I had heard about the following article which appeared in the Diocese of Spokane’s Inland Register previously when part of it was read on EWTN’s Open Line. I had searched for it before, but it wasn’t yet available. Via Free Republic I see it is now available.
I was recently watching a part of the daily televised liturgy on EWTN (Eternal Word Television Network). The liturgy there is an odd mix of English and Latin, while following the texts of the current Roman Missal. The priest and ministers of the liturgy look way too somber and serious. The ritual is performed with all the exaggerated exactness of the pre-Vatican II Latin liturgy. The Mass is overly formal and mechanical. Needless to say, there are no women allowed in the sanctuary area, there is no procession with the gifts, no Sign of Peace, and, of course, no Communion from the cup for the lay people who are present. The liturgy, in effect, is unlike anything that Catholics experience in the vast majority of Catholic parish churches.
Exactly true that the Mass on EWTN is unlike what most Catholics experience. A Mass with no liturgical abuses is rare indeed. A Mass that actually follows that intent and documents of Vatican II and have not banished Latin to the outer darkness. A Mass that is reverent and includes on experimentation is certainly unlike what most Catholic experience. Though my parish has both the Tridentine indult and on the first Sunday of the month has the new Mass like on EWTN.
I am certain that the planners of these liturgies would explain their differences from parish liturgies with the familiar refrain that the post Vatican II liturgical reforms have taken too much of the mystery away from the Holy Mass. Certainly, they say, allowing the congregation full, active and conscious participation in the ritual is what empties the rites of their mystery, so the further we keep the secular congregation away from the clerical activity and space, the better to preserve the liturgy’s mystery. Thus the need to eliminate any personal touch with the lay folks, and, by all means, do not allow them to communicate with each other, even to wish one’s neighbor the peace of the risen Christ. (One wonders what these people think of the pope as he hugs and kisses the children who present him with the gifts to be offered, giving each of them a small gift as a remembrance of the liturgy. Perhaps it is all right for the pope to be warm and personable during the liturgy, but inappropriate for lesser souls.)
"Certainly, they say, allowing the congregation full, active and conscious participation in the ritual is what empties the rites of their mystery." This is just total nonsense. Nobody make this claim. What is argued that active participation means active prayerful participation and not just things for the people in pew to do during Mass. It is also ridiculous to assert that EWTN sees the need to eliminate the personal touch with lay folk. Exactly who does he think is watching and contributing to the network? The homilies given are usually warm and personable and not some cold edict delivered from the pulpit.
I think the folks responsible for these stuffy liturgies are confusing mystery with mystification. Rites that express mystery will invite people into the unknown, into what lies beyond the action of the ritual. Liturgy done well this way will cause people to ask, “How does this ritual which I can see, and in which I am participating, lead me more deeply into the beyond, into life of the God of mystery whom I cannot see?” Mystification, on the other hand, leads one to ask, “What on earth does that mean, and why in God’s name is he doing that?”
So liturgy celebrated within the liturgical guidelines is now stuffy? Though he might be right about mystification. Some Masses I attend I am mystified and ask myself “What on earth does that mean, and why in God’s name is he doing that?” Though I don’t think my reaction to liturgical oddities is what he was driving at.
“We know that birettas and fiddle-back chasubles, mumbled (and often mangled) Latin, and truly execrable renditions of Gregorian chant were no more aesthetically than theologically impressive. Having lived through ‘speed-typing’ Masses guaranteed to last no more than twenty minutes, we can point to the greater seriousness, even greater solemnity, of parish worship today. Those who call contemporary worship insufficiently sacred literally do not know what they are talking about.
No doubt there was reform needed in the Church and that Masses said like somebody hit the fast-forward button did not lead to worship. The answer to poorly sung Gregorian Chant is not banishment of chant but better training. Though I would rather hear badly sung chant then the majority of modern hymns sung well.
“As for the growing similarity among the Eucharistic celebrations of Catholics and Protestants, we should rejoice that Catholics now feel at home at Lutheran, Methodist, and Episcopalian worship, and that our Protestant neighbors have gained much through our process of renewal and reform. The Catholic form of worship remains a strong motivation for conversion among adults. As we have known all along, God works powerfully through the words and gestures of the liturgy; the hard work of renewal has served to make God’s work plain and public each Sunday when we gather as ‘church.’”
Isn’t this paragraph a contradiction. First he says we should rejoice about the similarity of the Mass and Protestant worship and then says it remains a strong motivation for conversion among adults. Making God’s work plain doesn’t mean to make the Mass itself plain. I bet their are a lot of Masses in his own diocese that need critiquing compared to EWTN’s Mass.
Of course you won’t be surprised to read that Fr. Larson is liturgical consultant for the Archdiocese of Seattle.
29 comments
Be careful about buying into the myths of the 20 minute Sunday Latin Mass or the church full of people praying the Rosary during Mass or the one about 70% of people not believing in the Real Presence.
In 12 years of attending the Latin Mass before Vatican II I never once got out of church under an hour. I am not here talking about a weekday Mass which was shorted with no gloria, credo or sermon – communion lines were shorter too. Yes I remember people,mainly older ladies, praying the rosary but the rest either prayed the Mass from their Missals or watched the Mass and prayed.
Jimmy Akin of Catholic Answers demolishes the Real Presence survey results.
As the people who were actually there and can speak the truth die out the myths take over and all we will ‘know’ of the Latin Mass is that the priests gabbled it and the congregation all prayed the rosary because they did not know what was going on.
I don’t know if I should laugh or cry.
Throw up or spit nails.
This priest and I have divergent views on how we would like to see Mass celebrated. Attention to detail, in my opinion, reflects obedience.
God forbid we should actually pay attention to Mass, instead of the liturgist. *rolling eyes*
…we should rejoice that Catholics now feel at home at Lutheran, Methodist, and Episcopalian worship…
I think that says it all. Next article…
That last paragraph has waaaayyyy too many similarities to e-mails I get from Voice of the Faithful. (Yes, I’m still a “member”. I’ve unsubscribed three times…. grrr….)
I propose a flogging for anyone who uses the word ‘church’ without an article.
I propose a flogging for anyone who uses the word ‘church’ without an article.
Can we include anyone who does the same with “gift”, such as “All is gift”?
Hooray for EWTN, and Boo-Hoo-Hoo for Fr. Larson.
Warren
Oh no I’m moving to Seattle =(
Surely there must be some good churches there?
Finally, someone who expresses my thoughts about the hodge-podge that EWTN puts on and gently puts forward lots of the things that I have been thinking about SSPX sympathizers out there. I can honestly appreciate that you folks are more comfortable in the Tridentine rite and would gladly have the church admit a Tridentine rite seperate from the Novus Ordo rite, but the attitude that those of us who appreciate being able to understand mass are irreverent and inferior that the Tridentine crowd exudes really irks. The good father got it right except for the last paragraph (which read in context is not as aweful as it is made out to be).
“we should rejoice that Catholics now feel at home at Lutheran, Methodist, and Episcopalian worship…”
Of course, this comfort to attend protestant services is contrary to the general prohibition on worshiping with protestants, and does not seem to fit the only possible exception thereto.
From Unitatis Redintegratio 8: “This change of heart and holiness of life, along with public and private prayer for the unity of Christians, should be regarded as the soul of the whole ecumenical movement, and merits the name, “spiritual ecumenism.”
It is a recognized custom for Catholics to have frequent recourse to that prayer for the unity of the Church which the Saviour Himself on the eve of His death so fervently appealed to His Father: “That they may all be one”.
In certain special circumstances, such as the prescribed prayers “for unity,” and during ecumenical gatherings, it is allowable, indeed desirable that Catholics should join in prayer with their separated brethren. Such prayers in common are certainly an effective means of obtaining the grace of unity, and they are a true expression of the ties which still bind Catholics to their separated brethren. “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them”.
Yet worship in common (communicatio in sacris) is not to be considered as a means to be used indiscriminately for the restoration of Christian unity. There are two main principles governing the practice of such common worship: first, the bearing witness to the unity of the Church, and second, the sharing in the means of grace. Witness to the unity of the Church very generally forbids common worship to Christians, but the grace to be had from it sometimes commends this practice. The course to be adopted, with due regard to all the circumstances of time, place, and persons, is to be decided by local episcopal authority, unless otherwise provided for by the Bishops’ Conference according to its statutes, or by the Holy See.”
I wish all Catholic churches would say the mass as reverently as we see on EWTN.
Just one more reason I am SOOOOOO glad my husband did not get that job in the Seattle area. 🙁
+JMJ+
Well, we never have a procession of gifts for daily Mass (Novus Ordo)–the chapel is too small. AND we do not receive the Precious Blood unless a deacon or Ex.Min. shows up. And most of us would love to give up the sign of peace, but we are obedient, so keep it as reverent as possible. (We do have one priest close by who gives the sign of peace to the congregation, then simply continues with Mass–no congregational handshaking or anything)
Guess we wouldn’t make it in Seattle. I might add almost 50% of our daily Mass goers also watch the EWTN Mass BEFORE they come to church.
I think EWTN is feeding the faithful quite a bit more than poor Fr. Larson.
For anyone to suggest that it requires Latin for the Mass to be mumbled and mangled and run through at breakneck speed is simply dishonest. I have to suffer through a ‘speed-typing’ mass every once in a while that, while in English, I have a hard time understanding. There are priests who don’t understand that reverence is infinitely more important than speed, no matter what language they may speak. I have seen very reverent English NO Masses as well, it truly depends on the priest and his desire to do things as reverently as possible. Although I can’t remember the last time I heard EP 1 used in Mass other than on EWTN…
Further, his understanding of “full, active and conscious participation” leaves, well, a lot to be desired. To put it simply, if you can’t be active in prayer, your activity in motion is wasted.
Finally, I can see a small point that having the Mass in English can help in conversions. The lower the barrier to entry is the easier it may be for some to move closer to full communion with the Church. But to suggest this is a sufficient reason to do away with Latin as a rule is quite short-sighted. It is interesting that those who tend to pooh-pooh Latin often also are those who argue vehemently for “diversity” in the practice of our faith; diversity in every way but Latin.
I am reminded of Father Fessio’s remark that he has not attended an irreverent (I believe that was the word) Mass in many years … he is the celebrant!
It seems to be all about Father Larson’s traumatized childhood and hurt feelers. Otherwise, what would he care about what comes out — for a few minutes; he did not even watch the entire Mass — on EWTN? He can start his own cable station and televise his own Mass, erm, Eucharistic celebration. They do it from both the chancery chapel (including the Anglican Use) and the cathedral (Mass in Latin, Spanish, and English) in the Archdiocese of San Antonio. There is more money in his archdiocese.
Surprised?
It is after all, the diocese of Spokane
Victoria,
Holy Familiy parish in White Center (just south of West Seattle) is an immigrant parish in a slum neighborhood, which has reverent masses with good, solid homilies. Immaculate Conception parish in the Univeristy district is a Dominican parish with a very good reputation (although I have never been there). There are also a Byzantine Rite parish in Olympia, and a Ruthenian Rite parish in south Seattle, if your taste runs eastward.
Danby – do you mean Blessed Sacrament parish in the U-District? It is Dominican (Mark Shea’s beloved parish BTW.) I used to attend the 8:00 N.O. Mass, said in Latin, during the late 80’s. Beautiful chant. My brother attended until recently – I think it may be a bit less old school now (the 8:00 Latin Mass is gone – to “divisive” to the parish, or so I heard), perhaps in part because of the frequent rotation of priests through the priory.
David said: “…I can honestly appreciate that you folks are more comfortable in the Tridentine rite and would gladly have the church admit a Tridentine rite seperate from the Novus Ordo rite…”
Known as 332 says: We go to St. John Cantius. Although we’ve been to the Tridentine rite masses, we prefer the English Novus Ord masses. However, they are reverent, serious, without the cloying artificial “personal touch” we find elsewhere. No, we’re comfortable with the Novus Ordo rite – when treated with the respect it deserves.
I recently lived in Fr Larson’s parish…..it would make you ill if I described his Mass. Pray for him.
Danby, the Dominican church in the University District is Blessed Sacrament. A beautiful church – the real deal! (Which is also Mark Shea’s parish) St Mark’s in Shoreline finally has a HOLY priest, Fr Harris.
I regularly use the Roman Canon, particularly on the feasts of the apostles and other saints mentioned in it. Occasionally I find myself concelebrating with principal celebrants who go at breakneck speed, as did some priests in pre-Vatican II days.
Also, St. Philomena Parish in Des Moines, south of Seattle has an excellent priest, Fr. Bryan Hersey, who offers the Mass beautifully. He has recently reversed the 1970s “renovations” that were perpetrated on the church and is doing great things for the Parish.
“e who expresses my thoughts about the hodge-podge that EWTN “
Hodge-podge?? The EWTN mass is faithful to the Vatican. It is what the mass reform intended mass to be like (not the guitar playing kumba stuff)
Blessed Sacrament’s website is http://www.blessed-sacrament.org/
You can take a virtual tour, and see our new Virgin of Guadalupe tile mural. While we don’t have an all-Latin Mass, the 12PM Sunday Mass usually features quite a bit of Latin, including the Agnus Dei and Gloria, and a Latin hymn during Communion. I don’t know much about the other Mass times except for the 545 PM Sunday Mass which is generally a “guitar Mass”, but a rather reverent one.
I recommend you stop by if only to see the church building itself. You’re not going to find many Gothic-style churches on the West Coast!
Peace and God bless!
Thank you Sooo much for the suggestions! I go to a Latin Novus Ordo in Toronto (www.oratory-toronto.org) and will be missing it dearly, especially if I have to put up with liturgical dancers and felt banners.
Wow! This is a freaky feeling. I am actually the liberal on the board. Haven’t been one of those for a long time.
To “Known as 332”: I am not sure if I offended you or not. Certainly hope not.
To “anne”: Again I mean no one offense, but the EWTN mass is an unusual bilingual affair. I always get the impression that they would rather just use the latin but feel constrained to use english at some spots. I would not mind if it were all latin or all english, but the mix they use is kind of like catsup and ice cream; two good things that just don’t belong together. “Hodge-podge” seems apt.
David, I guess it partly depends on what you’re used to. Personally, I don’t find the mix in this agnus dei disturbing:
Agnus dei, you take away the sin of all the world. Misere nobis, etc.
But I guess I am used to a jumble of languages.
Comments are closed.