St. Louis Review online

News
Home Page
Local News
Nation and World
Briefs
Archive
Archbishop's Column
Sunday Scriptures
Dear Father
Youth Column
Calendar
Editorials
Classifieds
Special Sections
Marriage
Senior Living
Christian Hope
Travel
Vocations
Information
About Us
Advertise
Subscribe
Subscription Changes
Staff Directory
Contact Us
Archdiocese
Archdiocese Home Page
Life Teen Masses
Review On Tape




July 18, 2008

'Dear Father’
Why do the bells ring at the Consecration?

by Father Matthew Mitas


Last Sunday after Mass my little granddaughter asked me why the servers rang bells at the Consecration. Apparently they are not rung at her parish. Why is it that some churches do and some don’t?

Bells have been used in the Church going back many centuries and always for the same purpose, namely, to alert people to something important happening.

The custom of ringing bells during Mass seems to have originated in medieval times at monasteries, where only some of the monks would actually attend daily Mass because the other monks would be working out in the fields. The monks in church would chime the tower bells at certain points of the Mass so that their brothers could follow the progress of the Mass and pray along with them even though they weren’t physically present.

A big change occurred at the start of the 13th century when the Church instituted the practice of having the priest elevate the Host and chalice immediately after the Consecration. This was done as a result of an increased awareness of the mystery of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and everyone understood this was an important part of Mass. So much so, in fact, that it became a custom among the faithful to go from church to church just to witness the Consecration.

In time, churches adopted the monastic practice of ringing their tower bells at the Consecration so that anyone within earshot could pause and make an act of adoration to Christ in the Blessed Sacrament.

Through the centuries, the server’s ringing of a handbell replaced the ringing of the tower bells. This practice became almost universal (although I believe there are still a couple of churches in our archdiocese that have a button in the altar steps for the server to push to ring the tower bells).

We must also bear in mind that in those days the priest celebrated Mass facing away from the people and in an inaudible voice. The ringing bell served much like an alarm clock to focus the congregation’s attention to what they couldn’t see or hear.

Curiously, the instructions for the Tridentine Latin Mass (the extraordinary rite of the Mass) don’t mention bells at all, even though they were almost always used.

The current instructions for Mass say that bells may be used, but they’re not necessary. In other words, it’s a judgment to be made by the pastor of the parish whether the bells will be used.

I think it’s safe to say that the pastors who have retained the custom of ringing the bells have done so for the same reason it was first initiated: to call attention to the important parts of the Mass. And those who have discontinued it have done so because in the post-Vatican II liturgy there is no difficulty for the people to know exactly what’s happening at Mass and so no bell is needed to focus their attention.

Anyone making this decision has to bear in mind its consequences. In philosophy class we priests learned this maxim: "Whatever is received is always received in the manner of the one who does the receiving." This means that no matter what you were trying to say, and you may be convinced you made yourself perfectly clear, the people you were talking to may have gotten a whole different message.

If ringing the bells called attention to something important, then will a lot of people infer that to stop ringing them at the Consecration means that the Consecration is no longer important? Any deviation from custom needs to be explained exceedingly well.

Anyway, you can just tell your granddaughter that her pastor who no longer rings the bells is probably trying to win the "No-bel prize".

Father Mitas is pastor of Immaculate Conception Parish in Union. Address questions of a general nature about the Catholic faith to be answered by priests in the St. Louis Archdiocese to Dear Father, St. Louis Review, 20 Archbishop May Drive, St. Louis, MO 63119. You can also fax them to (314) 792-7534 or send by e-mail to slreview@stlouisreview.com. One question at a time, please.
 July 18, 2008
July 11, 2008
June 20, 2008
June 13, 2008
June 6, 2008
May 30, 2008
May 23, 2008
May 16, 2008
May 9, 2008
May 2, 2008
April 25, 2008
April 18, 2008
April 11, 2008
April 4, 2008
March 28, 2008
March 21, 2008
March 14, 2008
March 7, 2008
February 29, 2008
February 22, 2008
February 15, 2008
February 8, 2008
February 1, 2008
January 25, 2008
January 18, 2008
January 11, 2008
January 4, 2008
December 21, 2007
December 14, 2007
December 7, 2007
November 30, 2007
November 23, 2007
November 16, 2007
November 9, 2007
November 2, 2007
October 26, 2007
October 19, 2007
October 12, 2007
October 5, 2007
September 28, 2007
September 21, 2007
September 14, 2007
September 7, 2007
August 31, 2007
August 24, 2007
August 17, 2007
August 10, 2007
August 3, 2007
July 27, 2007
July 20, 2007
July 13, 2007
June 22, 2007
June 15, 2007
June 8, 2007
June 1, 2007
May 25, 2007
May 18, 2007
May 11, 2007
April 27, 2007
April 20, 2007
April 13, 2007
March 30, 2007
March 9, 2007
March 2, 2007
February 23, 2007
February 16, 2007
February 9, 2007
January 26, 2007
January 19, 2007
January 12, 2007
January 5, 2007
December 15, 2006
December 8, 2006
December 1, 2006
November 24, 2006
November 17, 2006
November 10, 2006
October 27, 2006
October 20, 2006
October 13, 2006
October 6, 2006
September 29, 2006
September 22, 2006
September 15, 2006
September 8, 2006
September 1, 2006
August 25, 2006
August 18, 2006
August 11, 2006
August 4, 2006
July 28, 2006
July 21, 2006
July 14, 2006
June 30, 2006
June 23, 2006
June 16, 2006
June 9, 2006
June 2, 2006
May 26, 2006
May 19, 2006
May 12, 2006
May 5, 2006
April 28, 2006
April 21, 2006
April 14, 2006
April 7, 2006
March 31, 2006
March 24, 2006
March 17, 2006
March 10, 2006
March 3, 2006
February 24, 2006
February 17, 2006
February 10, 2006
February 3, 2006
January 27, 2006
January 20, 2006
January 13, 2006
January 6, 2006
December 16, 2005
December 9, 2005
December 2, 2005
November 25, 2005
November 18, 2005
November 11, 2005
November 4, 2005
October 28, 2005
October 21, 2005
October 14, 2005
October 7, 2005
September 30, 2005
September 23, 2005
September 16, 2005
September 9, 2005
September 2, 2005
August 19, 2005
August 12, 2005
August 5, 2005
July 29, 2005
July 22, 2005
July 15, 2005
June 24, 2005
June 17, 2005
June 10, 2005
June 3, 2005
May 27, 2005
May 20, 2005
May 13, 2005
May 6, 2005
April 29, 2005
April 22, 2005
April 15, 2005
April 8, 2005
April 1, 2005
March 25, 2005
March 18, 2005
March 11, 2005
March 4, 2005
February 25, 2005
February 18, 2005
February 11, 2005
February 4, 2005
January 28, 2005
January 21, 2005
January 14, 2005
January 7, 2005
December 24, 2004
December 17, 2004
December 10, 2004
December 3, 2004
November 26, 2004
November 19, 2004
November 12, 2004
November 5, 2004
October 29, 2004
October 22, 2004
October 15, 2004
October 8, 2004
September 17, 2004
September 10, 2004
September 3, 2004
August 27, 2004
August 20, 2004
August 13, 2004
August 6, 2004
July 30, 2004
July 23, 2004
July 16, 2004

PAGE ONE | BRIEFS | ARCHIVE | YOUTH | CALENDAR | EDITORIALS
SPECIAL SECTIONS | ABOUT US | ADVERTISE | SUBSCRIBE | STAFF | CONTACT