Thomas O'Loughlin

Introducing a liturgy: a moment A short introduction may perform a

crucial function when people are gathered for the Eucharist, writes Thomas O'Loughlin, Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Nottingham.

nne direct consequence of the shift from Latin to the language of the cel-

ebrating community is the need to spend a moment at the beginning of every liturgy giving an unscripted word of welcome. The liturgy may have its formal introduction to mark the beginning of the celebration, but it needs to be complemented by an infor-mal word which focuses the gathering in the living and spontaneous here and now. The same group may have gathered for any number of reasons, or perhaps this group has never been together before — this is a special moment of togetherness, for in the presence of the Risen Lord, this group is going to engage in the activity of offering thanks to the Father. So the informal intro-ductory moment has many demands on it:

• it must welcome people

• affirm the identity of the group — this is a collective act, not simply a crowd of individuals each there for their private actions

• give a name to the community so that it has a sense of its own identity

• identify this community as a church

• act as a recollection of what the group has assembled for

• be a call to reflection on the presence of the Risen Christ among this community

• set a tone for the gathering

• provide a link between the physical moment and the liturgical moment

• recall the community to the notion of a sacramental gathering

• give expression to the particular focus of the liturgical gathering as a specific event.

And here is the rub, it must fulfil these objectives —

• in a matter of a couple of moments

• it must come across as being informal and the spontaneous expression of someone speaking to the group; and

• it must not become either a mini-homily or a set of didactic points.

It is not surprising that very often it is simply skipped as if the formal words of the set texts do not need further embellishment — and it suffers from the fact that it is, rubrically, an option and it is the way of options that they tend over time to be omitted. Moreover the tendency to avoid any spontaneity in the liturgy has increased markedly since the

The liturgy needs to be complemented by an informal word which focuses the gathering in the here and now

appearance of the new translation, and in the case of the Intmduction to the Mass of the day' the page lay-out obscures the invitation to say something at this point — but note that rubric number 3 is still there! Furthermore, it is proverbial wisdom that preparing an effective short statement is among the most

4 The Pastoral Review Volume 11 Issue 4

7 : reflectin• on of communication

difficult of tasks in composition. As Dr Johnson is said to have remarked: 'I shall write you a long letter because I have not the time to compose a short one!'

That said, this is something that is do-able, it is a skill that can be learned and honed, it is a valuable element in evangelisation, and a first step is to reflect on what one is trying to do in such a moment of introduction.

Is it optional? An action may be legally merely an option but it could be mandatory in terms of human rit-ual — the rituals that shape our everyday human encounters. Likewise, while a rubric may just refer in passing to that possible addi-tion, it may be essential in terms of how we communicate and relate — and a situation of communication and relationship must exist between the president and the other cele-

brants (i.e. everyone else) if this is to be our liturgical action. This interface between for-mal religious ritual, and the less obvious but even more basic rituals of language and human intercourse, is one of the keys to suc-cessful worship. If we fail to ritually express who we are through our common human rituals, then we will probably fail to experi-ence who we are through the Church's ritu-al forms. So the real question is this: what does the president need to do to help those who have gathered to take part effectively in this celebration such that it helps them in their journey of faith and in the life of disci-pleship?

In any fixed liturgy, where the actions and words are predicted in a book, there is need for a moment of non-predicted-text that links the continuous with this precise moment. This need comes from the nature of the cycli-

The Pastoral Review Volume 11 Issue 4

5

Introducing a liturgy: reflecting on a moment of communication - Thomas O'Loughlin In

cal time imagined when we think of liturgy and the linear time in which we actually exist. The only way to link these is with a word that belongs solely to this moment in linear time and ties the cycle of liturgy into us as living beings. Such a moment is that of the introduction.

Ritual is not just formality: all ritual needs to tie the individual actors into the ritual moment — hence the role for a moment of informal introduction in so many situations. This 'live' moment separates the ritual from being purely formulaic and makes it part of every participant's lived experience.

In short, the introductory moment anchors the ritual event in the living now of the assembly. Such an anchor is far from optional.

Who should do it? The president of the assembly is the obvious person to make this introductory link between life and liturgy, ritual time and historical time. He is the one who leads the assembly, and so ideally should take the lead here; and this is what happens most commonly in practice. This is the president's opportunity to set the tone of the whole event.

However, are there times when someone else should give these 'few words'? Let us begin by noting that the rubric says it can be done by the president, the deacon, or someone else. So when should this happen?

I see five situations in which it may be better if this is done by someone else. First, if the president is not himself a member of the community but a visitor 'supplying' for the regular presbyter. He may not know the community and they may not know him. Moreover, it is very hard to be informal with a group with whom one has no existing con-tacts — and these have to be built up outside of the liturgy. In this situation, a person belonging to the community may be far bet-ter placed to do the introduction — and

indeed to introduce the president to those with whom he is going to celebrate the Eucharist. The 'local' knows the community and can form a bridge between the assembly and the president, who is not really a mem-ber of the community apart from this action of presiding.

A second common situation is that where the assembly is itself a 'special group' within the local church — such as children or the sick —and someone may have far greater skills in communicating with that special group than a local pastor. In such cases, this is best left to those who have that link with the group that is at the heart of real human communica-tion. One sees many valiant efforts by pres-byters `to get down' to the level of children, for example, but for many it comes over as forced. If someone in the community has more skill than the president in this matte the president should see this gift as the work of the Holy Spirit and defer to that person.

It is a fact of life that there are people who can do the most complex task, but an infor-mal word before a group fills them with ter-

The introduction is an act of linking human beings together in a common action with a common purpose

ror — and when they do it out of duty it comes over as something painful both for the person to give and for the assembly to endure. If a presbyter does not have this gift, then he should recognise that fact. Rather than approaching it with fear (which is transmit-ted) or omitting it (which is a sad loss), he should find someone who has the gift to ful-fil this ministiy.

A moment's introduction is not just an off-the-cuff 'hello' — though that is better than

6 The Pastoral Review Volume 11 Issue 4

Introducing a liturgy: reflecting on a moment of communication - Thomas O'Loughlin

0

2

nothing! It requires thought and preparation, and many priests are overworked. If a pres-byter is feeling the strain, this is one small task to entrust to someone else.

Lastly, one of the larger issues facing Catholic liturgy is the fact that women do not hear women using their own voices (i.e. saying something as opposed to reading a lesson or other scripted text). The moment for the liv-ing voice, linking the 'beautiful things we have read' with what we are doing in life (to use the image of St Justin) is the homily. The homily, the moment par excellence when rit-ual (and narrative) time and historical time coincide, is reserved to those in orders - and so a woman's voice giving expression to her view of where we are as an assembly is virtu-ally never heard in the average parish. Here is a moment when such a voice can be heard.

What it is not It is not an act of the president welcoming the assembly as if it were his house, his table, his action - and they were attending it. They are not at 'the priest's Mass' nor are they getting a service from him. All form the community, and it is their - president and everyone else's - celebration.

It is not an occasion for liturgical direc-tions: these if needed can better be done

on a newsletter, on a board, or by someone before the celebration begins. Announcing that it is 'the 18th Sunday in ordinary time' is to transmit a detail that is not that important to the people assembled. It is different if it is a feast (today is Easter day - and so we are rejoicing') or special day ('this is Mothers' Day - so we are all think-ing about ...') - where we are acknowledg-ing a specific moment in our lives.

Likewise, it is not for technical notices such as 'you will find the text of today's Mass on page 83 in the blue booklets' or 'I shall be using Eucharistic Prayer III today' The intro-duction is an act of linking human beings together in a common action with a common purpose. Details about pages and prayers may seem helpful, but are just verbal clutter and act as a distraction from helping people to focus, reflect, and become a prayerful community.

It does not need to pre-empt the readings with a summary or survey of content. That can be done before the individual readings. If there is reference to a reading here, it may be forgotten by the time of the reading - our attention spans are that short. For much of the year there is not a single theme over the three readings: the epistles run in a different cycle to the gospels - any common link is

The Pastoral Review Volume 11 Issue 4 7

Introducing a liturgy: reflecting on a moment of communication - Thomas O'Loughlin Inti

coincidental or forced. However, if a message in a reading is, for example, the kingdom, then that image should be used in the introduction to alert ears - but there is no need to spell out that this will be a theme in the readings.

Lastly, it is not a preparation for the Rite of Penance: who we are, why we are celebrat-ing, and what we are doing is what we need to concentrate upon. The Rite of Penance, particularly when the options without the Confiteor are used, can look after itself.

What it is It is a statement that the liturgical event is an action by us. We are doing it: the minister is part of the assembly - they are there because they are one in baptism. This is the identity of all - the presbyter speaks as one of the assem-bly, not someone detached from it. We become this unity whenever we gather for the Eucharist. Therefore, we - the local com-munity - are not welcomed to this Eucharist, this table - it is our table, the table of us as a community. But we do welcome Christians who are visitors - and recall if it were not for such Christian welcoming of visitors to their eucharistic meals we would probably have a much smaller New Testament!

We affirm the presence of the Risen Lord. The Anointed One of the Father is with us in the assembly because we have gathered in his name (Mt 18.20). This presence - invisi-ble but as real as any other presence - is what makes this gathering distinctive, brings it into the realm of the holy and means that we gather in him in the very courtyard of heav-en (Heb 9). Following from this is the need to affirm that we are not just any bunch of peo-ple - but a priestly people (1 Pet 2.9) who will be able to stand in the presence of the Father and, in the Prayer of the Faithful, make inter-cession for ourselves, the whole community of the baptised, and all humanity. Equally, we must not speak as if the presence of the Christ was something in the future - he will `arrive' at the consecration - for that not only

perpetuates the late medieval confusion of a Eucharistic Prayer with 'a formula of conse-cration,' but implicitly denies the most basic presence that makes us a holy people - we have the risen one among us now

It asserts who we are: we are not a collec-tion of individuals there simply for a com-mon purpose - like travellers on a train -but we are a church, a distinct expression of God's presence, the redeeming work of the Christ, and a manifestation of the Spirit. It is so easy to think of a gathering as just a bunch of people who found this a conve-nient moment to get Mass - as something each wanted as part of a private spiritual diet. Meanwhile, our inheritance of an indi-vidualist spirituality and the consumerist individualism of modernity silently coa-lesce: subverting the Christian vision of the Eucharist. So this moment must recall our vision of a common action, a sense of belonging to a larger community, and that it is the local church, not a bunch of individ-uals, which celebrates the Eucharist.

It needs to recall us to what we are there to

It is the local church, not a bunch of individuals, which celebrates the Eucharist

do: we are going to offer thanks to the Father: we bless him and thank in union with Jesus and in the way that Jesus taught us. As such we are empowered by the Spirit and about to celebrate our common meal that we share with Jesus and which we should share with the poor.

Our gathering takes on different tones depending on the time of year, those pre-sent, the number of people in the gathering, and the festivals we are celebrating. This needs to be acknowledged: it is all part of our now, and part of the Church's now

R The PAStnMI IRRViP \A/ VtlitIMP 11 Iccilp 4

MAs by distance - f

MA Church HIStOry Understanding the past to make sense of the present. Course team: Dr Frances Knight, Professor Thomas O'Loughlin and Professor Alan Ford.

MA Systematic and Philosophical Theo! Confronting the central questions of Christian faith and reason. Course team: Professor John Milbank, Dr Alison Milbank, Professor Philip Goodchild and Dr Conor Cunningham.

Apply by 1 August 2015 for entry in October 2015. Applications also open for Fet3ruary 2016 start.

Introducing a liturgy: reflecting on a moment of communication - Thomas O'Loughlin

Equally, this gathering is distinct: we are dis-tinguishing ourselves from a world where selfish consumerism is often the order of the day and from a society where the mate-rial is often the only 'real.' We are distin-guishing the world of love and covenant —where the reality of the poor is an indict-ment of our sin — from the world of con-tracts where everything, and perhaps everyone, has a price.

Marking a boundary A few words can help the church assembled for the Eucharist to mark the boundary between everyday life and sacred action. We are the People of God — and need to hear this — and we are united in Jesus present among us — and need to be made mindful of this. We

g are about to be joyful and thankful, whatever the occasion, for the wonderful works of God, ,and in the power of the Spirit to bless him for his love and generosity •

t: +44 (0)115 951 5897 e: laura.jarvis@nottingham.ac.uk w: www.nottingham.ac.uk/go/d1

The Pastoral Review Volume 11 Issue 3

9