« The Death Penalty & Creeping Infallibilism | Main | "Don't You Know Who I Am?" »
April 04, 2006
Surviving Sunday Mass
(Michelle Arnold)
One of the pitfalls of becoming a Catholic educated in the faith is that occasions for outrage rise exponentially. One of my favorite parts of Mass as a baby Catholic was joining hands to sing the Our Father. Now I dread the touch on my arm -- or the occasional poke in the ribs -- that signals that someone isn’t listening to my “I don’t hold hands at the Our Father”-body language.
As I learned more about Liturgical Correctness -- have you noticed that “liberal” Catholics are Politically Correct and “conservative” Catholics are Liturgically Correct? -- I struggled with maintaining a sense of worship while a Mass would circle the Pit of Relativity. I wasn’t interested in signing up with radical Traditionalism but I sympathized with the outrage radical Traditionalists feel when liturgical rubrics intended to safeguard the dignity of the Mass are treated as menu options at Cafeteria Catholicism.
One article that helped me during this time was a piece Jimmy wrote on maintaining spiritual peace in the midst of problems in the Church. I especially took heed at the image of outraged congregants becoming spiritual fruitchuckers and my prayer at Mass for spiritual peace would often consist of “Lord, please don’t let me become a spiritual fruitchucker.”
Fortunately for me, over the years that I’ve attended, my parish has improved. So much so that I would unhesitatingly recommend it to anyone seeking a Good Parish in San Diego. A lot of the longstanding liturgical abuses -- everything from a missing altar crucifix during Advent and Easter to a horde of EMHCs gathered ’round the altar -- have been swept away. Parish life has also improved: We are blessed with perpetual eucharistic adoration (the establishment of this being the point at which I detected the shift to parish orthopraxy) and with regular retreats, missions, and seminars offered by solidly-orthodox lay speakers.
That’s why I was caught off-guard this past Sunday. Here’s what happened:
Because this Mass hosted the third Lenten scrutiny for the RCIA, we used the alternate readings, which meant that the Gospel reading was the raising of Lazarus. I closed my eyes in disgust when three of the lay RCIA facilitators traipsed up to the altar to join in the “interactive” Gospel reading -- something only supposed to happen on Palm Sunday and Good Friday. But it was when one of the lay readers cordially invited us to sit for the Gospel that I had to choke back some heated commentary of my own. It had been awhile since this particular abuse had occurred but this time I managed to lower the kneeler without thumping it against the floor in outrage. (My solution to previous invitations to sit for the Gospel had been to kneel -- a more profound sign of reverence than standing -- rather than contribute to the spectacle by being the lone person standing.) When the “players” proceeded to use a translation not found in my missalette, I dropped my head into my hands and spent the Gospel reading praying for spiritual peace.
The show over, the priest gave a good homily but one that seemed strangely brief. Immediately we found out why: The rest of the time for the homily had been given over to a lay speaker there to encourage everyone to attend a Lenten mission he’d be conducting this week. Although I’d have preferred for the priest to have given a short homily and then invited the layman to speak during the period for announcements -- he could even have mentioned at the end of his homily that the layman would be speaking during the announcements to let the early-birds know not to run out during the announcements -- I found myself enjoying the talk and looking forward to the Lenten mission. Surely, thought I, the peace I’d prayed for had been granted.
Then came time for the priest to impose hands on the elect. First, though, we sat through a litany of the personal hopes and needs of each candidate. “Free X from bondage to procrastination,” chanted our cantor, “That he might find resolve in you.” Obviously X and his fellow candidates in RCIA had been asked to plug in the vice to which they were enslaved and the virtue they prayed would replace it. (Curiously, at least three candidates wanted to be freed from Demon Procrastination, so I wondered if the RCIA director had suggested it as a Sample Vice that could penned into the "vice" blank.) As I've done for several Lents now, I once again gave thanks that my RCIA experience in this parish ten years previously had not required me to bare my soul like this. There’s a reason the Church moved from public to private confession over a millennium ago.
Finally the priest imposed his hands and prayed over the candidates, so I thought we were blessedly done with this and could move on to the Creed. Nope. First the congregation was cordially invited to extend their hands to the elect and pray along with the priest. Then we were to “welcome” the elect with a hearty round of applause. To all the world appearing mean and curmudgeonly because I did not want to join in this, I prayed but did not extend my hand and settled for aiming a bright smile of welcome to the elect rather than applaud.
Finally, finally, it was done. The elect were sent back to their seats and we could continue with the Mass. But by this time even the priest apparently was so disoriented that he completely forgot to lead us in the Creed and the prayers of intercession, instead skipping directly to the offeratory. While the congregation was busily singing a hymn of repentance (I kid you not), I flipped to the Creed and, sotto voce, read it aloud. (I’ve found that even a memorized prayer is hard to recall when everyone else is singing a song.)
So, did I leave that Mass angry? Thankfully, no. By the time Mass was over, my spiritual equilibrium was back in place. Certainly grace played its part, but I also reminded myself how rare such spectacles had become at this particular parish. I reminded myself of the overwhelming good this parish has done, and not because I had been in any way directly involved in shaping the parish’s liturgical or communal life. A host of good people, clerical and lay, could take credit for that. All for which I could take credit -- and even the credit for this that was mine was limited because God deserved most of it -- was for triumphing over the temptation to become a spiritual fruitchucker.
This story is a long lead-in to another post. How do we avoid going rad Trad when the temptations to do so can sometimes be overwhelming? How do we prevent righteous anger at genuine problems in the Church from eating away at our souls like dropped acid and turning us into bitter, disaffected souls isolated from the mainstream of Catholic life? I don’t have the cure, or even an inoculation, to radical Traditionalism, but only some suggestions that may help. Those suggestions will be the focus of an upcoming post.
Posted by Michelle Arnold in Liturgy | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/24994/4589218
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Surviving Sunday Mass:
Comments
O-o-o-h-h, Michelle,
This reminds me of the guided meditation and group homilies of our old parish.
Ugh!
You did well to keep your peace.
Posted by: Tim J. | Apr 4, 2006 5:15:58 AM
With all due respect... what's so bad about being Rad Trad?
I am grateful that these abuses are few and far between at your church, but if you'd like to come to my neck o' the woods to see the spiritual wasteland that American Catholicism has become, you might be especially fervent in your thanks that the Lord has delivered you from making a grim choice among:
1) Heterodox Catholic services
2) (Mostly) orthodox Protestant services, obviously not in communion with Rome but much more Catholic than # 1, but lacking the Eucharist
3) (Mostly) orthodox Eastern Orthodox Divine Liturgy, with the Eucharist and the other Divine Mysteries, but with bitter anti-Rome diatribes tacked on
4) SSPX and/or independent chapel reverent worship, with the Eucharist and the sacraments, but also with sniping against Rome and possibly (lots of passionate debate back and forth here) schismatic to boot?
No wonder I'm more Rad Trad than anything else. I can think of a lot worse things, despite some things in the Rad Trad movement I don't like, than a widespread return to some sort of ancient, reverent Liturgy.
Posted by: Orthros | Apr 4, 2006 5:37:44 AM
I have had problems with the holding hands during the Our Father, but I was blessed with several opportunities to avoid it.
1) When I was single, the parish I used to go to openly discouraged the holding of hands during the Our Father (even posting little notes on the pews).
2) Once I got married, I found that I could get around the hand-holding problem by sitting on the end, while holding the hand of my wife, who (through the sacrament of Matrimony) is one with me - it's like holding my own hand.
This was fine until my wife joined the choir. I could still get around this if I was an EME for that Mass, because the EMEs leave our pews at the Our Father to walk around the back and gather off to the side until after the priest receives the Eucharist. The other weeks, I then had to resort to folding my hands together and bowing my head, hoping no one would nudge me. Then came the best excuse of all not to hold hands.
3) I have a 1 year old daughter. She cannot be held with just 1 arm, except magically when I am receiving the sacred species under the guise of wine. Nobody feels the need to hold my hand when I am holding my daughter in my arms.
I figure if we can keep having infants and small toddlers until an official ruling on hand-holding, I'll be good. :-)
Posted by: Jamie Beu | Apr 4, 2006 6:41:01 AM
A couple of years ago I went to a Good Friday service and walked out in the middle. It began with the priest processing up to the altar. Then he sat down and conducted the entire rest of the service from the front pew. The Passion was acted by many, many people and accompanied by mood lighting and sound effects. When the liturgical dancers started just before the veneration of the cross, I left. I just couldn't stand it.
Posted by: Ellen | Apr 4, 2006 6:47:15 AM
Thank you, Michelle. I've always been disturbed at how bitter some folks can become about what goes on in a parish. (And then I notice myself getting just as angry--either in response to some liturgical abuse or, equally as often, in response to someone's bitter reaction to some abuse...this whole "beam in my own eye" thing is tough.)
An honest question: why are people so adamantly opposed to holding hands during the Our Father? Is this not permitted? Have the bishops or Rome spoken on this?
I ask because, early in the process of my conversion, before I entered RCIA and understood what the Eucharist was, holding hands and singing the Our Father was one of the most prayerful points in the mass for me. Of course I know now this is not the center of the mass, but I still don't understand how this constitutes a grave liturgical abuse.
Any light shed on that would be appreciated.
Posted by: pritcher | Apr 4, 2006 6:48:48 AM
Whenever our priest asks us to "extend our hands in blessing" I only extend my right arm as in a Roman salute, but NOT very high and stiff like the Nazi.
At a nearby parish, we were recently nudged to stand during the Consecration. We ignored them and continued to kneel on the floor. ( Kneelers are a luxury of course in most of the world).
I have also attended a Benediction officiated by a lay woman. What a nightmare. I left.
Posted by: John F. Kennedy | Apr 4, 2006 6:50:44 AM
Perhaps some clarification might be in order as to what you consider "Rad" Trad.... different people seem to have different definitions of what constitutes "radical" in this regard. Do you consider radical (as opposed to non-radical) Traditionalism to be a certain level of activity, including possibly:
1) Attending an indult Mass rather than a Novus Ordo?
2) Attending an SSPX chapel?
3) Outright sedevacantism?
I ask because, say, someone who attends an indult Mass might use the term RadTrad of sedevacantists; but someone who attends a Novus Ordo Mass might use it of those who go to the indult. Likewise, someone who attends a clown Mass might use the term of those who attend an Latin and/or orthoprax Novus Ordo. I am speaking only, of course, of those who use the term "RadTrad" in a derogatory fashion, and not those who use it proudly of themselves.
Or do you use it to refer to a certain outlook of bitterness & anger which is often seen in traditionalist comments on the state of the Church & liturgy? This latter can affect someone who is active at any of the three levels mentioned above, but seems to increase as you go down the list.
Posted by: | Apr 4, 2006 6:53:07 AM
Michelle,
We (I mean Catholics trying to live a faithful life) fight the fight 6+ days a week. We constantly have our faith derided and must struggle to live our faith in charity and constancy. On Sunday, for most of the day, we continue the fight, if we strive to make the Lord's day holy in the face of modern, consumer society.
What we should NOT have to do is to fight for the faith AT MASS! Is it too much to ask that for one hour a week or so, during the very act of worship of God and at the holy Sacrifice we are commanded to offer, we can be nourished and consoled?
I think not. It is not "rad trad" to attend an approved traditional Mass. You might like it. What I can tell you is that we have a wonderful parish here in St. Louis run by the ICKSP. People aren't bitter, they're joyful-- because their faith is nourished.
Posted by: tim | Apr 4, 2006 7:11:28 AM
There have been no converts in my church for years - at least 7. So you do have something to thank God for.
Posted by: JW | Apr 4, 2006 7:13:13 AM
I usually avoid this problem at my parish by going to the 10:00 Latin (Novus Ordo) Mass, but my fiance will be starting RCIA soona,d that requires attendance at the 5:30 Mass, or, as she likes to call it, the Rogers and Hammerstein Mass. We attended one recently and I was so put off by elements of the Mass, though it was capped by one of those renditions of the Agnus Dei where they insist on changing the words. This upset me so much that I did not receive the Eucharist - which is foolish of me since I should have just prayed for peace and allowed Christ to soothe my soul, especially since the Mass itself is not really as bad as the ones I've heard about from others.
This does concern me, though, because we'll have to attend this Mass for at least a year, maybe more depending on how RCIA progresses. Lucklily the presiding priest at 5:30 sometimes is our very young and very orthodox new priest, but I've heard from a friend of mine that the usual presider is one who tends to give, as he puts it, Maureen Dowd-like homilies. This will truly try my patience.
Whenever I'm at a Mass like that I tend to get upset, but eventually I am able to block out all those trifles and recognize that I am in the presence of Christ. But it can be difficult, and as someone who does prefer the Tridentine, it's even that more painful.
I don't think you have to go "Rad Trad" to avoid these types of situations. If Mass is routinely agitating your soul, I just think you have to see if you can go elsewhere, because Mass should not be a trying experience. But it sounds like a rare thing for your parish, so I think the best thing is to sweep it under the rug and forget about it. But also, we can help change our communities for the better. We are the laity, and just as some members of the laity have contributed to these liturgical abuses, we can work to try and correct them. Become more active in the parish, get on the whatever liturgical board it might have - or some other formation committee, and be an agent for change. At least that's what I intend to do.
Posted by: paul | Apr 4, 2006 7:24:36 AM
Ah Fond memories I have of my RCIA experience. I was a revert.I returned to the Church after 25 years of wondering in Charasmania, Word of faith and Fundamentalism. At the age of 45, I returned to my Catholic roots that haunted me. I sought the Blessings of Confirmation and had to endure my RCIA instruction that had no guidlines or direction. A director that tried to spin everything in a Protestant direction with hand holding and very little instruction. At one point we attended a "dry" Mass so they could explain what happened. I bit my lip as many didnt genuflect and leaned on the altar. We did very little discussion of the Catholic faith..but the coffee and cookies were great! It is now a 2 year program at our parish..they get baptised the first year and confirmed the second Easter! My parish still holds hands during prayer, raises their hands with the priest and despite direction from Our new Pastor. THEY still clap after Mass and immediatly start talking while others are kneeling (WE no longer kneel from the Holy Holy Holy to the Great Amen..some new teaching..i guess that we have from our american pope down Southin L.A!) in prayer! Our new priest are faithful to the Church and continue to guide us but The parish is strong in the "Dark Side". This the parish I grew up in that said Latin. The first parish to turn its Altars around aftyer Vat2. Our Pastor Emeritus and a Monsignor has been essentially ostercized out of the Parish (A faithful 80 year old priest that pastored only one parish- Ours....I am so disheartened that I go to a "RadTrad" to find some Catholic teaching and reverence. I am even considering SSPX down the street because they are closer. Being "RadTrad" maybe the last sanctuary for the Catholic faithful if we continue this path.
Posted by: Mark | Apr 4, 2006 7:25:46 AM
Dear Michelle,
(Taking inspiration from you by not naming the pertinent parish. We both know where I serve as associate, and we both know where you go to church.) Little by little, I'm doing my part to help good people in the parish to tidy up things so they're more in line with our obligations as professed members of the Church.
Several persons joining the priest in reading the roles in the Gospel. There is resistance to an effort to end this particular practice.
Using the wrong translation of the Gospel. I've already obtained an agreement that we need to update to the current approved translation. The challenge is not only for the Scrutiny Masses, but also for a few of the feastdays proper to this parish, when the parish supplies to the congregation copies of all the readings for Mass. E.g., the parish patron saint's feast: same printed-on-cardstock programs re-used every year, but with the former approved translation, rather than the current.
Liturgical options within the R.C.I.A. Hoo-wee! Quite a few options have been opted in and opted out. There is legitimate (published) permission for adaptation to persons and circumstances within the R.C.I.A. rites. The problem for me is in my wishing to say, "I would prefer that you not exercise that particular option," or, "I would prefer that you not exercise that option in that particular fashion."
The Profession of Faith (the Creed). The R.C.I.A. rubrics for Mass do permit the omission of the Creed when the Scrutinies take place. I'm not in favor of that, but it's a legitimate option, and I'm not the pastor of the parish.
I, too, am tempted to be a "spiritual" fruitchucker. (AND ... if I were a pastor, I would no longer be tempted--I would BE a chucker: OUT goes this option, OUT goes that, IN comes this rubric, IN comes that.)
May the Holy Spirit continue to bless your good spirit!
.
Posted by: Fr. "MichelleArnold-Knows-Who" | Apr 4, 2006 7:29:53 AM
for Pritcher...
QUERY: In some places there is a current practice whereby those taking part in the Mass replace the giving of the sign of peace at the deacon's invitation by holding hands during the singing of the Lord's Prayer. Is this acceptable? REPLY: The prolonged holding of hands is of itself a sign of communion rather than of peace. Further, it is a liturgical gesture introduced spontaneously but on personal initiative; it is not in the rubrics. Nor is there any clear explanation of why the sign of peace at the invitation: "Let us offer each other the sign of peace" should be supplanted in order to bring a different gesture with less meaning into another part of the Mass: the sign of peace is filled with meaning, graciousness, and Christian inspiration. Any substitution for it must be repudiated: Notitiae 11 (1975) 226. [Notitiae is the journal of the Congregation in which its official interpretations of the rubrics are published.]
Note the instruction "REPUDIATED"! This means it is forbibben and that it is not wanted.
Posted by: Pseudomodo | Apr 4, 2006 7:34:58 AM
Heres one for Jimmy...In a new parish building..The tabernacle is behind athe altar seperated witha wall! 5 feet from the exit! Oh it gets better...IT PLEXIGLASS..so the faithful can see the glass chalice and Jesus glass ciboreum! The priests wear pin stripped suits with their collars! And NO KNEELERS ANYWHERE!!!!!! Oh and totop the SUNDAE ( pun intended) The altar is a varathaned peice of rough Oak stump!!!!!!!! that is bare until during Mass ..the congregation carries out the Altar cloth and "dinnerware". Oh yes..the Hosts are in a basket!...Now tell why "radtrad" is bad ?...Blessings Jimmy
Posted by: Mark | Apr 4, 2006 7:37:49 AM
Thanks, Pseudomodo...that makes sense, as far as it goes.
But I've never participated in a mass where the holding hands "supplanted" the sign of peace; it's never been (in my experience, at least, but maybe I've just been lucky) a "substitution," only, as you've cited, "a sign of communion."
Posted by: pritcher | Apr 4, 2006 7:52:55 AM
Are you really of the opinion that Catholic Traditionalism is a sin which temptations to must be guarded against, or even a disease for which you must search for a cure or an innoculation?
Words fail in the face of such condescension.
Posted by: Wow | Apr 4, 2006 8:08:49 AM
"An honest question: why are people so adamantly opposed to holding hands during the Our Father? Is this not permitted? Have the bishops or Rome spoken on this?"
Aside from the fact that it is not called for in the rubrics, there are many reasons why people object to holding hands during the Our Father. For many people, hand-holding is a very personal action shared with those who are very close--spouses, lovers, parents and children. To be forced to participate or appear hopelessly churlish is unfair and embarrassing to them. A person who does not wish to hold hands in a congregation of people who have come to fully expect everyone to hold hands, is forced to take a perceptively negative action, i.e. actively declining to hold hands. This marks that person out as an unfriendly boor when, ironically, all they are doing is declining to participate in an act that is not even required!
What about the objection "At Mass we are all supposed to be one big family anyway; we should be able to show the love we are supposed to feel." Well, that is the express purpose of "the kiss of peace" before Holy Communion. In some cultures, a fraternal gesture is literally a kiss. In the Orient, it is a polite bow. In our culture, it is a friendly shaking of hands. To go from a more intimate expression of love (holding hands) to a less intimate (a handshake) does not make any sense. If someone wants to hold hands with their spouse or kids during the Our Father, it's a nice personal gesture. When the entire congregation automatically goes into the s-t-r-e-t-c-h across the pews mode at the invitation to pray, it becomes intrusive and presumptive.
Frankly, I am astounded that people go to so much trouble to defend any un-mandated action that, effectively, forces other people, willing or not, to participate. If someone wants to individually whirl like a dervish or bounce on one foot, or pick their I-don't-know-what and it makes them feel holier to do so during Mass, then they should go for it. But for goodness sakes, just because it makes them feel good, they shouldn't insist on promoting an un-mandated practice that makes others feel like boors if they don't feel the same way about it and decline to play along.
Posted by: Vince C | Apr 4, 2006 8:10:53 AM
Michelle,
Your post really resonated with me. It's sad, isn't it, when the greatest consolation so many Catholics have is, "Well, the liturgical abuse at our parish could be a whole lot worse."
This is the third Lent in which our parish has decided to skip the official Penitential Rite and replace it with their own construct. As the Priest & Co. process to the altar, the cantor leads the people in singing what they call a penitential litany, to each phrase of which the people respond, "Hold us in your mery." When the priest reaches the alter, everyone is supposed to kneel until the end of the song. When it's over, having skipped both the Introductory Rite and Pentitential Rite, the priest launches into Opening Prayer and then the Liturgy of the Word.
The first year, I wrote a letter to the pastor (citing relevant documents) pointing out that although it was laudable to try to bring the congregation to a greater sense of the penitence proper to Lent, that this sort of change was illicit. No response of course, and things have remained the same every Lent since. (Though I notice that this year at least one priest is inserting the prayer of absolution at the end of the song.)
Because of a commitment to unlock and work in the parish library every Sunday, I can't feasibly attend a Mass at a different parish. (And who knows, things may be even worse at surrounding parishes!) But I salve my conscience by withholding my active participation as well as my regular donations during Lent (which I then send to a Catholic charity).
And now, thanks to you Michelle, I will also pray for spiritual peace.
Posted by: MomLady | Apr 4, 2006 8:25:06 AM
"Are you really of the opinion that Catholic Traditionalism is a sin which temptations to must be guarded against, or even a disease for which you must search for a cure or an innoculation?"
But especially contradictory is a notion of Tradition which opposes the universal Magisterium of the Church possessed by the Bishop of Rome and the Body of Bishops. It is impossible to remain faithful to the Tradition while breaking the ecclesial bond with him to whom, in the person of the Apostle Peter, Christ himself entrusted the ministry of unity in his Church. APOSTOLIC LETTER "ECCLESIA DEI" OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF JOHN PAUL II
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J
Posted by: Inocencio | Apr 4, 2006 8:35:29 AM
The whole Rad Trad problem comes from two opposing evils; liturgical abuse and doctrinal dissent on the one hand, and schism on the other.
Neither can be excused or commended.
I applaud those who can attend an approved indult Mass. There is not one (that I know of) within driving distance of our parish, but if there were, I would be there every Sunday. If you have access to an approved Latin Mass, you are very blessed.
I am a traditionalist, but I would never dream of letting that drive me away from communion with Peter.
The emptiness of these novel liturgical fumblings is becoming evident. The traditional Mass will make a comeback. In the meantime, pray, wait on the Lord and remain united with His Church.
Posted by: Tim J. | Apr 4, 2006 8:39:04 AM
I really hope that B16 helps to re-enchant the mass. It seems that the liturgy has absolutely collapsed in the US. The mass is celebrated so poorly in my neck of the woods that (during my conversion from Protestantism) I actually thought of going Eastern Orthodox or SSPX because I thought "How could anything so ugly be true?".
Luckily, I did find a parish that celebrated an NO mass with Latin, chant, ad oreientem, incense, communion rail, altar boys, orthodox homilies, etc. It was nice to know that there are some parishes out there that are not afraid to look and act Catholic.
Posted by: Arieh O. | Apr 4, 2006 8:55:42 AM
"But especially contradictory is a notion of Tradition which opposes the universal Magisterium of the Church possessed by the Bishop of Rome and the Body of Bishops."
If you will read again you will find that this does not refer to Traditionalism but only a notion which claims Tradition but which opposes the Magisterium. You should further note that the Ecclesia Dei indult encouraged Bishops to allow the celebration of the traditional liturgy, not suppress it.
Between the self-rightous condemnations coming from the SSPX and the Novus Ordo Catholics, what is a Tradition loving, Tridentine liturgy worshipping, Magisterium loving Catholic to do?
Pray for peace and have faith the Holy Spirit will put things to right.
Posted by: Wow | Apr 4, 2006 9:02:49 AM
The sad part form me is that Sunday at my family parish is one of the more stressful days of my week. As others have said "it could be worse" but how are we supposed to evangelize others when we are leaving Mass with a cloud over our heads?
One strength of our faith is the authority held by our pope and bishops, so why is liturgical abuse still a problem?!?
Posted by: Mike Mercure | Apr 4, 2006 9:19:33 AM
I am a traditionalist, but I would never dream of letting that drive me away from communion with Peter.
Well spoken, Tim J. Thx for the quote from Ecclesia Dei, Inocencio.
There is clearly increasing interest in traditional Mass. This has been true in my life, and I hear evidence of it in others increasingly often. I think that these are evidence of a deep hunger for increased reverence, for a greater participation in the holy mysteries. And that is clearly a fruit of the Holy Spirit—how could it be anything else?
With that in mind, I think it's valid for this increased reverence to show up in the Novus Ordo, as it clearly does in the Benedictine community Mass (with their many forms, including both Latin and English elements etc.) that I’m often able to attend frequently. I think the same can be said for the indult Masses, which our archdiocese is blessed to have two communities offer daily. Of the two I prefer the Novus Ordo with the Benedictines (both in Latin and English forms), but for others the indult Mass seems best. And there are other valid ways to express the increased reverence as well.
so why is liturgical abuse still a problem?!?
I think there are many causes, but another way to look at it is to wonder what we can we do to change it?
Prayer, speaking out, and ... I may well be wrong, but I think some key parts of changing the qualities of the liturgy are to truly endeavor to treat the mass as the Mass, stay faithful to the Magisterium, grow in personal holiness, and charitably call our communities to the same. What form that takes will vary from parish to parish, but we can be at peace that as long as we’re obedient to the Magisterium we’re at least moving in the right direction.
And somewhere in there we’ll see a small glimmer of the freedom that comes from obedience!
Posted by: Bob Lozano | Apr 4, 2006 9:27:43 AM
How do we avoid going rad Trad when the temptations to do so can sometimes be overwhelming?
That's easy, you just go to the SSPX publisher's website and see that they're selling collections of essays by Noam Chomsky, Eric Margolis and Robert Fisk!
http://www.angeluspress.org/index.php?act=warehouse&info=8145
Wackos.
:)
Posted by: BillyHW | Apr 4, 2006 9:48:50 AM
"spiritual wasteland that American Catholicism has become"
Wow! I don't like holding hands either but sheesh.
Lets go to a movie theater, and see Passion of the Christ, but rather than focus on the supernatural aspects of mass, or the story of Christs passion lets complain about the uncomfortable chairs, how that AmerMark theater down the street has better sound equipment, or better statutes and special effects, or how the audio skipped a part.
I go to college, and at our parish our Lady has brought together so many from all parts of the state for her Son. There are masses with guitars, sure, not my preference, but there are also college students learning classic latin hymns for other mass times.
We have been blessed by two priests who celebebrate the liturgy so beautifully.
Daily mass attendence is extremly high! There is adoration every day. (Not perpetual because of saftey concerns, but from 7am until 11pm.) But there is perpetual adoration at a neighboring parish and it is not unusual to see a group of college students trapse in at 3 in the morning. There are many young men and women discerning their vocation, to marriage or religious life.
There are activities going on every day of the week, from Bible study, to groups based on the Catechism, Theology of the Body, Praise and Worship groups, and more.
Anyway, these people God sends forth across the state, even world. I have seen the effect they have had on the parishes they are sent to, bringing them a richer celebration of the Liturgy, more respect for Sacred Scriptures, and more fidelity to the bark of Peter. Most of all Christ puts in them a zeal for his sacred heart!
I know how you feel about liturgical abuses, Christ's children deserve better, but don't be so dour about the Church. I think God has a few tricks up his sleeves.
Posted by: IA_ | Apr 4, 2006 9:58:52 AM
I'm currently in a three year Scripture program. Our leader has told us something that has really helped. "You don't always have to be right." Yes what went on was wrong but the general direction of your church is good. If this continued then yes you have a problem and need to speak up.
Posted by: SteveL | Apr 4, 2006 10:00:32 AM
Your second to last paragraph made the article worth reading. I confess to having the same problems - often. We must focus on the Eucharist. Jesus Christ is still made present on the altar and we are able to receive him. Thinking anything less helps the Devil giggle. Getting angry does no one any good. Finally, telling everyone about it does no one any good. It helps those of us with that particular vice continue to fall into it. The priest should be talked to, and only him. We must overcome this vice with extraordinary humility and charity by the grace of God. Prayer is essential. The only ones who can change this are God and the priest. Those are the ones we should tell.
God started healing me of this vice when I went to a totally orthodox parish and experienced uncharity and disgust at a mere peep from my children. How dare I allow my children to disturb their Mass and prayertime? My kids were not being disruptive, either.
The one side may be politically correct, but the other side is leaning towards phariseeism. Do we ever consider that perhaps Our Lord is speaking, loving and filling with His grace those who
enjoy so-called "bad liturgy?" Something keeps them coming back.
God Bless,
SQ
Posted by: SQ | Apr 4, 2006 10:08:27 AM
Michelle,
Thanks for your post. I am saddened to hear about what my fellow Catholics have to endure in the Midwest, South, and West Coast on a weekly basis.
Luckily, having attended Mass most of my life in the Washington, Philadelphia, and Wilmington, DE, dioceses, a fairly orthodox parish can almost always be found within 5-6 miles.
A few Sundays ago, thanks to a busy schedule that forced me to miss morning mass, I had to attend a Sunday evening student mass at the Villanova University Chapel. We were treated to a homily about "Why We Stand," rather than kneel, during the Eucharistic prayer. Somehow, he tried to tie in the 3 societal sins of pollution, poverty, and the child sex trade (if he had at least mentioned abortion, I could have forgiven most of the situation).
The clincher was something along the lines of, "We are not here to worship Jesus, but to stand, united with Jesus, as we worship the Father." Naturally, we had the whole hand-holding experience. The individual baskets for the offeratory were brought up to and dropped in front of the altar by whatever student was the last to receive the basket, making the altar look like a big revolving door, with students coming from all directions during the preparation of the gifts.
The fact that this made me cringe so much only led me to worry about the people who have to endure MUCH worse on a weekly basis. Considering a week before (at another Philadelphia parish), the priest spoke at length about how artificial birth control goes against natural law and damages the family, I suppose I have much to be thankful for.
We must continue to pray for good bishops and strong vocations to help cleanse the church in greater America.
Posted by: Mike | Apr 4, 2006 10:15:03 AM
Question: What if a priest preaches something obviously and viciously heretical during his homily? Is correcting a misleading lie about Christ a sufficiently grave reason to interrupt?
Posted by: Kevin Jones | Apr 4, 2006 10:26:57 AM
Hi, Michelle
I really enjoyed your blog entry.
Wow, you and I seem to have some things in common. I, too, entered the church about 10 years ago (and I'm also in San Diego).
My parish (the one I where I was received into the Church) is a bit on the "liberal" side. And, I'm very involved in music and catechesis and being a "baby Catholic" as you put it I was just in this honeymoon stage of loving the mass and not really questioning liturgical abuses.
Well, due to some shake-ups in my parish (and my discovering "blogs") I've just recently really started to delve into the issues of liturgical (as well as theological) abuse (so I haven't yet experienced righteous indignation yet...but it'll probably come). It's a little bit of a humbling experience..stepping back and looking at things and questioning old assumptions. But since I do teach CCD and on occasion RCIA I feel it's very important for me to learn these things and not just go with the flow. (Besides I'm sort of a theology geek anyway and love learning this stuff :)
Anyway...just wanted to thank you for your perspective (and I was a little curious which parish you are talking about).
God bless,
Jennifer
Posted by: Jen S. | Apr 4, 2006 10:31:34 AM
My biggest problem in my parish is not so much liturgical abuse, although there some of that, is that the liturgy is just mediocre.
* Musical pablum of the Hagen and Haas type.
* The penetential rite always in "Form C" - direct to "Lord has mercy.." It has been over a year since I have said "I Confess..."
* The "Ubiquitous Song Leader" doing their lounge act, er, I mean cantoring.
* The army of EMHCs who never fail to scandalize me with their dress and/or behavior.
I'm not saying that everything is horrible, but it is such a distraction that it is almost impossible to focus on why I am in Church to begin wtih.
Posted by: Brian Day | Apr 4, 2006 11:02:35 AM
Sorry, make that "Lord have mercy..."
Posted by: Brian Day | Apr 4, 2006 11:03:42 AM
+J.M.J+
Mark writes:
>>>Now tell why "radtrad" is bad ?
"Radtrad" is not simply a synonym for traditionalist. It refers to certain traditionalists who become extremists, schisming from the Pope and/or embracing anti-semitism, conspiracy theories, etc. This is what Michelle is criticizing.
Not every traditionalist is a radtrad, and one need not be a radtrad (or even a traditionalist, for that matter,) to be disgusted by the situation Mark describes above.
I just see this over and over again on different blogs: the blogger complains about "radtrads" and some traditionalist (who is definitely not a radtrad) takes umbrage, as though it were directed at him. *sigh*
In Jesu et Maria,
Posted by: Rosemarie | Apr 4, 2006 11:05:29 AM
This post speaks to me. Understanding that others are going through the same struggles as myself helps me find peace, and something to focus on during Mass at those times when I may be inclined to be angry. My least favorite thing is to be angry at a time when I should be meditating and devoting all of my energy to the Lord. Fortunately, I believe the "liberation of the liturgy" will pass with a certain generation of priests. Most of the younger generation of religious are more "conservative" and orthodox in their theological approach.
Posted by: Chucko | Apr 4, 2006 11:07:32 AM
"If you will read again you will find that this does not refer to Traditionalism but only a notion which claims Tradition but which opposes the Magisterium."
That was the point.
"Pray for peace and have faith the Holy Spirit will put things to right."
Amen! and if possible volunteer at a local parish and offer your obvious knowledge and zeal. The more orthodox Catholics involve themselves at the local level the more impact we can have. It takes time, patience and charity but what could be of more value than educating our fellow Catholics of the beauty and power of the Holy Mass?
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J
Posted by: Inocencio | Apr 4, 2006 11:08:28 AM
A response to Michelle's lament:
Then head over to Fish Eaters.
Posted by: William | Apr 4, 2006 11:13:07 AM
Michelle-
I am a first time poster and this is only the second article that I have read from you. I sincerely do not understand the point of this article.
You know that the NO is prone to this kind of behavior. You know that, inspite of apparent conservative leanings in any parish, the liturgy can go south fast. Why do you persist in attending the NO and then complain about it?
If you didn't know there is a TLM in San Diego, approved by His Excellency Brohm at Holy Cross, where these 'abuses' don't happen. (I know because I go there.)Why not take yourself out of a bad situation, especially when the diocese allows you the option?
If you stay in the NO then you have to expect that this kind of liturgy will rear its head at one time or another. It makes no sense, in my opinion, to be suprised or angry when it does.
I am truly sorry that this mass happened to you but you do have options to ensure that you never have to "survive" another sunday mass again....
GOD bless us all during this Passiontide-
BLM
Posted by: BLM | Apr 4, 2006 11:24:18 AM
Michelle,
I sympathize with your experience having to endure various violations of the rubrics during the Mass.
However, there was one place where you incorrectly thought a rubric was being violated. You said that after the Third Scrutiny was finished, "even the priest apparently was so disoriented that he completely forgot to lead us in the Creed and the prayers of intercession, instead skipping directly to the offeratory."
In fact, it is a legitimate option of the priest to omit both the Creed and General Intercessions after the Scrutinies in Lent:
"When the eucharist is to follow, intecessory prayer is resumed with the usual general intercessions for the needs of the Church and the whole world; then, if required, the profession of faith is said. But for pastoral reasons these general intercessions and the profession of faith may be omitted. The liturgy of the Eucharist then begins as usual with the preparation of the gifts." (Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults, 177)
There are also other circumstances where the Creed and general intercesssions may be omitted, when another liturgical rite is inserted after the Liturgy of the Word, such as the Rite of Enrollment, or a Baptism.
Because the liturgy of the Church is found in so many different documents, at times one may think the rubrics are being violated when, in fact, a legitimate option is being exercised.
Posted by: Fr. Terry Donahue, CC | Apr 4, 2006 11:36:09 AM
My own opinion: What the Church needs is a fresh reading of "Sacrosanctum Concilium," the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, from the Second Vatican Council.
Our new Pope Benedict might be leading us in that direction, thanks be to God!
"For the liturgy is made up
of immutable elements divinely instituted,
and of elements subject to change."
It seems that, in large part, the first attempt at implementing Sacrosanctum Concilium included assumptions at all levels of the Church, from laity up to Cardinals, that just about everything was "subject to change."
And over the last 40 years, things have changed officially this way and that way,
and unofficially in every which way,
with a lot of resulting confusion, anger,
and disappointment.
Face it, the Vatican II liturgy is, currently,
in a state of chaos.
In regards to the Missal, the Mass:
a. Vatican is on 3rd edition (2002)
b. English-speaking bishops on 1st edition (1975), with GIRM from 3rd edition.
c. Average parish is on local adaptation from 1st edition, with bishop-specific conformities to 3rd edition GIRM.
d. Readings/Lectionary are 2nd edition (1980's).
e. Music is "whatever works," with no draft Episcopal guidelines ever developed, and Vatican promulgated Chant mostly ignored.
In regards to the Divine Office, Liturgy of the Hours:
a. General Instruction (GILH) specified 2 year cycle of Scripture readings never published
b. GILH specified Lectionary of patristic and ecclesial readings, and local episcopal lectionary of ecclesial readings, never published.
c. English-speaking world on 1st edition (1970's)
d. Vatican on 2dn edition, with some revisions.
In regards to RCIA:
a. English-speaking Rite approved in 1980's.
b. No guidance on what consititutes an RCIA program, who is approved to teach it, what is the catechetical content. Catechists range from well-meaning, but ignorant volunteers to religious and clergy (such as deacons) with wild, heterodox opinions.
c. Rites laregely ignored or adapted on the ground in parishes.
Is it any wonder that people find this situation confusing, if not discouraging?
Posted by: Old Zhou | Apr 4, 2006 11:37:46 AM
Sorry, I got carried away and forget the other quote I wanted to mention from SC:
==
In this restoration, both texts and rites should be drawn up so that they express more clearly the holy things which they signify; the Christian people, so far as possible, should be enabled to understand them with ease and to take part in them fully, actively, and as befits a community.
==
We really are not doing well at the "full, active participation" thing.
Instead, what we now have is a new form of the traditional "servers" that do the people's part. But now we call them Lectors, Cantors, Lay Ministers, etc. All those lay folks that you see in the sanctuary, often doing things with the local pastor's approval, rubrics be damned.
And the faithful are back to doing the much dreaded "private devotions" in the pews.
Only now, the "private devotions" are not the rosary, but things like reading the actually readings (instead of dramatic or politically correct adaptations proclaimed from the ambo), or praying the Creed, so often omitted, or kneeling, or a number of other things that the people in the sanctuary feel free to change or omit.
The current implementation of Sacrosanctum Concilium is a mess, and missing the goals of Vatican II.
Posted by: Old Zhou | Apr 4, 2006 11:42:35 AM
http://www.zenit.org/english/
Zenit has good liturgical resources, including the subject of not holding hands during the Our Father:
http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=44754
"...The process for introducing any new rite or gesture into the liturgy in a stable or even binding manner is already contemplated in liturgical law. This process entails a two-thirds majority vote in the bishops' conference and the go-ahead from the Holy See before any change may take effect.
Thus, if neither the bishops' conference nor the Holy See has seen fit to prescribe any posture for the recitation of the Our Father, it hardly behooves any lesser authority to impose a novel gesture not required by liturgical law and expect the faithful to follow their decrees.
..."
Posted by: John | Apr 4, 2006 12:00:59 PM
Old Zhou:
I for one have been tempted to sit in the back and pray the Rosary during a NO mass, and wondered whether that would really be so bad.
Posted by: Michael Sullivan | Apr 4, 2006 12:41:23 PM
Well praying the Rosary during the celebration of Mass does go against the express intent of the Magisterium, as in , where we're enjoined to seek "active and conscious participation" etc.
So sorry to hear that you're frustrated ... my guess is that you're being there is the first step in obedience, praying for grace to fully particpate is the next step, and undoubtedly God will honor your actions.
Posted by: Bob Lozano | Apr 4, 2006 1:12:21 PM
Sorry for the bad formatting, should have been:
Well praying the Rosary during the celebration of Mass does go against the express intent of the Magisterium, as in Redemptionis Sacramentum, where we're enjoined to seek "active and conscious participation" etc.
So sorry to hear that you're frustrated ... my guess is that you're being there is the first step in obedience, praying for grace to fully particpate is the next step, and undoubtedly God will honor your actions.
Posted by: Bob Lozano | Apr 4, 2006 1:16:11 PM
Ah oh. Another liturgy thread. They're usually good for a hundred comments, aren't they? If you're a Catholic and you have a pulse, chances are you've got a strong opinion about the liturgy.
On to Michelle's questions:
How do we avoid going rad Trad when the temptations to do so can sometimes be overwhelming? How do we prevent righteous anger at genuine problems in the Church from eating away at our souls like dropped acid and turning us into bitter, disaffected souls isolated from the mainstream of Catholic life?
I'll give my answer, but first let me start with my non-Trad and non-HighBrow credentials: I'm way too common to be an aesthete. I've never been to a Latin Mass of any kind. I wouldn't know the difference between Palestrina and pinochle. My preferred cigarette is Marlboro, my preferred drink is whatever happens to be in the fridge, my preferred uniform is jeans and a sweat-shirt, and my preferred TV show is whatever Western happens to be playing on the classic movie channel. And spirituality? The best "spiritual director" I ever had was a Marine drill instructor. Really.
I used to get really agitated about all those sappy liturgical "innovations", but nowadays I'm just weary of fretting over a bad situation that shows few signs of getting better. We have a Mass that was intended to please everybody in 1970, but has ended up pleasing no one in 2006. I'm pretty sure that Pope Benedict knows about the problem and wants to address it. I even believe that a good number of bishops are aware of the problem and want to do something about it. (Yeah, I know, silly me.) In spite of everything, I have enough faith to believe that the Church will one day get its act together re the Mass, but I'm sure that's not going to happen fast enough to please all those good Catholic folks who suffer from innovation overload. This means that everybody has to cope; everybody has to deal with it; everybody has to make their choices.
Me? I'm gonna go with what we've got. I, for one, will stick with Peter and I'll keep on believing the Promise. For those who won't or can't, and who justify their departure with high-sounding arguments that mask valid frustrations and dissapointments--hey, I understand. I know darned well that the Protestant impulse beats big in every human heart, and that every one of us at one time or another has used sweet sophistry to put a halo on our infidelities. But I was Protestant once. I've been off the bark of Peter and it's no place I ever want to be again. If you ain't on deck, you're swimming with the sharks. Capiche?
Life really is too short, so for me the liturgical issues have become very simple, very basic. When I'm at Mass these days, I simply want to pray. That's all. How do I pull that off? I begin with an axiom, move on to a method, and end with a flourish of defiance.
The axiom: This side of heaven, there's no such thing as a liturgy that's celebrated in accord with my every want, need, desire, taste, sensibility, and inclination.
The method: In a lowest-common-denominator world you have to come up with a lowest-common-denominator solution. You have to find a place where you can actually pray when you go to Mass--a place where you're not too distracted by bad architecture and art, where the music doesn't intrude too heavily upon your peace, where the homilies don't veer too far into weirdness, and where the priest sort of does what the red text in that red book on the altar tells him to do. Find a place like that, count your blessings, and call it a day.
The flourish of defiance: Here I stand (right here in the mainstream of Catholic life). I can do no other.
Posted by: ottanbrus | Apr 4, 2006 1:24:16 PM
"Because the liturgy of the Church is found in so many different documents, at times one may think the rubrics are being violated when, in fact, a legitimate option is being exercised."
Yeah, but it is so much more fun to be holier-than-thou.
Posted by: | Apr 4, 2006 1:58:22 PM
This story is a long lead-in to another post. How do we avoid going rad Trad when the temptations to do so can sometimes be overwhelming? How do we prevent righteous anger at genuine problems in the Church from eating away at our souls like dropped acid and turning us into bitter, disaffected souls isolated from the mainstream of Catholic life?
I recently completed home-schooling my daughter in religious ed, leading up to her confirmation. As a "field trip" we went to the local indult mass (ad orientem and all that).
I remember the Latin mass fondly as an altar boy, and thought I would naturally slip right back into the attitudes of prayer I remember as a child.
Fully 75% of the women were veiled (my daughter, being a "modern girl" was not among them). The priest did not wear a mic, and since he was talking to the altar, I couldn't make out what he was saying so I could follow along in the missal. I didn't have to. The choir did that for us. All we had to do was sit and watch... ummm... kneel and watch... umm... stand and watch... kneel and watch... sit and watch... The common thread was "watching", and we really didn't know when to sit stand and kneel (well, sort of but we discovered that our timing was off).
This was the first time that my daughter had ever received on the tongue. We didn't even need to say "Amen", the priest did that for us also. I also noticed that even though we were kneeling reverently, and taking communion on the tongue (like I still do), the priest was doing the "auctioneer's communion" corpuschristiamen corpuschristiamen corpuschristiamen corpuschristiamen corpuschristi amen corpuschristiamen corpuschristiamen...
I also noticed something else... Since the advent of the indult mass at 8:30am at this parish, the community had broken up into two communities. There was the "Latin mass people" and "the 'normal' people". And if "those 'Latin mass people' happened to be at another one of the Novus Ordo masses, they wouldn't even give you the sign of peace!"
I harken back to our parish now, where we have a new pastor who really shook things up. He treats the Blessed Sacrament like he really believes that it is the Body of our Lord and Savior. He got the EMEs out of the sanctuary, and moved the tabernacle there. We have Benediction after Stations of the Cross on Fridays during Lent, and we have a new votive candle rack in the "prayer chapel" (former "eucharistic chapel").
We have a dedicated core of faithful Catholics who are sticking by the pastor through thick and thin, taking on the Devil with rosary, adoration, benediction, prayer and Eucharist.
If all of the orthodox leave the parish to join their own exclaves, there will be nobody left to pray, help and work with the utmost caritas, gently guiding our brothers and sisters and showing them the benefits of respect and reverence at mass.
It will catch on. Trust me on this. I know because at my parish it is. I have never seen more people in the parish than I did last week, and many of them are new and returning from week to week (I see them because I volunteer to cantor at multiple masses because I'm one of a dozen or so music ministers left).
For Holy Thursday, the plan is Gregorian Chant for the eucharistic procession. I can't wait.
Keep the faith.
Posted by: Tony | Apr 4, 2006 1:58:46 PM
Thanks to the two priests who mentioned that at least one of the occurences at the Mass was a legitimate option. I'm not always right, which also helps my spiritual peace. :)
... Although I do wish that such options were announced so that the congregants would know that the priest is exercising a legitimate option and not making a mistake.
Posted by: Michelle Arnold | Apr 4, 2006 3:01:01 PM
Tony,
With respect, you cannot go to one TLM and issue the comments you made--not if you want to be fair. It takes time to acquaint oneself (or reacquaint) to a rite in a different language with different modes of participation. Your posts amounts to saying, in essence, "that Mass was different than the one I'm used to so I don't like it".
What you describe as mere "watching" are opportunities for active participation in the Mass. Speaking out loud is merely one type of participation. If you don't believe me, ask yourself what is the MOST sublime moment of participation in the novus ordo Mass, the moment of most intense participation by you during the Mass. If you say, the moment of consecration-- the unbloody sacrifice of our Lord for us-- then you will note that you are silent at this time.
The words of the Priest at communion are "Corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam aeternam. Amen" We don't respond amen because our assent is not required to make the species into the Body and Blood of Christ. The priest truly acts "in persona Christi" and intercedes for Christ's Body, the Church.
I will make a friendly wager with you, and say that if you attend the TLM for seven straight days you will feel differently. Or at least, your rejection of it will be based on better information.
Posted by: tim | Apr 4, 2006 3:05:35 PM
