Twelfth Sunday after Pentecost (Full Edition)

Full source-audited guide to the 1962 Roman Missal propers

Twelfth Sunday after Pentecost

DOMINICA DUODECIMA post Pentecosten

1962 Roman Missal propers: received help, life-giving ministry, enacted mercy, intercession, pardon, and sacramental strengthening

Scriptural Date and Location

The Propers: Themes and Movement

From the helpless cry to the life of love

The formulary moves from the cry of one who cannot save himself to the life of one made able to love. God gives the beginning, power, pattern, pardon, and food of Christian service: the Spirit writes the good command within; Christ the Samaritan draws near to fallen humanity; his mercy creates a merciful people; his intercession carries sinners to the altar; and his sacramental gift vivifies those sent to do likewise. Grace does not leave the human act behind. It heals, elevates, and completes it.

1. The cry for help opens into a grace-given course (Int., Coll., Ep.)

The Introit begins in the imperative: inténde, attend; festína, make haste. Before danger is described, the threatened servant turns toward God. Eusebius hears in this compact cry the voices of David, Christ, and the Church; Augustine hears the members of Christ confessing a need that remains throughout the pilgrimage; Cassian gives the verse to the monk in every condition, and Benedict makes it the threshold of the Hours and the prayer of humble work. Dependence is not an emergency measure at the edge of Christian life. It is the creature’s truthful posture before the giver of life.

The Collect transforms that cry into ordered movement. Worthy service itself comes de cuius múnere; therefore the Church asks the giver to grant that his people run without stumbling toward his promises. The prayer holds together gift, service, motion, and end. Augustine’s teaching on grace and free will supplies its doctrinal cadence: God awakens and strengthens the will so that the renewed person truly consents and acts. Aquinas, ST I–II, q. 109, aa. 2, 4–5, 9–10, says the same with scholastic precision: without grace fallen man cannot be healed, keep the whole law, merit eternal life, or persevere; under grace he acts as a living secondary cause. The Benedictine Prologue receives the biblical verb of running in just this key—the heart expands in the sweetness of love, and the monk runs toward the heavenly homeland.

Paul gives the Sunday’s ministerial form to this anthropology. Confidence is per Christum ad Deum; sufficiency is ex Deo; yet those made sufficient really are ministers. Chrysostom points to the Corinthians themselves as the Spirit-written commendation of apostolic labor. Theodoret and Aquinas refuse the rivalry between divine and human agency: God makes the minister fit, and the minister consequently serves. Thus the Introit does not end in helplessness, nor the Collect in pious desire, nor the Epistle in a theory of inward grace. Received help becomes a course, and received sufficiency becomes ministry.

2. The Spirit brings the written command to its living perfection (Ep., Gosp.)

Paul’s antithesis does not divide the God of Moses from the God of Christ. The stone-lettered ministry is divine and glorious; its command is holy. What it cannot do by external inscription alone is forgive the sinner, pour charity into the heart, and produce the obedience it requires. Chrysostom honors both glories while proclaiming the greater; Ambrosiaster locates the new ministry’s surpassing splendor in forgiveness and righteousness; Augustine teaches that even the good precept remains killing letter when the Spirit does not inwardly give love; Aquinas therefore calls the grace of the Holy Spirit the New Law in its principal reality. The promise of Jeremiah and Ezekiel is fulfilled: the one divine will once written on stone is written in the living heart.

The Gospel enacts this doctrine as a lesson in reading. Jesus asks the lawyer, “What is written? How readest thou?” The answer from Deuteronomy and Leviticus is entirely true: love God wholly and the neighbor as oneself. Then Christ gives the command a body. The Samaritan sees, is moved with compassion, approaches, binds, pours, sets the wounded man upon his own beast, brings him to shelter, keeps watch, pays, entrusts further care, and promises to return. The lawyer asks which persons fall within the boundary of neighbor; Christ asks which traveller became neighbor. The written word reaches its living perfection when grace makes charity operative.

The Fathers contemplate in the Samaritan both the Lord who saves and the life he gives his members. Origen preserves an elder’s reading of wounded humanity; Ambrose, Augustine, and Bede identify the compassionate stranger above all with Christ. Humanity descends from Jerusalem into mortality, is stripped and wounded by sin, and lies unable to restore itself. The Son becomes near by the Incarnation, bears our weakness in his flesh, binds the wounds, brings the patient to the Church, commits care to apostolic ministry, and promises to return. Bede holds the senses in fruitful union: Christ is Neighbor in the highest sense, and everyone who performs mercy becomes neighbor. The command fac similiter is therefore the form Christ’s own mercy takes in those he has healed.

The Gospel’s opening beatitude also orders the passage’s sight. The disciples are blessed because their eyes see the saving works long desired by prophets and kings. On the road, priest and Levite likewise see the wounded man, but their sight does not mature into approach. The Samaritan sees and is moved in his inward parts; compassion then becomes the long sequence of embodied acts. The lawyer must finally see himself inside that sequence: not merely defining the neighbor from outside, but receiving Christ’s merciful judgment and going to enact it. Blessed sight reaches its proper fruit when the person shown mercy learns to behold another’s misery with the heart of Christ.

3. Continual praise contains the whole day and the whole night (Grad., All.)

The Gradual answers received sufficiency with Benedícam Dóminum in omni témpore. Basil and Augustine hear “always” as the consecration of every season; praise in the Lord becomes common joy because the meek hear and rejoice. The Alleluia then sounds the opening of Psalm 87, the lament that carries no easy turn toward visible relief: Dómine, Deus salútis meæ, in die clamávi et nocte coram te. The singers can bless at all times because night itself remains before the God named salvation.

Patristic exegesis opens that constancy into the mystery of Christ. Augustine hears the Passion and, in day and night, the Church joined to Christ in prosperity and adversity. Eusebius reads the sequence from Psalm 86’s birth in Sion to Psalm 87’s descent into death as the incarnate Lord’s continuous oblation. Theodoret also lets the afflicted people and suffering humanity speak. At Mass these voices are not reduced to one historical occasion: they form the Church’s praise in the crucified and risen Christ. The disciples are about to be called blessed for seeing; the Alleluia teaches them that faith also addresses God when sight is dark.

4. The Mediator carries sinners from covenant promise to the altar (Off., Sec.)

At the Offertory Moses stands between threatened judgment and the people. He does not call the calf harmless. He invokes God’s saving name, the deliverance from Egypt, and the oath to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. First Clement and Chrysostom admire the pastor willing to be blotted out for his people; Gregory the Great sees God’s “let me alone” as the very opening through which the servant is drawn into bold supplication, and Moses’ willingness to die as a self-offering. Tertullian names the intercession a type of Christ. The figure is fulfilled, not discarded, in the one Mediator who offers himself and ever lives to intercede.

Augustine and Theodoret read the scene according to divine constancy. God’s anger is just judgment, not turbulent passion; his eternal providence includes the prayer by which mercy is bestowed. Theodoret’s sequence is especially important: pardon preserves Israel and the covenantal future, while discipline and accountability remain. Mercy does not name indifference to evil. It names the triumph of God’s faithful purpose through an intercessor whom God himself has raised up.

The Secret places that mystery within the Church’s Eucharistic offering. Its grammar asks God to regard the offerings favorably so that, in granting pardon to us, they may give honor to his name. Justin and Irenaeus praise the pure offering of the renewed people; Cyril of Jerusalem presents the memorial of Christ’s sacrifice together with intercession for the living and the dead; Augustine locates every acceptable sacrifice within the one whole Christ, Head and members. Trent states the doctrinal center without reserve: the Mass is a true and proper propitiatory sacrifice because the same Christ who offered himself once on the Cross is offered sacramentally in an unbloody manner. The human gifts do not purchase mercy; taken into Christ’s one oblation, they are the liturgical action through which the Church truly asks and receives pardon.

5. The Church receives created gifts as sacramental life (Comm., Postcomm.)

Psalm 103 first sings the Creator’s generous order. Rain descends, earth is filled, grass grows for beasts, and human cultivation brings forth bread, wine, and oil. Theodoret delights in their bodily purposes; Bellarmine draws from them gratitude, recognition of fatherly providence, and temperance. Christian spiritual reading does not empty these goods of their created truth. It discovers that the same Wisdom who feeds bodily life has ordered creation toward mysteries in which Christ feeds, gladdens, heals, and consecrates his people.

Eusebius accordingly passes from the vine to the true Vine, from bread to the mystical Logos, and from oil to light and healing. Augustine sees apostolic earth bearing Christ as bread, the cup giving sober inebriation, and anointing extending through the whole Christ. Cassiodorus is explicit: the wine received in ecclesial mystery is consecrated as Christ’s Blood, while oil evokes royal chrism. Sung at Communion, the triad therefore retains the praise of providence and reaches its sacramental fullness. Creation supplies what the Church offers; Christ gives what only his sacrifice and presence can make it become.

The Postcommunion names the fruits for which communicants pray. Participation in the holy mystery is to vivify; it is to grant expiation and protection. Ignatius calls the Eucharist medicine of immortality. Aquinas, ST III, q. 79, aa. 1–2, 4, 6, 8, explains that Communion nourishes the life of grace, remits venial sin, strengthens against future sin, unites the faithful to Christ and one another, and pledges glory; fruitfulness flowers in worthy reception. The Mass therefore closes where its Gospel command can be obeyed. Those found half-dead are borne by Christ; those vivified by his mystery become bearers of another’s burden. Those who received pardon intercede for sinners. Those fed from God’s works spend themselves in mercy. And those guarded through the night run toward the promise of eternal life, awaiting the Samaritan’s return.

From cry to neighbor. Cry for the help without which no course can begin; receive the Spirit who writes charity within; bless God through day and night; enter Christ’s intercession and offering; receive sacramental life and go to become a neighbor. Read in these five acts, the received Roman formulary joins elements that came from distinct historical sources.

The Propers: Detailed Commentary

The Appointed Formulary in Full

The Latin below is the complete recurring formulary collated against the 1962 Vatican typical Missal, printed pp. 392–393. Scriptural English is the registered public-domain Douay–Rheims/Challoner text; the three orations use the anonymous public-domain English in the Cummiskey hand missal of 1861. Where the chant adapts rather than extracts the Vulgate, the Douay has no exact English for it, and the gap is named at the element.

Introit (Int.)

Psalm 69:2–3, with verse 4a (Vulgate numbering)

Deus, in adiutórium meum inténde: Dómine, ad adiuvándum me festína: confundántur et revereántur inimíci mei, qui quærunt ánimam meam. Ps. ibid., 4 Avertántur retrórsum, et erubéscant: qui cógitant mihi mala. ℣. Glória Patri.

Douay–Rheims/Challoner, Psalm 69:2–4 (modern Psalm 70:1–3)

O God, come to my assistance; O Lord, make haste to help me. Let them be confounded and ashamed that seek my soul: Let them be turned backward, and blush for shame that desire evils to me: Let them be presently turned away blushing for shame that say to me: ’Tis well, ’tis well.

Witness boundary. The Douay follows the Gallican/Vulgate text and therefore has no counterpart for the chant’s added inimíci mei; its “desire evils” answers volunt mihi mala, not the chant’s cógitant mihi mala. The Douay thus has no English for either difference.

Collect (Coll.)

Oratio

Omnípotens et miséricors Deus, de cuius múnere venit, ut tibi a fidélibus tuis digne et laudabíliter serviátur: tríbue, quǽsumus, nobis; ut ad promissiónes tuas sine offensióne currámus. Per Dóminum.

Cummiskey Roman Missal, 1861, p. 420

O Almighty and merciful God, from whose gift it proceedeth that thy people worthily serve thee; grant we beseech thee, that we may run on, without stumbling, to the obtaining the effects of thy promises. Thro’.

Epistle (Ep.)

2 Corinthians 3:4–9

Léctio Epístolæ beáti Pauli Apóstoli ad Corínthios.

Fratres: Fidúciam talem habémus per Christum ad Deum: non quod sufficiéntes simus cogitáre áliquid a nobis, quasi ex nobis: sed sufficiéntia nostra ex Deo est: qui et idóneos nos fecit minístros novi testaménti: non líttera, sed spíritu: líttera enim occídit, spíritus autem vivíficat. Quod si ministrátio mortis, lítteris deformáta in lapídibus, fuit in glória; ita ut non possent inténdere fílii Israël in fáciem Móysi, propter glóriam vultus eius, quæ evacuátur: quómodo non magis ministrátio Spíritus erit in glória? Nam si ministrátio damnatiónis glória est: multo magis abúndat ministérium iustítiæ in glória.

Douay–Rheims/Challoner, 2 Corinthians 3:4–9

And such confidence we have, through Christ, towards God. Not that we are sufficient to think any thing of ourselves, as of ourselves: but our sufficiency is from God. Who also hath made us fit ministers of the new testament, not in the letter but in the spirit. For the letter killeth: but the spirit quickeneth. Now if the ministration of death, engraven with letters upon stones, was glorious (so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses, for the glory of his countenance), which is made void: How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather in glory? For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more the ministration of justice aboundeth in glory.

Gradual (Grad.)

Psalm 33:2–3 (Vulgate numbering)

Benedícam Dóminum in omni témpore: semper laus eius in ore meo. ℣. In Dómino laudábitur ánima mea: áudiant mansuéti, et læténtur.

Douay–Rheims/Challoner, Psalm 33:2–3 (modern Psalm 34:1–2)

I will bless the Lord at all times, his praise shall be always in my mouth. In the Lord shall my soul be praised: let the meek hear and rejoice.

Alleluia (All.)

Psalm 87:2 (Vulgate numbering)

Allelúia, allelúia. ℣. Dómine, Deus salútis meæ, in die clamávi et nocte coram te. Allelúia.

Douay–Rheims/Challoner, Psalm 87:2 (modern Psalm 88:1)

O Lord, the God of my salvation: I have cried in the day, and in the night before thee.

Gospel (Gosp.)

Luke 10:23–37

Sequéntia sancti Evangélii secúndum Lucam.

In illo témpore: Dixit Iesus discípulis suis: Beáti óculi, qui vident quæ vos vidétis. Dico enim vobis, quod multi prophétæ et reges voluérunt vidére quæ vos vidétis, et non vidérunt: et audíre quæ audítis, et non audiérunt. Et ecce quidam legisperítus surréxit, tentans illum, et dicens: Magíster, quid faciéndo vitam ætérnam possidébo? At ille dixit ad eum: In lege quid scriptum est? quómodo legis? Ille respóndens, dixit: Díliges Dóminum Deum tuum ex toto corde tuo, et ex tota ánima tua, et ex ómnibus víribus tuis, et ex omni mente tua: et próximum tuum sicut teípsum. Dixítque illi: Recte respondísti: hoc fac, et vives. Ille autem volens iustificáre seípsum, dixit ad Iesum: Et quis est meus próximus? Suscípiens autem Iesus, dixit: Homo quidam descendébat ab Ierúsalem in Iéricho, et íncidit in latrónes, qui étiam despoliavérunt eum: et plagis impósitis abiérunt, semivívo relícto. Accidit autem ut sacérdos quidam descénderet eádem via: et viso illo præterívit. Simíliter et levíta, cum esset secus locum, et vidéret eum, pertránsiit. Samaritánus autem quidam iter fáciens, venit secus eum: et videns eum, misericórdia motus est. Et apprópians alligávit vúlnera eius, infúndens óleum et vinum: et impónens illum in iuméntum suum, duxit in stábulum, et curam eius egit. Et áltera die prótulit duos denários, et dedit stabulário, et ait: Curam illíus habe: et quodcúmque supererogáveris, ego cum redíero, reddam tibi. Quis horum trium vidétur tibi próximus fuísse illi, qui íncidit in latrónes? At ille dixit: Qui fecit misericórdiam in illum. Et ait illi Iesus: Vade, et tu fac simíliter.

Rubric: Credo.

Douay–Rheims/Challoner, Luke 10:23–37

And turning to his disciples, he said: Blessed are the eyes that see the things which you see. For I say to you that many prophets and kings have desired to see the things that you see and have not seen them; and to hear the things that you hear and have not heard them. And behold a certain lawyer stood up, tempting him and saying, Master, what must I do to possess eternal life? But he said to him: What is written in the law? How readest thou? He answering, said: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart and with thy whole soul and with all thy strength and with all thy mind: and thy neighbour as thyself. And he said to him: Thou hast answered right. This do: and thou shalt live. But he willing to justify himself, said to Jesus: And who is my neighbour? And Jesus answering, said: A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho and fell among robbers, who also stripped him and having wounded him went away, leaving him half dead. And it chanced, that a certain priest went down the same way: and seeing him, passed by. In like manner also a Levite, when he was near the place and saw him, passed by. But a certain Samaritan, being on his journey, came near him: and seeing him, was moved with compassion: And going up to him, bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine: and setting him upon his own beast, brought him to an inn and took care of him. And the next day he took out two pence and gave to the host and said: Take care of him; and whatsoever thou shalt spend over and above, I, at my return, will repay thee. Which of these three, in thy opinion, was neighbour to him that fell among the robbers? But he said: He that shewed mercy to him. And Jesus said to him: Go, and do thou in like manner.

Witness boundary. The Missal replaces Luke’s opening narrative frame, “And turning to his disciples, he said,” with its liturgical incipit, In illo témpore: Dixit Iesus discípulis suis. The Douay English keeps Luke’s own frame.

Offertory (Off.)

Exodus 32:11, 13, 14, with adapted matter from verse 12

Precátus est Móyses in conspéctu Dómini Dei sui, et dixit: Quare, Dómine, irásceris in pópulo tuo? Parce iræ ánimæ tuæ: meménto Abraham, Isaac, et Iacob, quibus iurásti dare terram fluéntem lac et mel. Et placátus factus est Dóminus de malignitáte, quam dixit fácere pópulo suo.

Douay–Rheims/Challoner, Exodus 32:11–14

But Moses besought the Lord his God, saying: Why, O Lord, is thy indignation enkindled against thy people, whom thou hast brought out of the land of Egypt, with great power, and with a mighty hand? Let not the Egyptians say, I beseech thee: He craftily brought them out, that he might kill them in the mountains, and destroy them from the earth: let thy anger cease, and be appeased upon the wickedness of thy people. Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou sworest by thy own self, saying: I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven: and this whole land that I have spoken of, I will give to your seed, and you shall possess it for ever: And the Lord was appeased from doing the evil which he had spoken against his people.

Witness boundary. The chant condenses, rearranges, and replaces phrases in these verses: it names Jacob rather than Israel, inserts the land flowing with milk and honey, and follows an Old-Latin/Septuagint-shaped close. The Douay supplies the continuous Vulgate context, not an exact English translation of the chant, whose composite form has no English of its own.

Secret (Sec.)

Secreta

Hóstias, quǽsumus, Dómine, propítius inténde, quas sacris altáribus exhibémus: ut, nobis indulgéntiam largiéndo, tuo nómini dent honórem. Per Dóminum nostrum.

Rubric: Præfatio de Ssma Trinitate.

Cummiskey Roman Missal, 1861, p. 422

Mercifully look down, O Lord, on the offerings we lay on thy holy altar; that they may be to the honour of thy name, by obtaining pardon for us. Thro’.

Communion (Comm.)

Psalm 103:13 and 14–15 (Vulgate numbering)

De fructu óperum tuórum, Dómine, satiábitur terra: ut edúcas panem de terra, et vinum lætíficet cor hóminis: ut exhílaret fáciem in óleo, et panis cor hóminis confírmet.

Douay–Rheims/Challoner, Psalm 103:13–15

Thou waterest the hills from thy upper rooms: the earth shall be filled with the fruit of thy works: Bringing forth grass for cattle, and herb for the service of men. That thou mayst bring bread out of the earth: And that wine may cheer the heart of man. That he may make the face cheerful with oil: and that bread may strengthen man’s heart.

Witness boundary. The chant begins at verse 13’s second clause, inverts its order, adds Dómine, omits the first half of verse 14, and then continues through verse 15. The Douay therefore gives the complete verses, with no English for the chant’s spliced order.

Postcommunion (Postcomm.)

Postcommunio

Vivíficet nos, quǽsumus, Dómine, huius participátio sancta mystérii: et páriter nobis expiatiónem tríbuat, et munímen. Per Dóminum.

Cummiskey Roman Missal, 1861, p. 423

May the sacred participation of these thy mysteries, O Lord, we beseech thee, give us life; and be to us both an expiation and protection. Thro’.

The complete appointed text

The formulary printed above gives its Latin as collated from the facsimile images, not as normalized Bible Latin: the Introit retains inimíci mei and cógitant; the Alleluia retains the comma after Dómine; the Gospel retains the comma after iumentum suum; and the Offertory and Communion preserve their received adaptations. The English witnesses do not carry those differences.

Introit: the whole Christ cries for immediate help (Int.)

Psalm 69 is the shortest complete prayer in the Psalter’s Davidic collection. Its title assigns it to David “in remembrance,” and its body repeats the close of Psalm 39. Theodoret (PG 80, 1415–1418) places the prayer amid Absalom’s revolt: David remembers his own sin, sees danger surrounding him, and hastens not to an earthly defense but to God. The literal voice is thus a real servant in peril. The enemies seek his life and devise evil; he asks that their attack collapse in shame and that all who seek God rejoice. The Mass selects the opening crisis rather than the later turn to rejoicing. It brings the congregation to worship as people whose first truth is need.

Eusebius (Commentaria in Psalmos, PG 23, 767–772) gives that need a fully ecclesial range. The short prayer is to be kept ready on the lips; David speaks, Christ speaks in the Passion, and Christ’s members speak amid their conflicts. Augustine, Enarratio in Psalmum 69.1–4, develops the same mystery of the whole Christ. The Head who accepted human weakness and the body still journeying through temptation do not pray as strangers to one another. Their repeated Deus, in adiutórium meum inténde confesses that grace is not merely the beginning of salvation but the help by which every good act is continued. Cassiodorus likewise receives the cry in Christ and the Church, while St Robert Bellarmine notes both its Psalm 39 doublet and the Roman Church’s daily use.

The spiritual senses arise from that union. Allegorically, the suffering Head teaches his members to seek the Father’s help; morally, urgency becomes watchful humility rather than panic; anagogically, the enemies’ final confusion and the rejoicing of those who seek God look toward deliverance completed. Cassian, Conference 10.10, makes the verse a compendium for every monastic state—assault, distraction, thanksgiving, compunction, and hope. The Rule of St Benedict places it at the opening of the Hours and three times on the incoming kitchen server’s lips. Prayer orders both choir and labor.

The Introit therefore states the law of the entire formulary. The Collect’s runner begins by asking God to hasten. Paul’s minister will confess sufficiency from God. The wounded traveller will live because another approaches. Moses will ask for a guilty people, and communicants will ask the mystery itself to vivify and guard them. The cry is not left behind as the Mass proceeds; it is answered in increasingly concrete forms of divine aid.

Collect: grace gives the service and enlarges the road (Coll.)

The Collect’s grammar holds divine initiative and redeemed agency in one sentence. In de cuius múnere venit, ut tibi a fidélibus tuis digne et laudabíliter serviátur, the first ut clause names what comes from God’s gift. Yet a fidélibus tuis names the faithful as real agents of worthy and praiseworthy service. The imperative tríbue then governs nobis … ut … currámus: God grants, and the faithful themselves run. Ad promissiónes tuas supplies the end; sine offensióne asks that obstacle, stumbling, and fall not interrupt the course. The prayer is neither Pelagian self-motion nor passivity disguised as piety. It asks for the freedom of children moved by grace toward their Father’s word.

The appointed sequence makes the syntax audible. The Introit says, Dómine, ad adiuvándum me festína; the Collect answers, tríbue … ut … currámus. Paul then states the doctrinal principle: sufficiéntia nostra ex Deo est, and God idóneos nos fecit minístros. The Gradual enacts laudabíliter, because praise fills the mouth and the soul glories in the Lord rather than in its course. In the Gospel, hoc fac, et vives and Vade, et tu fac simíliter retain the full seriousness of action after its source has been named. The lexical center is mercy: God is miséricors; the Samaritan is misericórdia motus; the true neighbor is the one who fecit misericórdiam.

Augustine gives this order a rich biblical exposition. In Enarratio in Psalmum 118, sermons 10.5–6 and 11.1–6, God grants what unaided power cannot fulfill, enlarges the heart of the runner, brings the killing letter to life by the Spirit, and orders love toward God and neighbor. In De gratia et libero arbitrio 16.32–17.33 he insists that the divine command summons a real human will precisely because grace heals and assists it. Hilary’s treatment of Psalm 118:32, Tractatus in Psalmum 118, Daleth 41–42 (PL 9, 303–304), likewise joins running to the widened way of the commandments. Benedict’s Prologue turns the same movement into a school of service whose narrow beginning opens into running with an expanded heart.

Aquinas gathers the doctrine in ST I–II, q. 109, aa. 2, 4–5, 9–10: grace heals the will, makes the good act possible in its supernatural order, enables fulfillment of the law, and sustains perseverance. Trent, Session VI, chs. 5–6 and 16, teaches that preparation is impossible without prevenient grace, that the moved person freely assents and cooperates, and that growth in justice is at once God’s gift and the justified person’s living action. The Collect prays this doctrine before it defines it.

The witnesses attest the prayer in differing forms. A shorter cognate form in the Verona collection (Feltoe, p. 74) omits quaesumus nobis. The Old Gelasian places the second Collect in Book III, no. VIII (Wilson, pp. 228–229), with an apparatus variant a promissionibus. The Hadrianum gathers the three orations under Dominica XIII post Pentecosten, no. XXXI (Wilson, p. 173, Cambrai 164, fol. 167v). These identified witnesses display differing forms and the assembled oration set without proving a direct line of descent. Schuster (III, pp. 128–129) reads the prayer directly with 2 Cor. 3:5: God-given sufficiency is the power by which the worshipper runs.

Epistle: the Spirit makes ministers of the new covenant (Ep.)

Second Corinthians 3 is not an abstract tract on texts. Paul has called the Corinthian Church his letter of commendation, written by Christ through apostolic ministry, not with ink but with the Spirit, not on stone but on hearts (vv. 1–3). He then locates apostolic confidence per Christum ad Deum. Neither natural talent nor self-certification makes the minister sufficient; God makes him fit for a new-covenant ministry. The contrast with stone and death invokes Moses’ shining face in Exod. 34 and the promises of a heart-written covenant in Jer. 31:31–34 and Ezek. 36:25–27.

The appointed ending at v. 9 is important. Paul has called the old ministry glorious and the new ministry more glorious; vv. 10–18 continue the argument through surpassing glory, the veil, conversion to the Lord, freedom in the Spirit, and transformation into Christ’s image. Within that whole, líttera occídit cannot make Scripture’s literal sense, the moral law, Moses, or Israel evil. The Law is God’s gift and truly reveals his will. As Rom. 7–8 explains, command encountered externally by the sinner exposes and condemns but does not of itself forgive or pour charity into the heart. The Spirit’s ministry gives righteousness and the power of a filial obedience.

St John Chrysostom, Homilies on 2 Corinthians 6.2 and 7.1, 5, begins where Paul begins: the Corinthians are the apostolic letter because the Spirit has truly formed them. Confidence is not vanity but trust in God, and Moses’ ministry possesses a glory that the new gift surpasses rather than falsifies. Theodoret (PG 82, 391–394) reads sufficiency as a divine making-fit and the Spirit as the power by which obedience becomes possible. Ambrosiaster (PL 17, 176–177) finds the contrast in effects: the letter condemns sin, whereas the Spirit gives forgiveness and righteousness. These witnesses honor the first dispensation while proclaiming fulfillment.

Augustine builds his mature theology of grace around this passage. In De spiritu et littera 4.6, 14.23–25, 19.34, and 26.42, the killing letter is the good command left external to a heart still ruled by concupiscence; the vivifying Spirit writes love within, so that righteousness is not only known but desired and done. His earlier De doctrina christiana 3.5.9 applies the phrase to carnal captivity to signs, a genuine hermeneutical extension but not the primary covenantal sense. Aquinas, Super II ad Corinthios 3, lects. 1–2, keeps divine causality and human ministry together, while ST I–II, q. 106, aa. 1–2 identifies the New Law principally with the Holy Spirit’s grace. Even the written Gospel would remain external letter if that grace were absent.

The allegorical fulfillment is Christological: in the incarnate and risen Lord the promised covenant is enacted and the Spirit is poured out. Morally, the Epistle forbids both boasting in talent and hiding from service; God-given fitness exists for ministry. Anagogically, the movement from glory to surpassing glory opens beyond the pericope toward transformation into the Lord’s image. Ritually, the reading prepares the Gospel’s demonstration that the Spirit does not produce a vague interiority. He makes the written love of God and neighbor become merciful deed, and he makes a restored traveller into one capable of bearing another.

Catholic doctrine therefore reads Paul within one economy of revelation. Dei Verbum 14–16 honors the Old Testament’s lasting value and Christological fulfillment; Nostra aetate 4 and the Pontifical Biblical Commission’s Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures 41 forbid using 2 Cor. 3 as a judgment on Jewish persons or as a repudiation of Israel’s Scriptures. The contrast is between ministries and modes under sin and grace, not between peoples ranked by worth.

Gradual: David’s praise becomes the Church’s continual boast (Grad.)

Psalm 33 bears a received Davidic title: David changed his countenance before the Philistine ruler and escaped. First Samuel names Achis, while the title names Abimelech. Basil, Augustine, and Theodoret preserve different solutions, including a dynastic title and a spiritual naming. The historical sense remains David’s praise after deliverance during Saul’s persecution. The alphabetic form gives the thanksgiving a wisdom-like completeness: the rescued man teaches the meek how fear, praise, speech, conduct, and trust belong together.

St Basil, Homilia in Psalmum 33 1 (PG 29, 352–357), takes in omni témpore with its full moral force. Praise is not confined to prosperity; Job’s blessing under loss displays a mouth disciplined for every condition. Eusebius (PG 23, 288–297) moves from Davidic thanksgiving toward the Church assembled in the Lord. Theodoret (PG 80, 1101–1109) preserves the flight and rescue while teaching praise amid pursuit and calm. Bellarmine applies “always” to fitting praise throughout life and to the Church’s unceasing public worship. The meek rejoice because the psalmist’s boast is not private greatness but the Lord.

Augustine preached Psalm 33 in two sermons. He reads its Abimelech title alongside an Old-Latin/Septuagint-shaped narrative lemma from 1 Samuel 21:13, “he was carried in his own hands,” and applies the phrase to Christ at the Supper, carrying in his hands the sacrament of his own Body. That clause belongs to Augustine’s Samuel text, not to the psalm title; it is absent from the Clementine Samuel and from the appointed Gradual. The juxtaposition nevertheless generates a profound Eucharistic reception: David’s deliverance-song becomes the voice of the true David who gives himself as food. The literal rescue and sacramental mystery are ordered rather than competitive. The delivered king praises; Christ gives the definitive deliverance; the Church about to offer and communicate learns to glory in him.

Within the Mass the Gradual is the answer to the Epistle. Paul refuses quasi ex nobis; the psalmist answers, in Dómino laudábitur ánima mea. God has made ministers sufficient, and their praise returns the gift to its source. The verse also prepares the lawyer’s question. Eternal life will not be possessed by a self-justifying boast, but by love whose glory is God and whose joy becomes shared with the meek.

Alleluia: Christ and his members pray through the night (All.)

Psalm 87 begins by naming God as salvation and then descends through affliction, abandonment, the pit, wrath, and darkness. Its received heading assigns the instruction to Heman the Ezrahite, or in another Catholic line to David speaking in his name. Haydock relates Heman to the early monarchy and presents the whole psalm as agreeing to Christ in his Passion, death, and burial. The first verse already contains the mystery: prayer continues by day and by night, not because sorrow is denied but because the afflicted one still says Deus salútis meæ.

Augustine, Enarratio in Psalmum 87.1–2, hears Christ speak in the Passion and his body pray in him. Day and night also signify prosperity and adversity; the Church offers one prayer through both. Cassiodorus continues this Christological-ecclesial reading, and Bellarmine places its historical fullness in Gethsemane and Good Friday. The darkness is therefore taken into the Son’s obedient prayer. It does not define the final relation between suffering and God apart from the crucified Christ.

Eusebius (PG 23, 1052–1056) reads Psalm 86’s proclamation of birth in Sion followed by Psalm 87’s descent toward death as an incarnational sequence. Day and night become the incarnate Lord’s continual prayer and oblation. Theodoret (PG 80, 1567–1573) hears Israel in calamity and, through Israel, the sorrows of fallen humanity. These senses enlarge the Church’s voice: Christ prays, Israel laments, humanity cries, and the baptized pray as Christ’s members.

The choice of this verse for an Alleluia is a liturgical act of hope. The Gradual’s in omni témpore is not tested only by alternating good and bad moods; it enters the Lord’s own night. Immediately afterward Jesus calls the disciples’ eyes blessed. The juxtaposition teaches that revelation is gift, while faith’s prayer continues when consolation is not seen. The anagogical sense lies already in the address: the God invoked as salvation will not let the night possess the final word.

Gospel: Christ the Neighbor creates neighbors by mercy (Gosp.)

Luke places the episode within Jesus’ journey toward Jerusalem. Christ first turns privately to the disciples and blesses the eyes that see what prophets and kings desired. A lawyer then tests him by asking what deed leads to eternal life. Jesus sends the expert to the Law: Quid scriptum est? quómodo legis? The lawyer joins Deut. 6:5 and Lev. 19:18, loving God wholly and the neighbor as oneself. Christ confirms the answer: Hoc fac, et vives. Revelation, reading, and life belong together.

The second question discloses the resistance: volens iustificáre seípsum, the lawyer asks for the neighbor’s boundary. Jesus answers by narrating embodied compassion. A man descends from Jerusalem to Jericho and is left half-dead. Priest, Levite, and Samaritan each see; what distinguishes the Samaritan is the movement after sight. He is moved with compassion, approaches, binds the wounds, pours oil and wine, places the man on his own beast, brings him to an inn, tends him through the night, pays two denarii, entrusts further care, and promises repayment upon return. Jesus reverses the grammar: not “which person counts as my neighbor?” but “which became neighbor?” The answer is the one who did mercy; the command is Vade, et tu fac simíliter.

The Jerusalem–Jericho descent and its desert terrain make the danger concrete. Luke gives a parable and does not identify the victim; Cornelius a Lapide judges it drawn from a frequent real occurrence and calls it a true story in that sense. The evangelist does not state why priest and Levite pass by. The Samaritan is the distrusted outsider who fulfills the Law’s command, so the narrative rebukes every attempt to confine mercy by status. It cannot be turned into contempt for Jewish priesthood or people: Jesus, the lawyer, the double commandment, and the story’s prophetic world all stand within Israel’s revelation.

The ancient spiritual reading contemplates the complete economy of salvation within the story. Origen’s Homily on Luke 34.3 reports an elder’s allegory, which Ambrose VII.73–84, Augustine Quaestiones Evangeliorum II.19, and Bede further develop. Adam and humanity descend from the heavenly Jerusalem into Jericho, the mutable mortal world. The devil and his ministers strip the robe of grace and immortality and wound through sin. Humanity remains half-alive: rational nature and knowledge of God are not annihilated, yet the power to attain the saving end has been grievously wounded. Priest and Levite figure an Old Covenant ministry that is holy but cannot of itself heal fallen nature. The Samaritan—the Guardian—is Christ, who becomes near by assuming our condition.

Each act then discloses the Physician’s mercy. Christ binds the disorder of sin; in Ambrose, oil signifies remission and wine the announcement of judgment that brings compunction; in Augustine, oil is the consolation of good hope through pardon and reconciliation, wine the exhortation to fervent action. His beast is the flesh of the Incarnation that bears our weakness. The inn is the Church, where the wounded are restored through the ministry Christ entrusts. The two denarii signify the two commandments of charity, or the promises of present and future life, in Augustine, and the two Testaments in Ambrose. The morrow opens toward the Resurrection; the innkeeper figures apostolic and pastoral care; the promised return is the Parousia and judgment, when faithful expenditure for the wounded is rewarded. Origen 34.3 explicitly attributes the return-reading to the elder whose interpretation he transmits.

This allegory is not an ornamental afterthought. It answers the deepest question raised by the moral command: who first becomes neighbor to fallen humanity, and whence comes power to do likewise? Christ approaches before the wounded man can move. He bears, pays, entrusts, and returns. The moral sense therefore flowers from the allegorical: receive the Lord’s mercy, then bind another’s wounds, bear burdens, spend material goods, provide durable care, and exercise charity under prudence and justice. Bede states the union positively: everyone who shows mercy is neighbor, and Christ is Neighbor above all. The spiritual sense intensifies rather than attenuates the institution of mutual brotherhood.

The tradition develops that union in complementary registers. Clement of Alexandria, Quis dives salvetur? 28–29, presents Christ as the supreme neighbor whose love generates shared love. Irenaeus, Against Heresies III.17.3, shows Christ compassionating the man fallen among thieves, binding his wounds, entrusting him to the Holy Spirit, and giving the two royal denarii. Cyril of Alexandria, Sermons 67–68, emphasizes the fulfillment of the Law and Christ’s pedagogical reversal of the lawyer. Theophylact (PG 123, 843–852) joins neighborly action to the Christological Samaritan. Albert (Borgnet XXIII, 55–70) enumerates the Samaritan’s seven acts before opening the spiritual senses. Bonaventure (Quaracchi VII, 266–272) develops road, robbery, clerical duty, remedies, universal neighbor-love, and Jesus’ pedagogy within a single commentary.

Anagogically, the lawyer’s first desire is not discarded: eternal life is the end. The pilgrim Church is the inn where humanity is healed on the way to the heavenly patria; the Resurrection is the morrow; the Lord will return and bring hidden expenditure into judgment. At this Mass the allegory becomes ritual action. The Collect asks to run toward the promises; the Epistle names the Spirit who vivifies; the Offertory will show the mediator before God; the Secret asks pardon; Communion and Postcommunion give the life by which the healed go and act. St John Paul II’s Salvifici doloris 28–30 and Dives in misericordia 3–4, Benedict XVI’s Deus caritas est 15 and 20–25, and Francis’s Fratelli tutti 56–86 continue the patristic union of received divine love and concrete service to the wounded.

Offertory: Moses’ intercession enters Christ’s self-offering (Off.)

Exodus 32 stands within the covenant narrative. Israel has received deliverance, the commandments, blood of covenant, and the promise of God’s presence. While Moses remains on the mountain, the people fashion the calf. God reveals the apostasy to Moses and announces judgment; the very revelation raises the intercessor. Moses appeals not to Israel’s innocence but to the divine work already begun, God’s name among the nations, and the oath to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Mercy preserves the people so that covenantal presence may be restored in Exodus 33–34, although sin still bears judgment and discipline.

The Offertory’s received Latin is an ancient witness in its own right. It condenses Exod. 32:11–14, incorporates matter from v. 12, names Jacob where the Clementine Vulgate has Israel, substitutes the land flowing with milk and honey for the stars-and-land wording, and ends with placátus factus est Dóminus de malignitáte, quam dixit fácere pópulo suo. Augustine’s Old-Latin lemma in Quaestiones in Heptateuchum II.143 independently transmits the same construction. The Church therefore sings the text she received, not its later Vulgate form.

Patristic exegesis enters the divine-human drama without reducing it. In questions II.143, 147, and 149–151 Augustine explains that the threatened “evil” is penal judgment, never moral evil in God; the eternal will includes the temporal signs and creaturely prayers through which providence works. His City of God XV.25 names divine anger as just action, not a perturbation of the immutable divine life. Theodoret, Questions on Exodus 67–68, likewise reads the anthropomorphic language according to divine constancy. Question 68 preserves the moral seriousness of the sequence: mercy delays and preserves, while correction and accountability remain.

The Fathers then see Moses as pastor and type. First Clement 53 remembers the servant willing to be blotted from God’s book for the people. Chrysostom, On the Priesthood IV.1, finds there the daring love required of a pastor; his Homily 16 on Romans sees Moses risk everything for God’s glory and the salvation of those entrusted to him. Gregory the Great, Moralia IX.16.23, reads “let me alone” as God himself giving the intercessor confidence to plead; Moralia XX.5.14 treats Moses’ willingness to perish with the people as self-offering. Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem II.26, explicitly names Moses’ deprecation a type of Christ.

The type reaches its truth at the altar. Moses stands before God for the people; Christ is the unique Mediator who gives himself for sinners and whose intercession does not cease. Aquinas, ST I, q. 19, a. 7, ad 1 and II–II, q. 83, a. 2, explains how immutable providence wills prayer itself as a real secondary cause. The Catechism 2574–2577 presents Moses as formed in faithful, persevering intercession, while Benedict XVI’s audience of 1 June 2011 places his plea within the mystery fulfilled in Christ.

The complete formulary makes the type fruitful in four senses. Literally, Israel is preserved through the mediator God raises. Allegorically, Moses figures Christ who stands for sinners and offers himself. Morally, the minister made sufficient by God cannot advance by abandoning the fallen; he enters the need of the people in prayer. Anagogically, the patriarchal inheritance and restored covenant anticipate the promised homeland and the final healing for which the Church runs. At the Offertory the congregation places gifts upon the altar while this intercession is sung: judgment is confessed, promise is remembered, and pardon is sought within Christ’s one propitiatory oblation.

Secret: the true propitiatory offering glorifies God’s name (Sec.)

The Secret asks God to look favorably upon the offerings: Hóstias, quǽsumus, Dómine, propítius inténde. The ensuing ut clause gives their Godward end. The grammatical subject of dent is still hóstiae; nobis indulgéntiam largiéndo describes how they give honor to God’s name—by granting pardon to us. Largiendo, an ablative gerund, does not grammatically make God its immediate subject, although all efficacy and pardon come from him. Cummiskey’s 1861 English changes both order and agency, and the syntax traced above is the Latin’s alone.

The prayer is attested in differing forms. The Old Gelasian Book III, no. VIII joins the three orations and records the largiaris/largiendo variation. The Hadrianum’s Dominica XIII post Pentecosten, no. XXXI (Wilson, p. 173), gives the later set with largiendo; the 1962 Missal retains that reading. Schuster (III, pp. 128–131, especially p. 131) reads indulgence as the central favor to which the formulary’s benefits are ordered. In its received form, the prayer offers a compact sacrificial theology: the Church offers, God regards propitiously, pardon is truly granted, and the divine name receives honor.

The ancient witnesses explain how creaturely offering belongs within Christ’s gift. Justin, Dialogue with Trypho 116–117, sees Malachi’s pure offering fulfilled in the Eucharistic prayers and thanksgiving of Christians. Irenaeus, Against Heresies IV.17.5–18.6, insists that the Church offers created bread and wine in freedom and gratitude, confessing the Creator while receiving the firstfruits sanctified. Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Catechesis V.8–10, presents the Eucharistic sacrifice as the memorial of Christ’s offering within which the Church intercedes for all. Augustine, City of God X.5–6, 20, defines true sacrifice as the work that unites us to God and finds its perfect form in Christ, priest and offering, with the Church his body offered in him.

Trent, Session XXII, ch. 2, gives the prayer’s doctrinal register: the Mass is a true and proper propitiatory sacrifice. The victim and priest are the same Christ as on Calvary; the manner of offering is sacramental and unbloody; by this oblation God truly grants grace and the gift of repentance and pardons crimes and sins. The Secret’s positive claim therefore carries its full weight. These offerings, taken into Christ’s action, really are the Church’s sacrificial means of asking pardon and honoring the Father. They do not rival the Cross or add another redemption; they make sacramentally present the one sacrifice from which every pardon flows.

Across the propers, Moses has pleaded a prior promise for a guilty people. At the altar, his typical intercession enters the prayer of Christ and his body. The self-justifying lawyer has been answered by mercy; the Secret teaches the worshipper to seek justification as pardon before offering obedience as glory. And because pardon gives honor to God’s name, mercy does not terminate in the recipient. It returns as praise, sacrificial thanksgiving, and the neighbor-love commanded in the Gospel.

Communion: providence flowers into sacramental abundance (Comm.)

Psalm 103 is a vast hymn to the Creator who orders the heavens, waters, mountains, animals, seasons, labor, and sea. Verses 13–15 belong to its providential center: God waters the mountains from his upper chambers; earth is filled from his works; grass serves animals and plants serve human cultivation; bread strengthens the heart, wine gladdens it, and oil brightens the face. The Latin psalter receives the psalm under David’s name. The literal sense is not generic “nature” but creation continually receiving being, order, fertility, and usefulness from the Lord.

The Communion antiphon makes a precise liturgical selection. It begins with the second half of v. 13, reorders the clause, inserts Dómine, omits the first half of v. 14, and continues with the bread, wine, and oil of v. 15. The resulting first-person address turns cosmological praise into the communicants’ thanksgiving: the earth is filled from your works, Lord. Nothing created is despised at the moment of sacramental reception. The fruits of earth and human labor remain within the Creator’s economy and are brought to their highest liturgical service.

The Greek tradition first unfolds the providential abundance. Theodoret (PG 80, 1693–1707) explains the bodily gifts directly: bread sustains, wine brings fitting gladness, and oil nourishes and brightens. His reading gives Christian asceticism its grateful basis; temperance is ordered use, not contempt for the Creator’s goods. Eusebius (PG 23, 1273–1280) begins from the same providence and opens spiritual senses: wine calls forth the true Vine, bread the mystical Logos, oil illumination and healing. Created signs become capable of speaking Christ because all things were made through the Word.

Augustine, Enarratio in Psalmum 103, sermo 3.12–14, draws the passage into the whole Christ. Apostolic earth bears the bread of Christ preached to the nations; the cup gives a sober inebriation that lifts the heart without destroying reason; oil signifies the anointing that runs from the Head through his members. Cassiodorus, Expositio Psalmorum 103.20 (PL 70, 733–734), gives the ecclesial mystery explicit sacramental form: wine is consecrated as Christ’s Blood, and oil belongs to royal chrism. Bellarmine completes the moral reception with gratitude, recognition of fatherly providence, and temperance.

At Communion these senses stand in their Catholic order. Rain, cultivation, bread, wine, and oil are truly good; their providential service prepares the sacramental economy. The Church now receives not simply a symbol of absent care but Christ himself under the consecrated species. The Psalm’s abundance becomes thanksgiving for a superabundant gift: the Creator has taken what creation and labor supplied and, through Christ’s words and sacrifice, gives the faithful his Body and Blood. The Gradual’s Eucharistic reception of the true David and the Secret’s theology of offering meet here in sacramental possession.

Postcommunion: holy participation vivifies, expiates, and guards (Postcomm.)

The Postcommunion speaks after reception and still asks. Its subject, huius participátio sancta mystérii, is holy participation in this mystery, not a merely subjective recollection. The first petition, vivíficet, gathers Paul’s spíritus vivíficat; the second asks that the same participation grant both expiatiónem and munímen. Páriter coordinates the two gifts: cleansing from sin and defense for the continuing contest belong to one sacramental grace. The Church asks for objective divine action to bear its proper fruit in those who have communicated.

The text preserves a long prayer-family. The Verona collection has participatio tui sancta mysterii (Feltoe, p. 60); the Old Gelasian and the Hadrianum no. XXXI transmit the prayer within the three-oration set; the 1962 form reads huius. The change from tui to huius shifts the demonstrative reference but not the theological structure. Participation remains a gift whose life, expiation, and protection are sought from God.

St Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesians 20, calls Eucharistic communion the medicine of immortality and antidote against death, because it is union with Jesus Christ. Aquinas, ST III, q. 79, aa. 1–2, 4, 6, 8, distinguishes the effects contained in this compact prayer. The sacrament gives spiritual life and growth as food; it remits venial sin and strengthens charity; it preserves from future sin by union with Christ and the spiritual delight that resists disordered desire; and it pledges glory. These effects flow from Christ’s Passion made sacramentally present, while fruitful reception requires living faith and a fitting disposition. The Catechism 1391–1395 receives the same doctrine in pastoral form.

The final prayer consequently seals every movement of the Mass. The Introit’s helpless cry receives living aid. The Collect’s runner is nourished and defended on the road. The Epistle’s Spirit-given life takes sacramental form. The Gradual and Alleluia’s continual praise is sustained through trial. The Gospel’s wounded humanity is not only commanded but healed in Christ, and its new life is strengthened for merciful action. Moses’ plea and the Secret’s propitiatory petition reach pardon through the one sacrifice. Communion’s created abundance reaches Christ’s gift of himself. The communicant is thus sent out neither self-sufficient nor empty-handed: vivified, expiated, and guarded, he can go and do likewise while running toward the promises.

Source-Grounded Synthesis

A received Roman unity through historical layers

The formulary’s texts have separate histories. The Verona collection preserves shorter cognate forms of the Collect and Postcommunion; the Old Gelasian places the three orations together with variants; the Hadrianum no. XXXI gives their later lexical family; the psalm chants and lessons have their own scriptural and liturgical histories. The 1962 Missal sets these texts together for this Sunday. Schuster’s direct commentary on the assembled formulary (III, pp. 128–131) reads Collect and Epistle, Moses and the Secret, and Communion and Postcommunion as mutually illuminating.

The history and the unity therefore stand together: the received unity is real, and the Church’s stable act of proclamation, offering, and Communion can make texts from several periods speak together in the traditional senses of Scripture.

Gift does not abolish action; it makes action Christian

The Introit, Collect, Epistle, Gospel, and Postcommunion form an unusually strong account of grace-enabled agency. The worshipper first asks God to attend and hasten. The Collect says that worthy service itself comes from the divine gift and immediately asks that the faithful may run. Paul excludes sufficiency from self and immediately says that God has made ministers. Jesus commands fac and Vade after the lawyer has correctly read the Law. The final prayer makes sacramental participation the giver of life and defense.

Augustine’s doctrine of the Spirit writing charity within and Aquinas’s account of the New Law explain why these verbs belong together. Grace neither leaves the will inert nor permits it to boast as its own first cause. It heals the person into living action. The Samaritan’s many verbs are therefore not a secular moral appendix to a theology of gift. They are what divine charity looks like when it has taken flesh in a human agent: compassion approaches, binds, bears, spends, entrusts, and perseveres. The Postcommunion sends communicants into that service strengthened by what they have received.

Law, Spirit, and mercy belong to one divine economy

Paul’s contrast is not law against mercy. He calls Moses’ ministry glorious; Jesus sends the lawyer to the written Law and confirms the answer from Deuteronomy and Leviticus. The distinction lies between command remaining external to the sinner and command fulfilled through the inward gift of the Spirit. Chrysostom, Theodoret, Ambrosiaster, Augustine, and Aquinas converge on this order while preserving distinct emphases: old glory is real, new glory surpasses it, forgiveness and righteousness are given, and the Spirit supplies the love by which obedience becomes possible.

The Gospel makes that covenantal doctrine visible. Self-justifying reading asks for the minimum class to whom love is owed; Spirit-written reading becomes neighbor through mercy. Moses’ Offertory intercession and the Secret’s plea for pardon show why this does not become a new project of self-salvation. The doer of mercy remains one who needs covenant faithfulness and propitiation. Mercy does not empty command or judgment. It pardons, renews, and gives the power to fulfill love’s command.

Christ the Neighbor heals a people into neighbor-love

The Gospel’s literal and spiritual senses stand in a fruitful Catholic order. Literally, Jesus teaches universal embodied mercy through a Samaritan whose action answers the lawyer’s boundary-making question. Allegorically, Origen, Ambrose, Augustine, Irenaeus, Bede, and the medieval commentators contemplate fallen humanity in the wounded man and Christ in the compassionate Samaritan. The Son becomes near by the Incarnation, binds what sin has torn, bears the patient in his flesh, brings him to the Church, supplies the ministry of care, and promises to return.

The moral sense proceeds from that saving mystery. The Christian is not asked to imitate a distant exemplar by unaided resolve. He first receives Christ’s approach and healing; then Christ’s charity acts in him. Bede’s both-senses rule is exact: every person who does mercy is neighbor, and Christ is Neighbor in the fullest sense. Anagogically, the inn is the pilgrim Church, the morrow opens toward Resurrection, and the promised return toward Parousia and judgment. Eternal life, the lawyer’s first question, becomes the horizon of a mercy begun now and brought to completion by the returning Lord.

Continual prayer is Paschal rather than triumphalist

The Introit’s urgency, Gradual’s continual praise, and Alleluia’s day-and-night cry give the Church a complete grammar of prayer. Augustine and Eusebius hear Christ and his members in Psalm 69; Basil makes Psalm 33’s “always” include loss as well as prosperity; Augustine, Eusebius, Cassiodorus, Theodoret, and Bellarmine unfold Psalm 87 through the Passion, Israel’s affliction, and the Church’s prayer in every condition. Their interpretations are not identical, but they converge in one theological act: the sufferer continues to address the God named salvation.

The Mass’s Alleluia from so grave a lament is consequently a confession of the Paschal mystery. Christian praise does not call darkness unreal. It receives night into Christ’s prayer and waits for the Father’s answer in Resurrection. The disciples’ eyes are blessed for seeing Christ, but faith continues to cry when immediate sight is withheld. The Gradual’s meek rejoice because their boast is in the Lord, not because they have made themselves invulnerable.

Covenant intercession reaches propitiatory offering

Moses pleads for a people who cannot plead innocence. Augustine and Aquinas teach that immutable providence includes his real intercession; Gregory sees God open the way to bold supplication and Moses offer himself with the people; Tertullian receives the servant as a type of Christ. Theodoret keeps pardon and judgment in their biblical sequence: Israel and the covenantal future are preserved, while correction remains. Thus the Offertory does not contrast an angry Old Testament God with a merciful Church. It celebrates the faithful God who raises an intercessor and fulfills his promise.

The Secret brings this typology to sacramental fulfillment. God regards the offerings propitiously, and those offerings honor his name by granting pardon. Justin, Irenaeus, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Augustine place Eucharistic thanksgiving, created gifts, ecclesial self-offering, and intercession within Christ’s priesthood. Trent gives the definitive Catholic form: the Mass is truly propitiatory because the same Christ and victim of Calvary is offered in an unbloody manner. The Church’s action is real precisely because it participates in his one sacrifice. Pardon therefore excludes boasting while creating worshippers able to honor God’s name in praise and obedient charity.

Providence reaches sacramental life without ceasing to be providence

Psalm 103 first praises the Creator’s care for embodied life. Water makes the earth fruitful; bread strengthens, wine gladdens, and oil brightens. Theodoret dwells on this literal goodness, and Bellarmine draws gratitude, recognition of fatherly providence, and temperance from it. Eusebius, Augustine, and Cassiodorus then open the created triad into Christian spiritual senses: the true Vine and mystical Logos, Christ preached as bread, the cup’s sober inebriation, the anointing of the whole Christ, consecrated wine, and royal chrism.

Sung at Communion, the psalm receives its sacramental fullness. Creation and human labor supply gifts that the Church offers; Christ gives himself under the consecrated species. The Postcommunion asks the holy participation to vivify, expiate, and guard. Ignatius’s medicine of immortality, Aquinas’s account of Eucharistic effects in ST III, q. 79, aa. 1–2, 4, 6, 8, and the Catechism 1391–1395 show the doctrinal depth of those petitions. The sacrament nourishes the life of grace, cleanses, strengthens charity, protects against sin, joins the faithful to Christ and one another, and pledges glory. The proper ends with created providence elevated into sacramental provision and sacramental provision ordered toward merciful life in the world.

The Propers: Notable and Quotable

These four afterlives do more than repeat a biblical phrase: each moves it into a new register and changes what the wording is made to do.

The neighbour becomes a legal duty — Donoghue v Stevenson (1932)

Appointed wording. The lawyer asks, “And who is my neighbour?” (Luke 10:29).

Later use and locus. Lord Atkin’s speech in Donoghue v Stevenson, [1932] A.C. 562 at 580, moves from the command to love one’s neighbour to a restricted legal duty of care and asks: “Who then, in law, is my neighbour?”

The turn. Jesus refuses the lawyer’s attempt to delimit a class and asks who became neighbour by mercy. Tort law must do the thing the parable resists: specify foreseeability and legal proximity. Atkin turns a self-justifying question into a rule for liability; the civil rule is not the Gospel’s whole moral demand.

The Jerusalem–Jericho road becomes an experiment — Darley and Batson (1973)

Appointed wording. A man goes “from Jerusalem to Jericho”; priest and Levite see him and pass by (Luke 10:30–32).

Later use and locus. John M. Darley and C. Daniel Batson, “From Jerusalem to Jericho: A Study of Situational and Dispositional Variables in Helping Behavior,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 27.1 (1973), 100–108, sent seminarians past a slumped confederate while varying hurry and talk topic. The discussion reports that some “literally stepped over the victim” while going to speak on the parable (p. 107).

The turn. A narrative about seeing and passing becomes an experimental protocol. The assigned talk topic was not a significant predictor of helping, while time pressure had a marked effect. The staged emergency and small seminary sample do not exhaust mercy or prove the motives of the parable’s priest and Levite.

The killing letter exposes a marriage contract — Thomas Hardy (1896)

Appointed wording. “For the letter killeth: but the spirit quickeneth” (2 Cor. 3:6).

Later use and locus. Thomas Hardy places 2 Cor. 3:6 on the title page of the 1896 book edition of Jude the Obscure. In Part VI, ch. VIII (ch. 50 in the linked edition), Jude tells Sue inside a church that their return to socially sanctioned marriages is acting by the letter, and repeats “the letter killeth!”

The turn. Paul’s contrast between covenant ministries becomes an indictment of civil and ecclesial marriage convention; the epigraph also makes the phrase a key for the novel’s conflict between legal form and lived attachment. Jude is a conflicted fictional speaker, not Hardy’s unqualified doctrinal voice, and the novel’s use is not Paul’s exegetical meaning.

Paul becomes a canon of statutory construction — Justice Frankfurter (1950)

Appointed wording. “The letter killeth” (2 Cor. 3:6).

Later use and locus. Justice Felix Frankfurter’s dissent in United States ex rel. Knauff v. Shaughnessy, 338 U.S. 537, 548, 550 (1950), applies the phrase to Acts of Congress and invokes it while construing the War Brides Act in the case of an excluded soldier’s wife.

The turn. A Pauline claim about letter and Spirit is naturalized as an interpretive maxim: statutory purpose should control a harsh literal application. The dissent does not cite the verse and supplies no covenant exegesis. Its force depends on an English idiom descended from Paul, not on identity between apostolic ministry and judicial method.

The Propers: Interpretive Possibilities

The following are exploratory editorial or AI proposals. They are not attributed teaching, historical intent, or evidence about the formulary’s compiler. Each states its anchors, mechanism, fruit, nearest checked analogue, and controlling limit.

Exploratory proposal — Ministry begins where the traveller leaves

Anchors: Epistle, Gospel, Postcommunion.

Mechanism: Paul is made a fit minister; the Samaritan entrusts the wounded man to an innkeeper for continuing care; the Postcommunion asks holy participation to vivify and to grant expiation and protection to its recipients.

Fruit: Mercy needs durable ministries, not only a first responder. The Church receives care from Christ in order to continue it responsibly.

What the element-by-element reading misses: Paul’s fitness is a fitness for the kind of continuing charge the innkeeper receives, so the ministry the Epistle names becomes the care that outlasts a first rescue; the Postcommunion’s vivíficet and tríbuat themselves encode no such duration.

Precedent result: Near analogue located. Ambrose 7.82–84, Augustine Questions on the Gospels 2.19, and Bede identify the inn and its keeper ecclesially; none joins Paul’s sufficiency or this Postcommunion.

Limit: No minister or institution may identify itself simply with the Samaritan; ecclesial allegory remains subject to the literal command of mercy.

Exploratory proposal — Promise is destination, covenant ground, and guaranty

Anchors: Collect, Offertory, Gospel.

Mechanism: The Church runs toward God’s promises; Moses invokes the oath to the patriarchs; the Samaritan promises to return and repay further expense.

Fruit: Christian hope may be read not as escape from wounded history but as fidelity that sustains costly care within it.

What the element-by-element reading misses: The promises differ in kind (destination, covenant ground, guaranty); so distinguished, hope can sustain costly care now, not only at the road’s end.

Precedent result: Near analogue located. Origen, Homily on Luke 34.3, reports an elder’s eschatological reading of the return; Ambrose, Exposition of Luke 7.83, and Bede, PL 92, 470D, also receive that return eschatologically. These enumerated witnesses do not join all three promise forms.

Limit: The Samaritan’s narrated undertaking within the parable is not a covenant equal to God’s oath, and the proposal proves no compositional design.

Exploratory proposal — Mercy’s longer clock

Anchors: Gradual, Alleluia, Gospel.

Mechanism: Praise is “always,” prayer continues day and night, care passes into the next day and awaits return.

Fruit: Compassion becomes a temporal discipline: attention must survive the first emotion, the first expense, and the first liturgical moment.

What the element-by-element reading misses: The Gradual’s “always” and the Alleluia’s day and night measure prayer, the Samaritan’s next day measures care; joined, they lend care the duration of prayer, so that care outlasts its first emotion, expense, and liturgical moment.

Precedent result: Near analogue located. Bellarmine treats the Gradual’s “always” as continuing praise; Eusebius reads the Alleluia’s day and night as Christ’s continuous prayer and oblation; Origen’s elder, Ambrose VII.83, and Bede PL 92, 470D receive the Samaritan’s return. None of these enumerated witnesses joins the three-part duration.

Limit: The words arise in different literary units; they do not create a schedule, and urgency in the Introit remains as important as duration.

Exploratory proposal — A bounded question receives an open-ended answer

Anchors: Gospel and Secret.

Mechanism: Quis est meus proximus? seeks the limit of the person owed love; quodcúmque supererogáveris opens expenditure beyond the initial sum; indulgéntiam largiéndo asks pardon to be lavished.

Fruit: Mercy may resist the self-protecting move from “whom must I love?” to the smallest defensible obligation.

What the element-by-element reading misses: The lawyer’s bounded quis meets two open measures, the innkeeper’s quodcúmque and the Secret’s lavished pardon, so a question about love’s minimum is answered with expenditure and pardon beyond any initial sum.

Precedent result: Near analogue located. The enumerated Gospel commentators stress universal neighbour-love and the innkeeper’s further expense; none of them joins the Secret’s gerund.

Limit: Christian generosity requires prudence, justice, vocation, and finite stewardship; Fratelli tutti 79–82 does not erase these goods.

Exploratory proposal — The medicine is neither only natural nor only sacramental

Anchors: Gospel, Communion, Postcommunion.

Mechanism: Oil and wine treat wounds; Psalm 103 praises bread, wine, and oil as providential gifts; holy participation gives life and protection.

Fruit: Bodily works of mercy and sacramental communion can be held together without turning either into a decorative metaphor.

What the element-by-element reading misses: The oil and wine the Samaritan pours return in the Communion’s bread, wine, and oil, and the Postcommunion asks life and defense of the holy participation; the shared nouns set bodily care and sacramental communion side by side.

Precedent result: Near analogue located. Origen, Homily on Luke 34.7–9, explicitly cites Psalm 103 while reading the Samaritan’s oil, wine, day-and-night care, and inn; Augustine and Cassiodorus receive Psalm 103 sacramentally. None of them joins this Postcommunion.

Limit: The psalm’s literal created goods and the parable’s practical care must not be dissolved into Eucharistic allegory.

Appendix: Scope and Qualifications

Edition and use. This companion studies the recurring Dominica Duodecima post Pentecosten, II class, in the 1962 Vatican typical Roman Missal. It is not an official liturgical book, homily, civil-date assembly sheet, or ruling on present authorization. Occurrence, precedence, commemorations, and particular calendars remain outside the reusable formulary.

Text and translation. All ten Latin elements, their boundaries, references, rank, Credo, and Trinity Preface were visually collated against the identified facsimile. Scripture English is the registered public-domain Douay–Rheims/Challoner; oration English is the anonymous Cummiskey 1861 witness. Adapted chants are accompanied by witness-boundary notices rather than project translations. The 1962 scan itself is not redistributed; the focused Latin texts are pre-existing liturgical material whose rights analysis is recorded in the shared inventory.

Research boundary. Complete biblical contexts, principal Greek and Latin patristic expositions, representative medieval Doctors, later saints, Catholic doctrinal controls, sacramentary transmission, and targeted cultural afterlives were checked within the matrix in research/scope.md. The survey is broad and claim-driven, not exhaustive. Textual observation, documented reception, source-grounded synthesis, and exploratory proposal are kept distinct. The enumerated historical witnesses do not establish a single compiler’s cross-proper intent or the universal novelty of an editorial proposal.

Review. The Latin, historical English, claim-level sources, bibliography, bindings, and component classifications were audited. Both editions were built through settled passes, their logs checked, and the local web source conversion validated. These are internal source and production facts, not ecclesiastical approval or an installed-publication claim. Full records: propers/verified.md and research/scope.md.

References

• Missale Romanum, editio typica (Vatican City, 1962), Dominica Duodecima post Pentecosten, printed pp. 392–393, facsimile; Missale Romanum, Benziger editio iuxta typicam (1962), pp. 386–388, independent comparison edition.

• The Roman Missal, Translated into the English Language for the Use of the Laity (Philadelphia: Eugene Cummiskey, 1861), pp. 420–423; Collect, Secret, and Postcommunion. Scriptural English: registered public-domain Douay–Rheims/Challoner verse files.

• Textual comparisons: Biblia Sacra Vulgatae Editionis Clementina, eBible latVUC verse text, Exod. 32:11–14 and Ps. 69:2–4; Alfred Rahlfs, ed., Septuaginta, 9th ed. (Stuttgart, 1935), Exod. 32:11–14, identified by the exact Rahlfs-derived a1b5ff1 snapshot but not counted as a replayable Greek witness; direct tracked LXX comparison: Lancelot Brenton, The Septuagint Version of the Old Testament (London, 1851), Exod. 32:11–14. Augustine’s Old-Latin lemma is cited below.

• Scripture: Exodus 32 and 34; Deuteronomy 6; 1 Samuel 21; Psalms 33, 39, 69, 86, 87, 103 (Vulgate numbering); Jeremiah 31; Ezekiel 36; Luke 10; Leviticus 19; Romans 7–9; 2 Corinthians 3; Hebrews 7:25. Modern Catholic composition comparison: USCCB/NABRE Exodus, Psalms, Luke, and 2 Corinthians introductions and notes.

• Pontifical Biblical Commission, De mosaica authentia Pentateuchi (27 June 1906), replies I–IV; De auctoribus et de tempore compositionis Psalmorum (1 May 1910), replies II–IV, VII–VIII; and De auctore, de tempore compositionis et de historica veritate Evangeliorum secundum Marcum et secundum Lucam (26 June 1912), replies I, V–IX.

• George Leo Haydock, Douay–Rheims Bible with Commentary, notes on Psalms 33, 69, 87, and 103. Exact chronology control is the uninitialled apparatus in the 2014 Loreto/Feeney memorial facsimile: Exodus printed pp. 77, 109 (artifact pp. 105, 139); Achis, printed pp. 366, 368–369 (artifact pp. 396, 398–399); and Absalom, printed pp. 400–404 (artifact pp. 430–434). The compiled note on Exod. 32:19, printed p. 109, records a fast in memory of the shattered tablets rather than supplying a demonstrated event date.

• Catholic Encyclopedia: James Howlett, “Biblical Chronology” (1908); John Corbett, “King David” (1908); Cornelius Aherne, “Epistles to the Corinthians” (1908); and Cornelius Aherne, “Gospel of Saint Luke” (1910); A. J. Maas, “Jesus Christ,” III.B.3, Seventh Journey, Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 8 (New York, 1910), 378, 380–381.

• Cornelius a Lapide, Monotessaron Chronotaxis, third preaching year after 6 October and before November, and Commentaria in Lucam, ad Luke 10:30.

• Eusebius of Caesarea, Commentaria in Psalmos, PG 23, 288–297, 767–772, 1052–1056, 1273–1280; Theodoret of Cyrus, Interpretatio in Psalmos, PG 80, 1101–1109, 1415–1418, 1567–1573, 1693–1707.

• St Augustine, Enarrationes in Psalmos: 33, sermones 1–2; 69.1–4, 7; 87.1–2; 103, sermo 3.12–14; City of God 15.25; Quaestiones in Heptateuchum II.143, 147, 149–151 (Migne transcription; the Old-Latin lemma at II.143); Quaestiones Evangeliorum II.19; On the Spirit and the Letter, 4.6, 14.23–25, 19.34, 26.42; De doctrina christiana III.5.9.

• St John Cassian, Conference 10.10; Rule of St Benedict, ch. 17, ch. 18, and ch. 35.

• St Basil, Homilia in Psalmum 33 1, PG 29, 352–357; Cassiodorus, Expositio Psalmorum 69, 87, and 103.20, PL 70; St Robert Bellarmine, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, trans. John O’Sullivan (Dublin, 1866), Psalms 33, 69, 87, 103.

• St John Chrysostom, Homily 7 on Second Corinthians, §§1, 5, with Homily 6 §2; Homily 16 on Romans; Theodoret, Interpretatio in II Corinthios, PG 82, 391–394; Ambrosiaster, Commentarius in II Corinthios 3:4–9, PL 17, 176–177.

• St Thomas Aquinas, Super II ad Corinthios, ch. 3, lects. 1–2; Summa theologiae I–II, q. 106, aa. 1–2.

• Pontifical Biblical Commission, The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible 41.

• Origen, Homiliae in Lucam 34, ed. Max Rauer, Origenes Werke IX, 2nd ed., GCS 49 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1959), pp. 199–205, especially 34.3 and 34.7–9; St Ambrose, Expositio Evangelii secundum Lucam VII.69–84; St Bede, In Lucae Evangelium expositio III, Luke 10:23–37, PL 92, 467C–470D.

• Clement of Alexandria, Quis dives salvetur? 28–29, PG 9, 603–652; St Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Luke, Sermons 67–68, trans. R. Payne Smith (Oxford, 1859); Theophylact of Ohrid, Enarratio in Lucam 10:25–37, PG 123, 843–852.

• St Albert the Great, Enarrationes in secundam partem Evangelii Lucae, ch. 10, vv. 25–37, in Borgnet, Opera omnia XXIII (1894), 55–70; St Bonaventure, Commentarius in Evangelium S. Lucae 10.44–65, Quaracchi, Opera omnia VII (1895), 266–272, facsimile.

• Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem II.26; St Gregory the Great, Moralia in Iob IX.16.23 and XX.5.14, PL 75–76; Theodoret, Quaestiones in Exodum 67–68, PG 80; 1 Clement 53; St John Chrysostom, On the Priesthood IV.1; St Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae, trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1947), I, q. 19, a. 7, ad 1 and II–II, q. 83, a. 2.

• H. A. Wilson, ed., The Gelasian Sacramentary (Oxford, 1894), Book III, no. VIII, pp. 228–229; Wilson, ed., The Gregorian Sacramentary under Charles the Great (London, 1915), no. XXXI, p. 173, Cambrai 164, fol. 167v; C. L. Feltoe, ed., Sacramentarium Leonianum (Cambridge, 1896), pp. 60, 74.

• Ildefonso Schuster, The Sacramentary, vol. III (London, 1927), 128–131; Council of Trent, Session VI, chs. 5–6, 16, and Session XXII, ch. 2; Catechism of the Catholic Church 1391–1395, 2574–2577; Dei Verbum 14–16; Nostra aetate 4.

• St Hilary, Tractatus in Psalmum 118, Daleth 41–42 (on Ps. 118:32), PL 9, 303–304; St Augustine, Enarratio in Psalmum 118, sermones 10.5–6 and 11.1–6, PL 37, and De gratia et libero arbitrio 16.32–17.33, PL 44; Rule of St Benedict, Prologue; St Thomas Aquinas, ST I–II, q. 109, aa. 2, 4–5, 9–10.

• St Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 116–117, ANF 1; St Irenaeus, Against Heresies III.17.3 and IV.17.5–18.6, ANF 1; St Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Catechesis V.8–10; St Augustine, City of God X.5–6, 20; St Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesians 20; St Thomas Aquinas, ST III, q. 79, aa. 1–2, 4, 6, 8.

• St John Paul II, Salvifici doloris 28–30 and Dives in misericordia 3–4; Benedict XVI, Deus caritas est 15, 20–25, and general audience, 1 June 2011; Pope Francis, Fratelli tutti 56–86.

• Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] A.C. 562 at 580 (House of Lords); John M. Darley and C. Daniel Batson, “From Jerusalem to Jericho,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 27.1 (1973): 100–108.

• Thomas Hardy, Jude the Obscure (1896 book edition), title-page epigraph and Part VI, ch. VIII; Louise Creechan, “Killing the Letter,” Journal of Victorian Culture 27.3 (2022): 493–506, especially 493, DOI 10.1093/jvcult/vcac034.

• United States ex rel. Knauff v. Shaughnessy, 338 U.S. 537, 548, 550 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting).

Last revised (UTC): 2026-09-24T18:12:26Z

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.