A new year’s resolution the Church cannot afford to dismiss

Happy New Year, Church! 

One year into the third edition of the new Roman Missal, the editorials, blogs, news and reports from pastoral and diocesan leaders continue to comment on the missal’s effect on worshipping Catholic communities.

I’m a big believer of what Vatican II refers to as the sensus fidelium, which teaches that “the universal body of the faithful, who have received the anointing of the holy one, cannot be mistaken in belief.” (Lumen Gentium, 12) This statement affirms the share of the baptized as the holy people of God who share in the prophetic role of Christ.  (LG 12)

The sensus fidelium invites a mutuality of dialogue between the teaching magisterium of the Church and the people of God, offering an opportunity for each to share in the process of dialogue, discernment and dynamic equivalence that provides the opportunity for a more inclusive and reconciling dimension of ecclesial life, which creates a stronger bridge to full, conscious and active participation of the people at the table of word and feast. (SC 14)

That said, I became very interested in a recent poll conducted by CARA at Georgetown University that released research that found that 70 percent of Catholics agreed that the new translation of the prayers in the new Roman Missal is a good thing. (To read CNA’s complete article, click http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/catholics-strongly-support-new-mass-translation-after-first-year/

While I applaud the attention given to the sensus fidelium regarding the new prayers of the Roman Missal as we turn the corner in the one year anniversary at the beginning of a new year in Advent, I have some questions about the poll.

Which communities were polled by CARA?

Was there a national invitation extended to each diocese and to each parish to offer their comments on people’s experience of the 3^rd edition of the Roman Missal?

Were Catholic schools, which celebrate the Mass on a regular basis, invited into the poll? According to the statistics in the CARA report, age difference may impact the reactions of the focus groups to the Missal changes. “The millennial generation, born in 1982 or later, shows the highest rate of dissatisfaction with the new translation, although even among this group, nearly 60 percent approve of the changes.” (CNA article) The suggested reason tied to “findings in other studies that this younger generation is less affiliated with religion and churches in general.” Regardless, is anyone concerned about the 40 percent of persons surveyed who are dissatisfied?

 Which members of the millennial generation interviewed for the poll? Which part of the country was interviewed? Was there truly a statistically significant representation of the U.S. Catholic population? What and how many institutions participated in the poll? Parishes? Schools? Youth groups?

 Additionally, the polls find that people born before 1943 “may find the new liturgy challenging, struggling to remember the new responses due to their age.” Has the translation actually reduced the opportunity for prayer by senior citizens? Is this acceptable?

 Where were the surveys done, in what regions, what institutions (i.e. parish, Catholic nursing homes) and how many elders participated in the poll interview? 

A proposal: the Sensus Fidelium and the new Roman Missal

I propose focus groups for all diocesan councils and leaders of offices of worship.

In each diocese, every parish and every Catholic institution (schools, nursing homes, centers of prayer and worship, etc.) have a duty to conduct a survey of the language, the prayerfulness and the level of their engagement in full, conscious and active participation since the change of the new Missal.

 How might the hierarchy of the Church take the statistics of the accrued polls and go back to the drawing board if the result does not approach 100% satisfaction? Yes, 100% satisfaction, the correct goal of any new systematic endeavor. Would we be satisfied with less of any quality survey from a health system, an educational system, a government?

How might an expanded and robust survey that embraces ALL opinions, gives them weight and value and accepts that each contribution adds to the holiness of the people of God in worship? Opinions provide a front-line foundation for action that could be taken to improve acceptance of the Missal for those find a lack of prayerfulness of the Missal.

The CNA article clearly notes that this poll is not an end result, but the beginning of an exploration of opinions. Perhaps the sensus fidelium in its fullest ‘sense’ may be a new year’s resolution the Church cannot afford to dismiss.  

Advent blessings.