“… for she had been saying to herself, “If I only touch His outer robe, I will be healed.” (Matthew 9:21)
In an organic way and over the course of centuries, religious symbolism was added to very practical aspects of the Traditional Latin Mass. Overnight, most of that practical and religious symbolism was stripped from the Modern Mass and sadly so and to no real purpose as it does nothing to build the Catholic Liturgical Faith.
I have already written about the Church’s “sign language” stripped from the Roman Canon as well as the so-called “Introductory Rites” of the Mass.
But one symbolic gesture that always captured my imagination as a chid was the raising the hem of the priest’s outer garment (chasuble) during the elevations at the consecrations.
I had never heard a really good religious reason or symbolic interpretation of what was more than likely a very practical aspect of this ritualized moment.
And here it is from a passage found in the Gospels: “If I only touch His outer garment, I will be healed.”
That is powerful and completely lost in the Modern Mass.
Did you know that?
AND WHEN IT IS DONE AT THE MASS YOU ATTEND, DO YOU SAY TO YOURSELF, IF ONLY I TOUCH HIS OUTER ROBE, I WILL BE HEALED?
17 comments:
I think the "spiritualization/ritualization" of gestures, words, postures is what gets us into unnecessarily muddy waters liturgically speaking.
The notion that the lifting of the chasuble is somehow connected to "If I only touch his cloak,.." is, while pious and all that, something completely foreign to liturgical theology and the purposes of chasubles.
The hyper allegorizing of such actions is an artificial construct. These sorts of things get copied and repeated and find their way into the traditions of liturgical ritual without having any solid meaning.
Healing flowing from Christ, His Sacrifice and Blood symbolized by the High Priests garment and Scriptural support has no solid meaning in the Liturgy?!? UGH!!!!!
Fr K chimes in for the banal, boring, and failing liturgical "reform." No surprise
"Banal" describes your level of understanding - as usual. Pedestrian would be another descriptor. A third, superficial.
The "healing" idea attached to lifting the hem of the chasuble is the locus of the problem, not the healing power of Jesus. No, there is nothing in liturgical theology, let alone in Scripture, about the "healing" power of lifting the hem of the priest's garment at the elevation. Nothing. That concept is made up of whole cloth.
In attempting to transform pious piffle into theology you, and others, introduce a world of confusion. Lifting the hem becomes important, not because it IS important, but because rigid traditionalists SAY it is important. That's how accretions, of which there were many of the superfluous variety, found their way into liturgy, became ossified, and now are presented as the means by which the world will be saved.
Thank you for this post Fr. McD explaining about why lift the chsuble at the elevation. Nos I will always be reminded when it is done of the woman touching the outer garment of Jesus.
Fr K I am certain my understanding of the Liturgy exceeds yours. You are invested in the failure and you simply don’t care. Enjoy the subways when you retire to New Yawk City!
TJM - I am sure you are certain, though I would suggest without good reason.
There was once a reason to lift the hem - chasubles were heavy and their conical or bell shape made it easier for the priest to make the elevations.
The diminution of vestments to the "elongated bib" or "fiddle back" type shown in the pictures Good Father McDonald posted, a style denounced by St. Charles Borromeo as a break with tradition, eliminates the need for action entirely. Most chasuble fabrics and design used today do not impede the elevations, so no assistance-at-the-hem is needed.
So, wanting to retain that which is "traditional," what do we do? We invent a meaning. "Oh, it symbolizes the woman seeking healing!" It gets transformed from a practical act into a an act of "wonderful pedagogy."
High piety is just too precious, isn't it?
Fr K,
You are stuck in a 1970s mindset and can’t possibly see the spiritual value of a Rite that nourished the Faithful for over 1500 years. The current Rite is failing the Faithful utterly, no wonder millions have walked away. The “reformed” Mass is horizontal and is more like a big group hug than a transcendent encounter with the Divine.
The “accretions” you refer to have developed organically and have theological meaning in stark contrast to the Weekly accretions we get from malformed Novus Ordo priests.
At least Father McDonald has been trying
TJM, What's the big problem? After all, Father K did affirm that this gesture was "pious and all that."
"And all that."
Boy, if THAT doesn't reveal a condescending attitude, then what does?
Piety! Imagine! What a reflection of an outdated ecclesiology!
Now let's plug in the electric guitars, get some women in pants on that altar and watch some obese gay bishops dance down the processional aisle, holding the liturgical books while they bounce and sway! Now THAT's Catholic!
Jerome, it's good your recognize when someone directs condescension in your direction.
Alas, you misread the condescension as being directed toward piety, which is clearly not the case.
Invented piety is a problem. When non-theological overlays are fabricated in order to give "meaning" to "traditional" liturgical gestures, then we slip into something that is distracting and not worth continuing.
And those women in pants are going to be the death of you, but but your own choosing.
Jerome Merwick,
Fr K is an empty cassock and apparently is in love with the liturgical failure. John Nolan time and time again has put this errant cleric in his place, exposing his superficial knowledge of matters liturgical. But like a wounded animal he keeps coming back for more!
I am not a psychologist, but coming here to goad Father McDonald and other faithful Catholics must satisfy some primal need he has. All you need to know about the depth of his intellect and spiritual life is that he votes Democratic which espouses abortion as “healthcare.” He must be grieving that Biden does not have the votes to codify Roe v Wade.
If I understand correctly, the lifting of the hem is to assist the priest during the elevation. It is an act of Charity from the deacon or server and perhaps from the laity. Although different from the symbolism offered by Fr McD, I think the healing by Faith is still part of the act because they care enough help, thereby displaying the humility of a handmaiden.
rcg - The lifting of the hem WAS an act of assisting the priest, due to the heavy fabrics and styles that WERE commonly used in the past.
Look at the pictures Good Fr. McDonald posted. That tiny chasuble, made of very lightweight fabric and cut to the most diminutive dimensions imaginable, presents the priest with ZERO difficuly in making the elevations. Why, then, do some insist on the importance of the hem lift?
Because it's "traditional."
And because, "Oh, it is emblematic of the woman seeking healing who touched the hem of Jesus' garments." Where does that notion come from? It comes from the vacuum left when, because of the changes in farrics and designs, lifting the hem served no practical purpose, so another "reason" had to be invented to become a bulwark - a shaky one at best - against the practical reality that there's no good reason to conitnue to practice.
FRMJK, I find your antipathy toward symbolism applied to practical actions of the liturgy down right not-Catholic, not incarnational and not liturgical. There is symbolism to the vestments you wear at Mass, but that symbolism could be applied to your street clothes too or not applied at all, allowing you to wear whatever you want. The same is true with the Lavabo. the washing of the hands has a practical aspect. Do you then not pray the spiritual prayer associated with it, albeit in the Modern Liturgy, truncated but nonetheless there.
And incense too has a practical aspect to mask odors historically in a culture that had poor hygiene, used the church building as a market place, etc. But then allegorical meaning was added to the practical aspects. Do you then reject using incense since its need is no longer an issue in a world of good hygiene and deodorants one can use on their body and in the air?
I would suggest your antipathy toward liturgical allegory is down right corrupt.
Fr. ALLAN McDonald - Now, don't go getting your knickers all knotted up like that. You'll give yourself an ulcer.
As for the symbolism of my street clothes, please refer to the section on clothing in "Preppie Handbook." Although I have not turned up the collar of my polo shirt for decades, I do have several oxford cloth button downs in my closet, along with three pair of khaki slacks ranging from very pale to medium-dark. And, of course, I have one pair of dirty bucks and one pair of white bucks, the latter being worn only between Easter and Labor Day.
Now, let's take incense. Does you REALLY think its use in church originates with stinky people? And if being stinky was the norm, who was it who first decided, "We need some Plug-Ins or some incense in this place, these people stink!"?
Do check into the ancient practice of burning sacrifices as a way of making them total offering to the deity. This practice pre-dates Christianity as I am sure you are aware. And do check the numerous references to the use of incense in worship in the Old Testament.
If you could point me to the biblical references, Old of New Testament, to hem-lifting at the elevations, I would appreciate it.
Fr K,
Instead of posting here - seek help
Then, after numerous mutual corrections, we agree that it was, and remains, an artifact and proof of active participation from the Old Form. Notwithstanding the lightness of modern garb it is still a show of support for the priest during elevation. What need does God have for any special effort or care or worship from our lowly race? Do the Protestants have it right, that we make our peace with God one-on-one; that sincerity is all He cares about? There is no use for anything previous believers may have created, we need no guides, examples, and certainly no connections with them. We do not need the shoulders of giants and God need not strike us down for we have made ourselves dwarfs.
Post a Comment