I was in a positively ebullient mood as I went off to Christmas Mass at St. Mary's with my family in tow. The senses were amped up for the big production: stained glass, plainsong, frankincense and myrrh -- the works. A procession of children marched in neat rows up to the altar to light candles and stage the manger and with the precision of a marching band exited stage left ... who knows maybe to go on some exotic pilgrimage. It's happened before. (Kids are always part of the pageantry partially because we traditionally have so many of them.) The statues of saints, false idols to the uninitiated, looked down upon the faithful like acrobats from Cirque du Soleil about to spring onto a trapeze with a spinning ninja move. The company was in rare form and the sensual passion play, real theatre, had brought the house of God to its feet.
And that's when "it" happened. You know that moment in West Side Story where the Sharks and Jets are going to rumble and everyone sings "Tonight" in orchestrated counterpoint. That's the rhythm of the Mass. You know the longest running show on Broadway -- everyone knows the words and sings along. But someone blew their lines. I believe it all started with the priest, or was it the Vatican, I'm not really sure. All I know is that is that in an instant the synchronized syllables became a mush of puffery as the congregation struggled to make sense of the whole mess. You see, through decades of interminable Saturday's at Catechism we were all indoctrinated in the sacred language and rituals of the church. Altar boys like me were even fluent in the irregular Latin and dazzling medieval choreography. At least the priest faces the assembly now. It's not like they changed the lyrics to "Edelweiss" at a midnight showing of the Sound of Music. Prayers aren't just words. They are the way we talk with God. That's the brand promise of the universal church -- like McDonald's, it's the same everywhere. You can attend Mass in an overcrowded parking lot in China where services are in Cantonese and not miss a beat -- I've done it. All together now -- stand, kneel, cross yourself and repeat after me.
So Mass is now new and improved but not necessarily the good kind. It's more like Michael Bolton's foppish cover of "Georgia on My Mind" (Senator, you're no Ray Charles) or maybe the introduction of New Coke (Young man, you will drink it and like it). Yes, that's it -- the New Mass as New Coke.
Catholics aren't good at rebellion. We are after all a people under authority and our faith informs every aspect of our life. I know what it's like to be a non-conformist. I grew in Dutch Reformed western Michigan with a propitious Netherlander name. When teachers and friends alike learned that I belonged to the old church they assumed that something had gone terribly wrong. (Remind me to tell you about the time my tall blonde Hollander girlfriend broke up with me because I belonged to a "cult.") Just to keep the record straight -- yes, we are Christians -- and obnoxiously like to remind all detractors that Peter's church is the only one actually mentioned in the Bible.
In a recent article by former Maryland lieutenant governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend in The Atlantic entitled "Out of Step with the Flock," she remarks, "As a woman and a lifelong Catholic, I sometimes marvel that faith can flourish despite the hierarchy's not infrequent disdain for the faithful." In this case she is specially addressing the treatment of women in regards to issues such as birth control but the sentiment can be aptly applied here more generally as well. Not surprisingly, there have been reprisals on Catholic.net and the like with same message -- God doesn't answer to popular opinion. Sadly, these rebuttals miss the point entirely. The Church doesn't belong to the Vatican, Cardinals or Bishops. It belongs to the faithful who are capable of interpreting the tenants of their faith for themselves. In short, we didn't ask for this change to the Mass and from all indicators didn't want it.
Pope John XXIII believed in his people. He convened the Second Vatican Council with representatives from all over the world and all points of view to give the church back to its laity. Funny thing is that when you trust your people they have a tendency to return the favor. I wonder if the current administration got that memo. Apparently we were not invited to the secret meeting of the Latin Club in the Domus Sanctae Marthæ. "Consubstantial" -- really? That's the best you could do?
So now a simple neighborly blessing "and also with you" becomes a mystical incantation -- "and with your spirit." A humble request -- "Father, accept this offering" becomes a job for Noah Webster -- "Therefore, Lord, we pray: graciously accept this oblation of our service" -- oblation. Even Shakespeare didn't say oblation. Apparently the high flown language and symbolism of the Mass wasn't complicated enough.
Supposedly this was all done in the name of authenticity. If that were true, why not embrace the Jesus Seminar, a group of over one hundred of the world's foremost biblical scholars who have identified inaccuracies in the liturgy? Why not go back to the original language of the Bible -- Hebrew and Greek? Why not reconcile with the Eastern Orthodox Church which also has a legitimate claim as the original denomination? Some Jesuit scholars are now questioning if this new translation is indeed more accurate, but no matter, they are usually ignored and frequently excommunicated for their clever use of facts and their crazy powers of reason. Language is alive and updated with the times to be relevant to our lives -- like our beliefs. But these innovations move forward to keep up with us and our emerging needs -- not backwards to imagined halcyon days.
My church has some significant challenges these days. I guess if your religion is 2,000 years old and one out of every five people on the planet belongs to it there are bound to be some "management" issues. I propose that we "improve" the way we lead first and work on the letter of the law later.
I never liked New Coke, so I didn't buy it. I just kept drinking the regular brew. Similarly, I suggest that we say our prayers in our own voice. If that's the old way, great, or if you are feeling particularly creative maybe you make up your own words - just like the big shots do. Or we can just leave the translating to God.
Jeff DeGraff is a Professor of Management and Organizations at the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan. To learn more about his book Innovation You and PBS Special by the same name, visit his web site at www.innovationyou.com or follow his blog on innovation at Jeffdegraff.com.
Follow Jeff DeGraff on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JeffDeGraff
The funny thing is that the new Roman Liturgy seems like this weird, clunky, and awkward amalgamation of the Rite I and Rite II from the Episcopal Church. The language is the Rite I, but the pronouns are contemporary (and with thy spirit vs and with your spirit). It looses all the poetry that the traditional language has, and all the sense of neighborliness that the contemporary liturgy had. I do not like it.
The sad part is the progressive Catholics don't have a problem with there being both progressive AND traditional liturgies in existence at the same time. Traditionalists tend to want their liturgy and no other.
Still, it's curious -- if you think that "simple neighborly blessings" are to preferred to the "mystical" language that is actually there in the Latin (because we remember that the English is only a translation of something else, right? ), then you could not have been happy all these years with such "mystical" greetings as "The Lord be with you." Would you be happier if we had changed that to the "simple neighborly blessing" of "Have a nice day!"? It certainly is no worse as a translation than what we have had to put up with since the 1970s, when the old translation was introduced -- and like the old translation, it has that really cool 1970s vibe...
This desire to use literal translation of the Latin is idolizing and worshiping one language above all others.
Therefore, it isn't a question of a "literal" translation of the Latin (which would be awkward), butof a translation of the Latin original that is merely *competent*, which the old one was not. While you may like to pretend that English-speakers (and younger English-speakers at that) are the only people who count, the Church as a whole understands that American English-speakers are not the hub of the universe. The Church has been praying the same prayers in every country except those that have the shoddy, shabby, cheapjack English translation foisted on English speakers (and only English speakers) in the 1970s, and it is time the English-speakers caught up.
Unless you think Brady Bunch reruns and harvest-gold kitchens should be the model of taste and devotion for all humanity today, then you need to let go of the polyester leisure-suit version of liturgy known as the 1973 ICEL translation and start saying the same prayers that the rest of the Church has been saying in other languages for decades.
At the same time, the traditionalist Catholic view of ecumenism seems to be, convert to their version of Catholicism. Any change by the Catholic church is heretical.
What a pitiful statement for a "Catholic" to make. As noted by others, the word is "tenets" but that merely betrays poor editing whereas the entire article betrays poor thinking and even poorer Catholic education. Under orthodox ecclesiology the Church belongs neither to the hierarchy nor to the faithful, but to Christ. Mr. DeGraff epitomizes the poor state of catechesis in the Church today and demonstrates just why the liturgical abuses of the last fifty years need to be rectified.
As a side note, I certainly hope that the photograph accompanying the article is not a Catholic church. The building is ugly and inauthentic in the extreme. One can picture some Protestant television "ministry" in such a building but never the holy liturgy.
Well, your hopes have been dashed, unfortunately. It is a Catholic church.
In particular, it's the Church of Christ, Hope of the World, and it belongs to a Catholic parish in Vienna, Austria.
Personally, I think it's a beautiful example of modern architecture, especially when the dark color of the outside is compared to the light colors of the inside. Its simplicity is part of its beauty, with the light streaming in through the round windows, onto the light walls inside.
http://www.specifier.com.au/projects/religious/15974/Church-of-Christ-Hope-of-the-World.html
Not that I don't have appreciation for more traditional church architectures. I can and do admire and like both, and it's great that we live in a world where both are allowed to exist.
P.S. "TENETS of their faith," not "tenants." I guess you could say some people are just renters....
Though as far as church politics goes I'm on the "left," so to speak, I really like the new translations. They are more beautiful than the old ones, which tended to be bland and trite. They are more accurate -- they bring back prhasing and concepts that have been effectively banned from English language liturgy since the 1970s. It's true, "consubstantial" is going to be incomprehensible to 99% of the people in the pews; I probably wouldn't have used that word. But there's no English equivalent to the Latin, and "one in being" was vague, and no one knew what it meant either. So, there's no simple solution to that problem. But mostly the new version of the mass is a great improvement.
And his reference to the "Jesus Seminar" as if it was authoritative on any subject is beyond asinine. This man is not a real Catholic. At best he's a secularist stooge who takes his family to Mass twice a year (Christmas and Easter) and a way of keeping contact with his "faith community."
And as to saying whether someone is a real Catholic - judge not lest ye be judged. God decides, not you.
Real Catholics attend Mass at least once a week unless excused for compelling reason. It is obvious that Mr. DeGraff had not attended Mass since before Advent. Real Catholics also understand the maxim lex orandi lex credendi - whereas Mr. DeGraff recommends that the faithful pray not as the Church teaches but as he himself prefers. That will serve as an example of inauthentic Catholicism until another comes along.
Matthew 7:1 is one of the most abused verses in the Bible. It does not prohibit Christians from judging others, but merely from judging unfairly. In response I offer John 7:24 - "Judge not according to the appearance: but judge just judgment." A Catholic that refuses to pray as the Church prays is not a "real" Catholic.
Keep in mind, I haven't changed anything. It's the church that changed. They moved away from us.
Faithful Catholics will always stick with the Church, outside of which there is no salvation. Deliberately missing Mass is a grave sin. If you have missed Mass deliberately, I advise that you go to confession immediately.
I dunno, Jeff, if we can master the term "transubstantiation", I think we can deal with "consubstantial". The changes, for the laity, aren't really that large, and my parish has thoughtfully left "cheat sheets" in the pews for the forgetful.
I stopped going to mass when the old missal's last mass was said in November. I will start going to mass again, when the old missal is restored, and I know that God is on my side, and that He does not view it as being a sin. In fact, He view what the church has done as the church sinning against me.