Rutler writes about “men with chests”. The “impossible dream”?

Fr. Rutler has a terrific piece at the invaluable Crisis.

Read the whole thing, but here is some with my usual treatment.

Where Are the Churchmen With Chests? [“Chests”… a great image.  It was famously used (as Rutler mentions, below, by C.S. Lewis in his Abolition of Man. For Lewis “chests” are the “indispensable liaison officers between cerebral man and visceral man. It may even be said that it is by this middle element that man is man: for by his intellect he is mere spirit and by his appetite mere animal.”  Hence, “chest” allows a man to face reality and act with confidence.]

[…]

But carrying the heavy baggage of his many calamitous missteps, such as Gallipoli in 1915, Dieppe in 1943, the Bengal famine of 1943 and his ambiguity about the Normandy invasion, Winston [Churchill – arguably one of the greatest figures of the 20th c., if not they greatest] could honestly fit the same [Teddy] Roosevelt’s 1910 description in a lecture at the Sorbonne:

The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

[A famous speech, and very long.  That was the most famous bit.]

[NB] These observations provoke an anxious solicitude for the present state of the Church, for it would be hard to find a surplus of church leaders in the arena of such men. [Do I hear an “Amen!”?] The common instinct for Rotarian jocularity rather than true Christian prophecy resembles the manner of Churchill’s Home Secretary, Herbert Morrison, whom the prime minster called “A curious mixture of geniality and venom.” [Which describes a certain mid-western prelate and a fishwraper ghostwriter.] Those anointed to proclaim Christ seem not infrequently reticent about enlisting his Holy Name in what is no less than a spiritual warfare that cannot be won by appeasement. When our bishops were assured by President Obama that there would be no imposition of civil regulations on the Church’s moral standards, specifically in matters of health care, they left a meeting in the White House boasting that they had been promised a good deal. It was their Munich. That conjures the ghost of Neville Chamberlain waving his piece of paper securing “peace for our time.” When Chamberlain died, Churchill refused to humiliate his memory and paid an eloquent tribute in the House to his predecessor’s virtue, but he could not hide the naiveté that paved the steps winding the way down to near destruction.

As it is a nervous business for prelates to court and be courted by civil power, one might question the wisdom of popes addressing the United Nations or parliaments. A pope is not merely another head of state, and the whole history of the economy of Christ and Caesar makes clear that popes are never stronger than when they are weakest in things temporal. Surely a man resolved as Pope Francis is to do what is right for mankind, was ill-served by those who counseled him on what to say in addressing a joint session of Congress. On that awkward day, the Holy Father spoke of refugees, human rights, the death penalty, natural resources, disarmament, and distribution of wealth, but there was no mention of Jesus Christ. The speech invoked acceptable figures like Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Dorothy Day, and Thomas Merton, but no canonized saint that the nation’s legacy boasts.

The resources of the Church in the material order are vast, if fading, but her supernatural resources are beyond calculation an indicting finger points to the neglect of such treasures of talent and grace in lands of privilege, as for example in the mercenary hypertrophy of the Church in Germany. This affects all limbs of the Body of Christ. Where there are bishops of moral vigor, there will be an abundance of young men willing to take up the call of priestly service. [Bingo.  Trees and fruits, right?  Relatively small dioceses with sturdy bishops produce as many or more seminarians than great metropolises.] Where the spirit is tepid and refreshes itself on the thin broth of a domesticated and politically correct Gospel, seminaries will be vacant. As C.S. Lewis gave account: “We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.”  [You see, it is merely that we may ultimately lack true men: men become traitors.  One might say that we don’t just lack men, we also see a rise of effeminacy and sodomy.]

In his Idea of a University, Newman wrote: “Neither Livy, [born in Cisalpine Gaul] nor Tacitus, [Gallia Narbonensis] nor Terence, [Carthage] nor Seneca, [Hispania] nor Pliny, [Gallia Transpadana] nor Quintillian, [Hispania] is an adequate spokesman for the Imperial City. They write Latin; Cicero writes Roman.” The Church needs a Roman vigor that persuades men to rise above self-consciousness. [This next bit is gold…] An English bishop reflected: “Wherever St. Paul went, there was a riot. Wherever I go, they serve tea.” In spiritual combat, there is no teatime, and effective strategies cannot be plotted at conferences, synods, workshops, and costly conventions at resort hotels with multiple “break-out” sessions and mellow music. One fears that a fly on the wall at any of those conversations would drop to the floor out of boredom. “For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?” (1 Cor. 14:8)

That last image, was constantly used by my late mentor, Msgr. Richard Schuler to describe the disastrous approach to vocations to the priesthood that was, back in the day, pursued in the Archdiocese.  Men will not follow an uncertain trumpet.

“Cicero writes Roman.”

Romanitas… Roman-ness, the Roman Thing… is the sum of the enduring values and practices of Romans, especially ancient Rome and, now, in the Roman Catholic Church. It is hard to pin it down, but you “know it when you see it”. However, it always includes the virtue of gravitas. Moreover, it also includes a seemingly contradictory fusion of sternness with humor, inflexibility with the adaptive, mercy with justice, austerity with extravagance. Consider the Roman ability to fuse, for example, Hellenism, Judaism, and later the Gaulish and Teutonic, etc. The Baroque movement is the perfect example of Romanitas, and how Romanitas then transforms cultures. Romanitas is the key to a correct understanding of inculturation, whereby what the Church has to give always has logical priority in the ongoing, simultaneous process.

Concerning the splendid quote about the “man in the arena” I would add two points.

I have often remarked to people that “arena” refers to the sandy surface of the gladiatorial battleground.  Participation in the area of blogs, writing articles in print or electronic media, is a descent onto the sands of the arena.  If you tread the sands, don’t whine when people go for your guts.  If you don’t have the stomach for it – the chest – then this is not for you.

Next, that “man in the arena” passage has always reminded me of the climax tune of the musical Man of Lamancha about Don Quixote, “The Impossible Dream”.  When I was pretty young I saw Richard Kiley, who created the role on Broadway, and it has stuck in my head for that last half century.

YouTube thumbnailYouTube icon

Decades of terrible education, both secular and from the church, dreadful catechesis and feckless preaching, temporizing, compromising, enervating leadership, caving in to the Zeitgeist with enthusiasm…

Are there men with chests anymore.

Damn straight there are!  But for men of chests to discover themselves, they will need trumpet calls.

Not to devolve this into a musical review, but in the spirit of clarion, I am also reminded of a song from a Christian “rock” group called “Courageous”, which serves as the theme of a movie.  HERE USA BlueRay+DVD HERE.  Just DVD HERE. UK DVD HERE.

We were made to be courageous
We were made to lead the way
We could be the generation
That finally breaks the chains
We were made to be courageous
We were made to be courageous

We were warriors on the front lines
Standing, unafraid
But now we’re watchers on the sidelines
While our families slip away

Where are you, men of courage?
You were made for so much more
Let the pounding of our hearts cry [chest]
We will serve the Lord

We were made to be courageous
And we’re taking back the fight
We were made to be courageous
And it starts with us tonight

The only way we’ll ever stand
Is on our knees with lifted hands
Make us courageous [grace… and elbow grease]
Lord, make us courageous

This is our resolution
Our answer to the call [trumpet]
We will love our wives and children
We refuse to let them fall

We will reignite the passion
That we buried deep inside
May the watchers become warriors
Let the men of God arise

We were made to be courageous
And we’re taking back the fight
We were made to be courageous
And it starts with us tonight

The only way we’ll ever stand
Is on our knees with lifted hands
Make us courageous
Lord, make us courageous

Seek justice [women sing this in the background]
Love mercy
Walk humbly with your God

In the war of the mind
I will make my stand
In the battle of the heart
And the battle of the hand

[“chest” is the liaison of the intellective and affective which leads to action]

In the war of the mind
I will make my stand
In the battle of the heart
And the battle of the hand

We were made to be courageous
And we’re taking back the fight
We were made to be courageous
And it starts with us tonight

The only way we’ll ever stand
Is on our knees with lifted hands
Make us courageous
Lord, make us courageous

We were made to be courageous
Lord, make us courageous

Posted in Just Too Cool, The Drill | Tagged , , , , ,
15 Comments

The Pope wants to hear from you. No. Really. He wants the “sensus fidelium”.

I haven’t followed the Pope’s South American trip, other than his statements about the “dumb” people and about a certain unpopular bishop.

However, Ed Pentin – who is reliable – says that the Holy Father apparently wants to hear from the faithful.

Pentin includes a link about how to write to the Pope.

I haven’t seen the text of the speech in which the Pope said this, but Pentin is reliable.

Soooo…. writing to the Pope (or bishops or priests for that matter).

He wants to hear the sensus fidelium?  The sensus fidei fidelium?  The “sense of the faithful”? Here’s what I say.

First, in order to have the sensus fidelium something is absolutely necessary as a precondition: The Faith.  You have be faithful in order to participate and express the sensus fidelium.

Second, there may be a lot of people who write to the Pope who really don’t have the sensus fidelium because they are not, in fact, faithful.

Address the envelope to

His Holiness
Pope Francis
00120 VATICAN CITY

Tips:

  • Do NOT put Italy on the envelope.  If you do, Italian post will handle it and.. well… enough said.
  • While handwritten letters seem more personal, typed or printed are easier to read.
  • Keep it BRIEF.  ONE side of ONE page.
  • Do NOT be disrespectful.
  • Do NOT tell the Pope what his job is.
  • Go ahead and tell him what you feel.  Don’t be crazy.
  • Go ahead and ask him for what you want.  Don’t be stupid or unrealistic.
  • End the letter with a promise of prayers.
  • Make sure your own address is on the letter, not just the envelope.
  • Sign your real name.
  • Include your email and your phone number.

If you write, adhere to these tips.  Seriously.  You’ll multiply your chances of being read and taken seriously.

Finally, were I Pope, or when I will be Pope, I would consider this to be an Extremely Bad Idea™.

First, it gives the impression that, after receiving letters and messages, etc., something might be changed.

Second, it gives the impression that dogmas are changeable based on the prevalent view or desire of some well-organized lobby.

One of the problems with the Kasperites is, as Thomas Stark explained (HERE) is that Kasper, and people around Francis, have substituted philosophy with politics.  They don’t have objective underpinnings, premises and procedures.  They have polls.

UPDATE:

Why might one write?

1 – To write such a letter requires you to understand well what you think, or feel, or desire to ask.   It is, in itself, a good exercise.  In a way, it is a type of examination of conscience.

2 – The recipient is unpredictable.  He has been known to call people by phone out of the blue.

3 – You never know what impact many letters consistently saying the similar things will have.

4 – He won’t be able to plead ignorance of what many Catholics think and feel when he goes before the Lord for his judgment.  And if his minions shield him from the truth, then they will be held accountable before God.

5 – Maybe it will make a difference.  You don’t know.  If you don’t write, it won’t be your letter that is the final straw.  It’s like the lottery.  Your odds are not good.  But you will not win if you don’t by a ticket.

Lest weakness or defeatism get the better of some of you… Paul wrote to the Romans (we read this today at the Sunday TLM):

Brethren: Be not wise in your own conceits. To no man render evil for evil, but provide good things not only in the sight of God, but also in the sight of all men. If it be possible, as far as in you lies, be at peace with all men. Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but give place to the wrath, for it is written, Vengeance is Mine: I will repay, says the Lord. But, If your enemy is hungry, give him food; if he is thirsty, give him drink; for by so doing you will heap coals of fire upon his head. Be not overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

 

Posted in ¡Hagan lío! | Tagged
26 Comments

Your Sunday Sermon Notes

Was there a good point or two in the sermon you heard during your Mass to fulfill your Sunday obligation?

For my part, I spoke about the centurion and the Lord.  First, as a friend reminded me this week, Teresa of Avila notes that – now – it is only in the Eucharist that the Lord is vulnerable to abuse.  The Lord continues to “risk” in coming to us.  The centurion, in great humility and faith, took social risks to come to the Lord.  In this highly charged moment of encounter and risk we should not be complacent, thoughtless, indifferent.  Communion, and all the other things we do as Catholics, from making the sign of the Cross, etc., should not be allowed to become routine.  We must develop habits but without repetition that is mindless.    Saying, for example, the “Domine non sum dignus” three times should help us to be ever more mindful of what we are about to do and what a great gift it is.

All our devotions are gifts.  We must not abuse them directly or through carelessness.

I also brought up attacks on the sacrament of matrimony, which are also attacks on the Eucharist.    For our part we can battle the attacks by our own personal devotion and care.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
16 Comments

From a priest: an interesting experience saying Mass

From a priest…

I am a priest of ___, ordained now about a year and a half. I have been a regular reader of your blog since college, and I wanted to write you about an interesting experience I had the other day saying Mass.

I learned the Extraordinary Form in seminary, actually the semester before the practicum in the new rite. I joke that I’m one of the rare priests under the age of 70 who learned the old before I learned the new. I usually offer a low Mass about 2-3 times a week, on the days when I don’t have a public Mass. The other day, I went into the chapel to say Mass, and it had been a very long and tiring week, and I couldn’t really think straight. It had also been a few weeks since I’d been able to offer the EF Mass, as I’d been traveling a lot and my “mobile sacristy” does not as yet contain Extraordinary Form capability. I usually offer the OF in Latin when I travel, including on the great altar my brother built to put in my room at my parents’ house.

In any event, I found that even though it had been a few weeks, and even though I was very very tired, the rite just came back to me, just as natural as can be. I stumbled a bit on the pronunciation of the readings, being a bit out of practice, but other than that, I was able to just start the Mass and hang on, and it all came right back out again. It’s just a beautiful comfort for me of how much we can keep within us, how those words that give us access to God so intimately are always right there for us.

I think about something I told the first communion kids the other week, when their teacher asked me to tell them why learning their prayers was so important. I told them about the elderly folks I sometimes visit who don’t remember anything or anybody, but the moment I start saying the Our Father, they join right in. It stays with you, the gift of prayer the Lord gives us. I suspect that when I’m ancient and barely know my right from my left, I’ll still know my rites, and all it’ll take is that first Introibo to bring it all back.

God bless you and your work, Father!

Thanks for that!

First, I am encouraged at your story.  You have it now in your marrow.  That means that it is thoroughly yours now.  It is shaping you as a priest from within.

So many times I have encountered people who perhaps have not practiced their faith for many years but, when queued, they still know their prayers and catechism that they were required to memorize as children.   It is still within them, waiting to burst out.

Memorization is extremely important.

I am reminded of the way that priests who were to go into Russia during the long Communist nightmare memorized Mass formularies just in case.

With God in Russia The Inspiring Classic Account of a Catholic Priest’s Twenty-three Years in Soviet Prisons and Labor Camps by Walter J. Ciszek

US HERE – UK HERE

Of his imprisonment, Fr. Ciszek wrote:

It was impossible to say Mass in the barrack, of course. From time to time, however, Nestrov and I would take a walk into the forest, when we were free from work, and say Mass there. We used a big stump as our altar, and while one of us offered the Holy Sacrifice the other stood guard on the road. It was an experience I’ll never forget. In the heavy silence of the thick forest, you could hear the chipmunks running and the birds gathering overhead. Suddenly, you seemed very close to nature and to God. Everything seemed beautiful and somehow mysterious, all dangers for a time remote.

At other times, if we had an hour alone but couldn’t leave camp to say Mass, we would take turns reciting and memorizing the prayers of the Mass until we knew them all by heart. We were always aware that the Mass kit might be discovered, and we would lose our book and vestments, but we were determined that as long as we could get bread and wine we would try to say Mass.

And later…

After breakfast, I would say Mass by heart–that is, I would say all the prayers, for of course I couldn’t actually celebrate the Holy Sacrifice. I said the Angelus morning, noon, and night as the Kremlin clock chimed the hours. Before dinner, I would make my noon examen (examination of conscience); before going to bed at night I’d make the evening examen and points for the morning meditation, following St. Ignatius’ Spiritual Exercises. Every afternoon, I said three rosaries–one in Polish, one in Latin, and one in Russian–as a substitute for my breviary. After supper, I spent the evening reciting prayers and hymns from memory or even chanting them out loud: the Anima Christi, the Veni Creator, the Salve Regina, the Veni, Sancte Spiritus, especially the Dies Irae and the Miserere–all the things we had memorized in the novitiate as novices, the hymns we had sung during my years in the Society, the prayers I had learned as a boy back home. Sometimes I’d spend hours trying to remember a line that had slipped my memory, sounding it over and over again until I had it right. During these times of prayer, I would also make up my own prayers, talking to God directly, asking for His help, but above all accepting His will for me, trusting completely to His Providence to see me through whatever might lie ahead.

Fathers, seminarians, do you memorize?   It could be good to memorize a Mass formula, such as the classic Votive Mass of the Blessed Virgin Mary along with the Ordinary of Mass.

Frankly, we all should have the necessary prayers of Holy Mass memorized, right?

Parents, perhaps you could motivate your children (and yourselves) to memorize prayers and hymns and catechism answers through some prizes and so forth.

Memorization fell out of favor.  But once you have something memorized, it’s yours in way that it otherwise is … not.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged ,
19 Comments

OLDIE PODCAzT 127: The Eve of St. Agnes and a Bleak Midwinter

It is a little late in the day, but today is the Eve of the Feast of St. Agnes.  This reminds us all, of course, of the famous poem by Keats.

This is the Eve of St. Agnes and, therefore, time once again for a PODCAzT I made a while back.  HERE

I, fan of poetry that I am, read out Keat’s poem, 42 Spencerian stanzas.  It is torrid and lush, with marvelous moments and imagery, imbued with the revival of romantic, courtly love which was coming back into vogue in the early 19th century.  The poem takes inspiration from a superstition, which I explain in an introduction.

The Eve of St Agnes would inspire the Pre-Raphaelites, as a matter of fact.

Speaking of Pre-Raphaelites, one of their circle, was Christina Rossetti, a poet in her own right.

Christina Rossetti wrote a poem which later was made into a Christmas carol: In the Bleak Midwinter.  We are still within the Christmas cycle until Candlemas.

When I first posted this, a few prudish knuckleheads had a spittle-flecked nutty in my combox, but we pretty much ignored or deleted them.

 

Posted in Classic Posts, Linking Back, PODCAzT, Poetry | Tagged , , ,
1 Comment

My View For A While: Counter March

Time to head home.

Another wonderful Delta experience greeted me at the airport.

First, in my app, all my flights, today’s and future, vanished. That was strange.

Hence, I had to go through the check in process. At least there were not problems with security.

I shared a ride with friends and, hence, got to DCA way in advance of my flight, thinking I could get work done in the lounge.

Lounge temporarily closed.

So, I have a view of counters, as I do my counter, or “reverse” march from the March.

UPDATE:

At long last, having been bored, we’ve boarded.

I have a good book on Kindle, a medieval Japanese mystery. Of course you need the right music.

Quite a few folks have asked if I was at the March. The interesting part is that only a couple of them went to the March. Most watched coverage on TV. This suggests to me strong good will.

UPDATE:

In my app, I see that my flights are back from their silent retreat and that my bag was loaded onto the airplane I am presently sitting in.

UPDATE:

Ready for the next flight.

While on the ground I’ve been reading about those who have distanced themselves from Pope Francis’ less than opportune words in S America. The NYT (aka Hell’s Bible) went for him. Other rather surprising sources did too.

Interesting.

UPDATE:

Still at the gate.

We’ve been delayed for over a half hour while they dispute about a “clerical error”.

I NEVER! Cross my heart. It’s not my fault!

Posted in On the road, SESSIUNCULA, What Fr. Z is up to | Tagged
4 Comments

#March4Life numbers and Pres. Trump’s words

LifeSite has posted the text of Pres. Trump’s address to the March for Life.

Highlights…

[…]

The March for Life is a movement born out of love: you love your families; you love your neighbors; you love our nation; and you love every child born and unborn, because you believe that every life is sacred, that every child is a precious gift from God.

We know that life is the greatest miracle of all. We see it in the eyes of every new mother who cradles that wonderful, innocent, and glorious-newborn child in her loving arms. I want to thank every person here today and all across our country who works with such big hearts and tireless devotion to make sure that parents have the caring support they need to choose life.

Because of you, tens of thousands of Americans have been born and reached their full God-given potential, because of you. You’re living witnesses of this year’s March for life theme, and that theme is, ‘Love Saves Lives.’

As you all know Roe versus Wade has resulted in some of the most permissive abortion laws anywhere in the world. For example, in the United States, it’s one of only seven countries to allow elective late-term abortions along with China North Korea and others. Right now, in a number of States, the laws allow a baby to be born [sic, aborted] from his or her mother’s womb in the ninth month.

It is wrong. It has to change.

Americans are more and more pro-life. You see that all the time. In fact, only 12% of Americans support abortion on demand at any time.

Under my administration, we will always defend the very first right in the Declaration of Independent, and that is the ‘right to life.’

[…]

Contrast that with the last guy.

Today is the 1st anniversary of his inauguration.

YouTube thumbnailYouTube icon

This morning a friend said that she heard a major network say that there were maybe 40000 people at the “so-called” March for Life.

Go HERE to LifeSite to watch an AMAZING time-lapse video and ask yourself if that was 40K.

I’d like to know the true estimate. 500K?

Meanwhile, in Chile, Pope Francis celebrated a Mass.  I think they expected more people.

Posted in Emanations from Penumbras | Tagged , ,
14 Comments

DC March for Life 2018 – DAY 2: Forward MARCH!

Today before the rally on the mall we grabbed some sandwiches at a nearby cafe and headed out.

Perfect weather.

We parked ourselves near the speakers stand, but also near to a flag from my native place.

It was great to hear Pres. Trump address the crowd.  It was a good, long speech, too.  Not just a quick greeting.

 

During the President’s talk, I noticed two American Bald Eagles circling, a fact that made my friends from Rome rather pleased.  After all, the appearance of eagles at a public event of this magnitude.

Alas, it was hard to get them through the branches.

A sign along the march.

The crowds for the march are always vast.  Today, however, I had the feeling that they were beyond what I had seen before.

My friend Fr. Pasley!

This was different.

So that was the march.  It was a wonderful, recharging experience.

Later I walked to Old St. Mary’s for the Mass, but I made sure to walk through the Law Enforcement Memorial.

Old St. Mary’s.  JAMMED.

I saw so many wonderful people after the Mass.  Many old friends said hello and quite a few readers.

Then… off to supper.  Friday, so no flesh.

Afterwards… which is mine?  Hint, all three contain Pappy Van Winkle.

A wonderful day.

Tomorrow, home again.

QUAERITUR: Will the government shut down affect travel?

Posted in Emanations from Penumbras, On the road, What Fr. Z is up to | Tagged
7 Comments

DC March for Life 2018 – DAY 1: Paintings and plots

It is a whirlwind jump to DC, but one of my main reasons for coming this year was also to see the exhibition of Vermeer and other Dutch genre painters at the National Gallery.   It did not disappoint.

His paintings are on the small side, but they have great details.

We didn’t have a lot of time in the gallery after the extensive exhibit, but there was a space for some of the great Medieval pieces.

Here is one with a Christological Goldfinch but… differently.   The Christ Child has not yet grabbed hold of the critter, which is being offered by an angel.

The goldfinch in these paintings is a symbol of the Passion, a foreshadowing.   The European Goldfinch has a spray of red feathers on its head.  Legend says that the finch tried to give comfort to the Lord on the Cross by pulling thorns from His head.  In doing so, the finch’s head was colored with the Lord’s Blood, which remained ever after.

NB: The little Lord holds in his little hand a pomegranate, a symbol of the resurrection!

I like to think that this angel is the angel of the Passion that came to comfort Christ in the garden before His betrayal.

The Capitol Building is all spiffed up and clean.

In the evening, supper with friends.

Which drink is mine?

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

Canonist Ed Peters on the Papal mid-air airplane nuptials

From canonist Ed Peters comes a post.  I wrote about it, HERE.   There are some striking parallels.  I wonder why?

Any way…

Thoughts on a mid-air marriage

Show of hands! Who wants to rain all over the sentimental parade lining up behind (what is being presented as) the pope’s facilitation of married love? Anyone? Anyone?

I thought not. Oh well.

Readers of this blog know that I am no fan of canonical form for marriage (cc. 1108, 1117)—a cure that has far outlived the malady (clandestine marriage) it was designed to treat—but canonical form is still law for Catholics and that law goes to the validity of Catholic marriage. Based on the reports offered here and here, I cannot tell whether the ‘wedding’ that the pope put together for an unsuspecting couple satisfies Church requirements on marriage, and several other laws impacting the liceity of marriage seem simply to have been disregarded in the event. As happened several times under earlier administrations, a representative from the Vatican Press Office assures us that “everything was valid”. Such assertions by canonically unqualified and unauthorized PR staff carry, of course, no weight. Real questions worthy of real answers are still raised by this event.

Before getting into details, however, let me say that I am sorry for Paula Podest and Carlos Ciuffardi, two perfectly pleasant flight attendants who paid a courtesy call on their celebrity guest and, next thing they know, their names, faces, and rather odd marriage history are being broadcast to the world. They did not ask for a wedding and were astonished when Pope Francis suggested it. This was not their idea.

Now, about the matter itself.

Popes have jurisdiction for the external forum anywhere on earth (cc. 134, 331, 1108), so Francis can officiate at a wedding anywhere, anytime.

But officiating at a wedding means something specific: it means asking for and receiving the consent of the contracting parties to marrying each each other (c. 1108) here and now. Per the Rite of Matrimony consent is sought from each party individually and must be oriented to marrying the other party at this time; the request is not posed as a joint question to the couple about being married, akin to, ‘do you two want to be married?’, but rather is framed ‘do you marry him/her?’ at this point in time. If consent (the heart of marriage per c. 1057) is not adequately asked for and received, it is not exchanged, and such a couple would not be married [NB] (and, No, ‘Ecclesia suppletcannot make up for a failure in what is actually sacramental—as opposed to canonical—form). The above reports mention, as far as I can see, [Alas, we don’t know what really happened.] only the pope’s broaching the topic of marriage by asking the couple whether they wanted to be married, placing their hands together, saying a few inspirational words about marriage, and pronouncing them husband and wife. But such a sequence describes, not at all, a present exchange of consent by the parties. Let us hope, then, that in the actual event considerably more was said than has been reported.

Second, canonical form demands two independent actual witnesses to the exchange of consent, meaning that five persons must be immediately present for the wedding—not folks who heard about it a few minutes later, or who saw something happening and wondered, hey, what’s going on back there?—but five persons acting together and at the same time: a bride, a groom, an officiant, and two other actual witnesses. While reports are unclear as to how many people actually witnessed this event, and while this photo shows four people in the event (plus a camera man?) and four signatures on a document, another photo shows five names on the marriage document, so one may presume (c. 1541) accordingly.

Third, several canons impacting the liceity of weddings (norms on ‘liceity’ often being regarded as wink-wink rules in Church life, especially when higher-ups model the wink-winking) were apparently ignored here, including: the requirement for [NB] serious pastoral preparation prior to a wedding [Not ever omitted by a loving and merciful pastor…] (c. 1063), administration of Confirmation before Matrimony (c. 1065), urging of Penance and holy Communion before a wedding (c. 1065), verification that no obstacles to validity or liceity are in place (c. 1066), securing evidence of the contractants’ freedom to marry (c. 1068) upon pain of acting illicitly without it (c. 1114), an expectation that Catholic weddings be celebrated in a parish church (cc. 1115, 1118), and making use of the Church’s treasury of liturgical books for celebration of the sacramental rite (c. 1119).

As this story reverberates ‘round the world, now, deacons, priests, and bishops who try to uphold Church norms fostering values such as deliberate marriage preparation, an ecclesial context for a Catholic wedding, and the use of established and reliable texts for expressing consent will, undoubtedly, have the Podest-Ciuffardi wedding tossed in their face as evidence that, if Pope Francis does not insist on such legalistic silliness and only cares about whether two people love [Luuhv.] one another, why shouldn’t they do likewise? The ministry of conscientious clergy in this regard just got harder.

As mentioned above, I would be happy to see the requirement of canonical form for marriage eliminated, this, for several reasons, one of which is that—long story omitted—we could actually make higher demands of Catholics who want to marry before our clergy than we can currently demand. But the pope’s example of a spontaneous, zero-preparation, wedding is not at all what I and like-minded others have in mind. This couple undoubtedly gave more thought and attention to what they did by civilly marrying before a magistrate back in 2010 than they could have possibly given to what the pope suggested to them, on a few seconds’ notice, while at work, high above the Andes mountains.

If I have to say it, I will: I hope Podest and Ciuffardi are married and that they live happily ever after, but I worry whenever momentous life decisions are taken on a minute’s notice and under circumstances bound to contribute to one’s being carried away by events.

The pope has opined, apparently more than once, that “half of all sacramental marriages are null”. Here’s hoping that Podest and Ciuffardi beat those odds.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged ,
13 Comments