Fr. Z's Blog | Formerly entitled: "What Does The Prayer Really Say?" – Clear, straight commentary on Catholic issues, liturgy and life by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf o{]:¬)

Our priest borrowed glorious old blue vestments in the Roman style for today, the Feast of the Immaculate Conception. He announced that it’s the first time for him, and that it is per a 400-some-year-old indult for Marian feasts in former Spanish Franciscan Missionary Territories (at least in N. America.) FYI/plans for your visits to the US Southwest.

I am sure the vestments were as beautiful as the feast.

That said, I am also sure that that legendary indult no longer applies. I am also sure that some people will want to argue that there is a custom of using blue on Marian feasts. I am sure that some will say that certain solemn occasions merit the most beautiful vestments in the place even though they might not be the right color. I am sure of all these things.

I am also sure that blue is not an approved liturgical color in the Roman Rite.

It sure isn’t an approved color for Advent.

I am also sure that the abusive use of blue vestments during Advent is tapering off.

As soon as blue is approved for use, I will be among the first to seek and obtain a set in the Roman stye! The day they are approved, I will take up a collection and get, if possible, a truly spiffing set, perhaps even a solemn set, replete with cope and humeral veil.

As I have done in years past, I’ll post a poll about what you are seeing in your parish for Advent so far. We’ll have to have another for rose vestments soon.

Obviously this in intended for the Roman Rite.

And while you are clicking your choice, enjoy this annual song from the official Parodohymnodist.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted in Lighter fare, Linking Back, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Parody Songs, PODCAzT, Wherein Fr. Z Rants |
64 Comments

Rapid Soup!

Posted on 8 December 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Ahhhh!

Well… at least it’s not a platitude.

That soup was soooo good!

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged Chinese food
10 Comments

“There is no prize for being the oldest dissident Jesuit priest.”

Posted on 8 December 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Dozens of people have sent me links to stories about a 90+ year old Jesuit who was suspended in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee for “concelebrating” with a fake wymynpryst… the one who had her “ordination tambourine“. Remember her?

There is a deeper point, which I will get to by and by.

Anyway, the guy is a liberal Jesuit who thinks women should be ordained. He “concelebrated” with her and got suspended. One of his 75 year-old colleagues whined that his older brother in heresy was being badly treated. Boo hoo.

As one of my correspondents put it: “There is no prize for being the oldest dissident Jesuit priest.”

This is not much of a story, actually.

But I did love the photo that went with this article:

Do you remember reading my point that these aging hippies cannot separate their identity from the halcyon days of the civil-rights and the anti-war protest movements?

This is an example of what I am talking about.

The same guy:

Posted in Liberals, The Drill, Throwing a Nutty | Tagged anti-war protest, civil rights, liberals
58 Comments

Wherein Fr. Z concedes about the “one Mass for two obligations” theory

Posted on 8 December 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I have written a couple times (HERE and HERE) about the possibility of attending one Mass on Saturday evening of the day of the Immaculate Conception (a Holy Day of Obligation in these USA) and, thereby, of fulfilling also the Sunday obligation. That was my reading of can. 1248.

Remember: I am not a canonist. Nor have I played on on TV.

Remember too: I have been saying all along that it is far better to attend two Masses, one on each day.

It seemed to me, however, that the law, interpreted as flexibly as we are asked to interpret it when obligations are involved, could permit two obligations to be fulfilled by participation at one Mass. The Mass attended would just happen to fall in the period of about 8 hours of overlap of the two days as reckoned according to liturgical time and non-liturgical time. And, again, we interpret law as favorably as we can when obligations are imposed.

A couple canonists I have contacted agree with me. More, do not. The prevailing opinion among canonists (and I am not one) is that one Mass on Saturday does NOT fulfill two obligations. Among the dissenting (from me, that is) canonists is Dr. Peters, whom I respect greatly in matters canonical.

Now I have heard an anecdote which I must, in justice, share.

A priest friend in these USA after a retreat in Indiana recently collared His Eminence Raymond Card. Burke (Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, and thus Holy Church’s “Supreme Court Chief Justice”).

My friend said he was in a conversation with Card. Burke yesterday afternoon when one of the other priests present brought up the disagreement on the issue of the double obligation fulfillment. My priest friend said one of the priests said, “Ed Peters takes the position that one must attend two Masses, while Fr. Z says one Mass in the evening could count for both.” He said Burke responded, “Fr. Zuhlsdorf is generally very good, but here he’s just plain wrong.”

Card. Burke said that, in this matter, I am “just plain wrong”.

Well. There it is.

Card. Burke’s response is not the equivalent of an authentic interpretation of the canon as issued by the proper dicastery of the Holy See, but it ain’t chopped liver either.

All along I have said that I defer to proper authority on this one. I still don’t see the logic, but when I find I disagree with Dr. Peters AND Card. Burke, I start to question my ability to reason.

In the meantime, as I continue to scratch my head, you had all better get yourselves to Mass today and tomorrow as well.

I considered myself obliged to pass this news along to those of you who have followed the argument.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Linking Back, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Mail from priests, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill | Tagged can. 1248, Card. Burke, Dr. Peters, Holy Day of Obligation
68 Comments

About that survey by The Tablet… does anything strike you as a little queer?

Posted on 7 December 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I wrote HERE about The Tablet (aka The Bitter Pill aka RU-486 ) and their abortive attempts to get a survey right concerning acceptance of the new, corrected ICEL translation.

It has been a tough few days for RU-486, I’m afraid. They posted the wrong texts in their poll. They then had technical problems which required them to zero the results. They changed – corrected – the texts. It’s all a huge hassle, I’m sure.

One of the survey questions I really enjoy, however, is this one. Read it carefully and then ask yourself if there isn’t something odd about it.

See it? Yes? No? Yes?

The Latin text is NOT a translation. Ordinary Form, Extraordinary Form – whatever – are Latin to begin with.

This survey thing is hard!

Follow my link, above, to take their survey… in whatever form it has taken today.

Posted in Liberals, Lighter fare, Linking Back, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | Tagged RU-486, survey, The Bitter Pill, The Tablet, translation
17 Comments

St. Jerome did not like St. Ambrose

Posted on 7 December 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

In Book II of his Apology, Rufinus points out how Jerome had attacked Ambrose. He mentions Ambrose’ work De Spiritu Sancto. Thus, Rufinus about Jerome’s view of Ambrose.

Rufinus relates more of Jerome’s disdain for his “rival” in Milan (Apology 2,23-25) as he digs into accusations of plagiarism which were being hurled around.

Rufinus says in 2, 23 that Jerome referred to Ambrose as a raven, a bird of ill omen, croaking and ridiculing in an strange way the color of all the others birds on account of his own total blackness…

“praesertim cum a sinistro oscinem corvum audiam croccientem et mirum in modum de cunctarum avium ridere coloribus, cum totus ipse tenebrosus sit.”

Again, going on about Jerome’s accusation against Ambrose of plagiarism, in 2,25 Rufinus continues about Jerome’s treatment of Ambrose with his own counter charges:

25. You observe how (Jerome) treats Ambrose. First, he calls him a crow and says that he is black all over; then he calls him a jackdaw who decks himself in other birds’ showy feathers; and then he rends him with his foul abuse, and declares that there is nothing manly in a man whom God has singled out to be the glory of the churches of Christ, who has spoken of the testimonies of the Lord even in the sight of persecuting kings and has not been alarmed. The saintly Ambrose wrote his book on the

Jerome took another, less than oblique swipe at Ambrose.

Ambrose had been popularly proclaimed bishop in Milan in 374 even though he had not even been baptized and had no theological training. The emperor, who wanted peace, acceded and within a week Ambrose was baptized and consecrated bishop.

Jerome, who had probably been disappointed that he hadn’t been made bishop of Rome, surely felt the sting of this meteoric rise of Ambrose.

In any event, listen to Jerome:

One who was yesterday a catechumen is today a bishop; one who was yesterday in the amphitheater is today in the church; one who spent the evening in the circus stands in the morning at the altar: one who a little while ago was a patron of actors is now a dedicator of virgins. Was the apostle ignorant of our shifts and subterfuges? Did he know nothing of our foolish arguments?

(Heri catechumenus, hodie pontifex; heri in amphitheatro, hodie in ecclesia; uespere in circo, mane in altari; dudum fautor strionum, nunc uirginum consecrator: num ignorabat apostolus tergiuersationes nostras et argumentorum ineptias nesciebat?)

No love lost there.

Some time ago I made a PODCAzT about St. Ambrose and pro-abortion Catholic politicians.

054 08-04-29 Pro-Abortion Politicians and Communion; St. Ambrose and Emperor Theodosius

Also on Ambrose:

060 08-05-16 Pentecost customs; St. Ambrose on the dew of the Holy Spirit
065 08-07-19 St. Ambrose “On mysteries”; Interview: Fr. Robert Pasley
097 09-12-07 Ambrose to a new bishop; In The Bleak Midwinter

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged St. Ambrose, St. Jerome
9 Comments

Alfred Hitchcock – Catholic

Posted on 7 December 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Who can fathom the graces God offers as death draws near to us?

Some people are given the great gift of courage not to wait too long to become a Catholic, sometimes after a long time thinking about it.

John Wayne… Oscar Wilde…

I read that Dave Brubeck, who died recently, because a Catholic later in life.

Today I read that Alfred Hitchcock because a Catholic in his end times.
The WSJ has the story HERE.

Alfred Hitchcock’s Surprise Ending
A biographer said that the director, at the end of his life, shunned religion. Not true. I was there.

By MARK HENNINGER [a Jesuit]

I remember as a young boy watching the black-and-white “Alfred Hitchcock Presents” on TV and being enthralled from the start by the simple nine-stroke line-drawing caricature of the famed movie director’s rotund profile. The mischievous theme music set the mood as Hitchcock appeared in silhouette from the right edge of the screen, and then walked into the center replacing the caricature. “Good evening.” There followed his droll introductions, so unlike anything else on television.

Such childhood emotions came over me again when in early 1980 I entered his home in Bel Air to see him dozing in a chair in a corner of his living room, dressed in jet-black pajamas.

At the time, I was a graduate student in philosophy at UCLA, and I was (and remain) a Jesuit priest. A fellow priest, Tom Sullivan, who knew Hitchcock, said one Thursday that the next day he was going over to hear Hitchcock’s confession. Tom asked whether on Saturday afternoon I would accompany him to celebrate a Mass in Hitchcock’s house.

[…]

Read the rest there.