Four years ago, the Democratic Party seemed to have a nominee for the Presidency. He was intelligent, attractive, well-spoken, and experienced. He was the hand's down favorite of the core of the party. He was ahead in the polls going into the Iowa Caucuses. He had basically invented the idea of internet fund raising. And in retrospect he was the by-a-long-shot best candidate the party had to offer. Might even have made a damn good president. His name was Howard Dean.
Unfortunately, following a somewhat disappointing Iowa finish, he gave a concession speech which demolished his chances of winning. That because it ended with the famous red-faced manic scream - thereafter known as "The Dean Scream".
The reason it killed his campaign was simple (remember you saw it here first). As usual, the average man or woman picked up on it, while the elites in the press and politics were clueless. That thing known as common sense still exists out there. Just because the "political insiders" have scornfully sworn it off doesn't mean it has ceased to exist. Most common folk are immediately aware of the Emperor's lack of clothes.
Somewhere in the back of the minds of those common folk, they remember the football. They are aware, consciously or not, that the President of the United States is the man they are trusting to have his finger on "the button". And after seen the "Dean Scream" these common folk were not about to put anyone who appeared that unstable in charge of that awesome (and awful) responsibility.
Fast forward to 2008, and we find that Hillary Clinton, the poser of posers, has decided to play on those same instincts to try and derail the Obama Express. She has been running an ad (now famous) depicting her answering the phone in the White House at 3AM... The ad appears to be working to a limited extent, based on polling data anyway. We shall see the final results tonight! BUT the ad itself opens up a can of worms come November, where John McCain's astonishing experience make either Hillary or Obama look absolutely and hopelessly unprepared by comparison. He won't need to make a big deal out of it, or brag about it. His very existence carries with it the knowledge of his background and amazing story. Not just of his POW years, but since then both in the Navy and the senate. Yes, he's older, but old or not he is one tough son of a bitch. As the months wear on and November gets closer, people will start to think - really think - about that 3AM phone call, and I bet they'll like the thought of John McCain answering that phone a lot more than Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Sunday, March 2, 2008
What the Church can (and should) Learn from Mickey D's
Prior to the 1950's, when traveling across these United States, there was no way of predicting the quality and level of service for food or accomodations. At the same time, innovators like Kemmons Wilson and Ray Croc founders of Holiday Inn and McDonalds respectively, built huge empires based on the simple principle of consistency of service and product.
The concept was simple. People had really just begun traveling by automobile all over the country around that time, and Croc, for example knew that those people wanted to know that no matter where they went, when the walked in to a McDonald's, the burger and fries would be exactly the same as the ones they would get at any other McDonalds, any where. Similarly, Wilson knew that people looking for a place to lay their heads in a strange town wanted to know that the facility would be just the same any where.
These men were right. They became wildly successful as a result. And their methodology has been copied successfully over and over. That is because the fundamental principle is dead-on right. People want, or better yet NEED, to know that they can count on things.
Once upon a time, the Catholic Church was that way, too. One could walk into a Sunday Mass anywhere in the world, and know with very reasonable certainty what they would see and experience. Whether it was Seoul Korea or Seattle Washington, Warsaw, Poland or Wausau, Wisconsin - the mass was the same. This fact provided comfort to millions over the years. The Mass was The Mass.
Now, however, in our "enlightened" post Vatican II world, the mass in not only never, ever the same, it is often doubtful if it qualifies as a Mass at all! Priests feel "empowered" to change the words, the rubrics, even the theology according to their own personal whims. The result is that even in a modest sized city, one can find masses ranging from wide open Liberal Kumbaya-fests to pretty orthodox, by the book Novus Ordo celebrations. Here in my home City of Greensboro, NC we range from pretty much by-the-book Masses (two parishes), pretty good but some clapping and hand-holding (one parish), to no kneeling wide open Jesus Loves Me Can't We all Get Along Roman Protestantism.
Even architecturally, the Church is a mish-mash at best. Again in my city we have two older churches, one with the still awesome High Altar, the other much plainer and smaller, but still with the altar rail (but sadly the High Altar is history). Then there is one that is newer, but still looks like a church (albeit a Southern Baptist one). Then there is the other which is "in the round" with the most awful 1970's "mod" design. Looks like a standing rib roast on the outside, FWIW.
I think that it is no accident that the liturgical practices at the churches more or less mimic their appearance. But that is a subject for another post.
The whole thing is so so sad. A Catholic should be able to go to mass anywhere and know what to expect and how to behave. A Church should feel like a church, the Priest should act like a priest, and the doctrine should be strictly by-the-book doctrine. If you are Catholic, be Catholic. If you don't want to be, don't be, but don't expect all of the others who DO want to be to change because you like to feel like they need to be inclusive or sensitive or "in touch" or "speak to your needs" or what the hell ever. That's why there are protestant churches. Shop around, find one that "fits" you. No hard feelings, they're good people too.
The point is, that if you don't stand up and provide a stable, proven product, that offers your "customers" something that they can believe in, then you are doomed to extinction. For this reason, without a doubt, Rome needs to issue forthwith a strict set of rubrics and standards to be used world wide, without exception, if a Bishop or Priest doesn't like that, they MUST BE shown the door. A ship can have may may engineers, boilermen, cooks, etc. but it can only have ONE navigator if its to ever get anywhere. And this particular ship is hauling a lot of souls to heaven. It would be the ultimate shame if they were to wind up instead at a ... less desirable destination.
The concept was simple. People had really just begun traveling by automobile all over the country around that time, and Croc, for example knew that those people wanted to know that no matter where they went, when the walked in to a McDonald's, the burger and fries would be exactly the same as the ones they would get at any other McDonalds, any where. Similarly, Wilson knew that people looking for a place to lay their heads in a strange town wanted to know that the facility would be just the same any where.
These men were right. They became wildly successful as a result. And their methodology has been copied successfully over and over. That is because the fundamental principle is dead-on right. People want, or better yet NEED, to know that they can count on things.
Once upon a time, the Catholic Church was that way, too. One could walk into a Sunday Mass anywhere in the world, and know with very reasonable certainty what they would see and experience. Whether it was Seoul Korea or Seattle Washington, Warsaw, Poland or Wausau, Wisconsin - the mass was the same. This fact provided comfort to millions over the years. The Mass was The Mass.
Now, however, in our "enlightened" post Vatican II world, the mass in not only never, ever the same, it is often doubtful if it qualifies as a Mass at all! Priests feel "empowered" to change the words, the rubrics, even the theology according to their own personal whims. The result is that even in a modest sized city, one can find masses ranging from wide open Liberal Kumbaya-fests to pretty orthodox, by the book Novus Ordo celebrations. Here in my home City of Greensboro, NC we range from pretty much by-the-book Masses (two parishes), pretty good but some clapping and hand-holding (one parish), to no kneeling wide open Jesus Loves Me Can't We all Get Along Roman Protestantism.
Even architecturally, the Church is a mish-mash at best. Again in my city we have two older churches, one with the still awesome High Altar, the other much plainer and smaller, but still with the altar rail (but sadly the High Altar is history). Then there is one that is newer, but still looks like a church (albeit a Southern Baptist one). Then there is the other which is "in the round" with the most awful 1970's "mod" design. Looks like a standing rib roast on the outside, FWIW.
I think that it is no accident that the liturgical practices at the churches more or less mimic their appearance. But that is a subject for another post.
The whole thing is so so sad. A Catholic should be able to go to mass anywhere and know what to expect and how to behave. A Church should feel like a church, the Priest should act like a priest, and the doctrine should be strictly by-the-book doctrine. If you are Catholic, be Catholic. If you don't want to be, don't be, but don't expect all of the others who DO want to be to change because you like to feel like they need to be inclusive or sensitive or "in touch" or "speak to your needs" or what the hell ever. That's why there are protestant churches. Shop around, find one that "fits" you. No hard feelings, they're good people too.
The point is, that if you don't stand up and provide a stable, proven product, that offers your "customers" something that they can believe in, then you are doomed to extinction. For this reason, without a doubt, Rome needs to issue forthwith a strict set of rubrics and standards to be used world wide, without exception, if a Bishop or Priest doesn't like that, they MUST BE shown the door. A ship can have may may engineers, boilermen, cooks, etc. but it can only have ONE navigator if its to ever get anywhere. And this particular ship is hauling a lot of souls to heaven. It would be the ultimate shame if they were to wind up instead at a ... less desirable destination.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Catholic Schools Week
My late mother had a saying, "Fools and children tell the truth".
Several weeks ago was "Catholic Schools Week" and one of the things the school which my daughter attends did was make a bunch of little paper crosses, on which each student was to write something about why they like their school. Well, my lovely and lovable kindergartener, who definitely falls into mom's latter category had this to say...
I LIKE MY SCHOOL BECAUSE EVERYONE IS VERY NICE AND IT COSTS A LOT OF MONEY.
The crosses were all then taped to the BIG front window of the school office...
My wife was devastated. I am laughing to this day.
The moral of the story here is: be careful when you discuss the family finances around your 5-year old!
Several weeks ago was "Catholic Schools Week" and one of the things the school which my daughter attends did was make a bunch of little paper crosses, on which each student was to write something about why they like their school. Well, my lovely and lovable kindergartener, who definitely falls into mom's latter category had this to say...
I LIKE MY SCHOOL BECAUSE EVERYONE IS VERY NICE AND IT COSTS A LOT OF MONEY.
The crosses were all then taped to the BIG front window of the school office...
My wife was devastated. I am laughing to this day.
The moral of the story here is: be careful when you discuss the family finances around your 5-year old!
Monday, February 11, 2008
Lenten Meme....
From the Carolina Cannonball
1. What’s been your best Lenten-effort-idea ever?
Giving up meat and sweets simultaneously. Required more discipline than I knew I had.
2. And your worst?
Swearing off swearing... yeah, that lasted 5 seconds. damn.
3. What Lenten advice would you share?
Don't just "give something up" - give it up and remember WHY you are doing it. This is not just a diet or a "resolution".
4. And what you will feature this year?
This year I am foregoing snacks and sweets of all kinds - and it ain't that easy for a junk food junkie like me.
tagging, every passerby!!!!
1. What’s been your best Lenten-effort-idea ever?
Giving up meat and sweets simultaneously. Required more discipline than I knew I had.
2. And your worst?
Swearing off swearing... yeah, that lasted 5 seconds. damn.
3. What Lenten advice would you share?
Don't just "give something up" - give it up and remember WHY you are doing it. This is not just a diet or a "resolution".
4. And what you will feature this year?
This year I am foregoing snacks and sweets of all kinds - and it ain't that easy for a junk food junkie like me.
tagging, every passerby!!!!
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Leadership
For some time I have been thinking about leadership. What does the term even mean? And how does it fit into our world today? I am not literally talking about the meaning of the word itself. Wikipedia describes it as "The ability to affect human behavior so as to accomplish a mission designated by the leader." I think that pretty much nails it. What I am talking about are the real world manifestations of leadership. Examples abound, both positive and negative.
On one side, let's look at President Bush. Yes, he's a leader, by default the President of the United States is a leader. But what to do with it? How to use it to your, and most especially (in this case) country's best interests? After 9-11-01, the country was more or less unified - practically begging for leadership. President Bush blew it. Yes, he did the right thing in deposing the Taliban, and Saddam, but screwed up practically everything else. First, he essentially told the country "Nothing to see here... Move along now to the mall and shop 'til you drop." In other words - EXACTLY the wrong thing. People being led want - no need - to feel as it they are a part of the struggle. To be told that you can and should pretend that life is status quo ante is not only absurd, it is counterproductive. "Freedom isn't free" but you can pretend it is!!! If people are sacrificing in some noticable way, they are more inclined to "buy in" to your idea and thus keep it on course even when the storms come. Then, to follow up on that blunder, he made matters infinitely worse by adopting a policy of never ever explaining anything about what was going on in the world and why he was making the decisions that he was. I call this the Loves Me Like a Rock based on the words of the song by the O'Jays:
And if I was president
The men of congress call my name
I'd say who do
Who do you think you're foolin
I got the presidential seal
I'm up on the presidential podium
My momma loves me
She loves me
She gets down on her knees and hugs me
Like she loves me like a rock
In other words - I'm the decider and I'm right, now shut the hell up.
Now... rewind to 1961. The United States is in the deepest, darkest hours of the cold war. Another superpower is threatening to eclipse the freedoms that we as americans hold dear. President Kennedy knows that if the Soviets can make America look weak, that their converts in the world will quickly multiply. He also knows that the military (i.e. nuclear) option is madness but the US must look like the "king of the hill" in the eyes of the world. And he know that the current technological rage of space exploration is the best - maybe the only way to capture the world's attention that way. Or as his Vice President put it "Mister President, America cannot afford to be in Second Place".
So the young president gives a speech to congress. I highly recommend that you read the whole text, but I will provide out takes, with my emphasis here:
"These are extraordinary times. And we face an extraordinary challenge. Our strength as well as our convictions have imposed upon this nation the role of leader in freedom's cause... No role in history could be more difficult or more important. We stand for freedom... Read: This is serious stuff
I therefore ask the Congress, above and beyond the increases I have earlier requested for space activities, to provide the funds which are needed to meet the following national goals:
First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish... Read: This is going to be a long and tough road.
Let it be clear--and this is a judgment which the Members of the Congress must finally make--let it be clear that I am asking the Congress and the country to accept a firm commitment to a new course of action, a course which will last for many years and carry very heavy costs: 531 million dollars in fiscal '62--an estimated seven to nine billion dollars additional over the next five years. If we are to go only half way, or reduce our sights in the face of difficulty, in my judgment it would be better not to go at all. Read: Don't start what you are unwilling to finish.
Now this is a choice which this country must make, and I am confident that under the leadership of the Space Committees of the Congress, and the Appropriating Committees, that you will consider the matter carefully.
It is a most important decision that we make as a nation. But all of you have lived through the last four years and have seen the significance of space and the adventures in space, and no one can predict with certainty what the ultimate meaning will be of mastery of space.
I believe we should go to the moon. But I think every citizen of this country as well as the Members of the Congress should consider the matter carefully in making their judgment, to which we have given attention over many weeks and months, because it is a heavy burden, and there is no sense in agreeing or desiring that the United States take an affirmative position in outer space, unless we are prepared to do the work and bear the burdens to make it successful. If we are not, we should decide today and this year.
Read: I repeat, this is going to be wildly difficult and expensive!!!
Notice the difference??? President Kennedy got the NATION working towards a goal, and investing in that goal. And as a result, not only did we not forget it after his death, we MADE IT HAPPEN, because we refused to do otherwise.
On one side, let's look at President Bush. Yes, he's a leader, by default the President of the United States is a leader. But what to do with it? How to use it to your, and most especially (in this case) country's best interests? After 9-11-01, the country was more or less unified - practically begging for leadership. President Bush blew it. Yes, he did the right thing in deposing the Taliban, and Saddam, but screwed up practically everything else. First, he essentially told the country "Nothing to see here... Move along now to the mall and shop 'til you drop." In other words - EXACTLY the wrong thing. People being led want - no need - to feel as it they are a part of the struggle. To be told that you can and should pretend that life is status quo ante is not only absurd, it is counterproductive. "Freedom isn't free" but you can pretend it is!!! If people are sacrificing in some noticable way, they are more inclined to "buy in" to your idea and thus keep it on course even when the storms come. Then, to follow up on that blunder, he made matters infinitely worse by adopting a policy of never ever explaining anything about what was going on in the world and why he was making the decisions that he was. I call this the Loves Me Like a Rock based on the words of the song by the O'Jays:
And if I was president
The men of congress call my name
I'd say who do
Who do you think you're foolin
I got the presidential seal
I'm up on the presidential podium
My momma loves me
She loves me
She gets down on her knees and hugs me
Like she loves me like a rock
In other words - I'm the decider and I'm right, now shut the hell up.
Now... rewind to 1961. The United States is in the deepest, darkest hours of the cold war. Another superpower is threatening to eclipse the freedoms that we as americans hold dear. President Kennedy knows that if the Soviets can make America look weak, that their converts in the world will quickly multiply. He also knows that the military (i.e. nuclear) option is madness but the US must look like the "king of the hill" in the eyes of the world. And he know that the current technological rage of space exploration is the best - maybe the only way to capture the world's attention that way. Or as his Vice President put it "Mister President, America cannot afford to be in Second Place".
So the young president gives a speech to congress. I highly recommend that you read the whole text, but I will provide out takes, with my emphasis here:
"These are extraordinary times. And we face an extraordinary challenge. Our strength as well as our convictions have imposed upon this nation the role of leader in freedom's cause... No role in history could be more difficult or more important. We stand for freedom... Read: This is serious stuff
I therefore ask the Congress, above and beyond the increases I have earlier requested for space activities, to provide the funds which are needed to meet the following national goals:
First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish... Read: This is going to be a long and tough road.
Let it be clear--and this is a judgment which the Members of the Congress must finally make--let it be clear that I am asking the Congress and the country to accept a firm commitment to a new course of action, a course which will last for many years and carry very heavy costs: 531 million dollars in fiscal '62--an estimated seven to nine billion dollars additional over the next five years. If we are to go only half way, or reduce our sights in the face of difficulty, in my judgment it would be better not to go at all. Read: Don't start what you are unwilling to finish.
Now this is a choice which this country must make, and I am confident that under the leadership of the Space Committees of the Congress, and the Appropriating Committees, that you will consider the matter carefully.
It is a most important decision that we make as a nation. But all of you have lived through the last four years and have seen the significance of space and the adventures in space, and no one can predict with certainty what the ultimate meaning will be of mastery of space.
I believe we should go to the moon. But I think every citizen of this country as well as the Members of the Congress should consider the matter carefully in making their judgment, to which we have given attention over many weeks and months, because it is a heavy burden, and there is no sense in agreeing or desiring that the United States take an affirmative position in outer space, unless we are prepared to do the work and bear the burdens to make it successful. If we are not, we should decide today and this year.
Read: I repeat, this is going to be wildly difficult and expensive!!!
Notice the difference??? President Kennedy got the NATION working towards a goal, and investing in that goal. And as a result, not only did we not forget it after his death, we MADE IT HAPPEN, because we refused to do otherwise.
Sunday, January 20, 2008
South Carolina Primary
I know that this is not a political blog, and I am not intending to make it such, but the results of Saturday's primary in South Carolina are definitely worthy of comment in any case, so comment I will.
First, I will state that I am now and have been since day one of this campaign a Mike Huckabee supporter. I am not fanatical about it, and I understand and admit that there are certain positions that he has taken, both now and in the past, that I am not exactly in agreement with. In other words, he is not "perfect" in my eyes. However, unlike some other (influential) conservatives, I am not ignorant enough to let that get in the way of my appreciating that he is the best, most well-rounded, most electable candidate in the field - in either party.
It is that ignorance, that myopic intrasigence, in deadly combination with selective memory and misinterpretation, that has made this fight for the nomination so absurd, and so frustrating. There are many in the media (most notably Rush Limbaugh), in concert with many "conservatives" who have made it their mission in life to aggressively try to discredit and disparage any candidate who does not fit into their contorted concept of what a conservative is. The logic goes like this: Ronald Reagan snd his conservatism made this party and this country great - that is the "Reagan Legacy". ANY candidate who tries to claim the leadership of this party and is not 100% in the "Reagan mold" is not a "true conservative" and will lead therefore lead the party to ruin. Huckabee (and Romney and McCain for that matter) are not "true conservatives" and therefore will bring the party to ruin. Therefore they must be destroyed at all costs. At ALL costs. These people would much rather see another eight years of Clintonia than see Huckabee in the White House.
The main problem in that lies in the premise. The iconic image of Ronald Reagan is a dominating force in conservative politics. In a sense that is a good thing. It helps to remember how yougot where you are. The problem is the Reagan the remember is one who never existed. Yes, he was for smaller government, less taxes, and a dtrong defense - but so are Huckabee and McCain. BUT Reagan was also for a government that works. A government that is on the side of the people - not business interests. The deregulation that was driven through by Reagan was not intended to enrich corporate america, it was meant to (and DID bya and large) enrich the average Joe - The Working Man.
The Working Man has become the forgotten man NOT because of Reagan and his efforts, but because the results of those efforts were co-opted by the spawn of the old Country Club Republicans. The old stuffy pipe-smoking Republican has been replaced by the BlackBerry wielding MBA republican. Fully convinced of his manifest destiny to control and define conservatism - and AMericanism for that matter. The rest of us in the party are looked upon as useful idiots who didn't go to the right schools and dont' "network" with the right people.
How have so many seemingly intelligent people forgotten the one phrase that brought Ronald Reagan to power in 1980:
"Just ask yourself: Are you better off than you were four years ago?"
First, I will state that I am now and have been since day one of this campaign a Mike Huckabee supporter. I am not fanatical about it, and I understand and admit that there are certain positions that he has taken, both now and in the past, that I am not exactly in agreement with. In other words, he is not "perfect" in my eyes. However, unlike some other (influential) conservatives, I am not ignorant enough to let that get in the way of my appreciating that he is the best, most well-rounded, most electable candidate in the field - in either party.
It is that ignorance, that myopic intrasigence, in deadly combination with selective memory and misinterpretation, that has made this fight for the nomination so absurd, and so frustrating. There are many in the media (most notably Rush Limbaugh), in concert with many "conservatives" who have made it their mission in life to aggressively try to discredit and disparage any candidate who does not fit into their contorted concept of what a conservative is. The logic goes like this: Ronald Reagan snd his conservatism made this party and this country great - that is the "Reagan Legacy". ANY candidate who tries to claim the leadership of this party and is not 100% in the "Reagan mold" is not a "true conservative" and will lead therefore lead the party to ruin. Huckabee (and Romney and McCain for that matter) are not "true conservatives" and therefore will bring the party to ruin. Therefore they must be destroyed at all costs. At ALL costs. These people would much rather see another eight years of Clintonia than see Huckabee in the White House.
The main problem in that lies in the premise. The iconic image of Ronald Reagan is a dominating force in conservative politics. In a sense that is a good thing. It helps to remember how yougot where you are. The problem is the Reagan the remember is one who never existed. Yes, he was for smaller government, less taxes, and a dtrong defense - but so are Huckabee and McCain. BUT Reagan was also for a government that works. A government that is on the side of the people - not business interests. The deregulation that was driven through by Reagan was not intended to enrich corporate america, it was meant to (and DID bya and large) enrich the average Joe - The Working Man.
The Working Man has become the forgotten man NOT because of Reagan and his efforts, but because the results of those efforts were co-opted by the spawn of the old Country Club Republicans. The old stuffy pipe-smoking Republican has been replaced by the BlackBerry wielding MBA republican. Fully convinced of his manifest destiny to control and define conservatism - and AMericanism for that matter. The rest of us in the party are looked upon as useful idiots who didn't go to the right schools and dont' "network" with the right people.
How have so many seemingly intelligent people forgotten the one phrase that brought Ronald Reagan to power in 1980:
"Just ask yourself: Are you better off than you were four years ago?"
Monday, January 14, 2008
GREENSBORO TLM
Yesterday, January 13, 2008, marked a great day for tradition loving catholics in North Carolina. A 1962 Rite traditional High Mass was celebrated at Our Lady of Grace Church. The celebrant was Father Ferguson, for the FSSP, and in attendance (observing from the loft, I think) there the priests of the Diocese of Charlotte who are learing to celebrate the Mass of Blessed John XXIII. The church was filled to capacity, both by traditional-loving catholics from around the state, and by many many local catholics who were interested in the mass. I was there, along with my dear wife and mother-in-law. And it was awesome. Got a bit hot in there at one point and I shed my jacket, but wow. The only downside was that, in my excitement, I left my glasses at home, rendering my new Missal useless (at least to me).
Our local paper, the News & Record, has a large article and a very well done multimedia presentation. Here is some of the article:
Latin Mass fills pews By Nancy McLaughlin
Staff Writer
Monday, Jan. 14, 2008 3:00 am
The pews quickly filled at Our Lady of Grace on Sunday for this special worship service, with many women wearing head scarves for the first time in decades and the priest speaking in Latin, an ancient language not spoken routinely in Catholic congregations since the 1960s.
"It's as if your grandmother celebrated Christmas a certain way and your mother never did it the same way, and this is grandmother's way," said parishioner Janet Morrison, who was wearing a scarf for the first time since 1963, when she was a teenager. "It's bringing something back from my childhood, and it's wonderful."
Latin was the language of the church for centuries, before the Second Vatican Council of leadership suggested the liturgy of the Catholic Church be reformed to increase the participation of the people. Those reforms included a reduction of the number of blessings and prayers that were spoken, the loss of age-old customs and that Mass be celebrated in the common language of the people. More recently, Pope Benedict XVI loosened restrictions of the Latin rite, referred to as the Tridentine Mass, allowing parishes to celebrate in that way if it is the desire of the faithful. Some churches have slowly added Latin Mass as an option. Most remain in English and Spanish.
Fourteen priests from the Diocese of Charlotte, which includes Greensboro, recently studied the rituals of the prayers in Latin with the Rev. Robert Ferguson, who led the Mass at Our Lady of Grace — partly as a demonstration model for them.
Those in the pews came from across the state.
"Some of these people have been waiting for a long time," said Sister Sheila Richardson of Sacred Heart Mission Church in Wadesboro. She traveled the hour and a half drive with eight others. Some of those who showed up at Our Lady of Grace were too young to have witnessed a Mass in Latin, but said they were there to connect with the roots of their faith.
"My father sent me a videotape of a Latin Mass and it was so beautiful," said 32-year-old Jennifer Carter of Huntersville, who only five years ago joined the religion of her father. "The old prayers are so beautiful, so rich."...
To help those in the pews, ushers passed out programs containing the Latin and English versions of the Mass — even instruction on when to stand and when to kneel...
Some things were more familiar for Banks and the others, ranging from contemplative worship to the use of incense as a symbol of prayers wafting to God...
The sacred songs were in Latin but there also was Gregorian chanting.
In the more modern Mass, for example, the altar is placed in a central location in the sanctuary, allowing the priest to face the congregation during Eucharistic prayers. In the Latin Mass, the altar was placed against the wall at the back of the sanctuary, which meant the priest had to have his back to the congregation. [Actually, the original, marble high altar was used. the wooden table altar was nowhere to be seen]
Like those around her, Tina Witt of Charlotte knelt at the altar rail, which symbolized the gate to Heaven, and received communion on the tongue from the priest. Communion is given in many ways using the more modern Mass, including "by hand" to each parishioner.
"This is something we never should have gotten away from," Witt said of the customs surrounding the service.
The complete original article can be seen here.
And if you follow the link, there is a highly impressive multimedia presentation as well.
Deo Gratias!
Our local paper, the News & Record, has a large article and a very well done multimedia presentation. Here is some of the article:
Latin Mass fills pews By Nancy McLaughlin
Staff Writer
Monday, Jan. 14, 2008 3:00 am
The pews quickly filled at Our Lady of Grace on Sunday for this special worship service, with many women wearing head scarves for the first time in decades and the priest speaking in Latin, an ancient language not spoken routinely in Catholic congregations since the 1960s.
"It's as if your grandmother celebrated Christmas a certain way and your mother never did it the same way, and this is grandmother's way," said parishioner Janet Morrison, who was wearing a scarf for the first time since 1963, when she was a teenager. "It's bringing something back from my childhood, and it's wonderful."
Latin was the language of the church for centuries, before the Second Vatican Council of leadership suggested the liturgy of the Catholic Church be reformed to increase the participation of the people. Those reforms included a reduction of the number of blessings and prayers that were spoken, the loss of age-old customs and that Mass be celebrated in the common language of the people. More recently, Pope Benedict XVI loosened restrictions of the Latin rite, referred to as the Tridentine Mass, allowing parishes to celebrate in that way if it is the desire of the faithful. Some churches have slowly added Latin Mass as an option. Most remain in English and Spanish.
Fourteen priests from the Diocese of Charlotte, which includes Greensboro, recently studied the rituals of the prayers in Latin with the Rev. Robert Ferguson, who led the Mass at Our Lady of Grace — partly as a demonstration model for them.
Those in the pews came from across the state.
"Some of these people have been waiting for a long time," said Sister Sheila Richardson of Sacred Heart Mission Church in Wadesboro. She traveled the hour and a half drive with eight others. Some of those who showed up at Our Lady of Grace were too young to have witnessed a Mass in Latin, but said they were there to connect with the roots of their faith.
"My father sent me a videotape of a Latin Mass and it was so beautiful," said 32-year-old Jennifer Carter of Huntersville, who only five years ago joined the religion of her father. "The old prayers are so beautiful, so rich."...
To help those in the pews, ushers passed out programs containing the Latin and English versions of the Mass — even instruction on when to stand and when to kneel...
Some things were more familiar for Banks and the others, ranging from contemplative worship to the use of incense as a symbol of prayers wafting to God...
The sacred songs were in Latin but there also was Gregorian chanting.
In the more modern Mass, for example, the altar is placed in a central location in the sanctuary, allowing the priest to face the congregation during Eucharistic prayers. In the Latin Mass, the altar was placed against the wall at the back of the sanctuary, which meant the priest had to have his back to the congregation. [Actually, the original, marble high altar was used. the wooden table altar was nowhere to be seen]
Like those around her, Tina Witt of Charlotte knelt at the altar rail, which symbolized the gate to Heaven, and received communion on the tongue from the priest. Communion is given in many ways using the more modern Mass, including "by hand" to each parishioner.
"This is something we never should have gotten away from," Witt said of the customs surrounding the service.
The complete original article can be seen here.
And if you follow the link, there is a highly impressive multimedia presentation as well.
Deo Gratias!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
