Distractions in the liturgy

By Ladislaus Louis D’Souza

Mumbai: The biggest pandemic-lockdown casualty, the grisly death toll apart, is the Church’s liturgical celebration. From viewing Mass on TV or computer screens being just that, ‘viewing’/‘watching,’ to fulfilling the Sunday obligation by doing precisely that, our faith perspective in relation to the Liturgy has undergone a sea change. The Church in India is thus due for a long haul in terms of regaining the “source and summit of Christian worship” tag for the Mass and securing full attendance once churches have reopened!

Citing American research findings, William Grimm, Tokyo missioner, presbyter, and publisher of UCAN [Union of Catholic Asian News], in his post of 02 August 2021 writes: “Before the pandemic more than one-quarter of Catholics who went to Sunday Mass did so out of habit.….what lay behind the habit was a sense of obligation to attend…… Now that people have formed a new habit of not going to church on Sunday……, will reinstating an “obligation” be effective at helping people reactivate that old habit?…. Instead of emphasizing obligation, why don’t bishops emphasize opportunity – ‘After more than a year and a half of being unable to come together in worship, we now have the opportunity to do so again!’ would be more attractive” than declaring the cancellation of the dispensation from the obligation of in-person attendance at Sunday Mass.

The liturgy ought to move the faithful to look beyond the apparent annihilation of the world by the pandemic rather than give in to the obvious secularization the Church. If Mother Church is to succeed in bringing about a revival of the active practice of the Faith the focus of her liturgy must be to pointing us to heavenly realities that abide forever. Grimm adds: “A bishop is responsible for the liturgy in the diocese…. In preparation for the reopening of churches, bishops have an opportunity to raise the quality of liturgical service. Workshops for clergy on preaching and liturgy can be done remotely while waiting for the resumption of normal activities.” Indeed, “if people know that the pandemic period was used to prepare an opportunity for their better return to liturgy, they will be more likely to return.” The same applies to the Church in India. Given the emergence of newfangled liturgical anomalies and distractions as discussed below, our bishops and liturgists have a massive task on hand to rid the Mass of all distractions, thereby making it an enriching God-experience for every believer.

*Singing – While pre-recorded choral singing accompanying online Masses [Powai & Wodehouse choirs being flag-bearers!] makes for a semblance of participation in the online Mass, cantors per se seem to consider it a God-sent opportunity to exhibit their fetish for casual improvisations, lyrical nuances and musical notations royally tossed, the sense of dynamics underlying hymn-compositions given short shrift. Some cantors—better referred to as ‘crooners’, or maybe crow-ners!—sing as if with a vengeance, the decibel of their vocal output a virtual threat to both sound systems and auditory nerves alike! Others brazenly indulge in dirge-like slow motion murder of hymns like ‘Listen’ for the Entrance, and ‘The Lord is my shepherd…’ for Communion. As for the sheer frivolity of ‘Come and go with me to my Father’s House’ for the Recessional, the piece deserves to be dumped so as to nip the chalta hai attitude in the bud. Faulty intonation of ‘it’ as ‘eat’, sick as ‘seek’, ‘Heav’nly’ coolly replaced with ‘Hea-ven-ly’, and ‘Hosanna’ now sung with desi leanings, are other detestable aberrations. Pointing out liturgical truths such as ‘the choir is not the queen of the liturgy but its handmaid’ or that hymns ought to match the contents of the Readings, would earn you ‘you’re a nerd’ looks! Today, with hardly anyone around capable of composing original, sensible Church music, one cannot help but wonder whether the fate of polyphonic liturgical singing has finally been sealed by the pandemic-lockdown.

*Cantor? or ‘Co-Celebrant’? – A strange development is the appropriation of part of the Celebrant’s role by cantors who commence the recitation of the Confiteor, the Kyrie, the Gloria, Credo, Pater, Agnus and a host of other things while the Celebrant busies himself with opening the page of the Missal for his next part, getting the ciboria out of the Tabernacle, readying the steel bowls [used as ciboria] for the distribution of Communion etc.

*Proclamation of the Word – “The Word of the Lord” has suddenly come to be replaced with “The Word of God”! What next, “God’s Gospel”? Oftentimes one sees the deacon himself, instead of the Celebrant, kissing the Gospel. As for the Responsorial Psalm, what does one make of liturgical norms learnt in a diocesan Liturgy Course when priests, having rattled through the First Reading, say “Your response to the Psalm shall be….” overriding the fact that the Psalm per se is the Congregation’s response to God’s Word just proclaimed! Or, “Please stand up for the Acclamation”, ostensibly forgetting to say “please sit down for the Gospel”!
*Dress code – The ‘mini-chasuble’ for Lectors (similar to the vestment worn by the EMHC) in some of Parishes sports broad dazzling bands around the neckline drawing attention to the long, gorgeous locks flowing down the shoulder-front! But the amusing addition is a similar vestment for the Sacristan! As for participants ‘viewing’ the Mass at home, as long as the option of choice-driven fast-forwarding and reversing exists, ‘dress code’ is a formality best ignored!

*Altar linen – Rubrics specify the number and sizes of white sheets to be used, the longest of which, representing the burial shroud of Jesus, so placed as to have its two ends fall almost to the floor at either end of the Altar whose front however remains uncovered. Contrarily, we see gaudy sari-smocking covering the Altar-front and its sides, ugly veils wrongfully covering the beauty of carved Lecterns and Teak-wood Altar Missal Stands.

*Floral arrangements – in certain instances, placed on gaudy broad-rimmed plastic plates surmounting tree-trunk props atop wrought-iron stands just about anywhere in the sanctuary, these seem to outdo themselves in terms of size and colour-scheme. Resultantly, those at the mic are seen peering through an unseemly maze, their own faces largely blocked from congregational view! Often, the use of potted greenery that has obviously seen greener days, and flowers that have long withered, leaving the ‘oasis’ starkly exposed, constitute a needless eyesore.

*Spiritual Communion Prayer – the Celebrant leading its recitation, contradicts the fact of his own consumption of the sacred species!

*The hair factor – Amazingly, while women religious opt for short hair to save on hair-care time, more young priests are shedding the well-groomed look. Though there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with sporting long hair, what does matter is the unkempt look that contravenes the formalness of liturgical garb, thus calling for a rethink!

*Try coaxing, not taunting – With COVID-19 mutants and variants ruling the roost, full-attendance even at Sunday Mass will not be easy to achieve. For, innumerable are those who, depending on the severity of the Covid attack and the length of time taken to recover, have been strictly advised by their respective doctors to keep away from crowds or even small church-gatherings. Thus, instead of taunts like “Oh! So you got permission from your doctor to come to church!?!” how about gentle assurances that in Church one is on secure ground and in safe hands? For, the Lord does protect His own (cf Ps 121:7)! Indeed, unless appropriate steps are urgently taken, Grimm’s assertion could well come to pass: “Given the choice between un-involving in-person liturgy and moderately involving remote liturgy, people may opt for virtual participation, even if that precludes receiving the Eucharist.”