Catholic Sensibility

I've avoided it in a lot more places than I did it, but I still think it's a good idea: an annual check-up with each choir member. A director should track the ranges of the singers, getting a sense of where they can sing and how well. You can talk to your chorister about voice care: keeping hydrated, warming up on the way to Mass, things like that. I'd recommend talking about their favorite musical pieces. Ask people what they like to sing. Ask them about your own directing/conducting skills: when do they find you easy or hard to follow? If you have a forty-voice choir, that might mean 10-15 minutes each for a yearly visit. It seems like time well spent. Needless to say, I'm not a fan of auditions for parish choirs, generally speaking. That's not to say some people won't need to be helped to discern another arena for their talents.

More on liturgical formation: In seminaries and houses of religious, clerics shall be given a liturgical formation in their spiritual life. For this they will need proper direction, so that they may be able to understand the sacred rites and take part in them wholeheartedly; and they will also need personally to celebrate the sacred mysteries, as well as popular devotions which are imbued with the spirit of the liturgy. In addition they must learn how to observe the liturgical laws, so that life in seminaries and houses of religious may be thoroughly influenced by the spirit of the liturgy. "Liturgical formation in their spiritual life." What exactly does that mean, would you say?

After some heavy European history earlier this month, I had some fun this past weekend with Chris Roberson's Paragaea, reviewed here. I was reading the history mainly to get a sense of the Church's role in the Great War. I learned that the French almost pitched away victory because of their cultural anti-Catholicism. I read of how military leaders were snail-slow to take advantage of the advances in military technology, and how they continued to throw soldiers into harm's way simply by conducting a 20th century war with their brains (if not butts) in the Napoleonic Era. It made me wonder about Iraq even more.

Talking with some colleagues over the past several days. You know: real world colleagues who have to deal with liturgy in parishes, some of whom are even priests. One friend had an interesting take on the end of the lay purification indult: it's not the pope; it's Arinze. On the Kansas City front, there's nothing afoot on implementation yet. But I did hear from a friend about a conservative pastor who wants to install Canticle: The Franciscan University Hymnal in his parish.

The hardcover hymnal, which is used daily in Christ the King Chapel, consists of a comprehensive selection of music styles including traditional hymnody and contemporary songs, as well as Gregorian chant and praise and worship songs.

I looked at it for about five minutes today. Lots of praise and worship songs. Lots. Five Mass settings by Jim Cowan. Only two by Marty Haugen. Some plainsong, but probably more bits from GIA's contemporary psalms. A good quantity of hymns with "questionable" theology, as they say. I'd be curious to know what my reform2 friends think of this. Or anybody else.

What do you think, liebchens? Good idea? Necessary idea? Pastoral disaster? I'll weigh in tomorrow with my opinion.

Here's the latest full color image from Saturn, looking down on the dark side of the rings. The bright sliver on the lower left is the crescent of the day side of the planet. Looks like Blogger has its act together today. Let's see if I can replicate some of last Friday's lost post on moons. Blogosphere, meet Janus: Janus is one of Saturn's relatively small shepherd moons. Janus is 113 miles across--about the size and shape of Connecticut and Rhode Island put together. Old tiney space artists (as well as George Lucas) assumed that these small moons would be craggy, rocky bits. Yet the truth is not so. Check out this gallery of solar system moons ... First Telesto: And Mars' moon Phobos: These babies have craters, yes, but their contours are surprisingly rounded compared to what we thought we'd find in space. It turns out that we have erosion in space: radiation from the sun, solar wind particles, and the like. There's also a presumption that there are fine grains of dust covering these small bodies. Dust made of ice, as in the case at Saturn. Dust made of teeny particles of stone, as in the case at Phobos and our own moon. Static electricity is also a space event. Scientists are a bit worried about the possible effects of electric charge when astronauts go exploring. Will computers freak out? I blogged on this a few months ago, but all this dust in space is potentially hazardous to space travellers if it gets in their machinery, or especially, their lungs, where it can asphyxiate in minutes if it gets dragged back into the crew compartment. Anyway, that's decades in the future. For now, enjoy the pretty pictures.

More on the study of liturgy: The study of sacred liturgy is to be ranked among the compulsory and major courses in seminaries and religions houses of studies; in theological faculties it is to rank among the principal courses. It is to be taught under its theological, historical, spiritual, pastoral, and juridical aspects. In other words, everything. Let me ask priest readers: were all five aspects covered in your seminary training? I would like to say that my training probably lacked something of the spiritual and a bit of the juridical. History and theology were heavily emphasized in my courses, but I also confess I don't have a liturgy degree. Moreover, other professors, while striving to expound the mystery of Christ and the history of salvation from the angle proper to each of their own subjects, must nevertheless do so in a way which will clearly bring out the connection between their subjects and the liturgy, as also the unity which underlies all priestly training. This consideration is especially important for professors of dogmatic, spiritual, and pastoral theology and for those of holy scripture. In other words, professors in these disciplines must see how their academic specialty relates to liturgy. Again I ask clergy readers: was this true? Any other comments?

Short and sweet. Enjoy it; we don't get too many in the Vatican II department: Professors who are appointed to teach liturgy in seminaries, religious houses of study, and theological faculties must be properly trained for their work in institutes which specialize in this subject. In other words, a Roman collar is insufficient.

Chapter 1 continues with a new sub-section entitled, "The Promotion of Liturgical Instruction and Active Participation." Let's keep in mind the context of this: we've just completed a nine-part portion outlining the nature of the liturgy and its importance in the life of the Church. Continuing under "General Principles," we read:

Mother Church earnestly desires that all the faithful should be led to that fully conscious, and active participation in liturgical celebrations which is demanded by the very nature of the liturgy. Such participation by the Christian people as "a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a redeemed people (1 Pet. 2:9; cf. 2:4-5), is their right and duty by reason of their baptism.

Naturally, post-conciliar liturgists take this to heart. The very nature of liturgy implies a dialogue inclusive of those who attend worship. It is more than a right. Vatican II describes it as a "duty." I think one can misapply this and demand literal, fundamentalist compliance, thus alienating the people one is supposed to be leading. Or we can apply the principle in general. If a community or individual steadfastly refuses to be engaged in any way at any time, that would be a matter of grave spiritual import.

In the restoration and promotion of the sacred liturgy, this full and active participation by all the people is the aim to be considered before all else; for it is the primary and indispensable source from which the faithful are to derive the true Christian spirit; and therefore pastors of souls must zealously strive to achieve it, by means of the necessary instruction, in all their pastoral work.

The council bishops seem to suggest that the Roman Rite was in need of restoration, that somehow in its preconciliar state, it was failing to provide a full measure of sanctification to the faithful. Pastors--namely bishops and parish priests--are on the spot to provide the achievement of a full and active participation.

Yet it would be futile to entertain any hopes of realizing this unless the pastors themselves, in the first place, become thoroughly imbued with the spirit and power of the liturgy, and undertake to give instruction about it. A prime need, therefore, is that attention be directed, first of all, to the liturgical instruction of the clergy. Wherefore the sacred Council has decided to enact as follows: And we'll read more about these points a bit later. For now, any thoughts?

What did Vatican II say about devotions? Read it:

Popular devotions of the Christian people are to be highly commended, provided they accord with the laws and norms of the Church, above all when they are ordered by the Apostolic See.

Devotions proper to individual Churches also have a special dignity if they are undertaken by mandate of the bishops according to customs or books lawfully approved.

But these devotions should be so drawn up that they harmonize with the liturgical seasons, accord with the sacred liturgy, are in some fashion derived from it, and lead the people to it, since, in fact, the liturgy by its very nature far surpasses any of them. It seems clear. Popular devotions are good if in harmony with the Church. If a bishop backs it, so much the better. But Mass and the liturgical year provide the framework. I think about the Divine Mercy observance at Eastertime. It's a prayer I've found fruitful for my collaboration with good friends at my parish. My friends are far from possessing an unbalanced focus on this devotion, on the contrary, they are deeply devoted to the Mass and the liturgical prayer of the Church. Does SC 13 get used too much as a club? Or are devotions a problem in some places?

This section gives a good perspective on external and internal participation. The council, while acknowledging the importance of participation in liturgy, also recognizes the aspect of the spiritual life which is internal: The spiritual life, however, is not limited solely to participation in the liturgy. The Christian is indeed called to pray with (other believers), but ... must also enter into (her or) his chamber to pray to the Father, in secret (Cf. Matt. 6:6.); yet more, according to the teaching of the Apostle, (she or) he should pray without ceasing (Cf . 1 Thess. 5:17.). We learn from the same Apostle that we must always bear about in our body the dying of Jesus, so that the life also of Jesus may be made manifest in our bodily frame (Cf . 2 Cor. 4:10-11.). This is why we ask the Lord in the sacrifice of the Mass that, "receiving the offering of the spiritual victim," he may fashion us for himself "as an eternal gift" (Secret for Monday of Pentecost Week.). From the context, one might say that for the Christian, interior prayer should be constant, as Saint Paul advises. Interior participation at church is just an extension of what the believer should be practicing everywhere, all the time. Comments?

The council bishops recognized that the old legalistic/minimalist approach was a millstone around our necks. But in order that the liturgy may be able to produce its full effects, it is necessary that the faithful come to it with proper dispositions, that their minds should be attuned to their voices, and that they should cooperate with divine grace lest they receive it in vain (Cf. 2 Cor. 6:1.) . Pastors of souls must therefore realize that, when the liturgy is celebrated, something more is required than the mere observation of the laws governing valid and licit celebration; it is their duty also to ensure that the faithful take part fully aware of what they are doing, actively engaged in the rite, and enriched by its effects. This is also the introduction to the oft-repeated council sentiment of full, active, and enriching participation. The council is explicit in stating what is expected of the faithful. Let's review it carefully: - A proper disposition, which could be interpreted as an openness to the goal of sanctification. - Importantly, that their interior participation (minds) is attuned to their exterior participation (voices). This is the huge oversight on the part of modern critics of participation, those who suggest there's too much emphasis on the external. The middle way would suggest that, generally, the community is observing silence and engaged in meditation as well as singing and vocally praying. You can't get around it. Uncooperative believers still have an experience of grace, but the efficacy of the Roman Rite is called into question for those who persistently and stubbornly refuse to engage at the appropriate times. As spiritual guides, pastors are urged to see that their personal focus is not limited to the rubrics. Their responsibility is the full awareness of the people, their active engagement--external and internal, and that the faith community as a whole experiences spiritual growth as a result of liturgy.

IU's great program, Harmonia, is a weekly listen for me. I often browse the archives and listen to some of the programs from the past several years. Here's last week's program on early funeral music. Be warned: those of you who think that early sacred music is all about organ and voice might be alarmed to know music for lute is included. Consider that a twist on conventional wisdom on traditional music.

Here's where we get "source and summit" in Vatican II, one of the most-quoted sections of the whole constitution:

Nevertheless the liturgy is the summit toward which the activity of the Church is directed; at the same time it is the font from which all her power flows. For the aim and object of apostolic works is that all who are made (daughters and) sons of God by faith and baptism should come together to praise God in the midst of His Church, to take part in the sacrifice, and to eat the Lord's supper.

Sacrifice and meal, right?

The liturgy in its turn moves the faithful, filled with "the paschal sacraments," to be "one in holiness" (Postcommunion for both Masses of Easter Sunday.); it prays that "they may hold fast in their lives to what they have grasped by their faith" (Collect of the Mass for Tuesday of Easter Week.); the renewal in the eucharist of the covenant between the Lord and (humankind) draws the faithful into the compelling love of Christ and sets them on fire. From the liturgy, therefore, and especially from the eucharist, as from a font, grace is poured forth upon us; and the sanctification of (people) in Christ and the glorification of God, to which all other activities of the Church are directed as toward their end, is achieved in the most efficacious possible way. This seems fairly straight-forward: the two-fold purpose of liturgy, elucidated here: the sanctification of the believers, the glorification of God.

Is there more to life than liturgy? Vatican II suggests we also have evangelization:

The sacred liturgy does not exhaust the entire activity of the Church. Before (people) can come to the liturgy they must be called to faith and to conversion: "How then are they to call upon him in whom they have not yet believed? But how are they to believe him whom they have not heard? And how are they to hear if no one preaches? And how are men to preach unless they be sent?" (Rom. 10:14-15).

Therefore the Church announces the good tidings of salvation to those who do not believe, so that all (people) may know the true God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent, and may be converted from their ways, doing penance (Cf. John 17:3; Luke 24:27; Acts 2:38.). And for those of us who believe and celebrate liturgy? To believers also the Church must ever preach faith and penance, she must prepare them for the sacraments, teach them to observe all that Christ has commanded (Cf. Matt. 28:20.), and invite them to all the works of charity, piety, and the apostolate. For all these works make it clear that Christ's faithful, though not of this world, are to be the light of the world and to glorify the Father before (all). It's a careful reminder that liturgy as we celebrate it on earth, is a means to an end. A glorious means, to be certain. The council bishops were well aware of the importance that liturgy be a source, a wellspring of the Christian life. It should lead us to holiness. It should be apparent to non-believers that we are special. Not because of our own finely-tuned acts of worship, but because Christ calls us to be witnesses to the world.

This is a pretty straightforward piece. Liturgy binds us with the community of heaven: the saints and angels in their worship of God in glory. In the earthly liturgy we take part in a foretaste of that heavenly liturgy which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem toward which we journey as pilgrims, where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God, a minister of the holies and of the true tabernacle (Cf. Apoc. 21:2; Col. 3:1; Heb. 8:2.); we sing a hymn to the Lord's glory with all the warriors of the heavenly army; venerating the memory of the saints, we hope for some part and fellowship with them; we eagerly await the Saviour, Our Lord Jesus Christ, until He, our life, shall appear and we too will appear with Him in glory (Cf. Phil. 3:20; Col. 3:4.). Probably little concern with who's doing dishes. Any other comments?

If it's not already, the Catholic blogotariat will be atwitter about this one fairly soon:

At the direction of Pope Benedict XVI, extraordinary ministers of holy Communion will no longer be permitted to assist in the purification of the sacred vessels at Masses in the United States.

The one thing it has going for it is to restore a stronger sense of service in the clergy. In practice, I suspect that parish priests will be bothered by the interruption of good pastoral time after and in between Masses. It's possible to delay purifying vessels till after Mass. Most often that takes place in the sacristy. I'd like to hear from the clergy in the readership here: do you guys see this as having any impact on the quality of the celebration of Mass? Or is this another shot in the foot for priestly morale?

This is a bit of a chicken and egg thing. Without leadership and commitment from the bishops and pastors, good musicians won't be attracted to Roman Catholic parishes, at least not in the numbers we need. And if we lack top shelf musicians, the people will rarely, if ever, experience what good music ministry is all about. And if the people don't get it, they won't pressure the clergy to pony up for it. There's a lot of whining and complaining about the quality of church music. Some of the complaints are valid ones. Some of them reveal the usual log-speck-eye issues. Some of them are indeed matters of personal taste. What is lacking in most discussions is a plan to get from here to a future better than the present. What I'd like to do is look at the individual pieces that we need to fit the puzzle together and get to that future. I'd like to look at it first from what the diocese should be doing. Somebody has to start hatching the musical birds, so I'm going to put the pressure on the bishops from the get-go. From there, I'll describe what a church musician would like to see in a parish before committing to serve there. I can only testify as to why I accepted jobs where I did. So I'll rely on the input of other musicians to add their hopes and wants in the comment boxes. Pastors have a lot of work to do to make some of their parishes attractive to good musicians. Some of it will take money. But there are enough things to do outside of budgetary considerations. It just takes a little work and a direction. I'll also make a list of the skills a parish musician should have: what will make you attractive to employers; what will help you succeed in ministry; how you can sell yourself to your new pastor and the parishioners, what disciplines you'll need to adopt, if not master, to hit the ground running when you have diploma in hand. Some musicians, however, won't be in a position to get a degree. What then? Let's take a look at what parish volunteers can do to improve themselves. Next, I'll outline the ideal parish situation. Even if your budget can't pay the going rate for good musicians, there are way you can and should make your community attractive to your music director. What should the school personnel offer? How should the choirs adapt to and adopt their new leader? And finally, I'll outline what it should be looking like in twenty to thirty years: what we need to do to keep the machine humming.

The remains of two Perth archbishops were exhumed from under the floorboards of St Mary's cathedral in the Western Australia capital.

(R)ecords from 1943 suggested the tombs had been moved to a newer section of St Mary’s, but did not provide the exact location. The puzzle began to take shape about three years ago when archdiocese archivist Sister Frances Stibi discovered one of the crosses carved into the floor near the altar. But the fate of the crypt remained unresolved until six weeks ago when the pews were removed for restoration work, and the three other crosses were revealed. Archeologists —helped by University of WA students — used a metal rod to probe under the floorboards until they discovered a metal cap covering a small, brick and plaster crypt containing two coffins. Sand and building rubble coating the coffins still held footprints left by workers who covered the graves almost 80 years ago.

A fiber-optic probe was inserted through a small opening of one coffin. Researchers found a skeleton and vestments. The bishops' remains will be interred in a crypt with Perth's other archbishops after the renovation at St Mary's is complete.

This section is much-quoted since the council. A reading of SC 5 & 6 is helpful in giving it a wider perspective than traditionalist critics are willing to offer it. You'll remember that SC immediately began chapter 1 "General Principles ..." with a section entitled, "The Nature of the Sacred Liturgy and Its Importance in the Church's Life." Catholics see liturgy as Christ-centered. Everything about Christ--his preaching, his witness in time through the Scriptures, his Passion, eath and resurrection and how that Paschal Mystery roots the sacraments--all of this underlines a basic approach to the Church's liturgy. People might naturally ask, "Where is Jesus today?" Here's the answer: To accomplish so great a work, Christ is always present in His Church, especially in her liturgical celebrations. He is present in the sacrifice of the Mass, not only in the person of His minister, "the same now offering, through the ministry of priests, who formerly offered himself on the cross" (Council of Trent, Session XXII, Doctrine on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, c. 2.), but especially under the eucharistic species. By His power He is present in the sacraments, so that when a (person) baptizes it is really Christ Himself who baptizes (Cf. St. Augustine, Tractatus in Ioannem, VI, n. 7.). He is present in His word, since it is He Himself who speaks when the holy scriptures are read in the Church. He is present, lastly, when the Church prays and sings, for He promised: "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them" (Matt. 18:20) .

This multivalent presence is misunderstood. Christ's presence in the Church, in the priest, in the word, in the sacraments, in the people: these are not competing presences. They each manifest Christ in a different way, but as a whole, they offer a cohesive revelation to the believer. No sincere believer will isolate any of these to the exclusion of the others. Catholics believe that all of these offer a grace-filled encounter with the Lord. To get the fullest possible relationship with Jesus, one must consider all of these presences.

Here we have the explicit purpose of the sacred liturgy: the worship of God and the sancitification of the people:

Christ indeed always associates the Church with Himself in this great work wherein God is perfectly glorified and (people) are sanctified. The Church is His beloved Bride who calls to her Lord, and through Him offers worship to the Eternal Father.

This next paragraph offers a suggestion as to the importance of liturgy as a communal experience, namely that human beings experience sanctification through the perception of the senses. When we see, hear, smell, taste, touch, etc., our human senses become the conduit through which God communicates grace and holiness. It's possible this was misinterpreted to lessen the importance of such things as Masses without congregations. And while we can say that the efficacy of prayer is vital, be it done by a priest alone in a chapel or by contemplative orders, or by friends or saints interceding for us with God, the truth is that the liturgy achieves its desired result by the direct, sensual participation of the faithful:

Rightly, then, the liturgy is considered as an exercise of the priestly office of Jesus Christ. In the liturgy the sanctification of the (person) is signified by signs perceptible to the senses, and is effected in a way which corresponds with each of these signs; in the liturgy the whole public worship is performed by the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, that is, by the Head and His members. Nothing surpasses the importance of liturgy in achieving this two-fold goal of the worship of God and the sanctification of the faithful. The natural result is that we ourselves participate in the priesthood of Christ through these various presences in the liturgical celebration:

From this it follows that every liturgical celebration, because it is an action of Christ the priest and of His Body which the Church, is a sacred action surpassing all others; no other action of the Church can equal its efficacy by the same title and to the same degree.

Comments?

We missed World Mission Sunday at my parish. There was the 9.6 minute video presentation, "The Truth About Cloning" after Communion at all Masses. Homilies were shortened to get the folks out in an hour. I'm also the closest thing to a tech guy at the parish on Sundays, so it was left to me to make sure the hook-ups were in place for Bishop Finn and the various lawyers and mostly doctors assembled for the dvd presentation. My poor wife made two trips to a local site (which shall go nameless) to get the hardware for me to attempt to wire the dvd player & projector into the sound system. On trip one, the guy talked her out of getting what I needed and sent me a useless stereo adapter instead. Even so, the assembled hardware from trip two didn't do the trick either, so I was left with the Bronze Age solution of holding a microphone to the projector speaker. I laugh when people think of me as a liturgical nazi. I probably should've bowed to the pastor's wisdom when he suggested we might forego the presentation during Mass and do what the dicoesan RTL office said we shouldn't do: set the program up to run at coffee and donuts or something. But I thought that we owed our bishop some support on his first big public issue. I found it interesting that our vicar general didn't even know the video was being distributed to parishes this weekend. Communication is probably not one of our diocese's strong points this year. The Star's lead editorial today urged readers to vote for amendment 2. Interesting timing. Our parish has done a great deal to promote opposition to amendment 2, but I have to confess I'm picking up on some battle fatigue from the troops. I don't have a sense that this weekend we did much more than bring six celebrations of Mass to a crashing halt after Communion. (If any parishioners are reading this, please post here or e-mail me; I really want to know what you thought: bad and good.) And after a mass mailing, weekly articles in the diocesan paper, and at least two pulpit talks (I can't call them homilies, really) I suspect we've shot the wad on the issue already. Did anybody outside of Missouri have any success with World Mission Sunday? I'm not even going to ask about James and John imitating non-believers by lording it over the others. We'll come back to that in 2009. With any luck.

It's the former name of the spiffy Irish Elk blog (see sidebar). Oh yes; it's all the rage in the liturgy section of St Blog's this year, too. I was having a pleasant discussion with cantor on Cantate Deo about it this past weekend. It's been a topic here before on Catholic Sensibility. I think those who advocate it was the "best" or "only" proper orientation have a harder case to prove than they think. First, it is probably not the oldest orientation for Christians. Jesus celebrated a Passover meal at the Last Supper, and Leonardo not withstanding, they probably sat around on the floor or at a table. It would be surprising to me to learn the early house churches adopted a universal posture of facing east, though if memory serves, I do think they were aware of a liturgical east during the vigils kept before Sunday. At any rate, we know too little about the common practices of the Eucharist in Christian homes of the first three centuries. Christians adopted Roman public buildings to accommodate their growing numbers in the 4th century and these buildings also provided the natural acoustics for a bishop to preach to hundreds of worshippers. Vatican II promoted intelligibility. I can see why visually-oriented westerners might prefer a better glimpse of the altar and the Eucharistic species. I can see how the affective aspect of intimate home Masses, on floors, in small chapels, in homey surroundings, might have a certain appeal to some people. There's not so much an impulse to irreverence as much as a yearning for immediacy and intimacy in liturgical celebrations outside of churches. I'd submit that Catholic priests were already seen as performers before the Second Vatican Council. "Turning the priest around" was more about visibility, immediacy, and understanding than it was about a liberal cadre of Jack Paar wannabes taking over the Mass. In the worst of liturgical situations, the Mass has always been about the words the priest says anyway. That's what got the Tridentine observance into trouble: that we had too many minimalists concerned about saying the right words. Other aspects: music, art, architecture, and even the presence and sanctification of the faithful became irrelevant. Facing liturgical east meant something when churches were built to actually face east. Churches today are aligned in all sorts of directions. Pretending that a particular direction is east just because the reredo is aligned on a short wall is a deception, in my opinion. More than that, it potentially demonstrates a god-like arrogance on the part of liturgical leaders. "We didn't bother to build our church facing east, so we'll just reorder the universe to accommodate the way we're pointing. I do believe that ad orientem reflects the view of a priest leading the faithful on a pilgrimage. That's an image we surely don't want to lose. But not every Christian act of worship--not every Mass--is exclusively an expression of pilgrimage. Pilgrims break from their journey to share a meal, to rest, to reflect on where they are and where they are going. A church building that surrounds its worshippers with the images of saints, a foretelling of the heavenly banquet, is an equally powerful image. It would not be wrong to have many churches built to image that, assuing the zoning board didn't think to point the church east. But as an aside, I do wonder what would happen to ad orientem worship on a planet in which the sun did not rise in the east. Would they adapt, or would they reorder the universe to accommodate?

The two-fold aspect of liturgy is contained in this section. First, we are reminded of the salvific nature of preaching and evangelization: Just as Christ was sent by the Father, so also He sent the apostles, filled with the Holy Spirit. This He did that, by preaching the gospel to every creature (Cf. Mark 16:15.), they might proclaim that the Son of God, by His death and resurrection, had freed us from the power of Satan (Cf. Acts 26:18.) and from death, and brought us into the kingdom of His Father. ... and the sacramental life, particularly baptism and Eucharist: His purpose also was that they might accomplish the work of salvation which they had proclaimed, by means of sacrifice and sacraments, around which the entire liturgical life revolves. Thus by baptism (people) are plunged into the paschal mystery of Christ: they die with Him, are buried with Him, and rise with Him ( Cf. Rom. 6:4; Eph. 2:6; Col. 3:1; 2 Tim. 2:11.); they receive the spirit of adoption as (daughters and) sons "in which we cry: Abba, Father" (Rom. 8 :15), and thus become true adorers whom the Father seeks (Cf. John 4:23.). In like manner, as often as they eat the supper of the Lord they proclaim the death of the Lord until He comes (Cf. 1 Cor. 11:26.). For that reason, on the very day of Pentecost, when the Church appeared before the world, "those who received the word" of Peter "were baptized." And "they continued steadfastly in the teaching of the apostles and in the communion of the breaking of bread and in prayers . . . praising God and being in favor with all the people" (Acts 2:41-47). From that time onwards the Church has never failed to come together to celebrate the paschal mystery: reading those things "which were in all the scriptures concerning him" (Luke 24:27), celebrating the eucharist in which "the victory and triumph of his death are again made present" ( Council of Trent, Session XIII, Decree on the Holy Eucharist, c.5.), and at the same time giving thanks "to God for his unspeakable gift" (2 Cor. 9:15) in Christ Jesus, "in praise of his glory" (Eph. 1:12), through the power of the Holy Spirit. The council bishops recognized the intimate relationship between the Word and the Sacraments. Also note that the council is not leery about using the language of eating, for it presumes the notion of "sacrifice" as part of the foundation of the Mass.

Now we start to get to the meat of what Vatican II said about liturgy. Chaprter I is entitled: "General Principles for the Restoration and Promotion of the Sacred Liturgy" Section 5 begins under a chapter subheading, "The Nature of the Sacred Liturgy and Its Importance in the Church's Life" God who "wills that all ... be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:4), "who in many and various ways spoke in times past to the (ancestors) by the prophets" (Heb. 1:1), when the fullness of time had come sent His Son, the Word made flesh, anointed by the Holy Spirit, to preach the the gospel to the poor, to heal the contrite of heart (Cf. Is. 61:1; Luke 4:18.), to be a "bodily and spiritual medicine" (St. Ignatius of Antioch, To the Ephesians, 7, 2.), the Mediator between God and (humankind) (Cf. 1 Tim. 2:5.). For His humanity, united with the person of the Word, was the instrument of our salvation. Therefore in Christ "the perfect achievement of our reconciliation came forth, and the fullness of divine worship was given to us" (Sacramentarium Veronese (ed. Mohlberg), n. 1265; cf. also n. 1241, 1248.). The wonderful works of God among the people of the Old Testament were but a prelude to the work of Christ the Lord in redeeming (hu)mankind and giving perfect glory to God. He achieved His task principally by the paschal mystery of His blessed passions resurrection from the dead, and the glorious ascension, whereby "dying, he destroyed our death and, rising, he restored our life" (Easter Preface of the Roman Missal.). For it was from the side of Christ as He slept the sleep of death upon the cross that there came forth "the wondrous sacrament of the whole Church" (Prayer before the second lesson for Holy Saturday, as it was in the Roman Missal before the restoration of Holy Week.). This is a verification for the notion that the liturgy is all about Christ. Christ himself is "the fullness of divine worship." God's deliverance of the Israelites foreshadowed the unviersal deliverance offered to those who will accept God's grace. Note that the Church itself is described as a "s"acrament, a visible sign instituted by God to give grace. Which is what it does.

The liturgy is important because it draws believers in. It beckons us to join Christ in the act of worship in glorifying the Father.

Comments?

The introduction ends with this short paragraph, which first acknowledges various rites: Lastly, in faithful obedience to tradition, the sacred Council declares that holy Mother Church holds all lawfully acknowledged rites to be of equal right and dignity; that she wishes to preserve them in the future and to foster them in every way. The Council also desires that, where necessary, the rites be revised carefully in the light of sound tradition, and that they be given new vigor to meet the circumstances and needs of modern times. The point of interpretation for traditionalists would be, I imagine, the necessity of large-scale liturgical reform. In addition to revision, the bishops also called for vigor. Keeping in mind the focus on evangelization and Christian unity mentioned in section 1, perhaps it's not surprising or inappropriate to suggest that Roman Catholic worship lost something of its parochial distinctiveness. What I mean is: Is the so-called similarity to Protestant worship at odds with what is called for here?

Jumping right in:

Wherefore the sacred Council judges that the following principles concerning the promotion and reform of the liturgy should be called to mind, and that practical norms should be established.

These practical norms will come up in the bulk of the document; be patient.

Among these principles and norms there are some which can and should be applied both to the Roman rite and also to all the other rites. The practical norms which follow, however, should be taken as applying only to the Roman rite, except for those which, in the very nature of things, affect other rites as well.

So the Romans are saying that we're going to muck up--I mean reform-- the Roman Rite and the other rites are to be untouched by the considerations coming up in the document. Thoughts?

The liturgical blogosphere is all atwitter over the announcement that the US bishops will vote on norms for hymns at Mass next month. The usual heavyweights (I mean amy and Rock, not OCP and GIA) and my various internet musical colleagues are all over this like piranha on bleeding sardines. Three specific norms are listed on the USCCB site, and I have comments on all of them, particularly the last one listed.

1. The approval of liturgical songs is reserved to the Diocesan Bishop in whose diocese an individual song is published. He is supported in his work by this directory and by the USCCB Secretariat on the Liturgy.

Suddenly, the heat is on the sees of Chicago and Portland, Oregon. But there are other players in this market, too: Collegeville MN, and St Louis, to name two. Bishops there won't be getting off easy; they still have to review that content. One can imagine that if a composer or two felt they got an unfair shake in one place, they could pack up and move somehwere else, publishing off the net or something. Which of course brings to mind the reality that many liturgical composers abjure the major outfits and self-publish. Will a parish musician need his or her bishop's go-ahead to cut a recording of original liturgical music? Or will such items just go out without the official seal of approval? I wonder if religious orders will have any control in this.

2. The Diocesan Bishop is assisted in his review of individual texts through the formation of a committee for the review of liturgical songs consisting of theologians, liturgists, and musicians. The committee shall assure that each text is suitable for liturgical use based on the principles articulated in this directory.

It would be interesting to see if there's a rush to join these committees in Oregon and Illinois.

3. Within three years, the Committee on the Liturgy will formulate a Common Repertoire of Liturgical Songs for use in all places where the Roman liturgy is celebrated in the United States of America. While songs outside the core repertoire may also be used in the Liturgy, this core repertoire will be included in all worship aids used in the dioceses of the United States of America.

A few thoughts on core repertoire: just because it's there, doesn't mean it will be completely absorbed by the parish in question. Also, note this covers songs, not psalms or acclamations. That aside, I have a question for small publishers in general, as well as outfits that print to a specialized clientele. Will the Adoremus Hymnal's next edition, for example, be required to contain the entire common repertoire? Or will publishers all and each print a volume of common repertoire as a supplement to be added to "worship aids" found wanting? If a parish has a traditional supplement of some kind, will it be required to buy into the common repertoire? The commentariat in a few places is already gnashing their teeth over this announcement, saying it will never be enforced, saying it doesn't go far enough, hoping it will be the end of Everything Bad in Liturgical Music. Nobody bothered to respond to the Adoremus question when I brought it up at open book. I have a suspicion this is going to be a big headache for a lot of people all across the board. And if the conservatives are already whining, I think this common repertoire will be notable for having great entertainment value, above anything else.

The MRO is sending back some spectacular images, like this one from Terra Sirenum. Go to the web site and check them out. A few days ago they released a shot taken from 150 miles up of the Opportunity Rover on the lip of Victoria Crater. The hi-res image shows tire tracks from the probe and the shadow of the camera boom on the Martian sand.

This section is worth digesting in pieces: For the liturgy, "through which the work of our redemption is accomplished," (Secret of the ninth Sunday after Pentecost.) most of all in the divine sacrifice of the eucharist, is the outstanding means whereby the faithful may express in their lives, and manifest to others, the mystery of Christ and the real nature of the true Church. Note the first conciliar reference to the Mass is as a "divine sacrifice." Christians express Christ as well as reveal it to others, and the liturgy is considered "the outstanding" way in which this is done. The focus on Christ and the reference to sacrifice are surely not coincidental. Yet the situation on earth possesses four delicious paradoxes: It is of the essence of the Church that she be both human and divine, visible and yet invisibly equipped, eager to act and yet intent on contemplation, present in this world and yet not at home in it; and she is all these things in such wise that in her the human is directed and subordinated to the divine, the visible likewise to the invisible, action to contemplation, and this present world to that city yet to come, which we seek (Cf. Heb. 13:14.). We could unpack this for days, but note number two, "eager to act and yet intent on contemplation." Is the contrast more on action versus contemplation or is it also on eagerness and intensity? While the liturgy daily builds up those who are within into a holy temple of the Lord, into a dwelling place for God in the Spirit (Cf. Eph. 2:21-22.), to the mature measure of the fullness of Christ (Cf. Eph. 4:13.), at the same time it marvelously strengthens their power to preach Christ, and thus shows forth the Church to those who are outside as a sign lifted up among the nations (Cf. Is. 11:12.) under which the scattered children of God may be gathered together (Cf. John 11:52.), until there is one sheepfold and one shepherd (Cf. John 10:16.). Liturgy does not exist as an end to itself, we read, but also has a purpose in the world. I would say that some things we have done well with in the post-Vatican II church: eagerness, Christian unity, a presence of social justice. And while it is true these aspects were well known in preconciliar days, there were many positives for the 60's and 70's, and even today. When I use these passages for reflection with my liturgy committee or other groups, I always ask how the parish has measured up to these goals in the past forty years. What about your parish?

Well, friends: here we are. Today begins our look at the last of the Big Four documents of Vatican II, the constitution on the sacred liturgy. They say that Dei Verbum is in its ascendancy and Gaudium et Spes is fading, but we St Bloggers know that liturgy always lights a fire under the discussion. So let's not kid ourselves about which document has "pride of place" in the bile, if not the hearts and minds of Catholics today.

Brigid has been pestering me to organize this site a bit better, especially some organized links to the Vatican II series. And that upgrade may yet come some day. Meanwhile, you'll need to suffer through my one or two-a-day posts and trust me when I say we're a bit beyond 50% of the way through the Vatican II documents.

Sacrosanctum concilium has 130 sections, a bit more than 12,000 words, and not nearly as many footnotes as Lumen Gentium. We'll take this at about two a day, which should bring us to a completion sometime in Advent.

The first four sections are an "INTRODUCTION," and the first of them reads:

This sacred Council has several aims in view: it desires to impart an ever increasing vigor to the Christian life of the faithful; to adapt more suitably to the needs of our own times those institutions which are subject to change; to foster whatever can promote union among all who believe in Christ; to strengthen whatever can help to call the whole of mankind into the household of the Church. The Council therefore sees particularly cogent reasons for undertaking the reform and promotion of the liturgy.

With all the infighting on SC 14 versus 116, people miss this simple introduction in which the bishops put their cards on the table:

1. The Christian life of the post-WWII period was in need of more vigor. 2. Times do change, and adaptation to accommodate the pastoral reality of the modern world was the target of Vatican II. 3. Christian unity. 4. A stronger and more potent evangelization.

These four factors led the council bishops to do two things with the Roman Rite:

A) Reform it. B) Promote it.

As we read through the constitution in the coming weeks, let's not lose focus on that fourfold intent: vigor, adaptation, unity, and evangelization. It is in this context, not so much the reform2 attitudes of retrenchment and recovery, that this document should be considered.

Thoughts?

It was intentional that I did not offer a commentary on Cardinals Egan and Mahony other than that they were having a bad week. I'm not too familiar with New York's archbishop, other than his emphasis on fiscal responsibility. And St Bloggers have struggled for years with my dislike of LA's archbishop. It just doesn't compute for them. One person once suggested I was lying and that I really liked Mahony. Nope. I think both his critics and supporters should learn how to spell his name--it's not really that hard. And I think he's something of a refugee from a pre-conciliar era of prestige and clerical privilege. Egan doesn't sound too different in that respect. Liam weighs in sensibly (which is why he has an open invitation to join the blogging team here--anytime he desires it) on the "bad week" post. I grumble about finding an authentic way to express ourselves (meaning bishops and laity, supporters and detractors alike) as a Church. Liam has a level-headed approach that I've found to be very useful during this past decade of the liturgy tussles. (I don't like the term "wars" and I find it to be a bit overused and overblown in context of being sisters and brothers in Christ.)

It involves understanding that where one finds a cross, one finds a well of grace. It involves understanding that cross is an invitation to solidarity with people who have crosses they cannot choose to forego. That's the Catholic way.

I do think many Catholics get this. It's far more subtle than sighing, throwing one's hands in the air and moaning, "Poor me!" Though to the untutored observer, it might look the same. Unlike the conservatives, I've known I've had poor liturgical translations to work with since I was in grad school over twenty years ago. Most bishops and many pastors don't care enough about liturgy--my opinion, there. It's certainly frustrating to draw a measly 35% of able-bodied parishioners to Mass on any given weekend. And the current discussion on how many 1962 Latin Masses we're getting from the pope seems to me to be a distraction from the important issue of making all the Sunday Masses exceptional. But ... there are still graces to be found, and God is still working in the Church despite our collective failings. Let me offer a personal example. I think I'm on safe ground in doing so. My wife found my two years (2000-02) in rural ministry to be exceedingly tedious. To put it politely. With the exception of five new friends and adopting our daughter, she found little grace amongst the farmlands of Iowa: her health deteriorated; her schooling was put on hold; the people mistreated her badly. We discussed it often. After our adoption was final, she asked if we could relocate to a large city, preferably back East, and preferably near family. I asked for a third year where we were. We prayed about it for weeks and she consented. But then I found myself at a social justice workshop a few days later. The speaker said one thing that smacked me like an NFL linebacker. It was wrong for us to see ourselves as "owning" our ministry. Who were we to put others on hold so that "our" gifts, "our" talents could shine forth? This is supposed to be about Christ, about sacrifice, about the people we serve, and about the cross that perhaps others have no choice in carrying, as Liam suggests. Immediately, I realized that I had unjustly put my career, my desire for three years and a finished agenda, ahead of my wife's appropriate and important needs. So we scrapped the three-year plan. And God was good, providing for us from his well of grace.

It's something I've seen many progressive Catholics fight because it soooooo counter-cultural. As you know, I've witnessed the withering of formerly vigorous apostolates of service in favor of politicized agitation, eventually sundering communities. It is not the way of Christ. People have extended and distorted Dr. King's model of activism, I suspect because it is narcissitically gratifying to imagine the active struggling is more obviously righteous than the quiet, suffering service.

I think all Catholics--human beings fall down on this one occasionally, not just the progressives. My long contention is that much of the Catholic pro-life movement has been worn down by despair and agitation and has adopted a corrupted version of 60's activism. Oscar Romero described it well: sowing seed for a crop we will not harvest, recognizing out limitation as workers, not master builders. There is a tremendous freedom in laying down one's dear possessions, and taking up that cross to follow the Lord. It doesn't all depend on us. Which brings us back to Cardinal Egan's mutiny. Regardless of how the Boston priests may have been treated for wanting Cardinal Law out, they were brave and appropriate to put their names in the pot. The New York priests were cowardly for not affixing their names to their letter. Cardinal Egan's supporters could not have done a better job if they fabricated an anonymous letter themselves. And that's not to say that the archbishop of New York is not responsible to the people he serves. Church teaching, not to mention the gospel, is very clear on the shepherd's responsibility. If this mutiny is authentic, it is a mark of failure for Egan. Even if it was unjustly handled by his critics. As is usual in many such situations, just because one side or another may be wrong, that does not mean that the other is right. (In part, that's one reason why St Blog's cannot digest my dislike for Cardinal Mahony) But Catholic leaders from all walks of life would offer a great service to more publicly and accurately model Christ as a servant of all, as a servant of the Cross. If we can't count on leaders to set the bar high and demonstrate the high road, we're suffering a greater poverty than a lack of food, clothing, or shelter.

Our two "bookend" prelates in the US are not having a good week. NPR looks at a documentary that casts St Blog's favorite whipping bish in a very bad light. And Rock has been all over Cardinal Edward "No Confidence" Egan's mutiny in New York. Lots of posts, lots of news there from the past few days. They have so much work to do on restoring confidence in their leadership.

I think today's number of posts has been close to a Catholic Sensibility record. I haven't finished writing my magazine column yet (don't tell my editor!) but there have been so many fascinating stories to catch up on. I was catching a bit of espn this morning, getting my dislike of major college athletics, especially football and men's basketball, reinforced. Then I found this Zenit link describing a publication from the Pontifical Council for the Laity: The World of Sport Today: Field of Christian Mission. Can we have a mission to major college athletics, please? Please? Some of those sporting gentlemen from the University of Miami engaged in more on-field thuggery this past weekend. The replays on the tube were pretty vicious: helmet (in hand) to head (without helmet) contact, stomping, kicking. The NCAA shows the spine of a flatworm in handing down penalties. After all, this was only Miami's third footbrawl in their last seven games. One of the espn guys said he thought the two universities should be made to forfeit their upcoming games and reimburse their opponent schools for lost revenue. That sounds about right to me. But you know the NCAA would never do that to a Division I-A football program. If it's lacrosse, though, no problem to shut down an entire season. Local sportwriter Joe Posnanski nailed it in a recent column when the "lack of institutional control" label was slapped on the University of Kansas last week. Lots of big-time problems for big-time sports. A university, if it knows it's heading for official punishment, will sometimes try to inflict its own penance ahead of NCAA sanctions in an attempt to lessen the hammer blow. Sort of like saying ten Hail Marys before you head into the confessional. The KU men had the solution: strip away scholarships in women's basketball.

The one exception was (women’s basketball coach Bonnie) Henrickson, which was odd because she was the one coach who got a raw deal. Last year, Kansas’ self-imposed penalties included taking away two scholarships from women’s basketball and limiting the number of coaches who could go on the road. The school came down hard even though Henrickson was a new coach and had absolutely nothing to do with the previous follies. Kansas also did this even while taking away no scholarships from men’s basketball and just one from men’s football.

As it turned out, the previous women’s basketball coaches had not done much wrong. The NCAA report went out of its way to call the penalties thrown down on Henrickson “wholly disproportionate.” Now, Kansas officials explain this was all just a big misunderstanding having to do with a confusing timeline, late-breaking men’s basketball news and a lack of cooperation from former women’s basketball coaches.

Posnanski's other money quote:

You might want to act as if this hurt a bit. Heck, I don’t care if it’s just an act. Behind closed doors and with your buddies at the bar, you can whoop it up and raise your glass to the NCAA punishment, which was lighter than chocolate soufflé.

In public, though, you might want to at least pretend you learned something.

(The coaches) reminded of a child who gets spanked, turns to the parent and says, “That didn’t hurt.” The only thing the coaches didn’t do was stick out their tongues.

Ice hockey suffered from a Slapshot image for decades, especially through the 70's and 80's. NHL muckety-mucks finally got serious about the damage caused by team brawls. In 1994, serious rules with serious six-figure fines were set down for teams that emptied benches to fight. Unlike baseball, the NHL has not had a bench-emptying tussle in twelve years. You might not have known that, eh? That's how long it takes to wipe away a bad image. If the NCAA were serious about brawling, they could come up with some nice escalating sanctions for teams involved in fighting. For football, loss of five scholarships for the first incident. Ten for the second. Twenty-five for the third. No need for a months-long investigation and hardly any time for a prayer. That hockey is at least a half-generation ahead of them in team control leads me to think they're not really serious about it. But I'm thinking that the NCAA itself is the organization that has lost institutional control. The Division III solution is elegant. Athletic scholarships are given based on financial need or academic ability. Colleges should get out of the sport-for-money racket. Those UM players would make a fine minor league football team. Or is it bush league?

The Arkansas Catholic reports on a 1935 mural's restoration in a Helena, Arkansas church. It's hard to tell definitively from this image, but this art seems to be a definite cut above the plaster mold look of preconciliar (and some post-conciliar) churches. Naturally, most parishioners hated it. So they covered it up with a curtain in 1940. In the 70's, people painted the names above the six Old Testament prophets. (Don't blame the progressives; remember that we're in the no-explanation, let-the-symbols-speak mode. It must have been the catechists.) Parishioner Annetta Beauchamp has been a long-time advocate for the mural's restoration, having been in touch over the decades with Charles and Dorothy Quest, the artists who painted the wall back in the 30's. Casein, a milk byproduct, was mixed with mica to create the original paint. Beauchamp said, "Mrs. Quest said she stayed on her knees for months. They ordered the pigments from a place in New York City and she ground every one of them with mortar and pestle and she mixed it with ... buttermilk and eggs in from the farm every day and that was done exactly like the early Christian days." Cool. Not at all like varnishing a violin with your wife's blood. By the way, thanks to Amy, I found out about Catholic News Hub, a new service in which various local stories are provided by CNS at their site.

We're so close to the finish line on Lumen Gentium, so let's wrap it up a bit early.

It gives great joy and comfort to this holy and general Synod that even among the separated (believers) there are some who give due honor to the Mother of our Lord and Saviour, especially among the Orientals, who with devout mind and fervent impulse give honor to the Mother of God, ever virgin.(Cfr. Pius XI, Litt. Encycl. Ecclesiam Dei, 12 nov. 1923: AAS 15 (1923) p. 581. Pius XII, Litt. Encycl. Fulgens corona, 8 sept. 1953: AAS 45 (1953) pp. 590-591.) The entire body of the faithful pours forth instant supplications to the Mother of God and Mother of (humankind) that she, who aided the beginnings of the Church by her prayers, may now, exalted as she is above all the angels and saints, intercede before her Son in the fellowship of all the saints, until all families of people, whether they are honored with the title of Christian or whether they still do not know the Saviour, may be happily gathered together in peace and harmony into one people of God, for the glory of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity.

And concludes the constitution:

Each and all these items which are set forth in this dogmatic Constitution have met with the approval of the Council Fathers. And We by the apostolic power given Us by Christ together with the Venerable Fathers in the Holy Spirit, approve, decree and establish it and command that what has thus been decided in the Council be promulgated for the glory of God.

Any overarching sense from the document as a whole? How does it still fit us today? What areas are left for more work in today's Church? Any other comments before we start a look at Sacrosanctum Concilium?

If you're an Australian songwriter, they're looking for a good song for WYD 2008. Archbishop Stanislaw Rylko, president of the Pontifical Council for the Laity on it:

I invite all musically inclined Australian songwriters to turn their talents to this creative and holy cause, which will help us discover and reveal the spiritual and pastoral content of the WYD experience for all.

The theme is "You will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you will be my witness" (Acts 1:8). Criteris include: - They must be inspired by the theme of World Youth Day - Speak to young people - Be an instrument of evangelization that is easy to learn and sing - Written in English - Include a verse in each of the event's other official languages: Spanish, French and Italian. Zenit also reports that "the competition's winner will win a trip to Rome for two, where the anthem will be launched worldwide on Palm Sunday, next April 1. Entries in the competition close this Nov. 30. Hmm, no Latin.

Scanning the Zenit archives, catching up on news of the past month, I found this translation of the pope's response to an Albano priest's question"

As priests, we are called to celebrate a "serious, simple and beautiful liturgy," to use a beautiful formula contained in the document "Communicating the Gospel in a Changing World" by the Italian bishops. Holy Father, can you help us to understand how all this can be expressed in the "ars celebrandi?"

Pope Benedict's reply included this:

"(A)rs celebrandi" is not intended as an invitation to some sort of theater or show, but to an interiority that makes itself felt and becomes acceptable and evident to the people taking part. Only if they see that this is not an exterior or spectacular "ars" -- we are not actors! -- but the expression of the journey of our heart that attracts their hearts too, will the liturgy become beautiful, will it become the communion with the Lord of all who are present. Of course, external things must also be associated with this fundamental condition, expressed in St. Benedict's words: "Mens concordet voci" -- the heart is truly raised, uplifted to the Lord. We must learn to say the words properly. Sometimes, when I was still a teacher in my country, young people had read the sacred Scriptures. And they read them as one reads the text of a poem one has not understood. Naturally, to learn to say words correctly one must first understand the text with its drama, with its immediacy. It is the same for the Preface and for the Eucharistic Prayer. It is difficult for the faithful to follow a text as long as our Eucharistic Prayer. For this reason these new "inventions" are constantly cropping up. However, with constantly new Eucharistic Prayers one does not solve the problem. The problem is that this is a moment that also invites others to silence with God and to pray with God. Therefore, things can only go better if the Eucharistic Prayer is said well and with the correct pauses for silence, if it is said with interiority but also with the art of speaking. It follows that the recitation of the Eucharistic Prayer requires a moment of special attention if it is to be spoken in such a way that it involves others. I believe we should also find opportunities in catechesis, in homilies and in other circumstances to explain this Eucharistic Prayer well to the People of God so that they can follow the important moments -- the account and the words of the Institution, the prayer for the living and the dead, the thanksgiving to the Lord and the epiclesis -- if the community is truly to be involved in this prayer. Thus, the words must be pronounced properly. There must then be an adequate preparation. Altar servers must know what to do; lectors must be truly experienced speakers. Then the choir, the singing, should be rehearsed: And let the altar be properly decorated. All this, even if it is a matter of many practical things, is part of the "ars celebrandi."

This is vastly different from the pre-conciliar emphasis on saying the "right" words. I'm heartened the pope sees the importance of preparation, rehearsal, and practical skill in the various roles of the liturgy.