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

Fr. Z’s annual rant about Ascension Thursday Sunday

Posted on 1 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

We know with holy and Catholic Faith that what was not assumed, was not redeemed (St. Gregory of Nazianzus – +389/90).

Our humanity, body and soul, was taken by the Son into an unbreakable bond with His divinity.

When Christ rose from the tomb, our humanity rose in Him. When He ascended to heaven, so also did we ascend. In Christ, our humanity now sits at the Father’s right hand. His presence there is our great promise and hope here.

It is already fulfilled, but not yet in its fullness. That hope informs our trials in this life.

Be clear. Not only Christ’s humanity but our humanity ascended into heaven. Preaching on 1 June 444 St. Leo I, “the Great” (+461) taught (my emphasis), “Truly it was a great and indescribable source of rejoicing when, in the sight of the heavenly multitudes, the nature of our human race ascended over the dignity of all heavenly creatures, to pass the angelic orders and to be raised beyond the heights of archangels. In its ascension it did not stop at any other height until this same nature was received at the seat of the eternal Father, to be associated on the throne of the glory of that One to whose nature it was joined in the Son.”

Leo says in another sermon of 17 May 445, “This Faith, reinforced by the Ascension of the Lord and strengthened by the gift of the Holy Spirit, has not been terrified by chains, by prison, by exile, by hunger, by fire, by the mangling of wild beasts, nor by sharp suffering from the cruelty of persecutors. Throughout the world, not only men but also women, not just immature boys but also tender virgins, have struggled on behalf of this Faith even to the shedding of their blood. This Faith has cast out demons, driven away sicknesses, and raised the dead.”

The liturgical celebration of Ascension by the Latin Church has become a little confused in recent years.

In the post-Conciliar calendar used with the Novus Ordo editions of the Missale Romanum for this Sunday we ought to be observing the 7th Sunday of Easter.

Ascension Thursday is on Thursday.

However, by the same logical that dislocated Epiphany from its proper place twelve days after Christmas (“Twelfth Night”), some years ago the Holy See allowed conferences of bishops to transfer the celebration of Ascension Thursday to the following Sunday.

I call this liturgical quirk “Ascension Thursday Sunday”.

Those who are participating at Holy Mass with the 1962MR avoid this folderol.

I know the argument. The bishops hope to expose more people to the mystery of the Ascension of the Lord. Because it is too hard to go to Mass also on Thursday, they moved the feast to Sunday. Well… in most places they moved it to Sunday. What is even more confusing is that it isn’t transferred in some dioceses.

In the 1983 Code of Canon Law c. 1246, Ascension Thursday is indicated as one of the few Holy Days of Obligation. Again, I know the “laudable” reason for moving the feast.

However, perhaps it is the influence of reading so much St. Augustine over the years, but my present view of human nature suggests to me that when Holy Mother Church’s pastors lower expectations regarding the liturgy, people get the hint: it just isn’t that important. Maybe none of it is important.

I think the option to dislocate such an important and ancient feast is an arrogant novelty.

The celebration of Ascension on a particular Thursday is rooted in Scripture and reflects the ancient practice of the Church in East and West alike. We read in Holy Scripture that nine days, not six, intervened between the Lord’s physical ascent to the Father’s right hand and the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Ascension Thursday was fixed at the 40th day after Easter from about the end of the 4th century. In the Latin West, St. Augustine of Hippo (+430) called it Quadragesima (“fortieth”) Ascensionis. In the Greek East, St. Gregory of Nyssa spoke of it in 388. That’s only a 16 century tradition. Eastern Christians haven’t transferred Ascension.

What must the Easterners think of us Latins?

But let’s be more positive.

With the third, 2002 edition of the Missale Romanum we have once again a Mass for the Vigil of Ascension. This wasn’t in the 1970 or 1975 editions. Moreover, there are now proper Masses for the days (nine? six?) after Ascension until Pentecost, most having alternative collects depending on whether or not in that region Ascension is transferred to Sunday.

In the new printing of the 3rd edition there will also be an option for a longer celebration of the Vigil of Pentecost, in keeping with the ancient use similar to the Vigil of Easter, with various readings. There is a parallel between Easter and Pentecost for the sacraments of baptism and confirmation, which in the Latin Church were of old conferred in the same rite.

Drop to your knees and thank God for Pope Benedict and the provisions by which he liberated the use also of the pre-Conciliar liturgy through Summorum Pontificum.

Whether you prefer the older form of Mass or the newer, Pope Benedict is working to heal the rupture that took place after the Council in our worship of Almighty God.

The older use will exert a “gravitational pull” on the celebration of the newer forms and the whole Church will benefit.

Latin for “tweet” and “Twitter” – WDTPRS POLL

Posted on 1 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fewer questions in this twittering world burn at hot as the proper Latin terminology for Twitter.

In a couple places, for example on the entry about the Z-Cam and Radio Sabina, I have suggested that Latin for “tweet” as in the use of Twitter should be pipata, “tweets” from pipio “to twitter, chirp”.

I now read this from rogueclassicism (which I look at everyday) from this about the all important question of how to tweet on Twitter, Latinly.

I am not entirely convinced.

This past weekend, I was pondering whether anyone had bothered yet to render the word “Twitter” into Latin, [Yes. I did.] and threw the question out — naturally — to my Twitter followers. What I didn’t want was simply a transcription in Latin of something that sounded like ‘twitter’ … I was looking for a word which some Classical Roman might have used had social media of our sort existed back in the day. The word had to be Classically-attested, and ideally wasn’t a hapax or something culled from a disputed line in an apparatus.

I, and several others, immediately thought of Catullus’s sparrow hopping about in Lesbia’s lap (Carmina III, incipit, via the Latin Library):

LVGETE, o Veneres Cupidinesque,
et quantum est hominum uenustiorum:
passer mortuus est meae puellae,
passer, deliciae meae puellae,
quem plus illa oculis suis amabat.
nam mellitus erat suamque norat
ipsam tam bene quam puella matrem,
nec sese a gremio illius mouebat,
sed circumsiliens modo huc modo illuc
ad solam dominam usque pipiabat.

[…]

No matter what one thinks the passer actually refers to (e.g. see this short analysis of Carmina II), pipiare (‘chirping’ or ‘peeping’ in the avian sense) does seem to be related to the whole concept of Twitter and ‘tweeting’, obviously.

Accordingly, I chanced upon a nice page which conjugated pipiare in all its forms which offered a sort of ‘menu of potential terminology’ and initially was in a gerundive state of mind, and threw out the suggestion of Pipianda (things chirped) for Twitter, and pipiandum (a thing chirped) for a tweet. Other forms were suggested, most notably pipulum for Tweet, by Dave Oosterhuis (@VerbaLatina). Bill Thayer (@LacusCurtius) suggested ‘pipiatum‘ to save a character (we do tweet in a 140 character world, of course), which was also nice because it brought back the ‘t’ sound.

That ‘t’ sound seems to have latched onto my brain, and after some confusion (on my part) with the suggestion of tuitear (from @latinimberbe, who was giving me the Spanish word, but I didn’t catch on), I was waiting to see if any ‘t’ words came to be suggested.

Coincidentally, Daniel Russell (@NotusNasoNovit) brought up that he used ‘titiatum‘ to refer to Twitter because it did preserve the ‘t’. [Hmmm…] I had seen that word, but I could not discern whether it was Classical or Medieval. According to Daniel, in the OLD the word occurs in Suetonius — but not in the Lives of the Caesars, but in some obscure work called the Prata (fr. 161) which seems to be a catalog of animal noises. In the August Reifferscheid, Friedrich Wilhelm Ritschl edition which is online, we see the simple phrase: [But I thought the idea was to find something that was more than … obscure.]

passer titiare

That seemed to fit the bill nicely. Late consideration was also given to Aurelien Berra, who mentioned using fritinnio, fringultio, and frigutio in a Twitter-related discussion last summer.

A check of this word yielded (with help) the following from the Latin Dictionary at Perseus:

[…]

While the word is listed as ‘twitter’ or ‘chirp’, from the birds described as using it — blackbirds and jackdaws [Jerome’s description of Ambrose, btw.] — and the transferral of it to refer to stammering and stuttering, it doesn’t quite have the same elegance as pipiatum or titiatum. In the end, for me anyway, it was a bit of a coin toss and it boiled down to how good it looked as a logo:

versus

Aesthetically, the latter looks almost like the original (so is a translation of an image as well) and also has the nice feature of not having descenders, which seems to be something folks avoid in logos for some reason.

And so I humbly suggest (and/or confirm or agree): Twitter in Latin should be Titiatio and a tweet Titiatum

[…]

OKAY… this needs a WDTPRS poll. I am not saying I, personally, will perforce go by the results. But I want the data and arguments for the choice, which I hope you will give in the combox, below.

Loading ...

Posted in POLLS, The Drill | Tagged Latin, tweet, Twitter
15 Comments

Priests. The older Mass: Just Do It.

Posted on 1 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Summorum Pontificum was a great gift to priests and, through priests, to their congregations.

I have written many times that when priests learn to say the older, Extraordinary Form of Holy Mass in the Roman Rite, they are changed by the experience and they never say the Novus Ordo again in the same way. They come to know something more about who they are at the altar as priest/victim, and they learn something more about an ars celebrandi which is apt for the Roman Rite.

This is one of the ways in which Pope Benedict’s “Marshall Plan” will have a slow but sure effect on the larger Church.

With that as a preamble, Fr. Kyle Schnippel, vocations director for the Archdiocese of Cincinnati, wrote on his blog Called By Name about his first experience as a deacon at a Solemn TLM.

I hear from Fr. Schnippel that he will be celebrant for the first time for a public TLM. In advance of this Mass he has written some points of advice for priests concerning the older, Extraordinary Form.

Here are a few of his parting shots. You can read the rest at his place.

6) Switch your private Mass from Latin NO to the EF and keep praciticing.

7) Offer to assist as a Deacon or Sub-Deacon at the Solemn High Mass

8) Step to the Center and DO IT!

For me, this was a four to six month process, some days I put in more time (when I had it), some days/weeks, I didn’t get any progress made; but I tried to keep an upward trajectory.

This is worth it for your priesthood!!!!! It has helped me to celebrate the NO better, with more reverence. It has made me appreciate the Mass all the more. This will also help in appreciating the new texts we will be using this Advent.

As a priest, we get many demands, and this seems like a huge burden to learn and make progress. Break it down into the steps and timeline that works for you and DO IT!!!

WDTPRS KUDOS to Fr. Schnippel. I look forward to his reflections on being celebrant for a public TLM.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged X Fr. Kyle Schnippel
5 Comments

Card Burke withdraws from London conference at last minute

Posted on 1 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From the UK’s best Catholic weekly, The Catholic Herald:

Cardinal Burke withdraws from London conference at last minute

By David V Barrett on Wednesday, 1 June 2011

Mystery surrounds the unexpected withdrawal of Cardinal Raymond Burke as the main speaker at a conference organised by Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice at Westminster Central Hall on June 18.

The Faith of our Fathers conferences, which began in 1996, have traditionally attracted high-profile speakers such as Mother Angela, founder of the Eternal Word Television Network. As prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, Cardinal Burke oversees the administration of justice in the Church. He was to have spoken on “The Restoration of Church Discipline and Evangelisation”. He has long been seen as one of the most outspoken US bishops and, since his elevation to the College of Cardinals by Pope Benedict last November, is one of the highest-placed officials at the Vatican.

Daphne McLeod, chairman of Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice, said that Cardinal Burke had been informed by “several devout and faithful people” that his speaking at the conference would be divisive because Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice “are too outspoken and don’t have respect for the bishops”.

“We’re whistle-blowers, and we have enemies,” she said.

She would not say who she thought had issued this warning, but said the impression was given that if the cardinal speaks, “because he’s so close to the Pope it’ll look as if he’s speaking for the Pope and attacking the bishops – which is crazy”, she said.

Cardinal Burke came to prominence outside the Church during the 2004 American presidential elections, when he publicly stated that Democratic candidate John Kerry and other Catholic politicians who supported legalised abortion should not be allowed to receive the Eucharist.

Posted in The Campus Telephone Pole | Tagged Card. Burke, Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice, whistle-blowers
Comments Off

QUAERITUR: Questions or statements about Faith met with confusion or attacks.

Posted on 1 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From a reader:

Every time I start or enter conversations with non-catholic people, the moment I ask : “Why do you think this?” or say: “I don’t understand, please explain.” in response to a statement, it will be handled as an open personal attack. To be fair, there are people who actually give an asnwer to the question, but that is usually totally meaningless and upset, but the second reply is commonly a real personal attack. We don’t even reach the point when the talk we are having is beginning to be actual communication. I experience this kind of behaviour in the office with my colleagues and with my parents too.

I get really upset when I encounter this kind of behaviour, not becouse I hate the people, but becouse the refusal of reasoning irritates me. I usually say a prayer to my guardian angel or the Blessed Virgin to help me not to lose my temper.

Is this normal, or am I doing something wrong?

Given that we are members of a fallen race, suffering with the wounds Original Sin inflicted on our will and intellect, on our ability to control our passions and appetites, I would say that this is fairly normal. This is the sort of thing that made martyrs into martyrs.

To be less dramatic, however, keep in mind the times in which we live.

Attention spans are now very short. People are taught less and less useful information. We are surrounded by distractions which lull us away from consideration of the Last Things. Preaching and teaching and catechesis has been sheer disaster for decades. Liturgical worship has been banalized far and wide. The Church and religion and the moral, ethical teaching that flows from them have been incessantly run down by the entertainment industry and misrepresented by the mainstream media. Religious indiffrentism is advanced as enlightened dialogue. Critical thinking is a nearly lost tool.

Is it any wonder that when you ask them to give a reason for what they think, they have a negative reaction? Many people are unused to such a challenge.

Take into consideration the old adage, quidquid recipitur, in modo recipientis recipitur. That which is received, is received in the manner or mode of the one who is receiving it. That it to say, you may have to tailor your according to the people you are dealing with.

Therefore, give heed to what we red in 1 Peter 15: 13ff.

And who is he that can hurt you, if you be zealous of good? But if also you suffer any thing for justice’ sake, blessed are ye. And be not afraid of their fear, and be not troubled. But sanctify the Lord Christ in your hearts, being ready always to satisfy every one that asketh you a reason of that hope which is in you. But with modesty and fear, having a good conscience: that whereas they speak evil of you, they may be ashamed who falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ. For it is better doing well (if such be the will of God) to suffer, than doing ill.

Be prepared to give your own informed, measured and kind answers for your Faith.

Moreover, pray not only to your Guardian Angel, but also the other person’s Guardian Angel. Ask them to work together to help the two of you have a good exchange and to prompt you in the right directions of thought while protecting your from the traps of the Enemy.

And be sure to show joy in your Catholic faith. With the relatively religiously unlettered today, your joy may be the first, best hook you have in your tackle box.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box | Tagged apologetics
12 Comments

Business owners: Want to support vocations to the priesthood?

Posted on 1 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

May I recommend to Catholic business owners…

If you want to support vocations to the priesthood, one way to do so would be to find or offer summer jobs to seminarians.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Our Catholic Identity, The future and our choices | Tagged jobs, priesthood, seminarians, small business, summer jobs, vocations
12 Comments

A concrete reminder of how quickly things can go wrong: an English Catholic “recusant” house

Posted on 1 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I would like to redirect your attention to a fascinating post over at Damian Thompson’s place.

He has written about a … well… here is the first part as a tease to get you to go over there and read the rest.

Mapledurham House, an imposing Elizabethan mansion in south Oxfordshire, is one of Catholic England’s best-kept secrets. Which is appropriate, in a way – for it went to enormous trouble to keep its Catholic allegiance secret during times of persecution, when it was a safe house for fugitive priests.

That said, I think it’s high time that Mapledurham was better known: by rights it ought to attract thousands more visitors than it does. We live in an age when fans of The Da Vinci Code and other thrillers rush to historic locations to stare at “clues” to bogus mysteries. In contrast, the owners of Mapledurham House kept a genuine secret during the Tudor persecution and for decades afterwards: their fidelity to the Roman faith. But the clues had to be subtle – to the extent that, even now, its current owners, John and Lady Anne Eyston, are still making discoveries.

The most recent priest hole, for example, lay undiscovered until 2002 – though it’s in such an inaccessible upper bedroom that it can’t accommodate crowds of tourists. The hole is hidden underneath a sliding hearth, and it might better be described as an elaborate escape shaft.

“Family legend had it that there was a priest hole in the bedroom fireplace – but we didn’t realise that for years we were looking at the wrong fireplace, not the hidden original,” says Jack Eyston, a descendent of the Blount family who were guardians of the house for most of its history. “Nothing was ever committed to writing, for obvious reasons.”

Mapledurham is next to the Thames at a point where the river can’t be crossed. As Richard Williams observes in his guide to the estate, this means that “the village, clustered round the manor houses, the church, the mill and the almshouses, remains a peaceful and secluded oasis, beloved of artists and visitors”.

The river was crucial for some of those early visitors – Catholic priests. Mr Eyston explains: “This was an ideal safe house because you could get here without riding a horse and being spotted as a stranger.” But how would they know their boat had reached safety? “All recusant houses had a sign, and this was ours,” he says, pointing to a gable covered with oyster shells visible from the river. The shells may represent the biblical “pearl of great price” – the Catholic faith, whose Mass was celebrated in an attic.

[…]

Read the rest there.

In a time when Pope Benedict is talking about a “New Evangelization”, I often wonder if we should not start thinking about making “priest holes” again.

Posted in Just Too Cool, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice |
7 Comments

A new batch

Posted on 31 May 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I have ticked a few things off my To Do List for the day and can now settle down to read a bit.

I need, inter alia, to make some more notes about Augustine’s commentary on 1 John, which we will be tackling here on the blog as a Patristiblogger Project.

But before I crack the books, it is time to start a new batch of Mystic Monk sun tea!

As you can see, it is just getting under way.

Which I shall drink it on ice, as Preserved Killick would say.

Don’t be a Puir Slow-Witted Gowk.

Refresh your coffee and tea supply before you run out.

UPDATE:

After a couple hours in the sun…

Posted in Lighter fare, Preserved Killick, Puir Slow-Witted Gowk | Tagged mystic monk, Penjing, Preserved Killick, tea
7 Comments

A question for the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”

Posted on 31 May 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

QUAERITUR:

Msgr. Guido Pozzo
Secretary of the
Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”
Palazzo del Sant’Uffizio
00120 Vatican City

Reverend and Dear Monsignor,

The Instruction Universae Ecclesiae states in par. 8 that “the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum constitutes an important expression of the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff and of his munus of regulating and ordering the Church’s Sacred Liturgy.”

Why, in this digital age, is Summorum Pontificum, released in 2007, available only in Latin and Hungarian on the Holy See’s website?

Please, Monsignor, urge that translations of Summorum Pontificum be made available on the Holy See’s website in the major modern languages generally recognized and used in the Roman Curia when important documents of the Holy Father’s Magisterium are released.

It would not be too soon to see these modern language versions in place on the vatican.va website before the Roman Curia’s traditional August break.

With gratitude for the work of the Pontifical Commission and with a promise of prayers for you and your collaborators, I am

Sincerely yours in Christ.

Fr. John Zuhlsdorf
wdtprs.com

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, Universae Ecclesiae | Tagged Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei", SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, UE 8, Universae Ecclesiae
Comments Off

About Universae Ecclesiae and the Latin language

Posted on 31 May 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Over at Over at Fr Hunwicke’s Liturgical Notes I noted this from a few days ago. A good read and with my own emphases and comments:

Universae ecclesiae, C S Lewis, and Bl John XXIII

I referred not long ago to the amusingly delicate way in which UE referred to the scandal that for more than a generation those being formed for the priesthood were – in flagrant disregard of CIC 249 – not made fluent in Latin (I am assured that things are better now). [Where?]

As long ago as 1933, C S (‘Patrimony’) Lewis advanced the suggestion that the attacks – even then – upon the position of Latin and Greek as the basis of education, might be part of a plot devised in Hell to subvert the Faith. In The Pilgrim’s Regress he reminds the reader that “till recently” members of our society “had been made to learn” these languages “and that meant that at least they started no further from the light than the old Pagans themselves and had therefore the chance to come at last” to saving Faith. “But now they are cutting themselves off even from that roundabout route … and suppressing every kind of knowledge except mechanical knowledge“. [Perhaps today we might say “knowledge of how to use electronic gadgets”.] He believed that this shift had much to do with the need of the educated classes to cope with the increasing disinclination of the lower orders to work in domestic service, and added “No doubt the great landowners in the background [scilicet devils] have their own reasons for encouraging this movement”.

You will not be surprised to be reminded that His Abysmal Sublimity Under Secretary Screwtape strongly advocated the policy of preventing each generation from learning from its predecessors: [Sounds like the results of a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture.] “Since we [devils] cannot deceive the whole human race all the time, it is most important thus to cut every generation off from all others; for where learning makes a free commerce between the ages there is always the danger that the characteristic errors of one may be corrected by the characteristic truths of another.” That is why the demise of sacred languages among the clergy and the clerisy is such a triumph for our Enemy. [Do I hear an “Amen!”?]

Older readers may be reminded here of the teaching given to the Universal Church by Bl John XXIII in Veterum Sapientia. Here I have a problem. I would love to share all the important bits of this encyclical with you, but, after doing the two clicks necessary to bring it up on my screen, I realised that pretty well every word of this document is the purest gold. So … here are just a very few words in order to stimulate your resolution to do those two clicks yourselves. “No-one is to be admitted to the study of Philosophy or Theology except he be thoroughly grounded in [Latin] and capable of using it … wherever the study of Latin has suffered partial eclipse … the traditional method of teaching the language is to be completely restored. Such is Our will … the major sacred sciences shall be taught in Latin … if ignorance of Latin makes it difficult for some [seminary professors] to obey these instructions, they shall gradually be replaced by professors who are suited to this task …” What a good and holy old man he was!

‘Liberals’, of course, might point out that this document is not ex cathedra. I agree, because I think the word gradually is unnecessary. [ROFL!] As for sedevacantists who deny that the author of these wise words, Bl John XXIII, was truly pope, well, what I say is Burn the lot of them. It’s the only sort of language these people understand!*

^{*In case foreigners are distressed by the bloodthirstiness of my language, I should clarify the literary register, the genre, of the last paragraph. It is ‘humour’; and is in the spirit of the English satirical magazine Private Eye, which makes much comic use of the formula in my last sentence. (This is deemed, I believe, to be a phrase commonly used by London taxi-drivers in the course of their demotic exchanges of view with their ‘fares’.) I am not really in favour of burning anybody. Honest!}

The document Fr. Hunwicke refers to, Veterum Sapientia, is not just any old document. It is an Apostolic Constitution. An Apostolic Constitution is the high form or level of a document the Church issues. It isn’t a message, or instruction, or exhortation, or even an encyclical.