Why do people clap at the end of Mass?

The simplest explanation is that people want to express their appreciation to those who assisted with the Mass: the musicians, the readers, servers and, of course, the clergy. This otherwise benign gesture, while well-intentioned, has become a normal part of the liturgy in a growing number of parishes. Unfortunately, it reveals a serious misunderstanding of what the Mass is all about.

Why do people clap? It’s customary to clap at the end of a performance, even mediocre ones. You buy your ticket, you find your seat and you watch politely as the performers do their thing. At the end of the performance, you clap. If it’s an especially good performance,



you might give a standing ovation; maybe even call for an encore. In the theater it’s clear who’s who: you’re part of the audience and the actors, singers, dancers and musicians are the performers. You watch; they perform. In the theater or the stadium, you’re not one of the players; you’re a spectator. You paid for admission and you expect a good show.

This mind-set has begun to creep into the Mass. How did it happen? After all, one of the most important teachings of Vatican II, and one of the main reasons for many of the liturgical changes since the Council, was to foster greater participation on the part of the laity. “Mother Church,” the Council Fathers said, “earnestly desires that all the faithful should be led to that fully conscious and active participation in liturgical celebrations which is demanded by the very nature of the liturgy.” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 14). It’s one of the reasons, by the way, that the vernacular was allowed freer use in the liturgy, even though Latin is still the norm (SC 36, 54).

Vatican II, it is said, erased the rigid boundaries between the hierarchy and the laity. No longer were we to think of the Church in terms of a two-tiered system with clergy and religious in a higher, “holy” class – and the rest of us, who are members of an inferior spiritual class. Vatican II stressed the idea that everyone, by virtue of baptism and confirmation, are called to holiness no matter what one’s state of life was. Supposedly, before the Council the people were passive and compliant. Their only purpose, it seemed, was to “pay, pray and obey.” But Vatican II was supposed to have changed all that by encouraging the laity to be more actively involved in the life and mission of the Church.

Thankfully, there has been a lot more active participation in the Church on the part of the laity since Vatican II, which is why clapping at the end of Mass puzzles me. Because what it conveys, albeit unconsciously, is that many Catholics do not see themselves as members of the Body of Christ and active participants in the liturgy, but as consumers of religion and spectators of spiritual ‘sport.’ What does “full and active participation” really mean? It can mean, of course, the involvement of lay people in the liturgy as readers, extraordinary ministers of communion, altar servers, etc. But as Bishop Conley explains “full, conscious and active participation” can also mean something else; something that might appear inactive. “This kind of participation,” he said, “could be hidden and contemplative. That is to say, someone could be fully and actively, even mystically engaged in the liturgy and there would be no visible evidence of that. Only God would know!”

One of the more obvious changes following Vatican II has been for the priest to face the people during the Eucharist. The reason for the change was to foster the very thing the Council called for: greater participation. With the priest facing the people the liturgical action of the altar is much more visible to the congregation, thus enhancing their participation in the Mass. With the priest facing the people, however, there’s a tendency to see him as an actor on a stage. The liturgy then runs the risk of revolving around the priest rather than around Christ.

Even if the priest and the people ‘face each other’ their essential orientation is not toward each other, but toward God. “Liturgy,” Pope Benedict XVI said, “implies a real relationship with Another, who reveals himself to us and gives our existence a new direction.” There are many occasions where facing each other is appropriate, but Mass is different for there the priest and people together direct their attention to the Lord in praise and adoration “as we wait in joyful hope for the coming of our Savior.”

Clapping at the end of Mass, though well-meaning, is not appropriate because it expresses the idea that we are merely spectators of a religious performance done by others rather than an active participant in it – the very thing Vatican II was trying to correct. “The celebrating assembly,” it said “is the community of the baptized who, ‘by regeneration and the anointing of the Holy Spirit, are consecrated to be a spiritual house and a holy priesthood, that through all the works of Christian men they may offer spiritual sacrifices.’ This ‘common priesthood’ is that of Christ the sole priest, in which all his members participate.”(Lumen Gentium 10; Catechism no. 1141)

Do you see yourself as an observer of the Mass or an active participant in it? Do you see yourself as a religious ‘consumer’ or a follower of Christ? You are no less a part of the liturgy if you sit in the back pew than the reader or an extraordinary minister of the Eucharist, for the Mass is something we do together. Obviously, expressing your appreciation to the musicians or clergy is a very nice thing to do and I don’t want to discourage that. But if you want to show your appreciation to the preacher for a good homily or to the musicians for fine music, then tell them after the Mass. But save the clapping for the theater.