare textum originalem, versionem anglicam, et exemplar PDF paginarum pertinentium ex « Notitiae » vel alio fonte. Presens igitur labor opusculum « Ordo Missae locis correspondentibus illustratus » aliquatenus extendit. Est enim labor imperfectus quem, cum operae mihi est, suscipio. Denique Reverendo domino Danieli Gill, domino Radosław Gosiewski, et domino Abram Córdova y Muenzberg, qui nonnullas ex responsionibus transcripserunt, gratias refero, item etiam domino Ioanni Oliveire dominaeque Cristae Mootz, qui in linguam anglicam responsiones quasdam verteri adiuvaverunt. Exemplaria PDF exstant etiam textuum nondum transcriptorum. This website organizes responses, explanations, and decrees from Notitiae and sometimes from other sources (such as AAS) that are not readily available in other places. The goal is to provide the original text, an English translation, and a PDF scan of the relevant pages from Notitiae or other source. In some ways, the project is a further development of my Cross-Referenced Ordo Missae. This is an ongoing prject which I work on in my spare time. I am also grateful for the help of Rev. Daniel Gill, Mr. Radosław Gosiewski, and Mr. Abram Córdova y Muenzberg in transcribing some of these responses and also to Mr. Johan Oliveire and Miss Crista Mootz for helping to translate certain responses into English. PDFs are available even for texts that have not yet been transcribed.
Fac Patrem Dylanum Schrader certiorem si habes proposita vel corrigenda. Contact Father Dylan Schrader with suggestions and corrections.
N.B. In « Notitiae » 1 (1965) et 2 (1966), supra responsa, invenitur monitio: Solutio quae proponitur nullam induit vestem officialem. Solummodo habet valorem orientativum: solutiones enim ex officio publici iuris fient, si casus fert, a competenti Auctoritate in « Acta Apostolicae Sedis ». N.B. In Notitiae 1 (1965) and 2 (1966), this notice appears above the responses: The solution which is proposed takes on no official character. It has only an orientative force; solutions will be published officially, if the case warrants, by the competent Authority in « Acta Apostolicae Sedis ».

The responses below have been filtered. Show all responses instead.

Use this link to display only the responses that are associated with the specified tags: http://notitiae.ipsissima-verba.org/tag/hermeneutics.

TextUnofficial English TranslationCitationTagsPDF of the original document

14. Utrum ad Gloria Patri, quando in Missa occurrit, adhuc caput sit inclinandum?

Resp.: Affirmative, iuxta principa generalia.

14. Whether the head should still be bowed at the Gloria Patri when it occurs in the Mass?

Resp.: In the affirmative, according to general principles.

Notitiae 1 (1965), 139, n. 14bow, gloria patri, hermeneutics, posturePDF of Notitiae 1 (1965), 139

15. Utrum antiphona ad introitum post Gloria Patri repetenda, omitti possit, quia repetitiones secundum art. 34 Constitutionis sunt vitandae?

Resp.: Repetitio antiphonae ad introitum sequitur ex ipsa natura antiphonae; ideoque non est numeranda inter « repetitiones inutiles », de quibus art. 34 Constitutionis.

15. Whether the entrance antiphon to be repeated after the Gloria Patri could be omitted, because repetitions, according to art. 34 of the Constitution, are to be avoided?

Resp.: The repetition of the entrance antiphon follows from the very nature of an antiphon, and therefore it is not to be counted among the « useless repetitions », about which art. 34 of the Constitution is concerned.

Notitiae 1 (1965), 139, n. 15entrance antiphon, hermeneutics, introit, repetitionPDF of Notitiae 1 (1965), 139

43. Possunt Ordinarii religiosi vi art. 97 Constitutionis de sacra Liturgia et art. VII Motu Proprio « Sacram Liturgiam » in casibus singularibus et iusta de causa a recitatione Divini Officii dispensare etiam singulas communitates ex toto vel ex parte, aut commutare?

Resp.: Negative. Art. 97 Constitutionis est obvious: « in casibus singulariubs ». Nullo modo agitur de dispensandis communitatibus choro adstrictis. Ideo Motu Proprio « Pastorale munus » n. 24 concessit Episcopis facultatem reducendi obligationem choralem Capitulorum. Clare tandem excluditur talis interpretatio in Instructione diei 26 sept. 1964, n. 78, c, ubi pro regionibus Missionum peculiares conceduntur facultates, sed « salva disciplina chorali religiosa... iure statuta ».

43. Can religious Ordinaries, by virtue of art. 97 of the Constitution on the sacred Liturgy and art. VII of the Motu Proprio « Sacram Liturgiam » in individual cases and for a just cause dispense also individual communities from the recitation of the Divine Office, either in whole or in part, or commute it?

Resp.: In the negative. Art. 97 of the Constitution is obvious: « in individual cases ». In no way does it deal with dispensing communities bound to choir. Therefore the Motu Proprio « Pastorale munus » n. 24 granted to Bishops the faculty of reducing the choral obligation of Chapters. Clearly then such an interpretation is excluded in the Instruction of 26 sept. 1964, n. 78, c, where for Mission territories special faculties are granted, but « without prejudice to the choral discipline of religious... established by law ».

Notitiae 1 (1965), 186, n. 43divine office, hermeneutics, religious communityPDF of Notitiae 1 (1965), 186

45. Cum celebrans, in precibus ad gradus altaris, non amplius se signet ad verba Adiutorium nostrum in nomine Domini, quaeritur, utrum Episcopus se signare debeat, eaedem [sic] verba dicens, ad benedictionem in fine Missae?

Resp.: Negative, congrua congruis referendo. Nam in utroque casu signum crucis ad verba Adiutorium nostrum omittitur, ne bis successive celebrans se signet.

45. Since the celebrant, in the prayers at the foot of the altar, no longer signs himself at the words Adiutorium nostrum in nomine Domini, it is asked whether a Bishop should sign himself when saying the same words at the blessing at the end of Mass?

Resp.: In the negative, by referring parallel cases to parallel cases. For in either case the sign of the cross at the words Adiutorium nostrum is omitted so that the celebrant does not sign himself twice in a row.

Notitiae 1 (1965), 186–187, n. 45final blessing, hermeneutics, prayers at the foot of the altar, sign of the crossPDF of Notitiae 1 (1965), 186–187

76. Utrum, ad uniformitatem obtinendam, quando a rubricis plures dantur possibilitates, auctoritas territorialis competens pro universa regione, vel Episcopus pro sua dioecesi statuere possit ut unica ratio ab omnibus teneatur?

Resp.: Per se licet. Attamen, semper prae oculis habendo quod non tollatur illa libertas, quae a novis rubricis praevidetur, aptandi, modo intelligenti, celebrationem sive ecclesiae sive coetui fidelium, ita ut sacer ritus universus sit revera quid vivum pro hominibus vivis.

76. Whether, for the sake of obtaining uniformity, when several possibilities are given in the rubrics, the territorial authority competent for the whole region, or the Bishop for his diocese, can establish that a single way of proceeding be followed by all?

Resp.: Per se this is permissible. Nevertheless, it should always be kept before one's eyes that that freedom, envisioned by the new rubrics, of adapting in an intellignet manner the celebration either to the church or to the group of the faithful such that the whole sacred rite might truly be something living for living people, should not be taken away.

Notitiae 1 (1965), 254, n. 76adaptation, bishop, hermeneuticsPDF of Notitiae 1 (1965), 254

92. Utrum liceat uni tantum lectori omnes partes Proprii legere.

Dispositio ritus liturgiae verbi a Ritu servando et ab Ordine Missae ordinata, eo etiam tendit ut « in celebrationibus liturgicis quisque, sive minister, sive fidelis, munere suo fungens solum et totum id agat, quod ad ipsum ex rei natura et normis liturgicis pertinet » (Const., art. 28). Cavendum proinde ne fere totum quod olim celebrans faciebat, nunc lector ipse agat et ad ipsum praecipue attentio dirigatur, qui saepe partes Proprii, lectiones, cantus inter ipsas occurrentes legit, et aliquando commentatoris et cantoris munus etiam explet. Gradatim providendum est ut celebrationes iuxta spiritum Constitutionis disponantur, ita ut unaquaeque earum pars proprium habeat idoneum ministrum: lectorem, psalmistam vel cantorem, commentatorem. Partes vero Proprii sunt cantus processionales quibus tota communitas aliquam actionem comitatur, et de se pertinent populo vel scholae. Praestat ergo ut habeatur saltem aliqua pars communitatis, aliqualis chorus plurium personarum, qui illas legat vel cantet. Ubi hoc adhuc possibile non sit, saltem provideatur ut qui illas legit, a lectore, seu ministrante, pro lectionibus et a commentatore distinguatur.

Notitiae 2 (1966), 29–30, n. 92hermeneutics, lector, readingsPDF of Notitiae 2 (1966), 29–30

93. Utrum diaconus vel alius sacerdos qui Evangelium legit, tantum superpelliceum et stolam aut habitum choralem, si est religiosus, induere possit.

Praescriptio Ritus servandi, n. 44, non intendit ut quocumque modo alius sacerdos vel diaconus habeatur, qui tantum ad legendum vel cantandum Evangelium accedat statimque recedat. Mens praedicti documenti est ut diaconus vel, eo deficiente, alius sacerdos, ministerium suum celebranti praestet toto tempore actionis sacrae, quique proinde vestes liturgicas proprii ordinis induere tenetur, scilicet albam et stolam diaconalem, diaconus; albam et stolam, more sacerdotali, sacerdos.

Notitiae 2 (1966), 30, n. 93deacon, gospel, hermeneutics, priest, vestmentsPDF of Notitiae 2 (1966), 30

24. Quid intelligitur nomine « panis eucharisticus » in n. 283 Institutionis generalis Missalis Romani?

Resp.: Nihil aliud intelligitur quam hostia seu particula hucusque usitata, amplioris tamen mensurae. Expressio enim secundae lineae ( « panis eucharisticus » ) explicatur per quartam lineam: « sacerdos ... revera hostiam frangere possit in diversas partes ». Ita in secunda linea agitur de genere elementi eucharistici; in quarta linea de forma.

Inepte proinde expressio « panis eucharisticus » secundae lineae intellecta fuit pro forma elementi eucharistici, quasi innueretur loco hostiae formae traditae induci possit panis forma usibus familiaribus accommodati.

Institutio nullo modo mutare voluit formam hostiae et particularum, sed tantum, facultative, mensuram, spissitatem et colorem, ita ut sit et appareat vere panis, quoad substantiam inter plures divisus.

Notitiae 6 (1970), 37, n. 24bread, hermeneutics, hostPDF of Notitiae 6 (1970), 37

27. Utrum in Missae celebratione ritus « Lavabo » omitti possit?

Resp.: Nullo modo. Nam:

1. Sive Institutio generalis (nn. 52; 106; 222) sive Ordo Missae (cum populo, n. 24; sine populo, n. 18) tanquam unum e ritibus normativis praeparationis donorum « Lavabo » ostendunt. Agitur, evidenter, de ritu non maioris dignitatis, tamen non omittendus ob eius significationem, quae ita indicatur « quo ritu desiderium internum purificationis exprimitur » (I. G., n. 52). In decursu laborm « Consilii » pro Ordine Missae disceptationes haud paucae de valore, et loco « Lavabo » collocandi, de silentio servando vel de textu forsitan ritum comitante factae sunt: sed quoad eius conservationem omnes unanimes fuerunt. Etsi actio ipsa lotionis manuum inde a media aetate scopum practicum non habeat, eiusdem symbolismus clarus est ac facile ab omnibus intelligitur (cf. Const. de Liturgia, n. 34). In omnibus liturgiis occidentalibus ritus in usu est.

2. Constitutio de sacra Liturgia (nn. 37-40) praevidet rituales aptationes a Conferentiis Episcopalibus eventualiter proponendas atque Sanctae Sedis approbationi subiciendas. Tales aptationes oportet seriis fundari argumentis, ex. gr. particulare populi ingenium vel peculiaris animus, habitudines contrariae et inexstirpabiles, impossibilitas practica novum aliquem ritum, genio populi extraneum, aptandi, et ita porro.

3. Praeter libertates a rubicis praevisas necnon varias textuum populares interpretations (cf. Instructio « Consilii » diei 25-1-1969), Ordo Missae proponitur ut quid unicum, suius generalis structura necnon varia constitutiva elementa adamussim retinenda sunt. Rituum arbitraria selectio ex parte sive individui sive cuiusdam communitatis, brevi ad ruinam aedificii tam patienter ac graviter constructi verteret.

27. Whether in the celebration of Mass the « Lavabo » rite can be omitted?

Resp.: In no way. For:

1. Both the Institutio generalis (nn. 52; 106; 222) and the Ordo Missae (cum populo, n. 24; sine populo, n. 18) show the « Lavabo » to be one of the normative rites for the preparation of the gifts. It is a question, evidently, of one of the less important rites, but, nevertheless, one which should not be omitted on account of its significance, which is indicated as « a rite in which the internal desire for purification is expressed » (I. G., n. 52). In the course of their work, the « Consilium » had not a few discussions about the value and place of the « Lavabo », on keeping silence or on the text that should accompany it: but as regard to keeping it, they were all unanimous. Even if the action itself of washing the hands no longer has its practical scope since the middle ages, the symbolism of the same is clear and easily understood by all (cf. Const. on the Liturgy, n. 34). In all western liturgies, this rite is in use.

2. The Constitution on the sacred Liturgy (nn. 37-40) foresees that ritual adaptations will eventually be proposed by Episcopal Conferences and submitted to the Holy See for approval. Such adaptations need to be founded on serious reasons, e.g., the particular character of a people or a particular frame of mind, contrary customs that cannot be rooted out, the practical impossibility of adapting some new rite that is foreign to the nature of a people, and so forth.

3. Besides the liberties foreseen by the rubrics and various popular translations of texts (cf. Instruction of the « Consilium » of 25-1-1969), the Ordo Missae is proposed as something unique whose general structure and various constitutive elements are to be retained exactly. The arbitrary selection of rites whether on the part of an individual or on the part of a certain community, will lead in short order to the ruin of an edifice that has been so patiently and seriously built up.

Notitiae 6 (1970), 38, n. 27hermeneutics, lavabo, offertoryPDF of Notitiae 6 (1970), 38

29. Quaenam germana significatio terminorum « ministri » et « ministri sacri » in n. 27 Institutionis generalis Missalis romani?

Resp.: « Ministri » seu « Ministri sacri » iuxta locutionem n. 27 Institutionis generalis Missalis romani, qui « cum ad presbyterium pervenerint ... altare salutant » et « venerationis significandae causa ipsum altare osculantur ... », sunt revera diaconus et subdiaconus. De ipsis expresse hoc dicitur in nn. 129 et 144 eiusdem Institutionis generalis.

29. What is the proper meaning of the terms « ministers » and « sacred ministers » in n. 27 of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal?

Resp.: « Ministers » or « Sacred ministers » as spoken of in n. 27 of the Institutio generalis Missalis romani, who « when they arrive at the sanctuary ... reverence the altar » and « kiss the altar to show their veneration ... », are in fact the deacon and subdeacon. This is expressly said of them in nn. 129 and 144 of the same Institutio generalis.

Notitiae 6 (1970), 104, n. 29deacon, hermeneutics, ministers, sacred ministers, subdeaconPDF of Notitiae 6 (1970), 104

30. Utrum sacerdos possit stolam omittere e sacris vestibus induendis?

Resp.: Negative. Quaestio ponitur ex interpretatione eorum quae habentur in n. 299 Institutionis generalis Missalis romani. Nam quae dicuntur in praedicto numero: « Sacerdotis celebrantis vestis propria, in Missa aliisque sacris actionibus ... est planeta seu casula ... », intelligenda sunt ad normam nn. 81 et 302, ubi clare apparet stolam constituere sacerdotale indumentum numquam derelinquendum in Missa aliisque sacris actionibus quae cum Missa directo conectuntur.

Notitiae 6 (1970), 104, n. 30chasuble, hermeneutics, stolePDF of Notitiae 6 (1970), 104

42. In n. 26 Institutionis generalis verba « actioni sacrae » referenda sunt ad processionem sacerdotis et ministrorum vel ad totam celebrationem eucharisticam?

Resp. Verba de quibus supra referenda sunt ad processionem quia in contextu agitur de cantu ad introitum. Tamen ipsa norma induit valorem generaliorem: qualiscumque cantus in Missa aptari debet indoli temporis et actionis, quae hic et nunc peragitur.

42. In no. 26 of the General Instruction, are the words « sacred action » to be understood as referring to the procession of the priest and ministers or to the entire Eucharistic celebration?

Resp. The words mentioned above are to be understood as referring to the procession because in the context they are dealing with the entrance chant. Yet the norm itself takes on a more general force: every kind of chant in the Mass should be made fit to the character of the time and the action which is being carried out here and now.

Notitiae 6 (1970), 404, n. 42entrance antiphon, hermeneutics, introit, musicPDF of Notitiae 6 (1970), 404
Not yet transcribed. De habitudine Ritualis instaurati ad normas canonicas vigentes.Notitiae 9 (1973), 333hermeneutics, ritual, rituale romanumPDF of Notitiae 9 (1973), 333

2. In Missa cum populo modo sollemniore celebranda, adhibentur diversi modi turificandi oblata et altare: alter simplex ac planus, alter idem ac ritus turificandi praescriptus in praecedenti Missali. Quinam usus sequendus est?

Resp.

Numquam obliviscendum est Missale Pauli Papae VI, inde ab anno 1970, successisse in locum illius, qui improprie « Missale S. Pii V » nuncupatur, idque ex integro, sive pro textibus, sive pro rubricis. Ubi rubricae Missalis Pauli VI nihil dicunt aut parum dicunt singillatim in nonnullis locis, non ideo inferendum est quod oporteat servare ritum antiquum. Proinde non sunt iterandi gestus multiplices atque implexi turificationis iuxta praescripta Missalis prioris (cf. Missale Romanum, T. P. Vaticanis, 1962: Ritus servandus VII et Ordo Incensandi, pp. LXXX-LXXXIII).

In turificando, celebrans (IGMR 51 et 105) hoc simplici modo procedat:

a) erga oblata: triplici ductu turificat, sicut agit diaconus erga Evangelium;

b) erga crucem: triplici ductu turificat, quando ante eam celebrans venit;

c) erga altare: passim turificat a latere, dum circuit altare, nulla distinctione facta inter mensam et latera.

2. In a Mass with the people celebrated in a more solemn manner, different methods of incensing the offerings and the altar are used: on the one hand a simple and plain method, on the other hand the same method as the rite for incensing prescribed in the preceding Missal. Which practice should be followed?

Resp.

It must never be forgotten that the Missal of Pope Paul VI, from the year 1970, has taken the place of that which is improperly called « the Missal of St Pius V » and that it has done this totally, whether with regard to texts or rubrics. Where the rubrics of the Missal of Paul VI say nothing or say little in specifics in some places, it is not therefore to be inferred that the old rite must be followed. Accordingly, the many and complex gestures of incensation according to the prescripts of the earlier Missal (cf. Missale Romanum, T. P. Vaticanis, 1962: Ritus servandus VII et Ordo Incensandi, pp. LXXX-LXXXIII) are not to be repeated.

When incensing, the celebrant (IGMR 51 and 105) should proceed in this simple manner:

a) with regard to the offerings: he incenses with three double-swings, as the deacon does for the Gospel;

b) with regard to the cross: when the celebrant comes before it, he incenses with three double-swings;

c) with regard to the altar: he incenses all around the side as he circles the altar, with no distinction made between the mensa and the sides.

Notitiae 14 (1978), 301–302, n. 2altar, hermeneutics, incense, offertoryPDF of Notitiae 14 (1978), 301–302

Percutio pectoris

10. In quibusdam formulis proferendis, uti v.g. Confiteor, Agnus Dei, Domine non sum dignus, tum ex parte sacerdotum tum ex parte fidelium gestus verba comitantes non semper iidem habentur: nonnulli in supradictis formulis dicendis triplici ictu pectus sibi percutiunt, alii vero semel.

Quisnam usus legitime retinendus videtur?

Resp.

Haec in casu meminisse iuvabit:

1) Gestus et verba saepe saepius vim sibi invicem conferunt.
2) Hac in materia, ut in ceteris, liturgica instauratio veritatem et simplicitatem prosecuta est, secundum illud Sacrosancti Concilii: « Ritus nobili simplicitate fulgere debent ... » (SC, 34).

Dum in Missali Romano, auctoritate Conilii Tridentini promulgato, gestus etiam minimi frequentissime verba prosequebantur, Missalis Romani, auctoritate Concilii Vaticani II instaurati, rubricae discretione perspicuae inveniuntur quoad gestus.

Quibus dictis:

a) Verba mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa quae in Confiteor inveniuntur, huiusmodi rubrica in Missali Romano instaurato introducuntur: Omnes simul ... percutientes sibi pectus, dicunt ... (OM, n. 3). In priore Missali, eodem loco, rubrica sic sonabat: Percutit sibi pectus ter. Non videtur igitur quod ter sibi pectus percutere aliquis debeat, in proferendis latino vel alio sermone talibus verbis, etiamsi dicatur mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. Sufficit quod percutio pectoris fiat.

Patet etiam quod unus tantummodo gestus sufficit in illis linguis, in quibus verba ad culpam manifestandam simpliciore modo reddita sunt, uti, verbi gratia, lingua anglica: « I have sinned through my own fault », vel lingua gallica: « Oui, j'ai vraiment peche ».

b) Missalis Romani instaurati discretio manifestatur praecipua etiam in ceteris memoratis textibus, scilicet Agnus Dei et Domine, non sum dignus, qui verbis aliquomodo paenitentiae et humilitatis fractionem panis et invitationem fidelibus ad Eucharistiam suscipiendam comitantur.

Uti dictum est in responsione n. 2 Commentariorum « Notitiae » 1978, p. 301: ubi rubricae Missalis Pauli VI nihil dicunt, non ideo inferendum est quod servare oporteat antiquas rubricas. Missale instauratum antiquum non supplet, sed substituit. Revera Missale prius ad Agnus Dei indicabat: ter pectus percutiens; et in proferendo triplex Domine, non sum dignus percutiens: pectus ... ter dicit. Cum vero Missale novum nihil de hoc dicat (OM 131 et 133), nulla ratio postulat ut his invocationibus gestus aliquis adiungatur.

The striking of the breast

10. In speaking certain formulas as in, e.g., the Confiteor, the Agnus Dei, and the Domine non sum dignus, whether on the part of priests or on the part of the faithful, the gestures accompanying the words are not always performed the same. Some strike their breast with a triple strike when saying the aforementioned formulas, others once.

Which practice seems that it should legitimately be retained?

Resp.

In this case it will help to be mindful of these things:

1) Gestures and words often tend to lend significance to one another.
2) In this matter, as in others, the liturgical restoration has pursued truth and simplicity according to the passage of Sacrosanctum Concilium: « The rites should be resplendent in their noble simplicity ... » (SC, 34).

While in the Roman Missal promulgated by the authority of the Council of Trent the words were very frequently also accompanied by minute gestures, the rubrics of the Roman Missal restored by the authority of the Second Vatican Council are noteworthy for their discretion with regard to gestures.

Having said this:

a) The words mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa which are found in the Confiteor are introduced in the restored Roman Missal by a rubric of this sort: All likewise ... striking their breast, say ... (OM, n. 3). In the former Missal, in the same place, the rubric sounded like this: He strikes his breast three times. It does not seem, therefore, that anyone has to strike his breast three times in pronouncing those words in Latin or in another language, even if mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa is said. It suffices that there be a striking of the breast.

It is obvious also that only one gesture suffices in those languages in which the words for showing one's fault have been rendered in a more simple manner, as, for example, in English, « I have sinned through my own fault », or in French, « Oui, j'ai vraiment peche ».

b) The discretion of the restored Roman Missal is shown to be noteworthy also in the other texts mentioned, namely the Agnus Dei and the Domine, non sum dignus which by words of penitence and humility in one way or another accompany the breaking of the bread and the invitation to the faithful to receive the Eucharist.

As it was said in response n. 2 of the Commentary « Notitiae » 1978, p. 301: where the rubrics of the Missal of Paul VI say nothing, it must not therefore be inferred that it is necessary to observe the old rubrics. The restored Missal does not supplement the old one but has replaced it. In reality, the Missal formerly indicated at the Agnus Dei, striking the breast three times, and in pronouncing the triple Domine, non sum dignus, striking the breast ... says three times. Since, however, the new Missal says nothing about this (OM 131 and 133), there is no reason to suppose that any gesture should be added to these invocations.

Notitiae 14 (1978), 534–535, n. 10agnus dei, breast strike, confiteor, gestures, hermeneuticsPDF of Notitiae 14 (1978), 534–535

Positio manuum

13. Immixtione peracta, durante oratione Domine Iesu Christe vel Perceptio Corporis, nonnulli celebrantes manus iunctas super altare adhuc imponunt atquae, capite inclinato, textum orationis secreto proferunt. Estne modus iste adhuc servandus?

Resp.

Vestigia rituum antiquorum iterum his in rebus deprehenduntur. Ad dubium solvendum attendendae sunt semper normae OM, cura habita ne quid adiungatur et principio a Summo Pontifice Jonanne XXIII humaniter dato etiam hac vice prae oculis habito: « Contorta et difficilia, simplicia reddite; simplicia autem nolite perturbare ».

Vetus Ritus servandus revera circa hanc orationem ita indicabat (X, 3): Tunc manibus iunctis super altare positis, oculisque ad Sacramentum intentis, inclinatus dicit secreto ... OM Pauli VI (n. 132) pressius definit quod in n. 114 dicitur IGMR: « Sacerdos, deinde, manibus iunctis, dicit secreto ». Quapropter celebrans positione erecta stat, manibus ante pectus iunctis.

The position of the hands

13. After the completion of the commingling, during the prayer Lord Jesus Christ or the May the Partaking of the Body, some celebrants still place their hands joined over the altar and, with their head bowed, proclaim the text of the prayer quietly. Is this manner still to be observed?

Resp.

Traces of the older rites can again be found in these matters. To resolve the doubt, the norms of the OM should always be attended to, with care taken that nothing is added on and with the principle kindly given by Pope John XXIII, kept before one's eyes also in this case: « Make complicated and difficult matters simple, and do not disturb what is simple ».

The old Ritus servandus used to indicate with respect to this prayer (X, 3): Then bowed with his joined hands placed upon the altar, and his eyes intent upon the Sacrament, he says quietly ... OM Pauli VI (n. 132) more precisely defines what is said in n. 114 of the IGMR: « The celebrant then says with hands joined ». For this reason, the celebrant stands upright with hands joined before his breast.

Notitiae 14 (1978), 537–538, n. 13communion, gestures, hermeneuticsPDF of Notitiae 14 (1978), 537–538
[Nondum transcriptum - Not yet transcribed]Notitiae 23 (1987), 248–250hermeneutics, liturgy of the hoursPDF of Notitiae 23 (1987), 248–250

Utrum in dioecesibus, ubi valet Communionem distribui in manibus fidelium, liceat sacerdoti sive extraordinariis sacrae communionis ministris obligatione adstringere communicantes, ut hostiam tantummodo in manibus accipiant, non autem super linguam.

℟. Certo patet ex ipsis documentis Sanctae Sedis ut in dioecesibus, ubi panis eucharisticus ponitur in manibus fidelium, integrum tamen eis manet ius super linguam eum recipiendi. Contra normas ideo agunt sive qui communicantes obligatione adstringunt ad sacram communionem tantummodo in manibus recipiendam, sive qui renuunt christifidelibus Communionem in manu recipiendi in dioecesibus, quae hoc indulto gaudent.

Attentis normis de sacra communione distribuenda, peculiari modo curent ministri ordinarii et extraordinarii, ut statim hostia a christifidelibus sumatur, ita ut nemo discedat cum speciebus eucharisticis in manu.

Meminerint tamen omnes saecularem traditionem esse hostiam super linguam accipere. Sacerdos celebrans, si adsit sacrilegii periculum, communionem in manu fidelibus non tradat, eet certiores faciat eos de fundamento huius procedendi modi.

Notitiae 35 (1999), 160–161communion in the hand, communion on the tongue, communion, hermeneuticsPDF of Notitiae 35 (1999), 160–161
[Nondum transcriptum - Not yet transcribed]Notitiae 35 (1999), 537–540age, confirmation, hermeneuticsPDF of Notitiae 35 (1999), 537–540
This entry is very long. Click here to read it on its own page.Notitiae 37 (2001), 190–194hermeneutics, liturgy of the hoursPDF of Notitiae 37 (2001), 190–194

A Bishop recently asked the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments whether a Diocesan Bishop would be able to oblige his priests to admit women and girls to service at the altar. This Dicastery has considered it opportune to send this letter to the Bishop in question, and given its particular importance, to publish it here.

Prot. N.2451/00/L

July 27, 2001

Your Excellency,

Further to recent correspondence, this Congregation resolved to undertake a renewed study of the questions concerning the possible admission of girls, adult women and women religious to serve alongside boys as servers in the Liturgy.

As part of this examination, the Dicastery consulted the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts which replied with a letter of July 23, 2001. The reply of the Pontifical Council was helpful in reaffirming that the questions raised by this Congregation, including the question of whether particular legislation could oblige individual priests in their celebration of the Holy Mass to make use of women to serve at the altar, do not concern the interpretation of the law, but rather are questions of the correct application of the law. The reply of the aforementioned Pontifical Council, therefore, confirms the understanding of this Dicastery that the matter falls within the competence of this Congregation as delineated by the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus, § 62. Bearing in mind this authoritative response, this Dicastery, having resolved outstanding questions, was able to conclude its own study. At the present time, therefore, the Congregation would wish to make the following observations.

As is clear from the Responsio ad propositum dubium concerning can. 230, § 2, and its authentic interpretation (cf. Circular Letter to the Presidents of Episcopal Conferences, Prot. n. 2482/93 March 15, 1994, see Notitiae 30 [1994] 333-335), the Diocesan Bishop, in his role as moderator of the liturgical life in the diocese entrusted to his care, has the authority to permit service at the altar by women within the boundaries of the territory entrusted to his care. Moreover his liberty in this question cannot be conditioned by claims in favor of a uniformity between his diocese and other dioceses which would logically lead to the removal of the necessary freedom of action from the individual Diocesan Bishop. Rather, after having heard the opinion of the Episcopal Conference, he is to base his prudential judgment upon what he considers to accord more closely with the local pastoral need for an ordered development of the liturgical life in the diocese entrusted to his care, bearing in mind, among other things, the sensibilities of the faithful, the reasons which would motivate such a permission, and the different liturgical settings and congregations which gather for the Holy Mass (cf. Circular Letter to the Presidents of Episcopal Conferences, March 15, 1994, no. 1).

In accord with the above cited instructions of the Holy See such an authorization may not, in any way, exclude men or, in particular, boys from service at the altar, nor require that priests of the diocese would make use of female altar servers, since "it will always be very appropriate to follow the noble tradition of having boys serve at the altar" (Circular Letter to the Presidents of Episcopal Conference, March 15, 1994, no. 2). Indeed, the obligation to support groups of altar boys will always remain, not least of all due to the well known assistance that such programs have provided since time immemorial in encouraging future priestly vocations (cf. ibid.)

With respect to whether the practice of women serving at the altar would truly be of pastoral advantage in the local pastoral situation, it is perhaps helpful to recall that the non-ordained faithful do not have a right to service at the altar, rather they are capable of being admitted to such service by the Sacred Pastors (cf. Circular Letter to the Presidents of Episcopal Conferences, March 15, 1994, no. 4, cf. also can 228, §1, Interdicasterial Instruction Esslesiae de mysterio, August 15, 1997, no. 4, see Notitiae 34 [1998] 9-42). Therefore, in the event that Your Excellency found it opportune to authorize service of women at the altar, it would remain important to explain clearly to the faithful the nature of this innovation, lest confusion might be introduced, thereby hampering the development of priestly vocations.

Having thus confirmed and further clarified the contents of its previous response to Your Excellency, this Dicastery wishes to assure you of its gratitude for the opportunity to elaborate further upon this question and that it considers this present letter to be normative.

With every good wish and kind regard, I am, Sincerely yours in Christ,

Jorge A. Card. Medina Estévez
Prefect

Mons. Mario Marini
Under Secretary

Notitiae 37 (2001), 397–399altar girls, hermeneuticsPDF of Notitiae 37 (2001), 397–399

URBIS ET ORBIS DECRETUM

De signo sanctae Crucis in benedictionibus semper adhibendo

Cum ex usitato more semper liturgica viguisset consuetudo, ut in ritibus benedictionis signum crucis adhiberetur, id dextera manu a celebrante super personas aut res describendo, pro quibus misericordia impetratur, haec Congregatio de Cultu Divino et Disciplina Sacramentorum ad dirimenda dubia statuit, ut, etiam si textus illius partis Ritualis Romani cui titulus De Benedictionibus silentio signum ipsum praetereatur vel expressa in eo careat mentione temporis opportuni huius actionis, attamen tamquam necessarium in quavis benedictione sacris ministris peragenda supradictum signum crucis usurpetur.

Hac vero absente mentione, tempus opportunum habeatur cum textus benedictionis verba benedictio, benedicere vel similia praebeat vel his deficientibus verbis, cum concluditur ipsa oratio benedictionis.

Contrariis quibuslibet minime obstantibus.

Ex aedibus Congregationis de Cultu Divino et Disciplina Sacramentorum, die 14 Septembris A. D. 2002, in festo Exaltationis Sanctae Crucis.

GEORGIUS A. card. MEDINA ESTÉVEZ, Praefectus

✠ Franciscus Pius Tamburrino
archiep. a Secretis

A DECREE FOR THE CITY AND THE WORLD

On always making use of the sign of the holy Cross in blessings

Since, from the established usage, the liturgical custom has always been in force that in the rites of blessing the sign of the cross is employed by being traced by the celebrant with the right hand over the persons or things for whom mercy is implored, this Congregation for divine worship and the discipline of the sacraments, in order to dispel any doubts, has established that, even if the text of the part of the Roman ritual entitled "The Book of Blessings" remains silent about the sign itself or lacks an express mention of the appropriate time for this action, nevertheless the sacred ministers should adopt the aforementioned sign of the cross as necessary when carrying out any blessing.

Without a mention, however, the appropriate time should be regarded as when the text of the blessing uses the words blessing, to bless, or similar or, lacking these words, when the prayer of blessing itself is concluded.

Anything to the contrary not withstanding.

From the office of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, on 14 September, 2002, the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross.

GEORGE A. card. MEDINA ESTEVEZ, Prefect

✠ Francesco Pio Tamburrino
archbishop Secretary

AAS 94 (2002), 684blessings, gestures, hermeneutics, sign of the crossPDF of AAS 94 (2002), 684

Multis in locibus christifideles solent in privata oratione genibus flexis sistere vel sedere postquam repetunt suas sedes, cum singuli recepissent sacram Eucharistiam in Missa. Utrum statuta editionis typicae tertiae Missalis Romani prohibeant hunc usum?

℟. Negative et ad mentem.

Mens est ut per praescripta Institutionis Generalis Missalis Romani, n. 43, intenditur ex una parte praestare latis terminis aliquam uniformitatem habitus corporis in congregatione pro variis partibus celebrationis sanctae Missae, simulque ex alia parte non moderari habitum corporis ita rigide, ut qui velint genibus flexis sistere vel sedere non amplius ad id liberi sint.

In many places the faithful are accustomed to remain kneeling in private prayer or to sit after they return to their seats once they have individually received the holy Eucharist at Mass. Whether the provisions of the Third typical edition of the Roman Missal prohibit this practice?

℟. In the negative and with a rationale.

The rationale is that by the prescripts of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, n. 43 is intended to give, on the one hand, within broad limits some uniformity of posture in the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of the holy Mass, and at the same time, on the other hand, not to regulate posture so rigidly that those who wish to remain kneeling or to sit would no longer be free to do so.

Notitiae 39 (2003), 533communion, hermeneutics, posturePDF of Notitiae 39 (2003), 533