What Does The Prayer Really Say?
W D T P R S

Let’s hear your two-part captions.

Altar & Picnic Table?

The folks at the Sala Stampa have finally gotten their act together and let us know what the Pope said to the Swiss bishops.  (My emphasis)

On the subject of the liturgy, the papal address made it clear that this "is not some ‘self-expression’ of the community which in the liturgy enters center stage, it is rather the community abandoning its ‘being itself’ to enter the great banquet of the poor, to become part of the great living community in which God Himself nourishes us. ... And it must be borne in mind that the homily is not an interruption of the liturgy for the purposes of making a speech, but that it is part of the sacramental event, bringing the Word of God into the present moment of the community."

 

  "This means that the homily is itself part of the mystery, of the celebration of the mystery, and hence cannot be separated therefrom," said the Pope, highlighting the importance of it being the celebrant who pronounces the homily. "The priesthood is a thing of beauty only if the mission to be accomplished is seen as a whole, from which things cannot be cut off here and there. And this mission has always involved – even in the Old Testament rite – the priest’s duty to link the sacrifice with the Word, which is an integral part of the whole."

 

  As for the Sacrament of Penance, said the Holy Father, "we truly must learn it anew. Even from a purely anthropological point of view it is important, on the one hand, to recognize sin and, on the other, to exercise forgiveness. The widespread lack of awareness of sin is a worrying phenomenon of our times. The gift of the Sacrament of Penance consists, then, not only in the fact that we receive forgiveness, but also in the fact that we become aware of our need for forgiveness, ... and so we can also better understand others and forgive them."

MEANWHILE… also in France… In Le Figaro of 6 November there was an interview by Sophie de Ravinel with H.E. Philippe Xavier Ignace Cardinal Barbarin, Archbishop of Lyon. It was very interesting.

Rorate, as usual, had something about it the other day, but here is the relevant from the interview text (my emphasis and comments):

You don’t seem to desire a derestriction of the Tridentine Rite…

That isn’t really the point.  In four years, in Lyon, I have never had any problems with the community at the Church of St. George where Mass is celebrated according to the rite of St. Pius V.  Card. Decoutray was the one who gave the authorization back in 1989.  Ever since, everything has gone well.  Last May, on the advice of the Pope himself, I also celebrated this Mass and confirmed the young parishioners.  [So, the "wide and generous" commanded in the MP "Ecclesia Dei" actually works.  Fancy that.] The problem rests in the trust one gives or does not give to the pastors who are the Pope, the bishops… It lies also in the internal rupture in the traditionalist communities, which spawn devisions and pointless sufferings. [Schism in the Body of Christ is a ghastly sin which brings nothing but suffering in the long run and the risk of hell for those who commit it.]

Does Benedict XVI, in desiring to resolve the schism, risk creating new divisions?

Of course, I detect great disquiet in my diocese.  But I respond: be not afraid! (n’ayez pas peur!)  [So, H.E.’s predecessor was not afraid to be generous to the trad. community, he himself is quoting JP2, he followed B16’s advice and went to the trads for Mass and confirmation.  He is having no problems with them and he is worried about their well-being.  How is this not good?] You can create a mountain of future texts; but, in my opinion, this reaction is founded more on our own fears (angoisses) than on the actual undertakings of Benedict XVI.  [Yep.  Quidquid recipitur…]  The Pope’s goal isn’t to divide the Church.  He wants to reach out a hand, before its too late, to those who strayed away.  I feel however that this business isn’t over.  When a schism is at its beginning, you can still reach some sort of understanding.  This is more complicated after several decades.  There are those who in breaking with Rome think that the Sucessor of Peter is not faithful to tradition.  The Pope would be a prisoner of a plot ravaging the whole Church since the last Council.  Clearly there are scads of impure people within the Church, but Christ, who entrusted His Church to a traitor – the Apostle Peter – , is not put off by our sins!

Cardinal Barbarin didn’t actually answer in a direct way the question of whether he wants a freeing up of the old rite or not.  His experience with traditionalists has not been as bad as that of other bishops probably because his predecessor was generous from the start and left him a good foundation to continue building on.  He took John Paul II’s advice, and that of Benedict XVI, and was not afraid to go to them and say Mass with them and confirm their children.  So, he has found a formula that is working fairly well and is wondering if making the situation more complicated (by a liberalization) won’y muddy the waters. 

His concerns are legitimate because the traditionalist "thing" seems to attract the sort of person who is happy only when he is unhappy.  Stir things up and you might create more conflict.

He rightly considers schism with horror, like the Fathers of the Church and all sensible people.  At the same time, he seems willing to reach outside the box and do what he can.  Also, he seems to see the roots of the divisions in sin rather than merely in the more facile issues of liturgical preference or even precise theological controversies. 

I am often struck by how much today’s schism resembles in important respects the Donatist schism of North Africa of the 4th and 5th centuries, which so troubled St. Augustine.  In his anti-Donatist labors, Augustine emphasized that our Church is not a Church only of the pure.  It is comprised also of sinners.  The Church is corpus permixtum malis et bonis... a body mixed through with bad people and with good.  Christ sorts things out in the only way which is definitive.  We, on the other hand, need to be compassionate and reasonable.

Really, I ask, what harm does it do to be happy that people can have the form of Mass which we Catholics have as our mutual heritage and which nourished the lives of saints for centuries?  Why is being happy for these folks, happy that they love Holy Mass, such a threat?

Let that be the starting point in our subsequent efforts to heal the more serious issues that arise.

Once again we thank Rorate for a translation of paragraph #6 at the end of the closing talk Card. Ricard gave for the end of the meeting of the French bishops. It concerned the "Tridentine" thing. Big surprise. Here is my translation of the same together with the paragraph immediately before (#5). My emphasis and comments.

5) We know quite well the disputes with the faithful who have followed [Archbp.] Lefevbre in his "No" to Rome are not primarily liturgical, [For most, I bet it is liturgical.] but theological – concerning religious liberty, ecumenism, interreligious dialogue – and politics. But all the same we do not want minimize the importance of the liturgy which is at the heart of ecclesial life. In this regard we thank those who were formed, who contributed to the quality of our liturgies and who enable us to have, in many places, celebrations that are beautiful, prayful, joyous and recollected. [D’accord! When you can find them!]

6) We want to pursue the reception of those who retain an attachment to the so-called Mass of "St. Pius V". A diversity is possible. But it must be regulated. This comes from the unity of the liturgy and the unity of the Church. One musn’t leave the choice of one of the forms of the Roman rite – the Mass of “Saint Pius V” or the Mass of “Paul VI” to one’s subjectivity alone. [Going out farther onto the thin limb….] A Church in which each person would build his own chapel according to his personal tastes, his sensibility, his choice of liturgy or his political opinions could not still be the Church of Christ. It is necessary today to resist the temptation of an "à la carte religion". [CRACK! You mean… "the cafeteria is closed"!?? I fully expect now that the French bishops will begin their work on curbing individualist "subjectivity" ] As bishops, with the Holy Father and under his authority, we are ready to watch over the unity and the communion in the bosom of our local Churches and among our Churches.

First, the tone here is far more positive toward the traditionalist problem than the early reporting might have suggested it cold be. However, the content cuts both ways. In justice both sides, traditionalists and progressives must be treated even handedly. What might be the reason for the more positive sound here? Does it come from the fact that the bishops now have a game plan (for good or ill)? Or is this Ricard’s way of delivering the game plan, whether they want it or not?

Second, there is an ecumenical thing here. Notice the end: "communion in the bosom of our local Churches and among our Churches." This must refer to the individual diocese in France, but perhaps then also other Catholic Churches or the Orthodox, etc. Easter Christianity binds much of its identity to their liturgical rites. What must they think about dialogue with Latins who treat those who want traditional liturgy so badly?

Third, many who are not French don’t grasp how this traditionalist thing is tied into French politics. I suspect the French bishops are not terribly conservative. So, they must be really nervous and irritated at dealing with the French traditionalists, for whom traditionalism is often highly political. Still, that point can’t hold up the whole world, right?

Many of the things the Cardinal says really, in justice, have to be applied also to the liberal lefties and their "cafeteria Catholicism". It would be intolerable for them after all this not to begin working also to rein in the progressivist subjectivity.

A glimpse over the rooftops that surround my in my eyrie.

There is a very clever little allegorical piece over at the new blog The Undercroft.  If you liked The Prelatial Scream, you’ll love this entry.

There is an interesting series of entries over at Hermeneutic of Continuity by Fr. Finigan on "How would the old Mass help?", which in many ways reflects my own experiences and the comments I have been making in WDTPRS for years now. GMTA. You should be checking Hermenetic daily.

Someone kindly directed me to a note posted over at the National Catholic Register which reviewed some Catholic blogs.  The author of the entry, Eric Scheske blogs at The Daily Eudemon (www.ericscheske.com/blog) graciously wrote of WDTPRS back in September:

2. What Does the Prayer Really Say?, by Father John Zuhlsdorf (wdtprs.com/blog). Michael Aquilina at The Way of the Fathers (fathersofthechurch.com) turned me on to Father Zuhlsdorf. It might be the most cerebral blog on this list, but it’s not dull. Go here when you want intellectual stimulation. I have ranked him No. 2, even though he has been blogging less than a year. A blogger this good deserves encouragement.

 

"Cerebral"?  Really?  At least I’m not dull!  o{];¬)

Seriously, it is humbling even to have been mentioned in the company of the other bloggers listed. 

It is amazing, when you start scanning your RSS feed aggregators just what is produced in the blogosphere by so many good people.  Talk about alternative media sources!  Here are the blogs mentioned in the NCReg article.  They deserve to be visited often.

The Orthometer, by Father Erik Richtsteig (orthometer.blogspot.com).
Shouts in the Piazza, by Father Guy Selvester (shoutsinthepiazza.blogspot.com).
Thrown Back, by Father Rob Johansen (thrownback.blogspot.com).
Bonfire of the Vanities, by Father Martin Fox (frmartinfox.blogspot.com).
Father Jonathan Morris at Fox News (foxnews.com/index.html#blogs).
Piece of the Puzzle, by “Father Joe” (fatherjoe.wordpress.com).
Roman Miscellany, by Father Nicholas Schofield (romanmiscellany.blogspot.com).
Dappled Things, by Father Jim Tucker (donjim.blogspot.com).
Catholic Ragemonkey (ragemonkey.blogspot.com). Father Shane Tharp and Father Stephen Hamilton

It’s not too cerebral to mention Hamlet is it?  I think Catholic bloggers are sort of like Hamlet’s players (II,ii):

they are the abstract and brief chronicles of the
time: after your death you were better have a bad
epitaph than their ill report while you live.