www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Parish Life & Evangelization Evangelism strategy for dislocated RC's

Dan,

Perhaps some type of short instruction class would help maybe before Liturgy. That way you could weed out the folks don't want to really pursue Eastern spirituality. Then further down the line when they are members ask why or why not change Rites?

Remie,

I think the problem is the RC is becoming too Protestant. Hispanics are a passionate people they are not drawn to a minimalistic Liturgy and non -descript Churches. I think they would embrace the Byzantine Liturgy and the interior of our Churches. English vs Spanish ,it depends their level of English and how long they have been in the US. We had a family whose wife/mother was from South America but they have since moved to Texas.

Nicky's Baba

Dear Nicky's Baba,

You hit the nail right on the head!

The Novus Ordo Mass is really a liturgical expression, not so much of Protestantism, although it can be, but of the minimalist spirituality of the developed world.

The Cardinal, I forget his name, who was largely behind it was known for his "pro-modern" (as opposed to modernist, and I don't want to get into that argument) views.

He felt the Roman Liturgy should be adapted to the "on the go," "with it" and "I don't have too much time" attitudes of busy, upwardly mobile people who believe they are the enlightened ones, the pinnacle of modern achievement and education.

That is why the Psalter readings were expanded to cover a month, rather than the traditional week. Other shortenings were implemented too.

I think it was our Great Teacher, Mar Stuart Koehl, from whose fingers, busily clicking on the computer keys, first fell the words to the effect that the Church shoud maintain the liturgical traditions without shortening them, while allowing busy people to participate in them in accordance with their opportunity and time.

Your point, Babtsiu, about the passionate Latin Americans betrays a keen insight into culture and psychology. (Everything important that I know about these things I learned from my Babtsia).

Passionate people need to have all their senses excited in their worship. Pentecostals know how to throw a liturgical party, to be sure - and so they get converts.

Incense, colourful vestments, scapulars, rosaries, processions, weeping statues, festas, sugar skulls for All Souls' Day - we need to be so thrilled and overjoyed in our worship of God that we want to dance like David before the Ark of the Covenant!

That's how I feel during my parish's liturgy!

That's how the "real people" the Latinos, Africans, Asians, Slavs etc. should feel and need to feel in order to validate the strong religious and communitarian urges they feel.

Take that away, and the Pentecosts et al. are smiling - all the way to the bank!

Alex

You hit it right on the ethno-cultural head!! The enthusiasm for liturgical worship needs to be enhanced.

But, as for dancing naked before the Ark, as did David, I think I'll take a pass. Were I to engage in such activities, it would terrify children and small animals!

Blessings!

Dear Dr. John,

It is always good to read your musings here.

You are a thriller in your own Rite . . .

Alex

Alex,

"He felt the Roman Liturgy should be adapted to the "on the go," "with it" and "I don't have too much time" attitudes of busy, upwardly mobile people who believe they are the enlightened ones, the pinnacle of modern achievement and education."

Last night in one of my Comparative Religion classes I lamented (actually, I often lament this) the fact that for the last 3 or 4 decades we have had to tolerate the cheap and the taundry in ritual and theological expression by the intellectual elite (so they call themselves) both in and outside the Church. "I keep seeing signs of a revival", I continued, "of the search for truth. At least, I hope I do." A 27 year old student offered that your hope is on target. "I'm an example of it. There is a growing return to truth and spirituality with some content." I said, "Hallelujah!".

This is the "Springtime for the Church". Let's not blow it by hiding in our enclaves.

Dan Lauffer

Dear Professor Dan,

Well, that's exactly it - we are suffering the spiritual hegemony - and consequences - of that intellectual elite.

"La intellectual types" often don't like too much of all that "external morbidity" in ritual.

And let everyone in church keep their distance from one another, shall we . . .?

An underground writer during the USSR regime said that the Church was so popular, despite repression, precisely because it was the last place in that society where people could experience the beauty of ritual and ceremony, inhale the smell of holiness, and experience each other on a more intimate level, through conversation, ritual and touch in confession, anointing etc.

The Church's ritual made people feel human again.

I personally believe that ritual is not a sign of primitive underdevelopment of any sort, but the way we always relate to our environment.

Ritual is our symbolic language by which we communicate, learn, affirm, express and legitimate.

I think that is one reason why converts seek out the Eastern Churches.

The strength of liturgy lies precisely in its ritual aspects, I believe.

Alex

I do have a question for the older crowd. I have been to an indult Catholic Tridentine Mass on a couple of occassions, and Catholic Roman Mass a number of times as well. The Tridentine Mass lasted about 45 minutes, while the Roman Mass nowdays seems to be a good hour and the so-called 'progressive' parishes even longer.

Are my experinces abnormal? Others seems to think since the reform, the RC Mass is briefer.

Axios

Dear Axios,

What older crowd?

I guess I qualify, whatever your definition. For slightly less than half of my life, the Tridentine Liturgy was the form of worship that our Church used.

Your observation is pretty well on target. The Low Mass, celebrated by one priest who spoke quietly for the most part took even less time during the weekday masses (at times, 15 - 20 minutes). The people, in general prayed silently with a few "Et cum spiritu tuo's" said aloud when the priest turned and said, "Dominus Vobiscum." Many persons prayed the Rosary or nearer the time of the Council, tried to follow in the hand missal, if they had one.

High Mass, at which Gregorian Chant was sung by a choir and at which the priest also sang parts of the mass, took about 45 minutes or less depending on the celebrant. For the most part the congregation behaved as above.

A Solemn High Mass, a High Mass with a chief celebrant assisted by a deacon and sub-deacon (usually other priests filling the roles) with many communicants (common at Easter and Christmas) could take more time.

In my experience, both in seminary and in parish life, the current Liturgy takes longer. I've read that it is less symbol filled or less ritualized. Frankly, I must disagree. The symbolism is there and the ritual is quite extensive and meaningful.

Again, in my experience, I find that rather than separating participants as has been suggested, the current liturgy takes the participants out of their separateness and builds them into a body which worships together. This takes more time.

But I digress!

At least that is what I remember. (When I remember, that is!)

Did someone mention the older crowd?

Steve

The local (by this I mean 45 mins. away) Tridentine Catholic parish's High Mass is an hour and fifteen minutes, and the Low Masses are not significantly shorter.

I have a friend who used to be an altar boy at a Novus Ordo church (he still regularly attends, just not as an altar boy) and he (and others who attend the church) said that the Easter Mass he assisted at was 4 hours long. He said it was so long whenever he had spare time he would scratch at his enormous candle, and by the end of the service he had worn it away to the wick. He says that generally the Easter and Chrismas masses are 3 (and in that case 4) hours long, and the regular Sunday masses are about an hour thirty.

ChristTeen287

My experience mirrors Steve's. The weekday morning Mass was about 20 minutes, unless it was a Requiem Mass which took a bit longer. (Dies Irae, etc.) Sunday Mass took longer because there was usually a sermon and certain 'commons' were sung in chant with organ support. (If we went to St. Joseph's, it was much longer since there the sermon was given in English and then repeated in French.)

High Mass and Solemn High Mass often went about an hour. Solemn High was a rarity since you needed three clergy, and that wasn't easy to do. We had a 7, an 8:30 (kids Mass), a 10:00 in the Church and a 10:00 in the school hall, and an 11:00 in the Church. Rosary and Benediction at 5.

As Steve notes, most folks either prayed the rosary or novena booklet prayers with an intermittent attention to what was going on in the sanctuary so you'd be kneeling, sitting or standing at the appropriate time. Stand for the Gospel, sit for the sermon and kneel most of the rest of the time. The little bell set was most useful to signal folks to kneel at the Sanctus, pay attention at the consecration (ring at the "hanc igitur"), and to get ready for communion. It was a clear ritual - everything was firm and set and you could 'serve' in any RC church in the world and get it right.

The new liturgy is definitely participatory. Since it is in the vernacular, you can actually follow what is going on. Unfortunately, there is no time for private prayer during the new Mass form (except for a few seconds after communion). I think people miss that. But then again, we Byzantines don't have any "quiet time" during liturgy either. We're always singing something. Or being nagged by the deacon to 'be attentive'. (What's he think we're doing, playing cards or something?)

I don't get to an RC Mass very often, less than once a year, but most experiences I've had have been pretty good. The music seems to be better, although one still hears the old "Jesus in the OK Corral" junk on occasion. But, that was in the era of folk music - Peter, Paul and Mary, etc. - and that era is, thankfully, past.

Anybody remember the old fiddle-backs?

Blessings!

"The Novus Ordo Mass is really a liturgical expression, not so much of Protestantism, although it can be, but of the minimalist spirituality of the developed world."

I totally agree. The reforms fully coincided with the spirit of the 60's in the developped world. As one of architects of the reforms said "the modern man is the perfect man", a liturgy according the modern-secular man.
The 60's were the era of a radical secularism, so if there's a secular State, a secular education and s secular Church, why not a secular mass? (a liturgy that would perfectly fit with the political systems of the cold war, both marxism, and secular-liebal capitalism)
It was thought the the future world would be the world of the "space ships", the Era of the Man-God, but it's clear that the society didn't go that way.
A secular mass doesn't fit anymore with the society of the XXI century. People are tired of false solutions, false religions, bad political systems. People desperately look for a true spirituality which is not found in the "secular world", people want the Churches to become again sacred places, a refuge for their spirituality.

Remie,

I certainly agree with you. So, following the premise of this thread...where people can learn how to best express their spirituality is the place they ought to be. It seems we can be a place for some wandering displaced Traditional Western Catholicss, but not the only place.

Dan Lauffer

Dear Remie,

I read your posting with interest. It has raised many questions.

What liturgy are you referring to when you talk about a liturgy according to the modern-secular man?

What is a secular Church?

What is a secular mass?

Here's why I ask:

It appears that you are referring to the Roman Church as a secular church and her Sacred Actions as secular actions. You seem to imply that it was the intent of the Council to create such a Secular Church. Your also seem to suggest that the subsequent reform of the Liturgy of the Latin Church had the creation of a secular mass as a goal. Perhaps I have misunderstood?

If I have not misunderstood what you are suggesting or saying flat out, I respectfully disagree.

I lived through the the events of the Council that initiated the reforms from an unusual vantage point, the seminary. Counciliar Fathers and Periti spoke to us regularly. Some of the periti were our professors. I experienced the implementation of the reforms in several dioceses and parishes.

I can attest that I never heard any Church spokesperson at any level suggest that the reason for the reforms were secular in nature. I never read anything written by a Pope nor have I seen a Counciliar Document that said anything like that.

Of course, my experience is not the arbiter of reality. You have made statements that seem to suggest that the facts are other than those that I experienced. Are they your opinion based on your perception? Do you claim that they are fact?

If your statements are more than opinion, would
you cite official sources that support the allegations in your posting? I'd appreciate the lead.

This is the post that I am referring to:

"I totally agree. The reforms fully coincided with the spirit of the 60's in the developped world. As one of architects of the reforms said "the modern man is the perfect man", a liturgy according the modern-secular man.
The 60's were the era of a radical secularism, so if there's a secular State, a secular education and s secular Church, why not a secular mass? (a liturgy that would perfectly fit with the political systems of the cold war, both marxism, and secular-liebal capitalism)
It was thought the the future world would be the world of the "space ships", the Era of the Man-God, but it's clear that the society didn't go that way.
A secular mass doesn't fit anymore with the society of the XXI century. People are tired of false solutions, false religions, bad political systems. People desperately look for a true spirituality which is not found in the "secular world", people want the Churches to become again sacred places, a refuge for their spirituality. "

Remie, I certainly agree that people now are tired of false solutions, false faiths in material goods and the like, and failed political systems. This could be said of all of the years that I have been alive. They are and have been looking for the spirituality of which you speak.

From what I know and understand, the Council teachings and the reforms were the Roman Church's attempt to meet that need. They were trying to help men and women in the secular world to come into contact with the Sacred that is found in all of the Churches and their Sacred Actions.

There was no intent to secularize the Sacred. Rather the intent was to help Christians see the Sacred in the Church. This in turn would help Christians meet the Sacred present in the secular and help Him sanctify it.

I think that it's what we're still trying to do.

Thanks for hearing me out.

Steve

Dear Inawe:

I didn't refer to the Roman Church when I mentioned the secular Church. I meant that the idea of the secular world was popular in the 60's among intellectuals and some people who were active in the Church at that time, a secular church was a political invention of the 60's (but just an idea, not a real thing).

http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Inside/05-96/abbot.html

I think that Vatican II had a lot of possitive things (specially those related to Church Unity, Christian Unity, Ecumenism). I am sure that the Fathers of Vatican II had the best intentions and that the new liturgy in the West has lots of positive things too (it's effort to return to the ancient spirit of the christian liturgy, the good sense of christian community) and there are a lot of things that coincide with the East (participation of the laity, for example). However, there are problems (an important departure from the tradition of the Church, for example).

Dear Remie,

Thanks for the clarification. I really appreciate it.

Of course, not all people share your opinion that the Liturgical reforms led to a break with tradition.

But that discussion has taken place here in other threads.

Again thanks.

Steve