The Spirituality of the Ancient Liturgy
Part Two — continued from
the Summer 2001 issue
by by Father Chad Ripperger, F.S.S.P. - Fall 2001
Novelty begets spiritual gluttony. By spiritual gluttony is understood
the spiritual defect by which one takes delight and concerns oneself
only with the physical and spiritual consolations sent by God rather
than using the consolation as a means to growing more holy. Spiritual
gluttony occurs when people do spiritual or religious things because
of some consolation or delight they derive from them and so the delight,
rather than God, becomes the end of the action. Novelty begets spiritual
gluttony because people tend to think that newer is always better,
and so each new thing brings them some new delight. Here we see that
novelty can easily degenerate into keeping people entertained, but
the danger is that insofar as it prompts one to stop looking at God
and fixating on the new thing that sates our appetites, it impedes
our spiritual growth. All of the saintly spiritual writers warn that
spiritual gluttony is very dangerous for the spiritual life.
The ancient ritual actually destroys spiritual gluttony
on three levels. First, all of the silence takes away from our appetites
the
desire to talk. It is a fact that some people like vocal prayer
because of the “spiritual high,” to use a degenerate sixties
and seventies term, that comes from doing the talking. Second, the
repetition ensures that the appetites, which constantly want something
new, are not satisfied. Repetition in a spiritual good is something
that is appreciated on an intellectual level, not an appetitive level.
Our appetites can get bored when we experience the same thing; the
intellect, on the other hand, is able to see the value of the thing
each time it encounters it. Thirdly, a certain pleasure comes from
being in control of something. This is another reason that the ritual
must be fixed or determined by the Church and not by ourselves. For
insofar as the ritual is determined by our choice among options and
not according to the universal laws of the Church, we take a certain
pleasure in being in control. But this to subordinate a spiritual
good to our natural desires.
Moreover, while it is not part of the newer rituals
themselves, some of the forms of music employed in them are used
because of
some sensible
or appetitive pleasure derived from the music rather than for
their usefulness in drawing the mind and will into closer union with
God. This leads people to confuse the pleasurable experience
with
actually
experiencing God. In effect, it leads people to think that authentic
experiences of God are always pleasant. While in the next life
they are, in this life the experiences of God are often arduous
and exceedingly
painful for us – not because of some defect in the way God
handles us, but because of our imperfections and sinfulness which
cause our pain. As St. Theresa of Avila once said, “God, if
this is the way you treat your friends, no wonder you have so few
of them.”
The point is that music and all of the other aspects
of the ritual should be geared toward weaning people off sensible
delights
and consolations as the mainstay of their spiritual lives. This
is
why Gregorian chant which, has an appeal to the intellect and
will, naturally
begets prayer, which is defined as the lifting of the mind and
heart to God. Gregorian chant does not appeal to one’s emotions or
appetites; rather, the beauty of the chant naturally draws us into
contemplation of the divine truths and the mysteries of the ritual.
To return to our discussion of liturgical options,
by having a predetermined ritual by the universal laws of the Church,
one
avoids
having one
person force his disposition and his own spiritual life or
lack thereof on the rest of the people attending Mass. In other words,
it avoids
having someone impose himself or intrude on the spiritual lives
of the laity by the choices he makes which flow from his own
interior dispositions and spiritual life. Since people naturally
differ
in
disposition, when the ritual becomes the product of one individual
or even a few, it loses its spiritual appeal to the rest of
the
people, who may not share the same dispositions.
The traditional rite, on the other hand, avoids this
pitfall by determining the ritual itself. One of the advantages of
the
ancient
ritual is
that it does not matter which parish you attend; it is everywhere
the same. Insofar as the options of the new rite allow for the
particularization of the ritual, it ceases being catholic (meaning
universal). In fact,
in an age of hyper-mobility, it seems especially imprudent to
have changed the ritual. I realized this when I went to Rome
and attended
Mass in Italian. Had the Mass been in Latin according to the
ancient rite, I would have felt right at home at Mass; instead,
I was left
with the impression that I was merely an onlooker from the outside.
This is why Latin and a fixed ritual allow the Mass to have a
universal appeal: one can attend it in every country, in every
parish in
the world and still feel right at home. While we may not understand
the
homily or sermon when we are in a foreign country, we can nevertheless
enter into the ritual in the same depth and fervor that we can
at our home parish. This also avoids the unfortunate problem
of people
parish shopping, as it were, trying to find a priest whose choice
of Mass options suits their own dispositions.
Latin also provides a form of self-denial by taking
the translation of the ritual out of the hands of questionable agencies.
Inclusive
language is a classic example of what we have been describing:
the desire of a small group to impose its own spirituality on
everyone else. The desire for inclusive language is a manifestation
of the
expectation that the ritual should conform to the group rather
than
vice versa. Latin undermines this idea because everyone, as Pope
John XXIII says in Veterum Sapientia, is equal before the Latin
language. Latin forces a type of self-denial on us because we
can not manipulate
the language to our own ends. It also thwarts the inclination
of the priest to ad lib, foisting his own personal disposition
on
those attending the Mass.
The Latin, the fixed rubrics, these things strip us
of our selves so that we can become nothing. St. John of the Cross
often noted
that we must be nothing so that God can become everything in
us, or, as in the words of St. John the Baptist (which we can
apply
to the ancient ritual), “I must decrease, so that He may increase.” Stripping
ourselves of self, which the ancient ritual does, is a requirement
for any authentic spirituality.III. Perfection in Virtue
This brings us to the next topic: perfection in virtue.
The old Mass, insofar as it strips us of self, humbles us. This is
necessary,
since
every one of us suffers from pride. Moreover, by not giving us
control over the ritual, the old rite begets meekness, the virtue
by which
one does not go to extremes in one’s reactions or actions.
There are countless stories of laity and priests being furious after
attending the new rite because of something the celebrant did. The
priest should not be the cause of anger during the Mass. By becoming
the cause of anger, he erodes the meekness of the laity. Having a
fixed ritual, provided the priest follows the rubrics and says the
Mass reverently, minimizes the chance that the priest will anger
the laity. In this way, the old rite assures meekness.
Humility is the root virtue in the concupiscible appetite,
i.e., the thing in us that inclines us toward bodily goods. Humility
is the virtue by which one does not judge oneself greater than
he is.
St. Thomas Aquinas tells us it is the root virtue of all the
other virtues and that no other virtue can exist without it.
The old
Mass roots out pride and begets humility because it is not our
action
or our product but the product and action of God. Moreover, by
coming up against the mysterious which for us in this life is
insurmountable, it naturally causes in us a sense of our smallness
in comparison
to God. This in turn tempers the way we behave because we are
in the presence of someone who causes “awe,” which
is an overwhelming sense of wonder or admiration. “Awe” naturally
causes us to stop and consider ourselves in the light of that
which is awesome; it captivates us and therefore moderates what
we do.
The ancient ritual, in begetting humility and meekness – upon
which all the other virtues rest – reminds us of the words
of Christ, Who said, “Learn from Me, for I am meek and
humble of heart.” In other words, “
I conform myself to the truth, I am not proud and do not judge
myself greater than I am, I do not go to extremes in my reactions.” This
is what we must desire in any ritual. The ritual should speak
to us – not in our own words, but in the words of Christ.
In this way the ancient ritual can be seen to be saying metaphorically, “Learn
from me, for I am meek and humble of heart.”
Once meekness and humility are in place, the virtue
of reverence naturally follows. Reverence is the virtue contained
under the
more universal virtue of justice, and more particularly religion,
in which
one holds in honor and esteem some thing, usually sacred. The
ancient ritual helps us to honor those things that are holy because,
first,
we are humble and recognize the greatness of sacred things. Secondly,
we approach God in a sense of self-denial and subservience, and
in this respect the ancient ritual excels. For the priest bows
his head,
genuflects and humbles himself often in the prayers that God
might look upon his actions and be pleased.
Fortitude is also taught in the ancient ritual, if
in no other way than that it is clear that it is spiritual warfare.
At the
very beginning,
when the priest vests by putting on the amice, he says a prayer
in which he asks Our Lord for the helmet of salvation so that
he can
fight off the incursions of the devil. Also, since the priest
is not subject to a liturgical committee in making decisions
on what
should and should not be done, the traditional rite strengthens
the priest and reaffirms the masculine aspects of being a priest.
Here we highly recommend the article by Fr. James
McLucas on the emasculation of the priesthood, (The Latin Mass, Spring
1998)
in
which he argues that the newer rituals have, in fact, taken away
from the priest those things that are masculine: e.g., the role
of providing for and protecting his spiritual family. In the
ancient ritual, he alone feeds his spiritual family by distributing
Holy
Communion. This also means he can protect the sacred mysteries.
The
systematic removal of all these things that emphasize the masculine
and fatherly role of the priest has weakened our vision of the
priesthood. Moreover, we tend to get what we offer as an example.
Thus, if we
place before people a weakened view of the priesthood that has
little or no virtue of fortitude, then we can expect priests
to become weak
and effeminate, and attract seminarians who follow suit. Fortitude
is defined as engaging the arduous good and the ancient ritual
provides an avenue for the priest to obtain the greatest and
most difficult
type of fortitude: self-discipline through self-denial.
The ancient ritual also avoids violations of justice.
The new Code of Canon Law states that the laity have a right to attend
the liturgy
said according to the rubrics. Now all the options have eroded
the sense that the priest must render to the people their due;
the flow
of the Mass is at his discretion. This leads the priest
to think that he can do whatever he likes. While Church documents
are clear that he cannot do so, the fact is that all these options
contain the implicit principle of “do what you want.” This
is why, when the ritual
is out of the hands of the priest, it naturally begets a sense
of the requirement of justice in all of us. For when the priest
does
something that is contrary to the rubrics, or even in the rubrics
but included as optional, it gives people a sense that the priest
is concerned not so much about what God wants as about what he
wants, especially if one attending the Mass does not like the
particular option. Ultimately, the ritual of the Mass is about
God, and ought
to seek the best way of rendering to God
His due. This comes through a deep sense of justice. Through
the sacrifice to God and the conformity of the ritual to that
sacrifice,
we recognize that with respect to God, we have no claim of justice
insofar as we are mere creatures. Therefore, the Mass must be
about God and not ourselves. The ancient ritual helps us to forget
and
lose ourselves in the rendering of justice to God through the
Sacrifice.
The ancient rite begets faith, hope and charity. It
begets faith because it excels in its expression of Catholic theology.
Faith
comes through hearing and we hear the Faith in the very prayers
of the
ancient ritual. It begets hope because of its deep sense of the
transcendent and our participation in the transcendent. It begets
charity because
it helps us to realize that worship is about God, not us. Charity
is defined as love of God and neighbor for the sake of God. Even
when we love our neighbor, it must be for the sake of God. Hence
the ritual helps us to focus everything on God, thereby giving
a proper direction to our spiritual lives. Even if this were
not the
case, the ancient ritual begets charity if for no other reason
than that it keeps people’s imperfections at bay by taking away
the ability of one person to impose himself on another, thereby averting
anger, hurt feelings and the like.
IV. Ascendance in Prayer
The last aspect is ascendence in prayer. We have already mentioned
the silence that is necessary to ascend the heights of prayer.
While it is not required for vocal prayer, it is required for
mental prayer
and the other seven levels of prayer. St. Augustine said that
no person can save his soul if he does not pray. Now it is a
fact
that mental prayer and prayer in general have collapsed among
the laity
(and the clergy, for that matter) in the past thirty years. It
is my own impression that this development actually has to do
with the
ritual of the Mass. Now in the new rite, everything centers around
vocal prayer, and the communal aspects of the prayer are heavily
emphasized. This has led people to believe that only those forms
of prayer that are vocal and communal have any real value. Consequently,
people do not pray on their own any longer.
The ancient ritual, on the other hand, actually fosters
a prayer life. The silence during the Mass actually teaches people
that
they must pray. Either one will get lost in distraction during
the ancient
ritual or one will pray. The silence and encouragement to pray
during the Mass teach people to pray on their own. While, strictly
speaking,
they are not praying on their own insofar as they should be joining
their prayers and sacrifices to the Sacrifice and prayer of the
priest, these actions are done interiorly and mentally and so
naturally dispose
them toward that form of prayer. This is one of the reasons that,
after the Mass is said according to the ancient ritual, people
are naturally quieter and tend to pray afterwards. If everything
is done
vocally and out loud, then once the vocal stops, people think
it is over. It is very difficult to get people who attend the
new
rite of Mass to make a proper thanksgiving by praying afterward
because
their appetites and faculties have habituated them toward talking
out loud.
The ancient ritual also gives one a taste of heaven,
so to speak. Since the altar marks the dividing line between the
profane and
sacred, between the heavenly and the earthly, and the priest
ascends to the
altar to offer Sacrifice, the traditional rite leaves one with
a sense of being drawn into heaven with the priest. This feature
naturally
draws us into prayer and gives the sense of the transcendent
and supernatural that are key in the spiritual life. The numerous
references
to the saints foster devotion rather than minimizing it. The
Latin provides a sense of mystery. The beauty of the ritual,
the surroundings
that naturally flow from the ritual itself (such as the churches
that are designed for the ritual), the chant – all of these
things lead to contemplation, the seeking after that which is above.
Conclusion
Clearly we have not
exhausted all the spiritual aspects of the ancient ritual, but
the four areas we covered demonstrate that the ancient ritual
and the
newer forms have different spiritualities. If the Church is to
capture the sense of the transcendent for the laity, if we are
to have humble
and saintly priests, if we are to have a ritual that is driven
by charity and therefore has God as the sole focus of our longings
and
desires, it must restore that liturgy that God Himself fashioned
both when Christ was on earth and through the loving hands of
the saints throughout history. We cannot be satisfied with a
liturgy
that is the work of our own hands. For this reason, I do not
subscribe to the theory that we need to produce yet another ritual.
We need
the work of God back, because if the ancient ritual does anything,
it teaches us that we do not need our own self-expression. We
need God.
Fr. Chad Ripperger, F.S.S.P., is a professor
at St. Gregory’s
diocesan minor seminary and Our Lady of Guadalupe seminary, both
in Nebraska.