For some time now, 10 months or so, I have been more or less addicted to reading Catholic blogs and news. I have read, and continue to read nearly every post from the blogging Priests of the world - at least the more traditional minded ones. They all have a their own wonderful perspective, from the amazingly knowledgable Father Zuhlsdorf to the funny and humble Father Joe. I freely admit I love them all.
Of all these, however, one stands out in my mind. That is Father Martin Fox, of Bonfire of the Vanities. Somehow Father Fox manages to strike a balance between the intellectually though provoking, and the touchingly human. His posts range from "a day in the life" journal entries, to reflections on Sacrementam Caritatis, to straightforward challenges about current affairs, like the current credit crisis. Add to that the fact that he publishes his Homilies in his blog for all to see and be blessed by! He manages to balance the intellectual side of life with the faith side of life and seems to enjoy it all.
This man, and his blog, provide such a good, interesting insight on life as a priest that I sincerely believe that his blog should be required reading for any man thinking about the priesthood - especially adult men thinking about the priesthood.
Thanks for being there, Father Fox.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Summorum Pontificum, at T Plus 32 Hours
T is for Tridentine, of course!!
More than 32 hours as I sit here typing this since the Traditional Latin Mass was liberated. Or, as it is now rightly called, the mass of Blessed John XXIII. At this time there has been no official statement for the Diocese of Charlotte. I am disappointed in this, but not disheartened. I know that the Bishop discussed the subject with the presbyterial council on Tuesday, the 11th, so I know that something is being worked on. I just wish that things would move along more quickly.
Of course, there is the possibility that Bishop Jugis made some private communication to the priests of the diocese, and we parishoners will all be informed of it through our priests. In fact, I suppose that that is probably the proper way to do it, so that the faithful who actually attend mass will get the word. A press release or a statement in the Dioscean newspaper is way too likely to get overlooked or ignored. Ideally, I think that considering the importance of this document in the history of the church, that an announcement of this ought to be made at each and every mass in the diocese this weekend and the word put out that all those who think they may be interested speak to the priest after mass, or call or email to show their interest.
Either way, I know that things tend to move at glacial speed in the church, so for a bit more I'll keep watching and waiting. I would much rather see things move slowly and deliberately so that they are made a part of the fabric of the diocese than quickly and haphazardly - and thus quickly discarded as "an experiment that failed". Please note, however, that slow and stationary are two different things.
More than 32 hours as I sit here typing this since the Traditional Latin Mass was liberated. Or, as it is now rightly called, the mass of Blessed John XXIII. At this time there has been no official statement for the Diocese of Charlotte. I am disappointed in this, but not disheartened. I know that the Bishop discussed the subject with the presbyterial council on Tuesday, the 11th, so I know that something is being worked on. I just wish that things would move along more quickly.
Of course, there is the possibility that Bishop Jugis made some private communication to the priests of the diocese, and we parishoners will all be informed of it through our priests. In fact, I suppose that that is probably the proper way to do it, so that the faithful who actually attend mass will get the word. A press release or a statement in the Dioscean newspaper is way too likely to get overlooked or ignored. Ideally, I think that considering the importance of this document in the history of the church, that an announcement of this ought to be made at each and every mass in the diocese this weekend and the word put out that all those who think they may be interested speak to the priest after mass, or call or email to show their interest.
Either way, I know that things tend to move at glacial speed in the church, so for a bit more I'll keep watching and waiting. I would much rather see things move slowly and deliberately so that they are made a part of the fabric of the diocese than quickly and haphazardly - and thus quickly discarded as "an experiment that failed". Please note, however, that slow and stationary are two different things.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Memes -- the empty calories of Blogger
A One Word Meme seen at Cannonball's...
1. Yourself: Useful
2. Your spouse: Amazing
3. Your hair: Lots
4. Your mother: Perfect
5. Your father: Demanding
6. Your favourite item: nothing
7. Your dream last night: Lost
8. Your favorite drink: Coffee
9. Your dream car: Niva
10. The room you are in: Office
11. Your ex: Sad
12. Your fear: Unemployment
13. What you want to be in 10 years: Alive
14. Who you hung out with last night: Carrie
15. What you’re not: Lazy
16. Muffins: Bagels
17. One of your wish list items: Books
18. Time: Flies
19. The last thing you did: Boring
20. What you are wearing: jeans
21. Your favorite weather: Blustery
22. Your favorite book: Detailed
23. The last thing you ate: Cereal
24. Your life: Blessing
25. Your mood: :)
26. Your best friend: Carrie
27. What you’re thinking about right now: ;)
28. Your car: Quest
29. What you are doing at the moment: procrastinating
30. Your summer: long
31. Your relationship status: married
32. What is on your TV: Thomas
33. What the weather is like: HOT
34. When was the last time you laughed: last night
Tagging anyone who hasn't done this one yet.
1. Yourself: Useful
2. Your spouse: Amazing
3. Your hair: Lots
4. Your mother: Perfect
5. Your father: Demanding
6. Your favourite item: nothing
7. Your dream last night: Lost
8. Your favorite drink: Coffee
9. Your dream car: Niva
10. The room you are in: Office
11. Your ex: Sad
12. Your fear: Unemployment
13. What you want to be in 10 years: Alive
14. Who you hung out with last night: Carrie
15. What you’re not: Lazy
16. Muffins: Bagels
17. One of your wish list items: Books
18. Time: Flies
19. The last thing you did: Boring
20. What you are wearing: jeans
21. Your favorite weather: Blustery
22. Your favorite book: Detailed
23. The last thing you ate: Cereal
24. Your life: Blessing
25. Your mood: :)
26. Your best friend: Carrie
27. What you’re thinking about right now: ;)
28. Your car: Quest
29. What you are doing at the moment: procrastinating
30. Your summer: long
31. Your relationship status: married
32. What is on your TV: Thomas
33. What the weather is like: HOT
34. When was the last time you laughed: last night
Tagging anyone who hasn't done this one yet.
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Sunday, September 2, 2007
Ad Orientem
In the grand scheme of liturgical reform things, there is an elephant in the middle of the room. It isn't the latin language, it isn't the extraordinary versus ordinary rite, it isn't chant versus congregational singing, it isn't guitar versus organ.
That elephant is the altar and which way it faces. That table altar which was so unceremoniously plopped down in the middle of the santuary some years ago. It's big, and it's in the way. Unless and until a way is found to deal with it, to get rid of it entirely, any real change to the way that mass is celebrated will be very tough indeed. The more you think about it, the more apparent it becomes that as long as a priest has "his back to Jesus" and faces the people, the more obvious it becomes that the only way to have a truly Catholic mass is to have the priest, along with everyone else, face Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior. Mass facing the people is, by unavoidable definition, a mass that is all about the people. There is simply no way around that. No Way At All.
That being the case, the question is how do we get there from here. The technical issues are easy to work out. In some older churches, all of the old hardware still is in place, save for the aforementioned plopped down table. Remove the table, and in minutes, literally, you're good to go. Zero expense. In others, a new altar will be needed, or the existing one "un-modified". Some time, some expense, though not necessarily extravagant. But even in new churches, there is no reason at all that an real "high" altar could not be put into place. Sure, it would cost a bit, but it could be done.
The real issue is getting the church and the people to understand the importance of this change. How to teach people - BOTH PRIESTS AND LAITY - who, for a generation, have been conditioned to believe that it's a meal ("happy are those who are called to his supper"), and that it's all about them, that it ISN'T about them at all. To somehow teach people to be humble in His presence. We are, atfer all being led, as sheep, by the good shepher towards heaven. We are not supposed to be leading the charge, up front like the cavalry or a marching band. I don't know the answer, but the answer is going to have to come, and soon. Because as long as that elephant is there we can't even get off go.
That elephant is the altar and which way it faces. That table altar which was so unceremoniously plopped down in the middle of the santuary some years ago. It's big, and it's in the way. Unless and until a way is found to deal with it, to get rid of it entirely, any real change to the way that mass is celebrated will be very tough indeed. The more you think about it, the more apparent it becomes that as long as a priest has "his back to Jesus" and faces the people, the more obvious it becomes that the only way to have a truly Catholic mass is to have the priest, along with everyone else, face Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior. Mass facing the people is, by unavoidable definition, a mass that is all about the people. There is simply no way around that. No Way At All.
That being the case, the question is how do we get there from here. The technical issues are easy to work out. In some older churches, all of the old hardware still is in place, save for the aforementioned plopped down table. Remove the table, and in minutes, literally, you're good to go. Zero expense. In others, a new altar will be needed, or the existing one "un-modified". Some time, some expense, though not necessarily extravagant. But even in new churches, there is no reason at all that an real "high" altar could not be put into place. Sure, it would cost a bit, but it could be done.
The real issue is getting the church and the people to understand the importance of this change. How to teach people - BOTH PRIESTS AND LAITY - who, for a generation, have been conditioned to believe that it's a meal ("happy are those who are called to his supper"), and that it's all about them, that it ISN'T about them at all. To somehow teach people to be humble in His presence. We are, atfer all being led, as sheep, by the good shepher towards heaven. We are not supposed to be leading the charge, up front like the cavalry or a marching band. I don't know the answer, but the answer is going to have to come, and soon. Because as long as that elephant is there we can't even get off go.
Saturday, September 1, 2007
An Observation
This post has only a little to do with church, and only a little more to do with liturgy. It is a reflection on life and society that has been a long time coming. I have been haranguing my long-suffering wife for years about this topic, and as the phonomenon seems to be progressing so rapidly of late, I figure that the time is right to unleash it on the world.
Some years ago, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, coined the term “Defining Decency Down”. It is used to describle the slow, creeping deterioration of our societal mores wherein behaviors that were once considered disgusting and taboo are now considered normal and healthy.
Well, I am now borrowing and adapting that term to define the similar slow, creeping changes to what is considered decent and appropriate behavior and dress. I call it “Defining Slackness Down”. Nowadays, attire (and attitude) that was once to be seen only in teenagers on vacation is now considered acceptable nearly everywhere and anytime - even considered “Sunday Best”.
There is a phrase, “the clothes make the man” , but it really should be “the clothes reflect the man”. That is, the voluntary decision one makes as to is or her attire reflect the attitude with which that person approaches everything in the world. The man who dons a suit approaches himself and everything else in the world with an attitude completely different than the one who chooses a wrinkled t-shirt, shorts and boat shoes. If an example is needed one need look no further than the term “wife beater”, used to desribe the tank-top style shirts worn consistently by the drunken male sleazeballs seen in the infamous “Cops” TV series.
The extrapolation of this is that people in such a flip-flop wearing society expect to approach everything with a sort of slack, casual attitude. It is the projection of the personal comfort “uber alles” worldview. This is the reason that everywhere, no matter where you go, people don’t seem to give a damn about anything - anything that is ecept themselves. This is the all-pervasive flippant don’t-give-a-rats-ass about you attitude that we have to fight in so many situations is the ultimate result.
In the movie “Patton”, General Patton, as played by George C. Scott, was charged with turning a losing army into a winning one. His first observation - and definition of the problem went like this.
“You want to know why this outfit got the hell kicked out of it?
Hell, a blind man could see it in a minute. They don't look like soldiers.
They don't act like soldiers. How in the hell can they be expected to fight like soldiers?”
Well, the same can be said about our society today. People don’t look like they give a damn. They don’t act like they give a damn. How can they be expected to actually give a damn.
Perhaps, after all, this post does have to do with liturcgy and the church. Look up some photos on line. Take a look at the congregation at a tradtional mass. Then take a look at the congregation at one of the “progressive” masses. Which group do YOU think looks more like they give a damn about the fact that God himself is on the altar???
Some years ago, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, coined the term “Defining Decency Down”. It is used to describle the slow, creeping deterioration of our societal mores wherein behaviors that were once considered disgusting and taboo are now considered normal and healthy.
Well, I am now borrowing and adapting that term to define the similar slow, creeping changes to what is considered decent and appropriate behavior and dress. I call it “Defining Slackness Down”. Nowadays, attire (and attitude) that was once to be seen only in teenagers on vacation is now considered acceptable nearly everywhere and anytime - even considered “Sunday Best”.
There is a phrase, “the clothes make the man” , but it really should be “the clothes reflect the man”. That is, the voluntary decision one makes as to is or her attire reflect the attitude with which that person approaches everything in the world. The man who dons a suit approaches himself and everything else in the world with an attitude completely different than the one who chooses a wrinkled t-shirt, shorts and boat shoes. If an example is needed one need look no further than the term “wife beater”, used to desribe the tank-top style shirts worn consistently by the drunken male sleazeballs seen in the infamous “Cops” TV series.
The extrapolation of this is that people in such a flip-flop wearing society expect to approach everything with a sort of slack, casual attitude. It is the projection of the personal comfort “uber alles” worldview. This is the reason that everywhere, no matter where you go, people don’t seem to give a damn about anything - anything that is ecept themselves. This is the all-pervasive flippant don’t-give-a-rats-ass about you attitude that we have to fight in so many situations is the ultimate result.
In the movie “Patton”, General Patton, as played by George C. Scott, was charged with turning a losing army into a winning one. His first observation - and definition of the problem went like this.
“You want to know why this outfit got the hell kicked out of it?
Hell, a blind man could see it in a minute. They don't look like soldiers.
They don't act like soldiers. How in the hell can they be expected to fight like soldiers?”
Well, the same can be said about our society today. People don’t look like they give a damn. They don’t act like they give a damn. How can they be expected to actually give a damn.
Perhaps, after all, this post does have to do with liturcgy and the church. Look up some photos on line. Take a look at the congregation at a tradtional mass. Then take a look at the congregation at one of the “progressive” masses. Which group do YOU think looks more like they give a damn about the fact that God himself is on the altar???
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
