Hymnarium OP

Our Province of Dominicans has put together a new book of Hymns for the Divine Office (the Liturgy of the Hours), which we pray in common several times a day.  We are asking for help to fund the project.  We have set up a fundraising page through Rally.com.  Please consider visiting the page and donating some funds.  Even if you can't contribute, link to our Google+ page, send out a Tweet, or link to the page on Facebook.

Thanks for your support!

Liturgy & Law -- Adding St. Joseph to the Canon

Death of St. Joseph, Dominican House of Studies

Update 20 June 2013: The USCCB has announced through its website that the Holy See has amended the words of Eucharistic Prayers 2, 3, and 4 to insert the name of St. Joseph. According to the USCCB these revisions "are approved to be used immediately".  Below is the revised text English and Latin.  Whether this is "immediately" applicable in other countries is not immediately clear.  I would assume that the Conferences of Bishops would announce this individually for the diocese of their own territory. 

More information may be found at the USCCB website here:  http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/order-of-mass/liturgy-of-the-eucharist/saint-joseph-in-the-eucharistic-prayers.cfm

The original decree (and translations of the text into additional languages) may be found at the Vatican website here: http://attualita.vatican.va/sala-stampa/bollettino/2013/06/19/news/31223.htm

English

Eucharistic Prayer II

Have mercy on us all, we pray,

that with the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God,

with blessed Joseph, her Spouse,

with the blessed Apostles,

and all the Saints who have pleased you throughout the ages,

we may merit to be coheirs to eternal life,

and may praise and glorify you

through your Son, Jesus Christ.

Eucharistic Prayer III

May he make of us

an eternal offering to you,

so that we may obtain an inheritance with your elect,

especially with the most Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God,

with blessed Joseph, her Spouse,

with your blessed Apostles and glorious Martyrs

(with Saint N.: the Saint of the day or Patron Saint)

and with all the Saints,

on whose constant intercession in your presence

we rely for unfailing help.

Eucharistic Prayer IV

To all of us, your children,

grant, O merciful Father,

that we may enter into a heavenly inheritance

with the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God,

with blessed Joseph, her Spouse,

and with your Apostles and Saints in your kingdom.

There, with the whole of creation,

freed from the corruption of sin and death,

may we glorify you through Christ our Lord,

through whom you bestow on the world all that is good.

Latin

Prex Eucharistica II

Omnium nostrum, quǽsumus, miserére,

ut cum beáta Dei Genetríce Vírgine María,

beáto Ioseph, eius Sponso,

beátis Apóstolis et ómnibus Sanctis,

qui tibi a sǽculo placuérunt,

ætérnae vitæ mereámur esse consórtes,

et te laudémus et glorificémus

per Fílium tuum Iesum Christum.

Prex Eucharistica III

Ipse nos tibi perfíciat munus ætérnum,

ut cum eléctis tuis hereditátem cónsequi valeámus,

in primis cum beatíssima Vírgine, Dei Genetríce, María,

cum beáto Ioseph, eius Sponso,

cum beátis Apóstolis tuis et gloriósis Martýribus

(cum Sancto N.: Sancto diei vel patrono)

et ómnibus Sanctis,

quorum intercessióne

perpétuo apud te confídimus adiuvári.

Prex Eucharistica IV

Nobis ómnibus, fíliis tuis, clemens Pater, concéde,

ut cæléstem hereditátem cónsequi valeámus

cum beáta Vírgine, Dei Genetríce, María,

cum beáto Ioseph, eius Sponso,

cum Apóstolis et Sanctis tuis

in regno tuo, ubi cum univérsa creatúra,

a corruptióne peccáti et mortis liberáta,

te glorificémus per Christum Dóminum nostrum,

per quem mundo bona cuncta largíris.

UPDATE 19 June 2013:  Noted on-line apologist Jimmy Akin has apparently contacted the Committee on Divine Worship at the USCCB about the implementation date. He largely confirms what I said below.  See his blog entry here.

* * * * * 

It has been reported that the Congregation for Divine Worship has prepared a decree to insert the name of St. Joseph in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Eucharistic Prayers (it was added to the 1st Eucharistic Prayer--the "Roman Canon"--in 1962).  Some websites have erroneously reported that that means the name may or must now be inserted by priests using those Eucharistic prayers.  This is incorrect.

Under the Code of Canon Law, new laws do not generally take effect when they are issued.  Rather "a law is established when it is promulgated." (can. 7, emphasis added)  Promulgation is the official announcement  of a law.  This occurs by publishing it in Acta Apostolicae Sedis (AAS), the official commentary on all of the actions of the Holy See.  Note, however, that the canon cited above says "established" not "effective".  A law does not even go into effect on the day it is published in AAS.  The general rule is that a law goes into effect three months after its promulgation. (can. 8)  

The Holy See can waive these provisions to have a law take effect immediately.  It did so when Pope Benedict XVI issued the Apostolic Letter Normas Nonnullas, which changed the rules of the Conclave just before the effective date of his resignation.  (I discussed the possibility in a blog post this past February.)  To do this, the decree must "specifically and expressly" establish a period other than the three month rule.  So, in Normas Nonnullas the Pope stated in the very last sentence, "This document will enter into effect immediately upon its publication in L’Osservatore Romano."  This is how you specifically and expressly provide a different effective date.  The mere use of "henceforth" in the current decree on the use of the name of St. Joseph does not do this, and the decree mentions no other specific effective date.  Therefore, we should not--indeed may not--assume that the decree has immediate force or effect.

Something similar happened when Pope John XXIII first added the name of St. Joseph to the Canon back in 1962.  The decree was issued on November 13, 1962.  However, the name was not to be inserted into the canon until December 8, 1962, approximately 1 month later, as specifically mentioned in the decree.  It is normal for there to be a gap between the date of issuance of a new law and its effectiveness to allow time for the news to spread and churches to implement the change.

Therefore, since this new decree has not even been published, it has no legal effect yet.  Therefore, no priest, on his own initiative, should insert the name of St. Joseph into the other Eucharistic Prayers until such time as the decree has been published and the applicable waiting period has elapsed.

The Pope, Washing Feet, and Law

I was asked about the question of the Washing of the Feet and the Pope's decision to wash the feet of 2 young women on Holy Thursday.  There seems to be some great confusion on this, which to my lawyer's mind seems to be based in some misunderstandings about law generally and liturgical law specifically.

Before I begin, just a few caveats.  First, I do not believe there is some unchanging theological necessity that limits the washing of feet to 12 men.  In other words, I do not have any theological problem to the washing of women's feet on Holy Thursday.  As for the symbolism of the action, I tend to think that it is best expressed when the Diocesan Bishop washes the feet of 12 of his priests, but that's just my personal view.  However, as I will explain below, I do believe that limiting the washing of feet to men is the current law, and that generally we should have a spirit of obedience to the law, especially in regards the liturgy.  Nonetheless, proper authority certainly has the right to change this, but should it be changed it ought to be done in a way proper to the promulgation of law.

First, some background on the liturgical instructions.  As most Catholics know, on Holy Thursday priests are permitted (but not required) to include in the Mass of the Lord's Supper the liturgical action known as the Mandatum.  This is the washing of the feet in in imitation of Christ's own example, as recounted in the thirteenth chapter of John's Gospel.  There Christ tells his Apostles:

You call me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given you an example, that you also should do as I have done to you. 

John 13:13-15

In the current liturgical books, the Church permits the washing of the feet of twelve men.  In the Latin this is very clear, the text uses the word "vir"--meaning men specifically--and not "homo", meaning man generally (i.e., human beings).  There is no ambiguity in the liturgical rubric, if the Mandatum is done in the liturgy it is to be done with 12 men.  

Keep in mind, however, that this liturgical action is not a Sacrament, nor even a sacramental.  That is, it is not the vehicle for grace the way baptism is.  When water is poured over the head of a child and the words of baptism said, it effects a change in the child more than his just getting wet.  The symbolism of the pouring of water and saying of words is, in effect, the vehicle for God's salvific grace.  In this, God mandates not only the grace that is given, but the means through which it comes.  For this reason, the Church recognizes that she cannot change the symbol (the pouring water and the words) any more than she can change the grace that flows from it.  This is decidedly not the case with the washing of feet.  This action is just symbolic, it effects no grace by the working of the action itself, as sacraments do.  It only effects a change in that the viewer is stirred to reflect on the action of Christ in seeing it symbolically reenacted in the context of the Liturgy.  Thus, the Church is far freer in adapting the symbol to suit changes in time, place, and custom.

In regards to the changeable elements of the liturgy, who has the authority over it?  The Second Vatican Council made that abundantly clear in the document Sacrosanctum Concilium, the first Constitution issued by the Council Fathers:

Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See

Sacrosanctum Concilium 22 

That is, the Pope--and the Pope alone--has authority over the sacred liturgy.  He normally does that by promulgating the liturgical books.

Is the Pope bound to the authority of the liturgical books?  Yes, but remember that he also has the power of dispensation.  There are things in the liturgy which are unchangeable--the use of bread and wine, for example--which not even the Pope can derogate from.  But for the others--"merely ecclesiastical laws"--the Pope may dispense anyone from them.  So, for example, before the Second Vatican Council, to say Mass a priest had to have use of his thumb and index finger to hold the host.  The Jesuit Priest--now saint--Isaac Jogues had his fingers removed by the Mohawk Indians then living in Canada, whom he was trying to evangelize.  The Pope at the time dispensed him from that liturgical law so that he might continue to say Mass.

The Code of Canon law allows a legitimate authority to dispense from any "merely ecclesiatical law":

Can. 85 A dispensation, that is, the relaxation of a merely ecclesiastical law in a particular case, can be granted, within the limits of their competence, by those who have executive power, and by those who either explicitly or implicitly have the power of dispensing, whether by virtue of the law itself or by lawful delegation.

As a general rule, in the law one who has the power to dispense others has the power to dispense himself, unless explicitly prohibited from doing so.  Here, the Pope clearly has the power to dispense from the rule that the washing of the feet be limited to men.  In fact, he is the only authority with the power to do so, as the law explicitly reserves the regulation of the Sacred Liturgy to him.  Since he has the power to dispense others, he can dispense itself.

Therefore, those who say the Pope somehow acted illicitly by washing the feet of women on Holy Thursday are simply wrong.  He has the legal authority to do so, and such an action is completely legitimate.

Now, what about everyone else?  A well known Catholic writer issued on Twitter this comment:  "The question of whether a priest can wash women's feet on Holy Thursday now seems answered. Pope Francis will do this today in a prison."  To the extent that this was an assertion that any priest may now ignore the rubric limiting the washing of feet to men, this is simply wrong and misunderstands the nature of law.

The whole point of "dispensation" is that it derogates from the law in a particular instance.  Law, on the other hand, is something of general applicability.  Part of the very definition of law is that it must be promulgated by one in authority if it has general effect.  To state otherwise would be to say that every dispensation actually changed the law for everyone.  That would be chaos.  The orderly functioning of any society requires a consistent and coherent set of laws, and a clear delineation of what binds and what does not.

To conclude, Pope Francis was certainly not acting "illegally" by washing the feet of two women on Holy Thursday night in the juvenile prison in Rome.  At the same time, the Pope did not change the rubric for anyone else, only for himself on that one Holy Thursday.

If pastors--or Bishops--earnestly believe that there is great spiritual advantage to be had by changing the rule, their course is clear.  We are a hierarchical Church that, especially with regards to the liturgy, looks to those who have been given the special charge of preserving that liturgy.  Any priest, any Bishop, and even an entire Conference of Bishops, needs simply to petition the Apostolic See for a dispensation of the rule, or request its amendment.  Until then, the law should be followed.