Some Useful Reminders in the Liturgy Debate

I have often brought to our readers attention the wise musings of Brian Holdsworth, certainly one of the smartest and most consistently interesting Catholic voices on social media. He recently posted this very useful video in which he responds to one of the most common tropes of the ongoing debate over liturgy in the Church, which runs more or less as follows: it doesn’t matter so much how we celebrate the liturgy, and specifically, whether we celebrate it in the Ordinary Form (or “unique expression”, if you prefer), or the Extraordinary Form, because the really important thing is that the Eucharist is validly celebrated. And therefore, the argument goes, no one should contend that any given form of it is better than another; a fortiori, no one should contend that any practice permitted by the Church’s liturgical law, (say, never using the Roman Canon) is better than any other.

But as Mr Holdsworth rightly points out, this doesn’t just run altogether contrary to what the Church itself says and has always said about the liturgy. It runs contrary to the whole putative justification for the invention and imposition of the post-Conciliar Rite, which is premised on the idea that everything that we do in the liturgy does matter and is important. The liturgical reform itself is, or was supposed to be, an expression of the Church’s “grave concern” for every aspect of the rite of Mass, which in turn means that we ourselves should also be concerned that everything in it be done not just validly, but beautifully, reverently, and in a manner consonant with tradition, as the Second Vatican Council wanted and asked for.

Speaking of which, on Sunday, another decimal anniversary of the most recent ecumenical council, the sixtieth since its closing, passed with the usual lack of fanfare; there were no celebrations of note, and even the Pope barely mentioned it in passing at the Angelus. But it is always worth reminding ourselves that the Novus Ordo is not the liturgy of the Council, and does not represent what it wanted and asked for. Very few people are as well-versed in this matter as Dom Alcuin Reid, who offers a very useful summary of the problem in a column published two days ago in the Catholic Herald. As is always the case with Dom Alcuin’s writings, no summary or excerpt really does it justice, but the crux of the matter is this: 

“In marking the sixtieth anniversary of the closing of the Council it is important that we are clear about the facts. The Mass promulgated in the Missal of 1970, its successors and their various vernacular translations included, is not that which was called for or authorised by the Second Vatican Council. It is the product – duly authorised by the Pope, and sacramentally valid, but a product nonetheless – of a group of enthusiasts whose Secretary would later boast in respect of their work: “Fortune favours the brave.” In other words, what we have in our parishes in the modern rites, even faithfully celebrated, is not what the Council called for. It is in some part a broad interpretation of the Council’s Constitution on the Liturgy and in other parts an ideologically and politically motivated flagrant departure from what it authorised, ...

If we understand this we can see why it is possible to question and even reject the modern rites without being disloyal to the Council. ... The liturgical reform desired by the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council – and glimpsed by them with satisfaction sixty years ago today – quickly became a runaway train. Its engineers took it far beyond its intended destination, and those who attempt to control it today are unwilling and/or unable to get it back onto the tracks the Council laid down for it.”

A Very Good Video from Brian Holdsworth on Liturgical Reform

I meant to share this video from the always-wise Brian Holdsworth yesterday, which was the 18th anniversary of Pope Benedict’s motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, but travel plans and an uncooperative router intervened. The title is “A Plea to Pope Leo For Reform”, and essentially, he lays out a very good case for why Summorum Pontificum needs to be restored, and likewise, some good food for thought as to what the future of liturgical reform in general should look like.

If I may be so bold as to summarize his argument, it basically runs as follows. Improvements in the human person do not happen at once; they require slow and steady work. If you are unhealthy and out of shape, you cannot simply decide to be healthy and in shape from one day to the next. You need to not just exercise and eat better, but get in the habit of exercising and eating better. Likewise, if you want to be smarter, you cannot simply decide to be smarter; you need to develop the habit of doing things that will make you smarter (read more good books, waste less time on scrolling through videos, etc.) And if you try to change your habits all at once, and go directly to he desired end-result, you will fail disastrously; he likens this to trying to get in shape by going from lifting 40 pounds in the gym one day to lifting 200 the next.

What this means (and this is the part which really made me take notice) is that even if the post-Conciliar liturgy were indeed a vast improvement on the traditional liturgy in every way, as some contend, it was nevertheless brought with it such an unprecedented amount of change, and was implemented at such an unprecedented speed, that it was never going to have the desired effect. Mr Holdsworth makes the analogy that it was like moving the pin in the weight machine from 40 to 200 from one day to the next, and the result has been a failure.

And here, by the way, he also makes a very wise cautionary note for those of us who love the traditional rite, and pray to see it restored to its rightful place in the Church, namely, that this cuts both ways. If, as we believe, it is the traditional Roman Rite that is superior, circumstances within the Church have nevertheless now changed in such a way imposing it all at once would be similarly imprudent, and lead to a similar failure.

This, in turn, is why Pope Benedict’s vision, that the liberation of the traditional Roman Rite, and his hope that it would gradually improve the general condition of the liturgy in the Church as a whole, were so wise. So I thank Mr Holdsworth for this very good observation, and urge all our readers to continue their prayers for the hastening of the day when the Summorum Pontificum regimen is restored as it should be.  

“Why The Youth Want Tradition” : Another Excellent Commentary from Brian Holdsworth

Brian Holdsworth has just posted another superb video on why traditional forms of worship are so appealing to the young, and why attempts to “relate” to young people by aping the forms of popular culture in the liturgy inevitably fail. Any further commentary on this from me would be quite superfluous, apart from urging all of our readers to share this around as much as they can.

Brian Holdsworth on Unbelief in the Real Presence

The Catholic internet has seen a good number of articles in the last several days about a recent Pew Research Center Poll, which shows that only a quarter of Catholics under the age of 40 believe in Transubstantiation and the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. As is his wont, Brian Holdsworth has come up with (for my money) the best commentary on the matter thus far. He very rightly points that this is not primarily a problem of catechesis, and this is not the kind of problem that one resolves intellectually, because the reality of Christ’s presence in the Mass is not something which we experience primarily in an intellectual way. The greatest obstacle to presenting what the Church teaches about the Mass and the Eucharist is our low standards for the celebration of the liturgy, in which we actually experience these realities. If you surround the Real Presence with ugly, banal and commonplace architecture, decorations and especially music, you are sending the message, whether you mean to or not, that this is not really God Himself present in our midst. Watch the whole thing, it is well worth your time, and if you have the opportunity, share it with your pastor, bishop, youth ministry coordinator etc. Kudos once again, Mr Holdsworth!

Brian Holdsworth on “Keeping Youth in the Church”

Here is another great video from Brian Holdsworth which needs to be shared around as widely as possible. He very rightly points out the folly of attempts by some people within the Church to hold the interest of the young by “relating” to them. “I would much rather someone be themselves authentically than project my own characteristics back at me. If the Church wants young people to follow the message of Christ... they’re really undermining their own efforts by using tactics that provoke people to look down on the messenger...” He then brilliantly sums up why beauty and solemnity in the liturgy (and elsewhere) are necessary for the evangelization of all peoples, young and old. “These people took (Vatican II) as a license to vandalize all the outward expressions of our faith... in the hopes of making it more culturally relevant, and accessible. And the result if that the Church is less relevant than ever. ... This experiment has failed catastrophically. ... The way we present the message of Jesus should be like nothing of this world, because it’s not of this world ” Watch the whole thing, it is well worth your time, and if you have the opportunity, share it with your pastor, bishop, youth ministry coordinator etc. Kudos, Mr Holdsworth!