Cold and Hot Media: The Mass as a Medium

“Let’s Throw the Microphone Out of the Church!”

Paweł Jarnicki

Part 3

(See Part 1 | Part 2)

The difficulties in understanding McLuhan’s views on microphones may also stem from the fact that he assumes that the reader is familiar with his concepts presented in other texts. It is obvious that a microphone is a transmitter, that it is a medium. There is the one who speaks, there is the one who listens, and there is the message transmitted through the microphone.

But a casual reader may be surprised that McLuhan seems to suggest that the use of what he considers a “cold” microphone could “warm up” the Latin Mass (which he considers “cold”). What does it mean for media to be “cold” or “hot”?

In the simplest terms, a hot medium delivers information in “high definition”, in a form that minimizes the cognitive activity of the recipient. Take, for example, a contemporary entertainment film with surround sound and special effects. The recipient does not have to conjecture the details, does not have to imagine how something explodes, what someone is wearing, what a given interior looks like, what the background of a scene is, etc. (to stick to the realm of appearances). The recipient simply sees it, and is cognitively passive, because everything is “served on a plate.”

Cold media, on the other hand, provide information in “low definition”, in a form that requires cognitive activity on the part of the recipient; in order to assimilate the message, the recipient must “warm it up”. Someone who reads a novel has to conjecture a lot, has to imagine what the scene described in words looks like, has to complete a lot of details, construe a lot, and can do it in many ways to a certain extent. [1] So, although on the surface, just like a movie viewer, they do nothing (they do not move or speak), we understand that a book reader is more active than a viewer who simply surrenders to impressions.

Hot media make the audience cognitively passive, while cold media force cognitive activity, which is why, among other things, “the medium is the message,” because in the long run it changes the level of knowledge of a larger group of recipients. Continuing with our book-film example, let us note that the knowledge of students who have watched the film adaptation of a school reading is different from the knowledge of students who have carefully read the book.

In this sense, the type of medium has a greater impact on culture and society than the content of the message being conveyed. Regardless of whether it is Pan Tadeusz [the Polish national epic] or another story, more is “gained” from the reception of a cold medium. This is because a cold medium requires cognitive activity on the part of the recipient, an act that de facto creates a community.

After all, it is not state-issued ID cards or church baptism certificates that make us a community, but rather socialization into similar ways of “warming up” – completing, conjecturing, construing. If this seems too abstract, try to recall a social gathering. Jokes are often told at such gatherings, especially at the beginning, to build a shared mood. Jokes often involve some kind of understatement or mistake; the audience has to make a mental effort to “get it,” and shared laughter is proof that despite the ambiguity of the message, we “get it,” meaning we understand each other better and think alike. A momentary community is created. [2]

Another device that requires completion is... the parable. We usually think that their ambiguity served to ensure that only the chosen few understood them, so as not to cast pearls before swine, and we do not notice the other – or perhaps the first – side of the coin, that the ambiguity of certain statements, by forcing similar cognitive activity, builds a community.

Pius XII offering Mass at an altar with four microphones (only three visible). Photo courtesy of Nico Fassino

McLuhan writes about the microphone, but he also seems to think of the Mass as a medium, although he does not make this distinction explicitly. [3] If the Mass is a medium, then the speaker is the Church, the listener is the people of God, and what is communicated through the Mass is the deposit of Faith. Viewing the Mass as a medium helps us understand why the “cold” microphone “warmed up” the Holy Mass, because in the new Mass – with sound amplification, in vernacular, with the priest facing the people – everything is to be “high definition”: visible, audible, and understandable.

The traditional Mass was “low definition” – cold (“demanding”), like reading a book: the faithful had to complete for themselves what the priest was doing. They had dogmas as their guideposts. The new Mass is hot (“easy”), like watching a movie. However, even though the priest says everything loudly and in understandable language, it does not help at all to feel that he is addressing God and re-presenting the Sacrifice of Christ in an unbloody manner on behalf of the faithful. Continuing our analogy, the “plot” is supposedly the same (the deposit of Faith has not changed), but the level of “knowledge” of the faithful is radically different.

It is possible that illiterate people of past eras (raised on the old Mass) had a deeper faith than those among contemporary intellectuals (raised on the new Mass) who have remained in the Church and so “actively” participate in the new Masses. They read the readings, carry the gifts, and above all, they do not pray the rosary during Mass (a very common example!). “Traditionalists” often mock this “activism.” However, no one can explain what is wrong with it.

The paradox is that although the theoretical goal of the Mass reform was to increase the participation of the faithful (participatio actuosa), in practice the effects are the opposite of what was intended. The changes introduced (which were intended to increase clarity and comprehensibility, i.e., to “warm up” the Mass) have only increased external activity and suppressed internal activity, which is truly community-building. Contemporary Catholic communities that shake hands after meetings and say, “It’s good to have you here,” may in fact be superficial communities. Only internal, cognitive activity creates a deeper community, creates the Church.

If during the new Mass, where everything is seemingly clear, obvious, and understandable, the faithful do not have to complete anything themselves or conjecture anything (which is very difficult anyway, because they are flooded with many more stimuli), then they absorb the content of the reading to a much lesser extent, and their membership in the Community becomes increasingly formal. They cease to feel unity with other members of the Mystical Body. This is the first, painful consequence of introducing the microphone into the Church, concerning the Community. The second concerns the Word.

The church of St Matthäus in Düsseldorf, Germany. Notice the obligatory centrality of the mic, with the processional cross and candles to the side. The overhead crucifix only partly cancels out the effect.

Omnimediatization

After my conversion, I saw and heard many Masses. Very different ones. I quickly turned to traditional Masses, although I never rejected the new ones. I read about the reform, about non-believers and Protestants who once converted, enchanted by the beauty of the Latin Mass. And then they experienced the reform and the pentecostalization of Catholicism. And I began to wonder if today’s Mass could “captivate” someone enough to convert them. If I bring a non-believing friend to Mass in my parish, is there anything here that might delight them? It’s a difficult question...

The vast majority of new Masses are chaotic, and at times even noisy and cacophonous. The new Mass is not appealing at all. I have often wondered whether it is inertia or a miracle that people still come here. In today’s churches, too many things are shoddy, kitschy, and inconsistent. Plastic chasubles and hubbub stand in stark contrast to the thoughtful design and ornamentation of old churches.

Among the more “difficult” experiences, I include the contemporary new Masses known as “children’s,” “for children,” or “family” Masses. Much could be written about them, but I will focus here on one way in which the microphone is used during them. The moment of the homily arrives. The priest does not approach the pulpit or climb into the ambo, but takes a portable microphone, leaves the presbytery and goes into the nave (in front of the balustrade, which is not there) and calls the children to him. They crowd around him. Instead of a sermon, he gives a catechesis and asks the children questions. The children answer. The priest is happy, the parents are happy, because the children are “actively participating” and the content is good and pious. What’s wrong with that?

We already know that the content is actually secondary, because the primary message is the medium. And no one at this Mass is surprised that the priest speaks through a microphone to the children who are within arm’s reach. No one is surprised that they answer him through the same microphone, even though they are standing right next to him. And once during such a Mass, the priest, who after his sermon-catechesis had already asked all the children about their Mass intentions, turned – of course through that portable microphone, of course – to the adults remaining in the pews with the question: “Perhaps the floor has some intentions?”

This servant of the Lord’s constantly devasted vineyard, whose piety and good faith I am firmly convinced of, simply picked up the message from the microphone. He called the faithful who participate in the Sacrifice “the floor.” But it’s really not his fault. He was about 40 years old, so he was raised on Mass with a microphone.

It was only while writing this article that I realized how mediatized our world is, how it is mediated by the means of communication. [4] I tried to find contemporary social events that are not mediatized, and the only things that came to mind were school classes and some funerals of “insignificant people.” It was a shocking discovery for me that there are basically no more social events that are not mediatized. We have to see and hear everything.

Nothing should be left unbroadcast.

And yet, a hundred years ago in Fatima, over 70,000 people came, even though they couldn’t see. They came because they heard that something was occurring. But there was no sound system or zoom on site. They had no guarantee that they would see or hear anything, even if they were right in the center of events. The photos from Fatima in 1917 are, of course, a means of communication, but they are only documents; the events in Fatima themselves were not mediatized for their participants. That is, the means of communication were there, but they were... children, flesh-and-blood children.

Our world has changed significantly over the past hundred years. This would not have been possible without microphones and sound systems. The first such systems were developed around 1915, and two years later, during Christmas 1917 in San Francisco, the Magnavox sound system was publicly presented. In the same year, Our Lady of the Rosary appeared in Fatima. The carbon microphone was invented forty years earlier, in 1876. In 1877, Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception appeared in Gietrzwałd. And seven years later, in 1884, Pope Leo XIII had a truly Job-like vision, or rather “hearing,” because the revelation was (indeed!) acoustic in nature. Jesus spoke with Satan, who, wanting to attempt to destroy the Church (the deposit of Faith!), demanded [5] time (from 75 to 100 years) and greater power over those who would devote themselves to his service. Jesus was to allow this, and Satan chose the “coming” century (usually interpreted, but on what basis is unknown, as the 20th century).

Terrified by this revelation, Leo XIII decided that all priests would recite a set of prayers after low Masses (during the week), kneeling at the foot of the altar (the old one, i.e., together with the people, versus Deum), which were later called “the Leonine Prayers.” These prayers are no longer recited today except at the old Mass (though sometimes their echo can still be heard when, after a parish Mass, the prayer to St. Michael the Archangel is recited). The obligation to recite the Leonine Prayers as an “add-on” was abolished by the Consilium led by Bugnini in 1964.

I must admit that when I heard that the new pope had chosen the name Leo, I felt hopeful that this was not a random choice. Although the content of Leo XIII’s revelations is known to many believers, and many believers are familiar with other predictions of a crisis in the Church, priests today do not explain this to the faithful in a convincing manner. For believers, can such temporal coincidences as those mentioned above be purely accidental? Is the intensification of Marian apparitions accidental? Has Jesus really allowed Satan to destroy the Church? When? When will it end? Has it already begun? What would it consist of? Is it a coincidence that God’s people are lost in conjectures and conspiracy theories when the voice of the shepherds has become a processed voice?

Although succession in the Church must still be accomplished through the direct laying on of hands, the Word that priests proclaim today is transmitted. This may seem insignificant to us, but the sound that comes from the speakers is, contrary to appearances, heavily processed, so that the sound does not overlap with the echo of what was said a moment ago. [6] In addition, the priest’s voice today reaches the faithful from all directions (the nearest speaker may even be behind them); it is a “dis-placed” voice. In the past, it had one natural source in the priest’s body. This causes confusion, which is not visible in adults today because they are already accustomed to it, but it can be seen in some of the youngest children (who enter the space of a mass event with a transmitted human voice, not only in church). The microphone created, as McLuhan put it, a “sound bubble.”

This led to the actual elimination of the age-old division of the Temple into three zones (tabernacle – Holy of Holies; presbytery – Holy Place; nave – vestibule), which, in short, does not help the faithful understand that the most important part of the Mass takes place there, in the presbytery, in a slightly different space behind the balustrades. In fact, today the balustrade is often no longer there, because the sound bubble has made the space of churches a homogeneous space of encounter around the Table-Altar.

The voice also sounds at a similar volume all the time (in the old Mass, the priest sometimes spoke loudly, sometimes moderately, sometimes in a whisper). The microphone not only dis-placed the Word proclaimed during Mass, but also, as McLuhan puts it, discarnated it. It is precisely this second, painful consequence of the introduction of the microphone into the Church that concerns the Word.

TLM, Rome (Italy), Church of the Most Holy Trinity of the Pilgrims. A medium-sized church during a traditional Mass does not require a sound system; the cross is the axis of the celebration.

TLM, Vilnius (Lithuania), Church of St. Anne. A church without a single microphone, neither at the altar nor at the ambo.

Discarnation of the Word

The lord of death is unable to be born of a virgin like God. The lord of death cannot have his own body. At most, he can enter the bodies of those born naturally. The Church has developed methods to combat possession. But it has not noticed the new trick of the lord of death – a trick with a much greater destructive power than possession: the trick of the discarnation of the Word, which distorts the transmission of the deposit of Faith. That is why I say: Let’s throw the microphone out of the Church!

“Even then Cassandra, who, by the god’s decree, is never / to be believed by Trojans, reveals our future fate with her lips.”

I saw that on most of the new altars, the microphone had taken the place of the cross. The cross stood to the side or behind and became an ornament. Priests today move around the microphone.

But whatever happens, as the Church says, the Lord will come. He was born at night, he comes in silence, he will rise from the heights and illuminate the darkness.

Christmas Day, 2025

NOTES

^[1] Let us note in the margin that after a film with special effects, it is more difficult to have a meaningful conversation with other viewers (often these conversations do not go beyond “did you see that” or “that was great”), it is more difficult to talk about such films because we saw the same thing and everything was obvious. When, on the other hand, someone has read the same novel (I don’t mean a crime novel) at the same time, it is often easier to talk about it because we understand many issues and imagine them slightly differently.

^[2] Of course, it happens that a narcissistic character dominates a party that consists only of jokes, or that jokes quickly reveal that we will not understand each other, that there will be no community, because completing them would mean repeating stereotypes that offend us. Metaphors are a community-building device similar to jokes, although not as easy to notice. Due to their ambiguity, they also force the listener to make cognitive effort and create a community. In the presence of those who use metaphors that do not offend us, but are close to us, ones that we understand almost instinctively, we feel better.

^[3] This is how, by the way, Ashil D. Manohar develops McLuhan’s idea in his thesis entitled The Mass is the Medium: Marshall McLuhan and Roman Catholic Liturgical Change (2021). USF Tampa Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/etd/8817. Such an approach may seem strange at first, but it is not foreign to official church documents. Cf. e.g. p. 11 of the pastoral instruction on social communications Communio et progressio: “Communication is more than the expression of ideas and the indication of emotion. At its most profound level it is the giving of self in love. Christ’s communication was, in fact, spirit and life (Jn 6:53). In the institution of the Holy Eucharist, Christ gave us the most perfect and most intimate form of communion between God and man possible in this life, and, out of this, the deepest possible unity between men.”

^[4] I also realized that this world is coming to an end because of “Artificial Intelligence,” because it is beginning to eat its own tail. Trust in the media began to crumble earlier (because we began to realize that “the press lies” and “television lies” also today, and not just “during communism” behind the Iron Curtain), but AI will complete this process — once we realize that with its help, our and foreign intelligence services, criminals, and enlightened minds are able to generate hyper-realistic fake news, we will completely lose trust in our “extended senses.” In my opinion, it is only a matter of time before zones free from all kinds of technology begin to emerge. Churches could be at the forefront of this!

^[5] I do not have access to the relevant sources, but in reports that can be found on the Internet, Satan’s voice is described as “guttural” or “harsh” , and Artificial Intelligence confirms that early microphones caused such sound distortion and that the human voice transmitted through them was often described as “harsh,” “distorted,” or “raspy.”

^[6] This is necessary due to the “outdated” architecture of churches, which was designed for natural voices. Traditional methods of amplifying sound, apart from architecture, were based on the construction of the ambo — raised above the people. A canopy was installed above the pulpit, whose function was not only decorative — the canopy reflected the sound and directed it downwards towards the people, and in addition, a soundboard was often placed in it. However, all these measures amplified the priest’s live and unprocessed voice.

The Abbey Church of St Philibert in Tournus, France

The same friend of mine who recently visited the cathedral of Ss Peter and Paul in Troyes, France, also went to see the abbey church of St Philibert in Tournus, about 60 miles to the north of Lyon, and has gracious shared these pictures with us. This abbey was founded in 875, and named for a saint who founded another important monastery, Jumièges in northern France (very close to Rouen) in the 7th century. The current buildings date from the 11th century, and constitute one of the largest religious complexes of the Romanesque style that survives in France. As is the case with most such churches, it was modified a number of times, and also includes some Gothic elements. The massive solid wall of the façade is very typical of the style.

The entrance from the cloister to the church.

The barrel vaulting of the central nave is also very typical of the Romanesque.

Continue Reading this Article. . .

Durandus on the Liturgy of Pentecost Tuesday

Because the Holy Spirit is not given except by the ministers, on Tuesday the Introit “Receive the delight of your glory” is sung, as if the prelates of the Church were speaking. And since by two-fold love (i.e. of God and neighbor) we come to faith in the Trinity, we sing Alleluia five times. And the meaning of it is, “Receive the delight of glory”, that is, the Holy Spirit, because He will glorify and exalt you, such that every man may say which is said in the Communio, “The Spirit who proceedeth from the Father, he will exalt me.”

The Mass of Pentecost Tuesday, celebrated in 2023 at the church of St Eugène in Paris, sung by our friends of the Schola Sainte Cécile. The Introit Accipite begins at 6:52, and the Communio Spiritus qui a Patre procedit at 1:05:00.

Introitus Accipite jucunditatem gloriae vestrae, alleluia: gratias agentes Deo, alleluia: qui vos ad caelestia regna vocavit, alleluia, alleluia, alleluia. Ps. 77 Attendite, popule meus, legem meam: inclinate aurem vestram in verba oris mei. Gloria Patri. Accipite.

Introit Receive the delight of your glory, alleluia, giving thanks to God, alleluia, Who hath called ye to the heavenly kingdoms, alleluia, alleluia, alleluia. Psalm Attend, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth. Glory be. Receive.

Communio Spiritus qui a Patre procedit, alleluia, ille me clarificabit, alleluia. (The Spirit who proceedeth from the Father, He will glorify me.)

There follows the Epistle (Acts 8, 14-17), which says, “Then they laid their hands upon them, and they received the Holy Spirit.” ... The Gospel (John 10,1-10) agrees with the Epistle, where it says, “He that entereth not through the door... (is a thief and a robber)”, for he does not enter into the Church who does not enter through those who are the door, namely, through Christ and the Apostles, for heretics do not give the Spirit, except in so far as they agree with the Church. And since the Apostles and their successors attacked the leaders of heresies in a spirit of fortitude, this day’s liturgy is about fortitude, which is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

But the Holy Spirit is also the keeper of the door, who leads us through it to the Father, and this is also sung in the Offertory, “He hath opened the gates of heaven”, that is, the writings of the Apostles.

A polyphonic setting of the Offertory Portas caeli by the Polish composer Mikołaj Zieleński (post 1550 - post 1615).

Offertorium Ps 77 Portas caeli apéruit Dóminus: et pluit illis manna, ut éderent: panem caeli dedit eis, panem Angelórum manducávit homo, allelúja. (The Lord opened the doors of heaven, and rained manna upon them that they might eat; he gave them the bread of heaven, man ate the bread of Angels, alleluia.)

Ambrosian Chants for Mass and Vespers of Pentecost

The following recordings were made yesterday, the feast of Pentecost, by Nicola de’ Grandi at the church of Santa Maria della Consolazione, where the traditional Ambrosian Mass is celebrated every Sunday. The first two are of the Mass, and the remaining five of Vespers. Thanks once again to Nicola for sharing these with us. The Latin texts are given in the videos themselves; the English translations are my own.

First we have the Offertory of the Mass. Especially on solemn feasts, these tend to be much longer than their Roman counterparts, and have retained the partial repetitions which have long been purely optional in the Roman Rite. The first part of the text is taken from Leviticus 23, which is read in the Roman Rite at the Mass of the following Ember Saturday. “This day shall be for you as a memorial, hallelujah; and you will celebrate a solemn feast day unto the Lord, unto your generations, the day as an everlasting law, hallelujah, hallelujah. V. (Ex. 14) Moses said to the people, ‘Be ye of good spirit; salvation shall come to you from the Lord, and he will fight for you’ unto your generations, the day as an everlasting law, hallelujah, hallelujah.”

In the Ambrosian Rite, the chant sing during the distribution of communion is called the Transitorium. This particular text is extremely ancient, and is also used on Easter Thursday; the “clean lambs” to which it refers are therefore the newly baptized, since Milan shares the common tradition that Pentecost is the second major baptismal feast after Easter. “Sing a hymn, pure lambs, reborn in the washing of the font, satisfied with the body of Christ, hallelujah, hallelujah.”

Ambrosian Vespers has many texts in common with the Roman Rite, but the arrangement differs in many details. The general order is as follows: the lucernarium, a hymn originally sung while the lamps of the church were bring lit; an antiphon (by itself, and without repetition) called “in choro – in the choir”, since in the cathedral, it was sung by the cantors standing around the throne of the archbishop; the hymn; and then a responsory also called “in choro.” The Ambrosian Office puts the Veni, Creator Spiritus at Lauds, and at Vespers, sings the hymn Jam Christus astra ascenderat, which the Roman Office has at Matins. After this the psalmody begins.

An old photo of the choir of the Duomo of Milan, taken while the antiphon in choro was being sung on Epiphany; colorized by Nicola to very nice effect.

As in the Roman Rite, the psalms of Pentecost Vespers are the same as those of an ordinary Sunday, 109-113, but the first two are sung with the same antiphons as on the Sundays of Eastertide, consisting of four Hallelujahs (spelled thus, but the H is not pronounced) with psalm 109, and two with 110. The remaining three psalms are said with antiphons very similar to the first, third and fifth of the Roman antiphons. At Psalm 112, “They were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in various tongues, hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah.”

With Psalm 113, the antiphon is “In various tongues the Apostles spoke of the mighty deeds of God, hallelujah, hallelujah.”

Following the psalmody, an oration is said, then the Magnificat with its antiphon. The antiphon with which is it said on Pentecost has no parallel in the Roman Office, but many other Uses have one similar to it which was said on one of the two days after the octave of the Ascension. “The Holy Spirit will teach you, hallelujah, what you must say, hallelujah.”

The Magnificat is followed by another oration, and then two chants called psallendae, which were originally supposed to accompany some kind of procession, and in some cases still do. These are each sung with the doxology, and repeated, then followed by two versicles called completoria, and another oration. Psall. I “My peace I give you, hallelujah, my peace I leave you, hallelujah.”

Complet. I “Thy kingdom, o Lord, hallelujah, and Thy dominion in every generation and descent, hallelujah, hallelujah.”

Complet. II “Blessed art Thou, o Lord, God of our fathers, and praiseworthy and glorious unto the ages, hallelujah.”

Psall. II “Jesus commanded them saying, that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but await the promise of the father, hallelujah.”

Complet. I “For thou lightest my lamp, o Lord: o my God enlighten my darkness.”

Complet. II “Blessed art Thou, o Lord, God of our fathers, and praiseworthy and glorious unto the ages, hallelujah.” (This is the same text as the second completorium above, but sung with a shorter melody.)

Durandus on the Liturgy of Pentecost Monday

The liturgy of Pentecost) Monday shows that the law was given not only to the Jews, but also to the gentiles, whence the Introit is, “He fed them with the richness of wheat,” that is, with spiritual understanding, “and with honey out of the rock,” that is, with the teaching of Christ, which flows like honey. ... This is said in the Epistle (Acts 10, 34 and 42-48), “Peter (i.e. the rock) opening his mouth” etc. And the wheat is Christ, whose richness is the Holy Spirit, ... in whom are all the treasures of wisdom and the knowledge of God. (Col. 2, 3)

Introitus, Ps. 80 Cibávit eos ex ádipe frumenti, allelúia: et de petra, melle saturávit eos, allelúia, allelúia. V. Exsultáte Deo, adjutóri nostro: jubiláte Deo Iacob. Glória Patri Cibávit eos...

Introit Ps. 80 He fed them with the richness of wheat, alleluia: and filled them with honey from the rock, alleluia, alleluia. V. Rejoice to God our helper: sing aloud to the God of Jacob. Glory be... He fed them...

The Gospel (John 3, 16-21) seems to have nothing to do with the Holy Spirit, but it agrees with the Epistle, for it also shows that the law was given not only to the Jews, but also to the gentiles, saying, “God so loved the world,” understand, not only the Jews, “that he gave his only begotten son”, and afterwards it follows, “that everyone who believes in him may not perish.” Note the fearful saying that he who does not believe has already been judged. Furthermore, because mention is made of love, the Holy Spirit, who is love, is mentioned enough, as in the Communio.

Communio, John 14, 26 Spíritus Sanctus docébit vos, allelúia: quæcumque díxero vobis, allelúia, allelúia. (The Holy Spirit will teach you, alleluia: whatever I have said to you, alleluia, alleluia.)

And it should be known through this whole week, the signs of solemnity are kept, such as the Gloria in excelsis, Credo, Ite Missa est, Te Deum and Alleluia, so that we may all rejoice together at the salvation of the baptized, and be a figure of the fullness of future joy.

Finally it should be noted that the Lord did not preach to the gentiles personally, but through the Apostles, when He says, “go ye therefore, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”

Christ giving the Great Commission to the Disciples; stained-glass window in the co-cathedral of St Patrick, Dundalk, County Louth, Ireland. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by Andreas F Borchert, CC BY-SA 3.0 DE)

The Mass of Pentecost Monday at Chartres Cathedral earlier today, the closure of the famous annual pilgrimage, once again attended by a record number of participants this year.

Durandus on the Liturgy of Pentecost

The following excerpts are taken from book 6, chapter 107, of William Durandus’ Rationale Divinorum Officiorum, the Summa Theologica of medieval liturgical commentaries.

Alleluja is frequently sung through the whole week of Pentecost, since throughout these (fifty) days, the Church gathers the people to God through baptism, and therefore the (mystical) body, rejoicing at their salvation, sings the hymn of praise (i.e. ‘alleluia’) as long as they wear the white garments. For then we stand and pray as a sign of the deliverance of those who, through the gifts of the Holy Spirit, have merited to be raised from death to life, for on this day was the Spirit sent upon the Apostles in tongues of fire.

(The following recording begins with the antiphon version of “Confirma hoc, Deus” from Matins, which is also used at the rite of Confirmation; the other two antiphons of Matins are sung in exactly the same melody. The same text is sung to a more complex melody as the Offertory at the Mass of Pentecost.)

Aña Confirma hoc, Deus, quod operátus es in nobis: a templo sancto tuo, quod est in Jerúsalem, allelúja, allelúja. (Strengthen, o God, that which Thou hast wrought in us, from thy holy temple that is on Jerusalem, alleluia, alleluia.)

On the night of Pentecost (i.e. at Matins) three lessons are read, and three psalms are said with three antiphons, as on the night of Easter … because of the sacrament of Baptism, celebrated in the name of the three Persons, or because of the burial for three days of the Lord, with Whom we are buried in baptism.

Three psalms are said with three antiphons because the Holy Spirit did three things with the Apostles. For He renewed the aged, He confirmed the renewed, and sent the renewed to convert others. To the first belongs what is said in the first antiphon, “Suddenly there came a sound from heaven”, to the second, what is said in the second antiphon, “Confirm this, o God,” and the third to what is said in the third antiphon, “Send forth Thy spirit.” … and because the Holy Spirit wrought two things in the Apostles, the forgiveness of sins, and the working of miracles, the antiphons end with a double alleluia.

… from every nation which is under heaven, people had to come together for the feast day, and then the Holy Spirit descended visibly upon the disciples, as Christ had promised, and they spoke in all tongues before all. Therefore the Introit begins, “The Spirit of the Lord hath filled the world”, that is, the Church, which is called “the world”, for just as literally nothing lives outside the world, so spiritually, nothing lives outside the Church.

There follows, “and that which containeth all things,” that is, the Holy Spirit, in whose goodness all things subsist, “hath the knowledge of the voice,” that is, of tongues, and thus could He give it to the Apostles, and did so. From this, the enemies of Christ were confounded, and so there follows the verse, “Let God arise and his enemies be scattered” (in the Use which Durandus knows), for through the Holy Spirit all the demons are constrained and cast out.

Again He filled the world when He inebriated the Apostles, whose sound went out into all the earth (Ps. 18, 5, a text traditionally referred to the preaching of the Apostles throughout the world), of which sound it is said in the Epistle, “suddenly there came a sound from heaven.” And since the world is separated into four regions, therefore ‘alleluia’ is said four times in the Introit.

The epistle from the Acts of the Apostles (begins), “And when the days of the Pentecost were accomplished”, namely the fiftieth day from the Resurrection; for just as the Pentecost of the Jews took place on the fiftieth day after Passover, so does ours. And just as the people of Israel, on the fiftieth day from the sacrificing of the Paschal lamb … came to the mountain of God Horeb, … which is also called Sinai, then they received the law, so also on the fiftieth day from the Resurrection of the Lord, the Holy Spirit was given to the disciples in the upper room as they awaited His coming.

The lower section of the Pentecost Polyptych, ca 1478, by the Venetian painter Alvise Vivarini (1442/53 - 1503/5). To the left are Ss Francis of Assisi and Anthony of Padua, to the right, Ss Louis of Toulouse and Bernardin of Siena. Now in the Bode Museum in Berlin. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by Sailko, CC BY 3.0)) 

For it is commanded in Leviticus (23, 16) that on the day of Pentecost there should be offered new loaves of bread … from the new fruits, by which it is signified that we must give thanks to God, because He gave the new law through the Holy Spirit on that same day on which the old law was given…

Therefore Luke says about this day, “When the days of the Pentecost were accomplished, all the disciples were together in the same place,” that is, in unity of voice and heart, and then, “suddenly there came a sound from heaven.” … the Holy Spirit, is given, but suddenly, since ‘the grace of the Holy Spirit knows no delay in its workings.’ (St Ambrose, Commentary on Luke, 2, 19) He came down in fire, because just as fire illuminates and inflames, so does the Holy Spirit illuminate unto the knowledge of God, and inflame onto the love of God. Therefore He appeared to them in fiery tongues, that they might be eloquent in every type of speech. And because He himself is the tongue which from the hidden place of His goodness spoke forth the Word into the Virgin’s womb, and brings forth the word in the heart of man, according to that (which the Lord said), “It is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you” (Matt. 10, 20), those whom He fills, He makes also eloquent.

Now the double Alleluia which is sung after the Epistle signifies that rejoicing is to be doubled, and that the Holy Spirit was given to the Apostles twice, from earth and from heaven, and it signifies those who sing in spirit and in mind, and the conversion of two peoples (i.e. of the Jews and of the gentiles.) …

Alleluja, Alleluja. Ps. 103 Emitte Spiritum tuum, et creabuntur, et renovabis faciem terrae. (Send forth Thy Spirit, and they shall be created, and Thou shalt renew the face of the earth.)

Alleluja, Veni Sancte Spiritus, reple tuorum corda fidelium, et tui amoris in eis ignem accende. (Come, Holy Spirit, fill the hearts of Thy faithful, and enkindle in them the fire of Thy love.)

Now because in the Epistle it is said, “suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a mighty wind coming”, therefore, to represent this, in some churches trumpets are sounded while the Sequence is sung. For the Holy Spirit came in a mighty wind, because just as a mighty wind casts dust from the face of the earth, so the Holy Spirit casts from the heart of man all earthly concern.

Indeed, the ancients used (two) trumpets, as we read in the book of Numbers (10, 1-10), to gather the multitude to fight, to celebrate on festive days, but with a difference of sounds, and the use of them was of such power in the rejoicing that at the sound of them, the walls of Jericho fell.

The Fall of Jericho; an illustration of Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews by Jean Fouquet, 15th century. (Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons.)

These then are the two Testaments, and the preachers by whom the people is called to gird itself up in faith, to penitence, excited to tearful compunction, and invited to give praises in every way, and to Mount Zion, and the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and the gathering of many thousands of angels (Hebr. 12, 22), and called forth to the future judgment of God. And note that both in adversity and prosperity, noise is made with trumpets, for every time befits the Word, whence (the words of Psalm 33, 2), “I will bless the Lord at all times, his praise shall be always in my mouth.”

… Then also fire is cast down from high, because the Holy Spirit came down upon the disciples in tongues of fire, and also various flowers, to denote the joy and diversity of tongues and virtues. Doves are also released to fly through the church, by which the sending of the Holy Spirit is indicated.

Rose petals falling through the oculus of the dome of the Pantheon on Pentecost of 2010. (Courtesy of Orbis Catholicus.)

The Pentecost Exsultet

From time immemorial, it has been the custom of the Roman Rite to celebrate Pentecost as a baptismal feast on a par with Easter. At the end of the fourth century, Pope St Siricius (384-99) wrote in a letter to a Spanish bishop that the sacrament of baptism was to be celebrated on Pentecost as on Easter. (Epist. ad Himerium, cap. 2: PL XIII, 1131B-1148A) Pope St Leo I (440-61) reasserted that this was the Church’s practice in a letter to the bishops of Sicily, exhorting them to follow the example of the Apostle Peter, who baptized three-thousand persons on Pentecost day. (Epist. XVI ad universos episcopos per Siciliam constitutos: PL LIV, 695B-704A)

As we would expect, therefore, all pertinent liturgical books of the Roman Rite, going as far back as we have them, reflect this tradition. For example, the very oldest collection of Roman liturgical texts, the so-called Leonine Sacramentary, ca. 550 A.D., contains a Mass “on Pentecost, for those coming up from the font.” All Roman lectionaries attest that some of the prophecies from the Easter vigil are repeated at that of Pentecost, and the ancient sacramentaries all have prayers to accompany these readings.

The prayers which follow the prophecies at the vigil of Pentecost in the Gellone Sacramentary, ca. 780 A.D. 

Of course, the two vigils are not celebrated in exactly the same way. In the Missal of St Pius V, the vigil of Pentecost begins with the first prophecy, and everything that precedes the readings at the Easter vigil (the blessing of the fire, the procession into the church with the reed, and the Exsultet) are omitted. This is consonant with the received tradition of the Roman Rite in its many uses and variants.

However, I recently discovered, via a footnote in a book [1], that in the Middle Ages, two places in France, Reims and Besançon, had a special form of the Exsultet for the vigil of Pentecost. The text was edited in 1954 in an article by the Benedictine scholar Dom Anselm Strittmatter, but not translated. I believe that this article will therefore be the first English translation of it ever made. According to Dom Strittmatter, the text predates the liturgical reform of Innocent III (1198-1216), since it lacks the special intercession for the Holy Roman Emperor which was added in that period; the author is completely unknown.

The façade of the cathedral of St John the Evangelist in Besançon. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by Morio60, CC BY-SA 2.0)

The first part, from the opening to the preface dialog, is exactly the same as the normal Exsultet, so I will not include it here. Likewise, the opening clause of the second part makes only one small change, by adding the words “with the Holy Spirit.”

Vere dignum et justum est, invisibilem Deum Patrem omnipotentem Filiumque ejus unigenitum, Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum cum Sancto Spiritu, toto cordis ac mentis affectu et vocis ministerio personare: Qui pro nobis aeterno Patri Adae debitum solvit, et veteris piaculi cautionem pio cruore detersit.

Truly it is worthy and just to proclaim with all the affection of our heart and mind, and with the service of our voice the invisible God, the Father almighty, and his only Son our Lord Jesus Christ with the Holy Spirit; Who for us paid to his eternal Father the debt of Adam, and by his sacred blood canceled the guilt contracted by original sin.

This is the point at which the Pentecost text begins to diverge very notably from the Easter one, while keeping many phrases and expressions from the original. In order to show this, I will here give each section of the Easter version in Latin and English, followed by the Pentecost variant.

Easter A: Haec sunt enim festa paschalia, in quibus verus ille Agnus occiditur, cujus sanguine postes fidelium consecrantur. Haec nox est, in qua primum patres nostros, filios Israel, eductos de Aegypto, Mare Rubrum sicco vestigio transire fecisti.

For these is the Paschal feast, in which the true Lamb was slain, by whose blood the doors of the faithful are consecrated. This is the night in which formerly thou didst lead our forefathers, the children of Israel, out of Egypt, and cause them pass dry-footed through the Red Sea.

The Crossing of the Red Sea, depicted in a paleo-Christian sarcophagus, a reasonably common motif in early Christian funerary art. The front of the sarcophagus has been sawed off and used as the front of an altar in the cathedral of Arles in France.

Pentecost A: Haec sunt enim sacra solemnia, in quibus mortis perpetuae victor, vitaeque sempiternae largitor, humanae postquam conditionis substantiam non solum ab inferis eruit, sed ad superna polorum fastigia triumphans subvexit, Spiritus infusione Paracliti juxta suae verbum promissionis filios ditavit adoptionis.

For this is the sacred solemnity, in which the Conqueror of perpetual death, and granter of everlasting life, after he had not only rescued the substance of our human condition from hell, but (also) brought it up to the great heights of heaven, by the pouring forth of the Spirit, the Paraclete, enriched the sons of adoption according to the word of his promise.

Easter B: Haec igitur nox est, quae peccatorum tenebras columnae illuminatione purgavit.

This then is the night which dissipated the darkness of sin by the light of the pillar.

Pentecost B: Haec igitur dies est, quae peccatorum tenebras sua claritate purgavit.

This then is the day which dissipated the darkness of sin by its brightness.

Easter C: Haec nox est, quae hodie per universum mundum in Christo credentes, a vitiis saeculi et caligine peccatorum segregatos, reddit gratiae, sociat sanctitati.

This is the night which now through the whole world sets apart those that believe in Christ from the vices of the world and darkness of sin, restores them to grace, and unites them to sanctity.

Pentecost C: Haec dies est quae hodie per universum mundum in Christum credentes a vitiis saeculi segregatos, Sanctique Spiritus infusione purgatos, reddit gratiae, sociat sanctitati.

This is the day which now through the whole world set apart those that believe in Christ from the vices of the world, and having cleansed them by the pouring forth of the Holy Spirit, restores them to grace, and unites them to sanctity.

Easter D: Haec nox est, in qua, destructis vinculis mortis, Christus ab inferis victor ascendit. Nihil enim nobis nasci profuit, nisi redimi profuisset.

This is the night on which Christ, having broken the chains of death, rose in victory from hell. For naught had it availed us to be born, if it had not availed us to be redeemed.

Pentecost D: Haec dies est in qua, fugatis originalis peccati tenebris, Spiritus Parclitus ad suorum corda fidelium confirmanda, in igneis linguis de supernis descendit, non ut repentinus visitator, sed ut perpetuus consolator, aeternusque cohabitator.

This is the day on which, when the darkness of original sin had been put to flight, the Spirit, the Paraclete, to confirm the hearts of his faithful, descended in tongues of fire, not as a visitor unlooked for, but as a perpetual consoler that would dwell with us forever.

The Descent of the Holy Spirit on the Virgin Mary and the Apostles at Pentecost, ca. 1335-45, by the Florentine painter Taddeo Gaddi (ca. 1290 - 1366).

Easter E: O mira circa nos tuae pietatis dignatio! O inaestimabilis dilectio caritatis: ut servum redimeres, Filium tradidisti!

O, the wondrous regard of thy goodness towards us! O, the inestimable love of thy affection! To redeem a slave, thou didst delivered up a Son.

Pentecost E: O mira circa nos Dei pietatis dignatio! O inaestimabilis dilectio caritatis: ut hominem ab aeternitate dejectum, plasmator universalis ad superna reduceret, quos per Verbi sui doctrinam accenderat, per Sancti Spiritus virtutem confirmat.

O, the wondrous regard of God’s goodness towards us! O, the inestimable love of his affection! That when man had been cast down from eternity, the creator of the universe should bring him back on high, even those whom he once enkindled through the teaching of his word, and now confirms through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Easter F: O certe necessarium Adae peccatum, quod Christi morte deletum est! O felix culpa, quae talem ac tantum meruit habere Redemptorem!

O surely necessary sin of Adam, which hath been blotted out by the death of Christ! O happy fault, that merited to have such and so great a Redeemer!

Pentecost F: O certe necessarium Adae peccatum, quod Christi morte deletum est! O felix culpa, quae Spiritum Sanctum habere meruit Consolatorem!

O surely necessary sin of Adam, which hath been blotted out by the death of Christ! O happy fault, that merited to have the Holy Spirit as its Consoler.

The Fall of Adam depicted in an Exsultet scroll made somewhere near Benevento southern Italy in the second half of the 11th century, now kept in the museum of the cathedral of Pisa. The text is upside down because the scroll was unrolled from the pulpit as the deacon sang it, and the pictures became visible to the faithful standing below. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by Sailko, CC BY 3.0)

Easter G: O vere beata nox, quae sola meruit scire tempus et horam, in qua Christus ab inferis resurrexit! Haec nox est, de qua scriptum est: Et nox sicut dies illuminabitur, et nox illuminatio mea in deliciis meis.

O truly blessed night, which alone merited to know the time and hour at which Christ rose again from hell. This is the night of which it is written: And the night shall be enlightened as the day, and the night is my illumination in my delights.

Pentecost G: Haec dies est, quae sola meruit scire tempus et horam, in qua Spiritus Sanctus, ab arce divinitatis irruens, ut invisibilis super Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum baptizatum in columbae specie descendit, ita super Apostolos in igneis linguis apparuit; ut post Redemptoris nostri magnificentiam, credentibus augeret sapientiam, accumularet gratiam, formaret constantiam.

This is the day which alone merited to know the time and hour at which the Holy Spirit, rushing down from the height of the divinity, just as once he came down invisibly upon our Lord Jesus Christ when he was baptized in the appearance of a dove, did likewise appear upon the Apostle in tongues of fire; so that the glorification of our Redeemer, he might increase the wisdom of them that believe, increase grace, and fill them with strength.

From this point forward, there is only one really notable difference from the standard text of the Exsultet, and so I shall simply give the Pentecost variants in parentheses.

Hujus igitur sanctificatio noctis (diei) fugat scelera, culpas lavat, et reddit innocentiam lapsis et maestis laetitiam. Fugat odia, concordiam parat et curvat imperia.

Therefore the sanctification of this night (day) banishes crimes, washes away sins, and restores innocence to the fallen, and joy to the sorrowful. It banishes enmities, produces harmony, and humbles empires.

In hujus igitur noctis (diei) gratia, suscipe, sancte Pater, laudis hujus sacrificium vespertinum, quod tibi in hac cerei oblatione solemni, per ministrorum manus de operibus apum, sacrosancta reddit Ecclesia. Sed jam columnae hujus praeconia novimus, quam in honorem Dei rutilans ignis accendit. Qui, licet sit divisus in partes, mutuati tamen luminis detrimenta non novit. Alitur enim liquantibus ceris, quas in substantiam pretiosae hujus lampadis apis mater eduxit.

Therefore on this sacred night (day), receive, o holy Father, the evening sacrifice of this praise, which thy most holy Church renders to Thee in this solemn offering of a candle by the hands of her ministers, made out of the labor of bees. But already we have known the praises of this pillar, which the bright fire lights for the honor of God; which fire, though it be divided in parts, suffereth no loss from the sharing of its light, for it is fed by the melted wax, which the mother bee brought forth for the substance of this precious lamp.

Beekeepers depicted in an Exsultet scroll made at the abbey of Monte Cassino ca. 1075. 

This is the last place where the Pentecost version differs significantly from the original. 

Easter: O vere beata nox, in qua terrenis caelestia, humanis divina junguntur!

O truly blessed night, which plundered the Egyptians, and enriched the Hebrews. A night, in which heaven is united to earth, and God to man.

Pentecost: O vere beata dies, quae illuminavit credentes, ditavit fideles; dies in qua linguarum diversitates, in unius fidei confessione junguntur.

O truly blessed day, which enlightened believers, and enriched the faithful; the day on which the differences of tongue are united the confession of the one Faith.

Oramus ergo te, Domine, ut cereus iste in honorem tui nominis consecratus, ad noctis (diei) hujus caliginem destruendam, indeficiens perseveret. Et in odorem suavitatis acceptus, supernis luminaribus misceatur. Flammas ejus lucifer matutinus inveniat: ille, inquam, lucifer, qui nescit occasum, Christus Filius tuus, qui, regressus ab inferis, humano generi serenus illuxit.

We pray thee therefore, o Lord, that this candle, consecrated to the honor of thy name, may continue unfailing to dissipate the darkness this night (day); and being accepted unto a sweet savor, may be united with the lights of heaven. Let the morning star find it alight, that star, I say, which knoweth no setting, Christ Thy Son, who, being returned from hell, shone brightly upon mankind.

In the conclusion, the bracketed text is omitted in the Pentecost text, and the bolded words added.

Precamur ergo te, Domine: ut nos famulos tuos, omnemque clerum, et devotissimum populum, una cum beatissimo Papa nostro N. et Antistite nostro N., et gloriosissimo imperatore nostro N., quiete temporum concessa, in his paschalibus gaudiis (sacris solemniis) assidua protectione [regere, gubernare, et] conservare digneris. Per...

We beseech thee therefore, o Lord, that in these joys of Easter (these holy solemnities), thou may deign to grant peaceable times, and with thy constant protection to [rule, guide, and] preserve us thy servants, and all the clergy, and the most devout people, together with our most blessed Pope N. and our bishop N., and our most glorious emperor N. Through the same our Lord Jesus Christ...

The Byzantine emperors Basil II and Constantine VIII, and below, Pope John XIX with two deacons, depicted in an Exsultet scroll made ca. 1025, now kept in the diocesan museum at Bari. The Exsultet scroll as a form of manuscript was unique to southern Italy, which was under the rule of the Byzantine Empire until it was conquered by the Normans at the end of the 11th century.

[1] “The Exsultet in Southern Italy”, by Thomas Forest Kelly. (Oxford, 1996). On p. 43, the author cites the article by Dom Strittmatter, “ The Pentecost Exsultet of Reims and Besançon,” published in the anthology “Studies in art and literature for Belle da Costa Greene.” (Princeton, 1954)

The Microphone as a Social Actor

“Let’s Throw the Microphone Out of the Church!”

Paweł Jarnicki

Part 2

(See Part 1)

McLuhan coined two well-known phrases, the first being “global village” and the second “medium is the message.” While it is easy to understand that, due to the rapid circulation of information, we all live in a “global village” today, it is more difficult to comprehend that the medium itself is also a message. McLuhan meant that the medium itself has a strong influence on the audience. It is not that, for example, the type of telephone affects the content of everyday conversations, because intuitively this influence seems minimal, but that the telephone (especially in the form of a “smartphone”) has changed the nature of interpersonal relationships in the long term and even influences our personality and perception. The impact of landline telephones was not as easily noticeable as the impact of instant messaging on the peer relationships and state of mind of young people is today, as seen from the perspective of people in their forties and fifties.

Some inventions profoundly change life in the world, in ways we cannot predict at the time of their implementation. This was obvious to McLuhan in the 1970s. A decade later, Bruno Latour popularized this idea by developing the “actor-network theory.” In this theory, society is not just people, but a network of “actors” that influence it, including material objects and... abstract concepts.

When society adopts a new technology, it does not usually discuss the possible long-term consequences of the actions of such an inhuman actor. We have imposed a series of tests on the production of new drugs, but we did not discuss the possible effects of social media before its introduction. Only after some time do we begin to realize the consequences of including them in our network: serious analyses appear that show that these new actors have a destructive effect on democratic systems, and artists also begin to explore the topic of their negative impact on young people (let us mention the recent success of the difficult mini-series Adolescence).

In the actor-network theory, the concept of bacteria is also such a social actor. It is not that bacteria did not exist before this concept. The point is that the organization of the human world did not take this concept into account. And when this concept became an actor in our societies, our behaviors and habits in terms of hygiene changed fundamentally.

The Church had always been very cautious about introducing technical innovations, especially in churches, so the influence of such worldly, soulless actors on the liturgy was relatively small. And sometimes the Church was able to harness technical innovations to achieve its own goals. When it came to “media” inventions, this was certainly the case with the invention of printing.

NOM, Vilnius (Lithuania), Sanctuary of the Divine Mercy. At the new Mass, everyone must hear and see everything.

The Church’s reactions to the inventions of printing and the microphone

For McLuhan, as a media theorist, two inventions were revolutionary for our civilization: the printing press and the microphone. He realized that these (from today’s perspective) simple creations radically changed the world we live in, and changed it in ways that the people who witnessed the introduction of these inventions could not have predicted. These two inventions have twice reinforced the position of vernacular languages, i.e., the languages we speak every day.

The first reinforcement was visual, because printing completed the process initiated by the invention of the phonetic alphabet and caused us to move from an oral-acoustic culture to a visual-linear culture. It sounds complicated, but the point is that sight became the dominant sense in our perception of the world and in our culture. Earlier culture was more “auditory,” centered around hearing, and in fact multisensory with a slight advantage for hearing. According to McLuhan, printing has led us to a visual culture, one in which sight clearly dominates. What is the difference?

Hearing does not “see” contours [1] and works more synthetically. It integrates our experience of the world into a whole; we also hear from many sides at once. Sight sees contours, analyzes and divides our experience of the world into pieces – it has made our perception more sequential and abstract; we also focus our sight in one direction. Thus, our perception of the world and our culture have changed, which, thanks to printing – thanks to the shift in emphasis to visuality – has gained unprecedented momentum. But at the same time, all contours have become more important: divisions, segmentations, specializations, and in the longer term... nationalisms.

These cultural changes also had an impact on liturgy. As McLuhan writes, it might seem that “the demand for a vernacular liturgy arose spontaneously in the sixteenth century, but it isn’t so. In fact, that demand was linked to the invention of print, an invention that accentuated people’s need to push towards individualism and nationalism. Add to that the fact that printed texts gave rise to textual exegesis from the pulpit. And finally, the new accent on the visual favored placing the celebrant face to face with the congregation: we needed to see him and he wanted to be seen.” [2] According to McLuhan, the fact that greater emphasis was placed on preaching in the 16th century and that Protestant priests turned to face the people was a consequence of the invention of printing. According to him, “Medieval liturgy was mostly acoustic,” and in Reformed churches it became more visual.

In response to the invention of printing, the Council of Trent developed the Decretum de edendis sanctis litteris et facultate utendi iis, and Pius V issued the apostolic constitution Quo primum tempore, thus defining the rules for the use of the new invention and regulating its use during ceremonies. Thanks to this, Catholics living in the world after the invention of printing, in the (as McLuhan describes it) “Gutenberg Galaxy,” that is, those who already had the need to see everything, accepted that there are certain things that cannot be seen in the sacred liturgy of the Church. This is important because we use our sight to construct the world as a set of static, permanent objects that have contours (for the ear, everything is more “fluid”), so making everything visible, to put it mildly, did not facilitate belief in the transubstantiation and Real Presence of God in the sacrament of the Altar. When you see the contours, it is more difficult to believe that the host is transformed into the Body of Christ. The effects of shifting the emphasis to visuality are clearly visible among Protestants, who have lost their belief in the Real Presence.

In the 16th century, the Roman Catholic Church not only resisted the worldly impact of the invention of printing, but also harnessed the new technology to standardize and consolidate existing liturgical practices and centralize the one and only Church. And how the Church transformed the worldly emphasis on visuality, i.e., the need to see that was created among the laity living in the world, can still be seen today in Baroque churches.

NOM, Vilnius (Lithuania), Catholic church; I don’t remember which one. This beautiful high altar surmounted by a crucifix became simply a decorative background.

The second historical reinforcement – auditory – was given to vernacular languages by the microphone.

First, new mass media appeared, thanks to the microphone, radio and television developed. The circulation of information, this time also in the form of sounds, accelerated even more. In public spaces, we began to hear different sounds from all sides at the same time. Television began to use sight like hearing, and we began to perceive images as sound, with our eyes focused on a single point, we could begin to see and hear the entire scene.

Secondly, the nature of mass events changed: without the microphone, there would be no numerous competitions and championships, popular concerts, or demonstrations.

Thirdly, thanks to the microphone, new figures emerged. As McLuhan significantly notes, without the microphone there would have been no Gandhi or Hitler. The vernacular began to reign supreme in the public sphere, in a version increasingly close to colloquial language.

According to McLuhan, the overall impact of the microphone on culture is the opposite of that of print; because of the microphone, we have begun to return to an acoustic culture. Today’s culture is in some ways more reminiscent of that of the pre-literate era; we are returning from individualism to tribalism (we are more empathetic today, but only towards people from our own “tribe”); our perception has become non-sequential (non-linear), but immediate and holistic (rather than abstract, because it is difficult to “hear” contours).

So how could a microphone, which reversed the “visual” effects of printing on culture, cause the same “visual” changes in Catholic liturgy that printing caused among Protestants? Although the overall impact of the microphone on culture seems to be the opposite, both inventions have intensified the mediatization of our experience of the world. Today, we have a deeply rooted need to see and hear everything through the media, which are like extensions of our senses. If we cannot see and hear something through the media, we find it difficult to believe in it. [3] And since, with the microphone, we introduced into the Church the worldly need to hear everything, its older sister – the need to see everything – came along with it. And that is why, in the liturgical dimension, thanks to the microphone, the Church quickly “made up” for what it had previously “neglected” during the first visual reinforcement of vernacular languages. Priests who turn to the people and speak in their vernacular often behave as if they do not believe in the Real Presence.

The Church did not notice that the microphone was a new “actor.” Although the Second Vatican Council issued the decree Inter mirifica in 1963, it concerns social media, i.e., those used in the world. [4] The last council did not issue any document that would harness the microphone for the Church’s own purposes. And since the Church did not consider the issue of the microphone, this new worldly “actor” has been influencing the liturgy for almost a hundred years in the same way that it influences the world. And Catholics born into servitude should know who rules this world.

This approach sheds light on the contemporary crisis of the Church without attributing ill will to anybody, and explains the reason for the pentecostalization described in contemporary academic literature, i.e., the similarities between contemporary Catholic liturgical practices and Protestant practices. Some “traditionalists” (I believe in good faith) suggest that the new Masses imitate Protestants. This superficial observation often rightly outrages “new Catholics.”

In fact, these are deeper processes. “New Catholics” do not imitate Martin Luther, but succumb to the worldly influences of printing technology and microphones; they enter God’s temples with the same expectations there as they have in the world. Moreover, even many Church documents from the second half of the 20th century say that the faithful should “hear without difficulty.” [5] However, no one has considered whether it is really necessary for the faithful to hear everything during Mass. Isn’t it enough for them to assist at Mass, as they have done for eons?

By placing microphones on altars – in the place where God appears – we have introduced a Trojan horse into the Church: the microphone, and in it, the worldly need to hear and see everything. However, just as it is not necessary to see everything during Mass, it is also not necessary to hear everything. It is enough to look, listen, and... believe.

Against appearances, these are not subtle but fundamental differences, because the need to see and hear everything introduced into the Church by microphones has serious consequences. In Part 3, I will discuss two of them: those concerning the Community and those concerning the Word. [6] 

NOM, Vilnius (Lithuania), Our Lady of the Gate of Dawn. If the altar can’t be turned around, the speaker will ensure that everyone can hear everything

NOTES

^[1] The piano keyboard is an artificial creation.

^[2] Pierre Babin, Liturgy and Media: (Marshall McLuhan’s) Third Conversation with Pierre Babin, in: Eric McLuhan and Jacek Szklarek (eds.), The medium and the light: Reflections on Religion, Toronto: Stoddart 1999, p. 142.

^[3] This trend will most likely be reversed by artificial intelligence; see footnote 22.

^[4] Subsequently, based on Inter mirifica, a very enthusiastic pastoral instruction on the means of social communication, Communio et progressio, was developed in 1971 (“So, ‘among the wonderful technical inventions’ (Inter mirifica) which foster communication among human beings, Christians find means that have been devised under God’s Providence for the encouragement of social relations during their pilgrimage on earth”). On its twentieth anniversary, another instruction was published, entitled Aetatis Novae, which is no longer so enthusiastic (“the application of communications technology has been a mixed blessing”), but fails to identify the cause of the problem. These documents are about the press, radio, and television, and do not recognize the inventions from which they originated. It is like considering the impact of various computer programs without noticing the invention of the computer.

^[5]General Introduction to the Roman Missal (2010), point 311: “Care should be taken to ensure that the faithful be able not only to see the Priest, the Deacon, and the readers but also, with the aid of modern technical means, to hear them without difficulty.” See also no. 34 in the General Introduction to the Lectionary (1981): “Provision must also be made for the readers to have enough light to read the text and, as required, to have modern sound equipment enabling the faithful to hear them without difficulty.”

^[6] I will present more arguments against microphones in churches in a separate text, which will be included in an anthology that I will publish in Polish.