The following thoughts are compiled as a practical aide to those ministers and lay faithful who are charged with composing the Prayer of the Faithful. It is not intended to evaluate on a historical-liturgical level the merits of introducing these into the Roman Rite.

On Sundays after the Creed, parishes around the world enter into a part of the Mass called the “Prayer of the Faithful” or “Universal Prayer.” Since “[i]t is desirable that there usually be such a form of prayer in Masses celebrated with the people” (General Instruction of the Roman Missal [GIRM], 69), some parishes have seen fit to include this at daily Masses as well as Sunday Masses. These petitions are introduced by the priest, read by a deacon or another suitable minister, and concluded by the priest’s prayer. Many times, the faithful are invited to respond: “Let us pray to the Lord. Lord, hear our prayer.” However, the option to pause for silent prayer after each petition is also an option (GIRM, 71), though rarely used in my limited experience. This brief part of the Mass is “desirable” in public Masses, but not altogether required by the GIRM.

It will help to look at the historical context of petitions in the Roman liturgy. In the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite, there is no Prayer of the Faithful at Sunday or daily Masses. This part of the Mass was introduced by the reforms that followed the Second Vatican Council. However, petitions do exist in two forms before the liturgical reforms of the 1960’s. In the first instance, there are the petitions in the Roman Breviary that are included during Lauds (Morning Prayer) on certain penitential days throughout the year. These intercessions recall the pope, bishop, community, absent members of the community, and the dead, just to name a few. The form of the petitions in Lauds comes from the monastic tradition and incorporated into the Roman Breviary for secular clerics, as well. During the celebration of Mass, however, we have only the solemn petitions of the Good Friday liturgy. From the altar, much like the Solemn Liturgy of the Lord’s Passion in the Novus Ordo Missae, the priest introduces each petition with an admonition to the faithful; the deacon sings “let us kneel, let us stand;” and the priest then says a prayer for the intentions that have been offered to God by the whole community. This closing prayer collects into one the petitions of the whole Church. Outside of the codification of the Missal of Pius V after the Council of Trent, there were some set forms of petitions and prayers that were offered in some local rites throughout the West. In England these became the “Bidding Prayers,” for example. In some Eastern liturgical traditions, there are set litanies of supplication during the Divine Liturgy that change depending on the season.

The instruction that the Church gives for the employment of the Prayer of the Faithful is quite simple, but the practical pastoral use of it has become something else altogether. The intercessions that precede the Preparation of the Gifts are firstly a response to the readings that have been proclaimed. We read that “the people respond in some sense to the Word of God which they have received in faith and, exercising the office of their baptismal Priesthood, offer prayers to God for the salvation of all” (GIRM, 69). This implies that the readings have been internalized and the Word of God spurs the hearts of the community to pray for those needs that are inspired by the Scriptures. During Year B, on the 32nd Sunday of Ordinary Time, for example, there is the narrative of Elijah and the widow of Zarephath, as well as Christ sitting across from and observing the temple treasury. Two petitions come to mind. One could pray, “For all widows and those who have no one to provide for their family, that they may have the grace of great trust in God’s will for their lives.” And another might start, “For all members of this parish, that we might give to the point of sacrifice to support the missionary activity of the Church.” This second one touches not only upon the way to give alms mentioned by Christ, but also includes two precepts of the Church (material support of the Church and lending aide to the missions). Since these prayers are an exercise of the office of the baptismal Priesthood of the faithful, both petitions subtly reference the sacrificial aspect of the Christian life. In whatever Mass, the petitions ought to reflect one or two needs inspired by the congregation’s meditation on the Word of God.

Order, Content, and Style of the Petitions

The petitions should be composed in an orderly fashion, so that “petitions may be offered for holy Church, for those who govern with authority over us, for those weighed down by various needs, for all humanity, and for the salvation of the whole world”(GIRM, 69). Then, we read a suggested order: “The series of intentions is usually to be: a) for the needs of the Church; b) for public authorities and the salvation of the whole world; c) for those burdened by any kind of difficulty; d) for the local community”(GIRM, 70). The order suggested seems to indicate that the petitions flow from more general needs to more particular needs of the local community. The assembly of God prays first for others before considering its own needs. There are only four categories given, and it is desirable that the petitions do not become to particular and numerous. Though not set in stone by the GIRM, my personal rule of thumb is to have no less than 6 petitions, and no more than 8. It is also good to keep in mind the attention span of the congregation. When I add more petitions, I try to cut down the length of each one and make each petition simpler.

When it comes to the things for which the community prays together, the petitions should be unquestionably Catholic. I visited a parish in another diocese and was asked to celebrate Mass one day for the parish community. After the homily‚ wherein I preached about the Christian necessity of striving to be better than just “good people,” the deacon went to the ambo to announce each petition. The third one was, “For all mankind, that they strive to work for goodness in all endeavors. Let us pray to the Lord.” I notice two things about this petition. First of all, let’s hone in on the message being conveyed by the very first words: mankind/they. This seems rather accusatory. When we pray for “all mankind,” the petition should include those present and use the first person plural. As written, the petition seems to imply that “all mankind” is everyone outside the walls of the church. It also seems to imply that everyone inside the walls and present at Mass is already working towards what is good. Rather, we should readily acknowledge that we go to Church because we are sinners in need of a Savior, just like those who do not go to Church. The second issue with this petition is that it does not reflect Catholic theology and — with perfect timing in that instance — contradicted my homily. Now, I could be accused of splitting hairs. However, all mankind is good by his nature, and man only acts in pursuit of a perceived good. Even a thief is thieving because he is working towards the good of possessing something he wants. This is why we do bad things; we do bad because we see some good to possess. In writing petitions “for all mankind,” the author should always consider its ramifications on people who are baptized and on those non-baptized. There is a clear difference in the men and women who are baptized and the men and women who are not. A better way to approach this petition could be: “For all mankind, that the grace of God and pursuit of truth might motivate each person to consider what is sincerely right and good, let us pray to the Lord.”

Finally, when it comes to the individual petitions, each one must stand alone and, at the same time, fit alongside the other petitions. This requires parallelism. Parallelism is a literary tool that is employed in a body of text to render successive verbal construction that is similar in meaning, meter, structure, and/or sound. In short, pick some structure that week and stick to it. Petitions should be parallel to each other, whether they are simple or complex. First of all, each petition needs a destination(Church leaders, the community, the sick, the faithful departed, etc.). Each petition in the Prayer of the Faithful could essentially stop at this. “For the Church, [—pause—] let us pray to the Lord. For our nation, [—pause—] let us pray to the Lord.” One step in complexity further, however, is the purpose itself, that is, the more specific request. This is the asking of some special gift, grace, or benefit. There may be more than one purpose for each petition, but it is important to keep it simple when adding more than one petition for each line. (For the Church, that her leaders sincerely hear the Word of God and authentically act upon it in their ministry.) Lastly, in a more complex petition there may be a premise. This is a technical word that describes some state having been attained or condition of the petition. Let’s look at an example of a complex intercessory prayer:

For the members of this congregation [destination], that being nourished by the Sacrament of the Altar [premise] we may go from this place and draw others to the Eucharistic banquet [petition], let us pray to the Lord.

In the example in the paragraph above, the first of the two petitions can be converted into a premise:

For the Church’s leaders [destination], that sincerely hearing the Word of God [premise], they may authentically act on it in their ministry [petition]. Let us pray to the Lord.

Regarding parallelism throughout the whole text, it is important to pick the scheme of the body of intercessions and attempt to keep the same structure in each successive petition. This takes some practice and attention to detail if the complex structure with a premise is chosen. But the premise allows a spiritually creative person to create intercessions that respond to the readings and situations of the community. For the 27th Sunday of Ordinary Time (Year B), the readings focus on marriage and divorce. A petition that responds to the readings through a premise could be: “For our nation’s lawmakers, that having turned back to the meaning of marriage written into creation [this recalls the reading from Genesis and a theme on which many priests will preach], they might make laws which protect marriage as a permanent bond between one man and one woman, let us pray to the Lord.”

Finally, the last point about parallelism is the similarity that ought to be rendered in the incipit (start) and concluding invitation of each petition. The petitions may start with, “For…,” “That…,” and “Let us pray dear friends for/that….” While the author can be creative in the incipit, it makes no sense to switch from one style to another in the same body of intercessions. In the case of the concluding invitation, there are a few different invitations and responses. In short, one could consider these examples in the Roman Missal:

• Let us pray to the Lord. Lord, hear our prayer.
• Let us call upon the Lord: Kyrie, eleison. Kyrie eleison.
• Lord, in your mercy. Hear our prayer.

In one parish, on the weekend of the reading of Bartimaeus’ healing, one parish invoked God through the phrase, “Let us cry out to the Lord. Son of David, have pity on us.” While these should not become so creative that they are cumbersome, switching them around can have a rather positive effect in bringing the congregation’s attention back to the prayers that are being offered. If they are always bland and always the same, the “intercession hypnosis” can set in, wherein everyone stops paying attention and really engaging their interior power of prayer in the intercessions.

The Words of the Celebrant

By “words of the celebrant,” I wish to make a few comments regarding the introduction and closing prayer of the Universal Prayer. The introduction is addressed to the faithful, not to God. I make this mistake every now and again when I have not had a cup of coffee. See the difference:

• Confident that the God who provided manna in the dessert hears and answers prayers, let us now humbly present to him the needs of our Church and world.
• Listen, O Lord, to the prayers that we make to you on behalf of our Church, community, and the entire world.

The introduction to pray is addressed to the faithful, not to God. It should be brief and recall some aspect of the present celebration, Scripture passages, or liturgical season. In the case of a Votive Mass or Mass for Various Needs, it may recall the intercessory reason that the faithful have gathered. In ritual Masses (usually the Prayer of the Faithful is given in an appendix to the ritual), the gifts given in the particular ritual should be recalled. I have found it altogether inadequate when a celebrant returns to his chair, all pray the Creed, and then he says, “And now let us present our petitions to God.” This is not a response to the Word of God and does not make it seem like the congregation is being invited to exercise together their office of the baptismal priesthood.

The closing prayer should also be carefully crafted so that it is to-the-point, concise, and Roman. It is not an essay, it is not an additional, paticular intention, and it should not be a disjointed hodgepodge of sentimental affirmations. Here is a comparison before I explain some elements regarding this closing prayer.

God, you are merciful. In your presence we lift up our hearts. Listen to our prayers. Give us grace and help to serve you better. Answer the prayers we have made. In the name of Christ, your Son, our Lord.

O God of boundless mercy and goodness, listening to the prayers that we make to you as we lift up our hearts in your presence, answer us and give us the grace we need to be more faithful servants in your eyes. Through Christ our Lord.

The prayer on the left was taken from a liturgical periodical that is published quarterly with its own version of the Prayer of the Faithful for each Sunday. Not only deficient in the intercessions, I find the closing prayers in this publication to be far too simple, pedestrian, and certainly unfit for the liturgy. They are not well prepared and there is no attempt to mimic or even approximate a Roman-styled oration. Roman orations are composed of an invocation, anamnesis, petition, and, optionally, a premise and motive. While this article will not deal with the technical evaluation of each part, someone who is familiar with the Third Edition of the Roman Missal should be able to approximate the style and structure of the collects. One of the reasons that the Missal was retranslated was to update the style so that it followed the Latin texts more closely. When the text of the Roman liturgy is so efficient at reaching its end goal, the “creative” and changing elements that can be composed by the celebrant should not rip the faithful’s minds back to common parlance and concepts.

Finally, the closing prayer can be composed or superimposed. By this, I mean that one can take the time to compose a prayer that is fitting for liturgical use and replete with significance, or one can choose an oration that is already steeped in tradition. For example, on Divine Mercy Sunday, I inserted as the closing prayer of the Intercessions the prayer that is said to conclude the Divine Mercy Chaplet: “Eternal God, in whom mercy is endless and the treasury of compassion — inexhaustible, look kindly upon us and increase Your mercy in us, that in difficult moments we might not despair nor become despondent, but with great confidence submit ourselves to Your holy will, which is Love and Mercy itself. Through Christ our Lord.” On another occasion, wen the Sunday readings spoke of chastity and love of God, I went to the Roman Missal and found the collect for the Mass for Chastity: “Purify our hearts, O Lord, by the heavenly fire of the Holy Spirit, that we may serve you with a chaste body and please you with a pure heart. Through Christ our Lord.” An important reminder when plugging in collects and prayers from devotions and other Masses: the “short conclusion” is to be used (Through Christ our Lord) in all orations after the praying of the Collect, which uses the “long conclusion” (Through our Lord Jesus Christ your Son…). It is not enough to copy and paste. The conclusion should be revised, double, checked, and then read at least once out loud to be sure it can be read properly as it is written.

Time, Prayer, Practice

Everything that goes into the liturgy, in my opinion, should be well prepared. The celebrant should have looked over the texts of the Mass beforehand. The deacon ought to have read over the Gospel and Prayer of the Faithful and determined (in collaboration with the celebrant) which Penitential Rite and dismissal will be used. Whoever composes the prayer of the faithful should take their time in composing and then reviewing the prayers. Part of this review process should include the composer reading the prayers out loud before printing and using at the liturgy. If the deacon at the first Sunday Mass is the first person to read them out loud, a crucial step has been skipped.

In composing prayers, prayer is essential. Personally, I would not entrust the composition of the Universal Prayer to someone who is not immersed in liturgical prayer, namely, the Liturgy of the Hours and daily Mass. The Liturgy of the Hours is the official prayer of the universal Church. It crafts for what and for whom we pray, as well as how to pray. Morning Prayer and Evening Prayer, too, each have their own set of intercessions that helps each person reform their prayer to pray for what the Church prays. More than liturgical prayer, intimate personal prayer helps to form our conscience and purify our intentions. This keeps our attention focused on asking for the most essential graces and blessings from God in order to attain heaven. If our own supplications are not ordered toward our ultimate end for which we hope, then it will be difficult to compose intentions for a community that are properly balanced and ordered toward the ultimate good of our community, nation, world, and Church.

When one enters into the task of composing the Prayer of the Faithful each week, feedback is necessary. Similar to all feedback given about the liturgy, sometimes it is helpful and sometimes it is not. I was assigned to a pastor in a small rural parish. He came back from the early Mass after which he was accosted for not praying for a Mass shooting. He woke up at 5:45 a.m. to celebrate the Mass and had not yet read the news by the start of Mass. This shooting happened at 2 a.m. Sunday morning. No one can expect that the priest or writier of the petitions in thoroughly informed on every little thing going on in the world (or even every big thing!). The feedback that I mean by this is feedback from the minister who reads it, the priest(s) who introduces and concludes it, and the faithful who look to it to express their deepest petitions. Constructive feedback is an excellent help in composing prayers that are readable, concise, relevant, and understandable. This takes a lot of practice and many mistakes. But the liturgy is worth our time, preparation, energy, and prayer. Preparing worthy intercessions for the Prayer of the Faithful is a way to prayerfully prepare for Holy Mass. One tasked with this responsibility should see it as an opportunity and blessing.