In the first reading this morning at Mass there was the familiar story of Moses’ encounter with God at the burning bush on Mount Horeb. Approaching the Theophany, and thus the presence of God Moses received the following instruction:Posted on 07/18/2013 3:18:07 AM PDT by markomalley
In the first reading this morning at Mass there was the familiar story of Moses’ encounter with God at the burning bush on Mount Horeb. Approaching the Theophany, and thus the presence of God Moses received the following instruction:
Remove the sandals from your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground. I am the God of your father,” he continued, “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob. (Ex 3:4-5)
And here we see an ancient form of reverence. It is interesting that, to my knowledge, Jews no longer use this sign of reverence. But Muslims still do. I remember being outside the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem and seeing hundred of pairs of shoes lined up on the patio outside. A Muslim would not think to enter the Mosque without first removing his shoes.
The Jews however are very strict in insisting that men, Jewish or not should not go before the Western Wall or pray with heads uncovered, and there are men nearby, at the Wall who enforce the rule strictly and provide carboard-like yarmulkes for men who did not bring one or some other head covering.
Here in America, the thought of taking off ones shoes or being in Church without shoes would be thought of as highly irreverent! And for a man to go into a Church without removing his hat is often scolded by an usher. It would also seem that the Gentile world had this norm since St Paul, though himself a Jew, wrote Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head…A man ought not to cover his head, (1 Cor 11:4,7). He further indicates in the same place that a woman ought to cover her head.
And thus we see that culture has influence on signs of reverence and, while there have been different forms of it here and there, some equivalent of “Remove the sandals from your feet…” has been observed. Until now.
Until now? Yes, it would seem that there is really no observable and/or agreed upon way in our modern American culture that we “take off our sandals” and show some sort of reverence and acknowledgemnt that we are on holy ground, when we come before the Lord in our parish churches.
It is not just that women have shed veils (sadly I would opine – more on that here and here). But beyond that, almost no one dresses in any special way for Church these days. “Extreme casual” would seem to be the norm of the day, to look in most parishes. Most people don’t even think to change their clothes for church, there is a “go as you are” mentality. Further, other signs of entering the Church such as sacred silence, and genuflecting are increasingly absent.
It was not always this way. Even in my own short life I remember when going to Mass on Sunday was a formal affair, at least before 1970. As a young boy and teenager I had special Sunday shoes, hard black ones, and would not dream of going to church in jeans or a t-shirt. We were expected to wear pressed trousers, a button down shirt and tie, along with a jacket in the cooler months. The ladies all wore dresses and veils. (See picture of a youth Mass from 1968 above right). Church was a special place, Mass was a sacred occasion. On entering Church we were expected to maintain a sacred silence, and, upon entering, to bless ourselves with Holy Water and genuflect on entering our pew. Silent prayer was expected of one prior to Mass.
These were ways we “removed our sandals” and acknowledged we were on holy ground and before the Presence of the Lord.
Today this seems all but gone. A few “old folks” keep the traditions, and, interestingly, some younger twenty-somes as well! But for the vast majority of Catholics today, at least here in America, there is little visible or tangible equivalent of removing the sandals from our feet.
I will not even argue that ALL the old traditions should return, (even though I would like that). But at least we ought to recover SOME way of signifiying that we are on holy ground and before the presence of the Holy One of Israel, the Lord of glory.
I am aware that I will get some who say all this “stuffiness” will “turn people off.” But of course Mass isn’t just about pleasing people, it is about adoring the Lord who is worthy of our praise and our reverence. I am also aware that some will take the critique I offer here further than I personally think we need to go.
All that is fine. Where exactly to reset the line is debatable, but the bottom line seems to be that there ought to be some culturally appropriate that we fulfill the admonition of God to “Remove your sandals for the ground on which you stand is holy, I am the God of your fathers.”
How say you? Perhaps we can together start a trend (old) trend.
Good article, but right now Father Pope, we have this litle thing called a major summetime heat wave.
Post number 2 has a little bit of early morning dry humor. :)
As a Jew living in Israel I would say that there are many “minhagim” or customs that evolved over the last 5,000 years or so and many were dependent on the Temples in Jerusalem. Since the destruction of both Temples and the dispersion (Diaspora) of the Jews around the world, many customs were no longer practiced while new ones evolved.
The Kippa (Yarmulka) on the head is a sign of reverence as is always facing the Torah scrolls in a synagogue, that is, not turning your back to the Ark where the Torah scrolls are contained. Same holds true for the Western Wall (Kotel) i Jerusalem.
The Church has lost followers via the modernization process and the scorn heaped upon Western religious belief, post WWII. The Church is SO defamed now that it must look from within in order to find the right formula to attract people back. It will be a serious uphill battle though due to fashion and tastes in our sad era.
I used to discuss, while porch sitting, with a friend of mine the question, “Why do Christians go to church?” He eventually wrote a book on it called “And No Religion Too: Thoughts on the Spectator Church”
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/and-no-religion-too-edward-goble/1018273372?ean=9781438262543
Some time After he wrote the book, I asked him how he chose a church. He said by the quality of their pot-luck. He was only slightly kidding. His take was basically this, and one I not only agree with but applied when we chose a church in Kentucky:
Christianity is about two things: our relationship with our creator and our relationship with our fellow man. And they are intertwined. Christians do not need to go to church to worship God. They go to church to fellowship with other Christians. A church body exists not for Him, but for us. We help each other. We are a “Cord of Three strands”. We worship and fellowship together.
The potluck analogy was about how close the fellowship is between the believers at a particular church. And it makes total sense. I go to the church I go to because I can learn from and be helped by them, and they can learn from and be helped by me. And it all happens within the context that we are the body of believers. We are mindful of that. It matters.
BTW, the guy that wrote the book moved from Seattle to Kentucky in 2008. We visited a few times and now live about five minutes away from him. Gorgeous area! And we don’t go to the same church!
We are having a bit of hot weather here in the heart of Texas, too. Of course, that’s not unusual for us.
However, most churches around here are air conditioned. I am constantly amazed by the number of teen aged girls clad in very short shorts and low cut tight fitting t-shirts attending Mass with their parents.
On the other hand, I suppose it’s better for them to attend Mass than not.
One of the differences between Christianity and all other religions is that we have no holy places on earth. A church building is just a building. We are the dwelling place of Christ, not any building.
It means we take care of our church buildings in the name of stewardship, but they are, ultimately, just a place to keep us out of the weather and give us some privacy as we worship and celebrate grace together.
You can’t offend Christians, spiritually, by destroying their buildings, though you can cost them money.
Church is not for God. It is for us. And we can worship anywhere. In fact, in my family, we take communion at home after some meals. The bible is very clear about communion.
Major hypocrisy. This lack of reverence is 100% due to the “hope and change” brought about by Vatican II which “substantially transformed” the Catholic Church. And this priest, like all the members of the clergy who acquiesce by their silence, are guilty.
I was one of those who fought the changes, not for nostalgia, but for keeping the worship of God in the Mass. I was told by the bishop that there is no place in the Church for people like me. That prohibition continues today with the present church.
So don’t bemoan the lack of reverence. For what things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap. Galatians 6, 8
And for the NSA trolls, FU.
On the other hand, I suppose it’s better for them to attend Mass than not.We used to feel that way, but not as much anymore. We've noticed respectfully conducted Masses (whether TLM or Novus Ordo) almost always bring respectfully dressed parishioners. So I think it begins with the priest, and the rubrics that he follows.
You are 100% correct about Vatican II.
I think it's a symptom of the hyper-individualism of our culture. Community standards of appropriateness, showing respect for an occasion or the people around you, simply don't exist. It's all about Me and "what makes me feel comfortable."
I'm not too concerned, really. The cycle will turn on this, as on everything else.
Yes. No.
How can we recover it? We will not see it in our lifetimes.
It’s not what goes into the mouth but what comes out of it.
If I see scantily clad women in church, I avert my eyes and pray,
“O Lord, I thank Thee for granting unto me, Thy humble servant, this heavenly vision of some of the beautiful things which Thou has made!”
(That’s an old Lewis Grizzard line)
Seriously, there’s a serious lack of reverence in dress at Mass. It’s made even more evident when we drive past the A.M.E. church where the black folks are going in dressed to the nines, right down to the smallest children, a far more appropriate way to enter into the house of the Lord.
I believe that part of the problem lies with the priests in not setting a higher standard. Something appears to have been lost in the formation of our current generation of priests, since so many rush through the Mass and litter their homilies with irrelevancies.
Why should somebody dress up when the priest gives a dumbed-down Jay Lenoesque monologue instead of a sermon dealing with scripture and the tenets of Catholicism? If the priest seems more intent on discussing the area’s sports teams than Saint Thomas, then the parishoners would rightly assume that nothing important is going on here. In an atttempt to become “relevant” the Church has cheapened the Holy Mass.
Those who have commented that people who attend the Tridentine rite tend to dress up will also observe the strict adherence to the rubrics of that rite and that the priests’ sermons at such masses are heavy with theology and the Catholic doctrine. This is not to say that the Novus Ordo cannot be said in a very reverent manner – it can be and is by more than a few very good priests, but my observation is that they are in the minority.
Agreed. In my experience those priests that offer the TLM also offer the NO in a reverent manner. They are also the priests that expect silence in Church. A novel concept, for sure.
And the Priest and Deacon still vest in five layers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.