The Catholic Church has always had various rites for the Mass, both in the East and the West. The differences between western rites and eastern rites are rather pronounced. Since the Second Vatican Council, the differences in the same Latin rite, depending on parish, have become even more pronounced.
But even with the Tridentine Mass there was and is a vast difference between the sung Mass and the low Mass.
Everyone has their own individual tastes and sometimes we have to set those tastes aside for the common good of the Church universal and the parish local.
For example, I take very seriously that the norm for the Ordinary Form of the Mass as codified in its GIRM is that the sung Mass be the norm although there is now allowed a flexibility with what is sung and also what is known as a progressive solemnity.
Shortly after arriving at St. Joseph Church in 2004 we began to implement the new GIRM of the Roman Missal in the Ordinary Form. This meant that our first Mass on Sunday morning would have a processional hymn, sung Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus, Mystery of Faith, Great Amen and Agnus Dei. We also began singing the Processional hymn from the hymnal as well as a recessional hymn and a Communion Procession hymn that is congregational.
For our 9:30 AM and 12:10 PM Sunday Masses we did all that plus the priest would sing the collect, prayer over the offerings, preface and post communion collect. The Lord's Prayer is also chanted along with its embolism. The greetings are chanted too.
Our 4:30 PM Sunday Anticipated Mass on Saturday as well as our 5:00 PM Sunday Mass are similar to our 7:45 AM Mass. In the last three years we have begun chanting the Collect, Prayer over the Offerings and Post Communion Prayer as well as the Our Father.
We use incense at all the proper places at the 9:30 AM and 12:10 PM Masses.
In the last three years our cantor at all the Masses chants the official Introit as the procession begins which shifts smoothly to a metrical hymn from our hymnal. The Offertory and Communion antiphons are chanted too in addition to congregational singing at the Communion Procession.
As well everything is sung by for the priest's parts at the 9:30 AM and 12:10 PM Mass.
At our daily 8:00 AM Mass, the Alleluia, Sanctus, Mystery of Faith, Amen and Agnus Dei are chanted. Everything else is spoken and the Introit and Communion antiphon are spoken by all, led by the lector.
Other than our EF Low Mass each Tuesday at 5:00 PM, St. Joseph has no silent Mass.
Does everyone like that? No. But I no longer receive any suggestions for a low Mass on Sunday or during the week as I did when the changes above were implemented.
But this brings me to the point of this post. Do we love Jesus, His word proclaimed to us during Mass, His one Sacrifice re-presented in an unbloody way at the altar and His Risen and Glorified Body and Blood given to us in Holy Communion to keep us a part of Him and His Church, which is all of us who are baptized?
Or have we become so enamored with the form of Mass and its externals, that we have made the Mass into a false god, an end in and of itself, rather than simply the means to full Communion with Jesus Christ and His Church.
No matter how poorly or majestically a Mass is celebrated, if it is valid by shear force of "ex opere operato" than Jesus is present and Jesus will save us. We have to have this simple faith and humble attitude when attending any Mass and in whatever form.
10 comments:
Aside from the rare instances when Gregorian Chant is used (and your parish is one of very few in this corner of America that offers that) I much prefer silent Masses. Between the "folk" Masses of the last 40 years and the poorly sung traditional hymns and the horrors of hearing folk Mass hymns adapted to the organ (or choir or piano), the music has become for me an annoyance. If I hear a traditional hymn that predates 1980, I might sing along with it, but rarely does that happen. I tolerate it and I don't tell the priest what his business is, but once in a while the person or persons in charge of the "music ministry" don't show up. Those are wonderful days. I find myself focusing on the Mass much more clearly and prayerfully. Maybe it's because my stress level is lower and I am not tightening my gut in anticipation of what kind of horrific sonic surprise is just around the corner.
Mere validity of the Mass is a very low bar for comparison of liturgies, since it does indeed go without saying. Although the "intrinsic merit" of the Holy Sacrifice is infinite, the "extrinsic merit" of a particular celebration is finite, and both the glory given to God, and especially its efficaciousness as a channel of grace to souls depends upon accidentals--for instance, the beauty and solemnity of the celebration, its effect on worshipers, and their own spiritual receptivity.
If there was no fourth option then there would have been no need to turn the ceremonial itself into a Golden Calf...
We should be able to take good liturgy for granted. But between the post-Vatican II silly season, laity who think the Sunday homily is enough catechesis for their kids, and priests who were taught "liturgical guitar" in seminary, and "music ministers" with egos the size of Illinois, we cannot.
I am always happy to be in the presence of God when I attend the never-reliable Ordinary Form. But the liturgical experience is usually a thousand times better when I can attend the always-reliable Extraordinary Form. It's sad that when I travel, I am forced to research and plan out what church(es) I will be attending on Sundays.
Furthermore I would say that the only "side" that has turned liturgy into a Golden Calf is the beauty-hating philistine liberals.
The traditionalist does not worship the ceremony itself because the traditionalist only expects what the liturgy should be in the first place. It can therefore only be said that the dark side worships a false God. The traditionalist expects normalcy and goodness, the liberal expects unsustainibility and falsity.
This is not an equal playing field even from the beginning.
Demanding beautiful liturgy does not turn the liturgy into a false god. Look at the multitude of saints who did the very same: look at St. Gregory the Great, St. Pius V, St. Pius X, all the saints in the Catholic East who fought to retain their beautiful liturgy, the Ambrosian Rite itself maintaining its history surrounded by a different Rite, and there are many more examples.
Liturgy matters: it is the outward expression of our beautiful Faith. It is the corporate worship of the Church and the sum of all the theologians and doctors of the Church. Christ becomes Present surrounded by the Liturgy, it is the paraousia itself.
Bringing Christ to the altar surrounded by banality is a sacrilege at best. We seek to please God the Son with the beauty of the Liturgy. God the Son has promised to be present, which he surely is even in the most banal liturgy. Why should we aim for the minimum? Let us please God completely, as fully as possible given our human means. God wants us to please Him using human means, as we know from the Incarnation.
Can the Novus Ordo accomplish these lofty goals? Probably, but it happens rarely. That is the problem and it needs correcting.
I agree with what has already been posted....I won't "walk out" on some banal version of the OF because I am obliged to God to attend, but neither will I seek it out.
Life is too short to attend a bad poorly done Mass.
Wow! Such consistently good responses from many of the people I respect most on this blog! I agree with all of them...
It is common to distinguish between "form" and "content" in the Mass. I believe that is an artificial distinction. In a properly done Mass, the form is the content and the content is the form. The Mass, like the Holy Trinity, should be viewed as a unity of form and content. However, I will distinguish them for the pourpose of discussion... Certainly, then, if the content of the Mass is the Sacrifice of our Blessed Saviour, the form should be appropriate for such a Holy and solemn moment. Likewise,the "form" being a Prayer addressed to God the Father, it seems that the most reverent, dignified, and humble presentation would be the only appropriate structure for such an approach to His Sovreign Majesty. "Fear and trembling" comes to mind...
"No matter how poorly or majestically a Mass is celebrated, if it is valid by sheer force of "ex opere operato" than Jesus is present and Jesus will save us. We have to have this simple faith and humble attitude when attending any Mass and in whatever form."
Bingo. You hit the nail right on the head, Father. God protects the Sacraments, and He protects the Mass, too. The worst we can do is obscure what's actually going on by messing about.
I agree with you somewhat, Henry Edwards, in that the mere validity of the Mass is a bit of a low bar, but it's nonetheless a high bar in any case, if you catch my drift: Jesus is still present. Knowing that much and focusing on that alone can help you tune out all of the distracting banal and ugly nonsense. That Jesus is present is actually what makes all of it bearable, if only just (and there are times when that realization has indeed stopped me from being reduced to tears or just getting plain angry). Ultimately, we know what we're falling back on, or rather, we know what's there to catch us and keep us rooted (unless Father does something truly outrageous in terms of liturgical abuse that renders the Mass invalid).
That said, some ways of celebrating the Mass make that Real Presence far more effectively apparent and paramount than others, and form and content can't really be divorced from each other. The two inform each other way too closely, and what we pray is what we believe.
There's "the source and summit of the Christian life" versus being "companions on a journey, eating bread and drinking wine" (bleah!). Let's not allow the idea of "singing a new church into being" drive us away, by all means, but having said that, that doesn't mean it doesn't stink, yea and verily. Christ is eternal, so we will indeed come out of this mess, eventually.
Henry and Wsquared, Yes, you are correct...but, I'd like to feel that Christ is present in the Mass _because_ of how it is celebrated and not _in spite of_ how it is celebrated.
Henry made the most important point in this whole discussion: the extrinsic merit and the efficaciousness thereof of the Mass differs depending on the particulars of the celebration. So, while the Liturgy might be valid (although I've been to Novus Ordo Masses where I had serious doubts about the validity, which is something I should not have to doubt), poorly executed liturgy gives less glory to God and calls down less grace for those assisting.
These things matter, if we believe what we say we believe.
Post a Comment