The purpose of this paper is to:

Restructuring the Concluding Rite of the Mass

By Hugh O’Donnell, Nov 12, 2008,

ND THEO 60404 – The Eucharist

The purpose of the essay is to, first, describe the concluding rite of a Roman Catholic Mass noting changes in the rite since Vatican II. Second, I will review current criticism of the concluding rite, particularly critiques that address the rites’ lack of connection to other parts of the Mass. Finally, I will suggest ways of changing the concluding rite so the worship service becomes a seamless, integral celebration whose liturgical and theological objectives are coherent and relevant to modern congregations.

Before Vatican II, the Mass was all said in Latin and there was no “concluding rite” prescribed. After Vatican II, the Mass was radically redefined by documents like the General Instruction of Roman Missal (GIRM), which changed “what” we do during Mass and tried to explain “why.” The GIRM formed the preface to the Roman Missal and contained the rules for the celebration of the Eucharist and expressed the Church’s understanding of the Mass[1]. The preliminary issue of the GIRM came in 1969 (1969GIRM) after Vatican II approved the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy on December 4, 1963.

Specifications for the concluding rite consisted of two elements. The first element of the directive, article 57a, instructed the priest to give a greeting and blessing which sometimes could be expanded to prayer over the people or other solemn form. The second element, 57b, instructed the priest to give a dismissal that would “send the congregation out to do good works, praising and blessing the Lord.”[2]

GIRM2000, article 90, prescribed the concluding rite with four elements as follows: a) brief, b) a greeting and blessing by the priest, which on certain days is given an amplified expression and, on occasions, delivered with a prayer over the people or said with another solemn formula, c) a dismissal by priest or deacon, and d) kiss of the altar and profound bow by priest, deacon and other ministers. Interestingly, element c), the dismissal, no longer contained the specifying purpose of good works and praise.

GIRM2002, added back the dismissal’s purpose “ that each may go out to do good works, praising and blessing God.” Edward Foley, in his commentary on GIRM2002, suggests the dismissal’s purpose is an interpretation of the “fruits of the mystery” prayed in the after communion prayer[3]. The fact that the purpose was deleted in GIRM2000 serves to emphasize, for me, the confusion that always has accompanied the true nature and exact content of the concluding rite[4].

Many critiques contend the concluding rite never adequately connected to the Mass’ introductory rite nor did it connect the rite to other liturgical and theological Mass purposes. 2002GIRM, although never forbidding post-dismissal singing or recessional music, does not prescribe liturgical singing as it does for the entrance rite[5].

Father Michael Driscoll, in a 2005 article appearing in America, summarized current criticism of the concluding rite[6]. His main criticism contended the concluding rite was far too ill defined and abbreviated to achieve its intended purpose as a dismissal. Father Driscoll also maintained the concluding rite did not adequately send us forth into the world to live out the Eucharistic mission. In order to properly connect liturgy to life, the closing rite should be carefully reshaped.

In the same article, Cardinal Daneels’s contends the abrupt ending of the Mass, without proper closure and connection to the Church’s mission, represents a lack of respect for the Eucharist. The Cardinal says “People are not given the time to appropriate the great mystery after reception of Communion. It is symptomatic in our fast food society that we simply eat and run, if we do not actually eat on the run.”

The problems in the concluding rite stem not only from its’ disconnect to the Liturgy of the Eucharistic, but from its’ disconnect to the Liturgy of the Word. A similar problem exists in the Mass’ introductory rite where the collect prayer only introduces the Liturgy of the Word ignoring the Liturgy of the Eucharist. If the Mass is to become a unified theological and liturgical celebration, both the introductory and concluding rites need to be reshaped so as to address both these main sections of the Mass equally.

The first step in any total GIRM revision is the creation of 1) a clear statement of the Mass’ overall purpose and 2) a description of the Mass’ explicit connection to today’s Eucharistic mission. When the GIRM’s were issued, the Church mainly concentrated on implementing the new procedures. The “why” of the new procedures got lost in the “what.” The people never fully understood the reasons the changes were being made. We never saw the Mass as a vehicle by which Jesus becomes present, not only in each individual, but in our Church and the entire world, collectively, as envisioned by Saint Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians. The “whys” of the new Mass were too complex and multifaceted to be grasped by the laity. The entire Mass must be redefined in terms simple for all to connect with today. The many parts of the Mass must be unified by one core idea that is independent of liturgical season.

Father Thomas Keating, in his book, the Mystery of Christ: The Liturgy as Christian Experience[7], provides us with a good core image. He describes the Mass as “five ways” which Jesus becomes more present in the world. He describes the Mass as the” five P’s” by which Jesus becomes profoundly and progressively present.

The first P, the first presence of Jesus in the Mass, finds its roots in Jesus’ words “when two or more people come together in my name; I will be present” (Matt 18:20). Currently, the collect prayer of the Mass’ introductory rite “collects” us together and prepares us for the Liturgy of the Word. As a true introductory rite, the collect should introduce all five ways Jesus becomes “more present” starting with Jesus’ first presence when two or more are collected together.

The second P of the Mass finds its roots in Deut.18:15-19 and John 1:14. Moses tells us to listen to the words of the one to come after him. The author of John’s Gospel tells us the Word of God will become flesh and dwell among us. Therefore Jesus not only becomes present to us when two or more gather in His name, Jesus becomes more present in His Word.

The third P is perhaps the most explicit form of Jesus becoming “more present.” The third P comes during the Liturgy of the Eucharist (item 79c, Epiclesis, GIRM2002) when Jesus becomes present in the gifts on the altar. The bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus by the transforming power of the Holy Spirit.[8]

The fourth P happens between GIRM2002 items 87 and 88; the communion subsection of the Liturgy of the Eucharist. As each member of the congregation receives the Body and Blood, Jesus becomes present to each person who opens his heart to the sacrament. Jesus is present to all those who gather themselves in communion.

Finally, during the last P, Jesus becomes collectively present. Not only does each of us receive Jesus individually, we collectively become the Body of Christ (I Cor 11:12-27. A full description of Jesus’ collective presence in not adequately addressed in the GIRM. Granted, the after communion prayer (no. 89 GIRM2002) is meant to address this idea. However the impact of this reality and its’ implications on the Church’s

Mission are not clearly visible nor adequately carried forward into specific dismissal instructions. Perhaps the Mass’ dismissal, not the after communion prayer, it the better place to address the Eucharistic Mission of the Mass.

The fifth and most profound P of the Mass happens at the dismissal when we depart the Church hopefully understanding our roles as specific organs of one body, Christ.

The most profound way Jesus becomes present is not when Jesus becomes present in us individually, but when we collectively become the Body of Christ, present to the entire world, to the degree we collectively extend ourselves to others who are not present at Mass. We, like Mary, give birth to Jesus for the world. Jesus becomes present in a most powerful way, a way Jesus could not become present in His physical body 2000 years ago.

Emphasizing the possibilities and power of Keating’s fifth P are the most significant changes we can make to the Mass. The Mass’ dismissal instructions and announcements must do a better job of spelling out specific ways and specific events we can act in the world as the Body of Christ during the upcoming week. The priest must spell out our Eucharistic mission plan. We must be asked to think of specific ways we will take Jesus to others in the week ahead.

Although changes to the concluding rite must primarily focus the congregation on its’ collective Eucharistic mission, the rite must also conclude the Liturgy of the Word. We currently have no after Liturgy of the Word prayer like we have in the after communion prayer for the Liturgy of the Eucharist. As already hinted at, our after communion prayer should be folded into a concluding prayer that concludes not just the Liturgy of the Eucharist, but also the Liturgy of the Word. Furthermore, the concluding rite needs to have specific musical specifications just like the introductory rite.

In order to make the above recommendations specific and clear, I offer an example of how Mass prayers might change for the Third Sunday of Lent (year A). Currently, the new ICEL 2006 collect prayer proposed, but not yet adopted in the approved Sacramentary (1973), introduces both the Liturgy of the Word for the Third Sunday of Lent Sunday (Exodus 17:3-7, Rom 5:1-2, 5-8, and John 4:5-42) and the Liturgy of the Eucharist as suggested above. All we need do is accept this change and perhaps add an idea from John 7:38 “from him rivers of living water shall flow”. Not only does Jesus flow into us individually but through us to the entire world. The 2006 collect proposal now reads as follows:

O God, living and true, look upon your people, whose dry and stony hearts are practiced with thirst. Unseal the living water of your Spirit ; let it become within us an ever-flowing spring, leaping up to eternal life. Per Dominum.

The current after communion prayer (1973) for the Third Sunday of Lent does not address both Liturgies and reads as follows:

Lord, in sharing this sacrament, may we receive your forgiveness and be brought together in unity and peace. We ask this through Christ our Lord.

An example of a brand new concluding rite prayer, one that would replace the after communion prayer as well, for cycle A of the 3^rd Sunday of Lent, might read as follows:

Lord, having received your presence into our hearts today, help us to be like the Samaritan woman, who, having drank of your everlasting life, then took the life you gave her and shared it with her neighbors. May we, by the collective presence of your Body in the world, and like the example of your mother, Mary, go into our neighborhoods, giving birth to your Word, so they too can drink from your river of everlasting life.

Before Vatican II and before the concluding rite was a part of the Mass, the prologue to John’s Gospel (John 1:1-14) was always read at the end of Mass. As a way of keeping with this pre Vatican II tradition, all new concluding prayers might contain reference to John 1:1-14 as well. Words from John’s prologue nicely lend themselves to connecting any scriptural passage with the Liturgy of the Eucharist. As John’s prologue points out, the Word became Flesh and dwelled among…. to all those who would receive Jesus’ Word and Flesh. In the above concluding rite example prayer for the Third Sunday of Lent, words from John 1:1-14 blend together with the liturgical season scripture readings while also connecting to the key idea of all Liturgies of the Eucharist; the idea Jesus is made present by eating of His Flesh.

In conclusion, the more we make the parts of our Mass seamlessly connected together, the more meaningful our service will become. The simpler our core understanding of the Mass is, the better chance we have of internalizing its’ message. The better we blend the various liturgical and theological objectives of a particular season into an overall theme of the Mass, the more likely we are to implement the Eucharistic mission into our daily lives. The more we see the Mass as the progressive and profound way we make Jesus actually present in us, the Church, the community, the more likely we are to give birth to Jesus in our world.

[1] Various Authors, Introduction - A Commentary on the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, Liturgical Press, Collegeville, Minnesota, 2007.

[2] The General Instruction and The New Order of Mass, 1969 ICEL, Priests of The Sacred Heart, Hales Corners, Wisconsin.

[3] Foley, Edward, Chapter 2,, A Commentary on the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, Liturgical Press, Collegeville, Minnesota, 2007, page 193.

[4] Smolarski, Dennis C, The General Instruction of the Roman Missal 1969-2002, Liturgical Press, Collegeville, Minnesota, 2003. page 37.

[7] Keating, Thomas, The Mystery of Christ: The Liturgy as Christians Experience, Element, Rockport, Massachusetts, 1987.