What is true though is that I've talked at length about liturgy. And the reason for that is because I've been working through how lied to and betrayed I feel by my evangelical upbringing. In that world, they have a "liturgy" of sorts but they refuse to put it in writing. So there is a sense of ritual about evangelical worship. But at the same time, there's a strange, neurotic compulsion to deny that a liturgy exists.
On top of that, style takes a backseat to substance. It doesn't matter how or when you worship. What matters is that, by golly, your HEART is in it.
And honestly, I wouldn't have a problem with that line of thinking if it had any basis in fact. But it just doesn't. The early Church clearly believed that liturgy matters. Yes, your heart's conviction is important. It's not to be underestimated. But if the Lord has appointed a manner He finds acceptable to be worshiped, isn't it dangerously stupid to worship Him in any other way?
Also, evangelicals have this aggravating tendency to create a false dichotomy between liturgy and meaningful worship. When it comes to the Almighty, I've always had a reverential sense of soberness. He isn't my co-pilot, my best drinking buddy, my n***a or any of that stupidity. He's the sovereign God Almighty and there is none like Him.
Because of that, I was morally offended at times by how chummy a lot of evangelicals tend to be with Him. And whatever, He'll judge or not judge that for Himself. But this is a crucial part of evangelical worship and it took being painfully separated from all that for me to realize just how repugnant I find most of that stuff.
But anyway, my point here is that a lot of my discussion about liturgy is coming from the angle of a disgruntled evangelical who's forcibly woken up and smelled the coffee. Liturgy is a big subject for me because it's only been pretty recently that I've developed an awareness of and appreciation for it.
But among Catholics, it can be a contentious subject. This is illicit and that is not. I refuse to get involved with that. At least for right now. When I criticized the Novus Ordo, I did so on the basis that I don't think the sixth grade-level English of that Mass stacks up against the best of what the Anglicans have to offer. But I'm certainly not criticizing that Mass insofar as legitimacy is concerned. The Anglicans may have a more eloquent liturgy but what's it worth if half (or more) of their priests aren't validly ordained?
Because I want sober, reverential worship of the Lord, the only logical place for me to go is the Latin Mass. If the Solemn Masses I've seen on YouTube are indicative of what the Latin Mass is all about, this is about as High a Mass as the Catholic Church can offer (maybe the Orthodox have a Higher service but that takes you right back to the validity of their ordination in some cases).
But if others prefer the Novus Ordo, what difference does it make to me?
No comments:
Post a Comment