Fifteenth Sunday after Pentecost: 1962 Roman Missal Proper Guide (Full Edition)

Full source-first companion to the 1962 Roman Missal propers, including complete appointed texts, per-element reception, source-grounded and exploratory synthesis, and documented cultural afterlives

Fifteenth Sunday after Pentecost

Dominica Decima Quinta post Pentecosten · II classis · Green

1962 Missale Romanum, editio typica, pp. 396–397 · Credo · Preface of the Most Holy Trinity

The Propers: Map

The four senses

Scriptural Date and Location

Seven distinct passages are directly appointed, one for each scriptural element; the three orations quote no Scripture. Psalms carry the missal’s Vulgate number, the common modern number in parentheses.

The Propers: Themes and Movement

The three prayers of this Mass deny the Church and the communicant any standing of their own, twice over: she cannot stand safe without God, and what must go before in us is not our own sense but the working of a heavenly gift. The Secret between them asks only that the sacraments guard and defend, so that not one of the three credits the assembly with anything of its own. Everything the day sings and reads is the motion that answers that denial — mercy moving first in four grammars, a harvest whose seed was given, a dead man handed back alive at a town gate, and flesh given at the end of it for the life of the world.

1. Mercy moves first, and the formulary says so four times in four grammars

The word is a petition at the Introit, miserére mihi, Dómine, quóniam ad te clamávi tota die; a divine attribute at the Collect, miserátio continuáta mundet et múniat; the thing to be proclaimed at the Gradual, ad annuntiándum mane misericórdiam tuam; and at the Gospel the motion in Christ out of which the miracle comes, misericórdia motus super eam.

At the Gospel the initiative is Christ’s, and Cyril says so. Cyril of Alexandria sets Naim against Capharnaum: there Christ was present by invitation, here nobody summons him and he comes to raise the dead man on his own motion, in Cyril’s own words at the Gospel subsection (Payne Smith, vol. 1, pp. 132–133). The widow of the pericope asks nothing, says nothing, and is credited with no faith; everything that happens at the gate begins on the other side. What the scene draws from those who watch it is a verdict about God and not about the young man, Deus visitávit plebem suam, and the appointed text leaves that sentence with them and not with the Evangelist.

The first and last orations of the Mass say the same thing negatively, and their grammar says it too. The Collect’s semicolon puts the Church’s incapacity, quia sine te non potest salva consístere, ahead of the petition it grounds; the Postcommunion makes the same denial of the communicant in the first person plural, ut non noster sensus in nobis, sed iúgiter eius prævéniat efféctus, and puts its own subject last of all, both grammars being set out at the Collect and Postcommunion subsections. Augustine, on the Introit’s own psalm, makes the incapacity the ground on which the petition is heard — the ear bends to the neck that is not stiffened — in his sentence at the Introit subsection (En. Ps. 85.2). Misericordia and miseratio are different nouns, so what runs through the four elements is one sense and not one word, and praeveniat is a plain verb of precedence. The Gradual pairs the mercy with truth, misericórdiam tuam et veritátem tuam, the fixed collocation whose psalms are counted through the psalter at the Gradual subsection. Four grammars, and in none of them does the motion begin on the assembly’s side.

2. The lesson runs an economy, and its currency is itself given

The Epistle is unembarrassedly commercial — Opus autem suum probet unusquísque, Quæ enim semináverit homo, hæc et metet, témpore enim suo metémus — while the orations allow the Church nothing of her own. The tradition’s resolution is not that the economy is figurative but that its currency is a gift.

Augustine, expounding the Gradual’s own psalm, draws the consequence for any progress at all: quia munera ipsius sunt, non merita tua (En. Ps. 91.3); the Collect asks that the Church be governed tuo semper múnere. Aquinas finds the same doctrine in the lesson’s own grammar, reading the asymmetry of the possessives at Gal. 6:8: cum agit de seminatione carnis, dicit in carne sua … sed cum loquitur de semine spiritus, non dicit suo, quia spiritus non est nobis a nobis, sed a Deo (Super Galatas cap. 6 lect. 2) — and the asymmetry is in the appointed Latin, qui séminat in carne sua against qui autem séminat in spíritu, a possessive at the flesh and none at the spirit. At 6:5 he makes even the sheaves measured grace, the burden each man carries to judgement being mensuram gratiae suae … tamquam manipulos bonorum operum. Munere in the Collect and munera in Augustine do similar work, so the lesson’s commerce and the orations’ denial are one doctrine and not two: what the day tells the assembly it will reap was first given it to sow.

3. Flesh sown, flesh carried out, flesh given

Caro turns twice inside one Mass. The Epistle makes flesh the ground that yields corruption, de carne et metet corruptiónem; the Gospel carries a corpse out through a gate; the Communion gives flesh as the world’s life, caro mea est pro sǽculi vita. The lesson carries its burdens with the bier-bearers’ own verb, ónera portáte at 6:2 and onus suum portábit at 6:5 standing in the same Mass as hi autem, qui portábant at the gate of Naim. And the lesson’s other half reaps out of the spirit what the flesh cannot yield — qui autem séminat in spíritu, de spíritu metet vitam ætérnam — so the turn the noun makes across the three elements is already answered inside the element that begins it.

One Father turns the noun in both places, and he does it from the Gospel side. Asked why Christ touched the bier when a word would have sufficed, Cyril answers that the touch is itself the teaching: what the flesh of the Word touches it makes alive, because that flesh is the Word’s own, and his sentence stands at the Gospel subsection (Payne Smith, vol. 1, p. 135). Aquinas draws the same inference at the Communion’s verse, naming John Damascene for it and closing on Christ’s healing of the sick by his own touch (Super Ioannem cap. 6 lect. 6), so the bier and the bread stand side by side on a checked witness’s own sentence; Augustine supplies the ecclesial half at the same verse, where none but the body of Christ lives by Christ’s Spirit (Tract. in Io. 26.13), so that the life the antiphon offers is had by being made a member of the one whose flesh it sings. Cyril’s Luke commentary is quoted in an 1859 English of an ancient Syriac version, and Augustine’s and Aquinas’s lemmata at that verse read dabo and pro mundi vita, so their expositions belong to the verse and not to the antiphon as it is sung.

4. One voice through every change of person

The formulary changes person constantly: first singular at the Introit and the Offertory, first and second plural in the Epistle and its second singular at consíderans teípsum in Gal. 6:1, no speaking person in the Gradual or the Alleluia, Christ’s own singular at the Communion, first plural in the Secret and the Postcommunion. Augustine expounds both of this Mass’s psalm-antiphons on a single principle. At the Introit’s psalm the one Christ is head and members together, and his sentence stands at the Introit subsection (En. Ps. 85.1); at the Offertory’s psalm he settles the question of its speaker on the same principle, and his answer stands at the Offertory subsection (En. Ps. 39.5). Cassiodorus expounds both psalms on the same principle in his own words, so two Latin commentators state the reading: at Ps. 85 the speaker is Christ in the form of a servant and at Ps. 39 the Church he speaks in, his Latin standing at each subsection (PL 70). Head at the one antiphon and body at the other, and the Mass sings both of them in the first person singular.

The orations move with it. Their objects narrow from Ecclésiam tuam to nos to mentes nostras et córpora, while their verbs go from cleansing and fortifying to guarding and defending to possessing and going before; so the singular of the chants and the plural of the prayers are not two speakers alternating but one body addressed at closer range as the rite proceeds. Objects narrowing across a Mass is a common euchological shape, and this formulary is one instance of it. And at five places in this Mass’s two psalm-antiphons Augustine’s lemma is not the chant’s, three at Ps. 85 and two at Ps. 39, so there what he expounds is the psalm and not the sung text; Cassiodorus’s lemma departs from them at miserere mei alone.

5. The day’s subject is an interval to be endured

The vocabulary of duration is unusually dense — tota die (Int.), mane … per noctem (Grad.), exspéctans exspectávi (Off.), témpore enim suo metémus and dum tempus habémus (Ep.), and the stock euchological continuáta, semper and iúgiter in the three orations, which carry little on their own. Every scriptural marker of duration has a reading behind it that stretches it to a lifetime. Augustine reads tota die as the whole age in which the body of Christ groans under pressure, running to the end of the world, and Cassiodorus as the span of one life, both at the Introit subsection (En. Ps. 85.5; PL 70). At the Gradual’s versicle Augustine divides the day between the time when it goes well with us and the time of tribulation, giving the psalm’s mercy to the one and its truth to the other (En. Ps. 91.4); Cassiodorus on the same versicle takes the two words for the whole of a life, Mirabiliter vita nostra duobus est sermonibus conclusa. Ambrose on the Offertory’s doubled verb makes perfection not the waiting but the having waited (In Ps. XXXIX §1), on the strength of Matt. 10:22, the verse Jerome and Augustine likewise reach for where the lesson says non deficiámus; and Aquinas glosses dum tempus habémus as this life, which is the time of sowing. Chrysostom, on the same verse, makes the interval the measure of mercy itself: “As it is not always in our power to sow, so neither is it to show mercy.”

The one element that could have said today is the one whose today is left unsung. The Alleluia sings Ps. 94 from inside the summons to worship and leaves unsung the oracle of warning in which the psalm’s own hodie stands, as set out in the Alleluia subsection of the commentary. What this Mass sings is the waiting; the hodie that would cut the waiting short is the half the chant does not reach.

The Appointed Formulary in Full

Everything the 1962 Missale Romanum prints for this Mass, in the order it prints it: the Latin of the Vatican editio typica exactly as the controlling facsimile has it, each element under the printed heading, scriptural reference and marginal number the book gives it, and beneath it the English of an identified public-domain witness.

Formulary. DOMINICA DECIMA QUINTA post Pentecosten, II classis, printed pp. 396–397, marginal nos. 1582–1591. It opens in the lower half of the left column of p. 396, below the Postcommunion of the Fourteenth Sunday (no. 1581), and ends at the foot of the left column of p. 397, the right column of that page already carrying the Sixteenth Sunday. It appoints no Tract, Sequence, blessing or ritual text, and no second or third Collect, Secret or Postcommunion.

The English below. Scriptural elements are the Douay–Rheims as revised by Bishop Challoner — the English of the Clementine Vulgate the missal prints — in the Project Gutenberg e-text of that revision, with the psalm loci resolved in the missal’s own Vulgate numbering. The three orations are the anonymous English of The Roman Missal translated into the English language for the use of the laity, first revised edition (Philadelphia: Eugene Cummiskey, 1861), at the three prayers that book prints for this formulary at printed pp. 428–429, reproduced with its own nineteenth-century spelling and its abbreviated conclusion “Thro’.”

1. Introit (Int.)

Ant. ad Introitum — Ps. 85, 1 et 2-3 — marginal no. 1582

Inclína, Dómine, aurem tuam ad me, et exáudi me: salvum fac servum tuum, Deus meus, sperántem in te: miserére mihi, Dómine, quóniam ad te clamávi tota die. Ps. ibid., 4 Lætífica ánimam servi tui: quia ad te, Dómine, ánimam meam levávi. ℣. Glória Patri.

English: Douay–Rheims (Challoner), Ps. 85:1–4 printed whole, with the portions the chant sings in bold

v. 1 A prayer for David himself. Incline thy ear, O Lord, and hear me: for I am needy and poor. v. 2 Preserve my soul, for I am holy: save thy servant, O my God, that trusteth in thee. v. 3 Have mercy on me, O Lord, for I have cried to thee all the day. Ps. v. 4 Give joy to the soul of thy servant, for to thee, O Lord, I have lifted up my soul. ℣. Glória Patri.

Where the registered English does not answer the Latin. The antiphon is a three-part cento, not a quotation: v. 1a as far as exáudi me, then v. 2b from salvum fac, then v. 3 entire, with the psalm’s own inscription and the halves of vv. 1 and 2 that mention need, poverty and holiness all unsung. Two of its words are not the Clementine’s. Ad me is added at v. 1 and the Douay’s “Incline thy ear, O Lord, and hear me” has no counterpart for it; miserére mihi stands at v. 3 where the Bible text reads miserere mei, and the Douay’s “Have mercy on me” happens to answer both. The doxology cue Glória Patri belongs to the Ordinary and not to the proper.

2. Collect (Coll.)

Oratio — marginal no. 1583

Ecclésiam tuam, Dómine, miserátio continuáta mundet et múniat: et quia sine te non potest salva consístere; tuo semper múnere gubernétur. Per Dóminum.

English: Cummiskey (Philadelphia, 1861), Collect of this formulary, printed p. 428

May thy continual mercy purify and defend thy church: and since without thee it cannot be safe, may it always be directed by the influence of thy grace. Thro’.

Where the registered English does not answer the Latin. Tuo semper múnere becomes “by the influence of thy grace,” so the noun munus — the gift the Church is governed by, and the word Augustine uses at the Gradual’s psalm to deny that any progress is a merit — does not survive into the English, and semper is carried by the adverb of the verb rather than of the gift. The semicolon after consístere is the prayer’s hinge; the uncorrected optical layer of the Benziger 1962 shows it too, and those of the Pustet 1862, the Venice 1570 and the Vatican typica of 1604 show a comma there.

3. Epistle (Ep.)

Léctio Epístolæ beáti Pauli Apóstoli ad Gálatas. — Gal. 5, 25-26; 6, 1-10 — marginal no. 1584

Fratres: Si spíritu vívimus, spíritu et ambulémus. Non efficiámur inánis glóriæ cúpidi, ínvicem provocántes, ínvicem invidéntes. Fratres, et si præoccupátus fúerit homo in áliquo delícto, vos, qui spirituáles estis, huiúsmodi instrúite in spíritu lenitátis, consíderans teípsum, ne et tu tentéris. Alter altérius ónera portáte, et sic adimplébitis legem Christi. Nam si quis exístimat se áliquid esse, cum nihil sit, ipse se sedúcit. Opus autem suum probet unusquísque, et sic in semetípso tantum glóriam habébit, et non in áltero. Unusquísque enim onus suum portábit. Commúnicet autem is qui catechizátur verbo, ei qui se catechízat, in ómnibus bonis. Nolíte erráre: Deus non irridétur. Quæ enim semináverit homo, hæc et metet. Quóniam qui séminat in carne sua, de carne et metet corruptiónem: qui autem séminat in spíritu, de spíritu metet vitam ætérnam. Bonum autem faciéntes, non deficiámus: témpore enim suo metémus, non deficiéntes. Ergo dum tempus habémus, operémur bonum ad omnes, máxime autem ad domésticos fidei.

English: Douay–Rheims (Challoner), Gal. 5:25–26 and 6:1–10, printed whole

5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. 5:26 Let us not be made desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another. 6:1 Brethren, and if a man be overtaken in any fault, you, who are spiritual, instruct such a one in the spirit of meekness, considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. 6:2 Bear ye one another’s burdens: and so you shall fulfil the law of Christ. 6:3 For if any man think himself to be some thing, whereas he is nothing, he deceiveth himself. 6:4 But let every one prove his own work: and so he shall have glory in himself only and not in another. 6:5 For every one shall bear his own burden. 6:6 And let him that is instructed in the word communicate to him that instructeth him, in all good things. 6:7 Be not deceived: God is not mocked. 6:8 For what things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap. For he that soweth in his flesh of the flesh also shall reap corruption. But he that soweth in the spirit of the spirit shall reap life everlasting. 6:9 And in doing good, let us not fail. For in due time we shall reap, not failing. 6:10 Therefore, whilst we have time, let us work good to all men, but especially to those who are of the household of the faith.

Where the registered English does not answer the Latin. The word Fratres stands twice and only the first is liturgical: Fratres: at the head is the lesson’s added address, prefixed to Gal. 5:25 and displacing nothing, and it is the missal’s own, with no counterpart in the Douay; Fratres, in the middle is Paul’s own vocative at 6:1 and the Douay renders it. At 6:6 the Latin transliterates the Greek verb rather than rendering it, catechizátur and catechízat, while the Douay reads “instructed” and “instructeth,” so the Latin and English columns part company at the one word in this lesson that names a church office. The two burdens of 6:2 and 6:5 are one noun in Latin and in English, ónera and onus, where Paul writes two different Greek words. The sowing clause is numbered differently in the two languages: what the Clementine and the Douay print at the head of v. 8 stands at the end of Greek v. 7.

4. Gradual (Grad.)

Graduale — Ps. 91, 2-3 — marginal no. 1585

Bonum est confitéri Dómino: et psállere nómini tuo, Altíssime. ℣. Ad annuntiándum mane misericórdiam tuam et veritátem tuam per noctem.

English: Douay–Rheims (Challoner), Ps. 91:2–3

v. 2 It is good to give praise to the Lord: and to sing to thy name, O most High. v. 3 To shew forth thy mercy in the morning, and thy truth in the night:

Where the registered English does not answer the Latin. The Latin wording is the Clementine’s exactly at both verses, with nothing added, dropped or transposed; what differs is pointing. The Clementine prints a comma after misericórdiam tuam and the typical edition does not, and the uncorrected optical layers of the Benziger 1962, the Pustet 1862, the Venice 1570 and the 1604 typica all show it. Confitéri carries confession of sin and confession of praise together, and both Augustine and Cassiodorus build their expositions on the double sense; the Douay’s “to give praise” renders the second alone.

5. Alleluia (All.)

marginal no. 1586 — the missal prints no heading for this chant

Allelúia, allelúia. ℣. Ps. 94, 3 Quóniam Deus magnus Dóminus, et Rex magnus super omnem terram. Allelúia.

English: Douay–Rheims (Challoner), Ps. 94:3 — the Bible verse the chant departs from

v. 3 For the Lord is a great God, and a great King above all gods.

Where the registered English does not answer the Latin. The Douay does not answer this chant. The missal sings super omnem terram where the Clementine reads super omnes deos, and the Douay renders the Clementine; the predicate is not an orthographic or pointing variant but a different one, and it stands already in the uncorrected optical layers of the Pustet 1862, the Venice 1570 and the 1604 typica. The 1861 Philadelphia hand missal prints its own English of the versicle beside the Latin at printed p. 428, “℣. For the Lord is a great God, and a great King over all the earth. Alleluia.” — an identified nineteenth-century rendering of what the missal sings, and not the Douay.

6. Gospel (Gosp.)

✠ Sequéntia sancti Evangélii secúndum Lucam. — Luc. 7, 11-16 — marginal no. 1587

In illo témpore: Ibat Iesus in civitátem, quæ vocátur Naim: et ibant cum eo discípuli eius, et turba copiósa. Cum autem appropinquáret portæ civitátis, ecce defúnctus efferebátur filius únicus matris suæ: et hæc vídua erat: et turba civitátis multa cum illa. Quam cum vidísset Dóminus, misericórdia motus super eam, dixit illi: Noli flere. Et accéssit, et tétigit lóculum. (Hi autem, qui portábant, stetérunt). Et ait: Aduléscens, tibi dico, surge. Et resédit qui erat mórtuus, et cœpit loqui. Et dedit illum matri suæ. Accépit autem omnes timor: et magnificábant Deum, dicéntes: Quia prophéta magnus surréxit in nobis: et quia Deus visitávit plebem suam.

English: Douay–Rheims (Challoner), Lk. 7:11–16

v. 11 And it came to pass afterwards that he went into a city that is called Naim: and there went with him his disciples and a great multitude. v. 12 And when he came nigh to the gate of the city, behold a dead man was carried out, the only son of his mother: and she was a widow. And a great multitude of the city was with her. v. 13 Whom when the Lord had seen, being moved with mercy towards her, he said to her: Weep not. v. 14 And he came near and touched the bier. And they that carried it stood still. And he said: Young man, I say to thee, arise. v. 15 And he that was dead sat up and began to speak. And he gave him to his mother. v. 16 And there came a fear upon them all: and they glorified God saying: A great prophet is risen up among us: and, God hath visited his people.

Where the registered English does not answer the Latin. The missal’s incipit In illo témpore: Ibat Iesus replaces the Bible text’s Et factum est: deinceps ibat, which the Douay renders “And it came to pass afterwards that he went”; the missal’s opening is its own and has no Douay counterpart. Aduléscens is printed with u where the Clementine reads Adolescens, and the uncorrected optical layers of the Venice 1570 and the 1604 typica show the same, and the Douay’s “Young man” answers the word whichever way it is spelled. The parenthesis at v. 14 closes before its stop in this book, stetérunt)., against the Clementine’s steterunt.).

7. Offertory (Off.)

Ant. ad Offertorium — Ps. 39, 2, 3 et 4 — marginal no. 1588

Exspéctans exspectávi Dóminum, et respéxit me: et exaudívit deprecatiónem meam: et immísit in os meum cánticum novum, hymnum Deo nostro.

English: Douay–Rheims (Challoner), Ps. 39:2–4 printed whole, with the portions the chant sings in bold

v. 2 With expectation I have waited for the Lord, and he was attentive to me. v. 3 And he heard my prayers, and brought me out of the pit of misery and the mire of dregs. And he set my feet upon a rock, and directed my steps. v. 4 And he put a new canticle into my mouth, a song to our God. Many shall see, and shall fear: and they shall hope in the Lord.

Where the registered English does not answer the Latin. Three of this antiphon’s phrases have no Douay equivalent, because the Douay renders the Clementine and the antiphon does not. Where the Bible text has et intendit mihi, the chant has et respéxit me; where it has Et exaudivit preces meas, the chant has et exaudívit deprecatiónem meam; where it has carmen Deo nostro, the chant has hymnum Deo nostro. All three stand in the uncorrected optical layers of the Pustet 1862, the Venice 1570 and the 1604 typica. The 1861 Philadelphia hand missal is half a help here, printing at p. 429 “with expectation I have waited for the Lord, and he was attentive to me: and he heard my prayer, and he put a new canticle into my mouth: a hymn to our God” — following the Douay at the first, taking the Douay’s verb with the missal’s singular at the second, and the missal at the third. The whole of v. 3 from et eduxit me de lacu miseriæ to direxit gressus meos is cut, and so is the second half of v. 4, which the Douay prints and which the chant does not reach.

8. Secret (Sec.)

Secreta — marginal no. 1589

Tua nos, Dómine, sacraménta custódiant: et contra diabólicos semper tueántur incúrsus. Per Dóminum nostrum Iesum Christum, Fílium tuum: Qui tecum vivit et regnat in unitáte.

English: Cummiskey (Philadelphia, 1861), Secret of this formulary, printed p. 429

May thy mysteries, O Lord, preserve us, and always defend us against the attacks of the devil.

Where the registered English does not answer the Latin. The 1861 book prints no Latin incipit cue at this prayer, and no conclusion: the long form the typical edition sets out to in unitáte. is untranslated there, where the Collect’s short Per Dóminum. and the Postcommunion’s long form are rendered by the book’s abbreviated “Thro’.” The uncorrected optical layers of the Benziger 1962, the Pustet 1862 and the 1604 typica all show the short conclusion at this Secret; the long form here is the Vatican typical edition’s own choice at this place and is not a different prayer.

9. Communion (Comm.)

Ant. ad Communionem — Io. 6, 52 — marginal no. 1590

Panis, quem ego dédero, caro mea est pro sǽculi vita.

English: Douay–Rheims (Challoner), Jn. 6:52 printed whole, with the portion the chant sings in bold

v. 52 If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world.

Where the registered English does not answer the Latin. The Douay answers neither of the antiphon’s two departures. Dédero is a future perfect where the Clementine has the simple future dabo, and the Douay reads “I will give”; pro sǽculi vita stands where the Clementine has pro mundi vita, and the Douay reads “the life of the world.” None of the five English witnesses examined renders either reading distinctly. Both readings stand in the uncorrected optical layers of the Pustet 1862, the Venice 1570 and the 1604 typica. The first half of the verse is not sung, and Panis is capitalised where the Bible text has it mid-sentence.

10. Postcommunion (Postcomm.)

Postcommunio — marginal no. 1591

Mentes nostras et córpora possídeat, quǽsumus, Dómine, doni cæléstis operátio: ut non noster sensus in nobis, sed iúgiter eius prævéniat efféctus. Per Dóminum nostrum Iesum Christum, Fílium tuum: Qui tecum vivit et regnat in unitáte.

English: Cummiskey (Philadelphia, 1861), Postcommunion of this formulary, printed p. 429

May the efficacy of these divine mysteries, O Lord, possess both our souls and bodies: that their effects, not our own sensuality, may always take the lead in us. Thro’.

Where the registered English does not answer the Latin. Doni cæléstis operátio is a singular subject held back to the end of its clause behind two objects and a vocative, and the English turns it plural, “the efficacy of these divine mysteries,” which also carries efféctus into “their effects.” Mentes becomes “souls” rather than minds, and iúgiter becomes “always,” the same adverb the same book uses for semper in the Collect and the Secret. The typical edition prints no comma after nostras, so Mentes nostras et córpora is a single object pair; the uncorrected optical layer of the Benziger 1962 shows a comma there, and those of the Pustet 1862 and the 1604 typica show none.

Rubrics carried by the formulary. II classis under the heading; Credo. on its own line after the Gospel; Præfatio de Ssm̃a Trinitate. immediately after the Secret. The Gloria is said and the Introit carries no Allelúia, both by the general rubrics of 1960 — RG 431 a and RG 429 — and not by anything printed on these two pages.

The Propers: Detailed Commentary

The typical edition against the Benziger printing

The Vatican editio typica controls every word printed above. Against the Benziger editio iuxta typicam of the same year, in its uncorrected optical layer and allowing for that layer’s accent substitutions, the two agree, apart from the differences enumerated next, through the Introit, the Collect, the body of the Epistle, the Alleluia, the Offertory, the body of the Secret and the Communion — including ad me and miserére mihi, the semicolon after consístere, super omnem terram, respéxit me, hymnum, dédero and sǽculi.

Where they differ, one difference is a word and the rest are pointing, abbreviation and cue length. At Lk. 7:14 the typical edition prints Aduléscens with u and Benziger Adolescens with o; the Clementine reads the o, and so do the uncorrected optical layers of the Venice 1570 and the 1604 typica, so the u is the 1962 typical edition’s own form. At the same verse the stop stands outside the closing parenthesis here, stetérunt)., and inside it there, where the Clementine agrees with Benziger. Benziger adds two commas at Gal. 6:6 and one after Mentes nostras, prints the antiphon-repetition cue Inclína after the Introit’s Glória Patri., and abbreviates both the Secret’s and the Postcommunion’s conclusions to Per Dóminum. where the typical edition writes them out to in unitáte. — the reverse of the Fourteenth Sunday’s direction, where it is Benziger that prints the longer cue.

Where the appointed text is not the Bible’s text

Departures stand at six elements, tabled below. Nine of them are word-level: ad me and miserére mihi at the Introit, with quia for quoniam in its psalm verse; super omnem terram at the Alleluia; respéxit me, deprecatiónem meam and hymnum at the Offertory; dédero and sǽculi at the Communion. The eight outside the psalm verse stand also in the uncorrected optical layers of the Pustet Ratisbon 1862, the Venice 1570 and the Vatican typica of 1604, so none of the eight is a 1962 act. The rest of the table is matter of another kind — four extents cut, the lesson’s prefixed address, the Gospel’s substituted incipit, capitalisation, and the stop that moves outside the parenthesis at Lk. 7:14 — with one word form that runs the other way: the uncorrected optical layers of the Venice 1570 and the 1604 typica show Adolescens with the Clementine, and the u of Aduléscens is the 1962 typical edition’s own.

Beside these stand three classes of difference that are not departures of substance: pointing at the joins, where the Introit’s colons stand at a cut that spans a Clementine sentence end, exáudi me: salvum fac, and at a Clementine full stop, in te: miserére, while the Gradual sets a full stop and the versicle sign, Altíssime. ℣. Ad annuntiándum, where the Clementine has a colon; orthography and word division, huiúsmodi for hujusmodi and et si for etsi at Gal. 6:1; and capitalisation, which in a modern electronic Clementine is that text’s convention and in the missal is that book’s, so the difference is a convention of each book and not a variant. The Epistle is remarkably clean: after its liturgical address, the whole of Gal. 5:25–6:10 matches the tracked Clementine word for word, five differences in all standing across its twelve verses — two capitalisations, one word division, one i/j orthography and one comma. The Gradual departs only in pointing: the Clementine prints a comma after misericórdiam tuam and the 1962 typical edition does not, while the uncorrected optical layers of the Benziger 1962, the Pustet 1862, the Venice 1570 and the 1604 typica all show it.

Psalm numbering, and the rubrics behind the colour and the single oration

The four psalms are cited in the missal’s Vulgate numbering, and the tracked Douay concordance supplies their English equivalents rather than arithmetic. Vulgate Pss. 85 and 94 answer English 86 and 95 with no offset, the Clementine counting the inscription inside v. 1; Vulgate Pss. 39 and 91 answer English 40 and 92 at an offset of one, their inscriptions standing as Vulgate v. 1 and going unnumbered in English Bibles. Green is not printed at this Mass: it follows RG 127 b of the 1960 Rubricae generales, whose September Ember exception is a rule about feriæ and does not reach a Sunday. That the formulary prints one Collect, one Secret and one Postcommunion follows inside the 1960 code from RG 434 b with RG 435; the instrument that abolished the seasonal second and third orations themselves is not the Rubricae generales but Variationes in Breviario et Missali Romano cap. IV n. 18, Orationes pro diversitate Temporum abolentur, at AAS 52 (1960) printed p. 709. The same promulgation carries a Rubricae generales n. 18 at printed p. 599, on transferring the impeded Sundays after the Epiphany, so the bare numeral names two different instruments.

How this Mass came to be this Sunday’s

The three orations descend as a unit, and their wording has moved twice

All three composed orations stand together, as one Mass and in liturgical order, in the Gregorian Hadrianum as Wilson prints it: section XXXIIII, heading DOMINICA .XVI. POST PENTECOSTEN., printed p. 174, with the manuscript folio mark [fo. 168v]. The same three stand in the Old Gelasian, Vat. Reg. lat. 316, at Wilson’s Book III sect. XI, printed p. 230, under the heading Item alia Missa and with no Sunday number at all. Between the eighth-century books and 1962 the wording moves in two places, and the two ancient books do not move together: both of them read contra diabolicos tueantur semper incursus where the 1962 Secret reads contra diabólicos semper tueántur incúrsus, and at the Postcommunion the Old Gelasian sets the vocative differently, possideat, Domine, quaesumus, where the Hadrianum and 1962 read possídeat, quǽsumus, Dómine. So the Hadrianum stands apart from 1962 at one place and the Old Gelasian at two, and the two ancient witnesses differ from each other at the second.

Two further variants are transmitted at the Postcommunion. Wilson’s apparatus records Pamelius reading iugiter aevi praeveniat and the S(2) and Gerbert witnesses iugiter eius proveniat against the iugiter eius praeveniat of the received text, and notes that the Vatican manuscript’s sunt for sed is a scribal error corrected by Tommasi.

The Sunday number, and witnesses that disagree by one

Five further sacramentary witnesses number this Mass, beyond the Hadrianum’s DOMINICA .XVI. above, and they do not agree. Wilson’s apparatus at Gelasian III.XI records that “This Missa is assigned by R. S. Gerb. to the seventeenth Sunday after Pentecost: see the Missa for the sixteenth Sunday in Pam., and that for the seventeenth Sunday in Men.,” with the marginal citations R. S. / Gerb. 175. / Pam. 411. / Men. 179. — so Wilson reports Rheinau, S. Gallen, Gerbert and Menard at two Sundays later than 1962 and Pamelius at one, where the Hadrianum’s heading already stands. The page image settles what the optical layers lose: the second Collect of the Gelasian Mass, Da, quaesumus, Domine, hanc mentem populo tuo, carries only R. S. / Gerb. 175. in its margin, so Pamelius and Menard do not have it, and the three prayers all five of them carry are exactly the three the 1962 formulary keeps. The same one-Sunday split reproduces at the adjoining section, so the offset is a numeration base and not a local accident.

The Liber Comitis heads the Mass Dominica mensis vi at PL 30 cols. 521–522, its count from the feast of St Lawrence having stopped one Sunday earlier, and Schuster calls this one Quinta post Sancti Laurentii, the last of the Lawrence Sundays; the two reckonings differ by one. What Migne prints there under Jerome’s name — its date, its provenance, its textual authority, and whether the mensis vi and mensis viii headings with no mensis vii between them are the book’s own or Migne’s arrangement — is unsettled, so the Epistle-and-Gospel pairing here is what the Liber Comitis prints.

Honorius’s Fifteenth Sunday, and the chants that did not move

Honorius Augustodunensis, writing c. 1120–1130, has this Sunday’s Collect where 1962 has it: at Gemma animae IV cap. LXXVIII, Dominica decima quinta, \<Inclina:> sub lege, PL 172 cols. 719–720, he writes cui Oratio, Ecclesiam tuam, Domine, concordat, quam ut Deus mundet, muniat, rogat, and repeats the prayer at cap. LXXIX. His Sixteenth offers Absolve, Domine, tuorum vincula populorum, vel in Oratione, Tua nos, Domine, so this Secret’s incipit stands there as an alternative oration. His Alleluias are not this one, and he says so himself: Alleluia, Domine, exaudi … Alii cantant Alleluia, Confitemini Domino … Alii cantant Alleluia, Paratum cor meum. The Alleluia 1962 sings here stands at his Fourteenth. Honorius’s reading of the whole Mass off the September historia of King Josiah is his own scheme applied to a twelfth-century German use.

In the margins of Ottobonianus 313 the chant series and the oration series run two Sundays apart across five consecutive sections, uniformly. The four-element Mass standing under this Sunday’s Introit in that margin — Introit Inclina domine aurem, respond Bonum est confidere, Offertory Expectans expectaui, Communion Qui manducat — agrees with Honorius at three slots of four, and is not the 1962 four. Whether that margin’s Bonum est confidere under this Introit is a respond shared across two consecutive Sundays or a copying error is unsettled; the doubling on Wilson’s p. 173 is real, his own index printing “173 (bis).” Delisle assigns the manuscript to the second half of the ninth century and Ebner follows him, though Ebner’s later judgment favoured an earlier date; Wilson reports both and adopts neither.

The gregorien.info index of the six earliest Mass antiphonaries Hesbert collected already places this Introit, Gradual and Offertory at Dominica XV post Pentecosten, AMS 187, but gives that Mass the Communion Qui manducat carnem meam and no fixed Alleluia at all; Panis quem ego dedero stands there at the Fourteenth Sunday. So against that record the move runs one way: the Communion this Mass sings stands at the Fourteenth Sunday in AMS, and the Communion AMS gives the Fifteenth has not taken its place at the 1962 Fourteenth. Within the tracked registry that Sunday sings Primum quaerite at Mt. 6:33, while the 1962 book’s own Qui manducat meam carnem, Jn. 6:57, stands at the Ninth Sunday. Every antiphonary figure here is the gregorien.info database’s report of Hesbert’s printed pages.

The 1909 printing of Dom Lucien Fromage’s continuation of Guéranger’s The Liturgical Year shows the formulary before the 1960 change, printing the three seasonal orations by cross-reference — “The other Collects, as on page 120” at printed p. 345, “The other Secrets, as on page 130” and “The other Postcommunions, as on page 131” at p. 355 — and names the day “the Sunday of the widow of Naim.” He prints at p. 356, under Vespers, the Magnificat antiphon Propheta magnus surrexit in nobis, et quia Deus visitavit plebem suam; that antiphon is his book’s. Schuster’s three pages name no station church for this Sunday.

Introit (Int.)

The antiphon is a three-segment centonisation: v. 1a as far as exáudi me, then v. 2b from salvum fac, then v. 3 entire, with v. 4 as the psalm verse. The clause it drops first is the psalm’s ascription, and that ascription is unique: the ascriptions of Vulgate Pss. 72–88 in the tracked Clementine give Asaph at 72–82, filiis Core at 83, 84, 86 and 87, Eman the Ezrahite at 87 as well, Ethan the Ezrahite at 88, and Oratio ipsi David. at 85 alone. Ps. 85 is the single Davidic prayer in the whole of Book III, which the tracked text bounds by the doxologies at Ps. 71:19–20 and Ps. 88:53. What the cento sings after that omission is a psalm addressed by a servant to his God with no name attached to it.

Augustine, Enarratio in Psalmum 85 §§1–6 (PL 37, 1081–1090) This is the locus classicus of the totus Christus, and the whole of the Introit’s reception runs through it. The Word is head of men and men his members, so that there is one Christ qui et oret pro nobis, et oret in nobis, et oretur a nobis. Orat pro nobis, ut sacerdos noster; orat in nobis, ut caput nostrum, oratur a nobis, ut Deus noster. Inclina, Domine, aurem tuam is therefore spoken ex forma servi and by the whole Body; clamavi tota die is not one day but omni tempore … Unus homo usque in finem saeculi extenditur; and the ground of the petition is that Inclinat aurem, si tu non erigas cervicem: humiliato enim appropinquat; ab exaltato longe discedit (§2). At v. 4 he turns the psalm verse into an exhortation: Certe recte admonet membra sua ut sursum cor habeant … cor ut levetur, voluntatem mutat.

Cassiodorus, Expositio Psalmorum on Ps. 85 (PL 70) A second Latin witness stating the same reading in his own words: Ex forma servi (sicut praefati sumus) Christus omnipotenti supplicat Patri … quod dicit: Inclina, ostendit quia se ad ipsum extendere non poterat humana conditio. On tota die, totius vitae tempus ostenditur, ut per multa tempora annorumque curricula quasi unius diei continuus clamor esse monstretur. At v. 4 he reads the verse of the servant’s own part: Iucundari petit animam suam fons hilaritatis et origo laetitiae, ab illa scilicet parte qua servus est. His numbering runs level with the Vulgate’s here, Ps. 85 counting its inscription inside v. 1, so his Vers. 1 is the Vulgate’s v. 1.

Neither commentator’s lemma is the antiphon’s at every point, and the difference reaches the citation. Augustine’s v. 1 has no ad me and runs on into quoniam egenus et inops ego sum, the clause the cento does not sing and on which his §§2–3 hang; his v. 3 reads Miserere mei where the missal prints mihi; and his v. 4 reads Iucunda where the missal prints Lætífica, his §6 commenting on iucunda. Cassiodorus reads ad me and Laetifica with the missal but miserere mei against it. So the ad me the antiphon adds is older than the Missal and stands in a sixth-century Latin lemma, while miserere mihi stands in no Bible witness and in no patristic lemma opened here: Swete’s Greek at Ps. 85:1 has no pronoun answering ad me, and eleeson me at v. 3 is a bare accusative that cannot decide between a Latin genitive and a dative, so mihi for mei is a question of Latin construction and not of what the psalm says.

Within the tracked 1962 registry, a finding aid derived from the book, Ps. 85:3 opens the Sixteenth Sunday’s Introit, which sings v. 5 with it and takes Ps. 85:1 as its psalm verse, while Ps. 85:2 Salvum fac servum tuum is the Gradual of the Ember Friday in the first week of Lent — the head of the psalm here and its continuation a week later; at C3 of the synthesis the pair stands beside the two Offertories’ Ps. 39.

Collect (Coll.)

Ecclésiam tuam, Dómine, miserátio continuáta mundet et múniat: et quia sine te non potest salva consístere; tuo semper múnere gubernétur. The prayer’s hinge is its semicolon, which divides the causal clause from the single petition it grounds, so that the two verbs of the first limb stand on one side of it and the one verb of the second on the other. The uncorrected optical layer of the Benziger 1962 shows that semicolon too, and those of the Pustet 1862, the Venice 1570 and the 1604 typica show a comma in its place.

Three phrases of it reach into the rest of the Mass. Miserátio continuáta makes mercy an attribute and not a request, and the participle is the first word of duration in the three orations. Sine te non potest salva consístere denies the Church any standing of her own; that denial stands with the Postcommunion’s in the first unit of the thematic movement. Tuo semper múnere makes the Church’s governance a gift; Augustine, expounding the Gradual’s own psalm, uses the same noun to deny that any progress is a merit, in his own words at the second unit of the thematic movement.

No Father or Doctor comments on this prayer’s text in any source opened here. Its reception is liturgical, and Honorius’s quam ut Deus mundet, muniat, rogat is the nearest thing to an exposition of it.

Epistle (Ep.)

Where the lesson is cut from, and what the cuts carry in

The lesson opens on a conclusion whose premises it does not print: Gal. 5:25 Si spíritu vívimus, spíritu et ambulémus draws together the flesh-and-Spirit antithesis of 5:16–24, and the pericope closes the same figure at 6:8 in agricultural terms, so the excerpt is bracketed at both ends by an argument only one end of which is heard stated. Three threads carry in from outside it. The invicem chain runs 5:13, 5:15 and the lesson’s own 5:26. The law thread runs 5:14, 5:18, 5:23 and the lesson’s 6:2 adimplébitis legem Christi. And the lesson stops at 6:10, one verse before Paul takes the pen at 6:11.

Both of the lesson’s boundaries fall just clear of the cross. The lesson begins one verse after 5:24 Qui autem sunt Christi, carnem suam crucifixerunt, and ends four verses before 6:14 Mihi autem absit gloriari, nisi in cruce Domini nostri Jesu Christi. So the Mass raises vainglory as a problem and does not read Paul’s answer to it, and opposes flesh to spirit without reading the crucifixion of the flesh that grounds the opposition.

The lesson’s vocabulary

The two burdens are one word in Latin and two in Greek. The apparent self-contradiction between Alter altérius ónera portáte at 6:2 and Unusquísque enim onus suum portábit at 6:5 is an artefact of the Latin: the Greek reads baros at 6:2 and phortion at 6:5, and the Vulgate renders both by one noun. The Douay follows the Latin and says “burdens” and “burden.”

The sowing axiom is a commonplace of the Latin Bible — 2 Cor. 9:6, Prov. 22:8, Jer. 12:13, Eccles. 11:4 — and its verse is numbered differently in the two languages, the sowing clause standing at the end of Greek v. 7 and the start of Clementine v. 8.

One word in the lesson names a church office, and the English does not carry it. Catechizátur and catechízat at 6:6 transliterate the Greek verb rather than rendering it, and the Douay reads “instructed” and “instructeth,” so the Latin and English columns part company there. Domésticos fidei at 6:10 is the household metaphor of Eph. 2:19, domestici Dei.

And the lesson’s verb of carrying is the bier-bearers’ verb. The Greek bastazo occurs twenty-seven times in the New Testament, four of them in Galatians and two of those inside this lesson, and the appointed text prints portáte, portábit and qui portábant within one Mass. The Latin does not distinguish them and neither does the English.

What the commentators argue

Jerome, Commentariorum in Epistolam ad Galatas lib. III, on Gal. 5:26–6:10 (PL 26, cols. 423–432) At 5:26 he confesses that vainglory infects almsgiving, long prayer, the pallor of fasting, chastity in every state and martyrdom itself — martyrium ipsum, si ideo fiat ut admirationi et laudi habeamur a fratribus, frustra sanguis effusus est (col. 424). At 6:1 he observes that Paul calls the offender homo and does not call the corrector one, and that Paul wrote ne et tu tenteris and not ne tu cadas: Vinci quippe vel vincere, nonnumquam in nostra est potestate: caeterum tentari, in potestate tentantis est (col. 426). At 6:2 he grounds the burden on Ps. 37:5 and closes Quae Christi lex est? Hoc est mandatum meum, ut diligatis invicem (col. 427). At 6:5 he reconciles the two burdens by moving one of them to the tribunal: in this life we may help each other by prayers and counsel, but before the judgement seat non Job, non Daniel, nec Noe rogare posse pro quoquam, sed unumquemque portare opus suum (col. 429). At 6:6 he refutes Marcion’s reading of the verse as being about prayer; at 6:7 he ties Deus non irridetur to v. 6 against the disciple who pleads a failed harvest, Excusatio verisimilis hominem potest utcumque placare, Deum non potest fallere (col. 430); at 6:8 he answers the Encratite Julius Cassianus, who read sowing in the flesh as a condemnation of marriage; at 6:10 he makes the time of sowing the present life (col. 432). His lemmata agree with the missal at the points that matter — Deus non irridetur, considerans teipsum — and the Vulgate Galatians is his own revision, so his lemma and the appointed text are one text.

Augustine, Expositio epistulae ad Galatas §§52–61 (PL 35, 2145–2148) Correction of a brother is for Augustine the one test of a spiritual man, and it may be undertaken only after examining one’s own conscience: Nihil autem sic probat spiritalem virum quam peccati alieni tractatio; Numquam itaque alieni peccati obiurgandi suscipiendum est negotium, nisi cum internis interrogationibus examinantes nostram conscientiam liquido nobis coram Deo responderimus dilectione nos facere … Dilige et dic, quod voles (§§56–57). At 6:2 the law of Christ is the law of charity, whence Eadem igitur Scriptura et idem mandatum, cum bonis terrenis inhiantes premit servos, Testamentum Vetus; cum in bona aeterna flagrantes erigit liberos, Testamentum Novum vocatur (§58). At 6:3–5 the burden nobody can share is the burden of conscience: Non ergo laudatores nostri minuunt onera conscientiae nostrae; atque utinam non etiam accumulent (§59). At 6:7–10, Vident enim seminationem operum suorum, sed messem non vident … Bene autem seminare, id est bene operari, facilius est quam in eo perseverare (§61). §52 distinguishes the two vices of 5:26, aemulatio healed by peace and invidia by meekness. Augustine reads a pre-Vulgate Latin Galatians, and his lemmata differ from the missal’s at nearly every appointed verse: spiritu et sectemur for spíritu et ambulémus, the two participles of 5:26 in reverse order, in spiritu mansuetudinis intendens teipsum for in spíritu lenitátis, consíderans teípsum, et tunc in seipso for et sic in semetípso, proprium onus portabit for onus suum portábit, Deus non subsannatur for Deus non irridétur, and non infirmemur; proprio enim tempore metemus infatigabiles for non deficiámus: témpore enim suo metémus, non deficiéntes. His §54 argument depends entirely on his own verb sectemur.

Chrysostom, Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, chapter 6 (PG 61, 673–680), in the nineteenth-century English of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Chrysostom does not make the passage a discipline of the corrector’s conscience but an economy of complementary weaknesses inside one body. On 6:1: “He says not, in meekness, but, in a spirit of meekness, signifying thereby … that to be able to administer correction with mildness is a spiritual gift,” and he arraigns “the malice of the devil rather than the remissness of the soul.” At 6:2 the Church is a building whose stones hold different positions, and the verb is really “complete” — “make it up all of you in common, by the things wherein you bear with one another.” At 6:6 he reads a deliberate institution rather than a rule about stipends: Christ imposed on the teacher the necessity of requiring aid from his disciples, in order to repress his spirit. At 6:10 grace “invites both land and sea to the board of charity, only it shows a greater care for its own household.” His words are quoted in nineteenth-century English, so his distinction between “fulfil” and “complete” is his argument about the Greek.

Aquinas, Super Epistolam ad Galatas lectura cap. 6 lect. 1–2 Aquinas reads the lesson as an ordered instruction in how superiors treat inferiors (6:1), equals equals (6:2) and inferiors superiors (6:6). Praeoccupatus means overtaken by surprise and so the more deserving of pardon; in aliquo excludes the habitual sinner, against whom severity is right; and Paul wrote instruite and not corrigite because he speaks of men overtaken. He gives three modes of bearing another’s burden, the third of them pro poena sibi debita satisfaciendo, orationibus et bonis operibus — a development beyond anything in Jerome, Augustine or Chrysostom on this verse, and his and not the tradition’s. At 6:8 he reads the asymmetry of the possessives, and at 6:10 dum tempus habemus, id est in hac vita, quae est tempus seminandi. His second exposition of 6:7 is Jerome’s argument almost word for word, so the two are one continuous tradition and not two independent witnesses.

Jerome and Augustine make Gal. 6:1–2 a discipline of the corrector’s own conscience; Chrysostom makes it an economy of complementary weaknesses inside one body. On 6:5, Jerome moves the unshareable burden to the tribunal, Augustine identifies it with conscience, Chrysostom with self-regard, Aquinas with the rendering of account. Four expositors, four answers to one verse.

Gradual (Grad.)

The chant sings the psalm’s exordium and stops. What it does not sing runs from the sabbath inscription at v. 1 through the wicked springing up as grass at vv. 7–8 to Justus ut palma florebit; sicut cedrus Libani multiplicabitur (v. 13), Plantati in domo Domini … florebunt (v. 14) and Adhuc multiplicabuntur in senecta uberi (v. 15) — the harvest imagery that would have answered the Epistle’s sowing, and that nobody hears. The appointed text departs from the Clementine only in pointing.

The chant’s first word answers the lesson’s last bonum. At Gal. 6:10 the lesson reads Ergo dum tempus habémus, operémur bonum ad omnes and closes immediately on the five words máxime autem ad domésticos fidei, the catchword standing three words before máxime; the responsory printed directly beneath it on p. 396 begins Bonum est confitéri Dómino. The Greek and the unsung verses both narrow the catchword. In the Greek the lesson uses kalon at 6:9 and agathon at 6:10, so the triple repetition is partly the Latin’s and the chant answers only the second; and the further pairing with the psalm’s palm and cedar is drawn from verses the chant does not sing.

Misericórdiam tuam et veritátem tuam is a fixed collocation, standing in the tracked Clementine at Ps. 39:11, Ps. 87:12 and Ps. 91:3 and nowhere else — two of the three in psalms this Mass sings from.

Augustine, Enarratio in Psalmum 91 §§1–4 (PL 37, 1171–1178) The sabbath of the title is interior: Intus est, in corde est sabbatum nostrum … Cui autem bona est conscientia, tranquillus est, and against a merely bodily observance, Melius est enim arare, quam saltare. Confessing is two-sided, and this is the reading the Gradual’s first word carries: In utraque re, et in peccato tuo, quia tu fecisti, et in bono facto, confitere Domino, quia ipse fecit, with the excuses of Satan and of the stars each refused. Psallere nomini tuo is distinguished from singing — Opus nostrum, psalterium nostrum est … Canta ore, psalle operibus — and the singing seeks gloriam Dei, non tuam; nomen ipsius, non tuum, which is in praise exactly what the lesson forbids at Gal. 5:26. On the versicle: Mane dicitur, quando nobis bene est: nox dicitur, quando tristitia tribulationis est … quando bene est, lauda misericordiam; quando male, lauda veritatem: quia peccata flagellat, non est iniquus. His lemma matches the Gradual’s wording at both verses, including Altissime, differing only in the comma the 1962 book drops.

Cassiodorus, Expositio Psalmorum on Ps. 91 (PL 70) The same two-sided confession stated in his own words: confession is of sins and of benefits, nec meritorum nostrorum esse dicimus quod ipsius miseratione praestatur; Psallere enim significat piis operibus Domini mandata peragere, ut sicut psalterium de superioribus sonat, ita operatio nostra ad aures Divinitatis ascendat. On the versicle: Mane significat gaudium, nox autem cognoscitur indicare tristitiam … Per noctem vero, id est per tribulationem … veritatem ipsius similiter annuntiare debemus: quia merito patimur quod delictis gravantibus sustinemus.

Hilary of Poitiers, Tractatus de titulo psalmi XCI §§1–3 (CSEL 22, pp. 339ff.) What survives of Hilary on this psalm is a tractate on its title, not a commentary on its verses, and he has nothing on Bonum est confitéri Dómino or on Ad annuntiándum mane misericórdiam tuam — the two clauses the Gradual actually sings. What he argues is that the sabbath the title names cannot be the seventh day of Genesis, because the psalm says nothing about that rest: nulla hic diei septimi requies, nullum humanorum operum otium decantatur. The rest meant must therefore be sought at Ps. 94:11, and the Lord himself loosed the seventh-day sabbath when he said that the priests in the temple profane it and are blameless. Zingerle’s preface records the tractates on the titles of Pss. 9 and 91 as transmitted solis codicibus Vr. The Latin quoted from Hilary is that of a poor optical layer of a scan of Zingerle’s edition, whose running heads and apparatus are badly mangled and whose page sequence is unreliable.

Within the tracked registry the same antiphon and verse range stands at the Saturday of the second week of Lent, and Ps. 91:2 at Septuagesima as an Offertory; Schuster states the Lenten identity independently at printed p. 139 of volume III of The Sacramentary.

Alleluia (All.)

Ps. 94 is a summons to worship in vv. 1–7 and an oracle of warning in vv. 8–11, the turn falling at v. 7/8; the chant’s verse stands inside the summons as the first of its reason clauses, four verses before the turn, so the chant carries in the summons and not the warning. The warning half is what Hebrews quotes at length, at Heb. 3:7–11, 3:15, 4:3, 4:5 and 4:7, three of the five returning to Hodie si vocem ejus audieritis. The Fourteenth Sunday’s Alleluia is Venite, exsultemus, Ps. 94:1, so this chant continues the previous Sunday’s psalm — Schuster calls it “a continuation” and not the next verse, and it is not: 94:1 to 94:3 skips v. 2.

No checked witness expounds the predicate this chant substitutes. What is proper to this element is that the two expositions of Ps. 94:3 opened here are built on the word the chant removes, so that neither survives it; and the three composed orations have no expositor in any source opened here. The chant reads et Rex magnus super omnem terram where every Bible witness opened here reads above all gods — Swete’s epi pantas tous theous, the Clementine’s super omnes deos, the Douay’s “above all gods.”

Augustine, Enarratio in Psalmum 94 §§5–6 (PL 37, 1217–1234) Augustine’s lemma is et rex magnus super omnes deos, quoted three times in §§5–6 and again at the close of §6, and he builds two whole developments on the word the chant removes. First, with 1 Cor. 8:5–6 and Ps. 95:5, the gods of the nations are demons, over whom it would be small praise for God to be great: Parum enim erat quia terribilis super omnia daemonia Deus: quid magnum, esse super omnia daemonia? Second, the gods are men made gods by participation: Hic accipe homines deos … Deos dixit participatione, non natura; gratia, qua voluit facere deos … Deus verus facit deos credentes in se. Neither development survives the chant’s substitution, so both are exposition of Ps. 94:3 as the Latin Bible reads it and not of the Alleluia as sung. His §8 reading of the neighbouring in manu eius fines terrae, v. 4, of Christ joining two peoples is adjacent in sense to the chant’s wording and belongs to a verse the chant does not sing.

Cassiodorus, Expositio Psalmorum on Ps. 94 (PL 70) On the same verse Cassiodorus also has super omnes deos and expounds the gods the same two ways: Deos frequenter legimus ab hominibus confictos, ut Iovem, Martem, Saturnum … Legimus etiam deos, sanctos viros a Domino constitutos, ut est illud: Deus stetit in synagoga deorum. So two Latin commentators expound this verse, and both expound the predicate the chant does not sing.

The chant’s predicate is the Latin Bible’s own phrase. It stands verbatim at Ps. 46:3, quoniam Dominus excelsus, terribilis, rex magnus super omnem terram, the one place in the tracked Clementine where rex magnus and super omnem terram collocate.

In the older chant record the verse is cued at eight places in the antiphonaries Hesbert collected, none of them a Sunday after Pentecost later than the Eighth, and the Ottobonianus margins cue it at a Paschal Friday and at another Mass. Neither phrase the English Bibles carry renders this chant: “a great King above all gods” is the Bible text the missal departs from, and “a great king over all the earth” is the Douay’s Ps. 46:3, whose Latin the chant’s predicate reproduces. An identified English of the chant’s own reading exists outside the Bibles: the 1861 Philadelphia hand missal prints the versicle at printed p. 428 as “a great King over all the earth,” beside the Latin Quóniam Deus magnus Dóminus, et Rex magnus super omnem terram. Within the 1962 temporal registry the chant occurs at this Mass and nowhere else.

Gospel (Gosp.)

The pericope’s wording

The missal’s incipit cuts the connective. Luke’s Et factum est: deinceps ibat makes the raising the next thing in order after the centurion’s servant, and In illo témpore: Ibat Iesus replaces it while supplying the subject the sentence needs. With the connective goes the pair Luke makes, a servant healed at a distance for a Gentile who asks and then a son raised at close quarters for a widow who does not; and mortui resurgunt at Lk. 7:22, six verses after the pericope ends, has no antecedent in the Third Gospel but this. Naim is a hapax in the tracked Clementine.

The narrative is told in the words of Elias at Sarepta, and the identity is exact only in the Greek. The clause kai edoken auton te metri autou stands at LXX 3 Kingdoms 17:23 and is letter for letter the clause Luke 7:15 ends with; the Greek verse runs on past it into Elias’s own words. The Vulgate breaks the link, reading tradidit matri suæ at 3 Kings and dedit illum matri suæ at Luke, so a reader of the Latin column cannot see the quotation, and the quotation is visible in the Greek alone. Two weaker agreements stand beside it: the gate-and-widow agreement at 3 Kingdoms 17:10 against Luke 7:12 uses cognate but different nouns, and 4 Kings 4 shares the raising and the restoring but no verbal formula. Luke’s own text points to the Elias figure most strongly at 4:25–26, where the Sarepta widow is the programmatic example of the Nazareth sermon.

Deus visitávit plebem suam answers the Benedictus. The verb and object repeat Zachary’s quia visitavit, et fecit redemptionem plebis suæ at Lk. 1:68. Visitare with God as its subject stands at Lk. 1:68, 1:78, 7:16 and 19:44 eo quod non cognoveris tempus visitationis tuæ and nowhere else in Luke, the Latin stem and the Greek lemmata agreeing verse for verse. The word enters Luke twice in the Benedictus, is spoken once by the crowd at Naim, and returns once over Jerusalem. It is in the mouth of the crowd and not of the Evangelist.

Filius únicus renders monogenes, and the Latin hides the connection. Monogenes stands nine times in the Greek New Testament — Lk. 7:12, 8:42, 9:38; Jn. 1:14, 1:18, 3:16, 3:18; Heb. 11:17; 1 Jn. 4:9 — and the Latin split is complete with no exception: unicus in Luke, unigenitus everywhere else.

Misericórdia motus renders splanchnizomai, which Luke uses exactly three times: here, of the Samaritan at 10:33, and of the prodigal’s father at 15:20. The cognate noun occurs once in Luke, at 1:78 per viscera misericordiæ Dei nostri — the same Benedictus that supplies the visitation language, and there the Latin does keep the anatomy. So the Naim pericope answers the Benedictus twice, at v. 13 and at v. 16, and only the second is visible in the Latin. Noli flere and its plural return in Luke exactly three times: 7:13, 8:52 and 23:28.

Lk. 7:13 is the first place in the Third Gospel where the narrator’s own voice calls Jesus Dóminus, and the appointed text keeps it: before 7:13 the word is God in narration or in cited Scripture, or a character’s vocative, or inside a character’s speech.

Prophéta magnus is not a stock biblical title. In the tracked Clementine it stands only at Ecclus. 48:25, of Isaias, and at this verse. Surge at v. 14 and surréxit at v. 16 are one Greek verb in two forms; the Vulgate’s promise of a prophet at Deut. 18:15 stands on a different Latin verb, suscitabit.

What the commentators argue

Ambrose, Expositio Evangelii secundum Lucam V.88–92 (CSEL 32 pars 4, pp. 216–218; PL 15, 1376B–1377A) Three moves at once. The widow is holy Church, who populum iuniorem a pompa funeris atque supremis sepulchri suarum reuocet ad uitam contemplatione lacrimarum, quae flere prohibetur eum cui resurrectio debeatur, and ringed by the crowd of peoples she seems plus … esse quam feminam (§89). The bier is wood, and because it is wood the dead man already has hope of rising: spem resurgendi habebat, quia ferebatur in ligno … ut esset indicio salutem populo per crucis patibulum refundendam (§90). And the bearers who halt are the mortal fluxes of material nature — cum uel ignis inmodicae cupiditatis exaestuat uel frigidus umor exundat uel pigra quadam corporis habitudine uigor habetatur animorum … hi sunt nostri funeris portitores. At §§91–92, quis iste est tumulus tuus nisi mali mores? tumulus tuus perfidia est, sepulchrum tuum guttur est (Ps. 5:11), and fleat pro te mater ecclesia, quae pro singulis tamquam pro unicis filiis uidua mater interuenit. At VI.64, outside the pericope’s own place, he explains why this raising is public where Jairus’s daughter’s is private and reads the two as two peoples: est etiam forma sapientiae in uiduae filio cito ecclesiam credituram, in archisynagogae filia credituros quidem Iudaeos, sed ex pluribus pauciores — marked with puto and est etiam forma, offered as a reading and not as a demonstration.

Augustine, Sermo 98 (PL 38, 591–595) The three raisings are three grades of sin. The girl inside the house is sin consented to in the heart; the young man carried out of the gate but not yet buried is sin gone out into the deed; Lazarus, buried under the stone, is sin hardened into habit — Moles illa imposita sepulcro, ipsa est vis dura consuetudinis, qua premitur anima, nec surgere, nec respirare permittitur (§5). The four-step analysis behind it stands at §6: Prima est enim quasi titillatio delectationis in corde; secunda, consensio; tertium, factum; quarta, consuetudo. At §2 the widowed mother is mother Church rejoicing at each raising; at §6 the loosing of Lazarus is the office given to the disciples while the raising stays Christ’s. The sermon stops at v. 15, one verse short of the appointed pericope, and nothing in it comments on v. 16.

Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on the Gospel of Saint Luke, Sermon XXXVI (Payne Smith, Oxford 1859, vol. 1, pp. 132–135) Christ comes uninvited: at Capharnaum he was present by invitation, but at Naim “He draws near without being invited. For no one summoned Him to restore the dead man to life, but He comes to do so of His own accord.” The Evangelist supplies two proofs of a real raising, that the dead man began to speak and that Christ gave him to his mother; the three raised are “a pledge of the hope prepared for us of a resurrection of the dead,” confirmed from Is. 26:19 and Ps. 103(104):29–30. And the touching of the bier teaches the life-giving flesh: it was done “that thou mightest learn that the holy body of Christ is effectual for the salvation of man. For the flesh of the Almighty Word is the body of life … For consider, that iron, when brought into contact with fire, produces the effects of fire,” so that it “annihilates the influence of death and corruption.” The words are an English translation of an ancient Syriac version of a Greek original that survives elsewhere only in catena fragments.

Bede, In Lucae evangelium expositio lib. II (PL 92, cols. 417–420) Bede takes Augustine’s moral reading and works it through the pericope’s furniture. At v. 12 the dead man carried out is sin no longer hidden in the heart’s chamber but published abroad, quasi per suae civitatis ostia propalantem, and the widowed mother is mother Church, one perfect and immaculate virgin though gathered from many persons, licet e multis collecta personis, una sit perfecta et immaculata virgo, mater Ecclesia, each of the faithful her only son, with Gal. 4:19 quoted for her motherhood; the gate is one of the bodily senses, closing with Obsecro, Domine Jesu, cunctas meae civitatis portas justitiae facias (Ps. 117:19). Against Novatian, who veramque matrem Ecclesiam … negat consolari debere. At v. 14 the bier is male secura desperati peccatoris conscientia and its bearers vel immunda desideria … vel lenocinia blandientium … venenata sociorum; at v. 15 Redditur matri, cum … per sacerdotalis decreta judicii communioni sociatur Ecclesiae. Bede is the only witness located who comments on v. 16: Quia Deus visitavit plebem suam. Non tantummodo verbum suum semel incorporando, sed etiam … semper in corda mittendo. Two of his moves are his own and not Ambrose’s or Augustine’s: the anti-Novatianist application, and the reading of the restoration to the mother as sacramental reconciliation.

Gregory of Nyssa, De hominis opificio 25.6–11 (PG 44, 213–217), in the nineteenth-century English of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, second series vol. 5 The raising is fourth in a graded pedagogy by which Christ accustomed human weakness to believe in resurrection — the fever, the nobleman’s son, the ruler’s daughter, the young man on his way to the tomb, four-day Lazarus — and the widow’s only son is “the stock of her race, the shoot of its succession, the staff of her old age.”

Four expositors, four questions. Augustine reads the raisings morally, Cyril eschatologically, Ambrose ecclesially, Gregory of Nyssa as a pedagogy of increasing difficulty. None denies another and they answer different questions. On the widow the two Latin readings are not identical either: Ambrose’s Church weeps and intercedes for each sinner as for an only son and is forbidden to weep because resurrection is owed to her; Augustine’s rejoices. Grief and joy, not one doctrine.

What the commentators do not supply

Gregory the Great has nothing on this pericope. Within Luke 7 every heading of his in the Catena aurea, bare Gregorius or Gregorius in Evang., stands at lect. 6, on the sinful woman of Lk. 7:36–50, and none at lect. 2; the Gregorius Nyssenus headings are another Gregory’s. On the standard account of their contents, no edition of them having been opened for this formulary, Gregory’s forty Homiliae in Evangelia treat Luke 7 only at Homily 33, on the same pericope of the sinful woman.

The eight-resurrections scheme the Catena aurea attributes to Ambrosius is not in Ambrose’s Luke commentary: the scheme’s own terms stand in the complete critical text at V.86 and VI.64 only, and neither passage carries it; it may stand in another work of his, or be Ps.-Ambrose, or be a Glossa attribution. Three further attributions in the same catena at this chapter have no located text behind them — Theophylact’s widow-as-soul allegory, Titus of Bostra’s contrast with Elias and Eliseus, and the unnamed Chrysostom fragment on consolation. One heading of the same catena disagrees with the work it lemmatises: its Cyrillus in Ioannem at this chapter stands over a passage that is in Cyril’s Luke commentary, and Payne Smith’s own footnote at vol. 1, p. 135 records Aquinas and Cramer’s catena manuscript attributing the neighbouring fragment to Cyril as well.

Anthony of Padua preached this Gospel at his Sixteenth Sunday, not his Fifteenth

Anthony’s sermon on the widow of Naim is his Dominica XVI post Pentecosten, which opens Evangelium in decima sexta dominica post Pentecosten: Ibat Iesus in civitatem quae vocatur Naim and pairs the pericope with Eph. 3:13–21; his Dominica XV opens Nemo potest duobus dominis servire. His Fifteenth Sunday and the missal’s share an ordinal and not a Gospel.

The same pericope is appointed at the Thursday of the fourth week of Lent in the tracked registry, where the Missal pairs it with 4 Kings 4:25–38, Eliseus and the Sunamitess’s son; Schuster and Fromage both name that Lenten Thursday independently, and the Pustet 1862 does not print this Sunday’s Gospel at all but cross-references it there.

Offertory (Off.)

The antiphon takes vv. 2, 3 and 4 of Ps. 39 and cuts the middle out of them: the whole of v. 3 from et eduxit me de lacu miseriæ to direxit gressus meos goes, and so does v. 4b. What lies immediately past the second cut is Videbunt multi, et timebunt, et sperabunt in Domino and, one verse on, Beatus vir cujus est nomen Domini spes ejus. Two verses further the psalm’s vv. 7–9 are what Hebrews puts in the mouth of Christ coming into the world, and there the Latin Bible disagrees with itself across the seam: the psalm reads aures autem perfecisti mihi where Heb. 10:5 quoting it reads corpus autem aptasti mihi, while Swete’s Greek Psalter reads soma with Hebrews and against the Latin psalm. The antiphon stops three verses short of that seam, at Deo nostro.

Three of the antiphon’s phrases are not the Clementine’s, and all three have Latin witnesses no later than the sixth century. Against Swete, the second and third are the literal renderings and the Clementine’s are the freer: deeseos is a singular that deprecationem meam renders exactly where preces meas does not, and hymnon is hymnum and not carmen. The first, respéxit me, answers neither Swete’s proseschen moi nor any Greek variant collated here — but it stands in Cassiodorus’s lemma, so it has a witness even though it has no derivation.

Augustine, Enarratio in Psalmum 39 §§2–5 (PL 36, 433–450) The dative is Augustine’s point, and his lemma is not the antiphon’s at either of its first two verbs, reading Sustinens sustinui for Exspéctans exspectávi and attendit mihi for respéxit me: Ergo et cum malus esses, attendebat te, sed non attendebat tibi … Attendit mihi, inquit, id est, consolando attendit, ut mihi prodesset (§2). The pit of misery — which the antiphon cuts — is Profunditas iniquitatis, ex carnalibus concupiscentiis, and the rock is Christ (§3). The new song is the song of the new man: novus homo, dicat canticum novum: innovatus amet nova quibus renovatur … Dicimus ergo hymnum Deo nostro, et ipse hymnus liberat nos (§4) — his lemma reading hymnum with the antiphon and against the Clementine. At §5 he answers the question of the psalm’s speaker outright: it is Christ, speaking now in the name of our Head and now of us who are his members. The exposition opens with a long anti-Donatist prologue at §1 that has nothing to do with the appointed verses.

Ambrose, In Psalmum XXXIX enarratio §§1–4 (PL 14, cols. 1109–1110) The doubled verb is the point: the psalm announces the New Testament, and non est perfecti exspectare, sed exspectasse; nemo enim nisi qui perseveraverit usque in finem, salvus erit (§1) — the same Matt. 10:22 that Jerome and Augustine both reach for at the lesson’s non deficiámus. At §3, immisisti in os meum canticum novum, quod est Novum Testamentum. Gaudentes iam canimus hymnum Deo nostro, quia novarum virtutum praecepta cognovimus; ut nostra omnia relinquamus, Christum sequentes, et nostros diligamus inimicos … Maledicentes ecce benedicimus. His lemma carries the antiphon’s incipit and hymnum.

Cassiodorus, Expositio Psalmorum on Ps. 39 (PL 70) Cassiodorus’s lemma is the antiphon’s text word for word — Exspectans exspectavi Dominum, et respexit me: et exaudivit deprecationem meam — and he reads hymnum for the Clementine’s carmen. The speaker is the Church: Ecclesia catholica, quae fuerat de totius mundi partibus congreganda, patientiae virtutem praedicat. On the doubling, considerandus est hic sermo geminatus, quia superflua non est tam decora repetitio; on the verb the Clementine does not have, Respexit: quia praevenit omne bonum nostrum; on the noun, Deprecatio quoque significat frequentissimam precem; and on hymnum Deo nostro, Hymnus autem Graecus sermo est, id est, laus carminum lege composita. Et quoniam hymni erant quos idolis suis etiam gentilitas personabat, addidit, Deo nostro.

Ps. 39 and Ps. 69 stand at three Sundays inside a five-Sunday span. The Twelfth Sunday’s Introit sings Ps. 69:2–3, this Offertory Ps. 39:2–4 and the Sixteenth Sunday’s Offertory Ps. 39:14–15, one psalm supplying two consecutive Offertories. The doublet between the two psalms, and with it Cassiodorus’s division of the repeated words between speakers — Christ’s in his own person at Ps. 39 and his members’ at Ps. 69, which neither psalm’s own text marks — stand at their loci in the guide to the Twelfth Sunday, whose Introit sings that psalm, and his exposition of Ps. 69 stands there; his expositions quoted here are those of Pss. 39, 85, 91 and 94. Within the tracked registry the antiphon also stands at the Tuesday of the fourth week of Lent, which Schuster states independently at printed p. 140.

Secret (Sec.)

Tua nos, Dómine, sacraménta custódiant: et contra diabólicos semper tueántur incúrsus. Two verbs of defence, one object, and an adverb that has moved: both ancient Roman witnesses read tueantur semper incursus where 1962 reads semper tueántur incúrsus. The prayer’s object is the congregation and no longer the Church, one step of the narrowing across the three orations traced in the fourth unit of the thematic movement.

No exposition of this prayer’s text stands in any source opened for this formulary. What the prayer asks to be defended from is named in the lesson it follows: Chrysostom, on Gal. 6:1, arraigns “the malice of the devil rather than the remissness of the soul” in the man overtaken in a fault, and that malice is the diabólicos … incúrsus of the Secret. He is commenting on Paul.

Communion (Comm.)

The antiphon sings the exact clause at which the Bread of Life discourse turns from bread to flesh, and only its second half: the half not sung is Si quis manducaverit ex hoc pane, vivet in æternum, and the words that are sung are the ones that make the crowd start quarrelling in the next verse, Litigabant ergo Judæi ad invicem, dicentes: Quomodo potest hic nobis carnem suam dare ad manducandum? The element the excerpt carries in and cannot state is the discourse’s resurrection refrain: et ego resuscitabo eum in novissimo die three times, at vv. 40, 44 and 55 in the missal’s own Clementine numbering, and the same promise in other words at v. 39, sed resuscitem illud in novissimo die.

Both of the antiphon’s departures are on the Latin side. The Greek has a simple future doso and kosmou, so dédero and sǽculi answer nothing in it. Neither is an error — dedero is a future perfect and both sæculum and mundus are live Latin renderings of the Greek noun elsewhere in the Vulgate.

Augustine, In Iohannis evangelium tractatus 26 §§12–18 (PL 35, 1607–1616) The tractate’s own printed heading is the antiphon’s verse in the Clementine’s wording, Panis quem ego dabo, caro mea est pro mundi vita. The eating that gives life is inward: qui manducat intus, non foris; qui manducat in corde, non qui premit dente (§12). Only the body of Christ lives by the Spirit of Christ: De Spiritu Christi non vivit, nisi corpus Christi … O Sacramentum pietatis! o signum unitatis! o vinculum caritatis! Qui vult vivere, habet ubi vivat, habet unde vivat. Accedat, credat ut incorporetur, ut vivificetur (§13). The res of the sacrament is societatem corporis et membrorum suorum, quod est sancta Ecclesia, and it is omni homini ad vitam, nulli ad exitium where the sacrament is quibusdam ad vitam, quibusdam ad exitium (§15); the species is made of many grains and many berries (§17). His lemma is dabo and pro mundi vita, so this is exposition of the verse and not of the antiphon as sung.

Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on the Gospel according to S. John IV.2 (Pusey, Library of the Fathers 43, Oxford 1874, vol. 1, pp. 409–412) The chapter heading is the doctrine: That the Holy Body of Christ is Life-giving. The indwelling Word “transformed it into His Own proper good, that is life … rendered It life-giving, as Himself is by Nature,” with Jn. 17:19 read alongside and the heave-offering of Num. 15:18–21 as its figure. This is the same doctrine Cyril states at the Gospel’s bier, argued there from the touching and here from the Eucharist. The words are Pusey’s English of the Greek.

Chrysostom, Homily 46 on the Gospel of John (PG 59, 257–260), in nineteenth-century English “By bread He means here either His saving doctrines and the faith which is in Him, or His own Body; for both nerve the soul.” On the appointed clause: “observe how little by little He led them up to Himself. Here He says that Himself gives, not the Father.” And on the quarrelling that follows it, “when questioning concerning the how comes in, there comes in with it unbelief.”

Aquinas, Super Evangelium S. Ioannis lectura cap. 6 lect. 6 The flesh is organum divinitatis suae, and the instrument acts by the power of the agent: cum instrumentum agat virtute agentis … ita ut Damascenus dicit et caro virtute verbi adiuncti vivificat: unde Christus tactu suo sanabat infirmos. That last clause reaches the Gospel of this same Mass, where Christ touches the bier. The bread is the sacrament of the Church’s unity because made of many grains; on the verb, dicit dabo, quia nondum institutum erat hoc sacramentum; Non dicit autem carnem meam significat sed caro mea est; and on pro mundi vita, vita quam confert … quantum in se est, totius mundi. His gloss on the tense turns on the simple future and does not reach dédero, and his exposition of the universality of the effect does not reach sǽculi either.

Two numbering series meet at this antiphon

The missal cites the antiphon as Io. 6, 52, and the tracked Clementine and Douay both number it 52, so missal and Bible agree without adjustment. The Greek Fathers and the nineteenth-century English translations made from them number this clause 6:51 and reserve 6:52 for Quomodo potest hic nobis carnem suam dare ad manducandum? The modern label of Cyril’s chapter, 6:51–58, therefore stands one verse below the missal’s reference.

Within the tracked registry the antiphon also stands at the Thursday of the first week of Lent; Schuster states the same at printed p. 141 and adds that the Ninth Sunday’s antiphon comes from the same discourse, though his reference there is loose, the Ninth Sunday’s being Qui manducat meam carnem at Jn. 6:57.

Postcommunion (Postcomm.)

Mentes nostras et córpora possídeat, quǽsumus, Dómine, doni cæléstis operátio: ut non noster sensus in nobis, sed iúgiter eius prævéniat efféctus. The subject is held back to the end of its clause, behind two objects and a vocative: it is doni cæléstis operátio that is asked to possess, and its efféctus — not noster sensus — that is asked to go before. The pointing carries the grammar: no comma after nostras, so Mentes nostras et córpora is a single object pair, and the colon after operátio divides the petition from the purpose clause.

The three orations, and their liturgical history

No Father or Doctor comments on Ecclésiam tuam, Dómine, miserátio continuáta, Tua nos, Dómine, sacraménta custódiant or Mentes nostras et córpora possídeat in any tracked source, or in any patristic or medieval work opened for this formulary.

Their history is liturgical, and it begins where the books begin. None of the three occurs in the Veronense, in Férotin’s Liber mozarabicus sacramentorum, in Bannister’s Missale Gothicum or in Lowe’s Bobbio Missal. Incursus and ecclesiam tuam stand in both Veronense scans and in the Mozarabic and the Gothicum, possideat and mentes nostras in three of those four layers, and continuata in the Veronense scans alone, while no such control stands for the Bobbio Missal. No source opened for this formulary dates or attributes any of the three: their attested history begins at the Old Gelasian and the Hadrianum.

Source-Grounded Synthesis Across the Propers

C1. What the choir sings is not what the Bible on the facing page reads, at eight places in the sung texts, and the difference is older than 1962

Eight word-level departures separate the appointed antiphons and the Alleluia’s versicle from the Clementine — two at the Introit, one at the Alleluia, three at the Offertory and two at the Communion — and a ninth, in the Introit’s psalm verse, stands outside that count. Each of the eight stands beside the Bible’s reading in the commentary’s divergence table, and the three older Missals named there carry every one of them in their optical layers, so none of the eight is a 1962 act. Set against the witnesses collated for this Mass they fall into three groups, and each of the eight into one group only.

Four of the eight are attested in Latin by the sixth century. Cassiodorus’s lemma carries ad me at Ps. 85:1, and respexit me, deprecationem meam and hymnum at Ps. 39:2–4; Ambrose carries the Offertory’s incipit and hymnum; Augustine carries deprecationem meam and hymnum. Two of those same four, deprecationem meam and hymnum, are also the nearer renderings of Swete’s Greek, the Clementine’s preces meas and carmen the freer, as set out word by word in the Offertory subsection of the commentary: at those two places the chant is the closer rendering and the Bible text the looser one. Beside the four, and not itself one of the eight, stands Lætífica at Ps. 85:4, where Cassiodorus reads with the missal and Augustine reads Iucunda.

Two of the eight stand in no Bible witness and in no Latin or Greek lemma collated here: miserére mihi at Ps. 85:3, where both Latin commentators read mei, and super omnem terram at Ps. 94:3, where every witness reads super omnes deos; the collation stands at the Introit and Alleluia subsections. Nothing in Swete answers the Introit’s ad me either, which Cassiodorus’s Latin lemma nonetheless carries.

The Communion’s two stand outside both groups. Dédero and sǽculi answer nothing in the Greek, which has a simple future and kosmou, and none of the five English witnesses examined renders either reading distinctly. They are not variants a Greek witness can adjudicate but a future perfect and a second noun standing where the Bible text has neither.

The sixth-century lemmata date four of these readings in Latin before the Clementine.

C2. The lesson’s burden and the bier’s load are carried by one Latin verb, and Augustine and Bede put the same thing under it

The appointed Latin prints portáte at Gal. 6:2, portábit at 6:5 and qui portábant at Lk. 7:14, and one Greek verb stands behind the three where the Greek nouns for the two burdens differ, as set out in the Epistle subsection of the commentary. What the two elements’ expositors put under that verb is the same thing. Augustine, at the burden no one can hand to another, names it conscience, and adds that our praisers do not lighten it and may add to it (Exp. Gal. §59), the bearing of one another’s burdens at 6:2 fulfilling, on his reading, the law of charity (§58); Bede, at the bier, makes the thing carried the falsely secure conscience of a despairing sinner (In Luc. II, PL 92, 417–420), his bearers named in his own words at the Gospel subsection of the commentary; Ambrose, at the same verse, names the bearers from the body rather than the conscience (Exp. Luc. V.90). So the verb keeps its object across the two elements and reverses its office. In the lesson the conscience is a load each man carries for himself and no admirer lightens, while charity carries the loads that can be shared; at Naim the conscience is what is carried, by the very things Augustine says add to its weight, and the carrying runs toward the tomb until Christ’s touch stops the bearers, stetérunt.

The join holds only where the witnesses put it. Each expositor reads his own passage, and none sets Gal. 6:5 beside Lk. 7:14: the identity is of the object each names, not a comparison either draws. And Jerome, Chrysostom and Aquinas name the unshareable burden otherwise — the tribunal, self-regard, the rendering of account — so the conscience on the bier answers Augustine’s reading of the lesson and not a reading the four expositors share.

C3. Almost nothing this Mass sings is sung here alone

Against the tracked 1962 calendar registry, a finding aid derived from the book, most of this formulary’s chants, and its Gospel with them, are appointed somewhere else in the year as well.

Four of the chant texts are Lenten in their other life. The Gradual, the Offertory and the Communion each stand at a Lenten weekday — a Saturday of the second week, a Tuesday of the fourth, a Thursday of the first — and Schuster states all three identities independently of the registry; Ps. 85:2, the Introit’s own salvum fac, is an Ember-Friday Gradual of Lent’s first week, and Ps. 91:2 returns as a Septuagesima Offertory. The loci stand at the four element subsections.

Where the Gospel returns in Lent it is read against its own Old Testament figure. At the Thursday of the fourth week of Lent the Missal sets this pericope beside Eliseus and the Sunamitess’s son, 4 Kings 4; the witnesses to that day stand at the Gospel subsection of the commentary.

The neighbouring Sundays share this Mass’s psalm stock. The Sixteenth Sunday takes both the Introit’s psalm and the Offertory’s up where this Sunday leaves them — Ps. 85 at vv. 3 and 5 with v. 1 as its verse, Ps. 39 at vv. 14–15 — so this Mass sings the head of both psalms and the next their continuation; the Twelfth Sunday’s Introit sings Ps. 69, whose doublet with Ps. 39 stands in the guide to that Sunday at loci not opened here; and the Ninth Sunday’s Communion, Jn. 6:57, comes from the same discourse as this one’s.

The Alleluia is the exception. Within the 1962 temporal registry Ps. 94:3 is sung at this Mass and at no other, while the Fourteenth Sunday’s Alleluia takes Ps. 94:1 from the same psalm and skips v. 2 between them. The one element the rest of the year does not reuse is also the one whose sung predicate is not the Bible’s.

C4. The word for the cross stands in none of the ten elements, and the expositors of the bier supply the cross, the life-giving flesh and the sin

Ten elements, and the word stands in none of them. The extent the missal appoints is cut on both sides of it: the lesson opens one verse after the letter’s crucifixerunt at Gal. 5:24 and closes four verses before its in cruce at 6:14, as set out in the Epistle subsection of the commentary. The Gospel gives a death undone at a town gate rather than a death died. The Communion sings caro mea est pro sǽculi vita and stops before the discourse says how the flesh is given.

What the appointed wording withholds, the expositors of the one scene supply, each from the bier. Ambrose reads the wood the dead man is carried on as the sign of the salvation the cross was to give back, in his sentence at the Gospel subsection of the commentary (Exp. Luc. V.90), so the cross enters this Mass through the lóculum Christ touches and through no word the missal prints. Cyril reads the touch as instruction in the life-giving flesh, the doctrine set out from his sentence and Aquinas’s in the third unit of the thematic movement. Augustine reads the death as the middle of his three grades of sin (Sermo 98 §5), and Bede reads the restoration to the mother as the sinner’s return to the Church’s communion by priestly judgement (In Luc. II, PL 92, 417–420). So the cross reaches this Mass as the wood under the corpse; the flesh that touches the bier is, on Cyril’s and Aquinas’s showing, the flesh the Communion sings; and the death undone is read as sin. What the appointed wording itself puts where the word would stand is a visitation and three petitions — a crowd saying Deus visitávit plebem suam, and prayers asking that the Church be cleansed, that the congregation be guarded, and that mind and body be possessed. Ambrose alone names the cross; Augustine’s sermon stops at v. 15 and reads no crowd; and Cyril’s Luke is quoted from an English of a Syriac version.

The Propers: Notable and Quotable

Five afterlives of wording from the scriptural propers, each a use that moves the phrase into a register its writer did not occupy. Two elements supply all five: Gal. 6:2, 6:5, 6:7 and 6:9 have each become free-standing English proverbs; the Introit, the Gradual and the Communion have no such afterlife in the four corpora searched; and the Alleluia sings a reading the English Bibles do not carry.

Epistle, Gal. 6:7 — the verse as the operative sentence of a money judgment

Appointed text and locus. Epistle, marginal no. 1584, printed p. 396: Nolíte erráre: Deus non irridétur. Quæ enim semináverit homo, hæc et metet.

Later text and locus. Benton v. Bakker (In re Heritage Village Church & Missionary Fellowship, Inc.), 92 B.R. 1000, 1022 (Bankr. D.S.C., 9 November 1988), Reynolds, Bankruptcy Judge. The final paragraph of the opinion, under the heading CONCLUSION: “In conforming with the religious overture of this case, this Court observes that James Bakker either overlooked or ignored parts of the Bible including I Timothy 6:10 … Now, however, we must apply Galatians 6:7 — ‘Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap’. Let judgments be entered pursuant to this Memorandum Opinion.”

The turn. In the lesson the verse is a warning inside a passage about supporting one’s catechist and doing good to the household of the faith. Here a federal bankruptcy court, having found that the president of a religious broadcasting corporation took excessive compensation from it, uses the verse as the pronouncement of civil liability: it does not illustrate the judgment, it delivers it, and the judge frames the borrowing as “conforming with the religious overture of this case.” The sentence a congregation hears read as exhortation becomes the state’s sanction against a preacher. The court quotes the Authorised Version exactly and names chapter and verse, so the dependence is explicit, and Bakker’s 1989 federal fraud conviction is a different case.

Epistle, Gal. 6:7–8 — the title and the mechanism of a 1917 War Office film

Appointed text and locus. Epistle, marginal no. 1584, printed p. 396: Quæ enim semináverit homo, hæc et metet. Quóniam qui séminat in carne sua, de carne et metet corruptiónem.

Later work and locus. Whatsoever A Man Soweth (1917), silent film, 35mm, black and white, 2256 feet; director, producer and writer Joseph Best; sponsor, the War Office. Catalogued by the British Film Institute at Screenonline film id 1358391, with a curatorial analysis signed Bryony Dixon; corroborated in the Wellcome Collection catalogue, work id n4b7rac9, which lists it as the 1917 title in a British Film Institute collection of British sex-education films.

The turn. The title is the King James wording of Gal. 6:7 verbatim, truncated where the proverb is usually truncated, and the BFI’s own curator states that the title is biblical and the film built as a sermon: “As the biblical title suggests, it is essentially a straight sermon, a form that its target audience would have found familiar both from church at home and during their military service.” The film enacts the next appointed verse. The synopsis records a Canadian soldier accosted by a prostitute outside the National Gallery, taken round hospital wards “occupied by victims of venereal disease at every stage, including rotting legs and hands,” a school for the blind where “more than half the children there contracted blindness as a result of hereditary venereal disease,” and the soldier’s brother infecting his wife and finding their child born blind. Gal. 6:8’s de carne et metet corruptiónem is staged as clinical corruption of the flesh, and the BFI’s own clip title for the temptation sequence is “Sowing wild oats.” Paul’s warning about self-deception in the moral life becomes a state hygiene instrument for keeping soldiers fit for duty, with the reaping specified as syphilis, congenital blindness and a ruined family. The sponsorship is the BFI record’s own.

Offertory, Ps. 39:2 — the incipit as the title of a soldier’s poem, and the choir taking it back

Appointed text and locus. Offertory, Ant. ad Offertorium, Ps. 39, 2, 3 et 4, marginal no. 1588, printed p. 397: Exspéctans exspectávi Dóminum … The uncorrected optical layers of the Pustet Ratisbon 1862, the Venice 1570 and the 1604 typica show Expectans expectavi, the 1570 with that book’s u for v.

Later texts and loci. Charles Hamilton Sorley, “Expectans expectavi,” poem XXV in Marlborough and Other Poems (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1916), pp. 65–66, dated at its foot “May 1915.” The poem opens “From morn to midnight, all day through, / I laugh and play as others do, / I sin and chatter, just the same / As others with a different name” and ends “With parted lips and outstretched hands / And listening ears Thy servant stands, / Call Thou early, call Thou late, / To Thy great service dedicate.” Sorley was killed at Loos on 13 October 1915, aged twenty, five months after the date under the poem, and the volume was published posthumously. Then Charles Wood, “Expectans Expectavi,” alternative title “This sanctuary of my soul,” for mixed chorus and organ, first published Boston: C. C. Birchard, plate no. 1147, 1919, with Sorley named as librettist.

The turn, twice. Ps. 39:2 says the speaker waited and was answered; Sorley’s speaker is the one who does not wait — “From morn to midnight … I sin and chatter” — and the waiting is transferred to an inner shrine kept “Unlatched and lit” on the chance that God might “care / To enter or to tarry there,” with “Call Thou early, call Thou late” handing the initiative back. Sorley’s title, Expectans expectavi, sets the psalm’s confident perfect over a poem about not having been paying attention. The second turn is on top of the first: Wood’s 1919 anthem sets only the last two stanzas and is catalogued under their first line, so a poem whose point is a distracted young man is sung in choir as a straightforward act of devotion under a psalm title, with the confession cut. Nothing in the poem or in its printing ties Sorley’s Latin to this Sunday’s Offertory rather than to the Psalter or the Vulgate at large; the words are the same words, in the older spelling those three layers show, and they are the poem’s only Latin.

Offertory, Ps. 39:2–4 — the psalm closing a rock album, with the ending changed to a complaint

Appointed text and locus. Offertory, marginal no. 1588, printed p. 397. Douay–Rheims at Ps. 39:2–4: “With expectation I have waited for the Lord … and he put a new canticle into my mouth, a song to our God.”

Later work and loci. U2, War, Island Records ILPS 9733, released 28 February 1983 in the United Kingdom; track 10 of 10 is “40,” 2:35. The album’s opening track is “Sunday Bloody Sunday.” Bono describes the adaptation in his own introduction to Selections from the Book of Psalms (Pocket Canons, 1999): “lost for words and forty minutes of recording time left before the end of our studio time, we were still looking for a song to close our third album, War. We wanted to put something explicitly spiritual on the record to balance the politics and the romance of it … We thought about the psalms … ‘Psalm 40’ … ‘40’ became the closing song at U2 shows and on hundreds of occasions, literally hundreds of thousands of people … have shouted back the refrain, pinched from ‘Psalm 6’: “How long” (to sing this song)”.”

The turn. Ps. 39(40) is a thanksgiving: the waiting is over, the cry has been heard, the new song is already in the mouth. The song keeps the thanksgiving and appends a question from a different psalm — Ps. 6:4, usquequo, “how long,” a lament — so it ends not in the new song but in the question, and the crowd rather than the band is left singing it. On a record whose first track is “Sunday Bloody Sunday” the unanswered question lands on the Troubles. The overlap with the appointed wording is the waiting-and-being-heard clause and the new-song clause and not the whole song: the song follows the Authorised Version of Ps. 40:1–3, while the antiphon is the Roman chant’s Latin, which departs from the Vulgate at three places here, keeps only the opening clause of v. 3 and cuts the rest of it — the pit, the rock and the established goings, which the song keeps — and v. 4b with it. The statement about the refrain’s origin and the crowd’s response is the adapter’s own testimony.

Epistle, Gal. 6:2 and 6:5 — the lesson’s own internal tension argued out in wartime Parliament

Appointed text and loci. Epistle, marginal no. 1584, printed p. 396, containing both Alter altérius ónera portáte, et sic adimplébitis legem Christi (6:2) and Unusquísque enim onus suum portábit (6:5).

Later text and locus. United Kingdom, House of Commons, Official Report, debate “National Scheme of Family Allowances,” HC Deb 23 June 1942, vol. 380, cc1853–944, at c1895. Mr Maurice Hely-Hutchinson, Member for Hastings, speaking against the Motion: “It is far simpler to base one’s whole attitude towards this as indeed towards all forms of social service on the words in the second verse of the 6th Chapter of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians— Bear ye one another’s burdens than it is to struggle on to the fifth verse of the same chapter and there find the striking contradiction— For every man shall bear his own burden.” The interruption, at the same column: “Mr. George Griffiths (Hemsworth): That is not a contradiction but a confirmation.” And the reply: “It was the late Sir Arnold Wilson who called my attention to that apparent contradiction … The two verses reflect the use of the same English word ‘burden’ to represent two entirely different words in the original Greek … So the instruction appears to be that a man ought to carry his pack, and the rest of us ought to help him if it turns out to be so overwhelming a burden as to be a calamity.”

The turn. The appointed lesson is treated as a self-contradicting statute to be construed. Paul sets the two sentences three verses apart in one paragraph about correcting a brother and testing one’s own work; in the Commons they become the two rival principles of the welfare state, in the debate whose subject-matter became the Family Allowances Act 1945. The reply is a lexical argument on the floor of the House, used to limit the state’s duty to what is “so overwhelming a burden as to be a calamity”; the retort from the Labour benches is the counter-reading. The Greek argument in that speech is Hely-Hutchinson’s, and he attributes it to the late Sir Arnold Wilson: his renderings “calamities” and “pack” are his own and are not established. Paul does write two different Greek nouns at 6:2 and 6:5, baros and phortion, which the Greek New Testament carries whatever was said in the House. The two phrases stand in twelve and in two spoken contributions across the whole Hansard corpus, several of them in the same class of debate, so this exchange is one attestation of a standing parliamentary habit.

The Propers: Interpretive Possibilities

Everything below is exploratory editorial and AI proposal. None of it is sourced historical intent, attributed teaching or documented reception, and none of it should be quoted as any of those. Each proposal joins at least two precisely named appointed elements and ends on the strongest thing that stands against it. No connection here is claimed to be unknown, unprecedented, first or authored by the model; where a proposal and a checked witness conflict, the witness wins. The precedent search behind each, its corpus and its bounds, is recorded in research/scope.md and summarised in the terminal appendix.

Editorial proposal — P1. Incapacity stated twice in one Mass, once of the Church and once of the person

Anchors: Collect (Coll.), et quia sine te non potest salva consístere; Epistle (Ep.), Gal. 6:1 consíderans teípsum, ne et tu tentéris and Gal. 6:3 Nam si quis exístimat se áliquid esse, cum nihil sit, ipse se sedúcit

Mechanism: The same denial made at two scales inside one formulary. The Church cannot stand safe of herself; the man who takes his own measure deceives himself. The Collect’s own grammar states the incapacity before its last petition, the semicolon after consístere being its hinge, as in the Collect subsection of the commentary. The lesson does the same thing to the individual corrector, and Jerome, Aquinas and Augustine read it that way — Jerome noting that Paul warns of temptation and not of a fall, temptation lying in the tempter’s power, quoted at the Epistle subsection of the commentary; Aquinas that nothing so breaks a man’s severity in correcting as the fear of his own fall; and Augustine requiring the corrector to answer God first that he acts from love.

Fruit: A single doctrine of dependence preached at both scales in one hour: the ecclesiology of the Collect and the moral counsel of the lesson turn out to be the same sentence said twice, which is why the Mass can command correction of a brother without licensing severity.

What the element-by-element reading misses: Read alone, the Collect is a conventional prayer for the Church and Gal. 6:1–3 is a rule of pastoral practice. Read together, the rule of practice is the Collect’s ecclesiology applied to one man, and the shared move is from an admission of nothing to an instruction about what to do next.

Strongest limit: Salva consístere and exístimat se áliquid esse share no Latin root, so this is a doctrinal join throughout and not a word-play, and the shift from the ecclesial scale to the personal one is the proposal rather than an observation in the text. Whether any checked expositor reads Gal. 6:3 ecclesially was not reached, so the second half of the join has no reception behind it.

Editorial proposal — P2. The great King over all the earth, and the town he visits

Anchors: Alleluia (All.), et Rex magnus super omnem terram, Ps. 94:3 as the chant sings it; Gospel (Gosp.), Lk. 7:16 Quia prophéta magnus surréxit in nobis: et quia Deus visitávit plebem suam

Mechanism: The chant’s substituted predicate is a claim of universal scope, and the Gospel that follows it directly puts God at one town’s gate. The chant’s Rex magnus super omnem terram names God king over the whole earth and the Gospel’s prophéta magnus a prophet risen among us, and the crowd’s second clause names the visit as God’s own. The substituted predicate is the Latin Bible’s own phrase at Ps. 46:3, as in the Alleluia subsection of the commentary.

Fruit: The Mass’s widest predication of God and its narrowest scene of him stand within a few minutes of each other, so that the universality the Alleluia sings is what makes the visit at Naim more than a local wonder — and the Gospel’s own crowd, saying Deus visitávit plebem suam, is the one that draws the inference.

What the element-by-element reading misses: Treated on its own the Alleluia is a verse of general praise, and no exposition located here rests on the predicate it sings. Set against the Gospel it turns out to be the element that states the scope of what the Gospel then narrates.

Strongest limit: Severe and threefold. No checked witness expounds the chant’s predicate at all: Augustine and Cassiodorus both read super omnes deos and build their expositions on the very word the chant removes, so the proposal has no reception behind its key phrase. Nothing shows the chant took the phrase from Ps. 46:3 rather than from a psalter not opened here, no psalter of the older type having been collated at all. And the reading is inherited chant wording, standing in the uncorrected optical layers of the Pustet 1862, the Venice 1570 and the 1604 typica, so nothing about a 1962 compiler may be claimed from it.

Editorial proposal — P3. The ear the Mass asks God to bend, and the visitation the crowd reports

Anchors: Introit (Int.), Inclína, Dómine, aurem tuam ad me, with the missal’s own ad me; Gospel (Gosp.), Lk. 7:16 et quia Deus visitávit plebem suam

Mechanism: The Mass opens by asking God to bend down toward one speaker and closes its Gospel with a crowd reporting that he has come. What makes it more than a theme is the added word: the tracked Clementine reads Inclina, Domine, aurem tuam et exaudi me, and the antiphon supplies a direction the Bible verse does not have, while the Gospel supplies the arrival. Visitare with God as subject stands in Luke four times only, at the loci given at the Gospel subsection of the commentary, and the crowd’s sentence at Naim is one of the four.

Fruit: A shape for the whole Mass: the first thing asked is a movement of God toward one voice, and the last thing narrated is a crowd of witnesses saying it happened. It gives the communicant a way of hearing the Introit as a petition the day’s own Gospel answers.

What the element-by-element reading misses: The Introit’s ad me is otherwise only a textual curiosity, recorded in the divergence apparatus and dropped. Set against the Gospel’s visitávit, it is the element that makes the petition directional.

Strongest limit: The addition is inherited chant wording and not a 1962 act, so nothing about a compiler may be claimed; inclina aurem is common psalter idiom and its recurrence proves nothing on its own; and the appointed Gospel gives Deus visitávit plebem suam to the crowd and not to the Evangelist, so a reading that makes it Luke’s own verdict is an interpretation and not the text. Cassiodorus’s lemma does carry ad me, so the addition is older than the Missal.

Editorial proposal — P4. What the cuts withhold, the Mass says elsewhere

Anchors: Offertory (Off.), ending at hymnum Deo nostro; Introit (Int.), sperántem in te and the half-verses it passes over; Secret (Sec.), Tua nos, Dómine, sacraménta custódiant

Mechanism: Two cuts in one Mass each withhold a word that another element of the same Mass carries: the hope the Offertory stops short of is sung already at the Introit, and the guarding the Introit passes over is asked at the Secret. The Offertory ends at hymnum Deo nostro, so Ps. 39:4b, sperabunt in Domino, is cut mid-verse and Ps. 39:5, spes ejus, is never reached, the extent given at the Offertory subsection of the commentary — while the Introit’s own antiphon already prays salvum fac servum tuum … sperántem in te. And the Introit’s centonisation passes over Ps. 85:2a Custodi animam meam, while the Secret asks Tua nos, Dómine, sacraménta custódiant: the verb the unsung half-verse used of the soul is the verb the Secret asks of the sacraments.

Fruit: The Mass keeps saying, in prayers of its own, what its chants stop just short of singing. That is a way of hearing the orations as continuous with the chants rather than as a separate genre laid over them, and it gives the Secret — otherwise the least remarkable of the three prayers — a precise place in the formulary.

What the element-by-element reading misses: A cut is normally noticed only as an absence. Here the absences are answered elsewhere in the same Mass, which no element-by-element reading can see, because the answer is never in the element where the cut is.

Strongest limit: The unsung matter is not appointed text, and a proposal that leans on it presses verses the assembly does not hear. Custodíre is also among the commonest verbs in the Roman euchology, so the Introit-and-Secret leg rests on a coincidence of a very ordinary word.

Editorial proposal — P5. Let us walk, and Jesus was going

Anchors: Epistle (Ep.), Gal. 5:25 Si spíritu vívimus, spíritu et ambulémus, the lesson’s first imperative; Gospel (Gosp.), In illo témpore: Ibat Iesus in civitátem, the pericope’s first finite verb as the missal prints it

Mechanism: The appointed lesson’s first imperative and the appointed Gospel’s first finite verb are the same act, and the missal’s own arrangement puts them one after the other in the rite, with only a Gradual and an Alleluia between. The incipit is the missal’s own, standing where Luke’s connective stands, as in the divergence table and the Gospel subsection of the commentary, so that the first thing said of Christ in this Mass’s Gospel is that he was walking, immediately after the assembly has been told to walk.

Fruit: A reading of the day’s two lessons as one instruction and its example, in the plainest possible form: the Epistle says walk, and the Gospel shows where the walking goes — to a gate, a bier and a widow. It also gives the Epistle’s opening imperative, which is otherwise a conclusion drawn from premises the Mass does not read, something in this Mass to attach to.

What the element-by-element reading misses: Read separately, Gal. 5:25 is the tail of an argument about flesh and spirit and Lk. 7:11 is a scene-setting line. Read in the order the book prints them, they are an imperative and its enactment, and the enactment ends in mercy rather than in moral effort.

Strongest limit: Obvious and severe. In illo témpore is the standard Roman Gospel incipit formula throughout the book, and Ibat is inherited from the Bible text’s own deinceps ibat, so the substitution moves the verb to the head of the pericope rather than creating it. A proposal that overstated this would be claiming a compiler’s wit where there is a formula. How many other 1962 Gospel pericopes have their incipit reshaped the same way is a whole-Missal count nobody has run, and the optical layers available would not support it.

Appendix: Scope and Qualifications

Which edition this is. This is the canonical full edition. After the map, the dossier sheet and the thematic movement it prints the complete appointed formulary — the Latin of the 1962 Vatican editio typica beside the English of the registered public-domain witnesses — and then the element-by-element commentary, the synthesis sections and this apparatus, all from one source leaf. A mechanical synthesis companion is compiled from the same source at the same identity with a -synthesis suffix; it omits the complete appointed text and the element-by-element sweep, prints in the sweep’s place an integrated cross-proper commentary this edition does not contain, and owns no prose, research record or source audit of its own.

Edition, formulary identity and text-verification state

The work is the Fifteenth Sunday after Pentecost of the Missale Romanum ex decreto Sacrosancti Concilii Tridentini restitutum, Summorum Pontificum cura recognitum, editio typica (Vatican City: Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1962). Printed heading DOMINICA / DECIMA QUINTA / post Pentecosten, rank II classis, printed pp. 396–397, marginal nos. 1582–1591; Credo and the Preface of the Most Holy Trinity; no Tract, Sequence, second or third oration, blessing, station or ritual text. Green follows RG 127 b of the 1960 Rubricae generales and is not printed on these pages.

All ten elements, their headings, references, wording, accentuation, punctuation, the printed rank, the rubrics, the marginal series and both formulary boundaries were visually collated against the page images of the CMAA-hosted facsimile of the Vatican typical edition on 2026-09-05, at the scan’s native resolution, with disputed glyphs enlarged. No transcription and no optical text layer was allowed to supply a reading. The full record of that collation, its provenance and its unresolved points is propers/verified.md; the unedited machine pull that located the formulary is propers/retrieved.txt.

A second 1962 edition, the Benziger iuxta typicam, was read only in an uncorrected optical text layer. It is a different edition of the same revision and not an independent image of the typical edition, so every difference between them recorded in the commentary is an edition difference or an artefact of that layer. Nothing was blended and no Benziger form was substituted for a Vatican typical form. One word-form difference stands, Aduléscens against Adolescens at Lk. 7:14.

Published text, English, and rights

The basis for reproducing the Latin is 17 U.S.C. §103(b): the copyright in a revised edition extends only to the material that edition contributed. Nine of the ten elements are printed, in the same order and at the same references, in three Missals tracked in this repository as public-domain text — the Vatican typica of 1604, the Pustet Ratisbon 1862 and the Venice 1570 — and the Gospel in two of them, read in uncorrected optical layers of which no page image was opened here. The source records of the 1604 and the 1570 classify their layers degraded and forbid resting any negative search on them; the Pustet’s classifies its layer prose Latin and bounds that prohibition to searches over its accented text, and all three admit quotation only through a checked passage. It is not a page-image collation and nothing is quoted from any of the three: where the commentary or the appointed-text section reports one of their readings, a spelling or a point, what it reports is what that layer shows, and the strings behind those reports are the lightly normalised renderings recorded in propers/verified.md. No negative result in this guide rests on them. The Pustet does not print this Sunday’s Gospel at all but cross-references it to the Lenten Thursday that shares it, so the Gospel’s presence in a public-domain witness rests on the 1604 and the 1570. The 1962 typical edition’s own copyright status is unresolved and is more likely than not restored in the United States to the end of 2057; the reading of the statute above is this project’s and is not a clearance anyone granted, and it is not legal advice.

No English here is composed, translated, adapted or paraphrased. Scriptural elements are quoted from the Douay–Rheims as revised by Bishop Challoner, in the tracked Project Gutenberg e-text of that revision, with psalm loci resolved from the tracked numbering concordance and not by arithmetic. The three orations are quoted from The Roman Missal translated into the English language for the use of the laity, first revised edition (Philadelphia: Eugene Cummiskey, 1861), which this audit read on the page images of the registered scan at printed pp. 427–429 and found word for word the tracked transcription. That English is a free devotional rendering and not a word-for-word translation, its translator is not established by any source opened here, and it is presented as an identified historical English witness on that footing. Where the registered English does not answer the Latin, the appointed-text section says so at the element and leaves the gap open. At four sung elements the Douay has no counterpart for a reading — the Introit’s added ad me, the Alleluia’s super omnem terram, the Offertory’s three departed phrases, and the Communion’s dédero and sǽculi — and beside them stand the missal’s own untranslated cues: the lesson’s prefixed Fratres, the Gospel’s incipit, and the Secret’s conclusion, which the 1861 book leaves untranslated. Of the four only the Alleluia’s gap is closed, the 1861 book rendering super omnem terram at its printed p. 428. That book answers the Offertory’s hymnum and not et respéxit me, and at et exaudívit deprecatiónem meam it takes the Douay’s verb with the missal’s number and so answers the missal’s reading in number alone. Et respéxit me is answered by neither of the two Englishes printed at the Offertory, the Douay’s and the 1861 book’s, and the Introit’s added ad me by the Douay, the one English printed there; the Communion’s two readings are rendered distinctly by none of the five English witnesses examined.

The repository’s translation ledger and its own passage records contradict each other about these three orations. The ledger carries all three as text-free rows with availability “unavailable” and a reason of withheld rights, on the ground that no tracked publication artifact and passage binding establishes text that may be served — while that edition’s tracked public-domain artifact and three registered passages exist, two of them verified, and this audit read all three orations on the registered page images. The English printed here rests on the artifact and the passage records, which are cited; the ledger is not cited as evidence either way, and it stands unreconciled with the records it contradicts.

Evidence states and how claims are distinguished

Verified source text is wording checked against an identified primary edition: that is the Latin of all ten elements. A checked quotation is a published claim read at an exact locus in a named edition; that is every patristic, medieval and liturgical citation here, each carrying its locus at the point of use in The Propers: Detailed Commentary and, for the quotations the earlier pages carry, in References. Source-grounded synthesis is an editorial conclusion supported by checked evidence: the claims of Source-Grounded Synthesis Across the Propers. Editorial or AI proposal is labelled as such and confined to The Propers: Interpretive Possibilities. An unverified lead supports no published claim.

Greek is given in transliteration throughout, and the Greek witnesses are the 1904 Nestle text for the New Testament and Swete’s Septuagint for the psalms and 3 Kingdoms; those, and no other Greek edition, stand behind every Greek word printed. No Greek patristic text was collated anywhere. Cyril of Alexandria on Luke and on John, Chrysostom on Galatians and on John, and Gregory of Nyssa were all read in nineteenth-century English translation, and Cyril’s Luke commentary reaches English through an ancient Syriac version of a Greek original surviving elsewhere only in catena fragments. Where one of those witnesses makes a point about a Greek word, the point is reported as his argument and is not established here.

Source scope, and what it does not reach

Everything checked in Latin was read in Latin: Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, Bede, Hilary, Cassiodorus and Aquinas. The editions and their state vary and the variation is material. Ambrose on Luke was read as an optical layer of the critical edition, whose body text is sound and whose apparatus lines are mangled. Hilary on Ps. 91 was read as an optical layer of a scan of the critical edition whose Latin recognition is poor, whose running heads and apparatus are badly mangled and whose page-number sequence is unreliable; CCSL 61/61A was not consulted. Ambrose on Ps. 39 and Jerome on Galatians were read on page images with no text layer and transcribed by eye. Bede and Cassiodorus were read on optical layers of Migne whose recognition is poor and which corrupt individual words. Augustine was read throughout in a web presentation of the Maurist text. Aquinas was read in the standard scholarly electronic text of the Marietti editions. No critical edition later than 1919 was consulted anywhere: those are in copyright and are not held here.

Named commentators the repository’s own index ranks for these passages and which were not opened: on the four psalms, Theodoret, Jerome, Arnobius the Younger, Bellarmine, Peter Lombard, Nicholas of Lyra, Euthymius Zigabenus, Bruno the Carthusian, Albert the Great and Hugh of Saint-Cher; on the Epistle, Ambrosiaster, Theodoret, Marius Victorinus, Theophylact, Haymo of Halberstadt, Peter Lombard, the Glossa ordinaria, Nicholas of Lyra, Denis the Carthusian, Cornelius a Lapide and William Estius; on the Gospel, Theophylact, Titus of Bostra, Euthymius Zigabenus, Albert the Great, Bonaventure, Denis the Carthusian, Hugh of Saint-Cher and Maldonado; on the Communion’s verse, Hilary’s De Trinitate VIII, Irenaeus, Theophylact, Rupert of Deutz, Albert the Great and Maldonado. Bonaventure’s exposition of the Communion’s verse was located in a tracked public-domain volume and not read. Godfrey of Admont’s Homilia LXXXII, PL 174:575A–580C, and Homilia LXXXIII, PL 174:580C–583D, reach this formulary only as loci recorded in the preceding Sunday’s leaf; PL 174 was not opened, so what those two homilies say of these passages is not established here.

On the liturgical side: Rheinau, S. Gallen 348, Pamelius, Menard and Gerbert’s printed p. 175 were not opened, so the five-witness Sunday-numbering split is Wilson’s report of those books. The Wurzburg comes and Klauser’s Capitulare evangeliorum were not sought, so the lectionary result is what Migne prints at PL 30 under Jerome’s name, whose date, provenance and authority nobody here established. No Ordo Romanus, station list, Breviary of any date, Ambrosian or Mozarabic missal was opened for this Sunday, and whether it has a station church is not claimed either way. Hesbert’s Antiphonale Missarum Sextuplex cannot be reached under the rights policy in force: the edition is registered here at catalogue level with no artifact, on the ground that no affirmative United States redistribution basis for exact edition bytes was established, so every antiphonary datum in this guide is the gregorien.info database’s report of his pages and is attributed to that database.

Search limits and material negative results

Every negative below is the answer one corpus gave to one query, and a different corpus, a different phrasing or a non-English literature could overturn any of them.

• No Bible witness and no patristic or Greek lemma collated here reads super omnem terram at Ps. 94:3 or miserere mihi at Ps. 85:3. Both readings stand in the optical layers of the three older Missals read for the preexisting-material check, which are neither Bible text nor patristic lemma. Nothing in Swete answers the Introit’s added ad me, which Cassiodorus’s Latin lemma nonetheless carries.

• The Communion’s dédero and sǽculi answer nothing in the Greek, and no English witness examined — the tracked Douay, the Keating of 1806, the Cummiskey of 1861, the Lasance of 1945, Shepherd’s English of Fromage’s continuation of Guéranger as printed in 1909 — renders either distinctly.

• Naim occurs once in the whole tracked Clementine, and propheta magnus only at Ecclus. 48:25 and Lk. 7:16.

• The eight-resurrections scheme the Catena aurea attributes to Ambrose is not in his Luke commentary, on a word search of the complete critical text; it may stand in another of his works, or be Ps.-Ambrose, or be a Glossa attribution.

• Gregory the Great has nothing on this pericope, on the evidence of the Catena’s lemma frequencies over Luke 7 and of the standard account of his forty homilies. PL 76 and CCSL 141 were not opened.

• No Father or Doctor comments on the three orations anywhere in this repository’s tracked sources or in the patristic and medieval works opened for this formulary; the patristic corpora at large were not searched, and a Father found quoting one of the three incipits corrects the result. None of the three occurs in the Veronense in two independent scans, in Férotin’s Liber mozarabicus sacramentorum, in Bannister’s Missale Gothicum or in Lowe’s Bobbio Missal. Four bounds travel with that second negative: it is a literal search over uncorrected optical text and cannot see a paraphrase or a recentonised descendant; three of the four books are diplomatic editions printing manuscript contractions; the e caudata failure demonstrated below would hide any of the three in any of the four books; and the corpus itself excludes every eighth-century Gelasian, every Ambrosian book, every Gregorian supplement beyond Wilson, every medieval monastic or diocesan sacramentary and every later Roman missal.

• No registered passage record exists anywhere in this repository’s source library at any locus of Luke 7, at any of the four appointed psalms, or at any verse of the appointed Epistle; no Graduale, Liber usualis, Cantatorium or Latin psalter other than the Clementine is registered at all, and the one Antiphonale registered is Hesbert’s Antiphonale Missarum Sextuplex, at catalogue level with no artifact, so that no chant book’s text is reachable here. No Psalterium Romanum, no Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos and no Old Latin psalter was collated for this formulary.

• No qualifying cultural afterlife was located for the Introit, the Gradual, the Alleluia or the Communion, across four corpora searched on 2026-09-05: the Library of Congress Chronicling America collection, the CourtListener opinion index, the UK Parliament Hansard contributions index and the Caselaw Access Project static corpus. The counts are recorded in research/scope.md. The Alleluia is closed to that sweep as a matter of text and not of effort, because no English corpus can be searched for a reading the English Bibles do not carry. On this selection the gallery has no Gospel entry: the one located non-preaching use of the appointed Gospel is contestable under the profile’s own rule, and the absence is left standing.

• Those four corpora are overwhelmingly American and English-language. No British, Irish, Canadian or Australian newspaper corpus, no non-English literature, no film or broadcast archive beyond two catalogue records, no advertising archive and no manuscript source was searched.

• The precedent search behind the five interpretive proposals ran inside this repository alone, over the tree at the commit research/scope.md records: the 669 proper-guide files that search swept across both providers and both calendars, the 628 article files it swept, both providers’ theology and history trees, the 1962 Ordinary and reference works beside this series, and the tracked 1962 calendar registry and commentary corpus index. Those are the sweep’s extent at that commit and not the collection’s present size. The open web, external sermon and homiletic databases, printed chant repertories and any universal literature search lie outside it, so not located in the checked corpus says only that this bounded corpus, fixed at that commit, does not hold the conjunction.

• No gallery entry rests on a search snippet: every legal candidate retained was read in the Caselaw Access Project’s continuous text of the printed reporter and the phrase confirmed there. No page-image collation stands behind any gallery entry, so none of the five is described as verified and the printed pointing of none of them is presented as settled.

One method warning governs every literal search reported here. A search over registered optical text layers produces false negatives, and the demonstration is on this formulary’s own prayers: a first pass over the Hadrianum layer returned nothing for miseratio continuata, Mentes nostras et corpora and doni caelestis operatio, and a second pass found all three, the layer rendering a footnote marker inside one word and a caret for the ae-ligature in another. Every negative here was run with loosened patterns and cross-checked against a second scan or a second pattern where one existed, and each remains correctable.

Chronology

Every biblical date printed in this work comes from the Scripture chronology corpus and from nowhere else, carried in research/chronology.toml and projected mechanically into the Date column of the page-2 sheet. No date here was inferred, harmonised, or taken from a commentary or a chronological table. For all four psalm elements the composition answer is a single whole-Psalter boundary on a modern critical profile, which states in its own words that no individual psalm can be dated securely. For the three psalms whose titles name David the corpus also answers a traditional-attribution relation, marked disputed, which carries David’s reign in the usual chronology as a named reference point and not as a date of the psalm; that relation leads the Date cell, the explanatory row names its source, and the Gradual, whose title names no author, carries none. The Epistle carries five labels spanning nine years within one traditional profile, one preferred and four alternate, and all five are printed. The Gospel and the Communion each carry two disputed composition labels and one preferred narrated-event label, and the two kinds answer different questions — when the book was written and when the thing it tells of happened.

Review state

The research behind this guide was carried out in one production and its audit record is research/scope.md, which holds the passage-by-passage reception matrix, the corpora and editions searched, the rejected and unresolved leads, the competing historical judgments, the gallery audit with its candidates not selected, and the audit of the interpretive proposals with their precedent classifications and search boundary. The bindings this publication makes to the repository’s reusable source library are recorded in research/source-bindings.toml. This is a hand-missal companion for study, not an official liturgical text, a critical edition or a substitute for the cited sources, and it has passed no specialist, clerical or ecclesiastical review.

References

The Missal and the liturgical witnesses

• Missale Romanum ex decreto Sacrosancti Concilii Tridentini restitutum, Summorum Pontificum cura recognitum, editio typica (Vatican City: Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1962), printed pp. 396–397, marginal nos. 1582–1591, with the Rubricae generales at printed pp. XX and XXXI. Read on the page images of the CMAA-hosted facsimile, artifact.catholic-church.missale-romanum.vatican-typica-1962.cmaa-facsimile-pdf, at the scan’s native resolution. Controls every Latin form, heading, reference, accent, point, marginal number and rubric printed here, and both formulary boundaries.

• Missale Romanum, editio iuxta typicam (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1962), printed pp. 390–392, read only in the uncorrected optical text layer of the Internet Archive digitisation. Every difference recorded from it is evidence about that layer.

• Missale Romanum, Vatican typica (1604), under the running head Dominica xv. post Pentecost. at lines 38,590–38,741 of the tracked optical layer, its printed page number not legible there; Missale Romanum (Ratisbon: Pustet, 1862), printed pp. 338–339, at lines 50,324–50,454 of its layer; Missale Romanum (Venice, 1570), at lines 53,352–53,515 of its layer. All three were read only in uncorrected public-domain optical layers, and no page image of any of them was opened; the source records of the 1604 and the 1570 classify their layers degraded and forbid resting any negative search on them, while the Pustet’s classifies its layer prose Latin and bounds that prohibition to searches over its accented text, all three admitting quotation only through a checked passage. The 1604 and the 1570 carry all ten elements in the same order and at the same references; the Pustet carries nine, its Gospel standing there as a cross-reference to the Lenten Thursday that shares the pericope. Where a reading, a spelling or a point of theirs is reported in this guide, what is reported is what that layer shows: the strings behind those reports are the lightly normalised renderings of the layers recorded in propers/verified.md, not quotations of the books. No negative result here rests on any of the three.

• H. A. Wilson (ed.), The Gregorian Sacramentary under Charles the Great (Henry Bradshaw Society XLIX, 1915), section XXXIIII, heading DOMINICA .XVI. POST PENTECOSTEN., printed p. 174, folio mark [fo. 168v]; and printed p. 173 for the Ottobonianus 313 chant margins. Read on the page images of the Internet Archive scan and in its optical layer.

• H. A. Wilson (ed.), The Gelasian Sacramentary (Oxford: Clarendon, 1894), Book III sect. XI, printed p. 230, heading Item alia Missa, with the marginal apparatus R. S. / Gerb. 175. / Pam. 411. / Men. 179. Read on a page image and in two optical layers of the same printing that agree verbatim on every word quoted.

• The four non-Gregorian, non-Gelasian books over which the three orations’ negative was run, read as the uncorrected optical layers of the registered corpus corpus.catholic-church.ancient-sacramentaries-2026-08-01: the Veronense in Feltoe’s edition, in two independent scans; Férotin’s Liber mozarabicus sacramentorum; Bannister’s Missale Gothicum; and Lowe’s Bobbio Missal. Searched by literal string, after letter folding, for fourteen distinctive phrases of the three orations and for five vocabulary controls, with the two Wilson layers as the positive control; nothing is quoted from any of the four, no page image of any was opened, and the negative carries the four bounds stated in the appendix.

• Honorius Augustodunensis, Gemma animae IV capp. LXVII, LXXII, LXXIV–LXXX, PL 172 cols. 715–721, with this Sunday at cap. LXXVIII. Read on page images of a registered facsimile whose bytes are rights-restricted and are not held here.

• Liber Comitis, PL 30 cols. 521–522, the heading Dominica mensis vi and its Epistle and Gospel. Read on a page image of the Migne volume and corroborated in that item’s optical layer.

• Ildefonso Schuster, The Sacramentary, vol. III (London: Burns Oates & Washbourne, 1927), printed pp. 139–141, for the Lawrence reckoning, the Lenten identities of the Gradual, the Offertory and the Communion, and the absence of a station. Read on page images of the registered scan.

• The continuation of Prosper Guéranger, The Liturgical Year: Time after Pentecost (Dom Lucien Fromage), vol. II, second edition, translated by Dom Laurence Shepherd (Stanbrook Abbey, Worcester; London: Burns & Oates, R. & T. Washbourne, Art & Book Company; United States: Benziger Bros., 1909), printed pp. 344–356: the name “the Sunday of the widow of Naim,” the three seasonal orations by cross-reference, and the Magnificat antiphon at Vespers. Read in the digitisation’s own embedded text layer.

• Variationes in Breviario et Missali Romano, cap. IV n. 18, Orationes pro diversitate Temporum abolentur, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 52 (1960), printed p. 709, with the Rubricae generales n. 18 at printed p. 599 distinguished from it. Read on a rendering of the Holy See’s own scan.

• René-Jean Hesbert, Antiphonale Missarum Sextuplex, at AMS 187 and at the eight loci of Ps. 94:3. His pages are reached here only through the gregorien.info database’s index of them, that edition being registered in this repository at catalogue level with no artifact for want of an established redistribution basis, and every antiphonary figure in this guide is attributed to the database and not to him.

• src/sources/calendars/roman-1962/propers.yaml, the tracked 1962 calendar registry, for the other appointments of this formulary’s chants and readings. A repository derivative and a finding aid, not the printed book.

Scripture, its versions, and the chronology corpus

• Biblia Sacra Vulgatae Editionis (Clementine), tracked as edition.catholic-church.vulgata-clementina.ebible-latvuc: Pss. 39, 46, 85, 91 and 94, Gal. 5–6, Lk. 7 and Jn. 6, the comparison text for every divergence recorded here and the Bible whose English this guide quotes; and, behind the further readings and the exhaustive sweeps the commentary reports, the ascriptions of Pss. 72–88 with the doxologies at Ps. 71:19–20 and 88:53, Ps. 87:12, Ecclus. 48:25, 3 Kings 17:23, 4 Kings 4, Lk. 1:68, 1:78, 4:25–26, 7:22 and 19:44, Jn. 6:39–55, Eph. 2:19, Heb. 3:7–4:7 and 10:5, the whole-Bible sweeps for Naim, propheta magnus, rex magnus super omnem terram and misericordiam tuam et veritatem tuam, and the sweep of Luke for the stem visita-.

• The Holy Bible, Douay–Rheims, as revised by Bishop Challoner, tracked as edition.english-college-of-douay.douay-rheims-bible.challoner-gutenberg-1581: Ps. 39:2–4; 46:3; 85:1–4; 91:2–3; 94:3; Gal. 5:25–6:10; Lk. 7:11–16; Jn. 6:52. The English of every scriptural element, with the Vulgate-to-English psalm conversions taken from the tracked numbering concordance of the same edition.

• The Roman Missal translated into the English language for the use of the laity, first revised edition (Philadelphia: Eugene Cummiskey, 1861), printed pp. 427–429, and the tracked transcription artifact.eugene-cummiskey.roman-missal-english-laity.philadelphia-1861.temporal-orations-en at physical lines 155–157. The English of the Collect, the Secret and the Postcommunion; and, at printed pp. 428–429, the book’s own renderings of the Alleluia’s versicle and of the Offertory antiphon, reported at those elements as identified nineteenth-century English of what the missal sings and not as the Douay.

• Eberhard Nestle, Novum Testamentum Graece (1904), in the morphologically tagged digitisation of that text: Gal. 5–6, Lk. 7, Jn. 6, and the exhaustive lemma sweeps behind the counts of bastazo, monogenes, splanchnizomai and the visitation verb.

• H. B. Swete, The Old Testament in Greek according to the Septuagint, in a digitisation derived from the First1KGreek project: Psalmi at Pss. 39, 85 and 94, and Regnorum III at 3 Kingdoms 17. The title of Ps. 94 is emitted at an anomalous reference in that file, so verse bodies were read and titles were not relied on.

• The Scripture chronology corpus, as resolved for this formulary into research/chronology.toml and projected into the page-2 Date column. Its sources for this Mass are the introduction to the Psalms in the New American Bible Revised Edition (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops web edition, retrieved 2026-07-28), which carries the whole-Psalter boundary the four psalm elements share and is cited here and not reproduced; John Corbett, “King David,” The Catholic Encyclopedia vol. IV (1908), printed p. 642, which the corpus names for the regnal era it sets beside the Davidic attribution of the Offertory, the Introit and the Alleluia; Alfred Durand, “The New Testament,” vol. XIV (1912), which the corpus names for the first of the Luke and of the John composition labels; Aherne’s “Epistle to the Galatians” in vol. VI, Prat’s “St. Paul” in vol. XI, Fonck’s “Gospel of St. John” in vol. VIII and Maas’s “Chronology of the Life of Jesus Christ” in vol. VIII, all in the same encyclopedia (New York: Robert Appleton, 1908–1912); the Pontifical Biblical Commission’s 1912 responsa on Mark and Luke, named below; and Cornelius a Lapide’s prooemium and Argumentum to Galatians in his Commentaria in omnes divi Pauli epistolas (Antwerp, 1614). No biblical date printed in this guide comes from anywhere else.

Historical orientation for the page-2 dossiers

• Pontifical Biblical Commission, De auctoribus et de tempore compositionis Psalmorum, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 2 (1910), printed pp. 354–355: the antiquity of the psalm titles and David as chief author of the songs of the Psalter.

• Pontifical Biblical Commission, De auctore, tempore et veritate Evangeliorum Marci et Lucae, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 4 (1912), printed pp. 463–465: composition before the end of the Roman imprisonment.

• John Corbett, “King David,” The Catholic Encyclopedia vol. IV (1908), printed p. 642, for the reign in the usual chronology that the three Davidic psalm dossiers carry as a reference point, reported there under the article’s own qualification; Walter Drum, “Psalms,” vol. XII (1911); Cornelius Aherne, “Gospel of Saint Luke,” vol. IX (1910), and “Epistle to the Galatians,” vol. VI (1909); Leopold Fonck, “Gospel of St. John,” vol. VIII (1910); Ferdinand Prat, “St. Paul,” vol. XI (1911); Anthony Maas, “Chronology of the Life of Jesus Christ,” vol. VIII (1910); and the article “Naim,” vol. X (1911), for the Onomasticon placing and the modern village.

Patristic, medieval and later reception

• Ambrose, Expositio Evangelii secundum Lucam V.88–92 and VI.64, ed. Schenkl, CSEL 32 pars 4 (Vienna, 1902), pp. 216–218 and 258, with the Migne concordance PL 15, 1376B–1377A. Read as an optical layer of the critical edition, whose apparatus lines are mangled and whose body text is sound; the word search behind the rejection of the eight-resurrections attribution was run over that complete text.

• Ambrose, In Psalmum XXXIX enarratio §§1–4, PL 14, cols. 1109–1110. Read on page images with no text layer and transcribed by eye; the 1919 critical edition was not consulted.

• Augustine, Enarrationes in Psalmos 39 (PL 36, 433–450), 85 (PL 37, 1081–1090), 91 (PL 37, 1171–1178) and 94 (PL 37, 1217–1234); Expositio epistulae ad Galatas §§52–61 (PL 35, 2145–2148); In Iohannis evangelium tractatus 26 §§12–18 (PL 35, 1607–1616); Sermo 98 (PL 38, 591–595). Read throughout in a web presentation of the Maurist text; no CCSL or CSEL volume was consulted, and his Galatians lemmata are pre-Vulgate and are quoted as his.

• Jerome, Commentariorum in Epistolam ad Galatas libri tres, lib. III, on Gal. 5:26–6:10, PL 26, cols. 423–432. Read on page images with no text layer and transcribed by eye; the 2006 critical edition is in copyright and was not consulted.

• John Chrysostom, Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, chapter 6 (PG 61, 673–680), and Homily 46 on the Gospel of John (PG 59, 257–260). Read in the nineteenth-century English of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers; neither Greek column was collated.

• Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on the Gospel of Saint Luke, Sermon XXXVI, trans. R. Payne Smith (Oxford: University Press, 1859), vol. 1, pp. 132–135; and Commentary on the Gospel according to S. John IV.2, trans. P. E. Pusey, Library of the Fathers 43 (Oxford: James Parker, 1874), vol. 1, pp. 409–412. English throughout; the Luke commentary reaches English through an ancient Syriac version, and PG 73 was not collated.

• Bede, In Lucae evangelium expositio lib. II, on Lk. 7:11–17, PL 92, cols. 417–420. Read on an optical layer of a Google scan of Migne whose two-column setting interleaves badly and whose individual words are corrupt in places.

• Hilary of Poitiers, Tractatus super Psalmos, Tractatus de titulo psalmi XCI §§1–3, ed. Zingerle, CSEL 22 (Vienna, 1891), pp. 339ff. Read as an optical layer of a scan of the critical edition whose Latin recognition is poor. It is a tractate on the psalm’s title and not on its verses.

• Gregory of Nyssa, De hominis opificio 25.6–11 (PG 44, 213–217). Read in the nineteenth-century English of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, second series, vol. 5, in Wilson’s translation, as presented by New Advent at newadvent.org/fathers/2914; PG 44 was not collated.

• Cassiodorus, Expositio Psalmorum on Pss. 39, 85, 91 and 94, PL 70. Read on an optical layer of a Google scan of Migne whose recognition is poor and which mangles individual words; his verse numbering runs one lower than the Vulgate’s where the inscription stands as a numbered verse, as at Ps. 39, and level with it where the inscription is counted inside v. 1, as at Ps. 85.

• Thomas Aquinas, Super Epistolam ad Galatas lectura cap. 6 lect. 1–2; Super Evangelium S. Ioannis lectura cap. 6 lect. 6; and Catena aurea in Lucam cap. 7 lect. 2, used as an index of the Latin tradition and for the lemma frequencies over Luke 7. Standard scholarly electronic texts of the Marietti editions; the Leonine edition has not published these lecturae.

• Anthony of Padua, Dominica XVI post Pentecosten, on this Gospel, and Dominica XV post Pentecosten, on another. Named here only for the ordinal hazard; the critical edition of both is storage- and rights-restricted and neither sermon is drawn on.

Cultural afterlives

• Benton v. Bakker (In re Heritage Village Church & Missionary Fellowship, Inc.), 92 B.R. 1000, 1022 (Bankr. D.S.C., 9 November 1988), Reynolds, Bankruptcy Judge. Read in the Caselaw Access Project’s continuous transcription of West’s Bankruptcy Reporter vol. 92; United States federal opinion, public domain.

• Whatsoever A Man Soweth (1917), British Film Institute Screenonline film id 1358391, record and synopsis pages, curatorial analysis signed Bryony Dixon; corroborated by the Wellcome Collection catalogue, work id n4b7rac9. Both are catalogue and curatorial pages under their institutions’ own copyright and are cited rather than reproduced; the film’s own rights position is not established here and no frame of it was viewed.

• Charles Hamilton Sorley, “Expectans expectavi,” poem XXV in Marlborough and Other Poems (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1916), pp. 65–66. Read in two independent uncorrected optical layers of the 1916 and 1919 printings, which agree with each other; no page image was collated, so the poem’s printed pointing is not settled here.

• Charles Wood, Expectans Expectavi, for mixed chorus and organ (Boston: C. C. Birchard, plate no. 1147, 1919), Sorley named as librettist. The publisher, plate, first-publication, instrumentation and alternative-title details are the catalogue’s; the scanned score was not opened.

• Bono, introduction to Selections from the Book of Psalms: Authorized King James Version, Pocket Canons (Canongate, 1999), quoted from the authorised reprint in Modern Reformation 14:1 (2005). The Canongate book itself was not retrieved and its pagination is unknown. U2, War (Island Records ILPS 9733, 28 February 1983), track listing and durations from the MusicBrainz release record for the 1983 United Kingdom pressing. The song’s lyric is in copyright and is not reproduced.

• United Kingdom, House of Commons, Official Report, “National Scheme of Family Allowances,” HC Deb 23 June 1942, vol. 380, cc1853–944, at c1895; read in Parliament’s own historic Hansard digitisation as continuous text with column anchors, and not collated against the printed bound volume.

Last revised (UTC): 2026-10-01T22:26:08Z

Reuse and rights. To the extent Triptych holds the rights, project-created content and design are licensed under CC BY 4.0. Scripture, liturgical or official texts, received prayers or hymns, quotations, fonts, and other third-party material retain their own status; public-domain material remains public domain. Identify changes. Attribution implies neither Triptych nor ecclesiastical approval. See LICENSE and THIRD_PARTY.md in the source.