Re-Reading Sacrosanctum Concilium: Article 78

Vatican website translation:

78. Matrimony is normally to be celebrated within the Mass, after the reading of the gospel and the homily, and before “the prayer of the faithful.” The prayer for the bride, duly amended to remind both spouses of their equal obligation to remain faithful to each other, may be said in the mother tongue.

But if the sacrament of matrimony is celebrated apart from Mass, the epistle and gospel from the nuptial Mass are to be read at the beginning of the rite, and the blessing should always be given to the spouses.

Latin text:

78. Matrimonium ex more intra Missam celebretur, post lectionem Evangelii et homiliam, ante “orationem fidelium”. Oratio super sponsam, ita opportune emendata ut aequalia officia mutuae fidelitatis utriusque sponsi inculcet, dici potest lingua vernacula.

Si vero Sacramentum Matrimonii sine Missa celebratur, Epistola et Evangelium Missae pro sponsis legantur in initio ritus et benedictio sponsis semper impertiatur.

Slavishly literal translation:

78. By custom, Matrimony is celebrated within the Mass, after the reading of the Gospel and the homily, before the “prayer of the faithful.” The prayer over the bride, opportunely so amended that it might inculcate the equal responsibilities of mutual faithfulness upon each spouse, could be said in the vernacular language.

If however the Sacrament of Matrimony is celebrated without Mass, the Epistle and Gospel of the Mass for spouses is read at the beginning of the rite and the blessing for the spouses may always be imparted.

 

Having explicitly stated in art. 77 that the principles of liturgical inculturation already provided for in arts. 37-40 may be applied to the marriage rites of the Roman Rite, the Council Fathers now turn to certain explicit reforms.

If I am reading the pre-Vatican II Rituale Romanum correctly, the Marriage Ceremony proper consists of: 1) the priest’s questioning of the spouses to elicit their mutual consent; 2) the joining of the spouses’ right hands; 3) a declaration that the priest joins them in matrimony (!) in the name of the Triune God [“Ego conjungo vos in matrimonium. In nomine Patris, et Filii, (+) et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.” / “I join you in matrimony. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.”], with a sprinkling of holy water; 4) a blessing of a single ring to be given to the bride (!) through a series of versicles and responses and a collect anticipating the content of the nuptial blessing [“Bene (+) dic, Domine, anulum hunc, quem nos in tuo nomine benedi (+) cimus: ut, quae cum gestaverit, fidelitatem integram suo sponso tenens, in pace et voluntate tua permaneat, atque in mutua caritate semper vivat. Per Christum Dominum nostrum.” / “Bless, Lord, this ring, which we bless in your name: so that when she wears it, bearing total faithfulness to her spouse, she might remain in your peace and will and always live in mutual charity. Through Christ our Lord.”], with a sprinkling of holy water on the ring; 5) a placing of the ring on the ring finger of the bride’s left hand by the groom, after he has received the blessed ring from the priest; and 6) the priest reciting a series of versicles and responses (including Kyrie eleison, Christe eleison, Kyrie eleison and the Lord’s Prayer), concluding with a collect seeking God’s assistance for the newly married couple.

Apparently, if Mass was to solemnize the occasion, the nuptial Mass followed this ceremony. The two most noticeable additions to that Order of Mass were: 1) the Nuptial Blessing (which petitions God solely for the bride, that she may be faithful to her husband and dutiful in her care for the home); and 2) a blessing of the couple before the last blessing of the congregation.

It is in this context that the Council Fathers called for: 1) the Marriage Ceremony to be placed normatively within a celebration of Mass, after the gospel and homily, but before the to-be-restored “prayer of the faithful;” 2) the Nuptial Blessing to be re-cast so that it would become a prayer articulating the mutual responsibilities of the couple rather than being simply a prayer for the bride; 3) that even when the Marriage Ceremony is celebrated outside of Mass, a Liturgy of the Word take place before the ceremony; and 4) that the use of the revised Nuptial Blessing (which had already been permitted by apostolic indult in some areas when the wedding Mass was not celebrated) be appended to the ceremony.

It is interesting to note that the Council Fathers apparently assumed that the single Epistle and Gospel assigned to the Nuptial Mass in the pre-Vatican II Missale Romanum would continue to be the scriptural proclamations. Interestingly a much more extensive set of readings (Old Testament, New Testament non-Gospel, Responsorial Psalm, Gospel Verse, and Gospel) appears as the Lectionary for Matrimony when the Ordo Celebrandi Matrimonium appeared in 1972.

Pray Tell readers may wish to discuss: 1) how the reformed rite of Matrimony has been received in the areas in which they worship; 2) what further inculturation of these rites might be appropriate for those areas; and 3) the changes that appeared in the 1991 editio typica altera of the Ordo Celebrandi Matrimonium which we are promised we will see in official English translation soon.

Michael Joncas

Ordained in 1980 as a priest of the Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis, MN, Fr. (Jan) Michael Joncas holds degrees in English from the (then) College of St. Thomas in St. Paul, MN, and in liturgical studies from the University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN and the Pontificio Istituto Liturgico of the Ateneo S. Anselmo in Rome. He has served as a parochial vicar, a campus minister, and a parochial administrator (pastor). He is the author of six books and more than two hundred fifty articles and reviews in journals such as Worship, Ecclesia Orans, and Questions Liturgiques. He has composed and arranged more than 300 pieces of liturgical music. He has recently retired as a faculty member in the Theology and Catholic Studies departments and as Artist in Residence and Research Fellow in Catholic Studies at the University of St. Thomas, St. Paul, Minnesota.

Please leave a reply.

Comments

11 responses to “Re-Reading Sacrosanctum Concilium: Article 78”

  1. Peter Haydon

    Thank you Father for giving the context.
    It might be that the Mass, after the ceremony was a bit of a let down for the couple. By having their bit in the middle it switched from being a Mass, at which they were present, to a Mass built around them.
    I wonder if this brought it more closely into line with the Anglican services of the day.

    Reply
    1. Paul R. Schwankl

      @Peter Haydon – comment #1:
      Moving the rite of marriage did have the benefit of making couples feel more valued in the ceremony, but I think this change was part of a bigger picture. In the wake of the Council, a principle emerged that we carry out the sacraments only after we have heard the Word. Mass and ordinations already had that structure, but I’m quite sure that for the other five sacraments it was an innovation. I think it was a very good one.

      Reply
  2. Mgr Bruce Harbert

    The Nuptial Blessing also included a prayer that the Bride be ‘fruitful in offspring’. The text has been revised to include both parties in this petition.

    Reply
    1. Karl Liam Saur

      @Mgr Bruce Harbert – comment #2:
      Catching up to the discovery of modern reproductive science during the Enlightenment.

      Reply
  3. Todd Flowerday

    If only the sensibility could catch up in am additional, and possibly more important way, to be fruitful in a generativity expressive of Christ’s love and mission.

    My wife and I do not have biological offspring, and we chose to place our sacramental celebration in the middle of Sunday Mass. We don’t feel in any way impoverished. But I suspect that most clergy and engaged couples would not see it that way.

    Reply
  4. Ben Yanke

    I think it’s a pity that the exhortation before marriage was ommited. It was a beautiful text, and I plan on having it used in my wedding, even if I do get married in the ordinary form.

    Reply
    1. Paul R. Schwankl

      @Ben Yanke – comment #5:
      I haven’t heard that exhortation (“Most sacred and most serious”; http://www3.nd.edu/~afreddos/marriageinstruction.htm) since the era, now fifty years past, when I was a Mass server at weddings. Ben, I hope you extend suitable thanks to whoever put you on to it. It’s gorgeous (though the author is, annoyingly, anonymous). Although scripted, it’s better than many of the homilies produced by the officiants themselves. (I shall not soon forget the priest who recited “Casey at the Bat” as a wedding homily.)

      Reply
  5. Alan Johnson

    we only have a couple of weddings a year, and quite often the couple already have children. and they are often bridesmaids or pageboys.
    So our priest sticks “continue to” in this question
    “Are you ready to accept children lovingly from God and bring them up according to the law of Christ and his Church?”

    Reply
  6. Joshua Vas

    OCM2 made some good changes, particularly with regard to the celebration of marriage between a Catholic and an unbaptized person, and celebrations presided over by laypersons – both of which have seen an increase in the past decades. Personally, I also prefer the standardisation of the rites along the typical ‘Celebration of the Word’ pattern. The previous (and current English) edition preserves some peculiarities such as the Nuptial Blessing concluding the Prayers of the Faithful in certain forms of the celebration (a feature still found in various places such as the Rite of Candidacy). OCM2 reverts to a more standard and (in my opinion) logical sequence, with the Intercessions followed by the Lord’s Prayer and then the Nuptial Blessing.

    One thing that does not seem to have seen much discussion for our new English translation is whether the positioning of the Nuptial Blessing after the Lord’s Prayer in the Rite during Mass should continue. The position seems to be a medieval inheritance, as a place where various supplicatory prayers and rites were placed for added solemnity. Maybe some people have thoughts on the appropriateness of the position today? It does not seem however, that there will be a similar request as some (e.g. Germans) have to optionally place it with the other rites after the Homily.

    Reply
    1. Paul R. Schwankl

      @Joshua Vas – comment #7:
      I’ve long wondered whether there was some good reason, and not just how far back the practice goes, for placing the nuptial blessing at Mass after the Our Father instead of having it during the wedding rite, as when there is no Eucharist. But if it’s moved, I’d vote for having the “universal” prayer, as encompassing more than just the couple, come after the blessing rather than before.

      Reply
  7. Joshua Vas

    An interesting question in terms of adaptions is what to do when it is decided to include rites that may seem out of tune with modern sensibilities – and in fact, at face value, preserve meanings that are incompatible with the vision of Christian marriage and the equality of the spouses. For example, in many places influenced by the Iberian tradition there is the symbolic payment of money, the draping of the veil, etc. The prayers over these items often point to a re-interpreted understanding of the symbols, but in my experience that has not stopped many from interpreting them (willingly) in the older sense.

    Reply

Posted

in

, ,

by

Michael Joncas

Tags:

Discover more from Home

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading