In the Church today there exists a wide range of opinions amongst those in the hierarchy over how the mass should be celebrated. On one end of the spectrum is Bishop Clark’s understanding:
page 65 of Fr. James Callan’s “The Studentbaker Corporation”
Bishop Clark called the Corpus Christi rectory and announced that he was going to celebrate the Thursday Night Mass with us – that night! People were immediately atrtacted to him. They appreciated how comfortable he seemed to be sitting on the sanctruary rug with the children and enjoying the flow of the informal liturgy with all the people crowded around him at the Lord’s table. He especially liked a 7-year-old girl name Laura, who played a flute solo next to him for the Communion meditation. He commented on the way she spontaneously and confidently shared her gift with the congregation.
Towards the other end of the spectrum is our current Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI (and pretty much every other pope):
We might say that in 1918, the year that Guardini published his book (cf. The Spirit of the Liturgy), the liturgy was rather like a fresco.
It had been preserved from damage, but it had been almost completely overlaid by whitewash from later generations. In the Missal from which the priest celebrated, the form of the liturgy that had grown from its earliest beginnings, was still present, but, as far as the faithful were concerned, it was largely concealed beneath instructions for and forms of private prayer.
The fresco was laid bare by the Liturgical Movement, and, in a definitive way, by the Second Vatican Council. For a moment its colors and figures fascinated us. But since then, the fresco has been endangered by climatic conditions as well as by various restorations and reconstructions.
In fact, it is threatened with destruction, if the necessary steps are not taken to stop these damaging influences. Of course, there must be no question of its being covered with whitewash again, but what is imperative is a new reverence in the way we treat it, a new understanding of its message and its reality, so that rediscovery does not become the first stage of irreparable loss.
If this book were to encourage, in a new way, something like a liturgical movement, a movement toward a liturgy and the right way of celebrating the liturgy, inwardly and outwardly, then the intention that inspired its writing would be richly fulfilled.
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy, (from the Preface) 1999
Regardless of how you interpret Ratzinger’s statement here on the old rite, he makes it clear that he is not fond of some of the experimentation going on in the mass. To keep his remarks above in the proper context, we must remember that BXVI has a great respect for what he’s dubbed the Extraordinary Form (EF) of the mass. Otherwise he wouldn’t have issued his motu proprio “Summorum Pontificum” in which he allowed easier access to the EF. There is some debate over which mass (NO-novus ordo/OF-ordinary form vs EF-extraordinary form/TLM traditional latin mass) is more appropriate (see our forums). However the divide between a properly celebrated NO mass and the EF is much smaller than between a properly celebrated NO mass and an FFA (free-for-all), MIUAYG (make-it-up-as-you-go) mass which is so prevalent in the DOR. Put another way, if you are someone friendly to the EF, then you will almost certainly bring a greater sense of reverence with you to the OF (ordinary form). If you are someone who favors a FFA, TTBOTW (throw-the-book-out-the-window) mass, then you will almost certainly despise the traditional latin mass.
Everyone knows that the mass was significantly reformed after the second Vatican council. Lesser known is that the official reform of the mass and the masses that have actually resulted are worlds apart. Still lesser known is that the TLM was made more widely available not only in 2008, but also by JP2 in 1984 (with permission of the local bishop) and more so in 1988 with his Apostolic Letter, Ecclesia Dei:
To all those Catholic faithful who feel attached to some previous liturgical and disciplinary forms of the Latin tradition I wish to manifest my will to facilitate their ecclesial communion by means of the necessary measures to guarantee respect for their rightful aspirations. In this matter I ask for the support of the bishops and of all those engaged in the pastoral ministry in the Church.
by virtue of my Apostolic Authority I decree…respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition, by a wide and generous application of the directives already issued some time ago by the Apostolic See for the use of the Roman Missal according to the typical edition of 1962.
Given all this, a local bishop who favors the FFA mass (such as Bishop Clark) has the following options:
- submit to the Holy Father and not allow your personal preferences for FFA masses to supersede what Holy Mother Church requires
- allow for a diversity of masses
- allow only FFA masses and disregard Holy Mother Church
Asking someone like Bishop Clark to go with option #1 is probably a bit much, but seeing as this diocese is all about diversity one would think #2 would be the logical choice. After all, this is from the diocese’s mission statement:
As pilgrims nourished by the Eucharist for our journey of faith, we work with other churches and with all who seek harmony within the human family to advance the reign of God.
To the chagrin of many traditionalist Catholics, what Bishop Clark chose is actually #3. This is an excerpt from the Latin Liturgy Association’s Newsletter (No. 42)
A fine article “A desire for Latin” appeared in the April 27, 1991 issue of “The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle” [The online D&C archives only go back to ’02]. The piece was sent to the Chairman by our member Mr. Dominic A. Aquila [instructor of history and political science at Empire State College and teacher at the Rochester Institute of Technology] to whom the local Bishop, Matthew Clark, had addressed the letter with the five reasons for not allowing the 1962 Missal printed in the last issue of the Newsletter on page 3. Rochester is the only diocese in NY where the Papal Indult of 1984 has not been implemented. Aquila has collected 450 signatures on a petition for the old rite; a petition submitted in the late 1989 had 64 signatures. At present, the old rite of Mass is celebrated illicitly in the diocese; one such location is mentioned, and the newspaper says, “Attending this Mass in the Rochester diocese would not satisfy a Catholic’s Sunday obligation.” The newspaper notes that hundreds of Catholics attend the Latin Masses according to the revised Roman Missal celebrated at the two Rochester churches once a month. A long quotation from a letter of bishop Clark to a priest who had asked to be allowed to celebrate the Old Mass is given:
The Mass as we have it today is Christ’s sacrifice celebrated with and for the community of faith. Its form and development have invited a new sense of dignity for all baptized persons who gather together. The Mass of the 1962 Roman Missal does not reflect this dignity nor this theology [ah – the hermeneutic of rupture]; it reflects a theology where the people were pious and quiet as the priest prayed for them … I cannot see any positive purpose that such a celebration would serve, except the nostalgia of past days [pretty strong words for the pre-V2 Church]..A local priest, Robert J. Kennedy of St. Bernard’s Institute, is quoted as saying:
Who’s in charge? Is it the Pope or the bishop? The bishop or the local pastor? The pastor or the people? People insisting on the traditional Mass are challenging the authority of the Church in some way [on odd statement considering JP2’s apostolic letter quoted above].The Chairman concludes this notice with the comment that the word nostalgia comes from the Greek nostos (return home) and algos (pain); nostalgia is a form of melancholy caused by prolonged absence from one’s home or country. It is a sever home-sickness. It is a perfectly natural emotion, and those insensitive people who are not affected by it would do well not to boast that their hearts are like stones.
I guess diversity and “working together” includes everyone except those Catholics who prefer the traditional latin mass. Thankfully, Bishop Clark did eventually change his tune (with a little arm-twisting perhaps) and allow the TLM to be celebrated. Each and every Catholic should at some point or another experience it and it is available every Sun. at 1:30 at St. Stan’s. If you’re going for the first time, don’t be caught in a state of having to evaluate the whole mass as if you need to give a report on whether you liked it or not. Just experience it. And go back again (at least intermittently) until you become comfortable with it (should we ever be completely comfortable encountering our Risen Lord?). After all, even if you don’t like it, it was the mass celebrated for centuries, if not millenia. From a purely historical perspective, it is worth experiencing as a Catholic.