Page images

the Cross also laid upon him, bearing which he went to Calvary to offer the Sacrifice of our Redemption.

The prayer said by the Priest when he vests himself therewith, is, Lord, who hast said my yoke is sweet, and my burthen light: grant that I may be able so to bear it, as to obtain thy grace.

The Priest thus vested, now is the representative of Christ, going to offer that sacrifice which he instituted on the night before he suffered, in order to show forth by this commemorative observance his death until his second coming.

The next circumstance to be observed, is the difference of colour of the vestments on different days. The object of the Church is, thus to inform the faithful at once of the sort of office which is performed. Hence, where the means of the congregation will allow of the regulation being carried into effect, she commands that the vestments and hangings of the Temple shall be of different colours on different oceasions. The colours prescribed are White, Red, Violet, Green, and Black. White is used on the great festivals of our Redeemer, and on the days when we recall to our minds the virtues, and entreat the prayers of the blessed Virgin Mary, of the good Angels, and of those Saints who served God with fidelity in the practice of virtue, but did not shed their blood by martyrdom. Red is worn on the festivals in honour of the Holy Ghost, who in the form of fiery tongues descended on the apostles; and on the festivals of those saints who were martyred, as exhibiting their blood. Violet, in times of penance and humiliation; principally, therefore, in Lent and Advent. Green, on those days when there is no particular festival or observance; and Black, in Masses for the dead, and on Good Friday, when we commemorate the death of the Redeemer.

There are several orders of Clergymen in the Church; Bishops, Priests, Deacons, Subdeacons, and persons in minor orders which last orders are of

Ecclesiastical institution. The dresses distinguish those several persons. We have noticed the vest

ments of the Priest when he celebrates Mass. A Bishop also offers this holy sacrifice: the other Clergymen have not authority to make this great oblation; but they attend thereat as subordinate Ministers. The under dress of the Priest is a black cassock or gown, which he wears to denote his separation from the world and its vanities. That of a Bishop is purple, to signify the superiority of his order, and his authority to rule in the Church of God, (Acts xx.v. 28) over which he wears a short white robe called a Rochet, to denote the purity with which he should be surrounded, and a cross which hangs before his breast. The Roman nobility formerly wore a small golden ball, which was called Bulla, as designating their rank; whence this custom is supposed to have originated; but the Christian Bishop has his in the shape of a Cross, to teach him to glory in nothing but the Cross of his Redeemer. He also sometimes wears a short purple cloak with a hood, which is called a Mozette or Cappa, and his mitre, which is of eastern origin, differs considerably in its shape from that of Aaron, and Jewish Priests. The two pieces which hang from it behind, are the lappets or ribbands, which formerly were used to bind it under his chin, but which are now seldom, if ever, used for that purpose. He also carries a crosier, which has at its top a shepherd's crook, to denote that he is one of those Pastors charged by the Saviour with the care of his flock-and on some very solemn occasions, such as an ordination, he wears the dresses of the inferior orders with his own, to show that he contains them in himself, and is the source from which their authority is derived. An Archbishop's cross has two transverse pieces, and the Pope's has three, to denote their gradations of rank or power. And he who wears a cross upon his breast, does not bring the stole across when he prepares to celebrate the Mass.

The Deacon wears his stole on the left shoulder, to signify the subordination of his order, and binds it at his right side, to prevent its flowing too loosely. In place of the chasuble he wears a Dalmatic, which is rather shorter than a chasuble, and was always open at the sides, but had short sleeves which are now cut open, and has no cross on the back, for he only assists at the sacrifice, but does not offer it. This was the dress of the people of Dalmatia, whence its name.

The Subdeacon wears no stole, as he has no authority to preach the gospel in public, and his outer vestment is rather narrower than that of the Deacon; it is called a Tunick, and was the dress of persons in the middle class of society in Rome.

The Clergymen in minor orders wear the black Cassock, over which they wear a surplice or white robe, to signify purity and innocence. This also is the usual dress of Priests, Deacons, and Subdeacons, except on the more solemn occasions.

Having thus been made acquainted with the various dresses of the different Clergymen who may of ficiate at Mass, we come to ask the meaning of the word MASS. The Latin from which it is derived, if it be not taken immediately from the Hebrew or SyroChaldaic, is missa, which word is generally supposed to be a perverted mode of pronouncing the word MISSAH, which is a Hebrew expression for a sacrificial offering; and is found in the 16th chapter of the book of Deuteronomy-missah nedaba, which means a voluntary offering, to be made on the festival of Pentecost, and this word Missah is derived from the radical word Mas, which means the tribute paid by an inferior to his sovereign. Others, and they by no means writers of inferior account, derive the Latin word from Missio, or the sending away of the people after the offering, or the sending of the sacrifice to God; but the impression of the compiler of this essay is decidedly favourable to the opinion of those who derive the word from the Hebrew. From whatever

source it may be derived, it is one of the most ancient words in Christianity, being found in the earliest writers.

The next inquiry is concerning the language in which it is celebrated. In the Western Church, it now is, and always has been Latin. To many persons who have not been accustomed to reflect upon the doctrines of the Catholic Church, this appears strange, but their great difficulty arises from an almost inevitable error to which they are exposed. They know nothing of religion but praying, preaching, and reading; and because they have known nothing eise in religion, they imagine that religion has nothing else. This is a most erroneous impression. Religion has a Sacrifice and Sacraments, which are not any of those acts, though much prayer and some instruction are found to accompany them. They are acts; thus Baptism, which is more efficacious than either prayer or preaching or reading, is neither one nor two nor all of those-but it is an act instituted by Christ, upon the performance of which, he has bound himself to produce a certain effect; it is true, there are words accompanying the act, but as they are for the Lord who understands all languages, it is no matter in what language they are spoken. So the Mass is not a common prayer, but an act of sacrifice in which by the ministry of the Priest, God does acts beneficial to the people. The benefit to the people is derived not merely from the words said, but from the acts done. The acts are the producing the victim upon the altar, and offering him to God for our sins after he has been produced; and the producing the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist; that the faithful may receive the body and blood of the Saviour in his Sacrament. Now as the object of the Mass is the performance of those acts, the questions for consideration are, first-Is any particular language essential to their performance : and next, are there any sufficient reasons why a dead language should be continued in use rather than e

living language be adopted? With regard to the first, it may be unhesitatingly answered-No particular language is essential to the validity of the acts. Secondly—There are many sufficient reasons for continuing the use of the Latin language in our Liturgy, in preference to adopting the modern languages.

In the first place, the doctrine of the Church being essentially unchangeable, a dead language, which is subject to no change, as to the meaning of its expressions, is far better calculated to preserve it unchangeably, than modern languages which are perpetually varying. The same idea which was conveyed by those words one thousand years ago, is now conveyed by them; and if the world should so long continue, will be conveyed by them, after the lapse of one thousand years more: whereas, if the English words which, one thousand years ago, were used to convey the same idea, were now written for us, they would be perfectly unintelligible. Thus an unchangeable language is used as the medium for conveying through fluctuating times, and changing people, an unalterable doctrine.

Next; this doctrine is not merely that of an isolated people, who speak the same language, but that of many nations who speak different tongues, though they have the same faith: they preserve amongst them, of necessity, a perpetual communion, for the preservation of which a common language is necessary; and they use that which has been originally established, and universally received amongst them from the beginning. Their mode of communion is by their sacraments, sacrifices, and public offices; Lence they are all celebrated in that common language.

Again-Their Clergy and Laity are frequently under the necessity of travelling from one country to another, and this common language enables them to cifer up and attend at the Holy Sacrifice, in whatever place they may be, with the same benefit as if they

« PreviousContinue »