Mass: What it should be

About a week about Fr. George Rutler wrote an On the Square article for "First Things" about the idea of Liturgical Experts. It is a dense article that many better minds than I, have tackled and extracted the more salient points from it. One of those articles comes from Fr. Longenecker on his "Standing on my head" blog.

Fr. L really hits hard from the get go in his post. As a convert from the Anglican church, Fr. L understands and sees the deepness of meaning in the Mass. To him, every word, action, and vestment has a special meaning; this should also be the case for any priest. For these reasons innovation in the Mass is something that is not only perplexing for Fr. L but strikes against the meaning and purpose of the Mass. (My emphasis in red)

The deep down stuff is what we actually believe the liturgy is for, and that goes back to what we believe the church is for, and that goes back to what we believe about Jesus Christ's work on earth and that goes back to what we believe about God. Like the Methodist who said when he learned that the ashes for Ash Wednesday are from the burnt palm crosses from the year before, "Gee, all this Catholic stuff is connected!"


If we make the liturgy all about us gathering together to have fellowship and then go out to change the world then we have not only changed the liturgy, we have changed the gospel. The core of the gospel is not some sort of protest movement or lobby for political change. The core of the gospel is about the reconciliation between God and his alienated children. Its about the forgiveness of sin. It's the old, old story of mankind cut off from God restored through the salvific death of his Son the God Incarnate. The Mass celebrates and re-animates that once for all sacrifice of Christ on the Cross, and it is through this transaction that our hearts open first in repentance and then in faith and love to receive the life of Christ.

Have you heard this recently? Have you ever heard this? Let me tell you it isn't just his opinion. If you read Pope Benedict, Pope John Paul, John XXIII, Pius X, XI, XII, etc... they will say the same thing. The Mass is not  supposed to be (only) a teaching lesson about how we are supposed to act for the week. We are not protestant, although the modern Catholic Church tries to be for some reason, where we have a weekly theme at Mass and we are supposed to learn it and then live it... for the week. It is taking the core of the Gospel and celebrating it in a way that creates some small sliver of heaven here on earth.

A few weeks ago I posted how upset I was that more wasn't said about a ballot initiative here in Alaska. That wasn't because I buy into this idea of what some have turned the Mass into. I was not arguing that the priests around here should simply exchange one protest or lobby movement for mine. I was instead upset that what was being done at Mass was exactly that. Instead of talking about ideas central to the Faith (e.g. the sanctity of life), instead Mass, or as it is called around here Liturgy, has turned into this social justice movement cloaked in the rough form of the Mass. You see this in many parishes, the entire Mass has turned into some production about... well the people. How can I say that? Easy... next time you are at a Mass, that seems innovative ask: "Why are they doing that?" If the answer is to appeal to the congregation or to entertain, then it is wrongly conceived. Sure, you can couch things in: "We are doing this to glorify God." But, you should be able to see why things actually are occurring.

Why do we need this innovation? Hasn't 2000 years of tradition and divine revelation been enough to determine what should and shouldn't occur at Mass? Hasn't that 2000 years given us a good idea of what the Mass should be? Why then do we get some of the Masses that we do? Fr. L answers that:

The real reason so many modern liturgists turned the whole thing into a sort of hippy like protest movement is that very quietly, and usually without even being aware of it, they stopped believing the old, old story. The Virgin Birth became in their minds a charming Christmas tradition. The incarnation became a metaphor and the atoning work of Christ on the cross was dismissed as a barbaric, archaic and inaccessible part of the Christian tradition. The possibility of miracles was forgotten and the reality of sin ignored.


When all that was dropped what was left? Not much more than a milksop religion of smiling at one another and doing good works followed by sadly self righteous and earnest people who were blind to where their apostasy had taken them, and sincerely believed that they had created a new Christianity when all they had done was resurrect a bundle of old heresies.


Well, bless them. Their felt banners are frayed, their polyester vestments are faded, and all they have left are the rainbow banners of homosexual activism and the bland bleating of tired feminists whose rage, like their lava lamps, has almost burned out.

Again, this isn't one priests opinion. You can track his understanding back to what the Pope teaches about the Mass. The Pope's understanding comes from past Popes and theologians. There is continuity. What we see today stems from the 1960's and '70's when the Mass was hi-jacked by those looking to satisfy their need for religion and reconcile that with their socio-political motives. Hopefully Fr. L is right... and that has almost burned out.