A wonderful piece and, for me, a timely one: my girlfriend and I recently made the decision to plunge into the Tiber and today confronted the difficult task of informing our parish (Anglican) vicar. He was very understanding. Your piece here has only strengthened me in my resolve.
As a 34 year old cradle Catholic who has only ever lived in the Novus Ordo but is a traditionalist at heart, I am also trying to plant what seeds I can in my parish to improve the liturgical situation, even though my parish is already one of the best in my diocese at offering a beautiful NO mass.
Unfortunately, it seems like there’s just so much inertia. It feels like Catholics just don’t care to do anything *more,* forever content to keep capitulating to this comfortable, half-assed attempt at liturgical propriety.
I often feel like I’m going to be in my 60s myself by the time these Boomer holdouts finally go to their eternal rewards.
I sympathise, the parish where I devoted years of effort and input disappeared into the traddie black hole, and I’m into my 60s already. Don’t be enticed by traditionalism; it’s not traditional at all, but a house built on sand. The current edition of the Roman missal isn’t perfect, but neither were its predecessors, and some of the current problems were present in the ages of the so called TLM. All we can do is work patiently and faithfully to improve the parish and liturgy where we are.
Can you elaborate? I'm fairly aware of the ditch on the side of the road of clutching too hard at "tradition" without even realising how much of what seems traditional and old now was actually an aberration itself at one point.
I'm just wondering if you meant you were trying to make your parish less 70s progressive, but it got away and fell into that ditch or whether you meant you were trying to make it go the other way (back to the 70s and 80s).
E: apologies for not having replied earlier; trying to limit my time on this platform!
First, I think we should look at liturgy in a much longer perspective. Attempts to restore the Roman rite to a more authentic form began with the council of Trent, which decreed (for example) that those present at Mass should usually receive sacramental communion. There was also an attempt to reduce the complexity of church music, so that the words were intelligible. The terminology of “participation” was not used, but the effect was the same; the words of the Mass and the reception of communion should be open to all present at every Mass. In practice the liturgical reforms of Trent failed to produce the results the council had called for. subsequently there was the liturgical movement which sought to examine the history of the prayers of the liturgy and to draw out and explain its meaning. This remained predominantly a pursuit of monks and enthusiasts until St Pius X imposed the movement’s ideals of frequent communion and use of plainchant on the (reluctant) mainstream church.
These changes are now taken for granted, but the repercussions they caused is enormous.
Let’s start with plainchant. The tradition of the Roman rite is that someone actively engaged in singing should be standing (not kneeling or sitting). Try going to an “old rite” Mass and standing while singing the Kyrie, Sanctus & Agnus Dei; it will immediately remind you of a NO (if we must use that term) Mass, and that is because the current edition of the missal has grown organically from the previous editions, emended according to the decrees of Pius X, who in turn was (at last) implementing the reform Trent had demanded. The whole atmosphere and relationship between the celebrant and others present is changed.
Frequent communion was again a much larger change than is apparent now. Until Pius X most Catholics received communion only a few times a year, and then usually outside Mass. So communion was a separate rite with its own series of prayers and rituals. Making frequent reception at Mass required changes, so that the people participated in the prayers, scripture readings etc, and then received with the priest. This necessarily required changes in the structure of the Mass.
Pope Benedict XVI, in his “Address to the parish priests of Rome”, described how, in his youth, the priest celebrated Mass using the words and actions prescribed in the Missal, while the people used their own books, which only conveyed part of that meaning. Benedict said that the aim of the liturgical restoration was that the people should also be participating the full content of the missal with the priest, not a lesser (if worthy) devotion. It seems to me that what often happens is the opposite; the priest has started participating in the lesser devotions, neglecting the words in the missal. A straightforward example is replacing the chants of the Mass, introit, communion and offertory with hymns.
So stick with your own parish and attend Mass in the current edition of the Missal. If it has faults work to improve it, but going back to previous practices which restricted participation won’t help. We are supposed to be participating in the prayers and chants in the approved books, so chanting the introit etc is the ideal, not hymns. Latin is still supposed to be used, but not exclusively, not where it would genuinely inhabit participation (scripture readings being an obvious example). And we also participate in actions such as standing, kneeling or sitting as appropriate; the postures indicted in the official books are more appropriate than those used in the past.
I'm very impressed with both the quality and detailed citations in your writing, but most of all I'm very interested to learn more from someone who was Eastern Orthodox but decided on Catholicism instead. I'm a cradle Catholic who ran away from the church in his adolescence, and has in more recent times returned, but I've often been made to yearn for the apparent holiness and mysticality of the Eastern Orthodox. Especially reading Seraphim Hamilton, whose content I also subscribe to, has made me frequently impressed with the apparent fruits of wisdom budding in that church. Sometimes the only thing that has kept me from converting was the sense that it would be a hassle! But I'm fully knowledgeable that this could be just a feeling that the grass must be greener on the other side, when in fact it's just that I'm jaded to the benefits of my family's tradition and over-sensitized to what irks me about it. Thank you so much for your writing, it's exactly what I've been looking for; perhaps I'll find wisdom and good sense in the Catholic Church after all.
Welcome home! If I weren’t sitting in my car, I would respond with much more. However, your thoughtful, honest, and beautiful reflections are evidence of God’s work in your life! I look forward to sharing more with you soon! God bless you!
I am a cradle Catholic, in 2019 I stumbled upon Eastern Orthodoxy. I rejected Christianity in my teens and was atheist for some time. Things changed and I wanted to go be a Christian again, but same thing that happened to you happened to me. I was scandalized by the Pope. I’ve been at Catechumen in ROCOR since 2019 and now I’m thinking I might want to return back to Roman Catholicism, but I’m very confused. Is there anyway I could speak with you?
Hey Ben! We met over the weekend at the St. Dominic Priory in St. Louis. I don't know why, but my YouTube algorithm brought me to your video with the Catholic Brothers and I ended up stumbling upon your Substack. Deo gratias for your testament -- I share many of the convictions you have expressed in your article and it's inspiring to read about your journey. Happy anniversary and may God bless you!
A wonderful piece and, for me, a timely one: my girlfriend and I recently made the decision to plunge into the Tiber and today confronted the difficult task of informing our parish (Anglican) vicar. He was very understanding. Your piece here has only strengthened me in my resolve.
Glory to God! Praying for the both of you.
Bravo from a fellow convert. There’s no place like Rome. Great post.
As a 34 year old cradle Catholic who has only ever lived in the Novus Ordo but is a traditionalist at heart, I am also trying to plant what seeds I can in my parish to improve the liturgical situation, even though my parish is already one of the best in my diocese at offering a beautiful NO mass.
Unfortunately, it seems like there’s just so much inertia. It feels like Catholics just don’t care to do anything *more,* forever content to keep capitulating to this comfortable, half-assed attempt at liturgical propriety.
I often feel like I’m going to be in my 60s myself by the time these Boomer holdouts finally go to their eternal rewards.
I sympathise, the parish where I devoted years of effort and input disappeared into the traddie black hole, and I’m into my 60s already. Don’t be enticed by traditionalism; it’s not traditional at all, but a house built on sand. The current edition of the Roman missal isn’t perfect, but neither were its predecessors, and some of the current problems were present in the ages of the so called TLM. All we can do is work patiently and faithfully to improve the parish and liturgy where we are.
Can you elaborate? I'm fairly aware of the ditch on the side of the road of clutching too hard at "tradition" without even realising how much of what seems traditional and old now was actually an aberration itself at one point.
I'm just wondering if you meant you were trying to make your parish less 70s progressive, but it got away and fell into that ditch or whether you meant you were trying to make it go the other way (back to the 70s and 80s).
E: apologies for not having replied earlier; trying to limit my time on this platform!
First, I think we should look at liturgy in a much longer perspective. Attempts to restore the Roman rite to a more authentic form began with the council of Trent, which decreed (for example) that those present at Mass should usually receive sacramental communion. There was also an attempt to reduce the complexity of church music, so that the words were intelligible. The terminology of “participation” was not used, but the effect was the same; the words of the Mass and the reception of communion should be open to all present at every Mass. In practice the liturgical reforms of Trent failed to produce the results the council had called for. subsequently there was the liturgical movement which sought to examine the history of the prayers of the liturgy and to draw out and explain its meaning. This remained predominantly a pursuit of monks and enthusiasts until St Pius X imposed the movement’s ideals of frequent communion and use of plainchant on the (reluctant) mainstream church.
These changes are now taken for granted, but the repercussions they caused is enormous.
Let’s start with plainchant. The tradition of the Roman rite is that someone actively engaged in singing should be standing (not kneeling or sitting). Try going to an “old rite” Mass and standing while singing the Kyrie, Sanctus & Agnus Dei; it will immediately remind you of a NO (if we must use that term) Mass, and that is because the current edition of the missal has grown organically from the previous editions, emended according to the decrees of Pius X, who in turn was (at last) implementing the reform Trent had demanded. The whole atmosphere and relationship between the celebrant and others present is changed.
Frequent communion was again a much larger change than is apparent now. Until Pius X most Catholics received communion only a few times a year, and then usually outside Mass. So communion was a separate rite with its own series of prayers and rituals. Making frequent reception at Mass required changes, so that the people participated in the prayers, scripture readings etc, and then received with the priest. This necessarily required changes in the structure of the Mass.
Pope Benedict XVI, in his “Address to the parish priests of Rome”, described how, in his youth, the priest celebrated Mass using the words and actions prescribed in the Missal, while the people used their own books, which only conveyed part of that meaning. Benedict said that the aim of the liturgical restoration was that the people should also be participating the full content of the missal with the priest, not a lesser (if worthy) devotion. It seems to me that what often happens is the opposite; the priest has started participating in the lesser devotions, neglecting the words in the missal. A straightforward example is replacing the chants of the Mass, introit, communion and offertory with hymns.
So stick with your own parish and attend Mass in the current edition of the Missal. If it has faults work to improve it, but going back to previous practices which restricted participation won’t help. We are supposed to be participating in the prayers and chants in the approved books, so chanting the introit etc is the ideal, not hymns. Latin is still supposed to be used, but not exclusively, not where it would genuinely inhabit participation (scripture readings being an obvious example). And we also participate in actions such as standing, kneeling or sitting as appropriate; the postures indicted in the official books are more appropriate than those used in the past.
I'm very impressed with both the quality and detailed citations in your writing, but most of all I'm very interested to learn more from someone who was Eastern Orthodox but decided on Catholicism instead. I'm a cradle Catholic who ran away from the church in his adolescence, and has in more recent times returned, but I've often been made to yearn for the apparent holiness and mysticality of the Eastern Orthodox. Especially reading Seraphim Hamilton, whose content I also subscribe to, has made me frequently impressed with the apparent fruits of wisdom budding in that church. Sometimes the only thing that has kept me from converting was the sense that it would be a hassle! But I'm fully knowledgeable that this could be just a feeling that the grass must be greener on the other side, when in fact it's just that I'm jaded to the benefits of my family's tradition and over-sensitized to what irks me about it. Thank you so much for your writing, it's exactly what I've been looking for; perhaps I'll find wisdom and good sense in the Catholic Church after all.
Welcome home! If I weren’t sitting in my car, I would respond with much more. However, your thoughtful, honest, and beautiful reflections are evidence of God’s work in your life! I look forward to sharing more with you soon! God bless you!
I am a cradle Catholic, in 2019 I stumbled upon Eastern Orthodoxy. I rejected Christianity in my teens and was atheist for some time. Things changed and I wanted to go be a Christian again, but same thing that happened to you happened to me. I was scandalized by the Pope. I’ve been at Catechumen in ROCOR since 2019 and now I’m thinking I might want to return back to Roman Catholicism, but I’m very confused. Is there anyway I could speak with you?
Of course, feel to reach out to me either here on Substack, or on my Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100004767439270
🇻🇦
Another cradle Catholic who really appreciates this blast of good sense. I’ll reread this when I have more time! Keep the Faith!
Hey Ben! We met over the weekend at the St. Dominic Priory in St. Louis. I don't know why, but my YouTube algorithm brought me to your video with the Catholic Brothers and I ended up stumbling upon your Substack. Deo gratias for your testament -- I share many of the convictions you have expressed in your article and it's inspiring to read about your journey. Happy anniversary and may God bless you!
Thank you for the kind words brother! It was great to meet you this past weekend, do keep me in your prayers as I’ll keep you in mine!