 |
| Bishop Roger Foys of Covington, Kentucky |
It seems that the decree's primary concern is for the liturgical well-being of all Catholics in the Diocese of Covington. Bishop Foys appears to have taken the publication of the new English translation of the third edition of the Roman Missal, which was used throughout the US for the first time last Sunday, as an opportunity to reflect upon the real goals of Sacrosanctum Concilium. He also seems to desire that no-one in his Diocese abuses the liturgy by creating it in their own image - at the expense of the larger Church. In that sense, the Bishop's first direction emphasised that:-
The text of the Roman Missal be used exactly as it is written. As stated in the citation from the Second Vatican Council none of us has the authority to change the text for any reason.It would appear that in some parts of the world it has become all too common for priests and / or "lay clerics" to change the texts of the Mass, or any other Divinely ordained liturgy, as it suits them. One assumes that the reasons they do this are varied: ranging from a genuine (though misguided) desire to be "inclusive" to a more sinister attempt to hijack the Church's liturgy for theologically dubious or egotistical reasons. In seeking some justification for vandalising the Mass, many have often mentioned the Second Vatican Council (or its "spirit") - assuming (wrongly, of course) that Vatican II encouraged mucking about with liturgical texts. As Bishop Roger Foys has now pointed out, though, the Sacred Council's official document on worship and the liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium) specifically bars anyone from making arbitrary changes to the form of the Church's Sacred Liturgy.
a. This includes altering or changing any of the language contained in the liturgical books of the Church, not only the Roman Missal, but the Lectionary and other ritual books - the responses and prayers of the priest, and also those of the people.
b. Please note that only those texts approved for use in the Dioceses of the United States may be used.
c. Priests and deacons are restricted in their use of the Penitential Act – Form C, to those invocations found in the Order of Mass of the Roman Missal and those in Appendix VI (emphases mine)
In his recent decree, Bishop Foys also directs his flock to ensure that "music used in the Sacred Liturgy be theologically sound and properly composed in accord with the teaching of the Church on Sacred Music." He explained that theologically sound hymns should be used and that "[m]usic for the Ordinary Parts of the Mass (also known as Service Music – e.g. Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus, Agnus Dei) must have the approval from the Diocesan Office of Worship and Liturgy." I am sure that the people of Covington already use proper Mass settings, but Foys' decree should now also inspire other bishops to follow suit - ensuring that sacred music wherever the Roman Rite is celebrated leads to fruitful prayer as opposed to mindless entertainment or tediously boring and repetitive singing (so-called folk Masses and the like).
Already, many bloggers and commentators (The Hermeneutic of Continuity and Pray Tell to name but two) have congratulated Bishop Foys for decreeing that from now on all "gestures for the priests, deacons, religious and lay faithful [are to] be strictly carried out in accord with the rubrics of the Roman Missal." The Bishop of Covington also used his decree to remind his people of the need to adhere to the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, which, amongst other things, states that "[a] common bodily posture, to be observed by all those taking part [in the Mass], is a sign of the unity of the members of the Christian community gathered together for the Sacred Liturgy, for it expresses the intentions and the spiritual attitude of the participants."
Here in London, it is often the case that at least one or two members of any given congregation take it upon themselves to stand throughout the Eucharistic Prayer or after the Agnus Dei. Many are young and healthy, with no excuses to stand at these sacred moments when the rest of the congregation is corporally kneeling. Such egotism can be quite distracting (hence Evelyn Waugh's famous remark that Mass had become an occasion of sin for him!), and just goes to show how little respect some Catholics have for the Real Presence as well as their fellow believers. Thankfully, then, Bishop Foys' decree points out that in his diocese: -
Special note should be made concerning the proper posture during the Eucharistic Prayer. In the United States the lay faithful are instructed to kneel from the end of the Sanctus through the end of the Great Amen (see GIRM 43). Deacons kneel from the epiclesis through the showing of the chalice. Priests remain standing. In addition, "the faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the diocesan Bishop determines otherwise" (GIRM 43). (emphases mine - these rules, as far as I know, generally apply to all Catholics of the Latin Rite)It seems that the Bishop of Covington's instructions on how to pray the Lord's Prayer during Mass has already caused quite a stir - with some dissenters warning of their intention to rebel! In his decree, Bishop Foys had this to say regarding the Pater Noster: -
Special note should also be made concerning the gesture for the Our Father. Only the priest is given the instruction to “extend” his hands. Neither the deacon nor the lay faithful are instructed to do this. No gesture is prescribed for the lay faithful in the Roman Missal; nor the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, therefore the extending or holding of hands by the faithful should not be performed. (emphasis mine)In other words, the Bishop has definitively banned - within the Diocese of Covington - the liturgical abuse of holding hands during the Our Father - a relatively common practice in the US and parts of the UK. Whilst many think that holding hands during the Lord's Prayer is somehow a sign of community spirit or parochial bonding, the truth of the matter is that many, many people feel uncomfortable in being pressured into performing "party game" liturgical gestures. This is why the Church does not sanction them - for everyone should be made to feel welcome at Mass, including those who take their faith seriously, who do not like acting in an immature way, or who suffer from autism or social-phobia, etc.
Ironically, whenever I have found myself at a Mass where the congregation is told to hold hands during the Pater Noster, the intention behind this innovation seems to be a desire to be "inclusive" or to make everyone "feel welcome". The truth is, though, that the Mass is not about corporate group bonding games or hippyish "feel good" gestures. Also, it is a reality - and one that seems lost on "liturgical innovators" - that many people feel very uncomfortable (and therefore unwelcome) when having to engage in 1970's cult-like rituals or anti-liturgical mass hand-holding sessions. People with autism or aspergers' syndrome as well as many others (anxiety sufferers, etc) who live in a liturgically abusive - "all are welcome" - parish must find attending Mass a complete nightmare!
Bishop Roger Foys also directed his flock to observe a Sacred Silence in "churches prior to the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy to allow the clergy and the faithful to properly prepare and dispose themselves for the Sacred Mysteries to which they are about to participate." He also suggested that this holy silence should continue after Mass, "for those who might want to remain in the church to pray." I would add that silence should be generally observed at all times during the Sacrifice of the Mass, for it seems that in some places people are allowed to chat and mingle throughout the Liturgy. Hard as it is to believe, it now appears that even some people who attend the Brompton Oratory are beginning to give themselves over to mindless and distracting chatter during the Sacred Mysteries! (I am not talking about children here, of course, as I am sure that no-one would have a problem with babies and toddlers being a bit disruptive - as is in their nature to be!).
The priests and people of Covington are blessed to have such a wise and concerned bishop, who is willing to implement the actual documents of Vatican II in his diocese. For all too long now, many western Catholics have been fed a lie when it comes to the Second Vatican Council - especially when it comes to the Council's teachings on the liturgy. The reality of the matter is that the so-called "spirit" of Vatican II (which has led to many liturgical abuses) has practically nothing in common with the texts produced by the Council Fathers. It is also a sad fact that many who think they are making the Mass more "accessible" and "friendly" have, in reality, made it less attractive and welcoming. A Modernist version of the Novus Ordo Mass can often be a scary place, especially for fragile or introverted souls. And no-one - especially the vulnerable - should ever be made to feel unwelcome or distracted at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which is why Bishop Foy's Decree is very welcome indeed!
[Image: Bishop Roger Foys; this image has been released into the public domain by Jcs7708; source: Wikimedia Commons]
18 comments:
I hope his excellency, in his document, reminded bishops to wear their pectoral crosses underneath their chasubles and dalmatics! :P
@ Innocentius
LOL - I hadn't noticed that...
Well, we're all a work in progress, I guess!
Living in a community, as I have done for a number of years, I have found that many priests simply do not know that the abuses which they commit, small or great, are, in fact, abuses, so imbued with the spirit of liberalism they have become over the years of ecclesiastical neglect (which was around a long time before the Council!). Clergy have often been ill-formed about the significance and centrality of ritual action in the Christian religion. The meaning of the rites themselves are all but lost, save a few 1970s liturgical gimmicks, which, though often ancient, have been ripped of symbolism. Priests often have very derogatory opinions of their parishioners' intellects and ability to grapple the sacred rites and their meanings.
What is the greater tragedy, however, is the great number of priests who neglect their sacred commission, given to them at their ordination, to teach the truth, holding the precious Word which the Church has put into his consecrated hands. There are so many crises in the Church and in the world today, and one of those crises is a complete lack of proper and thorough on-going formation, both given to a presbyterate, and the inclination of individual priests to both keep themselves educated, and keep up with 'where the Church is at'. For many, it is as if the world stopped in 1979 - over 30 years later, there is an ever-widening rift between the dinosaurs of the Zeitgeist and those who desire ardently the rediscovery of a true Catholic philosophy, theology and praxis.
Many priests, and laypeople, who have a right to well-celebrated liturgies in accord with the mind of the Church, simply do not correct their fellow priests, or pastors, out of charity of their own ignorance. Those priests who are corrected, either lash out, sometimes violently, because of their own epistemological problem which fails to separate their ideas from their very being, and other priests just ignore it, or don't even understand the complaint, so far away from reality they have placed themselves.
Thank God for bishops like this one, who are starting to reign in their wayward priests and people, and bring them back into the universal flock!
Dylan,
Excellent post. Te Deum Laudsmus Indeed!
God Bless,
Michael.
". . . therefore the extending or holding of hands by the faithful should not be performed."
While the bishop is authorized to impose such restrictions, he is wrong if he thinks he is simply interpreting the rubric. It is illogical to infer from the rubric's silence on the posture of the laity that they MUST not extend their hands.
The orans position is THE traditional stance of Christian prayer. Last year the US Catholic bishops actually considered requiring the orans position during the Lord's Prayer. In the end, they chose not to require it, implicitly leaving it up to local bishops or, in the absence of any episcopal ruling, individuals.
I am Antiochian Orthodox. It is pretty common to see Christians of Middle Eastern background assuming the orans position for the Lord's Prayer.
What is a "lay cleric" (other than a contradiction in terms)?
@ Dc Nick
It's my way of describing those men and women who are actually laypeople, but who act as if they are ordained ministers or clerics - i.e. some pushy Eucharistic Minsters or "homilists", "lay parish pastors", etc.
Whilst claiming to be against a "culture of clericalism" many of these middle class, middle aged people have actually formed a new clerical clique - one that is elitist and more controlling than ordained clericalism. They also seem to be motivated by an ideology that isn't about service but about changing the Church.
As you know, this isn't the first time this has happened in the Church. In the Middle Ages, Benefit of Clergy actually extended to laypeople who could read - i.e. an elite laity.
If the people spontaneously hold hands anyway what happens? Will they be denied holy communion for disobeying the bishops orders? Just asking.
@ Bad Catholic
Unless someone is specifically barred from receiving Communion (excommunicated), the decision as to whether or not the person is in the right state to receive with reverence and love is down to the individual's own conscience. Therefore, most priests assume that whoever presents themselves for Communion are rightly disposed / in a state of grace.
So, it would be highly unlikely that anyone would be denied Communion for holding hands at the Our Father at Masses in Covington, even if it is a sinful act of disobedience. Having said that, I would think that if the rebellious action was committed as some kind of stunt or protest - a hijacking of a sacred rite - a good priest would then refuse to give Communion to such a person / people.
Anyone who claims to be Catholic would obey their bishop over this. If they wilfully decide to rebel, though, and if they had any semblance of a Christian conscience they would not then go forward to the Communion rail. It's ultimately a matter for them, though - but who wants to eat condemnation upon themselves (1 Cor 11:29)?
PS - What do others think?
PPS
@ Bad Catholic
Just noticed you qualified your question with the word "spontaneously". If there was no intention to disobey the Bishop then I don't see anything to worry about - grave acts if disobedience have to be intentional and wilful, not just spontaneous acts that haven't really been thought out and are therefore probably the result of years of conditioning (even if the conditioning was wrong in the first place).
There is nothing wrong with extending your hands either to God or to your neighbor ! Either one is an outward sign of humility and community with those present and those deceased.
I hope he doesn't go back to "kissing of the bishop's ring" This was one of the reasons people in high places fall from grace in the first place, because they are "put on a pedastal" and therefore given too much egotistical and illusionary power !
Does the good bishop realize that some people....maybe not all NEED someone to hold their hand during the Our Father...It may be the only hand that "reaches out to them." Mass is community and some of us need this expression of togetherness....
Let's look from the heart and not just the head here....remember, too many "silly rules" got us in trouble before and why some catholics left....
If people want to hold each other's hands, then let them, I say. So long as they are told frequently that it makes them look like they are an exclusive clique, and, frankly, like a bunch of crazy nutters. Truth brings people to Christ, not holding hands. Maybe you think that is an expression of 'fellowship', but your opinion isn't the same as everyone else's. That's a fundamental liberal fallacy.
The orans position is different. The priest expresses the orans position during the Paternoster, and, as the celebrant of the Mass, is making the sign on behalf of the entire assembly, in the same way that certain words are said on behalf of the entire assembly. Other people making this sign during the Mass is an insult to his vocation, and your own. Do you have a right to speak the Eucharistic prayer, to wear Massing vestments, to say, 'Lord be with you'? No. And you don't have the right to do what you damn well want during the liturgy either. It's just plain rude.
That's why it has never been part of our rite.
@ grandprixmama1
I think your Eucharistic theology is a bit skew-wiff. Mass is not community. It is an assembly of the baptised, called by God, to offer and re-present the one sacrifice of Christ, and is a foretaste of the eschatological banquet.
And what has the bishop's ring got to do with it? Catholics should really kiss the ring of their bishop, because they are venerating the mystical marriage of Christ to his Church, which the bishop signifies. It didn't give them 'egotistical and illusionary power', because the power bishops have is very real. Binding and loosing and all that. Even the person of the bishop should be greatly respected, not because they are better than us, but because they are in persona Christi capitas. Even Our Lady obeys bishops, because in them, she sees her Son. That's good enough for me.
I think you need to familiarise yourself with Vatican II.
Innocentius,
The orans stance is properly assumed by whoever is praying. Most of the prayers, including the Eucharistic Prayer, are said only by the priest, and therefore he is the only one who should assume the orans position for those prayers. But the Lord's Prayer is to be said by the whole congregation. Unlike most other prayers, the priest does not say it on our behalf - we all say it together.
The traditional icon at the front of a Byzantine church is Our Lady of the Sign, which depicts the Mother of God in the orans position. Icons of the Theotokos Orante go all the way back to the catacombs. She sets the example for all of us, and no one imagines that she is impersonating a priest.
This man is not worthy of the name Bishop. I suppose some individuals should never have been promoted. Just my opinion, of course, no offense intended, or please forgive me, maybe their was. Prayers should be, prayed in union, and holding hands is a sign of union, a sign of oneness with God.
If this keeps up there will become two Catholic Churches, one stuck in the past worshiping tradition and one that will come closer to the true worship, that worship in truth and spirit, that Christ said He wanted His followers to have.
It is about discipline and obedience to Magesterium of the Church. It is not what we want to do. Look at the Protestant's,everyone is allowed to interpret the scriptures.
Post a Comment