SUMMARY: I. Liturgical objects in general: 1. Cultural-religious assessment; 2. Historical synthesis; 3. In the “today” of the church: a) Distinctive notes, b) Material and form, c) Liturgical objects and sacred art, d) Competent authority – II. Main liturgical objects: 1. Eucharistic vessels: a) Material and form, b) Blessing of the chalice and the paten; 2. Vestments of the ministers: a) The different vestments, b) Material and form, c) Colors, d) Liturgical insignia – III. Conclusion.
Liturgical objects are called all those that in some way serve for the exercise of the liturgy. They are particularly related to liturgical places (churches, altars, etc.), to the ministers of the liturgy and to liturgical celebrations, especially the Eucharistic celebration.
The literature on liturgical objects continues to be abundant. The nature of this dictionary imposes limits on us. We believe that it will be enough to first give an overview of the liturgical objects considered in their complexity, to then proceed to the analysis of their main ones. We are going to refer in a special way to the Eucharistic vessels and the vestments of the ministers.
I. Liturgical objects in general
After an evaluative approach of a cultural nature to the subject, we will present a brief historical synthesis on liturgical objects and we will expose the current situation in this regard.
1. CULTURAL-RELIGIOUS ASSESSMENT. More or less, in almost all cultures the history of the objects used in religious celebrations presents two fundamental stages. Firstly, objects are used that are no different from those used in the ordinary circumstances of life. The only requirement to which they must respond is practicality-functionality. However, there is a tendency to prefer objects distinguished by their beauty and nobility. And this is how the demand for practicality-functionality is increasingly joined by that of ornamentation (and art) and that of the respect that is aspired to surround the exercise of worship. In this way, the way is paved for a successive development, which will have as its objective the diversity of objects used in worship and, consequently, their fixation. Simultaneously, a new requirement of a psychosociological nature is being consolidated, which is specified in the recognition of the need or usefulness of some easily recognizable external signs linked to the performance of certain community services.
In some more open and developed cultures, a third stage of evolution is still discovered: the objects, while remaining substantially the same, are subject to continuous adaptation to the new orientations of art that come to enrich the different cultures.
All of which leads us to the conclusion that the use of objects reserved for worship generally constitutes a cultural fact of notorious relevance in all peoples; a fact that is sometimes object of contestation, but that will survive thanks to its connatural and undeniable value of I sign. The very answers to which he is exposed will only serve to purify him and maintain his credibility.
This cultural-religious assessment with which we have started our exposition will be the basis of our entire treatise on liturgical objects.
2. HISTORICAL SYNTHESIS. We are now immediately interested in talking about the history of Christian liturgical objects’. We deal with liturgical objects in general. We must therefore content ourselves with quick allusions. It is, in fact, out of the question that for a true and complete history of liturgical objects a very specific description of each one of them or of certain groups would be necessary, with explicit reference to the different liturgical families or, at least, to the main ones in the East and the West.
At the beginning of its mission, the church did not adopt for the exercise of the liturgy objects other than those habitually used for other activities. Efforts were made to avoid, in this field, the influence of the Hebrew religion, even considering it as a necessary point of reference for Christianity because of the revealed doctrine contained therein. Likewise, for obvious reasons, all contact with pagan religions is avoided. Add that the exclusion of special objects for worship became necessary so as not to expose the church to the persecutions that accompanied its spread in the pagan world. In the first centuries it was enough for the church that the liturgical objects responded to the fundamental requirements of practicality-functionality, decorum and respect for the exercise of the liturgy.
The first news about the vessels for the Eucharist (chalices and patens) and about the vestments of the ministers belong to this line. For the Eucharistic vessels, it is maintained that they were originally made of decorated glass. Only successively (s. iv?) had to resort to precious materials, often artistically elaborated. About the vestments of the ministers we know that still in the s. v Common habits were used for liturgical celebrations. However, the military and labor were excluded; among the common ones the most elegant were chosen. In certain cases habits and insignia of some imperial officials were adopted. Such is the basic situation from which the later changes of the liturgical vestments start. The latter will progressively and increasingly distinguish themselves by the richness of their material and their preparation. The opposite reaction, in ecclesiastical environments, to the adoption in the civil field of new forms of habits, shorter and tighter, after the barbarian invasions, will also be the determining cause of their distinction.
In this way, also in the Christian liturgy, completely different objects were used for worship, as well as their fixation. This process will conclude in the s. see There was a further development, especially in the field of liturgical vestments, particularly pontifical ones, until the s. xn, which was like the apex of the true creative phase of liturgical objects. Through the clothing, its sign dimension is evidenced in the roles of certain people in the exercise of worship. It is also noteworthy how in such a period the custom of blessing liturgical objects with their own formulas spread, as proof of their exclusive destiny for worship. The primitive formulas go back to the s. IX.
After the s. xii there was a simple evolution of forms and ornamentation, which, however, did not always know how to avoid inconveniences, inconsistencies and distortions. Since the second half of the current century, various attempts at simplification have been made, which found their ratification in various provisions of Vatican II and in the -> post-conciliar liturgical reform.
It should also be underlined how in the field of Christian liturgical objects the influence of art has been remarkable in its successive stages and with its different styles. This is attested to by the rich ancient and modern production in the fields of painting, sewing, embroidery (as regards liturgical vestments) and goldsmithing (as regards sacred vessels).
To complete this historical synthesis, we believe it is useful to make a final allusion to the symbolic interpretation of the liturgical vestments (and insignia) and their various colors, an interpretation that was already developed in the Middle Ages and that has survived to the present day’. There has been no liturgical vestment that has not been the object of the most varied applications of symbolism. Much has been written on this subject, but most of the time it is about decadent or artificial compositions. The symbolism of the liturgical vestments has insisted on three points: the virtues that must shine in the ministers who wear them; the person of Christ represented by the ministers, his passion, object of the liturgical memorial. Such symbolism has found expression in liturgical formulas of various kinds: those pronounced by the bishop on the occasion of the delivery of the vestments to the newly ordained; those used for the blessing of said garments; those recited by the same ministers when dressing them.
3. IN THE “TODAY” OF THE CHURCH. What to say about liturgical objects after the reform promoted by Vatican II in the field of the liturgy itself?’ Because, as is known, the council also dealt with the sector relating to sacred vestments. His indications in this regard are found in c. SC VII. They made them their own, completing them, other later documents, in particular the General Order of the Roman Missal (OGMR). Therefore, in order to answer the question we have just formulated, we must turn to the examination of such documents, especially the SC and the General Order of the Roman Missal (OGMR). We will collect what we find most interesting, always referring, for now, to liturgical objects in general.
As a premise, let us underline how, throughout the whole, the will of the church to distinguish between objects intended for sacred use and those intended for profane use is clear today as it was yesterday, and to make the use of the former obligatory. . Such will appears more particularly manifest with respect to the objects of the Eucharistic celebration.
a) Distinctive notes. What are the distinctive notes of liturgical objects? It can be said that they have always been the same, but it must be added that today they are more prominent and are the object of particular insistence.
The SC, dealing in general with all “things intended for sacred worship”, says that the church has always tried to ensure that “they were truly worthy, decorous and beautiful, signs and symbols of heavenly realities” (SC 122). underline how the SC speaks of “things intended for sacred worship”. In reality, it is the belonging to the -> sacred cult of certain objects that constitutes their first distinctive note, on which the others are based. The words quoted from the SC are equally valid for liturgical objects. These have always been the object of the church’s attention. And it can be said that, in general, they have always appeared with such distinctive notes: fundamental belonging to the sacred cult, dignity, decorum, beauty. All this within a pluralism of orientations and achievements, the result of the different historical generations and of the different cultures.
In the General Order of the MR it is also read that “sacred buildings and objects that belong to divine worship” must be “truly worthy and beautiful, signs and symbols of celestial realities” ‘or, therefore, capable “of encourage piety and show the holiness of the mysteries that are celebrated” “. Perhaps it will be said that liturgical objects must have as their aim the education of the faithful and respond to the purpose for which they are destined and to the criteria of true art.
It is precisely this first consideration about the notes…