Liturgical Reform

The on-line edition of the National Catholic Reporter highlights reports of impending liturgical changes coming from the Vatican. Officials in Rome deny changes are coming and note that this is not the time for change considering that a new Missal is in process at this point. These denials seem to support the notion that changes are probably coming, but perhaps not for awhile. Some of the changes mentioned include an elimination of communion in the hand and having the priest turning around to face the wall. I wonder if Jesus turned his back to his apostles during the last supper.

Change that we know is definitely coming is a new missal which will go back to using more stilted English. Probably the most jarring for the people in the pews will be a return to the response of 'And with your spirit', when the priest says 'the Lord be with you'. Let me say here and now that I will continue to respond 'and with you' as I have been. Yes you heard it here. My big rebellion against the Church is in place. I can see the Vatican quaking in its boots already. Mind you, I won't be saying it loudly or holding up any signs, but let it be known that this is one Catholic who stands up for his beliefs.

Herein lies the problem with what are essentially ongoing reforms of the reform of the liturgy. None of the changes in themselves represent a big deal. To complain vociferously about any of these changes make one appear small and overly concerned about trivial issues when there are so many more important issues to contemplate. Such a reality makes it easy for the Vatican to little by little reverse the reforms that were put in place by the Second Vatican Council.

The truth is it really doesn't make much difference. When the new reforms were instituted in the 60's there was great optimism that the power of the liturgy would transform all of us into much better Catholics and Christians. There is little evidence of that. Traditionalists believe that making the liturgy more 'sacred' will instill greater reverence and thus holiness in the people of God. They too are wrong. I can assure you that I served many private Latin Masses for priests during my years in the seminary. Many of these Masses were completed in about 10 minutes. Prayers like the Gloria and the Creed were recited in seconds. It was precisely this kind of rote recitation of prayers not understood that led to the liturgical reforms in the first place.

The truth is, though we believe in "ex opere operato" (the power of the liturgy to be effective in itself) it actually has limited impact on parishoners regardless of its format. People in the pews do not easily connect with the Sunday worship so it is difficult to understand how separating them even more from what's going on will improve the situation. The only liturgies that I ever felt had a significant impact on the participants were very small group liturgies such as a family mass around the dining room table with a beloved priest presiding. Of course, such services would now be considered totally out of bounds.

As much as I hate to admit it though, I believe traditionalists are correct. In the forseeable future we will likely be returning to a eucharistic celebration much closer to the pre-Vatican II Tridentine Mass. Where I believe the traditionalists are mistaken, however, is in the belief that this return to something akin to the old Latin Mass will be any more permanent than the Vatican II changes. No doubt the reform of the reforms will stay in place for perhaps 50 to 100 years, but at some point people are going to insist on being more a part of their Sunday worship. Lectors, Eucharistic Ministers, altar girls and the like will be reinstituted.

The point that is being missed, just as it was during Vatican II, is that one size does not fit all. Just as some people love contemporary Masses and others find them terribly jarring, more variety needs to be provided. Our job as Church is to provide the kinds of worship that people can relate too. The availability of the Tridentine Mass in the Baltimore Archdiocese is a part of that. It might be instructive to note, however, that there has been no real clamor from the people to expand the latin mass offerings.

Finally, if people want more traditional devotions such as forty hours or perpetual adoration they should be available. I always loved 40 hour devotions growing up, even though it now seems to me to be pretty suspect from a theological perspective. There is no evidence Jesus instituted the Eucharist so that we could gaze at a jewel laden monstrance. But if people find meaning in such services there is no reason they shouldn't be available. More progressive forms of worship also need to be available. Again, as Church we need to provide for the worship needs of the entire community. At some point, I believe we will learn the importance of providing modalities by which all of us can best meet God and connect with our spiritual dimension. Clearly the robotic and perfunctory universal performance of poorly understood ritual cannot possibly meet the spiritual needs of all of today's Catholics.