EVERYTHING OLD IS REINTERPRETED AGAIN.

In college I attended a Mass at which the celebrant invited us all to stand around the altar for the consecration.  There were about 30 people in attendance for this weekday Mass.  We came up around the altar and as we stood there, a toddler came over and laid down on his back next to me, wrapped his legs around the ankle of my right foot and began to shake back and forth violently much to his enjoyment, my embarrassment, and the mother’s smile of, “Isn’t he cute?”

Anyway, that was a fairly common “in” thing to do for a spell.  (Gathering around the altar, not shaking people’s legs.)  I hardly hear about it at all anymore either because it is such old news that it doesn’t make the gossip chain anymore or because it has largely been given up on.

But oddly enough, this is a way of understanding the the use of the much vilified altar rail.  The altar rail is considered an extension of the altar of sacrifice.  That is why almost always, the top of the rail is made out of the same material as the mensa or top of the high altar (and why people should not sit on it, put pamphlets on it, or in general do anything that one wouldn’t do with the altar.)  The faithful who are priests, prophets, and kings by nature of their baptism are called to this extension of the “the Table” as the disciples were gathered around the table of the Last Supper, drawn up to the sanctuary to receive the Body and Blood of Christ from the very table itself.  Understood in this way, unless one troops everybody into the sanctuary to gather around the altar, the laity have actually been pushed back further away from the altar with the removal of the rail in so many of our spaces.  

My home pastor used to say, “When everybody gets tired of the way we do Mass now, we will have some new iteration that will look strikingly like the past, but will be entirely new and the people who start it will be innovators.  Then they too will become old school and someone will come by and change that innovation again.”  From architects to laity to clergy; everyone wants everyone to be “more connected” to the Mass.  All of it depends on how one interprets and labels the symbolism.  I look forward to what comes next. . .

FRIDAY POTPOURRI: HEAD, SHOULDERS, KNEES AND TOES, KNEES AND TOES.

Once, when I was a kid, we were at some sort of Mass that was not in a church building (probably some polka Mass at some festival or something) so of course there were no kneelers.  When it came time to kneel and nobody did my Aunt Milly said something like, “By God, I don’t care if nobody else is kneeling!  I am going to kneel before my God!”  And she did so.

There is some confusion in our diocese from parish to parish when it comes to kneeling.  There is universal law.  There are exemptions for the United States of America.  There were changes, which an ordinary has a right to do, that changed what we did in the Diocese of Cleveland.  There were the pastors that were not interested in going along with the (previous) bishop and those who were not.  Then there was a decree sent out by (now) St. John Paul II that, at a certain part of the Mass, we could make up our own mind concerning our posture.  

Some people like this.  Some people HATE this.  (I will be offering a class on gestures at Forest Lodges on the 15th of September at 7:00PM to explore these mysterious things.)  In today’s paragraph (96) it further refines what it means not to have certain personages “standing out” at the Mass - the mystery is pushed deeper.  We are, in fact, to become One Body in the listening of the readings, participating in the prayers and singing, and in the participation at the Lord’s table.

Then it says, “This unity is beautifully apparent from the gestures and bodily postures observed together by the faithful.”  If it is a sign of our unity, it is at least understandable why people get upset when someone decides to be a lone wolf and stand when others kneel or sit when others are standing.

There is SOME room for individual expression here, but not a lot - that is not what the Mass is about.  If you are going to buck a tradition, make sure your choice is legitimately available.  If you are too feeble to kneel or stand, of course people are going to understand.  If the setting makes kneeling impossible (such as squished lack of space), then of course you don’t have to kneel.  But one’s choice should never be to make a point to everybody else.  Hold a sign in the parking lot after Mass if there is a theological injustice you think is going on (and be ready to be confronted) but not at the Mass.  This is a place to become one body.

WOULDN'T IT BE NICE IF . . .

Much of the work of Vatican II can be undone with just five simple words – words that strike terror into a liturgist who just wants to do the Roman Rite – and they are these, “Wouldn’t it be nice if . . .”  It is what follows these words that is often painful.

 

One of the things the Second Vatican Council did was to streamline much of the Mass.  What some saw as unnecessary repetition was trimmed away, accretions into the Mass accumulated over centuries were examined and much eliminated.  Now I like the extraordinary form of the Mass - don’t get me wrong - but I also like the ordinary form as the ordinary form.  “Wouldn’t it be nice” is a way to wedge into the Mass all kinds of things it is not designed to take on.  There are a limited amount of blessings that may take place during the Mass but that does not stop well intentioned people from requesting all kinds of blessings to take place at Mass with invented ceremonies that surround them.  Not that there is anything wrong (hopefully) with the ceremonies themselves and they may be jim dandy at any other hour of the day or week including just before or just after the Mass – just not during this one hour, which is aimed in an entirely different direction.

 

But it’s more than blessings, it new processions, recognitions, added ministers, invented ministries, new “rites”, presentations, and other activities, recognitions, and human activity oriented undertakings – all very well intended – during a time when the community’s attention is supposed to be drawn toward God, not to each other.

 

And even they still are aimed at God, the “wouldn’t it be nice” contingents (and at times I am among them!) still do not have footing to employ them.  Their brothers and sisters in the pews have a right to the Roman Rite.  I feel sorry for the poor priest who wants to return to what the Church asks us to do and to which his fellow Christians have a right who gets beat up pretty badly because he wrests the community back to what it is called to do, and not only to do, not only to do well, but in which he has no authority to add or subtract from that which all have a right. 

 

Now, wouldn’t it be nice if we were able to all start there?

MONDAY DIARY: ALMOST EXCRUCIATINGLY TRUE STORIES: PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH

So . . .

I am back from vacation.  When a priest travels he must have a letter of suitability with him if he intends to celebrate a Mass publically outside of his diocese.  I didn't get around to getting a card so I thought it would be fun just to attend Mass someplace and see how it is prayed elsewhere.

 

So on Saturday my sister and I were going to go to this tiny little church in the woods.  They only have one Sunday Mass and it was on Saturday.  I was very much looking forward to it but the forces that be prevented us from making it on time.  So I figured we was meant to go somewhere else and on Sunday.

 

The one we knew we were not going to go to was the "big" Catholic Church in the nearby town which looked more like a renovated Kmart - and I apologize for insulting Kmart.  I am sure they have a wonderful, perfectly valid and licit Mass, but I was on vacation and wanted beauty.

 

So we drove quite a distance to go to a lovely church - beautiful!  We walked in and took a pew and prayed until it was announced that we would not be able to hear their pipe organ as the organist had just called in sick.

 

Oh well.

 

Then the celebrant said, "We are a friendly church.  So I want everyone to stand up and introduce themselves to the person sitting next to them."

For various reasons I find this trite and I have written about it in the past.  Not the least reason I don't recommend this practice is this:

My goal was simply to be there and pray with this community.  Once, many years ago, I was speaking with a liturgist after a Mass and he was asked, "What do you think of they way we celebrate mass here."  He raised is eyebrows and put his arms out and said, "I came here to pray with you, not to evaluate."  I think he was lying or insane.

 

I tried SO HARD to do this but it was an uphill battle when facing this:

Like I'm perfect (or even semi-perfect) right?  So who am I?  But STILL.  ARG!  See??  SEE???  I'm still grinding my teeth over it.  How have I failed my spiritual director?  Oh.

So when I tell people to get over it from now on when they complain about how a priest says Mass, I will try to keep this in mind.  My advice won't change though.  So . . .

It's the end of Mass.  The priest says, "Let us pray."  We all dutifully stand.  He says the prayer and ends with, "We ask this through Our Lord . . . one God for ever and ever."  And we dutifully say, "Amen."  Then he sounds as if he is going into the final blessing  BUT IT'S A TRICK!

So we stand there for his final dialogue with our fingers stuck to our foreheads.  Only the locals know and keep their hands down.  Sis knows I've about had it.  She sneaks me out the side door and flicks holy water on my to calm me down. 

Next year I'm taking my Mass kit.

MONDAY DIARY: LAUNCH SUCCESSFUL!

So like that we went from, “and also with you” to “and with your spirit.” 
I was expecting something like this:

I was expecting a train wreck. I was expecting protests in the streets. I was expecting SOMETHING dramatic but it seems that the parish made an honest go of it and the whole thing came off pretty much without a hitch. So much for excitement (for which I am very grateful.)

There is a prayer that a priest can traditionally say before celebrating Mass. It goes thusly, “Priest of God, say this Mass as though it were you first Mass, as though it were your last Mass, as though it were your only Mass.” Even though we practiced, praying this Mass pretty much felt as though it were my first Mass. I was nervous, my nose stuck to the book, and slightly unsure of myself.

Most of the parts that changed belonged to the priest. Often is was like having driven the same way to work for 10 years and then one day going somewhere else and it feeling like the car was fighting you to go to your usual place of employment. The cadences and flow were off. It meant staying more alert than usual, reading ahead, analyzing, and keeping the ship on course.

By and large it went fine except for the blessing of the deacon before the Gospel. I had typed up a cheat sheet and kept it next to my chair for his new blessing. When it came time for the it I could not find it. “You’ll have to make do with an approximate blessing,” I told him when he came over for his blessing.

In the end it went much more smoothly than I expected. The reaction of people leaving was interesting. There were a few who said they weren’t exactly happy but that they would be good soldiers. There were a number of people who liked it for various reasons. Those who came to our parish from other nations said that they were very happy with the translations because it is what they were used to in their home countries. It turns out there a more people in the parish who studied Latin than I would have guessed and they were happy with it as well as those who remember their old missals for the new translation is pretty close to that old translation.

As odd as it may sound, it did not really occur to me that this is the translation that we would be using every day now. I was so focused on this weekend that I never really thought past to Monday and forever. Tomorrow will be another Eucharistic prayer and another go at it.

I can’t wait.

FRIDAY POTPURRI: PREPARE TO LAUNCH THE MISSALS

So next Sunday we will start with the new translation of the Mass.

After Vatican II the book from which we read all the prayers of the Mass has been known as the Sacramentary. A cool name I think. But every wonder why the newspaper print book that many of you hold during the Mass for the readings or to follow along with prayers of the Mass is called a Missalette and not a Sacramentaryette?

Originally the book used at the mass was called the Roman Missal or “Missale Romanum.” (Hence the poor joke that used to go around that the only date allowed for a seminarian during the summer was with Miss Sally Romanum. Yuck yuck) This book contained just about everything needed for the Mass. With Vatican II the amount of readings were increased as well as the available prayers. To put them all into one book would have been crushed some poor server trying to hold the book. We would only be able to have weightlifters as altar servers.

The book was divided into the book for prayers and the book for readings. The book for prayers was called the Sacramentary, the book for readings was then called the Lectionary. (The Lectionary then being divided into numerous other books . . .)

Now I don’t mind one way or the other. It is simply stating the fact that for some reason yet to be explained to me we will no longer refer to the book containing the prayers for the Mass the Sacramentary. Starting next Sunday it is to be referred to once again as the Missal which in the long run fits our nomenclature much better. “Missalette” and “missal stand” will once again make much more sense.

PARDON ME WHILE I ANSWER MY ANGLO PHONE

Dear Catholic Anglophones,
(I like that word. I just learned it about a month ago.)

Anyway, Dear Catholic people who worship at Mass in English,

Hopefully you are aware that there is a new translation coming out of the Mass which will be used starting the first Sunday of Advent this year. If you have read this blog in the past you know that I am looking forward to it and think it a good thing. Even for people looking forward to it the changeover will present certain challenges. Not the least of which that there are some parts of what will be the old translation that has a certain cadence that I enjoy saying and it will be gone forever. Like saying the lines along with a movie that you enjoy too much such as:

“You’ve got to eat your breakfast Margie”

Or

“Very well. I’ll bide my time. But just try and stay out of my way, just try! I’ll get you my pretty and your little dog too!”

it would be a bummer if Hollywood gave it a rewrite that must always be said from now on.

“Well and fitting! For now I will retreat but will be ready to strike when that door of opportunity opens again. Try to remain far from clutches, flee! I will prevail over you my beautiful one, and that side kick dog of yours will meet his doom also!”

Actually – that wasn’t too bad. Might be fun.

But I digress,

There are things to like greatly about the current translation. But a new translation is coming out for the entire English speaking world no matter what. It can be painful or it can be merely a challenge for a few weeks. In any event, each person can help their fellow parishioners through the process or be the cause of distress. Please consider being an agent of hope amidst some of the confusion and resistance. Help bring your parish through the challenge. (Your priest will greatly appreciate it also!)

LOW COUNCILIAR SELF ESTEEM

One of the reasons for the reform of the Mass at Vatican II was to get rid of all of the various extra things that crept into the Mass over the centuries. Post Vatican II it seems that we could not wait to plaster a whole bunch of things back in to the Mass – many under the guise of being in the Spirit of Vatican II (an extremely slippery term that nobody can quite define but is used as a catch all for allowing just about anything.)

It may not seem like such a big deal but there are consequences. Extra services and blessings, processions, added songs, extra ministers and ministries in various forms and in differenting amounts are added to the Liturgy. Pope Benedict describes this in his book, “The Spirit of the Liturgy” in this way, “Unfortunately, (active participation) was very quickly misunderstood to mean something external, entailing a need for general activity, as if as many people as possible, as often as possible, should visibly engage in action. . . The almost theatrical entrance of different players into the liturgy, which is so common today, especially during the Preparation of the Gifts, quite simply misses the point.”

And what is the point? All these ministries are quite secondary to the primary action and the more we pull people away to perform secondary actions the less, obviously, are there doing the primary – or at least the less important the primary seems. I wonder if this does not extend from the idea that we come to Mass to watch, to be entertained, as one would do passively say at the theater. But in actuality we are each of us priests, prophets, and kings. The priesthood of the people may be different from the ordained priesthood but is none-the-less and essential ministry to be carried out by each baptized person, the five your old (in their own way) as well as the 95 year old.

Continuing with Pope Benedicts words, “The real Liturgical action, the true liturgical act is the oratio, the great prayer that forms the core of the Eucharistic celebration. . . we must pray for it to become our sacrifice, that we ourselves, as we have said, may be transformed into the Logos, conformed to the Logos, and so be made the true Body of Christ. . .in this prayerful approach to participation, there is no difference between priest and laity. . . Of course, external actions – reading, singing, the bringing up of gifts – can be distributed in a sensible way. By the same token, participation in the Liturgy of the Word (reading, singing) is to be distinguished from the sacramental celebration proper. We should be clearly aware that external actions are quite secondary here.”

So we come to at least some of the consequences of adding things to the Mass. The first would be the fostering of the idea that we come to Mass to witness something and that those who “have something to do” are in some way “participating more or in a more important way than I am.” That is simply false. A second would be that in the removal of innovations that were never called for or were in fact banned by everything except this mysterious “spirit of Vatican II” will appear to those who have bought into this idea as a return to pre-Vatican II era of when in fact, it is a return to Vatican II – and this can be a cause of unnecessary dissention between clergy and lay people.

I fear that if Vatican II were a person instead of council, she would be depressed. Always misunderstood and misquoted, always trying to say who she is and often being ignored. Like a rock star everyone wants to claim to know her without really spending any time with her getting to know her. “If people really knew me,” I imagine her thinking, “would they still like me?” Fortunately she is maturing now and able to assert herself more confidently.

SAME FENCE; NEW PAINT

“There’s something worth paying attention here to.” This is what my cousin, a fellow priest, leaned over to me and said during a diocesan meeting of all priests yesterday. I am inclined to agree.

All the priests of the Diocese of Cleveland were together in a great hall at the seminary for a seminar on the new translation of the Mass. My thoughts have been that I was looking forward to the translation but not the implantation of it. It will feel like, and in fact be, the most significant and difficult change to effect in the liturgical lives of Catholics since the sweeping reforms of the Second Vatican Council. Read: Teaching an elephant to walk a tightrope.

Then I heard the new translations proclaimed. I am not a person that rides heavily on my emotions. I am just not built that way. But when I heard some of the texts read I felt a stirring inside. They are absolutely beautiful. Knowing that it will still require great care in the introduction of this new translation and realizing full well there will be people who will resent it (probably exacerbated by my not presenting well to and for all parties) I have moved from having my first concern being the difficulties of introduction to anxiously awaiting the day we may pray these words.

The presenter spoke about why the English language translation is receiving such scrutiny. To begin with, English has become the new lingua Franca. It has become the new international language of common use. Should not then this most important of languages be treated with extra care? And not only that, there are many languages for which there are not scholars readily available schooled not only in their own language but in the depths and knowledge of Latin required to translate prayers going back to before 9th century. Therefore they use the English translation to translate into their tongue. The English translation then is extremely important and it is imperative that it be not only true (as far as translations go) but also beautiful. What is wrong with the English translation will affect the world.

But that does not mean that everyone is going to like it. Conversely there are those who offer numerous and constant complaints over my 12 years as a priest about the current translation. There are those who simply love the way it is (or are simply used to it) and there are those who will go gaga over the new translation. In other words, when trying to please millions of people you are not going to win no matter what you do – damned if you do and damned if you don’t. But no matter what side of the translation fence you happen to think the grass is greener on, the implementation of the new Missal is going to happen. Individuals then can choose to be joyful in it – or at least cooperative – or minimally: obedient, or they can fight and scream, cry, “Foul!”, storm out, and in general make the inevitable as miserable as possible.

That is not always a bad thing. It keeps people on their toes and makes sure that what is going on is darn legitimate. But this is the Mass. It is what we have. We can love it in its latest form or we can choose to be miserable.

I choose joy.

MONDAY DIARY: A NEW WAY OF SAYING THE SAME THING

This past Friday night all the clergy of the Diocese of Cleveland, priests and deacons alike, were brought together at Magnificat High School to be introduced to the new translation of the Mass. If you have not heard, the new translations has been approved by Rome and at least for now it seems that we will put the new Sacramentary to use the First Sunday of Advent 2011.

This new translation of the Mass is the greatest single change in the Mass since the Second Vatican Council. It is really quite a historic moment. Whether one desires the new translation or not, it will be disruptive for a spell. Some will be excited about it and some will disappointed to the point of anger. I rode to the convocation in a car packed with priests. Some made mention what a shock the new translation is going to be to the Christmas and Easter Catholics for the first few years. I hadn’t thought of that. It will be quite a shock for them.

Just as everyone will be, the clergy are also all over the board on how they feel about this new translation. Some are clearly excited, some just loyal to whatever is asked, some question, some are worried about being able to make the change, and a few are not happy at all. Hence the wisdom of bringing us all together to try to get us all on the same page, to prepare ourselves and in turn to help our congregations be prepared when the new translations hit.

We took our seats in the new auditorium of the High School and were welcomed by the principal of the school. Then we prayed Evening Prayer together which took up the first half hour of the meeting. Then Bishop Lennon introduced another bishop (I do not recall his name) who gave us a history of the translation which was highly consultative and painstakingly researched. Most of the talk was about addressing the “whys” and “hows” and in fact dealt very little with many of the texts.

In brief, it was mentioned that when the Mass was allowed to prayed in the vernacular, the document on it called for the periodic update of the translations. Further, Masses and prayers have been added, patristic and Biblical reference that were obscured were made clear, better understanding of how to translate from Latin to English have been developed, more formal language is used and an attempt to use language that would not cater to one particular English speaking county, and contrary to popular belief, it is not a slavish translation to the Latin though it is much closer than the current translation. (I’m not trying to start a debate, just reporting what was said.)

At the end there came time for Q and A and I braced myself in my seat waiting for some sort of onslaught. There was some bravado beforehand about question that would be proposed but perhaps it was the clearness of the presentation the allayed most of them except one good point concerning one word.

The meeting dispersed peacefully and happily enough. Perhaps this is going to go much better than I had anticipated. Though we may have some differences perhaps it is that we as a presbyterate are much more willing to come together to do this than I thought.

Just one personal note to those who will publish the new sacramentary: Please, please, please keep in mind that we have over 2000 years of Catholic art available to us to use. There are many good current artists. Could we please dump the Play School art and have something a bit more inspiring? (My deepest apologies for those who really like the current art work.)

WHO WILL BE THE NEW CONSERVATIVES?

If you read this space regularly you know that there is coming a change in the Roman Missal. Actually, that is incorrect; there is coming a change in the English translation of the Roman Missal. Even if you think it is necessary (and I do) and even if you think it is positive (and I do) and even if you are looking forward to it (and I am) it is going to be DIFFICULT.

This came to mind recently reading over the changes in everything from the Gloria to the Institution Narrative. There is a familiarity with these texts – a comfort – a rhythm that we have become both accustomed to saying and hearing. For me, anyway, it is like reading a favorite book or watching a best loved movie over and over again. You know perfectly well how it’s going to end, what the next scene is, and can even quote the lines, but there is still something so incredibly satisfying in going through it again.

That is about to change. Not completely. And that might be the most difficult part of it. It will be ALMOST the same. You will be going along familiar passages and then – WHAM – there will be a turn of phrase or a new sentence or a clarifying adjective that was not there before. It will be like watching the director’s cut and asking, “Where did THAT scene come from?”

There are going to be those who are going to complain. Protest. Be angry. There are going to be accusations that “We are going back in time! We are becoming Pre-Vatican II!” (as if automatically that is something evil – but that’s a post for another day.) But such is not the case. It is interesting to note that these particular changes are NOT changes. This translation (for those who may not be aware) is only taking place in English speaking countries. The rest of the world is not going through this because when they translated their Missals it was already more in line with the official words of the Mass. If you went to another country in which the spoke another language it would not take much of a language scholar to realize that when they were saying the Confiteor they were already saying their equivalent to “mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa,” or “through my fault, through my fault, through my own grievous fault,” which we currently translate as “though my own fault.” So far from doing anything new or “going retro,” we are merely bringing ourselves back in line with Church universal. (If somebody does know of some similar thing happening in another country please leave a comment.)

How we got here is a long and complicated story full of fighting and intrigue. But we are here and now we have to deal with this corrective phase. In a couple of years most everybody will be back to being comfortable once again. (Does anybody remember and is still aggravated that “This is the Word of the Lord” was changed to “The Word of the Lord”?) But the transition will be hard for many. Please pray for this transition and for those who will have a difficult time with it (clergy and lay alike.) Try to remain positive about it. And have this knowledge in your hip pocket to help those who will be struggling.

Here is the interesting question: Who will become the “Neo Traditionalists” who will want to preserve this old translation and will fight the changes? Now THAT will be fascinating.

MASS CONFUSSION CHAPTER 12 - THIS SERIES IS ENDED; GO IN PEACE

After receiving Communion the Communion Rite is not finished! The rite ends with the praying of the collect or Prayer after Communion. That is why it is inappropriate to have the announcements read or other such thing before the collect is prayed. We are not done yet!

The form of this prayer is similar to the collect at the beginning of Mass. There is a call to, “Let us pray,” at which time we are called to silent prayer. (Hopefully you are given a little time to do this.) The prayers are then collected into one great prayer offered on behalf of the congregation to the Father, thought the Son, in the power of the Holy Spirit. This concludes the Communion Rite and if there are any horrid little announcements to be read or some such thing this is the time to do it.

Now that we have been renewed, fed, instructed, we have praised God, been blessed by Him, and brought closer to Him, now that we have celebrated and have even touched God we have once more the call and response, “The Lord be with you.” “And also with you.” A final blessing is given just before we are sent out to live what we have celebrated. “May Almighty God bless you, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”

“Amen!” we cry out, ready to live anew the life to which Jesus has called us.

“This Mass is ended. Go in peace.”

How grateful we are for this great gift in which were privileged to participate. “Thanks be to God!”

The Mass ends right here. The concluding hymn is not part of the Mass. If you have stayed for the, “Thanks be to God,” you have stayed for the entire Mass and in doing so have fulfilled your Sunday obligation. The mandate of Vatican II for full, conscious, and active participation has been met.

Manners however might call us to something higher. Participating in the closing hymn, allowing the priest to take leave of the sanctuary, making a connection with other parishioners is not a matter of liturgy, it is a matter of community. It shows that we understand what it is to be Church. That is not to say that there are times that we might need to hurry on a particular day, but in general staying to offer a prayer of thanksgiving perhaps, going to coffee and donuts, stepping outside to speak to people with whom you have a connection, this is all part of trying live what we have just celebrated.

“That they might be one of the first to get out of the parking lot.” Er, I mean, “That they might be one.”

Well, so much for a quick overview of the Mass! But we are done. But, my friends, we have just scratched the surface. The depths of the beauty of the Mass is infinitely deeper. There is so much more to explore and there has been a mere taste here. If you “got something out of” this series please consider continuing your exploration of this “source and summit” of our lives; the cause and symbol of our unity.

MASS CONFUSION 11

Today's post may be a bit disjointed. I am sitting in the hospital waiting room as my sister has surgery on her wrist. Why must hospital furniture be so uncomfortable? There will also be no pitcures as the hospital web site restrict image searches!

Now that we are properly shook – the Lamb of God is sung. It is during this time not the concretion that the Eucharistic bread is broken. The priest says a private prayer at this point for which he has two options. The one that makes for pause of thought is the second one.

It reads in part, “As I eat Your Body and drink Your Blood let it not bring me condemnation but health in mind and body.” Is that not something to contemplate? This holy food can bring eternal life or condemnation.

Communion is the most intimate moment we have with God on earth. It is central to our covenant. It is the source and symbol of our bond as the marriage act is to marriage (a reason we do not “share” Jesus with persons who do not believe as we do!) To reject Him and His teachings yet take possession of His Body is a grave matter for one truly believes that this is the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord and that belief must be reflected in the life one leads.

At this moment the priest holds Jesus aloft and proclaims, “Behold that Lamb of God.” These are the same words that Saint John used when he pointed to Jesus on the shore and exclaims, “Belhold the Lamb of God!” We are making the claim and connection that this is the same Jesus in our midst 2,000 years later. “Happy are they who are called to His supper!” Communion then is shared among those of the same covenant, the same adoption, the same belief, those who are united as one.

Occasionally I make mention of this at Masses or in classes where there are people of different faith traditions and on more than one occasion someone has stepped forward and said that they were offended or confused in that they could not receive Communion at Mass. Usually this will end up in a discussion (usually over coffee) about why this is the case. Wonderful dialogues take place. In a few instances people had to seriously consider if they should not become Catholic for their belief was much closer to that of the Catholic Church than of their own. None of these opportunities would have taken place had there not been some honesty about division within the Christian Church. As long as we all pretend that everything is Okay and that there are no real division between us no real movement can be made in the direction of true unity.

MASS CONFUSION PART 10

We continue on with two more prayers to the Father. The first by the celebrant asking the Father to keep us always in His grace until we should joyfully greet His Son and the second by all that is a bit of an declaration of allegiance, “For the Kingdom, the power and glory are Yours . . .”

Then, interestingly enough, we have a prayer in which we directly address Jesus. Savvy is the celebrant who can by inflection or some other means makes this change in prayer perceptible to those in attendance. We turn to Him and plead for the peace here on earth which He promised to His disciples. Having done that the celebrant addresses all assembled, “The peace of the Lord be with you.”

“And also with you.”

“Let us offer each other the sign of peace.”

Now comes a problem that I doubt will ever be adequately solved. We have the sign of peace in this particular spot just before we approach the altar similar to the Gospel mandate that asks us to make peace with our brothers and sisters before approaching the altar. It makes sense. But it is a symbolic gesture. We are to turn to the person immediately next to us to offer the sign of peace. To make the sign of peace to one (or two) is to symbolically to make the sign of peace to all since as gathered we are the Body of Christ. If you try to grab everyone’s hand within spitting distance and give waves, winks, and finger gunshots to those beyond your grasp it ceases to be a symbolic gesture and becomes an actual gesture. Then you have the odd problem of those out of your range. What of Mrs. Gunnysack sitting in the front pew or the odd, hairy, slightly smelly guy who sits back in the corner? If it is not a symbolic gesture why not form two lines like at the end of the baseball game and have each person walk pass every other person and shake hands?

Someone once asked the former liturgist of our diocese, “So does that mean that I am to choose between which of my family I am going to offer the sign of peace to?” To which he responded, “in the Body of Christ we are one. There is not wife or husband, daughter, son, etc. We are all brothers and sisters.” That is probably the ideal. I can’t imagine ignoring someone that wanted to shake my hand because we want to liturgically perfect, but that does mean that we should cut down on the ridiculousness of the long distance, “Hey – and peace to you over there!”

“Right back at you dude.”

MASS CONFUSION PART 9

This is an exciting time. Jesus is present on our altar. The curtain of time has been opened and we are united in the original sacrifice. Now with our Savior the moment of absolute joy is almost here.

In this state we begin by recalling the mystical events in which we find ourselves. In the RC we start again addressing our Father, “ . . . we celebrate the memory of Christ, Your Son,” Who is now present on our altar, “we, Your people and Your ministers recall His passion, His resurrection from the dead, and His ascension into glory.” We then tell Him that we are about to offer Him the only gift worthy of Him: Jesus. In the Third Eucharistic Prayer we state, “Look with favor on Your Church’s offering and see the Victim Whose death reconciles us to Yourself.” Since most people listen instead of reading along in a book (which is right and good) they miss the capitalization of “Victim.” Jesus is THE one true Victim for our sins as He is the only truly Innocent One. As such we beg the Father to accept this sacrifice – His Son on our behalf for the forgiveness of our sins.

In the first half of the RC we were concerned with people and things of this world. Now that we are actively dabbling in things of the next we begin expanding outward to encompass the true circle of the Church. So as in the first part we recalled “all Your people especially those for whom we know pray,” in the second part we beg, “Remember Lord those who have died . . .especially those for whom we now pray.” What a blessing (to some soul) to call someone to mind – even if it is just the poor souls – during this time instead of thinking about a tee-time or grocery list!

We pray for our future with the saints after our time in this life is over. “May we share in the fellowship of the apostles and martyrs with John the Baptist, Stephen, Mathias . . .”

Finally, before the grand moment of the Mass we once make our ultimate request: That through this sacrifice, trusting in his mercy and love, we will enjoy the fruits of salvation.

Now, there are certainly a number of high points – very significant – even earth shaking events in the Mass. But here comes the most incredible moment of all. Jesus’ mission on earth was to be the perfect mediator between heaven and earth. He was to bring man back into relationship with his Father. We were estranged and now are family is healed! This is all because of the sacrifice of our God, a Trinity of Persons Who we, in the power of the Holy Spirit, can call Father through the One we are granted to name as Brother.

So, we see Jesus lifted up for all to see just as He was 2000 years ago except we see the glory of the lifting up where the original witnesses only saw scandal and disgrace. We can be the voice in the background at Golgotha that cries out, “Through Him! (Jesus!) With Him (Did you catch that? WITH HIM!) In Him! In the unity of the Holy Spirit, all glory and honor is Yours! Almighty Father! For ever and ever!” And we should burst forth, unable to contain ourselves with a three fold, “Amen! Amen! Amen!” But we are used to it! Mere mortals have become accustomed to visiting with God! That is both our shame and our glory. But think of it – now that Jesus has been lifted up in the Holy Spirit and we are once again united as closely as we can be here on earth with God (assuming we went to confession if need be) what are the first words out of our mouths? What did Jesus teach us to say? How do we address the Lord, God, Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth and all that they contain now that we have been brought this close together?

“Our Father, Who art in heaven . . .”

MASS CONFUSSION PART 8

Before we continue just a quick clarification to a good point that Samantha pointed out yesterday. She stated, “while it is true that the validity or essence of the sacrifice of the Mass is not impacted by which priest is presiding or his level of holiness, it does matter in terms of the guidance and potentially additional graces available to the lay faithful in attendance. Example, Holy priests who preside with genuine reverence aid the faithful by example in also participating with true reverence.” This is true and thank you for pointing that out. But the attempted point was that when you do not have a choice in the matter of the celebrant and the a particular priest does not work for you or you think him not holy enough, take comfort in that the Jesus you hear proclaimed and the Jesus you receive in the sacrament is just as valid. There is some comfort in that.

Turning the page in the Sacramentary in the RC we sum up, “Accept this sacrifice from your whole family,” and then inform Him (and us) what we want for all of us: Peace in this life, protection from final damnation, and being numbered among the chosen. This is our wish for all the living.

The next part is called the Epiclesis. You can recognize it in all of the Eucharistic Prayers by the priest extending his hands flat over the bread and wine. In many parishes this is also accompanied by a single ringing of the Sanctus Bells. This marks the calling down of the Holy Spirit upon the gifts which we ask God to approve and make acceptable our offering which we ask to become the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus.

Now begins the Institution Narrative – the particular instructions left for us by our Savior. Please note once again that it is the Father that is being addressed (not us!) just as Jesus addressed the Father when He said these words first 2,000 years ago. The celebrant takes the bread in his hands and even though the narrative says, “He broke the bread,” we do not break it at this point! We are NOT putting on a play nor are we making a new sacrifice. The rite of breaking the bread comes later. Now we are concerned with having Jesus becoming present in this significant way. As the bread and wine is consecrated and becomes the Body and Blood of Jesus the celebrant genuflects in adoration which is often accompanied by the ringing of bells. The congregation likewise is given a moment of adoration of God made present on our altars.

Notice we say, “Do this in memory of me.” Some people make the claim that Jesus wanted us to do this for some symbolic reason in much the same way we might use a blanket or some such thing to remember our late grandmother. It calls her to mind and reminds us of her kindness or what have you. This is a very logical assumption but wrong. One has to use the terminology the way Jesus intended it.

The Jewish people at Passover also celebrate “in memory.” But in celebrating they don’t celebrate a new Passover but by celebrating it become present at THE Passover and thereby become the Chosen People. (If I have any Jewish readers I hope that I explained that in an adequate fashion and if not please clarify.) In any event, that is what WE mean. We become part of the original sacrifice.

Jesus is now present on our altar in this most privileged way, we acknowledged the fact, had our first opportunity at worship and now (usually) sing of this wonderful mystery (by way of example) “Lord, by Your cross and resurrection You have set us free! YOU ARE THE SAVIOR OF THE WORLD!”