![o{]:)](http://www.wdtprs.com/blog/wp-images/topimage.JPG)
First Extraordinary Use Mass at Kenrick Seminary… yes… Seminary
I got a nice note from the gracious Fr. Jay A. Finelli to whom I tip my biretta o{]:¬) for the following about the first Mass with the extraordinary use at Kenrick-Glennon Seminary. Take a look!
“Ecce nova facio omnia!” (Apoc.21, 5)
Comment by John — 16 September 2007 @ 4:06 amIt looks like despite all the BS about the MP, the sun is beginning to dawn!
Comment by Cody — 16 September 2007 @ 8:01 amWhat you can’t see in this picture is the large Cross on the wall behind the altar.
Comment by Dr. Peter H. Wright — 16 September 2007 @ 8:16 amPhotos posted by Kenrick-Glennon seminary show this very clearly.
Why is it important ?
Because Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross is what the Sacrifice of the Mass is all about.
That is why we need the image of Christ crucified clearly before us when we worship.
I hope everyone has read the sermon given by Fr. Z over here in England on September 14, Feast of Exaltation of the Holy Cross.
It makes compelling reading.
As best I remember, the large crucifix at Kenrick is not on the wall but rather hangs free over the sanctuary. In the photo above you can see its shadow on the wall above the little altar cross—in its way, even more impressive than having the large cross in the picture.
Comment by Joseph Mansfield — 16 September 2007 @ 8:32 amWhat you can’t see in this picture is the large Cross on the wall behind the altar.
Photos posted by Kenrick-Glennon seminary show this very clearly.
Why is it important ?
Because Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross is what the Sacrifice of the Mass is all about.
That is why we need the image of Christ crucified clearly before us when we worship.
Comment by Dr. Peter H. Wright
Although I agree with you, I have attended loads of Novus Ordo Let’s Get Together For a Meal masses at Churches that had large crucifixes.
Comment by RBrown — 16 September 2007 @ 9:04 amThis is indeed something to rejoice over: the Extraordinary Rite being celebrated at a mainstream Catholic seminary in an important Archdiocese.Haec dies quam fecit Dominus exultemus in ea! Tom
Comment by TJM — 16 September 2007 @ 10:43 amOne odd thing that I have never seen…
For Communion, a large cloth is being used instead of a Communion Rail and paten.
???
Comment by Jonathan Bennett — 16 September 2007 @ 11:44 amIn the >real
Comment by Christophorus — 16 September 2007 @ 1:42 pmUnfortunately some special characters do strainge things.
In the “real” old days a linen cloth would be spread on the communion rail
as well as using communion pattens.
If this was done, a simular cloth would be held by two servers beneath the
Comment by Christophorus — 16 September 2007 @ 1:51 pmcommunion pattens as the clergy received at the altar.
Sorry if this is a silly question – but if you follow the links to all the pictures – On picture #15, there’s apicture of 3 clerics wearing birettas. The center one has some purple (?) coloring around the bottom of the tuft. What does that mean? I’ve not seen that before.
Comment by Mark Curley — 16 September 2007 @ 5:24 pmMark Curley,
I think it is a trick of the light. In the initial pictures there is a lot of apparently blue and blue-purple lighting coming from the “Gospel side” of the nave. It is possible that the apparent tufts of purple on the base of the biretta in question are, in fact, simply the way the light is hitting the biretta when photographed.
But there might also be something else going on…I’ll happily defer to others who know, since I’m just guessing here.
Comment by Flambeaux — 16 September 2007 @ 5:48 pmChristophorus, in the NEW “old” days, this linen cloth on the communion rail is still used, at least some places.
I had never seen one before, but the first time I attended St John Cantius, in Chicago, several years ago, there it was.
Huh?
Fortunately, a tic of ours, husband and I always seem to sit on the north side of any nave, so we could observe plenty of people placing their hands beneath the cloth before it was our turn as the priest, server, and Jesus arrived where we were kneeling…
(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)
Comment by Geri — 16 September 2007 @ 5:58 pmUnfortunately, even the idea of having the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite at the seminary that I am still attending is shunned. Many of us went to the parish that celebrates the extraordinary form and were forbidden from wearing cassocks and surplices and could not sit in choir, though we probably could not have fit everyone in the sanctuary.
Comment by Servus Dei — 16 September 2007 @ 6:22 pmServus Dei,
Sounds like you are in a fascist work camp of some type that believes in “diversity” except for Catholic expressions of the Faith. Perhaps you should consider transferring to a
Comment by TJM — 16 September 2007 @ 7:37 pmmore welcoming and open-minded seminary. Tom
Geri—you’re quite right. I’ve been (off and on) involved with the traditional
Mass since around 1959. I did not see a communion cloth until a video from
England in 1989.
As a sacristan I do have one problem with them. Consider a 60’ corporal! These
cloths have to be treated as one, rinsed in the sacrarium before being washed.
pax et bonum
Comment by Christophorus — 16 September 2007 @ 7:43 pmReading about the celebration of the Mass in Latin at Kenrick Glennon Seminary in I remembered reading the following from Called To Be Holy by Abp Dolan.
Speaking about Bishop George Gottwald Abp Dolan said “One of his many crises was the state of the seminary. One-fourth of the priest faculty left the priesthood, the student body was decimated by departures and the theology being taught was anything but of the Church. The priests who remained on the faculty announced they wanted to join an ecumenical theologate, since, according to their interpretation of the council, it was useless to teach Catholic theology – since such a thing probably no longer existed.
They demanded the presence of the apostolic administrator at what was really a “campus demonstration’ in the early spring of 1968, where they came to present him with their list of demands in front of the obligatory TV cameras….
The leader of the faculty and students informed the bishop that Kenrick Seminary might as well close, since the whole enterprise of priestly formation and Catholic theology was up for grabs.â€
Forty years later we have a Latin Mass celebrated at Kenrick Glennon Seminary. God can indeed write straight with crooked lines.
Comment by Sharon — 16 September 2007 @ 10:03 pmI the ‘old days’ in Australia there was always a cloth over the altar rails for Holy Communion. After Mass the cloth would be flipped over the Communion rail to hang like a curtain on the inside of the rail. It would only need the careful washing if a Host fell on it and that would almost never happen because the paten was also used.
Comment by Victoria — 16 September 2007 @ 10:13 pm> What you can’t see in this picture is the large Cross on the wall behind the altar.
There’s a neat desktop picture of the sanctuary crucifix here:
Comment by Jeff Geerling — 16 September 2007 @ 10:49 pmhttp://www.kenrick.edu/etchings/desktop/index.html
I am very happy for my former seminary! congratulations!
Comment by Fr. John Pecoraro — 17 September 2007 @ 1:24 amWonderful
Comment by Mrs Jackie Parkes — 17 September 2007 @ 1:51 amTo Mark Curley-
The different-colored tassel on the biretta is blue; it belongs to Fr. Lenhardt, the celebrant who is rector of the St. Francis de Sales Oratory in St. Louis, Institute of Christ the King, Sovereign Priest. Priests of the Institute wear clerical garb trimmed in blue.
Comment by Fr. Gregory J. Lockwood — 17 September 2007 @ 5:02 amIs it just me, or do the maniples and humeral veil used for this Mass not seem to match the rest of the vestments? (Not that there’s anything wrong with that. . . .)
Comment by dcs — 17 September 2007 @ 9:43 amBTW, that cloth is called a “housling cloth”.
Comment by Joseph Mansfield — 17 September 2007 @ 10:50 amGreat pictures, great event. But why the second Confiteor? That was dropped before 1962. And wouldn’t the large cross on the wall make the small one on the altar unnecessary? Back in the 50’s the parish I grew up in never used a communion rail cloth. As I recall it was relatively rare. The parish here that still uses it for the Novus Ordo Mass is German national, so maybe it was an ethnic thing.
Comment by Fr. Paul La Fontaine — 17 September 2007 @ 11:36 amAs someone who has only seen this form of the Mass celebrated once—the picture reminds me of a simple question I had.
The priest is clearly elevating the Chalice. One of the Altar servers is lifting the priest’s vestments—why?
Is this litugically significant, or is it just easier for the priest to raise his arms if someone gives some help?
Werner Fee
Comment by Werner Fee — 17 September 2007 @ 12:36 pmTo Fr. Paul @ 11:36 a.m.: There were a few parts of the Mass which may have been influenced by the fact that Fr. Lenhardt was the celebrant, and followed some of the Institute of Christ the King’s traditions.
Also, to Werner @ 12:36 p.m.: In addition to the time you mention, the priest is usually assisted by the two subdeacons when incensing the altar. The subdeacons will hold up the chasuble’s sleeves. I’m not 100% sure why, but it probably is a practical consideration; you don’t want the priest to have his vestments catch on fire or be charred when incensing, and you don’t want the priest to have trouble with his vestments while raising the Precious Body and Blood at the consecration.
Comment by Jeff Geerling — 18 September 2007 @ 12:01 pmWerner:
Comment by CT — 18 September 2007 @ 4:52 pmIn addition to the point Jeff made, I believe that the deacon (or in the case of a low Mass, the altar boys) help lift the chasibule because it used to be much heavier than they are now so it was much more difficult for the priest to move his arms about.
Apart from the practical considerations I always thought that the symbolism of the servers holding the vestments was reminiscent of the those holding up Moses’ arms during the battle in the Old Testament.
Comment by Ian — 18 September 2007 @ 5:33 pmThe lifting of the chausible by the deacon (not the subdeacon, who is holding the paten during the elevations) or the server is also practical in the sense that certain vestments can make it difficult for the priest to elevate the sacred species, and lifting it would ease this process. Even the Roman chausibles, which are unencumbering in this sense, are lifted by the deacon as a matter of tradition more than as a practical gesture.
The second confiteor was also said because the celebrant, being a priest of the Institute of Christ the King, has the permission from Ecclesia Dei to have this done at Masses that he celebrates. It does not appear in the ‘62 Missal, but i did see plenty of images from Masses celebrated on the 14th that did pray the second confiteor.
Comment by ABO — 19 September 2007 @ 11:26 amThe elevation of the corner of the chasuble by the deacon or server was originally for practical reasons. The Ritus Servandus in the Missal makes that clear: “…minister manu sinistra elevat fimbrias posteriores Planetæ, ne ipsum Celebrantem impediat in elevatione brachiorum†(“…the minister elevates with his left hand the posterior fringes of the Chasuble, so that it may not hinder the Celebrant in raising his arms…â€) A similar gesture is made by the deacon at the incensations, for the same reason. But as with so many other gestures in the Mass, it takes on a very beautiful symbolism. In my mind, I have always viewed it as the server joining himself (and us) to the priest at that important moment. We want to reach out and touch the divine mystery. The priest is “alter Christus,” and we wish to touch the hem of his robe, as we would Our Lord. It is particularly moving, I think, when it is a little tiny altar boy, a mere child, joining himself to the Holy Sacrifice for us.
That said, unfortunately the gesture is often exaggerated by lifting the chasuble up to the priest’s waist, exposing his undies, as it were, in a rather undignified way. The authorities I have read say that it should be a slight elevation of the hem of the chasuble (unless of course it is a very voluminous one that might require more assistance).
Comment by Publius — 20 September 2007 @ 10:19 am