sign in sign up
<<
Home , Ambrosian Rite, Directorium, Lavabo, Low Mass, Solemn Mass

Liturgy and Hygiene

The COVID-19 pandemic, and earlier public health emergencies including the outbreaks of H1N1 influenza in 2009 and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2002—2004, focus attention on questions of liturgy and hygiene.1 offers a variety of instances in which public liturgical praxis and what might best be termed ancillary supporting activities intersect with broad questions of hygiene. The natural materials used in the liturgy – including water, oil, bread, wine, fire, , salt – are loci of such discussions. As Michael Kunzler points out, “because water makes life possible and cleanses, it is also used within and apart from the liturgy […] in the form of water as an apotropaic. Fire […] purifies – e.g. in fire gold is refined, purified of dross (1 Peter 1:17). […] In ancient cultures [the use of incense] for reasons of hygiene was general and widespread. From this came the attribution of atropaic [sic] effects to incense.”2 The qualities and effects of the use of such natural materials lead to their being invested with the ability to ward off evil. This shows an ancient and holistic understanding of hygiene, seen as the preservation and promotion of health and wholeness, as a larger matter than care for the body. Hygiene is part of care for the soul: indeed, as Alan Touwaide notes, “the fathers of the often used the medical comparisons and the concepts of hygiene in presenting the message of .”3

Types of Hygiene

In the broadest sense, hygiene can include general cleanliness, and the day-to-day work which supports this: keeping vessels, fixtures, fittings, clean preserves them and, when done properly, prolongs their use. Moreover, “transferrable hygiene” is used in liturgical, domestic, commercial and other settings, with good reason: keeping -wine in good condition prevents its turning bad; dusting and polishing can add to the general appeal of a church or chapel as a place to spend time for worship, prayer, or visiting. These are as true for churches as they are for, say, restaurants, or homes. This broader notion may then have specific applications, which themselves develop as they are freighted with the significance of their liturgical context. The laundering of altar linens, for example, is necessary simply to prevent ingrained dirt damaging such cloths; it is also part of ensuring such cloths, which may be in regular use, do not become contaminated or pass on disease. And, as the example of altar linens shows, such care for hygiene can become ritualised. The first washing of used altar-linens was formerly reserved to “a

1 See, for example, the advice circulated in 2009 by the ’ Conference of England and Wales URL: https://familyofsites.bishopsconference.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2019/07/Church_Flu_A4_portrait.pdf and by the Anglican of Canterbury and York URL: http://www.anglicannews.org/news/2009/07/swine-flu-archbishops-advice-on-sharing-of-.aspx. 2 Michael KUNZLER, The Church’s Liturgy. London, 2001. 137–139. 3 Alan TOUWAIDE, Hygiene: Christian Perspectives, in William M. JOHNSTON (ed), Encyclopedia of Monasticism, 629. A brief discussion and bibliography on the relationship between the Greek goddess Hygieia and the Roman goddess Salus may be found in: Daniel OGDEN, Drakon: Dragon Myth and Serpent Cults in the Greek and Roman Worlds, Oxford, 2013. 319. or one in Major Orders”.4 Indeed, books may be written on the subject.5 The ritualization of such care remains part of the Catholic tradition.6 As we see at present, hygiene may also include specific measures taken during public health emergencies which may or be incorporated into liturgical praxis for a shorter or longer period, including requirements for spatial distancing, sanitizing of hands, and wearing of face-masks. These elements will rarely be specific to the liturgy, however, but will be measures encouraged or enforced by competent authorities with which the liturgy as well as other activities is intended to comply. There are, then, three kinds of hygiene to take into consideration with regard to the liturgy: 1) transferrable hygiene, the day-to-day practices of general cleanliness; 2) liturgical hygiene, care of particular liturgical items which may become ritualized; 3) specific hygiene, in response to public health matters. In turn, practitioners of liturgy are compelled to consider whether and how such elements may be incorporated into the liturgy.

Bread and Wine

Transferrable hygiene, in relation to the liturgy, involves such things as using wine within a reasonable period after it has been opened, as well as the fortification of Eucharistic wine (up to a specified percentage) so that it lasts longer. This is usually less of a problem when the faithful also consume the Precious Blood, since more wine is needed. When that does not happen, and if perhaps is not celebrated often in a given church, the difficulty become more acute. Keeping Eucharistic bread in a suitable container to avoid it going soft, or mouldy, or being eaten by mice or other pests, is another example. And, in relation to the bread and wine for Mass, we have an example of the intersection between transferrable and liturgical hygiene. The most extensive exploration of this is found in the document De Defectibus, which discusses various problems which might arise in the celebration of the Mass. The most important paragraphs, for our purposes, are as follows:

5. If the bread has begun to mould, but it is not corrupt, or if it is not unleavened according to the custom of the Church, the is valid but the celebrant is guilty of grave sin. 6. If the celebrant notices before the that the host is corrupt or that it is not made of wheat flour, he is to replace that host with another, make the offering at least mentally and continue from where he left off. 7. If he notices this after the Consecration, or even after having consumed the host, he is to put out another host, make the offering as above and begin from the Consecration, namely from the words Qui pridie quam pateretur. If he has not consumed the first host, he is to consume it after taking the Body and the Blood, or else reserve it somewhere with reverence. If he has already

4 William O’BRIAN, A Handbook for the Sacristan: in and sanctuary. A Guide for the Sacristan with Detailed Instructions Accompanied by Directive Schedules and Diagrams Showing how and what to Get Ready for the Carrying Out of Liturgical Functions Generally, According to the Roman Ceremonial. Catholic Research Institute, 1933. 5 Handbook for Laundering Liturgical Linens, Angelus Press, 2008. 6 See GIRM 120. consumed the first host, he is nevertheless to consume the one that he has consecrated, because the precept of completing the Sacrament is more important than the precept of fasting before Communion. 8. If this should happen after the Blood has been consumed, not only should new bread be brought, but also wine with water. The priest should first make the offering, as above, then consecrate, beginning with the words Qui pridie. Then he should immediately receive under both species and continue the Mass, so that the Sacrament will not remain incomplete and so that due order will be observed. 10. In the cases referred to in paragraphs 5-9 above, the of the Sacrament is to be omitted, and everything is to be done so as to avoid, as far as possible, any scandal or wonderment on the part of the faithful. 11. If the wine has become mere vinegar, or is completely bad, or if it has been made from sour or unripe grapes, or if so much water has been mixed with it that the wine is adulterated, there is no Sacrament. 12. If the wine has begun to turn to vinegar or to become corrupt, or if it is souring, or if it is unfermented, being made from newly pressed grapes, or if it has not been mixed with water, or if it has been mixed with rose-water or some other distillation, the Sacrament is valid, but the celebrant is guilty of grave sin. 35. If before the Consecration a fly or spider or anything else falls into the , the priest is to pour out the wine in a suitable place, put other wine into the chalice, add a little water, offer it, as above, and continue the Mass. If after the Consecration a fly or something of the kind falls into the chalice, he is to take it out, wash it with wine, burn it after the Mass is over, and throw the ashes and the wine which was used for washing into the sacrarium. 36. If something poisonous falls into the chalice after the Consecration, or something that would cause vomiting, the consecrated wine is to be poured into another chalice, with water added until the chalice is full, so that the species of wine will be dissolved; and this water is to be poured out into the sacrarium. Other wine, together with water, is to be brought and consecrated. 7 There are many other points covered by the document, but these show concern for the state of the matter, the bread and wine, both in terms of practical hygiene (if the bread is mouldy, or the wine sour), and of liturgical hygiene (how, for example, a fly falling in to the chalice is to be dealt with). Removing a fly and dropping it on the floor would have the same effect, in ridding the wine of the fully, but the way in which it is to be removed has a ritualised component, including being thrown into the sacrarium, the drain in the sacristy which is to be plumbed so as to go not into a drain but directly to earth. The modern iteration of De Defectibus is found in the General Instruction of the Roman , which reduces the very particular directions of the former to the following two paragraphs:

323. Diligent care should be taken to ensure that the bread and wine intended for the are kept in a perfect state of conservation: that is, that the wine does not turn to vinegar nor the bread spoil or become too hard to be broken easily

7 , De Defectibus. 324. If the priest notices after the consecration or as he receives Communion that not wine but only water was poured into the chalice, he pours the water into some container, then pours wine with water into the chalice and consecrates it. He says only the part of the institution narrative related to the consecration of the chalice, without being obliged to consecrate the bread again. If such problems as envisaged by De defectibus should happen, recourse can be had to the developed tradition to find out appropriate measures to deal with them.

Case Study: Washing of Hands

Washing hands has been repeatedly spoken of as one of the most important ways to reduce the transmission of Coronavirus. There are various points during the liturgy at which the celebrant is to wash his hands in various ways: classically, in preparation, with an associated prayer;8 at the Preparation of the Gifts, or ; after Holy Communion, as part of the purification of the vessels. There may be a further washing after Mass. In the Extraordinary Form of the Roman , when a celebrates Mass, there is a further washing of hands before the Offertory. Is the washing of hands at the Offertory an act of hygiene, of pure symbolism, or something in between? Comparing the in three of the , we find the following: Form “Then the Priest, standing at the side of the altar, washes his hands, saying quietly: Wash me, O Lord, from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.”9 This is amplified in the General Instruction: “the Priest washes his hands standing at the side of the altar and, as the minister pours the water, says quietly, Lava me, Domine (Wash me, O Lord).”10 Extraordinary Form “Sacerdos lavat manus, dicens: Ps 35, 6-12 inter innocentes.”11 The Ritus Servandus, however, adds “lavat manus, idest, extremitates digitorum pollicis et indicis, dicens psalmum: Lavabo.”12 Divine Worship contains two forms of the Offertory. Form I: “The Priest, standing at the side of the altar, washes his hands, saying in a low voice: Psalm 26:6-12.”13 Form II: “Then the Priest, standing at the side of the altar, washes his hands, saying quietly: Wash me throughly, O Lord, from my wickedness and

8 Da, Domine, virtutem manibus meis ad abstergendam omnem maculam ut sine pollutione mentis et corporis valeam tibi servire. Give virtue to my hands, O Lord, that being cleansed from all stain I might serve you with purity of mind and body. 9 28 in: The Roman Missal, English Translation according to the Third Typical Edition, London 2010. 565. Hereafter RM2010. The priest is also directed to wipe, “or if necessary, wash” his hands should a fragment of the host adhere to the fingers. General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 278 RM2010, 90. Hereafter GIRM. 10 GIRM 145. RM2010, 66. 11 Ordo Missae 1039. Missale Romanum 1962, 221. Hereafter MR1962. The psalm is recited with the Gloria Patri except during Masses de Tempore in and Masses of the Dead. 12 Ritus Servandus VII.6, MR1962, lix. 13 Divine Worship: The Missal in accordance with the Roman Rit,. London, 2015. Order of Mass 572. (Hereafter DW). cleanse me from my sin.”14 Here the and text are the same as the Ordinary Form, though the psalm is in the Coverdale version. The Rubrical Directory adds no further guidance.

Whichever liturgy is used, the Order of Mass directs the washing of the hands, accompanied by the given text. In the Extraordinary Form, however, it is suggested that “manus” does not in fact mean hands, but should be understood as the fingertips. To understand the nuances here, and to look to their effect in practice, I will briefly examine the history of the lavabo in the Catholic and Anglican traditions, looking at how it has been interpreted. The Priest in the Offertory of the Mass, a paper of the Office for the Liturgical Celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff, describes the lavabo thus: The priest’s washing of his hands does not represent a universal tradition (in and Spain it is not met with until almost the end of the 15th century, while is it was introduced in the “Ordines” that came from Rome toward the end of the 9th century). In Rome it had an entirely practical function, even though later it also acquired a symbolic value.15 Historical Missals from different traditions shows the variety of forms taken.16 William Maskell’s “Ancient Liturgy of the ” gives the rubrics of various pre- English Uses. Variations of “sacerdos lavat manus”, “the priest washes his hands”, are widespread at the Offertory, and only hands are referred to.17 At the post-communion ablutions, there are references both to hands and to fingertips.18 Elsewhere, the classical has a lavabo during the of the Mass.19 After the , the Missal presents: washing of the hands at the preparation before Mass; washing at the lavabo; purification after Communion.20 In the Pontifical Mass, at the Throne or the Faldstool, another washing takes place before the prelate goes to the altar for the offertory. There may be a further, entirely practical, washing of the hands after the are removed. I have already noted the apparent discrepancy between the Ordo Missae and the Ritus Servandus at the Offertory. Before looking at what commentators and rubricists have said on this, I will examine the development of the tradition within which led, over time, to the approaches to handwashing now present in Divine Worship.

14 DW 574. 15 Office for the Liturgical Celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff, The Priest in the Offertory of the Mass. URL: http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/details/ns_lit_doc_20100216_sac-offertorio_en.html [Accessed 15 May 2020]. Hereafter OLCSP. 16 The 1474 Missale Romanum, not especially forthcoming on rubrics, has “Quando sacerdos lauat manus dicit. Lauabo inter innocentes manus meas. Usque in finem cum gloria patri.” Missale Romanum Medolani, 1474, Vol. 1. Robert LIPPE (ed), London 1899. 201 17 William MASKELL, The Ancient Liturgy of the Church of England, London 1844, 28—29. 18 MASKELL, Ancient Liturgy, 62—65. Sarum and Hereford have fingertips, followed by a subsequent handwashing at the . Bangor has hands only. 19 See H. JENNER, “Ambrosian Liturgy and Rite” in: The , New York 1907. URL: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01394a.htm [Accessed 15 May 2020]. The reformed Ambrosian Rite, with its variety of Eucharistic Prayers, states simply that, when incense is used, “Quindi, se è necessario, il sacerdote si lava le mani” [italics in the original]. See: the Ambrosian General Instruction, 51. URL: https://www.unipiams.org/en/?id=100 [Accessed 15 May 2020]. 20 This does not include washing of hands specified after ceremonies such as the distribution of candles at Candlemas, ashes on , or palms on Palm Sunday. Divine Worship and the Anglican Tradition In the Book of Prayer (BCP) tradition, references to the lavabo or to other handwashing are largely absent, and this has been so from the beginning. The offertory in BCP1549 contains no such directions, nor do any of its officially-published successors down to the present day. Lancelot Andrewes (1555-1626) revived the lavabo in his private chapel, along with other pre-Reformation practices including a table placed “altarwise”, candles, and wafer bread.21 This was of course “unofficial”, and so, where Jeremy Taylor’s Communion Office of 1658 is much more explicit about manual actions, it contains no rubrics for handwashing, and is not constrained to do so by official liturgy. Taylor does, however, refer to the symbolism of handwashing at some length, even while furnishing no opportunity for it actually to happen.22 Development of lavabo practices in England and beyond during the 19th century took two main routes. The “Romanizing” of Anglican liturgy in the various “Missal” traditions took wholesale rubrics and texts from the Roman Missal.23 This provides much of what is now present in Divine Worship – this has been taken to its logical conclusion in that the Ordinary Form’s Offertory is given as the second form. Counter to this, and often in polemical tension with it, was the approach taken most notably by Percy Dearmer (1867-1936), set out in the Parson’s Handbook.24 In his description of The Communion, he does not mention a preparatory handwashing before vesting.25 Instead, at the preparation of the chalice soon afterwards, the priest washes his hands.26 After the offertory act, and the censing if it takes place, “the priest goes to the south horn of the altar and washes his hands.” A “basin and ewer” are used for this. Elsewhere, he notes that “for economy a plain glass bowl can be bought and a glass jug to stand in it. This ewer might be rather larger than the .”27 The towels, he says, is “generally made much too small”; it should be “about 3ft long by 12 or 13 in wide” (90cm x 30cm).28 During this, “the priest does not say a psalm”, though practices from pre-Reformation Uses are mentioned in a footnote. After the communion, the “thumbs and forefingers” only are washed.29 The BCP tradition as seen by Dearmer distinguishes between handwashing, and that of the fingers only. Various aspects of what might

21 Bryan SPINKS, , Ceremonies and the Stuart Divines: Sacramental Theology and Liturgy in England and Scotland, 1603-1662, Aldershot 2002. 47. 22 In a preparatory prayer: “pity me, O God, and wash away all my sins”; among a concatenation of psalm-verses termed a “Eucharistic ”: “I will wash my hands in innocence: and so will I compass thine Altar, O Lord”; and in the introduction to the Confession, “But first cleanse your hands and purify your hearts”. Jeremy TAYLOR, An Office or Order for the Administration of the Holy Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, 1658. URL: http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/Taylor_Communion.htm [Accessed 15 May 2020]. 23 See such texts as JOHN PURCHAS, Directorium Anglicanum, London 1858; and Ritual Notes, Oxford 1894. Both give simply the Roman Missal’s rubrics for the lavabo, translated into English. 24 Percy DEAMER, The Parson’s Handbook, London 1931 (12th edition). 25 Percy DEARMER, Parson’s Handbook, 306. 26 DEARMER, Parson’s Handbook, 309. 27 DEARMER, Parson’s Handbook, 158. 28 DEARMER, Parson’s Handbook, 155. 29 DEARMER, Parson’s Handbook, 352. be called the Western Tradition are admitted, others excluded, such as the lavabo psalm or its equivalent. However, the ewer and basin, and size of the towels, appears to demand an ample washing at the Offertory according to the Parson’s Handbook style.

The Roman Tradition in Commentaries and Rubrical Works Rubricists and commentators in the Roman tradition generally take the lavabo to refer to the fingertips only. John Heigham’s “Devout Exposition of the Holy Mass” gives five reasons for the lavabo being as it is, typical of the approach taken by liturgical commentators in the classical tradition.30 First, it relates to “the model and example of our Saviour Himself”, who washed the disciples’ feet before “He consecrated His Body and Blood, or communicated the same to His Apostles.” Second, and St mention the lavabo, so it is of venerable antiquity. Third, it is a mystical admonition to the potential communicant “to cleanse his conscience, presenting himself at this holy table, if he desire truly to feel the effects thereof to the health of his soul.” Fourth, it is an aid to the purity and piety of the priest himself. Fifth, “he washeth not his whole hands, but only the tips or ends of his fingers, to signify that out greater faults and grosser offences ought first to be cleansed elsewhere, to wit, in confession.”31 Rubricists such as Zualdi and Fortescue concur that the fingertips are envisaged, without going into any mystical significance.32 Not all commentators make this distinction, however. Prosper Guéranger’s discussion of the lavabo, in his Explanation of the Prayers and Ceremonies of Holy Mass, begins with the practicality that “the Priest has just been using the , which always soils the hands, because of the smoke.” He then turns to the way in which it “embodies a mystery”, and touches on reasons consonant with Heigham’s: that the priest should “purify himself yet more and more”, and that this can be related to the washing of the Apostles’ feet at the . Guéranger notes the Ambrosian rite’s different position, and concludes that, though it has the same meaning, “the moment chosen for this rite by the Roman Church, ever discreet in all her decisions, is preferable to that adopted by the Ambrosian Liturgy.” He goes on to comment on the psalm itself, and notes that “The Psalm is continued to the end, so as to allow the Priest ample time for washing and wiping his hands.”33 For Guéranger, this is both a symbolic and a real washing.

30 John HEIGHAM, A Devout Exposition of the Holy Mass, Second Edition of 1622, London 1876. 31 HEIGHAM, Devout Exposition. 181-182. 3232 Zualdi: “He washes the extremities of the thumb and forefinger of both hands, and then dries them.” Felix ZUALDI (ed. M. O’CALLAGHAN, rev. J. S. SHEEHY), The Sacred Ceremonies of , Dublin 1940. 90. Fortescue: “the server pours water over the thumb and forefinger of each [hand]. Adrian FORTESCUE, The Ceremonies of the Roman Rite Described, London 1918. 51 When incense is used, the hands are washed “as at Low Mass”, FORTESCUE, Ceremonies. 141. A 1950s commentary adds that the lavabo is “a practical necessity […] in when incense is used. But its significance is chiefly symbolic”: John F. SULLIVAN, Externals of the (School Edition), London 1956. 108. 33 Prosper GUÉRANGER, Explanation of the Prayers and Ceremonies of Holy Mass, Taken from notes made at the conferences of Dom Prosper Guéranger, of Solemnes, Translated from the French by Rev. Dom Laurence SHEPHERD, Stanbrook 1885. URL: http://www.liturgialatina.org/benedictine/holymass.htm#lavabo [Accessed 15 May 2020].

Liturgical Reform in the Twentieth Century Anglican liturgies which used the lavabo did so not because their rubrics demanded it, but because the celebrants wanted to. The extent to which the Alternative Service Book and Common Worship influenced Divine Worship’s rubrics is marginal, but it serves as a useful case of parallel development. One handbook suggests that because it “stands almost as an enacted version of the for Purity”, such that “the congregation can associate themselves with it as they witness it”, it should be “done visibly and generously”, as a “washing of the hands […] with the water seen to flow.”34 Meanwhile, in liturgy, the OLSCP commentary notes that “some have proposed and continue to propose the suppression of this rite. We do not share this idea, because we believe that it has a clear catechetical value and, moreover, renewed of the priest, who in that moment is disposing himself to the eucharistic act and is preparing himself for it.”35 Annibale Bugnigi’s memoirs indicate that, during the period of liturgical revision, “some thought the Lavabo to be superfluous: ‘It should be kept only in Masses in which the celebrant must really dirty his hands, for example, by using incense. Eliminate it from other Masses.’”36 In the end, it was retained, though the psalm was drastically shortened. In the Ordinary Form today, two things are noteworthy, summarised well in the General Instruction: “Then the Priest washes his hands at the side of the altar, a rite in which the desire for interior purification finds expression”.37 First, this is to be a real washing of the hands. Second, this is also a symbolic washing, and though the commentaries of Heigham and Guéranger relate the symbolism primarily to the priest, the GIRM, as with Heigham, encourages those present at the Mass to participate in this symbolism. Not only the priest must strive after purity. The OLCSP commentary contains the ideas of “interior purification” and “catechetical value”, as well as an appeal to antiquity (Tertullian is mentioned here, too). Curiously, a note of conflict found in preconciliar commentators is repeated here: Heigham saw the lavabo as symbolic in part because the hands were not washed, but only the fingertips, whereas Guéranger points to the “ample time” for an actual washing. GIRM implies nothing less than a real washing of the hands, but the OLCSP commentary states: “Currently, the lavabo is an entirely symbolic gesture, as can be deduced from the formula that goes along with it, and as can also be seen from the fact that, in general, all that get washed are the tips of the priest’s fingers and thumb, those that touch the sacred Host.”38

Washing of Hands: Hygiene, Symbolism, Sign

34 Benjamin GORDON-TAYLOR and Simon JONES, Celebrating the Eucharist, London 2005. 65. 35 OLCSP, The Priest in the Offertory of the Mass. The index to the articles, which is difficult to find on the Vatican website, is here: http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/details/ns_liturgy_index-studi_en.html [Accessed 15 May 2020]. 36 Annibale BUGNINI (trans. by Matthew J. O’CONNELL), The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1978, Collegeville 1990. 366. 37 GIRM 76. 38 OLCSP, The Priest in the Offertory. Though the Extraordinary Form Ordo Missae indicates a full handwashing, this is curtailed by rubrics elsewhere. And, though the Ordinary Form, and its analogues in Anglican liturgy, seem to demand a full washing, the opportunity for this is arguably curtailed by the severe shortening of the accompanying psalm. If a full handwashing, retaining the symbolism to which so many commentators point, were really desired, perhaps the reformers of the liturgy might have considered retaining the full lavabo psalm, and omitting the rubrics referring to the washing of thumbs and fingertips only. Indeed, the “elimination of inconsistencies” was to be “one of the specific tasks of the reform itself”: and yet, I suggest, an inconsistency remains here.39 In Divine Worship Form II, the Ordinary Form’s directions would seem to be followed. In Form I, however, there is no need to restrict the lavabo to fingertips only, and the full duration of the psalm could be taken as the opportunity for a real handwashing, with its accompanying mystagogy. It is true that, at Masses with incense, the lavabo provides a proper opportunity for cleansing the hands. However, in the liturgy, practical matters and spiritual interpretations have always gone hand- in-hand, and there is no need to reduce something to which both Catholic and Anglican writers have attributed significant worth to a perfunctory gesture. Divine Worship allows for this fuller sign, and its practice here could profitably inform other of the Church.

Specific Hygiene: Coronavirus Directives

Various principles are involved in reducing the transmission of Coronavirus, including hygiene, social or spatial distancing, and reducing time spent in situations of possible contagion. The liturgical directives issued during this period attempt to deal with these together. The Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales issued its guidelines at the beginning of July, for Mass and for Confession.40 These are interpretations of the UK Government’s guidelines for England.41 could be accepted by individual diocesan bishops and their equivalents, who ultimately bear the responsibility, as moderators of the liturgy, for what goes on in their own jurisdictions.42 The guidelines are a mixture of reminders about good practice, directions to help with parts of the liturgy that may be optional, and new rules for the specific situation. The first talks about washing linens at a hot temperature, and about the traditional use of the pall (the square cloth, sometimes containing a piece of cardboard or buckram, which sits on top of the chalice) and the (traditionally a covered, chalice-like vessel; more modern ciboria are

39 BUGNINI, The Reform of the Liturgy, 116. 40URL: https://www.cbcew.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/06/Guidance-Acts-of-Worship-Mass-V6-290620- 1014.pdf and URL: https://www.cbcew.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/06/Guidance-Acts-of-Worship- Confession-V4-290620-1013.pdf [Accessed 2 July 2020]. See Appendix 1. 41 URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-guidance-for-the-safe-use-of-places-of-worship-from-4- july/covid-19-guidance-for-the-safe-use-of-places-of-worship-from-4-july [Accessed 2 July 2020]. 42The bishop is “the first steward of the mysteries of God in the particular Church entrusted to him, is the moderator, promoter and guardian of her whole liturgical life.” (Redemptionis Sacramentum, no. 19); the bishop is, "within the limits of his competence, to set forth liturgical norms in his Diocese, by which all are bound." Code of Canon Law 838 §4. sometimes fashioned as wide dishes, which are directed to be covered). The second advocates the omission of the offertory and the prayers of the faithful. These are both optional, but highly encouraged at Sunday Masses. They do not need, however, to be present. Likewise the sign of peace can always be omitted at the discretion of the celebrant. While it is common for it to be shared at Mass, this is a matter of custom rather than necessity. The consumption of the Precious Blood is encouraged in certain circumstances in the General Instruction, but is not automatically envisaged always to be offered to the congregation at Mass, albeit this is common in many places. There is a rather unexpected rite for Holy Communion, in which the celebrant may hold up a Host before the whole congregation, say “The ”, to which the reply is “Amen”, and then distribute Holy Communion in silence. Alternatively, Holy Communion may be distributed immediately after Mass, a practice long discouraged, indeed, actively reprobated – until now. In order to remove further possibilities for transmission, sermons and are to be ‘brief’. Congregational singing is not allowed. Using servers, readers, etc. is made difficult. Face coverings or masks are not mandatory. However, present government guidelines allow for a distance of two metres where no mitigation is in place (such as masks), or “one metre plus” if masks are worn.43 Two metres remains, at the time of writing, the recommended distance.

Conclusions

These guidelines are intended to be temporary. They do highlight, however, that certain practices which may be thought of as “how we do things” are not absolutes, parts of the Mass which may never be omitted (the exchange of the Sign of Peace, for example). They also propose practices which were formerly almost universal, and which remain widespread throughout the Church, even if they have fallen into disuse in some places (the traditional construction of the ciborium, for example). We are also compelled to examine our ideas about participation actuosa, actual, or active, participation in the liturgy. Will the Mass as celebrated under these conditions be in some way lacking because our usual ways of interaction with what goes on are altered? It will certainly be different, but it may be that an enforced focus on our inward dispositions and attitudes bears good fruit. If we are to participate in the Mass without some parts which are optional in any case, or with temporary changes involving those which are not optional, we might rediscover an interior relationship with other parts of the Mass, or in our focus on those parts which we are compelled to do differently. In time, many things will return to normal, but we might be less inclined to take some of them for granted, if we have done so until now.

Appendix 1 – CBCEW Guidelines for Mass

43 It is not quite clear to me whether this applies to both parties in a conversation or interaction, or only one. Only those necessary should be in the sacristy before Mass. The celebrant, sacristan, or server should prepare everything for the celebration of Mass with care. Single-use gloves should be worn at this stage. Particular care should be taken over the preparation of the elements for Holy Communion. The altar breads for distribution to the people should be placed into a clean covered ciborium (a pall can be placed over a dish ). Sufficient altar breads for each celebration should be placed within at this stage. A separate ciborium/paten should be prepared for each person who will distribute Holy Communion. The cover of the ciborium or dish paten should not be removed until the time for distribution of Holy Communion. The priest should prepare his own chalice and paten with a large altar bread for consecration. The chalice should have a purificator and a pall. The purificator should be used only once and then laundered. He should prepare the cruets of wine and water and his own bowl for the lavabo. Again, the towel should be used only once and then laundered. All hymnbooks and missals and other published material normally used by the congregation and not meant for single use should be removed from the church. The stoups should be dry. Until further instruction is given on singing, there should be no congregational singing at Mass.

Any worship aids (missalettes etc.) should be for single use and taken with the user when the Mass ends. They should not be left in the church at the end of Mass. The priest, and if present, and server, should remain socially distant at all times on the sanctuary during the celebration of Mass. This is particularly important at the (for the deacon’s blessing), the Preparation of the Gifts, and during the Liturgy of the Eucharist. Readers should be supplied with single-use gloves and should avoid touching the microphones or the during the Liturgy of the Word, apart from page turning. The should be brief, to minimise the time that people are congregated in the church building. The Prayer of the Faithful should be omitted. There should be no offertory procession of the gifts of bread and wine to the altar; the priest should have these on the or the altar before Mass begins. There should be no sharing of the collection plate or bag. People should be encouraged to make their donation to the church online or via standing order. Plates or other collecting boxes for cash offerings should be placed at the entrances and exits of churches, and this should be overseen by stewards. The collection should be consolidated into plastic bags, sealed, placed into a secure location and left for 72 hours before counting. Counters should wear gloves when doing this task and the area should be well ventilated and cleaned before and afterwards.

Members of the congregation should not exchange the sign of peace. After the prayer and its response “Behold the Lamb of God...Lord I am not worthy,” the priest should hold up the Host to the Congregation and say audibly “The Body of Christ” to which the people should respond “Amen.” In the same way, he elevates the chalice and says, “The ” and again the people respond “Amen.” The priest should receive Holy Communion under both kinds using his own Host and Chalice. The priest will need to explain this to the congregation at this point. There are two options for the distribution of Holy Communion. In both cases, because the people have already acclaimed the presence of the Lord, at the Priest’s Communion, the People’s Communion is distributed in silence with no dialogue between minister and communicant.

•Option 1Once the priest has received Holy Communion, he should cleanse his hands with alcohol sanitiser before opening the pre-prepared ciborium for the Communion of the people. If there is a deacon assisting, or any other Minister of Holy Communion, they should similarly cleanse their hands and then receive communion from the priest from the people’s ciborium, and under one kind only. They should then cleanse their hands again before receiving their ciborium from which they remove the covering or pall if it is still in place. At the place where communion is to be distributed, a physical barrier should be placed, for example a prie-dieu (kneeler on the priest’s side) or small table to socially distance the priest distributing Holy Communion from communicants. Communion must be given silently in the hand only, with the communicant standing, and avoiding any physical contact. People should wait in their pews until instructed to move forward to the priest for Holy Communion by the Stewards, always aware of the regulations on social distancing in the orderly queue. When they approach the priest, they should do so with arms at “full stretch” so that there is a good distance between the priest and the communicant. Their hands, palms upwards, one of top of the other, should be extended as flatly as possible. Having received Holy Communion, communicants should move back to their pews in an orderly manner. Once Communion is complete, the priest returns to the altar and places the unused Hosts, without touching them, into the Tabernacle and he cleanses the sacred vessels himself in the usual way.

•Option 2 The priest receives Holy Communion as described and immediately cleanses his paten and chalice. He then holds a reverent silence before the Prayer after Communion, giving the Blessing and . At this point, the other Ministers of Holy Communion who will assist the priest come forward, cleanse their hands and receive Holy Communion under one kind. They then move to the points for distribution and communicants are stewarded forward in an orderly manner to receive Holy Communion as above, and then immediately leave the Church. The remaining is placed into the Tabernacle and the vessels cleansed in the usual way.

The procession from the sanctuary at the end of the Mass should ensure good social distancing. The sanctuary party should return to the sacristy after Mass. If the wish to greet the people, they should remove their vestments first and not engage in any physical contact with parishioners, who should be encouraged to return home and not remain. The celebrant should place the used altar linens into a receptacle for laundry. All sacred vessels should be washed in hot water with a little neutral soap and dried completely before storing. Any discarded printed materials should be removed and bagged for disposal. The church should be closed after the Mass has finished in order to clean the space according to the Bishops’ Conference guidelines on individual prayer. If there is cause for concern regarding the possible contamination of clerical vestments worn during the celebration of Mass, these should be washed in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions, using the warmest water setting allowed for the fabric and allowing time for them to dry completely.