The following is an article I wrote for the Diocese of Savannah's weekly newspaper, The Southern Cross on May 26, 1988! Keep in mind, that when I wrote this in 1988, my point on a diocesan level (I was the Diocesan Director of Liturgy at the time) was to call our parishes to recover the solemnity of the Mass that in 1988 had been lost for the most part and in many places in our diocese and elsewhere. So as you read this time warp, keep in mind what the liturgy was like in 1988!
The Mass: Attention to Detail
When older people nostalgically recall the Tridentine Latin Mass of yesteryear, the greatest impression that remains is the precision with which the rites were carried out. From the priest’s well-rehearsed and solemn reverence, all the way to the altar servers’ disciplined, choreographed movement in their flowing cassocks and gleaming surplices, one knew something important and awe-inspiring was taking place. The choir added its embellishing panoply to the liturgy with majestic polyphony and solemn Gregorian chant both of which evoked inspiration, contemplation, and piety. There were “bells and smells” and this was not understood in a derogatory way. After all, Catholic worship is “sensual” making use of all our senses of sight, smell, taste, touch and hearing.
There were few complaints about the quality of the Liturgy in those days. No one would dare critique the sacred, because they had a deep and abiding respect for the sacred and the purpose of their participation in the Mass. Their participation in the Mass united them to Jesus Christ, the second person of the Blessed Trinity and his one sacrifice on the cross. It also united them to Holy Mother Church and her pastors. This was a big deal!
But in the decades that followed the Second Vatican Council, complaints and criticism about the “renewed” liturgy soared to unprecedented volume. Many felt that what was once a fully loaded Cadillac had been stripped to a rear-engine Volkswagen. The caricatures were not without foundation.
Today we hear young people, who never experienced the Tridentine Mass asking for its celebration. Is it just to be obstinate or rebellious? Or has their experience of the renewed Liturgy left them uninspired and starving for awe and reverence? Is it more a commentary on how we have carried out the renewal of the Liturgy rather than a vote against the renewed liturgy altogether?
In an effort to promote the new Liturgy, many in the post-conciliar era often used the technique of denigrating the old Liturgy in order to establish in the hearts and minds of the faithful what was called the “new and improved” liturgy. Along with this trend, there was an undue emphasis placed upon the humanity of Jesus Christ to the neglect of his sovereign divinity. The “ordinary” was emphasized as the place where God could be found. And the ordinary slowly but surely crept into the life of the liturgy, architecture, art and technique. Combined with this was a pernicious mind-set which mistakenly equated “attention to detail and neatness” with a pathological scrupulosity.
For the first time, priests felt it was okay to improvise during Mass, not only with fixed greetings, such a “The Lord be with you” which was changed by some to “The Lord is with you,” or worse yet, banal, secular “good morning” or “how are you,” but also to improvising with the prayers of Mass in particular the Eucharistic Prayer. The spirit of narcissism was consuming some celebrant-priests, as though their spirituality, personality and personal prayer were at the heart of the liturgy.
Together with this, was the beginning of the “dark ages” of liturgical music in the vernacular that combined a banal, screeching style that ballyhooed a guitar strumming ensemble with a cadre of in-your-face vocalists. Narcissism and “it’s showtime” attitude of performance crept into those leading the assembly in the ministry of music. The organ was deemed outdated and overpowering. Fortunately, modern liturgical music is maturer today, but remnants of the “Glory and Praise” generation still rears its ugly head.
With all the trendiness of the late 1960’s and 70’s, the church had to contend also with the charismatic movement. Guitars, drums, piano and tambourine reigned there also. “Solemn Catholic devotion” which was outwardly passive prior to the Second Vatican Council was replaced by unfettered emotion, spontaneous prayer, speaking in tongues, hands upraised and handholding. “The Sign of Peace” became a “liturgy” unto itself! The same was true with the “General Intercessions.” These became open to all, spontaneous, personal and very particular, even to the point being classified as “gossip.” Those who promoted these liturgical novelties felt it was of the “spirit of Vatican II” and the work of the Holy Spirit.
Evaluation some 30 years later would indicate it was also the work of the “Assembly of God” theology and mentality that won the hearts of many Catholics of that period. Pentecostal worship by nature is less structured and more spontaneous than Catholic worship. Its music is more of praise and inspiration rather than liturgical. It relies heavily on the “movement” of the spirit, emotions and feeling good because it lacks the sacramentality of the Catholic Church and our rich liturgical history, prayer and spirituality.
The renewal of the Mass after the Second Vatican Council was not meant to break continuity with what had preceded it. But it was to advance the Church in her worship by maintaining a continuity between the previous style of worship through the implementation of a “noble simplicity” marked by active participation of the laity in the Church’s worship. The outward form of the Mass was in transition, but its underlying doctrines and dogmas remained in tack. New ways of showing reverence were institutionalized, but not without roots in an earlier tradition of the Church. For example, standing to receive Holy Communion as a sign of being raised up in Christ was taken from the tradition of the Eastern Church and an earlier tradition of our own. Receiving Holy Communion on the tongue or in the hand both had long standing traditions as well. Now Catholics had the option of either.
Perhaps the greatest thing that the Second Vatican Council recovered, was the need for the assembly, that is, the laity, to take their rightful place in the celebration of the Mass. The entire assembly, not just the priest, altar boys and choir, have an important role in making beautiful, inspiring Liturgy that is pleasing to God and gives him glory and worship. The liturgical renewal of the 1950’s had already begun this renewal within the Tridentine Mass. The Second Vatican Council simply took it many steps forward.
The laity accomplish their important role by arriving at Church early, being hospitable to each other and robust in their spoken and sung responses. They are the ones who must help to create silence and stillness for active listening to prayers and scripture and the contemplation of them. Screaming, unruly, misbehaving infants and small children do not enhance the liturgy, nor does passive indifference to the singing and praying. The way the laity dress for mass may also indicate an attitude of awe and wonder or indifference for the sacred.
The clergy and those who have liturgical roles such as altar servers, choir, lectors, Communion Ministers and ushers must pay close and strict attention to their outward appearance and abilities. This obviously must be inspired and motivated by an inner spirituality and reverence. The roles of each of these ministries during Mass must be choreographed to look and sound good. It must be an art form that is pleasing to the eyes and ears. Attention to the details of choreography and movements will greatly enhance the post-Vatican II Mass. We can learn important lessons from the Tridentine Mass in this regard, for this area was a major strength of the Tridentine Mass and something that should indeed be recovered!
Tied into this “attention to detail” should be a concern for the environment of worship. Do our churches invite active participation, devotion and contemplation? If the priests and the laity understand the nature of liturgy, active participation and energy can be just as satisfying and edifying in a Church designed prior to the Second Vatican Council, with communion railing and high altar, as in a contemporary church building in the round. In fact the pre-Vatican II design may be more conducive since it does not exaggerate the need to see each others' faces in worship as though that is of equal or more importance than seeing God in the Sacrament. The “sacramental presence” of Jesus Christ still has a position of greatest importance in the Liturgy without denigrating the liturgical presence of Jesus Christ in the assembly, the word proclaimed and the presider!
We must also use the talents of true artists and artisans to enhance the entire abode where we worship. When a beautifully crafted statue or crucifix are removed in favor of a homemade, burlap and felt banner filled with slogans and other symbols, we do a disservice to our liturgy, environment and people.
Vesture for priests and servers should be beautiful and becoming. Albs for altar servers with hoods and cinctures that tie them at the waste either make them look like giant potato sacks or members of the K.K.K. Albs that are too short or too flambouant are also a distraction. Certainly all vesture from vestments to altar linens should be clean and ironed!
Catholics are hungering for the sacred in their lives which are otherwise filled with the profane. The profane is neither needed nor desirable in the celebration of the Church’s liturgy. Someone once said that when we begin to rediscover and prefer the sacred to the profane, our liturgies will be such that if the Parousia were to occur during Mass, we wouldn’t know it! Concomitant with this rediscovery of the sacred is a deep reverence and appreciation for the divine presence of God. This indeed is encountered in those who assemble for Mass, in God’s Word and in the sacred signs and symbols of all the sacraments. Particularly, in the sacred species of Holy Communion, bread and wine consecrated and shared which are the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ and his one sacrifice renewed for us, do we share God’s divine and redeeming presence.
When people long for the pre-Vatican II liturgy, is it really that liturgy they long for, or is it a liturgy that is sacred, awe-inspiring and dignified? The post-Vatican II liturgy can satisfy the hungry heart just as well, if the attention to detail is present and an appreciation for the sacred is paramount. Liturgy celebrated well will “foster and nourish faith; poor celebrations may weaken and destroy it.” Let our liturgical celebrations be the best they can be and in continuity with the best of our liturgical tradition gained from the pre-Vatican II days!
11 comments:
Wow! A far more enlightened article than I recall seeing in a diocesan paper--or anywhere else--in the year of Our Lord 1988. You really were ahead of your time, especially for a diocesan liturgy director. And, to tolerate this kind of forthright clairvoyance, you must have had a better bishop then than I--in the neighboring archdiocese just to the north of you--then knew about.
Spoken like a true prophets. Perhaps you're seeing Marian apparitions?!
Btw, Father, one of the most exciting videos I've ever seen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=s1S9kvnwaeE
The second photograph is of the Birmingham Oratory, Cardinal Newman's church (although he didn't live to see it completed).
A Lesson to be Learned from New Coke
"Over the past 40 or so years, the protests have not dimmed, but the ridicule and oppression of those seeking the Traditional Mass has not abated (Pope Benedict’s Summorum Pontificum not withstanding). This would be understandable if the New Mass had accomplished what it was formulated to do: to increase the faith and devotion of Catholics and make the faith clearer to the modern Catholic. Unfortunately the opposite has occurred: the number of Catholics attending the New Mass has steadily declined, as have vocations to the priesthood and religious life, not to mention the knowledge of the faith amongst the vast majority of Catholics who still attend Mass weekly.
"Would you not think that presented with these facts, the Church’s hierarchy would take a look at the value of the “new formula” and start asking themselves whether this experiment was a failure on most every level? Instead, we are continually told that the problem is not with the product, but rather with how it is marketed or how it is consumed (to use corporate images). In terms more ecclesiastical, we are told that the Novus Ordo Missae isn’t the problem, but it was implemented badly in the 1970s or that those who regularly ignored the rubrics have caused the Novus Ordo Missae to not bring about the expected fruits. There is no way under God’s heavens that the Novus Ordo Missae is at fault, we are told ad nauseum.
"It took Coca-Cola executives only 79 days to realize that they had made a mistake, and this before there was any appreciable decline in their sales or market share. Why, oh why, has the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, after 40 years of declining numbers in almost every measurable category and appearing, at least in the United States, more and more like a corporation, not begun to ask themselves whether the problem might just be with the product and not the consumer?"
I believe it was 1985 when new coke came out and comparisons between it and the new Mass were made in the press. However there would be rebellion if we went back to the 1962 Latin missal. However there would barely be a blink of the eye if the 2012 English missal with the Extraordinary Order for it--that would work!
Fr. McDonald, there's no reason to wait around. The "English Missal"--the Tridentine missal in gorgeous Elizabethan English--is available right now, ready when you are.
Henry, there is no reason to wait around since the Roman Rite is still available. "Gorgeous Elizabethan English" disguised a heretical rite and sent Catholic martyrs to their deaths. St Edmund Campion on the scaffold was exhorted by the heretics to pray in English but preferred to pray in a language (Latin) "which both He and I understand".
John, I personally agree. With both you and St. Edmund Campion. However, I'm sometimes torn between my personal belief (and preference) and the possibility of appealing to the vast majority of contemporary Catholics (so called, at least) who cannot be lured into the TLM fold, but desperately need everything about the traditional liturgy, except possibly the Latin itself, which (as Fr. McDonald suggests) may be the principal impediment to a full restoration.
Sometimes I wonder just how many of our Catholic problems we have created for ourselves...
Not to knock your clairvoyance Father, but sometimes the captain, or shepherd, sees what the sheep do not based on training, experience, and his vantage point. Shoulders of giants, sort of. That is my biggest problem with the NO and the Spirit of V-II revisions. First, they assumed that they could create a Mass as meaningful as the, now, EF in a couple of years. Secondly, they deconstructed the EF based on almost farcical beliefs of how the early Church worshiped , again, without consideration of why those practices were abandoned or not used widely. Thirdly, they lowered the bar for gifts to The Ruler of the Universe theoretically to make the lowest amongst us to feel good then took that as a pass to give less of themselves.
Post a Comment