The Council, the Consistory, Liturgy and Life

We live as we pray, for we pray as we live. (CCC, 2725)

So it seems the Liturgy was taken off the agenda at the recent consistory of cardinals. Still, the current head of the Dicastery of Divine Worship, British cardinal Arthur Roche, sent around a two-page letter, explaining why a return to the usus antiquior, the Traditional Latin Mass, is not only unadvisable, but apparently impossible.

His argument may be summed up as follows: He invokes Pope Saint Pius V – of all people – who promulgated a ‘revised Mass’ in 1570 in accord with the decrees of the Council of Trent (1545 – 1563). So too, Paul VI’s own Missal of 1969 was promulgated in the wake of the Second Vatican Council, in accord with its own teachings. In the cardinal’s mind, therefore, rejection, or even criticism, of the Novus Ordo is linked with rejection of the Council. There is no going back, only forward.

The argument may seem true, but doesn’t hold up.

The Missal of 1570 made no fundamental changes to the Mass, which looked much the same as what was before 1570. Whatever modifications were made were fully in accord with the decrees of Trent.

What of the Novus Ordo? Whatever Paul VI and the Council Fathers intended, we can only compare what was – and is –done liturgically with what the Council actually taught.

Here we turn to Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, the first document of the Council, promulgated in 1963.

Therein it was decree that Gregorian chant should be given ‘pride of place’ in the Liturgy, followed by polyphony, and only then other sacred music. The organ was to be the principal instrument, ‘held in great esteem’, and other instruments only insofar as they could be made ‘apt for sacred use’, which means fitting for the Temple, and not the campfire or glee club. The Liturgy was to be primarily in Latin, with some vernacular permitted. When one of the Fathers warned that if they allowed some of the vernacular, it would become all vernacular, there was an awkward silence, and the other bishops laughed. ‘Impossibile!’

There was no mention at all in Conciliar constitution of Mass said facing the people (contra populum); or of lay, to say nothing of female, lectors; or Communion in the hand; or Communion as ‘procession’; or Eucharistic ministers; or forbidding kneeling or removing altar rails, or ‘Gothic’ vestments, or circular churches, or amplified music, guitars and pianos turned up to ‘11’.

All of this was made up and imposed after the Council, in light of an imagined vague and amorphous ‘spirit’ – certainly, not from the text of the documents.

To get to the nub of the matter, the Mass is meant to be truly ‘Catholic’, which means ‘universal’, the same across the planet. When a Byzantine Catholic walks into a Byzantine church, he gets a Byzantine liturgy. The same with Coptic, Carmelite, Carthusian, Ambrosian. This is legitimate diversity, signifying a deeper unity.

What they all have in common is that they signify what the Mass essentially is: the eternal sacrifice of Christ offered to the Father, and His real sacramental Presence abiding in the Eucharistic species.

These two essentials – sacrifice and sacrament – are obscured in too many Novus Ordo liturgies. We shouldn’t have to wander into a parish not knowing what to expect. Drums and guitars or chant and solemnity? Altar rail, or not? Kneeling permitted, or verboten? Communion on the tongue, or in the hand only? Legions of lay ministers? An orthodox sermon, or quasi-heresy?  Regular confession available, or ‘by appointment’ only?

For there is also a diversity that undermines unity, sowing chaos, undermining faith, which should not be hallmarks of the Catholic Church. Sure, as Joyce quipped, the Church may be ‘here comes everybody’, but everybody should find the stable and tranquil ‘pillar and bulwark’ of truth, the ark of salvation.

Yes, this is there under the surface, but the barque of Peter is buffeted and storm tossed, the uncertain tossings of a vagarious wind.

Most of us, myself included, would prefer a daily low traditional Mass early each morning, whether of the 1962 or 1969 Missal, preferably in Latin either way. Solemn, sweet and to the point, nourishment for the soul, like hearty spiritual porridge. The Fathers of the Second Vatican Council – at least as far as the text promulgated goes – envisioned that any post-conciliar reform would keep the Mass looking much the same.

But this is not what happened. Perhaps Christ, like the Apostles in that boat, has permitted the current turmoil to test us, to see how much we trust Him and the efficacy of His sacraments in the midst of imperfection.

Perhaps God, in the broadness of His mercy, is ‘lowering the bar’, to bring in as many as He might, all those in the highways and byways, compelling them to come into the marriage feast, even if they know little of what they do.

Perhaps it’s just His permissive will at work.

Whatever the case, we must stay with Peter’s barque, and pray for the Almighty to rein in the confusion in His own good time, like Christ waking up in the prow of the boat and calming the storm. In the meantime, since prayer, and especially liturgical prayer shapes our lives, we should seek whatever perfection, whatever measure of truth, beauty, goodness, we might, whether in the parish He has placed us, or in our journeys further afield.

The momentum does seem to be on the side of tradition amongst younger priests and families, and such will prevail through the current chaos. In the meantime, God is there, even in fractured Masses, like He is in the indissoluble bond of a turbulent but faithful marriage, in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health.

The difference is that if we persevere to the end, death will not do us part, but bring us to eternal life with Him, in everlasting beatitude.