Let’s pretend that a young man goes to his doctor and describes to him the symptoms that he thinks he has. He says to his doctor that he thinks he has bromidrosis and halitosis. After his thorough examination of his patient, the doctor returns and say that his problem is that he attends the EF Mass and prefers Mass ad orientem or, as one bishop spells it, orientum.
What stinks is a Mass like this. Why would the bishop of the Diocese of Venice think that the problem with the Mass in his diocese is priests who celebrate the normative Mass ad orientem or as he spells it, orientum?
There’s a pathology in the Church today and it stinks to high heaven! The affectivity of all involved in this production from the person who introduces this Mass, to the folk group to the priest shows that Mass facing the people becomes an acting job for those acting.
There is nothing transcendent, prayerful or even approaching what the true art of celebrating the normative Mass entails. That we even have to use the term “art of celebrating” to improve the normative Mass tells you something.
If this Mass remained with its silly music but the priest ad orientem, what an improvement that would be!
31 comments:
Bishop Dewane sounds like a bully. Do a google search and there are some interesting articles about him. He obviously does not know Latin
What drives me crazy isn't so much a bishop or pope exercising some muscle and authority, but misdiagnosing the source of the liturgical problems in the Church or a diocese that leads, first of all, to the loss of Catholic belief in what the Mass is meant to accomplish and secondly or lastly, loss of liturgical unity. It is incredible.
Father McDonald,
Spot on! The Novus Ordo is the problem and if the Church was serious about the loss of belief in the Real Presence, it would either be suppressed or substantially overhauled to be like the EF which was effective in conveying belief in the Real Presence. I think we are 5-10 years away from that being a possibility because by then most of the spirit of Vatican II types will be retired
The Novus Ordo is not the problem. And returning to universal Extraordinary Form is not the solution.
This is a vast, vast oversimplification of the issues that we face first as a culture, and, only then, as a Church.
The growth of the cult of radical individualism in the U.S. and many western cultures, is eroding the natural, cohesive nature of community, and impacts almost every institution from Churches to service organizations, from universities to kindergarten classes. That radical individualism is fueled, as Saint Pope John Paul II often said, by consumerism that leads to materialism which, he wrote, is "essentially and systematically atheistic," because, "in principle and in fact, materialism radically excludes the presence and action of God, who is spirit, in the world and above all in man."
Pope Benedict XVI also recognized this reality. He wrote that our cultural ethos makes us “scarcely able any longer to become aware of God.”
Paul Krugman, among others, has written about this corrosive trend. His "The Cult of Selfishness is Killing America" in the NYTimes (27 July 2020) is worth a read. Brene Brown has suggested that America's tombstone will bear the epitaph, "Death By Rugged Individualism."
Latin, the so-called Benedictine arrangement of candles on the altar, maniples, and the so-called fiddleback chasuble can't change the trend in our culture. They provide a comfortable cubby-hole to rest in for those who wish to be content in themselves and their preferred form of worship. But they're not going to engender a reordering of how we think of ourselves in realtion to God and to one another.
All that is well and good and mostly true. But you seem to negate the truism that the Law of Prayer is the Law of belief. Just what does the video I post say about liturgical prayer and what we believe as Catholics and I intentionally use the word "we"!
An ordinary Form liturgy with the accoutrements you so readily dismiss emphasizes what We as Church believe about the Mass and doctrine in general.
I suspect too, that you think the "art of celebrating" the modern Mass leads to a personalized and individualistic approach to even that as there are as many private opinions about it and what is shown in the video is just one!
No, I do not negate Lex Orandi...
Tell me, how does a maniple emphasize what we as a Church believe about the Mass and doctrine in general? How does the arrangement of candles? How does he cut of the chasuble?
How does the use of Latin emphasize the truth of the Incarnation or the truth of the Immaculate Conception or the truth of the Trinity?
I do not think that the "art of celebrating" leads to an individualistic approach. The simple fact is, the priest celebrating BEGINS as an individual, speaks as an individual, preaches as an individual. Made in the image and likeness of God the INDIVIDUAL priest is the one who speaks the words of the ritual, who distributes communion, who offers the final blessing and dismissal.
I do think that your notion that the "priest must disappear and no trace of his individuality be detected lest Mrs. McGillicuddy lose her faith" is vastly overstated.
I also think that the notion of the invisible priest runs contrary to the very basic understanding we have that Grace Builds On Nature. It is Allan McDonald who is celebrating, Michael Kavanaugh who is preaching, Stephen Parkes who is presiding. It is in and through the individuality that each of us has that grace finds its way into the people we serve.
Some people don't like it when Pope Francis smiles. Some people didn't like it when some priest colored his graying hair. Some people don't like it when priests wear sandals. You know what? The problem isn't a smile or Miss Clairol or Birkenstocks. The problem is the person who thinks he or she is the center of the world and that the world should reflect his or her preferences.
It’s Miss McGillicuddy, aka, Mrs. Lucy Ricardo or Mrs. Ricky Ricardo.
Let’s talk about the video, good father, how does that help the Mass any more than maniples, ornate vestments, ad orientem and the Benedictine altar arrangement. Latin or English in an EF Mass would be fine for me and like most EF Latin Communities they will be aided in actually believing what the Church teaches about the Mass. Polls prove this.
Yet, true to your smoke and mirrors, you fail miserably in not acknowledging this and why it is.
Fr. K asks:
Tell me, how does a maniple emphasize what we as a Church believe about the Mass and doctrine in general? How does the arrangement of candles? How does he cut of the chasuble?
Let's continue with your line of thinking and questioning...
How does wearing a chasuble at all emphasize what we believe about the Mass and doctrine in general? Or a stole? Or an alb or cincture? How does using candles -- at all? How does building a special building (as opposed to using any old building)?
Since the specific language doesn't matter, why use any Latin at all? Why use any Greek? Or Hebrew?
I can do this all day.
And I'll just point out again that almost no one actually likes the Novus Ordo. Overwhelmingly, those who profess to like it, can't stand it as it is. Like this priest in the video, they all aim to "improve" it. If you go over to the PrayTell blog, populated by great advocates of the glorious, as-if-handed-down-from-Mount-Sinai, infinitely superior Novus Ordo, they are always writing articles about improving it.
No one actually likes the Novus Ordo.
It is clear that Fr. K does not take into account the logical conclusions of his straw men assertions.
Father K ignores the science about the OF. Only 30 percent of its attendees believe in the Real Presence whereas 99 percent of EF attendees believe in the Real Presence. Just a mere detail
Let's see. Frs. K and McD are invited to a party. Fr. McD shows up with jacket, necktie, and nicely polished shoes. On the other hand Fr. K turns up in torn jeans, t-shirt with the a logo (SAVE THE LITURGY SAVE THE WORLD. -not!), and a baseball cap turned front to back.
Now which party-goer honors the host better? Also, I recall reading somewhere a wedding guest shows up without a wedding garment.
"And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment: And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless. Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. For many are called, but few are chosen."—Matthew 22:11-14
Fr. K, care to rethink how to vest for the next time?
Fr. Fox, your second observation is very true. Traditionalists who understand that the OF is the normative Mass want to improve it and I am in that camp. I don't believe we can realistically think the EF will become the normative Mass unless, like TJM thinks, attendance in the Normative Mass drops to less than 1% of Catholics everywhere. And that's not a wild projection, sadly, tragically.
Liberals want more change, more inculturation and more roles for women, LTGBQ, etc, etc and new introductory rites, etc.
I remember the heyday of changes in the 80's that each time liturgy committees or musicians went to a national workshop, they would come back with novel ideas to impose on the Mass. I can remember singing the Gloria as the Entrance hymn, or Starting the Mass after the first verse of a hymn with the Sign of the Cross and progressing forward from there after each verse. UGH! But I did this!
I remember too, when some priests only wore an alb with no cincture and the stole and did not use the chasuble. And I remember small group Masses in the seminary where the priest wore no liturgical garments and maybe not even a clerical shirt, but an open collared regular shirt and short sleeves. That's right up there with sandals, died hair and body piercings.
Father McDonald,
I love the Church and was in music ministry for over 40 years as a skilled volunteer: organist, soloist, cantor and choir member, most of which was for the OF. I was pulled out of the altarboys at age 12 to be a cantor. My parishes would send me to liturgical workshops throughout the years but eventually the constant changes and different approaches to the OF wore me out, hence, my return to the EF. I would be extremely happy if most parishes took the St. John Cantius approach to liturgy, but the vast majority plod along with banal and uninspiring horizontal liturgies. The EF I attended last Sunday at St. John the Baptist in Savannah was uplifting. That geriatrics in Rome are determined to stamp that form of the Latin Rite out borders on pure evil. Fortunately they will fail in this effort. The young folks at that Mass will not yield. Deus Vult!
Sorry, Fr. MARTIN Fox, I specifically referenced the so-called fiddleback chasuble, so my line of reasoning is not that chasubles don't matter or should not be used at all, but that that particular style is not necessarily better at emphasizing or calling attention to what we as a Church believe. Please, keep wearing the chasuble that suits your preferences. And if the Benedictine altar arrangement is a necessary support for your faith, have at it.
John - The parable of the ill-dressed wedding guest is not meant to tell us how we should be dressed when we go to parties. The meaning is that the world contains both the good and the evil, and that this mixed condition will last until the Judgement.
As for the video, which I had not watched until a few minutes ago, I find the celebrant's shenanigans very off-putting. The problem, though, is not the Novus Ordo, but the manner in which this somewhat loose canon celebrates it.
The problem is not the Novus Ordo.
Fr K
That is certainly the textbook explanation. However, you honor the Trinity as a priest, by presenting yourself at the altar dressed for the occasion with the greatest care possible.
John, it is not the "textbook" explanation. It is the explanation.
Your explanation - dress for the occasion- is an example of eisegesis "an interpretation, esp. of Scripture, that expresses the interpreter's own ideas, bias, or the like, rather than the meaning of the text."
Fr. MJK, “The problem isn’t the Novus Ordo.” I would agree with that statement. The problem is with the priests and communities who manipulate it and the video you viewed is a case in point and not an exception. It’s this type of manipulation of the Missal and avoiding saying the black and doing the red which leads to many who just want a normative Mass without surprises realizing that depending of the parish or a particular priest in a parish, the Novus Ordo is like a box of chocolates; you never know what you are going to get.
Priests who celebrate the EF Mass today do so well, un-rushed and with fidelity to the black and red. It is this consistency from Mass to Mass and celebrant to celebrant which attracts those who want to know and experience the Mass in a consistent way.
But, built into the Novous Ordo is the possility of ad libbing at various points and that is in the red. The other problem with the NO is it’s flimsy rubrics which allows for a lot of interpretation and usually what liturgists suggest takes more importance that what the red says to do.
One problem, though, with the vernacular Mass compared to the Latin Mass even in the Ordinary Form, is ad libbing the language which you admit doing and thinking your way is better than what is prescribed. That can’t happen in Latin unless the priest actually uses Latin as his vernacular, which no priest does.
Priests like Father K is part of the problem not the solution. The good news his kind will be retiring in the not so distant future and the liturgy will flower again with the younger priests
"...unfortunately not an exception."
I don't know - and I wonder if you do. I attend mass when I travel and have never encountered a celebrant like the one in the video. I concelebrate mass in various parishes here in Savannah and around the diocese and, again, have not encountered anything like that. So, I really wonder if your assertion is not your typical BOMBSHELL hyperbole.
The rubrics of the NO are not "flimsy." While they do not specify what needs no specification, such as which thumb is to be placed over the other when the priest's hand are folded, they also do not make an attempt to regulate every move, every gesture, or every step the priest takes - and with which foot.
Priests who wander far from the NO rubrics do not do so because they need more rules, but because they do not have an adequate understanding of 1) the liturgy, and 2) their role. The way to improve things is not to impose unnecessary and superfluous regulations, but to form the priests with better understanding.
FRMJK, have you ever sat down with or accompanied someone who prefers the EF Mass instead of the OF Mass to find out why from them and what their experiences prior to Summorum Pontificum were that enabled them to find a new spirituality and vigor in the Catholic Faith and liturgical peace?
You might also sit down and accompany any priest who celebrates both forms and listen to them.
And until you have celebrated both forms and experienced it for yourself and the community you celebrate. It for, you are on thin ice pontificating on their experiences in both.
I've been reading for years now what a priest who celebrates both forms has to say, and it doesn't move or impress me at all.
I've asked repeatedly here what those of us who do not celebrate the EF are "missing" and have had no reply, just your attempts at being cute and others' attempts at being abusive.
I've not pontificated on anyone's experience as a celebrate of the EF. If you think it's lovely and all that, have at it.
And by the way, you ought not pontificate about the spirituality and vigor of those who are not devotees of the EF. Some of the finest Catholics I know - far finer than thee or me - have never once attended an EF celebration and draw their vigor from the NO celebration of the Eucharist.
(Cue TJM's remarks about 1) abortion, 2) Catholic polls, and/or 3) the biological solution.)
Father McDonald,
Bravo!
When I first started the video, I thought it was a joke until it became apparent that it wasn't. I was so grateful every time the music stopped. Not my style. Why do so many priests introduce their own style, or, however you would refer to the way in which they hold the host prior to the elevation. It runs the gamut of what we saw here, the 180 degree wave, one handed and so on? Fr's homiletics is more dramatic than I'm accustomed to, but I won't condemn him for a style that I'm just not used to.
Fr. MJK mentions PF smiling, presumably a reference to another post here where I was skeptical at the HF's apparent joy. He does seem to scowl at much that evidently is not his preference.
I did think Fr. MJK following point was quite on point: Priests who wander far from the NO rubrics do not do so because they need more rules, but because they do not have an adequate understanding of 1) the liturgy, and 2) their role. The way to improve things is not to impose unnecessary and superfluous regulations, but to form the priests with better understanding.
At the same time, I thought Fr. Fox's point was equally on point: And I'll just point out again that almost no one actually likes the Novus Ordo. Overwhelmingly, those who profess to like it, can't stand it as it is. Like this priest in the video, they all aim to "improve" it. If you go over to the PrayTell blog, populated by great advocates of the glorious, as-if-handed-down-from-Mount-Sinai, infinitely superior Novus Ordo, they are always writing articles about improving it.
Third, I thought Fr. AJM's point was also on point: FRMJK, have you ever sat down with or accompanied someone who prefers the EF Mass instead of the OF Mass to find out why from them and what their experiences prior to Summorum Pontificum were that enabled them to find a new spirituality and vigor in the Catholic Faith and liturgical peace?
To often, those who attend the EF are thought of as hiding from the NO. Perhaps some are. I would think the majority are likely running TO something as opposed to AWAY from something else. While I do not attend the TLM and haven't been to one in at least 5 years, I do see the value in learning that tradition and its roots just to appreciate that form of liturgy and to better understand its adherents. I'm not against it, however, and would happily attend one if it was convenient to do so. Honestly, the sotto voce canon is not my favorite - even the Russians audibly chant most of the Anaphora (equiv. to Canon).
I've watched deacons and priests mock the maniple and chastise those who choose to vest in one. I'm a bit lost as to why as the corresponding vestment in the Byzantine East are the cuffs the priest wears on his wrists. Why wouldn't a priest want to symbolically retrace Christ's steps through vestiture in the same way the sacrifice itself retraces the events at Calvary? I don't think doing so is superfluous, or play acting - but a deliberate attempt at fostering a mindset regarding the work consecrated hands will undertake. When I was a sacristan, I used to lay out the celebrants vestments and for some, place the laminated card with the vesting prayers alongside. It always seemed to me that the journey of the Mass began right there if not with the washing of hands.
This particular conversation seems somewhat freed from the usual barbs being volleyed back and forth. Many good points were made that hopefully the varying viewpoints will consider. I think a dinner featuring single barrel bourbon, steaks, a few decent bottles of wine and the 3 priests would be a fascinating evening. Not being the biggest desert guy.....I don't know....Fr. Fox, we'll go with you to choose. Heck, I'd even have to have TJM there though we might have to wait until he's sleeping off the bourbon and wine to enjoy our cigars, port and to draw some conclusions.
ByRus,
I think the person offering snark is the one who has been on the Bourbon. I think an apology from you is in order
I have found that many people who are drawn to the Traditional Latin Mass find themselves at home at a celebration of the Novus Ordo when...
You know, I was going to give a list, but upon further reflection, it's almost all about what was going to be the first of several items:
1. When the celebrant sticks closely to the rubrics AND doesn't make himself the center of attention.
Notice those are two things, but they are related. A celebrant can stick closely to the rubrics -- and if he does, it will minimize putting himself at the center. That said, this latter is a mindset that is distinct from the rubrics, and if a priest really cultivates this mindset, it will have an effect on how he offers the *entire* Mass.
So, for example:
a) The priest doesn't make the homily all about himself, his experiences and reactions. Now, to be fair, it can be hard to avoid making the homily *somewhat* about yourself. That is to say, I cannot imagine giving homily that isn't a product to a significant degree of my own strengths, interests and experiences. That said, I have seen priests give homilies that are *mainly* about the Lord and the Faith, but certainly include the priest's personality and humor and own stories, versus a priest who basically entertains, or who treats that as 5-10 minutes of his time to do whatever he wants.
b) The priest doesn't feel the need to keep eye contact and have personal interactions with people throughout Mass. In my judgment, eye contact is great for a personal conversation, and it's good to cultivate during the homily or the announcements (which can be omitted). Beyond that, I think it's a mistake to cultivate eye contact during any of the prayers and readings, or even during the greetings. This is not a personal encounter between the priest and the individuals, this is a ritual action that is sui generis and shouldn't be treated too analogously to any other encounter. Traditionally, a priest keep his gaze lowered, even when he turned toward the people. This has the effect of allowing the faithful participating in Mass to enter into the prayer in their own way, and also in encouraging the priest to avoid making it all about himself.
I'll stop there.
Fr. Fox, exactly! Eye contact during prayer should be proscribed by the rubrics!
Well said, Fr. FOX!
TJM, lighten up, buddy. Just a bit of ribbing. At least you are on the guest list for the "dinner".
I suspect Fr. MJK and I might part company on this video. True, nothing horrible happened there. But, as the cigars burn down and I offer to top off the glasses of port, I might challenge him as follows: If you traded places with the priest in the video, and you were standing before "the fearsome judgement seat of the Lord", and you were asked "Is this really what you think my son's sacrifice was about?" how would you answer? There are no do overs relative to divine worship, and was this culture shock for me?? Definitely!
Byz, I previously posted, "As for the video, which I had not watched until a few minutes ago, I find the celebrant's shenanigans very off-putting."
Make sure one of the ports is tawny, pls.
Fr. MJK
100% on tawny. I don't mind ruby, but I don't seek it out either.
Post a Comment