In the last chapter we looked at those elements in the Roman Canon which form what one might call its core. In this chapter we will consider the elements which were added later, though in fact it was not that much later, probably in the course of the fifth century. We know that the Canon was edited by Gregory the Great in the late sixth century, though all that we can be sure about this revision is that it was he who added the words “diésque nostros in tua pace dispónas, atque ab aetérna damnatióne nos éripi, et in electórum tuórum iúbeas grege numerári”. Following the Gregorian revision the Canon has remained virtually unchanged until our own day.
The non-core elements of the Canon consist basically in a series of petitions for the living and the dead, and two commemorations of saints. The structure is quite symmetrical; the petition for the living (starting with one specifically for the Church) and one of the commemorations of saints come between the Sanctus and the Consecration Epiklesis, the prayer for the dead and the second commemoration of the saints come after the Communion Epiklesis and before the Doxology.
The petition for the welfare of the Church consists in one very long sentence, from “Te ígitur...” to “...cultóribus”. The subject of this sentence is “súpplices”, “[we] suppliants”, i.e. the priest and people. There are two main verbs “rogámus ac pétimus”, which both mean much the same thing, “we ask”. This duplication is a stylistic feature of the Canon, which occurs in numerous places; other examples are “haec dona, haec múnera”, “salútis et incolumitátis” , “donis ac datis”, “hóstiam puram, hóstiam sanctam” and “partem áliquam et societátem”. There are others too, but I will leave you to find these for yourself.
The object of the verbs is “Te...., clementíssime Pater”, “ Thee, most merciful Father”. “Igitur” means “therefore” and, like “étiam”, is a word which never comes first in a Latin sentence. We ask the Father, naturally, “per Jesum Christum, Fílium tuum Dóminum nostrum”, and what we ask for is found in the subordinate clause starting with “uti accépta hábeas et benedícas”, “that [thou mayest] accept and bless”. There is a triple object, each introduced with the word “haec”; “these gifts, these offerings, these holy unblemished sacrifices”. We have already met the expression “accépta hábeas” (literally “treat as accepted” or “keep accepted”) in the Anamnesis (see last chapter); it is an idiomatic phrase which is usually translated into modern English simply as “accept”, though this does not quite bring out the subtlety of the Latin. Note too that there is no Latin word for “may”; the idea of petition is expressed by putting the verb into the subjunctive (more about this in the next chapter).
Having asked God to accept our offerings the priest, on our behalf, says why we are making them, in a long relative clause introduced by “quae tibi offérimus” (“which we offer to thee”). We offer them firstly (“in primis”) for “thy holy Catholic Church, which thou mayest condescend (“dignéris”) to keep in peace, guard, unite and direct, throughout the whole world (“toto orbe terrárum”)”. The name of the currently reigning Pope is then mentioned, followed by that of the local bishop, and finally the petition is extended to all true believers (“ómnibus orthodóxis”) and teachers (“cultóribus”) of the Catholic and Apostolic faith. Grammatically, “fámulo tuo Papa nostro”, “Antístite nostro”, “ómnibus orthodóxis” and “cultóribus” are all in the ablative case, following “una cum” (“together with”). You will also note that, as we have seen in other instances, the genitives “cathólicae et apostólicae fídei” come before “cultóribus”, not after it as they would in English.
After praying for all faithful Christians, we turn to those individuals whom we wish to pray for individually, introduced by the word “Meménto”, which is an imperative, “Remember”. God is asked to remember those of His servants, (“famulórum famularúmque tuárum”) who are then mentioned by name. Notice again how economical Latin is; in English we have to say “both male and female servants”, but Latin says it simply by a variation in the word ending (both nouns are in the genitive, as we might say “be mindful of”). Note too that the word for “thy” (“tuárum”), which of course applies to both nouns, is feminine, because the noun closest to it is feminine. All of which just goes to show that inclusive language is not an invention of the twentieth century.
Following the mention of the names the petition is then concluded by a grammatically somewhat confusing petition for everyone present at the Mass and for others not present for whom the congregation wish to pray. It starts off reasonably enough with “et ómnium circumstántium, quorum tibi fides cógnita est et nota devótio, pro quibus tibi offérimus...” (“and of all present, whose faith is familiar to Thee and whose devotion [is] known, for whom we offer to Thee...”). One might expect it then to conclude with “hoc sacrifícium laudis” (“this sacrifice of praise”). Instead however there is an awkward shift from the first person (“offérimus”) to the third (“ófferunt”), and the prayer then continues in the third person. The literal meaning is “for whom we offer to Thee, or who [themselves] offer to Thee this sacrifice of praise, for themselves and all [who are] theirs, for the redemption of their souls, for the hope of their salvation and safety, and [who] offer their prayers to Thee, eternal God, living and true”.
The awkwardness arises from the fact that the words “pro quibus tibi offérimus, vel” are a post-Gregorian addition. Everywhere else in the Canon we find the simple first person plural; the celebrant offers the sacrifice on behalf of all those present, which of course includes himself. But the original reading here was “and of all present, whose faith is familiar to Thee and whose devotion [is] known, who offer to Thee...”, in other words the whole of this petition was originally in the third person only. It was evidently felt that the use of the third person here rather than the first might be taken as suggesting that only the congregation were offering the sacrifice, hence the addition was made to make it clear that it included the celebrant also. If this seems excessively pedantic to us, it must be said in fairness to the interpolator that the Latin word “circumstántium”, though it is usually translated as “those present”, literally means “those standing around”. It is also possible, though not certain, that the petition originally referred only to those present at the Mass in question, and has been extended later to include persons not present.
The next section of the prayer starts with two present participles (“communicating [with] and venerating the memory of...”) which are followed first by a reference to Our Lady and St. Joseph (the latter a very recent addition), and a list of twenty four apostles and martyrs. At first this appears to be an arbitrary list of names, but on closer inspection it turns out to be anything but. It is divided into two sections. First we have the twelve apostles (with the substitution of Paul for Judas), then a further twelve saints of the Roman Church, which is itself divided into two groups of six. The first subgroup consists in six bishops (five of them Popes), and the second in two deacons and four laymen, the latter comprising two soldiers and two doctors. It is therefore a representative selection of all grades within the Church. Whatever our status in the Church, we are all called to and capable of holiness. The names are naturally all in the genitive case, following “memóriam”. The list ends with a reference to “all Thy saints, to whose merits and prayers grant that in all [things] we may be defended by the help of Thy protection”.
At this point in the Old Rite the bell is rung. This is surely not the best place, since what follows immediately is the conclusion of the foregoing petitions, beginning “ígitur” (“therefore”). The rubric to ring it at this point dates only from the sixteenth century; before that the rubric simply prescribed that a bell to warn the people of the approaching Consecration should be rung, but did not specify when. In the Novus Ordo the bell is rung (if at all) immediately before the Epiklesis. One would have to be a truly diehard traditionalist not to accept this at least as a change for the better. The original conclusion was simply “Hanc ígitur oblatiónem servitútis nostrae, sed et cunctae famíliae tuae, quaésumus, Dómine, ut placátus accípias”. You will by now easily recognise the expression “quaésumus, Dómine, ut...”, meaning of course “we ask, O Lord, that...” “Placátus accípias” means literally “being pleased you may accept” or, as we would say, “you may be pleased to accept”. The object is “hanc oblatiónem” (remember that the accusative singular in Latin normally ends in “-am”, “-em” or “-um”), and the remaining words are genitives “this sacrifice of our servanthood and of all Thy household”. The remaining words, asking that God may order our days in His peace, and that we may be rescued (“éripi” literally means “snatched”) from eternal damnation and numbered in the flock of His chosen ones, were added by St. Gregory the Great.
Between the Communion Epiklesis and the Doxology come the commemoration of the dead and a second commemoration of saints. The former starts with exactly the same phrase as in that of the living, but after the names it continues “qui nos praecessérunt cum signo fídei, et dórmiunt in somno pacis” (“who have preceded us with the sign of faith, and sleep in the sleep of peace”). There is then a pause for more names, if required, and the commemoration concludes with “to these, O Lord, and to all [those] resting in Christ, we pray that Thou wouldst grant a place of coolness, light and peace”. “Quiescéntibus” is the dative plural of the present participle “quiéscens”, meaning “resting”. “Deprecámur”, coming as so often in Latin at the end, means “we pray” and “ut indúlgeas” means “that Thou wouldst grant”. At first sight it seems strange that we should pray that the dead should be granted a place of coolness, and some missals translate the word, oddly, as “refreshment”, which has acquired a totally different (and completely inappropriate) meaning in English. But of course the Canon was composed in Italy, where a cool place is indeed something to be highly desired, in the height of the Mediterranean summer. The word has also a secondary meaning, that of “consolation”. And there may well be an implicit reference to Psalm 65.12 “Transívimus per ignem et aquam, et eduxísti nos in refrigérium” (“We have passed through fire and water, and Thou hast brought us into a cool place”). So it is in fact a wholly appropriate word to use in the context of the Holy Souls.
There follows the second commemoration of saints in the Canon. The grammatical structure is fairly simple. The main verb (in the subjunctive) is “dignéris”, which means, as you will surely remember, “mayest Thou condescend”. What we ask God to condescend to do is “donáre partem áliquam et societátem cum tuis sanctis Apóstolis et Martýribus” (“to give some share and fellowship with Thy holy apostles and martyrs”) to us sinners, Thy servants (“nobis peccatóribus fámulis tuis”). A select list of saints then follows, which however arbitrary it may look is in fact as carefully chosen as the first. At the head of the list is John (probably the Baptist is meant since the Evangelist has been mentioned already in the first list), and he is followed by seven men and seven women. The men saints are headed by the first martyr, St. Stephen. There follow two apostles who were later recruits to the original twelve, and four martyrs of the Roman Church (Ignatius was Bishop of Antioch but he was martyred at Rome). Alexander and Marcellinus were priests, Peter (not the Apostle) was a layman, so once again we have in order, apostles, clergy, laity. The women saints include three Romans (Felicity, Agnes and Cecilia), one African (Perpetua), two Sicilians (Agatha and Lucy) and one from the East (Anastasia), so in this second list are represented women as well as men and the provinces as well as Rome. The list ends with a reference to all the saints, in the same phrase as the first list though this time it is, like the names, in the dative after “cum” rather than the genitive after “memória”. The commemoration ends with a request, introduced by the ubiquitous “quaésumus”, that God should admit us into their company “non aestimátor mériti, sed véniae....largítor” (“not [as] judge of our desert, but [as] dispenser of mercy”).
The Doxology begins at “Per ipsum...” but it is linked to the commemoration of saints by a brief relative clause “per quem haec ómnia, Dómine, semper bona creas, sanctíficas, vivíficas, benedícis et praestas nobis” (“through Whom, O Lord, Thou dost always create, sanctify, give life to, bless and bestow upon us all these good [things]”. What exactly are the “haec ómnia... bona” referred to at this point? “All these good things” would be a most inappropriate way of referring to the body and blood of Christ, present on the altar under the appearance of bread and wine, but there is nothing else which obviously fits the bill. The answer seems to be that at one time, when few people outside the towns used money, it was the custom of the faithful to present at the Offertory not only the bread and wine to be consecrated by the celebrant but gifts in kind for the maintenance of the ministers, particularly in the form of food and drink. These would have remained in the sanctuary until Mass was over, and these words constitute a formula of blessing for them (it is perhaps relevant that in the Old Rite the oil of Chrism is blessed at precisely this point in the Maundy Thursday Mass). As a result of the deep respect in which the traditional text of the Canon had come to be held these words were retained even after the use of money became universal and the offerings in kind of the faithful were replaced by the collection of money with which we are familiar today.