Models for Multicultural Liturgy

Rev. Mark R. Francis, CSV, S.L.L.
Pontifical Liturgical Institute, Sant' Anselmo University, Rome;
Superior General, Clerics of St. Viator

From Multicultural Celebrations: A Guide

Copyright © 1998, Revised 2000, Federation of Diocesan Liturgical Commissions, Washington, DC. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying , recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright holder.

Because of the amazingly diverse multicultural contexts in which pastoral ministers are called upon to work today, it is impossible to prescribe one liturgical model that will be always and everywhere appropriate. It is well to point out that the parishes around the country that have taken multicultural ministry seriously have developed several different ways or models for implementing the spirit of these guidelines and helping their multicultural assemblies celebrate. Each of these models has its advantages and disadvantages. For purposes of summary, three different models seem to have emerged that could be labeled: the “cultural hospitality” model, the “uniting multicultural” model and the “full multicultural” model.

The Cultural Hospitality Model
This model encourages the various cultural groups to offer “hospitality” to the rest of the parish at a culturally specific liturgical celebration. For example, the Mexicans invite the whole parish to celebrate Las Mañanitas on the morning of December 12 for our Lady of Guadalupe or the Vietnamese organize a eucharistic Tet (Lunar New Year) celebration at which the rest of the parish is made to feel welcome. This model has the advantage of placing cultural groups in the position of doing the outreach and inviting, of being hospitable on their own terms rather than simply “accommodated” by the rest of the parish as they may often feel at full multicultural celebrations. It also affords them the opportunity of celebrating as much as possible with their particular customs, inviting others to learn and adapt to their culture for this particular celebration. This celebration can provide a wonderful opportunity to help the rest of the parish get to know one of the cultural groups with whom they live and worship in a way that would otherwise be impossible.

A possible drawback to this model if it is simply imposed upon a cultural group in the parish is a feeling of being forced to “perform” rather than share their cultural gifts. For this reason care needs to be taken that the impetus for offering such a liturgy come from the particular cultural group. Also, since hospitality to others in this context would also necessitate celebrating differently than they would if they were alone—for example, bilingually rather than just in their native language, it needs to be acknowledge that this model, too, entails sacrifice. Experience has often shown that the cultural hospitality model is successful only when the group offering it is well established and secure in its own identity vis-à-vis the rest of the parish. For this reason, though, it can become an ongoing component of the parish’s liturgical ministry from year to year.

The Uniting Cultural Model
The uniting cultural model admits that full unity is a goal but not yet possible among all the various groups with the parish, especially because of language and extreme differences in culture, that the cultures are “uniting” but not yet united, especially in terms of the liturgy of the word. For example, in order to hear and understand the readings and the homily, the several language and culture groups of the parish celebrate the liturgy of the word in different places and then come together in the church for the liturgy of the eucharist which is prayed in a way respectful of the diversity of the parish’s cultural groups. This model has the advantage of simplifying planning for the first part of the eucharistic celebration while bringing the whole community together for the high point of the celebration which is the eucharistic prayer and communion.

Naturally, there are important logistical considerations to this model. First, the liturgies of the Word must be approximately the same length of time in order to facilitate all of the groups gathering without having to wait for the other to arrive. This consideration is especially important for the homilists.

Second, it works best if both groups gather outside of the worship space and both process in together, rather than give the impression that one group “has possession” of the sacred space, while the others are just being tolerated. Nevertheless, some parishes which lack the extra facilities for separate liturgies of the word are forced to use the church for one of the cultural groups of the parish. In order to overcome the idea that the groups entering after the liturgy of the word are “second class” those people seated in the worship space for the first part of Mass arrange themselves all around the body of the church, leaving empty places. This acknowledges that the assembly is not complete until the other group has arrived. When the other group or groups enter they fill in these empty spaces rather than being relegated to one section of the pews, which would be a counter witness to their inclusion in the whole of the parish.

The “uniting model” has been found to be a pastoral approach to the challenge of multicultural liturgy in a parish that is undergoing rapid change in cultural membership and where newly arrived groups of vastly different languages and customs have come together. Given the logistical complexity of this model, it is usually done sparingly during the year— during the Triduum and at Christmas for example.

The “Full Multicultural” Model
This model attempts to bring together all the cultural groups of the parish to celebrate the whole liturgy. In many ways this is the most complicated of the three models since sensitivity to the culture and language of all of the groups must be taken into consideration all of the time. It also requires the most liturgical flexibility since this model will also need to be constantly sensitive to the shifting population of the parish. Just because one strategy for proclamation of the Word works well one year does not necessarily mean that it will always be the most effective.

This model also presupposes that the parish is consciously aware of being about the creation of “something new” together: that all are working toward a respectful amalgamation of the various cultural elements of the parish into a way of worshiping God in Christ that is both faithful to the Catholic tradition and to the particular cultural gifts of every member of the assembly. These guidelines have sought to outline how this new creation might come about.

Conclusion

These guiding principles are meant to be pastoral, descriptive, and open ended. The dialogue that is just beginning today between the various cultures in the U.S. and our liturgical tradition will be fruitful as long as we are willing to continue this conversation and to evaluate the effectiveness of our attempts at multicultural worship. The principal question to ask in evaluating a multicultural liturgy is the same that needs to be posed after any liturgy: did we do what was in our power to provide the opportunity for all our brothers and sisters in Christ to give thanks and praise to God in Jesus Christ within our common Catholic tradition? In the multicultural liturgies of your parish or diocese, to paraphrase our African American Catholic bishops, “Do all people recognize themselves when Christ is presented; do all people experience their own fulfillment when the mysteries are celebrated”?24

24 See “‘What We Have Seen and Heard’ A Pastoral Letter on Evangelization

from the Black Bishops of the United States,” Origins 14:18 (October 18, 1984) 285.

Top of Page