Does God design some souls to be more sensitive to liturgy?

[leonie]

Liturgy is often a divisive issue among devout Catholics. I’ve often wondered if some people’s souls have been designed to be more sensitive to liturgy. It makes sense to me since some people in general seem to need more beauty around them.

Or, is it a matter of formation? Are some of us not well trained or conditioned to expect beautiful liturgy? Are we dumbed down?

I know I grew up in the middle of the seventies and eighties in a Protestant looking church with rather banal music. I love a beautiful liturgy, but a lesser Mass/service doesn’t seem to affect me like it does some.

It helps me to be more tolerant of Catholics with strong opinions about traditional liturgy if I consider that the Creator has placed a particular hunger in their souls. I don’t know if more traditionally minded Catholics have considered that God may have designed souls with different sensitivities to liturgies.

What do you think?

 

[Caesar]

I know I always feel when I attend a Novus Ordo that something is missing.

From a young age, even when I was an altar boy at Novus Ordo Masses, I loved the incense and the occaisional Latin hymns, and the beautiful artwork.

The only Novus Ordo Mass I felt “right” in was one I was at a few months ago that had the Ordinaries in Latin (Gregorian Chant with an Organ!), incense, traditional vestments, a communion rail, and a properly placed altar.

 

[chicago]

There may be a certain type of person who is inately more sensitive to such things. Or it may merely be that wherever a person is in life at a particular moment can drive their concerns to a signifigant extent.

Here in Chicago, for instance, there are a few parishes known for their dedication to liturgy. People who are quite concerned about such matters tend to be drawn to them, to the point that anything other than what they have to offer may be found bothersome.

Someone I know, for example, is concerned about the details to a tee. If any little thing is off, this person will be bothered by the “illicity” and desire it corrected (or just plain not want to attend that Mass). I, myself, once was more troubled by such things, too. At the time, I was happy to find one of these parishes where I could comfortably pray without having to play liturgical cop. I still don’t like people playing fast and loose with liturgy, but I’ve become more tolerant of a lot of things; knowing well that there are slight irregularities here and there and everywhere. I’ve also recognized just how human we all are and gotten honest with the reality that we live in an imperfect world of imperfect people and that it is reasonbale to expect imperfections. Not to mention that there is more than a single way to skin a cat. Sometimes I think that is the problem, then. People can get so caught up in desiring the perfect (or their perception of what is right) that they make it the enemy of the good, and don’t leave room for humanity.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I know I always feel when I attend a Novus Ordo that something is missing.

From a young age, even when I was an altar boy at Novus Ordo Masses, I loved the incense and the occaisional Latin hymns, and the beautiful artwork.

The only Novus Ordo Mass I felt “right” in was one I was at a few months ago that had the Ordinaries in Latin (Gregorian Chant with an Organ!), incense, traditional vestments, a communion rail, and a properly placed altar.

And this is instructive: you use the word “felt.” You should continue to use that particular word, because it doesn’t smack of a “knowing more than the Church,” particularly in the area of the “proper” placement of an altar (which the Church does not define as being backed up against the eastern wall. A “properly” placed altar may well be free-standing). “Felt” conveys your thoughts far better as it’s understandably, even sympathetically, subjective, as opposed to having your preferences stated in such a way that it appears that you believe that the Church is wrong and she’ll only get it right when she does it your way. Would that everyone could remember the word “felt.”

To the OP: I think most people love beautiful liturgy offered properly. The problem with that is what constitutes “beautiful?” We know what constitutes “proper,” ie, the celebration of the Mass according to the rubrics set forth by the Church, but “beautiful?” Many find the Divine Liturgy as it is celebrated in the Eastern Churches and by the Orthodox beautiful, ethereal, and transcendent. My attendance upon the Divine Liturgy left me thinking that it was lovely, but that I am drawn more to an austere liturgy, a more spare liturgy. My attendance upon the TLM just made me glad of the reforms. That doesn’t mean I don’t want incense, which I love, or beautiful, well-made vestments, or good music (by that I mean chant and a few hymns of the less-rollicking variety, though indeed, I wish we had more holy silence in Mass, particularly before the Gospel and after the homily, after everyone has rec. Communion, etc.). What some see as beautiful others see as flowery and overdone. But I was rec. into the Church under the auspices of a Carmelite monastery, where things were austere and spare…and where they used incense and had beautiful vestments and chant or plainly sung, yet moving music (not only at Mass, but at Benediction).

 

[Eileen_T]

To me, the Mass is worship directed to Almighty God Who loves us so much that He became Man, suffered and died for His miserable creatures.

When I am at Mass, I am there to worship with reverence, awe and thanksgiving for this great sacrifice. This worship is directed through the person of the priest to God. It is vertical, not horizontal.

At some NO Masses, well, what can I say, I have seen more respect and reverance at an Amway rally.

 

[leonie]

To me, the Mass is worship directed to Almighty God Who loves us so much that He became Man, suffered and died for His miserable creatures.

When I am at Mass, I am there to worship with reverence, awe and thanksgiving for this great sacrifice. This worship is directed through the person of the priest to God. It is vertical, not horizontal.

.

Good point. Do you think that some are offended because they have righteous anger that God is not being given proper worship. Or, are they angry because the worship doesn’t “feed” their souls.

It’s probably all mixed up.

This is such a good point. We should worry less about how we respond to the liturgy than if we (those assisting at Mass) are trully worshipping God.

The reason I’m thinking about this is there seems to be so little understanding between those who are very particular about a traditional liturgy (which is beautiful, I agree) and those who don’t have a particular desire for traditional liturgy.

I am wondering if it is an innate sensitivity or innate lack of sensitivity. Some people seem very drawn to liturgical study as well. Maybe their mission on Earth is tied more into giving worship through liturgy.

 

[Marsha_Adams]

I love a beautifully done liturgy, but it is more to me than just whether or not the liturgy is aesthetically pleasing, or even whether it elevates my senses to respond with a deeper devotion. To me a properly done liturgy is a sign of obedience to Rome.

In the U.S. we seem to have two churches, the Roman Catholic Church and the American Catholic church. Sometimes the only way you can tell which one a parish belongs to is by whether or not it has a proper liturgy. This causes me to be very aware of the liturgy when I am visiting other parishes.

Once I was vacationing in the Saganaw Diocese, during the entire Mass, the Priest never used the word “father”. He only referred to God as the Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier. A woman read the homily sitting down, from Tuesdays with Morrie. By the time I left, I seriously wondered if I had fulfilled my Sunday obligation.

As a convert, loyalty to Rome is very important to me, proper liturgy is a litmus test for that.

Marsha

 

[Caesar]

The “American Catholic Church”?

 

[chicago]

The “American Catholic Church”?

A lot of people use the term to refer to the general “do it yourself” mentality which has given way to all kinds of distortion on the faith and practice.

The same people will usually emphasize the word “Roman” in order to refer to a more rigid rule keeping.

I might add to the mix “Roman-er”, considering that there are the opposite extreme of the “American” types which think that they are more Catholic than the pope, so to speak.

IMO, all of these attitude are well intened, but none are ultimately entirely encapsulating a truly “Catholic” sensibility.

 

[Brenda_V]

The “American Catholic Church”?

Ceasar,

Sadly, there are other churches who call themselves catholic - there is one that is the “American Catholic Church” and the There is the “Liberal Catholic Church” too., I have one just up the street from me (not sure which one it is), they have a Priest (?) and incense and everything else as I understand it but they advertise “all the bells and smells without the guilt”. Huh?

Sadly, every year our Archibishop has to send out a warning of all the churches taking the name of Catholic and many of our traditions and practices that are not in line with Rome.

Then there is what some call the “American Catholic” and those are still under Rome but for whatever reason do things their own way - liturgy? (NOTE, this is just an extreme example that I have heard of) Gosh, why can’t we do a play for the gospel reading instead of the reading? Let’s include our teens in the play and it will be more relevant to them! Or, lets use crystal chalices for the cups, they are expensive and pretty - never mind the fact that they are not in the classification of “precious METALS”, or the fraction can be done after the consecration by an EMHC . We are in America, we live in a democracy so our Church must be a democracy (never mind the fact that the US is actually a Republic and the Church itself is more like a Monarchy with it’s proper hierarchy.)

Now as far as some souls being more sensitive to liturgy, I think it may be more of a stage in their learning. I used to be like that, you know, the liturgical police! This is shortly after we got internet (oh, about 10 years ago) and I had some wonderful sources to go to to satisfy my need of knowledge! I would then take what I learned here and apply it to the Masses I was attending, thankfully my Parish had never gotten that bad and the “worst” was getting better. When traveling now I still will see or hear something that is liturgically an abuse but rarely have I seen something that has made the Mass invalid, illicit, yes, but not ivalid. Most Masses I have attended outside of my mother Parish and the Mission have had small abuses in them and it was usually some special Sunday that the children were involved so I wouldn’t even be able to tell you if it was something that was done regularly or just once a year (and in that case, maybe they had permission from ther Bishop to do it!)

I gave up on being the liturgy police and when I did, I was able to enjoy Mass and participate more fully again whether in my home parish or when visiting somewhere else.

Brenda V.

 

[kleary]

Liturgy is often a divisive issue among devout Catholics. I’ve often wondered if some people’s souls have been designed to be more sensitive to liturgy. It makes sense to me since some people in general seem to need more beauty around them.

Or, is it a matter of formation? Are some of us not well trained or conditioned to expect beautiful liturgy? Are we dumbed down?

I know I grew up in the middle of the seventies and eighties in a Protestant looking church with rather banal music. I love a beautiful liturgy, but a lesser Mass/service doesn’t seem to affect me like it does some.

It helps me to be more tolerant of Catholics with strong opinions about traditional liturgy if I consider that the Creator has placed a particular hunger in their souls. I don’t know if more traditionally minded Catholics have considered that God may have designed souls with different sensitivities to liturgies.

What do you think?

Well for one thing there were several things as to me.

In the 5th grade Sister Marie Raymond (To those who went to St. Joseph’s Regional School in Somers point, NJ you will remember her) was telling us of “all the beautiful changes of Vatican II- no more communion rails, no more Latin, no more priest with his back to the people.”

That day I was scheduled to serve Mass at St. Joseph’s Church (the school I went to).

I remember going into the beautiful sanctuary, everything still intact- high altar with the altar cards and linens still on it with the Tabernacle on it also and the six huge candlesticks that reached almost to the ceiling. The large marble communion rail still there, cushions up against it also- YET NO ONE KNEELED THERE ANYMORE.

I turned and looked at this huge “table” placed in the middle of the sanctuary. It was made of plain old 2x4’s and plywood covered in a green cloth. It had been bolted through the marble floor and the floor was cracked where the screws penetrated the marble.

Anyway I did not know at that time that what the Tabernacle sat on was the altar…yet I remembered what sister told me and I went up to it- placed my hand on it and I heard a voice inside me saying, “This is THE REAL Altar of God”.

When I looked around at the sanctuary I felt like crying. This was fifth grade! I saw a communion rail no longer used and wondered why. I saw a horrible monstrosity bolted to a floor and wondered why. I longed to see the Mass of the Catholic church and was most certain that it had been destroyed, never to return…I felt so sad.

Then the pastor of the parish died, and in his dying breath he begged for the “Renovation of the Sanctuary”.

They renovated it according to his wishes. They tore down the altar rail completely, moved the high altar out to the center of the sanctuary and made a new “Eucharistic Pillar” for the Tabernacle". They also took Jesus off the crucifix so that only a cross remained and got rid of the many statues and votive candles. They even got rid of the confessionals and built a new “reconciliation room” from the ushers room.

Ken

 

[DustinsDad]

And this is instructive: you use the word “felt.” You should continue to use that particular word, because it doesn’t smack of a “knowing more than the Church,” … Would that everyone could remember the word “felt.”

And thank you for sharing your feelings on Caesar’s post.

DustinsDad

 

[steve_green_2]

Well for one thing there were several things as to me.

In the 5th grade Sister Marie Raymond (To those who went to St. Joseph’s Regional School in Somers point, NJ you will remember her) was telling us of “all the beautiful changes of Vatican II- no more communion rails, no more Latin, no more priest with his back to the people.”

That day I was scheduled to serve Mass at St. Joseph’s Church (the school I went to).

I remember going into the beautiful sanctuary, everything still intact- high altar with the altar cards and linens still on it with the Tabernacle on it also and the six huge candlesticks that reached almost to the ceiling. The large marble communion rail still there, cushions up against it also- YET NO ONE KNEELED THERE ANYMORE.

I turned and looked at this huge “table” placed in the middle of the sanctuary. It was made of plain old 2x4’s and plywood covered in a green cloth. It had been bolted through the marble floor and the floor was cracked where the screws penetrated the marble.

Anyway I did not know at that time that what the Tabernacle sat on was the altar…yet I remembered what sister told me and I went up to it- placed my hand on it and I heard a voice inside me saying, “This is THE REAL Altar of God”.

When I looked around at the sanctuary I felt like crying. This was fifth grade! I saw a communion rail no longer used and wondered why. I saw a horrible monstrosity bolted to a floor and wondered why. I longed to see the Mass of the Catholic church and was most certain that it had been destroyed, never to return…I felt so sad.

Then the pastor of the parish died, and in his dying breath he begged for the “Renovation of the Sanctuary”.

They renovated it according to his wishes. They tore down the altar rail completely, moved the high altar out to the center of the sanctuary and made a new “Eucharistic Pillar” for the Tabernacle". They also took Jesus off the crucifix so that only a cross remained and got rid of the many statues and votive candles. They even got rid of the confessionals and built a new “reconciliation room” from the ushers room.

Ken

Sad

 

[leonie]

Well for one thing there were several things as to me.

In the 5th grade Sister Marie Raymond (To those who went to St. Joseph’s Regional School in Somers point, NJ you will remember her) was telling us of “all the beautiful changes of Vatican II- no more communion rails, no more Latin, no more priest with his back to the people.”

That day I was scheduled to serve Mass at St. Joseph’s Church (the school I went to).

I remember going into the beautiful sanctuary, everything still intact- high altar with the altar cards and linens still on it with the Tabernacle on it also and the six huge candlesticks that reached almost to the ceiling. The large marble communion rail still there, cushions up against it also- YET NO ONE KNEELED THERE ANYMORE.

I turned and looked at this huge “table” placed in the middle of the sanctuary. It was made of plain old 2x4’s and plywood covered in a green cloth. It had been bolted through the marble floor and the floor was cracked where the screws penetrated the marble.

Anyway I did not know at that time that what the Tabernacle sat on was the altar…yet I remembered what sister told me and I went up to it- placed my hand on it and I heard a voice inside me saying, “This is THE REAL Altar of God”.

When I looked around at the sanctuary I felt like crying. This was fifth grade! I saw a communion rail no longer used and wondered why. I saw a horrible monstrosity bolted to a floor and wondered why. I longed to see the Mass of the Catholic church and was most certain that it had been destroyed, never to return…I felt so sad.

Then the pastor of the parish died, and in his dying breath he begged for the “Renovation of the Sanctuary”.

They renovated it according to his wishes. They tore down the altar rail completely, moved the high altar out to the center of the sanctuary and made a new “Eucharistic Pillar” for the Tabernacle". They also took Jesus off the crucifix so that only a cross remained and got rid of the many statues and votive candles. They even got rid of the confessionals and built a new “reconciliation room” from the ushers room.

Ken

Yeah, I could see it would be hard to go from “wow” to Quaker meeting hall. I grew in in the “Quaker meeting hall” type of church. But, we used to go downtown for Midnight Mass on Christmas Eve. St. John’s was so beautiful. The Choir in the choir loft was beautiful. The Priest would come out on the little balcony and chant the “begats.” Everyone was dressed to the t’s and it was standing room only.

But, that was my only exposure.

But, a lot of people didn’t blink an eye when the churches were stripped. Why do some feel the loss deep in their souls and others not?

Does God speak more to some through visual?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

And thank you for sharing your feelings on Caesar’s post.

DustinsDad

Just shooting for clarity, Dustin’s Dad. I wouldn’t want people mislead as to what a “properly placed” altar is. I’m sure YOU don’t.

 

[JButky]

To the OP: I think most people love beautiful liturgy offered properly. The problem with that is what constitutes “beautiful?” We know what constitutes “proper,” ie, the celebration of the Mass according to the rubrics set forth by the Church, but “beautiful?”

I don’t think most people know what either “proper” or “beautiful” are for that matter…

“Proper” should be inherently “beautiful”. People judge beauty based on their own experiences given to them by a polluted culture. As such there are many concepts of “beauty” in this world.

In heaven there is only one beauty. It is that particular one, that we must struggle to grow and learn while we are here in an imperfect state. Only through that struggle does perfection reveal its true beauty. Unfortunately, we need Divine grace to help us in that regard, which will reach it’s completion only in the next life. But Divine grace works here too. That is why it must be “proper” first. The mind can more easily be cognitive of that which in turn will lead to learning authentic beauty.

If we can’t get proper right, how are we to experience true beauty?

Joe B

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I don’t think most people know what either “proper” or “beautiful” are for that matter…

“Proper” should be inherently “beautiful”. People judge beauty based on their own experiences given to them by a polluted culture. As such there are many concepts of “beauty” in this world.

In heaven there is only one beauty. It is that particular one, that we must struggle to grow and learn while we are here in an imperfect state. Only through that struggle does perfection reveal its true beauty. Unfortunately, we need Divine grace to help us in that regard, which will reach it’s completion only in the next life. But Divine grace works here too. That is why it must be “proper” first. The mind can more easily be cognitive of that which in turn will lead to learning authentic beauty.

If we can’t get proper right, how are we to experience true beauty?

Joe B

You make an excellent point.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

I don’t know if individuals are necessarily “designed” to be more attuned to liturgical concerns, but from my experience the amount to which one imbibed and internalized in one’s youth the principles underlying Catholic worship (and, often, how much one has actually reflected on those) determines to a large extent how closely one is affected by liturgical innovation. When new principles were invented rather than developed, those who didn’t have very deep roots in what had come before thought, “Well this is how we do things now.” Those with deeper ties to previous piety knew that things were no longer being done properly, sometimes as only a gut feeling that this isn’t how we do things, other times with reference to reflected principle.

I think at that point, the argument over the proper way to worship really did have a right answer. The new forms thrusted upon congregations truly were foreign, and improper based on received propriety. Yet by this point, we have a church of youth (myself in that age range) that has been raised with the “new proper,” which makes propriety a much more subjective term based on what one was raised on. The split is furthered by the fact that some young people, once again myself included, were raised by priests and parents who, even though worshipping according to the new rite, acted in such a way as to perpetuate “old proper” to a large extent, enough that those rules of behavior make enough sense for some youth to embrace them.

The more someone has internalized - lives, moves, breathes according to - either old proper or new proper, the more affected that person will be by liturgical action that violates his propriety.

 

[Marsha_Adams]

My spiritual director once spoke to me of two types of people. He used terms that I have long since forgotten, but the gist of it was that there are those who find it easier to worship in richly appointed surroundings - stain glass windows, beautiful statutes, etc. - because these things elevate their minds to God. Others find it easier to worship in much plainer surroundings - a small room with nothing but a prie dieu and a cross on the wall, for instance - because there are no distractions. He said that the latter was indicative of a more advanced spirituality.

Marsha

 

[The_Augustinian]

I’m not sure whether or no a plainer sanctuary is indicative of a more “advanced” spirituality, but since the vast majority of Catholics are probably not advanced as St. Francis, they urgently need the incense, the statues, and the stained glass to help them. It’s simply a tragedy that this uglification took place. I think that proper worship should be done with the whole body as well as the soul, and that the experience of the senses – the smell of the incense, the sight of the altar, the sound of singing – is necessary. Let the more contemplative worship in a plainer, side chapel, but let’s not give meat to those who need milk first!