Church issues bioethical document.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has issued a bioethical document addressing many of the current problems and trends in our present times.

It addresses things like:

- Embryonic and adult stem cell research

- Contraception, especially oral contraceptives

- Receiving vaccines which were derived from aborted fetuses

- In vitro fertilization and test tube babies.

- Frozen embryos.

- Gene therapy

- Human cloning

The document can be found here:

Dignitatis Personae (The Dignity of a Person) at the USCCB website. (document in pdf format)

A VERY important document for our times. President-elect Obama needs to read this if he's as open minded as he says he is.

It's also Providential to find the document on the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, who is the patroness of the unborn and who helped convert a nation which practiced human sacrifice. Maybe this document can be a help in converting our own nation of the Untied States from it's human sacrifice of abortion and euthanasia.

Our Lady of Guadlupe, ora pro nobis!


RS

Is Advent penitential or not?

It appears that a few bloggers have already published thier Advent rants [cough]Fr. Z, Fr. Erik[cough] [LOL], so I am going to re-re-publish this post which appeared last year around this time (I guess this will become a tradition now).

Oh, and I'd like to point out that "Advent Penitential Services" are really unnecessary. I think it'd really be better if the pastor or priests at a parish just make confessions readily available REGULARLY (ie more than 1 hour a week) THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE YEAR, instead of only having an annual or semi-annual "penitential service." These things are not a part of our Catholic tradition. If you offer confession, they will come. Our priest, in a small parish in a small town, hears confessions at least an hour a day at least 6 days a week. And people actually come. And as for penitential services, general absolution is not allowed in these things, so if your priest or pastor does it, he is committing an abuse. Anyway, enough on that rant ... on with the traditional post:

A lot of people have been searching for this, so I am going to re-publish this post.

I'm also updating the post because of a little detail noticed over at The New Liturgical Movement. Saturday evening, at the 1st Vespers of Advent [last year], the pope wore the Penitential Papal Formale:


Looks like that hermeneutic of continuity is showing it's hand again.

You can read NLM's report about it here:

The penitential Papal Formale (it's back)

The following was originally posted 12/4/06.

Wow, ask a simple question ... and what a confusing journey on which you find yourself.

A friend and I wrote to Jimmy Akin asking whether he knew if Advent was penitential. He attempted to answer our emails in his post the next day. To summarize his post, he concludes,

"Bam. So Advent is not a penitential season, at least in the universal law of the Latin Church. Ya coulda fooled me!"

Now, on a technical level I understand his conclusion, and part of it is that the questions that my friend and I asked were different. Basically, my friend asked "legally what are we as the faithful bound to do during Advent?" as in comparison to Lent when we are legally (in Canon law) bound to fast on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday and abstain from meat on the Fridays of Lent.

So, I thought Jimmy wrong until I re-read and saw that his conclusion is based on the above question and that he did say, "at least in the universal law of the Latin Church." [emphasis mine]

However, my question was a bit more general and focused on the nature of Advent. "Is Advent penitential?" What raised this question for me was from my liturgical studies. In his book "Ceremonies of the Liturgical Year According to the Modern Roman Rite," Msgr. Peter Elliot says right off the bat in his section on Advent, "The season with which the liturgical year begins is not penitential." (p.34, #42).

This statement suprises me. I was raised with the understanding that Advent was sort of like a less rigid Lent. It wasn't as somber or rigorous as Lent, but nonetheless it had a penitential spirit about it. I mean, first off, there seem to be signs in the liturgy. Just as in Lent, the color of the vestments are violet, there is a week where rose may be worn (3rd Sunday of Advent and 4th Sunday of Lent), "the use of the organ and other musical instruments and the decorating of the altar with flowers should be done in a moderate manner, as is consonant with the character of the season, without anticipating the full joy of Christmas (Ceremonial of Bishops, #236), and there is no Gloria on Sundays of Advent. Even in regards to the celebration of Matrimony, "When a marriage is celebrated during Advent or Lent or other days of penance, the parish priest should advise the couple to take into consideration the special nature of these liturgical seasons." That makes it sound like Advent, Lent, and penitential days are pretty much in the same category.

Of course some will say that the violet used in advent is of a different hue, as even our diocesan ordo says "In order to distinguish between this season [of Advent] and the specifically penitential season of Lent, the bluer hues of violet may be used during Advent. Light blue vestments, however, are not authorized for use in the United States." So that statement seems to say that Advent is not specifically penitential as Lent is. However, it should also be noted that this distinction of hues is not a necessity either. The Generial Instruction on the Roman Missals just says that "violet" is to be used for Advent and Lent.

So, off the shelves come the liturgical books. At this point, I am wondering what is the nature of Advent? When did it start? How did it develop? Such a simple question should not be that hard to answer. So, in remembering that one of the reasons why I started this blog was that I was asked to share my liturgical knowledge, I dove into my personal library seeking out info on Advent.

The new "Compendium: Catechism of the Catholic Church" really only says about Advent,

"102. How did God prepare the world for the mystery of Christ? God prepared for the coming of his Son over the centuries. He awakened in the hearts of the pagans a dim expectation of this coming and he prepared for it specifically through the Old Testament, culminating with John the Baptist who was the last and greatest of the prophets. We relive this long period of expectancy in the annual liturgical celebration of the season of Advent."

"
The Catechism of the Catholic Church" says:

"#524. When the Church celebrates the liturgy of Advent each year, she makes presen this ancient expectancy of the Messiah, for by sharing in the long preparation for the Savior's first coming, the faithful renew their ardent desire for his second coming. By celebrating the precursor's birth and martyrdom, the Church unites herself to his desire: "He must increase, but I must decrease."

Hmmm, not very helpful yet. The season of Advent really isn't dealt with on a technical level, so I have few books that deal with the subject.

"The General Norms for the Liturgical Year and the Calendar" say this:

"V. Advent
39. Advent has a twofold character: as a season to prepare for Christmas when Christ's first coming to us is remembered; as a season when that remembrance directs the mind and heart to await Christ's Second Coming at the end of time. Advent is thus a period for devout and joyful expectation.
40. Advent begins with evening prayer I of the Sunday falling on or closest to 30 November and ends before evening prayer I of Christmas.
41. The Sundays of this season are named the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Sundays of Advent.
The weekdays from 17 December to 24 December inclusive serve to prepare more directly for the Lord's birth."

I think a key point here is that the coming of Christ is to be emphasized. Not only in celebrating His first coming when he was conceived and 9 months later born, but also His second coming, which will be the final judgement.

In "The Mass: A Study of the Roman Liturgy" Fr. Adrian Fortesque says this about Advent when looking the how the Gloria developed in the Mass:

"Advent was not considered a penitential season till about the XIIIth century. In the XIIth century it was still kept with white vestments and the Gloria. The omission of the Gloira in Lent and Advent is natural enough from its joyful character."

Interesting. He says that the season developed into a more penitential season.

"The New Dictionary of the Liturgy" by Gerhard Podhradsky, has this for its entry on Advent:

"Advent. adventus=coming. Period of preparation before Christmas, beginning on the fourth Sunday before Christmas.
I. Historical: As a result of eastern influences, a four to eight week period of preparation for Christmas was introduced, first of all in Ravenna about 450 then in regions using the Gallican liturgy, and finally in Rome under Gregory the Great (d. 604). In the early middle ages the Roman four week Advent became almost universal. The model would seem to be Lent, and the reason for its introduction the growing emphaisis on the incarnation (Christmas).

"II. Meaning: The twofold coming of Christ, in human flesh, and in judgement (emphasized by the readngs from Isaiah especially), form the theme of the Advent liturgy. Because the middle ages regarded the Last Day as above all a day of severe judgement, Advent took on a strictly penitential character, which was, however, mitigated by a note of joyous anticipation (hence purple vestments, limited use of the organ, restriction of floral decoration). Advent is designed chiefly, therefore, to keep the Church and its individual members in a state of vigilant readiness for Christ's return, and to keep Christian hope alive to the complete unfolding of the work of Christ ...

III. Customs: In the Roman liturgy, which finally superseded the special Gallican usages, Advent was never a strictly penitential season. Thus a wealth of customs was able to grow up within Advent."

So while it does have a penitential aspect to it, it is not "strictly" penitential as is Lent.

Finally, I scrounged around and from the back corner of my closet I found Father Josef Jungmann's "The Early Liturgy," which has an analysis of the early development of Advent. He says that

"in Gaul as early as the end of the fourth century, we find an Advent lasting three weeks. And by the end of the fith century this Advent has already developed into an Advent much more extensive and intensive than our present Advent - a second Quadragesima [Lent]."

He also says that the earliest records of Advent in Rome are from Saint Gregory the Great's four Advent sermons.

Here's a clue:

"The only thing we can ascertain regarding Rome before the age of Gregory [the Great] is a transformation of the Ember week that falls in the month of December, shortly before Christmas, into a sort of Christmas prelude. ... [Ember seasons] are among the most ancient institutions of the Roman liturgy ... during the months of June, September, and December one week was especially devoted to prayer and fasting."

He goes on to talk about the technicalities of Advent's development in Rome and in Gaul and the Gallic influence that came into Rome. He eventually continues:

"We can say, therefore, that the last weeks of the ecclesiastical year preceding our present Advent represent a sort of pre-Advent. In this pre-Advent period, the idea of the fianl coming of Our Lord, of the parousia, is predominant, as it is in Advent itself. By remembering this second and glorious advent, we prepare ourselves to celebrate the remembrance of the first advent. And this idea is being emphasized once more in our own time. For not only is the feast of All Saints celebrated in this period, but the feast of Christ the King, who is in gloria Dei Patris, is added as background, showing the depths of our hope and expectation."

And then finally! An answer:

"There is yet one more item of our present Roman Advent which we must trace to the Gallican tradition: its penitential character. According to the liturgical books of the early Middle Ages the Roman Advent was not a penitential season. It was simply a period of preparation for, and a joyful expectation of, Christmas. Therefore only the Sundays had the special characteristics of Advent. It was not until after the tenth century, when the Gallic Advent had exerted its influence on the Roman Advent, that it received its present penitental character. Now, however, the Gloria [is] omitted on the Sundays in Advent, purple vestments are worn just as in Lent, and a restriction is placed on the use of flowers and the organ. However, it never became - except in passing - a period of fasting. These are the influences of the old Gallic liturgy, of the ancient quadragesima S. Martini, on the Roman liturgy; it gave to our Advent and to our preparation for Christmas its more serious character."

So in conclusion, it does appear that Advent has a spirit of penance to it. Although it initially wasn't, through Gallic influences, the Roman practice adopted a more penitential practice which eventually became the universal form. This aspect of penance derives from the expectation of Christ's second coming, and thus finds the faithful joyfully preparing themselves for Our Lord's coming at the end of time and the final judgement. This also helps us to prepare for the commemoration of the Lord's first coming which we celebrate at Christmas. This penitential shift is reflected in the liturgical practices of the rite. However, this season is not strictly penitental and thus does not have required fasting as Lent does, but allows for other anticipatory customs as well. Thus, while there is no legal obligation upon the faithful as there is in Lent, if we are going to follow a true "hermeneutic of continuity" then in my opinion it is a penitential season.

Other Advent links:
The History of Advent at intermirifica

Advent in the Catholic Encyclopedia

RS

Thanksgiving and a meditation of gluttony.

Turbaconducken (Turducken (Turkey stuffed with duck stuffed with chicken) wrapped in bacon). As seen at bacontoday.com.
Just my annual reminder about not being gluttonous on Thanksgiving, with a link to a good article on the nature of gluttony (it's not just eating too much).

Gluttony by Christine Fletcher

I highly recommend the whole article.

RS

Funeral Masses, case in point

Remember my little rant a few weeks ago about the loss of the proper perspective on All Soul's Day?

Thinking about All Souls Day

Fr. Z has found a real life example:

A very sad Fr. Z and the promise of a Mass

I've been to funerals where the deceased has been "canonized" by the priest during the Mass: "I'm sure that [insert name here] is in Heaven." We can certainly hope that they are, but we can't know for sure until they are officially canonized by the Church. I'd rather be safe than sorry.

So, please pray for the dead. And this weekend on Christ the King you can get another opportunity to try to obtain a plenary indulgence for a soul in Purgatory. Stay tuned ...

RS

Thinking about All Souls Day

Time for a rant
I was just thinking a bit about All Souls Day in relation to getting things ready for the Masses this Sunday. I have to admit, I have been really disappointed with what seems to be a new perspective on the day. It seems like we should stop calling it "All Souls Day" and start calling it "All Saints Part II."

I don't know if it is just me, but when I was looking over the readings, particularly the ones that were "suggested" on the USCCB website, I just found the readings to be completely inappropriate for the occasion.

When I look at All Souls Day, I see a day in which we are focused on praying for all the faithful departed who have died in the state of grace but have had to go to Purgatory. They need our prayers because they are still being purified of their vices, bad habits, and imperfections, which is most likely a suffering. I sort of look at All Souls Day as a really big funeral Mass. And traditionally that is the way it has been treated. In the extraordinary form, you did not have funeral Masses or celebrate All Souls Day on a Sunday. It was just moved to the following Monday. Strangely, I don't think you can have masses for the dead on Sundays in the ordinary form, yet for some reason All Souls Masses can be said on Sunday, even though the Liturgy of the Hours is just taken from what the current Sunday would be if All Souls didn't fall on it.

Like I said, the readings seem totally inappropriate. Instead of helping us understand that those who die most likely have to go through Purgatory, and thus they need our prayers to help release them from their suffering so they can be brought into the Presence of God, the readings seem to overemphasize the resurrection, which is odd because even the damned will be resurrected. The important thing is where we ultimately end up: Heaven or Hell. The readings seem to give the impression that, "when someone dies, they are just shot into the arms of Jesus." The readings seem to tell us they are already saved and in Heaven. It's like the liturgy just says "don't worry about them, they're fine, no reason to pray for them." It's as though they (whoever "they" are) don't want us to think that just maybe we might be punished for our sins, even if it is a temporary punishment for those who die in the state of grace.

Anyway, I just want to re-emphasize that God is a just God and we all will have to make amends for our sins. Yet, God is a merciful God too. However, it is our duty in the Church Militant to pray for and help as much as possible our brethren in the Church Suffering. This is why I try to help explain plenary indulgences and how to obtain them. So, please on All Souls try to obtain a plenary indulgence for a poor soul in purgatory. And always remember to pray for the faithful departed. I especially like to pray for those who are suffering the most in purgatory and for those who have no one to pray for them.

And remember, this also applies to funerals as well. We certainly hope that the person died in the state of grace, but even if they did, we need to pray for them so that if they are in Purgatory, God will be merciful and bring them to Himself.

Anyway, yes, I'm tired and had to rant a bit, but I just wanted to add my reflections on All Souls Day and hopefully correct some of this improper perspective that has crept into the liturgy in the last 40 years.

RS

Ember Days

Today is (well, was at this hour) the first day of the Autumnal Ember Days. Here's some good articles about Ember Days. It seems ironic that in the hurry to restore things from the early Church into the liturgy, one of the oldest traditions was not only downplayed but in actuality dropped by the wayside.

From Fr. Z's blog:

EMBER DAY AWARENESS … DAY

From The New Liturgical Movement:

Ember Days: Explanation and Two Proposals [UPDATED]

and of course the Catholic Encyclopedia

Ember Days

RS

Is Advent Penitential?

A lot of people have been searching for this, so I am going to re-publish this post.

I'm also updating the post because of a little detail noticed over at The New Liturgical Movement. Saturday evening, at the 1st Vespers of Advent, the pope wore the Penitential Papal Formale:


Looks like that hermeneutic of continuity is showing it's hand again.

You can read TNM's report about it here:

The penitential Papal Formale (it's back)

The following was originally posted 12/4/06.

Wow, ask a simple question ... and what a confusing journey on which you find yourself.

A friend and I wrote to Jimmy Akin asking whether he knew if Advent was penitential. He attempted to answer our emails in his post the next day. To summarize his post, he concludes,

"Bam. So Advent is not a penitential season, at least in the universal law of the Latin Church. Ya coulda fooled me!"

Now, on a technical level I understand his conclusion, and part of it is that the questions that my friend and I asked were different. Basically, my friend asked "legally what are we as the faithful bound to do during Advent?" as in comparison to Lent when we are legally (in Canon law) bound to fast on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday and abstain from meat on the Fridays of Lent.

So, I thought Jimmy wrong until I re-read and saw that his conclusion is based on the above question and that he did say, "at least in the universal law of the Latin Church." [emphasis mine]

However, my question was a bit more general and focused on the nature of Advent. "Is Advent penitential?" What raised this question for me was from my liturgical studies. In his book "Ceremonies of the Liturgical Year According to the Modern Roman Rite," Msgr. Peter Elliot says right off the bat in his section on Advent, "The season with which the liturgical year begins is not penitential." (p.34, #42).

This statement suprises me. I was raised with the understanding that Advent was sort of like a less rigid Lent. It wasn't as somber or rigorous as Lent, but nonetheless it had a penitential spirit about it. I mean, first off, there seem to be signs in the liturgy. Just as in Lent, the color of the vestments are violet, there is a week where rose may be worn (3rd Sunday of Advent and 4th Sunday of Lent), "the use of the organ and other musical instruments and the decorating of the altar with flowers should be done in a moderate manner, as is consonant with the character of the season, without anticipating the full joy of Christmas (Ceremonial of Bishops, #236), and there is no Gloria on Sundays of Advent. Even in regards to the celebration of Matrimony, "When a marriage is celebrated during Advent or Lent or other days of penance, the parish priest should advise the couple to take into consideration the special nature of these liturgical seasons." That makes it sound like Advent, Lent, and penitential days are pretty much in the same category.

Of course some will say that the violet used in advent is of a different hue, as even our diocesan ordo says "In order to distinguish between this season [of Advent] and the specifically penitential season of Lent, the bluer hues of violet may be used during Advent. Light blue vestments, however, are not authorized for use in the United States." So that statement seems to say that Advent is not specifically penitential as Lent is. However, it should also be noted that this distinction of hues is not a necessity either. The Generial Instruction on the Roman Missals just says that "violet" is to be used for Advent and Lent.

So, off the shelves come the liturgical books. At this point, I am wondering what is the nature of Advent? When did it start? How did it develop? Such a simple question should not be that hard to answer. So, in remembering that one of the reasons why I started this blog was that I was asked to share my liturgical knowledge, I dove into my personal library seeking out info on Advent.

The new "Compendium: Catechism of the Catholic Church" really only says about Advent,

"102. How did God prepare the world for the mystery of Christ? God prepared for the coming of his Son over the centuries. He awakened in the hearts of the pagans a dim expectation of this coming and he prepared for it specifically through the Old Testament, culminating with John the Baptist who was the last and greatest of the prophets. We relive this long period of expectancy in the annual liturgical celebration of the season of Advent."

"The Catechism of the Catholic Church" says:

"#524. When the Church celebrates the liturgy of Advent each year, she makes presen this ancient expectancy of the Messiah, for by sharing in the long preparation for the Savior's first coming, the faithful renew their ardent desire for his second coming. By celebrating the precursor's birth and martyrdom, the Church unites herself to his desire: "He must increase, but I must decrease."

Hmmm, not very helpful yet. The season of Advent really isn't dealt with on a technical level, so I have few books that deal with the subject.

"The General Norms for the Liturgical Year and the Calendar" say this:

"V. Advent
39. Advent has a twofold character: as a season to prepare for Christmas when Christ's first coming to us is remembered; as a season when that remembrance directs the mind and heart to await Christ's Second Coming at the end of time. Advent is thus a period for devout and joyful expectation.
40. Advent begins with evening prayer I of the Sunday falling on or closest to 30 November and ends before evening prayer I of Christmas.
41. The Sundays of this season are named the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Sundays of Advent.
The weekdays from 17 December to 24 December inclusive serve to prepare more directly for the Lord's birth."

I think a key point here is that the coming of Christ is to be emphasized. Not only in celebrating His first coming when he was conceived and 9 months later born, but also His second coming, which will be the final judgement.

In "The Mass: A Study of the Roman Liturgy" Fr. Adrian Fortesque says this about Advent when looking the how the Gloria developed in the Mass:

"Advent was not considered a penitential season till about the XIIIth century. In the XIIth century it was still kept with white vestments and the Gloria. The omission of the Gloira in Lent and Advent is natural enough from its joyful character."

Interesting. He says that the season developed into a more penitential season.

"The New Dictionary of the Liturgy" by Gerhard Podhradsky, has this for its entry on Advent:

"Advent. adventus=coming. Period of preparation before Christmas, beginning on the fourth Sunday before Christmas.
I. Historical: As a result of eastern influences, a four to eight week period of preparation for Christmas was introduced, first of all in Ravenna about 450 then in regions using the Gallican liturgy, and finally in Rome under Gregory the Great (d. 604). In the early middle ages the Roman four week Advent became almost universal. The model would seem to be Lent, and the reason for its introduction the growing emphaisis on the incarnation (Christmas).

"II. Meaning: The twofold coming of Christ, in human flesh, and in judgement (emphasized by the readngs from Isaiah especially), form the theme of the Advent liturgy. Because the middle ages regarded the Last Day as above all a day of severe judgement, Advent took on a strictly penitential character, which was, however, mitigated by a note of joyous anticipation (hence purple vestments, limited use of the organ, restriction of floral decoration). Advent is designed chiefly, therefore, to keep the Church and its individual members in a state of vigilant readiness for Christ's return, and to keep Christian hope alive to the complete unfolding of the work of Christ ...

III. Customs: In the Roman liturgy, which finally superseded the special Gallican usages, Advent was never a strictly penitential season. Thus a wealth of customs was able to grow up within Advent."

So while it does have a penitential aspect to it, it is not "strictly" penitential as is Lent.

Finally, I scrounged around and from the back corner of my closet I found Father Josef Jungmann's "The Early Liturgy," which has an analysis of the early development of Advent. He says that

"in Gaul as early as the end of the fourth century, we find an Advent lasting three weeks. And by the end of the fith century this Advent has already developed into an Advent much more extensive and intensive than our present Advent - a second Quadragesima [Lent]."

He also says that the earliest records of Advent in Rome are from Saint Gregory the Great's four Advent sermons.

Here's a clue:

"The only thing we can ascertain regarding Rome before the age of Gregory [the Great] is a transformation of the Ember week that falls in the month of December, shortly before Christmas, into a sort of Christmas prelude. ... [Ember seasons] are among the most ancient institutions of the Roman liturgy ... during the months of June, September, and December one week was especially devoted to prayer and fasting."

He goes on to talk about the technicalities of Advent's development in Rome and in Gaul and the Gallic influence that came into Rome. He eventually continues:

"We can say, therefore, that the last weeks of the ecclesiastical year preceding our present Advent represent a sort of pre-Advent. In this pre-Advent period, the idea of the fianl coming of Our Lord, of the parousia, is predominant, as it is in Advent itself. By remembering this second and glorious advent, we prepare ourselves to celebrate the remembrance of the first advent. And this idea is being emphasized once more in our own time. For not only is the feast of All Saints celebrated in this period, but the feast of Christ the King, who is in gloria Dei Patris, is added as background, showing the depths of our hope and expectation."

And then finally! An answer:

"There is yet one more item of our present Roman Advent which we must trace to the Gallican tradition: its penitential character. According to the liturgical books of the early Middle Ages the Roman Advent was not a penitential season. It was simply a period of preparation for, and a joyful expectation of, Christmas. Therefore only the Sundays had the special characteristics of Advent. It was not until after the tenth century, when the Gallic Advent had exerted its influence on the Roman Advent, that it received its present penitental character. Now, however, the Gloria [is] omitted on the Sundays in Advent, purple vestments are worn just as in Lent, and a restriction is placed on the use of flowers and the organ. However, it never became - except in passing - a period of fasting. These are the influences of the old Gallic liturgy, of the ancient quadragesima S. Martini, on the Roman liturgy; it gave to our Advent and to our preparation for Christmas its more serious character."

So in conclusion, it does appear that Advent has a spirit of penance to it. Although it initially wasn't, through Gallic influences, the Roman practice adopted a more penitential practice which eventually became the universal form. This aspect of penance derives from the expectation of Christ's second coming, and thus finds the faithful joyfully preparing themselves for Our Lord's coming at the end of time and the final judgement. This also helps us to prepare for the commemoration of the Lord's first coming which we celebrate at Christmas. This penitential shift is reflected in the liturgical practices of the rite. However, this season is not strictly penitental and thus does not have required fasting as Lent does, but allows for other anticipatory customs as well. Thus, while there is no legal obligation upon the faithful as there is in Lent, if we are going to follow a true "hermeneutic of continuity" then in my opinion it is a penitential season.

Other Advent links:
The History of Advent at intermirifica

Advent in the Catholic Encyclopedia

RS

Robbed by the "reform"

Traditional Trappist Divine Office Book
As I had mentioned in a previous post, I got a Monastic Diurnal and have been trying to pray the Benedictine Office from that.

While I can't say all the Hours of the Divine Office, I have been getting a bit more in lately.

I must say that having the Latin/English side by side has really helped me in reading the Psalmody. Not only does the English help me to understand the text more quickly, but since I am reading the Latin, I see the actual words and sometimes see the the fuller meaning that a translation can't quite reveal.

One thing I have also noticed is how the modern Liturgy of the Hours has been "censored."

I cannot believe that the official prayer of the Church has been edited so that certain lines in the Psalms have been removed. (Actually it doesn't surprise me that much with all the improper implementations of the liturgical renewal of Vatican II, the Divine Office being one of the victims).
I was also slightly aware of this ever since I read the General Intruction of the Liturgy of the Hours.
"#131. Three psalms (58, 83, and 109) have been omitted from the psalter cycle because of their curses; in the same way, some verses have been omitted from certain psalms, as noted at the head of each. The reason for the omission is a certain psychological difficulty, even though the psalms of imprecation are in fact used as prayer in the New Testament, for example, Rv 6:10, and in no sense to encourage the use of curses."

I cannot believe this. The word of God has become inappropriate!?!? "Psychological difficulty?" What the heck does that mean? A bit of catechesis can do wonders for the faithful.

For example, probably the most shocking line out of the Psalms comes from Psalm 136 verse 9:
"Beátus, qui tenébit, et allídet párvulos tuos ad petram"
(Blessed is he who takes their babies and dashes them against the rock)

Although this sounds rather frightful, we must look at the spiritual meaning. Saint Benedict says that this refers to how we should deal with temptations: while they are young we should dash them against the Rock of Christ so that they do not grow and harm our souls (Prologue:28). Saint Augustine says that "we dash the little ones of Babylon against the rock, when we mortify our pssions, and stifle the first motions of them, by a speedy recourse to the rock, which is Christ."

I am starting to see why, when Pope Benedict wrote Summorum Pontificum, he not only allowed the old Mass to be said, but also allowed priests to say the traditional Roman Divine Office too.

BTW, I highly recommend this Monastic Diurnal if you are interested in saying (or just learning) the traditional Benedictine Office. This is very helpful in learning the Psalms better and all the rubrics are in English, so it makes figuring things out much easier. I have a full Breviarium Monasticum and an Antiphonale Monasticum, but since they are completely in Latin, I have to struggle with the rubrics. And, although the Abbey is in England, I (in the United States) had no problems purchasing it through their website.

RS

Gluttony: A meditation before Thanksgiving Dinner

.
Article ----> Gluttony by Christine Fletcher
(In case you get distracted by all the pictures)

Gluttony?
even wearing a safety helmet, do not try this
No, I'm not trying to ruin your Thanksgiving Dinner tomorrow. There's nothing wrong with preparing a nice meal and making sure all the particulars are well taken care of ... as long as you don't obsess (or excess) about it. As long as tomorrow is a day in which we do thank God for all He has given to us, don't become scrupulous over what you might read in the linked article at the end of the post.

Fox channel's annual "Glutton Bowl"
(shown on Thanksgiving Day)
Anyway, I found a really good post regarding guttony. The interesting thing is that in many places in today's world, we don't necessarily suffer from the "traditional" idea gluttony of just eating and eating without reason. We are becoming more conscious about how much we are eating. A more subtile form of gluttony is what is referred to as "gluttony of delicacy." Another way of saying it is that we are often way too picky about what we eat.

Record breaking hamburger (over 100 lbs).
This article by Christine Fletcher is an excellent analysis of gluttony and its different forms. I recommend a full reading of it. And I figured I'd post it today to give you a better chance of getting around to read it since tomorrow will probably be busy for those in the U.S. who celebrate Thanksgiving.

Article ----> Gluttony by Christine Fletcher
(Don't get all distracted by the pictures now!)

(Funny, after I read the article, suddenly when I'd got to other sites, food advertisements started showing up in the pages' advertising sections ... the first advertisement was for McDonalds. Guess my computer has been having too many "cookies.")

A 100x100 In & Out Burger (100 patties and 100 slices of cheese). Calorie count: over 19,490 Calories. Full story here: In-N-Out 100x100

I'm hungry, think I'll go get something to eat. :P


Article ----> Gluttony by Christine Fletcher
(In case you got distracted by all the pictures)

RS

St. Josaphat Kuncevyc and fidelity to the Church

It's interesting that I have a devotion to Saint Josaphat, even though at first I really didn't know much of anything about him. It only started because I have a friend who has a huge devotion to Saint Josaphat after hearing about his life. So, in 2000 when I went to Rome for the Jubilee Year, I promised my friend I would pray for him at Saint Josaphat's tomb since he told me it was in one of the side altars at the Basilica of Saint Peter. Ever since visiting Saint Josaphat, I myself have gained an intrest and devotion to him. It really is amazing how much your devotion can increase for a Saint just by visiting their tomb. As I've mentioned before, this is how I have made several "friends" in Italy.

Providentially, I am starting to see why I have gained this devotion to Saint Josaphat. Given how he was martyred for the sake of unity between the Orthodox and the Catholics, I've been praying to Saint Josaphat a lot lately. Unfortunately the reason I have been praying to him so much lately is because of a situation which has arisen lately.

This situation has gotten me to thinking about people leaving the Catholic Church, especially because of scandal or frustration (not for doctrinal reasons).

On the hand I do sympathize with them. Yes, I know there are problems in the Catholic Church. But I always remind myself, it isn't the Church, but many of the sinful members of the Church Militant that mess things up. As bad as all the current scandals, and liturgical abuses, and heterodoxy being taught seem to be, these are not reflections of the Church Herself. You have to see that if these people who cause scandal had followed the Church's teachings, there would not be these problems. I really think that God is testing the members of the Church to see if we can see through the actions of individual members to see the true teachings and doctrine of the Body of Christ, the Church. Fleeing can certainly seem like an option: "Why hang around this place?" But in spite of all the garbage that goes on, the fullness of God's revelation remains in the Catholic Church. And part of that truth is that if we are to truly follow Christ, we are going to have to be crucified with Him.


I know it is easy to think that the current times of the Church are bad, and there have certainly been more idyllic times. But there have been many other difficult times in the Church. Look at the early Church and how so many bishops and emperors embraced Arianism. Read the writings of Saint Peter Damian who lived in the 11th century, and you'll see that there were sexual scandals going on then that are almost identical to the ones nowadays. You'd almost think that the Church Militant consists of men and women who suffer the effects of Original Sin. That's right, it is ... the whole world is. Yet in spite of all the problems, there has always been the constant teachings of the Church and the means to Sanctity (ie the Sacraments). As Saint Paul says, where sin abounds, grace abounds all the more. And we certainly see that in times of greatest persecution or problems, God raises up more Saints, men and women who have become holy precisely because they had to fight against sin and problems in the Church. And it's often because of problems that better answers are found. Look at the early Church and see how much deeper an understanding we gained about the nature of Christ, only becuase there were those in the Church who began preaching heresy. Thus, ecuminical councils were called, and truths about Christ were clarified and better understood.

So, my whole point is, I have seen people leaving the Church out of frustrations with problems, be it the scandals, or bad liturgy, or whatever. But, I fear these people are not seeing that these problems are not caused by the Church Herself, but by individuals who are actually not following the teachings of God and the Church. Sure, there might be more comfortable places outside the Church, but is it really worth throwing away the Truth? And should we expect comfort in this life when Christ Himself suffered for us, and told us to "come and follow Me" for "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Light"?

We must stay strong in our faith, even though we may hear heterodoxy coming from those who should know better, even though we may hear of scandals by individuals who are clearly not following the teachings of Christ and the Church, or even though we may see a liturgical desert (which thankfully looks like it might start blooming again).

Saint Josaphat, please pay for those who are leaving union with Peter and the Church. And pray for us that we may never be tempted or give in to the temptation to flee the Barque of Peter, even when the seas are rough, because it is safer in the boat than floating in the middle of the storm on your own.

RS

A meditation on receiving Holy Communion.

"Communion" by Giuseppe Maria Crespi
As a good meditation for Sunday, I found a great reflection by Abbot Joseph of the Holy Transfiguration Monastery, Byzantine-rite Ukranian Catholic monastery in Redwood Valley, California.

Is it really a Holy Communion?

This would be a great meditation before (every) Mass.

RS

Fr. Z. on Pope Saint Gregory on Pastors

Picture above the altar of Pope Saint Gregory the Great in the Basilica of Saint Peter, Rome, Italy
I've never really gotten into podcasts, probably because I have rarely enjoyed talk radio. However, I have started listening to Fr. Z's "PODCAzTs" and have found them to be very informative. This particular "PODCAzT" was extremely good. He starts with Pope Saint Gregory the Great talking about what qualities a pastor should have, especially focusing on bishops. However, Fr. Z points out that this can also apply to any man in a role of pastor, be they bishops, priests, or even the father of a family.

Gregory the Great on when pastors should SPEAK UP; priests and getting your way; voicemail feedback.

I always highly recommend Fr. Z's blog, but this is one post that stands out IMHO.

RS

A Voice For My Generation

Wow! Talk about serendipty. I have known about Father Phillip Powell,OP's blog, and have always thought his homilies were good when I read them, but I happened to be looking at another blog that I had never heard of (thanks, Cathy_of_Alex!)and she had a link to this homily by Father Phillip:

Kids These Days: What they don't want from the Church

What he said articulated so well what my generation (I'm almost 35 years old) and apparently the current generation have felt all our lives, especially in relation to the Church ... or I should say many older members of the Church (the Church Herself has never preached the false teachings we've often been fed, just some of Her members).

Anyway, the post is a must read! It is what gives me hope when I see stupid articles like the one from the dinosaur Father Richard McBrien:

Pay no attention to the Pope

Guess, what Father McBrien? We know you are full of crap, and hardly anyone takes you seriously anymore!

RS

Prayer request for dadwithnoisykids and his family

Please pray for dadwithnoisykids and his family. This family is amazing not only in their openness to life, but also in their courage and faith in the midst of difficult times.

Mother Mary, Queen of Heaven and earth, pray for us.
Saint Therese of Lisieux, pray for us.
Saint Catherine of Siena, pray for us.

Tomb of Saint Catherine of Siena at Santa Maria sopra Minerva, Rome, Italy.
(click picture to embiggen)
RS

So, what's the point of this blog?

Vigil Mass of the Feast of the Exultation of the Holy Cross at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, September 13th, 2007, in Rome. Cardinal Bertone is the main celebrant, here during the Consecration (along with the relics of the True Cross on the altar)
(click picture to embiggen)
Over at The New Liturgical Movement, there have been some comments saying that with the motu proprio "Summorum Pontificum" the "reform of the reform" movement has become ignored and that everyone is focusing only on the extra-ordinary form of Mass now.

This got me to thinking a bit about that statement, and where myself and my own blog fit into that. In this blog's very first post, I said that I wanted to use this blog to share whatever liturgical knowledge I had. It was only after starting and seeing some of the excellent liturgical blogs out there (like The New Liturgical Movement and Fr. Z's What Does the Prayer Really Say) that I realized I had a lot to learn. However, having visted many monasteries and religious houses, having worked as a sacristan at a basilica in Italy and a few parishes here in the States, some of that experience, and the great wealth of information I have learned from studying liturgy over the years have begun to come together. A lot of what has been needed is a liturgical perspective that I first and foremost credit to Cardinal Ratzinger/Pope Benedict XVI. With his writings and especially with "Summorum Pontificum" it is as though he has opened a floodgate of liturgical discussion which I believe is beginning to produce great fruit. While I don't necessarily expect a major liturgical reform in my lifetime, I do think he has begun to lay the foundation for a true renewal of liturgical understanding, mostly from his hermenutic of continuity: of looking at the whole of the Church's Tradition.

One of the bad fruits of the "spirit of Vatican II," was that there was a mental rupture from the Church's Tradition in many of the faithful. I say mental rupture because there was not a doctrinal rupture on the Church's part, just an attitude amongst the faithful (even some leaders in the Church) where suddenly Vatican II was seen as a point at which anything before Vatican II is now obsolete, and only Vatican II and anything after that pertains to the Church in the modern world. What Pope Benedict has helped me to do is to break me of that mindset and to look at the whole of the Church's Tradition, and I don't just mean the Roman Church, I mean the entire Church, the Roman Rite, the Western Rites, the Eastern Rites and other Catholics around the world and throughout history.

So, where does this blog fit into all that? I don't think I'll ever be able to nail that down. But getting back to the initial question of the "reform of the reform" vis-a-vis the extra-ordinary form of the Mass that has been placed back on an equal standing with the ordinary form by "Summorum Pontificum," I can say that the motu proprio has actually put more "pressure" on the ordinary form to get it's act together. I don't mean that the Novus Ordo is to be changed to be more like the extra-ordinary form. That's something for the Church to do with an organized reform of the liturgy. "Vigilante liturgical reform" is not the answer to the problems in the Novus Ordo Mass. What I mean is to get the Novus Ordo back on track and to start getting it said as it is supposed to be said. We'll worry about actually reforming the ordinary use later. First we need to just get it said by the books.

I work in a normal diocesan parish, so the extra-ordinary form is something that may be able to be done on occasion, but since it is a parish, the ordinary form is what will be done the majority of the time. That's completely to be expected. "Summorum Pontificum" is not calling for the "Novus Ordo" to become the "Tridentine" or for the "Tridentine" to take over the "Novus Ordo. That's not what the Pope said at all. He merely made the "Tridentine" an easily accessable option for those who prefer it. In a typical parish, the ordinary form is still what will be celebrated as the norm. But hopefully the understanding that the "Tridentine" has to be said with such accuracy will influence those involved with the "Novus Ordo" to carry it out with the same accuracy according to its own instructions, rubrics, and ritual.

Thus, I would say that that is one of the goals of this blog: To help foster an understanding of the instructions, rubrics, and ritual of the Novus Ordo Mass ... even if I personally prefer the extra-ordinary ("Tridentine") form of the Mass. I do this because the extra-ordinary form of the Mass is not what has the problems. Those who want it respect it and say it as it is supposed to be said. The problem is in the chaos of the liturgical reforms of Vatican II, all sorts of things were introduced, especially a mindset that you can add anything to the Mass. I think this mindset is the first and greatest difficulty to get over. I have seen this in many, many priests formed after Vatican II, and I would say that even I have fallen into it myself in the past. Although I was always against goofy "liberal" changes, I had no problems with pius or reverent changes. But changes are changes. The Chruch gives instructions for each use and rite, and those are to be followed, not just because it is the law, but because it shows a unity with and obedience to the Church and a unity with that particular Tradition.

One of my first goals is that I would like to go through the 2002 General Instruction on the Roman Missal. The first time I read it, I was absolutely amazed that the Church actually gave such specific instructions on how the Novus Ordo Mass is supposed to be done. That document was what sort of woke me up to the fact that you can't just do whatever you want, you have to actually follow the books (suddenly Canon #846 Pt 1 made sense). Then I got ahold of the "Ceremonial of Bishops" and was amazed to see even more detailed instructions on the Mass. I suddenly saw that there is no real need for "creativity" (which is the same "creativity" that the Pope condemns in his accompanying letter to "Summorum Pontificum") because the actions of the modern liturgy are already laid out for the priest. Sure there might be a few more "options" in the Novus Ordo, but even those are specifically mentioned as options only for this or that particular part or situation in the Mass.

So, on your litany of things for which to pray for me, include that I can learn and understand better the liturgical understanding of not only the "Novus Ordo" and the "Tridentine" but also the bigger picture of the Church's liturical theology. I feel that this will be a difficult process, but one which will bear much fruit in the future.

RS

Old Form of Mass in our Current Context

Fr. Z. has an excellent post pointing out how we should approach things regarding the older form of Mass in the context of our current juridical laws. This is a must read!

Summorum Pontificum does not create an ecclesiastical Jurassic Park

We must remember that not all things pertaining to Mass are contained in the ritual itself. Canon law, liturgical law, and even some local law (ie liturgical instructions for certain regions or countries) also have a part in how things in the liturgy are carried out.

I especially wish to point out Canon #846 of the current Code of Canon Law:

Canon #846 - 1. The liturgical books approved by the competent authority are to be faithfully observed in the celebration of the sacraments; therefore no one on personal authority may add, remove, or change anything in them.

This is something Pope Benedict specifically addressed in his accompanying letter to "Summorum Pontificum", the problem of bishops, priests, and laity not following the liturgical instructions of the "Novus Ordo" and being "creative" with the liturgy.

"This [desire for the older form of Mass] occurred above all [my emphasis] because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear."

-Letter from Pope to bishops on "Summorum Pontificum"

Unfortunately this "creativity" has given rise to the mindset in many priests formed since Vatican II, whether they be of liberal or conservative bent, that they can make any changes they want to the "Novus Ordo." While making changes might be the status quo or what is done in practice, this is NOT the mind of the Church.

Really, the only thing "Summorum Pontificum" did was to allow the older form of Mass to be said without special permission. It puts it on equal ground with the newer form of Mass. It did NOT call for a hybridization of the Masses. Ritual and rubrics from the old use cannot be inserted into the new use and vice-versa. I believe the Pope's intent is that by having these two forms side by side, it will lead to a better understanding of each use in and of itself, and eventually lead to a fruitful and organic reform of the liturgy in the future.

However, we must also see that both forms of the Mass must also conform to the current universal liturgical and canonical laws. The former 1917 Code of Canon Law was abrogated (see Canon #6 - 1 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law) thus the older form will have to be looked at in light of the current Code of Canon Law. However, this is exactly one of the responsibilities of the Ecclesia Dei commision as set forth in "Summorum Pontificum". So let's learn a lesson from the chaos after Vatican II and "festina lente" when dealing with either form of the Mass. I'm enthusiastic about the older form too, but let's do liturgical reform right this time instead of hastily.

RS

Get ready for August 2nd.

Just as a reminder so you can prepare early by getting to confession this weekend:

August 2nd is the day of the "Portiuncula Indulgence." You can read more about it and the requirements for obtaining the plenary indulgence here:

August 2nd - "Portiuncula Indulgence"

RS

Signs of the Times

Kansas City Catholic has a new brilliant "dialogue" in a clever series. Go and check them out:

Signs: Street Talking

and an older one here:

Signs: Lenten Fare

RS

Vatican Website Updates

Most of you are probably familiar with the main Vatican website of the Holy See over at http://www.vatican.va.

(Remember, all official Vatican sites' domain names will end with ".va" as that is the official domain of the Vatican. Anything claiming to be the Vatican ending in .com, .net, .org, etc. is probably going to be bad news.)

And the Vatican just announced some more pages:

Vatican City State (English page)

Vatican Radio (English Site)

The "L'Osservatore Romano"
(The Vatican's Official newspaper)

And finally, the one that really caught my eye, the Vatican Museums

Official Vatican Museums Site

The Vatican Museum page looks very cool and has a lot of info on it. It's obviously not like actually being there, but it is a pretty thorough tour.

(I do admit that I was having trouble seeing the more detailed pictures, but I may be missing a plugin or it could just be that my dinosaur computer is just too old to handle some of the newer applications, eg I can't run quicktime 7.0 or higher.)

Have fun.

RS

The other part of the Church's teaching on immigration

My Vatican Information Service newsletter on Wednesday contained a summary of the speech delivered by Archbishop Agostino Marchetto, secretary of the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant Peoples, during the Global Forum on Migration and Development

It has the usual things about human rights, but there is one part that is not emphasized enough by many Church leaders:

"But rights and duties go together," he added. "Therefore, at the same time, migrants have the duty to respect the identity and the laws of the country of residence, strive for proper integration (not assimilation) into the host society and learn its language. They are to foster esteem and respect for their host country, even to the point of loving and defending it.

Living in Texas, I have seen much, much abuse of the immigration laws and have seen a lot of people who refuse to integrate (which is sad because it is to their own disadvantage).

Certainly, immigrants (even illegals) are humans, but the fact that they are humans means they also have the ability and duty to strive to not be a burden. It is a part of man's dignity to be able to work for his own sustinance. These people are not animals that we keep in a ghetto (or barrio) zoo. It's win-win if illegals use the proper channels to become legal and contribute to our country. There is a system that works (even if it can seem onerous. Unfortunately, there are many who don't bother with it. Again, it's only to their own disadvantage.

Yes, I have known illegals, and also those who have become citizens. I have seen the system work and I have seen the advantages of citizenship and integration firsthand. I have also lived in another country, so I know the difficulties of going to another country, culture, and language.

There's still opportunity here in the U.S., but you have to want to work for that opportunity.

Fr. Stephanos also has a good summary of what the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches about immigration:

What does the Church teach about immigrants?

RS