Mass Talks 19: Fraction of the Host until Distribution of Communion

When, once long ago, I was a student in an orchestral conducting class, our mentor at one point exclaimed, “A good conductor prepares his musical scores in the way a good Christian prepares himself for Holy Communion.” I felt ashamed hearing these words of reproach from the mouth of Jew, not on account of the implied reprimand for our wanting diligence in preparing our music, but because a non-believer seemed to realize better than I the crucial importance of being worthy for the reception of Holy Communion. Indeed, the whole structure of the Mass is designed with this aim in view: that one should communicate the Lord’s Body as fruitfully as possible. But before continuing on in that theme, I want to take a step back in the action of the Mass to the Fraction of the Host.

Many have wondered why the priest at a certain point in the Mass breaks the Host and places a particle of it into the chalice. This is in reality a profoundly significant act which imports great doctrinal meanings. The first has to do with sacrifice. The breaking–or fraction–of the Host is a meant as a symbol of our Lord’s death, a literal breaking of His Body. Since the Mass is essentially a renewal of the sacrifice of the cross–an invisible offering of Christ to the Father in atonement for sin–this external gesture throws the reality of Christ’s death before our very eyes. Of course, one must remember that this is a symbol of the Lord’s dying that took place only once on the cross. The Mass perpetuates the memorial of Calvary and is not for Jesus a new experience of suffering and dying. Also telling is the fact that during this breaking of the Body in sacrifice, music which indicates sacrifice is being sung, the Agnus Dei, a song to the sacrificed ‘Lamb.’

Another doctrinal point made here concerns the commingling of the Host and the Precious Blood. The small particle of the Host that is placed into the chalice signifies that the separate species of the bread and the wine constitute the one reality of the whole Christ: the totality of His sacred humanity joined to divinity. The point not to be missed here is that should one receive the sacred Host only or, if it should happen, only the Precious Blood, one would be receiving all of Christ in the one form rather than be receiving His Body–or Blood–only.

And then the priest is given to say some prayers in secret–a rare thing in the current form of the Mass. There are one of two prayers from which he may choose. Making his choice, the priest prays that his own reception of Holy Communion will not bring condemnation upon himself but rather spiritual and physical health. It was Saint Paul who in a celebrated passage from 1 Corinthians gave us the teaching that an unworthy reception of the Holy Sacrament, far from bestowing benefit upon the communicant, would cause his damnation. Taking Communion in a state of mortal sin, that is, without confession and absolution, significantly worsens (and not betters) one’s state of soul. It is a sacrilege. On the other hand, and as these prayers also indicate, a good Communion is a real boon to the receiver and fortifies him against lapses into sin.

The priest then genuflects before taking up either the Host alone (as is my preference) or both the Host and the chalice and then, turned towards the people, makes an invitation to those worthy to communicate. Ecce Agnus Dei... The Latin word ecce (‘behold’) has a ring of grandeur about it that the pedestrian “This is the Lamb of God” can’t match. In any case, “Behold the Lamb of God, behold Him who takes away the sins of the world.” It was remarked last week that this appellation of Christ as the ‘Lamb of God’ is taken from the words of St. John the Baptist in the Gospel. And the second part of this summons to Communion is also from the NT, the Book of Revelation. The literal words here are, “Blessed are they who are called to the supper of the Lamb.” Our English rendition once again sells you short in the phrase, “called to his supper.” It is the supper of the Lamb which refers not to this Mass only, but also to the supper in heaven where, in a vision, Saint John saw the Lamb upon the altar. Equally short-changed is the current English form of the people’s answer. The precise words are, “Lord, I am not worthy, that you should enter under my roof; but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.” From the original Latin text one easily draws the biblical allusion. This is, of course, an adaptation of the words spoken by the centurion after he had begged Jesus to heal his servant. The word ‘roof’ (the ‘tectum meum’) here has the double meaning of the roof over one’s house (referring to the centurion’s home) and the roof of the communicant’s mouth. The final linguistic mishap for the day is the deliberate omission from the text of the word ‘soul’ (the ‘anima mea’). The systematic excision of [the word] ‘soul’ from our English translation makes one wonder whether the translators believed they had souls. This is one of many areas that, one hopes, may soon be remedied in the forthcoming retranslation of the Roman Missal.

Not to get bogged down in these details, one should see that the Church has been duly diligent in providing the necessary means for us to become cognizant of the divine Reality before us in the Blessed Sacrament and of which–by God’s gracious deigning–we have been made partakers through Holy Communion