This past Sunday my family attended Mass in the Extraordinary Form, as my pastor has begun to say this Form of the Mass on a weekly basis at our parish. It was the first time attending a Latin Mass for my wife and most of my children, so I tried to prepare them beforehand as to what to expect. It was a Low Mass, so silence reigned, which was actually quite beautiful.

Although I truly appreciate the old Mass, I admit that I am content with the Novus Ordo, as long as it is properly celebrated. However, there are many Catholics who greatly prefer the Latin Mass, and John Zmirak has posted a wonderfully written, charitably-argued defense of traditional Catholicism over at Inside Catholic. I urge everyone to go over there and read it.

Zmirak distinguishes between “orthodox Catholics” and “traditionalist Catholics”. “Orthodox Catholics” are those who assent to all the Church’s teachings and appreciate all the Church’s traditions, yet do not have an attachment to pre-Vatican II, Tridentine Catholicism. In fact, some orthodox Catholics greatly prefer many of the changes that came about as a result of Vatican II. “Traditionalist Catholics”, on the other hand, also assent to all the Church’s teachings, but believe that many of the pre-Vatican II, Tridentine traditions of the Church still have great value. As someone who falls in the “orthodox Catholic” camp but has significant Traditionalist sympathies, I want to make a few comments on Zmirak’s article:

Still, the division [between orthodox and traditionalist Catholics] is palpable. It was lying right there on the table, for any who cared to palpate it, last week when I went to dinner with a Trad-minded colleague and a visiting author who’d come to speak at our college on G. K. Chesterton. (The presentation was riveting, and I highly recommend Dale Ahlquist’s talks and books.) Like the good Mr. Shea, our speaker is a convert, and he shared with Mark a puzzlement at the apparent fixation traditionalists have on restoring former elements of the liturgy and other Catholic practices that are not essential, and resisting innovations that are not inherently evil. Having come from churches that didn’t have the Eucharist, and remaining through God’s grace flush with gratitude for the sacraments, many converts really don’t understand what the rest of us are nattering on about. We who grew up privileged may seem like sulky, spoiled kids. We owe these good people an explanation.

Zmirak hits on an important difference here. When I go to Mass, I still sometimes find myself saying, “Jesus Christ is coming – body, blood, soul and divinity – to this altar; I can’t believe I’m here!” A traditionalist cradle Catholic, on the other hand, might sometimes think something along the lines of, “Jesus Christ is coming – body, blood, soul and divinity – to this altar; I can’t believe [insert liturgical abuse] is here!” Both are valid reactions, and both appreciate the awesomeness of what is happening. But the former perspective – often held by converts – doesn’t concern itself with many of the inessential elements of the Mass. After all, we have been a part of a ecclesial community which didn’t even have the Eucharist, so we are just thankful for being present.

But should we be concerned with “inessential” elements? Zmirak thinks so:

Here’s what we Trads have realized, that the merely orthodox haven’t: Inessential things have power, which is why we bother with them in the first place. In every revolution, the first thing you change is the flag. Once that has been replaced, in the public mind all bets are off — which is why the Commies and Nazis filled every available space with their Satanic banners. Imagine, for a moment, that a newly elected president replaced the Stars and Stripes with the Confederate battle flag. Or that he replaced our 50 stars with the flag of Mexico. Let’s say he got away with doing this, and wasn’t carried off by the Secret Service to an “undisclosed location.” What would that signify for his administration? If people accepted the change, what else would they be likely to accept?

A valid concern, but I would argue that it can be easily over-inflated. If the president changes the United States flag with the flag of Mexico, that has a powerful effect. But if he changes the dinner china in the White House dinner room, that does not. So there are inessential things that have power, and inessential things that do not. The trick is determining the difference, and the sin of the Pharisees was that they could not make that distinction. But even accepting that certain inessential elements have power (such as the turning of the priest towards the people), the Christian should still always realize that even then they do not trump truly essential elements, something that, at least in my experience, some Traditionalist Catholics have a hard time remembering.

In fact, you can see the danger in focusing on inessential matters in the very comments of Zmirak’s article. In one of the very first comments, another traditionalist criticizes Zmirak for being positive about the congregation saying the responses with the altar servers. Instead of focusing on the fact that Zmirak is giving an extremely powerful argument for his own beliefs, this traditionalist focuses only on another inessential matter to debate.

But this does not diminish the main thrust of Zmirak’s article. I applaud him for this well-argued article, and I hope many of us “orthodox Catholics” give it a read and take his arguments to heart.

Last week I took my teenage daughter to a special Mass which I hoped she would find especially appealing. It included inspiring worship music, elaborate visual stimulation and inspired preaching. And afterward, when I asked her what she thought, she enthusiastically told me that she liked it. Here is a description of this “teen-friendly” Mass from the parish’s website:

A Solemn High Mass in the Extraordinary Form for the Feast of the Purification (Candlemas) with a blessing of the Candles and Procession with polyphonic propers composed by William Byrd, and the Ordinary from his Mass for Four Voices, sung by Chantry.

Now I admit that I am not an “Old Mass-only” Catholic. Nor do I think the Mass needs to be in Latin; I prefer the vernacular, truth be told. However, I can’t help but marvel at the fact that we have spent countless hours and enormous amounts of energy over the past 40 years trying to create a Mass that is “relevant” and engaging to our teens, when perhaps it was collecting mothballs in the closet the whole time?

This is pretty cool: someone has gone through the entire Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom and noted all the biblical references in it. A small example:

Choir: Through the prayers of the Theotokos (Mother of God), Savior, save us.

Bible References:  Galatians 3:24, Saint Luke 1: 46 – 55, Saint Luke 1:42

Deacon: Again and again in peace let us again pray to the Lord.

Bible References:  1 Thessalonians 5:17

Choir: Kyrie, eleison.

Translation:  Lord, have mercy.

Bible References:  Psalms 51:1

Deacon: Help us, save us, have mercy upon us, and protect us, O God, by Your grace.

Bible References:  Psalms 123:3, Psalms 106:47, Saint Mark 9:22

Choir: Amen.

Deacon: Remembering our most holy, pure, blessed, and glorious Lady, the Theotokos and ever virgin Mary, with all the saints, let us commit ourselves and one another, and our whole life to Christ our God.

Bible References:  Saint Luke 1:42

Choir: To You, O Lord.

Bible References:  Acts 20:32

Priest: For Thine is the majesty, and Thine is the Kingdom and the power and the glory:  of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages.

Bible References:  Revelation 8:12, 1 Chronicles 29:11, Saint Matthew 6:13, Daniel 4:34

Oftentimes Protestant Christians will accuse liturgical Christians such as Catholics or Orthodox of not engaging in “biblical worship”. This page shows that nothing could be further from the truth.

Two announcements related to the Extraordinary Form of the Mass being celebrated in the DC area:

On Saturday, April 24th, Dario Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos, President Emeritus of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”, will celebrate the Extraordinary Form of the Mass at the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception. I imagine it will be breathtaking.

On an even more local note, the pastor of my own parish, St. John Neumann in Gaithersburg, MD, will begin celebrating the Extraordinary Form of the Mass weekly at 5pm on Sundays starting on Feb. 21st (the First Sunday in Lent). He will begin by celebrating the low mass, and he hopes to move to a Missa Cantata (basically a low mass with a choir) by Easter.

If you are in the area, try to make an effort to attend!

A common lament in many churches today is the lack of young people. It seems that many youth today can’t leave faith of their parents fast enough once they are on their own. This is true in Catholic churches and it is especially true in evangelical churches, at least according to this interesting article in the Broken Arrow Ledger entitled “Where have the Young People Gone?” Some excerpts (emphasis added):

“Nationwide polls and denominational reports are showing that the next generation is calling it quits on the traditional church. And it’s not just happening on the nominal fringe; it’s happening at the core of the faith.”

That’s the opening paragraph in a press release promoting a new book, “Already Gone,” by Ken Ham and Britt Beemer, with Todd Hillard…

Two-thirds of young adults who have grown up in evangelical churches are leaving, according to Ham and Beemer.

Nancy Mabry, youth director at St. Stephen’s United Methodist Church, agrees that evangelical churches are losing twenty-somethings, but she credits a reluctance to make any sort of commitment as the underlying cause.

If young people can’t commit to a skating party on Sunday evening until Sunday morning, they’re going to have difficulty making long-term commitments to anything else, Mabry said.

When she was in her 20s, she said “If you didn’t have a fever, you went to church. Some people say they don’t come to church because Sunday is the only day they have to spend with family. Why don’t they spend it with their family in church? Now, church is an option,” Mabry said.

What is the solution? There is a hint of it found later in the article:

There is an exception, however, according to Mabry. Traditional churches that are liturgical churches and smaller evangelical churches seem to be retaining their twenty-something members in greater numbers than larger and mega-churches.

The Rev. John Wilke, senior pastor of Immanuel Lutheran Church, has read the book and said he found it to be a fascinating study.

He cited one of Luther’s writings as something for church leaders to consider: “A faith that costs nothing and demands nothing is worth nothing.”

“I think that is where the church is today. I get too many things in the mail from churches that say, ‘Come just the way you are, you don’t have to change,’” Wilke said.

“While God loves you where you are, he expects you to change. We don’t put the fear of God in our churches, we don’t have that respect. We’ve made Jesus our homeboy. He’s not our homeboy, he’s our Saviour.”

Wilke said the only church he knows of that is experiencing growth in the 20-to-29-year old age group is the Greek Orthodox Church.

“The Greek Orthodox Church is a liturgical church. Kids want to return to something different from what they get from the world. If we want to reach these kids again, we are going to have to return to what the early church was doing. We need to raise the bar,” he said.

Read that last part again: a demanding, liturgical Church is actually attracting youth!

Over the past forty years, the goal of many Catholic parishes has been to make it as easy as possible to be a Catholic so that everyone, but especially the youth, would be willing to come. There has been very little preaching about sin and repentance or about the demands the Faith puts upon you. Furthermore, the underlying assumption for many has been to make the celebration of the Mass more “relevant” to the younger generations, so that they will be more attracted to coming. However, this study shows the exact opposite has occurred: kids have rejected the easy way and instead favor churches that are more demanding and more traditionally liturgical.

Youth want to be inspired; they want to be called to something above themselves. A demanding, liturgical church naturally does this and as a result attracts youth without even explicitly trying.

I am very excited by this announcement in my parish bulletin:

Altar Boys need for Mass in the Extraordinary (Tridentine) Form – Saturday, December 19th at 11:00am in the Church there will be an introduction to, and a practice for, serving the Mass in the Extraordinary Form (the “Tridentine” Mass). Out of respect for this form, this is only open to boys, from age ten to young adult. This is a very difficult Mass to server. It involves memorization of Latin responses and a great attention to very detailed actions. There is no firm schedule for offering Mass in this form. Fr. LaHood wants to have altar boys ready when it seems appropriate to offer Mass in this form in the parish.

As soon as I found out that my pastor was interested in offering the Mass in the Extraordinary Form in our parish, I have encouraged him to do so as soon as possible. I have also been helping him with recruitment of altar boys and people for the schola and I can’t wait until it is available at our parish. Until then, I’ll get ready by watching this video, narrated by then-Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen:

About a week ago I wrote a post titled “In Defense of the Novus Ordo“, which was really more an explanation that the things most criticized about the Novus Ordo are optional. Someone in the combox noticed I didn’t really defend the Novus Ordo itself, to which I foolishly responded that I would at some point write a true defense.

Why do I say foolishly? Because I realize that any defense, no matter how well-researched or well-defended, will bring out vicious attacks, including questioning the validity of the Novus Ordo, accusations of heresy in Vatican II and conspiracy theories about Masons, Protestants and Paul VI. Nothing denigrates faster than a Catholic blog discussion on the Mass. It has in many ways become the “third rail” of the Catholic blogosphere.

Why is this? Why is it that any discussion of the liturgy so quickly turns into conflict, and all-too-often a quagmire of attacks, uncharitable accusations, and downright un-Christian behavior? I can think of a few reasons.

The Liturgy is important. In academia, they say that arguments are so heated because the stakes are so small. I would argue that the opposite is true about the liturgy: the arguments are so heated because the stakes are so high. The Mass is the most important thing that we as humans do. We are all created for eternal life in heaven, and what will we be doing in heaven? Well, if you read the book of Revelation, you see that heaven is one big Mass. So it is quite understandable that people take it quite seriously.

How we celebrate the Liturgy is important. How we celebrate the liturgy matters as well. The Old Testament condemns worship to false gods, but it also condemns false worship to the true God. For example, in Leviticus 10:1-2, the sons of Aaron presented “unlawful fire” to the Lord and as a result, they were consumed by that fire. Furthermore, the excruciating detail in which the Old Testament explains how proper liturgy is to be performed shows that it is not only vital that we worship God, but that we do it properly. So liturgical debates are important.

The Liturgy is a human-divine activity. The Mass was instituted by Christ and it’s development has been guided by the Holy Spirit. In it, we worship God in the way He has asked to be worshiped. However, the liturgy is also a human activity which is shaped by human elements, including culture, taste, and ability. While maintaining the core structure of the Mass, we have a great range of details we can adjust. Just look at the difference between the Mass of the Latin Rite and the Divine Liturgies of the Eastern Churches: they are the same underlying liturgy, but are quite different in their execution. Because it is so influenced by human factors, however, there can be strong disagreements about what is appropriate and helpful to proper worship and what is not. It is often difficult to separate in our minds between what is contrary to true worship and what is just not our taste.

The Liturgy is our most common activity. And by “common” I mean both “frequent” and “related to the whole”. All practicing Catholics participate in the Mass at least once a week – we are never more than seven days separated from it. Furthermore, the Mass is what unites the Church universal: whereas there might be diverse spiritual practices from Europe to Africa to Latin America, we all celebrate the same Mass. Because of this, we are constantly reminded if a Mass is celebrated poorly and we know what a great impact this can have on the Church Universal.

Therefore, I am very empathetic with those who lament the direction (both figuratively and literally) liturgical worship has gone in the past 40 years. I have been fortunate to have been a member of three separate parishes (in three separate dioceses) that all celebrated the Mass without any egregious abuses or flippancy that you can see in some American parishes. But I can understand how someone who week-in and week-out experiences such Masses would become discouraged and even angry over such a state of affairs. I think Pope Benedict has made it clear that he too shares these concerns and is working to restore a more reverent atmosphere to the celebration of the Mass.

But (and you knew there would be a “but”, didn’t you?) even if we are angry, this does not justify sinful responses. St. Paul tells us, “In your anger do not sin…do not give the devil a foothold” (Eph. 4:26-27). Note the second part: by letting our anger lead to sin we are giving the devil a foothold to our soul. It doesn’t matter if that anger was justified or not, either way the devil wins. When we lash out at liturgical abuses or even Church-mandated changes which we think are unwise, we lose twice: first, the devil wins a victory over us and second, it is highly unlikely we will convince anyone of our position. Nothing is more self-defeating than someone who argues in anger.

It is unlikely that Satan is going to be able to convince a practicing Catholic to abandon going to Mass. So he won’t try. Instead he will tempt us to make Mass a near occasion of sin. But we don’t have to let that happen. Even if everything around us is loopy, that doesn’t mean that we have to respond in anger. Instead, it is a wonderful opportunity to pray and offer sacrifices (like the sacrifice of enduring the loopiness) for those who are abusing or denigrating the liturgy. We can turn the devil’s temptations into opportunities for grace. And who knows? Maybe our prayers and sacrifices will lead others to a deeper appreciation of the solemnity of the Mass.

Oh, and I haven’t written that defense of the Novus Ordo yet; I’m waiting until the full-body armor I ordered arrives.

During Advent we should all take extra time for prayer and contemplation. A beautiful way to do this is to participate in the liturgical hours of a monastery. However, most of us don’t live anywhere near a monastery and therefore can’t expose ourselves to this traditional form of prayer.

Now, due to the wonders of the InterWeb, we can! The Community of Maria Sedes Sapientiae, also known as the “Monks of Norcia”, are an order based in the birthplace of St. Benedict (and of whom I’ve written about before – here and here). They are making available recordings of their Vesper services. I have a good friend who is a priest of this order, and I can’t speak too highly of them – I would recommend that you check out their website and spend some time in prayer listening to their Vesper services.

This past weekend, the Novus Ordo Missae ( “New Ordinary of the Mass”), the Mass celebrated in almost every Catholic parish in the world, turned 40 years old. Instituted in the wake of Vatican II, this was the most visible change for most Catholics as a result of that Council.

The vast majority of Catholics have simply accepted the Novus Ordo and don’t think much about it. However, for some Catholics the Novus Ordo represents all that is wrong with the Church of the past 40 years. Other Catholics (and I would include myself in this camp) don’t have a problem with the Novus Ordo itself but do have criticisms in how it has been implemented in many dioceses and parishes.

The changes that have been most criticized are the use of the vernacular (instead of Latin), the priest turning around to face the people instead of facing the same direction as they do, and the terrible, terrible music heard in many parishes today. But, as Br. Charles points out, none of these things are actually required in celebrating the Novus Ordo:

• Benedict XVI is oft-quoted (from The Spirit of the Liturgy) on the theological and ecclesiological problems of the Mass offered versus populum. Many agree with him. However, though this option for celebration may seem to the casual observer to be one of the distinctive marks of the Mass of Paul VI, and is treated by many priests as a sacred and unalterable religious duty, it is neither essential nor normative. In fact, in the newer form of Mass, the priest is required to turn and face the people fewer times than in the older form. Thus, it is not fair to criticize the Novus Ordo based on troubles attendant on the offering of Mass “facing the people.”
• Analogously, though it may also seem that Mass offered in local languages is an instrinsic mark of the newer form of Mass, this is also an option rather than a norm. Sacrosanctum concilium 36 clearly affirms that the Latin remains the ordinary language of the Roman rite. Thus, it is also unfair to base criticisms on the use of the vernacular.
• Much criticism, and some of it justified, has been made against contemporary Catholic music that has grown up alongside the newer form of Mass. For most of us, the ordinary procedure for arriving at music for Mass is to contoct the ‘four song sandwich’ that will match the readings or suit our theme. This custom is taken for granted so much of the time that we forget that it is a matter of exception and substitution. The ordinary way of music-ing the Roman liturgy is to sing the actual texts of the Mass as they are found in the Missal and the Gradual, rather than substituting them for songs and metrical hymns. For this purpose, Gregorian chants allegedly retain their “pride of place,” at least according to Sacrosanctum concilium 116. Therefore, it is not exactly fair to criticize the modern Roman liturgy based on some of the bad music with which it has become associated, for this association is neither essential nor normative.

Thus, much of the criticism directed at the Novus Ordo should instead be directed at how it has been implemented. It would take no change in the law of the Church to change the celebration of the Mass to a more traditional, yet still faithful to the desires of Vatican II, way.

Seen in an Orthodox church:

(Source)

Translation: “Not turned-off cell phones in church – 100 prostrations”

I think we need something similar in our Catholic churches – perhaps 100 genuflections?

The recent announcement that the Pope has set up a way for large numbers of Anglicans to enter the Church has generated much excitement. One part of this new structure is that it will allow aspects of the Anglican liturgy to be preserved. We don’t know the details yet, but it will probably be something along the lines of the “Anglican Use” liturgy currently allowed in America.

The acceptance of Anglican aspects of the liturgy is possibly the most important part of this new structure, as the liturgy is the most important activity we as Christians can engage in. In the liturgy we encounter Jesus Christ directly – both in Word and in Sacrament – therefore how it is celebrated is very important. It is a wondrous privilege to be able to attend Mass and hear the Word of God in the Scriptures and receive the Word of God in the Eucharist. As Vatican II stated, it is the “source and summit” of our Christian lives.

The preservation of part of the Anglican liturgy in the Catholic Church also reflects the many beautiful and diverse forms of the liturgy. Over the centuries the celebration of the liturgy has never been a static thing, instead it has developed into many forms. The purpose of each development has been to draw people into a deeper participation and appreciation of what is occurring. Some developments have been more successful than others in achieving that purpose, but regardless of the form, in every liturgy we are worshiping the Almighty God and receiving His Son in sacramental form in the Eucharist. How incredible is that?!

All the various forms can be broken down into two main categories: Eastern and Western. In each of these two major groups, there are variations, although the variations in the West are much fewer than in the East.

In the West today, the main two forms of the liturgy are the Ordinary Form (aka “the Norvus Ordo”) which was instituted in the wake of Vatican II, and the Extraordinary Form (aka “the Latin Mass”) which has a long history but was standardized across almost the entire Western Church after the Council of Trent in the 16th century. The “Anglican Use” liturgy has also been available for some time here in the States, but it is celebrated in a very small number of places – but of course could be expanded greatly with the new Anglican structure just announced.

This is now twice in a few years that the Pope has liberalized a form of the liturgy within the Church that was rarely being celebrated. In 2007, Pope Benedict issued a motu proprio liberalizing the celebration of the Extraordinary Form. I think that was a great idea, as that liturgy has certain strengths, especially related to reverence during the liturgy, that too often have been neglected since the Norvus Ordo became the norm in the West. Also, I was excited to see that the first Extraordinary Form High Mass in 40 years was recently celebrated at St. Peter’s. I hope that the celebration of the Extraordinary Form becomes less “extraordinary” in the years to come; I hope the same regarding the Anglican Use liturgy.

In the East, there are many forms of the liturgy, but most are variations of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, the Liturgy of St. Basil, or the Liturgy of St. James. I highly recommend to any Western Catholic that they make an effort to attend an Eastern liturgy, either Eastern Catholic or Orthodox (note that an Eastern Catholic liturgy fulfills the Sunday obligation binding on Latin Catholics, but an Orthodox liturgy does not). An Eastern liturgy has the same basic structure as the Western forms, but its externals are VERY different. Two pages I recommend reading before attending an Eastern liturgy for the first time:

Twelve Things I Wish I’d Known…

For Visitors

Personally, I love all the forms of the liturgy when they are properly and reverently said. I find that each directs my thoughts and prayers towards a different aspect of God and His work. I also think the diversity of liturgies reflect the immensity of what the liturgy is doing; after all, having a direct encounter with God is so incredible that it is simply impossible for there to be only one way to do it.

If you are as interested in the liturgy as I am, here are a few recommended books from my own library:

• The Spirit of the Liturgy – Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
• The Wellspring of Worship – Jean Corbon
• Eucharist – Louis Bouyer
• The Shape of the Liturgy – Dom Gregory Dix
• Theological Dimensions of the Liturgy – Dom Cyprian Vagaggini, O.S.B.
• The Bible and the Liturgy – Jean Danielou, S.J.

But of course, nothing beats personal experience – so make an effort to attend the liturgy in all its various forms!

Some possible titles for the video below:

• Origin of “Folk Masses” discovered
• Elvis – the secret founder of the St. Louis Jesuits
• 1970’s Liturgical Training Video unearthed
• Member of Society of St. Pius X watches video, head explodes
• Traditionalists ask: “Will Elvis please leave the building?”
• The Spirit of Vatican II’s first victim
• Baptist church embraces traditional liturgy halfheartedly

H/t: Msgr. Pope

As readers of this blog know, I have a deep appreciation for the Eastern liturgies of the Church. A few weeks ago, I blogged about a Baptist minister (the “Real Live Preacher”) who visited an Orthodox Church for liturgy and was overwhelmed (in a good way). I just ran across (via Byzantine, TX) another great description of someone attending a Divine Liturgy for the first time. This time, it is a Latin Catholic who is visiting churches in Manhattan and just recently attended Divine Liturgy at St. Michael’s Russian Catholic Church. Some excerpts:

What an experience this week! I wandered into the celebration of The Divine Liturgy. I had never attended this before and it was like entering another world, so different than the Masses I am used to…

Peering through the window of the door I witnessed the beginning of the Divine Liturgy. There were four priests, fully decked out in traditional Byzantine Rite robes, gathered around an altar behind an ornate altar fence; I could hear the small congregation praying and singing in Russian; incense wafted through the air – immediately I was overwhelmed and my first thought was to flee. However, something made me open up the doors and walk in, standing alone in the small entryway corridor. Then, an older gentleman saw me and ushered me inside, and I entered the chapel…

The song and the prayer that followed for the next hour and a half were incredible, and it was really something special to be in that small, intimate space of such devotion. There were no chairs, save a few exceptions for some older members of the small congregation, and though admittedly an hour and a half is a long time to stand, it seemed to fly by…

I made my way to the altar, spoke my name, then the priest dipped the bread into the wine and using a little spoon dropped it into my mouth.* The deacon wiped my lips with a cloth and I kissed the base of the chalice as I had witnessed the others in the chapel do. To the left of the altar, a small table had been set up between two priests (or maybe they were deacons or acolytes, I’m not sure) that contained another plate of bread and small ladles of wine. My hand was shaking as I picked up the ladle. I quickly drank the wine, took another portion of bread, crossed myself clumsily and went back to my place against the wall to listen to the post-Communion hymns and prayers…

Read the whole article here.

*Note: since this was a Russian Catholic Church (i.e. not an Orthodox Church), communion is allowed for all Catholics, including Latin Catholics.

Tomorrow here in the Archdiocese of Washington, DC, a very special espiscopal ordination is taking place. Fr. Augustine Di Noia, O.P., will be ordained the Archbishop of Oregon City, Oregon. Why is this special? Because Archbishop-elect Di Noia has been appointed the secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, the body in charge of overseeing the liturgy. As such, he was raised to the rank of Archbishop, and like all Vatican officials, was made the titular head of a diocese that doesn’t really exist (in this case, Oregon City).

The appointment of Di Noia I think is interesting. He is known as a tremendous theologian, but not necessarily a liturgist. This seems to be consistent, however, with Pope Benedict’s desire to re-establish the theological importance of the liturgy in the life of the Church. The main contact the vast majority of Catholics have with the Church (and for that matter, with Christ) is through Sunday Mass, and the Pope recognizes that if the Mass is not a time in which man can encounter God, it has not done its job properly.

Nothing ignites passions among Catholics on the internet more than a discussion about the Mass. What I have found in real life, however, is that most Mass-going Catholics do not have strong opinions about how the Mass is celebrated – they simply attend each Sunday and do not care that much what music is played, which way the priest is facing, or how close the English translation is to the original Latin. But it is clear that they are deeply shaped in their own walk with Christ by the way Mass is celebrated each week.

This is why the liturgy is so important, as it either assists or detracts from our ability to fulfill our most primary responsibility in life: to worship God, our Creator and Redeemer. Personally, I am not a traditionalist who insists that the old Latin Mass is the only proper way to say the Mass. Yet I do believe that many of the innovations that have entered the Mass over the past 40 years have been detrimental to proper worship.

My own standard is this: in what “direction” does each aspect of the Mass – the words, the motions, the music, etc. – take us? Is it to God, or is it to ourselves? Liturgy is fundamentally an encounter between God and man, and as such, all the actions of the liturgy should direct man towards God.

Note that nothing I say here is culturally conditioned – I believe that each culture can adjust the Mass (within properly-defined boundaries, of course) as best fits its own genius. So there can be a wide variety of music, for example. Yet all music within the liturgy should be directed towards God, not towards ourselves (which thus excludes a large portion of music currently being used in parishes across the nation – what I call the “How Great We Art” song list).

This is one of the reasons I love the Eastern liturgies; they have maintained the proper “direction.” There is no question that everything that goes on in an Eastern liturgy is directed towards God. Yes, this can make it difficult for a newcomer to become comfortable with such a liturgy, but there is no question for any visitor what is going on when they enter: the worship of the Trinitarian God. I have been to many Roman liturgies in which this occurs as well, but too often I have attended Masses in which it is unclear at best exactly who is being worshiped.

I pray for Archbishop-elect Di Noia that he will work hard to make the Roman liturgy one that is always directed towards the Almighty God.

I absolutely love this article. A Baptist minister on sabbatical decided to bring his family to an Orthodox Liturgy. Needless to say, it was quite a culture shock:

Saint Anthony the Great isn’t just old school. It’s “styli and wax tablets” old school. We arrived ten minutes early for worship and the room was already filled with people lighting candles and praying. There was one greeter. I said, “We don’t know what to do.” She handed me a liturgy book and waved us inside.

Pews? We don’t need no stinking pews! Providing seats for worshipers is SO 14th century. Gorgeous Byzantine art, commissioned from a famous artist in Bulgaria. Fully robed priests with censors (those swinging incense thingies). Long, complex readings and chants that went on and on and on. And every one of them packed full of complex, theological ideas. It was like they were ripping raw chunks of theology out of ancient creeds and throwing them by the handfuls into the congregation. And just to make sure it wasn’t too easy for us, everything was read in a monotone voice and at the speed of an auctioneer.

I heard words and phrases I had not heard since seminary. Theotokos, begotten not made, Cherubim and Seraphim borne on their pinions, supplications and oblations. It was an ADD kids nightmare. Robes, scary art, smoking incense, secret doors in the Iconostas popping open and little robed boys coming out with golden candlesticks, chants and singing from a small choir that rolled across the curved ceiling and emerged from the other side of the room where no one was singing. The acoustics were wild. No matter who was speaking, the sound came out of everywhere. There was so much going on I couldn’t keep up with all the things I couldn’t pay attention to.

Lillian was the first to go down. After half an hour of standing, she was done. Jeanene took her over to a pew on the side wall. She slumped against Jeanene’s shoulder and stared at me with this stunned, rather betrayed look on her face.

“How could you have brought us to this insane place?”

Shelby tried to tough it out. We were following along in the 40 page liturgy book that was only an abbreviation of the service were were experiencing. I got lost no less than 10 times. After 50 minutes Shelby leaned over and asked how much longer the service would be. I was trying to keep from locking my knees because my thighs had gotten numb. I showed her the book. We were on page 15. I flipped through the remaining 25 pages to show her how much more there was. Her mouth fell open.

“Are you serious?”

“Yeah. And I think there’s supposed to be a sermon in here somewhere.”

“They haven’t done the SERMON yet? What was that guy doing who said all that stuff about…all that stuff?”

“I don’t know?” I said.

“I have to go to the bathroom,” she said. I looked around and saw the door at the back of the sanctuary swinging shut.

And then there was one.

Read the whole article and then read his account of attending alone the next week. Pastor Atkinson’s accounts are humorous, educational, and deeply humble. Instead of rejecting a form of worship so unlike his own, he appreciates its inner beauty and value.

Most American Christians – both Catholic and Protestant – have been in a rush to see how they can be the most “relevant” and “friendly” in their church services. It is nice to see there are still places which place worship at the center of a worship service.