"The great Father Zed, Archiblogopoios"
-
Fr. John Hunwicke
"Some 2 bit novus ordo cleric"
- Anonymous
"Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a traditionalist blogger who has never shied from picking fights with priests, bishops or cardinals when liturgical abuses are concerned."
- Kractivism
"Father John Zuhlsdorf is a crank"
"Father Zuhlsdorf drives me crazy"
"the hate-filled Father John Zuhlsford" [sic]
"Father John Zuhlsdorf, the right wing priest who has a penchant for referring to NCR as the 'fishwrap'"
"Zuhlsdorf is an eccentric with no real consequences" -
HERE
- Michael Sean Winters
"Fr Z is a true phenomenon of the information age: a power blogger and a priest."
- Anna Arco
“Given that Rorate Coeli and Shea are mad at Fr. Z, I think it proves Fr. Z knows what he is doing and he is right.”
- Comment
"Let me be clear. Fr. Z is a shock jock, mostly. His readership is vast and touchy. They like to be provoked and react with speed and fury."
- Sam Rocha
"Father Z’s Blog is a bright star on a cloudy night."
- Comment
"A cross between Kung Fu Panda and Wolverine."
- Anonymous
Fr. Z is officially a hybrid of Gandalf and Obi-Wan XD
- Comment
Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a scrappy blogger popular with the Catholic right.
- America Magazine
RC integralist who prays like an evangelical fundamentalist.
-Austen Ivereigh on
Twitter
[T]he even more mainline Catholic Fr. Z. blog.
-
Deus Ex Machina
“For me the saddest thing about Father Z’s blog is how cruel it is.... It’s astonishing to me that a priest could traffic in such cruelty and hatred.”
- Jesuit homosexualist James Martin to BuzzFeed
"Fr. Z's is one of the more cheerful blogs out there and he is careful about keeping the crazies out of his commboxes"
- Paul in comment at
1 Peter 5
"I am a Roman Catholic, in no small part, because of your blog.
I am a TLM-going Catholic, in no small part, because of your blog.
And I am in a state of grace today, in no small part, because of your blog."
- Tom in
comment
"Thank you for the delightful and edifying omnibus that is your blog."-
Reader comment.
"Fr. Z disgraces his priesthood as a grifter, a liar, and a bully. -
- Mark Shea
From a reader…
Loading ...
One of the better documents the USCCB Committee on Liturgy (as it was known) has issued was one on the care and cleaning of altar linens. I couldn’t find it on a quick search of the USCCB website, but the Archdiocese of Boston has it on theirs. It was issued in 2001. It is a very useful document:
http://www.bostoncatholic.org/Offices-And-Services/Office-Detail.aspx?id=27344&pid=464
Great booklet! I gave it to all of the women in my Rosary & Altar Society.
Our problem is that when the new church was built in 1987, they did not see the need for a sacrarium. How any priest let that happen is shameful! However, we use plastic bins to collect the soiled linens and the woman who washes them does the pre-washings in the plastic bins and pours the water in her garden.
If you look carefully at the cover illustration on that booklet, the corporal is up side down below the chalice and paten. I hope the information inside the booklet is more careful to be correct.
@ pjsandstrom,
Yes, I noticed that too. I am surprised to see such an obvious mistake in an SSPX publication.
The purificator should never be made of paper or any other disposable material.
…(the lavabo towel)…efforts should be made to avoid the appearance of a “dish towel,” “bath towel” or other cloth with a purely secular use.
That they had to mention this makes me cringe…
I have a copy and the corporal has been a real annoyance for me. It also appears to not be starched, which being that this was published by the SSPX, it is assumed that this would be done in accordance to the requirements for non-Vatican II corporals.
majuscule says:
1 July 2014 at 9:49 am
The purificator should never be made of paper or any other disposable material.
————————-
The Newman Center at my undergraduate institution had these. There was one Mass per week in a non-denominational campus chapel, and the paper purificators were used at those. (The Masses at the Newman Center itself used real cloth purificators.) When a roommate and I became sacristans for the chapel Mass, when made sure to collect the paper purificators so that they weren’t thrown away, as I believe had been the practice in the past. We would then carefully burn them in the courtyard of the Newman Center, with the approval of the chaplain. We never felt great about it, but did not know what else to do. We certainly knew that just throwing them out was wrong.
Of course, they also did not use precious metal chalices at the campus chapel, either, but I did not know about the rubrics for those then. I also can’t recall how we cleaned them. Perhaps that is for the best. I know the plate that was used for the hosts was stoneware/pottery. We would have two plates in the vestibule, and if you wanted to receive at that Mass, you would move a host from one plate to the other. After all, since there was no tabernacle, we didn’t want to have “extra” consecrated Hosts to have to transport back to the Newman Center! May God on mercy on us for any sacrileges we may have committed out of ignorance!
Could someone explain to me what this means (from the link to the Boston Archdiocese)…?
“Sacred vessels should be made of precious metal, although in the United States other precious materials may be used. Glass, ceramic or clay chalices and patens are not appropriate for use in the liturgy.”
What is an “other precious material” that’s NOT a “precious metal” that can be used? At first I thought maybe it was saying (which wouldn’t have surprised me) that the US Bishops had approved “precious” glass, ceramic, or clay… but of course the next sentence ruled those out, thankfully. But I’m confused by the wording here.