THE LITURGY AND POPULAR DEVOTIONS By Conrap Pepter, O.P. EACTIONS or revivals, however good they be, R often tend to aim at destruction rather than construction, Certainly, in this finite world, the generation of a new vitality moves abreast with the corruption of the old; but nature usually adopts a positive attitude, concentrating on birth rather than death. If in autumn she seems preoccupied with decay, it is also the positive side of this that she selects for emphasis. The glowing tints of the withered leaves distract from the thought of the lack of life. Reactions and revivals should strive to follow this general law of nature, and they should begin by dropping their names, which imply negation or destruction, in favour of some positive title, In the case of the Liturgical Revival this criticism has some points of application. It would strike a more attractive and less pugnacious note if it adopted uni- versally the title of the Liturgical Movement—a name which is happily already common. Yet even this name has its disadvantages. The term Liturgy is one of doubtful merit, since it has spread out into many shades of meaning according as its various elements are stressed or neglected. An unfortunate significance is thus commonly attributed to it by some “ revivalists” who contradistinguish the liturgy from popular devotions, making the chief aim of the liturgical reaction to break down these devotions and to supplant them by the liturgy. In this way an antinomy is set up between liturgical piety and popular piety, an antinomy whichThe Liturgy and Popular Devotions 201 is alien to the spirit of Christ and to the true spirit of the liturgy, as will be seen if the two forms of piety be analysed. At present the generally accepted notion conveyed by the word “ Liturgy ” is that of a set form of public worship as distinct from the private and interior worship of God. We therefore naturally select two elements as the main constituents of the liturgy, namely that of a set form or formulary and that of public worship of God. These two elements are the body and the soul of the liturgy, and, like the body and the soul, may be overemphasized one against the other into the sensualist or the manichee, It is according to the first element that the word is often applied to a particular form of rayer handed down by tradition, so that we find the Pitargy of St Basil or of St Ambrose, or the Roman Liturgy. In this way the external or material element is quite legitimately set aside in a category of its own, excluding all consideration of the interior and life-giving form. It is concerned not so much with the actual type of worship, as with its origin and history as having existed for a considerable number of years under the same rules and customs. Under this aspect liturgy differs from liturgy and the piety of one from the piety of another. If however this material element be not separated from the formal, but be regarded as the expression of the one true religion, it may yet receive a certain empha- sis to the prejudice of the idea of worship. By concen- trating on the set form in all its external intricacies, it is easy to become preoccupied with the rites and rubrics which go to make up the liturgy as realized in any particular ceremonial. The interest is not indeed centred on liturgies, in the plural, but on the Liturgy in its external manifestations. The engrossing questions begin to centre round the precise interpretation of202 The Downside Review this or that instruction in the Missal, or round the antiquity of a ceremony prescribed by the Church, which leads on to a Ritualistic Antiquarianism as foreign to true worship as is Puritanical spiritism in the other direction. Any pious practice not promulgated by the Church in writing and not dating at least from the Middle Ages becomes taboo, and is discouraged on every possible occasion. This tendency emphasizes more and more the distinction between liturgical and popular piety, until they are regarded almost as mutually exclusive. The other and deeper side of the liturgy, the formal element, needs a corresponding emphasis in order to keep the outlook on ceremonial balanced and profound. The fundamental notions of the liturgy are to be found under this aspect; since, before any considerations of rite or rubric, the word conveys the idea of worship complete in all essentials. In it we find the humble adoration of God performed by the man in his totality, not merely by a partial, exterior subjection of his body. The body expresses outwardly in word and gesture what the soul feels within. Moreover both body and soul are elements of a social being, so that the complete expression of praise and sorrow, thanksgiving and petition, are performed socially. Hence the liturgy comprises public prayer, public penance, and above all public sacrifice in the Mass, while it is not concerned with private and entirely personal aspirations to God. Yet the essence of the liturgy lies in the self-oblation of each individual in union with the self-oblation of Christ on Calvary and in the Mass, so that no bold line of demarcation can be drawn between what is private and what is truly liturgical. It will be obvious from this more fundamental conception that the liturgy properly understood is no specialized hobby of a few enthusiasts, but something very like a main artery inThe Liturgy and Popular Devotions 203 the life of the Church. Its contours stand out clear and widespread, not finical, small or scrupulous. Now let us turn our attention to the so-called popular devotions to see how they are related to the liturgy. They are often called “ private” devotions, but this seems to be a misuse of terms, since “ private” is no synonym for “ popular,” while in general they are as public as any traditional ceremony of the Church. Indeed the latter is so much the case that Mass and Benediction are often regarded simply as Morning and Evening Service. In these devotions as in the liturgy we can distinguish two main elements, external and internal, though it is harder to find a good definition for them. We might call them a common form of worship without the support of precise ecclesiastical legislation or long tradition. The two main features to be selected are, therefore, the essential notion of public worship and the more material, unregulated expression of it. Such may be verified in varying degrees of truth in the case of Benediction, the Holy Hour, the Rosary, devotions to the Sacred Heart, or yet a pil- grimage to Lourdes. As we have also seen in the liturgy, one of these two elements may receive emphasis to the detriment of the other. Clearly the aspect most exposed to abuse and excess is the arbitrary side to these devotions, which, since it goes hand in hand with a popular appeal, may possibly lead to unchecked enthusiasm. In this way an emotionalism may creep into the devotion, making it, in tendency at least, a form of self-indulgence rather than the worship of God. Sentimentalism ot this sort can often be an indulgence in sweet “ religious ” feelings, bringing harm to the worship in spirit and in truth. For example in the devotion to the Sacred Heart such an emphasis might tend to stress the physical human heart of Christ to the exclusion of the true symbolism of Divine Love; or it is even possible that204 The Downside Review the love stirred by this devotion becomes a rather thin type of human love. This emotionalism will tend to create a greater and greater dependence upon external stimulus of a kind that is only superficially religious. This emotionalism, however, is not a necessary feature of popular devotions. Beneath all the externals there lies that other fundamental aspect which consists in the offering of humble praise and supplication to God. If this element be given its due importance there can be nothing but good in these devotional exercises. The inner core of all approved Catholic devotions will always be a true worship of God, which of its nature should preserve its adherents from the danger of false senti- mentalism. A true perspective based on this principal feature of worship in the devotion to the Sacred Heart will present this as an expressive emblem of the love Christ bore us in all its aspects, but particularly in the Passion and death of the Cross, There can be little danger of over-emphasizing this side, since in tending to Puritanism it would naturally tend to destroy itself as a popular devotion. The foregoing remarks may at first sight seem to be an identification of, rather than a contrast between, the liturgy and devotions. The only difference would appear to be that of the presence or absence of a traditional legislation, whereas their fundamental aspects are the same, since both are acts of worship. Such a judgment would however be false, making an equation where only an analogy exists. A closer comparison will show the relative importance and interrelation of the two. The central fact in that notion of traditional legislation lies in the tracing back of this legislation to Christ himself, who fashioned the heart of the liturgy in the institution of the sacraments. Round those, and particularly round the Eucharist as the Sacrifice and sacrament, grew up the whole liturgy, so that from this point of view theThe Liturgy and Popular Devotions 205 liturgy was founded simultaneously with the Church as the official means of giving praise to God and of receiving His gifts. No devotion can boast of such an origin or of such a central position in the life of the Church. They have a more human source in the fervent charity of a saint or in the particular needs of a certain age. No devotion can be compared with the central liturgical action of the Mass. Mass and Benediction for example are both acts of worship; but the Mass is the worship offered by the Word made flesh, by incarnate God, uniting the whole Mystical Body of the Church in this offering, whereas Benediction consists in the adoration offered by each individual present, greater or less according to his own personal fervour. Thus the liturgy in its most important aspect stands on an alto- gether higher level than that of popular devotions, and the importance of each is hardly comparable. If the comparison were left at that stage there would be some justification for the supposed antipathy between liturgical and popular piety. On a closer consideration of their interrelation, however, we shall find no opposi- tion. Tracing the liturgy back to its source we discover that Christ only instituted its essential feature: ‘“ This is my Body, This is my Blood.” As to the rest, the numerous rubrics of the High Mass, for instance, have accumulated throughout the centuries. These accumu- lations have the nature of more or less popular intro- ductions according to the general religious sentiments in the Church in different epochs. In the fifth and sixth centuries when the Pope had sufficient time at his disposal to prepare for the mysteries by stately processions through “he streets of Rome, Introits and Litanies became incorporated into the traditional rite of the Eucharist. The elevations of the Host and chalice were introduced in the Middle Ages when the faithful found particular solace in the presence of our Lord upon the206 The Downside Review altar. In fact the process of the growth of the liturgy was one of introducing and stabilizing popular devotions round the one central theme. This may be seen in the devotion towards the Holy Souls, which in St Augustine’s time was almost a pagan practice among the faithful, but which gradually became purged of all false elements and flowered in the Dies Irae, the Mass and the Office for the Dead. In a lesser degree the Process may be seen at work in our own day. The acred Heart, Christ the King, our Lady of Lourdes, all these have their special Office and Mass, so that in this sense these devotions have become liturgized. Seen from this angle popular devotions appear as part, not indeed of the stabilized liturgy of the Church, but of the liturgy in process of formation, like peat which has not yet been compressed and turned into coal in the midst of the earth, but which burns for all that with a hearty glow. The true attitude, therefore, of liturgical piety towards this popular piety is not one of antipathy and separation, but of balanced encouragement and co-operation. The obvious task of one who has given his allegiance to the liturgy is to achieve a well proportioned synthesis of the two, just as the theologian and the scientist should attempt to correlate faith with science rather than emphasize their differences. To separate the liturgy from devotions and more or less condemn the latter will inevitably lead to a more tenacious adherence to their devotions and a greater distrust of the liturgy on the part of those whose sympathies are devotional. The respective relations of these devotions to the Church’s prayer should be disclosed, and the one made to serve the other. Although this synthesis needs to be worked out with care and accuracy in detail, its main outlines are sufficiently clear. The liturgy and these devotions are united in the fundamental fact of the complete worshipThe Liturgy and Popular Devotions 207 of God with body and soul. They are inspired by the same Holy Spirit and aim at the same goal which affords an excellent basis for the synthesis. ‘The liturgy never- theless transcends popular devotions for it possesses the necessary and Christ-given means of worship, while the others are concerned with the secondary and more fluid type of worship. The liturgy possesses the central fact of the Mass ; the devotions are an outcrop of fervour inspired originally by the Mass. Consequently these unstabilized forms of praise can easily be linked to the liturgy as handmaids assisting towards a greater central- ization round this one sacrifice. The unrestrained encouragement of popular devotions would lead towards emotionalism and away from the Mass. On the other hand if the Mass remains the pivot, everything that tends to increase the penetration into that mystery will be supported, while emotionalism, so admirably lacking in the Mass, will be easily avoided. All these devotions would thus lead to the same goal; that of the liturgy. The attempt at a synthesis of these two features in God’s worship should not be limited to the mere passive acceptance of the popular feasts when inserted in the calendar by the Holy See. The means lie close at hand in all the popular, extra-liturgical devotions, which can so easily be turned into intra-liturgical ones, The recitation of the Rosary is a universal custom which contains great powers of furthering liturgical devotion, especially in its Sorrowful Mysteries. However well-intentioned may be the desire to supersede the public recitation of the Rosary by Compline or Vespers, the general success of encouraging the Rosary to focus on the Mass must be within much easier reach, if not of equal value. The Sorrowful Mysteries dwell on Christ as He was through- out the sacrifice of Calvary, yet the Mass is the same sacrifice. One of the most valuable means of co- operation in the Mass as a fellow-victim with Christ is208 The Downside Review that of true sympathy with Him, engendered by medi- tating on the Passion. The faithful can learn by this means to realize more fully the true notion of priesthood and victim in which they must participate if they are to join in this sacrifice. Benediction or the Holy Hour foster the popular piety towards the Real Presence, which as a devotion is often regarded as definitely unliturgical. It may indeed have sprung up outside the liturgy, yet there is nothing to prevent the utilization of this most valuable devotion as part of the liturgy in process of formation. The sacrifice of the Mass is a real sacrifice and the same as Calvary precisely because of the symbolism of the conversion of the bread and wine into the real Body and Blood of Christ, who by this means is really present in the Sacrament, while the participation of the faithful takes place in their uniting with the really present Christ as the Priest and Victim. Moreover Communion is a necessary correlative of a perfect sacrifice such as the Mass, so that the gift of Christ’s presence in Holy Communion is intimately allied to the previous sacrifice. This devotion therefore only needs to be given a sacri- ficial colouring for it to become an extremely practical means of fostering a liturgical as well as popular piety. It is hardly necessary to dwell on other examples, for the principles may be applied without difficulty, and may be worked out in the case of almost any approved and well-established popular devotion. Such a synthesis must have many advantages mutual to both liturgy and devotions. If the devotions were made to serve the purpose of the liturgy, the danger of excessive emotionalism, latent in some of them, would be entirely avoided ; while on the other hand the liturgy would become richer and more fired with fundamental piety than would be the case if the two were kept separate and antagonistic. Priests who labour to establish the liturgyThe Liturgy and Popular Devotions 209 in parishes where popular devotions have reigned supreme would find their task far easier if attempted from this standpoint. Yet even so there is that difficulty about the name, since many are antagonistic to this true liturgical iety because for them it is synonymous with intransigent insistence on what are at first sight cold formalities. It seems that we must make use of the name “ Liturgy,” for there is no suitable alternative, and moreover the Liturgical Movement is happily so far advanced as to make a change impossible. On the other hand such words as “ Revival” or “ Reform ” might fall out of use with profit, and for the rest the continued insistence on the fundamental union of the two pieties must in- evitably remove prejudice. If this synthesis could be achieved it would surely be a step towards the uniting of the forces within the Church with a view to obtaining that supernaturalized human unity which the Church alone can give.