How small-c catholic liberals attack what they don’t like

Posted on 10 July 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf
In the past I have mentioned that catholic liberals right now are using the clerical abuse issue as a blunt instrument with which to bludgeon any issue or any person they don’t like.
If they don’t like, say, the Church’s teaching about the impossibility of the ordination of women, the Church should change its “policy” because, of course, the bishops failed to prevent the sexual abuse of children.   If they don’t like that a bishop sticks to the Church’s teaching on contrary-to-nature unions, then he should just shut up, because bishops failed in the sphere of clerical abuse.  If they don’t like the new translation of the Missal, then no one should use it because the bishops didn’t handle the abuses thing well enough.

If they don’t like a particular bishop….  you get my drift.

Here is an example of this from National Catholic Fishwrap.

Sacrifice at the altar of God

by Thomas C. Fox on Jul. 09, 2011
NCR Today

Rita Ferrone, author of several books on liturgy, has written in the July 15 issue of Commonweal a searing critique of the New Roman Missal translation set to take affect in November.

These are tough years for the U.S. bishops who have fallen under dark clouds for their failings in their handlings [sic] of the decades’ long clergy sexual abuse tragedy in our church. To the failing of protecting our children from clergy abuse many will now be adding another: the failure to protect clear and simple — and meaningful — English in our mass liturgies from an assault by ideologically led bishops.

Here is how Ferrone concludes her remarkable Commonweal analysis:

[…]

Ferrone, whom I may look at more closely in another entry, goes on to sneer at the new translation along the same tired lines, concluding that people might get used it the new texts eventually but, she adds ominously, they shouldn’t.
Tom, Rita… I agree wholeheartedly!   If you don’t like the new, corrected translation, just say no.

Your best approach is to promote the widespread use of Latin so that no one is forced to suffer with the horrible new English translation.  Eh-vur.

In any event, this opening in the Fishwrap article was a good example of how liberals work.  If they don’t like someone or something they will make  a connection – no matter the stretch – with the sexual abuse issue, or will perform some other fan dance of moral equivalency.
Conservatives generally resist this sort of smear tactic.  They opt instead to stick to arguments rather than ad hominem attacks or these false comparisons.
Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Biased Media Coverage, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, The Drill, Throwing a Nutty | Tagged , , ,
25 Comments

Reactions from priests to the Guide for Confessors

Posted on 10 July 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

About the Guide for Confessors… I asked priests for some comments.

Here is one I thought was very good.

Here’s my thoughts:  an “awesome” (as the kids say) echo and complement to Misericordia Dei.  My favorite lines tend to occur in the intro, actually, as nice handy phrases:

“Whenever a confessor is available, sooner or later a penitent will arrive. And if the confessor continues to make himself available, even stubbornly so, sooner or later many penitents will arrive!”

-Amen!  “People don’t come, so I only do 15 mins-30 mins” is a lame, lame, lame excuse.

“Our rediscovery of the Sacrament of Reconciliation, both as penitents and as ministers, is a measure of authentic faith in the saving action of God which shows itself more clearly in the power of grace than in human strategic or pastoral initiatives which sometimes overlook this essential truth.”

-I read this as “You have some programs.  That’s nice and helpful, but not enough.  Confession gets to the heart of the matter!”  [I read it also as “Hey priests!  To understand the sacrament of penance, you have to use the sacrament yourself.”]

“In the generous celebration of the Sacrament of Divine Mercy, each priest is called to experience for himself the uniqueness and the indispensability of the ministry entrusted to him. Such an experience will help him to avoid the “ever-changing sense of identity” which so often marks the existence of some priests.”

-Highlight, italicize it: “GENEROUS.”  And yes, we come to see we are ministers of grace, not accountants, plant managers, counselors, human resource managers, but priests of Christ.

The “filling out” and explanation of the role and method of a spiritual director is also a nice, handy, and valuable summary, as well as the need for our own spiritual care (lest we forget we are priests, or think that *we* are the ones who are doing all this great work of mercy, save as instruments of God.

That point about spiritual direction is good.  I noticed that the Guide makes a distinction between confession and spiritual direction, though they are obviously related, and in a deep way.  First, they both involve what is called the internal forum, which is under the Seal, and which involves a solemn responsibility.  But people – priests included – sometimes confuse confession time for spiritual direction time.  It can be, but not always.   While it is true that a regular confession will involve some small element also of “spiritual direction”, in the normal course of hearing confessions with lines of people waiting, a longer conversation is not always possible.   So, all squares are rectangles but not rectangles are squares.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Mail from priests, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , ,
Comments Off on Reactions from priests to the Guide for Confessors

QUAERITUR: Extraordinary Form Latin-Spanish resources

Posted on 9 July 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From a priest.   Can the readership help?

Do you know of any resources, similar to the three-volume “Rituale
Romanum” put out by the FSSP, that have the extraordinary form
sacramental rites in Latin and Spanish? I am involved in Spanish-language ministry and some families have requested I baptize their children in according to the Extraordinary Form. I would like to say in Spanish the parts that are permitted in the vernacular, but am
having a difficult time finding any resources.

Anyone?

Posted in ASK FATHER Question Box, Brick by Brick, Mail from priests, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM | Tagged ,
13 Comments

Card. Levada opines about the upcoming Assisi meeting

Posted on 9 July 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

The Assisi inter-faith meeting for peace.   All you have to do is mention it in some circles and the fireworks begin.

Benedict XVI, Pope of Christian Unity, has slated another meeting in Assisi, also an inter-faith gathering for peace.   It will without question have a different tenor to it than that original confab.

There is a story on ZENIT today:

Cardinal Levada Clarifies Assisi Event

Says the Path of Peace Is the Church’s Path

VATICAN CITY, JULY 8, 2011 (Zenit.org).- The prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is offering a clarification on the upcoming meeting in Assisi, where Benedict XVI will gather with representatives of the world’s religions and non-believers to promote justice and peace.

The meeting, to be held in October, follows upon two similar events hosted by Blessed John Paul II. All three of the meetings have caused a stir among certain ecclesial circles, with some people accusing the Popes of syncretism, or giving the impression that all religions are equal.

Cardinal William Levada, who succeeded the German Pontiff in heading the doctrinal congregation, acknowledged the misinterpretations that have been leveled against the Popes. And he questions why Benedict XVI would carry on with the initiative in such a context.

In short it is not a question of hiding the faith for the sake of a superficial unity, but of confessing — as John Paul II and the Ecumenical Patriarch then did — that Christ is our peace, and that precisely because of this the path of peace is the path of the Church, the cardinal said.

In his statement, published Wednesday, Cardinal Levada draws from then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s reflections as well as the Second Vatican Council in clarifying the intention of the Assisi event.

Because ‘all men are called to union with Christ’ (Lumen Gentium, 3), the Church must be leaven of this unity for the whole of humanity: not only with the proclamation of the Word of God, but with the lived testimony of the profound union of Christians with God. This is the authentic path of peace, he noted.

Moreover, the cardinal added, the title chosen for the next Day of Assisi — Pilgrims of Truth, Pilgrims of Peace — gives us a second indication [as to the motives]: to be able realistically to hope in the building together of peace, it is necessary to put truth as criterion.

The original bond between ethos and logos, and between religion and reason, lies ultimately in Christ, the divine Logos: precisely because of this, Christianity is able to restore this bond to the world, he said.

Peace without truth is not possible, Cardinal Levada stated, and the flip-side is also true: the attitude to peace constitutes an authentic ‘criterion of truth.’

I refer the readers to the Holy Father’s first Letter for the World Day for Peace of 1 Jan 2006 and also to the CDF’s 2000 document Dominus Iesus and Pius XI’s indispensable Mortalium animos.

Posted in Pope of Christian Unity | Tagged , , ,
51 Comments

Changes in the rubrics for music in the new, corrected translation.

Posted on 8 July 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

My friend Jeffrey Tucker of the estimable The Chant Cafe has a fascinating post about changes in the noew, corrected translation of the Missale Romanum which will affect sacred music in our worship.

Here is his piece, which I am cutting down so that you will be forced also to go to his place and read the rest… as I am sure you will want to do anyway.

My emphases and comments.

Dramatic Changes in Music Rubrics for New Missal
Posted by Jeffrey A. Tucker

Some of the most advanced thinkers in the world of music and liturgy have long identified the critical problem in Catholic music today. They have pointed out that the Mass itself provides for the texts and the music for the Mass, but in the General Instruction on on the Roman Missal, there appears a loophole. Musicians can sing what is appointed, or (“option 4”) they can sing something else, and that something else is limited only by what the musicians themselves deem as “appropriate.” What this has meant, in effect, is: anything goes. This is why it often seems that when it comes to music at Mass that, well, anything goes.  [Thus the texts of Mass, the actual texts, are in large part ignored, unknown, and the sense is implanted firmly that we can do anything we want to the Church’s official worship.]

I’m happy to report that the legislative ground has just shifted, and dramatically so. The new translation of the General Instruction removes the discretion from the music team to sing pretty much whatever it wants. The new text, which pertains to the new translation of the Missal that comes into effect on Advent this year, makes it clear beyond any doubt: the music of the Mass is the chanted propers of the Mass. There are options but these options all exist within the universe of the primary normative chant. There can be no more making up some random text, setting it to music, and singing it as the entrance, offertory, or communion.

I have no doubt that the practice of singing non-liturgical texts will continue but it will now continue only under a cloud. If I’m reading this correctly, any text other than an appointed text for the Mass will now fall outside the boundaries provided for by the authoritative document that regulates the manner in which Mass is to proceed.  [Thus, we shall see that many people simply don’t care that they are violating the rubrics on yet another level.  Will ecclesiastical authority do anything about that?  Sure!  They will probably place more roadblocks for traditional expressions of our liturgical worship.]

[This is good…] We can be sure that gigabytes of digits will be produced with the intention of explaining to me and everyone why what we can clearly read below does not really mean what it seems to be saying, that there has been some mistake in phrasing, that taking this literally is only the penchant of “traditionalists,” and that the prevailing practice surely has equal normative status. Nonetheless, the text is there, clear as a bell, and will be printed in all editions of the Missal that is now in preparation.

Catholic musicians of the world, the GIRM would like you to meet a new friend: the propers of the Mass.

Let us compare old and new:  [Hey!  Great idea to do that!  Maybe someone should do this with the prayers too!]

The Entrance

2003 GIRM:

47. After the people have gathered, the Entrance chant begins as the priest enters with the deacon and ministers. The purpose of this chant is to open the celebration, foster the unity of those who have been gathered, introduce their thoughts to the mystery of the liturgical season or festivity, and accompany the procession of the priest and ministers.

48. The singing at this time is done either alternately by the choir and the people or in a similar way by the cantor and the people, or entirely by the people, or by the choir alone. In the dioceses of the United States of America there are four options for the Entrance Chant: (1) the antiphon from the Roman Missal or the Psalm from the Roman Gradual as set to music there or in another musical setting; (2) the seasonal antiphon and Psalm of the Simple Gradual; (3) a song from another collection of psalms and antiphons, approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop, including psalms arranged in responsorial or metrical forms; (4) a suitable liturgical song similarly approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop.

2011 GIRM

48. This chant is sung alternately by the choir and the people or similarly by a cantor and the people, or entirely by the people, or by the choir alone. In the Dioceses of the United States of America, there are four options for the Entrance Chant: (1) the antiphon from the Missal or the antiphon with its Psalm from the Gradual Romanum, as set to music there or in another setting; (2) the antiphon and Psalm of the Graduate Simplex for the liturgical time; (3) a chant from another collection of Psalms and antiphons, approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop, including Psalms arranged in responsorial or metrical forms; (4) another liturgical chant that is suited to the sacred action, the day, or the time of year, similarly approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop.

Comment: There are several crucial differences. The new version clearly elevates the antiphons from the Roman Gradual or the Roman Missal as the core text. The old version had a mistake that had been confusing for years: it referred only to the Psalm from the Gradual. The new version clearly states that it is the antiphon and Psalm that are applicable from both books. Option three makes it clear that we are not talking about any song; we are talking about the liturgical chant, and there is a huge difference. Finally, option four blasts away the vague word “song” and again emphasizes chant, and with this important proviso: “suited to the sacred action, the day, or the time of year.” One would have to be deliberately obtuse not to see that this refers to the proper text of the day in question.

[…]

For the sake of length I will slice this off here.  Do go read over there as well.

Posted in The future and our choices | Tagged , , ,
55 Comments

WDTPRS POLL: Movie credits

Posted on 8 July 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Given that during the summer many new movies are released, and given that these releases are often on Friday, here is a WDTPRS POLL about your movie viewing habits.

Feel free to comment in the combox!

At a movie in a theater, do you stay for the credits?

View Results

Posted in Lighter fare, POLLS | Tagged , ,
31 Comments

Vatican Rep. at U.N. on “Impulse-driven rights” v. “Authentic rights”.

Posted on 8 July 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From CNA with my emphases and comments:

Vatican official: UN gay ‘rights’ agenda endangers Church’s freedom
By Benjamin Mann

Geneva, Switzerland, Jul 8, 2011 / 06:08 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The Vatican’s representative to the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva says a recent resolution on “sexual orientation and gender identity” is part of an agenda that could restrict the Church’s freedom. [Quaeritur: It is part of a larger agenda?  If so, what is that agenda’s ultimate goal?]

“The resolution marks a change. It is seen as the beginning of a movement within the international community and the United Nations  to insert gay rights in the global human rights agenda,” said Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, head of the Holy See’s Permanent Mission to the U.N. in Geneva, in a recent e-mail interview with CNA.  [Resist contrary-to-nature sexual politics and you could wind up in the Hague.]

The archbishop noted that a U.S. State Department spokesperson had described the resolution as “a beginning of an international norm that will take hold gradually.” But “if norms are established,” Archbishop Tomasi wondered, “what provisions will be made for freedom of expression on the part of religious leaders?”  [At first, some grudging reassurances will be made, but then they will be systematically challenged in courts.  And the purpose of the challenges will be to hurt the Church as much as it will be to reengineer anthropology.]

He spoke of a “genuine concern” that natural marriages and families “will be socially downgraded with the eventual legislation that puts homosexual “marriage” and the marriage between a man and a woman” on the same level. [Perhaps even lower true marriage as a kind of pay back?] The Vatican representative also said the Church could be threatened by related measures that would mandate homosexual adoptions and introduce “compulsory sex education at school that clashes with Christian values.”  [And when the Church’s minsters teach the Church’s teaching, they will be charged with hate crimes.]

At a June 27 event co-hosted by the U.S. State Department and the Gays and Lesbians in Foreign Affairs Agencies organization, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton credited a “major push by American diplomats” for the June 17 passage of what she described as “the first ever U.N. resolution recognizing the human rights of LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) people worldwide.”

Clinton called the resolution a “huge step forward,” and stated that “so far as the United States is concerned and our foreign policy, and our values … gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay rights.” [HUH?  Read that again!]

The resolution, which expresses “grave concern at acts of violence and discrimination … against individuals because of their sexual orientation and gender identity,” [The defense of true marriage is not discriminatory (in the sense of oppression).] will not have an immediate effect on U.N. member states. Instead, it formally requests that the High Commissioner for Human Rights undertake an investigation into such acts, in preparation for further dialogue at the council during 2012.

Although the resolution will do little in the short term, the secretary of state described its passage – over the objections of numerous Arab and African counties, as well as  Russia and Moldova – as one of the department’s “momentous achievements” on a matter of “high priority.”

In his remarks to CNA,  Archbishop Tomasi reiterated that the Church does not support violence against those who engage in homosexual behavior, or any attempt by the state to punish an individual simply because of “feelings and thoughts.”

“I think that violence against homosexual persons  is not acceptable and it should be rejected, even though this does not imply an endorsement of their behavior.”

“The terms ‘sexual orientation and gender identity’ are not defined in international law,” he noted. “To the extent that they are not external behavior, but feelings and thoughts, they cannot be subjected to punitive laws.”

But “for some people,” he pointed out, “these words are a code phrase for types of conduct.”

The archbishop expanded on a point he has previously tried to impress upon the Human Rights Council, as he observed that all societies regulate sexual behavior to some extent – by forbidding practices like incest, pedophilia, or rape – for the sake of the common good.

He contrasted the “clear message” of God’s creation, which spells out the complementarity of the two sexes, with the U.N.’s contrived and vague terminology of “orientation” and “gender identity.”

[This is a very important point.  Read carefully…] “Instead of  ‘gender,’” Archbishop Tomasi said, “the concept we should use is ‘sex,’ a universal term in natural law referring to male and female.”  [Get that?  “Gender identity” is misleading.]

“In fact, it seems that terms such as ‘gender’ or ‘sexual orientation’ are devised to escape reality and to accommodate a variety of feelings and impulses that then are transformed into rights.”

This use of “rights” language, to justify practices like same-sex “marriage,” may appear superficially harmless as long as the alleged rights seem to be confined to private life. But Archbishop Tomasi warned that these impulse-driven claims of “rights” are in conflict with authentic rights – such as the free exercise of religion, and the education of one’s children.  [Good distinction.  “Impuse-driven rights” v. “Authentic rights”.]

He pointed to the “traditionally Catholic country” of Spain, as “an example of where the current trend may lead.”

In that country, “legislation has been passed in the last four or five years in favor of homosexual marriage, free abortion in the first 22 weeks of pregnancy, of compulsory education even for children aged 8 to 12 on such issues as masturbation, same-sex marriage, contraception and abortion.”

This arrangement prevails in Spain, “notwithstanding the fact that thousands of parents are opposing this policy that denies their fundamental right to decide on their children’s education.”

Archbishop Tomasi suggested that Catholics today have a responsibility “to clarify legal and moral aspects of the current culture” – by drawing a distinction between desires and rights, promoting the Catholic synthesis of faith and reason, and making it clear that a judgment against homosexuality is not a condemnation of homosexuals.  [Tell that to Gov. Cuomo and the editors of the NCFishwrap.]

“There is confusion in some people’s mind,” he noted, “in combining a just respect and protection for every person – including homosexuals – and support for the indispensable role of the family, the parents right to educate their children, the support of the natural family for the common good.”

While the secular West may find this ethos increasingly incomprehensible, the Church will continues to promote it. “The teaching of the Church is not conditioned by political consensus,” the archbishop noted. “At times she is misunderstood and even becomes the target of reprisals and persecution.”

“Reason and natural law, however, support faith-inspired positions,” he stated, “and the convergence of faith and reason is exceptionally fruitful for the progress and well-being of the human family.”

Another symptom of TEOTWAWKI.

Posted in One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, TEOTWAWKI, The Drill, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged
18 Comments

Reason #177408 for Anglicanorum coetibus

Posted on 8 July 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Keeping in mind that Benedict XVI is the Pope of Christian Unity, here is a photo via NLM which offers one of the reasons why Anglicanorum coetibus was a good idea.

We need an infusion of this sort of blood into our anemic liturgical worship.  This is also why we need Summorum Pontificum.

Not every church or every Mass has to look like this – though that wouldn’t be so bad, given many of the alternatives we have seen over the last few decades – but our experience of this sort of liturgical worship can serve to influence overall our ars celebrandi and therefore deepen a sense of true active participation in sacred action.

Posted in New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, Pope of Christian Unity, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, The future and our choices | Tagged , , ,
25 Comments

The US Space Program – WDTPRS POLL

Posted on 8 July 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

With this final Space Shuttle launch, the US now “leads from behind” also in the exploration of space.

Whither the US manned space program?

Chose the best answer and give your opinion in the com box.

The U.S. space program and NASA.

View Results

Posted in Look! Up in the sky! | Tagged , ,
21 Comments

WDTPRS 4th Sunday after Pentecost (1962MR): Our great Captain

Posted on 8 July 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Today’s prayer is found in ancient sacramentaries, such as the Veronese and the “Hadrian” version of the Gregorian, and the so-called Gelasian.  It is unchanged in the “Tridentine” form of the Missale Romanum as my trusty copy of the 1570MR shows.  It survived the Consilium’s hack and grafters who pieced together the Novus Ordo as the Collect for the 8th Sunday of Ordinary Time.

COLLECT: (1962 Missale Romanum):
Da nobis, quaesumus, Domine,
ut et mundi cursus pacifico nobis tuo ordine dirigatur:
et Ecclesia tua tranquilla devotione laetetur.

Some vocabulary from the mighty Lewis & Short Dictionary.  Cursus can mean anything from “course, way, journey” to “course of a ship”, the “flow of conversation” and “postal route”.  Dirigo is “to give a particular direction” or “to lay or draw a straight line”.  It was used, among other things, to indicate ordering an army to march to a certain point or to direct or steer a ship on its course.    Ordo means too many things to get into in depth.  Suffice to say that it can refer to the “methodical arrangement, class or condition.” By extension it is applied to everything from the “orders” of the clergy, the way trees are planted, the lines of an army, or the banks of rowers in a ship.  Pacificus is a composite of pax and facio meaning “peacemaker” or “peaceable”.  The problem with that laetetur is that it could be from the deponent laetor or passive from laeto.  Because of those ablatives in that clause, I am opting here for the passive, like dirigatur.   Among the things that devotio means are “fealty, allegiance, piety, devotion, zeal.”

LITERALWDTPRS VERSION:
Grant us, we beg, O Lord,
both that the course of the world be set by Your methodical peace-producing plan for us
and that Your Church may be made joyful by means of tranquil devotion.

Despite the wordy literal translation I have given this time, I will later lend to this a rather poetic aspect.

Notice that in our collect’s vocabulary there are traces of military and nautical imagery.

Try reading this prayer with the mental image of a ship.

Its great Captain sets its course upon the sea. So great is the Captain that He can command calm waters and a favorable wind as well.  The ship can be seen as the world.  In this case I see the ship as the Church in the world, the Church Militant, which is not an unfamiliar image to those familiar with the Barque of Peter.  The sea it sails upon is the deep and turbulent world we live in.  The Captain is our Lord Jesus Christ, who calmed the stormy waters and commanded Peter to walk to Him upon them.  He entrusted His ship to Peter, to steer it in His stead.  Once all has been put into proper order, made “ship-shape and Bristol fashion”, our own sense of loyal zeal, our devotion, is the wind that the Captain uses to steer the ship upon the course He sets, carrying us its crew to the port and safe haven.

The word pacificus brought to mind an antiphon of First Vespers of Christmas: “Rex pacificus magnificatus est, cuius vultum desiderat universa terra… The peacemaker King, whose glance the whole world longs for, has been exalted.”  Is not the sight of God, “in whose will is our peace”, our true desire?  Is that not the port and safe haven we journey towards in the turbulence of this world?

We must look more intently at devotio… devotion.

According to St. Thomas Aquinas (+1274) writing in his monumental Summa Theologiae, devotio is an “active” virtue.  The Angelic Doctor wrote:

“The intrinsic or human cause of devotion is contemplation or meditation. Devotion is an act of the will by which a man promptly gives himself to the service of God. Every act of the will proceeds from some consideration of the intellect, since the object of the will is a known good; or as Augustine says, willing proceeds from understanding. Consequently, meditation is the cause of devotion since through meditation man conceives the idea of giving himself to the service of God” (STh II-II 82, 3).

The Jesuit preacher Louis Bourdaloue (1632-1704) translates this into “a devotion to duty”. What we do, including our “devotions”, must help us keep the commandments of God and stick to the duties of one’s state in life before all else.

In other words, there is an interplay between our devotions and our devotion.

Each of us has a state in life, a God-given vocation we are duty bound to follow. We must be devoted to that state in life, and the duties that come with it, as they are in the here and now.

That “here and now”, hic et nunc, is important.

We must not focus on the state we had once upon a time, or wish we had, or should have had, or might have someday: those are unreal and misleading fantasies that distract us from reality and God’s will.

If we are truly devoted and devout (in the sense of the active virtue) to fulfilling the duties of our state as it truly is here and now, then God will give us every actual grace we need to fulfill our vocation. Why can we boldly depend on God to help us? If we are fulfilling the duties of our state of life, then we are also fulfilling our proper roles in His great plan, His design from before the creation of the universe. God is therefore sure to help us. And if we are devoted to our state as it truly is, then God can also guide us to a new vocation when and if that is His will for us.

Faithful in what we must do here and now, we will be open to something God wants us to do later.

This attachment to reality and sense of dutiful obedience through the active virtue devotio is a necessary part of religion in keeping with the biblical principle in 1 John 2:3-5:

And by this we may be sure that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says ‘I know Him’ but disobeys His commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him; but whoever keeps his word, in him truly love for God is perfected. By this we may be sure that we are in Him: he who says he bides in Him ought to walk in the same way in which He walked.

Before the creation of the universe God knew each one of us and desired us and loved us.

He called us into existence as a precise point in His great plan, His economy of salvation.  He gives us a part to play in that plan and gives each of us the tools and talents we need to fulfill it.  If we devote ourselves with real devotio to our state-in-life and strive to carry out His will, God will give us every actual grace we need since we are furthering His great plan.

This is why I suggest above that our devotion can be like the wind that the Captain uses to direct our great ship.  More than just being the “hands on deck”, we play a vital part in the actual forward motion of the ship. We are not merely being hauled along upon the “alien merits” of Christ, as some Protestants call God’s saving intervention.  While we truly depend on Him and Him alone, while we truly do not merit what He provides, mysteriously it is part of His plan. He brings it to pass that His work becomes ours and ours His.  He “makes it so”.

A Somewhat Smoother Version:
Grant, we beseech you, O Lord,
that the course of the world be steered by your plan for peace
and that your Church be filled with joy from tranquil devotion to that plan.

Or a bit more poetic:
O Lord, we beg Thee to grant
that the peaceful steerage of the world’s course be set according to Thy plan
and that Thy Church be made full with joy from our tranquil devotion.

LAME-DUCK ICEL (1973):
Lord,
guide the course of world events
and give your Church the joy and peace
of serving you in freedom.

It is hard to strike a balance between the literal, which can be awkward and wordy, and the simple, which can be banal and miss the real impact of the prayer.

NEW CORRECTED ICEL (2011):
Grant us, O Lord, we pray,
that the course of our world
may be directed by your peaceful rule
and that your Church may rejoice,
untroubled in her devotion.

You decide.

Posted in WDTPRS | Tagged , , ,
1 Comment