• Home
  • |
  • In defence of Divine Worship

December 13, 2016

In defence of Divine Worship

It saddens me that one or two of the clergy within the Ordinariate have started slating the Divine Worship Missal on social media. Partly because in-fighting will damage any emerging movement in the church. Partly because the charges are entirely unwarranted. And partly because this is an indication, I think, that not all ordinariate clergy are on the same page. Allow me to flesh these three points out in a little more detail.

But first two points need to be made. Firstly there is not a major rebellion against Ordinariate liturgy occurring at present. Most groups are taking to it well and so I am speaking of a minority. Secondly those who are not enamoured with the new liturgy are good priests, and friends of mine, who are entitled to their view. I respect that they have reached different conclusions to me and they remain at liberty to disagree with what follows and come back at it. That is what healthy people do. They debate in love and learn by such debate. I am attacking ideas here not people.

The danger of infighting

Firstly the danger of infighting. This needs little explanation in terms of the damage it can do. By all means let us debate but we need to ensure this does not descend into unhopeful negativity. For if the Ordinariate does not pull together it will fall apart. After all it already faces multiple challenges; a lack of enthusiasm and support from certain Catholic bishops, chronic under funding, hostility from Anglo-Catholics, struggles in terms of establishing a functional national leadership and no buildings or churches of our own.

The charges are unwarranted 

Divine Worship aims to bring more reverence, beauty and majesty to the Mass. It was put together to be a more faithful interpretation of the desires of the Second Vatican Council. A mass in the vernacular but with roots in the extraordinary form. Inevitably people will experience it differently; depending on how and where it is done and their subjective taste regarding liturgy.

So it might not be your bag but I refute the suggestion it doesn’t work. Here in Pembury we have used it, for over a year, at our principal Mass on Sunday, in the week and on certain feast days. And the response has been overwhelmingly positive. Indeed some cradle diocesan Catholics have been amongst its greatest supporters. It works. It can be done with dignity, beauty and solemnity. It can and does lead souls closer to God. So please respect this before lashing out.

I was, however, sceptical about establishing it. I thought people might struggle because it is different. But it proved the easiest transition I have managed. Even the detractors (we have one or two) could see that our being an ordinariate group necessitates  its use. If we don’t adopt it then who will? What is the point of an Ordinariate liturgy if it is not being used in the larger Ordinariate settings?!

Yet, surprisingly, Divine Worship was not mandated by Rome. Our clergy have been granted the liberty to use or neglect it. And situations will dictate. In small groups, where the majority are diocesan members of a certain hue, one might understand a pastoral decision to rely solely on Novus Ordo. But I would challenge such a decision in larger settings. It might be legal but is it prudent? If all we offer is Novus Ordo done well- so what? How are we different to any decent parish like St. Patrick’s Soho Square? Why not simply join a diocese? And whilst our patrimony is broader than one particular liturgy- that liturgy, if done well, is such an effective vehicle for the broader aspects of our patrimony to flourish that it seems wrongheaded to simply dismiss it.

An anecdote highlights this point. Last Sunday I had to console a crestfallen parishioner who had taken a friend to Warwick Street in London, enthusing all the way about how wonderful and dignified Ordinarite Mass would be. But when they got there it was Low Mass, according to Novus Ordo, with priest facing West. “Father, I might as well have gone to St. Augustine’s, Tunbridge Wells.” Quite. Now there is nothing wrong with Novus Ordo. Nor with St. Augustine’s Tunbridge Wells. Nor did the priest do anything wrong in opting for the Novus Ordo. Yet this felt like an own goal. Because people traveled in expectation and were left disappointed. Surely the central Ordinariate Church in London- of all churches- should solely be offering worship according to the Ordinariate Missal?

NB: to be fair to Warwick Street they do use Divine Worship much of the time.

Why is there hostility? 

Why are a minority of clergy not embracing the Ordinariate liturgy? The reasons will be various. But here are the ones I discern:

1) There are those who spent so long as Anglicans ‘trying to be Catholic’ that they came to delight only in the Roman Rite. Anything hinting at Anglican patrimony was automatically iffy and suspicious. Thus the Divine Worship experience does not speak to them of the ancient English Spirituality of pre-reformation days (as it should) it just stinks of protestantism. The rose tinted spectacles focused only on Rome and never on England remain firmly on their noses. Meaning they carry baggage with them in terms of devotional life. This explains why the only people I meet strongly opposed to Divine Worship are current or ex-Anglicans, while Cradle Catholics tend to enthuse about it.

Some of these need help to better grasp the vision. Others only ever wanted to become Novus Ordo Catholics and the Ordinariate was a convenient way of doing it. Now safely on the banks of the Tiber they just want to go native. They have zero interest in what we are about. Perhaps we should honour their consciences and release them to the diocese? For how can they help us establish our goals if totally opposed to the liturgical life which Rome herself has gifted us?

Then there are those who see merit in using Divine Worship but are afraid it will not be well received. Perhaps they lead congregations in which knives will come out if they push it. Perhaps they are only assistant priests in large diocesan settings and therefore a minority voice. Here we must rescue individuals by securing our own buildings. For whilst our clergy have a duty to work within and alongside the diocese, if the ordinate is to succeed, they cannot be diocesan workers first and ordinariate clergy second. And the bishops of England and Wales- and congregations who benefit from our priests, need understand that respect and gain is a two way street. Respect needs be shown to our liturgical life.

Finally there are those in tune with the Ordinariate mission but who, themselves, are minimalists where liturgy is concerned. Having been formed in the seventies and eighties they tend towards low church worship. And that means they will ever prefer the simplicity of Novus Ordo over the majesty of Divine Worship. These might be encouraged to help the Ordinariate by taking the St. Anselm’s approach. Which is to say do both! A little compromise in other words. But please let us not reject it out of hand. For it really can be done well and prove effective.

Conclusion

I am passionate about Divine Worship. If done well it brings beauty and solemnity to worship and a distinctive English spirituality. Indeed it is the most obvious thing that can make the Ordinariate distinctive and fit for purpose. Yet I respect the fact that others have not warmed to it and prefer the Novus Ordo. To them I would simply say this. Would it not be better to keep such dissatisfaction to yourself and quietly get on with celebrating Mass according to the Novus Ordo? Nobody forces you to use it and any public raging against it only hurts those trying to make it work and get it off the ground whilst delighting our detractors. Sometimes silence is golden.

Related Posts

Truth will judge the synod

Truth will judge the synod

To fulfil not abolish

To fulfil not abolish

Archbishop’s visitation

Archbishop’s visitation

Requiem for a Queen?

Requiem for a Queen?

Admin


Your Signature

  • My own group were rather “iffy” about using Divine Worship, mostly because of the style of Language and that it was very strange to them. Not many of the group had experienced the BCP even though I used the English Missal for the early morning Holy Communion Service in our Anglican Parish.

    We mutually agreed to use Divine Worship on the first Wednesday of each month (we only have one mid-week Mass because of the distance I have to live away from the group). People found it very strange at first, and yes, difficult to come to terms with. However, as time progressed people got used to it and began to enjoy the language and richness of the Rite. We also began to attract someone from our previous Anglican parish who enjoys the BCP.

    Out of the blue, the group asked me if I would celebrate Divine Worship every Wednesday, which we now do. Occasionally, we are joined by members of our host parish who also seem to enjoy the Rite.

    Once a month at our Sunday Mass the organist from our host parish plays for us. He wanted to know more about Divine Worship and was impressed with the Rite. Last month we had our first Sung Sunday Mass of Divine Worship which was appreciated by everyone. The organist wants us to use Divine Worship for his next visit this coming Sunday.

    For many of us in the Ordinariate in this country we found the liturgies of the Ordinariate very different and even strange, as many of us were using the modern Catholic liturgies in our Anglican parishes. It is very easy to just dismiss the Ordinariate Liturgies because they are so different and of course we like what we are used to. However, by just stepping out of the box and experiencing these liturgies we discover their richness and beauty. Sadly, sometimes we are not prepared to step out of the known box and simply dismiss things because they do not match up to our expectations and experience.

    As members of the Ordinariate, It is important that we use the Ordinariate Liturgies and especially Divine worship for two reasons.

    First, because it is only by using the Ordinariate Liturgies that can we can fully live the life and mission of the Ordinariate.

    Second, we need to be distinct, we need liturgy that will show that we are a distinct part of the Catholic Church with a distinct mission; a mission that uses our Anglican Patrimony and tradition not only to be full members of the Catholic Church, but importantly to be a tool of ecumenism which enables members of the Anglican community to come into full communion with the See of Peter.

    Without this distinction the Ordinariate will fail, that is why using the Ordinariate liturgies is so important which my own group is testament to.

  • The Ordinariate service seems a fanciful mish-mash, neither fish nor foul. It is compromised by Pope Paul’s ‘Novus Ordo’. Why? There might have been a case for permitting the Knott missal translation of the mass, as a vernacular version of what Pope Francis calls the “extraordinary” form. And there might even have been a case for permitting the use of the ‘interim rite’, i.e. the 1662 BCP dressed in Tridentine ceremonial, as used by the vast majority of Anglo Catholic churches until the 1960s. What you’ve got is a mix up of both with a whole lot of Bugnini thrown in, that doesn’t represent anything much more than a pretty service.

    A slightly related rant: why is the mass that would be recognised by Augustine, Bede, Thomas Aquinas and Newman designated ‘extraordinary’, and the Bugnini service, which certainly would not be, ‘ordinary’?

    • Ever been to a Latin Rite Mass in Greece or Egypt where 4 or 5 languages can be used, depending on the make up of the congregation. The same can be said, at home, of Mass in some monastic churches where the order has its own liturgy. The Ambrosian Rite at Milan is also very different and would be somewhat incomprehensible to us. I’ve even been to the Easter services, in the UK, where the officiating priest had also been ordained for the Byzantine Catholic Rite. The services mixed both Latin and Byzantine elements and was very meaningful. There are also many other Catholic Rites – we are not liturgically monolithic and many of the other rites can be found in various UK churches. Incidentally, Medieval Britain used the Sarum Liturgy which is now rarely used.

    • Please excuse my ignorance (as a life-long Roman Catholic, with a great respect for the Ordinariate but no personal experience of Anglican or Ordinariate worship), but I wonder if you could explain a bit more the differences between the Anglo-Catholic worship you mentioned. I was under the impression that the Knott Missal/English Missal was simply the Tridentine Rite directly translated into English (and that this form of worship is now rarely used). Is that correct? What exactly is this Interim Rite you referred to? It would, I assume, be textually different from the English Missal? I had assumed that Anglo-Catholics before the 1960s used the English Missal, but I guess I must be wrong about that. Which rite, for example, is depicted in Martin Travers’ illustrations of the English Mass?

      I am sure the Ordinariate Missal is very worthy indeed, and will hopefully have a positive influence in the Roman Rite as a whole. I suppose it could be open to the criticism of being a new creation (a combination of BCP, Novus Ordo and Extraordinary Form) that has never actually existed on paper and never been used by any existing Anglican or Catholic congregation. Perhaps it would have been better just to authorise the Knott Missal as an optional “extraordinary form” for use within the ordinariate, but in the circumstance Divine Worship seems to accomplish the goal of having one liturgical book that can be used with some flexibility in view of the needs of different congregations.

  • Baggage indeed; 50 years of fighting such language only to find it’s a treasure.

    May they find grace to admit they are wrong

  • Sad to hear that there is hostility towards Ordinariate from certain bishops. Also, it’s seems crazy that you aren’t being provided with more churches. In my part of County Durham, we currently have 2 priests looking after 5 Churches, which is a situation that isn’t uncommon in this diocese. In Newcastle, they closed a beautiful church in the west of the city, which has now been reopened by evangelical Anglicans. I wonder if this church (and others) were offered to Ordinariate, FSSP, ICKSP? Maybe they were (I really should ask the question). My nearest OLW church is in Darlington (30 miles away). God bless Father. Merry Christmas to you and your family, and also your parish.

    • To paraphrase (slightly) Pope Francis – Change will always encounter resistance in certain minds.
      His sermons at Santa Marta are worth reading from time to time.

      • “Change will always encounter resistance in certain minds.” I agree, in intelligent, discerning minds that are happily and repeatedly take omne ignotum pro magnifico.

      • Oh, dear, what I meant to write was:

        “Change will always encounter resistance in certain minds.” I agree, in intelligent, discerning minds that are are immune to the modern tendency of repeatedly taking omne ignotum pro magnifico.

  • That’s why the odd delve into the Santa Marta homilies is enlightening. He’s Speaking to his fellow priests there. Now I’m shutting down until after Christmas (New Year if possible), so once again Seasons greetings to all.

  • {"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}
    >