Ordinariate Chrism Mass

Yesterday morning I went to London to attend the Chrism Mass for the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham which was celebrated by the Papal Nuncio, H.E. Archbishop Antonio Mennini, at St James Spanish Place.

The setting was splendid, there was a good line-up of priests in choir and the body of the church was filled by the laity as well as some non-participating priests.

The Papal Nuncio, the Ordinary and the clergy of the Ordinariate.
The photograph also indicates how splendid setting for the liturgy is the church.

Image: Ordinariate

The New Liturgical Movement blog has an illustrated report in First Chrism Mass of UK Ordinariate at St. James, Spanish Place. The Ordinariate Portal has a link to a full set of photographs of the liturgy here.

The Archbishop mixes the Chrism

Image:Ordinariate on Flickr/© Mazur/catholicnews.org.uk

The Archbishop bestows the blessing at the end of Mass

Image: Ordinariate on Flickr/© Mazur/catholicnews.org.uk

Beforehand a friend had expressed the view that the Chrism Mass is merely a modern invention. Whilst it is true tht it is, in its present form, a product of the liturgical changes of the 1950s and 1960s, it is nonetheless a restoration of an ancient practice. My 1930s edition of the St Andrew's Missal refers to its former existence. I assume that at some point the idea that there should only be one solemn Mass on Maundy Thursday, or sheer fatigue at the liturgical schedule, led to it being subsumed within the Bishop's Mass in his cathedral (or wherever he was celebrating Easter), accompanied by twelve priests, seven deacons and seven sub-deacons.

Reinstating a separate liturgy strikes me as a recovery of tradition rather than the invention of tradition. Once the ceremonies of Maundy Thursday moved back to the evening there are practical issues of time to determine events. In its present form, with the modern re-statement of priestly vows, it does serve to be a reaffirmation of priestly responsibility and duty, and, in a somewhat demotic way, by making it a public liturgy, brings that home to the laity as well.

In the context of the novus ordo liturgy and the thought which inspired it this does seem an appropriate occasion for concelebration, as is indicated by the interview to which I linked in my recent post Concelebration. The liturgy so celebrated does assert the unity of the local church around the bishop.

On the other hand it can equally well be argued, on a more traditionalist basis, that here, as elsewhere, concelebrants are not necessary at all, and that the key figure is the bishop as celebrant. Indeed it is important to stress the episcopal function as consecrator of the oils, that this is an hierarchical event, indeed a quintessentially one. The bishop is the mediator of the descent of Grace through tangible sacramental means, and requires no more than the appropriate traditional priestly and diaconal support.

Looking at the older liturgy I see that there, following the blessing of the oil of the sick, the oil of Chrism was consecrated first, and then the oil of the catechumens was blessed. The modern rite reverses this, concluding with the Chrism. This suggests an element of theatricality in the minds of the compilers, rather than adhering to the traditional order of proceeding, and is, I think, to be regretted.

So perhaps I favour restoring a separate Chrism Mass, but would favour a more traditional form, and indeed understanding of its theology.

The Queen and the Order of the British Empire

The Daily Telegraph has this rather fine photograph of The Queen at the sevice of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire which was held in St Paul's Cathedral this week. Her Majesty is wearing her robes as Sovereign of the Order.

The Queen at the service.
Her Majesty is wearing a tiara given to her by Queen Mary, who suggested the present rose-pink colour for the Order in place of the original purple.

Image:Geoff Pugh / Daily Telegraph

The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh led worshippers at a special service of dedication and thanks for the Order of the British Empire. Around 2,000 people holding the honour filled St Paul's Cathedral where they made an act of personal dedication led by the Bishop of London, Dr Richard Chartres. There are more pictures of the service here.

The Order, which was founded in 1917, has its chapel in the crypt of the cathedral, and the provisoon of uch chapels and the holding of services of the various Orders is an interesting development of the twentieth century. In 1900 there was only the Garter chapel at Windsor, and the ceremonial of procession and installation more fully restored in 1948 at its sixth centenary. The religious ceremonies of the Order of St Patrick had been abandoned at St Patrick's cathedral in Dublin with the dis-establishment of the Church of Ireland in 1869-71, and there were no other chapels functioning.

However in 1905 that of the Order of St Michael and St George was inaugurated by King Edward VII in St Paul's, the Thistle Chapel was built at St Giles Edinburgh in 1911, and the Order of the Bath established (or re-established) in King Henry VII's Chapel at Westminster Abbey in 1913. To this has been added the Chapel of the Order of the British Empire at St Pauls and the use by the Royal Victorian Order of the Queen's Chapel of the Savoy. All these Orders now have annual, bi-annual or trienniel services with the installation of Knights or Knights Grand Cross and the wearing of the appropriate robes and insignia. These are, therefore, all good instances of that recovery - I much prefer to use that term rather than 'invention' - of tradition by the Crown in this country, and defying the levelling tendency, or to 'dumb down.' It conveys a dynamic tradition, of a belief in received practice.

St Lucy

Today is the feast day of St Lucy, one of the Virgin martyrs who is named in the Roman Canon, and who has enjoyed widespread veneration through the centuries.

St Lucy and her mother Eutychia receive a vision of St Agatha after praying at her tomb.
A painting of 1410 by Jacobello del Fiore (c.1370-1439).
Civic Museum Fermo

Image:Wikipedia

There is a good account of her life and legend here showing how her story and image developed. She continues to be particularly celebrated in Sweden and, as this article on St Lucy's Day shows, that tradition has spread to other Scandinavian countries during the last century. An example of the diffusion and 'invention' of tradition. The article also examines the reasons for the persistence of devotion to St Lucy in a Lutheran country far from the origins of her cult in Sicily.

The Imperial Crown of India

Today is the centenary of the Coronation Durbar in Delhi of the King-Emperor George V.

There is an online article about the Durbars of 1877, 1903 and 1911 here. I understand from a friend who works on the history of India that the ceremonial was carefully modelled on that of pre-1857 Mughal Imperial enthronements.

There is another about the title Emperor of India here, from which I was interested to learn that the title was used until June 22 1948, ten months after partition and independence, and two years before the present Indian state became a republic.

The King-Emperor receiving homage
Image: myspace.com

The two previous Durbars had been held by the Viceroy, but in 1911 the monarch himself was present.

This can be interpreted as part of what can misleadingly be termed the "invention of tradition" at that time. I would prefer to use a term like "recovery of tradition" to describe the process. It is interesting that King george V, by temperament arather retiring man shoul dbe so prominent in this process. Under him the Coronation service was restored to more of its traditional form, St Edward's Crown permanently set with precious stones, the Investiture of the Prince of Wales revived as a public ceremony and held at Caernarvon, the Durbar held by the King-Emperor, the wearing of the Imperial State Crown at the State Opening from 1913 and, later on, at the suggestion of his cousin Princess Marie- Louise, the Royal Maundy once more given by the Monarch in person. This policy has been continued by King George VI - as for example the revival of much of the Order of the Garter ceremonial in 1948 to mark its 600th anniversary - and by the present Queen.

The King-Emperor and Queen-Empress at the Durbar

Image: Press Association

The presence of the King-Emperor posed a ceremonial problem. As a Coronation Durbar it was fitting for him to wear a crown ansd robes of state. However the Act of Settlement of 1701 forbids the removal from the realm of the crown jewels. As a result a new crown had to be made - there are details about its composition and cost, together with a photograph, here. The government were sceptical about having new crwons across the Empire and it was suggested that after its return with the King to Britain it should be broken up. This was rejected by the King, who considered his Indian subjects would appreciate seeing it alongside the other regalia in the Tower of London.

Then the question arose as to when the King-Emperor should put the crown on. Entering the Durbar arena and putting it on himself would make it a non-religious ceremony, which was opposed by Archbishop Davidson of Canterbury, but a Christian coronation of the ruler of an overwhelmingly Hindu and Muslim empire deemed inappropriate. As a result the King-Emperor entered the Durbar robed and crowned, and the Queen-Empress wore robes and a tiara made for the occasion. This was inherited by the present Queen from Queen Mary, but not used until recent years when it has been worn by HRH The Duchess of Cornwall.

When the funeral of King George V was held in 1936 no place was found for the Indian crown - the second Orb, that of Queen Mary II, placed on Queen Victoria's coffin in 1901 is said to have symbolised her position as Empress of India. By contrast in Austria alongside the Imperial Crown was placed a replica of the Hungarian Crown to symbolise the dual monarchy - and India could be deemed to be analogous.

The Imperial Crown of India

Image:Hylaride on Flickr

Following the independence of India and Pakistan and their becoming republics this spectacular crown has remained a museum piece rather than part of the living regalia of the monarchy. However as a crown that is not bound by statute to this realm it could take on the function of one to accompany the Monarch to his or her other realms, either to be worn or carried at State Openings of Parliament. Rather like the 'House-Crown' of the Holy Roman Emperor Rudolph II became the Imperial Crown of Austria after 1804-6 the Indian Crown could take on a new function.

Now that would be an invention or revival, or extension, of tradition - but it would, to my mind, make sense.