§ 2. Liturgical Worship

(1) This paragraph concerning liturgical worship we must credit to Rev. Fr. I. Hanssens, S.J., professor of sacred liturgy in the Pontifical Gregorian University and in the Pontifical Oriental Institute.

I. Conditions of a Good Definition. Liturgy is called the whole order of liturgical acts. But these acts, in order that liturgy may constitute some species and be the object of its own science, must: 1) have some proper nature, i.e. refer one and the same quality by which they both agree among themselves and differ from other acts of the same genus; and furthermore this quality must in some way be natural or essential, i.e. be joined by an intimate connection with those acts and constitute their intrinsic reason; 2) by reason of that nature, have neither too slight a place nor too light an importance among the acts of Catholic life.

That this order of acts exists and must be called by the name of liturgy will soon appear.

II. Insufficient Definitions. Such, on the contrary, would not be a liturgy which would be only the decorative part of worship, ceremonial, aesthetic; - or its ecclesiastical and human part, opposed to the other part, i.e. the essential and divine part instituted by Christ Himself. For, although perhaps such a sense can also be attributed to the word liturgy itself (let the grammarians see to it), liturgy conceived in this way would not have a sufficient place among the acts of ecclesiastical life; besides, the quality by which liturgical acts would be constituted would not be natural or essential, but wholly exterior and accidental. Nor is it enough to say that liturgy is that part of worship which comprises the sacrifice of the Mass, the sacraments and sacramentals, and canonical prayer; or that it consists of those acts whose norms the liturgical books legitimately define: for again in such definitions any intrinsic and essential note is lacking.

For this reason we cannot make our own the definition defended by the distinguished Callewaert, a man so well deserving of liturgy, according to which "liturgy is public worship insofar as this is ordered by ecclesiastical authority"¹, and which the author himself equates with the definition proposed in the notable manual of Thalhofer-Eisenhofer². It has rightly been objected to this definition that it establishes a specific reason too exterior, i.e. the ordering impressed on worship by the Church, and thus excludes from liturgy the rites themselves, at least insofar as they are already defined and instituted by Christ Himself, such as, for example, the Eucharistic sacrifice itself in the Mass, and the substantial rites of the sacraments³.

III. The True Definition. This is reached partly by deduction and partly by induction. For several centuries, however, all experts have connected liturgy with the public worship of the Church (concerning worship and specifically concerning public worship, cf. above n. 165, 166). Yet liturgy cannot yet be defined by public worship itself; for there are some acts of public worship in the Church which are not counted among liturgical acts: for example, sermons. Therefore proceeding further, we shall say that liturgy is public worship in the Church insofar as it consists of rites, or that it is the public and ritual worship of the Church; but by this note, that it is ritual, the specific reason of liturgical worship is constituted. A rite, moreover, can be defined as an exterior action to be done according to a definite form, by which some effect is signified and, ex opere operato, taken properly or more broadly, is produced, either in the sanctification of souls or, as in our case the matter stands, for the honoring of God. Every rite, although it is simple and stripped of all pomp, nevertheless necessarily possesses some stability and gravity. Liturgy is composed not only of rites instituted by the Church, but besides, indeed chiefly, of rites instituted by Christ, even before and apart from every ordering impressed upon them by the Church. As to the rites of the sacraments, although principally they tend to the sanctification of souls, nevertheless at the same time and equally immediately they are directed to the honor of God, and this by the very fact that they express and signify themselves as effecting the sanctification of the faithful, which is a most excellent work of divine power and goodness. Ceremonies are secondary rites, completing the principal rites and adding beauty and majesty to them, so that indeed they beget similar effects, but through rites properly so called.

Liturgical worship, although of itself it suffices that it be exercised in the name of the universal Church but apart from the community, nevertheless has been so instituted that it ought per se to be performed by the very legitimate and public (officielle) communities of the Church, i.e. collectively and hierarchically; and in fact it is usually performed in that way. This is true of Mass, of the canonical hours, which are the common office of some group, even if, by way of habit or exception, they are permitted to be recited apart from choir: this is true of the administration of all the sacraments and of the sacrament of Penance itself, as is clear from its history.

¹ Liturgicae Institutiones: Tractatus primus, Bruges 1910, p. 6, n. 6.

² Handbuch der katholischen Liturgik, 2nd ed., t. 1, 1912, p. 4.

³ D. Franco de Wyvls, Tydschrift voor Liturgie, 1920, p. 140.

— You ask, what are rubrics?

Rubrics are those rules which prescribe only the exterior manner of ritual actions, with no distinction made between rites and mere ceremonies, between necessary rites and adventitious rites, and with no explanation added of their sense or efficacy. For example, in exactly the same way they describe the rites occurring in the incensation of the altar and the rites proper to the consecration itself. The rubric therefore is the "letter" of ritual worship; but the "spirit" of this worship is the native signification of the rites and their proper efficacy.

The rubric must be animated and ruled by the spirit. In turn the spirit itself is subject to other necessities, which it pertains to the rubrics legitimately to define and to confer on them the force of law. Thus it happens that, while the spirit of the prayer Domine non sum dignus to be said in distributing Communion requires that it be recited by the faithful person himself, nevertheless on account of decency or for some other reason, the rubric fittingly establishes that it be pronounced by the priest himself in the name of the faithful person. By the same reason the dialogue Mass is consonant with the spirit of the liturgy, but it can be ignored by the rubric, indeed on account of extrinsic reasons it could be condemned by it.

The Spiritual Value of the Liturgy. It is scarcely necessary to say how great these parts are in the life of the universal Church. Is not public worship to be rendered to God to be placed among her more principal duties? But now, who does not see that in reality public worship is almost wholly contained in liturgical worship? Therefore, the faithful who become partners of liturgical worship, how fitting it is that they perform so great a duty worthily and intelligently!

Nor is fruit for souls lacking from such participation. For:

1. Liturgical worship, because it is ritual, pours into the soul the sense of some mystery and superhuman power, which greatly helps men to approach God with greater reverence.

2. For the same reason, i.e. because it is ritual, liturgical worship appears endowed with an efficacy which transcends ordinary human powers, and thus begets greater confidence.

3. Because it is adorned with pomp, it brings much beauty and majesty to the whole Catholic religion.

4. Because it is public, it excellently illustrates before all eyes the nature of the Church as she is a society.

5. Because it is stable and one, it awakens the sense of unity in time and unity in space, that is, of continuous tradition and catholicity. Therefore it is a most powerful remedy against excessive individualism and a document accommodated to all souls of a truly Catholic life, that is, collective and hierarchical.

6. Finally, by reason of the very means which it uses for signifying the honoring of God, it at the same time contributes most efficaciously to the Christian instruction of the faithful, namely by reason of the mysteries which are commemorated in it, by reason of the readings and chants which it contains, and especially by reason of the sacramental rites by which grace is poured in.

Certainly several of those salutary effects are not proper to liturgy as such: nevertheless even these usually in fact, at least with such great efficacy, are begotten by liturgy alone, either because, so far as most of the faithful are concerned, the collective and social exercise of religion is contained in liturgical worship, or because, as has been said, the principal means of sanctification which the Church uses, under another aspect, are also acts of liturgical worship.

Excesses to Be Avoided. 1. Nevertheless every excess must be abstained from in exalting the merits of liturgy; nor must its ambit be so extended that it seems to comprehend the whole spiritual life both of the universal Church and of individual faithful. For liturgy is public and ritual worship and nothing besides. Therefore whatever does not have the character of a worshipful act and does not consist in rites must wholly be denied to liturgy. But who will seriously deny that very many such works exist both in the spiritual life of the Church and in that of the faithful? Think of the whole office of public teaching or the use of jurisdiction in establishing laws and ruling the faithful: very many works of charity, etc.; but among the faithful, worship of private devotion, and especially the custom of pious contemplation and of examination of conscience; fasts, vigils, and the other exercises of penance, not to speak of many other things which are too manifestly distant from liturgy by the whole heaven.

2. Nor is the name of Catholic piety rightly reserved to liturgy, while outside it a place is conceded only to devotion that is wholly private. For a false supposition underlies this distinction; because not only those things which are exercised publicly in the Church, but all other good works also which are done at the will of or with the approval of the Church within her limits, although they are in some way private, nevertheless, on account of the communion of saints, are truly works of the whole Church and acquire their proper dignity from this. For the publicity of the acts of the Church, in relation to spiritual effects and especially to the communication of merits, is nothing other than a certain sacramental. Therefore the Church is badly defined as a "society of liturgy."

3. But must not at least the whole remaining spiritual life be subject to liturgical worship? Must not this be its center, as they say, so that all other spiritual actions are either preparation for or continuation of liturgical worship? There is someone who affirms this. But this necessity could be defended in some way if liturgy were not only materially (which it truly is) but also formally penance, thanksgiving, ascetical life, etc. For then liturgy would be the same as the public and legitimate exercise of the whole Christian and spiritual life. Nevertheless even then it would have to be demonstrated that the Church proposes that public exercise as one and excellent, so that the private exercise would be excluded or at least the public would always have to be preferred to it. This does not seem able to be said rightly. For in this assertion there lies hidden always the same error by which it is affirmed that only that which is public (officiel) is done with the Church and through her.

But moreover, liturgy is not formally penance, thanksgiving, ascetical life, etc., but only worship, and indeed public and ritual worship. But can worship, especially public and ritual worship, be the center of the whole spiritual life? There is no reason for asserting such a thing. For although to serve God is the one end of our whole life and of the Church's life, nevertheless God is not served principally by worship.

Yet again it is not denied that liturgy is of such great importance that its exercise is worthy to be carefully prepared and continued by apt readings and meditations; and this seems to us to be liturgical life. Nevertheless it must be noted that such preparation and continuation is no longer formally the exercise of liturgy.

But at least, even if some coordination only without subordination is admitted between liturgy and the remaining acts of spiritual life, is not liturgy nevertheless, as it were, the exemplar and teacher of the whole spiritual life? Certainly liturgy, since it is an ecclesiastical institution, enjoys immense authority; and on the other hand some unity in our spiritual life is greatly to be desired. But the authority which liturgy enjoys from the institution of the Church has force only insofar as liturgy is worship, not insofar as it is an exercise of penance, prayer, ascesis, etc., since all these things it is only materially. Moreover, the Church never hints that she wishes to propose, by her public worship, an exemplar of the whole spiritual life.

— You ask concerning "liturgical spirit."

And first, what is it? It consists in those dispositions of intellect and will, indeed also of sensibility, which are necessary or useful for performing a liturgical act well, i.e. integrally and worthily. But that it should be done fruitfully pertains at least to the spirit of the liturgy, because liturgy does not formally intend this end. Many things are often attributed to liturgical spirit as if they were proper to it, which pertain to it only materially. Thus that liberty of soul and mind in liturgical meditation, i.e. in that meditation which is exercised in the very performing of a liturgical act, for example in singing the Office. For why could someone not use the same liberty in meditating on the psalms or other passages of sacred Scripture apart from every action of liturgical worship? And so, while the liturgical spirit is altogether necessary, and too often is greatly lacking, in the exercise of liturgical worship itself, outside that worship it must be said not to be required; but individual acts of spiritual life must be done in that manner and with those dispositions of soul which their nature demands for greater spiritual usefulness, always with the authority of the Church preserved.