I'm old enough to remember when Catholics would never criticize the sacred; one's reverence and piety would not allow for it. Prior to the reforms of the Mass initiated after Vatican II, no one, except for elitist theologians but in a very respectful and nuanced way, would have dared criticized the Mass. Yes, some laity might criticize priests, their homilies and perhaps the length of sung Masses, the quality of the choir and some other small details, but the Mass itself was off limits. After all, Jesus Christ's one sacrifice was made present and in the Risen Lord's true Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity presented as Food and Drink, we came into Communion with God, the Most Holy Trinity and the people Jesus redeemed, past, present and to come. In other words we experience eternity at every Mass in the sacrificial, eternal banquet par excellence. I say this for both forms of the one Latin Rite, the EF and OF forms!
The greatest abuse of the Mass prior to the Second Vatican Council was how fast it could be celebrated by some priests. I have heard of 7 minute Masses. Recently, we've heard from Phil Lawlor of 11 minute Ordinary Form Masses in Ireland where I recently returned--although I did not experience an 11 minute Mass at the Shrine in Knock.
Contrary to popular belief, Vatican II's document on the Liturgy did not reform the Mass but simply set into motion some principles for reform. It was actually an elite group or commission that created the reformed Mass based upon their understanding of liturgical history and their biases against the old Mass and their interpretation of Sacrosanctum Concilium. Like Pope Benedict who decreed Summorum Pontificum on his own authority based upon authority given to him by other councils including Vatican II, Pope Paul VI promulgated the various changes to the Mass around 1968 on his own authority and against the better judgments of some in the curia and the college of bishops. But that is the pope's authority then as now. This would set into motion a major shift in terms of Catholic piety and reverence for the Mass. Criticism of the reformed rite came from those who could not believe that a Council or even the pope could reform the Mass. These schismatic Catholics poked fun at the revised Mass and even called it invalid.
Then, priests with no supervision from their bishops and sometimes with their bishop's approval began to experiment with the revised Mass bringing all kinds of novelty to it. These novelties included liturgical and architectural iconoclasm, improvisation, folk and secular music, burlap and felt banners and vestments or no vestments at all. In the 1970's I even experienced a "Mass" that was celebrated on the floor of an apartment, no altar, just people sitting "Indian" style on the floor around a simple table cloth spread on the floor with a simple chalice, plate, Wonder bread, homemade wine and a made up Eucharistic prayer. We consumed the "elements" as they were "consecrated" leaving nothing present on the floor for the remainder of the so-called Eucharistic prayer. It was so meaningful.
Did we complain? Yes indeed. These complaints eventually went to the actual reformed Mass celebrated well. Why was it stripped down? Was what we really got "noble simplicity" or ignoble arrogance that led to irreverence? Did we need liturgical and architectural iconoclasm?
Those who did complain about the revised Mass got their cues from progressive Catholics who were denigrating the old Latin Mass as an abomination that Vatican II fixed. Much of the catechisis for the new Mass came from lambasting the old Mass, it's "unnecessary repetitions"; its accidents of time, its complicated structured, its archaic music, its medieval style. The new Mass was precisely that, new and improved over old and awful.It was contemporary and "with it!" Never mind that the older Mass has nourished, sustained and helped to communicate God's grace to countless generations of Catholics many of whom were willing to died as heroic martyrs and others who lived heroic saintly lives who were eventually canonized. Never mind that nearly 80 or 90 percent of Catholics attended Mass around the world through about 1965. These Catholics who were criticizing the old Mass were biting the very "hand" of the Mass that fed them and sustained their Catholic faith and eternal life when they received Holy Communion worthily.
This spirit of denigration and negativity still exists today and it is turned up in volume as it concerns the abuse crisis and what the clergy should do to atone for the sins of leadership and of those guilty of the actual abuse.
Ann Burke is suggesting that Pope Benedict stop wearing his white cassock modeled after the Dominican habit and to wear a black one, perhaps like the Benedictine habit. She suggests that he get rid of the red shoes of the fisherman and wear something less flashy like crocks!
Her suggestions have opened the way for others in the Church to mock the pope in all he does, his dress and the liturgical wear of the clergy for Mass and other occasions. Will they ever grow up? When will we stop denigrating, follow the laws of the Church and do what is allowed and prescribed for either the EF Mass or the OF Mass. How long will an adolescent display of anger toward authority and law continue in our Church?
I recommend not criticizing the sacred. Only criticize that which is against God, negativity towards our Masses; negativity toward our sacred traditions with a capital and little "t" and negativity toward our traditional piety and beliefs. Keep in mind, denigrating the Mass was and is a part of a larger denigration of all things Catholic, especially our sexual morality and many of our doctrines on Holy Matrimony and Holy Orders.This is to be expected from unbelievers but is shocking when it comes from so-called believers. Do you think there is a cause and effect between jettison our Catholic morality for something pagan morality and the sex abuse crisis and indifference toward it in the recent past, especially the 1970's and 80's? I believe in casualty.
There are rats in the Church, some are bishops and priests, but a good number are laity too. But conversion through God's grace leading to repentance is always possible even for human beings who act like rats and denigrate who we are by their words and deeds.
15 comments:
Despite their gnawing on contiguous resources, habituating with rats in close proximity brings an even greater danger...mortal jeopardy.
For example, I give you the Bubonic Plague caused by sharing parasites with the rodents (fleas). It makes me wonder what parasitical sharing occurs with Catholic “human beings who act like rats” and the stand up (I.A.W. Isaiah) population of Catholics in the pews, rectories, and chancery’s?
I’m thinking of relativism and things like pseudo-culture that fallaciously promulgates competent children and sophisticated adolescents (“pomo”). Could it be that unlike varmint parasites, our realism and orthodox catholicity, which puts God first in everything, will bring a seemingly mortal jeopardy to the _acting_ like rats that denigrates? Behaving in reverse, and presenting a vanquishing prevalence over the plague of the “isms’?
I really like that phrase “God’s grace leading repentance”. It is so humble. Very keen.
I wish they would really get into the NO and make some substantial changes instead of decades and decades of writing about what is inherently wrong with this Form of Mass. It just seems when so much has been identified, the response is not much can be done except for a few cosmetic changes that could very well disappear with the next Pontificate. How is that lasting change? If things have been determined to have been bad for the Faith or the Faithful then they should be righted, not just talked to death. Maybe a shake up is just what the NO and Faithful need. It may wake people up. Mandate and enforce one thing, Ad Orientem. See how it goes. If they can not do it, then we will all know that nothing on the rest of the list can be done and just get on with worshipping at the whim of clergy who enforce the notion of a banal liturgy and celebrations. We all know the problems by now and it seems like the whole world is afraid the move an inch for fear of capsizing a boat that has taken on all the water it can hold. There does come a point when people think "Just do something already" because if there is no movement the whole idea will founder. Already I have been told you won't see that in your lifetime. For all of us who want things better and to help with support it is entirely deflating and depressing to feel you don't get far at all. The Church may very well think in centuries but the average lay person, doesn't. For support of reform you have to see it and feel its' stability. Who is going to keep supporting something when you are told things can't be mandated, and things take generations to be fixed? The reality, very few and that is why in most places, though there is change in some it gets worse in others. Two recent parishes I wnt to, NO, both started to institute holding hands during the Our Father. Although I usually attend EF Masses I am not closed to the idea of a reverant NO Mass and although conservative, I believe in what the Holy Father thinks about the two Forms existing side by side. But the chasm between the 2 has to be narrowed.
Fr, I take this post as a civilized call for more civility-among-Catholics. THANK YOU. I've sworn off many many "Catholic" blogs bc I just can't stand the sniping. "See how they love each other" indeed.
We are in a war, a battle. If you are in fight against an intelligent adversary, and we are, you must base your responses on solid principle rather than trying to counter each attack. This is difficult because it means there will be loss and sacrifice. But forgetting the tiny rats gnawing at you and acting on the solid principle defeats the rats, heals you, and may even save a few rats along the way.
It seems to me there may be a danger among those desiring a more obviously “sacred” order of the Ordinary Form to propose its immediate construction. But even if some Vatican committee were to thoroughly revise the present OF missal in favor of an order of Mass much more consistent with the Roman liturgical tradition, it would still be the work of a few men. The brilliance of allowing the two forms to move together in the Western Church is that the Holy Ghost can now gradually prompt slight changes over time, as needed, so that what emerges from the OF in the future will be God’s work, rather than our, or even Rome’s, own.
Good Father, again I suggest you are significantly misreading the causes of the decline of "reverence' at mass. It is naive, I suggest, to think that the vast cultural changes that took place in the 1950's, 60's, and 70's did not have significant impact on the reverence or irreverence that may be experienced in Churches, Catholic and otherwise. All one has to do is look around to see that in virtually every part of human life, the reverence that was once present is largely gone.
A very good reflection on the decline of reverence - reverence across the board, not only in church - is Paul Woodruff's small book, "Reverence." He's a Vietnam veteran turned Classics scholar who teaches at, I think, UT in Austin.
It is also a bit silly to suggest that papal red shoes are "sacred" and, therefore, should not be criticized. Personally, I don't care what color the pope's shoes are, but to try to deflect criticism you don't agree with by declaring it out of bounds is an example of the hubris you so often criticize in your posts.
Pater, I appreciate your comment on some og the other reasons for decline in reverence so much so people are embolened to outright contempt for others not evcluding the holy Father and traditional garb. I can only imagine what they say of the Dali Lama--o, that would be politically incorrect. I would suggest you provide a regular EFMass yourself and then judge the reverence by participants of it and the OF Mass
What is your measure of "reverence?" Silence, hands folded, heads bowed, mantillas, a choir singing in hushed tones from a distant choir loft?
I have been at mass with Boy Scouts, tent campers, Mexican field labourers, soldiers and airmen, and old folks in a home - all have been reverent. You see, Good Father, true reverence (not posturing) is something we bring with us to mass, not something that is imposed on us by mass.
Does the EF offer more opportunity for reverence? No. Does the OF encourage irreverence? No.
I think there is a serious Incarnational disconnect in many of your arguments for the EF. God did not become incarnate in one time and one form of the mass. God did not choose humans to stand in his plce - in the person of Christ - so that that person could be obliterated.
No, Good Father, the Incarnation is Truth for all times, all places, all people. Jesus is with us in OF and EF. And it is that abiding presence that we worship, not the style of vestments nor the direction in whiuch the priest faces.
The reverence one experiences during the EF comes only partially from the nature of that form of the Mass, I think. The fact is that most people who go to the EF are going to be more reverent generally*. If you were to take those people and put them in an OF Mass, they would still be equally reverent.
The question is: if you took a typical non-reverent OF Mass attendee and put them in an EF Mass, would their reverence increase? I believe the awe and wonder of the EF would, in itself, increase their reverence. By reverence here I mean the attention paid during the Mass, the ensuring outside noises, etc. are minimized (cell phones, for example), and gestures of the people. The unquantifiable reverence, the interior disposition, would also likely be different, but we can't know that for sure other than by gauging exterior behaviors.
* Not always - there are plenty of reverent people at the OF
John Hardon defined reverence in his Catholic dictionary as a complex virtue of honoring a Person’s / person’s dignity with respect and awe. It would seem to be the opposite of denigration. It does not call for measurement it calls for prudence.
In Catholicity, Latin became universally integral as verbal expression of reverence. It defies imprudence.
Apparel associated with semiotic significance that indexes the divine, deserves recognition, awe, and honor of the associated divine dignity.
I would dare say that we don’t bring reverence with us but it is that reverence brings us. As Catholics we ask for it, it can’t be imposed. The architecture of love draws it. Even if it is as shallow as a simple posture; ... the truth is a rose is a rose even in rocky soil... A position in the process of spiritual development should not be confused with disingenuity; and, isn’t presumption a...?
John Paul II reminds us that mockery is the first step in persecution. In my view, this blog correctly makes the point that despite the secular pseudo-culture that endorses and cultivates a rat race where cruelty and denigration rule the day; as followers of Christ we don’t practice cruelty, denigration...or persecution. We don’t take honor, we don’t disrespect God’s Dignity. As Catholics we construct architecture of love. We give awe, with eyes that see and honor with ears that hear. After all, if we run that Pauline race as rats, then when we cross the finish line are we not still acting like rats?
Who wants to embrace salvation acting as a rat? Is this not the root of “rataphobia”?
Celebrating the OF and the EF in the same parochial sea beautifies our spirituality and accents our parish architecture of love for God with elegant filigree unworthy of denigration or persecution. It is functional beauty in a spiritual way not a political way.
To those acting like rats I say, do not be afraid, peace be upon your house. Look only to Christ. For me, I’ll leave the politics of any sort, including persecution, to those acting like rats and have comfort in understanding it’s their cross to bear.
"Reverence" is an alertness measured by the heart and your total emersion in the event of "heaven on earth". Your lamp fully lit and prepared to meet our Lord.
"Pater" come in from the cold and feel the warmth of a most reverent EF Mass.
Change is enevitable, suffering is optional.
John Hardon defined reverence in his Catholic dictionary as a complex virtue of honoring a Person’s / person’s dignity with respect and awe. It would seem to be the opposite of denigration. It does not call for measurement it calls for prudence.
In Catholicity, Latin became universally integral as verbal expression of reverence. It defies imprudence.
Apparel associated with semiotic significance that indexes the divine, deserves recognition, awe, and honor of the associated divine dignity.
I would dare say that we don’t bring reverence with us but it is that reverence brings us. As Catholics we ask for it, it can’t be imposed. The architecture of love draws it. Even if it is as shallow as a simple posture; ... the truth is a rose is a rose even in rocky soil... A position in the process of spiritual development should not be confused with disingenuity; and, isn’t presumption a...?
John Paul II reminds us that mockery is the first step in persecution. In my view this blog correctly makes the point that despite the secular pseudo-culture that endorses and cultivates a rat race where cruelty and denigration rule the day; as followers of Christ we don’t practice cruelty, denigration...or persecution. We don’t take honor, we don’t disrespect God’s Dignity. As Catholics we construct architecture of love. We give awe, with eyes that see and honor with ears that hear. After all, if we run that Pauline race as rats, then when we cross the finish line are we not still acting like rats?
Who wants to embrace salvation acting as a rat? Is this not the root of “rataphobia”?
Celebrating the OF and the EF in the same parochial sea beautifies our spirituality and accents our parish architecture of love for God with elegant filigree unworthy of denigration or persecution. It is functional beauty in a spiritual way not a political way.
To those acting like rats I say, do not be afraid, peace be upon your house. Look only to Christ. For me, I’ll leave the politics of any sort, including persecution, to the acting like rats and have comfort in understanding it’s their cross to bear.
Pater Ignotus,
We're still waiting for a reply on whether or not you allow the EF in your parish. Just a simple yes or no!
See link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSV9_J8Csts
I will agree here with Pater that the loss of reverence is not confined to the Church alone, but has spread through out society since the 1960s.
However I think that only reinforces the urgency to restore a sense of reverence during the Mass and through the life of Catholics. Society as a whole needs a return to reverence and respect, and it should be The Church that leads the way.
Post a Comment