Once more — yes, again — the upcoming Mel Gibson movie on the Passion of Jesus was in the news, and now it was being played in certain quarters of the media as the cause of a little Vatican schism.
High Vatican “Drama”
There was a report that the Pope had viewed the movie and approved (“It is as it was,” he was rumored to have said) while this was nearly immediately denied by other authoritative sources at the Vatican, who asserted that the Pontiff, as is his wont with movies, had said nothing.
Conservatives in Rome were pleased with the movie, went the accounts, while others, concerned about relations with the Jews — but even more concerned with the conservative (some said “ultra-conservative”) viewpoints of Gibson — were uncomfortable with the highly-publicized film, which premieres on Ash Wednesday.
It was all appropriately high drama considering that no one was even sure how Gibson — who apparently belongs to a breakaway traditionalist church — feels about the Pontiff. The Italian newspaper Il Giornale reported that in 2002, Gibson had called the Vatican a “wolf in sheep's clothing,” but Gibson's representatives said the actor never spoke to the newspaper.
A Christian Rallying Point
Whatever the truth, these are all things that can and should be ironed out. Indeed, one can argue that instead of a schism, the movie may become a rallying point for all Christians — an endeavor of ecumenism. From all indications, it not only has widespread Christian appeal, but also an anointing: God is using this fine, popular actor to remind us of His Son.
In this context the real thing to look for is not a schism — a movie is not going to cause a Vatican schism! — but rather how certain matters within the Church will be discussed in future months. The movie is bound to lead to various discussions.
And one of those discussions may be the Mass itself. The prominence of Gibson and his movie is bound to be a spotlight on traditionalist Catholicism and the pre-Vatican II, Latin Mass, which is what the actor attends every Sunday.
The Right Rite?
Will this be good? Are there beneficial aspects? How should we view the Latin rite?
I remember the Latin Mass from my own youth as a wonderfully rich, mysterious way of presenting the Eucharist. I also recall that there were more people in the pews back then, and certainly more reverence. Arguably, the Mass has become too loose, taking away the mystery and allowing priests too much room for improvisation. It has certainly taken some of the focus off the Eucharist, with tabernacles moved off to the side. In future weeks we'll be exploring this at greater depth, for there are those who argue that installation of the modern Novus Ordo Mass has led to the great decline in priests, seminarians, nuns, monks, sacramental life, and Catholic education. In fact, attendance is way down from pre-Vatican-II days, falling from 74 percent in 1958 to 45 percent in the latest Gallup survey. For the first time since polling began, attendance among mainline Protestants is slightly higher than among Catholics. This is something that Rome must immediately and closely review.
But the problem is more extensive than the manner of liturgy, and decreases in attendance can be blamed on a generally deteriorating culture. There is spiritual power in the Latin rite, and there is also great power in the way Mass is currently said. While there are certainly problems with how some priests have brought in their own styles, and while much of the music since Vatican II is regrettable (not to mention clangorous), the so-called Novus Ordo has the priest facing the people — the followers, the disciples — as Christ faced His Apostles and is actually closer to the way the first Eucharistic celebrations were 2,000 years ago.
They're both terrific ways of honoring Jesus and they are both tremendous ways of coming into communion with God. In the end, it's what we put into them. Good people attend Latin Mass. Good people attend the new version. We note the power of St. Padre Pio celebrating Mass while facing the congregation and the fact that people like Mother Teresa had no problem with it — at the same time that we believe there are folks like Cardinal Ratzinger who would like the Church to begin reverting back to the “old” way (at least, the way just before the Vatican Council). We agree with that. We believe the Church would do well by moving back toward aspects of the pre-Vatican-II Mass. It needs to bring back reverence and mystery. It needs more mysticism.
But let us repeat: it's what we put into it. The Church can't do everything for us. The priests can't do everything for us. This is the lesson of the day. It is also the question. Are we listening to Scripture? Are we yearning for the Host? Are we praying from the heart whatever liturgy we're attending?
In the end, this should solve all quibbling. My goodness, sure, bring back the Latin Rite. Let whoever wants to attend the Latin Rite attend it. I certainly would on occasion. Bring back the “Hail Mary.” Bring back the prayer to the Archangel Michael. In fact, this is crucial!
But most of all, realize that Christ was about love. If Mass doesn't bring us to that — no matter what rite it is — it is not bringing us anywhere.
Michael Brown is the author of 13 Catholic books and director of www.spiritdaily.com, a daily Catholic news site.
