Formulary of the Mass

Pontifical Liturgy Institute

Formulary of the Mass: Dynamic text and rite

Taught byDaniel McCarthy

Seminar offered in English: 94495  (3 ECTS)
This page was thoroughly revised, 10 February 2018.

Brief description

The three proper prayers of one mass formulary reveal the dynamic movement of the eucharistic liturgy from entrance procession to the procession with the gifts and the communion procession and sometimes even hinting at the procession back home. The three prayers of each formulary present the divine-human exchange through a series of alternating divine and human actions both explicit and implied, active and passive. Each mass formulary expresses these dynamics in different ways.

This seminar provides a context for the student-scholar to learn and apply a method to discern the dynamic movement latent in three proper prayers from from one mass formulary, in three stages:

  1. Heuristics: the student-researcher studies the literary composition and ritual contexts of the prayers.
  2. Hermeneutics: the student-scholar interprets the prayers in their liturgical-ritual context and according to a semiotic analysis of who does what to whom.
  3. Synthetics: the student-author writes a final paper in which the author presents the divine-human exchange in the chosen mass formulary to a class of seminarians at a major seminary.

In this seminar, the student joins the collegial discussion among scholar-participants, as the professor provides careful supervision of the work undertaken.

Aims

By the end of this course the student will have done and will know a method for doing the following:

  1. Heuristics: the student will have gathered essential information on the three prayers of one mass formulary, their Latin expression and liturgical context, and will have communicated this to colleagues in the seminar.
  2. Hermeneutics: the student will have interpreted the prayers both in their ritual-liturgical context and semiotic analysis of who does what to who in order to understand the dynamic movement of the particular eucharistic liturgy from the entrance to the presentation and communion and finally departure. The student will have communicated this to colleagues in the seminar.
  3. Synthetics: the student will have integrated the findings and interpretation into a classroom lecture for seminarians in a major seminary, and will have communicated this in oral form to colleagues in the seminar and in written form in a final paper.
  4. The student conducts personal research while engaged in collaborative conversation with colleague-scholars, as the professor carefully directs their attention and encourages deeper investigation.

Structure of the course

  1. In this seminar the professor reviews the methods used in finding data, interpreting the three prayers in their respective contexts and writing a final paper; the professor provides careful moderation.
  2. In a first presentation each student presents to colleagues an analysis of the Latin expression of his or her three prayers.
  3. This is further developed in a second presentation, on the semiotics of the prayer, answering the question “Who does what to whom?”.
  4. In a final presentation each student presents a draft of his or her final paper to colleagues in the seminar.
  5. Seminar discussions encourage learning from others and support self-motivated personal research and sharing personal reflections.
  6. Each student integrates the data and findings findings in the preparation of a lecture on the divine-human exchange in the three prayers of the chosen mass formulary to address the concerns of a class of seminarians at a major seminary.
  7. Participants are encouraged to present their presentation materials to the instructor several days before giving each presentation so that the instructor may review the presentation and make suggestions for the student’s consideration. The final paper may also be submitted to the instructor in draft form for comments before its final submission.

Learning activities

  1. In the first round of presentations the student-researchers discuss the clear and accurate understanding of the Latin texts of the three prayers of each person’s formulary.
  2. In the second round of presentations the student-scholars discuss the semiotic analysis of who does what to whom in each person’s prayers and over-all formulary.
  3. In the third round of presentations the student-authors discuss the draft texts of their papers written to teach the students of a major seminary the meaning of the divine-human exchange by means of the three prayers of the chosen formulary.
  4. The final text of this lecture is submitted for valuation at the end of the course.
  5. Participants submit their presentations and the draft of tehir final paper to the instructor  several days in advance and then consider suggestions given.

Schedule

The course is scheduled for Wednesday afternoons of the Spring semester 2018, which permits only 10 encounters. The organizational meeting will be held on Wednesday 21 February. Sessions continue until the end of the semester at the end of May 2018.

Horarium: 15:30-17:05, aula IX
21, 28 February
7, 14,

After unanimous consent we have changed the time of our encounters to 10:15-11:50, aula VII for the following days:
21 March
(Easter break)
11, 18 April
2, 16 May

Note: no classes are held in the afternoon on the following days:

14 February = Ash Wednesday
25 April = National Holiday
9 May = International Congress of the PIL

Hours: 15:30-17:05

First session 15:30-16:15
Break: 16:15-16:20
Second session 16:20-17:05

Hours: 10:15-11:55

First session 10:15-11:00
Break: 11:00-11:05
Second session 11:05-11:55

Office Hours

Please do not phone the instructor.
Rather email him at danielmccarthyosb AT mac DOT com.

He is available outside of class time by appointment.

Bibliography

♦ Leachman, J.G. – McCarthy, D.P., « The formation of the Ecclesial Person through Baptismal Preparation and celebrations of the RCIA: The Collects of the Scrutinies », The Liturgical Subject: Subject and Subjectivity, ed. J. Leachman, SCM–University of Notre Dame Press, London – Notre Dame, IL 2008, 172-200.

♦ Leachman, J.G. –McCarthy, D.P., « Preparation for the Piazza: The Preface of the Second Scrutiny (the Fourth Sunday in Lent): the mystagogical formation of the neophytes and the assembly, » Conference of Societas Liturgica, « Liturgy and the Piazza », Studia Liturgica 38 (2008) 114-33.

♦ Leachman, J.G., “The Role of the Holy Spirit in the Catechumenal Preparation for Baptism in OICA,” in Spíritus spiritália nóbis dóna poténter infúndit[Studia Anselmiana 139], PIL, Roma 2006, 277-292.

♦ Leachman, J.G., “The Holy Spirit in the Period of Purification and Enlightenment in RCIA,” Studia Liturgica 36 (2006) 185-2007.

♦ Transition in the Easter Vigil: Becoming Christians. Paschali in vigilia Christiani nominis fieri, ed. D.P. McCarthy – J.G. Leachman (Documenta rerum ecclesiasticarum instaurata, Liturgiam aestimare: Appreciating the Liturgy 2), St. Michael’s Abbey Press, Farnborough 2011, 295-322.

Also recommended:

♦ LEWIS, C.T.,- SHORT, C., A Latin Dictionary, OUP, Oxford-New York 1879, reprinted 1995.

♦ Appreciating the CollectAn Irenic Methodology, ed. J.G. Leachman – D.P. McCarthy (Documenta rerum ecclesiasticarum instaurata, Liturgiam aestimare: Appreciating the Liturgy 1), St. Michael’s Abbey Press, Farnborough 2008.

♦ FOSTER, R. – D.P. MCCARTHY, Ossa Latinitatis Sola ad mentem Reginaldi rationemqueThe mere bones of Latin according to the thought and system of Reginald (Latinitatis Corpus 1), Catholic University of America Press, Washington DC 2016.

♦ MCCARTHY, D., “Seeing a Reflection, Considering Appearances: The History, Theology and Literary Composition of the Missale Romanum at a Time of Vernacular Reflection”, Questions Liturgiques / Studies in Liturgy 94 (2013) 109-143.

♦ LEACHMAN, J.G. “A New Liturgical Hermeneutic: Christian Maturation by Developmental Steps”, New Blackfriars 90 (2009) 219-231.

♦ LEACHMAN, J.G., – D.P. MCCARTHY, “A Liturgical Study of the proper prayers for St Charles of St Andrew Houben, C.P., (1) The Opening Prayer,” Questions Liturgiques: Studies in Liturgy 92 (2011) 28-44 (second edition of “J.G. Leachman, “Studium liturgiczne kolekty o św. Karolu od św. Andrzeja Houbenie CP”, Słowo Krzyża Crucis Verbum 4 [2010], 230-243).

Enter an inflected form of your word in the field under the heading “Dictionary Entry Lookup”, located in the column on the right.
Parsing tool with Lewis and Short Dictionary♦ LEWIS and SHORT dictionary available here: Enter the dictionary entry for your word in the field under the heading “Dictionary Entry Lookup”, located in the column on the right.

 

Examination

Preparation: Having agreed with the instructor upon the three prayers of a Latin formulary from the Missale Romanum, the student conducts his or her own study of the prayers and presents the findings in three brief seminar presentations. The student also participates in the seminar discussion on the research of other collegue-participants. The student uses the shared discussion and personal research to revise and further develop a final paper.

Examination in detail

Explanation: The student presents his or her findings in class three times and has the chance to revise the material based on class discussion and feedback from the instructor, before submitting a research paper of 10 pages of text but not more than 15 pages, following the norms of the PIL (without binding). The norms of the PIL may be downloaded here.

Criteria for evaluation: Both the regular in class presentations by the student of his or her ongoing research and the final paper are assessed based on the following criteria:

  1. understanding of the method and quality of its application to the particular prayers,
  2. logical organisation of the material and its clear presentation,
  3. accuracy of information and analysis,
  4. consistency in style of notes and bibliography,
  5. sources preferaby in their original languages,
  6. theological accuracy.

Mode of evaluation: The final assessment will be based 50% on class participation and 50% on the final written paper.

When: The final paper is to be handed in to the Registrar no later than 24 May 2018. If the student would like to receive back a copy with notations and comments the submission should be accompanied by such a request. A copy will be left in the office of the registrar (segreteria).

Academic program

The program of studies, course descriptions and calendar for the academic year 2017-2018 is available for download here.

Place

This seminar is offered in English at the Pontifical Institute of Liturgy housed at:

Sant’Anselmo
Piazza Cavalieri di Malta, 5
00153 Roma, Italia

See map below.

 

Schedule in detail
2017-2018

Session 1: Wednesday, 21 February 2018

Since this is a seminar and the students are expected to work together, we shall begin with general introductions of the students to one another.

We shall go over the syllabus, bibliography and make a visit to the library.

For session 2 the students are requested to choose the mass formulary they wish to examine. A formulary consists of the three short prayers assigned to one mass: the proper collect, the prayer super oblata and the prayer post communionem.

In choosing a formulary, participants in the seminar may choose the formulary of a Sunday of ordinary time, a Sunday of one of the four seasons or one of the feasts of the Lord which is observed on a Sunday (but not the Easter vigil). Participants may examine another fromulary after having secured the assent of the seminar moderator.

Each student is encouraged to access the instructor’s English translations of numerous mass formularies of Sundays and feasts published in The Tablet of London from 28 November 2009 – 20 November 2010, available in the library. A listing of these commentaries arranged according to their liturgical day are found at this link. At that link you may find commentaries of many of the three proper prayers that may occur on a Sunday. The final entry for each day has the heading, “Study translation of the four prayers”, where you may find our translations of the three proper prayers along with a preface.

During this first encounter, the seminar moderator will present his analysis of the following mass formulary, thereby offering an example of what the participants are to do in their presentations.

DOMINICA V PASCHAE

COLLECTA

( Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, )
semper ( in nobis ) paschale perfice sacramentum,
{ut, [ quos sacro baptismate dignatus es renovare, ]
( sub tuae protectionis auxilio ) multos fructus afferant, }
et ( ad aeternae vitae gaudiapervenire concedas.

Almighty eternal God,
ever bring the Easter mystery to perfection in us
so that the ones,
whom you have deemed worthy to renew by sacred Baptism,
may bear much fruit under the help of your protection,
and may you allow us to arrive at the joys of eternal life.

SUPER OBLATA

( Deus ), [ qui nos, ( per huius sacrificii veneranda commercia, )
unius summaeque divinitatis participes effecisti, ]
praesta, ( quaesumus, )
[ ut, ( sicut tuam cognovimus veritatem, )
sic eam dignis moribus assequamur. ]

O God, who through the venerable exchanges of this sacrifice
have made us sharers of the one and highest divinity,
grant, we ask, that, just as we have come to know your truth,
we may likewise live up to it by worthy actions.

POST COMMUNIONEM

Populo tuo, ( quaesumus, ) ( Domine, ) adesto propitius,
et, ( quem mysteriis caelestibus imbuisti, )
fac (ad novitatem vitae ) ( de vetustate ) transire.

Merciful one be present to your people, we ask, O Lord,
and make the people, which you have filled with heavenly mysteries,
to pass from oldness to newness of life.

Translations and commentary:

Collect: D.P. McCarthy, “Towards eternal joy”, Listen to the Word, The Tablet (13 May 2006) 25.

Super oblata: D.P. McCarthy, “A holy transaction”, Listen to the Word, The Tablet (19 April 2008) 17.

Post communionem: D.P. McCarthy, “From old to new”, Listen to the Word, The Tablet (9 May 2009) 17.

Formulary and translations: D.P. McCarthy, “Mystery ever Growning”, Listen to the Word, The Tablet (1 May 2010) 20.

THE FIRST ROUND OF PRESENTATIONS

The following students have chosen the formulary they wish to study:

Surname, Name | Formulary
Aneke, Jovitus | Lent, Sunday II
Beecher, Emmanuel | Christ the King
Etunwoke, Anthony | Easter Sunday
Gyapong,  Philip | Lent, Sunday V
Mantu, Akofang |Advent, Sunday II
Noronha, Ronald | Lent, Sunday IV
Okogie, Pachomius | Lent, Sunday IV
Onyiwara, Solomon | Advent, Sunday I
Thiraviam,  Justin | Lent, Sunday III
Toppo, Sushil | Lent, Sunday VI, Palm Sunday
Wilfred, Shaji | Advent, Sunday III
Young,  Geoffrey | Lent, Sunday I

The members of the two discussion groups are:

Group I
Year 2 student:
Anthony Etunwoke | Easter Sunday

Year 1 students and in Collects class:
Ronald Noronha | Lent, Sunday IV
Jovitus Aneke | Lent, Sunday II
Shaji Wilfred | Advent, Sunday III

Year 1 students not in collects class:
Emmanuel Beecher | Christ the King
Akofang Mantu |Advent, Sunday II

Group II
visiting professor
Pachomius Okogie | Lent, Sunday IV

Year 2 student:
Gyapong,  Philip | Lent, Sunday V

Year 1 students and in Collects class:
Justin Thiraviam | Lent, Sunday III
Sushil Toppo | Lent, Sunday VI, Palm Sunday

Year 1 students not in collects class:
Solomon Onyiwara | Advent, Sunday I
Geoffrey Young | Lent, Sunday I

Session 2: Wednesday, 28 February

The following are slated to present present the prayers of their respective formularies during this fifth sesion:

Group I

  1. Anthony Etunwoke | Easter Sunday
  2. Jovitus Aneke | Lent, Sunday II

Group II

  1. Philip Gyapong | Lent, Sunday V
  2. Justin Thiraviam | Lent, Sunday III

For each prayer of an agreed upon mass formulary the participant is to present:

  1. the Latin text of the prayer:
    1. with the action words (verbs, participles, gerunds, gerundives) underlined,
    2. with brackets around each clause.
  2. Draw a tree showing how one clause depends on another and label the connecting words at the juncture of each branch, that is clause.
  3. Draw a timeline of the actions and goals.
  4. Discern the interpretative categories of the prayer and complete a chart with three columns with the following three headings in this order from left to right:
    Latin text | function in Latin sentence | interpretative category.
    See the analysis of the literary forms in: J.L., Leachman, “The Collect for the Easter vigil”, in Appreciating the Collect, 105-140, especially pp. 117-125; and in: Leachman, J.G., – D.P. McCarthy, “A Liturgical Study of the proper prayers for St Charles of St Andrew Houben, C.P., (1) The Opening Prayer,” Questions Liturgiques: Studies in Liturgy 92 (2011) 28-44, especially pp. 31-37.
  5. give a draft rendering of the prayer in clear English (or Italian) as well as the student’s mother language.

Currently twelve participants are enrolled for credit in this seminar. Thus, the participants have been divided into two groups for their classroom activities. During each session two participants will present to their respective group. Each presenter will present the above material for all three prayers of his or her formulary for no more than 30 minutes each. The only way to achieve this is for the presenter to have prepared in advance all five items above for each of the three prayers in the formulary and either to print them out for distribution to each participant or to have a PowerPoint type presentation ready to present this same material. Each group will work through only as much material as is possible within the 30 minute limit for each presenter. This leaves half an hour for the moderator to provide further instruction during each session.

Each presenter is to prepare in writing a presentation on each prayer of the agreed formulary according to the five above listed items and hand this written material in to the seminar moderator who will consider them and give feedback in writing before or during the following session.

The seminar moderator will begin to present the semiotic analysis of the prayers by showing how to ask the question “Who does it?”. From this the moderator will examine how the divine-human exchange is presented in the general text of this prayer.

Session 3: Wednesday, 7 March

The following have agreed to present present the prayers of their respective formularies during this fifth sesion:

Group I

  1. Shaji Wilfred | Advent, Sunday III
  2. Ronald Noronha | Lent, Sunday IV

Group II

  1. Geoffrey Young | Lent, Sunday I
  2. Sushil Toppo | Lent, Sunday VI, Palm Sunday

 

Each participant presents the same material listed in session 2 for his or her agreed upon formulary.

These four presentations should take at most 60 minutes of our session together. This leaves 30 minutes for the moderator to present one item well in advance for the second round of presentations.

The seminar moderator will present the second step of semiotic analysis of a prayer by showing how to ask the question “Who does what?”. From this the moderator will further develop an understanding of how the divine-human exchange is presented in the text of the chosen prayer.

Session 4: Wednesday, 14 March

The following are slated to present present the prayers of their respective formularies during this fifth sesion:

Group I

  1. Emmanuel Beecher | Christ the King
  2. Akofang Mantu |Advent, Sunday II
  3. Gabriel Okeke | to be determined

Group II

  1. Solomon Onyiwara | Advent, Sunday I
  2. Pachomius Okogie | Lent, Sunday IV

Each participant presents the same material listed in session 2 for his or her agreed upon formulary.

The seminar moderator will present the third step of semiotic analysis of a prayer by showing how to ask the question “Who does what to whom?”. From this the moderator will further develop an understanding of how the divine-human exchange is presented in the text of the chosen prayer.

In addition to this, the moderator will then summarise the semiotics for all three prayers of the example formulary.

THE SECOND ROUND OF PRESENTATIONS

Session 5: Wednesday, 21 March

Note: our new horarium begins with this session. We shall meet from 10:15-11:50 in aula VII. We have also scheduled an encounter for 21 March, with this and all subsequent sessions moved up by one encounter. We no longer plan to meet on 23 May.

The following are slated to present present the prayers of their respective formularies during this fifth sesion:

Group I

  1. Anthony Etunwoke | Easter Sunday
  2. Jovitus Aneke | Lent, Sunday II

Group II

  1. Gyapong,  Philip | Lent, Sunday V
  2. Pachomius Okogie | Lent, Sunday IV

For each prayer of an agreed upon mass formulary the participant is to present the semiotics of each prayer in three stages according to three questions:

  1. Who does it?
    1. The presenter presents a chart that identifies the subject of each action word (verbs, participles, gerunds, gerundives),
    2. When a verbal form is passive:
      • both the subject of the passive form is identified and the agent of the passive action is also identified ( in rounded parentheses ).
      • If this latter agent is not explicit, then the presenter considers the possibility of implied divine agency or another implied agent, which is also indicated ( in rounded parentheses ).
      • In addition to the agent, some prayers include an instrument typically in the ablative. That is incorporated into the third chart, “who does what to whom”.
    3. After all of the subjects are identified along with the agents of passive forms the scholar considers how to arrange these on a series of several vertical lines.
      • Typically I draw a vertical line on the left and place on it all the references to God, “D”.
      • Further to the right I place a vertical line and label on it all the references to nos, “us”, given as “N”.
      • Between these two lines, I typically draw another vertical line on which I put all the references to mediation between God and us. These forms of mediation may be Jesus Christ, fully God and fully human; the Holy Spirit; the sacraments, which mediate the divine presence; or the church.
      • Furthest to the right I place a line for other things such as sin, vetustate, the world.
      • The scholar will have to assess all of the subjects to be included, consider their relationships one to another and decide how to relate like subjects with like subjects and best depict the relationships among them.
      • This may all need to be revised after completing all three charts once this analysis of the prayer is fully developed.
    4. The presenter then develops an understanding about the divine-human exchange in the subjects of the prayer by active and passive means.
  2. Who does what?
    1. The previous chart is copied and the following are added to it to form the second chart.
    2. Typically the “what” is the direct object of a prayer or the object in the dative of the 65 verbs (See: Ossa, Encounter 33, item 7.2) or of the compound verbs (See: Ossa, Encounter 33, item 7.3).
    3. The objects are labeled on the same set of vertical lines in such a way that all the items on any one vertical line concern a similar field of meaning such as: God, mediation, us, other. More vertical lines can be added if wholly new topics are introduced by an object.
    4. The scholar then draws an arrow from the subject to its object indicating direct action.
    5. Intransitive verbs do not have objects, so none is given.
    6. In the case of passive forms, the scholar may wish to draw a dotted or light arrow from the agent to the subject of the passive form.
    7. Sometimes the object of a verb is an entire expression given in the accusative with an infinitive (ACI). In that case I draw a box around the ACI, and then I draw an arrow from the subject of the verb giving rise to this expression to the box as a whole.
  3. Who does what to whom?
    1. The previous chart developed from the first two questions is then copied and the following is added to it to form the third chart.
    2. Typically the “to whom” describes the indirect object of the action (in contrast to the direct object), but this is also somewhat of a grab-bag category that includes the use of the ablative and some prepositional phrases.
    3. These items are then placed on the same set of vertical lines in a way that associates similar items on one vertical line: God, mediation, us, other.
    4. The scholar draws an arrow to these final items in a way that indicates the action of the verbs passing to these indirect objects, or ablatives or prepositional phrases.
    5. From this the presenter will further develop an understanding of how the divine-human exchange is presented in the text of the prayer. This may be illustrated by a series of horizontal zig-zags indicating the alternating divine initiatives and human responses.
  4. Rarely does a prayer also present an obstacle to be overcome in the actions of the divine-huamn exchange. This may also be examined and presented.
  5. The presentor will seek to discern the development in the semiotics of the three prayers of the agreed upon formulary and present this.

Each participant will have no more than 30 minutes to present the above material for all three prayers of his or her formulary. The only way to achieve this is for the presenter to have prepared in advance all items for each of the three prayers in the formulary and either to print them out for distribution to each participant or to have a PowerPoint type presentation ready to present this same material. We will work through only as much material as is possible within the 30 minute limit.

For each prayer of a formulary, a participant is to prepare the above items in writing and hand them in to the seminar moderator who will consider them and give feedback in writing during the following session.

These four presentations should take at most 60 minutes of our session together. This leaves 30 minutes for the moderator to further summarise the divine-human exchange in the prayers of a mass formulary.

 

Session 6: Wednesday, 11 April

The following have agreed to present present the prayers of their respective formularies during this sixth sesion:

Group I

  1. Shaji Wilfred | Advent, Sunday III
  2. Ronald Noronha | Lent, Sunday IV

Group II

  1. Justin Thiraviam | Lent, Sunday III
  2. Sushil Toppo | Lent, Sunday VI, Palm Sunday

Each participant presents the same material listed in session 5 for his or her agreed upon formulary.

These four presentations should take at most 60 minutes of our session together. This leaves 30 minutes for the moderator to speak  about preparing the final paper, from the presentation given below.

Session 7: Wednesday, 18 April

The following have agreed to present present the prayers of their respective formularies during this seventh sesion:

Group I

  1. Emmanuel Beecher | Christ the King
  2. Akofang Mantu |Advent, Sunday II

Group II

  1. Solomon Onyiwara | Advent, Sunday
  2. Geoffrey Young | Lent, Sunday I

Each participant presents the same material listed in session 5 for his or her agreed upon formulary.

These presentations should take at most 60 minutes of our session together. This leaves 30 minutes for the moderator to present to speak about the final paper.

 

THE THIRD ROUND OF PRESENTATIONS

No session on the national holiday, 25 April.

Session 8: Wednesday, 2 May

Our method consists in three stages of research and writing:

  1. heuristics = finding the information,
  2. hermeneutics = interpretating the information,
  3. synthetics = constructing the argument.

We have already accomplished the first two of these. 1) Heuristics involved choosing a mass formulary and coming to understand its Latin text. We accomplished this during the first third of our course and the first round of presentations. 2) Hermeneutics involved analysing the divine-human exchange in each prayer and then discerning any development in the same over the course of the three prayers of one mass formulary. We accomplished this during the second third of our course and the second round of presentations.

The third step of our method is synthetics. People sometimes mistake synthetics with simply presenting the data collected (heuristics) and interpreted (hermeneutics) in the first two steps, and then attaching a concluding summary (synthetics) to all of this data.

The synthetics I have in mind, however, is quite different. It involves setting aside all of the research completed to this point. The author then identifies:

  1. a topic to address,
  2. to a particular audience,
  3. addressing particular issues and
  4. a method of addressing this topic using the data collected in the process of heuristics and hermeneutics.

Audience: The author is encouraged to imagine himself or herself as a professor in a major seminary giving a classroom presentation to the seminarians.

Topic: The author is to address this one central topic: the divine-human exchange presented in the selected mass formulary.

Issues: The lecturer considers how this analysis of the prayers might address some particular struggle of the seminarians or how these prayers might suggest some considerations regarding the ministry of leading prayer or pastoring a community.

Method: The author is to choose a method well suited to the presentation. For example, were the author a professor of homeletics, he may write a one or two-page homily on the divine-human exchage as presented in the three prayers of the chosen formulary and then for a total of 10-15 pages teach the seminarians about the meaning of the divine-human exchange in these prayers. Were the author a professor of Trinitarian theology, he might use that lense to present the divine-human exchange in the three prayers of the mass formulary.

At the end of this web-page is the first part of a sample lecture this instructor would like to give to seminarians on the mass formulary of the Fifth Sunday of Easter. This draft lecture may serve as an example of how to write a final paper.

This presentation should include the following:

  1. What is meant by the divine-human exchange,
  2. A step-by step account of the divine-human exchange in each of the three prayers of the mass formulary,
  3. A consideration of all three prayers together to discern the changing configuration of the divine-human exchange in the overall formulary,
  4. The author’s insights into the meaning of the divine-human exchange in the chosen mass formulary,
  5. The author’s insights into the meaning of the divine-human exchange for the seminarians.

To focus the paper, the author may wish to focus on one central element of the divine-human exchanged and trace how it develops in the three prayers of the one formulary, and from that perspective present the fuller account of the divine-human exchange in the prayers of the mass formulary.

Citations: The student is to write the paper based on his or her findings, interpretation and chosen method of presenting an argument. The paper is to present the student’s own work, not the work of others.

Sometimes a reference to the work of another is warranted to present an authoritative source, such as a statement on the divine-human exchange given by Irenaeus of Lyon or Athanasius. Sometimes another author has presented some ideas with such clarity that they bear repeating, as for example the translations of the prayers published by the instructor. Sometimes the student wishes to present the argument of another as a basis for developing the student’s own argument. Sometimes the student wishes to contrast the writing of another with the student’s own ideas.

When making a direct citation of an another author for the first time, the student is to introduce the author and give the title of the work from which the citation is made. Thereafter the student may refer back to the author. Each direct quotation is followed by a footnote citation. My rule for direct citations is:

If I use three words or more in a row from another author, then I put them in quotation marks, either “…” or « … », and give a footnote citing the source of the text. If the citation is several lines long, then the entire text is indented, and no quotation marks are used, as for example this text is indented. A footnote citation is given at the end of the indented text.

Following the quotation, the student is to state in the student’s own words the elements from the quotation that are important to the student’s own argument. In this way the student will remain in charge of the argument presented in the student’s own paper. Thus, the quotation should be only as long as is necessary for the student to make the points needed for the student’s own argument.

If the student would like to take the work of another author and summarise it in the student’s own words, or to present it in the student’s own words, then, the student is to introduce the original author and source at the beginning. In this case, according to my rule, no three words in a row may be used directly from the original text. Rather, now the student is expressing the ideas in the student’s own words. The student must still give a footnote citation to the text of the original author.

Not citing the work of others correctly is considered plagiarism and, according to the policy of the Registrar (Segreteria), may result in dismissal of the student or the revocation of the student’s diploma.

Sometimes students have quoted long texts from other authors, without introducing the other author or the work and without giving a summary of the elements in the quotation that are important to the student’s own writing. Even if the text is properly quoted and cited in a footnote, the student is not to present the words of another author as if they were the student’s own presentation of the facts without any further critical reflection. This will not do in scientific writing. In short, the student is not to use a quotation of another person’s writing in place of the student’s own thought. Do not let the writing of others do your work for you.

Rather, this is your paper and you are presenting your own argument to the reader. Take charge of your own argument. By distinguishing the writing of other authors, the student will also come to the fore as a distinct voice and contribution.

In short, the student writing a paper is primarily in dialogue with the reader. Sometimes the student may wish to reflect critically on the writing of another author and to present this critical reflection to the reader.

Round three. In this third round of presentations, each participant presents an initial draft of his or her final seminar paper. Each participant is invited to submit the draft to the professor before the presentation for suggestions that may then be considered for incorporation into the presentation and final paper.

Due to the International Congress of the PIL, we can no longer schedule an encounter for Wednesday, 9 May. Rather than schedule another session at the end of the semester, I have asked three people to give presentations during each of the last two sessions. I am grateful to those students who have agreed to present their draft paper a week in advance. The following are slated to present present the initial draft of their papers during this fifth sesion:

Group I

  1. Anthony Etunwoke | Easter Sunday
  2. Jovitus Aneke | Lent, Sunday II
  3. Shaji Wilfred Advent, Sunday III

Group II

  1. Gyapong,  Philip | Lent, Sunday V
  2. Pachomius Okogie | Lent, Sunday IV
  3. Justin Thiraviam | Lent, Sunday II

Each participant will have no more than 30 minutes to present the initial draft of his or her paper. Each presenter will have to choose which elements to present. Each presenter is encouraged to leave time in the allotted 30 minutes for feedback from the other participants, and the presenter may request feedback or help on any more difficult part of the analysis or presentation. We will work through only as much material as is possible within the 30 minute limit.

These six presentations should take all 90 minutes of our session together. This will leave minimal time for the seminar moderator to present further material.

Session 9: Wednesday, 9 May
Session cancelled due to the Congress

 

Session 9: Wednesday, 16 May

The following are requested to present present the prayers of their respective formularies during this seventh sesion:

Group I

  1. Ronald Noronha | Lent, Sunday IV
  2. Emmanuel Beecher | Christ the King
  3. Akofang Mantu |Advent, Sunday II

Group II

  1. Sushil Toppo | Lent, Sunday VI, Palm Sunday
  2. Solomon Onyiwara | Advent, Sunday
  3. Geoffrey Young | Lent, Sunday I

Each participant presents the same material listed in session 8 for his or her agreed upon formulary.

These presentations should take at most 90 minutes of our session together. This leaves minimal time for the moderator to conclude the seminar.

Again, the final research paper of 10 pages of text but not more than 15 pages, following the norms of the PIL (without binding) should be handed in to the registrar not later than 24 May 2018.

 

Materials continued

You may purchase our books from Sr. Bernadette or the English desk at:

Pauline multimedia
via del Mascherino, 94
00193 Roma
Tel. 06.6872354
Fax: 06.68308093
Sr. Bernadette: Inglese@paoline-multimedia.it
General enquiries: centro@paoline-multimedia.it
www.paoline-multimedia.it

Map:

Latin resources

I have begun to develop a page of resources for the Latin language including: dictionaries, grammars, resources, texts, links.

Sample paper

Becoming the Gift:
A lecture for seminarians in a major seminary
on the prayers of the Fifth Sunday of Easter

When you pray to God, what do you ask for? Some of you are now in charge of writing the petitions for our daily liturgy, so I invite you to reflect on what you pray for.  Do you ask God for some thing? Do you ask God to do something for yourself or for another?

I would like to show you how the prayers of the church teach us how to pray. In these prayers the church does not simply ask God for some thing or simply to do something for us: “Give me a bicycle”, “Grant peace in this situation”. Rather, the church asks God to enable us do the work of God in this world. You will see that part of God’s gift is the way God gives the gift, by eliciting us and empowering us to do the work of God in this world. As God elicits our cooperation, we become part of God’s giving. We are God’s gift to the world. Our service freely given to others is the work of God in this world.

I invite you to look at the three proper prayers that make up the mass formulary for the Fifth Sunday of Easter: the collect, the prayer over the gifts presented and the prayer after communion.  To help facilitate our conversation I have provided the Latin text from the Missale Romanum 2008 with a study translation of the collect. Let us read it outloud together.

Omnipotens sempiterne Deus,
semper in nobis paschale perfice sacramentum,
ut, quos sacro baptismate dignatus es renovare,
sub tuae protectionis auxilio multos fructus afferant,
et ad aeternae vitae gaudia pervenire concedas.
Per Dominum

Almighty eternal God,
ever bring the Easter mystery to perfection in us
so that the ones, whom you have deemed worthy
to renew by sacred Baptism,
may bear much fruit under the help of your protection,
and may you allow us to arrive at the joys of eternal life.

What does God give? Not a thing. Rather, God brings the Easter mystery to perfection within us. This means that God is actively at work within us. I imagine that as the Easter season comes to an end, we ask God to perfect or complete this mystery within us.

God gives a second gift in this prayer in that God has deemed worthy to renew people by sacred baptism. Who are these people? Surely the neophytes who were baptised five weeks ago during the Easter vigil. We too, all the baptised may also be included in this gift of God. What is the gift? The gift is that we are deemed worthy; God deems us worthy; God makes us worthy. You see, our very self is a gift from God who created us and who deems us worthy to renew in baptism.

In both of these gifts, do you see that God is the one acting, but we are the ones changing. First, we are changed in baptism when we are deemed worthy to be renewed. Second, we change as the Easter mystery is brought to perfection within us. After we undergo both of these divine actions within us and we are changed in these ways, the action of the prayer shifts to us.

Next we bear much fruit. There is a subtlety here I want you to notice. It does not say that we make something or we work on something or we believe something. Our response is to bear much fruit. Do you hear the generative language used in this prayer? The prayer does not explicitely say it, but perhaps it reflects the language of baptism as being born again. God does not treat us like a thing, an object. Rather, God begets us. God renews us in baptism when we are deemed worthy, and God brings this generative activity within us to greater perfection every time we celebrate the Easter mystery. Humans are begotten, not made; persons, not things.

When you become pastors, be mindful that people are not objects for your benefit, things for your use, problems to be solved. Rather, the role of a pastor is to assist God who is already at work in renewing and bringing the faithful to perfection. This is the gift of God and we are all part of the giving.

Perhaps you can see in this prayer that there is an exchange going on between God and us. God deems us worthy to renew in baptism and brings the Easter mystery to perfection in us, and in turn we bear much fruit. We come to share in the divine work of bearing fruit, that is by joining in this divine work of bringing other people to new life. How do we come to share in divine life? We share in divine life by doing as God does in bearing fruit.

The prayer concludes with another petition. What does God grant? God allows us to achieve something. What do we achieve? We arrive at the joys of eternal life. When do we get these joys? It seems to me that we already share in them when God deems us worthy to renew in baptism. Already we are sharing in them as God brings the Easter mystery to perfection in us. We already share in these joys when we become part of the divine giving and we bear fruit in the lives of others, as we have received from God. …

[Note: what is missing is:

  1. a commentary on the prayer over the gifts presented,
  2. a commentary on the prayer after communion,
  3. a consideration of the divine-human exchange as it changes from one prayer to the other in the overall mass formulary.

You can see that the lecture is written for seminarians. It addresses several issues that I imagine seminarians might have and helps to draw them to a greater vision of their future ministry. It does this by giving a patient and step-by-step presentation of the collect.]

 

© 1 May 2018 by Daniel McCarthy