A DISCUSSION ON THE CATHOLIC LITURGY

  “I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves today depends in great part upon the collapse of the liturgy, which at times is actually being conceived etsi Deus non daretur: as though in the liturgy it did not matter anymore whether God exists and whether he speaks to us and listens to us.  But if in the liturgy the communion of faith no longer appears, nor the universal unity of the Church and of her history, nor the mystery of the living Christ, where is it that the Church still appears in her spiritual strength?...” (The Spiritual Vision of Pope Benedict XVI, Let God’s Light Shine Forth, Robert Moynihan, ed. 117-118). 

Introduction - Since the close of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), the Catholic Mass of the Latin Rite has been the focal point of intense conflict within the Roman Catholic Church.  Many younger Catholics frequently are unaware of the history and the causes of this conflict which is still ragging in America.  The information provided on this webpage is an attempt to provide E Parish members and readers a better understanding of this serious problem and to understand what solutions are at hand to resolve the conflict.

 My personal position has always been one of unwavering fidelity to all of the teachings of the Catholic Church.  As a Catholic priest I have been very happy celebrating the reformed liturgy of the Second Vatican Council.  However, I have made it my mission in life to implement and to teach, with loving fidelity, every liturgical norm of the Catholic Church.  I provide for the people of my parish a perfect application of the true teachings of the Second Vatican Council, not only regarding the Catholic liturgy, but also every aspect of Catholic life.

 Although I do not have any problem with anyone who has an affinity to the Tridentine Latin Mass, I personally do not share in that same affinity.  Based upon long experience, I firmly believe, that properly understood and correctly implemented, the Mass of the Second Vatican Council is a better liturgy and that there was a real need for the Church to reform the Tridentine Latin Mass.  Unfortunately, except for some for isolated locations, Catholics have been deprived the beauty of what the Second Vatican Council actually intended.  As a priest, I have made it my mission in life to do what I can to promote a perfectly correct understanding and implementation of the reform of the Second Vatican Council.  I personally disagree with those who claim that we need a reform of the reform.  I believe that we simply need to implement the reform correctly.  For the most part, this has not been done.  I hope the information that is provided here will help those who want to bring about a perfectly correct implementation of the Catholic liturgy according to the mind of the Church.  - Fr. James Farfaglia, Corpus Christi, TX.

Recommended Reading that will explain the history and causes of the controversy

The Catholic Church and the Society of Pius X

The Catholic Mass

             Forty years have gone by since the Second Vatican Council concluded its work.  The 16 conciliar documents have brought about many changes in the Catholic Church.  One of the most visible of these changes, is the way the Catholic Mass in the latin rite is celebrated.

           Unfortunately, shortly after the close of Vatican II, the liturgical reforms that the council set in motion, have been upset by ignorance, misinterpretation, and even infidelity.  The Catholic liturgy in America has become an ongoing battleground between three groups.  One the one hand there is a large group of Catholics that reject the missal of Pope Paul VI.  On the other hand, there is another large group of Catholics that have misconstrued the liturgical norms of the Paul VI missal and continue to spread errors and abuses that have nothing to do with Catholic liturgy.  Finally, there is another group of Catholics in this country, who are attempting to show the importance and the beauty of the liturgical changes brought about by the Second Vatican Council through a delicate fidelity to all of the liturgical norms of the Catholic Church. 

           Before we consider a concise description of the Catholic Mass, a brief answer to the two large groups that are causing such turmoil in the Church is in order.  Much has been written on the subject by Pope Paul VI, John Paul II, and Cardinal Josef Ratzinger before he was elected as Pope Benedict XVI.

           On the one hand, those who reject the liturgical changes of the Second Vatican Council and maintain a rigid adherence to the Tridentine missal of Pope Pius V, need to understand that the missal of Pope Paul VI is not a divergence from Catholic liturgical Tradition.  The General Instruction on the Roman Missal clearly states that, “In setting forth its instructions for the revision of the Order of Mass, the Second Vatican Council, using the same words as did St. Pius V in the Apostolic Constitution Quo primum, by which the Missal of Trent was promulgated in 1570, also ordered, among other things, that some rites be restored ‘to the original norm of the holy Fathers’.  From the fact that the same words are used it can be seen how both Roman Missals, although separated by four centuries, embrace one and the same tradition.  Furthermore, if the inner elements of this tradition are reflected upon, it also becomes clear how outstandingly and felicitously the older Roman Missal is brought to fulfillment in the new” (General Instruction on the Roman Missal, #6). 

           In recent times, the Church has stated in repeated statements that those who have a special devotion to the Tridentine Mass must be treated with respect and fraternal charity.  They are not to be treated as if they were part of a leper colony.  Nevertheless, these Catholics are to adhere to the true teachings of the Church; they are to embrace the true teachings of the Second Vatican Council; and they must cease their continual criticisms of the proper celebration of the Pope Paul VI missal. 

          However, on the other hand, the other rather large group that believes that the Catholic Mass is subject to continual personal innovations and experimentation, need to understand that no one has the right to subjectively make any changes or deviations from the prescribed norms of the liturgical texts.  As a priest friend of mine says to other priests: Say what is in black, and do what is in red.  “Therefore no other person whatsoever, not even a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on their own authority” (Vatican II, Sacrosanctum Concilium, #22.3).

           Since the arrival of the Pope Paul VI missal, much damage has been done to the fabric of the unity of the Catholic Church by irresponsible innovators who have confused and even scandalized the Catholic lay faithful.  This is why the Vatican issued a recent document in an attempt to halt the many dangerous and insidious errors that have crept into the Catholic Mass.  “Whenever an abuse is committed in the celebration of the sacred Liturgy, it is to be seen as a real falsification of Catholic Liturgy. St Thomas wrote, ‘the vice of falsehood is perpetrated by anyone who offers worship to God on behalf of the Church in a manner contrary to that which is established by the Church with divine authority, and to which the Church is accustomed’” (Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments,  Redemptionis Sacramentum, #169).  

           Having established these introductory reflections on the unfortunate and continual conflict currently going on in our Church in America, let us continue our reflection and consider what exactly the Mass is. 

           Practically speaking, we cannot fully understand the Catholic Mass without first reading the Book of Exodus of the Old Testament.  For those of you who are interested in gaining a deeper understanding of the Catholic Mass, I suggest that you begin by reading each day, little by little, the Book of Exodus.  It is essential that you especially understand the first Jewish Passover which is found in chapter 12.

           After reading Exodus, the next step is to read the gospel narratives on the Last Supper.  These narratives are found in Matthew 26: 17 – 29; Mark 14: 12 – 25; Luke 22: 1 – 20; and John 13 – 17. 

           Only through a careful study of these sections of the Scriptures can we understand the Church’s definition of the Catholic Mass.  Briefly stated, “The Mass is the sacrifice of the New Law in which Christ, through the ministry of the priest, offers himself to God in an unbloody manner under the appearances of bread and wine.  The principal priest in every Mass is Jesus Christ, who offers to his heavenly Father, through the ministry of his ordained priest, his body and blood which were sacrificed on the cross. The Mass is the same sacrifice as the sacrifice of the cross because in the Mass the victim is the same, and the principal priest is the same, Jesus Christ. The manner in which the sacrifice is offered is different. On the cross Christ physically shed his blood and was physically slain, while in the Mass there is no physical shedding of blood nor physical death, because Christ can die no more; on the cross Christ gained merit and satisfied for us, while in the Mass he applies to us the merits and satisfaction of his death on the cross” (Baltimore Catechism). 

           The new Catechism of the Catholic Church, promulgated by Pope John Paul II, gives a complete description of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacrament of the Eucharist.  I encourage everyone to read and study #’s 1322 – 1405.  However, let us for our reflection , consider these passages from the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

           “Because it is the memorial of Christ's Passover, the Eucharist is also a sacrifice. The sacrificial character of the Eucharist is manifested in the very words of institution:  ‘This is my body which is given for you’ and  ‘This cup which is poured out for you is the New Covenant in my blood.’  In the Eucharist, Christ gives us the very body which he gave up for us on the cross, the very blood which he ‘poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.’

            The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit… The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different. And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner. . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory” (CCC #’s 1365 – 1367). 

            “In the earthly liturgy we take part in a foretaste of that heavenly liturgy which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem toward which we journey as pilgrims, where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God, a minister of the holies and of the true tabernacle; we sing a hymn to the Lord's glory with all the warriors of the heavenly army; venerating the memory of the saints, we hope for some part and fellowship with them; we eagerly await the Savior, our Lord Jesus Christ, until he, our life, shall appear and we too will appear with him in glory. (Vatican II, Sacrosanctum Concilium, #8).

II

            We have already considered the definition of the Catholic Mass along with some important considerations regarding the controversies surrounding the Catholic liturgy since the close of the Second Vatican Council. Let us continue our reflection on the Catholic Mass by examining its structure. 

           The Catholic Mass of the Latin rite is divided into two principle parts: the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist.  Nevertheless, as we proceed with our considerations, we must remember that these two principle parts of the Mass “are so closely connected with each other that they form but one single act of worship” (Vatican II, Sacrosanctum Concilium,#56).

           Let us consider the first principle part of the Catholic Mass; i.e., the Liturgy of the Word.

           In the Vatican II document on the Sacred Liturgy, we find the following text regarding the Bible: “Sacred scripture is of the greatest importance in the celebration of the liturgy. For it is from scripture that lessons are read and explained in the homily, and psalms are sung; the prayers, collects, and liturgical songs are scriptural in their inspiration and their force, and it is from the scriptures that actions and signs derive their meaning. Thus to achieve the restoration, progress, and adaptation of the sacred liturgy, it is essential to promote that warm and living love for scripture to which the venerable tradition of both eastern and western rites gives testimony” (Vatican II, Sacrosanctum Concilium, #24).

           One of the most noticeable reforms of the Missal of Pius V has taken place with the Liturgy of the Word.  In my opinion, this was one of the best reforms, because it allows the Word of God to be proclaimed in the language of the people and it provides a greater variety of biblical texts for the enrichment of our spiritual life. 

           The Liturgy of the Word is comprised of three selections from the Bible.  Outside of the Christmas and Easter Seasons, the First Reading is always taken from the Old Testament.  During the entire liturgical year, the Second Reading is always taken from the New Testament.  The Gospel passage is taken from any of the four gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.  The Liturgy of the Word follows a three year ABC cycle which provides a rich variety of readings from the Sacred Scriptures. 

           Between the First Reading and the Second Reading, one of the 150 Psalms is sung or said.  The Responsorial Psalm provides a prayerful meditation between the two passages from the Bible.  Between the Second Reading and the Gospel, the Alleluia verse is sung or said.

           St. Jerome (340 – 420), who spent so much time with the Bible, once said that, “Ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ”.  In order to be well prepared for Sunday Mass, I recommend that you not only read the Scripture readings over before you go to your parish for Sunday worship, but that you actually make the Sunday Bible readings the center of your weekday meditations.  Take the Sunday readings each day of the week and contemplate the text.  Through quiet prayer, the Holy Spirit will help you apply the meaning of the texts to your practical life, and by being well prepared each week for the Sunday liturgy, your weekly experience will be much deeper and more meaningful. 

           The Sunday homily follows the proclamation of the gospel passage.  Parish priests have a solemn obligation that they are well prepared for the Sunday liturgy.  Priests who neglect this solemn duty are doing irreparable harm to the souls that have been entrusted to them.  Preaching the Word of God is a tremendous responsibility.  However, since the lay faithful are being bombarded by numerous and continual challenges for the practice of their Faith, it is essential that parish priests be committed to inspire, motivate, and instruct their parishioners every week.

           In order that parish priests can accomplish this solemn obligation, the ministry of preaching needs to be the very soul of their ministry.  They are to devote many hours every week to the preparation of the Sunday homily so that it meets the practical needs of their parishioners.  The preparation of the Sunday homily must be the first thing that each parish priest does each week.  The ministry of preaching is something that must be interwoven with the daily life of the parish priest.  His daily prayer and his daily apostolic activity must enlighten and inspire his Sunday homily.  When the Sunday homily is something that flows from his priestly heart, his spoken word becomes convincing and challenging to his listeners.  The parish priest must be willing to “walk the talk” and never ask his people to do something that he himself is not doing or is not striving to do in his own journey with the Lord.  Preaching becomes a powerful tool of evangelization when it flows from the heart of the preacher.  The Holy Spirit works well with this kind of sincere and convinced instrument of the Word. 

           After the homily, all stand for the declaration of the Profession of Faith.  Personally, I find this moment of the Catholic Mass to be one of the most moving because of its’ ancient origin.  It is at this moment that I am making a link all the way to beginning years of the Catholic Church.  I can feel the presence of our brothers and sisters from the early Church who came together each week for the “breaking of the bread”.  I can join together with my brothers and sisters who professed their faith while hiding in the catacombs.  People like Peter, Paul, Polycarp, Augustine, and Ambrose become real to me as I affirm my faith each week.  The thought of the first martyrs in the Roman coliseum inspires me to be more and more faithful.  Perhaps to alleviate their terror as the beasts came charging toward them, they cried out: I BELIEVE! 

            The Prayer of the Faithful concludes the Liturgy of the Word.  This part of the Mass also has an ancient origin.  St. Paul refers to the Prayer of the Faithful as a part of the liturgy when he writes, “First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men,  for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way.  This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1Timothy 2: 1-5). 

           As we listen to the petitions during the Mass we must be attentive to what we are asking the Lord.  It is at this moment that we should recall the words of Jesus when he said, “"Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.  For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened” (Matthew 7: 7-8).

III

                       The Liturgy of the Eucharist has four components: the Preparation of the Gifts, the Eucharistic Prayer, the Communion Rite, and the Concluding Rite.  First, we will look more closely at the Preparation of the Gifts and the Eucharistic Prayer.  Next, we will consider the Communion Rite and the Concluding Rite. 

          “At the beginning of the Preparation of the Gifts, the gifts of bread and wine which will become Christ’s Body and Blood are brought to the altar” (General Instruction on the Roman Missal. 38).  This part of the Liturgy of the Eucharist has a special significance because the act of bringing up the gifts is one of the important manifestations of the active participation that the Vatican II document on the Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, envisioned. 

           “Mother Church earnestly desires that all the faithful should be led to that fully conscious, and active participation in liturgical celebrations which is demanded by the very nature of the liturgy. Such participation by the Christian people as ‘a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a redeemed people’ (1 Pet. 2:9; cf. 2:4-5), is their right and duty by reason of their baptism” (Vatican II, Sacrosanctum Concilium #14).

           The very act of the lay faithful bringing up the offertory gifts of bread and wine is an act that proceeds from the priesthood of the faithful. Thus with these offertory gifts we bring the combined sweat and blood, sorrows and joys of the assembly gathered together for Sunday worship.  

           In the early days of the church the offertory processions were more elaborate and the gifts themselves were of an immediate practical nature.  Everything that the Bishop and the priests of the community needed for their weekly sustenance was brought up at this time. Bread and live animals were brought up in the procession that the clergy of the community might eat that week. Thus, the parish community had a real sense of supporting not only a church building, but equally important the clergy that shepherded them.     This is why, given today’s circumstances, it is good that the collection as the visible sign of this support be put into one basket to be brought up with the gifts.  The collection must be seen as the tithe, and pastors need to encourage all of their parishioners to practice the Biblical principle of tithing.  When the entire parish community practices tithing, their sense of active participation in the liturgy really comes alive. 

           The celebrant washes his fingers at the end of the Offertory precisely because in the early Church the nature of the offerings brought up by the lay faithful actually demanded that the celebrant cleanse his hands before entering into the Eucharistic Prayer.

           After the Preparation of the Gifts, we then proceed to the Eucharistic Prayer.  The Eucharistic Prayer is really the central moment of the Catholic liturgy.  The General Instruction of the Roman Missal calls it “the center and summit of the entire celebration…the prayer of thanksgiving and sanctification” (40).

            The Eucharistic Prayer is always preceded by the Preface.  The reform of the Second Vatican Council not only gave us the use of more Eucharistic Prayers or Canons besides the use of the Roman Canon or the First Eucharistic Prayer, but it also gave us the use of a large number of Prefaces.  Personally, I believe that this was another very good reform.  Today, because of pastoral reasons, it is very common that parish priests have to say a large number of Masses on weekends.  Being able to choose from among a number of very beautiful texts should be very enriching for the priest’s spiritual life. 

           For many centuries, the Mass had only one Eucharistic Prayer, which we now call Eucharistic Prayer I. Immediately after the Second Vatican Council, the Church added three more Eucharistic Prayers to the collection. Eucharistic Prayer V, Eucharistic Prayers I and II for Reconciliation, and Eucharistic Prayers of Children have followed since. Eucharistic Prayer II is an adaptation of the Eucharistic Prayer found in the third century.  Scholars believe that Saint Hipolitus composed this prayer.  Eucharistic Prayer III is a new composition that while similar in some respects to the First Eucharistic Prayer, does incorporate some elements from other sources. Eucharistic Prayer IV is related to an ancient prayer used in Egypt and later adapted into what came to be known as the Anaphora of St. Basil.

           The high point of the Eucharistic Prayer is the consecration.  This is when the miracle of the Eucharist takes place.  “…By means of words and actions of Christ, the Sacrifice is carried out which Christ himself instituted at the Last Supper, when he offered his Body and Blood under the species of bread and wine, gave them to his Apostles to eat and drink, and left them the command to perpetuate this same mystery” (General Instruction of the Roman Missal, p. 41).

               IV

         Over the years I have spoken and written much about the Catholic teaching regarding real presence and transubstantiation.  Regarding Holy Communion, I would like to focus our thoughts on our preparation for the reception for Holy Communion and the dispositions that we should have when we receive the Eucharist.

           Regarding the preparation that needs to take place before we receive the Eucharist, the Catechism of the Catholic Church reminds us of two fundamental realities.  First, when we receive the Eucharist, our conscience must be free from mortal sin. Secondly, we must fast one hour before we receive Holy Communion.

           Concerning this first point, the Catechism states, “To respond to this invitation we must prepare ourselves for so great and so holy a moment. St. Paul urges us to examine our conscience: ‘Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.’ Anyone conscious of a grave sin must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to communion (Catechism of the Catholic Church #1385).

           I have also written and spoken about this point a lot.  Most people who are objective will notice a disparity between the lines of people going to Holy Communion and the lines of people at the confessionals of any given parish in the U.S.  Many people, sadly even members of the clergy, have forgotten about the beauty of the sacrament of Confession.  This is a real tragedy.  People who never go to confession at all and continue to receive Holy Communion every Sunday, really worry me.  The frequent use of confession is an indication that the person’s spiritual life is in good shape and that the person is struggling to overcome sins and weaknesses.  The conscience of someone who never goes to confession, even when there is a special retreat, penance service, or visiting priest in the parish, is more than likely spiritually dead.  However, it is encouraging to see in some parishes, a dramatic increase in the practice of the sacrament of Confession. 

           Regarding the one hour fast before Holy Communion, the Catechism states, “To prepare for worthy reception of this sacrament, the faithful should observe the fast required in their Church.  Bodily demeanor (gestures, clothing) ought to convey the respect, solemnity, and joy of this moment when Christ becomes our guest” (Catechism of the Catholic Church #1387).

           Now that we have looked briefly at the preparation that we need for a worthy reception of Holy Communion, let us remember the proper gestures that we are to use when we receive the Eucharist.

           In the United States, the posture for receiving Holy Communion is standing.  However, when people voluntarily wish to receive Holy Communion kneeling, they are to be allowed to do so.  When Holy Communion is received standing, it is required that the communicant make a small and gentle bow of reverence before receiving the Eucharist. 

           The prayers of the Communion Rite, when prayed with devotion, should fill us with the proper dispositions that we need in order to receive the awesome gift of the Eucharist.  Give us this day our daily bread…Lord, I am not worthy to receive you; these beautiful prayers should fill us with deep sentiments of gratitude, peace, confidence, and joy. 

             The Concluding Rite brings to a close the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.  The structure of this part of the Mass is very simple, but what takes places after it, is very challenging. 

           The Concluding Rite consists of the closing prayer, the announcements, the final blessing, and the dismissal.  When the priest says, “Ite” or “go”, we are to go out into the world and live the gospel within the practical details of our every day circumstances.  This is a difficult task.  However, the Catholic Mass gives us the graces and the strength that we need to continue the mission of Jesus each day.

  V

           Bodily gestures in the Catholic liturgy are very important.  Every time that we participate in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, our bodily gestures make up a very important part of our worship.  Making the sign of the cross, genuflecting, sitting, standing, kneeling, and the beating of our breast are all components and expressions of worship.

           In recent times, there has been much confusion regarding certain aspects of our hand gestures during the Catholic Mass.  I would like to take a few moments to address this confusion.  There are three questions that are always being asked: 1) Is gesturing toward the priest with the hand while responding. “And also with you” considered correct? 2) Should the congregation pray with hands held in the orans position during the Our Father? 3) Is holding hands as the congregation recites the Our Father correct or even appropriate?

           At the present moment, it is true that there is not a single ruling on the subject of hand gestures, either from the Congregation of Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments or from the U.S. Conference of Bishops.  I believe that definitive norms on gesturing would provide clarity and uniformity. However, in the absence of such a norm, I would like to share my thoughts on resolving this issue.

           Regarding the first question, as to a gesture on the part of the people towards the priest when the people respond “And also with you”, my research on the subject, reveals no historical basis for this gesture within the liturgical tradition of the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church.  Nor is there any history of people gesturing with their hands during the beginning of the Preface.  These hand gestures, which have become quite common in parishes throughout the country, are innovations that have been introduced. 

           Secondly, as to praying with hands held in the orans position during the Our Father, there is an historical precedent for this bodily gesture in Catholicism.  Pope Benedict XVI, writing as Cardinal Josef Ratzinger, in his widely popular book, The Spirit of the Liturgy, provides a detailed discussion of this subject (203-204). That being said, it is also true that praying with folded hands has always been part of our Catholic tradition. 

           However, I would argue that praying with hands held in the orans position during the Lord’s Prayer or at other moments in the liturgy by the congregation is an innovation that has been introduced and encouraged as a novelty.  Let us remember, as we saw in our first reflection on the Catholic Mass, that no one has the authority to spontaneously introduce novelties within the Catholic liturgy.   The process for introducing any new rite or gesture into the liturgy in a stable or even binding manner is already contemplated in liturgical law. This process entails a two-thirds majority vote in the Conference of Bishops and the approval, or what is called the recognitio from the Holy See, before any change may take effect.  Thus, if neither the U.S. Conference of Bishops nor the Holy See has seen fit to prescribe any posture for the recitation of the Our Father, it hardly permits any lesser authority to impose a novel gesture not required by liturgical law and expect the faithful to follow their decrees.

             This is also true regarding the gesture of holding hands during the Our Father.  There is nothing in our liturgical tradition that shows any history of the congregation holding hands during the Our Father.  This too is an innovation that has been spontaneously introduced. 

           Regarding these innovative gestures and the silence on the part of the Holy See and the Bishops’ Conference, it seems to me that there is a very clear answer on the subject.  We need to keep in mind that the revised Roman Missal from Vatican II is not a departure from the Missal in use previously.  The liturgical reform mandated by the Second Vatican Council organically flows from the Tridentine liturgy.[i]  Therefore, since there is no evidence of innovative hand gestures in the Tridentine liturgy, there should be no innovative hand gestures in the Vatican II liturgy without a clear and precise decision from Church authority. 

            Thus, answering the three questions that have been raised regarding the use of certain hand gestures in the Catholic Mass, I would conclude the following:  1) The use of hand gestures towards the priest with the response “And also with you” is an innovation that has no place within the Catholic Mass; 2) The use of the orans, a position with an established historical precedent in Christian prayer, should not be introduced into the Catholic Mass until a definition has been given by the authority of the Church; 3) The gesture of holding hands during the Our Father has no historical tradition in the Catholic liturgy and should not be introduced into the Catholic Mass unless the competent ecclesial authorities were to decide  the contrary. 

           In conclusion, regarding the use of bodily gestures within the Catholic Mass, it seems to me that there needs to be unity.   The people become confused when one parish does one thing and down the road or in the next town, another parish is doing something entirely different.  “Therefore no other person whatsoever, not even a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on their own authority” (Vatican II, Sacrosanctum Concilium, #22.3).

            The idea of using the vernacular, or the language of the people, in the Catholic liturgy is not a new one.  The Council of Trent considered the possibility of allowing the Mass to be celebrated in the vernacular, but it decided that because of the turmoil being caused by the Protestant Reformation, that it would be better for the sake of the unity of the liturgy, that it be celebrated in Latin only.  However, the Council of Trent did say that explanations in the vernacular should be given during the Mass, and that the possibility of the use of the vernacular should be addressed by the Church at another time in the future. 

           The use of the vernacular in the liturgy came from the Vatican II document on the liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium.  However, it must be understood that the principles elaborated in this Vatican II document were already being widely developed in what was called the Liturgical Movement which began during the Pontificate of St. Pope Pius X, and which became a very intense movement from the Pontificate of Pius XII right up to the opening of the Second Vatican Council (1962 – 1965).  There were even isolated places where the Holy See allowed the use of the vernacular in the Latin Rite before Vatican II.[ii]  We should also remember that the Eastern Rite has always used the vernacular in their liturgy.  So, let us keep in mind that the vernacular is not a new idea. 

           Personally, I think that the widespread use of the vernacular was another good reform from the Second Vatican Council.  This is particularly true with the Liturgy of the Word.  However, it was not the mind of the Council, nor is it the intention of the Church today, that the Latin language should be considered something of the past, never to be used again in the Catholic Church.  I firmly believe that there is an important place for the Latin language in the Catholic Mass.  The liturgical life of a parish must be in the vernacular, but it is also very important that Latin, both in the prayers of the Mass and the liturgical music, should be present frequently throughout the liturgical year. 

           Since for the most part Latin has not been used in most parishes throughout the country since the Second Vatican Council, pastors will have to take the time to slowly educate their people teaching them basic Latin responses and introducing the congregation to Gregorian Chant, polyphony, and the beautiful hymns of our Catholic heritage.  Nationally, there is an interesting phenomena occurring: while some older priests and laity are repelled by any use of Latin, conversely more and more younger priests and laity are finding the use of Latin to be exciting, fulfilling, and very spiritual.[iii]

           On the subject of the use of Latin, Pope Benedict once wrote, “All the same I must admit that in the wake of the Council a lot of things happened far too quickly and abruptly, with the result that many of the faithful could not see the inner continuity with what had gone before.  In part it is simply a fact that the Council was pushed aside.  For instance, it had said that the language of the Latin Rite was to remain Latin, although suitable scope was to be given to the vernacular.  Today we might ask: Is there a Latin Rite at all any more?  Certainly there is not an awareness of it” (The Feast of Faith,  84).

            Silence is essential.  There are moments when brief periods of silence are to take place within the Catholic Mass.  Aside from these brief moments, I strongly believe that we need to recapture the practice of silence before the Mass begins and after it is has ended.  It is incorrect that social conversations take place in the church before Mass and after Mass.  All social life can be conducted outside of the church before Mass begins, and all social life after Mass can take place outside of the church or in the parish hall. 

           In my parish, after a long period of patient instruction, I have achieved a beautiful climate of silence in our church.  However, at the same time, our parish enjoys are very intense community life that takes place outside of the church.  I firmly believe that silence, which allows an individual to really encounter God, will develop the community life of the parish.  We cannot have an encounter with one another, unless we can have an encounter with God.  When we encounter the transcendent in the liturgy, we will automatically reach out to our brothers and sisters.  But, the encounter with God can only take place within silence.[iv]  

             Sacrosanctum Concilium gave us the words active participation.  Over the years, much has been discussed and debated regarding the meaning of these words.  To me, I think the meaning is quite simple. 

           At the time of the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church was going through a very difficult time.  The sacrificial nature of the Mass, the ministerial priesthood, and transubstantiation were all under intense attack from the Protestant reformers.  Therefore, the Church decided that the liturgy should emphasize these essential aspects of our faith. 

           The concept of active participation within the Catholic Mass, as understood by Sacrosanctum Concilium, and the Liturgical Movement leading up to the Second Vatican Council, restores the proper participation of the laity due to their membership within the priesthood of the faithful.  Thus, the reformed liturgy of the Second Vatican Council brought about a beautiful relationship between the ministerial priesthood and the common priesthood of the faithful.

           One of the roots of liturgical abuses since the close of the Second Vatican Council comes from the fact that many members of the clergy deny the essential difference between the ministerial priesthood and the common priesthood of the faithful.[v]  In other words, there is no ministerial priesthood.  If priests no longer understand who they are, then they will no longer understand what they are supposed to do within the Catholic liturgy.  What develops is a liturgical circus where active participation is understood as everyone doing something.  Moreover, their activity is subject to continual, spontaneous, and arbitrary creativity with no order or reference to the liturgical norms and principles of the Church. 

            Everything that involves the sacred liturgy must bring us to the sacred. Architecture, paintings, statues, music, vestments, and liturgical vessels serve to bring both the priest and the lay faithful into contact with another world.  Modernity needs continual reminders of the transcendent.  The church building and everything that goes on within it must reflect the existence and the presence of the sacred.  This is why proper attire for Mass is so essential. 

             “In the earthly liturgy we take part in a foretaste of that heavenly liturgy which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem toward which we journey as pilgrims, where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God, a minister of the holies and of the true tabernacle; we sing a hymn to the Lord's glory with all the warriors of the heavenly army; venerating the memory of the saints, we hope for some part and fellowship with them; we eagerly await the Savior, our Lord Jesus Christ, until he, our life, shall appear and we too will appear with him in glory” (Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium, #8).

VI

             Since the close of the Second Vatican Council, church music has been at the center of a lot of controversy. In many places liturgy has become mere entertainment or an emotional pep-rally.   The space allotted to an article does not permit a complete treatment of the subject of sacred music.  However, in light of our series of reflections on the Catholic Mass, I would like to address some very practical points that will help us to understand the mind of the Church regarding the proper use of music within the Catholic liturgy of the Latin rite.  Music has become the very center of a crisis which has profoundly affected the Catholic Mass. 

           For anyone who is interested in the proper implementation of the liturgical reform envisioned by the Second Vatican Council, there are documents on the subject of liturgical music which need to be read and studied.  These documents are listed at the end of this article.

           First of all, in order to begin our considerations, we need to ask the question, what is sacred music? 

           For the centenary of the Motu Propio “Tra le Sollecitudini” of Pope St. Pius X  (1835-1914) who did much work for liturgical reform, Pope John Paul the Great published an important document on sacred music.  In his document we find words that will help us answer our question.

           “In continuity with the teachings of St Pius X and the Second Vatican Council, it is necessary first of all to emphasize that music destined for sacred rites must have holiness as its reference point:  indeed, ‘sacred music increases in holiness to the degree that it is intimately linked with liturgical action’. For this very reason, ‘not all without distinction that is outside the temple (profanum) is fit to cross its threshold’, my venerable Predecessor Paul VI wisely said, commenting on a Decree of the Council of Trent. And he explained that ‘if music - instrumental and vocal - does not possess at the same time the sense of prayer, dignity and beauty, it precludes the entry into the sphere of the sacred and the religious’. Today, moreover, the meaning of the category ‘sacred music’ has been broadened to include repertoires that cannot be part of the celebration without violating the spirit and norms of the Liturgy itself” (#4). 

           From this text, we can deduce that not all music is appropriate for the Catholic Mass.  In fact, the post-conciliar document Musicam Sacram (March 5, 1967), gives us a precise definition of sacred music when it states: “By sacred music is understood that which, being created for the celebration of divine worship, is endowed with a certain holy sincerity of form.
The following come under the title of sacred music: Gregorian chant, sacred polyphony in its various forms both ancient and modern, sacred music for the organ and other approved instruments, and sacred popular music, be it liturgical or simply religious”.

           Sacred music has a very important function within the liturgy of the Catholic Church.  In the Vatican II document Sacrosanctum Concilium we find these words: “The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art. The main reason for this pre-eminence is that, as sacred song united to the words, it forms a necessary or integral part of the solemn liturgy” (#112).  The same text goes on to tell us the very purpose of the sacred music; i.e., the glory of God and the sanctification of the faithful. 

          In light of what we have seen thus far, we can now ask the question, what is appropriate music for the Catholic liturgy?   The documents on  sacred music already give us an answer to this question.  Let us look at Pope John Paul’s Motu Propio. 

           “Among the musical expressions that correspond best with the qualities demanded by the notion of sacred music, especially liturgical music, Gregorian chant has a special place. The Second Vatican Council recognized ‘that being specially suited to the Roman Liturgy’ it should be given, other things being equal, pride of place in liturgical services sung in Latin. St Pius X pointed out that the Church had ‘inherited it from the Fathers of the Church’, that she has ‘jealously guarded [it] for centuries in her liturgical codices’ and still ‘proposes it to the faithful’ as her own, considering it ‘the supreme model of sacred music’. Thus, Gregorian chant continues also today to be an element of unity in the Roman Liturgy” (#7).

           Secondly, after  Gregorian Chant, the Church considers polyphony as another important part of its patrimony of sacred music.  “But other kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations, so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action, as laid down in Art. 30” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, #116).

           After Gregorian chant and polyphony, other forms of sacred music, choral music and the congregational singing of hymns are also very important as well. 

           We can already see that the Catholic Church has never done away with its beautiful music of the past.  Moreover, all of the documents of the Church on the subject of music encourage its use. 

           Again, let us look at John Paul’s Motu Propio, where he writes: “The importance of preserving and increasing the centuries-old patrimony of the Church spurs us to take into particular consideration a specific exhortation of the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium: ‘Choirs must be assiduously developed, especially in cathedral churches’. In turn, the Instruction Musicam Sacram explains the ministerial task of the choir: ‘Because of the liturgical ministry it exercises, the choir (cappella musicale or schola cantorum) should be mentioned here explicitly. The conciliar norms regarding the reform of the Liturgy have given the choir's function greater prominence and importance. The choir is responsible for the correct performance of its part, according to the differing types of song, to help the faithful to take an active part in the singing. Therefore,... choirs are to be developed with great care, especially in cathedrals and other major churches, in seminaries and in religious houses of study’. The schola cantorum's task has not disappeared: indeed, it plays a role of guidance and support in the assembly and, at certain moments in the Liturgy, has a specific role of its own” (#8).

           From the Church documents sited thus far, not only do we see what is appropriate liturgical music, we can also conclude what is inappropriate for the Catholic Mass.  Jazz, rock, mariachi, and polka, are not musical genres for sacred music. 

           Pope Benedict XVI once wrote, “A Church which only makes use of “utility” music has fallen for what is, in fact, useless.  She too becomes ineffectual.  For her mission is a far higher one.  As the Old Testament speaks of the Temple, the Church is to be the place of ‘glory’, and as such, too, the place where mankind’s cry of distress is brought to the ear of God.  The Church must not settle down with what is merely comfortable and serviceable at the parish level; she must arouse the voice of the cosmos and, by glorifying the Creator, elicit the glory of the cosmos itself, making it also glorious, beautiful, habitable and beloved.  Next to the saints, the art which the Church has produced is the only real ‘apologia’ for her history.  It is this glory which witnesses to the Lord, not theology’s clever explanations for the terrible things which lamentably, fill the pages of her history.  The Church is to transform, improve, ‘humanize’ the world – but how can she do that if at the same time she turns her back on beauty, which is so closely allied to love?  For together, beauty and love form the true consolation in the world, bringing it as near as possible to the world of the resurrection.  The Church must maintain high standards; she must be a place where beauty can be at home; she must lead the struggle for that ‘spiritualization’ without which the world becomes the ‘first circle of hell’.  Thus to ask what is ‘suitable’ must always be the same as asking what is ‘worthy’; it must constantly challenge us to see what is ‘worthy’ of the Church’s worship” (Feast of Faith, 124-125).

           Aside from the outright rejection of anything that took place in the Catholic Church prior to the Second Vatican Council, which of course is an outright rebellion, even revolution, perhaps one of the reasons that has caused the liturgical music crisis is a misunderstanding of the concept of active participation.  Does the active participation promoted by the Vatican II document on the sacred liturgy mean that the people have to sing every piece of music within the liturgy?  If this is the case, then the use of polyphony and choral music will be impossible, and liturgical music will be reduced to the singing of simple hymns only.  In most parishes, this is exactly what has happened. 

           So, what does active participation mean?  Pope Benedict gives us an answer to this important question when he writes, “Wherever an exaggerated concept of ‘community’ predominates, a concept which is (as we have already seen) completely unrealistic precisely in a highly mobile society such as ours, there only the priest and the congregation can be acknowledged as legitimate executors or performers of liturgical song. Today, practically everyone can see through the primitive activism and the insipid pedagogic rationalism of such a position which is why it is now asserted so seldom. The fact that the schola and the choir can also contribute to the whole picture, is scarcely denied any more, even among those who erroneously interpret the council's phrase about ‘active participation’ as meaning external activism. (In the Presence of the Angels; Adoremus Bulletin, Vol. 2, Nos. 6-8, Oct-Dec. 1996)

   From the words of Pope Benedict XVI, together with all of the Church documents on sacred music since the Second Vatican Council, we can deduce that there should be a musical balance within the Catholic Mass.  Although it is the mind of the Council that the people need to participate actively by singing, this does not remove the possibility that some musical parts of the Mass could encompass musical pieces that are not sung by the congregation and are in fact traditional Latin pieces which may be Gregorian Chant, polyphony, or traditional choral music.

           In conclusion, let us remember that this discussion by no means exhausts the subject of sacred music.  However, perhaps this reflection will spark an interest in reading the Church documents on the subject of sacred music.  It is my hope that such a renewed interest will help parishes implement the true teachings of the Second Vatican Council.