Consecration, Bells, and the Euch. Prayer

[StatCrux]

So I had a discussion with my priest today and some interesting ideas were raised. I was asking questions about “in persona Christi” and other such things, and the conversation turned to the TLM. I happen to like that bells are rung during the consecration during the TLM. (Side note: I think my eyeballs would sooner fly out of my head before I hear bells at any of the NO Masses I attend.) Father explained that bells were used during the TLM to alert the congregation that the consecration took place because the congregation probably couldn’t hear the priest nor understand Latin. It was used to make sure everyone was on the same page.

This process of drawing very special attention this part of the Mass and to “HOC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM” developed over he centuries to the idea the consecration occurred at these “magic words.” He argued that the idea was in a sense ridiculous and unhelpful to clip away the entire prayer to the Father and condense out of it two necessary sentences. He argued that the entire Eucharistic Prayer is necessary.

He clarified that the words of consecration are necessary but they aren’t really the only part. So it made me think maybe ringing bells isn’t such a great idea. Ringing bells during NO might continue that way of thinking. At the same time, I think the bells cultivate a greater sense of mystery and reverence (especially important in todays world).

Your thoughts?

 

[Hijikata]

When I was an Alter Boy and served in the Novus Ordo Mass we would always ring the bells during the Consecration.

 

[NPC]

I too happen to think that the bells at the consecration cultivate a greater sense of mystery & reverence as you say, StatCrux. Even in our cathedral the bell is rarely rung at the consecration, and I often feel there’s something missing (obviously the realisation that Christ has become present on the altar is the most important thing) - when one hears a bell ring, it draws their attention to something; similarly at Mass when the Sanctus bell is rung it is a good way to remind people of the most solemn part of the Mass which is about to begin. In fact, while I remember little of my Mass-going as a young child, what I do remember is the sound of the consecration bell ringing and realising that something important and mysterious was happening! So bring back the bells is what I say, and more incense too for that matter!

 

[SenorBells]

So I had a discussion with my priest today and some interesting ideas were raised. I was asking questions about “in persona Christi” and other such things, and the conversation turned to the TLM. I happen to like that bells are rung during the consecration during the TLM. (Side note: I think my eyeballs would sooner fly out of my head before I hear bells at any of the NO Masses I attend.) Father explained that bells were used during the TLM to alert the congregation that the consecration took place because the congregation probably couldn’t hear the priest nor understand Latin. It was used to make sure everyone was on the same page.

This process of drawing very special attention this part of the Mass and to “HOC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM” developed over he centuries to the idea the consecration occurred at these “magic words.” He argued that the idea was in a sense ridiculous and unhelpful to clip away the entire prayer to the Father and condense out of it two necessary sentences. He argued that the entire Eucharistic Prayer is necessary.

He clarified that the words of consecration are necessary but they aren’t really the only part. So it made me think maybe ringing bells isn’t such a great idea. Ringing bells during NO might continue that way of thinking. At the same time, I think the bells cultivate a greater sense of mystery and reverence (especially important in todays world).

Your thoughts?

Your priest is mistaken about the origin of sanctus bells. The primary reason to ring them is as a means of giving thanks to God.

Their original use also stems from (they were tower bells not hand-held bells) using them to signify to those not attending the Mass (the ill, those working, those enslaved and incarcerated) that something miraculous was taking place.

The more people claim the bells are a “reminder”, the stronger the argument becomes of doing away with their use – as this suggests an altar server is more aware of the timing and content of the Mass than those in the pews.

With regard to the consecration keep one thing in mind. It’s either bread and wine or the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ – there is no intermediate state so the transformation must take place instantaneously at some point in time.

 

[jabelltulsa]

In my (FSSP) Church, not only are the bell’s rung at the altar, but also the church bell itself is rang. It rings for all to hear that Christ has come to us all in the Eucharist. Thanks be to God!

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Occasionally when I’m visiting another parish I’ll hear the bells rung and it impresses me as pointless. The prayers are in English and we KNOW what is happening. You may need it in the old Latin Mass but you don’t need it in the vernacular.

 

[benedictgal]

Our Faith is such that it encompasses all five senses. We see the beauty and the majesty of the church as it is decked out in its finest during the Christmas and Easter seasons. We enter into the penitential seasons of Advent and Lent in purple. We enter Palm Sunday and Good Friday in Red. This also holds true in the vesture of the priest/bishop during these seasons.

We touch the coolness of the holy water in the fonts. It also reminds us of the Baptism that made us members of Christ’s body, the Church.

The sweet fragrance of the incense that wafts out of the thurbile reminds us of the practice of ancient Israel of burning incense before the Holy of Holies in the Temple.

We literally taste and see the goodness of the Lord as we consume His Body and Blood during Holy Communion.

We hear the beautiful ancient music of the Church as the choir and the faithful in the pews join their voices in song. And, whenever the bells are rung for the consecration, we are alerted to the presence of the Divine Majesty of the God made Man. To simply discard this small, but, very significant gesture is to slowly chip away at the mystery of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Far from being an archaic throwback to the Middle Ages (or prior centuries), the bells are a very tangible reminder that, even though we cannot physically see Him, Jesus has come.

 

[Cavaille-Coll]

This morning, one of our servers rang the altar bells as usual at the Epiclesis and Consecrations and the other server rang three strikes on the old 1920’s tubular chime system (five brass chime tubes hang beside the side altar and are controlled by pushbuttons set into the steps of the high altar). I’ve never heard both used at once before.

 

[SenorBells]

…And, whenever the bells are rung for the consecration, we are alerted to the presence of the Divine Majesty of the God made Man. To simply discard this small, but, very significant gesture is to slowly chip away at the mystery of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Far from being an archaic throwback to the Middle Ages (or prior centuries), the bells are a very tangible reminder that, even though we cannot physically see Him, Jesus has come.

If the function of sanctus bells is to alert the faithful of the miracles taking place (both at the epiclesis and the consecration) then their function is now obsolete given that the Mass is in the vernacular, with the priest facing the faithful.

Thankfully that is not the function of the sanctus bells.

We also are faced with the matter of ringings large tower bells versus hand-held bells during the Mass. While ringing tower bells dates back to the thirteen century, ringing hand-held bells during the Mass came well after the Middle Ages.

To suggest their disuse “is to slowly chip away at the mystery of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass” is terribly wrong. Please reconsider your words for just a moment. Simply put, the Church would never have made the bell optional it if your claim had any validity whatsoever. In fact, I would think mindsets such are your own was one motivating factor that caused the Church to make their use optional.

I personally like the bells – the large tower bells much, much more than the hand-held variety, but I deeply respect the Church’s decision to make their use optional.

 

[benedictgal]

If the function of sanctus bells is to alert the faithful of the miracles taking place (both at the epiclesis and the consecration) then their function is now obsolete given that the Mass is in the vernacular, with the priest facing the faithful.

Thankfully that is not the function of the sanctus bells.

We also are faced with the matter of ringings large tower bells versus hand-held bells during the Mass. While ringing tower bells dates back to the thirteen century, ringing hand-held bells during the Mass came well after the Middle Ages.

To suggest their disuse “is to slowly chip away at the mystery of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass” is terribly wrong. Please reconsider your words for just a moment. Simply put, the Church would never have made the bell optional it if your claim had any validity whatsoever. In fact, I would think mindsets such are your own was one motivating factor that caused the Church to make their use optional.

I personally like the bells – the large tower bells much, much more than the hand-held variety, but I deeply respect the Church’s decision to make their use optional.

To just isolate one section of my post is not right, on your part. First of all, constructive criticism is appreciated; however, you have missed the point of my entire post. Along with the Orthodox, the Church is the only one that involves a complete and tactile experience of the Faith. This involves all of the senses.

Celebrating the Mass versus populum is an option for the Holy Sacrifice, just as celebrating ad orientsum is. Read the boook “Turning Towards the Lord”, with a foreword written to it by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

The sanctus bells are an important part of our tradition that should not be so readily discarded simply because someone sees it as “out of date.” Yes, the Church gives us that option. I recognize that, since I do read the liturgical documents. Thankfully, Pope Benedict still maintains it at St. Peter’s Basilica.

One last note, I never did mention the church tower bells. Please, when refuting someone, exercise accuracy in your arguments.

 

[benedictgal]

I realize that I may have been too harsh in my refutation of the previous post. My concern is that sometimes, I think, we pull out one quote without reading what was before it and what was after it.

I brought up the notion of the “miracle” of the Consecration to my parochial vicar (PV) because, in my diocese, there was an interesting phenomenum at the chapel of one of the local hospitals. Evidently, people began seeing the image of Jesus (Holy Face wearing a crown of thorns) within the Blessed Sacrament during the Monstrance. This happened three months ago (August 29th). So far, the bishop has not made a ruling.

When someone asked me if I had seen anything, I told them that I didn’t (felt bad). But, we shouldn’t be looking for a “miracle” in the Blessed Sacrament, as the miracle occurs every day during the Mass.

The ringing of the bells during the Sanctus, and, for re-clarification, I mean the handbells or the mushroom bell used at St. Peter’s, serves as an audible signal denoting the presence of Jesus. Yes, the priest, when he celebrates Mass facing the people, already shows us the Sacred Species. What need do we have of a further “announcement” that the Lord has come down?

But, I see the bells as a sign, just like the lit Sanctuary lamp that denotes the presence of Jesus in the Tabernacle. The only time we see the Sanctuary Lamp extinguished is during the Paschal Triduum. It is extinghuished after the Evening Mass of the Lord’s Supper and remains unlit until after Holy Communion the night of the Easter Vigil.

As I have repeatedly said, the Church is very tactile in that she involves all of the senses in a very real, physical manner. We can see, smell, hear, taste and touch the elements of our Faith. The Body of Christ uses the human body in its expressions of the Faith.

 

[TMC]

When I was an altar boy we did not ring the bells at the epiclesis, only at the words of consecration. This was uniform through the diocese, I think, because I served at more than one parish.

When my current parish started using the bells again a few years ago, at first I thought the servers were ringing them at the wrong time! (This was reinforced by the fact that they sometimes did ring them at the wrong time.) It seems like the practice now is to also ring them at the epiclesis, but it still sounds odd to me after all those years of doing it differently. Anyone else experience this? Has this practice changed, was it an option, or did I just do it wrong hundreds of times? (This is entirely possible, I was a terrible altar boy even after doing it for ten years.)

I like the bells, but I understand those that think they suggest the congregation needs ‘reminded’ what is happening. As I server I sometimes thought the bells were calling out “wake up” “wake up” “wake up” (we shook them three times), so the old folks wouldn’t miss the important parts.

 

[SenorBells]

To just isolate one section of my post is not right, on your part. First of all, constructive criticism is appreciated; however, you have missed the point of my entire post. Along with the Orthodox, the Church is the only one that involves a complete and tactile experience of the Faith. This involves all of the senses.

Celebrating the Mass versus populum is an option for the Holy Sacrifice, just as celebrating ad orientsum is. Read the boook “Turning Towards the Lord”, with a foreword written to it by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

The sanctus bells are an important part of our tradition that should not be so readily discarded simply because someone sees it as “out of date.” Yes, the Church gives us that option. I recognize that, since I do read the liturgical documents. Thankfully, Pope Benedict still maintains it at St. Peter’s Basilica.

One last note, I never did mention the church tower bells. Please, when refuting someone, exercise accuracy in your arguments.

Speaking of the Orthodox, the use of sanctus bells was one of the horrid “latinizations” forced upon many Eastern Catholic churches in the USA by some often ignorant and usually over-zealous Latin Rite bishops of the past. These sorts of actions were what drove many to Orthodoxy in this country.

You say ‘The sanctus bells are an important part of our tradition that should not be so readily discarded simply because someone sees it as “out of date”’ and there are two glaring errors with that statement.

First, only you are suggesting that they are an important part. They are indeed a part – even a beloved part to many, but their importance for the reasons you suggest has not been substantiated – by you or anyone else. Second the “someone” in this case is the Catholic Church, and your opinion does not trump the instruction of the Catholic Church.

I agree the bells are important for a reason you never mentioned – as a voice of thanks to God. Even then many will suggest the great amen sung by all in today’s Mass more than takes the part of an altar boy ringing a bell.

Finally you inferred that hand-held sanctus bells dated to the Middle Ages or before and that is erroneous – and it had nothing to do with any inaccuracy with my comments. They rang big tower bells back then and it’s that tradition that I find most wonderful.

P.S. You’re comment “Along with the Orthodox, the Church is the only one that involves a complete and tactile experience of the Faith. This involves all of the senses.” is also incorrect. At least one Protestant group – members of the Anglican Communion also employs “all of the senses.”