Rubrics[1] and the GIRM present just two choices; follow them or don’t follow them. So why is it that excuses about following (or not following) the guidelines for sacraments are as confusing as solving that similar sounding 70’s classic 3D puzzle Rubik’s Cube? On the one hand excessive attention to the rules detracts from the meaning of the liturgical words and purpose. On the other hand licensciously ignoring them leads away from virtue, truth and beauty. Asking ourselves what side we should be on gives us cause to wonder what side is Jesus on? Some see Jesus as the liberator. When the Pharisees tested Him, He rebuked them for shutting up the way to heaven (Matthew 23:13) and told us to do as they say but not as they do (Matthew 23:3). When they accused Him of breaking the Sabbath He explained that the Sabbath is made for man not man for the Sabbath (Mark 2:23-28). From these passages it would seem that Jesus is on the side of bending rules and yet Jesus set the record straight on divorce, saying that since the beginning it was not so and that whatever God has put together no man should undo (Mark 10:2-12). Jesus also chose to be baptized though theologically He had no need for it. When John protested Jesus said, “Allow it now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness,” (Matthew 3:13-17). So others see Jesus as demonstrating strict adherence to the rules. Passages like these that seemingly oppose or favor an attitude toward or away from law have been misappropriated by liberals and conservatives alike in order to paint an image of Jesus that fits their agenda. If you’ve ever been caught in a discussion or argument about the rigidity of rules in the Mass then you may have found yourself unwittingly forced onto one side or the other… and that’s where the problem is. Insisting on following the rules is liable to get you labeled as a Pharisee but twisting the rules puts you in the camp of non-conformist or anarchist. Neither extreme is desirable or correct.
So the problem is not so much with our answer as it is with the question “which side are you on?” The question incites division where there should be unity. In a sense it asks us to choose either the rigidity of Old Testament ways or the fluidity of New Testament revelation. But we should not settle for the loss of either. Both are crowns, both are graces and like Saint Maximilian Kolbe[2] we should choose both crowns. In similar fashion, the wedding feast at Cana shows us that the old wine is good and the new wine is exceedingly good. The old wine was not discarded because it was sour; rather it was heartily consumed because it was good. If the old wine is the Old Covenant and the new wine is the New Covenant then both covenants are good but the second is made extraordinary by grace and by succeeding the first. So let us rephrase the question to ask how we can embrace both the letter and the spirit of the law, which will never contradict each other. That is what Jesus did. He taught that both law and right practice are requirements for the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:17-20). When we have a heart for obeying the law, then we do what is required not out of obligation or misguided over-scrupulosity, but rather out of a sincere desire to do what is right.
Time and time again Jesus explained how the law is to be fulfilled. He taught persistence and humility in prayer, healing on the Sabbath, forgiveness of sins, love toward enemies, and sanctity of marriage, all as the right fulfillment of law. Many times the example Jesus gives elevates our understanding from law to sacrament and thus moves from good to extraordinary. One such instance is the Bread of Life discourse (John 6:30-68) which relates to the Holy Eucharist. In the Bread of Life discourse Jesus started with the Levitical understanding of Manna, the bread that fell from the heavens and which the Israelites ate in the desert, and exalted it to truly divine heights saying, “I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world” (John 6:51-52). Then at the Last Supper Jesus used these words, “this is my body” and “this is my blood of the covenant” (Matthew 26:26-28, Mark 14:22-24, Luke 22:19-20, & 1 Corinthians 11:23-26). This is the formula[3] of consecration in our Latin Rite Liturgy of the Eucharist even to this day and it is the second grace that John writes about in the first chapter of his gospel,” From his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace” (John 1:16). John’s meaning is clear, he is saying that the law and the prophets (the Old Testament) are grace to man, and that the good news (the New Testament) is a grace on top of that, a grace from the fullness of God. So this is how I choose to see rules like the GIRM and rubrics, those red letter words added to the formula of Mass to guide and instruct proper form. I choose not to see them as an intrusive burden but an added blessing. To be sure, they are not greater or more exulted words than the formulae, but they are important to understand the formulae. So I choose to see them like grace multiplying grace.
Resources:
Modern Catholic Dictionary, John A. Hardon, S.J. 1999 Inter Mirifica
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13216a.htm
licatholic.org
- What is a rubric? Rubrics are instructions and rules (laws really) that are inserted into the Breviary and Missal to guide bishops, priests or deacons in the Eucharistic liturgy, the administration of sacraments and sacramentals, and the preaching of the Word of God. Literally rubrica means red earth, specifically it is that red earth which ancient carpenters used to mark cut lines on wood. Similarly, in order to distinguish instructions from the formulae of prayers they were (and still are) written in red. These written instructions grew out of verbal instructions sometimes the red words are general instructions, sometimes they are specific but they always explain the use of the text. This lead to the common phrase, “read the red if you would understand the black.” [↩]
- Maximilian Kolbe had a vision as a child in which Mary showed him a pair of crowns; one white and one red. The white crown represented perseverance through purity and the red represented martyrdom. When Mary asked which he wanted, Maximilian answered, “both”. Indeed he remained pure and became a priest and then later in a Nazi prison gave up his life by taking the place of another condemned to stave to death. After days of starvation and thirst which he filed with song and prayer, he was killed by injection with carbonic acid. His faith and heroism up to the point of death are well documented. [↩]
- What is Formula[e]? A formula is a precise statement or formulation of a principle. There are philosophical, ritual, and theological formulas. For our purposes here we are concerned with ritual formulas which prescribe the administration of sacraments and sacramentals. For instance baptism requires the use of water and the words “I baptize you in the name of the father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit” [↩]
