Liturgical Leadership According to Pope Francis’ Desiderio Desideravi

The purpose of this article is to present a vision of liturgical leadership that can be found on the pages of Pope Francis’ apostolic letter Desiderio Desideravi (2022) (henceforth DD, available on the Vatican website).

The context of this papal letter is another document on the liturgy that Francis published in 2021, the motu proprio Traditionis Custodes which restricted the provisions that Benedict XVI gave in 2007 for the use of the pre-Vatican II Missal. With DD, Francis wanted to follow up and build on that decision from 2021, and therefore these two documents, in order to be understood properly, should be read and interpreted together as two sides of the same coin.

The right approach to the liturgy

What is the main message that the Pope wanted to convey to the Church in DD? There are many. Due to space constraints, in this article it will be possible to focus only on those points which seem to be most relevant for the topic of liturgical leadership.

The first one concerns the proper understanding of the “given-not-made” character of the liturgy. In the post-Vatican II theology, we have become accustomed to hearing that before being a teaching Church, we first need to be a listening Church, that ecclesia docens should be first of all ecclesia discens. With regard to the way the liturgy is spoken about in DD, it seems that the main message is very similar: before we are leaders in the liturgy, we are first participants in it; before we give others the liturgy of the Church, we first need to receive it ourselves. Before we form others in it, we need to let it form us; before we teach others about it, we need to let ourselves be taught by it.

As many know, Pope Francis, during his academic years, started a doctorate in theology, and his research was devoted to the theology of Romano Guardini, an Italian-German scholar who wrote a number of influential books, also on the topic of the liturgy. In DD Francis refers to Guardini’s Liturgie und liturgische Bildung as many as five times (DD, 34, 44, 50, 51). One of the most important theological principles strongly upheld by Guardini was the priority of Logos over ethos, of being over doing, of receiving over making. We first need to be what we are meant to be; only then we can do what we are meant to do. This is a very Catholic principle, since we read in the Gospel of John that “in the beginning there was the Word [the Logos]” (John 1:1). In this context one of the most important liturgical lessons from both Guardini and Pope Francis here is that we do not possess the liturgy, but we are possessed by it. Before we are ministers, we are disciples; before we are leaders, we are faithful Catholics, followers of Christ.

One of the things that comes to mind when reading this is the famous response that Cardinal Suenens, one of the most well-known fathers of Vatican II, gave to the interviewer who asked him, “Was the day that you were made a cardinal the most important day of your life?” The Cardinal responded, “No, the most important day of my life was the day when I was baptized.”

Francis considers the liturgy to be an antidote to some important obstacles to evangelization today, that is, to the phenomena of neo-gnosticism and neo-pelagianism which he explored in some other important documents of this pontificate, e.g. in Evangelii Gaudium (par. 94) and Gaudete et Exultate (par. 35–62). With regard to neo-Gnosticism, which he defines as an approach that “shrinks Christian faith into a subjectivism that ‘ultimately keeps one imprisoned in his or her own thoughts and feelings’” (DD, 17), Francis provides us with this comment in the context of the liturgy:

If Gnosticism intoxicates us with the poison of subjectivism, the liturgical celebration frees us from the prison of a self-referencing nourished by one’s own reasoning and one’s own feeling. The action of the celebration does not belong to the individual but to the Christ-Church, to the totality of the faithful united in Christ. The liturgy does not say “I” but “we,” and any limitation on the breadth of this “we” is always demonic. The Liturgy does not leave us alone to search out an individual supposed knowledge of the mystery of God. Rather, it takes us by the hand, together, as an assembly, to lead us deep within the mystery that the Word and the sacramental signs reveal to us.

Therefore, neo-Gnosticism (the Greek word gnosis stands for “knowledge”) is a temptation to think that we can possess some kind of insight that makes us more “initiated,” “aware,” or “enlightened” than others. Francis warns us that when we begin to think this way, we can easily become patronizing to others. If this happens, the “we” of the liturgy disappears and is replaced by the “I” of the individual who thinks that he, or she, knows better. This, the Pope tells us, is demonic and has nothing to do with the true spirit of Catholic liturgy. On the contrary, in the liturgy we, the whole assembly, that is, the people and the celebrant, are led by the hand into the mystery. The “I” mentality, or even more, the “I know better” mentality, or “the prison of self-referencing” must give way to the inner dynamism of the liturgical action.

Neo-pelagianism, on the other hand, is the idea that we can arrive at salvation by our efforts and good moral life, with little consideration for our fallen state and without the necessary recourse to grace. The main message that DD gives us in this context is that it is ultimately it is God who is in charge, not us (DD, 20). And in the context of the liturgy, Francis reminds us that moralizing is not the main purpose of the liturgy; the main purpose is worship and receiving the gift that God is giving to us in the Sacrifice of the Mass, in the Paschal Mystery that renews our life. The liturgy is not so much concerned about what we do, but about what God does in us, and also through us, as long as we allow him to lead us and let ourselves be guided by him (DD, 20). Overfocusing on our own efforts and not allowing the liturgy to speak for itself may lead us into the spirit of neo-pelagianism and downplaying the role of grace in the life of the Church, as well as our own spiritual life.

The importance of the God-centered character of the liturgy

While reading the papal letter, the ancient axiom primum non nocere, well known in medicine, often comes into mind: first of all, do no harm. The Pope asks us not to get in the way of the liturgy; rather, we are asked to let it speak for itself and transform the people through its own power and inner dynamism. The liturgy does not need to be altered and “improved,” since this would amount to neo-gnosticism (the “I know better” mentality) and neo-pelagianism (“I will make it work, because it does not work itself”). If we allow the liturgy to speak for itself, we will give the People of God what the Church wants them to have and what they are due.

The Pope provides us with a list of attitudes to the liturgy which he thinks can be found in the Church today and which do not serve our liturgical leadership well. He uses a well-known rhetorical device of juxtaposing two extremes to be avoided in order to arrive at a middle ground position. Attitudes to avoid include:

• Rigid austerity on the one hand, and an exasperating creativity on the other
• A spiritualizing mysticism on the one hand, and a practical functionalism on the other
• A rushed briskness on the one hand, and an overemphasized slowness on the other
• A sloppy carelessness on the one hand, and an excessive finickiness on the other
• A superabundant friendliness on the one hand, and priestly impassibility on the other
• The Pope also mentions “careless banality” and “ignorant superficiality” as attitudes that ruin the ars celebrandi to which everyone is all called to (everyone meaning not just the priest, but also the laity, everyone who takes part in the liturgy) (DD 54, 22).

Francis makes it clear that these behaviors are not “the most widespread” in the Church in general, but this does not mean that traces of them cannot be found in various places. Francis thinks that all these inappropriate approaches have one common root, and he does not mince his words when he says that this root is “a heightened personalism of the celebrating style which at times expresses a poorly concealed mania to be the centre of attention” (DD 54).

The Pope invites his readers to find a middle way between extremes, but this does not mean that anything that is not extreme is simply acceptable. For example, the warning against “rigid austerity” or exclusive preoccupation with rubrics does not mean that rubrics are optional, or that they are to be treated only as general guidelines that may be followed in fullness, but do not have to be if the celebrant thinks otherwise. He states very explicitly that “every aspect of the celebration must be carefully tended to (space, time, gestures, words, objects, vestments, song, music . . .) and every rubric must be observed. Such attention would be enough to prevent robbing from the assembly what is owed to it; namely, the paschal mystery celebrated according to the ritual that the Church sets down” (DD, 23, emphasis added).

What he condemns, therefore, is certainly not the mentality of following the rules, but rather a minimalist approach which thinks that by mere following of the rules the task of a celebrant is completed. While following the regulations is essential, one should not stop at this minimal requirement and think that this is all that there is to liturgical leadership. Our involvement in the liturgy needs to go deeper and needs to be informed by these external words, gestures, and the whole setting of the liturgy. Therefore, the question for Francis is not whether to obey the rules or to ignore them. Rather, the question is, once we have obeyed the rules, how do we follow up on this, and how do we build liturgical spirituality and Eucharistic piety that is truly Catholic and truly Christ-centered? This is where the real process of formation begins.

On this note, on another occasion in this document he states:

The assembly has the right to be able to feel in those gestures and words the desire that the Lord has, today as at the Last Supper, to eat the Passover with us. So, the risen Lord is in the leading role, and not our own immaturities, assuming roles and behaviors which are simply not appropriate. The priest himself should be overpowered by this desire for communion that the Lord has toward each person . . . When we are given to understand this reality, or even just to intuit something of it, we certainly would no longer need a Directory that would impose the proper behavior. If we have need of that, then it is because of the hardness of our hearts.

The highest norm, and therefore the most demanding, is the reality itself of the Eucharistic celebration, which selects words, gestures, and feelings that will make us understand whether our use of these is at the level of the reality they serve. It is obvious that this cannot be improvised. It is an art. It requires application on the part of the priest, an assiduous tending to the fire of the love of the Lord that he came to ignite on the earth (DD 57).

The importance of silence

Pope Francis addresses the importance of silence in our celebration. Prayerful silence is not simply lack of words or music; it is also not “an inner haven in which to hide oneself in some sort of intimate isolation, as if leaving the ritual form behind as a distraction” (DD 52). Rather, liturgical silence is “a symbol of the presence and action of the Holy Spirit who animates the entire action of the celebration. It “constitutes a point of arrival within a liturgical sequence” and “it has the power to express the Spirit’s multifaceted action.” By doing this, it moves us to contrition and awakens the desire for conversion; it “awakens a readiness to hear the Word and awakens prayer,” “disposes us to adore the Body and Blood of Christ,” and “suggests to each one, in the intimacy of communion, what the Spirit would effect in our lives to conform us to the Bread broken.” Silence, through the action of the Holy Spirit, gives us and our liturgies shape and form (DD, 52).

Liturgy in context

Effective liturgical leaders understand the importance of the liturgy in the context of other activities of the community of the Church. The Church essentially exists for three purposes: liturgia (worship), kerygma-martyria (proclamation) and diakonia (service). These three dimensions are extensions of the threefold office of Christ — priest (liturgia), prophet (kerygma-martyria) and king (diakonia). This means that the liturgy we celebrate has to inform, but also be informed, by the work of evangelization, and the work of service to others. The Eucharist, the breaking of the bread, should certainly lead us to the service to the poor (social justice). However, the liturgy should be evangelizing, that is, it should tell people about the Good News — about who God is, about who we are, and about Jesus in whom we have access to the Father.

This is very important especially in countries where the majority of the population is not Catholic, and where non-Catholics, or even non-Christians, frequently attend Catholic celebrations, especially baptisms, marriages, and funerals, sometimes even regular Sunday Masses. If a non-Catholic who knows very little about our faith would participate in our parish Mass, what would they think about this celebration? Are our liturgies vehicles of evangelization? How evangelizing are they, and also how catechetical, that is, how well do they represent and express our faith not only to those who do not know it, but also to those who do? One of the most well-known sayings of Pope Benedict XVI was that regardless of all the elaborate philosophical “proofs for the existence of God,” ultimately there are just two most important apologia for Christianity: the beauty of the Christian art (music, architecture) and the lives of the saints. Does our liturgy reflect that evangelizing power of the beauty of God, and of his love for us?

Existential character of the liturgy

Francis puts very strong emphasis on the existential character of the liturgy — existential meaning touching not only our intellect, but all other dimensions of our existence. He talks about it in paragraph 41:

From all that we have said about the nature of the Liturgy it becomes clear that knowledge of the mystery of Christ . . . does not consist in a mental assimilation of some idea but in real existential engagement with his person. In this sense, Liturgy is not about “knowledge,” and its scope is not primarily pedagogical, even though it does have great pedagogical value . . . Rather, Liturgy is about praise, about rendering thanks for the Passover of the Son whose power reaches our lives . . . The full extent of our formation is our conformation to Christ. I repeat: it does not have to do with an abstract mental process, but with becoming Him. This is the purpose for which the Spirit is given, whose action is always and only to confect the Body of Christ.

Therefore, the Holy Father reminds us we do not only participate in the liturgy with our intellect, but also with our will, memory, imagination, and body. Sacraments are physical means that communicate spiritual realities, and this physicality needs to be sensed not only with seeing and hearing, but also with touch and smell. Therefore, such liturgical elements as holy water and incense play an important role in our celebrations and should be regularly used: they help the liturgy to engage the whole person, both soul and body, in the worship of God.

Importance of formation

With regard to the process of formation of those who celebrate the liturgy, Pope Francis reminds his fellow priests that workshops and training on the liturgy are important, but it is primarily “the celebration itself that educates the priest to this [required] level and quality of presiding” (DD 60). Somehow paraphrasing Benedict XVI’s statement that “the best catechesis on the liturgy is the liturgy itself, well celebrated,” Francis recalls that

The priest cannot recount the Last Supper to the Father without himself becoming a participant in it. He cannot say, “Take this, all of you and eat of it, for this is my Body which will be given up for you,” and not live the same desire to offer his own body, his own life, for the people entrusted to him. This is what happens in the exercise of his ministry (DD 60).

With regard to forming others in the area of the liturgy, Francis is aware that every formation, also liturgical, is an ongoing journey, and that there is no clear-cut, one-size-fits-all pastoral program that would work always and everywhere in the same way. However, he reminds us that it is always a task of liturgical leaders to invest time and effort into the work of deepening our appreciation and love of the sacred rites that we have received. After all, the liturgy

in a sense . . . has priority over all others for its intrinsic dignity and importance to the life of the Church. . . . God must hold first place; prayer to him is our first duty. The liturgy is the first source of divine communion in which God shares his own life with us. It is also the first school of the spiritual life. The liturgy is the first gift we must make to the Christian people united to us by faith and the fervour of their prayers (DD 30, quoting St Paul VI).

Fostering unity

Finally, good liturgical leaders are leaders who try to unite, at least as much as it is possible. Liturgy should never be a vehicle of division, however sadly it often is when the celebration prescribed by the Church is replaced by some inappropriate, free-flowing inventions. Hence Francis’ pledges for unity that can be found both in Traditionis Custodes and in the closing paragraph of Desiderio Desideravi:

Let us abandon our polemics to listen together to what the Spirit is saying to the Church. Let us safeguard our communion. Let us continue to be astonished at the beauty of the Liturgy. The Paschal Mystery has been given to us. Let us allow ourselves to be embraced by the desire that the Lord continues to have to eat His Passover with us (DD, 65).

Final remarks

The general message for liturgical leaders from Desiderio Desideravi is that the chief shepherd in the Church is Jesus Christ, the ultimate leader and liturgist. Liturgical leadership, catechesis, and formation all have the same purpose, that is, greater conformity in Christ so that we truly become what we consume — the Body of Christ. Liturgy is an act of worship, the greatest act of worship that the Church has. Good pastors and leaders guide the sheep to eternal life, so liturgy is truly pastoral when it leads people to God, the ultimate pastor.