www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology To change just ONE THING in American Catholic worship

To Change Just ONE THING in American Catholic Worship
Kevin Hannan

I�ve spent the past several years working overseas, and on Sundays I typically attend a Greek Catholic (also called Eastern Rite or Byzantine Catholic) liturgy, or sometimes an Orthodox liturgy. If neither is available, I attend one of the local Roman Catholic churches. Always I am perplexed that those three different types of worship, each rich and unique in its own way, differs so markedly from American Catholic practices. I say �American Catholic,� because in my own experience, the Catholic Church in America really IS its own entity, with its own unique forms of American worship.

But then when I return to visit the U.S., inevitably I find myself in a spot where I have only the option to visit an �American Catholic� parish. Upon entering those churches, I am filled with apprehension. I experience something similar to the anxiety a non-believer must feel at the first visit to a church. And I ask myself: �What surprises lay in wait here? What unique local practices am I about to encounter? What type of liturgical or theological innovations has this community taken to its heart?�

Today on the glorious Feast of the Resurrection, I attended an Eastern Rite liturgy, as I did last year as well. (The liturgy last year, celebrated by my adopted country�s major Greek Catholic prelate and lasting more than four hours, was especially moving and not at all tiring. It uplifted my spirit for the entire liturgical year). During the rich experience of the liturgy this morning, I reflected on the various liturgical components I observed and on their effect on me. What was it then that moved me most? The chanting or the readings? A procession with cross and Resurrection icon? The public baptism of catechumens? No, it was the part of the service we experience during every liturgy � Holy Eucharist.

This morning that church was filled to full capacity, and before the priest and deacon were able to distribute the Body and Blood of Christ to the two steadily advancing lines of communicants, the choir had time to sing five different hymns. It was a beautiful, timeless meditative moment. There was no rush. Numerous acolytes, men and boys, stood �round the priest and deacon, as if on watch, guarding something precious, not of this world, some of them holding raised ceremonial fans, in tribute to the Holy Mysteries.

As I experienced the moment and simultaneously thought back to Resurrection liturgies of my past, it occurred to me: THIS is the very moment that is missing today in American Catholic parishes. In my adopted country, there is no shortage of priests in the Roman Catholic parishes, so that communion there is distributed ONLY by priests, each accompanied by a ministrant with communion paten. Almost without exception, the Roman Catholic faithful there receive the unleavened host upon their tongue, with the greatest reverence, after communion kneeling for a long time in the pews or on the stone floor. The Blood of Christ is not offered to the faithful, yet communicants show much greater reverence during and after Holy Communion than one observes anywhere in America.

The fallout of the Second Vatican Council still plagues America, where innovations in the 1960s and 1970s were introduced immediately, sometimes simply for the sake of innovation. The Churches in Central and Eastern Europe, especially those under communist domination, were spared that experience, and the Roman Catholic hierarchy there was reluctant to discard tradition simply for the sake of experimentation. It is now obvious, from the perspective of the twenty-first century, that many efforts to make the American Catholic liturgy �accessible� and �relevant� were ultimately counter-productive. Many of those innovations did not uplift the Body of Christ. Today, at least from the perspective of one who participates weekly in Catholic and Orthodox liturgies in various countries of Europe, so much of the American Catholic worship appears dated and meaningless. In fact, American Catholic worship is hardly �accessible� or �relevant� for most Europeans.

A problem of logistics confronts the Catholic Church in America: too few priests; too many huge mega-parishes with large numbers of parishioners and Sunday communicants; and strict time constraints on the number and duration of Sunday liturgies. A common solution to the logistics problem is America�s �fast food� approach to communion. Get the communicants up on their feet, and keep �em moving all the way back to the pews. That approach involves a lot of kindly, bustling, good-intentioned, but for me personally, VERY DISTRACTING lay folk. I am convinced that it is the fault of American Catholic eucharistic ministers that Americans today show less respect for the Holy Eucharist.

The Eucharist is, with no doubt, the central point of Christian worship. Those Christians who do not know the Eucharist experience have but a pale shadow of True Christianity. I do not doubt the faith or the dedication of American Catholic eucharistic ministers, many of whom perform valuable services in visiting the sick and disabled. And I recognize that their efforts appear to be one very practical solution to the problems of logistics in America. But when I compare the experience of the Eucharist in European churches with that of America, I cannot help but regret that American Catholics have lost a tremendous treasure. The work of America�s eucharistic ministers is not a true, traditional ministry. Ultimately, they take much more away from worship than they contribute.

Perhaps believers should worry less about problems of logistics. Not long ago I read a study on Greek (Eastern Rite) Catholics in Poland, where numerous respondents criticized the length of the Roman Catholic liturgy. �It�s too short,� many say. My own deeply felt conviction is that the Sunday obligation of worship is not satisfied by anything less than 70-75 minutes of community worship (Orthodox believers, of course, are used to much longer services).

The contemporary American Catholic practices demean the Holy Eucharist, reception of which must be accompanied by a time for reflection. American Catholics are not well served by the current practices of their Church, too many of which reflect the trendy suppositions of past decades. The reception of the Holy Eucharist must always be accompanied by meditation and reverence. Beyond America, Americans are associated with fast food, utility and convenience � things which even seem to have influenced American liturgical practices.

Easter
2005

Yes, I agree. I watched a comedian on TV comment that now Catholics have a line for the "bread", and another line for the"wine", maybe they should have a line for the salad bar as well. Horrible, but true.

There is very little about the "American" Catholic
Church that is actually Catholic anymore. And you
are right to be apprehensive about attending a
Mass in an unfamiliar parish, as you have no idea
what hideous abuses you are about to witness. I
like Mother Angelica's quote about this, as she
says something like: "Many Catholics feel that
they now belong to the ELECTRIC Church; everytime
they go to Mass, they get another SHOCK!"

Kevin,

I agree with you - the experience is quite different. My wife and I were in Rome two years ago attending a Mass in a simple chapel at the penzione (sp?) celebrated by a visiting Italian bishop. Even though the Mass was short, there was something about the atmosphere and tones used that seemed far more condusive to worship than what I have experienced at my periodic visits to RC parishes during the week back in the states. Granted, it could have been the fact that I was in the Ancient City just blocks from the Vatican, but truthfully I sensed a palpable and qualitative difference that is hard to describe.

Several months ago I attended a weekly Mass at a parish near my office. I felt like I was visiting a foreign country! Maybe it was the politically correct Nicene Creed that was projected on the ceiling above the altar, maybe it was the complete lack of symmetry in the architecture, or the "stage" feel of the altar area, maybe it was the three quarter time piano music that dripped of sentiment and trills and celebrated ourselves. Maybe it was a combination of all those things, but I haven't been back since.

If I go to Mass during the week, I've found a beautiful little RC parish downtown run by priests from India where everything else (architecture, music, etc.) makes sense. It is actually closer to what I experienced in Rome (although sometimes the priests are difficult to understand, so a little projector with the translation of their homily on the wall might not be a bad idea!!! J/K! )

When the RC Church is fully herself, she reflects a beautiful and profound Christian tradition. When this tradition is overpowered by American suburban boomer fads and tastes, however, it creates a spiritual dissonance that is foreign to her authentic nature and spirit.

My two cents,

Gordo

Can the "Light of the East" help in this situation? There are Roman Catholics who long for a reverent liturgy. Many others have just given up and either tolerate the present situation or they have stop going to Church. Pope John Paul II has called upon the West to look East and upon the East to shine forth its light. How is this to be done?

I know I tried it with on the "Defenders of the Catholic Faith" and wound up losing my poster privileges in the one area where things of this nature were being discussed. Those who controlled that area had made up their minds that the reason so many American masses are so banal lies at the feet of the Eastern Catholics for "forcing" the Church to abandon Latin.

I guess bbs have limited value.

What are some suggestions for helping the West see that throwing out reverence really gains nothing?

Dan Lauffer

Good morning Stojgniev. Could you please provide the source for Kevin Hannan`s article?

Mr. Hannan obviously has an axe to grind and he aims it at extraordinary ministers of holy communion. However, that is just one part of his ecclesial ideology. His comment "The fallout of the Second Vatican Council still plagues America" says it all. Blame everything on the Council. The late Archbishop Lefebvre made similar statements, as do the various "sede vacantist" groups, and many so-called "traditionalist" groups.

Mr. Hannan`s comment - his opinion: "I am convinced that it is the fault of American Catholic eucharistic ministers that Americans today show less respect for the Holy Eucharist" is baseless rhetoric. He offers opinions without facts to back them up.

It is a fact that extraordinary ministers of holy communion do exist in Europe including Italy.

Has the post-conciliar period been easy? Absolutely not. Was there adequate preparation in the U.S. for the changes in the liturgy of the Roman Church? Absolutely not. However, this is history, albeit recent history.

Many of those who criticize the changes which flowed from the council are extremely bitter and their comments are far from Christian, far from charitable. And many of those "on the other side" who reply to them are likewise far from charitable and far from Christian in their replies. Sarcasm and ad hominem attacks appear to be the modus operandi of many who take part in these battles and they are often confirmed in their attitudes by members of religiious communities who use the same tools of sarcasm and ad hominem remarks in their public statements. This is shameful.

Do some American Catholics have less of a reverence for the Eucharist than they had in the past? Yes ... and I`ll bet that some have a greater reverence. It is very fitting that we are in the midst of the Year of the Eucharist and this is a great opportunity for catechesis to increase devotion and reverence. There is an excellent site devoted to the Year of the Eucharist:
http://yearoftheeucharist.com

BTW, lack of reverence is not an "American" problem nor is it specifically a Catholic problem. In July 1982, I stopped by St. Paul`s Cathedral in London (Anglican) during their Sunday liturgy. I was shocked by what I witnessed. There were tourists walking around with slurpies and fast food and one fellow was shirtless. The vergers approached him only at the point where he was halfway up the main aisle of the cathedral. Having been already embarrased elsehwere by pushy American tourists, I was relieved when I learned that this fellow was not an American.

Peace!

Charles

Dear Charles,

The article has not been published yet. Anyone is welcome to distribute it in other forums, if they like.

I don't think any axes are being ground. There's a simple observation: Catholic parishes in America need to show more reverence for the Eucharist (a theme that resonates in the Year of the Eucharist ). And then there's a recommendation: The hustle & bustle at the altar by eucharistic ministers is distracting.

It's a simple recommendation. Why don't American Catholics try it during the Year of the Eucharist?

I think it is true that so many American eucharistic ministers seem to get so caught up in their "ministry" that they don't see the fuss they create for the faithful in the pews.

Generally, I find many of the lay folk distracting, e.g. poorly dressed readers, unprepared readers, readers who can't pronounce Gethsemene or Arimethea (those are my own experiences).

I don't think the article is blaming the Council. Look at what they did with the Council in Poland (though VERY, VERY cautiously & slowly). They embraced the changes & today the Roman Catholic Church in Poland is one of the most faith-filled and vibrant churches in the world (& there hasn't been significant resistance in Poland, unlike in America & elsewhere). So there you have a conservative church that embraced the decrees of the Council & still has a rich spirituality. So it is possible, I believe.

Yes, you are correct, there are many differences among nations in the degree of respect for the liturgy. Even in Austria I find the nonchalance of worshippers disturbing.

There's something of a continuum of spirituality today in Europe. As you go from west to east, the further east you go, the poorer the population gets, the more outdated the technology gets, & the deeper the expressions of religious faith and piety!

Stojgniev

Dear Stojgniev,

Thank you for your reply. I asked for a source for the article and you advised that it has not been published yet. Are you Kevin Hannan?

As for axes being ground, I beg to differ with you. The author of the article is very specific: "I am convinced that it is the fault of American Catholic eucharistic ministers that Americans today show less respect for the Holy Eucharist" and "The fallout of the Second Vatican Council still plagues America." The author of the article obviously does not approve of Vatican II - "fallout" is a specific term which connotes something toxic that contaminates. It is a loaded term. The author specifically blames "American Catholic eucharistic ministers" for the supposed lessening of respect for the Eucharist.

As for the statement that "(t)he hustle & bustle at the altar by eucharistic ministers is distracting", just what do you mean by distracting? And what do you mean by the statement that "...eucharistic ministers seem to get so caught up in their "ministry" that they don't see the fuss they create for the faithful in the pews"? What fuss do they create?

By putting the word ministry in quotes, you seem to indicate that you do not believe that it is a ministry. However, no less an authority than the Holy See calls them "extraordinary ministers of holy communion" in official documents. By definitiion, a minister performs or participates in a ministry. It appears to me that you have a real problem with extraordinary ministers of holy communion and by your seeming questioning of their performing a ministry, I believe that you trivialize the important work they do in bringing our Lord to their fellow parishioners.

You then go on to criticize readers. Have I ever seen a poorly dressed reader? Yes. On a regular basis? No. Have I ever heard a reader mispronounce a word? Yes. Do I encounter this on a regular basis? No.

If you believe that a reader or an extraordinary minister of holy communion is dressed inappropriately, speak to the pastor of the parish. I have done so and the pastor was (a) interested in my observation and (b) said that had he seen the person`s mode of dress prior to the beginning of Mass, he would have forbidden that person to participate in the particular ministry at that time.

Readers have an obligation to prepare themselves by reviewing the readings before the liturgy and, ideally, they should read them and reflect upon them before the liturgy. If I were to observe a reader regularly mispronouncing words, I would have no hesitation in speaking to the pastor.

Readers are not the only ones who make such errors. Over my 50 plus years, I have heard quite a few priests mispronounce words. People make mistakes, even in the proclamation of the scriptures.

If I am incorrect, I apologize, but it appears to me that you dislike the idea of laypersons proclaiming the scriptures and distributing the Holy Eucharist. You are entitled to your opinions, but I would note that these people do not minister in a vacuum. Their ministries are approved by national episcopal conferences and by the Holy See.

I agree with your observation concerning the Church in Europe, western versus eastern countries. However, the consumerism of the west has already effected the former Warsaw pact countries and there are steady declines in the numbers of people attending church. During one (and probably more) of his visits to Poland, the Pope spoke out forcefully about the dangers posed by the inroads of western consumerism into eastern Europe.

Peace,

Charles

Charles,

Even deacons mispronounce words. I recall on one occasion when I proclaimed the Gospel lesson I mispronounced "the feast of Booths" as the "feast of booze"...

Father Deacon John,

Yes, at times they do and so do bishops, but I decided to aim in the middle since some of my best friends are deacons and bishops.

Peace,

Charles

Charles,

you give some very practical and sound advice as it relates to Mr Hannan's complaints. On rare occasions I've had the opportunity to worship in the pews with my RC brothers and sisters. From a cleric's perspective the EMOC's do provide a valid ministry, as you stated, bringing the Holy Mysteries to their brothers and sisters. Are the EMOC's the ideal? No, but theirs is a practical ministry as well. Given the alternative, i.e., one priest (and on occasion a deacon) who distributes the Eucharist, which would make Communion the longest rite of the Mass, I would much rather opt for EMOC's. The alternative would certainly last longer than the singing of five different hymns.

On Sundays when I assist Father Rector with the distribution of the Holy Mysteries, the reception of Communion lasts about 10 minutes for about +/-200 communicants.

I can appreciate the need for "a beautiful, timeless meditative moment", but consideration must also be given to the priest-celebrants who binate (and even trinate?). Can anyone expect the priest to actually distribute the Holy Mysteries by himself to 800+ communicants at each Mass?

Dear Charles,

By whom (the priest only?) was Holy Communion distributed BEFORE the changes of Vatican II? Wasn't it always taken at the altar rail on bent knee?

I am not making any judgement, but am just really and truly curious as I was just a baby around those years and I am a cradle Orthodox.

I thank you kindly for your response.

In Christ,
Alice

Dear Stojgniev,

While you may be right about the quick distribution of the Eucharist in RC churches here in the States, please keep in mind that many Orthodox priests have to REMIND their congregants that the time of Eucharist is one of utmost reverence and quiet.

Infact, one priest I know, who is Orthocentric and not known to give compliment to the Roman Catholic Church too frequently, admitted that the Roman Catholics give much more QUIET reverence to the time of the Eucharist than we do! He said that he wanted to hear a pin drop at this time of his parish's Orthodox Liturgy, just as one could hear it drop in Roman Catholic Masses. So, perhaps ALL churches have something that could be done better, and thanks to good priests, they do get better!

I was bowled over by the depth of feeling and the traditional words of belief and words of challenge to disenting unorthodox Catholic priests and Bishops, of the visiting young priest celebrant on today's EWTN Mass. He and other young priests give hope of a new springtime in the American RC Church, and I do believe that it will come.

The RC Church has been experiencing, in the words of the historian Warren Carroll, a period of heresy,which history will ultimately call the modernist heresy. This will come to pass as all periods of heresy have come to pass in both the East and the West. (In my own Church we recently celebrated the triumph of the Icons against the Iconoclast heretics...this church dividing issue, this period of angry heresy, took one hundred years to resolve!)

Alice, before Vatican II, only the ordained could distribute communion, and on the tongue - no touching with hands by laity. I can see the use of the ministers when large numbers of communicants are there, but the problem is the use of the ministers when they are not warranted. For example, when the priest sits down and lets the ministers distribute, or when the line is not excessively long. Those ministers are supposed to be extraordinary, not ordinary. My understanding is that when sufficient numbers of priests and/or deacons are on the premises, it's their job to distribute communion.

Thanks ByzanTN Charles!

Why then is there a need for extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist today, if they weren't needed before Vatican II?

Is it so that the Mass can go quicker, and/or is it so that the laity can be more involved, which if I am not mistaken, was a precedent of the spirit of Vatican II?

Have the number of those who are communing (which at the Masses I have gone to, seem to be just about or almost everyone) gotten larger after Vatican II? If so, why?

Thanks for your answers!

In Christ,
Alice, who is quite a curious pest today!

Dear Alice,

Yes, Holy Communion was distributed to kneeling communicants at the altar rail before Vatican II. However, in those days most parishes in large cities and their suburbs (I lived on Long Island at that time) had at least three and usually four priests assigned and at least two other priests assisted the celebrant in the distribution of the Eucharist at Sunday Masses and the Eucharist was distributed only under one species. I recall that on the more popular feasts, we had 5 or 6 priests distributing the Eucharist at each Mass.

Having been an altar server in the pre-Vatican II period and also during the Council, I can affirm that the distribution of the Eucharist was done quickly and efficiently but not always reverently. The formula which the priest recited for each communicant, in Latin, was long and if he had recited it clearly and not rushed it - and rushing it was the norm - the distribution of the Eucharist would have taken longer than the rest of the Mass.

These days, with the clergy shortage - and it is real - in the U.S. we have many priests from developing countries such as India, Nigeria, and Tanzania - parishes which have two priests are to be highly valued. My parish has two priests and a deacon, but the priests are members of a religious community and they are part of the rotation in that community for supplying celebrants for other neighboring parishes. We have three Masses on weekends. Our pastor celebrates one, our associate celebrates another, and a priest from the community celebrates the third. All except our pastor, who is not well, also celebrate at other parishes each weekend. Our deacon is available for one of the weekend liturgies. In our diocese, the practice is to distribute the Eucharist under both species. EMOC`s are a necessity in our parish and also take care of bringing the Eucharist to our sick and homebound parishioners. We follow the GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal) and the directives of the bishops` conference to the letter. When sufficient clergy are available, EMOC`s are not used.

For the record, I have no problem with the Pian Mass, but while many people state that there was much reverence, I can remember 30 minute Sunday Masses - and not just in one parish. While my youth was spent in the greater NYC area, my father`s family was from Kentucky and I had the occasion to travel throughout the South and also throughout New England and visited quite a few parishes. I can recall a 15 minute Mass in Vermont, a 20 minute Mass in Georgia, and a 75 minute Mass on Long Island. I also remember people praying the rosary during Mass, doing the Stations of the Cross during Mass, and reading spiritual books. Reverence then and now largely depends on the celebrant and how he approaches the celebration of the liturgy. If he sees it as a job or an obligation, don`t expect a lot of reverence.

Sorry to go on at length. Once I hit 50 (about 8 and 1/2 years ago), I became more and more expansive in my writing.

Peace,

Charles