A Modest Proposal on Octaves

Restore the Octaves of Corpus Christi, All Saints, and, in the Pauline calendar, Pentecost.

The mind requires repetition to learn well, and that is what octaves accomplished in the life of the Church. Feasts that were particularly important or had resonated strongly through the centuries were commemorated in a special way across 8 days in the Mass and the Office. The 8-day observance is a reminder of Old Testament celebrations, including the original dedication of Solomon's temple. To get a feel for how it works, you can page through the Ordo for this period of All Saints at Restorethe54. 

The traditional calendar had 18 octaves, the '62 calendar has three, and the Pauline calendar has two (Christmas and Easter). So why restore these octaves in particular?

The Second Vatican Council declares the Holy Eucharist "the source and summit of our faith", and the US bishops have called for a Eucharistic renewal. One place to start is to emphasize the Eucharist in the calendar by restoring the Octave of Corpus Christi. The feast could also be restored as a holy day of obligation in the United States. 

During the Synod on Synodality, much is made of the necessity of listening to the Holy Spirit. Well then, why not observe the Octave of Pentecost to more deeply draw the faithful into the mystery of the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Church? 

And finally, Vatican II's Lumen Gentium speaks of the universal call to sainthood. One time-honored way of reminding the faithful of the call and real possibility of sainthood for all is to celebrate the feast of All Saints as an Octave. 

We don't need anything fancy, just word from the Vatican that these octaves are optional observances in both the '62 and Pauline calendars, then bishops and pastors can observe as they see fit. Maybe throw in the vigils too. 

For those who brush off these matters as insignificant details, all I can say is that praying on the Real Presence, the work of the Holy Spirit, and the universal call to sainthood as an assembly in a repeated way are critical areas for the Church to focus on in any age. 

And history tells us that Saint Julianna endured plenty of mocking for suggesting adding Corpus Christi to the calendar in the first place, so I'm in good company. 

Problem Children: Catholic Whisteblowers

Many faithful Catholics reflexively dismiss and ostracize anyone who dares to point out longstanding failures of the Church. A close companion is the urge to insulate key Church figures from any criticism.

With the Church in dire straits today, we do not have the luxury of banning certain topics and people from serious, open-minded evaluation. That traditionalist Catholics often do not observe these taboos is one reason people hate us so much. 

Discipline

Not one cleric directly responsible for sexual abuse has been seriously punished by the Church. Kevin Farrell, who considered McCarrick his mentor and lived with him for several years, was created a cardinal and appointed Camerlengo (in charge of the next conclave) by Pope Francis after the McCarrick scandal broke. Cardinal Donald Wuerl remained politically powerful and received public endorsements from Pope Francis after resigning in disgrace following the release Pennsylvania Grand Jury Report. 

Even Bishop Barron in his book on the abuse crisis essentially told concerned Catholics that there was nothing for them to do besides pray and trust that those in authority had already addressed the worst of the problem. Those who do serious digging on the matter are labeled quacks and conspiracy theorists. Evidently it’s not ok to launch real investigations or ask serious questions about personnel decisions. 

Obedience

“Aren’t you being disobedient by celebrating/attending the Latin Mass?” “So you don’t accept Vatican II?” 

When Pope John XXIII demands that all seminary professors teach in Latin, when Pope Paul VI says artificial contraception must not be used, or when Vatican II says Gregorian chant should have pride of place and that each parish should have public Sunday Vespers, that can be freely ignored. But dare to celebrate a traditional Mass outside of the latest restrictions, and you’re told you have a one way ticket to Hell. 

Dr. Kwasniewski does a good job pushing back on this. This article goes further, pointing out how the Church’s philosophy of slavish obedience since the post Reformation is what enabled forced changes to liturgy and the sexual abuse crisis. 

It is also blithely assumed that bishops are airlifted into a diocese they’ve never worked in before by appointment from an insulated Vatican bureaucracy that has no transparency and accountability. Rome directly appointing all bishops (rather than vetting and approving more local selections) is a newish practice. It’s increasingly clear it isn’t working, but no one offers any alternative. Surely bishops should (mostly) come from their home dioceses through a clear, transparent decision-making process with real influence from local clergy and faithful laity. But good luck mentioning this without getting a condescending eyeroll. 

Liturgy

The problems posed by celebrating Mass facing the people have been pointed out by Cardinal Ratzinger, Father Mike Schmitz, and many others. Yet when Cardinal Sarah proposed more priests celebrate ad orientem during Advent, he was undermined. Cardinal Cupich has now banned it in Chicago, even though Mass facing the people isn’t in any of the rubrics (in fact they assume Mass is done ad orientem). 

Another common trope is the instant dismissal of anyone who dares to question the liturgical reforms made in the 50s. One writer mocked such people, rolling his eyes and wondering “what form of liturgy is pure enough for them.” Here as elsewhere, the merits of the arguments and serious scholarship are never even considered. It’s just assumed that if you have a problem with it, something’s wrong with you, and you better shut up about it or else the ‘62 Mass you have will be taken away. Also, you’re basically a sedevacantist (just ignore how furious the real sedevacantists are with pre55 superstar Dr. Kwasniewski). 

Usury

You are a wild eyed Medieval fanatic if you dare to suggest that the Church’s constant (NOT traditional) teaching on usury should be upheld, and that its loss has been deeply damaging. 

This gem from Crisis Magazine quotes John Noonan to illustrate why the teaching is so misguided and damaging. Someone needs to inform Crisis that John Noonan was one of the main detractors of Humanae Vitae, and uses very similar arguments in his tirade against usury. Noonan isn’t the only one, nor is Gary Wills, as Zippy Catholic beautifully captured:

The progressive tactic of divorcing doctrine from pastoral and juridical practice is not a new Vatican II innovation targeted specifically at matters of sex and marriage. Earlier progressives were “successful” in leaving the doctrine on usury formally intact, as a kind of decoration that makes no important demands on anyone, despite their attendance of the traditional Latin Mass. Humanae Vitae could easily become the new Vix Pervenit. Contraception apologists have learned from earlier usury apologists and are using the same tactics. Progressives think that money is inherently fecund and that sex isn’t inherently fecund.

Acceptance of usury and contraception are both products of denying that things have an objective nature independent of human preferences. Centuries of ‘pastoral’ acceptance and indoctrination of economic relativism paved the way for other expressions of moral relativism.

You might think of this as the “hermeneutic of continuity of Hell”.

We are told, with the same tone used by a kindergarten teacher, that Christ endorses usury in Matthew 25. We are then told that the modern economy and concept of money is just different than the Medieval one. 

This is the same modern arrogance usually denounced by faithful Catholics. Of course these arguments have been considered and rejected by the Church, most notably in Vix Pervenit, going all the way back to the Council of Nicaea, and even further in the Psalms, example: Psalm 14(15). 

The modern economy and its concept of money are precisely what the Church has condemned, because it leads to a consumerist culture and the false accounting that brought us the 2008 financial crisis. It also leads to concentration of power in the hands of usurious companies that, surprise surprise, tend to push cultural agendas contrary to the faith. 

Untouchables

That someone is a saint does not exempt them from historical criticism. Particularly when the canonization process has changed drastically in the last few decades and many canonizations are driven by money and political connections. If we can criticize Pope Urban II for calling the First Crusade, we can criticize Pope John Paul II for making Mccarrick a cardinal despite testimony from Cardinal O’Connor that he sexually abused seminarians. If we can criticize Pope Pius IX for taking a Jewish boy from his parents and wallowing in bitterness at the loss of the papal states, we can criticize Pope Pius XII for getting caught up in postwar euphoria and failing to address the massive damage the Communists were doing to the Church in Eastern Europe and by off-the-rails theologians and secularists in the West. If we can criticize Pope Pius X for his police-state style surveillance of alleged modernists, we can also criticize him for blowing up the Roman Office by completely changing the ancient rotation of Psalms recited daily by every Roman priest. 

“What, even X isn’t good enough for you?” No one is perfect, and no one should be above criticism when they make decisions that, at the time or in hindsight, appear misguided and have damaging consequences. 

The Church has real problems. And as Einstein said: “We cannot solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them.” I have great admiration for people like Peter Kwasniewski, Zippy Catholic, James Larson, Mary Ball Martinez, Laszlo Dobszay, Geoffrey Hull, and others who were not afraid to let facts and logic lead them past the taboos into real problems and, given time and God’s grace, help the Church find real solutions. 

Just a Job

 

For the most part, holy men of Scripture are not very concerned about laboring. We only know that Saint Joseph was a carpenter because of dismissive comments made by villagers when Christ ministered in Nazareth. Saint Joseph, like all observant Jewish men, dropped his local work to make the required three pilgrimages to the Jerusalem Temple each year. He had no qualms about leaving Nazareth for Bethlehem for an extended period, then leaving Israel entirely for Egypt for 8 years (likely for a Jewish enclave in Alexandria). It’s noteworthy that he sacrificed two turtledoves at the Purification of the Blessed Mother, which was the sacrifice of the poor. This was not because he was incompetent at earning a living, but because he was not concerned with generating a high income. That the modern Church so heavily emphasizes Saint Joseph as the working man says much more about us than it does about him. 

Similarly, that Saint Paul was a tent maker during his ministry was mentioned only in passing. And he had no concerns about leaving whatever work he happened to be doing to make his missionary journeys, decade in and decade out. While he admonishes his fellow Christians to work for their food, Saint Peter also points out how it was not fitting for the apostles to neglect the word of God to wait at tables. 

While the patriarchs were successful in their farming and animal husbandry, those were typically not the periods when they were growing in faith.

One of the most effective ways of distracting men from growth in faith is an unhealthy fixation with work. Exodus 5 captures this beautifully when pharaoh reviles Moses for speaking to the Israelites about worshiping God. “You’ll put them off their work!” Predictably, pharaoh’s response is to give them more work, and this tactic is successful. Fresh from accepting Moses after seeing his miracles, the Israelites turn on him, a sign of things to come. 

Psalm 126(127) also names and rejects this work myopia. “It is in vain that you rise up early and go late to rest, eating the bread of anxious toil; for  he gives to his beloved in sleep.”

I know quite a few Catholic men whose faith lives have suffered because they have allowed themselves to become dominated by work, either working heavily extended hours, getting sucked into an unhealthy culture at work, or being afraid to live out their faith because of worry about losing their job (which they often recognize isn’t great culturally and professionally). 

For those of us with a college degree (or more) in the US, it’s not that difficult to change jobs, and recovery from a job loss usually does not take long. Nor is financially providing for a family an excuse to remain at a job that is spiritually toxic and takes too much time away from the family. I know guys who provide for families of 7 working as teachers or blue collar jobs without a college degree, making half as much money as guys who work weekends at six-figure jobs and “never have time for anything.” 

It seems that Scripture calls us to keep a few things in mind regarding work. 

One is put work in its place: it exists to provide a basic living and must coexist with spiritual growth. If work starts to take away from family life or spiritual growth, we need to dial it back. If that involves loss of income, we need to evaluate if we really need that income or if we’ve been suckered by the disease of more. Ditto for when work starts making morally unacceptable demands on us. Whatever our current job is, we don’t really need this job. 

Two is to be cunning as serpents with work. Saint Joseph and Saint Paul were able to make a living no matter where they lived. This is because their skills were transferrable. Every town needed a carpenter and every town needed a tent maker. Their work was focused on necessities, and it was not overly specialized. Even if we do work specialized jobs, there are ways of applying our experience to new industries, as well as cutting distractions and sharpening focus that can cut down on the time 

A third may be the benefit of owning our work. Saint Joseph and Saint Paul didn’t work for behemoths that had onerous requirements regarding contracts or location. They did what they had to do and left when they needed to leave. They may have viewed the typical work arrangements we have as a form of slavery similar to the Israelites’ position in Egypt. It’s worth being open minded and asking if we can get to a place where we own our own business/practice, be it consulting, freelancing, private tutoring, etc. A friend recently said, with all seriousness, that his plan is to work at his current job for two years, then return to private consulting, only this time working a 20 hour a week schedule. For many of us, wise spending habits and strong work performance should give us a cushion that we can use to assert some professional independence, whether becoming our own boss or retiring early. 

I’m trying to live up to these standards. In one sense I’ve done well: I have a Bachelor’s Degree in Environmental Studies from the University of Pittsburgh, generate the sole income for our household, and I have never had to work more than 45 hours a week for an extended period. Nor have I ever had serious financial struggles. This is despite purchasing a house at age 26 and having to replace the roof, furnace, air conditioner, and most of the plumbing. I also had to unexpectedly replace a car. In none of these cases did I have to take out a loan. 

Though I have a wonderful job with minimal stress, high income, and a growth industry, I recently applied for two jobs to make sure I can make a move when I need to. I have also gotten more assertive at pushing back on the unhealthy cultural imperialism our HR department is pushing. I’ll continue to pray for growth in holiness and a healthy approach to work, and encourage others to do likewise. 

When Accompaniment Becomes Abandonment

 

I attended a Mass as part of a 40 Hours Devotion tonight, followed by a procession, benediction, and formal dinner. As my wife was caring for our younger two recovering from illness, I was there with only my older two children. 

It so happened that we were seated at a table with just two other people: an older woman and her seven-year-old grandson. The woman introduced herself as Mrs. Rogers. 

About halfway through the conversation, she shared that her husband had divorced her (as far as the state is concerned) years ago and she was living a life of prayer to get him to Heaven. When he initiated an annulment process, the diocesan tribunal gave it to him, arguing that the mere fact of him seeking a divorce meant the marriage was never valid. Mrs. Rogers was told “You need to move on with your life” and “Don’t you want to be happy?”

On the recommendation of her spiritual advisor, she quoted Bishop Fulton Sheen to the canon lawyer, to the effect that she made a commitment and would remain committed to getting him to Heaven whether or not he stayed true to his vows. The canon lawyer told her: “You need help.”

She had no advocate except Cardinal Burke, who forwarded her case to the Apostolic Signatura, informed her of her right to appeal, and alluded to her on EWTN when he reminded viewers of the women and children damaged by a no-fault-divorce culture. Rome upheld her appeal, so her marriage remains. 

The conversation turned to her niece, V, who recently left a Benedictine convent. She was cloistered for five years but finally could not accept the constant pressure to be vaccinated for covid (she went to an appointment out of obedience, and the needle broke) and the attacks she endured for not voting for Biden. She is starting over in the world, out of her cloistered convent and wearing street clothes for the first time in five years. 

There are certainly strands of pharisaism among traditionalists. That is to say, people who use their knowledge of tradition and Catholic teaching to gain power over others, emotionally, financially, or otherwise. 

But from what I’ve seen, most people just want the support of their spiritual leaders to live lives of fidelity to the Church as handed down in the Church’s theological and moral teaching as well as sacred liturgy. 

Instead, they are treated with contempt, while their abusers are shown compassion and given everything they ask for. When the abused dare to speak up, they are told that they are fed the false dichotomy of accompaniment (that is to say, enablement of sinful lifestyles) vs rigidity and told to embrace accompaniment. 

Gentleness toward sinners does not require annihilating Church moral teaching. Saint John Chrysostom, who was himself exiled for upholding the truth, captured this beautifully in his Homily 29 on Matthew’s Gospel:

Wherefore groan, bewail, for the calamity indeed deserves tears. And the wounded man- again, nothing can so heal him as gentleness: gentleness, I say, which is mightier than any force.

Who is accompanying those widowed by divorce, who are told that their marriage never existed, their vows were invalid, their vocation is a lie? Or the children on places like Anonymous Us, scarred by the lack of a mother and/or father, or often horrified that their life began in a lab and was bought and paid for? 

Meanwhile, what is done to save the souls of the abusers? 

“If any one does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his own family, he has disowned the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” 1 Timothy 5:8

Still, we can have hope (and holy fear) in God’s promises given in Scripture. 

Your princes are rebels and companions of thieves. Every one loves a bribe and runs after gifts. They do not defend the fatherless, and the widow's cause does not come to them. Therefore the Lord says, the LORD of hosts, the Mighty One of Israel: "Ah, I will vent my wrath on my enemies, and avenge myself on my foes. I will turn my hand against you and will smelt away your dross as with lye and remove all your alloy. And I will restore your judges as at the first, and your counselors as at the beginning. Afterward you shall be called the city of righteousness, the faithful city." Isaiah 1:23-26

A Night at the Council

 

If there is one major misstep in my growth in tradition, it has been an over-reliance on books and blogs and not enough talking to real people, especially older people who lived through the 60s and 70s. 

Two nights ago, I had the privilege of getting the closest I will get to a night at the Second Vatican Council. Through an interesting series of circumstances, I wound up driving a gentleman who was in Rome for the entire Second Vatican Council to and from an Anglican Ordinariate Evensong an hour away. 

Naturally, conversation turned to those years. For once, I was able to shut my mouth to focus on asking questions and listening. 

The gentleman said “If you’re not liberal when you’re young, you have no heart. If you’re not conservative when you’re old, you have no brains.” People were excited to put new ideas into practice, and only once years had passed and revealed the consequences did some pause to reconsider. 

Back in the early 60s in Church circles, it was common to hear of people whose teaching and books had been suppressed for unclear reasons. There was a general sense that the hierarchy was trigger happy. Education for priests was tied to watered-down Thomism from the 19th and 18th centuries. These formulas were typically prioritized over knowledge of the fathers and the Scriptures in their original languages. 

So when the bishops, many of whom were Scripture scholars and had studied the patristics, convened at the beginning of the Council, they found fault with the original schema on source of Divine Revelation, a hot topic leading up the Council. Though the votes did not reach the threshold legally required to reject the document, John XXIII was not the type to railroad his agenda through heavy opposition and agreed to set aside the schema and permit work on an altogether new document. 

This was a watershed moment. For those who felt (not unfairly) that the Church was stagnating under politically motivated condemnations that stifled growth in knowledge of Scripture and the fathers, this was a real moment of hope that the era of unthinking, even toxic, obedience to authority might be ending. 

It was not immediately clear how far this pushback toward the old order would go. The radical theologians like fathers Hans Kung and Edward Schillebeecx were not publicly flouting orthodox teaching until after the Council.

In retrospect, there were three councils. There was the actual Council, which published the official documents. There was the theologians’ council, where the actual Council was used as a pretext to push their much more radical ideas into the open. And there was the media council, where secular media used the Council to push their own messages to generate revenue and coerce Catholics into aligning with their political and social views. 

In particular, Xavier Rynne of the New Yorker framed the narrative of the Council that has become the norm: compassionate, world-wise bishops bringing a backwards, dictatorial Church into the maturity and complexity of the modern world. 

Most telling is his article after Humanae Vitae, in which Rynne paints the encyclical as the first step in repudiating the Council and going back to the way of thinking before John XXIII. The article names the aftermath a more serious crisis in the Church than the Reformation. It quotes numerous bishops, theologians, and academics who reject the encyclical as non-Scriptural and a basic failure in moral law theory. It celebrates Vatican II’s statement on the absolute freedom of conscience and applies it to Catholics dissenting from the encyclical. It then paints Pope Paul VI as the hostage of Cardinals Ottaviani, Cicognani, and others who “opposed the Council from the beginning.” 

Whether because of Rynne or the numerous Church figures he quotes, this is exactly the way the Council has been received by most Catholics. The Council means the Church is allowing Catholics to reject its most foundational teachings because everyone has unlimited freedom of conscience to do as they please. Any pushback against this mentality is attacked as the failed mentality of the old Church that wants to go back to modernist “witch hunts.” 

The gentleman said that Humane Vitae was the moment when the masks came off. Creating more space for scholars to dig into the Scriptures and patristics without monitoring by Rome was one thing. Sheltering and promoting theologians who flatly contradicted Church teaching was quite another. Though the American bishops were generally supportive, plenty gave cover to theologians who openly rejected it and encouraged other faithful to do the same. 

When I asked about the liturgy, the gentleman confirmed two of my pet theories. The first being that the liturgical changes were not demanded by the faithful and were perceived as being forced on them from above. People didn’t know what was going on, especially because the changes happened so quickly. Secondly, once the Church had made massive changes to its liturgy, most faithful assumed it was only a matter of time before the Church changed everything else. Massive changes and “you do you” approaches to the main interaction most faithful have with the Church (Sunday Mass) made it inevitable that most assumed the same attitude would soon apply to moral and doctrinal teaching. 

The gentleman related how a group of laity fired up by the Council demanded their own parish from the bishop under threat of leaving the Church. They got one, and when he tried to introduce some polyphony to their Masses he was pushed out quickly. That parish is now about to close after being repulsive to all but the most liberal fringe since it opened in the 70s. 

Despite having directed a schola for several years in Rome in the late 50s and early 60s, he had no outlet for his experience in sacred music for decades. 

He has attended the local Anglican Ordinariate parish because it is “a bastion of orthodoxy” and has a culture of sacred music very difficult to find elsewhere. It also embodies the actual Council document on the liturgy in that it retains liturgical tradition (ad orientem, traditional prayers, chant and polyphony) while using the vernacular and having more visible lay participation. It is also an example of the Church’s ability to attract and assimilate former protestants. 

While this gentleman said there has been some disappointment in the relatively small number of Anglican churches that have entered the Catholic Church under Coetibus Anglicanorum, many sterling individuals have swum the Tiber, including a former chaplain to Queen Elizabeth II. It may also be a refuge if the hierarchy becomes more tyrannical about the Latin Mass. 

It was a truly illuminating conversation on a subject dear to my heart, and I hope to have may more with him and others. In these trying times, it is helpful and hopeful to hear from those who came before.

Aging as Accumulated Damage

 

In my kids’ favorite book series, a young heroine seeking help from a legendary warrior is warned that the warrior may be stuck in the form of a beast. When the heroine asks: “She’s lived a long time, is there any chance she has mastered her condition by now” she is told: “You are new to life. For most of us, a long life simply provides more time to accumulate damage.” 

This is why I have always loved children’s books and am comfortable reading them as an adult. Dumbledore from Harry Potter remarks that people have a knack of wanting precisely the things that are worst for them. Narnia’s tragic exposure of Susan’s faults and those of the dwarves in The Last Battle strike a chord. Tom Sawyer provides witty truths about our weakness to reverse psychology. Little Women teaches us about the pitfalls of “the good life.” 

And this phrase about age as accumulated damage is one of the more stunning truths I’ve found. When my wife’s grandmother was dying, my mother-in-law commonly chalked it all up to her being in her 90s. That didn’t compute with me, because I have known several relatives in their mid-90s who were far more lucid, caring, and stable on their feet. 

While there are some aspects of aging that can’t be avoided, many of the more dreadful aspects are direct result of repeated choices we make and harm we do to ourselves. 

Dr. Kelly Starrett in the first pages of Becoming a Supple Leopard shows how the postures most of us adopt (shearing our bones because we’re lazy when we bend over and refuse to use muscles to help support our back when sitting and standing) cause massive damage and pain over time. A related plan to prevent and reverse this damage can be found here. 

There are many other examples, beyond the obvious ones like smoking and egregious diets.

If I’m starting to feel a bit stiffer in my 30s with increasing hearing, eye, and skin issues, it’s not that I’ve hit a magical number that generates more pain. I’ve damaged my spine through years of bad posture, weakened my body through lack of stretching and exercise, harmed my digestive system through eating too quickly and eating too much sugar, gotten too many sunburns, spent too much time with earbuds pumping sound into my ears, and stared at electronic screens for too long. 

The same could be said of the spiritual life. It’s not that old people are inherently out of touch and crotchety. But many of them walk in that direction for quite some years, and our society’s idolization of retirement and plethora of financial benefits for reaching a magical age encourage isolation and entitlement. 

“Age” is an excuse we use to dodge responsibility for the poor physical and mental choices we and others have made through the years. Look closer at most conditions and you’re bound to find self-inflicted damage sooner or later. If you’re young, stop digging the hole. 

Liturgy Review: Exaltation of the Holy Cross

 

I have been fascinated with this feast ever since venerating a relic of the True Cross at Franciscan Monastery of the Holy Land in Washington, DC nearly 10 years ago. New Liturgical Movement has a wonderful article on the feast’s history.

Why celebrate the holy cross in September, five months after Good Friday? Few know the story. Firstly, the feast commemorates the dedication of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre when it was first built after Saint Helena traveled to the Holy Land. Secondly, the feast commemorates the conclusion of the “First Crusade” when the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius pulled together an army from his disintegrating empire and recovered the True Cross from the invading Persians in 629. It is hard to imagine the pure joy that must have exuded from the church on the day the True Cross was restored. 

Let’s see what the Roman Church has handed down to us today. 

Like all traditional feasts, it opens with I Vespers the evening prior (9/13). The Monastic and Roman psalms are the Sunday psalms, beginning triumphantly with 109(110): The Lord said to my lord: sit at my right hand, until I make thy enemies thy footstool.” Notably one of the antiphons in the Monastic Office asks Christ “who didst save Peter in the sea” to save us. A useful prayer for today, perhaps. The next antiphon tells enemies to flee for the lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David, hath conquered. 

The chapter is the beginning of the beautiful Christological hymn of Philippians 2: “Christ Jesus, who though He was by nature God, did not consider being equal to God a thing to be clung to, but emptied Himself, taking the nature of a slave.” The hymn is Vexilla Regis, also sung on Good Friday (for an excellent recording, see CC Watershed). 

Matins, after the usual opening of Psalm 94(95) kicks off with the Pange Lingua (sung on Maundy Thursday), followed by Psalms 1-3, then includes the opening of Numbers 21, nearly a mirror image of the reign of Heraclius. First, the Israelites are attacked, with several kidnapped. They pray to the Lord, fight back against their enemies, and destroy their cities. Then comes the familiar story of the Israelites reviling God in the desert, being punished with the serpents, and being healed by gazing upon the bronze serpent (which would’ve been in the shape of a cross). 

Matins continues with psalms 4,10 (In the Lord I put my trust, how can you say to me: flee into the mountain like a sparrow?), and 20. 

Now Matins recounts the story of Heraclius, whose peace offers being denied, boldly attacked Persian territory (led by an icon of Christ), touching off a revolt that unseated the Persian emperor and compelled the Persians to return both Byzantine territory and the True Cross. Matins also recounts how the gate of Jerusalem shut when Heraclius approached, personally carrying the cross, until he dismounted his horse and removed his royal raiment in imitation of the simple poverty of Christ. 

The Office concludes with homilies on the cross from Pope Leo I, a Te Deum, and the Collect:

Grant, we beseech thee, that even as we have understood the mystery thereof upon earth, so we may worthily enjoy in heaven the fruits of the redemption which was paid thereon.

Lauds also includes psalms of the Sunday, beginning with 92(93): The Lord reigns, He has clothed Himself in majesty. The passage from Philippians is read again. The hymn is Crux Fidelis. 

At Mass, vestments are red: recalling the triumph of the martyrs and the birth of the Church rather than the black vestments of mourning worn on Good Friday. The Mass opens with an Introit from Galatians 6: But it behoves us to glory in the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

The epistle is the passage following the Philippians passage from the Office: “Christ became obedient for us unto death: even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath exalted Him…”

The Gospel is the passage of John 12, where Christ says: “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all things to Myself.”

The Offertory prays that the Lord protect us from our enemies by the sign of the Cross, “that we may be able to do Thee worthy service, and that our sacrifice may be well pleasing in Thy sight.”

At this point I have attended several liturgies for this feast: the new, Pauline Mass, Byzantine liturgy, and choral evensong in the Anglican Ordinariate tradition. Though the Byzantine rite’s prostrations and venerations of the cross were moving, I haven’t found anything to compare with the strength of the Roman Rite’s psalms, Scripture passages, and hymns for this feast. 

Predictably the new Mass includes a reading from Numbers 21 but removes the first three verses about the Israelites’ combat against the Canaanites. The Gospel is John 3, where Christ tells Nicodemus that the Son must be lifted up as the serpent was in the desert. But this passage loses Christ’s line: “Now is the judgment of this world, now shall the Prince of the world be cast out”, contained on the traditional Gospel from John 12. 

It seems perfectly fitting that the Church gives us a reminder, halfway through the year after Triduum, of the triumph of the cross, with some Triduum hymns and Scripture passages. Not just that, but the Ember Days of Fall also lead us into fasting the following week. 

This feast is fundamentally subversive. The cross was the supreme instrument of Roman domination: carefully engineered torture to be inflicted on enemies of the state, notably Sparticus and his revolting slave army. Yet Christians, under heavy torture themselves, turned this “nuclear option” into a sign of defiance. Pray that we may have the courage and grace to do the same.