ASK FATHER: Is saying “God bless you!” a blessing?

From a reader…


I was just at a “seminar” that took place in a catholic church this past weekend and I knew right away that I was in the wrong place (thus the lower case c) when the parish priest introduced the speaker and asked all of us to extend our hand in blessing over this speaker, as though we had the power vested in us to confer blessing!

I spoke to my friends about this, and why it was so inappropriate, but it got me to thinking: I have long been in the habit of saying “God Bless” instead of “Good Bye” both in speaking and in writing…but if it’s inappropriate for me to bless someone in the way this priest was asking us to, then wouldn’t it be just as inappropriate for me to use this phrase? Of course, it is just me asking God to bless them, not pretending that I have the faculty to actually confer a blessing, but still…would it just be more appropriate for me to avoid saying this?

Saying “God bless you,” when someone sneezes has a long history in Christian civilization – spoken by cleric and laity alike. It’s a kind wish and a good thing to do. Similarly, saying “God bless you,” at the end of a conversation, or when tucking a child into bed at night, is laudable.

It’s an entirely different category to pretend one is a priest, extend one’s hands and attempt to “bless” another person. That’s something which the Church rightly reserves to Her ordained ministers, who act in persona Christi.

“But Father! But Father!”, some of you are now gurgling.  “Pope Francis himself asked people to bless him when he was elected and he’s the most wonderfulest, fluffiest Pope ehvur!  He’s the first Pope who ever smiled or kissed a baby!  You hate Vatican II, don’t you?!”

Yes, we all recall that awkward moment at the election of Pope Francis when on the balcony he said:

And now I would like to give the blessing. But first I want to ask you a favour. Before the Bishop blesses the people I ask that you would pray to the Lord to bless me – the prayer of the people for their Bishop. Let us say this prayer – your prayer for me – in silence.

Note that the Pope asked people to pray for the Lord to bless him, not that they would extend hands or make the sign of the Cross and bless him as priests might.   Just to be clear about that.  It was, however, confusing … for the easily confused

Avoid at all costs the silliness of simulating a priestly blessing. This veers close to sacrilege.  I think it smacks of an effort by a certain element in the Church to downplay the ordained priesthood.

Keep on saying “God bless you” when someone sneezes, and keep on asking God to bless friends and family members in your conversations.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark
Posted in "But Father! But Father!", "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Our Catholic Identity | Leave a comment

4 May: St. Monnica!

In the older, traditional Roman calendar today is the feast of the mother of St. Augustine, St. Monnica, widow.  She died in Ostia (Rome’s port) in 387, when she and her family were heading back to North Africa after Augustine’s conversion and baptism by St. Ambrose.  She caught a fever during a blockade of the port.

(Yes, you can spell her name “Monnica”, more consistent with her Punic origins.)

In the chapel of the Steam Pipe Trunk Distribution Venue I have a first-class relic of this marvelous woman.


In the post-Conciliar calendar, her feast was moved to be next to that of her son.

As she lay dying in Ostia near Rome, Monnica told Augustine (conf. 9):

“Lay this body anywhere, let not the care for it trouble you at all. This only I ask, that you will remember me at the Lord’s altar, wherever you be.”

Read about St. Augustine

She was buried there in Ostia. Her body was later moved to the Church of St. Augustine in Rome across the street from where I lived for many years.

May she pray for us, for widows and for parents of children who have drifted from the Church.

Be sure to pray for the departed. Pray for them! Don’t just remember them. Don’t just think well of them. Don’t just, as the case may be, resent or be angry at them. Pray for them!

Prayer for the dead is a spiritual work of mercy.

Also, I’ll remind you of a newish book on Augustine:

REVIEW: The book on Augustine which Pope Benedict would have wanted to write.

Posted in Saints: Stories & Symbols | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Pope Francis did two really cool things

First, yesterday, Pope Francis went to a parish near Ostia (Rome’s ancient port where St. Augustine’s mother, St. Monica, died – today is her feast in the traditional calendar). Before saying Mass, His Holiness heard confessions!

Fathers… hear confession!

Second, the Pope sent a message for the 750th anniversary of the death of Dante.

If you haven’t read the Divine Comedy you just haven’t read enough yet. It is key.

I recommend the translations by either…

Dorothy Sayers



Anthony Esolen


And don’t just read the Inferno and stop.  Go on and read also Purgatorio and Paradiso.

Posted in GO TO CONFESSION, Pope Francis | Tagged , , | 2 Comments


Please use the sharing buttons! Thanks!

Registered or not, will you in your charity please take a moment look at the requests and to pray for the people about whom you read?

Continued from THESE.

I get many requests by email asking for prayers. Many requests are heart-achingly grave and urgent.

Something is up. I’m getting many more requests for prayers than last year at this time

As long as my blog reaches so many readers in so many places, let’s give each other a hand. We should support each other in works of mercy.

If you have some prayer requests, feel free to post them below. You have to be registered here to be able to post.

I still have a pressing personal petition.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | 3 Comments

Your Sunday Sermon Notes

Was there a good point in the sermon you heard for your Sunday Mass?


Share it!

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | 15 Comments

ACTION ITEM! US CLERGY! Sign letter urging Synod to uphold Catholic teaching on marriage and family!

15_04_25_Credo_priestsI want to bump this to the top so that more priests will see it after a busy weekend.


Published on: Apr 25, 2015 @ 9:58

You will recall that hundreds of priests in England signed a letter, published in the Catholic Herald, urging the upcoming Synod to uphold Catholic doctrine and discipline concerning marriage and the family.  HERE

That letter created a stir.

I now see that there is an American initiative for Catholic priests to sign a similar letter!


Signers, be patient.  It seems that your names will not post automatically.  I think that someone must verify the names, which is a good idea.  There will be a delay.

Lay people, please let your priests know about this initiative and ask them to sign it.  Tell them you’ll be watching the list.

I urge all the priestly readers to sign this letter.  I have.

To the Synod Fathers:

In union with our brother priests in the United Kingdom (conforming to the teachings summarized in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1650-51), we make our own the petition they signed urging the Synod Fathers in the upcoming Synod to stand firm on the Church’s traditional understanding of marriage, human sexuality and pastoral practices:

Following the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops in Rome in October 2014 much confusion has arisen concerning Catholic moral teaching. In this situation we wish, as Catholic priests, to re-state our unwavering fidelity to the traditional doctrines regarding marriage and the true meaning of human sexuality, founded on the Word of God and taught by the Church’s Magisterium for two millennia.

We commit ourselves anew to the task of presenting this teaching in all its fullness, while reaching out with the Lord’s compassion to those struggling to respond to the demands and challenges of the Gospel in an increasingly secular society. Furthermore we affirm the importance of upholding the Church’s traditional discipline regarding the reception of the sacraments, and the millennial conviction that doctrine and practice remain firmly and inseparably in harmony.

We urge all those who will participate in the second Synod in October 2015 to make a clear and firm proclamation of the Church’s unchanging moral teaching, so that confusion may be removed, and faith confirmed.

Yours faithfully,


The priests are listed over there.  So far there are 2 bishops and 119 priests at the time of this posting, but I imagine there is a long queue.

Heh heh… the person doing the verification is about to get an avalanche.

Fr. Z Kudos and ¡Hagan lío!


We need a #hashtag for twitter.


UPDATE 24 April 2311 GMT:

Priests 191
Bishops 2

UPDATE 26 April 1854 GMT

Priests 260
Bishops 2

UPDATE 27 April 1445 GMT

Priests 330
Bishops 2

UPDATE 28 April 1816 GMT

Priests 441
Bishops 2

UPDATE 29 April 2236 GMT

Priests 594
Bishops 3

The newest Bishop to sign is the great Paprocki of Springfield in Illinois.

I see a lot of names of priests I know.

UPDATE 30 April 

Priests 697
Bihsops 4

The newest Bishop is no surprise.

UPDATE 3 May 1601 GMT:

Priests 775
Bishops 4

Posted in ACTION ITEM!, Fr. Z KUDOS, Mail from priests, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, Priests and Priesthood, Si vis pacem para bellum!, The Coming Storm, ¡Hagan lío! | Tagged , , | 55 Comments

WDTPRS Secret and Prayer over Offerings – the SAME in both Novus Ordo and TLM!

Today I had a text from the Great Roman Fabrizio™ about the fact that the word commercium is in the Secret for today’s Mass in the Extraordinary Form.

So, let’s drill into that wonderful prayer…. and be sure to get the bit at the end.

This Sunday’s Secret is found in ancient Liber Sacramentorum Engolismensis, on the 3rd Sunday after Octave of Easter (in other words today the 4th Sunday after Easter). It survived Fr. Bugnini’s liturgical experts of the Consilium to live on in the Novus Ordo as the Super Oblata for 5th Sunday of Easter (in other words today).

This is a rare instance of the prayer remaining in its place over the reforms of the centuries.

In the 1962MR this prayer is also the Secret for the 18th Sunday after Pentecost.

SECRET (1962MR):

Deus, qui nos, per huius sacrificii veneranda commercia, unius summaeque divinitatis participes effecisti: praesta, quaesumus; ut, sicut tuam cognovimus veritatem, sic eam dignis moribus assequamur.

Let’s look at vocabulary using the mighty Lewis & Short Dictionary. Since my computer’s automatic spelling checker is simply with child to change commercia into “commercial”, let’s start there. Commercium means, as you might suspect, “trade, traffic, commerce” but also “intercourse, communication, correspondence, fellowship.” Every student of Latin knows that epistolarum commercium is an exchange of letters, back and forth correspondence. You might know the phrase “O admirabile commercium … O wondrous exchange!”, the antiphon of the Octave of Christmas, set to music many times. In the Vulgate for the Old Testament commercium describes the covenant between man and God, a contract or exchange (though between very unequal partners). The new covenant with God is also commercium, the mysterious participation of the Second Person of the Trinity in our humanity. As some of the Fathers of the Church say, the Son of God became the Son of Man so that we might be the sons of God. There is also a strong juridical overtone to commercium. Ancient Romans classified people in roughly three different categories, cives, latini, and peregrini. The civis had the rights, among other things, of connubium et commercium, the rights to contract legal marriage and to conduct business and commerce (Latini had commercium and the peregrini had neither). Eventually in the dissolution of the Republic into the Empire these were the only two rights in the civitas (think of St. Augustine’s City of God…De civitate Dei) that were really valuable.

And to think that in our day, the liberals, with their twisted values, and others who share deviant notions or appetites, want to destroy marriage and they have made it harder and harder to conduct business so that people can prosper.  Augustine and the Romans had to deal with Alaric the Visigoth, we have liberals and homosexualists.  But I digress….

That was a very secular, earthly commercium. We want insight into the mysterious and sacred exchange, especially as it applies to today’s prayer.

Augustine explains often (cf esp. his commentary on Ps 30(2)) that Christ, as the Head of the body who takes us for His own, makes us… Him… in “divine commerce/transactions/exchanges” (divina commercia).  That is how we can do things that have any merit: He makes it possible for our works to have merit, and He, with and in us, is taking them, giving them to us, working them with and for us.  They are of Christ and they are gifts, graces.  They are truly ours and they are truly His.  He crowns His own merits in us.  Read this aloud:

“What, therefore, before grace is man’s merit, by which merit he receives except by grace and since God crowns nothing other than His own gifts when He crowns our merits?” (ep. 194, 19)


O God, who through the exchanges of this sacrifice which are to be venerated made us participants of the one and supreme Godhead, grant, we beg, that, just as we recognize Your truth, we may in that way grasp it by means of worthy practices of life.

The New Marian Missal (1958):

O God, who by the holy intercourse of this Sacrifice dost make us partakers of the One Supreme Godhead: grant, we beseech Thee, that as we know Thy truth, so we may follow it by worthy lives.


O God, who by the wonderful exchange effected in this sacrifice have made us partakers of the one supreme Godhead, grant, we pray, that, as we have come to know your truth, we may make it ours by a worthy way of life.

Prof. Eamon Duffy gives us some insight into the style of Roman prayers, translation, and the concept of a holy commercium (cf. The Tablet 6 July 1996 – my emphases):

In marked contrast to many of the longer and more discursive prayers of other rites, especially those of the East, these crisp and often tightly structured prayers (read: Collect, “secret”, post-Communion) offer a unique glimpse of Roman tradition at its most profound and most memorable. Fidelity to the tradition would demand faithfulness in transmitting something at least of the quality of these prayers into the vernacular. In discussing the distinctive theological merits of the Roman liturgy, Cipriano Vagaggini, one of the key figures in the production of the Post-Conciliar Mass, singled out the notion of a “sacrum commercium”, a holy exchange, in the eucharistic offering, which is so central in the Roman canon. Bread and wine, he wrote, “are chosen from among the gifts God has given us and are offered to him as a symbol of the offering of ourselves, of what we possess and of the whole of material creation. In this offering we pray God to accept them, to bless them and to transform them through his Spirit into the Body and Blood of Christ, asking him to give them back to us transformed in such a way that through them we may, in the Spirit, be united to Christ and to one another, sharing in fact in the divine nature.” Vagaggini was discussing the theological focus of the Roman Canon, but this notion of a “holy exchange” in fact underlies many of the most characteristic prayers of the Roman Rite, and could even be claimed, I think, as one of its defining features…. In the Missal its characteristic form is binary: prayers over the offerings or after Communion repeatedly explore the paradox that earthly and temporal things become, by the power of God, vehicles of eternal life. The Missal is never tired of this dialectic, and prayer after prayer rings the changes on it.

Translations are important, are they not?

Posted in EASTER, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, WDTPRS | Tagged | 4 Comments

WDTPRS: 4th Sunday after Easter (1962MR) – “values”, and the smoke of Satan

This is the 4th Sunday after Easter according to the older, traditional Roman calendar.

Today’s Collect survived the slash and hack editors of the Novus Ordo.  Find it for the 21st Sunday of Ordinary Time as well as Monday of the Fifth Week of Easter.  That is… of Easter.  In the post-Conciliar calendar Sundays are reckoned “of Easter”. In the pre-Conciliar calendar they are “after Easter”.  In the newer calendar Easter Sunday itself is included in the reckoning of Sundays of the Easter season.  In the older calendar Sundays are counted from the first Sunday after Easter.  So, in the new calendar today is the Fifth Sunday of Easter and in the older it is the Fourth Sunday after Easter.

However, today’s Collect is in the ancient Gelasian Sacramentary for the Third Sunday after the close of Easter!  Our more distant ancestors counted Easter Sunday, the days of the Octave, and “Low” Sunday in albis as being one single liturgical idea, one day, as if the clock stopped for that whole Octave.  Thus, what is the Fifth Sunday of  Easter (2002MR) and the Fourth Sunday after Easter (1962MR) is also the Third Sunday after the close of Easter (GelSacr). Is it clear now?

– (1962MR):
Deus, qui fidelium mentes unius efficis voluntatis:
da populis tuis id amare quod praecipis,
id desiderare quod promittis;
ut inter mundanas varietates
ibi nostra fixa sint corda, ubi vera sunt gaudia.

The Novus Ordo version adds commas “ …ut, inter mundanas varietates,…”  All those long eeee sounds produced by the Latin letter “i” are marvelous to hear and sing. Note the nice parallels in the construction: id amare quod praecipis, id desiderare quod promittis as well as ibi…sint corda with ubi…sunt gaudia.  In the first line the genitives unius…voluntatis are elegantly split by the verb efficis.  A genius wrote this prayer.  Let’s find out what it really says.

The densely packed leaves of your own copy of the thick Lewis & Short Dictionary show that varietas means “difference, diversity, variety.”  It is commonly used to indicate “changeableness, fickleness, inconstancy”; “vicissitude” hits it square and sounds wonderful to boot.  The adjective mundanus, a, um, “of or belonging to the world”, must be teased out in a paraphrase.  Efficio (formed from facio) means, “to make out, work out; hence, to bring to pass, to effect, execute, complete, accomplish, make, form”.   Voluntas means basically “will” but it can also mean things like “freewill, wish, choice, desire, inclination” and even “disposition towards a thing or person”.

O God, You who make the minds of the faithful to be of one will,
grant unto Your people to love that thing which You command,
to desire that which You promise,
so that, amidst the vicissitudes of this world,
our hearts may there be fixed where true joys are.

Let us revisit that id…quod construction. We could simply say “love that which you command,” or “love what you command”, but to me that seems vague and generic.  Of course, we must love everything God commands, but the feeling I get from that id…quod is very concrete.  We love and desire God’s will in the concrete situation, this concrete task.  A challenge of living as a good Christian in “the world” is to love God in the details of life, especially when those details are little to our liking.  We must love him in this beggar, this annoying creep, not in beggars or creeps in general.  We must love him in this act of fasting, not in fasting in general.  This basket of laundry, this paperwork, this obsolete ICEL translation…. Didn’t I say it was a challenge?  God’s will must not be reduced to something abstract, as if it is merely a “heavenly” or “ideal” reality. “Thy will (voluntas) be done on earth as it is in heaven.”

What did the Anglican Church do with this back in the day?

1662 Book of Common Prayer (Fifth Sunday in Lent):
O almighty God, who alone canst order the unruly wills and affections of sinful men:
Grant unto thy people, that they may love the thing which thou commandest,
and desire that which thou dost promise,
that so, among the sundry and manifold changes of the world,
our hearts may surely there be fixed, where true joys are to be found.

You have to love that!  I often wonder why the original incarnation of ICEL didn’t use the Book of Common Prayer as a model.  But… right… first the redactors of the Novus Ordo cut certain unpleasantries, such as guilt and sin, out of the Latin original and then the people working for ICEL cut out all the rest of the meaningful concepts.

When you slaughter a critter, first you bang it on the head, then you tear its guts out, and afterwards hang upside down to drain out all its blood.  So what did the pre-reformed ICEL do to this prayer?  What will people hear at Holy Mass with the Novus Ordo on Monday of the Fifth Week of Easter?

help us to seek the values
that will bring us lasting joy
   in this changing world.
In our desire for what you promise
make us one in mind and heart.

This version makes me want to scream.

Note the theological catch-all word “help”, a technical term in obsolete ICELese and rather Pelagian.  Does “help us” underscore our total reliance on God?  He does a bit more than “help”.  What did ICEL did to God’s “commands”?  Presto-chango they are now “values”.  And did no one in ICEL or in Rome, where blame for this translation disaster must also be ascribed, see a theological problem with “lasting joy in this changing world”?  The Latin says the world is “fickle” (mundanas varietates).  We cannot have “lasting” joy in this world.  It can be attained only in the life to come.

More about the slippery word “values”.  We should make a distinction between values and virtues.  To my mind, values have an ever shifting subjective starting point while virtues are rooted in something objective.  In 1995 Gertude Himmelfarb wrote in The De-Moralization of Society: From Victorian Virtues to Modern Values: “it was not until the present century that morality became so thoroughly relativized that virtues ceased to be ‘virtues’ and became ‘values.’”  Rem acu tetigit!   In this post-Christian, post-modern world the term “values” seems to indicate little more than our own self-projection.  I suspect this is at work in the obsolete ICEL prayer with its “help us” and the excision of God’s commands and promises.

We should be on guard about that word “values”, in this time of growing conflict between what the Church embraces and worldly relativism.  Can “values” be rescued, used properly? Perhaps. John Paul II used it in Evangelium vitae, but in a concrete way.

Benedict XVI constantly presented us with the threats we face from both religious and secular relativism, the reduction of the supernatural to the natural, caving in to “the world”, that which shifts constantly, is subjective.

Holy Scripture also warns us about “the world” which has its Prince.

The Enemy still dominates this world until Christ the King will come again.   St. Paul wrote to the Romans: “Do not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect” (12:2 – RSV).  Christ put His Apostles on guard about “the world”: “The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify of it that its works are evil” (John 7:7).

When what “the world” has to give is given preeminence over what God has to give through His Church, we wind up in the crisis Pope Paul VI described on the ninth anniversary of his coronation (29 June 1972):

“…da qualche fessura sia entrato il fumo di Satana nel tempio di Dio… through some crack the smoke of Satan has entered into the temple of God”.

Today’s Collect, in both the Ordinary and the Extraordinary form of the Roman Rite, is a spiritual safeguard in the vicissitudes of this world.

Posted in EASTER, WDTPRS | Tagged , , | 9 Comments

Krauthammer on “Wolf Hall”

I have seen the whole series Wolf Hall via BBC.

I entirely agree with Charles Krauthammer at WaPo:

“Wolf Hall,” the Man Booker Prize-winning historical novel about the court of Henry VIII — and most dramatically, the conflict between Thomas Cromwell and Sir Thomas More — is now a TV series (presented on PBS). It is maddeningly good.

Maddening because its history is tendentiously distorted, yet the drama is so brilliantly conceived and executed that you almost don’t care. Faced with an imaginative creation of such brooding, gripping, mordant intensity, you find yourself ready to pay for it in historical inaccuracy.

And “Wolf Hall’s” revisionism is breathtaking. It inverts the conventional view of the saintly More being undone by the corrupt, amoral, serpentine Cromwell, the king’s chief minister. This is fiction as polemic. Author Hilary Mantel, an ex- and anti-Catholic (“the Catholic Church is not an institution for respectable people”), has set out to rehabilitate Cromwell and defenestrate More, most especially the More of Robert Bolt’s beautiful and hagiographic “A Man for All Seasons.”

Who’s right? Neither fully, though “Wolf Hall’s” depiction of More as little more than a cruel heretic-burning hypocrite is particularly provocative, if not perverse. To be sure, More worship is somewhat overdrawn, as even the late Cardinal Francis George warned at a 2012 convocation of bishops.More had his flaws. He may have been a man for all seasons, but he was also a man of his times. And in those times of merciless contention between Rome and the Reformation, the pursuit and savage persecution of heresy were the norm.

Indeed, when Cromwell achieved power, he persecuted Catholics with a zeal and thoroughness that surpassed even More’s persecution of Protestants. “Wolf Hall’s” depiction of Cromwell as a man of great sensitivity and deep feeling is, therefore, even harder to credit. He was cruel and cunning, quite monstrous both in pursuit of personal power and wealth, and in serving the whims and wishes of his royal master.


Read the rest there.

And, let it be said, Henry VIII was a monster.


Posted in Biased Media Coverage, The Coming Storm, The Drill, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , , , | 42 Comments

ASK FATHER: Commentator during Mass

Howard CosellFrom a reader…


Our local Ordinary Form parish has started having “teaching” Masses on Sunday. They have a lector explain everything as it is happening during the Mass. As a catechist I know people need to learn about the Mass; however…It is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass! Is there any Church document or canon law permitting, directing or forbidding such things? I am concerned for this parish has a long history of liturgical abuses, among other unorthodox activities. Thank you in advance for your help Father Zuhlsdorf.
God bless you.

It is a laudable goal to teach people about what happens during the Holy Mass.

Yet, … one has to wonder if doing the teaching during the Mass is the best way to do so.

By way of an analogy, what would be the benefit to having a lecturer on stage during a performance of Macbeth (errrr, “the Scottish Play”) explaining, “Here’s where Malcolm’s men cut down Birnam forest to use as cover as they marched up Dunsinane hill against Macbeth, fulfilling the prophecy of the third apparition in Act 4, Scene 1.”

Having a bit of an explanation before Mass, and being available after Mass if folks have questions would be a more didactically appropriate way of teaching about Holy Mass than mucking up the liturgy itself with sidebars and running commentary.  I believe that is what Romano Guardini did for his flock and those little pre-Mass lessons became a book.

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal does make provision for a commentator, stating (in art. 105),

“The commentator, who, if appropriate, provides the faithful briefly with explanations and exhortations so as to direct their attention to the celebration and ensure that they are better disposed for understanding it. The commentator’s remarks should be thoroughly prepared and notable for their restraint. In performing this function the commentator stands in a suitable place within sight of the faithful, but not at the ambo.”

So, the commentator, if needed, is to make brief clarifying statements.  I think they should mostly be of an informational nature, e.g. “Today’s second collection is being taken up for the heating fund.” or “Please silence your cell phones before Holy Mass begins.” or “This being the Solemnity of the Annunciation, all are asked to kneel when the choir sings the ‘Et Incarnatus‘ during the Creed.”

I sincerely doubt the Legislator envisioned the commentator being a sort of Howard Cosell/Pat Summerall dyad (“Father’s wearing a green chasuble today, looks like we’ve entered Ordinary Time again.” “Interesting point, Howard, ‘ordinary’ time isn’t meant to mean common time or normal time, but rather the weeks that are counted, or ordered…” I did that once for the TV broadcast of a magnificent Pontifical Mass at the Shrine in Washington DC, but we were not in the sanctuary or audible in the Basilica!

I might make an exception for Vin Scully.

Nor would Shinichiro Ohta and Kenji Fukui of Iron Chef be a good model for the commentator, as entertaining as the thought might be.  Get your imaginations around that!

If this parish has a history of liturgical abuse and unorthodox activity, the best course of action may be to take one’s worship (and checkbook) elsewhere.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged , | 21 Comments