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

From Facebook:

Dear Fr. Z,

The priest that celebrates de EF in Buenos Aires, has decided today to do it versus populum quoting a work of Card. Ratzinger that says that the cross must be the focal point or liturgical east. He also says that the rubrics of JXXIII’s missal doesn’t prescribe to celebrate the mass "ad orientem". Is this all right? What can we say to him?
Please, forgive my poor english and thank you very much!

No, there is nothing that requires the TLM (EF) to be celebrated ad orientem.  In Roman Basilicas it was celebrated versus populum because of the way the altar was situated in the sanctuary: on the model of San Pietro, where the celebrant stood at the main altar so as to face the East.  In the ancient Basilica of St. Peter, the people would be directed to turn around also to face the East during the action of the Mass.  So… celebration of Holy Mass to the liturgical East is important in the Roman way of seeing things.

However, nothing specifically prescribes ad orientem worship… though in my opinion it is superior. 

The other thing to consider, and this is important, the sensibilities of the people in the congregation should be considered.  If the people would be upset by an versus populum Mass with the EF, then it probably wouldn’t be a good idea.   There is no sense in doing that merely as a novelty or for shock value, or even because of the priest’s own preference.   The TLM and ad orientem are closely connected.

Pray.

A kind reader has sent me the second update of the day!  Feast or famine, it seems.

I am pleased to share with you the Internet Prayer in Norwegian.  I am hoping to audio files of these prayers as well.

Bønn før en logger seg på internett:

Allmektige evige Gud,
Du som har skapt oss i ditt bilde,
og oppfordret oss til å søke det som er godt, sant og vakkert,
spesielt i din enbårne Sønns,
vår Herres Jesu Kristi, gudommelige person.
Vi ber at du,
gjennom den hellige biskop og kirkelærer Isidors forbønn,
vil gjøre det slik at vi på våre reiser gjennom internettet
retter hender og øyne mot det du finner velbehagelig,
og at vi behandler alle vi møter med kjærlighet og tålmodighet.
Ved Kristus vår Herre. Amen

I was clued to this from Dealbreaker by a friend.  Very funny:

Paulson To Use Superpowers Sooner Than Expected

In a raft of measures, that aren’t desperate (no really, we swear) Hank Paulson is set to issue what looks to be a general "term sheet" in the next few days for all financial institutions needing an thick injection of syrupy cash, or three.

Apparently, the power and flexibility Paulson possesses to complete these transactions has taken some by surprise. (People, we went over this once already. The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 renames Paulson "Kal-El" and, because of his proximity to our yellow sun, grants him powers mortals could only dream of. Especially when it comes to syrupy capital injections). There is concern among many legislators that there was far too little opportunity for hand-wringing and grandstanding with lots of cameras and microphone thingies pointing before Paulson stole the show. Damn that Paulson and his financial crisis!

There is some grumbling (read: preparatory leaks) that Paulson might go so far as to nationalize crumbling banks as well, which should silence all the snickering that has been going on since Northern Rock was smothered in the ample bosom of the crown earlier this year.

Then there is the discussion of backing all bank deposits in the United States. It’s all the rage, you know.

No word yet on the use of X-Ray vision to see into balance sheets from afar.

I am interested in the intervention of H.E. Rino Fisichella whose background is in fundamental theology.  (Rene Latourelle)

-  H.E. Most. Rev. Salvatore FISICHELLA, Titular Bishop of Voghenza, President of the Pontifical Academy for Life; Rector of the Pontifical Lateran University (VATICAN CITY)

The Dei Verbum had still not been discovered and developed in its great intuition that constituted an authentic dogmatic progress; the Council fathers in fact had recovered the Biblical concept of the uniqueness of the source. This allowed Sacred Scripture to be understood within the life of the Church which does not just live by it but is responsible for its being alive, complete and fruitful. Many believers when asked what they mean by “Word of God” reply: the Bible. This is not a wrong answer, but it is incomplete or at least it shows an incomplete perception of the richness present in the expression and leads, as a consequence, to identifying Christianity as the “religion of the book”. It is necessary that in our language we do not fall into the uncertain expression “the three religions of the book”. Christianity is the religion of the “word”. It is important to strive for the construction of a culture that sees sacred Scripture as a living word, dynamically open to the truth of the revelation it contains. If we do not present this teaching in its totality in the various instruments we possess for the training of our people, we risk humiliating the Word of God because we reduce it exclusively to a written text without the provocative force to bring meaning to life any longer. As the Apostle reminds us: “God’s message cannot be chained up” (2 Tm 2:9).

What we are always faced with is the inexhaustibility of the Word of God; it is like the bush that burns without going out. We are called to exercise a ministry that permits this Word of Life to spread so that everyone in every part of the world can grasp its profound meaning in such a way as to obtain salvation. In a time like ours filled with attempts to marginalize the sacred texts as bearers of meaning only insofar as they are myths , with no historical character and destined only for the naïve, it is important that they find the necessary forms to restore historical value and provocativeness about the sense of existence. We really are faced with a teaching emergency that brings back to the center of our life of faith the theme of salvation. Again Dei Verbum reminds us how much has been transmitted and written on the “salvation announcement” (DV 7). The various cultural tendencies present in the modern world have not only perverted the meaning of salvation but they have marginalized it as useless and illusionary. Representing the Word of God in its totality means pointing the scope of its teaching towards the theme of our salvation.

 

 

His Excellency Most Rev. David A. Zubik, Bishop of Pittsburgh, has issued a letter to his flock on VOTING.

Here it is with my emphases and comments.

Letter from Bishop David A. Zubik
on Catholics and Voting

My dear family of the Church of Pittsburgh,
 
There is an important matter that falls under my responsibilities as bishop which has taken front and center stage – the upcoming elections. One of the things I treasure most about you, the faithful of the Church of Pittsburgh, is the open way in which you offer suggestions to me and make requests of me. Sometimes those requests conflict. The election issue is one such example. Some of you have asked me to speak out publicly about the presidential candidates. That I can not do. [The bishop does not want directly to endorse a specific candidate.]  The important document written by the Bishops of our country entitled Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Call to Political Responsibility from the Catholic Bishops of the United States (available at www.faithfulcitizenship.org) [But this is NOT a teaching document in the sense that the Church has a Magisterium.  Bishops conferences do not have a munus docendi in the same way that the Holy Father or individual bishops have.] underscores the important point that the Church cannot, I repeat, cannot tell people for whom they must vote. However, the document is very clear about highlighting two things about our voting privilege: (1) the right that we have to vote as American citizens is precious. (2) the obligation that we have to bring our faith to our voting is sacred.
 
As we approach the coming elections, I implore you to consider both: your right to vote; and your obligation to bring your faith to the voting booth.  [YES]

To assist you in both might I suggest four important steps. [This is good] (1) Familiarize yourself with the issues of the campaign; (2) Learn what the teachings of the Catholic Church are regarding those issues; (3) reflect on both in a spirit of prayer, and (4) Vote.  [Don’t opt out.]
 
To assist you in understanding what the teachings of the Church are regarding the various campaign issues, I would recommend that you consult with the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the United States Catholic Catechism for Adults or the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. Moreover, you might also want to secure a copy of Faithful Citizenship.  [The USCCB does not have a teaching office, a munus docendi by which they can issue teaching documents that can be placed together with, e.g., the CCC.  Faithful Citizenship is not a document of the Magisterium.  It cannot be treated as such.  Evangelium vitae, however, is a document of the Magisterium.  It is as if Apostolos suos wasn’t issued.] Since the presidential election of 1976 and every four years, we the Bishops have offered updated versions of this important document to assist voters as they exercise their voting rights coupled with the responsibility of an understanding of the issues from the perspective of faith. [I would have preferred also that H.E. spell out the main points to review.]
 
Now there is a second issue which I need to address with you as well. Over the course of the last several weeks, several people who are recognized as Catholic leaders in our diocese have espoused a public rationale for why they personally are choosing to vote for a particular candidate for the presidency. [Apparently, some prominent Catholics are saying that you can vote for a pro-abortion candidate.  Perhaps readers in Pittsburgh can fill us in on the background.] These reflections have appeared in either local newspapers or in national periodicals. A number of you have raised questions with me about their statements.

Over the course of the past week especially, I have reflected long and hard about how I might be able to respond to the many questions that you have placed on my desk about such statements.

I wish to clarify the confusion that has been caused by these public statements with the hope that any division that has been caused by such remarks and worse any scandal [We are back to this ugly reality: scandal.] that may have resulted from such comments is addressed. It is important to say once again that no one has a right to tell anyone how to vote. Moreover those who have offered their personal interpretation of the Church’s teaching do not speak for the Church and in some part do not reflect the teaching of the Church.  [It would be good to have local background here.]

While Faithful Citizenship speaks about the moral choice which we each must make when we enter the voting booth, the manner in which we vote must weigh all the issues with a clear reflection on the teachings of the Church. The primary theme of Faithful Citizenship is the right to life and the dignity of every human person. [EMPHASES IN THE ORIGINAL] As the United States Bishops made clear, this is the foundation of a moral vision for society. We cannot dismiss this foundational principle as secondary in our thinking. As the bishops insist, we cannot consider abortion or euthanasia as merely two issues among many to be weighed or dismissed with a shrug. Nor can we exclude other issues that also are pro-life: concerns about the poor and immigrants, concerns about peace and war, concerns about bigotry and prejudice, concerns about capital punishment, and other social justice issues. [He is saying that the issue of right to life cannot be set aside in favor of these other important issues.]

Having offered these few thoughts on the upcoming electoral process, it is my sincere hope that I have clarified some of the questions which you have raised, [I think he did, when you read this closely.] especially in light of some well-