From the pen of Bl. Ildefonso Schuster, the great liturgist and Cardinal Archbishop of Milan.
The Church, as though she feared that the very splendour of her liturgy might lead simple folk into thinking that Christianity consisted merely in holding functions and receiving the sacraments, insists continually in her Lenten formulas that we should, by our good works, give reality to what is so sublimely expressed in the liturgy. Without this personal and intimate realization, brought about by constant effort, the liturgy would become a kind of magic formula. This fact clearly explains the words of the Gospel that many who during this life hold a high place among the followers of Christ, who even prophesy and work wonders in his name, will after death be rejected and condemned by our Lord himself. Nescio vos — “I know you not — depart from me all ye that work iniquity.” It is not ritual forms nor a sterile faith, but the good deeds inspired by a living faith, that will gain for us everlasting salvation.
This is not to say that our ritual forms, our sacred liturgical worship is inconsequential. In fact, our sacred worship, which fulfills the requirement of the virtue of Religion, is our sustenance and strength which powers our daily works, both of vocational duty and of mercy. They each enliven the other.
Loading ...
Harrowing. Hope to have a living faith and a conversion.
In my experience, parishes which have increasing numbers of attendees do charitable outreach or liturgy really well.
That being said, I’ve rarely ever seen both charitable outreach done well AND liturgy done really well at the same parish.
Perhaps it’s a function of one of the philosophical transcendentals (identified by Plato) appealing most strongly to those in control of the parish: The Good (Charity/Outreach), The True (Truth/Teaching), The Beautiful (Beauty/Liturgy).
I surmise that the Psalms and the Gospels teach that all three are important.
Charity is easy in comparison to make work: You will even get “c”atholics who believe in reincarnation to contribute. But a parishes that became deserted over decades can’t be revived in teaching and liturgy without effort and you need to win over those forces who feel disturbed by clear and unshortened teaching and liturgy by the rules.
Perhaps here is what Cardinal Roche does not see. Those who want to expand the availability of the Vetus Ordo are inspired by it with an evangelical zeal. To some it takes the form of being a better parent or a better and more thankful child of an elderly parent (charity begins at home), for others it takes the form of wanting to share what they have been given by the VO, the chance to worship God in spirit and in truth. For others it is serving other parishioners by prayer and action (I especially see this with prayers and meals provided for new babies and their mothers). I suppose I could go on, but will stop there. For there to be good works, there must be an inspiring liturgy which inspires both the congregation and the priest and this creates the zeal of those promoting the VO.
diaconus says
In my experience, parishes which have increasing numbers of attendees do charitable outreach or liturgy really well.
That being said, I’ve rarely ever seen both charitable outreach done well AND liturgy done really well at the same parish.
It’s interesting that you say that – that hasn’t been my experience. Since being married (35 years), I have had close ties with
(a) a liturgically very ill parish with outwardly good charitable services;
(b) a liturgically very good parish with fair charitable services;
(c) a liturgically poor parish but then quickly improving, with pretty good charitable services;
(d) a liturgically excellent parish with excellent charitable services;
(e) a liturgically excellent parish with medium charitable services;
(f) a liturgically very ill parish with medium charitable services; which then became
a liturgically dramatically improving toward good parish with medium charitable services.
I cannot find a clear trend in there with liturgy and charitable services being mutually antagonistic. And it seems to me that it would be equally important to layer in the level of faith-formation, i.e. people’s understanding of the Gospels and Church teaching, (recalling St. Augustine’s “faith seeking understanding”). If anything, though, my guess is that what controls is whether
(1) there is a good pastor who understands how the liturgy relates to charity (in its proper meaning of love of God), and then how love of God relates to charitable services: the services, liturgy and teaching are each an EXPRESSION of the same underlying love, but there is an inherent hierarchy involved.
(2) a bishop who will either leave the good pastor in place long enough (a good deal more than 6 years) to form the parish with sound customs of liturgy, teaching and services, or follow-up one good pastor with another.
I attend a traditional diocesan parish with excellent liturgy (we even do pre-55 Holy Week, with pre-55 Tenebrae etc.) AND excellent charitable service with a strong emphasis on serving the homeless.
I suppose it depends on what one considers charitable outreach and how much they advertise their “good” works.
It’s not that such a parish doesn’t exist (it certainly does) – it’s just my experience that parishes are typically ‘good’ at one or the other, if they are growing. Finding the parish where both is done really well, can (and obviously does) exist, but it is a bit of a rare bird.
Being involved with ‘ecclesiastical stuff’ for over 20 years now (albeit, considerably less than that as a deacon), it’s an observation I’ve made living (and working) in multiple dioceses in different capacities.
More data points on the topic are always welcome – no point in entertaining a theory if it’s just not true.