Video summary
In this video, Father William Rock introduces a detailed review of Father Michael Mueller's extensive work, *The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass*, originally published in 1874 and recently republished by Tan Books. The book is a substantial volume of over 570 pages that explores the theology of the Eucharist through the lens of Father Mueller, a nineteenth-century Redemptorist priest known for his writings on Catholic doctrine. Father Rock outlines the book's structure, noting that it begins with an overview of sacrifice and the Eucharist, moves into how the Mass renews the life of Christ by offering His merits as a reservoir to believers, and then discusses practical participation in the liturgy. A central theme emphasized throughout the text is the necessity of self-sacrifice; Father Mueller argues that true participation in the Mass requires the faithful to offer their own souls, bodies, wills, and daily intentions on the altar alongside Christ, effectively becoming a living holocaust united with Him in His passion.
Father Rock also examines the methodological approach used by Mueller, which employs a fourfold sense of interpretation similar to biblical exegesis: the literal, allegorical, moral, and anagogical senses. While Mueller primarily focuses on the literal meaning of the Mass ceremonies, he frequently intermixes these with spiritual interpretations, such as viewing the altar not just as a physical table but as a representation of Christ himself. The review highlights several theological points where Father Rock offers critique or clarification, particularly regarding the nature of symbols and language. For instance, Mueller's assertion that bread is an unfitting symbol for a body is disputed by modern sacramental theology, which holds that the matter used in a sacrament must be fitting for its purpose, much like water fits baptism. Additionally, Father Rock clarifies the distinction between devotional language, which describes Christ descending from heaven in a metaphorical sense to convey truth, and theological precision, which maintains that Christ's glorified person remains in heaven while His substance is present under the species of bread and wine through transubstantiation without physical movement.
The summary concludes with Father Rock addressing historical and liturgical nuances within Mueller's text that reflect the context of his time rather than current universal practice. Mueller writes with a "low Mass mentality," suggesting that solemn high Masses should be reserved for special occasions, whereas historically, the solemn high Mass was often the normative daily celebration in monastic communities, with low Mass serving as a concession. Father Rock also notes historical inaccuracies regarding Frederick II and the use of Muslim mercenaries, correcting the record to show that Muslims were subjects within Frederick's kingdom rather than hired mercenaries from a sultan. Despite these dated perspectives and occasional theological imprecisions, such as the problematic attribution of divine qualities directly to human nature in Christ, Father Rock affirms the book's value for understanding the core theology of the Mass. He recommends reading the full text outside of liturgy to gain a comprehensive understanding, while using specific commentary chapters during Mass if they aid personal devotion, ultimately presenting the work as a rich, albeit lengthy, resource for deepening one's appreciation of the Holy Sacrifice.
Read the full video transcript
Hello, I am Father William Rock of the
Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter and
this is Tan Book's year of the Latin
Mass. In this video, we'll be discussing
the work the holy sacrifice of the mass
by Father Michael Mueller who is
redempterists. According to the
biography provided by Tanbooks,
Michael Mueller was born in Germany on
December 18th, 1825. Zealous at a young
age for the salvation of souls, he
joined the redempterus and was selected
to further apostolic works in the
missionary territory of the United
States of America. He was ordained at
the age of 27 by St. John Noman and
exercised his priesthood in a variety of
capacities throughout the 1850s. Eager
to cultivate the faith further since he
was not a gifted preacher, Father
Mueller sought to win souls over by his
writing, explaining the essentials of
Catholicism, promoting authentic
spirituality, and defending the faith
against the attacks of modernism.
Beginning in the 1860s and continuing
all the way until his death in 1899,
Father wrote proficiently to make
Catholicism and the Redemptorrist better
known in the United States, making him
one of the better known Catholic
theologians in America in the 19th
century. Of the more than 30 works which
he wrote, some of Father's best are
prayer, the key to salvation, the
blessed eukarist, our greatest treasure,
the holy sacrifice of the mass, familiar
explanation of Christian doctrine, and
God the teacher of mankind.
concerning the work currently under
consideration. It was first published in
1874
under the title The Sacrifice of the
Living and the Dead, the Clean Oblation
offered up among the nations from the
rising to the setting of the sun. It was
republished in 1884
as the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
Republished again in 2023 by Tan Books.
As you can see, it is very lengthy and
it numbers 572 pages. So, it is not for
the faint of heart.
Now, I'd like some time to discuss the
overall structure of the work. And this
is my own personal organization. It's
not something present in the work
itself, but I think it's helpful as it
will capture sort of the overview of the
book, will capture the themes of the
book. So to begin with, chapters 1-10
present an overview of sacrifice and of
the holy eucharist. One of the things it
does speak about which was interesting
is how Adam and Eve were instructed by
God to offer animal sacrifice as a sign
and reminder of the promised redeemer.
The next grouping is chapters 11-30
which is about how the mass renews the
life of Christ and those whom the mass
benefits. In particular, it is drawing
from the idea that the merits of Christ
on the cross are like a reservoir which
are offered to us through the sacrifice
of the mass. Then chapters 31 through 38
discuss how one can participate at mass
and other associated topics. So for
example, it talks about mass with
regards to the fors of prayer namely
adoration, thanksgiving, reparation and
petition. It also notes that we can
represent all of creation before God at
the sacrifice of the mass. And the
author makes very strong claims and true
claims that there are ways that we can
worship God only at mass and it's not
something we can do at home. So we need
to be attending mass. He also in this
part explains and summarizes the method
of St. Leonardo Port Maraice presented
in the saints the hidden treasure which
is also part of tan book's year of the
Latin mass and has a video made about it
already as well. Now to give a taste of
what this author wrote about this topic
I would like to read a little bit from
his own writings. The best method,
however, of hearing mass is to recall
the sufferings of our Lord's passion and
to consider with what an excess of love
he devoted himself for us to the death
of the cross. One of the chief ends for
which he instituted the holy sacrifice
of his body and blood being that we
might have his passion ever present to
our minds. As often says the apostle
Paul, as you shall eat this bread and
drink this chalice, you shall show the
death of the Lord until he comes. The
reason why this hearing is the best of
all is because it is best calculated to
produce in us the spirit of sacrifice
which is the spirit of Christianity. The
spirit of Christ himself is necessary
that when we offer the sacrifice of the
mass we should offer ourselves also to
God in sacrifice. And as we celebrate
the mysteries of the passion of our
savior we ought to imitate what we
celebrate. Jesus Christ will be truly a
victim for us. we become a victim with
him. In this sense, St. Peter calls as
Christians a holy priesthood. What is
more royal mercotto
than to subject the mind to God and the
body to the spirit? Many offer to God
their prayers, arms, fasts, and
mortifications, but few offer
themselves, and make an oblation of
their very own hearts. They always
secretly reserve to themselves the
disposal of their own will. How can this
internal reservation be anything but
displeasing to God and cause him great
sorrow? We should remember, therefore,
that as we are associated with the
priest of Christ in offering the
adorable victim to God, so should we be
associated with the divine victim in the
spirit of self-sacrifice.
We should offer ourselves with him. We
should lay on the altar the oblation of
our soul and body, our memory, will and
understanding, our thoughts, words,
actions, and intentions of the day, our
life, death, and whole being that all
may be sanctified by union with him who
is emulated for the love of us. We
should offer all generously to God with
self- renunciation that the mystic death
of Jesus in his temple may produce in
our souls a similar death. the death of
our evil inclinations to worldly
pleasures and alarmments, but above all
the death of our self-will, in order
thus to become a fit holocaust in the
sight of God, of which he may dispose
according to his good pleasure, for his
greater glory and for that of our own
soul and the souls of our fellow men. So
that is a short taste of what the author
says about participating at mass. So I
thought I would share it here. Then
there are chapters 39 to 47 which is an
explanation of the mass and other
related topics. And here it's sort of an
exposio misay and the method used is the
method similar to what is used in the
interpretation of scripture.
So to begin with in the interpretation
of scripture there is a literal and a
spiritual sense. So the literal sense is
in a sense the immediate meaning of the
words or phrases but not to be
understood in a literalistic way. So
literally the phrase it's raining cats
and dogs means it's raining really hard.
A literalistic understanding would be
that cats and dogs are actually falling
from the sky. So when we say that we're
using the literal sense, it's what's
intended by the words or phrases, not
necessarily their literalistic
application.
So when we look at the literal sense of
scripture, we would see in Noah's ark
the actual boat that was built by Noah
historically.
Then there are in scripture three
spiritual senses. First there's the
allegorical sense which is where things
of the old law called types signify the
things of the new law called antityypes
or things of the new law signify other
things of the new law. According to this
sense, Noah's ark represents the church.
Then there is the moral or tropological
sense which are moral lessons which the
passage signifies. According to this
sense, the gold frank presented by the
magi represent voluntary poverty,
obedience, and fasting or mortification
of the flesh respectively.
Lastly, there's the anagogical sense
which is where things which relate to
eternal glory both during the age of the
church and in the age of the world to
come are signified by the passage.
According to this sense, the gold,
frankincense and myrr signify man's
redemption, Christian religion and the
resurrection respectively. Now, this can
be applied to the mass as well. And so
for example, one of the uses by the
author of this method is when discussing
the altar, the literal sense is that the
altar is that upon which the sacrifice
is offered. But a spiritual or
allegorical sense is that the altar
represents Christ.
Now in this work, the author makes use
of as was just shown the different modes
of interpretation, but they are
intermixed. So he'll kind of go from the
literal to the spiritual and then back
to the literal without making a clear
sort of break between them. They're just
kind of one right after the other. But
it does seem that primarily he is
focused on the literal mode or the
historical sense of what is being
performed in the mass.
Then finally there is the final chapter
chapter 48 which discusses the love of
God.
So now that we have gone over a general
overview of the work, I'd like to give
some overall observations or critiques.
So to begin with, the author uses what I
would call a very aggressive writing
style. He's very uh sort of blunt, very
straightforward, very sort of
confrontational, especially in the early
chapters. That might be a turnoff uh for
some. So just be aware of that.
Throughout the course of the book, the
author makes use of many quotes from
saints and from the fathers of the
church and also uses many stories and
historical points to illustrate what it
is he is trying to explain to the
reader.
At one point, however, the author notes
that he does not think bread is a
fitting symbol for a body and therefore
our Lord must be speaking literally
about the Eucharistic bread being his
body. Now this point is disputed by
other authors who say that actually yes
bread is a fitting symbol of body and
this sort of fits in with a general
understanding of sacramental theology
that the matter used in the sacraments
are fitting for what they're used for.
So for example the washing of the body
with water in baptism is a fitting
symbol of grace washing the soul. And so
authors will argue that bread actually
is a fitting symbol of body even though
this author denies it. So he does state
it very sort of strongly but it is
disputed but I would say that the
stronger argument is that bread actually
is a fitting symbol for body. Um and
therefore we have to use other arguments
to point out what our lord was saying or
to explain what our lord was saying
regarding the eucharist.
The author also makes the statement that
the eucharistic sacrifice is completed
by the destruction of the sacramental
presence. So the receiving of the body
and blood in the sacrifice of the mass.
I had never encountered this before.
This might be position unique to this
author. Um but I don't know how
widespread it is but again I haven't
encountered it before. And now something
to note is that in chapters five and six
he gives a very sort of drawn out
explanation of a public exorcism which
involve the sacrifice of the mass and
the blessed and the blessed sacrament in
order to demonstrate the power of the
mass and the blessed sacrament.
Now, I would say that these chapters
might lead one into uh the vice of
curiosity of kind of looking into things
that maybe they shouldn't be. And I can
understand maybe why the author decided
to include it. Um I will admit that I
skipped part of it. So, I read part of
it and then skipped it because I didn't
really feel it was doing anything for my
own personal edification. And so I would
just maybe give that warning there to
those that might have um sort of an
inordinate draw to these type of things
to skip those chapters. Also, the author
gives uh historical information about
liturgies and also what he believes is a
recreation of the last supper. However,
these presentations are not always
accurate and they're not always what
scholars today would agree with. now
that we have uh additional years of
scholarship behind us. So I think his
work is good for the theology of the
mass but maybe not so much the
historical development.
Another thing, and this is kind of
minor, but it's interesting to point
out, that he does talk a little bit
about the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick
II, and accuses him of being an enemy of
the church, particularly because his use
of Muslims in his campaigns in northern
Italy. The impression given by the
author is that, at least the impression
I received is that Frederick II reached
out to a sultan somewhere and hired some
Muslim mercenaries. This isn't the case.
It's a little bit more complicated
because not only was Frederick the Holy
Roman Emperor, he was also the king of
Sicily. And at one time Sicily was
controlled by the Muslims but then was
liberated by the Normans and eventually
Frederick II through the turns of
history was also the king of Sicily. And
so he had a population of Muslims living
under him in Sicily. And it was these
Muslims, his subjects that he took with
him in his armies, not ones that he
would recruited from a Muslim sultan or
something like that. He also makes a you
can say a reference to our Lord being
formed at least our Lord's body being
formed out of his mother's blood. And
you'll find this in various writings.
The general theological principle here
is that Mary contributed to the
formation of our Lord's body, whatever
it is that a mother normally
contributes.
Now, in certain times in history, it was
believed that what mothers contributed
was a purified blood from their body.
And so, it makes sense that if this is
your understanding of what mothers
contribute, that this is what Mary
contributed. uh but with current science
the conclusion would be different even
though the principle is the same. Again
the principle is that Mary contributed
whatever it is that mothers normally
contribute to the conception of their
child. Another topic worth discussing at
this point is the difference between
devotional language and theological
language because the author makes use of
both. So devotional language we can say
is language which gets to the heart of
the reality that's being discussed but
is not done in a way that is strictly
theologically or scientifically
accurate. So for example the author will
say something to the effect that at the
words of consecration our lord comes
down from heaven is present at the
altar.
Now, while this gets the heart of the
truth that what used to be bread and
wine are no longer bread and wine, but
really and truly and substantially the
body and blood, soul and divinity of our
Lord. It is not true that our Lord's
glorified person in heaven moves. So
before the consecration, during the
consecration, after the consecration,
the person of our Lord and his glorified
uh humanity stays in heaven. He doesn't
he doesn't leave heaven.
But what is theologically accurate to
say would be that at the words of
consecration, the substance of the bread
is transubstantiated into the substance
of our Lord's body with his blood, soul,
and divinity thereby conccommatance.
And at the words of consecration, the
substance of the wine is
transubstantiated
into the blood of our Lord, the
substance of the blood of our Lord with
the substance of his body, soul and
divinity there
without him physically changing location
as a person from his place in heaven. So
this is kind of good to note that there
is a distinction between theological
language and devotional language. They
both have their place and they can both
be helpful. We want to make sure that
we're understanding if something's being
said devotionally in order to get to the
heart of the matter although maybe not
entirely theologically accurate or
something being said theologically which
is going to be more we can say
scientifically accurate. He also does
make some passing um observations
regarding prayers for the emperor, the
king in the cannon of the mass which
would have been done in certain places
in Europe uh but not everywhere but
definitely in the Holy Roman Emperor
Empire at the time. The Holy Roman
Emperor would have been prayed for in
the canon as well as the prayers on Good
Friday and Holy Saturday. uh but this
wouldn't have been universal but he does
make a mention of it. Another thing to
be aware of is that he has a certain
what we can call a low mass mentality
which is seeing the low mass as the
primary understanding of mass. So the
low mass is the primary way we should
understand the mass. His commentary of
the mass is based on the ceremonies of
low mass with sort of the ceremonies of
the high mass added on afterwards.
Now given the time he's writing this is
understandable because the low mass
would have been what was most common but
it's not necessarily actually accurate
to the way we should be approaching
mass.
So for example he says on page 506
on great somnities or solemn occasions
when a bishop or a priest celebrates
solemn high mass. Now here is implied
that a solemn high mass should only be
celebrated on great somnities or very
solemn occasions.
And the way that you distinguish between
the semnity of a day is by the type of
mass. So if it's kind of a normal day
you do a low mass. If it's a great or
solemn occasion, you do a solemn high
mass. But historically, this wasn't
really the case. Historically, the main
mass of the day, especially if you're in
a monastery, would have been a solemn
high mass. So, you would have had a
solemn high mass every day. And the way
that the semnity of the day would be
designated would be by the quality of
the ornamentation of the altar of the
vestments of the vessels of how
different things were arranged. And so
even though it would be a solemn high
mass every day, the salenity would be
able to be identified or expressed by
again the quality of the vestments, the
vessels, the layout of the altar, um,
and the decorations of the altar, things
like that.
So I think this is unfortunate because
it kind of is not the way historically
things were looked at. Historically, the
solemn high mass was the main mass with
the low mass kind of being concession
when it couldn't be celebrated or for
the private masses of say the monks in
the monastery, but they would gather for
the communal celebration of the solemn
high mass. Unfortunately, this idea is
kind of still with us in certain circles
that you should only have a sung mass or
a solemn high mass on very special
occasions and generally you should just
have a low mass. But really the normal
mass and the lens through which we
should view the ceremonies. The mass
should be the solemn high mass. It is
the in a sense normative mass that we
should have. Now I understand that we
don't always have the resources in order
to do a solemn high mass especially not
something we can do every day in a
parish. But we should realize that the
solemn high mass should be the normative
mass and not the low mass. But again
given the time that the author was
writing I can understand why he has this
mentality and why it would be presented
in the book as it was. There is another
theological point I would like to
discuss which has to do with the union
of the divine nature and human nature in
the one person of our lord. On page 270,
the author wrote, "We may attribute to
the human nature of Jesus Christ that
which belongs to the divine nature, and
in like manner may attribute to the
divine nature that which belongs to the
human nature. Consequently, in virtue of
the hypothatic union, the union of the
two natures in one God, that we may call
God weak, passable, mortal, dead, and
say of the human nature that is an
immense, omipotent, and omnisient."
The
problem with this
passage is that we don't attribute the
qualities of the two natures to the
other nature but rather to the person.
Uh so in the hypothatic union the union
of the divine and human nature and our
lord in the one person of God the son
god the word we claim and hold as
orthodox that the natures did not
change. So there's no change to the
divine nature in the union and there's
no change to the human nature in the
union. The divine nature is still the
divine nature with all that's proper to
the divine nature. And the human nature
is a human nature with everything that
is proper to human nature. So we would
not say that the human nature is
impassible
or omnipotent. Nor would we say that the
divine nature has become passable. But
we can say it of the person. So we can
say that the person of God the son our
lord after his incarnation is both
passable because of his human nature and
impassible due to his divine nature. So
we can attribute these things both to
the person but we wouldn't sort of
communicate them between the natures. So
hopefully that that makes sense as sort
of a quick overview. So that passage
there I think is a little problematic.
um but maybe the surrounding uh context
helps clarify it but I wanted to just
make sure that gets clarified here as
well.
So now all that being said we can ask to
what mass we can apply this work. So the
general theological explanations can be
used for the study of any mass be it
eastern or western because it's
explaining the church's theology about
the mass. However, his sort of more
step-by-step explanation of the mass
offered at the end of the book is use or
is using the traditional Latin mass. So,
his explanation of the mass at the end
would only really apply to the
traditional Latin mass. Um, and so that
would be its purpose there. Now, how
could one use this book? Again, it's
very long, some 570 pages. So I would
not recommend reading all of it during
mass. Although maybe the commentary
part, those few chapters about the
commentary of mass might be useful to
have in mass itself. Um but again, it's
not that one should be reading the whole
book at mass. Read the whole book
outside of mass and then if you find the
commentary helpful, you can at least
refer to those chapters during mass. So
that is all for today. God bless and
we'll see you at mass.