First Steps

Most serious Catholics will agree that over past forty years or so we have witnessed a general breakdown of Catholic identity in the United States. Such a statement is certainly going to generate debate, but let's face it, with notable exceptions, the Catholic leadership in the states has messed up in things both large and small: Catholic schools, liturgical life, seminaries, administrative decisions, Catholic hospitals, the retreat movement, etc. I don't say this to be gratuitously critical or unduly harsh. It's simply a statement of fact. While many bishops, ensconced and detached in their curial bubbles, floating in the heavens, may pat themselves on the back for holding the line, it is the lay Catholics who are actually in the pews day in and day out, week after week, year after year, who have been the primary recipients of the worst of the failed experiment that saw a toxic blending of egalitarian-tinged liberalism with watered down Catholicism.

I'd like to offer some ideas that might help push back the tide, at least a bit. Most, if not all will center on liturgy. What possibly can an untrained layman know about liturgy? Perhaps it is audacious to offer these bold suggestions, but I will do so anyway.

1. Away with "Eucharistic Ministers": One of the most unfortunate moves over the past several decades has been a slow, creeping erosion of the distinction between the laity and ordained ministers, namely, the priests. In a misguided effort to involve more of the people in the goings on at the altar, it was thought appropriate to introduce waves of laity to serve as "extraordinary ministers" (the correct nomenclature). The original thought was that, for exceptionally large congregations, extraordinary ministers could help mitigate the time it took to distribute Holy Communion. But it didn't take a rocket scientist to see what would inevitably happen, and indeed, what has happened. Soon, a few extraordinary ministers became armies of "Eucharistic ministers" who, regardless of the size of the congregation, now file into the sanctuary to take their rightful place next to the priest and to take up the sacred vessels, a duty traditionally reserved for priests and deacons. At his ordination, a priest's hands are consecrated with holy oil in anticipation of their indispensable role in the consecration of the bread and wine, which become the Body and Blood of Christ. With the introduction of Eucharistic ministers, the line between the priest and the laity has become blurred, if not erased. Laity today handle the Sacrament in ways that were unthinkable only a couple generations ago. The issue is out of control at some, if not most, parishes. I've heard of instances when the priest remains in his chair while the "ministers" distribute Holy Communion. This needs to be reined in, and fast.

2. Away with Communion in the hand: Some of this will tie into the first suggestion and, like the first, needs to be addressed sooner rather than later. For centuries, receiving Communion in the hand was not merely a liturgical solecism that would rightly be seen as scandalous; even further, it was absolutely verboten. Pope Paul VI, who many see as a more progressive pontiff, strongly defended and upheld the tradition of receiving Communion on the tongue when pressed to ease up on the tradition. He said the following on the subject: "A change in so important a matter that has its basis in an ancient and honored tradition does not simply affect discipline, but can also bring with it dangers that, it is feared, may arise from the new way of administering Communion." Receiving in the hand started off on shaky ground as an aberration born out of disobedience in the late 70's and, since receiving unenthusiastic, resigned approval from the top, it has spread through the Church like a fire through dry forest. Communion in the hand has enabled numerous instances of abuse, both intended and unintended, with regard to the Body of Christ. I agree with Father John A. Hardon's characteristically candid assessment of the issue when he said, "Behind Communion in the hand --I wish to repeat and make as plain as I can-- is a weakening, a conscious, a deliberate weakening of faith in the Real Presence."

3. Away (in most circumstances) with Communion under both Species, excepting intinction done by the priest or deacon: This suggestion, quite simply, would go a long way in limiting accidental spilling of the Precious Blood by well-intentioned, yet sometimes careless or inattentive faithful. We should look for ways to minimize accidents of this nature, and limiting the reception of Communion to one species could help accomplish this. I also think that Communion under both Species, as it is most commonly practiced in the average parish, contributes to a false theology of the Eucharist. People who are not properly catechized may tend to think that Christ's presence is somehow divided between the Consecrated elements. Of course, this presumes that there is widespread believe in the Real Presence to begin with.

4. Away with altar girls: Once again, the obsession with egalitarian overtures is responsible for this phenomenon. Allowing altar girls for Mass was seen as a concession of sorts to the feminist movement. The green light for the girls sent the wrong signal, in my opinion, as it gave the impression that the Church is susceptible and vulnerable to gradual inroads made by the feminist movement, which has always seen female ordination as their (un)holy grail. Also, the sanctuary has traditionally been the domain of the priest acting in persona Christi, and the proximity of altar boys to the altar affords them the chance to get an up-close and personal glimpse of the most significant moments of a priest's life. Introducing girls in the sanctuary is, sorry to say, a distraction from that unique opportunity a young boy has at that time to consider a vocation to the priesthood. George Weigel made this point more eloquently than I have here. I wish I could find the article.

5. Away with kitsch and iconoclasm: Bad taste has inundated Catholic liturgical life, from music, to vestments, to schmaltzy homilies that would make Oprah proud. The list could go on. Let's get serious about re-engaging our unrivaled artistic patrimony and start acting like adults with good taste!

6. Away with versus populum: Let's see much more ad orientum, where the priest and people face the same direction for prayer. Ad orientum is often misleadingly described as the priest with his back facing the people, as though this was done as a sign of disrespect to the laity by an elitist cleric. Also, there is no mistaking where the attention during Mass is focused when the priest is facing ad orientum: the Eucharist, where it should be. However, when the priest begins to face the people, Mass becomes more and more about him, his "style" and report with the people, and less and less about Christ in the Eucharist. The pope makes many salient points on this subject in his excellent book, The Spirit of the Liturgy.

7. "Hello!" to Sacred Space: I set up "sacred space" to contrast it with the now-popular "gathering space" that has been introduced in so many parishes across America. Usually, the gathering space is intended to serve as an agora, usually in the back of the church, for people to congregate and shoot the breeze before and after Mass. Instead of a sanctum sanctorum for the encounter with mystery and the ineffable God, the church building has morphed into a comfy, familiar social hall to meet and greet each other. I came across a once beautiful gothic church in Saint Louis that fits this description to a tee. This particular gathering space was carved out of the back third of the church building, the pews removed to accommodate, not a mystery but a crowd, and even a board with name tags for all the parishioners to wear during Mass. Some of the names even had smiley faces next to them. I think I did that once too, in kindergarden. Also, at the other end of the church, in the sanctuary, let's aim to make that a "Reserved for" area once again. Do I really need to see everyone listed in the baptism registry mincing about in an space that was once reserved exclusively for priests and deacons? Really, I will not feel excluded or left out. I'm not that touchy.

8. "Hello!" to Latin (or at least beautiful English): There is just something indescribably beautiful and alluring about the haunting chants conducted in this ancient tongue. (It took far too long to do away with "And also with you," by the way.) I think we've gotten stuck in an unfortunate misconception about the meaning of the "universality" of the Catholic Church. I like to think that universality means, at least in part, that wherever I go in the world, whatever the culture and language of this or that particular people, the Catholic liturgy will be more or less the same, in terms of how it is executed. It seems that nowadays, "universality" translates into an obsession to accommodate every single language and culture under the sun. There are ways this can be done; I'm just not so sure that liturgy is the place to do it, especially in Western countries.

So these are some rough ideas that, while hardly dispositive or original, may be helpful at turning things around. I may add to them over the next couple days.