OLD MASS, NEW MASS

Printed in the U Matuna, the newspaper for the Archdiocese of Agana on 12/2/12.

Allow me to stray a bit this week into an internal Catholic Church matter which I feel could use some clarification: the return of the “Old Mass”, or more specifically some misunderstandings wrought by its return. By “Old Mass” I mean the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM), now formally labeled the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite.

The restoration of the TLM began in 1984 when John Paul II first issued an indult, a special permission, for its usage. In 1988, the Pope again addressed the TLM and appealed for a wider and more generous usage. In 2007, Pope Benedict in the Apostolic Letter, Summorum Pontificum, went beyond the indult, declaring that the TLM  had “never been abrogated” and its celebration needed no indult.

In an accompanying letter to the world’s bishops, the Pope affirmed that there was “no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal” (the TLM and the Mass of Paul VI - the “New Mass”), and that “what earlier generations held as sacred remains sacred and great for us too”. He also called on the bishops to see to it that the TLM, as one of the “riches which have developed through the Church’s faith and prayer”, be given its “proper place”.

All of this is to say that the Pope has declared both forms of the Mass to be equally valid and sacred and one is not to be considered superior to the other. So on to the misunderstandings.

It is not uncommon for those who find the TLM attractive to soon find themselves propagating it with a “born again” zeal. This is particularly true among the youth which is a fast growing demographic at this Mass.

Why the youth find the “Old Mass” new is a matter for another column. The issue we wish to address here is that advocates of the TLM, young or old, should not and cannot speak ill of the “New Mass” (though questioning innovations not prescribed by the Liturgical books is never off-limits).

However, most of the “speaking ill” comes from the other direction in a rather constant chorus of criticisms of the TLM, sometimes from those in high places. Those criticisms consistently center on the two elements of the TLM which most distinguish it from the New Mass: the use of Latin and the “ad orientem” position of the priest, or as critics put it, the priest’s “back to the people”.

We are told that previous generations of Catholics “didn’t get anything out of it” because they didn’t understand Latin, and the priest’s “back to the people” is impugned as a posture of ignorance.

First, let us examine these criticisms on their face. To make either of these accusations is to say that for the better part of 2000 years the infallible Church of God had it WRONG. This a very serious matter even if it is said in jest. But in fact it is normally not said in jest. It is normally said superciliously and often by people who should know better.

Pope Benedict has reaffirmed the sacrality of the TLM, and that includes both the rules governing the actions of the celebrant (rubrics) and the venerable language of its celebration. An attack on either is an attack on the sacred. We may prefer the Mass in the vernacular. We may prefer the priest facing the people. But we don’t get to belittle and impugn the language and rubrics of the ancient Mass. For what was “sacred then is sacred now.”

But beyond that, one does wonder why so many docilely accept these criticisms when there is enormous evidence to the contrary. On Guam, long before the priest turned around and spoke in Chamorro or English, the “Old Mass” was the source of a profound faith, a faith which saw generations of Chamorros through innumerable trials and the incalculable horrors of a World War, and left their faith stronger still!

To accept that our parents or grandparents didn’t get anything out of the “Old Mass” because the priest had his “back to the people” and said the Mass in Latin is an insult to their memory and dangerously doubtful of the power of the Holy Spirit who “blow(s) where it wills” (Jn 3:8)

Speaking only empirically, it is in fact SINCE the celebrant has turned around and the Mass said in local languages that the pews have emptied, the faith has waned, and Catholics have exited, not entered, the “door of faith”.

In fact, it is due to this recent physical, spiritual, and moral exodus from the one, true Church, that the Pope has declared a Year of Faith in the hopes of inspiring a return. And it is this same Pope who has called for the restoration of the ancient Mass. Maybe there’s a connection.

Latin Lesson for 34th Sunday in Ordinary Time

May I recommend getting your own copy of the Daily Roman Missal (ed. James Socias). It’s a wonderful resource: readings for all Masses, weekday and Sunday, all 3 cycles, Proper of the Saints, Common Masses, Ritual Masses, a summary catechism, and loads of Devotions and Prayers. The beautiful leather binding and gold gilt pages make you want to respect what’s in it…something the disposable Missalette lacks.

But the feature that I most enjoy about the missal is its inclusion of Latin. The missal employs Latin alongside the English in the canon and also inserts it at the Responsorial and Alleluia verses.

While some do not see any reason to pay attention to the Latin, I personally find it absolutely fascinating. As you may know, Latin is our Catholic ancestral language (one of them – Greek is the other). Latin is also the official language of the Church. So if you want to know what the Church really says about something, you need to “go to the Latin”.

This is the same reason Biblical scholars “go to the Greek” – since it’s the language in which most of the Bible was written, or at least has come down to us. No serious student of the Bible doubts the importance of “going to the Greek” in any genuine study of the Bible. Thus, we shouldn’t doubt the importance of “going to the Latin” when we are searching for the truth in matters as regards our Liturgy and official Church teaching.

I am not a Latin scholar, but Latin resources are easy enough to come by these days. One particular resource is Latin Grammar – Grammar Vocabularies, and Exercises in Preparation for the Reading of the Missal and Breviary. Since we are at present more concerned with the study of Latin as it regards our Faith and not the reading of Virgil or Cicero, this book (and its companion “Second Latin”) would be an excellent and focused resource. Other excellent resources are only a click or two away online. But back to the topic at hand.

The side by side translations of the Responsorial and Alleluia verses sometimes amaze, amuse, or at least interest me. Here is an example.

This past Sunday, (34th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Cycle C), the Responsorial Verse reads:
“The Lord comes to rule the earth with justice.”
The accompanying Latin text reads:
“Venit Dominus iudicare populos in aequitate”.

Let’s do a word by word translation:

Venit - Venit is a third person singular perfect indicative active verb, and is the main verb of the sentence. Thus, we get: “came” or perhaps “has come”.

Dominus – Lord

Iudicare – to judge

Populos – people

In – in
Aequitate – equity or justice

The words are quite easy and almost a transliteration, thus you almost don’t need a dictionary.

The actual translation is:
“The Lord has come to judge the people in equity (justice)”.
And again, the English translation in the missal is:
“The Lord has come to rule the earth with justice”.
Since the English translation of the Lectionary is authorized by the USCCB we cannot question its legitimacy so we won’t. We can and should however dig more deeply into texts to better understand and grow from them just as a student of the Bible would want to get at the words behind the words to get a better sense of the biblical message.

In this case, I see the Latin giving us a full sense of God as Judge, something we don’t hear much about anymore, along with such related topics as sin, hell, purgatory, judgment, etc. I don’t know about you, but I need constant reminding about my “End”. Sometimes it’s the only thing that keeps me good. I’d like to say that I choose “Good” because I want to please God. But I don’t. Perhaps I’m not spiritually mature enough, so the “fear of the Lord”, helps me in times of great temptation.

But let’s continue the Latin Lesson just a bit more. Again, I in no way want to slight or slander the English translation as we must accept it as valid and licit. But the word study here is valuable.

There are those who may say “well, it may not be an exact translation but it still gives the same sense or the same meaning”. Maybe it does, but the bottom line is what the Latin actually says and what it doesn’t say.

The English uses the word “rule” instead of “judge”. In Latin, “to rule” is “regere”. There is no relation here to “judge”. It’s a completely different word with a completely different sense. Obviously the Latin wanted to stress that God will judge us … and that there is something to judge!

The English translation uses the word “earth” instead of “people” (populos). “Terra” is the Latin word for “earth”. While it could be argued that “earth” implies its human inhabitants why not just use “people” since that is what it actually says? Also, only “people” can be judged since only people have free will and thus something to judge. God won’t be judging the rocks and dirt.

The above discussion reveals an obvious attempt to “soften” the message of the scripture, something that happens quite frequently in the current Lectionary and in more contemporary versions of Scripture. While we cannot contend with the translator’s right to make such modifications, I believe we should ask ourselves if a “kinder, gentler” message is what our culture needs just now. I personally think not. Yes, God is infinitely loving and merciful. But He is also infinitely JUST. I wonder if we understand the implications of that.

Lost in Translation - The Last Word on Divorce

The Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ and the events of Lent are still fresh in our mind. Actually on Guam, if you listen to Catholic Radio, you get to experience Holy Week twice since we are on a one-week delay as regards programs generated in the states and rebroadcast here. And while tuned in to a particular episode of Catholic Answers I heard an interesting discussion on the Seven Last Words of Christ.

I have come to realize as of late the significance of these Last Words. The final words of any dying person always merit grave attention, but how much more so in the case of the 2nd Person of the Holy Trinity, particularly since in order to utter those words Jesus had to push himself up on the nails through his feet which surely increased his incomprehensible agony.

Generations upon generations have meditated upon these “seven last words”. Great meditations have been written and momentous musical settings composed. It has been pointed out that the whole of Divine Revelation could be summed up in these Seven Last Words: all that God wants us to know of Himself is revealed in those dying moments.

If it stands to reason that if the Seven Last Words of Christ merit the deepest attention then perhaps the very Last Word would merit it all the more.

“It is finished”, said He…or did He? Most modern translations of Scripture use the word “finished”, but the official Catholic Scripture text does not. The “official Scripture text” (1) of the Catholic Church is the Latin Vulgate of St. Jerome.

There are several reasons to give more weight to the Vulgate than to more modern translations:

1. The man who authored the Vulgate translation became a canonized saint. The NAB, RSV, NJB, etc., valid and useful translations though they may be, cannot make the same boast of its authorship.

2. The Vulgate is the only translation to be authorized by the Church with the force of an anathema. (2)

3. St. Jerome was 1600 years closer to the sources than any modern translation. (Jerome lived in the 5th century.)

4. Modern translators had to learn the languages of the original scriptures whereas Jerome actually spoke Greek and was very familiar with Hebrew (though he did need some help with Chaldeic).

The list could go on. But the important thing is that the Church actually says what the Vulgate says and the Vulgate does not say “It is finished”. The Vulgate says “consummatum est”, “It is consummated”.

It is true that the original Greek word (tetelestai) could be translated as “finished”, but there are several Latin words that could mean “finished” including the word “finis” from where we get our English word. It is thought that the ancient dismissal “Ite Missa est” actually included the word “finita” or “Ite, missa est finita” which translates literally “The Mass is ended (finished)” which is what we say in English anyway.

So the question is WHY did Jerome select “consummatum ” and not another word that could clearly mean “finished”?

The Church has always proclaimed the deep and true meaning of “consummatum est”, but in our modern sexually confused times it has take seven years of lectures by Pope John Paul II and another 25 years of reflection and study by the ablest of scholars to once again hand us the deepest meaning of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.

The Theology of the Body reminds us that we are created for marriage, the marriage of the Apocalypse, where Christ, looking as a Lamb that was slain, marries his bride, the Church. Earthly marriage is a foreshadowing of that heavenly marriage.

On the cross, Christ initiates the wedding feast of Heaven by bodily giving Himself to His bride, The Church. This is why Paul exhorts husbands to “love your wives as Christ loved the Church”. And this is why in order for a marriage to be valid it must be “consummatum”!

A quick etymological investigation of the word is instructive: “con” = together, “summa” = highest (as in summit). Literal translation: the highest coming together, the pinnacle, the summit of union. There is nothing higher. And indeed, there was nothing higher than the sacrifice of Christ, the consummation of His Body for His Bride. Christ gave His All down to the last drop of blood and water…completely expiated, wrung out, “consumed” by love for us.

It is also instructive to note that the word “consummate” is also used to describe that which is most “exquisite”, “precious”, “wonderful”. (e.g. “He is a consummate violinist..”)

“Consummate” can also be translated as “complete”, which is perhaps closer in some sense to the word “finished”. But “complete” in this sense would not mean “done”, “no more to do”, but “complete” in the sense of “without flaw” or “perfect”.

In any event, the “more relatable” word “finished”, as we can see from the above discussion, is a sad and rather limp expression compared to the full meaning of the word Jerome chose (and which our Church still officially uses).

Once again the riches of our Faith are more impoverished, not because we don’t know Latin, but because translators have chosen their wisdom over Jerome’s and over that of the Church.

The words “It is finished” have caused much confusion and dissension on the apologetic front because our Protestant brethren like to use those words to proclaim the “finished work of Christ” as meaning “no more to do”, or that we can “add nothing”. This is all very ridiculous of course otherwise there would be no need to obey Christ’s instruction to take up your cross and follow Me (Mk. 8:34), or to heed the warning to “persevere to the end” (Mt. 10:22).

When understood in the context of the wedding feast of the Lamb, we see that Christ is just beginning His marriage, just as a couple upon consummating their marriage is beginning theirs.

It’s interesting to speculate how the radical rise in the rate of divorce (amongst other contemporary ills) has coincided with the release of these new translations. Hmmmm.





1 Bible Versions and Commentaries by Colin Donovan STL
http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/bible_versions.htm

2 But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema (Council of Trent - Decree Concerning the Canonical Scriptures)

Moreover, the same sacred and holy Synod,—considering that no small utility may accrue to the Church of God, if it be made known which out of all the Latin editions, now in circulation, of the sacred books, is to be held as authentic,—ordains and declares, that the said old and vulgate edition, which, by the lengthened usage of so many years, has been approved of in the Church, be, in public lectures, disputations, sermons and expositions, held as authentic; and that no one is to dare, or presume to reject it under any pretext whatever. (Council of Trent - Decree Concerning the Edition and the Use of the Sacred Books)

Latin Lesson for 22nd Sunday in Ordinary Time

Back at the dawn of the Internet Age Bill Gates was purported to have prophesied that the Internet’s greatest contribution would be the empowerment of the individual. Twenty years later, the fulfillment of the prophecy is so ubiquitous and integrated into daily life that few even consider this tool as an “empowerment”. But just let the “net” go down for a couple minutes and its like oxygen being cut.

I suppose that’s an odd paragraph to introduce another installment of my ongoing personal reflections on what the Church actually says (Latin) and what the English translators have made it say. But prior to the Internet, the average individual (me, in this case) would not have had access to such handy tools as the official Latin texts and an online Latin-English dictionary.

Well, to the lesson for today, Sunday, September 03, 2006, Twenty Second Sunday in Ordinary Time, Cycle B. At issue is the Psalm Verse.
The Latin says: Dominus, qui habitabit in tabernaculo tuo?
The English says: “The one who does justice will live in the presence of the Lord.”

Before we do any translation we can easily note that the Latin ends with a question mark and the English with a period. Hmmm. The Latin is a question, the English is a statement. What’s up?

Let’s take a look at the Latin, word for word:

Dominus = Lord
Qui = who
Habitabit = to live in, or dwell, inhabit
Tabernaculo = tabernacle
Tuo = your, thy

Translation: “Lord, who shall dwell in thy tabernacle?” Now how hard is that?

The English not only does not translate this as a question it goes on to insert an answer. It’s not just a bad translation (my opinion), it’s not even A translation. It’s a completely different set of words. In addition (more of my opinion) the English destroys the effect of the verses that follow.

First let’s look at the very next verse in English:

“Whoever walks blamelessly and does justice; who thinks the truth in his heart
and slanders not with his tongue.”

There’s the answer to the question. The original Q&A setting of the Psalm hammers home the point. The question “Who shall dwell…” is asked 3 times and 3 times an answer is given. (By the way, again with the 3 times that we have so often discussed before). Look at the effect of this:

WHO SHALL DWELL IN THY TABERNACLE?
Whoever walks blamelessly and does
justice; who thinks the truth in his heart and slanders not with his tongue.

WHO SHALL DWELL IN THY TABERNACLE?
Who (ever) harms not his fellow
man, nor takes up a reproach against his neighbor;
By whom the reprobate is
despised, while he honors those who fear the Lord.

WHO SHALL DWELL IN THY TABERNACLE?
Who (ever) lends not his money at usury and accepts no bribe
against the innocent.
Who (ever) does these things shall never be disturbed.

The psalm verse is supposed to be THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION. The translators have purposely eviscerated the effect: eliminating the question and substituting something else altogether. But for what purpose?

The word “justice” is the clue (my opinion). “Justice” was the rallying cry of the age in which the English translation was born (1960’s and 70’s). “Social Justice” jumped out of Vatican II like a hungry tiger looking to satisfy a centuries-long appetite. This isn’t the main topic of this entry so I don’t want to spend much time on it here. But basically what materialized under the banner of Social Justice was more Social (-ism) than Justice, probably most poignantly epitomized by Catholic university students lining up to assuage their middle-class guilt in Tortilla Marathons and token stints at soup kitchens.

Okay, not all of you. Relax! But let’s face it. The emphasis, energy, and resources dedicated to helping “poor Mexicans” (a metaphor for the larger picture – and I’m Mexican, by the way) was suspiciously disproportionate. Consider this: have you seen the same “emphasis, energy, and resources dedicated to helping people live chaste lives? Okay, you get the point. It’s not there. And the list could go on of course.

By the way Social Justice was not unique to Vatican II and the new “enlightened Catholic”. It used to be called “Charity”, and people used to practice it quite on their own. I can recall seeing my mom feeding burritos to homeless guys on our back porch. I can recall going with my dad to fix a toilet at the home of an elderly person. I have lots of memories like that. I can recall something called the St. Vincent de Paul Society that cared for the poor quite without the help of government grants which didn’t exist then anyway. Perhaps the saddest effect of the Social Justice mentality has been a move away from personal charity and a reliance on institutionalized charity, which is more welfare than charity.

I have very good personal friends who are very involved with Social Justice issues and I don’t wish to offend them. I am not attacking any individual involved with the true care of those in need. I am, though, singling out “justice” in the context of the over-eager Social Justice agena that here even invades Scripture and rewrites it.

Well, that was quite a digression. Let’s go back to the Latin lesson because there’s something else that our translators are denying us in this short verse: the word “tabernacle”.

What a sad replacement is the word “presence” (“…will live in the presence of the Lord”) for the word “tabernacle”. “Tabernacle” is of course a word with great biblical significance. God’s “presence” is everywhere, but He always was (and still is) especially present in His Tabernacle. The Tabernacle, in the days of Moses, as it is now, was and is: “God with us”.

And there’s another dimension of the word “tabernacle” that is not spoken of much, which is odd because it is the very meaning of the word. Most of the time it gets translated as “tent” or “dwelling”. But it’s more than that. It’s not just a place to come in to; it’s a place to get fed. It’s where we get the word “tavern”, literally a public house for travelers – a place where one could come in out of the weather, find safety, warmth, and nourishment.

And of course that would line up with what the “Tabernacle” was and is. The Tabernacle of Moses housed the Ark of the Covenant which itself held the manna. The Tabernacle that was Mary kept the Jesus in her womb safe, warm, and nourished. The Tabernacle in our churches holds the Bread of Life Himself.

It’s not surprising that the modern translators did away with “tabernacle” from the psalm verse. It’s the same folks (and those of like mind) who have done their best to do away with the actual tabernacles in our churches. And no surprise that while they were at it, tried to get rid of images of that most special tabernacle, Mary, the Mother of God.

This brings me back to my major contention that the Catholic Church, at least in America, has been sickened from within by the translations the ICEL has foisted upon us. No amount of parish programs, workshops, youth groups, etc. will stop the bleeding because the bleeding is internal.

First Mass Last Mass - Which is it?

We had a question come up last week in one of our parish workshops:

“Jesus was very simple and humble in his preaching…in his attire…why do our
priests don themselves in glamorous attire during the Mass…when did this begin
and why?”

It’s an irksome question that belies a deeper antagonistic attitude towards the perceived wealth of the Church if not the Church itself. But it’s irksome also because at first blush the antagonist seems to have a point, if not the higher ground: certainly Jesus was in fact simple, humble, wore no special vestments or fancy hats, and, in great contrast to the grand affair the celebration of the Mass eventually became, conducted the first Mass with a small group, reclining at table, with probably the simplest of vessels.

I’ve never heard the challenge satisfactorily answered. There are the usual references to giving honor, glory, respect, etc., but the accusation seems to stick and most are left wondering if somehow the Catholic Church got on the wrong track with this.

Certainly there are many who thought that to be the case which is why for the last 40 years or so we’ve done everything possible to simplify our liturgical celebrations, to bring it down to earth, to make it more relatable to the common man. Vestments were made more plain, architecture dulled, and sacred vessels downsized and downgraded to earthenware (in many cases).

The Mass itself was stripped of all “non-essentials”, simplified, translated into the vernacular, and made to hearken back to the supposed “Mass of the early Christians”. The people followed suit…or should I say…got rid of the suit. No more dressing up like before, no need for all the pomp and fuss. Jeans, t-shirts, and sandals became Sunday attire. After all, Jesus didn’t wear a suit and tie.

Music…? Well no need for any of these fancy choirs. Things are “simple” now, back to basics. Away with chant, polyphony, the organ and the likes of Palestrina! Now all one needs is a guitar and a heart for Jesus. After all, Jesus doesn’t care what we sing or how we sound. Jesus loves me, yes he does…

In addition ecclesial communities and movements continue to sprout up clamoring for a return to the ways of the “early Church”, some even forsaking the Mass of the whole community for small intimate affairs in private “cata-homes”. It’s hard to argue with these folks for they point to the example of the early Church and indeed to the First Mass itself.

I do not need to go through the litany of things that have been done in the name of “getting back to basics”, but obviously we have witnessed radical change with all things liturgical over the last four decades.

Well, I’m here to tell you that it’s all wrong! Actually, I’m here to tell you that the Catholic Church itself says that it’s all wrong. It’s in the Catechism. But before I tell you where, let’s take a look at this from a “phenomenological” perspective.

Since this is my blog and not an article that I have to keep to a certain length I’d like to ramble just a bit. First, we need, for the sake of those of us who are new to this word, define “phenomenological”

I’ve been fascinated with the word ever since I learned that John Paul II was a phenomenologist. His revolutionary Theology of the Body is not only an exercise in phenomenology but the very reason why said Theology is revolutionary...and a "phenomenon".

Phenomenology, at least how John Paul II uses it is “an approach to philosophy that begins with an exploration of phenomena (what presents itself to us in conscious experience) as a means to finally grasp the absolute, logical, ontological and metaphysical Spirit that is behind phenomena.“ (Wikipedia definition)

In other words it’s an approach to understanding the essence of something by beginning with what it looks like, smells like, sounds like, feels like... That's the attraction of JP's Thelology of the Body. It basically says: “Look, here’s what a man looks like naked and here’s what a woman looks like naked. Now, putting everything else aside, let’s try to understand, just from what these two creatures look like, their reason for being made that way.” It cuts to the quick. There’s no arguing with it. It’s like your mouth. “Look it opens, has teeth, a tongue, saliva glands. Huh! Wonder what it’s for?”

Now phenomenonologically speaking, the one thing we can say about the externals of divine worship, the vestments, the vessels, the places of worship, the music, and all that stuff is that there has been a consistent trend towards the more ornate, the more beautiful, the more expansive, the more massive ever since the Church came out of the catacombs.

There was the occasional revamping, refining, & renewing of liturgical worship and all that surrounded it over the course of almost 20 centuries, but in general things always progressed toward the “more is better” and away from sandals and pottery.

Now why is that? That’s the phenomenological question. Did the Church lose its marbles right from the beginning? Why didn’t it keep the model of the Last Supper, the simple table, the small group, the “sandals and pottery”? Why did the Church, as soon as it was able, build bigger and bigger churches? Why the massive Cathedrals instead of some sort of recreation of the "Upper Room" (with brown shag carpet)”? Why the ornate vestments and vessels and polyphonic grandeur instead of sandals, pottery, and "If I Had a Hammer"? Is all this just more evidence that man is fallen and will always try to re-erect the tower of Babylon?

This question is more than just a curious inquiry. It’s at the root of all that has gone afoul in the liturgical life of the Church in the last 4 decades and the cause of immeasurable damage to the faith life of many. The stripping of the altars was but a metaphor for the stripping that occurred at all levels in the Church. Seemingly, “not one stone was left upon another”. The Faith of many Catholics, simple, humble, and molded to follow the directions of “Father” or “Sister” was severely damaged when the Church of their fathers was ripped from them in the name of “a return to the early Church” and the ubiquitous lie of “in the Spirit of Vatican II”.

Before we go on we must once again examine the phenomenological fact that for the better part of two millennia, the Church, for the most part, saw nothing wrong with building Her places of worship ever larger, ever more ornate, ever more massive, and adorning both it and its ministers with that which was ever more precious and beautiful.

To say that this was wrong and a departure from a simplicity that Christ supposedly intended is to tread on the likes of everyone from Augustine to Aquinas and every Pope to ever wear the “sequined shoes of the fisherman”. I mean, here’s the deal, they had 2000 years to figure out that something was wrong and revert back to “sandals and pottery”…but they didn’t

So here’s the easy answer: the model for our liturgy is not the First Mass, it's the Last Mass - the heavenly liturgy found in the Book of Revelations, not some "birkenstock" replay of the events of the upper room, but a participation in the “wedding feast of the Lamb”.

1090 “In the earthly liturgy we share in a foretaste of that heavenly liturgy
which is celebrated in the Holy City of Jerusalem toward which we journey as
pilgrims, where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God, Minister of the
sanctuary and of the true tabernacle. With all the warriors of the heavenly army
we sing a hymn of glory to the Lord; venerating the memory of the saints, we
hope for some part and fellowship with them; we eagerly await the Savior, our
Lord Jesus Christ, until he, our life shall appear and we too will appear with
him in glory.”-Catechism of the Catholic Church (quoted from Sacrosanctum
Concilium)

“Foretaste” is the word! A foretaste of the "wedding feast of the Lamb, not an “aftertaste” of the Last Supper: Paragraphs 1136-1139 go on to explain more fully how it is that the earthly celebration of the sacraments is in fact a participation in the eternal liturgy found in Revelations. (Of course the Church is not negating anything about the Last Supper, She is telling us that the First Mass and the Last Mass are the same...a participation in the heavenly liturgy.)

This is a fascinating discovery for me personally because I can’t even begin to explain the “decimation” (that’s the only word I can find for it) I have felt for as long as I can remember (and still feel) whenever I encounter liturgical worship that seems aimed at me.

Remember, it was John who was taken up to heaven (“I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day”) not Jesus who was brought down to earth. And what did John do upon arrival? He “fell at His (Jesus) feet as though dead”. Most of us don’t even bother to genuflect anymore. Perhaps one of these days God will remind us of where we really are (in His Presence) and we will be made to fall at his feet, but NOT as though dead, but dead - just a small reminder. Has happened before!

Scott Hahn’s book The Lamb’s Supper develops this truth further and offers a list of scripture references from Revelations where we find the elements of the Catholic Mass. I’ve listed them for you here with the scripture quotes from the Douay Rheims version.

Sunday worship
1:10
10I was in the spirit on the Lord's day…

(Note: We know this is Sunday because the early Christians met on the first day of the week to break bread – Acts 20:7)

A High Priest
1:13
13And in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks, one like to the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the feet, and girt about the paps (chest) with a golden girdle.

An Altar
8:3-4
3And another angel came, and stood before the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given to him much incense, that he should offer of the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar, which is before the throne of God. 4And the smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel.
11:1
1And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and it was said to me: Arise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar and them that adore therein.
14:18
18And another angel came out from the altar, who had power over fire; and he cried with a loud voice to him that had the sharp sickle, saying: Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vineyard of the earth; because the grapes thereof are ripe.

Priests (presbyteroi)
4:4
4And round about the throne were four and twenty seats; and upon the seats, four and twenty ancients sitting, clothed in white garments, and on their heads were crowns of gold
11:16
16And the four and twenty ancients, who sit on their seats in the sight of God, fell on their faces and adored God, saying:
19:4
4And the four and twenty ancients, and the four living creatures fell down and adored God that sitteth upon the throne, saying: Amen; Alleluia.

(Note: The word “ancients” is used interchangeably with “elder”, the Greek word being “presbyteroi”.)

Vestments
1:13
13And in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks, one like to the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the feet, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.
4:4
4And round about the throne were four and twenty seats; and upon the seats, four and twenty ancients sitting, clothed in white garments, and on their heads were crowns of gold.
6:11
11And white robes were given to every one of them one; and it was said to them, that they should rest for a little time, till their fellow servants, and their brethren, who are to be slain, even as they, should be filled up.
7:9
9After this I saw a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and tribes, and peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne, and in sight of the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands:
15:6
6And the seven angels came out of the temple, having the seven plagues, clothed with clean and white linen, and girt about the breasts with golden girdles.
19:13-14
13And he was clothed with a garment sprinkled with blood; and his name is called, THE WORD OF GOD. 14And the armies that are in heaven followed him on white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

Consecrated Celibacy
14:4
4These are they who were not defiled with women: for they are virgins. These follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were purchased from among men, the firstfruits to God and to the Lamb:

Lamp Stands, or Menorah
1:12
12And I turned to see the voice that spoke with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks:
2:5
5Be mindful therefore from whence thou art fallen: and do penance, and do the first works. Or else I come to thee, and will move thy candlestick out of its place, except thou do penance.

Penitence
Chapters 2 and 3
(Here’s one excerpt from 2:5)
5Be mindful therefore from whence thou art fallen: and do penance, and do the first works. Or else I come to thee, and will move thy candlestick out of its place, except thou do penance.

Incense
5:8
8And when he had opened the book, the four living creatures, and the four and twenty ancients fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints:
8:3-5
3And another angel came, and stood before the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given to him much incense, that he should offer of the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar, which is before the throne of God. 4And the smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel. 5And the angel took the censer, and filled it with the fire of the altar, and cast it on the earth, and there were thunders and voices and lightnings, and a great earthquake.

The Book or Scroll
5:1
1And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne, a book written within and without, sealed with seven seals.

The Eucharistic Host
2:17
17He, that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the churches: To him that overcometh, I will give the hidden manna, and will give him a white counter (stone), and in the counter, a new name written, which no man knoweth, but he that receiveth it.

(Note: The white counter or stone is a reference to the custom of showing a little stone, with some appropriate mark on it, to gain entrance to a feast or banquet. The name inscribed on the stone referred to here shows that the Christian has a right to partake of the good things which the Lord reserves for those who win the victory. – Navarre Bible Commentary)

Chalices
15:7
7And one of the four living creatures gave to the seven angels seven golden vials, full of the wrath of God, who liveth for ever and ever.
16 (several references, here’s one)
1And I heard a great voice out of the temple, saying to the seven angels: Go, and pour out the seven vials of the wrath of God upon the earth.
21:9
9And there came one of the seven angels, who had the vials full of the seven last plagues, and spoke with me, saying: Come, and I will shew thee the bride, the wife of the Lamb.

Sign of the Cross
7:3
3Saying: Hurt not the earth, nor the sea, nor the trees, till we sign the servants of our God in their foreheads.
14:1
1And I beheld, and lo a lamb stood upon mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty-four thousand, having his name, and the name of his Father, written on their foreheads.
22:44
And they shall see his face: and his name shall be on their foreheads.

The Gloria
15:3-4
3And singing the canticle of Moses, the servant of God, and the canticle of the Lamb, saying: Great and wonderful are thy works, O Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, O King of ages. 4Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and magnify thy name? For thou only art holy: for all nations shall come, and shall adore in thy sight, because thy judgments are manifest.

The Alleluia
19:1,3,4,6
1After these things I heard as it were the voice of much people in heaven, saying: Alleluia. Salvation, and glory, and power is to our God.
3And again they said: Alleluia. And her smoke ascendeth for ever and ever.
4And the four and twenty ancients, and the four living creatures fell down and adored God that sitteth upon the throne, saying: Amen; Alleluia.
6And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of great thunders, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord our God the Almighty hath reigned.

Sursum Corda (Lift up your hearts)
11:12
12And they heard a great voice from heaven, saying to them: Come up hither. And they went up to heaven in a cloud: and their enemies saw them.

The Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy)
4:8
8And the four living creatures had each of them six wings; and round about and within they are full of eyes. And they rested not day and night, saying: Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, who was, and who is, and who is to come.

The Amen
19:4
4And the four and twenty ancients, and the four living creatures fell down and adored God that sitteth upon the throne, saying: Amen; Alleluia.
22:21
21The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

The Agnus Dei (Lamb of God)
5:6 and throughout
6And I saw: and behold in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the ancients, a Lamb standing as it were slain, having seven horns and seven eyes: which are the seven Spirits of God, sent forth into all the earth.

The Prominence of the Virgin Mary
12:1-6, 13-17
1And a great sign appeared in heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars: 2And being with child, she cried travailing in birth, and was in pain to be delivered. 3And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads, and ten horns: and on his head seven diadems: 4And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to be delivered; that, when she should be delivered, he might devour her son. 5And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod: and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne. 6And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she had a place prepared by God, that there they should feed her a thousand two hundred sixty days.

13And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman, who brought forth the man child: 14And there were given to the woman two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the desert unto her place, where she is nourished for a time and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. 15And the serpent cast out of his mouth after the woman, water as it were a river; that he might cause her to be carried away by the river. 16And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the river, which the dragon cast out of his mouth. 17And the dragon was angry against the woman: and went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.


Intercession of Angels and Saints
5:8
8And when he had opened the book, the four living creatures, and the four and twenty ancients fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints:
6:9-10
9And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held. 10And they cried with a loud voice, saying: How long, O Lord (holy and true) dost thou not judge and revenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
8:3-4
3And another angel came, and stood before the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given to him much incense, that he should offer of the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar, which is before the throne of God. 4And the smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel.

Devotion to St. Michael
12:7
7And there was a great battle in heaven, Michael and his angels fought with the dragon, and the dragon fought and his angels:

Antiphonal Chant
4:8-11
8And the four living creatures had each of them six wings; and round about and within they are full of eyes. And they rested not day and night, saying: Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, who was, and who is, and who is to come. 9And when those living creatures gave glory, and honour, and benediction to him that sitteth on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever; 10The four and twenty ancients fell down before him that sitteth on the throne, and adored him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying: 11Thou art worthy, O Lord our God, to receive glory, and honour, and power: because thou hast created all things; and for thy will they were, and have been created.
5:9-14
9And they sung a new canticle, saying: Thou art worthy, O Lord, to take the book, and to open the seals thereof; because thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God, in thy blood, out of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation. 10And hast made us to our God a kingdom and priests, and we shall reign on the earth. 11And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne, and the living creatures, and the ancients; and the number of them was thousands of thousands, 12Saying with a loud voice: The Lamb that was slain is worthy to receive power, and divinity, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and benediction. 13And every creature, which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them: I heard all saying: To him that sitteth on the throne, and to the Lamb, benediction, and honour, and glory, and power, for ever and ever. 14And the four living creatures said: Amen. And the four and twenty ancients fell down on their faces, and adored him that liveth for ever and ever.
7:10-12
10And they cried with a loud voice, saying: Salvation to our God, who sitteth upon the throne, and to the Lamb. 11And all the angels stood round about the throne, and the ancients, and the four living creatures; and they fell down before the throne upon their faces, and adored God, 12Saying: Amen. Benediction, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, honour, and power, and strength to our God for ever and ever. Amen.
18:1-8
1And after these things, I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power: and the earth was enlightened with his glory. 2And he cried out with a strong voice, saying: Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen; and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every unclean spirit, and the hold of every unclean and hateful bird: 3Because all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication; and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her; and the merchants of the earth have been made rich by the power of her delicacies. 4And I heard another voice from heaven, saying: Go out from her, my people; that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues. 5For her sins have reached unto heaven, and the Lord hath remembered her iniquities. 6Render to her as she also hath rendered to you; and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup wherein she hath mingled, mingle ye double unto her. 7As much as she hath glorified herself, and lived in delicacies, so much torment and sorrow give ye to her; because she saith in her heart: I sit a queen, and am no widow; and sorrow I shall not see. 8Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine, and she shall be burnt with the fire; because God is strong, who shall judge her.

Readings from Scripture
Ch. 2, 3, & 5
8:2-11

Priesthood of the Faithful
1:6
6And hath made us a kingdom, and priests to God and his Father, to him be glory and empire for ever and ever. Amen.
20:6
6Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection. In these the second death hath no power; but they shall be priests of God and of Christ; and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Catholicity or Universality
7:9
9After this I saw a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and tribes, and peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne, and in sight of the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands:

Silent Contemplation
8:1
1And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven, as it were for half an hour.

Marriage Supper of the Lamb
19:9
9And he said to me: Write: Blessed are they that are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith to me: These words of God are true.
17 (whole Chapter)

Misericordiae

I have more important things to do than taking time to gripe about things that I can’t do anything about. And you have more important things to do than taking time to read my gripes about things that none of us can do anything about. But for the sake of therapy I’ll gripe anyway.

The cause of my present anxiety is my beautiful, new, leather bound, gold trimmed Daily Roman Missal. You see, this version, in response to the Vatican’s encouragement to reacquaint ourselves with the universal language of the Church, that being Latin, and indeed, Vatican II’s own dictate: “…the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites (SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM 36.1), actually has many of the prayers and responses printed also in Latin.

Now why should this cause me anxiety? Well because now I can see what the original text ACTUALLY says whereas before I just ignorantly babbled (prayerfully of course) the given English translation. I’m no Latin scholar, but I know just enough to be bothered by what I see.

One of the responses that is always accompanied by the Latin translation is the Psalm response. This week (15th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Cycle B) the response was “Lord, let us see your kindness, and grant us your salvation.” It is a verse I’ve repeated many times. But now I feel cheated. Why? Because that’s not what the text actually says.

The word translated as “kindness” is “misericordia” which actually means “mercy” or even “an appeal to pity”. In fact, a literal translation would be: “Lord, pity us…” The Latin word for “kindness” is “beneficentia” or “benevolentia”.

A few weeks ago, (12th Sunday) the psalm response read “Give thanks to the Lord, his love is everlasting.” Again the word “misericordiae” appears in the Latin, but this time is translated “love”. The fact that there are many Latin words for “love” testify to the great ambiguity of the word “love” in English. Here are a few: “adamo” (as in to fall in love), “amor” (to love passionately), “cupido” (physical desire), and even “lucrum” which is love of gain or avarice, one of the Seven Deadly Sins.

“Misericoridae” is obviously a very different word than the tepid “kindness” and the ambiguous “love”. The fact that “misericordia” translates as mercy and even pity implies that there is a NEED for mercy and pity. It cries out from our fallen nature. It affirms our complete and utter reliance on Him and our truly desperate sinful state.

It is my opinion that more and more Catholics are increasingly morally, doctrinally, and spiritually confused, if not neurotic. This, I think, is a direct consequence of our being increasingly shielded from the full conscious horror of sin and our dire need for sacramental repentance. Fulton Sheen once said that not to go to confession is like not changing a dirty diaper. We may pretend not to see the problem but the stench eventually overwhelms.

The effects of sin and the consequences of neglecting the confessional are better documented elsewhere. My point here is to suggest that it is not only the much discussed lack of authentic, consistent orthodox catechesis that is at fault in our society’s “slide to Gomorrah”, but the whitewashed text that we in the American Church have adopted as our official translation.

As stated at the outset, there is nothing a poor layman can do about an officially approved translation. We must say what it says. But there is no law against complaining about it…the squeaky wheel, you know. There is also no law prohibiting me from reading the Latin, knowing the Latin, and teaching my children the Latin. And so I do that…and encourage you to do it also.

Yes, Lord, let me know your kindness and love, but moreover, hear my cries for “misericordia”.