QUAERITUR: What to do about liturgical abuses?

Posted on 5 April 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I am under siege in email from frustrated people pouring our their tales of liturgical abuses, perpetrated or scheduled, for Holy Thursday. They ask “what am I supposed to do”?

Most of the time, there is nothing we can do in the face of some priest who in his arrogance or, sometimes, ignorance but sincerity, imposes his whims on God’s people. Liturgical abuse is abuse of people, by the way.

What can you do?

This depends on circumstances.  Sometimes, in the face if ingrained arrogance or ignorance, or that unbeatable combination of both, you can do nothing except pray for patience and pray for the people involved.  Offer your sufferings to God for the sake of some good purpose.

If you are going to act, however, take a few moments to read the end of Redemptionis Sacramentum:

6. Complaints Regarding Abuses in Liturgical Matters

[183.] In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious duty incumbent upon each and every one, and all are bound to carry it out without any favouritism.

[184.] Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff.  It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.

Read all of Redemptionis Sacramentum and other liturgical legislation.  It may be that what you think is an abuse, is really a legitimate option.  Be sure.

You can also review my tips for writing to ecclesiastical authorities.

Also, I would engage is a deep examination of your own conscience before setting pen to paper. Examine carefully your motives and your own practices. You need to be clean.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill | Tagged ,
40 Comments

Benedict XVI’s sermon for Holy Thursday evening Lord’s Supper Mass – a theology of kneeling

Posted on 5 April 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

The Pope’s sermon for Holy Mass evening “Supper” Mass.

Within this sermon there is a tremendous reflection on the posture of kneeling.

My emphases and comments:

Dear Brothers and Sisters!

Holy Thursday is not only the day of the institution of the Most Holy Eucharist, whose splendour bathes all else and in some ways draws it to itself. [Water image.  File that away.  Ratzinger is careful when he crafts his sermons.  He plants points at the beginning and comes back to them.  Let us see if he picks up on water again, down the line.] To Holy Thursday also belongs the dark night of the Mount of Olives, to which Jesus goes with his disciples; the solitude and abandonment of Jesus, who in prayer goes forth to encounter the darkness of death; the betrayal of Judas, Jesus’ arrest and his denial by Peter; his indictment before the Sanhedrin and his being handed over to the Gentiles, to Pilate. Let us try at this hour to understand more deeply something of these events, for in them the mystery of our redemption takes place.

Jesus goes forth into the night. Night signifies lack of communication, a situation where people do not see one another. It is a symbol of incomprehension, of the obscuring of truth. [He is picking up the theme of Truth from his Chrism Mass sermon in the morning.] It is the place where evil, which has to hide before the light, can grow. Jesus himself is light and truth, communication, purity and goodness. He enters into the night. Night is ultimately a symbol of death, the definitive loss of fellowship and life. Jesus enters into the night in order to overcome it and to inaugurate the new Day of God in the history of humanity.

On the way, he sang with his disciples Israel’s psalms of liberation and redemption, which evoked the first Passover in Egypt, the night of liberation. Now he goes, as was his custom, to pray in solitude and, as Son, to speak with the Father. But, unusually, he wants to have close to him three disciples: Peter, James and John. These are the three who had experienced his Transfiguration – when the light of God’s glory shone through his human figure – and had seen him standing between the Law and the Prophets, between Moses and Elijah. They had heard him speaking to both of them about his “exodus” to Jerusalem. Jesus’ exodus to Jerusalem – how mysterious are these words! Israel’s exodus from Egypt had been the event of escape and liberation for God’s People. What would be the form taken by the exodus of Jesus, in whom the meaning of that historic drama was to be definitively fulfilled? The disciples were now witnessing the first stage of that exodus – the utter abasement which was nonetheless the essential step of the going forth to the freedom and new life which was the goal of the exodus. The disciples, whom Jesus wanted to have close to him as an element of human support in that hour of extreme distress, quickly fell asleep. Yet they heard some fragments of the words of Jesus’ prayer and they witnessed his way of acting. Both were deeply impressed on their hearts and they transmitted them to Christians for all time. Jesus called God “Abba“. The word means – as they add – “Father”. Yet it is not the usual form of the word “father”, but rather a children’s word [But NOT “daddy”.  “Abba” is not “daddy”. I’ve written about that here at other times.  But let us not get bogged down.] – an affectionate name which one would not have dared to use in speaking to God. It is the language of the one who is truly a “child”, the Son of the Father, the one who is conscious of being in communion with God, in deepest union with him.

If we ask ourselves what is most characteristic of the figure of Jesus in the Gospels, we have to say that it is his relationship with God. He is constantly in communion with God. Being with the Father is the core of his personality. Through Christ we know God truly. “No one has ever seen God”, says Saint John. The one “who is close to the Father’s heart … has made him known” (1:18).  [As St. Hillary taught, the Son, the Word, was the perfect invisible image of the invisible Father.  Christ is the perfect visible image of the invisible Father.  In the Chrism Mass sermon, Benedict speaks about “translations” of the Word in our world.] Now we know God as he truly is. He is Father, and this in an absolute goodness to which we can entrust ourselves. The evangelist Mark, who has preserved the memories of Saint Peter, relates that Jesus, after calling God “Abba”, went on to say: “Everything is possible for you. You can do all things” (cf. 14:36). The one who is Goodness is at the same time Power; he is all-powerful. Power is goodness and goodness is power. We can learn this trust from Jesus’ prayer on the Mount of Olives.  [Counter-intuitive, no?  In human terms, power corrupts.  In divine terms, absolute power is absolute goodness.]

[Let liturgists pay attention to this next paragraph!] Before reflecting on the content of Jesus’ petition, we must still consider what the evangelists tell us about Jesus’ posture during his prayer. Matthew and Mark tell us that he “threw himself on the ground” (Mt 26:39; cf. Mk 14:35), thus assuming a posture of complete submission, as is preserved in the Roman liturgy of Good Friday. Luke, on the other hand, tells us that Jesus prayed on his knees. In the Acts of the Apostles, he speaks of the saints praying on their knees: Stephen during his stoning, Peter at the raising of someone who had died, Paul on his way to martyrdom. In this way Luke has sketched a brief history of prayer on one’s knees in the early Church. Christians, in kneeling, enter into Jesus’ prayer on the Mount of Olives. [Are you ready to say it aloud now?  “Let us KNEEL for Holy Communion!”] When menaced by the power of evil, as they kneel, they are upright before the world, while as sons and daughters, they kneel before the Father. Before God’s glory we Christians kneel and acknowledge his divinity; by that posture we also express our confidence that he will prevail.  [Clear enough?]

Jesus struggles with the Father. He struggles with himself. And he struggles for us. He experiences anguish before the power of death. First and foremost this is simply the dread natural to every living creature in the face of death. [Fear of death is described by Augustine as “our daily winter”. I have often used this as a starting point for my own liturgical reflections here and elsewhere.] In Jesus, however, something more is at work. His gaze peers deeper, into the nights of evil. He sees the filthy flood of all the lies and all the disgrace which he will encounter in that chalice from which he must drink. [Benedict doesn’t often invoke the image of “filth”, but when he does, he is profound.  Think of his 2005 Stations of the Cross, Jesus Falls the Third Time.] His is the dread of one who is completely pure and holy as he sees the entire flood of this world’s evil bursting upon him. [There’s the water image again.  And in his Stations reflection, he used the image of water swamping the boat of the Church even when talking about the “filth” of abuse, etc.] He also sees me, and he prays for me. This moment of Jesus’ mortal anguish is thus an essential part of the process of redemption. Consequently, the Letter to the Hebrews describes the struggle of Jesus on the Mount of Olives as a priestly event. In this prayer of Jesus, pervaded by mortal anguish, the Lord performs the office of a priest: he takes upon himself the sins of humanity, of us all, and he brings us before the Father.  [This is about the meaning of priesthood.  The Chrism Mass sermon in the morning, he dealt with priests who are disobedient.  They have forgotten that priesthood is inseparable from sacrifice.  Priests of Christ the High Priest are ordained for sacrifice, as all priests are, but they are also, like Christ, priest and victim.]

Lastly, we must also pay attention to the content of Jesus’ prayer on the Mount of Olives. Jesus says: “Father, for you all things are possible; remove this cup from me; yet not what I want, but what you want” (Mk 14:36). The natural will of the man Jesus recoils in fear before the enormity of the matter. He asks to be spared. Yet as the Son, he places this human will into the Father’s will: not I, but you. In this way he transformed the stance of Adam, the primordial human sin, and thus heals humanity. The stance of Adam was: not what you, O God, have desired; rather, I myself want to be a god. This pride is the real essence of sin. We think we are free and truly ourselves only if we follow our own will. God appears as the opposite of our freedom. We need to be free of him – so we think – and only then will we be free. This is the fundamental rebellion present throughout history and the fundamental lie which perverts life. [Again, I cannot help but think of his Chrism Mass sermon.] When human beings set themselves against God, they set themselves against the truth of their own being and consequently do not become free, but alienated from themselves. We are free only if we stand in the truth of our being, if we are united to God. Then we become truly “like God” – not by resisting God, eliminating him, or denying him. [This is a theme for his whole pontificate which he signaled at the close of his sermon at his inaugural Mass at the beginning of his pontificate in 2005.  I have quoted it time and again on this blog.] In his anguished prayer on the Mount of Olives, Jesus resolved the false opposition between obedience and freedom, and opened the path to freedom. Let us ask the Lord to draw us into this “yes” to God’s will, and in this way to make us truly free. Amen.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Brick by Brick, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, Pope of Christian Unity | Tagged , , , , , , , , ,
13 Comments

Benedict XVI’s Sermon for Chrism Mass: hits hard about priesthood, disobedience, zeal for souls

Posted on 5 April 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

The Holy Father’s sermon for Holy Thursday Chrism Mass (in the morning, not the even “Last Supper” Mass).

UPDATE: This sermon is starting to get some sizzle.  The New York Times is out and the head line is “Pope Assails ‘Disobedient’ Among Priests.”, and the writer’s, Donadio’s, first line refers to Benedict again as “God’s Rottweiler”.  Hell’s Bible is not trying to be complimentary, but this is exactly what we need!   I would by far, leaps and bounds, want to have them talk about the Pope as a “Rottweiler” right now.  He isn’t like that, and we know that, but, right now, I want hard-ball, not soft-ball.  We do better with “Rottweiler” than “grandpa”.  Let the Pope be Pope. Let Benedict be Benedict.

With my emphases and comments.

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

At this Holy Mass our thoughts go back to that moment when, through prayer and the laying on of hands, the bishop made us sharers in the priesthood of Jesus Christ, so that we might be “consecrated in truth” (Jn 17:19), as Jesus besought the Father for us in his high-priestly prayer. He himself is the truth. He has consecrated us, that is to say, handed us over to God for ever, so that we can offer men and women a service that comes from God and leads to him. [QUAERITUR:] But does our consecration extend to the daily reality of our lives – do we operate as men of God in fellowship with Jesus Christ? This question places the Lord before us and us before him. “Are you resolved to be more united with the Lord Jesus and more closely conformed to him, denying yourselves and confirming those promises about sacred duties towards Christ’s Church which, prompted by love of him, you willingly and joyfully pledged on the day of your priestly ordination?” After this homily, I shall be addressing that question to each of you here and to myself as well. Two things, above all, are asked of us: there is a need for an interior bond, a configuration to Christ, and at the same time there has to be a transcending of ourselves, a renunciation of what is simply our own, of the much-vaunted self-fulfilment. We need, I need, not to claim my life as my own, but to place it at the disposal of another – of Christ. I should be asking not what I stand to gain, but what I can give for him and so for others. Or to put it more specifically, this configuration to Christ, who came not to be served but to serve, who does not take, but rather gives – what form does it take in the often dramatic situation of the Church today? [NB:] Recently a group of priests from a European country issued a summons to disobedience, and at the same time gave concrete examples of the forms this disobedience might take, even to the point of disregarding definitive decisions of the Church’s Magisterium, such as the question of women’s ordination, for which Blessed Pope John Paul II stated irrevocably that the Church has received no authority from the Lord. Is disobedience a path of renewal for the Church? [Remarkable.  Benedict used this moment to answer that dissident group.  If any of those men have the slightest Catholic sense left in them, I imagine they would have to feel deep shame that Peter would on Holy Thursday itself use them as an example of the OPPOSITE of what priests should be.] We would like to believe that the authors of this summons are motivated by concern for the Church, that they are convinced that the slow pace of institutions has to be overcome by drastic measures, in order to open up new paths and to bring the Church up to date. But is disobedience really a way to do this? Do we sense here anything of that configuration to Christ which is the precondition for true renewal, or do we merely sense a desperate push to do something to change the Church in accordance with one’s own preferences and ideas?

But let us not oversimplify matters. [QUAERITUR:] Surely Christ himself corrected human traditions which threatened to stifle the word and the will of God? Indeed he did, so as to rekindle obedience to the true will of God, to his ever enduring word. His concern was for true obedience, as opposed to human caprice. Nor must we forget: he was the Son, [and we are not] possessed of singular authority and responsibility to reveal the authentic will of God, so as to open up the path for God’s word to the world of the nations. And finally: he lived out his task with obedience and humility all the way to the Cross, and so gave credibility to his mission. Not my will, but thine be done: these words reveal to us the Son, in his humility and his divinity, and they show us the true path.

[QUAERITUR:] Let us ask again: do not such reflections serve simply to defend inertia, the fossilization of traditions? No. Anyone who considers the history of the post-conciliar era can recognize the process of true renewal, which often took unexpected forms in living movements and made almost tangible the inexhaustible vitality of holy Church, the presence and effectiveness of the Holy Spirit. And if we look at the people from whom these fresh currents of life burst forth and continue to burst forth, then we see that this new fruitfulness requires being filled with the joy of faith, the radicalism of obedience, the dynamic of hope and the power of love. [I am not entirely surely I understand what he is talking about in that paragraph.]

Dear friends, it is clear that configuration to Christ is the precondition and the basis for all renewal. But perhaps at times the figure of Jesus Christ seems too lofty and too great for us to dare to measure ourselves by him.  [St. Augustine makes this point, suggesting that the lives of saints are better models which we can actually imitate.] The Lord knows this. So he has provided “translations” on a scale that is more accessible and closer to us. [Saints.  Note what the Pope is doing here.  Christ is the Word made flesh.  Saints are the Word’s “translations”.] For this same reason, Saint Paul did not hesitate to say to his communities: Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ. For his disciples, he was a “translation” of Christ’s manner of life that they could see and identify with. Ever since Paul’s time, history has furnished a constant flow of other such “translations” of Jesus’ way into historical figures. We priests can call to mind a great throng of holy priests who have gone before us and shown us the way: from Polycarp of Smyrna and Ignatius of Antioch, from the great pastors Ambrose, Augustine and Gregory the Great, through to Ignatius of Loyola, Charles Borromeo, John Mary Vianney and the priest-martyrs of the 20th century, and finally Pope John Paul II, who gave us an example, through his activity and his suffering, of configuration to Christ as “gift and mystery”. The saints show us how renewal works and how we can place ourselves at its service. And they help us realize that God is not concerned so much with great numbers and with outward successes, but achieves his victories under the humble sign of the mustard seed.  [Holy Church has always given two great gifts to all of humanity, not just to her own members: art and saints.  Both art and saints reflect the beauty of God’s truth.]

Dear friends, I would like briefly to touch on two more key phrases from the renewal of ordination promises, which should cause us to reflect at this time in the Church’s life and in our own lives. [Whew!  Getting heavy…] Firstly, the reminder that – as Saint Paul put it – we are “stewards of the mysteries of God” (1 Cor 4:1) and we are charged with the ministry of teaching (munus docendi), which forms a part of this stewardship of God’s mysteries, through which he shows us his face and his heart, in order to give us himself. At the meeting of Cardinals on the occasion of the recent Consistory, several of the pastors of the Church spoke, from experience, of the growing religious illiteracy found in the midst of our sophisticated society. [Could this same “religious illiteracy” be a factor in the disobedience of certain priests?] The foundations of faith, which at one time every child knew, are now known less and less. [This is so true, but it has been true for YEARS.  It has been said again and again.] But if we are to live and love our faith, if we are to love God and to hear him aright, we need to know what God has said to us – our minds and hearts must be touched by his word. [Nemo dat quod non habet.] The Year of Faith, commemorating the opening of the Second Vatican Council fifty years ago, should provide us with an occasion to proclaim the message of faith with new enthusiasm and new joy. We find it of course first and foremost in sacred Scripture, which we can never read and ponder enough. Yet at the same time we all experience the need for help in accurately expounding it in the present day, if it is truly to touch our hearts. This help we find first of all in the words of the teaching Church: the texts of the Second Vatican Council [Some of the disobedient might try reading them for the first time.] and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are essential tools which serve as an authentic guide to what the Church believes on the basis of God’s word. And of course this also includes the whole wealth of documents given to us by Pope John Paul II, still far from being fully explored.

All our preaching must measure itself against the saying of Jesus Christ: “My teaching is not mine” (Jn 7:16). We preach not private theories and opinions, but the faith of the Church, whose servants we are. Naturally this should not be taken to mean that I am not completely supportive of this teaching, or solidly anchored in it. In this regard I am always reminded of the words of Saint Augustine: what is so much mine as myself? And what is so little mine as myself? [Typical Augustinian paring/aporia.] I do not own myself, and I become myself by the very fact that I transcend myself, and thereby become a part of Christ, a part of his body the Church. If we do not preach ourselves, and if we are inwardly so completely one with him who called us to be his ambassadors, that we are shaped by faith and live it, then our preaching will be credible. I do not seek to win people for myself, but I give myself. The Curé of Ars was no scholar, no intellectual, we know that. But his preaching touched people’s hearts because his own heart had been touched.

The last keyword that I should like to consider is “zeal for souls”: animarum zelus. It is an old-fashioned expression, not much used these days. In some circles, the word “soul” is virtually banned because – ostensibly – it expresses a body-soul dualism that wrongly compartmentalizes the human being. Of course the human person is a unity, destined for eternity as body and soul. And yet that cannot mean that we no longer have a soul, a constituent principle guaranteeing our unity in this life and beyond earthly death. And as priests, of course, we are concerned for the whole person, including his or her physical needs – we care for the hungry, the sick, the homeless. And yet we are concerned not only with the body, but also with the needs of the soul: with those who suffer from the violation of their rights or from destroyed love, with those unable to perceive the truth, those who suffer for lack of truth and love. We are concerned with the salvation of men and women in body and soul. [Zelus animarum leads to salus animarum.] And as priests of Jesus Christ we carry out our task with enthusiasm. [Zelus!] No one should ever have the impression that we work conscientiously when on duty, but before and after hours we belong only to ourselves. A priest never belongs to himself. People must sense our zeal, [there it is again] through which we bear credible witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Let us ask the Lord to fill us with joy in his message, so that we may serve his truth and his love with joyful zeal. Amen. [I have on my shelf a signed copy of his book of some years ago on priesthood called “Servitori della vostra gioia“.]

UPDATE:

I have now seen AP’s article by Nicole Winfield, who is usually more careful with what she writes.

Pope denounces dissident priests on celibacy
By NICOLE WINFIELD

VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Benedict XVI denounced priests who have questioned church teaching on celibacy and ordaining women, saying Thursday they were disobeying his authority to try to impose their own ideas on the church. […]

No, Nicole. I don’t think that is a fair characterization. The Holy Father wasn’t talking about HIS own authority, was he. Read the sermon. Hepful hint: Other than the fact the Pope is talking about JESUS throughout, focus on the section where Benedict says “Blessed Pope John Paul II stated irrevocably that the Church has received no authority from the Lord.”. Whose authority are the priests defying? Not just Benedict’s.

Most of the article focuses on the position of the dissidents in Austria.  There is some truly slithery thought in the rest of the AP piece.  If any of you in the USA or other English-speaking countries think you have it bad with your priests and bishops, thank God you not in Austria, so beautiful, once so Catholic, now so confused.  Corruptio optimi pessima.

 

Posted in Mail from priests, New Evangelization, Non Nobis and Te Deum, Our Catholic Identity, Priests and Priesthood, The Drill | Tagged , , , , , , , ,
46 Comments

Good piece by Catholic League on links between Obamacare, HHS mandate, and ACLU

Posted on 4 April 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Be sure to review and file away for reference this piece from the Catholic League:

OBAMA ENLISTS ACLU TO WAR ON CATHOLICS

April 4, 2012

On April 3, Catholic News Service published a story on an internal memo from the bishops on ObamaCare. Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on it today:

The more the bishops study this issue, the more resolved they are in opposing ObamaCare. At the heart of the bishops’ objections is the contrived and unjust way the Obama administration defines a religious organization; it grants an exemption only to what it deems is a religious entity. In point of fact, it is the ACLU that is really dictating to Catholics what passes as a religious institution.

In 2000, the California Contraceptive Equity Law was passed. In it there is a provision defining what qualifies as a religious employer, and it was written by the ACLU. Besides noting that the institution must be a non-profit, the exact qualifying language is as follows:
“The inculcation of religious values is the purpose of the entity”
“The entity primarily employs persons who share the religious tenets of the entity”
“The entity serves primarily persons who share the religious tenets of the entity”

The Health and Human Services edict forcing Catholic institutions to provide for abortion-inducing drugs in their insurance coverage also allows an exemption for groups it deems religious. Besides noting the non-profit status, the exact qualifying language is as follows:
“Has the inculcation of religious values as its purpose”
“Primarily employs persons who share its religious tenets”
“Primarily serves persons who share its religious tenets”
Having written a Ph.D. dissertation and two books on the ACLU, I can say unequivocally that the ACLU has long been an enemy of religious liberty. Indeed, when it was founded in 1920 by Roger Baldwin (whom I interviewed in 1978), it listed all the provisions of the First Amendment among its first ten goals. Not among them was religious liberty. And these are the same folks that Obama turns to in his war on Catholics.

Contact our director of communications about Donohue’s remarks:
Jeff Field
Phone: 212-371-3191
E-mail: cl@catholicleague.org

Posted in Dogs and Fleas, Emanations from Penumbras, Our Catholic Identity, Religious Liberty, The Drill | Tagged , , , , ,
9 Comments

Pres. Obama invokes “social Darwinism”. Mr. President, look in the mirror.

Posted on 3 April 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Please use the sharing buttons!

The President called the budget plan proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), “social Darwinism“.

Do you want an example of true social Darwinism?  Look at Pres. Obama’s eager support of abortion and even infanticide.

Only the strong survive.

The trajectory fueled by authentic Darwinism led to the eugenics and hate-filled agenda of Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood, the queen of big-business abortion, of which Pres. Obama is a huge supporter.

Can we forget that Pres. Obama’s unelected appointee, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius openly declared that lowering live births would help pay for health care?  “The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for cost of contraception”.  Ipsa dixit.

This president is so dedicated to actual social Darwinism, dog eat dog lethal social Darwinism, that he is ready to violate the 1st Amendment and the consciences of a large number of Americans and ram paying for contraception, abortifacients and sterilizations down the throats of religious institutions.

And if the Catholic Church, for example, says it will not comply to his assault, he will, believe me, send the attack dogs.

He is pushing his aggressive agenda because he thinks he is stronger than than we are.

Want to find social Darwinism, Mr. President?

Look in the mirror.

Posted in Dogs and Fleas, Religious Liberty, The Drill | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,
10 Comments

CATHOLIC BLOGGERS! ACTION ITEM! POLL ALERT! Time Magazine on Card. Dolan

Posted on 3 April 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Bloggers! Please pick this up.  You don’t have to link to me. Just DO IT. Solidarity!

The dreadful TIME Magazine (dreadful when it comes to anything about the Catholic Church) is having a poll and you should participate.

From their site:

The 2012 TIME 100 Poll

Cast your votes for the leaders, artists, innovators, icons and heroes that you think are the most influential people in the world. Official voting ends on Friday, April 6, and the poll winner will be included in the TIME 100 issue. The complete TIME 100 list will be chosen by our editors and revealed on TIME.com on Tuesday, April 17.

Note well the language: “influential”.

It does NOT say “whom you like” or “whom you agree with”.  

It says “influential”.

Given what is going on in the USA right now, Timothy Card. Dolan, as President of the USCCB engaged on our behalf in a battle with the White House over the religious liberty and civil rights of all Americans… and making headway… is nothing if not “influential”.

Card. Dolan should be on that list.  If he is on that list, he’ll get some “street kred”, though the newsies will ignore it.  Will it make huge difference?  Perhaps not.  But when pundits and talking heads prattle about this our battle in the news, they could say, “Hey! Keep in mind that Card. Dolan is considered in the top 100 by TIME…”, or, if you are an enemy, “Why should the White House listen to Card. Dolan? Nancy Pelosi, Lady Gaga and Kathleen Sebelius are on the TIME list and Dolan isn’t!  Theeeyyyy support the PREZ-i-dent!”  Yes, newsies and talking heads can be that shallow.  But this is the world we live in.  You know that what I am saying is true.

Here is what it looks like on the page (with my easy arrows):

See those social media sharing buttons?  Use them.  Let’s get some sizzle going here … on our side.

Here is how the voting stands as I write:

I will guarantee … guarantee… that the “No Way” votes are coming from liberals (TIME’s readership is nothing if not liberal… okay, they are obtuse, too…) NOT because they think Card. Dolan is NOT “influential” but because they hate what he stands for, or they want free contraception, or they simply hate the Catholic Church.

If I am wrong about that, if they are voting “No” because they really think he isn’t “influential”, I’ll buy TIME’s editor a whiskey sour.

So…CLICK HERE and vote… VOTE… VOTE!

UPDATE 2324 GMT:

I think this is moving well, because people are using the Twitter button.  Use those social network buttons.

UPDATE 1 April 1833 GMT:

NO FOOLIN’

Not bad.  Let’s keep it going.

UPDATE 2 April 1448 GMT:

Slipped a little.

And did you notice the way Card. Dolan is described by TIME:

The man most likely to give Barack Obama fits on the way to election day is the newly biretta’d Archbishop of New York. Affable, jolly and theatrical, he deploys these genial weapons as the Catholic Church’s point-man in the battle against the Administration’s policies on contraception and abortion. The President just barely won the Catholic vote back in 2008; without an accommodation, Dolan could turn away enough voters to tilt a close election — all with a smile.

UPDATE 3 April 0115 GMT:

The poll has slipped a bit.

Everyone, do me a favor a post in the combox here names of other blogs who have helped in this matter.  Thanks!

 UPDATE 3 April 02oo GMT:

A little gain.

VOTE VOTE VOTE

UPDATE 4 April 1530 GMT:

A little better, thanks.

We need a list of blogs who are linking to this poll.

Posted in Biased Media Coverage, Brick by Brick, Our Catholic Identity, POLLS, Religious Liberty, The Drill, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , , , , , ,
81 Comments

WDTPRS Holy Tuesday Prayer over the people: of slithering

Posted on 3 April 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

A long-time reader and WDTPRS supporter wrote with a question about today’s Oratio super populum in the 2002MR.  As you know, with the 2002MR the “Prayer over the people was resurrected after its 30 years in tomb Bugnini and company carved from the soft rock of the ’60’s.  Now that there is a new, corrected ICEL translation, the Oratio is heard, more or less, in English as well.   But.. I digress.

Let’s look at the Oratio super populum which today is the same in the 1962MR and the 2002MR:

Tua misericordia, Deus, populum tibi subditum
et ab omni subreptione vetustatis expurget,
et capacem sanctae novitatis efficiat.

My questioner asks:

What’s that subreptione mean here?

Alarm bells are ringing in my head, because I remember seeing a variant of this word in another, famous, context.

But first, let’s seek an origin for this prayer.  I eventually found it with a variation for this very day, Feria III ad Sanctam Priscam, in the Gregorian Sacramentary.  So, it has a pedigree.  “Tua nos misericordia, deus, et ab omni subreptione vetustatis expurget et capaces sanctae novitatis efficiat.”

CURRECT (which was a typo, but seems to be a cross of “corrected” and “current”) ICEL (2011):
May your mercy, O God,
cleanse the people that are subject to you
from all seduction of former ways
and make them capable of new holiness.

Now, we can drill a bit.

First, subrepo, the interesting word here, is not going to reveal its secrets in most dictionaries unless you look under surrepo.   In Latin that labial + -r- often morph into -rr-.  Surrepo is ” to creep under, to creep or steal along, creep softly on, steal upon, to come on unawares, insensibly, or by degrees, etc.”. Sub+repo It is obviously a compound, where repo is “crawl, slither”, used to describe the motion of ants, snakes, creeping children, people swimming, stalking cranes, the snaking out of the vines of gourds, etc.

When I was researching by whose scholarship and accident we wound up with the bad translation of pro multis as “for all”, now happily in the past, I found a dubium proposed to Rome about whether the bad translation “for all” was allowing heresy to “slither” into the understand of the consecration form.  The verb was, you guessed it, our friend “surrepo“.

So, let’s see what this prayer means with a

Super literal version:
May your mercy, O God,  both purify the people subject to You
from every slithering inroad of the old,
and also bring it to be fit for the new.

The imagery here is clearly the “old man/new man” contrast in Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians 4: 22-24:

Put off your old nature which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and put on the new nature, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.

Or Paul to the Colossians 3:1-10:

If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth. For you have died, and your life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory. Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: fornication, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. On account of these the wrath of God is coming. In these you once walked, when you lived in them. But now put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and foul talk from your mouth. Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old nature with its practices and have put on the new nature, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator.

Or perhaps even the old and new wineskins image which Fathers of the Church used in talking about the resurrection of the flesh.

Etc.

The Scriptural echo in the prayer leads the hearer to remember the Apostle’s powerful ethical and moral message he attaches to the change in our character, a necessary conversion of life resulting from our belonging to Christ.

Don’t let bad old ways, unsuitable for Christians, slither back into your lives.

Posted in LENT, Our Catholic Identity, WDTPRS | Tagged , , , , ,
4 Comments

Card. Ranjith works personally to improve liturgical worship in his diocese

Posted on 3 April 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I desire to redirect you to our friends at Rorate who have presented some exquisite reflections and directives from His Eminence Malcolm Card. Ranjith, Archbishop of Colombo.  May he be emulated far and wide.

You may remember that last year Card. Ranjith in his diocese reinstituted kneeling for Communion, which is to be received on the tongue.

During March the Cardinal informed his clergy that he personally was going to take stock of the manner liturgical worship in the diocese.  He is trying to eliminate liturgical abuses.  He is, for example, insisting on proper vestments, for example, and offers a fine reflection on vestments.

And there is this:

And so dear fathers, kindly ensure that in each Church in your parishes there is an adequate supply of a sufficient number of amices, girdles, stoles and chasubles for daily use. When I come for my parish visits starting from January next year, I will check on this matter personally. Kindly begin celebrating your daily sacrifice of the Eucharist properly clad and that means dressed with the alb, with or without the amice, the girdle, stole and chasuble. This should start immediately. The Auxiliary Bishops and Episcopal Vicars should kindly ensure that this is strictly followed in your areas.

It is good to read that a diocesan bishop is taking such steps, personally, to improve the ars celebrandi of his clergy.

WDTPRS kudos to Card. Ranjith.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Brick by Brick, Fr. Z KUDOS, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , , , , ,
37 Comments

QUAERITUR: Too many people for confession. Priest gives General Absolution.

Posted on 2 April 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From a reader:

This past Saturday afternoon, I went to confession (or, rather, I tried to go to confession). The good news is that the line was full of penitents. There were at least 25 people waiting in front of me and a good number behind. After waiting nearly an hour, the priest came out of the confessional and assessed the line. He called everyone in line to gather close, distributed cards with an act of contrition printed on them, and explained that he had to get ready for Mass and would not have time to hear the remaining penitents’ confessions. He asked everyone to pray the act of contrition together and then he gave absolution (the official form) to everyone there. [i.e., General Absolution] I know that, even after receiving a general absolution, penitents are still bound to confess mortal sins if afforded the opportunity in future.

My question, Fr. Z, is whether the absolution was invalid, illicit, or neither. I had mortal sin to confess; I plan to confess it as soon as possible but I did receive the Eucharist at Mass this weekend. I approached communion with humility and begged the Lord to forgive me if it was displeasing to Him. I will probably not be able to confess my sins by number and kind until the weekend of Divine Mercy. Should I refrain from receiving the Eucharist in the interim, or was the absolution valid and can I consider myself properly disposed to communicate? What do you think?

I am sure the absolution was valid.  If you will not have have the opportunity to confess your mortal sins in the normal fashion until Divine Mercy weekend, you can nevertheless receive Holy Communion with clear conscience (provided you do not commit other mortal sin before that).  Do go to confession at the first opportunity as you are obliged by the fact that you received General Absolution.

It is unfortunate that, in many places, confessions are not heard during the Triduum.

Although the absolution was valid, what was done was illicit.

The priest should not continue this bad practice (which, sadly, is not uncommon).

If the priest was not able to hear all the confessions prior to Mass, he should have stated that he would be hearing them afterwards. If he was unable to hear confessions afterwards, he could have said when the next available time for confessions would be.

If the priest does this General Absolution thing regularly, because there are a few unshriven penitents left in line, a letter should be sent to the diocesan bishop or regional vicar simply stating clearly what happened (as you did in your email).

I want to give Father the benefit of the doubt and guess that he thought he was within the guidelines for General Absolution.  In most places, however, he was not within the guidelines for the licit imparting of General Absolution.

“But Father! But Father!”, some of you are saying. “Isn’t there a provision that priests can give General Absolution if there are too many penitents?  Isn’t that what this priest did?  You are mean.  You hate Vatican II.”

I respond saying that General Absolution is to be given in cases of grave necessity, emergencies (e.g., airplane about to crash, earthquake traps people under rubble, listeners in a hospital ward, battle about to begin, etc.).  Canon 961 establishes that a grave necessity exists (outside of the clear case of danger of death) when…

“given the number of penitents, there are not enough confessors available properly to hear the individual’s confessions within an appropriate time, so that without fault of their own the penitents are deprived of sacramental grace or of Holy Communion for a lengthy period of time.”

All those conditions would need to be present for general absolution to be given licitly.  Telling people to “come back next week” would NOT deprive them of sacramental grace for a “lengthy period of time,” which most manualists – and we like manuals – would say is a month or more.

Furthermore, the Motu proprio of 7 April 2002 Misericordia Dei, 5 clarifies that “judgment as to whether there exists the conditions required by canon 961 is [Note bene] not a matter for the confessor, but for the diocesan bishop who can determine cases of such necessity in light of the criteria agreed upon with other members of the Episcopal Conference.”

The local bishops lay down the conditions.  They may vary from place to place.  In Africa, for example, a missionary priest might arrive at a place to find a thousand people waiting.    That conference will lay down the proper conditions for the priest.  In the USA, these problems don’t exist and the bishops have laid down the conditions (more which repeats the point about a month or more).

Also to be abominated is the scheduling of General Absolution, which is as wrong wrong wrong as wrong can be!  You cannot reasonably schedule an emergency.

This whole scenario, in addition, underscores another problem.

Tell me if this sounds familiar. Confessions are scheduled from 3:00 pm to 3:45 pm, once a week, before a 4:00 pm Saturday Mass.  The priest sits, lonely in the confessional, until the first penitent shows up at 3:42.  She is immediately followed by 20 people who all want to get their sins shriven before this Mass.  When, at 4:03, the priest has to leave the confessional to start Mass late, they are mad… at the priest!

Keeping in mind my 20 Tips for Making a Good Confession, if you have grave sins you must confess, try to get to church for the beginning of confessions, not toward the end of the scheduled time.

And, everyone, avoid General Absolution.  You cannot receive General Absolution twice validly, except in danger of death, without having made a regular, auricular confession beforehand.  When you receive General Absolution, licitly or illicitly, you are bound to confess all your mortal sins in the normal manner as soon as you can.  If priests are scheduling General Absolution way in advance, blow the whistle on them.  This is a serious abuse of God’s people which has to be stopped.

Posted in "But Father! But Father!", "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, GO TO CONFESSION, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, The Drill | Tagged , , , , ,
47 Comments

Of Tea and Coffee

Posted on 2 April 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From a reader:

Father Z, don’t forget to let everyone know that Mystic Monk has great tea!

I’m abstaining from coffee (decaf) until Obama leaves office!
I’ve been off for 2 months. God bless you!

Okay!

Did you know that the Wyoming Carmelites also have a variety of teas (real and herbal)?

While some of you are buying your Pascha Java, others are choosing Earl Grey.

BTW… I noticed that some of you are opting for a coffee blend I had not seen before: Easter Sunrise Blend. (Higher caffeine!)

Mystic Monk Tea… it’s swell!

Posted in The Campus Telephone Pole | Tagged , , , ,
5 Comments