How do YOU understand the meaning of "fully conscious, and active participation in liturgical celebrations"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lepanto
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The more I thought about it, the more I realized that in a sense, we face the “Martha/Mary” syndrome. When Jesus visited Lazarus, Martha and Mary, Martha busied herself wth the external apsects of hospitality for Jesus, cooking, cleaning and whatever else there needed to be done. Mary, on the other hand, took the more internal aspect, namely, sitting at the feet of Jesus and listening to Him. Martha complained to Jesus that Mary was doing little to help her. Jesus told Martha that her sister “took the better part” and it wasn’t going to be taken from her.

We probably should have a little bit of Martha and a little bit of Mary when we participate in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Granted, we are not bumps on a log when we are at Mass. We just don’t stare out into space during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. On the other hand, we don’t yell and holler either.

When we assist at Mass, we do so wholeheartedly, from the siltent depths of our hearts and souls, to our voices to our stitting, standing and kneeling. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a tactile expeirence. We see the liurgical colors of the season. We taste the Body and Blood of Christ. We hear the music, and, if we are lucky enough, the bells. If we are really fortunate, we even get to smell the fragrant aroma of the incense as it rises from the thurible.

Throughout these threads, I have bragged (incenssantly, I suppose) about my parochial vicar. However, of all of the priests in the diocese, including the local Ordinary, he makes a conscious effort to foster active participation in the Mass, both interior and exterior. This past Christmas, for example, the use of incense made a brief, but very welcome return. Unfortunately, our parish doesn’t have bells, if not they, too, would have been heard.

Active participation doesn’t mean Martha vs. Mary. We can and should have both. Without Martha’s preparation, done with great love, Jesus would not have had a great meal. Without Mary’s simply being with Him, Jesus would not have had company. We need both.
 
benedictgal said:
The more I thought about it, the more I realized that in a sense, we face the “Martha/Mary” syndrome.

Jesus told Martha that her sister “took the better part” and it wasn’t going to be taken from her. We probably should have a little bit of Martha and a little bit of Mary when we participate in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass…

Active participation doesn’t mean Martha vs. Mary. We can and should have both. Without Martha’s preparation, done with great love, Jesus would not have had a great meal. Without Mary’s simply being with Him, Jesus would not have had company. We need both.
Click to expand...
I like that. I realize that your intention is to make a sensible point about the Mass, so I guess it’s not really to the point if I focus on Luke’s text. But, hey, you left out one of my favorite lines, one of the wonderful examples of the eloquence of Jesus: But one thing is needful. (Lk 10:42)

So, why is the Martha stuff needful at Mass? Why should we have both?
benedictgal said:
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a tactile experience.
Click to expand...
And there’s a possible answer.

This seems like a really fundamental point to me, and it goes some way to answering the question that bugs me, viz, why did anybody think “active participation” would be an improvement on “assisting” at Mass in reverent silence and stillness?

Question: Why were all the Marys told to get up and go be Marthas?

Possible Answer: Because it’s a sacrament, and sacraments are tactile, external as well as internal.

Hey, that’s less troubling than the answer I would have come up with: Because people weren’t doing a very good job as Marys, and it’s much easier to be a Martha.

Aside: It really is fundamental. As a catechist teaching eighth graders about the Church, I frequently throw out questions like, “Well, what does it mean to be a Catholic, anyway? What’s the difference between Catholics and other Christians?” There are many important answers (not all highly complimentary!), but the one I want them to get is: “Catholic Christianity is sacramental; especially our worship, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.”

ASD​

Traditional Latin Mass: Translation and Grammar
 
I think that the Martha/Mary example is nice and I like it, but I also think it’s limited in some ways.

Certainly, the Gospel is wonderful commentary for meditation on the differences, similarities, and interplay between the active and the contemplative life, as well as to the relationship and interplay between the two in a single soul.

On the other hand, I don’t think that the Liturgical worship of God can necessarily be split very evenly along that line, nor that it need be.

For example, in the Eastern Catholic rites, they have very long traditions of the more contemplative, or perhaps more appropriately for the Eastern rites, mystical life. On the other hand, their Divine Liturgies do not make this distinction so clearly, often involving much “activity” as well as much stillness. (In fact, my understanding is that in some Eastern rites, the Divine Liturgy is made up primarily of activity of some sort or another, for what it’s worth).

I give that as an example to illustrate my point. I don’t think that to offer the Confiteor, to offer the Psalm responses, to perhaps offer song or chant, and to offer various acclamations are contrary to the spirit of Mary. Surely, in sitting at Jesus’ feet, she may have spoken at some point. We could of course consider certain aspects even of mental prayer involving “activity,” such as meditation interspersed with vocal petitions or statements, which I will sometimes do and have seen recommended in much of the reading I have done on mental prayer.

In short, even John of the Cross did not spend the second half of his life without uttering any vocal prayers, nor even it would seem highly likely a single day. Much like the false dichotomy that is often suggested between faith and science, I think that it is easy to see the liturgy as a false dichotomy between being a Mary and being a Martha, for the reality is that neither Mary nor Martha was, in the fullness of her life, entirely without something of the other.

I don’t think that the Mass was made into more of a “Martha experience” because it was easier, but because the true Liturgical worship of God involves aspects of both.

That being said, an interesting thought is that just as the Lord calls some of us to be Marys and others Marthas, perhaps the Holy Spirit has guided the Roman Church into providing each with a liturgical option more suited to his tastes. It’s surely an interesting thought, whether or not it be so.

By the way, ASD, did you see the new thread that was split off containing our discussion?
 
benedictgal said:
The more I thought about it, the more I realized that in a sense, we face the “Martha/Mary” syndrome.
Click to expand...
“One thing is needful” notwithstanding… I see Martha’s problem as being distracted from what Mary was experiencing because of her own work, not simply that she was working.

I like what Pope Benedict wrote about participation in Sacramentum Caritatis 55:
In their consideration of the actuosa participatio of the faithful in the liturgy, the Synod Fathers also discussed the personal conditions required for fruitful participation on the part of individuals. One of these is certainly the spirit of constant conversion which must mark the lives of all the faithful. Active participation in the eucharistic liturgy can hardly be expected if one approaches it superficially, without an examination of his or her life.

This inner disposition can be fostered, for example, by recollection and silence for at least a few moments before the beginning of the liturgy, by fasting and, when necessary, by sacramental confession. A heart reconciled to God makes genuine participation possible. The faithful need to be reminded that there can be no actuosa participatio in the sacred mysteries without an accompanying effort to participate actively in the life of the Church as a whole, including a missionary commitment to bring Christ’s love into the life of society.

Clearly, full participation in the Eucharist takes place when the faithful approach the altar in person to receive communion. Yet true as this is, care must be taken lest they conclude that the mere fact of their being present in church during the liturgy gives them a right or even an obligation to approach the table of the Eucharist. Even in cases where it is not possible to receive sacramental communion, participation at Mass remains necessary, important, meaningful and fruitful. In such circumstances it is beneficial to cultivate a desire for full union with Christ through the practice of spiritual communion, praised by Pope John Paul II and recommended by saints who were masters of the spiritual life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top