O Gracious Lord Jesus, I, a sinner, presuming not on my own merits, but trusting in thy goodness and mercy, fear and tremble in drawing near to the Table on which is spread Thy Banquet of all delights. (St. Ambrose, opening line of prayer said silently by congregants before Mass.)
When you enter the nave where a Latin Mass will be celebrated, you immediately notice what is not present.
There are no musical instruments, not even a piano or organ, by or near the sanctuary.
There is no choir. There is no microphone or speakers.
There is no table with bread and wine in the middle of the aisle for parishioners to carry up.
No banners are hanging down from the ceiling or flags decorating the walls.
No parishioners are running to and fro around the altar, setting up for Mass.
There is no practicing reading, singing, or talking at all.
Nothing can take your attention away from the silent Sacred: the Tabernaculum, the “little house” or Tabernacle where Christ resides upon the Table of the Lord.
Indeed, everything is built to draw your eye to that very Tabernacle. The center aisle leads directly to it. (The side aisles are narrow and nearly hidden from sight.) The pews are low and dark, so they do not interfere with your line of vision (and are non-cushioned, so they do not make you too comfortable). The low altar railing serves as a protective wall proclaiming that there is something precious beyond.
Each step going up to the main altar leads to a smaller and smaller area so that your eye can only go in one place. The sculptures around the altar point toward or accentuate it. Even the side altars, with statues of saints and votive candles, are recessed and darker as they point to the Tabernacle shining ever more brightly.
Ecce Agnus Dei! Ecce Qui tollit peccáta mundi!
But why would you want to behold anything else? A miracle occurs at every Mass, and its results are guarded beautifully in that little royal house. For it is the King Himself who resides there; therefore, we bend our knees to Him when we arrive to greet Him accordingly. For this reason, we dress modestly and maintain a respectful silence, as is fitting the presence of our King.
On the evening of February 2, forty days after the Nativity, we celebrated the Feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary. It is known as Candlemas, the last day of the Christmas season. We brought candles to thank God for the bees (“…by Thy command has caused this liquid to become perfect wax by the labor of the bees…”), His gift of candles, and to seek His blessing upon them.
It was appropriate that most of the Mass which followed was celebrated by candlelight. To say it was magical is an understatement. (“…A light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of Thy people Israel.”—Luke 2:32.) All throughout, our eyes were drawn even more to the Tabernacle, now illuminated by many candles, surrounded by the darkness of the nave.
The Tabernacle at the Center
The real and complete presence of Jesus in the Eucharist is a primary teaching of the Catholic Church. Yet, sadly, less than 1/3rd of Catholics believe this. Many have claimed this is due to poor catechesis; thus, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has planned a three-year revival.
Yet, if the Tabernacle is not the primary focus of our church structure, why would we treat its Inhabitant as real or important? If His house is off to the side and surrounded by bedlam, why would we think that it is something more than a container?
Christ told us that His Body and Blood are present in the Eucharist. Shouldn’t we base our entire way of life on this statement?
Visus, tactus, gustus, in te fállitur,
Sed audítu solo tuto créditor,
Credo quidquid dixit Dei Fílius,
Nil hoc verbo veritátis vérius.
Taste and touch and vision to discern Thee fail,
But the hearing only well may here prevail.
I believe whatever the Son of God hath told;
What the Truth has spoken, that for truth I hold.
(St. Thomas Aquinas, Adóro Te Devote)
9 thoughts on “Love Letters to the Latin Mass 2: Drawn to the Tabernacle”
Pingback: THVRSDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit
There is no comparison with regards to solemnity, reverence, mystery and beauty between the TLM and the NO Mass.
The theater I witnessed week after week, the casual attitudes of all involved, the horrible 1970s music and song and the silly banners, all come across as an amateur hour production, not a holy sacrifice. So be it.
By the grace of God, I was raised in the TLM. Served as an altar boy in the TLM. Learned liturgical Latin in the TLM. Learned to understand the holy Mass and the beauty of the Catholic Church in the TLM. Thanks be to God, it will never be crushed. Bet on it.
Are you, therefore, saying that the failures (as you see them) of the congregation are powerful enough to lessen the quality and efficacy of Jesus’ sacrificial offering to the Father?
I’ve been a Priest for 41 years now. I love the beauty of older Churches and the lovely vestments, the smell of incense and the glorious sound of Gregorian Chant. I’ve celebrated Mass with the Pope in his private chapel, which is a gem and seen the beautiful basilicas, churches and cathedrals in England, Scotland, Ireland, Germany, The Czech Republic, Hungary, Austria and Italy, as well as in Israel. These, compared to what we have in California and other places in the United States, are magnificent structures.
But I’ve also seen the little places on the floor of Auschwitz where Priests celebrated Mass on the floor. I’ve seen the basement of a jail where I celebrated Mass among smelly men. I’ve celebrated Mass in several Nursing Homes with the sound of patients yelling. I’ve seen Mass on film of a Priest celebrating Mass on the hood of a vehicle as American and British soldiers knelt in the mud during WWII.
I simply cannot decide which of these is more beautiful.
I suppose it depends on how closely you want the Eucharist to look like the way Jesus did it. It was certainly not facing away from his apostles, speaking in a foreign language. The Eucharist was his invention, not the Church’s. “Do this in memory of me.” What was “this”?
Very nicely said!
Thanks for writing, Stephen.
I don’t know and won’t presume how others experience the Masses they attend. I’ve had wonderful experiences at a variety of Masses. In fact, some of the most inspirational Masses for me have been those organized by school kids.
It seems obvious to me, however, that if the tabernacle is not the primary focus of a church (i.e., off to the side or hidden behind other items), then it will be treated accordingly, and we shouldn’t be surprised if people don’t believe it contains what it does. Additionally, if we don’t receive the Eucharist in a somber and respectful way, and teach our kids to do the same, this denigrates its true nature. Similarly, if parishioners are not expected to dress appropriately and modestly for Mass, they will naturally come to believe that what happens at Mass is no big deal.
In reality, it is the most amazing miracle to ever occur.
Best wishes,
Cynthia
Thanks for your response, Cynthia. I certainly do not disagree with your thoughts on the Eucharist. Even though I love the NOM, I do believe some reforms are needed. I am an instituded Acolyte. In my parish, we are initiating practices that address the issues of which you speak. We are in the planning stages of putting a communion rail next to the sanctuary. Some liturgical responses are now being said in Latin. EWTN’s Mass is an example of what we are putting into place. When the ciborium is reposed after Communion, everybody on the sanctuary turns to the Tabernacle and kneels. There is more, but I’m sure you get the picture. Ours is not the only parish making these changes. The Holy Spirit is at work.
I think it is great that you love the Tridentine Mass (TLM). Hopefully, this attitude of love does not come at the expense of tolerance for those who love the Novus Ordo Mass (NOM). I can’t tell you how many times Traditionalist have tried to make the think less of myself for going to that inferior, or even invalid, NOM. Someone very very close to me (I won’t name names) considered me a heretic for going to said Masses. A close family member said much the same thing.
Having spent the first twenty years of my life exclusively attending the TLM, I have a different view. I know from personal experience that the TLM led to many attitude “problems” for those sitting in the nave. I think many who are too young to have experienced that historical period romanticize about the TLM incorrectly. Often they are ignorant of the realities of Mass in the 1950s and 1960s.
I love the NOM. I recognize that there have been some abuses that were introduced by some modernist within the episcopate at Vatican II, but that does not take away from the perfect offering by Jesus that exists in every valid Mass, whether in the Ordinary or Extraordinary Form. Every Council has spawned controversies that have taken decades or even centuries to be adequately addressed and resolved.
One of the reasons I love the NOM is because it is the first time that the Mass is said with the recognition of the fact that all those baptized — those sitting in the nave — become part of the common priesthood. What is the primary, if not only, role of all priest? To make acceptable sacrificial blood (and other material) offerings to God the Father. What is the only offering the Father finds fully acceptable — the offering of the incarnate Son through the Mass.
To say that one Form of the Mass is superior to a different Form would be egregiously wrong (I’m speaking generally Cynthia, not to you particularly — although, without actually saying it, you seem to intimate that in your article). If that is so, then I recommend you read the following article: https://www.stossbooks.com/novus-ordo-versus-latin-mass.html. Both the NOM and the TLM are equally PERFECT offerings of the Son to the Father.
If one is saying that fewer graces are received through the NOM compared to the TLM — again, one would be wrong! Too many Traditionalists have very little understanding of the economy of grace relative to the Mass. If you, Cynthia are claiming that the NOM is to blame for the lack of belief in the real presence, I would suggest that you are making the same mistake that so many Traditionalists make. You are committing the logical fallacy of correlation equals causation. Please read the following to see why my claim is true: https://www.stossbooks.com/did%20novus%20ordo%20mass%20cause%20attendance%20declines.html.