Concepts of faith
The idea of faith shared by all Christian churches is rooted in the New Testament. But the New Testament idea of faith is not simple; indeed, it possesses a breadth of meaning that has led to varying understandings, even within a single Christian communion. Most modern interpreters of the New Testament would agree to a description of faith as the personal knowledge of God revealing himself in Christ. Yet it is doubtful whether the post-Reformation theology of any Christian church has presented faith simply in these terms.
Well before modern theologians considered the meaning of faith, Christian thinkers, beginning with Paul and the Evangelists, sought to explain faith. In the Synoptic Gospels, God was the object of faith, and faith itself was belief in Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God. The apostle Paul taught that faith meant belief in Christ and the preaching of Christ, which is the word of God, as well as obedience to Christ. Faith also was the key to salvation, and as such it offered confidence in the reconciliation with God. For John, faith was inspired by miracles and was knowledge of Jesus as the Messiah. The Apologists and other early writers commented on faith, but the most influential discussion of faith was that of Augustine, for whom faith was the acceptance of revelation and the freely given gift of God. This idea was developed and given official sanction at the second Council of Orange (529), which declared that the beginning and even the desire of faith was the result of the gift of grace. In the 13th century St. Thomas Aquinas defined faith as an intellectual assent to divine truth by the command of the will inspired by grace and the authority of God. Aquinas’s definition was made canonical by the Council of Trent and Vatican I. The fathers at Vatican II confirmed this understanding of faith in the dogmatic constitution Dei verbum (November 18, 1965; “The Word of God”), which declared that faith must be preceded and assisted by “the grace of God and the interior help of the Holy Spirit.” Vatican II stressed that both the bestowal of grace and the human response to it are free acts.
Preambles and motivation of faith
Two subjects are key to understanding Catholic faith: the preambles of faith and the motivation of faith. The preambles of faith include those rational steps through which the believer reaches the conclusion that belief in God is reasonable. The freedom of faith is respected by affirming that such a conclusion is as far as the preambles can take one. That is, the preambles show that there is good evidence for the existence of God and that belief in God is reasonable, but they cannot establish God’s existence with absolute certainty or beyond rational doubt. Thus, the preambles leave one free to accept faith or to reject it.
Traditional approaches to the preambles include the study of the scientific and historical difficulties raised against the Christian fact itself (i.e., the Incarnation, Resurrection, Ascension, and glorification of Jesus Christ), against the Roman Catholic interpretation and proclamation of the Christian fact, or against the Roman Catholic claim to be the exclusive custodian of revealed doctrine and the means of salvation. In their earlier forms, these studies attempted to show that faith is the necessary result of a purely rational process. But a faith that proceeds necessarily from reason alone can be neither free nor the result of grace.
The study of the motivation of faith attempted to meet this difficulty. Some analyses presented faith as resting solely on evidence and clumsily postulated a movement of grace necessary to assent to it. Normally, however, one “wills” to believe something only in cases where the evidence for the belief is less than rationally compelling. Ultimately, the Roman Catholic analysis must say that the evidence that belief is reasonable can never be so clear and convincing that it compels one to believe on rational grounds alone. At this point, the will inspired by grace chooses to accept revelation for reasons other than the evidence.
The motive of faith that has been presented by Catholic theologians is “the authority of God revealing.” It is held that the preambles of faith show that it is reasonable to believe that God exists and that he has revealed himself. This evidence, together with an acceptance of the notion that, if God reveals himself, he does so authoritatively (i.e., through church authorities), motivates a person to make the act of faith. The problem with such an analysis has been to define how the authority of the revealer is manifest to the believer. It seems that the notion of the authority of God revealing must be an object of faith rather than a motive, because the believer cannot ever experience the conjunction of this authority together with the fact of revelation. This dilemma caused an increasing number of Catholic theologians to move closer to a view that emphasizes faith as a personal commitment to God rather than as an assent to revealed truth.
Heresy is the obstinate denial by a professed, baptized Christian of a revealed truth or of that which the Roman Catholic Church has proposed as a revealed truth. The unbaptized person is incapable of heresy, and the baptized person is not guilty of “formal” but only of “material” heresy if he does not know that he denies a revealed truth. The seriousness with which Roman Catholicism regarded heresy is shown by the ancient penalty of excommunication. Civil penalties, including death, did not appear until the age of Constantine. Lesser civil disabilities continued in force, though the law was often ignored, into the 20th century. Protestant governments were often as severe as Roman Catholic governments in the suppression of heresy.
Roman Catholic theologians often deal with heresy, paradoxically, as a necessary step in the development of dogma. They point out that the questions raised by heresy are often legitimate, though heretics too quickly assume a one-sided and exclusive view of the doctrine they wish to impose on the entire church. Modern studies have noted that many of the criticisms of the church made by the heretics of the early 11th century were made by the papal reformers after 1050. In recent times many of the theses of Modernism, which were condemned vigorously by Pius X in 1907, found their way into Catholic theology later in the 20th century.
The concept of revelation
Although other religions have ideas of revelation, none of them bears a close resemblance to the idea of revelation found in the Bible and in Christianity. Roman Catholic theologians distinguish between revelation in a broad sense, which means knowledge of God deduced from facts about the natural world and man’s existence, and revelation in the strict formal sense, which means the utterances of God. This latter idea can be conceived only by analogy with the utterances of man, and its precise definition involves difficulties.
The earliest idea of revelation is the one found in the Hebrew Scriptures, in which the speech of God is addressed to Moses and the Prophets. They in turn are described as quoting the words of God rather than interpreting them. Jesus, the fulfillment of the Prophets, does not merely speak the word of God; he is the word of God. This phrase, which occurs only in the opening verse of both the Gospel and the First Letter of John, has become a technical term in theology; Jesus is the incarnate Word. As such he is both the revealer and the revealed.
The content of revelation
The proper content of revelation is designated in Roman Catholic teaching as mystery; this theme was important in the documents of Vatican I. The theme of mystery was developed in response to the intellectual movements of the 18th and 19th centuries known as the Enlightenment, scientism, and historicism. The Roman Catholic Church perceived these movements as threats to the idea of a sacred revelation, because they appeared to claim that human reason had no frontiers or that human reason had demonstrated that revelation was historically false or unfounded or that the content of revelation was irrational. The affirmation of mystery meant that the reality of God was unattainable to unaided human reason (theologians had long used the word “incomprehensible,” which says more than modern theologians wish to say). Mystery refers both to the divine reality and to the divine operations of the world. These operations can be observed only in their effects; the operation itself is not seen, nor is its motivation seen. The plan of God, which is realized in history, is mysterious. Vatican I insisted that the existence of God and of a moral order is attainable to reason, and some of the fathers of the council wished to state that these truths were imposed upon reason by the evidence, a step that the council did not choose to take. Mystery does not mean the incomprehensible or the unintelligible; it means, in popular language, that man cannot know who God is or what God is doing or why God is doing it unless God tells him. Mystery also means that, even when revelation is made, the reality of God and his works escapes human comprehension.
The term “supernatural” has been used in Roman Catholic theology since the 17th century to designate not only revelation but other aspects of divine work in the world. The term’s inescapable ambiguity, however, has led many modern theologians to avoid it. The “natural” that the supernatural presupposes is the world of human experience; the quality of this experience is not altered by technological and social changes, as long as they are fulfillments of the potentialities of nature. Indeed, it is the spectacular growth in the knowledge of these potentialities in modern times that leads to doubt as to whether there can be a supernatural at all. The supernatural reality is identified with God in his reality and in his operations. This is a reality that man cannot create or control. The supernatural in cognition is this reality as it is perceptible to man; it is, for man, simply unknown as far as unaided reason can attain. Vatican I affirmed that without revelation human reason cannot reach anything but a distorted idea of the divine and an imperfect idea of the moral order. This means also that without revelation human beings are unaware of their destiny, either individually or collectively, and are unable to achieve it without the entrance of the supernatural into the world of history and experience.
Contemporary theologians of revelation are aware that historical and literary criticism have rendered untenable the primitive idea of revelation as the direct utterance of God to man. Although Roman Catholic theologians have not found a satisfactory way of describing revelation, they do not agree that the destruction of a naive idea of revelation entails the destruction of any possible idea. Theologians also recognize that the older idea of a “revelation of propositions” as a collection of timeless and changeless verities, almost like a string of pearls, is no longer tenable. Every utterance that is called a revelation was formed in a definite time and place and bears the marks of its history. There is no revealed proposition that cannot be restated in another cultural situation. Indeed, contemporary theologians are aware that these propositions must be restated if the Roman Catholic Church is to speak meaningfully in the modern world. Roman Catholicism does not accept the possibility of a new revelation; it believes that reason can never completely penetrate the “mystery” and that it must continue the exploration of the mystery that has already been revealed.
Tradition and Scripture
In Roman Catholic theology, tradition is understood both as channel and as content. As channel it is identical with the living teaching authority of the Catholic church. As content it is “the deposit of faith,” the revealed truth concerning faith and morals. In Roman Catholic belief, revelation ends with the death of the Apostles; the deposit was transmitted to the college of bishops, which succeeded the Apostles.The Roman Catholic Church recognizes that the Bible is the word of God and that tradition is the word of the church. In one sense, therefore, tradition yields to the Scriptures in dignity and authority. But against the Protestant slogan of sola Scriptura (“Scripture alone”), itself subject to misinterpretation, the Roman Catholic Church advanced the argument that the church existed before the New Testament. In fact, the church both produced and authenticated the New Testament as the word of God. For this belief, at least, tradition is the exclusive source. This belief also furnished a warrant for the Catholic affirmation of the body of truth that is transmitted to the church through the college of bishops and preserved by oral tradition (meaning that it was not written in the Scriptures). The Roman church therefore affirmed its right to determine what it believed by consulting its own beliefs as well as the Scriptures. The Council of Trent affirmed that the deposit of faith was preserved in the Scriptures and in unwritten traditions and that the Catholic church accepts these two with equal reverence. The council studiously avoided the statement that they meant these “two” as two sources of the deposit, but most Catholic theologians after the council understood the statement as meaning two sources. Some Protestants thought it meant that the Roman Catholic Church had written a second Bible.
In contemporary Catholic theology this question has been raised again, and a number of theologians now believe that Scripture and tradition must be viewed as one source. They are, however, faced with the problem of nonbiblical articles of faith. To this problem several remarks are pertinent. The first is that no Protestant church preaches “pure” gospel; all of them have developed dogmatic traditions, concerning which they have differed vigorously. It is true, however, that they do not treat these traditions “with equal devotion and reverence” with the Bible. The second remark is that, through the first eight ecumenical councils (before the Schism of 1054), the Christian church arrived at nonbiblical formulas to profess its faith. Protestants respond that this is at least a matter of degree and that the consubstantiality of the Son (i.e., his being of the same substance as the Father), defined by the Council of Nicaea, is more faithful to the Scriptures than the Assumption of Mary, which was defined as dogma by Pius XII in 1950.
Roman Catholics and Protestants should be able to reach some consensus that tradition and Scripture mean the reading of the Bible in church. Protestants never claimed that a person and his Bible made a self-sufficient Christian church. The New Testament itself demands that the word be proclaimed and heard in a church, and the community is formed on a common understanding of the word “proclaimed.” This suggests a way toward a Christian consensus on the necessity and function of tradition. No church pretends to treat its own history as nonexistent or unimportant. By reading the Scriptures in the light of its own beliefs, the church is able to address itself to new problems of faith and morals that did not exist or were not attended to in earlier times.
Catholic theologians of the 19th century dealt with this problem under the heading of the development of dogma. To a certain extent the question is an epistemological one: Is a new understanding of an ancient truth a “new” truth? It is important to note that the problem of the development of dogma does not arise out of faith. Thus, Sir Isaac Newton’s observations of falling bodies consisted of nothing that people had not seen for thousands of years, yet his insights profoundly altered our understanding of the universe. The problem is important in theology because of the necessity of basing belief on the historical event of the revelation of God in Christ. Unless this link is maintained, the church is teaching philosophy and science, not dogma. Hence, Roman Catholic theology has tended to say that dogma develops through new understanding, not through new discoveries.
The concept of teaching authority
The Roman Catholic Church claims for itself a teaching authority that is unparalleled in the Christian community. In its broadest sense, this authority belongs to all members of the church, who, according to Vatican II, share in the threefold mission of the church by virtue of baptism. Teaching authority in a narrower sense is held only by bishops and the pope by virtue of their office and by theologians by virtue of their learning. In its strictest definition, the magisterium refers to the teaching authority of bishops and the pope. The Reformers of the 16th century rejected the traditional definition of the magisterium and did not claim for their own churches the authority they rejected in the Roman church.
To teach with authority means that the teacher is able to impose his doctrine upon the learner under a religious and moral obligation. This obligation does not derive from the nature of teaching itself; the learner is morally obliged only to assent to manifest truth. Instead, it derives from the premise that the teaching authority of the Roman church is founded on the commission given by Jesus to the Apostles as contained in the New Testament (Luke 10:16, “Whoever listens to you listens to me”). But whereas the response of the hearers of the Apostles was faith, the response of the Roman Catholic is expected to go beyond faith. The Apostles were presumed to speak to those who did not yet believe, whereas the Roman Catholic Church imposes its teaching authority only upon its members. The definition of the church’s teaching authority must show that these modifications do not exceed the limits of legitimate doctrinal development.
Organs of teaching authority
Although teaching authority most broadly defined is vested in the whole church, it is especially associated with certain well-defined organs. These organs are the hierarchy—the pope and the bishops. The Roman Catholic Church has traditionally been divided into “the teaching church” and “the listening church.” Clergy below the hierarchical level are included in “the listening church,” even though they are the assistants of the bishops in the teaching office. The hierarchy alone teaches what the Roman Catholic Church calls “authentic” doctrine. This idea contradicts the traditional belief that “the consent of the faithful” is a source of authentic doctrine. The conventional resolution of this problem, which stipulates that the consent of the faithful is formed under the direction of the pastors, deprives the consent of the faithful of any meaning.
As Vatican I solemnly declared, the Roman pontiff is vested with the entire teaching authority of the Roman Catholic Church. This means that the pope is the only spokesman for the entire Roman church and that the papacy carries in itself the power to act as supreme pastor. It is expected that the pope will assure himself that he expresses the existing consensus of the church, but in fact the documents of Vatican I are open to the understanding that he may form the consensus by his utterance alone. Vatican II clarified this ambiguity in the idea of the spokesman of the church by its emphasis on the collegial character of the primacy of the pope. The pope, however, does not always speak as the supreme pastor and head of the Roman church, and he is expected to make this clear in his utterance.
The bishops are authentic teachers within their dioceses. Thus, the same implicit conflict exists with regard to teaching as was noted in connection with governing. The conflict is resolved by collegiality: whether the doctrine taught by the authentic teacher is orthodox can be determined by comparing it with the doctrine of his episcopal colleagues. In the pre-Constantinian church, doctrinal disputes were resolved in this way, and a regional council was called if necessary. Since the Reformation, the Roman see has never admitted publicly that a bishop has fallen into doctrinal error; the united front of authentic doctrine is preserved, and the matter is dealt with by subtle means. What is taught by all the bishops is understood to be authentic doctrine. It is further understood that the bishops teach in communion with the Roman pontiff, and a conflict of doctrine on this level is simply not regarded as a possibility. This consensus of the bishops is known as “the ordinary teaching.” “The extraordinary teaching” signifies the solemn declaration of an ecumenical council (which is the assembly of the bishops) or the most solemn type of papal declaration, known as a definition of doctrine ex cathedra.
Object and response
The object of authentic teaching is defined as “faith and morals.” Faith means revealed truth. Morals theoretically means revealed moral principles, but it has long been understood as moral judgment in any area of human conduct. Thus, not only does the Roman Catholic Church prohibit contraception for its members, it also asserts that contraception is universally wrong by declaring that it is contrary to “natural law.” In this way morals includes both the declaration and the interpretation of natural law. The limits of faith and morals have never been defined by the Roman Catholic Church, nor can one take the exercise of the teaching authority as a reliable guide. Thus, the teaching authority condemned the heliocentric theory of Galileo as contrary to the Bible because it had always understood that revealed truth, in the context of current knowledge, may require one to accept or to reject certain propositions, though those propositions themselves are not part of revealed doctrine.
Dogma is the name given to a proposition that is proclaimed with all possible solemnity either by the Roman pontiff or by an ecumenical council. A dogma is a revealed truth that the Roman Catholic church solemnly declares to be true and to be revealed; it is most properly an object of faith.
Vatican I declared that the pope, when he teaches solemnly and in the area of faith and morals as the supreme universal pastor, teaches infallibly with that infallibility that the church has. The infallibility of the church has never been defined, but its extent is understood by theologians to be limited to faith and morals, as is pontifical infallibility. These terms are ambiguous, as noted above. Although the doctrine of infallibility is subject to many reservations and qualifications, pontifical documents often have an aggressive tone that may mislead the incautious reader. The real problem is how an authority that can and does make errors in doctrinal teaching can be called infallible, even with numerous and serious reservations. In the early 1970s some Catholic theologians, such as Hans Küng, suggested that the church should be understood as indefectible—i.e., not able to fail or be totally led astray—rather than infallible.
The proper response of the Roman Catholic to authoritative teaching that is “ordinary” and does not clearly deal with faith or morals is “religious assent,” a term that is extremely difficult to define. The theory of religious assent does permit considerable dissent from authoritative teaching, such as the dissent that greeted Paul VI’s teaching against contraception in 1968. Religious assent is particularly relevant to the pontifical document called the encyclical, which first appeared in the 18th century and became the normal mode of pontifical communication in the 19th century. The encyclical letter is a channel of ordinary teaching, not solemn and definitive, and is somewhat provisional by definition. Religious assent may be withheld, in popular language, by anyone who in good conscience thinks he knows better. Although the decisions of Vatican II raised the possibility that the church would implement its teaching authority in a less juridical and less hierarchical way, Pope John Paul II reasserted the traditional claims of the teaching authority and emphasized the need for all Roman Catholics to adhere closely to a strict definition of orthodoxy.
Major dogmas and doctrines
The Roman Catholic Church in its formula of baptism still asks that the parents and godparents of infants to be baptized recite the Apostles’ Creed as a sign that they accept the basic doctrines of the church and will help their children grow in the Catholic faith. The creed proclaims belief in the Holy Trinity; the Incarnation, Passion, and Resurrection of Christ; the coming judgment of Christ; the remission of sins; the church; and eternal life. The early Church Fathers made the creed the basis of the baptismal homilies given to catechumens, or those preparing for the rite. The homilies, like modern Roman Catholic doctrine, went considerably beyond the bare articles of the creed.
Roman Catholic faith incorporates into its structure the books of the Hebrew Bible, or Old Testament. From these books it derives its belief in original sin, conceived of as a hereditary and universal moral defect of human beings that makes them incapable of achieving their destiny and even incapable of basic decency. The importance of this doctrine lies in its explanation of the human condition as caused by human and not by divine failure (nor, in modern Roman Catholic theology, by diabolical influence). Humankind can be delivered from its debased condition only by a saving act of God—the death and Resurrection of Jesus. In Jesus, God is revealed as the Father who sends the Son on his saving mission, and through the Son the Spirit comes to dwell in the redeemed. Thus, the Trinity of persons is revealed, and the destiny of man is to share the divine life of the three persons of the Trinity. The saving act of Jesus introduces grace, which in Roman Catholic belief signifies both the love of God and the effect produced in human beings by his love. (The theological idea of grace has been hotly disputed.) The response of believers to the presence of grace is the three theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity; these enable them to live the Christian life. Human beings are introduced to grace and initiated into the church by baptism, and the life of grace is sustained in the church by the sacraments.
The life of grace reaches its fulfillment in eschatology. In this area of belief about the end of the world and “the last things,” modern theology rejects the physical rewards and punishments that were central to earlier belief and so vividly depicted by Dante. Most theologians recognize the allegorical character of most of the traditional imagery of heaven, hell, and purgatory, and the church’s catechism identifies separation from God as the greatest punishment of the “eternal fire” of hell. Judgment itself is both personal and general, according to the church. Every individual will be judged according to his faith and works immediately after death, but Christ will also come to judge the living and the dead at the end of time. Central to Catholic eschatology is belief in the resurrection of the body, which for Roman Catholics, as for all Christians, is confirmed by the bodily Resurrection of Jesus. Indeed, the importance of the Ascension of Christ in his flesh was noted in the Gospels and the letters of Paul the Apostle.
In Roman Catholic theology a sacrament is an outward sign instituted by Jesus Christ that is productive of inner grace. The number of sacraments varied throughout much of the first millennium of Christian history, as did the definition of the term sacrament itself. After extensive theological discussion during this period, church leaders in the 11th and 12th centuries decided upon seven as the exact number of sacraments. They are baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, penance (reconciliation), anointing of the sick, marriage, and holy orders. This number was confirmed by the Council of Trent against the Protestant Reformers, who maintained that there were only two sacraments.
The sacrament in modern theology is frequently described as an encounter with mystery, the mystery being the saving act of God in Christ, and theological studies have explored the ideas of sign and significance. The traditional Roman Catholic view of the effectiveness of the sacraments (as defined by the Council of Trent) is described by the phrase ex opere operato (“from the work done”), which is best explained briefly by saying that the faith and virtue of the minister neither add to the sacrament by their presence nor detract from it by their absence. The minister is merely the agent of the church, and the effectiveness of the sacrament is based on the saving act of God in Christ, which is signified by the rite and applied to the recipient of the sacrament.
The theological explanation of the sign that effects by signifying is not easily communicated and has often been criticized by those outside the church. Roman Catholic theologians remark, however, that the mystery of God’s saving act is not capable of complete rational explanation, though there are analogies in common experience. Indeed, there is no society that does not employ effective signs. The inauguration of the president of the United States, for example, is an effective sign in the sense that the ceremony results in the oath taker becoming president. The sign of the coronation of a monarch is similarly effective.
Traditionally, the church attributes the institution of the sign to Jesus Christ (though this has been the subject of discussion among modern theologians), which removes the right of anyone to tamper with it. The Roman Catholic Church believes that, if God gives a sign, alteration of the sign might cause it to lose its significance or otherwise render it ineffective. Hence, the proper material and the traditional formula are treated as sacred. Since Aquinas, the material used is called “matter” and the words are called “form”; the terms are borrowed from Aristotelian metaphysics. The material becomes sacred and salutary only by its conjunction with the proper words. The effect produced has for centuries been called “grace.”
The term sacramental is used to designate verbal formulas (such as blessings) or objects (such as holy water or medals) to which a religious significance has been attached. These are symbols of personal prayer and dedication, and their effectiveness is measured by the particular dispositions of the person who uses them.
Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration and initiation into the church that was begun by Jesus, who accepted baptism from John the Baptist and also ordered the Apostles to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). According to the teaching of St. Paul, which draws an analogy with the death and Resurrection of Jesus, baptism is death to a former life and the emergence of a new person, which is signified by the outward sign of water (Catholic baptism involves pouring or sprinkling water over the candidate’s head). Baptism is understood, therefore, as the total annulment of the sins of one’s past and the emergence of a totally innocent person. The newly baptized person becomes a member of the church and is incorporated into the body of Christ, thus becoming empowered to lead the life of Christ. Nothing but pure natural water may be used, and baptism must be conferred, as Jesus taught, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Baptism is normally conferred by a priest, but the Roman Catholic Church accepts baptism conferred in an emergency by anyone, Catholic or non-Catholic, having the use of reason “with the intention of doing what the church does.” In the spirit of Vatican II, which acknowledged the validity of any baptism that is “duly administered as Our Lord instituted it” (Unitatis redintegratio [“The Restoration of Unity”]; November 21, 1964), the church has recognized as valid the baptisms of a wide range of non-Catholic churches.
As the sacrament of rebirth, in which the baptized person is made new and permanently sealed with the spiritual mark of belonging to Christ, baptism cannot be repeated. The Roman Catholic Church baptizes conditionally in cases of serious doubt of the fact of baptism or the use of the proper rite, but it no longer approves of the conditional baptism of miscarried or stillborn infants.
Two points of controversy still exist in modern times. One is baptism by pouring or sprinkling water on the head rather than by immersion of the entire body, even though immersion was probably the biblical and early Christian rite. The change almost certainly occurred during the spread of Christianity into Europe north of the Alps and the usual occurrence in early spring of the baptismal feasts, Easter and Pentecost. The Roman Catholic Church simply asserts that the symbolism of the bath is preserved by a ritual infusion of water.
The second point of controversy concerns the baptism of infants. There is no certain evidence of this practice earlier than the 2nd century, and the ancient baptismal liturgies are all intended for adults. There is, however, extensive testimony suggesting the introduction of infant baptism as early as the 1st century. The apostle Paul compares baptism with circumcision, the Jewish rite initiating male infants into the religious community. Other early Christian writers provide evidence of the practice: Tertullian rejected it, thus suggesting its widespread use, and Origen spoke of infant baptism as an established practice. It became the norm by the 4th century and remained so until the 16th century, when various Protestant groups rejected it. It remains the practice of the Roman Catholic Church and most mainline Protestant churches.
The long-standing liturgy of infant baptism, however, indicates the importance of an independent adult decision; without this decision the sacrament cannot be received. The Roman Catholic Church accepts this principle by introducing adults (sponsors, godparents), who make the decision for the infant at the commission of the parents and are given the responsibility of ensuring the child’s Christian upbringing. The responsibilities of parents and godparents have received great emphasis in the church’s rite of baptism for children, which was first promulgated in 1969 and subsequently revised. It is expected that, when they grow up, children who have been baptized will accept the decision made for them and will thus fulfill and validate the adult decision that was presumed.
Traditionally, one of the justifications for infant baptism was the popular and learned belief in children’s limbo (limbus infantium). Although discussed by theologians, including Aquinas, the doctrine of limbo was never formally pronounced by the church. From the 12th century, however, it was commonly believed that the souls of children who die unbaptized go to limbo, where they experience neither the torments of hell nor the joys of heaven. In the 20th century, belief in limbo became more rare, and the church taught that unbaptized infants are entrusted to the mercy of God and Jesus, who said
Let the children come to me; do not prevent them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.
A sacrament that is conferred through the anointing with oil and the imposition of hands, confirmation is believed to strengthen or confirm the grace bestowed by the Holy Spirit at baptism. Apostolic precedent for the sacrament has been found in the Acts of the Apostles, chapters 8 and 19, in which Peter and Paul on separate occasions put their hands on already-baptized Christians to confer on them the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The sacrament was originally administered as part of baptism, as it still is in Orthodox churches, but gradually evolved into a distinct sacrament. As a result of its detachment from baptism, confirmation came to be delayed until later in life, so that in the modern church the minimum age for receiving it is seven; many dioceses, however, have established an older minimum age. The postponement of confirmation has led many Roman Catholic theologians to interpret it as a rite of passage from childhood, like the Jewish bar mitzvah ceremony. It is also understood as a rite in which Christians can confirm the commitment to the church made for them at baptism.
The confirmation rite is a relatively simple ceremony that is traditionally performed during the mass by the bishop, though modern liturgical renewal has empowered pastors of parishes to confer confirmation. The service includes a homily, usually on the meaning of the sacrament, followed by the renewal of the vows of baptism by the confirmands. The bishop raises his hands over those taking confirmation and prays for the bestowal of the sevenfold gift of the Holy Spirit (according to Isaiah 11:2–3, wisdom, understanding, counsel, strength, knowledge, piety, and fear of the Lord). He then anoints the forehead of each confirmand with chrism (holy oil consecrated at the Maundy Thursday service) and says Accipe signaculum doni Spiritus Sancti (“Be sealed with the gifts of the Holy Spirit”). The rite concludes with the eucharistic service and blessing of the congregation. The recipient of confirmation, who is presented by a sponsor of the same sex, traditionally takes a “confirmation name” that will remind the confirmand of this sacrament. Many confirmands choose the name of a saint whose qualities they admire.
The Eucharist (from the Greek for “thanksgiving”) is the central act of Christian worship; also known as Holy Communion and the Lord’s Supper, it is practiced by most Christian churches in some form. Along with baptism it is one of the two sacraments most clearly found in the New Testament, and along with baptism and confirmation it is one of the sacraments of initiation. The Roman Catholic Church distinguishes the Eucharist as sacrifice (mass) and sacrament (communion).The rite was instituted by Jesus and is recorded in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) and in the letters of Paul. According to the Evangelists’ account, Jesus established the practice at the Last Supper, a traditional Passover seder, when he blessed the bread, which he said was his body, and shared it with his disciples. He then shared a cup of wine with his disciples and told them “this is the blood of my covenant, which is poured out for many.” According to the Evangelist Luke, Jesus called on his followers to repeat the ceremony in his memory, and it is clear that the earliest Christians regularly enacted it. Originally, the Eucharist was a repetition of the common meal of the local group of disciples with the addition of the bread and the cup signifying the presence of Jesus. During the 2nd century the meal became vestigial and was finally abandoned. The Eucharist was originally celebrated every Sunday; by the 4th century it was celebrated daily. The eucharistic formula was set in a framework of biblical readings, psalms, hymns, and prayers that depended in form somewhat on the synagogue service. This remained one basis of the various liturgies that arose, including the Roman rite.
The sacrificial character of the Eucharist is derived from the sacrament’s relation to the death of Jesus. According to the Gospel accounts, Jesus spoke of himself as a sacrifice, possibly foreshadowing his imminent sacrifice on the cross. He used bread and wine to symbolize his body and blood, possibly reflecting contemporary Jewish usage of bread and wine as sacrificial elements, and gave them to his disciples so that they could share in his sacrifice. The theme is clearly elaborated on in Paul’s Letter to the Hebrews, and the sacrificial character of the Eucharist was widely accepted by the early Christians. Roman Catholic theology preserves the early understanding of the Eucharist as a sacrifice in its teaching on the mass, and it has firmly insisted that the mass repeats the rite that Jesus told his disciples to repeat. The rite is the memorial of the original sacrifice of Christ. It is an effective commemoration of his death that also makes present the sacrifice on the cross; during the mass
the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and offered in an unbloody manner. (Catechism of the Catholic Church; 1992)
Roman Catholics believe in the real presence, an issue that has dominated Catholic-Protestant controversies about Holy Communion. The celebrated term transubstantiation is defined as the change of the substance of bread and wine into the substance of the body and blood of Jesus Christ, even though the physical appearance of the offering remains unchanged. Roman Catholic teaching, which was developed during the Middle Ages and supported by later councils and popes such as Paul VI, applies Aristotelian categories to explain the mystery of Christ’s literal presence in the sacramental bread and wine. This teaching of the real presence is intended to emphasize the intimate relationship between Jesus and the communicant. Although Catholic theologians developed new ways to interpret the mystery of the sacrament of the Eucharist in the period after Vatican II, the doctrine of transubstantiation remains the fundamental understanding of all Catholics.
As a result of Vatican II, the church sought to restore to the Eucharist the symbolism of Christian unity that the sacrament clearly has in the New Testament. Originally, the symbolism was that of a community meal, an accepted symbol of community throughout the whole of human culture. Roman Catholic efforts to restore this symbolism have included the use of the vernacular and the active participation of the laity. As a means of symbolizing unity, the ancient rite of concelebration—i.e., several priests or bishops jointly celebrating a single eucharistic liturgy—was restored by Vatican II, which also emphasized the corporate nature of communion as well as the important role of the laity in eucharistic celebrations. The practice of celebrating the Eucharist in an informal setting—i.e., in private homes or classrooms—was instituted in some places as a way of drawing the laity more intimately into the rite.
Church law obliges Roman Catholics to receive Holy Communion at least once a year (during the Lent-Easter season) but encourages them to take it at mass every Sunday, on feast days, and even every day. In this way the faithful can receive the many benefits of the Eucharist. In addition to strengthening community, frequent communion also strengthens contact with Jesus Christ and allows the faithful to participate in Jesus’ sacrificial work. Finally, the Eucharist focuses attention on the ultimate goal, the return of Jesus Christ. Communion is the anticipation of the coming glory of heaven.
The name of the fourth sacrament, reconciliation, or penance as it was once known, reflects the practice of restoring sinners to the community of the faithful that was associated with the earliest discipline of the penitential rite. Those who sinned seriously were excluded from Holy Communion until they showed repentance by undergoing a period of trial that included fasting, public humiliation, the wearing of sackcloth, and other austerities. At the end of the period, they were publicly reconciled to the church. Although there were some sins, called mortal sins—e.g., murder, adultery, and apostasy—for which certain local churches at certain times did not perform the rite, this did not mean that God did not forgive but only that good standing in the church was permanently lost. Elsewhere it was believed that the rite of penance could be performed only once; relapsed sinners lost good standing permanently. Rigorist sects that denied the power to forgive certain sins were regarded as heretical. The penitential rite involving strict discipline did not endure beyond the early Middle Ages, and there can be no doubt that it was too rigorous for most Christians. In the opinion of many, it did not reflect the forgiveness of Jesus in the Gospels with all fidelity.
It is impossible to assign an exact date of origin for “auricular confession”—i.e., the confessing of faults by an individual penitent to a priest—but it was most likely developed in the 6th century by Irish monks and introduced to the Continent later by Irish and Anglo-Saxon monks. This is the penitential rite that has endured into modern times. It was rejected by most of the Reformers on the ground that God alone can forgive sins. The Roman Catholic Church claims that the absolution of the priest is an act of forgiveness; to receive it, the penitent must confess all serious (mortal) sins and manifest genuine “contrition,” or sorrow for sins, and a reasonably firm purpose to make amends. Following Vatican II, the church began to emphasize penance as a process of reconciliation with the church and as a means of obtaining pardon from God. The priest is seen as a healer aiding in the process, and the penitent sinner is called to conversion and correction of his or her life.
Indulgences, which caused such controversy at the beginning of the Reformation, represent neither instant forgiveness to the unrepentant nor licenses of sin to the habitual sinner. Rather, they are declarations that the church accepts certain prayers and good works, listed in an official publication, as the equivalent of the rigorous penances of the ancient discipline.
Anointing of the sick
This sacrament was long known in English as “extreme unction,” literally rendered from its Latin name, unctio extrema, meaning “last anointing.” It is conferred by anointing the forehead and hands with blessed oil and pronouncing a formula. It may be conferred only on those who are seriously ill. Seriousness is measured by the danger of death, but imminent death, however certain, from external causes—such as the execution of a death sentence—does not render one apt for the sacrament. It may be administered only once during the same illness; recovery renders one apt again. Its effects are described as the strengthening of both soul and body. An ancient rite that continues Jesus’ ministry of healing, the sacrament is directed against “the remains of sin.” Although this is a poorly defined phrase, it was long ago recognized that serious illness saps one’s spiritual resources as well as one’s physical strength so that one is not able to meet the crisis of mortal danger with all one’s powers. In popular belief, anointing is most valuable as a complement to confession or—in case of unconsciousness—as a substitute for it.
Anointing is not the sacrament of the dying—it is the sacrament of the sick. The New Testament passage to which the Roman Catholic Church appeals for this rite (James 5:14–15) does not envisage a person beyond recovery. Postponement until the patient is critically ill (in modern medical terms) means that the sacrament is often administered to unconscious or heavily sedated patients even though the church urges that the sacrament be given, if possible, while the person is still conscious.
The inclusion of marriage among the sacraments gives the Roman Catholic Church jurisdiction over an institution that is of as much concern to the state as it is to the church. The church claims complete jurisdiction over the marriages of its members, even though it is unable to urge this jurisdiction in modern secular states. The sacrament in Roman Catholic teaching is administered by the spouses through the exchange of consent. The priest, whose presence is required, is an authorized official witness; in addition, the church requires two other witnesses. Marriage is safeguarded by a number of impediments that render the marriage null whether they are known or not, and the freedom of the spouses must be assured. This means that the Roman Catholic Church demands an unusually rigorous examination before the marriage, and this in turn means that it is practically impossible to marry on impulse in the Catholic church. All of this is for the purpose of assuring that the marriage so contracted will not be declared null in the future because of some defect.
The rigid Roman Catholic rejection of divorce, which is based on the teachings of Jesus, has been a major cause of hostility toward the church in the modern world. Absolute indissolubility is declared only of the marriage of two baptized persons (Protestants as well as Catholics). The same indissolubility is not declared of marriages of the unbaptized, but the Roman church recognizes no religious or civil authority except itself that is empowered to dissolve such marriages; this claim is extremely limited and is not used unless a Roman Catholic is involved. Declarations of nullity, however, should not be confused with divorce nor be thought of as a substitute for divorce.
The onerous conditions that Roman Catholicism formerly imposed upon non-Catholic partners in “mixed” marriages have been relaxed significantly since Vatican II, particularly as regards written promises that the children will receive religious education in the Roman Catholic faith. The church’s former rigidity toward such marriages has also largely disappeared. They may now be celebrated in church during the mass, and a Protestant minister or a Jewish rabbi may share the witness function with the priest.
This sacrament confers upon candidates the power over the sacred, which means the power to administer the sacraments. The Latin church had long recognized four minor orders (porter, lector, exorcist, acolyte) and four major orders (subdeacon, deacon, priest, bishop). The minor orders represented church services rendered by persons not ordained. In 1972 Pope Paul VI issued the apostolic letter Ministeria quaedam (“Certain Ministries”), which abolished the major order of subdeacon and all minor orders and created the lay liturgical ministries of lector and acolyte. Only the major orders are held to be sacramental, but they are regarded as one sacrament within which a tripartite hierarchy of sacramental effects is administered separately. Ordination is conferred only by the bishop; the rite includes the imposition of hands, anointing, and delivery of the symbols of the order. The power of the sacred peculiar to the bishop is shown only in the sacraments of confirmation and orders. Ordination can neither be repeated nor annulled. Priests who are suspended from priestly powers or laicized (permanently authorized to live as laymen) retain their sacred power but are forbidden to exercise it except in emergencies. The priest is always ordained to a “title,” meaning that he is accepted in some ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Lectors and acolytes are instituted by a bishop or by the major superior of a clerical religious institute. Following a calling of the candidates, instruction, and prayer, lectors are presented with a Bible and acolytes with a vessel with bread or wine.
Following Vatican II, much theological discussion was devoted to such issues as the ordination of women, which is a divisive issue within the church and between the church and other Christian denominations. Catholic women do serve in various roles, as lectors, eucharistic ministers, even marriage tribunal officers and altar servers, and large number of women are lay chaplains. Many traditionalist Catholics, however, have seen the advent of altar girls in 1994 as merely the first salvo in the battle for the complete ordination of women, and John Paul II made it clear to dioceses and bishops that they are under no pressure to use altar girls. Some nuns have also pushed for a larger role in a more “inclusive” church; some of them have even gathered in groups to administer the Eucharist to one another. Other controversial suggestions include the restoration of the permanent diaconate (with the powers to baptize, preach, and administer the Eucharist), to which both married and single men are admitted, and the idea of ordination for a fixed period of service. Except for the diaconate, these are radical suggestions in Roman Catholicism.
Cultic worship—a formal system of veneration—is so universal in religion that some historians of religion actually define religion as cult. Cultic worship is social, which means more than a group worshipping the same deity in the same place at the same time. A cult is structured, with a division of sacred personnel (priests) who lead and perform the cultic ceremonies for the people, who are in a more distant relation with the deity. The sacred personnel are designated by the choice and acceptance both of the deity and of the worshipping group. The words and actions of the cultic performance are divided into roles assigned to the leaders and to the worshippers. It is the tendency of cultic worship to replace spontaneity, which it once had, with set and even rigid forms of words and acts. These are preserved by tradition, and they generally have a sacredness that is based on the belief that the directions for cultic worship came ultimately from the deity.
Roman Catholic liturgy has its roots in Judaism and the New Testament. The central act of liturgy from earliest times was the eucharistic assembly, the commemorative celebration of the Last Supper of Jesus. This was set in a structure of liturgical prayer. During the first six centuries of the Christian church, there developed a rich variety of liturgical systems, many of which have survived in the “Oriental” (i.e., Eastern) churches. In the West the Latin liturgy appeared fully developed in Rome in the 6th and 7th centuries. The Roman liturgy was adopted throughout western Europe from the 8th century. In the same period, however, liturgy developed in Frankish territories; the Roman rite that emerged as dominant in the 10th century was a Roman-Frankish creation. The Roman rite was reformed by the Council of Trent by the removal of some corruptions and the imposition of uniformity. After Trent the Roman see was the supreme authority over liturgical practice in the entire Roman Catholic Church.
By the 11th century, Roman liturgy had acquired the classic form that it retained up to Vatican II. The fullness of the liturgy could be witnessed only in some cathedrals, collegiate churches, and monastic churches. The full liturgy included the daily celebration of the solemn high mass and the recitation of the divine office in choir. The solemn high mass was entirely sung and was performed by at least three major officers (celebrant, deacon, and subdeacon), assisted by many acolytes and ministers; the low mass was spoken and conducted by a single priest and a server or two. Except during the penitential seasons of Advent and Lent, the altar was decorated, and numerous candles (used in the Middle Ages for light rather than for ornamentation) and incense were employed. Singing and chanting were accompanied by the organ and in modern times even by orchestral music. Indeed, Mozart once complained that the archbishop of Salzburg compelled him to compose a mass without the resources of a full symphonic orchestra.
Latin did not become the language of the Roman rite until the 6th century. As a sacred language, Latin really has no parallel. Jews have always made a genuine effort to learn some Hebrew, and other sacred languages are archaic forms of the vernacular; the English of the Authorized Version of the Bible became the language of prayer in many Protestant churches. The effect of the use of Latin, it has been argued, was to make the liturgy the preserve of the clergy and to make the laity essentially passive. This was countered by efforts to use sound and spectacle in the performance of the solemn liturgy. For centuries the canon of the mass, the central eucharistic formula, was recited by the celebrant inaudibly, with his back to the people, and the elevation of the host and chalice and the ringing of the bells to signal the consecration were the only means of communicating to the people that the pivotal point of the mass had arrived; the canon of the mass was a kind of verbal “sanctuary” that the laity were not even supposed to hear.
The abandonment of Latin as a result of Vatican II excited deep antagonisms. Some Catholics cherished the Latin liturgy and regarded it as the symbol of the timeless and changeless Roman Catholic Church. Others believed that the restoration of the vernacular would restore to the liturgy two functions that it had in the early centuries: to instruct converts and to confirm members in their faith. Although most Roman Catholics came to accept the vernacular mass approved at Vatican II, a minority group, the so-called Catholic traditionalists, rejected the reforms of Vatican II and remained devoted to the Latin mass. The best-known figures in this movement were Gommar De Pauw in the United States and, especially, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in France.
The divine office
The divine office was a legacy to the clergy from the monks. From the earliest times, monks assembled several times daily for prayer in common. This practice developed into set common prayer at stated times each day (matins or vigils, midnight; lauds, first daylight; prime, sunrise; terce, mid-morning; sext, noon; none, mid-afternoon; vespers, sunset; compline, before retiring). The divine office consisted basically of the chanting of the Psalms (in a weekly cycle), the recital of prayers, and the reading of the Scriptures (to which were later added selections from the writings of the Church Fathers, probably instead of a homily given by one of those present). Together with the mass, the office has been the only “official” prayer of the Roman Catholic Church; all other prayer forms are “private,” even if several hundred people recite them together. For this reason clerics in major orders since the Middle Ages have been obliged to recite the divine office, or “breviary,” privately if they are not bound to attend the office in choir. It was long recognized that there is an inconsistency in the private silent reading of a prayer structure that is intended for choral chanting. Vatican II recommended a reform of the canonical hours, which included simplifying their observance, encouraging participation by the laity, and restoring the practice of singing the hours in groups..
The liturgical year
The liturgy has traditionally been arranged in an annual cycle that is a reenactment of the saving events of the life, death, Resurrection, and glorification of Jesus Christ. The events are reenacted as an assurance that the saving act will reach its eschatological fullness, and the liturgy is an expression and a support of the Christian hope. The cult of the saints is an intrusion into the liturgical cycle, and it has been much reduced in the contemporary liturgical reforms.The liturgical season begins with Advent, a time of preparation for the Christmas holiday. After Christmas the first of two periods of Ordinary Time follows and continues until Ash Wednesday, the beginning of Lent, a time of penitence leading to the Paschal Triduum, the period beginning on Holy Thursday and ending with the evening prayer on Easter Sunday. Easter Sunday marks the start of the Easter season, which continues as a time of celebration until Pentecost Sunday, some 50 days later. Pentecost (commemorating the descent of the Holy Spirit on the disciples) marks the start of the second period of Ordinary Time, which continues until the Advent season begins anew.
The colour of the priest’s outer garments reflects the liturgical season or day: white or gold is worn for Christmas and Easter; purple is worn for Advent and Lent, except on the third Sunday of Advent and the fourth Sunday of Lent, the midpoint of the penitential seasons, when pink is worn as a sign of hope and joy; red is worn for Good Friday and Palm Sunday and on the feasts of martyrs; green, another symbol of hope, is worn for the rest of the liturgical year; and white is worn for funerals as a symbol of life instead of mourning.
In the Roman Catholic Church, liturgy in the proper sense is the liturgy of the mass, the divine office, and the sacraments. For hundreds of years, however, the Latin language, the clerical character of the liturgy, and the search for novelty have combined to produce forms of worship that are “paraliturgical,” meaning that they lie outside the liturgy and in some cases contradict it. These acts are also known as devotions or devotional practices, which means that they are accepted voluntarily and not from obligation.
A number of eucharistic devotional practices arose in the Middle Ages, when Catholics rarely received the Eucharist more than once a year. The practice of benediction of the Blessed Sacrament, for example, is a blessing conferred by a priest holding a consecrated host in a vessel of display called a monstrance; the priest’s hands are covered to signify that it is the blessing of Jesus and not his own. This blessing is accompanied by hymns, the organ, and the use of incense. The practice of “exposition” is the public and solemn display of the eucharistic bread, again with the accompaniment of hymns, the organ, incense, and processions. The most prominent of the eucharistic celebrations is the Feast of Corpus Christi, which was instituted in the 13th century by Pope Urban IV (reigned 1261–64) and was inspired by Blessed Juliana, prioress of Mont Cornillon (near Liège in present-day Belgium). The reservation of the Eucharist in churches is a way in which Catholics can address themselves in personal prayer to Jesus “really present.” These eucharistic devotions have often functioned as substitutes for mass and Holy Communion, and since the modern renewal of liturgy they occur much less frequently.
Cult of the saints
Other devotions involve the cult of the saints, a practice of great antiquity repudiated by the Reformers of the 16th century as a denial of the total mediation of Christ. Although this objection oversimplified Catholic practice, the devotions did sometimes approach superstition. Since the Second Council of Nicaea in 787, Catholic theologians have distinguished (by Greek technical terms) the worship paid to God (latria, “adoration”) from the veneration addressed to Mary (hyperdulia, “super-service”) and the saints (dulia, “service”). The Roman Catholic understanding of the intercession of the saints is an extension of the belief in the communion of saints. Although such veneration does tend to multiply mediators, it has often fostered a simple and not unpleasing familiarity with the world of the supernatural.The cult of the most important saint, Mary, has been the source of great controversy with Protestant denominations, especially after the papal declarations of the Immaculate Conception in 1854 and the Assumption in 1950. As the mother of Jesus (Greek Theotokos, “God-bearer”), Mary has long been accorded special devotion by Catholics and other Christians. She is given the feminine traits of sympathy and tenderness that are not improper to the deity but are somewhat improper to the father figure and the king figure. She is the object of one of Catholicism’s most famous prayers, the Hail Mary:
Hail Mary, full of grace,
The Lord is with thee!
Blessed art thou among women,
And blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary, mother of God,
Pray for us sinners,
Now and at the hour of our death.
A mediator before her son, Mary has been thought by some to be a co-redeemer with Christ, and the church recognizes her as the mother of the church, a model of faith, and a symbol of eschatological hope. The multitude of apparitions of Mary (e.g., at Lourdes, France, and at Fátima, Portugal) reflects the need among many Roman Catholics for local symbols and signs of her presence.
The Rev. John L. McKenzie
The word mysticism is of relatively recent coinage. The Catholic tradition for centuries has spoken of theologia mystica (a term taken from the Pseudo-Dionysius), which means the experience of God in prayer without images in the mind—a direct, albeit obscure, experience of God; a foretaste of the vision of God in the next life. St. Augustine, famously in the Confessions, described that experience as an ascent toward God. That “dark” contemplative experience runs like a thread from the Greek Fathers into medieval spirituality (especially among the Carthusians), reaching its greatest expression in the writings of the 16th-century Carmelite school best represented by St. Teresa of Ávila and St. John of the Cross. Its greatest 20th-century exponent was the Cistercian monk Thomas Merton.
More generally, the modern term mystic has been applied to those spiritual teachers and writers who have reached intense levels of contemplative prayer through their identification with the person of Christ (St. Francis of Assisi) or through a disciplined practice of meditation (St. Ignatius of Loyola) or through other forms of contemplative practice. While some of these figures may have exhibited ecstatic phenomena (stigmatization, locutions, etc.), such exterior signs are not essential (St. John of the Cross warned against them). The Roman Catholic Church has always expressed some reservations about such experiences for fear that they may be the result of psychological pathologies or demonic illusions. The constant test of the authenticity of mystical prayer has been whether it increases love of God and neighbour; as St. John of the Cross once put it, “In the evening, you will be examined in love.”
The order of the mass
Catholics are expected to attend mass each Sunday and on various holy days of obligation designated by the church. The mass itself is highly structured and can be difficult for non-Catholics to follow. Typically lasting about an hour, sometimes longer, the mass is generally divided into two parts, the liturgy of the Word and the liturgy of the Eucharist, but in reality five distinct phases are discernable: the introductory rites, the liturgy of the Word, the liturgy of the Eucharist, the communion rite, and the concluding rite. Catholics must stand, sit, kneel, bow, and make the sign of the cross at various points throughout the mass. Variations in the order of the mass (discussed below) are common depending on certain circumstances and the time of year.
The introductory rites
A typical Sunday mass begins with an entrance song, during which the priest, deacon, and ministers, and sometimes altar servers (both altar boys and girls are permissible), lectors, and lay eucharistic ministers (who assist in administering Holy Communion) process to the altar. The priest and deacon then kiss the altar. After greeting the congregation, the priest asks the people to recall their sins and to repent by reciting the penitential rite (“I confess to almighty God…”) or a version of it. Unless it is included in the penitential rite, the Kyrie is then spoken (“Lord, have mercy…”) followed (except during Christmas and Lent) by the Gloria, an ancient hymn of praise (“Glory to God in the highest, and peace to his people on earth…”). The priest then delivers the opening prayer, to which the congregation responds with “Amen” (“So be it”), thus concluding the first part of mass.
The liturgy of the Word
The second phase of the mass, the liturgy of the Word, typically consists of three readings: a reading from the Old Testament, a non-Gospel reading from the New Testament, and a reading from the Gospels; the first two readings are done by a lector (a lay reader), and the Gospel is proclaimed by the deacon. A responsorial psalm and a Gospel acclamation divide the three readings. The priest then delivers the homily, which usually focuses on one of the readings or on that day’s special occasion. The public profession of faith follows, which means reciting either the Nicene Creed or the shorter Apostles’ Creed. The Nicene Creed is a succinct statement of Catholic doctrine:
We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered, died, and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in fulfillment of the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated on the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.
Ending the liturgy of the Word are the general intercessions (the “prayer of the faithful”), in which petitions are offered for the “holy Church, for the civil authorities, for those oppressed by various needs, for all mankind, and for the salvation of the entire world.” Specific prayers may also be extended to couples recently married in the church, to persons ordained or confirmed in the church, or to members of the church suffering illness or bereavement.
The liturgy of the Eucharist
The third part of mass, the liturgy of the Eucharist, is the high point of the celebration. While the gifts (donations) of the people are being gathered and brought to the altar, an offertory song is typically sung. Meanwhile, the deacon and assistants prepare the altar. The priest washes his hands, and he offers a prayer of thanks to God (quietly or aloud, if no song is being sung) for the gifts of bread and wine that presently will be changed into Christ’s body and blood. He then invites the people to pray that their sacrifice will be acceptable to God, whereupon the people repeat: “May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of his name, for our good, and the good of all his Church.” The eucharistic prayer follows, in which the holiness of God is honoured, his servants are acknowledged, the Last Supper is recalled, and the bread and wine are consecrated. The host and chalice are then elevated into the air by the priest, who sings or recites: “Through him, with him, in him, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, all glory and honour is yours, almighty Father, forever and ever.” The people respond with “Amen.”
The communion rite
At the start of the communion rite, the priest calls on the people to pray the most universal of Christian prayers—the Lord’s Prayer (the “Our Father,” the Pater Noster)—whose author, according to the Gospels, was Christ himself. The prayer is said or sung, often while members of the congregation join hands:
Our Father, who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name;
Thy kingdom come;
Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread;
And forgive us our trespasses
As we forgive those who trespass against us;
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil.
In divergence from Protestant practice, the Catholic church stops the prayer after “deliver us from evil,” which is where the original prayer ended before an additional two lines (a doxology) were added about AD 100. At this pause in the prayer the priest says, “Deliver us, Lord, from every evil, and grant us peace in our day…” at which point the people in unison complete the final two lines of the prayer, saying “For the kingdom, the power, and the glory are yours, now and forever.” The deacon then asks members of the congregation to exchange a sign of peace with their neighbours to signify one family in Christ, an act which usually consists of a handshake or a nod while saying “Peace” or “Peace be with you.” After the priest prepares the bread and wine, the people exclaim: “Lord, I am not worthy to receive you but only say the word and I shall be healed.” Once the priest has administered Holy Communion to his assistants, the people then file up to the altar, row by row, receiving the bread first (which is placed in their hands or on their tongues by the priest, deacon, or eucharistic minister) and the chalice of wine, if offered, second. (Communion offered in both kinds—bread and wine—has a long and complicated history; beginning in the 12th century, the chalice gradually came to be reserved for the priest alone. Though Communion under both kinds is now allowable at the discretion of the bishop, many churches offer both kinds to the priest’s assistants at the altar but offer only the bread to the congregation at large; this is often done merely to ensure an “orderly” administering of Communion to the congregation, and the church teaches that the whole Christ is present in the individual elements of bread and wine.) Upon receiving Communion, the people then return to their seat and kneel in silent prayer while waiting for Communion to end.
The concluding rite
Once Holy Communion is completed and the altar has been cleared, the final part of mass follows: the concluding rite. The priest, after a period of silence for reflection on the “mystery” that has just occurred, offers a final greeting. Church announcements are typically made at this point, a final blessing is then offered, and the people are dismissed, encouraged to “go in peace to love and serve the Lord.” Variations on the dismissal include “The mass is ended, go in peace,” and “Go in the peace of Christ.” Some parishes sing a final song, though this is not required according to the official order of the mass.