Confession



'Bless me Father, for I have sinned.
I have been with a loose girl'.

The priest asks, 'Is that you, little Joey Pagano ?

'Yes, Father, it is.'

'And who was the girl you were with?'

'I can't tell you, Father. I don't want to ruin her reputation'.

"Well, Joey, I'm sure to find out her name sooner or later
so you may as well tell me now. Was it Tina Minetti?

'I cannot say.'

'Was it Teresa Mazzarelli?'

'I'll never tell.'

'Was it Nina Capelli?'

'I'm sorry, but I cannot name her.'

'Was it Cathy Piriano?'

'My lips are sealed.'

'Was it Rosa DiAngelo, then?'

'Please, Father, I cannot tell you.'

The priest sighs in frustration. 'You're very tight lipped, and I admire that. But you've sinned and have to atone. You cannot be an altar boy now for 4 months. Now you go and behave yourself.'

Joey walks back to his pew, and his friend Franco slides over and whispers, 'What'd you get?'

'Four months vacation and five good leads.'

21st Sunday in Ordinary time. August 23rd 2009. It is our faith alone that will help us to ascent to The Mystery of Faith Regarding this mystery,

Homily on John 6: 60-69 Twenty-first Sunday
After a few weeks of reading the Bread of Life discourse, today, we read the final verses of the 6th chapter of St. John’s Gospel. This is the final reaction to all of what we have read and heard; it is the final reaction of hearts and minds to the revelation of the Greatest Mystery of Our Faith—Mysterium Fidei…The Mystery of our Faith. And we have heard that this Mystery of our Faith, is that Jesus is the bread of life; and this bread is His real flesh and blood for the life of the world. Jesus actually instructs us to eat his true body and to drink his true blood in faith if we are to have life. And He backs up these words by swearing an oath, twice—Amen! Amen! I swear an Oath! I swear an Oath! These teachings were and are shocking, and Jesus recognizes them as such by saying, “does this shock you?”
It is our faith alone that will help us to ascent to The Mystery of Faith Regarding this mystery, St. Thomas famously wrote, “et si sensus deficit, ad firmandum cor sincerum sola fides sufficit.” Our senses are not able to know the mystery; only the gift of faith will help. It looks like bread, it taste like bread, it feels like bread, but it is not bread…it is Jesus in the flesh, in the body he took from the Blessed Virgin Mary. The Mass may look like a normal “service”, but it is not…it is the re-presentation, the very act of Jesus’ Sacrifice on Calvary now made truly present in space and time on this altar…While at the same time, it is literally heaven on earth with all of the angels and saints, our family in heaven, present with us as we adore God. Heaven is the Eucharist unveiled for all eternity…O” Mystery of mysteries.”
We see today in our reading, a great profession of faith- when Peter affirms his faith in Jesus’ divinity, in the light of all of those who rejected it. It is interesting to note that in the Gospel of St. John, Peter’s confession of faith comes here at the end of the disclosure of the Holy Eucharist, which is the pivotal moment of the life of the apostles. Simon was named Peter in the first meeting of Jesus in the Gospel of St. John, but today in John, Peter as chief of the apostles and as the head of the Church, professes His faith in Jesus’ divinity by professing His faith in the Eucharist—which is really one and the same act of faith. But its important to note that Peter did so, struggling and weak. This is great hope for us, who struggle as well in the face of such a “hard saying”. But even in his weakness, Peter through the power of the gift of faith, professes, “Master, to whom shall we go? You alone have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.” So, even though Peter struggles, He believes, because Jesus who is God, says the Eucharist is truly His whole self, in the fullness of His Divinity and Humanity—and Jesus as God can neither deceive nor be deceived! We believe because Jesus as said it; and we believe that Jesus is God.
I think it’s also important to note, that the first mention of Judas’ betrayal comes here in John 6 as well, at this pivotal teaching of Jesus. We didn’t read it today, but it comes immediately after the act of faith of Peter. In contrast to Peter’s act, Judas refuses to believe in Jesus’ words and thus refuses to make an act of faith. As a result, it is very clear that Judas’ heart was filled with betrayal as a direct result of his failure to believe and to make an act of faith in the Holy Eucharist. Later in John, during the last supper, we are told that the devil enter into Judas because Judas receives the Eucharist without believing and as result makes a sacrilegious communion. Judas failed to ask God to help in his weakness of faith, he fail to ask God to increase his faith and profess that faith in action, and so falls prey to the snares of the devil, who always entices us all to deny the truth of the Holy Eucharist.
Back to the profession of Peter’s faith in the Holy Eucharist. We also have to realize that while this profession of Peter is a deeply personal act between Christ and Peter, it is also an act of the entire Church and as such it is a communal act…In other words, when it comes to faith in the Eucharist, its not just about Jesus and me…it is about that, yes, but not only that. When any person says, “I believe in the Holy Eucharist”, he or she can only say that in faith with, in and through the faith of the entire Church. That’s why in the Mass we say, look not on our sins, but on the faith of your church, which is another way of saying, “look not on the weakness of my own faith, but on the faith of the church and then strengthen my faith through the Church’s faith.
This reminds us that the church is a family and we all depend on that family for our personal faith. We cannot believe and cannot not love God in isolation, we depend on the prayers and the support of all…and I mean all of the members of the family—This is one of the reasons why we must attend Mass every Sunday--the entire family literally depends on us, each and every week.
We are all in this together and we need each other, we need each other in order to be able to believe, to make an act faith and to be able to live that faith out. We all need each others’ prayers, each others’ acts of adoration—when you adore Jesus at the Mass or Holy Hour, you help the whole Church. We need each member from the youngest to the oldest, we need them not only to believe but to live that belief out in action. We truly are a body- We are all vital organs! We have to be here for each other, if we are not, it is a failure in charity and in love on our part, and we end up separating ourselves from the entire body, who desperately needs us.
I remember one person coming to me lamenting that one of her friends left her parish because she was mad at the priest. This person said to me sadly, I am so hurt she left, what happens if I need her prayers…I need her prayers.” Now of course this friend can still pray for this lady, but its not the same as it is when families pray together—there is strength in unity. And to struggle to maintain unity is to fail in charity, to fail in love.
We need each other, we need each other in order to believe in Jesus, to believe that Jesus is the Eucharist; and we definitely need each other to live out this faith in our daily lives. Again, nobody believes in God in isolation and nobody loves God in isolation. We can’t be here just for ourselves but for others before ourselves.
So this brings up another point, when we love God in the Eucharist, then we must love God in our neighbor. We can’t love God and not love our neighbor. Don’t misunderstand me, we must love and adore God first and foremost, over and above all else, because we can’t love our neighbor the way we are commandment with out loving God and loving Him through adoring Him in the Eucharist, but then we must show this love of ours for God, by loving and yes, even serving our neighbor, especially the ones we don’t like; and most especially those in our parish family we struggle to love.
In the end, we must have two responses when we receive Holy Communion. First, like Peter, we must ascent in faith that it is truly “the Lord we are dealing with” in order to receive worthily the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus and receive Him in a way and manner that shows we really believe. But this act of faith must not end with just “Jesus and me” because Holy Communion extends to the love of neighbor. This is not an abstract kind of concept; it is real and practical. It is carried out in deeds, such as: forgiving the member of the Church family, both the lay members and the members of the clergy and religious; doing penance for those who wrong us, and forgetting ourselves and making sacrifices of our time, talent and treasure for the sake of the family of God, our parish family.
As we end this beautiful Bread of Life Discourse in the Holy Eucharist, hopefully in our prayerful hearing and meditation on the words of Jesus in the Sixth Chapter of St. John, we have discovered more fully that our deepest need is Jesus in the Eucharist. And hopefully, now we have discovered more deeply that this union with Jesus in the Eucharist is only as deep as our union with the Church which produces the Eucharist. This is why one of the Church’s great sorrows is to have her members leave this Communion with the Body of Christ, both His physical body in the Eucharist and His mystical body in the pews---we heard this happen in the Gospel, “Many of the disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.” How sad it is to hear someone say they have left the Church to “find” Jesus…How could you leave to “find Jesus” when He is right here, bodily and personally, really and truly at every Mass and in every tabernacle of every Catholic Church…And how could you leave your family--the Church, which is the family of God, both those members of heaven and of earth, who are able to come together as one at the Holy Mass to adore the Trinity in unity and in love.
Let us never leave Jesus in the Holy Eucharist, let us instead believe and at the same time cry out, “Lord help my unbelief!” The Eucharist is truly Jesus, God still among us, O Mystery of mysteries, Praestet fides supplementum Sensuum defectui…Faith will supply for all defects when our feeble senses fail us before such a great mystery as this.…Our Lady, Queen of the family of God on both heaven and earth, Queen of our hearts, Queen of the Most Holy Eucharist, pray for us…

Another excellent article on Actual Participation in the Sacred Liturgy as well as some good points on Ad Orientem. Fr. Z's comments in parenthesis

The Art of Celebrating the Liturgy
By Archbishop Alfred C. Hughes
(Clarion Herald – 8-08-09)

Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith, [the former] Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of Sacraments, recently delivered the keynote address at the Gateway Liturgical Conference in St. Louis. He touched upon the central issue that we need to face if we are going to realize the vision expressed in the Constitution on Sacred Liturgy at the Second Vatican Council: the art of celebrating the Sacred Liturgy. [This is the ars celebrandi of which Pope Benedict speaks in Sacramentum caritatis.]

First, it is helpful for us to recognize that the term art usually refers to the creative skills for contributing to beauty. As it applies, however, to the sacred liturgy, human skills are subordinate to a divine reality that is taking place. When focus is on the human, apart from the divine, the celebration of the liturgy suffers.

There should be no tension between the art of celebrating and the full, active and fruitful participation of all the faithful. [On the contrary, ars celebrandi positively aids the active participation of the faithful.] Unfortunately, in the first stage of implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy of the Second Vatican Council, a great deal of emphasis was placed [Wait for it…] upon external activity on the part of the people. As a result, the focus on full participation has gravitated more toward the involvement of lay liturgical ministries than to [Wait for it…] the interior dispositions required for making participation more fruitful. In the Sacred Liturgy, it is Christ who acts. [Sound familiar at all?] What is incredibly important is that we are interiorly united with him in the sacrificial offering that he once made historically and is re-presented in the sacramental celebration of the liturgy. The Lord is the artist. [Good phrase.] It is ours to be united with him.

Thus, the art of celebrating well is the enot so much a matter of a series of actions put together in a harmonious unity as a deeply interior communion with Christ and his self-sacrificial saving action. [Let’s not take that "not so much" to be a denial or opposition. It take both. But His Excellency has a good point: there is a logical priority to the interior which makes the exterior "authentic". On the other hand, the exterior elements can aid our interior receptivity.] This means that the priest needs to enter into a profoundly reverent, totally concentrated and self-abasing attitude of faith and prayerfulness. His sense of awe must be tangible. His desire to live out what he is celebrating must be recognized in his life. [Well said. Also, the celebrant must get himself out of the way. I would say that ad orientem worship facilitates this in a way far superior to that versus populum.]

Moreover, the sacred liturgy is an action that has been entrusted to the Church. The celebrant does not own the liturgy. It is not his with which to tamper. The liturgy is a gift, a treasure, to be respected and to be received with a sense of reverence and protected against inappropriate secularization.

Christ himself is the main celebrant. In Pope Benedict’s apostolic constitution, [opps…. it isn’t an "apostolic constitution". It is a Post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation.] ‘The Sacrament of Charity,’ he affirms this truth powerfully: ‘Priests should be conscious of the fact that in their ministry they must never put themselves or their personal opinions in the first place, but Jesus Christ. Any attempt to make themselves the center of the liturgical action contradicts their very identity as priests. The priest is, above all, a servant of others and he must continuously work at being a sign pointing to Christ, a docile instrument in the Lord’s hands. This is seen particularly in his humility in leading the liturgical assembly, in obedience to the rite, uniting himself to it in mind and heart and avoiding anything that might give the impression of an inordinate emphasis on his own personality.’

One of the great risks in celebrating Mass facing the people is that the priest will be tempted to draw attention to himself. [So let’s try more ad orientem worship.] We are all human. But the center of the action is Christ. The way in which we speak and act must draw attention to this truth. Hence, a sense of awe and mystery should pervade the celebration with appropriate silence and in a spirit of prayer. What we do is Divine Liturgy. It is ecclesial in its shape and formation. It should not be subjected to personal adjustments. That is why the appropriate art of celebrating involves faithful adherence to the liturgical norms in all their richness.

The saintly Curé of Ars once wrote: ‘All good works together are not of equal value with the sacrifice of the Mass, because they are the works of men, and the holy Mass is the work of God. Martyrdom is nothing in comparison; it is the sacrifice that man makes of his life to God; the Mass is the sacrifice that God makes to man of his Body and his Blood.’

God grant to all of us who are priests the grace to realize and to fulfill this awesome role in such a way that we truly do foster ‘the full, active and fruitful participation of all the faithful.’

Pretty descent document on Summorum Pontificum by the Worship Director of Miami. Fr. Z corrects it's weaknesses (his comments in parenthesis)

Archd. of Miami Director of Worship on Summorum Pontificum
CATEGORY: Brick by Brick, SESSIUNCULA, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 8:37 pm
A reader alerted me to a piece written by the director of Liturgy for the Archdiocese of Miami. He writes on the website of the Archdiocese about Pope Benedict’s emancipation proclamation, the 2007 Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum. Let’s see what he has to say with my emphases and comments.
On July 7, 2007 Pope Benedict XVI published the Apostolic Letter Summorum Pontificum by which the Holy Father allows for and promotes [Get that? Not just "allows" but "promotes"] a wider usage of the liturgical books that were in use by the Roman Catholic Church in 1962. Pope Benedict XVI seeks in this Apostolic Letter [inter alia] to reconcile “in the heart of the Church” those individuals who have demonstrated an attachment to the liturgical forms that were in place before the liturgical renewal of the Second Vatican Council. He begins by defining two forms of the rule of prayer of the Latin Church: an ordinary form contained in the Roman Missal of Pope Paul VI, and an extraordinary form, as contained [once upon a time] in the Roman Missal of Pope Saint Pius V. [But more recently in that of Bl. John XXIII.] Both make up the Liturgy of the Roman Rite.

Any priest of the Latin Church may, without permission from the Holy See or his bishop, celebrate the extraordinary form in a Mass without the people at any time except during the Easter Triduum. It is noted that he may be joined by the faithful, since the extraordinary rite is primarily a private Mass. [I think I will take gentle exception to this. No Mass is primarily a private Mass. All Masses, that is all rites of Mass, are not intended to be private.] In parishes where a group of faithful are attached to the extraordinary form of the Mass, they may approach the pastor to request the celebration of the extraordinary rite, without permissions from the Holy See or the bishop. If a priest cannot demonstrate a minimum rubrical or linguistic ability in Latin, he is not to celebrate the extraordinary form of the Mass. [However… that doesn’t mean that those people making the request are out of luck… or rather, out of their rights. First, the priest really ought to know his own Rite, right? So, he should learn the older form if he doesn’t know it. Second, if he cannot see to these people himself, he ought to take steps to find someone who can help. That is part of his role as pastor. It is understood that if the group is very small, it might be hard to take a huge initiative. Yet large initiatives are implemented for very small groups all the time. Third, if the pastor can’t get anything going, then the diocesan bishop needs to help get things going… in that parish. Not just anywhere.]

Pope Benedict XVI is very clear in his apostolic letter that the current Roman Missal (Missale Romanum) is the ordinary form of the Eucharistic Liturgy and the extraordinary form is found in the 1962 Missal of Blessed John XXIII. He points out that there is “no contradiction between the missals” [...and, therefore, one form of Mass is not "primarily" private….] and that the history of liturgical books is characterized by “growth and progress, but not rupture.” In both the ordinary and extraordinary forms of the Roman Missal, full, conscious, and active participation of the faithful is to be desired above all else. [Properly understood, of course. And since this included the phrase "above all else" we can most suitably begin with the person’s baptized character and then his or her state of grace. You see, true active participation is first of all an interior reality, not an outward expression. It leads to outward expression, the most perfect of which – in the liturgy of Mass – is the reception of Communion by a baptized person in the state of habitual grace. To that end…. watch what this smart writer does….] This begins with interior participation [YAY! See? Interior! This priest gets it.] in the sacrifice of Christ. The ordinary form customarily accomplishes this participation through listening and responding to the prayers of the Mass in the vernacular [well… vernacular…. okay…] and by taking part in forms of exterior communal action. The extraordinary form accomplishes this interior participation largely by listening to the prayers in Latin and following the words and actions of the priests and joining our hearts to “what is said by him in the Name of Christ and [what] Christ says [to] him.” [hmmm…. those two forms of participation sound an awful lot alike.]

From all of the above we see that the Church continues to treasure the riches of its past, [which is now its present] especially with regard to the sacred liturgy. The spirit of earlier liturgical forms, which permeated the spirit and culture of many who still remember these forms, continues in the celebration of both rites. Thus, it was through pastoral concern that Pope Benedict XVI was motivated to more easily allow for the celebration of more ancient liturgical rites and prayers by issuing Summorum Pontificium.


Msgr. Terence Hogan
Director, Office of Worship and Spiritual Life
WDTPRS kudos to Msgr. Hogan. Well done.

I think I might have added something stemming from that organic growth comment about another objective of Summorum Pontificum and the use of the older Rites. The use of these older forms will exert an influence on the way the newer forms are celebrated.

Still and all, you folks in Miami can be pleased that this priest has a clear sense of some very important concepts for a sound liturgical praxis. He has a far better understanding of active participation than we have seen coming from most liturgical offices for several decades. He speaks with respect about the older form and has not merely conveyed a reluctant tolerance toward it. He speaks of continuity and eschews clichés about the Second Vatican Council.

Interesting Article on Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (their correct title). Fr. Z's comments are in parenthesis.

The question of Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion
CATEGORY: "How To..." - Practical Notes, SESSIUNCULA — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 3:55 am
I think you have all seen it happen.

As the time for Holy Communion approaches, a small throng of EMHCs troop up into the sanctuary.

On the blog Uncommon Sense there is a proposal, worth reading and passing around. I include the whole thing here so as to make it a bit more visible. Be sure to visit that blog, however.

His emphases in the original but with my emphases and comments.
Whereas the General Instruction for the Roman Missal 162 states: “The priest may be assisted in the distribution of Communion by other priests who happen to be present. If such priests are not present and there is a very large number of communicants, the priest may [not must] call upon extraordinary ministers to assist him, e.g., duly instituted acolytes or even other faithful who have been deputed for this purpose. In case of necessity, the priest may depute suitable faithful for this single occasion.
And whereas the Instruction “Redemptionis Sacramentum” in paragraph 88 states “Only when there is a necessity may extraordinary ministers assist the Priest celebrant in accordance with the norm of law.”
And whereas the same instruction in paragraph 151 states: “Only out of true necessity ["necessity"... sensing a theme yet?] is there to be recourse to the assistance of extraordinary ministers in the celebration of the Liturgy. [NB…] Such recourse is not intended for the sake of a fuller participation of the laity but rather, by its very nature, is supplementary and provisional. [I don’t know how many times I have heard priests and laypeople talking about giving laypeople something to do during Mass.] Furthermore, when recourse is had out of necessity to the functions of extraordinary ministers, special urgent prayers of intercession should be multiplied that the Lord may soon send a Priest for the service of the community and raise up an abundance of vocations to sacred Orders.”
And whereas the same document states in paragraph 158: “Indeed, the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may administer Communion only when the Priest and Deacon are lacking, when the Priest is prevented by weakness or advanced age or some other genuine reason, or when the number of faithful coming to Communion is so great that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged. [The problem is that "necessity" and "unduly" can be loosely interpreted and there isn’t really any way to tighten up the meaning.] This, however, is to be understood in such a way that a brief prolongation, considering the circumstances and culture of the place, is not at all a sufficient reason.
And whereas the Vatican instruction “On Certain Questions Regarding the Collaboration of the Non-Ordained Faithful in the Sacred Ministry of Priest” states in Article 8 § 2: “Extraordinary ministers may distribute Holy Communion at Eucharistic celebrations only when there are no ordained ministers present or when those ordained ministers present at a liturgical celebration are truly unable to distribute Holy Communion. They may also exercise this function at Eucharistic celebrations where there are particularly large numbers of the faithful and which would be excessively prolonged because of an insufficient number of ordained ministers to distribute Holy Communion.
And whereas the same document at the end of Article 8 states: ”To avoid creating confusion, certain practices are to be avoided and eliminated where such have emerged in particular Churches: the habitual use of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion at Mass thus arbitrarily extending the concept of “a great number of the faithful.” [Again, this practice, as it is usually observed today tends to blur the distinct roles of priest and laypeople in Holy Mass.]
And whereas the conclusion of the same document states: ”All particular laws, customs and faculties conceded by the Holy See ad experimentum or other ecclesiastical authorities which are contrary to the foregoing norms [On Certain…] are hereby revoked.” [In other words, they cannot be continued out of an excuse that it is local custom.]
And whereas in “Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America” paragraph 24 states: ”In practice, the need to avoid obscuring the role of the priest and the deacon as the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion by an excessive use of extraordinary ministers might in some circumstances constitute a reason either for limiting the distribution of Holy Communion under both species or for using intinction instead of distributing the Precious Blood from the chalice.” [Intinction also gets rid of Communion in the hand…]
And whereas the same norms in paragraph 28 states: ”When the size of the congregation or the incapacity of the bishop, priest, or deacon requires it, the celebrant may be assisted by other bishops, priests, or deacons. If such ordinary ministers of Holy Communion are not present, “the priest may [not "must"] call upon extraordinary ministers to assist him, i.e., formally instituted acolytes or even some of the faithful who have been commissioned according to the prescribed rite. In case of necessity, the priest may also commission suitable members of the faithful for the occasion.” … When recourse is had to Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion, especially in the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds, their number should not be increased beyond what is required for the orderly and reverent distribution of the Body and Blood of the Lord. In all matters such Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion should follow the guidance of the diocesan bishop [Mindful of the fact that this paragraph draws its authority from GIRM 151 which speaks only of instances where a great number of the faithful are gathered, and it is the competence of the Holy Father alone, and of no bishop or priest, to legislate anything in the liturgy against the norms which the Holy Father has duly set forth].
[All that having been laid out…] We put forth the following observations:
Observation 1: The habitual use of extraordinary ministers at Masses in the United States is in fact a violation of the norms set forth in “On certain questions.” In most parishes across this country are even scheduled weeks ahead of time.
Observation 2: The majority of these Masses are not attended by “a great number of the faithful” and thus this term is being arbitrarily extended in violation of the norms of the Holy Father set forth in “On Certain Questions…”.
Observation 3: In point of fact, aside from being viewed as supplementary and provisional, extraordinary ministers are being utilized in such a way that they believe that their ministry involves a fuller participation in the Eucharistic celebration, in violation of the norms set forth by the Holy Father in “Redemptionis Sacramentum.”
Observation 4: The continued unnecessary recourse to the use of extraordinary ministers continues to blur the distinction between the ordained and lay members of the Catholic Church.
[Therefore] And in light of the above observations we submit the following petition:
Petition: Considering the constant violations of the norms set forth above, we humbly ask you [bishops and priests] to implement the provisions set forth in the Norms for the United states, namely that Holy Communion normally be distributed only by the ordinary minister, under one species [the Host], or by intinction in those parishes and communities where the faithful wish to receive under both species.

Good Article on Active (actual) participation. Fr Z's Comments are in parenthesis.

Drilling into an article on “active participation”
CATEGORY: Brick by Brick, SESSIUNCULA, The Drill — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 5:57 pm
I discovered on CNA a interesting feature. Louie Verrecchio writes a column called Harvesting the Fruit of Vatican II. One of his columns concerns active participation in the liturgy.

WDTPRS has been working to spread a correct understand of active participation for a long time and combat the madness that has corroded our identity through a distorted understanding.

Let’s see what Mr. Verrecchio has to say, with my emphases and comments.
July 23, 2009
Active Participation: Doing liturgy and becoming church
By Louie Verrecchio

I don’t remember the first time I encountered the phrases "doing liturgy" and "becoming church," nor do I recall my specific reaction. [I remember. The US seminary I was in, and out of. And I felt sick.] Regular readers of this column, however, can pretty much imagine what that might have been, but I’m getting a little ahead of myself.

I’d like to share with you a snapshot of my home parish, which I suspect is probably not unlike most others.

My parish of record is a warm and inviting place. It’s my home-base community within the Church Universal; a place where I have worshipped and celebrated and mourned with family and friends for many years.

I have a great deal of affection for my parish’s pastor. He is a kind and genuinely loving caretaker of souls who has offered me and others who are dear to me priestly ministry and good counsel on more than one occasion.

Why then over the last twenty months or so have I been traveling more than thirty miles out of my way to participate in Sunday Mass at a different parish? Simply put, because my home parish has unfortunately become overly enamored with the idea of "doing liturgy" and "becoming church." [Anyone else had this experience? Stop! STOP! Don’t trample… okay… I get it!]

To that end, my parish has a "Liturgy Committee" whose mission statement – taken almost verbatim from the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy – reads, "Our goal is to enable the People of God to engage in full, conscious, and active participation in the celebration of the sacred liturgy." [A good goal… provided they have a correct understanding of what that means.]

The result of their effort is a Mass that is increasingly nuanced by what appears to be the self-imposed pressure to constantly inject new forms of creativity into the liturgy. In practice this means that liturgical prayers and procedures are altered; liturgical roles are assigned to as many lay persons as possible, individuals are singled out during the Mass for special recognition and applause, and music for the Mass is apparently selected more for the catchiness of its tune than for the meaning of its content. [Anyone else had this … no wait… STOP already!]

I have no doubt that the Liturgy Committee means well, but I wonder how many its members have actually read Sacrosanctum Concilium; the aforementioned conciliar document to which they attribute their stated mission?

Those who have explored the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy would know that the Council’s idea of "active participation" has nothing whatsoever to do with turning the Mass into a production with an ever increasing number of lay cast members, much less its entertainment value.

Before we examine the Council’s thoughts more closely, it’s important to consider that the desire for liturgical participation on the part of a well-formed laity was not invented in the 1960’s.

In 1947 Pope Pius XII lauded and encouraged the laity’s active participation in the liturgy – yes, the Traditional Latin Liturgy – saying:

"Therefore, they are to be praised who, with the idea of getting the Christian people to take part more easily and more fruitfully in the Mass, strive to make them familiar with the ‘Roman Missal,’ so that the faithful, united with the priest, may pray together in the very words and sentiments of the Church. They also are to be commended who strive to make the liturgy even in an external way a sacred act in which all who are present may share. This can be done in more than one way, when, for instance, the whole congregation, in accordance with the rules of the liturgy, either answer the priest in an orderly and fitting manner, or sing hymns suitable to the different parts of the Mass, or do both, or finally in high Masses when they answer the prayers of the minister of Jesus Christ and also sing the liturgical chant." (Mediator Dei – 105)

Pope Pius XI some two decades earlier had offered similar encouragement saying, "The faithful come to church in order to derive piety from its chief source, by taking an active part in the venerated mysteries and the public solemn prayers of the Church." (Divini Cultus – 1928)

Neither of these examples represent "out of the box" thinking, mind you; on the contrary. Active participation in the liturgy is as old as the Church itself as indicated by St. Paul’s exhortation to the Corinthians, a letter written sometime in the mid-first century, in which he underscored the importance of proper disposition when participating in the Body and Blood of Christ. (cf 1 Cor. 11:23-34)

So [here is the big question] what does active participation in the context of the Mass as we know it actually mean, and what did the Council have in mind? For clarity of the matter, let us turn directly to one of the Council Fathers, Pope John Paul II.

In his Ad Limina Address to the Bishops of the United States in 1988, the Holy Father saw fit to expound upon some of the misunderstandings that lead to "abuses, polarization, and sometimes even grave scandal" in the liturgy.

"Full participation does not mean that everyone does everything, since this would lead to a clericalizing of the laity and a laicizing of the priesthood; and this was not what the Council had in mind," the Holy Father said.

"Active participation certainly means that, in gesture, word, song and service, all the members of the community take part in an act of worship, which is anything but inert or passive," he said, honing in on the most overlooked point of all. "Active participation does not preclude the active passivity of silence, stillness and listening: indeed, it demands it." [Get that?]

The Council Fathers notion of how authentic participation is achieved is indicated in the very title to Chapter II of Sacrosanctum Concilium, "The Promotion of Liturgical Instruction and Active Participation."

You see, "instruction," according to the mind of the Council, is the essential key to "participation;" one cannot possibly hope to penetrate the sacred Mysteries in such way as to actively participate in them without first comprehending, to the extent that it is possible, what is taking place. [He is correct. And that phrase "to the extent that it is possible" is important by the fact that we are dealing with an encounter with mystery. The point of worship is an encounter with mystery. Our understanding, opened by what we can learn and comprehend, edges us a little close to that chink in the rock through which we peer at the God who passes by.]

To the Council Fathers, fostering active participation among the laity meant providing the "liturgical instruction" necessary in order for the "faithful to take part in the sacred liturgy fully aware of what they are doing." (cf SC 11) [Perhaps a bit too optimistic, unless we mean that we come to understand that we don’t understand. What we know helps us to know what we don’t know.]

The Mass itself is a teacher, [well… yes… okay… well… Mass is not a didactic moment. Mass is not a teaching experience. Yes, we learn things through the texts and other elements, but the purpose of Holy Mass is not for "learning".] according to the Council Fathers, [?] and they envisioned a revised liturgy that might more effectively communicate our belief that "every liturgical celebration, because it is an action of Christ the priest and of His Body which is the Church, is a sacred action surpassing all others." (SC 7) [I don’t think SC 7 supports the claim that "Mass itself is a teacher". Yes, we can learn things from perceptible signs. But this is not the point of Mass.]

"Liturgy," in other words, is not so much something we "do" as it is a gift we are privileged to receive along with the invitation to unite ourselves to the Lord’s sacred action. [EXACTLY. A constant theme here at WDTPRS has been that the core of a proper understanding of active participation is interiorly active receptivity. Our active participation begins with our interior character, our baptismal character which makes us members of Christ and allows us to receive the other graces offered through the sacraments. We must strive to unite ourselves to the liturgical action, which is really being enacted by the true Actor, Christ the Priest. Our interior receptivity becomes outward expression at the appropriate times and in the appropriate ways indicated in the liturgical rites.] Likewise, "church" is not so much something we "become" as it is that which we already are by virtue of our incorporation into Christ’s Body through Baptism; the gateway to fully conscious and active participation in the sacred liturgy. [After years of writing this in my columns and on the blog, I sense that progress has been made.]

A focus on "doing liturgy" and "becoming church" has brought us to the unfortunate point where Mass in many places, including my parish, all too often obscures the inherent sacredness of the action as much as it communicates it.

Though I admit to being somewhat apprehensive, I will one day "bite the bullet" and respectfully share some of these thoughts with my pastor in the hope that by the grace of God I may be able to repay him well for the good counsel that he’s so freely given to me over the years.



Louie Verrecchio is the author of Harvesting the Fruit of Vatican II; a highly acclaimed adult faith formation tool – endorsed by George Cardinal Pell – that has been helping parish based study groups and individuals worldwide to faithfully explore the documents of the Second Vatican Council since 2004. For more information please visit: www.harvestingthefruit.com

WDTPRS kudos to Mr. Verrecchio for getting it right!