Meditations Before Mass
by Romano Guardini

XXI. Hindrance: Human Nature

How EXACTLY, did the Lord institute the mystery of the Eucharist? Considering what was happening, Who was placing the essence of His being and work into an act which henceforth, constantly renewed, was to form the center of religious existence, one would suppose that He minutely determined everything the structure of the whole as well as the details of words and action; that He protected this holy of holies from the disturbing and distorting effects of history by placing it in a spiritual "preserve" guarded by strict laws. The more so since the Old Testament tradition from which He came had developed an elaborate cult life, so that on the one hand He would find such specification only natural, on the other He would consider it necessary in order to keep the line between the old and the new clear and definite. Yet actually it was quite different. The Gospel reports show that Christ was completely filled with the significance of the moment. It is unthinkable that He could have been careless of anything. He does precisely what He set out to do. But what is that? In connection with the Passover feast, He takes bread, pronounces over it the words we know, and offers it to His followers to eat. He does the same with the chalice. He says: "As often as ye shall do these things, ye shall do them in remembrance of Me." It is plain whom He means: the apostles and their successors. What they must do is also evident: "these things" that He Himself has just done, without warping or "spiritualizing" them. That is all. Nothing more is said: no instructions on how the act is to be worked out in detail, its position in a greater whole or frame, when and where it is to be performed, and all the other questions which naturally arise. Thus the terse command of infinite possibilities and divine dignity is laid with startling simplicity in human hands.

Jesus drew upon the situation of the Passover for the sacred act and commanded that in future it continue to be celebrated in this new form. In brief, He arranged no proceedings; He planted a seed, which promptly took root in the young congregation and unfolded there. The Church has always known that what took place on Maundy Thursday was to be renewed in the celebration of the Eucharist: not in the form of mimicry, but as a vital realization. The seed has always been directly affected by its "soil" by all the forces, motives, circumstances that affected its growth, again by the size of the congregation, by its urban or rural location, by the kind of people in it and the historical and cultural situation in which they found themselves.

Thus the cornerstone of the sacred act was laid in history and what long and diversified history! There could not fail to appear along with its vital, indestructible aspects, others bound to prove transitory, soon to become extinct. The whole structure had to "settle" sometime in the process, shifting certain concepts out of-line. Sometimes less valuable additions managed to creep into language or ritual, and there were other dangers, quite aside from the hazards of the "dead language" employed.

Another thing: Holy Mass is celebrated by people, by a priest and servers and the congregation. All are human. One is deeply appreciative of the special nature and form of the liturgy; another is not. One responds easily to symbols; another only to ideas or moral precepts. Even within a single individual the degrees of readiness and spiritual participation fluctuate. There are alert and joyous periods, but also periods of indifference and despondency, carelessness and dullness. God's sacred act is planted in human imperfection. Celebrated by a priest for whom the liturgy is really alive, its words and gestures are convincing; by one who is not immersed in the spirit of the liturgy they are apt to appear forced and unnatural. Then there are all the private, little shortcomings of speech and bearing and movement which can be so distracting. The same is true of the congregation. It too can be understanding or indifferent, can actively participate or merely allow events to take their course. It can be educated to the celebration of the Mass and really understand; but it can also passively watch the ceremony unwind, an accepted tradition, day after day, Sunday after Sunday. It can enter into the sacred action or remain outside, carrying on its private devotion with all the varying shades of mood that ever variable human life contains.

For the individual believer this can present serious difficulties. When he goes to Holy Mass he finds it as it is with all its inadequacies. Everything depends on whether he remains a spectator who expects to be "offered something decent" and is accordingly pleased or disappointed or whether he understands that it is a question of service performed together, hence depending not only on the priest and the rest of the congregation, but also on himself.

Everyone is responsible for the celebration of the Mass, each according to his qualifications. As far as he is able to act within the established order, the individual should do everything in his power to perfect a practice or remove an abuse. Beyond that, he must accept the Mass he attends as it happens to be. He must not be unduly upset by its limitations; certainly he must not use them as an excuse to withhold his share of participation. He should remind himself that the essential remains untouched, should enter into it and help to accomplish the sacred act.