The Winters of Our Discontent (AUDIO)

AUDIO version below

______

Does the sight of several yards of red silk cause you to break out in a sweat, even if only a little, and start to tremble? Do your fingers start to tingle? Do you get the inexplicable urge to tweet about a certain canonist, known for his adroit pastoral skills, his incisive commentary, and his deep love for the Church?

Do you find yourself making outrageous comments like “It is time for him to be removed, and to go as quietly as possible”? HERE

Do your friends dart their eyes uncomfortably in your presence when you go on and on and blather about his “twisted view of the world,” HERE Do they cough and try to change the subject while you make your venomous ad hominem attacks? HERE

Do you lapse into a spittle-flaked nutty when someone mentions canon law? What about the constant and consistent teachings of the Church regarding the nature of marriage? When people speak of the sinfulness of sexual activity outside of marriage and the unnaturalness of homosexual inclinations do you swoon upon your fainting couch?

If you have experienced one or more of these symptoms, you may have Burke Derangement Syndrome™.

Don’t despair. There is good news. It can be cured with just a few simple steps!

A week retreat at a lovely shrine can be arranged to help you with the initial stages of recovery. Here you’ll bask in the healthful glow of the Church’s rich sacramental and liturgical life, and start to feel the healing balm of a devotional life centered not on protesting, riding buses with nuns, and worrying about silly things like the progressive agenda. Slowly your animus towards traditional piety and the comforting embrace of canon law will move you beyond the first step of acknowledging your problem toward a holistic integration. And everyone knows that holistic integration is important!

After your retreat, to foster additional healing, we recommend purchasing a copy of Divine Love Made Flesh and Remaining in the Truth of Christ. Expose your heart and soul to the healing balm of a truly great Churchman, with an obvious love both for Christ and for the People of God.   The experience can be deepened through imbibing Mystic Monk Coffee as you read.

But wait!  There’s more!

Once you feel the effects of normalcy reassert themselves in your nervous system, it will be most salubrious to attend a Pontifical Mass celebrated by the holy Cardinal who was once the catalyst for your psychological condition. Rather than eliciting paroxysms of unpleasant logorrhea and episodes of the vapors, the sight of a cappa magna will cause your heart and soul to leap to new heights as you begin to enter into the Tradition of our Holy Mother the Church. Soon enough, you’ll find yourself longing for a regular dose of Tradition. You’ll have less and less in common with the false “friends” with whom you once shared the dangerous disorder of…

Burke Derangement Syndrome™.

Brought to you by …

Mystic Monk Coffee

“It’s Swell!”

… and …

The Zed-Heads

“You’re all going to die!”

Posted in Liberals, Lighter fare, PODCAzT, Throwing a Nutty | Tagged , , , ,
27 Comments

“There was the Council of the Fathers – the real Council – but there was also the Council of the media.”

I was recently sent a link to a video of one of the last appearances of Benedict XVI during his pontificate. This is the famous audience during which he spoke about the “Council of the media”.

[wp_youtube]CfTWC5lPshM[/wp_youtube]

I think it is interesting to compare Benedict’s words to what happened during the recent Synod of Bishops, and what is likely to happen at the next Synod, next year.

Posted in Benedict XVI | Tagged , , ,
14 Comments

MANHATTAN: Holy Innocents SAVED! What happened? And: 40 HOURS DEVOTION

Holy Innocents in Manhattan, NYC, is about to begin, on Friday, their Forty Hours Devotion!  More on that, below.  

First, some comments.

During the last few days since the decision about the Church of the Holy Innocents in Manhattan was made public, I have seen much speculation about what saved the Church from the threat of being closed.

Some think it was the aggressive media coverage about the proposed closing. Others think it was the hundreds of letters sent to New York’s Archbishop, Timothy Card. Dolan together with unscheduled meetings Holy Innocents’ parishioners had by chance with the Cardinal before the decision.  Some want to credit the Church building itself, by architect Patrick Keely, or its altar mural of the Crucifixion by Constantino Brumidi, or its stained glass windows by Meyer of Munich. Others want credit the many priests who made the daily celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass possible.  It is hard to imagine that all of these factors made some difference in the final decision.

That said, I bring to your attention something that an insider at Holy Innocents told me.   He gives the credit for this decision in favor of keeping the parish open to Our Lady and to the Miraculous Rosary Novena that the faithful parishioners diligently prayed.

After it was first announced in late April that Holy Innocents had been slated for closing, parishioners at Holy Innocents began praying the 54-day Rosary Novena every day before the 6 PM Extraordinary Form Mass.

This Rosary Novena consists of 27 days of petition and 27 days of thanksgiving. At Holy Innocents, the parishioners prayed the complete Rosary Novena three times since they began it.

QUAERITUR: Is it a coincidence that they completed their third full Rosary Novena on Friday, 31 October and that the first reports that the parish had been saved the next day?

Coincidence?

[wp_youtube]IRoh62wRgkc[/wp_youtube]

That said, the Church of the Holy Innocents will host its 2nd Annual 40 Hours Devotion beginning this Friday.

Holy Innocents, in Midtown Manhattan is easy to reach from both Penn Station and Grand Central Terminal.  It is close to Herald Square (e.g., Macy’s), on 37th St. between Broadway and 7th Avenue.

From Friday 7 November at 6 PM through Sunday 9 November 9th at 10:30 AM Holy Innocents will have the 40 Hours Devotion, which will coincide with their usual all-night vigil for 1st Friday. The Mass of Exposition will be a Solemn Votive Mass of the Blessed Sacrament on Friday at 6 PM with a procession with the Blessed Sacrament inside the church, the Litany of the Saints, and other prayers.

Posted in ¡Hagan lío!, "How To..." - Practical Notes, Be The Maquis, Brick by Brick, I'm just askin'... | Tagged , ,
7 Comments

Bp. Athanasius Schneider on the recent Synod’s final document: “radical neo-pagan ideology”

His Excellency Most Reverend Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana, Kazakhstan, had an interview with a Polish news outlet. HERE. He speaks with his usual forthrightness, to the point of being blunt.

I am tempted to say, “Enjoy the clarity and honesty now, friends. Who know how long it will last?”

Here is the first question and answer, with my usual emphases and comments:

Q: Your Excellency, what is Your Excellency’s opinion about the Synod? What is its message to families?

A: During the Synod there had been moments of obvious manipulation on the part of some clerics who held key positions in the editorial and governing structure of the Synod. [Without question.  And we should be happy that it was unmasked.] The interim report (Relatio post disceptationem) was clearly a prefabricated text with no reference to the actual statements of the Synod fathers. [“no reference” is not quite right, not as far as the whole thing is concerned.  But the troubling paragraphs were prepared ahead of time.] In the sections on homosexuality, sexuality and “divorced and remarried” with their admittance to the sacraments the text represents a radical neo-pagan ideology. This is the first time in Church history that such a heterodox text was actually published as a document of an official meeting of Catholic bishops under the guidance of a pope, even though the text only had a preliminary character. [Creeping Incrementalism] Thanks be to God and to the prayers of the faithful all over the world that a consistent number of Synod fathers resolutely rejected such an agenda; this agenda reflects the corrupt and pagan main stream morality of our time, which is being imposed globally by means of political pressure and through the almost all-powerful official mass media, which are loyal to the principles of the world gender ideology party. [What does this remind me of? “Through some crack the smoke of Satan has entered into the temple of God.” – Paul VI, 1972] Such a synod document, even if only preliminary, is a real shame and an indication to the extent the spirit of the anti-Christian world has already penetrated such important levels of the life of the Church. This document will remain for the future generations and for the historians a black mark which has stained the honour of the Apostolic See. [BUT… it isn’t all only grim…] Fortunately the Message of the Synod Fathers is a real Catholic document which outlines the Divine truth on family without being silent about the deeper roots of the problems, i.e. about the reality of sin. It gives real courage and consolation to Catholic families. Some quotations: “We think of the burden imposed by life in the suffering that can arise with a child with special needs, with grave illness, in deterioration of old age, or in the death of a loved one. We admire the fidelity of so many families who endure these trials with courage, faith, and love. They see them not as a burden inflicted on them, but as something in which they themselves give, seeing the suffering Christ in the weakness of the flesh. … Conjugal love, which is unique and indissoluble, endures despite many difficulties. It is one of the most beautiful of all miracles and the most common. This love spreads through fertility and generativity, which involves not only the procreation of children but also the gift of divine life in baptism, their catechesis, and their education. … The presence of the family of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph in their modest home hovers over you”.

[…]

There’s a lot more.  For example:

By admitting the “divorced and remarried” to Holy Communion those bishops establish a new tradition on their own volition and transgressing thereby the commandment of God, as Christ once rebuked the Pharisees and Scribes (cf. Math 15: 3). [It is ironic that the liberals who want to depart from tradition and the norms of Christ’s words in Scripture, accuse those who defend tradition as being “Pharisees”.  It is ironic that “rigid” and “ideologue” is now code for “defender of the Church’s teaching”.] And what is still aggravating, is the fact that such bishops try to legitimize their infidelity to Christ’s word by means of arguments such as “pastoral need”, “mercy”, “openness to the Holy Spirit”. Moreover they have no fear and no scruples to pervert in a Gnostic manner the real meaning of these words labeling at the same time those who oppose them and defend the immutable Divine commandment and the true non-human tradition as rigid, scrupulous or traditionalist. [There it is.] During the great Arian crisis in the IV century the defenders of the Divinity of the Son of God were labeled “intransigent” and “traditionalist” as well. Saint Athanasius was even excommunicated by Pope Liberius and the Pope justified this with the argument that Athanasius was not in communion with the Oriental bishops who were mostly heretics or semi-heretics. [Isn’t that one of the reasons why that Bishop in Paraguay was removed from his diocese? He didn’t get along with the other bishops of the region.  Do I remember that incorrectly?] Saint Basil the Great stated in that situation the following: “Only one sin is nowadays severely punished: the attentive observance of the traditions of our Fathers. For that reason the good ones are thrown out of their places and brought to the desert” (Ep. 243).

 In fact the bishops who support Holy Communion for “divorced remarried” are the new Pharisees and Scribes because they neglect the commandment of God, contributing to the fact that out of the body and of the heart of the “divorced remarried” continue to “proceed adulteries” (Math 15: 19), because they want an exteriorly “clean” solution and to appear “clean” as well in the eyes of those who have power (the social media, public opinion). However when they eventually appear at the tribunal of Christ, they will surely hear to their dismay these words of Christ: “Why are you declaring my statutes and taking my covenant in your mouth? Seeing you hate instruction, and cast my words behind you, … when you have been partaker with adulterers” (Ps 50 (49): 16-18).

[…]

 

Check out Bp. Schneider’s book Dominus Est!

CLICK!

Posted in The Coming Storm, The Drill, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , ,
42 Comments

D. Oakland, Bp. Barber: Novus Ordo Requiem, Latin, Black Vestments, Faure

The use of Latin in our liturgical worship must not be limited to the Usus Antiquior of the Roman Rite.  Latin is the language if the Latin Church.  That means Extraordinary and Ordinary Form alike.

For this reason I object to the phrase “The Latin Mass” when speaking about the Usus Antiquior or Extraordinary Form.  We should at least say “Traditional Latin Mass” or TLM.

That said, His Excellency Most Reverend Michael Barber, SJ, Bishop of Oakland has a great entry at his page (HERE) about their All Souls Requiem, celebrated in their Cathedral.

Here is a video:

All Souls Day Requiem Mass from Diocese of Oakland on Vimeo.

What really caught my eye was something Bp. Barber wrote about the Mass. Emphases in the original:

I was so pleased with the turnout at our first Solemn Requiem Mass for All Souls Day, where our Cathedral Choir sang Gabriel Faure’s Requiem. The beauty of the music led so many to a heightened interior participation in the Eucharist. The choir and musicians did a superb job, and I look forward to making this an annual tradition.

Did you catch that? The music led to heightened interior participation! He absolutely nailed it.

The actual/active participation we are called to is, first and foremost, interior action, indeed actively interior receptivity. This is made possible by baptism, which allows us to receive graces and instruction which the Lord, the true Actor in liturgical worship, wants to give us through the mediation of the Church’s rites and her sacred ministers. Active, attentive listening is a key mode of actual participation. It is not automatic and it is not easy. It is hard to listen in an attentive way, with real openness to the content. Music, therefore, is of critical importance.

Liturgical music must be both sacred and true art. It is art from the point of view of both composition and performance. It is sacred, or should be, from the point of view of its texts and its music idiom. Music is not an add on. It is not simply an ornament. It is part of the liturgical action itself.

Bishop Barber put his finger on an important point. The act of choosing to listen to the sacred liturgical music brings about interiorly active receptivity which is a profound mode of actual participation. This in turn heightens appropriate outward expression in participation at the right time.

Alas, the Bishop – a Jesuit – quoted Karl Rahner, who said, “When a person is with God in awe and love, then he is praying.” Immediately, I must counter the effects of Rahner by quoting St. Augustine, “cantare amantis est… Singing belongs to one who loves” (s. 336, 1 – PL 38, 1472).

So, Bp. Barber had All Souls Mass in the Cathedral, in Latin, in the Novus Ordo, in black vestments, with worth sacred music.

More photo there.

Brick by brick.

Fr. Z kudos to Bp. Barber.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Brick by Brick, Fr. Z KUDOS, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Mail from priests, New Evangelization | Tagged , , , , ,
22 Comments

New norms for the resignations of bishops

My spidey-sense has been tingling for a while now.  Given recent events and developments (e.g., the havoc of the latest Synod and the surprise outcomes) I have suspected that perhaps a few bishops in different regions around the world might suddenly have to retire for reasons of health or be removed from office.

Today I see in the Bollettino that His Holiness Pope Francis has approved a new set of norms governing resignations from offices by bishops and others who are appointed by the Roman Pontiff.

Are the norms strikingly different from previous law?   Not so much.  But timing is not to be discounted.

“Rescriptum ex audientia Ss.mi” sulla rinuncia dei Vescovi diocesani e dei titolari di uffici di nomina pontificia, 05.11.2014

Il Santo Padre Francesco, nell’Udienza concessa al sottoscritto Cardinale Segretario di Stato il giorno 3 novembre 2014, ha approvato le disposizioni sulla rinuncia dei Vescovi diocesani e dei titolari di uffici di nomina pontificia.

Il Santo Padre ha altresì stabilito che quanto è stato deliberato abbia ferma e stabile validità, nonostante qualsiasi cosa contraria anche degna di particolare menzione, ed entri in vigore il giorno 5 novembre 2014, con la pubblicazione su “L’Osservatore Romano”, e, quindi, nel commentario ufficiale Acta Apostolicae Sedis.

Dal Vaticano, 3 Novembre 2014.

Pietro Card. Parolin
Segretario di Stato

DISPOSIZIONI

SULLA RINUNCIA DEI VESCOVI DIOCESANI
E DEI TITOLARI DI UFFICI DI NOMINA PONTIFICIA

Il grave peso del ministero ordinato, da intendersi come servizio (diakonia) al Popolo santo di Dio, richiede, a coloro che sono incaricati di svolgerlo, di impegnarvi tutte le proprie energie. In particolare, il ruolo di Vescovo, posto di fronte alle sfide della società moderna, rende necessari una grande competenza, abilità e doti umane e spirituali.

A tale riguardo, i Padri del Concilio Vaticano II così si esprimevano nel decreto Christus Dominus: “Poiché il ministero pastorale dei vescovi riveste tanta importanza e comporta gravi responsabilità, si rivolge una calda preghiera ai vescovi diocesani e a coloro che sono ad essi giuridicamente equiparati, perché, qualora per la loro troppa avanzata età o per altra grave ragione, diventassero meno capaci di adempiere il loro compito, spontaneamente o dietro invito della competente autorità rassegnino le dimissioni dal loro ufficio. Da parte sua, la competente autorità, se accetta le dimissioni, provvederà sia ad un conveniente sostentamento dei rinunziatari, sia a riconoscere loro particolari diritti” (n. 21).

Rispondendo all’invito che il Concilio Vaticano II aveva espresso, il mio predecessore, il Beato Paolo VI, promulgò il 6 agosto 1966 il Motu proprio Ecclesiae Sanctae (AAS 58 (1966) 757-787) che al n. 11 della Pars Prima invitava vivamente i Vescovi e gli altri ad essi equiparati a “presentare spontaneamente, non più tardi dei 75 anni compiuti, la rinuncia all’ufficio“. Queste disposizioni furono poi accolte sia dai cann. 401-402 e 411 del vigente Codice di Diritto Canonico, sia dai cann. 210-211, 218 e 313 del Codice dei Canoni delle Chiese Orientali.

Uguale criterio venne anche seguito relativamente a funzioni proprie dei Cardinali, mediante il Motu proprio Ingravescentem aetatemdel Beato Paolo VI del 21 novembre 1970 (AAS 62 (1970) 810-813) e, più in generale relativamente alle funzioni dei Vescovi che prestano il loro servizio nella Curia Romana, con le sagge disposizioni che San Giovanni Paolo II volle inserire nell’art. 5 della Costituzione apostolica Pastor bonus del 28 giugno 1988 (AAS 80 (1988) 841-930; cf. pure can. 354 CIC).

Prendendo in considerazione tutto quanto precede e accogliendo le raccomandazioni del Consiglio dei Cardinali che assistono il Santo Padre nella preparazione della riforma della Curia romana e nel governo della Chiesa, viene disposto quanto segue:

Art. 1.- È confermata la disciplina vigente nella Chiesa latina e nelle varie Chiese orientali sui iuris, secondo la quale i Vescovi diocesani ed eparchiali, e quanti sono loro equiparati dai cann. 381 §2 CIC e 313 CCEO, così come i Vescovi coadiutori e ausiliari, sono invitati a presentare la rinuncia al loro ufficio pastorale al compimento dei settantacinque anni di età.

Art. 2.- La rinuncia ai predetti uffici pastorali produce effetti soltanto dal momento in cui sia accettata da parte della legittima Autorità.

Art. 3.- Con l’accettazione della rinuncia ai predetti uffici, gli interessati decadono anche da qualunque altro ufficio a livello nazionale, conferito per un tempo determinato in ragione del suddetto incarico pastorale.

Art. 4.- Degno di apprezzamento ecclesiale è il gesto di chi, spinto dall’amore e dal desiderio di un miglior servizio alla comunità, ritiene necessario per infermità o altro grave motivo rinunciare all’ufficio di Pastore prima di raggiungere l’età di settantacinque anni. In tali casi i fedeli sono chiamati a manifestare solidarietà e comprensione per chi è stato loro Pastore, assistendolo puntualmente secondo le esigenze della carità e della giustizia, secondo quanto disposto del can. 402 §2 CIC.

Art. 5.- In alcune circostanze particolari l’Autorità competente può ritenere necessario chiedere a un Vescovo di presentare la rinuncia all’ufficio pastorale, dopo avergli fatto conoscere i motivi di tale richiesta ed ascoltate attentamente le sue ragioni, in fraterno dialogo.

Art. 6. – I Cardinali Capi Dicastero della Curia Romana e gli altri Cardinali che svolgono uffici di nomina pontificia sono ugualmente tenuti, al compimento del settantacinquesimo anno di età, a presentare la rinuncia al loro ufficio al Papa, il quale, ponderata ogni cosa, procederà.

Art. 7. – I Capi Dicastero della Curia Romana non Cardinali, i Segretari ed i Vescovi che svolgono altri uffici di nomina pontificia decadono dal loro incarico compiuto il settantacinquesimo anno di età; i Membri, raggiunta l’età di ottant’anni; tuttavia, quelli che appartengono ad un Dicastero in ragione di un altro incarico, decadendo da questo incarico, cessano anche di essere Membri.

[01739-01.01] [Testo originale: Italiano]

UPDATE:

Canonist extraordinaire Ed Peters comments on his blog In The Light Of The Law:

Notes on new norms for episcopal resignations
November 5, 2014

The Holy See’s new norms on episcopal resignations {Italian original here} are presented as a papal “rescript” (the term does not come first to mind per Canons 59 ff.) and not as a papal motu proprio (which these norms seem much more like). But whatever their canonical genre the new norms don’t seem to change much law regarding episcopal resignations. [As I said, above.]

Article 1 reiterates the import of Canons 401 and 411 whereby bishops are requested to resign at age 75. The vast majority of bishops submit their resignations at age 75, but the legislative history of Canon 401 (Peters, Incrementa, 364) leaves no doubt that such resignations are voluntary and, being voluntary, cannot be lawfully compelled.

Article 2 states that episcopal resignations are effective only upon acceptance, but one already knew that from Canon 189 etc. Oddly, the anomaly caused under Canon 189 § 3 (which goes to validity!) when episcopal resignations are submitted at age 75 but are not accepted by the Holy See until many months, sometimes years, later, is not addressed.

Article 3 asserts the concomitant loss of any national offices open only to sitting bishops upon their resignation from primary pastoral office. This resolves a mild ambiguity under Canon 450 in regard to membership in episcopal conferences, although the same result was apparent, I felt, from applying the plain meaning of Canons 134 and 376.

Article 4 on caring for retired bishops seems to say nothing that Canon 402 and Christian charity do not already make clear.

Article 5 [the one I highlighted… I knew there was something about it that didn’t feel right, but I couldn’t put my finger on it…] should cause some pause, not because it lays down any new rules (it does not, and instead simply states what ecclesiastical leadership has always been free to do, namely, to ask for episcopal resignations), but because it implicitly acknowledges that Roman requests (demands?) [two monsignors with Sicilian accents sit on either side of the bishop and one says, “We heara Eccellenza, data you sicka…”] for episcopal resignations are occurring much more often these days. Such actions, however, taken by several recent popes but [NB] without advertence to any process recognizable under canon law (e.g., Canons 192-196) raise serious canonical and indeed ecclesiological questions.* [No process.  Thus, no procedure for evidence, witnesses, counter evidence, judgment… just a chat over glasses of grappa?] While those concerns remain I must recall an observation made by Cdl Burke in another context: “The too rapid growth of practice without a clear and solid theoretical foundation has its most serious consequences in the confusion regarding the very foundations of law”. Burke, Lack of discretion of judgment (1986) at 85.

Article 6, requiring (quite licitly, to be sure), among others, cardinal heads of Roman dicasteries to submit their resignation at age 75 is already required under ap. con. Pastor Bonus (1988) art 5 § 2, though again I remind those concerned to note the import of Canon 189 § 3! In any case, perhaps this article is intended to reach a few cardinals holding curial offices not covered by Pastor bonus, though I do not know what those offices might be. The duties of cardinals in the election of the Roman Pontiff are undisturbed by Article 6.

+ + +

* From my Canon Law Facebook page, 2014 SEP 29: John Paul II did it once that I recall (Gaillot), Benedict XVI did it at least four times (Makaya Loembe, Morris, Micciché, and Bezák), and now Francis has done it (Livieres Plano), namely, effecting the removal of a bishop from office without observing a publically cognizable procedure. [BAMMO!] All six prelates indisputably held ecclesiastical offices “conferred for an indefinite period” (c. 193) and so all had a canonical right to a removal process “defined by law”. Alternatively, if their “privation” was carried out in response to canonical crime (c. 196) a penal process was required for its effect. While no norm expressly requires these procedures to be public, canon law does require that objective and fair processes be followed. Moreover, the Church’s traditional duty to be the “Speculum Iustitiae” (Mirror of Justice) for the world suggests that such procedures be understood by the wider faith community…

Transparency.

Like the transparency we saw during the Synod of Bishops?

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Francis, The Drill | Tagged , , ,
8 Comments

Where’s the Prefect? Woman “priest” at altar of Benedictine monastery in Austria for 10 years?

I saw a piece by the intrepid Marco Tosatti of La Stampa about a “wedding” in Austria that was witnessed at a Benedictine monastery in Kremsmunster, by a woman “priest” (wymyn pryst).

The wymyn was excommunicated 11 years ago, but she regularly participates at liturgical ceremonies with the Benedictines and has done so for 10 years.    Apparently every two weeks she does something or other at the one of the altars of the abbey.

The bishop of the place apparently hasn’t said anything about this situation.

And so one needs to ask the question, along with Tosatti:

Now we wait for the Prefect of the Congregation for Religious, the Brasilian Braz De Aviz, so firm and severe with the Franciscans of the Immaculate, for reasons that are still kept rigorously secrete, to manifest his presence.

Does silence imply consent?

Posted in Goat Rodeos, Liberals, The Coming Storm, You must be joking! | Tagged , ,
26 Comments

ASK FATHER: Hand positions during Mass

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

How should a layman position his hands when praying the Mass?

It might come as a surprise that, for centuries, there were scant rubrical directions for the posture of the faithful at Holy Mass.

Unlike the minute detail for the gestures of the priest and other ministers in the sanctuary
(who need to be closely controlled lest their egos get in the way of the true liturgical Actor), some customs developed for lay people, but there were few written laws to regulate the postures of the congregation. Modern critics of “the way things used to be” like to sneer that this was because of an excessive focus on the priest and a denigration of the laity, whose presence at Mass was – so they say – merely accidental to the real action. That’s one interpretation of things.

Another interpretation is that the Church, in her wisdom, recognized that the faithful attending Mass are not a monolithic body.

The people in the congregation participate at different points in their interior lives.  They have different needs and expectations, different dispositions and attitudes. And that’s okay. Some may have a particularly deep piety.  They may be moved by interior graces to kneel in humble adoration throughout the Mass. Some may be distracted by other concerns, such as small children, or the pressures and stresses of life. They might try to be attentive, but keep wandering off mentally. Some may be finding their way back to a fuller practice of the faith and may want to simply sit in a back row, behind a pillar, and observe.

One might say that the principle of gradualism has been at work for centuries on postures for Mass.

All are welcome.  We Catholics, especially traditional Catholics, are into diversity.  It’s only liberals who want to force everyone not to kneel.

We don’t want to force everyone into a lockstep posture: stand NOW!, sit NOW! … smile, shake hands, bow, twirl, wave the ribbon, laugh at the puppet, scowl at the self-absorbed promethean neopelagians and the rigid intellectualists….

To put this in terms of psychogeography, Holy Mother Church permits folks to be where they are at interiorly.

Even if in yesteryear there weren’t many written rules, for our forebears who truly believed, some postures were almost demanded by what is going on during Mass. One stands for the Gospel. One kneels for the consecration. One kneels to receive Holy Communion.  It’s obvious.

Spiritual authors, guiding people to holiness, recommended postures for specific prayers. For example, St. Dominic outlined nine postures of prayer in a sort of a spiritual calisthenics: bowing, kneeling, genuflecting, prostration, lifting one’s arms, walking, and so forth. But at the liturgy of the Mass, for the most part Holy Church allowed a measure of freedom of posture.

The current General Instruction of the Roman Missal contains some explicit rules about the postures of the congregation, but still there is a good deal of flexibility.

Back to the question.

For the hands….

Although there are no real directions, for most of the Mass a respectful folding of the hands would be best. Placing them in one’s lap when seated would be good.

Refraining from using them to scratch unnecessarily, or to fluff one’s hair, or to wave at one’s neighbor, or to touch the bald spot of the man in the row ahead of one are all virtuous policies.

I am not entirely set against shaking one’s index finger at the pastor when his homily lapses into material heresy, but that should be done with a little discretion, so as not to call undue attention to oneself… except the pastor’s.

Finally, at the time of the Offertory collection – and I want to stress this – it is especially good to position one’s hand properly to pull out one’s wallet so as to open up that secret pocket wherein one stashes large bills.  This is perhaps the most virtuous use of one’s hands at Holy Mass.

I hope this helps.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Self-absorbed Promethean Neopelagians | Tagged
36 Comments

Lighter Fare

I’t election day, and we are dealing with that. The Synod was a wreck, and we are dealing with that. Ebola is around, and we are dealing with that. Obama is still President and…. well.. we are dealing with a lot of things.

So…

YouTube thumbnailYouTube icon

Posted in Lighter fare | Tagged ,
3 Comments

John Allen on Pope Francis’ targeting of conservatives, traditionalists

Over at Crux (and my jury is still out… sort of… well… maybe not so much), John Allen posted something about how it seems that, under Pope Francis, conservatives and traditionalists are under fire.

Does Pope Francis have an enemies list?

In the dying days of the Nixon administration, the discovery that the White House maintained an enemies list was, for many Americans, the last straw. It seemed to reveal an administration using power not to advance policy or defend the nation, but to settle political scores.

Although any comparison between Nixon and Pope Francis is obviously an apples-and-oranges exercise, nonetheless many Catholic conservatives and traditionalists these days are asking if the pontiff has an enemies list of his own.

Recently, news has surfaced that the Vatican is either contemplating or has launched investigations of three bishops in different parts of the world:

  • Rogelio Ricardo Livieres Plano, who has already been removed from the small Paraguayan diocese of Ciudad del Este.
  • Robert Finn of Kansas City-St. Joseph, Missouri, who’s currently awaiting the conclusions of an apostolic visitation that’s already taken place.
  • Mario Oliveri of the small Albenga diocese in northern Italy, where a Vatican spokesman this week said that an investigator may soon arrive.
In each case, there are specific motives for the inquests.

Livieres was accused of various forms of mismanagement as well as dividing the bishops’ conference in Paraguay, for instance by publicly accusing the Archbishop of Asunción of being gay.

Finn is the lone American bishop to be criminally convicted of failure to report an accusation of child abuse, and looms for many observers as symbol of the church’s abuse scandals.

Oliveri is the latest to join the line-up. [I don’t think he means the baseball image.] He’s accused of tolerating all kinds of misbehavior among his clergy, including priests who’ve posted nude pictures on Facebook, priests who work as bartenders at night, and, in one case, a priest currently serving jail time for molesting an 11-year-old altar girl. (The priest maintains his innocence.)

Despite the different details, many observers can’t help noticing that all three prelates have one obvious thing in common: Each is among the most conservative members of their respective bishops’ conferences.

Livieres and Finn are both members of Opus Dei, while Oliveri is known as a traditionalist deeply attached to the older Latin Mass.

In conservative Catholic circles, the investigations of these three bishops often are placed in context with other disciplinary moves by Pope Francis, such as his ongoing crackdown on the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate. The suspicion is that what’s really going on isn’t so much a clean-up operation as an ideological purge. [If it walks like an ideological purge and it quacks like an ideological purge…]

[…]

In June 2014, veteran Italian Catholic commentator Marco Tosatti [who is level-headed] described the crackdown as the leading edge of a wider “witch hunt” directed at conservatives, describing it as “an internal war … being waged in the name of the pope.” [By those around the Pope? I don’t doubt it.  By the Pope, too?  I have a very hard time doubting it.]

Other frequently cited uses of papal muscle against perceived foes include, for Italians, the removal of Cardinal Mauro Piacenza from the Congregation for Clergy, and, for Americans, Cardinal Raymond Burke losing his membership on the Congregation for Bishops. Burke is also expected soon to be removed from his position as head of the Vatican’s Supreme Court and assigned to a largely ceremonial role.

I spoke to one tradition-minded Catholic this week, asking if he sees all this as Francis making clear what side of the street he occupies.

“It’s not just what side he’s on,” this observer said. “It’s that he’ll steamroll right over you if you don’t move to his side.”

Conservatives say that to date, there hasn’t been a high-profile case under Francis of a bishop being called on the carpet for any of the usual doctrinal offenses – tolerating violations of the liturgical rules such as routine use of group confession, for instance, or signaling support for the ordination of women. (Last September an Australian priest was excommunicated on similar grounds, but that was a priest rather than a bishop.) [And it is pretty clear that that was already a done deal by the time Francis was elected.  Oh… btw… Reynolds is still excommunicate under the pontificate of Francis.]

In fairness, there hasn’t been a more liberal bishop accused of personal misconduct who’s been given a free pass.

Last month, for instance, Pope Francis accepted the resignation of Bishop Kieran Conry of Arundel and Brighton in the United Kingdom after Conry admitted to a long-term affair with a woman in his diocese. A supporter of civil unions for same-sex couples and notoriously lukewarm about the Latin Mass, Conry is nobody’s idea of an archconservative. [Hardly a good example.  This was out in the press! Nothing else could be done.]

Nonetheless, many on the Catholic right can’t help but suspect that the recent preponderance of conservatives who’ve found themselves under the gun isn’t an accident. Some perceive a through-the-looking-glass situation, in which upholding Catholic tradition is now perceived as a greater offense than rejecting it.  [“Ideologue” is now code for “defender of the Magisterium”.  “Rigid intellectualist” is code for “believer in the Church’s doctrine”.]

How to explain these disciplinary acts?

One possibility is that Francis genuinely wants to hobble the traditionalist constituency, and is using every chance to accomplish it. If so, then Francis doesn’t owe anyone an explanation, because his moves would be having precisely the intended effect.

Another, however, is that the pontiff’s motives aren’t ideological. Instead, he knows he was elected on a reform mandate to promote good governance in the Church, and is responding to reported breakdowns as they occur without really paying attention to the politics of the people involved. [Promote good governance… should we review how well the last Synod was governed, directly under the Pontiff’s eyes?]

The speech Francis delivered at the end of the recent Synod of Bishops would seem to lean in the second direction, as he tried to signal sympathy for both the progressive and traditionalist camps. [That was the speech in which Francis, who for most of this pontificate has been “Bishop of Rome”, is suddenly referring to himself as POPE.] Francis is also a deep admirer of Pope John XXIII, the “Good Pope” of the Second Vatican Council, who famously said that “I have to be pope both for those with their foot on the gas, and those with their foot on the brake.” [Two words: Veterum sapientia.]

If that’s the case, Francis might need to find an occasion to explain in his own voice why he’s going after the people and groups that find themselves in his sights. Otherwise, the risk is that a good chunk of the Church may conclude that if the pope sees them as the enemy, there’s no good reason they shouldn’t see him the same way.

I think that was a well-measured piece.  He touched on the angles and was, in the main, fair.

You decide.  On track?  Off base?  Way waaaaay off base?

Posted in ¡Hagan lío!, CRUX WATCH, Francis, Goat Rodeos, Hard-Identity Catholicism, Liberals, Our Catholic Identity, Self-absorbed Promethean Neopelagians, The Coming Storm, The Drill, The future and our choices, What are they REALLY saying? | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,
69 Comments