One Less Mass: A Silver Lining?

In my diocese, the feast of the Ascension is not celebrated on Thursday, 40 days after the Resurrection, but is transferred to the following Sunday. Well, of course, that makes so much sense (she says, rolling her eyes). You can kill two birds with one stone – both the Sunday obligation and the holy day obligation. How economical! How efficient! (How American.)

Sigh. I find that annoying. “Forty days” is significant, symbolic, sublime even! There’s a reason it’s called Ascension Thursday!

So, every year I go through a mourning phase over Ascension Thursday. Thanks be to God for the Divine Office, which I can celebrate at home, observing the feast through the psalms, readings, and responsories of the Hours. That gives me some solace, though it would be nice to go to an Ascension Thursday Mass, as well.

This year, though, a thought came to mind that made me realize that there is in fact a silver lining to that cloud called “transferred to Sunday”.  

If the feast of the Ascension were not transferred to Sunday, then Thursday would be a holy day of obligation, and I would have to attend Mass. Now, if you’ve been reading this blog for any length of time, you will probably be aware that the extraordinary form of the Mass is not available in my neck of the woods, and the Novus Ordo Masses in the closest parishes leave much to be desired. There is no Latin, no Gregorian chant...but plenty of altar girls, chit-chat, and happy-clappy music. Etc.

So, if the Solemnity of the Ascension of the Lord was celebrated on Thursday in this diocese, there would be one more Mass I would be obligated to attend where I would be saddened by the apparent lack of interest in our Catholic identity and tradition, if not annoyed by various liturgical abuses.

Instead, since the Ascension is transferred to Sunday, I will only have to tolerate one barely tolerable Mass, which will fulfill both my Sunday obligation and my holy day obligation. How economical! How efficient!

How sad.

If I were a priest reading this, I think I would be quite dismayed at those thoughts. I think I would be saying to myself, “Oh my gosh. Are people really feeling that way about the Mass? Are faithful Catholics who attend Mass every Sunday and every holy day, really so upset by the way Mass is celebrated that they don’t really want to be there?!”

Yes, Father, there are many faithful Catholics who feel that way. One of them mentioned to me that the EF Mass she is able to attend twice a month is said by an elderly priest "so that Mass is very long, and he just rambles about nothing at the sermon.  And there’s no music – just a low Mass." I commented that it must still be better than the typical NO Mass, which is very bad where she lives. She agreed, saying,

Yup. It's amazing. No one talks, comes in late, or leaves early. And I don't have to hide out in the back to avoid having to hold hands, etc. Nice! And I don't have to avoid the eyes of all the EMHCs behind the altar. Gosh, just thinking of the pluses is great.

I know for a fact that some priests quickly dismiss people who see it this way as just too “critical”, too “divisive”; they say that nothing will make us happy, and that we need to realize that “this isn’t Rome, you know.”  

But I guess my hope is that reading this might prompt some priests to examine just exactly what Vatican II had to say about the Mass, and what the GIRM really says about celebrating Mass, and what the rubrics clearly dictate. And I know some priests – maybe even many priests – have done this without reading my blog. Unfortunately, most of them apparently live in some other diocese.

For a little comic relief, go here.

Boiling Frogs, CAVE People, and Liturgical Abuse

I know there are many who think I’m unjustly and uncharitably critical of liturgical offenses in our diocese. And I admit I am not always able to maintain a charitable attitude! But the reason for my ardor, my zealous defense of the rubrics, my insistence on following the “rules and regs” is this: it’s important.

An old folk warning suggests that if you put a frog in boiling water, it will quickly jump out; however, if the frog is placed in cool water which is then gradually heated, it will be lulled into a sleepy daze and remain there until it is boiled alive.

And that’s what has happened to us with liturgical abuse. The more abuse that’s tolerated, the less people will object. And when some of us do object, we are met with blank stares and comments like “Do you think God really cares about that?” Yes. I do.

When the bishop of the Diocese of Honolulu says he plans to say Mass in a water park, that ought to raise eyebrows – not to mention a storm of protest. For heaven’s sake, the bishop, of all people, should know better! And the fact that he doesn’t tells the faithful that Mass at the water park is just fine.

In the same way, when the pastor of a parish allows a concert to be held in the parish church, under circumstances that are clearly outside canonical norms, that’s a problem, too. The pastor ought to know better. In the case I wrote about yesterday, the issue has been brought up before, apparently. One former member of that parish wrote:

We were estranged from St. Francis of Assisi 30 years ago, when [the music director] put on just such a concert, in the sanctuary in front of the altar; and we and others protested. We were called "intolerant," "mean-spirited", and all the other epithets progressives like to hurl at anyone who tries to rain on their parade. We moved to [another parish] for Sunday Mass, which was then as bearable as any church in the area – if one could stand the coma the kindly but inarticulate pastor's sermons induced.

Out of the boiling pot and into a simmering one…

Another parishioner also reacted to yesterday’s post, noting that:

We gave the building committee, the pastor and priests, and several parishioners copies of the Code of Canon Law regarding concerts in the Nave. We were promised it wouldn't happen.

Want fries with that?

Guess what we have right next door to the Church? We have a very large gym with acoustic panels on the walls, with hundreds and hundreds of chairs. So why have a concert in the Church? The only possible answer is to be sacrilegious, to tell God who is really in charge…

We have seen Beatles music, and an altered version of the Our Father; we've had to put up with drums; and we’ve been confronted with breasts, bellies, and butts showing from our choir…

… I think I'll go to this concert, with a hoagie and Big Gulp in hand, wearing a tank top and daisy dukes and flip flops and not pay the cover charge. While I 'm dressed for all occasions, I think I'll take in a wedding and a funeral; no judgment.

Now, I thought that was quite humorous! And another parishioner added that, given the general impression generated by the Aztec handball court…Armadillo…new St. Francis church, maybe a concert isn’t all that inappropriate. Except for the very important facts that the church is consecrated, the Eucharist is confected on that altar, and it is the place where the parish faithful gather to worship God.

And the point of the humorous harangue of the above parishioner really is not funny at all.  The point is that there are people who recognize when abuse is happening, who recognize a lack of reverence for Our Lord in the Eucharist, who recognize that there really is appropriate and inappropriate dress for Mass, and who recognize that wolves in sheep’s clothing are running their parishes.

Being in the minority, though, they are squelched by the name-calling and ridicule of the liberal element that runs most parishes. Case in point: “Living Your Faith” and “Engaged Parishes” programs, which serve as a training ground for the heterodox in how to squelch the orthodox. I wrote about these programs almost a year ago. Allow me to repeat some of my points. First, consider this little blurb in our Diocesan Chronicle (Nov. 7, 2010 edition):

Seen any CAVE people lately? Those who attended this year’s Clergy Assembly will now be on the lookout for them. Why? Because it is the CAVE people who contribute to so many of our parishes being dragged down to the brink of failure. So who are these CAVE people? CAVE people are those members of our parish who Complain About Virtually Everything! You know who they are. Whenever you try to do anything in your parish they are the ones who make it clear to anyone who will listen that it will never work. The problem is that too many listen to them. What we need is more of those who do not spend all their time complaining, but are spending more of their time growing in holiness, to have a greater influence in our parishes. These people we will refer to as being “engaged” in their parish.

  

“CAVE people”, eh? I think I’m considered one of those. I have pushed a couple of parish priests – and even a bishop or two – to conform to the mind of the Church, especially with regard to liturgical issues. I have tried my best to always be respectful, to back up my request with documentation from Church sources, and to keep the issue between me and the priest. And I make an effort to compliment priests when they do things well, and to acknowledge the tough job they have. Still, here are the responses I’ve received: “This is the way we’ve always done it”; “Other parishes do it, so it’s okay”; “Why do you have to be so ‘by-the-book’?”; “You’re right; but sometimes there are more important things than being right.”

I have a sneaking suspicion that CAVE people are simply the ones who won’t go along with the crowd. In every parish there seems to be a core group of people with loud voices and lots of “political” power in the parish; if we were talking about junior high, we’d say they formed a clique. “Why can’t we all just get along?” they ask. But what they really mean is, “Like it or lump it. This is how it’s gonna be.” And if you complain about that, you are a CAVE person. It amounts to sanctioned name-calling and stereotyping.

The ones whose blood boils at the first tepid signs of liturgical abuse try to sound the alarm, but the frogs in the water have already been lulled into submission. And so the average parishioner who just wants to show up for Sunday Mass and sing a few well-loved ditties is sitting in water that gets closer and closer to the boiling point, not even realizing the danger.

For related posts, click on the "TLM and Liturgy" tab above.

More Liturgical Abuse

Here are a few more thoughts on a couple more cases of liturgical abuse, and some thoughts on liturgical abuse in general.

First, the other day there was a story on Rorate Caeli blog about a “Memorial Mason Mass”, with several photos of the event. It was noted that:

What makes this mass noteworthy, therefore, is the occasion: it is a memorial new mass for the "Day of the Freemason", celebrated by Father Geraldo de Magela Silva, of the Diocese of Pesqueira (state of Pernambuco, Brazil), on August 20, 2012. Its images were actually posted on the Facebook page of a Masonic organization.

Talk about a contradiction in terms! The Masons have been condemned by the Church for centuries, and the Catholic faithful are still forbidden to be members!

Also occurring in Brazil was this ludicrous and sacrilegious scene:

 

(H/T Tantamergo via Eponymous Flower)

Apparently, the young woman has joined the priest in the “Agnus Dei”. And in the photo below, she is administering Holy Communion under both species. 

As Tantamergo noted:

Is this dress considered sufficiently modest to take the very Lord of the Universe into one’s hands and then distribute it to another?

Amen, brother.

Back to that imminent water park Mass in the Diocese of Honolulu…I have had a few thoughtful comments from readers. CatholicSacristan said (my emphases):

When will prelates, priests and people realize that the aged hippy-dippy generation, shorthand for "Spirit of Vatican II" folk, was and is wrong about the Liturgy? They mistakenly think that making the Liturgy "relevant" will engage young people. My experience with contemporary college students indicates that a different tack is required. The college students I know have indicated in no uncertain terms that they want Tradition. They want Catholic identity and substance not frothy, abuse ridden liturgies which focus on the people (rather than Christ) and only serve to create a cult of personality. They want deep ritual and many routinely go to the TLM at Our Lady Queen of Peace and the Latin OF on Saturdays. In brief, they want Christ not kitsch, Jesus not cheesy. [See also his post “A Tale of Two Maui Parishes”]

I don’t know very many college students these days, but I keep hearing that young people are looking for something more than the fluff that’s too often all there is to the typical parish Novus Ordo Mass. I pray it is true!

Another reader emailed me with this comment (my emphasis):

It seems to me that if there was one thing I would want Catholics to know, it would be that the Mass is the most important thing there is, and that it is separate from all other gatherings/celebrations/ meetings/missions/services, etc. Just leave the Mass alone and you can do whatever with all those other things. Sing all that music and do all your dancing, etc. somewhere else. In the window of my parish church it says, 'Daily service 8:00'. SERVICE!!! To me that shows a huge lack of catechesis at the very basic level.

Exactly! The Eucharist is the source and summit of our Christian life! Why do we see it marred and mocked by liturgical abuses?

I think that in many cases, the liturgy is abused in ignorance. People just don’t know. And they’ve been Protestantized to the extent that their Catholic sensibilities are not speaking very loudly. Sometimes the faithful “just know” something is wrong in a particular Mass, but they can’t put their finger on it; other times, the abuse screams so loudly that even our numbed and dumbed-down Catholic identity recognizes it and objects.

The sad fact is that we can find priests and bishops who seem to hold the correct Catholic moral view of things like abortion, contraception, and homosexual “marriage”, and who might even “go public” in trying to educate the faithful about these things. But these same priests and bishops fall flat when it comes to the liturgy. They will uphold Catholic moral teaching in the same Mass where liturgical abuses abound!

And yet, the Mass is the foundation! The Eucharist is the source and summit of our Christian life! If we would just get it right, so many wrongs would be corrected.

Save the liturgy, save the world.

Liturgical Abuse: Sweating the Small Stuff

I’m sure you’ve heard this one: “Rule Number One is, don’t sweat the small stuff. Rule Number Two is, it’s all small stuff.” 

No, really;
DO sweat the small stuff!

That may be a workable adage for earthly matters, but not for spiritual concerns. In the Kingdom, everything is turned upside down: the meek shall inherit the earth; when I am weak, then I am strong; we must die to self in order to truly live. In the Kingdom, sometimes the “small stuff” is the truly important stuff. And in the Kingdom, it’s definitely not all “small stuff”.

Concerning the liturgy, the “little things” spelled out in the rubrics or in Canon Law or in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) are all there for a reason, and the net effect of a correct implementation of each part is a more beautiful portrait of the Heavenly Banquet. In his book Worship as a Revelation, Laurence Paul Hemming states,

A further part of this textual character of the liturgy as a whole is the vestments the furnishing and ordering of the church interior, the shape and character of the sacred vessels, the materials from which all is made, its exact placing and so forth. Everything in a church intends a meaning, so that the whole of the liturgy, its chant, what is performed, by whom, and how, where, and when, form a whole textual complex with intricate significance. (p. 11)

It seems to me that the average Catholic – the one who goes to Mass on Sunday and maybe holy days of obligation (wait…is that really average any more?) – well, anyway, the average Catholic: a) doesn’t know what the rubrics say about how the liturgy is supposed to be celebrated; b) doesn’t care; and c) is fine with keeping things just as they are. “This is how we’ve always done it”, and they don’t want anything to change.

The result is that – at least where I live – we have Catholic parishes that look, act, and think more like Protestant churches: the focus of worship is more human-centered – it’s all about ‘us’. The music is “what makes us feel good”. The homilies are pablum (actually, a lot of Protestant homilists are serving meat, while many Catholic priests stick to cereal). We want to be “inclusive” and make people feel “comfortable”.  

Seriously?!

The liturgy is too significant to take lightly or to meddle with unnecessarily: It is “the summit toward which the activity of the Church is directed; it is also the fount from which all her power flows" (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 10). It is the source and summit of our life as Christians (Lumen Gentium, 11). It is the earthly sign of the heavenly banquet and our communion with the saints: “In the earthly liturgy we take part in a foretaste of that heavenly liturgy which is celebrated in the Holy City of Jerusalem toward which we journey as pilgrims…” (SC, 8). What can possibly be “small” in such an important piece of our Catholic Christian identity?

Here’s a list of some of the “small stuff” that bothers me at Mass:

• Sloppily attired altar servers
• “Contemporary” music
• Priest adding “Good morning” at the beginning of the liturgy, and “Have a nice day” at the end
• Inappropriate items placed on the altar
• Using the altar as a background for “seasonal” decorations

And here’s a list of some of the “big stuff” that makes me cringe:

• Priest adlibbing the Lamb of God and/or any other prayers
• Calling for “spontaneous” general intercessions
• Inappropriate vestments
• Lay ministers performing tasks that should be reserved to priests, deacons, or acolytes
• Unvested lay ministers entering the sanctuary to receive Holy Communion
• Acolytes and deacons performing tasks that should be reserved to priests

These are just a few examples, and you may agree or disagree as to whether they are “small stuff” or “big stuff”. To me, frankly, they’re all “big stuff”. These errors violate the sacred structure of the Mass, disdain tradition and apostolic teaching, and contribute to a general lack of reverence for the liturgy.  

The point is, in the liturgy, we need to sweat all of the “stuff” in order to make sure that the big picture is not out of focus.

But my view is not shared by many in the parishes I’ve experienced. An entirely different attitude prevails: one of casualness. One parishioner asked me in all sincerity, “Do you really think that stuff matters to God?” She also wondered aloud why my opinion on liturgical matters should matter more than hers or some other parishioners’. My explanation that it was not my opinion, but rather, what the Church demands of us for Her liturgy, fell on deaf ears. This parishioner – and she’s not the only one – has no concept of the authority of Church teaching, documents, or tradition. She doesn’t know the difference between an encyclical and an encyclopedia, or between the GIRM and the missalette (“Isn’t everything we need to know in the missalette?” she inquired).

Another parishioner told me didn’t understand why we should have to follow a bunch of rules about the way the sanctuary was furnished and how the altar was covered. “I think people should be comfortable when they come to church,” he said.

Yep. He's comfortable...

Sadly, this comment is probably the most telling of all. I would say that people are definitely “comfortable” in our Catholic churches. They are so comfortable that they feel free to traipse through the sanctuary at will, with a quick nod of the head toward the tabernacle. They feel comfortable enough to enter the sanctuary and stand right next to the altar to receive Holy Communion. The altar servers feel comfortable enough to slouch and yawn their way through Mass. The priests are comfortable enough to treat their role as one of talk-show host. Once, I suggested to a priest that if Jesus entered the room, we would all fall on our faces in adoration, not just greet him with a casual, “Oh, hi, Lord.” He laughed and said he would probably do the latter.

In truth, most priests probably do follow the rubrics quite well… or at least intend to. For most, any errors are probably due to oversight or ignorance, rather than willful disobedience. Busy parish priests may find it difficult to take the time to study the GIRM. However, shouldn’t this have been covered in the seminary?!

I also understand that priests are faced with “parishioner pressure” – those pillars of the local parish community who tell the priest, “But this is the way we’ve always done it”. And certainly, re-catechizing such parishioners can be a daunting task. In my own little parish, I have had unfruitful conversations with others regarding liturgical issues.

But I think priests and bishops are making a big mistake by “going with the flow” in their parishes and dioceses. If they are not moving toward greater liturgical excellence, then they’re going backwards. And they are doing a disservice to the faithful.

When priests and bishops dismiss liturgical abuses as insignificant they do two things: First of all, they allow the faithful to persist in their errors, and hand these errors on to the next generation of parishioners (“that’s how we’ve always done it”). They dilute our Catholic identity.

Second, they cause scandal. When a faithful Catholic discovers the truth about the liturgy, he’s bound to wonder why the shepherds of the Church have failed to teach it. When a faithful Catholic begins to see the beauty, wisdom, majesty, and pure depth of Catholic tradition, he is bound to wonder why the shepherds of the Church have hidden it.

And he begins to wonder if those shepherds are really wolves in sheep’s clothing. That is not a good thing.

Personally, I’ve been maligned by the pastor of my own parish (and beyond) because of my orthodox views, and my willingness to insist on liturgical correctness. I’ve been censured by an acting bishop. So what I see is that the leadership of the Church cares very little about the liturgy, but very much about popular opinion. And since my “opinion” is not popular, they don’t care about it.

It doesn’t bother me that the powers-that-be (or even my friends, family, and fellow parishioners) don’t care about my “opinions”.  Sometimes, I don’t care about theirs, either!

What bothers me is that they are so quick to dismiss what the Church has to say about the liturgy and how it should be celebrated. This is not a matter of opinion, and shouldn’t be dismissed as such. It is a matter of truth.

When people say the rubrics are optional or don’t matter for some reason or another, what they are really saying is that their opinion should hold sway! And they tell me I’m too “rigid”.

To them, I offer this thought from Pope Benedict XVI, writing as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger:

The life of the liturgy does not come from what dawns upon the minds of individuals and planning groups…[It] becomes personal, true, and new, not through tomfoolery and banal experiments with the words, but through a courageous entry into the great reality that through the rite is always ahead of us and can never quite be overtaken.

Does it still need to be explicitly stated that all this has nothing to do with rigidity? (Spirit of the Liturgy, p. 168)