Signs Of The Cross Before The Gospel

Sequentia Sancti Evangelii

The Sign of the Cross and the Proclamation of the Gospel

Geoffrey Horton Liturgy 501 December 7, 2004

In nearly every Mass1, the ordained minister who is to proclaim the Gospel, after he has said, “A reading from the holy Gospel . . .” makes a small sign of the Cross on the book of the Gospels, and then signs himself on the forehead, mouth, and breast. All others present do this as well. I will examine the history of this practice and the reasons for it in this paper. The sign of the Cross itself is a very old gesture. In his De corona, dated ca. 211 A.D., Tertullian noted “whatever activity occupies us, we trace, we trace on the forehead the seal [or sign].2” Since it was traced upon the forehead, this must refer to a small sign of the Cross. This making of a small sign of the Cross was not restricted to the forehead. One author notes that the sign of the Cross could be made over diseased members of the body, on the breast at the announcement of the Gospel (a point to be revisited later), or even upon several places of symbolic significance in succesion.3 For special reasons the sign of the cross was also made upon other parts of the body, for instance, diseased members, on the breast at the solemn announcement of the Gospel, upon the lips, or on even upon three or five different places on account of the symbolism of these members. This practice continues today, even outside of the triple cross before the Gospels, though most (if not all) of them occur in the specific context of an anointing: for example, in the he Baptismal rite, for Confirmation, for Ordination, and for the Anointing of the Sick. The last is particularly significant in that it retains small signs of the Cross over various parts—minimally the forehead and hands, and other parts as custom and condition of the patient indicate4. 1 Palm Sunday is an exception, as the usual opening and closing are omitted from the Passion Gospel. 2 “quacumque nos conuersatio exercet, frontem signaculo terimus,” Tertullian, De Corona Militis, chapter 3, PL II 80A. 3 Richard Stapper, S.T.D, Catholic Liturgics, trans. and adapt. David Baier, O.F.M. S.T.D., rev. ed. (Patterson, NJ: St. Anthony Guild Press, 1938), 58. 4 Pastoral Care of the Sick: Rites of Anointing and Viaticum (New York: Catholic Book Publishing Co., 1983), 111.

That the sign (single or triple) was not made before the reading of the Gospel in older rates is suggested by the absence of such a usage from the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom5. Jungmann traces its first appearance to the Ninth Century A.D.6, providing as a reference a passage from Amalar's De Ecclesiasticis Officiis. Amalar describes the proceedings as follows: After this, the priest and the whole people turn themselves to the east, up until the deacon begins to say, “To the Lord”, and they make a cross on their foreheads . . . . Meanwhile, the people pray to God, lest the devil bear away the words of the Gospel from their hearts, and that their hearts may not be stony, neither overgrown nor thorny; but good land, that it may be able to receive and bear good fruit. . . . Since mention has been made of the sign of the cross on the forehead, it is good to tell why we make it chiefly on that part of the body. The seat of modesty is customarily in the forehead. Even supposing Jews blush to believe in he whom they knew to be crucified—as the apostle Paul says: We however preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to the Jews—we believe that we are saved through the Crucified, at whose name the Jews blush, by whose name we believe we are saved. And so therefore we make the sign on the forehead, where the seat of modesty is, as we have said7. This passage contains several noteworthy items. Two pertain to the action itself: the sign is made on the forehead only, and only the people make it. The others pertain to the meaning of the action. The idea that the sign is made on the forehead because it is the seat of modesty will persist for centuries (as will be shown shortly), but does not seem to have survived to the present. 5 Author's personal observation. 6 Joseph A. Jungmann, S.J., The Mass of the Roman Rite: Its Origins and Development, trans. Rev. Francis A. Brunner, C.SS.R, (Westminster, MD: Christian Classics, Inc., 1992), 1:452. 7 De Ecclesiaticis Officiis, Amalar of Metz, PL CV, 1125D. The Latin text is as follows: Post hoc sacerdos et omnis populus vertit se ad orientem, usque dum diaconus incipiat ad Dominum loqui, et faciunt crucem in frontibus eorum. . . . Sed populus interim deprecetur Deum, ne diabolus auferat verba Evangelii de corde eius, neque petrosa sint corda, neve dumosa vel spinosa: sed terra bona, ut fructum bonum possit accipere et fructificare. . . . . Quia mentio facta est de signo crucis in fronte, bonum est intimare cur eam potissimum in ea parte corporis faciamus. Sedes verecundiæ in fronte solet esse. Siquidem Judæi erubescunt credere in illum quem norunt crucifixum: ut apostolus Paulus dicit: Nos autem prædicamus Christum crucifixum, Judæis quidem scandalum (I Cor. 1). Sed nos credimus per Crucifixum salvari, de cujus nomine Judæi erubescunt, ejusque nomine nos credimus muniri.

The verse from 1 Cor. 1 cited by Amalar stays associated with the action. The next witness to this practice is Remigius of Auxerre, writing around the close of the ninth century. His account varies in several places: the deacon makes the sign first, on forehead and breast, then announces the reading. The people, in response, make the sign on the forehead only. His explanations of the action focus on the need for pure hearts and minds8. (The text is not clear on the sequence of events; it is possible that deacon and people make their respective signs at the same time.) The Roman Ordo II has both deacon and people making the sign on forehead and breast. The mouth is still not signed9. Moving forward to the twelfth century, John Beleth provides a account of the practice almost as it stands today: the deacon and the people at the same time make the sign on forehead, mouth and breast. His explanation of the reasons clearly has roots in the tradition of Amalar, as he too mentions the forehead as the set of modesty10, citing again the passage from 1 Cor. 1. The sign is made upon the mouth to indicate our willingness to proclaim the word, and the sign is made upon the breast to indicate our willingness to suffer with Christ. (He is not completely consistent in making a distinction between pectus and cor. In restating his thesis in regards to the signs on mouth and breast, he notes, “Again in this cross which we sign mouth and breast, we openly confess with the mouth and believe with the heart that Christ crucified, whose book we read, is our God and Lord11.”) He also discusses whether the sign should be made from right to 8 Remigius, Expositio, PL CI 1251A. 9 Ordo Rom. II, n. 8. PL LXXVIII, 972. 10 I cannot resist noting that the idea of the forehead as the seat of modesty is the root of the English word effrontery. Beleth notes, “In fronte, quod locus sit pudoris et verecundiae, unde impudicos homines effrontes dicimus, quasi sine fronte.” 11 Rursus in hoc quod os et pectus cruce signamus, aperte innuimus nos audacter ore fateri et corde credere Christum crucifixum, cujus liber legitur, Deum et Dominum nostrum esse.

left or left to right, presenting the latter as the opinion of “not a few” and the former only briefly, suggesting that he prefers the modern Western practice12. The element missing from Beleth's account is the making of the sign on the book itself, which is attested to by Innocent III. Innocent's reasons for making the signs are the familiar ones, though he is the first source cited since Amalar to make mention of preventing diabolical theft: “Then the deacon fortifies himself with a small seal of the cross, lest the devil, who sets traps for good works, take devotion from his heart, or the word from his mouth.13” Jungmann notes two exceptions to this general picture; one of his commentators says that the action of the faithful was only the opinion of quidam, and that Saxon Franciscans in the 15th century had only one sign of the Cross made only by the deacon.14 Though the ritual itself remains essentially unchanged from this time forward, the reasons given for doing it have continued to shift. The signing of the book, which seems to have been the last element added to to ritual, becomes (at least in some interpretations), the source for what follows. One commentator explains the action as transferring a blessing from the book to the reader, only then referring to the more traditional understanding of the signs as an act which the deacon does “to draw strength from the Gospel, that he may bear and preserve the teaching of the crucified Saviour in his mind, upon his lips and heart, and also that he may be able to profess it boldly by word and deed.” He notes that the congregation does likewise for the same purpose15. His attention to the action of the congregation is unusual in that most commentaries of the time, perhaps reflecting a concentration on the Mass as a priestly prayer, do not spend much time 12 John Beleth, Explicatio, chapter 39. PL CCII, 4803. 13 Unde diaconus munit se signaculo crucis, ne diabolus, qui bonis insidiatur operibus tollat ei devotionem de corde, vel sermonem de ore. Innocent III, De s. alt. mysterio II, 43. PL CCXVII 824. 14 Jungmann, 453. 15 Stapper, 58.

on the congregation. The concentration on priestly actions is shown in Fortescue's Ceremonies of the Roman Rite Described, which takes 133 words to describe the action in detail but never mentions what (if anything) is to be done by the people16. Perhaps surprisingly, neither does The New Roman Missal of Fr. Lasance. In his discussion of the prayers and ceremonies of the Mass, he describes the action of the priest (omitting mention of the signing of the book, and making no reference to any action on the part of the congregation) and notes that the meaning of the act is “at once apparent”—perhaps an overconfident assertion in light of variations of meaning attributed to it over time. It is also of interest that he does not mention this action at all, by priest, deacon, or people, in the section where he presents the Ordinary of the Mass17. Even an extensive discussion of the Mass for the laity omitted and discussion of the sign on the book and of the laity making any gesture at all. This book does present an brief but informed rationale for the gesture, and one akin to those that the author of this paper has encountered in the past: The sign is first made on the forehead as a prayer that the Gospel be first in our minds; next, on the lips, so that we may speak the Gospel; and finally on the breast, meaning that the life of Christ should be lived in the heart18. However, the gesture was made by all, even if it is rarely mentioned in print19. Finally, turning to the modern celebration, we first note that the sacramentary calls for this gesture only from the deacon or priest reading the Gospel20. The 1975 General Instruction of the 16 Adrian Fortescue, The Ceremonies of the Roman Rite Described (London: Burnes Oates and Washbourne LTD, 1938), 48. 17 Rev. F. X. Lasance and Rev. Francis Augustine Walsh, OSB, The New Roman Missal, (Palmdale, CA: Christian Book Club of America, 1993, reprint of 1945 edition with emendations for Pope Pius XII's changes), 80, 764. 18 Rev. Joseph A. Dunney, The Mass, (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1941), 69-70. 19 Fr. Robert Zylla, O.S.C., interview by author, Emmitsburg, MD, 29 October 2004. 20 Sacramentary. (New York: Catholic Book Publishing, 1985), 367.

Roman Missal makes no mention of a gesture on the part of the congregation either21 (as a matter of fact, it makes no mention of the deacon making the gesture22). Only with the 2002 GIRM does the picture begin to clear, and even then a potential confusion remains. Paragraph 134, in the section on Mass without a deacon, clearly states that “everyone else as well” makes the triple cross when the priest does. But paragraph 175, in the section on Mass with a deacon, omits any reference to “everyone else as well.”23 Presumably this is an oversight and the gesture is intended to be made by all in either circumstance.

21 General Instruction of the Roman Missal, editio typical altera. Accessed 6 Dec. 2004 at http://www.intratext.com/X/ENG0012.htm, 95. 22 Ibid, 131. 23 General Instruction of the Roman Missal. 3rd edition. (Washington, DC: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2003), 59 and 69.

WORKS CITED Amalar of Metz. De Ecclesiaticis Officiis. PL CV. Beleth, John. Explicatio. PL CCII. Dunney, Rev. Joseph A., The Mass. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1941. Fortescue, Adrian. The Ceremonies of the Roman Rite Described. London: Burnes Oates and Washbourne LTD, 1938. General Instruction of the Roman Missal, editio typical altera. Accessed 6 Dec. 2004 at http://www.intratext.com/X/ENG0012.htm. General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 3rd edition. Washington, DC: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2003. Innocent III, De s. alt. mysterio II. PL CCXVII. Jungmann, Joseph A. S.J. The Mass of the Roman Rite: Its Origins and Development. Trans. Rev. Francis A. Brunner, C.SS.R. Westminster, MD: Christian Classics, Inc., 1992. Lasance, Rev. F. X, and Rev. Francis Augustine Walsh, OSB. The New Roman Missal. Palmdale, CA: Christian Book Club of America, 1993, reprint of 1945 edition with emendations for Pope Pius XII's changes. Ordo Rom. II. PL LXXVIII. Pastoral Care of the Sick: Rites of Anointing and Viaticum. New York: Catholic Book Publishing Co., 1983. Remigius, Expositio, PL CI. Sacramentary. New York: Catholic Book Publishing, 1985. Stapper, Richard, S.T.D. Catholic Liturgics. Trans. and adapt. David Baier, O.F.M. S.T.D., rev. ed. Patterson, NJ: St. Anthony Guild Press, 1938. Tertullian, De Corona Militis, chapter 3, PL II.. Zylla, Fr. Robert, O.S.C. Interview by author 29 October 2004.

APPENDIX Below are fuller extracts from the Patrologiae Latinae. Citations may be found in the text. The author wishes to thank Brother Joshua Kibler and David C. Smith for help on the English translation of some of the trickier passages. Any errors that remain are of course his own. From Beleth's Explicatio: Illud quoque diligenter notandum est, quod simul atque evangelium inchoatur, universus populus, tam clerici quam laici, tam qui illud profert quam qui audit, crucis signum imprimere debeat in fronte, in ore et in pectore. In fronte, quod locus sit pudoris et verecundiae, unde impudicos homines effrontes dicimus, quasi sine fronte. Per hoc ergo quod fronti signum crucis imponimus, evidenter ostendimus nos non erubescere, quod credamus in Crucifixum, et eum habemus Deum et Dominum qui a Judaeis atque ethnicis nobis exprobatur. Unde mehercle Apostolus: Nos autem praedicamus Christum crucifixum, Judaeis quidem scandalum, gentibus vero stultitiam (1 Cor 1). In ore autem ideo, ut significemus nos audacter crucem Domini praedicare. Denique in pectore, ob eam causam quo nos paratos esse pro Christi nomini pati ingenue ostendamus. Rursus in hoc quod os et pectus cruce signamus, aperte innuimus nos audacter ore fateri et corde credere Christum crucifixum, cujus liber legitur, Deum et Dominum nostrum esse. Sacerdos itaque, vel diaconus, evangelium lecturus signat se in ore, fronte, et pectore, quasi dicat: Non erubesco crucem Domini, sed eam ore praedico et corde credo. Libro quoque crucem imprimit, tanquam si dixerit: hic est liber Crucifixi. Posset autem hoc loco quaeri quemadmodum crucis signum fieri debeat, a dextrane in sinistram, an vero a sinistra in dextram. Ac nonnulli quidem sunt que crucem a sinistra in dextram fieri velint, atque ex hujusmodi versu sumpserunt auctoritatem: Egressus est a Patre, etc. (Joan XVI). A Patre venit Filius in mundum, et ideo crucem inchoamus a parte superiori, per quam designatur Pater. Sed quod a parte absque ulla intercapedine in mundum venit, per quem sinistram partem intelligimus, ideo postquam a superior parte descendimus, statim a sinistra in dextram pergimus; nam et postea ad partem ascendit, quod designat dextera. Alii vero putant quod a dextra in sinstram fieri debeat, quia Christus a dextra in sinistram, id est a Patre veniens, diabolum per crucem repulit, qui per sinistram significatur. -- Beleth That also must be noted diligently, that just as the Gospel is begun, the whole people, both clerics and laity, both he who proclaims it and he who hears, ought to imprint the sign of the cross on the forehead, on the mouth and on the breast. In the front, because this is the place of decency and modesty, whence we call indecent men "effrontes", as if without forehead. Therefore through this sign of the cross which we impose upon the forehead, we show clearly that we are not ashamed, because we believe in the Crucified, and we have him as Lord and God who is scorned by the Jews and the heathens. Therefore also on the mouth, so that we may show that we boldly preach the cross of the Lord. Finally upon the breast, for this reason, by this we show openly that we are prepared to suffer for the name of Christ. Again when we sign mouth and breast with the cross, we openly make a

sign that we confess with the mouth and believe with the heart that Christ crucified, whose book we read, is our God and Lord. And so the priest, or the deacon, who is to read the Gospel signes himself on mouth, forehead, and heart, as if he says: I am not ashamed of the cross of the Lord, but I preach it with my mouth and believe it in my heart. Also he presses a cross upon the book, as if he were to say: This is the book of the Crucified. At this point, he may ask how he ought to make the sign of the cross, from right to left, or rather from left to right. And not a few there are who wish to make the cross from left to right, and suppose on the authority of this verse: He came from the Father, etc. (John 16). The Son came into the world from the Father, and therefore we begin the cross from a higher part, through which the Father is designated. But because he came into the world, which we signify by the left side, therefore after we descend from the greater part, at once we go from left to right; for also afterwards he ascended into the part, which the right signifies. Others however think that it should be done from right to left, because Christ from the right to the left, coming from the Father, repulsed through the cross the devil, who is signified by the left. From Innocent III: Unde diaconus munit se signaculo crucis, ne diabolus, qui bonis insidiatur operibus tollat ei devotionem de corde, vel sermonem de ore. Sacerdos itaque vel diaconus cum lecturus est Evangelium, signare se debet in fronte, signare se debet in ore, signare se debet in pectore, ac si dicat: Ego crucem Christi non erubseco, sed corde credo, quod ore praedico. . . . Nos autem gloriari oportet in cruce Domini nostri Jesu Christi, in quo est salus (Galat VI) quia Dominus inquit in Evangelio: Qui me erubuerit et meos sermones, hunc Filius hominis erubescet, cum venerit in majestate sua, et Patris, et sanctorum angelorum (Luc IX). Debet etiam signare librum et osculari . . . . Then the deacon fortifies himself with a small seal of the cross, lest the devil, who sets traps for good works, take devotion from his heart, or the word from his mouth. And so the priest or the deacon when he is about to read the Gospel, ought to sign himself on the forehead, ought to sign himself on the mouth, ought to sign himself in the breast, as if to say: I am not ashamed of the cross of Christ, but I believe in my heart what I preach by my mouth. (1 Cor. 1 is again cited). We however ought to glory in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, in whom is salvation (Gal. 6), because the Lord said in the Gospel: He who is ashamed of me and my words, of him the Son of man will be ashamed when he shall come in his majesty, both of the Father and of the holy angels (Luke 9). He ought therefore to sign the book and kiss it . . . . And from Remigius:

Crucem in fronte ponit diaconus, annuntiaturus verba vitae, ut ostendat se discipulum illius esse, qui crucem pro totius mundi salute sustinuit. Deinde in pectore, ut omnis vana at immunda cogitatio ab eius corde pellatur. Salutat et populum, dicens: _Dominus vobiscum_, quatenus corda illorum a mundanis cogitationibus Dominus emundet, et ad suscipienda verba salutifera aperire dignetur. Ad cuius salutationem populus crucem in frontibus ponit, ut a malis cogitationibus corda sua emundet, ut ad intelligenda verba salutis pura permaneant. Dicit diaconus: "Sequentia [etc.]" The deacon about to proclaim the words of life makes a cross on the forehead, that he may show himself a disciple of him who took up the cross for the salvation of the whole world; then upon the breast, so that all vain and filthy thought may be expelled from his heart. And he greets the people, saying: "The Lord be with you," that the Lord may purify their hearts from filthy thoughts, and that he may deign to open the saving words to be taken up. At this greeting, the people place the cross on their foreheads, that it may cleanse their hearts from evil thoughts, so that they may remain pure for understanding the words of salvation.