Fr. Z's Blog | Catholic commentary by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

QUAERITUR: simultaneous Masses v concelebration

Posted on 29 December 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

QUAERITUR: simultaneous Masses v concelebration From a reader:

Canon 902 states that “Unless the welfare of the Christian faithful
requires or suggests otherwise, priests can concelebrate the Eucharist. They are completely free to celebrate the Eucharist individually, however, but not while a concelebration is taking place in the same church or oratory.”

So how is this to apply in Traditional Simultaneous Masses?

Simultaneous Masses (EF or OF) seem to be licit under can. 902, as long as one of the simultaneous Masses is not being concelebrated.

Since concelebration is pretty unlikely in the Extraordinary Form, let a hundred simultaneous TLMs blossom! Let a hundred priests discourse over Mystic Monk Coffee afterwards! (Fathers, refresh your coffee supply now!)

I’m not sure how this “no simultaneous Mass where there is a concelebration” is squared with the common practice in, particularly, St. Peter’s Basilica, in Rome. In St. Peter’s and other pilgrimage places, individual priests are celebrate Mass at one altar simultaneously as another Mass is being concelebrated at the next altar over. There may be some sort of a dispensation or particular law governing St. Peter’s, St. Mary Major, etc.. Otherwise, those in charge are just bowing to the obvious and ignoring a silly canon.

What I strongly object to is any pressure on priests to concelebrate or any fisheye if they choose not to. Sometimes even priests who should know better get obnoxious about this point.

Concelebration should be safe, legal and rare.

Let there be Masses! Masses, I say, many and simultaneous!

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged can.902, concelebration, simultaneous Masses
59 Comments

Detroit: New orchestral Mass premiered at Assumption Grotto, composed by the parish priest!

Posted on 29 December 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I posted about the comments made by Msgr. Miserachs-Grau about the state of sacred music. Now I would like to share something about a friend of mine Fr. Eduard Perrone at the great Assumption Grotto parish in Detroit. He is a music and composer. This is from the Freep:

Assumption Grotto: Pastor creates music for mass, lifts spirits at vulnerable parish
Dec. 28, 2011

The Rev. Eduard Perrone, while on vacation last summer at his mother’s home in Warren, awoke from an afternoon nap with a melody in his head. He scribbled it down before he forgot it.

Over the next few days, more musical ideas popped into his mind, often after he woke up.

That was the start of what has turned into a full orchestral piece for Catholic mass, a 30-minute composition being performed for the first time this holiday season. It’s rare for a full-time priest to compose his own music for mass, but for Perrone, 63, it fit well with his role as pastor at Assumption Grotto, a historic Detroit church with a rich musical history.

Called “Fountain of Beauty,” Perrone’s composition is dedicated to the mother of Jesus.

“It’s my belief that the Virgin Mary is the most beautiful of all God’s creatures,” Perrone said.

Divided into six parts, the piece is written for a 65-member choir and 38 musicians, some of whom are professionals with the Detroit Symphony Orchestra and Michigan Opera Theatre. On Dec. 21, it was performed for the first time with the full orchestra during a rehearsal under the neo-Gothic arches of the majestic church.

“That was stunning, Father,” Diane Korzeniewski, a choir member and member of the church, said after the rehearsal.

Unifying the parish
Born to parents who were both musicians, Perrone learned music at Cass Tech High School and at a now-closed school in the Detroit archdiocese that taught church music. He learned piano, organ and Gregorian chanting.

But his heart was set on a higher calling.

“I felt being a priest would be the greatest thing I could do in my life,” he said after practice inside the sacristy, the room where items used for services are kept.

For years, he said, “I dropped (music) entirely.”

But after becoming pastor at Assumption Grotto in 1994, Perrone was encouraged to renew his love of music. The church’s outstanding acoustics, its pipe organ and an eager choir were a good fit for his interests. He often conducted classical music and put together musical performances of popular Broadway shows like “My Fair Lady.”

“It was a great unifying thing for the parish,” Perrone said.

A couple of years ago, parishioners asked him: “Why don’t you write a mass?”

At first, Perrone dismissed the idea. But in July, while on vacation, the music came to him.

“I’m sleeping in bed, and then I hear a melody,” he said. “One after the other, the ideas came.”

A reason to keep going

Perrone’s efforts come at a time of change for historic churches such as his in the Archdiocese of Detroit.

Started in 1830, Assumption Grotto is one of the oldest parishes in Detroit. It continues to attract a lot of Catholics, especially since it still offers the old, traditional Latin mass, also known as Tridentine mass. But it’s in a rough area on Detroit’s east side that doesn’t have too many remaining Catholics.

In November, a committee recommended it be merged with another church and closed down in the future if Perrone retires and a replacement is not found.

But to parishioners such as Korzeniewski, the orchestral mass Perrone composed is one of many reasons the church should be kept alive. Orchestral masses have a long history in Western classical music, with many noted composers — Mozart, Schubert and Haydn included — creating them.

“Where else do you get this — a Catholic pastor conducting a mass he created?” Korzeniewski asked.

Many Catholic churches have guitar and piano music, but few offer the classical musical tradition that Assumption does, with Gregorian chanting and orchestral music.

“We have to keep this going,” Korzeniewski said. “This is a place where the music lifts your soul to the heights.”

Contact Niraj Warikoo: nwarikoo@freepress.com or 313-223-4792

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Brick by Brick, Just Too Cool, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | Tagged Detroit.Assumption Grotto, Fr. Perrone, Freep, liturgical music, sacred music
15 Comments

A fun statistic for readers who use my amazon links

Posted on 29 December 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Many thanks to those of you who have been using my Amazon.com links or the boxes on the sidebar! In particular thanks to the people who go into amazon and do shopping other than for the book or object I have highlighted.

When I look at the stats for clicks and sales, etc., I am amazed at the huge range of things which are ordered. Of course I cannot tell who orders anything or where the stuff goes, but the variety of things reflects normal daily needs and also a pretty rich intellectual life.

For example, here are a few items I saw in the list – again, I cannot tell who orders what or where it goes.

Handbook of Neurosurgery
Graduale Romanum [hurray!]
12 Madagascar Vanilla Beans
Levi’s Boys 8-20 505 Straight Regular Jean, Armor, 14 R
Alec Guinness: The Authorised Biography
Orka Silicone Tagine, Black [I had to look that one up to see what on earth it was. I figured it was something for the kitchen, but… now I know. Want one? Click HERE.]

By far, the most clicks and the most sold was the great book by Edward Feser, The Last Superstition: a reputation of the new atheism.

Since I posted about that book there have been 2165 clicks on the link and over 50 copies have been sold! I’m impressed.

We are making the world smarter book by book.

I wish I had a way to see what sort of Mystic Monk Coffee people were drinking as they read Feser’s Book. Or more like… the Handbook of Neurosurgery.

Posted in Brick by Brick |
Comments Off

QUAERITUR: About negative judgments for “annulments”

Posted on 29 December 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From a reader:

Archbishop Sheehan’s Pastoral Letter on Couples who are cohabitating was published in my church bulletin, …. I belong in the third group. My husband, who is not Catholic, was married in the church in Diocese A. After 20 years his wife divorced him and I met and married him a few years later. He applied for an annulment in Diocese B and was denied. He then went to the tribunal in Diocese C who applied to Diocese A. Their reply was that Diocese B denied so they would too. I am 75 and my husband is 69. We have been trying for an annulment for the 9 years we have been married. Please help me.

Sigh.

These are not great questions to work on through the internet. But, this is probably a common enough problem that we could look at it for a bit and offer some points.

To that end, I wanted to engage the help of a good canonist whom I trust who has also exhibited a sound pastoral sense. Here is his answer when I passed the email along for his opinions.

A change in focus might be helpful here. We’re used to using the term “annulment” (which is not found in the Code of Canon Law) and the terminology of “getting an annulment.”

That’s not what happens. An annulment is not a “thing” that is either granted or denied. A declaration of nullity is issued if – and only if – sufficient evidence is produced to overturn the Church’s presumption that when a man and a woman say “I do” to each other, they mean what they say and that act of consent creates a marriage.

Perhaps an analogy might be useful. When one goes to a doctor, complaining of some discomfort, the doctor pokes and prods, does some tests, asks some questions and ultimately comes up with a diagnosis. He doesn’t “grant” a diagnosis, he makes a judgment based on the facts that are available to him. He starts with the presumption that this is a healthy person before him, but tests several hypotheses before concluding, “Yes, it seems that you’re suffering from scrofula.” If all of his tests turn up inconclusive, he may say, “I know you feel discomfort, but I cannot find anything wrong with you. I’m not declaring you to be healthy, but I’m stating that you haven’t been proven to be ill.”

This is similar to what a Tribunal does. A marriage is presented to the Court. At the outset, if this marriage was contracted between a man and a woman, objectively free to marry, of sufficient age, not hindered by any impediment – then the presumption the Tribunal begins with is “this is a valid marriage.” The parties are asked to present evidence, witnesses are named and provide testimony, sometimes an expert is called in to help the Court assess the situation, the documents are scrutinized. Arguments, rebuttals, counter arguments are heard. The officials of the Court, following a procedure that has evolved over more than a thousand years, review the evidence and ultimately render a judgment. If the evidence presented is either inconclusive or insufficient to provide moral certitude that the marriage, which seemed valid, was, in fact, invalid – then the Court renders a negative decision. The presumption of validity has not been overturned. You may think the marriage is invalid, but you have not provided sufficient evidence to overturn the presumption of validity.

The decision of a Tribunal can sometimes be very hard for people to accept. Those who want a declaration of nullity, and truly believe that their marriage was invalid, can be crushed when they hear that a negative decision has been given. Those who believe their marriage to have been valid can feel betrayed and angered when an affirmative decision is given. Accusations can fly – the Judge is cold and unfeeling, the Judge ignored this set of facts, the Judge just wanted to please the other party, money was involved, or much worse.

A couple things need to be taken into consideration. The Church does not invest the Tribunal system with infallibility. Tribunals can and do make mistakes. It is regrettable, and something that all attempts are made to avoid (there are considerable “checks” placed in the Tribunal process to avoid making rash judgments). But if the Tribunal says your marriage is invalid and you know they’re wrong – you have the right to appeal, and even then, you shouldn’t lose faith in the Church.

Accepting a negative decision, when one wants an affirmative, can be even more difficult. You may firmly and fully believe that your marriage was invalid, but you have not been able to prove it to the Tribunal. It may be that the marriage, despite your belief, was valid. If so, nothing the Church can do can “invalidate” that marriage. Even when one party abandons the other, that does not give the abandoned party the right to have the marriage declared invalid. It can be a difficult and painful thing, but it can also be part of the Cross that God has asked a person to carry in this life.

In this specific case, it sounds like the man has not been able to provide sufficient proof to overturn the presumption that his first marriage was invalid. The fact that that first marriage lasted for 20 years strongly supports that presumption of validity, and the length of time since the marriage in question makes the investigation difficult. The couple may not be able to get the declaration of nullity they desire, and therefore cannot have their current civil marriage recognized in the Church. They should be in conversation with their pastor, who might determine that, if they are willing to live in perfect continence – as brother and sister – they could be readmitted to the reception of the Sacraments. This would only be possible if their situation is not well known in the parish and admitting them to the Sacraments would not cause scandal. Their willingness to live in continence should be sincere – God is not fooled. Even if they are unable to receive the Sacraments, they are still obliged to participate in the Mass.

I frequently refer people to the excellent discourse the Holy Father gave on July 25, 2005, to the clergy of the diocese of Aosta, in part addressing the situation of the divorced and remarried who, thus, are excluded from the Sacraments. In part, he says,

“Even if these people cannot go to sacramental Communion, they are not excluded from the love of the Church or from the love of Christ. A Eucharist without immediate sacramental Communion is not of course complete; it lacks an essential dimension. Nonetheless, it is also true that taking part in the Eucharist without Eucharistic Communion is not the same as nothing; it still means being involved in the mystery of the Cross and Resurrection of Christ. It is still participating in the great Sacrament in its spiritual and pneumatic dimensions, and also in its ecclesial dimension, although this is not strictly sacramental.”

The discourse is here.

A long-winded response, but hopefully some bits of it might be useful!

Very useful indeed.

Thanks to the guest canonist!

I would like to suggest to people who have questions about “annulments” and about the processes involved, should get Dr. Edward Peters’ comprehensive and easy to follow book which presents questions and answers.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, HONORED GUESTS | Tagged annulments, declaration of nullity
1 Comment

More on Card. George’s comparison of the homosexual parade to a KKK demonstration.

Posted on 29 December 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From the Chicago Tribune:

Cardinal defends comparing gay parade organizers to Ku Klux Klan

By Brian Slodysko
Tribune reporter
1:03 p.m. CST, December 28, 2011

Setting off a new round in his dispute with gay right activists, Chicago’s Cardinal Francis George has issued a statement defending his recent comparison of the gay rights movement to the Ku Klux Klan. [O most excellent Eminence.]

George’s initial comments came in connection with a controversy over whether next summer’s gay pride parade would interrupt morning services at Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church in the Lakeview neighborhood. [Remember the initial report? There was concerned that before the parade reached the church there would have been among the paraders considerable consumption of alcohol. What could possibly have gone wrong?]

That dispute was resolved last week, but the cardinal’s KKK comparison – and his new explanation of those comments – have kept the controversy boiling. [Good.]

“Organizers (of the pride parade) invited an obvious comparison to other groups who have historically attempted to stifle the religious freedom of the Catholic Church,” the cardinal said in a statement issued Tuesday. “One such organization is the Ku Klux Klan which, well into the 1940s, paraded through American cities not only to interfere with Catholic worship but also to demonstrate that Catholics stand outside of the American consensus. It is not a precedent anyone should want to emulate.” [But that is precisely what homosexual groups are trying to claim.]

Gay rights advocates said today that George was expressing “bigotry” and should apologize and resign.

In October, the route and time of the pride parade were changed to accommodate larger crowds. The start was changed from noon to 10 a.m., and the new route went past Our Lady of Mount Carmel. Church officials later objected, arguing that it would interrupt morning services. Last Wednesday, an agreement was reached to move the start time back to noon.

Meanwhile, George was interviewed by Fox News Chicago. He said: “You know, you don’t want the gay liberation movement to morph into something like the Ku Klux Klan, demonstrating in the streets against Catholicism. So I think if that’s what’s happening, and I don’t know that it is, but I would respect the local pastor’s, you know, position on that.”

When excerpts from the interview were disclosed last week, a spokeswoman for the archdiocese said people should view the entire interview, which aired on Fox on Christmas Day.

[…]

Read the rest over there.

The KKK pushed something that was abominable. The KKK relentlessly attacked the Church. The KKK is now seen by most people as ghastly.

I think Card. George’s take is dead on.

Posted in One Man & One Woman, The Drill | Tagged Card. George, Chicago, homosexuals, KKK
18 Comments

“The rediscovery of Gregorian chant is a sine qua non condition to give back dignity to the liturgical music.”

Posted on 29 December 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

When thinking and writing about music appropriate for liturgical worship I have always gone back to what the late Church musician Msgr. Richard Schuler correctly asserted: since sacred liturgical music is NOT an add-on in worship, since it is actually an integrating part (pars integrans) of liturgical worship, since it is prayer, liturgical music must be both sacred and also art.

The texts must be sacred texts. The idiom must be a sacred idiom, or at least not opposed to the sacred. The music must be good, that is, well-composed, of high artistic value. It must be performed well.

Music for liturgical worship must be sacred and it must be art.

If the music chosen does not fulfill those criteria, it does not belong in the Mass.

The music itself becomes prayer within the liturgical setting. People pray also by listening to true sacred liturgical music. It is prayer.

We cannot ever go wrong when we stick to the texts actually assigned by the Church for each Mass or office. We cannot ever go wrong when we use Gregorian chant and polyphony and the pipe organ, as the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council established as having the first place among all genres of music for sacred worship.

I have mentioned in the past Msgr. Valentin Miserachs-Grau, the head of the PIMS, the Pontificia Istituto di Musica Sacra in Rome.

Miserachs-Grau has given a good address, which NLM has reproduced in its entirety. Here, however, is the meat of the matter, with my emphases and comments.

[…]

This one is a sore point: the rampant wave of false and truly dreadful liturgical music in our churches. Nevertheless, the will of the Church clearly appears in the words of the Holy Father I have just mentioned. [… he cites documents… ] Now we must wonder: if the will of the Church has been clearly declared also in our times, how is it possible that the musical praxis in our churches distances itself in so evident a way from the same doctrine? [NB: “doctrine”.]

We must consider several problems at the root of this question, for instance the problem of repertoire. We have hinted at a double aspect: the risk of shutting oneself in a closed circle that would wish to essay new compositions considered as being of high quality in Liturgy. We must say that the evolution of musical language towards uncertain horizons makes the breach between “serious” music and popular sensitivity to become more and more profound. Liturgical music must be “universal”, that is acceptable to any kind of audience. [?! Really. I don’t think I can accept that given the degradation of culture and taste these days. Still, well-sung Gregorian chant pretty much fits that description, as does polyphony.] Today it is difficult to find good music composed with this essential characteristic. I do not discuss the artistic value of certain contemporary productions, even sacred, but I think that it would not be opportune to insert them in the Sacred Liturgy. One cannot transform the “oratory” into “laboratory”.

The second aspect of the problem derives from a false interpretation of the conciliar doctrine on Sacred Music. As a matter of fact, the post-conciliar liturgical “renewal”, including the almost total lack of mandatory rules at a high level, has allowed a progressive decay of liturgical music, at the point of becoming, in the most cases, “consumer music” according to the parameters of the most slipshod easy-listening music. [Attention:] This sad practice sometimes determines attitudes of petulant rejection towards genuine Sacred Music, of yesterday and today, maybe composed in a simple manner, but according to the rules of Art. [WHAT?! Art has RULES?!?] Only a change of mentality and a decisive “reforming” will – that I am afraid is far to come – would be able to bring back to our churches the good musical praxis and, together with it, also the conscientiousness of celebrations, that would not lack to entice, through the value of beauty, a large public, particularly young people, currently kept away by the prevailing amateurish practice, falsely popular and wrongly considered – even in good faith – as an effective instrument of approaching. [My own experience of when I was rector of a church in Italy, is that when we used good chant and polyphony, and when we opened the church doors, people came in and stayed.]

Regarding the power of involvement of which the good liturgical music is capable, I would like to add only what is my own personal experience. By a fortunate chance, I am acting after almost forty years, as Kapellmeister at the Roman Basilica of Saint Mary Major, where every Sunday and on feast days the Chapter Mass is celebrated in Latin, and with Gregorian and polyphonic chant accompanied by organ (and by a brass sextet in highest solemnities). I can assure you that the nave and the aisles of the basilica get packed and not rarely there are people that come after the ceremonies to express their gratefulness, moved to tears as they are, especially by the Hymn to the Madonna Salus Populi Romani (Our Lady, Salvation of the Roman People). They often cannot hold back the excitement and arrive to burst out clapping. People are thirsting for good music! It goes directly to the heart and is capable of working even resounding conversions. [Yep. Excellent sacred music, properly understood, played a major role in my own conversion.]

Another compass of good liturgical music –always reminded by the Teaching of the Church– concerns the primacy of the pipe organ. [… he discourses on the organ for a while …]

In our quick review of the main points underlying a good liturgical musical praxis, we have now arrived to a last but not least question, one that should be firstly considered: the Gregorian chant. It is the official chant of the Roman Church, as the Second Vatican Council reasserts. Its repertoire includes thousands of ancient, less ancient, and even modern pieces. Certainly, we can find the highest charm in the oldest compositions, dated back to the Xth-XIth Centuries. In this case also it has to do about an objective value, since the Gregorian chant represents the synthesis of the European and Mediterranean chant, related to the genuine and authentic popular chant, even that of the remotest regions of the world. It is a deeply human and essential chant that can be traced in its richness and variety of modes, in its rhythmic freedom (always at the service of the word), in the diversity and different degrees of its single pieces, according to the individual to whom the execution is assigned, etc. This is a chant that has found in the Church its most appropriate breeding ground and constitutes a unique treasure of priceless value, even from the merely cultural point of view.

[NB:] Therefore, the rediscovery of Gregorian chant is a sine qua non condition to give back dignity to the liturgical music and not only as a valid repertoire in itself, but also as a source of inspiration for new compositions, as it was the case of the great polyphonists of the Renaissance, who –following the guidelines of the Council of Trent– created the structure bearing their wonderful works departing from the Gregorian subject matter. If we have in Gregorian chant the master path, why not follow it instead of persisting in scouring roads that in the most of cases drive to nowhere? […]

You can read the rest over there.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged Msgr. Miserachs Grau, PIMS.sacred music
45 Comments

ACTION ITEM! POLL ALERT! “Are religious rights being trampled on by government?”

Posted on 28 December 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Perhaps other blogs will pick this up and help.

An article from the ultra-liberal New York Times (“Hell’s Bible”) is posted on the even more liberal MSNBC.

The article concerns the objections of the USCCB against pressure from the Obama Administration and/or states to force Catholic adoption agencies to allow homosexual “couples” to adopt.

You have to scroll down to the bottom of the MSNBC webpage to find the poll form. You can leave comments.

Click HERE!

I am not going to tell anyone how to vote.. but… as of now here are the results.

UPDATE: 14:47 GMT:

Posted in Dogs and Fleas, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, POLLS, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged adoption, anti-catholicism, Catholic Charities
21 Comments

The Feeder Feed: Venetian Christological Goldfinch Edition

Posted on 28 December 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

At the Met in NYC there is a nice exhibit of paintings and drawings of the Venetian school.

Here is a Madonna and Child Enthroned by Lorenzo Veneziano (+1372), obviously a Venetian painter.

There are touches of the byzantine in this portrayal.

Here we find a naturalistically rendered Christological goldfinch, by now an old friend of regular readers here. I do like to share the Christological goldfinches.

Very nice!

The Met was jammed to lunacy with people today. I find those crowds oppressive.

Posted in On the road, The Feeder Feed, What Fr. Z is up to |
4 Comments

Something amazing and revolutionary during the Holy Father’s Midnight Mass … which I missed.

Posted on 28 December 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Something remarkable occurred during the Holy Father’s Midnight Mass.

I had a note from a long time reader about this. I didn’t see the broadcast of the Mass this year, but it is archived and it can be viewed on demand.

In the on demand video, at about 36:28, the men of the Sistine choir sing the Gradual for the 1st Mass of Christmas.

Get that?

A GRADUAL!

They don’t sing it particularly well, for it drags, but they sing it Then a cantor, at the microphone sings the solo parts. He doesn’t seem to understand where and how to breathe, or what the text means, and he has a little more vibrato than he ought, but it was the Gradual, not a responsorial psalm.

There was no “reponsorial psalm with congregational singing.

[Just a warning: turn it off when the solo is over so you don’t have to experience the voice of the woman who reads the second reading. It’ll etch your computer screen.]

In any event, my correspondent wrote: ” thought amusing the Vatican Radio announcer’s labored effort to explain that it is actually ok under the new rubrics to substitute an “ancient gradual” (as he called it, the same one as the EF gradual for Christmas midnight Mass) for the responsorial psalm.”

Indeed it is okay to sing a Gradual in place of the “responsorial psalm”. You can find the graduals, along with the other proper chants for Mass, in the Ordinary Form Graduale Romanum published by Solesmes. And check out also the Gregorian Missal for Sundays.

We have seen His Holiness celebrate Mass ad orientem, and wear Roman vestments, and use older trappings of office. He has now done something else along the same line. He has signaled to the whole world that it is not necessary that congregations be singing or talking all the time, even at the times when they have been accustomed to sing or talk. They can listen to a text, and that text can be in Gregorian chant, which the Council says has pride of place in sacred liturgical music.

Gravitational pull? This would have been unthinkable a few years ago.

Here is a link to the pdf of the booklet for the Mass.

Imagine being surprised to hear a Roman Gradual at a Mass in the Roman Rite celebrated by the Roman Pontiff.