Hello,
What do you think, should text for the Mass be allowed to be shortened? Obviously the most common form of this is the readings (primarily the Gospel) has an optional shorter version. But, also the sequences for solemnities (i.e., for Corpus Christi).
To me, to shorten the text robs the faithful of hearing the Scriptures and very important catechetical and dogmatic proclamations in their fullness.
Hi, JMJ - I started a
thread a month ago about short forms of readings at Mass. As some people noted on the thread one reason for selecting the short form is to omit a section which may be too much for the congregation to take in at that time. However I wonder if it is concern for the congregation in terms of time that is actually the primary motivator for readers selecting short forms. It seems to me that if a group of bishops selected a particular Scripture text (granted they agreed on the short form too) then we should read the full form. I can’t help thinking, especially in the case of the Gospels, that by reading the short forms we are implying that even one of Christ’s teachings can simply be glossed over in favour of another…
I think the sequences are very rarely sung in churches. In our cathedral we sing some of the main sequences during the year such as Victimae Paschali Laudes on Easter Sunday and Veni Sanctae Spiritus on Pentecost Sunday. I certainly like singing them, but I expect most other parish churches in the diocese have probably never heard one of these sequences.
Overall, I greatly dislike attempts to shorten the Mass by any means. In my parish church the congregation have come to expect that Mass will not go over thirty-five minutes on a Sunday. In the cathedral, where I attend Mass, it normally will not go over fifty minutes. However, over the last few weeks a visiting priest celebrated Masses which frequently went over an hour on Sundays and up to forty minutes on weekdays! The congregation were shocked! Ultimately I think attempts at short Masses are out of concern for the congregation - though this concern is misplaced because many priests are simply trying to keep the people happy. In Ireland’s case, many priests have lost so many from their flock in the past decade that they will almost do whatever it takes to keep those they still have.
This, unfortunately, demonstrates a grave misunderstanding (or perhaps a complete non-understanding) among many of the laity of the importance and power of the Mass. I mean, this one time in the week that the Church asks them to spend with Christ at Mass is about one hour out of their whole week - just about half a percent of the week! And it must go deeper than this - to the Eucharist, for example. As a Cardinal (whose name escapes me) said a few months ago, if people really understood or believed in what or who they were receiving at Holy Communion they would think twice before missing Mass. Granted, we’re talking about people who have actually made it to Mass, but many it seems cannot get out of the church quick enough. Why? Because they do not believe in the nourishing power of the Word of God or because (as they see it) the priest is only giving them a piece of wafer and an ordinary cup of wine…i.e. Mass is therefore boring.
Unfortunately, for issues such as the Eucharist, boring Mass, omitting prayers, short readings - all things that result in the priest celebrating a shorter Mass - there is somewhat of a vicious-circle in terms of educating and evangelising the people. The desire to keep people happy through a short Mass extends to the homily. I have heard of dioceses where the priests have been directed to keep their sermons to less than four minutes! So, what should be a most opportune time to give a solid grounding in Scripture and Church Doctrine or to renew interest in the Mass is denied - and the reason? To keep the people happy. Rant over
