Your Sunday Sermon notes – 5th Sunday after Easter (N.O. 6th of Easter) 2021

Was there a GOOD point made in the sermon you heard at the Mass for your Sunday (obligation or none), either live or on the internet? Let us know what it was.

Too many people today are without good, strong preaching, to the detriment of all. Share the good stuff.

Also, are your churches opening up? What was attendance like?

Mine.

If you are involved with preparing coffee and donuts after Mass (yes, this is returning) consider using Mystic Monk Coffee.  Use my link. You help the monks, you help yourselves, you help me.  A pretty good deal.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
4 Comments

Daily Rome Shot 152

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged
Comments Off on Daily Rome Shot 152

ASK FATHER: I forgot to confess a detail about a mortal sin. Do I have to re-confess everything?

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

I know we must confess mortal sins in kind and number and the details which change the nature of the sin. I confessed a set of past sins and mentioned an important detail which changed the species/nature of the sin (let’s call it Detail X).

However, I recently remembered another detail (Detail Y) that I don’t recall mentioning. The forgotten Detail Y changed the nature of the sin in the *same way* as Detail X, even though they were distinct details. So even though I forgot Detail Y, the priest still understood how the nature of the mortal sin was changed. Both Detail X and Detail Y belong in the same “category,” so either of them would have changed the nature of my sins in the same way.

Am I in the clear, or do I have to re-confess everything yet again but this time including Detail Y? This has caused me *great* mental agony as I have re-confessed the same set of past sins again and again over the years in greater and greater detail. I just want to be free once and for all, but I keep remembering things I fear change the nature/gravity.

I can tell that you take going to confession seriously and that you want to do the right thing.

Doing the right thing includes doing your best.   It sounds to me as if, when you make your confessions you, at the moment, did your best.  You tried to make a good confession and did not intentionally exclude any important point.

When you do your best and, through no fault of your own, you nevertheless forget some detail or even a sin, all your sins are still forgiven.    Don’t fret about that.   You don’t become “unforgiven” if you remember something.

The next time you go to confession, if there is some sin you forgot before, simply include it in your confession and mention that you had sincerely forgotten it before.  As far as some detail is concerned, if you feel like it, to get it off your chest, you can mention that also, but I don’t think that you should feel compelled to.

This experience will help you to remember to make your good examination of conscience before your confession.  I am sure you do already.  However, you will probably now be more aware of “game changing” details than before.

I’d like to counsel you not to torment yourself, in such a way that you become afraid to go to confession for fear of not doing well enough.  Just go and do your best.   Making your examination of conscience each night will help you to relax and make a good confession without all sorts of doubts and scruples creeping in.

When strong doubts creep in, resist your anxiety.  Don’t worry.  You are not being “lax”.

If you are having a really hard time feeling the comfort of having made your good confession, tell your confessor, tell the priest.  It could be that he will have some advice for you.

The most important thing is to BELIEVE in Christ’s promises and His love for all of us in instituting the Sacrament of Penance. He gave His own power to His priests to absolve our sins.  He knew that we would need this sacrament.  He knew that we would sometimes struggle with it.   Be confident and believe in His care for you.   He does not desire that you feel as if you are on the rack.   Making a confession can be hard sometimes, but HE is not your prosecutor.  He is the dispenser of divine mercy.  He knows you better than you know yourself.

Do your best and all your sins are forgiven.  They don’t snap back into unforgiveness if you remember one that you had forgotten.  Remember that.

Everyone…

GO TO CONFESSION!

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, GO TO CONFESSION, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Save The Liturgy - Save The World | Tagged ,
9 Comments

Daily Rome Shot 151

Photo by Bree Dail.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged
Comments Off on Daily Rome Shot 151

“Missa pica”

From a reader… animi caussa!

Dear Fr Z,

Last Monday week (April 26) was the day after Anzac Day, a day whereon all Australians and New Zealanders who died in war are remembered.

We sang a daily requiem mass for the dead, during which a juvenile Australian magpie (Gymnorhina tibicen) strayed into Ss Peter and Paul, Garran, Canberra, Australia.

It was very distressed for a while, not being able to find its way out, despite our best efforts. Eventually, having given up, it settled down and, perching quietly on a pew, seemed to develop an interest in our proceedings (see photo attached).

It landed on the bench that you can see, at the left hand side, and crabbed sideways for 10ft or so up to the gentleman in a very deliberate way, then stopped and fixed on him with its gaze for a long time. The irony was that it was our Anzac requiem, and this gentleman was the only military person (a retired Brigadier) in the whole congregation. It was as if it were asking for orders! I could barely hold my mirth.

Then, get this – and I swear – immediately after the Consecration, it started singing away lustily, … it was a glorious elevation motet!

After mass, we managed to coax it safely out an open window.

Note that it came dressed in the appropriate liturgical colours for a requiem. How thoughtful!

“Bless the Lord all ye works of the Lord.”

Posted in Lighter fare | Tagged
10 Comments

8 May Indulgence: Supplication to O.L. of Pompeii

There is a beautiful tradition for 8 May, this year Sunday (often right at 1200 noon).

Once upon a time one could obtain this day a plenary indulgence by reciting the Supplication to the Madonna of Pompeii.  The other day for this is the first Sunday of October.

With the changes to the concessions for indulgences, according to the Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, there is no longer any plenary indulgence for this prayer, notwithstanding anything you might see in some old book or on a website.  For example, if you see something about Pope Leo XIII granting an indulgence, etc., that is null and void now.

However, the new Enchiridion says with concession #17, §3 that Marian prayers obtain a partial indulgence under the condition that the prayer is approved by competent authority and that it is recited with fervor in the state of grace (you don’t need confession and Communion within 20 days, nor must you recite the prayers for the Roman Pontiffs intentions for a partial indulgence)You can receive a partial indulgence, by maintaining this beautiful custom of the Supplication today. 

For more about this, including the prayers, click HERE.  I included background on Bl. Bartolo Longo, a converted Satanic priest! John Paul II beatified Bartolo Longo in 1980.  Some of his writings form the basis of the Luminous Mysteries of the Rosary.

Posted in Just Too Cool, Our Catholic Identity |
1 Comment

WDTPRS – 5th Sunday after Easter (TLM): Liturgical goop. Wherein Fr. Z rants.

I am going to drag you – again – through my standard and sustained rant about liturgy, punctuated by Latin vocabulary and Neoplatonism.

First, to be grown up Catholics we need a Mass for grown ups.

Our Mass should give us thick red steak and Cabernet, not pureed carrots and milk for baby teeth.

I want meat for you, not goop.   That means I want some of you to grow up into something more than you have hitherto desired.

Goop is fine for babies.  Babies need goop.  But when you grow up, you need more than goop.  Adults can survive on goop, but they won’t thrive.

I want you to thrive through our Mass not just survive.

In the revisions and recreation of new prayers for Novus Ordo we lost most of what could be characterized as “negative” concepts: sin, guilt, penance, propitiation, etc.  But these are vital nutrients for Catholics.  Grown up Catholics, that is.  Catholics who understand that we are sinners, and that one day we are going to die and meet our Maker, who is our Savior and our Judge.

When we deal with very young children we don’t drum on about the Four Last Things.  They shouldn’t be ignorant of them, but we shouldn’t stress them to much, either.  Let children be children.

But we must not infantilize adults by denying them the sustenance of TRUTH.  “Goo goo ga ga” is not enough for adults. To preach “goo goo” to them is precisely the opposite of charity, which seeks to serve the good of others.

Alas, the Novus Ordo has a lot of “goo goo” built in it, because the experts who cobbled it together stripped the rites and prayers of many essential nutrients.  The deficiencies can be partly made up for by a good ars celebrandi and good preaching, just as in the TLM some of the optimistic eschatology stressed in the Novus Ordo can be brought in with good effect.

It is far easier to do that with the later than to evolve the former.   But I digress.

Bottom line…

Mass must be succulent, not insipid.

With the help of preachers and devotional reading and some silent contemplation – yes, I mean sitting down and thinking for a while without looking at a screen – we can crack the bones of our prayers and rites open with adult teeth, chew their marrow and gnaw their flesh with benefit.

Moving on to Sunday’s prayer, let’s start cracking those bones for the marrowy goodness within.

In the ancient Gelasian Sacramentary today’s Collect is found on the Fourth Sunday after the close of the Easter Octave. The Gelasian or Liber sacramentorum Romanae ecclesiae (Book of Sacraments of the Church of Rome) was assembled from older material in Paris around 750.

It has elements of both the Roman and Gallican (French) liturgies of the Merovingian period (5th – 8th cc.). This Collect survived the cutters and snippers who pasted the Novus Ordo together on their desks. You hear it now on the 10th Sunday of Ordinary Time.

COLLECT – (1962MR):

Deus, a quo bona cuncta procedunt, largire supplicibus tuis: ut cogitemus, te inspirante, quae recta sunt; et, te gubernante, eadem faciamus.

The Novus Ordo version slightly rearranges the word order, saying “tuis largire supplicibus”, which I actually prefer since it flows better, but the more ancient version in the Gelasian omits the “tuis” altogether.

Our never distant Lewis & Short Dictionary says procedo means “to go forth or before, to go forwards, advance, proceed” and more importantly “to go or come forth or out, to advance, issue” and even “to issue from the mouth, to be uttered”. Largire looks like an infinitive but is really an imperative form of the deponent largior, “to give bountifully, to lavish, bestow, dispense, distribute, impart… to confer, bestow, grant, yield”. The neuter substantive rectum, i (from rego), is “that which is right, good, virtuous; uprightness, rectitude, virtue”. Rego involves “to keep straight or from going wrong, to lead straight; to guide, conduct, direct”. The core concepts are “straight” and “upwards”. In its adjectival form, rectus, a, um, there is a moral content, “right, correct, proper, appropriate, befitting” again having reference to that which is “above”. Cogito is more than simply “to think”. As in Descartes’ often quoted “Cogito ergo sum… I think, therefore I am”, it is really, “to pursue something in the mind” and “to consider thoroughly, to ponder, to weigh, reflect upon”. The English derivative is “cogitate”.

LITERAL VERSION:

O God, from whom all good things issue forth, bountifully grant to Your supplicants, that, You inspiring, we may think things which are right, and, You guiding, we may accomplish the same.

CURRENT ICEL (2011 from the Ordinary Form):

O God, from whom all good things come,
grant that we, who call on you in our need,
may at your prompting discern what is right,
and by your guidance do it
.

Well… okay.

Time to CRACK SOME BONES!

In today’s classically sculpted Collect there is a concept important for theological reflection by the ancient Church through the medieval period.

A theological key helps us to open up what the Church is really saying to God, on our behalf, locked up in words.

Ancient theologians, both pagan and Christian struggled alike for answers to the same questions.

  • If all things come from God, did God create evil?
  • If all things come from God, then are all things, in fact, also God?
  • If in the cosmos there are only God and everything else which is not-God, and if God is the only Good, then are all created not-God things evil?
  • Is matter evil by nature?
  • Are we evil, destined to doom or nothingness?

Pagans and Christians, using the same starting points and categories of thought, came up with differing solutions.

Rejecting the idea of both a good god principle and an evil god principle, pagan theologians of the Platonic stream of thought posited a kind of creation through an endless series of intermediaries to avoid the conclusion that God, the highest good, created evil. For them, the perfectly transcendent One overflowed with being through descending triads of intermediaries down to the corrupt material world from which we must be freed. This solved nothing, of course, because no matter how many hierarchies of intermediaries you propose, those hierarchies always must be further divided into more hierarchies. Christian theologians, who were also Platonists, using the same categories of thought found another solution: creatio ex nihilo… immediate (that is “unmediated”) creation of the universe from nothing. Evil was explained as a deprivation of being, essentially a “nothingness”, not created by God. All things which have being come forth from God, are good, and will go back to God. This is the key for unlocking our prayer.

Let us now look at the lame-duck version people had to hear in church for over thirty years on the 10th Sunday of Ordinary, brought to you by…

OBSOLETE ICEL (1973 10th Ord. Sunday):
God of wisdom and love,
source of all good,
send your Spirit to teach us your truth
and guide our actions
in your way of peace.

BLECH! Did I mention “goo goo ga ga goop?”

Folks, translation is hard but it ain’t that hard.   BTW… I read that a certain American Archbishop wants us to review the current translation.   This same Archbishop was, I believe, at one time in favor of “feedbox” for “manger” and “big boat” for “ark.  But I digress.

If our prayer today is like a nice plate of ossobucco, it’s time to dig out some of that good rich marrow.

When our Sunday Collect was composed, Western theologians (still really Platonists in many respects) were mightily struggling to solve thorny problems about, for example, predestination. This required them to gaze deeply at man’s nature and the problem of evil.

In this titanic theological battle we find on all sides the ancient Platonic view of creation. All creation proceeds (procedo) forth from God in indeterminate form. In a reflection of the eternal procession of uncreated divine Persons of the Trinity, the rational component of creation (man) turned around when proceeding forth in order to regard his Source and, in that turning, that conversio, took determinate form and began to return to God. This going forth and returning, this descent and rising (in theology exitus and reditus or Greek exodos and proodos) is everywhere present in ancient and medieval thought… and in liturgical prayer today when the ancient form was too messed up by the redactors.

For Christians of the Neoplatonic Augustinian tradition, man, the pinnacle of creation, “drags”, as it were, all of created nature with him in a contemplative “conversion” back to God.

Man’s rational nature was not destroyed by sin in the Fall.

However, were it not for the Incarnate Logos, the Word made flesh, the union of uncreated with created, the descent of creation would have simply continued “exiting” away from God for eternity.

If not for the Incarnation man and all creation with him would never turn back, doomed to become ever more indeterminate!

Instead, rational man, the image of the rational Word, and all creation with him can turn back to God.

The Son entered our created realm and made possible man’s conversio after the Fall.

As John Scotus Eriugena (+877) put it, man is “nature’s priest”.

Through rational acts man plays a part in God’s saving plan for creation.

This pattern of exitus and reditus is exemplified in the writings of theologians in a line from pagan Neoplatonic writers like Plotinus (+270), to Christian Platonists like St. Augustine (+430), Boethius (+525), Eriugena, St. Bonaventure (+1274) and St. Thomas Aquinas (+1274). This is the theology behind many ancient prayers.

Our Collect echoes the Neoplationic theology of late antiquity and early Middle Ages together with the Scriptural James 1:17, a text used frequently by these same Merovingian and Carolingian thinkers.

We need what our prayers really say.  They are the bones of our daily lives. We need a Mass for grown ups.

Demand Grown-up Mass.

Lastly, perhaps that Augustinian, Neoplatonic stuff I rattled on about could be the starting point for a serious “theology of ecology”, somewhat more substantial than the pseudo-scientific tripe that’s being peddled today.  You theology students out there: this could provide some starting points for papers and theses.  Go back and read that last part and see what you can think up.

Just don’t attempt this at Villanova or at some Jesuit school unless there is solid faculty member about.

Meanwhile, dear readers, consider this a different sort of “food post”.

Posted in WDTPRS, Wherein Fr. Z Rants |
3 Comments

ASK FATHER: Validity of Confirmation when an instrument is used and there is no hand contact

Recent I had two dubia about the same issue, one via email and another via SMS.  I find it curious that they both came in within days of each other.

The question was about the administration of the Sacrament of Confirmation using a some kind of cotton swab or instrument.  It is valid or not?

I’ve written about this question HERE and HERE.

I am flummoxed.

On the one hand, after Trent, at least, it was completely clear that use of an instrument was invalid.  The valid administration of Confirmation required a) imposition of the hand and b) anointing with Sacred Chrism.

At the time of Paul VI in 1972 it was clarified that the use of the thumb to anoint (or in case of need a different finger) sufficed for imposition of the hand.  That underscored that there had to be a touch of the hand.   So, if there was no imposition of the hand, but the bishop did anoint with the thumb, that was sufficient for validity.

Before Trent, a 15th c. painter Rogier van der Weyden shows that Confirmation could be done with an instrument.   It does not show the moment of imposition of the hand, but one assumes it.

Moving forward, in September 2020 (mid COVID Theater) the CDW told the USCCB that an instrument could be used and that it wouldn’t affect validity.  Presumably that would mean that Confirmation could be administered without any touch of the hand at all, given the response in 1972.

It’s a mess.

I think that the CDW is not the Congregation to answer this.  For questions of validity of sacramental forms and matter it seems to me that the CDF should answer the question.   It was, for example, the CDF that answered a challenge from French bishops about the continued use of the traditional form of Confirmation.

Meanwhile, because of COVID Theater, it is possible that some bishops, when confirming, are not imposing their hand and also using an instrument, meaning that there is no imposition of the hand.

Until this is resolved, it would not be a mistake to seek the Sacrament of Confirmation from a bishop using the TRADITIONAL Rite, including laying on the the hand and anointing with the thumb.  There is ZERO question of validity that way.

And isn’t that what we all want?  Do we ever want the slightest doubt about validity of sacraments?   We are our rites, after all.

Confirmation is REALLY IMPORTANT.   And through the history of the Church back to Apostolic times, as attested in Acts, imposition of hands  by the bishops is necessary.  That said, to this day I do not think that there has been an end-all-debate dogmatic declaration about imposition of hands.

It is natural that we should want clarity about this.

This is why we want to make sure that wine is truly grape wine, that hosts are from wheat and are not adulterated.  This why we want Father to use the correct words of absolution in the confessional.  Do you want to wonder of the Eucharist was really confected or your sins were absolved?   This is why the Church has a specific form for marriage.  This is why there is rite for anointing.  This is why a precise form should be used for baptism.

Remember the awful consequences when a couple of priests learned that they had been invalidly baptized because, back in the day, the priest or deacon made up his own baptismal form?

Do we ever want the slightest doubt about validity of sacraments?

This is why we must always

 

 

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Save The Liturgy - Save The World | Tagged ,
3 Comments

A missed anniversary: Freedom 7

At APOD today we find a pic of the Mercury-Redstone 3 lift-off from Cape Canaveral of Alan Shepard in Freedom 7.  5 May 1961… 60 years ago.

60 years.

Alan Shepard would later command Apollo 14 and walk on your planet’s Moon.

Posted in Just Too Cool, Look! Up in the sky! | Tagged
9 Comments

Daily Rome Shot 150

Photo by Bree Dail.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged
1 Comment