tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-92217222149337359472024-03-12T20:01:45.596-04:00In Umbris Sancti PetriAll things Catholic. And everything truthfully.Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.comBlogger22125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-13300376372773123592010-01-11T12:12:00.002-05:002010-01-12T20:38:15.309-05:00Benedict, Marini & the Importance of the 'Reform of the Reform'There's been a lot of buzz lately in the Catholic news outlets about one of my favorite topics: liturgy. And I'm eager to share a few thoughts of my own on the matter...<br />
<br />
There was a time in my life (not all that long ago) when "liturgy," for me, was not much more than a physical expression of some poorly-formed and weakly grasped ideology--one that took issue with Reformation-esque practices as (in the words of Hilaire Belloc) a "profound cleavage" from the traditions of Roman Catholicism. But, at the heart of my rash reactionism was a poor understanding of just what that Roman Catholic tradition meant for the history of Western civilization as a whole; and, accordingly, a grasp of what the Protestant influence meant for its future.<br />
<br />
I've come to the (slightly) more informed realization, recently, that the Church's influence on culture and tradition has not merely offered a sense of universal significance to something that was otherwise without, but rather that its very importance is entirely and inextricably united with the basic, cosmological significance of history and tradition as it has always unfolded and developed. And nowhere is this more clear than in the Catholic liturgy.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_kP_5uj5b6TE/S0tb3WHEtdI/AAAAAAAAAL4/P_PiZ72v45o/s1600-h/10hp0007.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_kP_5uj5b6TE/S0tb3WHEtdI/AAAAAAAAAL4/P_PiZ72v45o/s200/10hp0007.jpg" /></a>Thankfully, this opinion is more than simply personal. And, in the last few days, it has been echoed strongly by papal emcee and liturgist, Msgr Guido Marini, in his comments regarding the "reform of the reform" of Catholic liturgy. In short, Marini asserts that the liturgy celebrated by the Catholic Church should have a character of historical continuity. "I purposely use the word continuity," says Marini, "a word very dear to our present Holy Father. [...] He has made it the only authoritative criterion whereby one can correctly interpret the life of the Church." (<a href="http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1000051.htm">CNS</a>)<br />
<br />
What is more "Catholic" than "catholicism": that is, universality, interwovenness, and the highest sense of "continuity"? And, conversely, what is more "Protestant" than an affront to such continuity (often expressed even overtly in terms of "non-denominationalism" or post-enlightened "egalitarianism")? If there is no clear series of precedence, then there is no possibility for continuity.<br />
<br />
What I saw initially as a "profound cleavage" from Roman tradition--the Reformed infiltration of the Catholic liturgy--was a valid perception. But without attempting to comprehend the absolute depth of such cleavage, my mindset was one aimed merely at fixing the problem at hand, and not at seeking to repair the damaged roots of a thorough and complete break with the <i>sensus fidei</i>. "The liturgy cannot and must not be an opportunity for conflict," says Marini; yet the reformist mentality of the late 20th century amounted almost entirely to nothing <i>but </i>a conflict with the stated and perennial traditions of the Church for centuries before.<br />
<br />
As Marini is keen to point out, the real work of faithful Catholics in the 21st century--for those who wish not simply to profess the faith, but to live, preserve and <i>pray </i>it by their deeds and practices--lies in promoting an understanding of the liturgy that is, above all, wholly Christian, and wholly undivided and non-partisan. "Fixing the glitch" is not a sufficient response to the deep wounds inflicted by the Protestant mentality of spiritual individualism (or what Belloc calls the "alienation of the soul"). Instead, Catholics must follow the example of the Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, by further grasping the true meaning of liturgy (theologically) and by evangelizing their fellow Christians on its deep importance in the life of faith.<br />
<br />
"I have learned to deepen my knowledge these past two years in service to our Holy Father," admits Marini. "He is an authentic master of the spirit of the liturgy, whether by his teaching or by the example he gives in the celebration of the sacred rites."<br />
<br />
Indeed, Pope Benedict has never modeled an attitude of reactionism; but instead always an attitude of genuine appreciation and profound love for the beauty of the liturgy that is possessed simply by virtue of its supernatural character. Benedict and Marini speak of the "reform of the reform" not because they are Reformers, but instead because they realize the importance of eradicating the very mentality of the Reformation by way of a thoroughly Catholic "hermeneutic of continuity."Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-43089271807498425482009-10-26T17:00:00.016-04:002009-10-26T21:08:50.532-04:00'Faithful' Dissent: Where's the Line?During my days as an undergraduate student at a (Jesuit) Catholic university, one could pretty well count on the fact that most campus ministers would define themselves, proudly and primarily, as 'faithful dissenters.' "I am Catholic," they would invariably admit, "but the Church is really behind the times on [insert dogmatically defined issue here]." From small-group leaders to musicians to sacristans, almost anyone involved in serving the Catholic community at my college was somehow at odds with some aspect of Church teaching.<br /><br />And in all cases--on the heels of such discordant convictions--their 'ministry' to the community suffered. Instead of attesting to the truth of the Church's magisterial authority with their very lives, they spent most of the time discussing why such-and-such was holding them back from <span style="font-style: italic;">really</span> living out an authentic Christian vocation.<br /><br />Five years after those tumultuous (and tiring) days as an undergrad, I still can't seem to escape the phenomenon of 'faithful dissent.' And, what's more, of 'faithful dissent' coupled closely with a desire to minister to the people of God. In particular, an encounter I had just last month reawakened many questions that had, for a while, lain dormant in the back of my mind. Now, again, they persist.<br /><br />For the last few months, I've been heading up the Gregorian chant schola at my local parish. After singing at a Mass the other weekend, the parish organist/music director approached me to discuss how Mass had gone. "You sounded good," she said, and proceeded to mention her thoughts on chant, music and our schola as a whole. "Gregorian chant is nice," she finally said, with a bit of a chagrinned look on her face, "but I don't want to go back."<br /><br />"Go back to what?" I asked.<br /><br />"Back! This diocese has a tendency to go back, not forward," she suddenly retorted. "And I don't know why! It's not doing what all the other dioceses are doing; and I think our diocese needs to realize that the past is not the answer. The Church needs to realize that it won't go anywhere until it reconsiders how it does things--and starts to let women up there!" She pointed toward the sanctuary.<br /><br />In less than a minute, our friendly discussion of liturgy and music degraded into a diatribe against the male, celibate priesthood, and the very foundations of the Church's teaching authority. Without so much as hinting at a reason, our music director had bypassed all logical segues and proceeded directly into a rant about 'antiquated' rituals and mediaeval hierarchical nonsenses. However, I have to admit that (sadly) I was not all that surprised. And I immediately thought back to those folks at college--those 'ministers'--whose energy was spent more on rationalizing and justifying than on serving and teaching.<br /><br />In light of this most recent run-in, I'm left with the same perennial questions: namely, is it really possible for someone who dissents from a dogmatic teaching of the Church--and who dissents so vehemently--to be an authentic minister of that Church? Or, to put it a different way, what's the line beyond which one's actions in the name of the Catholic Church cease to be effectively Catholic, and start to be effectively something-else?<br /><br />For my old college campus ministers, being a 'faithful dissenter' was a badge of pride; and they wore is courageously on their breasts (probably alongside a rainbow ribbon and a "Catholics for Choice" button). For my present colleague, 'faithful dissent' seems rather to arise from some long-held resentment, which betrays a deep and fundamental divergence from the faith of the Catholic Church. In both cases, Christians feel a desire to serve others; but it is a desire weighted down heavily by the burdens of constant complaint, disagreement and capriciousness. In either case, the very bedrock of ministering to others "in the Catholic tradition" (as some are wont to phrase it) is utterly compromised by the desire to hold in tension two conflicting and diametrically opposed viewpoints--i.e. that of the Church, and that of unwavering personal opinion.<br /><br />Certainly, there is no easy answer to this dilemma. It is an ubiquitous one both in America and throughout the entire world. But it raises deep questions that ought to be dealt with, lest we lose sight of the responsibility of Christian ministers--in whatever capacity--to serve with honesty and integrity. If one can only give to others so much as he or she has received from the first Giver, then how much of a unified, true message can one convey who himself sees truth as negotiable and unity as simply an option?<br /><br />To minister to others requires that we first be ministered to by the Church herself. If our understanding of that Church promotes any sort of disunity among its members, then we are not aspiring to the true Christian Church. And if we are not ministers of the true Church, we are not ministers to the faithful of that Church after all.Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-25025918328356321692009-06-28T20:21:00.006-04:002009-06-28T20:38:37.990-04:00Duruflé's Messe "Cum jubilo"One of the most interesting things I've been a part of in recent months (or really ever, for that matter) has finally come to fruition. No, not my M.A. But it's almost as good!<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://ep.yimg.com/ip/I/jav-inc_2056_44299"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 230px;" src="http://ep.yimg.com/ip/I/jav-inc_2056_44299" alt="" border="0" /></a>Last Spring, the choir of the Pontifical North American College recorded a full-length CD of a Mass setting by the 20th century French composer, Maurice Duruflé. The record, his <i>Messe "Cum jubilo"</i> is now available through <i>JAV Recordings</i> <a href="http://www.greatorgancds.com/dumecjuponoa.html">here</a>. For anyone interested in classical/sacred music, it's a great buy!<br /><br />Altogether, the CD is an entire Mass (sung the way it ought to be!) comprised of both Gregorian chant (<em>Introit</em>, <em>Alleluia</em>, etc.) and Duruflé's compositions of the <em>Kyrie</em>, <em>Gloria</em>, <em>Sanctus/Benedictus</em> and <em>Agnus Dei</em>. It even includes all the prayers, propers and readings from the Mass of the Immaculate Conception—the College's patronal feast.<br /><br />What's more, there's a great deal of organ improvisation as well, done by one of the most influential and noted organists in the world today: Stephen Tharp. From the bells on the first track to the organ <em>sortie</em> on the final, this recording is something worth checking out. Even the CD booklet has some cool pictures, and some interesting (and meditative) shots of the NAC that some might enjoy. (The cover photo, above, is the mosaic in the apse of the Immaculate Conception chapel at NAC.) Plus, you'll get to hear me sing—and you'll be supporting a good cause.<br /><br />So visit <em><a href="http://www.greatorgancds.com/dumecjuponoa.html">JAV</a></em> and pick up a copy. And play it for your kids. They will like it too! [And if they don't, you can teach them!]Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-73366611279528195422009-06-04T10:18:00.009-04:002009-06-04T11:50:57.628-04:00What's the Deal with Liturgy?"Everything's better in Latin," say the 'traditionalists.' "Why do anything other than the red and say anything other than the black?"<br /><br />On the other side of the fence, the über-progressivists contend that Mass ought to be anything but cookie-cutter. "Jesus is present in the people, and people are dynamic and alive, so Mass should be too."<br /><br />Finally, for the pietists, "Mass is Mass; and as long as Jesus is present, that's all that matters."<br /><br />[N.B. For those who don't care for sweeping generalizations, this post is not for you.]<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/images/reviews/r0000319i.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 350px;" src="http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/images/reviews/r0000319i.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />So, again we ask: "What's the deal with liturgy, anyway?" Why all this hubbub about the Mass? In a few short lines, we are able to class the vast majority of liturgical sensibilities into three (fairly) tight-knit groups; and despite the (resounding) accusations that such categories are naïvely cliché, the fact is that stereotypes arise from empirical data. After all, there's probably a reason that we don't speak about neo-Arians and hyper-Origenists: no one cares. But something about the liturgy fascinates people; and it fascinates them enough to divide them into distinct and undeniable camps (regardless of what we decide to call them).<br /><br />Whatever's at the heart of all this debate about the way the Mass 'ought to be' is certainly a powerful concept. It's something that must strike to the core of what it means to be a Catholic, or at least a Catholic in the twenty-first century. No doubt, this central issue is deeply connected to various ideas of how the Church ought to interact and exist in the modern world. The question of liturgy is one that permeates the entire Christian life, since it is a question of man's openness to the divine, and his practice of worshiping God, the Creator of all that is.<br /><br />Really, it's this last notion, I think, that forms the real edge of liturgical disagreement and dialogue. The idea that the Catholic liturgy is the <em>prima theologia</em> is undeniable, even for those who are far from being theologians in any other respect. There is something unavoidably 'theological' about Mass; and I think this inevitable sense of encounter is what makes liturgy such a touchy topic.<br /><br />In fact, I would be remiss in failing to admit that a certain facet of this concept of <em>prima theologia</em> is present in all three of the liturgical camps I mentioned initially. For the 'traditionalists,' it is apparent that the Church's authority to discern the appropriateness and fittingness of certain liturgical activities is absolute. The Church is the Body of Christ, and she is reliant upon her divine Head (whose Vicar is the pope) to distinguish what will benefit the entire Body as a whole. For the 'progressivists,' the idea of dynamism is ever present; and a dynamism that really does capture the reality of a Body fully alive. The same Body of Christ is ever growing and developing in its environment. It is the Body of a divine Person, but in human form. And for the 'pietists,' there is the simple fact that "God alone is enough." No matter the form of the Mass, or the political agendas vying for supremacy, the really important thing is that God-made-man is present among us; and we, as a Church, are there to pay him homage.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://web.mac.com/cicdc/iWeb/KStreet/CICpod/F055EBBB-D082-4CF5-8900-65B09D9DC2A3_files/lamb.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 379px;" src="http://web.mac.com/cicdc/iWeb/KStreet/CICpod/F055EBBB-D082-4CF5-8900-65B09D9DC2A3_files/lamb.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />In some way, perhaps, this distinct, tripartite <em>theologia</em> is actually a Trinitarian theology. In other words, each emphasizes a Person of the Trinity which, unless seen in relation to the others, loses its relational subsistence. God the Father is the ungenerated font of all being, and of all Truth. He is the source of all reality, and the ultimate term by which are understood the Son and the Spirit. Accordingly, the Holy Spirit is the dynamic breath of the Father, sweeping through his creation and imbuing it with life. And finally, the Son, Jesus Christ, is the vision of the Father. He is the way we approach the Father, and the one to whom all praise and honor is due.<br /><br />Ultimately, the trick with any 'theology' is in coming to get all the parts to fit together. And this is without a doubt the trick with liturgy. But the more we come to appreciate the individual contributions of any given liturgical sensibility, the more we'll come to see the Mass as a real <em>prima theologia</em>; and as the true vision of the Paschal Mystery that it is.Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-18153945577909481722008-12-10T07:37:00.005-05:002008-12-10T07:37:00.419-05:00From the Mouths of BabesI can't lie; usually when people are noisy at Mass it really annoys me. I guess it's just one of those things I expect shouldn't happen: people talking to one another, rustling around, reading something non-liturgical, etc. In short, it's distracting.<br /><br />But, like any rule (even rules I make up myself for my own comfort), there's an exception, and yesterday that exception came in the form of a little boy who babbled and chattered from start to finish of the Eucharistic prayer. At first I was typically drawn into his noise—'I was just getting prayerfully focused! Now this kid is going to start talking behind me... geesh...' Naturally, I couldn't help but listen to him, since by this time I was clearly uninterested in my former meditative ideas. The funny thing is, the more I listened to his words, the more my affection was drawn prayerfully back to the altar.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.stgeorgesnashville.org/_capnassets_/Children/H-%20Children%20at%20altar.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 330px;" src="http://www.stgeorgesnashville.org/_capnassets_/Children/H-%20Children%20at%20altar.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />The little boy said lots of things, but I remember two particularly:<br /><br />First, his comment at the preparation of the chalice. The priest had already said the prayers of offering for the bread, and was preparing the chalice by mingling the water with the wine. Suddenly I heard: "Mommy! That's water like <em>I</em> can drink!"<br /><br />And indeed it is. Somehow this little kid, who was clearly uninterested with the Mass up until then, became immediately fascinated with the Incarnate Word; he realized that something in the depths of his personhood was compatible with what was going on at the altar. 'Mommy! The priest isn't doing magic. He's using water, and <em>I</em> drink water!'<br /><br />By the time I got finished dwelling on his beautiful and childlike insight, it seemed we had sped to the words of consecration. My heart was already more affectionate toward the sacrifice than it had been before. But again, I heard spiritual commentary usher forth from the pew behind me: "That's Jesus' body—the priest is holding Jesus' body," whispered the lady. "Where? Where!" shouted the boy. "I want to see it!" Indeed, his realization that something normal was becoming something super-natural baffled him. 'I just saw water, but now it's not water? Never mind! I want to see what happened to the water and the bread!'<br /><br />I suppose we can meditate all we want on the sublime mysteries of the faith. They are certainly worthy of meditation. But what happened to that little boy was something much more pure than any meditation—it was an actual realization that what stood before him was something that should never be. He heard the testimony of a miracle, immediately believed, and sought to discover its root. Really, he exemplified the entire Christian life in about ten seconds. Is it any wonder that Christ extols the childlike?Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-46723171282807660542008-09-28T22:22:00.006-04:002008-09-28T22:35:13.753-04:00Liturgical Renewal Abounds in Vatican<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20080924/capt.8f0293ac6fd646ddabea652ffdc82459.vatican_pope_ppc101.jpg?x=300&y=345&q=85&sig=LQSnNOljrTMhKXWfo4JZ8Q--"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20080924/capt.8f0293ac6fd646ddabea652ffdc82459.vatican_pope_ppc101.jpg?x=300&y=345&q=85&sig=LQSnNOljrTMhKXWfo4JZ8Q--" border="0" alt="" /></a>Also noteworthy—and a little more germane to the title of this blog—the Holy Father has continued his tradition of trend-swaying appointments, once again in the liturgical sector:<br /><blockquote>Pope Benedict XVI made a low profile but significant move in the direction of liturgical reform by completely renewing the roster of his liturgical advisors yesterday.<br /><br />A hardly noticed brief note from the Vatican's Press office announced the appointment of new consultants for the office of Liturgical Celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff. It did not mention, however, the importance of the new appointees.<br /><br />The new consultants include Monsignor Nicola Bux, professor at the Theological Faculty of Puglia (Southern Italy,) and author of several books on liturgy, especially on the Eucharist. Bux recently finish a new book "Pope Benedict’s Reform," printed by the Italian publishing house Piemme, scheduled to hit the shelves in December.<br /><br />The list of news consultants includes Fr. Mauro Gagliardi, an expert in Dogmatic theology and professor at the Legionaries of Christ's Pontifical Athenaeum “Regina Apostolorum”; Opus Dei Spanish priest Juan José Silvestre Valor, professor at the Pontifical University of Santa Croce in Rome; Fr. Uwe Michael Lang, C.O., an official of the Congregation for the Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and author of the book "Turning Towards the Lord" -about the importance of facing "ad orientem" during Mass; and Fr. Paul C.F. Gunter, a Benedictine professor at the Pontifical Athenaeum Sant Anselmo in Rome and member of the editorial board of the forthcoming "Usus Antiquior," a quarterly journal dedicated to the Liturgy under the auspices of the Society of St. Catherine of Siena. The Society, which has an association with the English Province of the Order of Preachers (Dominicans), promotes the intellectual and liturgical renewal of the Church.<br /><br />Also relevant to the appointments is the fact that all former consultants, appointed when Archbishop Piero Marini led the office of Liturgical Celebrations, have been dismissed by not renewing their appointments. (CNA)</blockquote><br />Not a shock. But definitely interesting news nevertheless...Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-85455295028123584542008-08-14T11:30:00.022-04:002008-08-14T12:50:11.230-04:00YHWH: Sacred Silence<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.metmuseum.org/explore/byzantium_iii/images_small/Sinai-Moses-sm.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://www.metmuseum.org/explore/byzantium_iii/images_small/Sinai-Moses-sm.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a>In more recent news from the Vatican, the Congregation for Divine Worship has issued a directive concerning the utterance of the Name of God in Catholic liturgy. The Hebrew 'tetragrammaton' for the name of God, <em>YHWH</em> (often depicted as "Yahweh"), is no longer to be said aloud during the course of the Mass or any other liturgy of the Church. This will not alter any of the official texts of the Mass, since the Church has always held regard for the sacred name, which is an acronym for the Hebrew words, "I AM WHO AM"—the name given to Moses by God in the Book of Exodus. The only alterations which will need to be made at present, according to <a href="http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=90429">the CWN report</a>, pertain to some hymns, which invoke "Yahweh" by name. This is good news for the US bishops, who have been working tirelessly on the approval of new translations of the official liturgical texts.<br /><br />However, I don't think it's coincidence that the Vatican directive on the pronunciation of the tetragrammaton is aimed only at non-official texts. Certainly, the scope of this new instruction as being aimed only at miscellaneously published texts in songs and other improvised prayers (such as the prayers of the faithful, etc.) is not without cause. The fundamental reason, in my opinion, is that this isn't the first time the Church has dealt with this topic. Even recently, in the 2001 document from the Congregation, <em>Liturgicam Authenticam</em>, the same issue is addressed:<br /><blockquote>In accordance with immemorial tradition...the name of almighty God expressed by the Hebrew tetragrammaton (YHWH) and rendered in Latin by the word <em>Dominus</em>, is to be rendered into any given vernacular by a word equivalent in meaning. (<em>LA</em>, 41)</blockquote><br />Biblical translators have used a variety of words to translate the tetragrammaton, including <em>Dominus</em>, and its Greek version, <em>Kyrios</em>, both stemming from the Hebrew word, <em>Adonai</em>. In fact, the tradition of using alternative titles for God, other than the proper name given in Exodus, has been continuously present in the formation of liturgical texts since the early days of the Church. The curious matter here seems to be, "Why all of a sudden a directive with the intent of restricting the use of the Name of God?"<br /><br />The answer, I think, lies in a greater problem than simply the utterance of the word, "<em>YHWH</em>." The modern mindset seems to tend toward two extremes, both of which are equally harmful: either 'all is sacred' or 'nothing is sacred.' In the end, both equal out to pretty well the same thing. Both deny the rift between what is transcendental and what is ordinary. In short, both deny the need for mediation between the natural and supernatural. In Christian theology, we call this mediator Jesus Christ. Without Christ, there is no mediation between God and man; sinfulness and brokenness bind man irrevocably. Thus, without the Mediator, nothing is sacred (except of course that which we cannot ever hope to attain). On the flip side, if one assumes that the rift between transcendent and ordinary is bridged by human nature—somehow able to traverse both sides of the metaphysically unbridgeable gap—then the result is that 'all is sacred,' insofar as "all" is experienced and has to do with man's primacy over everything else.<br /><br />The appearance, in recent years, of "Yahweh" in the liturgy is perhaps nothing other than the beginnings of such a mindset. It should go without saying that many of the songs used in worship have become increasingly less-theological and more-emotive. While there is nothing wrong with acknowledging and articulating emotion and its connection with our created and redeemed nature, we need to be aware that all perception of emotion must necessarily coincide with our theological understanding of God. If our hearts and minds are not pointed in the same direction, we are acting duplicitously. This is not the action called for by the Church.<br /><br />Although uttering the Name of God during Mass is perhaps a small indication of this mindset, it is nonetheless an indicator. As Catholics, we ought to be ever conscious of our tendencies toward self-exaltation and pride. If we truly believe that 'calling upon the name of the Lord' is a sacred action—sacred enough in Jewish tradition that to utter it is a profanation thereof—then our liturgical and public actions should reflect that truth. The Church, herself born from the Jewish faith, understands this serious responsibility of the faithful to act in accord with such a prominent tradition. We should always seek to understand more and more how we might venerate the blessed Name of God, especially when we are so close to that same Lord in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-8539341639177726282008-08-12T14:27:00.014-04:002008-08-12T22:53:06.154-04:00Veritas Dulcis EstI know. You are thinking that the header of this post might be the title of the latest papal encyclical. I'm quite sure it's not. But Fr. Foster, if you decide to use my idea I won't hold it against you...<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20080810/capt.2e1db77e734e48f584a2393072cd7084.italy_pope_georgia_xap102.jpg?x=400&y=245&sig=8yo8YnavHe5utLE.WpNSaQ--"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px;" src="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20080810/capt.2e1db77e734e48f584a2393072cd7084.italy_pope_georgia_xap102.jpg?x=400&y=245&sig=8yo8YnavHe5utLE.WpNSaQ--" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />Actually, such a quippy phrase seemed the best way to introduce Pope Benedict XVI's recent meeting with priests at his summer get-away, Bolzano-Bressanone. The candid conversation with priests of the diocese covered many issues, some of which many of us (underlings) often discuss amongst ourselves. Topping the list—in terms of outside attention anyhow—were the topics of sacramental administration and catechesis. What I found to be most interesting was the Holy Father's reply to a question about administering Holy Communion to those who are visibly unprepared to receive:<br /><br /><blockquote>In response to another question about what do with the children and young people who request First Communion and Conformation but do not appear to be ready to persevere in the faith, Benedict XVI confessed that “when I was younger I was stricter. I said, the sacraments are the sacraments of the faith, and therefore where there is no faith, there is no praxis of faith, and thus the sacrament cannot be conferred. And I discussed this latter with my priests when I was Archbishop of Munich. (…) As time has gone on I have come to understand that we must follow always the example of the Lord, who was very open to those on the fringes of Israel at that time as well, He was a Lord of mercy, very open—according to many official authorities—with sinners, embracing them and allowing himself to be welcomed at their dinners, attracting them to communion with Him.”<br /><br />“If we can perceive even a flicker of desire for communion in the Church, a desire also of these children who want to enter into communion with Jesus, I think it is fair to be more generous. Naturally of course, one aspect of our catechesis should be to make it understood that Communion, First Communion, is not an ending event, but rather demands a continual friendship with Jesus, a journey with Jesus,” the Pope continued. (<em>CNA</em>, 12 Aug. 2008)</blockquote><br /><br />I found this little glimpse into the heart of the pontiff very telling. First of all, it does wonders in breaking apart what remnants endure of the <em>Panzerkardinal's</em> 'rule-with-an-iron-first' reputation. More importantly, though, it exemplifies his true desire to work for religious conversion in the hearts of the faithful and non-faithful alike. It certainly seems that with a perspective like this about the distribution of Holy Communion, the pope is promulgating the true efforts of the Church to bring all into communion with the Lord, and that in the most genuine and truly Christian sense of the word.<br /><br />Nevertheless, I would suspect that some former Ratzis are probably wondering just what has happened to their <em>Motu Proprio</em> pushing, 'traditionalist' pope. Sure enough, such a candid disclosure of his heart will earn Benedict more than a few opponents: "How can he distribute communion on the tongue, kneeling on the one hand," they will say, "and admit to something like this on the other?"<br /><br />The careful and attentive observer, however, will notice that what the Holy Father has stated in Bressanone is not at all a contradiction to the distribution of Holy Communion on the tongue and kneeling. Instead, it is an affirmation of the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist; it is evidence—it seems to me—of Christ's presence in his Church and in her mission of converting hearts and saving souls. The pope understands that regulations on the administration of the sacraments do not flow from a desire to litigate, but a desire to love. He understands that catechesis is not a matter of indoctrination, but a matter of loving instruction. Most of all, he understands that the truth is not a weapon—something we wield against enemies to see how much damage we can inflict. Rather, it is something as sweet as honey, and something toward which we must continue to attract others' hearts by our own deeds of service, charity and mercy.Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-34929165526772562472008-07-01T09:10:00.000-04:002008-07-01T09:11:31.393-04:00"Venite, Adoremus..."Probably not a shock to anyone who's been following Vatican practices for the last few years, Pope Benedict's reported affinity for Communion on the tongue <a href="http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=89539">has been confirmed</a> by the pope's chief liturgist, Msgr. Guido Marini. According to the Catholic News Agency, Marini testified that "people receiving Communion kneeling and on the tongue will become common practice at the Vatican." No doubt, this step toward further adherence to the liturgical tradition of the Church was a long time coming; this and similarly traditional observations have been continuously implemented all throughout Benedict's papacy.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_kP_5uj5b6TE/SGgsMEBkpvI/AAAAAAAAAEg/m__cLBJpC_k/s1600-h/b16mar.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_kP_5uj5b6TE/SGgsMEBkpvI/AAAAAAAAAEg/m__cLBJpC_k/s320/b16mar.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5217468754059110130" /></a><br />The practice of receiving Communion on the tongue—as many are familiar with—is still the 'normal' means by which to receive the Holy Eucharist. "In this regard," Msgr. Marini reminds us, "it is necessary not to forget the fact that the distribution of Communion on the hand remains, up to now, from the juridical standpoint, an exception (indult) to the universal law, conceded by the Holy See to those bishops' conferences who requested it." According to the CNA, the United States ranks among quite a few other countries whose bishops have elected to pursue such an indult.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20080629/i/r2831156703.jpg?x=242&y=345&sig=ixhqkasgOGXv.1zsoQ99Kg--"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20080629/i/r2831156703.jpg?x=242&y=345&sig=ixhqkasgOGXv.1zsoQ99Kg--" border="0" alt="" /></a>Benedict XVI's affection for such a posture of prayer upon reception of Holy Communion has come to the forefront in recent days, specifically after his pastoral visit to the coastal Italian town of Brindisi. All of the faithful who received Communion from the Holy Father during this celebration did so kneeling and on the tongue. As can be expected, this occurrence caused some uproar among less traditionally-minded groups in the Church, and evoked jubilant praise for those on the other side of the liturgical fence. The ultimate goal of the pope's gesture—I am quite sure—was not to inspire further animosity between 'left and right wing' Catholics, though. As pastor of the universal Church, Pope Benedict undoubtedly seeks not only to reconcile existing differences among the faithful, but to steep both 'sides' in the rich authenticity of the Catholic Tradition. The Holy Father's distribution of Communion kneeling and on the tongue is not a diatribe against the past forty years of liturgical reform, nor an emphatic affirmation of the 'traditionalist' position. Instead, it is a faithful articulation of liturgical piety and genuine Catholic teaching surrounding the dignity and honor due to Our Lord, present in the Blessed Sacrament.<br /><br />If it is in fact true that the reception of Holy Communion in papal liturgies will soon assume the traditional form practiced in Brindisi, then we as Catholics ought to rejoice. The Holy Father is seeking to show us the fullness of tradition present in the Sacred Liturgy. Since the liturgy itself is the <em>prima theologia</em>, and the fundamental means of catechesis for the faithful, how could a further respect and reverence for Jesus Christ in the Eucharist possibly be a step in the wrong direction?Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-52104409382172133672008-04-23T04:22:00.002-04:002008-04-23T04:59:34.025-04:00Confession & the Ecclesial BodyThe two bookends of the priesthood—for lack of a more theologically descriptive term—are the Sacraments of the Eucharist and Confession. Really, it is through offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and hearing the confessions of the faithful that the priest does the greatest work in the salvation of souls and the sanctification of the world. Of these two Sacraments, the most written about is certainly that of the Eucharist, which comes as no real surprise given its primacy as the “source and summit” of the entire Catholic faith. In seeing the beauty of the Eucharist, though, we cannot be unconscious of that beauty which flows just as profoundly from the Sacrament of Confession.<br /><br />In the ‘economy of salvation’ (or the manner by which God has deemed salvation to be achieved through Christ), one could say that the Eucharist presents to us the opportunity to share fully in Jesus’ Passion, death and Resurrection, while Confession affords us the necessary purification required to approach such an august mystery of redemption. The two function in complete harmony with one another and, although they are no more ‘Sacraments’ than are Baptism or Confirmation, they are certainly the most regularly encountered in the life of the ordinary Catholic. Thus, our understanding and appreciation of both the Eucharist and Confession need to be refined time and again, in order that we might most fully share in the Sacrifice of the Mass every Sunday. Here, we can say a few things about Confession in particular that may provide a little further insight into a Sacrament all too often overlooked.<br /><br />I will assume that the basics of what Confession is don’t need to be explained—it is the normal means by which serious sin is absolved by the authority of the Church, through the priest acting <em>in persona Christi capitis</em>. Even in this small description, however, if we don’t read carefully, it may seem as though everything is overly-apparent; really, there is more than meets the eye, particularly with regard to the “authority of the Church.” While it is true that this authority subsists in the magisterial teaching of the Church that the remission of sins is in fact possible and <em>real</em> when exercised according to the norms of the Sacrament, what may not be so evident is that the Church—rightly speaking—is something bigger than just the Magisterium. Ultimately, if what the formula for absolution says is true—namely, that “through the ministry of the Church, I absolve you…”—there is something happening in every Confession that involves the participation of all the faithful throughout the world.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/03VrgjQdBG5mE/340x.jpg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/03VrgjQdBG5mE/340x.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a>So as not to confuse this ecclesial action with something else, since I am not proposing that it is the Church and not the priest who offers absolution, it is important to look at the words very carefully. “Through the ministry of the Church” is not the same as “the Church absolves you.” The priest still gives absolution, acting as Christ. However, what the words do tell us is that the Sacrament of Confession can, and is, rightly considered to be a liturgical action and not simply a private devotion; Confession involves the participation of the entire Church—of all the faithful—who share in that “ministry” of forgiving sins in a real way. Although the lay faithful cannot efficaciously absolve sins as does the ordained priest, they can and <em>ought</em> to offer prayers for the forgiveness of sins and for the conversion of hearts to the Lord. This is really where Confession ties in most directly to the Eucharist; in addition to Confession providing a sinner the means to be reconciled to the Church and God, it also derives its beauty and power from the Sacrifice of the Eucharist. During the Eucharistic Prayer in particular, the priest prays for the faithful throughout the world, and prays on behalf of those at the Mass who are offering God their own intentions at the same time. The end ‘result’ is one big oblation of petitions to the Father, who in turn delivers his Son to us under the forms of bread and wine.<br /><br />The “priesthood of the faithful,” which is a resulting character of Baptism for all Catholics, is certainly instrumental in bringing about the forgiveness of sins. What is important is that we all participate properly in the degree of priesthood which we have received—either in Baptism or Holy Orders. “Through the ministry of the Church,” sins can and will be forgiven. That is a magnificent charge, and one that we should not neglect or take for granted.Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-31517387867220153992008-04-08T04:37:00.004-04:002008-04-08T08:25:57.108-04:00Architecture: Our Disposition Toward GodChurch architecture has a major role to play in the way we experience the Lord. When we walk into a church that draws our attention toward his magnificence, we can’t help but be somewhat mystified by the beauty of our glorious God; his eternal splendor is shown in some small part through the earthly edifice. However, when we walk into a church that has been constructed not necessarily to give glory to God, but rather to the exaltation of the human person, and toward human progress in autonomy and ‘creativity,’ the difference is immediately clear; we immediately realize the elements of transcendence and mystery are lacking. Although beautiful and prayerful churches can and have been built in almost any style under the sun, the simple and fundamental fact—which we know through these basic experiences—is that some styles are just better suited for showing God, and some better suited for showing man.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://firmumest.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/notre-dame-int.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://firmumest.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/notre-dame-int.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a>Most likely, no one here will be building a church anytime soon (and if you will be, by all means I hope this isn’t the first time you’ve thought about this sort of thing). However, I think it’s entirely appropriate to reflect some on why certain elements are critical in building churches that are specifically suited to Catholic prayer and liturgy, and ultimately in drawing attention toward the focus of all existence: God himself. Unfortunately for those seeking quick answers, knowing how to best draw the mind and heart to God requires a preliminary understanding of who this God is, and how he is known by his Church in her teachings and dogmas. As the culmination of all this, the liturgy—which means the ‘work on behalf of the people’ in Greek—is the concrete yet mysterious expression of all such understanding in a mode both expressive and faithfully receptive. A Catholic church, then, ought to incorporate not simply the proximate whims of an aspiring architect or adventurous parish building committee, bur rather the fullness of the Catholic faith to which it will serve as a home and a means of articulation.<br /><br />Understanding the faith means understanding the “source and summit” of the faith: namely, the Eucharist. Jesus Christ present in the Eucharist is not only the highpoint of the faith, but most obviously of the liturgy; this has been the teaching since Apostolic times and will surely never change. Thus, the primary consideration one must make in deciding on a church design is, “Will this design reverence and express our belief in Christ’s True Presence in the Holy Eucharist?” I would be so bold as to guess that the feeling we get when entering a church and realizing either God’s or man’s exaltation has much to do with this one point. If the Eucharist is not central in the construction of a Church, what does that say about our theology as Catholics? Both Christ present in the tabernacle and Christ present in the consecration of the Mass need to be given prime place if a Catholic church hopes to achieve its mission of correctly articulating the faith, and the true ‘work of the people’ to adore and worship the Son of God.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.stjulies.org/ALTAR-best.jpg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://www.stjulies.org/ALTAR-best.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a>On the flip side, what happens when this principle is abandoned? I think nothing speaks more strongly than that feeling of cold emptiness present in churches uninhabited by Our Lord in the Eucharist. Something is missing. If Christ is not at the center of the house, in vain do its builders labor. Jesus Christ is the cornerstone of the Church, and although he was “rejected by the builders” (of old, as well as quite literally in recent times), he ought to be recognized as the cornerstone of every Catholic church in the entire world. Putting souls in close proximity with the Eucharistic Lord puts them into contact with the infinite mystery of the Godhead, and ultimately with the mystery of their own lives. Instead of expressing our human mystery in unintelligible shapes and gyrating, deconstructionist images that scarcely represent reality as we know it and require a guidebook to appreciate in any depth, why not rely on the infinite beauty of Jesus Christ to adorn our churches?<br /><br />Really, the question of the human person and its pronouncement in places of worship ought to instead be considered as a question of the person of Christ, and his presence in the place of worship. By turning in on himself, man ultimately idolizes himself. However, by turning toward the Lord—<em>Conversus ad Dominum</em>, as the ancient Church prayed—we find an expression of humanity much more beautiful and meaningful than anything we could muster on our own. So too do we find a way to integrate that humanity with the humanity of the Son of God, giving great glory to God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and living out most eloquently the faith that we profess in the liturgy of the Mass.Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-85557708916673341852008-03-16T17:11:00.007-04:002008-04-02T15:59:50.893-04:00The "Great Week" of the FaithBefore the liturgical reforms of Vatican II, Holy Week was known as the "Great Week": <em>Maior Hebdomada</em>. This is a fitting title, seeing how the fullness of Christ's Paschal Mystery is actualized and consummated within the span of its days. In Holy Week, Catholics celebrate the triumphal entrance of Jesus into Jerusalem (Palm Sunday), his Last Supper and first Eucharist with the Apostles (Holy Thursday), his Passion and death (Good Friday) and finally his Resurrection from the dead (Easter Sunday). Certainly, these events--especially when seen together--are worthy of the title, "great."<br /><br />I could write a book on Holy Week; there's just so much to say. The opportunities to reflect on the suffering, death and Resurrection of the Son of God are too much to describe in words. In fact, they transcend words, yet we only know them because of words: we know them through the Gospels and Tradition of the Church, and we live them in the Eucharist. Indeed the greatest thing about this "Great Week," then, is that we realize it's effects and mysteries perdure even until today. We are drawn into an experience of Christ's saving mission that demands our physical and mental attention; we are able to reflect on the mysteries as we participate bodily in the liturgies the Church has celebrated for 2,000 years. Here is a chance to experience <em>completely</em> the beauty of the Catholic faith--the same faith preached and defended by the first Apostles with blood and martyrdom--which subsists in the one, true Church, washed in the Blood of the Lamb of sacrifice, offered on the altar of the Cross. Holy Week demands more of us than just our participation in the liturgies of Palm Sunday, Good Friday and Easter Sunday, however. If we truly wish to delve into the mysteries that we are faced with in such a proximate and real way, we are called to offer our very selves, if only for this week, to the God who offered his only Son for our sake. It is safe to say that <em>if we fail to join Christ in his sacrifice upon the Cross, we will certainly fail to experience his true glory in the Resurrection</em>.<br /><br />To modern ears, this seems like an extreme claim. The fact is that for ancient ears the claim was no less severe. Sacrifice demands suffering, and suffering demands pain. Our lot as Christians is nothing less than the lot of Christ, who told his Apostles just before his trial and suffering that "no slave is greater than his master. If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you." (Jn 15:20) As our Master tells us this on Holy Thursday, we ought to consider the rest of the Easter Triduum (the three days from Thursday to the Easter Vigil on Saturday night) as our chance to share in the persecutions of Christ. These three days, in particular, provide a time to share in the trials and tribulations of the early Apostles: with Peter, who denied the Lord; with Judas, who betrayed him for worldly gain; with John, who stood by him as he suffered; with Mary his mother, who pondered and suffered the fullness of the Passion in her heart, and whose faithful witness can be seen as the first faith of the Church during Christ's bloody Mass of the Cross. All of these mysteries become accessible to us, and all in profound depth during this Holy and Great Week before Easter.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/nm/20080316/2008_03_16t084752_450x314_us_pope_palmsunday.jpg?x=400&y=279&sig=Wb8vClqcIxW7r260uf3I1w--"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/nm/20080316/2008_03_16t084752_450x314_us_pope_palmsunday.jpg?x=400&y=279&sig=Wb8vClqcIxW7r260uf3I1w--" border="0" alt="" /></a>Focusing on the day at hand, Palm Sunday provides us the chance to acclaim Christ as our Lord, and as the "Son of David" whose salvific mission will set us all free from sin. The traditional Latin chant, which starts the entire week of liturgies on Palm Sunday morning, begins with the words, <em>Hosanna filio David, benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini</em>: "Hosanna, O Son of David; blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!" The Church calls us to raise our hearts in acclaim of the Lord, riding triumphantly into the royal city of Jerusalem to take his throne; we carry palm or olive branches to join in the homage of the Israelites who did the same thing almost two millennia ago. Our adoration of the Lord will be short lived, though, for in the course of a week we will find him guilty of the harshest crimes and sentence him to a cruel death by our sins and the hardness of our hearts. His love is insurmountable, though, even by death; he raises up to life what had previously condemned innocent life to death. The "Great Week" of the Church is our participation in this drama of salvation. Indeed, let us not forget what lies before us now. Let us go forth to the altar of God--to Christ upon the throne of the Cross--and fall down in worship: <em>Hosanna filio David! Adoramus et glorificamus te Christe, Fili Dei vivi, quoniam per crucem tuam redemisti mundum!</em>Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-54265319691873122282008-02-02T10:53:00.000-05:002008-02-02T10:57:25.669-05:00Translations in Due TimeIt seems that we’ve received a lot of site traffic concerning the upcoming release of the new translation of the Roman Missal (<em>à la</em> English). While I know nothing new—at least nothing newer than the rest of the general public—I do know that the wheels of progress turn ever-so-slowly in the Vatican, and this matter will certainly be no exception.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.catholicfamilycatalog.com/Merchant2/graphics/bhmr1.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://www.catholicfamilycatalog.com/Merchant2/graphics/bhmr1.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a>The latest is that the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) announced its plan to have the translation finished by its next meeting in September of this year. The commission’s last meeting in January was a continuation of translations and revisions on certain texts, which had earlier been commented upon by bishops around the world, as well as the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. Ultimately—in September—when everything is finalized with the translation phase of the operation, the definitive text will then be re-submitted to local bishops’ conferences for “further processing and eventual publication.”<br /><br />Now, what this really means I have no idea; I am a mere seminarian and the intimate workings of the universal Church far supercede the scope of my commentary. Certainly, the time it takes to translate, re-translate, edit, submit and finalize all these texts of the Roman Missal has some out there absolutely befuddled. Perhaps you are asking yourself: “How on earth can an organization like the Catholic Church—which has endured for 2000 years—be so absolutely inefficient in dealing with such simple matters?” If this sounds like what you are thinking, know that you are not alone. However, I would submit a spiritual element to these comments, which may help us all to understand the situation a little better.<br /><br />There is a great little line from the Second Letter of Peter that speaks precisely to this occasion: “Consider the patience of our Lord as salvation.” (3:15) In fact, the reason that the bishops are re-translating the English version of the Missal <em>again</em> has to do with the hasty translation the first time around. Had we as English-speakers been more patient and prudent then, this second translation would likely have never come about. It’s easy to become impatient, especially when what’s happening is something we really care about (i.e. the an encounter with God in the liturgy). However, if what is truly at stake is our salvation—and it is nothing else that we ought to be concerned with when speaking of the liturgy—then St. Peter’s words ought to pervade our dispositions here especially. There is nothing worse than people up in arms about the liturgy, which is <em>per se</em> such a manifest act of unity in the Church. All we need to do is follow what the Church teaches us, open our entire selves to the Lord and adore his glory as he pours forth his grace through the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. But, just as much, we need to give the same Church the time she needs to rightly present these mysteries, and to be as faithful as possible to the deposit of faith which she guards so carefully.Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-58499905855034077252008-01-30T07:07:00.001-05:002008-01-30T08:17:49.489-05:00'Hic Est Enim Calix Sanguinis Mei...'Like any good seminarian, I found myself day-dreaming before Mass today as I was watching the priest bring out the vessels and put them on the altar. My first thought was, “Wow, I can’t wait till I can do that, preparing the chalice for Mass, knowing that it will soon be filled with the Precious Blood.” Naturally—and given the particulars of the situation—my second thought was, “That’s a really nice chalice!” After I quickly realized how my interior disposition had switched from the content of the chalice to the nicety in itself, it actually caused me to reflect a little on what it truly means to offer the chalice of the Lord, and why it’s something I should even appreciate. Lo and behold, this was a great topic of meditation…<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.katolikus.hu/hungariae/3-9.jpg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://www.katolikus.hu/hungariae/3-9.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a>For any new priest, receiving one’s first chalice is an occasion of great joy. To begin with, it usually comes from loved ones (parents, grandparents, etc.) and is a concrete sign of their appreciation of a vocation to the priesthood. More than that, however, it is their contribution to the mystery of the priesthood, which is so closely bound with the Paschal Sacrifice offered on the altar each day. In some sense, the offertory of the Mass is really exemplified in a priest receiving his first chalice from those on whose behalf it will be implemented; a striking reality.<br /><br />Second, the chalice not only indicates the oblation of the people to God through the pure gift of Jesus Christ to his Father, but it also signifies the depth of the mystery in which both the people and priest participate at each and every Mass: “The cup of salvation I will raise; I will call on the Lord’s name. My vows to the Lord I will fulfill before all his people. O precious in the eyes of the Lord is the death of his faithful.” (Psalm 116) The offering of the chalice by the priest is not simply some gesture of solidarity with those around him, but rather an elevation of those around him to God the Father, through the sacrifice of the Son. Jesus tells James and John—when they had desired to sit at his right and his left in Paradise—“You do not know what you are asking. Can you drink the cup that I am going to drink?” (Matthew 20) Christ knew that only through the consumption of the chalice could salvation be brought about, and what else are its contents than his very Blood, poured out <em>pro multis</em> as an expiation for their sins. The <em>multis</em> are those willing to partake freely of this sacrifice of Christ with full submission to its mysterious yet necessary truth: that we can only find salvation—the Resurrection—through first suffering and dying.<br /><br />At the moment of the consecration at Mass all of this occurs. The offering of the people joined to the offering of the priest, who, acting <em>in persona Christi</em> offers the Son to the Father through the love of the Holy Spirit. In reality, the Passion, death and Resurrection of our Lord are made re-present on the altar and in the chalice. That is why I—as a seminarian—ought to value the sacrifice of the Mass and the offering of the chalice to the Lord. That is also why we all need to pray for seminarians and priests around the world, that their hearts might be open to the glorious mysteries God intends to lavish upon his Church.Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-31712122015763091342008-01-29T06:14:00.001-05:002008-04-10T03:47:32.455-04:00Dominus Est!<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_0EiZ-ZzxBgo/R58QQuNhK8I/AAAAAAAAAPI/o76dkkegMEs/s1600-h/dominusestmonsathanasiuje6.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_0EiZ-ZzxBgo/R58QQuNhK8I/AAAAAAAAAPI/o76dkkegMEs/s320/dominusestmonsathanasiuje6.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5160861577458559938" /></a>While walking home today, I decided to stop into the Vatican bookstore. I was just looking around and asked one of the store workers when Bishop Athanasius Schneider's new book, "Dominus Est," is coming out. <em>Dominus est</em> means, "It is the Lord," in Latin and is referring to the Gospel of John when Christ is recognized by John while Peter and John are fishing.<br /><br />The book interests me, because the Liturgy interests me. It is about the posture and disposition of the one receiving Holy Communion and the practice of receiving Holy Communion on one's knees and on the tongue. This post is not an <em>apologia</em> for either of those practices, which remain the universal norm of the Church while Bishops and National Bishop's conferences are able to create other norms if they deem it pastorally expedient. Personally, I support and prefer the practice defended in this book, but I would like to limit myself to making a few brief comments on the orientation of the liturgy in general.<br /><br />In the Catholic liturgy, there must always be a common orientation of all the assembly: <em>versus Dominum</em>, toward the Lord. Cardinal Ratzinger speaks of this at length in his book, "The Spirit of the Liturgy." The same Pope Benedict XVI spoke of this in his General Audience on St. Augustine a couple weeks ago, mentioning the practice of the priest in the early Church who proclaimed, "<em>Conversus ad Dominum!</em>" (Turn toward the Lord) after the homily, at which point the congregation would turn toward the East. This is the reason that Pope Benedict celebrated the Baptismal Mass in the Sistene Chapel "<em>ad orientem</em>," or toward the East, Christ our Lord, the rising Son that never sets. The orientation of our hearts toward the Lord is expressed in chant, gestures, movements and postures in Catholic Liturgy because human beings are not angels (pure spirit) or animals (flesh without a rational soul and will). We must express with our body, the movements and orientation of our heart. This is the context in which Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith, the Secretary for the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, puts his argument forward with respect to receiving communion kneeling and on the tongue in his forward to this book.<br /><br />I plan on buying the book from the Vatican bookstore sometime this week when it comes out, and I will try to put some posts up on the general arguments and themes. Whether we receive Holy Communion standing or kneeling right now (both of which are certainly viable options according to the Church), let us always prostrate our hearts in loving adoration before the God who is love. "This is a real presence which includes every dimension of who Jesus is: body and blood, human soul and divine person. The consecrated Eucharistic species are the Lord and therefore command our adoration. We do not adore ourselves, nor the ordained priest, nor the Bible, even though these are vehicles for Christ's spiritual presence; we do adore the Eucharist, this blessed sacrifice made really present sacramentally." (Francis Cardinal George, Archbishop of Chicago)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-13558524292614503682008-01-04T14:16:00.000-05:002008-01-04T14:36:22.704-05:00Benedict's Liturgy: TraditionalTo switch briefly from philosophy to other things, there has been much happening in the Vatican in recent days that is worthy of note. Principally (at least in terms of visible notice), the latest trends in papal liturgies have begun to cause quite the stir within Catholic blogs and seminary dinner-table discussions. In case you haven’t noticed—which is probably the case, since I’m sure that most of you don’t have the time to justifiably watch for such things—the Holy Father has been associating himself more and more with the strong liturgical traditions of the Church, particularly during his recent Christmas and New Year celebrations. Although Benedict XVI has always been reputed as a solid liturgist, it wasn’t until lately that the depth of his love for the traditional Catholic liturgy was brought to light. Here are a few examples and explanations…<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20071231/i/r1469300660.jpg?x=243&y=345&sig=t2u5XiGJVV0EovuTVLAfgQ--"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20071231/i/r1469300660.jpg?x=243&y=345&sig=t2u5XiGJVV0EovuTVLAfgQ--" border="0" alt="" /></a>Upon the appointment of the new papal master of ceremonies (the man responsible for directing papal Masses, etc.), an effort has been in the works to restore some of the liturgical glory proper to the celebrations of the Roman Pontiff. In other words, Benedict realized that much of the Church’s rich traditions had been lost in past decades and decided to take up the task of re-establishing what was always good and true in the liturgy. The issuing of <em>Summorum Pontificum</em> was one step in that direction (click <a href="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/motu_proprio/documents/hf_ben-xvi_motu-proprio_20070707_summorum-pontificum_lt.html">here</a> for the document and <a href="http://inumbrissanctipetri.blogspot.com/2007/11/summorum-pontificum-old-mass.html">here</a> for my post on it). In addition to simply reinvigorating a love of the Tridentine Mass though, the pope has also been keen to instill anew the beauty proper to the <em>novus ordo</em> Mass, celebrated after Vatican II.<br /><br />While the details of this project would take a long time to hash out, looking at the pope’s Christmas and New Year’s liturgies might shed some light on the underlying reality. The primary goal of Benedict, it seems, is to properly utilize and respect some of the symbolism that was cast out in many cases throughout the last forty years. Some visible examples of this have been his use of older, more ornate vestments, beautiful vessels (to hold the Blessed Sacrament), more well-planned and properly ‘Catholic’ liturgies, and an increased use of Latin when celebrating the Mass. For a brief time in recent history, each of these things was popularly deemed as causing separation between priest and people—between the simplicity of life needed to be Christ-like, and the lavishness of worldly pleasure. However, in his much more objective and apostolic foresight, the Holy Father has seen past this deceptive claim and is beginning to promote the truth which has always underlined Catholic tradition.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20071225/capt.033d75ffafb54a3ea2041277ed310b4a.vatican_pope_christmas_oss101.jpg?x=400&y=249&sig=ZG__EzLufbzMw29poiPTJA--"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20071225/capt.033d75ffafb54a3ea2041277ed310b4a.vatican_pope_christmas_oss101.jpg?x=400&y=249&sig=ZG__EzLufbzMw29poiPTJA--" border="0" alt="" /></a>I suppose what I intend to say could be summed up by this: we ought to be thankful for our current Holy Father’s insight, both spiritually and academically, which is able not only to integrate the current trends in thought and spirituality, but also to meld them with the illustrious tradition given to us by the Church. Whether it is in his pastoral and educated approach to Church doctrine, or in the more ostensible area of liturgy, Benedict XVI is doing great things to preserve and renew the totality of the Catholic faith handed on to us from the Apostles. We certainly ought to support him with our prayers, but we also need to support him with our willingness to accept and respond positively to this great resurgence and ‘springtime’ of the Church. The real beauty of the Kingdom of God is only just beginning to show itself, and the more we approach the source of that beauty in the Eucharist, the more it will become totally manifest in our homes and in the world.Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-84280946588671385362007-12-05T09:52:00.000-05:002007-12-05T10:03:43.408-05:00'Beauty' in the Sacraments<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.wdtprs.com/images/07_03_18_comm5_det"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://www.wdtprs.com/images/07_03_18_comm5_det" border="0" alt="" /></a>One of my favorite subjects to study (although not necessarily my favorite class at the university right now) is the Catholic liturgy, namely the Holy Mass. There is just so much to be said about the beauty of the Sacraments, especially the Eucharist, which happens to occur <em>only</em> within the context of the Mass. Because the Eucharist is inherently beautiful, I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to say that the Mass, if done in accord with the authority and teachings of the Catholic Church, is also an innately beautiful activity. I’ll try to explain what I mean (with a slightly philosophical bent, as always)…<br /><br />It seems to me that there are a few types of beauty that we can and do experience in the world. The first type is the kind we see in, say, paintings, music, other artwork, etc. This type of beauty is perceived by the viewer, and is dependent on his or her own disposition toward the object of beauty. For example, one person may love a certain Bach violin concerto, and another person might utterly hate it. We cannot be offended either way, though, since the music itself is neither ‘good’ or ‘bad,’ but is specifically designed to appeal to the human senses and therefore be judged by the individual as worth listening to or not. In other words, the music itself is not ‘objectively’ good or bad, but is deemed so by the ‘subject’—the listener.<br /><br />Another type of beauty exists in the Sacraments. The form of the Sacraments comes through the Tradition of the Church, which was first initiated by Christ in his public life and revelation. Even though our Sacraments nowadays look different than they would have in the year 34 AD, the same essential elements have certainly been preserved. What’s more, even though the outward appearance may differ over time, the inner <em>substance</em> of the Sacraments—i.e. God’s efficacious grace, the fact that he really is doing something through them—remains forever. In this case, the beauty of the Sacraments is a sort of ‘objective’ beauty, it seems, or a beauty that exists not because of the viewer saying it does, but rather because the very act of God’s grace flowing into the human world is something in and of itself beautiful. If God is the perfection of beauty, which he is, than how could his very life, being poured out in the Eucharist and the other Sacraments, not also be something altogether beautiful?<br /><br />Having said all that, we can see how the Mass—the only place where the Eucharist can really be celebrated—is also something very beautiful. It is <em>not</em> beautiful in the deepest sense because of what <em>we</em> do to it, or the things we add; for example, the songs we sing and words we use, while they may be beautiful in the first sense (like the Bach music), are not as beautiful as the Eucharist, which sustains its own perfection. The Mass is beautiful because it was given to us substantially (in it’s very core) by Jesus Christ, who celebrated the first Mass the night before he died; likewise, the Son of God continues to be present at every Mass, celebrating each one by way of the priest, who acts <em>in persona Christi</em>.Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-30925775130676315162007-11-26T11:46:00.000-05:002007-11-26T12:03:42.357-05:00The Eucharist as Tradition Par ExcellenceIn the first Eucharistic Prayer of the Mass (also called the ‘Roman Canon’), we hear the priest say, at the point of consecrating the host, “This is my body, which will be given up for you.” With these very words—the ‘words of institution’—the bread is <em>transubstantiated</em> into the Body of Jesus Christ. The mystery of transubstantiation is worth a whole post, but instead I’d like to focus here on the words of institution.<br /><br />Any authentic analysis of… well, anything—requires a look at the original ‘thing.’ In this case, to examine the words of institution, let’s look at the original Latin prayers used in the current edition of the Roman Missal. The words of institution are: <em>Hoc est enim corpus meum quod pro vobis tradetur</em>—literally, “This is indeed body mine which for you-all will be handed over.” From this text, two words strike me as differing greatly from the English: <em>enim</em> (“indeed”) and <em>tradetur</em> (“will be handed over”). With <em>enim</em>, emphasis is obviously placed on the veracity of the Eucharistic Sacrifice; it <em>really is</em> Christ’s Body and Blood. But perhaps more interesting is the use of <em>tradetur</em> as a verb for what Christ does with his true Body and Blood.<br /><br />The Latin <em>tradere</em> is the root of <em>traditio</em>, which can be recognized in English as “tradition.” Ultimately, ‘tradition’ is when something is handed on from one person or group to another; in its original meaning it contains this aspect of linear ‘passing-on.’ However, it also contains a sense of ‘surrender.’ In terms of the Church’s prayer, both are very present. Christ is obviously handing over his Body in sacrifice on the Cross—the very day following the Last Supper—but he is also handing over his Body to the Apostles, so that they may continue ‘handing-on’ the Eucharist to the universal Church through the ages. We miss this distinction with the English, “will be given up for you,” which isolates the sacrificial reality and says nothing of the ‘traditional’ one.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20071125/capt.5cc3ed0388d24f8cab159994fb559d98.vatican_new_cardinals__xppc103.jpg?x=380&y=245&sig=sdJeSp8ROfCdnRL7YQC3vA--"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px;" src="http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20071125/capt.5cc3ed0388d24f8cab159994fb559d98.vatican_new_cardinals__xppc103.jpg?x=380&y=245&sig=sdJeSp8ROfCdnRL7YQC3vA--" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />A brief mention should also be made about the place of tradition within the life of the Church. When the Catholic Church speaks of “tradition,” the normal sense of the word entails the whole history of faith, handed down from the Apostles (i.e. the ‘deposit of faith’), which still informs the decisions and teaching of the Church today. Sometimes this is called ‘big-T’ Tradition. On the other hand, ‘little-T’ <em>traditions</em> are those things we encounter in the visible parts of the liturgy (e.g. sitting, kneeling, folding hands, candles, incense, etc.) and in other aspects of Catholic life. Although the same word—“tradition”—refers to both, it is very important to separate the two and make a clear distinction. The ultimate point to remember is this: traditions can change, but the Tradition of the Church cannot.<br /><br />When we see all of this together—from Jesus’ words prayed at the Mass to the two-fold sense of the word itself—the real meaning of “tradition” becomes even more alive, and the prominence of the Eucharist, as the means of this ‘handing over’ on both the spiritual and doctrinal level, becomes much richer!Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-21953352067623761432007-11-22T10:13:00.000-05:002007-11-23T09:19:20.346-05:00Vatican II: Sacrosanctum Concilium<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_0EiZ-ZzxBgo/R0bhWjDMXTI/AAAAAAAAAMs/EeoE4JB9yFE/s1600-h/r1188141090.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_0EiZ-ZzxBgo/R0bhWjDMXTI/AAAAAAAAAMs/EeoE4JB9yFE/s320/r1188141090.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5136040202544635186" /></a>In the 19th Century, the Liturgical Movement began to pick up steam as theologians called for a new liturgical piety, which flowed from the faithful's participating more fully in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass by uniting their hearts and minds to the prayers and actions of the liturgy. This objective was greatly aided by the use of hand missals, which had the prayers in both Latin and English so that the faithful could more easily follow along. This Liturgical Movement was officially recognized by the Church in 1947, when Pope Pius XII released the Church's first liturgical encyclical, <em>Mediator Dei</em>, "The Mediator of God." It was during these years that Pius XII set up a commission to help with the reform of the Liturgy, and this was well before Vatican II; this commission was responsible for the restoration of the Easter Vigil among other things.<br /><br />When Pope John XXIII announced the Second Vatican Council in January of 1959, Pius XII's commission was ended as the liturgy and its reform would be dealt with during the council. A new commission was eventually set up, being composed of bishops, priests, religious and scholars representing as territorially wide an area as possible. This commission was charged with drawing up a draft for the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council to discuss and work from. The Constitution on the Liturgy was what came from all this work and it was the first document promulgated by Vatican II, giving a clear signal that the Sacred Liturgy is of primary importance to the Church and in it's own words, that "[t]he liturgy is the summit toward which the activity of the Church is directed; at the same time it is the font from which all her power flows.” (<em>SC</em>, 10) <br /> <br />The first chapter discusses in a theological fashion the nature of the Sacred Liturgy, namely what is it. “From this it follows that every liturgical celebration, because it is an action of Christ the priest and of His Body which is the Church, is a sacred action surpassing all others; no other action of the Church can equal its efficacy by the same title and to the same degree.” (<em>SC</em>, 7) The Liturgy is the work of God, the action of Christ the priest who unites us to Himself in His sacrifice to the Father and thus brings about our redemption. It is in the Sacred Liturgy that we most fully encounter Jesus: crucified, died, risen from the dead and gloriously ascended into heaven. <br /> <br />The Church proceeds to speak of its desire for full, conscious and active participation in the Liturgy. This idea goes back to the beginnings of the Liturgical Movement in the late 19th century, and received official recognition from the Church in 1903 in Pius X's encyclical, <em>Tra Le Solicitudine</em>. Unfortunately many people have interpreted this in a way contrary to what the Church has said, by associating “full, active and conscious” participation with 'doing' something at Mass (Reader, Server, Usher, Extraordinary Minster of Holy Communion, etc...). However, the Council and the Popes since that time have repeatedly stated that to fully, consciously and actively participate means first and foremost to live a life in accordance with the Gospel so that when we are present at the Sacred Liturgy, we can enter into the true spirit of the liturgy by uniting our hearts with the prayers, songs, responses and gestures.<br /> <br />The Church then goes on to speak about the Holy Mass, the Divine Office (prayer-book of priests), the Liturgical Year, Sacred Art and Music. Of interest is the fact that Vatican II said, “The use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites,” (<em>SC</em>, 36) while allowing for the vernacular in the parts of the Mass that pertain to the people (readings, homily, prayers of the faithful). The Council never mentions the priest facing the people, as opposed to the 2,000 year old tradition of the priest facing the east, where Christ will come again in glory, or the removal of altars and altar rails. These three things, the use of vernacular languages, the priest facing the people and the removal of altars and altar rails, are probably the most obvious differences in post-Conciliar liturgies, even though the Council never addressed two of them, and stated that Latin is to be retained in the Latin Rite of the Church; it added: “Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them.” (<em>SC</em>, 54)<br /> <br />Obviously what the Second Vatican Council says about the Sacred Liturgy is much richer and more exhaustive than what I have written here, but it is my hope that this brief article will propel you to prayerfully read the actual text. It can be found at:<br /><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html">here</a>.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-36910677925880785522007-11-14T02:28:00.000-05:002007-11-14T02:30:24.418-05:00Summorum Pontificum & the 'Old Mass'<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.lrc.edu/rel/blosser/images/Mass.jpg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://www.lrc.edu/rel/blosser/images/Mass.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a>Liturgy captivates me. In a recent lecture at the Greg, I heard it described as the ‘<em>prima teologia</em>’—the first theology. When I thought about this, it really seemed quite true. Oftentimes ‘theology’ is consigned to the realms of universities and, particularly in my case, seminaries, as something to be taken up only by intellectuals and future-priests. Not so, I tell you…<br /><br />On the contrary, theology is something accessible and necessary to us all, if we hope to grow in our relationship with our Creator. As the ‘first theology,’ the liturgy of the Holy Mass does much to help us understand the mysteries of the Catholic faith, all in a way that draws us closer to the mystery of our salvation: the Incarnate Son of God, Jesus Christ, present in every Mass for the last 2,000 years. Although the <em>form</em> of Mass we often experience nowadays is rather new (called the <em>Novus Ordo</em> in Latin, or the ‘new order’ of the Mass), the <em>substance</em> of the Mass is still the same; i.e. Jesus is still present in the Eucharist, and the same grace is provided by God to his Church. No matter the underlying substance of the Mass, though, the outer appearance or form still attracts most of the attention; as human beings, we are drawn by visible and audible beauty to the deeper beauty of the invisible God. For this reason, the fullness of the Church’s tradition of liturgy must be appreciated, since it all serves in appealing to the different senses and different states of humanity throughout history.<br /><br />This reality was precisely the driving force behind Pope Benedict XVI’s (rather) recent document, entitled <em>Summorum Pontificum</em>. In this document, the Holy Father calls for the broader practice of the ‘old Mass,’ or the Tridentine Mass—that which was celebrated for the 500 years before Vatican II. In his writing, the pope specifically calls attention to the fact that the Tridentine Mass—which he calls the “extraordinary form” of the Mass—is still completely lawful and ought to be held in very high esteem in the eyes of the faithful. On the contrary, the <em>Novus Ordo</em>—which he denotes as the “ordinary form” of Mass—still remains the norm.<br /><br />This ‘wedding’ of the two forms, so to speak, really draws much consideration to the idea of both forms being of one and the same substance; again, Jesus is truly and fully present in each. The Holy Father’s acclaim for the ‘extraordinary form’ of the Mass also brings to light the fact that there is still much beauty and goodness to be found in this older form. Although the liturgical reforms of Vatican II provided quite an extreme shift in liturgical styles, the older form of celebrating the Mass deserves much respect. With the wider use of the ‘extraordinary form’ of Mass allowed by <em>Summorum Pontificum</em>, we can also expect have many more chances to pray at this Mass and appreciate its beauty first-hand. I would recommend anyone who has never been to a Tridentine Mass to try and go; it will be a memorable experience and—with a heart open to the Holy Spirit—hopefully a prayerful and beautiful one as well.Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-82487226849681926092007-11-13T02:20:00.000-05:002007-11-13T02:45:45.165-05:00Youth Ministry: Presenting the Face of Christ<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2005/08/21/pope_wideweb__430x278.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px;" src="http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2005/08/21/pope_wideweb__430x278.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a>I was reading another blog yesterday when an interesting topic struck me, namely ‘youth groups’ and ‘youth rallies.’ The other blogger’s take on this phenomenon—which I’m not even really sure you <em>could</em> condense into one particular and distinguishable phenomenon—was that youth programs were at the heart of corrupting authentic Catholic teaching/living. He took the approach that all the youth events he had been to were poorly conducted and only driven by an emotional undercurrent, which after climaxing in the event (i.e. singing, enthusiastic prayer, etc.) left the kids without any real and substantial relationship with God. While I do not agree with his wholesale regard of youth programs as decadent, I do believe he makes an interesting point worthy of further discussion.<br /><br />First, I’ll pose this question: What are we <em>truly</em> trying to accomplish by catechizing our youth? Perhaps better, what is the ultimate goal of any Catholic youth program? The obvious answer is, “Providing them with a deeper relationship with Jesus Christ.” To this I would ask a second question: What, then, is the role of the youth minister/catechist in all this? The not so obvious—but altogether necessary—answer to this is: “To teach kids about the truths of the Catholic faith…while at the same time diminishing in their own presence so that the presence of Christ can increase.” Alas, here we find the source of great misunderstanding.<br /><br />While trying not to be overly biased, I will say that in my experience of youth ministry, the most noticeable figure being encountered by young Catholics has <em>not</em> been Jesus Christ; on the contrary, it has been the youth ministers. (This is not meant as a diatribe against youth ministers, but rather food for some provoking thought.) The same tendency of human nature—to bolster one’s own persona in place of Christ’s—is present throughout the Church, however I think it manifests itself particularly and perhaps most dangerously in the realm of youth ministry. Where the soil is most fertile is precisely where we must do the most to ensure it is seeded with virtuous example.<br /><br />If I have not been clear enough yet regarding what I intend to say, some concrete examples will surely help. Reverting to the blog post that prompted all this, I must say that most examples given by the author concerning ‘youth rallies’ fall into this category; in other words, how often do we see youth events that are more of a concert instead of an encounter with Christ? Are youth ministers really seeking to show the Incarnate Son, or their own inflexible ideas of what Jesus <em>would</em> look like if he were with us now? How often do we forget that the <em>Logos</em>—the Word of God himself—who is totally capable of expressing himself <em>par excellence</em>, is very much with us in the Blessed Sacrament, waiting to draw us into his self-revelation? If there is a base in the claim that ‘youth rally highs’ leave kids feeling empty afterward, we need look no further than the fact that we often neglect feeding them the “true food” that never fails to satisfy.<br /><br />On a final note, it is not enough simply to put people in the presence of Jesus in the Eucharist; while this <em>is</em> efficacious and valuable in itself, if we continue to impose our own designs over and above the designs of God—for example, never allowing Christ to speak himself, but rather drowning out the silence he sometimes uses with our own formulation of relentless noise, music, etc.—how can we expect him to make a real impact? In God’s infinite and mysterious plan, he allows us to become helpers to one another in the ultimate salvation of the world. With this in mind, we ought not to underestimate the vast responsibility that faces us when showing our youth the way to Christ. “He must increase,” as St. John the Baptist testifies, “but I must decrease.” (Jn 3:30)Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9221722214933735947.post-28553515530651595042007-11-05T05:37:00.001-05:002007-11-05T05:46:15.050-05:00ICEL's New Translation of the Roman Missal<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://vitrine.library.uu.nl/wwwroot/images/hs402_179v180r.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px;" src="http://vitrine.library.uu.nl/wwwroot/images/hs402_179v180r.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />Perhaps some of you are aware of the most current task being taken on by the English-speaking bishops of the Roman Catholic Church. This undertaking, namely the retranslation of the Missal (i.e. parts of the Mass) from the original Latin into English, is finally nearing completion. Headed by the <em>International Commission on English in the Liturgy</em> (ICEL), the responsibility of translating such a massive amount of text has been a daunting one. However, after nearly five years of work, the end is in sight and hopefully, English-speaking Catholics around the world <em>should be rejoicing</em>; the new translation from the Latin will render the sacred and ancient prayers of the Mass much more faithfully to the tradition of the Church, replacing some of the ‘sloppy’ prayers we have now with more profoundly meaningful ones. Here are a few examples…<br /><br />Latin: <em>Dominus vobiscum.</em> R. <em>Et cum spiritu tuo.</em><br /><br />Actual Translation: “The Lord be with you. <em>R.</em> And with your spirit.”<br /><br />Current Translation: “The Lord be with you. <em>R.</em> And also with you.”<br /><br />Clearly, there is a divergence from the Latin text now that isn’t necessary; the prayer is intended to express a profound wish of God’s presence in the innermost recesses of the human person, not simply his presence “with you.” Another example would be the prayer just before communion, said by the faithful…<br /><br />Latin: <em>Domine, non sum dignus ut entres sub tectum meum, sed tantum dic verbo et sanabitur anima mea.</em><br /><br />Actual Translation: “O Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be made well.”<br /><br />Current Translation: “O Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed.”<br /><br />Again, the profundity—although easily overlooked at first glance—is much more clearly expressed in the Latin text; there is a sense personal relationship with Jesus that is not expressed in the current English translation. In fact, this prayer is the one uttered by the centurion in the Gospel, who was ashamed to have Christ himself enter his house to cure his servant. In its original form, it expresses something much more meaningful than simply “receiving” Jesus, but rather welcoming him into the house of our very body in the Eucharist.<br /><br />This small sample is only a glimpse at the huge project that we await with great hope. The work of ICEL has been to make note of these important distinctions of the Latin text and transfer them—as seamlessly as possible, but with strict regard to their magnitude—into English. Thus, Catholics around the world should be glad to know that the sacred prayer of the Mass will soon be dignified by even more beautiful language, which will enable us to enter into the age-old prayer of the Church more fully and completely than in the recent past.Andrew Haineshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10671184824570808892noreply@blogger.com5